Pope meets Kim Davis

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



Time-Immemorial
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/09/30/444671535/kim-davis-and-pope-francis-reportedly-had-a-private-meeting-in-dc

Time-Immemorial
Double post

Robtard
This is sad. What a waste of his time, on an ignorant *******/attention whore.

Surtur
If she's an ignorant attention whore and the Pope is taking the time to meet with her then what does that say about the Pope and what he is?

Remember, this is the same guy who literally gave a speech last week about rejecting all forms of discrimination and yet also gave support to this woman. When I questioned this the response was essentially "oh he has to follow doctrine".

Bashar Teg
still, as far as popes go, this one is by far the most magnanimous in history.

no need to look a gifthorse in the mouth imho.

Bardock42
Originally posted by Bashar Teg

no need to look a gifthorse in the mouth imho.

Ah yes, the Trojan motto...

Surtur
Originally posted by Bashar Teg
still, as far as popes go, this one is by far the most magnanimous in history.

no need to look a gifthorse in the mouth imho.

This just goes to show how horrible past Pope's were though..doesn't say anything good about this one...who is a hypocrite just like a lot of religious figures. Nothing but a politician wearing a robe.

Bashar Teg
Originally posted by Bardock42
Ah yes, the Trojan motto...

is there a sly implication there regarding the pope or are you just pretending to be clever again?

Bardock42
Originally posted by Bashar Teg
is there a sly implication there regarding the pope or are you just pretending to be clever again?

Why can't it be both?

Robtard
Is there any confirmation that her met to agree with or applaud her shenanigans?

Regardless, I still feel it was stupid of him to meet with her, even if it was to verbally slap her in the mouth.

Surtur
We know it wasn't to verbally slap her because he also praised her out in the open and talked about how it's a human right to be able to refuse to do what Kim refused to do.

I also heard on the radio the Pope gave her and her husband two blessed rosaries.

Bashar Teg
it seems to be legit. at least the vatican seems to have verified it. http://insidethevatican.com/news/letter-38-2015-kim-and-francis

Surtur
So now that she has met and been given gifts by the Pope..I can never see Kim Davis now doing what the courts told her to do. He basically just confirmed everything she is doing is correct.

Bashar Teg
well...he certainly did not help that particular situation...least of all her as she'll find out if she chooses to act upon her newest illumination by obstructing the court.

Surtur
I can almost guarantee she'll say some dumb shit like "The Pope is of a higher authority then the courts".

long pig
He's a goddamn tranny.

Surtur
Originally posted by long pig
He's a goddamn tranny.

Even if he was..so what man like the pope said we should reject any form of discrimination. Unless of course you're discriminating against gays..then its totally cool.

Actually wait no gays can't be discriminated against, silly me. It's not discrimination when it is the will of the Lord. After all you do see a lot of "God hates f*gs" signs and if you can't trust a crazy person holding up a sign of hate then who can you trust?

Digi
Guys. Calm the heck down. Here:
http://imgur.com/gallery/x5wsE

Look, I don't like that he talked with her, because it's easy to see the political sh*tstorm it has or will cause. But we lose our sense of perspective with these things too easily. The imgur link there encapsulates many of my thoughts quite well to this effect.

Time-Immemorial
Originally posted by Digi
Guys. Calm the heck down. Here:
http://imgur.com/gallery/x5wsE

Look, I don't like that he talked with her, because it's easy to see the political sh*tstorm it has or will cause. But we lose our sense of perspective with these things too easily. The imgur link there encapsulates many of my thoughts quite well to this effect.

Awesome article, thank you.

Digi
To be clear, I think Kim Davis is absolutely in the wrong with what she did. But a religious figure meeting with her really shouldn't mean anything other than that he's the type of guy who's going to meet with people with all kinds of political leanings (political leanings that he probably ignores, for the most part) for a variety of reasons; and most of those reasons are probably quite humane and loving.

Bardock42
Originally posted by Digi
Guys. Calm the heck down. Here:
http://imgur.com/gallery/x5wsE

Look, I don't like that he talked with her, because it's easy to see the political sh*tstorm it has or will cause. But we lose our sense of perspective with these things too easily. The imgur link there encapsulates many of my thoughts quite well to this effect.

That's fine for Jesus, but here in the real world the actions of celebrities have consequences, and those should be considered.

Mindset
Maybe they just made out, or something.

You guys are overreacting.

Surtur
Originally posted by Digi
To be clear, I think Kim Davis is absolutely in the wrong with what she did. But a religious figure meeting with her really shouldn't mean anything other than that he's the type of guy who's going to meet with people with all kinds of political leanings (political leanings that he probably ignores, for the most part) for a variety of reasons; and most of those reasons are probably quite humane and loving.

When that religious figure goes on record telling people to reject discrimination and then goes and has a sit down with a woman practicing discrimination..that means more then "dude has to meet with all kinds of political people".

He also sure as hell wasn't ignoring Kim Davis, he was out giving the b*tch friggin gifts even. Basically doing a lot to make sure this woman will never ever back down. That isn't something we can just brush under the rug with excuses that essentially come down to "well he's the pope, gotta play to both sides". You see when politicians pull this shit we call them out on it, so the Pope shouldn't get a pass. Especially given how much power the church has? No way.

Should he be sending children the message of acceptance or of "Gotta play both sides kiddies" ?

bluewaterrider
Originally posted by Surtur
When that religious figure goes on record telling people to reject discrimination and then goes and has a sit down with a woman practicing discrimination..that means more then "dude has to meet with all kinds of political people".

He also sure as hell wasn't ignoring Kim Davis, he was out giving the b*tch friggin gifts even. Basically doing a lot to make sure this woman will never ever back down. That isn't something we can just brush under the rug with excuses that essentially come down to "well he's the pope, gotta play to both sides". You see when politicians pull this shit we call them out on it, so the Pope shouldn't get a pass. Especially given how much power the church has? No way.

Should he be sending children the message of acceptance or of "Gotta play both sides kiddies" ?

Questions:

1. How does the Catholic Church have any power, if, in your opinion, it is supposedly based on beings (Satan and God) who are completely "fictional"? Are you telling me, in effect, that the behavior of millions of people can be swayed or directed by or through untrue propaganda?

2. Are you saying that "acceptance" really translates into going with only ONE side and view exclusively? Or that if you're going with the right thing to do you can NOT actually support "the other side" in some cases, especially the current one, because that would actually be the WRONG thing for a moral person to do?

Bardock42
Originally posted by bluewaterrider

1. How does the Catholic Church have any power, if, in your opinion, it is supposedly based on beings (Satan and God) who are completely "fictional"? Are you telling me, in effect, that the behavior of millions of people can be swayed or directed by or through untrue propaganda?


What the f**k?



Yes....obviously....

Surtur
Originally posted by bluewaterrider
Questions:

1. How does the Catholic Church have any power, if, in your opinion, it is supposedly based on beings (Satan and God) who are completely "fictional"? Are you telling me, in effect, that the behavior of millions of people can be swayed or directed by or through untrue propaganda?

2. Are you saying that "acceptance" really translates into going with only ONE side and view exclusively? Or that if you're going with the right thing to do you can NOT actually support "the other side" in some cases, especially the current one, because that would actually be the WRONG thing for a moral person to do?

I'm so flabbergasted by the stupidity of your first question it's kind of hard to answer your second one. Perhaps you aren't exactly sure what propaganda means or the purpose of it. Or perhaps you aren't aware that while I personally believe these beings are fake..a majority of people do not. You also must be aware people have in the past gained massive amounts of power via untrue propaganda? You certainly can't deny the power the church has.

But I will try and answer the 2nd question now: he preached rejecting discrimination. He then sits down and gives gifts to a person who right now epitomizes discrimination in this country.

He basically has now fueled the fires of discrimination for Kim Davis and the people who support her. He is in fact most likely indirectly contributing to more discrimination now by doing this.

But like I said we call out politicians all the time for being two faced. I don't see why the Pope should be given a pass..he wields far too much power for that.

Surtur
So the Vatican came out saying the Pope choosing to specifically meet with Kim and give her and her hubby blessed rosaries does not mean he supports her. You know because..we just entered Bizarro World where up is down and left is right. Hold on a second guys I think I hear my cat barking.

Robtard
Apparently the "meeting and talk" didnt really happen and Davis is full of doodoo:

http://reverbpress.com/discovery/spiritual/kim-davis-caught-lie-sex-couple-actually-got-secret-meeting/

Bashar Teg
What a slime.

Emperordmb
Originally posted by Robtard
Apparently the "meeting and talk" didnt really happen and Davis is full of doodoo:

http://reverbpress.com/discovery/spiritual/kim-davis-caught-lie-sex-couple-actually-got-secret-meeting/
Thank you for that. That legitimately made my day thumb up

Mindship
Originally posted by Mindset
Maybe they just made out, or something.

You guys are overreacting. Chuckled I did.

Originally posted by Robtard
Apparently the "meeting and talk" didnt really happen and Davis is full of doodoo:

http://reverbpress.com/discovery/spiritual/kim-davis-caught-lie-sex-couple-actually-got-secret-meeting/ Satan awaits her.

Lestov16
Originally posted by Robtard
Apparently the "meeting and talk" didnt really happen and Davis is full of doodoo:

http://reverbpress.com/discovery/spiritual/kim-davis-caught-lie-sex-couple-actually-got-secret-meeting/

Being an agnostic theist who genuinely supports Pope Francis' humanitarianism, this news makes me incredibly happy.

Surtur
This really makes no sense now though. If they never met why was the Vatican releasing statements saying the meeting didn't mean they supported her?

Of course meeting or no meeting the Pope still voiced support for her.

Omega Vision
Here's the thing: the Pope "met" Davis, but he didn't say anything of note to her and he didn't express support or give her a gift. The Vatican isn't denying the meeting took place, they're denying that it had any real significance. More significant was the Pope's meeting with a gay former student and that student's partner.

Lestov16
It's not saying that they didn't meet. They're saying their meeting was at a commonly held public forum, akin to an autograph book signing, and it wasn't the private "I give you my personal support" meeting the Davis supporters are claiming.

edit: pretty much what OV said

Omega Vision
Kim Davis's claim is a bit like if you claimed to have studied cooking under Bobby Flay because you once went to his restaurant and he gave you a few cooking tips when you chatted with him.

Surtur
Okay, but you realize he did give her his support right? He just didn't mention her by name, but it was obvious who he was talking about.

Emperordmb
Originally posted by Omega Vision
Here's the thing: the Pope "met" Davis, but he didn't say anything of note to her and he didn't express support or give her a gift. The Vatican isn't denying the meeting took place, they're denying that it had any real significance. More significant was the Pope's meeting with a gay former student and that student's partner.
thumb up

As far as the gift thing goes though, I thought he was handing out rosaries to the people there.

Lestov16
He didn't give her his support. He was like "Sup. God Bless. Next person please." It was no way of supporting her cause.

Surtur
Originally posted by Lestov16
He didn't give her his support. He was like "Sup. God Bless. Next person please." It was no way of supporting her cause.

Nope, he definitely gave her his support. I'm not talking about at whatever public forum Davis was at, but if you'd been listening to the speeches he made last week..he 100% gave her his support he just didn't mention her by name.

He talked about how people have a "human right" to be doing what she did.

Q99
The plot thickens:

Pope Francis meet with gay married couple

Emperordmb
thumb up thumb up thumb up

Omega Vision
Originally posted by Surtur
Nope, he definitely gave her his support. I'm not talking about at whatever public forum Davis was at, but if you'd been listening to the speeches he made last week..he 100% gave her his support he just didn't mention her by name.

He talked about how people have a "human right" to be doing what she did.
Could you provide the quote and context?

Q99
Originally posted by Emperordmb
thumb up thumb up thumb up


And I'll note, *Francis* invited the couple, while no-one knows who set up the Davis meet.

Emperordmb
Oh we know the Davis thing was set up by a member of the church living in the U.S.

Surtur
Originally posted by Omega Vision
Could you provide the quote and context?

He said government officials have a "human right" to not do their assigned duties if it violates their conscience.

So he's supporting her actions without actually coming right out and saying "I specifically support Kim Davis". Keep in mind this is the same person that, in the same week, said we should reject all forms of discrimination.

Emperordmb
That statement wasn't specifically about Kim Davis or even gay marriage. Some dude asked the Pope a broad question about conscientious objection and he answered it broadly.

There is a precedent for conscientious objection. Pharmaceutical workers who have a moral issue with giving someone contraceptions just have someone other than themselves do it. Kim Davis on the other hand prevented those working under her from doing the duty that she took issue with doing.

Surtur
It's not hard to read between the lines given the Kim Davis story is big right now. He answered it broadly because he is not stupid enough to specifically say "I agree with Kim and those of her ilk". He's like a sleazy politician.

He's undoubtedly aware of the recent issues we are having in regards to people opting out of their duties for religious reasons. I don't mean to suggest he was talking *only* about her. But his statement without a doubt shows he supports someone doing what Kim Davis did. Therefore to say he supports the actions of Kim Davis is an accurate statement.

Also pharmaceutical workers aren't government officials, Kim Davis is.

Q99
Originally posted by Surtur
He said government officials have a "human right" to not do their assigned duties if it violates their conscience.

So he's supporting her actions without actually coming right out and saying "I specifically support Kim Davis". Keep in mind this is the same person that, in the same week, said we should reject all forms of discrimination.


Note, that is not even the biggest problem with Kim's action. Her problem is she's not only not doing her job, but actively trying to block others as well.

A clerk bowing out is not too much of a problem- as long as it still gets done through their office.

He's expressed no comment on the 'block others' action.

Emperordmb
@Q99 thumb up

@Surtur Or the Pope's opinion on conscientious objection could be the same even if you took away the gay marriage "controversy" (for lack of a better word). It's not like he even went out of his way to address that issue, he was simply answering a question asked to him by a reporter. It shouldn't come as a surprise that a religious leader thinks someone should have the right to object to doing something they see as morally wrong :/ And sleazy politicians don't do the kinds of things Pope Francis has done.

Surtur
The Vatican just fired a priest for coming out as gay.

bluewaterrider
Originally posted by Emperordmb
... sleazy politicians don't do the kinds of things Pope Francis has done.

You'll need proof if you want this accepted, and likely even by people like Surtur, let alone the average person or people like me. Especially if you're suggesting Francis is exempt from such a brand by virtue of charitable or honorable work. There are a lot of people with extensive backgrounds of work done over the years that most would deem good or admirable who are nonetheless considered by many to be sleazy, or politicians, or even sleazy politicians.

bluewaterrider
Originally posted by Surtur
The Vatican just fired a priest for coming out as gay.

Krzysztof Charamsa, yes.

I don't think the Catholic Church will long hold to any position that is Biblically moral but politically incorrect; I expect them to reverse course relatively shortly, in fact.

Even so, the firing of this man by them is quite understandable, at least for the present.

Bashar Teg
Originally posted by Surtur
The Vatican just fired a priest for coming out as gay.

Was it for being a homosexual or was he fired for having a lover?

bluewaterrider
Originally posted by Surtur
He said government officials have a "human right" to not do their assigned duties if it violates their conscience.

So he's supporting her actions without actually coming right out and saying "I specifically support Kim Davis".


I agree that, for the present, it APPEARS that way, Surtur ...

Bardock42
Originally posted by Bashar Teg
Was it for being a homosexual or was he fired for having a lover?

Or was he fired for having an adult lover.

Bashar Teg
no expression

Surtur
The way they made it sound like it wasn''t cuz he had a lover, but because of the way he announced it.

So you guys remember the popes whole "reject all forms of discrimination" thing? Even if it was because of having a lover that is still discrimination.

Originally posted by bluewaterrider
I agree that, for the present, it APPEARS that way, Surtur ...

There is really no debating against this actually. Dude straight up said government officials should be able to refuse to do duties if it violates their conscience. Kim Davis is a government employee. Kim Davis refused to perform her duties because of her religion. The pope gave support for people who do this.

Thus the Pope supports Kim Davis and people like her. It's not really a "maybe" but a fact.

Bashar Teg
Could be sensationalist spin telling us that.

Surtur

Bashar Teg
Vatican said nothing about it being over homosexuality.



If his partner was a woman it all would have applied. This reeks of media spin horseshit and some unethical priest trying to blackmail and smear his boss in the name of progressive activism.

Surtur
So it's strictly over being in a relationship? If that was the only reason why were they bringing up the timing of the announcement and how it was done before an event, as if that made what he did especially bad?

Bashar Teg
No. The priest dictated the timing with his own announcement and got fired. There seems to be no evidence that the vatican had a specifically anti homosexual agenda here, yet every media outlet just ran with it.

Surtur
I never said the priest didn't dictate the timing, rather just that the timing was brought up as a reason what he did was wrong.

Bashar Teg
Just because it was mentioned does not make it the reason. Catholic priests are not allowed in an intimate relationship, he went public breaking the rules, and he got canned. Its a non story on maximum spin cycle

Emperordmb
thumb up

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.