The Pope thread

[Tyrath]

The whole expecting him to overturn church doctrine is the biggest strawman that keeps popping up over and over and over. Please stop it. Nobody expects this.

It's more that he is preaching acceptance he doesn't really seem to believe in himself to make the church APPEAR more inclusive, meanwhile nothing seems to have changed on the inside. If he is going to preach not judging gay people, then by that logic he should also be telling someone like Kim Davis off for using her religion to discriminate against them. Isn't the whole idea that god will sort that stuff out?

What part of telling someone who is DISCRIMINATING against gay people to "stay strong" in her course the same as the message of treating everyone kindly?

[Marootsoobutsu]

And then he has a secret meeting behind the curtains with a fringe anti-gay figure and tells her to stay strong. How do people not see the dishonesty and meaninglessness of the gesture of "I can't judge a gay person" after that?

Legit question: Do homosexuals need to have homosexual sex? Hint: His not judging a gay priest gives you his likely perspective.

[Dimmauk]

"Just knowing the pope is on track with what we're doing, and agreeing, you know, kind of validates everything," Davis tells ABC News Wednesday morning, speaking about her meeting with Pope Francis and the stand she has taken against same-sex marriage.

This statement is kinda disrespectful, and I'm surprised anyone believes anything she says.

[Tyrath]

This statement is kinda disrespectful, and I'm surprised anyone believes anything she says.

How is it disrespectful? The pope said he agreed with her in his speech before he met her. I've only mentioned this about 3x in the thread. Of course he was doing his duplicitous bullshit where he said so without saying her name so as to not piss off everyone who supports him. Which is probably why he had the meeting in secret in the first place.

[Byrthnoth]

I mean, fuck the pope for meeting with that miserable troll, but the idea that he shouldve made a public spectacle out of it is just WTF

I don't get it.

Didn't it become a public spectacle anyway?

Considering Kim Davis is a two bit drama whore, wasn't this a very obvious outcome?

Given that it was such an obvious outcome, doesn't it seem like he intentionally made a public spectacle out of supporting her?


But yeah, the fact that he made a public spectacle out of supporting her is pretty WTF

[archibaldcrane]

Are you intentionally failing to understand that the point is regarding his two-faced dishonesty, exemplifying the fact that he isn't really progressive at all? He's a PR stunt by the Catholic church.

What makes him dishonest here? He's never supported gay marriage. Did you think he supported gay marriage?

[Andalusian girls]

is it wtf? this is the same man who acted as an apologist for the Islamists who executed the Charlie Hebdo massacre, 'if he says a curse word against my mother he can expect a punch'. the value he places on secular rule of law and secular values is clear.

[archibaldcrane]

I don't get it.

Didn't it become a public spectacle anyway?

Considering Kim Davis is a two bit drama whore, wasn't this a very obvious outcome?

Given that it was such an obvious outcome, doesn't it seem like he intentionally made a public spectacle out of supporting her?


But yeah, the fact that he made a public spectacle out of supporting her is pretty WTF

Lol

[Rooney]

What makes him dishonest here? He's never supported gay marriage. Did you think he supported gay marriage?

Maybe the fact that he is on record saying "Who am I to judge?" but has turned around and is supporting a woman who has committed the sins of divorce and adultery that is judging the shit out of an entire group of people she doesn't even know?

[synistar]

All this talk got me to read a few things that came out of Vatican II. I'd say that two documents have some contradictions that both support Davis' actions as well as attack her actions.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_c...umanae_en.html
Dignitas Humanae is about religious freedom in secular states. It defends Davis' actions that she stand firm to her beliefs and not be oppressed by the state. So of course she has the support of the Church. If I were to guess, the Pope probably thanked her for being vigilant about her faith. but...

http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_c...aetate_en.html
Nostra aetate has a strong point in the end that states: "The Church reproves, as foreign to the mind of Christ, any discrimination against men or harassment of them because of their race, color, condition of life, or religion."

It doesn't mean that she should be an ass about it. She refused to perform her civic responsibilities and should step down. Sure it may be civil disobedience, but when you're elected, you have a job to do, and if you can't do your job, you get fired like in any other position.

[vivbiibasjiu]

Legit question: Do homosexuals need to have homosexual sex? Hint: His not judging a gay priest gives you his likely perspective.

Do heterosexuals need to have heterosexual sex?

[Marootsoobutsu]

Do heterosexuals need to have heterosexual sex?

Nope.

They don't need to have any kind of sex.

[Dimmauk]

What's the deal with atheists? Their only belief is that everyone's beliefs are wrong?

[Tyrath]

What's the deal with atheists? Their only belief is that everyone's beliefs are wrong?

Atheists don't have to have anything in common besides the fact that they don't believe in god.

[Marootsoobutsu]

Atheists don't have to have anything in common besides the fact that they don't believe in god.

... and everything that goes with that.

[Tyrath]

... and everything that goes with that.

No. An atheist is someone who doesn't believe in god. Period. Everything else is different for every atheist just as different people believe and/or act in different ways. No need to stereotype.

Also we're getting off topic here.

[BerenTebogo]

What's the deal with religious people?Their only belief is that everyone's beliefs that aren't their own narrow interpretation of their religion are wrong?

I know, right?!

[Anoat]

I yearn for the days when the Pope was more medieval warlord and less figurehead leader. Assassin's Creed 2 was fun.

[BerenTebogo]

It's funny that the pope is trying to focus on helping the poor instead of abortion and gay marriage, but everyone in here is focusing on abortion and gay marriage.

There's more work to be done apparently.

This may just me being obtuse, but I legitimately cannot think of any actions the pope could take that would actually improve the quality of life of the poor as a whole.

The poor in Italy? Possibly. The poor in western Europe? Maybe? The global impoverished? The pope has zero sway over any government outside of italy. I guess I just don't see what he could do or decree that would amount to even a drop in the bucket. Poverty is best (?) handled from a governmental position. Sure, not everyone (including America) does it right, but some European countries have a decent handle on it.

Imploring the middle class and lower classes (the majority of religious believers) to donate money / food / whatever is great, but ultimately it's a suggestion. Stating that using modern convenience that is literally a life-saver for millions is not a sin is something that would actually matter (contraception). But we've been through this, he wont cuz it's too radical, etc.

[archibaldcrane]

Maybe the fact that he is on record saying "Who am I to judge?" but has turned around and is supporting a woman who has committed the sins of divorce and adultery that is judging the shit out of an entire group of people she doesn't even know?

First of all, we have no idea how his meeting with Kim went. Second, Kim's sins are pretty irrelevant - in the pope's eyes all are sinners, her sins aren't unique. Third, if you think "Who am I to judge" means "God approves of men marrying other men"...well...lol.