FUNNY THAT

I've been making fun of Robert's religion again. Sorry about that.
Actually I'm not really sorry as he's the one that puts it in everyone's face and expects us to just accept the illogical and nonsensical statements and affirmations as truth. When we don't he says that it's because we lack faith but never mind, Jesus still loves us (not Richard though who he says is going to Hell). What the hell do we make of that? ......

Click on the above to read the dialogue clearly

....... We laugh at it of course, although Catholics (and philosophers) might disagree.

I feel that I'm entitled to laugh at the silliness of religion and especially the Catholic version of it as I was schooled by nuns, Marist brothers and priests. They tried for years to get me to believe in the fairy tales that they called Catechism, and Christian Doctrine, (I like the 'doctrine' in that title) was my worst school subject and one that I often failed in school exams because I had either not read the rubbish that they wanted me to regurgitate or made facetious comments on the exam paper when it came to questions like: "what is transubstantiation?" Answering that it is an underground railway platform automatically resulted in a 'D'.

Incredibly enough this Christian Doctrine rubbish was part of the school curriculum right through to the 7th form! I'm sure that the priests seethed that it wasn't part of the national curriculum and a compulsory subject for School Certificate, University Entrance and Bursary.

I resisted it then so I don't see why I shouldn't resist it now.

I've got no real objection (beyond incomprehension) that Robert and others believe in this stuff. Hey! Everyone is entitled to an opinion or a belief. What I do object to is when it 'gets in your face'.
I try not to (and should not -I've got to get better) make derogatory comments to Robert's posts unless he goes too far with the nonsense, but when he transports it to comments on my blog posts I react as I did when he made a comment (soon after deleted) that "Jesus loves you". There wasn't even a context to this. To me it sounded like stalking so in the spirit of the 'Me Too' movement I replied:

"First of all - how do you know that?
Secondly - I don't want him to.
If he persists then that is unwanted attention bordering on stalking.
'No' means no. What part of that does the creep not understand?"

That's all that I'm going to say on this subject.*















* Just kidding.