Technically he can, that's what the previous pope did too. But it's supposed to be a life-long position.

God chose him for life.

Russia need not worries about US arms, it's US boredom the belligerents should be concerned of. America does not lose wars, she looses interest.

During a time when charity and empathy are expected to be emphasized, human rights abuses and totalitarianism rises. Typically.

This post seems to be about US internal politics which is not allowed in r/worldnews.

This classification may be wrong. If the article is in fact international in scope, please contact the moderators who will then review the issue and might reapprove it.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Honest question. Can't he just retire? His health has been failing for years.

It's hard to be factual with the rape cases

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics

Different definitions, more trust in police in different areas heavily skew the results.

https://akm-img-a-in.tosshub.com/indiatoday/images/bodyeditor/201912/image005-x953.png?DzUKPOx_vFMSdv99qvo.8lnDODz6ly1K

Seems to be getting worse, or just more women report it to police.

I dunno if there is an update, but I read yes, but not as strong.

No habemus papa

Russia kissing ass and hoping for the best

[removed]

"I base my science exclusively on 80s articles of Discovery and the real estate decisions of a multimillionaire who will be dead long before any negative effects of climate change affect his real estate. I are SMRT!"

Putin stop making Reddit accounts already

We're actually not that cool

If only that puffy coat was really his

You forgot the part how he made Steven Seagull, his bitch.

I hate click-baity headlines.

First, my argument was not one about the possibility of getting everyone to collectively engage in these practices. It was simply an observation on a single way in which a person could insulate themselves from food insecurity in a failed economy.

Second, nobody said "turn your front yard into a farmland" a family of 4 could be sustained for an entire year on a series of raised beds in less than 800 square feet. As I said, this isn't feasible for everyone, but it is feasible for a lot of people, regardless of whether they're willing to or not. Those who are not willing to, will suffer from food insecurity when the economy collapses. Whether you or I can convince them of not isn't our problem, it's theirs.

One thing I can say for certain, is that if we destroy the climate through our continued practices, nobody will be growing anything in their yard, whether they want to or not.

I live in a redneck, MAGA county, and I fully understand exactly how unwilling people are to accept any new ideas or that climate change is even real. My argument was in no way an argument to convince people collectively to make this change, it was a suggestion that if anyone does not want to die of starvation in an economic collapse because they're dependent on the grocery store, then they probably want to make this change (or some other similar change that reduces their reliance on grocery stores to survive). Their willingness to accept that is none of my concern. My food security situation is handled 100%.

I could make arguments about how individuals could change their behaviors to save our climate....but again, I know all too well that will fall on deaf ears.

[removed]

[removed]

Cool, slap them in a hydroponics facility and there'll be even more water savings.

Coupling hydroponics with vitromeat technologies could make every major city in the world self sustaining foodwise while allowing vast amounts of traditional agricultural land to be returned to a natural ecological state.

Look I get it, you're a civilian. You don't have the heart to actualy take on the fight. You'd much rather go about your day without the interruption of the unwashed masses making a mess of the place because their ever decreasing quality of life is ignored.

But both poles are at 90 degrees, with the equator at 0. Lower latitudes should mean nearer to the equator, no matter the hemisphere. Or am I missing something obvious?

Too late.

[removed]