Pope says, Sex can become 'like a drug'

I know that, so I advocate that parents go on enjoy sex naturally and reproducing ever more people, so that future generations can come to be around, to talk about it as well.

"World population is barely large enough for you and I to have been born." some poster on the internet

Good thing our ancestors weren't population phobic.

The natural and elegant outlet for our powerful reproductive urges, is proper commitment in marriage for the security of families, and of course reproduction.

Maybe it's no so much whether sex is "addictive" like a drug, but whether it's a proper healthy addiction. People tend to habitually eat and sleep and pee, so maybe we should stop doing those things? Of course not. There's a proper place for those things, as there is for people pairing up, marrying, and working productive jobs and such to better support their natural proliferating of their numbers.

The liberal war protesters of the rebellious 1960s were partially right about "Make love, not war." Having children gives people something productive to do, to stay out of trouble, so yeah "making love" is a great idea, if it's all about building lasting families and welcoming children to come to life, rather than fighting amongst ourselves needlessly. We all need such useful things to do. Besides, having babies is generally very good for growing and stimulating the economy, far more safely with so much less mess, than war ever was.

I really like this new pope. He looks kinda scary, but he's actually done really good things for the church. For a pope, he's pretty progressive.

Well I hope they will still advocate large families. Somebody has to do it. So much of the Church has become so worldly, sounding too much like the world, and not enough of the ways of God.

Progressive? Is that good or bad? Is that liberal or conservative?

I seem to recall something about the Pope scolding the West for not having enough children. But that may have been the previous Pope?

I would count that the Pope says not to use "artificial" birth control, fairly low on the very long list of moral and practical reasons to let families grow possibly large, as I am Protestant, not Catholic. If the Popes and priests think large families are such a good idea, then why the celibacy? That I have never understood so well. As I don't see it commanded in my Bible. Set the example, and let moral people with large families, be priests, bishops, preachers or whatever. Maybe that's partly why Protestants don't seem to have quite the same problems, that Catholicism sometimes gets in the news for?

And good parents need ready excuses to reject the anti-faith message of the "family planners" ever pushing their shoddy, promiscuity-promoting experimental contraceptive potions and poisons.

wow, I think this is the first time I've encountered full-frontal pronatalism.

very very interesting and cool philosophy

My parents would never have done anything that awful, and that's why I am a virgin, just like Good Queen Bess.

It is wonderful knowing that I have never been fucked nor sucked, even though I would have never had periods of addiction.

Is this like when they forgave Galileo and took away his ex-communication 800 years or so after he was dead so that they could "think about it?"

It's amazing how long they take to wake up to certain realities.

Oh, I've seen it before. Check out quiverfull.org

There's lots of websites encouraging large families. By relaxing and welcoming the human race to ENLARGE its growing numbers more naturally, there comes to be all the more people around to enjoy life, what could be more win-win for everybody?, but to welcome the natural flow of human life to flow naturally unhindered.

Of course it needs somewhere to go, so people need to responsibily commit in marriage, to assure responsible fathers and mothers for the children that come along, and so society can know who to hold responsible for their children's care and love and raising.

Human population growth is beautiful, for it allows all the more people to live. Let the human race blossom in size naturally.

Picking up on what MisterGeeCee said:

Obviously abstinence from sex is unnatural and unhealthy. The evidence of that is these supposed 'men of God' who sodomise their altar boys.

I don't know how Catholicism has any followers...I think its mostly a case of people being born into it.

What I have noticed about people who know "everything" and are "know it all" is the fact that state the bloody obvious and state it as if it was revelations of their own making.
This way the "know it all" can always be right and thus always try to claim the higher intellectual ground.

I'm not Catholic, and definitely have some issues with some core beliefs there (the whole idea of saints is really problematic for me), but pretty much understood (and somewhat agreed with) the Pope on the content posted by njqt. The resistance to artificial methods of fertilization is in line with their stance on birth control/rhythm method.

I also fully concur on the "sex can be as addictive as a drug" thought. Drugs, sex, drinking -- they all touch on the Pleasure Principle, and an awful lot of people have been destroyed by excesses in temporary fixes in pleasure. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that sex is bad or wrong or inherently evil, just that an excess of it can lead one astray from more important priorities. The same can be said of many activities (excessive devotion to daytime dramas, baseball statistics, work, etc.) but sex can have stronger ties to you since it is so immediate and easy and fantastic-feeling. As far as comparing it to a drug, I've seen very few people in my life who get strung out on it the way that they might on heroin or PCP or even Oxycontin, but it definitely isn't an empty comparison.

Kev

Mr. Pope could not be any more irrelevant. This idiot should be in prison for his role in the child molestations of the last century. Yes, it was him specifically. Nazi fuck!

An excerpt from an interview with the author of a fascinating book I'm reading that absolutely trashes Hitchins, Dawkins, and other shallow "Darwinists" that seem to think Science disproves the existence of a God:

Kengor: You have some surprises in here even for Christians, including those Christians who have bought into the caricature of the Galileo incident as a case of science and reason being trashed by close-minded religious fanatics—centuries-ago precursors to the Salem witch-hunters and, of course, George W. Bush—who opposed not merely scientific inquiry but progress itself. You re-examine the Galileo case, calling it "an atheist fable." Tell us about this.

D'Souza: It seems like every year or so one of the news magazines does a cover story on Science vs. Religion. It turns out that this whole framework is a 19th-century fabrication. There is no sustained historical clash between science and religion. In fact, Christianity was crucial in giving birth to modern science, and the vast, vast majority of leading scientists over the past 500 years have been Christians. The whole warfare model relies on a handful of examples, mostly exaggerated or made up. Perhaps the best example that the atheists can cite is the Galileo case. I re-examine this case in the light of the best scholarship about it. We discover that the evidence for heliocentrism was not definitive in Galileo's day. With hindsight we know that Galileo was right, but the arguments he made for heliocentrism were actually wrong. The Church's position was far more open-minded and reasonable than Galileo's. He made agreements that he didn't keep, and blatantly lied about his views before the Inquisition courts. Still, he was treated leniently and allowed to continue his scientific work and died in his bed.

EDIT: Here we go, a blog post refuting most of common "knowledge" about the Galileo case. More Atheist Humbug About Galileo - News Bloggers

Geez, who told him???

Best drug around!!!

Yes, he does have this little 'light in the loafers' kind of walk. I think they're all queer: wish they all would admit it.