It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Pope slams gay marriage as 'attack' on creation

page: 5
12
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Helmkat
Even the tiniest scratch on creation will tell you any potential creator would not give one rats behind if two members of one species and the same gender happen to love each other.


Helm, Could you pls clarify....what does it mean "even the tiniest scratch on creation will tell you...."?
Thanks.




posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 05:04 PM
link   
reply to post by whaaa
 


POPE Benedict is an acient relic that has died ages ago and which they got out of the closet and dusted off to play Pope in the End Game


Catholic Rome is nothing but a mirror of todays politics a la Washington or London ..... a big laugh full of games with as sole goal to gain and have Power.

IF any cardinal should have been the new Pope it should have been the Belgian cardinal Godfried Danneels! A man of God with a vision beyond the pathetic power of supression and economics. A man for men!

Peace!



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 05:08 PM
link   
If as the the religious claim this is an affront to GOD and a symptom of man's decadence, why then is homosexual behavior seen throughout the animal kingdom?

Currently we do not attribute animals with any intelligence more than basic survival and reproduction. If the elephant seal (as an example of a well known swinger in the wild) has only slightly better than stimulus response intelligence then this behavior should not exist in thier species. If this behavior is a choice made by sentient beings and not 'natural' then how does it happen? Since they cannot choose thier sexuality (as choice requires intelligence to weigh options) these animals should be exclusively intrested in females as per the will of GOD and the natural order.

But it does exist. It exists in many species.

Please explain to me how something so abhorrent to GOD can exist beyond the claimed sinful debauchery of our species, the only one capabale of making the 'choice' to live that way.

You can't.

I am yet another 'red blooded hetrosexual', I see the Catholic Church in particular and organized religion in general as the prime source of intolerance and hatred within humanity; personally the idea of two men together makes me squirm. However, and here's the kicker, what two consenting adults choose to do in the privacy of thier home is thier business.

I'm confused as to how a man's love for his wife is in any way impacted by a gay person's love for thier partner.

"I may not agree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it" - Evelyn Beatrice Hall, writing under the pseudonym of Stephen G Tallentyre in "The Friends of Voltaire" (1906).

What does this mean? It means freedom ain't free. We in the west seem to have forgotten that true freedom REQUIRES us to stand up for the rights of those we may not agree with in defence from tyranny.

Allowing discrimination against one allows for discrimination against all.

Look at the world and the mess that we have made of it across all facets of human existence. Please tell me that the most important issue in the world today is not the further reduction of freedom by mandating a narrow view of morality. Please tell me that the freedom to choose how to live your life while remaining a peaceful citizen isn't the next thing people want the government to take away.

Supposedly, LOVE is GOD's greatest gift to man, I can't seem to find the amendment limiting that to men and women.

Mind your own business.


[edit on 11-1-2010 by [davinci] spelling & content]

[edit on 11-1-2010 by [davinci]]



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 05:08 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


It is bad when alot of people look up to you.

has you don't want your children to look up to a bad behaved girl and slam every moves Miley Cyrus does.

Why can't I be protective of my friends thoughts when he is too influenced by others? (population)
If someone tells you to kill yourself will you do it? No
If a holy man tells you to kill yourself in the name of god, some people will do it, it has to do with commitment to a cult or religion...What do we do to cults? try to find them and reason with people so they don't follow wrong paths.



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 05:20 PM
link   
Those who disagree with same sex marriage are ignorant fools.

It's time to grow up and become civilized beings.



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 05:25 PM
link   
As we have known for ages in our rotten little country: procreation is a function of sex but sexuality is a function of love.

Can somebody please "releave" this sorry excuse for a human being?! (pun intended of course).

There are enough heterosexuals in the world to keep society on it's feet, or am I wrong?

Last time I checked, world population is +6 BILLION people and growing, but not a single shred of evidence that homosexuality is messing with that!

Let live and let love...

Geeeeez!



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 05:25 PM
link   

What about animals?


Perhaps the Pope needs to preach his morals to the entire animal kingdom and explain to them that creation is hurt by such behavior:

Homosexual behavior in animals

List of animals displaying homosexual behavior

NOTE: If you don't like Wikipedia, the same information can be found on many other reputable websites.



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 05:29 PM
link   
reply to post by downisreallyup
 

Do you have any examples of animals getting married?




posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 05:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by BazzeMan

There are enough heterosexuals in the world to keep society on it's feet, or am I wrong?

Last time I checked, world population is +6 BILLION people and growing, but not a single shred of evidence that homosexuality is messing with that!

Let live and let love...

Geeeeez!


Yes, you would think that if over-population is really the worst problem facing the world, the Pope would find a way to support one of the best answers to the problem... reduced male/female sex. And you'd also think he would support the best thing for male/female partners to help them curb over-population: birth-control/condoms.

Honestly, it seems that the Pope is not at all into curbing over-population, and for that reason, his policies are out-of-step with the governments of the world.



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 05:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by troubleshooter
reply to post by downisreallyup
 

Do you have any examples of animals getting married?



Kind of a stupid comment there... all animals get married for a period of time... they just don't need a marriage license because they are truly free... unlike the "sheeple" of the earth.

Before governments began sticking their noses into the marriage thing, people just got married by going into the tent, having sex, and then declaring they were married. The ceremony thing was added later to provide an excuse to have a big family party and to involve the community. Technically, there is no requirement morally to have a party or even a minister. That is an invention of mankind and has nothing to do with natural law. Only LOVE can keep to creatures together... nothing else.



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 05:38 PM
link   
First of all, I am not catholic or a homosexual. I am a spiritual hetrosexual.

Secondly, I don't see what all the fuss is about. People are enraged that the pope equates homosexuality with an attack on CREATION. How is it not? Last time I checked, two gay men cannot have sex and then one of them gets pregnant as a result. Same with two women. Gays are simply not doing their part to ensure that the world remains populated with humans. How could one say they are when they cannot procreate? [dissect that word please, pro- CREATE , pro CREATION , simple 1st grade english]. I see too many people here personalizing this whole thing when the big picture is right in front of your eyes. Classic case of not being able to see the forest through the trees.

I learned a long time ago to get advice and knowlege from any source possible, use common sense and logic to dissect the usable from non-usable, throw away what you can't use and learn from the rest regardless of where you got it from. Too many people nowadays listen more to the messenger than the message. So this guy is the leader of a religion that IMO holds no sway at all in the real world. The fact remains that he is RIGHT. I don't care if Hitler said it, or Bono,or Mother Teresa or the satanist down the street. What's right is right people.

I really don't see how he was attacking the personal aspect of a homosexual. I believe he was referring to the sexual orientation itself and how it is not conducive to nature[ or, as he put it, creation ]. I think if more people tried to interpret it that way, we would have a lot less friction here.



Just my 2 cents. Peace



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 05:52 PM
link   
reply to post by downisreallyup
 


I'm not talking about overpopulation at all, my friend. Just flaming the pope for his remark that gay marriage is an attack on creation.

It is not, love and sexuality in all their forms are functions of creation/being/having emotions.

Marriage is a function of an intelligent society and that is a different discussion but a whole lot of people are having sex without being married. Is that an attack on creation also?

And here's Lewis Black for a thought:



Warning: he drops the f-bomb! *run for your lives!!*

Edit to add: If overpopulation was really the problem then by G-d, we need them homosexuals, and a lot of 'em!


[edit on 11-1-2010 by BazzeMan]



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 06:11 PM
link   
i never understood how people that slam homosexuality because it doesn't do their theory of creation justice don't understand that they're really slamming God, if there is such a being.

what they're really saying is that God isn't all knowing, or He didn't look that far ahead when he created man. otherwise, why would He overlook this 'defect'.

another thing they don't consider is the possibility that God was into 'experimenting' when he created man
.

as for those that say it has to be unnatural because they can't have children, well, i don't see how that's a valid argument. i'm not gay, but i think i can understand 'love' between two people of the same sex. i think we just have to stop looking at it as love between two men, or love between two women and start looking at it as love between two individuals.

i should have a go at a rant too i suppose. i wish gay people would stop their activism as gay individuals and start their activism as free individuals.

[edit on 11-1-2010 by Ionut]

[edit on 11-1-2010 by Ionut]



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 06:17 PM
link   
reply to post by whaaa
 


He's supporting the Catholic position. Any surprise there? He doesn't make law except for those that choose to obey. We continue to give him attention. He is barely payed attention to by Catholics. Is this Papal envy? It's the sad eyes and funny hat, right? Gets me every time. Who doesn't love a former Hitler youth in decline?

Marriage in Catholic terms equates to a couple that can join sexually and produce a life by that joining. Not possible by same sex couples except through adoption or methods other than intercourse between the couple. The Church grants annulments to couples that can't have children if they so desire. Marriage in the Bible was brought about for the raising of children by both parents. It was meant to keep the man from walking away. It was not meant merely for forming couples, just more permanent pairings of parents.

Times have changed, the Church has not. It is not mandatory that it does. You have a choice so choose. Take a man. Take a woman. Take a goat, just don't let PETA know.

My sincere apologies to all goats.

[edit on 11-1-2010 by Hemisphere]



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 06:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Taupin Desciple
First of all, I am not catholic or a homosexual. I am a spiritual hetrosexual.

Secondly, I don't see what all the fuss is about. People are enraged that the pope equates homosexuality with an attack on CREATION. How is it not? Last time I checked, two gay men cannot have sex and then one of them gets pregnant as a result. Same with two women. Gays are simply not doing their part to ensure that the world remains populated with humans. How could one say they are when they cannot procreate? [dissect that word please, pro- CREATE , pro CREATION , simple 1st grade english]. I see too many people here personalizing this whole thing when the big picture is right in front of your eyes. Classic case of not being able to see the forest through the trees.

I learned a long time ago to get advice and knowlege from any source possible, use common sense and logic to dissect the usable from non-usable, throw away what you can't use and learn from the rest regardless of where you got it from. Too many people nowadays listen more to the messenger than the message. So this guy is the leader of a religion that IMO holds no sway at all in the real world. The fact remains that he is RIGHT. I don't care if Hitler said it, or Bono,or Mother Teresa or the satanist down the street. What's right is right people.

I really don't see how he was attacking the personal aspect of a homosexual. I believe he was referring to the sexual orientation itself and how it is not conducive to nature[ or, as he put it, creation ]. I think if more people tried to interpret it that way, we would have a lot less friction here.



Just my 2 cents. Peace


By gosh man, do you live in the 1700's? Open your eyes and take a look around. The world is OVER-POPULATED! There are already TOO MANY heterosexuals having babies. If anything, the world needs more homosexuals to help slow this terrible trend. Plus, as a general rule, homosexuals tends to be highly artistic and highly intelligent people, so it wouldn't hurt man's progress either.

I would highly suggest you revamp your thinking to adjust for the current realities of the world. And, why did you have to inform everyone you weren't a homosexual? Do you think taking an advocacy position of fairness and justice somehow implicates you as a participant? It's just that kind of thinking that needs to change, in my opinion.



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 06:28 PM
link   

Plus, as a general rule, homosexuals tends to be highly artistic and highly intelligent people


so that's a general rule, eh?


i'm not homophobic, but that's quackery, pure and simple.

on a second note, if someone was to say that heterosexuals are highly intelligent it would be seen as an attack on gay people, and rightfully so. so you shouldn't make such hateful remarks either.

as for what you said about over-population, well, my advice is you should travel more by plane.



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 06:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by GorehoundLarry
Those who disagree with same sex marriage are ignorant fools.

It's time to grow up and become civilized beings.



Way to go buddy thats away to converts over to your side call em names, rascists, or bigots, something you leftys are good at.



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 06:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by BazzeMan
reply to post by downisreallyup
 


I'm not talking about overpopulation at all, my friend. Just flaming the pope for his remark that gay marriage is an attack on creation.

It is not, love and sexuality in all their forms are functions of creation/being/having emotions.

Marriage is a function of an intelligent society and that is a different discussion but a whole lot of people are having sex without being married. Is that an attack on creation also?

And here's Lewis Black for a thought:



Warning: he drops the f-bomb! *run for your lives!!*

Edit to add: If overpopulation was really the problem then by G-d, we need them homosexuals, and a lot of 'em!


[edit on 11-1-2010 by BazzeMan]


wheres he at with this video i do The left coast? He may n ot have recieved such a warming response in the south, midwest, or parts of the north



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by downisreallyup
There are already TOO MANY heterosexuals having babies. If anything, the world needs more homosexuals to help slow this terrible trend. Plus, as a general rule, homosexuals tends to be highly artistic and highly intelligent people, so it wouldn't hurt man's progress either.


Get the homosexuals in gear! Rub those sticks together. I didn't know there was shortage of intelligent artists.

You know if I were a dumbass homosexual I might be highly offended by your comments. But then again I likely wouldn't know enough to be offended. I would know that I was homosexual though. The witty guy in the puffy shirt standing behind me would clue me in. We're good that way.



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 06:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by pumpkinorange

Originally posted by Helmkat
Even the tiniest scratch on creation will tell you any potential creator would not give one rats behind if two members of one species and the same gender happen to love each other.


Helm, Could you pls clarify....what does it mean "even the tiniest scratch on creation will tell you...."?
Thanks.


Sure. Reality, existence, its all around us, from the tiniest particle to the grand multiverse. It all functions without Humans and does not need us. Reality helps and hinders us in equal measure and without regard to the outcome. So if all of the universe is going on along "just fine thank you" why would a potential creator of -everything-care one iota about a function of human sexuality? it certainly does not hinder the survival of the species and displays behavior that can be found in various other lifeforms on that world.

Homosexuality does not alter reality or impead the survival of the species: Check-all good-.

So since the multiverse and its creator don't care, that means that the words of men should be recognized as such. Our growth as a species will eventually reach a point where we have to discard ideas that suppress us or risk falling into a new dark age of ignorance.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join