Who has Jesus?

Why, St. Xavier, of course:

One of the top Catholic football programs in the nation is finding itself in hot water after members of its student fan section directed chants of “We’ve got Jesus!” at opponents in a heated, intra-city rivalry game on Friday night in Ohio.

According to the Cincinnati Enquirer, then-No. 8 Cincinnati (Ohio) Colerain football coach Tom Bolden reacted with fury when he heard members of the then-No. 26 Cincinnati (Ohio) St. Xavier student section chanting “We’ve got Jesus!” in the moments after St. X escaped with a narrow, 17-14 victory in a matchup of two teams ranked among the top 30 in the RivalsHigh 100 standings of the country’s best teams.

But isn’t this what they believe? Sure, Colerain probably has some Catholic players and students, but as a collective body, it is a core part of St. Xavier’s beliefs that Colerain does not, in fact, have Jesus. Why aren’t we respecting these religious beliefs?!?! Can’t anyone think of the horror that will follow if people raise objections?

Besides, Colerain had a decent enough chant of their own:

After an original Friday postgame Enquirer blog post cited the “We’ve got Jesus!” chant, multiple St. Xavier students reportedly wrote in to the newspaper citing the Colerain student body starting off the chant wars with a rendition of “We’ve got girls!”, an attack at St. Xavier’s all-male, Jesuit student body.

Personally I would rather have girls than Jesus. (And perhaps Jesus would rather have boys than girls?)

Advertisements

22 Responses

  1. Religion takes away at least half of one’s brain.

  2. If you’re the counter example I see no evidence that atheism is any better.

    As far as I know the Jesuits give one hell of an education and always have. Sounds like a nice rivalry to me, that’s all.

  3. We got Jesus vs We got girls. That us one he’ll of a rivalry. LOL.

    We have one example of Jebus worship right here. He always produces ad hominems and us a troll.

  4. You started out demeaning all religious peoples intelligence, so stop acting like you are some kind of victim anytime someone gives it back to you.

    “And us a troll”. I’m not entirely sure what you are trying to type. “is”? Your spelling seems to be getting worse and worse, I know people of your advanced age sometimes need to get their eyes checked more than the younger folk, you might want to get on that.

    And is speaking as if you are talking to a third party really necessary?

    I still think it’s just a funny little back and forth they had.

  5. Nate, do ALL Catholics encourage, support and hide pedophiles or is is just the Pope and the clergy? Tell us your stance.

  6. I would say as they are all human beings you have good and bad clergy and good and bad Catholics. I’d go out on a limb and say there are atheists that would sweep allegations of abuse under the table too.

    There is no inherent quality of the catholic church that made that happen, just like there is no inherent quality of the public school system that makes it happen with far more frequency than in the church.

    Aren’t you usually very concerned about staying right on topic, Bob? Why the change of heart? Are you the only one allowed to take a detour?

  7. First of all you need to look up the definition of ad hominem. I did not attack you when I said religion takes away half a brain, unlike your direct attack upon me.I also did not demean all religious people, but said religion takes away half their brain, which is commenting on their actions. I can show proof of unreasonable thinking ( using less than a whole brain) with thousands of examples starting with the irrational, insane belief in supernatural being(s) with no proof other than fairy tale books from thousands of years ago by uneducated, fearful stone age people. Other example is the rampant pedophilia of the Catholic church, Flying planes into buildings in the name of a god, and on and on. It is funny how I have so many facts to back me up

    Spelling: sorry you could not figure out ‘us’ should have been ‘is’ Typing on an iPhone can be difficult, but you probably use a Commodore 64 so would not realize.

    I’d go out on a limb and say there are atheists that would sweep allegations of abuse under the table too.

    There you go again, as you do so often, making shit up with no evidence. Just despicable and expected from someone who has no real argument to use defending his precious, but corrupt and immoral church.

    The topic here is religion. Sorry you can’t understand that.

  8. Religion is a willful embrace of irrational ideas and a deliberate rejection of reason and logic. The intelligence of those who make such a choice is legitimately suspect, as is their potential danger to civilization.

  9. Again, I think you need to go back and learn about ad homs.

    And unless you are going to make the claim that atheists can’t be crappy people just like religious people can be, there is nothing wrong with my statement that there are crappy people who are atheist just like among the religious.

    I have no problems with veering a little off topic, like I usually say, a lot of stuff in the margins is germane to the topic and interesting to talk about. I don’t mind you veering away from the specific instance the post was about and talking about religion. I just wish you wouldn’t try and climb all over me when I do so.

  10. The topic is religion and every comment of mine was about religion.

    You really do need to learn what ad hominem means.

  11. Yes I know. I never claimed otherwise. Look back at some of the times you accuse me of being off topic.

    No you really need to learn what ad hominem means.

  12. And if it’s alright with you, can we give it up after whatever your comment is? Unless you think we are really going to get someplace.

  13. You started out demeaning all religious peoples intelligence

    Of course, you’d never stoop to something so low: http://congressshallmakenolaw.wordpress.com/ (see photo)

  14. Yes, please do see photo. I think it’s pretty funny. Big difference is I’m not using that satirical photo as a part of any argument, but rather as a decoration.

  15. Big difference is I’m not using that satirical photo as a part of any argument, but rather as a decoration.

    Oh, that’s much better.

  16. Well by definition, an ad hominem argument is one which uses an insult as if its relevant to the matter at hand.

    “You are dumb”, Therefore your argument is invalid. That’s an ad hominem.

    Having a humorous photo on the side of my blog is hardly the same as making a claim of widespread stupidity being an explanation for certain behavior.

    Michael often posts comics that poke fun at religious persons or conservatives but usually he doesn’t try and make any argument based on a comic. Everyone should be able to appreciate humor.

  17. An ad hominem is personal insult, to one person, the term means “to the man”. It is not to be used for a group.

  18. Sure, but it still has to be part of the argument. If the insult is not part of your argument, it’s not an ad hominem, it’s just simply an insult and generally should just be passed over.

  19. And by the way Michael, your mother.

  20. You are dense and clueless.

  21. Thank you.

  22. There are different types of ad hominens.

Leave a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: