|
I think historically that while King Henry the VIII wanted a divorce (because he did in some way
really love and care for Catherine of Aragon) that part of the reason for the formation of the
Church of England was Anne Bolyn's doing. Her family was pushing Henry as shown by his decision to
later behead them (yes he beheaded more with Anne Bolyn then just her). I think that a good society
is one that is consentious of others, that it helps to develop people more. In a large way that is
part of what the Royal Family does - they set standards (although I can't say they're always good
standards, but they do set them). Things such as education, dedication to duty and faithful service
can be seen in Henry and (oh bloody hell what's his brother's name - Charles? Hmmph) regardless
they've taken more into them in setting the standards that were formed from their mother. In giving
something back to those whom choose to see them. They offer up support and I (even as an American)
don't see them as people who are out of touch (much like their father). |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
The split of godbots in Europe meant there were two dictatorships instead of one. People who were
persecuted in one religion could run away and hide in the other's camp, while the dictators said,
"Ha ha, he's on our side now!"
When the catholic cult was solely dominant, it was no different than the Soviets for its murderous
behaviour, and the prostate-ents would have been no different, happy to kill millions. It was
Martin Luther, the founder of the reformation, who wrote, "The Jews And Their Lies" to promote the
murder of Jews.
Free speech, along with social and scientific advancement, only happen in secular societies
where no religion or ideology dominates. All social problems that exist today - hate towards women,
gays, minorities, other ideologies and ethnicities, rationalized greed/selfishness/war - are
perpetrated by religious nutbags of every stripe. |
| |
K9  14 Sep 2008 17:51
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Not at all and here's why... The Catholic church was the superpower of it's day controlling most of
Europe and becoming quite corrupt in its power. It's most questionable and controlling processes
were exactly what the Protestants rebelled against. However, EVEN if the Protestants hadn't opposed
it and split others would have. Destitute peasants would have rebelled for economic reasons even if
not for religious. Islam would have still remained a polar opposite knocking at the Southern door
of the empire. Someone would have taken the church on. And even in Italy the abuses of the Pope
during the Inquisitions and especially when a Jewish child was stolen and forced to be raised
Catholic is why militarily the Italians beat back the Catholic church to remain in the limited space
now known as the Vatican. So in many different ways someone would have taken down the Catholic
church even if it wasn't the Protestants. Then in terms of your second point (whether it destroyed
holy society) I'll point you back to the fact that the Inquisition, the selling of favours, etc.,
are solid proof the holy society you believe existed back then really did NOT exist. It was corrupt
to the core even then. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Now that is really funny. The way I read it...the king of England wanted a divorce. The
self-proclaimed "church" got a taste of it's own medicine when it wouldn't grant the divorce.
The king of England declared himself the head of the "church". Why not? So then, he granted himself
a divorce. Of course, the marriage didn't go too well. Didn't he have her and her brother killed?
And I don't believe that had anything to do with Protestants, unless you consider declaring yourself
the head of the church of England being a protest against the "church".
Let's face it..
Just be thankful England and the rest of Europe exists after their great civilized history.
A good, holy society. I can't stop laughing. Would that be the one that would kill and torture those
who had different beliefs? Yep. That would be the one. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|