After Resignation, Media Speculates Over Pope's Orientation,

Mar 1, 2013 Read more: EDGE 45

Rumors about Pope Benedict XVI's sexual orientation have resurfaced on the day of his resignation after gay Catholic blogger Andrew Sullivan wrote a controversial piece for the Dish.

Read more

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

#48 Mar 1, 2013
Jeb wrote:
Are you jealous big boy? Just because I have what it takes and the size doesn't mean you need be threatened. It would no doubt choke a regular man. I doubt you could handle it, either way you took it.
Nah, I'll just balk, thanks.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#50 Mar 1, 2013
Otter in the Ozarks wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, that's certainly a snotty answer to a friendly, well-intended and innocent question.
Your original post was confusing to begin with because of the way it was worded. I had to think a moment before I realized that you meant to say, "I like NEITHER calumny NOR detraction."
According to the Catholic encyclopedia, "calumny" involves unjustly accusing someone of a FAULT or CRIME of which they are NOT GUILTY. "Detraction" is the act of damaging a person's reputation by publicizing a FAULT or CRIME of which they are GUILTY, or which you believe them to be GUILTY.
So do you consider being gay to be a FAULT or a CRIME? That is the question I was asking ... apparently I was being too indirect by trying to give you the benefit of the doubt.
My reply was a hurried Rohrshach.

My focus was on "denigration", but I don't like calumny anymore than I do Argumentum ad Hominem.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#52 Mar 1, 2013
Otter in the Ozarks wrote:
At first I thought, "Oh, gross. No way could that repulsive ex-Pope be gay. He's too homophobic."
And then it dawned on me ... as we've seen time again, the most rabid homophobes are always the closet cases who are either secretly wanting it or actually getting it on the side. That's true among Catholics, Republicans and Topix trolls.
The mind reels and the stomach turns.
Those are the worst kind. Closet queens for sure.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#54 Mar 1, 2013
There are factors at play here than people are catching.

First, the Vatican has succeeded in gaining control of the narrative by virtue of the simple act of resignation, and the very interesting bureaucratic process of his replacement. It's like a royal wedding. People see the bling and pretty much forget that the purpose of such pageantry and tradition is to sway the public. This hoodwonks them to whatever the actors wish to conceal.

Second, remember that there were confirmed instances of sex trafficking going on inside the Vatican, and that people were fired and still others juridically silenced because of it.

Third, the bling has diverted from further questioning, especially about for whom the assignations were arranged, with strategic firings and reassignments to throw off the scent.

Fourth, even the issues regarding the sex abuses have been feeding into misdirection.

Fifth, reports of possible blackmail openings leaves things dangling, but unquestioned, as to who any blackmailers might be and, most importantly, blackmail of whom.

All this covers a glaring possibility through misdirection.

Controlling narrative is a specialty; one of which the Vatican is a centuries-old master.

Who thinks they can guess the answer.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#55 Mar 1, 2013
Should read:

"There are factors at play here than people AREN'T catching."

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#58 Mar 1, 2013
snyper wrote:
There are factors at play here than people are catching.
First, the Vatican has succeeded in gaining control of the narrative by virtue of the simple act of resignation, and the very interesting bureaucratic process of his replacement. It's like a royal wedding. People see the bling and pretty much forget that the purpose of such pageantry and tradition is to sway the public. This hoodwonks them to whatever the actors wish to conceal.
Second, remember that there were confirmed instances of sex trafficking going on inside the Vatican, and that people were fired and still others juridically silenced because of it.
Third, the bling has diverted from further questioning, especially about for whom the assignations were arranged, with strategic firings and reassignments to throw off the scent.
Fourth, even the issues regarding the sex abuses have been feeding into misdirection.
Fifth, reports of possible blackmail openings leaves things dangling, but unquestioned, as to who any blackmailers might be and, most importantly, blackmail of whom.
All this covers a glaring possibility through misdirection.
Controlling narrative is a specialty; one of which the Vatican is a centuries-old master.
Who thinks they can guess the answer.
Makes you go Hmmmmmmmm.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#59 Mar 1, 2013
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Makes you go Hmmmmmmmm.
And more, I hope.
Master Adrian

Assen, Netherlands

#62 Mar 2, 2013
I am sorry,k but the discussions on the sexual orientation of the former Pope were already ongoing while he was Pope..... He's been "accused" of being a homosexual while he was in lecturing in Germany (then students have reported on sexual activities back then), and he has never surrounded him with old geesers as secretaries........ It always have been "better-looking" younger priests, never a female housekeeper....... He did sent away the nuns at the Vatican, and installed male assistants.......
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#63 Mar 2, 2013
Jeb wrote:
<quoted text>
In the first place, I'm not stalking anyone. Second place, I'm not begging for sexual favors. Third place, not too many people can handle me, but I know you can. Fourth place, the ones that can handle me, never wants to leave, no brag just a fact.
Yeah, right. That's why you're obsessed with gay men, ain't it?

Uve

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#65 Mar 2, 2013
Larry wrote:
Theirs no real evidence Pope Benedict 16 is a homosexual none whatsoever-this just some gay blogger with a mean streak in him trying to justify his own homosexuality.
There is never any evidence in such a secretive organization, look how long it took for them to admit child molestation. What about those 'rumors' of the valet? He's still going to live with Benedict XVI and then take care of the new pope, sounds shady..

Uve

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#66 Mar 2, 2013
Jeb wrote:
<quoted text>
I am a gay man, BlTCH
I need to copy and paste this..finally the troll admits it!

Uve

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#68 Mar 2, 2013
Jeb wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not a troll, I'm as queer as you are. Only thing is, I've got much better equipment to offer. If you think you're a real gay man, then see if you can handle me. Maybe you're the real troll here.
LOL Definitely Not Interested...Maybe you should go on Manhunter...

“Common courtesy, isn't”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#78 Mar 2, 2013
NoQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually you are way too manly for me, but that's beside the point. Yea, you know Ricky, he's just going by a different name. Otter in the Ozarks AKA Ricky in Kansas. A big topix DREAMBOAT. That STUDMUFFIN deletes my post or has them deleted daily. Anyway, you lay off him. He's mine, you hateful old sow.
Hey, it's my personal b*tch, NoIQ.

So you finally caught on, did you? Yes, I have your posts deleted WHEN I FEEL LIKE IT. It's one of the many ways in which I control you. I decide how much of your nonsense I'm willing to put up with, and then I make the rest of it vanish. You rant and rave and then, with a few simple clicks, I obliterate your miserable presence. That, you slobbering imbecile, is called power.

Now, about the whole paranoid fantasy of Rick in Kansas and I being the same person. Really? You think so? I've been laughing at you all along. If you had a clue, you'd know that I have changed my registered name, but never my registered avatar.(Or have I?)

What if I told you that I have SIX registered Topix identities, and that you've interacted with them all? Would you believe me? Could you name them all? Or would I just be yanking your chain again in order to humiliate you further? You'll never know because you're too obtuse to see what's right in front of your face.

Crawl away, cretin. You begin to bore me.

“Common courtesy, isn't”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#79 Mar 2, 2013
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
My reply was a hurried Rohrshach.
My focus was on "denigration", but I don't like calumny anymore than I do Argumentum ad Hominem.
"A hurried Rohrshach"? Oh, of course, I see it. It's an inkblot of a man using latin words he doesn't understand.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#80 Mar 2, 2013
Otter in the Ozarks wrote:
<quoted text>
"A hurried Rohrshach"? Oh, of course, I see it. It's an inkblot of a man using latin words he doesn't understand.
Aliud Argumentum ad Hominem?

Quare? Mea comment erat neutrum. Quid quaeris invidiam non est?

Tua quae est forsit!

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#82 Mar 2, 2013
"Otter"! There's no need to take his abuse on MY account!

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#83 Mar 2, 2013
Or is "self-abuse" more accurate?

Since: Apr 11

North Hollywood, CA

#84 Mar 2, 2013
Otter in the Ozarks wrote:
At first I thought, "Oh, gross. No way could that repulsive ex-Pope be gay. He's too homophobic."
And then it dawned on me ... as we've seen time again, the most rabid homophobes are always the closet cases who are either secretly wanting it or actually getting it on the side. That's true among Catholics, Republicans and Topix trolls.
The mind reels and the stomach turns.
My theory is that homophobia is caused by a person's inability to deal with their own same sex attractions. I can't think of any other reason they would get so worked up about that much less competition for the opposite sex.

“Common courtesy, isn't”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#87 Mar 2, 2013
NoQ wrote:
<quoted text>
LMFAO you don't control SH*T.
Of course I control SH*T ... I control YOU. And I always will. Why else would you get your tampon in such a wad every time I jerk your chain?

Ha. Ha. Ha.

Post away, Missy. Stamp your little foot, toss your pigtails back and forth, and hold your breath until your face turns red. I insist.

“Common courtesy, isn't”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#90 Mar 2, 2013
snyper wrote:
"Otter"! There's no need to take his abuse on MY account!
Oh, my petulant personal plaything isn't abusive. Not in the least.

On the contrary, I find him highly amusing. I just wind him up, pull the string that makes him repeat the same old tired phrases, then set him down and watch him walk into walls and topple over.

Feel free to mess with his head anytime you like. I'm happy to share ...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

Roman Catholic Church Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 4 min Just Think 582,499
News Who Is Allah? (Aug '07) 5 min Hughes 216,550
News Turkish Leaders Invoke Crusades, Inquisition in... 48 min SpaceBlues 22
News What Divides Catholics and Protestants? (Apr '08) 4 hr THROW AWAY WORD O... 84,034
is a schismatic still part of the catholic church? 5 hr Myname96 1
News 'Boring priests not enough reason to leave church' (Apr '13) 7 hr ELIAS IBARRA 185
News Some "Traditionalist Catholic" You Are, Rick Sa... 17 hr vib_ram 3
More from around the web