🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <36604a96.0@news.mho.net>,
  Melissa9Z@Zmho.net (Melissa) wrote:
> In article <73om1i$gob@enews1.newsguy.com>,
>    Roger Williams <rogerw@shell1.tiac.net> wrote:

> That by "doing good for the poor" and at the same time encouraging even more
> poor through overpopulation, the net effect is negative.

And let's see your statistics.

> I don't know about "profiting from" but they aren't doing the world any good
by
> encouraging overpopulation.

And your proof that overpopulation is bad for the world?

> Yes. They're perpetuating a cycle of misery.

Thats why India has no overpopulation or misery, no Catholics?

> Oh yeah, right, preaching abstinence works, especially in a patriarchy where
> it's an insult not to give the husband what he wants. That's why Catholic
> population has been declining instead of steadily increasing, I suppose. No?

Actually, it has been increasing at a rate that is lower than India, lower
than Africa, lower than Asia, so it must be doing some good, right?

> Did it ever occur to you that just maybe, perhaps, you're acting as an
> apologist for a theocracy?

Did it ever occur to you that you are acting as an knee-jerk reactionary for
an anti-religious liberal agenda?

The fact is that the Catholic countries are no worse and probably better at
caring for their poor and limiting population growth than non-catholic
countries. The other fact is that you are so fanatically anti-Judaeo-Christian
that you will never look at any religious issue without bias. Keep hating
Christians all you want, the only person you are hurting is yourself.

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/       Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own