🚀 go-pugleaf

a_jabberwock@hotmail.com wrote:
> 
> In article <36658C29.3241B509@earthlink.net>,
>   Chris <lightpony@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> > a_jabberwock@hotmail.com wrote:
> 
> > All overpopulation, or just Catholic overpopulation? And if the latter -
> > my assertion - then would you require that I survey all overpopulated
> > catholic families and determine whether it was his bulls that drove
> > their decisions to breed like bunnies or if they simply prefer an
> > unwrapped sex act to the latex variety.?
> 
> Any overpopulation. And a condom is of little interest to a poor, uneducated
> man, unless he can sell or trade it for food.

All he needs is this much education: "This is your best protection against a
disease which absolutely will kill you if you get it. It also can prevent
pregnancy, and another mouth for you to feed."

If he doesn't have someone feeding him delusions like "you will burn in hell
if you use the condom", rationality might commonly win out over the urge to
get laid without the condom.

> 
> >
> > The fact is that he opposes condom usage.
> 
> So what? He opposes all sorts of things that are as widespread in Catholic
> countries as non Catholic countries. To truly blame the religion, you have to
> prove that people are doing what the Pope says instead of what they want to
> do.

condoms are much more important to prevent the spread of HIV, much moreso than
or contraception. His Eminence should certainly know this.

> 
> > As the leader of one of the planet's largest organized religions he thus
> > sends a policy statement out which directly impacts the breeding choices
> > of his followers. You want to put a statistic to it to minimize the
> > impact in the face of Asian or African numbers. Go right ahead. His
> > words stand. And so do the burgeoning numbers of Catholics.
> 
> But his words are not causing the overpopulation, as a comparison of catholic
> birthrates in developed countries vs undeveloped countries shows. Sorry, but
> people do what they want to do, not what the Pope tells them to do, even most
> Catholics.

Possibly because people in developed countries have other sources of
instruction besides priests preaching hellfire and damnation. And as a rule,
science is a lot more convincing than some madman screeching about some
imagined afterlife.

> 
> > > > And overpopulation, whether enabled by lack of education, societal
> > > > mores, or religious edicts, will eventually ruin all of our collective
> > > > chances for survival
> 
> > > Probably not, It bodes ill for the overpopulated area, but the effects
> remain
> > > localized.
> 
> > Really? Cripes, Look at Aids. Look at Tuberculosis. Look at Ebola. Look
> > at Cholera. Whether you choose to see the preceding as chemical induced,
> > stress induced, or viral induced illnesses is up to your reading and
> > medical science to argue. Know this, however, crowding increases stress
> > levels, minimizes sanitation, and increases disease vectors. And they
> > travel across borders you know, just like immigration - what goes around
> > comes around.  If you think you exist in a vacuum anymore, your liable
> > to someday be dead wrong!
> 
> Disease has always been around, and widespread diseases in third world
> countries do not overly impact us here.

They're only a jet-flight away you know. BTW how about the massive
near-epidemic of antibiotic-resistant tuberculosis coming across the border
from Mexico?

>  In fact, the worse disease outbreak
> in US history was Influenza caused by WWI, a political cause.

You cannot possibly attribute a species-jumping virus originating in swine to
political causes! How so?

> The widespread
> AIDs in eastern Europe and possibly Africa was caused by vaccinations with
> non-sterile needles, a science/political problem, the worse plauge in
> American written history, the one brought by disease resistance Europeans to
> the American Indians, a political problem. Bad government, poor sanitation,
> tribal (gang) mentalities, these are the specters of death, not the Pope, and
> these are the source of the population problem in third world countries, a
> problem that we, along with other developed nations, can isolate ourselves
> from if we wish. Will there be a global impact? Certainly, but it can, and I
> believe will, be minimal.

Only through the greatest efforts of the greatest numbers can disaster be
averted, it has always been so and will always be so. 

> 
> > Hey get over it - all major religions are pyramid schemes, not just
> > yours. And I'm not concerned with how much power he has in Asia or
> > Africa - just that he exercise some minute grain of common sense over
> > *his* followers!
> 
> > > I just prefer that you be more precise.
> >
> > That is a blatant dodge from the matter under discussion. You lost
> > credibility there.
> 
> Your lack of precision does not affect my credability, sorry.

Dodging questions with such remarks, however, definitely affects your
credibility.

> 
> > > Not at all. It would take the elimination of most animals, and a skimpy
> > > vegitarian diet, but it is mathmatically possible.
> >
> > Yes we can all exist on chlorella I believe - a form of algae. I've read
> > all about that. What a jolly experience that will be. And as in Dune
> > we'd better have our body still suits set for desertification - because
> > that's the impending result. BTW - in the News today it is estimated
> > that lacking some kind of more stringent immigration policy the US
> > population alone will touch 1.9 billion by 2050. I'm glad that given a
> > normal life span I won't be here to see that cluster f***!
> 
> You won't, because more stringent immigration policies will be used when
> needed.

They absolutely will _not_ in this scenario, mostly because the year 2050 is
the year when Census projects that the voting majority will have a Hispanic
surname and will have grown up speaking spanish in the home. they will not
close the borders, they will throw them wide open!

You really aren't taking evrything into consideration, are you?

> 
> > > the Catholic bashing on the overpopulation issue is based in you rather than
> > > fact.
> >
> > Of course they are a problem. The top 2 or 3 , obviously not in raw
> > numbers. But as i said when you are looking at one of the planet's major
> > organized religions there is a need for intelligent leadership. The Pope
> > has chosen to take a divergent path. We need not excuse that action with
> > a data point dismissal.
> 
> It's not a divergent path, as the world religions go. It's a literal holding
> of the old path. And it's impact on the world, as far as the actual teachings
> of the Catholic religion being the cause of overpopulation, is negligable.

Time alone, it would seem, will lay this argument to rest.

> 
> > > Why not? Should he pervert his beliefs because chris doesn't agree with
> them?
> >
> > He might just want to see if his beliefs are fundamentally and
> > scientifically unsound? Why draw the narrow conclusion that *my*
> > personal offering is the fulcrum for *his* change. How about taking
> > collective charge of your faith through outreach and downloading some
> > common sense grass root lobbying to the Vatican?
> 
> His beliefs are as valid as anyone elses, and, in fact, the structure that the
> RCC brought to Europe over a few centuries is one reason they don't have the
> tribal warfare problems that stifle development and limit government and
> science. A lot of what we are today comes from the Catholic church.

More to the point, it came from Rome, which eventually became merged with the
Church.

> 
> If everyone followed the Pope's words, there would be no murder, no crime, no
> unwed mothers, a lot of bad things would be gone.

We'd have all of that if everyone followed the Wiccan Rede too, or the simple
Golden rule for that matter, or even the first law of the doctor: "First, do
no harm".

> The fact that murder rates
> in Catholic countries are no different than non-Catholic countries shows that
> the Popes words are not really impacting anyone, even Catholics. Every ounce
> of effort you waste on changing the Pope's mind on birth control is wasted
> effort, as the situation in non-Catholic countries shows.

Hey, if the Pope can help eliminate population growth in even a _part_ of the
world, it's a step in the right direction.

> 
> > > Not in all cases, but the Pope has little effect on the problem areas at any
> > > rate.
> >
> > Study what I said. 1.9 billion in our country by 2050. Do you know where
> > our major immigration vector is? Do you know what the dominant faith in
> > Mexico and South America is? Quit trying to squirm out of *your*
> > responsibility!
> 
> a) there will not be 1.9 billion in the US by 2050, this is simply a "chicken
> little" scare tactic. There may be half a billion people, but not more.

What sources will you cite to back this up?

> 
> b) it is not my responsability to determine the religious preferences or
> beliefs of other people.

In your arguments, you unilaterally support the Catholic Church. thus, you
support them, thus you support their beliefs and practices, thus you support
the results of those practices, thus you support overpopulation and ecological
destruction.

> 
> > > So keeping it in the home and Church is not limiting it?
> >
> > *You* said I would limit it -please stop inserting quotations and
> > crediting me for them! If you can't win the argument based on your own
> > responses, and clearly you can not, admit defeat and get over it.
> 
> YOU said, and I quote YOU, "I'm all for prayer in the home or church - just
> keep it there." That is a stance limiting the free speech of those that pray,
> Chris, so don't try to squirm out of what you said by attacking me for
> quoteing you.

Sorry, dimbulb, Separation of Church and State requires that no religious
function may be performed in any activity which is mandated by the State.
First Amendment you know.

> 
> > I have a brother in law who holds that faith. He's a fine man, has a
> > fine family, leads a clean life, and I love him. We disagree on policy,
> > as you would suspect, but I do not by any means suggest that Catholics
> > are bad people. The very fact that they care enough to have a faith
> > suggests precisely the opposite. I opine, however, that their leaders
> > are misguided. Much of their dogma is foolish and bizarre, and that they
> > shirk from the responsibility of 20th century life by ignoring the issue
> > of overpopulation - or, as you have - pointing to the rest of the world
> > and saying "it ain't us".
> 
> Its the poor and uneducated, across the board, Chris. The Catholics in this
> country maintain low birth rates,

Roughly the same as many Protestants.

> with the exception of recent immigrants from
> the poor, undeveloped nations. Stop trying to blame the problem on the Pope,
> when it is clearly not due to religion, but instead to poverty and ignorance.

Many of those poor ignorant people would try to exercise more birth control if
the Pope told them it ws good for their souls, I bet.

> 
> > > That is a reflection of people. Knock on wood lately? A goofy thing to do.
> >
> > No I haven't. But I wear my lucky Broncos jersey for each game. And to
> > an extent you are spot on. People are hopelessly primal beings with
> > pretensions of godliness. Again I go back to the beach scene from the
> > movie "Contact" where Ellie meets her father. We have such lofty and
> > noble dreams and yet such ugly nightmares too. And when we organize it
> > our duty to aspire to the best, not the worst. That is the inherent flaw
> > in mass movements, knowing whether the goal is truth and awaking to find
> > the deception of human nature leads us astray
> 
> > > Churches can be limiting, yet there is a strong movement in the Christian
> > > church to do just what you are doing as it pertains to the Christ's words.
> > > Most modern Christians find the Catholic practices somewhat strange and
> > > hypocritical, and they were dangerous to many in the past, but they are
> > > hardly the causes of the worlds ills.
> >
> > There is only one cause to the world's ills though, isn't there?
> >
> 
> Bad government, poor managment, ignorance and poverty. You can do a lot more
> good fighting these than you can fighting the Pope.

At last, you give some good advice.


-- 
    Be kind to your neighbors, even though they be transgenic chimerae.
          Re-transmission of this e-mail expressly prohibited. 
  Non-UseNet re-transmission of this article is a willful violation of US
 Copyright Law and the Berne Convention. Statutory damages are $250,000.00
Whom thou'st vex'd waxeth wroth: Meow.      http://www.clark.net/pub/klaatu/