Re: Am I going to go to hell for this?
Posted by ZombieLoffe on Thu Mar 3rd at 10:49pm 2005
Pure genius. Sinner repent!
[addsig]

ZombieLoffe
member
24 posts
32 snarkmarks
Registered: Sep 19th 2004
Location: Sweden
Occupation: Bloody nerd
Re: Am I going to go to hell for this?
Posted by azelito on Thu Mar 3rd at 10:50pm 2005
That is so lousy. I laugh at you: hahahaha!
You will not go to hell, the popes real message is finaly being brought through!
[addsig]

azelito
member
570 posts
127 snarkmarks
Registered: Aug 8th 2002
Location: Sweden
Occupation: Wierdness
Re: Am I going to go to hell for this?
Posted by Dred_furst on Thu Mar 3rd at 10:50pm 2005
that woman enjoys running from danger :S
[addsig]

Dred_furst
member
455 posts
106 snarkmarks
Registered: Sep 3rd 2003
Location: UK
Re: Am I going to go to hell for this?
Posted by Mephs on Fri Mar 4th at 1:28am 2005
I dunno why I chose her ReNo, just a random person, (though I'd
forgotten how shaggable she was). You're the second person to have
complained about a lack of sound. I don't know what that is. :
[addsig]

Mephs
member
381 posts
38 snarkmarks
Registered: Sep 18th 2004
Location: Northern Ireland
Occupation: Office Monkey
Re: Am I going to go to hell for this?
Posted by Gwil on Fri Mar 4th at 3:53am 2005
Mmm, Roman Catholocism in Europe (especially Italy) is really quite
strict about birth control, it is frowned upon by the Vatican.
[addsig]

Gwil
super admin
2864 posts
293 snarkmarks
Registered: Oct 13th 2001
Location: Derbyshire, UK
Occupation: Student
Re: Am I going to go to hell for this?
Posted by Mephs on Fri Mar 4th at 5:13am 2005
This is the only forum that I know of where you START with stupidity,
and then decend into serious debate, rather than vice versa!! (It's
definately no bad thing.)
And it was actually Humanae Vitae I was thinking of, not Second Vatican Council.
[addsig]

Mephs
member
381 posts
38 snarkmarks
Registered: Sep 18th 2004
Location: Northern Ireland
Occupation: Office Monkey
Re: Am I going to go to hell for this?
Posted by Mephs on Fri Mar 4th at 10:19am 2005
"Contraception
was so far outside the biblical mindset and so obviously wrong that it
did not need the frequent condemnations other sins did. Scripture condemns
the practice when it mentions it. Once a moral principle has been
established in the Bible, every possible application of it need not be
mentioned. For example, the general principle that theft is wrong was clearly
established in Scripture; but there?s no need to provide an exhaustive
list of every kind of theft. Similarly, since the principle that contraception
is wrong has been established by being condemned when it?s mentioned in
the Bible, every particular form of contraception does not need to be dealt
with in Scripture in order for us to see that it is condemned."
In other words, it doesnt, Lep. Its just one of those dumb laws PEOPLE make, and say that god said so.
Furthermore, the only mention of coitus interruptus was Onan's sin(Gen.
38:8?10). He got killed for "spilling his seed onto the ground".
Its actually wierd that the catholic term for the sin of using birth
control is Onanism, given that he was killed for practising the only
thing method they endorse.
[addsig]

Mephs
member
381 posts
38 snarkmarks
Registered: Sep 18th 2004
Location: Northern Ireland
Occupation: Office Monkey
Re: Am I going to go to hell for this?
Posted by Mephs on Fri Mar 4th at 11:14am 2005
Actually, when the romans adopted christianity they were pretty liberal
with it. It was only in the dark ages that the concept of self hate and
the need to constantly repent took over the idea of the actual
forgiveness. You'll notice that when stupidity like this takes hold,
the advancement of civilisation stops. Then in the renaissance, when
people tried to restore some of the splendour that the roman empire
once had, the church started being questioned again.
[addsig]

Mephs
member
381 posts
38 snarkmarks
Registered: Sep 18th 2004
Location: Northern Ireland
Occupation: Office Monkey