I usually cringe at each new statement from the Vatican- but I also kinda liked the fact that the list included "accumulation of excessive wealth" as a sin.

Uh, yeah, and birth control too. Even though one of their other sins is "creating poverty", despite the fact that lack of access to birth control is a huge factor in the creation of poverty. So, yeah, I'm not buying it. Hitler loved dogs.

This will be just like when they finally decided they cared about AIDS in africa. What happens is perfectly effective programs are forced to divert their scarce and thinly stretched resources on abstinence programs that dont work, just to appease their new "supporters" from the religious ranks. Thanks Billy Grahm Jr. et al, but we can do better work without your retarded beliefs impeding us.

other then the anti love and sex platforms I find christianity...especially catholiscism very progressive...well excluding the domenicons

Religion is stupid

Yeah, They're against all the fun stuff . . . drugs, sex, nuking Iran. . . .

Well, the world IS funny and people are strange and man is a creature of constant change.

#2: Creating poverty is a sin, but so is doing anything to fight it.

That's religion for you. If we weren't all damned, would we really need it?

Is there anyone who actually prefers the new sins? Avarice, gluttony, lust, etc. are wonderfully evocative. I'll take them over "bioethical violations" and "widening the gap between rich and poor" any day.

New shins? I like my current shins just fine! I don't have shin splints -- I've never even been running! Who asked for new shins?

I sense a rift in the space-time continuum. Did someone mix diet Coke and regular Coke in the same glass again?

The only reason the Catholic church considers accumulation of excessive wealth a sin is because they want wealthy people to give them some of that wealth. "You have too much money and will go to hell unless you give it to a righteous cause such as us!" Of course, some might argue that the church itself violates this sin.

religion good if bhuddist.

Dharma bums 'r' kool!

["love poor" not PC; ignore!]

So, the whole pollution is a "new sin" thing is pretty much utter BS. A guy in the catholic church makes a speech telling catholics to go to confession, and he tries to make that relevant to people (e.g. you can confess your liberal guilt over not doing enough for the environment).

the catholic church used to list "usury" as a very high level of sin. you know, today they would call it "predatory lending." was that on the list? should be (again). anyway, i see the pendulum swinging away from sexual sins as a focus for religious types. it's a welcome relief.

Self-pollution has been a deadly sin crying out to the holy ghost for vengeance forever, so maybe they just extended it and something got lost in translation.

Since the earth is only 6,309 years old, one can't very well appeal to 100,000 year long climate cycles to explain global warming now, can one?

@16 - If you studied up you'd find the Vatican supports the concept of evolution, not the silly Bishop Usher timeline for Creation in 4004 BC.

Technically, this wasn't an official statement from the Vatican, like a Papal edict, but part of an interview with Archbishop Gianfranco Girott, a Vatican official, in which he suggested a social take on the Seven Deadly Sins, what he called "New Forms of Social Sin".

These were the seven concepts the Archbishop talked about in the interview:

· Environmental pollution;
· Genetic manipulation;
· Accumulating excessive wealth;
· Inflicting poverty;
· Drug trafficking and consumption;
· Morally debatable experiments;
· Violation of fundamental rights of human nature.