H
Hildebrand
Guest
Or FDR and Stalin? Good old buddies. FDR called Stalin affectionately “Uncle Joe”. Oh how nice and cute.Or the US and Saddam against Iran…oops, sorry didn’t mean to sidetrack![]()
Or FDR and Stalin? Good old buddies. FDR called Stalin affectionately “Uncle Joe”. Oh how nice and cute.Or the US and Saddam against Iran…oops, sorry didn’t mean to sidetrack![]()
Oh sheesh! What a brillig concept.Or the US and Saddam against Iran…oops, sorry didn’t mean to sidetrack![]()
Eh? It wasn’t a concept…it was a comparison to a historical fact.Oh sheesh! What a brillig concept.
Er…what a brillig comparison to historical fact. Even better.Eh? It wasn’t a concept…it was a comparison to a historical fact.
But there is a difference. The United States in both the Second World War and the Iran-Iraq War did not take on the ideologies of Stalin or Saddam. For example, FDR did not institute communist policies in the United States. Compare that with Cindy Sheehan advocating the very far left ideas and policies of her “allies”. Read what she has been saying and you’ll find out they are more than common allies against a common enemy - Bush. In most instances, Cindy is virtually the same as her allies.Eh? It wasn’t a concept…it was a comparison to a historical fact.
Okay, now I have to ask what “brillig” is. I thought it was a typo on the first post…Er…what a brillig comparison to historical fact. Even better.
I agree with you there. Cindy Sheehan is a far-left idealogue. Family members I’ve heard on local radio say she always was. She keeps this company because she agrees with them.But there is a difference. The United States in both the Second World War and the Iran-Iraq War did not take on the ideologies of Stalin or Saddam. For example, FDR did not institute communist policies in the United States. Compare that with Cindy Sheehan advocating the very far left ideas and policies of her “allies”. Read what she has been saying and you’ll find out they are more than common allies against a common enemy - Bush. In most instances, Cindy is virtually the same as her allies.
This objection was answered by Blessed Pope John XXIII in the following key sections of his encyclical *Pacem in terris * (“Peace on Earth”):Why can’t you do your own demonstration? Why do you have to piggyback along with those that support violence under the guise of promoting peace? Does that make any sense, let alone correspond to the teachings of the Church and Christ?
You can comfortably cooperate with those that radically oppose the Church and the Gospel and radically oppose life and the weakest of society? . . .]
Don’t bring the Blessed Mother into support of a cause that supports killing babies and supports terrorists. Please.
If it hinted at support of Communist policies, it was wrong to do.In the 1930s, about the only people demonstrating against racism in America were the Communists. Numerous Catholics, knowing what the overall Communist agenda was, nevertheless participated with them in demonstrations against racism.
There is no cooperating with individuals that are opposed to Jesus Christ. Start your own group so as no obfuscation may occur.In
One can cooperate with others where one can validly cooperate with them, and not cooperate where their aims are contrary to ours. For example, cooperating with Fundamentalists on pro-life issues even though they are otherwise anti-Catholic.
And a fine encyclical it was. I’m just going to look at one part of what you quoted:As for the Blessed Mother, it’s impossible to exclude her from the peace movement, because she is the Queen of Peace, and because peace is one of the themes of the message of Fatima.
Keep and spread the Faith.
Marxists never lie. The US is evil. Code Pink believes in the Castro’s Cuban Paradise. That is why thousands of the oppressed are swimming from Miami to freedom in Cuba.Cindy said this country is not worth defending. No wonder Code Pink is supporting her.
`Twas brillig, and the slithy tovesOkay, now I have to ask what “brillig” is. I thought it was a typo on the first post…
I would expect there to be normal run-of-the-mill Iraqis in Fallujah. It doesn’t seem unlikely that they may have needed food, shelter or medical supplies.directly to the center of Iraqi resistance, Falujah.
]I would expect there to be normal run-of-the-mill Iraqis in Fallujah. It doesn’t seem unlikely that they may have needed food, shelter or medical supplies.directly to the center of Iraqi resistance, Falujah
Only God can read people’s hearts and souls and judge *subjective * culpability. Still, speaking from the standpoint of the *objective * moral order, we can say this: if an anti-war activist supports legalized abortion and same-sex unions, then he or she, to that extent, is not a person “of natural moral integrity.” But, from the same perspective, we must also say that the same person *is * of good character to the extent to which he or she promotes the teachings of the Catholic Church on war and peace.And a fine encyclical it was. I’m just going to look at one part of what you quoted:
It even involves the cooperation of Catholics with people who may not be Christians but who nevertheless are reasonable people, and people of natural moral integrity. 'In such circumstances they must, of course, bear themselves as Catholics, and do nothing to compromise religion and morality
Can you honestly say the vast majority of the anti-war movement is funded and supported by reasonable people with moral integrity? I say their support for homosexual acts and killing babies excludes them from this category of people.
Secondly, in participation with these groups (if you must) are you making clear your disdain for abortion, euthanasia, and same-sex marriage as a Catholic? Are you clearly defining these lines? If so, then why not lead the movement rather than piggy-back with people that disagree at very basic and fundamental levels of life with you?
I am not suggesting you eliminate Mary from the peace movement. I am saying you should not intertwine her blessed image with those that support the destruction of life. You must make a clear distinction and not jeopardize the message of the Gospel to those that see you working side-by-side with those that hate life.
Please keep this in mind when you’re composing your posts.Only God can read people’s hearts and souls and judge *subjective *culpability.
Not “anti-war” protestors. They were largely anti-draft protestors. Once the draft was stopped, almost all of the protests stopped as well.All I can say is, remember Viet-Nam. The war we lost, not from the lack of courage and committment of our troops, or the lack of purpose. We lost because of public opinion, anti-war protesters, and the lack of support of the troops in this country.
Solid Catholic’s have been sheding their blood in the muck and the mire for centuries. Solid Catholic’s have been good citizens of heaven and on earth, laying down their lives for cowards who will not serve or sacrifice save their efforts to defame and divide. Solid Catholics are once again being spit upon and mocked just as Chist himself was.If enough solid Catholics flood into the active ranks of the anti-war movement, then Catholics will lead the movement. I pray for that outcome.
Keep and spread the Faith.
And solid Catholics can oppose war too. Any and all war in fact.Solid Catholic’s have been sheding their blood in the muck and the mire for centuries. Solid Catholic’s have been good citizens of heaven and on earth, laying down their lives for cowards who will not serve or sacrifice save their efforts to defame and divide. Solid Catholics are once again being spit upon and mocked just as Chist himself was.
MikeWe should look upon conscientious objection not as a scandal, but rather as a healthy sign. War will still not be replaced by more humane institutions for regulating conflict until citizens insist on principles of non-violence. John F. Kennedy once said, “War will exist until the distant day when the conscientious objector enjoys the same reputation and prestige as the warrior does today.”