The Nightstar Zoo
http://zoo.nightstar.net/

The pope is dead
http://zoo.nightstar.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=12087
Page 1 of 2

Author:  gnolam [ Sat Apr 02, 2005 3:53 pm ]
Post subject:  The pope is dead

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/04/02/europe/web.jpf1.html

Well, the topic should say it all really...

Author:  Pronto [ Sat Apr 02, 2005 3:56 pm ]
Post subject: 

Unfortunately they'll just replace him with another power-hungry, bigotted, out-of-touch-with-the-real-world priest.

The pope is dead, long live the pope.

Author:  sun tzu [ Sat Apr 02, 2005 5:08 pm ]
Post subject: 

Pronto wrote:
Unfortunately they'll just replace him with another power-hungry, bigotted, out-of-touch-with-the-real-world priest.

The pope is dead, long live the pope.


Don't you think you're being a bit harsh?

Author:  Jeremiah Smith [ Sat Apr 02, 2005 5:59 pm ]
Post subject: 

sun tzu wrote:
Don't you think you're being a bit harsh?


Knowing Pronto, he probably thought he was being nice.

Author:  Kerlyssa [ Sat Apr 02, 2005 6:25 pm ]
Post subject: 

Knowing Pronto, he WAS being nice.

Author:  Pronto [ Sat Apr 02, 2005 7:40 pm ]
Post subject: 

Being nice or not-nice is not part of my purview.

But when you consider the millions of people who die every year, almost all of them without living a full, power-wielding life, I have trouble getting wound up about a figurehead for an organization I consider corrupt, power-hungry and evil.

Dispute my opinion if you want. If you can.
And, yes, it is just my opinion. But there is a whole chitload of evidence behind that opinion.

Author:  Dark [ Sat Apr 02, 2005 8:23 pm ]
Post subject: 

"Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it." - Ecclesiastes 12:7

Author:  Ishidan [ Sat Apr 02, 2005 11:30 pm ]
Post subject: 

Pronto wrote:
Being nice or not-nice is not part of my purview.

But when you consider the millions of people who die every year, almost all of them without living a full, power-wielding life, I have trouble getting wound up about a figurehead for an organization I consider corrupt, power-hungry and evil.

Dispute my opinion if you want. If you can.
And, yes, it is just my opinion. But there is a whole chitload of evidence behind that opinion.


Hey, that's nothing. Just last week, people were getting wound up about the death of a person who has been a hospice bed ornament for the last decade and a half.

Author:  Pronto [ Sat Apr 02, 2005 11:50 pm ]
Post subject: 

Ishidan wrote:
Hey, that's nothing. Just last week, people were getting wound up about the death of a person who has been a hospice bed ornament for the last decade and a half.


If you're refering to that American that they starved to death, it wasn't any people that were getting wound up.

Author:  Pronto [ Sun Apr 03, 2005 12:28 am ]
Post subject: 

You know, I felt a slight touch of bad, posting such strong opinions about a recently dead person that so many people revere...

But MY God posted this:

Sarapis wrote:
Uh, if by tolerance you mean complete and total bigoted intolerance of homosexuality, divorce, contraception, and abortion, then yeah.

And I'm sorry, but I will never, ever forgive him for telling AIDS-plagued Africa that using condoms is wrong. 36 million people infected, largely via sexual transmission that would be prevented most of the time by condom use.


Hah! You and me Sarapis. :P

Author:  Pronto [ Sun Apr 03, 2005 9:38 am ]
Post subject: 

http://slate.msn.com/id/2116085/

Quote:
A few years ago, it seemed quite probable that Cardinal Bernard Law of Boston would have to face trial for his appalling collusion in the child-rape racket that his diocese had been running. The man had knowingly reassigned dangerous and sadistic criminals to positions where they would be able to exploit the defenseless. He had withheld evidence and made himself an accomplice, before and after the fact, in the one offense that people of all faiths and of none have most united in condemning. (Since I have more than once criticized Maureen Dowd in this space, I should say now that I think she put it best of all. A church that has allowed no latitude in its teachings on masturbation, premarital sex, birth control, and divorce suddenly asks for understanding and "wiggle room" for the most revolting crime on the books.)

Anyway, Cardinal Law isn't going to face a court, now. He has fled the jurisdiction and lives in Rome, where a sinecure at the Vatican has been found for him. (Actually not that much of a sinecure: As archpriest of the Rome Basilica of St. Mary Major, he also sits on two boards supervising priestly discipline —yes!—and the appointment of diocesan bishops.) Even before this, he visited Rome on at least one occasion to discuss whether or not the church should obey American law. And it has been conclusively established that the Vatican itself—including his holiness—was a part of the coverup and obstruction of justice that allowed the child-rape scandal to continue for so long.


No, I don't think I'm being too harsh.

Author:  Gerald [ Sun Apr 03, 2005 10:02 am ]
Post subject: 

I wanna be the next Pope.

Author:  Pronto [ Sun Apr 03, 2005 10:08 am ]
Post subject: 

Ger, you're uniquely qualified for the position.

I hope you're doing ok, and I sometimes miss you.

Author:  Jeremiah Smith [ Sun Apr 03, 2005 12:16 pm ]
Post subject: 

Gerald wrote:
I wanna be the next Pope.


Don't. The hat would just look stupid on you.

Author:  Kit the Odd [ Sun Apr 03, 2005 1:50 pm ]
Post subject: 

Pronto wrote:
You know, I felt a slight touch of bad, posting such strong opinions about a recently dead person that so many people revere...

But MY God posted this:

Sarapis wrote:
Uh, if by tolerance you mean complete and total bigoted intolerance of homosexuality, divorce, contraception, and abortion, then yeah.

And I'm sorry, but I will never, ever forgive him for telling AIDS-plagued Africa that using condoms is wrong. 36 million people infected, largely via sexual transmission that would be prevented most of the time by condom use.


Hah! You and me Sarapis. :P


Considering that his alternative was celibacy outside of marriage, which is more effective than condom use, I don't see the reason for the hatred. The pope, and many other religious leaders, are remarkably consistant on this subject.

Going without sex outside of marriage may not be popular or easy. But that doesn't make it a bad idea.

Author:  Kit the Odd [ Sun Apr 03, 2005 1:51 pm ]
Post subject: 

And I agree about not wanting the job because the hat looks silly.

Plus, I've got a wife and kid. I don't think they'd let me on the ballot.

Author:  Pronto [ Sun Apr 03, 2005 2:42 pm ]
Post subject: 

Kit the Odd wrote:
Considering that his alternative was celibacy outside of marriage, which is more effective than condom use, I don't see the reason for the hatred. The pope, and many other religious leaders, are remarkably consistant on this subject.

Going without sex outside of marriage may not be popular or easy. But that doesn't make it a bad idea.


Quote:
And it has been conclusively established that the Vatican itself—including his holiness—was a part of the coverup and obstruction of justice that allowed the child-rape scandal to continue for so long.


Many of his priests think sex outside of marriage (Mmm, I haven't seen any evidence that says the priests were married to those children... I might be wrong) is a good idea... and he seemed to support the idea. Or at least believed they shouldn't be stopped or punished.

Author:  Jeremiah Smith [ Sun Apr 03, 2005 3:20 pm ]
Post subject: 

Kit the Odd wrote:
Considering that his alternative was celibacy outside of marriage, which is more effective than condom use


Only if you completely forget to take into account The Behavior Of Actual People.

Author:  Pronto [ Sun Apr 03, 2005 7:29 pm ]
Post subject: 

Kit is one of those people who are willing and able to fit his life into the mold that someone else has laid out for him ... and thinks that everyone should be willing and able to do the same, despite the evidence of his senses.

Author:  Kit the Odd [ Sun Apr 03, 2005 9:57 pm ]
Post subject: 

I'm not the only one that has been a virgin on their wedding night. I went for many years celibate. It is not impossible, just difficult. It is even posible for Actual People. It just requires someone that is willing to control their desires rather than be controled by them.

Of course, there are many, such as yourself evidently, that see no reason not to indulge those desires. Fine. But there are many who feel that it is better not to indulge those desires for at least a while. Why do you have a problem with that?

Many, if not most, religions say that it is better to wait for marriage to have sex. If that standard is adhered to then many of the problems/dangers of sex would be effectively gone. So why shouldn't a religious figure be allowed and expected to put forward that view of the problem.

Some Actual People can and do practice celibacy outside of marriage. Why can't everybody else? (Not why don't they, but why can't they. I fully understand the reasons for choosing not to.)

Quote:
Kit is one of those people who are willing and able to fit his life into the mold that someone else has laid out for him ... and thinks that everyone should be willing and able to do the same, despite the evidence of his senses.


Yes and no. I am willing and able to fit into a lifestyle that has been laid out because I believe it is the lifestyle that will bring me the most happiness, even if it requires discipline, sacrifice, and hard work. And yes, I think everybody should do the same because I believe it would bring them more happiness in the long run also. But I'm not silly enough to think that everyone would be willing to do it. Many people only care about short term pleasure, or are happy enough where they are that they aren't interested in anything more. And many more just don't believe that the lifestyle I believe in will actually bring them more happiness.

If I ever was naive enough to think that everyone would be willing, two years of looking for anyone interested, and sharing my beliefs with those that were, would have cured me of that delusion.

Author:  Pronto [ Mon Apr 04, 2005 3:44 am ]
Post subject: 

Kit, you do realize that you are in the minority... you are the abnormal one. Perhaps you have a medical or pyschological condition that would account for your low sex drive.
The popes priests can't even manage to remain celibate.

It's a wondeful thing that you manage to live within your idealized protocols. But your intolerance for other peoples choices -and weaknesses- is offensive.

Author:  Anh Minh [ Mon Apr 04, 2005 4:28 am ]
Post subject: 

What intolerance?

Author:  Pronto [ Mon Apr 04, 2005 4:56 am ]
Post subject: 

Kit the Odd wrote:
And yes, I think everybody should do the same because I believe it would bring them more happiness in the long run also. But I'm not silly enough to think that everyone would be willing to do it. Many people only care about short term pleasure, or are happy enough where they are that they aren't interested in anything more. And many more just don't believe that the lifestyle I believe in will actually bring them more happiness.

Author:  sun tzu [ Mon Apr 04, 2005 5:57 am ]
Post subject: 

Like Anh Minh said, what intolerance?

Author:  Ogredude [ Mon Apr 04, 2005 12:23 pm ]
Post subject: 

The intolerance that leads him to support not providing any alternatives to his own moral lifestyle, even though he admits that not everyone can follow his way of life.

Some religions don't hold nonbelievers to the same standards as believers. These religions wouldn't have a problem with people having access to solutions that fall outside their moral structure, they'd just prohibit these solutions to their believers.

But when you don't support /anyone/ having access to solutions that don't jive with your religion's moral compass, that's intolerance.


And before you flame, there's a huge difference between not liking someone's behavior and going out and actively trying to change their behavior.

Author:  Anh Minh [ Mon Apr 04, 2005 12:51 pm ]
Post subject: 

I'm lost. You're saying kit should pay for other people's condoms?

Author:  Pi [ Mon Apr 04, 2005 1:03 pm ]
Post subject: 

No, I think Oggy's saying that Kit should put down the picket sign and step away from the abortion clinic. A tolerant religion would be one that censures its own members from getting abortions. An intolerant one will try to make all abortion illegal for everybody just to salve its own moral conscience.

Author:  Ogredude [ Mon Apr 04, 2005 1:10 pm ]
Post subject: 

What Pi said. Exactly.

Author:  sun tzu [ Mon Apr 04, 2005 1:53 pm ]
Post subject: 

Wait wait wait...That argument makes sense with condoms, but not with abortions. Pro-lifers believe that abortion is murder; why the hell should they allow non-believers to commit it? (I'm pro-choice myself, but if I believed there was a genuine murder involved in an abortion, I'd most certainly make it a big issue to make these illegal.)

Author:  Kit the Odd [ Mon Apr 04, 2005 3:39 pm ]
Post subject: 

Ogredude wrote:
The intolerance that leads him to support not providing any alternatives to his own moral lifestyle, even though he admits that not everyone can follow his way of life.


Two things.

One, maybe I'm not familiar with the exact words of the pope on the issue, but I DEFINIATLY never said I was against alternatives being available. I just think it is just and reasonable for a religious leader to publicly support the path acceptable to their religion. In this case, supporting abstinance outside of marriage rather than condom use as a protection against STDs.

Two, I think everyone CAN follow my way of life. I think people choose not to for many reasons. But if someone literally cannot keep themselves from having sex, then I am wrong and there are at least some people that CAN not, as opposed to DO not, follow it.

I would fall under your definition of tolerant Pi. I would not censure someone for doing something they thought was acceptable. I may try to persuade them that it is unacceptable, but not act against them in most cases. (I add 'most cases' because I'd stop someone from commiting murder even if they thought it was acceptable.)


Just a few other clarifications:
I've never picketed an abortion clinic and don't plan to in the future, but I do think that abortions are the wrong choice except in cases of rape, incest, or serious danger to the mother's health.
I've got nothing against condom use, it is extra-marital sex I think is wrong.

Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/