A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
It's weird to see the traditional roles getting reversed here
Where the established order would usually represent the conservative side of the schism, here the conservatives are the schismatics with official doctrine, to the degree of even rejecting official decrees where it suits them or even if it really doesn't just because they hate modernity (see the weirdos still using latin despite not understanding it at all)
Yeah, because they aren't actually conservative. They're regressive, if anything.
For these guys, if the Pope disagrees with them, then they'll reject the Pope. Most of them probably already identify as Christian, not Catholic, anyway. (They probably wouldn't say Protestant, if they were more specific it would probably be because they were Baptists or something.)
I’ve been hearing people say “not my pope” for years now. Oh, and that Jesus was too “woke” and weak, turning the other cheek.
It happens in Catholicism sometimes because liberal Catholics just ignore shit and get ignored until they start leaving. The church has understood this since the Protestant reformation.
I despise a lot about religion but I have enjoyed seeing the Catholic Church slowly become a bit more accepting of humanity’s nature by being more inclusive with the LGBT population and now seeing this. It gives me hope that religion is capable of growing alongside people and adapting to something better than it is has been and is.
I support religion as long as it gives people a sense of community, hope, and strength. When it starts taking things away, being oppressive, and not holding its officiants accountable for wrong doing, it’s wrong.
#NotMyPope
American catholics have long disfavored papal influence so this isn't likely to change any minds. Additionally, while the pope is mostly a piece of shit, this is a nice move - so it's broken clock time.
This pope is pretty stand out. Previous one was an idiot.
Okay…but could Vatican City help the situation by opening its doors to Migrants from Mexico? Are they able to house them, provide them food and water, provide them medical care, provide them child care and education for their unvaccinated children, and promise them jobs to sustain themselves long-term? Can they justify raising the taxes on the working class of their own people to pay for these migrants? They’ll probably need to raise taxes on big businesses. This will probably result in big business raising their prices to recoup their losses from paying higher taxes. They probably won’t be able to take it out of other areas, because minimum wage is always increasing as cost of production often increases, too, for most companies. Then those companies will be selling overpriced products to the inhabitants of that country, with people about to riot over how expensive everything has become; especially food, for example. Some might say it’s not that big of a deal, but the money to support a new, huge, group of people has to come from somewhere. Does Italy have the money to fund all of that?
Some of our nation’s homeless might have better treatment if they crossed the border to Mexico and then turned around, and crossed it again, as a migrant.
Instead of encouraging so many people to run from a country that can’t protect its people, or provide for them, why can’t other nations take a stand against that country’s government and intervene? It’s going to cause civil unrest to push a huge group of people from one country into another, where the language and culture are different. Avoid all of that, have America, and other nations intervene to improve Mexico so people won’t be risking their lives to cross the border, and causing mass outrage here, in America.
Vatican City is 109 acres, and your genius idea is to ship thousands of Central American refugees over there, seemingly as punishment for the Pope calling us out on failing our responsibility to help these people.
What a very Republican idea...
I’m actually a democrat. I would just like to see solutions presented in political discussion rather than constant criticism. It leads nowhere to just turn the spotlight on those who want to give their criticisms. I want solutions. The same problems from migrants, to Gaza, have been floating around the political toilet bowl for decades and every so often someone famous throws in their two cents and receives a pat on the back for criticizing the way things are. Yes, things are bad. Now less talk, more action. Fix it.
I'm actually a democrat
If you are advocating for human trafficking, you are a fucking fascist.
So when the Red Cross creates shelters for hurricane victims in the Southern and Eastern States, do you call them traffickers, and fascists? Sometimes people deserve to have a safer option on where they live.
Also, cussing out an internet stranger and calling her a fascist makes you look unstable.
Amazing that you think creating shelters for Americans displaced by natural disaster is in any way comparable to forcibly deporting asylum seekers to Europe because the Pope called us out.
Disaster relief isn't human trafficking, obviously. Trafficking asylum seekers to another continent absolutely is.
People are coming to our country begging for help, and your solution is to kick them out and ship them thousands of miles away. If you take offense to being called a fascist, consider not being one.
No, that isn’t my solution. I never said they would be shipped. They aren’t being shipped to America. They have seen an opportunity and have migrated here themselves. If Italy offered an opportunity, then they would probably migrate there, as well. They wouldn’t dare stow away on a boat to mainland China and demand that their country care for them, and provide for them. Many countries have laws against illegal immigration. America does, too, but no one respects the laws in America. Everyone picks and chooses which laws they want to demand be enforced and they want herd immunity for the ones they break. Migrants could cross the border with a passport and ask for asylum. That wouldn’t be illegal immigration.
What a baffling response...
They have seen an opportunity and have migrated here themselves. If Italy offered an opportunity, then they would probably migrate there, as well.
We were talking about Vatican City, not Italy. They are different countries (regardless of what you may think). Italy is 116,631 square miles. Vatican City is 0.17 square miles (686,064x smaller).
These migrants are so destitute that they are fighting malnutrition and exhaustion to trek on foot across Central America and Mexico to the US southern border. You really think they're apt to buy plane tickets to Europe? What are you fucking smoking?
America has laws against illegal immigration, but no one respects the laws in America.
Seeking asylum isn't illegal immigration. Turning asylum seekers away is against international law.
Everyone picks and chooses which laws they want to demand be enforced and they want herd immunity for the ones they break.
No clue what you mean by "herd immunity" (a medical term), but "choosing which laws are enforced" has a name: it's called "Democracy". It's pretty cool, you should read about it sometime.
Migrants could cross the boarder (sic) with a passport and ask for asylum. That wouldn’t be illegal immigration.
That is literally what they are doing, maybe minus the passport part, but you don't need one to seek asylum. Requiring one, as mentioned before, would be a violation of international law.
Honestly, you really need to better understand what you are talking about before speaking further on any of this. You don't seem to know the difference between immigration and asylum seeking, and you characterize these migrants as being "Mexican", when the vast majority are from Central America. You don't know the difference between the European countries you think should help us shoulder the burden of helping refugees from countries that WE DESTABILIZED! Fuck, you can't even spell the word "border" (a common trait amongst racist anti-immigration folks - ignorance was never a big fan of proper spelling).
You just seem to have a hateful opinion of the Latin American refugees that ask us for help, and want to brainstorm ways to keep them out of the country...