The Pope thread

[Tyrath]

The trend of people taking up a defensive position for the pope without providing actual talking points or examples continues. Thanks for the insight Ksandra!

I've already admitted he's progressive...for a pope. My argument is that that is not very progressive at all because of the limitations of being the pope and holding the beliefs that he holds. You don't need to be a liberal democrat, but when you hold women back in your own organization, there's only so far you're gonna get in terms of progress.

[Churchill]

You are being ganged up on by what basically amounts to SJW's and religious folks, you should act like a good Catholic and know when to pull out.

[Tyrath]

I use condoms, I never learned to pull out.

[Dimmauk]

You are being ganged up on by what basically amounts to SJW's and religious folks, you should act like a good Catholic and know when to pull out.

LOL. I seriously doubt most of BG are religious folk. As far as the holding women back, I'm guessing you are talking about women priests? I'm guessing it because of the whole celibacy thing? Cant have men in women in the seminary or men going through the novitiate?

Didn't the Dalai Lama recently say a women would have to be beautiful in order to be the Dalai lama? THAT BASTARD!

[Tyrath]

That bastard is right (if it went down like you said). Being a holy man doesn't excuse you from casual sexism or other types of bigotry.

[Marootsoobutsu]

That bastard is right (if it went down like you said). Being a holy man doesn't excuse you from casual sexism or other types of bigotry.

Your sig is perfect. You just have this angry, tiny-eyed scream going on, and everyone else can't help but laugh.

[Tyrath]

The funny thing is, I've offered perfectly calm examples of why I think what I think and most of the religious people or the religious apologists have offered either personal attacks or talked me down in some way.

Love thy neighbor, indeed.

[BaneTheBrawler]

I HAVE RETURNED FROM MY WANDERINGS

[ronin sparthos]

LOL. I seriously doubt most of BG are religious folk. As far as the holding women back, I'm guessing you are talking about women priests? I'm guessing it because of the whole celibacy thing? Cant have men in women in the seminary or men going through the novitiate?

Didn't the Dalai Lama recently say a women would have to be beautiful in order to be the Dalai lama? THAT BASTARD!

The Dalai Lama can't even secure his own borders so......

[Xno Kappa]

The funny thing is, I've offered perfectly calm examples of why I think what I think and most of the religious people or the religious apologists have offered either personal attacks or talked me down in some way.

Love thy neighbor, indeed.

You're being petty to be honest. You're coming off as if you're offended by the fact the current pope has made any kind of effort at all to change the tone of the church. More helping the less fortunate and less damnation to sinners is a plus in my book. Obviously more can be done and the dude has only been there what? One or two years of what is essentially a lifetime post? Even from the outside looking in by a guy who stopped giving a shit about religion a long time ago, I can tell he seems to be shaking things up to be more in line with modern thought. At the very least he seems a lot more pragmatic than his predecessors.

I think that's the point everyone is trying to make. I don't know about religious folks or religious apologists lol.

[BaneTheBrawler]

K, less discussing Tyrath and more discussing da Pope.

[Gredival]

Pope Frank just wants everyone to be the very best they can be

[Thunder]

Again, if you're an atheist you're never going to line up with the fucking Pope but be reasonable here.

Idk what you mean by line up, but I'm an atheist from a catholic family (EU, 1st gen. immigrant - idk if it makes a difference to most people but it does to me, EU catholics seem much more catholic) and a die hard atheist that likes this pope.

Like everyone's said, he's pretty progressive for a pope. That means a lot to me - I don't expect the church to change in half a decade, I expect it to change in a century or something. This guy is just the beginning, in my eyes, and his slightly slanted side on the progressive scale will let other popes after him be even more progressive without pissing too many catholics off at a time.

Unless this is like dems and repubs and after a very "democratic" pope they elect a very "republican" pope. But I don't think the papacy has a pattern like the presidential elections have, right? I tihnk it's fair to say every pope down the line will be more and more progressive thanks to guys like this pope

LOL. I seriously doubt most of BG are religious folk. As far as the holding women back, I'm guessing you are talking about women priests? I'm guessing it because of the whole celibacy thing? Cant have men in women in the seminary or men going through the novitiate?

Didn't the Dalai Lama recently say a women would have to be beautiful in order to be the Dalai lama? THAT BASTARD!

You'd be surprised.

Reason for no women priests from way long ago was because a celibate women hurt the max # of offspring your society can have, a celibate man doesn't affect max # of offspring unless he's the last man. It's also why most religions are against contraception of any form (anal included). Can't defend against the barbarians without a ton of people

[Ksandra]

Idk what you mean by line up, but I'm an atheist from a catholic family (EU, 1st gen. immigrant - idk if it makes a difference to most people but it does to me, EU catholics seem much more catholic) and a die hard atheist that likes this pope.

I think because atheists and religious leaders like the Pope are going to have vast different outlooks towards certain topics. While Catholics try to match science with the Bible as best they can, religious doctrine is going to take precedence over certain areas.

ie. Abortion.

This is not to say an atheist can't like and respect the Pope. I think ronin is saying it's unrealistic to assume that you will share ALL ideals.

Reason for no women priests from way long ago was because a celibate women hurt the max # of offspring your society can have, a celibate man doesn't affect max # of offspring unless he's the last man.

I don't think this is true. At least not for Catholicism. You may have forgotten nuns also cannot marry/have kids. There has been a lot of debate on when/where priests stopped being able to marry. And many Orthodox Churches still allow their priests to marry and have kids, but with certain sexual restrictions.

I actually hope the church changes their stance on priests marrying. I think it's very possible.

With that said, I am a "terrible woman" and couldn't give two shits about woman being priests. If a woman has the calling, she can be a nun. You don't see men whining they can't be nuns. There is little difference in the good you can do as a nun vs. a priest. And when it comes to your faith, you should care more about doing good, than trying to make some liberal point.

Reality is, Catholicism is very very focused on the roles of a family. It wouldn't make a lot of sense with the way the church is structured to merge the roles.

[Tyrath]

Kim Davis' lawyer claims she got a secret meeting with the pope and he told her to "stay strong."

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/30/us...ited-pope.html

I'm taking this with a grain of salt for now. The Vatican hasn't confirmed or denied it yet.

If it was a secret meeting, why would he bring it up? Sounds like he could be trying to garner extra support for her after the pope said she didn't do anything wrong.

[BerenTebogo]

Been avoiding this because there's no point, but I can't sleep so lol.

Factually true statement: the current pope is, in terms of magnitudes, less of an impediment to the health and welfare of mankind as a whole than his predecessors.

Factually true statement: the current pope offers no more actual benefits to the health and welfare of mankind as a whole than his predecessors.

Being less shitty is not the same as helping to make things better. You could argue that one implies the other, but you'd be wrong, so don't. Echoing Tyrath, offering support for science that doesn't give a shit about your support in any way, shape, or form is great and all but it doesn't make him progressive in regards to social issues. Public or private acceptance of scientific theories is not a social issue, it's a scientific (literacy) one. Again we can probably circle back and find some shit argument wherein people try to justify social issues leading to science literacy (illiteracy) but let's not.

Obviously I'm an atheist. Obviously I don't give half a fuck about the opinions of the pope, or any religious leader. Am I pleasantly surprised when one of them does something that isn't burning witches at the stake? Yeah, sure. But, objectively, the deviation between this dude's stance on issues of contraception, abortion, lbgt issues, yadda yadda and those of his predecessor is so small that there's no point even talking about it.

Evolution works regardless of whether or not we get the Pope to agree on the subject. He could turn around and denounce it tomorrow and demand that every catholic cry intelligent design from the rooftops and do you know who it would hurt? Nobody (except kids getting indoctrinated but yeah). How many people (women, lbgt, impovershied third worlders) could be saved/helped/rescued by him reversing his stance on abortion or contraception or human rights?

See the difference? Accepting science as fact doesn't give the guy a pass on all the pain and suffering that goes on with his blessing.

Popes are shitty. This one is shitty too. Just because he doesn't think his iphone 6s runs on fucking bottled prayers doesn't make him not shitty.

[Churchill]

Wow you edgy teenager you

[BerenTebogo]

Wow you edgy teenager you

I had to take a break mid-post to redraw my anarchy symbol on my hand.

[Tyche]

Public or private acceptance of scientific theories is not a social issue, it's a scientific (literacy) one. Again we can probably circle back and find some shit argument wherein people try to justify social issues leading to science literacy (illiteracy) but let's not.

Its not a shit argument and it's quite an easy one to make when looking at the current political environment. I don't get why you're so dismissive of it considering how politicians use religion to dictate how and what we teach children. Sup Texas.

[Tyche]

Scientific research, development, and ultimately, literacy are, for worse, inextricably tied to funding, which is tied to social issues. NDT hit this on the head in a Colbert interview.

"When you part the curtains, at the bottom of all that, there's a politician funding that research… We have scientists who invented the bomb, yes, but somebody had to pay for the bomb, and that was taxpayers. There were war bonds. There was a political action that called for it. Everyone blames the scientists."

One of the biggest scientific achievements of this century came as a result of war.

Now what any of this has to do with the pope, I have not a fucking clue.