Pope: Gay Marriage an Obstacle to World Peace

In a statement released yesterday by the Vatican, Pope Benedict XVI ranked same-sex marriage with nuclear arms proliferation, environmental pollution, economic inequality, abortion, and birth control as threats to world peace in a message for for the World Day of Peace on January 1st, according to Religion News Service:

Pope“Presenting the nuclear family as the ‘first and indispensable teacher of peace’ and the ‘primary agency of peace,’ the 15-page document links sexual and medical ethics to international relations. ‘Everything that serves to weaken the family based on the marriage of a man and woman, everything that directly or indirectly stands in the way of its openness to the responsible acceptance of new life … constitutes an objective obstacle on the road to peace,’ Benedict writes.”

Pope Says Abortion, Gay Marriage Are ‘Obstacles’ to World Peace [the pew forum]

Recently
Flaming Pope Photo Seen as Blessing from Beyond the Grave [tr]
High-Ranking Vatican Cleric Suspended in Gay Sex Scandal [tr]
Bush, Pope, Ahmadinejad in Human Rights ‘Hall of Shame’ [tr]

Comments

  1. jake says

    I wonder if priests molesting their young parishioners is an obstacle to world peace? Let’s see, two married gay guys with a kid, or a priest who destroyed the lives of countless children while his superiors covered it up… the Pope should just shut the hell up.

  2. Jonathon says

    Let me say this clearly so there is no misinterpretation:

    THERE IS NO ORGANIZATION ON THIS PLANET THAT IS MORE EVIL, MORE CORRUPT AND MORE OF AN OBSTABLE TO WORLD PEACE THAN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH!

    For centuries, men like Pope Benedict have stood in the way of progress, fighting it every single step of the way until they are forced to concede that progress is a good thing after all. Yes, it has been a few hundred years since Christians were burning witches and heretics at the stake, but the bloodthirst among many Christians has not been quenched. That’s why their “Prince of Peace” is depicted as a muslce-bound Rambo instead of the humble, loving and spiritual person that he was. That’s why followers of the man who told us to love one another have spent CENTURIES killing anyone who got in their way.

    Why is it that the so-called “three great monotheistic religions” – Judaism, Christianity and Islam – who have collectively had at least 4000 years of influence yet have been unable to bring peace to the world? Why is it that it is always one of these groups who is at odds with the other and through their opposition to one another bring war, suffering, famine, etc. to the world?

    I have a suggestion: let us liberal, freedom-loving and even same-sex loving secularists have the next 4000 years and see if we can’t do better than the so-called religious people have over the past 4000 years. Clearly, religion – ALL RELIGION – is just not up to the job of creating peace, creating stabliity and creating freedom.

    I’d love nothing more than to have the chance to slap that nasty smirk off of Benedict’s face and put him and the rest of the Vatican in their place. I can’t wait for the day when the walls of the Vatican are torn down and the whole monstrosity is levelled to the ground. In its place there should be created a memorial to the millions and millions of people who have suffered and died at the hands of the Church and from its policies of Christian superiority, opposition contraception, opposition safe and legal access to abortion, etc. Enough is enough, y’all.

  3. David says

    Truth, James.

    Religion is the most realistic obstacle to peace existing today, in my opinion. The vast majority of armed conflicts stem from differences in religious ideology.

  4. noteasilyoffended says

    Jesus Christ! How does gay marriage stack up next to intolerance, hunger and poverty in the threat to world peace? Gay marriage, no matter who thinks what about it, is based in love. How can that be a threat to peace? Someone wake up the antiquated figurehead!

  5. vinny says

    Religion is the OBSTACLE to World Peace. Ronald Reagan often called religion the world’s mightiest force for good, “the bedrock of moral order.” George Bush said it gives people “the character they need to get through life.” This view is held by millions. But the truism isn’t true. The record of human experience shows that where religion is strong, it causes cruelty. Intense beliefs produce intense hostility. Only when faith loses its force can a society hope to become humane.

    The history of religion is a horror story. If anyone doubts it, just review this chronicle of religion’s gore during the last 1,000 years or so: http://www.theskepticalreview.org/JAHPoliticsDeathToll.html

    Anything that divides people breeds inhumanity. Religion serves that ugly purpose.

  6. Jordan says

    It’s just sad that so many people listen to what this awful little wanna-be drag queen says. Wasn’t he a nazi in a former life?

    I can’t be bothered. I just go by what Madonna says about how awful the Catholic church is. Organized religion (all of it) sucks. It should be outlawed. Period.

  7. FizziekruntNT says

    Unfortunately, religion has been given a horrible reputation, many original texts in major religions are violent and contradictory (not to mention, written by human beings supposedly divinely inspired..ha!), as noted by just about everyone above, but the real problem is stupidity. IF contracting a bad case of the dumbass were fatal, we’d be tripping over corpses. Problem solved!

  8. says

    Religion can be a beautiful thing, when it helps a person realize the beauty in the world, create a more peaceful life, and love those around them.

    The problem is when people start to believe everything that an organized religion has to say and when those religions start dictating the actions of those inside and outside of their religion based on ideals that may have been made up thousands of years ago.

    Instead of attacking religion, we should go after their followers and remind them that they have both free will and common sense. Attacking religion makes us sound like a bunch of hedonistic gays and what God-fearing person is going to want to listen someone like that.

  9. the queen says

    gimme that old time religion, boys: the dionysian mysteries… i’m on my knees every sunday … worshipping cock.. anyone care to join me?… services start at 11:00 a.m.

  10. Derrick from Philly says

    Boys, I’m tellin’ ya':

    Santeria and Voodoo and other African based religions are your answer. You can be a Voodoo priest and be openly gay…and white! You don’t have to hide in the closet and bother little boys like in Christianity & Islam. I don’t insult the Jews. I’m PC.

  11. andrew says

    I wonder if he was wearing he Prada shoes while making the comment? Amazing he was able to keep a straight face while hiding that 12 year old under he garb………

  12. MikeinSanJose says

    Maybe we should preemptively invade the Vatican. It’s just as likely that they have WMDs stuffed up under their pretty little dresses as it was likely that Saddam hid them in his mustache.

    And since we know that ‘WMDs’ is code for ‘We want to steal that sovereignty’s wealth and resources’ – well, Catholics wrote the book on looting other civilizations. Think of all the treasure they have stashed away over there.

    Hell, Nuke ’em and be done with it.

    And while we’re on that topic… If the Muslims are such sworn enemies of ‘Infidels’ why haven’t they rushed the Vatican? I mean… it’s just SITTING there… It’s not like hunting for OBL (who is somewhere in Afghanistan dragging around his Dialysis machine and making Bush look even more like a moron and incompetent.)

    Religion sucks, and if we’re not careful we’re going to be back in Medieval Europe during the Dark Ages when the church controlled everything.

  13. says

    If gay marriage is such a threat to world peace, it’s funny how countries that recognize gay unions tend to be peaceful ones, while Intolerant (i.e. religious) countries tend not to be so peaceful . . . hmmm? And according to this theory, he himself, along with all the unmarried priests, would also be threats to peace; well, he may have that part right.

  14. MikeinSanJose says

    Oh, and I do recognize a complete distinction between spirituality (a personal relationship with a higher power of your choosing) and religion (a mechanism for ‘interpreting’ the will of the Flying Spaghetti Monster in an effort to get people to bend to your will and finance your multi-million dollar homes while those same people live in squalor).

    Religion = public exhibitionism of a relationship that is supposed to be private.

    Didn’t Jesus say something negative about praying in public??

    Matthew 6:5-15 (New International Version)

    Prayer
    5″And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. 6But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. 7And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words. 8Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him.”

    …and then it launches into the lord’s prayer…

  15. Gil says

    What this vile Nazi is essentially saying is that we should be wiped out—as if we were a pestilence.

    In other words: “I declare hunting season to be now open”.

  16. TP says

    This one has truly nailed the box closed in my belief that organization can do anything other than divide people. Such hate coming from a person who’s suppose to represent the concept of “all loving.” Shame on you, ope Benedict XVI!! You DO NOT represent the God I believe in.

  17. says

    “… stands in the way of its openness to the responsible acceptance of new life …”

    And how is his unmarried bunch of freaks going to bring forth new life?

    So according to this reasoning, Israelites and Palestians are fighting over who’s going to bottom for whom? And Darfur is nothing but muslim men f_ing up the ass their christian male neighbors? Tutsis and Hutus in Rwanda were all up in arms simply because they wanted the right to officially and publicly bed each other? Waouw! If this doesn’t get my devout catholic grandma to go atheistic on his ass, I dunno what will!!

  18. NowItMatters says

    The Pope is a bit of a dope on this one.
    While moral order and religion go hand in hand, I fail to see a connection between same sex couples and a stumbling block to world peace.

    I agree that civil unions should be granted to these couples as I agree with the religious/moral order that a man and a woman are the only species that constitute marriage.

  19. Derrick from Philly says

    Well said, SHABAKA. Homos are one of the main causes of all this trouble in the world. I think this Pope is recalling the early 1940s, and what can be done about “troublesome” people like homos. Heil!

  20. Marco says

    Fuck you Pope and suck my dick while you’re at it.

    Gee, I typed the above a minute or so ago, waited, and looks like hell hasn’t reigned over me.

    Guess it’s all bullshit.

  21. AggieCowboy says

    I’ve always wondered how much more advanced we would be as a civilization if the Catholic Church (among other religions) hadn’t done it’s damnest to suppress scientific knowledge. How much was lost only to be “discovered” centuries later? Where would we be today if the industrial revolution had occurred in the 1300’s (or earlier) instead of the 1800’s.

  22. Jonathon says

    NowItMatters wrote: “…moral order and religion go hand in hand…”

    Bull$hit!! Cite your source!! Religion is a plague, a virus, “the opium of the masses”. Morality and religion are not joined at the hip. One can lead a highly moral life and yet not practice any religion at all. Religiosity is no sign of morality. Hell, the past year’s worth of Republican scandals is proof enough of that!

    Then, NowItMatters goes on: “I agree that civil unions should be granted to these couples as I agree with the religious/moral order that a man and a woman are the only species that constitute marriage.”

    First, all human beings, male and female alike, belong to the same species: Homo sapiens. Even gays and lesbians belong to that species, believe it or not!

    There is nothing “magic” about “man + woman”. There is nothing inherent to heterosexuality that makes it superior to homosexuality in any way. In my opinion it is quite the opposite. The enduring and courageous love that same-sex couples have for one another, despite society’s disapproval and the de facto second-class status that ALL gay and lesbian people suffer in our country, proves that same-sex love is real and is enough reason to change the laws for the government to recognize same-sex marriages. The churches, synagogues, mosques and temples can do what they want. If people want a religious ceremony (which is MEANINGLESS in the eyes of the law, btw) then they can have it and churches/synagogues/mosques/etc. that choose to offer services to same-sex couples can do so and those who oppose it can’t be forced to. They key here would be to make everyone’s marriage a civil union. That way if religious people want an additional ceremony they can have it, but in the eyes of the law it is the CIVIL aspect of the relationship that matters. And, quite frankly, it is only the civil side of things that gay and lesbians are demanding. That doesn’t seem too much to ask, does it?

  23. Greg says

    Yeah, sure Gay marriage is as much a threat as nuclear weapons – and I’m going to get married to a man if the Pope doesn’t pay me a million dollars…. mwahahahaha

  24. James Poppinga says

    Will someone please photoshop this photo. Look at his sunken eyes. If he doesn’t look like the Emperor Palpatine from Star Wars I don’t know who does.

  25. Martin says

    Our good old Benedikt! Has he to say something?

    Well not the gays started the war in Irak.
    I don’t think that Dennis Koslowski is gay either – the one with the shower curtain.
    Or Kenneth Lay – Enron. The ones who wasted billions of Dollars. The subprime mortgage crisis is gay, too?
    Martha is a lesbian?
    Well Larry Craig is a problem. His double standards are. These bigots in power are a problem.

    Benedikt needs to remember that not the whole world is catholic! And thank GOD that the church has no more (or less!) influence over politicians and politics in Europe. Yes, we have gay marriage in Spain, Pacte Civil in France, Life Parterships in Germany and so MUCH more in the United Kingdom, Switzerland, Portugal, Luxemburg, the Netherlands. Belgium, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland… Hungary, Israel, New Zealand, Australia, South Africa, Argentina, Urugayy, Brazil, Colombia, Mexico… Did I forget anybody – sorry. And remember that the world has not come to an end (what he predicted). No, the world is BETTER!!!

  26. Martin says

    Yes, and I do want to add one thing: all of my family members are Christians – Protestant for centuries or Catholic.
    My mother would rather shoot the Pope than see me unhappy.

  27. atheist says

    Fuck, Fuck, Fuck the Pope.

    I like how a Nazi pope whose followers molested boys and girls and covered it up and let AIDS spread in Africa is lecturing others about world peace and our failure to obtain it.

    Look in the mirror Nazi fuck.

  28. H.S.H. Caligula says

    I am Greek Orthodox, born and raised in Athens, Greece, but have Venitian ancestory. I was sent to private schools in Venice and the Vatican. The Vatican is a beautiful place and is full of Greek and Roman are. Much of this art is homo-erotic and yet the catholic church never had it destroyed. They have all ancient Greek and Roman text translated into Italian and other newer languages. The catholis church at this time is more of a symbol and these things are said to appease the masses. The Vatican in itself is not a awful place if you visit behind the scenes. Much of the homosexual issues have to do with the female and penetration. The female menstal psycle and the act of penetrating a female has always been the forefront that men should not be femenized. The female is unclean and thus a male should not aquire such traits. The Vatican is well aware of homosexuality within the Vatican and has never made it a true issue. Being gay and loving men is not the issue as is being anally penetrated like a female and thus being a woman. We all know how women are treated in Catholicism and my religion Greek Orthodox. There are intire peninsulas in Greece where womaen can’t set foot. It sounds hurtful what the pope said, but it is something that they will always say. I remember my time at the Vatican and it was a great time, but things will get worse before they get better. The world is changing, new nations like Russia, China and India are becoming the new powers and they are very homophobic. It will take the homosexual communities of the world to unite in a stronger more realistic manner in order for things to change and to remain peaceful for us. GlAAD and such organizations are losinn the battle. It will take more people coming out and stronger representation from gay leaders, not Will and Grace or Ellen. We need gay presidents, gay politicians, soldiers, actors, models, lawyers, generals in order for the overall viewpoint of homosexuality to change. Much of the world thinks that gays are stupid and ridicoulous and the but of jokes. In my country, Greeks are not homophobic but they make fun of gays on a daily basis. We need stronger representation in the world. Men are affraid to come out because it will take there masulinity away and until that changes we wont be able to exist 50 years from now. The Russian, Poles and Chinesse are all experimenting on the gay gene and how to eraticate it, its time for our revolution to begin. The question is who will take the lead.

  29. H.S.H. Caligula says

    I am Greek Orthodox, born and raised in Athens, Greece, but have Venitian ancestory. I was sent to private schools in Venice and the Vatican. The Vatican is a beautiful place and is full of Greek and Roman are. Much of this art is homo-erotic and yet the catholic church never had it destroyed. They have all ancient Greek and Roman text translated into Italian and other newer languages. The catholis church at this time is more of a symbol and these things are said to appease the masses. The Vatican in itself is not a awful place if you visit behind the scenes. Much of the homosexual issues have to do with the female and penetration. The female menstal psycle and the act of penetrating a female has always been the forefront that men should not be femenized. The female is unclean and thus a male should not aquire such traits. The Vatican is well aware of homosexuality within the Vatican and has never made it a true issue. Being gay and loving men is not the issue as is being anally penetrated like a female and thus being a woman. We all know how women are treated in Catholicism and my religion Greek Orthodox. There are intire peninsulas in Greece where womaen can’t set foot. It sounds hurtful what the pope said, but it is something that they will always say. I remember my time at the Vatican and it was a great time, but things will get worse before they get better. The world is changing, new nations like Russia, China and India are becoming the new powers and they are very homophobic. It will take the homosexual communities of the world to unite in a stronger more realistic manner in order for things to change and to remain peaceful for us. GlAAD and such organizations are losinn the battle. It will take more people coming out and stronger representation from gay leaders, not Will and Grace or Ellen. We need gay presidents, gay politicians, soldiers, actors, models, lawyers, generals in order for the overall viewpoint of homosexuality to change. Much of the world thinks that gays are stupid and ridicoulous and the but of jokes. In my country, Greeks are not homophobic but they make fun of gays on a daily basis. We need stronger representation in the world. Men are affraid to come out because it will take there masulinity away and until that changes we wont be able to exist 50 years from now. The Russian, Poles and Chinesse are all experimenting on the gay gene and how to eraticate it, its time for our revolution to begin. The question is who will take the lead.

  30. tommy says

    Well, H.S.H. Caligula’s comment is a little confusing, but I think I will draw on some universal issues that he (or she) obliquely touches; i.e., not all “organized” religious or spiritually influenced behavior is inherently evil or anti-human.

    I find it quite frankly really troubling that so many of the commentators here have literally “thrown the baby out with the bathwater.” In other words, all religious sentiment is nothing but crap, based on the hateful and/or discriminatory dismissive actions of certain individuals who claim their actions and statements are supported and inspired by their faith.

    So, I suppose that we have to then completely ignore centuries of people who have been and continue to be driven by a genuine belief in a deity that actually manifests itself in caring, supportive actions? Those who have sacrificed to perform works of mercy for others, and have accepted them for who they are, and ground their actions in their religious faith?

    There are plenty of real human beings in history who did not condemn others for their behavior, and lived lives of service and dedication to humanity, and yes, this behavior was grounded in their faith….and this occurred in Christianity, Islam, Judaism, etc.

    I would love to hear what some of these posters have to say if they really investigated what grounds some who provide real service and care in their communities, i.e., the volunteers for those who are sick, dying, hungry, homeless, etc. Could some of these argue their faith grounds them? Certainly.

    I find it quite frankly ignorant to argue that any action based in a spiritual or religious grounding has done nothing but harm humanity. That is simply not the case.
    This would be just as ridiculous as making the comment that because one can come up with numerous examples of money-grubbing, intolerant, selfish atheists, then all atheists are selfish, money-grubbing, intolerant individuals.

  31. Integrityofmen says

    The Pope is entitled to his opinion, as we are here on this blog. World peace has nothing to do with a man being in a relationship with another man. Nor does a legitimate union of two men (or women) weaken a nation. The Pope is merely promoting what his Catholic base want him to: that gay marriage is not indigenous to their beliefs. Unfortunately, civil uinions are not an acceptable alternative for this religious group, because civil unions are in fact what makes for equality.

  32. D-train says

    A lot of people are upset about this, and apparently they haven’t bothered to read it.

    http://www.oecumene.radiovaticana.org/en1/Articolo.asp?c=173082

    The document doesn’t mention same-sex marriage even once (nor does it mention abortion).

    I suppose in his mentioning of male/female marriage as the essential family unit the Pope could be said to be dissing same-sex marriage, but that’s to be expected of an organization which doesn’t believe in same-sex marriage.

    However, clearly the Pope isn’t condemning same-sex marriage any more than he is condemning, say, a heterosexual couple living together without being married.

    I don’t agree with the Pope that a family has to be male/female parents to be valid as a family, but the level of anger being directed at the Pope for something not even indicated in the document is alarming, and more indicative that those who are in a froth didn’t bother to READ the document than indicative of anything offensive in the document itself.

  33. nic says

    @ D-TRAIN,

    does one really need to read the entire document to understand the implicit meaning: hetero-marriage, good; gay-marriage, threat to peace. don’t be a dick-head. this old fart is perpetuating the anti-gay speechifying of the older fart he replaced. everyone knows that the cardinals (bird-brains all, but oh so well feathered) placed numb-nuts benedict as a transitional drag queen, er, pope that would carry on the conservative positions of john paul (may he rest in hell). throughout his tenure john paul never said anything akin to, “gays deserve human and civil rights, and they deserve rights equal to heterosexuals in the eyes of the law. please stop the violence against homosexuals.” he didn’t. such a simple statement. yet he didn’t make it, and may god have mercy on his soul (if he is not in hell but in purgatory or some other fantastical construction of the delusional religious mind.

    i have no more patience with the catholic church, nor with their apologists.

  34. D-TRAIN says

    Yes, NIC, one does need to read the document if one is to comment on it with any credibility.

    Especially since it doesn’t say what so many of the people commenting on it, including the original poster, think it says.

    And you are wrong, by the way, about John Paul. In fact when he was Pope the Vatican issued a document specifically addressing the treatment of homosexuals and calling for them to be treated the same as anybody else.

    Not many people read that one either though, and now they use it as evidence that Benedict is anti-gay, because Benedict wrote it back when he was still Ratzinger.

    Look, I don’t agree with the Catholic Church on homosexuality. It would be tough for me to do so because I am gay.

    But so many people are in such a hurry to bash the Pope or the Church that they don’t bother to think it through. You get all wound up to shriek petty insults (like your silly drag queen comment) that they can’t be bothered to see if what they are whining about is actually true or not.

  35. nic says

    D-TRAIN,

    credibility is something the catholic church lost a long, long time ago. and, no, one does not need to read every word of the pope’s bullshit to know that for the most part it IS bullshit. though it may be trite, the expression “consider the source” has never been more apt as it pertains to people such as he and his brethren, or should i say sistren.

    i remember john paul in the 80’s wading (in all his regalia) through a sea of platter-eyed, swollen-bellied, starving black children in africa while decrying contraception. to this day, the church does not support the use of condoms, despite the deaths of countless innocent lives due to AIDS.

    the church’s leadership on the gay issue is at best benign ignorance and at worst malevolent disregard. i’m sorry, but platitudes like “love the sinner but hate the sin” no longer hold water. do you really believe that an all-loving god gives a rat’s ass where you put your penis? if there is an all-loving god, i would hope that he cares more about your treatment of your family, friends, and all human beings and much, much less about the trappings and pomp of the catholic church.

    i stand by my previous comments. i will not debate the minutae when the big picture is self-evident.

  36. D-Train says

    Whatever your opinion of the Catholic Church in general, you’re still missing my point, and my point is this:

    The document doesn’t say any of what it’s being claimed it says.

    The document doesn’t say anything, not a word, about gay marriage.

    What is says is that families help kids grow up happier, which in the long run serves the cause of peace.

    Yes, the document specifies male/female headed families. I think that’s simplistic and ignorant, but it’s hardly malevolent.

    If you prefer to comment about the document from ignorance, that’s your choice.

    But it doesn’t serve you well to carry on about slights which are only in your imagination.

  37. Ego.Maverick says

    The church/religions hides in it’s very own misconceptions and totally misguided teachings, when will it wake up to reality? to actual truth. To any person, of any faith, just looking back in history is complete and utter proof that religion has been the scourge of mankind! not because of the religion itself, but through the power wielding/hungry leadership of same. It surely has been the cause of more wars, deaths, riots, and the down-treading of the poor and the meek, and the mental health of many poor souls!

  38. D-Train says

    The great irony in all this outrage over the document in question is that, except for the misguided focus on male/female led families over just “families”, the document could have been written by a die hard American liberal such as myself.

    It talks about the need to save the environment, stop needless war, fight poverty, and on and on and on.

    Most Catholic teaching is very politically liberal. Being a gay ex-catholic, I’m bothered by the Church’s stance towards my sexuality, which is why I’m an ex-Catholic.

    But otherwise, they’re on almost exactly the same page as I am.

  39. Gregg says

    D-TRAIN, you are fooling yourself if you think that this document does not condemn marriage equality. I actually did read the document, and although there are some lovely sentiments throughout, those niceties do not negate the malevolence towards homosexuality.

    This sentence directly from the document sums it up: “everything that serves to weaken the family based on the marriage of a man and a woman, everything that directly or indirectly stands in the way of its openness to the responsible acceptance of a new life, everything that obstructs its right to be primarily responsible for the education of its children, constitutes an objective obstacle on the road to peace”. This same quote in a shortened version is in the original post here. True, this can include unmarried straight people. But they have the OPTION of marriage. Gay people do not.

    Good for you that you can so easily dismiss the homophobia in the church and see the good aspects of the church through the fog of hatred that this malevolent pope is fostering. Good for you that you can dismiss the countless deaths caused by AIDS due to the pope’s condemnation of condoms.

    This is not some goody goody document that, oops, mistakenly assumes that a marriage can only be one man and one woman. No. This is a calculated dissertation on the dangers in society – one of those dangers being marriage equality.

    You state that the document “doesn’t say what so many of the people commenting on it, including the original poster, think it says”. Well, if you read the document without trying to whitewash it, then it does indeed equate marriage equality with nuclear arms, pollution, economic inequality, abortion and contraception as obstacles to peace – just as the original post states.

    You cannot blame this uproar on the fact that people have not read the document. You are wrong. I, among many others, have read it and come away with the same conclusion. The pope is stating that marriage equality is a threat to world peace.

  40. D-Train says

    The fact that so many arrive at the same wrong conclusion is just evidence that some people are predisposed to hatred and misplaced rage, nothing more.

    I agree with your classification of the section on marriage as homophobia, but in the literal sense: fear.

    Fear born of ignorance, not hatred, and it is a significant difference. Ignorance can be corrected. It wasn’t long ago that most Catholics would have agreed with the Church’s stance on homosexuality. That has changed, just in the past generation or two.

    Catholics, even Catholic clergy, are generally good people, just as most people are generally good people. I have no doubt that in time the Church’s stance on this will soften. It’s not a doctrinal issue. It has nothing to do with the faith of the Catholic Church, so it’s something that CAN change as the leadership changes. And all that takes is time.

  41. Ego.Maverick says

    D-TRAIN,you say all the church needs is time! it’s had 2,000 odd years, does it need another 2,000? there is doubt that the ‘earth’ will be here then :)

  42. D-Train says

    Well, it’s only in the last dozen years or so that we’ve started to get any kind of legal protection in the USA, and only in the last 30 or so that we’ve gotten any legal protection in Europe.

    There’s no reason to believe the Church won’t follow the same pattern.

    Contrary to the prevailing sentiment here, the Church isn’t made of a billion evil hateful people who want us to suffer and die. It’s made of people. And people are generally good.

  43. Phil says

    D-Train – are you for real? How long did it take the Catholic Church to admit that Galileo was correct? The Catholic church does not change at a rate anywhere close to that of general society.

    I speak from a position of knowledge, having worked closely and still working with many Catholic officials on a multitude of levels. Currently, there is an atmosphere of institutionalized distrust, fear, malevolence, and cold indifference coming from the highest levels of the church. I know good, kind, compassionate priests and religious who are leaving or have left the Catholic church because of frustration with the current situation. It is extreme.

    You can paint a rosy picture all you want, but it doesn’t change the fact that this current pope indeed said that marriage between two people of the same sex is an obstacle to world peace.

    Your assessment, both of the validity of the initial post here and of the intentions of other commenters, is clearly colored by some need to believe in the good of the Catholic church and all of its officials. You say that people are generally good. That does not mean that ALL people are good. And it does not mean that this pope is good. This pope is taking the Catholic church in the opposite direction of which you speak – heading back into the Middle Ages.

    We NEED to speak out against this malevolence when it occurs, so that the church CAN eventually change. But simply looking at the bright side while failing to look at the negative will not encourage them to change.

    Please, look at the situation objectively.

Leave A Reply