# Pope Ratzi **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [April 19, 2005, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-ratzi/300086 "2005-04-19T17:22:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2005, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-ratzi/300086/81 "2005-04-19T19:17:30Z")
This could be interesting. We have a hard-line conservative cleric who comes from Western Europe, which has been moving in a strongly secular direction in recent decades. At the same time, even practicing Catholics over there, judging by declining birth-rates, seem not to care a fig for the ban on contraception, just as is the case with most American Catholics. It’ll be a clash between two unyielding forces. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2005, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-ratzi/300086/82 "2005-04-19T19:17:39Z")
> [@Airman Doors](#): > > What did he do in his whole one hour or less in office to warrant this thread? After all the previous anti-Catholic threads and some of the posts that came before my first one, what conclusion would you like me to draw? That you’re such a hater of a man who has done nothing so far that you preemptively want to call him an asshole? Because that’s the only conclusion I can draw. It’s not like the just decanted him from a cloning tank and handed him his miter. The man has a history, has taken stances on a variety of public issues, and has given a pretty good indication of what direction he plans on taking the Church now that he’s behind the wheel. I’m not religious myself, so I don’t know a whole lot of details about what sort of guy Ratzinger is, but my mother, who is a practicing Catholic, involved in many Catholic charities, and is ardently liberal, calls him Rat Bastard, and is none to pleased (and none to surprised) by his elevation. You don’t have to be anti-Catholic to dislike the guy, and you don’t have to be clairvoyant to guess what sort of Pope he’s going to be. ---
**Author:** ![Aagramn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e8c25b/32.png) [@Aagramn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aagramn)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2005, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-ratzi/300086/83 "2005-04-19T19:18:49Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Well, the Church holds that having sex for pleasure outside the confines of marriage is wrong. Doubtless you disagree. But the Church has always taught this lesson, and it will continue to do so, your disapproval notwithstanding. True. However, like I said in my first post, I was hoping for a pope who might be willing to state that using contraception is less sinful than spreading STDs. > [@](#): > > Fecundity is a gift, an end of marriage, for conjugal love naturally tends to be fruitful. A child does not come from outside as something added on to the mutual love of the spouses, but springs from the very heart of that mutual giving, as its fruit and fulfillment. So the Church, which is “on the side of life,” teaches that “it is necessary that each and every marriage act remain ordered per se to the procreation of human life.” If you follow this to it’s logical conclusion, you end up with either gross overpopulation, followed by war, famine and disease, or even married couples having to abstein from sex after having had enough children to maintain the population. ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2005, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-ratzi/300086/84 "2005-04-19T19:20:51Z")
> [@Airman Doors](#): > > What did he do in his whole one hour or less in office to warrant this thread? After all the previous anti-Catholic threads and some of the posts that came before my first one, what conclusion would you like me to draw? That you’re such a hater of a man who has done nothing so far that you preemptively want to call him an asshole? Because that’s the only conclusion I can draw. I could have sworn any googling of his real name whould reveal the answer, but nothing as pope, just as the Pope’s chief theological adviser, and there is no reason why he will not do worse, as the pope. Also, Pope Ratzi is too good a title to give up. [**In a strongly-worded 12-page document signed by the Pope’s chief theological adviser, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the Church brands homosexual unions as immoral, unnatural and harmful.**](http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3108349.stm) [**According to this latest missive from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith–a kind of star chamber of orthodoxy in Rome headed by conservative Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger–feminism has been “lethal,” obscuring “natural” differences between women and men, and generally insulting a divine plan.**](http://www.religiousconsultation.org/News_Tracker/Vatican_coverage_misses_Holy_See_political_clout.htm) ---
**Author:** ![gobear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/8dc957/32.png) [@gobear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gobear)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2005, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-ratzi/300086/85 "2005-04-19T19:26:42Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Better to follow all the rules from the start. Well, not necessarily. My partner and I (both raised as Catholics) are STD-free and monogamous, yet we are both unrepentant sodomites. We’re breaking a major Church rule, yet we are better off than the wife of an Angolan worker with 7 kids. And since there’s no God and no afterlife, we don’t have to worry about getting sent to the circle of the Violent Against Nature. ---
**Author:** ![Aagramn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e8c25b/32.png) [@Aagramn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aagramn)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2005, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-ratzi/300086/86 "2005-04-19T19:29:24Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > But in fact, FOLLOWING the Church’s rules - all of them - will save more lives than breaking the rules you advocate. > > You would like to pick and choose – break some rules because it feels good, get into life-threatening jeopardy, and then break other rules to save your life. > > Better to follow all the rules from the start. What if the rules are wrong? Or unneccessary? Or bigoted? Personally, I don’t consider blind following of “the rules” to be moral. ---
**Author:** ![spectrum](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9fc29f/32.png) [@spectrum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spectrum)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2005, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-ratzi/300086/87 "2005-04-19T19:30:35Z")
> [@Airman Doors](#): > > Great. He’s not even Pope for an hour… in fact, he’s not even Pope yet, and already you vultures are criticizing him. He may have been pope for an hour, but he’s been an evil, discriminatory, gay-hating, woman-hating, freedom-hate troll for decades. Fuck him and fuck you. ---
**Author:** ![spectrum](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9fc29f/32.png) [@spectrum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spectrum)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2005, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-ratzi/300086/88 "2005-04-19T19:32:42Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > Would the risk of AIDS be reduced if Catholic sexual teachings were strictly followed? > > Be honest now. If everyone were forced to strictly follow Catholic teachings, I would kill myself. A life with no possibility of sex would not be a life worth living. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2005, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-ratzi/300086/89 "2005-04-19T19:34:38Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > If it were necessary to break rules to save lives, that would be a vallid argument. > > But in fact, FOLLOWING the Church’s rules - all of them - will save more lives than breaking the rules you advocate. > > You would like to pick and choose – break some rules because it feels good, get into life-threatening jeopardy, and then break other rules to save your life. > > Better to follow all the rules from the start. You are misstating the choices. The CHURCH has the choice of either a.)breaking a “rule” by giving out information about safe sex, distributing condoms and encouraging their use or b.) yammering on about abstinence and homos while _refusing_ to endorse safe sex or provide information or condoms. The first option above has a chance to be effective. The second option does not. Your suggestion that everyone in the world should just follow church rules is a false choice (actually an impossible one for gay people) which blames the victims and evades the question about the choice the CHURCH has to make. ---
**Author:** ![spectrum](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9fc29f/32.png) [@spectrum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spectrum)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2005, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-ratzi/300086/90 "2005-04-19T19:36:40Z")
> [@cmkeller](#): > > Gee, the Western liberals think it’s a bad idea for Catholic Cardinals to elect as leader of their church someone who thinks Catholic doctrine is correct. > > That’s the beauty of freedom of religion, guys…you don’t like what Catholicism says, be something other than a Catholic. Don’t waste time wishing Catholicism was or will be different. If the Catholic Church left me alone, I would never say or think a thing about it. But when it is one of the most active forces in the world fighting my equality as a human being, a “live and let live” attitude isn’t feasible. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2005, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-ratzi/300086/91 "2005-04-19T19:37:05Z")
> [@Aagramn](#): > > What if the rules are wrong? Or unneccessary? Or bigoted? > > Personally, I don’t consider blind following of “the rules” to be moral. If that’s the way you see it, I would suggest you’d probably not be too comfortable as a Catholic. Yet you want to dictate how the Church should behave. Fascinating. From my point of view, the rules are not wrong, unncessary, or bigoted. So the “what if” doesn’t apply. I recognize that you feel differently. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2005, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-ratzi/300086/92 "2005-04-19T19:39:15Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > Your suggestion that everyone in the world should just follow church rules is a false choice (actually an impossible one for gay people) which blames the victims and evades the question about the choice the CHURCH has to make. I don’t agree. I know several gay Catholics who have chosen to live a celibate life. It is possible. ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2005, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-ratzi/300086/93 "2005-04-19T19:40:59Z")
Bricker, what, psychologically, causes this deep seated belief that only a member of a group can criticize said group? Really, I want to know. I started this thread, so for what little it’s worth, I won’t call Hijack. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2005, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-ratzi/300086/94 "2005-04-19T19:41:18Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > If that’s the way you see it, I would suggest you’d probably not be too comfortable as a Catholic. > > Yet you want to dictate how the Church should behave. > > Fascinating. > > From my point of view, the rules are not wrong, unncessary, or bigoted. So the “what if” doesn’t apply. I recognize that you feel differently. I don’t have to be a member of the Church to be able to point that a specific policy is irresponsible and kills people. I am also perfectly free to decide if I believe the Church is behaving immorally and should stop. Why do I not have a right to criticize the Church? ---
**Author:** ![holmes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e95f7d/32.png) [@holmes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/holmes)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2005, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-ratzi/300086/95 "2005-04-19T19:41:38Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > If it were necessary to break rules to save lives, that would be a vallid argument. > > But in fact, FOLLOWING the Church’s rules - all of them - will save more lives than breaking the rules you advocate. > > You would like to pick and choose – break some rules because it feels good, get into life-threatening jeopardy, and then break other rules to save your life. > > Better to follow all the rules from the start. So what rules did an infant break? What rules did a miner who needs a blood transfusion break? What rules did a loving wife break? Explain it to me. Africa’s blood supply is tainted beyond belief, explain to me what rules I broke in order to feel good, when I receive tainted blood. That’s the problem that I have with you guys, your and the Church’s defense hinges upon someone “breaking the rules, asking for favours or bringing it upon themselves” ignoring the fact that the majority of people affected are innocent bystanders. Children, wives and injured people…what rules did they break? ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2005, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-ratzi/300086/96 "2005-04-19T19:44:08Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I don’t agree. I know several gay Catholics who have chosen to live a celibate life. It is possible. The point, as I see it, is that while individuals may follow these rules, it is incontrovertible that the majority of people will not. The Church, like all other self-aware entities, shares in responsibility for the predictable outcomes of its decisions. If the church strongly advocates positions that over a large population result in more STDs, then the church shares in responsibility for these–and it is no defense against this charge that following their positions would’ve saved lives. You’re not responsible for what would’ve happened if everyone did just what you said; you’re responsible for the predictable outcomes of your decisions. And it’s predictable that people won’t follow these positions, over the large scale. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Incubus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c68b51/32.png) [@Incubus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Incubus)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2005, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-ratzi/300086/97 "2005-04-19T19:44:14Z")
You know if religion didn’t exist, the Pit would be pretty damn quiet. [laughs at all the chicken littles in this thread] ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2005, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-ratzi/300086/98 "2005-04-19T19:45:21Z")
> [@holmes](#): > > That’s the problem that I have with you guys, your and the Church’s defense hinges upon someone “breaking the rules, asking for favours or bringing it upon themselves” ignoring the fact that the majority of people affected are innocent bystanders. > > Children, wives and injured people…what rules did they break? What percentage of infected people are blood transfusion victims, innocent wives, or children infected at birth? Over 50% ? Really? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2005, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-ratzi/300086/99 "2005-04-19T19:48:29Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > The point, as I see it, is that while individuals may follow these rules, it is incontrovertible that the majority of people will not. > > The Church, like all other self-aware entities, shares in responsibility for the predictable outcomes of its decisions. If the church strongly advocates positions that over a large population result in more STDs, then the church shares in responsibility for these–and it is no defense against this charge that following their positions would’ve saved lives. You’re not responsible for what would’ve happened if everyone did just what you said; you’re responsible for the predictable outcomes of your decisions. And it’s predictable that people won’t follow these positions, over the large scale. > > Daniel Absolutely disagree. It’s predictable that a prosecutor will occasionally send an innocent person to jail, though no bad faith or negligence of his own. Is he responsible for that ill? No. He is responsible for following the rules, for acting in good faith, for doing what is RIGHT. ---
**Author:** ![holmes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e95f7d/32.png) [@holmes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/holmes)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2005, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-ratzi/300086/100 "2005-04-19T19:50:02Z")
24.5 million individuals are living with HIV in sub-Saharan Africa (71% of worldwide total). · Every 25 seconds another person in Africa is infected with HIV. · With HIV positive rates approaching and in some cases exceeding 20% in many of these countries, blood transfusions account for an ever-growing percentage of new HIV/AIDS cases. · Of the estimated 6,000,000 blood transfusions performed each year in sub-Saharan Africa, as many as half of them are not tested for all infectious diseases and another 1.5 million may be improperlyperformed. · Less than 1/2 of African countries have adopted a national blood transfusion policy. · Less than 1/3 of African countries have any policy to limit HIV infection through blood transfusion. You tell me **Bricker** , what percentage of dead people who didn’t get infected via sin is enough for you? I’ll see what I can dig up. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-ratzi/300086.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pope-ratzi/300086.md?page=6)