I think Popes (and other religious leaders) have been making statements about all sorts of things for a long time. It seems strange that this particular statement (that you don’t really disagree with) pushed you over the edge.
But if everyone followed that line of reasoning, we’d never hear from you.
LOTS of them, actually.
Yes, a meaningless, feeble pitting. I’m pretty much the anti-Christ in my scathing criticism of organised religion - but you seem to have selected some sensible words from the least objectionable Pope to get all fired up about.
You could also pit the Pope for supporting climate science and advocating environmental stewardship. Morons like you are typically opposed to that, too.
I’m not religious and I have no special love for the Pope, but Francis has generally been pretty much on the ball in the positions he’s taken on contemporary issues, striking a good balance between traditional doctrine, contemporary mores, and modern scientific knowledge. You, on the other hand, are a driveling fucking moron, at least judging by most of your posts so far. In fact if anyone has any doubts about Francis’ views on this difficult and complex issue, the fact that a troglodyte like you is pitting him should be ample proof that he must be right.
And “doctor’s” what? Randomly throwing in apostrophes when pluralizing words is a sure sign that the moron in question is not only cognitively impaired, but is also a blithering illiterate.
I have no problem with Pope assuring his followers that they don’t need to grasp at pointless, expensive and painful extreme measures in a futile attempt to put off their deaths.
I can only wish that his insistence that the patient is judge of what medical treatments she will receive can extend to women such as Savita Halappanavar, who died in a Dublin Catholic hospital after suffering a slow-motion miscarriage at 17 weeks. The priests & doctors refused to allow a D&C procedure to remove the remains of the placental material until the baby’s heartbeat stopped (although there was never any possibility that the baby would survive.) Halapannavar developed blood poisoning and died.
This futile and extravagant end-of-life decision for a baby who was dying anyway led to the futile and easily preventable death of a young woman.
So maybe intensive care units should be stocking Bibles and doctors will be urged to consult with a priest before making treatment recommendations?
The pope can support anything he likes. I suppose supporting death is after all, one of his greatest achievements. More power to him! Any other irrelevant drivel you’d care to throw out?
Idiots who do not understand the distinction between religion and medicine will get their just desserts sooner rather than later when lifesaving treatment is withheld for religious reasons.
Next up, claiming doctor’s will let you die so your organ’s can be harvested.
edited to add incorrect apostrophe’s.
I understand you mopes think it’s fun using the pit to lambaste other posters, but anyone who believes the Catholic church has any business interjecting their dogma into medicine on any level should seriously re-evaluate the extent of decay in their cognitive function. The church proffering a position on science in any form is total hypocrisy. Calling for more death in intensive care and assisted living facilities in the name of religion is just absolutely preposterous.
Nothing in your cite says anything like that. Nowhere is the Pope “calling for more death in the name of religion”. He’s saying that patients shouldn’t be forced to continue lifesaving treatments if they don’t want them or it doesn’t improve their quality of life, which is a belief most secularists on this board agree with.
That wasn’t happening before the pope and his shills dreamed up this attempt to exercise relevancy in the age of Catholic decline.
The level of hubris for a person in his position to suggest caregivers, family and patients themselves might somehow be remiss in managing end of life issues without considering some sectarian angle is just amazing.
Dude, he’s giving guidance to Catholic patients, families and providers. That is his goshdang JOB.
Really. My standard phrase with every papal replacement in the internet age (JP2’s death and Benny’s retirement) has been “whoever it is, the Pope is NOT going to turn the RCC into the ELCA, stop wishing for it, it’s not happening.”
Francis has most often merely restated what has been contained within Church teaching for a while or even all along, only in a gentler manner than many of his predecessors, who seemed to be convinced that they could not even seem to be softening.
There’s perfection in that post 
“Wasn’t happening”? Do you seriously imagine that this sort of last-ditch painful prolongation of dying by excessive medical intervention hasn’t been a genuine problem in end-of-life medical care?
I’m not claiming that religious leaders calling attention to this issue is particularly high on my list of effective strategies for addressing it, but if you think they just “dream up” its importance then you’re out of your mind.
It’s closer to tautologically pointless then it is controversial really. Without any specifics mentioned he basically just said “You shouldn’t go past the point that marks the point you shouldn’t go past”
And I’ll take this opportunity to remind you of the title of the goshdang article: “Pope Francis calls European physicians to morally withdraw from ‘overzealous treatment.”
See anything about patient’s and family in there? The pope is trying to tell doctors how to do their jobs, plain and simple: withdraw from overzealous treatment = more death. Shading it any other way is really dishonest, but I suppose that is to be expected of the pious - they can’t even be honest with themselves. Try re-reading the entire article for full effect.
Today he most often did this particular stunt for the first time.
Yeah right - shit happens. Any more shocking news for us? No, let’s just assume the church knows how to hanlde any EOL problems that might crop up - when in doubt, just pull the plug, right?
ok - might not snyc, lyrically, with I Pit the Pope - sue me…
*Lord knows you got to change
Po-ope
Been Jammin’s grandstADin’ on your ass
You let him down
Po-ope
Bibles in I.C.U.s and-now-a-who-knows-who
He’s gettin tired, of how you, espouse this last cause
But then you decide, he’s goin, through his own menopause
This can’t go oooooooon
Lord knows you got to change.*
At least he doesn’t live under a bridge, which is not something you can say about the OP.
Alright, let’s do that.
Why, goshdang it! It’s almost as if he’s saying the exact opposite of the words you’re putting into his mouth.
No, it means the same amount of death, spaced out differently. We’re talking about end-of-life treatment here - you might get a few months, or weeks, or even days out of it, but it might not be worth it to you to go that route. What he’s saying here, if you read the article instead of just the headline, is reiterating what Pius XII said on the subject - withdrawl from treatment is neither euthanasia nor suicide.
Quite a lot of the people disagreeing with you on this are atheists, you know.