A threat to the 1%? Are the attacks on the Pope Coordinated?

[Chrom]

As I read through many topics about the pope not standing up to purity tests, one has to wonder...

what kind of progressive democrat would not be happy to embrace any progress in the direction of income equality around the world....

in particular a slap in the face to the very hypocrites who have devastated the finances of the country with their wars and horrible tax policies

who claim to be Christian, but have done nothing but prop up the rich.


What the Pope has been discussing is THE most important topic affecting billions of people, people who are starving and homeless and living a miserable existence because of the greed of a very few....WHAT could be more important than that?

Most progressive Democrats that I know focus on the positive and would be so happy to know the Pope is fighting for the 99%, and here the Republicans and their sadistic policies are being exposed and the emperor has no clothes....

but instead of seeing the positive, a vocal minority appears to just HATE the Pope, they can't seem to say enough bad stuff about him...it's weird.

[valerief]

1. Organized religion keeps people powerless and ignorant. nt

[DesertFlower]

4. only if they allow it to. i know

people who are religious (not fanatical) and they seem to be doing okay.

[valerief]

24. MANY women forced to wear burquas for religious reasons

would rather not but have no choice.

MANY IF NOT MOST women forced to give birth to a baby, for religious reasons, instead of having an abortion would rather do the latter but may risk economic catastrophe if they do so.

[billhicks76]

17. People are damaged by religion

Some cant see through it but the Pope is doing as much as Obama at the very least. The really incendiary attacks against him are probably from paid Republican sock-puppet profiles.

[rug]

76. What cartoon did that line fall out of?

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. Yes, that liberation theology slip is showing

and that is a real threat.

[Scuba]

3. Of course they are. The right does understand mass manipulation of weak minds.

[niyad]

5. "show me (words, words, words)"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=H8zyF0ZOy3k

[Vashta Nerada]

6. Yes. I dislike him because I'm a 1%er.

Maybe I dislike him because of, I don't know, these issues: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4193732

[zeemike]

11. Sounds like because he don't meet your test on your issues.

which is fine I guess...if that is how you feel.
But the enemy of your enemy is your friend, and too many don't understand just how that works.
But right wingers do, and you will never see them throw someone under the buss for not being 100% with them...I have seen them quote liberals when they say what will further their own causes...even George Carlin...and most famously MLK and JFK.
It seems that only liberals want to not accept help unless they meet all the liberal tests.

[Vashta Nerada]

13. Yeah, god forbid I oppose homophobia, bigotry, and sexism.

And not to forget he covers up pedophiles.

I'm on a liberal site, right?

[zeemike]

14. There is a difference between opposing it and rejecting help.

and this pope is offering us help in the financial space at least...and that makes him the enemy of our enemy...that is is you see Wall Street as our enemy.
I am on a liberal site right?

But carry on driving away those that help us in general and keep looking for that perfect liberal that agrees with all that you agree with...For me I will take what ever help we can get...and not make perfect the enemy of the good.

[Vashta Nerada]

20. Rights for LGBT, reproductive rights for women, and allowing women to serve in positions of power

are all liberal values that the Pope doesn't have. And, he's complicit in the cover-up of priests who molest children. So he wants to help the 99%. Good for him. So did the last Pope and all other Popes before him.

Ron Paul is anti-war and wants to legalize weed. Should we start loving him here now?

Why is that so hard to understand?

[zeemike]

21. Don't worry I know I will never change your mind.

And we will continue to loose at the polls because we never figure it out, that making the big tent smaller is not working...
So piss off some Catholics if you like...we don't need them...

But I don't have to love Ron Paul, but if he supports legalizing weed I will give him credit for it, and use it to bolster my case for it with Conservatives.
And you don't have to love the pope...just give him credit where it is due and use it.
Why is that so hard to understand?
Dichotomy of with us or against us is a loser...

[sendero]

118. There is a qualitative difference between your issues..

... and the issue of survival/starvation. I think in this case I'm not going to let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

I don't believe in churches but I prefer those that at least give lip service to what their own namesake stood for. Truth is, Jesus didn't have much to say about sexuality but he said a lot about greed. If you can't see the positive in having a pope who will sound like an actual Christian for the first time in decades, well that is your choice.

[ErikJ]

7. But he's "Pro-life" so some of the RW Christians might come around.

[MyNameGoesHere]

8. It's one thing to say I am against poverty

it's another to empty the church coffers and do something about it.

[MisterP]

18. you fight poverty with structural change: the Henry VIII approach only enriched the gentry...

[cprise]

82. Reproductive rights are structural change

Without those, the pope's charm offensive is nothing more than that. In fact, its BS.

Support for labor rights and other liberal causes will have little effect if women are marginalized and the poor are exploding in numbers and scrambling to do richy-rich's bidding just to have a chance at an ever-shrinking piece of the pie.

[MisterP]

94. well, if you want to dig into natalism it's an extremely broad issue

this was a vocal and prevalent view, left, right, and center; it was the unquestioned lefty position that "it's not the demand, it's the distribution" (not that that helped the Ethiopians or Tanzanians ...); Nehru, Mao, Nkrumah, Ceaușescu, Alfred Sauvy, the Tibetans all agreed that the Pill was a Rockefeller/Kissinger plot to cripple the Third World by depriving it of human resources, bypassing real issues, and preventing revolution from breaking out--after all, Belgium and Hong Kong had huge densities, and they did great!

the Salvadoran students' union called it "preemptive genocide" by reducing the number of the poor and Honduras's Communist Youth were the ones beating up any doctor who talked about contraception on the National University's campus and cancelling even demographics from the curriculum ("We've convinced them that to carry out such a program is to act against the nation. ... The Medical School will never allow a plan of North American penetration to be carried out in its name!&quot ; Salvadoran editors (pre-Humanæ Vitæ) opined that Central America "should think of birth control only after it has twice the population of England or France. At one point he speaks of Central America's resources being sufficient for a population ten times its present size" and the Hondurans' belief 1970 was " If we would have had more people, El Salvador would not have dared to invade us": 75% of intelligentsia and 60% of students in Honduras thought that a doubled population was needed to end poverty; Planned Parenthood's job was seen as "assuring the domination of western civilization" by keeping foreigners in control of the Third World: the First World feared "that their prestige and power positions might be threatened if our countries grow too fast"; one French-educated atheist in El Salvador(?) said that "A situation now favorable to the U.S. will no longer be so once Latin America triples its present population," and leftists were likelier to oppose family planning if irreligious (39% right pro-planning vs. 29% left): 24% of the right denied that growth increased poverty, as opposed to 50% of the far left (Axel Mundigo); in the 80s it was the decidedly un-religious (but very male-dominated) human-rights orgs opposing legalizing abortion way more than the Archdiocese in the newspapers

by the mid-80s the most religiously and ideologically devout countries were acknowledging that demographic explosion was a disaster--and also that it was caused by "deformed" economic development rather than just being a blind force of nature, and that it was "articulated" rather than automatically causing war if it tipped past 2.66667%; by the mid-80s, OTOH, the Right Livelihood Award was still being used to say "nothing's going on here"--after all, "Man is born with his own capacity to produce his food"

[cprise]

97. The physical fundamentals are changing

...and putting issues like the environment front and center. The late-20th century realpolitic is almost entirely gone now. This makes the progressive message all that more meaningful, however, because conservatives can't hide behind notions of "relative poverty" (poor people aren't all that poor in absolute terms just because 1% wealth is in the ionosphere).

Political economies, whether left or right-leaning, can't honestly act as if the sky is the limit for economic activity and wealth accumulation (IOW, the neoliberal consensus about 'rising tide raising all boats' is dead). The alternatives now are either to go medieval, or be humane and egalitarian and efficient.

(BTW, its easy to see the medievalists have their backs up against the wall and dwindling in numbers, and there's no going back to Uncle Ronnie's formula this time.)

The interesting thing about Latin America is that its not very populous... those old reactions toward birth control were understandable. More than a generation later, however, and Latin Americans are leaving the Catholic Church in droves. The women there live under center-left governments AND they want their career prospects now; they will go where there is less misogyny and (see USA examples) there is no separating the bedroom from the boardroom on that matter.

[Phlem]

9. I know the Pope is flawed. He's human.

I knew his stance on gay marriage is wrong, I know more skeletons are going to come out of the closet. I'm not even Religious, but he has brought front and forward some serious issues to the MSM. For that I am grateful.

-p

[el_bryanto]

10. I think it's a bit of a slander to suggest that the people attacking the pope

are doing it because they are propping up the 1% - at least at DU. I've argued with many of them and their arguments boil down to the argument that he's not actually doing much being making symbological moves, and that he continues the Catholic Church policy of oppressing Woman and Homosexuals.

While I disagree with them focusing on those issues to the exclusion of all else, I don't doubt that they are sincere in their criticisms.

Bryant

[Chrom]

28. Gay people are suffering from poverty and inequalilty just the same as straights

Most gay people I know are self confident enough to not need the Pope's approval for their personal lives, but can still see that what he says about the greedy wealth hoarders affects us all and stands to move the entire world in a positive direction.

The best part is he is exposing the right wing as the hypocritical assholes that haven't even read the Bible that they are....

Gay people have been bashed incessantly by Limbaugh and his ilk, and for the Pope to put them in their place is just...delightfully hysterical!

[el_bryanto]

30. I agree that that aspect of it is gratifying

But that's not all the OP says - what the OP says is that people who criticize the Pope are doing it on behalf of the 1%, which I think is both wrong and slanderous.

Bryant

[Chrom]

36. Occupy had a real chance of uniting the left and the right against the bankers who stole from US

So what did 1%ers do?

Infiltrate, pick some morons to put on the news, distract and redirect the movement...

and even at DU .....every possible effort was made to bash tea party people that might join forces with Occupy...

because they are very very afraid of us uniting against them.


Now here comes the Pope, basically bashing the very people who claim to torture the 99% in God's name....

and he tells them what the Bible really says and ruins their whole fundie selfish asshole shtick


What could possibly be better than exposing these liars?

What could possibly be more threatening to the 1%ers, after using religion to control and manipulate their minions, when the minions find out they are a bunch of phony evil doers that have been lying to them?

Republicans can be incredibly mean and hateful, I can only imagine their wrath when they find out they have been duped.

It seems to me to be priority number one to discredit this Pope right now.

[theHandpuppet]

37. Seems to me...

...you've made it your mission to discredit anyone here who is critical of the Pope and his long-held, bigoted views. There used to be rules against accusing other DUs of being trolls or RW plants.

Perhaps if you took the time to peruse some of the journals of Francis' critics you just might find how many of us have spoken out against economic injustice and poverty and for YEARS, not just the couple of months you've been here. To accuse many good DUers of being RW plants as you have done is beyond disgusting and if the rules were truly being enforced here, this thread would be locked.

[Chrom]

43. why focus hatred on the pope, when right wingers are far worse, and the pope is sticking it to them

How can anyone not be excited about how he is slapping them and their entire belief system in the face?

Just don't get it.

[NuclearDem]

61. You're telling entire minority communities to sit down and shut up.

Embrace the pope's income inequality if you want, but you have zero standing to tell the LGBT community to remain silent about the Catholic church's work in denying them marriage rights, or to tell women to shut up when Catholic institutions are working to deny them reproductive rights.

Furthermore, you've got even less standing to tell these same groups to tolerate the Tea Party and their racist, misogynist, and homophobic members because some Tea Partiers might not like the banksters. Maybe try giving a shit about what these communities have to say rather than 'splaining to them.

[Chrom]

68. no one told you to shut up

There is no justification for the hatred.

[NuclearDem]

75. You equated the criticism of the Pope to being tools of the 1%.

And went on later to 'splain that the LGBT community should love the Pope--again, the head of the largest anti-gay organization on the planet--because of the populist rhetoric.

And the fact that you see "no justification for the hatred" is evidence of exactly what I said.

[muriel_volestrangler]

110. You are telling any DUer criticial of the Pope to shut up

There are many long-standing DUers who are saying they still think his attitudes to LGBT mean we should not just say "what a great Pope". There may be an argument to be had over whether this is a good idea, but, as el bryanto says, you are really out of order when you accuse them of being puppets of the 1%. "There is no justification for the hatred" could be said to you, too.

[el_bryanto]

39. The problem is that many of those who are attacking the Pope are long time posters

It's not credible to believe that they are attacking him on behalf of the 1%. There are also rationales for why they feel the way they do; I may disagree with them, but there's no reason to suggest conspiracy or collusion when there are simpler explanations.

Bryant

[Chrom]

44. and many people have rec'd this thread so they can see what I am saying

and there are long term posters, laying in wait to control topics.



Lenin 'The best way to control the opposition is to lead it'

[el_bryanto]

56. OK - so you see no reason to criticize the Pope other than to support the 1%? nt

[Chrom]

70. I see the Pope telling bigots like Paul Ryan to shut the fuck up

He is telling them to focus on income inequality which is the real message of the Bible.

I don't get the hate at all.

[el_bryanto]

72. That's a strong quote - can you provide a citation?

Or any citation where Pope Francis mentions Paul Ryan by name?

Maybe you should read what they are saying; you might not like it and it might rile you up, but they do have reasons for feeling the way they do.

Also don't you feel a little bit sheepish being her with such a low post count and telling us that long term contributors are all agitators for the Conservatoids?

Bryant

[Bluenorthwest]

69. Thanks Bryant, but the word 'attacking' is not the proper word, what you see is defense of ourselves

and of our families and our community. We did not start this, Francis did. He has been a long term, very active, political opponent of gay rights internationally. He has used horrible language about gay people, endlessly. His verbiage in Argentina was so full of hate that the President there said it was 'Medieval and suggestive of the Inquisition'. Francis says we are a destructive attack on God's plan, that comes from the Father of all Lies. So that bully with his hate speech and superstitious bullshit flying is the one who attacked. If anyone expects that their preachers will be allowed to launch diatribes against us without hearing a response they should think again.
When ugly bullies like Francis attack, they will be met with a strong response, always. The day when rich old hate mongers got to control the message is over and it is done. Francis and his ilk need to learn to play nice with others or they should go putter in the garden like Benedict.

[el_bryanto]

71. I call them like I see them; obviously I disagree with you on your assessment of Pope Frances nt

[Nevernose]

115. 50% of Tea Baggers admit believing

That job creation rests entirely with the one percent, a demonstrably ridiculous statement. Many others flooded the public discourse with statements like "government stay out of Medicare" and "Death panels!" They were never, in a million years, going to side with Occupy. Their whole spiel about retaking America from the bankers was a PR move to disguise irrational hatred and bigotry towards anything new or outside their expectations.

[JNelson6563]

52. I darsay the OP

might've been wiser to insert the word "unwittingly" into the part you take issue with. I know that if that word is included the statement is something I can completely agree with.

But then again I seek out common ground and those I think the OP refers to seem to seek out/focus on differences. Just as the 1% owned media does. Isn't it funny how zealots of all stripes have that in common? Love, love, love differences. Hate, hate, hate common ground. Rather die than acknowledge it it seems.

Julie

[PeaceNikki]

55. The same as straights? You really think that's true?

"Pushing the Catholic Church to embrace the full legal equality of LGBTQ people or the bodily autonomy of women is not petty or nitpicking or asking for too much too soon, it is essential to achieving the pope’s stated platform. Because, beyond being issues of deep cultural and political importance, they are economic issues, too.

In the same document in which he so eloquently tears down the gross excesses of free market capitalism, he remains utterly silent on the rights of LGBTQ people, who are often, it should be noted, more likely to experience poverty and homelessness than straight people in similar circumstances.

Francis has remarked in the past that the church has become fixated on its opposition to marriage equality and other issues of LGBTQ equality at the expense of its broader mission toward inclusion, but hasn’t budged on the supposed sinfulness of being gay.

In the same interview for which he was widely heralded as a beacon of progressivism, he also said, “The teaching of the church, for that matter , is clear and I am a son of the church, but it is not necessary to talk about these issues all the time.”

But as the pope’s explicit and specific critique of capitalism’s excesses shows, it is incredibly necessary to talk about these things. Because widespread discrimination against LGBTQ people — which people like Rick Santorum and others defend as a matter of “faith” — results in widespread violence, disproportionate income inequality, job discrimination and other injustices that the pope nominally opposes."

http://www.salon.com/2013/11/27/sorry_pope_francis_reproductive_justice_and_lgbtq_rights_are_economic_issues_too/

[NYC Liberal]

12. Opposing bigotry and misogyny is now imposing a "purity test"?

Absolutely disgusting.

Support of this pope is a slap in the face to progressives who oppose bigotry. It's a slap in the face to us gays. It's a slap in the face to women. Women's rights, birth control and contraception, freedom of choice -- these are all issues related directly to poverty and economic condition.

This pope is NOT "fighting for the 99%"...unless straight, Christian males constitute your definition of the 99%. My own definition is just slightly broader than yours seems to be.

Do you complain that people here "can't seem to say enough bad stuff" about conservative Republicans? I find it odd that criticizing a right-wing 1-percenter (the pope IS a 1-percenter; he's an absolute dictator for crying out loud!) is labeled "bashing" or "hating" on a supposedly liberal website.

Ron Paul speaks often about his anti-war positions. Shall we heap praise upon him and ignore his other, horrible right-wing views? (Well, some have done that here, but it's not nearly as widespread as the fawning over the pope.)

[Go Vols]

15. I will repost from here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4229630

Star Member Go Vols (1,960 posts)
136. Sounds like a good PR push

by the Pope.The more money that the 99% posses,means more money in the collection plate.

If half of Catholics in the US put an extra dollar in the plate each Sunday,34 million bucks a week.

I could give a shit about the Pope,but if the 99% get more/treated fairly due to him wanting to grow the Catholic coffers,more power to him.

[SidDithers]

83. Nailed it...nt

Sid

[freshwest]

16. IDK about your conclusions on individuals, but the 1% had better watch themselves.

There are millions more Catholics than there are of them. They should remember how many governments and other insitutions were brought down by religions in the past.

As the 1% deliberately weakened governments to remove a barrier to their power, they had best not try to incite the believers. They weren't merciful in the past when they had total control.

Dangerous game they are playing, to attack this Pope, especially. And yes, he has cut out a lot of their friends. He's going his own way, crossing barriers between different societal groups. He's already condemned the policies in the harshest terms, essentially saying they are going to hell.

[JoeyT]

19. Yeah, we hate him because we're totally fighting for the 1% and we're totally right wing plants.

Or you know, we could just loathe bigots. In particular we could be highly annoyed that someone that isn't fond of gays or women is being lauded as a saint by alleged progressives. It's like a bizarro world Third Way, only instead of being socially liberal and economically conservative, it's economically liberal and socially conservative. I'm not even sure what that's called.

What I see is a coordinated effort by a bunch of people to refuse to refute facts, and instead to try to shift the discussion and label the people that are against bigotry as bigots. It's like a phalanx of Bill O'Reilly clones that charge courageously into babble whenever anyone brings up the fact that the pope is still socially regressive. And that he's the head of an organization that's still protecting pedophiles.

I wasn't willing to let the LGBT thing go with Obama, and I didn't vote for the pope.

Y'all can defend the goddamned Klan for all I care, but you won't make me stop speaking the truth about them, no matter what how broadly you define the word "hate". Which apparently now includes speaking the truth about a person or organization.

I'm glad we've come to this: The point people are openly making "GHEYZ AND WIMMENZ CAN SHUT UP NOW!!!" OPs. At least that rips the veil off the people that were trying to hedge with "Well, we can support him but disagree with his ideas about LGBT people and women." arguments. We're done hedging now, it seems. Now we're down to browbeating anyone that thinks the rights of about 60% or more of the population are important.

[Chrom]

27. what is weird is the folks accusing the Pope of being hateful, are seriously full of hate toward him

and he is the most open minded caring Pope we have ever seen, it doesn't make sense.

[PeaceNikki]

63. He said that gays raising children is a form of child abuse. That is one reason why.

[NuclearDem]

22. Yeah, fuck the LGBT community, right?

If you support the Pope's message about economic inequality, then great for you. I do too. But don't, don't dismiss the legitimate criticisms from the LGBT and women's communities as some conspiracy by the 1%.

[Chrom]

23. This LGBT magazine is able to recognize that this is not just about the pope

"Pope Francis is leader of 1.2 billion Roman Catholics all over the world. There are three times as many Catholics in the world than there are citizens in the United States. Like it or not, what he says makes a difference. Sure, we all know Catholics who fudge on the religion's rules about morality. There's a lot of disagreement, about the role of women, about contraception, and more. But none of that should lead us to underestimate any pope's capacity for persuading hearts and minds in opening to LGBT people, and not only in the U.S. but globally.

The remaining holdouts for LGBT acceptance in religion, the ones who block progress in the work left to do, will more likely be persuaded by a figure they know. In the same way that President Obama transformed politics with his evolution on LGBT civil rights, a change from the pope could have a lasting effect on religion....

As pope, he has not yet said the Catholic Church supports civil unions. But what Francis does say about LGBT people has already caused reflection and consternation within his church. The moment that grabbed headlines was during a flight from Brazil to Rome. When asked about gay priests, Pope Francis told reporters, according to a translation from Italian, "If someone is gay and seeks the Lord with good will, who am I to judge?"

The brevity of that statement and the outsized attention it got immediately are evidence of the pope's sway. His posing a simple question with very Christian roots, when uttered in this context by this man, "Who am I to judge?" became a signal to Catholics and the world that the new pope is not like the old pope."

http://www.advocate.com/year-review/2013/12/16/advocates-person-year-pope-francis

[NuclearDem]

26. And it was a stupid call on the Advocate's part.

The Pope and his organization are still hardly allies of the LGBT community.

[pnwmom]

111. They DO have legitimate criticisms to make. But some people's comments

have been nothing but lies and their own form of bigotry.

And anti-Catholic bigotry is nothing new.

[theHandpuppet]

113. Sometimes its a matter of how bigotry is manifested

Perhaps there are some folks whose comments have stepped over the line or, as you perceive it, recall for you an anti-Catholic bigotry. I can't speak to that but don't feel I have the right to dismiss your feelings, which are genuine.
However, I hope you can also understand the frustration and anger at an institutional bigotry that has been and continues to be expressed in outright persecution not only of LGBT persons but women as well.
GLBTs do not lobby to prevent Catholics or any other religious denomination from marrying or adopting, from having full, equal rights, nor do they lobby to prevent people of any stripe from making decisions regarding family planning, or deny them life-saving medical procedures. Make no mistake - the Catholic church, along with other fundamentalist Protestant churches, continues to wage war against women and LGBT persons. The American Conference of Catholic Bishops has outlined the goals quite clearly and on their website you can find insulting "commentaries" against gays, transgendered men and women, marriage equality (and should you need one, a prayer to preserve "traditional marriage&quot , vows to fight reproduction rights, ENDA, the HHS mandate, the ACLU et al, rebuffing the UN's inquiry with regard to child rape and abuse. The next time folks here feel insulted by the angry language in some posts regarding Pope Francis, I would entreat you to visit that website and experience for yourself the kind of incredible insults LGBT people put up with as a matter of religious policy. Not to mention the millions of dollars the church has invested in defeating gay marriage bills and reproduction rights.
Yes, words can hurt. And Pope Francis himself has said some disgusting, hateful things about gays and their families, yet remained oddly silent when it comes to the recent passage of anti-LGBT, anti-woman laws from India to the Philippines to Uganda.
Beyond the personal scope of hurt feelings, the kind of bigotry that expresses itself in actual persecution of millions of women and LGBTs around the globe, that threatens their families, their rights, their health and their very lives, is the kind of bigotry many people here are fighting. When and if Pope Francis joins that fight for equal rights for women and LGBTs he will have my full support but until that time, to see him lauded on DU as some kind of folk hero is something I find incredibly insulting, hypocritical and to be frank, inexplicable.

[theHandpuppet]

116. The latest case in point...

http://news.yahoo.com/justice-delays-health-law-39-birth-control-mandate-031614323.html

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court has thrown a hitch into President Barack Obama's new health care law by blocking a requirement that some religion-affiliated organizations provide health insurance that includes birth control.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor late Tuesday night decided to block implementation of the contraceptive coverage requirement, only hours before the law's insurance coverage went into effect on New Year's Day.

Her decision, which came after federal court filings by Catholic-affiliated groups from around the nation in hopes of delaying the requirements, throws a part of the president's signature law into temporary disarray. At least one federal appeals court agreed with Sotomayor, issuing its own stay against part of the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare...

You know who this hurts the most? The poor. But by all means, let's all line up and give Francis some pats on the back for speaking out on poverty, nevermind the fact that equality for women and reproduction rights are a FUNDAMENTAL part of that battle.

[boston bean]

25. If there were no organized religion in the world, it would be a better place.

I don't give two hoots about the Pope.

[Eleanors38]

29. Well, organized religion is with us nevertheless.

I was struck by comments of Black Power advocates in the 70s who admitted error when they ignored and even derided the old-line churchs within the African-American community.

Politics makes strange bedfellows.

[boston bean]

31. Sorry, even with that new nugget of info, I'm still not going to church on Sunday.. LOL

[Eleanors38]

34. Not much into Sunday services myself. People getting married,

People getting dead. I've avoided one.

[gollygee]

32. There are plenty of non-troll reasons to disagree with the Pope

And not every disagreement is "an attack."

And not all attacks are coordinated.

This is ridiculous speculation with no merit.

[theHandpuppet]

33. The only thing that seems to be coordinated around here...

... is a daily barrage of Pope PR threads on General Discussion and LBN. When threads such as yours, with its thinly veiled attacks on his DU critics as being part of some RW conspiracy, are allowed to stand, while threads such as these are locked: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024009872 you tell me where the coordinated efforts truly can be found. More likely it can be suspected among those who post a half dozen threads a day about Francis -- an admitted misogynist and homophobe. To some of us it's like getting slapped in the face every time we come to DU.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go cash my check from my RW, Wall Street-luvvin' overlords.

[NYC Liberal]

53. The fawning isn't just annoying anymore. It has now become offensive.

[PeaceNikki]

64. Agreed. Welcome to Papal Underground!

[Chrom]

67. why click on the threads? Why pursue people who want to enjoy the Pope's message?

That is what I find odd.

There are so many people to hate on, why him?

I have seen more threads attempting to get people to find something wrong with the Pope,

because of the natural positive reaction folks (whether catholic or not) were having to his message.

[NYC Liberal]

74. So only people who agree with an OP are supposed to post in them?

As long as a bigot is lauded here every single day, I will continue to answer the praise. There is no need to go hunting for things wrong with the pope. The things that are wrong with him are his core beliefs, his most basic principles. When we criticize him, we aren't nit-picking. We aren't going after him for some stupid little gaffes or for his clothes. We are criticizing his positions on fundamental issues of human rights.

As for "why click on the threads": I don't go to great lengths to seek out these threads. They are posted in the most popular forum on the site almost daily. If they were posted in the Religion forum (where they belong), I would not be posting in them because I don't visit that forum and would not do so just to find pope threads.

[NYC Liberal]

89. Why him? Because he is one of the world's leading

bigots. Why should I NOT criticize him on a liberal, Democratic website?

[Chrom]

86. some might find the angry attacks on the pope offensive

nt

[NYC Liberal]

88. Some might find attacks on Jerry Falwell or

Pat Robertson offensive.

[Chrom]

91. where are the threads attacking them?

It just seems that the Pope is certain people's target, when he has been trying to help our cause.

If the church has always been that way, can't we embrace the fact they are changing in certain ways that embrace our cause?

I thought Democrats were the Big Tent, not closed minded, all or nothing, Black vs White 'thinkers' like the GOP.

[theHandpuppet]

95. Perhaps the question could be restated thusly...

Just where are the threads that praise them?

Oh, that's right -- there aren't any.

[Marrah_G]

35. You have alot of nerve

You come on this web site and accuse those of us who call out the bigoted, misogynist leader of a bigoted and misogynistic religion as working for the 1%?

As much as I would like to tell you what I think of you and your OP, it is against the rules here on DU.

[SidDithers]

38. +1...

suspicious behaviour from a "newbie".

Sid

[Chrom]

45. Who would I be working for? A secret freeper who loves the pope and hates republicans

I know, I work for the pope?

Who would hire me to speak out against economic inequality?

[NuclearDem]

54. No kidding.

The OP's consistently flippant attitude towards the LGBT community is downright disgusting.

[MineralMan]

40. Yesterday, I posted a thread calling Pope Francis to account

for his attitudes towards women and LGBT people. I praised him for his appeal for economic justice, but pointed out that many of his opinions are more closely aligned with the Tea Party than with progressives. He supports a patriarchal view of women, and his church does not allow any women to be in positions of real authority. He opposes all contraception and reproductive rights for both men and women, and is far from a friend of the LGBT community.

Do you think I hate the Pope or the Catholic Church? I do not. I just oppose any of his or its policies that are regressive rather than progressive. In speaking of economic justice, he is not breaking any new ground for the Roman Catholic Church, which has always spoken in support of the poor. That's nothing new, and is expected.

However, he also supports the church's long-time opposition to and suppression of women's rights, reproductive rights, and LGBT rights. For that, he deserves no praise whatsoever, but should be chastened by everyone who believes that human rights are essential to a progressive world.

You are a short-time poster here, with few contributions to the discussion. I suggest you read more of DU before making sweeping statements about DU and DUers. That's up to you, of course, but that's what I suggest.

[Chrom]

42. I was just asking questions, pondering the threat this pope is to the 1%....

and just noticing, yes, some people have legitimate gripes and leave it at that, other people are just over the top HATING on him and will not let it go, answering poster after poster trying to prove just how evil this pope is.

There are many people who are much bigger haters than this pope, why focus their anger on him?

[MineralMan]

46. Who is "hating on" the Pope?

Give me a couple of links here on DU. I've not seen that. Since you're claiming that, post some links so we can see what you're talking about, OK?

[Cleita]

49. Herein lies your misconception in your own words.

You blame the man for what the institution preaches. He can't change anything without the authority of the whole institution, doctrines that were put n place long before he was born. What he is doing is trying to change the discussion from women and gays, etc. to caring for the poor and social justice. I believe it's what he can do short term. Let's hope he starts some real reforms for core issues in the future.

[MineralMan]

58. He has said almost nothing new about poverty and economic justice.

Truly. You have only to look at previous Popes' words on the subject.

In the case of the Pope, the man and the institution are synonymous. You claim he can change nothing regarding its regressive social equality policies. If that it the case, he can do nothing about anything. Nice speeches about economic justice are just that, if nothing real is done about it. The same is true for womens', reproductive, and LGBT rights. The reality is that the Pope can speak ex cathedra about anything, and when he does so, his words are taken as infallible. Pope Francis could issue an Encyclical, ex cathedra, and declare that past policies go against the word of God. He could then change those policies and doctrines.

Within the Roman Catholic Church, the Pope is far from powerless as an individual. He can do much, if it is his will to do so.

As for economic justice, I gave an interesting example in my thread yesterday. My mother-in-law was in a convalescent center run by the Archdiocese of Minneapolis St. Paul. The workers in that facility are not paid a living wage. Instead, those caring for the sick there are paid the same pitiful wages paid by other similar facilities. Why is that, if the RCC is so interested in economic justice?

The Archbishop of Minneapolis St. Paul lives very nicely, and the church owns many valuable properties. Why does the church not, as Jesus recommended, "sell all they have and give to the poor?" It's a good question. So is the question about why the Archdiocese of Minneapolis St. Paul only recently turned over the names of priests who had abused children sexually. So is the question about why the same Archdiocese spent millions of dollars campaigning for a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage and more money to fight the marriage equality bill in our state legislature. Why were not those millions spent to help the church's own employees have a living wage?

Pope Francis has spoken some pretty words about economic justice. The RCC has it within its power to put those words into action and to divest itself of its vast holdings to accomplish that very thing as an example to others. Yet...it does not do so. It is more of the "Let's you and him fight" attitude seen in so many other areas. Pope Francis is telling others to do what the RCC will not do. There's a word for that, and it's a word the Jesus they claim to follow used more than once in Matthew. The word is "hypocrites."

My eyes are open. I'm not just blowing smoke here. The Roman Catholic Church can change if it will change. If it does not have the will to do so, it will not change, Pope Francis or not. I'm watching to see whether the pretty words Francis has spoken actually are followed by actions. Such words have been spoken before, but without the action.

In the meantime, I will continue to point out where the Roman Catholic Church fails dismally in areas of social justice and equality. I'm surprised at how few others here will do so.

[Chrom]

73. " Nice speeches about economic justice are just that, if nothing real is done about it. "

Do you feel that way about Obama?

Because he IS OUR leader and he can do a helluva lot more about income inequality than the Pope!

[MineralMan]

79. Actually, the Pope has much more power in the RCC

than a President has in the USA. The Pope can issue infallible decrees. President Obama has to get Congress to propose the things he wants to do. You do not seem to understand hour our country's government actual works.

I suggest a reading of the Constitution of The United States soon.

[Chrom]

80. That's funny, Bush demanded tax cuts and he got them

Bush made up a bunch of stupid shit to start two wars and he got them.


Ever heard of the bully pulpit?

Obama needs to use it, then demand tax reform that makes sense.

We had two tax cuts during two wars.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out why we are in so much debt.


Obama can explain to the public, very slowly if necessary, that revenue comes from taxes and to pay down the debt, you have to raise taxes.

He can bring up Eisenhower and explain how taxes were high to pay for the war debt, because responsible citizens did not leave a pile of debt for their grandchildren.

He can explain that the pentagon cannot be audited due to fraud, waste, and abuse and how he will root this out rather than allow Congress to give them more money than they even need for equipment they don't even want.

I could go on....and so could Obama....

[NYC Liberal]

66. The institution preaches what he tells it to.

The "authority of the whole institution"? He IS the authority of the whole institution: the pope is the sole and supreme legislator and judge in the Church. And as such he can change the law at any time.

He has "changed the discussion" by saying "end of discussion" on women's rights and LGBT rights. He was hired to change the Church's image without actually changing policy. Not unlike the Republicans trying to change their image with people like Michael Steele, Bobby Jindal, and Marco Rubio -- different faces hiding the same old ideology.

[raouldukelives]

41. Progressive Dems love it. For the centrists, it's the wrong messenger for them.

If Rick Warren had said it, it'd be pennies from heaven.

[Cleita]

47. I'm no lover of the Catholic Church nor the Vatican and the Papacy, but

I have found myself defending all of those from unfair and untrue accusations this past year. Telling the unbiased truth about this Pope and the institution he represents is one thing, but the blatant hatred and unfounded accusations are another thing. I would do the same for Atheists and Satanists if the same dynamic was at work.

[Tikki]

48. The kind that has seen history and how it plays out...

I do applaud the pope's dialog on economic justice and even his attempts to reach out to the gay community
but, right now, he needs to talk about how family planning might bring about more economic opportunities
for families.

I would, also, like the pope to speak to families about how their family unit can grow stronger in ways without more
children.

I have seen progress stalled by settling for so much less than what can be said and done.


Tikki

[Orsino]

50. We can embrace progress made by this pope...

...without embracing the entire pope, as it were.

The things we seem to like about him align pretty well with things the 1% dislike. That is one of the best things about him, IMO.

[Tikki]

60. We can…if we are willing to settle…slow or stop progress...

just what I am concerned about.

Pope Francis opened the box…I hope he doesn't shut it on other issues that might help bring
more economic progress to families around the World.


Tikki

[Orsino]

85. It may be that he makes no further progress...

...and that in a few years even the diehard Catholics will be blase about his style. He will have moved the needle a bit, and that will still have been a huge accomplishment that makes all other popes look timid and weak.

[Tikki]

92. Yes, if the rich back candidates and legislature to open more money and opportunity to the poor and.

as a whole, if peoples of nations are more tolerant of gays and the poor, then he gets a lot of credit for speaking out.

As a person, not of religion, I wish he'd go further…in my way of thinking…'Nothing should stop him now."


Tikki

[NoOneMan]

51. Occam's Razor

Its not just for shaving

[RandySF]

57. Not Yet

I think the right wonders were caught flat-footed by the Pope's comments thus far.

[NaturalHigh]

59. Yes, a lot of people hate the Pope...

and there is still a lot of anti-Catholic bigotry in this country too. I didn't realize just how much until I married my (Catholic) wife.

[Egalitarian Thug]

62. If you believe the Catholic Church is going to hurt the 1% in any way,

you are being very naive. A lot of people have been seriously screwed up by the church and the church has essentially told them all to fuck off, and so they are understandably skeptical.

Then there's the fact that so far, the Pope hasn't actually done anything to help. So take a very long and perfectly consistent record of abusiveness and combine it with an orchestrated PR campaign with no active follow-up and it makes this new Pope look like the old Pope with a kinder, gentler face.

[Bluenorthwest]

65. Francis IS the 1%, fantastically wealthy, richest cleric of all time. The RCC is one of the world's

top 10 real estate owners, it owns somewhere between 15-20% of all the stocks and bonds that exist to own. The bigot 'Cardinal' Tim Dolan is the largest single owner of real estate in NYC, the RCC local holdings go in his name. Tens of millions, scores of millions are given to Peter's Pence, the name for the Pope's personal accounts, his 'mad money'. Americans alone give 60 million and up each year to that fund.
The Pope heads what is one of about a 12 organizations of that size in the world. There are many things he could do instantly to increase economic fairness, but he does not and he will not. He speaks of the poor to distract from their own status as global financial giants, just as he attacks gay people to distract from the horrible crimes against children his peers and cohort are so frequently tied up in. Dolan gave money to pay off child abusing priests, then he lied about it, and folks like the OP allow him to claim he is very moral and to attack gay people, this liar, this accomplice to child rape, this vastly wealthy man with servants and multiple homes and celebrity friends and political allies in high places.
And of course, no one who opposes the rights of vast amounts of people can be 'for the 99%' because some of that 99% are gay or use birth control. So subtract them. Francis stands for himself and his clerical peer group and their huge financial empire. To claim he is 'for the 1%' because he mutters some words between diatribes about 'the gay lobby' is really disgusting.

[Cleita]

84. Jesuits take a vow of poverty and cannot own wealth or property. Don't confuse the holdings

of the Catholic Church with Francis. He cannot own anything individually. Your post is misleading and inaccurate and seems to come from more hate than facts. I hope in the future he does address the grievances you have against him. He is very early into his papacy and seems to want to attack social justice first. I'm sure he has a list as he has added global warming to his first agenda. Give him some time.

[El_Johns]

90. You seem to be confusing the Pope with the Catholic Church.

[NYC Liberal]

96. The pope is an absolute monarch who has absolute control

over all of the Church's resources.

[El_Johns]

98. I doubt it.

[rug]

77. There some who despise religion no matter what.

[Bluenorthwest]

78. How the Vatican built a secret property empire. The Guardian. Who do YOU serve?

"Few passing London tourists would ever guess that the premises of Bulgari, the upmarket jewelers in New Bond Street, had anything to do with the pope. Nor indeed the nearby headquarters of the wealthy investment bank Altium Capital, on the corner of St James's Square and Pall Mall.

But these office blocks in one of London's most expensive districts are part of a surprising secret commercial property empire owned by the Vatican.

Behind a disguised offshore company structure, the church's international portfolio has been built up over the years, using cash originally handed over by Mussolini in return for papal recognition of the Italian fascist regime in 1929."
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jan/21/vatican-secret-property-empire-mussolini

[Chrom]

87. Pope's Personal Assistant to Oversee Bank Reform

Since taking office in March, Pope Francis has embarked on a number of changes to clean up the Vatican and root out corruption.
This has included making the bank - which has 114 employees and $7.1bn of assets - more transparent.

In August he issued a decree designed to combat money-laundering and prevent any financing of terrorism within the bank, formally known as the Institute for Works of Religion (IOR).He also set up a commission to investigate the bank and report back to him personally.

It followed the arrest in June of a senior cleric, Monsignor Nunzio Scarano, on suspicion of money laundering.
He and two others were arrested by Italian police on suspicion of trying to move 20m euros ($26m; £17m) illegally.

Pope Francis has also raised the prospect that the bank could be handed over to commercial banks or closed down unless it can reform itself.
In October the bank published its first annual report in its 125-year history.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25142123

[WhollyHeretic]

81. Dog-whistles, not just for republicans anymore!

[LeftyMom]

93. Until the Church makes real progress on women's rights they can fuck off.

You can't call yourself a champion of the poor when you're making women's lives worse.

[Chrom]

99. I'm pretty sure women are at least 50% of those suffering from poverty

n/t

[LeftyMom]

100. And the best way to improve women's status is to empower them to control their reproduction.

[Chrom]

103. who is stopping you from getting contraception- c'mon!

I was raised catholic, and my mom and most other women used birth control.

They realized it was a official church policy and still did whatever they wanted.

[LeftyMom]

104. The Catholic Church is blocking access for a lot of women in the developing world.

edit: And Catholic hospitals are blocking women from controlling their health care right here in the USofA. My very own mother lost her ability to get her tubes tied during her C-section when her doctor changed hospital affiliations to a Catholic institution late in her pregnancy.

[theHandpuppet]

105. Tell it to these women

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/07/09/church-begins-final-philippine-birth-control-battle/

Church begins final Philippine birth control battle

MANILA (AFP) – A relentless Catholic Church campaign to derail a birth control law in the Philippines begins its final phase at the Supreme Court, with the verdict to have monumental impacts for millions of poor Filipinos.

The court on Tuesday will start hearing arguments to challenges against a family planning law that President Benigno Aquino, defying intense church pressure, helped steer through parliament late last year.

It is the last legal recourse for the Church, which had for more than a decade led resistance efforts to birth control legislation in the mainly Catholic Southeast Asian nation by lobbying and intimidating politicians.

The Church, which has threatened Aquino and other supporters of the law with excommunication, held prayer vigils and masses on Tuesday morning ahead of the court hearing in an effort to influence the judges....

[theHandpuppet]

106. Or how about this?

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/ny-judge-orders-first-permanent-block-against-hhs-mandate/

[theHandpuppet]

109. Or this?

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/10/catholic-hospitals-bishops-contraception-abortion-health-care
http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2013/12/23/315288.htm
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/12/02/cardinal-dolan-affirms-church-opposition-to-obamacare-warns-backlash/
https://www.aclu.org/blog/tag/contraception-and-catholic-church
http://hotair.com/archives/2013/11/22/catholic-dioceses-non-profits-in-pa-win-injunction-against-hhs-contraception-mandate/

[theHandpuppet]

117. Let's add one more shall, we?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024261447

Hot off the press.

[polichick]

101. Sorry, but just the idea of a pope bugs me - how top-down can you get?

[Thinkingabout]

102. Isn't it amazing how those who disagree with anothers opinion raise holy hell while trying to force

Their beliefs on others. WTH, learn not everyone believes the same, grow to accept the difference and unless you are willing to change all your opinions then do not expect others to change to your beliefs.

[Populist_Prole]

108. Great observation. It's so simple a point yet so ignored

My very conservative father is just like that. My comic summation of him is that of "A very pushy salesman that doesn't like being sold to". He does not see the irony. All he sees is ideology that must prevail no matter what.

[grahamhgreen]

107. Yes. That's why we should talk about issues, not personalities.

[Chrom]

112. kick

nt

[theHandpuppet]

114. Rather than a kick...

How about a reply to posts #104, 105, 106 & 109?

[Chrom]

119. I'm not your monkey

thanks for the kick!

[theHandpuppet]

120. No answer, huh?

Well as long as we keep kicking this thread, the more people will see that you're either unwilling or incapable of rebutting those posts.

[Humanist_Activist]

121. You are just a homophobic bigot apologist, no more, no less...

may your time here be fleeting.