Give me a flippin’ break. In a sanctimonious and erroneous speech of epic proportions, “On Development That Respects the Environment,” the Prada Papa Ratzi takes a brief break from his incessant homo-bashing to give a swift kick of blame to atheists for sending the world into hell in an environmental handbasket.
The earth is a precious gift of the Creator, who has designed its intrinsic order, thus giving us guidelines to which we must hold ourselves as stewards of his creation. From this awareness, the Church considers questions linked to the environment and its safeguarding as profoundly linked with the topic of integral human development. I referred to these questions several times in my last encyclical “Caritas in Veritate,” reminding of the pressing moral need for renewed solidarity” (49) not only in relations between countries, but also between individuals, as the natural environment is given by God to everyone, and its use entails a personal responsibility towards the whole of humanity, in particular, towards the poor and future generations.…“Is it not true that inconsiderate use of creation begins where God is marginalized or also where his existence is denied? If the human creature’s relationship with the Creator weakens, matter is reduced to egoistic possession, man becomes the ‘final authority,’ and the objective of existence is reduced to a feverish race to possess the most possible.”
Wow. Does this man sit around all day, with his assistants at his beck and call, thinking up ways to shuttle blame for the state of the world on every group and institution except his own domain of child-raping, faithful-family ruining priests and cover-up cardinals? It’s mind-blowing that he can so effortlessly bleat out these statements when his own house isn’t in any kind of moral order. Paul Fidalgo@Examiner.com:
According to Joey Ratz here, atheism is a cause of environmental rape. It’s the usual false equation usually made about atheists and morality–if there’s no God telling you how to behave, how do you know not to kill? Or in this case, how do you know not to selfishly ravage our earthly habitat? But here, he even goes a step further, and implicates people who simply don’t have God as a central part of their lives, “where God is marginalized,” not always at the forefront of thought. That’s rough.The heavy dose of anti-atheist bigotry in this message is not only on the surface, blaming atheists for the plunder of the planet. Worse yet, those heads of corporations and governments who couldn’t give two Hail Marys about our current habitat or what our children will inherit are primarily religious believers. In America, mostly Christian. And by “mostly,” I mean “for all intents and purposes all of them.” These folks are not denying God’s existence–in many instances God is used as a justification for insane waste, exploitation, and brain-dead policy.
A response from Terry Sanderson, President of the National Secular Society:
“This is rich coming from the leader of an organisation that has plundered the world to enrich itself. As he sits in his golden palaces, surrounded by unimaginable luxury and material wealth, he lectures the rest of us about restraint and greed. We have nothing to learn about environmentalism from this hypocrite.”
Hat tip, Ed Brayton.



29 Comments





Someone needs to school this fool99.98% of all incarcerated people are religionists. 0.02% are athiests. If we generalize about who obeys the law more, there is an obvious correlation between who is more responsible and who is not. The athiests come out on top 99% of the time.
Ratzi…the tiarra is too small or too tight
oh SNAP, terry sanderson!that is exactly what i was thinking! shut it down!
Feels Like A ComicHe’s almost like a comic villain – this ancient sissy in his disco cape claiming that gays have all these powers – and on top of that, I’m an Atheist/Agnostic as well.
But there’s a lot more to me than those 2 things. Maybe the old queen can probe into all that and find out what other undiscovered powers I might have.
Before it’s over with, I might as well legally have my name changed to “Dazzler” or “Kitty Pryde”.
serve the poor, nahHe didn’t like the best thing of 20th century Catholicism LIBERATION THEOLOGY in Latin America, either.
Damn, you did it, bluegrasswith those references to Dazzler and Kitty Pryde…just go all out and be Jean Grey.
On A Bad DayI COULD be Jean Grey as Phoenix!
But with my love of disco music, Dazzler would likely be most appropriate. I can deal with the blue face paint, but I can’t roller skate worth a damn! LOL
Infallibly DelusionalWhat will He think of next? Gay marriage causes deforestation and the extinction of species?
The Pope demonstrates that He is intrinsically disordered by trying to connect civil-rights progress and environmental destruction. He could have a lasting impact on global warming by keeping his mouth shut and thus reduce the amount of greenhouse gases He puts into the atmosphere.
What should have been the headline
THAT would be news…
A pope telling the truth.
FEAR ME, before I smoot you ALL!Bwahahahaha….
Bow before MY might, Papa
SmurfRazi; I sneer in your general direction!Off to knock down a forest, raise the earth’s temperature a few notches and eat some baby seals or something. Ta-ta!
BTWI have to admit something- it was not God but ME who scattered the dinosaur bones around the place.
They aren’t any sort of “cosmic puzzle”- they were just a barbeque.
They were also absolutely delicious (especially the pterodactyl wings and baby back stegosaurus ribs!) and I am a terrible litterbug…
Popes don’t wear crowns any moreAt the end of Vatican II, in 1963, Pope Paul IV removed the tiara and placed it on the altar. His two immediate successors, John-Paul I and John-Paul II both declined coronation, and JP II issues an apostolic constitution (official Vatican decree) in 1996 that removed coronation from the ceremonial of investing a pope.
I’m sure Maladict was very disappointed.
We all know that *real* Christians respect and honor the planetA real Christian recycles and never, ever uses fossil fuels or items derived from petroleum or petroleum by-products.
Oy.
Let’s see who is itthat’s so insistant that global warming doesn’t even exist? I’m pretty sure it’s not the atheists.
Hey, look who must be an atheist, then….Ann Coultergeist:
My apologies to my atheist friends for the sarcastic implication that she might be one of them. Also, apologies to poltergeists as well.
This seems to be a slightly baked rehash of another bit of Papal BullIt seems suspiciously imilar to Benedict XVI’s 2008 Christmas greeting message to the Roman Curia and Prelature, given on December 22, 2008, where it seems as if he bashes gays, trans people and othes as being more dangerous than those who harm the rain forests, because we don’t respect the “natural order.”
Benedict does not realize that LGBT people are as much a part of the “natural order” of things as out straight cisgender sistes and brothers. Ever since he took the post as the head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in the 1960′s, the doctrinal arm of the Roman Catholic Church has fallen farther into a deep moral error which has made the Church less and less relevant to reality.
His assault on atheists is cut from the same cloth – having no regard for the reality, his existence and that of the Roman Catholic hierarchy continues to become even less relevant to the real world.
Having taken some small steps with Vatican II to attempt to make an encounter with the “Modern World,” the Roman Catholic Church hierarchy has under Joseph Ratzinger’s guidance, forst at Propaganda Fideii and now as Pope, from the issuance of the encyclical Humanae Vitae (the condemnation of artificialbirth control) in the 1960′s to the current daft announceent, beaten a path to disorder and severe moral error.
If we say she’s full of chickensh*tdoes that make her a poultrygeist?
Pope and a Politician, They both lie their asses off in order to raise money.
Shame on you,You didn’t share any of that feast feast for the rest of us. But I can’t wait until some discovers all the baby back ribs I buried in the shape of Jesus, That will really get them wondering.
I thought you were the onein charge of putting all those little “doves” in sand dollars…
Self righteous bigotrymay have worked in the time of Galileo by arresting him, but the Vatican does not have the power today to shut scientific discovery down. 96% of scientists today are atheists.
Who’s responsible?Gee, all this time I thought it was overuse of resources, rape of the land, and pollution. Who knew it was atheists? Not just those atheists who might be contributing to those activities, mind, but ALL of them. I’m glad I learned this! Knowing about this and death panels and all that kind of stuff has really enlightened me!
I’m just curious–is the contribution to global warming because atheists fart more than people who hold other belief systems, thus putting more methane into the atmosphere? Because that’s the only conclusion I can come to with this vapid argument.
Do you have any statisticsto back up that claim that 96% of scientists are atheists?
93 % not 96%members of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) often cited by Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins. It’s been awhile since I read their books.
From Wikipedia
A study has shown atheism in the west to be particularly prevalent among scientists, a tendency already quite marked at the beginning of the 20th century, developing into a dominant one during the course of the century. In 1914, James H. Leuba found that 58% of 1,000 randomly selected U.S. natural scientists expressed “disbelief or doubt in the existence of God” (defined as a personal God which interacts directly with human beings). The same study, repeated in 1996, gave a similar percentage of 60.7%; this number is 93% among the members of the National Academy of Sciences. Expressions of positive disbelief rose from 52% to 72%.[
Aren’t the fundies and Conservative Catholics the anti-Goreand anti-global warming people?
When he says “natural order”…
The thing is, the phrase “natural order”, when used by Pope Palpatine and the like, has a completely different meaning from when the rest of us us it. Coming from that crowd, the “natural order” means nothing more or less than “everything conforming to our doctrines”.
No, just extraordinarily fowl
BelieversSome time back, maybe 30 or 40 years ago, I read that a double blind survey of randomly picked religious people with adjustment for non returns that over 50 per cent of all clergy did not believe in the existence of a god.
95% is a sub-set numberThe first person to study religious trends among scientists was psychologist James Leuba. In 1914 he conducted a survey of 1,000 randomly selected scientists and found that 58% of those surveyed expressed belief in a Deity. Among 400 “greater scientists” the figure rose to 78%. Leuba repeated his survey study in 1934 and found that the percentages had risen to 67% and 85%, respectively.
In 1996 Edward Larson of the University of Georgia repeated Leuba’s survey and found that 61% of the general scientist population were atheists. Among the 400 “greater scientists” 72% claimed to be atheist, 20% claimed to be agnostic. Larson noted that biological scientists were more likely to be atheists than physicists or astronomers. “Greater scientist” indicates a level of peer recognition such as membership in the National Academy of Sciences.
Larson describes the NAS membership’s reaction to the survey as “near universal rejection of the transcendent by NAS natural scientists.” He also noted that despite the near total rejection of religion among the members of NAS, for political correctness, the NAS continually insists that it is “religion-neutral,” particularly when the topic of science education in schools comes up. Just goes to show you how the know-nothings keep fucking it up for everyone, reinforced by Texas fundie christian textbook manufacturers.
The results of Larson’s study were printed in the 23 July 1998 issue of Nature magazine, entitled “Leading Scientists Still Reject God.” The article is re-printed in full here.