…and this is a 
It is truly an amazing hat.
That's the kind of hat that if anyone other than a priest were seen to be wearing it, small children would point and whoop with laughter, adults would purse their lips in concern and cross the street to avoid it, and concerned policemen would pull over to politely ask, "Do you need some assistance, sir? Are you on any medication?"
Strangely, though, priests must get a special dispensation to be allowed to wear clothing that, if portrayed on the pages of a super-hero comic book, would cause readers accustomed to the garishness of Superman and Wonder Woman to blanch, blink their eyes, and wonder how over-the-top these crazy artists were going to get.
And that's before we even listen to what they have to say.
That's the new Archbishop of Westminster, and the Times had the perfect title for the article: Archbishop of Westminster attacks atheism but says nothing on child abuse. Really, nothing more needs to be said.
This is the blinkered cleric who said of the reports of abuses in Irish Catholic workhouses that it took great courage for the clergy to step forward. This is the guy who used the opportunity of his homily to pretend faith was a source of great good in the world.
This archbishop also has a pal, Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor, who against the backdrop of the recent revelations of pedophilia, sadism, and the cover-up of same, could say:
For Jesus, the inability to believe in God and to live by faith is the greatest of evils.
So Richard Dawkins and I are far greater evils than the goatish Christian Brothers who raped young boys in their care? Well, gosh, thanks, I think.
Just to place myself in the Catholic mindset for a moment, though, if leaving the church is a great evil, wouldn't discrediting the church by evil acts, by the suppression of justice, and by turning a blind eye to the corruption spreading through the body of Christ be even greater sins, since they will cause multitudes to turn away from the Church? Wouldn't that make Murphy-O'Connor and Nichols perpetrators of even greater crimes against the faith than Richard Dawkins?
Comments
Posted by: Sven DiMilo | May 22, 2009 11:23 AM
tee-hee!
Penis hat!
I'll bet it looked stupid even in the second century.
Posted by: Sili
|
May 22, 2009 11:23 AM
I should keep that in mind if I ever encounter one.(Yes, I'm at a loss for words. Again.)
Posted by: alextangent | May 22, 2009 11:27 AM
Wrong church; the ArchBish is Church of England. Unspoken rule that you don't diss the opposition.
Posted by: Matt Heath | May 22, 2009 11:27 AM
This might well be true. Murphy-O'Connor's only failing here is forgetting to add "therefore Jesus was a dickhead, and we shouldn't assume anything he said to be worth listening to.Posted by: JoshS, Official SpokesGay | May 22, 2009 11:29 AM
Off topic:
Wow! PZ, the LA Times actually printed your editorial lambasting Charlotte Allen. I'm shocked and delighted. Rock on!
Posted by: Greg Peterson | May 22, 2009 11:31 AM
How can a moral judgment be made on an INABILITY? An unwillingness, maybe--but most of us are perfectly WILLING to believe things for which there is sufficient evidence. The inability comes in not being able to make ourselves believe things that don't make sense and appear mistaken.
If this is the Catholic mindset, no wonder some of those poor children took it as a KINDNESS when they did not receive a beating they feared was coming.
Posted by: Patricia, OM | May 22, 2009 11:33 AM
Dammit JoshS! I just saw PZ's article flashed up on Google News from the LA Times, you stole my thunder. *snort*
Posted by: Matt Heath | May 22, 2009 11:34 AM
alextangent: No he isn't, Archbishop of Westminster is a Roman http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archbishop_of_Westminster
Posted by: JoshS, Official SpokesGay | May 22, 2009 11:34 AM
Sigh. Html fail in my post above. Actually, I did it right, but Sciblogs doesn't like it, I guess. Richard Dawkins' site has a front page link to PZ's editorial in the LA Times.
Posted by: SC, OM | May 22, 2009 11:35 AM
LOL! (Sorry, not a fan of the LOL, but that was a good laugh.)
Was it Murphy-O'Connor who said, several months ago, that reason led to killing people? (No, not science - reason. I remember Richard Dawkins showing up to point this out on the thread. Whoever it was actually said reason was dangerous, or something much like it, but I can't remember if it was M-O'C or not...)
Posted by: tigerlily55 | May 22, 2009 11:36 AM
Catholics in general were/are horrified. The abuse itself is bad enough, but to keep covering it up and moving priests to different parishes is what is the most difficult to absorb. To be more concerned with keeping it's suppposedly pristine reputation with the lay population than dealing honestly and compassionately with the victims, that is the greatest sin. Why there was not a great outcry from laity on this issue demanding bishops heads and apologies for abusing their positions of authority, that is another question.
Signed-Recovering catholic
Posted by: Free Lunch
|
May 22, 2009 11:37 AM
alextangent,
The Times article makes it clear that he is a Catholic archbishop replacing the retiring Cardinal.
Posted by: Katsu | May 22, 2009 11:37 AM
Well, to go with the theme, here's an item from the BBC today:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8063855.stm
"Officials in Serbia are investigating an Orthodox Church-run rehabilitation centre where drug addicts have allegedly been filmed being beaten."
Posted by: JoshS, Official SpokesGay | May 22, 2009 11:38 AM
Patricia, I could never steal your thunder. No one could. Your thunder's too bootylicious for us, babe. We're simply not ready for that jelly.
Posted by: Glen Davidson
|
May 22, 2009 11:40 AM
But atheists don't say the right things about child abuse, such as that children have souls, and evil people will go to hell.
It's not about stopping evil, it's about what happens to the evil people. It's about revenge and ressentiment.
See, it's all about worldviews again. Atheists are evil, and don't have the proper attitudes toward saints and sinners, and that's what really matters. They, too, need to feel the fires of hell licking their feet, and anything else isn't worth discussing.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/6mb592
Posted by: damnedyankee | May 22, 2009 12:18 PM
"The church is always trying to get other people to reform; it might not be a bad idea to reform itself a little, by way of example." - Mark Twain
Posted by: Mumon | May 22, 2009 12:18 PM
I quoted this from Wikipedia the other day:
Posted by: RamblinDude
|
May 22, 2009 12:23 PM
If there is evil in the world, it is these old men in pointy hats and dresses, these intellectual corpses, dry-rotted from the inside out, who will stop at nothing to maintain there hold over people.
They are doddering, musty old vampires. Shine a bright light on them.
Posted by: Alverant
|
May 22, 2009 12:24 PM
"For Jesus, the inability to believe in God and to live by faith is the greatest of evils."
Actually we have the ability to believe in his god. Just as we have the ability to randomly punch people in the street. We just choose not to use that ability. Animals don't have the ability to believe in his god. So is he saying animals are evil?
Posted by: lose_the_woo
|
May 22, 2009 12:32 PM
That would make Jesus a lunatic, not a person of virtue, moron.
Posted by: Jesus_is_my_fuckpig | May 22, 2009 12:34 PM
Not wishing to be outdone by the catholics, the church of England has been getting in on the child abuse/cover up/lying action as well...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_8062000/8062486.stm
Cunts.
Posted by: fftysmthg | May 22, 2009 12:38 PM
I don't know whether the inability to believe in god is one of the greatest evils or not but, I do know that I gotta get me one of those hats...Styling!
Posted by: GMacs | May 22, 2009 12:43 PM
First: I thought Westminster was Church of England.
Second: Ballsily ironic thing to say for a man of the church with Darwin's remains beneath their very floor with a carving in the wall honoring him.
Third: Fuck you, Westminster guy. I like that building. I like it a lot. It's bad enough I'm asked to cease wandering about and marveling at the structures and sculptures every hour to indulge in your fucking superstition, now you're not criticizing, but outright vilifying my worldview. Seriously, fuck you.
Posted by: sammywol
|
May 22, 2009 12:45 PM
Sorry PZ. I don't think you have the necessary equipment to look at things their way. Their eyes may be in their heads but their heads are so far up their arses they can see daylight.
I used to have a great cartoon of a bishop in his mitre with a frantic parent bird stuffing worms down the 'gape' in the top. Makes even more sense if you think of the clergy as cuckoos.
Posted by: Die Anyway | May 22, 2009 12:47 PM
re Alverant @19
He (the archbishop) isn't saying anything. He's just making shit up like all preachers everywhere. String some pretty words together, stick in a Jesus or two and try to make it sound like some sort of platitude. The faithful think: "The guy in the funny clothes said it, it must have deep meaning." It's garbage and if he took time to parse his own sentence he probably wouldn't even agree with himself.
Posted by: inajeep | May 22, 2009 12:50 PM
Sigh. I don't know what is more depressing, the fact that reading up on the latest political happenings occurring with almost clockwork like frequency or the irritating religious dogma that also seems never to end. I wish for some type of mass epiphany for either group to give me a moments hope that that we as a species are getting better, improving somehow.
I can not even fathom the sheer weight of misery religion has brought to this earth vs anything atheists have done. What is it about politicians and religion that both fascinates and and and the same time are revolting to me?
Posted by: Emmet, OM
|
May 22, 2009 12:51 PM
Well if it's an “inability”, surely we can't be held morally responsible for it? In any case I'm pretty sure Jesus was quite accustomed to people not believing him, and would've taken a dimmer view of people who claim to speak on his behalf ass-raping and torturing little boys.
Thankfully, atheists are incapable of the same kind of evil as the Church — institutional conspiracy to protect serial child rapists from due process — because we have no institution, priests, or doctrine.
Posted by: MosesZD
|
May 22, 2009 12:58 PM
I fucking hate typepad. I don't even remember what I was going to say half-an-hour ago thanks to the time I spent with fixing my account. Again.
Could we find something DIFFERENT with which to establish accounts? Hmmmm? Something that works well.
Posted by: Sven DiMilo | May 22, 2009 1:00 PM
'kipedia sez:
The Abbey (w/Darwin) is different.
Posted by: lose_the_woo
|
May 22, 2009 1:01 PM
Oh, and one thing I left out: fuck your Jesus. There are many better examples throughout history of kinder, more thoughtful, and productive men and women of great character, than your jebus.
And to think these catholic kooks have so much influence.
Posted by: Piltdown Man | May 22, 2009 1:06 PM
PZ Myers:
That's not a hat. This is a hat.
Yes.
Posted by: Knockgoats | May 22, 2009 1:07 PM
GMacs,
No, Archbish of Westminster is a Roman Catholic post. Darwin is buried in Westminster Abbey, which is C of E., not Westminster Cathedral, which is RC. Confusing, I know.
Tee-hee. Penis hat. - Sven DiMilo
Hence "bashing the bishop" as slang for solitary male sexual activity.
Posted by: Larry Harnett | May 22, 2009 1:13 PM
Sorry, off the topic, but there's a new Wash. Times poll today. The topic is whether we agree with Obama or Cheney about Gitmo, torture, et. al. I'm paddling as fast as I can, but I'm barely holding them off. I could use some help.
Posted by: SC, OM | May 22, 2009 1:14 PM
More confirmation for my hypothesis that Pilt is a fantastic troll - nothing more, nothing less.
This couldn't get any funnier.
Posted by: AdamK | May 22, 2009 1:15 PM
When it comes to pointy hats, I much prefer the Friday Cephalopod's.
Posted by: inajeep | May 22, 2009 1:19 PM
Sigh. I don't know what is more depressing, the fact that reading up on the latest political happenings occurring with almost clockwork like frequency or the irritating religious dogma that also seems never to end. I wish for some type of mass epiphany for either group to give me a moments hope that that we as a species are getting better, improving somehow.
I can not even fathom the sheer weight of misery religion has brought to this earth vs anything atheists have done. What is it about politicians and religion that both fascinates and and and the same time are revolting to me?
Posted by: strangebrew | May 22, 2009 1:20 PM
A true Christian...
"Citing St Paul, he said that faith was not only compatible with the mind’s capacity for reasoned thought but complemented it."
Translation...
Ignore evidence and believe in Yahweh!
It gets better...
"“What is most crucial is the prayer that we express every day in the Our Father, when we say ‘deliver us from evil’. The evil we ask to be delivered from is not essentially the evil of sin, though that is clear, but in the mind of Jesus it is more importantly a loss of faith. For Jesus, the inability to believe in God and to live by faith is the greatest of evils."
Equating Atheism and evil....these folk prefer to brand lack of belief in such nonsense as a sub-human trait.
Also since when do the retards start claiming that they know what jeebus was thinking...I thought jeebus was a god...true it is that the religious themselves a little confused over that point...but if jeebus is his daddies little soldier and a chip of the old block...that means dipstick Nichols can read god's mind...now that is interesting...the first clergy crow to ever admit that salient point.
Will he have some explaining to do when they ask him about children with terminal cancer...the stock answer of 'tis god's will'...well we can now ask godbot what god's will actually is!
Posted by: Josh
|
May 22, 2009 1:22 PM
-10 for use of LOL.
Posted by: existentialdrift
|
May 22, 2009 1:23 PM
I just ran across this related story, 'We did not know that child abuse was a crime,' says retired Catholic archbishop".
It is easy to point at religion and see that it is morally bankrupt, but the sheer scale of all this is unbelievable. This is an old-boys-club for some of the worst people in society, yet they will continue to get a pass from society in general. It is utterly sickening.
Posted by: Marcus Ranum | May 22, 2009 1:34 PM
I can't see how telling people that their sins are forgiven (assuming they do the correct genuflection before they are completely dead) doesn't encourage sin in the here and now. But what do I know? If one were to try to figure out what "morals" are, by looking at christian religion, one would come up with some very convoluted "rules", indeed.
Posted by: SC, OM | May 22, 2009 1:35 PM
I'll try to live with the shame.
:P
Posted by: Josh
|
May 22, 2009 1:42 PM
Right. You know the look I'm giving you.
Posted by: Religion™ Brand Brain Staples | May 22, 2009 1:46 PM
Fixed that for you.
What? We all know that's what the man in the silly hat really meant.
Posted by: SC, OM | May 22, 2009 1:48 PM
Well, there are real responses and there are...expedient responses.
Posted by: Religion™ Brand Brain Staples | May 22, 2009 1:49 PM
*cough* I want everyone to pretend that I misspelled Church on purpose out of disdain, not incompetence. Yeah, disdain, the ticket.
*shifty eyes*
Posted by: Sven DiMilo | May 22, 2009 1:52 PM
There is nothing wrong with "LOL" if one has truly and honestly L'ed OL.
IMO.
Posted by: Josh
|
May 22, 2009 1:52 PM
I know! Because you're just so proper.
*ducks back*
Posted by: vjack | May 22, 2009 1:53 PM
As strange as those hats are, at least they were effective at concealing rabbit ears. Yes, I watch too much South Park.
Posted by: Cuttlefish, OM | May 22, 2009 1:57 PM
I saw a man who wore a hat,
So big, so bright, so tall--
So heavy on his head, it sat,
The biggest hat of all.
He carried this tremendous weight,
Although his neck did strain,
Because it made him contemplate
Christ's suffering and pain.
It made him feel that pain is good--
It fortified his soul.
He suffered greatly, as he should,
For thus is mankind's role.
He wore it proudly, even though
The atheists would scoff;
It hurt his head, but even so
He would not take it off.
The moral here, I think you'll find,
Is easy to apply:
Take off that hat, and free your mind,
And hold your head up high.
(...slinks back to the pile of grading...)
Posted by: SC, OM | May 22, 2009 2:11 PM
*smacks Josh on the back of the neck*
Hang in there, Cuttlefish.
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | May 22, 2009 2:13 PM
Wonder Woman - garish?
Would you say that with the golden Lasso of Truth around your neck?
Chivalry is truly dead!
Posted by: BJ | May 22, 2009 2:17 PM
Nailed the Church and its contradictions wonderfully. (As a recovering Catholic, I sometimes refer to myself as "an incense survivor".)
On the other hand, we are in the season of convocations and I don't think academics have any basis for criticizing clerics for the way they dress!
Posted by: Josh
|
May 22, 2009 2:17 PM
Priceless.
Okay, so that's how it's gonna be, eh? Alright.
*looks around for his body armor*
Posted by: Richard Harris
|
May 22, 2009 2:18 PM
Hey, go easy on the hat. These guys need hats like that for their pointy heads.
Posted by: ArchangelChuck | May 22, 2009 2:20 PM
RamblinDude wins.
Posted by: Abs42 | May 22, 2009 2:23 PM
I have been watching some of this on the news - utter utter bastards - that is all I have to say - I wish there was a hell so they could rot in it.
I have two young boys, and if anyone EVER did that to them I would be castrating them with a rusty blunt knife - don't say I didn't warn you.
I am gobsmacked at how the priests haven't had irate parents attacking them.
Posted by: SC, OM | May 22, 2009 2:28 PM
{The Lasso of Truth rocked.]
Won't help you.
...Or anyone. *sigh* - the human condition
Posted by: Heaventree
|
May 22, 2009 2:34 PM
Hey, I like the hat, but when did Ron Paul become Archbishop of Westminster?
Posted by: Brownian, OM
|
May 22, 2009 2:35 PM
As someone who occasionally wears outlandish clothing in public (I've got a great Tom Jones circa 1976-esque yellow mesh singlet that only barely manages to hold back my tsunami of hirsute), I must admit I'm dismayed by the exhortation that we should live in a world where "small children would point and whoop with laughter" at someone because of their clothing choices. I'm interested in a world where there's less churlishness towards non-conformity, not more.
Posted by: Sunfell | May 22, 2009 2:41 PM
I've noticed that there seems to be a reality disconnect between guys who wear funny clothing and fish-head hats, and the Rest of Us.
They seem to hate everything- females especially- and do not want to listen to anyone but their fusty peers.
Typepad is hosed up. I could not log in.
Posted by: Crudely Wrott | May 22, 2009 2:49 PM
The new guy with a bad hat, Vincent Nichols --
Well, I have observed myself and quite a few others after a religious conversion and it was apparent to some degree in all cases that my/their thinking became narrow and specialized, and some things were just off limits. Church dogma, don'cha know.
Not exactly reason complemented by faith. In my case and for a pitiful handful of those others this process was reversed.
Faith and reason are crudely opposed, but only from the viewpoint of faith. From the view of reason the opposition is characterized as becoming easier to pin down and refute, if not less frustrating. Due to the dwindling resources of reason available to the faithful, they keep drifting further afield as reason continues to expose mysteries and answers questions.
Posted by: RamblinDude
|
May 22, 2009 2:56 PM
RamblinDude wins.
Hmmm, kinda wish I hadn't misspelled "their" now.
Oh, and Cuttlefish OM,
LOL! (in genuine delight)
Posted by: Sven DiMilo | May 22, 2009 3:05 PM
I just learned that the guy who came up with the Lasso of Truth also developed an early prototype of the physiological "lie-detector" (polygraph; only it wasn't yet poly because he just measured systolic blood pressure). Huh.
Posted by: Nerdette | May 22, 2009 3:12 PM
Hmm.. I should think in this day and age (particularly in a college town) you can walk down the street wearing any hat you want and only get passing stares. I got more stares caring my tuba on my back (I'm 5'3"; my tuba is 3'6") on the bus than I did wearing a bonnet all day for a class presentation. Morris must be more conservative than Hyde Park :P
Posted by: 'Tis Himself, OM
|
May 22, 2009 3:21 PM
That's not a hat. This is a hat.* Note the blue satin cloak and gloves. The right accessories really set off the outfit.
*Picture is of Anti-Pope Gregory XVII of the Palmarian Catholic Church.
Posted by: SC, OM | May 22, 2009 3:28 PM
So who came up with this, I wonder...:
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1235u_barbarella-orgasmatron_fun
Posted by: Kevin | May 22, 2009 3:33 PM
I remember seeing a comedian who commented on the popes apparently magic hat. It is the hat that gives the pope his credence. As he pointed out, no one would take birth control advice from an 80 year old virgin in a John Deere hat.
Posted by: Holbach
|
May 22, 2009 3:33 PM
That demented religious moron wears a hat that even a legitimate clown would not wear and he feels qualified to discourse on things his shit brain is not cognizant of? And this same moron would laugh at a mentally challenged person with a hat with a propeller on top, and he seriously thinks he lacks all the trappings for a demented idiot? And when he makes an incredible insane statement, "For jesus, the inability to believe in god and to live by faith is the greatest of evils", he is sure that he has not become totally unhinged and purged his infested brain of all reason. As I said previously, it is only in the numerical majority that accepts this demented religious dimwit as a sage of sage that religious dementia will always prevail. What pure joy it would be to meet this religious scum on the street and reduce him to the retarded fecal matter he truly is. Only with religion can reason succumb to the numerically superior insane hordes. It will never end, especially when insane morons with weird hats are allowed to walk around and puke insanities and get away with it.
Posted by: Josh
|
May 22, 2009 3:37 PM
*nods at the accuracy of the statement*
Posted by: Sven DiMilo | May 22, 2009 3:54 PM
lesbians?
French lesbians?
Posted by: John Phillips, FCD | May 22, 2009 3:55 PM
Cuttlefish, YAY, always a pleasure.
Posted by: SC, OM | May 22, 2009 4:06 PM
Ah, peut-être.
Posted by: Rik G | May 22, 2009 4:13 PM
Hats, robes, accessories--they've got it all! Remember that fashion show from Fallini's "Roma"?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYzRL9YIswQ
Posted by: me | May 22, 2009 4:13 PM
Asshats, all of them.
Posted by: Rik G | May 22, 2009 4:15 PM
Oops! That should be Fellini's Roma, not Fallini!
Posted by: Newfie
|
May 22, 2009 5:21 PM
Well, there you have it. I'm evil, but.. the raping and brutalizing of children by the Church is good. So sayeth the Church.
Hope all you believers are going to be happy in heaven with these folks.... for eternity.
Posted by: Newfie
|
May 22, 2009 5:34 PM
Nice, a man covers up abuse, put him in the position where he can cover up more abuse.
Come On, Cracker Lovers! Where's your outrage now?... fuckin' chickenhawks.
Posted by: Sven DiMilo | May 22, 2009 5:54 PM
Evolution of the penis-hat
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | May 22, 2009 5:59 PM
snicker
Though, some of those do like like asshats.
Posted by: Sven DiMilo | May 22, 2009 6:03 PM
good eyePosted by: cicely
|
May 22, 2009 6:23 PM
PM @ 31, that's not a hat. That is the spawn of the unholy mating of a hat and a wedding cake.
existentialdrift @ 39:
*jaw drops, hits floor*
I can only assume willful ignorance, as a deliberate attempt at plausible deniability.
Posted by: MadScientist
|
May 22, 2009 7:15 PM
@Sven #1:
The hat does say it all: "I'm the biggest dick around, and you'd better not screw with me." When god ruled the world, anyone who laughed at the hat could be tortured, shown some christ-loving, and murdered. Ah, I miss the good old days when religion ruled the world.
Posted by: frog | May 22, 2009 8:06 PM
Now, why do those hats always look like penises?
Posted by: Kel | May 22, 2009 8:31 PM
I can see his point of view, it's right there in the bible. The only unforgivable sin is to deny God's existence.Just goes to show how fucked-up religion is.
Posted by: Anonymous | May 22, 2009 8:40 PM
Amen Brother...Posted by: Emmet, OM
|
May 22, 2009 8:48 PM
If your penis looks like that, see a urologist — STAT!
Posted by: Ron | May 22, 2009 11:42 PM
The saddest thing, the most heartbreaking thing, is that thousands of parents will continue to place the well-being and upbringing of their children into the hands of these twisted rat bastards.
Posted by: Jadehawk, OM
|
May 22, 2009 11:46 PM
holy bloody hell
Posted by: Kel | May 22, 2009 11:56 PM
That's really messed up. Though it being criminal or not doesn't excuse the behaviour. It's wrong for moral / ethical reasons, not because of legal reasons.
Posted by: Tassie Devil | May 23, 2009 1:03 AM
here come the apologists:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/damian_thompson/blog/2009/05/21/the_times_disgraces_itself_with_report_linking_archbishop_nicholss_installation_to_irish_child_abuse
...it has another comments section that needs correcting, methinks.
Posted by: Michael Gray | May 23, 2009 1:29 AM
Great!
The more these evil bastards make totally obscene arse-holes of themselves in public, the quicker their remaining faithful will drop them.
Posted by: Talzy | May 23, 2009 2:02 AM
While watching Angels and Demons, I confess that I was seized with mad jealousy that cardinals and pontiff may parade about in bright red dresses and absurd head-gear unquestioned.
However, I suspect the assertion that someone wearing a dumb hat for secular reasons would be persecuted has not been well-tested. We only have a few personal anecdotes.
And so, here is the Skwid Cap. It can be printed out, cut out with scissors, and assembled with a glue stick in under an hour.
Photo of a blue Skwid Cap:
http://fc01.deviantart.com/fs45/f/2009/142/5/6/Wearing_a_SKWID_Cap_by_Talzhemir1.jpg
Skwid Cap kit (one 8 page .PDF printout)
http://fc04.deviantart.com/fs43/f/2009/142/1/5/S_K_W_I_D__Hat_by_Talzhemir1.pdf
It will take more than a few atheists wearing Skwid Caps to discern if unreasoning fashion forgiveness in favor of clergy truly exists.
Also, we may have overlooked some special effect of embroidering little pictures (of crosses, holy wafers, fish, small white birds with leaves in their beaks, and cute bloody lambs) have upon making a hat socially acceptable.
For accurate comparison, we shall need a number of Skwid Caps constructed from highest-quality felt and watered silk. They should then be embroidered with little depictions of atoms, polio vaccine cookies, zebra fish, African gray parrots, cute bloody removed tumors, and other personable icons of science.
To be a fair test, the symbols should be executed in copious amounts of real silver and gold threads, pearls, rubies, emeralds, sapphires, and so on.
Perhaps we also need to take into account the age of the wearer, and the specific color of the hat. Is there some instinctive human reaction to bright red that stifles revulsion or honesty? Our theory needs to account for why Red Hat ladies can apparently also get away with so much.
Posted by: astrounit | May 23, 2009 2:58 AM
The archbishop beams as if he's got a secret...
What do you suppose they're hiding underneath that Towering Edifice?
Maybe there's another hat under there.
Nested hats, like Russian dolls - at least 7 of them, one within the other.
All the way to the Vatican.
The littlest one sits upon their horn- uh, holiness.
Posted by: Gorogh | May 23, 2009 4:37 AM
I see nothing per se wrong with hats, or this hat in particular, in any stylish fictional religion. The priests from the Esoteric Order of Dagon wore tiaras, too.
And even if it was revealed these christian guys are not wearing the hat for religious purpose, Zak McKracken solves the riddle. Oh wait, the phone is ringing...
Posted by: MadScientist | May 23, 2009 5:11 AM
@Talzy #92: That looks like the FSM, not a squid. PBUTFSM
Posted by: ihateaphids | May 23, 2009 11:48 AM
ah but there is a comic hero with that hat!
BATTLE POPE!
http://comics.wikia.com/wiki/Battle_Pope
Posted by: michee | May 23, 2009 11:51 AM
The Vatican supported chapter of NAMBLA, thats all priests are.
Why dont they stop it? Because those freaks are offenders too.
Deranged savages.
Posted by: ihateaphids | May 23, 2009 11:52 AM
ah but there is a comic hero with that hat!
BATTLE POPE!
http://comics.wikia.com/wiki/Battle_Pope
Posted by: fallan | May 23, 2009 11:56 AM
These priests have more in common with atheists than true Christian believers.Because they calls themselves "christians" doesnt mean they are.Jesus said by their fruits you will know them These men were evil and will pay the price at the judgement.But of course for atheists there is no judgement no justice for those abused just oblivion so thats alright then Ugh!These are the words of Jesus for such men.
Mattew 18:16
But whosoever shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.
You jump at the chance to condemn ALL Christians by the actions of evil men who were wolves in sheeps clothing.You have to ask yourselves are you really concerned about what happened to those who were abused or did you jump for joy so you could attack the christian faith I think I know which one it was.
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
May 23, 2009 12:05 PM
Fallan, still missing the point. Priests, who supposedly know what is Xian behavior better than anybody, behaved in a very unXian manner. Christ would be very disappointed with them. We find the irony in this delicious. Secondly, either you demand that the offenders be jailed, or you are part of the problem. This is where we condemn the moderate believers, since they aren't doing that. Thirdly, atheists had nothing to do with this, and you irrational attempts to say because people are atheists they are more likely to behave in the same is wrong. At least until you can show some hard evidence, versus personal opinion, otherwise.
Posted by: Knockgoats | May 23, 2009 12:27 PM
"But whosoever shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea." - Matthew 8:16 [my emphasis]
So, apparently Jesus had no problem with the abuse of children who don't believe in him. Ugh.
Fallan, atheists sometimes abuse children, but what they don't have is a vast and powerful organisation systematically covering up their crimes, as the Catholic Church is still doing: in Ireland it insisted that no names should be named and no-one should be prosecuted as a result of this investigation. Moreover, the beatings, slave labour and lies about the death of parents were official policy of the Church. As for your claim that critics of the Church are not concerned with those abused, but just wish to attack the Christian faith, why don't you listen to what the survivors of the abuse themselves are saying? Those I have heard react to your kind of apologetics with anger and contempt.
Posted by: Piltdown Man | May 23, 2009 4:39 PM
ihateaphids @ 98;
Warrior Nun doesn't get to wear a hat.
Posted by: McBrolloks | May 23, 2009 6:14 PM
The worlds oldest and most evil cult: The Roman Catholic Church
Posted in Child Abuse, Cult, Religion, Roman Catholic Church on May 23, 2009 by McBrolloks
There is a clear pattern here. Everywhere the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) operates, there is thousands of cases of child abuse, rapes and other atrocities committed by priests who work for them.
These monsters rape children (boys and girls), they rape nuns and women who work for the church or are part of their congregation. Then they forced the nuns who got pregnant after getting raped repeatedly to have abortions. Some of the nuns even died from AIDS as a direct result of getting raped by priests.
Now if this isn’t a clear and sickening pattern, I don’t know what is.
What baffles me is that they get away with this everywhere, for centuries. Why isn’t there a government in the world who kicks these bastards out of their countries?
They should get sued till they are out of business. They should be put on trail, starting with the Bishops, and sentenced to serve time in jail for their deeds.
How can people believe in a god that allows his “employees” to do this?
How can people still go to these churches? It is insane!
If the RCC really does serve a god, then that god is a sick and twisted bastard. I say put him on trail too, and if he doesn’t show up in court, then dismiss him as a ghost.
It is time to label the RCC for the evil organization it is. They are nothing other than a sick cult.
The RCC is definitely not a place to take your children. Or anyone you care about.
Posted by: McBrolloks | May 23, 2009 6:17 PM
The worlds oldest and most evil cult: The Roman Catholic Church
Posted in Child Abuse, Cult, Religion, Roman Catholic Church on May 23, 2009 by McBrolloks
There is a clear pattern here. Everywhere the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) operates, there is thousands of cases of child abuse, rapes and other atrocities committed by priests who work for them.
These monsters rape children (boys and girls), they rape nuns and women who work for the church or are part of their congregation. Then they forced the nuns who got pregnant after getting raped repeatedly to have abortions. Some of the nuns even died from AIDS as a direct result of getting raped by priests.
Now if this isn’t a clear and sickening pattern, I don’t know what is.
What baffles me is that they get away with this everywhere, for centuries. Why isn’t there a government in the world who kicks these bastards out of their countries?
They should get sued till they are out of business. They should be put on trail, starting with the Bishops, and sentenced to serve time in jail for their deeds.
How can people believe in a god that allows his “employees” to do this?
How can people still go to these churches? It is insane!
If the RCC really does serve a god, then that god is a sick and twisted bastard. I say put him on trail too, and if he doesn’t show up in court, then dismiss him as a ghost.
It is time to label the RCC for the evil organization it is. They are nothing other than a sick cult.
The RCC is definitely not a place to take your children. Or anyone you care about.
Posted by: McBrolloks | May 23, 2009 6:22 PM
The worlds oldest and most evil cult: The Roman Catholic Church
Posted in Child Abuse, Cult, Religion, Roman Catholic Church on May 23, 2009 by McBrolloks
There is a clear pattern here. Everywhere the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) operates, there is thousands of cases of child abuse, rapes and other atrocities committed by priests who work for them.
These monsters rape children (boys and girls), they rape nuns and women who work for the church or are part of their congregation. Then they forced the nuns who got pregnant after getting raped repeatedly to have abortions. Some of the nuns even died from AIDS as a direct result of getting raped by priests.
Now if this isn’t a clear and sickening pattern, I don’t know what is.
What baffles me is that they get away with this everywhere, for centuries. Why isn’t there a government in the world who kicks these bastards out of their countries?
They should get sued till they are out of business. They should be put on trail, starting with the Bishops, and sentenced to serve time in jail for their deeds.
How can people believe in a god that allows his “employees” to do this?
How can people still go to these churches? It is insane!
If the RCC really does serve a god, then that god is a sick and twisted bastard. I say put him on trail too, and if he doesn’t show up in court, then dismiss him as a ghost.
It is time to label the RCC for the evil organization it is. They are nothing other than a sick cult.
The RCC is definitely not a place to take your children. Or anyone you care about.
Posted by: fallan | May 24, 2009 5:04 AM
Ive said these men are evil and the Catholic church and those in charge charge who knew what was going on should be charged and if the Irish police dont charge them then it should be taken to the court of human rights.
The Catholic church has millions if not billions of money in its coffers and should be hit hard even if that means stripping out some of the vast wealth in the Vatican.
Im a Christian and am appalled by what these priests did and if they are still alive and get convicted then they should spend the rest of their lives in jail.
The words of Jesus is to the point offend children and if you escape justice in this life you will not in the next.But as atheists on the other hand dont believe in a judgement after death so some of those who did such evil acts and are not prosecuted in this life will after their death according to you will just go into oblivion.
Posted by: Rorschach
|
May 24, 2009 5:27 AM
@ 105,
Source,please,or abstain from making extraordinary claims.
Posted by: McBrolloks
|
May 24, 2009 11:13 AM
Fair enough. Here is one article, from the San Francisco Chronicle.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2001/11/23/MN172663.DTL
And a Pulitzer Prize winning article from the Boston Globe:
http://www.pulitzer.org/archives/6741
Posted by: Rorschach | May 24, 2009 9:24 PM
Thanks.