Vatican issues guidance questioning modern 'gender identity'

And this is why I don't like discussing the Church; it always leads to bigots coming out of the woodwork.

And this is why I don't like discussing the Church; it always leads to bigots coming out of the woodwork.

Is that why you’ve joined in the conversation?

Well he has and hasn't, that's the beauty of it, he's commented to show his disagreement and his claim that a section of people here are bigots, but he's given no argument, so in short, it's the standard religious comment.

And this is why I don't like discussing the Church; it always leads to bigots coming out of the woodwork.

Is that why you’ve joined in the conversation?

Oh wow such an insult

Saying that the Catholic church has a history of abuse and bigotry isn't bigotry, it's like saying that water is wet, a well known fact with no controversy in it.

Pretty much everything.

Civilisations have only thrived via the economic value that comes about as a result of the nuclear family. Destroying that will cause the opposite effect.

The promotion of "alternative genders" will make more people unattractive as potential willing or desirable mates, thus reducing the birth rate.

first of all, mentioning sex scandals is totally irrelevant. second of all, it's cliche and a copout.

third of all, the actions of a few people does not define the religion. you should know this, as an adult. unless there's something in the bible or religious texts itself which the Catholic church teaches that states: "one must and should molest people" you're failing to convince anyone that the Catholic church and Christian religion is too corrupt and therefore in no place to still pass proper values

tsr is quite monotonous and sheepish

you guys can say whatever you want. Catholicism isnt going anywhere,

why do you guys bother with your futile pseudo intellectualism?

The people bringing up the Church's record on sexual abuse (which is a lot less dark then you would have it) on a topic irrelevant to that should hang their heads in shame. You're doing the same thing as Tommy "WhAt AbOuT ThE MuSlAmIc RaY GuN TaXi PaEdOs In RoThErHaM" Robinson, and it comes from the same place of hatred.

The people bringing up the Church's record on sexual abuse (which is a lot less dark then you would have it) on a topic irrelevant to that should hang their heads in shame. You're doing the same thing as Tommy "WhAt AbOuT ThE MuSlAmIc RaY GuN TaXi PaEdOs In RoThErHaM" Robinson, and it comes from the same place of hatred.

The people bringing up the Church's record on sexual abuse (which is a lot less dark then you would have it) on a topic irrelevant to that should hang their heads in shame. You're doing the same thing as Tommy "WhAt AbOuT ThE MuSlAmIc RaY GuN TaXi PaEdOs In RoThErHaM" Robinson, and it comes from the same place of hatred.

Civilisations have only thrived via the economic value that comes about as a result of the nuclear family. Destroying that will cause the opposite effect.

You're right. Who needs a functioning birth rate anyway right?

If you fail to grasp this, you’ll struggle to understand why people are abandoning Christianity in the UK.

Quite the opposite, the nuclear family was a product of economic development. Living separately from your parents as a working adult, especially if far away, was an unaffordable luxury for most of human history.



Nuclear families and declining birth rates come together. Indeed, the former would be much less viable without the latter.

Having a family unit to take the burden of the children so the man could work without disruption, is how the nuclear family drove economic development. Can you think of a culture that thrived without it? There's a reason why in the modern era, the default of all thriving cultures that survived to this day have a basic default of the nuclear family.

Cultures that promoted overt sexuality, such as the romans, didn't make it.

Did you seriously just blame the demise of the romans on ‘overt sexuality’? 😂😂😂😂 oh wow.