Pope John Paul II RIP

[SPIKE1257]

The heart thing is a bit strange, though pretty understandable. The Pope was one of the best things to happen to Poland in recent years, and he definitel left his touch on them. They know they cant have his whole body, so they are hoping that they can have a piece of him back in his homeland. A very symbolic piece.

I don't really think they should let Poland have his heart, but they should definitely give them something of his. Preferably not something that was attached to him once.

They can have his penis, he probably didn't use it that much. May still be under warranty.

 

[Minotaur]

its not like he said do this or else...

Actually that is the message that was given to Catholic congressmen and senators... tow the Vatican's party line or risk excommunication.

 

[Minotaur]

or maybe he understands homosexuality better than you can. he sees it for what it is and you are lying to yourself in order to rationalize your feelings of guilt.

I don't think he does. I have no guilt for being who and what I am. I like my sexuality and am happy being what I am.

when a religious leader speaks out against a sin it is not persecution. he didnt say "expell all of your fags from from your cities" that would have been persecution. research persecution a little before you speak of it.

Persecution takes many forms.

 

[Minotaur]

I really dont, but I am having fun criticizing your logic

Simple pleasures for a simple mind.

 

[Minotaur]

its a fairly common practice if i understand right. they have different body parts of important people all over the place in different cathedrals. heads, fingers, arms, major organs

Those are called relics and are usually the objects of veneration.

 

[gococksDJS]

Oh crap, Here comes Minotaur driving the equality train. All aboard, but if you don't agree with my views then your wrong, and a hateful bigot.

 

[Minotaur]

Oh crap, Here comes Minotaur driving the equality train. All aboard, but if you don't agree with my views then your wrong, and a hateful bigot.

That was uncalled for. This is why these conversations go down the crapper. Fuck you and the horse you ride.

I keep coming back here thinking there might be something fun and interesting to talk about. But I'm usually wrong in that regard. Someone once told me that you don't keep opening the jar when you know something is rancid.

I think I'll take his advice.

 

[Eggs]

Simple pleasures for a simple mind.

Maybe my mind would step up to the challenege if I actually had one.

As GoCock said, dont you have a train to drive somewhere? I'm pretty sure I'm not heading where thats going, so seee ya.

 

[Eggs]

That was uncalled for. This is why these conversations go down the crapper. Fuck you and the horse you ride.

I mean, not really. His post was rather indicative of your attitude

 

[Pepper]

Great sources there, a google search that isnt actually pointing to him actually calling gay evils, but calling the lifestyle evil.

Oh, and pointing to gay.com. Now thats not going to be a biased source!

Lets be realistic, the Pope wasnt saying that Gays were evil people... that they should be burned at the stake, or whatever else you could think of. He's saying that according to the Bible, homosexuality is a sin, and in that, sin is evil.

As to this:



Lemme see, according to Christianity (in all but the most liberal views), homosexuality is wrong and is a sin. So, the fact that the American Episcopal church allowed this Bishop in, is very much akin as far as sin goes to allowing a rapist or what not be Bishop. So you're saying it would be okay to let a known rapist, child molester, etc to be made Bishop as well? And before we go off and say something stupid like "Oh, they let child molesting priests do it all the time" well, I dont really think thats the case. Child molesters are being dealt with, and if a priest committed any other form of rape the same would be expected.

What you're saying is that the Church shouldnt be able to enforce any of its beliefs on those that work for it. Well, I dont see how one could truly believe in a religion and think that they shouldnt have the right to enforce their own belifs amongst their clergy.

Wow. This may be my favorite post of the year.

Very well said.

 

[Pepper]

Simple pleasures for a simple mind.

Any you called GoCocks out for being rude?

 

[Pepper]

We can't condemn him for falling into the unjust ruts of his beliefs,

So, you can't fault the Pope for believing the Bible? How generous of you.

Persecuting homosexuals? How, by calling it a sin?

 

[Eggs]

oh, and btw...

I think I'll take his advice.

Please dont be one of those people that just talks about it

 

[Decker]

Just my two cents. Like all leaders, the pope--his life and actions--must be scrutinized strongly (absolute power tends to corrupt--well, you know the rest). The papacy represents the most centralized form of religious power in the world outside of Sun Myung Moon and his church.

In my opinion, the pope's stance on attacking poverty, political disenfranchisement, and war were right on the money and he is to be lauded.

On the other hand, I don't condone his declaration that homosexuality is incongruous, a sin, b/c it contravenes natural law as God intended and is outside of attaining the image of ...the creator. That notion is based on the superstition that: 1. anyone can definitively divine God's intentions or 2. the bible is the inerrant word of God. Personally, I find little merit in either of those concepts.

Also, for health reason, I don't agree with his view that birth control should never be used.

Like all great figures, he was controversial and we're left to sort out the details. RIP

 

[Decker]

Offhand, does anyone know why the pope wears an egyptian ceremonial hat? I saw the pharoah in the 10 Commandments wearing the same thing?

Why is a replica of the Washington Monument in St. Peter's Square?

I don't have time to google these things myself.

 

[Eggs]

On the other hand, I don't condone his declaration that homosexuality is incongruous, a sin, b/c it contravenes natural law as God intended and is outside of attaining the image of ...the creator. That notion is based on the superstition that: 1. anyone can definitively divine God's intentions or 2. the bible is the inerrant word of God. Personally, I find little merit in either of those concepts.

And thats the reason why you arent the leader of a world religion.

As to the hat, no idea.

The monument is a great phallic symbol thats been around since before the Washington monument. All hail the mighty boner. Every modern civilization has a few monuments to erection in their cities. Its all the rage. I'd put one in my backyard, but I live in an apartment.

Oh, as to scrutinizing the Pope, I have no problem with that. But I think its best done once the body is in the ground and though we might not all have agreed with everything he said and done, he did accomplish much and does deserve to RIP.

 

[Decker]

The monument is a great phallic symbol

That's what I thought too, but that's exactly what they want us to think...


hahaha

 

[kbm8795]

or maybe he understands homosexuality better than you can. he sees it for what it is and you are lying to yourself in order to rationalize your feelings of guilt.

when a religious leader speaks out against a sin it is not persecution. he didnt say "expell all of your fags from from your cities" that would have been persecution. research persecution a little before you speak of it.

It is only a sin because the religious leader interprets scripture in that manner. It also used to be Catholic doctrine to not eat meat on Fridays and to not allow women to have c-sections in delivery. Someone obviously decided that it wasn't so sinful any longer. Unless you believe in that particular religion, his remarks shouldn't mean anything - however, when it is used to create laws harming other people outside the Church, they cause persecution. Perhaps it is the Catholic Church which feels guilty for publicly condemning "sinful" behavior that was obviously overlooked within their own religious industry.

As for Minotaur's experience with religion, I thought he had noted on some previous threads that he has had more experience with churches than obviously those believers could ever have had walking in the shoes of a gay citizen.

 

[Eggs]

It is only a sin because the religious leader interprets scripture in that manner.

And murder is only wrong because we as a society say it is.

Where I grew up, a hundred years and some change ago if you raided a mans village, took his wives as slaves and ate his brain you were the man.

Society does what it wishes, and as to persecution, show me bodies and I'll show you persecution

A white boy like me could get a bullet walking in the wrong side of town... having people dislike you isnt something new or original. Besides which, the Pope certainly wasnt trying to cause anybody physical distress.

The man is the head of a religion. You have to believe you are right to be in a position like that... that what you believe is right beyond question. Scary? A little... but mostly to those that cant believe in something so strongly.

 

[kbm8795]

Oh crap, Here comes Minotaur driving the equality train. All aboard, but if you don't agree with my views then your wrong, and a hateful bigot.

Nobody said you had to get on board or that you can't be a hateful bigot.

 

[kbm8795]

And murder is only wrong because we as a society say it is.

Where I grew up, a hundred years and some change ago if you raided a mans village, took his wives as slaves and ate his brain you were the man.

Society does what it wishes, and as to persecution, show me bodies and I'll show you persecution

Obviously denying c-sections in Catholic hospitals resulted in deaths with the religious reasoning being that a c-section wasn't "natural" childbirth. It wasn't a policy for the greater society.

I suppose Minotaur could likely provide plenty of examples of gay bodies as a result of persecution. The famous "gay panic" defense, which has recently been reapplied in murder cases (of course, only in defense of straight men) would be a modern example. So murder isn't necessarily wrong, (it's manslaughter if a man says his peepee is threatened) regardless of religious belief, if it is rationalized around the doctrine. God's name is regularly invoked for war and persecution. Not even the Pope was able to stop that practice, but then I recall Sean Hannity blasting him as a "liberal" for decrying the invasion of Iraq.

 

[bio-chem]

Actually that is the message that was given to Catholic congressmen and senators... tow the Vatican's party line or risk excommunication.

oh no thats terrible. a church leader who actually expects members to follow church beliefs. what wil they think of next? what is this world coming to?
(Dripping with sarcasm)

 

[bio-chem]

That was uncalled for. This is why these conversations go down the crapper. Fuck you and the horse you ride.

I keep coming back here thinking there might be something fun and interesting to talk about. But I'm usually wrong in that regard. Someone once told me that you don't keep opening the jar when you know something is rancid.

I think I'll take his advice.

im taking my ball and going to play somewhere else, and you cant come! (said the baby crying)

 

[Eggs]

Obviously denying c-sections in Catholic hospitals resulted in deaths with the religious reasoning being that a c-section wasn't "natural" childbirth. It wasn't a policy for the greater society.

While I personally believe tht C-Sections should be allowed, and that any way of having your baby is pretty much as natural as it should be... I have to respond, "so what?" We let people drink a drug that yearly causes thousands of deaths in our country... and we recklessly let people do all kinds of funky shit. I'm not all too horrified. Different religions have at some time for whatever reason changed their stance about something.

We know you dont like Christianity, and you really havent said anything new here.

I suppose Minotaur could likely provide plenty of examples of gay bodies as a result of persecution. The famous "gay panic" defense, which has recently been reapplied in murder cases (of course, only in defense of straight men) would be a modern example.

Thats nice. btw, which murder case was the "gay panic" defense allowed in recently? Just out of curiosity.

So murder isn't necessarily wrong, (it's manslaughter if a man says his peepee is threatened) regardless of religious belief, if it is rationalized around the doctrine.

I have to admit, if you threatened by peepee I'd take care of the situation. So by all means leave the scissors at home when you talk to me

God's name is regularly invoked for war and persecution. Not even the Pope was able to stop that practice, but then I recall Sean Hannity blasting him as a "liberal" for decrying the invasion of Iraq.

Thats funny, I regularely invoke my peepee when going to war and prosecuting others. Hrmm, Sean Hannity... is he some kinda hero of yours? I try to stay away from his stuff, but you bring it up in most of our conversations Shame on you

 

[kbm8795]

While I personally believe tht C-Sections should be allowed, and that any way of having your baby is pretty much as natural as it should be... I have to respond, "so what?" We let people drink a drug that yearly causes thousands of deaths in our country... and we recklessly let people do all kinds of funky shit. I'm not all too horrified. Different religions have at some time for whatever reason changed their stance about something.

A doctrine that is supposed to be based on an absolute document would have no reason to change.

We know you dont like Christianity, and you really havent said anything new here.

Uh...."WE know?" So much for your clever statement at the bottom of your posts - now you are issuing opinions for others? I haven't made the statement that I "don't like christianity"..that's just your interpretation. But I do recall that I recently clarified that I don't like christian impersonaters.



Thats nice. btw, which murder case was the "gay panic" defense allowed in recently? Just out of curiosity.

Actually, two...a third one tried, but it was turned away. The case in Kentucky allowed a defense that claimed the perpetrator was approached for sex, arranged to have that sex, and killed the victim out of guilt and repulsion
when he claimed they had an altercation over doing the act later in a hotel room. This was contrasted with the testimony that a relative of the perpetrator was told beforehand by the perpetrator that he was going to kill the victim. The "gay panic" not only caused the killing, but drove the perpetrator to pack the body in a suitcase, drive to a lake and dump it into the water. Verdict: manslaughter.

The same issue was raised in Wisconsin at about the same time when a young man claimed to kill a man after having sex. I think that case is currently under appeal.

I have to admit, if you threatened by peepee I'd take care of the situation. So by all means leave the scissors at home when you talk to me

Thats funny, I regularely invoke my peepee when going to war and prosecuting others. Hrmm, Sean Hannity... is he some kinda hero of yours? I try to stay away from his stuff, but you bring it up in most of our conversations Shame on you

Of course Sean is a hero - he just forgot about his words about the Pope, which isn't unusual for him at all.
I believe it was former Congressman Ed Schrock (R-VA) who quickly announced his intention to retire last fall after accusations that his voice was recorded soliciting gay sex on a personals line in D.C. Schrock, who is married to a woman, was famous for his statements that gays should be denied military service because straight men would be afraid in the showers. Ironically, he had a rather long career in the military himself.

I always thought that statement did more to show how vulnerable our military is than anything else. After all, a man who can't protect his own peepee sure isn't going to be too capable of protecting a nation.

 

[gococksDJS]

Fuck you and the horse you ride.

I ride the equality horse, wanna jump on? But be careful, im religious, so does that mean I hate gays? It does by your standards.

 

[bio-chem]

how is that ironic. it bugs me when people use that word wrong. and it doesnt show vulnerability, it just shows that when your sharing a foxhole you want to trust the guy with you. personally i dont have a problem with homos in the military. if men are required to fight and die in war to protect freedoms they should have to fight and die like the rest

 

[Dale Mabry]

but mostly to those that cant believe in something so strongly.

Or those with an ounce of common sense and a grip on reality.

 

[Eggs]

Or those with an ounce of common sense and a grip on reality.

Bleh, that couldnt possibly mean you, could it Dale?

 

[Dale Mabry]

Bleh, that couldnt possibly mean you, could it Dale?

Hell no, I don't possess either trait from column A or B