I hate Pope Benedict XVI!

coffee_cake

St_Crispin wrote:

I would imagine that most of the transmission of HIV in the third world occurs through sex before marriage (most but not all). The pope is already preaching that they shouldn't do it. That would stop it completly.
However you expect them to break one rule about premarital sex, yet follow all the others?

If it's a case of most and not all (which I doubt) then no sex before marriage isn't going to stop it *completely*. And since people can apparently have hiv from birth and many might not know, marriage isn't going to be a good preventor of spreading it...

J.R.HARTLEY

you seem to think that the pope saying that the people shouldn't use condoms somehow puts up an invisible barrier to them using them, he doesn't condone condoms in the first world be we still use them, what are you implying about african people, maybe you think they are incapable of making their own minds up. your entire post is vague and shaky to say the least. your post is in fact your opinion and not a sourced and proven fact.

coffee_cake

J.R.HARTLEY wrote:

you seem to think that the pope saying that the people shouldn't use condoms somehow puts up an invisible barrier to them using them, he doesn't condone condoms in the first world be we still use them, what are you implying about african people, maybe you think they are incapable of making their own minds up. your entire post is vague and shaky to say the least. your post is in fact your opinion and not a sourced and proven fact.

Yes, clearly listening to what your spiritual leader says indicates you can't make your mind up
If they don't have access to the condoms thanks to church prevention, that doesn't help either

Rev Hellfire

I'd be interested in the source for the statistics you provided UU

And while I agree that the use of condom would be a help when it comes to battling aids in africa, I dont see them as a silver bullet, I still feel that for aids to be brought under control there need to be major cultural changes first.

Rev Hellfire

bluewolf wrote:

And since people can apparently have hiv from birth and many might not know, marriage isn't going to be a good preventor of spreading it...

I would suspect that the survival rate from babies with hiv to adulthood is pretty poor, enough as to be statically irrelevant. btw this is pure conjecture on my part.

BrianCalgary

Rev Hellfire wrote:

And while I agree that the use of condom would be a help when it comes to battling aids in africa, I dont see them as a silver bullet, I still feel that for aids to be brought under control there need to be major cultural changes first.

AIDS is a sexually transmitted disease, or passed on by drug use or to innocents through birth and blood transfusions. If it wasn't for the latter two there wouldn't be the former.

Both sex outside marriage is a sin as is illicet drug use. If the people had been adhering to the Biblical instructions regarding the use and care of the human body, there wouldn't be an AIDS problem. hence, the need for cultural changes.

Vangelis

bluewolf wrote:

Yes, clearly listening to what your spiritual leader says indicates you can't make your mind up
If they don't have access to the condoms thanks to church prevention, that doesn't help either

It is not an opinion that contraception is not allowed. It is a conclusion based on God's word, namely the Bible. For Christians, the Bible is not an opinion, it is God's truth, intentions, wisdom and tells of the true nature of Mankind.

You can say that God's word is the Church's opinion, yes. But some people seem to separate between opinion and God's word, which is not right to do.

Heeding the words of one's spiritual leader, in this case the Pope, does not mean that your aren't independent or immature, incapable of 'standing on your own feet'. The spiritual leader tells God's will, assuming that what he says is based on the Bible of course.

Kernel

Hmmm I don't know which to feel worse about, the blatant disregard for people's faith or the blatant ignorance of theology demonstrated by OP.

With regard to the issue of condoms and Africa (the often cited damnation of Catholic doctrine) I would say that if the people in Africa followed the teachings of the Catholic Church then they wouldn't have sex outside of marriage, so unprotected sex is a nonsensical source of the spread of AIDS.

With regard to you other point of women in the third world dying in childbirth (presumably, by your stance, due to lack of abortion) I would say that the Catholic Church was in no way responsible for civil or economic/medical policy towards providing abortion, and even so, how many women do you feel die as a result of lack of abortion? You also disregard the whole sex outside a loving marriage factor. So you're talking.. what... hmmmm... Ridiculous. Nonsense. Immature tripe.

But, on the other hand, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say that you are just young, so, read up and research such things - hell, maybe talk to a representative of the Church about your views and then get some informed and intelligent views to think about - seriously, it's good for you as a person.

robindch

Vangelis -

> It is not an opinion that contraception is not allowed. It
> is a conclusion based on God's word, namely the Bible.

Crumbs, I really wish that you good folks would learn your bible and religious history rather better!

The only place in the bible where birth control is mentioned is in Genesis 38:8-10, where Onan refused to inseminate his brother's wife, so god murdered him.

The strong anti-birth control tendency generally comes from the early Church fathers who, like the current and previous popes, spent large amounts of time thinking about sex and particularly, how and when other people ought to be enjoying it (or not). More information on the history of birth control and the church's attempts to control *that* can be found here.

robindch

Kernel -

> With regard to the issue of condoms and Africa (the often cited
> damnation of Catholic doctrine) I would say that if the people in
> Africa followed the teachings of the Catholic Church then they
> wouldn't have sex outside of marriage

Yes, and if people didn't eat food, they wouldn't choke. The evolutionary fact of the matter is that humans, just like almost every other organism, are designed to enjoy sex. The catholic church, like almost every other religion, tries to control this urge for its own ends: that sex can only happen with its approval (marriage), to produce more little catholics (baptism) -- the church has evolved this behaviour to ensure its own propagation. The church's statements on abstinence are as disingenuous as its insistence that condoms aren't effective against spreading disease.

BTW, lest you think that I think that the catholic church is the only one at fault, take a look, for example, at what's happening in the bible belt in the USA, where sex-ed is banned and consequently, there's a ludicrously high rate of teen pregnancies and STD's. PBS did a good documentary on this six months back named The Education of Shelby Knox.

> maybe talk to a representative of the Church about your views
> and then get some informed and intelligent views to think about

Are you seriously telling people seeking advice on marriage and sex, to speak to guys who are supposed to be unmarried and celibate?

Asiaprod

robindch wrote:

Are you seriously telling people seeking advice on marriage and sex, to speak to guys who are supposed to be unmarried and celibate?

If I had a Euro for every time I asked that I would be a millionaire by now. That one defies logic.

coffee_cake

Vangelis wrote:

It is not an opinion that contraception is not allowed. It is a conclusion based on God's word, namely the Bible. For Christians, the Bible is not an opinion, it is God's truth, intentions, wisdom and tells of the true nature of Mankind.

You can say that God's word is the Church's opinion, yes. But some people seem to separate between opinion and God's word, which is not right to do.

Heeding the words of one's spiritual leader, in this case the Pope, does not mean that your aren't independent or immature, incapable of 'standing on your own feet'. The spiritual leader tells God's will, assuming that what he says is based on the Bible of course.

I think you missed the sarcasm in my post.

And I honestly don't know where you're getting the "opinion" thing from...?

Kernel wrote:

With regard to the issue of condoms and Africa (the often cited damnation of Catholic doctrine) I would say that if the people in Africa followed the teachings of the Catholic Church then they wouldn't have sex outside of marriage, so unprotected sex is a nonsensical source of the spread of AIDS.

How is marriage protected sex then?

UU

Cantab. wrote:

Could you please source those figures?
What about buggery and rape as a result of war-ridden Africa? What about HIV/AIDS transfer as a result of mass drug abuse and mass prostitution?
Incidently, what do "scientific humanists", which I believe you are a member of, do to address the problem of HIV/AIDS in Africa?
You say you 'hate' the Holy Father. Do you actually realise the gravity of such a term.
I would consider your original post blasphemous. You are an ignorant twat.

I actually got the statistics from my Leaving Cert Geography book (Elective 3) and the book is fully up to date.

I'm not an ignorant twat! How dare you! Am I not allowed to speak out against those whom I disagree with? Just because he is the Pope can I not speak ill of him or something? "Holy Father" (sarcasm) - What has he done that makes him so holy all of a sudden? There are people who go over to places like Africa and try to save people's lives such as Mother Theresa - they are worthy of the word 'holy'! I'm not a member of Scientific Humanism as it is just a belief system like atheism, not a religion (although many conservative Christians despise Humanists because we disbelieve in a Supreme Being). I am Unitarian (with Humanist beliefs) for your info and nearly each one of our collections every Sunday goes to charity. At World AIDS Day, we give our whole Sunday collection to charity for HIV sufferers and some of members of my congregation have gone to Africa in the past to help people.

It seems to me that the only reason why you worship the Pope is because he is the Pope - not who is actually is. Did you have the same respect for him when he was just a cardinal?

StupidLikeAFox

bluewolf wrote:

How is marriage protected sex then?

because if two catholics are going to follow their churches teachings in such detail, then they should be virgins when they marry.

I know you can say that one party may have been raped, but then rapists rarely use condoms, so it doesnt come into the equation

NeilJ

Vangelis wrote:

It is not an opinion that contraception is not allowed. It is a conclusion based on God's word, namely the Bible. For Christians, the Bible is not an opinion, it is God's truth, intentions, wisdom and tells of the true nature of Mankind.

If this is the case why is it that certain Christain churches allow the use of contraceptives and others don't. Are they using different versions of "God's truth"? Surely as Christains they are all using the same holy scripture? What is being followed is as you said

Vangelis wrote:

a conclusion based on God's word, namely the Bible

. So to boil it down to a simple case of following God's law is not quite true. What you are following is one groups interpertation of that law. If it was simply down to following the Bible there would be only one Christain church, but we all know this is not the case.

Neil

Kernel

robindch wrote:

Yes, and if people didn't eat food, they wouldn't choke. The evolutionary fact of the matter is that humans, just like almost every other organism, are designed to enjoy sex. The catholic church, like almost every other religion, tries to control this urge for its own ends:

I don't think you are following the logic, nor do you understand the Church's spiritual view on love and sex. It cannot be compared whatsoever to your eating/choking example. Think about it.

robindch wrote:

Are you seriously telling people seeking advice on marriage and sex, to speak to guys who are supposed to be unmarried and celibate?

I'm advising that somebody should learn about spiritual matters and religious doctrine from somebody who is qualified to teach them, before arriving at ill-informed, erroneous and ignorant conclusions on the theology. Don't you agree with that?

bluewolf wrote:

How is marriage protected sex then?

Usually it isn't, no. However, logic dictates that if two people are in a long term monogomous relationship, they have a far far lower chance of catching any STI - including AIDS than if there is multiple unprotected sex or adultery with prostitutes etc.

I mean, how do you think AIDS is being spread? Yes, by ****ing around. Logic also dictates that if these promiscuous Africans are blatantly ignoring the Catholic teachings with regard to sex before marriage, then they would be equally happy to ignore the teachings about condoms. Fact is, they don't bother with them, or cant afford them. Either way, you can't logically blame the Church for this.

robindch

> I don't think you are following the logic, nor do you understand
> the Church's spiritual view on love and sex.

I have read various church tracts on love and sex and since I find them either incoherent, unrealistic or directed at preserving the integrity of the institution of the church through one means or another, I feel I understand them quite well.

> I'm advising that somebody should learn about spiritual matters
> and religious doctrine from somebody who is qualified to teach
> them, before arriving at ill-informed, erroneous and ignorant
> conclusions on the theology. Don't you agree with that?

Certainly -- if you wish to imbibe traditional religious doctrine, there are few better people to speak to than a priest.

Your earlier post, though, concerned itself almost exclusively with sex and didn't mention any specific instance of relgious doctrine at all, so I hope that you can forgive me for understanding that when you advised that an earlier poster should "talk to a representative of the Church about your views and then get some informed and intelligent views to think about", I understood that you were advising them to speak to a priest about sex. Apologies for publicly misinterpreting your post.

Cantab.

UU wrote:

I actually got the statistics from my Leaving Cert Geography book (Elective 3) and the book is fully up to date.

I'll take your word for it (tentitively). So what conclusions did you draw from these statistics?

UU wrote:

I'm not an ignorant twat! How dare you!

You expect others to treat you with respect when you come out with rubbish like 'this Pope is highly corrupt' and 'I hate Pope Benedict XVI' on a Christianity forum where a he is the spiritual leader for a lot of people on this board. My charge stands.

UU wrote:

Am I not allowed to speak out against those whom I disagree with? Just because he is the Pope can I not speak ill of him or something?

Yawn. Just don't expect many people to listen to you.

UU wrote:

"Holy Father" (sarcasm) - What has he done that makes him so holy all of a sudden?

You obviously don't have a clue about anything any Pope has ever done. You are continually engaging in blasphemy. You should choose your words more carefully and think before you type next time.

UU wrote:

There are people who go over to places like Africa and try to save people's lives such as Mother Theresa - they are worthy of the word 'holy'!

Yeah, and she would have accepted the Pope's authority. Was she wrong?

UU wrote:

I'm not a member of Scientific Humanism

Oh dear... And why then, did you post this over on the boards.ie>Soc>Lesbian, Gay, Bi forum? You seem very unsure of yourself. Do you need some guidance?

UU wrote:

...although many conservative Christians despise Humanists because we disbelieve in a Supreme Being).

Not true.

UU wrote:

I am Unitarian

But you said about 2 weeks ago you were a scientific humanist. Something overpowering make you change your mind?

UU wrote:

(with Humanist beliefs) for your info and nearly each one of our collections every Sunday goes to charity.

Many a noble cause I'm sure.

UU wrote:

At World AIDS Day, we give our whole Sunday collection to charity for HIV sufferers and some of members of my congregation have gone to Africa in the past to help people.

Unfortunately, the Catholic Church will not be supporting such organisations that promote the use of contraceptives.

UU wrote:

It seems to me that the only reason why you worship the Pope is because he is the Pope - not who is actually is.

Your ignorance astounds me. Fyi, Catholics don't 'worship' the Pope. Only God is worthy of worship.

UU wrote:

Did you have the same respect for him when he was just a cardinal?

Yeah I did actually. I guess you have in mind his document on the pastoral care of homosexual persons which you and I have debated about over on the LGB forum? Ratzinger has the respect of his peers, he's an amazing theologian and unbelieveably hard-working and modest man. Even if you don't believe in what he says, you have to admit, he's an extraordinary man.

robindch

> the Catholic Church will not be supporting such organisations
> that promote the use of contraceptives.

For the reasons I said before, namely, that the best way to produce lots of little catholics is for the big catholics to have sex without contraceptives. It's the mechanism by which the catholic church guarantees its own future.

BTW, I don't know whether anybody's come across US ex-President Jimmy Carter's recent book "Our Endangered Values", but it does have the following interesting observation:

Canadian and European young people are about equally active sexually, but, deprived of proper sex education, American girls are five times as likely to have a baby as French girls, seven times as likely to have an abortion, and seventy times as likely to have gonorrhea as girls in the Netherlands. Also, the incidence of HIV/ AIDS among American teenagers is five times that of the same age group in Germany.... It has long been known that there are fewer abortions in nations where prospective mothers have access to contraceptives, the assurance that they and their babies will have good health care, and at least enough income to meet their basic needs.

Job 4:8 is a true now, as when it was written.

UU

Cantab. wrote:

I'll take your word for it (tentitively). So what conclusions did you draw from these statistics?
You expect others to treat you with respect when you come out with rubbish like 'this Pope is highly corrupt' and 'I hate Pope Benedict XVI' on a Christianity forum where a he is the spiritual leader for a lot of people on this board. My charge stands.
Yawn. Just don't expect many people to listen to you.
You obviously don't have a clue about anything any Pope has ever done. You are continually engaging in blasphemy. You should choose your words more carefully and think before you type next time.
Yeah, and she would have accepted the Pope's authority. Was she wrong?
Oh dear... And why then, did you post this over on the boards.ie>Soc>Lesbian, Gay, Bi forum? You seem very unsure of yourself. Do you need some guidance?
Not true.
But you said about 2 weeks ago you were a scientific humanist. Something overpowering make you change your mind?
Many a noble cause I'm sure.
Unfortunately, the Catholic Church will not be supporting such organisations that promote the use of contraceptives.
Your ignorance astounds me. Fyi, Catholics don't 'worship' the Pope. Only God is worthy of worship.

Yeah I did actually. I guess you have in mind his document on the pastoral care of homosexual persons which you and I have debated about over on the LGB forum? Ratzinger has the respect of his peers, he's an amazing theologian and unbelieveably hard-working and modest man. Even if you don't believe in what he says, you have to admit, he's an extraordinary man.

Look Cantab., I don't wish to argue with you but there are some things I don't agree with in the world and one is the current Pope. Just as you are free to express yourself I am too even if you don't agree with what I have to say. Some of the things the Pope says aren't nice and they upset a lot of people. I think he forgets that homosexuals are still people too. As in Merchant of Venice:

"If you prick us do we not bleed? If you tickle us do we not laugh? If you poison us do we not die? And if you wrong us shall we not revenge?"

The last Pope said that it was homosexual nature he didn't agree with but he would still treat homosexuals with love and compassion like Jesus would. This one is now saying that us ourselves are immoral and doesn't really represent Jesus on Earth. I'm sorry if my "blasphemy" insulted you so I suppose I should not say I hate George Bush just in case I offend his supporters then?

Cantab. you go take your conservative Catholic path and I'll go take my more liberal Unitarian path. But I refuse to accept those I do not agree with regardless of how holy they may make themselves out to be. People can put their beliefs before their life if they choose but if they attempt to try to put their beliefs over other peoples lives that is truly wrong (and that includes brainwashing and manipulating)!

Just as you say I don't understand Catholicism, you don't Unitarianism. I'm sorry if I'm confusing you but I'll try to explain. It is non-dogmatic which means that there is no set creed - we are all free to have our own beliefs so I hold some Scientific Humanist ones. Hence, one can be Buddhist Unitarian or Pagan Unitarian . . . and I'm Humanist Unitarian. See?

I actually thank you, Cantab., as you have really opened my eyes! You made me realise that there are much more things to worry about than the Pope. The Catholic Church can rant on as much as they want about homosexuality and other stuff but I don't care what they say as long as it doesn't affect me. I don't hate everyone within the Church as there is a lot more good in it than bad and I feel truly sorry for those who are given a bad name because of what others did.

Although, I do think the Dalai Lama is a much more extraordinary and holy man - he is really impressive! Perhaps he had the right view in life - PEACE!

Blondie86Star

Its not the Pope who makes the rules, per say its what was from the Bible. While I don't agree with the churches position on homosexuality, contraception and sex before marriage theres no point in sayin you hate the man.

UU

Blondie86Star wrote:

Its not the Pope who makes the rules, per say its what was from the Bible. While I don't agree with the churches position on homosexuality, contraception and sex before marriage theres no point in sayin you hate the man.

Yeah you're right. I'm no better myself acting this way. Geesh, now I feel really guilty! I suppose there's good and bad in everyone isn't there?

I'm sorry to anyone who was insulted by my comments. Yes Cantab. I am an ignorant twat and I'm sorry for being like that. Something just really annoyed me about the Pope but perhaps I should acknowledge that he was brought up in a very conservative background and that he is human after all and is also capable of making mistakes too. Now I realise my own faults and can learn to become a better person.

Asiaprod

UU wrote:

Although, I do think the Dalai Lama is a much more extraordinary and holy man - he is really impressive! Perhaps he had the right view in life - PEACE!

Indeed he is, and his message is open to all. He is not concerned with who belongs to what religion. He believes his message is for all humanity. Even I, despite the differences between his and my beliefs, hold him in very high regard.

UU

Asiaprod wrote:

Indeed he is, and his message is open to all. He is not concerned with who belongs to what religion. He believes his message is for all humanity. Even I, despite the differences between his and my beliefs, hold him in very high regard.

Yes I almost forgot you were Buddhist too. Are you Zen Buddhist then as that is the big one of Japan, isn't it? The Dalai Lama is truly a spectacular man and was rather good friends with Pope John Paul in which they wrote a book together on faith. His message of peace is so strong from his actions:

He has lived in India since he fled from Chinese troops in 1959 and was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1989 for his non-violent struggle for Tibet.

Asiaprod

UU wrote:

Yes I almost forgot you were Buddhist too.

Shrieeeeek!!! How could you almost forget, I say it enough.

Are you Zen Buddhist then as that is the big one of Japan, isn't it? :

No, I am a Mahayana Buddhist, of the Nichiren School.
I will expound on Zen slightly just to give us all a little break and a rest from Benedict.
A great majority of people that eventually turn to Buddhist philosophy as a path started with Zen. However, Zen is terribly complicated and convoluted. It emphasizes the role of meditating for long period completely motionless in pursuing enlightenment and is considered to be simply a practice and an art form by most of its practitioners. It is not very big in Japan anymore as it does not really suit the modern world. It used to be practiced, I should really say mandated, in the old days by the Samurai class, but their desire was to develop their mental abilities to the point where they could enter battle with absolutely no fear of being hurt of killed. 100% focus on doing the other party in, and having no fear of death would ensure that they would come out victorious. Japanese Zen is a formalized system of rituals with very few Zen practitioners ever actually attaining realization, their term for enlightenment. Almost all Japanese temples are family businesses handed down from father to son, and the Zen priest's function has been reduced to officiating at funerals, in particular, funerals for pets. I live next door to the largest pet cemetery in Japan. Would take more than a day to walk around it.

The Dalai Lama is truly a spectacular man and was rather good friends with Pope John Paul in which they wrote a book together on faith. His message of peace is so strong from his actions

The Dali Lama is indeed a person that any denomination should be able to listen to and respect. The person he admires most was Gandhi; As a Buddhist, he actually dedicated the Nobel Award he was awarded to the life and spirit of Gandhi who was a Hindu. I find that aspect of the man fascinating and typical of his humility. Despite what ever our individual religions, or lack off are, I think we could all agree that this man is worthy of praise and respect.
End of break, back to Benedict, By the way, I loved the Xmas photo of him looking like the alternate Santa Clause in his red hat and outfit. I have that on my wall. No disrespect intended, my daughter thinks it is a picture of the Grinch who stole Xmas. Wickedly, I don't have the heart to tell it is not.

Cantab.

Asiaprod wrote:

...his message is open to all. He is not concerned with who belongs to what religion. He believes his message is for all humanity. Even I, despite the differences between his and my beliefs, hold him in very high regard.

You could just as well be talking about the Pope. Now what was your point again?

coffee_cake

Cantab. wrote:

You could just as well be talking about the Pope. Now what was your point again?

You sound a little ...bitter. And angry.
And it's not exactly true.

Asia: What I found very interesting was that he says that buddhism is certainly not for everyone, and made an analogy to do with a restaurant serving the same dish all the time.
I have read some of his books, and I like how his philosophies and practices are sometimes aimed at non buddhists, and supported by reasoning that seems to have nothing to do with the religion. I also like the "Try it and see if you agree, and if you don't, that's ok" kind of approach.
His book on happiness - I forget the exact title and I have lent it to someone - I found absolutely fascinating. Just reading it made me happier

Dades

Asiaprod wrote:

I will expound on Zen slightly just to give us all a little break and a rest from Benedict.

That's all well and good, Asiaprod, but what does it all have to do with Motorcycle Maintenance?

:v:

NeilJ

Blondie86Star wrote:

Its not the Pope who makes the rules, per say its what was from the Bible.

I'm having more and more difficulity dealing with this excuse for the actions of various christain churches. They all use the same Bible yet have very different views on Contraception, homosexuality etc. So its not really fair to use "it says it in the Bible" as an excuse, cause at the end of the day the catholics say one thing, the protestants say another, the methodists say another, but they all say it comes from the same book. These rules and dogmas laid down are becauses these institutions choose to follow a particular INTERPERTATION of the Bible so they are themselves to blaim for some of their more conservative and at times 'seemingly' narrow-minded viewpoints, not the sacred texts they follow so I can't see how they can use it as an excuse.

Neil

Asiaprod

The Atheist wrote:

That's all well and good, Asiaprod, but what does it all have to do with Motorcycle Maintenance?

:v:

If you own a Harley Davidson, a lot. Ever try to start one of those things on a cold morning, and keep it going. You would be quicker walking:)