Kim Davis' meeting with the Pope a farce....

[BmorePat87]

(10-02-2015, 05:30 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Well it does destroy the family unit.  Just like countless other things that society pushes.

I'm not even sure where to start. Do I go with the fact that having two gay parents is better than no parents? Do I go with the fact that, unless you or your wife are gay, gay people are not involved in your marriage? Maybe I point out that most gay people do not have heterosexual marriages, making it unlikely that gay people are responsible for ending a significant amount of marriages?
What exactly is your argument for how it destroys the family unit?

[Mike M (the other one)]

(10-02-2015, 07:40 PM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: Successful marriages, between gay and straight couples who care for each other and their children, strengthen the family unit.

Divorce is what destroys it. People like Kim Davis has destroyed multiple families.

She's a bad and extreme example, both sides have them.

"I think" What Lucie's referring to is that the best case scenario for rearing children is one in which there is a loving and nurturing Father and Mother in a stable environment. 

And before you try to put words in my mouth, that doesn't mean that the other family unit types are incapable of rearing children, they are just not the preferred family unit type.

[Blutarsky]

 Perhaps not a farce after all.
“This was a private meeting initiated by the Vatican,” Mr. Staver said. “My contacts were Vatican officials in the United States. And I was informed the request came directly from the pontiff.”

Mr. Staver said the request had come on Sept. 14, the day Ms. Davis returned to work after her release from jail. Ms. Davis and her husband were picked up at the Omni Shoreham Hotel in a tan van by private security guards who spoke Italian, he said. She had been instructed to change her hairstyle so she would not be identified.

Mr. Staver said Ms. Davis was not among a large group of people meeting the pope. She saw no one else waiting to see the pope and no one else saw her. “Just think about it. If she was in a line, there is no way this could have been kept secret for five days,” he said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/03/world/europe/pope-francis-kim-davis-meeting.html

[BmorePat87]

(10-02-2015, 10:53 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: She's a bad and extreme example, both sides have them.

"I think" What Lucie's referring to is that the best case scenario for rearing children is one in which there is a loving and nurturing Father and Mother in a stable environment. 

And before you try to put words in my mouth, that doesn't mean that the other family unit types are incapable of rearing children, they are just not the preferred family unit type.

That's a bit more rational than saying it destroys the family. 

[Blutarsky]

(10-02-2015, 10:53 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: She's a bad and extreme example, both sides have them.

"I think" What Lucie's referring to is that the best case scenario for rearing children is one in which there is a loving and nurturing Father and Mother in a stable environment. 

And before you try to put words in my mouth, that doesn't mean that the other family unit types are incapable of rearing children, they are just not the preferred family unit type.

A mother has something unique to give to a child that most fathers can't give and a father has something unique to give a child that most mothers cant give.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(10-02-2015, 11:49 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Yeah, I'm calling shenanigans. She was chosen because of the approval by the Vatican of her current battle. The Vatican is now trying to pull on the reins a bit but the image is pretty clear. A non-Catholic figure as controversial as Davis was chosen for one reason, it's not hard to see.

I could not agree more, you nailed this.  The pope has a huge team of people who vet who he meets.  Let's put it this way; if Beyonce met with Kim Davis would we not conclude that she supports Davis's position?  If Ricky Gervais met with her would we not conclude that he supports her position?  If Mike Huckabee meets with her would we not conclude that he supports her position?  Why would you give the pope, who has a far bigger team of handlers that monitor and carefully control the man's every move, the benefit of the doubt that you wouldn't extend to any of those three people and myriad others?  This is yet another example of how disingenuous the current pope is.  Like I've said all along, a slick PR man but scrath the surface and it's the same old hide bound catholic dogma that has attempted to choke western civilization since its inception.

[GodHatesBengals]

(10-02-2015, 10:53 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: She's a bad and extreme example, both sides have them.

"I think" What Lucie's referring to is that the best case scenario for rearing children is one in which there is a loving and nurturing Father and Mother in a stable environment. 

And before you try to put words in my mouth, that doesn't mean that the other family unit types are incapable of rearing children, they are just not the preferred family unit type.

Actually studies have shown that gender doesn't matter; it's personality dynamic. Basically having a more nurturing type combined with a more commanding type make the best parents, regardless of whether they're same sex or opposite sex.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(10-02-2015, 11:17 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I could not agree more, you nailed this.  The pope has a huge team of people who vet who he meets.  Let's put it this way; if Beyonce met with Kim Davis would we not conclude that she supports Davis's position?  If Ricky Gervais met with her would we not conclude that he supports her position?  If Mike Huckabee meets with her would we not conclude that he supports her position?  Why would you give the pope, who has a far bigger team of handlers that monitor and carefully control the man's every move, the benefit of the doubt that you wouldn't extend to any of those three people and myriad others?  This is yet another example of how disingenuous the current pope is.  Like I've said all along, a slick PR man but scrath the surface and it's the same old hide bound catholic dogma that has attempted to choke western civilization since its inception.

Well the Pope might be supportive, but the Vatican is not. Don't blame it all on him. I think it's more of a case of Left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(10-02-2015, 11:56 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Well the Pope might be supportive, but the Vatican is not. Don't blame it all on him. I think it's more of a case of Left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing.

While I get your point I think you're being far too forgiving.  The Vatican, while subject to the errors inherent in any bureaucracy, is a rigidly controlled entity.  The pope has his handlers but he is not a baby in a basket being carried wherever he's told without his input.

[BmorePat87]

(10-02-2015, 11:53 PM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: Actually studies have shown that gender doesn't matter; it's personality dynamic. Basically having a more nurturing type combined with a more commanding type make the best parents, regardless of whether they're same sex or opposite sex.

If anything, it would be constant reinforcement of a "normal family" by society that would cause the child to feel like they are not getting the full experience. The problem is that you cannot make shows or movies or books that highlight these same sex parent families without someone crying that it's goal is to push a radical gay agenda and destroy families...

[Belsnickel]

(10-03-2015, 12:03 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: While I get your point I think you're being far too forgiving.  The Vatican, while subject to the errors inherent in any bureaucracy, is a rigidly controlled entity.  The pope has his handlers but he is not a baby in a basket being carried wherever he's told without his input.

From one article I read, the official setting up the meeting is not a fan of the current Pontiff and is more conservative. There may have been some intent behind it on his part. That being said, the comments Francis made on the plane show he likely does support Davis' position, I just think if it were up to him it would have been a meeting he would have avoided.