Tuesday, March 23, 2010

Celibate intercourse?

Celibacy as per Canon 277: "Clerics are obliged to observe perfect and perpetual continence [i.e. sexual abstinence] for the sake of the kingdom of heaven and therefore are bound to celibacy which is a special gift of God by which sacred ministers can adhere more easily to Christ with an undivided heart and are able to dedicate themselves more freely to the service of God and humanity".

Well, just a few days ago, pope Joseph Ratzinger wrote a pastoral, apologizing for child abuse by the catholic clergy in Ireland. Figuratively raising his finger at the canon-law-breaking culprits amongst his followers. Almost like a papal whip job for the pedophile clergymen on the loose. 

Thinking that all the pedophile eclectics will chime in and say to themselves "Oh, I guess I was... wayward, right there"? Thinking that the thousands of victims will say "He's sorry, let's forget about it and have a jolly good time"? Thinking nobody would see the hypocrisy in a letter written by the very person responsible for the long history of concealment of all sexual, physical and emotional abuse by priests, nuns and catholic orders. Probably not thinking at all!


The code of canon law states that sex between priests and minors constitutes an ecclesiastical crime (1395:2). The same code also states that molesting "is not viewed as seriously" as concubinage or attempted marriage. In other words: Priests with a natural desire (to fuck a woman) are penalized with suspension, while priests with a perverse desire (to sexually abuse children) face lesser or no penalties at all. Or: canon law protects clerical establishment more than abuse victims.

Clerical celibacy is a law and not a doctrine. It can therefore be changed at any time by the pope. Personally, I believe it is about time for the Vatican to accept nature's way and revise the code of canon law accordingly. Let these priests marry, fuck and procreate! For sure, married men and fathers are less likely to abuse children.
 

Monday, March 8, 2010

Kill Tilly?

Tilly is the Killer Whale that ... killed... a SeaWorld trainer in Florida. No doubt a tragedy for the family suffering from the loss of a loved one. No doubt a great opportunity for the American Family Association to get a few press clippings: The AFA called for the whale to be stoned - according to Scripture (Exodus 21:28). 

Let's just pause for a moment and redigest: So, the conservative, christian puritans want to overthrow the secular constitution and impose a Theocracy, ruled by the ancient civil code of Israel. Then - depending on the method of stoning the AFA chooses, they want to (for example) bury the whale up to its flappers and then throw rocks at it until it dies. OK. I know that capital punishment isn't new to the United States, but... are you guys stoned?

Depending on which judaic prescription is followed, and assuming the Scripture be applied rigorously, it would mean that quite a few other living creatures would have to be stoned, including myself - repeatedly having broken Shabbat, working on Saturdays. I think I'd rather be stoned.

This whole story is of particular nuisance to me, not only because of AFA's pathetic attempt to promote Scripture, but also because it's based on another perversity: You take a dangerous animal (Killer Whale does sound dangerous, no?), you take it out of it's natural habitat, put it in a small water tank for 20 years, go swim with it and tell it to do awkward things all day long. And after a couple of hundred thousand rounds of doing so, there's a tragic incident (i.e. the Killer Whale does what's in its name). Why are you acting surprised? Why don't I marinate myself in steak juice and go snorkeling in a pack of stirred up, greedy sharks? D'oh!   

An Oscar for Bullock?

So, Sandra has gotten a statue. I will not debate whether this is fair or not. Anyways, it has happened and it can't be undone. The question is, should there be a more principle-based approach to rewarding actors with a prize? 

Personally, I believe Bullock has done a lot of damage in the past (the list is too long, just go see her filmology on imdb.com) and should have been categorically excluded from being rewarded with whatever she's done to make up for her past. 

Mediocrity is like a tattoo. Maybe she could just be honorably discharged from the actors guild?