Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Pope Benedict XVI

[travis2]

.

[NeoConIV]

Yeah Baby!!!

[polandprzem]

For how long?

[travis2]

One never knows. Or what he will do. After all, Pope John XXIII was supposed to be a "caretaker" Pope, and he started Vatican II...

[desflood]

Well, here's to hoping Benedict XVI does even half the job his predecessor did.

[Hook Dem]

This was a very important event and I'm glad we have a new Pope. Can we get back to the local news at noon now and save all of this for commentary later? Enough already!

[JoeChalupa]

God Bless.

[polandprzem]

Some info saying that he was in Hitlerjugent.
I just don't know yet on a 100%.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

attention, attention, attention all conservatives:

the pope is white
there is no need to fear
i repeat, the pope is white
you may continue your day's work in peace

[Cant_Be_Faded]

for all you eschatologists

http://www.newswithviews.com/Ryter/jon85.htm


my teacher at NA, mrs shcoener, always told us that the pope after john paul the II would be the 'anti-pope' and would cause the downfall of catholicism shortly before the end of the world....interesting...

but then again, she also told us that she witnessed a ufo landin

(not being stupid here, this teacher of mine 7th to 8th grade really did say these things)

[jalbre6]

I can see the ceremony now...

http://i.timeinc.net/ew/img/review/990709/animalhouse.jpg

Your Delta Tau Chi name is Benedict XVI!

[MannyIsGod]

Hey, I'm curious here...

What is the reason behind the name change?

Even though I grew up in the Catholic church, I don't know much about the papal transitioning and what I do know, I learned from Angels and Demons.

[travis2]

It's just a tradition. There's no rule that says the new pope must change his name.

It became a tradition in 996.

The first time it happened was in the 6th century, when the priest who had been elected pope decided his given name was not appropriate for the papacy...his given name was Mercury.

[MannyIsGod]

Alrighty. Thanks, Travis.

[jalbre6]

It's just a tradition. There's no rule that says the new pope must change his name.

It became a tradition in 996.

The first time it happened was in the 6th century, when the priest who had been elected pope decided his given name was not appropriate for the papacy...his given name was Mercury.

Though in hindsight, "Pope Mercury" would have made a great 6th century action hero name.

[The Ressurrected One]

.nevermind.

I like the choice...seems like an upstanding Catholic who will adhere to doctrine and carry on with his well-loved predecessor's agenda.

Not being Catholic, I really had no preference...and, in fact, was kind of hoping for the African guy. He seemed pretty upstanding as well. Anybody but that Desmond Tutu idiot.

[The Ressurrected One]

i saw desmond tutu make a speech once
he was pretty compelling, not as good as i thought he'd be though
Tutu is an idiot...

[NeoConIV]

If the liberal wing were to take the reins of the Catholic Church...God help us all.

I hope that Ratzinger helps reinvigorate the faith in Germany. Sorely needed.

[Ocotillo]

Isn't Tutu Episcopalian (sp)?

[exstatic]

If the liberal wing were to take the reins of the Catholic Church...God help us all.

Look for the US Catholic church to continue their slide under this follow up conservative Pope; in attendance, tithing, and in ordinations. JP II's refusal to aggressively clean house on pedophiles, and come correct for past mistakes cost the Vatican dearly where it hurts: in the coffers.

[exstatic]

Isn't Tutu Episcopalian (sp)?

I believe so.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

this site is better
http://www.jpdawson.com/lastpope.html
makes it really creepy that he chose 'Benedict' as his name

oh, and this new Pope was in Hitler Youth, when he was 14--participation was compulsory....


the site compares this guy's prophecies to nostradamus...thats kinda funny.

[NeoConIV]

Look for the US Catholic church to continue their slide under this follow up conservative Pope; in attendance, tithing, and in ordinations. JP II's refusal to aggressively clean house on pedophiles, and come correct for past mistakes cost the Vatican dearly where it hurts: in the coffers.
You wanna see a slide, wait till a lliberal pope gives the blessing on female priests, contraception, and gay marriage.

[spurster]

I agree that female priests would cause the end of the world or something worse.

[exstatic]

You wanna see a slide, wait till a lliberal pope gives the blessing on female priests, contraception, and gay marriage.

How about one standard for male priests? You do know that Anglicans who converted were allowed to remain both married and priests, and the Earth hasn't stopped rotating yet? Imagine that. Imagine being a Catholic priest at the time, wanting a family, and seeing others allowed to have one. Imagine the priest shortage over in about 5 years. Nevermind. We're talking the Vatican here.

I also see nothing wrong with female priests. One of the best Christmas Eve services I've ever attended was last year at my sister's Lutheran church with a female minister. Another outlet to end the priest shortage, but nope...nevermind.

The stand on contraception is plain stupid when taken in the context of both the Third World, and their population problems, and the stand on abortion. I would venture to say that most Catholic girls who "get in trouble" wouldn't if they had used contraceptives. Then again, I guess that's just another case where women are supposed to shut up, and accept their place in the church heirarchy, which is plainly at the bottom and silent.

I would venture to say that gay marriage within the church has very little support, mostly because gays who are interested in living a full, undiscriminated life left the church long ago. As with priests, telling someone to keep it zipped is not really a viable or humane option. You can't just "turn off" someone's sex drive. It's there and the motor is running.

[Bandit2981]

If the liberal wing were to take the reins of the Catholic Church...God help us all.
considering a conservative wing is in charge and prefers to hide or quietly transfer priests that molest children, i'll take the liberals anyday

[desflood]

Ex, if women don't like their place at the bottom, they can leave the Church. It's their choice.

[exstatic]

They do, in droves. At last count, two of my five sisters and my mother have all taken a walk.

[jalbre6]

They do, in droves. At last count, two of my five sisters and my mother have all taken a walk.

Both of my sisters and my stepmother have as well.

[exstatic]

My mother left after the age of 70. THAT'S a statement. ;)

[IcemanCometh]

Told you they would elect a hard pipe hitting nigga as Pope. Keep in mind this guy has effectively been in charge for the past 10 years, the Catholic church has been doing some swell work in that time. Mind you they only chose him because hes old and they don't expect him to last. The real selection of Pope is only now underway.


Remember you can't spell ratzinger without nazi

[NeoConIV]

As with most liberal ideas, they look great on paper, but usually never quite work out as planned.

Female Priests - Don't doubt that you may have attended a beautiful service presided by a female. Great. Be a Lutheran or any other denomination that ordains women. It's all good.




http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p123a9p4.htm#III

The Fathers rejected women's ordination, not because it was incompatible with Christian culture, but because it was incompatible with Christian faith. Thus, together with biblical declarations, the teaching of the Fathers on this issue formed the tradition of the Church that taught that priestly ordination was reserved to men. Throughout medieval times and even up until the present day, this teaching has not changed.

Further, in 1994 Pope John Paul II formally declared that the Church does not have the power to ordain women. He stated, "Although the teaching that priestly ordination is to be reserved to men alone has been preserved by the constant and universal tradition of the Church and firmly taught by the magisterium in its more recent documents, at the present time in some places it is nonetheless considered still open to debate, or the Church’s judgment that women are not to be admitted to ordination is considered to have a merely disciplinary force. Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church’s divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Luke 22:32) I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful" (Ordinatio Sacerdotalis 4).

Contraception - Understand that for devout Catholics, this is more about interrupting the holiness and sanctity of the union of a man and a woman. Population problems? Abstinence/Celibacy/NFP. My wife and use NFP. Simple. The answer isn't offending God with some device. As a means to avoid abortion? Same answer.



http://www.catholic.com/library/Contraception_and_Sterilization.asp
Christians have always condemned contraceptive sex. Both forms mentioned in the Bible, coitus interruptus and sterilization, are condemned without exception (Gen. 38:9–10, Deut. 23:1). The early Fathers recognized that the purpose of sexual intercourse in natural law is procreation; contraceptive sex, which deliberately blocks that purpose, is a violation of natural law.

Every church in Christendom condemned contraception until 1930, when, at its decennial Lambeth Conference, Anglicanism gave permission for the use of contraception in a few cases. Soon all Protestant denominations had adopted the secularist position on contraception. Today not one stands with the Catholic Church to maintain the ancient Christian faith on this issue.

How badly things have decayed may be seen by comparing the current state of non-Catholic churches, where most pastors counsel young couples to decide before they are married what form of contraception they will use, with these quotations from the early Church Fathers, who condemned contraception in general as well as particular forms of it, as well as popular contraceptive sex practices that were then common (sterilization, oral contraceptives, coitus interruptus, and orally consummated sex).


Gay Marriage -

Just skim here:
http://www.catholic.com/library/gay_marriage.asp



People can leave if they wish. The Church is interested, and has been interested in truth. Not which way the wind blows. The bottom line isn't about numbers...it's about truth. If so and so has left for this reason, I know a so and so who has joined the Catholic Church for that.
Which reminds me, I saw an article recently about how the Church has made substantial gains in recent years (Since yall are into numbers). Let me find it.

[IcemanCometh]

Has the church accepted that the world is round and revolves around the sun? Or do they still condemn that too?

[NeoConIV]

Has the church accepted that the world is round and revolves around the sun? Or do they still condemn that too?
Iceman 1 Catholic Church several centuries ago 0.

[exstatic]

The church is a large bureaucracy, nothing more. Those institutions exist only to perpetuate themselves. I love the way the Pope says "We can't do that!" with regards to ordaining women. The church had NO problem instituting the doctrine of infallibility...1870 years after the birth of Christ. :lol Then again, that speaks to perpetuating and increasing the power of the Papacy and the college of Cardinals.

[IcemanCometh]

Lets not forget the myth of original sin. That fable teaches us that the pursuit of knowledge is the most evil thing a person can do. Nice little scam they have going there, maintaining power over the ignorant.

[NeoConIV]

The Church, rather, Churches of any denomination are run by imperfect humans who inevitably will run the Church imperfectly. And as long as imperfect humans are running Churches in an unperfect world, it will always be easy to look at the Church with a cynical eye. I guess that's just the way it is.

[exstatic]

Iceman 1 Catholic Church several centuries ago 0.

Doesn't matter. They were wrong and wouldn't admit it. It's the same problem they have now with a number of issues. We'll see movement on women priests, married priests, and other issues, it just won't be in our lifetime. In three hundred years, NeoConMCXXLVII will be chiding IceManIsHere about mocking the church of three hundred years before, when they were WRONG and deserved to be mocked for their provinciality. :lol

[exstatic]

The Church, rather, Churches of any denomination are run by imperfect humans who inevitably will run the Church imperfectly. And as long as imperfect humans are running Churches in an unperfect world, it will always be easy to look at the Church with a cynical eye. I guess that's just the way it is.

The Vatican would burn you for saying the Pope is fallible, fucking heretic.

[IcemanCometh]

The Church, rather, Churches of any denomination are run by imperfect humans The pope is the voice of god and as such is infallible. Didn't you know that?

[NeoConIV]

The Vatican would burn you for saying the Pope is fallible, fucking heretic.
Um, no they wouldn't. Everything the Pope says is not infallible. The Vatican would totally agree with what I just said. Totally.

[exstatic]

Your'e either fallible, or infallible. It's not a part time gig. :lol The Vatican chose the stupid path.

[NeoConIV]

Your'e either fallible, or infallible. It's not a part time gig. :lol The Vatican chose the stupid path.
Brush up on Papal Infallibility. Whatever the Pope says isn't infallible. Hold on, let me get link to where it explains specific conditions from which the Pope will speak infallibly.

[NeoConIV]

http://www.catholic.com/library/papal_infallibility.asp
An infallible pronouncement—whether made by the pope alone or by an ecumenical council—usually is made only when some doctrine has been called into question. Most doctrines have never been doubted by the large majority of Catholics.

Pick up a catechism and look at the great number of doctrines, most of which have never been formally defined. But many points have been defined, and not just by the pope alone. There are, in fact, many major topics on which it would be impossible for a pope to make an infallible definition without duplicating one or more infallible pronouncements from ecumenical councils or the ordinary magisterium (teaching authority) of the Church.

At least the outline, if not the references, of the preceding paragraphs should be familiar to literate Catholics, to whom this subject should appear straightforward. It is a different story with "Bible Christians." For them papal infallibility often seems a muddle because their idea of what it encompasses is often incorrect.

Some ask how popes can be infallible if some of them lived scandalously. This objection of course, illustrates the common confusion between infallibility and impeccability. There is no guarantee that popes won’t sin or give bad example. (The truly remarkable thing is the great degree of sanctity found in the papacy throughout history; the "bad popes" stand out precisely because they are so rare.)

Other people wonder how infallibility could exist if some popes disagreed with others. This, too, shows an inaccurate understanding of infallibility, which applies only to solemn, official teachings on faith and morals, not to disciplinary decisions or even to unofficial comments on faith and morals. A pope’s private theological opinions are not infallible, only what he solemnly defines is considered to be infallible teaching.

Even Fundamentalists and Evangelicals who do not have these common misunderstandings often think infallibility means that popes are given some special grace that allows them to teach positively whatever truths need to be known, but that is not quite correct, either. Infallibility is not a substitute for theological study on the part of the pope.

What infallibility does do is prevent a pope from solemnly and formally teaching as "truth" something that is, in fact, error. It does not help him know what is true, nor does it "inspire" him to teach what is true. He has to learn the truth the way we all do—through study—though, to be sure, he has certain advantages because of his position.

Now you know!

[jalbre6]

Now you know!

:rolleyes

http://www.yojoe.com/action/83/83card/duke-var.jpg

And knowing is half the battle!

[NeoConIV]

It's just a fact that Catholic doctrine is so routinely twisted and turned around. There are some unbelievable misconceptions out there. Papal infallibilty is one of the big ones.

[NeoConIV]

My mother left after the age of 70. THAT'S a statement. ;)
Why did she leave?

[exstatic]

How can you be infallible part of the time? And how do you get to pick when? It's an idiotic concept from the get go.

[jalbre6]

It's just a fact that Catholic doctrine is so routinely twisted and turned around. There are some unbelievable misconceptions out there. Papal infallibilty is one of the big ones.

I believe you. When over a billion people belong to a religion two millenia old with a couple of skeletons in the closet, crap like that is bound to occur.

What was the last "radical" move the Catholic church did do, by the way? Allow services to be in other languages besides Latin? Curious.

[NeoConIV]

How can you be infallible part of the time? And how do you get to pick when? It's an idiotic concept from the get go.
I'd rather you understand that Papal Infallibility is basically NEVER used, EXTREMELY rare and for you to think it's a dumb idea, than to believe that whatever the Pope says is infallible. The latter is just patently false.

[exstatic]

Why did she leave?

Primarily anger over the church's decades long coverups of the molestations, simmered on top of 30+ years of dissatisfaction of a secondary role in a church where women have no say. She's Evangelical Lutheran now, and couldn't be happier. So is one of my sisters.

[jalbre6]

I'd rather you understand that Papal Infallibility is basically NEVER used, EXTREMELY rare and for you to think it's a dumb idea, than to believe that whatever the Pope says is infallible. The latter is just patently false.


When was the last time it was used?

[NeoConIV]

I believe you. When over a billion people belong to a religion two millenia old with a couple of skeletons in the closet, crap like that is bound to occur.

What was the last "radical" move the Catholic church did do, by the way? Allow services to be in other languages besides Latin? Curious.
Hmm. Travis is an obviously very knowledgeable Catholic. I might defer that one to him or any other Catholic more knowledgable than me. But the one you mentioned is a fine one, as well as the fact that priests would now face the laity. Many felt that that took away from the solemnity of Liturgy, but that one is one that Catholics could really appreciate I guess.

[exstatic]

I don't believe that everything that the Pope says is infallible.

I don't believe that anything the Pope says is infallible.

I don't believe that you can be infallible, part-time. It's a cop out, used to control the millions of Catholics around the world, and keep that collection basket jingling.

[jalbre6]

If people think that a man, any man, for whatever reason, is infallible, that is their business. I personally think it's foolish that a guy gets elected by other men and now can be infallible, but then again I haven't been Catholic in at least fifteen years.

But faith is a strong thing. And faith in a leader that is infallible (or has the ability to be infallible) can make said leader a force to be reckoned with.

[JoeChalupa]

I've found, for me anyways, it is best not to "debate" those who oppose the Catholic faith. I say to them, "God Bless You", and move on.

If you don't find Jesus in the Catholic Church...then I hope you find him somewhere else. Peace to ALL.



I knew this thread would follow this path.

[Das Texan]

just fucking great.


if you will excuse me i will now go prepare for the dark ages.


he will make jp II look like a damn liberal.

good job catholic church in further alienating the flock.

[JoeChalupa]

Okay..maybe one more comment.

I think it is up to the faithful to change, not the Church to change for the flock. Nobody said having faith was easy.

I know I'm guilty from straying from the teachings of the Church and being a sinner.

[Bandit2981]

Lets not forget the myth of original sin. That fable teaches us that the pursuit of knowledge is the most evil thing a person can do. Nice little scam they have going there, maintaining power over the ignorant.
just curious Iceman, are you a Deist?

[exstatic]

I think it is up to the faithful to change, not the Church to change for the flock.

Nope. If that were the case, Rome would still be burning people at the stake for saying that the earth is round, and that it goes around the sun. That which does not change, dies.

[JoeChalupa]

Even the ignorant are not powerless.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

good posts

organized religion is flawed because it is organized

[Cant_Be_Faded]

organized religion is what men make it, and is very different to the universal church. the idea is to worship as close to the way peter and paul did.


what do you mean by universal church

[NeoConIV]

I've found, for me anyways, it is best not to "debate" those who oppose the Catholic faith. I say to them, "God Bless You", and move on.

If you don't find Jesus in the Catholic Church...then I hope you find him somewhere else. Peace to ALL.



I knew this thread would follow this path.
Joe, correcting misconceptions by presenting Catholic doctrine and debating are two different things. I'm not suggesting that everyone should believe Papal Infallibility, for example, just what the Church teaches about it.

Always correct misconceptions when you come across them.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

You wanna see a slide, wait till a lliberal pope gives the blessing on female priests, contraception, and gay marriage.


that will never happen, at least not for gay marriage

thats the one thing the church will (and should) never change on

[IcemanCometh]

just curious Iceman, are you a Deist?

nope atheist. mind you i used to be a lot more tolerant of people and their beliefs, but i don't know something about the past 4 years has just rubbed me the wrong way.

[Drachen]

edit, I should read the whole thread before responding.

[scott]

they could have chosen Bill Frist to be Pope and they'd still be the most liberal of Christian faiths... and thank God (pun intended) for that.

[Drachen]

I would go with episcopalian for that honor.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

I like him already :lol

http://beta.news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20050419/pl_afp/vaticanpopeus

[NeoConIV]

:lol Most liberal of the Christian faiths? We talkin about the same church here?

[NeoConIV]

I like him already :lol

http://beta.news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20050419/pl_afp/vaticanpopeus
Werd!

The MSM coverage I've seen so far is laughable. They're just a breath away from calling him the anti-Christ. Freaking hilarious. Just because they're not getting their way with "progressive issues" BOO HOO HOO!!


....Anyone see Cokie Roberts on nightline?! :lol :lol :lol She was visibly livid. Yo Benedict! Shuddup shuttin up! Cokie's running the show now! Get lost!

[Nbadan]

memories...

http://www.nobeliefs.com/images/hitler_cardinal4.jpg

[Cant_Be_Faded]

nope atheist. mind you i used to be a lot more tolerant of people and their beliefs, but i don't know something about the past 4 years has just rubbed me the wrong way.


what do you say to people when they say

well you're talking about something called "god" you're mentioning the word "god"

what is it that the word "god" as you use it refers to?

and then they go on to say that theres no possible way to be an atheist if you speak of god even if you say ' you dont believe in god'

im not ranking you, im really curious

cuz i used to be an atheist, but then i realized it wasn't possible to be a true atheist (for me), i had to be agnostic....
but now im following my own religion...but that, my friends, is another post

[exstatic]

I would go with episcopalian for that honor.

I agree. Episcopalians and Evangelical Lutherans both have women clergy.

Weirdest take I ever saw from you, scott.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

Episcopalians and Evangelical Lutherans both have women clergy. Weirdest take I ever saw from you, scott.


hey exstatic, is it true that the episcopalian faith is the closest to christianity? or is it considered christianity, and did i mean to say it was the closest to catholicism?

i can't remember shit about religion.....even though i used to go to catholic schools from grades 2-12....along with the necessary theology classes...ugh, talk about brain washing

luckily i survived

[NeoConIV]

The Anglican (Epicopalean) also raised to bishop and openly and practicing homosexual priest.

[NeoConIV]

i can't remember shit about religion.....

Well...ah, nevermind.

:angel

[Drachen]

I agree. Episcopalians and Evangelical Lutherans both have women clergy.

Weirdest take I ever saw from you, scott.

edit
read Drachen READ!

[NeoConIV]

memories...

http://www.nobeliefs.com/images/hitler_cardinal4.jpg
No date on this? Every other picture from nobelief.com (dude, can you say Christan Haters? :lol Damn!! What a wacko website) is at latest 1935... :rolleyes

[Nbadan]

more kindleing for the fire...


April 20, 2005 4:05 AM
New pope shelved sex abuse claim, accuser says
By Alistair Bell

MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - A former trainee priest who has accused the founder of an influential Catholic order of sexual abuse said on Tuesday that new Pope Benedict XVI deliberately shelved a probe into his claims for six years.

Jose Barba is one of eight ex-members of the Rome-based Legion of Christ, most of them Mexicans, who accuse the order's founder, Marcial Maciel, of sexually abusing them from the 1940s through the 1960s.

The allegations are too old to be investigated under criminal law but nine former members brought a suit against Maciel, 84, under the Vatican's canonical law in 1998. One has since died.

The case was filed at the Church's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, headed by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger who was elected Pope Benedict XVI on Tuesday.

SwissInfo.org (http://www.swissinfo.org/sen/swissinfo.html?siteSect=143&sid=5701468&cKey=1113962737000)

[NeoConIV]

God may only know the truth to that Dan, but does that ever stink....he said she said.

[cqsallie]

The new pope, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, now known as Benedict XVI, is a former Hitler Youth member. He now says he joined this under duress, but one has to wonder about the church's penchant for martyrs/saints who refused to do something that was outside their moral values and were executed as a result. Obviously, the new pope wasn't ready for martyrdom, and joined Hitler Youth.
As an American Catholic, I wonder very much about other statements made by this new pope: the role of women in the church (subservient), the idea that priests can marry (anathema, although Jesus never asked celibacy of his apostles - St. Peter, the so-called first pope married three times), birth control (outrageous proof of hedonism).
Right up until the great schism, which caused the Eastern Orthodox Church to break with the Roman Church, the Holy Spirit was a female entity known as Sophia (Wisdom). In the initial Apostles' Creed, Jesus was the product of the love between the Father and the Holy Spirit (Sophia). When the "Old Poops" re-wrote doctrine, they eliminated any female reference from the Gospels. Sophia became a male Holy Ghost who was generated by the love between the father and the son. Makes a whole lot of sense, doesn't it? This is when the Eastern Church split and the great Hagia Sophia remains as one of the world's greatest temples to a female Holy Spirit. In the Eastern tradition, the Apostles' Creed still states that Jesus (or the Redeemer) is the product of God (power) and the Holy Spirit (Sophia/Wisdom).
I am steeped in religion - the Catholic religion. Not only did I attend Catholic school from grades 1 through 12, but I also attended Catholic college, before breaking free and graduating from a secular university. However, I can recite the "Our Father" (Pater Noster) and the "Hail Mary" (Ave Maria) and the entire ritual of a Mass and Benediction in Latin. I was the editor of a Catholic newspaper for nearly five years. I have hobnobbed with nuns, priests, bishops - and yes, cardinals, for most of my life.
This is why I feel that I have a right to express an opinion. Occasional Catholics and Hysterical Catholics don't know what I know.
Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger has been called "The Hammer," and "The Defender of the Wrong," and "God's Rotweiller," and "The Enforcer," in my circle. None of these are labels of praise. You may be very comfortable with the election of Ratzinger, but what could one expect? Of course the dean of the College of Cardinals would be a front-runner. Is he the best choice? Who really cares? Only a fool would think that any pope has real clout in the scheme of things.
Pope Benedict XVI will set back the forward movement of the church, but he's 78 years old and may well fall prey to a debilitating illness quite soon in his reign. I don't hope for this, and it matters little to me what pompous ass takes over in his stead. They are all pompous asses.
A very dear friend phoned me tonight (a priest) to ask my opinion of the new pope. I told him pretty much what I've posted here. He said, "Everyone I've spoken to says he's very humble..." Well, I know he said more than that, but my mind locked on the "humble" description.
"How can he be humble while insisting that everything he says is the gospel truth?" I asked. There was a long pause and I thought that my friend had hung up. Then came a long, loud sigh. "Aaahhh," he finally replied, "You always ask the hard questions!"
So, I ask of you: Ask the hard questions; accept no one at face value; don't be afraid to question the tenents of the faith you say you espouse. Does it all make sense to you? Do you have any questions?
If you don't, the time has come for you to seriously question your faith and why you believe what you believe. Are you sure your faith isn't just something you've been spoonfed and your beliefs demanded of you?
Peace and love....

[travis2]

Hmm. Travis is an obviously very knowledgeable Catholic. I might defer that one to him or any other Catholic more knowledgable than me. But the one you mentioned is a fine one, as well as the fact that priests would now face the laity. Many felt that that took away from the solemnity of Liturgy, but that one is one that Catholics could really appreciate I guess.

I don't know how knowledgeable I am...but I know where to find answers if I don't know.

Also, it depends on your definition of "radical change"...

[travis2]

I've found, for me anyways, it is best not to "debate" those who oppose the Catholic faith. I say to them, "God Bless You", and move on.

If you don't find Jesus in the Catholic Church...then I hope you find him somewhere else. Peace to ALL.



I knew this thread would follow this path.

I hear you, Joe...I've found a high percentage are merely anti-Catholic bigots looking for fresh meat. Don't confuse them with facts, they already have their minds made up.

[JoeChalupa]

Well, my faith is solid as a rock. Amen.

[travis2]

I have no doubts either.

[polandprzem]

Well , many of you just treating the religon as some kind of politics. I hate the threads about it in a political forum but well...


If you are happy somewhere else than in Catholic church okay, let it be. John Paul II was talking about uniting the religions.
Universal church? - (for everybody) one of the predictions to the word (Nostradamus and things). What about the black Pope ? He should be next and last before the worst times in history but who believes in that.

You talkin about the Pope the priests , this wrong , that wrong, okay but if it was abot that so I wouldn't know what the true faith is.
PEOPLE ARE THE CHURCH - not soeme building and having a pleasure all the time.

God gave you the choice. And it's your decision to make the right ones.

[Experiment2100]

hey exstatic, is it true that the episcopalian faith is the closest to christianity? or is it considered christianity, and did i mean to say it was the closest to catholicism?




All faiths that believe in Jesus are considered christian.


i can't remember shit about religion.....even though i used to go to catholic schools from grades 2-12....along with the necessary theology classes...ugh, talk about brain washing

Easiest "A"s ever. It's not as bad as other school's theology classes, trust me.

Also papal ifallibility can be invoked in two ways 1) when the church meets and comes to a conclusion on doctrine. The justification being that the Holy Sprit was there to influence the council's doctrine. and 2) Something about the pope and throne of Saint Peter, this one I'm not sure of.

This selection doesn't surprise me, the church has made liberal changes, if you don't believe me look at what it was 35 years ago. Not liberal as we would see it. Ratzinger is uberconservative so don't look for any doctrinal changes any time soon. Unless they are regressive and not progressive.

[Clandestino]

women do hand out the host now.. they call them eucharist ministers...

regardless, the way the world came together at the death of pope jp II is something that shows catholicism is still very strong. you will not see that for the death of any other religious leader.

[Experiment2100]

the thing i don't understand about the catholic church claiming that the ordination of females is against the faith, is that there used to be female priests...or more accurately, women performed the eucharist, distributed the bread and wine and so forth.
way back when christianity was called 'the way', back when they used to practice in the roman sewers..
wasn't until 200 ad or so that men began to condemn women for doing this.

The deaconate was just recently put back and it too existed in the early church, it just takes time and patience, and some don't have that.

[Experiment2100]

women do hand out the host now.. they call them eucharist ministers...

regardless, the way the world came together at the death of pope jp II is something that shows catholicism is still very strong. you will not see that for the death of any other religious leader.


What he is refering to is that when the Church first started, women led services like priests do now.

[Clandestino]

what is the big deal??? why do women want to do everything like men...even fight in combat... why aren't women complaining that there are only a handful of women ceos???

[Experiment2100]

what is the big deal??? why do women want to do everything like men...even fight in combat... why aren't women complaining that there are only a handful of women ceos???

I would say it's because the woman priest and combat thing are publicised more, once they get what they want they'll find something else to bitch about.

[Clandestino]

the women need to go complain to the muslim scholars about women in the muslim society...

[polandprzem]

Wtf elpimpo4cc ?

[samikeyp]

And knowing is half the battle!

I always wondered what the other half was. :)

[MannyIsGod]

I've "left" the church for reasons that I've outlined before. Basicly, I think it's unessecary for my relationship to any god that may exsist.

That being said, I respect NeoCon, Joe, and Travis for what they believe and the way they believe it. They are great examples of good catholics.

[NeoConIV]

I've "left" the church for reasons that I've outlined before. Basicly, I think it's unessecary for my relationship to any god that may exsist.

That being said, I respect NeoCon, Joe, and Travis for what they believe and the way they believe it. They are great examples of good catholics.
Thank you sir. I should buy you a beer sometime.

[desflood]

what is the big deal??? why do women want to do everything like men...even fight in combat... why aren't women complaining that there are only a handful of women ceos???
Because women today are stupid. They used to rule the world. Men did what they had to do during the day, but at night in bed they listened to their females... or God help them. Now, women have lost that feminine touch, and all the power they had before with it, and need to make themselves feel equal.

[MannyIsGod]

Because women today are stupid. They used to rule the world. Men did what they had to do during the day, but at night in bed they listened to their females... or God help them. Now, women have lost that feminine touch, and all the power they had before with it, and need to make themselves feel equal.Holy shit (I crack myself up with my bad puns), you really think women ruled the world?

I'm all for everyone being able to decide what they want out of life and what brings them happiness. If for you, that is the traditional female role, then I see no problem with that.

But, if I was a woman fighting for my equal rights and I read what you said, especialy the stupid part, I'd probably be offended. Women want equality, and there's nothing wrong with that. I think it's pretty shitty to have a role defined for you based on nothing more than what you have between your legs. Or don't have, rather.

[Guru of Nothing]

Now, women have lost that feminine touch, and all the power they had before with it

As evidenced by your level 4 score on the "How Straight Acting Are You" quiz.

[desflood]

Holy shit (I crack myself up with my bad puns), you really think women ruled the world?

I'm all for everyone being able to decide what they want out of life and what brings them happiness. If for you, that is the traditional female role, then I see no problem with that.

But, if I was a woman fighting for my equal rights and I read what you said, especialy the stupid part, I'd probably be offended. Women want equality, and there's nothing wrong with that. I think it's pretty shitty to have a role defined for you based on nothing more than what you have between your legs. Or don't have, rather.
What I'm saying is that women can have whatever they want. As a whole, however, we are going about it the wrong way. Let me think for a while and see if I can come up with a way to explain it so you'll understand my point.

[Bandit2981]

what is the big deal??? why do women want to do everything like men...even fight in combat... why aren't women complaining that there are only a handful of women ceos???
yeah no shit! come to think of it, those blacks and mexicans want equality too, what the hell is their problem?? they must have taken that "liberty and justice for all" thing to heart! :rolleyes

[MannyIsGod]

lol you should change your name to guru of nothing but funny shit
lol
:lmao !!!!!!!!

GoNButFunnyShit

[desflood]

Let me rephrase the word "stupid", however. Perhaps the word "misguided" would work better in its place.

[desflood]

As evidenced by your level 4 score on the "How Straight Acting Are You" quiz.
By the way, most men would call me "low-maintenance" and be quite happy about it! I don't need feminine, frilly, expensive things to make me happy.

[MannyIsGod]

Let me rephrase the word "stupid", however. Perhaps the word "misguided" would work better in its place.
Well, that really doesn't make it any better. What makes old gender stereotypes so damn great?

[MannyIsGod]

By the way, most men would call me "low-maintenance" and be quite happy about it! I don't need feminine, frilly, expensive things to make me happy.
Some would call you misguided.

[Guru of Nothing]

[/B]
What I'm saying is that women can have whatever they want. As a whole, however, we are going about it the wrong way. Let me think for a while and see if I can come up with a way to explain it so you'll understand my point.

Try using the word pussy-whipped to get your point across. Manny will understand that.

[desflood]

Well, that really doesn't make it any better. What makes old gender stereotypes so damn great?
Some of those stereotypes do have a basis in fact. Give me a good example. We'll discuss it.

[MannyIsGod]

Try using the word pussy-whipped to get your point across. Manny will understand that.
:lol

I KNEW that was going to come up. This has nothing to do with Jess, although I doubt she would date me if I believed otherwise.

[MannyIsGod]

Some of those stereotypes do have a basis in fact. Give me a good example. We'll discuss it.
Well, what stereotypes do you think are based in fact?

[desflood]

Well, let's go back to Clan's post about women wanting to fight in combat. The stereotype would be that women are weaker than men. Feminists claim women can do anything men can. Do you really think that's true?

[MannyIsGod]

No, I don't think woman and men can do exactly the same things. There are biological differences between men and women. Men can't have babies, women can't impregnate other women.

However, I do think women are capable of outperforming men physicaly. I think in general, men are going to be larger and stronger due to the biological differences. But that does not mean that a woman can not meet and exceed the standards set for any member of the military who is to be allowed in combat.

Why must you exclude an entire gender without giving them an opportunity to prove themselves just like a man would be given? If they fail, then they aren't eligible. But if they meet the same requirements, what reason would there be to limit their participation?

[desflood]

I think, Manny, that I know the shortcomings of my own gender pretty well. Men could never make it through childbirth. But, if you look at just the size difference, I'd put a man into physical combat any day. Take my husband and I. He's 6'4" and 230 lbs. I'm 5'4" and 140. He's never panicked (unless one of the kids got hurt), but I think I'm mentally stronger than he is. Overall, however, I'd rather be next to him on the battlefield than me. Even if I meet the physical standards as set by the military, I'd still rather be next to him than me.

[MannyIsGod]

I think, Manny, that I know the shortcomings of my own gender pretty well. Men could never make it through childbirth. But, if you look at just the size difference, I'd put a man into physical combat any day. Take my husband and I. He's 6'4" and 230 lbs. I'm 5'4" and 140. He's never panicked (unless one of the kids got hurt), but I think I'm mentally stronger than he is. Overall, however, I'd rather be next to him on the battlefield than me. Even if I meet the physical standards as set by the military, I'd still rather be next to him than me.
You know your own shortcomings, but I wouldn't even hesitate to say that you don't know the shortcomings or lack there of for every woman out there. You act as though every man put into combat is 6'4 230. Well, I know that's not the case. I know there are women out there who are more than capable of meeting any standards you place in front of them as far as combat goes.

You can argue all you want about men making it through childbirth. I honestly don't give a shit. I'm going to stick to the relm of what is actualy possible in this case. I don't plan on taking a dump anytime soon just to find a baby in the toilet, so you know, it doesn't matter to me.

Your husband may never panic, but men are by no means infallible to panic.

Either way, your husband is no more every man than you are every women, and thats not the way to judge the capabilities of an entire gender.

[desflood]

So, you really don't think that women wouldn't have the slightest bit of insight into the minds of other women?

[MannyIsGod]

So, you really don't think that women wouldn't have the slightest bit of insight into the minds of other women?
I think people have insight into the minds of people like them. Do I think you have insight to the kind of woman who would want to be in combat and would be suitable to that? Absolutely not. No more than I have insight to the mind of someone who thinks the role of women is to be barefoot and pregnant. Both are opposites.

[desflood]

So, because I don't think women should be in combat, you assume that I believe women should be nothing more than drones in the household?

[desflood]

As a side note (don't know if you know or not), I was a military medic. Almost went to Bosnia.

[MannyIsGod]

So, because I don't think women should be in combat, you assume that I believe women should be nothing more than drones in the household?
I never said that. The above was in reference to opposites, not to you.

[Clandestino]

in general, women are weaker than men... of course, there are exceptions, but they are extremely few and far between... the military acknowledges it by their different standards for pt tests..

and yes, men and women would be screwing if they were on the front lines together.. the military makes women think they are beauty queens bc every horny servicemember goes after them no matter what they look like.. it is crazy!

[MannyIsGod]

As a side note (don't know if you know or not), I was a military medic. Almost went to Bosnia.
I knew you were in the military, but I did not know what branch, type of service etc etc.

Honestly, what other reasoning do you have for excluding a gender from combat other than gut feelings or personal family observations?

[MannyIsGod]

and yes, men and women would be screwing if they were on the front lines together.. the military makes women think they are beauty queens bc every horny servicemember goes after them no matter what they look like.. it is crazy!
:lol

That's not limited to the military. You put an ugly woman in an all male office, and watch out.

[Clandestino]

:lol

That's not limited to the military. You put an ugly woman in an all male office, and watch out.

it was especially bad overseas bc many guys were afraid to talk to foreign chicks... they would be stuck with the military chicks or spouses... they were all beauty queens!!!

[Manu'sMagicalLeftHand]

New Pope elected:
http://insane-asylum.co.uk/stuff/Darth_Pope.jpg

[desflood]

I knew you were in the military, but I did not know what branch, type of service etc etc.

Honestly, what other reasoning do you have for excluding a gender from combat other than gut feelings or personal family observations?
Here comes another stereotype! Men tend to think more logically. Women are more prone to be emotional about things. I got that from observing other women. Not an assumption, or a personal experience. Women don't like to admit it, but it's true. Differences in the biology of the brain.

And I was a med tech in the Air Force. Might surprise you to know I haven't been barefoot and pregnant all my life :p

[MannyIsGod]

That is a personal experience Des.

I've seen some of the guys who are considered able for combat and well, I haven't been very impressed. I know there are women out there capable of out performing them.

It's just like not allowing women to fly combat missions. That was shot down (muahhhahaha, another bad pun for you) just as the rest will be.

The military is a haven for stereotypes as they leave regular society. Don't ask don't tell, anyone?

[Clandestino]

That is a personal experience Des.

I've seen some of the guys who are considered able for combat and well, I haven't been very impressed. I know there are women out there capable of out performing them.

It's just like not allowing women to fly combat missions. That was shot down (muahhhahaha, another bad pun for you) just as the rest will be.

The military is a haven for stereotypes as they leave regular society. Don't ask don't tell, anyone?

don't even get me started on gays in the military... i'd rather have women in combat!

[MannyIsGod]

There are currently, and always have been, gays in combat.

[Clandestino]

There are currently, and always have been, gays in combat.

but not openly people serving...

[desflood]

I didn't say interacting with other women, I said observing them.

[MannyIsGod]

Des, did you conduct a scientific study? Because if not, I'm going to file it under personal experience.

[MannyIsGod]

but not openly people serving...
Ok, you might want to clarify because they way this reads to me is that the people in the military are so homophobic that knowing someone who was serving was gay, regardless of how well they did their job, would have a large effect.

[CommanderMcBragg]

In the heat of battle I don't give a crap if you are gay or not.

In the heat of passion? well, that's a different story.

[dcole50]

memories...

http://www.nobeliefs.com/images/hitler_cardinal4.jpg
Wow, you're really off base. Ratzinger's membership in the Hitler Youth was not voluntary but compulsory. He was even the son of an anti-Nazi policeman. Nice try, though.

I'm not catholic, or even religious for that matter, but I respect others' beliefs. Pope John Paul II was a great man. Ratzinger has big shoes to fill, but I think he is capable of doing so.

Maybe someone with more knowledge of the Catholic faith can correct me, but is Ratzinger not a ... well, "placeholder" pope. After such a strong leader in JPII, I assume the church chose someone who will sit on the throne for a decade or so and will maintain the status quo ... while in the meantime, others in the church will decide which direction the church will take after the passage of Benedict XVI.

Am I incorrect in this thinking?

[desflood]

Des, did you conduct a scientific study? Because if not, I'm going to file it under personal experience.
We did do a few studies where I worked, but none officially on this subject, so you go right ahead and file, if you so desire.

[MannyIsGod]

We did do a few studies where I worked, but none officially on this subject, so you go right ahead and file, if you so desire.
How were the studies conducted? I'm curious.

[dcole50]

you get an A on your religion test, dcole

but would you vote for the Round Mound of Rebound if he ran for governor of alabama?
haha, i've decided i will. we have a history of electing awful governors. there's no humanly possible way that barkley could be our worst. maybe he'll get into a few bar fights while in office. ;)

[desflood]

How were the studies conducted? I'm curious.
I worked in OB/GYN, Women's Health, etc. Later I worked in the ICU, eventually the neonatal ICU. We did studies on birth control, mental health, hormone levels and their effects on emotion... some of them I had to sign statements for (you know what I mean).

[MannyIsGod]

What did you find?

[desflood]

What we found in most of them was one of those "well, duh" kind of things. Hormones (and their monthly swings) play a HUGE role in women's emotions, and in some cases, even their mental states.

[MannyIsGod]

Would your findings affect a woman's ability to be in combat? And would a mans fluctuations of homores also effect his combat readiness?

[desflood]

Men's hormones don't fluctuate as severely as women's, I believe. Men are mostly testosterone. That goes up and down a bit, but mostly remains steady. The women we studied... many of them were absolute wrecks during PMS time. Some felt angry for no reason they could pin down, and therefore acted more angrily and compulsively. Those diagnosed with depression (and some who were but were not diagnosed) became more depressed. And one thing was very common... birth control added fuel to the fire. It made those women CRAZY. Take a system that is slightly unstable to begin with, add more hormones... I wouldn't have trusted most of them farther than I could throw them. Put them in a combat situation and you have the makings of a disaster.

[MannyIsGod]

So, do all potential soldiers who go into combat go through psychological evaluations?

[desflood]

Don't know. Sure as hell hope so!

[MannyIsGod]

So then it's safe to assume that women would undergo those same evaluations and if they had any depression concerns, they would be found?

[desflood]

Depression sometimes will go in cycles. If someone chooses to lie and the depression is "dormant" (for lack of a better word), it might not be detected. In an ideal world they wouldn't lie, but we all know better than that.

[IcemanCometh]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v85/jo_chan/ratzinger.jpg

[NeoConIV]

Well, I'm going to jump in here and keep it simple with a simpleton arguement. Following Desflood's line of reasoning, I want to pose a question. Let's say you have Army A comprised of 100 men infantry. Army B has 100 women infantry. Who will have the upper hand in combat, either long range or hand to hand? Best subjective guess?

Now let's suppose Foreign Army C is invading your city with an army of 200 men infantry. Would you rather defend your city with 100 women and 100 men, or would you rather defend your city with 200 men? Let's assume the male/female defending army are all of normal average builds. Your family's lives are on the line. Assume losing means losing everything.

Understanding that there are plethora other variables I'm not considering, what are your choices with the given scenario?

[Clandestino]

Ok, you might want to clarify because they way this reads to me is that the people in the military are so homophobic that knowing someone who was serving was gay, regardless of how well they did their job, would have a large effect.

for some jobs it is fine... but for jobs where the soldiers would be serving together in tight/close quarters the gay problem sets in.. you can't have anyone in the squad, platoon, company, etc thinking on of their "buddies" wants to get closer. even if he didn't it wouldn't make for good morale for the troops... in the military you are put in weird situations and settings... you have to trust your buds 100%

[Clandestino]

regarding women in combat.. i'm sure manny knows that the majority of women are weaker...i think manny has to have his feminist views bc jekka seems like a strong character..

[desflood]

Nah. Manny is an idealist, bless him. The rest of us are just to jaded to identify!

[Manu'sMagicalLeftHand]

"Lord Vader, Rise"
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v85/jo_chan/ratzinger.jpg

"Yes, master"
http://insane-asylum.co.uk/stuff/Darth_Pope.jpg

[dcole50]

you have to trust your buds 100%
why couldn't you trust a gay solider? you act as if a gay soldier would constantly be trying to have sex with the other soliders.

[spurster]

On women's emotional instability: This is supported by our prison statistics, which is mostly men.

On gays being unable to control themselves: I guess people are adding gays to the emotional instability list, no doubt that is supported by our prison stats, too.

Let me introduce an inconvenient fact to this discussion. You put a group of guys isolated together for a long period of time. Guess what happens. They start having sex with each other. No, not all of them, but a substantial fraction, much much higher than any gay rate.

[mookie2001]

i think some of this is in poor taste

[IcemanCometh]

You put a group of guys isolated together for a long period of time. Guess what happens. They start having sex with each other. No, not all of them, but a substantial fraction, much much higher than any gay rate.


yes because the prison population is indicative of the population at large. good job equating 2 people of the same sex choosing to be in a relationship with rape.

[IcemanCometh]

Now let's suppose Foreign Army C is invading your city with an army of 200 men infantry. Would you rather defend your city with 100 women and 100 men, or would you rather defend your city with 200 men? Let's assume the male/female defending army are all of normal average builds. Your family's lives are on the line. Assume losing means losing everything.


I'd rather defend my city with the better trained better equipped army, not to mention a better motivated army thank you, regardless of race,sex,creed or religion.


for some jobs it is fine... but for jobs where the soldiers would be serving together in tight/close quarters the gay problem sets in.. you can't have anyone in the squad, platoon, company, etc thinking on of their "buddies" wants to get closer. even if he didn't it wouldn't make for good morale for the troops... in the military you are put in weird situations and settings... you have to trust your buds 100%

we'll never be able to let the coloreds serve in the army with white soldiers because we simply can't trust them. They aren't as smart and we all know they are cowards at heart.

just because you're a worthless bigot doesn't mean everyone in the army is.

[MannyIsGod]

Well, I'm going to jump in here and keep it simple with a simpleton arguement. Following Desflood's line of reasoning, I want to pose a question. Let's say you have Army A comprised of 100 men infantry. Army B has 100 women infantry. Who will have the upper hand in combat, either long range or hand to hand? Best subjective guess?

Now let's suppose Foreign Army C is invading your city with an army of 200 men infantry. Would you rather defend your city with 100 women and 100 men, or would you rather defend your city with 200 men? Let's assume the male/female defending army are all of normal average builds. Your family's lives are on the line. Assume losing means losing everything.

Understanding that there are plethora other variables I'm not considering, what are your choices with the given scenario?

Lets assume we don't have restrictions on combat and instead take the best 100 qualified people. Who would you ratehr have, the top 100 people, or the top 100 men?

Hey, the top 100 may very well be all men, but if thats the case there's no need for a restriction because the women just won't be good enough.

You guys can try to justify keeping women out of combat anyway you'd like. But when it comes down to it, it's just the justification of a practice who's roots lie within the thought that even the best woman, isn't as capable as the worst man. Thats what it all boils down to.

If even ONE woman can best ONE man, I would much rather have her in place. Whether that be hand to hand combat, long range combat, naval combat, aeiral combat, or who can piss further combat.

It's pretty much the same thing with homosexuals. The policy we have in place is incredibly fucked up. So, you join the military to fight for the land of the free, yet let the segregation fly. The man next to me may be the best sniper on the face of the earth, but I don't want to fight with him because he really does like guns.

That's pretty damn stupid.

[MannyIsGod]

regarding women in combat.. i'm sure manny knows that the majority of women are weaker...i think manny has to have his feminist views bc jekka seems like a strong character..
Jess has done nothing but reinforce my views that women are pretty damn capable. But she's not the first person I've dated that's proven that to me. No, actualy, I've been around strong women my entire life, starting with my mother.

[Clandestino]

just because you're a worthless bigot doesn't mean everyone in the army is.

when was the last time you were in the army?

[Clandestino]

here is a personal example of how gays can fuck up your unit morale: i was working at a base. a group of 6 guys i knew(4 army, 2 contractors) went on a weekend trip to rome... one night, they all ended up back at the hotel bar drinking(they were already drunk from being out)..2 dudes(1 army, 1 contractor) said they were tired and were going to bed.. the rest stayed out getting drunk for a little while, then they were like, yeah, we're tired too, let's go to bed as well...anyway, when they went upstairs the 2 dudes who had gone up earlier were naked in the shower TOGETHER! they wanted to puke.. they were so fucking mad these dudes would do that shit to them, etc... when the other 4 came back they told everyone.. whole morale for the unit was shot to hell... neither dude had been openly gay before...

[MannyIsGod]

"Do that to them"

Man, it's just pointless to continue debating it when thats the mindset. I seriously wonder what it was like for black men being intergrated into the army. There are probably tons of similarities.

[Clandestino]

"Do that to them"

Man, it's just pointless to continue debating it when thats the mindset. I seriously wonder what it was like for black men being intergrated into the army. There are probably tons of similarities.

the issues are totally different. we figured out that black men are not different that white except in skin color...

gays will still want to fuck you in the ass no matter what.. they are still different.. manny, you have no idea what it is like being in the military...

those dudes couldn't even trust their "friend" to tell them he was gay... then a little while later they find him buttfucking someone! how can you trust that dude???

[MannyIsGod]

You're right about one thing, I don't understand the military.

Man, we shouldn't allow straight guys in the military either, because all they want to do is fuck women!!!!!!!!

#1 I shouldn't have to trust ANYONE with my sexuality, because it's none of their business.
#2 My sexuality is part of me, but it is not a defining characteristic of how well I do in the military.
#3 Did you ever think the reason they didn't tell anyone was because of the stupid policy that gets them kicked out if they do?
#4 What difference does it make who wants to fuck who, as long as they do their job?

[MannyIsGod]

the issues are totally different. we figured out that black men are not different that white except in skin color...

And eventually you will figure out that gay men are not different than straight men except that they dress better, are cleaner, and like a different hole.

[Clandestino]

You're right about one thing, I don't understand the military.

Man, we shouldn't allow straight guys in the military either, because all they want to do is fuck women!!!!!!!!

#1 I shouldn't have to trust ANYONE with my sexuality, because it's none of their business.
#2 My sexuality is part of me, but it is not a defining characteristic of how well I do in the military.
#3 Did you ever think the reason they didn't tell anyone was because of the stupid policy that gets them kicked out if they do?
#4 What difference does it make who wants to fuck who, as long as they do their job?

i mean trust them for anything... and the military is about teamwork.. if you can't trust your teammates or work with them you are screwed..

[Clandestino]

And eventually you will figure out that gay men are not different than straight men except that they dress better, are cleaner, and like a different hole.

those are all stereotypes... funny how you choose to include them now! oh, except the last one.. they'd love to fuck you in the ass any day of the week!

[MannyIsGod]

The military says it can't trust the gay man, yet the military demands trust from the gay man. Insane.

[MannyIsGod]

those are all stereotypes... funny how you choose to include them now! oh, except the last one.. they'd love to fuck you in the ass any day of the week!
Those were jokes.

Do you think every woman out there wants to fuck you? So why would you think every gay man wants to do the same?

[Shelly]

Those were jokes.

Do you think every woman out there wants to fuck you? So why would you think every gay man wants to do the same?

I never understood why people assume that either. No matter team you bat for, there still has to be some attraction.

[NeoConIV]

Assume all countries applied US "progressive" reasoning into their militaries and allowed females in combat.

Who in here, if were a Marine sniper, would think it grotesque and grossly against the natural order to line up a female soldier in your sites and squeeze off a head shot?
Who wouldn't give a damn and say, 'hey, she's in uniform, fair game"?

I'm squarely in the former. Everyone else?

[MannyIsGod]

So you'd be ok with killing a man but not a woman in uniform?

Man, I am having trouble following much of the logic in this thread.

[NeoConIV]

So you'd be ok with killing a man but not a woman in uniform?

Man, I am having trouble following much of the logic in this thread.
With much respect, the feeling is quite mutual.

[MannyIsGod]

:lol fair enough.

[Clandestino]

Those were jokes.

Do you think every woman out there wants to fuck you? So why would you think every gay man wants to do the same?

the same way the ugliest woman becomes a beauty queen on a base bc there are only a few.. a gay man would think all the army dudes were hot!

[dcole50]

a gay man would think all the army dudes were hot!

because as a straight man i think every single woman is hot and try to have sex with every female i come in contact with ...

[Clandestino]

because as a straight man i think every single woman is hot and try to have sex with every female i come in contact with ...

you obviously haven't read where i said all army dudes think even the fattest ugliest girl is hot when that is the only girl around...

[MannyIsGod]

But There Would Be Lots Of Men Around!

[NeoConIV]

http://insane-asylum.co.uk/stuff/Darth_Pope.jpg

LINE UP THE HERETICS AND COMMENCE EXCOMMUNICATIONhttp://www.climate.unibe.ch/~beyerle/Animation/fire.gif



:lol :lol