# Pope Benedict making friends ...



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

https://today.reuters.com/news/arti...TRIA-POPE-ABORTION.xml&src=rss&rpc=22&sp=true

"It was in Europe that the notion of human rights was first formulated. The fundamental human right, the presupposition of every other right, is the right to life itself," he said in an address at the former imperial Hofburg Palace.

"This is true of life from the moment of conception until its natural end. Abortion, consequently, cannot be a human right -- it is the very opposite. It is a deep wound in society."


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Ksinc,

I am confused by the title of the thread. Are you surprised that the Pope would be against abortion? Will you be surprised that almost no one in Europe will listen to him?

European opposition to capital punishment is admirable but the almost total acceptance of abortion in Europe is deplorable.

Karl


----------



## vwguy (Jul 23, 2004)

Karl89 said:


> Ksinc,
> 
> I am confused by the title of the thread.


As am I. It's not like the Pope's postions on any matter are a surprise to anyone.

Brian


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

ksinc said:


> https://today.reuters.com/news/arti...TRIA-POPE-ABORTION.xml&src=rss&rpc=22&sp=true
> 
> "It was in Europe that the notion of human rights was first formulated. The fundamental human right, the presupposition of every other right, is the right to life itself," he said in an address at the former imperial Hofburg Palace.
> 
> "This is true of life from the moment of conception until its natural end. Abortion, consequently, cannot be a human right -- it is the very opposite. It is a deep wound in society."


Typical Ratzinger: misguided and evil conclusions based on subjective and incorrect assumptions. I wonder if he said a word about the fundamental right of women to control their own reproductive systems. Probably not.

As for the "moment of conception" nonsense, is sperm any less human than a fertilized egg? "Consequently", is maturbation, oral sex etc also violations of the fundamental human right to life?

This is a very slippery slope. Next thing you know we'll all be living in a "Christian" version of Iran.

As for Ratzinger, he's been causing deep wounds in society for the last 40+ years, and he's not interested in repairing any of them. Genuine evil.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

FrankDC said:


> Typical Ratzinger: misguided and evil conclusions based on subjective and incorrect assumptions. I wonder if he said a word about the fundamental right of women to control their own reproductive systems. Probably not.
> 
> As for the "moment of conception" nonsense, is sperm any less human than a fertilized egg? "Consequently", is maturbation, oral sex etc also violations of the fundamental human right to life?
> 
> ...


I hope that answers Karl89's and VWguy's post.

Clearly, I do not agree with _Fraud_, but I knew that's how he would feel/react.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

I am niether an apologist or defender of Pope Benedict or Roman Catholicism; their past or present deeds. I do find it supremely ironic this declaration is subject to posting on the same day bin laden bravely sends a communicae from whatever rathole he's hiding in. To practice a particular expression of religosity, one usually doesn't sit down with Priest and Lawyer and negotiate which sections of the doctrines will be observed. Sadly, modern Europe and secular humanism have done exactly that to the point of losing a cultural strength and self history. The last time I talked to a Catholic priest was at my church's Greek Festival. The bulges under his cassock were from lots of food, not explosives.


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

Kav said:


> I am niether an apologist or defender of Pope Benedict or Roman Catholicism; their past or present deeds. I do find it supremely ironic this declaration is subject to posting on the same day bin laden bravely sends a communicae from whatever rathole he's hiding in. To practice a particular expression of religosity, one usually doesn't sit down with Priest and Lawyer and negotiate which sections of the doctrines will be observed. Sadly, modern Europe and secular humanism have done exactly that to the point of losing a cultural strength and self history.


Every major Christian religion is a subset of selective beliefs and observations. If it were otherwise, we'd be seeing "defense of marriage" movements focused on reducing 50+% divorce rates instead of trying to prevent a relative handful of same-sex marriages.


----------



## The Gabba Goul (Feb 11, 2005)

FrankDC said:


> Typical Ratzinger: misguided and evil conclusions based on subjective and incorrect assumptions. I wonder if he said a word about the fundamental right of women to control their own reproductive systems. Probably not.
> 
> As for the "moment of conception" nonsense, is sperm any less human than a fertilized egg? "Consequently", is maturbation, oral sex etc also violations of the fundamental human right to life?
> 
> ...


Oh but those poor muslim extremeists that we're always picking on are so much better right??? Dude you're such an idiot, I seriously wish I could just reach into my computer monitor and smack you sometimes...


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

The Gabba Goul said:


> Oh but those poor muslim extremeists that we're always picking on are so much better right??? Dude you're such an idiot, I seriously wish I could just reach into my computer monitor and smack you sometimes...


Quick someone call Apple - they could call that the i-fraud. LOL


----------



## vwguy (Jul 23, 2004)

FrankDC said:


> Typical Ratzinger: misguided and evil conclusions based on subjective and incorrect assumptions. I wonder if he said a word about the fundamental right of women to control their own reproductive systems. Probably not.
> 
> As for the "moment of conception" nonsense, is sperm any less human than a fertilized egg? "Consequently", is maturbation, oral sex etc also violations of the fundamental human right to life?
> 
> ...


Wow, I don't even know where to start w/ you...

Brian


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

I believe, I hope you intended to say every major Christian sect or branch. There is only one christian religion. The christian world set forth one creed, the Nicene in the first two ecumenical councils in the 4th century. The great schism between East and West and later Protestant reaction to Roman Catholic have not substantialy altered said declaration. Like it or not, the Pope is correct in the christian foundation for much of european and western genius and culture. Like it or not, It does help knowing who we are,or at least were, especially since a 6'6 cripple hiding out in Pakistan thinks he does, and wishes us harm for it.


----------



## The Gabba Goul (Feb 11, 2005)

ksinc said:


> Quick someone call Apple - they could call that the i-fraud. LOL


nah...call it the iSmackpunks for fun...seriously...for these anti-Catholic comments his @ss should be banned...you know damn good and well that if he made disparaging comments to that effect about some other religion, it'd be considered a hate crime...why are Catholics the only religion left that it's okay to talk $hit about???

In fact, this is so over the line that I'm suggesting that he get the bounce, and I urge all the other proud Catholics on these fora to do the same...


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

That's not true, he bashed Mormons too.


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

The Gabba Goul said:


> nah...call it the iSmackpunks for fun...seriously...for these anti-Catholic comments his @ss should be banned...you know damn good and well that if he made disparaging comments to that effect about some other religion, it'd be considered a hate crime...why are Catholics the only religion left that it's okay to talk $hit about???
> 
> In fact, this is so over the line that I'm suggesting that he get the bounce, and I urge all the other proud Catholics on these fora to do the same...


First you violate forum rules by posting personal insults, then you turn around and claim *I* should get bounced for expressing my opinion (one which I've held for the last 30+ years) that Joseph Ratzinger is evil and hypocrisy personified. Amazing.

You have no clue about my history (I was born and raised in the RCC), my past correspondence with Mr. Ratzinger (which again spans 30+ years), or the fact I am not attacking and have never attacked the religion itself (e.g. I've had nothing but praise in this forum for the last Pope). However the current Pope has been spewing the same hatred, arrogance, homophobia etc for as long as I can remember. Both men had similar viewpoints on abortion, homosexuality etc, but while PJPII's approach toward these issues was IMO authentically Christian, Ratzinger's IMO is the exact opposite.


----------



## The Gabba Goul (Feb 11, 2005)

FrankDC said:


> First you violate forum rules by posting personal insults, then you turn around and claim *I* should get bounced for expressing my opinion (one which I've held for the last 30+ years) that Joseph Ratzinger is evil and hypocrisy personified. Amazing.


First you spew anti-Catholic garbage, if you'd have said something about any other religous/ethnic group you's have been drawn and quartered, and you know it as well as I do, your comments were cowardly and hateful...and for that, yes, you should be bounced...



> You have no clue about my history


...don't care...



> or the fact I am not attacking and have never attacked the religion itself


Explain to me how calling the supreme pontiff "evil" is not attacking everything that the Catholic church stands for??? He sets the tune...He is our leader...



> However the current Pope has been spewing the same hatred, arrogance,


examples??? oh that's right, you don't have any, and don't bother pulling some obscure thing from 40 years ago out, because I'm not even going to dignify your idiotic ramblings, try as you might to justify them...seems to me that the only hateful and arrogant person here is you...



> Both men had similar viewpoints on abortion, homosexuality etc, but while PJPII's approach toward these issues was IMO authentically Christian, Ratzinger's IMO is the exact opposite.


Ummmmm...I'm quite sure that they both took a pretty hard-line stance against these things...and I'm pretty sure that there might have been, oh, I dunno...a few Popes before the two most recent who also shared these views...

go read a book...educate yourself...


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

The Gabba Goul said:


> First you spew anti-Catholic garbage, if you'd have said something about any other religous/ethnic group you's have been drawn and quartered, and you know it as well as I do, your comments were cowardly and hateful...and for that, yes, you should be bounced...


Hateful? Definitely. As for cowardly, if you and I were in the same room, my opinion about Ratzinger wouldn't magically change one iota. And if you took my opinion about him as some kind of personal affront to you, it's entirely your problem not mine.

The terms of use for this forum do not include restrictions on posting opinions about religious or political leaders. They do, however, prohibit personal attacks on fellow AAAC members.


----------



## The Gabba Goul (Feb 11, 2005)

FrankDC said:


> Hateful? Definitely. As for cowardly, if you and I were in the same room, my opinion about Ratzinger wouldn't magically change one iota. And if you took my opinion about him as some kind of personal affront to you, it's entirely your problem not mine.


If you and I were in the same room, it'd take all of my strength to keep from popping you for spewing anti-Catholic garbage...The sad part is...I think you probably actually believe your own BS...

enjoy your Kool-Aid...and don't take any wooden nickels son...


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

FrankDC said:


> Every major Christian religion is a subset of selective beliefs and observations. * If it were otherwise, we'd be seeing "defense of marriage" movements *focused on reducing 50+% divorce rates instead of trying to prevent a relative handful of same-sex marriages.


I have rarely seen such a level of perseveration in absence of some kind of mental diagnosis. Between fixation on Dubya and the DoM Act, I think Frank wants to marry Bush. It really is the only thing that makes sense at this point.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

Do you really think George is his type?


----------



## The Gabba Goul (Feb 11, 2005)

Wayfarer said:


> I have rarely seen such a level of perseveration in absence of some kind of mental diagnosis. Between fixation on Dubya and the DoM Act, I think Frank wants to marry Bush. It really is the only thing that makes sense at this point.


well it all makes sense now...of course he doesnt like the Catholics...they won't let him marry his boyfriend in a Catholic Church...

lol...seriously though...that dude is obsessed...


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

The Gabba Goul said:


> well it all makes sense now...of course he doesnt like the Catholics...they won't let him marry his boyfriend in a Catholic Church...
> 
> lol...seriously though...that dude is obsessed...


Sorry, I just made the mistake of falling for another of ksinc's pathetic trolls. It won't happen again.

ksinc: PLONK


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

FrankDC said:


> Sorry, I just made the mistake of falling for another of ksinc's pathetic trolls. It won't happen again.
> 
> ksinc: PLONK


So by mentioning the Pope talk about abortion, ksinc knew you would twist it into a rant on gay marriage? Damn, he's good! Scary genius good.


----------



## The Gabba Goul (Feb 11, 2005)

aaaaw wait Frank...don't go...here I got something to make your tiny brain explode...


----------



## The Gabba Goul (Feb 11, 2005)

Wayfarer said:


> So by mentioning the Pope talk about abortion, ksinc knew you would twist it into a rant on gay marriage? Damn, he's good! Scary genius good.


well...I mean...c'mon...it's a safe bet that Frank is going to turn whatever anybody posts into an anti conservative tyrade...hell, you could post about rootbeer or some $hit like that, and he'd start popping off about how GWB is evil and how all Republicans are ignorant...he's like the love child of Michael Moore and Bill Maher...

this guy is in serious need of either counseling or medication...

...or both???


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

Thanks Gabba, but I'm not playing anymore. I'll let y'all worry about your hiatal hernias, and matching your socks to your pants.

Although if Jesus does wind up returning to Earth in the next year or so, that photo serves as the perfect explanation of his timing.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

I suppose our order of business should be to forgive FranckDC for any injuries real or imagined. As Christians, observers of Festivus or even agnostics and athiests with a personal code it is the correct response. And make no mistake we are assuming any moral high ground in doing so. But, the problem here, the problem in all of our reactions to Frank is defining any ground at all. We all know your litany of grievances and antagonisms. We all have our own. But in trying to understand why, and seeking rational explanations instead of soundbite flashes a la' Triumph of the Will theatrics we are left ignobly ignorant of his angst. Who loses, Frank or us?


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

Kav said:


> I suppose our order of business should be to forgive FranckDC for any injuries real or imagined. As Christians, observers of Festivus or even agnostics and athiests with a personal code it is the correct response. And make no mistake we are assuming any moral high ground in doing so. But, the problem here, the problem in all of our reactions to Frank is defining any ground at all. We all know your litany of grievances and antagonisms. We all have our own. But in trying to understand why, and seeking rational explanations instead of soundbite flashes a la' Triumph of the Will theatrics we are left ignobly ignorant of his angst. Who loses, Frank or us?


You forgive me? For having an opinion on a ex-Hitler Youth anti-Pope?

To the contrary, I forgive the personal insults that were hurled my way in this thread. In fact I've come to expect them, as AAR#1 goes consistently unenforced.


----------



## medwards (Feb 6, 2005)

*AAR#1*

_1. No flames. Keep all debates clean and civil. This is a gentleman's (and ladies) Forum. Everyone is expected to behave accordingly. What constitutes flaming and incivility should be clear to all: no name-calling, ad hominem attacks, slurs, swearing, or personal insults. Individual instances of flaming and/or incivility will be judged by the moderators. _


----------



## Albert (Feb 15, 2006)

Karl89 said:


> European opposition to capital punishment is admirable but the almost total acceptance of abortion in Europe is deplorable.


Very well stated, Karl.

(Although I do not entirely agree regarding the capital punishment part, but that's for another discussion...)


----------



## Albert (Feb 15, 2006)

FrankDC said:


> I wonder if he said a word about the fundamental right of women to control their own reproductive systems. Probably not.


Master of differentiated statements, huh?



> As for Ratzinger, he's been causing deep wounds in society for the last 40+ years, and he's not interested in repairing any of them. Genuine evil.


FrankDC,

Well done. This is the most uninformed, cultureless and outright stupid statement that I have ever read on this message board. During my time in the States, I have fortunately not met a single person of your "format" - if I had, I might be rooting for Osama by now.

A.


----------



## Albert (Feb 15, 2006)

The Gabba Goul said:


> nah...call it the iSmackpunks for fun...seriously...for these anti-Catholic comments his @ss should be banned...you know damn good and well that if he made disparaging comments to that effect about some other religion, it'd be considered a hate crime...why are Catholics the only religion left that it's okay to talk $hit about???
> 
> In fact, this is so over the line that I'm suggesting that he get the bounce, and I urge all the other proud Catholics on these fora to do the same...


+1

Well stated.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

DC, tendering forgiveness is as much a selfish act and self reflection of injury given consciously or unconsciously. Catholicism has a history of good and bad. And like Karl's recent post about the czechs anybody can find fault with anybody else or any institution. Why, today I was so perturbed by Bin laden's exhortation to convert I felt unworthy of communion. Oh the unchristian thoughts that invaded my soul right there during liturgy. I'm staring at the Ikon of Saint George spearing the dragon, only being a greek church the dragon was a persian or maybe a turk. And I'm thinking about riding my quarterhorse mano a mano against him on some knotheaded arab and doing a stockhorse slide as that goofball, dishnosed stallion catches the scent of my mare in season and tosses osama right before the argentine cavalry lance I found at a garage sale and walked home with, getting stopped by the police trying to figure out if it was a weapon (weapon? of course it's a weapon. But it's virtually useless until I get my horse officer, and they let me continue.) And then this greek lady talked angrily about some document the Pope published dissing Orthodoxy and I almost mentioned your reference to the Hitler Jungen. But Frank, I really don't know the man's full history. And at 70 something We could have white smoke coming from the Vatican simultaneously with the DNC chossing Hilary. So, illuminate us about the german guy, save me time for other pursuits. Did he dalley with a fraulein at an oktoberfest? Inquiring minds want to know.


----------



## The Gabba Goul (Feb 11, 2005)

Albert said:


> +1
> 
> Well stated.


Thank you...I'm glad I'm not the only one who was sickened by this guy's hatred and venom...


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

Kav said:


> DC, tendering forgiveness is as much a selfish act and self reflection of injury given consciously or unconsciously. Catholicism has a history of good and bad. And like Karl's recent post about the czechs anybody can find fault with anybody else or any institution. Why, today I was so perturbed by Bin laden's exhortation to convert I felt unworthy of communion. Oh the unchristian thoughts that invaded my soul right there during liturgy. I'm staring at the Ikon of Saint George spearing the dragon, only being a greek church the dragon was a persian or maybe a turk. And I'm thinking about riding my quarterhorse mano a mano against him on some knotheaded arab and doing a stockhorse slide as that goofball, dishnosed stallion catches the scent of my mare in season and tosses osama right before the argentine cavalry lance I found at a garage sale and walked home with, getting stopped by the police trying to figure out if it was a weapon (weapon? of course it's a weapon. But it's virtually useless until I get my horse officer, and they let me continue.) And then this greek lady talked angrily about some document the Pope published dissing Orthodoxy and I almost mentioned your reference to the Hitler Jungen. But Frank, I really don't know the man's full history. And at 70 something We could have white smoke coming from the Vatican simultaneously with the DNC chossing Hilary. So, illuminate us about the german guy, save me time for other pursuits. Did he dalley with a fraulein at an oktoberfest? Inquiring minds want to know.


In my view, a dalley with a fraulein is forgivable. Pawning yourself off as the representative of Jesus Christ on Earth, while telling women they should follow the "roles inscribed in their biology", telling gay people they're "objectively disordered" and that physical violence against them "should be expected", telling a billion Muslims their religion is "only evil and inhuman", and tearing society apart in a dozen other ways... Maybe God will forgive Ratzinger, personally I can't.

Etc.


----------



## The Gabba Goul (Feb 11, 2005)

uuugh...Jeez...and here I thought you were done posting because you were being "baited" or whatever...like anybody gives a rat's @ss what you think...

Anyway...as usual your argument is the equivalent of bringing a knife to a gunfight...



FrankDC said:


> In my view, a dalley with a fraulein is forgivable. Pawning yourself off as the representative of Jesus Christ on Earth, while telling women they should follow the "roles inscribed in their biology",


hmmmm...I'm pretty sure that in the eyes of the church this is, indeed considered murder...I'm not going to get into the whole "when does life begin?" BS...because, I'm not really sure where I stand on the issue...but...at least the church (and the Pope) know where they stand, just because it isnt where you stand doesnt necessarily make them wrong...If he got up there and said that all murderers are wretched people, would you still call him evil???



> telling gay people they're "objectively disordered" and that physical violence against them "should be expected",


Ummm...ever hear of Sodom and Gomorrah? Or do you only feel it's your job to criticize the Bible rather than familiarize yourself with it's stories??? Once again, perhaps this is all alleghory, and I'm certainly not saying that gays should be punished for being gay, but, if you know the story, you can understand a bit better where he's comming from...it kind of is his job to spread the message of the Bible, y'know what with it being the word of God and all...



> telling a billion Muslims their religion is "only evil and inhuman", and tearing society apart in a dozen other ways...


Oh but when the muslims call for the destruction of Israel and all of us other western thinking "infadels" who enjoy the freedom to walk into a starbucks and not worry about some dickhead blowing the joint up in the name of..._you guessed it_...their religion...well that's just peachy huh???



> Maybe God will forgive Ratzinger, personally I can't.
> .


I'm sure he'll survive...

Now beat it kid you bother me...


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

The Gabba Goul said:


> hmmmm...I'm pretty sure that in the eyes of the church this is, indeed considered murder...I'm not going to get into the whole "when does life begin?" BS...because, I'm not really sure where I stand on the issue


Yes, by all means please spare us. Or at least read the referenced Time article, where you'll discover Ratzinger's quote about woman had absolutely nothing to do with abortion. In straight talk he's telling women they belong at home baking cookies and raising children, and if they do anything else with their lives (such as have a career), Ratzinger claims they're "rebelling against their full potential."



The Gabba Goul said:


> Ummm...ever hear of Sodom and Gomorrah? Or do you only feel it's your job to criticize the Bible rather than familiarize yourself with it's stories??? Once again, perhaps this is all alleghory, and I'm certainly not saying that gays should be punished for being gay, but, if you know the story, you can understand a bit better where he's comming from...it kind of is his job to spread the message of the Bible, y'know what with it being the word of God and all...


Jesus said nothing about homosexuality, and as for the other Biblical texts, Ratzinger -- like all good fake Christians -- selects them to accomodate his own homophobia and bigotries. By now, the fact that gay people were stoned to death, burned in oil, lynched etc for 3500 years in Judeo-Christian "tradition" is understood to be obscene genocide based on abysmal ignorance. If that's where Ratzinger is "comming from", he needs to be sent back.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

Understood by everyone??

Our pastors teach us to love the sinner, but hate the sin. (I'm Missouri Synod Lutheran.) Sex outside of marriage for anyone is a sin. Homosexual orientation is not.


----------



## JRR (Feb 11, 2006)

forsbergacct2000 said:


> Understood by everyone??
> 
> Our pastors teach us to love the sin, but hate the sinner. (I'm Missouri Synod Lutheran.) Sex outside of marriage for anyone is a sin. Homosexual orientation is not.


"love the sinner, hate the sin" is the usual mantra in mainline Protestestism. Grew up United Methodist.


----------



## Albert (Feb 15, 2006)

FrankDC said:


> In my view, a dalley with a fraulein is forgivable. Pawning yourself off as the representative of Jesus Christ on Earth, while telling women they should follow the "roles inscribed in their biology", telling gay people they're "objectively disordered" and that physical violence against them "should be expected", telling a billion Muslims their religion is "only evil and inhuman", and tearing society apart in a dozen other ways... Maybe God will forgive Ratzinger, personally I can't.
> 
> Etc.


FrankDC,

I cannot find the "quotations" you used in the linked articles; neither have I heard of them. The quote about islam was a medieval citation he used to introduce a dialectic sermon (this might be slightly beyond you). His appeal to women is, as I understood it, _not_ to serve as housewives under any circumstances, but to respect the ones that _choose_ to serve as housewive.

In fact, your post above seems to be a concoction of untruths, semi-truths and embellishments. That's what you are: a cowardly forger who has to invent his own little reality in order to appear morally superior.

A.


----------



## Albert (Feb 15, 2006)

JRR said:


> "love the sinner, hate the sin" is the usual mantra in mainline Protestestism. Grew up United Methodist.


Quite right. Looks to me like a typo in the OP.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

I have edited my post. I apologize for the error. Love the sinner; hate the sin is correct.


----------



## Phinn (Apr 18, 2006)

Maybe Frank's quoting from his imagination.


----------



## Albert (Feb 15, 2006)

Phinn said:


> Maybe Frank's quoting from his imagination.


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Gents,

Funny how FrankDC never has any "good words" for Benedict or anyone else associated with Western Civilization. 

Karl


----------



## TMMKC (Aug 2, 2007)

Karl89 said:


> Gents,
> 
> Funny how FrankDC never has any "good words" for Benedict or anyone else associated with Western Civilization.
> 
> Karl


He did give me some good advice on a watch once. Good thread, gents. Enjoying the view. Far better than _Hardball_.

BTW...I started igorning what the pope says many years ago. But, then again, I'm a (ELCA) Lutheran.


----------



## Rocker (Oct 29, 2004)

FrankDC said:


> In my view, a dalley with a fraulein is forgivable. Pawning yourself off as the representative of Jesus Christ on Earth, while telling women they should follow the "roles inscribed in their biology", telling gay people they're "objectively disordered" and that physical violence against them "should be expected", telling a billion Muslims their religion is "only evil and inhuman", and tearing society apart in a dozen other ways... Maybe God will forgive Ratzinger, personally I can't.
> 
> Etc.


Um, I think the "objectively disordered" language comes from the Catechism of the Church - you know the one approved by your good buddy JP II - Benedict didn't just pull that language out of his biretta.

In any case, neither he nor the catechism has stated that "gay people [are] 'objectively disordered,'" the teaching of the Church is that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered." (Catechism Section 2357) and that the "[homosexual] inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them [i.e., homosexuals] a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity." (Catechism Section 2358). In short it says nothing about "gay people" simply homosexual acts and inclination. It's also worth noting that the Church considers masturbation to be gravely disordered (Catechism Section 2352). The church teaches all sexual activity that is not between a man and a woman and that is open to the possibility of creating life is wrong. The Church has been pretty consistently teaching that for 2,000 years - and it's not just Benedict allegedly restricting the "fundamental right of women to control their own reproductive systems." Prohibitions against abortion can be found in the Didache. Prohibition on abortion was one of the defining aspects of Christianity in its early history as both abortion and infant exposure were quite common in the Roman Empire during early Christianity - this is NOT a new teaching FrankDC.

As for Benedict "pawning [himself] off as the representative of Jesus Christ on Earth," you're well aware of the history of apostolic succession and the fact that Bishop of Rome claiming to be Peter's successor does not originate with Benedict, right?

As you note, Jesus didn't say anything about homosexuality, he wasn't there to abrogate the law but to fulfill it, remember? He was building on his Jewish tradition - I don't recall him saying anything about murder, worshipping idols, incest, or bestiality, either.

On many issues, but on this one particular, FrankDC, you become unbalanced.


----------



## Albert (Feb 15, 2006)

TMMKC said:


> BTW...I started igorning what the pope says many years ago. But, then again, I'm a (ELCA) Lutheran.


TMMKC,

I am a devout Lutheran too. However, I think that the pope has a very important role in Western European society: he is the caller in the wilderness. If it wasn't for the pope, many conservatively and spiritually engaged young people in Europe would regard their lifestyle and cause as _lost_ and consider themselves to be complete outsiders. He reminds us that there are values beyond agnostic indifference and needs beyond pluralist hedonism. That is something I am quite grateful for.

Cheers,
A.


----------



## Rocker (Oct 29, 2004)

FrankDC said:


> As for the "moment of conception" nonsense, is sperm any less human than a fertilized egg? "Consequently", is maturbation, oral sex etc also violations of the fundamental human right to life?
> 
> This is a very slippery slope.


I really struggle not to bite at FrankDC's asinine statements, but this one was too stupid to pass up.

Yes FrankDC, a sperm cell is less human than a fertilized egg - in fact, it's not human at all. The fertilized egg, however, is human or, at least, human in its potentiality given the absence of interference, and in fact has DNA distinct from either of its parents.

It only becomes a slippery slope when you suspend the use of logic.


----------



## Albert (Feb 15, 2006)

Rocker,

Very well researched and stated. Thank you.

As I said, I think FrankDC is rather flexible with regards to reality. It seems to be most important to him that _he_ is morally superior and beyond approach. I actually think he is beyond *re*proach, but this fine difference might be a matter for another discussion.

Thanks again for a very informative and balanced posting,
A.


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

Rocker said:


> Um, I think the "objectively disordered" language comes from the Catechism of the Church - you know the one approved by your good buddy JP II - Benedict didn't just pull that language out of his biretta.
> 
> In any case, neither he nor the catechism has stated that "gay people [are] 'objectively disordered,'" the teaching of the Church is that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered." (Catechism Section 2357) and that the "[homosexual] inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them [i.e., homosexuals] a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity." (Catechism Section 2358). In short it says nothing about "gay people" simply homosexual acts and inclination.


We've been through this discussion in other threads. Without getting into the absolute hypocrisy of the Church's position (RCC clergy is, by far, the largest organized group of gay people in the world today, and has been for 2000 years), the evidence on this issue is unequivocal: sexual orientation cannot be surgically separated from the rest of a human being's psyche. Telling gay people their behavior is disordered is telling gay people THEY are disordered.

PJPII, even while parroting the Church's traditional gay bashing position, understood this reality, while Ratzinger has been a raging homophobe his entire adult life (and as far as we know, even during his Hitler Youth days). Only he and God know how many times he raised his right hand in salute to his Fuhrer.


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

Rocker said:


> I really struggle not to bite at FrankDC's asinine statements, but this one was too stupid to pass up.
> 
> Yes FrankDC, a sperm cell is less human than a fertilized egg - in fact, it's not human at all.


Amazing. What species of animal is human sperm?

You're clueless.


----------



## Albert (Feb 15, 2006)

FrankDC said:


> PJPII, even while parroting the Church's traditional gay bashing position, understood this reality, while Ratzinger has been a raging homophobe his entire adult life (and as far as we know, even during his Hitler Youth days). Only he and God know how many times he raised his right hand in salute to his Fuhrer.


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

FrankDC,

And only God knows how many times you have defended tyranny and tyrants. And the Pope risked his life by deserting from his unit during the war. I would ask if you had any shame Frank, but we all know the answer to that.

On behalf of the Interchange I invite you to go F*** yourself.

Karl


----------



## Phinn (Apr 18, 2006)

> What species of animal is human sperm?


Human. A spermatozoa is human, as much as a skin cell is.

But neither then skin cell nor the spermatozoa is a discrete organism. So, while both are _human_, neither is _*a*_ human.

Once the ovum and sperm cell have fused into an indivisible cell, it is a discrete, human organism.

Another word for that is "person."


----------



## Albert (Feb 15, 2006)

Karl89 said:


> FrankDC,
> 
> And only God knows how many times you have defended tyranny and tyrants. And the Pope risked his life by deserting from his unit during the war. I would ask if you had any shame Frank, but we all know the answer to that.
> 
> ...


Karl,

You make a very good point here. Please allow me to add the following: every German teenager was enrolled _automatically_ in the Hitler Youth from the age of 14. Attacking Ratzinger for being a member of a mandatory state youth organization is preposterous. Moreover, there are records that indicate that he and his brother did not attend the weekly meetings at all (which were deliberately scheduled on a Sunday morning).

His desertation is something I see as rather neutral. As an ex-soldier, I would be generally suspicious of someone who leaves his colours by simply walking away. However, there was hardly a point of staying in service in late April 1945, especially under such an irresponsible government. His father, by the way, seems to have communicated his grievances rather openly to the state authorities in the last few weeks of the war...

Cheers,
A.


----------



## TMMKC (Aug 2, 2007)

Albert said:


> TMMKC,
> 
> I am a devout Lutheran too. However, I think that the pope has a very important role in Western European society: he is the caller in the wilderness. If it wasn't for the pope, many conservatively and spiritually engaged young people in Europe would regard their lifestyle and cause as _lost_ and consider themselves to be complete outsiders. He reminds us that there are values beyond agnostic indifference and needs beyond pluralist hedonism. That is something I am quite grateful for.
> 
> ...


Good point. Giving youth today (at least) something close to moral or spiritual guidelines is so needed...because God knows many parents are falling down on that job. I never said the pope doesn't have value, I just choose to tune him out a lot of the time. Maybe I need a moral compass!


----------



## Albert (Feb 15, 2006)

TMMKC said:


> Good point. Giving youth today (at least) something close to moral or spiritual guidelines is so needed...because God knows many parents are falling down on that job. I never said the pope doesn't have value, I just choose to tune him out a lot of the time. Maybe I need a moral compass!


I'm sure this one is fine as well:


----------



## The Gabba Goul (Feb 11, 2005)

Karl89 said:


> FrankDC,
> 
> On behalf of the Interchange I invite you to go F*** yourself.
> 
> Karl


I'll go ahead and second that motion...


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

Albert said:


> Karl,
> 
> You make a very good point here. Please allow me to add the following: every German teenager was enrolled _automatically_ in the Hitler Youth from the age of 14. Attacking Ratzinger for being a member of a mandatory state youth organization is preposterous.


No, what's preposterous is claiming resistence to the Hitler Youth was not widespread at the time in Germany:
https://hnn.us/roundup/entries/11864.html

Ratzinger not only refused to resist the Nazis, two years after leaving the Hitler Youth he rejoined, er, excuse me, was drafted by the Nazi army.


----------



## Albert (Feb 15, 2006)

FrankDC said:


> No, what's preposterous is claiming resistence to the Hitler Youth was not widespread at the time in Germany:
> https://hnn.us/roundup/entries/11864.html
> 
> Ratzinger not only refused to resist the Nazis, two years after leaving the Hitler Youth he rejoined, er, excuse me, was drafted by the Nazi army.


----------



## Mike Petrik (Jul 5, 2005)

The Gabba Goul said:


> I'll go ahead and second that motion...


I'd call the question, but I doubt Frank needs the encouragement.


----------



## The Gabba Goul (Feb 11, 2005)

^^^FrankDC^^^


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

Methinks thou dost protest too much, Gabba. But hey, if it makes you feel better about defending an ex-Nazi Vicar of Christ, that's the important thing.


----------



## The Gabba Goul (Feb 11, 2005)

FrankDC said:


> Methinks thou dost protest too much, Gabba. But hey, if it makes you feel better about defending an ex-Nazi Vicar of Christ, that's the important thing.


I'm the one protesting too much???

Oh that's Rich...now...let me get this "straight", you're the one who keeps broadcasting your man-crush for GWB on every frickin thread you post in...and now you're spewing anti-Catholic hate just because you take exception to the fact that the Pope doesnt embrace the lifestyle you choose, that is, having a creepy crush that boarders on obsession with another man...yet I'm the one with the problem???

So you'd rather sit and talk $hit instead of getting your facts straight...once again, son, I'll tell it to you like this...go read a book and educate yourself...It makes no sense to try to explain things to you intellegently like a grownup...yet, you can't even admit the fact that you're ignorant, you just keep digging in deeper and deeper...lame...truly lame...

well, anyway...

...now hurry up and run along before you're late for your date with Sinead O'Connor...


----------



## Albert (Feb 15, 2006)

FrankDC said:


> Methinks thou dost protest too much, Gabba. But hey, if it makes you feel better about defending an ex-Nazi Vicar of Christ, that's the important thing.


Frankie,

Please allow me to share a little lifestyle cue with you that I have learnt from some European left-wing acquaintances. Everytime you mention the word _Nazi_, you should wear trousers as tight as possible, preferably jeans. It makes you feel your genitals even more and that really is a great thing. 

Only problem is that you might want to improve a little bit on self-restraint; it's so much fun that you might end up calling Hillary or Al Gore a _Nazi_, and that of course could be slightly over the top.

Cheers,
A.


----------



## KenR (Jun 22, 2005)

Gabba,

Please do not use the image of Stewie in vain. :icon_smile:


----------



## Rocker (Oct 29, 2004)

FrankDC said:


> No, what's preposterous is claiming resistence to the Hitler Youth was not widespread at the time in Germany:
> https://hnn.us/roundup/entries/11864.html
> 
> Ratzinger not only refused to resist the Nazis, two years after leaving the Hitler Youth he rejoined, er, excuse me, was drafted by the Nazi army.


It was not widespread - your own article states that "resistance to Hitler Youth -- particularly by Catholic youth -- was not a statistically minute aberration, though it remained an exception." That language does not support any interpretation other than it was not widespread.

The Horror! A sixteen year old boy didn't have the spine to tell a murdering regime to go f_ck itself and risk persecution of both he and his family. Further, at a time when deserters were routinely shot on the spot or hanged from lamp posts for public display, he let himself be drafted at age 18 at the very end of the war.

You, FrankDC, are undoubtedly of stronger mettle. And if we can't expect heroic physical and mental courage from 16 year olds, who can we expect it from?

Assuming the worst of Ratzinger (which you love to do) and that he lacked a scintilla of moral courage - perhaps you should be reminded that a grown man, Peter, publicly denied Jesus repeatedly for fear of persecution and another grown man, Saul, was actively involved in persecuting Christians, yet they went on to play pivotal roles in the Church. People can grow and learn from life experiences - especially when one is only 16.


----------



## Albert (Feb 15, 2006)

Rocker said:


> It was not widespread - your own article states that "resistance to Hitler Youth -- particularly by Catholic youth -- was not a statistically minute aberration, though it remained an exception." That language does not support any interpretation other than it was not widespread.
> 
> The Horror! A sixteen year old boy didn't have the spine to tell a murdering regime to go f_ck itself and risk persecution of both he and his family. Further, at a time when deserters were routinely shot on the spot or hanged from lamp posts for public display, he let himself be drafted at age 18 at the very end of the war.
> 
> ...


+1, well stated.

Common sense doesn't seem to be one of little Frankie's core competencies. Maybe he should have the great pleasure of demonstrating his courage under an oppressive, murdering regime. Iran comes to mind.


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Albert,

I will happily chip in $500 USD to send Frank on a tour of North Korea, and I am sure he would "speak truth to power" once he was there. But remember Gents, Frank has promised to leave the US once the current POTUS leaves office, lets not forget to remind him.

Karl


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

I've been in the presence of His Holyness the Dalai Lama 3 times; briefly meeting him at LAX airport many years ago when L A buddhists either had epicanthric eyelids or eclectic interests, a small audience a few years later and a brief personal meeting some years ago during a big Hollywood Bowl ecumenical gathering. My kata is a treasured keepsake of those meetings. Now His Holyness is on Larry King, photographed with Steven Seagull and his books and tapes move well at Borders. Outside of the CHICOMS I can't remember hearing even a suggestion of criticism. But the truth is Tibet was once a pretty tough place with slavery, gruesome tortures and adventurous outsiders often as not winding up dead. To be fair, He was a mere boy and what reforms his enlightened education under another WW2 kraut by name of Heinrich Harrer and others would have produced are only speculation. One can attend UC Santa Barbara and get a degree in tibetan language and studies, where the somewhat bemused department chair lectures as much to explain this reality as the pronunciation of Avalotishekvara to future New Age bookstore owners and volunteers to Dharmasala. Christianity teaches there is only one man without sin. The treatment of the rest of us is to often overlooked.


----------



## The Gabba Goul (Feb 11, 2005)

KenR said:


> Gabba,
> 
> Please do not use the image of Stewie in vain. :icon_smile:


but, I needed Stewie to get the message across...that's just how serious the topic is...



Rocker said:


> Assuming the worst of Ratzinger (which you love to do) and that he lacked a scintilla of moral courage - perhaps you should be reminded that a grown man, Peter, publicly denied Jesus repeatedly for fear of persecution and another grown man, Saul, was actively involved in persecuting Christians, yet they went on to play pivotal roles in the Church. People can grow and learn from life experiences - especially when one is only 16.


I wouldnt waste my time citing specific biblical examples...this dingleberry won't pay attention to facts...he'd rather make ignorant and uninformed statements...he's perfectly happy being ignorant...why if he actually educated himself, he might find that he's wrong, and then what excuse would he have for spouting anti-Catholic bile???


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

Kav said:


> Christianity teaches there is only one man without sin. The treatment of the rest of us is to often overlooked.


As evidenced by this thread.

So sayeth the dingleberry.

Youthful moral spinelessness is forgivable, but spiritual arrogance is what Jesus railed against *more than any other sin*. In my view, if Ratzinger isn't the Antichrist he's doing one heck of an impersonation.


----------



## Albert (Feb 15, 2006)

FrankDC said:


> As evidenced by this thread.
> 
> So sayeth the dingleberry.
> 
> Youthful moral spinelessness is forgivable, but spiritual arrogance is what Jesus railed against *more than any other sin*. In my view, if Ratzinger isn't the Antichrist he's doing one heck of an impersonation.


Frankie,

First time that you use the words "in my view". I say: fair enough. Everybody is entitled to his own opinion.

But please stop styling yourself as morally superior to anybody else.

Cheers,
A.


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Gents,

Now Pope Benedict is the Antichrist according to FrankDC. Not Kim, bin Laden or Mugabe but the Pope. Frank does your health insurance not cover psychiatric care? If it doesn't that would explain alot and you blame your lack of coverage on the GOP to boot.

Karl


----------



## The Gabba Goul (Feb 11, 2005)

Karl89 said:


> Gents,
> 
> Now Pope Benedict is the Antichrist according to FrankDC. Not Kim, bin Laden or Mugabe but the Pope. Frank does your health insurance not cover psychiatric care? If it doesn't that would explain alot and you blame your lack of coverage on the GOP to boot.
> 
> Karl


I wonder now if it isnt Frank who's baiting us...I mean...seriously...if he really believes some of the crap that he's posting, he's even more retarded than we may have previously thought...


----------



## KenR (Jun 22, 2005)

Albert said:


> Frankie,
> 
> First time that you use the words "in my view". I say: fair enough. Everybody is entitled to his own opinion.
> 
> ...


It's either moral superiority or self loathing. I've never seen such self-righteousness in my life as Frank's. He makes my in-laws look good by comparison and I'm ready to divorce them (but not my darling wife).

It's not an easy thing to vilify 99.999% of humanity, but he does it with such ease.


----------



## KenR (Jun 22, 2005)

The Gabba Goul said:


> I wonder now if it isnt Frank who's baiting us...I mean...seriously...if he really believes some of the crap that he's posting, he's even more retarded than we may have previously thought...


Maybe the baiting is on purpose. I'm suprised no one has ever mentioned the "T" word in connection with Francis. I know I have thought about it. Can anybody be that obnoxiously arrogant and self-righteous? Or am I just naive?


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

KenR said:


> Maybe the baiting is on purpose.


One need look no farther than the title of this thread to see who is baiting whom, or to understand my original claim that Ratzinger is an evil, divisive force in the world.

As for self-righteousness, it's all a matter of conscience and perspective. I follow mine, as do the rest of you. If Ratzinger winds up going to heaven or burning in hell it won't be because of posts on a men's fashion forum.


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Frank,

Again you prove that Hell is other people.

Karl


----------



## The Gabba Goul (Feb 11, 2005)

KenR said:


> Maybe the baiting is on purpose. I'm suprised no one has ever mentioned the "T" word in connection with Francis. I know I have thought about it.


I have too...and this thread really kind of makes me wonder that much more...

hmmmm...

FrankDC???

also...just curious Frank...please help me understand...you know how dumb us Catholics are...how was the title of this thread calling you out???


----------



## JDC (Dec 2, 2006)

The Gabba Goul said:


> how was the title of this thread calling you out???


Read the first four responses in this thread to get your answer.


----------



## The Gabba Goul (Feb 11, 2005)

FrankDC said:


> Read the first four responses in this thread to get your answer.


Okay...of the first 4 responses, two have nothing to do with you, one is you spitting anti-Catholic venom, and one is a response to that...kind of...

dude...it's called medication...get familiar with it...


----------

