The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Pope Benedict's recent mass in Paris, oh gimme a break.
I just read this while browsing Yahoo News archieves. Am I the only one who finds this ironic? Actually, forget about irony, lets call it hypocrisy. The head of the richest religion out there complains about power, possessions, and money.
Statements like this are why seperation of church and state is an absolute necessity today. Jebus.
PARIS - 13 September 2008. Pope Benedict XVI condemned unbridled "pagan" passion for power, possessions and money as a modern-day plague Saturday as he led more than a quarter of a million Catholics in an outdoor Mass in Paris.
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
edited September 2008
So basically, you've basically been paying no attention to the Catholic Church since... ever? Also, what the fuck does his statement have to do abut government?
So basically, you've basically been paying no attention to the Catholic Church since... ever? Also, what the fuck does his statement have to do abut government?
To be fair, all those power, possessions and money are for god.
Not heathens.
Antihippy on
PSN: Antiwhippy
0
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
edited September 2008
Actually, I want my question fucking answered, because random morons shouting about "separation of Church and State BLARGH!" (especially concerning fucking France) is stupid, and dilutes the message when it actually applies.
Oh wow, I didn't even know that was a quote from the bible. That a significantly different meaning, but more in keeping with what the pope said, in any case.
Yeah, essentially I'm not too bothered by this, because the message is at least good.
I dont usually like to wail on the Church as its too easy - but this reminded me of the new 7 deadly sins that they brought out. Some of this raised my eyebrows.
- Environmental pollution
- Genetic manipulation
- Accumulating excessive wealth
- Inflicting poverty
- Drug trafficking and consumption
- Morally debatable experiments
- Violation of fundamental rights of human nature
I just read this while browsing Yahoo News archieves. Am I the only one who finds this ironic? Actually, forget about irony, lets call it hypocrisy. The head of the richest religion out there complains about power, possessions, and money.
Most of the Church's wealth is in priceless artifacts. Their actual liquid wealth goes to do a lot of humanitarian work and pretty much nothing else.
Salvation122 on
0
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
I just read this while browsing Yahoo News archieves. Am I the only one who finds this ironic? Actually, forget about irony, lets call it hypocrisy. The head of the richest religion out there complains about power, possessions, and money.
Most of the Church's wealth is in priceless artifacts. Their actual liquid wealth goes to do a lot of humanitarian work and pretty much nothing else.
You may disagree with their ideologies See: Condoms, but yeah, it's not like they're pooling their wealth, or using it to buy big screen TVs.
I just read this while browsing Yahoo News archieves. Am I the only one who finds this ironic? Actually, forget about irony, lets call it hypocrisy. The head of the richest religion out there complains about power, possessions, and money.
Most of the Church's wealth is in priceless artifacts. Their actual liquid wealth goes to do a lot of humanitarian work and pretty much nothing else.
"It belongs in a museum!"
Tach on
0
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
I just read this while browsing Yahoo News archieves. Am I the only one who finds this ironic? Actually, forget about irony, lets call it hypocrisy. The head of the richest religion out there complains about power, possessions, and money.
Most of the Church's wealth is in priceless artifacts. Their actual liquid wealth goes to do a lot of humanitarian work and pretty much nothing else.
"It belongs in a museum!"
A lot of it is in museums. Like the Vatican City Museum. or on loan
I just read this while browsing Yahoo News archieves. Am I the only one who finds this ironic? Actually, forget about irony, lets call it hypocrisy. The head of the richest religion out there complains about power, possessions, and money.
Most of the Church's wealth is in priceless artifacts. Their actual liquid wealth goes to do a lot of humanitarian work and pretty much nothing else.
Why do they need priceless artifacts?
MikeMan on
0
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
I just read this while browsing Yahoo News archieves. Am I the only one who finds this ironic? Actually, forget about irony, lets call it hypocrisy. The head of the richest religion out there complains about power, possessions, and money.
Most of the Church's wealth is in priceless artifacts. Their actual liquid wealth goes to do a lot of humanitarian work and pretty much nothing else.
Why do they need priceless artifacts?
Because the Sistine Chapel and St Paul's Cathedral aren't really something anyone would just give away?
I just read this while browsing Yahoo News archieves. Am I the only one who finds this ironic? Actually, forget about irony, lets call it hypocrisy. The head of the richest religion out there complains about power, possessions, and money.
Most of the Church's wealth is in priceless artifacts. Their actual liquid wealth goes to do a lot of humanitarian work and pretty much nothing else.
Why do they need priceless artifacts?
Because the Sistine Chapel and St Paul's Cathedral aren't really something anyone would just give away?
I'm not talking about buildings, I'm talking about artifacts.
Why do they need the artifacts?
Sell them to a museum and give the money to the poor.
Man what? Catholicism is the essence of unwavering dogma. They refuse to change, and in fact, take pride in their refusal to change. A progressive Pope is a Pope that wears beige robes instead of sandy egg-white robes. :P
Oh and the millions used to settle the abuse lawsuits of course
Yeah, frankly, that made me really really angry. Those fuckers should have been excommunicated and hung out to dry.
Or maybe that should have happened and then, you know, the church could stop calling gay acts a sin and let popes marry other people, men included.
Priests not marrying is intended as a sacrifice and a protection from conflicts of interest between the Church and their spouse, and is not (and should not, in my opinion) going anywhere soon.
The Church considering homosexuality a sin is kind of douchey, but is at least internally consistent with their position that all sexual acts not intended to produce children is sinful, which has some reasonable scriptural backing.
I just read this while browsing Yahoo News archieves. Am I the only one who finds this ironic? Actually, forget about irony, lets call it hypocrisy. The head of the richest religion out there complains about power, possessions, and money.
Most of the Church's wealth is in priceless artifacts. Their actual liquid wealth goes to do a lot of humanitarian work and pretty much nothing else.
Why do they need priceless artifacts?
Because the Sistine Chapel and St Paul's Cathedral aren't really something anyone would just give away?
I'm not talking about buildings, I'm talking about artifacts.
Why do they need the artifacts?
Sell them to a museum and give the money to the poor.
The church really doesn't need the couple hundred million that would come from selling the Pieta. They're already very well funded through tithe and investments. (Did you know that the Roman Catholic Church is the majority shareholder in Coca-Cola? It's true!)
Man what? Catholicism is the essence of unwavering dogma. They refuse to change, and in fact, take pride in their refusal to change. A progressive Pope is a Pope that wears beige robes instead of sandy egg-white robes. :P
While I agree with the spirit of this, didn't Benedict basically say he accepted evolution as the mechanism for God's creation of creatures?
The Catholic church, for all its faults, also does a lot of good humanitarian work.
Oh and the millions used to settle the abuse lawsuits of course
Yeah, frankly, that made me really really angry. Those fuckers should have been excommunicated and hung out to dry.
Or maybe that should have happened and then, you know, the church could stop calling gay acts a sin and let popes marry other people, men included.
Priests not marrying is intended as a sacrifice and a protection from conflicts of interest between the Church and their spouse, and is not (and should not, in my opinion) going anywhere soon.
I understand what their rationale is. It's just a mindbogglingly stupid rationale. Conflict of interest? There are thousands of perfectly find pastors in protestant churches who get along just dandy while married.
The Church considering homosexuality a sin is kind of douchey, but is at least internally consistent with their position that all sexual acts not intended to produce children is sinful, which has some reasonable scriptural backing.
Being "internally consistent" is not a virtue when your entire internal framework is retarded.
Man what? Catholicism is the essence of unwavering dogma. They refuse to change, and in fact, take pride in their refusal to change. A progressive Pope is a Pope that wears beige robes instead of sandy egg-white robes. :P
While I agree with the spirit of this, didn't Benedict basically say he accepted evolution as the mechanism for God's creation of creatures?
The Catholic church, for all its faults, also does a lot of good humanitarian.
It's still a slap in the face to science. Behind it all, there was an architect doing his ominscient and omnipotent thing. What good humanitarian efforts does it do that don't involve proselytizing at the same time?
Man what? Catholicism is the essence of unwavering dogma. They refuse to change, and in fact, take pride in their refusal to change. A progressive Pope is a Pope that wears beige robes instead of sandy egg-white robes. :P
While I agree with the spirit of this, didn't Benedict basically say he accepted evolution as the mechanism for God's creation of creatures?
The Catholic church, for all its faults, also does a lot of good humanitarian.
It's still a slap in the face to science. Behind it all, there was an architect doing his ominscient and omnipotent thing. What good humanitarian efforts does it do that don't involve proselytizing at the same time?
How is that a slap in the face to science? If his statement gets people to stop denying evolution, then what does it matter if they believe that a God controls it?
If I'm starving, I'll listen to fundie bullshit as long as they feed me- to me, the good of feeding hungry people or bringing them water or giving them a place to sleep far far outweighs the evil of proselytizing.
Man what? Catholicism is the essence of unwavering dogma. They refuse to change, and in fact, take pride in their refusal to change. A progressive Pope is a Pope that wears beige robes instead of sandy egg-white robes. :P
While I agree with the spirit of this, didn't Benedict basically say he accepted evolution as the mechanism for God's creation of creatures?
The Catholic church, for all its faults, also does a lot of good humanitarian work.
The Catholic church does not believe in "Evolution", it believes in "Intelligent Design." There's a huge difference.
The Catholic church's good humanitarian work is offset by the monumental evil they do in Africa in promoting abstinence-only education and discouraging condom use.
Man what? Catholicism is the essence of unwavering dogma. They refuse to change, and in fact, take pride in their refusal to change. A progressive Pope is a Pope that wears beige robes instead of sandy egg-white robes. :P
While I agree with the spirit of this, didn't Benedict basically say he accepted evolution as the mechanism for God's creation of creatures?
The Catholic church, for all its faults, also does a lot of good humanitarian.
It's still a slap in the face to science. Behind it all, there was an architect doing his ominscient and omnipotent thing. What good humanitarian efforts does it do that don't involve proselytizing at the same time?
How is that a slap in the face to science?
Science doesn't and WILL NEVER account for an intelligent architect pulling the marionette strings. First off, an omnipotent, omniscient being is not falsifiable (meaning there is no tangible evidence to prove, or more importantly, disprove its existence), so it will never have a role in science. Second, you try writing a paper on tRNA mechanisms in drosiphila melanogaster, and when things get fuzzy, you write "god did it here". What a wonderful explanation, and how easy, yes?
Man what? Catholicism is the essence of unwavering dogma. They refuse to change, and in fact, take pride in their refusal to change. A progressive Pope is a Pope that wears beige robes instead of sandy egg-white robes. :P
While I agree with the spirit of this, didn't Benedict basically say he accepted evolution as the mechanism for God's creation of creatures?
The Catholic church, for all its faults, also does a lot of good humanitarian.
It's still a slap in the face to science. Behind it all, there was an architect doing his ominscient and omnipotent thing. What good humanitarian efforts does it do that don't involve proselytizing at the same time?
How is that a slap in the face to science?
Please read up on their stance on evolution. They do not actually believe in evolution as a scientist would describe it. They believe God guided the evolution of humanity. That is not only not evolution, it is laughable as a concept and entirely unscientific. You might as well believe tropical storms are guided by God's hand instead of currents and climates. It doesn't explain anything, and it's indeed a slap in the face to honest science.
Evolution has no person. Organisms that fit an environment survive. Organisms that don't fit an environment perish or migrate. Everything thing we see in a given environment is a product of survivors. It's a really neat concept, actually.
Oh and the millions used to settle the abuse lawsuits of course
Yeah, frankly, that made me really really angry. Those fuckers should have been excommunicated and hung out to dry.
Or maybe that should have happened and then, you know, the church could stop calling gay acts a sin and let popes marry other people, men included.
Priests not marrying is intended as a sacrifice and a protection from conflicts of interest between the Church and their spouse, and is not (and should not, in my opinion) going anywhere soon.
I understand what their rationale is. It's just a mindbogglingly stupid rationale. Conflict of interest? There are thousands of perfectly find pastors in protestant churches who get along just dandy while married.
Living in the heart of the Bible Belt I have yet to hear of a church who has not at one time or another had a big chunk of parishioners leave because the pastor was a dick to his wife in one way or another.
Oh and the millions used to settle the abuse lawsuits of course
Yeah, frankly, that made me really really angry. Those fuckers should have been excommunicated and hung out to dry.
Or maybe that should have happened and then, you know, the church could stop calling gay acts a sin and let popes marry other people, men included.
Priests not marrying is intended as a sacrifice and a protection from conflicts of interest between the Church and their spouse, and is not (and should not, in my opinion) going anywhere soon.
I understand what their rationale is. It's just a mindbogglingly stupid rationale. Conflict of interest? There are thousands of perfectly find pastors in protestant churches who get along just dandy while married.
Living in the heart of the Bible Belt I have yet to hear of a church who has not at one time or another had a big chunk of parishioners leave because the pastor was a dick to his wife in one way or another.
...Because not being a dick conflicted with their spiritual position? I'm not sure I understand. Can you give some examples?
Man what? Catholicism is the essence of unwavering dogma. They refuse to change, and in fact, take pride in their refusal to change. A progressive Pope is a Pope that wears beige robes instead of sandy egg-white robes. :P
While I agree with the spirit of this, didn't Benedict basically say he accepted evolution as the mechanism for God's creation of creatures?
The Catholic church, for all its faults, also does a lot of good humanitarian.
It's still a slap in the face to science. Behind it all, there was an architect doing his ominscient and omnipotent thing. What good humanitarian efforts does it do that don't involve proselytizing at the same time?
How is that a slap in the face to science?
Please read up on their stance on evolution. They do not actually believe in evolution as a scientist would describe it. They believe God guided the evolution of humanity. That is not only not evolution, it is laughable as a concept and entirely unscientific. You might as well believe tropical storms are guided by God's hand instead of currents and climates. It doesn't explain anything, and it's indeed a slap in the face to honest science.
Posts
Really.
The hypocrisy isn't exactly new.
Raaaaawwwwwwrg!
Not heathens.
This is far from the worst sort of thing for a religious leader to hypocritically condemn, though. Money is the root of all evil, yadda yadda.
Sorry, pet peeve.
Yeah, essentially I'm not too bothered by this, because the message is at least good.
- Environmental pollution
- Genetic manipulation
- Accumulating excessive wealth
- Inflicting poverty
- Drug trafficking and consumption
- Morally debatable experiments
- Violation of fundamental rights of human nature
"It belongs in a museum!"
Giving millions of dollars to victims of sexual abuse? That is humanitarian work!
Yeah, frankly, that made me really really angry. Those fuckers should have been excommunicated and hung out to dry.
Why do they need priceless artifacts?
Or maybe that should have happened and then, you know, the church could stop calling gay acts a sin and let popes marry other people, men included.
I'm not talking about buildings, I'm talking about artifacts.
Why do they need the artifacts?
Sell them to a museum and give the money to the poor.
Priests not marrying is intended as a sacrifice and a protection from conflicts of interest between the Church and their spouse, and is not (and should not, in my opinion) going anywhere soon.
The Church considering homosexuality a sin is kind of douchey, but is at least internally consistent with their position that all sexual acts not intended to produce children is sinful, which has some reasonable scriptural backing.
The church really doesn't need the couple hundred million that would come from selling the Pieta. They're already very well funded through tithe and investments. (Did you know that the Roman Catholic Church is the majority shareholder in Coca-Cola? It's true!)
While I agree with the spirit of this, didn't Benedict basically say he accepted evolution as the mechanism for God's creation of creatures?
The Catholic church, for all its faults, also does a lot of good humanitarian work.
I understand what their rationale is. It's just a mindbogglingly stupid rationale. Conflict of interest? There are thousands of perfectly find pastors in protestant churches who get along just dandy while married.
Being "internally consistent" is not a virtue when your entire internal framework is retarded.
How is that a slap in the face to science? If his statement gets people to stop denying evolution, then what does it matter if they believe that a God controls it?
If I'm starving, I'll listen to fundie bullshit as long as they feed me- to me, the good of feeding hungry people or bringing them water or giving them a place to sleep far far outweighs the evil of proselytizing.
The Catholic church does not believe in "Evolution", it believes in "Intelligent Design." There's a huge difference.
The Catholic church's good humanitarian work is offset by the monumental evil they do in Africa in promoting abstinence-only education and discouraging condom use.
Please read up on their stance on evolution. They do not actually believe in evolution as a scientist would describe it. They believe God guided the evolution of humanity. That is not only not evolution, it is laughable as a concept and entirely unscientific. You might as well believe tropical storms are guided by God's hand instead of currents and climates. It doesn't explain anything, and it's indeed a slap in the face to honest science.
...Because not being a dick conflicted with their spiritual position? I'm not sure I understand. Can you give some examples?
Oh so we're going to make this an atheism thread.
Have fun with that.