Login |
New User
Books
Read the 1st Chapter!
The Greatest Show On Earth: The Evidence For Evolution
The God Delusion
Over 1.5 million copies sold
The Oxford Book of Modern Science Writing
by Richard Dawkins
The Selfish Gene
by Richard Dawkins
The Blind Watchmaker
by Richard Dawkins
The Ancestor's Tale
by Richard Dawkins
Unweaving the Rainbow
by Richard Dawkins
Climbing Mount Improbable
by Richard Dawkins
Print
Vatican cardinal calls on Catholics to stop funding Amnesty
by Tom Kington, Guardian
Thanks to Michael Murray for the link.
Reposted from:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/religion/Story/0,,2102583,00.html
· Group 'betrayed mission' over new abortion policy
· Human rights organisation fears dip in donations
A senior Vatican cardinal said yesterday that Catholics should stop donating to human rights group Amnesty International because of its new policy advocating abortion rights for women if they had been raped, were a victim of incest or faced health risks.
Cardinal Renato Martino, president of the Vatican's Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, accused Amnesty of turning its back on its mission to defend human rights.
"The inevitable consequence of this decision, according to the cardinal, will be the suspension of any financing to Amnesty on the part of Catholic organisations and also individual Catholics," said a statement from Cardinal Martino's office yesterday.
"AI has betrayed its mission," Cardinal Martino told the US National Catholic Register in an interview.
Amnesty changed its neutral stance on abortion in April, but its Italy chairman Paolo Pobbiati insisted its new position had been misinterpreted by the cardinal.
"This has nothing to do with legitimising abortion as part of a campaign for human rights, it is to do with combating violence against women," he said.
"It was partly inspired by our experience in Africa where soldiers rape women in communities they attack to force them to have their children. We also believe women who have had abortions should benefit from medical care regardless of the reason for the abortion. Moreover we aim to promote education and contraception to reduce abortion rates."
"AI does not take a position on whether abortion should be legal or whether it is right or wrong," it added in a statement.
In his interview with the National Catholic Register, Cardinal Martino did not see any grey areas.
"The Church teaches that it is never justifiable to kill an innocent life. Abortion is murder," he said. "To selectively justify abortion, even in the cases of rape, is to define the innocent child within the womb as an enemy, a 'thing' that must be destroyed. How can we say that killing a child in some cases is good and in other cases it is evil?"
In a statement released in Italy, Amnesty stated it did not receive funding from the Vatican or the Catholic church. Amnesty also declines support from governments and political parties. But Mr Pobbiati admitted that the fallout for funding could be serious if individual Catholics heeded Cardinal Martino's advice.
"This could be a danger to donations and we are extremely upset about these statements," he said.
Amnesty's joint campaigning with Catholic organisations could also be complicated by the Vatican's position, he said.
"We mount joint campaigns with organisations like Caritas and the Community of Sant'Egidio against the death penalty and child soldiers and in favour of arms control. We sincerely hope Catholics will not share Martino's views on funding."
Reposted from:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/religion/Story/0,,2102583,00.html
· Group 'betrayed mission' over new abortion policy
· Human rights organisation fears dip in donations
A senior Vatican cardinal said yesterday that Catholics should stop donating to human rights group Amnesty International because of its new policy advocating abortion rights for women if they had been raped, were a victim of incest or faced health risks.
Cardinal Renato Martino, president of the Vatican's Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, accused Amnesty of turning its back on its mission to defend human rights.
"The inevitable consequence of this decision, according to the cardinal, will be the suspension of any financing to Amnesty on the part of Catholic organisations and also individual Catholics," said a statement from Cardinal Martino's office yesterday.
"AI has betrayed its mission," Cardinal Martino told the US National Catholic Register in an interview.
Amnesty changed its neutral stance on abortion in April, but its Italy chairman Paolo Pobbiati insisted its new position had been misinterpreted by the cardinal.
"This has nothing to do with legitimising abortion as part of a campaign for human rights, it is to do with combating violence against women," he said.
"It was partly inspired by our experience in Africa where soldiers rape women in communities they attack to force them to have their children. We also believe women who have had abortions should benefit from medical care regardless of the reason for the abortion. Moreover we aim to promote education and contraception to reduce abortion rates."
"AI does not take a position on whether abortion should be legal or whether it is right or wrong," it added in a statement.
In his interview with the National Catholic Register, Cardinal Martino did not see any grey areas.
"The Church teaches that it is never justifiable to kill an innocent life. Abortion is murder," he said. "To selectively justify abortion, even in the cases of rape, is to define the innocent child within the womb as an enemy, a 'thing' that must be destroyed. How can we say that killing a child in some cases is good and in other cases it is evil?"
In a statement released in Italy, Amnesty stated it did not receive funding from the Vatican or the Catholic church. Amnesty also declines support from governments and political parties. But Mr Pobbiati admitted that the fallout for funding could be serious if individual Catholics heeded Cardinal Martino's advice.
"This could be a danger to donations and we are extremely upset about these statements," he said.
Amnesty's joint campaigning with Catholic organisations could also be complicated by the Vatican's position, he said.
"We mount joint campaigns with organisations like Caritas and the Community of Sant'Egidio against the death penalty and child soldiers and in favour of arms control. We sincerely hope Catholics will not share Martino's views on funding."
Comments 1 - 50 of 85 |
Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers2. Comment #50003 by Fedler on June 14, 2007 at 1:53 pm
Try as I may to see the Cardinal's side on this, I just can't. It seems to me AI is trying to serve women as best they can, without offending who are arguably their largest supporters. In contrast to AI who is seeking to provide medical care for women who have had an abortion, the Cardinal seems willing to neglect their medical needs just because he perceives them as doing something immoral.Then in the ultimate play on people's emotions, the Cardinal says:
"To selectively justify abortion, even in the cases of rape, is to define the innocent child within the womb as an enemy, a 'thing' that must be destroyed. How can we say that killing a child in some cases is good and in other cases it is evil?"
It doesn't appear AI, or anyone else, is calling the unborn child evil. Just unwanted in these cases.
It may seem preferable to deliver the child, then give them up for adoption, but the adoption process is lacking in so many ways that it would be hard to justify that choice, also.
It's a hard call. Deliver the child where they may be in an unsafe environment or neglected by the parent because they can't adequately care for the child (in the Africa case), or abort the child to spare them those possible outcomes.
Either way, the Cardinal is drawing an awfully hard line.
Other Comments by Fedler
3. Comment #50007 by steveroot on June 14, 2007 at 2:09 pm
It's a ball of cells, not a "baby" or "child". We're not talking about "partial birth" abortions here, I assume. Rnewson has it exactly right.Steve
Other Comments by steveroot
4. Comment #50008 by Fedler on June 14, 2007 at 2:13 pm
Very good point, steveroot. My former catholicism/indoctrination was showing through :). Other Comments by Fedler
5. Comment #50009 by PaulJ on June 14, 2007 at 2:14 pm
The Vatican throwing its weight around again.Catholics have their beliefs (whatever one might think of those beliefs) and that's fine -- up to a point. That point is reached far too often.
Other Comments by PaulJ
6. Comment #50011 by alovrin on June 14, 2007 at 2:20 pm
This is just evil cloaked in piety. This and the no condom use thing for aids prevention. It makes me feel sick. Other Comments by alovrin
7. Comment #50014 by sauronlord on June 14, 2007 at 2:29 pm
I am so disgusted by the Catholic Church.A bundle of cells takes precedence over the dignity and well-being of a victim.
They use intentionally misleading words like "child" or "baby" to try and make a point. This is not compassion but oppression disguised as such.
How dare they stick their dirty fingers and deny contraception, condoms, and expect poor helpless women to "live with" this horrible experience by carrying it through term.
Statements like these are hateful and AGAINST human rights. Shame on the Church and anyone that endorses such views.
Life is not about absolutes or sweeping generalizations like the Church keeps spouting off about.
Hell, the Ten Commandments are not even absolutes.
For everyone of the Commandments you can foresee a situation where it is Ethical to break it.
Think of Anne Frank (for lying), think about murder in self defense, etc...
Other Comments by sauronlord
8. Comment #50017 by newcomer on June 14, 2007 at 2:39 pm
To Cardinal Martino:Please follow the letter of the holy bible
According to Deuteronomy 22:28-29 all a
rapist owes for raping a young woman is to
pay fifty shekels of silver to the young
woman's father and she shall become his wife.
That's it, case closed.
Other Comments by newcomer
9. Comment #50019 by bluebird on June 14, 2007 at 2:49 pm
There needs to be worldwide accessibility to contraceptives that are readily available, cheap, and easy to use. Most women (perhaps all) want control of their reproductive issues, but this won't happen anytime soon, if ever.
Other Comments by bluebird
10. Comment #50022 by CJ22 on June 14, 2007 at 3:14 pm
"This has nothing to do with legitimising abortion as part of a campaign for human rights, it is to do with combating violence against women,"No dilemma there for the Vatican. They don't give a shit about women or women's rights, and they never have.
Other Comments by CJ22
11. Comment #50024 by pewkatchoo on June 14, 2007 at 3:17 pm
How amazing. A bunch of ignorant child molesters in skirts are preaching on morality. Well there you go then, what a topsy-turvy world we live in. Christopher Hitchins was debating with some wierdo who was burbling on about the religious being more charitable than atheists. But their version of charity seems to come with an awful lot of qualfications. Other Comments by pewkatchoo
12. Comment #50032 by MIND_REBEL on June 14, 2007 at 3:54 pm
LOL at this crap. This is almost worse than the Vatican outlawing condoms in Africa, which caused the AIDS crisis. The Vatican is the most powerful organization in the world, and its shameful the way they're able to bully around entire countries.
Other Comments by MIND_REBEL
13. Comment #50034 by Dr Benway on June 14, 2007 at 4:00 pm
Maybe this is marketing. Hardcore positions are presently in fashion and everyone seems to want a piece of macho, rightist, Big Bro pie.I say marketing, because I doubt Amnesty International relies much on the Church for support. If in the coming weeks the Church proscribes Catholics from donating to Greenpeace or the International Gay and Lesbian Association, I'll know I'm right.
Other Comments by Dr Benway
14. Comment #50036 by mc on June 14, 2007 at 4:12 pm
AI's response:Amnesty International defends access to abortion for women at risk
Press release, 06/14/2007
Amnesty International today firmly stood by the rights of women and girls to be free from threat, force or coercion as they exercise their sexual and reproductive rights.
Responding to a statement from the Vatican, Amnesty International contradicted the claim of Cardinal Renato Martino, head of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, that Vatican funding for Amnesty International would cease. "We have not accepted funds from the Vatican and do not accept funds from any other state in support of our work against human rights violations," said Kate Gilmore, Executive Deputy Secretary General of Amnesty International.
"Millions of people around the world of many faiths and creeds donate to Amnesty International as individuals. Among them are welcome donations from members of the Catholic faith. We hope that Amnesty InternationaI's work against torture, against the death penalty and for the proper administration of justice including for women and girls will continue to draw active support from people of conviction the world over," said Kate Gilmore.
Defending the right of women to sexual and reproductive integrity in the face of grave human rights violations, Amnesty International recently incorporated a focus on selected aspects of abortion into its broader policy on sexual and reproductive rights. These additions do not promote abortion as a universal right and Amnesty International remains silent on the rights and wrongs of abortion.
"Amnesty International's position is not for abortion as a right but for women's human rights to be free of fear, threat and coercion as they manage all consequences of rape and other grave human rights violations," clarified Kate Gilmore.
Yesterday Cardinal Martino, through an interview, encouraged Catholics to withdraw support for Amnesty International, claimed that Amnesty International is "promoting abortion rights". Amnesty International's actual policy, however, standing alongside its long-standing opposition to forced abortion, is to support the decriminalisation of abortion, to ensure women have access to health care when complications arise from abortion and to defend women's access to abortion, within reasonable gestational limits, when their health or human rights are in danger.
"Amnesty International stands alongside the victims and survivors of human rights violations. Our policy reflects our obligation of solidarity as a human rights movement with, for example, the rape survivor in Darfur who, because she is left pregnant as a result of the enemy, is further ostracised by her community," said Kate Gilmore.
"We are a movement to protect citizens including the believer but we do not impose beliefs. Ours is a movement dedicated to upholding human rights, not specific theologies. Our purpose invokes the law and the state, not God. It means that sometimes the secular framework of human rights that Amnesty International upholds will converge neatly with the standpoints of certain faith based communities; sometimes it will not."
Amnesty International encouraged the Catholic Church not to turn away from the suffering that women face because of sexual violence and urged the Catholic leadership to advocate tolerance and respect to freedom of expression for all human rights defenders, including Amnesty International, just as Amnesty International will continue to defend the freedom of religion.
Further information :
http://web.amnesty.org/actforwomen/sexual_and_reproductive_rights-eng
Other Comments by mc
15. Comment #50054 by aznxscorpion517 on June 14, 2007 at 7:01 pm
They think giving the right for women to abort a child caused by RAPE or to prevent health problems is traitorical to defending human rights? Immoral?That is disgusting.
I can't think of anything other than religion that would say such a thing.
Other Comments by aznxscorpion517
16. Comment #50055 by Astroboy on June 14, 2007 at 7:24 pm
The Vatican does not care about people. All it cares about is its doctrines. Other Comments by Astroboy
17. Comment #50058 by Russell Blackford on June 14, 2007 at 7:34 pm
This is just one more demonstration, if we needed it, of how thoroughly contemptible the Vatican is.Keep up the campaign, folks. This sort of thing is exactly why religious views deserve no respect, and some religionists are beyond the pale of rationality. Not only does the Vatican lack moral authority; it is nothing more than a bloated cult of superstition and misery.
Other Comments by Russell Blackford
18. Comment #50061 by Crazymalc on June 14, 2007 at 7:42 pm
Sad. Sad. Sad.Let's increase the suffering of the world.
Bastards
Other Comments by Crazymalc
19. Comment #50066 by Zaphod on June 14, 2007 at 7:51 pm
Cardinals have no say in this matter. They should keep their mouths shut. Stupid elderly virgins. Typical nonsense. Other Comments by Zaphod
20. Comment #50067 by Big T on June 14, 2007 at 8:39 pm
I was raised a Catholic. I have given up hope the church will ever even change it's crazy policy on birth control, never mind abortion. Or celibacy for priests, an optional policy that results in pedophile priests and hideous scandals. The Catholic church is simply immune to reason, enlightenment, science and change.Other Comments by Big T
21. Comment #50078 by crystalstar79 on June 14, 2007 at 10:15 pm
As an estranged Catholic, I can tell you, stuff like this is one of the reasons I left and turned to Deism. If the money shortage significantly dries up Amnesty International, it will hurt a lot more people. But they don't think of that do they? My friend goes to the reformed catholic church (www.reformedcatholicchurch.org) and they are much better (for a church :)) But they are pretty tolerant. If there's any Catholics who are really disgusted by this (as I hope there will be) and they don't want to give up faith entirely, they should all just go to the reformed church! I can tell you though, I've met a lot of liberal Catholics so hopefully they won't listen to this nonsense (I don't know why they stay). And this Church wonders why people are leaving! I'm not a fan of abortion being used as a form of birth control (but I don't get in people's faces over it). But rape, incest, and a woman's life? Cmon, that is totally different........Other Comments by crystalstar79
22. Comment #50081 by BAEOZ on June 14, 2007 at 11:00 pm
Let's play the bait and switch kiddies!First, I'll sound all-caring by saying killing a child is bad. No one could disagree with me now could they? Those sweet little cherubs must be protected. A nice bait.
Then, I'll switch and say that a ball of cells called a zygote, later an embryo is the same as a child. An almost undeveloped lump of cells is a viable, squawking cherub.
If I'm quick and sound pious, people will agree with me, and not know why they feel a little confused by me deception......
It's good to be the Emperor. Sorry, cardinal. Now where are my clothes?
Other Comments by BAEOZ
23. Comment #50082 by pewkatchoo on June 14, 2007 at 11:27 pm
The problem is that the catholic church has limitless buckets of cash. They don't even need rich followers any more as they are self-sustaining. They will be there until the day when we get totally fed up of them and physically tear down the whole stinking edifice. Other Comments by pewkatchoo
24. Comment #50085 by Logicel on June 15, 2007 at 12:29 am
The useless guys at the Vatican seem to be yapping more and more lately. Wonder why?Do protesters ever circle the Vatican with signs describing the hypocrisy and evil of the Vatican? If not, then it is needed to be done.
Apparently, the church coffers are getting a bit of a hit from the lawsuits pertaining to the child sexual abuse scandals.
Other Comments by Logicel
25. Comment #50087 by NJS on June 15, 2007 at 1:30 am
Aside from abortion, AI campaigns against human rights abuse worldwide. When was the last time the vatican spoke up against despicable regimes? How many of these regimes, especially in Central and South America operate with the tacit and beyond co-operation of the catholic church?Hypocritical institutionalised evil.
Other Comments by NJS
26. Comment #50090 by rokort on June 15, 2007 at 2:20 am
Allmost all superlatives for the immeasurably ignorant statement by this cardinal have been used here, and rightly so. Any sane person would condemn the aggressor, not the victim. But then again, this club of emptyheads called Church knows best how to rape and get away with it, showing for the umpteenth time they don't care anything about women or kids.I think it's time the UN charges the Vatican for obstructing peace. How many more lives we tolerate to be wasted by these child molesters?
Other Comments by rokort
27. Comment #50095 by DavidMcC on June 15, 2007 at 3:00 am
So, the Vatican is ganging up with rapists to make the innocent suffer in order to follow their own logic ad absurdam! Why am I not surprised? Other Comments by DavidMcC
28. Comment #50096 by Henri Bergson on June 15, 2007 at 3:11 am
This is pure comedy: two delusional institutions fighting each other for the moral high ground!Amnesty's beliefs, just like Catholicism, cannot be proved or verified. They are both faiths. Amnesty is not allowed - by the courts of Britain - charity status as it is considered a political creed.
Other Comments by Henri Bergson
29. Comment #50098 by Logicel on June 15, 2007 at 4:12 am
For those who are interested in an overview of AI and also the criticism directed at it, Wikipedia has a fairly comprehensive article:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amnesty_international
Other Comments by Logicel
30. Comment #50099 by Sargeist on June 15, 2007 at 4:31 am
I know that the topic of abortion can be *really* REALLY controversial and over at Pharyngula there were getting on for 400 comments about a very short post that PZ Myers did recently, so I shall try hard to avoid setting off a Rant Bomb here.The Catholic Church's position often baffles me on their opposition to abortion. As a previous commenter stated, the Commandments about various topics would appear to have loopholes built in, as demonstrated the Ye Olde Testament. "Thou Shalt Not Kill/Murder" obviously didn't apply to the various -ites that Moses et al were ordered to annihilate, and it no doubt did not apply to the Cathars or people such as Giordano Bruno whom the Church was so pleasant to.
Given, then, that there are always exceptions, I cannot understand why the Catholics are so intransigent about this topic. I tried to have a conversation about this with a Catholic friend of my girlfriend last Saturday. She was taking the position that the soul enters the zygote at the point of conception, which I mentioned was different from Augustine's views on the subject (I hope I was right about that).
So I assumed that the problem with the killing of the zygote was the fact that it has a soul. If there was no soul, there would presumably not be a problem. "What happens," I asked her, "in the case of identical twins?" Was there one soul, and then two? Did God know in advance that the zygote would split, so he had a soul standing by? If so, why not simply "know in advance" that it would be aborted at 12 weeks, and not bother putting a soul in? What about all the pregnancies that spontaneously abort? Something like a third of them do (hmm, need a reference!).
Now, I know that the response to the last point could be "well, god wanted that pregnancy to abort itself because he had a Secret Purpose behind it", which may well be consistent, I suppose. But if the issue is the killing of innocents, and if god would want to avoid causing misery to innocent souls, it seems terribly unfair in this theology to damn both mother and zygote for the mother's actions.
Lastly, cos I have rambled on, I was reminded of the Irish girl who was recently having to fight to be allowed to go abroad for the permission to abort her foetus. Her *anencephalic* foetus. How could anyone, with whatever religious or ethical system, possibly have *any* objection to removing something that didn't even have a brain?
Oh, for G-d's sake, they wind me up!
Other Comments by Sargeist
31. Comment #50100 by Hugo on June 15, 2007 at 4:52 am
I made sure that my donation to AI mentioned my opposition to the vatican's stance on abortion.http://web.amnesty.org/pages/donate_now
Other Comments by Hugo
32. Comment #50107 by BAEOZ on June 15, 2007 at 5:21 am
well, god wanted that pregnancy to abort itself because he had a Secret Purpose behind it",I can only think of J's post recently on Wee Flea's site. About playing the Christian football team. God is omnibenevolent, but when something bad happens, we can't question faith in him, we just say that isn't an own goal as we the lord works in mysterious ways. Oh, getting all Spanish Inquisition here, I can think of 2 responses! First J's and RD's comment in the GD about god being the biggest abortionist out. Oh wait, I can think of 3. 3 comments! Monty Python raised me, what can I say?
Other Comments by BAEOZ
33. Comment #50110 by phasmagigas on June 15, 2007 at 5:27 am
I wonder how many women find themselves not only pregnant after a rape but also HIV positive? Its amazing that the vatican can sit on their well fed behinds free from any suffering and condemn a woman in the worst possible scenario that a human can find themselves in. I can visualise the empty chatter, the plates of uneaten food, the chastisement, the extravagent process of robing, the plush warm rooms, I can also visualise the makeshift home, calories for the day, mental and physical injuries, little medical help, desparation and fear and i just wonder who the hell those rancid decaying old men think they are.Its almost like those flaccid minds (and bodies) gleefully rejoice in the suffering of a woman and subsequently a child born of rape, but their imposition upon the lives of somebdy 1000's of miles away (and a few words by the vatican alters what millions immediately think-how does, how can that happen??????)must somehow satisfy their desire for ultimate status, which is somehow tied in with sexual domination, its ironic how our evolutionary past (which they probably reject) is what fuels their desire for elevated status and sexual command over people.
I can almost see the vatican patting the back of the rapist and congratulating him on his 'good work, keeping all those woman in order'. Its the same mentality, status and sex.
Other Comments by phasmagigas
34. Comment #50111 by BAEOZ on June 15, 2007 at 5:33 am
i just wonder who the hell those rancid decaying old men think they are.
Sunt princepes ecclesiae. Sunt viri stulti.
Other Comments by BAEOZ
35. Comment #50115 by Luthien on June 15, 2007 at 5:54 am
This is the result of the Catholic Church's lobbying in Nicaragua:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6161396.stm
A ban on abortions even when the woman's life is at risk. Sick!
I think Amnesty International should open a file on the Catholic Church's human rights abuses!
Other Comments by Luthien
36. Comment #50116 by konquererz on June 15, 2007 at 6:00 am
This is the PERFECT example of how "well intention" religious morality is still harmful. Ignorance is always able to harm someone some how. Now, religious morality stands opposed to a group that has done, verifiable, allot of good in the world today, more so than any church or child-molesting priest. This type of crap is exactly why religion is dangerous and why Hitch, Dawkins, Harris, and Dennet are getting so much public face time. People are starting to get sick of this disgusting display of "morality". But its good that its getting exposed. Even the "moderate" religion heads end up backing sickening displays like this. That is why Harris is right, all religion is bad because it has the potential to be so horrible.
Other Comments by konquererz
37. Comment #50120 by SharrieG on June 15, 2007 at 6:22 am
konquererz says:Even the "moderate" religion heads end up backing sickening displays like this.
No, we don't. I think this is appalling.
Firstly, Amnesty do fantastic work, and to single out one thing you don't agree with and thereby write off the whole organisation is disgraceful.
Secondly, why should the cardinal be telling people who they should and shouldn't donate to?
And thirdly, the debate is much more than a black and white 'abortion is wrong' matter. We're talking about women in desperate need here - they MUST at least be given the choice. To deny them that is, I think, abusive.
Incidentally, I know that a fair number of churches, including the denomination I belong to, actually support a woman's right to an abortion in a case like this - and even where they would officially believe abortion to be wrong, they agree with the individual's right to choose and they support that. So please don't say that all religious people will back this; I assure you that there will be many who protest against it.
Other Comments by SharrieG
38. Comment #50122 by Sargeist on June 15, 2007 at 6:40 am
The point made about women ending up HIV positive after being raped brought to mind a question that I was musing over recently: I seem to have got it into my mind that "the Church" believes that HIV is a punishment from God sent to those who have sinned sexually (usually homosexual behaviour between men). I think that Hitchens says something about it in his book, which I own but have not yet done more than skim through. And an annoying Catholic I know at work has said a similar thing to me (which set me off on a major Rant Bomb).But... is this actually an official(ish) Church attitude? Has it been even intimated by high up people in any major church that this really is some kind of sin punishment?
Other Comments by Sargeist
39. Comment #50127 by SharrieG on June 15, 2007 at 7:18 am
But... is this actually an official(ish) Church attitude? Has it been even intimated by high up people in any major church that this really is some kind of sin punishment?
Not in any church I've ever been involved in... although I guess some of the whackier ones might think like this... unfortunately it tends to be though, that the kind of people who think like this, are the kind of people who shout the loudest.
And I can't speak for American churches; I suspect attitudes there may be different.
Other Comments by SharrieG
40. Comment #50134 by Sargeist on June 15, 2007 at 7:54 am
Thanks, Sharrie, for being a voice of sense in a sea of lunacy :)I tend to oscillate wildly between loathing religion utterly and finding that there is some faint "it doesn't really matter" attribute about it. Of course, I think it's all nonsense, but when it has become pretty much a vague philosophical deism like Martin Gardner had, then it doesn't bother me too much.
However, when someone at work says that HIV is a punishment for sin, specifically sexual sin, and when I say "but I thought one could repent of sins and be forgiven, so how come people don't suddenly get cured of AIDS when they confess and repent?" and it leads to no considered answer but a fobbing off, then it really does bother me.
On the subject of contraception, why why why is the Catholic Church so annoyed by it? If god is all that clever, he'd just organise it so that contraception never worked.
We'd be there in our labs trying really hard to work out just why it is that the latex really ought to stop things as small as sperm from getting through. And we'd test it with all sorts of inorganic things, and show that, yes, indeed it is working well, but for some bloody reason it seems to be transparent to sperm. And we'd keep testing, and it would just be a "natural law". It would be odd, but if it were reproducible then that would just be the way it was.
Religious people often annoy me with their "well, that would just be silly" attitude. Like when I said that god could stop people from being murdered by psychopaths if He made, for instance, bullets always miss when their targets were "innocent", I was told "so, you mean god should just turn the bullets into flowers or something?" I said, "Yes, why not?" Once again, if we could investigate it scientifically, and just simply find out, reproducibly, that there was something "special" about humans that meant the universe had its own laws about us, well it would definitely seem odd to us now, but if were true, well it would just be true.
Hmm, another long post. Sorry
Other Comments by Sargeist
41. Comment #50146 by Diplo on June 15, 2007 at 8:59 am
Hopefully this will cause Catholic AI members to realise what a inflexible, dogmatic organisation the Catholic Church is and how it cares far more about upholding superstitious, archaic doctrine than it does about people. Other Comments by Diplo
42. Comment #50148 by phasmagigas on June 15, 2007 at 9:09 am
sargeist.What you have come against is that inconsistent rationalisation that believers use. They can rationalise ANYTHING to accept belief but will reject any similar 'rationalising' that goes against it. The problem is its VERY easy to rationalise as you know and anybody can do it. The reason bullets didnt turn into flowers is because the man who was to die obviously had found his time at gods side, from his original plan, oh or was it perhaps that god doesnt show such vulgar obvious 'miracles' as that would be too obvious a showing of his prescence (and so ensure belief is on faith and not evidence). You and i both could make up rationalisations for ever.
Its an interesting althogh totally dishonest party game, if you babble believer nonesense at a party (stuff you just make up) its incredible how many people will nod and agree even though you just made it up, I think this would make an excellent documentary, just seeing what people will believe. I'd like to see somebody feigning being an evolutionist who didnt know anything about it for more than a few seconds.
Other Comments by phasmagigas
43. Comment #50158 by Blue Lithium on June 15, 2007 at 11:01 am
The Cardnal wrote: "How can we say that killing a child in some cases is good and in other cases it is evil?"--This sums up a lot of religious people's mentality for me. It's either "Right" or it's "wrong". Nothing ever seems to be neutral, or a nesarcary evil.
Sargeist wrote: "But... is this actually an official(ish) Church attitude? Has it been even intimated by high up people in any major church that [HIV] really is some kind of sin punishment?"
Jerry Falwell(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_falwell) says this:
"AIDS is not just God's punishment for homosexuals, it is God's punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals."
It's cited in The God Delusion, pg 289.
Falwell was a fairly influential member of the church.
I believe people like Fred Phelps have said such things too, though he hardly counts as "high up in a major church".
Other Comments by Blue Lithium
44. Comment #50166 by SharrieG on June 15, 2007 at 11:59 am
sargeist:Thanks, Sharrie, for being a voice of sense in a sea of lunacy :)
You're welcome. Any time. As a bonus, I can do lunacy too.
If there's one good thing that The God Delusion has done, it is that it has shaken up the church a bit and made the less vocal people sit up and say 'is that really how people see us?'. On this site as well, I'm amazed at some of the things that people seem to think are representative of Christianity. I'm not sure that Dawkins did a terribly good job of representing the range of opinions, but at least it gave Christians an idea of some of the things people think of when they hear religion.... a lot of it is misrepresented.
However, when someone at work says that HIV is a punishment for sin, specifically sexual sin, and when I say "but I thought one could repent of sins and be forgiven, so how come people don't suddenly get cured of AIDS when they confess and repent?" and it leads to no considered answer but a fobbing off, then it really does bother me.
Some people just refuse to think. It really bothers me too. Stupid, dangerous attitude; I suspect though, that they like the fact that it makes them feel better about themselves ('I don't have AIDS therefore God must like me' or something along those lines). In fact, I suspect that a lot of people who go to church do so for that reason, rather than because they actually believe it. I'm in two minds whether to argue that the fall off in church attendance lately has actually been a good thing - a lot of those who have left were those who used the church to get power, status whatever.... getting them out might be a good thing in the long run.
On the subject of contraception, why why why is the Catholic Church so annoyed by it?
Dunno. There is some kind of 'theological' reason that they give, but I've never understood it. It's in danger of becoming a dogma now though; yet it has caused so much that's bad: spread of diseases, unwanted pregnancy, poverty as a result of huge families, that kind of thing... but like I say, I don't know their reasons. Likewise, the 'no sex before marriage' programs... nice idea, but you have to make sure that teenagers are educated to make a choice, not just talk a lot and hope they do what you say. I prefer to support programs that educate people in contraception and stuff that's going to help them, though, rather than wasting time arguing.
Other Comments by SharrieG
45. Comment #50175 by RabbitDynamite on June 15, 2007 at 1:34 pm
On the subject of contraception, why why why is the Catholic Church so annoyed by it?
I can field this one. basically, it's a two pronged thing. Firstly, Catholic theologians believe that everything in the world was made by God in order to serve part of His "ultimate plan". If we help that plan, it's good, if we hinder it, that bad. According to Catholics, we can tell the purpose of the sex organs is for reproduction, so if they're used without reproducing, that's interupting God's vision and bad.
Secondly, one of of the most influential figures in early Christianity was St. Augustine of Hippo (no, I didn't make that up). He was a lovely little chap who said that God knew that some people were inevitably going to hell, but that all humans are utterly evil and so we should be thankful for God for saving some of us, 'cause we don't deserve it. He also held that sexual pleasure was a creation of the devil, and should be tterly avoided except where it was an unavoidable side effect of making babies. At the time, there was another theologian, a Briton named Pelagius, who claimed sexual pleasure was actually a gift from God and we were free to save our own souls. Augustine won, Pelagius lost. Augustine didn't create the anti-sex atitude in Christianity, but he did make it utterly dominant, the fact it's still such a strong vibe today is probably attributable to him. With Contraception, we are indulging in the Devil's creation of sexual pleasure without baby making.
So there you have it, Catholics view a spreading AIDS epidemic as morally preferable to rubber sheats because it's interfering with God's vision (the "God as a petulant artist" view) and is because an early war of religious ideas was won by a nasty, pessimistic self-righteous hellmonger...sigh.
Other Comments by RabbitDynamite
46. Comment #50177 by Dr Benway on June 15, 2007 at 2:06 pm
SharrieG:If there's one good thing that The God Delusion has done, it is that it has shaken up the church a bit and made the less vocal people sit up and say 'is that really how people see us?'Tell the folks in your church the atheists recognize the difference between the fundies and the moderates. You guys are much cooler. I would be happy to invite you over for tea.
Nonetheless, I must criticize you lot for this: you speak of faith as you speak of puppies, butterflies, newborn babies, and warm summer days. Sure, it all seems like fun and games... until someone loses an eye.
The world needs you moderates to set clear limits upon faith, or belief without evidence. It's not difficult. You can keep your Sunday services, lovely buildings, music, and stained glass. You can use the word faith to mean optimism. You only have to lose the notion that people are justified in believing any nonsense they want by "faith."
Speak of a faith in God's goodness, or life's goodness, or the notion that things will work out for the best. But denounce over-confident, over-literal statements about the mind of God as hubris. Say, "faith must not outrage reason" or "we see through a glass darkly" or "any belief without evidence must be tentative and subject to doubt."
I have no problem with speaking of "a faith" to refer to a group of like-minded worshippers. I'm fine with using faith to mean keeping a positive outlook, as when a religious person might tell a sick friend to "keep faith in God." I'm specifically opposed to faith in the narrow sense of "belief without evidence," particularly when that belief translates into political actions that hurt people.
Please have a talk with your moderate friends and ask them to stop bashing the atheists. Explain that we, like you, simply don't want the nutters to bother us.
Other Comments by Dr Benway
47. Comment #50179 by kev_s on June 15, 2007 at 2:40 pm
Sargeist, you may be interested in this story:http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/panorama/3844945.stm
that investigated the Vatican's claim that there is scientific evidence AIDS can pass through condoms.
There is quite a handy summary of scientific evidence refuting the Vatican's claim.
Other Comments by kev_s
48. Comment #50203 by crystalstar79 on June 15, 2007 at 4:51 pm
Wow Dr. Benway-that was freakin brilliant! :)Other Comments by crystalstar79
49. Comment #50210 by Russell Blackford on June 15, 2007 at 5:57 pm
Okay, I can see that some people here are not familiar with the monstrosity known as Humanae Vitae, the key Vatican document that provides the rationale for much of the cruel morality of contemporary Catholicism. It is a must-read work for anyone seriously interested in understanding how the Vatican folks think, however distasteful (or possibly just boring) you might find it.So, go here:
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html
Other Comments by Russell Blackford
50. Comment #50265 by SharrieG on June 16, 2007 at 6:05 am
Dr Benway, I'd be happy to come for tea any time. Heck, you can come to me too. I make really good cookies. crystalstar79 can come as well.I will do my best to stop the moderates bothering you, and can only apologise for the limits of my sphere of influence.
In all seriousness, though, it makes me mad when the fundies claim to speak for all Christians. It also drives me mad when atheists say that they want to stamp out all religion, because they don't see beyond the fundies.
I've had my share of bashing from the fundies too; being told I was going to Hell for not believing in 6-day creation. Some people are just too insecure; they need everyone to agree with them in order to feel ok about themselves.
Much better to discuss it all over a nice cup of tea.
Other Comments by SharrieG
Comment Entry: Please Login
Register a new account
Upcoming Events:
DVDs
'The Genius of Charles Darwin: The Uncut Interviews' DVD
'The Genius of Charles Darwin' DVD
'The Enemies of Reason: The Uncut Interviews' DVD
'Richard Dawkins: Appearances & Events 2007-2008' DVD
'Enemies of Reason' DVD
'Root of All Evil?' DVD
'Root of All Evil? The Uncut Interviews' DVD
'Growing Up in the Universe' DVD
'Voices of Science' DVD
'The Four Horsemen' DVD
'Break the Science Barrier' DVD
1. Comment #50000 by rnewson on June 14, 2007 at 1:40 pm
Ignoring the distinction between a zygote and a child is, of course, deliberate. I guess part of its purpose is to distract from the truly offensive opinion that rape victims should be forced to carry to term.
Once again the Vatican proves that we don't get our morality or our compassion from Scripture.
Other Comments by rnewson