1
   

A quote from the Vatican.

 
 
Elmud
 
Reply Wed 11 Mar, 2009 02:27 pm
The invention of the washing machine has done more to advance the cause of women than voting or the pill. -Heard that on the radio yesterday.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 2,895 • Replies: 53
No top replies

 
xris
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 Mar, 2009 02:47 pm
@Elmud,
Elmud wrote:
The invention of the washing machine has done more to advance the cause of women than voting or the pill. -Heard that on the radio yesterday.
As women cant become priests they are not allowed to vote on the cardinals choice of pope and as they dont believe in contraceptives..they would say that..
Elmud
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 Mar, 2009 06:00 pm
@xris,
xris wrote:
As women cant become priests they are not allowed to vote on the cardinals choice of pope and as they dont believe in contraceptives..they would say that..
Yes xris. They would say that. :perplexed:
Holiday20310401
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 Mar, 2009 10:07 pm
@Elmud,
Deeply disturbing.... Makes me just wanna take my heart out of my body and throw it at a cardinal. Maybe their clothing will turn a deeper red.
0 Replies
 
Zetherin
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Mar, 2009 01:21 am
@Elmud,
I agree, Holiday, and I haven't a clue why that cardinal 'law' hasn't been corrected yet.
xris
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Mar, 2009 04:29 am
@Elmud,
Elmud wrote:
Yes xris. They would say that. :perplexed:
Why does my statement perplex you, can you explain..:perplexed:
Elmud
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Mar, 2009 02:24 pm
@xris,
xris wrote:
Why does my statement perplex you, can you explain..:perplexed:

No, not your statement Xris. Theirs.
0 Replies
 
GoshisDead
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Mar, 2009 06:28 pm
@Zetherin,
Zetherin wrote:
I agree, Holiday, and I haven't a clue why that cardinal 'law' hasn't been corrected yet.


Corrected? What is wrong with the law? It's a private organization it can have its own laws. If i decided to become a neo-nazi, the no jews allowed rule would not be incorrect, It may be morally reprehensible, but not incorrect.

The other thing I wonder is why people are so keen on trying to denounce the catholic church. Oh they are evil for having long held opinions couched in history and circumstance. Let's change them! At what point does this become hypocrisy? At what point do we become as maliciously discriminatory as them?
Elmud
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Mar, 2009 07:25 pm
@GoshisDead,
GoshisDead wrote:
Corrected? What is wrong with the law? It's a private organization it can have its own laws. If i decided to become a neo-nazi, the no jews allowed rule would not be incorrect, It may be morally reprehensible, but not incorrect.

The other thing I wonder is why people are so keen on trying to denounce the catholic church. Oh they are evil for having long held opinions couched in history and circumstance. Let's change them! At what point does this become hypocrisy? At what point do we become as maliciously discriminatory as them?

Actually, I kind of like the Catholic church. Their charitable organizations are substantial. St. Jude hospital, St. Marys food bank. St. Vincent Depaul charity dining room. Andre House. Just to name some. That is why the statement kind of perplexed me. It kind of put women in a negative light which I don't really understand or agree with. anyway, i kind of agree with you on this one.
0 Replies
 
Zetherin
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Mar, 2009 09:55 pm
@Elmud,
GoshisDead wrote:
Corrected? What is wrong with the law? It's a private organization it can have its own laws. If i decided to become a neo-nazi, the no jews allowed rule would not be incorrect, It may be morally reprehensible, but not incorrect.


Well, Gosh, it's for two reasons:

1.) Catholicism is a worldwide religion, a religion that has influence over much of the known world (I believe 1/3 of the world's population is Christian, and there are many Catholics within this figure. If you'd like an exact figure, I'll do the research). Catholicism isn't just a 'club': it has, and has had, power over land and people for centuries. Thus, it's not that private, and if it's not that private, I personally don't feel the higher council should only be limited to males. Should our higher councils in government be limited to males, too?

2.) In Christian scriptures, I believe Jesus advocates equality and love. For a higher council of this religion to be exclusive to males seems a bit contradictory to this, and, well... old. Old in terms of the ways society used to view different races and genders. I'd think we would have grown out of discrimination of females by now, no?

Quote:
The other thing I wonder is why people are so keen on trying to denounce the catholic church. Oh they are evil for having long held opinions couched in history and circumstance. Let's change them! At what point does this become hypocrisy? At what point do we become as maliciously discriminatory as them?
Yes, things can be 'evil' for being "couched in history and circumstance". To deny that possibility seems silly -- I can cite you countless examples, if you'd like. The fact that this higher council religious council is still sexist screams wonders about how Christianity in general is still being misinterpreted, and I'd argue, abused.

All of this is just my opinion.
Elmud
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Mar, 2009 10:26 pm
@Zetherin,
Zetherin wrote:
Well, Gosh, it's for two reasons:

I'd think we would have grown out of discrimination of females by now, no?


I can think of hardly any religion that has not thought of women as being inferior to men. Maybe Wiccan. Naw, the discrimination is still present. Shoot, August 18, 1920 wasn't all that long ago relatively speaking. I guess I harp on this a lot. Maybe because I had five sisters and three daughters. Guess I'm a little partial.
Zetherin
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Mar, 2009 10:41 pm
@Elmud,
Elmud wrote:
I can think of hardly any religion that has not thought of women as being inferior to men. Maybe Wiccan. Naw, the discrimination is still present. Shoot, August 18, 1920 wasn't all that long ago relatively speaking. I guess I harp on this a lot. Maybe because I had five sisters and three daughters. Guess I'm a little partial.


And frankly, that seems wrong to me. I don't think they should be thought of inferior to men.
0 Replies
 
GoshisDead
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Mar, 2009 12:31 pm
@Zetherin,
Zetherin wrote:
Well, Gosh, it's for two reasons:

1.) Catholicism is a worldwide religion, a religion that has influence over much of the known world (I believe 1/3 of the world's population is Christian, and there are many Catholics within this figure. If you'd like an exact figure, I'll do the research). Catholicism isn't just a 'club': it has, and has had, power over land and people for centuries. Thus, it's not that private, and if it's not that private, I personally don't feel the higher council should only be limited to males. Should our higher councils in government be limited to males, too?

2.) In Christian scriptures, I believe Jesus advocates equality and love. For a higher council of this religion to be exclusive to males seems a bit contradictory to this, and, well... old. Old in terms of the ways society used to view different races and genders. I'd think we would have grown out of discrimination of females by now, no?

Yes, things can be 'evil' for being "couched in history and circumstance". To deny that possibility seems silly -- I can cite you countless examples, if you'd like. The fact that this higher council religious council is still sexist screams wonders about how Christianity in general is still being misinterpreted, and I'd argue, abused.

All of this is just my opinion.


Hmmmm Catholicism is Big yeah the Pope might be the most powerful person on the planet. Still its size has very litte to do with its right as a private organization (not a government organization or a government sponsored entity with the power to make laws for its people) to determine the laws within its own bailiwick of direct influence. To say that catholicism has to change because its big destroys any chance of small "club sized" religions to maintain their own internal integrity. Stepping on the rights of the BIG boys is tantamount to total extermination of the little kids. The big influence of the Catholic church also has no bearing on its status as a private organization, If one is going to call discrimination on sex by discriminating against belief, how does that fix the intitial equality problem.

As far as bilblical scholarlyness goes, I'm not one, yet I don't recall anywhere where Jesus talks about sex equality, maybe if he was all about sex equality he would have had a female in the 12 apostles. There were plenty of parables about class and ethnic equality, but I don't remeber one about sex equality.

I believe, I was trying to say that being couched in history and circumstance was why Catholicism has much of its current doctrine and dogma. It wasn't an apology for its doctrine just an explanation. To clarify, I think it was a silly thing for the Pope to say, both politically and socially and I don't agree with it, Yet he has the right to say it, which is my whole point.
xris
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Mar, 2009 01:10 pm
@GoshisDead,
GoshisDead wrote:
Hmmmm Catholicism is Big yeah the Pope might be the most powerful person on the planet. Still its size has very litte to do with its right as a private organization (not a government organization or a government sponsored entity with the power to make laws for its people) to determine the laws within its own bailiwick of direct influence. To say that catholicism has to change because its big destroys any chance of small "club sized" religions to maintain their own internal integrity. Stepping on the rights of the BIG boys is tantamount to total extermination of the little kids. The big influence of the Catholic church also has no bearing on its status as a private organization, If one is going to call discrimination on sex by discriminating against belief, how does that fix the intitial equality problem.

As far as bilblical scholarlyness goes, I'm not one, yet I don't recall anywhere where Jesus talks about sex equality, maybe if he was all about sex equality he would have had a female in the 12 apostles. There were plenty of parables about class and ethnic equality, but I don't remeber one about sex equality.

I believe, I was trying to say that being couched in history and circumstance was why Catholicism has much of its current doctrine and dogma. It wasn't an apology for its doctrine just an explanation. To clarify, I think it was a silly thing for the Pope to say, both politically and socially and I don't agree with it, Yet he has the right to say it, which is my whole point.
If you can find any historical evidence that christ made any speech, ide be everso surprised.As an agnostic atheist the whole scenario makes me puke. A faith that by man decided who or what did or not did is of no interest to me.What interests me is the influence and the importance certain delusional faithful place on these garbled messages,supposed to be direct from god via an ex nazis.Monty python never made up such a ludicrous plot..
GoshisDead
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Mar, 2009 01:34 pm
@xris,
LOL true enough...
0 Replies
 
Zetherin
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Mar, 2009 02:55 pm
@GoshisDead,
GoshisDead wrote:

As far as bilblical scholarlyness goes, I'm not one, yet I don't recall anywhere where Jesus talks about sex equality, maybe if he was all about sex equality he would have had a female in the 12 apostles. There were plenty of parables about class and ethnic equality, but I don't remeber one about sex equality.


I think much of it is interpretation. Having gone to Christian school for 6 years, my interpretation was that he discriminated against no human. Perhaps I was wrong, and I'm sure DT can clarify.

GoshisDead wrote:
I believe, I was trying to say that being couched in history and circumstance was why Catholicism has much of its current doctrine and dogma. It wasn't an apology for its doctrine just an explanation. To clarify, I think it was a silly thing for the Pope to say, both politically and socially and I don't agree with it, Yet he has the right to say it, which is my whole point.


But when we get into the realm of politics, it makes this less of a 'private organization' and more of a 'political power'. And when we cross this threshold, this is when I think things should change. Would you be fine with U.S democracy only permitting the election of male officials? If it was some small, private organization with little influence, there would be no problem. As far as I know, Catholicism holds a lot of political power, and influence over many people. I mean, really, many base their lives on these establishments... how can we just ignore something like this?

And yes, just from a standpoint of maturation of a species, I believe we shouldn't be discriminating on this level anymore -- and especially not at the level of a political power. Sure, 50 years ago many could get away with it, but we should see no more of this. Have we not grown up enough to refrain from yelling, "OMG, she's a female, don't let her in!" :perplexed:

Again, this is just opinion, how I feel. Thanks for listening,

Z
GoshisDead
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Mar, 2009 03:35 pm
@Zetherin,
Oh no, I hate organizations that limit membership weilding inordinate political Power "DAMN YOU TEACHER'S UNION!"
Didymos Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Mar, 2009 06:33 pm
@GoshisDead,
Zetherin wrote:
I think much of it is interpretation. Having gone to Christian school for 6 years, my interpretation was that he discriminated against no human. Perhaps I was wrong, and I'm sure DT can clarify.


"Love thy neighbor as thyself" that teaching does not mean only men.

In the canon, it's hard to find much. Mary Magdalen was a prominent figure, but not, apparently, an apostle.

If we look at non-canonical scripture, then we find some interesting teaching attributed to Jesus; basically, Jesus says to get past these misogynistic male and female distinctions because the sexes are equally capable of love and knowing God.
xris
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Mar, 2009 10:12 am
@Didymos Thomas,
Didymos Thomas wrote:
"Love thy neighbor as thyself" that teaching does not mean only men.

In the canon, it's hard to find much. Mary Magdalen was a prominent figure, but not, apparently, an apostle.

If we look at non-canonical scripture, then we find some interesting teaching attributed to Jesus; basically, Jesus says to get past these misogynistic male and female distinctions because the sexes are equally capable of love and knowing God.
We are not criticising the teachings of Christ but the RC church, there is a distinct difference..
0 Replies
 
Zetherin
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Mar, 2009 11:19 am
@Didymos Thomas,
Didymos Thomas wrote:
"Love thy neighbor as thyself" that teaching does not mean only men.

In the canon, it's hard to find much. Mary Magdalen was a prominent figure, but not, apparently, an apostle.

If we look at non-canonical scripture, then we find some interesting teaching attributed to Jesus; basically, Jesus says to get past these misogynistic male and female distinctions because the sexes are equally capable of love and knowing God.


I'm sorry, I'm not familiar. What is canon and non-canon scripture (this dummy thought there was only one!)? Do you mean revisions of the ancient scripture?
xris wrote:

We are not criticising the teachings of Christ but the RC church, there is a distinct difference..


You're right, there is a distinct difference.

However, my question was actually considering all of Christ's teachings: It was curiosity on my part, as I was brought up in a Christian environment that advocated equality. Sorry for not making this more clear.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Your Quote of the Day - Discussion by edgarblythe
Poo-tee-weet? - Question by boomerang
can anyone help me with this quote - Question by ritchielmk
Quotes...not exactly correct. - Question by Frank Apisa
Post your favorite tv shows Quotes? - Question by makwarne01
looking for a peace offering quotes - Question by aycelsanorjo
Looking for a particular quote... - Discussion by LocalHero
 
  1. Forums
  2. » A quote from the Vatican.
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/02/2021 at 04:29:29