Vatican says it will not bless same-sex unions, calling homosexuality a 'sin' and a 'choice' (approved by Pope Francis)

So he’s not the pro-gay symbol that people were letting on. Shocker.

The good news is people are leaving religion in droves.

But fucking kids is okay. Got it.

All pedophiles. All of them.

I knew a guy, gay, who is a staunch catholic. He always said the church recognized being gay wasn’t a choice, but having gay sex was. Sex is for men and women to make crotch droppings. Not that he didn’t have sex with men, but he twisted himself into such guilt about it that he had major stomach issues. He was all kinds of fucked in the head, tbh. Dodged a huge bullet when i ghosted his ass.

Good. No one should want a blessing from a pedophile cult.

Suicide.

Religion needs to be eradicated.

I thought the Pope personally said before that he was ok with it ? Might he gotten overruled by some powerful faction in the Vatican?

[quote]the negative judgment on the blessing of unions of persons of the same sex does not imply a judgment on persons.

Oh, it does more than imply that.

They can continue to fuck off.

The Catholic Church does not want to marry same sex couples why is this news? why would you want to be married in the church ? Ridiculous. Find something else to bitch about.

And millions of gay Catholics including a LOT of ex-Catholic school DLers will continue to look on the rituals of their Church fondly.

And millions of gay Catholics including a LOT of ex-Catholic school DLers will continue to look on the rituals of their Church fondly.

Why would anyone think the Roman Catholic Church will ever take a different position? To do so, they would have to stop believing the Bible, the teaching of the early church, its own core teaching, and the strong convictions of almost all (98.9%) of churches and Christians throughout history.

R12

FF. This statement is dangerous and harmful for us, and I think you know that.

F*** You, Franny!

Why are they not taxed? They are a hate group.

Yeah, the vatican. That's relevant.

Newsflash, the pope is a flaming faggot anyway

Any type of Christianity, believing Christ was the son of a God, is a stupid cult. It should be ridiculed and shamed to it's demise.

Millions of impoverished, unskilled, and uneducated Catholics and future Republicans are crossing the U.S. border illegally, and agree with the anti-gay stances of the Church.

Heading backwards for worse, not forward.

They are the religious equivalent of log cabin Republicans. A bunch of twisted self loathing fags.

What’s scary for those of us in the US is, The Supreme Court is filled with right wing Catholics.

Who gives a flying fuck?

Anyway I'd not be a member of any club that would have me as a member ,as Groucho remarked.

I wonder how they feel about transgender? Pat Robertson is in favor of transgenderism claiming “it’s not a sin”.

But they'll waste their time baptizing bastard children. The bible says bastards and the next 10 generations of their families will not be going to heaven. And while God forgives, murderers, he doesn't forgive children whose mothers are whores

[quote]It should be ridiculed and shamed to it's demise.

R21 So should your grammar. its demise

R27, cite where it says such in the Bible. I’ve never seen in all my Bible studies.

R29 That's what happens when you steal laws meant for others. They are all misinterpreted and WRONG.

The Catholic Church hasn’t been relevant in the first world for the last 30+ years. Who gives a shit?

[quote]God "does not and cannot bless sin," the statement added.

LOL - "God" seems to bless whatever is convenient.

I always marvel that people like these would be willing to speak on behalf of a being whose very theology they espouse would not approve of such blasphemy.

What the Church is referring to as a choice is homosexual behavior. It does not regard a homosexual orientation as sinful in and of itself. I believe this is spelled out in the Catechism.

OFF TOPIC, but i was just thinking how in all of history, well 2021 b.c. history, NOT ONE SHRED of documented provable fact has ever been shown that their is a afterlife...... and yet the entire planet is suppose to have faith that their is one? because?????????

SO "GOD" likes to play games or is a masochist?....

Those Prada wearing boytouchers CAN GO FUCK THEMSELVES

I get so upset at some of the DLers here who have tried to rehabilitate the image of the Pedo church and say that Francis isn't all that bad. The church is irredeemable. Putting aside the homophobia and hostility towards our community, the church is a haven of child abuse and support for the Italian mafia. The Vatican bank holds billions from drug smugglers and terrorists who use generous pithes to the church as a means of having their sins repented. They are a money laundering organization and should be abolished, but at the very least stripped of its tax exempt status. I have no respect for any practicing Catholic. By continuing to support the church unconditionally, you support their crimes and that makes you an abetter worthy of scorn.

R36... food for thought, as a no longer practicing catholic, (haven't gone to a catholic mass in decades) i now question myself going to the nearby catholic church for their "fish frys".... thinking i'm contributing my money to them simply for the good food...

It is a bit more complicated to me, because the institution of Catholicism is different than individual congregations. At the congregational level there's support for gay people but The Official Church has so many stances that most lay people do not support.

So you can’t get married but you can join the priesthood and live in secrecy? Right before Covid hit I went to a baptism at a beautiful famous Catholic church here in London. Almost all of the priests there were obviously Mo’s. “Purses falling out of mouth” obvious. Such a disturbing religion because of its blatant hypocrisy. Thank goodness people are continuing to leave in droves.

It’s not hypocrisy if they are living in celibacy and believe teachings.

Yes, R38, the active Catholics who aren't mindless idiot/monsters always like to talk about how the members aren't the same as the church or some shit like that.

Fuck the pope.

[Bold] I KNEW IT! I KNEW THIS POPE WAS FULL OF SHIT!!!!!!

This Pope from the start has been walking the fine line with gays. I knew it was bullshit.

How come he didn’t say LGBTQ? He just singled out “homosexuals”. Hmm.

Raised Catholic, Catholic school 12 years...left and never looked back. Why would any gay man want to be a part of the hateful pedophiles?

I don't understand why any gay would want a Church's "blessing" since it's not really clear what a blessing does? Does a blessing change something? NO Civil marriage is much better. Fuck the Church.

It's amazing how much the Catholic Church and the Royal Family have in common, both racist, out of touch and irrelevant in the 21st century and both a safe harbor for pedophiles

People will never stop being shitty to people for things they have no control over. It’s a sad fact of human existence.

[quote]Sex is for men and women to make crotch droppings.

If that’s the case, does that mean the many people who are infertile should not be having sex? Does that mean women should not have sex after menopause?

[quote] The good news is people are leaving religion in droves.

Yes, and we have truly entered into an age of enlightened reason and universal brotherhood, haven’t we?

They are SO confused with their charitable mixed messages....what a mess.

Who the hell wants a blessing for their union? How is that in any relevant to their life? You'd have to be a complete moron to think that in any religion a man or woman blessing you means anything. Simply because they studied religious texts that gives them the an ability to somehow sprinkle fairy dust on you? You might as well ask for a blessing from your mechanic. It means as much.

[quote]R27, cite where it says such in the Bible. I’ve never seen in all my Bible studies.

R29, he's talking about Deuteronomy 23:2. But it's important to bear in mind that it's a Jewish text, and has been profoundly distorted in the hands of Christians - there's nothing in that passage about 'bastards,' or who goes to heaven, etc..

This article discusses how Jews regard the passage.

The hypocrisy is a little much, no?

Well then they can't suck my cock any more! So there!

[quote]The decision is a setback for Catholics who had hoped the institution would modernize its approach to homosexuality.

Actually, it's a setback for the institution. Fucking troglodytes.

Fuck them. People who make excuses for religion and claim that you can separate followers from the institutions are so full of it. My whole family is christian and I have seen the hypocrisy and bullshit first hand. They give money to the church so they are supporting hateful ideas and corruption the likes that put politicians to shame. I don’t give a shit what they say, a same sex marriage is as valid as mine. You don’t need their blessings anyway. I didn’t get married in a church and my marriage is 21 years strong. Blessings mean nothing.

A useful realistic corrective to any and all such backward stunting statements will remain a viewing of 'Spotlight' - most especially perhaps in the very long list of major cities involved in sexual abuse scandals linked to the Catholic Church, with which the film ends.

"Well then they can't suck my cock any more! So there! —Timmy, 9"

Oh, Timmy, you're already a little long in the tooth for most of them

What a loser

Being very much moreso a Catholic — I feel this is the worst signal the Vatican could’ve put out. I’m finally accepting and enjoying faith, on the road to confirmation and now this comes out. I am absolutely clueless on how to feel about it. One small step towards faith, twenty large steps back.

There was a recent thread here on DL. OP raised Catholic but never got confirmation sacrament. Lots of posters encouraging OP to go ahead and get confirmed. People get very sentimental about something that is, in large part, indoctrination that happened when you were too young to choose.

[quote]God "does not and cannot bless sin," the statement added.

What a ridiculously tautological statement. It's God who determines what sin is.

[Quote] Being very much moreso a Catholic

This is what I was talking about earlier when I said we had a problem with certain DLers defending the Pedo church and still being a part of it. What the fuck is wrong with you all? This isn't some new revelation. The church is shit and you are a shitty person for still identifying as Catholic. Leave the church if you have any moral decency or ethical standards.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Gay Catholics are like an abused woman who won't leave her husband because she thinks she can change him.

The minute the Catholic church found out and then began shuffling pedophile priests around to different locations where they had a whole new pool of kids to rape from is when they lost any credibility whatsoever. I'm embarrassed for my Catholic family members.

Screw the Vatican -- as if anybody wants their corrupt blessing anyhow.

R65 I don't want to to go the church of Ralph. The Catholic Church is the one true universal church, even though they don't even understand the times. Sure, there are rapey priests, but there are rapey people in pop culture too. It's one of those things that naturally flaws society. There are wonderful priests and archbishops. My aunt recently spoke with the Archibishop of New Orleans on the phone -- he is a most courteous and nice man. These people want to help society, genuinely. By oath. The ones we should be pointing at are Joel Osteen, Westboro Baptist Church etc.

Christianity's gotta evolve to survive, or else we will all be atheists by the end of the century.

[quote]What a ridiculously tautological statement. It's God who determines what sin is.

R64, "God" has never expressed any opinions on the matter, as he doesn't exist. 𝑀𝑒𝑛 determine what constitutes 'sin,' 𝑚𝑒𝑛 write the texts regarded as 'scripture,' and 𝑚𝑒𝑛 interpret them. People also harmonize incongruities in the texts, and rationalize them away, as well as alter the vocabulary to whitewash away meanings which are no longer acceptable today, 𝑡𝑜 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑚. They tend to be far less assiduous with issues which don't affect them personally.

At no point does 'God' even come into it.

[quote]R57: Actually, it's a setback for the institution. Fucking troglodytes.

[quote]R62: I feel this is the worst signal the Vatican could’ve put out.

I concur. In terms of making themselves relevant to the modern world and new generations of followers, the Catholic Church has very much dropped the ball, to its certain detriment. It's the equivalent of choosing to side with the Southern states on the issue of slavery.

[quote]The Catholic Church is the one true universal church, even though they don't even understand the times.

R69, they've 𝑛𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑟 understood any of the times in which they've operated; they have always positioned themselves directly in opposition to knowledge and progress. That has been the case since the middle 2nd century, when they first emerged on the scene, and began claiming that they were the first, the one true church. Like all of their claims, that too is a crock.

R70 -- it's so true. The Church nearly killed people when they were trying to prove the Earth is round. So it takes a revelation for them to change their doctrine and dogma. Dogma that makes absolutely no sense when it comes to LGBT rights, at least.

R26 is trying to pretend trans people aren't victims even though Republicans are passing anti-trans bills left and right

R66, I think more like a long-suffering housefrau who looks the other way while her husband cheats on her over and over again, but I get your comparison.

[quote]So it takes a revelation for them to change their doctrine and dogma.

Yes, but that rarely occurs. They like to claim that the Church never changes - 𝑠𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑒𝑎𝑑𝑒𝑚, 'always the same' - but that's another crock. They 𝑑𝑜 change, but only when it suits them. The Church is extremely conservative in such matters, and only claim 'revelation' when the point of view in question has already been the widely-held view of a critical number of Catholics for decades, if not centuries (here I'm thinking of Pius IX and his encyclical 𝐼𝑛𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑠 𝐷𝑒𝑢𝑠 (1854), in which he made the Doctrine of the Immaculate Conception official). People cannot afford to wait for the Church to get off its ass and change - which it ultimately will, but probably not in our lifetimes.

This is exactly why anyone wanting gay marriage is insane. Patriarchies like the Catholic Church invented marriage. Either you are above this kind of shit or you aren't.

"their is a afterlife"

No one (with any brains) gives a fat rat's ass what The Whore Of Rome says.

I know a couple of gays who are devout Catholics, and very involved in their church. They claim they are "welcome" because they go to church in the most liberal part of town. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think there is only one Catholic church, so essentially they are NOT welcome. I think other church goers are nice to them because they have money, and they love to volunteer/host parties.

[quote] Patriarchies like the Catholic Church invented marriage.

R75, no they didn't. Ceremonies which ritualize and commemorate human relationships (of any gender) far antedate latecomer religions like Christianity and institutions like the Catholic Church. The Church has no legitimate claim on marriage.

At one point during the Middle Ages, the Catholic Church used to solemnize and bless same-sex relationships. It only ended in the 11th-12th centuries.

[Quote] What the Church is referring to as a choice is homosexual behavior. It does not regard a homosexual orientation as sinful in and of itself. I believe this is spelled out in the Catechism.

Which is a Bull shit stance to take. Imagine if it viewed straight people this way.

Ridiculous

Oh Francis, honey, you'll come around. It's all so tiresome.

[quote]R33: What the Church is referring to as a choice is homosexual behavior. It does not regard a homosexual orientation as sinful in and of itself. I believe this is spelled out in the Catechism.

Since 1991, yes. Prior to that point, the Catechism didn't address homosexuality at all.

Funny thing: around the same time, give or take, the wording of various versions of the bible re: 1 Corinthians 6:9 also changed to include some variant of the word 'practicing.'

Well, we know who poisoned you.

R75, marriage is a civil institution that gives people extra rights and benefits under the law

[quote]Oh Francis, honey, you'll come around. It's all so tiresome.

I think that, personally, Francis has already come around, and has made efforts to reach out to LGBTs - only to be made to walk such statements back. Should he cross those limits more authoritatively, it's likely he will be found like John Paul I, dead in his bed, holding a devotional book open on his lap, or some such similar staging.

[quote]Well, we know who poisoned you.

Really, R83? Who?

Do tell.

"But fucking kids is okay. Got it."

They'd never say that. They'd never publicly say that the position of the church is that fucking kids is okay. So in their minds, there's no hypocrisy.

Of course all of their actions say otherwise. Maybe it's not "okay" but it will not be called out and will be ignored.

[quote]What the Church is referring to as a choice is homosexual behavior. It does not regard a homosexual orientation as sinful in and of itself. I believe this is spelled out in the Catechism.

[quote]Which is a Bull shit stance to take. Imagine if it viewed straight people this way.

Well, it does view straight people who have sex outside of marriage that way.

But yes, it's only the same-sex oriented that are expected to live completely sexless lives. And priests. Which is one reason why so many gay men have gone into the priesthood over the centuries.

The Catholic Church’s anti-sex, anti-pleasure obsession will spell its doom. Nobody believe that sex is just for procreation in marriage. Nobody.

[Quote] "But fucking kids is okay. Got it." They'd never say that. They'd never publicly say that the position of the church is that fucking kids is okay.

By doing nothing significant about the child rape, he implicitly condones it

The death knell of religion

So basically the Church is still hung up on the whole "living in sin" bullshit I remember from when I was a kid. My Ma said her oldest sister, now dead, could not get married in the Church because her husband to be was a divorced Catholic who could not afford the expense of having his marriage annulled especially since they weren't sure the annulment would be approved. He had kids with his first wife so that would have made them bastards. Yes. Back in 1950 something that was an issue.

The Church has ruled very consistently that any sex, straight sex included, that happens outside of marriage is illicit. Sinful. Bad. Since the whole purpose of marriage is to procreate, etc. Since Gay sex can't procreate, than Gay sex is illicit. So this ruling is based on the Catholic sacrament of marriage.

This is bad. Because you have Extremists who will use this in legal decisions. Like the Catholics on the SCOTUS who are determined to turn us into a Theocracy. Fucking Ireland is more Liberal. Civil Unions are legal, dammit. Fuck getting the Church's blessing. I'm going to become an Episcopalian. This can now be revisited as a wedge issue for the Extremists. Fuckers.

[quote] And while God forgives, murderers, he doesn't forgive children whose mothers are whores

In other words, God is just like us!

At one time, the Church had a simple message even illiterate peasants could understand. That message was that no matter how shitty this life is, if you live a good life and repent of your sins you'd go to heaven. Quite a few Buddhist sects had this message as well. The message today is too complicated and the inner workings of the Church are no longer hidden, so everyone can see the hypocrisy.

yup, r79, really our marriage laws come straight out of Rome, and not really Catholic Rome, but good ole pagan Rome. Monogamy, laws about divorce, all of it predates the Church by centuries. It sure as hell doesn't come out of the Old Testament.

What a pity. Some churches and abbeys are so pretty not to mention the papal and princely palaces. Oh well.

They're still pretty. Get to the Vatican Museum at least once if you can, if at all possible.

This is not news. The Church has always had this position. They look at marriage as a sacrament between a man and a woman. Period. Always have. Nothing new. Where people got optimistic is when Francis said that disowning a Gay person or mistreating them was wrong. He preached tolerance. But any sex outside of marriage has always been a sin, except for when priests fuck altar boys. What I find worrisome is why now? The political implications of underscoring and promoting a long held position suggests to me that the more reactionary forces within the Curia are asserting their power and hoping to influence Politics. It is another attempt to insert extremist views into the mainstream. It's pushback against any progress we have made.

[Quote] They're still pretty. Get to the Vatican Museum at least once if you can, if at all possible.

And then maybe people will realize that this opulence is exactly what the Vatican is really about

yeah, maybe, but you know what, thank the jeebus for the opulence. These are world treasures and everyone who can should see them at least once.

Oh for crrissakes I was speaking sarcastically about the prettiness, as if that would be my priority opinion about the totality of the church, like Andy Warhol.

well, you were inadvertently correct r100. Yay, you.

[quote]What I find worrisome is why now? The political implications of underscoring and promoting a long held position suggests to me that the more reactionary forces within the Curia are asserting their power and hoping to influence Politics. It is another attempt to insert extremist views into the mainstream. It's pushback against any progress we have made.

With this, I concur, R97. Somewhat less with your 'always' statements. The Church developed those positions; it did not always have them.

[quote]R94: really our marriage laws come straight out of Rome, and not really Catholic Rome, but good ole pagan Rome. Monogamy, laws about divorce, all of it predates the Church by centuries.

A few centuries, sure.

And the Caesars became the popes.

but seriously, enjoy the artwork and amazingness, even if you don't love the source, like, well, pretty much every other great art museum in history.

One pays to get in to see the treasures, R103, and I do not think that anyone should give so much as a red cent to the Church of Rome, not for any reason.

One can enjoy the art for free, online.

R36 says “I have no respect for any practicing Catholic. By continuing to support the church unconditionally, you support their crimes and that makes you an abetter worthy of scorn,” but it doesn’t take a Jesuit to point out the hole in your logic. “Practicing Catholics” rarely support the church unconditionally (witness the widespread use among Catholics of artificial birth control) but nevertheless it is our church. Some of us fight to change things, others shrug their shoulders and simply follow their consciences. “Practicing Catholics” have been arguing with the Vatican ever since there’s been one.

disagree with you on this (although you tend to be right about many things). You should pay to view the treasures of the world, even if somebody you don't like gets the money. It's okay. Most of the world is like that. Behind every great fortune is a great crime. Balzac? said that.

Chasten Buttigieg reminds us:

Love is love.

Gay marriage is legal.

The Pope isn’t your County Clerk.

Register for the fancy sheets and wine glasses.

Peace and blessings.

I agree r105. Some people are just so overwhelmed by their hurt and anger they have lost everything else. It's okay to see other things.

[quote] You should pay to view the treasures of the world, even if somebody you don't like gets the money. It's okay. Most of the world is like that.

I don't agree, R106. Every penny placed into their hands finances future atrocities and oppression. It's like supporting the Nazis. It's not something I can live with.

wow, Nazis? I guess I don't go that far.

R110, while I was only making the moral comparison of supporting them (much like patronizing Chick-fil-A), yes, Nazis. There was a tremendous amount of overlap between German Catholics and the Nazis. Recall the centuries of Christian antisemitism in Europe and especially Germany? Remember the 1938 Concordat between the Church and the Nazis? Remember Hitler's statement, "I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so"? Remember the Vatican's post-war efforts to enable Nazis to escape the Allies, via the Ratlines? This case has already been reliably made. The idea that the Nazis were something other than Christians is pure apologetics.

But that aside, purely as a matter of comparison, any financial support of the Church helps enable it to continue enslaving minds, obstructing progress and freedom, molesting the young and covering it up, and furthering the aims of reactionary governments with which it finds approval (think of dictatorships like the Diems, the Perons, the Marcoses, the Duvaliers, not to mention American anticommunism and Ronald Reagan).

A penny dropped into their coffers will enable them to continue to teach young impressionable gays that they're going to hell if they act upon their natural feelings.

ALL organized religions are backward and should cease to exist.

Most practicing Catholics quietly shrug off or ignore the points of doctrine and dogma with which they disagree. They understand this choice as part of the church’s own teaching which affirms the primacy of conscience in moral decision making. Teachings on sexual morality are the most likely to be honored more in the breach than the observance, whether the person is devout, lapsed or somewhere in between. All are still good Catholics and all are good people.

Pope Francis, if you listened carefully, never said he accepted gay couples. He said he didn't want to focus excessively on that issue. He bought some time with gay Catholics and now he has been forced to make clear the Catholic church's position.

We must remember that as the church teaches us, while it is not a sin to be gay, it is a sin to engage in homosexual acts. Therefore, it goes without saying that they can't bless homosexuals unions, as that would infer they were blessing sex in those unions too.

IMPLY, r115

Speaking of the Pedo church, this story from Jay Leno has always bothered me. It's notable because Jay mentions how one of their priests was taking a $10,000 bribe from an infamous Italian Mobster. It's not really the point of the bit, but the fact that the church can so blatantly and openly take bribes from the most vile of criminals in the underworld without a hint of hesitancy or circumspection shows how evil and corrupt they really are. This is something that I do not believe gets nearly enough scrutiny and it must moving forward. Investigate all of them for supporting underworld crime and bring them to justice. Story starts at 2:32.

I remember hearing a dissenting gay priest say about the Roman Catholic Church's position on homosexuality:

"It's ok to be a bird, but you can't fly"

The "Body of Christ" is much bigger and much older than the Roman Church.

Organized religion is the result of people misapprehending metaphors and symbols as literal.

[quote]"It's ok to be a bird, but you can't fly"

What’s he got against penguins?

You know what pisses me off? These motherfuckers are one of the reasons so many people think Gays are perverts and pedophiles. These fucking priests. For centuries.

Well they won’t be seeing another bloody dime from me. But he isn’t it ironic an institution full of pedophiles should have this kind of opinion? I mean really.

Why don't people turn their backs on organized religion, and just believe (or not) what they feel is real?

The Holy Father loves everyone, but we cannot expect him to condone sin. That is simply not an option for him as the head of the Catholic Church.

R124 Irrelevant defense. The experience of folks on this site can share with you, the experience of good Christians, is that a man loving a man and woman loving a woman is not a sin.

Your focus on the "holy Father's" definitions of sin that he also "cannot condone" include nocturnal emissions, masturbation, birth control, divorce, capital punishment...

We need to get rid of religion or humanity isn't going to last another 100 years.

It’s interesting how the Church can have a marriage annulled after years so they can re-marry. I also don’t understand why they aren’t vehemently opposed to heteros living in sin, which is also considered fornication. Why don’t they spend some time and energy on them for a change? Why are gays always the designated target?

If you don't like it, don't be a Catholic.

Good luck keeping the church going with with young millennials and social justice ethos of Gen Z. I think boomers and old Xers were the last generation to be devout Catholics. I don't nobody who goes to Catholic church gay or straight once they left the house. It was a complete chore for even boomer parents. Mass was something to endure and get over as quickly as possible. Cancelling the dictionary Gen Z/young millennial is not going to keep this going once the rest die off. Not in the US.

Their push to open up churches and leaving mask wearing as a personal choice issue had me scratching my head given their “pro-life” stance.

Calista. Gingrich.

If you want to see a real POS priest, check out this MAGA priest who is still pushing that Trump is the true POTUS and having prayer vigils for him on Facebook. The asshole even wears a MAGA hat. He pushes a pro-life agenda as well, so as long as he keeps the oldsters writing checks, the Church will turn a blind eye to what should be a violation of the tax exemption laws.

Not Permitted: Partisan Speech

Churches and other 501(c)(3) organizations have been prohibited from supporting specific political candidates since the passage of the Johnson Amendment in 1954. The Internal Revenue Code provides that, by definition, 501(c)(3) organizations do not “participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office.” In other words, taking an active role in a political campaign can negate a church’s tax-exempt status. If a church is determined to have violated this rule it may be required to pay income tax for every year it has failed to qualify for the exemption due to its political activities.

Has the Catholic Church ever had a non-white pope?

More fun

In Catholic school, as vicious as Roman rule

I got my knuckles bruised by a lady in black

And I held my tongue as she told me

"Son, fear is the heart of love, " so I never went back

Within the next two generations the Catholic Church will cease to exist, because only the last few remaining bigots will use it as an excuse to discriminate against others. Society has no more use for it. Atheism, New Age philosophies, and splintered cult groups will remain. However, social media will control people's groupthink / mob mentality similarly as religion did in the past.

[quote] R27, cite where it says such in the Bible. I’ve never seen in all my Bible studies.

I think you need to study some more

Deuteronomy 23:2 - A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD.

R27/R137, see R54.

R137 R138 Why in the world are Xtians discussing laws meant solely for JEWS? And worse, why are you quoting a translation that is both WRONG and out of context?

There is only one true Christian Church and that is the Catholic Church, now and forever!

But will they bless the trans? That remains to be seen.

Something is up! Maybe Pope Francis is not long for this world....

One thing is for sure Francis has been got at by person or persons within the Church. This statement is not a mere "clarification" of previous others, but a forceful declaration that nothing much has changed. Roman Catholic church dogma is what it is, and Pope Francis isn't making any major shifts at least where homosexuality is concerned.

OTOH it is almost certain somewhere in Europe, United States or elsewhere, some priest has blessed a same-sex marriage. No, it isn't supposed to happen, but then again buggering little children or young adults isn't either.

R139, did you read R54?

R143 I read the original text. It is about Amonites and Moabites and being forbidden to be included in "G-d's Public". NOWHERE does it mention ממזר. The English translation in R54 is WRONG. Yet another case of WRONG translation, WRONG interpretation. Exactly like Leviticus 18:22.

R143 I read the original text. It is about Amonites and Moabites and being forbidden to be included in "G-d's Public". NOWHERE does it mention ממזר. The English translation in R54 is WRONG. Yet another case of WRONG translation, WRONG interpretation. Exactly like Leviticus 18:22.

Fuck these guys. It’s their loss if they want to die on this hill.

So many Datalounge queens are Marys. Did you all consider the Priesthood at some point?

Imagine giving the tiniest shit about that kiddy raping cult

[quote] I read the original text. It is about Amonites and Moabites and being forbidden to be included in "G-d's Public". NOWHERE does it mention ממזר.

That would be Deuteronomy 23:𝟑, R145. Deuteronomy 23:𝟐 definitely mentions ממזר ('mamzer').

If you're going to scream at people, it would come off better if you weren't mistaken yourself.

[quote]The English translation in [R54] is WRONG.

Which "English translation in R54'? I didn't post one at all in R54, and the link I offered says the same thing you keep screaming, that the Christian translation is incorrect.

You don't even have the correct verse, and cannot distinguish between one post/poster and another. Are you drunk posting? Trolling? What's the matter with you?

[quote]This article has been corrected to reflect that the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith referred to same-sex unions, not homosexuality itself, as a "sin" and a "choice." A push alert with the incorrect wording was also sent.

It may take a while, but one day, this doctrine WILL change.

R149

This is what appears in R54:

The source of the mamzer prohibition is biblical. Deuteronomy 23:3 states the following . . .

They quoted the WRONG verse. Thus the confusion. And the English translation remains WRONG, written by someone who knows fuck all about Hebrew, Jewish law, etc. etc. etc. You non-Hebrew speakers keep right on making a nonsense of translations.

FYI, while the official prohibition is 10 generations, it was reduced to 3 generations via Talmud and Gemara commentary, which is still in force to this day.

It is touching to see many "woke" stars tweeting and condemning this....oh wait... they're not!!!!!

Yet again, gays are treated like 2nd class citizens and nobody says a word

R152, freedom of religion.

OMG 😱 Organized Religion takes on gay people!

After a year and a half of working, in my misguided youth, on the large L.A. Archdioceses case for Cardinal Mahoney, I can honestly say I hold the Catholic church in as low regard as I do LDS and Islam. Just a den of perverts and weirdos. Not ALL, and, obviously, there are normal human beings who happen to be Catholic but in general...disgusting.

The irony is rich.

Does anyone KNOW the Catholic position on trans being married? (That is, a mtf marrying a man, or a ftm marrying a woman.)

R157

Why do you keep desperately trying to change the subject to trans? Fuck you.

[quote]I also don’t understand why they aren’t vehemently opposed to heteros living in sin, which is also considered fornication.

They are vehemently opposed, in theory. In practice, though, individual parish priests -- at least in America -- don't much care. They're certainly not denying communion to known fornicators, as they're always threatening with pro-life Catholic politicians. I'm friends with a couple that is active in their parish, and their son is getting married in their church this fall -- even though neither the groom nor bride has set foot in a church since they left their respective parents' homes, and they've been "living in sin" for years.

Church rules can be bent for straight people, but not gays.

I don’t think that’s very “Christian” of him!

[quote]Does anyone KNOW the Catholic position on trans being married? (That is, a mtf marrying a man, or a ftm marrying a woman.)

They’ve never commented on it. They did single out “homosexuals” and didn’t mention other groups. Pat Robertson is fine about transgenderism and believes “it’s not a sin”. I anticipate the same from the Vatican in the coming years, which I’m sure will only embolden the trans movement and its supporters.

R64 read the ten commandments in the bible. God layed out what He considers a sin and there are other passages in the holy book which describes in detail what God judgement will be if certain sinful behaviors persists without forgiveness.

[quote]read the ten commandments in the bible

You read them R162? What's the 6th Commandment?

R162 And while we're at it, what's the 8th Commandment?

6th is thou shall not kill and 8th thou shall not steal. So what is your point. I can ask you to name all the ten commandments. I am not Catholic but I understand their stand on this issue.

The only place that Catholicism is growing is South America and Africa. They don’t have a choice. They have to appeal to their homophobic base, like Trump had to appeal to his. Catholicism is dead in North America and Europe, where people are finally sick of their children being raped by priests.

R165 The 6th Commandment is don't MURDER (לא לרצח), not kill (להרוג)ץ

As far as stealing, the Catholic Church STOLE laws meant for another nation to annihilate that nation. Then took those laws and translated them so that they have no corolation or connection with the original text. Every time a priest/minister quotes the Bible, they are complicit in and knowingly breaking the 8th Commandment.

^^^^ corrElation ^^^

"Christianity's gotta evolve to survive, or else we will all be atheists by the end of the century."

There's a healthy percentage of us atheists right now, R69, who never believed the nonsense of any of the "great" religions, and have not felt the lack. And it isn't that Christianity has to "evolve" to be more palatable to the masses; it's that the entire notion of Christianity is absurd.

Christianity continues to grow globally, very robustly in much of the world. By far, there have never been more Christians. And Pentecostalism and evangelicalism are the fastest growing segments of Christianity

If that's true, R170, more's the pity. Religion is the problem, not the solution, and Christianity in particular feeds off the ignorance and fear, mostly of poor people, around the world.

R127 Exactly - my point at R125. There are many ways that RCs "get around" the Church's teaching on "sins", and focuses disproportionately on gay people and same gender relationships.

R128 Remember you are defending the Roman Church, not "catholics" - with a small c. The first Nicene Creed, 325CE, defines what a Christian, and affirms belief in a holy catholic and apostolic church... all before the split that created a Church under the control of the Bishop of Rome.

I am a Christian who believes in a holy catholic and apostolic church (the Body of Christ), but remain disappointed in the Roman Church. Neither Jesus nor the Nicene Creed say anything about love between those of the same gender.

R170 Your data on Christianity growing in the Southern Hemisphere is a little out of date. Evangelical and Pentecostal Christian sects have grown greatly in the last few decades - also Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons (both heretical cults to most Christians). The growth rates are slowing for them, though. The slowing correlates some (the data are incomplete) to economic improvements. Also, the fastest growing religion is Islam - unfortunately especially fundamentalist Islam.

Reactionary religion has gained momentum in the last 50 years, and now is reaching a stage of attaining political power that is fascist in nature - the fundamentalist Hindus in India in power and creating laws designed to oppress Muslims, the Buddhists in Myanmar who want to ethnically clean the Muslims, the Muslims across Africa and Asia who want to impose Sharia Law and would imprison if not execute apostates, orthodox Jews in Isael who have no commitment to democracy and want their vision of the Law imposes on all in Israel. Christo-fascists in Poland, Hungary, and the United States who want to destroy Western democracies in order to achieve repressive authoritarian power. I do think that this historic rise of religious fascism is not sustainable.

R167 This argument about "the Law" in the Old Testament and how to apply it in the US in 2021 will never be resolved.

Fundamentalists who claim that the law is the law, historic and cultural "contextual" analyses will never be reflective about the problems with their positions. They won't be moved. Even the Ten Commandments include two that refer to slavery... in a positive way. You are not to 1) covet your neighbors' slaves, nor 2) steal your neighbors' slaves. Fundamentalists will explain away what's not comfortable to them.... although some more Christo-fascist fundies (see R173) may actually allow that it's ok to own "slaves"...

r170 Do you have a link with statistics please? I was off the impression the opposite was the case and whilst other religions are experiencing global growth Christianity was predicted to shrink?

The CNN piece states that the Vatican decreed, "'It is not licit to impart a blessing on relationships or partnerships, even stable, that involve sexual activity outside of marriage, as is the case of the unions between persons of the same sex." So--what about all those gay couples who are legally married in the country in which they reside?

R22 If you're that concerned about it, then do what the left does in a Catholic nation like Colombia: Burn down their churches and make it clear that their homophobia isn't tolerated here. They and the kid fuckers will get the message very quickly.

Committing arson as part of a mob is not the answer, R177.

Nor will it be effective. Quite the opposite.

R22 Many political and cultural refugees are trying to enter the US because they are gay... and getting away from repressive "catholic" culture. They are not going to be Republicans.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[quote]You non-Hebrew speakers keep right on making a nonsense of translations.

R151, it really is presumptive of you to claim that the authors of the site 'My Jewish Learning' are non-Hebrew speakers. And regardless of their making a mistake of listing Deut. 23:3, the fact is that here on this thread, Deuteronomy 23:2 is what was being cited and discussed, something of which you seemed to be unaware or disregarded. That doesn't speak to your supposed grasp of the issue.

What I originally said:

[quote]But it's important to bear in mind that it's a Jewish text, and has been profoundly distorted in the hands of Christians - there's nothing in that passage about 'bastards,' or who goes to heaven, etc..

The reason I chose that source in order to counter R27's original claim was because they were Jewish and offered a perspective quite different from R27's.

[quote]And the English translation remains WRONG, written by someone who knows fuck all about Hebrew, Jewish law, etc. etc. etc.

You have not cited the supposed "English translation" you're ranting about, nor have you offered what you take to be the better rendering. I don't think you have one - you simply seem to be functioning as an identity troll, bursting into the forum and screaming that others - specifically me - are all wrong. If you want to contribute meaningfully to this discussion, to demonstrate that 𝑦𝑜𝑢 yourself "know fuck all about Hebrew," then offer your actual take on the meaning.

For my own part, I hold that Deuteronomy 23:2 isn't talking about 'illegitimate' children in the Christian sense of 'bastard,' but is instead referring to the offspring of other unapproved unions - the fruit of adultery, incest, or - to borrow the sense of 23:3 - of foreigners of whom Yahweh was supposed to disapprove, i.e. Ammon and Moab. Thus, I think the ESV has the best sense of it in English:

“No one born of a 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑏𝑖𝑑𝑑𝑒𝑛 𝑢𝑛𝑖𝑜𝑛 may enter the assembly of the LORD. Even to the tenth generation, none of his descendants may enter the assembly of the LORD."

...provided that one understands that the expression '𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑏𝑖𝑑𝑑𝑒𝑛 𝑢𝑛𝑖𝑜𝑛' does not refer to the Christian concept of 'bastard', i.e. someone born outside the so-called 'sacrament of marriage,' but rather an entirely different set of criteria.

[quote]Why in the world are Xtians discussing laws meant solely for JEWS?

R139, I assume that's a rhetorical question, since it's been common knowledge since the 2nd century CE that the Tanakh was appropriated by Catholic Christians (as opposed to Marcionites and other gnostics, who wanted nothing to do with it) as part of 𝑠𝑢𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑖𝑠𝑚 (see link below).

The late 2nd century/early 3rd century pseudepigraph 2 Timothy 3:16-17 specifically refutes the Marcionite position, by averring, "𝐴𝑙𝑙 𝑠𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑝𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 (not merely Christian writings, but also the Tanakh) is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work."

𝑇ℎ𝑎𝑡'𝑠 why Xtians cite Jewish scripture as if it were germane to themselves.

But then you know that perfectly well, don't you?

The Catholic Church is the one and only true Christian Church, all the others are simply not legitimate. We cannot pick which church teachings to follow just because we don't agree with them. Whether we like or not, the fact remains, sex is only for procreation. Gay sex obviously will never meet that threshold.

R184. What in the world are you talking about. Catholism is not the only Christian faith. As a Pentecostal Christian you have some nerve.

R184 is more Catholic than the Pope! (The Catholic Church does not hold that Protestants are “illegitimate.” If you have been baptized as a Christian you don’t get baptized again should you choose to become Catholic.)

R178 The Pedo church supports fascist dictatorships and violence against its political enemies and you're concerned about a church burning where no one gets injured or killed? Sounds like some messed up priorities to me. Property is not more valuable than human life. Even so, "respectable" gays don't have to do it. Just don't stand in the way when the anarchists do it and the message will get sent across to the kid fuckers loud and clear with the least amount of blowback possible to us personally

As I mentioned upthread, we need to be clear that the Roman Catholic (the church which claims authority and supremacy through historical power of the Roman Empire and certain interpretations of one thing Jesus said about Peter).

There's no way out of the doctrinaire closet that R184 locks himself into. He will go to the grave believing this - unless the Holy Spirit chooses to open his eyes and heart. Prayin' for ya kid!

There was a church long before the councils and structures that eventually became the Roman Church. Humans killed humans for centuries contending this point. Meanwhile, Jesus wept. Christ's Body is inclusive, it embraces, loves and enfolds Roman Catholics... He forgives them their human frailties... including the victimization of gay humans that this recent statement causes. Roman Catholics for centuries killed native peoples in order to exert "righteous" political power over them. I think, R184's limitations of spirit notwithstanding, to remember that not all Roman Catholics are monolithic. As disappointing as this statement about marriage equality is, also this week the Jesuits have publicly announced that, acknowledging how the Order played a role in slavery, they were beginning a campaign to raise money for reparations.

Admitting/confessing our sins is how God forgives us, and frees us. Scripture, tradition, devotion all point to God's word, His voice. But many of the faithful forget that He is still speaking.

It's not as if the scandals in the Catholic Church have gone away.

Damn! Chasten Glezman Buttigieg has his moments of being awesome. Great tweet!

Awww, they look like straights, how cute!!

[quote]The Pope isn’t your County Clerk.

Yet, this is the Pope that met with anti-gay and now ex-County Clerk Kim Davis when he visited the U.S. The Vatican soon afterwards downplayed it, basically implying it was an unvetted set-up and a brief, casual greeting.

And on the same day Kim Davis slithered her way into meeting the pope, the pope had an official audience with a former student of his and that student’s same sex partner, both of whom the Pope had met on a previous occasion.

Guess God only sanctions pedos.

A Catholic still needs a dispensation to marry a non-Christian (not baptized).

𝐑𝐞𝐛𝐞𝐥 𝐩𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐬 𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐲 𝐕𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐧, 𝐯𝐨𝐰 𝐭𝐨 𝐛𝐥𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐬𝐚𝐦𝐞-𝐬𝐞𝐱 𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐬

A dissident band of Roman Catholic priests leading a disobedience campaign against the Vatican said on Tuesday they would carry on blessing same-sex couples in defiance of Church orders.

R182

[quote]it really is presumptive of you to claim that the authors of the site 'My Jewish Learning' are non-Hebrew speakers.

It is most unfortunate that as a non-Hebrew speaker, you are reduced to assuming that translations are "accurate" based on source/author. They aren't. And that's how I know they are non-Hebrew speakers.

[quote]nor have you offered what you take to be the better rendering

The source text and laws were meant for a nation who could understand it. Who required neither outside translation nor elucidation, because what was written was understood by all.

You keep making the same mistake in attempting, based on translations removed from the original text in meaning, and concepts which are often not easily translatable and/or impossible to translation, again further removing meaning/context, to explain and extrapolate on your explanations. In reality, all it displays is your ignorance of language and nuance, making a complete nonsense of your "explanations".

Stick with the Xtian Bible . You will look less totally ignorant.

R183

[quote]since it's been common knowledge since the 2nd century CE that the Tanakh was appropriated by Catholic Christians

Xtians - Catholic and otherwise - stole/usurped Jewish law and history to annihilate Jews, to erase Jews and the Jewish origins of Xtian doctrine. "Appropriate" is far too benign a term for 2,000 years of discrimination, pogroms, ghettoes, persecution and genocide in on-going pursuit of that annihilation.

[quote]The source text and laws were meant for a nation who could understand it.

Mmm-hmm. Sure, Jan. As an excuse for why you can't offer what you think is a better English rendering of Deuteronomy 23:2, that's pretty poor.

You're not anything you claim to be, R197. Not even a Hebrew speaker. Just a troll, pretending to be one.

Online, everyone of us here has encountered one of them online - a flaming troll with a supposed Jewish persona, screaming with rage at everyone on the forum, spouting racist and extremist invective, trying to make others respond in kind, but with zero substance outside of the rage. For trolls, it's an easy role to play, and one they find amusing.

You're a sock of one of the Catholic trolls hovering over this thread, probably the same one responsible for R83 and R184, using other accounts. I'm through playing with you.

I'll come back and contribute to this thread if anything real develops, outside of the socks talking to one another and bumping the thread.

Why do people have to be gay, why can't everyone just be normal like the Lord made us?

[quote]As an excuse for why you can't offer what you think is a better English rendering of Deuteronomy 23:2,

Again you completely miss the point. The text in the original is the law. Not the English (or any other) translation.

[quote]Mmm-hmm. Sure, Jan.

Petulant dismissal doesn't change the fact that you are dependent on others to interpret and understand the Hebrew (and Aramaic) in the Jewish Bible. You are completely lost as to context, nuance and meaning. And yet you continue to pose and extrapolate based on that ignorance. Such arrogance!

עברית היא השפה השלישית שלי שהתחלתי לדבר בגיל 5

As stated in R197, stick with the Xtian Bible . You will look less totally ignorant.

R200 Petulant dismissal of 2000 years of Christian scholarship on the Old Testament texts, contexts, and interpretation (including anthropological and archeological things like the most recent - this month! - Dead Sea Scrolls), dismissal of things that can lead to our understandings.... is ignorant adjacent?

R201 Xtian "schlolarship"? Is that like "we're gonna tell the Jews about THEIR laws and history"? Such arrogance!

Xtian "scholarship"? On a text that cannot read let alone understand nor have they any frame of reference as to context and meaning? Seriously?

"Our" understanding? You mean "Xtian understanding"? I'd query to what end but we've seen 2,000 years of that.

R201 Indulge me. I had a back and forth with a poster about Vayikra (Leviticus) 18:22. Specifically the word זכר. Was that you?

R201 No, I have no dog in any of these Jewish/Christian spats. But to "own" scholarship by religious affiliation is, it seems to me, narrow-minded, at the least.

R196 Weak sauce bull shit. They should split off from the church and make it clear to the Pedo Pope that it's part of a schism, if they are really serious about supporting our community. Otherwise, it's nothing more than posturing, the way priests posture by giving communion to people who have had abortions.

R204 To reduce the nation of Israel to simply a "religion" illustrates woeful ignorance and more of that annihilation.

R206 Ok. It's much like interacting with a born-again fundamentalist Christian.. there is no space left for dialog. God bless ya kid!

R207 And you're just another Xtian arrogantly presuming to dictate to Jews.

R208 Hon, I am a Buddhist, but it's all good. I only want the best for you.

[quote]If you don't like it, don't be a Catholic.

Simple! It happens every fucking time. A letter from the Vatican sends DL (most of whom aren't even Catholic) into meltdown. It's almost as if they're desperate for Catholic approval because this is the exact same position of most Christian churches in America. Yet not a single thread about these other denominations. Why?

[quote] But fucking kids is okay. Got it.

No, it's not okay. The Roman Catholc Church classifies paedophilia a sin too. No one in the Church ever said it's okay. But the American Church fucked up royally when they transferred pedo priests from parish to parish instead of involving the law. That's human beings for you.

My point: if you feel rejected by the Roman Catholic Church, why not go elsewhere? It's shocking to see the anger here of people that don't attend mass. Why does it matter to you?

R209 But you weren't raised a Buddhist. You were raised Xtian. Living in a Xtian country. With entrenched social/cultural Jew hatred.

But carry on pretending. It seems to work well for you.

[quote]My point: if you feel rejected by the Roman Catholic Church, why not go elsewhere? It's shocking to see the anger here of people that don't attend mass. Why does it matter to you?

That's human beings for you...

This from a church that covered up child sexual abuse among other moral failings. I mean come on they lost all credibility when that happened. Why does anyone even pay attention to it anymore.

Those moral failings - slavery is one. Then of course there's the Catholic Church that did nothing when the Nazi's murdered 6 million Jews. That one is a biggie.

R210, most of us aren't Catholics, but we can be concerned with things that don't directly affect us

Just like men can be concerned with women's rights and straight people can be concerned with gay rights

Your whataboutism makes no sense. Yes, other denominations can be homophobic but that doesn't let Catholics off the hook

[quote]most of us aren't Catholics, but we can be concerned with things that don't directly affect us

The letter is not for you. It's for the Catholic faithful to explain why the Church will not bless same-sex unions. As Chasten Buttigieg said, you can go to your county clerk if you want to get married, just not in a Roman Catholic church. Frankly, I'm not surprised given how homosexuality is depicted in the Bible.

[quote]Yes, other denominations can be homophobic but that doesn't let Catholics off the hook

No one is asking to let them off the hook. Their club, their rules. You don't have to join.

This is war! In response, my gay gay husband and my gay gay self will not bless the vatican, since being catholic is a "sin" and a "choice."

𝐕𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐜𝐚𝐫𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐬 𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐧𝐝 𝐠𝐚𝐲 𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐛𝐥𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐛𝐚𝐧 𝐚𝐦𝐢𝐝 𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐧𝐭

ROME (AP) — Three cardinals close to Pope Francis defended a recent Holy See pronouncement that priests cannot bless same-sex unions as the Vatican faced outright dissent from some Catholic clergy and questions about the pontiff's approval of the document.

More at link below:

Who the fuck cares what that nest of old queens have to say about anything.

What is going on with Pope Francis. I just don't feel like this is him speaking. Francis was almost so outspoken (for a Pope) that I used to think, "you in danger, gurl." This goes against everything Pope Francis has said and done since he became Pope. The statement doesn't even sound like his voice. I was anti-Catholicism regardless but held a special place in my heart for the rebel Pope. Do you think this is his voice or the the men in the "white suits" as it were.

R219, IMO, it's the far right among the Curia. They either have something on him, or are leveraging the health and security of people or causes he cares about.

It's fine by me. I don't believe in sin so. Pope, you do you Pope. We'll go on ahead without you. Catch up later?