Border wall for illegal inmigration

  • Thread starter Thread starter ajac
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
To summarize, the principle of subsidiarity implies that individual human beings have the right to self determine based upon natural law, human nature and God’s providential will – i.e., with respect “to the natural law, to the public order, and to the fundamental rights of persons [who] cannot achieve the common good.” That implies the right to organize into increasingly larger social groups to the mutual benefit of all – family, community, municipal, state and national authorities – is God ordained and each level receives its authority from God for keeping order and promoting the good of all, provided that the “diversity of political regimes is morally acceptable, [and] provided they serve the legitimate good of the communities that adopt them.”

Dictatorial regimes or totalitarian socialist and globalist governments, where the “state” subsumes authority to itself to determine all the rights of individuals in place of their natural and inalienable rights from God, are inadmissible. Likewise, any nation state which disregards the natural rights of individuals according to natural law and principles of reason is illegitimate.

All nations are not equal in this respect.

Therefore, nations which promote human well-being and freedoms have their authority from God, provided "the choice of the political regime and the appointment of rulers are left to the free decision of the citizens. The diversity of political regimes is morally acceptable, provided they serve the legitimate good of the communities that adopt them.

If you wish to argue that any “populist” national government chosen by the citizens is ILLEGITIMATE simply because it is popularly elected by the majority, then your argument is completely contrary to the teachings of the Church outlined in the CCC and quoted above.
 
Last edited:
HarryStotle said:
This is patently untrue,
Click to expand...
I do not know what in the world you are talking about. Subsidiarity is an entirely different issue. This is a great example of saying a lot of true stuff that no one is disagreeing with and bypassing what I said. This is what I was speaking of, and it has zilch to do with your response:
Patriotism, being a species of love, is a good thing. It needs to be contrasted with nationalism, which arises not out of love but out of pride. We know that pride is a sin—the chief of the Seven Deadlies—but colloquially we use the word pride in positive senses: I have pride in my child’s educational attainments; I have pride in my favorite sports teams; I have pride in what my co-workers accomplish at the office.

The pride that underlies nationalism is not this harmless sort. The nationalist thinks America is “the best,” that Americans are “the best,” that American politics and culture are of universal applicability. His fundamental attitude is not one of gratitude and satisfaction but of expansion and even imposition. There is no room for foreigners to be equally nationalistic because their countries and their people are not “the best.” They are inferior in history or constitution or military power or table manners.
Click to expand...
https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/patriotism-begins-at-home
… nationalism and racism. It is quite natural that nations recently arrived at political independence should be quite jealous of their new-found but fragile unity and make every effort to preserve it. It is also quite natural for nations with a long-standing cultural tradition to be proud of their traditional heritage. But this commendable attitude should be further ennobled by love, a love for the whole family of man. Haughty pride in one’s own nation disunites nations and poses obstacles to their true welfare. It is especially harmful where the weak state of the economy calls for a pooling of information, efforts and financial resources to implement programs of development and to increase commercial and cultural interchange. .
Click to expand...
http://w2.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_26031967_populorum.html
 
“Modernity need not provoke fear, but neither can it be constructed by neglecting the past but is accompanied by avoiding " pitfalls” such as unconditional surrender to the law of the market or that of finance, nationalism or exaggerated and sterile tribalism which can become destructive, a politicization of interreligious tensions to the detriment of the common good, or finally the erosion of human, cultural, ethical and religious values". Benedict XVI
Click to expand...
The rails of Nationalism end at the camps of Auschwitz.
 
pnewton said:
There is no room for foreigners to be equally nationalistic because their countries and their people are not “the best.” They are inferior in history or constitution or military power or table manners.
Click to expand...
I know of no one who would claim that there is “no room” for foreigners. The question is one of preserving the common good within the properly ordained boundaries of the country where its citizens have formed a free society and in order to protect that society there is a need to reasonably assess the potential risk to well-being from those who are permitted to enter and become citizens or residents

The problem, it seems to me is one of the distinction between nationalist and patriot and where the line is to be drawn between them.

I submit those teachings from the CCC are key to understanding this distinction so that those with political agendas ought not think they are free to draw the line anywhere their collective socialist little hearts decide it ought to be. A failure to be precise with language and ideas is a very convenient method used to systematically impose faux or politically correct rights and “ideals of society” in place of natural and inalienable rights of human beings.

I would think the commitment to truth, and to resist playing fast and loose with it, is critical at this moment in time and history given that the consequences are so dire.
 
HarryStotle said:
The problem, it seems to me is one of the distinction between nationalist and patriot and where the line is to be drawn between them.
Click to expand...
There is Patria,latin

Fatherland, native land, country

Patrio ,
Related to father land,native land,country

http://latindictionary.wikidot.com/noun:patria

Patriotismo (from latín patriota and greek patriotes, that means belonging to the land of the father ), is a concept that relates a human being for the land native or adopted to which he/ she feels bound by values,culture,history and affection( afectos)

Three words.
 
Last edited:
pnewton said:
The rails of Nationalism end at the camps of Auschwitz.
Click to expand...
To be precise, instead of polemical, the rails of National Socialism ended at the camps of Auschwitz.

To claim that every form of nationalism necessarily ends there is nonsensical. I don’t see nationalism in Switzerland, New Zealand, Monaco or Liechtenstein ever ending there. Do you?

Just to keep things in perspective, “pride” is only one of seven capital vices – vices that can easily lead to other vices.

Ergo, love for one’s nation (which you characterize as patriotism) may morph, via pride, into a disordered love for one’s nation, but that isn’t necessarily what happens to any individual’s sense of patriotism. Furthermore, there are six other capital vices – avarice, envy, wrath, lust, gluttony, and sloth or acedia – which could just as easily turn good citizens into vicious ones.

It seems to me that advocating for larger governments (even globalism) putting more and more power into the hands of fewer and fewer human beings is a huge mistake because power does, indeed, corrupt. Keeping political power distributed as widely as possible – via the principle of subsidiarity and the allowance of free speech – would seem the only way to stop corruption and the power of evil from becoming overwhelming on this earth.

So is your general argument for smaller government? Or toward larger or globalist forms? That is a serious question.
 
Last edited:
It depends from where he is coming from and in good faith.
Really defining terms helps.
There is more than one way to deal with the differences. Depending also on what one is stressing.
 
Last edited:
DaveBj said:
All generalizations are false, including this one.
Click to expand...
Which is why I did not say “all.” The “ending” was a metaphor, though I think only here would I need to explain this, meaning the end is the ultimate in exceptionalism.

A similar statement would be that pride ultimately follows the footsteps of Satan (because he is the epitome of pride)

“Make America great again,” is a solidly patriotic sentiment. “American must be the greatest,” is not, especially if one sees this not as a goal, but a destiny. The ultimate end of that thinking is suppression of all others, economically, militarily, politically, etc.
 
Last edited:
I understood this,PNewton. In light of the common good as well.
Stressing the ideological aspect of Nationalism as well in that case .
 
Last edited:
It wouldn’t have sounded as cool. But I paid the price having to come back and clarify.

But the bottom line, as in all things, is the Golden Rule, though I also think Kant’s version is pretty good of the Categorical Imperative. The thing is, if we are just, I should not want for me in my country what I do not think you should want. I want to be America to be the best in all things, I have to accept it is moral for a man in China, North Korea, Iran, Russia, even the U.K., to want the same thing.

I prefer to think it best just to want to be in the best nation that we can be, and want the same for all others; patriotism, not nationalism.
 
White suprematists wanna screw over the whole world because it’s “natural”. But they get upset when others do it to them.
 
pnewton said:
The rails of Nationalism end at the camps of Auschwitz.
Click to expand...
So we are to put our society on par with that of the Islamic State (or Communist dictatorships like North Korea), since any kind of view that our morals are superior to theirs, is a dangerous form of ‘nationalism’ that ends at the camps of Auschwitz?

How about religion? should we see ourselves equal with the Aztecs who practiced human sacrifice? So much for Catholicism’s claim to be true, and to preach the Gospel, what’s the point when all views are equal and equally valid?

What do you make of Christ’s claim that none come to the father except through Him and that He alone is the way, the truth and the life?
 
Last edited:
pnewton said:
I want to be America to be the best in all things, I have to accept it is moral for a man in China, North Korea, Iran, Russia, even the U.K., to want the same thing.
Click to expand...
So you want North Korea’s Nuclear program to be the best it can be? on par with the USA’s? Iran too? How about a man in the Islamic State?
 
Last edited:
It is the truth though. I refuse to let anyone use the alleged crimes of my ancestors as justification for the immolation of my race in the present.
 
starshiptrooper said:
It is the truth though.
Click to expand...
It starts with ‘dear conquered peoples’ is this how you view your fellow Americans? You will get absolutely nowhere by viewing your fellow citizens as ‘conquered peoples’ nor will they get anywhere by viewing their fellow citizens as ‘evil invaders’.

Your American Citizens, not separated by race or ancestry. They either get it together as one United States, or they fall apart as one Divided States.
starshiptrooper said:
I refuse to let anyone use the alleged crimes of my ancestors as justification for the immolation of my race in the present.
Click to expand...
Which is fair and just, but they would also be fair to say that they refuse to let the alleged ‘conquer’ of their ancestors as justification for the immolation of their race in the present. (And by race I don’t mean religion, sometimes conflated with culture, which is very different, it is not an acceptable part of ones culture or religion to practice human sacrifice for example).

I hope this has helped

God Bless

Thank you for reading
Josh
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top