Thread: Pope is dead

I do not believe in flaming people. If you are upset at me I apologize.
I have not watched any TV at all for the past few days so I do not know how much media attention the death of the Pope is getting. If you are complaining about the media spreading the message "let's be sad about the pope", I cannot comment on that. Maybe you are right, maybe not. If I have time I will turn on the TV this week-end and make my own judgment. I saw the story that the Pope died on the start page of my browser and I am saddened by the news that the leader of the Catholic Church has died. If you cannot feel sadness over the death of a great humanitarian whether you are Catholic or not, then maybe you cannot feel sadness of the lost of a parent or child or friend. I do not know what else to say.

My history of the Dark Ages is somewhat lacking. I do acknowledge that many millions of people have died over religious beliefs in the many holy wars of the past. Even the Catholic religion was spread by the sword at one time. However, you will have to clarify your statement

Originally Posted by DDT

“ …because of what he (the Pope) represents and that does not include the 150,000,000 men women and children killed by popes in the Dark Ages in Europe.”

Catholicism is a fairly recent religion. The first Catholic Pope was Saint Peter just a mere 2000 years ago. So to say the Pope represents all these deaths is incorrect.

Anyway, what is your answer to the question: What is the difference between the death of a king, or the death of a carpenter?

Of course it matters who dies. Not that one person is more important than the next one, but if a lot of people know the person who has died then of course the sadness would be more widely spread. The people will share their grief. I don

I don't like religion, and am a godless athiest liberal, so I don't really care. And people keep going on about how how many people he helped (and I find this claim that he brought down the iron curtain quite exagorated), but he was also a sexist, homophobic, authoritarian who told people in AIDS ridden countries not to use condoms, and continusouly ignored the scandal of paedophilic priests.

Originally Posted by DDT

I think the starvation of Terry Shaivo is a more important story.

Euthanise her!? Let her die a quick 'n' peaceful death?!? Good grief! No that is murder! Let's starve her to death and keep our conciences clear.

*mind boggles*

Originally Posted by Niamh

Euthanise her!? Let her die a quick 'n' peaceful death?!? Good grief! No that is murder! Let's starve her to death and keep our conciences clear.

*mind boggles*

Why didn't they just rob her of her fluids. There would be a happy medium for those for the long and those for the short "killing" experience.


DDT; Pravit: Just joking....you were expecting flames. It's been an interesting conversation and intruiging to have been taken to such core philosophy. And I appreciate that. My opinion is on both sides of the fence. "So What. And Awe that's so sad. And huh. I wonder who the next Pope is" I am sad for those who lost an icon that they directed love to. I am not sad for the Pope.

Originally Posted by TATY

I don't like religion, and am a godless athiest liberal, so I don't really care. And people keep going on about how how many people he helped (and I find this claim that he brought down the iron curtain quite exagorated), but he was also a sexist, homophobic, authoritarian who told people in AIDS ridden countries not to use condoms, and continusouly ignored the scandal of paedophilic priests.

I agree the Bible is sexist, maybe the Pope is too. I am not sexist.
I am somewhat homophobic, but I don't preach that homosexuality is a sin. If you are a homosexual TATY, then good for you.
As far as the pedophilic priests, maybe he did ignore it. It is a very embarrising issue. The priests should have been immediately excommunicated and thrown in jail.
Your comment about AIDS and not using condoms is just stupid. It sounds like the Pope is trying to spread AIDS which is of course wrong.
According to the Catholic religion, the use of contraceptives is a sin, sex before marriage is a sin, and extramarital sex is a sin. If everyone followed all three of these rules, then there would be no spread of AIDS.

Originally Posted by kwatts59

My history of the Dark Ages is somewhat lacking.

Then try this site. I am sure they “forgot” to tell you. http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:U6WM ... .unc.edu/~

Originally Posted by kwatts59

If you cannot feel sadness over the death of a great humanitarian

Was he?

Originally Posted by kwatts59

The first Catholic Pope was Saint Peter just a mere 2000 years ago. So to say the Pope represents all these deaths is incorrect.

The first pope was not until 602 AD (or close to it}. Peter was a Christian (not a catholic). The catholic church did not exist in Peter’s time. Yes the pope does represent all those deaths. The estimates are between 50 million to 150 million . Killed at the pope’s order. Like the Waldenses, whose crime was to posses copies of the Bible. The pope claims to be God’s representative on earth and as such “infallible” while they are still digging the bones of thousands of babies out of convent basements. In one place alone it is reported that 800 babies were buried there after being born to nuns.

Originally Posted by kwatts59

Anyway, what is your answer to the question: What is the difference between the death of a king, or the death of a carpenter?

Everyone dies. It is how you live that counts.

Account given in an article at the web site http://www.ianpaisley.org/main.asp
The discoveries made by the armies of the First Napoleon on taking Karne and opening the Inquisition are well known, but the abomination was restored. The revolution at Rome in 1819 was the means of opening the Inquisition there, to the gaze of an astonished world. For the accommodation of the military it was intended to modify one of the convents, and in the course of the work human bones were found, and a trap-door discovered.
This led to excavations being made, and further discoveries of human bones. Digging deeper still the workmen lighted upon a vault, where a great number of human skeletons were found; some of them so close together and so amalgamated with lime, that no bone could be moved without being broken.
In another vault was found a vast quantity of black rich earth, mixed with pieces of decayed animal matter, and human hair of such length as to lead to the belief that it belonged to women rather than to men. From the manner in which the skeletons found in the vaults were placed, it was evident that they must have been deposited there since the erection of the edifice, which was within a period of less than twenty-four years.
The bones of such a multitude of human beings, supplies volumes touching the doings of the so-called Holy Office.
Another evidence of massive persecution is a statement made by Colonel Lehmanowsky who had served in Napoleon’s army sent to Spain under the command of Marshal Soult. This statement was included in History of the Old Albigenses, by Jean Paul Perrin with additions written in the 1840s, 1991 edition, Ages Digital Library, Book 3, pp. 311ff. Col Lehmanowsky commanded three regiments of soldiers who took part in the destruction of a secret prison of the Inquisition at Madrid, Spain in 1809. Here is a portion of the account:
From this room we proceeded to the right, and obtained access to small cells, extending the entire length of the edifice; and here such sights were presented as he hoped never to see again. Those cells were places of solitary confinement, where the wretched objects of inquisitorial hate were confined year after year, till death released them from their sufferings, and there their bodies were suffered to remain until they were entirely decayed, and the rooms had become fit for others to occupy. To prevent this being offensive to those who occupied the inquisition, there were flues or tubes extending to the open air, sufficiently capacious to carry off the odor. In these cells we found the remains of some who had paid the debt of nature; some of them had been dead apparently but a short time, while of others nothing remained but their bones, still chained to the floor of their dungeon.
In other cells, we found living sufferers of both sexes — and of every age, from three-score years and ten down to fourteen or fifteen years — all naked as when born into the world! and all in chains! Here were old men and aged women, who had been shut up for many years! Here too were the middle aged, and the young man and the maiden of fourteen years old. …
.

I got confused because you said the Dark Ages and I thought you were
referring to the period from about 1000AD before the Catholic religion even existed.

I briefly looked at the article and it looks very interesting. I will read it.
The 150 million killed sounds extrodinarily high, so I doubt that is accurate. But undoubtedly, millions have been killed. It is rather astounding to hear such large numbers of deaths from these holy wars. I am sure there are many other untold evils in the world history. It is sad that there was such treacherly back then.

Despite all the horrors of the past, Pope John Paul II does not represent this evil. I find it a waste of time to argue this.

Let me rephrase my question since I do not know if the person of which I am thinking was actually a carpenter:
What is the difference between the death of a king, or the death of a carpenter's son?

The answer depends on which carpenter's son died. The son of which I am thinking was very poor Jewish boy who was born in a stable.

Originally Posted by kwatts59

I got confused because you said the Dark Ages and I thought you were
referring to the period from about 1000AD before the Catholic religion even existed.

The Dark Ages I speak of were brought about by the Roman church.
http://www.answers.com/topic/dark-ages

Originally Posted by kwatts59

I am sure there are many other untold evils in the world history. It is sad that there was such treachery back then.

This “treachery” as you put it only began back then. Most of the killing has stopped but the misinformation spread about is still propagated by the popes, including this one.

Originally Posted by kwatts59

Despite all the horrors of the past, Pope John Paul II does not represent this evil. I find it a waste of time to argue this.

Pope John Paul II chose to be pope knowing the corruption but still acclaiming the church's “infallibility” ( meaning his belief that the church is incapable of making a mistake). He was head of the organization claiming it is innocent. That sounds responsible to me. Why would anyone join them? Perhaps after you become fully aware of their history past and present you will see the significance.

Originally Posted by kwatts59

What is the difference between the death of a king, or the death of a carpenter's son?

The answer depends on which carpenter's son died. The son of which I am thinking was very poor Jewish boy who was born in a stable.

Like I said, it depends on how you lived. If you lived defending lies. Or if you lived defending the truth.

I once saw JP2 in 30 meters or so, in 1991. He was in pope-mobile with armoured glass although. So it is a death of someone I saw with my own eyes.
After all, he was not a very bad Pope. At least he didn't support Nazis or ordered to burn witches like some others did.
On the other hand during his papacy the Catholisism became more banal, common may be, like Protestantism, with all those modern languages in churches and self-made songs. Although he didn't give permission to use condoms to his followers, it's a fact

Every sperm is sacred,
Every's sperm is good,
Every sperm is needed
in a neighbourhood.

Every sperm is sacred,
Every sperm's divine,
Every sperm is needed
Mine, and mine, and MINE!



And he continued to try and impose his autority over the other religions under the mask of "we're all the world, we're all the people".

The Pope does not advocate massive slayings.

Originally Posted by DDT

Originally Posted by kwatts59

What is the difference between the death of a king, or the death of a carpenter's son?

The answer depends on which carpenter's son died. The son of which I am thinking was very poor Jewish boy who was born in a stable.

Like I said, it depends on how you lived. If you lived defending lies. Or if you lived defending the truth.

You must have heard the story of the carpenter's son!
Are you serious DDT? Do you need more clues?
The man who had 12 followers. The man who was whipped, beaten, had nails driven into his hands.

Please tell me you heard the story and you know why His death was more important than any kings.

Oh you silly head! I know who you are taliking about. The death of the carpenters son was the most important death in history. It was the death of a King aswell as that of a carpenter. He was one who lived defending truth. I thought that it was obvious.

Every sperm is sacred
Every sperm is great
If a sperm gets wasted
God gets quite irate!

Well, I can remember one definitely good thing about the deceased: he directly opposed american aggression against Iraq.
There's a lot of not so good things, either, but... about dead people either good or nothing. RIP, John-Paul.

Originally Posted by kwatts59

Your comment about AIDS and not using condoms is just stupid. It sounds like the Pope is trying to spread AIDS which is of course wrong.
According to the Catholic religion, the use of contraceptives is a sin, sex before marriage is a sin, and extramarital sex is a sin. If everyone followed all three of these rules, then there would be no spread of AIDS.

That works in nicely in America but in Catholic areas of Africa you have married couples where one spouse is infecting the other with HIV because the Vatican says condoms are a sin.
You have organisations trying to promote safe sex in vain, because the church is telling people to ignore them.

I understand, although do not agree, on the general idea of not having sex before marriage, or the sanctity of sex. What I don't understand and abhore is the stupid backward, Catholic view on contraception and even masturbation. In reality, what guy hasn't masturbated? Their view on contraception is just dangerous in the modern world.

The Pope thought that no sex before marriage and no contraception was the way to lead a happy life. But is having testicles like plums or 12 kids really happiness?

A recent survey of American Catholics:

63% Think priests should be able to marry

75% Think that contraception should be allowed

55% Think they women priests should be allowed.

Here is a nice article on the Pope, relating to Russia

A Resounding Message for Russia
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/stories/2 ... 4/006.html


I'm starting to like that Pope.

The problem I have with him is that of the things that Taty mentioned outlawed by the pope;

Priests not marrying -- the bible says that church leaders should be the husband of "one wife". And actually warns the young church against 'forced celibacy' in I Tim 4.3!

Masturbation -- the bible says nothing.

Contraception -- the bible says nothing


Women as priests? -- That's a good question. Paul says “no” but it is hard to tell in what context. It is believed that there were women mentioned as "apostles" in the new testament, "Junai and Phoebe".
It is certain that Jesus’ acceptance and treatment of women was quite remarkable in that day. The popes idea to shut nuns up in a convent is nothing short of looney!

Saint Peter was pope from 32AD through 67AD. There is some debate on whether or not he is really the first pope.

I read the article and the calculation of deaths due to religious persecution. It says in a nutshell, the population in 1100AD was 320mil, the growth rate was 19.75%, the population at 1500AD was 425mil which is 146mil short. Subtracting 40mil deaths due to Black Death leaves over 100 million deaths due to persecution.
http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:U6WM ... .unc.edu/~

Aside from the fact that the numbers are inaccurate to begin with, the logic is just silly. You can’t just subtract two numbers and attribute the difference to persecution.

As far as abstinence, monogomy and birth control, I don't care. You can rag the Pope all you want on the sexual beliefs. That is your opinion. I just don't like it when people say things like "the Pope wants to spread AIDS because he said don't use condoms". This is just ridiculous.

As far as the pedophilic priests, maybe he did ignore it. It is a very embarrising issue. The priests should have been immediately excommunicated and thrown in jail.

Not "maybe", he was well aware of hundreds upon hundreds of paedophilic priests. So fooking what if it was a "very embarressing issue"? I'm sure the embarressment saved at the time was greatly appreciated by the victims. Really, he acted disgracefully on this issue and could have prevented millions of acts of abuse.

Originally Posted by kwatts59

Saint Peter was pope from 32AD through 67AD. There is some debate on whether or not he is really the first pope.

‘Pope” would not have been his title. He was not catholic.

Originally Posted by kwatts59

Aside from the fact that the numbers are inaccurate to begin with, the logic is just silly.

Then how many deaths (and assuredly they were in the many millions) do you find acceptable to be murdered by popes?

Originally Posted by kwatts59

As far as abstinence, monogomy and birth control, I don't care. You can rag the Pope all you want on the sexual beliefs. That is your opinion.

You should care because if your religion is spreading lies, you should step out of it.

Originally Posted by kwatts59

I just don't like it when people say things like "the Pope wants to spread AIDS because he said don't use condoms". This is just ridiculous.

I don’t think that he wanted to spread AIDS but his false doctrine caused the epidemic to become far worse. Why is anyone still catholic? Because they refuse to give up their man made traditions. Sad.