Google excludes churches from its non-for-profits discounts

[Hatter The Mad]

How come the Pope was a nazi youth member?

Because he and his family would have been ostracised and perhaps persecuted if he was not. That's besides the point.

 

[Glaucus]

These aren't anywhere near on the scale of what happens in the church (and that's even assuming we have found out about it all, which we clearly haven't given the ongoing revelations)

And how many of them have as many "employes"
they are identical, again you are blinded and can't realise that this is a problem in all of society.


How about nestle and it's work in Africa against breast feeding.

 

[Hatter The Mad]

Regardless of views on religion and corruption within many faiths, many churches aren't as such for profit so I don't really agree with google discriminating in that way.

No, but pretty much any major religion perpetuates and praises ignorance (sorry, 'faith') instead of intellectual enlightenment, and glorifies not thinking. At the worse it reverses social and cultural progress, at best it helps it stagnate.

Why would Google want to subsidise that?

 

[Dj_Jestar]

Which newspaper organisation or political party or large charitable organisation (like Amnesty International, or DWOB) have issues with the institutionalised rape of children and then a cover up of it, in the recent century?

Which political party or independent charity preaches falsehoods and lies (like the Catholic Church regarding condoms in Africa) that lead to suffering and death? Not only do they preach falsehoods but they scare people with threats of eternal hell and damnation if they go against their teachings.

Are you seriously claiming that only religious institutions are morally corrupt? How about those paedophile rings? Those are organised institutions. How about groups like the various mafias from around the world? Those are organised institutions.

You're picking specifically "good" organisations, then comparing them with a generic stereotype of organisations on the other side.

PETA are a charity that contradict what they preach. They've killed many more animals than they've ever "saved".

 

[Dj_Jestar]

No, but pretty much any major religion perpetuates and praises ignorance (sorry, 'faith') instead of intellectual enlightenment, and glorifies not thinking. At the worse it reverses social and cultural progress, at best it helps it stagnate.

Why would Google want to subsidise that?

Incorrect. Many religions are all about enlightenment. Where do you think that term comes from?

 

[kedge]

oh look, another christianity bashing thread

Professed christians perhaps?.

The thing that annoys me most about religion as a whole is that if you are born to a religious family, then it's drilled into your skull at birth. Most of these people brought up in religious families will believe what they were told growing up and blindly follow that, they don't get to make their own decisions.

You obviously need to search more amongst your fellow humans. Indoctrination can be done at any level, take Evolution for example, it is taught as fact and claims of "overwhelming evidence to support it" and yet there is little actual fact and evidence, only philosophical speculation for this blind mindless process, and, yet evo is sytematically thrown in your face from the media services and educational establishments.

 

[Glaucus]

Incorrect. Many religions are all about enlightenment. Where do you think that term comes from?

He's only seen extremists and hasn't seen that even within denominations some people strive for understanding and that you actually get a massive range of different beliefs and ideas.

 

[Tefal]

How come the Pope was a nazi youth member?

if you were a youth in Nazi Germany would you have said no even if you disagreed?

I wonder if you'd have ended up in the Organisation Todt or just had a bit of a kicking.

If you would fair play to you, don't think I'd have been brave enough.

 

[Rroff]

No, but pretty much any major religion perpetuates and praises ignorance (sorry, 'faith') instead of intellectual enlightenment, and glorifies not thinking. At the worse it reverses social and cultural progress, at best it helps it stagnate.

Why would Google want to subsidise that?

Because thats as much opinion as it is fact and becomes discriminatory.

Don't get me wrong I know first hand how religion (man) can ruin lives.

 

[Hatter The Mad]

Incorrect. Many religions are all about enlightenment. Where do you think that term comes from?

Spiritual maybe (and even that is questionable), but rarely intellectual. Without people being ignorant to science or reality (ie having 'faith'), there wouldn't be any major religion.

 

[Glaucus]

Spiritual maybe (and even that is questionable), but rarely intellectual. Without people being ignorant to science or reality (ie having 'faith'), there wouldn't be any major religion.

You can have another oh dear.

So how do you reconcile your flawed opinions. With professional scientists.

Science and religion can happily coexist and run side by side.

 

[Hatter The Mad]

He's only seen extremists and hasn't seen that even within denominations some people strive for understanding and that you actually get a massive range of different beliefs and ideas.

Have I really? I was born and raised a Catholic. Half my family is Catholic, one half Protestant.

 

[Glaucus]

Have I really? I was born and raised a Catholic. Half my family is Catholic, one half Protestant.

And perhaps they are all extremists and not free thinking people, of which you I'll find many and are still religious.

 

[Hatter The Mad]

Science and religion can happily coexist and run side by side.

Was that before or after the church had a nasty habit of murdering anyone pushing forward science and reason that flew in the face of 'faith' and church teachings?

With professional scientists.

They are relatively few, but still as misguided as a non-scientist religious person in my view.

 

[Hatter The Mad]

And perhaps they are all extremists and not free thinking people, of which you I'll find many and are still religious.

Being raised in England, I think the chances of all my teachers, school friends, priests and family being extremist Christians is pretty slim.

 

[Dj_Jestar]

Spiritual maybe (and even that is questionable), but rarely intellectual. Without people being ignorant to science or reality (ie having 'faith'), there wouldn't be any major religion.

Faith and knowledge of science and reality are not mutually exclusive.

Einstein was very religious.

 

[Glaucus]

Was that before or after the church had a nasty habit of murdering anyone pushing forward science and reason that flew in the face of 'faith' and church teachings?
.

And that happened how long ago? And again over preached and the re airy is far less than people make out.
Again are those actions based on religion, or on people in power. Hmm let me think.

 

[craptakular]

Because he and his family would have been ostracised and perhaps persecuted if he was not. That's besides the point.

Not really, if God is on your side...

If they believe in God and heaven why didn't they object even if that meant being killed, they would all go to heaven after all, right?

 

[Casdawer]

Good, the church makes enough money as it is.

 

[Glaucus]

Being raised in England, I think the chances of all my teachers, school friends, priests and family being extremist Christians is pretty slim.

I don't mean extremist in that way. I mean total believers and followers of the church, rather than religious people who actually question debate and discus and change opinions. There are some very distinct groups.
Again just in all walks of life.
Take CT you have people who I'll follow what they are spoon fed and yet have others with far more sense and only follow certain aspects.

And what would the "destruction" of religion do. Because it is unachievable. People believe what they want. Forcing opinions on others does solve anything, it creates even more problems.