Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
what a fucking dinosaur dickhead he is.
what about that muslim fucker.
yeah someone needs to draw a cartoon about that lad.
What a fud he is, what a backward institution he resides over.
If any other mainstream continually behaved the way the catholic church does (and the rest for that matter) they'd be fucking closed down. Disgraceful as usual.
leave my tradition alone?
TO CLARIFY: I personally think he is a ridiculous man, at the head of a ridiculous idea. But it looks as though he's not actually attacking the entire concept of an equality bill, just one that directly effects the catholic church running their operation according to their beliefs.
You can't go around saying 'being religious is okay as long as you only have a religion we can completely change as and when we like depending on public outcry,' can you?
Whilst I find vast swathes of catholic doctrine to be utterly absurd (and that's as a fully dyed-in-the-wool indoctrinated convent school girl), it's not unreasonable for the head of a religious group to speak out against something which threatens to undermine what they believe in ('rightly' or 'wrongly').
Also- let's look at equality as a whole- what about the rights of Catholics to marry members of the royal family? My ife has been ruined by this unjust law, and poor William is very upset.
But as for the pope himself- what a fucking nugget of a man he is.
but he's making an impassioned speech about freedom. and his freedom to restrict other people's freedoms. and his freedom to encourage other people to restrict other peoples freedoms. which is the complete opposite of freedom.
i understand his position but the argument he's chosen to use is absurd.
so is being lectured to about natural law by a celibate old man.
if anyone fancies signing a petition to make the pope pick up the tab for his £20 million jolly to the uk then there's a petition below.
are you saying that sexual identity should be priveledged over religious identity?
Or are you saying they're on an even keel? Because if that's the case, then the whole argument becomes an impasse.
but society is about balancing peoples beliefs to allow everyone to live alongside one another. there are plenty of individual beliefs that society doesn't tolerate based on the cultural implications of those desires - in this instance, how much suffering will occur to each group if the other gets their way. this is where, to my mind, the pope's argument falls down, and why the pope shouldn't have raised the issue of freedom.
if this law get's passed then catholics will not be able to discriminate against the hiring of homosexuals in catholic charities and organisations. they don't want to hire homosexuals because homosexuality is a sin. now, if the catholic church could demonstate that it had a tough line on all sins and that making them admit homosexuals would prevcent them from preserving this stance then they might have a point. as it is the catholic church has a terrible record on punishing sinners within its own staff and followers. equally they are not campaiging to have the right to discriminate on the basis of any other sin.
the catholic church's position is horribly inconsistent and the right they are asking for is not to discriminate on the basis of their beliefs but the freedom to discriminate against someone elses.
Apart from Scientology, because that's pretty funny and makes celebrities look a bit mental sometimes.
Got anything in the 'will moan a bit, call the Pope a bit of a knob, then get a pint in and carry on with his life' bracket?
it's called DiS
Next week, we can all be equally shocked at the notion of Islamists not takin' too kindly to democracy, feminism and faggotry.
What we should all be concerned about is the fact that the majority of the Lords support the right of religious institutions to discriminate in accordance with their fairy tale dogma.
at what point are we allowed freedom from religion? Because it seems to me that in the 21st century we shouldn't be doing anything other than treating this shit with contempt and ridicule. Instead, we're earnestly "taking on board" what religious authorities "have to say about society." Eww.
in the same way i have freedom from darts
i'm aware they both exist, people talk about them, some people like them, but i couldn't give a monkeys, and i don't
i also realise that isn't remotely your point, i just wanted to annoy some darts fans. why? i'm bored
OneNUNdred and eighty!
4 Like arrows in the hands of a warrior
are sons born in one's youth.
5 Blessed is the man
whose quiver is full of them.
They will not be put to shame
when they contend with their enemies in the gate.
it's divine revelation.
I'm confused. I want to know whether I'm being slandered or not.
"I will heap calamities upon them
and spend my arrows against them"
what did you expect him to say?
that didn't seem to annoy me as much
i saw the pope once. i went on pilgrimage to rome and sat for ages waiting for him. a guy i went with got to kiss his ring too :o
it doesn't really anger me to be honest. It's a given that he and his folowers will feel this way.
now that John Terry prick has me right pissed off............
'A spokesman for the Government Equalities Office said: "The Pope acknowledges our country's firm commitment to equality for all members of society. Also he's batshit crazy.
"We believe everyone should have a fair chance in life and not be discriminated against. The Equality Bill will make Britain a fairer and more equal place."'
that Evan Harris is pretty much my favourite MP
whereas the uk paxpayers are a little light at the moment...
something about protesting to much or something.
is the calibre of person who is jumping ship from the CoE (because it's becoming too liberal for them) to the catholic church under a backward looking leader (because it's becoming more hardline right wing)
the serial letter writers to the Glasgow Herald have been complaining about masses not being read in latin and lack of hellfire and damnation scaremongering from the pulpit
all religion is fairytale nonsense and has no business in being allowed the mass exposure and influence it enjoys
but really this isn't a surprise is it? I mean, we're talking about a man who said that condoms increase the spread of AIDS.
Just one outcome has been thousands of uneducated poor people coming to brand AIDS the result of witchcraft and sorcery...
...leading to children being accused of witchcraft...
...leading to these same children being tortured in week-long "exorcisms" and then exiled from their home villages.
They have to answer for much more besides, do the RC church, particularly the role their priests and bishops played in the Rwandan genocide.
in the eyes of the public.
He can carry on for all I care.
this would have 200 replies of people/brusma arguing with him about something completely ludicrous.
He was generally alright the rest of the time.
He didn't say anything about party politics, you've just inferred it from the word partisan, which often implies party involvement, but can equally just be about an idea or cause.
rather than political criticisms. He is just a bad writer.
Unless elsewhere in the article he's doing so. He's just saying the pope shouldn't be fucking with things considering good old king henry kicked his institution out of the country a fair while back!
in that he got the main thrust of his argument across: that this is about discrimination. you can tell it's about discrimination because it's the only sin that the catholics have any interest in denying access to their organisation. where are their demands for the right to discriminate against the gluttenous!
who really cares? i don't.
How do you feel about it now, eh?
what is the world coming to, no one cares about anything, we're all going to die from deadly apathy
*scrunches up face*
*jumps up and down on the spot*
*ceiling at work
id make altar boys altar strippers/cheerleaders. not only would people be more accepting of the casual sodomoy, but i think its exactly what the church needs to jazz things up a bit
also the 'blood of jesus' would now be fortified
time for another schism?
I'd start using real blood and human remains in the communion citing the LITERAL WORD OF THE BIBLE as the reason for doing so.
And also for consistencies sake. If you're going to start using the arguement of the literal word of God in the Bible then do it across the board, not just when it suits your arguement.
And I also second the motion for strippers during mass.
just like every other christian sect out there.
Evidence for the prosecution: Stance on homosexuality using Leviticus,
also; Transubstantiation during Communion.
Im not really fussed, being lapsed and all that, i was being flippant and cant really be bothered with a theological debate as Im having a 'good day'.
If I was having a bad day any excuse for an arguement would be pursued with vigor. ;)
Apparently he's a catoholic.
FILE TRANSFER PROTOCOL as they say in half of Belfast.
That's what it stands for, right?