Don’t Eat Gay Animals on a Friday

On the largest scales the universe is evolving. In a few billion years our galaxy will merge with the Andromeda galaxy, our nearest big neighbour. The scales involved here mean that this will probably happen without any major collisions — just a series of gravitational interactions.

For smaller things there are theories that cosmic rays coming from within and outwith our galaxy are responsible for small changes in DNA code and therefore can alter the evolutionary process.
In a universe this dynamic and changeable it is heartwarming to know there are some things we can hold on to – some things to rely on.

One of those things for me is the near certainty that sooner or later the catholic church will make a bizarre statement which is likely to give me a good laugh.

True to form,

Pope Benedict XVI has said that saving humanity from homosexual or transsexual behaviour is just as important as saving the rainforest from destruction.

He explained that defending God’s creation was not limited to saving the environment, but also about protecting man from self-destruction.

What is particularly comical here is that he has decided to dress this intolerance up with science and sociology — that is doubly bizarre because the church still has an attitude to those subjects that is schizophrenic at best.

He continued,

It is not “out-of-date metaphysics” to “speak of human nature as ‘man’ or woman’”, he told scores of prelates gathered in the Vatican’s sumptuous Clementine Hall.

I don’t think anyone thinks it is out of date to consider that there are two sexes, especially given that human hermaphrodites are relatively rare, so what is he talking about?

“We need something like human ecology, meant in the right way.“

Ahhh. This is classic. “Meant in the right way” — right way according to whom? God, via the catholic church presumably. After all, they still have that infallibility thing — eating fish on Friday was wrong, but now it isn’t. And just ask Galileo who is happily in heaven now after receiving a papal sort-of-pardon — in 1992; they might not be fast but they get there in the end.

The BBC story also pointed out that

The Catholic Church opposes gay marriage. It teaches that while homosexuality is not sinful, homosexual acts are.

…which is something like a rerun of what they said to Galileo “we aren’t saying you are wrong, you are probably right, but you can’t go around telling anyone that or we will set fire to you.” [I am paraphrasing a little there].

I wonder if this means that they are going to be preaching to the 1,500 animal species that have had their gay behaviour observed? Probably though, we just won’t be able to eat gay animals on a Friday.

I have never had a gay episode in my life. I did once fall asleep in a gay bar in Seoul. I was there with some gay friends and the only thing of note that happened was that I was woken up by the barman an hour later asking if I wanted another drink.

But maybe I have been on the wrong bus all of my life because all of this struck me as a good way for gays to promote their culture.

The human race really doesn’t need more people at the moment. Quite simply, there are far too many of us already. So why not ‘Gay is the new Green’ campaigns. If almost everyone goes gay for 25 years then the population will reduce over time giving us an opportunity to feed, house and water the people already here and the ones to come in the future.

On many occasions the church has exhorted young men to lay down their lives in uniform for the greater good so why not encourage them to lay down their DNA in sequins?

It is an absurdity, but I am deliberately joking. The unfortunate thing is that these buffoons aren’t and this idea is not any less absurd than the next thing they will invent — did I say ‘invent’? Sorry, I obviously meant to say ‘receive by first class post from god himself’.

Scotland's Michael Greenwell has worked, at various times, as a university tutor, a barman, a DJ ("not a very good one,"), an office lackey, supermarket worker, president of a small charity, a researcher, a librarian, a volunteer worker in Nepal during the civil war there, and "some other things that were too tedious to mention." Nowadays, he explains, "I am always in the education sector in one way or another." Read other articles by Michael, or visit Michael's website.

14 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

  1. Michael Kenny said on December 27th, 2008 at 9:49am #

    I always think that when someone lowers themselves to mere sneering, it means that they cannot think of any serious arguments to put forward. I don’t see the point of an article that puts forward no serious points.
    By the way, the Spinwatch website does not list Mr Greenwell as a member.

  2. michael greenwell said on December 27th, 2008 at 9:55am #

    serious points do not always have to be made with footnotes.

    You will find some of my writing on spinwatch not to mention some of my research.

    I am not a member of the advisory board but I do not claim to be.

  3. michael greenwell said on December 27th, 2008 at 10:15am #

    I have also been involved with the spin tours, done some blogging for spinwatch, helped out at the conference, have done some of the research for something upcoming and among other things happen to be friends with quite a few of the people involved.

    I hope that clears that up for you.

  4. bozh said on December 27th, 2008 at 11:08am #

    nature experiments w. all kind of biota and people. it makes -not me- bad, good, short, tall, gay, dark, fair, ‘dumb’, ‘smart’, (im)pious, ectetc, people.
    so, at least today, i’m not arguing w. my maker; secretely, tho, i curse her for making me what i am.
    who am i to blame papa benedicto when it isn’t his fault for the way he is?
    and on top of that makes me laugh? oops, i mean, nature makes me laugh.
    but, but if nature wld only gives us also/respect for biota and other life.
    may be some day. thnx

    anyhow, i had been happy for my readers while i’m here; after i go, well, i don’t know.

  5. David of Oregon said on December 27th, 2008 at 12:17pm #

    Here is what the Pope actually said…the media really did the gay community a disservice on this. Not once did he mention gay, lesbian, homosexual, or transgender.

    Since faith in the Creator is an essential part of the Christian Credo, the Church cannot and should not confine itself to passing on the message of salvation alone. It has a responsibility for the created order and ought to make this responsibility prevail, even in public. And in so doing, it ought to safeguard not only the earth, water, and air as gifts of creation, belonging to everyone. It ought also to protect man against the destruction of himself. What is necessary is a kind of ecology of man, understood in the correct sense. When the Church speaks of the nature of the human being as man and woman and asks that this order of creation be respected, it is not the result of an outdated metaphysic. It is a question here of faith in the Creator and of listening to the language of creation, the devaluation of which leads to the self-destruction of man and therefore to the destruction of the same work of God. That which is often expressed and understood by the term “gender”, results finally in the self-emancipation of man from creation and from the Creator. Man wishes to act alone and to dispose ever and exclusively of that alone which concerns him. But in this way he is living contrary to the truth, he is living contrary to the Spirit Creator. The tropical forests are deserving, yes, of our protection, but man merits no less than the creature, in which there is written a message which does not mean a contradiction of our liberty, but its condition. The great Scholastic theologians have characterised matrimony, the life-long bond between man and woman, as a sacrament of creation, instituted by the Creator himself and which Christ – without modifying the message of creation – has incorporated into the history of his covenant with mankind. This forms part of the message that the Church must recover the witness in favour of the Spirit Creator present in nature in its entirety and in a particular way in the nature of man, created in the image of God. Beginning from this perspective, it would be beneficial to read again the Encyclical Humanae Vitae: the intention of Pope Paul VI was to defend love against sexuality as a consumer entity, the future as opposed to the exclusive pretext of the present, and the nature of man against its manipulation.

  6. joe said on December 27th, 2008 at 1:38pm #

    Why is there a Pope ? What is his function, his intentions, his motives ?
    Why is the Pope always a male ? How many presidents, prime minsters, etc., are male ? How many generals, admirals, colonels are Female ?

  7. bozh said on December 27th, 2008 at 3:16pm #

    speaking for creator, instead creator speaking for self is affirmation on one hand and denial on the other; known also as “not let ur right hand know what the left is doing”. thnx

  8. John Hatch said on December 27th, 2008 at 6:33pm #

    Well, I thought Michael Greenwell’s article made several salient points, and did so with welcome humor.

    As a recovered (yep, I did it!) Catholic, I am still stunned at the absurdity and arrogance of that unholy religion with its prancing Gucci Bishops and tons of gold bullion in the US and Switzerland (and not inconsiderable amounts of cash, stocks and bonds, some derived- and they have admitted this and do not apologise- from indirect arms dealing. The Vatican Bank was also dealing with counterfeit Coca-Cola stock for awhile, and there was a warrant out for chief banker Archbishop Marcinkus. Public record.) This while how many children starve every single dayof the year?

    Oh yes- and Ratzinger was the holier-than-thou guy who instructed every Bishop to drag his (or her? Nah!) feet regarding priestly sex abuse, or face possible excommunication.

    Suffer the children, indeed. Nice article, Michael.

  9. michael greenwell said on December 27th, 2008 at 6:38pm #


  10. JNicolson said on December 27th, 2008 at 9:18pm #

    When has the Pope ever bothered with “serious arguments?” The Catholic church perpetuates itself by brainwashing & indoctrinating children too young to argue. When you’re old enough to start questioning the dogma, they tell you to “have faith.” Their idea of morality is the carrot, the stick & blind obedience to the will of ‘god,’ which just so happens to be whatever they say it is. Do & think what you’re told or go to hell, quite literally.

    I really don’t understand why an organisation that has a history of supporting mass-murdering fascists (EG: Franco, Duvalier, to a lesser extent Hitler) & of systematically sheltering paedophiles, allowing them to continue molesting children, is treated as a moral authority. To say nothing of the inquisition or the crusades. Or the way the church hierarchy continually sides with the rich & powerful against the poor & oppressed. Admittedly the poor are allowed to politely beg for alms, but god forbid that anyone should ever try to change things.

    And where the hell does the pope get his priorities? He could condemn the war-mongers, arms dealers, profiteers, mercenaries & armies that are busily slaughtering innocent people. Or he could condemn the economic system that deprives literally billions of people of their most basic rights & kills tens of thousands every day. But no! He’s more concerned with condemning consensual sex between adults that harms no one. That is his idea of a sin. Other ‘sins’ include using contraception & (according to John Paul II) being sexually attracted to your wife.

    Not only is this sort of dangerous prejudice & idiocy preached at mass, it is also taught in schools, & much more explicitly than in this particular speech.

  11. Brian Koontz said on December 27th, 2008 at 9:54pm #

    “Why is there a Pope ? What is his function, his intentions, his motives ?
    Why is the Pope always a male ? How many presidents, prime minsters, etc., are male ? How many generals, admirals, colonels are Female ?”

    Most aspects of society are hierarchical. With respect to the Pope, the mythology states that he translates the will of God and passes that along to the people. Without a Pope the people would have to interpret God for themselves, and do a bad job of it, according to the Church. The Church serves a similar function – an intermediary between God and people.

    The Pope must be male since the Bible prefers males, and the Bible is the word of God. With respect to the Bible, it makes as much sense for a cow to be the Pope as it does for a woman to be.

  12. bozh said on December 28th, 2008 at 8:41am #

    notice please that all religions r structured in same way as the armies.
    on top r infallible/faultless popes/heads of other churches/generals.
    at the bottom r women and to generals the cannon fodder. thnx

  13. The Angry Peasant said on December 31st, 2008 at 7:08pm #

    I’m tired of this whole “gay marriage” issue, personally. It’s unimportant when everything else in the world is going to hell. This is one of those rare issues I truly don’t care about at all. For onr thing, I don’t believe in the oppressive, outmoded institution of marriage. For another, I’m not gay. Ergo, I don’t give a shit.

  14. Fahim Akhter said on January 30th, 2009 at 2:48am #

    “eating fish on Friday was wrong, but now it isn’t. ”

    I know its a small piece in the big article and well just a metaphor. I like the whole article and everything but here when you say that a thing was banned there is a reason. Fish was banned because it was a test ( I know it sounds stupid but thats when the ‘leap’ of faith comes in) to see who obeys and who doesn’t and there was always good and more abundant fish in the river on Friday and God wanted to see who actually obeys the orders and who doesn’t. But unfortunately we found a way around that, at that time they used to make small puddles to which the water was diverted and the fish got stuck in the pond and they caught it the next day :p