D
DaveBj
Guest
Reason to protest =/ right to break the law.
- Status
I
ishii
Guest
I searched in vain for any reference to this nun and any protests against abortion. Just as I thought - the left doesn’t really care about the slaughter taking place right now. How ironic that they used blood in baby bottles:
Boertje-Obed explained why they sprayed baby bottles full of human blood on the exterior of the facility.
“The reason for the baby bottles was to represent that the blood of children is spilled by these weapons,” he said.
But no attention at all to the slaughter that happens daily. I suspect that if the good sister had protested against abortion, she would lose most of her friends on the left. I have absolutely no respect whatsoever for her.
This all reminds me of a passage from CS Lewis’ Screwtape Letters:
“Whichever he adopts, your main task will be the same. Let him begin by treating the Patriotism or the Pacifism as a part of his religion. Then let him, under the influence of partisan spirit, come to regard it as the most important part. Then quietly and gradually nurse him on to the stage at which the religion becomes merely part of the “Cause,” in which Christianity is valued chiefly because of the excellent arguments it can produce in favour of the British war effort or of pacifism. The attitude which you want to guard against is that in which temporal affairs are treated primarily as material for obedience. Once you have made the World an end, and faith a means, you have almost won your man, and it makes very little difference what kind of worldly end he is pursuing. Provided that meetings, pamphlets, policies, movements, causes, and crusades, matter more to him than prayers and sacraments and charity, he is ours – and the more “religious” (on those terms), the more securely ours. I could show you a pretty cageful down here.”
Pacifism and activism as religion.
Ishii
P
pnewton
Guest
I do not know if you were too young to remember, but you seem to hit talking points, not what really happened.
If I did not know better, I would think your efforts are designed to be deliberately provocative. Yes, Nelson Mandela had many good qualities, and some that do him no honor. He is not the subject of this thread. Iraq is not the subject here. I am surprised you didn’t through Nazis in as much as you are jumping. Nothing here has anything to do with the actions of this nuns. This didn’t happen in Iraq, South Africa, or Nazi German.
C
Corki
Guest
Rosa Parks is a great example of what this sister did NOT do. Rosa Parks broke an **unjust law **but did so without violence or destruction of property. The sister broke a **just law **in a violent and destructive way in order to make a point about something she disagreed with. She knew she was breaking the law, that’s part of why she did it. She wasn’t striking against the law (like Mrs. Parks was) but was using the law for publicity.
E
Eric_Hyom
Guest
My point is unjust laws should never happen, Rosa Parks had a criminal record and lost her job, simply for standing up against an unjust law. People lived in fear, some suffered and died, the protest was not plain sailing.
Nuclear weapons represent death and destruction, America retains the right to impose restrictions on other countries nuclear programmes, yet they ignore and justify their own rights to have these weapons.
The sisters just created a low level protest, compared to America’s right; to protest against other countries nuclear programmes.
P
pnewton
Guest
Unjust laws can exist, and if you know history, have existed in every corner of the world, especially if we were to judge all history by our twenty-first century moral compass. America not only fails to be unique in this, but was once the moral leader.
Likewise, the United States has often taken the initiative in disarmament treaties, though has never been so foolish as to unilaterally disarm. There are too many countries, and people, that are anti-American out there.
M
maryjk
Guest
Exactly. Rosa Parks wanted the unjust law done away with.
The sister can’t claim that. She was trespassing. Does she really want us to do away with trespassing laws? And if not trespassing, what unjust law was she protesting?
P
pnewton
Guest
We would also have to legalize vandalism as well. Thinking of an application of the Golden Rule, should someone who is an atheist be allowed to break-in and vandalize a church, or their convent?
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
Risking going off topic to clarify. The WMD were not “invisible”. The Brits destroyed the last known of the chemical weapons last summer at the request of the Iraqi government. Nobody knows, of course, what’s still out in the desert somewhere or what went to Syria.
Saddam Hussein killed approximately one million people. Would you have him back if you could?
Regardless, nobody has been killed by a nuke since 1945.
M
maryjk
Guest
True.
Could you imagine coming home from work and finding out that someone was upset about something you said, so they broke into your house and sprayed blood everywhere and smashed all of your furniture? And because there was no law against trespass and vandalism, there wouldn’t be anything you could do about it.
E
Eric_Hyom
Guest
Two quotes taken from the article in the opening post, with my highlights.
Americas stockpile of nuclear weapons are immoral and illegal, these words; inspire the nuns to say, I live for my beliefs, and if necessary, I am prepared to die for my beliefs, reminiscent of Nelson Mandela’s passion against injustice,
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
It’s there to do, and available to all.
If one goes to North Korea and throws blood or something on some nuclear plant, one will likely die for one’s beliefs as a consequence. Of course, one doesn’t die from a nuclear attack in the U.S. because it has the power to keep the murderers from causing dissidents in the U.S. to die for their beliefs.
J
JimG
Guest
The U.S. Has reduced the number of land-based ICBM’s in its nuclear deterrent from 1150 to 450 and plans are afoot to reduce it even more. Meanwhile Russia is deploying a newly developed next generation of ICBM’s.
Is it possible for an imbalance in deterrent forces to make war more likely? Yes it is. If the imbalance results in more war, either nuclear or conventional, as is possible, will the nuns take some responsibility for the imbalance which led to war?
Is it possible for an imbalance in deterrent forces to make war more likely? Yes it is. If the imbalance results in more war, either nuclear or conventional, as is possible, will the nuns take some responsibility for the imbalance which led to war?
D
DaveBj
Guest
The most important words in the quote have been bolded above – " . . . America’s overwhelming stockpile of nuclear weapons, which they call immoral and illegal." They took it upon themselves, personally, to declare something “immoral and illegal,” and then they broke other laws (trespass, vandalism) to shine a light on their personal beliefs. In a nation ruled by laws, we are not allowed to arbitrarily, and on our own personal authority, rule on something else’s “illegality” and break laws to try to eliminate it. By that standard, bombing abortion clinics and murdering abortionists would be justifiable, simply because someone else believes that abortion is immoral (which it is) and illegal (which it currently is not).
This whole situation reminds me of a verse that shows up twice in the Old Testament book of Judges: “In those days there was no king in Israel, and every man did what was right in his own eyes.” That is a description of anarchy. If we are to be a nation of laws, then people who break the laws should be held accountable for the laws that they break.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
Of course they won’t. Some people are simply anti-American, and want to see America brought down in some manner.
P
pnewton
Guest
They are not illegal. What law do you think they violate. Immoral? That is truly possible, but there are others that believe the Catholic Church is the Whore of Babylon. Should they have the right to break into a Catholic Church and deface it?
E
Eric_Hyom
Guest
America bombing Iraq; confirms your theory,
The same God created both Iraqi and America, despite our differences in belief.
C
Corki
Guest
Even if the laws that allow nuclear weapons are immoral, those were not the laws Sister is accused of breaking.
Strictly speaking, an unjust law is one that advances a moral evil. The laws against trespass and destruction of property are not unjust laws.
Moral theology teaches we must not obey an unjust law. But it doesn’t say we should break other laws that happen to have been passed by the same government. Catholic moral teaching actually says the opposite - that we must obey just laws.
I
ishii
Guest
In the past decades Planned Parenthood has killed millions, whereas those stockpiles of nuclear weapons have killed no one. What is the nun doing to stop abortion? I was not able to find anything. I think her priorities are misguided.
Ishii
J
JimG
Guest
That has nothing to do with nuclear deterrence. However, if Russia had a nuclear deterrent much greater than the U.S., it might have tried to use that nuclear threat to deter the U.S. from taking action in Iraq. And such a threat might have been successful. However, it would not have been likely, since there were a number of nations besides the U.S. which were convinced that action was needed in Iraq.
- Status