In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 1984
Online now 1846 Record: 18710 (2/25/2012)
We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.
Where the madness isn't just in March.
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Dude. I am a Catholic and a religious one at that. I would like to see them change their official stances on things like contraception, especially in third world countries. They have a lot of influence there and a change in position would improve things greatly.
Yep. It'd be a lot easier to treat the church as a non-political entity if they didn't meddle in politics constantly...
I'm hoping the next pope will finally come to terms with the whole birth control situation. It's not a big deal in the US, but people are spreading AIDS like crazy in Africa because the Catholic Church doesn't approve using condoms.
Also, I hope the next guy doesn't systematically cover for child rapists. That'd be good too.
Also, obligatory joke:
"The economy is so bad that even god is laying people off."
This post was edited by ramssuperbowl99 14 months ago
I don't think anyone considered it a real possibility. As I said early in the thread, it's been almost 600 years since the last time a Pope resigned. The Pope had said in an interview (a couple years ago, I believe) he'd be open to considering resigning, but I don't think anyone within the Church made much thought of it.
I would be ok with that. Way too many welfare gatherers in Mexico.
Yes they should just change their stance on these things, like a political party trying to stay relevant. I mean it's not like their position is based on anything, it's completely arbitrary. They should get Gallup to conduct a poll and base the positions of the Church on the results of the polls on various issues.
If you can point me to what part of the bible says "thou shalt not wear condoms," I'd greatly appreciate it.
Seriously though, it's not like the church has never changed its official stance on things. The Catholic church (as a whole) has to adapt and negotiate new territories all the time, areas that the original writers of the Bible could never have foreseen.
No way do they go more tolerant. I mean, new guy might be less Hitler Youth but there are laws and rules that will never be changed. JP 2 was a softer, mellower pope but it's not like the church's views ever changed on things like homosexuality, abortion, birth control... etc
Hopefully the new guy will take the sexual misconduct stuff a little more seriously though. They need to find out why these boys are suddenly finding it necessary to report that they're being molested. Clearly just telling them not to tell anyone is no longer working.
I think the Rooney rule should be in effect. When was the last time we had a black Pope?
You guys do realize that almost every kid growing up in Hitler era Germany was a Hitler youth, right?
Christianity frowns on sex outside of marriage, and argues that sex inside of marriage a condom wouldn't be necessary. That contraception being made available only encourages fornication and thus sin. I am sure the church wouldn't be so much against married couples using condoms, but we all know that the vast if not nearly all condoms and other contraception are intended for casual sex or at least sex outside if marriage. That is why the church doesn't support it, because it believes it shouldn't be necessary in the first place.
• A much higher proportion of married than of never-married women use a contraceptive method (79% vs. 39%). This is largely because married women are more likely to be sexually active. But even among those at risk of unintended pregnancy, contraceptive use is higher among currently married women than among never-married women (93% vs. 82%).
You could not be further from the truth.
As for the church's 'solution', Natural Family Planning:
• Only 2% of at-risk Catholic women rely on natural family planning; the proportion is the same even among those women who attend church once a month or more.
The church doesn't have to change their stance on anything, but they risk further reduced influence and membership. Already in Europe christianity and catholicism is well into its decline phase, and the US isn't that far behind. If the church wants to take a hard stance on contraception, that's fine - it will just make them irrelevant faster.
Foresaking the religious beliefs and tenets of Christianity to increase church enrollment is pointless.
Also those stats seen rather suspect, and men are the ones that use condoms anyway.
Then people won't show up. And the pope won't have anyone to pay for that funny gold hat of his.
And, if you're wondering, the church considers condom use, in or out of marriage, as a mortal sin.
I hadn't been to a Catholic service in a while til last week and a bunch of the Eucharistic wording changed. It pissed me off. Tradition is not to be messed with
It would be far more humane of them to make this change. Not politics, its just logic.
This is the direction I would like to see my church go in. No one is asking you to agree with my opinion.
Believing in Jesus is a "religious belief". Banning condoms for married couples is a policy and a pretty shortsighted one
Unless your goal is to have more people following you, then forcing your members to spit out kids like sunflower seeds makes more sense.
It's been I characteristically cold in Rome. Germans + Cold....= see ya.
Meh who cares
Steve Spurrier is a God, and Mark Richt worships him
Can he use the forever stamps to mail his LOR to god or does he have to pay current postage rates
Well not believing in Jesus is the cool thing these days, and clearly the trends are that less people will be believing in him in the future. So maybe the Church should be a trendsetter and denounce Jesus so it could be more relevant and contemporary. Gotta keep up with the times.
Ignoring the obvious facetiousness of that statement, what exactly bothers you so much about change? You said once in a thread you missed the way America was in the 1950's (another topic obviously). What is so wrong with progressing and adapting and evolving?
Never said that, not once.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports