Skip to main content

View Diary: Why the Pope would be powerful even if he weren't Pope (118 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Okay, I get where some Catholics are coming from (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    frostbite, marykk, JuliathePoet, Skyye, mmacdDE

    regarding abortion, although I disagree with them. And yes, I think many other Catholics are simple hypocrites on the matter who use their religion's doctrine as a excuse to try to control women.

    However, I not only do not condone the official Catholic position on contraception, but have to say it has never made any sense to me from any point of view. Even if it were taken as a given (and I do not take it as even likely) that there were a God and He had actually said "Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth", we've done that. Mission way overaccomplished. I see no need to equivocate in saying that the Catholic Church, Pope included, is wrong on this.

    All that said, though, I'm not going to demand credentials from someone to whom hundreds of millions of people listen who is raising up hunger, inequality, and economic injustice as important issues that need to be addressed. At least, not until there is a better spokesperson who is just as likely to be heard.

    My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right.
    --Carl Schurz, remarks in the Senate, February 29, 1872

    by leftist vegetarian patriot on Tue Jan 14, 2014 at 03:56:57 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  I'm very interested to see what Francis (3+ / 0-)

      does w/r/t contraception.  The Church's "doctrine" on this is hardly longstanding; I think it originated with Paul VI.  I'm sure Francis believes that abortion is wrong.  But I think he's far too intelligent to believe contraception is wrong.  That, and acceptance of gay relationships, are points on which we may see so-called doctrinal change.

      •  I don't know. I hope you are right. n/t (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right.
        --Carl Schurz, remarks in the Senate, February 29, 1872

        by leftist vegetarian patriot on Tue Jan 14, 2014 at 05:18:21 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  I think that simply moving to the point (3+ / 0-)

        where the Catholic Church encourages its members to make thoughtful, prayerful choices, regarding birth control, would be a reasonable next step to expect. I know a lot of liberal Catholics, who hope that the Catholic Church follows the Mormon stance, that gay couples should have the same legal rights as straight couples, without calling it marriage.

        Most progressive/liberal Mormons have taken the further step of not differentiating civil marriages, and allowing same sex couples to be civilly married, while protecting the rights of all churches to be decide the criteria for religious solemnization, in their religious traditions. I think that the next few years will shake out a lot of issues on gay rights, and I think that if Catholic religious leaders focus on economic inequality, and now out of gay rights and birth control/abortion discussions, that transition could be a lot smoother. So, I hope American Catholics end up following the Pope's example, at least in regards to income inequality. :-)

      •  The church has had this doctrine since (0+ / 0-)

        birth control was invented.  My mother could not get a diaphram in MA in the 50's because the church owned the legislature in those days. She had to cross into CT to do so.  

        Of course Francis believes contraception is morally wrong. If he didn't, or if he ever expressed that, he'd be out of a job.

        •  Hell, you couldn't get contraception (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          in New York State in the 60s unless you were married.  I was there.  That wasn't Catholicism, it was everyone; that was the craziness of the times.

          I believe that Paul VI commissioned some kind of study group and then disregarded their recommendation and said all birth control was bad.  

          •  Yup (0+ / 0-)

            It was not the church but the State of Connecticut that went after Griswold, you know.

            If you think you're too small to be effective, you've never been in the dark with a mosquito.

            by marykk on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 07:00:22 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  You don't seem to understand the (0+ / 0-)

              political power the RCC has in the US... although I think that could be waning as people are getting more than fed up with it.  The CT legislature was dominated by reps that were Catholic.  From Americans United for Separation of Church and State's website...

              "Connecticut’s anti-birth control statute was only being sporadically enforced at the time, and some types of birth control were available in drug stores. But Buxton and Griswold (who opened the birth control clinic in New Haven) believed that as long as the law was in place, access to contraceptives wasn’t secure.

              Sure enough, when they opened their facility, conservative religious leaders went on the warpath. The state’s politically powerful Roman Catholic hierarchy demanded action, leading to the raid on the clinic."

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site