CHURCH HIDES DOCTRINES TO TRICK PARENTS INTO TRYING TO MAKE THEIR BABIES MEMBERS OF CHURCH

A FAR FROM EXHAUSTIVE LIST OF DOCTRINES HIDDEN FROM CATHOLIC PARENTS: 

The doctrine that the baby is not fit to be with God until baptism.
 
The doctrine that God is impersonal or every different from us - the three persons in God are metaphors. This shows that people who revel in their relationship with God are worshipping a God made in their own image or confusing the gifts of God with God himself.
 
The doctrine that God was right to order all the killings of adulterous people in the Old Testament. Jesus said stoning an adulteress to death was right if you have no sins yourself.

The doctrine that God punishes forever and deprives one of any chance to change though he has the power to melt hearts - the doctrine that we make this fate ourselves is a cover-up. It suggests we damn ourselves forever and ignore God's continued attempts to help us see the light. The Christian God is evil for punishment that has no interest in reforming is based not on asserting justice but on using what the person has done as an excuse for abusing them.

The doctrine that if science or philosophy or facts conflict with Catholic doctrine we must still believe Catholic doctrine and hope that the solution for the conflicts will come. This is the starting point of fundamentalism.

The doctrine that loving God is the greatest and main commandment. Love of neighbour is only the second. This implies that underneath the "good" works of Christians there is a secret and concealed contempt for people and they prefer God. Confirmation of this is found in the Catholic doctrine that we don't have to like anybody but we have to love them for love and liking are not the same thing. The teaching is that we must love God as an end in himself and love others just to please God, as a means to an end. Mother Teresa said she helped people only for God. Christian love for neighbour means only not that the neighbour is valued but what is seen of God in that person and God is supposed to live in all beings. Christianity's evil influence on Islam got the doctrine that alms must be given to the poor not for them but for God into the Koran. The result was grave dysfunction and fundamentalism and eventually 9/11. It would be best if we could love others for themselves. It is hard to do that but bringing God into the equation only makes it harder.

The Church teaches very hurtful doctrines such as that a boy masturbating will go to Hell if he dies unrepentant. Also, its permitting belief in miracles attracts the gullible. Even if miracles really happen, only a few will have a mature outlook in relation to them. They will base belief on evidence. Everybody else is just credulous. The belief encourages gullibility and the tendency of people to prefer the gifts of God to God himself. Catholics prefer God's love to God himself.

The Catholic Church is polytheistic. It just calls its gods and goddesses saints. The saints influence God. But a perfect God cannot be influenced by a creature he has made. Influence implies that you need to be encouraged to do something as if you are uncertain. The saints are better than God if they can influence him.

The Church teaches that goodness is not an abstract notion. It is God. If God is a person then goodness is a person. But goodness is an abstract notion. It is real nevertheless. To substitute a person or God for goodness is idolatry and turning away from goodness but retaining the appearance of goodness.

The Bible teaching that anything worshipped as God among us that can be destroyed broken is not God is ignored in favour of the bizarre idea that the bread and wine of communion are the body and blood of God and not bread and wine at all. The doctrine opposes the scientific truth that bread cannot be alive.

It is vicious to teach that we are all sinners. That implies we are being judged at least generally. It does not matter if I am a sinner. I cannot change what I have done. All I can do now is make decisions in the present moment to correct the damage in the future. Belief in sin is irrelevant. Even if I have free will, I am never totally responsible for what I do. This is a fact of psychology. I cannot choose to reject God totally thus there can be no Hell. I should not fear the gospel of the Catholic Church that warns of the danger of Hell for sinners.

If you make very serious allegations you need proof to back them up. If you accuse somebody of carrying out murders, you will have to come up with very strong proof. It would be best if you could film them. The Church has no proof for us for the serious allegations it makes. It says for example we have the power to be bad enough to reject God forever in Hell.

All these doctrines contradict the cardinal rule: Accept only ideas that do people no harm.

The sinister implications of Catholic doctrine are often worse than the doctrines themselves. For example, there is no evidence that the Catholic Church is God's one Church and its teaching without error. The Church bans women and practicing homosexuals from the priesthood. If I invent a religion and ban blacks from it I am a racist. And the less evidence I have that this religion is from God the more racist I am. There is enough of discrimination in the world without following a religion that practices it.

No good done by the Church justifies support of the Church.
 
CONCLUSION
 
Baptism confers pretend membership of the Church on a baby. You cannot make a baby a member of a sports club so why would you think a baby can be made a member of the Church? And if the baby is inclined to rebel against God from conception as the Church says and needs baptism to heal this trait, surely you are forcing your will on the baby by baptising it or having it baptised? If the baby had a choice it would most probably choose what is called evil by the Church - namely a normal life that doesn't worry much about God or popes or what the Bible says. In other words, it doesn't want baptism for it doesn't want to be healed.
 
If enrolling your baby in the gym cannot make it a true member of the gym but only a nominal or pretend one, surely trying to enrol him or her in the Church is far sillier if it is true that our nature is to live without God? It is really down to a refusal to accept anybody as a person, they have to be accepted as a Catholic.