will the Roman Catholic Church 'accept LGBT' on/before August 15, 2067?

[DC Al Fine]

I doubt it. My denomination (PCA) will accept homosexual acts before the RCC does. Besides, why would they? The church outside the West is more conservative, and even in the West, liberals aren't exactly known for passing on the faith or tithing.

[DC Al Fine]

I doubt it. My denomination (PCA) will accept homosexual acts before the RCC does. Besides, why would they? The church outside the West is more conservative, and even in the West, liberals aren't exactly known for passing on the faith or tithing.

Not really--Latin America and the Philippines are for the most part more gay-tolerant than their non-Catholic neighbors. You're most certainly correct with regards to African Catholics, though.

As to the poll, I voted Option 2.

What are Latin America's non-Catholic neighbours? America and Guyana?

[DC Al Fine]

Yes, just considering the ways things are going

Ok I'll bite. How so?

[DC Al Fine]

Hmm, well, the Latin Church did not accept the tenets of Copernicus/heliocentrism until 1822 (Galileo disproved geocentrism in 1610 with The Starry Messenger). They didn't bother to say, "Yeeeeah, we were wrong about Galileo" until something like 1992!

It's about 300 years or a little more for them to catch up to reality.

So, when will they accept something that their books say is wrong? When they absolutely have to.

Not this old canard again. You have had this explained to you over and over again without even a vaguely relevant counter argument in response.

Now, one could ask oneself how Copernicus proposed his theory, had it explained to the freaking Pope and yet encountered no problems. Ignorance is bliss.

To the depths of bad history hell with you.

[DC Al Fine]

Hmm, well, the Latin Church did not accept the tenets of Copernicus/heliocentrism until 1822 (Galileo disproved geocentrism in 1610 with The Starry Messenger). They didn't bother to say, "Yeeeeah, we were wrong about Galileo" until something like 1992!

It's about 300 years or a little more for them to catch up to reality.

So, when will they accept something that their books say is wrong? When they absolutely have to.

Not this old canard again. You have had this explained to you over and over again without even a vaguely relevant counter argument in response.

Now, one could ask oneself how Copernicus proposed his theory, had it explained to the freaking Pope and yet encountered no problems. Ignorance is bliss.

To the depths of bad history hell with you.

Unfortunately for you, it's not a canard - Galileo's forced abjuration of 1633 happened, and too bad you don't know or acknowledge that. But dismissing people to hell is pretty much all people like you are good at. Have at it from the dustbin that modern times have relegated you to.

You're completely missing the point.

Of course Galileo's abjuration happened. The error you and many others make is imposing a modern era dichotomy on a 17th century debate.

The simplistic church v science view is complicated by

a) Copernicus managed to say similar stuff without getting into trouble
b) Galileo was friends with the Pope, but literally called him retarded when invited to present his views

and most importantly:

c) Galileo's hypotheses were incorrect according to the observable data of the time

In the 1600's, the lack of an observable stellar parallax was strong evidence against Galileo's claims, which in turn causes a pretty big issue in the "Galileo disproved geocentrism and the church hated him for it" theory.