Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: G Larry; Cronos
Don't let the "lost and in the translation" excuse and EWTN fool y'all. The apostate pope was talking about the legal, universal recognition of homosexual unions. He's talking about adults, guys, not kids. He was not talking about six-year old Susy Smith hooking up with her best "les be friends", Jane Doe, under her parents roof.

He is condoning the legal rights of adult, practicing homosexuals raising children; i.e. child abuse.

And it's getting tiresome hearing it's just the man's personal opinion. When he, in the office of the Pope, states in a public documentary that is to be distributed worldwide, his call for the the legalization of sodomite unions, it is no longer a personal "private" opinion.

P.S. It was his "private opinion" that the death penalty is now suddenly a grievous sin, yet he's enshrining that opinion in the Catholic Catechism.

What we have is an apostate dictator pope.

49 posted on 10/22/2020 12:32:13 PM PDT by ebb tide (We have a rogue curia in Rome.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies ]


To: ebb tide; G Larry
The Pope gave an off-the-cuff remark. Did you read it?

This morning’s screaming headlines come from a statement made by Pope Francis in the course of a long interview where the Pope discussed, as one reporter noted, “the environment, poverty, migration, racial and income inequality, and the people most affected by discrimination.” Within that interview, he made this statement:

Homosexual people have the right to be in a family. They are children of God. What we have to have is a ccivil cohabitating ("convivencia civil") laws; that way they are legally covered.

This has nothing to do with marriage

Pope Francis — like Popes Benedict XVI and John Paul II — has condemned same-sex marriage during his tenure, and he has not retreated from that position.

On a number of occasions, Francis has warned against threats to the institution of marriage and described marriage as “between a man and a woman.” Accepting gay family members or accommodating same-sex partnerships in civil law, he said, “does not mean approving of homosexual acts.”

you are right that even condoning the legal rights is bad - yet, look at this -- the leftists are arguing that the reason for gay marriage is due to "legal benefits" that marriage undoubtedly gives

By saying "the government does civil unions and Marriage is the sole prerogative of the church - and that is between man and woman alone" , that eliminates the leftist argument

53 posted on 10/22/2020 11:56:26 PM PDT by Cronos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson