Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (503)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • 3000 Jews were saved by the church, but it is she who is forgetting that the anti-semitic preaching of the past by that same church contributed to the conditions that allowed their massacre to become reality.

  • I think Ann Widdecombe's voice is the lovechild of the Queen and actress Maggie Smith...

  • Proof God doesn't exist, no god would make anyones voice that stupid !!!

  • @zh1992 I was about to reprieve you for that jab (at something I assume she cannot help) - and then I realised what a great example it was of being free to say something, even to make a joke.

  • Comment removed

  • She fails to mention that the Church would have also brought unknown diseases to the indigenous populations that they were 'saving'. And then what? Provide them with the medicine that is needed in order to help sustain them or they die. Also, if medicine is needed to heal the sick then doesn't that show that the power of science is more vital than the power of prayer?

  • God! her voice is the most unnatural and annoying thing I've ever heard. Why do people allow themselves to be cliches?/1

  • I find that Mr Widdecombe bloke irksome in the extreme. Like a female Bill Donnohue!!!

  • Comment removed

  • LOL ann is so ignorant... the catholic church and the pope were alongside hitler. just because some small section of it saved a few out of millions of jews is laughable. She needs to shut her poor sad uneducated face.

  • Widdecombe has that stereotypical voice people make when attempting to impersonate the queen.

  • Christianity - One woman's lie about an affair that got WAY out of hand..!

  • She left the Anglican Church because it gave her the potential right to be equal to men? Wtf

  • I know this is out of order, but I hate Widdecombe's shrill voice.

  • @Pipebombdreams Agreed. Every time I hear her speak, it takes a great deal of restraint not to shove a fork in my ear.

    To put it in perspective, her voice is almost as horrible as what she says in this debate!

  • First time viewer here. How often do these debates happen? Are there a bunch of subjects covered?

  • This is what annoys me about Anne Widdecombe and other supporters of the Catholic Church: they believe that without the Church, the world would be in a state of despair. It seems so arrogant to think that without this one church humanity couldn't possibly prosper. This is how the Catholic Church has survived for so long; they scare people (usually poor and illiterate) into thinking that without the Church they cannot make it on their own and cannot achieve salvation.

  • Atheists have murdered and raped( +children) more people in the past 150yrs than all religions combined since the beginning of time/or records began, how this is there number one argument baffles me. Atheists make a big song and dance about the very small few who do these terrible things. Me as a catholic just pray for the atheists who do. I know which is better.

  • @davidjarvissound sorry, where did you get that statistic?

  • @davidjarvissound Sounds like some really bad statistics there. I can't imagine that every single one of those rapists had no religious belief. Regardless, as an atheist they have nothing to prove to a deity. Religious types are supposed to act in a better way.

  • That women talking about third world countries stings me the most. The church gets so much money, and they use some of it(or abuse it) to win new souls. Witch-burnings, extreme hate against homosexuals AND other religions, exiles, and all the violence that comes with it... and in the meantime these people become completely dependent on the church. They follow the hand that feeds them. It's low, sick and loath-able. Abusing those who are most vulnerable, once again.

  • damn, i wish i had known more about Christopher Hitchens whilst he was alive. He truly was a remarkable individual! Can anyone recommend any books by him or about him?

  • @amar1989 I don't know if you know about his book"god is not that great" you should get that nice book.

  • @SammyYoung82 thanks mate... i'll def check it out :)

  • She has the MOST annoying voice in the world.

  • The problem with the first part widdicombe's argument is that to show good acts by members of the church is not to show that the church is a force for good, but rather that some of its members are virtuous, and I don't think anyone was denying the latter claim..

  • Damnation. The video stopped working at the 6:15 mark. How can I listen to this woman, whose shrill voice kills erections, when the video hates me? I know I disagree with her, but I would like to hear what she has to say.

    I'll just go eat donuts.

  • I immediately turned on the next part when that wench went to the podium.

  • Why would anyone want to defend the Catholic church...much less defend it against Christopher Hitchens. Good luck with all that.

  • We where so much richer when hitchens was among us. The world needs cristopher

  • this. ladies. voice. is. fucking. screeching.

  • Is it possible for Christopher Hitchens to get through one sentence without people interupting and cheering? oh...no... becuase he is AWESOME!

  • hysterical sinister VIRGINS!!

  • Dear Ann.. The Billions of pounds don't come from the church.. they come from the wallets of curch goers.

  • @simonrijsdam dear atheist the catholic church is the largest charitable institution in the planet. and the atheistism is the largest group of stupidity.

  • Someone take that toad of the stage xD

  • If she says "the catholic church" one more time i swear i'll put a gun to my head

  • Potter! Weasley! back to your dormitries

  • 5:40-5:45 i'm sorry, maybe i misunderstood what she said, but did she just say that Ann Widdercombe left the church of england because they allowed for having female priests? wtf? is she against her gender having equal rights?

  • @ADragonAmongRoses Yes, because the Bible says that men are superior and she is a very hardcore Christian.

  • Watching Hitchens lay into Catholics is intellectual pornography

  • @paranoidAndroid23 Sweet! You can join him someday and 'laugh' about it;

  • I know that this is not the most important or intelligent comment I could make on this video, but at 4:43 it is those words and some others (used in the Aiden songs "The Essence" and "Hysteria") that introduced me to Christopher Hitchens and I am very pleased to find the debate in which some of those words were used (and used well :)

  • Did anyone else see how Ann Widdecombe steeled herself at 7:45 before saying "innocent children"? I bet "deviant sinners" was only moments away from forcing itself past her lips.

  • Slap the biatch don't care how hard, when or anything...slap the biatch!

  • When I heard her voice I lost my shit AHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAAAA

  • Widdecombe vs Hitchens is like a rowing boat taking on HMS Invincible.

  • @RaisuliLordoftheRiff haha brillaint analogy!! so true!!

  • The catholic has over a billion followers, as Onaiyekan was happy to point out.

    How many nations have a population similar or higher than that number? not that many i suppose. Maybe some in the developing world, but usually those are the ones who need help. It wouldnt be that helping if them gave money to themselfs... Plus the people that give you money probably arent given it to the governments later.

    besides all that YOU PEOPLE LIKE IN FREAKING GOLD CASTLES!!!

  • the catholic church was a massive nazi supporter wtf stupid chick

  • @insidejokesarelame your stupid atheist are communist.

  • @craventref no I'm an intelligent atheist who is centre left. you my dumb friend are a fucking idiot who should die.

  • Pope has a palace? I don't think that was Jesus' intent.

  • Ugh. What a disgusting excuse for a human being.

    She makes me ill from appearance, sound and thought.

  • Comment removed

  • elporteroful can fuck off!

  • Comment removed

  • i seriously don't want to be rude, but that lady's voice is fucking amazing.

  • They forgot Richard Dawkins xD

  • @LHGrunge That's just mean.

  • @bigj651 Yeah, but seriously, they should've just had the conservative MP in there. The uganda high or arch bishop should have not been there, I swear, I could not take him seriously lol

  • @LHGrunge They couldn't find a third person for the Catholic church who could string a sentence together, so Stehpen Fry, Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins all had to do a few rounds of rock, paper, scissors to determine who goes up for debate.

  • lol "misrepresentation of the catholic church that i have heard in a long time" *hitchens shakes his hand* hahaha

  • Comment removed

  • In retrospect Ann?

    The Cloyne report uncovered massive child abuse in the Cloyne Diocese in Cork THIS YEAR.

    And still nobody has been brought to justice.

  • Well I'm Sorry Mrs Widdecome but if you claim to have the knowledge of an all knowing God behind your organisiation then it's not unreasonable to expect greater insight from it.

  • Could you put these videos in a playlist? (just to help other people)

  • the billions of £ the church gives makes up for the child abuse......... brilant Ann

  • @donmoreno25 If only they could maybe cut out that middle step of massive child abuse and then institutionally covering it up. If only they could just skip straight to the money giving, kind of like secular institutions like UNICEF does...

  • I love that he said "...fellow primate." Ohh!! He is SUCH win.

  • Go Hitchens, Go Hitchens, Go-Go Go Hitchens

  • I actually jumped when Hitchens said the F word...oh my.

  • If I was due to go to a debate AGAINST, Hitchens and Fry, I would ring in sick. Unless I wanted my ass handed to me.

  • @chestypants78 Hitchens arguements are for most part silly, IMHO.  Maybe he lacks basic understanding of the bible and its interpretation, more likely though, he knows that he is babbling and still keeps on. If you can't see they're silly, you need to read, and if that doesn't do it, you're probably a lost cause

  • @YouDabian Hilarious that your response is purely ad hominem and at no point actually engages with what he's saying.

    Give it a go.

  • @zed1207 Actually, I wasn't going for the man, I was merely voicing my opinions about his arguments. The point being, that they're too silly to deserve an answer, for most parts. If you feel strongly for one of his arguments, I guess I could engage, but I'm assuming that if you're buying his arguments, you're biased beyond reason.

  • @YouDabian Calling his arguments "silly", saying he "lacks basic understanding", that he is "babbling" and that anyone who agrees with him is a "lost cause" is going for the man. You didn't mention a single thing he said, or engage with what he said at all.

    And again, without mentioning a single point, anyone who agrees with him is "biased beyond reason"? It's just all ad hominem, and your arrogance, in the fact you are calling the majority of the audience "beyond reason" is astonishing.

  • @zed1207 You're right, I need to apologize. I thought I was commenting on another video. Hitchens does have some arguments in this video, which has points.

    Most of his arguments, however, are of historical nature, and since we're discussing whether the Catholic Church *is* a force of good, and not whether it was so in the middle ages, during the second world war or any other period in the past. His points are valid, the Catholic Church has done a lot of bad things.

    Other points are silly.

  • @YouDabian Dismissing arguments as "beyond reason" because, from all the reasons you've given, of the character of the man and those who support him is almost the exact definition of ad hominem.

    You're right, you COULD engage with the subject, but you haven't and that's my point.

    And again, dismissing the massive majority of people who watched the debate and who have commented here as "biased beyond reason" without engaging with the subject matter at all is hopelessly arrogant.

  • I love you Hitch, and I never even met you!  You changed my whole life.

  • The catholic church never stood a chance in this debate. Time for it to go and good riddance to bad rubbish.

  • She managed to say nothing with a lot of words...

  • hahahahahaha. Is the kid below me serious?

  • @Dan48001 Yeah. I'm being serious.

  • Wow! Do atheists always have to bring up the past?

  • @elporteroful Hows the head injury that you must have sustained.

  • @BaggyOz Can you not answer my question? Why do atheists always have to bring up the past? Did you sustain a head injury that rendered you incapable of answering my question?

  • @elporteroful Well others have brought up some points but I would think it would be obvious. The past is important. They were debating a religion founded in hte past. Events don't become unimportant the moment htey are no longer in the present. Athiest have to bring up the past in these sort of debates because the past is relavent. It's not like they are talking about Mesopotamia, they are talking about hte history of the organisation that the debate is centred around.

  • @BaggyOz Yes, but they make it seem as the though the Church is still corrupt. I'm not saying there's no corruption within the Church at all (there's corruption in just about every organization), but what is annoying is that everyone seems to keep thinking that the Catholic Church is still widely corrupt!

  • @elporteroful It is still corrupt. You are talking about one of hte worlds wealthiest organisations that doesn't pay a single bit of tax, have their own nation, has systemic cover up of child molesters high up into the church and is preventing the greater good to further their own goals.

  • @BaggyOz I've have never heard anything about the Church being so wealthy, but I do know that there are countless Catholic organizations that bring relief to many impoverished parts throughout the world. There is no systemic cover up of child molestors. Yes it happened, but if someone from outside the Church did something similar they are a bad person, but would later be forgiven. Now if it happens in a church of any kind that whole church is corrupt and evil.

  • @elporteroful Are you Nuts!!!! There is definitely a systematic coverup!! Why ARE NONE OF THE PRIESTS IN JAIL????? i'll tell you why, because your present Pope was in a position To Cover it all up before he ever became the Pope!! that was his job, and now there is no question, as he is Pope that he's continuing the coverup! If it were a teacher molesting children, there would be cover of it on the media as the police would be involved, the DA and etc. tell me, Where is the justice?

  • @elporteroful The Church is massively wealthy. The Vatican City only exists as part of a deal between the Church and Mussolini, it is a modern construct in part maintained to avoid paying any tax to any state.

    Or look at the Vatican City churches, with their gold leaf and pomp and ceremony. This is not the behaviour of the communistic early Christian communities.

    There is, according to the Irish, American, British and Dutch police, a systematic coverup by the Catholic Church of child abuse.

  • @zed1207 Mussolini had to be submissive to the Catholic Church because it is the spiritual power of Italy. He didn't want Italy to split up and have to take loyalties. Mussolini's fascist regime was a failure from the beginning. The Church appears rich to honor God. The people pay for the elaborate and large structures to have a home away from home, a home were they can talk with God, worship him. We want the best for our Lord.

  • @zed1207 I'm not denying that there was a cover up. God forgave the man before he repented, which he did do. The Church forgave him and protected him from the world, knowing that the world would demonize him mercilessly for his acts. If the world would be more forgiving, then we wouldn't have so many problems.

  • @BaggyOz You're doing to Catholics what Americans did to all Muslims and Arabs after the attacks of 9/11; criminalizing them! It is wrong to stereotype an entire nation of people because of something only a few people did. I've known many great Catholic priests that never committed such acts!

  • @elporteroful Baggy is wrong to criminalise all Catholics, many who are pious and virtuous citizens. He is right to criminalise those who actively aided paedophiles in avoiding justice, among them the man who was responsible for dealing with the issue of child abuse, as ordered by the then-Pope.

  • @elporteroful "but what is annoying is that everyone seems to keep thinking that the Catholic Church is still widely corrupt!"

    ooo let's think about why "everyone" thinks that.... hum... Cause it's TRUE!

  • @mortisha69 You know what, they did try to cover it up. Why? Because those priests have repented and God through his mercy already forgave that man. The Church protected him because they knew the world would hate him, just as it did and still does. And now because the Church defended this man, it too is being harassed. Where's the justice in harassment and maltreatment?

  • @elporteroful To the Church it may be acceptable that a serial killer and rapist genuinely repents of his sin. But doesn't the Bible tell you to give unto Caesar what is his? It is not just up to the Catholic Church to decide the punishment of these people, it is also up to the secular authorities who rule over the Church in the countries in which it operates.

    The Church has committed a crime against society by protecting paedophiles against the proper course of the law.

  • @zed1207 Not all the laws in world are right. True, he should have been incarcerated, but he should demonized after or even before he repented. "He who is without sin cast the first stone."

  • @elporteroful So are you saying that it would be alright and acceptable of me to rape dozens of children and not go to jail as long as I repent? The church deserves every ounce of harassment flung its way because what it did was evil. It would be one thing if there was significant doubt about the allegations, but there isn't. And the fact that you are advocating against justice and for letting child rapists off the hook is disgusting.

    I'm sure Christ is proud of his church and flock. /sarcasm

  • @leejs I've heard this argument before. It's pathetic. Next.

  • @elporteroful Doesn't change the fact that you're saying that since the church believes the priests in question have repented, they shouldn't face justice. Fuck what the church thinks, fuck what the pope believes. These people committed crimes and should be incarcerated. Moreover, everyone involved in the cover-up should be incarcerated as well, which would most likely include Benny the Rat. You can't really demonize an evil organization.

  • @leejs That's all very easy for an atheist, like yourself, to say. You're very unforgiving which is not good. I'll pray for you.

  • @elporteroful Actually suggesting that justice be done in these cases and that people face the consequences for their actions (be they the rapists or those who protected them) is the least that anyone should demand. Forgiveness is all well and good, but justice is paramount. The question you need to examine is this "If a priest that rapes a child can be forgiven and not face justice, can every rapist be forgiven of child rape without facing justice? If not, why?"

  • @leejs Yes, you can forgive all of them, but people like to hold grudges. Even if they don't repent, you can still forgive them. Whether or not they repent should determine the severity of their punishment.

  • @mortisha69 Your answer is based on what?

  • @elporteroful The Church is financially corrupt; relying as it does on tax avoidance agreements with most of the countries in which it operates. It has accumulated vast wealth that is spent on the ceremony and spectacle of the Church in the Vatican.

    The Church is morally corrupt; it is guilty of covering up child abuse on a massive scale, moving paedophile priests away from the authorities according to the mantra that "the reputation of the Church must be upheld". It is rotten to its core.

  • @zed1207 Tax avoidance agreements? The secular governments of the world have a separation of Church and State policy. The government cannot give money to the Church or interfere with it and the Church in turn cannot interfere or give money to the government. Therefore, the Church shouldn't have to pay anything other than the utilities and cost of the land.

  • @elporteroful again, Are you Nuts?? bringing up the past??? really??? but you christains do it constantly with your bible, commandments, rules and all that crap! You LIVE IN THE PAST by the very nature of following christianity or for that matter ANY organised religion that was... ooooo let's see.. started in the PAST!!!!

  • @mortisha69 If everyone stuck to the teachings of the bible, to the Church, to God, instead of finding excuses to stop believing such as: not wanting to conforming; preferring scientific proof over the fact that miracles can happen, when the fact that you are alive, can move, and think is a miracle in and of itself. No the Church is not perfect, but the actual Catholic Church itself is constructed by the followers of the Church. Look to the people, not the officials of the Church.

  • @elporteroful Being alive is a miracle? Oh for fucks sake, just because you're pathetic excuse for a brain cannot comprehend how life works does not mean you can come up with your own crazy idea's and replace proven scientific fact with 'goddidit'.

  • @BourbonJRA I understand that we breathe oxygen, our heart distributes that to our deoxygenated blood and pumps through our body. I understand that light reflects off of objects into our eyes to create an image. I understand that our brains send messages to our bodies faster than we can think so that we can react and move. I understand all that, but explain to me why we function that way? Why we are the only species in the world that functions the way we do?

  • @elporteroful This is nonsense. If another species functioned the same way as we do, they would be by definition the same species.

    All of your arguments are a plea to awe and ignorance. Simply asking "why" can be adequately explained by anthropologists, biologists, historians, even reaching so far back as astronomers.

    And regardless of that fact, even if we DIDN'T have such a massive body of evidence for these things, that is not an invitation to dump theology into the gap that would be left

  • @zed1207 Yes, they would, but out of all the other species in the world, we are the most advanced by a landslide. And why could you not fill those gaps with theology? The Catholic Church has done that. Perhaps not with every aspect, but in some of the teachings we have. We are not ignorant of science, in fact the Church has made many contributions to it.

  • @elporteroful How are we the most advanced? Our senses are primitive compared to a whole swathe of species. Our intellects are greater, but that is one arbitrary measure akin to the pseudo-scientific need of Victorians to rank the world around them.

    Again: we are described perfectly well using historical, biological, anthropological explanations. We do not need theological explanations; those who feel they need theology create questions so narrow only theological answers will suffice.

  • @elporteroful As for the contributions of the Catholic Church, it must be weighed against the damage it has done. You are entitled to come to your own conclusions, but I feel the Church has been on balance something we'd be better off without.

    And please stop using logical arguments for God that were disproved thousands of years ago, like a plea to ignorance or absurdity, or this cosmological nonsense your last post contained. It's all been disposed off long ago.

  • @zed1207 Our senses may not be as heightened as other species, but the Victorians ranked other people around them. They may have compared them to an animal of some sort, but I assure you the Catholic Church does not do that to the people. Can you explain to me why feel certain ways about certain things with science? Why a lions roar might instill fear in some of us and others find it to be cool? You say you can perfectly describe humans with history, biology, and anthropology. Then please do.

  • @elporteroful It is simply impossible to explain the whole of these disciplines in a Youtube comment. As with your "but WHY" questions, you're not genuinely asking this question; you're setting it up to fail.

    Suffice it to say, please get down to your local library and look at these incredibly interesting, illuminating and truly profound studies in human character.

    I am not for a second arguing against your faith, fundamentally, but your wider arguments have been repeatedly demolished.

  • @zed1207 I've already told you that just because we have theological answers for some things does not mean that we exclude science from ever being an answer to anything. And if the contributions of the Catholic Church must be weighed against the damage it has done, then the contributions atheists have made must be weighed against the damage they have done as well. We have moved on from the past, the Church has apologized for the Crusades...

  • @elporteroful Your theological answers must be encased in intellectual honesty. You cannot use massively demolished arguments, relying on the ignorance of your audience as you have done here.

    And yes, I agree, a lot of atheists are depressingly dogmatic in their opinions! Whether the Church has genuinely apologised is another matter, and comparing atrocities is pointless. If Catholics want to move on, they must genuinely apologise for child abuse and its subsequent orchestrated cover-up.

  • @zed1207 Like I said, the Church has already apologized for its past mistakes. It took hundreds of years to do so, but it did.

  • @elporteroful That is not the only issue with your arguments. Additionally, I cannot understand how the "apologies" of the Church can be counted as such, least of all in the light of what your so-called Jesus taught.

    For Ratzinger to "apologise" without opening up the Church to secular authorities is a joke.

  • @zed1207 Why would it open up to secular authorities? It is its own nation. The Church has to handle its own issues. No other country likes to have other countries investigating in their land, so why should the Church, a country based on religion, allow secular authorities to intervene?

  • @zed1207 It has apologized for every inhumane act Vatican officials have done under the name of the Church or God, yet people still like to like to use past atrocities to hold against the Church. Many people have forgiven the Church, but if they keep using these acts against us, then what is the point in forgiving? You must forgive and forget, otherwise you're just holding a grudge. And why should I stop using logical arguments for God? Would you prefer I use illogical ones?

  • @zed1207 In Mexico, in the Basilica of Our Lady of Guadalupe, there is a shawl that has the image of the Virgin of Guadalupe, which scientists have done countless tests on to see if the image is a fake. The image on this shawl is over 500 years old has not faded or eroded away. The shawl has a life span of 40 years, it's made of maguey plant fibrers, and has been intact for those 500 years. Science cannot explain why this image has survived for the time it has.

  • @BourbonJRA We can communicate vocally, create languages, create amazing structures, specific chemicals are released in different situations, invent new things. But why, WHY, can we do this? Why do we function this way? Why are you born into the environment you are born into or the time we are born in?

  • @elporteroful DERRRR, I don't know why, I guess GODDIDIT. Moron.

  • @BourbonJRA I'm glad to see you have finally realized that there is a God, but why are you being so hostile?

  • @elporteroful Sure, that's what happened. My brain could not comprehend any other explanation, ergo, God did it.

    Please, I'm not that retarded.

  • @BourbonJRA That's not being retarded, but tell me this why don't you believe? And I don't wanna hear "because he doesn't exist", what is your personal reason for not believing?

  • @elporteroful I seriously have to go there? Little thing called evidence you might want to look up, well, more to the point, the lack of it. Please don't come back telling me about what some freakin' book says. That's not evidence. May as well be talking about harry fucking potter.

  • @BourbonJRA You know what, you win. If you need the satisfaction of winning for your ego boost, then by all means take it. I'm tired of your insults. I'll pray for you. God bless.

  • @elporteroful I don't win because you let me, I win because you can't come back with any kind of argument. Also I'd rather you didn't pray, it's only wasting your time.

  • @BourbonJRA No, you are just so wrapped up in the propaganda being shoved down your throat and filled with so much hatred that is pointless to argue with you. So goodbye and God bless.

  • @elporteroful HAHAHAHA, propaganda? What? You're going to tell me all these scientists, atheists and rational thinkers are involved a world wide conspiracy now? Jesus christ man, you are out of your freaking mind!

  • @BourbonJRA Just thought I should say that even if it wasn't intended to be, your use of "Jesus Christ" while arguing against a Catholic lunatic has kept me laughing for 5 minutes straight.

  • @STEELWOLFF666 Oh trust me, the irony was fully intended

  • @elporteroful This is a plea to ignorance.

  • @zed1207 How?

  • @elporteroful Look it up. Your approach is almost text-book.

  • @elporteroful If everyone stuck to the teachings of the Bible, female rape victims would be killed if they did not marry the man who had raped them.

  • @zed1207 No. That's not mentioned anywhere in the Bible, plus we don't get all our teachings from the Bible. There are many other things to learn outside of the Bible.

  • @elporteroful This is nonsense. There is no such thing as sticking to the Bible. The Bible itself is a document that has evolved over more than a millennium to be in the form you find it today. Even now, evangelical Christians in America pretend that the KJV, arbitrarily, is "THE" Bible because interpretations vary so much.

    Even then, the Bible is internally inconsistent. It presents the OT God as a vengeful petty child interfering in the minute details of life. Compare that to the NT.

  • @zed1207 I've never heard of the KJV, I've never heard it mentioned in mass, or anywhere else. I honestly have no idea what you have just said there.

  • @mortisha69 A note on nonconforming: everyone conforms in one way or another. There are millions of people that do the same things you do.

  • @elporteroful Because the past is the story of how we've arrived at the present, and it's only the best indicator we have about what will happen in the future.

  • @elporteroful Although to be honest I wish the past was brought up less by your side as well. Keep in mind who's beliefs are based in the science of now, and who's beliefs are based on a 2000 year old manuscript written by primitive sheepherders in the middle east, which was at the time one of the least advanced cultures in the world.

  • @MarsManatee Keep in mind that the Vatican is always changing and discovering more and more. The Church itself has made huge contributions to science. We don't go by Sola Scriptura like most Protestant churches do, so not everything we do is by the Bible. What others don't take into account is that back then the Church had so much corruption that sometimes even the pope was corrupt. Everyone likes to say that's the way it was and that's the way it is now.

  • @elporteroful "the Vatican is always changing" Isn't that sort of the point though? It's either god's eternal law or it isn't. If the church doesn't know any better than the rest of us, what's the point? The very claim by these people that they are gifted with some holy knowledge unattainable to the rest of us, but that we must live by it anyway is in itself corrupt. The church is corrupt by nature, even without all the institutionalized corruption which I guarantee is not gone.

  • @MarsManatee That knowledge is attainable. It depends on the person whether or not they want to attain it. That's what happened when the Lutherans split forming the thousands of other sects. They like to interpret things their own way. You cannot bend God's words to your liking. The Catholic Church is the one true of God. "You are Peter and on this rock I will build my church." That rock was Peter, who spread the word of God to the people, forming the Catholic Church. The people are the church.

  • @elporteroful That might be a valid point if the Catholic church wasn't founded 3 centuries later by the Roman government.

  • @unlimiteddj It wasn't founded by the Roman government. It was founded by Christ, St. Peter spread the word of God to the people forming the Church.

  • @elporteroful Perhaps you should study your own Catholic Church's' literature provided by the catholic church. Even the Pope would tell you that there wasn't a catholic church until centuries after the death of Peter.

  • @unlimiteddj The Vatican, which you seem to think is the Catholic Church itself, is the capital of Catholicism. The people that follow Catholicism are the Church.

  • I just had to check google to see if Ann Widdecombe had a stroke at some point in her life, 'cause I swear her voice sounds exactly like my nan post-stroke

  • Widdecombe's fanatical defense of the Catholic Church is punctuated by the fact that the institution still objectify women as inferior. And when you have a woman with so much to say, yet so little to speak of, it raises little question as to why.

  • as soon as she opened her mouth i burst out laughing. I am a terrible person, a very jolly terrible person.

  • without tripping over her own cleavage ofcourse

  • Anne Widdecombe is terrible she should go back to her cats

  • Bill Gates has donated $150 billion to charity and he's just one man. Fuck your church.