News   Jul 30, 2024
Ambitious Residential Proposal Retains Car Dealership at Jane and St Clair
 941     4 
News   Jul 30, 2024
8 Wellesley's Distinctive Slope Emerges as Construction Reaches Crown
 1.6K     4 
News   Jul 30, 2024
News Roundup for July 30, 2024
 651     0 

Michael Prue says it's time to reconsider Catholic school funding

I am a practicing protistant Christian.

I get upset by the fact many people in this city jump up and label all churches as "hateful". Many churches I know are very progessive and believe in scocial justice (Heck, if you took a good look, you would see that most of the homeless shelters in the city are run by the church). The vast majority of churches are not run by Pat Robertson or any other neo-cons fron the states.

A Gay Christian isn't an oxymoron either. Our congregation is filled with many openly gay people who just want to express their spirituality. But this view isn't held alone by the protistant church, but by many Catholics as well.
Just because some old man in the Vatican (who I will reminde everyone that he is elected by people and not by God himself) says to do this, I doesn't mean that everyone follows. Would you do something cause Harper says so? As the Pope is to Catholics, he is to all of us. We may not like it and not listen, but he still officially speaks for us.

There was a reason Martin Luther came around, he saw how the politics, corruption and special interests were infringing on spirituality, worship and good deeds.

To this day the Catholic church has many flaws, but never, ever underestimate it. In the end, (politics and human sin aside) it is a force of good in this world. Do unto others as you would do unto them is what we believe, but we are all just human after all, (with heiarchy and politics included). But could you imagine if we finnaly acheived that message? C'mon, you can't get any better than that. :)


Back on topic, I believe in the separation of church and state. There should be no Catholic Schools funded by public money.
 
It's not just the pope, it's cardinals getting involved in elections by denying communion to more left wing candidates while the right wing war mongers are never challenged. My knowledge of this is from the US.
At my parents US Catholic Church they had flyers against civil unions and domestic partnerships distributed.

The Catholic Church here in Canada were fierce fighters against equality for LGBT people.

Sure churches can do some good things, that doesn't excuse the bad.

Seperation of church and state is for the benefit and preservation of both institutions.

I thought it was spelled "Protestant"?
 
^

I do have to say that the churches in the US are far more conservative than up here. And If I had to deal with all of the crap that the people (key word: people) in the states (and even here to a lesser extent) throw at the public who think that there is an angry, jealous hate filled being up there, I would call it quits too.

But I don't worship their God. My God is quite different from theirs.

I was also pointing out some of the hypocracies of the Catholic church:
How can you say, "Love unconditionally" and "Homosexualls are evil" in the same place? It's kinda like the US constitution until LBJ: "All men are given right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, except the blacks." :rolleyes:


And yes, it is spelled that way. Jesus refuses too correct my spelling for some reason....
 
urbanboom said:
I am a practicing protistant Christian.

I get upset by the fact many people in this city jump up and label all churches as "hateful". Many churches I know are very progessive and believe in scocial justice (Heck, if you took a good look, you would see that most of the homeless shelters in the city are run by the church). The vast majority of churches are not run by Pat Robertson or any other neo-cons fron the states.

A Gay Christian isn't an oxymoron either. Our congregation is filled with many openly gay people who just want to express their spirituality. But this view isn't held alone by the protistant church, but by many Catholics as well.
Just because some old man in the Vatican (who I will reminde everyone that he is elected by people and not by God himself) says to do this, I doesn't mean that everyone follows. Would you do something cause Harper says so? As the Pope is to Catholics, he is to all of us. We may not like it and not listen, but he still officially speaks for us.

There was a reason Martin Luther came around, he saw how the politics, corruption and special interests were infringing on spirituality, worship and good deeds.

To this day the Catholic church has many flaws, but never, ever underestimate it. In the end, (politics and human sin aside) it is a force of good in this world. Do unto others as you would do unto them is what we believe, but we are all just human after all, (with heiarchy and politics included). But could you imagine if we finnaly acheived that message? C'mon, you can't get any better than that. :)


Back on topic, I believe in the separation of church and state. There should be no Catholic Schools funded by public money.
Click to expand...

martin luther was not a good man...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luther_and_antisemitism

also, the catholic church is not a "force of good" in this world. everything from their stance on condoms, political interference in hESC research, pope ratzinger sending secret letters telling his "staff" not to involve authorities in sex abuse cases and waiting for statute of limitations to run out, etc, to name a few..

any good that the church has done is far outweighed by the evil they have done.

and P.S, we weren't off topic.
 
I'm no Catholic, but some of the criticism here is somewhat, but not entirely, unfair. Sure the church is 100% against condom use, but it's also 100% for sexual relations exclusively within a monogamous, heterosexual marriage. If people in Africa or wherever want to say that the church is forcing them to avoid condoms and thus putting their health at risk, where are the same people saying that they'd like to mess around sexually or engage in homosexual acts, but can not (and will not) because of the church?

Indeed if people actually followed the church's teachings on sexuality, Africa would have far fewer cases of HIV.
 
Admiral Beez said:
I'm no Catholic, but some of the criticism here is somewhat, but not entirely, unfair. Sure the church is 100% against condom use, but it's also 100% for sexual relations exclusively within a monogamous, heterosexual marriage. If people in Africa or wherever want to say that the church is forcing them to avoid condoms and thus putting their health at risk, where are the same people saying that they'd like to mess around sexually or engage in homosexual acts, but can not (and will not) because of the church?

Indeed if people actually followed the church's teachings on sexuality, Africa would have far fewer cases of HIV.
Click to expand...


How many people are virgins on their wedding days?

The church's approach is out of date with the reality of human nature.
The church isn't forcing people to avoid condoms so much as preventing them from being available at all. It's a death sentance as we all see in Africa.
 
Mot said:
How many people are virgins on their wedding days?

The church's approach is out of date with the reality of human nature.
The church isn't forcing people to avoid condoms so much as preventing them from being available at all. It's a death sentance as we all see in Africa.
Click to expand...
How is the church preventing condoms from being available? If Coca-Cola can have bottling plants and distribution in almost every despotic and harsh place in Africa, surely any of the condom companies could just as well set up distribution if there was a ready market.
 
Admiral Beez said:
I'm no Catholic, but some of the criticism here is somewhat, but not entirely, unfair. Sure the church is 100% against condom use, but it's also 100% for sexual relations exclusively within a monogamous, heterosexual marriage. If people in Africa or wherever want to say that the church is forcing them to avoid condoms and thus putting their health at risk, where are the same people saying that they'd like to mess around sexually or engage in homosexual acts, but can not (and will not) because of the church?

Indeed if people actually followed the church's teachings on sexuality, Africa would have far fewer cases of HIV.
Click to expand...


you know who should follow the church's teachings on sexuality? THE CATHOLIC CHURCH!

and with regards to why some rules are followed (no condoms) but others broken (premarital sex), i wonder if those catholic priests in the sex scandals wore condoms when they were raping young boys? i bet they didn't because they probably thought 2 sins were worse than 1.
 
Admiral Beez said:
How is the church preventing condoms from being available? If Coca-Cola can have bottling plants and distribution in almost every despotic and harsh place in Africa, surely any of the condom companies could just as well set up distribution if there was a ready market.
Click to expand...

Catholic Health agencies, many times the only health agency for some Africans, are denying condoms, even in the case of married people where one partner is HIV positive. They will only provide abstinance only education.

Also see this article from a Catholic Doctor's perspective.
Bishops in Africa are far more powerful leaders than the ones here in Canada and the US. They influence public policy on a much greater scale.

http://www.catholic.org/international/international_story.php?id=19561

" In a 2003 Vatican document titled Family Values Versus Safe Sex, the use of condoms in HIV-prevention programs was forcefully rejected:

The Catholic bishops of South Africa, Botswana, and Swaziland categorically regard the widespread and indiscriminate promotion of condoms as an immoral and misguided weapon in our battle against HIV/AIDS for the following reasons. The use of condoms goes against human dignity. Condoms change the beautiful act of love into a selfish search for pleasure-while rejecting responsibility. Condoms do not guarantee protection against HIV/AIDS. Condoms may even be one of the main reasons for the spread of HIV/AIDS.

Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo, head of the Pontifical Council for the Family, has elaborated on the latter point: “In the case of the AIDS virus, which is around 450 times smaller than the sperm cell, the condom’s latex material obviously gives much less security... to talk of condoms as ‘safe sex’ is a form of Russian roulette.” Cardinal Trujillo called on ministries of health to require “a warning, that the condom is not safe” on packages distributed worldwide. "


Further evidence of the Church pushing public policy against condom use.
http://www.afrol.com/articles/15359

"The Catholic Bishops' Conference of Southern Africa has enraged South African government officials and groups fighting the AIDS pandemic. The Catholic Church had criticised South Africa's government for promoting condoms in the fight against AIDS "when it is clearly not working."

Cardinal Wilfred Napier, the head of the Catholic Bishops' Conference in Southern Africa, made this statement on Monday, criticising the government of South Africa for its promotion of condoms. Cardinal said South Africa should follow Uganda's example and focus its anti-AIDS campaign on sexual abstinence."
 
and look at all the fuss with the HPV vaccine; that "it encourages promiscuous behavior "

i wonder how many girls will end up getting cervical cancer because religious authorities told their parents they'd become little whores if they got the vaccine.

if the HPV vaccine encourages promiscuous behavior, does the HEP A&B vaccine encourage people to eat shit? :rolleyes:
 
MisterF said:
If everyone followed biblical teachings humanity would have been extinct a long time ago.
Click to expand...

Yes, because if eveyone loved unconditionally and treated others as you would like to be treated yourself, the world would just be an awful place. :rolleyes:


and to the pope:
I seem to recall that condoms are mentioned in a grand total of ZERO times in the Bible.
 
urbanboom said:
And yes, it is spelled that way. Jesus refuses too correct my spelling for some reason....
Click to expand...

Jesus spoke and wrote in english?

I always thought that protista made reference to a large grouping of mostly single-celled organisms such as the protozoa, algae, fungi or slime molds.

Was Jesus being funny, or just poor at spelling?
 
I think that Jesus just can't spell.

(But somehow he can turn water into wine.)


And I meant to say "Protestant" before. I sure don't belong to the Church of fungi!
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top