Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

The Pope spreads a little more hate around the world watch

Announcements
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Annie72)
    I think he needs to get with the times!!. Of course the Catholic church is perfect isnt it..........<< sarcasm by the way. In case anyone thinks I am knocking the Catholics well I was baptised in the faith, long since lapsed though.
    So what, you're allowed to **** someone off so long as they baptised you? Interesting moral code there...
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bobifier)
    So what, you're allowed to **** someone off so long as they baptised you? Interesting moral code there...
    I just know how the Catholic church works.
    Offline

    3
    (Original post by Kreuzuerk)
    So in essence you believe that Governmental legislation was not warranted in cases of Blacks being told that they could not enter certain restaurants, for example.
    It's not my restaurant, it's not your restaurant, it's not the government's restaurant. If they want to have their private little racist club, it's theirs, I just won't eat there. Why does the state have a right to decide how private organisations can spend their money or organise themselves?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Annie72)
    I just know how the Catholic church works.
    So you're allowed to **** someone off so long as you think you understand them, then? I'm still not sure I see where you're coming from.
    Offline

    15
    (Original post by O-Ren)
    Ew anyone else seen the 'Ugandan Child Sacrifices' link?

    I really hate humans. And religion.
    :ditto:

    More often than not, the humans i've met are bimbos :yep:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kreuzuerk)
    There is no reason not to allow homosexuals to have administrative jobs, and the Pope's comments will be taken as an excuse not to hire them. This is not about forcing employers to hire a certain group of people, rather it is about forcing them not to impose a blanket-ban for no other reason than the individual's personal taste, and personal taste is of course a far-reaching matter, one that is irrelevant to the role required of the job and ill-reasoned to not hire because of. Clearly, if this was a matter of race, those voicing their approval for the Pope would not be as quick to do so, and in reality there is no difference between the two situation. Both groups are being discriminated for reasons which are not connected to the role required of them. Christian's have a right to their beliefs but critically, they do not have a right to infringe others.
    It's not just "personal taste", son - the Catholic church opposes homosexuality, so employing homosexuals really doesn't work.

    Imagine an organisation that was against paedophilia - would you say that they ought to employ paedophiles?

    Or an organisation that, say, did charity work in Africa - do they have to employ people who hate blacks?


    I know paedophilia and "racism" are currently not in fashion, whereas being homo is pretty much as saintly as you can get these days, but of course those statuses are all completely arbitrary and a product of our little social pinpoint in time, so the analogy applies.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Seem's a shame, but these are the beliefs he has been taught and has kept with for however long he has been a servant of God, perhaps longer.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Lol the pope should give us a little dance with that pole of his.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    shut up *******
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by humz2)
    :ditto:

    More often than not, the humans i've met are bimbos :yep:
    you must be a freak then from tre tramp shop down the road
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by burningnun)
    Does that mean gay people have to give equal sex to men and women?

    Or does equality apply to everyone except gay people?

    Or is discrimination a part of someone's private life which should not be the subject of legislation?


    Let's be honest - the Pope is an idiot but he is right about this.
    That is the stupidest, most ironic, idiotic post I think I have EVER read on TSR. And that's beating some standard. Congratulations.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    The pope is an eejit, so what else is new?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ciawhobat)
    It's not just "personal taste", son - the Catholic church opposes homosexuality, so employing homosexuals really doesn't work.

    Imagine an organisation that was against paedophilia - would you say that they ought to employ paedophiles?

    Or an organisation that, say, did charity work in Africa - do they have to employ people who hate blacks?


    I know paedophilia and "racism" are currently not in fashion, whereas being homo is pretty much as saintly as you can get these days, but of course those statuses are all completely arbitrary and a product of our little social pinpoint in time, so the analogy applies.
    There is a limit to which the freedoms of the Catholic Church extend, because whilst they are entitled to freedoms of their beliefs, it is imperative that those very beliefs do not infringe others. I agree that the nature of such faith means that anyone wishing to become part of the clergy should clearly also follow those values however, I do think that in cases of recruitment for administrative positions, such as a cleaner for example, the sexuality of that individual is utterly irrelevant. So long as that individual, through vocal output, does not attempt to undermine the church's stance on the subject, it matters little as to whether he is homosexual or not. In fact, it is utterly irrelevant. This piece of legislation is therefore designed at limiting the capacity for such a wide-scale blanket-ban of individuals whose beliefs, although not in line with their employer, have no real consequence.

    To answer your analogies, a racist should not be automatically disregarded from any possible employment solely because of his beliefs, rather it is a matter of his competency for the role. If that role is as a cleaner, it matters little whether he is a racist or not because all that he will be doing is cleaning. All that matters is whether he is a good cleaner or not.

    And please, don't refer to people as 'son', it's unbecoming.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ciawhobat)
    It's not just "personal taste", son - the Catholic church opposes homosexuality, so employing homosexuals really doesn't work.

    Imagine an organisation that was against paedophilia - would you say that they ought to employ paedophiles?

    Or an organisation that, say, did charity work in Africa - do they have to employ people who hate blacks?


    I know paedophilia and "racism" are currently not in fashion, whereas being homo is pretty much as saintly as you can get these days, but of course those statuses are all completely arbitrary and a product of our little social pinpoint in time, so the analogy applies.
    You have no idea. Go crawl back in to the cave you came out of.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheMeister)
    How is pedophilia related to this debate? It's completely unnecessary to mention this in regards to the limitations that the proposed legislation will impose upon our faith.
    The fact that the roman Catholic church takes priests, lets them abuse small children and then moves the priests before they can be convicted. And yet they won't let a perfectly moral openly gay man become a priest. I take this as saying the Catholic church thinks that paedophilia offenses against small catholic choir boys is more moral than grown men consenting to sex with each other. But I don't think that's their official line.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ciawhobat)
    It's not just "personal taste", son - the Catholic church opposes homosexuality, so employing homosexuals really doesn't work.

    Imagine an organisation that was against paedophilia - would you say that they ought to employ paedophiles?

    Or an organisation that, say, did charity work in Africa - do they have to employ people who hate blacks?


    I know paedophilia and "racism" are currently not in fashion, whereas being homo is pretty much as saintly as you can get these days, but of course those statuses are all completely arbitrary and a product of our little social pinpoint in time, so the analogy applies.
    Are you honestly comparing homosexuality to racism and paedophilia.........!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Men like the Pope pick and choose parts of the Bible which suit them. I can't remember the exact number, but I think there are about 6 lines in the whole of the bible which condemn homosexuality. A much larger proportion encourages you to love others. What happened to "love thy neighbour"?
    This sort of thing makes me sick. We are living in the 21st century and we are all equal. What difference should your sexuality make if your intentions are good and you try to do right by other people?

    Like OP said, if the Catholic Church wants to change things and sort things out, it should start by looking at the own sorry state it's in and try to change that first. Paedophilia being one of those problems...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gesar)
    The fact that the roman Catholic church takes priests, lets them abuse small children and then moves the priests before they can be convicted. And yet they won't let a perfectly moral openly gay man become a priest. I take this as saying the Catholic church thinks that paedophilia offenses against small catholic choir boys is more moral than grown men consenting to sex with each other. But I don't think that's their official line.
    Your post reflects the main problem with everyone's view on catholicism in this thread. You think that a minority of a group reflects the whole of a group. True, there have been made paedophilic priests, but these are the only ones represented in the media; what about the hundreds of thousands of priests accross the globe who are not paedophiles?

    Just because some white people have murdered other people (ie hitler), it doesn't mean all white people are murderers.

    The catholic church certainly didn't 'let' priests get away with things, it would have been a few individuals within that that allowed it to go on. True, what these few people did is horrendus, but don't let it give you the wrong impression of a faith that does a lot of good accross the world.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I hope he comes near me...I'll have rotten eggs waiting :mwuaha:
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Scherzando225)
    a faith that does a lot of good accross the world.
    I'm going to have to disagree with you there.
 
 
 
Poll
Do I go to The Streets tomorrow night?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.