Typical for a close-minded individual to have this reputation being built upon his actions. Doesn't surprise me one bit. Its a bit sad that he is responsible for being the voice of an entire church. I feel sad for the members who don't feel the same as he does. I would hate to have my views slandered because of a bigot in charge.

And yet… idiot gays still flock to mass and give this douchebag their hard earned money. So very very pathetic.

He didn't only slag the protestants.
He also called the other orthodox churches aberrations (even though some of them have a firmer pedigree than his own church).

I hate to be the barer of bad news but it's most likely that those "sources" are false. As a former devout catholic with aspriations to become a priest (I realized that I DON'T like molesting kids, so I became an engineer instead) the Vatican is a very, VERY dogmatic institution (duh).

That being said, the Pope isn't simply elected, the Pope is believed to be chosen for his role even before he is born. God decides who will be the leader of His church on Earth before anyone else – the election that the cardinals partake in is simply a way to "cement" the idea that this man is the man God wants as His Head of House while he's away.

Unless the Pope becomes ill or mentally unstable (ie. diagnosed with a neurological disorder, which I'm sure because of his recent actions, one would argue he may already have) the Church can do nothing to kick him out. Everything the Pope says in terms of dogmatic Catholic Law is infalliable. He either dies or steps down himself due to an inability to perform his duties. THAT'S the only way to get rid of a Pope.

@darek:

You are leaving out the most obvious way to get rid of a pope….MURDER by his own circle of astonished advisiors. The catholic church has done many things equally if not more evil.

The church is in a tailspin that it will not recover from. Personally, I hope papa ratzi lives to be at least 120 as I am really enjoying his meltdown show.

I don't know if the "insiders" are real or not, but it seems to me that if they are in fact Vatican insiders, the Church is in far worse shape than anyone would imagine. This is supposed to be God's megaphone. Catholics are actually turning around and saying, "Bitch, you're crazy." Remember in the 90's when Shanade O'Connor ripped up a picture of the Pope? (I actually liked John Paul II, he was adorable)(I'm a secular Jew btw) People went nuts. They were calling for her head and burning pictures of her in the street. Not much time has passed between then and now, but we've certainly come a long way in how much reverence must be afforded to the Pope. I was living in Rome when John Paul II died, and Ratzinger was elected. It seemed more like a sporting event than a spiritual event. A group of about 100 people had made a huge banner that read "Parti Martini" in order to show their support for Cardinal Martini. People in the crowd were actually upset when Ratzinger was announced. I'm still pretty young, and I certainly wasn't alive for John Paul II's rise to the papacy, but I think even within my 25 years, the respect reserved for the Pope has declined dramatically.

As a Buddhist I've often felt the unconscious and unintended cruelness of the Christian faithful. The Catholic Church and its Pontiff are prime examples of this attitude so I'm always ready to find fault. But in your 3rd example of Benedict's bigoted statements u quote him as saying, "The tropical forests do deserve our protection; but man, as a creature, does not deserve any less." It seems to me that he's saying man does deserve protection. Am I wrong in reading the text that way?

What do you expect from a Hitler youth? Oh, right, we're not supposed to talk about that.

@Daniel H Smith:

You are reading it correctly, but missing the forrest from the trees. What papa ratzi is saying is that we must STOP transgendered people from transforming into the sex that they believe that they are and that this transformation from one sex to another is destroying the natural creature known as man. Just another negative swipe at a sexual minority.

Oh! So the protection Benedict believes a person deserves is protection from her or his desire to change sex. Thank you for explaining that to me. Now I feel free to find fault again with that former Nazi youth.

@Daniel H Smith: you're quite correct, Papa Ratty was saying that mankind deserves the same protection as the rainforest. The issue for us is that he sees LGBTs as a disease – an aberration that threatens the survival of the human species. This is despite the fact that the rate at which heterosexuals are breeding is one of the biggest threats to the planet's ecosystem – and once that goes, Humanity dies out. Of course, like all good fanatics everywhere, Papa Ratty never lets reason, logic and scientific knowledge get in the way of religious dogma.

The catholic cult’s leadership is terrified by Ratzinger’s candor.

As an authentic descendent of the howling madness of the Dark Ages, Der pope is a forcefully unambiguous voice for the inherent insanity of the catholic cult. He’s a racist who'll gladly see millions die of HIV/AIDS because they're afraid of condoms and medicine. He’s a bitter misogynist and homophobe. A not particularly ex Nazi, Ratzinger says Jews have no right to criticize the strong connections between Pacelli’s papacy and Hitler’s Chancellorship. He refuses to apologize for the catholic cults role in the genocides against Jews, Poles and Soviet citizens.

Just as Pacelli provided a Vatican escape route for the SS fleeing war crimes indictments, Ratzinger continues to provide asylum for accessories to child rape like Bernard Law of Boston in the precincts of Vatican City. Vatican City is where, mysteriously, the age of consent for sex among boys, at 12 years old, is the lowest in the world. Ratzinger doubtlessly thinks that's very amusing, but I expect the altar boys just think it's a pain in the ass.

Queerty, I don't know where you got the information to back up your statement that "Benedict contradicted Catholic bishops and priests in Africa, who have said that condoms are a key to fighting the disease." but it needs to be hedged a bit.

Some are agreeable to condom use but plenty of African prelates and priests oppose them and even the use of HIV/AIDS meds. Their pigheaded superstition and ignorance are literally murdering people.

Here's one of many examples, this one from Mozambique:

"Maputo, Mozambique, Sep 28, 2007 / 10:46 am – The head of the Catholic Church in the African country of Mozambique is suspicious of the condom campaigns created to avoid the spread of AIDS and is proposing abstinence instead.

However, Archbishop Francisco Chimoio’s opposition to condoms goes beyond the Church’s teaching on sex and sexuality. He believes that some European-made condoms have been deliberately tainted with the HIV/AIDS virus to kill African people.

Catholics make up 17 percent of Mozambique's population. More than 16 percent of Mozambique's 19 million people, mostly aged between 14 and 49, are infected with HIV/AIDS. About 500 infections are recorded every day, according to the health department. AIDS patients occupy more than 50 percent of Mozambique’s hospital beds.

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=10516

Or from Mexican Cardinal Javier Lozano Barragan, president of the Pontifical Council for Pastoral Health, speaking about Africa who says "

"I think by now we've said everything that's to be said regarding our position on condoms…What we need to look at are comprehensive practices like those in Uganda which reduced AIDS infections through faithfulness and abstinence.”

Who are these people & what planet are they from?!

I sincerely hope Israel launches a military attack on the Vatican for its role in the Holocaust.

@Vanhattan: as much bad as the catholic church as done, i was hopeful about it under john paul

I think a mutiny by his advisors would do the world a great favor.
A moderate in charge of the church might be able to stop lesbian gang rape as a cure by some of his more devout followers in lawless parts of the catholic developing world.

From Saint Peter’s Square to Harvard Square
Media coverage of papal comments on AIDS in Africa is March madness.

‘We have found no consistent associations between condom use and lower HIV-infection rates, which, 25 years into the pandemic, we should be seeing if this intervention was working.”

So notes Edward C. Green, director of the AIDS Prevention Research Project at the Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies, in response to papal press comments en route to Africa this week.

Benedict XVI said, in response to a French reporter’s question asking him to defend the Church’s position on fighting the spread of AIDS, characterized by the reporter as “frequently considered unrealistic and ineffective”:

I would say that this problem of AIDS cannot be overcome with advertising slogans. If the soul is lacking, if Africans do not help one another, the scourge cannot be resolved by distributing condoms; quite the contrary, we risk worsening the problem. The solution can only come through a twofold commitment: firstly, the humanization of sexuality, in other words a spiritual and human renewal bringing a new way of behaving towards one another; and secondly, true friendship, above all with those who are suffering, a readiness — even through personal sacrifice — to be present with those who suffer. And these are the factors that help and bring visible progress.

“The pope is correct,” Green told National Review Online Wednesday, “or put it a better way, the best evidence we have supports the pope’s comments. He stresses that “condoms have been proven to not be effective at the ‘level of population.’”

“There is,” Green adds, “a consistent association shown by our best studies, including the U.S.-funded ‘Demographic Health Surveys,’ between greater availability and use of condoms and higher (not lower) HIV-infection rates. This may be due in part to a phenomenon known as risk compensation, meaning that when one uses a risk-reduction ‘technology’ such as condoms, one often loses the benefit (reduction in risk) by ‘compensating’ or taking greater chances than one would take without the risk-reduction technology.”

Green added: “I also noticed that the pope said ‘monogamy’ was the best single answer to African AIDS, rather than ‘abstinence.’ The best and latest empirical evidence indeed shows that reduction in multiple and concurrent sexual partners is the most important single behavior change associated with reduction in HIV-infection rates (the other major factor is male circumcision).”

And while, as Travis Kavulla writes from Kenya today, the international media will ignore all sorts of fascinating new stories about church and civilizational growth in favor of a sexier, albeit way-too-familiar storyline, Green has some encouraging news: The pope is not alone. “More and more AIDS experts are coming to accept the above. The two countries with the worst HIV epidemics, Swaziland and Botswana, have both launched campaigns to discourage multiple and concurrent partners, and to encourage fidelity.”

The pope added during that Q&A, “I would say that our double effort is to renew the human person internally, to give spiritual and human strength to a way of behaving that is just towards our own body and the other person’s body; and this capacity of suffering with those who suffer, to remain present in trying situations.”

We need to, in other words, treat people as people. Reason with them and show them there is a better way to live, respectful of themselves and others. It’s a common-sense message that isn’t madness whether you’re in Africa or dealing with hormonal American teenagers. It’s a hard message to hear over the same-old silly debates, parodies, and dismissals. But it’s one that is based on real life—and that’s acknowledged not just in Saint Peter’s Square but in Harvard Square.

@Hmm:

AMEN!

Green is hardly a casual or neutral commenter on this question. He was appointed by Bush to his Presidential Advisory Council for HIV/AIDS and the Advisory Council of the Office of AIDS Research, HHS. What's more Green is not an MD or epidemiologist – and it shows. He got his Ph.D. in anthropology from the Catholic University of America and is a firm believer that “western medicine and traditional sub-Saharan African healing should work together rather than compete.”

Green has impeccable credentials in the superstitious community. According to The Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights Green says that “basic behavioral changes in Uganda of 1987-95 kept HIV prevalence declining up until now.” He adds that “reason why the progress that has been made is now in jeopardy has more to do with dropping the emphasis on abstinence.” This is the essence of the Bush/Ratzinger hoax about preventing HIV/AIDS.

According to a Mr. Sylva, vice president of the another papal front group, the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute, the most important audience for Greens thinking “is the Bush administration.” http://nationalreview.com/book.....301423.asp

In other words, Green is a shill for Ratzinger and the late unlamented Bush Administration.

“A shill is an associate of a political group, who pretends no association to the group and assumes the air of an enthusiastic supporter. The intention of the shill is, using crowd psychology, to encourage others unaware of the set-up to support the political group's ideological claims.”

People the world over who accept superstitious catholic hokum will fall victim to the HIV/AIDS pandemic.