By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Pope denounces U.S. political push to legalize gay marriage

Kasz216 on 20 March 2012
kowenicki said:
Kasz216 said:
kowenicki said:
Kasz216 said:
kowenicki said:
Player1x3 said:
kowenicki said:
Whats unusual about that...? quite a few other out of touch and very elderly people in the home for the bewildered down the road from me think the same... so long as they take their meds they are fine. I assume he is taking his?

He is irrelevant, his church is irrelevant... actually, thinking about it.... HIS church is dangerous


Yup they are irrelevant...thats why he and his church have 2.2 billion followers. Its not that much, just 1/3 of world population...

he is actually even more than irrelevant to me...

I seriously doubt that all of the 1.5bn or so roman catholic followers are devout.... Every catholic I know is very far from devout and would be classed as failed in his eyes.

The Pope is (always) a silly old fool who has lived in a bubble of stupidity, ignorance and arrogance for most of his life.

 

Well duh.   That's kinda the main tenant of all Christanity.

That all people fall short of the hopes god created for mankind and as such, need forgiveness.

As for arrogance... I'd say your being at least as arrogant as any pope.

As for him being irrelevent... you don't act like he's irrelevent to you... and quite honestly the Catholic Church does more for charity then I believe any other charitable organization does in the world... by quite a bit.

Second highest i believe... oddly being the Mormon Church.


They may have some views you and I would find reprhensible however they are very relevent to the world, and in fact, on average have a very positive relevent effect on the world.

 

The positive effect actually becomes greater if you extend back through historty, even counting things like the crusade and inqusition blindly as bad.  (inqusition probably was, the Crusades though were an interesting case which I could write paragraphs on.)

If it weren't for the Catholic Church... we'd probably be decades behind in modern technology for example.

You helped prove my point. 

Time and place...

Where is the roman catholic church growing the quickest....?  Africa

Where is it shriking the quickest?  Western Europe and North America.


A)  Not sure how that proves your point... that at just about any time in history the Catholc church has been extremely relevent and mostly done more good then evil.

B) Sort of a law of averages thing there.  Not much "new buisness" in Europe as far as Catholicsm goes... where Africa is full of people to convert.  Though actually, it's never been shrinking.  It's always been increasing numbers though it's lost "share" in europe and america, but growing in actual numbers.  The share shrinkage I think actually doesn't exist in the US anymore though, partly due to so much  immigration from the south.

 

You have a really strange and silly hostile atitude towards the Catholic Church though, which is strange coming from someone like you.  I guess it just goes to show why religious bigotry worries are on the rise in Europe.

http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2011/09/13/osce-conference-warns-of-growing-intolerance-against-europes-christians/

You seem to be fighting bigotry with bigotry.

I wouldnt call it hostile... Catholics arent a special case by the way... I  think ALL religions are divisive.  I see no place for religion in a mature and intelligent society.

Thats all.

I'd say its the defenders of religions that often come off as hostile... no surprise when it comes from "cults" where fear is at the very core.

You might not call it hostile, but you literally ended your post with a huge hostile flaming comment that will likely only save you from moderation due to your senior status on the site.

You essentially just flamed all religious belief there.



Around the Network
benao87 on 20 March 2012

Come on people keep those quotes short.

 

OT: F**k the pope.



Complete comic

Kasz216 on 20 March 2012

 

kowenicki said:
Kasz216 said:
kowenicki said:
Kasz216 said:
kowenicki said:
Kasz216 said:
kowenicki said:
Player1x3 said:
kowenicki said:

 

YSort of a law of averages thing there.  Not much "new buisness" in Europe as far as Catholicsm goes... where Africa is full of people to convert.  Though actually, it's never been shrinking.  It's always been increasing numbers though it's lost "share" in europe and america, but growing in actual numbers.  The share shrinkage I think actually doesn't exist in the US anymore though, partly due to so much  immigration from the south.

 

You have a really strange and silly hostile atitude towards the Catholic Church though, which is strange coming from someone like you.  I guess it just goes to show why religious bigotry worries are on the rise in Europe.

http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2011/09/13/osce-conference-warns-of-growing-intolerance-against-europes-christians/

You seem to be fighting bigotry with bigotry.

I wouldnt call it hostile... Catholics arent a special case by the way... I  think ALL religions are divisive.  I see no place for religion in a mature and intelligent society.

Thats all.

I'd say its the defenders of religions that often come off as hostile... no surprise when it comes from "cults" where fear is at the very core.

You might not call it hostile, but you literally ended your post with a huge hostile flaming comment that will likely only save you from moderation due to your senior status on the site.

You essentially just flamed all religious belief there.


I think I have agreed with almost evrry post you have ever made on this site... until now.

sounds pretty divisive to me.

and why would I be moderated for saying religions are cults....   I'm not allowed an opinion on religion?

I remember an article on the BBC... "cult or religion - whats the difference?"...  better get the BBC moderated too.


Not an offensive uninformed flaming opinions no, that should be obvious to someone who used to be a mod..  You strawmanned all religions as cults that rely on fear to get anyone to follow them.

That's not even remotely true to anyone who's spent 5 minutes looking at world religions... the last religion that used fear as it's core as far as I can tell was the ancient sumerian religion.

Your posts on religion are as ridiculious hostile and flamebaiting as anything i've seen about homosexuality on the site.

It's exactly the same as those who say "The core of gay people is sexual deviance like pedophilia and necrophelia."

Something else, that while an opinion... is an ignorant flaming one.



Kasz216 on 20 March 2012
kowenicki said:
@kazs

quotes getting too big.....

religion is a choice, being gay isn't.

I have never been a mod

I'm not going to fall out with you about this so I'm leaving the thread.

So it your opinion that flaming choices is ok then.

I mean... gaming consoles are a choice too.

Someone saying the "Xbox 360 is a shooterbox bought only by stupid Americans who can't afford PS3s" is ok then?  Despite it being well... and incredibly stupid insulting opinion.

If you want to leave the thread fine, but i'd avoid religious threads if I were you in general just to avoid moderation.

 

Also, i'd suggest looking into religion's influence in western culture, Adam Smith and the Economy... without the Catholic Church, modern beliefs themselves would be quite different.



marioboy2004 on 20 March 2012

sticking you c@ck in an @nus is a choice, so is divorce, so is marriage a choice... Being attracted to something may be innate, but just because I'm attracted to a magazine, apple pie, consenting teenage boy, or another woman (while married) doesn't mean I should choose to stick my c@ck in each of them.

Marriage shouldn't ONLY be based on attraction, if it was then we'd have a 50% divorce rate and the American economy and society would be collapsing; oh wait this is already happening.



Around the Network
marioboy2004 on 20 March 2012

Free will is a real thing, Predestination not so much.. So choosing to have homosexual sex, smoking cigerettes, divorcing, staying in a relationship, or eating food when hungry are all choices...



bouzane on 20 March 2012
marioboy2004 said:
sticking you c@ck in an @nus is a choice, so is divorce, so is marriage a choice... Being attracted to something may be innate, but just because I'm attracted to a magazine, apple pie, consenting teenage boy, or another woman (while married) doesn't mean I should choose to stick my c@ck in each of them.

Marriage shouldn't ONLY be based on attraction, if it was then we'd have a 50% divorce rate and the American economy and society would be collapsing; oh wait this is already happening.


Why mention the divorce rate along with the economic and societal problems that currently exist in America today? There is no correlation between them (except maybe the possibility of the divorce rate and other societal ills having some common sources). Additionally, if you believe that interpersonal love should also be required for marriage I can only say two things. 1: Most gay couples I have seen are just as loving as any other. 2: Why should gay marraige be held to higher standards than "traditional" marriage? Straight couples are not required to be loving, content or even attracted to each other in any way before getting married.



Kasz216 on 20 March 2012
bouzane said:
marioboy2004 said:
sticking you c@ck in an @nus is a choice, so is divorce, so is marriage a choice... Being attracted to something may be innate, but just because I'm attracted to a magazine, apple pie, consenting teenage boy, or another woman (while married) doesn't mean I should choose to stick my c@ck in each of them.

Marriage shouldn't ONLY be based on attraction, if it was then we'd have a 50% divorce rate and the American economy and society would be collapsing; oh wait this is already happening.


Why mention the divorce rate along with the economic and societal problems that currently exist in America today? There is no correlation between them (except maybe the possibility of the divorce rate and other societal ills havings some common sources). Additionally, if you believe that interpersonal love should also be required for marraige I can only say two things. A: Most gay couples I have seen are just as loving as any other. B: Why should gay marraige be held to higher standards than "traditional" marraige? Straight couples are not required to be loving, content or even attracted to each other in any way before getting married.

I would go one step farther.

Why is a higher divorce rate a societal ill.

Now if the quality of marriages were worse, that would be one thing.  However, how do we know that the reason divorce rates are higher now simply is just because people are less willing to stick out awful marriages.

I mean, the divorce rate has risen... so has female employment and female empowerment.

Couldn't the divorce rate be rising partly due to women no longer feeling trapped in abusive marriages since they too can now make their own living?



bouzane on 20 March 2012
Kasz216 said:
bouzane said:
marioboy2004 said:
sticking you c@ck in an @nus is a choice, so is divorce, so is marriage a choice... Being attracted to something may be innate, but just because I'm attracted to a magazine, apple pie, consenting teenage boy, or another woman (while married) doesn't mean I should choose to stick my c@ck in each of them.

Marriage shouldn't ONLY be based on attraction, if it was then we'd have a 50% divorce rate and the American economy and society would be collapsing; oh wait this is already happening.


Why mention the divorce rate along with the economic and societal problems that currently exist in America today? There is no correlation between them (except maybe the possibility of the divorce rate and other societal ills havings some common sources). Additionally, if you believe that interpersonal love should also be required for marraige I can only say two things. A: Most gay couples I have seen are just as loving as any other. B: Why should gay marraige be held to higher standards than "traditional" marraige? Straight couples are not required to be loving, content or even attracted to each other in any way before getting married.

I would go one step farther.

Why is a higher divorce rate a societal ill.

Now if the quality of marriages were worse, that would be one thing.  However, how do we know that the reason divorce rates are higher now simply is just because people are less willing to stick out awful marriages.

I mean, the divorce rate has risen... so has female employment and female empowerment.

Couldn't the divorce rate be rising partly due to women no longer feeling trapped in abusive marriages since they too can now make their own living?


An interesting view on divorce rates. Sadly the rate of domestic abuse is still far too high. Personally, I am of the belief that the type of woman most likely to be abused, or to otherwise find herself in a bad marriage is less likely to get a divorce. This is merely speculation on my part, I will have to do a little research into the topic.



marioboy2004 on 20 March 2012

childhood (poverty, drug abuse, gangs, deliquincy) and divorce go hand in hand people... just do some research and you'll see some logical truth.. I have already done the research for school as a health care professional