Vatican May OK Biotech Crops

[dArKeR]

The Vatican will convene a round-table discussion in the fall to study the ethical and scientific implications of biotech crops.

The Vatican “will draw the appropriate conclusions” on using genetically modified organisms after the meeting, Cardinal Renato Martino told Vatican Radio on Monday. A day earlier, an Italian newspaper that interviewed him on the divisive issue suggested the Vatican was coming out in favor of biotech crops as a way to combat world hunger.

“The problem of hunger involves the conscience of every man and in particular those of the Christians,” Martino told Vatican Radio. “For this reason the Catholic Church follows with special interest and solicitude every development in science to help the solution of a plight that afflicts such a large part of humanity.”

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/08/04/tech/main566575.shtml

I think the Vatican would better use it's resources to:

1. Stop their priests from having sexual intercourse with children.
2. Stop their priests from having sexual intercourse with congregation members who are having emotional crises.
3. If for one second you think the Pope, all the Bishops, all the Cardinals, all the Vatican didn't know about this for 20 years then you will probably go to hell for being ignorant. (The 11th Commandment).
4. It's still going on in overseas parishes in Africa, South America, and Asia. Only 1000 times more and the victims are too poor to hire lawyers, the media would never even consider reporting on the Holy Catholic Church..

http://darkerxdarker.tripod.com/

[Maple]

1. Oh well that's good of them

Have they forgiven Galileo yet?

[soothsayer]

2. aaack, my own church!

As you pointed out, the priorities seem a little off.

And do they REALLY think this stuff will help the starving? I sure don't.

[DemBones DemBones]

5. Read the article -- all it says is that a discussion will be convened

to study the ethical and social implications of GM crops. CBS overstates a bit to say "Vatican may OK." I oppose GM foods, too, and hope the Vatican will conclude not to support their use.

[Pert_UK]

3. Interfering with nature & children is OK...homosexuality isn't......

Go figure.....

Now...perhaps if homosexuals had been created by scientists messing with their DNA (rather than God), then they would be regarded as fine and dandy.....

In case you couldn't tell, I was being sarcastic....

P.

[DemBones DemBones]

4. It's unfortunate that

you posted this article just to give yourself an excuse to rant about the Roman Catholic Church.

The truth is that the Church ~has~ taken steps to deal with the problem of sexually priests, particularly those who have sex with minors. To imply that nothing has been done shows deliberate ignorance of what has been widely reported.

I'm angry at the perverts who have had sex with teenagers and even children. They have harmed their victims and disgraced their vows as priests. They should be removed from the priesthood and punished by the legal system. But their sins do not destroy the message of the Church.

The Church will survive this scandal and American Catholics have learned that we don't have to scratch too deep to find anti-Catholicism beneath the veneer of "tolerance."

[Voltaire99]

6. What's anti-Catholic about the post?

I see nothing anti-Catholic in the original post.

The poster is questioning the Catholic church's legitimacy to hold forth on other issues while its own house is in severe disorder. That seems a reasonable position.

No institution may cover up severe betrayal for decades and expect that "taking steps to deal with the problem" is sufficient to restore its standing as a social critic or moral agent. There is such a thing as disgrace...

And it is unpersuasive to me to characterize the church's response to exposure of its collosal cover-up as some kind of commendable reform. Firing molesters, accepting resignations from their senior co-conspirators, and paying out fortunes in settlements for hiding institution-wide pedophilia aren't exactly virtues. These are acts of the barest, meanest accord with the law.

[tlb]

7. Taking that to its conclusion though

doesn't that mean no church may take any stand unless it can certify it is morally perfect ? Since churches are represented by humans, that will never be. WOuld you therefore silence the Vatican on all issues now ?

Before you answer, did you likewise say the Vatican should be silent on the Iraq war issue until it had dealt to your satisfaction wiht the molestation scandals ? When the Vatican criticized the Bush administration on that issue, I recall nobody here saying the Vatican was too morally deficient to allow it to lobby against the war.

My personal preference would be for churches to follow the original precept of render unto God what is Gods, and unto Caesars what is Caesars. GM foods simply don't strike me as a theological issue. But shouldn't that be up to the church to decide for itself ?

[chemenger]

8. OK ! Somebody help me to sort this out here.

On the one hand, it's OK to manipulate an organism's genetic makeup in order to feed the world's hungry people but, on the other hand, it's not OK to use a rubber or some other means of birth control in order to check the growth of the the world's starving population.

:shrug:

[jfkennedy]

9. biotech food is poison

Why would the Vatican endorse made by Republicans food (Biotech food).

The Republicans hate the poor, even if they grow more of it because it's biotech they will never give it to the poor. Republicans never do anything for humanity. Name one Republican that can or will the next Jesus Christ, Gandhi, or Kennedy, Martin Luther King.

The Republicans don't even like regulation of real food in the USA.


The Republicans once again just want a way to sell garbage when Biotech food goes bad and is rotten it looks fresh. So they the Republicans can sell it.

That does not seem very moral or Christian to sell someone rotten food.