because gays and blacksaren't a highly organised single mass responsible for mass suffering and actively opposing efforts such as the drive to reduce AIDS transmission?
You're actively opposed to the Catholic church's teachingwith regards to aids. Presumably, then, abstinence doesn't reduce aids transmission? If not having sex reduced the transmission of aids then you too would be actively opposing the drive to reduce aids transmission.
Now, I agree that the catholic attitude to aids is terrible, but to mitigate a little if you say "Don't have premarital sex. Once married, stay married and stay faithful. Do not use condoms." and I ignore one part of that, you cannot be entirely to blame to for me coming to harm.
Both the examples given are misquotes.
The first was a proclamation that having sex except for procreation was against Catholic doctrine, which you and I might not agree with, but is hardly spreading aids.
The second was a desire to prevent a law which would allow sexually active homosexuals to work for an organisation which does not allow ANY sexually active members, which also seems reasonable to me.
Given the number of really shit things the Catholic church does, it amazes me that the two big stories in recent years have both just been bad journalism.
when i have a child
i am not going to let her have a bike helmet and instead just tell her not to fall off or get runover
Yes, because sex is just as likely to be a complete unwanted accident
as falling off a bike.
when i was a kid
falling off my bike was no biggy. i definitely did daft things that resulted in me falling off, and then did it again and fell off again. it is called having fun
if you tell people not to fuck and not to wear condoms, they are going to fuck and not wear condoms. anyone who thinks that telling people not to fuck is going to work is an absolute fucking retard
Yes,
because British lax morality is worldwide and no Roman Catholic (or Muslim, or whatever) communities have in any way managed to encourage their women not to fuck.
hahaha!
i'm glad you agree with me
But what's so wrong with fucking
that the religions want to stop everyone doing it?
It's a different, better and more immediate way of
achieving ecstasy than through the love of [whatever their alleged supreme being is].
It causes STDs and unwanted population explosions
as well as causing emotional turmoil amongst many individuals, not to mention the objectifying of humans.
I do not think that keeping fucking down to something you only do with people you trust is a terribly religious thing, just a morality thing.
I am not opposed to fucking, but I also hate marmite, without wanting to kill marmite eaters.
who the fuck is talking about killing anyone?
Who is talking about Marmite?
I am not going to go down a straw man avenue.
you massive twat
This is an debate about bigotry.
If we fixate on a throw away Marmite comment then you may as well stand in the middle, shouting 'ALBATROSS!'.
you pathetic, snide coward.
be a fucking man for once in your life and stand by what you said or retract it. who of us are you saying wants to kill catholics?
Then I shall retract it.
It was clearly a throw away comment, but if you need me to clearly state this then I will.
welsh jesus would hate you if you did
I loved that story.
For one thing it looks like Bobby Charlton taking an emu for a walk and, for another, it's Marmite.
You can move Marmite around and make a picture.
Fucking BBC.
church weddings
pay for the roof restoration funds
Now, here I probably disagree with you opinions as well as your bigotry.
I think that churches should have a shit load of money thrown at them - most of them are in a terrible state of decay and, frankly, they are worth preserving.
Bear in mind that for me a church is a building, not a congregation.
I have to say,
having lived in the communities in which we are referring to, and having lots of colleagues who have lived in them long term, this is what I think.....
In many ways, the lax morality attributed to the british is worse on the continent of Africa.
What is different is we will acknowledge it. There is a huge amount of hypocrisy in third world countries around morality as their aid, and the assistance they recieve, is tied into them "being moral".
This is why we, as an NGO, have no religious message. We don't tie our support or assistance into a moral code. We say "Abstinence is good, but if you can't help filling the pink love tunnel, always wear a condom"
The catholic church will not engage with sex workers to help and educate them. Big mistake.
And don't even get me started on abortion.
You say it is a mistake (and I would do it)
but evidence does show that sex education and the availability of contraception always leads to an increase in promiscuity and a subsequent rise in STD.
thats absolute bollocks,
as we prepare the reports here.
Take a look at Rwanda. They have massive sex ed programs in school. They have huge billboard adverts everywhere with a smiling woman and man on saying "always use a condom".
Rwanda is a model of how to reduce HIV/AIDS incidence, reduce sti levels, reduce unwanted pregnancies, empower women, reduce rape, and leverage all of that into geting their economy up and running.
Now, South Africa. Complete opposite in message/education etc. One of the worst places in thwe world HIV wise. 1 in 4.
lets hope the man u contingent of the england team
go bareback
lols.
Its a bloody dangerous place sex wise, thats for sure, and it doesn't help when the health minister believes Vitamins and Potatoes are a prevention and cure for the HIV, that HIV and AIDS are unrelated, and that AIDS is engineered by the western world and distributed through vaccines, in order to enslave and subjugate the black man further.
Stupid Bitch. Killing thousands a year.
Now that's fucking evil.
Proper Idi Amin shit.
jebus
pol pot territory.. can't they just arrest her?
I am not claiming that education is not effective (although the Rwanda example is
perhaps more fuelled by the massive reduction in rape?)
I am speaking solely of distribution of contraception.
The Catholic church does educate to reduce HIV/AIDS incidence, reduce sti levels, reduce unwanted pregnancies and reduce rape.
Not fucking is an excellent methodology to achieve this.
When we get right down to it,
all you, and I, and every other person, is simply a fucking machine. We are designed to procreate.
You may as well tell the lion to go Vege.
Now, here's another point. Due to very high infant mortality on that Continent, they fuck more than we do. Historically they have had to. Its very hard to make a cultural u-turn in a short space of time.
The rape issue in Rwanda was mostly down to womens rights education.
Rwanda is also a very interesting country sexually speaking. Female ejaculation (i.e. squirting) is common place (3 in 4), and its one of the few places in that area of sub saharan africa where the men do not have a taste for "dry sex" as a preference.
Women's rights education is important
and I did miss that out deliberately, because I do not know that the RCs are hot on it.
also, no point telling women to stop fucking if rape is a problem.
And if telling rapists not to fuck works, why do we send ours to prison ; )
we barely do
`
i'm pretty sure jim
knows the feeling
You,
see FB
cor!
message sent
I now have snot on my
moustache.
I'm a baffled as to how otherwise normal, sensible people
can exhibit such blind hatred and bias about the Catholics.
when I have a child I'm going to make him wear a condom all the time in case he falls over and lands hilt deep in a HIV positive person.
i don't hate catholics
i just think the pope is an evil fucking cunt
to qoute Doug Stanhope badly,
"Why are people worried that the Pope is an ex Nazi? The Nazi's were only around for 15 years and didn't do half of what the catholic church achieved. I'd be more worried if someone said "you know that Nazi is an ex pope!""
hahaha
`
in what aspect is it blind and biased?
have we not just put a whole load of posts here explaining our reasoned objections?
There is far more anti Catholic/pope sentiment
than there is facts relating to Catholic/papal behaviour.
It's fine to hate the pope and think all Catholics are wrong, but this thread contains a lot anger and statements that are too broad sweeping to be accurate.
"when i have a child i am not going to let her have a bike helmet and instead just tell her not to fall off or get runover" is not comparable to saying "No extramarital sex, no condoms".
that would depend on the true price of sex, really.
And I mean cost in the economist sense.
If the price of sex unprotected is as high as the price of riding a bike unprotected, the comment is valid.
No,
saying 'don't ride a bike' is the same, not saying 'ride a bike unprotected'.
I concede.
For my part, I'm going to defend my viewpoint.
I don't hate catholics. But I do have some massive, fundamental disagreements with the doctrine and teaching of the catholic church. I'll extend that, and say thats the same with most religions.
I have a major problem with pretty much anyone
who thinks they are right and is intolerant of others.
Intolerance is something that I find it hard to tolerate.