←back to thread

First American pope elected and will be known as Pope Leo XIV

(www.cnn.com)
606 points saikatsg | 5 comments | 08 May 25 16:30 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
nickthegreek ◴[08 May 25 17:22 UTC] No.43928638[source]▶
"Whereas Francis said, “Who am I to judge?” when asked about gay clerics, Cardinal Prevost has expressed less welcoming views to L.G.B.T.Q. people.

In a 2012 address to bishops, he lamented that Western news media and popular culture fostered “sympathy for beliefs and practices that are at odds with the gospel.” He cited the “homosexual lifestyle” and “alternative families comprised of same-sex partners and their adopted children.”"

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/02/world/americas/pope-candi...

replies(15): >>43928744 #>>43928820 #>>43928830 #>>43928904 #>>43928911 #>>43928948 #>>43929020 #>>43929030 #>>43929239 #>>43929343 #>>43929708 #>>43929793 #>>43929936 #>>43929957 #>>43931844 #
sepositus ◴[08 May 25 17:40 UTC] No.43928911[source]▶
Curious, do you think he's wrong that it's at odds with what was taught by the apostles? It's obviously unpopular, but I have yet to see a convincing argument (based in the teachings of the Bible) that promotes same-sex marriages.

If I were in his position, and part of my duty is to interpret and lead via "the holy scriptures," then I would probably want to be as accurate as possible.

replies(13): >>43928988 #>>43929022 #>>43929079 #>>43929106 #>>43929271 #>>43929309 #>>43929328 #>>43929364 #>>43929430 #>>43929877 #>>43930031 #>>43930845 #>>43931821 #
lo_zamoyski ◴[08 May 25 18:08 UTC] No.43929309[source]▶
It's important to realize that while the pope's main role is to guard revelation from corruption and manipulation, the teachings on same-sex attraction and the gay lifestyle do not require revelation. They rely solely on the natural law. Ethics rooted in unaided reason suffices.
replies(2): >>43929433 #>>43930503 #
1. FeteCommuniste ◴[08 May 25 18:17 UTC] No.43929433[source]▶
Oddly enough practically the only philosophers who buy "natural law" arguments against homosexuality are Christian.

Makes my motivated reasoning detector go off.

replies(1): >>43929709 #
2. moomin ◴[08 May 25 18:39 UTC] No.43929709[source]▶
Gay penguins are massively inconvenient for “natural law” arguments.
replies(1): >>43932588 #
3. ImJamal ◴[09 May 25 00:08 UTC] No.43932588[source]▶
I don't think you know what natural law means. This is from wikipedia.

It wouldn't matter if 99% of animals and humans were gay.

> Natural law[1] (Latin: ius naturale, lex naturalis) is a philosophical and legal theory that posits the existence of a set of inherent laws derived from nature and universal moral principles, which are discoverable through reason. In ethics, natural law theory[2] asserts that certain rights and moral values are inherent in human nature and can be understood universally, independent of enacted laws or societal norms. In jurisprudence, natural law—sometimes referred to as iusnaturalism[3] or jusnaturalism,[4] but not to be confused with what is called simply naturalism in legal philosophy[5][6]—holds that there are objective legal standards based on morality that underlie and inform the creation, interpretation, and application of human-made laws.

replies(1): >>43933002 #
4. harimau777 ◴[09 May 25 01:24 UTC] No.43933002{3}[source]▶
I don't see how an appeal to natural law holds any value since humanity has a near infinite ability for motivated reasoning. To the point where if someone advocates natural law that suggests to me either that they have a serious lack of wisdom or they aren't arguing in good faith.
replies(1): >>43940874 #
5. ImJamal ◴[09 May 25 21:07 UTC] No.43940874{4}[source]▶
Natural law isn't really related to the reason why people are motivated to do something. It is considered one motivation, but not the only one.

Also, what does your comment have to do with gay penguins that i was responding to? I was just trying to show natural law has nothing to do with gay animals.