[extropy-chat] embedded in open hearts

[Olga Bourlin]

From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
> --- Olga Bourlin <fauxever at sprynet.com> wrote:

>> Is that saying a lot?  And does this justify what the Jews are doing
>> to the Palestinians?

It comes and goes - but never entirely seems to leave:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/10/international/middleeast/10gaza.html?

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/news/news-mideast.html

> It's saying a lot ...

No, it's not (unless you can explain to me why the pope is lauded for 
something ordinary citizens have already figured out a long time ago - i.e., 
that Jew were victims in the Holocaust, and that Jews did not kill any 
fictional deity character and are therefore not to blame; well, okay, so 
maybe ordinary citizens still believe in the fictional deity character, so 
two steps forward, one step back ...).

> You need to get a new schtick. The Iraq war is over, so you need to
> find a new war to protest against. There isn't much going on in
> Palestine. I suppose you could protest against democratization in
> Lebanon, or Egypt, or Saudi Arabia... or cheer as Iran strings up
> another 16 year old girl for having the temerity to denounce the
> government.

You need a new schtick, Mike (suggestion:  tell me how much you really love 
me).   I don't need any "new" (new? I've been following the 
Israeli/Palestinian conflict since 1967, before you were born, I believe 
...) war, and the Iraq war is neither over nor are its effects going to go 
away anytime soon.

>> Besides, I thought Judaism and Christianity were still mutually
>> exclusive religions? What has changed? Have Christians stopped
>> believing that Jews and other infidels are destined to go to hell?
>>  (Where-oh-where have I been lately?)
>
> As stated in the article, the Church denounced the concept of
> collective blame of the crucifixion on Jews per se (particularly in
> light of research showing that crucifixion was reserved for treason
> against Rome, not for religious crimes against Judaism, and other bits
> that place the blame more properly on Roman authorities and not Jewish
> ones.) This therefore makes anti-semitism a sin in the Catholic Church.

So it's, like, don't be anti-semitic now, but it's NOT a sin or anti-semitic 
(and anti-[insert any other religion] to think that Catholics (and some 
other Christians - or maybe just Catholics?) to believe that Jews (and 
others who are not of the true faith) are going to roast in the Lake of Fire 
forever in the life-after-death?  (These issues cannot be separated - one 
can't have it both ways - the trouble being, of course, that if the Catholic 
church didn't have that dangling-carrot advantage that they teach about 
life-after-death for good Catholics, well then ... what's the point?  What's 
a heaven for?)

> Whether Jews go to heaven or not is a separate issue for the church.

It may be separate, but it's tied into their inherent and implied exclusive 
status.  Obviously Jews are not going to go to heaven - no one does.  But to 
even think or believe such a thing - even if implicitly taught - if that's 
not all out savagery and self-righteousness and as cruel an idea as has been 
propounded, I don't know what is.

Save me from the "saved."

Olga