Catholic Church Waging War on Women and Gays

Oct 30, 2007 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Fables of the reconstruction

“Pharmacists must seek to raise people's awareness so that all human beings are protected from conception to natural death, and so that medicines truly play a therapeutic role”

Pope Benedict XVI said Monday that pharmacists have a right to use conscientious objection to avoid dispensing emergency contraception or euthanasia drugs - and told them they should also inform patients of the ... via Fables of the reconstruction

Comments
206,941 - 206,960 of 219,864 Comments Last updated Tuesday Jul 22

Since: Sep 09

Vanderhoof, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241627
Nov 16, 2012
 
Joyce wrote:
<quoted text>
No matter what you say the bottom line is you believe the unborn always comes first than the pregnant female. That's the way the Roman Catholic Church sees it and always did.
Not ALWAYS. The issue depended on which pope was in "charge" at any given time in history.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>

RCC doctrines on abortion have changed over the centuries. According to Augustine ("On Exodus," sections 21 and 80) and Jerome (Epistle 121, section 4), the soul did not enter the body until roughly 90 days after conception. The reason is that a soul can not enter an "unformed" body. Jerome said, "The seed gradually takes shape in the uterus, and it [abortion] does not count as killing until the individual elements have acquired their external appearance and their limbs." (This matches Bible doctrine, Leviticus 17:11, 14, "the life is in the blood," i.e., not until then, not until the aforesaid development.)
----------
The theory of "delayed animation" of the soul is from Aristotle, "On the Parts of Animals," particularly Book 7, Chapter 3, section 583b. This has the line of reasoning picked up by Jerome and Augustine.
----------
"Six thousand skulls of infants are reported to have been taken from a single fish-pond near a nunnery...." says Republican Senator Charles Sumner, LL.D., "The Barbarism of Slavery" (Washington, DC: 4 June 1860), p 172, in support of the Campaign for President by Abraham Lincoln.
----------
Pope Innocent III once ruled that a monk who had arranged for his lover to get an abortion did not commit murder because the unborn child was not "animated." The idea that the soul enters the body AT conception is essentially a recent invention.
----------
The RCC Canon distinguished between an "animated" (ensouled) and "unanimated" unborn child until 1869 (about the time they invented the notion of papal "infallibility"). Making it up as they go along, the RCC Canon was altered again in the 20th century to allege sinfulness of abortion at any stage of pregnancy.(For background, see, e.g., Uta Ranke-Heinemann, Eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven: Women, Sexuality and the Catholic Church (New York: Doubleday, 1990). And note that "the Catholicism of today is not the Catholicism of a thousand years ago, or even one hundred years ago," says Prof. Michael Dean Murphy of the University of Alabama, writing in "Catholicism" in Religion and Culture: An Anthropological Focus, Raymond Scupin, ed.[New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2000], p 341, citing Tali Asad, Genealogies of Religion [Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1993], p 46.)

Since: Sep 09

Vanderhoof, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241628
Nov 16, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

I never realized how silly I used to sound when over and over and over I sang the popular hymn "Praise the Lord, I saw the light."

I now wonder what light I figured I had seen!

No doubt I thought it was the RIGHT light.

:)

Since: Sep 09

Vanderhoof, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241629
Nov 16, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

I now perceive that I was about as "enlightened" as a light bulb ... a dim one at that!

:)

Since: Sep 09

Vanderhoof, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241630
Nov 16, 2012
 

Judged:

1

I watched a program where a guidance counselor in a school got into a physical fracas with another teacher and bent the teacher's finger until it broke.

The judge gave both of the women quite a lecture about teaching children the improper way of handling anger.

To me, it is just another example of teachers teaching what first needed to be learned.

It's comparable to preachers in religion teaching the value of being moral, when they can't even perceive that being moral to one person means being immoral, or amoral to another.

When a Christian found out that I was NOT Christian, I was accused of being amoral. Needless to say ... I wasn't impressed with the supposed "moral" nature of the Christian.

Since: Sep 09

Vanderhoof, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241631
Nov 16, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

And to top it off, the teachers had their physical fight in front of some students.

WAY to go teachers!!!

Show the kids that you TOO are human, and that will teach them that if adults seem too good to be true, it's because they are not being true.

Since: Sep 09

Vanderhoof, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241632
Nov 16, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

And on and on and on it goes. IF it stops ... nobody knows!
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>

The California Teachers Association this week sent the letter to parent Doris Gomez, admonishing her for speaking out against Monte Vista Elementary School teacher Marianne Lawson.

Gomez is alleging that on Feb. 15, the sixth-grade teacher grabbed her son roughly by the arm and pulled him out from behind his desk, made fun of him in front of class and asked him if he was dating another male student in the class.

"They're telling me in not so many words not to continue with these actions, but I'm doing this for my son," Gomez said. "I'm not harassing her or doing anything but defending my son. My son is afraid, he's biting his nails. I can see this has affected him, so I'm just basically defending him and being his voice."

Calls to the California Teacher's Association and the Teachers Association of West Covina were not returned.

http://www.sgvtribune.com/news/ci_20277260/un...

Since: Sep 09

Vanderhoof, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241633
Nov 16, 2012
 
From my perspective the parents of gay children have the right to expect teachers not to be anti-homosexual.

But when teachers are raised by homophobic religious parents to believe that a god is offended by homosexuality ... the teachers might believe they are merely taking care of "sin" in the classrooms.

In such cases there can be no "meeting of the minds."

One or another law has to rule, and if taken to court, that will be decided in the courts.

In such cases, parents of homosexuals that want to defend what they believe are the rights of their children, can only hope that the judges are not heavy-duty Christians from the "old" schools of thought.

Since: Sep 09

Vanderhoof, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241634
Nov 16, 2012
 
My guess is, many Christians of the day were certain that "god" would punish Thomas Jefferson for being too lenient of what they perceived was the sin against "god" of homosexuality.

The people that were homosexual were perceived as nothing but OBJECTS of sin, or sin-containers to the self-perceived holy Christians.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>

In 1779, Thomas Jefferson proposed a law that would mandate castration for gay men and mutilation of nose cartilage for gay women. But that's not the scary part. Here's the scary part: Jefferson was considered a liberal. At the time, the most common penalty on the books was death.

http://civilliberty.about.com/od/gendersexual ...

Since: Sep 09

Vanderhoof, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241635
Nov 16, 2012
 
Jefferson pitied the black people because he was certina that "god" ordained them to be black.

In memory of the ones who were born black by nature's design, I pity the black people for having to endure the blatant cruelty and ignorance of the Christians.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>

Forest G. Wood is the author of “The Arrogance of Faith.”

In his classic Notes on the State of Virginia (1785), Jefferson remarked how “unfortunate” it was that it had pleased God to make Africans black

Since: Sep 09

Vanderhoof, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241636
Nov 16, 2012
 
certain

Since: Sep 09

Vanderhoof, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241638
Nov 16, 2012
 
I forgot the first "line" of that joke.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>

Revelations? Guess the Forbidden Fruits are no longer forbidden when MaryJane is in the Garden.





It all makes sense now....

Gay marriage and marijuana being legalized on the same day.

Leviticus 20:13- "If a man lays with another man he should be stoned."

We've just been interpreting it wrong all these years.

“The Black Mermaid”

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241639
Nov 16, 2012
 
June VanDerMark wrote:
Jefferson pitied the black people because he was certina that "god" ordained them to be black.
In memory of the ones who were born black by nature's design, I pity the black people for having to endure the blatant cruelty and ignorance of the Christians.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>
Forest G. Wood is the author of “The Arrogance of Faith.”
In his classic Notes on the State of Virginia (1785), Jefferson remarked how “unfortunate” it was that it had pleased God to make Africans black
His attitude was disgusting! That's like saying "You're black and I feel your pain", or "You're black but it's not your fault." Such ignorance!

June, I hope you NEVER leave this forum; you add so much common sense and a TON OF REALITY, something desperately needed here. As you well know, most people do not want their archaic beliefs challenged and they don't want truth. And it's those very people who honestly think they're "religious". Discrimination and prejudice are SINS, but I'm sure I don't have to tell you that.
Jumper

Owensboro, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241640
Nov 16, 2012
 
You don't have to tell her anything. She knows all about the Twinkies!

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241641
Nov 16, 2012
 
June VanDerMark wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course it wouldn't! But if you had your way ... it WOULD!
My guess is, you would have no mercy on those physicians ... NONE!!!
"How DARE they," is your attitude!
Just more lies from you. No surprise, coming from a pathological liar.

You're disgusting.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241642
Nov 16, 2012
 
June VanDerMark wrote:
My guess is, if one such as Bitner went into law, she would be a prosecutor, NOT a defense lawyer.
Everyone would be guilty until proven by further testimony of countless witnesses as innocent ... unless they were Wiccan.
Bitner would let other prosecutors take those cases, as she wouldn't want to appear to favor her own religion.{{{snicker}}}
Atheists do not favor those in any religion, so a lawyer who is Atheist, whether a prosecutor, or a defense lawyer would be best to keep quiet about his/her Atheism.
Very quiet indeed.
Another bad guess. You don't know what I'd do. You're nothing but a lying piece of shit.

“The Black Mermaid”

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241643
Nov 16, 2012
 
Jumper wrote:
You don't have to tell her anything. She knows all about the Twinkies!
Aw, Jumper, you know I like you so there's no need to be snippy to me. I've told you there's no reason I can't be friends with both of you. I find you both intelligent and interesting and I like all your posts.

And I hope you both have a very pleasant Thanksgiving! You too, June :)

Since: Sep 09

Vanderhoof, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241644
Nov 16, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Sherlayne wrote:
<quoted text>
His attitude was disgusting! That's like saying "You're black and I feel your pain", or "You're black but it's not your fault." Such ignorance!
June, I hope you NEVER leave this forum; you add so much common sense and a TON OF REALITY, something desperately needed here. As you well know, most people do not want their archaic beliefs challenged and they don't want truth. And it's those very people who honestly think they're "religious". Discrimination and prejudice are SINS, but I'm sure I don't have to tell you that.
Thank you Sherlayne. I don't intend to leave, but I have no control over what happens in the future.

As you are probably already aware, I don't believe in using or adhering TO the word sin.

As I don't believe in the existence of a god, I don't believe in the theology of falling short of the expectations of a god ... which the word sin denotes.

I believe that babies are born whole in worth, and as they grow older, if they weren't taught BY religion that the best of them is off somewhere with gods or goddesses, they would believe in their own worth as WHOLE beings just as they are.

From my perspective, religion is not only silly ... it causes emotional pain by teaching that humans are an insignificant part of something far more wonderful that must be sought after in order to find.

The fear that humans can't be good without religion is simple nonsense taught by leaders of cults that either don't know better, or know better and refuse for one reason or another to do better.

Since: Sep 09

Vanderhoof, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241645
Nov 16, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Sherlayne wrote:
<quoted text>
And I hope you both have a very pleasant Thanksgiving! You too, June :)
Thank you Sherlayne, and as usual, best wishes to you.

Since: Sep 09

Vanderhoof, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241646
Nov 16, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Jumper wrote:
You don't have to tell her anything. She knows all about the Twinkies!
Yes ... how sad! I wonder if another company will make Twinkies for Twinkie-lovers. I haven't studied the issue.

:)

Since: Oct 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241647
Nov 16, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Joyce wrote:
<quoted text>
No matter what you say the bottom line is you believe the unborn always comes first than the pregnant female. That's the way the Roman Catholic Church sees it and always did.
I'd like to see you explain how that unborn child is totally independent of the mother and vice versus.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••