I haven't seen any evidence that Pope Francis has even signaled support for "same-sex unions." Here is the quote from the 432-page book
Politics and Society:
“Let us call things by their names. Matrimony is between a man and a woman. This is the precise term. Let us call the same-sex union a ‘civil union,’” he said.
The first sentence is a statement that a union between two men or two women is not "matrimony." Sounds pretty solid so far. The next sentences request that such unions be called "civil unions" instead. But why has this been taken as a statement that "civil unions" are a good thing and should be in law? To me it just looks like a descriptive term: it is undeniable that governments
have put into law
some form of union between two men or two women. It clearly isn't "matrimony," but if we want to discuss it we need to call it
something and "civil union" is as accurate as anything.
Now it's possible that immediately before or after this Pope Francis is quoted as saying something which unambiguously shows support of same-sex civil unions. I don't know, I don't have the book. But I doubt there is any such quote. For if there was, why wouldn't it be paraded about as proof that Pope Francis supports same-sex civil unions? Who would choose an ambiguous quote when an unambiguous quote existed?
It reminds me of how "who am I to judge" was taken to be an unambiguous statement that homosexual acts were no longer considered sinful by the Catholic Church. When the script for the narrative is already written, it doesn't really matter what quote is used to prop it up.
