Poll: Pope Francis calls for inclusion of gays in society, saying he has no right to ‘judge’

[stevenleser]

A little late, but as many of the folks here in the US who are homophobic are catholic and use catholicism to justify their homophobia, this could be an important step. What do folks here think?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/2013/07/29/0d26789e-f87e-11e2-b018-5b8251f0c56e_story.html

Pope Francis on Monday continued to recast the Catholic Church’s image by focusing on its inviting, merciful aspects, this time shocking a planeload of reporters by saying of homosexuality: “Who am I to judge?”

“If they accept the Lord and have goodwill, who am I to judge them?” the leader of the world’s 1.2 billion Catholics said in a remarkably candid and off-the-cuff news conference en route to Rome from Brazil. “They shouldn’t be marginalized.”

The pope’s seemingly casual remark was another example of his approachable style, which was on full display during his visit to Rio de Janeiro for World Youth Day. He carried his own bag onto the plane and traveled around Rio in a small Fiat without being shielded by hordes of security guards. He met with recovering drug addicts in a hospital and condemned inequality in a visit to crime-ridden slums.

He made his comments about gays, signaling that the church looks on them as brothers and sisters, as he fielded questions from reporters for an 80-minute stretch, at times leaning on the back of an airplane seat as if he were just another passenger. With his predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI, reporters had to submit questions ahead of time, and the Vatican decided which ones the pontiff would answer.

9 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Time expired
	This could be a significant step toward moving equality forward
	0 (0%)
	This isn't going to affect anything
	9 (100%)
	Not sure
	0 (0%)
	Other/Explain
	0 (0%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[Bluenorthwest]

1. First, the Catholics on DU might take issue with your opening line and I would agree with them

'many of the folks here in the US who are homophobic are catholic' puts Catholics in a light more deserved by other groups. Here is the fact of that matter:
" US Catholics support gay marriage by a larger margin than ordinary Americans despite Church teachings that forbid it, a new poll out Friday has found.

The Quinnipiac University poll found 54 percent of Catholics support same-sex marriage while just 38 percent are opposed, compared to a 47-43 percent margin among all American voters."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/08/catholics-gay-marriage-support_n_2835847.html

And just as you have put the regular Catholics in a poor light they do not deserve, you are seeking to put Francis in a good light he does not deserve. He has said nothing new, he continues to call us sinners and to say we must not have sexual relationships, he calls our marriages 'an attack on God'. An attack on God. Do you have a spouse, Steve? Is your relationship an attack on the creator of the universe? Would you take it kindly if I said your parents marriage was an attack on God? If not, why do you claim Frankie is kind toward gay people?
Of course you leave out the part where he called being gay a 'tendency' and claimed there are issues with 'the gay lobby' because that does not fit the spin you want to give to this old hate bag.
It gets old as hell watching this promotion of a religion and it's leader here. The RCC and the Papacy does and has for centuries done great harm to LGBT people. The level of amends and penance that will be required to ever think about forgiving Francis for his public and vicious attacks on me and my loved ones, when he was in Argentina and as Pope is much higher than muttered and vague words and insults like 'sin' and 'tendency'.
Francis is tainted by the crimes of his peers and associates, institutional crimes against children yet he has the pus dripping gall to say adoption by same sex couples is child abuse.

[theHandpuppet]

2. +1

[Bluenorthwest]

6. It is like a puff piece on the Pope that attacks American Catholics to accomplish the Pope puffing.

An honest OP would compare US Catholics with other US groups and that would show us that protestants and Orthodox Christians are in fact more opposed to equality than are regular Catholics. It's the Baptist and 'evangelical' Churches that are most venomous.

[stevenleser]

10. No, it's not. nt

[stevenleser]

9. It's impressive how badly you have mischaracterized my post.

My post was "What does the LGBT community think of this". Not, "Wow, wasn't this a great thing the pope did!"

As far as the catholic thing, the fact is, many catholics are homophobic. I didn't say "most" I said "many". Even your percentage as listed leaves a lot of homophobic catholics.

When I saw this news article, I thought, "hmmm, maybe this would help with homophobia in the catholic community. I wonder what my friends in the LGBT group at DU would think". The only way to find out the answer to that question is to post it here to get input.

You imputed a lot of ill intent into the very small amount that I wrote at the beginning of the message text. And it was completely unwarranted.

[Bluenorthwest]

13. You claim you asked because you wanted opinions, you got one but you don't like it, poor guy!

Catholics on DU have often asked that the regular Catholics not be confused with leadership. The leadership is and was hugely bigoted, there have been no changes as you attempt to claim there have been. The rank and file are more accepting than Protestant or Orthodox Christians so to hold them up as homophobic while claiming the POPE is less homophobic is in my view a service to the Pope and an insult to regular Catholics and to gay people.
Don't want opinions, do not ask for them. Don't want strong reactions, don't post blame where it should not be while absolving the actual source of the hate. Which is what you are doing. Francis is the head homophobe and hate speaker, you claim he's leading hateful people to glory.
I think my reaction was spot on and highly warranted, I challenge you folks pushing this Pope as something he is not, and his words as something they are not.
Sorry that my opinion is not your own opinion. That's life among equals. Better get used to it, you and Frankie Ones.

[stevenleser]

17. No, I got a personal attack disguised as an opinion. That is very different. nt

[Bluenorthwest]

19. Care to offer specific complaints? What was a personal attack? I asked you many questions about

the point of view you presented with your OP and poll. You did not answer any of them. Instead you claim you were 'personally attacked' but offer no examples of what offended you. Are you offended that my opinion is not the same as yours? That I dared to ask about YOUR family and how YOU would feel if anyone said about them what you praise Francis for saying about my family? Is yours rhetorically off limits while ours are fodder for your polls and promotions?
What exactly did you see as a personal attack? I think that's just your way of refusing to answer the things asked of you.
Back up your words, Steve, otherwise all you are doing is making a personal attack lacking in all other content as well as lacking any support for your claim. You were offended. Please explain what offended you? Can you?

[MNBrewer]

35. That was no personal attack.

[stevenleser]

40. Yes it was and it's easy to prove. How many "You" and "Your" words are in his reply to me? nt

[MNBrewer]

41. Responding directly to you is not the same as attacking you, personally

Saying that you mischaracterized something, even if it's just that you quoted something that the responder believes has mischaracterized something, isn't a personal attack.

A personal attack might have referred to you by some kind of slur, but it didn't. See the difference?

[stevenleser]

42. He's not responding to me. He's imputing beliefs I never voiced and then attacking them. AND...

in so doing, he accused me of both attacking Catholicism, and propping up the pope in a puff piece. He was so intent in attacking me he attacked me for supposedly having both positions.

[MNBrewer]

43. then say that, don't characterize it as a "personal attack".

[stevenleser]

44. That IS a personal attack. nt

[MNBrewer]

46. You and I have very different definitions of "personal attack", then.

I guess you should alert on it and let a jury decide whether it's "personal"

[kestrel91316]

3. It may push those catholics who are on the fence into being firmly in favor of

gay rights. And it may push the devout, obedient, staunch conservative catholics onto the fence. So it's a good thing.

This pope is wise. He knows that change has to come fairly slowly to the RCC if he wants to avoid John Paul I's fate.

[One_Life_To_Give]

4. For a person in Uganda

For a person in Uganda it could be significant. 40% of that homophobic country is Catholic so maybe it will do some good.

[Bluenorthwest]

5. Francis still condemns actual gay relationships and it is those relationships that are punished in

Uganda and Zimbabwe and other backward capitols of ignorance. So he's firmly on their side so far and has not said a word that is critical of what they do. His silence on those nations is profoundly damning of this man in silk and gold.

[theHandpuppet]

8. Then let him go to Uganda

And tell them face to face.

[MNBrewer]

37. It will have no effect on Ugandans

If he wanted to end the unjust persecution of homosexuals in Uganda, he should go there and explicitly deal with the topic.

[theHandpuppet]

47. And while he's at it, he can make a stop in Cameroon

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20130731/NEWS0103/307310127/Man-arrested-guns-during-Obama-visit-gets-prison

Cameroon gay rights groups go on strike
Groups working on Aids programmes say they are at risk of murder and have written to donors asking for protectionAfua Hirsch, West Africa correspondent
The Guardian, Thursday 25 July 2013 12.59 EDT

Gay rights groups in Cameroon have gone on strike, refusing to continue work on Aids programmes until foreign donors improve security.

The groups say their work puts them at risk of murder and attack, and have written to donors asking them to provide protection...

...The letter comes one week after prominent activist and journalist Eric Lembembe was found dead, believed to have been killed for his work campaigning for gay rights in Cameroon, where homosexuality is illegal...

..."Religious leaders – the Catholic church in particular – publicly condemn homosexuality and incite protests against the issue."

MORE

[dbackjon]

7. He is still a bigot that says gay sex is immoral

And opposes gay marriage, and the evil gay lobby.

[stevenleser]

12. No question.

What I am wondering is, if the pope says to the catholic laity, in effect, it is not right to discriminate against the LGBT community, would that help? Would that be an improvement?

[dbackjon]

18. As in saying drop opposition to gay marriage and ENDA?

That would.

[MNBrewer]

38. The problem is that the RCC makes a distinction between just and unjust discrimination

against GLBT people. They see some discrimination as just and right and holy. Which is disgusting, in my book.

[closeupready]

11. You can't tell an average gay parishioner to deny himself

or herself expression of his or her God-given sexuality for life, and not be homophobic and cruel.

So while, in comparison, he seems to hold moderate views, I'm still not impressed with the stupidity of what the Vatican calls "Natural Law" and its views on human nature.

$0.02 from a former Catholic.

[Bluenorthwest]

14. I think the OP and some others don't really hear what Francis is saying.

We have 'tendencies' and we are an 'attack on God' and a 'lobby' and yet we have to hear about what a great guy he is calling for inclusion which he has NOT done.
It makes me furious at the hubris of it all.

[closeupready]

15. And the RCC lobbies all the time, on abortion legislation,

same-sex marriage legislation (as we know), so it's great hypocrisy to say 'lobbies are bad, except when the Vatican does it.'

Rest assured though, the day will come when they will once again be attacking gay people for some reason or other - history demonstrates that, at any point in time, the RCC either hates gay people or is - as here - indifferent to gay people.

So yeah, I'm with you - I can't get excited about this statement.

[theHandpuppet]

20. The hypocrisy of the Church abounds

The only "approved sex" is that within marriage, but since the church does not approve of marriage between same-sex couples, any sex between gay folks is automatically deemed immoral.

[closeupready]

16. By the way, Steve, you might find this Time op-ed interesting -

I sure did - it basically articulates better my feeling about this statement:

>>Papal statements often get the same breathless scrutiny that’s usually lavished on cryptic symbols in Dan Brown novels. So it’s hardly surprising that the world, especially Roman Catholics like myself, is breathlessly decoding what Pope Francis told reporters on his flight back to Rome from Brazil on Monday regarding homosexuality: “If someone is gay and he searches for the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge?”

As TIME’s Stephen Faris has noted, while the Pope’s remarks might be a welcome and humane sentiment, they hardly represent a break with Catholic church doctrine, which still condemns homosexuality. The Vatican’s catechismal stance regarding the LGBTs in our midst remains the same: The church may love the sinner, but it hates the sin. And since Francis was referring specifically to gay priests—who like other Catholic clerics take a vow of celibacy and so don’t commit the “sin”— His Holiness wasn’t exactly going out on a theological limb.

But at a time when the world, including most U.S. Catholics, is increasingly accepting gay rights and even gay marriage, here ‘s what’s really significant about the Pope’s statement: The love-the-sinner-but-hate-the-sin trope no longer carries much if any moral credibility. How—given our awareness today that homosexuality is as biological as heterosexuality, and that homosexual relationships have proven as valid and socially enriching as straight ones— can we take any religious leader seriously when he claims to love gay people but at the same time demonizes the consummation of their love for each other?...<<

http://ideas.time.com/2013/07/30/pope-francis-and-gays-loving-the-sinner-is-still-intolerance/#ixzz2aYUEfF3d

[Bluenorthwest]

21. Can you support your assertion that Francis called for inclusion of gay people in society?

I sure as fuck did not hear anything like that. Seems like a bit of fiction writing to me. Let's see that quote.

[stevenleser]

22. I never made that assertion. That is the headline of the article. nt

[Bluenorthwest]

23. Then what exactly does the word 'this' in your poll refer to if not the words above it?

It seems to be your assertion, and the poll asks if it matters or does not matter, it does not ask about the merit of or accuracy of the assertion the assertion is assumed as true in your poll.
Or maybe you meant something else?

[stevenleser]

24. "This" refers to the Pope's statements. nt

[Bluenorthwest]

27. Why would they make a difference? It is nothing new at all.

nt

[stevenleser]

28. That's the opinion that I asked for. I don't decide on my opinion of something that affects the LGBT

community until I hear from the LGBT community.

[Bluenorthwest]

31. The first one was the same opinion with details and requests to think about these issues in

a way personal to yourself prior to asking such questions. It is not an attack on you to ask that you dawn the floral print frock of Dame Imagination and walk a kilometer in our Crocs before framing your questions if you want civil answers, ask civil questions. Also, there are several 'Frankie Ones is a Stud' posts on Du in GD daily, which are no different from 'Why I dig Pat Robertson' posts and this is unpleasant when these men are leading bigots attacking my family. Seeing straight DUers express affection for Francis or Robertson makes me sick.

[theHandpuppet]

32. The difference being...

...had there been between 350-400 threads on GD and LBN proselytizing for Pat Robertson over the past 7 months, DU would have exploded long ago. Why does the Pope get a pass? If anything, his feet should be held to the fire even more, since he's the annointed leader of a church that has actively and passionately campaigned against the basic human rights of women and GLBTs around the globe. The responsibility for the untold suffering of millions rests in Rome and every time I see another thread cheering on His Holiness I feel as if I'm being slapped in the face and basically told by my fellow DUers that as a human being I don't count. It makes me sick. Why this is allowed to go on at DU is beyond me. At some point I have to wonder if the saturation of DU with Pope threads isn't a deliberate, coordinated effort. All I know is, if it continues someone will succeed in driving away even the diehard GLBTs here, like me. I don't need to come here to read incessant praise for a misogynic homophobe.

[mitchtv]

25. I'll go with "no difference"

from a retired Catholic, I'd have to hear a lot more,before I pay any attention to that mob

[hrmjustin]

26. I hope and pray that this means the ice is cracking.

[William769]

29. Watch the video then decide.

Despite Pope's Remarks, Cardinal Says Homosexual Acts are Still Sinful

During an interview with CBS This Morning, Cardinal Timothy Dolan denied the Roman Catholic Church had softened its staunch opposition to homosexuality after Prope Francis told a group of reporters on Monday that it isn't his place to pass judgment on gay priests, reports Think Progress.

Dolan insisted that the Pope was “articulating… the traditional teachings of the church,” and clarified that the church still believes “homosexual acts” are a sin.

“Homosexuality is not a sin, right? Homosexual acts are,” Dolan told CBS, adding that “while certain acts may be wrong,” the pope “would always love and respect the person and treat the person with dignity and not judge them.”

http://www.advocate.com/politics/religion/2013/07/30/watch-despite-popes-remarks-cardinal-says-homosexual-acts-are-still

P.S. I know that I am being shunned but that will not stop me from getting the truth out.

[Behind the Aegis]

30. I don't know what effect this may have, if any.

I will take issue with your first sentence, though. I don't believe that "many of the folks here in the US who are homophobic are catholic (sic)" is accurate. While it is true some homophobes are Catholics, and some Catholics are homophobes who use their religion to justify homophobia, in this country, a number of Catholics have been pretty good when it comes to GLBT issues. Now, if you want to discuss Catholics on a global scale, then I would have to say I agree. One only needs to look to Africa, Latin/South America, and the Caribbean to see that many use their Catholicism to endorse their homophobia.

As far as I can tell, this is nothing more than "hate the sin, love the sinner" type of tripe. No matter how it is sliced, we are still "sinners" and it used to deny us our rights. It reminds of that odious T-Shirt, "A moral wrong does not make a civil right."

[Old Union Guy]

33. Nope. No change in policy. Certainly no change in doctrine.

Love the sinner, hate the sin, etc.

[theHandpuppet]

34. Let's revisit Francis' real track record, shall we?

http://msmagazine.com/blog/2013/03/15/know-your-new-pope-a-feminist-guide/

[Plantaganet]

36. My two cents...

I took the time to read through several hundred responses to this story on the Huffington Post. Many, many people were saying things like, "I might just consider going to church this Sunday."

Presumably, though, this was the whole idea - to make it easier for left-leaning Catholics to continue attending and giving their money. For them it's enough to have the illusion of change, even though core doctrine remains the same. Love the sinner, hate the sin. It's a shame that people are so easily fooled, but not really surprising.

[theHandpuppet]

39. Bingo!!

We have a winnah!

[nomorenomore08]

45. I'd like to be optimistic. But in reality I think any short-term change will be superficial.

After all, he still says it's a "sin." So while his position may be not be as hardline as Benedict's, it's still prejudiced in its own way.

[Fearless]

48. Hmm...

For the average person, this will have no affect. For the hardcore religious, it may, if he continues on this line of thought and lives a decade or two. We'll see. In the end, it doesn't matter IMHO. The best way to change hearts and minds is to make sure that every homophobe knows LGBT people. Real ones. Not just images in their head of sinful creatures, but people they love and respect, who are for instance in their families. You cannot simultaneously love and hate someone. Eventually one or the other wins out. That is what will change the most minds not the Catholic church.

[theHandpuppet]

49. Let me return for a moment to the OP

Hi stevenleser ... I assume you posted this poll to this particular forum because you wanted feedback from the LGBT community at DU. However, I'm not sure how you could ever judge the validity of the results, since anyone can post (or vote) here. Unless you could poll everyone who voted, the results could not possibly considered an accurate reflection how the GLBT community here feels about this issue. Just sayin'.

[stevenleser]

50. I hear you. And I note in particular that most of the folks who I know from here to be regular

posters of this group (and actual LGBT) voted that they dont think that these statements by the pope mean much of anything.

I am going to cover his statements on my radio show this week and I am going to make sure that skepticism is included.

[Zorra]

51. I see it as a positive thing. It may be that he is learning

more about love.