«

[Stroggy]

I didn't care when Diana died, maybe I was still too young but even now I still think she was just like the other royals, nice words and some nice acts of compassion that got blown out of proportion.

But the pope was something different, he actually changed the church, in a way it was he who pulled it out of the depth of WW2, he managed to repair (at least some of) the damage popes like Pius XII did to the church by saying and doing things that should have been said and done a long time ago.

I thanked Sebatianos for his eulogy and laughed at his reply, for I was thinking the same, he said: "this shows what a great man he was. A Jew is thanking an atheist for the eulogy of a catholic"

[xcom freak]

Originally posted by Chuck the plant+Apr 4 2005, 02:38 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Chuck the plant @ Apr 4 2005, 02:38 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-TaloN@Apr 4 2005, 11:11 AM
i think possibly the worst thing i heard over the whole thing was someone in the pub yesterday "i hope we get a sodding day off, then he might have done something for me at least" - i nearly smacked the guy.

Well, what do you think the pope did else for that guy? I sure know the pope never did anything for me. Then again, I'd never have gone and asked him, anyway.

And about "respectfulness": I still believe that a person who all of a sudden is treated like the incarnation of holiness itself should also be measured by his faults and wrongdoings, and what that man here did to the african continent is a bloody shame. Some of you might find this "disrespectful, -I- call it the truth. Just because he's dead doesn't mean he's taboo all of a sudden. Or would people who claim that say the same thing about Hitler, Stalin, Idi Amin or General Pinochet? Or Osama Bin Laden, should he happen to die sometime soon? I know that the pope does not line uo with those (because HIS faults weren't done on purpose, but out of ignorance), but it would be the logical conclusion of such a way of thinking. The pope DID some bad things as well, and just because he's dead shouldn't mean we're not entitled to talk about those anymore, especially not in a topic like this, where some people try to paint a picture of a man that was always good and right, which he just simply wasn't. [/b][/quote]
Still with the pope killed thousands becoz he forbid condoms???

The Pope also is against sex b4 marriage, doesnt that lower AIDS more than condoms? The pope is against homosexuality, and as u may know a homosexual act has X times more chances to infect ,doesnt that lower AIDS more than condoms? What about monogamy, faithfulness to one's wife, policys against divorce dont these lower AIDS too?

Aids in Africa is contracted from mother to son plus by the means of insects that can byte an HIV positiv then an HIV negative. The source of HIV is said to be a monkey in Africa...

But no it is of course becoz of the pope .......

EDIT : Here's a link to prove u that i am right! these are the causes of HIV and as u can c the Pope has nothing to do with it.

proof

[Stroggy]

a word to the wise, xcom freak, if you want to come over more... seriously, refrain from using leet talk like 'b4' and 'u'

[xcom freak]

Originally posted by Stroggy@Apr 4 2005, 03:51 PM
a word to the wise, xcom freak, if you want to come over more... seriously, refrain from using leet talk like 'b4' and 'u'

LOL
thanks 4 the advice
euh thanks for the advice

[Havell]

With regard to the point about homosexuals and AIDS, my um has access to the records of HIV and AIDS infection in her work and the fastest growing group of HIV positive people is hetrosexual men. It is a myth that HIV affects homosexuals more than hetrosexuals.

[Chuck the plant]

Originally posted by xcom freak@Apr 4 2005, 03:38 PM
Still with the pope killed thousands becoz he forbid condoms??? The Pope also is against sex b4 marriage, doesnt that lower AIDS more than condoms? The pope is against homosexuality, and as u may know a homosexual act has X times more chances to infect ,doesnt that lower AIDS more than condoms?

Ooooooooooh, so you're a homophobe as well... I won't even bother to get deeper into this, since it's just utter nonsense. BTW, homosexuals being in constant relationships would be much less likely to spread AIDS than "free raging gays", don't you agree? You don't make ANY sense here.

Aids in Africa is contracted from mother to son plus by the means of insects that can byte an HIV positiv then an HIV negative. The source of HIV is said to be a monkey in Africa...

Well, how does the mother get HIV in the first place? Because she humped a monkey? How old are you, anyway?

EDIT : Here's a link to prove u that i am right! these are the causes of HIV and as u can c the Pope has nothing to do with it.

proof

Maybe you should read that link yourself. Why is there no sexual education? Because people don't find it nescessary, and that's not at last because the pope himself spoke out against sexual education, emanzipation and the use of condoms or other preventional methods. Personally. On several occasions. And since the pope claims universal knowledge as Gods "stand-in" and since many africans are deeply religious and take his word as LAW, there is a direct link between those events. As I said, maybe do a little more research, try googling for the situation in Nairobi and other large african cities. And maybe read the "prooving link" you posted again as well.

Ah yeah, and stop that "l33t"-sh*t. Doesn't help your arguement at all if people already get p*ssed about having to read it at least twice to just get the WORDS...

no myth : smaller holes....proner to injuries....more fluid exchange. keeping this

post for 20 seconds before deleting it...

Since you know so much about homosexuals... (even more than official research-institues, as you claim): You ever heard of the fact that intercourse by way of the rectum isn't "gay exclusive", now did you?

[xcom freak]

My age is in my profile .. oh in case u cant count sorry didnt mean to offend u its 19.
.

since when mentionning a scientific fact make u homophobic? u can have sex with an HIV positive woman and have lets say 50% of chance of getting it. While if u have it with a man u have 60 % of getting it.(considering they are both in the same stage). + 50% of girls accept to get it behind. while all intercorse with men have to be by the behind.

monkey byte/scratch can give u HIV . What i meant in that example is that AFrica is the birthplace of HIV.

The problem in Africa is due to alot of unwed intercourse due to cultural stuff. If they are so religious how come they do that?

what l33t sh t?

[Stroggy]

Actually according to quite a few scientists aids did spread from animal to human because of scietists, Belgian scientists.
Belgian scientists wanted to create a cure for a certain tropical illness, but this disease would only survive on the organs of a primate, so they transported the disease using aids-infected organs, one thing lead to another and the cure contained the aids-virus.
people in africa were injected with the cure and thus got aids because of this.

I'm not sure if this is correct but it is a theory gaining more and more support, I saw it in a documentary on antional geographic sore perhaps it is true.

[Chuck the plant]

Originally posted by xcom freak@Apr 4 2005, 04:16 PM
since when mentionning a scientific fact make u homophobic? u can have sex with an HIV positive woman and have lets say 50% of chance of getting it. While if u have it with a man u have 60 % of getting it.(considering they are both in the same stage). + 50% of girls accept to get it behind. while all intercorse with men have to be by the behind.

It makes you seem like a homophobe:

a) because you imply that homosexuality and having an HIV-infection go along with each other by stating it the way you did

B) because you still cling to a false claim even after statistics proved you wrong.

c) you brought it up absolutely randomly. What does homosexuality per se have to do with AIDS (see also a) ) and especially with the AIDS-situation in Africa? There was no connection howsoever.

The problem in Africa is due to alot of unwed intercourse due to cultural stuff. If they are so religious how come they do that?

Why do so called "christians" keep throwing the first stone at others? Why do people kill in the name of God? Why is the bible itself full of contradictions? That's called "hipocrisy", it's a human thing. And of course the initial cause is unwed sex (I don't think I implied that those people get HIV because of monkey-bites, because I shouldn't bother about condoms in the first place then), but as I said: hypocrisy is human and that's the reason why many africans do what the pope says personally, but don't care much about some other aspects of the bible (just like ANY christian doesn't abide to everything that's demanded in the bible, simply because it's near impossible to do so anyway - and before you try turning that against me in favour of the pope: The pope does claim universal knowledge, so he SHOULD be better than human, don't you agree?), but the fact that the Pope personally spoke out against the use of condoms does in no way help to diminish the spreading of HIV, don't you think so as well?

EDIT: Please pay attention to some modifications in the above post

[xcom freak]

true except for the parts making me look like a complete moron.

he is not helping the AIDS situation in AFrica but he isnt THE cause of it, he isnt responsible of it.
Maybe some people caught it becoz they thought that the condom was the devil but this minor detail cant be a major factor.

If people are truly religious they would folow his other sayings that lower AIDS. But as u said hypocrisy...it does feel better without a condom... so i am concluding that he hasnt done anything to help things out but he isnt to blame.

edit oops