Is forced sex what the Vatican wants for people?

Yesterday, I quoted a twit priest who mentioned the "authentic truth about human sexuality". So, what kind of sex does the church consider "authentic"?

I mean, think about it. What type of sex gets the church's approval? They seem to be fanboys of the sex that occurs between male husband and female wife in a marriage -- as long as the couple avoids all the fun sinful positions while doing the deed. This kind of sex is not only great, it's holy!

And, judging by their actions rather than their words, we must infer that the church has no problem with the sex that priests force on children. If memory serves me correctly, it wasn't the priests, bishops and popes who railed against this common practice. It was outsiders who were horrified by priests raping kids, and brought the abuse to the attention of the media.  So I guess the church is fine with that kind of sex, too. It must be "authentic".

The characteristic that these two instances of "authentic" sex share is that the sex is viewed (by priests) as "forced". After all, no "good woman" enjoys marital sex. The husband forces it on the wife and it's her duty to comply with his illustrious, husbandly wishes. No fun, no foul. (And never you mind if the men enjoy it; that's what men do: they enjoy. It's their god-given right as menfolk!)

But in a gay marriage, neither partner is forced to have sex with a more powerful partner. The power issue is very important. If a man doesn't get to lord it over a less powerful creature, it's not god-approved.

Gay marriage, by definition, involves equality. And in the eyes of the church, people who are equal can't have "authentic" sex. Only the sex a man forces on his wife (or a priest forces on a child) is godly, good and above all else, authentic. If neither partner honors god by forcing sex on the other, how can the relationship be holy? Given these parameters, gay marriage will always be a sham. So say the priests.

I think this idea has wings. It's all about the forcing. What do you think? Does this argument ring true for you?

New week, same church

As the sacred rituals of conclave week begin, Catholicism reveals its true face in yet another country. 

A commission investigating abuse of children linked to Dutch Roman Catholic institutions says girls were sexually abused by members of the clergy in their homes and in church, while they suffered physical abuse and intimidation at the hands of nuns in boarding schools.

The commission, led by former Hague mayor Wim Deetman, was funded by the Catholic church. In preliminary conclusions in December 2011 it estimated that up to 20,000 children were molested at Catholic institutions between 1945 and 2010.

At least this one was funded by the church. Let's give them credit for that. I wonder if this news will reach the princes of the church as they settle in for their extra-holy, super-special conclave.

That's quite a church they've got there.

The vapid words of priests

The pope sent the following message to the grieving families in Newton, CT:

"I assure the families of the victims, especially those who lost a child, of my closeness in prayer," the pope said in his first public comments on the massacre by a lone gunman. "May the God of consolation touch their hearts and ease their pain." 

Thanks, pope. Your meaningless words mean...nothing. But what does fat, red-faced Cardinal Timmy Dolan have to say about the massacre? (I knew he'd worm his way into these events somehow.)

“Even in moments of tragedy, God gives us light,” Dolan said. “We have to seek the light in the darkness that God gives us. Goodness will always trump evil.”

Yes, let's all look for that light from god, and the goodness that is surely all over these events. It must be there...somewhere. Priests offer meaningless words. It's what they do.

Yesterday on CNN, I heard a dreadful pastor speaking nonsense. The anchor asked him what we should tell the parents. I didn't get the pastor's name, but he said we must remember that we are "fallen" and must "seek redemption." You know what, pastor? Fuck you and your filthy faith. Fallen indeed. That's just what the parents need to hear right now. What disgusting words.

Religion is empty. It's a magic fence constructed around nothing. Thus the words of priests are always meaningless. It disgusts me the way these "men of the cloth" cluster around disasters to reap their own Earthly rewards, such as camera time, adulation and donations. They make me sick.

It finally hit me: PZ is right

PZ Myers on his blog, Pharyngula:

Religions are systematic collections of threats and cajoling lies intended to bully a population into living in fear and supporting a parasitic priestly caste.

He says this all the time but the sense of it never came through to me until this reading. It's true. It's all about "supporting a parasitic priestly caste". Elsewise, why religion?

The hijab: not just for Muslims?

This morning, I read an article in the NYT about Amra Babic, the hijab-wearing mayor of central Bosnian town of Visoko. This led me to read about the hijab in Wikipedia:

The Arabic word literally means curtain or cover (noun). Most Islamic legal systems define this type of modest dressing as covering everything except the face and hands in public. Some interpretations say that a veil is not compulsory in front of blind, asexual or gay men.

I found that last bit amusing. But it also made me think of Christian priests because the concept of hijab applies to men as well as women. The article states that "For men, hijab includes the wearing of modest clothing (not very attractive)." Combine this with the prescription to hide all but the face and hands in public, and you end up with a priest's cassock. Priests in hijab. This idea will stick with me.

Then who, pray tell?

This is the funniest thing I've seen in a while:

PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — The Vatican won a major victory Monday in an Oregon federal courtroom, where a judge ruled that the Holy See is not the employer of molester priests. 

Then who, pray tell, employs these creatures? Do they receive checks directly from Jeebus, to fund their forays into little boys' pants?

The decision by U.S. District Court Judge Michael Mosman ends a six-year question in the decade-old case and could shield the Vatican from possible monetary damages.

Isn't that convenient?

"There are no facts to create a true employment relationship between Ronan and the Holy See," Mosman said in his ruling from the bench. 

Indeed. No relationship at all. And no need to pay attention to this:

The plaintiffs argued that Ronan's fealty to the Pope, the Vatican's ability to promote priests, the Vatican's laicization, or removal, process, and the ability to change priests' training all pointed to the Vatican employing priests. 

But it's not employment. Again, how very convenient. It's nice to know we live in a world where the Vatican will never be held accountable for its actions. That must be comforting for the popey guy. He's probably having a celebratory chalice of wine right now. It's great to be the popey guy!

But they're mad at Obama over birth control

LOS ANGELES (AP) — Robert Van Handel was a 15-year-old seminarian at St. Anthony's, a prestigious Franciscan boarding school, when, he said, a priest slipped into the infirmary where he was recovering from a fever and began to molest him. The priest told him it would help draw the fever out. 

That's what the church needs -- something to draw the fever out.

As the 9/11 iconography turns

Dolan and Egan: faces of evil. Dog knows what they're laughing at.

This is how legends are created by our intrepid, independent press:

NEW YORK (AP) — Cardinal Edward Egan was eating breakfast when then-Mayor Rudy Giuliani called to say there was a tragedy and the churchman was needed. A police car would soon be outside the chancery to take the leader of New York's Roman Catholics downtown.

Egan didn't know exactly what had happened in lower Manhattan that morning as he and his priest-secretary hurtled through the city . . . He would spend the next several days anointing the dead, distributing rosaries to workers as they searched, yada yada yada. 

That's just what you need to do in a crisis: call some twit priest who's on a first-name basis with sky fairies so he can mutter incantations and give bits of plastic away. I'm sure that helped a ton. And many thanks to the inestimable Rudy Giuliani for calling this jerk instead of someone who could, you know, do something. The reporter's reverent tone makes me ill. "There was a tragedy and the churchman was needed." Indeed. I hope the church paid the writer well for this slavering bit of iconography.

Religious twits running loose in the world

When I lived in Manhattan, I was once a patient at St. Vincent's Hospital in the Village. While there, I saw an appalling thing. Even today I shudder to think of it.

There was a knock at my door one morning and a priest stuck his upper body into my room. Ugh. He had a rosary dangling from one hand and some sort of spooky religious "vestment" in the other. Ugh.  And he said, in a sweet voice:

"Would you like a prayer?" 

Ugh! It was like he was some kind of mad cigarette girl at an old-time nightclub, but marketing prayers instead of smokes. I looked at him with open disgust and said, in my best Bea Arthur voice, "No! Get out."

What is wrong with these people? They should hide in darkened churches and leave normal people alone. There are a lot of sick people in hospitals and not one of them is in need of a prayer.

"Would you like a prayer?" Ugh!