Klevius: The Pope ought not to have a "dialogue" with muslims before he has vetted them for Human Rights violating sharia islam!
Pope: God must never be used to justify hatred and violence.”
Then he immediately contradicted himself by warning the religious leaders that “young people are being radicalized in the name of religion to sow discord and fear, and to tear at the very fabric of our societies.”
Klevius: This is the very difference between secularism (Atheism) and religion. Human Rights vs kind of human rights. Religious purity is defined by its distance to Universal Human Rights equality.
Pope: “How important it is that we be seen as prophets of peace, peacemakers who invite others to live in peace, harmony and mutual respect”.
Klevius: In religious segregation it's always the most evil that benefits the most from such "mutual respect”. Here's an example:
According to the Vatican, the Paris attacks have heightened the pope’s sense of urgency about the need for interreligious dialogue.
Klevius: "Interreligious dialogue" may strengthen each religion - and thereby by necessity also true islam, the so called "radical islam".
Pope: "Those living in such (poor) communities are victims of new forms of colonialism by rich co untries. These are the wounds inflicted by minorities who cling to power and wealth, who selfishly squander while a growing majority is forced to flee to abandoned, filthy and rundown peripheries.”
Klevius (still the world's foremost expert on sex segregation/apartheid - sad isn't it - and therefore also on islam and other "monotheisms"*):
* You don't have to go philosophically deep to realize the weirdness of such a concept as "monotheism". Only racist "god logic" makes any sense - leaving those who defend Human Rights equality (i.e. Atheists) outside this creepy outdated illogic. The definition of a "moderate" religion is how close it has managed to reform itself towards Human Rights equality.
The new black upper-class are those coming from Western universities and Western culture! Just think about how they would have been looked upon with whiter skin color! Or just read stupid sociology etc works about "white/Western colonialism".
Europe is the most secularized Human Rights bastion after socialist* fascism caused WW2. Industrialization was born in Europe after having got rid of Catholicism. In the rest of the world it's Atheist countries such as Japan and China who have been the most technologically progressive.Then comes the backward continents Catholic Latin/South America and last the continent destroyed by islam, i.e. Africa.
* Fascism and Nazism grew out of "moderate" socialist parties - much like state Communism grew out of social-democracy before the 1917 revolution.
When should the Pope visit Mecca and the Saudi dictator family who is behind most of islam's atrocities today?
Klevius: Isn't it puzzling that both the Pope and the die hard (and presumably non-religious) socialist Jeremy Corbyn both avoid Saudi Arabia, the "guardian of islam", while still talking about "dialogue" with islam and "islamophobia"!?
Klevius wrote 10 years ago:
Sunday, August 21, 2005
Pope Ratzinger: Cooperate against extremism! Klevius translation: Castrate Islam!
Ratzinger: Islam features "a very marked subordination of woman to man"
He also says: "the quest for certainty and simplicity becomes dangerous
when it leads to fanaticism and narrow-mindedness". Compare this with
Klevius Definition of religion and uncertainty!
Also see July 26 posting: True roots of "true" Islam!
Also see July 26 posting: True roots of "true" Islam!
Klevius wrote a year ago:
Monday, December 01, 2014
Pope asks muslim leaders to speak up against islamic state. Why?
The religion of piece(s)
John Cleese on muslim stupidity
So called "moderate muslims" (i.e. non-practicing "muslims") are disgusting racist cowards who hide themselves from muslim terrorism by saying they are muslims while non-muslims are targeted. On top of this they (together with true muslims) also benefit from Western "diversity" policy under which they can socially bully and terrorize non-muslims by using the handy "islamophobia" and "hate" sword."British muslims" have greater 'faith in the police' than the rest of the population. So what about muslim jihad victims?
Six out of ten "British"* muslims rate the police as either good or excellent according to the British Journal of Criminology.
* You can't be a muslim without sharia, and you can't have a sharia ruled Britain - or?!
Klevius (who, btw, also happens to have a Master's Degree in criminology): Perfectly sharia compliant police after years of "education" by the same imams who support those who kill and despise British soldiers in the name of islamic ideology. However, a more telling report would be who have the least faith in the police. Klevius qualified guess is that it would be the victims of muslim jihadists.
It would help a lot of girls/women if BBC's sharia presenter Mishail Husain would commit apostasy by dismissing sharia. But she never will because she isn't as brave as Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Or does she propose Human Rights violating sharia for Britain? Why isn't she even asked about it? There seems reportedly to be lot of time while she is laughing at (ignorant?) British license fee payers together with other BBC presenters during
Klevius wrote:
Monday, July 29, 2013Pope Francis: Gays are ok - women are not!
Klevius intellectual translation: Whereas (male) gays are seen as fully humans although sexually dysfunctional, women are seen as a different species. Therefore the Pope & Co can accept gay priests but not female priests.
Pope Francis: The Catholic door is closed for women priests and the decision is definitive!
As a background you may read Klevius' Sex and Gender Tutorial
The female patriarchy that keeps the Pope & Co and islam ticking
Klevius (sadly still the web's by far foremost expert on sex segregation/apartheid): While reading the Catholic horror from Brazil below please keep islam in mind! And, in an extension, think about general sex segregation, and you will start understanding what Klevius is ranting about...
Catholic nuns (O’Connor & Drury 1998) reporting from Brazil and the US:
"It's our culture and we can't change it,"
Clearly, the inhibiting environment of patriarchy and
machismo is primarily to blame for the depressed condition of
Brazilian women. But, from what the interviewees have shared, it is
also clear that other factors play a significant part in women's
oppression. The fatalistic attitude of many was startling. While
complaining about their subjugation, women shrugged off their
responsibility to do something about it. Many said, "it's our
culture and we can't change it," or "the price is too
high." Could the underlying reason for this reluctance to change
be a fear of losing touch with the "self' that women know and
with whom they have become comfortable? Their attitudes make it
difficult for those who have the courage to confront their
oppressors, be they clergy, macho men, or other women, to effect even
a minimal change.
Fear of ridicule, change, and loss of security
A major reason women choose to maintain the status quo
in the church, and want other women to do so, is their fear of
ridicule, change, and loss of security. The clamor in the United
States for a married clergy and women priests threatens "good
women's" comfortable place in the church. These women appear to
be more interested in retaining their image than in challenging
the injustices that face them daily.
Most Brazilian women are paralyzed by their machistic
society and face total ostracism if they so much as address the topic
of sexism in society or in the church. Frightened women from both
countries, who have found their identity within the patriarchal
church, become angry at women who promote equality because they fear
losing their status, inferior as it is. In different yet similar
ways, they indicate they benefit from the oppressive structure and
often persecute other women who try to change the system.
An inherent need to put other women down
Among some women in both countries there seems to be an inherent need to put other women down. Women frequently do not help one another. They criticize each other, thereby working against solidarity. They tend to replicate the patriarchal model by using what little power they have to force other women into submission. By criticizing women who speak for equality and by reporting such "heretics" to the clergy or hierarchy, they marginalize those who have the courage to stand against the tide of clerical oppression.
Women act as tormentors both from the top down and from the bottom up. This was evidenced by an Episcopal woman priest in the United States who admitted she oppressed women because that was the only model she had ever seen in the church. Another example is, the sister in the diocesan office who, behind the scenes, forced the bishop's secretary to resign by overtly oppressing her. Similarly, the women in a Brazilian parish boycotted their Methodist minister simply because of her gender. In another Catholic parish the women
jeered and taunted a woman catechist because she gave a
good homily and distributed Communion, roles they felt belonged
to men only.
Western liberation
Those communities who have European or North American members are likely to be in the forefront in liberating themselves from the burdens their patriarchal formation has placed upon them.
Certain women in each country can be found who, in their
efforts to achieve change, burn with anger against the injustices
they are experiencing both in society and in the church and who
search for ways to confront these sins.
Fear and jealousy
A group of women from a base community discussed the
various aspects of fear in their dealings with one another.
We're afraid of leaving our own comfortable space. We
give our rights to somebody else because we don't want to assume
responsibility. We could be participating together and deciding
together, but we don't. We bring something to be discussed but we
don't say anything. Sometimes we're afraid of being criticized. Fear
is the reason why women who want their space and when there is an
opportunity to get it, don't use it. [Older Women in Favela, Sao
Paulo]
Fear has a lot to do with it. Women don't have as much experience being active and speaking out, assuming responsibility in a wider reality. They assume responsibility in their own house, but when you ask them to do something in the community they refuse. Fear is the problem with women. [Middle‑aged Woman in CEB, Petropolis]
Women are afraid that other women will talk about them if they are different, if they do things against the social customs. [Young Married Woman, Brasilia]
Acting behind another's back is a lot more common than
open conflict. Sometimes if we say something, we're afraid we'll be
given more work. We withdraw to protect ourselves, not to solve
problems. [Middle‑aged Woman in CEB, ParanA]
For the most part, the women who were not afraid to challenge the status quo were sisters or economically independent women. A wealthy woman in the north noted:
Although fear is clearly a major contributor to the
oppression of women by other women, another problem for women in the
church is jealousy. "Everyone is looking for her place in the
sun.,'3
Among the things that are destroying the work among
women is jealousy It seems one wants to see the other fall. Women
seem to thrive on seeing others make mistakes. They don't even give
credit where credit is due. They can't even give a compliment, but
criticize each other. They don't motivate or help each other to get
better. They never praise work well done. This kills the work and the
motivation. It drives competent women out of church ministry.
Patriarchy functions only with the cooperation of women
Women in both countries must take heed of Gerda Lerners
warning that patriarchy functions only with the cooperation of women,
through their continued acceptance and embrace of a system we
now know to be oppressive to all, women and men alike. Women must
stop thinking of themselves only as "victims" and start
examining their role as "perpetrators" of patriarchy
(O’Connor Drury
Women in both countries must take heed of Gerda Lerners
warning that patriarchy functions only with the cooperation of women,
through their continued acceptance and embrace of a system we
now know to be oppressive to all, women and men alike. Women must
stop thinking of themselves only as "victims" and start
examining their role as "perpetrators" of patriarchy.
With naive consciousness they continue to promote what their mothers and grandmothers told them
In many groups the pros and cons of the type of
education given to women were debated. The focus was on how education
has been used as a weapon against women: teaching them that they have
no worth, depriving some of ever discovering what it means to be a
woman, exposing them to fragmented ideas so that with naive
consciousness they continue to promote what their mothers and
grandmothers told them; instructing them to he submissive and
therefore incapable of independent thought or actions.
"It's not just culture we inherit in life. Women must face up to their historical programming," noted Irma Passom, former religious and political activist. "Our grandmothers and mothers had a certain guilt, which they passed on.
Women are formed to hang their heads. I saw this in my own home. The
mother passes these ideas on in the family. There is no point in trying to
change this. Since our mothers inculcated this idea in
us, so in religious life
when we encounter domination we allow ourselves to be
dominated. It is a
vicious circle. The big responsibility is the mothers.
If she isn't aware of what
she is doing then the children will carry it on.
[Sister, Bahia]
A second sister offered a slightly different view "I
also think that religious
life can wake women up to their own value." She
explained that religious life
was neither the cause of women's oppression nor their
awareness.
It comes from what they have been educated or raised to
believe, The essen
tial point is the family, the way you were raised.
Formation either helps you
get more repressed or frees you more. It either
reinforces what you had at
home or opens places for new ideas.
She seemed to answer her own question of why it is that
the same formation
provides growth for some while crippling others.
No comments:
Post a Comment