Thread:Bawi678/@comment-1672596-20180912123318

Adding my response here instead of the Belle message wall since this is technically off-topic from that:

"And the fact some priest from XVIIIth century stated Voltaire and Dierout they're plotting to destroy Christianity, doesn't mean they were. Voltaire was more of a Freethinker than an atheist, and I doubt Diderout was plotting something like that. There's difference between not being a Christian and being an enemy of them. Just a conspiracy theory. And even if they would, there's a difference between plans and reality. The education developed even among villagers, but it doesn't mean that suddenly everyone started going to school, think independently and things like that. "

1. It wasn't simply a "priest", it was actually the headmaster of Yale at the time (not to mention this speech was given in the aftermath of the event and was to explain WHY said event occurred in the first place). 2. Voltaire and Diderot actually DID have quite a bit of a role in the French Revolution's creation, as even the French Revolutionaries admitted. And Voltaire and Diderot definitely had a big role in the creation of the Encyclopedie, as well, which WAS part of their six step plan. Also, Diderot actually has stated on the record that he "looked forward to the day the last king is strangled by the entrails of the last priest", meaning at the very least Diderot definitely wanted Christianity dead, let alone would actually plan for it. As far as Voltaire, his work of Candide actually DID act as one of the bases of the French Revolution and the Jacobins' actions. It's not even conspiracy theory, it's an actual conspiracy. Voltaire even mentioned as much shortly after the Encyclopedie was made, as you can read here. You can also find more reading material on Voltaire and Diderot's direct roles in the French Revolution (not to mention Rousseau and even Sade's roles) in the following areas:


 * http://www.ukapologetics.net/2liberalismsroots.htm
 * http://www.culturewars.com/CultureWars/Archives/Fidelity_archives/parricide.html
 * http://american_almanac.tripod.com/dehoyos.htm

"And literacy indeed grew then, also thanks to Church's schools, but remember that reading Bible wasn't considered by Catholics back then as important as attending a Latin mass nobody understood. I doubt that all nuns were literate. This was a different type of religiousness. You'd be suprised how unpopular reading Bible is in one of the most religious/Catholic countries is even in times when everyone can do it. When it comes to Marie Antoinette, she was a daughter of an emperor, so, well. "

Yeah, I'm doubtful ESPECIALLY speaking as a Catholic myself. We've got missals at our church, we actually READ the various designated readings on Sundays and Holy Days of Obligation (and by that, I don't just mean Christmas). And the bible would have actually BEEN necessary in Catholicism, like in ANY sect of Christianity, to be read (arguably FAR more important than even attending a Latin Mass.), especially after the Printing Press was created and books ended up mass-produced. Maybe if it was during the Middle Ages where books were fairly rare (so rare in fact that only the king's family and religious orders had any chance to read them), I could buy it, but definitely not during the Enlightenment. Heck, even back during the Middle Ages, the monks and various priests would have been required to be literate with the bible. Do you REALLY think the nuns, who are supposed to serve a similar purpose to the priests in terms of following God, would have been barred from being able to read the bible? As far as Marie Antoinette, yeah, I'm doubtful the daughter of an Emperor would have made mud strudels, to be honest And my overall point is, whether they liked it or not, they were still actually ABLE to read it, meaning they were still literate. If they truly weren't literate, they would have acted like Krusty did here, where he couldn't recognize mere letters of the alphabet, let alone read a book.

"I'm not stating if she would or wouldn't be executed, I wanted to show that women were treated differently in these times, and there wasn't such a thing as woman's law. "

Technically, there was NEVER such a thing as woman's law in the first place, even today. There may be some laws that benefit women, but there isn't such a thing as woman's law, just as there is no such thing as man's law. There is simply the law. It's gender neutral, meaning EVERYONE is subject to it, or at least every human.

"I just wanted to say, villager's mentality was different than philosopher's mentality. They had got different worldviews, different lifestyles, and things you learn about culture of given epoque is mainly about elites. Peasants' situation was changing, but not very spectacullary. The idea of education for all was just born, and views of many Enlightement villagers were similar to their medieval ancestors' ones. "

Actually, my point was that those "philosophers" actually spread their crap to even the peasants, which is exactly what Timothy Dwight stated when explaining why the French Revolution happened. Doesn't matter if there's a difference between villager's mentality and philosopher's mentality, the fact of the matter is, the philosopher's mentality influenced villager's mentality into trying to kill King Louis XVI and destroy Christendom, and later to try and destroy one of the few parts of France that remained devoted to Christendom, which was the Vendee region. How else do you explain even the Peasant class trying to slaughter King Louis XVI and supporting Robespierre even when he and his ilk were spending their time slaughtering the heck out of them? And make no mistake, Belle most likely would end up joining the Jacobins, maybe even backstab Beast as well. If Robespierre and his ilk could form the Jacobins and then go on a killing spree in a delusion that they should remake the world to match Voltaire, Diderot, Rousseau, and Sade's insipid views of reality, Belle most certainly can as well, especially when there's zero indication that she's even discerning in literature. 