i am presbyterian i want to convert ..

[humble_in_doubt]

in the end the CC is right. She is always right in the end. just like the pill, abortion,…and others. now we can see how right she has been all along.

yes the earth stands at the center of the universe (oops I guess she ain’t always right huh?). As for the pill … I see no problem with it, and I’m pro-choice (with some exceptions). So I disagree & would say the CC is rarely right about anything. Moreover, the CC wasn’t the only one who objected to eugenics … everyone did (as it was framed it was insane, along the lines of nazi thinking).

"Let us note that the very tradition, teaching, and faith of the
Catholic Church from the beginning, which the Lord gave, was preached
by the Apostles, and was preserved by the Fathers. On this was the Church founded;
and if anyone departs from this, he neither is nor any longer ought to be called a Christian."
St. Athanasius, Letter to Serapion of Thmuis, 359 A.D…

whatever you say

 

[josie_L]

Eugenics was certainly misapplied during the early part of last century, however, the basic concept (genetic improvement of our species) is a good one; and it’s still alive and well.

When a woman goes to a fertility clinic and selects male sperm from a male with certain quality traits she deems desirable that’s a form of eugenics. We learned that smoking while pregnant can lead to certain defects … prenatal care can be viewed as a very rudimentary form of eugenics. Let’s be honest with ourselves, it’s only a matter of time before we’re able to test for genetic traits in DNA (we already can to a large degree), and such testing will slowly become more and more common place (particularly when we’re able to correct genetic problems). Obviously most won’t volunteer for a genetic test now because it has no utility. What if I discovered there’s a 5% chance my future child could have a birth defect, will that prevent me from having kids? No of course not, it would just mentally torture me (so again, why would I do it). However, if upon discovering that information medical science could somehow correct the problem … now we enter a new paradigm.

The Catholic church will complain about it … but it won’t matter.

Firstly,

This is nothing compared to what was going on during the Eugenics movement, it’s like comparing a bb gun to a Bazooka.

Secondly,

I take care of mentally and physically handicapped children, I take umbrage at the fact that you would be mentally tortured at the idea your child might not be perfect, but if by birth defect you mean something way more serious like a congenital heart problem, for example, due to a genetic predisposition that’s more understandable. However, if science does get to the point wherein it can fix these genetic problems. it would have to be in an ethical manner, otherwise it may have disasterous results. Just look at ESCR as compared to the ASCR, which is ethical and effective. I know God in his infinite wisdom will make sure that if there ever is a cure or a way of reversing genetical defects it could only be done so in an ethical fashion.

P.S. I have a question for you: if your unborn child was found to have down syndrome would you abort it?

 

[wisdomseeker]

yes the earth stands at the center of the universe (oops I guess she ain’t always right huh?). As for the pill … I see no problem with it, and I’m pro-choice (with some exceptions). So I disagree & would say the CC is rarely right about anything. Moreover, the CC wasn’t the only one who objected to eugenics … everyone did (as it was framed it was insane, along the lines of nazi thinking).

whatever you say

humble in doubt, do you know the difference between the Truth and the lie? please tell me.

and no, i didnt say it. that quote was said long before i was even born. it was said by a saint.

"Let us note that the very tradition, teaching, and faith of the
Catholic Church from the beginning, which the Lord gave, was preached
by the Apostles, and was preserved by the Fathers. On this was the Church founded;
and if anyone departs from this, he neither is nor any longer ought to be called a Christian."
St. Athanasius, Letter to Serapion of Thmuis, 359 A.D…

 

[humble_in_doubt]

Firstly,

This is nothing compared to what was going on during the Eugenics movement, it’s like comparing a bb gun to a Bazooka.

Secondly,

I take care of mentally and physically handicapped children, I take umbrage at the fact that you would be mentally tortured at the idea your child might not be perfect, but if by birth defect you mean something way more serious like a congenital heart problem, for example, due to a genetic predisposition that’s more understandable. However, if science does get to the point wherein it can fix these genetic problems. it would have to be in an ethical manner, otherwise it may have disasterous results. Just look at ESCR as compared to the ASCR, which is ethical and effective. I know God in his infinite wisdom will make sure that if there ever is a cure or a way of reversing genetical defects it could only be done so in an ethical fashion.

P.S. I have a question for you: if your unborn child was found to have down syndrome would you abort it?

I think it’s a fair consideration to abort a child who a potential parent knows for certain will never become a productive human (and will always require enormously expensive care). Obviously once such a person is born we must have compassion and care for them in ways that take care to preserve their human dignity. However, striving for genetic evolution (and eliminating recessive genes from the gene pool) isn’t a bad idea if done gradually and respectful of human freedom (and obviously very carefully). I would rather see genetic science advance to the point where we can improve ourselves without drastic measures like abortion; but I do understand a couple who makes a decision to abort a child who will be an immense burden to society (and themselves), and I respect their right to do so.

I know this sounds like a harsh view to a Catholic, but any society is only as strong as its citizens. For humans our genetic disposition plays a strong role in individual fortitude (whether physical or intellectual). Therefore, I don’t find anything wrong with finding “responsible” ways to improve ourselves.

Our ideas of liberty, equal rights, and dignity is moving beyond the Christian model. If we were to follow a sola scriptura approach to human rights then women would have to wear head scarves and their only role in society would be child bearing and rearing. So while I find some value in tradition, I also understand its weaknesses (and the fact that any tradition was generally promulgated by less advanced people).

 

[humble_in_doubt]

humble in doubt, do you know the difference between the Truth and the lie? please tell me.

you said (and I quote):

**in the end the CC is right. She is always right in the end. **

and no, i didnt say it. that quote was said long before i was even born. it was said by a saint.

you cited those words to support your position, which logically infers you agree with them (and indeed you defend the infallibility of your church). I merely provided one (of many) examples where your church was wrong, yet now you’re trying to backtrack?

If you propose X = Y and defend that position (and use it to rebut my objection); whether it was you who first proposed X = Y or someone else, you’re relying on that idea in a debate with me. Therefore, it’s only logical for my to rebut X = Y if I have empirical evidence showing it’s not true (indeed it’s logical for me to do so … in other words it’s what you should naturally expect).

If you want to play word games … that’s what I do for a living. On the other hand if you want to discuss this rationally … then at least take ownership for the ideas you present, defend, and use to rebut my objections or ideas.

 

[wisdomseeker]

you said (and I quote):

**in the end the CC is right. She is always right in the end. **

you cited those words to support your position, which logically infers you agree with them (and indeed you defend the infallibility of your church). I merely provided one (of many) examples where your church was wrong, yet now you’re trying to backtrack?

If you propose X = Y and defend that position (and use it to rebut my objection); whether it was you who first proposed X = Y or someone else, you’re relying on that idea in a debate with me. Therefore, it’s only logical for my to rebut X = Y if I have empirical evidence showing it’s not true (indeed it’s logical for me to do so … in other words it’s what you should naturally expect).

If you want to play word games … that’s what I do for a living. On the other hand if you want to discuss this rationally … then at least take ownership for the ideas you present, defend, and use to rebut my objections or ideas.

humble in doubt.
these ideas are not yours, they been around from the beginning. you just decided to embrace them. you made a choice.

i on the other hand decided to embrace the idea that there is a God. a living God who made all things. and in our Lord Jesus, the Savior. i dont know if you believe anything Jesus said, i bet you cant find anything wrong in His teachings. He rules through the Church, therefore the Church cannot be wrong because God cannot be wrong. you can make references of many times where man in the Church were wrong. but i am talking about the Teachings given to the Church by Christ. they cannot be wrong in matters of faith and morals.

i could not understand myself why the Church was against the pill. until i heard the priest saying since the 60s when the pill was introduced, man suddlenly begin to see women as sexual objects, no longer they felt they neede to be commited to any woman. marriage begin to be secondary to them. women are no longer respected. children became a burden. today we see that families are no longer important. with it, many others came to top this problem. today we even have to fight to preserve the innocense of our children. tell me if this is world you came to appreciate. do you not see what is going on around us?

 

[humble_in_doubt]

humble in doubt.
these ideas are not yours, they been around from the beginning. you just decided to embrace them. you made a choice.

OK … won’t disagree with you here

i on the other hand decided to embrace the idea that there is a God. a living God who made all things. and in our Lord Jesus, the Savior. i dont know if you believe anything Jesus said, i bet you cant find anything wrong in His teachings. He rules through the Church, therefore the Church cannot be wrong because God cannot be wrong. you can make references of many times where man in the Church were wrong. but i am talking about the Teachings given to the Church by Christ. they cannot be wrong in matters of faith and morals.

sure Jesus said many good things (frankly most of his teachings were the same things the stoics were preaching for centuries before he lived … but anyways).

i could not understand myself why the Church was against the pill. until i heard the priest saying since the 60s when the pill was introduced, man suddlenly begin to see women as sexual objects, no longer they felt they neede to be commited to any woman. marriage begin to be secondary to them. women are no longer respected. children became a burden. today we see that families are no longer important. with it, many others came to top this problem. today we even have to fight to preserve the innocense of our children. tell me if this is world you came to appreciate. do you not see what is going on around us?

What I see is a world with diminishing slavery, human rights abuses, etc. that religion contributed to (or at least enabled) in the past. Marriage and the nuclear family was around for thousands of years before Christianity and even before or without Judaism. Therefore, you guys don’t have a monopoly on these ideas.

In fact when the US and Europe was far more Christian (and at least in the case of Europe “Catholic”) children would frequently have to forgo school and enter the workforce at a very young age. Our secular liberal society evolved to the point where we enacted laws prohibiting child labor (just as we’ve moved to protect children in various other ways). In fact it was liberals who were generally non-religious who fought for these type of laws, just as it was liberals who fought against Jim Crow, segregation, and all the rest.

This is not to say some Christians of conscience didn’t make important contributions to these fights (because they did) … but the impetus for these ideas (and the people who really caused these changes to happen) were liberals who were either non-religious or religion played a very minor role in their lives.

 

[wisdomseeker]

OK … won’t disagree with you here

sure Jesus said many good things (frankly most of his teachings were the same things the stoics were preaching for centuries before he lived … but anyways).

What I see is a world with diminishing slavery, human rights abuses, etc. that religion contributed to (or at least enabled) in the past. Marriage and the nuclear family was around for thousands of years before Christianity and even before or without Judaism. Therefore, you guys don’t have a monopoly on these ideas.

In fact when the US and Europe was far more Christian (and at least in the case of Europe “Catholic”) children would frequently have to forgo school and enter the workforce at a very young age. Our secular liberal society evolved to the point where we enacted laws prohibiting child labor (just as we’ve moved to protect children in various other ways). In fact it was liberals who were generally non-religious who fought for these type of laws, just as it was liberals who fought against Jim Crow, segregation, and all the rest.

This is not to say some Christians of conscience didn’t make important contributions to these fights (because they did) … but the impetus for these ideas (and the people who really caused these changes to happen) were liberals who were either non-religious or religion played a very minor role in their lives.

so the stoics also died in the cross like Christ and claiming the same, like being the Son of God?

i never said we have monopoly on anything. i just point out to what is happening today with the family. do you deny it?

unless you are against work, you have no point here. what do you think we have today? children as young as 5 yrs old doing drugs, criminals, even killing adults. tell me how today is better.

children are dissobedient to parents very early in life. can you not see evil influence all around us?

 

[humble_in_doubt]

so the stoics also died in the cross like Christ and claiming the same, like being the Son of God?

frankly I don’t see dying as a very good idea (under most circumstances). However, when I referred to stoic value I was referring to its virtue (obviously). I think that was sort of a red herring don’t you?

i never said we have monopoly on anything. i just point out to what is happening today with the family. do you deny it?

unless you are against work, you have no point here. what do you think we have today? children as young as 5 yrs old doing drugs, criminals, even killing adults. tell me how today is better.

children are dissobedient to parents very early in life. can you not see evil influence all around us?

With regard to child labor … if you study the child labor practices of past decades, it was a horrible system that exploited children is aberrant ways (and unfortunately it still goes on in a few backwater places on earth, but it’s going away quickly thanks mostly to liberals).

Secondly, drugs is obviously a horrible development of modern man, particularly in poor urban and rural areas where drugs seem to have a markedly more ruinous effect on peoples lives as compared to affluent and middle class suburbs or urban areas.

Whether we have more or less criminality these days as compared to past decades I can’t really comment on. I do know we have far more reporting of crimes such as molestation, rape, and other similar crimes. I suspect these sort of crimes were always around, but “the media” seem to be the best disinfectant. All this is the result of liberalism and freedom, and we certainly wouldn’t be here under a theocratic Catholic regime. What happened in the old days is these sorts of crimes were never reported. A woman wouldn’t report being raped, because she would have been branded a social outcast (and the rapist probably wouldn’t have been convicted anyway). Blacks were commonly beaten in the south by white racist gangs, usually with impunity. Homosexuals were also frequently beaten with impunity. Children were molested and were victims of incest usually silently with no one to protect them (sometimes by the very people they trusted the most, clergymen, family members, etc.).

Yes we still have problems … but your take IMO doesn’t take into consideration how far we’ve come. Rather than seize on our successes and admit why we’ve succeeded in many areas, you propose that it’s our deviation from your ancient mythology at the root of our ills (when religion has rarely solved any problem).

Kids usually disobey their parents because they have bad parents. They fall victim to drug use also because of poor parenting. In fact most kids raised by atheist parents rarely fall victim to these ills, why, because avowed atheist adults are usually well educated and affluent.

So IMO you’re not taking a logical and forensic approach to how we should solve our social problems. However, I’m not saying atheism is inherently better than theism. The fact is the biggest determining factors are usually (though not exclusively) intelligence, affluence, and so on. So might I suggest we focus on these things rather than religious diatribe? Religion should be a personal choice & our social strengths and weaknesses have little to do with whether or not one is religious (and these are the facts).

In conclusion … I don’t mean to berate people for their deeply held beliefs, but rather simple shed light on reality verses myth (with regard to why we are how we are).

 

[wisdomseeker]

frankly I don’t see dying as a very good idea (under most circumstances). However, when I referred to stoic values I meant in the area of virtue (obviously). What’s up with the red herrings wisdomseeker?

With regard to child labor … if you study into child labor practices decades ago, yes it was a horrible system that exploited children is aberrant ways (and unfortunately it still goes on in a few back water places on earth, but it’s going away quickly thanks mostly to liberals).

Secondly, drugs is obviously a horrible development of modern man, particularly in poor urban and rural areas where drugs seem to have a markedly more ruinous effect on peoples lives as compared to affluent and middle class suburbs or urban areas.

Whether we have more or less criminality these days as compared to past decades I can’t really comment on. I do know we have far more reporting of crimes such as molestation, rape, and other similar crimes. I suspect these sort of crimes were always around, but “the media” seem to be the best disinfectant. All this is the result of liberalism and freedom, and we certainly wouldn’t be here under a theocratic Catholic regime. What happened in the old days is these sorts of crimes were never reported. A woman wouldn’t report being raped, because she would have been branded a social outcast (and the rapist probably wouldn’t have been convicted anyway). Blacks were commonly beaten in the south by white racist gangs, usually with impunity. Homosexuals were also frequently beaten with impunity. Children were molested and were victims of incest usually silently with no one to protect them.

Yes we still have problems … but your take IMO doesn’t take into consideration how far we’ve come. Rather than seize on our successes and admit why we’ve succeeded in many areas, you propose that it’s our deviation from your ancient mythology at the root of our ills (when religion has rarely solved any problem).

Kids usually disobey their parents because they have bad parents. They fall victim to drug use also because of poor parenting. In fact most kids raised by atheist parents rarely fall victim to these ills, why, because avowed atheist adults are usually well educated and affluent.

So IMO you’re not taking a logical and forensic approach to how we should approach and solve our social problems. However, I’m not saying atheism is inherently better than theism. The fact is the biggest determining factors are usually (though not exclusively) intelligence, affluence, and so on. So might I suggest we focus on these things rather than religious diatribe? Religion should be a personal choice & our social strengths and weaknesses have little to do with whether or not one is religious (and these are the facts).

In conclusion … I don’t mean to berate people for their deeply held beliefs, but rather simple shed light on reality verses myth (with regard to why we are how we are).

you might judge yourself is much smarter than i am. but i doubt very much that your ideas are any closer to solve the problems of the world as mine.

what things? how is our society shaped? is it not based on a set of beliefs? should a Catholic proclaim to believe in One Living God, then deny it to the society he lives in because another group insisting in deny such an existence? now, which group deserves more than the other?

again disobedience is the root of many evils.

 

[jam070406]

Kids usually disobey their parents because they have bad parents. They fall victim to drug use also because of poor parenting. In fact most kids raised by atheist parents rarely fall victim to these ills, why, because avowed atheist adults are usually well educated and affluent.

Sounds like you have some unresolved issues.

 

[humble_in_doubt]

you might judge yourself is much smarter than i am. but i doubt very much that your ideas are any closer to solve the problems of the world as mine.

I never made or I don’t think inferred that sort of judgment. I try not to judge people (especially those I’ve never met … well except maybe politicians ).

what things? how is our society shaped? is it not based on a set of beliefs? should a Catholic proclaim to believe in One Living God, then deny it to the society he lives in because another group insisting in deny such an existence? now, which group deserves more than the other?

again disobedience is the root of many evils.

I don’t think you really understood what I was saying (perhaps I explained it poorly). Of course I don’t think you should deny that you believe in god.

Let’s face, opposition to abortion, embryonic stem research, euthanasia, etc. are hardly our biggest problems in this country (and I don’t expect nor would I ask religious people to surrender their values in those type of areas).

However, when you say something like look how screwed up our society is & then infer that it’s because we need more religion, I say that’s an unproductive approach and frankly it’s untrue. We’re not worse off than our predecessors. We live longer, we’re more affluent, we respect human rights (and all humans, not just us white guys), I mean in a whole host of areas we should be celebrating our accomplishments as a human race. Yet you guys want to keep us mired in this sort of depressive self hate to advance your own agenda & I think it stinks. Don’t get me wrong, when it comes to a dark view of human existence the Muslims seem to take the cake, but Christians aren’t too far behind IMO.

So I just don’t agree that your philosophical approach is either good or necessary as far as solving our problems go. If every kid had to say the Our Father every morning in school, and they believed in the christian version of god … what would that really do for us?

Seriously, a theocracy rarely encourages human progress (in fact I can’t think of a worse way to spur progress, it would be regression not progression). Sure it might make them more obedient and robotic (in a stoic sort of way) … but is that really what we want? Where would the next Bill Gates come from? IMO it would be far less likely that we could produce those sort of people if you had your way with things.

Isn’t it better that kids obey their parents because they realize their parents simply have their best interests at heart? The reason why the children of more intelligent and affluent parents are more likely to obey their parents is because their parents are good role models. Why, because they’re smart and affluent (and those are nice things to be). Why not base our social model on reality rather than fiction? It just works better & it always has!

 

[jam070406]

and also:

Isn’t it better that -]kids/-] the creature obey their -]parents/-] Creator (ie God/Church) because they realize their -]parents/-] Creator & His Church simply have their eternal best interests at heart?

 

[jam070406]

The reason why the children of more intelligent and affluent parents are more likely to obey their parents is because their parents are good role models.

So, in your opinion, it’s based on parental intelligence and not parental love?!?

No offense, but just based on what you write it’s no wonder you don’t understand the Christian Faith.

 

[wisdomseeker]

I never made or I don’t think inferred that sort of judgment. I try not to judge people (especially those I’ve never met … well except maybe politicians ).

I don’t think you really understood what I was saying (perhaps I explained it poorly). Of course I don’t think you should deny that you believe in god.

Let’s face, opposition to abortion, embryonic stem research, euthanasia, etc. are hardly our biggest problems in this country (and I don’t expect nor would I ask religious people to surrender their values in those type of areas).

However, when you say something like look how screwed up our society is & then infer that it’s because we need more religion, I say that’s an unproductive approach and frankly it’s untrue. We’re not worse off than our predecessors. We live longer, we’re more affluent, we respect human rights (and all humans, not just us white guys), I mean in a whole host of areas we should be celebrating our accomplishments as a human race. Yet you guys want to keep us mired in this sort of depressive self hate to advance your own agenda & I think it stinks. Don’t get me wrong, when it comes to a dark view of human existence the Muslims seem to take the cake, but Christians aren’t too far behind IMO.

So I just don’t agree that your philosophical approach is either good or necessary as far as solving our problems go. If every kid had to say the Our Father every morning in school, and they believed in the christian version of god … what would that really do for us?

Seriously, a theocracy rarely encourages human progress (in fact I can’t think of a worse way to spur progress, it would be regression not progression). Sure it might make them more obedient and robotic (in a stoic sort of way) … but is that really what we want? Where would the next Bill Gates come from? IMO it would be far less likely that we could produce those sort of people if you had your way with things.

Isn’t it better that kids obey their parents because they realize their parents simply have their best interests at heart? The reason why the children of more intelligent and affluent parents are more likely to obey their parents is because their parents are good role models. Why, because they’re smart and affluent (and those are nice things to be). Why not base our social model on reality rather than fiction? It just works better & it always has!

it is clear to me that we live into two different world. not that i dont desire what you desire which is a perfect society. point out to me where you find a perfect society built by atheistic ideas.

the obedience that i am talking about is obedience to God and His Laws.

 

[jam070406]

the obedience that i am talking about is obedience to God and His Laws.

Might I add: out of our love for Him.

 

[humble_in_doubt]

it is clear to me that we live into two different world. not that i dont desire what you desire which is a perfect society. point out to me where you find a perfect society built by atheistic ideas.

the obedience that i am talking about is obedience to God and His Laws.

Scandinavia comes to mind! Japan is also pretty close. In fact the countries with the lowest crime rates, highest quality of life, etc. tend to be overwhelmingly non-theistic.

Moreover, when you reference god’s laws … there’s little theists and atheists disagree on with regard to the definition of desirable virtues. We simply understand that these ideas were around far longer than religion or belief in any supernatural, invisible, intelligent, and omnipotent power.

 

[wisdomseeker]

humble in doubt.

there is a Bible study going on right now on EWTN a Catholic chanel. perhaps you should see it. it is so beautiful. you might find that there are many of you ideas in there.

 

[humble_in_doubt]

humble in doubt.

there is a Bible study going on right now on EWTN a Catholic chanel. perhaps you should see it. it is so beautiful. you might find that there are many of you ideas in there.

respectfully … I probably won’t watch it. I spent most of my life as a Catholic & I’ve studied theology ad nausea. Plus, I’m hungry, need to plan the rest of weekend (I worked hard this week & it’s play time), and I’m watching FOX news right now (which is talking about our real problems … like our idiotic march toward socialism).

 

[wisdomseeker]

Might I add: out of our love for Him.

i dont see God any other way. it is called free will.

look all i am saying is that as Catholics we believe and know there is someone above us. someone that knows more than we do. a Creator whom we called God. One Living God. without Him is just you and me and another billion people. that being sad, my idea is just good or bad is yours.