Pope: "Gay Marriage insidious and dangerous"

[Mr. T]

The evidence of un-american teachings are coming out.

Just look at the attack on religion. And our tax dollars pay for this.

[Westside Steve]

Then again no one is proposing making child rape a constitutional right.

WSS

[VaporTrail]

@calfoxwc said:

You gonna wait til the 8th month, then kill it by neglect in a closet?

Doesn't matter to you?

Why are you enraged that other people believe what you don't believe?

It is NOT a crime... yet.

No, I'll take an abortion pill, but thanks anyways, partial birth abortions are just too costly these days, and they don't let me eat the head.

@mr.-t said:

The evidence of un-american teachings are coming out. Just look at the attack on religion. And our tax dollars pay for this.

How many times do I have to tell you that I go to a private Catholic university?

@westside-steve said:

Then again no one is proposing making child rape a constitutional right.

WSS

This has nothing to do with the Constitution.

[Westside Steve]

QUOTE (Westside Steve @ May 14 2010, 10:01 AM)

Then again no one is proposing making child rape a constitutional right.

WSS

This has nothing to do with the Constitution.

No? Gay marriage doesn't concern the constitution?

Here's thge heading one more time in case you missed it.:

" Pope: "Gay Marriage insidious and dangerous", No comment on child rape

"

WSS

[Kosar_For_President]

Gay marriage bad, raping little boys good. So it's bad to be in a relationship with someone you love gay or not vs. being in a relationship with a 9 year old, alter boy?

It's so funny when articles come out about huge numbers of people leaving the church or converting to other religions altogether, like it's a big mystery.

So T, attack on the church? Dude, are you saying these rapes don't happen and the media makes it up? I understand the breakdown of the family unit, blah, blah, blah.

"The most telling moment came earlier this month, when the Associated Press dug up a 1985 letter from Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger — as Pope Benedict XVI then was — apparently resisting pleas to immediately defrock a child-abusing California priest, on the grounds that such action might implicate the “good of the universal church.” Those five genteel words encompass the essence of the ancient knock against the Vatican: that it renders its fidelity not to God, or to the faithful, but to its own preservation."

Guess who this is:

[Kosar_For_President]

@westside-steve said:

Then again no one is proposing making child rape a constitutional right.

Ed Rooney is.

[VaporTrail]

@westside-steve said:

QUOTE (Westside Steve @ May 14 2010, 10:01 AM)

Then again no one is proposing making child rape a constitutional right.

WSS

This has nothing to do with the Constitution.

No? Gay marriage doesn't concern the constitution?

WSS

Perhaps you're right, but there is nothing in the Constitution about gay marriage. If you're arguing whether it's relevant to getting an amendment added on concerning it, then yes, you're right. But that's all beside the point I'm trying to get at here, the institution of the Catholic church is the epitome of hypocrisy.

[Westside Steve]

@vaportrail said:

Perhaps you're right, but there is nothing in the Constitution about gay marriage. If you're arguing whether it's relevant to getting an amendment added on concerning it, then yes, you're right. But that's all beside the point I'm trying to get at here, the institution of the Catholic church is the epitome of hypocrisy.

And I say you're being unreasonable hateful.

Maybe a child "rapist" should be shunned for life.

I won't argue that either way.

However if one believes in second chances, as most liberals seem to be in respect to other crimes, then that doesn't seem unreasonable.

I might not like it but there are a lot of things I don't like.

How about one strike for violent criminals? Yes? No?

Today marriage is a man and a woman, probably for solid reasons.

Some want it to be for any number or collection of humans.

Fair enough.

But the Catholic church is not supporting peserasty.

I'd imagine that there's more of it in Jr high schools, yet I rarely hear the vitriol toward the teachers union.

WSS

[VaporTrail]

And I say you're being unreasonable hateful.

Maybe a child "rapist" should be shunned for life.

I won't argue that either way.

A child rapist's crimes certainly shouldn't be covered up and the rapist allowed to preach at a church somewhere else. The Catholic Church hasn't just turned the other way when one of their priests are caught raping boys, they actually protect them.

However if one believes in second chances, as most liberals seem to be in respect to other crimes, then that doesn't seem unreasonable.

I might not like it but there are a lot of things I don't like.

How about one strike for violent criminals? Yes? No?

I wouldn't have a problem with that.

Today marriage is a man and a woman, probably for solid reasons.

Some want it to be for any number or collection of humans.

Fair enough.

I'd say it's out of religious intolerance and ignorance. Homosexuality is an "abomination." I guess that means it's wrong.

But the Catholic church is not supporting pederasty.

Yes, they are. They cover it up and reinstate the priests somewhere else where they do it again. Maybe support isn't the right word, but they sure as hell enable it.

I'd imagine that there's more of it in Jr high schools, yet I rarely hear the vitriol toward the teachers union.

I'd guess, percentage-wise, there's more in religious organizations, and that doesn't include only Catholics.

[Pumpkin Eater]

yes, the Catholic church are hypocrites. someone I know recently converted. They had been divorced 2X and remarried. They had to pay $600 bucks each to get their old marriages annulled through the church. So the Catholic church recognized the old marriages even though they were not done through the church and not to another Catholic. However, they are not recognizing the current marriage. It will have to be re-done through the church and her husband will have to be Catholic.

How does that make sense?

I'm a Methodist.

[VaporTrail]

It makes sense because the church they went to gets ~$2000 when all is said and done.

[Westside Steve]

Thanks for the reply.

I disagree here:

" I'd say it's out of religious intolerance and ignorance. Homosexuality is an "abomination." I guess that means it's wrong. "

Actually it's normal human physical revusion to homosexual contact. That's the basis IMO.

Gay marriage was turned down nearly 70 to 30 just about everywhere, even in non evangelical demographics and Democrat areas.

If the church "protected" rapists it's because of an ill conceived faith in redemption.

Same thing that allows liberal judges to turn them back out into the street to rape and kill again.

WSS

[Pumpkin Eater]

@vaportrail said:

It makes sense because the church they went to gets ~$2000 when all is said and done.

Yeah, that's about what I figured, too.

[VaporTrail]

@westside-steve said:

Thanks for the reply.

I disagree here:

" I'd say it's out of religious intolerance and ignorance. Homosexuality is an "abomination." I guess that means it's wrong. "

Actually it's normal human physical revusion to homosexual contact. That's the basis IMO.

Gay marriage was turned down nearly 70 to 30 just about everywhere, even in non evangelical demographics and Democrat areas.

If the church "protected" rapists it's because of an ill conceived faith in redemption.

Same thing that allows liberal judges to turn them back out into the street to rape and kill again.

WSS

The Catholic vote is 50/50 for the most part. Other demographics that vote Dem (Mexicans and Blacks), I would argue, are usually against gay marriage because of the religious roots in their upbringing. Churches play big roles in those communities, and I'd say play some part in determining their views on homosexuality. I think the biggest reason those people are against gay marriage is because of ignorance, a lack of education, and poverty. I realize this is a pretty sketchy and racist belief, but people from poorer and less-educated areas tend to have a negative disposition toward gays, amongst other things. This brings up the whole correlation=/=causation, and I realize that, but I really do think that ignorance is why people distrust gays and why anti-gay votes get cast in typically blue areas.

Revulsion to gay contact is normal if you're straight. Are you saying, then, that gay people are not normal? They're just the minority. Every other aspect of their life can be superior to yours, the only difference is that something else turns them on.

I think our laws are flawed. They're based on forgiveness and the belief that everyone can be a normal, functioning, contributing member of society; if you screw up, you can atone for it and be made better again. That isn't the case.

[Westside Steve]

@vaportrail said:

Revulsion to gay contact is normal if you're straight. Are you saying, then, that gay people are not normal?

That's exactly what I'm saing.

And that's not a big deal, it's just that I don't consider everything that happens in nature "normal."

I think S and M and bestiality are out of the norm but some folks dig it..

Wanting to bang a hot 15 year old is normal.

But it's against the law.

I think our laws are flawed. They're based on forgiveness and the belief that everyone can be a normal, functioning, contributing member of society; if you screw up, you can atone for it and be made better again. That isn't the case.

Not as often as we'd like VT.

WSS

[Pumpkin Eater]

Homosexuality is definitely not normal, but lots of strange things happen in nature. I say it is not normal because it serves no natural purpose.

[VaporTrail]

Neither do blowjobs.

[Westside Steve]

@vaportrail said:

Neither do blowjobs.

So don't give them, says I.

WSS

[VaporTrail]

May I receive them?