The possessing of nuclear weapons is immoral, Pope Francis said

  • Thread starter Thread starter mdgspencer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Very well said from the Holy Father. With God’s help we can be free from them.
 
Last edited:
Kajimoto was working in a factory when the bomb was dropped. She was buried under timber and tiles, but eventually managed to get free. “When I went outside, all the surrounding buildings were destroyed,” she told the pope. "It was as dark as evening and smelled like rotten fish. Helping evacuate the injured, she saw “people walking side by side like ghosts, people whose whole body was so burnt that I could not tell the difference between men and women, their hair standing on end, their faces swollen to double size, their lips hanging loose, with both hands held out with burnt skin hanging from them.”
Click to expand...
Lord have mercy, St. Joseph protect the world from intrinsic evils and all sin
 
mdgspencer said:
“War,” he wrote, “makes people crazy, and the ultimate craziness is the atomic bomb”
Click to expand...
Just to be clear, the pope did not say that. It was part of a written statement by a survivor of the bomb that was read aloud.
 
Last edited:
mdgspencer said:
“War,” he wrote, “makes people crazy…"
Click to expand...
If this is true, then he should be for the atomic bomb. It is the atomic bomb that prevented the Soviet Union from overrunning Western Europe, and the world from descending into an additional World War. Also, I noticed the Pope still retains the Swiss Guard. Why is the state bearing the atomic bomb for defensive measure any different than the Swiss guard doing so with Heckler and Koch submachine guns?
 
Last edited:
Nuclear deterrence does not provide security but rather an illusion of security, because it implicitly suggests that war is only deterred so long as nobody is clever enough to avoid being destroyed themselves.

Genuine security cannot be found through nuclear arms or through weapons at all, but through a society of conscience and the affirmation of the value of human beings.

Peace.
 
Last edited:
I used to think this way-that nuclear weapons should be banned. Then, as much as I don’t like admitting it, I began to realize that countries surrounded by enemies would be wiped off the map if they had to give up their nuclear weapons. Like Israel.

It’s a complex, and depressing issue.
 
Last edited:
StJosephPrayForUs said:
Kajimoto was working in a factory when the bomb was dropped. She was buried under timber and tiles, but eventually managed to get free. “When I went outside, all the surrounding buildings were destroyed,” she told the pope. "It was as dark as evening and smelled like rotten fish. Helping evacuate the injured, she saw “people walking side by side like ghosts, people whose whole body was so burnt that I could not tell the difference between men and women, their hair standing on end, their faces swollen to double size, their lips hanging loose, with both hands held out with burnt skin hanging from them.”
Click to expand...
Nothing in this description really differs from the effects of gunpowder charges and burning pitch used centuries before nuclear power was used.
Click to expand...
 
Nuclear weapons and flags should be banned. Both are immoral when used uncharitably.

The use and threat of nukes globally (and flags on CAF indiscriminately) is part of a cancel culture.

I trust things will settle down again after the upcoming elections.
 
Last edited:
The Pope isn’t a nuclear engineer. He doesn’t know what it takes to get rid of nuclear weapons, nor does he appreciate that the money spent on nuclear weapons is far less than the money that would be spent on conventional arms without them. Peace and disarmament starts with an accurate understanding of the problem.
 
Possessing nuclear weapons is immoral?
Isn’t it like, let’s say, I want to set fire to a business but I don’t, I did not actually do an immoral act. Possessing something is not actually doing an action. I have a gun but it’s locked up. Is having a gun immoral? If I have bottles of liquor and don’t drink it, is having it immoral? I didn’t drink too much on Saturday night AND I didn’t drive intoxicated. All within my power having both liquor and a car.
 
@PennyinCanada

Willfully putting oneself in a certain situation can in of itself be immoral, yes.

There also isn’t a feasible explanation for using nuclear weapons in a manner that isn’t gravely immoral. Mining asteroids maybe, but that isn’t why they exist. They exist to create a false peace that inhibits nations from solving problems and building bridges on a deeper level.
 
Last edited:
Good. I expect that Their All-Holinesses Bartholomew and Kirill will be on board with a forceful joint statement? Make it 100 pages; the UN “Security” Council restrooms are low on usable paper.
 
Last edited:
No.

It implicitly deters war by causing the leaders of countries, for the first time, to be afraid of starting anything.

Since Biblical times, rulers have sat in comfort while ordering their young male generations to fight and die. But the major national leaders know now, if they try it at any world scale, they too will get evaporated.

Nuclear weapons alone are why we haven’t fought WW3 and 4 by now.

ICXC NIKA
 
@GEddie

Obedience on difficult moral issues has a tendency to show its wisdom many, many, many years after the fact. Most people said the Church’s teachings on contraception were ridiculous, and most people still do, but every year we move into the future the words of St Paul VI are proving more and more accurate about its detriment to children, families, sexuality, contentment, and male/female relations.

The further we move into the future, the more chaotic the situation becomes as nuclear weapons become increasingly accessible to a complicated web of nations.


(This person is not a Catholic speaker; just somebody who has followed the issue for a very long time).

Nuclear weapons are not ethical. Not using them, and not possessing them.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top