Kim Davis's "meeting with the Pope" not as it seems

[anonymous#2]

http://www.mail.com/news/us/3861242-vat ... ge-hero1-4" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Kim Davis, what a maroon.

[dbackjon]

Welcome Anonymous.


Yes, very hilarious

[Pwns]

Welcome back to the board, Catamount Man! Hope the workouts are going well.

[JohnStOnge]

I don't know what the point is. The Pope clearly agrees with Davis on the issue of marriage. He clearly agrees with the idea that marriage is a union between one man and one woman. He also clearly thinks that homosexual sex is immoral and can never be sanctioned. If the idea is that this Pope is somehow sanctioning actual homosexual behavior as "acceptable" in the eyes of the Catholic Church the idea is completely whacked. It just isn't the case.

[anonymous#2]

Welcome back to the board, Catamount Man! Hope the workouts are going well.

55 pounds lost since June 15. Unfortunately, 35 of that has been due to an emergency appendectomy in August followed up by another procedure in September due to infection. Have another follow up next week. Making it as best as I can. Have been given tons on antibiotics and now am trying to get some good bacteria in me.

Taking Norco for the pain. This has made me take some stock of myself at 40, and how I want to live the rest of my life. Been living life through a lot of fear. Need to just let things go and trust my higher power. I will get better.

[anonymous#2]

I don't know what the point is. The Pope clearly agrees with Davis on the issue of marriage. He clearly agrees with the idea that marriage is a union between one man and one woman. He also clearly thinks that homosexual sex is immoral and can never be sanctioned. If the idea is that this Pope is somehow sanctioning actual homosexual behavior as "acceptable" in the eyes of the Catholic Church the idea is completely whacked. It just isn't the case.

The point is that Kim Davis is acting like the GOP's top martyr and her lawyer has flat out lied to the world about a "private" meeting with the leader of the RCC. Kim Davis, fueled by the Tea Party, Mike Huckabee aka the 21st century Pat Robertson and Ted Cruz, is an attention whore. Nothing more.

[kalm]

Welcome back to the board, Catamount Man! Hope the workouts are going well.

55 pounds lost since June 15. Unfortunately, 35 of that has been due to an emergency appendectomy in August followed up by another procedure in September due to infection. Have another follow up next week. Making it as best as I can. Have been given tons on antibiotics and now am trying to get some good bacteria in me.

Taking Norco for the pain. This has made me take some stock of myself at 40, and how I want to live the rest of my life. Been living life through a lot of fear. Need to just let things go and trust my higher power. I will get better.

[JoltinJoe]

I don't know what the point is. The Pope clearly agrees with Davis on the issue of marriage. He clearly agrees with the idea that marriage is a union between one man and one woman. He also clearly thinks that homosexual sex is immoral and can never be sanctioned. If the idea is that this Pope is somehow sanctioning actual homosexual behavior as "acceptable" in the eyes of the Catholic Church the idea is completely whacked. It just isn't the case.

I think the point is that, while Francis certainly believes homosexuality activity is sinful, he also believes it is no more sinful that other sexual activity outside of a marriage between a man and woman -- or other grave sins, for that matter -- and that the particular focus of homosexuality as a sin derives from a historical prejudice against homosexuals. At least that would be consistent with the ideas of the Jesuits I had in college.

So we all need to get off our high horses and focus on our own individual shortcomings, and we should seek mercy for ourselves and others, since we are all fallible beings.

It should also be noted that the New Testament's most explicit condemnation of homosexuality is found in Paul's epistle to the Romans, Chapter 1. Paul was writing in an historical context in which homosexuality was understood to be synonymous with paganism and promiscuity -- i.e., First Century Rome. So the special wrath for homosexuality in Romans 1 shouldn't be viewed as a special wrath for homosexual acts outside of that context.

So Francis is saying we all sin, and there's no reason for any sinner to feel superior to any other sinner.

Francis actually had an audience with a homosexual couple while in Washington, because one of the partners is a former student of his. Like when Jesus visited Zacheus's house, many people are now complaining that Francis accepted sinners into his company.

Like those in the New Testament story, those complaining about the Pope's meeting are missing the point that it was impossible for Jesus to accept the company of any person without keeping the company of a sinner.

[kalm]

I don't know what the point is. The Pope clearly agrees with Davis on the issue of marriage. He clearly agrees with the idea that marriage is a union between one man and one woman. He also clearly thinks that homosexual sex is immoral and can never be sanctioned. If the idea is that this Pope is somehow sanctioning actual homosexual behavior as "acceptable" in the eyes of the Catholic Church the idea is completely whacked. It just isn't the case.

I think the point is that, while Francis certainly believes homosexuality activity is sinful, he also believes it is no more sinful that other sexual activity outside of a marriage between a man and woman -- or other grave sins, for that matter -- and that the particular focus of homosexuality as a sin derives from a historical prejudice against homosexuals. At least that would be consistent with the ideas of the Jesuits I had in college.

So we all need to get off our high horses and focus on our own individual shortcomings, and we should seek mercy for ourselves and others, since we are all fallible beings.

It should also be noted that the New Testament's most explicit condemnation of homosexuality is found in Paul's epistle to the Romans, Chapter 1. Paul was writing in an historical context in which homosexuality was understood to be synonymous with paganism and promiscuity -- i.e., First Century Rome. So the special wrath for homosexuality in Romans 1 shouldn't be viewed as a special wrath for homosexual acts outside of that context.

So Francis is saying we all sin, and there's no reason for any sinner to feel superior to any other sinner.

Francis actually had an audience with a homosexual couple while in Washington, because one of the partners is a former student of his. Like when Jesus visited Zacheus's house, many people are now complaining that Francis accepted sinners into his company.

Like those in the New Testament story, those complaining about the Pope's meeting are missing the point that it was impossible for Jesus to accept the company of any person without keeping the company of a sinner.

You do a great job of explaining this stuff Joe, and I'm guessing it's not all a reflection of how you think...but you have to admit the bolded parts are funny.

[Ibanez]

Can we kill this story? Stop giving this bitch power.

[Ibanez]

I don't know what the point is. The Pope clearly agrees with Davis on the issue of marriage. He clearly agrees with the idea that marriage is a union between one man and one woman. He also clearly thinks that homosexual sex is immoral and can never be sanctioned. If the idea is that this Pope is somehow sanctioning actual homosexual behavior as "acceptable" in the eyes of the Catholic Church the idea is completely whacked. It just isn't the case.

The problem isn't Davis' beliefs. It's her failing to Carry out the duties of her office AND her interjecting her faith where it doesn't belong.

[anonymous#2]

I don't know what the point is. The Pope clearly agrees with Davis on the issue of marriage. He clearly agrees with the idea that marriage is a union between one man and one woman. He also clearly thinks that homosexual sex is immoral and can never be sanctioned. If the idea is that this Pope is somehow sanctioning actual homosexual behavior as "acceptable" in the eyes of the Catholic Church the idea is completely whacked. It just isn't the case.

I think the point is that, while Francis certainly believes homosexuality activity is sinful, he also believes it is no more sinful that other sexual activity outside of a marriage between a man and woman -- or other grave sins, for that matter -- and that the particular focus of homosexuality as a sin derives from a historical prejudice against homosexuals. At least that would be consistent with the ideas of the Jesuits I had in college.

So we all need to get off our high horses and focus on our own individual shortcomings, and we should seek mercy for ourselves and others, since we are all fallible beings.

It should also be noted that the New Testament's most explicit condemnation of homosexuality is found in Paul's epistle to the Romans, Chapter 1. Paul was writing in an historical context in which homosexuality was understood to be synonymous with paganism and promiscuity -- i.e., First Century Rome. So the special wrath for homosexuality in Romans 1 shouldn't be viewed as a special wrath for homosexual acts outside of that context.

So Francis is saying we all sin, and there's no reason for any sinner to feel superior to any other sinner.

Francis actually had an audience with a homosexual couple while in Washington, because one of the partners is a former student of his. Like when Jesus visited Zacheus's house, many people are now complaining that Francis accepted sinners into his company.

Like those in the New Testament story, those complaining about the Pope's meeting are missing the point that it was impossible for Jesus to accept the company of any person without keeping the company of a sinner.

You're so correct. Today's GOP would kill Jesus just like the first century holier than thous in Israel did. While I am longer RC I do like the fact that this Pope upsets so many of the Vatican's stuffy dead heads. This Pope seems to be living the Gospel better than his two predecessors that's for sure.

[Chizzang]

You're so correct. Today's GOP would kill Jesus just like the first century holier than thous in Israel did. While I am longer RC I do like the fact that this Pope upsets so many of the Vatican's stuffy dead heads. This Pope seems to be living the Gospel better than his two predecessors that's for sure.

Just like the old joke:
Atheists don't need to worry about the Second Coming
Because Christians will kill Jesus immediately upon his return

[Ibanez]

You're so correct. Today's GOP would kill Jesus just like the first century holier than thous in Israel did. While I am longer RC I do like the fact that this Pope upsets so many of the Vatican's stuffy dead heads. This Pope seems to be living the Gospel better than his two predecessors that's for sure.

Just like the old joke:
Atheists don't need to worry about the Second Coming
Because Christians will kill Jesus immediately upon his return

Haha. I never thought of it that way but it's probably true. Like the Jews in the NT, Christians won't accept the anyone coming and saying they are the Savior.