Nazi Pope! Nazi Pope! Nazi Pope! Fuck off!  

rm_VoodooGuru1 49M
2116 posts
11/4/2005 9:04 am

Last Read:
3/5/2006 9:27 pm

Nazi Pope! Nazi Pope! Nazi Pope! Fuck off!

OK, I don't expect very many of you to get the DK reference that is my title, but how about this one?...

"Without children there is no future.”

Some sappy slogan from a sycophantic southern PTA? A quote on one of those “I hate abortion” license plates they offer in southern states? Ooooohh, I know! It’s from Michael Jackson’s defense team, right?

Nope, sorry kids. It’s from a much more respected man than any of these sources. It’s from Nazi Pope.

Nazi Pope spoke this rhetorical platitude on Wednesday at his weekly audience in St. Peter’s Square. Among this congregation were thousands of members of the - get this - “Italian Numerous Families Association.”

Were this association to have a chapter in the States, what would it be called? American Mormon Families Association? American Irresponsible Welfare Recipients Association?

Nazi Pope went on to say, “Wir müssen vertreiben der Auslander!

Er, that is, "It is my hope that further adequate social and legislative interventions be promoted to protect and support the more numerous families, which constitute a richness and a hope for the entire nation."

Funny that a man who used to be a member of a party whose goal it was to exterminate some 10MM people, and which made about 67% of goal (a passing grade), a man who fired an anti-air gun at American planes every fucking night (no one knows his success rate), should be calling for more children to be born to “repopulate” Europe.

Then again, along with extermination of Jews, Gypsies, Czechs, Poles, homo-homos, the retarded, mentally ill, der Fuhrer wanted lots of Aryan boys born. Anyway, the Vatican was always sympathetic to Nazis anyway.

Ah, yes... demand that people start having more sex, but as usual, they aren’t allowed to enjoy it, no mouth or butt sex, and don’t use protection of any kind. Then - ask the state to pay for the consequences. Typical Vatican bullshit. I’m convinced that secretly, the Vatican still thinks it trumps any secular government in Europe, the Americas. At the very least they believe that Catholics in these countries owe their allegiance to Nazi Pope first, and their government second.

What abject irresponsibility! Will the Vatican take care of all the extra kids? I’m not being rhetorical here either; the Church has enormous land holdings, and like it or not, wields tremendous political influence. OK Nazi Pope, you want a bunch more kids? Start growing soybeans in the backyards of all your churches and land holdings; then lobby all First World governments to provide additional resources for alternative energy development. There must be a bunch of talented Catholic scientists & engineers... encourage them to study altergy too.

I am serious about this, though. If the Church were to do something constructive to help provide for a world with a much greater population - and this is something they can do if they want - so that all these extra lungs and stomachs can live somewhere above utter poverty, I’ll leave them alone, might even support them, eh?

Until then, Nazi Pope continues to commit the sin of omission, and remains on my list of corrupt men with far too much power who drag the world’s populace down with him, and actively keep us all from being more than we are.


sleeplessknight1 68M

11/4/2005 10:48 am

I am interested at seeing what response you get to this post.
I will comment if yu wish.
I respect that you have strong feelings on this subject.
I do not know the circumstances from which you speak....
so I would not wish to comment in ignorance.....
perhaps I should walk on by....


GleesFlakyShawl 50M
1620 posts
11/4/2005 10:57 am

funny thing is church men dont think they have to have kids ... i mean, they champion ofr their own celibate.....


PawPr1nt 51M
133 posts
11/4/2005 11:29 am

I think the context is that secular powers WERE once subordinate to the Papacy (prior to the Renaissence), which relied on the poverty and scientific ignorance caused by it's doctrines to 'cull' excess population and create a kind of religion-induced natural-selection. A very neat self-regulating system, I think.

It's interesting that the Papacy is also a net profiteer from the 'franchising' of it's version of the Christian faith. Probably has something to do with not having to financially support all of it's sick and poverty-stricken adherents... (Who are told they will go to Hell if they don't stick to the rules).

The 'Hell' represented in the Bible, in the way it is by Catholicism, is a good distraction form the fact that most Catholics in the Third World are already existing in a living Hell-on-Earth. At least Buddha, who came from those parts, was frank enough to tell people that suffering is part of life and we just have to deal with it. No need for mind-games (guilt) and dynasty-building population strategies from that plain-talking holy-man.


Rowan_Taltos 48F

11/4/2005 11:43 am

Did I wake up in Bizarro world again? I thought that it was almost a Catholic mandate to have big families to grow up in the church. Although how the Catholics that I know, managed to have the perfect 2 kids combination is completely beyond me.


caressmewell 53F

11/4/2005 12:13 pm

I didn't realize that people had stopped having babies...damn where have I been?

Go a bit easier on the South please. Not all of us are ignorant, bible thumping, Bush voting, conservative morons.


rm_VoodooGuru1 49M
2053 posts
11/4/2005 8:08 pm

sleeplessnight1 - Say what you want dude; opinion, prefaced by acknowledging you aren't an expert on the subject, is always welcome.

dz2502 - agreed, and then these celibate priests think they can offer marriage & sex counseling.

pawpr1nt - thank you, you bring up some valid, thought-provoking points. One of which is your mention of hell; hell is not mentioned at all in the Old Testament - as if it didn't exist, eh? But it is mentioned somewhat frequently in New Testament. It's almost as if Jesus brought hell with him, no?

However, I should point out that Papal supremacy continued in much of Europe long past the Renaissance; indeed, well into the Enlightenment. Remember Cardinal Richelieu? The Frenchy-Foo-Fag-Nasty Revolution began in 1788, no?

[Rowan Taltos] - I may very well be wrong on this, but I thought the mandate was that the laity must not use any form of birth control. Big families just kinda happened because of this.

caressmewell - sorry if moi offended. I'm well aware that not all Southerners are "ignorant, bible thumping, Bush voting, conservative morons," but most are. And ALL of youse drink that horrible thick, brown, syrupy sludge you call "sweet tea."

I lived more than a decade in the South, in STP, ATL; both states had those "Choose Life" tags (as they're called down there). Pro-Choice people asked both state governments to either offer a Pro-Choice tag, or to discontinue the Choose Life tags. The response from both governments and the anti-abortion folk was that these tags were not, in fact, promoting a political agenda, they were just promoting kids. If that's the case, then why the fuck would Rev. Wildmon, Ralph Reed, Jerry Fartwell, et al, get so involved in the issue? Isn't lying a sin?

Oh, and in Europe, the average number of children is a population decreasing 1.7 kids per couple.


PawPr1nt 51M
133 posts
11/4/2005 9:06 pm

Renaissence - In the British Isles, we set the trend in Europe and most definitely put roman-catholicism on it's back foot early-on. Hence our wars with all those Roman-Catholic nations. I was seeing it from my national perspective

Demographics - As a whole, there are less births taking place, but the statistic doesn't show that amongst the 'indigenous' citizens it's actually almost at a stand-still, whereas the 'imported' citizens of Eastern Europe, Middle-East and Asia are at it like rabbits. Apparently, it's got something to do with us Westerners having a egotistical 'need' for higher standards of living/expression for the individual, as opposed to a possible concept of stack-it-high-and-treat-it-cheap family-ethic amongst the immigrants. A kind of 'Drang nach Westen' amongst the economic refugees, maybe...?


rm_VoodooGuru1 49M
2053 posts
11/4/2005 11:45 pm

pawpr1nt - of course. Wasn't it Queen Mary, the last Catholic monarch of GB?

Thank you for your perspective on demographics; I prefer learning to teaching.


watchmesquirm 46F  
99 posts
11/5/2005 1:02 am

No butt sex????


PawPr1nt 51M
133 posts
11/6/2005 12:32 am

Yeah, lets get back to watchmesquirm's enquiry... NO buttsex?

Challenge to the readers - Where in the Bible does it say no driving up the Hershey-Highway?

Just for reference you understand...

You can never know too much.


MissAnnThrope 56F
11488 posts
11/7/2005 10:17 am

You know, you forgot to mention, this man was the Grand Inquisitor of the church from 1982 until he was named Pope. He actually had Priests who disagreed or wrote scholarly works that offended him excommunicated. The clergy has been afraid to speak its voice since he got that position.

I know at least three devout Catholics who have left the church and won't be returning until this man is gone. I know one who believes he's the anti-Christ and if you look at what Revelation says about the anti-Christ and what St. Malachy said in his predicitions of Popes, she could very well be right. One thing is certain, this man is no good. He wants to bring back the Inqusition.

How he was elected Pope, I'll never figure out. For one, he is too old. For another, considering how afraid of him all the Cardinals were reported to be, you would think they would want to elect someone else and limit his power. Then again, he could have blackmail material on all of them.

Now, what does the church do with all the unwanted children, you ask? Nothing. It's the fetus that's important to them. Not the child once it's born. Back in the mid to late 80s, the death squads in South America started to make the news. Children of peasants were set out on their own. I mean little kids. There were kids living on the street as young as six that the reporters found. There are probably younger out there.

Basically, the church tells these people they can't use birth control, they have to take their chances as far as birth control goes. If they don't want to have babies, don't have sex. Yeah, illiterate peasants who don't even have electricity. What else are they going to do to amuse themselves?

Anyway, the families go to the church for help, or even try to leave babies with Catholic orphanages. They're turned away. So, when the kids are old enough to fend for themselves, they're thrown away. Out onto the streets. That is where the death squads come in.

I'm sure they still operate. Nothing was done about them when the international media got ahold of the story. They were told the squads were a necessary evil, as the kids were mostly criminals. Pickpockets, muggers and thieves with no future. So at night, especially in Brazil, government troops went out at night to kill the throw away children the Vatican told their parents they had to have.

Now, in the eyes of the Vatican, these children are martyrs. I'm not joking. Ask anyone who is truly indoctrinated into Catholic though. I mean, the people who would die for the Pope if he asked. The children are martyrs. So are children that are beaten, by family members and otherwise abused. Too bad martyrdom is no longer a guarantee of instant sainthood. There would be thousands of new saints, as these children died because of the church.

Ratzinger wants to drag the church even further back into the middle ages now. The man makes John Paul II look like a liberal.


Become a member to create a blog