# Guilty of genocide?



## Rhisiart (Mar 29, 2009)

Not sleeping around makes good moral sense as well as being better for one's survival, particularly if you live in sub-Saharan Africa.

However, the Pope's recent advice that condoms should not be used at all strikes me as feckless in the extreme.

It is not my intention to offend Catholics (of which my wife is one). But at a time when AIDS/TB is rising faster than at any time in the last 30 years, surely the Pope is taking a non-Christian view of the problem.


----------



## ora (Mar 29, 2009)

Catholicism has a bunch of bad baggage. I really think they need to get over this stuff in order to seem relevant to people in the modern world, that said most of the Catholic base in in the developing world these days. Having a bio background I am also fairly irate at anyone who I feel is essentially increasing the risk of people getting HIV/AIDS. It may not be genocide but it is morally wrong IMHO.

Same with that idiot Mbeki in South Africa who seems to believe that HIV and AIDS are unrelated. As it happens there are some valid scientific discussions on this topic but they way he dealt with it in the public sphere was in my opinion grossly irresponsible.

With both Ratzinger & Umbeki, they seem blind to the fact that people WILL have sex, whatever they say, and unprotected sex in an area with a high prevalence of HIV/AIDS is supremely dangerous. Marriage is not the solution either, in South Africa many of the women who have AIDS get it from their husband's infidelities. Again, infidelity will ALWAYS happen to some extent, humans are imperfect. Surely we need to do everything we can to stop this disease from wrecking Africa and elsewhere.

If you want to read a Not Safe for Work, aggressive satire on the pope issue read this but be warned, if you are easily offended probably best to skip it.


----------



## voice- (Mar 30, 2009)

At least he's being consistent. The catholic church has always been opposed to condoms, even among their own members and even before we knew of AIDS. I don't believe for a second that the Pope hates africans or that he is trying to keep the disease alive, I think he's just against condoms because he honestly believes they promote casual sex among unmarried people.

If the alternative is abstinence he's quite right, condoms will increase the problem. Then again, if the alternative were abstinence, there would be no problem at all, so the alternative is clearly unprotected sex.

He's not evil, he's just stupid.


----------



## Giaguara (Mar 30, 2009)

I guess the US school systems also shows how great results they can achieve with the abstinence only. If it doesn't protect teenagers from having sex, how would you explain the abstinence only to older people, or e.g. those who are married or in stable relationship? Abstinence for the sake of ... not affording a child? Sure, clear solution (the same as for preventing overpopulation?) = no sex for anyone even remotely possibly in a reproductional age. So no one over the age of 4 (as the youngest proven mother was 5), to no upper age limit (at least for men. Probably for women the age of 70 should work for upper limit?)

For the sake of continuity, I think they should take as strong an opinion against all assisted fertility options and treatments. So no IVF etc.


----------



## Rhisiart (Apr 1, 2009)

Miniature Earth


----------



## reed (Jun 2, 2009)

A question. What do the Jewish and Muslim big wigs think? For example. Are they ever asked this in the press? Just curious.


----------



## Randy Singer (Jun 2, 2009)

There is no Jewish equivalent to the Pope.  Judaism is non-centralized.  Individual rabbi's (literally "scholars") interpret the Torah and Talmud for folks who ask.  But rabbi's often confer with and/or disagree with each other.  (There is an old saying "get two rabbi's together, and you will get three opinions.")

The Jewish religion tends to be very progressive on a lot of modern issues.

As far as the Jewish view on birth control, check out:
http://judaism.about.com/od/sexinjudaism/a/birthcontrol.htm


----------



## reed (Jun 2, 2009)

Thanks for the clarification Singer. 
   The Christian religion too can be very progressive by the way. Like all religions in fact. Even the Muslims. It all depends on who one talks to or wishes to believe I guess. The Pope does not control all his "flock." Thank goodness. I just wish it wasn't always the Pope (Roman Catholic view point) that is quoted in terms of these issues. That's all.


----------



## rubaiyat (Jun 7, 2009)

Everyone assumes the Muslims are just like us, just a bit different, and have the same values.

Has anyone actually read the Koran? 

Some of the Koranic values I have trouble with are: 

"Thou shalt kill."

"Thou shalt beat thy wife"

"Thou can rape and get away with it".


----------



## g/re/p (Jun 8, 2009)

rubaiyat said:


> Everyone assumes the Muslims are just like us, just a bit different, and have the same values.
> 
> Has anyone actually read the Koran?
> 
> ...




I have not read the koran - but out of simple curiosity, I have spent
a good bit of time at this website:

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/.

I cannot find any direct references there to "Thou shalt kill" 
"Thou shalt beat thy wife" or "Thou can rape and get  away with it".

Would you please specify the book and verse each of these
are contained in?


----------



## Doctor X (Jun 8, 2009)

Oh my. . . . 

Meh.  You can find the following in the Hebrew Bible/New Testament:


1. Flat Earth
2. Eschaton* occurring prior to 150 CE
3. Requirement of child sacrifice to YHWH
4. Genocide and infanticide demanded by YHWH
5. Denial of salvation to good men
6. Being born twice ten years apart
7. ZOMBIES!!11! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



8. Plants existing before the Sun, Moon, and stars
9. A man who has nothing happen to him who hangs himself who explodes who has nothing happen to him.
10. Different texts denouncing other texts.
11. El dividing the world amongst his sons, of whom YHWH is one.
12. The sons of the gods dancing the light fantastic with "da wimminfolk" and founding a race of heroes
13. _Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera_.

Men take their prejudices, write them down, declare them holy.  Other men take their prejudices, read them into writings, and then call them holy.

Nothing more, nothing less.  

Methinks we should advance beyond myth.

brkt &#8217;tkm lyhwh &#353;mron wl&#8217;&#353;rth

Shantih  shantih  shantih

--J.D.

*Ask Mummy for an explanation!


----------



## rubaiyat (Jun 8, 2009)

*Sura IV:23-24* _"Forbidden to you are your mothers, your daughters, your sisters, your paternal and maternal aunts... Also married women, except those whom you own as slaves. Such is the decree of God"_.

Mohammed himself had Marya, a coptic Christian given to him by the Egyptian governor. Her sister Shirin was given to his grandson Hassan. Rihana was a Jewish slave taken by Mohammed when he killed her husband and 800 others of the Banu Quraizah tribe. Juwairya, also Jewish, was taken as war booty when the Banu Mustaliq tribe was slaughtered. She converted to Islam and Mohammed married her. No doubt out of love for the killer of her family and neighbors!

*Sura IX:29* _"Fight those who believe not in God nor the Last day, 
Nor hold that forbidden Which hath been forbidden By God and His Apostle, Nor acknowledge the Religion Of Truth (even if they are) Of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya With willing submission And Feel themselves subdued."_

*Sura XLVIII:29* _"Mohammed is God's Apostle those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another."_

*Sura: IV.89:* _&#8220;They would have you disbelieve as they themselves have disbelieved, so that you may be all like alike. Do not befriend them until they have fled their homes for the cause of God. If they desert you seize them and put them to death wherever you find them. Look for neither friends nor helpers among them&#8230;&#8221;_

The call to kill all apostates, those who renounce Islam or convert to another religion, has been extended to the non violent Bahaii and Ahmadiyya, as no doubt their non-violence attests to their non-Islamic beliefs. It has also been used against any other Islamic group that the beholder reckons diverges from _true_ Islam ie Sunni vs Shia and vice versa, which is why the bombings in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan etc are either not condemned or only with excuses.

The real reason for the lack of criticism, in my estimation, is fear of the consequences and no support from the authority of the Koran.

*Sura IV:34* _"As to those women On whose part ye fear Disloyalty and ill-conduct,
Admonish them, refuse to share their beds, beat them;
But if they return to obedience, Seek not against them Means."_

For those who believe there is grounds for mutual respect and friendship:

*Sura: V.51* _"O ye who believe! Take not the Jews And the Christians For your friends and protectors."_

and the quote that was used by Saudi school textbooks to declare all Christians swine and all Jews apes:

*Sura: V.60* _Those who Incurred the curse of God And His wrath, those of whom some He transformed into apes and swine"_

The Koran is not a long book and worth reading. As it follows no logic, nor train of thought as we know it, it might be best to obtain an annotated copy. It is usual to have a translated copy parallel with the original Arabic as only the Arabic is the true word of Allah.

You might also want to follow the protracted thread about so called racial profiling which went into an extended debate about the supposed equivalencies between Islam and the other monotheistic creeds.


----------



## Giaguara (Jun 8, 2009)

And the other Judaism-based religions are all tolerant and loving happy campers with their happy and loving book? There doesn't seem to be much original added in any stories inspired by the 'old' testament...


----------



## rubaiyat (Jun 8, 2009)

The Old Testament is certainly not a loving patch.

However the New Testament, the Buddhist scriptures, Confusionism, Daoism, the teachings of Bahá'u'lláh, the teachings of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and Zoroaster are all admirable for their calls for peace and love of your fellow man.

Islam is singularly rooted in violence from its foundation and if you read the Koran seems to find violence as _the_ answer for dealing with their own "transgressors" but particularly when dealing with "non-believers".

Don't take the fact you have not gone into the teachings or history of Islam delude you into thinking "they're all the same". They are not.

A violent Christian, Buddhist, Bahá'í, Ahmadi, Confucian, Daoist is a _bad_ Christian, Buddhist, Bahá'í, Ahmadi, Confucian, Daoist.

A violent Muslim as long as he targets non-believers or "apostates" is a _good_ Muslim.

Of the group of devout Muslims in Victoria, Australia who were caught plotting to attack and kill a large number of innocent people at a sporting venue, the single religious doubt expressed was whether it was permissible under sharia law to steal the van they were going to use to commit the massacre.


----------



## Doctor X (Jun 8, 2009)

rubaiyat said:


> Don't take the fact you have not gone into the teachings or history of Islam delude you into thinking "they're all the same". They are not.



I have.

They are.

They suffer from the same vices whenever men substitute magical for critical thinking.  

--J.D.


----------



## rubaiyat (Jun 9, 2009)

Glad you magically came to that conclusion.


----------



## Doctor X (Jun 9, 2009)

rubaiyat said:


> Glad you rationally came to that conclusion.



Indeed I did.

This is a computer forum, specifically a Mac help forum.  I am uncertain the general viewer wishes to have their fantasies challenged, though if you persist I take no responsibility for what happens to yours.

--J.D.


----------

