The pope is resigning

[Mithridate]

The point is not about condoms. It is about the motivation behind them. Point made.

You mean, him lying and causing suffering is perfectly reasonably instead of saying "dont have sex outside of wedlock"?

If they teach chastity and abstinence then that should solve the problem shouldn't it, and if we can see that with Paedophillia it works then it will work with normal Africans so they are free to lie about condoms to promote their message.

So what? You're complaining that the Church goes against the grain and against the established procedural bureaucratic norms. I say that man has an innate dignity, which prevents him from being a slave to bureaucracies. Spiritually and morally, in the very least, which includes the freedom not to be taken as a reproductive mammal.

Having trouble wrapping my head around this, are you defending acting out on pedophilia?

[Diocle]

For those who do not have the level of understanding necessary to read a simple text, it is simple enough to sum up in a few points:

1 - Man is not a self-replicating automaton.
2 - Man has conscience, dignity, and the right to a spiritual choice.
3 - Man is not an automaton condemned to satisfy his impulses perenially due to some freudian, darwinian or jungian concept you love.
4 - Man has the right to opt out of bureaucratic schemes that only seek for procedural efficiency, instead of conscience.
5 - Man is a spiritual being, who can and must shun a shallow materialism that sees hedonistic pleasure as an inevitable end in itself.

The rest is tosh. It's quite clear to see what's the most sensible choice here.

For these reasons I claim our sacred right to hang the Pope!

[Marie Louise von Preussen]

Pure tosh. AD-hominem. And lots of strawmen. It's quite clear that there is no counter-argument against the Church bar that old, ridiculous "oh but condoms" thingy.

This is a typically materialistic view, very infantile. Ironically, it is also a strawman. As a Catholic, I could argue that man could live on, eat, and put whole stashes of condoms all day all time. The problem is not the condom, the problem is this ridiculous notion that "sex is all good", "promiscuity is all good", "unhinged sensuality should be stimulated", "true love and mere sensuality do not differ", etc...

This is ultimately beyond something that could be exposed in a mere set of categories. But I find it amusing that ideas as horrifically distorted as these can be touted around as normal and mainstream. Evil has become good, indeed.

For these reasons I claim our sacred right to hang the Pope!

It must be quite warm and moisty inside that cave. And very dark, too. Tell me, have you really pondered on your nihilism?

[Denny Crane!]

Still refusing to address the fact that they lie.

[Mithridate]

1 - Man is not a self-replicating automaton.
Point being? aside from stating 2

2 - Man has conscience, dignity, and the right to a spiritual choice.
I believe in good, you believe in an ancient fairytale collection endorsing slavery, genocide and suffering... still, so what?

3 - Man is not an automaton condemned to satisfy his impulses perenially due to some freudian, darwinian or jungian concept you love.
Back to 1 and 2, point being? ( did not know what jungian was... thank you? )

4 - Man has the right to opt out of bureaucratic schemes that only seek for procedural efficiency, instead of conscience.
No he does not, Its not that simple. morals differ and such a simplistic view cannot be employed in real world.

5 - Man is a spiritual being, who can and must shun a shallow materialism that sees hedonistic pleasure as an inevitable end in itself.
Bull. We can argue this to no end, im "spirutual" yet dont for a second believe in a god as described in the vile holy books. Most people dont, even those whom believe in said gods. As to hedonistic pleasure... Really?

The rest is tosh. It's quite clear to see what's the most sensible choice here.
Yes, to everyone but you it seem

[Marie Louise von Preussen]

Still refusing to address the fact that they lie.

'twas already addressed when I talked about Westminster. Africa also has a lot of married clergy, too. Persistence in telling I defend this is a strawman, purely and simply.

The real is not the rational. Corruption is everywhere. If we used corruption as an excuse to destroy every ideal, then we would have nowhere to run. Not even from ourselves.

Ironically this is very much a very Christian thingy. The very fact that human nature ought to forgive and redeem itself is very Catholic, and one of the reasons why the doctrine is so sensible.

[Denny Crane!]

I'm not talking about forgiving a past crime I'm talking about current actions. And the very fact that you feel the need to give a rambling incoherent obfuscatory answer on the issue speaks volumes.

[Mithridate]

Pure tosh. AD-hominem. And lots of strawmen. It's quite clear that there is no counter-argument against the Church bar that old, ridiculous "oh but condoms" thingy.

The best and most well argued debate on the Church I have seen (tho any other honest debates would be appreciated)

A good debate, hopefully you will reconsider

This is a typically materialistic view, very infantile. Ironically, it is also a strawman. As a Catholic, I could argue that man could live on, eat, and put whole stashes of condoms all day all time. The problem is not the condom, the problem is this ridiculous notion that "sex is all good", "promiscuity is all good", "unhinged sensuality should be stimulated", "true love and mere sensuality do not differ", etc...

This is ultimately beyond something that could be exposed in a mere set of categories. But I find it amusing that ideas as horrifically distorted as these can be touted around as normal and mainstream. Evil has become good, indeed.

Sex is not a bad thing, sex and love are two different things that are strongly related. They are not one and the same, this is well known

Even if you dispute this, how is it relevant to the lies about condoms?
Gods representative on earth should perhaps not mindlessly and needlessly lie, but go for what you claim is the true target namely some messed up morals?

[Marie Louise von Preussen]

I'm not talking about forgiving a past crime I'm talking about current actions. And the very fact that you feel the need to give a rambling incoherent obfuscatory answer on the issue speaks volumes.

Somebody here needs to start reading more complex texts if he or she thinks that is "too complex" or constitutes "rambling incoherence". A few Christian authors of great intellect, or perhaps a few pagan ones, if that is not your taste.

"Current actions". Please tell me more. The ones that you have selectively picked out, or the ones that truly matter? It is true. There is institutional corruption in Catholicism. Like there has always been. Lol. I have never defended institutional corruption, so you persist in attacking a strawman.

A good debate, hopefully you will reconsider

Hitchens is a windbag. He is quite literally weak. We do not need an Urs von Balthasar or a Boethius to refute him, any parish priest with standard seminary training trashes him.

[Lazarus]

The very fact that human nature ought to forgive and redeem itself is very Catholic

Complete, total, utter, garbage in the shape of whales bollocks. Catholics, Christians, Muslims, Mormons or whatever fantasy you subscribe to did not invent and does not have a monopoly on being a decent human being. No matter how vehemently theists claim otherwise.

[Mithridate]

Somebody here needs to start reading more complex texts if he or she thinks that is "too complex" or constitutes "rambling incoherence". A few Christian authors of great intellect, or perhaps a few pagan ones, if that is not your taste.

"Current actions". Please tell me more. The ones that you have selectively picked out, or the ones that truly matter? It is true. There is institutional corruption in Catholicism. Like there has always been. Lol. I have never defended institutional corruption, so you persist in attacking a strawman.

Watch the bloody clip posted for a few, google for some more

Hitchens is a windbag. He is quite literally weak. We do not need an Urs von Balthasar or a Boethius to refute him, any parish priest with standard seminary training trashes him.

He is also dead, you are either not very current or approve of some very vile people.

The audacity to call him... oh my xD I disagreed a lot with him on American policies, but you are just... Oh my

[Marie Louise von Preussen]

Complete, total, utter, garbage in the shape of whales bollocks. Catholics, Christians, Muslims, Mormons or whatever fantasy you subscribe to did not invent and does not have a monopoly on being a decent human being. No matter how vehemently theists claim otherwise.

Not every redemption is Christian, but still, Redemption is a central tenet of Christianity.

... I am tired of this low level debate.

[Lazarus]

I am tired of this low level debate.

Then step up your game.

[Marie Louise von Preussen]

Then step up your game.

Please, children. Don't make too much noise.

[Lazarus]

Interesting that you take this path instead of addressing the points raised against you (addressing them: not just writing words and submitting it). It speaks volumes of how weak your position is.

[Mithridate]

Please, children. Don't make too much noise.

Its all over! Run, flee for your lives!

[Marie Louise von Preussen]

Interesting that you take this path instead of addressing the points raised against you (addressing them: not just writing words and submitting it). It speaks volumes of how weak your position is.

There is nothing more to address because all has been correctly addressed. It's not my fault that you cannot read through some very simple lines I write. The rest is tosh. Usually, in a true dialogue, we hold out our narcissistic and sentimental impulses, as well as personal opinions and sentiments because we care for the truth more than for ourselves. This is not the case here, and all the persistent repetition of one liners and sentimental quips will be of no use to y'all. There can be no debate with children, that's it.

[Lazarus]

There is nothing more to address because all has been correctly addressed. It's not my fault that you cannot read through some very simple lines I write. The rest is tosh. Usually, in a true dialogue, we hold out our narcissistic and sentimental impulses, as well as personal opinions and sentiments because we care for the truth more than for ourselves. This is not the case here, and all the one liners and sentimental quips will be of no use to y'all. There can be no debate with children, that's it.

Tell me what is it other than sentiment and opinion that allows you to defend the Pope lying about condoms - in Africa of all places?

You're right. All has been addressed and addressed correctly. It just doesn't look as good for you as you want to pretend it does.

[Sar1n]

You're still debating him/her? My encounters with him/her ended with getting no coherent reply except for personal attacks, then evacuating a thread after having nothing to say to my rebuttals. Same thing is happening here...

[Marie Louise von Preussen]

Oh, goodbye children. I mean you really have a very nice, wubby, fluffy humanitarian ideal, but in the end, that's just you. How that correlates to truth is something which not a single one of you has cared to explicit.