One of the men who threw the Idols (Pachamama) in the Tiber speaks!

  • Thread starter Thread starter IanM
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
JimmyDFG said:
Not necessarily, the legitimate defense of person or persons against the murder with the intentional killing.
Click to expand...
So you concede not all taking of property is theft. Great.

Obviously, the loss of immortal souls is far more dangerous than loss of moral lives, so removal of the False Idol even more justified than removal of the gun.
 
No he isn’t. He is just reading what is actually written. All truths aren’t equal; there is a hierarchy. This is the problem with the seamless garment analogy made by the likes of cardinal cupich. It ignores the fact that within Catholicism certain truths have primacy over others. The fact that there is one God and that we shall not worship any other is at the base of our faith and it takes precedence over every other.
 
JimmyDFG said:
Where Have I said that?
Click to expand...
Ok my apologies. If you dont think that, then all taking of property is theft. So you don’t think we can take the gun from the mass shooter since it would be theft. We simply disagree on that. I don’t think all taking of property is theft. This is just one example.
 
Last edited:
So taking a slave from his master is theft and you oppose it? Or would you go on a hike from Rome to Austria to ‘bring awareness’?
 
Babaganoush said:
The fact that there is one God and that we shall not worship any other is at the base of our faith and it takes precedence over every other.
Click to expand...
Pretty scary that this has to be repeated over and over in the thread.
 
goout said:
You are stretching morality to shreds there.
Click to expand...
No, it is just explaining to you that “theft” is not something you can easily define without considering all the factors and circumstances that determine the formal character of the act. What appears as theft in one instance may not be theft in another instance with different circumstances.
 
You can’t “bring awareness”, since that falls under “self-aggrandizing” and “publicity stunt”
 
rom said:
What appears as theft in one instance may not be theft in another instance with different circumstances.
Click to expand...
Aquinas said once someone has no food or clothing, everything becomes common property and thus its not theft for them to take food from another who has an abundance.
 
Yes, the same people who are accusing him of theft would then be arguing that he shouldn’t have so publicly undermined the church and the pope.
 
Aquinas11 said:
Aquinas said once someone has no food or clothing, everything becomes common property and thus its not theft for them to take food from another who has an abundance.
Click to expand...
Right. And there is also such a thing as epikea, which St. Thomas also talked about (ST, II-II, Q. 120).
 
In his treatise on law he argues that no human law is absolute. A city under siege might have a law that no one is allowed to leave the city. But suppose a man leaves the city in order to obtain aid from an ally. The law has become a hindrance to the good of the city. So the man is justified in violating it, although he may be subject to the kings justice afterward.
 
Babaganoush said:
So taking a slave from his master is theft and you oppose it?
Click to expand...
Colossians 4:1
Masters, treat your slaves justly and fairly, realizing that you too have a Master in heaven.

You would still take someone (perhaps against their will) even thou they may be treated fairly. If so what do you call that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top