Dan Savage at his ferocious best:
"...What's maddening about this pope's signature gay bashing is this: When the pope—the dead one, the next one, the one after that—says something stupid about homosexuality, straight folks take it to heart.... But when a pope says something stupid about heterosexuality, straight Americans go deaf. And this pope had plenty to say about heterosexual sex—no contraceptives, no premarital sex, no blowjobs, no jerkin' off, no divorce, no remarriage, no artificial insemination, no blowjobs, no three-ways, no swinging, no blowjobs, no anal. Did I mention no blowjobs? John Paul II had more "no's" for straight people 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.
So I can't get behind this orgy of cheap and easy piety. Watching the talking twats on CNN pay their respects to this "universally beloved man of God" (how many of them have had premarital sex, I wonder?), to say nothing of the suddenly reverent assholes on Fox News (Bill O'Reilly didn't have many nice things to say about J.P. II when he opposed the invasion of Iraq), makes me want to throw a bottle of lube through a stained-glass window.
I'm sorry the old bastard's dead, I'm sorry he suffered. But I'm not so sorry that I won't stoop to working John Paul II into a column about zombie fetishism...."
Friday, April 22, 2005
God, the smoke's all black! Defrock the Vatican at the UN
What do you make of Ratzinger as the new pope? The Catholic Church's view on homosexuality is well known as also it's condemnation of its own sheep to death because of its stand against condoms as protection against HIV (a stand that puts the Church's own survival in peril--a good thought, but at what cost!).
Ratzinger and every Catholic (for that matter, anyone at all) in the world is entitled to their views on homosexulity. As long as they are themselves not gay (especially closeted) or they don't put other people's lives in peril. I can imagine the torment gone through by young gay Catholics who are yet to come to terms to their sexuality and find the balance between their personal convictions and the Church's beliefs (here's a 1986 publication drafted by Ratzinger and approved by John Paul II). Undoubtedly, many contemplate suicide. Some commit it. We can only pray that the tortured souls find the right help, in time. (As an aside, here's an encounter of one of my favorite writers with Ratzinger.)
Here's a well-written article by Richard Cohen, a columnist with The Washington Post, which covers the Church and homosexuality, condoms, AIDS, etc. and Ratzinger's so-called Nazi past.
What I don't see discussed anywhere how the Catholic Church is the only religious organization that has a United Nations membership (not like the countless others which are merely heard on the UN's many sponsored organizations). I believe the Vatican has statehood and as such equal status as any other country. This gives it even more power and this has been abused (in cohorts with some Islamic nations!) to block the "Brazil resolution" at the UN (the latest is that the resolution has lapsed, in spite of intesne lobbying by activists). Shouldn't we debate why Catholicism has this special right at the UN? Shouldn't stripping the Vatican of its membership also be part of the imminent reforms at the UN?
Ratzinger and every Catholic (for that matter, anyone at all) in the world is entitled to their views on homosexulity. As long as they are themselves not gay (especially closeted) or they don't put other people's lives in peril. I can imagine the torment gone through by young gay Catholics who are yet to come to terms to their sexuality and find the balance between their personal convictions and the Church's beliefs (here's a 1986 publication drafted by Ratzinger and approved by John Paul II). Undoubtedly, many contemplate suicide. Some commit it. We can only pray that the tortured souls find the right help, in time. (As an aside, here's an encounter of one of my favorite writers with Ratzinger.)
Here's a well-written article by Richard Cohen, a columnist with The Washington Post, which covers the Church and homosexuality, condoms, AIDS, etc. and Ratzinger's so-called Nazi past.
What I don't see discussed anywhere how the Catholic Church is the only religious organization that has a United Nations membership (not like the countless others which are merely heard on the UN's many sponsored organizations). I believe the Vatican has statehood and as such equal status as any other country. This gives it even more power and this has been abused (in cohorts with some Islamic nations!) to block the "Brazil resolution" at the UN (the latest is that the resolution has lapsed, in spite of intesne lobbying by activists). Shouldn't we debate why Catholicism has this special right at the UN? Shouldn't stripping the Vatican of its membership also be part of the imminent reforms at the UN?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)