Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(AP News)   "When it comes to same-sex marriages, it's time for all of us to lighten up." --Francis   (apnews.com) divider line
    More: PSA  
•       •       •

3712 clicks; posted to Main » and Politics » on 21 Oct 2020 at 11:09 AM (5 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



222 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2020-10-21 10:59:52 AM  
i.ytimg.comView Full Size
 
2020-10-21 11:03:37 AM  
It's a start in the right direction. Still a lot of work to do, but it's a start
 
2020-10-21 11:08:59 AM  
Conservative Catholics:
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-10-21 11:10:59 AM  
Just like the Spanish Inquisition. No one expected it.
 
2020-10-21 11:11:20 AM  
The Catholic leadership are so going to have him assassinated. Damn shame
 
2020-10-21 11:11:33 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size

It's not at odds with the teachings of Jesus, that's for sure.  Now the old testament, well that's another story.
 
2020-10-21 11:11:53 AM  
Was not expecting that.
 
2020-10-21 11:12:35 AM  

EL EM: Just like the Spanish Inquisition. No one expected it.


Quite Interesting - Spanish Inquisition
Youtube o85NK1EEnMY
 
2020-10-21 11:12:36 AM  
Isn't this just an extension of the "love the sinner, hate the sin" bollocks?
 
2020-10-21 11:12:43 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-10-21 11:13:05 AM  
This is a great step forward, in the "Organized religion gets graded on a curve" sort of way.
 
2020-10-21 11:13:27 AM  
The other thread should have gotten green, but to repeat.

What do you call a Catholic who disagrees with the Pope?


Protestant
 
2020-10-21 11:13:48 AM  
Well since the office of the papacy is protected by infallibility, meaning it's not possible for the Pope to authoritatively pronounce a teaching that is untrue, does this mean if Catholics disagree, they will be forced to believe they will burn in hell?  Please tell me it does.
 
2020-10-21 11:15:06 AM  
"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. "What we have to have is a civil union law; that way they are legally covered."

So separate but equal.
 
2020-10-21 11:15:14 AM  
"Homosexual people have the right to be in a family. They are children of God," Francis said

Holy fark! An acknowledgement that homosexual people are....people?


"What we have to have is a civil union law; that way they are legally covered."

Damn it. So close. What we have to have is equality. If you are supporting a division between "marriage" and "civil union", you are saying the two are not equal. Now in your religious fantasy world, I'm fine with that. In our legal reality, it simply doesn't work. Still, I'll take this as a step in the right direction.
 
2020-10-21 11:15:20 AM  

EL EM: Just like the Spanish Inquisition. No one expected it.


And the comfy chair!
 
2020-10-21 11:15:53 AM  
Not marriages. Of course not.

The PR Pope here is advocating on behalf of OTHER governments to create laws that relegate gay people to separate-but-equal "civil unions."

He won't make these laws in the Vatican, of course. Even though it's entirely in his power. Nope.

And he also now claims he "stood up for" civil unions when he lived in Argentina.

Which is a lie.

He was a vocal opponent of marriage equality in Argentina, in pretty offensive terms. There are some who claim that he privately said he was okay with separate-but-equal.

That is not "standing up for X."

Francis is a fraud. Don't be suckered.
 
2020-10-21 11:16:41 AM  

jfivealive: Well since the office of the papacy is protected by infallibility, meaning it's not possible for the Pope to authoritatively pronounce a teaching that is untrue, does this mean if Catholics disagree, they will be forced to believe they will burn in hell?  Please tell me it does.


More or less.
but like all large enough religions, Catholics are no more in one unified lockstep religious practices belief than Jews are.
 
2020-10-21 11:17:02 AM  

minnesotaboy: The Catholic leadership are so going to have him assassinated. Damn shame


Yeah, the last thing a lot of senior clergy want is their tops suing them for alimony.
 
2020-10-21 11:17:35 AM  
He's still against birth control I think. I wonder if it is ok for lesbians to use condoms.
 
2020-10-21 11:17:53 AM  
The article only refers to him endorsing civil unions and not same-sex marriages which is more separate but equal nonsense. I understand he can only try to change the church so much, but there's a difference between civil unions and marriages that's still rooted in bigotry.
 
2020-10-21 11:18:08 AM  

ukexpat: Isn't this just an extension of the "love the sinner, hate the sin" bollocks?


No, this is a recognition that their love should be recognized by law. Which is a lot different than loving the sinner hating the sin.
 
2020-10-21 11:18:49 AM  
American Catholics will be particularly angry.
 
2020-10-21 11:18:53 AM  

Gaddiel: EL EM: Just like the Spanish Inquisition. No one expected it.

[iFrame https://www.youtube.com/embed/o85NK1EE​nMY?autoplay=1&widget_referrer=https%3​A%2F%2Fwww.fark.com&start=0&enablejsap​i=1&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fark.com&​widgetid=1]


I expect it has a more "now" name, like "INQWIZ" or some other pharmaceutical-sounding moniker
 
2020-10-21 11:19:15 AM  
"What we have to have is a civil union law; that way they are legally covered."

This old argument again? "You can have the benefits of marriage but don't you dare call it 'marriage!'" The hubris endemic to any organization which claims a monopoly over the definition of marriage is staggering. I guess we should also revoke the marriages and issue 'civil union certificates' for all straight atheist couples? Or all non-catholic couples?

They need to get over themselves. Any such 'separate but equal' type arguments reveal them for what they truly are.
 
2020-10-21 11:19:37 AM  

tekmo: Not marriages. Of course not.

The PR Pope here is advocating on behalf of OTHER governments to create laws that relegate gay people to separate-but-equal "civil unions."

He won't make these laws in the Vatican, of course. Even though it's entirely in his power. Nope.

And he also now claims he "stood up for" civil unions when he lived in Argentina.

Which is a lie.

He was a vocal opponent of marriage equality in Argentina, in pretty offensive terms. There are some who claim that he privately said he was okay with separate-but-equal.

That is not "standing up for X."

Francis is a fraud. Don't be suckered.


Dude, this is the Pope.

Baby steps.
 
2020-10-21 11:19:45 AM  

fiddlehead: "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. "What we have to have is a civil union law; that way they are legally covered."

So separate but equal.


Yes, but still a step forward from they should all burn in hell! Sinners!
 
2020-10-21 11:19:53 AM  

jfivealive: Well since the office of the papacy is protected by infallibility, meaning it's not possible for the Pope to authoritatively pronounce a teaching that is untrue, does this mean if Catholics disagree, they will be forced to believe they will burn in hell?  Please tell me it does.


Yeah that's not the definition of Papal Infallibilty. P.I. involves a true, formal pronouncement Ex Cathedra and is generally limited to dogmatic questions only. It's only happened twice. Nothing he's said is out of line with what Catholics believe- another poster said so, but its a rehash of hate sin/love sinner, but Francis makes the case in a positive way (give them something) vs the negative reaction of ban everything.
 
2020-10-21 11:20:04 AM  
Still doesn't make up for aiding and abetting hundreds (thousands?) of child rapists.
 
2020-10-21 11:20:59 AM  

Two16: [Fark user image 600x380]


she and catholics like her already think the pope is a fake pope or doesn't count or something
 
2020-10-21 11:21:06 AM  

eKonk: Damn it. So close. What we have to have is equality. If you are supporting a division between "marriage" and "civil union", you are saying the two are not equal. Now in your religious fantasy world, I'm fine with that. In our legal reality, it simply doesn't work. Still, I'll take this as a step in the right direction.


I think the reality is that's the closest we'll get.
I think it's a lot smarter for us to just take religion out of marriages wholeheartedly.
Stop associating the bond of two people in matrimony in the modern world with regressive, bronze age philosophies. Especially when the act of marriage, for centuries has been for entirely civil reasons and -not- for religious reasons.
Just another case of the church worming its way into stuff for it's own influence.
 
2020-10-21 11:21:21 AM  
FTFA: Cruz, who is gay, said that during his first meetings with the pope in May 2018, Francis assured him that God made Cruz gay.

I knew Cruz was gay.
 
2020-10-21 11:21:26 AM  

Begoggle: American Catholics will be particularly angry.


If you want to make heads spin, remind them that a previous Pope declared "Americanism" to be heresy.
 
2020-10-21 11:21:43 AM  
the only person who has the power to make homosexuals a problem for you, is you yourself.

otherwise there is no effect on your life at all.
 
2020-10-21 11:21:51 AM  

Farker Soze: He's still against birth control I think. I wonder if it is ok for lesbians to use condoms.


Dental damns!
 
2020-10-21 11:21:54 AM  

eKonk: "Homosexual people have the right to be in a family. They are children of God," Francis said

Holy fark! An acknowledgement that homosexual people are....people?


"What we have to have is a civil union law; that way they are legally covered."

Damn it. So close. What we have to have is equality. If you are supporting a division between "marriage" and "civil union", you are saying the two are not equal. Now in your religious fantasy world, I'm fine with that. In our legal reality, it simply doesn't work. Still, I'll take this as a step in the right direction.


I don't think the Church would make a distinction between a legal marriage and a legal civil union.  Legally, they're pretty much the same thing.  I think the distinction is that he doesn't want people thinking he's okaying Holy Matrimony, the religious sacrament, for LGBT people.

I mean it's at least a step in the right direction so I'll cheer it on with half-hearted enthusiasm.  One thing it might open the door for is the Church being fully accepting of Catholic gays adopting, and that is a pretty significant step.
 
2020-10-21 11:22:06 AM  
Catholics have generally been for civil unions instead of marriage for a while. It is cone down to a basically really stupid argument of the semantics of calling it marriage. The difference between civil union and marriage varies by country due to different local legal definitions. But when you support it in the abstract, across many nations, like the pope is doing here, you are basically accepting definitions of civil unions that may be indistinguishable from
marriage in anything but name. The Church knows that they've pretty much lost the debate on this issue, so now they are basically trying to settle for a dumb victory on the terminology.
 
2020-10-21 11:22:08 AM  

PanicAttack: The article only refers to him endorsing civil unions and not same-sex marriages which is more separate but equal nonsense. I understand he can only try to change the church so much, but there's a difference between civil unions and marriages that's still rooted in bigotry.


I see it as the next step in making "marriage" meaningless as a legal term, which I'm all for.
 
2020-10-21 11:22:36 AM  
Except the Pope couldn't actually call it "marriage."

Someone that goddamned farking powerful, still using euphemisms for "same sex marriage."
 
2020-10-21 11:23:41 AM  

madgonad: tekmo: Not marriages. Of course not.

The PR Pope here is advocating on behalf of OTHER governments to create laws that relegate gay people to separate-but-equal "civil unions."

He won't make these laws in the Vatican, of course. Even though it's entirely in his power. Nope.

And he also now claims he "stood up for" civil unions when he lived in Argentina.

Which is a lie.

He was a vocal opponent of marriage equality in Argentina, in pretty offensive terms. There are some who claim that he privately said he was okay with separate-but-equal.

That is not "standing up for X."

Francis is a fraud. Don't be suckered.

Dude, this is the Pope.

Baby steps.


I thought he was the minister of funny hats?
 
2020-10-21 11:24:49 AM  

Farker Soze: He's still against birth control I think. I wonder if it is ok for lesbians to use condoms.


I wonder how they would use them.
 
2020-10-21 11:26:27 AM  
We should stop recognizing religious weddings because it's all bullshiat.
 
2020-10-21 11:26:43 AM  
Well I guess Kim Davis, Liberty Counsel, Huckabee, Mat Staver, and Papal Nuncio Archbishop Vigano are all so happy that their concocted hijacking of  the Finale of  Francis' visit to America with a "private audience" worked out so well -- but not to their aggressive manipulative tastes.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-10-21 11:26:44 AM  

punkwrestler: Farker Soze: He's still against birth control I think. I wonder if it is ok for lesbians to use condoms.

Dental damns!


Are you swearing at my teeth?  Well, ankle damn to you, buddy.
 
2020-10-21 11:26:52 AM  

whidbey: Except the Pope couldn't actually call it "marriage."

Someone that goddamned farking powerful, still using euphemisms for "same sex marriage."


I'm sure the pope would want to call my secular marriage a "civil union" as well. "Marriage" is reserved for Catholics, and perhaps other accepted religions.
 
2020-10-21 11:26:52 AM  

Knight without armor: FTFA: Cruz, who is gay, said that during his first meetings with the pope in May 2018, Francis assured him that God made Cruz gay.

I knew Cruz was gay.


Is that why he became the zodiac Killer or was he just following the path after his father killed JFK?
 
2020-10-21 11:26:58 AM  

PvtStash: jfivealive: Well since the office of the papacy is protected by infallibility, meaning it's not possible for the Pope to authoritatively pronounce a teaching that is untrue, does this mean if Catholics disagree, they will be forced to believe they will burn in hell?  Please tell me it does.

More or less.
but like all large enough religions, Catholics are no more in one unified lockstep religious practices belief than Jews are.


Catholics have a defined leadership structure, at least - The Pope is Boss of All Catholics (so you'll need to get the silver arrow to beat him), and there is no analog in Judaism (not in any major strain I'm aware of*).

There is a single Catholic doctrine that flows from the Vatican (although I suppose this dictum, like the results of Vatican II, will be ignored by the fundies**) - Jews can't even agree on whether or not the Talmud is controlling, and that was edited specifically to be a single-source 1500 years ago!

So I think I agree with your point, but I see it more like convergent evolution - we did not arrive at this place through the same processes or motivations.

// the Talmud, even if you smash together the two different versions (and can reconcile the contradictions, as many have), doesn't cover the entirety of law
* there are local "Chief Rabbis", but those are political/ceremonial titles (as in the UK and Israel), not religious
** in terms of adherence to doctrine, I'd agree that most lay Jews and Catholics share the cafeteria mindset
 
2020-10-21 11:27:53 AM  

Minus1Kelvin: Still doesn't make up for aiding and abetting hundreds (thousands?) of child rapists.


Just a friendly reminder.  I still farking hate your Fark profile picture on mobile. I still stupidly try to wipe away the hair off my phone
 
2020-10-21 11:29:14 AM  
I wish to nominate this headline as a candidate for Fark's Headline of the YearTM
 
2020-10-21 11:29:18 AM  

nekom: [Fark user image 257x196]
It's not at odds with the teachings of Jesus, that's for sure.  Now the old testament, well that's another story.


Yes, it is another story.

Like David and Jonathan.  Purely platonic.
 
Displayed 50 of 222 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.