babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » international news and politics   » 95% of gays not gay, just perverts claims Belgian bishop

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: 95% of gays not gay, just perverts claims Belgian bishop
Newbie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4143

posted 21 January 2004 02:30 PM      Profile for Newbie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
"I am willing to write in my own blood that of all those who call themselves lesbian or gay, a maximum of five to 10 percent are effectively
lesbian or gay," Joos said. "All the rest are just sexual perverts," he added.

"Real homosexuals don't wander in the streets in colorful suits. Those are people who have a serious problem and have to live with that. And if they make a mistake they will be forgiven. We have to help these people and not judge them," Joos said in the interview.

Belgium bishops Wednesday distanced themselves from Joos' remarks.

http://www.365gay.com/newscon04/01/012104gayPervs.htm


From: Toronto, Ontario | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
paxamillion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2836

posted 21 January 2004 02:41 PM      Profile for paxamillion   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Disgusting.
From: the process of recovery | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Jimmy Brogan
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3290

posted 21 January 2004 02:46 PM      Profile for Jimmy Brogan   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
"I am willing to write in my own blood that of all those who call themselves priests or bishops, a maximum of five to 10 percent are effectively
Catholic or Christian," Jimmy Brogan said. "All the rest are just sexual perverts," he added.

From: The right choice - Iggy Thumbscrews for Liberal leader | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
oldgoat
Moderator
Babbler # 1130

posted 21 January 2004 02:49 PM      Profile for oldgoat     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Well, I read the article, and looked at the picture of the Cardinal for a bit. Then I thought "this guy is calling others perverts for wandering around in colourful outfits"??? Hell, the College of Cardinals has got to be he most flamboyant crew of fussy old cross dressers I've ever seen. (yes I know cross-dressing does not = gay. Neither is expecting others to genuflect in front of you and kiss your ring I suppose)
From: The 10th circle | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
paxamillion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2836

posted 21 January 2004 02:52 PM      Profile for paxamillion   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by JimmyBrogan:
"I am willing to write in my own blood that of all those who call themselves priests or bishops, a maximum of five to 10 percent are effectively
Catholic or Christian," Jimmy Brogan said. "All the rest are just sexual perverts," he added.


Now there's a press release. LOL!


From: the process of recovery | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Rebecca West
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1873

posted 21 January 2004 03:10 PM      Profile for Rebecca West     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
"I am willing to write in my own blood that of all those who call themselves lesbian or gay, a maximum of five to 10 percent are effectively lesbian or gay," Joos said.
I'd encourage the Bishop to do so. In fact, I'd be happy to lend a hand.

Scalpel please...


From: London , Ontario - homogeneous maximus | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Newbie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4143

posted 21 January 2004 03:11 PM      Profile for Newbie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by paxamillion:
Disgusting.

Oh I don't know. I'd rather be called a pervert than intrinsically evil and disordered.


From: Toronto, Ontario | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
oldgoat
Moderator
Babbler # 1130

posted 21 January 2004 03:26 PM      Profile for oldgoat     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Oh I don't know. I'd rather be called a pervert than intrinsically evil and disordered.

I'd have to agree with that. In my own experience it's a lot more fun being a pervert than being intrinsically evil and disordered, and also doesn't have the same burden of expectations.


From: The 10th circle | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
paxamillion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2836

posted 21 January 2004 04:26 PM      Profile for paxamillion   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by oldgoat:
I'd have to agree with that. In my own experience it's a lot more fun being a pervert than being intrinsically evil and disordered, and also doesn't have the same burden of expectations.

As someone struggling with disorders, I can imagine you are right.


From: the process of recovery | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Willowdale Wizard
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3674

posted 21 January 2004 05:36 PM      Profile for Willowdale Wizard   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
it's a lot more fun being a pervert

what a good idea for a t-shirt ...


From: england (hometown of toronto) | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 21 January 2004 07:50 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Whotta dink.

But the good news is, the louder the bigots in the churches roar, the deeper they'll bury themselves into oblivion. And unless their churches hold them at arms' length, they'll be buried right along with them.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Newbie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4143

posted 21 January 2004 08:12 PM      Profile for Newbie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
So anyone want to place bets on how far away we are from the first gay, married pope?
From: Toronto, Ontario | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 21 January 2004 08:15 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
500 years?
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Agent 204
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4668

posted 21 January 2004 08:24 PM      Profile for Agent 204   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Sounds about right I'm afraid. They only admitted that Copernicus and Galileo were right a few years ago. I think they've also accepted evolution, though I'm not sure how willing they are to accept Darwin's version of it (don't they think God is up there tinkering with lifeforms to make them evolve or something?)
From: home of the Guess Who | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
Gir Draxon
leftist-rightie and rightist-leftie
Babbler # 3804

posted 26 January 2004 03:26 AM      Profile for Gir Draxon     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Newbie:
So anyone want to place bets on how far away we are from the first gay, married pope?

I'll go for 1000 years.

How about the first lesbian married pope? 10,000 years? 1,000,000 years?


From: Arkham Asylum | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518

posted 26 January 2004 12:23 PM      Profile for jeff house     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Since the ban on marriage became part of canon law in about the year 800 or so, I think it is likely that we have already had a gay, married pope.

Records are sparse on their sexual practices during the first 800 years.

An alternate theory would suggest that gays became priests only BECAUSE of the ban on marriage.


From: toronto | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
paxamillion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2836

posted 26 January 2004 01:20 PM      Profile for paxamillion   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
There was a piece on CBC Radio this weekend just past about priests with wives and families that are kept secret. I missed it. Anyone catch it?
From: the process of recovery | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Sara Mayo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3714

posted 26 January 2004 03:31 PM      Profile for Sara Mayo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I heard parts of it. It was about a group in France advocating for the Church to change its policies so that the children and partners of priests don't have to live in secret.
From: "Highways are monuments to inequality" - Enrique Penalosa | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
swirrlygrrl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2170

posted 26 January 2004 11:18 PM      Profile for swirrlygrrl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
It's actually kind of interesting to see how this perversley ties into queer theory and the idea of sexuality as performance/performativity, the distinguishment between what one does and what one is. I mean, this guy's off his rocker, but Foucault would have a field day in this freaky reconstruction of the invention of homosexuality.
From: the bushes outside your house | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Gaia_Child
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3015

posted 02 February 2004 05:57 PM      Profile for Gaia_Child     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Geez, how did he know?

I mean, I'm not really gay. I'm just a heterosexual pervert who has gay sex because that's apparently what heterosexual perverts do.

I mean, the two sexy, intelligent women who proposed marriage to me in the last 5 years... Well, I turned them down because I am more interested in having sex with the gender I am not sexually attracted to.



From: Western Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Newbie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4143

posted 03 February 2004 12:27 PM      Profile for Newbie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Well those who challenge biblical prohibitions against homosexual acts while remaining religious contend that back then the concept of a homosexual orientation didn't exist, and that those prohibitions were therefore meant to apply to heterosexuals.

I prefer to think of it as: the bible was written by men who would not be considered qualified to mop floors at McDonald's because they lack the skills to make use of running water and mops. There are no more truth to be found there than there are in a five-year-old's theory of how babies are made.


From: Toronto, Ontario | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
paxamillion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2836

posted 03 February 2004 01:25 PM      Profile for paxamillion   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Newbie:
Well those who challenge biblical prohibitions against homosexual acts while remaining religious contend that back then the concept of a homosexual orientation didn't exist, and that those prohibitions were therefore meant to apply to heterosexuals.

I simply look at them as existing in a historical context that is very different from now.

By your reasoning, Newbie, we might consider being equally dismissive of Aristotle. Some of his work in biology looks pretty crude by the standards of today.


From: the process of recovery | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518

posted 03 February 2004 03:42 PM      Profile for jeff house     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I've recently been reading a book about the Enlightenment. In the last 1600's, it was quite common for the church to allege that all those people claiming to be atheists and deists, weren't REALLY atheists and deists.

They were just acting out.

It seems like denial has a long history in the church.


From: toronto | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
paxamillion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2836

posted 03 February 2004 03:55 PM      Profile for paxamillion   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
And in politics, and in the legal system, and in the medical system, and and and and and....
From: the process of recovery | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 03 February 2004 04:13 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
That's not just then, Jeff. I have often heard, in my church travels, Christians labelling those who are atheists or agnostics as "immature in their faith" or "seeking God". To many Christians, any belief that isn't Christian is merely a stepping stone on the ultimate journey to faith. Many believe that humans are hardwired with a human need to worship God, which God himself has implanted in us.

Those of us who have been strong believers in the past and have become agnostics, however, are not "maturing in our faith". We are "losing our way", but will hopefully, like the prodigal son, return to the path in order to continue progressing towards the spiritual maturity of believing blindly and literally in a 2000 year-old document.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 03 February 2004 04:17 PM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Christians labelling those who are atheists or agnostics as "immature in their faith"

I thought growing out of the need for imaginary playmates was a sign of maturity, not the other way 'round.


From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
flotsom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2832

posted 03 February 2004 04:23 PM      Profile for flotsom   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
I have often heard, in my church travels, Christians labelling those who are atheists or agnostics as "immature in their faith" or "seeking God".

Or the slightly more sophisticated philosophical variant which supposes that atheists must be forever linked with that which they deny exists, and are therefore only another form of believer: the "believer" who disbelieves.

What about those of us who simply cannot believe in the actual existence of the bearded shepherding god of ancient nomadic hill shepherds?

[ 03 February 2004: Message edited by: flotsom ]


From: the flop | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Newbie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4143

posted 03 February 2004 04:28 PM      Profile for Newbie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by paxamillion:
By your reasoning, Newbie, we might consider being equally dismissive of Aristotle. Some of his work in biology looks pretty crude by the standards of today.

Yes it does, and I expect if anyone was insane enough to pretend his work was the infallible word of God, people would be pretty dismissive of him today too. Hardly his fault, but I'm still not going to trust a doctor who considers him to be the last word in biology.

quote:
To many Christians, any belief that isn't Christian is merely a stepping stone on the ultimate journey to faith.

Interesting, Michelle. I believe Freudians (not Freud) believed the same about homosexuality, that everyone goes through a homosexual stage and some of us get stuck there.

Of course to believe that, you need to believe that two little girls playing "I'll show you mine if you show me yours" is the same thing as two adult women with a mortgage, 3 kids and 5 cats.

[ 03 February 2004: Message edited by: Newbie ]


From: Toronto, Ontario | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
paxamillion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2836

posted 03 February 2004 04:28 PM      Profile for paxamillion   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by flotsom:
What about those of us who simply cannot believe in the actual existence of the bearded shepherding god of ancient nomadic hill shepherds?

What about you?


From: the process of recovery | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 03 February 2004 04:30 PM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Or the slightly more sophisticated philosophical variant which supposes that atheists must be forever linked with that which they deny exists, and are therefore only another form of believer: the "believer" who disbelieves.

Right! The same way we're all wedded to, and in fact defined by, our belief that the moon is not made of green cheese! Or our belief that cows do not possess language. Or our belief that pigs cannot fly. Or any of an infinite (and I mean infinite, not just "a lot") number of other things we disbelieve.

They're all just another form of faith.


From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
flotsom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2832

posted 03 February 2004 05:14 PM      Profile for flotsom   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Pax, I understand that faith, or spiritual authority, is toxic to a process of inquiry; where doubt is essential.

But don't take my word for it.

[ 03 February 2004: Message edited by: flotsom ]


From: the flop | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
paxamillion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2836

posted 03 February 2004 05:27 PM      Profile for paxamillion   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by flotsom:
Pax, I understand that faith, or spiritual authority, is toxic to a process of inquiry; where doubt is essential.

But don't take my word for it.


That has sometimes been my experience and sometimes not.

But don't take my word for it either.


From: the process of recovery | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca