Why don’t you share with us what hard evidence you have – not your assumptions, but evidence – that anonymous strangers on a message board are “so worked up?” And be sure to compare the posts here to the threads you have opened and contributed to which include broad generalizations, emotional statements and CAPITAL LETTERS (like here) on various subjects, you know, the posts about homosexuality, masturbation, and contraception. Perhaps you can analyze for us how calm & composed you are versus supposedly how “worked up” everyone else is.
You have no credible evidence about any poster’s emotional state. You may assume that posters who consistently contribute to various subjects are probably very interested in those subjects, but how “worked up” they are is not something you can assess. And being passionately interested in a topic, even invested in it, is legitimate. By the way, the Bishops of this country do not agree with you that expressing interest in contemporary issues – whether passionately or dispassionately – is inappropriate because supposedly “other people’s behavior” “doesn’t affect them at all.” And that includes homosexual “marriage,” about which they are very specific.
Read the USCCB documents which are linked in the Social Justice forum. According to your bishops, institutionalizing homosexual couplings and illegitimately referring to that as “marriage” does indeed affect those not in those relationships, just as I am affected by divorce statistics and by spousal abuse, while not divorced or abused.
www.marriageforareason.org
(Only one of many Church documents on how essential traditional marriage is to a society, and how the regulations about marriage affect us all.)
Again, what evidence do you have for your assumption that others are “obsessing?” (That’s right: none.)
The Church’s position on Faithful Citizenship involves much more than voting. It involves rational argument, witness, and persuasion, but you sound as if you would prefer to halt certain subjects on CAF -subjects which are also clergy concerns, including the Vatican’s-- from being discussed “too much.” Actually, most people on this forum who are concerned about this issue rarely start a thread about it. (We mistakenly assume that most Catholics actually know their faith, including the Bishops’ and Vatican’s statements on this issue.) But apparently you would prefer to exercise some veto power over who gets to respond to such threads, and how often opposers get to post?
Nah, not a “worked up” statement.
Thank you for the self-appointed psychiatry from a distance. Except that again, you have zero evidence for how anyone else here “feels” relative to anyone or any subject about which they post. So consider who just might be sitting in that ivory tower?
There have been a number of them, actually, and with many sympathetic responses. Some of those threads occurred long before you became a member and started contributing to this discussion forum.
Um, speaking of worked up, you seem to spend an inordinate amount of time (on threads overall) criticizing other CAF posters for responses you assume they will have. From these many posts, it’s beginning to sound as if you have more of an agenda to stereotype CAF users than an agenda to contribute constructively to the issues in the debates. We are in fact supposed to discuss issues, not to speculate about each other’s motivations. I should not be contributing to that myself, except that once again you are categorizing posters (as you have elsewhere) in a very “personal” way, which virtually requires them to defend themselves and to question why you are doing this.
:thumbsup: