Comments on: Roman Catholic bishops slam Ireland’s Civil Partnership Bill

By: Stan James

Stan James — Sat, 26 Jun 2010 04:58:21 +0000

The Roman catholic church – power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely, and when you claim to speak for God………….

They always needed someone to hate to sell their brand of love. It was the Muslims during the crusades, when 40-50 million were murdered in the name of God, by those carrying a cross in one hand, and a sword in the other. No wonder Muslim nut cases hate us

And there was the inquisition – say the earth was round, not flat per the pope, and it was to the torture chambers and fire that you went.

women were burned at the stake as witches. Their real witchcraft was exciting the church fathers organs, and creating a crisis re celibacy. So once again the church found a way to deliver a message – to women,a nd to those priests who like the majority of people long for sexual companionship.

the hatred of the gays is just the same thing for the minority who long for sexual companionship with the same sex. It gives the church fathers boners, and that doesn’t look good to those in their transvestite uniforms.

it goes on and on. they hated Jesus own people the Jews. Which their boy hitler, born and baptised catholic, leveraged to gain power and 50 million died for the “church of life”. He documented his hatred in Mein Kampf, learned while growing up in very catholic Austria.

And they have yet to EXcommunicate Hitler

while Pope RATZInger in 2009 UNexcommunicated a Bishop Williamson. He is a holocaust denier, but he brings back into the church his 600000 mad followers. At least Argentina threw this nazi bishop out of the country. And its House of Representatives just passed a gay marriage law.

And of ocurse the church has its cover up sex scandals, now reaching into Brazil, the USA, Ireland, Austria, Australia, Germany, Switzerland italy, etc. With Pope RATZInger and his brother implicated as well. When they talk about love, they really are talking about their secret desires.

And back about 1000 years ago, the church went to celibacy for priests, from previously allowing them to marry. The priests now marry the church in the queerest marriage of them all. So the priests are totally controlled, and their property is inherited by the church, not their wife or progeny.

Virtually every west european country except Italy and greece have legal recognition of gay peoples unions, including MARRIAGE in Norway, Sweden, Holland, Belgium, Spain and just recently Portugal. Which had the balls to sign gay MARRIAGE into law while the stench of the pope from his visit to derail it was still in the air. And Iceland just legalized gay MARRIAGE by a unanimous 49-0 vote of their parliment. civil Unions in Ireland – a foregone concludsion.

Along with 20 or so other countries, including 5 catholic countries in South/Central America, Israel, Repub of South Africa, Nepal, Canada, Chech Republic, Hungary, Austria etc.

The church is dead in Europe. Mankinds worst tragedy was that the Arabs didn’t retaliate properly for the crusades, by burning the Vatican to the ground, and turning its land into a sewer pit 500 years ago.

By: Another Voice In The Wilderness

Another Voice In The Wilderness — Mon, 05 Apr 2010 07:34:55 +0000

I am not a Doctor. I am a simple human being. I know that naturally, children come from a sexual act between male and female. I know that it is not always consensual, and without any doubt I also believe I am here because someone in my ancestry, in all probability, was raped. Rape, sodomy, buggery and all other acts of sexual intimacy are all part of the large array – the massive, or small mural (a question of perception perhaps) of just being human. By the light of common reason, humanity is still in its journey. It is painful for some, for others a breeze. Our scale of sight is limited by our vision of death. We must all end. We must all die. Most want to make some sense before that happens. Some donâ€™t and wonâ€™t! We are driven by life itself but some donâ€™t care to take any control, while sometimes, those that do, take full advantage of power and might. Some are quite wrong in their actions. I say the Roman Catholic Church is not responsible for the vile acts of any man or woman, even within its â€˜coverâ€™. The Roman Catholic Church is not responsible for men or women who tell lies or try to bear false witness. A â€˜few very bad applesâ€™ without doubt and NO, what good that is sometimes done in that institution does never cancel the bad, also done under its cloak. The Roman Catholic Church is not one person. This institution, these people, are only human beings too, on the same journey as you or I. Today I feel good, full of faith, or what good I believe in, and with love and warmth too, tomorrow I might feel the exact opposite! I am human after all. That is the truth. It is our common condition and we are all part of it, whether we like it or not. Using our power to get our wants, even if that is against the will, or causes the harm of another, is an individual action of self. In the UK, corruption is everywhere. Chaos comes out of order! The local Councils, the Courts, the Police, the Members of Parliament â€“ You name it, itâ€™s bent, broken , falling to pieces. Big business is buying up our futures, our policies, our laws. When I feel out of control, I suspect like you, I will lash out against good reason, wherever that comes from. When the current sickness against having rules of moral worth ends, I wonder who will be left to uphold them! Maybe, just maybe, The natural Family of at least one man and one woman may take centre stage once again. I wonâ€™t be holding my breath though!

By: NeoWolfe

NeoWolfe — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 10:12:49 +0000

I am so sorry, Most Holy Dr. Harwood, but, so far, since I’ve been contributing here, only one person has called me a jackass, and that is you. But, since you are a Doctor, surely you must be correct, given your educational background. But, the assembled audience must surely be curious as to what grounds you have to address me in such a disrespectful manner. If failing to acknowledge you prominence is your complaint, I think that makes you the jackass, doesn’t it? Please respond.

NeoWolfe

By: William Harwood

William Harwood — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 07:01:48 +0000

I am DR Harwood, MR Wolfe. I did not identify any person in my comment. But if the shoe fits…
Given the number of persons who have already identified Mr Wolfe as a jackass, if he wants to keep posting proof of his ignorance, the smart thing to do would be to adopt a new pseudonym. But I guess jackasses are not that bright.

By: NeoWolfe

NeoWolfe — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 01:39:58 +0000

harwood,

In your own way, are you trying to prove that point?

NeoWolfe

By: William Harwood

William Harwood — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 14:39:13 +0000

To whom it may concern: It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than open your mouth and remove all doubt.

By: Angela_K

Angela_K — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 09:29:34 +0000

@NeoWolfe. “I donâ€™t know where you get your date, but, Mosaic law contained regulations on marriage and divorce, written before 1150 B.C.”

NeoWolfe, I’m sorry but I can’t remember where I read about christians getting in on the marriage business; I remember the 5CE reference was for Western Europe.

By: Patricia Ryan

Patricia Ryan — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 05:48:21 +0000

1 I know that same sex partners certainly need the same protection that wives and husbands get on the death of their partner. There have been too many cases of a devoted partner caring throughout the last illness and then relatives of the deceased walking off with the assets and even refusing the surviving partner a place in arranging funeral arrangements but

2 If as many have argued marriage is a civil contract why do we recognise the rights of the partner in a case of cohabitation.
In a business situation if there is no contract one surrenders the protection of the law. Peerhaps if the state were not to include these relationships people would realise the bebefits of a civil contract. Should we recognise those in same sex relationships that have not registered their union?

By: NeoWolfe

NeoWolfe — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 01:16:25 +0000

Harwood,

Didn’t your gradeschool teacher instruct you that the last paragraph was supposed to be a conclusion that summarized your talking points?

Nice shotgun blast of sorta-facts, without a single footnote.

NeoWolfe

By: William Harwood

William Harwood — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 22:16:49 +0000

Are the tyrants who now claim that the world’s largest organized crime syndicate has a monopoly over marriage unmitigated liars? Or do their brainwashers prevent them from learning that their cult rejected marriage as licensed prostitution for the first 1,300 years of Anointianity’s (khristianismos) existence?
Origen wrote, “Matrimony is impure and unholy, a means of licentious passion.” Jerome instructed Christians to “cut down with the axe of celibacy the wood of matrimony.” Ambrose declared that matrimony was prostitution against the Christian god. Tertullian called it “obscenity … more monstrous than any punishment or death.” Augustine of Hippo called it “sin.” Only in medieval times did the RC church adopt the position, “If you can’t beat them, annex them.” At that point they declared marriage a sacrament–after 13 centuries of instructing priests not to attend marriage ceremonies lest they appear to be legitimizing immorality.
The tanakh’s earliest reference to marriage is in the Yahwist (J) torah of c 920 BCE. Its earliest reference to divorce is in the Priestly (P) torah of 621-612 BCE. The concept of marriage, essentially the private ownership of women as men’s breeding stock, dates back to the Big Discovery of c 3500 BCE. The pretence that the torah was written by Moses was invented some time between J’s date and P’s.