These posts are very revealing of the ridiculous rift we feel we must have in our lives as human beings in order to make ourselves feel superior, and demonstrate the natural propensity for humans to use their own mental superiority against themselves rather than to advance themselves.
Why is it that we must have some other group of humans to dislike? Why do we insist on having an enemy? And why do we insist on attacking whichever group happens to be the largest, most vocal, most powerful, most protective, most kind, most evil, most wealthy, or most vast?
The simple fact is: The Pope is famous...and famous people attract more comment and attention when they die. Whether you believe in his religion, feel sympathetic, hate, or love him, you KNOW of him, and therefore his death will be in the press and on the tongues of many, whether that tongue be one of sugar or bile. The same thing happens when a world leader dies, or when a musician or actor dies. We obsess over fame. It is silly then to comment on the crime of others when you are one of the guilty - you started YET ANOTHER thread about the pope, and his fame prompted that. And you felt the need to include your opinion about the Pope (by specifically de-faming him as a famous person not deserving of attention) in order to merit responses.
And of course, such a thread brings out human nature at its worst, by immediately bringing out our inate need to feel hatred and have enemies. The religious groups start first, by feeling the need to attack or defend their particular belief, or point out the reason they feel the pope represented the best or worst of his religion against or for their own. Then the nationality groups feel the need to join the hate-fest, by bringing nationalistic sentiments of hate into the thread against particular countries and their political systems. The racial groups naturally want to get their hate-jabs in, and dredge up racial issues from the past, and the lifestyle groups join in with their opinions about homosexuality or heterosexuality as well as deviant behaviors.
Does it make us, as people, feel stronger or better, smarter or superior, to have another group to hate, and to use anonymous outlets such as internet message boards to express those feelings so they can remain neutral in personal contact? Why must someone feel the need to hate a Christian, or a Jew, or a Muslim, or a Buddhist, or an Athiest, or a Hindu, or an Agnostic? Why can't we accept the range of different beliefs as just that, while we all remain elementally human?
And why must we have some geographical boundary of hate in our world to unite us with those of like opinion? Why must Americans, in the absence of a Communist threat to label as an 'enemy', label another group as an 'enemy'? And why must Europeans label Americans as the 'enemy' despite their obvious sameness in all but political decisions by their leaders? And those political leaders, from ALL countries, are making decisions not for the good of the entire world as a group, but on personal and nationalistic selfishness that will somehow promote, empower, or economically benefit them over both their enemies and their allies. One has to be ignorant, short-sighted, or both to assume that the U.S. government is the only one making decisions for its own benefit - as the Middle-Eastern countries either ally with or against the U.S. for personal gain and influence, to become wealthy from exclusive contracts either with the United States or with Europe. And European leaders seek to gain power both within the European Union as well as in the World by underhandedly seeking financial and economic gain for their own government from allies and enemies alike, while publicly disdaining such behavior by other leaders of other countries. One would have to live with a blindfold on to not see that there is equal corruption and underhandedness by governments from Syria, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Russia, Germany, France, Britian, United States, Venezuela, and virtually all others.
continued...
--
Justin
