General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums*EDITED*If you are showering unqualified praise and admiration onto an openly bigoted person....
...then that leads me to believe you're a bigot yourself. If you don't like that, then perhaps you should pick your subjects of admiration more carefully.
Never would I have believed that an unabashed bigot would receive so much praise and admiration on DU. But I was clearly being naive.
EDIT: This is about the pope.
Edit 2: While my view hasn't changed on this pope, nor on the inappropriate nature of the praise currently being heaped on him, I could have voiced my opinion in a more constructive manner. My apologies. I let my frustration get the best of me.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)Yeh, I find it revolting that anyone could defend him because defending him is condoning his words, which are his and part of him.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)eqfan592
(5,963 posts)Enrique
(27,461 posts)whoever it's about.
A-Schwarzenegger
(15,596 posts)rug
(82,333 posts)And the days are not full enough
And the nights are not full enough
And life slips by like a field mouse
Not shaking the grass
freshwest
(53,661 posts)Although I like this one, too:
What Is Life?
What is life?
It is the flash of a firefly in the night.
It is the breath of a buffalo in the wintertime.
It is the little shadow which runs across
the grass and loses itself in the sunset.
~ Attributed to Crowfoot (ca 1830-1890), chief of the Canadian Blackfoot tribe.
rug
(82,333 posts)And that's a beautiful poem. From the snippets I've seen of Native American speeches, prose and prayers, they all have raw, authentic simple truths.
eqfan592
(5,963 posts)But there is something wrong with calling anybody that points out that he was a fascist collaborator "hateful" and lashing out on them for doing so.
rug
(82,333 posts)eqfan592
(5,963 posts)rug
(82,333 posts)Otherwise, it's dishonest.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)Xipe Totec
(43,890 posts)Do you have any idea how you come across?
eqfan592
(5,963 posts)roguevalley
(40,656 posts)Not live in stark either or land
That would include my brother and uncles, open. Nice
eqfan592
(5,963 posts)We are talking about a real, unabashed bigot here, and lots of "I love this guy!" type comments here. Sorry, but no person that can say the sorts of things he had said will get that level of admiration from me without making some substantive changes.
http://www.salon.com/2013/03/14/pope_francis_on_gay_rights_his_5_worst_quotes/
rug
(82,333 posts)eqfan592
(5,963 posts)BlueCheese
(2,522 posts)eqfan592
(5,963 posts)Few people here failed to call the president out on his position prior to him coming to his senses.
EDIT: Also, I don't think the president ever said anything nearly as damning about gays add the pope has.
BlueCheese
(2,522 posts)Almost all of them state they disagree with his views on certain important issues.
eqfan592
(5,963 posts)Some saying things like "I love this pope" and so forth. He's a more likeable person than the previous pope, but he's yet to enact any substantive change in policy to warrant this outpouring of admiration.
BlueCheese
(2,522 posts)Plenty of people said they loved President Obama, without following it by saying, "except for where he thinks God is against same sex marriage".
eqfan592
(5,963 posts)TheDebbieDee
(11,119 posts)The longest of journeys is taken but one step at a time (Or some shit like that!) That this Pope isn't out of step enough to call for the instant banishment of gay people, illegitimate children and the like is a step in the right direction.
Is this as good as the Pope calling for instant acceptance of all gay people? Of course not, but I think he's taking a step in the right direction......(He was non-committal about gay people, wasn't he?)
eqfan592
(5,963 posts)MicaelS
(8,747 posts)We're always ready to form a circular firing squad in the name of ideological purity.
eqfan592
(5,963 posts)This man stands in direct opposition to some of progressives most core values! Just because he's likeable doesn't mean we need to treat him as the greatest thing since sliced bread. Especially not when he sits at the head of a massive conservative organization. Name me one other conservative leader that gets this kind of free pass on gay and women's rights.
Niceguy1
(2,467 posts)Direction, and thatbwe should support.
Lifebisnt all or nothing.
eqfan592
(5,963 posts)...in the right direction. At least not in my book.
gulliver
(13,186 posts)Just fringe whatever and noise. We are always going to have some form of extremism hanging around, unwelcome but determined. Almost none on the left would agree with the OP. Ergo it is not left.
Tikki
(14,559 posts)I thought my reasons were personal, but bigotry is way more than personal...
Tikki
ps I know it's about the pope.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Well said.
Sid
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)eqfan592
(5,963 posts)He now says Catholics shouldn't concentrate so much on gays and abortion, which is a far cry from changing the churches position on the topics.
He's more likeable, and maybe more compassionate than the previous pope/ but he's still an unabashed bigot in charge of an unabashedly bigoted organization.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)The may not say it every post but that is what I sense from people here.
eqfan592
(5,963 posts)...the running narrative that this pope is awesome by highlighting his bigotry are being thrown under the bus and labeled as "hateful" and "bigoted" ourselves, and that people seem so willing to just forget about these important issues in regards to this particular person.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)hateful or a bigot. I do think that the thread about the pope hugging an ill man had some horrible responses.
Pointing out the church is wrong on certain issues is not hateful.
mocking a persons faith is. I am by no means pointing at you with this. There are people here who do mock people's faith and do things that are unnecessary and mean spirited.
xmas74
(29,675 posts)We had a discussion about this a couple of days' ago and I do feel like I'm one of the people you are referring to.
In other words, I'm a bigot in your eyes. Thanks for the clarification. I'm sure that a number of other long time members needed to be reminded that you view us all as bigots.
eqfan592
(5,963 posts)But no, this was not directed at any single individual.
xmas74
(29,675 posts)I can't tell you what to think about me but I can tell you that I do feel that this is personally directed towards me, as did another poster who sent me the link to this thread.
eqfan592
(5,963 posts)To be frank, I don't even remember you. I've conversed with a great number of folks on this subject to recall any specific conversations. In fact, it's the number of people praising a conservative bigot that prompted this post.
TheDebbieDee
(11,119 posts)And no, I'm not talking about the OP of this thread.
xmas74
(29,675 posts)but it was another poster who also went through the same with the OP, asking which one of us did I think it was about.
Our back and forth was in a the middle of a long thread and I just got tired of replying to the OP. Now I do feel a bit like it's a call out to any number of posters on that thread, myself included.
kelly1mm
(4,734 posts)the edit. Would people pre 2012 that showered unqualified praise and admiration on the President lead you to believe they to were bigots?
eqfan592
(5,963 posts)The President: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/76109.html
The pope: http://www.salon.com/2013/03/14/pope_francis_on_gay_rights_his_5_worst_quotes/
And still people regularly took the president to task for supporting civil unions but not gay marriage.
kelly1mm
(4,734 posts)bigoted position or not?
Are you suggesting that there are different levels of being a bigot? Like being a little bit pregnant?
eqfan592
(5,963 posts)Never said it wasn't. But do I see a difference between "civil union" and "destructive pretension against the plan of God?" Yes, if only as a matter of severity, in that one is more likely to eventually see reason than the other.
kelly1mm
(4,734 posts)and the people who heaped unqualified praise on him for 4+ years were also likely bigots as you point out in your OP. Is this correct based on your argument above?
eqfan592
(5,963 posts)I voted for him, even knocked on doors for him, but I never stopped reminding him (through email and social media) that he was dead wrong on this issue (and some others). But few here ever failed to mention his wrongheadedness on this, and those that dismissed it were regularly hounded.
kelly1mm
(4,734 posts)threads that praised him up and down while failing to acknowledge his shortcomings. Certainly not EVERY thread said something to the effect of 'except for the fact that he is a bigot, President Obama is the bees knees!"
Basically, what I am asking is do you expect that every post or OP praising any public figure point out any inconsistancies with progressive politics (shoot - we can't even agree on what THAT is lol!)
eqfan592
(5,963 posts)But I would like to think that in the case of a hardcore conservative bigot such as this that we wouldn't so easily toss aside the issue of equality because the man kissed a sick person and was nice to a child.
In the case of the pope, people have accused those of us that dared to remind them of the pope's position on gays and women as being "hateful" of the pope and of Catholics, and that we should just shut up and let them enjoy the new pope. THAT is what has made this situation so different from any other I've seen on DU.
kelly1mm
(4,734 posts)now and understand (although do not totally agree) with the OP! Have a GREAT night!
eqfan592
(5,963 posts)eomer
(3,845 posts)You probably delivered some form of unqualified praise. That's what I did. One guy replied to me that I was a fanatic and that seeing me at his door confirmed his belief that Obama was a Communist or something like that. In that one case out of many hundreds of doors, I told him that, no, actually, I wasn't that big a fan of Obama but that he was the better alternative. Now I wonder whether maybe I was wrong, whether it would have been better to have a Republican in name that Democrats would be fighting against rather than the stealth Republican that Obama turned out to be (the opposite of that loony guy who thought he was a Communist).
My point is just that people's actual opinions can be more complex and nuanced than you know from a brief interaction with them. You're likely getting a simplified view as most posts on DU make a narrow point and don't purport to say every thing that person thinks about the more general topic.
newcriminal
(2,190 posts)At Fri Nov 8, 2013, 08:38 PM an alert was sent on the following post:
If you are showering unqualified praise and admiration onto an openly bigoted person....
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024004676
REASON FOR ALERT:
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS:
Just so tired of seeing the same thing from this person.
This thread is actually calling out several members of DU personally without saying their names. It's gone too far with this poster.
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Nov 8, 2013, 08:46 PM, and the Jury voted 3-3 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: I see no problem with this. Let it stand.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT and said: I'm an atheist, but I'm tired of the anti-pope hate. This is the best pope of my lifetime. Calling people bigots because they like the guy is BS.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Calling out people without naming names happens all the time, especially in this manner. As for the premise of the post itself, I personally think it's stupid but it's really nothing more than an opinion. Trash thread option or ignore poster option are your friends.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT and said: I agree this poster is way over the top.
Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.
xmas74
(29,675 posts)saying that they thought I was one of the people it was directed towards because of a previous conversation.
I'm tired of the same old crap. I have things to do IRL-maybe it's time to take another break from DU.
newcriminal
(2,190 posts)You're preaching to the choir.
xmas74
(29,675 posts)about how if someone doesn't agree then blah, blah, whine, blah, snark, whine.
It gets old.
eqfan592
(5,963 posts)xmas74
(29,675 posts)as said to a single mother.
You don't know a single thing about me.
eqfan592
(5,963 posts)...very little surprises me. All I know is your position on an unabashed bigot, and that you thought this thread applied to you.
xmas74
(29,675 posts)there are a number of things I'd love to say but I know when something is improper.
eqfan592
(5,963 posts)TheDebbieDee
(11,119 posts)And I CAN'T say that that someone is the OP......because that would be against the rules.
Long live Pope Francis! You Rock!
And I'm not even Catholic!
Now I'm a whiner since I absolutely hate his views on homosexuality? He has the same views on homosexuality as the most ultra-conservative politicians in this country.
Whining.
Pfft.
xmas74
(29,675 posts)shouldn't you be wondering about John Hurt's role in the big special on the 23rd?
I need to go rewatch the clips right now.
Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)an incarnation of the Doctor between the 8th and 9th Doctors.
OR
Maybe he's the Valeyard.
I'm looking forward to finding out!
xmas74
(29,675 posts)but I suspect that's too easy-at least for diehards.
I suspect he's between the 8th and 9th and that his role is directly involved in the Time Wars. At least I hope we finally get a bit more of the Time War-we deserve it!
If the Valeyard returns I'd rather see him in what I anticipate to be an excellent reign by Capaldi. I see great things from him-less fangirl swooning, more of everything I want in The Doctor.
BTW-did you see this?
http://uk.tv.yahoo.com/doctor-peter-capaldi-might-just-star-13-episodes-004000533.html
One year contract with a possible renewal. I worry that he might go the route of Eccleston.
Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)I really like Matt Smith as The Doctor, but I'm kind of tired of the quirky, over-the-top Doctor that we had with Tennant and Smith. I want someone like the 5th who's more introverted and reserved with a darker tone. If there is a Valeyard, I'd like it to be Capaldi. But he'll have to stick around for more than 13 episodes for that to work.
I agree with your assessment of John Hurt's character. I think he's an incarnation of the Doctor we haven't seen before. If that's the case, Smith is the 13th. I guess we'll have to wait to find out! Waiting sucks!
Thanks for the link by the way!
xmas74
(29,675 posts)Have you seen the videos yet?
http://www.doctorwhotv.co.uk/the-day-of-the-doctor-leaked-previews-54880.htm
Capaldi can pull of a Valeyard storyline, as could Eccleston. Tennant and Smith, not so much. You need someone who can go dark for the role.
Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)I've been too busy with thesis work. I have time to watch them tonight!
Thanks again!
xmas74
(29,675 posts)Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)Thank you for your kindness to me after I was acting like a jerk.
xmas74
(29,675 posts)I try to find something that I can relate with for nearly everyone, whether on here or out on the street. I even find something to relate to with hard right and the RR. (Football and racing works wonders, as does canning and freezing/dehydrating food and good recipes to take to potlucks.) I've noticed that once I find a way to relate we always get on, even when on opposite sides of the fence.
I knew we could talk the moment I saw your name. I grew up watching old episodes of Doctor Who late at night on a PBS station back in the late seventies/early eighties. The babysitter would turn on Doctor Who or Son of Svengoolie and I would hide behind the couch, peeking at the tv.
FWiW-I'm a Tom Baker girl, bread and buttered.
Taitertots
(7,745 posts)REASON FOR ALERT:
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS:
Just so tired of seeing the same thing from this person.
This thread is actually calling out several members of DU personally without saying their names. It's gone too far with this poster.
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Nov 8, 2013, 08:46 PM, and the Jury voted 3-3 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: I see no problem with this. Let it stand.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT and said: I'm an atheist, but I'm tired of the anti-pope hate. This is the best pope of my lifetime. Calling people bigots because they like the guy is BS.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Calling out people without naming names happens all the time, especially in this manner. As for the premise of the post itself, I personally think it's stupid but it's really nothing more than an opinion. Trash thread option or ignore poster option are your friends.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT and said: I agree this poster is way over the top.
Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)...but by comparison with that Nazi fuck the new Pope replaced, I like this guy a lot, irrespective of the views of some DUer with a godddamned 'baggerflag. Have a nice weekend.
eqfan592
(5,963 posts)...on these issues. Ok then.
Also, try reading the flag before commenting.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)And yeah, I read your flag. Now we've both wasted time restating the obvious. I've seen posters browbeating others here for many years now. I'm completely immune to the pissants and I think what I think no matter how far it makes your jaw drop in feigned moral outrage.
eqfan592
(5,963 posts)...then that's your prerogative.
Arugula Latte
(50,566 posts)William769
(55,147 posts)The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops opposes unjust discrimination, but it also opposes the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, according to a letter the group sent to the U.S. Senate.
The conference, which speaks for the Roman Catholic Church on public policy matters, sent the letter last week, saying ENDA rejects the biological basis of gender, threatens religious liberty, affirms and supports sex outside marriage, and could be used to support same-sex marriage rights many of the typical complaints about LGBT-inclusive antidiscrimination laws.
The conference also objects to ENDAs lack of a bona fide occupational qualification exemption, which it says is necessary for those cases where it is neither unjust nor inappropriate to consider an applicants sexual inclination.
The letter was signed by Bishop Stephen Blaire of Stockton, Calif., Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone of San Francisco, and Archbishop William Lori of Baltimore, all of whom chair conference committees or subcommittees. It can be viewed on the conferences website.
http://www.advocate.com/politics/religion/2013/11/06/catholic-bishops-oppose-discrimination-oppose-enda-too
Somebody is lying. Or is it he just doesn't have control over his subordinates. Damn sure can't have it bot ways. I'll go with #1 and #2.
Chan790
(20,176 posts)This conversation actually dovetails quite nicely with one I was having earlier with a friend from college who is now a college professor of public policy in Indiana. We both went to school at Catholic University of America here in DC and are activists for social justice.
The topic of the conversation was a petition on Faithful America, a group that represents the viewpoints of liberal Christians and Catholics (I'm agnostic but I'm on their mailing list because I was involved with their efforts to bar pro-death-penalty politicians from CUA's campus and a signatory of their letter of support of CUA faculty's rebuke of John Boehner 2 (I think) years ago when he was the commencement speaker for his positions in opposition to social justice and human dignity), about the fact that the US Council of Catholic Bishops is likely to elect Joseph Kurtz, a vocally-outspoken critic of this Pope opposed to his social justice agenda, as its President next week. The petition is to urge them to elect a USCCB President more in line with the positions and leadership of Pope Francis.
The people most heavily pushing Kurtz' candidacy are the conservative wing of the USCCB leadership, including Archbishop Lori. The very crux of the problem is that the conservative leadership of the US Catholic church is very much at opposition with both the push for liberalization from Rome and from their own laity, resisting calls for change and actively looking for ways to push back. They're not the only ones, Pope Francis has also gotten a great deal of push-back within the Vatican for his actions to consolidate power and eliminate an entrenched old-guard conservative faction in the church leadership.
The petition, if anybody is interested, is here: http://act.faithfulamerica.org/sign/francis_usccb/?source=fa_campaignpage_img
Tl;dr: The US church leadership is much more conservative than Rome and not at all keen on the direction this Pope is taking Catholicism.
Earth_First
(14,910 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)You know he was an open admirer of Franco, right?
eqfan592
(5,963 posts)What's your opinion of the man who said these things?
http://www.salon.com/2013/03/14/pope_francis_on_gay_rights_his_5_worst_quotes/
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Best pope in a long time, but... well, he's still the Pope
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)and how easily PR-influenced a lot of our supposed free-thinking left is.
I'll be perfectly happy to like the guy IF policies start changing. Just being a nice guy doesn't cut it- JPII was by all accounts a nice guy, but look at the sheer volume of shit that occurred under his aegis.
eqfan592
(5,963 posts)And I think you make a fair point about the PR.
Deep13
(39,154 posts)He has already directed the Church to stop obsessing over social issues and to concentrate on ending poverty and violence. So, done. Now it is a matter of enforcing it, which is problematic since he has no temporal authority outside of Vatican City.
eqfan592
(5,963 posts)So if the republicans say they will stop concentrating on their anti gay standpoint, then all is good? How about actually changing the standpoint???? Man, how quickly some are willing to forgo the fight for equality in order to praise a conservative bigot. Smh...
Contrary1
(12,629 posts)has led himself to believe I am a bigot?
Deep13
(39,154 posts)You know, the POTUS was not in favor of gay marriage when he was first elected. Are all the people who voted for him homophobes?
People evolve and when they show signs of doing so, it ought to be encouraged rather than condemned for not being fast enough. As Pope he must comply with the rules of his institution, but he is doing so in a manner that is as accepting and as tolerant of others as is possible while still calling himself a Catholic. Frankly, I think you are bashing him and, since it is for the norms of his church, all Catholics. Some call that bigotry.
What I find most admirable about Dr. King and the other leaders of the Civil Rights movement is that they never lost sight of the fact that their enemies were also human beings with far more in common with them than there were differences. Louis Stokes was on Rachel last night or the night before explaining that. Always try to find common ground with your opponent to encourage her or him to recognize your common humanity.
eqfan592
(5,963 posts)Please scroll up to see the discussion. Yes, people's positions and opinions do evolve, but so far I have seen nothing to show that the pope has come all that far from this:
http://www.salon.com/2013/03/14/pope_francis_on_gay_rights_his_5_worst_quotes/
I never said the pope wasn't human, but that doesn't mean I'm set to sing the man's praises.
Deep13
(39,154 posts)Do what you want. I'm done here.
eqfan592
(5,963 posts)I guess not, since you're done.
Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)If a politician had views like this:
Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/13/pope-francis-gay-marriage-anti_n_2869221.html
and anyone here supported that politician, they would be booted. But since he's the leader of a hypocritical religious organization, for some reason he gets a free pass.
SMH.
Glassunion
(10,201 posts)Of acceptable persons and entities both past and present, in which we can praise, thereby helping us in our purity tests, that validates our party affiliation? That way we can cleanse out the undesirables, making us a more pure and focused party.
Niceguy1
(2,467 posts)From the unlure but don't want to hear what they have to say.
eqfan592
(5,963 posts)And I'm sorry, but I don't think anybody who's said the sorts of things this pope has is deserving of the sorts of praise being shot his way.
http://www.salon.com/2013/03/14/pope_francis_on_gay_rights_his_5_worst_quotes/
Glassunion
(10,201 posts)I haven't really seen a single post of unqualified praise. Someone saying "Hey the Pope did X, that's awesome! He's a cool guy" is not unqualified praise. If I really, really think about it there is not a single living or dead person worthy of unqualified praise. Look the guy is a dickhead when it comes to gay and women's rights. But I try not to let my hate blind me to what is good.
Think about it for just one minute. Has this new pope done absolutely nothing good at all in the past 8 months he has been in office?
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)I think if people kept their praise of clerical homophobic sexists in the proper forums that would suffice.
Praising of a man who hates a minority group can rightly be seen as an attack on that group in and of itself. If folks her are devout Pope following anti gay types, that's their choice, but the SOP of GD says they are not welcome to do that in GD.
The fact that the 'religious' are the ones who break the community rules in order to insult a wider number of people is definitive of the value of their 'faith' and the teachings of their clerics.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)I was a GD host and saw it all the time in the alerts. It is not only the religious. The hosts will not lock a thread unless you alert on it.
I agree this belongs in religion but it untrue to say"The fact that the 'religious' are the ones who break the community rules in order to insult a wider number of people is definitive of the value of their 'faith' and the teachings of their clerics."
The Op of this post is not a believer in the pope. There have been several pope threads and I do not know they are believers.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)"Marriage is between a man and a woman.... God is in the mix" he said.
And quite a few of us praised and admired him nonetheless. (I for one, however, was merciless towards what I saw as either his bigotry or his political cowardice).
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)has engaged in, Obama never said gay couples were an 'attack on God' not that adoption by gay parents is 'discrimination against the child' as Francis has. The President of Argentina called Francis' attacks on gay people 'Medieval and suggestive of the Inquistion'.
Francis in Argentina was Roberston and Santorum in one. He is an old man with a long and brutal history befor his ascension to the highest perch of his company.
I would much appriciate it if people informed themselves and did not claim that Obama's words were anything like those of Francis because that is false and very unfair to Barack Obama. Very.
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)Hippo_Tron
(25,453 posts)We throw around the term bigot a lot as though there's one group of people "the bigots" who have deep seeded hatred for someone (blacks, gays, women, etc.) and the non-bigots who don't. It's true that there's certainly a group of blatantly hateful bigoted people, one only needs to go over to somewhere like Freerepublic to find them. There's also the vast majority of the rest of us who fundamentally believe that all human beings are created equal, but being human beings we still sometimes will act in a bigoted manner often without even realizing it.
So if statements like "I love the new pope" offend you, then I would politely go about explaining to the person making that statement why it offends you and ask them to re-consider their unqualified admiration for the pope. Speak up about how you feel, just don't assume the worst in people when doing it.
eqfan592
(5,963 posts)I let my frustration get the best of me here.
Hippo_Tron
(25,453 posts)And again, I think this is a good discussion to be having. I think there are a lot of liberals who desperately want to believe that right wing Christians will suddenly start looking more towards the golden rule and less toward Leviticus when deciding how they feel about homosexuality. But hints of that by the Pope don't change the fact that the Catholic Church is still a deeply homophobic and sexist institution that has hurt a lot of people.
eqfan592
(5,963 posts)And I agree on the importance of this discussion.
Skip Intro
(19,768 posts)their views, or expression thereof, simply because somebody might dislike it and call them names.
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)As I have seen him in action however I am starting to think he may be a much better person than I originally believed. I am well aware of his past bigotry, but since being chosen as Pope he seems to be moving in a better direction and he is starting to make me hopeful that he may be preparing move the church in a new direction away from their bigotry of the past. He said horrible things about gays before being selected as Pope, but since he became Pope he has sent some strong signals that he may not be as anti-gay as he initially appeared. I can forgive him of his past if he stands up for gay rights in the future and I am actually starting to think there is a chance he might do that.
I am still skeptical of him, but I am more willing to give him a chance now than I was when he was first selected. I do not like the institution of the Catholic Church at all, I think it has been overrun with bigots for centuries and I thought that there was little chance of the new Pope significantly changing an institution that is so rotten at its core. Early on however this Pope is sending signals that he wants to lead the church in a very different direction and a much better direction. I am not ready to praise him yet as he has not yet brought the change needed, but I will give him a chance.
Warpy
(111,331 posts)but without a fundamental change in Rome's thinking about women and by extension gays, it's just window dressing.
I predicted the last pope's reign would be acrimonious and short.
I predicted this one would be a more popular pope who would repair the image of the hierarchy but would be prevented from instituting the type of change the organization needs by all the entrenched arch conservative bureaucrats.
cynatnite
(31,011 posts)I haven't seen him being openly bigoted, but I haven't been closely following him either.
It seems to me that he's trying to bring the church out of the 19th century. While I think that is a good thing as a whole, the proof will be how things progress in the next year.
I think I'd be more convinced of his sincerity if he would address the issues surrounding the child abuse by priests who were protected by the church.
Criticizing a bigot for their bigotry totally makes you a bigot, after all. It's Fox News logic.
It's pathetic this OP got alerted on, and even more pathetic that it missed a hide by one vote: The alerter and all three hide votes ought to be ashamed of themselves, trying to hide an OP that calls out a religious figure on more of the same old "Love the Sinner, Hate the Sin" horseshit.
Edited to add: And you've got the same people screaming about this OP that had a fit when anyone criticized the last pope. The one that didn't even bother with the Love the Sinner lie, and just went with Hate the Sin and the Sinner and Anyone That Happens to be Nearby for Good Measure. It's almost like they'd pretend he was perfect no matter what the guy did. If y'all keep making anti-pope OPs, they're going to make trees an endangered species.
cali
(114,904 posts)there has been qualified praise. quite a different thing.
So you hate Daniel and Phillip Berrigan, right?
And you hate Thomas Merton, right? (if you even know who he is)
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)it is self defense. I pity a twisted ignorant soul like that of Francis, but I will not allow his infection to spread to others, nor for his hateful teachings to be glossed over. He teaches hate toward gay people. Calling that out is simply a person's only option. When a powerful person seeks to malign one's family it is one's only path to defend that family from the malicious and powerful figure.
I understand that for some of you, seeing gay people defend our families is in itself bothersome, some feel we are here to be attacked by men like Francis and Pat Robertson and that we will never defend our selves and our own and it upsets them to see that they can't simply promote a bigot without any contenst any more. They don't think we have the right to say a word as the thugs berate and call us a product of 'the evil one'.
And here you are accusing people of hating Tom Merton. Because they don't like being called demonic influences. I hope you are proud of that.
alphafemale
(18,497 posts)I'm not Catholic so he really has No Real Sway on my life whatsoever.
He is just another indicator that the arc of history does curve toward justice.
He did shut down a swag bishop and turn his house into a soup kitchen.
That was pretty damn funny.
Will one pope be able to root out millennium of corruption to the core?
There was a JP1 that vowed to try and do that.
And he was reported in the press, as saying that God "is our Father; even more He is our Mother,
After he said that-Do you remember how long he lived?