Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

AP: Francis becomes 1st pope to endorse same-sex civil unions


Recommended Posts

Francis becomes 1st pope to endorse same-sex civil unions

 

Pope Francis endorsed same-sex civil unions for the first time as pontiff while being interviewed for the feature-length documentary “Francesco,” which premiered Wednesday at the Rome Film Festival.

 

The papal thumbs-up came midway through the film that delves into issues Francis cares about most, including the environment, poverty, migration, racial and income inequality, and the people most affected by discrimination.

 

“Homosexual people have the right to be in a family. They are children of God,” Francis said in one of his sit-down interviews for the film. “You can’t kick someone out of a family, nor make their life miserable for this. What we have to have is a civil union law; that way they are legally covered.”

 

While serving as archbishop of Buenos Aires, Francis endorsed civil unions for gay couples as an alternative to same-sex marriages. However, he had never come out publicly in favor of civil unions as pope.

 

Click on the link for the full article

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Rdskns2000 said:

I think the Pope better watch his back. The catholic heiracy won’t like that and may take him out.

 

If he doesn't watch himself, coronavirus will take him out:

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Religion will either become more liberal to keep from losing generations of followers or weed down to only the most strict interpretations and believers as a minority of society.

 

It really depends on how the next generation of church leaders look at this, some people even that young believe very strongly in what they believe, then find they little more flexible on certain things then their parents.  

 

It's gonna take a while, hopefully not too long.  But this is a good move to get ahead of being left behind in an increasingly secular society.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

Religion will either become more liberal to keep from losing generations of followers or weed down to only the most strict interpretations and believers as a minority of society.

 

I don't think it's a "one or the other" situation.  Each individual church will conform to their market to keep asses in the pews and therefore cash in the collection plate.  

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, PleaseBlitz said:

 

I don't think it's a "one or the other" situation.  Each individual church will conform to their market to keep asses in the pews and therefore cash in the collection plate.  

 

No they won't, some will, some will go down swinging.  

 

Mine will probably go down swinging unless I can feel for who the heir apparent is, think I know who it is, and he's one of those that was down the wrong path and tried to 180 so I respect him.  No matter how understanding I take members to be, every once in a while I'm reminded of what conviction actually looks like.

 

 It's not that simple for some folks when it comes to dealing with certain contradictions, mine is an African Church, they'll likely never do a civil union ceremony, let alone a gay wedding.

 

 And frankly, they shouldn't be asked to or forced and not what I see happening from this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

No they won't, some will, some will go down swinging.  

 

Mine will probably go down swinging unless I can feel for who the heir apparent is, think I know who it is, and he's one of those that was down the wrong path and tried to 180 so I respect him.  No matter how understanding I take members to be, every once in a while I'm reminded of what conviction actually looks like.

 

 It's not that simple for some folks when it comes to dealing with certain contradictions, mine is an African Church, they'll likely never do a civil union ceremony, let alone a gay wedding.

 

 And frankly, they shouldn't be asked to or forced and not what I see happening from this.

 

That's what I'm saying.  If your church doesn't like what the Pope says, they'll ignore it.  If another church likes what he says, they'll embrace it.  They'll do whatever they need to do to appease their customer base.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

That's what I'm saying.  If your church doesn't like what the Pope says, they'll ignore it.  If another church likes what he says, they'll embrace it.  They'll do whatever they need to do to appease their customer base.  

 

I agree with you, just want to clarify that I see that as bigger then Catholic Church, every denomination is going to look at this and think about it or clarify they will never go this route.  I'm halfway expecting it to come up this Sunday, and not a good way.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Renegade7 said:

 

I agree with you, just want to clarify that I see that as bigger then Catholic Church, every denomination is going to look at this and think about it or clarify they will never go this route.  I'm halfway expecting it to come up this Sunday, and not a good way.

 

Gotcha.  Yea, I'm sure it will be a congregation-by-congregation thing.  I'm sure that where I live, in ultraliberal Alexandria VA, the Catholic churches will see this as a great thing.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

I don't think it's a "one or the other" situation.  Each individual church will conform to their market to keep asses in the pews and therefore cash in the collection plate.  

I’m not happy to take such a cynical view of what organized religion is, but I do. It seems hard to ignore. 
 

ive always found the Christian standpoint on social and ethnic issues perplexing. Growing up it seemed like one sentence was about how we should love all our neighbors and never hold grudges and turn the other cheek stuff because everyone is a child of god and it’s not our place to judge, and the next was about how anyone out of the their defined “norm” was going to hell. I had a hard enough time with the idea that there was one “correct” religion and the others were “wrong”as well. 
 

based on conversations with people over the years that were in positions to know, in detail, about the falling attendance and why... a lot of it had to do with the gay marriage stuff. Many people moved on and grew tired of being lectured on it every Sunday and the whole situation made them rethink how they practiced their religion. And that many churches at the local level were making the adjustment in an effort to stop the bleed and even get some back. I have not heard of it being a success in bringing people back, and whether it helped stopped the bleed or was too little too late and the people who would leave already left was hard to determine. But it just adds to my confusion. If churches are making decisions about stances on important items based on membership... then... what exactly is it all about....

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, tshile said:

I’m not happy to take such a cynical view of what organized religion is, but I do. It seems hard to ignore. 

 

I agree with your entire post.  Quoting just this part to note that my view (I'm not religious) isn't even cynical in my opinion.  It's just a fact of life that churches are organizations with costs and expenses and therefore need to generate income to provide the services that churches provide.  That's just how the world works.  That income comes from parishioners, who are the churches customers.  They keep it going.  Without customers, all organizations die.  Again, that's not cynical, that's just how life works.  If the church turns against its parishioners, it will cease to exist as those parishioners will go somewhere else more in line with their beliefs.  Churches may not be business per se, and they may be exempt from taxation, but they aren't exempt, in this country, from the basic precepts of capitalism and free markets.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@tshile

 

It's not easy to take a book literally that's for the most part 2000+ years old in the 21st Century.  There has to be give and take, but I do believe in many cases the damage is done in certain folks not coming back.  It's a risk of also losing the most strict believers if liberalizing too fast.  Is it the message that needs to change or the interpretation of the book itself?

 

Religion is going to change, but has to be in a way that isn't so blatantly obvious about money that everyone on all sides see right through it.  Otherwise there's going to be more believers then Churches.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, PleaseBlitz said:

That's just how the world works


i was thinking a little more into it. 
 

If being so against it was based on the word of god... then what’s changed? They’re losing money? That doesn’t really seem to fit with the word of god and the teachings of Jesus as I understand them. 
 

Or are we supposed to accept that this is the correct interpretation of the word of god? And so up until now was... what? Everyone ignoring that and exercising hate/bigotry and going against the word of god? And we’re all just supposed to ignore what that means? This is essentially an “organization-wide” issue. 

 

It’s just weird to me. I cannot square how they’ve handled this, going back decades, with what they proclaim to be. 
 

don’t get me wrong, I can come up with my own answer easily. And it’s why I’ve stayed the way I have. 
 

but if I were to try to square it all from the standpoint of being religious and what these organizations proclaim to be... I find it difficult to do that. I feel like we’re missing a step in the transition 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The bible and other religious texts are obsolete and were tainted with stupid **** to begin with anyways. The old testament in particular is a horrible foundation to build a spiritual practice upon, let alone to cherry pick when one is choosing who to discriminate against. Eventually Christianity will have to come to terms with that.

This Christian **** as it is, is not what Jesus wanted. I feel bad for Jesus. He tried so hard to get these primitive mother****ers to harmonize and his own disciples barely lasted till after his death before they started squabbling and breaking apart (IIRC).

I don't get why no one has attempted to build a spiritual practice on the universal values of love. It's just there waiting for people to put it all together and it's completely internally consistent and threads the needle in such better ways than the bull**** others would have you believe.

 

Edited by Fresh8686
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, LadySkinsFan said:

The Pope just couldn't take that last step to marriage equality.


He has a few more steps to go. I don’t think he supports marriage equality between a Catholic and a Protestant.

But maybe Protestant heretics are worse than the gheys.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

How long until religion as a human practice disappears?  It gets exposed more and more as a vestige of an ancient, ignorant time.  The many benefits of it - fellowship, caring for others, a moral compass - often get overshadowed by the tragedy and conflict brought about by the people who adhere to different faiths.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...