permalink for this thread :
Dibzzz Posted on 23/12/2008 09:22
The Pope talking shyte

Pope Benedict XVI has said that saving humanity from homosexual or transsexual behaviour is just as important as saving the rainforest from destruction.

FFS, this is the 21st Century, I thought catholic faith was supposed to be all about love, tolerance and understanding.

And people actually sit up and listen to this tit.

rumrunner Posted on 23/12/2008 09:24
The Pope talking shyte

homo`s burn them all

Lezzars are ok though dont be going burning them like

rutters Posted on 23/12/2008 09:25
The Pope talking shyte

well if everyone was Gay then we would be in trouble

maxi_levy Posted on 23/12/2008 09:25
The Pope talking shyte


rumrunner Posted on 23/12/2008 09:25
The Pope talking shyte

Oh yeah and some of them tranny`s are mint you can leanve them off the bommy an all

Scrote Posted on 23/12/2008 09:26
The Pope talking shyte

when you think about it though, he does have a point

if we all become homosexual for a laugh then the chances of the human race surviving are roughly nil


mfc_1 Posted on 23/12/2008 09:27
The Pope talking shyte

if anyone on this board had said what he has they would have been a police investigation.

Prime example why all religion should be banned from every school in the UK

Bigbilly Posted on 23/12/2008 09:27
The Pope talking shyte

Homosexual or transsexual behaviour means acts of a sexual nature between people of that persuasion.

If we all did the above then mankind as we know it would become the exception rather than the norm.

rumrunner Posted on 23/12/2008 09:30
The Pope talking shyte

some of the homo`s are quite fit like dont burn them mebbe stub a few fags out on em but thats all no none of that burning

MarlonD Posted on 23/12/2008 09:31
The Pope talking shyte

'Hey Benedict, leave those lezzers alone'

scuzzmonster Posted on 23/12/2008 09:32
The Pope talking shyte

'All in all, it's just another hole on a hole.'

mm40 Posted on 23/12/2008 09:33
The Pope talking shyte

he is only stating what he believes is right.

MarlonD Posted on 23/12/2008 09:33
The Pope talking shyte

'We don't need no double enders'

Dibzzz Posted on 23/12/2008 09:35
The Pope talking shyte

It's an utterly ridiculas statement, and at very best in very poor taste.

Well it's not rocket science that the human race would soon die out if everyone was gay, but it's not going to happen is it?

Jesus could have been gay, he didn't marry which was very unusual back in those days and he hung around with 12 other blokes.

maxi_levy Posted on 23/12/2008 09:37
The Pope talking shyte

All them puffs want a good F***ing,

MarlonD Posted on 23/12/2008 09:37
The Pope talking shyte

Dibzzz, calm down you're getting yourself all worked up over nowt.

Us catholics know the score, the top bloke has to denounce the bummers and that to keep the hardliners happy. We allknow that he likes the rug munchers.

DavidShayler Posted on 23/12/2008 09:55
The Pope talking shyte

He`d do well to practice what he preaches: take a look at the hypocracy of the Catholic Church.Corruption, collusion with Hitler and Mussolini, backing tyranny in South America (eg. Fujimori in Peru)and South East Asia and backing reactionary regimes in the new Europe of former Soviet States. It preaches peace then blesses the sons of the poor as it sends them off to war.


Show me one who leads by example not preaches one thing and does another.Nuff said.

MarlonD Posted on 23/12/2008 10:01
The Pope talking shyte

Aye we're a funny bunch.

Don't upset us.

karla Posted on 23/12/2008 10:03
The Pope talking shyte

He should start looking closer to home if he wants to deal with this issue - the words pot and kettle spring to mind!

BenGee Posted on 23/12/2008 10:04
The Pope talking shyte

"collusion with Hitler and Mussolini"

Find me conclusive proof of the latter.

MarlonD Posted on 23/12/2008 10:05
The Pope talking shyte

"the words pot and kettle spring to mind"

The words homo & bender spring to mine

Dibzzz Posted on 23/12/2008 10:35
The Pope talking shyte

The words relegation and dogfight spring to mind.

scuzzmonster Posted on 23/12/2008 10:37
The Pope talking shyte

Marlon's right. The Pope is just the CEO. Doesn't mean we have to agree with him all the time, or even like him for that matter.

MarlonD Posted on 23/12/2008 10:39
The Pope talking shyte

I preferred John Paul II. At least he could play in goal.

borobadge Posted on 23/12/2008 10:50
The Pope talking ......

enjoy your christmas lads....

the celebration of t'birth of Jesus Christ.

Genghis_Khan Posted on 23/12/2008 11:06
The Pope talking ......

If we burnt tranxesuals instead of trees it would be better for the enviornment.

MarlonD Posted on 23/12/2008 11:08
The Pope talking ......

They would smell a bit though.

Spartakus Posted on 23/12/2008 11:13
The Pope talking ......

Does the stupid ignorant F***** not think that celibacy is just as big a threat to reproduction as homosexuality.

And let's get it right religious fundamentalists and their intolerance are a far bigger threat to human life than the Gay and Lesbian community at the moment.

Has the man never read the new Testament???

MarlonD Posted on 23/12/2008 11:14
The Pope talking ......

New testament ?

Is that the next installment of Harry Potter ?

John67 Posted on 23/12/2008 11:16
The Pope talking shyte

A bloke, wearing brightly coloured dresses all day and loads of matching camp jewellery, who joined the Hitler youth for the uniform (very fetching) and has never slept with a women and yet is constantly surrounded by alter boys and young priests, tells you being a bummer is wrong!!!!!! The bloke is a wooly in denial.

karla Posted on 23/12/2008 11:18
The Pope talking ......

It´s galling to be preached at by a former member of the Hitler Youth.

Grumpy_Paul Posted on 23/12/2008 11:19
The Pope talking shyte

"Show me one who leads by example not preaches one thing and does another.Nuff said"

Francis of Asissi



Mother Theresa

Many unsung Christian heroes past and present

Next Dumb question?

Billy_Corkhill Posted on 23/12/2008 11:25
The Pope talking shyte

"who joined the Hitler youth"

Was conscripted into the Hitler youth more like and deserted once the Allies entered Germany.

I think basic research before posting would save a lot of posters looking like fools.

Kirkylane Posted on 23/12/2008 11:27
The Pope talking shyte

Dibzzz you must be very insecure to feel so threatened by a man in a frock a long way away.

"Prime example why all religion should be banned from every school in the UK"

Or is it just an excuse to let your authoritarian tendencies get out? Can't you collect some dead flies, and pull their legs off instead?

karla Posted on 23/12/2008 11:29
The Pope talking shyte

I said "former member of the Hitler Youth" - get it right.

GillZean Posted on 23/12/2008 11:31
The Pope talking shyte

And I thought it was only Rangers fans who were bigots (sheeeezz!!) [B)]

Dibzzz Posted on 23/12/2008 12:06
The Pope talking shyte


Insercure? Nor not me mate, I think the bloke in the frock a long way away has the insecurity problems.

SteveGoldby Posted on 23/12/2008 12:18
The Pope talking shyte

It's unbelievable that a man who has harboured known sex criminals and encouraged the covering up of paedophilia within his organisation can say this.

The man is a first class T***, pure and simple.

Death to the church!

Link: Grounds To Arrest Ratzinger?

number9point5 Posted on 23/12/2008 12:24
The Pope talking shyte

"And people actually sit up and listen to this tit"

no time for him myself but have to agree with him on this one.

And as for "Has the man never read the new Testament" have you?

Here's one for you Romans 1 vs 26-27, thats the New Testament.

believe what you want but at least get your facts right.

Spartakus Posted on 23/12/2008 15:35
The Pope talking shyte

You're not seriously using the words FACT and new Testament in the same sentance are you.

Regardless of all the non facts within the New Testament, the general message from Jimmy Christ seems to be one of tolerance towards fellow Human Beings. Something a lot of 'Christians' seem to overlook.

scooby Posted on 23/12/2008 15:36
The Pope talking shyte

More S***e from the head of an organisation of deluded T***s.

crowborough81 Posted on 23/12/2008 15:44
The Pope talking shyte

don t forget don bosco grumpy (sings) "oh its good to be a roman catholic"

karembeu_ca Posted on 23/12/2008 15:45
The Pope talking shyte

nice cheery xmas thread isnt it!

scooby Posted on 23/12/2008 15:47
The Pope talking shyte

Goodwill to all men!

Love thy neighbour!

God loves us all!

....what a hypocritical bunch they are.

The_same_as_before Posted on 23/12/2008 15:50
The Pope talking shyte

Member of the deluded T***tery here. He is simply restating doctrine, does not mean I have to agree with him.

There are parts of Catholicism I fundementally agree with, e.g. anti-Abortion, it does not mean I am going to bomb a hospital.

Still each to their own.

scooby Posted on 23/12/2008 15:54
The Pope talking shyte


Nothing like pure hatred towards your fellow man, eh?

I see how your a'la carte faith gets you off the hook but personally I don't want anything off their menu. I have no respect for a religion headed by an apologist for paedophiles and no respect for people who pretend to belong to such an organisation but stick their fingers in their ears when the evil side of it comes out in public.

The_same_as_before Posted on 23/12/2008 15:56
The Pope talking shyte

OK, good point, thanks.

PortseaBlue Posted on 23/12/2008 15:58
The Pope talking shyte

Well said that Pope. The arsehole is for S***ting not shagging and it was Adam n Eve not Adam n Steve !

GAYS OUT !! Lol !

nobbienuts Posted on 23/12/2008 16:43
The Pope talking shyte

Nice to see the usual dickwads on here still don't read peoples replys.

Here is what 9.5 actually said if you care to read it

""And people actually sit up and listen to this tit"

no time for him myself but have to agree with him on this one.

And as for "Has the man never read the new Testament" have you?

Here's one for you Romans 1 vs 26-27, thats the New Testament.

believe what you want but at least get your facts right."

number9point5 Posted on 23/12/2008 16:45
The Pope talking shyte

Why thnk you nobbie....

From my perspective you either believe that the bible is gods word or you chose not to the choice is yours.

If you think it is then ALL of it is, you can't pick and choose which bits are or are not. It's an all or nothing thing.

if you think it's not then what does it matter what some old german in a fish hat says?

"You're not seriously using the words FACT and new Testament in the same sentance are you." did you read my reply sparty if so then your reply is rather moronic too say the least, if not then you best read it before replying.

scooby Posted on 23/12/2008 16:52
The Pope talking shyte

That book is as much god's word as the presents under our tree were delivered by a fat guy in a red suit.

That guy Jesus was brilliant and I'd love to have met him. Had some great ideas that were sadly hijacked by power-hungry B******s and followed by superstitious sheep. 30+ year old jewish man unmarried 2000 years ago? I reckon the anti-homosexual stance of the church is a handy way to avoid every discussing THAT issue.

borobadge Posted on 23/12/2008 16:56
The Pope says "are the boro struggling",

of course us Catholics are to blame for all the worlds evils...

thank the good lord those lions are in licensed cages and Zoo's.....we wouldnt want then waking now, would we!.

enjoy your christmas lads...and celebrating the birth of Jesus Christ.........his the saviour of the world, so deserves all of your adulation........dont forget to give your children, parents and loved ones presents..just like the 3 wise men brought the baby'll soon be Easter, again you can take days off work and celebrate Jesus Christ once again...

God Bless.

number9point5 Posted on 23/12/2008 16:57
The Pope talking shyte

so whats the problem then scooby?

if thats what the german in a fish hat thinks then thats his problem, why get so worked up about it?

I don't get all hot under the collar when dawkins spouts his drivel.

Personally i have zero time for anything that the pope says, it just happens that what he has said this time agrees with what the bible says on the topic, kind of a change for popes really.

tranny_terry Posted on 23/12/2008 16:59
The Pope talking shyte

He's as barmy as those irritating Jehovah coonts.

scooby Posted on 23/12/2008 17:04
The Pope talking shyte

Just because a guy agrees with a load of S*** doesn't make him impressive in my eyes.

Personally, I don't see how you can proclaim to love all men but then remove certain groups from 'all' afterwards.

Secondly, I've never heard Dawkins tell anyone to hate another group of humans and certainly not on the basis of a fairy tale.

Borobadge, there's no way I'd fill my son's head with rubbish so while we will play along with the idea that there was a virgin on a donkey with some wise men, there's a fat bloke who can fit down every chimney after being transported by flying reindeer and there is a fairy who will take away his milk teeth - I won't be telling him to keep his mind open that all those things are real. I certainly won't be brainwashing him or using guilt to make him 'believe' nor will I ever encourage bigotry and hate in the name of the religion of love and compassion.

nobbienuts Posted on 23/12/2008 17:04
The Pope talking shyte

Ah an intellectual response form the resident cross-dresser. i used to know a terry who was that way inclined, you come from thornaby by any chance?

tranny_terry Posted on 23/12/2008 17:12
The Pope talking shyte

I'm as much a cross-dresser as you are a paedophile, now that's out the way, no, I'm not from Thornaby.

You've got to laugh at the tvvat who thinks Christmas is simply about celebrating Jesus, the ignorant git probably doesn't realise that it was originally a pagan festival before those dopey band-wagon jumping berks hijacked it.

number9point5 Posted on 23/12/2008 17:14
The Pope talking shyte

While i can appreciate your sentiment scooby it would clear up a whole lot of misunderstanding if people actually read what it says in the bible rather than base opinion on hearsay and whatever the bloke down the pub says.

The bible condemns the practice of homosexuality in the say way it condemns the practice of adultery, sex before marriage, murder etc. the operative word is "practice", if people cannot get there head around the distinction then I'm not going to explain it.

As for dawkins, well from my stand point the theory of evolution is responsible for a great many crimes in society because it removes moral accountability to a greater power, be that a god of whatever type. It is interesting that the world’s greatest pogroms have been committed since darwin's theory became popular and generally by those subscribing to that belief. Like it or not secularists are still a minority in the world. Perhaps we should be feeding you lot to the lions [:D]

tranny_terry Posted on 23/12/2008 17:20
The Pope talking shyte

Maybe 9.5 should practice what he preaches in terms of reading the bible.

SteveGoldby Posted on 23/12/2008 17:21
The Pope says

borobadge - nobody stated on here that the catholics are to blame for anything and Christ is no more the saviour of the world than you or I are.

Whilst you are busy celebrating the birthday of Jesus Christ, why not also raise a glass for Horus, the Sun God of Ancient Egypt who was born of a virgin, Isis Mary, in around 3000BC. Horus also performed miracles, spread his message with his band of twelve followers, was betrayed, crucified, rose from the dead three days later and ascended into heaven.

And it's not just Horus's birthday on 25th December. Attis of Phrygian was born in around 122BC, Krishna of India was born in around 900BC and Mithra of Persia in around 1200BC and all three were born on 25th December.

All were born to virgins, performed miracles and spread their message with a band of twelve followers. All were betrayed, suffered crucifixion and rose from the dead three days later and ascended into heaven.

And there's more. At least twelve more saviours, messiahs, sons of God etc have parallel lives and many, if not all, of the characteristics listed for Horus and the other three examples.

Which proves the point that the power and strength of world religion lies in the suppression of information and knowledge.

Have a watch of this film and spread the word about it because as it's message grows, so the evil of world religion will decline. It's a brilliant film as the facts within will result in the death knell for Rome and the end of the church as we now know it.

Have a great Christmas and please say a prayer for all the kids that have been brutally sodomised by the lousy B******s in charge of your stinking religion.


scooby Posted on 23/12/2008 17:21
The Pope talking shyte

Do you mean this passage?

"For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet."

The stuff is almost Nostradamus-like in its phrasing! [:D] There's huge scope for retrospectively fitting a meaning in there - very similar to the discussion we had about the Bible proving that believers in God had discovered the water cycle etc etc

Evolution is not responsible for great crimes in history!! It removes responsibility to a higher power? Are you telling me that humans need the vengeance of a nasty god hanging over them before they do the right thing? Plenty of people are able to accurately set and follow their moral compass without having the fear of retribution hanging over them. If secularists are a minority, that does make your suggestion that the rise in 'evil' in the past two centuries is down to them seem odd! You good Samaritans must have stopped crossing over that road a long time ago to allow a minority to assume sole responsibility for the world's evils!

tranny_terry Posted on 23/12/2008 17:25
The Pope talking shyte

I can't get over the fact they think Jesus walked on water.

HolgateCorner Posted on 23/12/2008 17:34
The Pope talking shyte

The Pope is right on this subject though, isn't he?

tranny_terry Posted on 23/12/2008 17:42
The Pope talking shyte

Come on. Do you honestly think the "blurring of gender" is going to destroy humanity? If he'd said HIV/AIDS he may have had a point.

number9point5 Posted on 23/12/2008 17:50
The Pope talking shyte



Here's why....

Jesus was not born on the 25th Dec. OK let me repeat that Jesus WAS NOT BORN ON THE 25th DEC or the 21st of December or the winter solstice.

Now the first part of the film devotes itself entirely to Jesus being BORN ON THE 25th of December or the winter solstice and comparing the account to Ra/Horus or whomever. Now if he, Jesus, was not BORN on the 25th of December then the film and the incorrect summations’ it makes are wrong! Apart from that it’s to be trusted 100% for its factual content (sic)

Makes sense as to why the film is a load of BOLLOX, bye the way I tried to contact the makers to point out this small error right at the beginning of the film but was unable to do so, read what you like into that.


People will be nasty, when I was in the SADF i watched Christians (so called) and atheists do terrible things. i prefer to live my life with hope rather than with none.

Buddy Posted on 23/12/2008 17:59
The Pope talking shyte

borobadge - can you point me to the documentary evidence regarding a specific number of wise men please?

On the wider point, as usual religious dogma is used as an excuse for intolerance and discrimination.

Do you reckon Jesus was taking the P*** when he called his followers his "flock"? As in "this lot will go wherever I tell them"...

SteveGoldby Posted on 23/12/2008 18:02
The Pope talking shyte

Yes, I am well aware that he wasn't born on 25 Dec. He also was never born to a virgin, never got crucified and never rose from the dead and ascended to heaven.

Because the whole JC story is completely taken from the stories of other 'Gods' who were around well before Christ is supposed to have lived and that's the whole point of the film.

But even conceding that one point to you, what about the rest of it? Surely there's too many cold facts in there for you to deny that the whole basis of Christianity has no foundation anymore?

Uncle_harry Posted on 23/12/2008 18:04
The Pope talking shyte

popes talking cack eh? well he won't be the first.....

Link: Here comes the popes pt 3

number9point5 Posted on 23/12/2008 18:06
The Pope talking shyte

"But even conceding that one point to you"

err rather a big point don't you think! our whole argument is based on a small point oh Jesus was not born on the winter solstice?

Kind of debunks the rest of the argument.

SteveGoldby Posted on 23/12/2008 18:12
The Pope talking shyte

Well first of all number9point5, it's a discussion not an argument.

No, I don't agree at all that Christ not really being born on 25 Dec debunks the rest of the argument. In fact, it adds to it because you have to ask the question - why did the powers that be select that date?

Probably because it was Horus' birthday (and all the others) and if you're going to plagiarise, you may as well go the whole hog.

And what about all the other points in the movie?

ThePrisoner Posted on 23/12/2008 18:23
The Pope talking shyte

Oh, hokey, cokey , cokey
Oh, hokey, cokey , cokey
Knees bend, arms stretch, rah! rah! rah!

king_hellfire Posted on 23/12/2008 18:27
The Pope talking shyte

It seems that Dawkins is looked down on by quite a few posters on here, so i will post an excerpt from Christopher Hitchens' God Is Not Great that adds a little extra information regarding SteveGoldby's post at 17:21.

Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost." "Yes, and the Greek demigod Perseus was born when the god Jupiter visited the virgin Danaë as a shower of gold and got her with child. The god Buddha was born through an opening in his mother's flank. Catlicus the serpent-skirted caught a little ball of feathers from the sky and hid it in her bosom, and the Aztec god Huitzilopochtli was thus conceived. The virgin Nana took a pomegranate from the tree watered by the blood of the slain Agdestris, and laid it in her bosom, and gave birth to the god Attis. The virgin daughter of a Mongol king awoke one night and found herself bathed in a great light, which caused her to give birth to Genghis Khan. Krishna was born of the virgin Devaka. Horus was born of the virgin Isis. Mercury was born of the virgin Maia. Romulus was born of the virgin Rhea Sylvia."

"For some reason, many religions force themselves to think of the birth canal as a one-way street, and even the Koran treats the Virgin Mary with reverence ."

Also, as a side note Christopher Hitchens makes an interesting point with the following quote:

"If Jesus could heal a blind person he happened to meet, then why not heal blindness?"

For anyone who is interested in reading God Is Not Great, there is a copy of the text on the link below.

Link: God Is Not Great.

Guisborough_Town_Red Posted on 23/12/2008 18:29
The Pope talking shyte

Jesus was probably born on 4 BC, and definately not on 25th December. Oh, and there wasn't 3 wise men.

attonBORO Posted on 23/12/2008 18:50
The Pope talking shyte

he's right coz if every one was an arsee bandit, then there woulod be no procreation and we would eventually die out!! Agree lezzers are ok though.

The_263 Posted on 23/12/2008 18:58
The Pope talking shyte

He's right. Gay men are beyond reproach but lesbos can be converted if they get the right treatment.

Scrote Posted on 23/12/2008 23:06
The Pope talking shyte

steve_goldby - considering the zeitgeist gubbins has been argued (or should that be discussed - semantics ftl) to death on here before i really can't be bothered starting again with it

but the other major flaw it has is that Jesus died and rose again and then ascended into heaven

horus and 90% of the other deities mentioned die and live in a cyclic manner due to their being based on solar cycles - they are descriptive myths of what actually happens in the heavens as viewed by people without a big telescope in space

unlike some Christians i don't believe that every word in the bible is absolute fact/to be followed absolutely - it plainly isn't intended to be

the birth story of Jesus is an irrelevance and is only used as a method to berate Christianity because the actual message of Christ is pretty much bang on

the fact that organised religion has managed to bugger things up doesn't mean that Jesus wasn't who He said He was

HolgateCorner Posted on 23/12/2008 23:27
The Pope talking shyte

Scrote has made a good point - regardless of the factual content, the morals of the Bible tales aren't bad considering they were put together a couple of thousand years ago.

If you started from scratch now, the messages would be the same wouldn't they?

Maybe not for gay boys, lesbos and lady boys I suppose.

Dibzzz Posted on 23/12/2008 23:32
The Pope talking shyte

One things for sure, there will be still plenty of Homosexuals walking this planet when all of today's religions have long been forgotten.

scooby Posted on 23/12/2008 23:35
The Pope talking shyte

Incredibly, a lot of people manage to live out a morally just life without a handbook - certainly not one that requires worship of a man/god.

Jesus being the son of god is what F***ed it up. Great ideas but doomed to abuse because it has a mythology around it.

Can't we just have some good ideas without a wizard at the centre of it?

Dibzzz Posted on 23/12/2008 23:35
The Pope talking shyte

Did you know that the bible was written some 400 years after the alleged event?

HolgateCorner Posted on 23/12/2008 23:37
The Pope talking shyte

That's ok as long as they are not in everybody's face about being homosexual and victimised.

I mean if two gay blokes want to adopt a couple of kids there's nothing unnatural about that is there?

Imagine at the school gate - how come your mam seems to be a bloke??

scooby Posted on 23/12/2008 23:38
The Pope talking shyte

Dibz, all homosexuals were created by hetrosexuals. Hetrosexuals can't be natural surely?

scooby Posted on 23/12/2008 23:40
The Pope talking shyte

Holgate, you'll find that kids don't tend to be born with preconceived bigotry and it is usually installed in them by adults. Christian parents in all probability.

Anyone know why Jesus wasn't married in his 30s, by the way? Did he ever say anything about gays or did he ever say anything about his own sexuality?

Dibzzz Posted on 23/12/2008 23:42
The Pope talking shyte

It's just the way they are, they can't help it, just leave them be, as long as they leave us be.

There's plenty of gay activity in the animal world, of which we are part of.

It's all just part and parcel of being a creature on this planet Earth. (Which god definatley didn't create)

HolgateCorner Posted on 23/12/2008 23:43
The Pope talking shyte

The decline in moral standards in this country is a result of the decline in the influence of the church.

Unfortunately young people do need some moral guidance.

Dibzzz Posted on 23/12/2008 23:45
The Pope talking shyte

I've never heard such crap, you can have moral guidance without it being attached to some cult you know?

HolgateCorner Posted on 23/12/2008 23:47
The Pope talking shyte

But who sets the benchmark?

Who, for examle, says murdering somebody is wrong?

Plenty of murders go on in the animal kingdom....

king_hellfire Posted on 23/12/2008 23:48
The Pope talking shyte

'That's ok as long as they are not in everybody's face about being homosexual and victimised.'

Christianity has been in 'everybody's face' for 2,000 years, so they're the last people who should be preaching about Homosexuals doing it, plus they wouldn't have to complain about being victimised half as much if Christians didn't go around spreading sh!te about homosexuality being unnatural and 'wrong'.

scooby Posted on 23/12/2008 23:51
The Pope talking shyte

"The decline in moral standards in this country is a result of the decline in the influence of the church."

I have a son, he has quite clear moral guidelines in place from me thanks. I don't think he'll be needing fire, brimstone and hocus pocus to keep him in line.

HolgateCorner Posted on 23/12/2008 23:52
The Pope talking shyte

sorry but I can't be doing with any of the 'look at me I'm different' mob.

They can just get on with it as far as I am concerned.

The Pope is right.

scooby Posted on 23/12/2008 23:55
The Pope talking shyte

Holgate, the pope also seemed to think it was ok for priests to rape children as long as it was kept out off the public eye. Is this ok to you too? I salute your live-and-let-live attitude.

king_hellfire Posted on 23/12/2008 23:56
The Pope talking shyte

'Plenty of murders go on in the animal kingdom....'

I'm not too sure about that.

Surely animals kill for a reason, such as killing over territory/food/survival or fighting over a mate.

scooby Posted on 23/12/2008 23:58
The Pope talking shyte

They certainly don't do it because they are in dire need of moral guidance.

HolgateCorner Posted on 24/12/2008 00:00
The Pope talking shyte

No it's not ok to me, but that wasn't the subject of the original post.

I am not a religious person but I see the value of the moral guidance given by religions in society. The morals you pass down to your son will be morals you picked up from living in a Christian society when you were a child.

It won't take many generations of neglect to lose our moral values.

HolgateCorner Posted on 24/12/2008 00:02
The Pope talking shyte

king hellfire - would you kill somebody for food, shelter, a mate etc?? If not, why not?

You are part of the animal kindom aren't you?

scooby Posted on 24/12/2008 00:03
The Pope talking shyte

holgate, I'm not a Christian neither are my parents. Amazingly, none of us have managed to go on a rampage just yet. Are you starting to feel you might though? You aren't religious so must be at risk?

king_hellfire Posted on 24/12/2008 00:07
The Pope talking shyte

'king hellfire - would you kill somebody for food, shelter, a mate etc?? If not, why not?'

If it was essential to my chances of survival, then, yes, but we are an advanced intelligent species who have managed to overcome the problems that face other, less intelligent species.

HolgateCorner Posted on 24/12/2008 00:11
The Pope talking shyte

what religion are you then scooby? Whatever it is I am sure it will have a moral frame work.

I am not religious but I am most certainly a Christian, and proud of it.

scooby Posted on 24/12/2008 00:12
The Pope talking shyte

What religion am I?

None. Don't believe in a God of any type.

king_hellfire Posted on 24/12/2008 00:24
The Pope talking shyte

I'm off to bed now but i will leave you with this...

Mankind has been around long before the birth of Jesus and we managed not to wipe ourselves out.

One idea of where our morals may have originated is that when we were 'cavemen' it was more beneficial for our own personal survival to be part of a group (safety in numbers) to protect ourselves from attacks by wild animals, neighbouring groups etc. and it made hunting, building etc. a lot easier.
So to kill a member of our group would slightly lessen each individuals chance of survival, plus if we shared food and shelter with other members of the group and helped them if they were being attacked they would, in turn, help you out if ever you were in trouble, again this would be beneficial for your personal chances of survival.
Therefore we learnt that it wasn't a good idea to kill people because it would lessen our chance of survival.

tranny_terry Posted on 24/12/2008 00:34
The Pope talking shyte

What fooking world does HolgateCorner live in? What an absolute bellender.

scooby Posted on 24/12/2008 00:36
The Pope talking shyte

One where even if you are "not religious" you still get a nominated religion that you have to declare you are in?

tranny_terry Posted on 24/12/2008 00:40
The Pope talking shyte

Reading through his posts it's baffling to think he believes the crap he writes. All this religious moral guidance b0llocks! Please.

Scrote Posted on 24/12/2008 01:18
The Pope talking shyte

scooby - "incredibly, a lot of people manage to live out a morally just life without a handbook - certainly not one that requires worship of a man/god."

can you define a morally just life without reference to western Christian derived morality?

i.e. do you think it is morally acceptable to visit your friends house and sleep with his wife?

do you think it is morally acceptable to kill your child if it is a girl and you'd prefer a boy?


Dibzzz - "Did you know that the bible was written some 400 years after the alleged event?"

utter poppyC**** - considering the bible was written by many different people at many different times it's absurd to say it was written 400 years from anything

and even if you mean just the NT you'll find it difficult to find any serious scholar that will put the earliest NT texts beyond 70AD

scooby Posted on 24/12/2008 01:30
The Pope talking shyte

"do you think it is morally acceptable to visit your friends house and sleep with his wife?"


"do you think it is morally acceptable to kill your child if it is a girl and you'd prefer a boy?"


Not sure what the point of those questions are. We could spend all night digging pretty nasty things out of the bible and other religious texts that it condones that I wouldn't do either.

Scrote Posted on 24/12/2008 01:40
The Pope talking shyte

scooby - the first used to be standard practice in southern africa - guests were invited in and given access to one of the hosts wives - etiqutte if you like - it was morally acceptable in that culture and yet you don't think it is - any particular reason?

(the practice has died out in large parts of africa due to HIV/AIDS risks although i think it is still customary in some places (i'd have to check))

- the second has been morally acceptable in large parts of the world over the centuries (and into this one)

it was first seen as absolutely immoral by followers of judaism based on OT scripture and has always been condemned by Christianity

however you don't base your morals on Christianity so where are you getting your "No" from?

the point of the questions was to show you that your morality is derived from that which is common in the west and that that in turn is derived from Christianity

if you'd managed to answer yes to the the first i'd have accepted that you might see murder as immoral whatever the circumstances, but there is nothing morally wrong with the former if you take the Christian morality away

scooby Posted on 24/12/2008 02:07
The Pope talking shyte

Well I'll give you the long version then.

You simply said:

"do you think it is morally acceptable to visit your friends house and sleep with his wife?"

Well there wasn't any context there, was there? You didn't mention that this would be something that would be done with my friends consent so the implication was that I somehow 'took' what I wanted from my friend (or his wife) or had some sort of illicit affair with her. Now I have a wife and I know that she would find the trust that our relationship is based on shattered if I shagged about and that's why I wouldn't do it. I also would be destroyed my wife cheated on me.

Of course, as you've said, I find murder with any justification abhorrent.

I just don't think these moral 'rules' originate from religions. They are in the moral codes of most religions because they have a certain universality and I think the fact that you've quoted an obscure swinging culture that is now mainly dead is telling. People realising that women should not be treated as a commodity is hardly solely a Western idea especially when you consider the gradual emergence of women's rights in traditionally male-centred faiths such as Islam.

The only thing both questions have in common is the historical repression of women who have been seen as less valuable or important and this is something that almost all religions I know off have built-in to them.

Scrote Posted on 24/12/2008 03:08
The Pope talking shyte

but the long version doesn't work either

africa is a fairly big country and the practice of sharing wives with guests was hardly obscure (it is disease that is preventing it NOT change in custom through 'advanced' morality) - you find the idea morally repugnant because you've been brought up within a Christian framework - more tellingly, there are plenty of people in western society with similar upbringings who DO shag around - making the moral absoluteness without religion more absurd

lack of context shouldn't matter to morality - either something is morally wrong or it isn't - how you act based on the morality you choose may vary with context but the underlying moral framework shouldn't

you also use the word "cheated" when that in and of itself implies wrong-doing - in a society where it is morally acceptable to have sexual liaisons with other's spouses it isn't cheating so why do you feel bound by what is almost certainly a religion inspired choice of morality for sex/spouses?

and when you mention treating women as a commodity, how does binding your wife to yourself in marriage and monogamy sit with women's lib?

do you class abortion as murder? and at what point do you determine a foetus/infant is capable of being murdered? from where do you derive the morality of any separation if you think there is one? if you don't think there is one what are your moral views on the morning after pill etc.??

just because you "don't think these moral 'rules' originate from religion" doesn't mean they don't - in fact i'd suggest they do as there is no evolutionary (species-wise) benefit to having them

early humans were pretty adept at killing off rival tribes - no moral objection to killing

as already stated plenty of people shag around with no guilty conscience (whether for personal pleasure or as cultural etiquette) - no moral objection until you bring religion into it (and again, a cultural objection such as a matriarchal society not allowing it is not equivalent to an objection based on a random moral framework)

Bren_MFC Posted on 24/12/2008 08:02
The Pope talking shyte

The Pope is right. Why should everything suddenly change just because we are in the 21st Century, very strange.

BenGee Posted on 24/12/2008 09:12
The Pope talking shyte

If you don't believe in God what is the big deal over what some old bloke in Rome says?

Maybe those that are up in arms about this are secretly worried that the big fella upstairs will make good on his promise to St Peter...

"And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven"

Dibzzz Posted on 24/12/2008 09:24
The Pope talking shyte


Bible writing times:

Magdalene Ms (Matthew 26) 1st century 50-60 AD co-existant (?)
John Rylands (John) 90 AD 130 AD 40 years
Bodmer Papyrus II (John) 90 AD 150-200 AD 60-110 years
Chester Beatty Papyri (N.T.) 1st century 200 AD 150 years
Diatessaron by Tatian
(Gospels) 1st century 200 AD 150 years
Codex Vaticanus (Bible) 1st century 325-350 AD 275-300 years
Codex Sinaiticus (Bible) 1st century 350 AD 300 years
Codex Alexandrinus (Bible) 1st century 400 AD 350 years

Ok I was refering to the Codex Alexandrinus version.
The very first version was written 50-60 years after the event, now you can call me picky but if someone was to write a book 50 years after an event now I'm sure it would be slightly innacurate, writing a book 50 years after the event just under 2000 years ago without the aid of the internet and other sources of research it would have more holes in it than a Newcastle defence.

The first bible as we know it wasn't put together till three and a half centuries after jesus snuffed it. I'd be very skeptical of it if I could be bothered to read it, which I won't, I know what happens at the end anyway [:)]

One more thing, what did big j do after he came back to life? You don't hear owt about that do you?

BenGee Posted on 24/12/2008 09:32
The Pope talking shyte

"One more thing, what did big j do after he came back to life? You don't hear owt about that do you?"

Errrrrrr you do ....He ascended into heaven on pentecost, it's all in the Book.

Dibzzz Posted on 24/12/2008 09:37
The Pope talking shyte

What's pentecost?

So hang on, he died, came back to life and then went to heaven, don't you have to die to go to heaven?

It's all a bit confusing, I need a lie down, but not next to my brother, or I'll burn forever in hell or something, the fuel bills must be ridiculas.

John67 Posted on 24/12/2008 09:39
The Pope talking shyte

My own opinion on the matter is that the Pope should be arrested if he ever visits this country. Incitment to hatred is a crime in this country and if a muslim cleric can be arrested for such incitment, then it should also be the case for a Christian cleric. The pope as a bishop and later as an Archbishop was guilty of allowing sexual abuse to go on in his diocese and of covering it up, what a holy man.

The_same_as_before Posted on 24/12/2008 09:42
The Pope talking shyte

There is something very unpleasent about this Scooby lad. I am a Catholic in the same way some people are Sikhs or Muslim, I appreciate and accept their faiths without the need to expouse bile against them as individuals or as a group.

As I said I don't believe in all or everything the Catholic faith brings with it, I believe in Jesus Christ, if he has married I have no idea, if he was gay I have no idea, it seems to me he was a perfectly decent person.

My children are in their early 20's and lated teens, to my knowledge they have only entered a Catholic church at a wedding, it's up to them.

borotmt Posted on 24/12/2008 09:42
The Pope talking shyte

So lets get this right, some of you are saying that not all bummers are evil? is that right?

Dibzzz Posted on 24/12/2008 09:43
The Pope talking shyte

The same as before,

Good call, they all need to be a bit more like you, even your leader needs to wind his neck in a bit, would you agree?

Scrote Posted on 24/12/2008 10:14
The Pope talking shyte

the pope needs to be logically consistent within the Catholic contextual frame - otherwise the whole thing falls apart - other than that has anyone actually read what he said?

dibzzz - why the trolling? you either study biblical matters and therefore know exactly what pentecost is and exactly what is attributed to Jesus before and after the crucifiction, or you are just a google-fiend; with no interest in the subject matter except to try and spread the odd falsehood in an attempt to turn people away from Christ

also, do you discount all anthony beevor's WWII works based on the fact that it all happened 60 years ago? or do you accept that certain events will be relayed pretty accurately down the ages due to their impact on those that took part?

DavidShayler Posted on 24/12/2008 10:16
The Pope talking shyte

Or that all adulterers are forgiven for torturing and emotionally abusing their partners and kids.

The_same_as_before Posted on 24/12/2008 10:21
The Pope talking shyte

Scrote, your first paragraph is spot on, I think I said the same with different words.

We all accept the bible was written well after the events, we know Christ was born about 48bc, thats not the point.

If we asked 1000 people to write a book on what they believe to be right, 49 out of th top 50 would be the same. We call them commandments, we have the catecism, othetr faiths have the same things simply with a different title.

Dibzzz Posted on 24/12/2008 10:27
The Pope talking shyte


Non of the above, I knew the WWII would pop up, but there's proably more documentation on that than any other war.

I was more leaning towards a folk tale/urban legend scenario, I should have been clearer, so apologies for that.

As for the whole thing falling apart if they start taking bits away, what about when they abolished the idea 'limbo' recently?

I still have no idea what a pentecost is.

DavidShayler Posted on 24/12/2008 10:29
The Pope talking shyte

Silly old duffer should stick to the free bread and wine. Thats more than Hitler gave the Jews!

Buddy Posted on 24/12/2008 10:29
The Pope talking shyte

Tsab - I know exactly where you're coming from, that was my view until quite recently. I would have described myself as a "tolerant atheist" - personally I think it's bollox but if someone else wants to think something else that's their outlook and I would protect their right to think it and follow it.

The more I've thought about it though, the more I've seen religion fking up people's lives. There was a documentary on Radio 4 not long ago where they interviewed male Muslims in Birmingham who basically said that if their sister looked at a bloke while she was out shopping God said she had to be killed.

Now I suspect, not having read it, that the Koran says no such thing, and I think the programme pointed out that it was a particular custom from one part of the world, but the religion is the pretext that allows them to get away with it. When Channel 4 did a Dispatches programme exposing some of this nonsense, the police raided the television station instead of the mosque.

Similarly, the Catholic church still spouts on about homosexuality and contraception. There's an argument as to whether the former is down to nature or nurture, but what it certainly isn't is evil, or a threat to the species. Preaching against the latter could be said to have contributed to the accelerated spread of HIV.

I know Scrote doesn't like this point, but it seems self-evident to me that if your leader says "thou shalt not have sex, but if thou dost thou certainly shouldn't use any contraception", the species of ape being preached at, which biologically can't obey the first half of the command, might at least try to keep in line by obeying the second half. Again, "God's word" is the pretext for a damaging cultural influence which causes unnecessary suffering.

JonMc Posted on 24/12/2008 10:32
The Pope talking shyte

Sadly T_s_a_b I think that because of the shift toward secularism in society there would be less concensus nowadays on what is right and what is wrong. These days the idea that we can shag, get P***ed, get stoned and be rude to whoever we want, without any consequences seems to be the prevailing attidude. I think it has all to do with a turning away from religion has resulted in people becoming their own Gods with their own laws as a result.

I'm a confirmed (pun intended) agnostic but you keep trucking fella. Merry Christmas.

The_same_as_before Posted on 24/12/2008 10:38
The Pope talking shyte

There is probably only one belief in Catholicism I would stand up for away from the standard of murder, theft et al and that is Abortion. I beieve with everything that it is wrong, I will even accept that at the edges their could be a medical case for it.

But, that is my belief, if other people think it is acceptable that is for their conscience not mine. As for Homosexuality and contraception, I havn't tried the former but having had the snip that disproves the latter.

Merry Yuletide to all.

BenGee Posted on 24/12/2008 10:58
The Pope talking shyte

I find it highly amusing that a person can lecture others on a Theological level and yet not know what the Pentecost is.

sixtyniner69 Posted on 24/12/2008 11:43
The Pope talking shyte

I think I would have liked BIG J,honest type of chappy, and as for the fudge packers as long as they do not try it on with me I have no problem. I would not like to get drunk and incapable near one mind just in case me hemeroids get some remedial treatment.

I can not remember BIG J being against anyone apart from the banking fraternity which was a proffession that was disbarred to christians for many years, oh and a lot of religious leaders he seemed not to like them. Strange that the Pope being one of them religious leaders.

JonMc Posted on 24/12/2008 11:48
The Pope talking shyte


I think Her Zeus would think about what he went through, took one look at what was carried out in his name, layed down a wept.

ThePrisoner Posted on 24/12/2008 12:27
The Pope talking shyte

"My own opinion on the matter is that the Pope should be arrested if he ever visits this country."

I'm sure Peter Tatchell is planning it at this very moment.

Scrote Posted on 24/12/2008 14:29
The Pope talking shyte

2 points

one already made earlier but can be put more succinctly in the form "love the sinner, hate the sin" - yes it isn't a perfect statement but it goes some way to explaining how the Church deals with paedophile priests and why it can preach love towards homosexuals as individuals but not acceptance of the homosexual act

two extremes covered by the same overall concept which is probably why it is so hard for non-Christians to understand or interpret correctly (not including those deliberately misinterpreting things for separate agendas)

secondly - @buddy surprisingly [;)]

again i counter your argument re. contraception is better than AIDS with the simple point that the pope is interested in people's soul - not their mortality if it gets in the way of saving the soul

whether the Church is right or wrong on contraception the logical consistency is there

plus, as i've said plenty of times before, if people are happy to ignore one command (don't have sex) why do they suddenly become holier-than-thou when it comes to not using contraception?

if, in a society of intellectually advanced lemmings, the commandments were:

1. don't jump off that cliff
2. don't wear a parachute

would lemmings be hurtling to their doom or would they take the fairly simple precautions necessary for survival regardless of the fact that it contravenes one of the already broken laws?

people have sex without a condom for various reasons, but to suggest it's 'cos the Church is against it is, quite frankly, ludicrous

scooby Posted on 24/12/2008 14:36
The Pope talking shyte

"There is something very unpleasent about this Scooby lad"

I couldn't give a toss what you think about me because you choose to belong to an organisation that has sucked billions out of it's members, covered up the sexual abuse of children and continues to preach hatred in this day and age. I have little respect for your views which fits perfectly in line with your Pope's and your faith's tolerance of certain groups who's only mistake is loving the wrong people. You'd burn them at the stake if you could still get away with it.

Scrote, your points at 3am were a bit late for even me and I see where you are coming from. I'm not going to deny that my own morals have elements within them that are influenced by Western Christian traditions. The original point I was making was that absence of religion in my life was not going to cause me or my descendants to descend into total moral collapse because fundamentally my moral decision making comes down to whether I would like what I do to others to happen to me. The Golden Rule, eh? Well you can say that came from religion and I can say religion took it from evolution. It seems to pop up in every religion going, I say that is evidence to support my view. You think that social bonding and interaction has no evolutionary purpose, well I'd say you don't understand very much about it as long before we were talking and writing books of myths we were looking after our young, our family, our friends, our sick and our elderly. It's probably the single most important thing humans ever evolved to do.

Whether it is acceptable in our society to cheat on your partner or not, my friends would not want me to sleep with their wife nor would I want them to sleep with mine. There's my decision making right there. As for your comment about me being married to my wife being some sort of affront to the women's liberation I thought you must have been joking. We enter into it as equal partners, something that most modern religions still can't seem to get their heads around.

While our current moral framework is influenced by Western Christian traditions, the absence of religion will at least allow people to analyse and reflect on their own way of life and it give them the possibility of change, something that organised religion hates. So maybe in the future our friends in South Africa will stop forcing their wives to act as sex slaves and maybe we will become more tolerant to people who wish to lead polygamus marriages but at least we'll have that option to move and change as our civilisation grows rather than be held back by religious zealots.

PortseaBlue Posted on 24/12/2008 14:37
The Pope talking shyte

Calm down you bunch of faggots.

End of the day, arse bandits are wrong.


red_shamrock Posted on 24/12/2008 14:46
The Pope talking shyte

Yeah Im a Catholic and I think in this day and age his views are wide of the mark, live and let live I think.
But some get really worked up about it if your not a devout Catholic then why?

That Steve AMER Goldby wants to chill a little.

And dont forget Boro is owned by a Catholic for Catholics and its best ever two Players were Catholics.

Merry Christmas

Scrote Posted on 24/12/2008 14:47
The Pope talking shyte

scooby - why the obsession with women as sex slaves - assuming they are willing partners in all this (and i can only go on what i've read) why are you judging them based on your own emotional feelings towards marriage and sex

is there something fundamentally morally wrong with having sex with a willing partner if one of the partners is married to someone else? if so why?

civilisation used to manage quite comfortably with polygamy (and some societies still do) - why do you suppose our society accepted a sea-change in thinking if everyone was so happy with the status quo?

and organised religion (at least within Christianity) doesn't hate change - it just approaches it with caution

also - "Whether it is acceptable in our society to cheat on your partner or not, my friends would not want me to sleep with their wife nor would I want them to sleep with mine."

do you not see that the above is again just the ingrained Christian morality poking it's neb in again without any referential logic taking place in your argument?

if it was acceptable as the norm then you wouldn't even think about it - you would see someone trying to keep a wife for themselves as being strange (and perhaps forcing a sex slavery...)

Scrote Posted on 24/12/2008 14:53
The Pope talking shyte

"And dont forget Boro is owned by a Catholic for Catholics and its best ever two Players were Catholics."

i thought jan aage fjortoft and mikkel beck were Thor worshipping pagans [:O]

red_shamrock Posted on 24/12/2008 14:58
The Pope talking shyte

Glad you seen my post for what it was Scrote... just a laugh

By they get themselves wound up a bit on here over bugger all.

scooby Posted on 24/12/2008 15:01
The Pope talking shyte

"scooby - why the obsession with women as sex slaves - assuming they are willing partners in all this (and i can only go on what i've read) why are you judging them based on your own emotional feelings towards marriage and sex"

Yes - 'assuming'. I don't live in South Africa and in this country is is not exactly the social norm to share your wife out although can I point out *again* that your original question didn't mention if it was something my friend's wife would have a choice about and was something he would simply allow me access to.

"is there something fundamentally morally wrong with having sex with a willing partner if one of the partners is married to someone else? if so why?"

There is if someone in the whole arrangement does not want me to or would be hurt by it. Whether that custom of being faithful came from Christianity or not does not matter, my morals are guided based on what would hurt people or not hurt them. I covered this in my last post although I did add some edits so go and read what I said about the golden rule again if you missed it. We're going over old ground a little here so read back - I *do* address and concede some points to you.

"and organised religion (at least within Christianity) doesn't hate change - it just approaches it with caution"

It took 400 years to realise that calling a guy a heretic for reporting what the heavenly bodies did was wrong. It's too slow. It's easy to do whatever you like when you know you can just say sorry 4 centuries later. We'll get an apology to homsexuals in 400 years too I guess!

"also - "Whether it is acceptable in our society to cheat on your partner or not, my friends would not want me to sleep with their wife nor would I want them to sleep with mine."

do you not see that the above is again just the ingrained Christian morality poking it's neb in again without any referential logic taking place in your argument?"

Again, have I not just answered this? I know there is influence - massive in fact. Just stop giving Christianity credit for me being able to independently make a judgement on what I feel is right or wrong. If society allowed this, if society allowed that - right now in my community and with my friends adultery is not acceptable. While you get all obsessed with where that came from, I'll carry on accepting that it would hurt those I care about and refraining from it.

Buddy Posted on 24/12/2008 15:02
The Pope talking shyte

Sex is one of the three biological imperatives though Scrote, unlike (fallacious, as I'm sure you know) rodent cliff-jumping. A better analogy might be "don't eat, but if you do, don't eat chocolate". Again, much easier to follow one bit than the other.

Scrote Posted on 24/12/2008 15:08
The Pope talking shyte

buddy - that doesn't work though because eating chocolate is less dangerous than not eating - you need to find something that is more dangerous than the original forbidden act

e.g. sex with condom = soul destroyed and bit of fun had

sex without condom = soul destroyed, bit of fun had, HIV contracted

or alternatively, cliff jumping with parachute = bit of fun had

cliff jumping without parachute = bit of fun had, dead

FranzBoas Posted on 24/12/2008 15:11
The Pope talking shyte

his well worth a 200 (s)hit.

zaphod Posted on 24/12/2008 15:11
The Pope talking shyte

The Bible doesn't make that big a deal about homosexuality or any other kind of sexual sin/misdemeanour. It's stated (very occasionally) to be immoral, but you'll find much stronger condemnation of selfishness, greed & other commonplace sins, especially oppression of the weak & poor. I really don't understand why the Pope makes such a song & dance about it. If homosexuality was really a serious danger to the world, you'd think Jesus would have said so. As it is, he didn't mention it once.

BTW, Jesus ascended to His Father on Ascension Day (surprisingly enough), not Pentecost, which celebrates the empowering of the apostles to go out & spread the message.

Buddy Posted on 24/12/2008 15:17
The Pope talking shyte

But if the message spread is that condoms are more dangerous than they actually are, and the biological imperative is still there....

Link: Conspiracies

number9 Posted on 24/12/2008 15:18
The Pope talking shyte


"One more thing, what did big j do after he came back to life? You don't hear owt about that do you?"

Well if you sat down and read the bible you would know what he did. The Bible is more than the NT it also includes what is commonly called the OT, 66 books in all from Genesis to Rev and believe it or not the book holds together even though written by many but inspired by God because the message is the same. If you examine just one verse and follow it's events through (Gen 3:15) from Gen to Rev you will see that Jesus is more than a baby in a crib and then killed in March/April.

By blindly saying "I will never read it" means you will never have the full facts and hence will never be able to make an informed decision as to whether you believe it or not, sad I think.

As for the original question,,, the pope is right the bible condemns the practice homosexuality in the OT & NT Jesus would have agreed to this he being a Jew. He would also agree with it because he was Gods son, not God as many teach, and he would have felt exactly the same way as his father, but then if you bothered to find out what the bible really says you would know that.

That’s my bit as I have read this post with much merriment and as with all of theses “threads” have a good laugh at what some think what the bible teaches.

As for morals scrote is right, as we live in a judo/Christian environment, and have done for about 1500 years, that is where we get our morals from. Perhaps you parents are/where atheists but what about there parents etc they got there moral values from someone.

Scrote Posted on 24/12/2008 15:21
The Pope talking shyte

scooby - you said - "incredibly, a lot of people manage to live out a morally just life without a handbook"

are you now saying that you actually do use the handbook to form your morality but you only follow the bits of it you're bothered about

and if so - do you not see the absurdity of that stance?

hurt is an emotional response - it has nothing to do with morality

if it was culturally acceptable for you to sleep with your mates wife you wouldn't even think about it hurting anyone because it wouldn't hurt anyone - is it that difficult to comprehend?

the context of the original question (or lack of it) is the whole point - you are basing your moral judgements on those espoused by Christianity - you have not formed them either independently of any handbook or even with the handbook as a guide - you have taken the handbook wholesale and just stuck a different label on the front

you are adding the other person not wanting something and that is fine as a different part of a moral framework but, all things being equal, do you see any fundamental moral problem with sleeping with a mate's wife if both he and she were happy with it (and your wife wasn't bothered either)?

scooby Posted on 24/12/2008 15:24
The Pope talking shyte

It's just utterly ridiculous that in day and age we've got people talking about saving souls before saving lives. We've got this gift of life that appears to be incredibly rare and the ability to reason with and about all around us which makes us unique in the known universe and we are wasting it over a bit of rubber which somehow destroys our soul.

How does a condom destroy your soul? Is it because you give up the chance to create life? Seems like life is pretty cheap to the Church when they want it to be.

scooby Posted on 24/12/2008 15:30
The Pope talking shyte

"scooby - you said - "incredibly, a lot of people manage to live out a morally just life without a handbook""

Well you seem to be picking and choosing what you want to read in my own posts so I think it's time to stop repeating myself.

I don't need an irrelevant old man in Italy to instruct me in what is moral or not. The fact that my society has certain traditions is beyond my control and while I have (repeatedly) accepted that these stem from Christian traditions I have pointed out (3 times now) that my reasoning for following that moral code is that it would hurt my friends and that is the main driver for me. It's not hard to understand but I can understand why you wouldn't want to.

HolgateCorner Posted on 24/12/2008 15:31
The Pope talking shyte

Good afternoon Scooby

I think you will find that the use of rubber changes the act of sex from a creation thing to a pleasure thing, and therein also lies the Popes problem with Homosexuality.

number9 Posted on 24/12/2008 15:36
The Pope talking shyte


The bible does not condemn contraception, surprisingly it says nothing much about it.

It was only in the 13th century that Gregory IX enacted what the New Catholic Encyclopaedia calls:
“the first universal legislation by a pope against contraception" based on a misinterpretation of gen 38:6-10 or so I understand.


The bible does not condem "gaining pleasure from sex" it is in fact rather frank in many places, try reading the Song of Solomon and not engaging in a sly sN*****. that would be sn1gger not N*****.

scooby Posted on 24/12/2008 15:40
The Pope talking shyte

Hiya Holgate. I answered your question yesterday:

"what religion are you then scooby? Whatever it is I am sure it will have a moral frame work.

I am not religious but I am most certainly a Christian, and proud of it."

...with the answer that I do not belong to any religion. I have an inkling you saw that response anyway - just a hunch.

red_shamrock Posted on 24/12/2008 15:45
The Pope talking shyte

I agree Scooby with the multitude of things that we have to tackle... poverty hunger violence injustice hate and bigotry...

A very consevative Pope elected by conservative Cardinals who live in a world of their own, instead of reaching out to people like Jesus Christ taught they prefer to divide us.

Thats why a lot of people lapse and give up when they see the stupidy of a Church who dare not stand up to for the real issues.

Its as stupid and out of date as kings and Queens.

Scrote Posted on 24/12/2008 15:45
The Pope talking shyte

scooby - i'm not asking you what cultural code you follow or why

i'm asking whether you think it is morally wrong to do certain things - whether you would do them or not is irrelevant - hence the lack of a need for context

scooby Posted on 24/12/2008 15:49
The Pope talking shyte

Whether I would do something is driven by whether I think it is morally wrong. Anyway, I've answered that to death and you are starting to sound a bit Papal to me [;)]

Scrote Posted on 24/12/2008 15:52
The Pope talking shyte

you haven't answered it at all - you've avoided answering it quite well but if having to answer a simple question brings you out in a cold sweat you'd be as well to turn the computer off...

HolgateCorner Posted on 24/12/2008 15:54
The Pope talking shyte

Number 9 - I am talking about the Pope not the bible - the Vatican does not follow the bible to the letter, they 'interpret' it don't they?

They don't approve of contraception because it interferes with creation and becomes a pleasure.

These bishops and priests believe in abstinence - it seems strange but they are fundamentalists.

scooby Posted on 24/12/2008 16:07
The Pope talking shyte

"ou haven't answered it at all - you've avoided answering it quite well but if having to answer a simple question brings you out in a cold sweat you'd be as well to turn the computer off..."

I have, perhaps you haven't worded your question properly if you think I haven't answered it?

You asked some dubiously contrived 'moral' questions which I answered. You then pounced on them and dug up some obscure practises in South Africa to make the point that I really was being guided morally by the Bible and I have repeated over and over that I accept there are elements of our society that echo historical biblical teachings but my fundamental moral compass is guided by the golden rule. Not sure why you think that is not answering it but that's 4 times I've repeated myself now.

scooby Posted on 24/12/2008 16:08
The Pope talking shyte

In fact scrote, don't bother rephrasing it or explaining it. I'll only have to repeat myself for the 5th time. You're just taking the P***.

Scrote Posted on 24/12/2008 16:34
The Pope talking shyte

no scooby - you're being deliberately obtuse

if you aren't able to separate morality from cultural norm then i apologise for wasting your time

the question though is quite simple and is based on your stance that your morality is driven by something other than Christian law and that these laws are somehow universal - which is demonstrably untrue (as shown above in various posts)

if you are now acceding that point then fair enough but trying to spin it so you were right all along just looks a bit pathetic

red_shamrock Posted on 24/12/2008 16:38
The Pope talking shyte

.Morality exists, therefore God exists’
Column: A haunted conspiracy believer
Posted on Sunday, 30 November, 2008 | 5:45 | Comments: 39

Mike Reed: The statement that because morality exists, God must exist stems from the moral argument. This suggests that a true sense of right and wrong (morality) can only come from God. This sense of morality exists in the world therefore God must exist. Although the arguments of St. Thomas Aquinas and Immanuel Kant support this claim, other arguments that morality is merely a result of evolution cancel out the need for a god. It is also questionable whether there is a true sense of right and wrong in the world and alternative sources of morality such as cultural relativity and emotivism further muddy the issue.

The argument that morality comes from God was explored by the philosopher St. Thomas Aquinas in his Fourth Way. In the Fourth Way, he claimed that all the morality we see and experience in the world must have originated from a higher, more moral being. This can only be God otherwise an infinite regress would be necessary, throwing the subject into confusion. Aquinas based this argument on Plato’s idea that what we experience in this world – things such as mountains, love, morality – are only shadows or reflections of reality. So somewhere there must be a world where these realities exist, therefore morality in the world is only a shadow of the reality or idea of Morality, fitting in with the Fourth Way. His argument is also to be a strong argument because it shows that we are all striving to be perfectly moral so the moral being we are idolising must actually exist – it’s God. Aquinas’ argument defends God as a moral standard, not as an intangible creator and integrates well with common perceptions of what God is – he is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient and totally benign. However, his argument has been criticised as it doesn’t prove the existence of God conclusively, merely makes his existence a probability. There is also no conclusive proof that a sense of morality comes from God and Aquinas’ higher being may not be God. It could be anything; an angel, a demon, a different god entirely.

Another philosopher called Immanuel Kant argued that God’s existence was necessary for morality to reach its goal. His theory claims that we have a duty to achieve the highest good (summum bonum) through morality which means we must obey an objective moral law. However we can sometimes misread this law, resulting in pain and suffering. So we need help. This help must come from God so God must exist, otherwise we cannot achieve the summum bonum. If God doesn’t exist, there is no reason for morality as we would be unable to attain its ultimate goal. This argument was supported by the philosopher H.P Owen who wrote that ‘it is impossible to think of a command without thinking of a commander’ and Kant’s argument also agreed with Aquinas’ theory that God wrote the moral code into the design of the world. It also has the strength that if we are ought to achieve the summum bonum, that implies that we can. We would not be asked to achieve something we couldn’t actually achieve and as we have been asked to achieve this, God must exist to give us help. But despite these strengths, Kant’s argument has been subjected to many criticisms, most notably from Freud who indicated that Kant’s theory collapses if there is no moral obligation and that we don’t need God if there is no need for us to attain what is beyond our human grasp. Freud argued that our perceptible obligation comes from our super ego and the conflict between our subconscious desires and the morals our parents and society teaches us. Another objector to Kant’s argument, Brian Davies, pointed out that aiming for a goal we cannot achieve is illogical and that God may not even be the highest moral good if the rest of the argument is true.

Other philosophers have argued the case for the existence of God through forms of the moral argument. Rashdall said that there must be an objective moral code because people are conscious of such a code and are aware of this law’s demands on them, even when this law is broken. A finite mind – a limited mind, such as the mind of man, Rashdall assumes – cannot fully grasp this law’s entirety. If a finite mind cannot grasp this, then a finite mind could not have conceived it. So this objective moral code must have been conceived within an infinite mind; the mind of God. This argument was echoed by the writer C. S. Lewis who argued that there must be an absolute moral law because if there wasn’t, we would not make excuses for breaking it and promise or treaty keeping would be pointless. He claimed that this code was not due to herd instinct, convention, nature or imagination but that it must reside in a mind of absolute good, that of God. These two arguments acknowledge that the moral code doesn’t contain morality as it happens, but morality as it should happen. This is a strength as many philosophers argue that there is no moral law based on the evil in the world, a viewpoint I intend to look at closer in this essay. They also fit in well, as Aquinas’ argument did, with general perceptions of God as being entirely benevolent. One failing of these arguments, however, is that they assume the definite existence of a highly debatable object – an absolute moral code. If such a code does exist, that is not to mean their argument is right. The law Rashdall and Lewis claim to have come from God could be another reflection of Plato’s reality, the same idea mentioned alongside Aquinas’ argument. To summarise, if there is an absolute moral law there are two possible origins – the mind of God or Plato’s reality.

The idea of cultural relativity disagrees with Kant’s theory and provides an explanation for the origin of morality without the need for a god. Cultural relativity states that every society has their own view of what is right and what is wrong. The children in that society are raised with the knowledge of what their culture feels is right and wrong, therefore morality is a product of society, not God. This theory shows that right and wrong are not simply black and white nor are they contained in an objective moral law as different cultures believe different things. It also explains why the death penalty is considered to be wrong in some countries, but right in others. The argument provides respect for different society’s beliefs as well. But if cultural relativity were true, there are a number of unsettling statements we must solve. A major inconsistency of this argument is that it contradicts itself by putting forward the suggestion that there is no absolute moral law as an absolute moral! In history, I was taught that a source containing contradictions was an unreliable one and I think the same applies here. It would mean that societies could not condemn one another for their customs and values so if two societies went to war, we would have no power to interfere as this would be considered inappropriate. Secondly, social reform would be impossible as challenging a society’s customs would have no standard to compare it to. Martin Luther King could not have challenged apartheid as he could not say it was wrong because cultural relativity leaves no room for an objective moral law. But as King and others have challenged their society’s ideas, this questions the validity of cultural relativity. It would, if taken to extremes, encourage anarchy as nobody would be able to tell a society murdering innocent people that they were wrong. The theory of cultural relativity also makes social reform obsolete, so this argument is not as convincing as it first seems.

One argument claims that morality is simply a matter of personal opinion and that when somebody says something is right or wrong, they are just expressing their opinion. This argument is called emotivism and is more concerned with what moral statements are for as opposed to what they mean in themselves. Moral statements are simply made to influence the behaviour of the listeners.; So, for example, if Person A says that ‘Racism is wrong’, he is not stating a fact, but his personal opinion to influence he behaviour of Person B. This theory is a strong theory because it makes logical sense but its criticisms are damaging. It has been argued against emotivism that moral arguments are not just a question of personal feelings as they can be discussed in a logical way. The theory also suggests total reliance on our feelings in moral situations. Whether we think something is right or wrong would then depend on our state of mind at any given time. As that is bound to vary, then so would our sense of right and wrong. This argument does no justice to the thousands of moral debates we have witnessed over the centuries, nor does it leave room for independent truths outside our personal judgement that are right or wrong no matter what we believe.

Before we return to sources of morality, one facet of the moral argument beckons debate. The moral argument states that because there is a true sense of right and wrong in the world, God must exist. But is there a true sense of right and wrong in the world? Is there an objective binding moral code we must all stick to? We have already covered the origins and arguments in favour of an absolute moral code, but from looking at the world today I can see very little evidence of one. If there was a moral code, how did the Nazis murder thousands and thousands of Jews and other innocent people without breaking the code? Is there some loophole in this universally absolute moral policy that says it’s alright to kill? When I read about terrorists, when I read about how national minorities were persecuted both in Russia and Germany in history, when I think how many innocent soldiers are killed by the skeletal hand of war…if there was this moral code, these things shouldn’t happen. Or if these events break none of God’s moral laws, what else is on that objective and absolute code? Are all our negative perceptions of murder, genocide and torture just wrong? What kind of god is up there? These are questions which I feel seriously weaken the moral argument.

So far, the arguments over the origins of morality can be organised into two areas. The first states that morality comes from God, as argued by St Thomas Aquinas. The second argues that there is evidence of a moral code in the world and that God is a requirement for this moral code to exist. The third argument explains morality without the need for an objective moral law or a god: the theory of evolution. Writer Richard Dawkins argues in favour of a ‘survival of the fittest’ approach, by which he suggests that men with morality inherent in their genetic makeup survived longer than others, therefore having more time to breed, passing down the moral gene. Other supporters of the evolution theory point out that as the brain and mind developed, moral and social awareness grew alongside. They also consider conscience to be a safety device which prevents unnecessary tension between people which could lead to a life threatening situation. If the evolution theory is true, then we can explain why we live in a fair and just society by stating that an unjust society would threaten the individuals within it. Therefore, just society is another safety mechanism to protect us. Probably the strongest asset of this argument is that it explains why cruel and evil people exist; it is because they lack the moral gene.

A criticism of the evolution theory is that if people simply follow their instincts to make moral decisions, how can we distinguish between good and bad instincts? It has also been suggested that if we hold this theory to be true, it undermines morality to its lowest level – that of plain self interest. For example, ‘I’ choose to live in a just society because an unjust society would be a danger to ‘me’. ‘I’ don’t kill somebody I don’t like because that would put ‘me’ at risk. My response to that is to ask is it really wrong to admit that we are just out for ourselves? Sure it’s not nice, but does that make it wrong? Personally, I feel that the theory of evolution is the strongest argument for the origin of morality.

Other philosophers have disagreed with the religious origin of morality, including Bertrand Russell and Albert Camus. Russell used the Euthyphro Dilemma to disprove God’s existence. The Euthyphro Dilemma asks whether something is good because it is good in itself or only because God wants it to be. Russell argued that if the first case is true then God is subject to a higher standard of goodness, meaning he is not supreme. If the second option is true then God is the sole dictator of morality and morality is simply based on the whim of God. Therefore God is either subject to a higher standard meaning he is not the ultimate power or he is not essentially good as he has no knowledge of morality as it is simply subject to his whims. Either of these would not be worthy of worship so God cannot exist. One of the argument’s strong points is that it takes the two sides of the Euthyphro Dilemma and continues its line of thought to a logical conclusion. But he assumes that a less than supreme or an arbitrary god would not be worshipped, or be worthy of worship. Although his argument does not reflect the general view of God as God is considered to be omnipotent and benign, that is not to say gods from other cultures are not so. For example, the gods and goddesses of Ancient Greece were not totally good – while they were above humans, they had human characteristics, good and bad. So Russell’s theory may disprove the existence of the god of classical theism but it doesn’t disprove the existence of any type of god. For all we know, there could be a god in existence opposite to our perceptions and to the characteristics of the god Russell’s argument was attempting to disprove. Albert Camus also argued against the existence of God using a moral argument. In his novel The Plague, he theorises that theism is opposed to humanitarianism therefore God cannot exist. The example he used in this novel was that of a priest and a doctor’s reaction to a plague. Camus argues that if you join the priest you cannot fight the plague as it is God’s will you would be fighting. If you join the doctor, you must fight the plague and therefore fight God. You cannot fight the plague (humanitarianism) without fighting God (theism). One contradicts the other so if humanitarianism is right, theism is wrong. This argument does make good sense at first, a fact in its favour, but many theologians disagree with Camus’ opinion that disease is God’s will. They also argue that disease is part of God’s system, a good system, and that it is not wrong for us to fight it off using medicine.

In conclusion, the statement that because morality exists, God must exist is simply too limited and simplistic to prove the existence of God. I feel that despite the arguments of St. Thomas Aquinas and Kant, the theory of evolution put forward by Richard Dawkins and others are much more plausible and probably nearer the truth than the standard ‘God did it’.

Article Copyright© Mike Reed

Link: .

scooby Posted on 24/12/2008 16:48
The Pope talking shyte

Scrote, holgatecorner suggested that without the bible to tell me how to make moral decisions we'd lose our ability to make them. If you wanted to jump in and argue some other point then you should have argued it with someone else. How I choose to live my life is my choice and not one I choose to have dictated to by a bible. If you think that is a different point to what you brought up then that's your fault for bringing it up because you are clearly on about something else.

You did this last time, twisting the whole thing around into something else. You think I make my moral decisions because the bible told me too. You're mistaken but then again, you *do* believe in what amounts to a load of nonsense so I won't lose any sleep over it.

HolgateCorner Posted on 24/12/2008 16:51
The Pope talking shyte

red shamrock - did you post this for a reason or just for general interest?

Who is Mike Reed anyway?

Scrote Posted on 24/12/2008 17:05
The Pope talking shyte

last time? i didn't realise there WAS a last time...

i don't think you make your moral decisions because the bible told you so - i think you base your moral decisions on morality as defined in the bible and i don't think you'd have a clearly defined morality without that guidance

you said - "I just don't think these moral 'rules' originate from religions."

and yet when faced with cultural differences that allow for alternate moral absolutes you cling to the moral rules that DID originate in the current culturally dominant religion

karembeu_ca Posted on 24/12/2008 17:19
The Pope talking shyte

so who's to say these moral rules werent in some form of common consciousness (as has been hypothesised) and that religion didnt just adopt them and expound on them?

the mere fact that there does appear to be moral 'development' throughout life (see Kohlberg) suggests that morality may be learned, and could therefore have evolved. ontogeny racpitulates phylogeny after all!

Scrote Posted on 24/12/2008 17:26
The Pope talking shyte

karembeu - if they were a part of some common consciousness they wouldn't be different dependent on culture

i don't have a world history of everything tattooed on my brain but as far as i'm aware judaism was the first major religion to outright ban the practice of infanticide based on moral concepts

to suggest that we have independently arrived at the same conclusion whilst being so culturally close to the abrahimic religious roots for hundreds of years is just a bit too far-fetched

starting with a moral framework and justifying it is easy - getting a moral framework up and running from scratch is rather more difficult

also - i'm not sure how learning morality can equate with evolving morality - i'd argue that it's learnt and would expect someone in the "common conciousness" camp to argue it is evolved

i'm off to read lord of the flies again...

karembeu_ca Posted on 24/12/2008 17:36
The Pope talking shyte

there are plenty of things that disparate peoples and cultures have independently developed - facial epxressions for emotions being a well researched one, and a good example.

individual tenets of maorality may differ, but the underlying principles (in kohlberg's stages anyway) are pretty much common. dont confuse practice with philosophy.

HolgateCorner Posted on 24/12/2008 17:45
The Pope talking shyte

despite scooby's bad tempered responses, I am in no doubt that morality is learned and equally sure that in the past religion had a heavy hand in developing and enforcing morality.

Now that has gone we are seeing the start of the free for all and who knows where it might go in future in the UK in terms of life becoming cheaper, more relationship problems, more stealing etc etc. You could also argue that greed in the banking sectoe and envy amongst consumers (keeping up with the jones's) has brought the economy to its knees.

Well done to the Pope for standing firm on centuries old beliefs, values and teachings, somebody in this world has to have a backbone.

borobadge Posted on 24/12/2008 17:45
The Pope talking.........

One thing about this Pope is...

he get's people talking, typing and thinking..

thats quite difficult to do during these 'dumbing' down times.

Scrote Posted on 24/12/2008 17:50
The Pope talking shyte

karembeu - i'm not sure what the point you're making there is (i'm afraid i'm unfamiliar with kohlberg and have far too much wrapping to do to look him up now!!)

are you saying that the fact some form of morality is more or less universal is an indication that morality is an evolved entity?

is that not again arguing backwards?

i'm fairly sure our earliest ancestors did have certain rules about what could and couldn't be done within the bounds of one's own tribe (or village/cave whatever) - however the evolution of that into a codified morality is a big step and then the actual codification process requires (in my opinion) some form of cultural control (i.e. religion)

which is why the communist offshoot that the soviets employed backfired so drastically - the moral absolutes employed by the totalitarian regime weren't accepted by the populace in the way that scooby seems to have adopted the morality from his Christian roots - no matter how far back he has to go to find them

number9 Posted on 24/12/2008 18:12
The Pope talking shyte


There in lies the problem...

The catholic church puts itself in the position as the defender of the Christian faith, the pope is even considered to be Christ’s representative on earth by Catholics, if they are the defender of the faith and the faith is based on not only Christ’s teachings but that of the whole bible and they are interpreting it as they see fit then they are not Christ’s true followers. Why because 2 Tim 3: 16,17 states “All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness, that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work.”

That made sense when I wrote it bye the way.

BoroGrecian Posted on 24/12/2008 18:15
The Pope talking shyte

ah it's at times like this that I am glad to be a Quaker

karembeu_ca Posted on 24/12/2008 18:34
The Pope talking shyte

no more backwards than saying maorality was dreamt up by God and passed down intact to man through religious principles.

if you instead believe that God is a creation of man, then that morality must also be from man - which, lets be honest, is far more likely (occams raxzor and all).

regarding kohlberg, he basically said (as I recall from the misty depths of uni.) that people all over seem to pass through the same 'stages' of moral development - some get further than others as well. you go through stages where you do good only to avoid pounishment, to where you have an internal compass of beliefs that guide you to do 'good' not just for yourself etc.

the ontogeny bit is classic biology, where physical development in the womb actually mirrors evolutionary development - that is, ontogeny (womb development) recapitulates (follws the same steps) phylogeny (evolutionary development (I hope thats right, i'm pretty old now, and that was a long time ago!) if you therefore believe that, why would moral development, out of the womb, not also recapitulate evolutionary moral development - not one of kohlbergs ideas (I dont believe), but it sounds reasonable [:)]

ffs, that is too much reasoned thought for one day!

Scrote Posted on 24/12/2008 18:42
The Pope talking shyte

hmm, lets just pick on the quakers...

karembeu_ca Posted on 24/12/2008 18:47
The Pope talking shyte

a quaker ex-prison guard ??? now THAT'S proof of evolution [:D]

Scrote Posted on 24/12/2008 18:57
The Pope talking shyte

i'm fairly sure that the evolution in the womb stuff was discredited some time ago - however i'll stand corrected if i'm thinking of something else

i also don't see how anything that has to be learnt by each and every person can be considered 'evolutionary'

for example - the ability to produce sound is an evolutionary trait that was beneficial to early humans

the ability to speak a language is learned

i think there is a very clear distinction and i think that it is as clear with morality - what is good and bad if you've never been taught the difference?

BoroGrecian Posted on 24/12/2008 19:07
The Pope talking shyte

Karembeu: ah but I was never a prison officer, mearly an desk jockey who did the paperwork on behalf of the officers. Although I did have my moments of slamming cell doors in the faces of prisoners [;D]

number4 Posted on 25/12/2008 07:56
The Pope says

"My own opinion on the matter is that the Pope should be arrested if he ever visits this country. Incitement to hatred is a crime in this country and if a Muslim cleric can be arrested for such incitement, then it should also be the case for a Christian cleric. The pope as a bishop and later as an Archbishop was guilty of allowing sexual abuse to go on in his diocese and of covering it up, what a holy man"

I'd say Steve is sailing dangerously close to the old incitement to religious hatred thing here. " death to the church"? tut, tut, tut.

what is it about these hippies that gets them so worked up about the church.

on a more serious note, a couple of points.

1.) why every time on this message board do people equate religion with Christianity. there is more than one religion you know, that's what causes all this crap in the first place!

when all the vociferous anti-religionists lay into islam or judaism in the same way they do christianity then i might give them some credibility. soft targets eh boys ?

2.) so all religion and it's followers are all bad? or just the guys running the show ? (so, by that logic because we have a S*** war mongering, poverty perpetuating government we are all complete useles B******s as well ?, note; you can vote for a new government but not a new pope or cardinal)as paul mc cartney once said: "there is good and bad in every one, even christians, islamists, jews, etc.

3.) lighten up a bit. i'll use jesus as an example of how a good human being should be on this planet not some ex-nazi bigot.

merry christmas, even to the goth hippy freaks.

buttermyarse Posted on 25/12/2008 08:11
The Pope talking shyte

What about the Judean People's Front? Where do they stand in all of this?

red_shamrock Posted on 25/12/2008 13:23
The Pope talking shyte

what have they ever done for us?

wokingmassive Posted on 25/12/2008 14:44
The Pope talking shyte

The only religion the world needs - is kindness


Buddy Posted on 25/12/2008 16:17
The Pope talking shyte

"when all the vociferous anti-religionists lay into islam or judaism in the same way they do christianity then i might give them some credibility. soft targets eh boys ?"

Do you want to start with my 10:29 post yesterday?

buttermyarse Posted on 25/12/2008 16:21
The Pope talking shyte

Take a pinch of white man
Wrap him up in black skin
Add a touch of blue blood
And a little bitty-bit of red indian boy..

Curly, black and kinky
Mixed with yellow chinky
if you lump it all together
Well, youve got a recipe for a get-along scene
Oh what a beautiful dream
If it could only come true
You know, you know..

What we need is a great big melting pot
Big enough to take the world and all its got
Keep it stiring for a hundred years or more
Turning out coffee-colored people by the score

number4 Posted on 26/12/2008 13:32
The Pope talking shyte

are you kidding?

two vague lines, more about murder than religion as redress for all the hatred thats been posted about christianity on here over the years?

what i'd like to see is the athiests leave religion and it's followers alone. show some respect.

Buddy Posted on 26/12/2008 13:37
The Pope talking shyte

It's quite difficult to show much respect to blind belief in a myth which perpetuates itself by requiring blind belief and respect.

tranny_terry Posted on 26/12/2008 15:35
The Pope talking shyte

FFS! What a petty, ignorant bunch the God Squad are.