Pope Says Governments Should Redistribute Wealth To Help The Poor
Pope Francis: Governments Should Redistribute Wealth To The Poor (via http://crooksandliars.com)
By John Amato May 9, 2014 9:22 am – Comments Conservatives will not be happy after Pope Francis called for not only income equality, but for world governments to “redistribute” their wealth to the poors. Conservative media is yelling “Stop the printing…
90 responses to Pope Says Governments Should Redistribute Wealth To Help The Poor
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Obewon May 9th, 2014 at 13:40
The fastest way for the USA to immediately end poverty is nationally adopting SeaTac’s $15 minimum wage creating jobs by increasing disposable income. Voting out the Godless Oligarch Party in November is now a Papal edict: ‘”Trickle-Down Economics ‘Has Never Been Confirmed By The Facts’”-Pope Francis knows record U.S. $16 T GDP comprises a measly 7% in wages! Greedy cheapskates are the cause of today’s poverty. http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/11/26/2997451/pope-francis-trickle/
And it’s our government that feeds the poor through food-banks & churches: -NYC Food Bank procures and distributes food to a network of more than 1,000 community-based member programs citywide, helping to provide 400,000 free meals a day for New Yorkers in need. In addition, CookShop, our government-funded nutrition education program reaches approximately 30,000 children, teens and adults. Income support services including food stamp direct service and outreach and training and advocacy; as well as Free Income Tax Services for the working poor that last year put more than $80 million back in the pockets of low-income New Yorkers through tax refunds and Earned Income Tax Credits (EITC http://www.foodbanknyc.org/about-food-bank
John Tarter May 9th, 2014 at 16:29
That’s right, keep people dependent on the government, that is the way to go for sure. Robbing people of their dignity and self worth by constantly providing what people should be providing for themselves breeds only contempt and continuing generational poverty.
Bunya May 9th, 2014 at 17:05
Oh wow! That’s the exact same crap millionaires Rush Limbaugh and Gwen Beck spew daily! You’ve fell for their talking points hook, line and sinker . I’m sure they’re both elated that feeble-minded folks such as yourself are still buying their bullsh*t!
Alan May 9th, 2014 at 17:14
sshsss! don’t chase the right-wingers away. We’re making money off them :)
fancypants May 9th, 2014 at 19:23
the right wingers want us around because their lawyers wont let them steal from each other
Obewon May 10th, 2014 at 02:22
John Tarter truth in advertising dictates that you change your ID to “General Corporate Welfare” via your advocating the $60B Annually that Big Oil squeezes out of taxpayers paying 3+ times their 13% federal tax rates that Billionaire Romney pays. You realize of course that big oil received over $8 T in subsidies since GHWB’s 1988 via your GOP votes? Big Oil as a whole receives 101.5% income tax credits and are in fact Welfare Queens like TP’s favorite rodeo clown Cliven Bundy! Oh myyyy…
jasperjava May 12th, 2014 at 02:56
John Tarter: “Robbing people of their dignity and self worth”
People only lose their dignity and self-worth because a$$hole right-wing racist RepubliKKKAns treat them with hatred and contempt.
Obewon May 9th, 2014 at 13:40
The fastest way for the USA to immediately end poverty is nationally adopting SeaTac’s $15 minimum wage that also creates jobs by increasing disposable income. Voting out the Godless Oligarch Party in November is now a Papal edict: ‘”Trickle-Down Economics ‘Has Never Been Confirmed By The Facts’”-Pope Francis knows record U.S. $16 T GDP comprises a measly 7% in wages! Greedy cheapskates are the cause of today’s poverty. http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/11/26/2997451/pope-francis-trickle/
And it’s our government that feeds the poor through food-banks & churches: -NYC Food Bank procures and distributes food to a network of more than 1,000 community-based member programs citywide, helping to provide 400,000 free meals a day for New Yorkers in need. In addition, CookShop, our government-funded nutrition education program reaches approximately 30,000 children, teens and adults. Income support services including food stamp direct service and outreach and training and advocacy; as well as Free Income Tax Services for the working poor that last year put more than $80 million back in the pockets of low-income New Yorkers through tax refunds and Earned Income Tax Credits (EITC http://www.foodbanknyc.org/about-food-bank
John Tarter May 9th, 2014 at 16:29
That’s right, keep people dependent on the government, that is the way to go for sure. Robbing people of their dignity and self worth by constantly providing what people should be providing for themselves breeds only contempt and continuing generational poverty.
Bunya May 9th, 2014 at 17:05
Oh wow! That’s the exact same crap millionaires Rush Limbaugh and Gwen Beck spew daily! You’ve fell for their talking points hook, line and sinker . I’m sure they’re both elated that feeble-minded folks such as yourself are still buying their bullsh*t!
Alan May 9th, 2014 at 17:14
sshsss! don’t chase the right-wingers away. We’re making money off them :)
fancypants May 9th, 2014 at 19:23
the right wingers want us around because their lawyers wont let them steal from each other
Obewon May 10th, 2014 at 02:22
John Tarter truth in advertising dictates that you change your ID to “General Corporate Welfare” via your advocating the $60B Annually that Big Oil squeezes out of taxpayers paying 3+ times their 13% federal tax rates that Billionaire Romney pays on net Income after very generous deductions. You realize of course that big oil received over $8 T in subsidies since GHWB’s 1988 via your GOP votes? Big Oil as a whole receives 101.5% income tax credits, paying less than $0 in Federal Income taxes, and are in fact Welfare Queens like TP’s favorite rodeo clown Cliven Bundy! Oh myyyy… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWYXIuuI-Rg
jasperjava May 12th, 2014 at 02:56
John Tarter: “Robbing people of their dignity and self worth”
People only lose their dignity and self-worth because a$$hole right-wing racist RepubliKKKAns treat them with hatred and contempt.
Bunya May 9th, 2014 at 13:59
My question is, when is the Vatican going to help feed the hungry, house the homeless, etc.? They are the richest tax exempt corporation in the world. I bet if they redistributed THIEIR wealth, poverty around the world would be cut in half.
John Tarter May 9th, 2014 at 16:21
They would never redistribute their wealth because it seems this Pope is an economic liberal and he only wants others to redistribute other peoples money.
arc99 May 9th, 2014 at 16:46
contrary to what radio entertainers tell you, we liberals are taxpayers too. it is just as much OUR money as it is yours.
as far as Pope Francis is concerned, there again you are mistaken, as he has already begun what will undoubtedly be a process that takes years if not generations to change the way the Church handles wealth
any questions?
http://ncronline.org/news/vatican/vatican-office-calls-religious-sisters-priests-live-poorly-reject-capitalism
Mar. 10, 2014
ROMEThe Vatican office responsible for the approximately 900,000 priests and brothers and sisters in religious orders around the world called on them this weekend to re-evaluate their holdings of wealth and to issue critiques of the global market capitalist economy, calling it unjust to the world’s neediest.
Holding a conference near the Vatican for some 500 treasurers of the global orders Saturday and Sunday, the Vatican office looked back to the earliest teachings of the church, calling on the religious to reject accumulation of goods in order to follow Jesus, “the poor man who lives in solidarity with the poor.”
Alan May 9th, 2014 at 17:13
hey, uh, be careful there about radio “entertainers”
arc99 May 9th, 2014 at 17:45
point taken Alan.
it just chaps my hide when folks on the right tell Barbara Streisand to shut up, then faithfully tune in to Rush to get their daily talking points.
Neither Limbaugh nor Streisand has had any career other than in public media so I have never understood the double-standard.
What it boils down to is that when it comes to honesty, some folks on the radio are better at it than others.
Shades May 9th, 2014 at 17:48
Touche Alan. Seriously though, I’d like to see Arc contributing op-eds (or whatever they’re called on a blog). The comments section doesn’t do him justice.
arc99 May 9th, 2014 at 18:02
thank you for the compliment Shades. As I approach retirement age, I have fantasized about being a syndicated blogger and earning a few pennies here and there from advertising.
I suppose I would have to clean up my vernacular and eliminate even my asterisked swear-words. I wonder what the thesaurus would suggest as a synonym for ‘what the -bleep-‘
Shades May 9th, 2014 at 22:35
Actually, ‘what the bleep’ should work just fine.
Alan May 10th, 2014 at 15:22
Arc….why not submit a story via the “submit story” button at the top of the home page and see how it flies?
John Tarter May 9th, 2014 at 21:42
You might like some government bureaucrat deciding where your money goes as far as helping the needy , but I don’t. I can do a better job donating to a private charity who only uses a small percentage for administrative tasks.
Priests and Brothers have taken vows of poverty, so what does that have to do with us taxpayers? The Popes call for governments to redistribute the wealth would be fine if they (governments) provided some sort of product that they could make a profit from, but they don’t. They take it from us, from our labors with the threat of sanctions if we don’t comply. No, we didn’t set up our form of government as a charitable organization. They should stick with their purpose – the affairs of state i.e. the military, the courts, and relations between nations.
arc99 May 9th, 2014 at 21:52
From its inception, the US Constitution empowered the federal government to “take it from us”, so if you are going to refer to the origins of our Republic, then let us include all of the pertinent details, specifically Article 1 Section 8 which appears under the powers of CONGRESS.
Your personal opinion notwithstanding, it is Congress which determines how the tax dollars they are Constitutionally empowered to collect, are spent.
Now if there is a clause here which restricts general welfare to the military, the courts, and relations between nations, please point it out. I see no such clause.
Section 8 – The Text
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and **general Welfare** of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
John Tarter May 9th, 2014 at 22:27
You liberals have stretched the meaning of the “General Welfare” clause just like you have done to other parts of the Constitution to make it conform to your way of thinking. The Founders would be aghast at seeing the Federal Government involving itself in things like toilets and light bulbs.
For example, the setting up of public heath hospitals to deal with communicable diseases would be a “general welfare” mandate, while the inclusion of health care facilities for cradle to grave care would not. See, it’s pretty simple if you only think correctly.
Shades May 9th, 2014 at 22:40
“General welfare” is a pretty big tent. After all, it does have the word “general” in it (look it up). And talk about stretching, you cons have turned the second amendment into a freaking bungee cord jump. Please respond ASAP. Your blathering is apparently quite profitable for the website.
arc99 May 9th, 2014 at 22:58
Shades, I think it is one of the great paradoxes of contemporary politics where the American right tries to lay exclusive claim to the principles instrumental in the founding of our country.
What they never mention is that the legislation passed by the British Parliament which led to the original Boston Tea Party was an act which enabled one of the largest companies in the world at the time, the East India Tea Company to avoid paying taxes. Sounds like Occupy Wall St to me.
http://www.bostonteapartyship.com/the-tea-act
Provisions of the Tea Act Prior to the Tea Act, the British East India Company Tea was required to exclusively sell its tea at auction in London. This required the British East India Company to pay a tax per pound of tea sold which added to the company’s financial burdens. The Tea Act aborted this restriction and granted the British East India Company license to export their tea to the American colonies. This opened up the British East India Company’s markets to the lucrative American colonies. Additionally, under the Tea Act, **duties Britain charged on tea shipped to the American colonies would be waived or refunded upon sale**.
arc99 May 9th, 2014 at 22:46
agreeing with your interpretation of the Constitution and thinking correctly are hardly the same thing.
what the Founders would have been aghast at, is entirely irrelevant to life in the 21st century. . they would be aghast at women voting. they would be aghast at a black man serving on the Supreme Court. they would be aghast at compensating Native Americans for the genocide perpetrated against them.
in all likelihood they would also have been aghast at a corporation (Monsanto) suing farmers for cultivating seeds blown onto their property by the wind. whenever someone refers to the personal opinions of the Founders, I doubt they would have approved of a system where corporations control every aspect of our lives and government is powerless to intervene when corporate profitability conflicts with the public good. in any event, the personal opinions of the Founders do not govern us.
there is nothing in the US Constitution explicitly authorizing the federal government to have the power to authorize and approve the design and operation of vehicles providing public transit for hire. is the Federal Aviation Authority “stretching” the intent of the general welfare clause?
your definition of general welfare restricted to the military, the courts, and international relations is your personal opinion. my definition of general welfare which includes providing for public safety and health is my personal opinion. it is up to Congress to decide which vision prevails. that is how our system works. you can certainly argue that my position is bad policy and I can do the same in describing your vision. but to argue that my position involves “stretching” the Constitution is nonsense as there is no explicit definition of general welfare. it is up to Congress. period.
jasperjava May 12th, 2014 at 02:51
John Tarter: “I can do a better job donating to a private charity who only uses a small percentage for administrative tasks”
Then why don’t you, you schmuck?
Bunya May 9th, 2014 at 16:56
@ John Tarter – I am no fan of the Catholic church, but I’m a big fan of this pope. He talks of equality and the brotherhood of man – two subjects that I’m sure you know nothing about.
I’m sorry you feel that the hungry should starve and the homeless should die from exposure to the elements, but I’m not surprised. Many conservative chrischuns wish ill upon their fellow man.
John Tarter May 9th, 2014 at 21:15
No, we do not wish ill will upon our less fortunate fellow men, but believe in each Christian helping those people through PRIVATE CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS. The problem starts when governments get involved and more often than not waste and fraud are the hallmarks of their redistributional process. I’m surprised that the Holy Father is not aware of this pertinent fact.
mea_mark May 9th, 2014 at 21:30
And I suppose you don’t think there is any fraud and corruption in the Churches here in America today. I’ll bet there is less waste and corruption in the government than there is in the churches here in America today. The problem starts when there is no regulation and the charlatans are allowed to fleece the people under the guise of religion.
John Tarter May 9th, 2014 at 22:38
You can’t be serious in betting that there is less waste and corruption in the government can you? Good heavens, where have you been of late? The waste and fraud in Medicare, Medicaid, SSI, SSDI and other government programs is legendary and is admitted to by members of Congress routinely. I mean really, it costs the government something like $14, 000.00 to educate one pupil while parochial schools do it for half that amount.
jasperjava May 12th, 2014 at 02:48
“it costs the government something like $14, 000.00 to educate one pupil while parochial schools do it for half that amount.”
How much does it cost to indoctrinate a child, when all you need is ONE book that explains everything?
Forget science, mathematics, social studies, when you have a religious indoctrination that misleads students into believing fairy tales like Creationism.
Bunya May 11th, 2014 at 01:01
Really? Where are all these “charitable contributions” you speak of? If we depended on Christians to actually help those less fortunate, we wouldn’t need government intervention now, would we? Unfortunately, in this world money trumps everything, and don’t think for one minute that these churches are going to pony up any up any of their cash to help someone else. Nope, they depend on the generosity of their parishioners to help the destitute and the parishioners are depending on the generosity of the church. Thank God we have the government helping out. If not, we’d be living in a dog-eat-dog society,brothers fighting brothers for scraps.
BTW, if you’re one of these so-called “Christians”, perhaps you can kick in an additional $3 million in donations to help the needy? You know, to pick up the slack left by other “Christians” who would love to help, but just can’t spare the funds – like Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, the Koch brothers, etc.
Alan May 9th, 2014 at 17:12
he’s more of an economic socialist, which is even better :)
Alan May 9th, 2014 at 17:11
This Pope has been very focused on the hungry and homeless and has done more to redirect the focus of the church than any Pope in recent memory.
Bunya May 9th, 2014 at 13:59
My question is, when is the Vatican going to help feed the hungry, house the homeless, etc.? They are the richest tax exempt corporation in the world. I bet if they redistributed THIEIR wealth, poverty around the world would be cut in half.
John Tarter May 9th, 2014 at 16:21
They would never redistribute their wealth because it seems this Pope is an economic liberal and he only wants others to redistribute other peoples money.
arc99 May 9th, 2014 at 16:46
contrary to what radio entertainers tell you, we liberals are taxpayers too. it is just as much OUR money as it is yours.
as far as Pope Francis is concerned, there again you are mistaken, as he has already begun what will undoubtedly be a process that takes years if not generations to change the way the Church handles wealth
any questions?
http://ncronline.org/news/vatican/vatican-office-calls-religious-sisters-priests-live-poorly-reject-capitalism
Mar. 10, 2014
ROMEThe Vatican office responsible for the approximately 900,000 priests and brothers and sisters in religious orders around the world called on them this weekend to re-evaluate their holdings of wealth and to issue critiques of the global market capitalist economy, calling it unjust to the world’s neediest.
Holding a conference near the Vatican for some 500 treasurers of the global orders Saturday and Sunday, the Vatican office looked back to the earliest teachings of the church, calling on the religious to reject accumulation of goods in order to follow Jesus, “the poor man who lives in solidarity with the poor.”
Alan May 9th, 2014 at 17:13
hey, uh, be careful there about radio “entertainers”
arc99 May 9th, 2014 at 17:45
point taken Alan.
it just chaps my hide when folks on the right tell Barbara Streisand to shut up, then faithfully tune in to Rush to get their daily talking points.
Neither Limbaugh nor Streisand has had any career other than in public media so I have never understood the double-standard.
What it boils down to is that when it comes to honesty, some folks on the radio are better at it than others.
Shades May 9th, 2014 at 17:48
Touche Alan. Seriously though, I’d like to see Arc contributing op-eds (or whatever they’re called on a blog). The comments section doesn’t do him justice.
arc99 May 9th, 2014 at 18:02
thank you for the compliment Shades. As I approach retirement age, I have fantasized about being a syndicated blogger and earning a few pennies here and there from advertising.
I suppose I would have to clean up my vernacular and eliminate even my asterisked swear-words. I wonder what the thesaurus would suggest as a synonym for ‘what the -bleep-‘
Shades May 9th, 2014 at 22:35
Actually, ‘what the bleep’ should work just fine.
Alan May 10th, 2014 at 15:22
Arc….why not submit a story via the “submit story” button at the top of the home page and see how it flies?
John Tarter May 9th, 2014 at 21:42
You might like some government bureaucrat deciding where your money goes as far as helping the needy , but I don’t. I can do a better job donating to a private charity who only uses a small percentage for administrative tasks.
Priests and Brothers have taken vows of poverty, so what does that have to do with us taxpayers? The Popes call for governments to redistribute the wealth would be fine if they (governments) provided some sort of product that they could make a profit from, but they don’t. They take it from us, from our labors with the threat of sanctions if we don’t comply. No, we didn’t set up our form of government as a charitable organization. They should stick with their purpose – the affairs of state i.e. the military, the courts, and relations between nations.
arc99 May 9th, 2014 at 21:52
From its inception, the US Constitution empowered the federal government to “take it from us”, so if you are going to refer to the origins of our Republic, then let us include all of the pertinent details, specifically Article 1 Section 8 which appears under the powers of CONGRESS.
Your personal opinion notwithstanding, it is Congress which determines how the tax dollars they are Constitutionally empowered to collect, are spent.
Now if there is a clause here which restricts general welfare to the military, the courts, and relations between nations, please point it out. I see no such clause.
Section 8 – The Text
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and **general Welfare** of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
John Tarter May 9th, 2014 at 22:27
You liberals have stretched the meaning of the “General Welfare” clause just like you have done to other parts of the Constitution to make it conform to your way of thinking. The Founders would be aghast at seeing the Federal Government involving itself in things like toilets and light bulbs.
For example, the setting up of public heath hospitals to deal with communicable diseases would be a “general welfare” mandate, while the inclusion of health care facilities for cradle to grave care would not. See, it’s pretty simple if you only think correctly.
Shades May 9th, 2014 at 22:40
“General welfare” is a pretty big tent. After all, it does have the word “general” in it (look it up). And talk about stretching, you cons have turned the second amendment into a freaking bungee cord jump. Please respond ASAP. Your blathering is apparently quite profitable for the website.
arc99 May 9th, 2014 at 22:58
Shades, I think it is one of the great paradoxes of contemporary politics where the American right tries to lay exclusive claim to the principles instrumental in the founding of our country.
What they never mention is that the legislation passed by the British Parliament which led to the original Boston Tea Party was an act which enabled one of the largest companies in the world at the time, the East India Tea Company to avoid paying taxes. Sounds like Occupy Wall St to me.
http://www.bostonteapartyship.com/the-tea-act
Provisions of the Tea Act Prior to the Tea Act, the British East India Company Tea was required to exclusively sell its tea at auction in London. This required the British East India Company to pay a tax per pound of tea sold which added to the company’s financial burdens. The Tea Act aborted this restriction and granted the British East India Company license to export their tea to the American colonies. This opened up the British East India Company’s markets to the lucrative American colonies. Additionally, under the Tea Act, **duties Britain charged on tea shipped to the American colonies would be waived or refunded upon sale**.
arc99 May 9th, 2014 at 22:46
agreeing with your interpretation of the Constitution and thinking correctly are hardly the same thing.
what the Founders would have been aghast at, is entirely irrelevant to life in the 21st century. . they would be aghast at women voting. they would be aghast at a black man serving on the Supreme Court. they would be aghast at compensating Native Americans for the genocide perpetrated against them.
in all likelihood they would also have been aghast at a corporation (Monsanto) suing farmers for cultivating seeds blown onto their property by the wind. whenever someone refers to the personal opinions of the Founders, I doubt they would have approved of a system where corporations control every aspect of our lives and government is powerless to intervene when corporate profitability conflicts with the public good. in any event, the personal opinions of the Founders do not govern us.
there is nothing in the US Constitution explicitly authorizing the federal government to have the power to authorize and approve the design and operation of vehicles providing public transit for hire. is the Federal Aviation Authority “stretching” the intent of the general welfare clause?
your definition of general welfare restricted to the military, the courts, and international relations is your personal opinion. my definition of general welfare which includes providing for public safety and health is my personal opinion. it is up to Congress to decide which vision prevails. that is how our system works. you can certainly argue that my position is bad policy and I can do the same in describing your vision. but to argue that my position involves “stretching” the Constitution is nonsense as there is no explicit definition of general welfare. it is up to Congress. period.
jasperjava May 12th, 2014 at 02:51
John Tarter: “I can do a better job donating to a private charity who only uses a small percentage for administrative tasks”
Then why don’t you, you schmuck?
Bunya May 9th, 2014 at 16:56
@ John Tarter – I am no fan of the Catholic church, but I’m a big fan of this pope. He talks of equality and the brotherhood of man – two subjects that I’m sure you know nothing about.
I’m sorry you feel that the hungry should starve and the homeless should die from exposure to the elements, but I’m not surprised. Many conservative chrischuns wish ill upon their fellow man.
John Tarter May 9th, 2014 at 21:15
No, we do not wish ill will upon our less fortunate fellow men, but believe in each Christian helping those people through PRIVATE CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS. The problem starts when governments get involved and more often than not waste and fraud are the hallmarks of their redistributional process. I’m surprised that the Holy Father is not aware of this pertinent fact.
mea_mark May 9th, 2014 at 21:30
And I suppose you don’t think there is any fraud and corruption in the Churches here in America today. I’ll bet there is less waste and corruption in the government than there is in the churches here in America today. The problem starts when there is no regulation and the charlatans are allowed to fleece the people under the guise of religion.
John Tarter May 9th, 2014 at 22:38
You can’t be serious in betting that there is less waste and corruption in the government can you? Good heavens, where have you been of late? The waste and fraud in Medicare, Medicaid, SSI, SSDI and other government programs is legendary and is admitted to by members of Congress routinely. I mean really, it costs the government something like $14, 000.00 to educate one pupil while parochial schools do it for half that amount.
jasperjava May 12th, 2014 at 02:48
“it costs the government something like $14, 000.00 to educate one pupil while parochial schools do it for half that amount.”
How much does it cost to indoctrinate a child, when all you need is ONE book that explains everything?
Forget science, mathematics, social studies, when you have a religious indoctrination that misleads students into believing fairy tales like Creationism.
Bunya May 11th, 2014 at 01:01
Really? Where are all these “charitable contributions” you speak of? If we depended on Christians to actually help those less fortunate, we wouldn’t need government intervention now, would we? Unfortunately, in this world money trumps everything, and don’t think for one minute that these churches are going to pony up any up any of their cash to help someone else. Nope, they depend on the generosity of their parishioners to help the destitute and the parishioners are depending on the generosity of the church. Thank God we have the government helping out. If not, we’d be living in a dog-eat-dog society,brothers fighting brothers for scraps.
BTW, if you’re one of these so-called “Christians”, perhaps you can kick in an additional $3 million in donations to help the needy? You know, to pick up the slack left by other “Christians” who would love to help, but just can’t spare the funds – like Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, the Koch brothers, etc.
Alan May 9th, 2014 at 17:12
he’s more of an economic socialist, which is even better :)
Alan May 9th, 2014 at 17:11
This Pope has been very focused on the hungry and homeless and has done more to redirect the focus of the church than any Pope in recent memory.
Dwendt44 May 9th, 2014 at 14:34
Few christians read the bible and even fewer bother to act like it says.
Add in the most Fundamentalists don’t trust catholics to begin with, and dismiss the Pope and spokesman for Satan, I don’t think this message will accomplish much.
Alan May 9th, 2014 at 17:11
It accomplishes a great deal, even if the message resonates just within the Catholic church.
The Lochnar May 14th, 2014 at 18:23
What is being accomplished is distraction from the child abuse scandal.
Shades May 9th, 2014 at 17:43
It gives us a lot of ammunition.
Dwendt44 May 9th, 2014 at 14:34
Few christians read the bible and even fewer bother to act like it says.
Add in the most Fundamentalists don’t trust catholics to begin with, and dismiss the Pope and spokesman for Satan, I don’t think this message will accomplish much.
Alan May 9th, 2014 at 17:11
It accomplishes a great deal, even if the message resonates just within the Catholic church.
The Lochnar May 14th, 2014 at 18:23
What is being accomplished is distraction from the child abuse scandal.
Shades May 9th, 2014 at 17:43
It gives us a lot of ammunition.
Svasol May 10th, 2014 at 09:47
Sounds like Catholics need to turn Left. That alone could neutralize the Koch’s massive propaganda war.
Svasol May 10th, 2014 at 09:47
Sounds like Catholics need to turn Left. That alone could neutralize the Koch’s massive propaganda war.
Sunka May 12th, 2014 at 00:41
Star nations rejoice! The Pope we have waited for has arrived! I suspect he is thoroughly versed in knowledge of the global currency reset & revalue. He will big the biggest whistleblower, on everything, that we’ve ever seen! Could he be an ascended master incarnate? I’m staying tuned into him!
The Lochnar May 14th, 2014 at 17:08
Whistle blower on everything? What about giving evidence to the police about the criminal child abuser the church protects? Why is this very important issue forgotten? This pope is no better than any pope. The media takes a comment out of context and everyone thinks he is different. If one reads the full context they will see that nothing has changed.
Sunka May 14th, 2014 at 22:59
I certainly share your concern about the outrageous history of the church & child abuse. The Catholic church is not the only one. Other churches have not been confronted as thoroughly in the public eye.
I do see a definite change in the approach Pope Francis is taking. I doubt he receives much support from the inner circle of the Vatican for his statements and actions. I find his courage to speak out remarkable and hope he will continue. I am willing to wait and see but I believe he is making a sincere effort.
peacedreamer May 12th, 2014 at 00:41
Star nations rejoice! The Pope we have waited for has arrived! I suspect he is thoroughly versed in knowledge of the global currency reset & revalue. He will be the biggest whistleblower, on everything, that we’ve ever seen! Could he be an ascended master incarnate? I’m staying tuned into him!
The Lochnar May 14th, 2014 at 17:08
Whistle blower on everything? What about giving evidence to the police about the criminal child abuser the church protects? Why is this very important issue forgotten? This pope is no better than any pope. The media takes a comment out of context and everyone thinks he is different. If one reads the full context they will see that nothing has changed.
Sunka May 14th, 2014 at 22:59
I certainly share your concern about the outrageous history of the church & child abuse. The Catholic church is not the only one. Other churches have not been confronted as thoroughly in the public eye.
I do see a definite change in the approach Pope Francis is taking. I doubt he receives much support from the inner circle of the Vatican for his statements and actions. I find his courage to speak out remarkable and hope he will continue. I am willing to wait and see but I believe he is making a sincere effort.
Sunka May 12th, 2014 at 00:48
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/sierra-neblina/2014/03/19/galacticu-radio-with-sierra-neblina
Sierra is in contact with the Pope!
peacedreamer May 12th, 2014 at 00:48
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/sierra-neblina/2014/03/19/galacticu-radio-with-sierra-neblina
Sierra is in contact with the Pope!
Sunka May 12th, 2014 at 01:04
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz9n6HK6W0I
Emeli Sande…Love this! Would make great bumper music for Friday night!
peacedreamer May 12th, 2014 at 01:04
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz9n6HK6W0I
Emeli Sande…Love this! Would make great bumper music for Friday night!
The Lochnar May 14th, 2014 at 18:21
Why is no one here talking about why only a handful of priests have been criminally charged? No other issue has as much significance as this issue, not even close. For the masses to take the pressure off by lauding this pope who has not been forthcoming indicates how easily people are fooled. Shame on you!
arc99 May 14th, 2014 at 18:47
before you presume to accuse people of being “fooled”, seems to me that local district attorneys around the country would be in the best position to explain why there have not been more prosecutions.
if you have information that DA’s around the country are not doing their jobs then please share it.
otherwise, pardon me if I feel no shame whatsoever in applauding the small steps the Pope is taking to turn the Church to a better direction.
The Lochnar May 14th, 2014 at 19:28
So it’s OK to not turn people over to the cops with the evidence if you discover there was abuse? It’s OK to aid and abet after the fact? It’s OK as long as law enforcement doesn’t have enough on them?
Those small steps are only words taken out of context with no actions and are having the desired effect. Where is the action?
The Lochnar May 15th, 2014 at 19:22
Your silence speaks volumes.
The Lochnar May 14th, 2014 at 18:21
Why is no one here talking about why only a handful of priests have been criminally charged? No other issue has as much significance as this issue, not even close. For the masses to take the pressure off by lauding this pope who has not been forthcoming indicates how easily people are fooled. Shame on you!
arc99 May 14th, 2014 at 18:47
before you presume to accuse people of being “fooled”, seems to me that local district attorneys around the country would be in the best position to explain why there have not been more prosecutions.
if you have information that DA’s around the country are not doing their jobs then please share it.
otherwise, pardon me if I feel no shame whatsoever in applauding the small steps the Pope is taking to turn the Church to a better direction.
The Lochnar May 14th, 2014 at 19:28
So it’s OK to not turn people over to the cops with the evidence if you discover there was abuse? It’s OK to aid and abet after the fact? It’s OK as long as law enforcement doesn’t have enough on them?
Those small steps are only words taken out of context with no actions and are having the desired effect. Where is the action?
The Lochnar May 15th, 2014 at 19:22
Your silence speaks volumes.