The Pope Just Handed Kim Davis A Huge Win

[PeaceNikki]

ABOARD THE PAPAL PLANE, Sept 28 (Reuters) - Pope Francis said on Monday government officials have a "human right" to refuse to discharge a duty, such as issuing marriage licenses to homosexuals, if they feel it violates their conscience.

...

On the flight back to Rome, he was asked if he supported individuals, including government officials, who refuse to abide by some laws, such as issuing marriage licenses to gays.

"Conscientious objection must enter into every juridical structure because it is a right," Francis said.
..

"I can't have in mind all cases that can exist about conscientious objection but, yes, I can say that conscientious objection is a right that is a part of every human right," he said, speaking in Italian.

"And if someone does not allow others to be a conscientious objector, he denies a right," he added.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/pope-same-sex-marriage-kim-davis_56091364e4b0dd850308087c

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

1. Gods. I'm tired of seeing these same few comments reappear with replies.

Last edited Mon Sep 28, 2015, 06:22 PM - Edit history (1)

I don't actually care enough about this topic to keep responding, so I've edited this one out to reflect my total lack of giving a flying f... at a rolling donut, and am self-deleting the others.

[PeaceNikki]

5. Yeah, it was cool of him to say that she should step down from her position

... oh, wait. He didn't.

[Miles Archer]

151. LARGE portions of the U.S. Workforce are built on the concept of "right to work."

That means you can show up for work, and decide one day you don't want to do that, and then don't, and that's OK.

OR...you can show up for work, and I can decide one day, for any reason, that I'm sick of your face and I can shitcan you...and that's OK, too.

But I don't think I've ever seen a law that states that you can be hired for a job and then refuse to perform it because of your "beliefs." I mean, seriously...what the FUCK...show up, refuse to do the job you were hired to do, and bring home a steady paycheck?

Maybe Kentucky one of those magical states where this is, in fact, law. I doubt it.

[Bluenorthwest]

8. Where does Francis say anything even hinting at your extrapolated theory? He did not.

So maybe he was really talking about tacos. I mean, maybe. Right? This might not be about anything but lunch. This is really about lunch. Francis ordered lunch, and that's really super pro gay!

[wordpix]

34. agree

[trotsky]

66. So, in this wonderful world you envision...

what if none of the clerks or other authorized employees of a particular county or municipal unit want to issue SSM licenses?

What then?

[trotsky]

97. Who would fire them?

What if their supervisor also refuses?

I am appalled at how little people think these things through.

[AtheistCrusader]

109. You can't fire an elected official.

There are mechanisms that can harm them, but to actually get rid of them, you need the voters to agree.

There are only so many ways to accomplish that, and none of them fit the bill of a timely manner capable of addressing an infringement of people's civil rights.

[trotsky]

112. You paint a picture of a wonderful utopia.

It would be great if we lived in it.

[AtheistCrusader]

108. She did promise to execute her duties on behalf of the state. That's why her stupid ass ended up in

jail.

[tishaLA]

91. MSNBC reporterd that he was specifically asked about government officials

and he said that if they are still human when they are in the government, this extends to them, as well.

So, yes, it would be a huge win for Davis. If only the Kim Davises of the world considered the Pope (or any other Catholics) "Christian," but they don't.

[Egnever]

110. You are right of course as is the pope

People should always be allowed to stand up for what they believe in. That doesn't mean they get to keep their job if their belief's prevent them from doing that job . but they should not be jailed for standing up for what they believe in.

[AtheistCrusader]

116. She wasn't jailed for standing up for that belief. She was jailed for defying a lawful court order

to carry out the duties she swore to perform.

[Egnever]

118. What does that have to do with what I said?

I didn't mention kimeh at all. nor did the pope.

[rockfordfile]

122. It would be a good

It would be a good idea to stop supporting right wing religious extremist like the pope.

[Egnever]

139. .

[AtheistCrusader]

123. You said Erich was right. He is not right.

In fact, he's totally wrong. It's totally appropriate to jail people who refuse a lawful court order, because she is standing in the way of people exercising their civil rights.

Let's say the electorate chooses to keep her. Can we sit back and allow her to continue to refuse to do her job, to spite people trying to realize a lawful, due process and equal protection enumerated civil right, as found by the Supreme Court in Obergefell v. Hodges?

If Erich is right, then we have to sit on our hands if the people of her state want to keep her in office.

Where I come from, when states defied orders stemming from the '64CRA on racial integration, we sent in armed marshals to make it right.

[Egnever]

138. He didn't say any of the nonsense you posted

And again neither did the pope

[AtheistCrusader]

148. There are clerk positions that cannot be sidestepped.

Some counties don't have enough people. You could have a single point of failure. So the principle behind this is even bigger than Kim Davis' refusal, for the fact that her name is on the certificate as the head of that office.

In this case the issue is informed by her refusal to defer to an underling, but who resolves it when there IS no underling to allow to handle it if the party in question abstains? What if the entire office was unwilling to delegate on her behalf?

There is an underlying principle, and that must be addressed. At work, Kim Davis is not Kim Davis. At work Kim Davis is the State of Kentucky and the State of Kentucky doesn't get a religious conscientious objection to performing any aspect of the State of Kentucky's business.

Pope's wrong. Erich is wrong. What they said could possibly be true of positions wherein people work for the state but are not a intercessor representative OF the state. People not acting on the state's behalf. Charged with upholding the law.


This brilliant bit of bullshit is as old as the entire country. There was a time Catholics were not allowed by law to hold public office or act as an officer of the state in any capacity, not even as a lawyer. Took 30 years after the ratification of the Constitution to unwind that shit across all the initial states. Let's not roll the clock back folks, those were dark times. The Government is a sandbox, in which everyone gets to play. If you personal moral code says 'I can't play with others' then get the fuck out of the sandbox. You can't force everyone else out of the sandbox and claim it for yours alone as a viable solution.

No one gets to discriminate with the power of the state. The state is, like justice supposed to be blind to the particulars of the petitioners. If it is legal, if the facts are true, the outcome should always be the same. We cannot survive in a system where two legally eligible couples go to the county clerk for a certificate, and one couple comes away with a certificate, and the other is denied due to their apparent gender. It is not a permissible condition. It cannot be allowed. It will destroy us to maintain that sort of balance.

[Warren Stupidity]

150. "conscientious objectors" is a completely false framing.

Lets review what a conscientious objector is and why conscientious objector status existed.

1. we had compulsory military service.
2. there existed people who had profound and sincerely held ethical objections to participation in the military as a combatant.

To resolve the conflict between compulsory military service and profound ethical objections to a combatant role in military service we created a category of conscientious objector. People who qualified for conscientious objector status were still required to serve in various ways (depending on the era, WWI, WWII, post-WWII) but were not required to perform combat roles.

Now lets review Kim Davis. She volunteered for her government job. She is under no compulsion to serve. There is no impediment to her simply resigning her position. She is not a conscientious objector, and framing her self imposed martyrdom as a conscientious objector issue is total horseshit.

Another example of a similar "conscientious objector":


Lestor Maddox. Determined to not serve african americans in his store.

[SidDithers]

2. But he's dreamy!!...

Sid

[pnwmom]

104. You've said that how many dozens of times now?

Maybe we should be calling you Sid McDreamy ,. . .

[REP]

154. I call him Pope Frankie McDreamy

He makes his fanboyz and girlz so screamy!

[Bluenorthwest]

179. But Sid has no Renault and hardly ever wears the robes anymore.

So Frankie Silks has to get the heat. Plus, Sid may be many things as are we all but he is not a homophobe so he's not really qualified to do the Pope's gig. Sid is a man of science who would never tell people in Africa to abstain from using condoms while hundreds of thousands die of AIDS. Francis does that. Sid would not.
Sid wins.

It is my opinion that those who are supportive of Francis should be sending large amounts of cash to secular groups engaged in sexual education and particularly AIDS awareness in Africa and still more cash to groups that provide medicine to those who are sick and yet another stack of cash to the organizations that try to help the millions of orphans created by this virus which can be avoided greatly, save for superstitions and ignorance.
I say send money to clean up the mess that dogma makes. I'm tired of reading 'Oh, US Catholics pay not attention, we all use any birth control we want!' as if that excuses the dogma and the outcome from following that dogma. Over 100,000 dead each month in Africa. Each month. Condoms. Education. Medicine. Orphanages. Send them money.
Sell all you have and give it to the poor if you want to follow. Or keep it all and tell the poor to take great risks with their lives. Jesus suggested one of these two things.

[Kelvin Mace]

3. As long as they are willing to suffer the fate

of civil disobedience. I'm cool with it.

If she wants to go to jail and stay there, more power to her.

[djean111]

4. So, there is no point to having laws at all. I see.

As an atheist, I have always view the Pope as a rich guy telling poor people to have more babies. I do not see him as any beacon of fairness, just lip service. This seals the deal, really. he sides with Kim Davis, and this pronouncement will be eagerly lapped up and used against the LGBT community.

Thanks, Pope. You just said that laws don't count.

[PeaceNikki]

9. And how many more clerks will feel empowered by his words to also conscientiously object?

[KittyWampus]

20. How many more people will turn away from climate denial because of his words

on climate change.

[trotsky]

44. Have you met any yet? n/t

[LostOne4Ever]

53. Fighting Climate change without population control is nonsense

http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/popes_climate_push_is_raving_nonsense_without_population_control_20150925

[haikugal]

90. ^^^^THIS^^^^

[AtheistCrusader]

114. +1 Family Planning is a huge component. Think of it as conservation, if you must.

[AtheistCrusader]

113. And, what will they object to? Should I just set my calendar back to 1963 and save myself some

time and effort?

There's no way to unravel this mess without people simply carrying out their duties or resigning. Any other option means taking us back to pre-civil-rights-act/'64.

Thank you for jumping on this, glad to see people speaking up about the logical end result. How some can't see it from here, I don't understand.

[Darb]

38. You give atheists a bad name.

Atheist-haters rely on atheists that are arrogant and misinformed to promote their hate. You should consider not giving them ammo. "Rich guy telling poor people to have more babies"? I guess you could see things even more simplistically, but you'd have to work at it.

Someone's faith should allow them to conscientiously object. But the job must still get done. Francis didn't say they could stop the law from going forth did he? Or did I miss that?

Talk about black and white, "....no point in having laws at all". Geeez.

[djean111]

41. To be clear, I don't care in the slightest if someone hates me for my atheism.

I don't hate religious people, unless they interfere with my life. Which they do, and try to do. I hate the interfering. I feel everyone should be free to believe or not believe.

[Arugula Latte]

42. Why is it that atheists are always scolded and told to watch their words,

yet believers are always given free rein to express their "faith"?

[snagglepuss]

64. Bang on,. That is a fine observation. Atheists and agnostics are just supposed

to take it on the chin when pious fools categorically state a whole host of beliefs that are frankly insulting.

[Darb]

73. That was not a scold, just a correction and an opinion.

Don't play the victim. Stand up for what you believe, but a word to the wise, pick your battles. Attacking this particular Pope for what he should have said, uh........well.......your call.

[PeaceNikki]

45. Nor did he say she should step down, or stop impeding others from doing their jobs.

He's the master of the vague statement - the political Rorschach ink blot

[Darb]

67. So I guess you should put words in his mouth?

He said what he said.

[PeaceNikki]

68. I'd like to shove somethin' in his mouth, alright.

[Darb]

70. Nice violent inference. And toward the Pope.

My, aren't you a sweetheart.

Peace, Nikki.

[Goblinmonger]

72. Do you ever think bad things about RW Republicans?

Why does the pope, when spouting what are RW talking points in the US, somehow to be afforded a different reaction?

When it comes to gays, women, and a lot of other areas, he is a bigot. Fuck him for that.

[Darb]

76. Would you mind linking to the "RW talking points"?

I didn't read those. Or is this just your interpretation taking into account what you think he meant?

[Goblinmonger]

79. Two easy ones

Tell me this doesn't sound like something you would hear at the next Republican debate:

"every person needs a male father and a female mother."

he declared same-sex “marriage” a diabolical effort of “the Father of Lies” to “destroy God’s plan … and deceive the children of God.”

[Darb]

92. And?

That "anthropological" part was an interesting word choice. The rest is pretty much Catholic doctrine. We are talking about the leader of the Catholic Church right? Just curious, do you have his actual words or just opinion pieces about his words? Like the following: ...where he declared same-sex “marriage” a diabolical effort of “the Father of Lies” to “destroy God’s plan … and deceive the children of God.” ? That might help the credibility factor. That above sentence leaves a great deal to be desired from the authenticity point of view.

So, let me get this straight, you want the relatively new leader of the Catholic Church to adhere to your beliefs regarding same sex marriage and adoption and espouse them worldwide? Other wise you folks are going to run him down?

Let me remind you of the intent of my original post: Choose your battles wisely.

[Goblinmonger]

101. And, what?

He's a bigot. Just because he is a Catholic and following the bigoted teachings of that church does not make him less of a bigot.

Here's a more full version of that quotation.

He doesn't need to have my views on gay marriage. But given the views he does have, he's a damn bigot.

If someone on DU made the same statements that the Pope is making, they'd be kicked off the site. And rightfully so. Given that, how about we not treat these guy as the most awesome thing that has come about.

[rockfordfile]

129. The pope is a bigot

Standing up for a bigot is right wing.

[PeaceNikki]

74. lol

[Darb]

77. Thanks, I was actually goofing.

I get it. I just think that this pope should get cut a little bit of a break. He didn't restart the Inquisition while I wasn't paying attention did he?

[AtheistCrusader]

115. Oh, you missed the part where the WonderPope is ok with hitting people?

Say something bad about his mom, he'll punch you.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/15/world/pope-francis-punch/index.html

"If Dr. Gasbarri, a great friend, says a swear word against my mother, then a punch awaits him," Francis said. "It's normal, it's normal. One cannot provoke, one cannot insult other people's faith, one cannot make fun of faith."

Beating children is ok, so long as its dignified-like.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/06/pope-francis-parents-ok-smack-children-dignity

[LostOne4Ever]

56. You give atheists a bad name

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=teal]By making excuses for the world's single greatest opponent of women's right and LGBTQ rights and giving him ammo.[/font]


*Note to Jury: I am reflecting the posters words back at them. If they wouldn't have said "you give atheists a bad name" I would not have responded in kind.

[Darb]

69. I won't alert, so don't worry. I can take the heat.

To quote Obama, "don't make the perfect the enemy of the good". Francis is way beyond any Pope before him with taking on issues of the day. But, attack him if you must.

But a fair share of posters around here treat Obama worse than they do most Repubes, so go ahead, blast me for quoting Obama, that far right-wing fraud that he is.

The Pope Must Do Exactly What I want With Regard To Every Issue And He Must Say It How I Want Him To Or I Will Denounce Him In No Uncertain Terms and Hold Him To Account For All The Wrongdoings Of The Church From The Beginning Of The Institution!!!!

Got it.

[Goblinmonger]

75. How is he different?

What policy has he espoused that is "way beyond any Pope before him." I expect that you will give me both where the current pope is saying something and a reference to a prior pope being SO different.

I'll wait patiently for an education in how this pope is so wonderful compared to pope's before him.

[Darb]

81. You Bernie supporters are a tough group. Funny that.

I was referring to the fact that he is out front with regard to helping the poor. He criticizes capitalism for fuck's sake. He relates it to Satan? He crushed the Pubes on the death penalty TO THEIR FACE! Have you been paying attention?

The Pope doesn't make policy. He says things. He promotes ideas. He gives guidance to his flock.

If you want to whine about him go right ahead. If you want to moan about what he didn't say or how he didn't go far enough for you, go right ahead. My point is that it is unbecoming to attack Pope Francis, IMHO. Jussayin'.

Have at it.

[PeaceNikki]

83. Benedict wrote books railing against capitalism and poverty.

That's not new or revolutionary.

[Darb]

86. Referring back to my posts.....yep, I was right.... never said "revolutionary".

Whatev.

Hate that old man all you want. I think that is pretty stupid, but that's just my opinion.

You win, OK.

Enjoy!

[PeaceNikki]

88. lol, I don't hate him, I just don't LIKE when people build him up as some liberal hero.

[Goblinmonger]

102. Your exact words were "way beyond any Pope before him"

Are you going to back that up yet? On what issue is the new pope "way beyond" those that came before him.

I'm still waiting patiently.

[Goblinmonger]

93. Wow. Not sure why this becomes a Sanders thing.

How is what he says about the poor different from the last popes?
How is what he says about the death penalty different from the last popes?

Please educate me how he is better than Ratzy.

[LostOne4Ever]

82. Obama is for LGBTQ rights so I have no issue with him

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=teal]I am especially pleased with him in keeping us out of wars and getting PPACA passed.

If you are looking for an Obama hater, you responded to the wrong poster.

But the pope has actively pushed for social conservationism on nearly every front. It not just one issue. He opposed gay marriage. He is opposed to gay adoption. He compares being transgender to a nuclear bomb. He akins gender theory to totalitarian dictators of the last century. He is opposed to abortion. He is opposed to death with dignity laws. He thinks women should be "feminine" and men "masculine." He is opposed to contraception and birth control.

It is not just one issue where he is wrong.

Not only is against us on these issues, but fights to strip innocent people of their rights. If we are going to celebrate him on just a handful of issues then we might as well celebrate the Pauls for their position on the war on drugs or Rick Santorum on supporting increasing the minimum wage.

Further, I put extra emphasis on civil rights because we are talking about people lives. That is not something that should ever be ignored. Otherwise you end up with people suggesting evil shit like this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7204545

I will not throw people's lives under the bus. I care about BOTH social justice AND economic justice! The pope is the greatest enemy of social justice in the world and he must be exposed and opposed in the harshest way possible![/font]

[Darb]

89. You have interesting opinions.

I enjoyed reading them.

I don't follow the Pope as closely as you do obviously, so maybe you could point me to his actual words that support your opinions.

I must not expect as much as you do from the leader of a religion.

I wish you luck changing the world in one fell swoop.

[Bluenorthwest]

178. If you are uninformed about him why are you lecturing others about him? If you have not read

what the man says, what are you basing your support for him upon? Why are you posing as an authority and speaking with great certainty if you don't really follow the story or know what he's said? Don't you have Google on your internet machine? Being uninformed in the internet age is a choice, not a condition.
Knowledge = Life

[AtheistCrusader]

117. No he isn't. He's in perfect alignment with John Paul II, without the gold and red velvet that Ratzi

nger liked to wrap himself in.

When you say Francis is better, you only display your complete and total ignorance of the policies of the former popes.

[Act_of_Reparation]

59. Remember when Atheists were nice and accomodating...

... and in return were welcomed and treated kindly by society at large?

Because I don't.

[Warren Stupidity]

106. Oh thanks for the tone trolling.

We will all shut up and be good little atheists now and let the disgusting outspoken bigots like Kim Davis and her supporters, who now include several here in this thread, hog the limelite. We wouldn't want to disturb anyone by objecting to religious exemptions for overt bigotry.

[AtheistCrusader]

111. No, it shouldn't. Oath of office is on the bible to UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION, not the reverse.

Personal faith doesn't enter into it.

A Muslim doesn't get to refuse to issue a license to a restaurant with a lawful and complete application because they plan to have BLT's on the menu. (And no, I'm not suggesting one would)

When you are acting as an official of the state, you are carrying out the duties and powers OF THE STATE. Meaning, you ARE the state. When she signs those certificates it is not as Kim Davis, it is as the State of Kentucky. All she does is attest the form is complete and correct and valid, and all the fees paid, etc.

One does not get a personal opinion or a faith or anything. The individual filling that role as officer of the state effectively does not exist as part of the transaction. If you cannot represent the state and perform your duties as an organ of the state, when on duty, then DON'T TAKE THE FUCKING JOB.

If we allowed what you are suggesting, there would still be clerks unwilling to issue marriage licenses to interracial couples.

Stop and think for a second what the fuck you are arguing in favor of, would you? Please?

[rockfordfile]

127. I'm sorry but you

I'm sorry but you sound like a right wing religious extremist.

"Francis didn't say they could stop the law from going forth did he?" Oh come now of course he did. The bigotry is really showing from the pope.



Of course I'm a atheist. Welcome to 2015.

[LuvNewcastle]

6. Of course he couldn't say that

religion and politics don't mix. Not this fucking Pope.

[tanyev]

7. She has the right to refuse to issue licenses.

She just doesn't have the right to force everyone that works for her to also refuse to issue licenses.

[Demit]

13. Exactly. And I think that's what the pope is saying.

He's saying a person following his conscience shouldn't be punished for doing so, NOT that the law must go a step further and allow conscientious objectors to impose the dictates of their conscience on others. And he has said, in another context, that secular laws must be observed. He's a shrewd one, this pope, in his language.

[saturnsring]

48. she should not have the right to refuse to do her job or any part of it

[AlbertCat]

50. She just doesn't have the right to .....

.... get paid by taxpayers for not doing her job.... that she took a oath to do after she was elected to do her job.

Telling other employees what to do is the least of her problems.

[jeff47]

84. Except she doesn't.

Things like removing her name from the license make the licenses issued by the deputies questionable under KY law. The law explicitly states what must be on the license, and removing her name means the licenses do not comply with the law.

In a state with a less specific law, she could probably get away with it. She isn't in one.

[tanyev]

142. I am in agreement with you.

She has the right to personally refuse to issue licenses, but when she takes actions that essentially prevent her entire office from issuing valid licenses, then she is in violation of the law. Her attorney keeps saying that she wants accommodations for religious freedom, but she is refusing to accept the accommodation that she personally does not have to issue licenses as long as someone in her office will.

[Warren Stupidity]

163. No she has no such right.

She has an obligation to perform her job. If she cannot perform her job she should resign.

[tanyev]

169. And I agree with you.

Which is the whole point of the second sentence I wrote in the body of the post.

[Bluenorthwest]

10. His fan base does not care about LGBT rights

They feign support while cheering for our denigration.

[leftofcool]

11. +1

[PeaceNikki]

12. Even worse, they LIE about it, tossing around the "Who I am to judge?" quote saying that he

meant it about the "LGBT community" or about "LGBT people". They pretend that just because he didn't SAY same-sex marriage or women's reproductive freedoms were the threats he referenced that it's NOT what he meant.

[Orrex]

14. Wow.

That was 100% right on the money.

[Darb]

40. More bullshit, different day.

This "fan base" shit sounds eeerily like the baggers saying Obama supporters look at him as the messiah. It's really dumb, in case you didn't know it. But I think you did. That is why I cannot understand why you take such a harsh tone with regard to the pope. But, I say again, it is all about you isn't it?

[PeaceNikki]

47. No, clearly it's all about YOU

[Bluenorthwest]

78. Well the Pope calls me disordered so I am nicer to him than he is to me. Your personal attack with

name calling is sweet and serves to show us the fruits of the Pope's philosophy in action. You are a walking example of what I am talking about. The term 'fan base' is well suited to people who do not follow the Pope's teachings but still want to claim him as authority over others.

[AtheistCrusader]

119. The pope calls same sex marriage an "anthropological regression", from what he claims is a

scientific, secular viewpoint.

You should read his book. It's all in his book. He's a bigot, before the question of Catholicism even enters the picture.
http://www.amazon.com/Heaven-Earth-Jorge-Mario-Bergoglio-ebook/dp/B00BWX099Q/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1400080801&sr=8-1&keywords=on+heaven+and+earth

He's a fucking bigot. He just shines up real good for the PR ops.

[treestar]

192. BNW has zero tolerance

Less than zero perhaps, making all of the rest of us homophobes - be careful, you questioned him a bit, and that does make you a homophobe. The Pope could change his mind completely (or any other person) but it is also too little too late.

Now that gay marriage is the law of the US and recognized as such, seeking out homophobia is so hard it involves looking for ancient DU posts were a person disagreed with BNW's hijacking of another subject to be about gay rights. Any thread about some other form of oppression will be met with a lecture on how gay people are the ones we should be talking about (IE the Muslim kid in Texas - we were chided that we were too upset about that here at DU - we should not be wasting time on prejudice against Muslims-only one form of oppression matters)

Apparently, the Pope does nothing else but oppose gay rights - you'd think that's what the job of Pope is for. There are no other issues. If you think there are, you are a homophobe.

[trotsky]

46. 100% correct.

LGBTQ, women, those who support reproductive freedom - all thrown under the bus because Pope Awesome is, well, just awesome!!

[struggle4progress]

100. Much of his fan base may be more tolerant than you think

[AtheistCrusader]

107. Yet they still give the church money, and are counted among it's 'supporters' by the church lobbyist

s, when they are throwing money around in Washington, and leaning on politicians with promises of support and or vengeance at the polls.

[PeaceNikki]

125. Exactly!

[Bluenorthwest]

171. Why should it be a mystery? Are they unable to express their tolerant natures? Other people see

actions, not our inner narratives. Where are the demonstrations of this tolerance? All I see is aggressively manufactured excuses and demands that minority persons quietly endure the abuses of their clergy. If they objected to the anti gay or anti choice segments of Francis' speeches that would be great, but they do not, they always claim his words might mean many things, they still insist that 'who am I to judge' was about actual gay people in the world when it was about celibate priests who have no sex, no romance, no community around being gay. 'The gay lobby, it's bad' he said. It was not a positive statement, but his defenders cite it as proof of his being 'nicer' than other Popes. It was not a nice thing to say. It was not about lay gay who get laid, it was about priests who deny every aspect of their gayness, sexuality, friendship, community, all of this must be denied.

It is up to the members of the oppressing group to communicate any new found tolerance. So let them do so, no one is stopping them. They are free to do as they wish.

[Ilsa]

15. As a conscientious objector to a duty inherent in the job

title, they can find another job. There is no reason to pay a public official to sit on his or her butt and ignore a major job requirement.

The pope hasn't clarified anything in Davis' favor. To me, it makes the decision to remove her even easier.

[bowens43]

16. She does have a right to refuse, she does not have a right to stay in job she won't do.

[liberal N proud]

17. Do you know how long I would have a job if I refused to do what I was paid to do?

Today would probably be my last day on the job if that were the case.

You get paid to do a job regardless of how you feel about it.

[Hortensis]

18. If more of us were conscientious objectors, we'd probably have a

pretty nice world. Pope Francis's call for conscientious objection is yet another of the many reasons I am admiring him so much, and grateful to have him on our big team.

However, Pope Francis knows perfectly well that, inevitably, this magnificent tool will also be wrongly used by fools and scoundrels to pursue harmful goals and self aggrandizement -- just part of the cost of operation.

If felt she, as Pope Francis felt she should, had simply announced that she was no longer able to perform a job that required her to aid in immoral acts and resigned, she and her stance would have been respected by far more people than just some members of the religious right. Or she could have made a statement of her principles and position to local media about her position and explained that others in her office would perform those marriages. Less noise, but more principle.

Notably, all the charges of hypocrisy and self aggrandizement, including plotting for reelection, money, and attention, that call her motives into question would have never have been made. She should never have signed up with GoFundMe.com for people to send her money, and she should have sent that snake-oil salesman Huckabee, and others who swarmed to profit from her, away.

Those who admire her will cheer, but others still won't be fooled.

[bullwinkle428]

19. I don't think it's a massive stretch to call him

"the World's Most Lovable Homophobe".

[Solly Mack]

21. No, it isn't a "right" to discriminate against others.

You can cloak it religion or call it "conscientious objection" if you so desire. Dress your bigotry up any old way you want to - won't change the fact that it's still bigotry, it's still discrimination.

She wasn't drafted to work for the government. She chose to work for the government.

[Brickbat]

22. He's saying that conscientious objection is a right.

He doesn't say anything about everyone dropping everything to cater to conscientious objectors.

[MineralMan]

23. I'm very disappointed, but not surprised at

the Pope's statement. It lends support to people who violate the law on religious grounds, and he did not temper it by saying that a person who feels he or she cannot do a job should resign.

This is why we have separation between church and state. Would that we actually followed that principle universally.

[Zorra]

24. By that logic, it is our right to refuse service to religious people. And people with blue eyes.

Or brown eyes. Or white skin. Or dark skin. Or purple skin. Or Popes. Or fascist religious leaders. And on and on and on.

Where does the hate stop, Francis? Wherever YOU say it does? Not in my country, darlin'. We made laws to protect innocent people from people like you, Frank. We made laws to prevent your Inquisitions.

It may be our personal "right" to discriminate. At the same time, it is our right to make laws to prevent ignorant, unevolved people from expressing their filthy hatreds by discriminating.

And it is our right to make laws that enable us to prosecute people who discriminate, and protect our people from hate.

See ya! Have a nice day! Don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out!

[Tommy_Carcetti]

25. I'm not sure I agree 100% with your police work there, Lou.

From my reading of it, the Pope either a) isn't intimately familiar with the details of the Kim Davis matter, or b) sought to split hairs and sidestep the more controversial aspects of the Davis matter in order to maintain a neutral tone.

He seems like a fairly informed cookie, so my money's on B.

The crux of his statement pertains to contentious objection, that an individual can choose to refrain from engaging in an otherwise mandated activity if he or she believes it violates one's personal beliefs.

The whole thing about the Kim Davis matter is that if she had merely objected on a personal basis, she'd still be some unknown clerk in Kentucky. If, for example, a gay couple had come to her office and requested a marriage license, and she'd quietly excused herself and let one of her deputies handle all the paperwork because she believed issuing the license herself would somehow violate her own religious beliefs, I hardly doubt there'd ever be any newsworthy story that erupted from it. That's classic conscientious objection, just as people who said serving in the military violated their own personal religious beliefs.

Where she went wrong is that she made it an office wide policy to refuse all such applications, clearly contravening judicially affirmed law that would require her office--not her personally--to issue licenses regardless of sexual orientation.

So I don't think the Pope really wanted to rock the boat on the issue, and therefore issued a somewhat vague statement that supported personal conscientious objection while remaining silent on the actual issue of whether Davis had the ability to refuse such action on behalf of the entire clerk's office. Therefore, the conservative wing of his church wouldn't have anything to go on him officially "caving" to the gay marriage issue while he still managed to not actually condone Davis' official actions.

[PeaceNikki]

26. He's the master of the vague statement - the political Rorschach ink blot

Kudos to his PR team.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

28. It's perfectly fine for the situation, IMHO.

If we don't want religious figures making comment on secular public policy (i.e. court decisions), him remaining silent on whether an individual has the right to refuse action on behalf of an entire agency based strictly on personal belief more or less jives with that notion. Sort of a lending Caesar to Caesar disassociation.

Mind you, I'm not saying he'll always abide to that rule universally in all situations, but in this one particular situation, I don't see anything particularly objectionable in him not commenting on the issue.

[Bluenorthwest]

172. This man is the world's leading advocate for overturning Roe v Wade. He comments on court

decisions, and has even taken part in influencing those decisions, he met with the family that owns Hobby Lobby prior to their case against the ACA, he supports the March For Life.

A man who does all of those things needs to either refuse the question or answer it. Affecting that he has no point of view is called mendacity. Jesus himself commanded his followers to use clear, direct and honest language crafted to avoid all possible confusion 'let your yes mean yes, your no mean no for anything further comes from evil'. From evil, according to Jesus. Spin and intentionally vague statements are not supported by the Scriptural teachings the Pope claims as source of his authority.
Pope Cake And Eat It Too. Wants it all ways. Wants the cover of furtive language to expedite his having it all ways.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

177. If you noted in my post, I said "in this one particular situation."

When it comes to the issue of abortion, it appears as though he's willing to take a more outspoken path on it. But I don't think he feels that Kim Davis is worth his time and effort, so he put out a generic statement about civil disobedience and called it a day.

Personally, I'm not going to be apologetic for the fact that I am a practicing Catholic. That I do attend mass almost every week. That doesn't mean I don't differ with some aspects of the Church's public policy positions. I don't agree with their position on contraception. I'd like to see ordination of women. I'd like to see ordination of married people. I don't know if I will see the church shift on those matters in my lifetime. Maybe, maybe not. I don't see those issues being so injurious to my faith that I stop attending mass, regardless of my dissent.

No, we shouldn't expect the Church to start conducting sacramental gay weddings in our lifetimes. No, we shouldn't expect the Pope to suddenly become an abortion rights advocate. What I do see with this current Pope, however, is a realization that wherever you may stand on those particular issues, they don't necessarily become a be-all, end-all of what it means to be Catholic, which certain staunch conservative Catholics I think were trying to twist the entire faith into being. So while a 180 is not to be expected on certain topics, a certain level of de-emphasis is a step in the right direction. So if the Pope doesn't want to go all the way and call Kim Davis a numbskull, fine. Kindly and subtly dismissing her is still a good thing in my book. So yeah, good on him.

The Pope is who the Pope is. The Church is who the Church is. It isn't an American organization, nor is it a liberal or a conservative or a Democratic or Republican one. And last I checked, no one's card checking me at church or asking me what I think about contraception or the ordination of women or married people before they let me in the doors, so I'm just going to continue keep on keeping on in that respect.

[PeaceNikki]

180. I don't expect the RCC to welcome LGBT or even be super supportive of women ANY time

What I expect is that they stop imposing their dogma in a secular society. I expect that they stop using their money to oppress women and LGBT. I expect that if they are going to claim to be leaders in helping with poverty and climate change that they be honest about the direct correlation between population control/reproduction and it. I expect that they stop with the insane anti-vaxx conspiracy theory bullshit in Kenya. I expect that sexual abuse by priest be handled in a CRIMINAL manner. I expect that if they are going to run hospitals that they do it without dogma and offer full science-based services to everyone.

I don't give a shit if they ever perform gay marriage or ever ordain women or married men. That's all their own internal shit to deal with.

[treestar]

187. Yes, or had she quit the job, quietly

because she can't do it in concert with her religious beliefs.

She tried to be above the law, and that makes no sense whatsoever. She wanted to use the power of the office to do other than administer the law. She wanted it to administer her own will no matter what the law is. That's the essence of refusing to be a part of society, because society makes the law, not individuals.

[jberryhill]

27. A "Win"? What does she "win"?

Vague words from the head of an apostate church and tool of Satan, according to her cohort?

That's a "win"?

[tammywammy]

30. I don't get it either

She's not Catholic and probably doesn't believe Catholics are even Christians. Fundamentalist evangelical Christians don't look too highly on the Catholic Church.

[PeaceNikki]

35. On the contrary, they collaborate VERY well together to oppress women and gays.

Prop 8 is one example - and they do a fine fucking job restricting women's reproductive freedom everywhere they can.

[ProfessorGAC]

51. Don't Think So

While both are guilty as charged, where is the evidence of collusion? They both are guilty of backward thinking in these matters, and since it's rooted in thousands of years to "habit", they don't need to collaborate to arrive at the same stupid policies and behaviors.

[PeaceNikki]

55. It's a fact.

I don't give a shit if you don't believe me and I am not in a position to give you links.

[LostOne4Ever]

65. Prop 8

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_8_(2008)#Religious_organizations

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Catholics-Mormons-allied-to-pass-Prop-8-3185965.php

[Bluenorthwest]

71. You want evidence? They are actively meeting and organizing. Time Magazine, Nov 2014

Vatican Strengthens Ties with Evangelicals and Mormons Against Gay Marriage
"The presence of American evangelicals and the LDS Church was particularly notable. Rick Warren, pastor of Saddleback Church, and Russell Moore, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, each gave speeches, and representatives from the Heritage Foundation and the Family Research Council in Washington attended. President Henry Eyring of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints’ first presidency spoke and Elder Tom Perry of the LDS’s Quorum of the Twelve also joined. In the United States, this trio of faiths has worked together to stand against the government’s Affordable Care Act’s contraception mandate, but it was the first time they were coming together at the Vatican to talk about marriage."
http://time.com/3597245/vatican-evangelicals-mormons-gay-marriage/

Francis gave the key note speech. Tony Perkins had a great time, please read the article to share in his euphoria. Tony gave Kim an award on Friday.
Read it and weep, as Jesus wept.

[ProfessorGAC]

94. You're Right. I Was Wrong

I still think they would have come to the same positions without collusion though. But, i stand corrected.

[Bluenorthwest]

121. Thanks for reading and acknowledging it. I've posted it many times and the Pope fans just wont

discuss it. So thanks. This weekend's conference was also exclusionary of all LGBT groups and voices by design.

[ProfessorGAC]

167. BTW:

I'm not a fan of the pope. The last guy was horrible. This one less so. That is hardly enough to make me a fan.

[AtheistCrusader]

133. Yep, the RCC was the second largest funder of Prop-8, behind the LDS church.

And it mattered particularly in the Prop-8 fight because this:

[PeaceNikki]

33. It was stated well above, I think

"This seals the deal, really. he sides with Kim Davis, and this pronouncement will be eagerly lapped up and used against the LGBT community. "

[DetlefK]

29. Oh, when it comes to Kim Davis, all of a sudden the Pope is infallible again?

[edhopper]

31. The main point here

is that he doesn't think LGBT people have a right to marry. People do not have the right to be conscientious objectors to deny others rights.
He sees it as "religious freedom" bullshit, which it is not. It is about allowing religious bigotry.
He is wrong on all counts.

[gollygee]

32. Yep

I'm not surprised.

[alarimer]

36. The Catholic Church does not run this country.

It does not matter what the pope thinks.

Kim Davis is still wrong, according to our law.

[Act_of_Reparation]

61. That's pretty naive, don't you think?

The 700 Club doesn't run the country either, but that doesn't make Pat Robertson harmless.

[Starry Messenger]

37. I have serious Pope fatigue.

I do not get the excitement over this guy. Anyone reactionary is already going to ignore him (see, Scalia et al) and progressives should be working better angles on issues for the middle than "the pope says so."

[trotsky]

49. "progressives should be working better angles on issues for the middle than 'the pope says so.'"

Nail on the head.

Because we progressives ignore him on so many other issues - reproductive rights, LGBTQ equality, etc. - I really fail to see why we should ever try to promote a position by saying "The pope says so."

[Bluenorthwest]

80. "progressives should be working better angles on issues for the middle than 'the pope says so.'"

And that is the whole point right there.

[Marrah_G]

39. Good thing he doesn't make the laws here.

[YoungDemCA]

43. In shocking news, it has been confirmed that the Pope is indeed, Catholic

Also, the Pope is both the leader of a worldwide religious organization whose hierarchy prides itself on resisting change, and a head of state. This shouldn't be forgotten.

[NightWatcher]

52. Except that he is a religious figurehead and his word carries no legal, binding weight here

[PeaceNikki]

54. Right, NOBODY cares what the pope has to say.

"This seals the deal, really. he sides with Kim Davis, and this pronouncement will be eagerly lapped up and used against the LGBT community. "

[Arugula Latte]

57. Oh no! You interrupted the Pope Perfect Slobberfest once again!

[Agnosticsherbet]

58. They have a human responsibility to face the consequences of their choices.

A person who can not in good conscience perform the duties of the office have a responsibility to resign.

Forcing others to follow your conscience is tyrany.

[stevenleser]

60. Yep, this is why I stopped talking him up a year or so ago. This kind of stuff is unacceptable.

His economic fairness and populism is fine, but I can't tout him as a great guy if he throws women and LGBT under the bus.

[mr blur]

62. But he's cool and groovy very well-liked on DU! How could he be such a jerk?

He's so progressive and cool and changing the RCC completely!! He heals babies! Kisses disabled people! Hates capitalists! Shares cigarettes with lepers! he's healing the world! Getting rid of child-raping prie... no, he's not doing that one... Embracing the homosexual comm... not, not that one either... Drives his own car! Is in favour of contrac... no, .... OK, he's just a ridiculous, hypocritical old bigot.

[NCTraveler]

63. He is the number one promoter of bigotry on the planet.

But he has great thoughts on economics. lol. People just don't get it. He is building support by talking out of both sides of his mouth in order to generate more cash-flow. Some will be duped by his words and the media. They are a simple crew.

[Politicalboi]

85. Says the pedophile protector

FU pope. This asshole is nothing more than a Jim Jones in white with a silly hat.

[jeff47]

87. Yep. Like his economics and environmentalism, hate his "everything else". (nt)

[struggle4progress]

95. I usually don't want punitive treatment of people trying to live according to their consciences

It's fine with me if Kim Davis doesn't want to issue licenses to same-sex couples herself -- but when she tries to obstruct issuance of licenses, then she should go to jail. I think that was the stance of the court that jailed her briefly, too

[pnwmom]

105. Agreed. She was violating the consciences of her subordinates who wanted to comply. nt

[artislife]

98. Oops, there is the Catholic Church I grew up in.

He isn't 100% good....

[pnwmom]

103. YOU ignore the fact that SHE was violating the consciences of her subordinates,

by threatening to fire them if they didn't comply with her orders.

He also made clear that he didn't know the specifics of her case and was just speaking in generalities.

[Bluenorthwest]

120. He was asked about her and he answered, very clearly. If he misspoke, he is free to clear that up.

It's his job to be understood. The question asked of him was about Kim Davis. He did not pass on the question, he did not speak of her subordinates nor of the rights of the people she refused to license. He strongly supported her right to fuck others over while taking pay.

This is very important, and if that is not what he meant he has the responsibility to make himself understood.

No one owes your preacher the benefit of the doubt.

[PeaceNikki]

128. I didn't and don't ignore that. This discussion is about Wonderpope McDreamy being asked a question.

[pnwmom]

130. Yes, you did ignore that. He only answered in terms of generalities, after saying he didn't know

the specifics of her case.

He would have supported the freedom of conscience of her employees just as he did of hers.

[PeaceNikki]

135. No, I didn't.

[pnwmom]

140. Then please provide the relevant link where you mentioned it. n/t

[PeaceNikki]

143. I didn't.

[ananda]

124. In a way Pope Francis is worse than Pope Ratzinger.

That's because he has that loveability factor and speaks
ostensibly for the poor... but when it comes to human
rights, he is SO wrong.

[nichomachus]

126. The reporter should have asked a follow-up question

"What would happen to a priest who followed his conscience and started marrying same-sex couples? How long would he stay a priest?"

My guess is about 35 minutes.

[rockfordfile]

131. Anytime I read or hear a religious extremist

Anytime I read or hear a religious extremist wow! It makes me so blessed that I'm a atheist.

[joeybee12]

132. This is why this Pope is just so swell...

He has two faces to love, not just one. KNR

[CTyankee]

134. I think what is lacking in this whole argument is that the Pope just doesn't "get"

separation of church and state that we have in this country.

[CharlotteVale]

136. County clerks are being DRAFTED against their will now?

Who knew

I mean, it's not like she has a choice of employment, or anything.

[Call Me Wesley]

137. Who cares, if he says nice things

and drives around in small cars made by FIAT? I mean, who else would want to drive in a FIAT, such a obviously vehicle for modest people? (We have one.)

He's the Pope we can relate to. He loves butterflies. We all love butterflies. The Swiss Guard probably sprays the larvae in Spring, but who cares. He loves Ponies, too! There's no pony in Vatican City. Doesn't matter. There's no female cardinal, either. There hasn't changed anything about the medieval ruling of the Catholic establishment. Popes come, Popes go.

There's no acceptance of the LGBT-community, and the residential Archbishop here can utter stuff like 'kill the gays' with no repercussion. It's a cesspool, and everyone who falls into it is either strongly naive or just doesn't think that we, in the 21st century, should have overcome those dark medieval times by now (it's cool on 'Game Of Thrones', though.)

He condemns arms manufacturers, like we all do, because, ugly people, un-Christian-like:

"The Swiss Guard uses traditional weapons, such as a sword and a halberd, as well as modern weapons such as the SIG P220 and Glock 19 pistols, the Steyr TMP machine pistol and submachine guns like the Heckler & Koch MP5A3."

Ooops, they bought from them?

He's the Pope of the people. He's a Jesuit. He's well educated and knows rhetoric's like no one else. He says the right thing at the right time or corrects it later if there's a slight criticism, in such a neat and gentle way.

Meanwhile, in Vatican City, not a thing has changed.

[PeaceNikki]

141. This ^

He's a PR genius. And a master at the political Rorschach ink blot. It means what you want it to mean!

CMW!!

[Call Me Wesley]

144. Hello! :)

And let's not forget Saint Junipero Serra. Just freshly canonized, because, he should rot in hell.

[LostOne4Ever]

146. THANK YOU

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=teal]I kept on wondering why no one mentions that he just Canonized a genocidal monster![/font]

[Call Me Wesley]

147. Because he's a very cool Pope.

Cooler than the ones before him. Really cool. Cool like Disco-music we all could dance to it! And humble. So very humble in his ornate. So tolerant and forgiving. Such a great speaker. Forgiving the murderer of native people, Holy Saint Junipero Serra, too. What's not to love about him?

We're all brainwashed here by PR-tricks.

[brooklynite]

145. If Kim David only became "Christian" when she stopped being a Baptist...

...I'm thinking the Pope doesn't mean much.

[WinkyDink]

149. 1. He isn't a U.S. citizen, let alone an official one; 2. C.O.'s must also accept penalties.

[CTyankee]

152. #3. We have separation of church and state here in the U.S. Italy does not...

A lot of this dates back to the Protestant Reformation...

[beam me up scottie]

153. Fuck him and anyone else who thinks bigots should be dedended by claiming they're a c/o

If she was conscientiously objecting to interracial marriage and a bigoted religious leader took up her cause would DUers be defending them?

You don't get to declare your bigotry is just and righteous because it's based on religious beliefs.

I am sick of the double standard here.

[REP]

155. But he's Pope Frankie McDreamy, the cool pope with hip PR!

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. He's just so aaawwwwwwwwesome*

*awesomeness may not apply if you're a woman, LGBTQ, childfree or otherwise deemed unworthy by his McDreaminess

[rug]

156. I must have missed Kim Davis being mentioned.

Was "such as issuing marriage licenses to homosexuals" part of the question or is it simply a helpful suggestion by the writer?

Conscientious objection is a bedrock right. And it often comes with significant personal cost.

What Davis is doing is not conscientious objection at all. Conscientious objection is not using governmental office and power to deny someone else rights. It's what one does in the face of governmental power, regardless of the personal cost.

[bklyncowgirl]

157. Please, Rug, no rationality allowed here. People are parsing the Pope.

It's sort of like reading the Bible. Everyone takes a little bit away from it depending on his or her particular views, life experiences and prejudices. If you believe with all your heart that the Catholic Church is a hopelessly corrupt, misogynist, homophobic institution that should be consigned to the dustbin of history, you will read this as a reference of support for Kim Davis. Those who see this Pope as a possible redeemer for this corrupt, misogynist, homophobic institution and are willing to overlook the less liberal are more likely to see it as a much more benign statement.

I'm not seeing all these dire pronouncement either way. I do wonder why he was he not absolutely clear on what he meant. Maybe after this rather grueling schedule the man was just tired. It's not as if the man is infallible after all--on less of course you're a devout Catholic--and even then it's only as if he was speaking ex-cathedra. I don't think an airline seat qualifies.

At any rate the only people I see who are truly trashing the Pope are the right wingers from Rush Limbaugh and Michael Savage to my brother in law and a former high school classmate who keep sending me dire pronouncements about him being a socialist, an atheist and the antichrist--or is it the antichrist's mini-me--I get so confused with all the dog whistles and this tiny but vocal group on DU, the yapping Chihuahuas of political correctness.

[AtheistCrusader]

159. The pope IS a homophobe. I posted an excerpt from his book upthread

Written by him about 7 years prior to his elevation to Pope, and he couched it not in religious terms, but in anthropological terms. As if from a position of social human study.

He's a bigot. It's a joke to think he's just biding his time, like a slow current, eroding away for long-scale change.

The recent Supreme Court decision, and recognition of same sex marriage nationwide is a specific thing the pope put on his agenda. He's very much referring to situations like Kim Davis, and others in that answer.

[beam me up scottie]

160. Please, AC, no rationality allowed here. People are praising the Pope.

He's just misunderstood you see.

Even though his past words have proved that he's a bigot to anyone who isn't suffering from confirmation bias.

[bklyncowgirl]

162. Whatever...time will tell whether he's undergoing a change of heart or not.

Time will also tell whether this ancient institution can be changed even if an individual Pope wanted to change it. To his credit Francis has done a pretty good job in cleaning up the Vatican Bank. His change of tone on social issues may, as you say be meaningless or it may not.

I haven't darkened the door of a Catholic church except for weddings and funerals for many years now and have no intention to do so until I see concrete signs of change: abusers and those who covered up for them actually punished, a change in the church's position on birth control and a halt to their ceaseless political lobbying on abortion and gay marriage--lobbying which effects Catholics and non-Catholics alike.

The Catholic Church aside, Pope Francis is a man of a certain age who comes from the culture which gave us the word machismo. I'd surprised if he turned out to be a whole-hearted feminist and crusader for gay rights.

On the other hand I find the Pope Francis Truth Squad annoying and repetitive. Everyone on this board knows that the Catholic Church as an institution is deeply flawed and morally bankrupt. Everyone knows that it is homophobic, misogynist and has contributed to untold misery with its prohibition on birth control. Everyone on this board can tick off the issues on which they disagree profoundly with Pope Francis. The fact that many of us are cheering his leadership on the environment and economic issues--and that to me at least, seems to be bringing back the more liberal Catholicism of my youth does not mean that these people do not care about the rights of gay people and women. It simply means that we can walk and chew gum at the same time.

[Bluenorthwest]

168. Men who are within a year in age to Francis include Jack Nicholson, Warren Beatty, Morgan Freeman

Woody Allen. None of those guys are anti gay. It's not about age, it is about that which dwells in the heart of the individual.

So your 'walk and chew gum' snark would have far more weight if you did not make excuses like 'he's old' prior to claiming you really care about LGBT rights.

[Warren Stupidity]

164. "Pope Francis said on Monday government officials have a "human right" to refuse to discharge a duty

, such as issuing marriage licenses to homosexuals, if they feel it violates their conscience." - yeah this has fuck all to do with Kim Davis, a government official who has refused to issue marriage licenses to homosexuals.

The defenders of bigotry lie with abandon. At least Pope Frank makes his bigotry overt. His defenders weasel around pretending it aint so.

[PeaceNikki]

174. We're VERMIN, not "yapping Chihuahuas"

[Bluenorthwest]

176. The question cited Kim Davis specifically.

The response was about Kim Davis. That's how language works.

[joeybee12]

184. Want to backtrack on that now they confirmed he met with her? nt

[rug]

185. As soon as yo get a sorce besides Davis' lawyers

and produce the original question he was asked.

[joeybee12]

188. Apparently you won't...

The Pope's a bigot...and all the PR he has with him won't change that.

[rug]

196. Ah, it boils down to public relations and bigotry.

Thanks for the fine analysis.

[cleanhippie]

197. As long as his apologists are out in force defending him at every turn like this...

You're wasting your time here, JB. The Pope is a proven bigot, but his sycophants could care less.

[joeybee12]

198. Yup, they'll soon be demanding photos, video

with what he said exactly.

[cleanhippie]

199. One could provide live video and a certified transcript, and some shyster lawyer types

would try to argue that it didn't happen.


And cue one of those shysters in 3...2...

[PeaceNikki]

189. Like the Vatican? Will that do?

On Wednesday, the Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, confirmed the meeting, but he declined to elaborate. “I do not deny that the meeting took place, but I have no other comments to add,” he said.

Mr. Staver said that Vatican officials had been aware of Ms. Davis, and that the meeting had been arranged through them — not through bishops or the bishops’ conference in the United States. He would not identify the Vatican officials.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/30/us/county-clerk-kim-davis-who-denied-gay-couples-visited-pope.html?_r=0

[PeaceNikki]

186. Since they met earlier in his visit, I think that's clear.

On Wednesday, the Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, confirmed the meeting, but he declined to elaborate. “I do not deny that the meeting took place, but I have no other comments to add,” he said.

Mr. Staver said that Vatican officials had been aware of Ms. Davis, and that the meeting had been arranged through them — not through bishops or the bishops’ conference in the United States. He would not identify the Vatican officials.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/30/us/county-clerk-kim-davis-who-denied-gay-couples-visited-pope.html?_r=0

[rug]

190. And what precisely was discussed?

[PeaceNikki]

191. Probably chocolate chip cookie recipes! Or how bad the fucking Chicago Bears suck!

[rug]

195. That's as plausible as the cabal being suggested.

[restorefreedom]

158. he is being misrepresented

as usual, the media puts the spin they want.

he never referred to the davis case. and he never said that a person should object and necessarily keep their job. he said conscientious objection is a right of all.

which it is

unspinned quotes here


http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/pope-francis-visits-america/pope-francis-i-understand-anger-catholic-church-sex-abuse-victims-n434681

[PeaceNikki]

175. lol, that link has exactly the same words as the OP.

"Pope Francis said on Monday government officials have a "human right" to refuse to discharge a duty, such as issuing marriage licenses to homosexuals, if they feel it violates their conscience." - yeah this has fuck all to do with Kim Davis, a government official who has refused to issue marriage licenses to homosexuals.


The only 'spin' is from those who are trying to claim it's not about Kim Davis.

[CBGLuthier]

161. The pope did not hand anybody anything. He runs a theocracy. We do not.

The pope has zero authority when it comes to the governing of the US and frankly i think he was an asshole for bringing this up.

[Warren Stupidity]

165. The RCC was part of the hobby lobby decision.

This organization he runs is active in our political system pushing their fucked up agenda.

[PeaceNikki]

173. And Prop 8 and nearly every one of the HUNDREDS of anti-choice laws written and/or passed.

To act like they have no influence is dishonest. If they didn't, Pope-a-palooza wouldn't have been such a roaring hit.

[mucifer]

166. I'm glad he visited a prison and didn't have a photo op with her.

But, yeah it sucks that he said that.

Remember he shook hands with John Kerry and not any republicans when he was walking down the aisle in congress.

[Capt. Obvious]

170. Latest meme going around about Kim Davis

[Rex]

181. Maybe he meant during a war.

I notice he keeps it vague on purpose.

[PeaceNikki]

182. Yes. It's a political Rorschach ink blot. It means what you want it to mean.

[PeaceNikki]

183. I am kicking this since it takes on a new context now that we know they met.

Clearly he is more familiar with her case than people in this thread want to think.

[Octafish]

193. That's what her lawyer said.

The guy did stretch the truth about that 100,000 person rally in Peru, though.

[PeaceNikki]

194. And the Vatican also, too!!

On Wednesday, the Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, confirmed the meeting, but he declined to elaborate. “I do not deny that the meeting took place, but I have no other comments to add,” he said.

Mr. Staver said that Vatican officials had been aware of Ms. Davis, and that the meeting had been arranged through them — not through bishops or the bishops’ conference in the United States. He would not identify the Vatican officials.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/30/us/county-clerk-kim-davis-who-denied-gay-couples-visited-pope.html?_r=0

[truebrit71]

200. So it's official, he endorsed an anti-gay bigot....

....what a wonderful guy Frankie the Wonder-Pope is....

[kelliekat44]

201. What did she win?? nt

[PeaceNikki]

202. The Pope's seal of approval for her bigotry.