Pos System For Frozen Yogurt Shops

Ateofobi the fray

According to Minister Frattini, the latest in a long series of ateofobi institutions, the atheists would be such a threat to society to make urgent need for a "holy alliance" between the monotheistic religions (two of which, it should be noted, along with other totalitarian ideologies have made the greatest slaughter in history) to fight them, and then think about a "new humanism to counter this perverse". He says in a step letter Osservatore Romano, where he also performed in the usual defense office of the crucifix "symbol of the secular state." What would the Minister, the reopening of the courts of the Inquisition to send the atheists at the stake?

unspeakable These statements are based on lies and the dangerous effects, do not deserve comment except to stress that who produces a show so full of platitudes about atheism and so violently against a considerable part of Italian citizens, not worthy of his post of Minister of the Republic, and has done well to write to the Uaar Napolitano protest and demand the resignation of Franco Frattini: one that has an institutional role is so important and which should represent all Italians (if for no other reason to take all the salary, not only by believers) can say these things at home in front of the fireplace with his friends, not as a minister of the Republic.

remains rather to understand what they think the new crusaders of the so called 'devout atheists', those who have served so well the case in recent years: they are dangerous too? Giuliano Ferrara, who tried to found a party on abortion and calls for no mercy by the Church, Marcello Pera, who is a friend of the pope in person-say, Massimo Cacciari, immediately jumped up to defend the crucifix, and so on: they too must be normalized? Who knows, but you will notice that the war atheism is the new frontier of this pontificate, combattua on two fronts: one-this-is the frontal attack, which also makes use of many zealous papists flatterers of the pope even more who are inside the palace, the other is more subtle, and aims to use the undecided and opportunists (above) imprisoning cage in which they called the "Court of the Gentiles" mentioned in the last month by Archbishop Gianfranco Ravasi and all the Vatican hierarchy, which will ultimately be exhibited as trophies as the 'big game'. So the comparison is intended oltretevere.

If it is not necessary to respond to the statements of Frattini, who had already defined secularism "reverse racism" , (and expecting to be able to understand how the atheists would be a threat to society, then how should play this fight against them) is rather useful to give an alarm to all the lay Italians, but also atheists or believers Critics' Catholic adults, "as it was Weather: the condition of non-believers is no longer an irrelevant detail are already the rights of non-believers are lower than those of the believers (ie, on civil unions law on end of life, religion hour, more funding or less absurd requirements and other privileges to the Church, etc..), then if the crazy idea of \u200b\u200bthe 'crusade' against non-believers should have happened then it would play in our lives everyday in all its aspects. So just shut , but wake up and react, in all areas and every day!

Getus In Facebook Com

Denial and homophobia

After the case of university professor Teramo who gave a lesson on the tragedy of the Shoah denier , and in the wake of almost daily rants of Ahmadinejad and cronies, Riccardo Pacifici, the head of the Jewish community of Rome, proposed a law that punishes the denial. Assuming that we could not be farther from the positions of anyone denying the Holocaust, the question arises: in a country sick of secularism and rampant racism, because the denial needs a state law that punishes and homophobia rather not?

The Act concerns homophobia was finally sunk a year ago, in a Parliament has not even discussed blocking the vote on the ruling of unconstitutionality submitted by the party ultra-Catholic UDC and also voted by the PDL (Finian excluded) and the League, with dissenting votes instead of the PD and IDV.

comparing the positions that led to the two bills, it is not clear where it ends the right to express an opinion, as clearly unfounded, stupid and idiotic, and where it should begin with the crime and its punishment. But mostly affects the difference in view between the two issues: the denial needless to talk about it, so obvious is its inconsistency, but homophobia? Why the Taliban Vatican nostrani and all their minions should remain free to say that atrocities such as homosexuality is "unnatural," that gays are perverts and should be maintained even against their will, pointing out that those who would give them the most basic civil rights would be even against the laws of nature and / or God, basing their case on terms that often are the boundaries of racism real? With all that that entails, as the newspapers tell us quite regularly, suggesting that what leaps to the headlines is just the tip of the iceberg, but often is silent about what the homosexual and transsexual people have to suffer even today in theocracies Islamic countries and stronger Christian character.

We have just commemorated the deportation of Roman Jews from the ghetto on 16 October 1943, and every time we forget that the tragedy of the Holocaust have also found death homosexuals (and the Roma and other dissidents) would be a very good exercise for consistency and realism, as well as democracy, remember that racial discrimination - all - have the same gravity anywhere at any time. If it is desirable to have a clearer dividing line between freedom of opinion and propaganda of racist potentially (too often actively) el'incolumità dangerous for the freedom of certain 'categories' of citizens, then we must remember not to exclude anyone.

Incidentally, I am for freedom of expression, even the fools (as homophobic and negazonisti), but we can not ignore that some 'terms' have practical consequences different from the others, so that you could easily define 'propaganda', using a tremble in the last century had a very meaning left.

Perhaps the biggest problem today with respect to anti-Semitism and homophobia, which is an institutional bank even at some European governments. It 's true, however, create protected categories or unequal treatment of citizens is as pull a pickaxe to the liberal state, but in practice it ignores the consequences of religious propaganda against homosexuals, not for nothing that the Vatican and all the monotheistic religions have always opposed a law against homophobia (which exists in other countries) and understand why, as now also oppose the proposal of the rabbi of Rome. Want to have your hands-and language-free in both fields.

In short, this is not just verbal formulas negligible, because the words that open the way to the facts. It 's always been like that. We do not agree? Ok, give up the law against homophobia, but then also say no to the proposal for Pacifici, and also abolishes the Mancino law in its entirety.

The truth is that a truly liberal democracy and no difference between people working on it to get there on time, and if you need some 'corrections' to protect the physical safety and civil rights of some, and educate everyone mutual respect, Well then you have to do. Waiting for better times.

What Is Cost Of Good Weave

Catholic politicians 2.0

So the bishops would like to eventually move from threats to practice, after the ' appeal of the Pope in person for a renewed commitment of Catholics in political life, repeated several times in the last period: Cei, anticipates without revealing Mgr. Crusade (nomen omen), would in fact thinking of a 'training school for Catholic politicians' . That it seems almost a joke: there are not enough of Catholic politicians? For them obviously not, or you yet but not quite 'flexible'.

Perhaps it would be to call a spade a spade, in accordance with the truth ("what you say is: yeah, no no" - Matthew 5:37), we try to give a name to the nth coherent operation Church of aggression of the civil life of the country: for example, might be called "Colonization of Parliament for the final death of democracy and the beginning of a new theocracy," COPAMODET. Sounds bad? Patience, because the substance is this.

What the bishops to teach those who want to become a Catholic politician? How you hate discrimination and who does not want to be part of the flock? How do career with Communion and Liberation? All methods for increasing the assets of the Church and all its many privileges to give of all citizens? What will be the first bill, setting up eight per cent in place for eight thousand? The return of the Quirinal Palace to the Pope? The direct control cable (audio-video link) of all the apartments in the Vatican as part of the power Orwell's 1984?

By the way, we also give some advice to lorsignori. Future students of 'arrogance academy will immediately called the sad truth, namely that any national-Catholic or not-who wants to do politics in this unhappy country, if elected to take the chair and its benefits should go to the Quirinal Palace to swear on the Constitution of the Italian Republic in the hands of the President of the Republic, the Vatican and not to swear on the Bible in the hands of the pope. It seems obvious, but more than a current generation of Catholic politicians, not educated enough for the bishops, it ignores or pretends to ignore it; perjury, then. And there are written into the Constitution -With the blood of those who have beaten a dictatorship flanked by the predecessors of Msgr. Crusade-the fundamental principles of individual liberties and civil rights of men, it does not say that a moral and ethical-among many-that belongs only to some arbitrarily should be imposed on everyone, even those who do not share.

And if even now, with the 'old generation' (the 1.0) to Catholic politicians- continuously pulled by the neck by the Vatican hierarchy, these principles are thoroughly rejected, what could combine a 'new generation' of politicians Catholics? Simple: to impose no additional legal and constitutional obstacles to their religion once and for all, could not help but bury this Constitution and write another one, of a confessional, finally placing the hypocrisy of the secular state, that there never was. Amen.