I'd also watched the Jihadist Next Door
documentary on YouTube, since as an American, I do not have access to Channel 4 Documentary on their site. I had been nearly chilled. I am grateful that my introduction to Islam had not been with learning the existence of such persons or their ideological stances, otherwise I would not have been as inclined towards Islam from my former atheism/agnosticism.
The Pope, as far as I have seen, has shown himself to be a kindhearted person with a sense of humor. In regards to the specifics, like @czgibson
has said above, the Pope has not endorsed same-sex marriage. He's simply refused to judge and condemn in an unbecoming manner that is not befitting of righteous persons or a righteous community, and I quote
his words: “Tell me: when God looks at a gay person, does he endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person? We must always consider the person. Here we enter into the mystery of the human being. In life, God accompanies persons, and we must accompany them, starting from their situation. It is necessary to accompany them with mercy.”
As Muslims, and rightly so, we do not like the media or anyone misrepresenting us or our positions, and I'd say the same courtesy and kindness should be given and applied uniformly to everyone. Here, the Pope's position on same-sex marriage has either been misconstrued or misrepresented, and neither is a just outcome.
, I disagree as to last paragraph, because I have heard/read of revert stories wherein Catholics have been curious or explored Islam after either hearing or reading Islamic scripture quoted to them. That said, I do not think conventional wisdom dictates debating with another person of any faith or no faith to get him/her to change his position, because debating is said to be spiritually harmful and should ideally not be undertaken in most circumstances.
Most importantly, if we're honest with ourselves, we'll see that no one likes being challenged on something and so I think when two debaters usually enter into an arena, the goal is to win and not to learn or concede pivotal positions that can tip the balance of the debate in another's favor. So, I think the idea of engaging in debate to understand is actually a deficient means of seeking knowledge and is not a productive towards true comprehension as ego on both sides usually clouds both persons' judgment.