Pope makes eejits of the Church again.

[Heneni]

What one calls 2=2=4 the other calls 2=2=6. This is an unsolvable dilemma.

Are you proposing that millions of people violate gods commands to engage in homosexual acts.

I would think that asking them to condone homosexual acts is like asking them to prove 2 =2=4

Heneni

 

[Magic Man]

Mans judgement of what is right and what is wrong means they set themselves up as judges. Therefore compiling a human moral law.

Now, you're getting it.

The only way to be a judge and be human...is to learn from the judge himself. Its not hard. The law is written...the verdict is out. So to be a good judge means you too believe that what god says is wrong is wrong, and what god says is right is right.

No, the only way to be a judge and be human is...to be a judge and be human.

To be a good judge, you cant break the law yourself. So if man in any shape form or fashion break their own moral codes, they become quilty as charged. They make their own laws and break them.

That's absurd. Of course you can break the rules and still be a good judge. Just because I've stolen before doesn't mean I don't know it's wrong.

I think trusting man to be reasonable...is 'out there'. Since they find themselves in a universe they think happened by chance, and they find themselves unable to believe there is a god, they too are unaware that the judge is right at the door. Mankind can only get away with murder for so long....

Heneni

Well, either the universe or God happened by chance. You believe one of them did, I believe the other did. So, we're even. I'm not really sure what that has to do with understanding morality, though.

The main point is that you believe that there is God and he set out morality for everyone. You're welcome to believe that, but there are plenty of people who don't believe it. I don't believe it, so you constantly repeating it doesn't help. You need to realize that it is only your believe just like "there is no god or objective morality" is my belief.

 

[Darkwater]

As long as two(or more?) people are in love,who are we to judge.....that goes for any new classes of gender too.

Every adult is responsible for their own actions,if I were to be compassionate I would explain why my a.s.s is a *one way street*..ok,here goes.

ok,anyone ever see the movie *Dune*,where the dudes pop the cork on the guy & feed off of him.

There I said it.no more compassion from me.

I believe that Heneni is arguing from a compassionate point of view,with the best of intentions & all the good will in the world.

The pope has ulterior motives.Nice to see he cares about the tree's.

His will & intent should be very closely examined to see what the hell he is on about.

 

[Sunstone]

Are you proposing that millions of people violate gods commands to engage in homosexual acts.

If people want to engage in homosexual acts, why shouldn't they? Are you seriously suggesting that morality can be reduced to the alleged pronouncements of a tribal deity?

 

[Heneni]

What one calls 2+2=4 the other calls 2+2=6. This is an unsolvable dilemma.

When groups of people dont have the same moral code. There is hardly anything you can do about it unless you try to change the moral code of one or the other.

A christian does not have the right to change the moral code. That is a dillema, not for them...but for those who cant get them to change it.

 

[Storm]

My issue with this speech isn't so much that the Catholic church is opposed to homosexuality; I agree that this isn't news. My problem is with the Pope claiming it to be of equal importance to protecting the environment. If this is used to guide the works of the Church and the faithful, I worry about what the effect might be.

The Pope has quite a bit of influence over about a billion people. He could use this influence to accomplish amazing things... but I worry that this pronouncement will send the Church in what I feel is the wrong direction.

For example, if this speech results in decisions in a few hundred dioceses to move the budget from some sort of environmental project to buying ad space in the local paper for letters from bishops against same-sex marriage, or if it inspires several thousand parish priests to decide to give homilies on sexual morality instead of the duty of dominion and stewardship over the planet, I think that this will result in real harm, or at least real foregone benefit.

Hear, hear!

 

[Heneni]

The main point is that you believe that there is God and he set out morality for everyone. You're welcome to believe that, but there are plenty of people who don't believe it. I don't believe it, so you constantly repeating it doesn't help. You need to realize that it is only your believe just like "there is no god or objective morality" is my belief.

Indeed you believe that there isnt a god. But to believe in god has never been a requirement for the law to be real, and to exist, and to be working.

Heneni

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

A christian does not have the right to change the moral code.

I see the point you're trying to make but in reality it happens all to often. Do you think that Christians today have the same moral code they did 1000 years ago? How about 500 years ago? 50 years? The so called moral code of Christianity is as flexible and changing as anything else.

 

[Heneni]

My issue with this speech isn't so much that the Catholic church is opposed to homosexuality; I agree that this isn't news. My problem is with the Pope claiming it to be of equal importance to protecting the environment. If this is used to guide the works of the Church and the faithful, I worry about what the effect might be.

The Pope has quite a bit of influence over about a billion people. He could use this influence to accomplish amazing things... but I worry that this pronouncement will send the Church in what I feel is the wrong direction.

For example, if this speech results in decisions in a few hundred dioceses to move the budget from some sort of environmental project to buying ad space in the local paper for letters from bishops against same-sex marriage, or if it inspires several thousand parish priests to decide to give homilies on sexual morality instead of the duty of dominion and stewardship over the planet, I think that this will result in real harm, or at least real foregone benefit.

Since humankind is part of nature..there is just as much reason to spend money on the wellbeing of their morality as it is on the well being of nature.

In fact...to spend more money on the moral health of humans, will probably result in less damage to the environment.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Indeed you believe that there isnt a god. But to believe in god has never been a requirement for the law to be real, and to exist, and to be working.

And that the Pope is the duly-appointed arbiter of the law?

You said before that you're "not a stickler for organised religion" and that you don't "throw [your] support in with the catholic church". I'd wager that you've fallen afoul of the Pope's interpretation of God's Holy Law as well.

 

[Heneni]

If people want to engage in homosexual acts, why shouldn't they? Are you seriously suggesting that morality can be reduced to the alleged pronouncements of a tribal deity?

Morality reduced?

Who's morality do you use as a standard? And why?

Heneni

 

[Heneni]

And that the Pope is the duly-appointed arbiter of the law?

You said before that you're "not a stickler for organised religion" and that you don't "throw [your] support in with the catholic church". I'd wager that you've fallen afoul of the Pope's interpretation of God's Holy Law as well.

He he...well ill let god be the judge of that.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

He he...well ill let god be the judge of that.

I imagine that the many homosexual Christians would take a similar attitude to your interpretations of the "law".

 

[Magic Man]

Since humankind is part of nature..there is just as much reason to spend money on the wellbeing of their morality as it is on the well being of nature.

In fact...to spend more money on the moral health of humans, will probably result in less damage to the environment.

But then you have to decide which version of morality you're going with. I'm not sure how you make the claim that spending more money on the moral health of humans will result in less damage to the environment. Less homosexual acts has no effect whatsoever on the environment. ...well, actually, it has a positive one. It means less people are having children. (And, yes, of course, homosexuals have children, too, but not nearly at the same rate as heterosexuals, as far as I know) That means there are less of us using up nature's resources, which benefits the environment greatly.

Anyway, again you're assuming there is one universal morality that we can protect or "spend money on". There is not. Asserting that yours is the right one is no better than me saying that Braveheart is the best movie ever made (although it is ).

 

[Magic Man]

You said before that you're "not a stickler for organised religion" and that you don't "throw [your] support in with the catholic church".

She says that, and yet she always turns up to support the Christian view of things. I have long wondered why she claims that she belongs to no organized religion, and yet espouses the very same things I hear from Christians.

 

[Heneni]

I imagine that the many homosexual Christians would take a similar attitude to your interpretations of the "law".

What they do and what i do...neither can bypass the law.

I dont see how homosexual acts as being wrong is up for interpretation. How much clearer must the bible be about sexual immorality than it already is. For someone trying to find a loophole,the entire thing will become foggy, especially if they try to avoid what it says.

Heneni

 

[Magic Man]

What they do and what i do...neither can bypass the law.

Luckily we don't have a law against homosexual acts.

I dont see how homosexual acts as being wrong is up for interpretation. How much clearer must the bible be about sexual immorality than it already is. For someone trying to find a loophole,the entire thing will become foggy, especially if they try to avoid what it says.

Heneni

I'm not sure what it takes to get through to you here. We understand that the Bible says that. We don't care. We don't believe in God or the Bible, and so what it says doesn't pertain to us. You can keep quoting the Bible and using it to support your argument, but it's as irrelevant as me using the Bhagavad Gita.

 

[Heneni]

She says that, and yet she always turns up to support the Christian view of things. I have long wondered why she claims that she belongs to no organized religion, and yet espouses the very same things I hear from Christians.

You dont have to say '''she''' like im not here.

I can very well turn up wherever i want. Thank you very much.

Gossiping while im sitting here is...i have a word for it....:angel2:


Heneni

 

[Wandered Off]

I dont see how homosexual acts as being wrong is up for interpretation.

It's not up to much interpretation that such activity was wrong according to the culture in which the Bible was compiled. What may be in question for some is whether this is yet another case of Bronze-age cultural mores mistaken for divine command.

 

[Magic Man]

You dont have to say '''she''' like im not here.

I can very well turn up wherever i want. Thank you very much.

When I'm talking to someone else about you, it only seems appropriate to say "she". You're more than welcome to turn up anywhere you want. I just find it funny that you say you reject organized religion, and yet you constantly support your arguments with the Bible and you support the Catholic church's teachings and Christianity in general. I don't understand the contradiction is all.

Gossiping while im sitting here is...i have a word for it....:angel2:


Heneni

Who's gossiping? I'm commenting, and I expect you to see it, obviously.