Nerys Ghemor wrote:
But why then do I hear about so many stories about American Republican politicians trying to force creationism into schools? Why do the majority
of Republicans doubt evolution is real? Maybe those aren't Catholics, I don't know. .
Most often, those aren't
The Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches, as well as some of the mainline (as opposed to evangelical) Protestant denominations allow for theistic evolution
--a position not to be confused with creationism/"Intelligent Design", as those are two entirely different positions.
Most often, when you see such anti-evolution stuff, it's Southern Baptist/evangelical/Pentecostal/nondenominational influenced, particularly given the influence those denominations have had on pop culture in the US and especially the South (thanks to the prominence of such figures as Billy Graham). Once you move away from Baptist-influenced denominations, I'm not saying you won't see some of that among Christians of other types, but it's quite a bit less frequent.
Fair enough. There's whackos and normal folks in every denomination.
Chaos Descending wrote:
Well, you're right. It's not fair. Some child molesters are straight, and some are gay. Just as not all straights molest kids, neither do all gays.
True and true, but it doesn't really address my deeper point, which is that it is my belief that the majority of people in that situation who commit those acts would never have ended up being child molesters if they had only grown up in a culture that did not demonise all types of sexuality. If they had been able to incorporate a healthy expression of sexuality in their lives all along, the bad acts would never have taken place.
Repression never works, no matter what you're repressing - it only comes back stronger and in a much more dangerous and warped form. I would have thought the truth of this was self-evident, and yet it astonishes me that so many cultures the world over are built on exactly that - repressing what is a natural part of human nature. Catholicism is certainly not alone in that. It seems so utterly self-contradictory and doomed to failure to me.
If I understand correctly, the basic idea is that one should aspire to concern oneself only with matters of the spiritual, not the physical. I suppose that's all well and good in principle, but in practise it's buried under so many layers of catechism and doctrine and regimentation that any positive aspect of that message is lost, and all that's left is the guilt - body = bad
That's what leads to so many problems - this insane idea that the body is a dirty thing. Why on Earth should anyone think that? If you believe in a God, and you believe that God created everything in nature, then should not the human body - the most complex and intelligent organism yet discovered - be celebrated as God's greatest achievement?
Instead you're going to hell if you even acknowledge the fact that you have a sex drive or that it is natural to want to enjoy it. I'm not saying you should indulge your every whim or urge all day every day, but you have to accept that sexuality is a normal part of human nature, and allow it a place in your life. Doing so does not negate any good works one might do for God. Otherwise it just fucks everything up and the whole point of what you're trying to do is ruined. And yet that's exactly what Catholicism (and other similar traditions) want us to do.
I swear there was a topic in here somewhere... On yes, here it is: