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.
this post was submitted on 14 Jun 2025
1150 points (98.9% liked)
News
30241 readers
3352 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Vance is part of a specific far right hyperpolitical faction of Catholics that he adopted via his patron Thiel.
Yeah and if prayer worked we wouldn't need hospitals.
It's not 2014 anymore
Many hospitals are also run by the church. Catholics believe in science - all recent popes say evolution is fact.
Catholics believe in some science. Their stances on abortion for instance are extremely barbaric.
None of those are prayer, they are materialistic! See, god is a redundant hypothesis.
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.)
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.
Its most likely the bias I have from only knowing Americas Catholicism then. Thanks for the info!
Religious people are not mentally well.
They believe if they whisper hard enough that magic will fix their problems.
They believe if they follow some thousand year old undiagnosed obsessive compulsive disorder sufferers compulsions that magic will fix their problems.
They literally believe in magic.
They are all wackos.
Every single one.
There are no good religions.
yeah, right. not like the pope knows anything about religion. /s
It's literally in their Bible... This should just be standard. Not special.
Yep. Also Catholic official "recommended ideology of state" was distributivism last time I checked, which is something of a holy mix (can't be unholy mix in this situation) between anarcho-capitalism and anarcho-syndicalism with a conservative touch.
It has its downsides, but the upsides are that limiting immigration, legal inequality, racism and fascism are in theory not allowed there.
(Just in case someone thinks Peter Thiel and such people's ideas are what Catholic church recommends, and they surely want to make such an impression, - no.)
Bible is like the Constitution. Some people don't read it.
Bible is like the Constitution. Some people don’t read it.
People only read what they want to take out of anything. Scientific reports, government policies, laws, philosophical essays, books, etc.
Saw it happen all the time. I use to work at the court house that was open to serve the public. We had at least 2 different signs that said "We are not City Hall. We do not do driver's license, birth certificates, passports, etc.." Without fail, people would walk in and still ask about City Hall Services. People looked at the sign and saw Driver's License, assumed that's what we did.
Because they'd be atheists if they actually did. The ones who read it and stay Christians are just sociopaths.
It made me a leftist lol.
The old testament is all about a people who keep fucking up by adopting the shitty practices of the people around them, then being shamed into being better for a while. And then the person who called them out dies or leaves... But if they stay they get too comfortable with power and abuse it. Some of them are assholes the whole way through... It's about history and notable figures, it's not aspirational at all
Then the gospels are a how to guide to living under an occupying state.
No temples, we just share meals now. No relics, water is holy now. No leaders, we all serve each other. No money, no stock piles, no rich people - let the tax man have nothing to take. No open resistance to invite a crackdown, instead we're going to just be really, really obnoxious to deal with through third path shit
It worked so well Rome straight up massacred the communes to stop the spread, and it was still spreading underground until Constantine slapped Jesus branding on the Roman religion.
Finally, I'm not sure what Revelations is about, but it has cool imagery
The Bible really hits different when you don't have someone explaining each passage one by one going "oh, that wasn't mutual aid, that was magic"
Well I'm glad you were able to look past all of the genocide and glorification of slavery, and pick and choose which parts of the book suit you... Err wait...
I didn't look past that, it's the whole point
It's a shitty people becoming better. But it's a people trying to be better. It's people who believe they are better, and when it's pointed out to them that they're actually assholes they're humbled enough to listen to the person calling them out. They glorified them as wise men blessed by their god
They were proud of themselves for treating their slaves better than the civilizations around them, they prided themselves on being conflicted about going to war. These are good things... But you're not supposed to copy them. You're not supposed to go back.
You're supposed to also strive to be better
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(6 replies)
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.
load more comments
(16 replies)
This is where we find out which faith is stronger, organized religion or the MAGA cult.
None of them have faith, religion has been used to prior up racist, sexist ideas for over a century in the US. They left faith long ago, it's just a tool for their hate.
load more comments
(26 replies)
view more: next ›