Jump to content

Recommended Posts

ManoftheCloth, your parents were and are entitled to do exactly as they wish, and you are fortunate to have had such a wonderful life.


What is completely unacceptable is that streak in you, an essentially nasty (daye I say it evil) streak, that makes you want to impose it upon other people who do not agree with you.


Not only do you want to impose it upon people, to control them, to enslave them to your opinions, but you do this with threats and menaces, by undermining their confidence and attempting to disenfranchise them from society. Your persistent use of the term 'sin' is a reflection of your own desire to perpetuate this abuse.


The weapons that the church uses to control innocent people are far worse than any dreamed up by engineers, in that they represent a lifetime's psychological bullying and torture.


The pathetic pricks who wrote the article for Business Insider are ridiculous in their claim that contraception has created a moral decline in society that has made women objects for men.


The 'moral 1950s' that they hark back to was a period where JFK could rape a 19 year old intern in the White House without redress, a crime orchestrated by his colleagues. Where women knew their place and it was subordinate to men.


These views still find their place in the catholic church, an institution that believes the rape and buggery of small children is only a minor transgression worthy of turning a blind eye.


Your views are abhorrent.

Brendan Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Catholics don?t really practice any of the stuff

> the church says anyway. Particularly the no birth

> control thing. We just don?t mention it when the

> priest is around. Just like you don?t tell your

> granny when you?ve been smoking crack. It?s a bit

> like all that believing in god business.


I was brought up a Catholic and know from what my mum said that our local priest told women their choice of contraception was between them and their conscience, he definitely didn't impose the official view on them. I was schooled in Catholic institutions in the 70s/80s and I'm not convinced the average family size was any bigger than the "2.4" stereotype.


In any case, sticking to the "no artificial contraception/vatican roulette/avoiding sex during your fertile period" method doesn't have to mean tons of kids if you do it properly. My mum claims to have stuck to it, and I have just one sister. It does require a particularly co-operative husband of course, I certainly wouldn't do it - but then it's been 20 plus years since I told mum I wouldn't be going to church anymore.


She did tell me the devil was going to come and get me, but he's certainly taking his time over it.

ManOfTheCloth, are you for real, or just another hoax poster?


How can anybody seriously preach to people that by protecting themselves and their families, they are committing a "sin", and that they are "damaging" themselves? And the evidence for this - an imaginative interpretation of ancient mythology. It would be laughable if it wasn't so utterly disgusting.


Why is modern society tolerant of this nonsense?

He's just true to his dogma.

Catholic orthodoxy has it that sin damages our souls our society and the very fabric of reality.

catechism 1849[/url]]It wounds the nature of man and injures human solidarity


They always play the long game, today it's contraception in the US healthcare system, tomorrow we're all back in monastaries praying for souls and flagellating our sins away.


It's completely bonkers frankly. And that tone


"98% of Catholic women would be wrong then; they would be committing grave sin. Sorry but that is the long and short of it. Your sins will be forgiven though of course but why continue to damage ourselves and others in this way anymore?"


So utterly repellent and smacking of fanatcism as holders of 'the truth' always do. No better than a muslim demagogue predicting divine retribution on the infidels for their ungodly ways.

Medievalism at its worst.


Man of Cut from the Same Cloth I reckon!

In fact I do find the whole thing confusing, even inconsistent (imagine that!!).


We cannot receive the grace of god without admitting our sins, which presumably means we have to commit sin else there's nothing to admit to.


"God created us without us: but he did not will to save us without us."To receive his mercy, we must admit our faults. "If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness."


"God has consigned all men to disobedience, that he may have mercy upon all"


So it's a rigged game, there is no choice but to damage our fabric, and God (and his representatives of course!!) are the only path to salvation.


Jeez, does this thread end in a discount sale of indulgences by any chance?


Oh and in case anyone is in any doubt how bad use of a condom is, it's one of the mortal ones!

Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity and the privation of sanctifying grace, that is, of the state of grace. If it is not redeemed by repentance and God's forgiveness, it causes exclusion from Christ's kingdom and the eternal death of hell, for our freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back. However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.


It's like the enlightenment never happened, forgive me (pardon the pun) if I think that 'casting a living light' is achieved by battling the spread of ignorance and superstition based upon medieval values, through the use of reason; not granted by a venal, paedophilic, abusive and power hungry organisation that has poisoned society for far too long.


But as we can see they just can't stop themselves can they.

El Pibe Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> tomorrow we're all back in monastaries praying for

> souls and flagellating our sins away.


Can?t see it myself. In our liberal society and free market the church no longer monopolises the market for places to indulge in flagellation in an all male environment.


Although you should really save that sort of thing for Friday.

El Pibe Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> We cannot receive the grace of god without

> admitting our sins, which presumably means we have

> to commit sin else there's nothing to admit to.


Fear not, God has thought of everything - you're still covered by Original Sin. Hallelujah!

and it's this "but why continue to damage ourselves and others in this way anymore" that really sticks in the craw.

Some african countries have 25% of children or more orphaned with AIDS death rates are so high, and they claim contraception injures man?

Staggering hypocrisy!!!!!

woot


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/21/health/policy/growth-of-catholic-hospitals-may-limit-access-to-reproductive-care.html?src=me&ref=general


the sinister peadolphilic proto fascist tentacles of the catholic church seek new victims to assuage their own guilt and mysogony.


vile fuckers

El Pibe Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> In fact I do find the whole thing confusing, even

> inconsistent (imagine that!!).

>

> We cannot receive the grace of god without

> admitting our sins, which presumably means we have

> to commit sin else there's nothing to admit to.

>

> "God created us without us: but he did not will

> to save us without us."To receive his mercy, we

> must admit our faults. "If we say we have no sin,

> we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

> If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just,

> and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all

> unrighteousness."

>

> "God has consigned all men to disobedience, that

> he may have mercy upon all"

>

> So it's a rigged game, there is no choice but to

> damage our fabric, and God (and his

> representatives of course!!) are the only path to

> salvation.

>

> Jeez, does this thread end in a discount sale of

> indulgences by any chance?

>

> Oh and in case anyone is in any doubt how bad use

> of a condom is, it's one of the mortal ones!

> Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human

> freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss

> of charity and the privation of sanctifying grace,

> that is, of the state of grace. If it is not

> redeemed by repentance and God's forgiveness, it

> causes exclusion from Christ's kingdom and the

> eternal death of hell, for our freedom has the

> power to make choices for ever, with no turning

> back. However, although we can judge that an act

> is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust

> judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of

> God.

>

> It's like the enlightenment never happened,

> forgive me (pardon the pun) if I think that

> 'casting a living light' is achieved by battling

> the spread of ignorance and superstition based

> upon medieval values, through the use of reason;

> not granted by a venal, paedophilic, abusive and

> power hungry organisation that has poisoned

> society for far too long.

>

> But as we can see they just can't stop themselves

> can they.



The Cathilic church - a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma, smeared with the blood and fears of its enslaved fearful adherents.never forget the Lateran pact & reichskoncordat.

Intersting reading woodrot.


So in fact Obama 'war' is actually an attempt to defend the US constitution and bill of rights and an individual's rights enshrined therein against a catholic funded campaign to limit them.


Somewhat reminiscent of Republicans bleating about the need to curtail Iranian expansionism when the country is almost entirely surrounded by US allies and airbases. I think the word is 'propaganda'.


Nice try MotC.

I love this quote:


?That is a constant challenge,? said Sister Carol Keehan, president of the Catholic Health Association of the United States, which represents the nation?s roughly 600 Catholic hospitals. ?It?s a challenge we take very seriously.?


Being a Catholic hospital means adhering to the church?s religious directives about care, Sister Carol said, but she says hospitals also see their mission much more broadly, including caring for those who are less fortunate and treating patients with respect.


Because at its heart she knows that Catholicism has nothing to do with respect. In order to achieve respect for other people its necessary to treat those directives more broadly. ;-)

A couple of years ago the Pope sent an emissary to Africa to tell them that 1) condoms do not prevent the spread of the HIV and 2) promoting the use of condoms was the West's way of trying to control the population in Africa.

This is the 21st Century ffs.

Since thousands of Mexicans (mostly Catholic) try to get into the US all the time Obama has a vested interest in promoting the use of contraception any which way. '...man thinks things divine because he does not understand them....' so said a Greek philosopher of BC. This still suits the church today and thousands are kept in ignorance!

indiepanda Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> In any case, sticking to the "no artificial

> contraception/vatican roulette/avoiding sex during

> your fertile period" method doesn't have to mean

> tons of kids if you do it properly.


While it's true that properly practiced, the rhythm method for abstaining from intercourse during a woman's fertile period does prevent pregnancies, it is also true that it prevents a woman from having sex during the time her libido is most active. Therefore this demands that a woman abstain from sex during the time that she would most enjoy it. Smacks of mysogyny to me.

I'm not sure that the Catholic Church actually hates women, so much as it is entirely indifferent to the needs of a second class human being. It would far prefer that you knew your place.


It never occured to me that the rhythmn method had that particular side effect, which is rather shameful in retrospect.

Saffron Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> indiepanda Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > In any case, sticking to the "no artificial

> > contraception/vatican roulette/avoiding sex

> during

> > your fertile period" method doesn't have to

> mean

> > tons of kids if you do it properly.

>

> While it's true that properly practiced, the

> rhythm method for abstaining from intercourse

> during a woman's fertile period does prevent

> pregnancies, it is also true that it prevents a

> woman from having sex during the time her libido

> is most active. Therefore this demands that a

> woman abstain from sex during the time that she

> would most enjoy it. Smacks of mysogyny to me.


Trust me, I wouldn't practice it myself - and I don't like an awful lot of what the Catholic church stands for, hence I am lapsed and haven't been to church for another than weddings for over 20 years. Come to that, I think most religions see women in a second class role, which is one of my many objections to them.

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'm not sure that the Catholic Church actually

> hates women, so much as it is entirely indifferent

> to the needs of a second class human being. It

> would far prefer that you knew your place.

>

> It never occured to me that the rhythmn method had

> that particular side effect, which is rather

> shameful in retrospect.


The Catholic Church venerates women. or at least one woman in paricular - a Christian cult that seems to home in on the untouchable Virgin bride rather than Christ himself.Its easier to place the untouchable on a pedestal - remember jesus lived his life as an ordinary man during his wilderness years and probabaly got up to all kinds of macho stupidity - Mary was pure to the very end.


Not surprising that real world women come a distant second when comapred to Mary, especially when its celibate men who are making the rules & in all likelyhood are unable to cope with the realpolitik of relationships with women.


Theres sub Reichian theme going on here - just like the the teenager who plasters his walls with airbrushed pin ups and then have to come to terms with the reality of actual live women. Sometimes they cannot bridge the gap between mythical and real.expthe expectations can fall far short.How can any catholic priest view the women in his flock as anything less than second choice?


awful bunch of hateful shitters.


read Hitchens on Mother Teresa to get a feel for this lot of charlatans and snake oil peddlers

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I'm certainly not surly - it's Friday, so I'm in a delightful mood.  As Earl Aelfheah said, the money has to come from somewhere. But Labour new that hiking fuel as well as employee NIC in would be a step too far - for businesses and consumers. It was the right decision for this moment in time. Suggesting that someone who's against fuel duty increase on this occasion is against and fuel duty full stop is quite a leap. Why do you demonise everyone who doesn't think that owning a car is a cardinal sin?  I'm not sure using Clarkson as an example of your average farmer holds much weight as an argument, but you know that already, Mal. 
    • Hope it's making others smile too! I don't know the background or how long it's been there 😊
    • If you are against the increase in fuel duty then you are surly against fuel duty full stop.  It has not kept up with inflation, I'm talking about getting it back on track.  Ultimately road user charging is the solution. Labour will probably compromise on agricultural land inheritance by raising the cap so it generally catches the Clarksons of the world who are not bothered about profits from land beyond, in his case, income from a highly successful TV series and the great publicity for the farm shop and pub
    • Were things much simpler in the 80/90s? I remember both my girls belonging to a 6th Form Consortium which covered Sydenham Girls, Forest Hill Boys and Sedgehill off Bromley Road. A level classes were spread across the 3 schools - i remember Forest Hill boys coming to Sydenham Girls for one subject (think it was sociology or psychology ) A mini bus was provided to transport pupils to different sites, But I guess with less schools being 'managed' by the local authority, providers such as Harris etc have different priorities. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...