Anyway, his article, in which he mentions the word "pandemic" 5 times, "covid" 4 times, and "Jesus" zero times, is full of exaggerated and emotion-based claims. He doesn't even take other sides of the debate seriously. No, there is only one correct perspective on Covid, everyone else is a heartless monster.
There are some parts of this opinion piece I agree with. The pope starts off his article titled "A Crisis Reveals What Is in Our Hearts" by saying that we often think of issues as global rather than individual and we can feel powerless. He encourages people to care for those around them. That's a huge thing in my opinion. Too often, people get involved with causes, and neglect smaller areas where they can actually have an impact.
He continues by describing the medical issues he faced as a youth and some of the encounters he had with medical professionals. He goes on to talk about the current situation and applauds medical professionals who gave their lives serving others. Certainly this is very laudable and perhaps heroically virtuous.
Soon after this however, he goes off the rails. He commends all government lockdowns as making "great efforts to put the well-being of their people first, acting decisively to protect health and to save lives". About any government that did not impose draconian lockdowns, he says "The exceptions have been some governments that shrugged off the painful evidence of mounting deaths, with inevitable, grievous consequences."
Clearly, to Pope Francis, this is a completely black and white issue with no moral ambiguity whatsoever. There is no room for any disagreement. Either you are in favor of strict government lockdowns or you are a horrible person who cares nothing for people.
He is not satisfied, however, to simply mention people opposed to any and all forms of government oppression under the guise of "protecting people". He has to lay a smack-down on them. This is from his letter:
Yet some groups protested, refusing to keep their distance, marching against travel restrictions — as if measures that governments must impose for the good of their people constitute some kind of political assault on autonomy or personal freedom! Looking to the common good is much more than the sum of what is good for individuals. It means having a regard for all citizens and seeking to respond effectively to the needs of the least fortunate.
It is all too easy for some to take an idea — in this case, for example, personal freedom — and turn it into an ideology, creating a prism through which they judge everything.
Ah, isn't it nice to simply caricature those with whom you disagree? Makes things rather simple. People who are protesting the lockdowns aren't doing so simply because they feel a concept of personal freedom is being challenged. As if they know there is a huge danger to society without these lockdowns but they refuse to be told what to do.
The reality is that the anti-lockdown side of the equation actually has very solid reasons for disagreeing with the draconian measures being put in place. Destroying the economy isn't some intellectual idea like not being allowed to have frozen yogurt on a particular Saturday. Destroying the economy has huge and devastating impacts on people's lives. This is particularly true in third-world countries. People literally starve to death if they cannot earn an income. They cannot simply apply for unlimited unemployment benefits. Not everyone is so lucky.
There are many negative repercussions to the lockdowns such as increased depression, spousal abuse, drug abuse, people being prevented from seeking medical help, etc. Many of the people opposing the lockdowns say the "cure" is much more devastating than the disease. But no, according to the pope, these people are heartless evildoers who just want to increase suffering because of "concepts".
Another thing is that most anti-lockdown people don't just say anything goes. They want a common-sense approach to dealing with the issue. Protect vulnerable people specifically. Perhaps not everyone has to have the same restrictions. For more age categories, the survivability can be as high as 99.9%. Should our entire civilization be shut down to stop such a disease?
The other big issue in my opinion is the isolation. On the one hand, Pope Francis condemns modern technology such as cell phones and the internet and other technologies and encourages people to meet face to face. Yet somehow he feels this has no value while there is a virus circulating. What about the 90 year old grandmother who sits alone in her nursing home longing to see her children and grandchildren. Is she and her children evil for wanting to see her? As one commentator put it, perhaps she only has a few Christmases or Thanksgivings left. Maybe she is willing to risk Covid to see her family.
On top of all of this, there is credible evidence to show the lockdowns are doing little if anything in terms of Covid. Places that didn't lock down at all are faring very similarly to places that imposed massive restrictions. You won't see this much on Facebook, Youtube, etc as this opinion has been banned.
This is NOT a simplistic good vs. evil question. There is legitimate debate as to what constitutes the best course of action. For the Holy Father to suggest that anyone who dares question their particular leaders with regards to Covid are evil is flat-out wrong. Perhaps he should speak to several people who disagree with his stance to truly find out their perspective. I can guarantee him there are many faithful Catholics in that boat.
And on a side note, I strongly suggest the pope stick with actual moral issues such as the Ten Commandments, the works of Mercy, the seven deadly sins, etc and how to be holier people, instead of always focusing on climate change and whatever else is the topic-du-jour in the leftist world. We need a moral and spiritual leader, not another political one.
