Jesus’ family were supposedly immigrants and asylum seekers. Priests should step up. So should real christians.
Another argument for renaming the “No True Scotsman” fallacy to “No True Christian” to make it more self-explanatory.
I know that the name of the fallacy comes from an example, but I don’t think I’ve ever heard a scotsman invoke “No True Scotsman”. I’ve heard countless Americans invoke it though, and one side does it far more than the other.
“REAL CHRISTIANS”.
They’re all real christians, just some ignore the hate speech, and pretend it’s not part of the religion while most don’t ignore it at all. Fuck your hate religion, and the hate that it spawns.
The fascist people in charge of the deporting, the fascist militia, and the rest of the christians on the sidelines funding and supporting them - they’re ALL REAL CHRISTIANS.
Stop following their hate religion. Nobody on the outside thinks you’re part of anything but a hate religion, even if you have good intentions. You’re surrounded by people with bad intentions, and nobody can tell you apart.
I’m an atheist. That doesn’t mean I can’t tell the difference between those who are claim to be christians and those who actually try. It’s probably 100:1 in favor of fake christians, if not more.
Christians are supposed to follow the teachings of Christ. The old testament is just context. Jesus’s only extended story on what earns salvation or damnation is about the treatment of the poor, imprisoned, the sick, and foreigners.
What about pedophiles? How does he think they should be handled?
I dont know about the pope but i am a fan of:
If they have not wronged children: therapy
If they did: prison & therapyYou can’t cure it with therapy, and the Catholic church protects and habors pedophiles. I don’t give a damn what he says. The church is a cancer and needs to be destroyed. If you support the church you support pedophiles.
deleted by creator
Likely with kid gloves
😂 🤣
‘People of Faith Stand with Immigrants’
Yeah, I don’t think “people of faith”, at least the more conservative ones, are going to be taking that lesson very seriously… Good luck changing their mindset.
🤷♂️
Evangelicals are not, but there are progressives within the ranks of christianity. The actual message of the new testament is down right socialist.
Jesus died a pacifistic anarchist at the very least
Pacifist yes — definitely not an anarchist. He instructed his followers to obey all laws in all situations that didn’t conflict with loving God and loving other people. However, he despised “tradition” and flaunted it constantly.
Anarchists aren’t against following laws, they’re against unjust hierarchies
What do you think the word “communist” meant before Marx?
Many of these people in US concentration camps are catholic. The thing that’s crazy is how many insane catholics like JD Vance are cheering this on.
Vance is part of a specific far right hyperpolitical faction of Catholics that he adopted via his patron Thiel.
There are a lot of people who wear the label catholic because they always have, not because they identify with other catholics or believe that the pope is the earthly voice of god.
JD Vance is a fascist white supremacist who happens to be catholic. The fascism and white supremacy being more important to him than the catholicism…
If the catholic church somehow turns into a force for good this century that would be awesome. Its weird to think they might be the adults in the room in a lot of cases.
The church is large and complex and run by many different people. It has been a force for good and evil all along.
The catholic church has been a considerable “force for good” for centuries. Whether or not the bad they do outweighs that is a question of how much value you assign to the bad things they do and how much credit you give them for good intentions.
Sure, they’re anti-abortion and implicitly sexist, but they’re also pro-mercy, anti-war, anti-death-penalty, and possibly the most pro-science of all theistic churches. Bishops in the USA are obnoxious right-wing partisans, but in other countries they’re firmly in the local center or on the bleeding edge of the local left. (There’s a reason why the first American-born pop wasn’t a working priest in the USA.)
Its most likely the bias I have from only knowing Americas Catholicism then. Thanks for the info!
I have no idea what you’re basing this comment on.
The sins of the catholic church are many and global and as large and unforgivable as their wealth and reach and history:
From the very beginning they were antithetical to plurality - soon as they got power first order of business was the destruction of classical Hellenistic learning centres.
Then crusades, inquisitions, colonialism and forced conversions, complicit in slavery, the witch trials, and interference with politics all over the world.
Opposition to human rights, anti-science (dark ages anyone), support for dictatorships, residential school systems targeting indigenous children, and the ongoing sexual abuse crisis with institutional cover-ups.
And their worst crime of the modern era: their response to the AIDS crisis in the 1980s.
Strict opposition to condom use (in fact actively lobbied against condom distribution and sex education) even as HIV/AIDS spread globally - particularly devastating in heavily Catholic regions like sub-Saharan Africa, the Philippines, and Latin America where the Church wielded significant influence over public health policy (as they still do). Millions of infections and deaths directly attributed to this crime against humanity.
But yes, “force for good”.
I’m basing it on an understand of history and nuance.
The roman catholic church is at least sixteen centuries old. I dare you to name any human organization of which endured for over a millennium and did not partake in something odious to modern sensibilities.
I could probably go point-for-point with a rebuttal to each bad things you noted, but the only one that really merits rebuttal is “dark ages”. The term is out-of-vouge in modern scholarship largely because it was essentially an anti-theistic smear from the start; the roman catholic church’s obsessive need to keep books and insist that the world was made by a rational intelligence laid the fundamental foundation for the renaissance, and the era between the fall of Rome and the enlightenment was far more advanced than the term you used implies.
Like I said, whether the roman catholic church is a net-good in 2025 is entirely based on how you weight the value of both the good and bad things they do. You’re free to assign them an arbitrarily high negative value because you have religious differences with them if you like, but pretending that they’ve never done anything good and aren’t doing anything good today is a position of willful ignorance.
Come to think of it, I doubt you can find a single organization that was even a century old which doesn’t have at least one black mark against them.
So you could go point for point for rebuttal but don’t and instead write 5 paragraphs of arm waving and whataboutism - “what about other old institutions” - I don’t care, we’re talking about the church.
The comment I replied to, you said “considerable force for good for centuries” now you want to limit it to 2025?
Go ahead and rebut how millions of lives were lost by actively sabotaging condom use and every other crime I mentioned.
I said they’re an overall negative, anti-human institution with a long well documented history of points to back it up.
I didn’t say “nothing good” has come out, beautiful flowers come out of excrement too.
You held on to the “dark ages” - but skipped over the destruction of knowledge that led to them and you wrote what you consider a rebuttal. So let’s talk about that:
They didn’t systematically keep fuck all.
Some scribes kept some books, the ones they could hide from the church. Most of the old writings of classical authors have been lost.
Between 500-1000AD the Church systematically destroyed classical libraries and learning centers. The burning of the Library of Alexandria and closure of philosophical schools eliminated centuries of knowledge in science, mathematics, and philosophy.
The Church controlled virtually all education, restricting literacy to clergy and limiting curriculum to religious doctrine.
Church prohibited dissection and medical research, leading to the loss of advanced Roman medical knowledge. Illness attributed to sin rather than natural causes, impeding medical advancement for centuries.
The Church burned books, destroyed manuscripts, and executed or exiled intellectuals who challenged religious orthodoxy.
It’s an obscene rewriting of history to thank the executioner for the rivers of blood that fed what came after.
Are you an atheist, a neo-pagan, or just a protesting with an anti-papal bias?
I ignored most of your anti-catholic bullshit because that’s what it is – anti-catholic bullshit. You asked where I got my assertion from, and I answered. If you want to get into more detail, sure, let’s do that.
Go ahead and rebut how millions of lives were lost by actively sabotaging condom use
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_HIV/AIDS
Condoms are very effective at stopping the spread of HIV, but they do fuckall to keep anyone infected with HIV from developing AIDS and dying. If the catholics are providing 25% of the world healthcare for people with AIDS, that means that there are “millions” of people alive today because of the roman church. And if celebrities like Princess Diana or Magic Johnson get credit for humanizing victims of the AIDS epidemic, so does the catholic church.
I don’t want to defend their wrongheaded opposition to prophylactics due to their family planning usage, but how much blame they get for the spread of HIV and how much credit they get for research and healthcare is, like I said. complex as fuck.
Between 500-1000AD the Church systematically destroyed classical libraries and learning centers.
To paraphrase wikipedia, “citation fucking needed.” Here’s some random links I found, starting with two biased statements.
https://churchandstate.org.uk/2023/01/christian-vandalism-of-the-classical-world/ https://www.christian-thinktank.com/qburnbx.html
The first is a pop-formatted article by a rather obviously biased author, who doesn’t seem to have any actual citations for his claims. The second is a more scholarly formatted article from someone with a more pro-christian bias, but numerous citations are included. Here’s a less biased take, whose short form is “no”:
The Church burned books, destroyed manuscripts, and executed or exiled intellectuals who challenged religious orthodoxy.
I’m going to infer that you’re alluding to the story of Galileo Galilei here. In short, Galileo was condemned by the church not because he was an “intellectual who challenged religious orthodoxy”, but because he didn’t even try and hide his anti-catholic bias. There’s a world of difference between telling the king he’s wrong and telling the king that he should abdicate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei
To paraphrase what I said before, if you want to assert as a matter of faith that Christianity in general or the roman church in particular are bad and evil, then there’s no way I could convince you otherwise. If your perspective is more religiously agnostic, however, I encourage you to do a bit more research before you repeat the biased accusations of others as if they were objective fact.
We haven’t studied rhe same History.
Good on the USB, got the religion right. You know who doesn’t? People who hate their neighbours, casted stones in the capitol and know compassion only for their own.
These people pretend to be religious, because it happens to be popular with conservatives, not because they understand religion
Yeah and if prayer worked we wouldn’t need hospitals.
What exactly is your take here lmao. The headline says nothing about prayer. It calls for actual physical action that is likely to positively impact outcomes for at least some immigrants. I personally consider this to be a huge net good, as it speaks respect and love for immigrants with a voice that a not-insignificant number of conservatives are willing to hear from. Did you just see the word “catholic” and wanna dunk on Christians?
That’s the point. We’re doing the heavy lifting, why do we need an invisible sky Santa? And why now? Kinda sucks if you were born 200 years ago, no? Was I supposed to pray for leeches back then? There is no god.
Time to put the security blanket away.
I honestly can’t see the point you’re trying to make.
It’s not 2014 anymore
yeah, right. not like the pope knows anything about religion. /s
He went on to say, “especially the little boys, they need to be escorted the most.”
Don’t make me like you, kiddy diddler.
Sometimes working with people you dislike to do a good thing isn’t a bad idea. No True Scotsman fallacy is why America is where it is now.
The catholic church: “We’re better than everyone else, even the presence of a priest on your behalf will get you special treatment.”
No. No, it won’t. No, it shouldn’t. Ever.
Fuck religion and fuck those that support it.
If youre in a position of power, why not use it for good? Yeah, they shouldnt have it in the first place but in a crisis those sorts of discussions are less important than protecting the vulnerable.
Just like joining a military, some people are born sheep and need to cling to a rigid structure to thrive. Without it, you have all sorts of nasty consequences from people who can’t self-actualize and need to believe in being part of something magical that has a plan for them.
Not something I’d ever want for myself, but as I get older I’ve come to realize that there are many people, people that con artists like Reagan, Trump, McConnell, and every Mega Church leader ever, capitalize and prey on because they need to be told what to think to feel safe.
I don’t think the answer is to abolish the crutches of the weak minded, so much as for society through representative government to regulate what they teach to minimize the potential for turning the structure weak minds crave into a potential army of useful idiots for those that would coopt such movements.
