So the Pope has come on the record to say that Freedom of
Religion overrides Freedom of Speech. In sum and substance, he said that it is
not permissible for someone to disrespect anyone's religion through their
expression of free speech (source). So tell me: If I asked the current Pope
whether or not he thought Islam to be the one true religion, and whether or not
Mohammad's teachings were absolutely correct and were the words of Allah (God),
and also asked if Allah was the one true and absolutely the only God - and
finally - if I asked the Pope if he would denounce Jesus - would he respond with an absolute and
infallible yes to all of those questions? It seems, he must do so because for
him to do otherwise would be seen, by many Muslims, as disrespecting and
ridiculing Islam or worse still as blasphemy in their eyes. Islamists have
beheaded and put to the sword untold numbers of people for less than that.
Would the Pope not then, by answering any of those questions in the negative,
be guilty of doing exactly what he says others should not do! Since he has
preached that it is not right or permissible for others to do so, and since I
am certain he is a man of his word who would never lie to his flock (aren't all
Catholics just as certain as am I), I have arrived at the conclusion that he
must have recently and secretly converted to Islam. Otherwise, without any
doubt in my mind, he is just another bull-shitter of the politically correct
(PC) ilk or should that be religiously correct (RC) type. (Hmm, maybe RC has
not stood for Roman Catholicism over all these centuries but instead has meant
religiously correct, it would explain a lot!)
I do not believe for one minute that the Pope is infallible
or incapable of lying or that he truly is a man of faith more than anyone else.
Based upon his cowering statements, I do believe, despite denials by the
Catholic Church, that threats have probably been made against him or Catholic
targets by Islamic terrorists. I also believe that he has yielded to those
threats and is condescending to the level of other appeasers of terrorism who
do or say nothing - or worse yet to the level of those who actually bend over
backwards to defend or justify the actions of religious terrorists. He, in my
opinion, has justified the recent Charlie Hebdo terrorist attack. You see, no
matter how much he says he is anti-violence, he still winds up using an example
in which violence is the result of ridicule and then explains that it (the
violent response) is normal and implies that is true in the case of religious
ridicule. So in other words, he has in fact - as far as I can see, yielded to
they who wield murderous violence in the name of Islam (or for that matter in the name of
any religion).
Of course, maybe I am wrong and no such threats were made
that caused the Pope to yield to Islamic terrorism but if that is the case then
the Pope evidently is simply hedging his bets by way of a lightly veiled
justification of the Charlie Hebdo murders. Make no mistake about it, with that
punch in the nose example he gave, supported by him saying "It's normal. You cannot provoke. You
cannot insult the faith of others. You cannot make fun of the faith of
others." that is exactly what he was doing - supporting the terrorist
attacks on Charlie Hebdo. As far as I am concerned that makes the Pope, at
least this particular pope, no better than the anti-Christ.
A hat tip and my thanks to Peter Q for sending me the link
to that article.
All the best,
Glenn B