Of course.busyLivin said:V, you're looking for a reason to dislike him...
Although being christian already helps a lot.
-
🛑Hello, this board in now turned off and no new posting.
Please REGISTER at Anabolic Steroid Forums, and become a member of our NEW community! 💪 -
🔥Check Out Muscle Gelz HEAL® - A Topical Peptide Repair Formula with BPC-157 & TB-500! 🏥
New Pope from Germany
- Thread starter MorteSubite
- Start date
Although being christian already helps a lot.
Ohhhhhhh, right.busyLivin said:
The marriage was banned because, as stated earlier, the priests were giving all the churchs money to their wives to go shopping. It was a montery matter, nothing to do with God.
Vieope said:
He was in the army, there is no room in the army to "not accept". (well yeah you probably could, but just once, before you got shot in the head)
And for whoever asked, the no sex "law" came in affect around the year 1000.
married men can become Catholic priests. The principal of my highschool was a priest and he had 4 children and was still married.
busyLivin said:
True. In effect Jesus said, if you must then do so freely, even though it would be good to not need those things. I am thinking I spotted it in Mark but I'm not sure.
overthepond said:
If they claim to serve God does it not have everything to do with him? If they could not come up with a salary system at the time they should have gotten rid of spoiled priests. Then again history will attest to church corruption.
He wasn't a deacon. He was a Roman Catholic priest.busyLivin said:
topolo said:
Yur too old.
Try bringing a nude photograph of some folks depicting a scene from the Bible and they'll stone you, yet the Cappella Sistina (Sistine Chapel) is covered with these images. There was a point where you could only have a good christian name anything else meant you were going to hell.
bio-chem said:
Teaching only abstinence is ridiculous. I'm absolutely positive that teenage pregnancies has decreased primarily because of safe sex education, and also significant social changes throughout the decades... abstinence may have had a small impact and I doubt it had anymore than that. Lets see some statistics from real sources...
And when you look at conservative views of contraception, held by such people as John Paul II and George W. Bush, in regards to Africa, it is completely ridiculous. They believe in giving money and aid to Africa if only abstinence is taught... cause yeah, that is a really a practical solution to the spread of AID's there....
busyLivin said:
They do not need to condone it, but they can acknowledge that it does exist in Africa and that contraception can help stop the spread of HIV. The Catholic Church, that which I am a member of myself, is so prolife that I cannot understand why they are willing to choose being against something that could save lives.
MWpro said:
abstinence is more reliable than condoms. People decide to sleep around & know the risks. They are to blame, not the Catholic Church.
People are willing to sleep around (which is against the Church) but will not use a condom in accordance with the Church? Give me a break!
If they were worried about disobeying the Church, they wouldn't be having sex to begin with! Put the blame where it's due.
I don't think MW is talking about blame here, but what is the best end result. Contraception goes against the church's teachings, so does sex before marriage. The latter will continue to happen despite abstinence teachings.
Abstinence is obviously effective, but many will not practice it. Is it better for those who do not practice it to do so with or without contraception? I do not think it is a difficult choice. However, putting an explicit view out on the issue for the church just goes against the grain too much. Could it help? Probably... Will it happen? Nope
Abstinence is obviously effective, but many will not practice it. Is it better for those who do not practice it to do so with or without contraception? I do not think it is a difficult choice. However, putting an explicit view out on the issue for the church just goes against the grain too much. Could it help? Probably... Will it happen? Nope
busyLivin said:abstinence is more reliable than condoms. People decide to sleep around & know the risks. They are to blame, not the Catholic Church.
People are willing to sleep around (which is against the Church) but will not use a condom in accordance with the Church? Give me a break!
Abstinence is definitely more reliable than condoms, and I agree it should be taught, but not as the sole solution. A multipronged attack of the problem is necessary, which is why I disagree with the Church and George W. Bush on this issue.
You're right, the Catholic Church is completely irrelevant in regards to the influence of these people. However, that is not the point here. They are for giving aide only if it for teaching absintence. This is hypocritical to me, coming from a Church that is extremely prolife. I am not -blaming- the Catholic Church for the problem, I am criticizing them of their stance on the issue.
Also remember that a portion of the people with AIDs in Africa did not contract it as a result of their actions; they got it from their parents. But it really doesn't matter who is to blame, is what I'm saying, but only that the situation is addressed in the most efficient way possible.
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2002
- Messages
- 6,978
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 44
MWpro said:
And if you're saying that condoms will end the AIDs problem, you're wrong.
Regardless, you werent talking about something being "the least bit useful". You stated "that is a really a practical solution to the spread of AID's there".
Anybody that teaches that condoms should be used as a prevention of AIDs is an idiot. Thats not their intended purpose, and it would only give people a false sense of security. The only reliable method of not contracting AIDs is not sleeping with somebody with AIDs. Condoms, BC or whatever else isnt going to help with that. When dealing with AIDs, the only possible safe method is to not sleep with somebody that has it. When so many have it, the only reliable method is to try and teach abstinance.
Besides which, the Pope has a moral responsibility to his beliefs. His beliefs dont allow for premarital sex. In regards to condoms after sex, I do think that the Catholic church needs to move on and support that, and BC.
However, in regards to Africa, he can't have a different policy towards them than others. If others are expected to abstain, so should African Catholics.
I'm not placing blame on anyone either.. I see what you mean, but it's basically asking the Church to say "Please don't sin, but if you're going to anyway, here's a better way to do it." That may be ok for a school or government to say, but for the Catholic Church, their rules are simple.. don't sin. To say otherwise would be folding to today's view of the meaninglessness of sex.
All a matter of opinion, really. I support their decision.
All a matter of opinion, really. I support their decision.
Heard on the radio this morning.. some big announcement from the new pope will be made about "married men & the priesthood"
Suprising, but that would be great
... no Dale, I don't think that includes marrying boys.
Suprising, but that would be great
... no Dale, I don't think that includes marrying boys.
I don't think anyone is naive enough to say that Eggs. On the whole, it is better to have condoms than not. Abstinence is fine but in the real world, like it or not, sex happens. And condoms are a proven tool in reducing the risk of the transmission of the disease.Eggs said:
To argue the teaching of abstinence only and crossing your fingers hoping for the best is illogical and dangerous in the face of extant human sexuality and the prophylactic measures available.
It is a matter of scientific fact that condoms offer protection from the spread of STDs. [size=-1] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention[/size]
In my opinion, I think the ban on all contraception by the church is not good thing. As a matter of opinion, science should prevail in matters of health where religion is obdurate.
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2002
- Messages
- 6,978
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 44
Sure its better to have condoms, I am sure they are pretty effective. Lets be realistic though, this people are generally having pre-marital/extra-marital sex, which is leading to the infection with AIDs. Do you really think that they care what the Pope says about condoms?
Secondly, I refuse to pay taxes to help purchase 50 billion condoms a year so we can support the sexual desires of people in Africa. American kids know about pregnancy and STDs today, but that doesnt stop quite a few from having unprotected sex.
Secondly, I refuse to pay taxes to help purchase 50 billion condoms a year so we can support the sexual desires of people in Africa. American kids know about pregnancy and STDs today, but that doesnt stop quite a few from having unprotected sex.