Religion
Related: About this forumGay marriage a threat to humanity's future: Pope (yeah, he DID say that)
Last edited Wed Jan 11, 2012, 06:31 PM - Edit history (1)
War? Nope.
Famine? Nope
Greed? Nope
Genocide? Nope
Overpopulation? Nope
Pedophile Priests? Nope
Apparently, nothing is more of a threat to Humanity than Gays getting married.
Tell me again why the Catholic Church is relevant and has some 1.3 BILLION followers?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pope Benedict said Monday that gay marriage was one of several threats to the traditional family that undermined "the future of humanity itself."
The pope made some of his strongest comments against gay marriage in a new year address to the diplomatic corps accredited to the Vatican in which he touched on some economic and social issues facing the world today.
He told diplomats from nearly 180 countries that the education of children needed proper "settings" and that "pride of place goes to the family, based on the marriage of a man and a woman."
"This is not a simple social convention, but rather the fundamental cell of every society. Consequently, policies which undermine the family threaten human dignity and the future of humanity itself," he said.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/09/us-pope-gay-idUSTRE8081RM20120109
Angry Dragon
(36,693 posts)and that will solve all of humanity's ills
EvolveOrConvolve
(6,452 posts)Somehow, I don't think the Pope would understand the irony of his position.
Boojatta
(12,231 posts)every Catholic priest will be required to make a choice: either get married to a woman, or stop teaching religion to children?
education of children needed proper "settings" and that "pride of place goes to the family, based on the marriage of a man and a woman."
Or is that just a passive-aggressive way to accuse traditional families of the sin of pride, and of claiming that Catholic priests provide a setting that is free of sin and, in particular, free of pride?
cleanhippie
(19,705 posts)Your post is spot on.
ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)Response to cleanhippie (Original post)
Post removed
applegrove
(118,622 posts)that issue?
laconicsax
(14,860 posts)Aside from personally poking holes in every condom made, I don't know what else he can do to promote his views on the subject.
tama
(9,137 posts)The Bonobo, which has a matriarchal society, unusual amongst apes, is a fully bisexual speciesboth males and females engage in heterosexual and homosexual behavior, being noted for female-female homosexuality in particular. About 60% of all sexual activity in this species is between two or more females. While the homosexual bonding system in Bonobos represents the highest frequency of homosexuality known in any species, homosexuality has been reported for all great apes (a group which includes humans), as well as a number of other primate species.[56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63][64] Dutch primatologist Frans de Waal on observing and filming bonobos noted that there were two reasons to believe sexual activity is the bonobo's answer to avoiding conflict.
Anything that arouses the interest of more than one bonobo at a time, not just food, tends to result in sexual contact. If two bonobos approach a cardboard box thrown into their enclosure, they will briefly mount each other before playing with the box. Such situations lead to squabbles in most other species. But bonobos are quite tolerant, perhaps because they use sex to divert attention and to defuse tension.
Bonobo sex often occurs in aggressive contexts totally unrelated to food. A jealous male might chase another away from a female, after which the two males reunite and engage in scrotal rubbing. Or after a female hits a juvenile, the latter's mother may lunge at the aggressor, an action that is immediately followed by genital rubbing between the two adults.[65]
Bottlenose dolphins
Dolphins of several species engage in homosexual acts, though it is best studied in the bottlenose dolphins.[1] Sexual encounters between females take the shape of "beak-genital propulsion", where one female insert her beak in the genital opening of the other while swimming gently forward.[66] Between males, homosexual behaviour include rubbing of genitals against each other, which sometimes lead to the males swimming belly to belly, inserting the penis in the others genital slit and sometimes anus.[67]
Janet Mann, Georgetown University professor of biology and psychology, argues that the strong personal behavior among male dolphin calves is about bond formation and benefits the species in an evolutionary context.[38] She cites studies showing that these dolphins later in life as adults are in a sense bisexual, and the male bonds forged earlier in life work together for protection as well as locating females to reproduce with. Confrontations between flocks of bottlenose dolphins and the related species Atlantic spotted dolphin will sometimes lead to cross-species homosexual behaviour between the males rather than combat.[68]
Elephants
African and Asian males will engage in same-sex bonding and mounting. Such encounters are often associated with affectionate interactions, such as kissing, trunk intertwining, and placing trunks in each other's mouths. Male elephants, who often live apart from the general herd, often form "companionships", consisting of an older individual and one or sometimes two younger, attendant males with sexual behavior being an important part of the social dynamic. Unlike heterosexual relations, which are always of a fleeting nature, the relationships between males may last for years. The encounters are analogous to heterosexual bouts, one male often extending his trunk along the other's back and pushing forward with his tusks to signify his intention to mount. Same-sex relations are common and frequent in both sexes, with Asiatic elephants in captivity devoting roughly 45% of sexual encounters to same-sex activity.[69]
Giraffes
Male giraffes have been observed to engage in remarkably high frequencies of homosexual behavior. After aggressive "necking", it is common for two male giraffes to caress and court each other, leading up to mounting and climax. Such interactions between males have been found to be more frequent than heterosexual coupling.[70] In one study, up to 94% of observed mounting incidents took place between two males. The proportion of same sex activities varied between 30 and 75%, and at any given time one in twenty males were engaged in non-combative necking behavior with another male. Only 1% of same-sex mounting incidents occurred between females.[71]
etc.
MarkCharles
(2,261 posts)tama
(9,137 posts)AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)I'm a homo sapien. I practice homo sapien sex because... what else can I do? Homo sapien sex includes homosexual sex.... and many other things (like raping children). So if bonobos raped baby bonobos, it'd be alright for humans to do so? Lions eat their young. Spiders kill their mates.
Like I said, who cares (other than it's interesting) what Giraffes do?
tama
(9,137 posts)that we are not that different from other animals, and that human life is not more dependent from popes views about family than bonobo life, elefant life, etc.
Human family life has evolved as a species that uses fire and eats cooked food, which lead to division of labor where men hunt and women gather and cook meals for their husbands in hunter-gatherer societies, division of labor and family unit based on the fact that both hunting and cooking take a lot of time. But evolution does not stop there, and structures that were meaningful in hunter-gatherer societies are much less useful in horticultural mostly vegetarian societies. Gays can tend garden and cook too, I'm not aware of any gay couple or their children dying from malnutrition because there is no female around to cook their meals. As a species, our state of evolution no longer requires the family model that is based on the place of woman between fist and stove, what ever pope chooses to pronounce in his patriarchal delirium.
ButterflyBlood
(12,644 posts)Quite a few in the US certainly don't.
cleanhippie
(19,705 posts)by it's adherents here in the US? That assertion is ludicrous. You will need to supply some very strong evidence of that for anyone to take THAT idea seriously.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)in the US have used birth control (and I am not talking the rhythm method)
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/14/us-most-catholic-women-us-use-birth-cont-idUSTRE73D4SZ20110414
Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)that will land them in hell.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)why they continue to give their support and money to an organization that they don't agree with.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)with a group for a variety of personal reasons. Perhaps some feel that the good the Catholic Church does outweighs the negatives.
cleanhippie
(19,705 posts)cbayer
(146,218 posts)I can say this with certainty - not all priests are pedophiles or misogynists.
cleanhippie
(19,705 posts)Although enough priests have been implicated in such activities to make anyone with an ounce of reason to be on hightened alert when children are around them.
But the church is guilty of instituionalized child rape and misogyny, no? Meaning that as an institution, it has gone above and beyond to hide and protect child rapers in order to protect itself, and perpetuate patriarchal misogyny.
How anyone could attend, give money and support, and call themselves members of such an organization is beyond my comprehension. The catholic faith, as an ideology is one thing, but as a structured institution? IMO, it should be condemned, much like the KKK, Neo-Nazi groups, NAMBLA, and others.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)What they did as individuals and as an institution is reprehensible. Although steps have been made to address and remedy the situation, I agree that not enough was done, is being done or was done swiftly enough.
The difference, though, between the Catholic Church and the KKK, Neo-Nazi groups and NAMBLA is that those organizations have as their mission things I consider reprehensible. A sickness arose within the church that was antithetical to what it said it stood for.
You may not see the good things the church has done, but many others do.
cleanhippie
(19,705 posts)By the harm it has done.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)I also respect the right of others to come to a different conclusion.
I think many Catholics are appalled and outraged by what has happened in terms of sexual abuse, but they have chosen to maintain their relationship with the church for other reasons. Perhaps some of them even think they have a better opportunity to change things from within than from without.
No one is asking you to support the Catholic Church. At least I have never seen anyone ask you to do that. Why would you ask others to stop supporting it?
cleanhippie
(19,705 posts)cbayer
(146,218 posts)tama
(9,137 posts)twists my tongue too
cbayer
(146,218 posts)"prosteltyzing against struggling with prostate strangling"...
cleanhippie
(19,705 posts)Maybe our wires got crossed. I'm not following you, not sure just what you are asking.
I do not see how I could be supportive of anyone who chooses to continue to give money, time, and support to an organization that condones and hides child-rapers and misogyny.
How can you support people that continue to support that?
cbayer
(146,218 posts)I read it as you saying that you were engaged in trying to get people to stop supporting the Catholic Church. That is why I asked the question. But it wasn't clear and I may have really gotten it wrong.
I am not going to defend the Catholic Church here. I have my own position on this and will share it if I choose to. In the meantime, there are some great posts here from other members about where they stand with regards to the CC and how they got there.
What I support is their right to choose what path to take. What I support is their right to weigh the good vs. the bad and come to their own conclusions.
What I don't support is anyone who says there is only "one way" and those who do not follow it are wrong, bad, doomed, stupid, delusional, etc., etc., etc.
rexcat
(3,622 posts)more like 1900 years or so. The catholic church is rotten from the top down when it comes to abuse of childern. I am of the belief that any organization who has institutionalized child abuse should not be allowed to continue as an organization. Child abuse in any form is not acceptable!!!!!!!!!!!!!
cbayer
(146,218 posts)So my approach would be to support those on the inside that are doing whatever they can to change it and to support any good deeds that it does.
rexcat
(3,622 posts)cosmetic. Having previously worked in a pediatric hospital and having seen abused children I am not forgiving at all. As a previous poster stated any good the catholic church has done has been nullified by the harm they have done to the children. As an atheist I don't see the catholic church or any organized religion as fundamentally good but that is my bias.
I have always had the attitude of live and let live. I don't care if someone is religious, just don't try to force it on me. I think that is why I don't like the Church of the Latter Day Saints or any religious denomination who comes knocking on my door pushing their beliefs. I don't bring up my religious beliefs or lack of to people I meet because, in the past, I usually get a negative response from them. There is a real bias in this country when it comes to atheism and it is not positive.
Of all the religious groups the catholics have been the worst when it comes to atheism (that is my observation) with the exception of my wife, who was raised catholic and knew early on in our relationship that I was an atheist. She has since abandoned the catholic faith because of the child abuse. I was shocked when she walked away from it. On the other had her parents have not been as kind. They have tried to interfere in our marriage for the past 30 years. My lack of religious beliefs are not discussed with my in-laws friends because it is a point of embarrassment to them (first generation Italian/American). When we go to visit I have heard many a negative comment about those damn atheists by friends and family. I even see it within my own family. I came to the conclusion many years ago that if is not worth the effort to discuss religion with any of them but I do like to get my little jabs in when I can.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)I am sincerely interested in how individuals have arrived at the point they occupy at any given moment. Your experience (and your wife's) really help put things in perspective and your explanation of how your are treated and treat others is also clarifying.
We have a generally non-believing daughter who is very likely going to marry a Muslim man from Pakistan with a strongly religious family. To further complicate things, one of her grandmothers is a strict Christian fundamentalist. At this time, we can't avoid talking about religion, but it sure is hard at times.
Dorian Gray
(13,491 posts)is never nullified.
I understand your anger at the Catholic Church. I'm angry too. My faith has been shaken throughout the years, and I've questioned the authority of the church immensely.
But my little church in Brooklyn does a lot of good, and the Pastor at our church is one of the good guys. And I try to live up to the example that is set by many of the kind, generous, giving people in my community. (I live in Park Slope, Brooklyn.)
There have been many bad things that have happened Internationally, Nationally, and within my diocese of the church. There have been many times that I've been angered and felt like quitting. But then there are the good things that I see on a daily and weekly basis. The local and international works that are done through the church. And those things are never nullified by the evils that others have perpetuated.
Now it's true that the evil is not nullified by the good, either. And the pain and suffering of children that had been perpetuated by those in power is abominable. And the church is rightly suffering from it's actions. Membership is down. Financials are down. Priests are being punished (finally) for their actions. People don't trust the church, and who can blame them.
I guess my long response is basically to the idea that bad nullifies good (or vice versa). In my experience, that is very untrue.
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)I don't know that, historically, the Catholic church has ever been an organization that didn't involve sickness or corruption. It seems it's always been filled with corruption and those of the power-hungry variety (just look at that link below). How many Popes, like Borgias, bought their way into the papacy (and this happened in the 15th century)?
I think no matter the time in history, any organization that is as powerful as the Catholic church has been over the centuries has a reputation that contradicts what its mission statement is. There always has been and always will be corruption within the Catholic church -- maybe not at our "mortal" levels but most certainly in Vatican City (which is just another power-hungry government run amok).
http://bit.ly/Akkw93
cbayer
(146,218 posts)Church. I am not now and never have been a fan.
What I am interested in is allowing individuals to embrace there own belief system or lack of beliefs and in understanding how and why they do so.
justiceischeap
(14,040 posts)that the Church has always had issues with corruption.
cleanhippie
(19,705 posts)Help me understand that mindset, where people continue to fill the pews, listen to the messages, fill the coffers, donate the time and effort....despite widespread the corruption, misogyny, and predatory behavior?
cbayer
(146,218 posts)See reply #49 for a good response. I think that for every Catholic you will get a different answer.
Why do you want to change them?
cleanhippie
(19,705 posts)I do not have the power to change anyone, but I can try and understand why people act in such self-defeating, hypocritical ways. But change? I don't want to change anyone, they have to want to change themselves.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)However, starting your inquiry from the point of view that they are self-defeating and hypocritical is probably not going to get you the information that you claim to desire. And it doesn't do a lot to assure anyone of the authenticity of your stated desire to understand them.
cleanhippie
(19,705 posts)in an attempt to have a conversation you cop out with the "ask them" nonsense.
This was you and I having a discussion, expression our opinions, and talking about what may be the cause of peoples behavior. I feel like as we are just getting to where the root of the problem may lay, you want to punt, and move on to something else. This whole sub-thread seems like a total waste of my time.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)What I perceive you to be looking for, you won't find here.
Have a great day, ch.
cleanhippie
(19,705 posts)Then yes, you are on to me.
But I think this reveals more about you, as it shows your unwillingness to apply some critical thought to the apparent contradictions and hypocrisy, for fear of revealing to yourself the very same contradictions and hypocrisy that arise out of your own beliefs.
You have yourself a nice day, too.
rexcat
(3,622 posts)especially within the catholic faith and the catholics have had a long time to prefect it. It's more of an art form.
ButterflyBlood
(12,644 posts)I was raised Catholic. I am very far from one now. They're not getting a dime from me, and I haven't attended a Mass in almost a decade. But regardless the fact remains, all Catholics don't follow all the Pope's marching orders.
cleanhippie
(19,705 posts)I can believe that.
But I would not limit that to just the Catholics. Pretty much all believers subscribe to the cafeteria version of their particular religion, wouldn't you agree?
cbayer
(146,218 posts)You can call it the "cafeteria version" if you wish. While there are certainly religious believers that subscribe to strict dogma, there are many who do not. Those that do are, imo, the fundamentalists that cause the most damage. Those who personalize their religion are far less likely to try to get you to subscribe or to try and impose their ideologies on others.
Which would you prefer?
Response to cbayer (Reply #21)
Post removed
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)Then why don't they keep it to themselves?
It's not all personal. That's why they congregate to worship. Stop pretending there is no huge in-your-face side to people's beliefs. Have you seen St John the Divine in NYC????
Some of it is personal but MOST (IMHO) is not. Certainly not the influential parts. Many people (atheists too) are all "live and let live"... but that isn't what happens in reality. It's a nice fantasy.
MarkCharles
(2,261 posts)the Pope seriously about LGBT issues, but not about contraception, or heterosexual sex being only intended for procreation.
It's a strange conundrum, isn't it? They stick to the Catholic church because they think it does more good for THEM to be stuck to that church, rather than be without a religion in the end times of life, and that promised land beyond the grave.
As you say, much of the same is true for followers of any other religion, but the head of the Catholic church is the person calling the shots for over a billion people who are not LGBT, and for many that ARE LGBT, too!
cbayer
(146,218 posts)As I said, would you prefer fundamentalists?
cleanhippie
(19,705 posts)I'll take choice C: None of the above
cbayer
(146,218 posts)cleanhippie
(19,705 posts)cbayer
(146,218 posts)You put up two choices. To me they read "fundamentalist" or "cafeteria plan". I don't see any grey area there.
Perhaps many people who consider themselves believers have simply identified with the institution that makes the most sense to them, choosing to embrace what is meaningful and reject what is not. Is that what you describe as the "cafeteria plan"?
What other group of believers would there be?
mr blur
(7,753 posts)know about "the traditional family"?
edhopper
(33,570 posts)this sack of shit does not have any children.
MarkCharles
(2,261 posts)their holy father.
deacon_sephiroth
(731 posts)Because it sure as hell does it for me.
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)And how do you know he doesn't?
Who the hell knows what those old megalomaniac weirdos so cut off from today they still wear clothes from the 11th century and like people bowing down to them... who the hell knows what they are up to?
edhopper
(33,570 posts)cleanhippie
(19,705 posts)deacon_sephiroth
(731 posts)The truth hurts, but that doesn't mean you can just paint the roses red.