Pope's theology of the body has become popular topic for study groups

The Theology of the Body: Human Love in the Divine Plan
by Pope John Paul II

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45-nospam@hotmail.com), March 12, 2004

Answers

a better link to the book

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45-nospam@Hotmail.com), March 12, 2004.

Bill,

Please don't take offense to this.

Stop starting so many threads linked to every thing you find "interesting" and agree with. Scale it down some, "Home boy".

-- T (Not@G..........), March 12, 2004.

every now an then, one of the threads 'catch' the interest of the group... but I understand and I will 'tone it down' :)

I get a little bored talking about why Catholics pray to the saints all the time though, so the more topics people can post the better???

-bill

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45-nospam@hotmail.com), March 12, 2004.

Bill, usually people get criticized here for monopolizing ONE thread or promoting one topic or agenda. Now, you're being singled out for giving people choices about what to think about here in the forum. I guess there's no pleasing everyone.

You are permitted to start as many threads as you wish that have to do with the Catholic Faith provided our rules are observed. If the topic doesn't interest a reader, he doesn't have to read it. :)

-- Ed (catholic4444@yahoo.ca), March 13, 2004.

More information is here on the Theology of the Body:

www.theologyofthebody.net

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45-nospam@hotmail.com), March 13, 2004.

Make that

www.theologyofthebody.net

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45-nospam@hotmail.com), March 13, 2004.

Bill,

Just a note of thanks. I don't always post responses, but have found many of your articles to be interesting and valuable.

-- JimFurst (furst@flash.net), March 13, 2004.

Let's start a pro Bill thread. He's da man!!

-- Mark Advent (adventm5477@earthlink.net), March 13, 2004.

Bill,

It was just a silly thought. You do great pro-life work in forum, and you educate people what a good man President Bush is.

If we have all that oil than how come we paying two bucks a gallon now? Wheres the oil?

-- T (.Not@G..), March 13, 2004.

We don't have the oil and never wanted it. What Bush said all along was that the oil belonged to the Iraqi people. You would think by now people would have learned that Bush means what he says. Let me quote form a recent article on the topic:

Thicker than Oil
Putting to rest the Left's Iraq deceptions.
by Dr. Victor Davis Hanson, Calif. State Univ, Fresno and a Fellow at the Hoover Institution. He is a professor of classics.

It has now been almost a year since the liberation of Iraq, the fury of the antiwar rallies, and the publicized hectoring of Michael Moore, Noam Chomsky, Sean Penn, and other assorted conspiracy freaks — and we have enough evidence to lay some of their myths to rest.

I just filled up and paid $2.19 a gallon. How can that be, when the war was undertaken to help us get our hands on "cheap" oil? Where is the mythical Afghan pipeline when we need it?

"No Blood for Oil" (never mind the people who drove upscale gas- guzzlers to the rallies at which they chanted such slogans) was supposed to respond to one of two possibilities: American oil companies were either simply going to steal the Iraqi fields, or indirectly prime the pumps to such an extent that the world would be awash with petroleum and the price for profligate Western consumers would crash.

Neither came true. Iraqis themselves control their natural resources; the price of gasoline, despite heroic restoration of much of Iraqi prewar petroleum output, is at an all-time high.

So did Shell and Exxon want too much — or too little — pumping? Was the Iraq conspiracy a messy crisis to disrupt production as an excuse to jack up prices, or a surgical strike to garner Third-World resources on the cheap to power wasteful American SUVs?

The truth is, as usual, far more simple. The United States never did intend to steal or manipulate the oil market — not necessarily because we are always above such chicanery, but because it is nearly impossible in a fungible market under constant global scrutiny, and suicidal in the Byzantine politics of the Middle East.

Instead we have pledged $87 billion to secure and rebuild Iraq — one of the largest direct-aid programs since the Marshall Plan. Tens of thousands of brave Americans risked their lives — and hundreds have died — to end the genocide of Saddam Hussein, alter the pathological calculus of the Middle East, and cease the three-decade support of terrorism by Arab dictators.

... Let's examine, instead, what really happened. While fellow Arabs did little or nothing to free the Iraqi people — but apparently both cheated on and profited from the U.N. embargoes — Americans set up a consensual government. And for our part, American casualties so far mirror roughly the racial make-up of our general population. So much for the old Vietnam-era myth that people of color always die in disproportionate numbers fighting rich people's wars. Our three top officers most visible the last year in Iraq — Generals Abizaid, Sanchez, and Brooks — are an Arab American, Mexican American, and African American. The national-security adviser and the secretary of state are minorities as well. And so on. This was a war about values — not race, class, or ethnicity.

Another myth was that of the "noble European" — promulgated here at home by American shysters like Michael Moore, who cashed in overseas, fawning over the likes of Jacques Chirac (the guy who sealed the French nuclear-reactor deal with Saddam) and Dominique de Villepin (who wept over the Christ-like Napoleon's demise at Waterloo).

The truth again is very different; and John Kerry should be wary about bragging that unnamed European leaders — if true — tell him that they favor his election. Each week we learn how European companies were knee-deep in the foul stream of forbidden supplies that flowed to Saddam in violation of their hallowed U.N. statutes. And the most recent European tired chorus — "We support the needed Afghan multilateral operation, but not the Iraq aggression" — is proven false by the fact that there are about ten times more American troops right now in Europe than there are NATO soldiers in Afghanistan.

Read the rest at:
Th icker than Oil.

and

The Oil-for-Food Scandal The program was corrupt. The U.N. owes the Iraqis--and Congress--an explanation.

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45-nospam@Hotmail.com), March 13, 2004.

Bill,

I don't think you took me the way I intended. :-( I'm sorry about that.

I'll make it simple:

Why are Americans paying more money for a gas every day if we attacked Iraq for oil?

Couldn't America just bought hundreds of billions of dollars worth of oil if we wanted?

I agree with you "wild Bill".

-- T (Not@G.....), March 14, 2004.

I think Bill does this forum a great service by providing the links.

Plus, on the oil thing, the price of gasoline hit $1.00 per gallon around 1979, 25 years later it might hit $2.00. Perhaps we should count our blessings that oil prices have only doubled in that time, while other prices have tripled and quadrupled.

-- James (stinkcat_14@hotmail.com), March 14, 2004.