Indian rationalist forced into exile for explaining why Jesus sprung a leak

Indian rationalist forced into exile for explaining why Jesus sprung a leak

Sanal Edamaruku. Click on pic for video report.

IT was out of pure concern for people’s health that prompted Sanal Edamaruku to demonstrate earlier this year that water oozing out of a statue of Jesus was actually a seepage of sewage. That, and to demonstrate what gullible imbeciles the faithful can be.

This was all to much for the Catholic & Christian Secular Forum, which saw the exposure of the “miracle” at a cross at the Church of Our Lady of Velankanni as an attack on Catholic faith, and promptly initiated a blasphemy charge against him.

Now the Indian rationalist, having been denied bail, is living in exile in Finland.

Joseph Dias, of the C&CSF, said that Edamaruku had a right to free speech, but this ought not to be allowed to  “encroach” on people’s religious  beliefs.

However, in a gesture of Christian magnanimity, his organisation was prepared to drop charges if Edamaruku were to apologise.

He effectively told them to bugger off.

Human rights lawyer Colin Gonsalves insists that no criminal act had taken place. The law under which he is charged, he said, requires

A deliberate and malicious act.

He added:

What has this man done? He’s a rationalist. He’s giving you a rational , non-spiritual, non-hypothetical explanation [for the so-called miracle].

Edamaruku has appealed to the Indian Prime Minister to scrap the country’s blasphemy law, but to no avail.

Meanwhile this foul organisation, which describes itself on its website as a “human rights” body, wants people to stop bad-mouthing Ratzinger, and has launched a lengthy petition to this end.

It begins by saying:

The media is rife with allegations flying all around accusing the Pope from one end of the spectrum to another. However, to blame Cardinal Ratzinger of sweeping the child abuse cases under the carpet is gross injustice to the man … There is absolutely no proof to show that Pope Benedict XVI deliberately did nothing, in spite of having information.

It then goes on to link priestly paedophilia with homosexuality:

Cardinal Bertone’s comment that homosexuals are more likely to be paedophiles has drawn anger especially from gay groups. He is seen as second only to Pope Benedict sought (sic) to link homosexuality to paedophilia, saying homosexuality, not celibacy, lay behind the child sex abuse scandals.

Cardinal Bertone told a news conference: ‘Many psychologists, many psychiatrists have demonstrated that there is no relationship between celibacy and paedophilia but many others have demonstrated, I was told recently, that there is a relationship between homosexuality and paedophilia. That is true. I have the documents of the psychologists. That is the problem.

The organisation said it had placed on its website:

A well researched article that seeks to establish a relationship between gays & paedophiles. If this is true, then one needs to come down as heavily on homosexuality as well. This is something the media and liberated others are not likely to.

At the last count, the petition managed to attract 386 signatures.

Hat tip: Canada Dave

19 responses to “Indian rationalist forced into exile for explaining why Jesus sprung a leak”

  1. Graham Martin-Royle says:

    So the rcc is trying to link homosexuality and paedophilia again. There is NO link between the two, despite their desire to find one. The only reason they do this is to be able to carry on their campaign against homosexuality.

    Oh, and by the way Ratboy, I won’t stop stop accusing you of being the head of a criminal gang of paedophiles, of being the person in charge of an organisation that obstructs police investigation into paedophile activity by your employees, of being in charge of a bunch of bullies (the Edamuruku case being a case in point). If you and your cowardly bunch of sycophantic arsewipes don’t like that, tough.

  2. AgentCormac says:

    Typical xtians – can’t tell the difference between shit and reality.

  3. Barry Duke says:

    Or shit from Shinola, a phrase I’ve always liked but never understood. Until today when I found this link:

  4. Trevor Blake says:

    Direct documented evidence from the mainstream media that Pope Benedict (formerly known as Cardinal Ratzinger) is and long has been fully aware of and entirely supportive of sheltering rapist clergy and silencing those raped by clergy…

  5. JohnMWhite says:

    Black is white, up is down, war is peace, the sky is green and the grass is blue. That’s what faith, and the fear it causes, does to the brain. As ever, displaying one’s piety and protecting the image of the church is far, far more important than facing real things that have happened and trying to stop horrendous injustice. The vindictiveness of slighted Catholics is never to be underestimated.

  6. David Anderson says:

    Let me get this straight. There is no link between celibacy and paedophilia, but there is a link with homosexuality. Therefore it must be true to say that those priests or whoever are involved in these child abuse cases are homosexual paedophiles.

    If this is the case, why does the calick church think this is some sort of excuse and continue to hide or allow those accused of these crimes to remain in the church. Also, how does this explain the girls that have suffered sexual abuse by this scum.

  7. Bruce Murdoch says:

    ‘Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.’

    George Carlin

  8. ZombieHunter says:

    The christians should have been left to wallow in the sewer water and then darwinism would have run it’s course

  9. Marky Mark says:

    (Or shit from Shinola, a phrase I’ve always liked but never understood)…from what I was told, Shinola was a dark paste used to shine shoes in the days of the old Shoeshine Boys that set up shop on the sidewalks of the Cities. Since the job of a Shoeshine Boy was considered to be of low intelligence, if one could not tell the difference between shit and shinola…they were really, really dumb.

    I seen a Documentary about this guy some time ago where he proved the statue was leaking sewage…Didn’t know the church was after him for exposing their fairytale.

    I remember years and years ago where thousands of people from I think Bosnia, were staring into an empty sky claiming they could see the virgin mary. Some freethinkers called it mass-hallucination. I disagree and think it was because people were afraid to say they didn’t see anything in fear of persecution…so they went along with it. What has happened to this guy is proof that people are afraid to tell the truth, a real fear of arrest.

  10. Marky Mark says:

    “Want to end the war on drugs? Start stringing up the Wall Street Bankers who launder the drug money and it will end tomorrow”

    George Carlin

  11. Matt Westwood says:

    Want to end the war on drugs? Legalise and tax them, and all your political problems will be over in a fortnight.

  12. Matt Westwood says:

    The “shit from Shinola” phrase is explained entertainingly in Thomas Pynchon’s “Gravity’s Rainbow”.

  13. Har Davids says:

    I tend to agree with ZombieHunter: as long as the faithful only harm themselves in any way, they’d better be left alone with their invisible friends. The only problem that needed to be solved was who’s to set the boundaries on their behaviour? With Sanal Edamaruku expected to apologise for being a rational human being, it’s obvious that we’d better let them wallow, and perish, in their stupidity.

  14. Tim Danaher says:

    Always worth posting this clip of a Hindu mystic trying to kill Sanal live on Indian television:

    Thing is, if the mystic truly believe that he could kill Sanal using these powers, what would the legal position be? Attempted murder?

  15. remigius says:

    Tim, to prove any criminal liability you need both mens rea and actus reus.

    If there is no actual deed done, then whether the idiot believes it or not is irrelevant.

  16. Jay says:

    Related issue: In Brazil, you can be jailed for criticizing religon.

    This is (an inevitable) results of those who would criminalize ‘hate speech’ or even some versions of ‘bullying’. To the average person (including the average voter or legislator), racist, sexist or other speech are functionally the same and will be handled by the same brush.

    Defending free speech includes defending racist, sexist, homophobic or other offensive speech as well. This is where the free speech advocate and the atheism advocate tend to part company with much of the liberal left.

  17. Matt Westwood says:

    You know you have an ideological battle on your hands when someone says: “I’m completely in favour of free speech, except ..>”

    The “except” usually precedes “… this list of things that I personally don’t like very much.”

    “… Well, obviously, if it causes offence then it shouldn’t be allowed …”

  18. Danaher says:

    There you go again, Remigius, bein’ all rational an’ tha’…

  19. remigius says:

    And there you go again, puttin’ your email in the name box!