• 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.

Francis: Christians must apologize to gay people for marginalizing them

Grand Mal said:
, the day Paul was berated by a burning bush.
Click to expand...

When would that be? Paul is never alleged to have had an encounter with a burning bush. At least not in the bible, nor any church history I'm aware of.
 
Grand Mal said:
Oh I know about Luther and the Protestant Reformation but Christianity was far from unified before. Far from it. It's too big a subject to be a sidebar in this thread, but the Catholic Church was in a constant state of dealing with schism and heresy since, yes, the day Paul was berated by a burning bush. A good part of the Epistles is Paul trying to be a unifying force and every Pope since has scrambled to do the same.
Click to expand...

So... You've got nothing. You acted all knowledgeable, but it turns out you can't even tell Moses from Paul. Paul never encountered a burning bush. That's just the first of a number of blunders with your post.

It never ceases to amaze me how people who obviously know very little about a topic can somehow feel qualified to have very strong opinions on it.

The fact it was Moses who encountered a burning bush and not Paul is a Sunday school level of understanding. This is the kind of information Church going prepubescent children could tell you. You've brought less than a Sunday school level of understanding to the discussion. Congratulations.
 
Last edited:
Grand Mal said:
Oh I know about Luther and the Protestant Reformation but Christianity was far from unified before. Far from it. It's too big a subject to be a sidebar in this thread, but the Catholic Church was in a constant state of dealing with schism and heresy since, yes, the day Paul was berated by a burning bush. A good part of the Epistles is Paul trying to be a unifying force and every Pope since has scrambled to do the same.
Click to expand...

Without Protestants the division was less vast. Once the 2 split...the world became a VERY different place. Especially for nations. You can't compare the unity of the Christians prior to Protestants to post split.
 
blackjack50 said:
Without Protestants the division was less vast. Once the 2 split...the world became a VERY different place. Especially for nations. You can't compare the unity of the Christians prior to Protestants to post split.
Click to expand...

Of course, the Protestant Reformation was world-changing. I don't dispute that. I don't dispute much in this thread, just want to point out that the Catholic Church pre-Luther wasn't as unified as some have said. It took a lot of effort and bloodshed to hold it all together, several times in it's history.
 
CrabCake said:
So... You've got nothing. You acted all knowledgeable, but it turns out you can't even tell Moses from Paul. Paul never encountered a burning bush. That's just the first of a number of blunders with your post.

It never ceases to amaze me how people who obviously know very little about a topic can somehow feel qualified to have very strong opinions on it.

The fact it was Moses who encountered a burning bush and not Paul is a Sunday school level of understanding. This is the kind of information Church going prepubescent children could tell you. You've brought less than a Sunday school level of understanding to the discussion. Congratulations.
Click to expand...

Holy Moses! That's it? I confuse one episode of divine revelation with another nearly identical one and that nullifies everything I've said?
Alright, I'll take your word for it when it comes to Sunday-school level understanding. I guess that proves that the Catholic Church was a unified, homogeneous institution right up until Luther nailed that bear's paw to the church door. (Did I get that part right?)
 
Cryptic said:
He does. Official Catholic teachings regarding protestants has changed in recent decades to where protestants are acknowledged as Christians, they dont belong to real churches. Rather, real churches include only the Catholic church and the various Orthodox churches.
Click to expand...
that is complete baloney

a Christian isn't less of a Christian due to the church they attend

that is right winged evangelical BS
 
Grand Mal said:
Holy Moses! That's it? I confuse one episode of divine revelation with another nearly identical one and that nullifies everything I've said?
Alright, I'll take your word for it when it comes to Sunday-school level understanding. I guess that proves that the Catholic Church was a unified, homogeneous institution right up until Luther nailed that bear's paw to the church door. (Did I get that part right?)
Click to expand...

It illustrates the level of knowledge you bring to the table. There's a lot more wrong with your post than that. Basically none of what you said is actually true. But proving the rest of it would take more effort than merely putting the level of knowledge you are bringing to the table on display for everyone to see and leaving it at that.

If people still want to give credence to your claims despite your proven lack of knowledge on the topic is up to them.
 
Last edited:
The Pope is losing Sunday collections from the pews, and has been for 30 years.

He has protected his boy raping priests while chastising the free world.
 
CrabCake said:
It illustrates the level of knowledge you bring to the table. There's a lot more wrong with your post than that. Basically none of what you said is actually true. But proving the rest of it would take more effort than merely putting the level of knowledge you are bringing to the table on display for everyone to see and leaving it at that.

If people still want to give credence to your claims despite your proven lack of knowledge on the topic is up to them.
Click to expand...

You bailed on the discussion, latched onto a simple mistake and rode it for all it was worth- well, actually, tried to milk out more than it was worth. Didn't address what I said about the Catholic Church and schisms and heresies because you'd be 'way over your head- that simple mistake was like a life ring found by accident. Cling to it, grip it tight. If you had more words available to you, you'd be able to work the topic but since you don't you won't.
 
Grand Mal said:
You bailed on the discussion, latched onto a simple mistake and rode it for all it was worth- well, actually, tried to milk out more than it was worth. Didn't address what I said about the Catholic Church and schisms and heresies because you'd be 'way over your head- that simple mistake was like a life ring found by accident. Cling to it, grip it tight. If you had more words available to you, you'd be able to work the topic but since you don't you won't.
Click to expand...

Nope. If you look at my post history you will quickly find that your analysis is completely incorrect. This is a field of study I'm well versed in.

What we have here is the equivalent of someone who wants to tell us everything that is wrong with the US system of government. He spouts off a bunch of incorrect claims which demonstrate that he only has a vague, fuzzy understanding of how the government works; an understanding that obviously did not come from actual study of the topic but rather from piecing it together from the little scraps he has heard here and there throughout his life. One of the statements he makes refers to congress as parliament , or perhaps refers to the supreme court as the executive branch. Now, you could go point by point showing everyone how the numerous claims the guy made are wrong and based on a fuzzy, vague understanding of the government that doesn't hold up once you start going into the details. or...you can point out that the guy just called congress parliament, or the supreme court the executive branch and leave it at that. Both approaches will work, one of them just takes less effort.
 
Howler63 said:
As an atheist, I've nothing to apologize for. My prejudices are my own.
Click to expand...

actually that means you have even more to apologize for
 
I will say this and not just re: christians...I have seen much change of heart in recent years and yet very rarely ever an apology. Surely there must be more than like 2 ppl who voted against gay rights, if not behaved violently, and regret it, but they don't seem to have the fortitude to admit it. Guess i shouldn't be surprised because it's a lot easier just remaining the same coward they were behind the voting curtain. I can forgive those who ask forgiveness, and that's it

now that i'm off that tangent, back to christianity...

At least the pope can admit he is the intellectual and spiritual inheritor of a religion that was completely monstrous to gays for centuries. State sanctioned executions didn't end in the anglo-saxon world until 1851 (the same period the south seemingly cannot put behind), and arrests didn't end until 2003. This is entirely due to christianity and NOT just catholics.

So if you're going to call yourself a christian, sharing the same identity and holy book as those who murdered tens of thousands of homosexuals (more than heretics!), at least acknowledge this. Stop pretending your religion is better than islam, that it never hurt a fly, that it always had that rainbow flag near the church, or whatever the ****. This kind of silent about-face i expect from career politicians like hillary. My own memory and experiences extend beyond this pathetic revisionist tract, my own eyes can see hateful **** on christian forums and social media after orlando, and i'm certain that lgbt who witnessed the 'compassionate christian' of the "AIDS cures homosexuality" 1980s and earlier are not buying it

The pope is right, there's an awful lot of apologizing left to be done to say the least
 
_Sal said:
that is complete baloney

a Christian isn't less of a Christian due to the church they attend

that is right winged evangelical BS
Click to expand...

It is not right wing evangelical BS. Rather, it is based on a 2,000 year old concept of apostolic lineage and who has, or does not have it. Then add a "chicken or the egg" argument regarding whether the Orthodox churches left Rome, or Rome left the Orthodox churches.
 
Cryptic said:
It is not right wing evangelical BS. Rather, it is based on a 2,000 year old concept of apostolic lineage and who has, or does not have it. Then add a "chicken or the egg" argument regarding whether the Orthodox churches left Rome, or Rome left the Orthodox churches.
Click to expand...

then add us little mortals...LOL
 
Howler63 said:
Nope. One apologizes if one is repentant, I am not. I see 'gay' for what it is. Abnormal. I'll make no apology for that.
Click to expand...

you should be repentant for your behavior based on those views, that is my point. You have much to apologize for, whether you realize it or not
 
Christ never apologized for pointing out the sin in people life in fact he rebuked them forgave them and told them to
Go and sin no more.

Christians shouldn't apologize for their faith or what the bible says.
For there is no condemnation in Jesus Christ.
 
This prick of a POPE is wearing out his welcome.

It is clear now that he was a bad pick
 
Beaudreaux said:
Francis: Christians must apologize to gay people for marginalizing them | National Catholic Reporter

Being that I am not Catholic, I don't tend to pay that much attention to the Pope when he tried to tell me how I should act and what I should do, as this particular Pope tends to do, a lot. However, when he tells his own church members what to do and how to act, I do pay attention because they make up the largest Christian church in the world.

In this instance, he's talking about actions that all Christians should take, but he does so through his own church members. Nonetheless, when he says "Who are we to judge them?" I go back to my understanding of the New Testament and what Jesus taught us, and I have to agree with him completely. As for the Catholic Church apologizing to gays, women, children, and the poor, well, that's something I don't feel comfortable opining about since, again, I'm not Catholic.

As for me, as a Christian, I apologized a long time ago, when I realized that the opinions I grew up being taught, were hateful and just plain wrong. I've grown and learned - it appears that the Catholic Church via this Pope, is growing and learning as well (at least on the subject of gays).
Click to expand...

The phrase "pastorally accompanied" is beautiful.
 
I hope by Christians, he's just speaking on his flock. He's got no business lecturing non-Catholics about....anything.
 
And you've no obligation to consider anything he says.
 
Good thing Im not Catholic. I owe no one a apology
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom