Philosophical Questions

Philosophical question of the month: Should the Catholic priesthood be nominated for a Darwin Award?

In the words of Rob Drury: "Contentious and provocative as this may seem, it appears that ardent followers of this strange cult have, by taking vows of celibacy, removed themselves from the gene pool and consequently put themselves in the running for a Darwin Award."

K. H. Ryesky, Esq. - March 27, 1998
I do not think that they quite qualify for a group award. Yes, they do, by and large, remove their genes from the gene pool, but The Darwin Award is premised upon bad genes being removed from the gene pool. The Catholic priesthood tends to include those from the HIGHER end of the bell curve, not the lower end. During the Middle Ages, European learning, scholarship and knowledge were not propagated in the general population at large, but were carried on in the Church and by the Rabbis in the Yeshivahs. The Rabbis went forth, multiplied, and produced more scholars. The priests did not. And THAT explains why the Jewish people, who are less than a half percent of the population, are well represented beyond their proportion in all fields which require brain work.

Virginia Ni Mhaolmhichil - March 27, 1998
I cannot agree that the Catholic priesthood should be nominated for the Darwin Awards because two family names exist in Ireland which disprove celibacy in the church. The names are "MacIntaggert" and "MacEnaspi" which are the anglicized versions of "Son of the Priest" and "Son of the Bishop."

Victor Molotov - March 29, 1998
Your attack on the priests was the most dispicable thing I have ever witnessed. Your site is a disgrace to the internet. If you had more than one brain cell, you would read the Bible and go to church to learn what it is all about, instead of using cowardly, ignorant attacks. I challenge to you a discussion with a real priest before you say anything further. If you continue to attack priests, I hope you go straight TO HELL. By the way, Charles Darwin was about the stupidest person to walk to face of the Earth. Anyone who uses his name as the title to a website has the IQ of a slug.

Phil Marshall - May 02, 1998
The catholic priesthood is a volunteer-oriented Darwinian black hole.

Malcolm Davidson - April 03, 1998
Priests do not, as a rule, reproduce biologically, but the profession commands respect in certain populations. For example, Mr Molotov's cocktail of incendiary comments on these pages was no doubt sparked by his respect for the priesthood. That respect has caused boys of successive generations to join, or be enjoined to join, the priesthood, though not in great enough numbers to reduce the reproductive capacity of the source populations. That the priesthood strongly opposes contraception is another contributor to its longevity. Note that the effectiveness of this opposition is again dependent upon the population's respect for the priesthood. As long as the profession continues to command sufficient respect within its source population, it will carry on.

Cormac Farrell - April 02, 1998
As someone who has to deal quite a bit with Catholic priests, I can sincerely vouch for their lemming-like devotion to a Pope that's out to lunch. They may not be doomed, but they are trying hard!

Silent Bob - April 02, 1998
Victor, would a priest hope someone would go to hell? Why would you be seeking to fill your free time with something you obviously see as wrong? No one has the right to criticize someone else's thoughts. If you see it as being so bad, put up your own "I hate the Darwin Awards" Webpage.

J. Cox - April 03, 1998
I think you should stop critcizing Priests and the Catholic Church. This is a form of putting down Catholics and should not be tolerated.

Elise Patkotak - May 07, 1998
As a young girl growing up Catholic, I was always taught that God gets the best and we get the rest. Then I took a good look at the priests who taught me, and decided, if that was the best, staying single was the only viable option. Any group that refuses to allow women to participate is clearly showing signs of genes that need to be immediately and radically removed from the general pool.

Steve Tomsko April 02, 1998
Eligibile for Darwin Awards? Decidedly not. First, a vow of celibacy isn't proof of abstinence. Second, look at these guy! Celibacy is no stretch for any of them.

Jeff May 08, 1998
As long as we're being politically incorrect, why not add all gays and lesbians? Procreation is notoriously difficult with same-sex couples.

ben sammis - May 06, 1998
No, they should not be nominated. Although they can't reproduce, they do spread their beliefs, ideas, dogmas, etc., and therefore are reproducing, albeit in an abstract manner.

Richard - May 05, 1998
i sometimes go to your site for entertainment, but i think it to your advantage to lay off the Catholic bashing...not only from a spiritual perspective but also Catholics are 80% of the world's religon.

Gumby - May 05, 1998
A joke in the religious vein: KFC (Kentucky Fried Chicken fast food chain) was doing poorly in sales. The Colonel decided to call the Pope. He begged him to change the Lord's Prayer from "Give us this day our daily bread" to "Give us this day our daily chicken. After The Colonel agreed to $200 million donation, the Pope reluctantly agreed. The next morning, he announced to his congregation, "I have good news and bad news. The good news is that I have made $200 million for the church! The bad news is that we have lost the wonder Bread account."

Janice - April 25, 1998
I'll probably go to hell for this, but, don't forget the nuns. Its EQUALITY!

jmn - May 04, 1998
As a born again agnostic, I don't understand these Catholic nutcases who disavow the most basic fundamental of life, to procreate, in order to save their souls because some man told them to do so. The very fact that someone would be dumb enough to make such a vow proves that they are in the running. You can't get to heaven by reading a book, not having sex, tithing to the church, marking time on a string of beads, or not having a free will.

John P. - May 03, 1998
Sounds like the webmaster should be nominated for spreading hatred and ignorance about catholics not realizing that those priests throughout history who have obeyed their religion and principles have shown themselves to be far above an ordinary hero in history.

Mike Fitz Gerald - May 01, 1998
To say that Catholic Priests are notorious for breaking their vows of chastity might be streching the wire a bit too far. The celibacy rule for Catholic Priests has only been among us for 400 years now, and may have been motivated by the poverty suffered by parishioners and the need to keep the costs of maintaining a priest as low as possible. There seems to be no other logical reason for seeking to limit their propagation.

Shannon - April 30, 1998
Because they continue to survive, they cannot be nominated for a Darwin Award. However, a special award might be awarded to them simply for surviving against all basic rules of nature. I might simply call this the GOD Award, named after the mysterious being that science cannot prove exists yet seems to thrive anyway.

Perhaps Catholic priests are reomoving themselves from the gene pool. However, their method lacks a certain flair. Therefore, although priests might be nominated they couldn't possibly win.
Cole Hanley - April 29, 1998

Anonymous - April 26, 1998
Reproductively speaking, a person is a collection of genes. "Sterile" means "unable to pass genes along to other people". That's what it takes for a _person_ to get a Darwin award. Reproductively speaking, the Catholic priesthood is a collection not of genes but of ideas. "Sterile" must be redefined to mean "unable to pass ideas along to other people". The Catholic priesthood is definitely not sterile; they've been ordaining new priests for centuries and show no signs of stopping.