We were unable to load Disqus. If you are a moderator please see our troubleshooting guide.

Binary_Bob • 8 years ago

It must have cost a fortune to travel to all the churches all over the world and test the water.

Guest • 8 years ago

Exactly, those elite university "studies" seem to be driven by another agenda. Health . . . that's just a cudgel . . . betcha there's no studies to determine the cleanliness of the floors of madrassas.

woofa • 8 years ago

You people sure get touchy about your religions! Nobody is trying to stop you from being ignorant and worshiping. The point here is purely and simply to point out it's not exactly sanitary. If you see some other agenda then that's your own problem and your own insecurities with your religion. It speaks loudly.

John Thimakis • 3 years ago

Just let them them drink their Kool Aid... er I mean Holy Water. ๐Ÿ˜‰๐Ÿ‘

Jerry Rivera Mendrez • 3 years ago

I see where your gonna be going, ill see you there

Fatesrider • 8 years ago

First of all, no one had to travel anywhere. They just call people in the locations they want and get samples sent in the mail. Secondly, cvcr, they have done multiple studies of what in on floors of all kind, so you lose the bet.

And what the hell kind of "agenda" is there to telling people that the water they smear all over themselves is bad? The "Gosh, we don't want you to die because other myth believers can't wash their hands after pooping" agenda?

Brilliant thinking there, Poindexter.

AugustineThomas • 8 years ago

You're a bitter soul.
St. Francis pray for God to remove the bitterness from this individual's heart..

cupid92 • 8 years ago

and this is why I never ever put my hand in the bowl of holy water!! Some people think i"m being disrespectful-I think I'm being hygienic

Fatesrider • 8 years ago

Actually, they don't think you're being disrespectful. They think you're a vampire. Do you sparkle in the sunlight? ;)

AugustineThomas • 8 years ago

I'd love to see your life for a day.. You slander all religious people as if you're something, but you're clearly a troll and trolls always have miserable lives.
St. Peter pray for this poor soul!

JustGNow • 8 years ago

Why on earth would anyone even consider drinking Holy Water? it is not meant for that use at all. Never has been and never will be made for drinking.

carolrhill814 • 8 years ago

You took the words right out of my mouth Holy Water is NOT for drinking and never was and that is a fact the article NEVER said.

Aprildawn Hale • 8 years ago

I think dabbing it on skin would be bad enough, or anywhere near the mouth... Ugh.

AugustineThomas • 8 years ago

You realize that every time you go into a public restroom and you smell someone's you know what, it means that some of the particles are in your nose, which means that some of the particles are in your mouth?
You do that crappy math..

woofa • 8 years ago

You need to actually learn something about the things you try to speak about.

"In 1975 Professor Gerba published a scientific article describing the little-known phenomenon of bacterial and viral aerosols due to toilet flushing. The more you learn about it, the scarier it sounds. According to Gerba, close-up photos of the germy ejecta look like โ€œBaghdad at night during a U.S. air attack.โ€ The article ominously depicts a โ€œfloor plan of experimental bathroom with location of gauze pads for viral fallout experiments.โ€ A lot of virus fell on those gauze pads, Gerba found, and a lot of bacteria too. In fact, significant quantities of microbes floated around the bathroom for at least two hours after each flush."

This has been known for over 38 years. Eat crow pie.

Mike McCue • 8 years ago

It actually is a lovely custom. Stand at the entrance of any Catholic Church on a Sunday and you can watch people blessing themselves in the simple and ancient gesture. You can see parents teaching their small children this devout, prayerful act. Lovely.

fredx2 • 8 years ago

You must have missed the similar reports the e coli and feces are all over every place in your house, blah blah blah.

doninkansas • 8 years ago

actually, that is incorrect. holy water has frequently be drank and continues to be drank around the world. in fact, in the good ole days, many so called "mystics" encouraged people to drink it and use it frequently. in the Eastern Catholic and Orthodox Christian churches it is customary at the blessing of waters on Theophany for the people to come with cups and drink the newly blessed waters and take large vessels of it home with them.

See here: http://www.newadvent.org/ca...

And here: http://forums.catholic.com/...

In both the east and the west there is a very long history of this pious tradition.

Mike McCue • 8 years ago

drink, drank, drunk ---I suggest working on your grammar
The most common use of holy water does not involve drinking.

workingclass1 • 8 years ago

Makes sense. Religion is full of it, so why not the "holy" water.

Guest • 8 years ago

Ah, see you fell for the media trap. Any excuse to attack religion, right?

Fatesrider • 8 years ago

No, actually... One doesn't need an excuse to ridicule scientifically discredited myths.

Ashley Williams • 8 years ago

When was god proved not to exist? Who proved it? Facts please.

economicus • 8 years ago

You're attempting to shift the burden of proof, and are therefore committing a logical fallacy.

"If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes.But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time."

- Bertrand Russell

So prove to us Ashley that the Great Pumpkin doesn't exist?

spitfire1938 • 8 years ago

Ah yes... Bertrand Russell, statist, communist, anti-religious zealot, eugenicist, misanthrope... good example...

economicus • 8 years ago

Attacking the messenger doesn't make the argument any less valid.

So you go ahead and prove the Great Pumpkin doesn't exist.

spitfire1938 • 8 years ago

Why... The question is about "Faith"... So I know God Loves you!

economicus • 8 years ago

Wrong. My response was to Ashley.

The Great Pumpkin loves you!!!

woofa • 8 years ago

You said it was about FAITH. So you don't KNOW anything. You simply HAVE FAITH in your belief founded from ignoring advances and staying glued to ancient notions.

Geoff Alnutt • 8 years ago

Based on this latest revelation we can now correctly change the word from FAITH to FILTH. It's a lateral move to me.

doninkansas • 8 years ago

no, you "believe" that god loves him. if I remember my theology classes (yes, I studied theology on a university level and used to be a priest), faith is trusting something is true, but that can't be proven.

spitfire1938 • 8 years ago

Thank you for correcting my sloppy reply.

fredx2 • 8 years ago

OBVIOUSLY I can't prove that he does not exist. So what? Now,if you want to prove that he exists, go ahead.

AugustineThomas • 8 years ago

Next he's going to give us a quote from Satan and hope the ignorant will take it as proof of God's nonexistence (an absurd proposition in the first place)..

AugustineThomas • 8 years ago

So you and Bertrand Russell are smarter than Galileo, Lemaitre, Copernicus, Leibniz, Kepler, Mozart, Beethoven and Bach (all of whom believed devoutly in the Christian God) and we should give up on our impeccable social stats? (Those who regularly attend church have better social stats than anyone in the world. Atheists and those afflicted with homosexual lust have among the worst--only poverty stricken individuals and prison inmates score worse.)

economicus • 8 years ago

Argumentum ad populum fallacy. Fail

sadlyperturbed • 8 years ago

Funny, but according to your own beliefs, I was created in God's image. God must also be gay then, right?

Guido • 1 year ago

3rd law of thermodynamics precludes god..... unless you believe in a crappyverse imbecile god that failures 100% of the time.

AugustineThomas • 8 years ago

Also, should we believe, as you do, that we're self-creating man-gods who forgout our own self-creation and then came to earth with all the theists?

economicus • 8 years ago

Either/or fallacy. Fail.

Geoff Alnutt • 8 years ago

Or The Flying Spaghetti Monster. Ramen!

fredx2 • 8 years ago

The burden of proof is on the one making the assertion. So as soon as the atheist says, there is no God, then the burden of proof is on him.

fredx2 • 8 years ago

You must have missed the point what the Christians say they believe because of faith. How did you get the impression that Christians believe because they can prove the existence of God? Nobody ever says that, yet you people continue to play your little teapot games.

woofa • 8 years ago

Sorry but burden of proof is required to the positive. When was he proved to exist? Never. There are nothing but anecdotal stories.

Guido • 1 year ago

man's delusion always conjure a god with their same defects and ignorance... each age has its own modified delusion to match the current ignorance level of the population.
religion exists solely for the protection and providence of evil. It protects psychopaths that prey on the weak of mind.

justamaz • 8 years ago

Yes and that science is so questionable. Problem is, the atheists of this world, just can't see it because of the blinders they wear.

fredx2 • 8 years ago

You mean like Ptolemaic theory, the one that "scientists" insisted was true for a thousand years. You know, the one where the earth is at the middle of everything? And when Copernicus, a Catholic ordained canon, discovered otherwise he was afraid to publish his results, because he would be destroyed by the "scientists". Where his archbishop urged him to publish his new theory, but he held back, not wanting to become a pariah in the universities?

Villings. • 8 years ago

"media trap", amazing. 21st century and, still using that old, old excuse..

woofa • 8 years ago

Any excuse? There are myriad excuses to attack nonsensical beliefs of religion and many other idiotic beliefs that many humans buy into. We don't need ANY excuse. This also isn't an attack on religion, it's pointing out holy water isn't very sanitary and the fact is very many people put it on their lips.