Secular Fanaticism?

[Revolvr]

and the irony is that they dogmatically refused to let him speak
:shrug:

Yes, more intolerant than the religious people they despise for being intolerant. Oh the irony.

 

[spidergoat]

The issue (at least from my perspective) was more about the revered holiness many atheists reserve for secularism, and how it is constitutionally diametrically opposed to dogmatism.

This appears to be a myth.

I'm not sure it is a myth, but yes, the secular or atheist person might hold any number of other dogmas or ideologies. They could, for instance, hold a grudge against an institution that still performs exorcisms. I suppose if a student were to say, "The Devil ate my homework!", it's a valid excuse?

 

[iceaura]

The Pope decided not to speak, due to the possible indignity of finding his speech protested.

How is this "secularists" violating "secular" ideals ? The Pope talks - not a lecture or a presentation in room, but a public oration in the common outdoor political arena of a university - and expects reverential and dignified order maintained at all times ?

 

[Tiassa]

Papal complaint: bogus, hypersensitive, deceptive propaganda

If I was a secularist, yes

Are you afraid to answer the question directly?

Would you give the Devil a pulpit?​

Don't be afraid of who or what you are. Don't hide behind what you would do if you were someone else. What would you do? Would you give the Devil a pulpit?

if a small portion of a (secular) community go out of their way to stop a person speaking (to the disdain of the greater community), what else can you call it?

Freedom of speech and assembly. The Vatican made its own free-will choice, too: since they would not be received without dissent or controversy, they decided to refuse the invitation.

BTW - the designated space wasn't the entire campus

A "small group" of students could hold the "entire campus"?

Look, we have the same problem in the U.S. Authorities these days are trying to declare "protest zones", restricting free assembly and expression to the convenience of the police, public officials, or the objects of protest. In the U.S. this is actually illegal, but I don't know what the law in Italy is on that. If they've broken the law, why not prosecute the students accordingly?

In the meantime, if "free speech" means the pope is entitled to speak without any visible controversy, I question that definition.

Had the pope gone ahead with the speech, and it was canceled for a direct threat to his safety, I would agree with you that the students overstepped their bounds. However, given that this is about the Vatican's perception of dignity, I say it's the Vatican's decision and therefore their own fault.

I'll wait to indict the students at least until the government does.

I take it you get a kick out of Oprah Winfrey?

Do I want to know what that's supposed to mean? Or is it just your confession that you're not to be taken seriously?

Veteran Vatican-watchers said they'd never seen anything quite like it. Pope Benedict XVI on Tuesday abruptly called off plans to speak at Rome's prestigious La Sapienza university, after students and professors rallied to proclaim him pontiff non grata.

More than 60 professors signed a letter to the public school's rector saying the pope's appearance, which had been scheduled for the opening of the academic year Thursday, was an affront to people of science and to the "secular" nature of the institution.

Students staged a sit-in Tuesday, waving banners with angry slogans ("Knowledge needs neither fathers nor priests") and launching what they dubbed "anti-cleric week."

"This pope unfortunately is not particularly friendly to science," physics professor Andrea Frova, one of the La Sapienza academics who signed the petition, said in an interview.

Frova and the others said they were offended by a comment made by the pope 17 years ago, when he was Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, that called the heresy trial of 17th century astronomer Galileo "reasonable." (In fact, Ratzinger was quoting another philosopher in that passage, part of a long speech on the Roman Catholic Church and Europe.)

The issue goes beyond Galileo, Frova said, and to the church's position today on stem cell research, evolution and genetic engineering.

"History changes; the scientific problems are different today than in the time of Galileo, but the attitudes of the church stay the same," he said.

The pope would be welcome at the university to debate these issues, Frova said, but not to deliver a speech in which there would be no opportunity for discussion or response.

Given the incidents of the last few days, a brief Vatican press statement said, "it was considered opportune" to scrap the event.

(Wilkinson)

Oh, dear God! A ... (gasp!) ... sit-in! A ...(gasp!) ... letter! And what's this? A ... (gasp!) ... banner!

Seriously, dude. Come on.

So "it was considered opportune"?

op•por•tune
Pronunciation: \ˌä-pər-ˈtün, -ˈtyün\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French opportun, from Latin opportunus, from ob- toward + portus port, harbor — more at ob-, ford

Date: 15th century

1 : suitable or convenient for a particular occurrence <an opportune moment>
2 : occurring at an appropriate time <an opportune offer of assistance>

(M-W.com​

This wasn't a matter of force. This was a matter of suitability and convenience.

CNN's Rome bureau chief Alessio Vinci said it was quite extraordinary for the pope to cancel the visit just because of the objections of the students and professors. It Is especially surprising, he said, given that this is the same pope that made a controversial visit to Turkey last year.

Pope Benedict went to the predominantly Muslim country despite strained relations between the Vatican and the Islamic world following a lecture the pope gave at a German university in which he made unflattering comments about the Islamic faith.

(CNN.com)

The largest number I can find regarding the protesters so far is sixty-seven. Perhaps the protester was larger, and that number simply represents professors and not students. However, it seems a dubious assertion that sixty-seven people could "take hold" of the largest university in Western Europe. Although, I admit that, despite the number in the news reports, there had to be more than sixty-seven people protesting; the school has 138,000 students.

Physicist Andres Srova, seemingly the de facto spokesman for the protest, explained, "We have no objections to the pope visiting at any other time when there can be exchanges of opinion, but not at the inauguration .... It was a mistake to ask him to come at this time."

I would propose that your complaint is both ill-informed and hypocritical. While the propriety of having the pope deliver a speech to inaugurate the academic year is its own question, it seems rather quite bogus that you should complain that the Pope, choosing to decline an invitation because he could not be guaranteed a forum free of dissent, somehow equates to censorship by other parties.
____________________

Notes:

Wilkinson, Tracy. "Protest leads pope to cancel speech". LATimes.com. January 16, 2008. See http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-pope16jan16,1,6142305.story

CNN. "Galileo protest halts pope's visit". CNN.com. January 15, 2008. See http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/01/15/pope.protest/index.html

See Also:

Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. See http://m-w.com

BBC News. "Papal visit scuppered by scholars". January 15, 2008. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7188860.stm

Wikipedia. "Sapienza Università di Roma". See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Rome_La_Sapienza

 

[Cris]

lgLg,

so in other words you have no problem with the censorship of views that are divergent or challenging to your own values?

What censorship? They were protestors exercising their right to freedom of speech. It was the pope who voluntarily decided not to proceed.

 

[greenberg]

Seems we can notch this up to the ethics of secularism not necessarily encompassing broadness or freedom of thought.

Anyone who has ever let their thoughts be 'broad' and 'free' can attest that this is no good. It leads to confusion and misery.

Similar happens on the level of society.

 

[spidergoat]

Secularism doesn't mean that a private citizen or institution cannot limit one's free speech, only that the government can't.

 

[lightgigantic]

Tiassa

Originally Posted by Lightgigantic

If I was a secularist, yes
”
Are you afraid to answer the question directly?

Would you give the Devil a pulpit?

Don't be afraid of who or what you are. Don't hide behind what you would do if you were someone else. What would you do? Would you give the Devil a pulpit?

It case you haven't gathered, I am critical of the BS secularists expect us to swallow in the name of secularism.

would I give the devil the pulpit?
No

But then I don't have any secularist ideals to live up to

“
if a small portion of a (secular) community go out of their way to stop a person speaking (to the disdain of the greater community), what else can you call it?
”
Freedom of speech and assembly.

or alternatively, bad behaviour

”
Oh, dear God! A ... (gasp!) ... sit-in!

I think oprah also has seats in the studio for the audience and guests

 

[spidergoat]

In a theocracy, students would not be allowed to have a say in who speaks at the university. In a secular state, you can exclude (I know that's not exactly what they did) anyone for any reason from your private institution.

 

[Tiassa]

I'm not sure what your Oprah fetish has to do with anything ....

But then I don't have any secularist ideals to live up to

And you will continue to get, from secular society, more than you are willing to give.

You should keep that in mind, sir.

or alternatively, bad behaviour

Perhaps, but as you've pointed out, you're predisposed to the irrational and have no obligation to be just, reasonable, or fair.

I think oprah also has seats in the studio for the audience and guests

What is your strange fascination with Oprah?

 

[lightgigantic]

“

Originally Posted by LightGigantic

But then I don't have any secularist ideals to live up to
”
And you will continue to get, from secular society, more than you are willing to give.

yes, that and a whole lot more

You should keep that in mind, sir.

don't worry
I do

“

or alternatively, bad behaviour
”
Perhaps, but as you've pointed out, you're predisposed to the irrational and have no obligation to be just, reasonable, or fair.

oh you rational, just, reasonable and fair secularist you!!
:thankyou:

“
I think oprah also has seats in the studio for the audience and guests
”
What is your strange fascination with Oprah?

just a lead into what you would deem as a sufficiently sober atmosphere for intelligent discussion

 

[spidergoat]

The row has its origins in a speech made at the same university by the Pope - then still Cardinal Ratzinger - in 1990. He cited an Austrian philosopher of science, Paul Feyerabend, who had declared the Roman Catholic church’s treatment of Galileo to be “reasonable and fair”.

Is such an idea compatible with a secular institution?

Another question to ponder: what does a "tolerant" atheist look like? Would they only object to religious torture of heretics a little bit?