Pope Weighs in on Absent Father Crisis

by W.F. Price on May 24, 2012

Speaking in St. Peter’s Square, Pope Benedict XVI addressed 20,000 pilgrims with a call to restore fatherhood. Reminding them that the relationship between Christians and God is one of children to father, he decried the contemporary state of affairs:

“Perhaps modern man does not perceive the beauty, grandeur and profound consolation contained in the word ‘father’ with which we can turn to God in prayer, because the father figure is often not sufficiently present in today’s world, and is often not a sufficiently positive presence in everyday life,” the Pope said in his weekly general audience address.

He underscored that the “the problem of a father not present in the life of the child is a big problem of our time” because it can become difficult for those children “to understand in its depth what it means to us that God is Father.”

In the U.S., over one-third of all children live apart from their biological father…

It seems that the crisis of fatherhood, in the United States in particular, has finally become a cause for concern in the Catholic Church. Paired with recent moves to roll back feminism, this indicates that one of the most influential organizations on earth has finally cast its lot in with those of us who are fighting to turn back the tide of radical feminism, which emerged as a dominant political force in the realm of family and sexuality in the late 20th century.

Although many oppose the Catholic Church and its policies, it still exerts an enormous amount of moral influence even beyond its adherents, and has the potential to embolden those who might agree but who otherwise lack the fortitude to go it alone.

Hopefully, other non-Catholic Christians and even non-Christian religious leaders will also take up the restoration of fatherhood as a worthy cause. Now that the head of the Catholic Church has done so, it should be a lot easier to defy feminist family-wreckers on this crucially important matter.

{ 104 comments… read them below or add one }

WRB May 24, 2012 at 11:06

There still are two institutions in which women are not in charge – the Catholic Church and Boy Scouts of America.

Both are worthy of our support.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 65 Thumb down 16
Grit May 24, 2012 at 11:20

The sentiment is nice, but the BLAME is put on MEN again and again and again and again. The men who openly advocate the four sirens are your enemies: contraceptives, no fault divorce, and rigged laws in favor of feminized workplaces and feminized relationships. Blame these men for supporting such subversive philosophies.

“Absent Father Crisis’ my ass. More like ‘Delinquent Mother Crisis.’

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 103 Thumb down 1
Justinian May 24, 2012 at 11:31

this indicates that one of the most influential organizations on earth has finally cast its lot in with those of us who are fighting to turn back the tide of radical feminism,

The problem that I have with the Pope’s statement is that it doesn’t attack feminism, and from one vantage point might appear to be doing the usual so-con tactic of placing the blame on men.

The Pope’s statement is typical of many of the Catholics church moral pronouncements in that they are dressed up in flowery rhetoric and highly ambiguous.

It is very much like the Caritas in Veritate encyclical about economic and social issues. The language in that work was nearly indecipherable and both socialist-leaning and capitalist-leaning Catholics claimed “victory” for thier side.

Too often the church goes so far in concealing the true meaning of their words, that they end up saying nothing.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 50 Thumb down 1
Eric May 24, 2012 at 11:39

WRB:
Since they’ve already started feminizing the military, those are about the only two left. Notice how the media’s been trying to undermine both; putting pressure on the Scouts to have homo scoutmasters and accusing the church of being a hotbed of child abuse.

I was never in the Scouts, but did go to a summer-camp held by the Church. The priests there were total ‘Father Duffy’ types. One of them used to give boxing lessons. The old priest, who was actually in retirement, ran the camp-ground. He was an Italian guy who’d been a chaplain in WW2 with the Italian units in the Africa Corps. One of the others was an expert on botany and used to take us on hikes where we learned to live off the land.

Compare them to the ‘role-models’ boys are given now.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 48 Thumb down 1
Veritas May 24, 2012 at 11:41

WRB: The Catholic Church is run by homos, not “men” in the real sense. I have no hate on for the Catholic Church, I know it very well, but cut the BS about what a “manly” institution it is. In the USA, and all the West really, at the parish level it’s a hen party. Get real. No self-respecting normal man wants to have anything to do with the Catholic Church as it is today. It was once quite virile, indeed patriarchal, but not in anyone here’s lifetime.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 37 Thumb down 24
Okrahead May 24, 2012 at 11:43

Will this emphasis on fatherhood include a call for an end to frivolous divorce by womyn and the legal expulsion of fathers from their children’s lives? If it’s only going to be another round of man-bashing then I fail to see what good can come of it. If, on the other hand, it will be a call to arms against what feminists have done to fathers in Western countries, then in the immortal words of John McClane, “Welcome to the party, pal.”

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 39 Thumb down 1
greyghost May 24, 2012 at 11:46

Lets help him out. The Pope wants to get hard lets show him how to be hard. Does the Vatican have a website. Let’s E-mail the fellas at the cultural department some manosphere blogs. Including the pick up stuff like heartsiste and then let them see the feminised catholic blogs showing how in the name of christ women are being encouraged to shit on their husbands and put the fathers out using family law. I think the Catholic church’s embracing of liberalism as finally bit them in the ass.
I’m rooting for the church and will be watching what happens.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 30 Thumb down 2
keyster May 24, 2012 at 11:54

Hopefully, other non-Catholic Christians and even non-Christian religious leaders will also take up the restoration of fatherhood as a worthy cause.

Reciprocity among denominations of the faithful has always been a precarious situation. Any common ground inevitably slams up against doctrine, so they don’t bother joining up at all.

@Grit, Justinian and like minded MRA’s

What would have been adaquate for the Pope to say that would have met your standards – – passed the M RA-dar test? Do you expect him to say “Teh wimmins be bitches, full stop y’all!”? Does a negative message have to found in anything positive, if it doesn’t meet the MRA narrative standards? The world doesn’t work that way. The Pope has to be as political (politically correct) as any politican. He’s saying the father represents God for Christs sake! What more do you want?

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 23 Thumb down 13
Justinian May 24, 2012 at 11:55

The Catholic Church is run by homos, not “men” in the real sense. I have no hate on for the Catholic Church, I know it very well, but cut the BS about what a “manly” institution it is. In the USA, and all the West really, at the parish level it’s a hen party. Get real.

Exactly.

The priests I encountered when I used to attend church were either in-the closet or total Omegas. Some of them were fat and had high voices making me think that they had been castrated before puberty.
All the church committees were completely run by women.

The “manly” priests vanished decades ago. The only recent example of an Alpha priest was that Fr. Corapi character whom apparently was eventually tempted by the women around him.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 6
J May 24, 2012 at 12:03

I think I see where you are going with this, that both sides are viewing the move to the middle by the Pope as a huge swing in our direction. However, though the femies will take credit of it, I agree with the author in that they will have to take note that this huge geologically slow moving body of parishoner leaders is moving to the middle. Which means, they may eventually move in our direction.

Could be a good thing if they do, could also be a bad thing. Most likely will be a little of both.

If they move towards us, even though they have helped the femmies bludgeon us in the feminie inquisition the last 45 years, they will still expect us to submit to their authority! Anyone with the title “vicar of Christ” or Christ on earth, who is not Christ will get limited submission by me at best, if not outright refusal! If they are brothers in the faith, then let them be, if they are just using the faith, AGAIN, then get the hell outta here! We have enough problems without getting put back into a pre-feministic, most likely pre-modern era that we have no practical knowledge of. I am not going to view the local Bishop like a medieval liege just because the Pope all of sudden “might” be saying men are ok now! Any man, and that is just what the Pope is can just say something is ok, and it is. IT, namely the family crisis at present, has to actually be OK before he can identify it as such. Semantics do nothing for me, and they certainly don’t make me repsect such a large orginization with it’s obviously checkered, and colorful past.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 4
Justinian May 24, 2012 at 12:04

The Pope has to be as political (politically correct) as any politican.

This is precisely why Christianity is dying. Gone are the fire and brimstone sermons of old, now everyone has to “Play Nice”, hold hands, and sing.

If you have to play by the prejudices of the “world”, which according to your sacred documents hates your beliefs, then why bother being a church at all?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 48 Thumb down 4
Traveller May 24, 2012 at 12:08

Of course it is the usual shaming on men.

Vatican Catholic Church is just a business, and it is unrelated to the faith of believers.

Really, you do not have idea how huge amount of money Vatican have. Every taxpayer in Italy is forced to give money to the church

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight_per_thousand

even those who do not declare the destination, since the majority chooses the church.

The sole real fiscal paradise in Europe is the Vatican bank, cyphered, anonymous, reserved for high priests and bishops.

How you (you Mr Price) are far from the reality of the Vatican was showed by your notice in recent post “they want church pays taxes” as if it were an attack to the church and not a clear injustice. Not only they have a monstrous amount of money but they do not pay even taxes.

Some years ago the pope tried slut shaming, but feminists declared they would have revoked the 8/1000 (link above) to the Vatican. Immediately pope and bishops back pedaled and licked feet of women.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 4
evilwhitemalempire May 24, 2012 at 12:09

again we see left leaning anti-fems nit-picking at what little help we have

jeeeez! you guys are like homeless men demanding steak and caviar

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 22 Thumb down 17
Grit May 24, 2012 at 12:11

@keyster

Uhhh well if you think the church is subservient to the political system at large, then thats a pretty clear case of “giving Caesar what God is due” which is not part of religious doctrine. If the church conforms to politically correct speech it has already demonstrated lower value.

The pope could just as well say “The Church is going to begin a new campaign in which the sanctity of leadership, strength, and power is returned to the husband and father. The calling for men to either enter a religious order or to become a married man has become obfuscated- but make no mistake that God calls men to these and only these two roles- short of a life of chastity and solitude. The Church will strive to sacrifice itself to return the honor to the institution of marriage, and to strengthen the connection made in the marriage bond, which is a direct vow between man and woman before God.”

See? I didn’t even address women, but at least I didn’t try and shame men AGAIN. The Church just proved it has no balls to combat the issue. If you want to put the onus on men AGAIN, at least do so by committing to your own teachings.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 16 Thumb down 6
Eric May 24, 2012 at 12:14

WRB:

Post-script to my earlier post: notice how the media hypocrisy again tips its hand that its real agenda is anti-male. First, they criticise the Scouts for not allowing homosexuals around boys; then they alledge that the church is allowing it to happen and then covering it up.

Whenever the American media says anything anymore, I assume the opposite of what they say is really the truth.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 1
greyghost May 24, 2012 at 12:15

Keyster
You are on the right track. The Catholic church will be the conventional army that makes the finale drive. The MRA types the rebel troops will do their but like was mentioned MGTOW,PUA, marriage strike , fuck you bitch are tactics of survival and act to reduce the strength of the beaste but a masculine church. That will be where the defeated masses turn to. When the red pill is the norm and is what is expected of a man rather than this supplicating pc guy that is legally required today we can work on the laws of misandry.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 3
Justinian May 24, 2012 at 12:17

again we see left leaning anti-fems nit-picking at what little help we have

jeeeez! you guys are like homeless men demanding steak and caviar

When you are in an existential crisis, (which Europe is in due to Islam), you don’t leisurely deal with the problem.

Since the church operates at such a glacial pace, I have no doubt the RCC will not fully acknowledge the destructive effects of feminism until they are a tiny persecuted minority like the Christians in the Middle East.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 1
WRB May 24, 2012 at 12:18

Eric,

Sadly, you are right about the military, it used to be male-dominated.

I like Boy Scouts more than the Church. Unlike the Church, they mean what they say and (how shocking for liberals) expel homosexuals.

Still, I am glad to see one religion which makes feminists furious by refusing to ordain priests.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 3
WRB May 24, 2012 at 12:19

“Still, I am glad to see one religion which makes feminists furious by refusing to ordain priests.”

I meant to write “refusing to ordain women priests.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3
evilwhitemalempire May 24, 2012 at 12:22

rightist misandry : big scorpion
leftist misandry : little scorpion (lethal)

use the right to stop the left

THEN clean house in the right

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 5
Brigadon May 24, 2012 at 12:37

heh, do you think I’d be alienating christians by calling my blog ‘The Gospel of Man”?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
TFH May 24, 2012 at 12:39

It is unclear to me whether the Pope is blaming men, or rather correctly recognizing that the reason is most certainly NOT due to the fathers being deadbeats…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 3
W.F. Price May 24, 2012 at 12:46

It is unclear to me whether the Pope is blaming men, or rather correctly recognizing that the reason is most certainly NOT due to the fathers being deadbeats…

-TFH

If you look at the context of recent moves, it’s pretty obvious what’s going on.

First, he moves against the biggest US nun group for espousing “radical feminist” themes, then he gives a sermon about the crisis of absentee fathers. Also, note that no shaming language was used against fathers in the sermon.

Eric May 24, 2012 at 12:47

Keyster,
More and more I’m starting to agree with you and Greyghost about the ‘circular firing squads’ in the MRM. Purists are bad for any movement and some of these militant Gamecocks are especially obnoxious to outreach efforts.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 17 Thumb down 6
Rmaxd May 24, 2012 at 13:00

You guys arent going to achieve anything unless you change the very definition ..

It’s single mothers who’re the real dead-beats …

NOT the fathers

WOMEN WHO CHOOSE to have a child without a mans consent, is not only a child abuser, but also a dead-beat for relying on welfare & forcing a guy to pay child support for a child he DOESNT want …

Women who leave the father, & force him to pay half of everything he owns, AND child support, theyre dead-beats, as well as thieves & child abusers

The MRA HAS TO BE alot tougher on women, especially when it comes to dead-beat women

PREGNANCY IS NOT CONSENT TO FATHERHOOD

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 32 Thumb down 6
Rmaxd May 24, 2012 at 13:05

Women SHOULD be forced to be financially independent

Want to Leave a man AND take the children … PLAN FOR IT, just like EVERYONE ELSE

Want to STEAL a mans sperm & have a child against HIS WILL? FINANCIALLY PLAN FOR IT, just like EVERYONE ELSE

DEAD|BEAT BITCHES EVERYONE OF EM

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 19 Thumb down 8
walking in hell May 24, 2012 at 13:11

In my opinion the speech rang hollow. All I heard was anambiguous version of Barrack Obama’s famous absentee father’s day speech sprinkled with some Catholic mysticism.

The Pope spewed the same bullshit line that every other American Christian Church is spewing: that fathers are absent. Yes, we all know that fathers are absent. In case you don’t know why Pope Benedict Arnold, I will tell you why.

1) 75% unilateral divorce filed by women for mostly frivolous reasons.
2) 90% custody given to women. Man allowed two weekend per month to visit his children.
3) Massive child support awards to women.
4) Financial destitution of men.
5) Incarceration of men.
6) Brainwashing the children by women.

How can anyone expect fathers to be present under these conditions? Few men can withstand the humiliation and degradation of being reduced to that of a visitor to their children under the watchful dictatorship of some castrating bitch and the police force.

I would say the American Christian churches have done some of the most damage with respect to mens rights and families. Their “women can do no wrong” mantra has removed all responsibility from the female and made women’s behavior worse.

“What man caused you to fornicate and commit adultery, my poor lady?” “Jesus forgives and let’s us remarry. Come to our Christian divorce care and singles night.”

The Muslims have done a great job at preserving mens and children’s rights and crushing feminism. It is no wonder Islam is the world’s fastest growing religion: No unilateral divorce allowed by the woman; primary custody of children to the father after a certain age (around 10). Punishment for adultery.

I am a Christian and a Catholic. It is very hard for me to continue in a religion that does not look after my interests as a man and that does not protect my rights to my children.

I think America could use a little Sharia Law.

Here are some links I collected that might be of interest.

Rabbi explaining how Islam withstood social revolutions that negatively affected Christianity: example, feminism and communism.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9a6blduFb0

Video showing European fertility rates Vs Muslim fertility rates.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wr91q2fxjXQ

Christian Pat Robertson, “very concerned” about Islam in Paris. Instead Pat should get “very concerned” about why American women are such whores and why American Christian men are getting screwed over.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VwJhgXTTqRk&feature=related

Sharia law and child custody
http://www.expertlaw.com/library/family_law/islamic_custody.html

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 5
Poiuyt May 24, 2012 at 13:22

Our original problem and lot as men the world over is found in the following vexing quandry:

“… Why have men in positions of public or private authority, come to abuse the natural credibility and prestige of their gender, to promote, to advocate, to surborn and to abbett principles, philosophies, and morals that are wholly inimical to the sovereignty, freedom and dignity of the male gender-class ?”

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 0
walking in hell May 24, 2012 at 13:23

@Rmaxd
“It’s single mothers who’re the real dead-beats …

NOT the fathers”

You said it. The question that needs to be asked of single mothers is this: “How did they become single?”
1) Widows
2) Husband truly abandoned her.
3) Husband beat her and/or cheated on her.
4) She was not happy and divorced husband and took the children.
5) She chose single motherhood from the beginning.

4) and 5) need to be differentiated and coined with a new term. How about “dirt bag mother?” I think dirt bag mother is fitting and has a nice dichotomy with dead beat dad.

The problem is many women who claim 2) and 3) are really 4) and 5).

What does everyone else think?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 4
Rmaxd May 24, 2012 at 13:24

Btw those of you suspicious of idiots like Eric & Keyster …

Hawaiian Libertarian has an interesting post about professionally employed trolls …

It also begs the question, who in the hell would go around promoting conservatives or anti-gamers, unless they were obviously paid for it …

“He was part of a commercial team employed to infest internet forums and comment threads on behalf of corporate clients, promoting their causes and arguing with anyone who opposed them.

Like the other members of the team, he posed as a disinterested member of the public. Or, to be more accurate, as a crowd of disinterested members of the public: he used 70 personas, both to avoid detection and to create the impression there was widespread support for his pro-corporate arguments.

Would it be outlandish to suppose that there may a prominent blogger in any of these sectors in the blogosphere, who has built up a stellar reputation, a multitude of followers and popular comment threads, was actually one of these cognitive infiltrators?”

http://www.hawaiianlibertarian.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/cognitive-infiltration.html

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 8 Thumb down 14
Veritas May 24, 2012 at 13:24

WRB said: “I am glad to see one religion which makes feminists furious by refusing to ordain priests.”

Presumably you’ve heard of Eastern Orthodoxy? You should have, it’s the second-biggest Christian group on earth, something like 300 million adherents.

They, too, refuse to ordain women to anything – indeed, they object a tad more strenuously than the Catholics (and they allow – actually basically require – married parish clergy, so a lot less pink funny business in the parishes).

If you’re looking for a male-led church, it’s more plausibly Orthodoxy than Catholicism.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 1
Eric May 24, 2012 at 13:24

Rmaxd;
These are probably two of your stupidest posts yet, and that’s saying a lot.

Most of these ‘heroic single moms’ got knocked up in the first place by deadbeat thugs from whom they could never collect support and now they rely on welfare. Divorced single moms are a totally different issue, so when you say moronic things like ‘pregnancy is not a consent to fatherhood’ are you implying that all the men here who’ve been through a divorce never consented to being fathers? That’s just stupid. Of course, they consented: it’s their ex-wives who are guilty of betraying them and the children with whom the wives were entrusted.

The way to stop deadbeat moms is for men to avoid feminised women like the plague, and punish both them and their thuggish sperm-donors for being drains on society.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 4
W.F. Price May 24, 2012 at 13:28

@Rmaxd

Show me a men’s issues blogger who is driving a Mercedes and drinking champagne every night and I might believe it.

Eric May 24, 2012 at 13:31

Rmaxd;
‘It also begs the question who in the hell would go around promoting conservatives or anti-Gamers unless they were being paid for it.’

It could also be asked why you Gamecocks seem to have so much free time for your prodigous efforts in spreading the Gospel of Game?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 2
walking in hell May 24, 2012 at 13:39

“BEAT BITCHES EVERYONE OF EM”

Notice how the media calls them “dead beat parents,” even though they are dead beat mothers. So dead beat mother is technically a non-politically correct term for a mother that does not pay her child support.

How about “Dirt Bag Mothers?” or S&M (Sperm and Money) mothers?
or PACs (Pregnancy, Alimony, Child Support Mothers).

To be politically useful, any nickname needs to have a reference to freeloading and welfare. That is why I like “Dirt Bag Mother.”

We can combine the acronyms.

Dirt Bag Mother – a woman who PACs (Pregnancy, Alimony, Child Support) her husband. Often Dirt Bag Mothers alienate the children while denying the man parenting time; all the while collecting welfare as she works under the table to avoid taxes.

Even better if we can bring the term “single mother” into play.

Dirt Bag Mother – a single mother who PACed (Pregnancy, Alimony, Child Support) her husband. Often after PACing their husbands, Dirt Bag Mothers brainwash their children against the fathers and deny him parenting time with his children. The worst Dirt Bag Mothers collect welfare and work under the table illegally in order to avoid taxes.

What do you think?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0
Rmaxd May 24, 2012 at 13:42

@Walking In Hell

Excellent points as usual …

You should make your posts alot more extreme, I’d love to see you mentioned in places like Feministing again …

Nothing beats pissed off feminists & the fury of loosing their tampons …

Btw your bullet points on women being a widow, or a husband truly abandoned her or beat her …

What exactly do those things have to do with women getting alimony, child support ?

Women HAVE to be financially prepared, for ANY disaster, just like EVERYONE ELSE, in the real world …

If a woman is widowed it is HER responsibility to be prepared, IF SHE ISNT financially secure, she IS NEGLIGENT of her children AND her own financial security

WOMEN HAVE TO BE MADE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR OWN ACTIONS

It’s about freaking time, we stopped responding to womens sob stories, & tell women to stop playing tax payers AND HUSBANDS AND FATHERS THE SAME GODDAMN VIOLIN FOR THE LAST 50 YEARS

Women HAVE TO BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR OWN ACTIONS AND CHOICES

STOP PAYING FOR WOMENS MISTAKES

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 4
Rmaxd May 24, 2012 at 13:46

@W.F. Price

“Show me a men’s issues blogger who is driving a Mercedes and drinking champagne every night and I might believe it.”

Not meaning to offend, but what are you referring to?

If you’re referring to my professionally employed trolls post, I highly doubt these professional trolls make any serious bank … theyre more likely well paid side-jobs

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 8
walking in hell May 24, 2012 at 13:51

@Rmaxd
Btw your bullet points on women being a widow, or a husband truly abandoned her or beat her …

What exactly do those things have to do with women getting alimony, child support ?

Agreed. Involuntary alimony and child support should be made illegal and a thing of the past for all cases.

1) Widows
2) Husband truly abandoned her.
3) Husband beat her and/or cheated on her.
4) She was not happy and divorced husband and took the children.
5) She chose single motherhood from the beginning.

For 2) and 3), women should not be punished. 4) and 5) should be illegal and/or severely punished using public examples.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Rmaxd May 24, 2012 at 13:53

@Walking in Hell

I like the Dirt Bag part, but calling these women mothers, is an insult to mothers everywhere

Dead-beat women, who deprive their children of a FAMILY AND a stable home, are anything but mothers … theyre dead-beats hundreds of times worse then any feminist

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4
walking in hell May 24, 2012 at 13:59

@Rmaxd
“I like the Dirt Bag part, but calling these women mothers, is an insult to mothers everywhere”

Agreed. It is insulting to the real concept of a mother.

Maybe “Dirt Bag Mama.” That brings in a filthy ghetto element and is a play on baby Mama.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Rmaxd May 24, 2012 at 14:04

@Walking In Hell

Im not suggesting women be punished, im stating women be held responsible for their own actions ..

If a husband leaves a woman, or beats her, why is he PAYING HER TO LEAVE HER …

The current laws are ridiculous beyond belief …

Ironically, the ONLY REASON, apart from screwing over fathers, women are rewarded with child support & cash prizes, IF the state didnt hand out welfare, women would be SOCIALLY SHAMED & PUNISHED, by society

Destroying child support & No-fault divorce, would radically bring back slut shaming & force women to be held respoonsible for THEIR OWN ACTIONS IN A RELATIONSHIP

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
Paradoxotaur May 24, 2012 at 14:05

@W.F. Price: “First, he moves against the biggest US nun group for espousing “radical feminist” themes, then he gives a sermon about the crisis of absentee fathers.”

Let’s not forget the 43 Catholic groups in 8 states that have sued the White House over Obama’s contraception mandate.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1
greyghost May 24, 2012 at 14:06

Troll for hire. I will say mean and hurtful things or kind and thoughtful things for any body or anything for $74K year with 15 days vacation.
Instead of a Mercedes I would like a dodge power wagon with 6.7 cummins and instead of champagne I would like miller genuine draft.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1
walking in hell May 24, 2012 at 14:11

@Rmaxd
“Im not suggesting women be punished, im stating women be held responsible for their own actions ..”

I think women should be held responsible for things like adultery, child abduction, intentional pregnancy by being severely punished.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
American May 24, 2012 at 14:15

The new world Order, with the white Gender-Raunch capital gains community at the summit, will only succeed if they can “Break others patriarchies”.
A Broken patriarchy of un-educated laborers are easy to harvest, they don’t have the language to defend themselves.
Maybe the pope has some humanitarian in him.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 6
Rmaxd May 24, 2012 at 14:17

@walking in hell

Yea i’d like to see women punished for things too

Nobodies calling for women to be punished, precisely because men dont think women should be responsible for EVERYTHING THAT HAPPENS TO THEM

If a woman is widowed, or a husband beats her … most men are more then happy to run to her with bags of cash … for her OWN inability to SAVE or be responsible for own future ..

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4
W.F. Price May 24, 2012 at 14:18

Instead of a Mercedes I would like a dodge power wagon with 6.7 cummins and instead of champagne I would like miller genuine draft.

-Greyghost

I’d take a Ford Ranger and a skiff for fishing and crabbing. Imported Heineken (not the ersatz stuff bottled here) would be a nice touch.

Huck Finn May 24, 2012 at 14:25

“Whenever the American media says anything anymore, I assume the opposite of what they say is really the truth”.

I agree. Whatever the mass media usually predicts about investing (or economy) it is almost always most profitable to do the opposite.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0
Rmaxd May 24, 2012 at 14:28

@walking in hell

Unless men are willing to hold women responsible for EVERYTHING that happens to them

AND STOP giving women a pussy pass, for every tear inducing bullshit, these bitches think theyre entitled to handouts for

Society will NEVER HOLD WOMEN RESPONSIBLE OR PUNISH WOMEN

IF you hand-out women FREE CASH if they become widows, women will demand cash if a guy leaves them … using the excuse a guy leaving them is the same as a woman being widowed

Which is PRECISELY what these sluts & feminists’ve been doing FOR FREAKING CENTURIES

The ONLY time a woman should get welfare if she becomes incapacitated or unable to work …

As it is women get everything from INSANE extended health insurance, where EVEN THEIR TAMPONS are covered by health insurance, to affirmative action

Whats even more insane, is the fact women are classed as MINORITIES, even though they make up 50% of the goddamn population

All of the above is magically achieved if you’re batshit crazy with a magical vagina …

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2
Charles Martel May 24, 2012 at 14:30

Rmaxd
Would it be outlandish to suppose that there may a prominent blogger in any of these sectors in the blogosphere, who has built up a stellar reputation, a multitude of followers and popular comment threads, was actually one of these cognitive infiltrators?”

There are no paid infiltrators in the MRM. How do I know? The MRM is powerless, totally without influence in the traditional sense. No-one in business or government cares about us.

I do believe there’s a small army of well-paid influencers who support the political and military initiatives currently considered “important.” The Bush regime really cranked this up and I’m sure the Obongo crowd has continued it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1
ahamkara May 24, 2012 at 15:35

walking in hell May 24, 2012 at 13:11

“How can anyone expect fathers to be present under these conditions? Few men can withstand the humiliation and degradation of being reduced to that of a visitor to their children under the watchful dictatorship of some castrating bitch and the police force.”

I think our feelings are beside the point. A devoted father will put up with any amount of humiliation and degradation to be as present in his children’s lives as the law allows.

The problem is that the law doesn’t allow it. Outrage is the appropriate emotional response.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2
Gx1080 May 24, 2012 at 15:37

Heh. Anything positive said towards the Catholic Church is a sure way to get Dawkinites coming out and do their usual “KKKRISITANS are EVIL” dance.

Overall, the previous denoucement against radical feminists got all the libfags frothing. “The PATRIARCHAL (everything patriarchy is evil) Catholic Church will soon vanish against the glorious secular humanism. Oh, and we are going to take Muslim cock on the ass when there’s nobody to oppose them, of course”.

So, this development has my full support.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 5
PeterTheGreat May 24, 2012 at 15:47

It is obvious that Benedict XVI is destined to be one of the great Popes. He is cleaning up the mess from Vatican II, the homosexuals and feminists.

He has mandated aver 1000 changes in the Mass to bring it back to what it was prior to the humanists and dark forces corrupted it in the ’60′s. Once all the changes are implemented the Novus Ordo will be an English Tridentine Mass, valid in all points.

He has had a short reign thus far, and his health is rumored to be not the best. May he reign another 20 years to fully implement his reconquista of the Church by real Catholics.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 4
keyster May 24, 2012 at 15:53

…again we see left leaning anti-fems nit-picking at what little help we have…

When Republicans defeated the Paycheck Fairness Act by one vote…silence
When one Republican congresswoman stood VAWA on its head and got gender neutral language and accountability reform passed in the House…silence

They don’t dare criticize the Left, so they go to great pains to find any little hint of “anti-men” on the Right. Can you imagine organized Feminism being composed of some Conservative women? No you can’t, because there aren’t any.

So the MuthaFukin’ Pope of all people, who has influence over 63 million Americans alone, says something positive about men and fathers, and all the Liberal MRA can see is a conspiracy of some kind. It’s all bad. Everything is bad, no matter what ANYONE does – – especially if it’s a religious figure, a conservative politician or a woman…something will be bad about it, we just don’t realize it and they do.

But the President of the United States mandates a “Presidential Council for Women and Girls” with our tax dollars, while denying anything similar for men and boys, and that’s OK. He’s cool, because he’s not an evil man-shaming SoCon Bible thumper.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 20 Thumb down 8
Ode May 24, 2012 at 15:57

Is marriage good?

1. Children raised in two parent households do better.
2. Married women are much better off financially than single women.
3. Married men tend to work harder and for longer hours so corporate America benefits from marriage.
4. Bigger profits from companies equals more taxes for Uncle Sam to collect so the government has a stake too.
5. More taxes means more money for social welfare retirement programs for the old.

It’s pretty clear there’s a huge segment of society and institutions that benefit from marriage but there is one last question that Nobody within society dares to ask, except for the MRM, and that is,
Is marriage good for men?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0
W.F. Price May 24, 2012 at 16:02

It’s pretty clear there’s a huge segment of society and institutions that benefit from marriage but there is one last question that Nobody within society dares to ask, except for the MRM, and that is,
Is marriage good for men?

-Ode

Good question. I think the answer would be that it is good for some – probably most – men in its normal, traditional form, but definitely not all. Same goes for women.

Therefore, there should always be the option of remaining single for life, and men who choose it should not be stigmatized.

keyster May 24, 2012 at 16:05

Let’s not forget the 43 Catholic groups in 8 states that have sued the White House over Obama’s contraception mandate.

Do you mean the largest institutional civil legal action ever undertaken against a sitting President of the United States, that our news media refuses to acknowledge is taking place?

It will be moot anyway when the Supremes shoot the whole mess down next month. Imagine all the women being “denied access” to healthcare. Sandra Fluke might die from HPV.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 2
greyghost May 24, 2012 at 16:10

Is marriage good for men?
The answer today is NO. But when it IS or when enough men THINK it is we have the wealthiest, and the most technically advanced country in the world.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3
WRB May 24, 2012 at 16:23

Post-script to my earlier post: notice how the media hypocrisy again tips its hand that its real agenda is anti-male. First, they criticise the Scouts for not allowing homosexuals around boys; then they alledge that the church is allowing it to happen and then covering it up.

Women’s brains can hold two contradictory ideas simultaneously.
In this case, they do it by claiming that homosexuality has nothing to do with pedophilia.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 2
Justinian May 24, 2012 at 16:25

So the MuthaFukin’ Pope of all people, who has influence over 63 million Americans alone, says something positive about men and fathers, and all the Liberal MRA can see is a conspiracy of some kind.

I see the RCC as being part of the left. Catholic voting patterns over the years proves that.

I suppose that makes me a frothing -at -the -mouth radical right winger compared your own standard of what defines a conservative.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4
Paradoxotaur May 24, 2012 at 16:45

@keyster: “Do you mean the largest institutional civil legal action ever undertaken against a sitting President of the United States, that our news media refuses to acknowledge is taking place?”

Yeah, that’s the one. :-)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Eric May 24, 2012 at 18:42

Greyghost;
I would take the 74k, and I’ll take the champagne. Also, I would insist on an all-expense paid trip to Latvia (‘for research purposes only’, of course), to verify if what Price says about Latvian women is really true.

Then when I’m in Riga with pockets stuffed full of cash and beautiful Latvian girls all around. we’ll see who trolled whom LOL. Good luck with the extradition, suckers!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
Eric May 24, 2012 at 18:57

Huck Finn:

‘Whatever the media predicts about the economy or investing, it’s more profitable to the opposite.’

But I will bet that ignoring that advice—while watching closely where the editors and owners of financial news services actually invest themselves—would be very profitable! Let’s just say my intuition tells me that they’re not religiously following the same advice they give others. LOL

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Eric May 24, 2012 at 19:00

WRB;

‘Women’s brains can hold two contradictory ideas simultaneously’

Which is why the Church has wisely kept them out of them of leadership positions, and governments did the same before the Feminist/Progressive Dark Age set in.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
Attila May 24, 2012 at 19:30

A non-Saudi type of Islam is your only hope – or perhaps Orthodox Judaism – except that the Ortho-Jews make it difficult for “goyim” to join.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4
Eric May 24, 2012 at 19:51

Attilla:
The Arabs once had a monopoly on coffee and the reason they roasted the coffee-beans was so that they couldn’t germinate. It was once a capital offense to try and smuggle viable coffee beans out of Arabia. It’s still illegal to export certain types of plants native to those countries from which they extract expensive perfume oils.

I think they do the same with Arabian women. I once told an Arab guy that the real reason they make their women wear burkhas is because if Western guys knew what they really looked like underneath then Arabia would become a destination spot for single Western guys too.

‘Mohammed was wise in more ways than one.’ he replied with a knowing smile.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4
Ode May 24, 2012 at 21:28

‘Women’s brains can hold two contradictory ideas simultaneously’

That is why women can say a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle and then turn around and complain they can’t get married because there is a shortage of good men.
Huh?
Of course they fail to see the irony!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0
evilwhitemalempire May 24, 2012 at 22:51

I think they do the same with Arabian women. I once told an Arab guy that the real reason they make their women wear burkhas is because if Western guys knew what they really looked like underneath then Arabia would become a destination spot for single Western guys too.

**********

ain’t that the god-damn truth?

maybe gives one insight into why feminists are so conspicuously silent about sharia law and the burka

is it just ‘multiculturalism’ that muzzles them or is there something else?

this guy has an interesting, unconventional (even for anti-fem) take on this
http://theantifeminist.com/what-feminism-is/

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
LastCrucible May 24, 2012 at 23:18

“I think our feelings are beside the point. A devoted father will put up with any amount of humiliation and degradation to be as present in his children’s lives as the law allows.”

BULLSHIT. YOU can put up with “any amount of humiliation and degradation.” You’re an enabler. I’m all for fighting for one’s child, but becoming an undignified, manipulated, emasculated, castrated little bitch that has resigned himself to perpetual brow-beating from some slag ain’t happening. FOH. My feelings as a man and FATHER matter.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0
walking in hell May 25, 2012 at 02:43

@evilwhitemalempire

On that blog he makes the case that Western feminism is Sharia law for Western men. I couldn’t agree more.

“Yet, having a society base its morals and social structure upon the primitive reproductive urgings of one sex alone degrades women, degrades men, degrades civilization and, in fact, turns the western humanist world into nothing more than a ‘secular’ and feminised version of an Islamic fundamentalist state under Sharia law.

Actually, men in the west are far worse off than women under Sharia, as at least Islamic law does cater for the basic needs of women (which are largely reproductive). This is why feminists are so reluctant to criticise ‘the oppression of women’ under Islam and often appear to even support it.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
freebird May 25, 2012 at 03:42

Here’s an original thought for you hungry Spearhead readers:
The Vatican is a Sovereign nation, how ’bouts the pope dictates automatic father custody and fault divorce in his nation!
A little less talk and a lot more action!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
The Contrarian Expatriate May 25, 2012 at 06:14

So first it was Obama, and now it is the Pope who throws “fathers” under the bus.

Why is it so difficult to understand that single mothers either do not want children’s fathers around, or they drive them away with vexatious drama and abusive behavior?

The broken America family is directly the result of wayward women. Men are no longer fathering due to the fact that women don’t need men to father when the courts garnish income, and enable female abuse towards men.

It is very discouraging that the Church has gotten this wrong. That the pope cannot muster the moral authority to decry women and feminism means that the public relations war has been won by women.

The American family will only get worse……..

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Donkey May 25, 2012 at 06:25

@freebird

I don’t think the sovereign nation of the Vatican ever hears child custody cases since no families actually live there.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Donkey May 25, 2012 at 06:42

I think we need to read the full text of his address and not what some reporter thinks of what he said.

Many times I’ve read a reporter’s rendition of a speech, and it missed completely the point the author was trying to convey.

The full translation of the text will be available here (as of yet they have only translated two paragraphs):
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2012/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20120523_en.html

If anyone on this site can read Italian maybe they could clarify based on the published text:
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/audiences/2012/documents/hf_ben-xvi_aud_20120523_it.html

PS (I have also seen poor translations.)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Georice81 May 25, 2012 at 07:59

Donkey wrote:

“I don’t think the sovereign nation of the Vatican ever hears child custody cases since no families actually live there.”

The Vatican is not a nation. It belongs to something called “The Holy See” and is one of many extraterritoral jurisdictions that it owns. The USA has diplomatic relations with the Holy See whether or not it actually occupies any land. You could say that the Vatican is one of several small states that the Holy See owns. The biggest one is actually the castle where the Pope resides most of the time and I believe that the second largest one is the tower farm for Vatican Radio.

The Vatican does contain the administrative offices of the Holy See. Yet the Holy See could be based anywhere and for a while it was based in France.

There is another category of single mothers: those who abandoned their husbands AND children. I have met some and they still act as if though they were victims and great mothers although they could not care any about their children. There used to be a time when even the left looked down upon these women. Yet lately I have been reading more and more articles defending them. The only possible reason for why the left may still look down upon them is that they did not do enough to derail their husbands by leaving them with the children.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Tom Smith May 25, 2012 at 09:02

The real irony is that it’s the pope who is standing up for fathers, NOT the (usually) white male leaders of American society. And the pope- at least in the view of many non-Catholics- has a hard time understanding marriage in the first place. (After all, he chose to be celebate and ambitious, otherwise how could he obtained that position in the first place?) Why are all of the other “powerful” male leaders silent on this subject- could it be that they lack the political will to make a stand?– I think so.

For men in the U.S., chosing to be single means being characterized as a “queer” or a weirdo. This should not be the case. Being single as an older male (I am more than 30), makes others wonder 1) why you aren’t married or 2) whether you have been through a REALLY nasty divorce and cannot afford a second marriage (a finance and self-esteeem issue).

For single women in the U.S., their state is worn as a “badge of honor.” If she’s divorced, she “ditched a loser.” If she’s never been married and is sleeping around, she’s “exercising her freedom.” And for both categories of women, there’s no responsibility that comes with the supposed “freedom” of being single. The leaders in society ought to realize that this has to change.

The issue the pope highlights is the true absence of FATHERS as role models and caregivers for children. This is something that established male leaders should worry about. As the U.S. welfare state eventually grinds to a halt, there will be problem for the support of all of the single mothers (and their children). Men who have no contact with children are usually loathe to support them. And the role models that fathers provide for offspring of both genders cannot be ignored. In this aspect, I believe change will come through evolution, not revolution.

But the members of the Spearhead community should work to bring this viewpoint to bear on the politicians and judges wherever they may reside.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1
Tom Smith May 25, 2012 at 09:07

And “is marriage good for men?” Not in the U.S. This is because there’s a system where men can be systematically bilked of their money (pre and post-divorce), required to support their children, but without the ability to meaningfully enforce the attendant rights of visitation. This has to change.

Also, even within marriage the fact that a man can be charged with “marital rape” makes marriage a poor situation for men.

Perhaps in the past, marriage was a partnership whereby society legitimised the offspring of a union between a man and a woman, now there’s no meaningful difference between legitimate and illegitimate children for inheritance purposes.

Currently, at least in the U.S., the law does not support the inherent benefits in marriage, so it’s no wonder many men choose to reject marriage as an option.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
Matt Strictland May 25, 2012 at 11:06

I’ll pay attention to the Pope when the RCC cleans up its own house.

The corruption and womanizing I understand, Priests are only human and all of us fail from time to time

The implicit tolerance of pedophilia and the willingness to cover that up is another matter . It suggests a diseased institution with enough moral rot to be nearly unsalvageable .

Its no wonder people in the West are turning away.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2
Rebel May 25, 2012 at 11:55

I don’t understand what the Pope is trying to accomplish besides reviving the dead.

The “Father” is dead. And, as a consequence, the family is dead also, for without the father, the mother becomes irrelevant. Just like the night cannot exist without the day. BOTH mother AND father are now dead.

That was part of a grand scheme.

The children of the future will be grown in a jar, decanted, then let out of their jars. When they will reach a certain age, they will be recycled.

A Brave New World is in the making in which the family has no place.

Tomorrow’s humanity will be artificial.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2
Chaz345 May 25, 2012 at 13:32

The number one cause of fatherless children is not, as the feminists would have us believe, deadbeat men shirking their responsibilities. The number one cause is women who, in the name of being unhaaaaaapy, toss the “bum” out and divorce him with the help of the horribly biased family court system. A close second is women who, because they’ve slept with so many men, have absolutely zero clue as to who the father actually is.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
by_the_sword May 25, 2012 at 15:22

The Roman Catholic church did not acknowledhe that the Earth revolved around the Sun until the 1950′s. Do not expect them to acknowlege the sorry state of affairs that opresses men and fathers in any sort of timely manner.

We’re pretty much on our own when it comes to fixing this mess. But one men are regarded as equals to women under the law, the Catholics will pat themselves on their own backs and talk about how they were there for us in the struggle.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3
bcdad May 25, 2012 at 15:57

I’ve seen enough of the Pope’s comments to know who he blames for the fatherlessness epidemic – the fathers. Shades of Obama and Blair. Crocodile tears.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
Attila May 25, 2012 at 16:06

The fact is —that NON-SAUDI Islam has both a strong social aspect (Shariah) and – depending on the culture- a strong inward (Tarika/Haqiqa) dimension.

Part of the problem can be gleaned by looking at the founder’s archetype—Jesus was
a celibate, totally inward individual) — while Muhammad was a warrior/prophet very much in the Semitic mold. If you want father’s rights— where else are you going to find them?

Where????

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4
American May 25, 2012 at 18:03

Rebel, I will add that the oppression of the future will be more of the “Break the patriarchy” construction.
The oppressors will be from the educated patriarchy (that calls it self the matriarchy); and the oppressed will be from the matriarchal underclass of broken, divided, un-educated laborers ( that the Gender-feminist constructionists erroneously “BUT STRATEGICALLY” call.. the patriarchy).
The American gender-feminist establishment use their perverted definitions of patriarchy and matriarchy to their advantage in their “Constructions”.
Now im not necessarily a do gooder trying to fix everything wrong with the world, Im just sick of hearing loudmouth gender-Raunch inflaming the masses against the innocent.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2
Brigadon May 25, 2012 at 18:11

@by_the_sword, That is one of the worst twists of an established fact I have ever heard.

The CHURCH admitted that on the subject of the earth revolving around the sun, Galileo was correct before his death. But politically, they were not going to esteem a guy that was trying to destroy the church and humiliate the pope.

The Pope during Galielo’s time was a very smart fellow, and was, in fact, a good friend of Galileo’s for many years, or at least as much of a friend as that arrogant prick ever had.

The real story is that after Galileo’s house arrest (which, at 80 years old, was not exactly a hardship, and he chose that in preference to excommunication)

The problem was that Galileo published an EXTREMELY insulting book, where he made the pope out to be an idiot (in a very feminist fashion) He basically, in his book, turned the pope into ‘simple’, and used him as his idiot watson to prove all the points of his dialogues. He also essentially made out every church policy to be idiotic, and furthermore made fun of every other scientist in existence.

Essentially he had these public figures and other scientists into straw men posing incredibly stupid comments (That in fact they never made) in order to have the book’s narrator prove them an idiot again and again. The pope was even referred to as ‘simple’ and ‘simpleton’ (since the pope’s canonical title at the time was simple)

The thing is, Galileo was WRONG in the vast majority of his science, and his mathematics were wishful thinking at best. He was feuding with numerous colleagues because they pointed out that not only were his conclusions illogical on their face, but his records were sloppy, his experiments proceeded from his theories, and he was basically the peter venkman of the rennaissance… All of which were entirely true.

The worst part is, he tried to manhandle the church (Which at the time was the ONLY scientific institute) and blackmail it into accepting everything he wrote as gospel, and canonizing him.

His book was banned, by the church alone (the rest of the Europe still had as free an access to it as they cared to), and He was given the choice of either accepting the church’s edicts (and submitting to house arrest in wealth and comfort for the next 6 years) or denying them, and being excommunicated. He chose house arrest.

Now, The church proceeded to study his book, and had other researchers of the time investigate his conclusions and methodology. The irony is that EVERY SINGLE CONCLUSION in his works that has been proven today (all of the few correct ones) was actually written into canonical science BEFORE his death. That includes the earth revolving around the sun.

However, due to the offensively insulting nature of the book, it was not taken off of the church ‘ban’ list until a bunch of galileo-worshippers demanded it. The church, of course, promptly complied (as promptly as a beuaracracy trying to find a banned manuscript lost in the archives hundreds of years before can be) and in 1992, removed the manuscript from it’s banned list.

Despite the fact that every single worthwhile thing in the book had been thoroughly investigated and confirmed and put into canonical understanding hundreds of years earlier. People looking for ‘the secret wisdom of Galileo’ were… very dissappointed to find that it was mostly the ravings of an egomaniac.

So, in essence, Galileo was not ‘cleared of all charges’ until 1992. And retarded religion haters constantly try to harp on how backwards the church is by claiming that they didn’t admit that the earth went around the sun until 1992. (not the 1950′s) in complete ignorance and with total lack of research.

Frankly, I would welcome the assistance of the Pope on MRA issues. He sounds like a real ass kicker. I may be an athiest, but with the backing of a reputable organization like the catholic church, we might finally start to have the kind of leverage we need to break the back of feminism.

Folks, PLEASE do not fall into Feminism’s tactics of trying to recite facts without even determining their reasonable validity. You do that, and we wind up with bullshit like By_The_Sword’s commentary above. I would also like to point out that the book, by the sword, was written by a very militant feminist, Mercedes Lackey, who is well-known for injecting feminist, liberal, propaganda and politics into everything she writes.

Remember. Feminists are stupid, throw facts at them.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Joe May 25, 2012 at 20:28

It’s time for the churches to start lecturing women, because it’s women who are destroying marriage these days (overwhelmingly), and it’s women (overwhelmingly) who are keeping the kids away from their fathers. And the government is in collusion with the women. Same situation in Italy these days.
Big Chief Holy Father With Head Up Ass Speak With Forked Tongue.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2
Attila May 26, 2012 at 09:02

Nothing is going to happen until a critical mass of men adopt some religion that overrides/ignores the civil marriage codes. Already shariah councils are sprouting all over the UK- and perhaps other parts of Europe. Ortho-Jews have their own Jewish courts to handle marriage/family issues.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Anonymous Reader May 26, 2012 at 15:35

Eric
The Arabs once had a monopoly on coffee and the reason they roasted the coffee-beans was so that they couldn’t germinate.

When was this monopoly on coffee? I’ll agree that Europeans did not get their hands on coffee until after the failed Siege of Vienna, but an Arab monopoly? Do you know where coffee was originally grown? And I challenge you to find any real useful drink that can be made from green coffee beans, in any condition.

It was once a capital offense to try and smuggle viable coffee beans out of Arabia.

Really. No doubt the Arabians guarded their coffee groves, high in the fertile mountains of Saudi Arabia quite carefully…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Anonymous Reader May 26, 2012 at 15:42

Question: if each Pope is infallible, why is it that the current infallible Pope is presumably having to do so many things to fix blunders/errors/mistakes committed by one or more previous infallible Popes?

Welmer, the attention to fathers by the Pope is welcome, but I for one am going to have to see a whole lot of follow-through to believe any of it. I remember too many past actions where the RC church has take the side of lefties of various shades, including feminists and other Marxists, to have any real trust that one speech means any substantial change in policy.

For a start, the RC church could stop handing out annulments in the US like candy on Halloween, and then fathers like Elusive Wapiti would not have their children ripped away from them. Cutting back the US annulments to be in line with the rest of the RC church would be a real demonstration that the Pope isn’t just spouting nice words, but actually presiding over a substantial pro-family policy.

I won’t hold my breath waiting; the memory of “liberation theology”, RC Bishops pressing the US to surrender to the USSR, goddess-worshipping nuns, etc. is too clear to be dismissed on the basis of some nice words.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Anonymous Reader May 26, 2012 at 15:51

There is another category of single mothers: those who abandoned their husbands AND children. I have met some and they still act as if though they were victims and great mothers although they could not care any about their children. There used to be a time when even the left looked down upon these women.

Yeah, no kidding. I know some men in their 60′s who are taking care of children under 10, because the worthless whoring daughter who popped the kids out decided she needed her “space” to be happy . That’s right, there are mothers who dump their children on their parents, and split for the big city. Pensioners raising their grandchildren, because the alternative is that their whorish daughters will give the kids to the state for adoption / foster care.

Despicable. And increasingly common. Don’t look for any church to say one peep about it, either.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Brigadon May 26, 2012 at 22:33

@Anonymous Reader-

Close, but the turks (who were somewhat muslim, or arab at the time) actually DID have a monopoly on coffee beans for a while. the turkish government can and did execute ‘smugglers’ for trying to export viable turkish beans, which was widely renowned as the world’s premier coffee. (at least compared to african beans)

They roasted the beans prior to export, although, of course, you have to roast them to make them into coffee. This was in contrast to african beans which were roasted at their destination.

since then, of course, northern africa has ceased to be a viable producer of coffee… something in their soil makes the coffee taste ‘mealy’, even when they use good, single-pip beans.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
migu May 26, 2012 at 23:11

Anonymous reader.

Ever heard of the ottoman? Check em out. Add coffee to the search. Then there is that whole fertile crescent. Let us not forget the river Jordan.

Yes, the Arabs had a monopoly on coffee until the Spanish started.growing it in america. The mughals did the same with cotton.

Folks if you learned it in publich schools it’s probably bullshit.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Brigadon May 27, 2012 at 00:29

“Folks if you learned it in publich schools it’s probably bullshit.”

seriously.

Honestly, I have to say I like wikepedia. It is slanted, but to hear the MSM and blue pills slander it, it has about the average validity and resource content of…say… Urban dictionary

The thing is, the information on wikipedia is typically subject to truly exhaustive peer review, and citing requirements are extremely strict. even the political orientation or emotional slant of an article can cause it to be disallowed. This is far far better and more accurate than common school textbooks, and a logarithmic multiplication of the quality of your average teacher or ‘political creature’ tenured professor.

I cannot say that I agree with wikipedia about everything, especially since they killed the Thomas James Ball article, but you could do WAY worse than pick up all of your ‘common’ education from wikpedia, or use it as a valuable tool for home-schooling.

Way worse like sending your kid to ‘feminise and drug your children’ public school.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
migu May 27, 2012 at 02:08

Wikipedia is where you start. Then follow their citations and so on until you find a primary source that you cant read, because it’s in a dead language.

When I was a kid, it was worldbook or Britannica. Had both sets at the house.

Keyster is a plant huh? Where do you people come up with this stuff? Seriously do your MRM history folks, at least an intro. Way too funny seeing someone use HL’s blog to paint keyster as a plant.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
migu May 27, 2012 at 02:15

Galileo was wrong on everything. Heliocentrism was just as false as geocentrism. About the only thing he had right was earth’s gravity. 9.8/s^2 to this day. And he didn’t even figure out the mass ratio, he timed a frigging marble on a series of inclines. So did Pythagoras, and so did Anslem.

The church simply said, yeah so we already knew that. Bbbbbut that means the sun is the center of the universe. No it doesn’t, and the geocentric calculation for the heavens stays accurate longer.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Brigadon May 27, 2012 at 02:32

Axtually, Galileo was only ‘accidentally’ right about gravity. In dialogues he actually argued for mass affecting the speed of gravity, completely failing to account for air friction.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
migu May 27, 2012 at 04:18

Mass does affect gravity. More mass more gravity.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Migu May 27, 2012 at 08:44

The Pope, the most powerful man in the world, just offered support for Men who want their families back. What does that mean for those of us who don’t have any forced bastards? It means The Pope is behind US. The Pope people, The friggin Pope.

If you guys hold to your, “Everybody always has an angle on me.” philosophy, then work the Pope’s Angle and see which dog will have a full belly at the end of the day.

Here is a hint. When the Nation States go bankrupt, The Pope will be solvent.

Sometimes I just don’t get it. Everyone claims practicality and then goes against it religiously.

Damn, the Pope acknowledged the plight of men in this culture, and what do you all do; scream “FUCK THE POPE.” Okay, I guess. Ra Ra……

If the shoe fits and all….

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Brigadon May 27, 2012 at 12:04

Well, yes, but I am talking more about not accounting for atmospheric friction.

Yes, Mass does affect gravity, but he made the assumption that gravity only emanated from earth, not from the objects affected by it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
fakeemail May 27, 2012 at 12:49

Oh, great. We have the pope telling us to “man up”. This is again blaming men under the presumption that men have become too immature and selfish to raise a family.

WRONG. It is the BAD BOYS who women lust for that are doing that. The other 90% of us “nice guys” (the invisible extras) who actually make society work would love to get married and have a family in our early 20s. Women just want us to foot the bill for their bastard kids.

Wake me when someone important tells women to “man down” and stop being ahole-lovin’ sluts.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
migu May 27, 2012 at 16:21

Oh right. Forgot about that Brigadon. My bad.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Brigadon May 27, 2012 at 22:51

Heh, I worded it badly.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Poiuyt June 2, 2012 at 01:47

Bishop of London warns of divorce ‘epidemic’
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18305515

The Bishop of London says the extent of youth unemployment in Britain is “appalling”

Promiscuity, separation and divorce have reached epidemic proportions in Britain, the Bishop of London has said.

The Rt Rev Richard Chartres said people should use the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee to restore strained relationships.

He said although people were better off in many ways since the Queen’s accession to the throne in 1952, material progress had come at the expense of equality and communal life.

He also called for action to tackle “depressingly high” youth unemployment.

Writing in a Bible Society pamphlet, Dr Chartres said relationships had become more strained, fragile and broken than people cared to recognise.

Anti-depressants

“Literally millions of children grow up without knowing a stable, loving, secure family life – and that is not to count the hundreds of thousands more who don’t even make it out of the womb each year,” he said.

“Promiscuity, separation and divorce have reached epidemic proportions in our society.

“Perhaps, then, we shouldn’t be surprised that depression and the prescription of anti-depressants has reached a similarly epidemic level.”

The senior Church of England bishop presented the Biblical understanding of a Jubilee as an opportunity to take a long view, and think about the kind of environment being bequeathed to following generations.

He said it should include a move to living within our means.

Dr Chartres also described youth unemployment in Britain as “depressing” and said we should look to role models and mentors for a solution as well as government.

“The extent of youth unemployment is appalling. The waste of human talent is unsustainable morally and economically,” he said.

He also praised the “quiet dignity” of the Monarch, who he described as the most famous public figure on earth and the most respected.

“The way in which she and her family have reached out to include newly established British communities has provided a focus for continuing but expanding national self-respect,” he said.

That in turn had helped the peaceful transformation of Britain’s national identity, he added.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Darryl X June 5, 2012 at 10:09

I agree that too many people including the Pope condemn appropriately the problem of fatherlessness but misplace the cause and blame men and fathers instead of feminists. I have heard too many times from various denominations that men choose to abandon their children when really they were driven from their children’s lives by feminists. Condemning wrongly men for these developments isn’t going to solve the problem. Only until blame is correctly assigned can the problem be defined properly and addressed.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: