• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Go Pope!

Yes, these are synonyms. Buddhism is not "nondogmatic."



Westerner adaptations of Buddhism are all well and good, but don't try to say that "Buddhism is non-dogmatic." Maybe your version is, but that pays short shrift to the cherished dogmas of millions upon millions of the Buddhists whose culture you are appropriating when you make such an unfounded claim.

I'll get to the rest later.

Dogma:

A principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true [OED]

I just ask, what authority? The Lord Buddha said: "Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense."
 
And what bishop is not going to forgive someone who's wants confession and is repentant? And in most diocese in the US even the priests were granted the faculty to lift the excommunication since that was more expedient. So what is the problem here?
It appears that I screwed up the post a bit, and it won't allow me to edit, so here's the cleaned up version. My apologies for not paying attention to detail.

That's good and dandy, but the US isn't the only place where Catholics exist. t's a problem for all Catholics all over the world. Just because some priests may offer a fast-track absolution does not mean it's not a problem everywhere else. It took Sister Margret McBride two years to lift an excommunication for allowing the abortion of a pregnancy of a woman who would not have survived it. And that was only because of a fairly sizable backlash and protest for it. It's even worse in Latin America, where views toward women aren't exactly "enlightened". If you're a woman who gets excommunicated for abortion in, say, Colombia, you will more than likely remain excommunicated for the rest of your life. Things aren't as easy as you make them sound.
 
As a catholic, I don't even accept that he is a pope. He is merely a leftwing activist.

I'm confused--as a Catholic, do you even get a vote? My intent in asking this question isn't disrespectful; I just don't understand your thinking that you have an option here.
 
I'm confused--as a Catholic, do you even get a vote? My intent in asking this question isn't disrespectful; I just don't understand your thinking that you have an option here.

Perhaps he believes the Catholic church is a democracy. :)
 
It appears that I screwed up the post a bit, and it won't allow me to edit, so here's the cleaned up version. My apologies for not paying attention to detail.

That's good and dandy, but the US isn't the only place where Catholics exist. t's a problem for all Catholics all over the world. Just because some priests may offer a fast-track absolution does not mean it's not a problem everywhere else. It took Sister Margret McBride two years to lift an excommunication for allowing the abortion of a pregnancy of a woman who would not have survived it. And that was only because of a fairly sizable backlash and protest for it.

The lifting of an excommunication requires repentance. I don't know the exact details regarding the lifting of the excommunication, but I imagine this was the sticking point.

It's even worse in Latin America, where views toward women aren't exactly "enlightened". If you're a woman who gets excommunicated for abortion in, say, Colombia, you will more than likely remain excommunicated for the rest of your life. Things aren't as easy as you make them sound.

Where is any evidence to support that?
 
I'm confused--as a Catholic, do you even get a vote? My intent in asking this question isn't disrespectful; I just don't understand your thinking that you have an option here.
.

Put simply, I think the vatican chose a phony. As a catholic, I have no use whatsoever for this particular pope. He is a political activist who apparently does not understand what his responsibilities are.
 
Pope Francis was legitimately elected via Papal Conclave. Your heresy has been noted, and quickly discarded as being utterly useless.

I really do not care. This particular so-called pope is little more then a left wing activist. I have no use for him. Take it or leave it.
 
.

Put simply, I think the vatican chose a phony. As a catholic, I have no use whatsoever for this particular pope. He is a political activist who apparently does not understand what his responsibilities are.

I thought the Cardinals chose the Pope.
 
d263601474327ccd9142c979dcd866fa.jpg
 
Either way...bad choice. We do not need a left wing activist in the position of Pope.

Well, suck it up, because there've been raging conservatives in the post for (almost) ever and I'm guessing the parlous state of the church required a chalice full of kick-ass to stop it declining further into reactionary irrelevance. Seems the cardinals had the good sense to recognise it.

Still, if I were Pope Fran, I'd be making my own bedtime cup of tea!
 
The lifting of an excommunication requires repentance. I don't know the exact details regarding the lifting of the excommunication, but I imagine this was the sticking point.
That's fine, but a Bishop is just a man, subject to the same prejudice and pride as any other. There's nothing stopping him from refusing to lift excommunication, even if the sinner is truly penitent and remorseful. My disagreement was and still is that the sin of abortion, whether receiving, giving, or otherwise facilitating in any way should not automatic excommunication. Until you convince me why they should be excommunicated while any other murderer is not, I will continue to disagree with it on the grounds that it is an inconsistency.


Where is any evidence to support that?

It's anecdotal, since there's no articles nor documentation I have access to concerning the instances I am aware of, so, get your gotcha in. I'm going to prove my point with a bit of a tl;dr, but hopefully it gives you some insight into the real problems that Catholics face in the less civilized parts of the world, so you can develop an appreciation for all the stuff you and yours will hopefully, and most likely never have to see. There are plenty of documented cases where the Church in Colombia is extremely unfair, and out of their damned minds. Granted, the whole Church down there isn't like that, I've attended mass in Bogota a few times, and it's very nice, but there's a lot of extremist crazy in that part of the world too


COLOMBIA: Magistrates Excommunicated for Partially Lifting Abortion Ban | Inter Press Service
Colombia Catholic Church Bishop Bans Those Involved in Girl's Abortion
Colombia says priest led paramilitaries that committed atrocities

There are also the two priests, Camillo Torres Restrepo, who issued the blasphemous quote "If Jesus were alive today, He would be a guerrillero", and Manuel Perez, who promoted such "Christianly" ideals as kidnappings to extort ransom, torture, and summary executions. These men of the cloth lead the ELN, a quaint little marxist rebel group with ties to drugs, human trafficking, kidnapping, extortion, and a slew of human rights violations and war crimes, including killing people in hospitals, illegal executions and reprisals, planting land mines in areas populated by civilians, detonating VBIEDs that primarily maimed and killed innocent men women and children, and they amassed quite a large grouping of child soldiers.

The Catholic Church, while very staunch on excommunicating people for having anything to do with abortion, because it destroys an innocent life, regardless of the circumstances, did not issue excommunications for the "recruiters" and commanders of child soldiers. Those kids have to watch the brutal execution of their fathers and/or other male relatives who are too old, or had to do it themselves, then had to watch their mothers, sisters, aunts, and/or any other female relatives get raped and sent off to be trafficked into prostitution, drug manufacture and/or distribution, or they became unwilling organ donors. The trauma continued as they faced (some still do to this day) constant psychological and physical torment and torture, starvation, sleep deprivation, etc. until they are old enough to do the same to other families. Innocent lives destroyed and turned into agents of perpetual evil, which is arguably worst than death. Why no excommunication for that? Is that not destroying an innocent life?

You may be wondering where I'm going with this, so I'll get to it. This crap with ELN, which is only one rebel group out of many, had been going on since 1964, and it wasn't until 1999 that Archbishop Duarte excommunicated all members of the ELN. It wasn't because they killed anybody, no abortions were performed, no 9 year old boys were forced to blow their daddy's brains out with a Browning 9mm. No, they got excommunicated because they disrupted Mass and took hostages, then didn't release them fast enough for the Archbishop's liking. Actions speak louder than words, and the actions of the Catholic Church in Colombia has pretty much said brutal atrocities are a-ok as long as you don't terminate and remove a disgusting and loathsome product of incest or rape, or worse from a victim's body, or disturb a ceremony to kidnap some guys that are eventually all released unharmed. There's clearly a problem there, and I don't see how anyone can expect a fair shake at any diocese in that country.
 
Back
Top Bottom