AOC future of Catholic church?!

[Dr_Meinheimer]

She believes the status of St. Damien of Molokai should be torn down because, white supremacy and all. Whatever good qualities she has are overshadowed by her ignorance, lack of class, and foolish ideas.

 

[CTBcin]

She believes the status of St. Damien of Molokai should be torn down because, white supremacy and all.

I literally just saw this in my news feed.

Of all the dumb comments about statues recently, her’s takes the cake. (And that’s about as charitable as I can be).

 

[Lea101]

Wasn’t there another thread about this already? Nothing new can be said, unless people just want to use this as an opportunity to insult her.

 

[Annie]

So… what @pnewton is saying is analogous to replying All Lives Matter or what about the many black people killed by black people when someone says Black Lives Matter…?

 

[Neithan]

Looks more like the other way around, distracting from the point that all human beings have the right to life because there isn’t enough concern for some group of people, or because people hurt each other.

 

[Annie]

I don’t really understand what you are saying.

 

[Neithan]

Sorry, I guess I didn’t understand your question.

 

[pnewton]

Please tell me this is just a bunch of nonsense

The headline is nonsense, and a lie. AOC was only used as an example of a passion for justice and human dignity, as a future for the Church. Sure, using here was a political move, but they never said AOC was the future. The NCReporter, as stated, remains fish wrap, and LSN, continues as clickbait.

 

[otjm]

Would you seriously leave our 2000±year-old Mother Church over a politician you don’t like?

I would not leave the Catholic Church even over a politician who was bat guano crazy if you want to take it to an extreme, but if I had a fairly large group of people who were using the tactics of Lenin, and a large group of useful idiots who were attempting to get rid of police or render them incapable of dealing with crime, and politicians (including district attorneys) who were refusing to prosecute crimes, and releasing convicts willy nilly, I would be doing my best to try to bring some sanity to the conversation.

 

[otjm]

There is a huge difference between claiming she is the future of the Church, and the future of the Church displaying passion for justice, human dignity and having the courage and integrity to face criticism even in the face of vulgar attacks.

There is more than a scintilla of difference between allegedly having passion for justice and human dignity, and having that with common sense.

 

[pnewton]

Nonetheless, the headline remains a lie. What is common sense almost always means in agreement with me.

 

[JoeFreedom]

The speech she gave is just a trap to ensnare and is not the truth if interspersed and peppered with lies and hatred.

Satan said, “If you eat the fruit you will become like gods yourselves acquiring the knowledge of good and evil”.

It appears good and contains elements of truth but in the end evil will devour whatever and whomever who accept it.

 

[JoeFreedom]

and I would argue most bishops likely endorse it…

And some to many don’t meaning that it is not Church teaching which I have to follow.

Many priests sexually abused children and then endorsed the coverup. I don’t have to believe that is correct because they endorsed that. Do I?

 

[twf]

There’s not much of a discussion to be held when you compare social democracy, as practiced in most of the Western world, with clerical child abuse.

 

[Beryllos]

The speech she gave is just a trap to ensnare and is not the truth if interspersed and peppered with lies and hatred.

Satan said, “If you eat the fruit you will become like gods yourselves acquiring the knowledge of good and evil”.

It appears good and contains elements of truth but in the end evil will devour whatever and whomever who accept it.

Wow! How dramatic!

She was speaking out against Representative Ted Yoho calling her, in the presence of news reporters, a f***ing b**ch. Do you think she should just lie down and take it?

I think her speech in response to his vile and hateful remark was an excellent reminder that people should respect one another and not speak of any human being in that way.

 

[JoeFreedom]

Maybe AOC should take your advice and not be a racist in her speech.

 

[Beryllos]

I don’t know what you’re talking about.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

Your husband won’t hire someone because of political views?
Is that legal? How does he suss out if someone is “progressive” or “neocon”?

Not condoning this, but you can always find reasons not to hire anyone, and I speak as one who has hired people before. I wouldn’t have discriminated based on political views — my only interest was “is this the best person to get this job done?” — but I don’t doubt that it takes place, with the “real” reason being concealed behind an ostensible reason. Typically, when you are not hired, they don’t tell you why.

 

[27lw]

Just seems like this could all become a sticky wicket pretty quickly. Let’s say RuthAnne’s husband saw on FB that someone supports BLM. This, is his mind, says “progressive” and he doesn’t hire her. Let’s say the candidate found this out somehow, and said, “you didn’t hire me because of race”.
Isn’t there something compelling when the politics is mixed with race factors? Or if the hiring criteria are not the same for every candidate?
When I’ve been involved in hiring it was in a government context, I realize that private business is more free to do their own thing.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

As I understand it, it is an abbreviation for Latinas and Latinos.

I had always thought it was making a nod to gender theory, non-binary people, etc.

It also seems to be very much an American invention. I’ve certainly never heard latinos refer to themselves as such.

What would be so difficult about just saying “Latín”, with no gender suffix at all?