Thread: Pope is dead

Did you check under your bed? Those Swiss Guard spys might be hiding there
If you think the Catholics are everywhere then you should consider staying away from Russia. You would be terrified of the Orthodox presence on every street and every shopping center.

Your response is typical for one who has no answers. This is the response you should have given in the very first place instead of even attempting to debate seriously

This thread started when Pravitt questioned the media coverage on the pope's funeral. He was attacked for doing so, apparently because the pope is considered by so many to be "untouchable". That is when I took it upon myself to show that not only is he fallible and therefore "touchable", he deserves to be attacked.

I've been giving you educated answers for days now but you don't know/ don't comprehend Christian history and refuse to look it up. You keep insisting that your copy of only one bible translation (King James) and your personal interpretation are the only references necessary to "prove" that the Catholic Church and it's leaders are out to take over the world .

Why did the media spend so much time covering the Pope's death? Because millions of people all over the world wanted to watch it. Why did so many world leaders and their representatives show up at the funeral? Because millions of people all over the world were watching it. Why did the Vatican allow news cameras into previously forbidden places and private rituals? Because it's great PR for a business venture that is in poor health in the financial ($ losses in stocks and conversion to Euro, plus decreasing public donations)and public perception (priest child molestation scandles) arenas.

The people on this forum were recognizing JP2 for the good things he did. Discussing your own opinion of the Catholic Church's doctrine on infallibility really doesn't have anything to do with JP2 being a good man or an evil man. He did not write the doctrine, he didn't hold any ecumenical councils to rally the world to accept it, and he certainly didn't use it as an excuse or weapon within his own church to justify any of his decisions or behaviors. Your ranting against the man was an illogical personal attack that has more to do with your personal hatred of the Catholics than it has to do with any crimes committed by John Paul 2.

Originally Posted by JB

The people on this forum were recognizing JP2 for the good things he did. .

Ahem! I think a few of the people were actually recognizing the old pope for his stance on telling people in countries with an AIDS epidemic to NOT to use condoms. A rather foolish thing to proclaim because it is none of his business. I don't have a thing against catholics, as long as they keep their nose in their OWN affairs.

And exactly where is this statement by JP2 published? The Catholic Church has doctrine that it against their belief to use birth control and against their belief to have sex outside of marriage. But I have never seen or heard any statement by JP2 that people who are married and have AIDS should not use condoms or that people who are engaging in extramarital sex should not use condoms.

Originally Posted by JB

And exactly where is this statement by JP2 published? The Catholic Church has doctrine that it against their belief to use birth control and against their belief to have sex outside of marriage. But I have never seen or heard any statement by JP2 that people who are married and have AIDS should not use condoms or that people who are engaging in extramarital sex should should not use condoms.

He said no condoms, no sex outside of marriage. He didn't then say "But it's OK for married couples where one might have AIDS".

We are not saying he wanted them to get AIDS, but when you have that much respect from people, you should be very careful about your teachings. If I said don't use condoms it's OK, cos no one's gonna listen to me. That's the thing, JPII was so reluctant to make any modernisations, that by doing so he he has effectively orphaned thousands of kids.

I have been studiny the fall of communism recently at University. None of the lectures, and none of the books mention JPII. In fact the first time I heard his name mention in relation to it was when he was about to die. People were practically saying he single handedly brought down the iron curtain.

Please post your link to the site of this statement by JP2. I've been going through multiple search engines and cannot find the speech or any Vatican document that supports this claim specifically against condoms. I have found many other sites where people complain about his not changing the Catholic policy on birth control but none that quote him about condoms.

Many other faiths and denominations also teach against extramarital sex and contraceptive use but how is it that JP2 gets to carry the whole burdon of AIDS?

Also the major reason for people not using condoms is culture and education. In countries that have AIDS epidemics condoms are available but not widely used because of the culture (contraception is a woman's problem, condoms aren't for real men, somebody else gets AIDS but not me). And 2 of the countries with the biggest out of control AIDS epidemics are not even Catholic, Africa and Russia. So who are all these people who got AIDS because they followed the Pope's advice and didn't use condoms?

I was watching a news magazine on television last night. The guest was a leader of a gay organiztion and she was not very happy with JP II over the condom thing. She brought up the the very topic you just metioned Taty. Sex between married people with an HIV risk and Popey's stance on using condoms. So it is not just me and my psychotic ramblings that thinks that the pope is a dope.

So you think the Gays are not using condoms because the Pope said it was a sin?

Ah... it is nice to be silent and see people fight! But since I am in a good mood, I might as well drag my name down again!

Originally Posted by DDT

I don't have a thing against catholics, as long as they keep their nose in their OWN affairs.

Who's nose is in who's affair, DDT? Anyway, ze pope is just telling the catholics that, hey, condom is a no-no. It is pretty well his own affair, since he is the leader of the catholics and can tell his followers what to do and not to do. It's in his job description. I personally think it is pretty silly to tell this to the people who have a problem with AIDS. But then again, he is professing the church's stand on the issue, which also includes the stand that you shan't have sexual contact before marriage. And it is really THAT that is the culprit in spreading AIDS! So, if people would actually heed his advice, AIDS wouldn't be such a problem!

Hoorah! More people to join in the game! (I was starting to get bored with only DDT to play with )

Originally Posted by kalinka_vinnie

Who's nose is in who's affair, DDT?

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/americas/ ... tion.reut/

http://www.aegis.com/news/ads/1988/AD880025.html

Originally Posted by kalinka_vinnie

Anyway, ze pope is just telling the catholics that, hey, condom is a no-no. It is pretty well his own affair, since he is the leader of the catholics and can tell his followers what to do and not to do.

Looks you’re turning out to be wrong about that.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/ ... click=true

“”””””””””Here in El Salvador, church leaders in 1998 helped ban abortions even when necessary to save the life of a woman, and, much worse, helped pass a law requiring condoms to carry warnings that they do not protect against AIDS.””””””””””””

-----------------------------------------
I’d be pretty mad if my wife died because of a popes bungling!
When the catholic church pressures the government to change laws they are not just telling catholics how to live, are they? Hello?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------



It is my business you dodo. When the Vatican tries to influence the UN he is not just trying to influence catholics now ,is he?
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2000/feb/00021403.html


Apparently popey old boy even has catholics pissed at him!
http://www.catholicsforchoice.org/new/l ... nsjoin.htm
Duh! Hello! Are you beginning to see a pattern here?

Sweet collection of links!

But what does it prove?

- The catholic church does not want to hand out condoms, because they believe it is morally wrong. Every sperm is, of course, holy. That is their choice, and they are getting people angry, like a certain person in Australia. What will we do next, tell Bush he can't attack Iraq? Tell Putin he can't jail oligarchs? Or tell the church that you have to allow condoms, because, despite being against everything you stand for, it is the right thing to do.

- Catholics angry at the pope, americans angry at Bush, heck there were people angry at the beatles! No surprises there.

- Hopefully your wife will not die of AIDS, which (hopefully) she could only get from you right? (I didn't quite follow your argument, cause I didn't want to register for theage and hence couldnt read the article)

Ok, so the pope was a little stiff on the whole AIDS issue, but he is credited for the fall of communism. that's gotta count for something! (ooh... i feel the hard eyes of DDT... better cross myself)

Really? I didn't have to register for The Age to read it. But I did take and post that paragraph below the link which was from the article. The article was saying that the catholic church had been lobbying for laws concerning reproductive rights. Well my point is that it is one thing to interpret scripture to their parishers but it is quite another to effect laws that encompass the entire population of the country.

The other links were to show that this "church" not only tries to change laws in a particular country but that they have a seat in the U N in order to have their say in world politics. I find this disturbing because I don't happen to agree with catholic philosophy and neither do many of the people who are affected by Vatican lobbying.

PS I don't actually have a wife. I meant that if I did have a wife who had complications giving birth. I would do anything to make sure that she survived over a new baby if only one could survive. Her life is more important especially if she already has other children. Now I don't care if a catholic lets his wife die in that situation (well I do, but he is stupid if he does) but if the Vatican gets the law changed in this country like they did in El Salvador. The war will really be on.

Hmm... I just tried to go back to the link with The Age and now it wants me to register. Well they can bugger off!

Originally Posted by kalinka_vinnie

but he is credited for the fall of communism. that's gotta count for something! (ooh...

Didn't one of our Russian residents post a link somewhere about that today, saying that the pope had nothing to do with the fall of comunism? I know I saw it some where.


Anyway Kalinka Vinnie ol' boy if you don’t want to register for The Age (don’t blame you) here is another take on the same story. http://reproductiverights.org/rfn_99_11.html#elsalv

“”””discovered that the Catholic Church in El Salvador had been actively engaged in manipulative tactics to sway an already conservative legislature into passing the extreme laws - by busloading Catholic schoolchildren to””””

Yes the Vatican has a seat in the UN where they push for a Catholic agenda. Several Islamic countries (run by Islamic clerics) also have seats in the UN where they push an Islamic agenda. A Jewish country has a seat in the UN and pushes their agenda. Hmmm, which one doesn't have a right to be there?

America has been more of a hinderence to world contraception than the Vatican. In his suck-up to the religious right (largely made up of evangelical protestants) Bush has threatened to stop American funding and loans to countries or organizations that distribute or promote contraceptives.

And here's a big reality check for you. Abstinence is better than condoms to prevent AIDS. Condoms slip, leak and break. Some are defective and have microscopic holes in them. How do I know this? I worked for 7 years at one of the world's leading AIDS research and treatment clinics. I lost count of the numbers of people who insisted their test results were wrong because they used condoms and everybody knows condoms prevent AIDS. Are condoms better than nothing in a risky situation? Yes. But if two people are celebate before they get together and stay only with each other as sexual partners, then their risk of getting AIDS is 0%.
So the Vatican is actually telling the truth about condoms and extramaital sex.

As for a Catholic church in El Salvador sending buses of demonstrators to protest in their own country, that is a freedom of civil rights that we Americans defend and promote. You have the right to protest and lobby for what you believe in and if your country's government listens to you it is not a sin or conspiracy of your church or religion. It's called democracy. (did you think the Vatican flew little Italian kids to El Salvador to protest )

Originally Posted by JB

Yes the Vatican has a seat in the UN where they push for a Catholic agenda. Several Islamic countries (run by Islamic clerics) also have seats in the UN where they push an Islamic agenda. A Jewish country has a seat in the UN and pushes their agenda. Hmmm, which one doesn't have a right to be there?

The Vatican because the others represent a country with millions of citizens. The Vatican has a population of next to nothing. And they don't even have proper jobs. The Vatican isn't a proper country. They should turn it into a hotel.

Anyway, I don't think any of them should push a religious agenda.

As DDT's link stated, the Vatican is a sovereign state with it's own government and is recognized by the world. Their sovereignity is such that even Hitler feared crossing that white line painted on the plaza cobblestones.

Let's get it over with already. I assassinated the Pope!

Careful Pravit. We may have to actually start talking about something Russian!