Homosexuality is a bigger threat than climate change. My question: Why do people listen to this sanctimonious old shit? I'd say ratbag religions and the bigots who promote them are a bigger threat to the planet than people who prefer to have sexual relations with their own gender because that is the orientation established in them on the basis of their genes. But maybe some corpse-like ex-Nazi who's never had a root in his life knows better.
The Pope (and the Catholic Church) are far from espousing the message of love preached by the man Jesus Christ. The values of Christ provide a possible, useful moral code for humanity. The message of the Catholic Church is one which glorifies the pale virgin shrouded in snow. The Corpse Hour with Commandant Benedict. Arise from your graves you ignorant bigots and go where the sunflower wishes to go!
Update: the relevant section of the Pope's message.
"What is necessary is a kind of ecology of man, understood in the correct sense. When the Church speaks of the nature of the human being as man and woman and asks that this order of creation be respected, it is not the result of an outdated metaphysic. It is a question here of faith in the Creator and of listening to the language of creation, the devaluation of which leads to the self-destruction of man and therefore to the destruction of the same work of God. That which is often expressed and understood by the term “gender”, results finally in the self-emancipation of man from creation and from the Creator. Man wishes to act alone and to dispose ever and exclusively of that alone which concerns him. But in this way he is living contrary to the truth, he is living contrary to the Spirit Creator. The tropical forests are deserving, yes, of our protection, but man merits no less than the creature, in which there is written a message which does not mean a contradiction of our liberty, but its condition. The great Scholastic theologians have characterised matrimony, the life-long bond between man and woman, as a sacrament of creation, instituted by the Creator himself and which Christ – without modifying the message of creation – has incorporated into the history of his covenant with mankind. This forms part of the message that the Church must recover the witness in favour of the Spirit Creator present in nature in its entirety and in a particular way in the nature of man, created in the image of God. Beginning from this perspective, it would be beneficial to read again the Encyclical Humanae Vitae: the intention of Pope Paul VI was to defend love against sexuality as a consumer entity, the future as opposed to the exclusive pretext".
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
22 comments:
I share your disdain for most organised religion, but calling the Pope an "ex-nazi" is a monstrous smear. He was conscripted into the Hitler Youth, like everyone else his age, for Pete's sake!
You've been hanging around universities too long Harry. As an old Hungarian chippy cracked me up once with this pearl of wisdom- ' The poofters are like the Jews. They punch way above their weight!'
And that's largely Ratzys point about the gender bending that goes in high places, most notably in our esoteric Sandstones. According to our airhead elites and their over-represented homosexual peers, if you're not homo-euphoric just like them, then clearly and rationally you're a homo-phobic trog. Now while it's true poofters got a raw deal in the past, society has broadly accepted they don't deserve to be beaten up and thrown in the Torrens and our laws and mores broadly accept that. However Ratzy's point is that the pendulumn has swung too far with the gender bending industry and their trendy caravan of hangers on. That would no doubt apply to the notion that homosexual experimentation by our elites is somehow to be applauded as normal behaviour(indeed often a badge of their tolerant honour), to the advocacy of homosexual union as equal to marriage, to IVF for the lesbian brigade. In that sense Ratzy is quietly telling our elites to pull their heads in and backs the conservative mainstream and their iconic Judeo-Christian traditions. Basically, naff of Nero's Rome!
Don't agree Observa. I find homosexual practices unpleasant - I am not euphoric at all about them and screeching queers who scream about homophobia are a turnoff.
But I don't see homosexuality as some type of disease or social problem. It is a fact of life driven by genetics.
Don't agree Wayne. Don't forget that Ratzinger is not Joe Blow in the street. He is the successor of Peter and the supposed infallible leader of the Christian Church.
How can an ex-Nazi be any sort of moral authority? If he is God's rep on earth why did he not resist the Nazis? Why did he become a member of a German army anti-aircraft unit that protected a factory which included included slaves from the Dachau concentration camp.
Resistance to the Nazis was no means impossible and remember this is a man with the infallibility of a Pope who can tell people how they should and should not live their lives. It is pure baloney.
If you're not catholic, then I cannot see how the pope can have much influence in your life. Why not simply ignore any religious leader with whom you disagree? There must be many of them that every one of us could disagree with on any number of issues.
Jesus Harry, at 14 years of age he was dragooned as a 'Flakhelfer' and at 16 conscripted into the infantry as the Americans were advancing, whereupon he deserted and took off home along with a lot of other frightened schoolkids and classmates. He was subsequently briefly imprisoned as a POW,(as would any German in uniform have been) but upon release rejoined the seminary.
'Luftwaffenhelfer (commonly: Flakhelfer) are terms commonly used for German students deployed as child soldiers during World War II.
The Luftwaffenhelfer ("Luftwaffe support personnel") program was the implementation of the "Kriegshilfseinsatz der Jugend bei der Luftwaffe" ("Deployment of the youth to support the war effort with the air force") order issued on January 22nd, 1943. The order called for drafting whole school classes with male students born in 1926 and 1927 into a military corps, supervised by Hitler Youth and Luftwaffe personnel. The draft was later extended to include the 1928 and 1929 births. Deployment included ideological indoctrination by the Hitler Youth, military duties and limited continuation of the normal school curriculum, often by the original teachers.
While the official term was "Luftwaffenhelfer (HJ)", the term more commonly used is "Flakhelfer" (Anti-Aircraft-support or AA gun assistant). The 1926-1929 births are commonly referred to as the "Flakhelfer-Generation".' -(wiki)
I hark back to MasterO at 16 who, with his classmates, was busy 'tram surfing' on his BMX bike or sneaking into the Hilton Hotel at the Bay for a swim in their luxury pool, while being indoctrinated at school that his grandparents if not indulging in eugenics with half-caste children, were busy ruining Gaia in capitalism's dark satanic mills.
The next year I made him sign up for a 2 weeks work experience opportunity, via the school curriculum with Mitsubishi. He came home somewhat flabbergasted that real people, with intelligence actually worked there and made useful and interesting things. Never seen him so motivated in the mornings to get up and go.
So much for having a clue about what goes on in factories, let alone the real world at 17 even. He is now a self-employed electrician at 25 while they all wished they voted for Kevin and worked for GMH. Clearly with that background, MasterO shouldn't be trusted to change the batteries in your TV remote now Harry?
That's right, Harry. 14 year old's were the worst of the nazis.
Let me guess, you're another athiest who was raised a protestant and learned from an early age to dislike catholicism.
Have you read the speech? Thought not. There is nothing in there that specifically metions homosexuals and to be honest I really don't see his opinion very much different from your own on most issues.
JC, I didn't say 14 year olds were the worst of the Nazis so the expression "That's right" is a deliberate lie. The rest of youtr comment is a set of conjectures that is full of spelling mistakes. Grow up - I could equally conjecture that you are a right-wing homophobe.
The speech is bigotry dressed up as an extension of natural law. Of course it didn't mention homosexuals just the nonsensical view that his view of what is natural is right and proper and deserves respect. Why?
No Harry, they aren't spelling mistakes. They're typos. Lefties focus on typos when they don't have argument. Don’t tell me you’re onto that too now.
This is what you wrote:
How can an ex-Nazi be any sort of moral authority? If he is God's rep on earth why did he not resist the Nazis?
My comment was clearly a sarcastic take off of your bigoted statement. Did you even know he was 14 years old during the war? Do you think a 14 year old has the mental maturity to make the decisions you expected of him?
Grow up - I could equally conjecture that you are a right-wing homophobe.
Not from anything I ever said you couldn’t. That would be a cold lie whereas my sarcasm was coated with truth.
You basically accused the pope of being a Nazi. That’s not conjecture, that’s you statement….” How can an ex-Nazi be any sort of moral authority”
You haven’t answered the question as to whether you read the speech?
I am getting bored JC. Very bored.
I said the Pope was an ex-Nazi. He was.
This discussion has run out of steam.
Harry:
I think you're chasing an extinct goose. It looks increasingly likely that the Pope never said any of those things.
Perhaps you ought to offer an apology.
Andrew Norton has been doing some digging and it it appears the Reuters dispatch was crap.
You may be bored, Harry, but you're also wrong.
Harry, while I agree with you on many issues, I have to say in this instance, calling someone who was 14 years old at the time, a nazi, does not pass the reasonable test. How many 14 year olds in nazi Germany had a clue what was going on?
If you are not a catholic, I'd guess that you consider the pope's (any pope, btw) "infallability" to be a myth. So why get so terribly distraught about it if you don't beleve it in the first place?
"How can an ex-Nazi be any sort of moral authority? If he is God's rep on earth why did he not resist the Nazis?"
He was in his early-to-mid teens. You think a barely pubescent boy is going to stand up against the Third Reich? For that matter, would YOU have done so?
"I said the Pope was an ex-Nazi."
Ok, seeing as you're not backing down, we can say with confidence that you don't think carrying the title of "ex-nazi" has any moral implications, so we can dismiss this charge as having any meaning.*
*Unless you're about to claim that the average (or even a very exceptional) 14-year-old should be able to stand up to a regime with a record of massacring political opponents. Oh, wait...
By the way, Harry - most 14 year olds are scared of standing up to their parents. Seeing as you seem to think standing up to Hitler was a doddle, did YOU ever actually duke it out with your dad? Enquiring minds want to know.
"The speech is bigotry dressed up as an extension of natural law. Of course it didn't mention homosexuals just the nonsensical view that his view of what is natural is right and proper and deserves respect. Why?"
Firstly Ratzy, with his 'ecology of Man' statement and as democratically elected representative of Catholic thought, he's naturally treading on lots of other sacriligious toes here. In doing that he's stuck his head firmly above the parapet for a plethora of snipers. However he's quite a student of theology and philosophy, as well as being spokesman for an ethos that stands in direct contradiction to some failed alternatives, not least Nazism, but which might include a spectrum of many franchises of Islam to the Dreamtime and secular rationalism that ends up at the Stargate of empty nothingness. ie Once upon a time there was this Big Bang children and all the water appeared for the amoebas to crawl out of and evolve, except naturally none are more evolved than another and you know it all makes sense children because well umm..err.. it's written in the university scrolls by learned folk who know all about such matters.
If you still have the odd question children, then you might fall for Ratzy's ethos and shock, horror, end up like societies of devout Catholics, instead of all the outstanding alternatives on offer. Cherry picking the smorgasbord of the Taliban and the Dreamtime is so much more exciting than the boring fare of the straight menu for some. Being spiritual rather than religious is so much more enlightening and empowering these days. You can appreciate the natural wonder of Gaia and the need for spiritual connection with Mother Earth, but if she deals you a bad hand, well subsidised IVF is one's natural right for AC and DC alike, but Gaia forbid you'd bring baby up on GM foods. Clearly Ratzy and his ecology of Man stuff is a stinking pile of voodoo nonsense for intellectual free agents. The man's obviously a Nutzi!
Harry:
You still haven't answered the question.
Did you read the speech?
Oh JC!
I didn't answer your question!
I agree Observa:
A Nutzi!
Harry:
You went into a tirade against Ratzinger.
It would be worthwhile to know what exactly he was supposed to have said.
It doesn't look like he even mentioned gays.
Other than the religious aspect you both seem to share the same sorts of views.
Did you read the speech, Harry?
And as for Mark Henderson's learned prognostications on nature vs nurture here-
"Homosexuality is not biologically determined - almost no human behaviours are. But it almost certainly begins with a delicate combination of genetic, gestational, environmental and social cues, which together forge a person's sexual orientation.
Few gay men and women feel they have chosen a way of life, and the science is with them. Their preferences are as much a part of normal human variation as traits such as height or intelligence, to which nature and nurture also both contribute."
You can easily substitute paedophilia, bestiality or anorexia for homosexuality and get where Mark gets to. Apparently I'm supposed to be as ambivalent to this normal variation in my offspring as if they were blind in one eye or had one leg shorter than the other.
Observa, Your point is half-right. Many forms of behaviour and individual preference are forged jointly by nature and nurture. But surely - of these - forces of behaviour that involve voluntary and mutually beneficial interactions between individuals (sex between same sex couples) don't require legal and moral restrictions.
Paedophilia does.
Anorexia is harder - an internality - a misperception that harms the individual.
Harry
Fred Argy has admitted his mistake in that the pope didn't say anything against gay people.
Are you?
See Norton's blog.
hc--you find homosexual practices unpleasant? I think if you engaged in them, you would find them far more enjoyable! Just a suggestion!
Post a Comment