Invisible 10 year old boy
Invisible 10 year old boy
(Pope Benedict)
picture: dunno source, via our lolcat builder. lol caption: Shane
More Lolz:LolcatsLoldogsLol CelebsFunny Look-AlikesLol News & PoliticsFun With ChartsNostalgic WinFail Pix & VidsEngrish
Show Only: News | Democrats | Republicans | Media
« Previous I’d like to thank you both for being here… | It’s 3a.m. in the White House and the phone is ringing Next »
Invisible 10 year old boy
(Pope Benedict)
picture: dunno source, via our lolcat builder. lol caption: Shane
eyem tinkin dis 1 mae b uh lil ouda sorts.
LMAO!!! That is just WRONG!!
Dude I dont understand why ppl cant just leave us Catholics alone. I mean good God Almighty, we all make mistakes, even non-Catholics, but the only Christian denominations you hear ppl makin fun of is Catholics and Mormons. It just really ticks me off that ppl wont just leave it alone, I mean the Pope came to the US to address that exact incident.
Because it was a particularly juicy scandal! And Catholics and Mormons ain’t the only ones getting picked on, I know some primo Baptist jokes and, as a Buddhist, I have access to some schmexi Buddhist jokes too.
I don’t believe the pope was touching the keikis, but I don’t care how pious and wonderful a person may be in public, what matters is that they are a good person on the inside and obviously the priests involved in the scandal were not good people in their hearts. Sure they’re the minority and many priests are wonderful people who would never dream of hurting children, but still.
I’m not going to go into the encyclopedic timeline of “Catholicism- Christianity, ur doin it wrong” that I could go into, I’ll just leave it at this one point:
Why is it that people have the hardest time laughing at themselves? Humor heals almost all emotional wounds, except maybe being dunno… molested. Learn to laugh at yourself, to feel empathy for the victims instead of claiming victimization by association with the victimisers, and also to live your life in a righteous manner and to it’s fullest enjoyment.
Besides, it’s just a damn dirty joke, next thing you know you’ll be strapping a bomb to your chest over a cartoon of the Pope in a European newspaper, but I’ve been known to ramble.
I was raised Catholic, and will continue to mock them, Emperor Palatine, and whoever else is involved with hurting little kids, supporting lying about birth control, and continuing to exert political control in a way that is harmful and wrong.
Make your religion better, and then I will think about shutting up. And trust me, anything I’m saying to you, I say to my mom.
That pix made up for the week of Yahoo News reporting on his every move, and making me want to throw up. I also make fun of cults, baptists, and anyone else that acts the same way.
Why won’t we leave it alone? Because Catholics are hypocritical holier-than-though pricks. How do I know? Because my family is Roman Catholic, I was brought-up in the church and left it as soon as I came to my senses and had to ability to differentiate a fairy tale (the bible) from fact (science). The whole molesting children thing just reaffirmed my decision to be the correct one.
As for Mormons….. yeah, pretty self-explanatory on that one.
You don’t have to be a good Catholic/Lutheran/Muslim/Hindu to be a good person (or to try and make a “proper life” only in hopes of having a “proper afterlife”….. why not just try being a good person for the sake of being a good person?
Whats so bad about Mormons? I’m LDS, no Mormon I know pretends to be perfect. We all know we make mistakes. All religions, all people, at times and in ways are hypocrites. We just try to be our best, thats all, we have certain standards, but by no means is it a law, there are consequences for what you do, and it should be that way. Our world is all too happy to get away with doing potentially harmful things to ourselves and others. It’s all choices, though, I try to make good choices.
And this picture could be interpreted in a few ways…
Hence, the irony so settle pettle and relax and have a laugh insted of getting on your high horse.
Perhaps it’s because Catholic and Mormon leaders practice a whole lot of oppression, repression, and hypocrisy?
As for the rest of the Christian denominations, the religious reich is its own joke, and the rest of them aren’t so insufferably arrogant.
And please, spare us the “we’ve been wronged” nonsense. Ever hear a Jewish joke?
I’m an ex-Catholic and a lapsed Unitarian. I can tell you UU jokes all day. It’s just that UUs don’t have things like Inquisitions in their past. Karma. She slaps.
Actually, I make fun of jehovah’s witnesses, pentacostals, AND every other religious affiliation. Don’t worry, you’re not alone in my ridicule, atleast.
I LMFAO at that picture…
And the Catholic church deserves EVERY SINGLE “cheap shot” they get…
In stead of sending the molesting priests to jail, they just sent them to a 3rd world country, basically saying “enjoy your vacation, those boys won’t tell anyone…”
as for the whole ‘Don’t pick on my religion’ stuff:
“With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil — that takes religion.”
- Steven Weinberg
‘Nuff said…
404 lolz not found
BWAAAA-HAAAA-HAAAAAA!!!!1!!!!!
spewing all ovah keebord…
ROTF LMAO!!!!!
lulz. with a german accent.
and popetacular.
l loves.
*Snarkle*
Ouch, I find catholic jokes funny (As I do all religious jokes) but this one is too wrong to be funny to me. Too each his own I guess, but the Pope?
My thoughts exactly. The priests who messed up sure, but the Pope? really?
Um… this one’s not funny to me. Not with the Pope. He wasn’t doing this stuff, and that’s just wrong to do to a major religious figure, even if I’m not Catholic. (I’m Christian, by the way…)
It’d be funny if it were a priest, but not the pope…
What’s the difference? A person is a person. Who cares what title they hold? They don’t even follow the bible anyway.
exatcly my pov on this
I’m Catholic, and I make fun of myself and my religion constantly, but I think this just kind of hit a sour note, especially after the pope came to the US to offer sympathy and consolation to victims of molestation. I’m not one to get offended easily, but this was just not cool.
Sympathy and consolation? WTF? Like having a private meeting and praying with them is going to do absolutely anything to help victims.
How about actually kicking out the priests who were involved, huh?
You do realize this is the same Pope who is on record as saying that warfare and capital punishment are lesser evils than abortion and euthanasia when it comes to deciding who gets to eat communion wafers, right?
See for yourself: http://origin.ewtn.com/news/blog.asp?blog_ID=2.
Sadly, there are probably few jokes that come close to the offensiveness of the Catholic church as an organization throughout history.
This is over the line.
boooooooooooooo
I’m not a Catholic, but this totally offends me. It’s disrespectful to both the Pope and the victims of the clergy abuse. Sorry, not funny.
HA! Shane - I’m loving you!!
So yeah, never mind that the pope is just a human being, like the rest of us. He’s not mother Theresa, or any specific miraculous figure. People forget that the office of the Pope is a political one, not that of a quasi-deity. In fact, it annoys me that there is more recognition and focus on the Pope and other mortal figures both current and in history than the actual relevant figures in Christianity. Personally, as far as I’m concerned, how dare mortal men try and proclaim to have the authority to speak God’s word in order to further their goals on this world. Hell, the office of Pope is an elected one, the dogma of papal infallibility didn’t even exist until 1870, and only in recent centuries has the Vatican focused on matters of religion more than political control and dominance using religion as leverage. It also has a long and persistent history of “do it because I said so” going back to the first few centuries AD, including when we celebrate Easter and the consolidation of authority amongst several areas claiming leadership of the world’s Catholics.
All I’m saying is do some research and some soul searching and for God’s sake, try and figure out what’s actually the important focus of your faith before you elevate a mortal, essentially political figure to the reverence, perfection, unconditional respect and love reserved for a true deity.
Then again, education has long been the only enemy capable of restraining and shrinking the influence of the Catholic Church, so don’t look into it if that’s your thing. It’s whatever.
I’d also like to add, just for the record, I’m a very convicted Christian. I just don’t like how a certain denomination has screwed it up over the last 1800 years. You have to focus on the devine message, not 1800+ years of meddling by mortal man.
You go, Shane
“He’s not mother Theresa, or any specific miraculous figure.”
Heh…Mother Theresa had her flaws too.
I’m practically agnostic and I find this in bad taste. There are so many things you could make fun of this guy or the Catholic church for, but not this. This joke is getting old anyway.
Of course it’s in bad taste…
If I had to live in a world restricted to inoffensive fluff, I think I’d want off it, quick.
I’ll begin by saying that I, too, find this to be offensive. I can take a joke, but this definitely crosses the line. All throughout the past week, the Pope has been working tirelessly to heal the wounds that things like this seek to perpetuate.
Now, on to my main point. As a Catholic, I noticed a few things wrong with what you said, Shane. First of all, the Pope is not merely a political figure. He is first and foremost a religious leader, and his responsibility is to guide the people of the Church and bring them closer to God. Yes, sometimes this involves speaking about “political” issues, but his role is primarily a religious one. Second, we do not elevate the Pope to the level of a deity. We don’t worship him, and we don’t think he’s perfect. We do, however, believe that he is Christ’s representative on earth. This does not mean that he IS Christ, or that we think he is God, or that he can’t make a mistake. Third, the DOGMA of papal infallibility didn’t exist until the 1800s, but that doesn’t mean that just because it wasn’t formally declared doesn’t mean that the Pope was not infallible before then. It just means it wasn’t formally declared. Also, papal infallibility does NOT mean that every word that comes from the mouth of the Pope is doctrine and must be believed. It is limited only to matters of faith and morals, and it has to be a formal declaration “ex cathedra” (from the chair of Peter). There are only a few times that a declaration has been made in such a way.
It is true, though, that Catholics have a great deal of respect and reverence for the Pope because, as I said, he is the visible head of the Church on earth. Christ established this succession with Peter. The Pope does not give us new teachings; he simply clarifies and teaches what has been handed on by Christ Himself.
Finally, regarding your comment about education, I must say that I strongly disagree. There are many who have been drawn to the Catholic Church after a great deal of study and searching. The Catholic faith is consistent with reason; it is not irrational blind belief.
Hope this helps clear some things up.
Peace,
Laura
1. He is too a significantly political figure, elected by his political peers in a political process.
2. Belief that a mortal man, elected by mortal men, is Christ’s representative on earth (with the exception of the first “pope”, then not even called a pope but designated by Christ himself) is, well, thin at best.
3. History has shown that not only does the Vatican issue some very questionable edicts, but questioning the Vatican’s edicts, no matter how wrong they are, result in harsh retribution. Just ask Galileo.
4. As a follow up to #3, one of those questionable edicts that they have gone back and forth on, up to a final ban on, is allowing priests to marry. This was done as a land grab, as at the time, illegitimate children were prohibited from inheriting land, thus consolidating and growing the Vatican’s (and the extended church’s) land holdings. In environments where female contact is prohibited, human males will sometimes resort to homosexuality; see prison. Now in a situation where females are absent and getting turned in for homosexuality is both a high risk and high likelihood, where is a repressed priest to turn? Yes, the Vatican is directly responsible for child molestations. If they would address problems created by their meddling with actual issues of the faith for their corporeal gain in a timely fashion, instead of ignoring them until they exploded leaving a centuries long trail of damaged faithful behind them, it would be a different story. However, the truth is they simply do not.
5. As far as education, the Catholic church was still mandatorily delivering masses in Latin up until 1964, instead of the local languages. You can’t tell me for one second that education was repressed, even education of the word of God.
6. The Catholic religion demands the utmost blind faith as the cornerstone of its existence. The crushing contradiction with reality and often times the intent and message of the whole Christian faith would implode the Catholic church without this blind faith. Reason has long been the enemy of the church, with science as the standard issue effigy to be burned as an offering to the power the church holds over its subjects.
The Roman Empire never fell; it just changed strategies.
I admire the strength it takes to hold to your beliefs, and to be faithful in today’s world. However, ur doin it wrong. No hard feelings meant, and I’m not insulting you (at least in intent). This is just an intervention, and it’s entirely your place to believe whatever you want.
“Now in a situation where females are absent and getting turned in for homosexuality is both a high risk and high likelihood, where is a repressed
priest to turn? Yes, the Vatican is directly responsible for child molestations.”
Off topic, but PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE do not confuse homosexuality with pedophilia- unless of course, you believe repressed heterosexuality also leads
to child molestation.
The Vatican did “address” the problem, using this logic, by banning gay priests.
I am not confused one bit. I’m pointing out the progression of limitations and where it leads, not some sort of parallel nature between pedophelia and homosexuality. To clarify, homosexuality won’t work out because of the risks of getting caught. They will then turn to the most vulnerable (and controllable) outlet.
Secondly, the Vatican didn’t properly address anything. Chasing the problem after it happens, with full knowledge that it will likely happen again instead of fixing the source of the problem is a load of crap. I have no problems with homosexual priests; some of the most well adjusted people both spiritually and otherwise that I’ve known have been homosexual.
Banning homosexual priests to fix the child molestation is like invading Iraq to stop Al Quaida.
I realize this is long done and overwith, but I don’t understand…
If one is supposed to be chaste to enter the priesthood, why should homosexual priests feel a “risk” of being caught? I don’t expect an answer because this is a long done topic.
The only way one runs a risk of being caught would be to have sex and BE caught. Anyone caught having sex while being a priest would be, I would hope, removed from their status, regardless of sexual orentation. The idea that homosexual priests couldn’t keep their pants on like straight priests is rather insulting to gay priests who serve their chosen god in their own way and do so with reverance.
I also take issue to your use of the word “resort” as it relates to your sentence of prison sex. It’s rape. Prison inmates resort to rape. Homosexuality isn’t rape. The deviant priests resort to trickery and rape, not homosexuality.
Your first paragraph in this reply is also rather insulting. Stating that it’s homosexuals that resort to raping altar boys because their sexual “frustations” aren’t being met is extremely homophobic. In many of these cases, the rape is a result of what’s the easiest to obtain. They are, by any stretch of the imagination, ALL homosexuals. If there were altar girls, I’m sure we would see the SAME thing happening to them. It’s opportunity, not homosexuality, that’s getting the best of these priests who want their cake and eat it too.
Homosexuality isn’t about SEX, much like Heterosexuality isn’t about SEX. Sex isn’t something that’s necessary in a relationship. Get past the hangup that gays and straights function differently and then work on the idea that gay’s don’t join the priesthood to rape boys.
Sounds like you have a thing against the catholic church.
I’ll stay on topic and simply say that the priests should practice what they preach and exhibit some self-control, like the rest of the catholic priests do.
What was done is despicable, but was not something the catholic church forced onto people. They volunteered for this position, they knew what it entailed. Sex isn’t needed to live, it’s for pleasure and to procreate. It’s not breathing.
Hey look, one of my replies is below this one, that’s usually a sign that I need to stop. XD
Heh… it’s all good. However, I don’t have any agenda to single out the Catholic church organization. I do, however, have a major issue with organizations that have screwed with people’s faiths for corporeal and personal gain. I have the same problem with the Catholic church as I do with the FLDS or Westborough Baptist.
One more thing…
Sex is a fundamental cornerstone of what it is to be human. Sex is, in fact, needed to live when you consider the species as a whole. We are designed to procreate, it is an instinctual urge of the body and the mind. A well disciplined mind can live without it; however, it isn’t easy. As humans, when things aren’t easy, we tend to falter. Anyone who says they are happily living without sex is either doing so out of a) strong discipline or b) failure to obtain or c) some sort of experience or deformity that makes sex unpleasureable for them.
The only thing wrong about sex and the priesthood is that the Catholic church still forces people to subscribe to going cold turkey on the former to obtain the latter.
That’s pretty far off topic XD
Regardless of the Pope’s habits, the catholic church’s mistakes, and the various things you mentioned (And I agreed on a bit).
Still a really messed up caption.
Mother Theresa wasn’t a human?!
If Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger had not been the main attack dog of the Vatican on the issue of the child molestations, I would question the caption. However, he was the pit bull on this issue long after it was clearly apparent that this was not a media creation, but a very real problem that was allowed to go on too long.
Yeah, I heard that, too. Ratzinger counselled JP2 not to worry; to let the matter blow over. I don’t know how reliable that information is; I sort of remember hearing it on NPR as I was moving from one room to another doing laundry today. It was pretty early and I had only had one cup of coffee, too. Take it with a grain of salt - or google it!
YEah, think I’ll go try that. brb
hmmm…. he said/ he said stuff go look for yourselves
My goodness, people get so fired up about religion. :S
The story of earth’s history.
Though maybe “People get so fired up about their beliefs” since many people aren’t religious, but still have beliefs.
““People get so fired up about their beliefs” since many people aren’t religious, but still have beliefs.”
This is absolutely true, but many people don’t take their beliefs too seriously, while religions have no room for laughing or discussion, they are always serious matter.
Terms like “sacrilege” and “blasphemy” are almost always used in religious context and have zero meaning outside belief systems. I find it funny.
Pope is the head of the church, so he’s responsible for everything, at the end.
So, the CEO is responsible for the employee who rapes a customer or another employee? Sure, he should do something about it, but it’s not like he personally interviews each and every employee.
And “sacrilege” and “blasphemy” are used outside of religious contexts all the time. They just masquerade as different words. You don’t need a God to worship something, sometimes people worship things a little more down to earth, and a little more physical. They can be just as protective and vindictive in the name of those beliefs as religious folk can.
Many religious people don’t take their religion seriously either.
Yes, the CEO is responsible for the conduct of his employees to his customers, especially when proper corrective actions have been avoided for centuries. Violations by “employees” of the Catholic church, on the historical whole, have been swept under the rug instead of dealt with.
Ooh, ooh! Do one about the Imam next!
Mwhaaahahahahhaaaaa!!
That’s awesome!!!
For those of you that can’t take a joke, stay off the internet and never leave your house. The world is better off without ya!
Just cause something is a joke, doesn’t make it funny.
And something a joke, doesn’t excuse what’s said.
I found this offensive, mainly because of the implication. Making a joke about such things hurts quite a lot, and someone who came over to try to make it better shouldn’t be made fun of.
I think the point that you (and many others) have missed is far too little, far too late. If they were actually looking to fix this problem, instead of just do a little public relations damage control, they’d allow the priests to get their winkies whacked in a healthy, proper way, instead of painting them into a corner where they commit the utlimate unspeakable perversion.
Being a priest is a volunteer position, if they wish to have sex, stop being a priest. The church didn’t put them into this situation, the priests did and their lack of self control mixed with some effed up perversions.
What the church needs to do is to fix its system by which it trains and selects its priests. Cause it’s obviously got problems.
Agreed, somewhat. However, there’s still the fundamental problem with policy in that bad policy has been tied in with a significant calling.
Becoming a preist isn’t like deciding you want to work at Kinkos, or even enlist in the military. It is a higher calling, where a young man walking the path towards serving God in the best way he understands doesn’t know how he’ll behave in 20 years, let alone maybe doesn’t understand certain things about themselves. Young people tend to be idealistic and optomistic about their future, and once you’re in you’re in. I think it’s awfully screwed up to bind and restrict such a fundamental part of human nature as payment for wanting to serve God. It was a pagan idea to start with, adopted by the church to grab land. I think they can let it go by now.
Certainly true, and I think removing it would be a great idea. But in the mean time, it’s the rule, and as such is enforced until it’s removed.
LMAO!!!!! that is awesome. it will never get old…