Thursday, May 22, 2008

Catholic "sex"

If you can call it that.

The handbooks listed recommended penance of bread, water, and abstinence for exotic congress....By the 1400s, it seems, the Church had to give up on such detailed analyses, possibly because the congregation was beginning to get ideas.
What I wanna know is, what's so different about today? The Church still condemns a lot of things that give you pleasure and don't lead to having babies, because they need to breed more collection plate contributors. And the Church is hemorrhaging parishioners in their 20s and 30s because they know Rome is completely out of touch with the modern world, and they don't have to put up with the BS anymore.

The problem is, not everyone gets the fact that everyone should be treated equally, and by that I mean gays and lesbians. Dan Savage, speaking on the occasion of the death of Pope John Paul II:
When the pope--the dead one, the next one, the one after that--says something stupid about homosexuality, straight Americans listen. The church's efforts have helped defeat gay rights bills, lead to the omission of gays from hate-crime statutes, and helped to pass anti-gay-marriage amendments. But when a pope says something stupid about heterosexuality, straight Americans go deaf....John Paul II had a longer list of "no's" for straights than he did for gays. But when he tried to meddle in the private lives of straights, the same people who deferred to his delicate sensibilities where my rights were concerned suddenly blew the old asshole off. Gay blowjobs are expendable, it seems; straight ones are sacred.
I may have mentioned this a time or two, but the Church is in no position (har) to comment about sexuality or perversions. What's really perverse is how many lives these people continue to screw up.

(HT: Sullivan)

No comments: