The Pope claimed that condoms would make the aids epidemic worse. That's just plain fucking lying.
The Pope claimed that condoms would make the aids epidemic worse. That's just plain fucking lying.
Ah, A religious debate. I am sidelined . My morals come from my parents, not an organised religious group.
another "religion is for retarded idiots and religious people are dumb" thread on vgchartz. wow, i only see that like 59754642197536853195 times a week here.
we get it atheists, you cant accept that someone has different opinion than you.
BladeOfGod said: another "religion is for retarded idiots and religious people are dumb" thread on vgchartz. wow, i only see that like 59754642197536853195 times a week here. we get it atheists, you cant accept that someone has different opinion than you. |
Did you read the thread? It was about a specific church in a specific religion, and not the followers but the organisation itself.
Thats like saying that if I don't like President Obama then I think all people who like democracy are morons.
It states in Levicitus (The book that condemns homosexuality) that I can't eat shellfish, I should own slaves, I should not wear clothes made of two materials, women are lesser than men, Bats are actually just birds in a cunning disguise, and that I should sacrifice, well, a whole fucking menagerie of animals to appease God. Oh and that I should stone people who don't follow it to death.
I found this and it points out all the absurdities in levicitus (there's a long version too). The vast majority of which I imagine most Christians just brush aside anyway. I mean how many Christians do you know who sacrifice a lamb or two turtles and two doves during a child's birth to keep the mother pure? Yet it goes on about that verse after verse after verse, far more than it talks about homosexuality.
Do Christians sacrifice animals so often during childbirth? Because it's clearly just as important (according to Levicitus) to sacrifice countless animals than to be heterosexual. Does the pope condemn people for not bringing lambs into hospital and killing them in front of the midwife?
No. What I think it is, is selective reading.
Alterego-X said:
If there are people who actively spread AIDS around in Africa because they took the Pope that seriously, they are probably doing it wrong, because afaik the Pope supports monogamy too, and that would also stop the above AIDS spreading. |
I think you might have misunderstood me. Nobody is saying AIDS should be spread. My point was that people are going to have sex anyway and if you're trying to help them, as the Catholic Church does, you should not discourage use of contraception. That not only lessens the spread of AIDS but also helps control overpopulation.
Monogamy is not a 100% solution to the HIV/AIDS problem either. Although it is ideal, its unrealistic to expect everyone to adhere to.
highwaystar101 said: It states in Levicitus (The book that condemns homosexuality) that I can't eat shellfish, I should own slaves, I should not wear clothes made of two materials, women are lesser than men, Bats are actually just birds in a cunning disguise, and that I should sacrifice, well, a whole fucking menagerie of animals to appease God. Oh and that I should stone people who don't follow it to death. |
I really think it's more just... Levitcitus was clearly added in later.
A lot of "God's comandments" there really were more guidelines that would help a small somehwhat xenophobic group of people to survive.
Cherry picking the bible is so common, I've stopped caring really. It's not like people nowadays can stick to customs and laws from a couple thousand years ago, so they take whatever they please to expose.
But that's hardly a surprise, the Pope's views on homosexuality, condoms and whatnot are known too well.
This article isn't just about that though, it's about still seeking exemption from laws (and I mean mainly their tries on the issue of adoption centres). And I think being exempted from tax is already too good for them.
(Though after the sex scandals in Ireland, I don't know how hot it is to be a catholic orphanage, adoption centre etc).
highwaystar101 said: It states in Levicitus (The book that condemns homosexuality) that I can't eat shellfish, I should own slaves, I should not wear clothes made of two materials, women are lesser than men, Bats are actually just birds in a cunning disguise, and that I should sacrifice, well, a whole fucking menagerie of animals to appease God. Oh and that I should stone people who don't follow it to death. |
Most Christians would probably argue that Christ's death ended the Old Testament, fulfilled the law, and started the salvation by grace. As Paul says:
Acts 13 :39:"And by Him (Jesus) all that believe are justified from all things, from which you could not be justified by the Law of Moses"
So these are just old legal writings for ancient jews, and we should move on, the only rules still active are the ones about how we should love our neighbour, and our God, and stuff like that.
Though, Paul also says this:
Romans 1:26-27: "For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet."
And again, one could argue that these are just rules for ancient romans, and we should again move on.
FootballFan said:
|
Tyrannical trolls gay people and gets bans. These people troll Catholics. I see that's ok.