1. Bitter Brother wrote:

Despite the Pope’s “moral responsibility to articulate his understanding of a divine mandate”, I understand the ire of the Left. With the AIDS pandemic showing signs of only slow diminution in particular demographics, despite the levels of education and awareness being disseminated, his message is only loftily ideal rather than pragmatic. For every step enlightenment brings human-kind further from suffering, impractical religious dogma takes us ten steps back. This situation bolsters my sentiments that the Bible in the hands of an influential few is a weapon of mass ignorance. It’s frustrating!

Foremost, I don’t believe in a Vicar of Christ in any form. Hence, his words aren’t beyond reproach. His beliefs have the same level of fallibility as any other Christian. The imperative should always be for us all, theists or atheists, to preserve human life here on Earth…Period!!

2. Clif Harrison wrote:

smh…

3. R.oB. wrote:

Do we really expect God’s intercessor to say “Let’s forget the whole chastity/sanctity of marriage thing and give out some Trojans”?[sic]

Amen! PREACH!

As a Catholic, I’ve grown out of the anger and distrust that resulted from a crisis of faith I had years ago. I approach my church as i would any human organization committed to doing good in this world, with an honest eye to faults but a profound respect for it’s fundamental ethos. My church family has taught me a lot of things about that.

4. james wrote:

the pope is probably the primary reason why i’m glad i don’t attend my catholic church very much.

5. derwin wrote:

I wish we had as much outcry by the left and media over the Bush/Clinton abstinence only policies at home and abroad where we wasted billions — or as my dad would say, threw up a wild hog’s ass and hollered suey!

6. R.oB. wrote:

james, the only reason I’m a Catholic is because of my church family. same pope. different result. no man or woman should be anyone’s reason for being a part of or out of anything. gives them power they shouldn’t have.

7. Regkam2 wrote:

Bro Marc. I urge to dig a little deeper into this so-called AIDS/HIV ‘pandemic’ and stop relying on the CDC and Corporate media stats regarding this construct. 1st, an average of 16,530 people have died of AIDS in the past 5 yrs. That’s less than 28 people per state per month in the US. Since 1985, less than 600,000 people have died of ‘Aids’. In that same time span, 14,000,000 people have died of heart disease, 9,000,000 people have died of cancer, and even over 1,000,000 people have died from car accidents. Which is more pressing Aids or Heart Disease?

Regarding Africa, most Black people do even get a so-called AIDS test. Most Africans are diagnosed under the Banqui definition; displaying 3 of the 4 following symptoms….10% weight loss, severe diarrhea, vomiting or dry cough.

Regarding the so-called AIds test, all 31 of them are plagued with false positives and non-specificity. None of the tests test for HIV, but only antibodies that are supposedly specific to HIV. But if u have the flu and take the test, chances are u will test positive (even though u just have the flu). If a woman is pregnant, she has a high chance testing positive. The tests are garbage and are not reliable. But don’t take word for it. Here’s what the test inserts for the Elisa and The Western Blot says…..

Elisa Test
“At present there is no recognized standard for establishing the presence or absence of HIV-antibody in human blood.” (Abbott Laboratories, Elisa HIV Antibody Test Insert, section “Sensitivity & Specificity”)

“EIA testing cannot be used to diagnosed AIDS….The risk of an asymptomatic person with a repeatedly reactive serum developing AIDS or an AIDS related condition is not known.” (Abbott Laboratories, Elisa HIV Antibody Test Insert, section “Limitations of the Procedure”).

Western Blot
“Do not use this kit as the sole basis of diagnosis of HIV-1 infection. (eptope, Inc. Western Blot Test Insert, section ““Limitations of the Procedure”).

“The Clinical Implications of antibodies to HIV-1 in an asymptomatic person are not known.” (Calypte, Cambridge Biotech HIV-1 Western Blot Kit, section “Limitations of the Serum and Plasma Procedure”)

8. Regkam2 wrote:

Bro Marc. I urge to dig a little deeper into this so-called AIDS/HIV ‘pandemic’ and stop relying on the CDC and Corporate media stats regarding this construct. 1st, an average of 16,530 people have died of AIDS in the past 5 yrs. That’s less than 28 people per state per month in the US. Since 1985, less than 600,000 people have died of ‘Aids’. In that same time span, 14,000,000 people have died of heart disease, 9,000,000 people have died of cancer, and even over 1,000,000 people have died from car accidents. Which is more pressing Aids or Heart Disease?

Regarding Africa, most Black people do even get a so-called AIDS test. Most Africans are diagnosed under the Banqui definition; displaying 3 of the 4 following symptoms….10% weight loss, severe diarrhea, vomiting or dry cough.

9. Regkam2 wrote:

Most africans are dying of malaria, poor water supply, TB and mal nutrition. Not Aids. Most of the statistics coming out of Africa are not based on any field study. Dr Harvey Bialy, scientific editor of Bio/Technology and has worked for many years in Africa as a tropical diseases expert says the following: “There is no scientific literature about AIds in Africa. It is 100 per cent ad hominem, anecdotal trash……Diseases that are called AIDs are classical African diseases in populations that have for a very long time been subject to these infections.” (Interview for Drew Hopkins, City Week, 17 October 1988).

Regarding the so-called AIds test, all 31 of them are plagued with false positives and non-specificity. None of the tests test for HIV, but only antibodies that are supposedly specific to HIV. But if u have the flu and take the test, chances are u will test positive (even though u just have the flu). If a woman is pregnant, she has a high chance testing positive. The tests are garbage and are not reliable. But don’t take word for it. Here’s what the test inserts for the Elisa and The Western Blot says…..

Elisa Test
“At present there is no recognized standard for establishing the presence or absence of HIV-antibody in human blood.” (Abbott Laboratories, Elisa HIV Antibody Test Insert, section “Sensitivity & Specificity”)

“EIA testing cannot be used to diagnosed AIDS….The risk of an asymptomatic person with a repeatedly reactive serum developing AIDS or an AIDS related condition is not known.” (Abbott Laboratories, Elisa HIV Antibody Test Insert, section “Limitations of the Procedure”).

Western Blot
“Do not use this kit as the sole basis of diagnosis of HIV-1 infection. (eptope, Inc. Western Blot Test Insert, section ““Limitations of the Procedure”).

“The Clinical Implications of antibodies to HIV-1 in an asymptomatic person are not known.” (Calypte, Cambridge Biotech HIV-1 Western Blot Kit, section “Limitations of the Serum and Plasma Procedure”)

10. Regkam2 wrote:

In fact, most africans are dying of malaria, poor water supply, TB and mal nutrition. Not Aids. Most of the statistics coming out of Africa are not based on any field study. Dr Harvey Bialy, scientific editor of Bio/Technology and has worked for many years in Africa as a tropical diseases expert says the following: “There is no scientific literature about AIds in Africa. It is 100 per cent ad hominem, anecdotal trash……Diseases that are called AIDs are classical African diseases in populations that have for a very long time been subject to these infections.” (Interview for Drew Hopkins, City Week, 17 October 1988).

Regarding the so-called AIds test, all 31 of them are plagued with false positives and non-specificity. None of the tests test for HIV, but only antibodies that are supposedly specific to HIV. But if u have the flu and take the test, chances are u will test positive (even though u just have the flu). If a woman is pregnant, she has a high chance testing positive. The tests are garbage and are not reliable. But don’t take word for it. Here’s what the test inserts for the Elisa and The Western Blot says…..

Elisa Test
“At present there is no recognized standard for establishing the presence or absence of HIV-antibody in human blood.” (Abbott Laboratories, Elisa HIV Antibody Test Insert, section “Sensitivity & Specificity”)

“EIA testing cannot be used to diagnosed AIDS….The risk of an asymptomatic person with a repeatedly reactive serum developing AIDS or an AIDS related condition is not known.” (Abbott Laboratories, Elisa HIV Antibody Test Insert, section “Limitations of the Procedure”).

Western Blot
“Do not use this kit as the sole basis of diagnosis of HIV-1 infection. (eptope, Inc. Western Blot Test Insert, section ““Limitations of the Procedure”).

“The Clinical Implications of antibodies to HIV-1 in an asymptomatic person are not known.” (Calypte, Cambridge Biotech HIV-1 Western Blot Kit, section “Limitations of the Serum and Plasma Procedure”)

11. Regkam2 wrote:

In fact, most africans are dying of malaria, poor water supply, TB and mal nutrition. Not Aids. Most of the statistics coming out of Africa are not based on any field study. Dr Harvey Bialy, scientific editor of Bio/Technology and has worked for many years in Africa as a tropical diseases expert says the following: “There is no scientific literature about AIds in Africa. It is 100 per cent ad hominem, anecdotal trash……Diseases that are called AIDs are classical African diseases in populations that have for a very long time been subject to these infections.” (Interview for Drew Hopkins, City Week, 17 October 1988).

12. james wrote:

r.o.b, yea, i can certainly see how attendance at a particular church can be socially redeeming, but for me, obviously, it doesn’t work that way. in other words, i have never attended a catholic church for social purposes.

13. wouldn't you like to know? wrote:

although i understand where the pope is coming from, i do believe his interpretations would ADD to the HIV/AIDS epidemic…

i believe it takes a very strong and mature mind to understand what love and marriage really means….sex is merely here for us to procreate…that’s it! Love and marriage is very much a spiritual thing. our societies have been shaped and manipulated in so many different ways that i think we have lost focus of that main core. now sex is used just as a form of pleasure…and damn near everything is fair game in the name of Love/sex…we live in a world where a lot of perversions are running rampant and made to seem like it’s healthy and okay…

we have to promote safe sex and condom usage….we live in a very sexually liberal society. honesty and monogamy are practically obsolete, damn near taboo, in this day and age.

until we mature as people, understand why we are given life, and what love/marriage really means….then i say strap it up…period.

14. james wrote:

wyltk: sex has always been used as a form of pleasure; it is first and foremost, pleasurable; if it isn’t, you’re not doing it right. procreation is a secondary consequence and function of human sexuality. all of us will have much more orgasms than children in our lifetime of sexuality.

15. wouldn't you like to know? wrote:

james, sex is very pleasurable to me..thank you very much.

but i don’t believe pleasure is the main point of sex. i believe why God has made it pleasurable, is to bring two people closer together…so they can reproduce. if it felt bad then people wouldn’t want to make babies…

why we make love is to make babies, babies are LIFE, LIFE is love….the pleasure priciple, is to make the bond between two people stronger…and yes every time a person climaxes, doesn’t necessarily mean they’re going to conceive…but that’s where the saying “at first you don’t succeed try try again” comes from….

making love is very pleasurable, God loved us enough to make “making a baby” worth it…

16. james wrote:

wyltk: sexual pleasure–orgasm–is usaually the main point of any sexual activity. most people don’t engage in sexual activity to make babies. however, when a male of the human species ejaculates inside or near a woman’s vagina, it is quite possible for a child to be formed.

17. wouldn't you like to know? wrote:

“sexual pleasure–orgasm–is usually the main point of any sexual activity. most people don’t engage in sexual activity to make babies.” – James

thank you for making my point in comment 10…

that is why i’ve said, it takes a mature and strong mind to understand what love and marriage really means…

most people don’t get that sex is not just for pleasure…therefore, that is why we have so much loose behavior out here…therefore, that is why it’s important that one must STRAP IT UP…

18. Bitter Brother wrote:

Regkam,

Unlike heart disease, HIV/AIDS is an entirely preventable disease. Predisposition for heart disease and cancer is hereditary in a large percentage of cases. For that reason, there is much more that can be done to reduce its incidence versus heart disease for now… And did you really cite an interview from 1988 as your primary reference or is that a typo?

19. DCI74 wrote:

regkam2 I have some questions for you.

What difference does it make that more people have died from other causes like heart disease or cancer? Even if your numbers are 100% accurate its not an issue because only 600,000 people have died? It’s only relevant when a certain threshold has been reached and then it should become a worthy issue? If people are dying the objective should be to eliminate and minimize those deaths but by your argument people should wait until the numbers escalate to an exorbitant level before it should be taken seriously. How does that even make sense?

Additionally, every time this topic comes up you continuously state how the numbers aren’t accurate and somehow the stats provided by the CDC and corporate media facts are false, which of course is open for debate, but how do you know the alternative information you have is accurate?

I hear you wyltk, I’d rather wear and condom than a toe tag.

20. james wrote:

wyltk: love and marriage, while they often enhance sexual pleasure, they are not necessary for sexual pleasure. “loose” sexual behavior is probably not related solely to the pleasures associated with orgasm. i would say a person’s sexual ethics are based more in their total development as human being.

21. wouldn't you like to know? wrote:

james, little do you know, that you are still making my point.

you can absolutely hate someone and have sex with them and still experience pleasure, says the rapist and the molester…

i mean a person would have to hate someone to rape or molest them…yet still the sexual pleasure is still there, at least for one party…that’s a bit extreme, but still a point none the less….

just because something turns you on, doesn’t necessarily make it right or moral…a lot of people are very liberal with their sexuality…sex is a scapegoat for a lot of people’s perversions…most are weak when it comes to sex….that’s why we’re so free with doing whatever…

i personally believe that making love is much much more than just a physical thing and has everything to do with a spiritual thing…hence the fact that making love brings fourth other spirits…meaning, a child…

like the Doc has stated “the flesh is weak!” and that is why i believe it takes a very mature and strong mind to look past the “sex” part and more into the “making love” aspect of it…

i’m not here to judge people and their sexuality, but i do believe with all this sexual liberation, that one must use protection…

22. Regkam2 wrote:

Bitter Brother, I will agree on your 1st point in that heart disease and cancer in hereditary (in diet and lifestyle). But both diseases are preventable and can be cured. Most diseases come from our environment and what we put in our mouths, not our genes.

Bitter Brother, yes that quote came from 1988 and it holds true today. I can cite several scientists and scholars who say the same today. Do u want them?

23. Regkam2 wrote:

DC174 asks….’What difference does it make that more people have died from other causes like heart disease or cancer?’

I put out those stats because we keep saying AIDS/HIV is a pandemic or epidemic and its not. I put those out there because we keep spouting this because the CDC or NIH tells us so without critical thought and research.

…..’Even if your numbers are 100% accurate its not an issue because only 600,000 people have died?’……..I am not saying that those 600,000 deaths are not relevant. I am saying that its not as dire as cancer, heart disease or car accidents for that matter. Aids/Hiv construct is a $50 Billion system. Why isn’t more money spent on healthy diet (which most heart disease stems from – the lack thereof)?

…..’It’s only relevant when a certain threshold has been reached and then it should become a worthy issue? If people are dying the objective should be to eliminate and minimize those deaths but by your argument people should wait until the numbers escalate to an exorbitant level before it should be taken seriously. How does that even make sense?’

DCI74, you are missing my point. I am bringing another side of the coin that most people don’t think of. I am saying that most people don’t know what AIDS is (a construct of 31 different diseases that have been around for decades, ie. malaria, TB, cervical cancer, pneumonia, etc.). I am saying that AIDS test is a hoax. It’s garbage. And I am saying that Black people (whether in Africa or America) are not dying from HIV (which has not been isolated nor purified and is a retrovirus which has no cell killing mechanism), but ignorance, poor health, and AZT n other toxic drugs that doctors prescribed to ‘treat’ Aids.

…..’Additionally, every time this topic comes up you continuously state how the numbers aren’t accurate and somehow the stats provided by the CDC and corporate media facts are false, which of course is open for debate, but how do you know the alternative information you have is accurate?’

Well, I have been researching this topic for 5 yrs. I’ve done a lot of work studying this topic. I’ve taken my research to nurses, doctors, toxicologists, and other medical experts. No one has come with any scientific data to refute what I am saying. I also have studied those who are experts in molecular biology and epidemiology. There are an alarming amount of scientists around the world who are saying the same thing that I am saying. I could be wrong, but it shouldn’t take much to prove me wrong. But what if I’m right…..I just ask those who read this to do a little research outside of money train (CDC, NIH, etc.) or better yet figure where they get their stats from. I can give u some books, DVDs, Cds, websites to look at if u are interested…..

24. DCI74 wrote:

Ok Regkam2. I teach research so I can easily find any data out there are that will support your perspective so I don’t need you to cite any books, dvds, etc. What I would like to know about is these doctors and nurses you’ve shared your info with who couldn’t refute what you presented. Also have you written any peer review articles that would and should be available online that have been reviewed by members of the medical field? I would be much more interested in that kind of information that has been held to a certain level of professional scrutiny that some random book, dvd, or website.

25. Regkam2 wrote:

No, I have written any peer review articles cause I an independent researcher. But I can give u some articles written by others online that u (as well as others) can review. The websites and books that I was going to give u are by medical journalists, professors, and virologists. Do u want them?

I spoke to a nurse who works for a public health facility and goes into the Black community to encourage Black people to get the phony HIV tests. I ask her 10 questions about AIDS/HIV and she couldn’t answer half of them. I asked her as well as her boss, an epidemiologist for a meeting to elaborate further of my findings. I’ve written them for months w/o no reply. I spoken to a friend of mine whose a toxicologist and gave her some of my findings. She couldn’t refute what I gave her as well. DCI74, the fact is most doctors don’t know much about HIV and Aids except what they hear from the CDC. In fact, most doctors don’t read scientific research outside of their specialty. So they take some blood, send it to a lab, await for the results, and then prescribe u drugs which their pharmaceutical companies push on them.

26. timaree wrote:

regkam2- as someone to whom you have posed these questions, i can say with certainty that you are not going to find refutation of your points. this is because you have already given a blanket denial of anything published by the scientific bastions that perform the majority of the research: WHO, CDC, etc.

if tomorrow i decided i didn’t believe in osmosis and declared that the international botany community was crooked and that i accepted none of their findings, i’d have a hard time being dis-proven either.

ultimately, both of want the numbers to be reduced, albeit in different ways. good luck to you, nonetheless. i’ll keep doing my part to reduce the statistics on HIV infections and you do yours.

27. timaree wrote:

wyltk- as much as i normally want to say i respect differing viewpoints, i’m really not in the mood. you have no evidence that sex is “for” procreation any more than i have proof that rocks are “for” building houses.

they exist whether we use them that way or not. it’s a matter of personal practice as to whether sex (or rocks) are used in a specific way… or at all.

the reason i’m being antagonistic about this is that while you claim, “i’m not here to judge people and their sexuality,” you pontificate without evidence in a manner that is inherently judgmental, by making consensual sex a moral issue. you in fact equated sex for pleasure with rape and child molestation, a grossly disingenuous analogy.

hold your beliefs as you see fit: fine by me. but do not wax philosophic about how misguided liberal interpretations of sexuality are ruining the world as though you are relaying some sort of fact. you will not win anyone over to your side, you will not convert anyone to your religion, you will simply be calling people sinners and then running away from it by signing off with some line about not being judgmental.

28. Nkadzi wrote:

Regkam2, your refutation of hiv/aids is rather alarming. i am african from botswana and we have an epidemic of hiv/aids, and i am not talking about the research or what scholars say; i am speaking as someone who has first hand information on what hiv/aids is, yes, it is conglomeration of different disease mainly because one’s body has been weakened by the virus; In botswana we have a problem of malaria but it has been controllable, people have lived. however, with hiv/aids,it has been a different story. so i suggest you travel to Africa, and speak with people who have the disease. In fact go to Botswana and speak to those who are living with the disease.
The Pope has his views, but until he speaks against gender relations that have played a part in hindering women’s safety and prevention in Africa, then Africa has a long way to go. for as long as African women(excuse the homogeneity) do not own their sexuality, hiv/aids will always have links to gender relations.

29. wouldn't you like to know? wrote:

timaree,

although you’re in no mood to respect my views. i respect yours…

plus the “evidence” i have most people won’t respect anyway..after all how many people really respect God now a days?

if i’ve offended you, that wasn’t the intention. i can only live how i see fit, and certain things i can’t and won’t compromise…live your life, because i’m living mine….

peace.

30. DCI74 wrote:

“DCI74, the fact is most doctors don’t know much about HIV and Aids except what they hear from the CDC.

Ok Regkam2 I get it, you didn’t write any articles but you should be able to direct me to some legit sources. If there is some truth to that statement you made then please direct me to the peer review articles that should be on any of the following sites: JAMA, PLoS Medicine, or BiomedCentral to start with. Books, dvds, and random articles aren’t held to the same level of scrutiny as PR articles so if you can tell where I can find those I’ll be more than happy to read them. Anything other than that I’m not interested in reading because I have to question it’s legitimacy.

31. ~JJG~ wrote:

Regkam2, I forward your comments to my girlfriend who is an epidemiologist. I was curious about her thoughts/opinions regarding your claim. I have decided to share her thoughts with the Shop (she said it was ok). See below.

“Let me start by saying that HIV & AIDS are NOT my area of expertise, but I have had numerous conversations with colleagues who work in HIV & AIDS. My first question would be where is this guy getting HIS data from? Because he’s got to be getting it from somewhere and I’m not seeing him provide the references, since he’s claiming to not listen to the CDC. Second, to question the importance of HIV & AIDS because AIDS isn’t the #1 cause of death is like saying, well, Gonorrhea rates aren’t high anymore, no need to worry about Gonorrhea. So because Measles, Mumps & Rubella are no longer killing people, we should go ahead and get rid of the vaccines that are preventing people from even contracting them in the first place? To me, that essentially sounds like the argument dude is trying to make. “If it’s not killing people, why are we worried about it?” That logic is inherently flawed. Sickle cell anemia doesn’t kill masses and masses of people, but it still kills people and we should be doing what we can to help!

To focus solely on “death rates” is very one-sided. In the past 10-15 years there have been a number of advances in treatment that have allowed people to live longer with the HIV virus and avoid progressing to full blown AIDS. This has ultimately resulted in fewer deaths, however the number of people contracting & living with HIV & AIDS is not dropping significantly, BECAUSE there are less people dying from HIV & AIDS.

So what are these 10 questions that he asked a nurse to answer? Has he ever stopped to think that the nurse was hired for the sole purpose of improving HIV screening practices? Nurses are not experts in HIV & AIDS just because they are nurses. The same way that just because someone teaches math, doesn’t mean they know EVERYTHING there is to know about math or that they don’t make mistakes. I’m sure I could come up with 10 questions about diabetes, cancer, epidemiology, biostatistics, malaria, etc., that if he was asked on the spot, he couldn’t answer, does that mean they don’t exist? does that mean MY beliefs about those things are right and that he couldn’t answer them because the scientists he gets his information from are all wrong? NO!

He talks about an “alarming amount of scientists that say the same thing he is saying”, but tell him to read a book called “Medical Apartheid” so he can see that back in the 1800’s there were an ALARMING number of scientists who said that black people had smaller brains than white people, blacks don’t feel pain, that black women are extremely sexual beings, that did horrible, unethical experiments on slaves and misrepresented their findings to support the institution of slavery. Does that mean because they are scientists and they wrote it down that it’s true? Maybe he should reconsider his approach with the public health folks? He’s requesting a meeting with an epidemiologist that is probably overworked and underpaid – because THAT is the reality of what people who work in public health deal with on a regular. Typically there is ONE epidemiologist for each health district which covers a range of either 1 to 16 counties at a time. If you come in, guns blazing, most people are going to immediately retreat.

As a biostatistician and epidemiologist, I teach my students that the way they ASK the question they are interested in can often be a direct result of their own biases. That bias can also lead to the types of research that SUPPORTS your very own biases. Ever heard the saying “be careful what you go looking for, because you just mind find it?”

I can respect his desire to not just take the information that’s presented to him as indisputable fact. Research inherently, by it’s very nature, always has flaws. There is no such thing as “perfect research.” One must always ASSESS the source of the information they are getting.

I have seen one of my dad’s closest friends die from AIDS, WITHOUT treatment. Before treatment was where it is now actually! During the time when all they could do is watch you slowly waste away from AIDS. There isn’t anyone on this earth who can convince me that HIV & AIDS don’t exist or that we shouldn’t be concerned about it in our communities”.

- Cassandra

32. R.oB. wrote:

James, religion by definition is a social construct. But I’m not attending a party. I said church family, not church social club.

33. james wrote:

okay r.ob., how do you define “church family,” and how does that differ from a social club?

34. R.oB. wrote:

For me, they are different in pretty much the same way being married is different from taking home a hottie from the club.

35. R.oB. wrote:

Oops, forgot to define church family: that group of individuals you choose to connect with spiritually to worship the God found in Jesus Christ.

36. R.oB. wrote:

I have to correct myself because worship is not complete. You also connect with your church family to experience Jesus. That’s some don’t throw your pearls before swine type ish, baby. Least for me.

37. james wrote:

r.ob., my wife is/was/and-forever-will-be the hottie i took/take/will take home from the club, so i’m not sure that marriage analogy really works for me.

how do you specifically “connect” with your church family to “experience” jesus?

38. james wrote:

r.ob. over a million people went to see the pontiff the other day in africa for mass. that is power. real power. the only way to destroy that power is to not participate in it, especially at the grass roots level of your local church. until the pope changes his tune on things he really knows absolutely nothing about (human sexuality, for example), i will continue being glad my daughter is an athlete and we attend the church of sport on sunday mornings rather than sts peter and paul.