PDA

View Full Version : Condoms and the pope



Happy Harry
22-11-2010, 09:03 PM
I see in the news that pope Benedict has made a small concession to the use of condoms. What is it about the pope and his advisors (the cardinals) that has them so far removed from the reality’s of modern man.
I am an atheist and while I do have respect for most christians and their religious dedication , I find the cynicism and contempt that most church hierarchy have of their followers makes a mockery of their religion.
I have a friend who is a strong christian and we frequently have lively debates.
Our ongoing talks on evolution or god creating the world, is always interesting
If you don’t believe in evolution, but believe that god created the world, then surely you have to believe that some other entity created god and then of course who/what created the entity who created god?
Then of course the next step. If god created the world and everything in it, then god created evil, embodied in the form of satan! Why would a god do that?
So the oft quoted “god is all-knowing, all-powerful and all-good” can be shown to be wrong in so many ways, to me proves my argument.
There is no god.

Snorkbox
22-11-2010, 11:05 PM
I would suggest you carry on your debate with your friend. It has already been held here and nobody has won yet. :-)

ubergeek85
22-11-2010, 11:18 PM
Some people have explained the whole 'god created evil' thing to me as simply god giving angels free will, and one angels free choice to turn evil. One POV I guess.

As for the pope and rubbers, I found this (http://www.badscience.net/2010/09/the-pope-and-aids/) a good read.

Roscoe
23-11-2010, 09:02 AM
I have no desire to start a god/no god debate but I was interested to hear an opinion concerning the argument that humans evolved from something or other.

The opinion said that if all humans disappeared from the earth and then some aliens landed, had a look around at the buildings left behind and concluded that no one designed the buildings, they "just evolved" would, of course, be silly. Although the aliens had no idea how these buildings were made, they were not silly enough to think that they just happened - they could see that the buildings were designed and that someone built them. They just did not know who, how or why.

The opinion continued that although we do not know who, how or why, it is obvious that the human body did not just evolve but has been designed and built to a plan. It is as obvious as designing and constructing a building. Besides, if the human body did evolve, why is it still not evolving?

The question remains: who or what designed the human body? Will we ever find out?

xyz823
23-11-2010, 09:18 AM
I have no desire to start a god/no god debate but I was interested to hear an opinion concerning the argument that humans evolved from something or other.

The opinion said that if all humans disappeared from the earth and then some aliens landed, had a look around at the buildings left behind and concluded that no one designed the buildings, they "just evolved" would, of course, be silly. Although the aliens had no idea how these buildings were made, they were not silly enough to think that they just happened - they could see that the buildings were designed and that someone built them. They just did not know who, how or why.

Buildings are inanimate objects. Unlike buildings, humans have the ability to grow and change.

Roscoe
23-11-2010, 09:30 AM
Buildings are inanimate objects. Unlike buildings, humans have the ability to grow and change.

The argument was not as to whether they were inanimate or not but whether or not the human body was designed.

xyz823
23-11-2010, 09:34 AM
The argument was not as to whether they were inanimate or not but whether or not the human body was designed.

Gotcha, I think I read too much into it and got myself confused.

Roscoe
23-11-2010, 09:40 AM
It is an interesting thought, though. The human body, as you know, is very complex and each part depends on another part. It does seem that it was designed. Hard to imagine that it evolved. But how do you solve the question of who, how and why? Perhaps we need a time machine to travel back to see how it happened?

mikebartnz
23-11-2010, 11:07 AM
The opinion continued that although we do not know who, how or why, it is obvious that the human body did not just evolve but has been designed and built to a plan. It is as obvious as designing and constructing a building. Besides, if the human body did evolve, why is it still not evolving?
Do you really expect to see major changes in the human body over a few years?
It has been evolving slowly but will only do so when occasion forces it to. Every time there is a major disease we evolve slightly.
It could be said now that the human race is getting weaker and weaker as doctors manage to keep alive people that would have died not so very long ago and so end that run of bad genes.
As Happy Harry said if God created man then who or what created God and on and on.

CyberHubHost
23-11-2010, 11:25 AM
These sort of discussions are always very interesting and I personally really enjoy them (many don't). I happen to be a Christian so a creationist by default. From my study there are a great many questions I have for both sides of the argument.

However I have come to the conclusion that you require faith for both sides of the argument as there is quite a lot of information missing. I believe the conclusion that you require more faith for is to believe in the theory of evolution. Let me explain.

Did you know that scientists do not have an example of a genetic mutation that adds information to a viable genome (not even one that I have found). Even our friend Mr Dawkins could not answer the question http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WoXzF9zDy_k&playnext=1&list=PL78C9E8F70E7C7B49&index=17

This is the very thing that the Theory of Evolution pivots on, mutations increasing information in DNA. In Science you are meant to be able to test and measure and then retest just to make sure that you are right. Well with the Theory of Evolution they seem to just make stuff up to fit their paradigm with no real hard evidence. Please if you know of an mutation that results in an increase of genetic information in a viable organism please add it to the comments below, I will be interested in finding out.

Here is an interesting website. The evolution of man scientifically disproved http://ldolphin.org/wmwilliams.html

It seems to me that the pushers of evolution have done very well good job at making sure that this theory which in many peoples opinion is not an accurate depiction of what happened taught in schools as a fact. At the same time as teaching people potentially misleading information they behave more like followers of a cult where any other ideas are immediately rubbished, even when there is much evidence to prove their truth.

Anyway, a few ideas to add to this conversation :)

Gobe1
23-11-2010, 11:35 AM
And over 90% of all people on the planet believe in some form of deity, so are the less than 10% suffering from something else? Some form of mass delusion (i think is the term)

Scenario:
You believe in God: He exists
You die = excellent

You dont believe in God: He exists
You die = Bummer

You believe in God: He doesnt exist
You die = Bummer

You dont believe in God: He doesnt exists
You die = Bummer

Pretty simple really

mikebartnz
23-11-2010, 11:57 AM
It seems to me that the pushers of evolution have done very well good job at making sure that this theory which in many peoples opinion is not an accurate depiction of what happened taught in schools as a fact. At the same time as teaching people potentially misleading information they behave more like followers of a cult where any other ideas are immediately rubbished, even when there is much evidence to prove their truth.

Anyway, a few ideas to add to this conversation :)
The trouble is there is no hard evidence to prove the truth of God.

I will never forget the time the SDA came to our place.
My father, I had only ever known to go to church for weddings, funerals and christenings.
They walked in and quoted something out of the bible and off the top of his head he quoted something that contradicted their quote. Well they had to scour the bible to find it and were a little discomforted to find him right. He did it to them three times before they took off with their tail between their legs.
It was interesting that he knew the bible better than those three that were pushing it.

nerd
23-11-2010, 01:19 PM
Sound. It proves god doesn't exist, who would ever think of making up sound?

Cicero
23-11-2010, 01:37 PM
Someone who has considered the question at length,scientifically
http://richarddawkins.net/

None of this I can't understand how it works,so something must have designed it rubbish.

Winston001
23-11-2010, 03:14 PM
The Roman Catholic Church believes that the procreation of new life (children) is utterly sacred and any artificial barrier to conception is unnatural.

Cynics say this theology is rooted in the Church's drive to increase its members.

ubergeek85
23-11-2010, 03:25 PM
So, not having sex is a bad thing in Catholicism? I knew it was always one of the best versions of Christianity!

Cicero
23-11-2010, 03:58 PM
I am sure the top lads,pope etc know as well as I do that it is a fraud, but clearly it is in their interest to say otherwise.

The masses are unable to consider life without some assurance of something bigger.

Which is easier, consider the science of the matter, or just believe and belong to a nice group that thinks the same?

mikebartnz
23-11-2010, 04:23 PM
I am sure the top lads,pope etc know as well as I do that it is a fraud, but clearly it is in their interest to say otherwise.

The masses are unable to consider life without some assurance of something bigger.

Which is easier, consider the science of the matter, or just believe and belong to a nice group that thinks the same?
I read a book (can't remember the title) about the Vatican once that paid special attention to the Vatican Treasury and it was a real eye opener especially the bit where they had invested in a condom factory.
I have always thought of religion as a psychological crutch.

Paul.Cov
23-11-2010, 09:13 PM
Back to the original topic...

I also reckon this new stance is one of self preservation.
There are so many catholic priests rodgering other males that AIDS could become a concern for the church's own survival, so Benedict has essentially given up on asking his gay comrades to be abstinate, and he's giving them the green light to rodger away in the relative safety of a latex sheath.

But as for the rest of the straight world, he doesn't care about the risks we may face - we have to take our chances... after all, someone has to breed more kids to become cardinals, priests and alterboys for their consumption.

Cicero
23-11-2010, 09:30 PM
Back to the original topic...

I also reckon this new stance is one of self preservation.
There are so many catholic priests rodgering other males that AIDS could become a concern for the church's own survival, so Benedict has essentially given up on asking his gay comrades to be abstinate, and he's giving them the green light to rodger away in the relative safety of a latex sheath.

But as for the rest of the straight world, he doesn't care about the risks we may face - we have to take our chances... after all, someone has to breed more kids to become cardinals, priests and alterboys for their consumption.

Surely with that conclusion, there has to be a god.