The Catholic Church Sucks!

[sugaredwalls]

They should be ashamed of themselves:

The Catholic Church in Washington, D.C. has issued an ultimatum to the District's city council: approve same-sex marriage, and the Church will stop serving the city's disadvantaged, including the homeless.

Guess that Catholic Church commitment to the poor is only skin deep. For the Catholic Church to threaten the lives of homeless people and others who depend on church social services just to gain political points on the issue of gay marriage is sad, sorry, and a sign that no religious instutition in the country is willing to stand in the way of civil rights for gays and lesbians more than the Catholic Church.

The temper tantrum being thrown by the D.C. Church is being portrayed as a direct threat to the Washington, D.C. City Council. Listen to us, the church says, or we'll throw this city's poor and homeless in front of the closest Metro train.

Susan Gibbs, a spokesperson for the Archdiocese of Washington, told the Post yesterday that the Church isn't playing around here, and that they really will stop serving the poor and helping kids if gay marriage goes through in the District.

"If the city requires [gay marriage], we can't do it," said Gibbs. "The city is saying in order to provide social services, you need to be secular. For us, that's really a problem."

But the city isn't saying anything about being secular. The same-sex marriage law before the D.C. City Council does not force the Catholic Church to hold gay marriages in their churches and cathedrals. It doesn't force Catholic priests to officiate gay weddings. The institutional Catholic Church doesn't have to change one iota of its homophobic identity if D.C. passes gay marriage.

But instead of accepting that fact, the Church is willing to blackmail D.C. city council folks by threatening to pull the plug on social services that serve upwards of 68,000 people in the District, including at least one third of the city's homeless population.

Guess that begs the question: did the Church really care about homeless people in D.C. in the first place, if they're willing to sell them out in order to peddle discrimination against gays and lesbians?

D.C. City Council member Mary Cheh perhaps said in best in the article that appeared in the Post.

"[Is the Church] really going to harm people because they have a philosophical disagreement with us on one issue?" Cheh asked.

The answer appears to be yes.

Another example of the so called "Christian values". They make me ill. http://www.barbandgreg.com/images/Emoticons/puke.gif

 

[Etoile]

They recently won a "Good Neighbor Award" too. I hope it gets taken back.

 

[none2_none2]

The thing that gets me about this is that they receive public money and they are tax exempt, yet they can get involved with politics. If they want to set themselves apart from the secular world
that is fine, but render unto Washington those things that are Washtington's -- those $$$'s that they receive and don't pay tax on.

I'm also shocked that they would rather not feed the hungry or care for the poor for fear of gay marriage. Perhaps they should make the following changes to the bible: "Take up your cross and follow Jesus -- unless of course that cross has been handled by a homosexual -- then you are off the hook -- or more appropriately off the nail."

I was googling on this topic, and I did read that Massachusetts' Catholic Charities did stop adoption & foster care work in that state. However, they didn't stop other programs for the poor. So some of this DC issue could be local Catholic politics since the message isn't consistent across the country.

I would like to know the official policy on such situations as it relates to heterosexual marriage in the Catholic church:

1) A man looses his penis -- ie cancer or an accident.
2) A man looses his testicles -- ie cancer or an accident
3) A man is permanently impotent -- no blue pill special fix.

4) A woman has a hysterectomy.
5) A woman has her ovaries removed -- ie cancer
6) A woman has cervical cancer
7) A woman has some vagina issue which makes intercourse painful or nearly impossible..

If it is true that in none of these situations can a person be allowed to marry as the holy spirit would be unable to properly guide a penis into a womb to sprinkle it with holy fluid, then at least we can say they are consistent in their teaching -- no matter how backwards.

 

[none2_none2]

interesting article:

http://www.bostonphoenix.com/boston/news_features/top/features/documents/03702314.asp

"...Catholic legislators — especially those who disagree with the church’s stance on same-sex marriage — insist that they’ve never seen their church push so fiercely or so thoroughly on any previous public-policy debate. Not on social services for the poor. Not on the death penalty. Not even on abortion..."

 

[Vail_Indigo]

On Tonights Episode Of "When Priorities Get Mind-blowingly Out Of Whack"

The Church always has and always will thrive on fear. At the moment, the tool of choice is homosexuality. In earlier times, it was women (and still is, sometimes, just not quite so blatantly).
At the core, its sex, though. Gays and women, to the church, personify this and the church HATES fucking (*insert priests fucking little boys and the church helping them do it joke here*)

 

[Etoile]

On Tonights Episode Of "When Priorities Get Mind-blowingly Out Of Whack"

LOL

In all seriousness, this is so totally fucked up I can't comprehend it. I guess the reasoning is that the homeless people still have to get fed, so the burden will fall on the city (and nonprofits like Bread for the City where my brother-in-law works) as "punishment" for the city having passed the law. But it's far more likely that people will be going hungry, and the only people being "punished" here are the homeless.

Really, really fucking tragic. I hope they reconsider.

 

[Vail_Indigo]

LOL

In all seriousness, this is so totally fucked up I can't comprehend it. I guess the reasoning is that the homeless people still have to get fed, so the burden will fall on the city (and nonprofits like Bread for the City where my brother-in-law works) as "punishment" for the city having passed the law. But it's far more likely that people will be going hungry, and the only people being "punished" here are the homeless.

Really, really fucking tragic. I hope they reconsider.

I can't imagine they will.
The church doesn't care about people anywhere near as much as they care about being 'right'

 

[Etoile]

You know, I think I am going to email my uncle about this. He is a rabid Catholic and maybe he can explain it to me.

 

[Vail_Indigo]

You know, I think I am going to email my uncle about this. He is a rabid Catholic and maybe he can explain it to me.

I'd be interested in what he might say.
I suspect that much of the laity doesn't support this move but maybe thats wishful thinking.
I suspect that the powers that be see this as an issue they can win on.
There's rampant homophobia in our society and they can glom on to all that. Thats much more likely to work out for them than trying to stop abortion, war, or the death penalty.
Its a battle they can win.

 

[none2_none2]

You know, I think I am going to email my uncle about this. He is a rabid Catholic and maybe he can explain it to me.

Oh it is simple. I can answer that. Poor people and hungry people die if they are sprinkled with lavender pixie dust which gay married folk excrete at the molecular level. Until the Church re-formulates holy water to combat this infection, they have no choice but take the actions they are threatening. They are working diligently on this issue. I think they have hired a scientist who is a descendant of Galileo who promises if he finds that the cure is contrary to doctrine, he will deny it. (He doesn't want to wait 400+ years for an apology.)

 

[Vail_Indigo]

Oh it is simple. I can answer that. Poor people and hungry people die if they are sprinkled with lavender pixie dust which gay married folk excrete at the molecular level. Until the Church re-formulates holy water to combat this infection, they have no choice but take the actions they are threatening. They are working diligently on this issue. I think they have hired a scientist who is a descendant of Galileo who promises if he finds that the cure is contrary to doctrine, he will deny it. (He doesn't want to wait 400+ years for an apology.)

Thats actually true. You'd be surprised at how many people I've killed by hugging them when they've skipped a meal.
And I have to stay far away from all other jews on Yom Kippur

 

[none2_none2]

They found that adding Anise seed in holy water seems to make the lavender pixie dust dissolve into a harmless lavender cream that they discovered is a good lubricant to keep church bells tolling.

However, it only works with that dust extruded within the bonds of non-sacred, gay marriages for males. There is no known cure for Lesbianic Lavender Pixie Dust (LLPD) Syndrome. Let us pray that they find a cure before DC is left without any bingo parlors.

 

[chelleb]

and the Catholic church wonders why some who were brought up in the church leave and/or rebel against it as adults.....................

 

[Stella_Omega]

interesting article:

http://www.bostonphoenix.com/boston/news_features/top/features/documents/03702314.asp

"...Catholic legislators — especially those who disagree with the church’s stance on same-sex marriage — insist that they’ve never seen their church push so fiercely or so thoroughly on any previous public-policy debate. Not on social services for the poor. Not on the death penalty. Not even on abortion..."

I've seen them push exactly as fiercely.

I guess it just depends on where you're standing while the parade goes by.

 

[Etoile]

*snorts*

You guys are funny!

My uncle's health is not what it used to be, so I'm not sure how much time he spends online or when he'll reply. He's the author of a major Catholic text (how to convert Jews to Catholicism in 3 easy steps...he was raised Jewish) so he has a LOT of ability to come up with answers to things that have no logical answer.

But still, I'm interested in how he'll answer "is it right for Catholics to deny homeless people food for any reason" and I'll report back.

 

[none2_none2]

As I said in another thread. I think that it is more the people than the institution. If enough Catholics were fed up, then it would change no matter how centuries old the church is. Catholics while very conservative on sexual matters, have always been very liberal on other issues. That trend has changed as they moved more republican over the last decades. The fact that this would become a hotter topic than any other morality issue, is more a sign of just how disgusting the American culture has become than a particular church. Most Americans (including Catholics) tend to be cafeteria followers because they have the independence to want to put on their plate what they like, and leave the other stuff for the next person in line. In the Catholic mind, divorce is wrong, remarriage is a no-no, capital punishment is wrong, birth control is wrong, etc. Yet these things are really put on the back burner because the Joe/Jane Doe in the pew really doesn't agree. Ask yourself: Do you think there are many catholics who think: "Oh gee, I'm going to burn in hell or simmer in purgatory if I use birth control."?

I, like most people, simply tune the churches off when they get on the topic of things such as homosexuality. The feeling I actually experience anymore isn't one of anger or rage as much as pity. I heard a guy with a PhD in microbiology explain how clear and precise John Paul II was on explaining sexuality and why homosexuality was intrinsically disordered. I pitied him because I realized that no matter how many books he had immersed his head into or years of taking exams, he had absolutely no clue about the human experience which includes a wide range of sexuality which had no basis in good or evil, but simply existed. Existed as something without the need to condemn if it didn't match what a "good" Catholic would want to do. Just as we do not need to condemn someone who is left handed.

Yes, as I have said before, if we found our world population dwindling down to just a few hundred or few thousand, then the needs of humanity might at that point outweigh the need for sexual freedom. In such a world we would need to consider what is good for humanity over our own needs. That situation is an extreme remote possibility. However, that should be tempered with the fact that reproduction does not equate with heterosexuality. Plenty of gay people have children with minimal involvement with a person of the opposite gender.

Anyway, I am ashamed of the Catholic Charities in DC. However, I think the fault lies in the people -- not some abstract theology. People CHOOSE what they wish to follow all the time. It is just that many people have no problems condemning that which they would never be tempted to do.