politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
A bit torn on this, tbh. 'Cause on the one hand, good - fuck that guy. He's trash and he deserves to be thrown out for being trash. But on the other hand, as far as I'm aware, none of those priests that fucked children were excommunicated. So according to the head of the catholic church, slagging off the pope is worse than fucking children? Seems like a weird set of priorities.
The first priest that the PR Pope excommunicated, in 2013, earned it by speaking out for women to be ordained (he also supported marriage equality, but the ordaining women thing seems to be the main issue).
In Melbourne. The same city where George Pell molested children and protected other molesters. George Pell, a child who the Pope appointed to the Council of Cardinal Advisers.
Child molestation isn't a lesser sin to the church. It's a non-sin.
I mean, where in the Bible does it say you can't rape children? The bible doesn't condemn rape of adults or children. It's not a sin to rape anyone at all.
"The greatest tragedy in mankind's entire history may be the hijacking of morality by religion."
The bit that western xtians like to say means don't do gay sex could be better translated to "don't fuck your apprentices"
But king James was fucking his advisors, who were more than twice his age, while they were translating the bible into English so they took some creative liberties
One is just cause for excommunication according to the rules. Excommunication is a very specific punishment for very specific religious things.
Stealing communion wine could technically earn you an excommunication depending on how it was done and what was done with the wine.
The rules behind excommunication are practically ancient at this point but they weren't there to prevent all sins, just be punishment for specific things that were threatening to the absolute shitshow that the organization itself was a long ass time ago.
The fact that it's still a shitshow as an organization, albeit a slightly different KIND of shitshow has no bearing on this situation in particular.
Let's be fair, though. All kiddy diddlers are in the depths of iniquity and should have long since been addressed under what's said in scripture and held to account on that regardless of any talk of excommunication.
Clergy should have been removed for choosing to actively live in sin and then punished according to the law.
The important part is to be loyal. Same as when Elizabeth I broke with Rome the people punished for being chatolic was not charged with heresy, but treason
We go high, they go low. Taking the moral high ground against these people just end us losing the battle.
Not to defend the pope and his lack of prosecution of these pedophiles, but you have to remember that the rule of a leader is never absolute. A leader still has to answer to either the lay people, the nobles/elites, or both. Or else a leader will have to face a rebellion in some form or another. That being said, the problem is that Pope Francis has to go against a significant number of pedophiles and other ultraconservative priests. The Vatican is a hotbed of political intrigue as much as in the royal courts, congress or parliaments. There has been a talk of conservative discontent on Pope Francis for many years now; many of whom adore the pope's more conservative predecessor, Benedict XVI. I mean, how else would a pope get elected by its own elites other than to also engage with politics? It's not different to your everyday office politics or government.