View Full Version : Religion
Pages :
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
[
9]
10
11
12
Kellydancer
09-16-2010, 12:50 PM
Depends where you go. The usual rule seems to be that persecution creates radicalisation. In places where Catholics have suffered persecution on the grounds of their faith, like Ireland (at the hands of the English), you'll find absolutely staunch Catholics. In places like France and Italy, where Catholics have not suffered persecution, the attitude towards the faith is far more liberal.
In places like your country and mine, Catholics do seem to be more liberal than non-Anglican Protestants, possibly because it's a much older faith and more people were born into it (as well as not having a history of being systematically persecuted in these places, though they have been victims of bigotry in decades past). It's a truism that converts make the staunchest followers of a faith, and many evangelicals are converts, in addition to being members of a faith that veers fairly heavily on the side of being socially conservative.
It's funny you bring that up because I was talking about that with my mom. My mother has a now exfriend and this exfriend is a Catholic convert. She's against smoking, drinking, swearing, secular music and films and pretty much anything not Christian. Anyone who knows the Catholic Church knows that none of those things are really forbidden.
What I don't mention is while I was born Catholic I don't come from a strict Catholic family. My mother is Catholic, but she made the decision herself because her parents were both different religions (grandma Catholic, grandpa Lutheran). In a strange irony, her father later converted to Catholicism after my mom did. My mom wasn't baptized as a child. Neither was my dad and his parents were different religions. His dad was Catholic though we've since found out his dad was Jewish. My nana (paternal grandmother) was Anglican. Several cousins later converted to Southern Baptists and my brother converted to Baptist himself (or nondem, not sure). If I marry the guy I love his family are devout Italian Catholics and he has more problems with the church than I do.
Elvia
09-16-2010, 08:56 PM
The entire church - everyone? I am a part of the church (Sunday worshipper) - I covered it up, too?
If you gave money to the church, then yes, you have supported the negative things they have done. That's not to say you're equally to blame, or necessarily to blame. But the money you and the other paritioners drop in the basket has given them power, and funded a lot of ugly things.
The "fraternity" of police officers cover up for each other's errors, omissions and crimes 99.99%. This has been proven time and time again in the courts.
So? How does this excuse the Catholic Church?
No, that's YOUR issue. That's how you and every other anti-Catholic wants to frame the issue for your own agenda.
The REAL ISSUE is that pedophilia is rampant. It is EVERYWHERE - schools, churches, youth sports, youth organizations, police, prisons, family, friends, etc. - I thought I made that point clear with examples,... but, you just want to talk about priests and boys - like you have some kind of fetish.
As has been explained- it's horrible enough when one person abuses a child. it becomes an even greater issue when such a massive large scale conspiracy has perpetuated it for so long. let's not pretend that's not significant.
We all need to waken up to this alarming truth (pedophilia) and do something about it - either put enormous pressure on the medical community to create drugs that kill the sicko's sexual drive, or lock them all up for good.
The sexualization of girls (and boys) by the media contributes to the problem. I cannot say that it CAUSES the problem, but it definitely CONTRIBUTES to the problem.
Read the American Psychological Association's report, if you really care about this issue. (But, you probably don't.)
http://www.apa.org/pi/women/programs...eport-full.pdf (http://www.apa.org/pi/women/programs/girls/report-full.pdf)
Again, you are trying to excuse the catholic church by pointing at another's wrong doing. You may have valid points, but it does not excuse the Catholic Church, or lessen the heinousness of their crimes. There's a lot more that the catholic church needs to be held responsible for. And not just in some abstract moral way. They need to be held financially accountable (for more, yes) and criminally.
Elvia
09-16-2010, 09:00 PM
@jack
May I ask what are your thoughts on the Magdalene Asylum? Does it bother you to give money to an institution that benefited from slave labor, of children no less? Does it bother you that most of those victims are still alive today and have not received any share in the financial earnings of their own forced labor? Or even an apology? Your church pretends like it never happened, and don't you as well when you give them more money every week without making any demands that they rectify such wrongs?
Kellydancer
09-16-2010, 09:29 PM
Speaking of the pedophilia, remember that one is innocent until proven guilty. I bring this up because the last cardinal was accused of molesting. He was a well loved cardinal who sought to bring everyone together. A guy on drugs accused him of molesting him as a child. These were later proven to be false. Destroyed the cardinal's rep for awhile.
Elvia
09-16-2010, 09:58 PM
^^^ That's unfortunate, but I'm not sure what it has to do with the larger point. We know that there was a lot of molestation going on in the church.
If this is in regards to the Magdalene asylums, the sad thing is that it is unlikely the Catholic Church would ever be brought to trial over such a thing in Ireland. I could be wrong but I've been told the Catholic Church isn't brought to trial over anything in Ireland, even accusations of molestation and sex abuse. Either way, It's rather unfair to say "innocent until proven guilty in a court of law!" when the perpetrator is likely to never be brought to trail, despite overwhelming evidence of abuse on a massive scale.
Kellydancer
09-16-2010, 10:06 PM
There was a lot of molestation, but many priests were likely innocent and got blamed for it because it was the "fun" thing to do.
flickad
09-16-2010, 11:38 PM
Jack - it is true that accused persons should be proven guilty before receiving punishment. However, in many of these cases, the allegation is not made to police by the accused's superiors so that it can be investigated, nor is the accused removed from his position in the interim, or at all. I can not say that all members of the Church's upper echelons are involved in cover-ups, but a great number notoriously are. I am not saying that all members of the Church are rotten, but that those who are should be held accountable and that what they have done should not be minimised.
The same goes for members of any other institution who have acted in this way.
flickad
09-16-2010, 11:42 PM
There was a lot of molestation, but many priests were likely innocent and got blamed for it because it was the "fun" thing to do.
Until the matter is investigated and, if there is sufficient evidence for trial, tried, it's difficult to make that statement with any authority. It's unusual for an alleged victim of sexual assault to make up stories about it, given the trauma of disclosure and trial, though of course invented stories do occasionally occur. However, I doubt that when they do, the motive is 'fun'.
jack0177057
09-17-2010, 09:10 AM
Again, you are trying to excuse the catholic church by pointing at another's wrong doing. You may have valid points, but it does not excuse the Catholic Church, or lessen the heinousness of their crimes. There's a lot more that the catholic church needs to be held responsible for. And not just in some abstract moral way. They need to be held financially accountable (for more, yes) and criminally.
First, the Catholic Church is comprised of hundreds of thousands of clergy and millions of followers across the world. When you say we should punish the Catholic Church - it is not fair. It is like saying - let's punish all exotic dancers, because some or most violate the law and prostitute themselves in the club.
The media has made it appear that every priest in the Catholic Church is a homosexual and a pedophile. But, remember, this is the same media that perpetrates the stereotype that every exotic dancer was abused as a child and grows up to be a drug-addict stripper and prostitute, that all black kids live in the ghettos and wear gang colors (except only for the Huxtable kids and the Banks kids), that Jewish girls are all little spoiled princesses, etc... Of the hundred of thousands of priest across the world, most of them are fine upstanding men and not every single parish is involved in a cover-up.
Having said that, I support a FULL INVESTIGATION into the Catholic Church and I support using the FULL WEIGHT of the law enforcement machine to prosecute INDIVIDUALS within the Catholic Church who have committed crimes. As I said before, us Catholic parishioners are as appalled and outraged as non-Catholics, even more so. Anyone in the Catholic Church who committed a crime, whether child abuse, harboring child abusers, or failing to report child abuse, should be put in jail - whether he/she is a priest, Cardinal, Bishop or even Pope.
My point is that all the attention on the Catholic Church scandal was good to awaken people to the fact that PEDOPHILIA IS EVERYWHERE, but instead of using it for good - i.e., to start a massive campaign to put pressure on the medical and/or law enforcement commuties to find solutions to treat pedophilia, the scandal has been hijacked by anti-Catholics and used for anti-Catholic bashing. This doesn't help the problem because ignorant people begin to feel that it is ONLY a Catholic Church problem.
Again - do not excuse anyone in the Catholic Church, but let's turn this terrible situation into a wake up call - so we recognize that pedophiles are lurking EVERYWHERE and do something about it.
@jack
May I ask what are your thoughts on the Magdalene Asylum?
I don't know much about this and would have to research it. But, again, prosecute the individuals who committed the crime.
Does it bother you to give money to an institution that benefited from slave labor, of children no less?
Do you pay taxes? Does it bother you to give money to an institution that has benefitted from the slavery of blacks, stealing land from the natives and plundering their villages, the unequal treatment of women and minorities, plotting global assasinations, putting corporate interests above the interests of the poor, using nuclear weapons on innocent people, etc...., etc...., etc....
I am sure that somewhere in the world individuals associated with the Catholic Church are doing evil things, that is just the nature of the human race, and unfortunately, religion doesn't alter that. But the bad acts of some, even many, doesn't condemn an entire religion. If it does, all religions and non-religious groups are guilty.
Kellydancer
09-17-2010, 10:43 AM
Until the matter is investigated and, if there is sufficient evidence for trial, tried, it's difficult to make that statement with any authority. It's unusual for an alleged victim of sexual assault to make up stories about it, given the trauma of disclosure and trial, though of course invented stories do occasionally occur. However, I doubt that when they do, the motive is 'fun'.
But people lie all the time, including the case I mention above. I have several friends who are teachers and they are always terrified a student will accuse them of molesting. Molesting is the #1 thing people make up because there isn't always a lot of proof either way.
Elvia
09-17-2010, 12:21 PM
Do you pay taxes? Does it bother you to give money to an institution that has benefitted from the slavery of blacks, stealing land from the natives and plundering their villages, the unequal treatment of women and minorities, plotting global assasinations, putting corporate interests above the interests of the poor, using nuclear weapons on innocent people, etc...., etc...., etc....
Yes, it does. Which is why I engage in political activism. I DO insist that my government address such issues.
Besides Jack, it's not really comparable. One legally has to pay taxes. when you donate to the catholic church you do so completely voluntarily.
jack0177057
09-17-2010, 01:39 PM
^ But, again - let's punish the individual bad actors and not condemn an entire religion. The Catholic Church does a lot of good things locally and around the world and a lot of sick, old, poor and needy people benefit from Church programs. I agree with being critical about bad behavior by Church officials, but the solution is to punish the bad people, -- the solution is not to punish the innocent beneficiaries of Church charities by withholding donations to the Church.
Elvia
09-17-2010, 01:59 PM
^^^ You could give to individual charities that will help people, without supporting all the negative things, like giving people in third world countries false information about STD prevention. I give to a charity. If I found out they were funding programs to teach people to NOT use condoms based on blatantly false information, I would stop giving them money and let them know why I'm discontinuing my support. If Catholics started insisting that such issues be addressed, and withheld money from the church until they were, the church would be forced to take greater responsibility and handle these things internally. You guys hold the power! It's your money! You should start insisting on having a greater say as to how the church spends it!
jack0177057
09-17-2010, 05:22 PM
^ You're shifting from genuinely bad conduct that we both agree is bad (like child sexual abuse, etc.), to religious beliefs, that we probably disagree on. Unnatural birth control (as distinguished from Church-approved natural forms of birth control), abortion, homosexuality, etc. - these issue are dealt with based on religious beliefs based on biblical interpretation. I am not Jew, Muslim, Bhuddist, etc., - and I don't share their religious views and beliefs, but I respect those religions and their non-violent beliefs.
I've personally researched the issue regarding unnatural birth control and I agree with the theological analysis of the Catholic Church. That doesn't mean that I don't use condoms - since I am FAR from being a saint.
The Catholic answer to concerns over STDs is to avoid sexual intercourse, except with your spouse. Of course, people in third-world countries also have to cope with rape, and I don't know how to address that situation. Should the Catholic Church give out condoms to suspected rapists and ask that they wear it when they commit acts of rape? If you want to be purely practical and logical, that would be the best approach, since the victim is less likely to have the time or opportunity to secure a condom.
Elvia
09-17-2010, 06:11 PM
^^^ No, I'm not. Telling people that using condoms won't prevent the spread of STD's is blatant false information. That is not a "religious belief" that deserves respect. It is a straight up lie.
And you're still avoiding my point. This is what really bugs me about Catholicism. Parishioners will say they are against certain things, but they just continue to give money freely, even while supposedly having serious objections. There's this attitude of "yeah, that's terrible, somebody should really do something about that someday" instead of actually trying to make any changes. If you really care, maybe you should give some of that money to one of the many young girls who suffered permanent physical damage after being enslaved, abused, and overworked by the catholic church. If this was any other organization besides your religion, I doubt you'd continue to quietly hand over money. If any other "charitable" organization did something like that and didn't even accept any fault, you'd stop funding them until such issues were addressed and rectified.
rickdugan
09-17-2010, 07:58 PM
@jack
May I ask what are your thoughts on the Magdalene Asylum? Does it bother you to give money to an institution that benefited from slave labor, of children no less? Does it bother you that most of those victims are still alive today and have not received any share in the financial earnings of their own forced labor? Or even an apology? Your church pretends like it never happened, and don't you as well when you give them more money every week without making any demands that they rectify such wrongs?
I was trying to stay out of this thread but I am getting a little tired of the demonizing of the Catholic church.
Does the Catholic church have issues, both historical and present? No doubt. From the Crusades to present there have been numerous problems in the church. Has it always handled these issues well? Absolutely not and there is no doubt that they still need to address some of these issues. I also agree with Kelly that the prohibition on priests marrying is a real problem and likely leads to certain personality types choosing the path of priesthood over others.
But the Catholic church is also the single most influential charitable organization in the U.S. and the world. What other organization does so much to help the homeless in this country? How many soup kitchens and shelters are run by the Catholic church? How many outreach programs do they run to help everyone from the sick and dying to desperate immigrants? In how many blighted urban areas does the Catholic church provide the only decent school option? How many people has the church helped worldwide through its various missions, programs and donations?
No doubt that the Catholic church has many faults, and I most certainly don't agree with all of its positions, but possibly millions of people worldwide would be worse off if not for help that the Catholic church provides. If I withold my weekly and special annual donations then I deprive those programs as well.
I can understand how some may feel about the Catholic church, but I think that a little balance and perspective is in order.
Elvia
09-17-2010, 08:13 PM
If I withold my weekly and special annual donations then I deprive those programs as well.
*sigh*
How many times does it need to be said? You could give your money to OTHER organizations. One's that don't take with one hand what they give with the other. Too many people are acting like their only option to do any good in the world is to give money to the Catholic Church. You could give to another organization, one that would give a much higher percentage of your donation towards the people you say you want to help.
If you're going to portray them as a CHARITY then hold them to the same standards you would expect of all other charities.
missplayful
09-17-2010, 08:26 PM
I'm a devout atheist ( I love the irony in the term ) but I am very live and let live, so long as no one is pushy with me.
There are hypocrites in every group of people, even atheists. Just do the best you can in your life and ignore what anyone else says. They aren't you, so they don't know what's best for you.
Side note; I googled "Popi" and nothing came up. Is this like, some sort of cult leader guy or something?
Oh and Phil, I listen to the Quran! It's kind of funny actually. One of my girlfriends married a Muslim and she converted. She sent me a link to recitation and I like that is sounds like music, so I listen to it. No idea what it's saying as it's in Arabic, but I love the hell out of listening to it.
Haha. Upon inspection, that last sentence is rich.
Hahahah u are too funny:P i agree recitation sounds like song or music:P i am muslim i dont really obey whole rules but i try to follow acceptable things as soon as possoble. i DONT cover my head or dont wear conservative clothes...i pray to GOD i love GOD. thats all i can say... However any religion is good if there is a way to appriach GOD.It really doesnt matter which religion we do follow or practise.... i think should not be...
flickad
09-18-2010, 02:15 AM
^^^ No, I'm not. Telling people that using condoms won't prevent the spread of STD's is blatant false information. That is not a "religious belief" that deserves respect. It is a straight up lie.
And you're still avoiding my point. This is what really bugs me about Catholicism. Parishioners will say they are against certain things, but they just continue to give money freely, even while supposedly having serious objections. There's this attitude of "yeah, that's terrible, somebody should really do something about that someday" instead of actually trying to make any changes. If you really care, maybe you should give some of that money to one of the many young girls who suffered permanent physical damage after being enslaved, abused, and overworked by the catholic church. If this was any other organization besides your religion, I doubt you'd continue to quietly hand over money. If any other "charitable" organization did something like that and didn't even accept any fault, you'd stop funding them until such issues were addressed and rectified.
To be fair, this isn't uniquely a Catholic problem. You'll find variations of the same thing in all religions. The Catholic Church actually compares favourably to many, though it certainly isn't without flaws. I can't say that I agree with its social positions, for instance, but the social positions of other major religions are far more reactionary in many cases.
rickdugan
09-18-2010, 05:57 AM
*sigh*
How many times does it need to be said? You could give your money to OTHER organizations. One's that don't take with one hand what they give with the other. Too many people are acting like their only option to do any good in the world is to give money to the Catholic Church. You could give to another organization, one that would give a much higher percentage of your donation towards the people you say you want to help.
If you're going to portray them as a CHARITY then hold them to the same standards you would expect of all other charities.
They are both a religion and a charity, and that is what makes it a better option IMHO. I know their motivations when they open up a soup kitchen in another city. Now I am no religious fanatic by any wild stretch, but I have seen the ugly inner working of a few secular charities (small minded people, career charitable execs, etc.) and IME faith based charities, regardless of denomination, tend to be more pure in their motives and most likely to get into the streets and other gritty places. In addition to the Catholic church, I give to a couple of other faith based organizations whose beliefs I don't share, but whose motives I can't question, and they also reach out directly and in a hands-on way to troubled populations.
Also, who could I give it to that would be more effective, on a mass scale, than the Catholic church?
I understand how you feel, but I'm not quite ready to throw out the baby because the bath water is a little murky.
Kellydancer
09-18-2010, 12:39 PM
To be fair, this isn't uniquely a Catholic problem. You'll find variations of the same thing in all religions. The Catholic Church actually compares favourably to many, though it certainly isn't without flaws. I can't say that I agree with its social positions, for instance, but the social positions of other major religions are far more reactionary in many cases.
True. I am Catholic, right now going through the process the make my confirmation (made baptism and communion as a child) to finish the process and will readily admit I don't believe in all of the views. I support stem cell research, abortion rights (though I likely wouldn't have an abortion) and gay rights. I support their view on the death penalty, praying to saints and even divorce (I do support divorce in various cases such as infidelity and abuse). In the class I will not ever mention what I disagree about because the church won't change on various issues. I do feel they will on a few though since many things have changed. For instance back when my mom attended church as a teen women had to wear hats and everything was in Latin. Now it's in the language of the country (English in this case). I've never worn a hat in church and have seen people wearing jeans. Girls can be altar servers now and I suspect that women will get more power in the church.
Many people want to make the Catholic Church into this far right organization and they aren't. I also want to point out that generally speaking, more Catholic politicians have been Democrats than anything else (Kennedys come to mind). There is a politician/minister here (James Meeks) who's against abortion and gays, yet is a Democrat. He also has a Halloween event at his church because they believe "Halloween is evil". Compare this to the fact I actually attended a Halloween party at the Catholic Church. I bring this up to mention that the Catholic Church isn't the only religion that promotes views that society deems different. Many churches are against abortion and gay rights for example, yet it's only the Catholics who are bashed for this.
Elvia
09-18-2010, 01:46 PM
Also, who could I give it to that would be more effective, on a mass scale, than the Catholic church?
If you Catholics who are supposedly so interested in healing the world got together, you could do a lot with your money. Instead, you blindly hand it over to an organization that has shown it can't be trusted. When another disaster hits and it turns out your money has funded another atrocity, I'm sure you'll shrug then and say that there's nothing you could have done, that you could not possibly foreseen it, and will continue to put money in the collection plate. The Church knows this.
In the meantime, why not give to Christian Children's fund, now known as Childfund? They have a long standing reputation as being an extremely efficient charity. They provide food, nutrition, schooling, health care and recreational activities to children all over the world. And they don't spend money on opulent crap while preaching the virtues of living humbly, nor do they have a history of supporting child abuse and enslavement.
Frankly, this thread has left me even more disgusted with the Catholic Church than ever before. I will have respect for Catholic parishioners when they start giving a little money to the VICTIMS of the Catholic church, instead of just giving money to abusers everyday. If you care about the damage your church has caused, do something about it instead of just shrugging it off.
I can't imagine what the women who survived the atrocities of the Magdalene Asylums must feel when they hear things like this. It must just be a giant Fuck You.
Elvia
09-18-2010, 01:48 PM
To be fair, this isn't uniquely a Catholic problem. You'll find variations of the same thing in all religions.
Please explain to me what other religion is going to Africa and urging people not to use condoms and giving false information about STD prevention, outside of Christianity?
Elvia
09-18-2010, 02:12 PM
Here is a documentary about the Magdalene Asylums
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJs-4cncGmk
Everyone who gives money to the Catholic Church should see this. Everyone should have to see these women and listen to what they endured. It is truly shocking. This is the first of 5 parts, and I'll warn you now it gets more and more disturbing.
Kellydancer
09-18-2010, 02:26 PM
I'm just saddened that there is so much Catholic HATE in this thread. I posted another church that actually espouses hate and people brush it aside. I can mention many PROTESTANT churches that preach hate and do little to help anyone, and no one ever makes a peep.
Is there a problem in the Catholic Church? Certainly, but there is a problem in EVERY church. The Amish in fact are having problems with teens drinking.
As for condoms, I believe in them for safe sex, but let's look further into this since it was brought up. There is a thing called abstinence and if more people practiced it there would be less out of wedlock babies and less diseases. I'm certainly not going to claim to be perfect myself, and yes I've had sex, many times with many guys. However, years ago I made a vow to abstain until I become engaged. The man I love (and hope I eventually marry) respects this and in fact he doesn't want to have sex either until we get to a serious stage. We take pregnancy seriously and will marry if one occurs. If more people thought like we did, there would be less illegitimate babies (and as a result less tax dollars going to pay for them). There would also be less disease. The people in Africa should be taught abstinence but also taught condoms are needed if one isn't abstinent. I realize it's hard to abstain, but sex has caused me so many problems in the past and I'm glad I'm waiting.
Elvia
09-18-2010, 02:34 PM
I'm just saddened that there is so much Catholic HATE in this thread. I posted another church that actually espouses hate and people brush it aside. I can mention many PROTESTANT churches that preach hate and do little to help anyone, and no one ever makes a peep.
Is there a problem in the Catholic Church? Certainly, but there is a problem in EVERY church. The Amish in fact are having problems with teens drinking.
As for condoms, I believe in them for safe sex, but let's look further into this since it was brought up. There is a thing called abstinence and if more people practiced it there would be less out of wedlock babies and less diseases. I'm certainly not going to claim to be perfect myself, and yes I've had sex, many times with many guys. However, years ago I made a vow to abstain until I become engaged. The man I love (and hope I eventually marry) respects this and in fact he doesn't want to have sex either until we get to a serious stage. We take pregnancy seriously and will marry if one occurs. If more people thought like we did, there would be less illegitimate babies (and as a result less tax dollars going to pay for them). There would also be less disease. The people in Africa should be taught abstinence but also taught condoms are needed if one isn't abstinent. I realize it's hard to abstain, but sex has caused me so many problems in the past and I'm glad I'm waiting.
Yes, there are lots of hate groups, and they are dispicable. The difference is that they haven't been allowed to enslave people without question for a century and simply get away with it scot free. Are you really going to compare that to Amish kids sneaking some alcohol? Really!?
I have no problem with anyone urging people to abstain. But to tell people that using condoms will not help prevent the spread of diseases is whole different matter. That is an outright lie. And a dangerous one.
missplayful
09-18-2010, 09:58 PM
SOME African countries even dont have transportain or any food or place to stay as a home.. I watch a documentry about Africa and a lady and her baby needed to go hospital and get HIV test cause mom was barely sick.She could not go very long time because she did not have any money .. transportation costs 2 dollar with bike and they coudnt even afford. Finally she went hospital and yes lady and her baby both had HIV .These people used to live home maden woods only one room:( mostly they dont have any food.
I know these people can not even afford 2 dollars to hospital but sex is Natural action.Sex will be involved anywhere even though people have really bad life conditions. I wish they could find a condom sometimes they can t even have daily needs.I hope God help all of them i will be prayin for them and whenever if i dont like my food i try to eat or i never throw away a food because i know some people woudnt have food which i refuse or throw to garbage.
flickad
09-19-2010, 12:44 AM
True. I am Catholic, right now going through the process the make my confirmation (made baptism and communion as a child) to finish the process and will readily admit I don't believe in all of the views. I support stem cell research, abortion rights (though I likely wouldn't have an abortion) and gay rights. I support their view on the death penalty, praying to saints and even divorce (I do support divorce in various cases such as infidelity and abuse). In the class I will not ever mention what I disagree about because the church won't change on various issues. I do feel they will on a few though since many things have changed. For instance back when my mom attended church as a teen women had to wear hats and everything was in Latin. Now it's in the language of the country (English in this case). I've never worn a hat in church and have seen people wearing jeans. Girls can be altar servers now and I suspect that women will get more power in the church.
Many people want to make the Catholic Church into this far right organization and they aren't. I also want to point out that generally speaking, more Catholic politicians have been Democrats than anything else (Kennedys come to mind). There is a politician/minister here (James Meeks) who's against abortion and gays, yet is a Democrat. He also has a Halloween event at his church because they believe "Halloween is evil". Compare this to the fact I actually attended a Halloween party at the Catholic Church. I bring this up to mention that the Catholic Church isn't the only religion that promotes views that society deems different. Many churches are against abortion and gay rights for example, yet it's only the Catholics who are bashed for this.
I actually regret the loss of the Latin mass. it's one of the romantic attributes of Catholicism to which I've always felt attracted. but yes, you're right in that the Catholic Church does change (albeit very slowly), whereas you won't see change in faiths such as Judaism and Islam, however out of step the positions of those faiths become with contemporary reality.
flickad
09-19-2010, 12:49 AM
Please explain to me what other religion is going to Africa and urging people not to use condoms and giving false information about STD prevention, outside of Christianity?
You might not find that specific thing outside the Catholic Church, but you will find other horrors, such as the picketing of gay funerals, harassment of women outside abortion clinics and crisis pregnancy centres that give false information about abortion and delay, via untruths, the client's abortion until the pregnancy is so advanced that abortion is no longer possible. Essentially this is forced birth by deception. You will also find things like the wifely submission movement, which essentially brings back the 18th and 19th Century system of coverture, albeit in extra-legal form. In fringe forms of Christianity, such as the FLDS, you will find child marriage, and Scientology is essentially a Ponzi scheme.
As for the major non-Christian religions, I have four words to say: the entire Middle East. To be less concise, this includes things like the stoning of rape victims, wholesale slaughter of members of other faiths in places like Gaza, the absolutely abominable treatment of women, child marriage, female circumcision, maiming as legal punishment, the beheading of gay men, the Taliban, terrorist attacks and similar horrors. See, for instance, this example of an execution of a teenaged girl in Iran: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTv6ZDRyqe8 and, in print form: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/5217424.stm. The Catholic Church compares most favourably, despite its well documented failings.
If you're going to critique one religion, be consistent and recognise the others that have acted just as despicably or more so. And accept that, similarly, evils have occurred throughout human history that had little or nothing to do with any religion, Stalinism being one of many such instances.
I'll add that I don't support the evil things done by the Catholic Church, nor am I a member of any faith. I don't even believe in god. But I do think that it's unfair to hold out the Catholic Church as the epitome of all that's evil when, in context, it is no such thing. It's one of many religions that has acted badly in certain respects, and is nowhere near the worst of the bunch.
flickad
09-19-2010, 01:25 AM
Here is a documentary about the Magdalene Asylums
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJs-4cncGmk
Everyone who gives money to the Catholic Church should see this. Everyone should have to see these women and listen to what they endured. It is truly shocking. This is the first of 5 parts, and I'll warn you now it gets more and more disturbing.
I've read about the Magdalene Asylums before and have begun watching this. Thanks for the link!
I should add that the 'fallen women' doctrine was not unique to the Irish Catholic Church during much of the Magdalene era, nor was the institutionalisation of these women in appalling conditions that amounted to slave labour. This took place in England (under Protestant auspices) as well, sadly.
missplayful
09-19-2010, 08:31 AM
You might not find that specific thing outside the Catholic
As for the major non-Christian religions, I have four words to say: the entire Middle East. To be less concise, this includes things like the stoning of rape victims, wholesale slaughter of members of other faiths in places like Gaza, the absolutely abominable treatment of women, child marriage, female circumcision, maiming as legal punishment, the beheading of gay men, the Taliban, terrorist attacks and similar horrors. See, for instance, this example of an execution of a teenaged girl in Iran: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTv6ZDRyqe8 and, in print form: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/5217424.stm. The Catholic Church compares most favourably, despite its well documented failings.
.
Honey i am muslim from Turkey yes it is middle east too but we dont have stuffs which u wrote here. Not every middle east country is same. By the way only Middle eastern is not muslim countries comunnity. I know more than 40 countries practise islam WHICH some countries are MUSLIM: Asian maleysia ,African like somalia,morroco,nijeria, some european countries Albenia,Kosova etc.. there is the list of countries.
By the way islam has different classes too.Not all christians doesnt practise same way. They are baptist,protestant or catholic. Even these cults doesnt agrree some times same practise of bible or they dont follow same rules it suppose to be. Sometimes sharing same religion doesnt mean we all do same thing. Muslim cults are Sunii-sii-hanefi-maliki... i am hanefi and some people are crazy mostly Arabs are sii .
Iranians are sooo free by the way. Them seem like they have bad ass goverment. But i know whole iranian girls cover their bodies but when they go home they have crazy parties which they wear super short skirts expensive designer shoes etc they have sex after they go doctors for fixin their virginity ...
Female circumcision IS involved with African countries mostly. i DID not hear anything about it in middle east. Even though we are muslim circumcision required for only man. But these African countries are muslim too right? This is just a culture for them not sometin Islam wants.
Legal punishments are not required too. For example i am married with christian guy,i did not convert him and my goverment just says good luck thats all:P But other countries might have some punishments which i heard in suudi Arabia is crazy place i m happy i dont live there! In my country people can wear anythin they want skirts ,bikini etc no problem.This is a free country. People can have sex before marriage if they want. People can do fornication nothin happens.Gay people are welcome what can we do we can not kill them cause they are gay lol. we have even gay singers or dancers.Execution is big no-no.. we dont even execute pervert pedofilis or murderrers which they deserve to die instead of that my goverment put them in jail for a life time whoch i wish they could die!wE NEVER attacked any country because of ISlam. Some countries Azerbayjan, uzbekistan, kosova, albenia, turkey practise in a different way . these countries are non-Arab.
Arican countries practise different way... Arabs are dangerious and yeah they really practise in dangerious way which problem for both muslim and christian community.
My Goverment doesnt treat people with ISLAM rules.President doesnt manange country with religious forms cause this is not their business. If THERE IS sometin wrong and involved with religion people go hodja and get some advises.Or GOD will punish them thats all. This is not goverments job to punish people who had mistakes with religion norms
Religion practises varies culture to country and some other factors.
flickad
09-19-2010, 09:07 AM
^^
Turkey is a bit of an exception, having deliberately maintained strong separation of religion and state. I have been told that religious garb such as hair coverings were not allowed in Turkey to this end. It is also Eurasian rather than Middle Eastern as such.
I have read that women remain quite repressed in Iran, more so than in Saudi Arabia. I linked above to the instance of an Iranian teenage girl who was hung on her own (torture obtained) confession of having been raped. The rapist received 96 lashes.
I realise that not all sects of Islam are alike and also that some of these practices do not come from the Koran. However, the fact is that they are associated with religion and justified on religious grounds. The issues with the Catholic Church that we have discussed do not originate with the Bible either, nor were institutions like the Magdalene asylums found in Western European Catholic countries like Italy and France, nor in the Eastern European strongholds like Poland. The asylums were not only associated with the Catholic Church, some being Protestant run.
missplayful
09-19-2010, 09:22 AM
I AGREE U! we are actually eurasian. But we are by the iraq so people assume us as middle eastern. Female circumcision, executions in some Arab and IRAN makes my blood frozen! We have Virgin Mary memorial/tomb in my country lots of Christian come to visit especially ITALIANS they are mostly catholic.However i took my hubby there he did not wanna pray like others ...I thought they all are Christians. He thinks only he can pray GOD/ Jesus christ. She think Virgin mary was just a person.Because he is protestant
Well i think u can find cruelty on any kinda religion it comes with different package.Radical religious people are dangerious no matter which religion they belong to...
i watched video these type things happened in past . Iranians come to Turkey for school. I know my one of girlfriends use to live at same home with iranian guy. Another chicks use to go beach with g strings and havin none limited sexes.I met with bunch of Iranian chicks who they came to Turkey again for vacation....They use to drink like crazy and flirted with tons of guys at my holiday hotel lol. Only before they get married with someone they go for gynecologist for fixin their virginity. i think goverment pushes them a lot and these people are really gettin crazy and they do lots of stuffs which u or i woudnt do... i heard IRan USE TO BE LIKE THAT executions.but they are very sneaky right now and smarter to hide their dirty things :P
Kellydancer
09-19-2010, 11:19 AM
You might not find that specific thing outside the Catholic Church, but you will find other horrors, such as the picketing of gay funerals, harassment of women outside abortion clinics and crisis pregnancy centres that give false information about abortion and delay, via untruths, the client's abortion until the pregnancy is so advanced that abortion is no longer possible. Essentially this is forced birth by deception. You will also find things like the wifely submission movement, which essentially brings back the 18th and 19th Century system of coverture, albeit in extra-legal form. In fringe forms of Christianity, such as the FLDS, you will find child marriage, and Scientology is essentially a Ponzi scheme.
As for the major non-Christian religions, I have four words to say: the entire Middle East. To be less concise, this includes things like the stoning of rape victims, wholesale slaughter of members of other faiths in places like Gaza, the absolutely abominable treatment of women, child marriage, female circumcision, maiming as legal punishment, the beheading of gay men, the Taliban, terrorist attacks and similar horrors. See, for instance, this example of an execution of a teenaged girl in Iran: and, in print form: . The Catholic Church compares most favourably, despite its well documented failings.
If you're going to critique one religion, be consistent and recognise the others that have acted just as despicably or more so. And accept that, similarly, evils have occurred throughout human history that had little or nothing to do with any religion, Stalinism being one of many such instances.
I'll add that I don't support the evil things done by the Catholic Church, nor am I a member of any faith. I don't even believe in god. But I do think that it's unfair to hold out the Catholic Church as the epitome of all that's evil when, in context, it is no such thing. It's one of many religions that has acted badly in certain respects, and is nowhere near the worst of the bunch.
Excellent points. One issue the Catholic Church is strong on is abortion. While I am personally pro choice (though likely wouldn't have an abortion) the church generally doesn't protest at abortion clinics. Instead they have a pro life group that raises money for the women and babies. They also run many adoption agencies. I knew people from other churches (all Protestant) and their "pro life" organization consisted of them blocking abortion clinics. To me that's far more dangerous than the Catholics. The wife submission thing isn't big in the Catholic Church. I don't ever remember being told as a woman I had to submit. Most of the women in the church groups as a teen were all career women (one was a scientist). However, my ex was in a fundamentalist church and the minister would preach that "good women" were housewives, even if the couple couldn't afford it and the man had to work 3 jobs (and never see his kids).
Speaking of Islam, I know several woman (American servicepeople) who were stationed in Saudi Arabia and their branch of Islam is far worse than even the most extreme Catholics. Women couldn't drive and I believe they had to be covered if they went off base. Women in the more extreme Muslim countries are treated as cattle. Yet of course the people bashing Catholic never bash these religions.
ArmySGT.
09-19-2010, 07:35 PM
http://i81.photobucket.com/albums/j218/ArmySGT_photos/Makes%20me%20laugh/bad%20post%20or%20thread/1265429512642-1.jpg
rickdugan
09-20-2010, 03:59 AM
Frankly, this thread has left me even more disgusted with the Catholic Church than ever before. I will have respect for Catholic parishioners when they start giving a little money to the VICTIMS of the Catholic church, instead of just giving money to abusers everyday. If you care about the damage your church has caused, do something about it instead of just shrugging it off.
I can't imagine what the women who survived the atrocities of the Magdalene Asylums must feel when they hear things like this. It must just be a giant Fuck You.
So it's your contention that the ENTIRE Catholic Church condoned this? I agree some of the things that have happened within the church, both historic and present, are horrible, but the church is a huge institution and one should not hate an entire population of people or religion over the actions of a relative few.
I don't give money to abusers, I give money to my Archdiocese. Want to know what they do with that money? Maintain soup kitchens, put schools in horrible areas, provide shelter for the homeless and one for battered women and children. I see these things every day in my community - it is real and it is in the trenches. You suggest that I stop funding these things in the hopes that some other organization MIGHT be able to eventually replace these things, but the people I would be hurting today is not some theoretical evil church, but those who are getting their next meals TODAY in a Catholic run soup kitchen or shelter.
Kelly told the story of returning to the church and being unable to give money. The nice thing about her church is that nobody looks at her badly when the collection plate passes and every Catholic church would welcome her. Nobody asks her how much she makes or whether she can pay membership dues. She does not need to buy a ticket to celebrate Christmas mass - she just has to walk in the door. All are welcome. This is the Catholic way.
I understand your feelings on this issue, but I severely doubt that today's church as a whole would knowingly condone attrocities, even though I agree that they have done a piss poor job in dealing with some of these things. But like I said before, I have no intention of throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
jack0177057
09-20-2010, 11:44 AM
^^^ No, I'm not. Telling people that using condoms won't prevent the spread of STD's is blatant false information. That is not a "religious belief" that deserves respect. It is a straight up lie.
How do you know this? If you are correct that these statements were told (assuming you KNOW the truth and aren't just relying on anti-Catholic propaganda, or out-of-context statements), then I agree that, although somewhat true (even the condoms packaging warns that condoms cannot guaranty against the spread of STDs), these statements are misleading, and should be censured.
And you're still avoiding my point. This is what really bugs me about Catholicism. Parishioners will say they are against certain things, but they just continue to give money freely, even while supposedly having serious objections. There's this attitude of "yeah, that's terrible, somebody should really do something about that someday" instead of actually trying to make any changes. If you really care, maybe you should give some of that money to one of the many young girls who suffered permanent physical damage after being enslaved, abused, and overworked by the catholic church. If this was any other organization besides your religion, I doubt you'd continue to quietly hand over money. If any other "charitable" organization did something like that and didn't even accept any fault, you'd stop funding them until such issues were addressed and rectified.
Again, no religion is "clean" - humans are humans. Will you tell a Jew not to contribute to his synogogue, because of the excessive and outrageous "self-defense" tactics of Israel?
I contribute to my church, because, without parishioner support, there would be no church to worship in. The mortgage and other expenses don't pay for themselves. Furthermore, I highly doubt that my miniscule contribution (I am not a big donor) goes farther than our local church and its local charities. If my church was shown to be directly involved in wrongdoing, and the wrongdoers were not held accountable, I would go to another Catholic church and donate to another Catholic church.
What do you contribute to? Do you really think there is any institution, relgious or secular that has perfectly "clean hands".
Again, imagine holding all dancers accountable for the "bad things" that some dancers do. I know that dancers are not organized into an institution, but the principal is the same - punish the "bad" individuals and don't castigate or stereotype an entire group for the sins of some.
The Catholic Church is the biggest religion/denomination in the world and is world-wide with 1.1 billion people. Its far too easy to find a handfull, or even hundreds of bad incidents, and call the whole thing evill. But, if you want to be fair, you would have to put the "good" and the "bad" side by side.
The Catholic Church has set up tens of thousands of schools, hospitals and orphanages for poor people around the world. In 1901, in France alone, the number of persons assisted by Catholic societies was 107,400, or 83,000 children, 700 girls and women in refuges, 17,000 aged, and 6,700 insane persons. The total number of Catholic charitable societies exceeded 4000. According to the Catholic directory for 1908, there were in the United States 272 orphan asylums with 42,597 inmates, and 1054 other charitable institutions. The Report of the Superior Council of New York for the year 1905 informs that there were in the United States 443 conferences of the St. Vincent de Paul society, whose combined membership was 7,423. During that year they assisted 19,193 familites and expended 233,698 dollars.
In the U.S., the first benevolent work undertaken by American Catholics was the education of girls. In 1805 Visitation nuns near Washington, D.C. established a small day school for poor girls and cared for a number of boarding orphans. Several years later, Mother Elizabeth Seton, who had just founded the Sisters of Charity, established a similar school in Baltimore. From these small beginnings evolved the vast and varied network of charitable and educational institutions.
The arrival of millions of impoverished immigrants, many of them Catholic, in the 1840s and 1850s posed an immense challenge for a scattered, working-class church. Benevolent laity, clergy, and members of religious orders joined forces to house and care for the destitute, especially parentless children. Typically, local parishioners, with the approval of their pastor, would construct a small orphanage, engage an order of nuns to care for the children, and pledge ongoing financial support for the institution. Every parish orphanage had its own male board of trustees, female auxiliary, and benevolent society.
Catholic hospitals appeared in response to devastating typhoid, cholera and smallpox epidemics that recurred regularly in the early nineteenth-century. Founded by religious sisterhoods to serve the indigent, these small establishments were financed by free will offerings and the sisters' contributed labor. In time, they became larger, broadened their services, and increased in number, from eighteen in 1860 to about 140 by 1885.
Although many people perceive the Catholic Church as anti-women, women have always been very influential in the church. In the 19th century, Church leaders strongly encouraged generous young Catholics to join one of the many religious orders that were subsidizing church charities and schools through the contributed labor of their members. The response from women was especially enthusiastic, and by 1900, the nation's more than 40,000 sisters outnumbered clergy by a margin of nearly four to one. Religious sisterhoods continued to flourish until the mid-1960s, when their total membership peaked at approximately 180,000. Nuns were an ubiquitous and very important feature of the nineteenth-century Catholic charity system. In an era of narrow views about women's proper sphere of influence, they assumed leadership roles in hospitals, social agencies, schools, and child-caring institutions, a phenomenon remarked upon by Americans of every religious persuasion.
One aftermath of the Civil War was a sharp rise in the number of orphaned and abandoned children. In response to this critical problem, the Catholic community founded a number of urban orphanages with attached industrial schools. These huge enterprises appeared in most major cities, with seven opening in New York City alone between 1875 and 1885. The New York Catholic Protectory, accommodating nearly 3,300 children, was the largest child-caring institution in America in 1897.
http://learningtogive.org/faithgroups/phil_in_america/catholic_philanthropy.asp
Dirty Ernie
09-20-2010, 07:57 PM
How do you know this? If you are correct that these statements were told (assuming you KNOW the truth and aren't just relying on anti-Catholic propaganda, or out-of-context statements), then I agree that, although somewhat true (even the condoms packaging warns that condoms cannot guaranty against the spread of STDs), these statements are misleading, and should be censured.
Actually, in a visit to Africa in Mar of '09, the Pope himself said that condom use increased the spread of AIDs in Africa.
hockeybobby
09-20-2010, 09:46 PM
^^^that's a fairly solid rebuttal. LOL
jack0177057
09-21-2010, 08:01 AM
Actually, in a visit to Africa in Mar of '09, the Pope himself said that condom use increased the spread of AIDs in Africa.
I'll have to research this and get back to you, as it seems it is being taken out of context. Anyway, there's some truth to that statement. Again, even the condom companies warn that condoms cannot guarantee against the spread of STDs. Despite these warnings, condoms may be guilty of giving people a false sense of security.
If you compare abstinance until marriage (the Church ideal) vs. sexual promiscuity (even with condoms) in a country where a HUGE percentage of the population is infected -- the Pope is correct that condoms have increased the risk of AIDs, because of the false sense of security and the tacit encouragement to be sexually promiscuous. (If you disagree, answer this question honestly - Would you knowingly have sex with a person infected with AIDS using a condom?... I sure as hell would not.)
In a country with a massive AIDS epidemic - abstinence until marriage is really the only safe option (assuming your spouse has done the same).
flickad
09-21-2010, 09:09 AM
^^
Here you go:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/17/pope-africa-condoms-aids
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7947460.stm
Granted, Benedict is a particularly conservative pope, but still.
Abstinence is indeed safer than condoms, but it's not necessarily the most realistic option. Also, there is no guarantee that one's spouse is clean. And condoms are a good option, being 98% effective: http://www.condomeffectiveness.com/. The warning of the condom companies is there to avoid litigation in the event of the 2%.
Kellydancer
09-21-2010, 12:49 PM
^^
Here you go:
Granted, Benedict is a particularly conservative pope, but still.
Abstinence is indeed safer than condoms, but it's not necessarily the most realistic option. Also, there is no guarantee that one's spouse is clean. And condoms are a good option, being 98% effective: . The warning of the condom companies is there to avoid litigation in the event of the 2%.
I prefer John Paul over Benedict, but I do have to agree with Jack. I still wouldn't sleep with a guy with AIDS, I don't care how safe he is. Abstinence is the most realistic option. People need to stop fooling around.
jack0177057
09-21-2010, 01:09 PM
^ According to the article, the pontiff said condoms were not the answer to the continent's fight against HIV and Aids and could make the problem worse.
More than two-thirds – 67% – of the global total of 32.9 million people with HIV live in sub-Saharan Africa. Three-quarters of all Aids deaths in 2007 happened there. Condoms encourage more promiscuity and a false sense of security - they break, slip off, are defective, expire, or may not be available at the critical time. (If you disagree - tell me why in the US, where condoms are handed out like candy, we continue to have more STDs and teen pregnancy than before the proliferation of condoms.)
I love sex as much as anyone else (probably a lot more), but if I was living in a place like this, I would rather be abstinent until marriage - then play Russian-roulette with my life. (I would have married a lot sooner, though - like 16.)
Here is what the US Food and Drug Administration says:
The surest way to avoid these diseases is to not have sex altogether (abstinence). Another way is to limit sex to one partner who also limits his or her sex in the same way (monogamy). Condoms are not 100% safe, but if used properly, will reduce the risk of sexually transmitted diseases, including AIDS...
http://www.fda.gov
The first part of this sounds a lot like what the Pope is saying, doesn't it? The "surest way" is the Catholic way.
But, other people argue that the people over there are like beasts and cannot exhibit restraint, even when their lives depend on it...
Believe it or not, you will not die by only having sex with one person all of your life... Many people have done this.
Kellydancer
09-21-2010, 01:18 PM
See, that's what I don't get. Abstinence is the only 100% method but when people mention this, they are called "Jesus freaks" or unrealistic. Whether we want to admit this or not casual sex has caused many problems.
flickad
09-21-2010, 02:53 PM
I wouldn't sleep with someone with AIDS either, but for those who are not going to be abstinent, implying that condoms are ineffective is at best misleading and at worst close to murder. Condoms are very effective, though not 100% so, and it appears that the promiscuity is happening in any event. In the US, abstinence-based sex education has had a deleterious effect on the very statistics you mention, Jack. In Australia, a comparable (in many respects) democracy, the rate of AIDS and other STDs have dropped since the proliferation of condoms, as has teen pregnancy. The difference? We don't have abstinence-based sex education here. Our AIDS rate is well below yours.
I am in no way against abstinence, but accept that it is not always a realistic option and, given that basic truth, harm reduction can save lives. Making misleading statements about the efficacy of harm reduction can only increase the spread of AIDS, not reduce it. Certainly, many people have successfully abstained until marriage and been faithful to the one partner, but many more have not. I'm sure you know how powerful the human sex drive can be. I do not believe that the people who have failed to curb theirs deserve to die for failing to observe the sexual morés of the Catholic Church.
The pope didn't say that the surest way is abstinence - he said that there was no such thing as harm reduction, essentially, which is not true and could kill people. Defending those actions on the part of the pope makes Catholicism look bad. You would do the reputation of your faith a bigger favour by accepting that the pope's actions were wrong in this instance and pointing out the good the Church has done rather than trying to justify the bad. I am in no way anti-Catholic (despite disagreeing with the Church on many issues), but am finding these sorts of apologetics pretty stomach-turning.
ETA - I notice that you didn't link to the actual FDA article you quoted, Jack. I found it by googling your quote. Here's the part you didn't mention:
About two-thirds of the people with AIDS in the United States got the disease during sexual intercourse with an infected partner. Experts believe that many of these people could have avoided the disease by using condoms.
http://www.fda.gov/ForConsumers/byAudience/ForPatientAdvocates/HIVandAIDSActivities/ucm126372.htm
Kellydancer
09-21-2010, 03:33 PM
I wouldn't sleep with someone with AIDS either, but for those who are not going to be abstinent, implying that condoms are ineffective is at best misleading and at worst close to murder. Condoms are very effective, though not 100% so, and it appears that the promiscuity is happening in any event. In the US, abstinence-based sex education has had a deleterious effect on the very statistics you mention, Jack. In Australia, a comparable (in many respects) democracy, the rate of AIDS and other STDs have dropped since the proliferation of condoms, as has teen pregnancy. The difference? We don't have abstinence-based sex education here. Our AIDS rate is well below yours.
I am in no way against abstinence, but accept that it is not always a realistic option and, given that basic truth, harm reduction can save lives. Making misleading statements about the efficacy of harm reduction can only increase the spread of AIDS, not reduce it. Certainly, many people have successfully abstained until marriage and been faithful to the one partner, but many more have not. I'm sure you know how powerful the human sex drive can be. I do not believe that the people who have failed to curb theirs deserve to die for failing to observe the sexual morés of the Catholic Church.
The pope didn't say that the surest way is abstinence - he said that there was no such thing as harm reduction, essentially, which is not true and could kill people. Defending those actions on the part of the pope makes Catholicism look bad. You would do the reputation of your faith a bigger favour by accepting that the pope's actions were wrong in this instance and pointing out the good the Church has done rather than trying to justify the bad. I am in no way anti-Catholic (despite disagreeing with the Church on many issues), but am finding these sorts of apologetics pretty stomach-turning.
ETA - I notice that you didn't link to the actual FDA article you quoted, Jack. I found it by googling your quote. Here's the part you didn't mention:
About two-thirds of the people with AIDS in the United States got the disease during sexual intercourse with an infected partner. Experts believe that many of these people could have avoided the disease by using condoms.
There are many reasons why the US has high teen pregnancy and disease rates and not all of it is because of abstinence classes. I personally feel that kids should be taught about condoms and other birth control but also that it's wrong to sleep with someone as a teen. I realize that makes me a hypocrite, but I know now it was wrong and I wish I had waited. We all know that many kids don't wait and if they are going to have sex at least be safe.
This isn't the only reason why we have a huge teen pregnancy problem. The fact is the media glamorizes it. I always see stories on tv about these teens that want babies for many reasons. Everything is sexualized in the media and little girls are often sexual looking at an early age (think JonBenet Ramsey). Not to mention the attitude very prevalent in the lower classes where the idea is "if I get pregnant I'll just get welfare". This is why I oppose welfare for teens. I don't know what I'll do if I had a teen girl and she got pregnant. I would hope though that I installed strong morals in her not to have sex before she was ready. I would do the same for a teen boy.
flickad
09-21-2010, 04:16 PM
^^
You're right that abstinence-based sex education isn't the only factor, but it is certainly a contributing one. Bristol Palin should be the poster child for its inefficacy.
I agree that teens should be told about birth control and condoms, but also that waiting is the best option.
jack0177057
09-22-2010, 08:37 AM
In the US, abstinence-based sex education has had a deleterious effect on the very statistics you mention, Jack. In Australia, a comparable (in many respects) democracy, the rate of AIDS and other STDs have dropped since the proliferation of condoms, as has teen pregnancy. The difference? We don't have abstinence-based sex education here. Our AIDS rate is well below yours.
Here is the difference: in Australia, AIDS was never a major epidemic, like it is in Africa. When AIDS is a major epidemic - the only way to be safe is abstention and monogamy (with a partner whose done the same). Again, we're talking about a region with the worst AIDS epidemic in human history - extreme situations call from extreme measures.
Also, bear in mind that guys have a love/hate relationship with condoms - we love them because they allow us to get sex from women who would otherwise be afraid to have sex because of pregnancy and STDs, but we HATE the feeling of sex with condoms. (And blowjobs with condoms really suck. No pun intended.) So, whenever we can, we try to talk women out of using them. I personally used this line - "Just this one time, I'll pull out right before I come." - and it resulted in a lovely baby girl. (No regrets.)
I am in no way against abstinence, but accept that it is not always a realistic option and, given that basic truth, harm reduction can save lives.
Seriously, are we really animals that can't control ourselves? Most of the guys that go to SC get seriously turned on from LDs and still manage to refrain from forcing themselves on the dancer. Half of them will go home and have sex with their wives and the other half will go home and masturbate. (Good kinky and fetish porn for masturbation might help the Africans.)
If abstinence is impossible, what about monogamy? Have sex with your high school sweatheart, marry him/her when you're older, and never sleep with another person.
I'm sure you know how powerful the human sex drive can be. I do not believe that the people who have failed to curb theirs deserve to die for failing to observe the sexual morés of the Catholic Church.
Again, we're talking about an extreme situation - an EXTREME AIDS EPIDEMIC! - People, put your clothes on and stop fucking everything is sight, because half of the people you're fucking have AIDS!
If half of the boys you have had sex with said - "I have AIDS, but not to worry, I have a condom." - would you have slept with them?
My sex-drive is extremely powerful, but my keep-alive-drive is even more powerful. I would not fuck Angelina Jolie is she had AIDS, even with 10 condoms on.
ETA - I notice that you didn't link to the actual FDA article you quoted, Jack. I found it by googling your quote. Here's the part you didn't mention:
About two-thirds of the people with AIDS in the United States got the disease during sexual intercourse with an infected partner. Experts believe that many of these people could have avoided the disease by using condoms.
I included in my quote the FDA's third recommendation - to wear condoms (read my quote again: "Condoms are not 100% safe, but if used properly, will reduce the risk of sexually transmitted diseases, including AIDS...") and my link has the same language as yours. But, the FDA said the "surest way" to avoid STDs is abstinence and monogamy.
Again, under normal circumstances, I would agree that sexual promiscuity with condoms is fun (even if "sinful") and not likely to kill you. But, we are talking about a place where half the population might be infected with AIDs. Telling these people -- "Don't worry about it, keep fucking everything on two legs and you'll be fine with these rubbers." -- may not be the best idea. Even the US FDA would agree. Even you would agree, if you weren't so determined to be right.
Rubbers break, slip off and have other defects, or they expire from old age or wrong temperature. Also, fluids leak. Also, humans with untrained discipline may forget to bring a condom and will fuck anyway. (Specially if drunk or high.) Or the dude might tell the girl - "Just one time, let me feel your hot and wet pussy,... I'll pull out before I come."
In the US, every kid knows about condoms and they are handed out for free, like candy, in schools and clinics. This hasn't stopped the spread of STDs or teen pregnancy. Abstinence programs in schools are a joke, very few kids (usually religious) pay any attention or take them seriously. You're mixing up cause and effect: abstinence programs were introduced because of the alarming rate of teen pregnancy and teen promiscuity at an alarmingly early age. But, abstinence programs were too little, too late - they haven't had any effect at all. The problems continue not because of abstinence programs, but in spite of them. Everything in our society glamorizes and celebrates promiscuity and porn has penetrated (no pun intended) and influenced the main stream - for example, music videos, fashion and fitness trends (e.g., strip aerobics and pole-dancing). (I'm not saying these things are bad - porn has some good attributes, when restricted to adults - its entertaining, it encourages women to explore their sexuality, it adds some spice to "vanilla" sex. It also encourages masturbation, which could be a way to cut down on promiscuity and the spread of STDs, in places with epidemics like Africa.)
eagle2
09-22-2010, 09:17 AM
The entire church - everyone? I am a part of the church (Sunday worshipper) - I covered it up, too?
You're the one who is defending your church. What have you ever done to oppose the criminal acts committed by your church?
The "fraternity" of police officers cover up for each other's errors, omissions and crimes 99.99%. This has been proven time and time again in the courts.
You're just making this number up and it has nothing to do with what is being discussed.
No, that's YOUR issue. That's how you and every other anti-Catholic wants to frame the issue for your own agenda.
No, that's what's being discussed. Please look at the title of the thread. The title of the thread is religion.
The REAL ISSUE is that pedophilia is rampant. It is EVERYWHERE - schools, churches, youth sports, youth organizations, police, prisons, family, friends, etc. - I thought I made that point clear with examples,... but, you just want to talk about priests and boys - like you have some kind of fetish.
It's not anywhere as rampant as it's been in the Catholic Church. I don't know of any other organization that went to the extent that the Catholic Church did to protect men raping children.
eagle2
09-22-2010, 09:29 AM
I agree with this. My point is not that the Catholic Church should be excused. Us Catholics parishioners are as appalled and outraged as non-Catholics, if not more so. Anyone in the Catholic Church who committed a crime, whether child abuse, harboring child abusers, or failing to report child abuse, should be put in jail.
But, instead of learning this from the scandal - PEDOPHILES ARE EVERYWHERE, EVEN IN THE PRIESTHOOD OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND PEOPLE/INSTITUTIONS WILL COVER UP THE PROBLEM BECAUSE IT IS SO SHAMEFUL AND DISGUSTING AND NO ONE WANTS TO ADMIT THE UGLY TRUTH, the Catholic-bashing crowd only rants - CATHOLIC PRIESTS LIKE TO MOLEST LITTLE BOYS AND THE BIG BAD CATHOLIC CHURCH WILL PROTECT ITS PRIESTS! This is a bigotted statement and it does not serve to shed light on the broader problem.
Nobody said that all priests like to molest little boys. The issue is, your church knew priests were doing this and did nothing to stop it. Your church did protect its priests. It's a fact.
Also, I don't know what evidence there is that the ENTIRE upper echelon of the Catholic Church was involved in a massive cover-up. You've got to remember that, at least in the US and most civilized places, you're innocent, until proven guilty. If an allegation is made about priest A, but there is not sufficient evidence to prove it - what would you do? If priest A is alleged to have committed an act of molestation, and the Church alerts the parish about this, the priest could file a multi-million dollar suit for defamation. If the Church cannot prove that the priest, in fact, committed the act, it could be liable. Also, if the allegation is false, it could destroy the life of an innocent person.
It's a fact that the entire upper echelon of the Catholic Church was involved in a massive cover-up. Don't you have any idea of what goes on in your church?
Nobody is disputing priest have committed these criminal acts. Your church doesn't deny it.