What with one thing and another (and as I tried to explain here) I'm hardly the best person in the world to defend what the Pope says. But this piece of gay gobbledygook just made my head spin. Should we throw our arms up in the air with shock and horror that this 'ex-Nazi' Pope Benedict claims in his Christmas speech, to his followers, that homosexuals are a greater threat to humanity than the destruction of the rain forests?!Well yes, quite! (It goes on for quite a bit.) Except of course that obviously the Pope did no such thing. If he had said that gays do more harm to the world that the destruction of the rainforests then I'd have agreed with him. Alas, no!
Well no! It is typical behaviour of these Popes, stretching all the way back in time to the beginnings of the Christian Empire. The Christian Hall of Shame
As you will see when you study the long line of his predecessors and their morality, then it makes sense this Pope is carrying on the bad work!
But, looking at what this man says reasonably makes no sense whatsoever. He is trying to say that 'homosexuals' (a term itself made up in the 1950s as a form of pseudo segregation from the other imaginary divide, the 'blessed' 'heterosexuals), or gays pose a threat to the world? How come? Wouldn't it be better more people chose to be gay (not that you always can) so as to ease the increasing rise in world populations. But did the old fool mean that? Is it some 'evil' against 'God' he means?
The world's big problem at the moment is not a rising population but an ageing population caused by a collapse in the bithrate (caused by, amongst other things, the increase in homosexuality). This is now causing a rapid drop in Anglo-American house prices and an enormous "credit crunch" and recession, which will in turn lead to a huge number of job losses and hardship for many people.
And all because the West couldn't be fucked (literally!) to keep the system going!
UPDATE: In reply to Uncle Sidney,
1. Re: the Pope's sex life, that's not what I've heard.
2. The Pope is not a "fundie". Last time anyone checked he was a Catholic, albeit of the fairly namby-pampy Social Democrat variety.
3. Again, I just don't see where the "gaff" is. (IMHO most of these "gaffs" are deliberately intended to generate controversy and headlines anyway.)
UPDATE II: Well here's where I'm going to go all girly and say "Well, it depends what you mean by 'official' Catholicism." The Catholic Church is deeply split about some pretty fundamental questions, and no one likes to ask which side the Pope's on.
There's really good people in the faith. However they're helping folks in spite of, not because of the guys in the funny hats.
I couldn't agree more, although even I'd be cautious about writing off all the people in the funny hats.
These guys are bad news, and have as much to do with the preachings of the Carpenter as Kim Jung Ill.
Nicely put!
I guess they'll add my comments here to my upcoming time in Prugatory.
Frankly I'm not at all sure that I'll even make it that far.
Why didn't the priest thing work out? (I'm sort of interested, but don't say anything if it's embarrassing.)
His problem is he didn't get enuff sex while at seminary.
ReplyDeleteThis is seriously nuts.
'Can't say I'm surprised though. It reflects the general fundie attitude to sex, and fun in general.
Still what da hell is the old guy thinking. Doesn't he have handlers to prevent gaffS like this from leaking out?
Well I was raised a Roman Catholic. Was nearly a priest infact,...there's a long story there for another time.
ReplyDeleteAnyhow I do see official Catholicism as just another "Fundie" small "c" Christian cult.
There's really good people in the faith. However they're helping folks in spite of, not because of the guys in the funny hats.
Okay I'm totally biased here, but that's just how I feel.
These guys are bad news, and have as much to do with the preachings of the Carpenter as Kim Jung Ill.
I guess they'll add my comments here to my upcoming time in Prugatory.