Funny, after watching “Conclave,” I found myself wondering when the Roman Catholic Church would select an American pope, not that I really cared. The New York Times saw yesterday’s surprising decision as justification for more Trump-bashing and an appeal to authority (a logical fallacy) that the Times’ acolytes—Democrats—overwhelmingly don’t acknowledge as an authority. Thus we got “The Pope Appears Uneasy With Trump Immigration Policies: Before Cardinal Robert Francis Prevost became pope, a social media account under his name shared criticisms of the Trump administration’s positions on immigration. “I…Don’t…Care,” and no one should care even if the social media posts in question came from the guy, which is unlikely. Sharing any opinions or positions without one’s own commentary is lazy, ambiguous social media conduct. But apart from that, becoming Pope creates a hard, black border around whatever the individual elected may have thought, said or done before becoming Pope, making all of that “non-operative,” as the used to say in the Nixon Administration. Furthermore, if this Pope tries to interfere with U.S. law, policy and values like the last one did, the proper response of Americans ought to be the same as I expressed here. The short version: “Mind your own business.”
I was amused yesterday when three waggish baseball pundits were discussing which Chicago baseball team Pope Leo followed, as he hails from the Windy City. The White Sox, one of them claimed. “No, his team is the Cubs!” another insisted. “I’m pretty certain he roots for the Angels,” said the third, ending the debate.
They forgot about the Padres!
Enough from me: This is your post…get opining.
Ethics Alarms 
Albany adds provisions to a proposed budget bill that would put NY taxpayers on the hook for Letitia James’ legal bills related to her fraudulent mortgage dealings.
https://nypost.com/2025/05/07/us-news/taxpayers-could-be-on-hook-for-ny-ag-tish-james-legal-bills/
Being a follower of things Catholic, though I am Protestant, here’s my take on the election of the new Pope. The frontrunners could not get the two thirds to be elected. I thought it would be Parolin, but he lacked charisma. Or Tagle but he has a spotty record on leadership. Prevost, or as he is now, Leo 14, probably got votes from the pro-Francis side as he was given a high post by Francis and favors the former Pope’s social policies. He probably got votes from the anti-Francis side because theologically he is more conservative than Francis. His missionary background worked in his favor mitigating his American citizenship. He has a history of capable leadership. He is not one to make off-the-cuff remarks like Francis. And he has been critical of the Trump administration, and while that was not a major factor in his election, it probably did sway some to vote for him. He’s going to be Francis-like in political and social issues, and somewhat Benedict 16-like in defending Catholic doctrine and practice.
Another Commie, like Francis. It’s my understanding he’s taken Peruvian citizenship.
I would like some thoughts regarding Ohio House Bill 102, which proposes to prevent sex offenders from residing within 2000 feet of their victims or loitering within 1000 feet. I personally think this is a horrendously stupid bill for several reasons. One, it seems unenforceable without subjecting the victims of sex offenses to registration and tracking requirements. Two, it seems like established law can already provide for relief through restraining orders and whatnot. Three, it makes no exception for cases when the victim is, for example, a child, and there is the desire in the family to reconcile the victim with the offender. I’m not entirely sure if it would interfere with statutory cases where the victim and offender later marry.
Apparently there is a similar bill down in Texas, and it has garnered some public commentary. Most of the erudite commentary seems to be from people who believe the bill is terrible and should be voted down, while those who support the bill have no greater argumentation than “sex offenders should be kept away from their victims” or “sex offenders should be punished more”. I know it isn’t desirable to defend someone who has committed a sexual crime, especially if it was against minors, but it seems like our nation just continues to write more and more sex offense laws that seem largely ineffective at accomplishing anything they purport to address.
Of course, I’m no longer in Ohio and back in Wyoming, so I guess Ohio can run whatever experiments it wants, and I’ll advocate for what works if Wyoming decides to follow suit…
“Three, it makes no exception for cases when the victim is, for example, a child, and there is the desire in the family to reconcile the victim with the offender.”
What? What? Allowing dysfunctional families to push a child to “reconcile” with the person who abused them is a horrible idea. It allows the child to be re-victimized. Call me skepiical, but I’d rather allow the victim to choose whether or not they ever want to reconcile. Or, burn that relationship to the ground.
I have a family member who, having suffered years of abuse from her father, decided she wanted to reestablish a relationship with him. Yes, reconciliation should be dependent upon the victim’s wishes, but it does happen, and in some cases it is encouraged as part of the healing process. I’m not saying a family pushes a child into reconciliation, but that all parties (victim and offender and other family members) all stack hands and agree to work on it. But this Ohio law seems to preclude the possibility whatsoever, regardless of what the victim desires.
I would tend to agree with you. It seems that, even though there are statutory punishments for sex offenders, our society wants to keep on and on and on punishing them after they have served their sentences. I find that troubling, despite the despicable nature of their crimes.
A criminal is supposed to be able to ‘pay his debt’ to society by serving his sentence. I don’t think it should be a payday lending sort of sentence where we keep tacking on interest and penalties.
What this has to be doing is to encourage these people to find a way to disappear, to create a new identity and move somewhere they can live a ‘normal’ life. Is that what we want to have happen? Or do would want to just drive them to reoffend, on the idea that their life really can’t get much worse?
I understand the studies showing sex offenders tend to reoffend, that they’re unlikely to reform. But our society just cannot build itself around endless punishments for particular crimes.
Maybe he’s a Red Birds fan?
I should add, I’m in full agreement with you, Jack, that the Pope should keep his nose out of US politics. Especially the issue of immigration when Vatican City has some of the most restrictive policies on who can live within its borders.
With any change in leadership comes the opportunity for change. The election of a new pope affords the Catholic Church such an opportunity. While I hold out hope that the new pope will be a catalyst for change, I am highly doubtful. Many of the problems plaguing the Catholic Church are systemic and difficult to change.
For a frame of reference, I consider myself a recovering Catholic who has no use for the Catholic Church. In my younger years, including adulthood, I was a practicing Catholic, attending mass regularly and involving myself in church functions. However, as the sexual abuses and financial scandals continued to pile up, my disillusionment with the church intensified. I increasingly felt that the actions of an institution that holds itself as a moral authority on human interactions is, itself, a self-serving, hypocritical organization.
‘Vatileaks’ scandal a ‘battle between good and evil’ in the Catholic church
I understand that pedophilia can be considered to be a psychological disorder of unknown epidemiology. Studies suggest that the incidence rate in the general population is about 1%. “According to The Nature and Scope of Sexual Abuse of Minors, 4,392 clerics were accused of childhood sexual abuse. This represents about 4 percent of clerics in active ministry during that period”. Sexual Abuse of Minors by Catholic Clergy
Interestingly, in the general population, pedophiles predominantly select female victims. However, Catholic clergy pedophiles select primarily young males for their victims. A four times higher incidence rate among Catholic clergy vs the general population suggests that the priesthood is an attractive vocation for pedophiles and or homosexuals.
The deliberate cover-up of the sexual abuse problem by the church hierarchy and leadership is not just wrong, it is evil.
Much of the decades-long abuse came to light during Pope Francis’s papacy. Despite the power to do otherwise, he never did more than provide lip service to the problems. I found his lack of action to be unconscionable.
Furthermore, his repeated admonishment of President Trump’s actions to stem the tide of illegal immigration is yet another example of self-serving hypocrisy. Illegals are a cash cow for the US Catholic Church. It swells its ranks of believers, and approximately 2/3 of Catholic Charities’ revenue comes from Government grants. The same can be said of his preachings on the environment. This stance helped him curry favor with many mega-donor foundations whose beliefs agreed with his stance on open borders and the environment.
These collective actions and inactions prevent me from forming a favorable view of the Catholic Church. This stance is not a disbelief in God or the teachings of Jesus. Rather, it is a disgust with the Catholic Church, which was crafted by flawed individuals. I wish Pope Leo well and hope he will bring about real change. I highly doubt it. I hope I am wrong.
“Despite the power to do otherwise, [Francis] never did more than provide lip service to the problems.”
What power, Tom? Short of defrocking the clergy in its entirety and starting over with heterosexual married priests, the predators will remain in control.
The Pope holds a unique position in the world. He is the spiritual leader of the Roman Catholic denomination of Christianity. He is the Head of State of the Vatican. Finally, he is the head of the Roman Catholic Church’s employees. Regarding the latter two roles, he can function as a dictator and implement policies without seeking others’ approval.
While no one can change the past, he has the power to affect the future. He could require all Church employees to report credible suspicions of any sexual abuse to non-church authorities for investigation and prosecution if warranted. He could create an office of professional conduct responsible for investigating and reporting on the clergy’s criminal and non-criminal misconduct, staffed by lay people. He could require the Church hierarchy to report all incidents of misconduct up the line to the Pope.
He could communicate that going forward, there will be zero tolerance in the church for any employee engaging in sexual misconduct and failure to report questionable behavior to the office of professional misconduct. All clergy should be bound by an honor code similar to the US Military Academies, pledging not to engage in sexual abuse or tolerate others who do. He should specify the consequences for various degrees of misconduct. Individuals found guilty of sexual assault should be excommunicated and forfeit all privileges and benefits of office. No food, housing, healthcare, or pension.
Something along these lines should go a long way toward reforming the Church.