BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: Greg F.
Date: 27 Oct 17 - 01:49 PM

The War against Pope Francis

Pope Francis is one of the most hated men in the world today. Those who hate him most are not atheists, or protestants, or Muslims, but some of his own followers.

Outside the church he is hugely popular as a figure of almost ostentatious modesty and humility.

But within the church, Francis has provoked a ferocious backlash from conservatives who fear that this spirit will divide the church, and could even shatter it.

This summer, one prominent English priest said to me: ?We can?t wait for him to die. It?s unprintable what we say in private.

Continued here:

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/oct/27/the-war-against-pope-francis

---

Good point, Greg, but I see no need to resurrect this contentious thread when there's already another religion thread going. I'm going to close this one.
-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: Stringsinger
Date: 19 Mar 13 - 11:32 AM

"The statistics on male homosexuality tell a completely different story, including very high rates of psychiatric illness, sexual health problems and promiscuity."

These statistics are totally invalid since they ignore even greater psychiatric illness, sexual health problens and promiscuity in the heterosexual community.

Why greater? Because homosexuals are in the minority.

Sexual preference is no indicator of mental, physical or social health.

Catholicism rejects homosexuality on religious and not scientific grounds.
In fact, many priests are closet gays as has been shown repeatedly.

I'm not gay but I know biased prejudice when I see it.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 19 Mar 13 - 07:17 AM

I can cheerfully echo, without naming names, similar examples to Michael's within my ken.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 19 Mar 13 - 06:28 AM

""Mike...If you going to make a study of any particular form of relationship....it cannot be restricted to those "within your ken".""

How can anybody judge and assess anything which is outside of their knowledge and experience.

You state that "in your experience, the majority of homosexuals are not happy", then castigate Mike for telling you what his experience is, and how it differs from yours.

You say you don't hate, while calling us scumbags and bigots.

You are exposed every time you post comment as someone who not only hates, but also hates irrationally. You can't even bring yourself to address me directly.

You are a hate fueled, intolerant and pretty unpleasant character with no respect or liking for your fellow man, and your opinions are more than sufficient to brand you as a bigot yourself.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: Musket
Date: 19 Mar 13 - 05:38 AM

Dear Akenation,

We at the Oxford English Dictionary wish to use examples for the noun "hatred" and wondered if we could use some of your posts? Especially the posts that are not about Gay relationships but religion which you still manage to introduce your irrational fear of others into.

Yours,

The human race.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Mar 13 - 05:04 AM

No Mike, my views are not based on the couples I have known, as i said they were all rather old and I am sure their interest in sex would have waned.

Sorry but I think you are wrong about the figures, which stae catagorically that MSM figures are much higher that hetero, even among "singles"; tho it would appear that you validate my point about the family structure having a bearing on sexual behaviour.

Unless of course, you think the word MARRIAGE has magic properties :0)

There is nothing to stop young people from committing to one another without using "the word"...and many do.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 19 Mar 13 - 04:41 AM

Well, Ake, I may not be able to judge accurately only from those within my ken, but that seems to be exactly what you are doing in your 3rd para. I was talking of lifelong relationships, from youth onward. I remember, when Valerie & I told John-Stuart Anderson & his partner Ricky, who used respectively to act his distinguished one-man plays at, and administer, the Eye Theatre Suffolk in the 1980s, that we were approaching our Pearl Wedding [30 years] in 1989, they trumped us by telling us that they had passed their 40th. John-S unhappily died soon after and I have lost touch with Ricky if he survives. But their example certainly runs counter to your generalisation about later-in-life-companionship being the norm for such couples. And, as pointed out above, the statistics regarding promiscuity, STIs &c within the gay community are no higher than those among the single, unpartnered part of the heterosexual community.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Mar 13 - 04:29 AM

Mike...If you going to make a study of any particular form of relationship....it cannot be restricted to those "within your ken".

The statistics on male homosexuality tell a completely different story, including very high rates of psychiatric illness, sexual health problems and promiscuity.

The same sex couples whom I have known, have all been in the late years and I am sure their relationship was more to do with companionship than sex.
However sexually active young male homosexuals appear to have little interest in marriage or monogamy, hense the high rates of promiscuity.
In my opinion males are by nature, sexually predatory and the limiting factor in this behaviour is the production of a family and setting an example to ones children......a social braking system. Not the word "MARRIAGE"

Homosexuals cannot produce .....and this causes the social brakes to fail.......Only an opinion.

What is your opinion on the discrepancy in sexual health rates?

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 19 Mar 13 - 04:03 AM

This point is not meant to exclude the single by any means. But assuming, as experience seems to teach, that one of the bases of a happy life is frequently a satisfactory & happy marriage or long-term partnership, then I must point out to Ake, yet again, that my dear friends, past & present, Mandy & Nicola, Ben & Dick, David & Brian, John-Stuart & Ricky, Michael & David, et al, all in long-term relationships &, where surviving, civil-partnered since soon after the 2004 Act, appear to be as stable and contented as any of the heterosexual couples of my acquaintance. I just can't make out any rational basis for these peculiar views of his.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Mar 13 - 03:59 AM

"Hatred" Ian?.....Who the fuck said anything about hatred?
This portion of the discussion was supposed to examine the Catholic Churches' response to "Gay Marriage" today, and whether or not legislation should be brought forward to support it.

Twats like you, use every opportunity to bring the word "hatred" into any discussion that you wish to close down.

The word hatred has no place in any discussion on immigration regulation(racial hatred), "Gay Marriage"(homophobic hatred, or any other contentious issue.

Grow up please.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie
Date: 19 Mar 13 - 02:14 AM

Akenaton states above that gay people aren't happy people. If we accept that, although it is sweeping and based on prejudice. .. then it is worth pointing out that it can only be the case because twats like him use every opportunity to make hatred acceptable.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: Stringsinger
Date: 18 Mar 13 - 08:23 PM

Here is an example of how politicians are using religion to get at oil but at the same time,
these fundies are wrecking the world.


Fundie Religion is growing elsewhere

This is thread creep but spotlights the role of religion.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: Stringsinger
Date: 18 Mar 13 - 07:32 PM

Sure ake but your opinion doesn't seem to be based on the scientific evidence that homosexuality is biological and found in nature. There is as much VD and rampant AIDS now in the heterosexual community as is in the gay community. I don't see heteros bringing their behavior "into line". Massive ill health is not restricted to the gay community. As a matter of fact, monogamous gay relationships have just as much chance of curbing AIDS and VD as do the hetero relationships. Don't make the mistake of assuming that gay relationships are necessarily promiscuous.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: gnu
Date: 18 Mar 13 - 05:53 PM

From my question to a discusion of homosexuality and Mother Theresa?

Sick shit. I dunno why I bothered to chek back. I shant be arsed to do so again. Have your fetish fest. You deserve it.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: GUEST,Blandiver
Date: 18 Mar 13 - 05:45 PM

There is a story (refuted by Catholic apologists) that Mother Theresa withheld pain killers in her death houses as a matter of course. One woman, crying out in agonising pain, begged for painkillers, but was rebuffed and told that her pain was 'Jesus kissing her' for sharing the agonies of his passion. The woman cried out: 'Then please - tell Jesus to stop kissing me!'

Interesting therefore that this same bon mot was deemed to be a worthy bit as part of Mother Theresa's stand-up routine, where she delivers 'Tell Jesus to please stop kissing me' as the pay-off and has the audience rolling in the aisles. Here's a wee film of one such performance:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkIyQyrfQS4

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Mar 13 - 03:51 PM

I value your opinions highly Frank, but at the end of the day they are opinions just like mine.....even Ian and Don have opinions...just the one each mind, but opinions none the less.

Time will tell if male homosexuals have the capacity to bring their behaviour into line, and infection rates down. If they are unable or unwilling to do so and are still "celebrated" by society for that behaviour, then the future looks bleak for society and homosexuals themselves.

In society you are correct in stating that there are differences, but all differences are not respected, nor should they be.

If "different" behaviour results in massive rates of ill health, then that behaviour deserves the utmost scrutiny from society.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: Stringsinger
Date: 18 Mar 13 - 10:44 AM

aketon, you obviously don't know many gay people well. You are repeating the stereotype analysis that there has to be something wrong with being gay. In fact, whether homosexual or heterosexual, I don't know many people period who are fulfilled and happy individuals. Gay is not a disease but a biological preference found in nature. I am not gay, myself, but I recognize that people are different and that difference should be respected.

That doesn't mean I have to go along with ideologies that I think are repugnant. I hope I've learned to separate the worth of an individual from their ideological proclamations.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 18 Mar 13 - 08:10 AM

""Grow up Steve.....do you really think homosexuals in general are fulfilled and "happy" individuals.
If they are, I have yet to meet one.""

You grow up!

If they're not, it's because they meet too many sanctimonious bastards who want to run their lives for them.

Recognise yourself?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 Mar 13 - 05:51 AM

Oh dear, Ake, this doesn't belong on this thread, honestly; and you know it. We have had previous threads, on one of which I recall listing 6 same-sex couples, M & F, known to me so obviously a pretty significant sample in proportionate terms of one man's total acquaintance, who lived happy, fulfilled and faithful lives. All, except one couple where bereavement had supervened too early, took the opportunity of Civil Partnership when the 2004 Act came in. Your acquaintance among gays strikes me as thoroughly inadequate to base such strictures on.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Mar 13 - 05:28 AM

Grow up Steve.....do you really think homosexuals in general are fulfilled and "happy" individuals.
If they are, I have yet to meet one. All that i have met seem to have something missing in ther lives, as if they were participating in a theatrical production......a charade..

Things like "Gay Marriage" are of course the "props"

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Mar 13 - 08:17 PM

No. Read it properly.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: akenaton
Date: 17 Mar 13 - 07:30 PM

Hmmm.......Should the above post not be moved to the "Psychobabble" thread?

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Mar 13 - 04:25 PM

I do not "celebrate" any form of sexual behaviour, o "guest", unless it's one of those rare occasions when I'm getting enough of it. I said that we should celebrate difference and diversity. We should celebrate even more when we finally have a world in which everyone of whatever persuasion in whatever walk of life that does not impinge on the freedoms of others can be happy in their own skins and feel that so is everyone else. People like you simply stand in the way of that ultimate quest for happiness.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: gnu
Date: 17 Mar 13 - 03:46 PM

Subject: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: gnu - PM
Date: 08 Mar 13 - 07:38 PM
************************************************************
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: gnu - PM
Date: 12 Mar 13 - 08:07 AM
****************************************************************
134 posts... I think I have gleaned the answer to my question.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: gnu - PM
Date: 12 Mar 13 - 09:01 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: gnu - PM
Date: 12 Mar 13 - 08:16 AM
***************************************************************
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: gnu - PM
Date: 12 Mar 13 - 09:35 PM
*********************************************************
bject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: gnu - PM
Date: 15 Mar 13 - 06:29 PM
**************************************************************
ect: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: gnu - PM
Date: 16 Mar 13 - 09:08 PM
****************************************************************
Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: Bonnie Shaljean - PM
Date: 17 Mar 13 - 07:08 AM

In the past I have seen where Joe has gone back afterwards and edited a few of his posts. Wonder if that's going to magically happen again? In the past I have seen where Joe has gone back afterwards and edited a few of his posts. Wonder if that's going to magically happen again?
**********************************************************************

From a reasonable request to possible libel? What the fuck is wrong with youse? To wit....

Subject: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: gnu - PM
Date: 08 Mar 13 - 07:38 PM

A partial quote from that OP.... "If the thread goes south, and I can just imagine it will, I will ask for it to be deleted."
***************************************************************

I request that this thread NOT be deleted but that it is kept for all eternity for every human to read in future.

I request that this thread be closed.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: Stringsinger
Date: 17 Mar 13 - 01:22 PM

I don't think you can separate the Pope's "conservative" views from his embracing of an authoritarian regime. They are "status quo" as was the Argentine regime at the time of his sojourn there.

Dictators flourish under authoritarian views whether they are Catholic or not.

Again, you can't paint all Catholics with the same brush, as well as devotees of other religions.

But the basic problem with religion is that it causes war.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: Bonnie Shaljean
Date: 17 Mar 13 - 11:52 AM

Strange, because I hadn't written anything in the intervening time - and my previous post was simply defending my character. Not sure what provoked the fresh outburst in my case. Whatever new thing I did, I managed it while I wasn't even logged in!

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 17 Mar 13 - 11:47 AM

"Sorry Bonnie...cross posted.I don't think Joe was referring to you in particular"
.,,.
Yes he was, Ake; he specifically named Bonnie, along with Jim & Steve, as being those who had provoked his outburst. You weren't reading carefully. Not sure why he left me out; don't think I am revealing any cabinet secrets if I say I had some PM correspondence, which he initiated, with him on the matter.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Mar 13 - 10:44 AM

Steve, please answer the question, why should we "celelebrate"
sexual behaviour which produces such results?

Apparently sexual custom in parts of Africa determines that hetero males behave in a very promiscuous manner, this is to be condemned, but at the moment we are discussing infection rates in the developed western countries where information and education is readily available.    Perhaps you could take a little time out from your "celebrations" to explain the huge discrepancies between homo and hetero infection rates, not only for hiv but for most serious, sexually transmitted diseases.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie
Date: 17 Mar 13 - 10:28 AM

What a thread eh?

Joe loses his temper. Akenaton explains his bigotry in plain easy to understand words but then fails to see what he is describing and then to cap it all the thread is about how the new Pope gets to grips with a reality he has no experience of. And neither did the cardinals when they chose an apologist for the Argentinian junta. Let alone his views on human beings, especially women and gays.

I doubt I shall be using his pronouncements as my guide.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Mar 13 - 09:48 AM

There is absolutely no reason why a homosexual "lifestyle" should be inherently more hazardous than a heterosexual "lifestyle". HIV is a predominantly heterosexual problem in much of Africa, which highlights the true issue, that sexually transmitted diseases are to do with poor education, ignorance often promoted by religion and the unavailability of condoms. You are using statistics to shore up your moral crusade, when the statistics actually reveal a lot more about what a bunch of numpties we are when it comes to sex education and how easy it is for religion and moralising to get in the way. It's the same with the horrid abortion rates. Moralising perpetuates these problems. Leave your morals at the door, stop being so bloody triumphalist about statistics that actually show something you're not talking about, and think about practical measures just for once.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: akenaton
Date: 17 Mar 13 - 09:43 AM

Sorry Bonnie...cross posted.

I dont think Joe was referring to you in particular, your messages seem to be reasonable even when they are critical.
You also seem to know exactly what you are talking about, unlike a handful of other "attack dogs" who reside here.

Joe is trying to explain and defend feelings which are very personal to him, to a group of people who neither share, nor even have any understanding of such matters.
His outburst was understandable and long overdue...in my opinion.
He has apologised to you personally and from his words it can be easily deduced that he respects your opinions.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: akenaton
Date: 17 Mar 13 - 09:26 AM

Steve....how do you find it possible to "celebrate" a lifestyle that carries with it such horrific rates of sexual infection?

Are you so blinded by your agenda that you cannot see that male to male sex is highly dangerous to those who participate in it.
In my opinion,the extreme promiscuity which you say causes these inflated rates is a symptom of, and endemic to male homosexuality.

The church is correct to point this out, whether it be a fashionable viewpoint or not; unfortunately the church continues to encourage the practice by retaining the celibacy rule and filling the priesthood with homosexuals......the highest figure in the catholic Church in Scotland has just been accused of sexual misconduct with young men so something is obviously amiss.

However, that is very different from attacking the whole ethos of religious faith, as seems to be happening in this thread.
All churches should reflect a socially conservative view in their teaching, do do otherwise would mean they become only another cult.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: Bonnie Shaljean
Date: 17 Mar 13 - 09:17 AM

Erm, in case you hadn't noticed, Ake, Joe has been doing a great job of "standing up" (which is not how I'd describe it) to opposing opinions. Since when is it not allowed to express dissenting viewpoints and ask valid questions? I don't see why the demonisation of people who don't share his beliefs should go unchallenged.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: akenaton
Date: 17 Mar 13 - 09:06 AM

I dont "suck up" to Joe, for any reason.....I dont "suck up" to anyone, either here or in the real world.

I have been urging Joe to stand up to the "mice" who have been attacking him and what he obviously believes in. These people are not liberal, they are an excellent definition of "liberals".

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Mar 13 - 07:35 AM

Feel free to correct my capricious italics any time in your pdf, Bonnie. :-(

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 17 Mar 13 - 07:10 AM

I have no agenda to irradicate homosexuals....live and let live i say....toleration etc etc.
This inane remark reinforces your image as a bigot. You can't see it, can you. "Toleration"? So homosexuals are to be "tolerated", huh? Any provisos for them while you're at it? Instead, how about celebrating diversity and difference and living together?

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: Bonnie Shaljean
Date: 17 Mar 13 - 07:08 AM

In the past I have seen where Joe has gone back afterwards and edited a few of his posts. Wonder if that's going to magically happen again?

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: Bonnie Shaljean
Date: 17 Mar 13 - 06:47 AM

I've just put this thread into "printer-friendly" mode and made a PDF of it. 128 pages. Gosh.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: Bonnie Shaljean
Date: 17 Mar 13 - 06:28 AM

It has taken me until now to calm down enough to even come back on the site, so this is the first time I've seen this thread since my previous message a couple of days ago. And I wrote this post before reading everything that follows my last one. Wow. Now I'm a "fucking" bigot. (Isn't there supposed to be some rule about no personal attacks on Mudcat? Or does that only apply to the rest of us?)

I'm going to send it anyway, as-is, because its basic point hasn't changed. For "I" and "me" you can simply read "we" and "us."

From: Joe Offer
Date: 15 Mar 13 - 05:42 PM

It's not that you are a bigot. It's just that you aren't very tolerant

Another lie. Joe, DO NOT make character judgments on me. Don't try to tell me what I "am". You Do. Not. Know.

Do not call me names simply because a viewpoint I have clashes with one of yours. You do not have the right to pronounce judgment on me. And you especially do not have the right to twist my words and paraphrase me with things I *did not say*. Most of the time I have been simply asking questions.

And: You're criticising me for TOLERANCE????? That's rich, considering the tolerance-level of the institution you spend so much time defending.

Nowhere have I shown myself to be "anti-Catholic" because I am simply not. Asking fair questions - which still have not been answered to satisfaction - is not being bigoted or anti- or whatever slander you feel like slinging my way.

There is a difference between critical query and attack, but this is such a vulnerable area for you that you can't seem to distinguish between the two. There is also a difference between moral issues being "complicated" and being self-contradictory. Reading through the texts does not make them less so.

But whatever about arguing points of religion: DO NOT ASSIGN CHARACTER-DESCRIPTIONS TO ME. You have no right to sit in judgment on anyone.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Mar 13 - 05:26 AM

"That would be hilarious Ake, if it weren't so tragic."
Not forgetting this is the guy who suggested that the Norwegian mass murderer Breivik had some 'important points that were worth listening to'
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 17 Mar 13 - 02:36 AM

""live and let live i say....toleration etc etc.""

That would be hilarious Ake, if it weren't so tragic.

I think you actually believe that ridiculous statement, in the face of multiple threads which expose again and again your total intolerance of travellers, homosexuals, British Pakistanis and fellow members of this forum, capped off with a rabid hatred of anything or anybody you categorise as "liberal", whatever that means in your bubble of intolerance.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: gnu
Date: 16 Mar 13 - 10:05 PM

I came back to make another point because it was bugging me and I read Ake trying to suck up to Joe and make this thread about his (Ache's) gay agenda... nevermind... yer all goin ta hell... well, those with a concience that is.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Mar 13 - 09:55 PM

Steve, you confuse bigotry with plain speaking....I doubt that you can contradict anything which i write, either on the health issues associated with homosexuality or on how homosexuality is perceived in the public sphere.

The world does not end at the walls of your "liberal" bubble.

I have no agenda to irradicate homosexuals....live and let live i say....toleration etc etc. I do feel it is correct to comment on what i see as bad legislation and to give my reasons for doing so. I know you think that makes ME a bigot, but THAT is more of a reflexion on your mindset than my views.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Mar 13 - 09:40 PM

I'll swear I sent that just the once.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Mar 13 - 09:39 PM

If I call someone a bigot I have a pretty clear idea in my mind why I would be using that term. Akenaton is a bigot of the highest order, for example. His last post provides all the evidence one needs to make that assertion. We really ought to thank him for providing such a clear illustration of the true meaning of the term.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Mar 13 - 09:39 PM

If I call someone a bigot I have a pretty clear idea in my mind why I would be using that term. Akenaton is a bigot of the highest order, for example. His last post provides all the evidence one needs to make that assertion. We really ought to thank him for providing such a clear illustration of the true meaning of the term.

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Mar 13 - 09:32 PM

Joe....Thats my boy!! :0)
They ARE bigots who want to destroy religion not because they are more intelligent or have greater understanding than people of faith, but because religion is seen by them as the last bastion of conservatism.....it is really a political agenda, and they care not a whit for the views of others.....they are illiberal in the extreme.

The fight back starts here you scumbags.... :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: gnu
Date: 16 Mar 13 - 09:08 PM

"He contradicted nothing. He simply lashed out and called three of us bigots."

Anyone can read all the posts on this thread. So anyone can determine whether or not that statement is true.

That's as far as I read. I am outta here. If you don't understand why... well, yer never goin ta hell.

HINT : Ignorance is bliss.

Blindness for the sighted is just plain sad as it isn't even a
poor excuse but a simple ruse by which they fool themselves and attempt to fool others.

Whaddya mean that don't make sense? Sure it does. Think about it.

gnightgnu

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 16 Mar 13 - 08:58 PM

In a peculiar way, the fact that this Pope connived in a vicious regime's activities, or that the last Pope was a member of Hitler Youth, matters very little in any substantive sense. Yes, these facts (and facts they are, despite the desperate spin put on them by the Vatican hierarchy) give gleeful atheists and the like some wonderful sticks to thrash Catholicism with. But the underlying, and far more serious, issue is that this Pope, despite his much-trumpeted humility and penchant for doing "ordinary things", is at least as reactionary as God knows how many popes before him. The Catholic community takes lying down the election of a chap by a bunch of shagged-out, utterly unworldly old cardinals in frocks, not a woman in sight, yet women are overwhelmingly the victims of Catholicism. The major issue for Catholics (if they see it as an issue, which I admit many may not)is that nothing can change as a result of the election of this pope. See how we rail against regimes in Iran, Egypt, China and the rest for their undemocratic ways, yet we gleefully accept the election of a geriatric Pope by smoke. Gimme strength!

Subject: RE: BS: Catholic religion response to 'today'
From: Stringsinger
Date: 16 Mar 13 - 08:08 PM

Hey Joe, you're overreacting. You have every right to your belief system and if others take exception to something the Church does, they have that right too.

As much as religion tends to dominate the culture in the U.S., I don't think any branch of it is completely monolithic. There are Catholics and Catholics, Jews and Jews, Protestants and Protestants, Muslims and Muslims, etc.

As far as the Pope is concerned, the jury is out on him in his association with the Argentine dictator. This remains to be uncovered.

Many religious folk take a slam at their religion personally. I think that if they do this,
they belie their "faith" in which criticism shouldn't matter if they really "believe".

Everyone is a bigot in some areas of their lives. You and I have some of this too.

So cool off on the shouting folks down. They have a right to their opinions and so do you.

But throwing "bigot" around doesn't address the problem of communication. These people who you have cited have something important to address and it's not just hatred but criticisms that if you explored them, you might be in agreement.