samedi 19 mai 2012

Some difference though...

The interesting part in religions isn't the belief in the existence of a Supreme Being, which is the archaic stage of development of any human society, but the system of moral values that they all set up. Since they basically tend to function as social regulators, they all more or less share the same starting point: Don't do to others etc. which of course they don't apply.

Yet there are some differences though and I'm thinking Catholicism vs. Protestantism, particulalry in the field of politics.

For what I know in religion, that is next to nothing, my time is too precious to waste it in studying what the 13th surat says, I can only observe there's apparently more decency (to a certain extent) with politicians in Protestant northern Europe than is the case in Catholic southern one. And so seemingly is the case in the US, at least at the highest level, when it comes to personal responsibility.

I explain: The presidential election is over now here in France and we are rid of the former gvt which was composed of former convicts (yes) and total incompetents who just happened to be cronies and lackeys of a certain dwarf.

- The "babes" that were mentioned some times ago were totally unheard of until Sarko decided to put them on the front line. It didn't take long to learn they're just another pair of gold diggers (working hard for France and the French needless to say). Is there anything similar in the current American administration?

- The former Minister of Foreign Affaires (Alain Juppé) was convicted to a one year suspended sentence (see here, in English) as was the former Minister of Defence Gérard Longuet in 1967. And there may be others I don't know of or that I have forgotten. Are there former convicts in the American administration?

- There is also the case of an avowed paedophile who wrote a book telling about his adventures in male brothels of Bangkok. There has been somme fuss for some days and the whole thing was forgotten. Am I wrong in thinking this simply would be impossible in any A.A and the media and the judiciary would be all up in arms? Not so in Catholic France.

-  Douillet, Laporte and innumerable other names could be cited as example of totally inept and incompetent servants of Carla Bruni's husband who have been promoted Ministers. Is there anything similar in the A.A? I know money plays a fundamental role in the U.S, much more than in Europe, that's part of the deal I guess, but are donators former convicts or imbeciles like those we had in France under Sarko?

Sarko is as religious as me but since there is a certain percentage (not that much in fact in France) of voters to court he went to see the Pope (with revisionist Bigard as special guess, of all people!!! A 9/11 denier). The Pope? Does the Pope mean anything to the Protestants? Rightist politicians care only for the Catholics (75% of them voted Sako last time) and the Jews since Protestants overwhelmingly vote for the left.

It's not that politics and politicians are paragons of virtue in the U.S that would be news to everybody, but when it comes to hypocrisy and unaccountability, the French Catholic right has reached depths (or heights) not seen since the pre-war years. These people actually stink!

Whatever may be said about the new French president, he's not religious, he never used that card, nor did a former Prime Minister who lost against Chirac ten years ago after he had done a great job and vital statistics were excellent. Note that he was raised as a Protestant...

Religions may be more or less all the same but still, there' some difference...

13 commentaires:

Flocon a dit…


before I write the post, I concur with Cellequilit, how about watching some skits by the Monthy Python when you're feeling low down?

Or this one for example, though I don't know how funny it is and also I'm not amused by Rowan Atkinson...

(But as everyone knows by bow, there's no accounting for taste ☺)

Ned Ludd a dit…

Life of Brian Debate

I don't find Atkinson that funny, but I found the link above which is very entertaining.

Ned Ludd a dit…

Sorry, you have to click on the "Featured" tab.

Cellequilit a dit…

Flocon: Did you mean "SAME difference...?" :)

Flocon a dit…

Some difference, that's what I mean, although same difference would be interesting in terms of formal logics...

But maybe am I betrayed by my feeble English skills... you'll tell me after I've written the post...

Ned Ludd a dit…

Flocon, there are several things in your post to respond to. "Same difference" would mean something like "the more things change, the more they remain the same".

Judging by the context, I would say you were right to say "some difference".

As to convicts among donors(I correct you here), there are many cases over the years for both parties. Candidates have sometimes been forced to return such contributions.

As to convicts among the politicians, I don't of any who were known as such before they entered an administration, but who have had to resign when their acts became known, usually while they were newly in power.

Maybe the most well-known convict is Newt Gingrich who despite that was running for president.

Christopher Hitchens gave a speech which denies the "some difference" on religions, so for him it would be the "same difference".

My parents have many good books in their library, but my believing mother has some incredible ones. One is "What God Promises the American Patriot" and funnier still, "How to Read the Bible and Enjoy It". I am not making this up!!!

Anonyme a dit…

I don't believe Gingrich was ever convicted of any crime. Or even indicted.

When he was Speaker of the House of Representatives, the House (at that time with a Republican majority) voted to reprimand him for a single ethics violation. He was reprimanded for claiming tax exempt status for a college course that was alleged to be developing partisan Republican policy positions.

Subsequently, the Internal Revenue Service, after an independent investigation, concluded that the tax laws had not been violated.

I find Gingrich to be a philandering megalomaniac. But compared to the French examples named by Flocon, Gingrich appears to be a Boy Scout.

Not that I am planning to invite him to dinner anytime soon.


Flocon a dit…


I knew it was "some difference" that I meant so I didn't understand why Cellequilit asked whether it wasn't rather "same difference". Now you explain and retrospectivaly cellequilit's remark makes sense.

It also shows how misunderstandings await us at every turn of the road. And not only between foreign languages.

Which leads to the questionning of language as an adequate tool not ony to communicate but also to grasp the world. This has philosophical implications of course.


I am not making this up!!!
I know you're not:

What God Promises the American Patriot

(Deluxe edition)

How to Read the Bible and Enjoy It

(Paperback only)

In his trademark clear, friendly style, Skip Heitzig (author of Jesus Up Close) provides simple, easy-to-use tools to unlock the riches of God's Word. He inspires readers to enjoy studying the Bible as they discover its extraordinary relevance and transforming power.

Hmmm... I'm considering going over to Gallignani or W.H Smith and order some copies for me and my neighbourgs...

Flocon a dit…


compared to the French examples named by Flocon

Please note that this post somehow praises Protestantism vs. Catholicism...

Also, the examples I provide come from the rightist part of the political spectrum. Not to say that politicians on the left are spotless angels but really, it's like night and day, and probably one of the reasons French protestants vote for the left. They do have some decency.

Also keep in mind how the French (and Italian for that matter) Catholics were close friends with the Nazis 70 years ago. The same electorate Sarko has been cajoling for years.


Oh, and now I remember there was a name I knew I was forgetting in the list. That of an avowed paedophile Sarko picked up because said paedophile's name was a good catch/trophy to show.

If you want to know more about François Mitterrand's nephew it's here

Now, two former convicts, a paedophile, two gold diggers (at least, entering into the details would be tedious to you) and innumerable imbeciles and profiteers in the govts of someone who relentlessly resorted to the religious card, methinks that's a bit rich !

"Personne ne nous empêchera de revendiquer nos racines chrétiennes" shouted the little man some days before the second round of the election a couple of weeks ago.

Even Chirac that you moderately appreciate didn't stoop that low. You may think well of Sarkozy because he was pro American, pro market and seemingly energetic but fact is this (censored) is the filthiest thing the French catholic right has produced since... well I'm too young to remember.

But indeed, American politicians are boy scouts when compared to the scum who was the French president these five last years.


Not that I am planning to invite him to dinner anytime soon.

For some reason, this quote from Churchill came instantly to my mind when I read your last sentence:

When Nancy Astor said to Churchill: "If I were your wife I would put poison in your coffee.", Winston riposted with: "Nancy, if I were your husband, I would drink it."

There must be some parallel...?

How do you say in English? A tit for a tat? ☺

Anonyme a dit…

Berated by a woman for being intoxicated in public, Churchill replied:

"Madam, it is true that I am drunk. But you are ugly, and tomorrow I will be sober."


Flocon a dit…

Are you telling me you're drunk and I'm ugy SemperFidelis?

Anijo a dit…

how about watching some skits by the Monthy Python when you're feeling low down?

Or how about reading the repartee between you, Cellequilit, Ned and SemperFi. That also works. ☺

Ned Ludd a dit…

There is a lot of talk on the elections about the "classic" right working with the extreme right Front Nationel. I would say that the FN is less extreme than the Tea Party wing of the Republican Party, and maybe even most of the "classic" RP.