Tis true.
On the offchance you haven't heard.

In the words of my mother, he was a nice man.

Moved to "General".

To catholics he was a moral guide and religious leader. To non-catholics he was still a strong leader and a great person. Although it's not exactly a surprise, today is a day that is filled with sorrow for all those whose hearts he touched. May he rest in peace.

John Paul II was the greatest champions of peace and social justice of the last twenty-five years. He was a wonderful leader for all Catholics and a gift to the world. He has truly earned his eternal rest.

KappaWing wrote:To catholics he was a moral guide and religious leader. To non-catholics he was still a strong leader and a great person. Although it's not exactly a surprise, today is a day that is filled with sorrow for all those whose hearts he touched. May he rest in peace.

Not to all non-Catholics.

So you think he was a weak leader and a selfish idiot?

KappaWing wrote:So you think he was a weak leader and a selfish idiot?

I think the deliberate misrepresentation of the effectiveness of condoms in particular, is something i find almost unforgiveable. Whilst I disagree with the Catholic churches position on contraception in Africa (an AIDs hotspot), I don't object their right to have that opiion - but when such an influentialbody lies to support their position (they released 'reports' which wrongly said condoms were far less effective than they actually are as a barrier), and when that lie can potentially kill millions, I can't accept that as being 'just'.

As an individual, I can't say I saw him as a great person or strong leader; because he never affected my life in any way. And I always remain deeply cynical of the Vatican, whenever I see their city-state full of priceless art & furnishings, and the cardinals with fingers full of ruby rings, I can't help but feel that there are others who are more humble and charitable.

So I'm ambivalent; I mourn him no more or less than I would any stranger.

Anyone who is stupid enough to believe the Vatican in the first place, especially when they release reports that claim to be remotely scientific, deserves what they have coming to them.

He never affected my life either, but he affected so many other lives that you can't help admiring his devotion and strong will. The pope isn't responsible for every aspect of the vatican, such as the elegant treatment of high-ranking religious leaders. The reports probably led to the death of millions, but these millions were stupid enough to believe the Vatican in the first place. Thus, the dependant thinkers are eliminated from the gene pool.

The care and selflessness he showed toward individuals was astounding. The apathy he showed towards the AIDS crisis is equally astounding, but in a bad way. Just as in a great work of art, the contrast this man has shown while he held office defines him as an extraordinary individual.

KappaWing wrote:Anyone who is stupid enough to believe the Vatican in the first place, especially when they release reports that claim to be remotely scientific, deserves what they have coming to them.

He never affected my life either, but he affected so many other lives that you can't help admiring his devotion and strong will. The pope isn't responsible for every aspect of the vatican, such as the elegant treatment of high-ranking religious leaders. The reports probably led to the death of millions, but these millions were stupid enough to believe the Vatican in the first place. Thus, the dependant thinkers are eliminated from the gene pool.

Actually, it only takes one person to believe; a person in power.

The Vatican is spiritual leader for an entire sect of Christianity, a vast amount of people. It is suppossed to be led by Gods representative on earth; so any Roman Catholic should be able to trust it, and follow the guidance of it.

Blaming people for believing a lie, when that lie comes from people their faith tells them to trust, is stupidity. Blaming the thousands of children born with AIDS through no fault of their own, is insulting.

The Vatican has a responsibility borne of its influence; you can't excuse them for lying, by calling their followers stupid.

Am i the only one that feels indifferent about him dying? Meh.

I somewhat agree with aldo.

While I do wish for the fellow to RIP, I do not actually mourn him. We hear of deaths every day. His is only slightly different.

I feel more sorry for the several aussies that were killed in the plane crash in Indonesia. People like them deserve more honour and mourning I think. The actual 'workers of the hive'.

I fail to see how the contrast of good and evil in a human being can make them a great person.

I think the pope did quite a many good things for the world in peace talks etc. But few actual results became of them.
At least he tried though.

So, apparently being one of the most influential figures in the fall of communism doesn't rate too high with your people? Or being incredibly outspoken against autocratic regimes around the world? Or working to secure the fundamental right to live for all people, no matter their status? No, I guess none of that qualifies as "important." I swear, with some of the absolute **** I've heard spewed over the past few days, I can honestly say I'm almost ashamed to be part of the worldwide Internet community.

What does the Vatican being full of artwork have to do with the Pope's life? Ever notice that the Catholic Church is by far the most munificent charitable organization in the world? Does the fact that bishops wear rings change that fact?

As for the condoms issue, you're criticizing the Pope for upholding the moral teachings of the Catholic Church? Seems a little nonsensical to me. I haven't heard any convincing evidence from the contraceptive industry that condoms are as effective as they claim, and I can tell you that I would be infinitely more willing to trust the Church in this matter than the likes of Planned Parenthood.

Top Gun wrote:So, apparently being one of the most influential figures in the fall of communism doesn't rate too high with your people? Or being incredibly outspoken against autocratic regimes around the world? Or working to secure the fundamental right to live for all people, no matter their status? No, I guess none of that qualifies as "important." I swear, with some of the absolute **** I've heard spewed over the past few days, I can honestly say I'm almost ashamed to be part of the worldwide Internet community.

Unless said people are, for example, homosexual. It's selective equality, which in itself is contradictory.

Top Gun wrote: What does the Vatican being full of artwork have to do with the Pope's life? Ever notice that the Catholic Church is by far the most munificent charitable organization in the world? Does the fact that bishops wear rings change that fact?

Power & wealth corrupt.

Ever heard of Roberto Calvi (the 'Devils Banker' & Lucio Gelli? $1.3bn missing from Banco Ambrosiano which was traced to the Vatican accounts? Reports that Archbishop Malinkus was directly involved in discussions leading to the subsequent murder of Calvi? The warrant issued for Cardinal Michele Giordano over charges of usury, extortion and membership of a criminal group? The mysterious death of Pope John Paul I (embalmed after half the usual time, no samples taken to test for poision, no death certificate ever released, items taken from his room by Cardinal Villot, the denial of an autopsy despite a precedent) after reportedly seeking to democratise and respiritualize the the Catholic church?

There are people there with dirty fingers, that I am sure of. And i look at them in their ivory towers, living in complete luxury & impunity, and I wonder if these are really the people who are best equipped to give spiritual guidance.

I'm not religious, but I'd take the priest/preacher/pastor/whatever who slums it in a hut in sub-Saharan africa over that as a guide, any day.

Top Gun wrote: As for the condoms issue, you're criticizing the Pope for upholding the moral teachings of the Catholic Church? Seems a little nonsensical to me. I haven't heard any convincing evidence from the contraceptive industry that condoms are as effective as they claim, and I can tell you that I would be infinitely more willing to trust the Church in this matter than the likes of Planned Parenthood.

The WHO has already stated that the Vaticans comments over condom effectiveness were seriously flawed and dangerous. The EU called the statemend 'bigoted'; it was a definitive lie, calculated for their own ends. And it could literally cost millions of lives.

I find that unforgiveable; it's not a question of different faith or belief, it's a question of lying when the lie itself is dangerous, when the lie can literally kill.

And, how in hell can you equate the opinion of the entire medical community with the contraceptive industry? It's be unequivocally tested time and time again, and yet you find it more reliable to trust a truly idiotic piece of scaremongering? (especially from the institution that said some condoms were already smeared with HIV/AIDs 'out the packet').

Hippo wrote:Am i the only one that feels indifferent about him dying?

No.

Top Gun wrote:So, apparently being one of the most influential figures in the fall of communism doesn't rate too high with your people? Or being incredibly outspoken against autocratic regimes around the world? Or working to secure the fundamental right to live for all people, no matter their status? No, I guess none of that qualifies as "important." I swear, with some of the absolute **** I've heard spewed over the past few days, I can honestly say I'm almost ashamed to be part of the worldwide Internet community.

The fact that millions of people will die of AIDS as a direct result of the lies his regime spread cancels out a large portion of that as far as I'm concerned.
No one is claiming that he wasn't important. I'm sure he did some good. But he also was in charge of a state that did a lot of bad while he was in charge of it. As such he bears full responsibilty for that.

Top Gun wrote:As for the condoms issue, you're criticizing the Pope for upholding the moral teachings of the Catholic Church?

Let me put it this way. If I went to Africa and said that everyone there should become an atheist that would be my right. If I however went there and claimed I had scientific proof that being a christian made your dick shrivel up and fall off then you'd think I needed to be challanged on that one for spreading lies especially if people started believing me and converting from christianity.
The Pope can teach that condoms will make you burn in hell all he wants. He can say that good catholics don't use them. He can claim that preventing pregnacies is a sin against God.
What he can't do is claim that they don't work. They do. It's not a matter of faith. It's a matter of science. The science proves that they work. He lied. End of matter.

Top Gun wrote: I haven't heard any convincing evidence from the contraceptive industry that condoms are as effective as they claim

You haven't looked for any. Show me one single scientific study that says that it isn't as effective. It's not just the contraceptive industy that makes those studies so get any stupid theories about condom manufacturers conning people just to sell more out of your head. Independant research also proves condoms work.

That isn't even the issue though. Even if condoms were only 30% effective in protecting against AIDS that would still be several million less cases than there are now. Or are you going to try to make the ridiculous claim that condoms have a negligable effect on AIDS?