[Newton was celibate. Tesla claimed his celibacy helped him focus. Mendel was, of course celibate as well.
They were also nerds too!
[quote]Sloth wrote:
But have the Criests been forced into celibacy?[/quote]
Like I said, I would only consider it “force” if it were an unnecessary and artificial limitation of their choices that resulted in an unhealthy outcome.
[quote]orion wrote:
Some degree yes, that degree no. [/quote]
So you do support forcing others to pay money against their will. You’re no different than me in principle, the question is where to draw the line.
Helping others is now a “medieval concept”? How quaint. I’m not in favor of handouts to the lazy, but I do believe in teaching others to fish.
[quote]forlife wrote:
Sloth wrote:
But have the Criests been forced into celibacy?
Like I said, I would only consider it “force” if it were an unnecessary and artificial limitation of their choices that resulted in an unhealthy outcome.[/quote]
That’s a non-answer to a rather simple question. And I see you’re starting to throw in some caveats. “I would consider it…” I could consider “hot” to mean “cold”, but I’d be wrong for all intents and purposes. Then, “force” in quotations.
Have they been forced? The only honest answer is, no. Because the Criests know exactly what they’re getting into, and have voluntarily taken the vows. Your reasoning excuses irrational choices.
“I’m going to be a Catholic Priest, who I know take a vow of chastity, lives off a pittance, and serves when and where he is needed. But I plan on marrying and having a family too.” Ok…That’s irrational. Poor decision making. You have employed the wrong means to the wrong end, consciously. That is the fault of the individual.
You do realize that abstaining from a “second best” to achieve a “first best” isn’t in itself force, right? It’s simply a decision. You are championing irrational planning in order to take a pot shot.
Your own bizarre definition of force would mean that if the Church ever caved on celibacy, it will have been the victim of force. They give up the advantages of a singly focused cleric for the approval of forum psychologists. Since they can’t have approval without doing so, they are “FORCED” into it. No, that isn’t force either. It would be a voluntary decision about what ends are more important, and what means can be used to pursue them.
You’ve created a world where people who aren’t given what they want, at the expense of what others want, are victims of force. So everyone is a victim of force, even when real force isn’t employed.
As I pointed out, force isn’t inherently bad. I’m not universally against restricting people’s choices. I’m against unnecessarily restricting people’s choices in a way that results in unhealthy outcomes.
There’s no reason whatsoever why priests should be required to be celibate. Ministers in many other faiths are equally dedicated to their flocks, without needing to deal with the psychological issues of repression and sexual acting out that tend to result from such artificial constraints.
One might even argue that having a wife and children deepens the person’s humanity, and increases his capacity to relate to the other people in his congregation. Most parents will tell you that they are better human beings, by virtue of being parents, than they would be otherwise.
Why does it matter? Do you think it is too harsh on the rapists to call them pedophiles? You’ll get to a point in your life when you realize that 18 and 19 year olds are still children, regardless of how they view themselves.[/quote]
I think they say pedophile to cover up that they are gay. And maybe its because in 22, but I dont see a 18 or 19 y/o as a child. I would have sex with a 18 y/o female the same as I would a 28 or 38 y/o female. And I would fight a 18 y/o guy the same as I would fight a 28 or 38 y/o guy. Its all the same to me.
[quote]forlife wrote:
pat wrote:
Why do you give a fuck? Why don’t you worry about yourself and not everybody else. You aren’t Catholic or a priest so it does not affect you one iota.
For the same reason I give a fuck about any other social issue that doesn’t directly affect me. Life is short, and people are entitled to as much love, happiness, and peace as possible for the time they have. Telling people that they have to be celibate their entire life is all about controlling others, and I pity the people that fall for it.[/quote]
Being a priest is voluntary, nobody is forced. They choose to make the sacrifice. There is no mandate. So don’t worry about what other people choose to do with their lives. It’s none of your damn business. You are not Catholic, Christian, or even a theist. This has absolutely zero to do with you.
Or do you have some control issues where you feel like you have to enforce your brand of happiness others? Most priests like being priests and are willing to make the sacrifice. Their problem not yours. Who are you to dictate how others should live their lives or to dictate what a church you are not a part of does?
They are not lobbying for rights, they are not asking for permission, they are do no harm to anybody.
[quote]clip11 wrote:
I think they say pedophile to cover up that they are gay.[/quote]
WTF, you think it’s more socially acceptable to be a pedophile than to be gay?
[quote]pat wrote:
They are not lobbying for rights, they are not asking for permission, they are do no harm to anybody.[/quote]
Do tell:
[quote]LEADING bishops gathered at the Vatican have suggested that Roman Catholic priests should be allowed to marry as a way of overcoming the shortage of priests.
The question of celibacy, which was suppressed under Pope John Paul II, has come to dominate a three-week synod of more than 250 cardinals and bishops. Cardinal Angelo Scola, the Patriarch of Venice, who is seen as a potential future Pope and is chairing the discussion, raised the issue in the presence of Pope Benedict XVI. Cardinal Scola said that some bishops had “put forward the request to ordain married faithful of proven faith and virtue, the so-called viri probati,” while maintaining his own support for celibacy. There is a shortage of priests, and reformers believe that allowing married priests would help to attract newcomers.[/quote]
Just for flavor, this was posted on CNN an hour ago:
Lutherans consider noncelibate gay clergy
Woot!
[quote]forlife wrote:
Just for flavor, this was posted on CNN an hour ago:
Lutherans consider noncelibate gay clergy
Woot![/quote]
Who gives a shit?
[quote]forlife wrote:
pat wrote:
They are not lobbying for rights, they are not asking for permission, they are do no harm to anybody.
Do tell:
LEADING bishops gathered at the Vatican have suggested that Roman Catholic priests should be allowed to marry as a way of overcoming the shortage of priests.
The question of celibacy, which was suppressed under Pope John Paul II, has come to dominate a three-week synod of more than 250 cardinals and bishops. Cardinal Angelo Scola, the Patriarch of Venice, who is seen as a potential future Pope and is chairing the discussion, raised the issue in the presence of Pope Benedict XVI. Cardinal Scola said that some bishops had “put forward the request to ordain married faithful of proven faith and virtue, the so-called viri probati,” while maintaining his own support for celibacy. There is a shortage of priests, and reformers believe that allowing married priests would help to attract newcomers.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article577041.ece [/quote]
Again, being an atheist, what do you give a shit what the Catholic Church does?
This is not your problem. Are you considering become a priest?
[quote]forlife wrote:
orion wrote:
Some degree yes, that degree no.
So you do support forcing others to pay money against their will. You’re no different than me in principle, the question is where to draw the line.
Plus, you advocate taxation for the sake of “compassionate” redistribution which lives off the notion that some people live to serve others which is a truly medieval concept.
Helping others is now a “medieval concept”? How quaint. I’m not in favor of handouts to the lazy, but I do believe in teaching others to fish.[/quote]
No, no, no the idea that you have the right to make someone help someone else by force if necessary, that makes it a medieval concept.
Your organizing principle is violence and the constant threat of imprisonment or death.
You know no kid on the schoolyard that bullies the lunch money out of other kids even pretends that they “do it for their own good”.
They might not be more morally evolved than you, but at least they do not BS themselves.
No, you want to throw other peoples money at problems so that you can tell yourself that YOU, of all people since it was their labor, have tried really hard.
You just not get to have a real good conscience at such a conveniently low price.
[quote]pat wrote:
Again, being an atheist, what do you give a shit what the Catholic Church does?
This is not your problem. Are you considering become a priest?[/quote]
ITT religious person asks atheist why he cares about negative effects that will have far reaching consequences. If you weren’t so anti-forlife, you might have picked up the idea that he puts forth - unhealthy repression of human sexuality leads to things like pedophilia and rape.
Religion in general has this tendency to try and control and almost subjugate human sexuality, one of the more powerful forces determining who we are. Sexual innocence, while nothing short of charming in children, is absolutely horrendous in adults. When the artificial barriers imposed by religion start to collapse, which happens all too often, it can and usually will result in behavior that the average masturbating, fornicating sinner could scarcely begin to contemplate without recoiling in horror.
On another note, let’s be frank, “child abuse” is a shallow, silly and pathetic euphemism for what really has been going on. What we are discussing is no less than the systematic rape and torture of children, aided and abetted by a hierarchy that did little more than to move the worst offenders to parishes where they would be safer.
[quote]forlife wrote:
clip11 wrote:
I think they say pedophile to cover up that they are gay.
WTF, you think it’s more socially acceptable to be a pedophile than to be gay?[/quote]
Let us not forget my sinful friend, pedophilia isn’t really a sin. Not like you crazy gays, you guys are totally unhappy with your lives, and I’m qualified to tell you this by having read Jewish fairy tales.
[quote]forlife wrote:
pat wrote:
They are not lobbying for rights, they are not asking for permission, they are do no harm to anybody.
Do tell:
LEADING bishops gathered at the Vatican have suggested that Roman Catholic priests should be allowed to marry as a way of overcoming the shortage of priests.
The question of celibacy, which was suppressed under Pope John Paul II, has come to dominate a three-week synod of more than 250 cardinals and bishops. Cardinal Angelo Scola, the Patriarch of Venice, who is seen as a potential future Pope and is chairing the discussion, raised the issue in the presence of Pope Benedict XVI. Cardinal Scola said that some bishops had “put forward the request to ordain married faithful of proven faith and virtue, the so-called viri probati,” while maintaining his own support for celibacy. There is a shortage of priests, and reformers believe that allowing married priests would help to attract newcomers.
Er, so?
[quote]forlife wrote:
Just for flavor, this was posted on CNN an hour ago:
Lutherans consider noncelibate gay clergy
Woot![/quote]
We should be able to pick up some new Catholics over that move.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
pat wrote:
Again, being an atheist, what do you give a shit what the Catholic Church does?
This is not your problem. Are you considering become a priest?
ITT religious person asks atheist why he cares about negative effects that will have far reaching consequences. If you weren’t so anti-forlife, you might have picked up the idea that he puts forth - unhealthy repression of human sexuality leads to things like pedophilia and rape.
[/quote]
Do you have any evidence that voluntary celibacy is an “unhealthy repression of human sexuality”? I’d like to see the study. Further there is not one single shred of evidence that celibacy leads to and kind of deviant sexual behavior. I would counter argue that somebody who chooses abstinence as a life style is far more in control of his sexuality than someone who indulges his urges regularly. Voluntary celibacy is NOT “unhealthy sexual repression”.
Further, you will find most pedophiles are not Catholic priests. Those who were deserve everything they got, but to link the priesthood with pedophilia is a false link, just like the link between homosexuality and pedophilia.
I am not anti-forlife…He puts himself out there to be challenged. So I do, it has nothing to do with him personally. In this matter he has no concern. He is neither Catholic or a priest. What the church does is of absolute no consequence what so ever. I question his motives, are not people free to behave as they choose? Yet he asserts that they should change? Even if they did change it would still be zero consequence to him.
Religion in general has this tendency to try and control and almost subjugate human sexuality, one of the more powerful forces determining who we are. Sexual innocence, while nothing short of charming in children, is absolutely horrendous in adults. When the artificial barriers imposed by religion start to collapse, which happens all too often, it can and usually will result in behavior that the average masturbating, fornicating sinner could scarcely begin to contemplate without recoiling in horror.
[/quote]
You are completely incorrect about religion. You don’t know what you are talking about…Those are merely your preconceived biases based on selective facts.
[quote]
On another note, let’s be frank, “child abuse” is a shallow, silly and pathetic euphemism for what really has been going on. What we are discussing is no less than the systematic rape and torture of children, aided and abetted by a hierarchy that did little more than to move the worst offenders to parishes where they would be safer.[/quote]
It’s even worse than that. It is the most intimate violation of the human person. Some are dead, many are getting raped regularly themselves. There will always be bad people in every institution, it does not invalidate the whole institution unless the institution itself condones it. It does not, it vehemently abhors it.
[quote]pat wrote:
Do you have any evidence that voluntary celibacy is an “unhealthy repression of human sexuality”? I’d like to see the study. Further there is not one single shred of evidence that celibacy leads to and kind of deviant sexual behavior. I would counter argue that somebody who chooses abstinence as a life style is far more in control of his sexuality than someone who indulges his urges regularly. Voluntary celibacy is NOT “unhealthy sexual repression”.
Further, you will find most pedophiles are not Catholic priests. Those who were deserve everything they got, but to link the priesthood with pedophilia is a false link, just like the link between homosexuality and pedophilia.[/quote]
Sorry, I read the thread title and got a bit confused, leading me to think that we were discussing the Catholic Church scandal.
I am not linking pedophilia to the Church, I’m pointing out that most of them are not adequately prepared in the seminary to deal with a lifetime of celibacy. It has will continue to manifest itself in child abuse. However small the numbers might seem, even ONE child having such an atrocity perpetrated against them is one too many.
I note a lot of people here who talk about the merits of male/female marriage because it promotes procreation, and now they speak of celibacy as if it is the ideal? Fuck me, make up your minds already.
So he can’t have an opinion, because religion is private and must be respected? Fuck off. In a world where a redneck Christian or backward Muslim can have enough education in chemistry to create a bomb that would take down a building, and make said weapon in their back yard and still believe in a talking snake or people rising to heaven bodily, I reserve the right to be critical of the belief system that would potentially lead them to killing or otherwise harming innocent people.
It has a LOT to do with him, or me, or any other person alive today.
Enlighten us then. Simply declaring me to be incorrect helps nothing.
Bullshit. The Church knew what was going on and deliberately went out of their way to conceal it.
Penn State professor, Phillip Jenkins, puts the percentage of pedophile priests between .2 to 1.7 in his work Priests and pedophiles. With the figure for protestant clergy ranging from 2-3%. So, what’s all this talk about celibacy?
Between 1-5% of teachers abuse students.
http://www.cpiu.us/statistics-2/
And, since children are far more likely to abused by a relative or friend of the family, I think it’s safe to say non-clergy take the cake…
Going by stats, casting aspersions at your uncle, or even ole pops in his recliner, is the safer bet.