Francis speaks the truth again - which you know, because everyone hates it

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

It's early in his pontificate, but I'm already convinced that Francis will end up the greatest Pope of my lifetime. He showed that again with some off-the-cuff comments in which he called out hypocritical Christians, suggesting at one point that it would be better to be an atheist than a "fake" Christian.

The reason I know he hit the bullseye is that he pissed off both sides. Catholics examined his comments to stress that no, technically, he did not say it was better to be an atheist, while atheists ignored his message and took issue with his (apparent) implication that being atheist was bad (hard to believe the head of a church would think that).

And, of course, everyone on both sides missed the key message: hypocrisy is bad; love and compassion are good. Francis was simply continuing the message that he's been espousing since he took office that claiming love of God is meaningless if you don't show it in your actions, an important message that was sadly missing in Benedict's tenure.

 

[Accuro]

Is it okay to love your own race, and give preferential treatment to members of your own race or religion if you are a white/Caucasian? Probably not. It's only okay if you're not Caucasian.

 

[anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa]

Is it okay to love your own race, and give preferential treatment to members of your own race or religion if you are a white/Caucasian? Probably not. It's okay if you're not Caucasian.

Da'fuq?

 

[RBB89]

Is it okay to love your own race, and give preferential treatment to members of your own race or religion if you are a white/Caucasian? Probably not. It's only okay if you're not Caucasian.

Would you please shut up about race? You are completely obsessed and it's really, really weird.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

Is it okay to love your own race, and give preferential treatment to members of your own race or religion if you are a white/Caucasian? Probably not. It's only okay if you're not Caucasian.

I can't believe we've never banned you.

 

[IUINSB]

Is it okay to love your own race, and give preferential treatment to members of your own race or religion if you are a white/Caucasian? Probably not. It's only okay if you're not Caucasian.

What?

I can't believe we've never banned you.

Well you could start now.

 

[iu_a_att]

It's early in his pontificate, but I'm already convinced that Francis will end up the greatest Pope of my lifetime. He showed that again with some off-the-cuff comments in which he called out hypocritical Christians, suggesting at one point that it would be better to be an atheist than a "fake" Christian.

The reason I know he hit the bullseye is that he pissed off both sides. Catholics examined his comments to stress that no, technically, he did not say it was better to be an atheist, while atheists ignored his message and took issue with his (apparent) implication that being atheist was bad (hard to believe the head of a church would think that).

And, of course, everyone on both sides missed the key message: hypocrisy is bad; love and compassion are good. Francis was simply continuing the message that he's been espousing since he took office that claiming love of God is meaningless if you don't show it in your actions, an important message that was sadly missing in Benedict's tenure.

I agree that there is much to admire in the Pope's statement. The emphasis on love and compassion for those who are "other" accords with Christianity and humanism. You are right to draw attention to what ought to make the message newsworthy--because that message was downplayed, as you say, by previous popes. I don't think any humanists are pissed off by that message at all.

I do think there is always some room for consciousness raising on the topic of atheists. It might be understandable that the head of a church would think atheists are bad. But it would also be understandable if that same head thought members of other religions are bad and for the same reason. But that, thankfully, not the message that this pope means to send about members of other religions. I don't think it is the message he means to send about atheists either...rather I expect his phrasing reflects some of the baggage of the past he is actually trying to jettison.

 

[DrHoops]

Here's what I don't understand. To Catholics, what the Pope says is the word of God himself. So, how can any Catholic have any kind of beef with what the Pope says? They're arguing with God, no?

 

[RBB89]

Here's what I don't understand. To Catholics, what the Pope says is the word of God himself. So, how can any Catholic have any kind of beef with what the Pope says? They're arguing with God, no?

Speaking as a Catholic, people have become so obsessed with politics and watch so much cable news, that they've twisted everything up into this weird ball of anger and "I know it all" nonsense. Like, everything is about what their political party would do. It's become more about loyalty to R or D than Jesus. It's a tad frightening.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

Here's what I don't understand. To Catholics, what the Pope says is the word of God himself. So, how can any Catholic have any kind of beef with what the Pope says? They're arguing with God, no?

That's not what Catholics believe.

 

[DrHoops]

Well, if the Pope is infallible, then what does it mean?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_infallibility?wprov=sfsi1

That's not what Catholics believe.

 

[DougS]

I can't believe we've never banned you.

I did. Someone let him back in.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

Well, if the Pope is infallible, then what does it mean?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_infallibility?wprov=sfsi1

Not at all what you described. Why don't you try reading your own link, first, and then let me know what you don't understand?

 

[meridian]

Accuro said: ↑
Is it okay to love your own race, and give preferential treatment to members of your own race or religion if you are a white/Caucasian? Probably not. It's only okay if you're not Caucasian.

Would you please shut up about race? You are completely obsessed and it's really, really weird.

Weird?
Try pathetic!
I hope he did not get his education at IU.

 

[Accuro]

The reason I posted that was because the pope is always criticizing white countries for not allowing more refugees to come in, most of whom are either colored or muslim or both. That might not have been the context here, but what I said is still true.

 

[Fro]

The reason I posted that was because the pope is always criticizing white countries for not allowing more refugees to come in, most of whom are either colored or muslim or both. That might not have been the context here, but what I said is still true.

The Bible has several passages telling us to be kind/merciful/treat refugees well.

There's not a lot of Christians in the Middle East in the political position to be able to help refugees in the numbers that are being displaced, and most of those aren't under the Roman Catholic Church.

 

[twenty02]

The reason I posted that was because the pope is always criticizing white countries for not allowing more refugees to come in, most of whom are either colored or muslim or both. That might not have been the context here, but what I said is still true.

Colored?

LOL.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

The reason I posted that was because the pope is always criticizing white countries for not allowing more refugees to come in, most of whom are either colored or muslim or both. That might not have been the context here, but what I said is still true.

No, he's not. The Pope consistently calls on wealthy countries who can afford to help the refugees to do so. It has nothing to do with race or religion.

You really, REALLY need to take a long look in the mirror, because this is like the umpteenth time you've showed up here and started talking like a white supremacist.

 

[zeke4ahs]

Colored?

LOL.

I had to have that discussion with my grandparents constantly.

 

[Accuro]

The Bible has several passages telling us to be kind/merciful/treat refugees well.

There's not a lot of Christians in the Middle East in the political position to be able to help refugees in the numbers that are being displaced, and most of those aren't under the Roman Catholic Church.

None of those verses says that you have to let foreigners come into your country en mass. I think that they were referring to small numbers of foreigners who were there on a temporary basis.

As far as the current situation is concerned, refugees should just be kept in camps until they are able to return home.

 

[Sope Creek]

None of those verses says that you have to let foreigners come into your country en mass. I think that they were referring to small numbers of foreigners who were there on a temporary basis.

As far as the current situation is concerned, refugees should just be kept in camps until they are able to return home.

I'd bet a 100-1 odds that you couldn't pass the background checks required to qualify for immigration to the US.

I'm not referring to eligibility, which is regarding whether your circumstances meet the definition of refugee status. I'm talking about the quality of your personal, educational and work backgrounds.

 

[Accuro]

No, he's not. The Pope consistently calls on wealthy countries who can afford to help the refugees to do so. It has nothing to do with race or religion.

You really, REALLY need to take a long look in the mirror, because this is like the umpteenth time you've showed up here and started talking like a white supremacist.

That is what I said about the pope. You are proving my point. Also, your "white supremacist" remark proves what I was saying. Anyone who sticks up for Caucasians is a racist, bigot, or supremacist.

 

[Accuro]

I'd bet a 100-1 odds that you couldn't pass the background checks required to qualify for immigration to the US.

I'm not referring to eligibility, which is regarding whether your circumstances meet the definition of refugee status. I'm talking about the quality of your personal, educational and work backgrounds.

Yeah, I guess they only let you in if you have a Phd.

 

[Sope Creek]

That is what I said about the pope. You are proving my point. Also, your "white supremacist" remark proves what I was saying. Anyone who sticks up for Caucasians is a racist, bigot, or supremacist.

You're a bigot, and it's not because you're "sticking up for Caucasians", it's because you denigrate those who aren't Caucasian under the guise of "sticking up for Caucasians".

Well, that, plus you don't know the difference between those two.

 

[Sope Creek]

Yeah, I guess they only let you in if you have a Phd.

For many that's just a start. It takes on average 4 years for the background check process to be completed. And the level of information required is exacting. Plus the scrutiny they receive when they get here is substantial . . .

. . . like I said, I have substantial doubts that you'd qualify, white or not.

 

[Noodle]

I want Pope Lenny. He grew on me.

 

[Sope Creek]

I want Pope Lenny. He grew on me.

Picked a bad show to start watching that . . . it was the one where some cougar stripped down and leaned up against a door waiting for Lenny to, um, well, um . . .

. . . anyway, MrsSope said "What is this" in "that" tone of voice, and we've not tried to watch it since.

 

[Accuro]

For many that's just a start. It takes on average 4 years for the background check process to be completed. And the level of information required is exacting. Plus the scrutiny they receive when they get here is substantial . . .

. . . like I said, I have substantial doubts that you'd qualify, white or not.

You're talking refugees from a camp headed to the US, not the millions of migrants sneaking into Europe. They are totally unvetted.

 

[Accuro]

You're a bigot, and it's not because you're "sticking up for Caucasians", it's because you denigrate those who aren't Caucasian under the guise of "sticking up for Caucasians".

Well, that, plus you don't know the difference between those two.

Maybe you can explain how I "denigrated" anyone.

 

[Sope Creek]

Maybe you can explain how I "denigrated" anyone.

Here are two, just in this thread:

1. "preferential treatment to your own race", by definition excludes others from such treatment which is a denigration.

2. "colored", when referring to people generally is considered a deep insult to them, which is a denigration.

 

[Sope Creek]

You're talking refugees from a camp headed to the US, not the millions of migrants sneaking into Europe. They are totally unvetted.

As I understand it from hearing several folks who participate in ME to US refugee immigration at our church, background check vetting to gain refugee status under UN rules takes about 2 years . . .

. . . I'd love to see whether you could pass that set of background vetting too.

 

[Accuro]

Here are two, just in this thread:

1. "preferential treatment to your own race", by definition excludes others from such treatment which is a denigration.

2. "colored", when referring to people generally is considered a deep insult to them, which is a denigration.

Ha ha ha! You must not watch the cable news networks, because they use the term "people of color" all the time, I mean A LOT!

 

[zeke4ahs]

Ha ha ha! You must not watch the cable news networks, because they use the term "people of color" all the time, I mean A LOT!

And there is a difference. People of color is acceptable, colored people is not. Just as a child might have autism, and that's the preferred term over autistic child. The color or the disability doesn't define you.

 

[Sope Creek]

Ha ha ha! You must not watch the cable news networks, because they use the term "people of color" all the time, I mean A LOT!

Yeah, I recall that joke from the Opus cartoon back in the 90s . . . that cartoon also had some pretty choice stuff to say about a guy named Donald Trump. Those might be fun to revisit too!!

 

[Accuro]

And there is a difference. People of color is acceptable, colored people is not. Just as a child might have autism, and that's the preferred term over autistic child. The color or the disability doesn't define you.

Who determines what is acceptable? It seems like the media must be controlled by someone who tells them what terms to use.

 

[RBB89]

Who determines what is acceptable? It seems like the media must be controlled by someone who tells them what terms to use.

How in the hell do you not know the difference between colored and people of color in 2017?

Or you could, as I requested earlier, simply stop obsessing over race and shut up about it.

 

[Accuro]

Yeah, I recall that joke from the Opus cartoon back in the 90s . . . that cartoon also had some pretty choice stuff to say about a guy named Donald Trump. Those might be fun to revisit too!!

Not sure what you're referring to.

 

[Sope Creek]

Who determines what is acceptable? It seems like the media must be controlled by someone who tells them what terms to use.

When it comes to names and descriptors for ethnic and racial backgrounds, you let them determine for themselves what they do and don't want to be called, and you respect that. "Colored people" referred specifically to black folks and was considered a denigration. "People of color" was coined to describe more broadly those nonwhites living in the US, as a means to capture their common experience across their multiple backgrounds.

 

[Sope Creek]

Not sure what you're referring to.

That's OK . . . .

 

[Accuro]

How in the hell do you not know the difference between colored and people of color in 2017?

Or you could, as I requested earlier, simply stop obsessing over race and shut up about it.

You totally missed the point about the media. Someone, somewhere, somehow, must be making these decisions.