Political Party in Re: to Catholicism

[SoCalRC]

Catholic charity does not call for one to examine the thoughts or soul of another. That is between the person, in this case, Bob, and God.

Let’s see, isn’t it “Bob” who has repeatedly called me a pro-abortionist, despite the fact that I have never suggested that anyone ever vote for a pro-choice candidate?

That would seem to imply a guess on my inner beliefs.

Similiarly, all I did was reiterate what he has, in fact said, and asked if that was how he really wanted to represent himself.

I made no presumption on rather it was an accurate reflection on his inner thoughts or deeds. You, however, presumed to ‘read’ more of my intentions than what was stated.

That is a prevailing theme in this thread. Just as you ‘know’ my intentions and condemn them, devoted GOP members vote for abortionists, closet pedaphiles, and other flawed individuals, but then profess themselves to be following the one true reflection of our faith…

My only suggestion is that we carry what we say in Mass to how we act here. We are all sinners and we all make moral compromises. If one ones to make a compelling case for their compromises fine, but professing to hold real truth, superceding that of even the Mother Church, is heretical and anathema.

 

[SoCalRC]

Okay. Well, I guess we have to go back to calling liberals Communists. That term was not invented by political pollsters, so I’m sure people on the Left won’t mind.

Current US foreign policy does not define who I am as a conservative, yet I have been called a neo-con several times. It is obvious that the person doing so is using it as a pejoritive and not really for its defined meaning.

I have not called anyone here a neo-conservative. However, it remains a fact that self-described neoconservatives hold many positions of power and are the driving force behind the most visible Bush foreign policy, pre-emptive war in Iraq (against a now debunked threat).

In other words, a major force in the GOP - assigned to more positions of power than any other, are “neo-cons”. So, if one is a committed GOP voter, it seems reasonable to assume that the agenda being pursued is endorsed. Neo-cons don’t find the term derogatory. If you do, then perhaps you have an issue with the GOP, which is widely endorsed here as the ‘conservative’ party.

I too would be offended if someone called me a neo-con, but the accusation would be without foundation. I vote my entire faith, which means I follow the Pope on abortion and unjust war. If I voted for neo-cons, I’d be embarrassed, but I would not deny my responsibility.

Calling democrats “communists” would simply be a sin. Communists have their own political party and bearing false witness is specifically prohibited in Holy Scripture. I know some folks would like to portray the democratic stereotype as somehow communist, but it is, at best, somewhat socialistic. And, indisputably, the GOP is the current king of massive public spending (we are now looking at 9 trillion in debt, and have outspend even LBJ by a wide margin).

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Beautifully said. I applaud you SoCal!

Well said as well. I am continually pleasantly surprised to find such intellectual honesty among so many folks. We are mostly wrong in our attempts to use Church Documents to our own purposes in argument. I daresay that more often then not we are incorrect in our reading and interpretation because we do not know and understand what other documents must be taken into consideration with them to understand them properly.

It’s doubly bad when people, as we are all tempted to do cite such materials as “factual” when they are really no more than our personal interpretation which we are not qualifed to assume is necessarily correct.

SoCal reminds us well of that.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Of course it’s a strawman. Vern didn’t say he rejected the authority the church and neither did I. What we do you reject is the distortions of church teachings that people try to peddle to the ignorant. For instance claiming the church declared the Iraq war unjust or that the church opposes the death penalty in all cases.

The Church has for all intents and purposes so declared the war in Iraq. There is little other interpretation that can be concluded. Even the neo-con Catholics lament that this is so. Why do you try to cling to a war is okay stance? That is by far the more interesting question. ? Why do you like to parse life issues such as war, torture, and the death penalty when you so hiddeously describe your agony over abortion? Death seems strangely limited in your prohibitions to one category only.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

I seldom find myself at a loss for words, but I am dumb-founded with the vitriole and inane examples that this thread as deteriorated to. I don’t think anyone is going to change anyone elses mind and the examples cited in some instances have nothing whatever to do with the subject at hand. May I also remind that we have been castigated for calling the left party the Democrat Party, I am complaining about the term neo-com. It is a derogatory term and I have no idea how that relates to a conservative.

Neo Con is a term they seem to define themselves with…see:

amconmag.com/2005/2005_08_29/article.html

 

[mary_bobo]

Let’s see, isn’t it “Bob” who has repeatedly called me a pro-abortionist, despite the fact that I have never suggested that anyone ever vote for a pro-choice candidate?

That would seem to imply a guess on my inner beliefs.

I have not assumed anything about you. I have no idea how you vote, might vote, or will vote. Surprisingly, I don’t care. That is your balliwick, not mine.

Similiarly, all I did was reiterate what he has, in fact said, and asked if that was how he really wanted to represent himself.

I made no presumption on rather it was an accurate reflection on his inner thoughts or deeds. You, however, presumed to ‘read’ more of my intentions than what was stated.

Perhaps if you were less verbose, we could all discern what you are really saying. I was only taking your statements on face value. I will not do so again.

That is a prevailing theme in this thread. Just as you ‘know’ my intentions and condemn them, devoted GOP members vote for abortionists, closet pedaphiles, and other flawed individuals, but then profess themselves to be following the one true reflection of our faith…

Never said that I knew your intentions, nor do I care as already stated. And to jump from that to what failed individuals GOP members vote for is really a stretch.

My only suggestion is that we carry what we say in Mass to how we act here. We are all sinners and we all make moral compromises. If one ones to make a compelling case for their compromises fine, but professing to hold real truth, superceding that of even the Mother Church, is heretical and anathema.

Again, what in the world are you talking about? I don’t recall anyone saying they held real truth superceding Mother Church. Again, your interpretation and again, a stretch.

 

[mary_bobo]

Neo Con is a term they seem to define themselves with…see:

amconmag.com/2005/2005_08_29/article.html

Thanks for the link, but I still maintain that there are conservatives and there are neo-conservatives and I am offended being called a neo. It is just as derogatory as Democrat Party to a true conservative. I must have missed the part where anyone other than the author of the article referred to themselves as “neo-cons”. I’ll read it again.

 

[vern_humphrey]

The Church has for all intents and purposes so declared the war in Iraq.

“For all intents and purposes?”

English translation: “They really haven’t, but I can pretend they have.”

There is little other interpretation that can be concluded.

Quite the contrary. John Paul II openly said we must stay and finish the job.

Even the neo-con Catholics lament that this is so.

For the umpteenth time, what is a “neo-con?”

Why do you try to cling to a war is okay stance? That is by far the more interesting question. ? Why do you like to parse life issues such as war, torture, and the death penalty when you so hiddeously describe your agony over abortion? Death seems strangely limited in your prohibitions to one category only.

Why do you keep trying to draw moral equivalency between abortion and other issues – especially when the Church has said there is no such moral equivalency>

 

[SpiritMeadow]

The left has a great foreign policy. Children are foreign and their policy is you have a 9 month window in which you can chop them into little pieces. This is acceptable because Geroge Bush is evil and it is a blessing for a child not to be born into a world where George Bush exists.

Guess you missed that we moved to an adult conversation here, considered, intelligent, and thoughtful. We are not having any tantrums right now. Will call you when we do.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Thanks for the link, but I still maintain that there are conservatives and there are neo-conservatives and I am offended being called a neo. It is just as derogatory as Democrat Party to a true conservative. I must have missed the part where anyone other than the author of the article referred to themselves as “neo-cons”. I’ll read it again.

I can see the distinction. You do not adopt neo-con principles. No problem. I meant they call themselves that, because the site is a conservative site, and the article is written about those who are Catholic and neo-conservatives. So I assume they have no problem with the title, otherwise they wouldnt’ publish it unless it was changed. They do not apparently read any derogatory pejorative meaning in the word.

Frankly I’ve heard mostly other conservative republicans use the term, though I admit they are not happy. Mostly because they believe this group has hijacked the party.

 

[stinkcat_14]

For the umpteenth time, what is a “neo-con?”

I don’t know either, nor do I know why some people are offended by the term.

 

[vern_humphrey]

I don’t know either, nor do I know why some people are offended by the term.

Well, judging by the way it’s used, it appears to be intended to offend.

But I really would like to know what a “neo-con” is – especially as used by some who post here.

 

[estesbob]

Catholic charity does not call for one to examine the thoughts or soul of another. That is between the person, in this case, Bob, and God.

Mary-thanks for the defense but I’ve long since quit reading ,more or less replying, to this posts. I have a hard enough time defending things I do say without having to defend things I didn’t say.

You’ll notice about every third post he will tell you about how the Republicans favor slavery and forced abortions. Can one really have a reasonable conversation with someone who claims that?

 

[rlg94086]

I have not called anyone here a neo-conservative. However, it remains a fact that self-described neoconservatives hold many positions of power and are the driving force behind the most visible Bush foreign policy, pre-emptive war in Iraq (against a now debunked threat).

In other words, a major force in the GOP - assigned to more positions of power than any other, are “neo-cons”. So, if one is a committed GOP voter, it seems reasonable to assume that the agenda being pursued is endorsed. Neo-cons don’t find the term derogatory. If you do, then perhaps you have an issue with the GOP, which is widely endorsed here as the ‘conservative’ party.

I too would be offended if someone called me a neo-con, but the accusation would be without foundation. I vote my entire faith, which means I follow the Pope on abortion and unjust war. If I voted for neo-cons, I’d be embarrassed, but I would not deny my responsibility.

Calling democrats “communists” would simply be a sin. Communists have their own political party and bearing false witness is specifically prohibited in Holy Scripture. I know some folks would like to portray the democratic stereotype as somehow communist, but it is, at best, somewhat socialistic. And, indisputably, the GOP is the current king of massive public spending (we are now looking at 9 trillion in debt, and have outspend even LBJ by a wide margin).

I am not a neo-con, but I am a Republican. The two are not the same thing. Therefore, if you did call me or any other non-neo-con Republicans a neo-con, it would be a sin. Therefore, you really shouldn’t use the term in the manner you do. If you are referring to a person who has actually described themself as a neo-con, then it’s fine. If you are judging them to be a neo-con, and then using the term in the pejoritive manner you do, then you are sinning - the exact same way that someone calling a liberal a Communist (note, in this post and the previous post, I said nothing about calling Democrats Communists…you assumed that’s what I meant when I said “liberal.” ).

 

[estesbob]

The Church has for all intents and purposes so declared the war in Iraq. There is little other interpretation that can be concluded. Even the neo-con Catholics lament that this is so. Why do you try to cling to a war is okay stance? That is by far the more interesting question. ? Why do you like to parse life issues such as war, torture, and the death penalty when you so hiddeously describe your agony over abortion? Death seems strangely limited in your prohibitions to one category only.

Then in your mind all Catholics fighting in Iraq are going to hell? How do you reconcile that with the Vatican’s latest pronouncement that we should stay in Iraq until it is stabilized?

The reason I cling to the war is okay stance is because the Pope specifically said that Catholics in good conscious can either support or oppose this war. If you can find a similar statement about abortion please post it.

By the way I oppose the death penalty as adamantly as I oppose abortion. Perhaps you and I can swap stories about our experiences we have had protesting outside the walls of the prison when an execution is going on. The crowds have gotten quite a bit bigger since Texas moved the execution time to 5 p.m. rather than midnight. Being I spend a lot of time in Colorado I’ dont make it as much as I used to

I also oppose torture, and unjust wars, but in reality I dont know of anybody who supports unjust wars or torture, , Although I know there are many define torture as anything beyond raising your voice to a prisoner and that many define an unjust war as any war waged by a Republican president.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Then in your mind all Catholics fighting in Iraq are going to hell? How do you reconcile that with the Vatican’s latest pronouncement that we should stay in Iraq until it is stabilized?

The reason I cling to the war is okay stance is because the Pope specifically said that Catholics in good conscious can either support or oppose this war. If you can find a similar statement about abortion please post it.

By the way I oppose the death penalty as adamantly as I oppose abortion. Perhaps you and I can swap stories about our experiences we have had protesting outside the walls of the prison when an execution is going on. The crowds have gotten quite a bit bigger since Texas moved the execution time to 5 p.m. rather than midnight. Being I spend a lot of time in Colorado I’ dont make it as much as I used to

I also oppose torture, and unjust wars, but in reality I dont know of anybody who supports unjust wars or torture, , Although I know there are many define torture as anything beyond raising your voice to a prisoner and that many define an unjust war as any war waged by a Republican president.

Sorry, Bob, but he’s got you. It’s the old, “He doesn’t actually think, act, or say this, but I pretend he does, so he’s guilty” ploy.

 

[estesbob]

Sorry, Bob, but he’s got you. It’s the old, “He doesn’t actually think, act, or say this, but I pretend he does, so he’s guilty” ploy.

The real torture is reading the tortured logic in his posts. I am also suprised he believed I supported the death penatly given you forced me to get a job as a guard on death row becuase of it…

 

[mary_bobo]

Mary-thanks for the defense but I’ve long since quit reading ,more or less replying, to this posts. I have a hard enough time defending things I do say without having to defend things I didn’t say.

You’ll notice about every third post he will tell you about how the Republicans favor slavery and forced abortions. Can one really have a reasonable conversation with someone who claims that?

Probably not, but in my naivete I can’t help but jump in from time to time.

 

[SoCalRC]

I am not a neo-con, but I am a Republican. The two are not the same thing. Therefore, if you did call me or any other non-neo-con Republicans a neo-con, it would be a sin. Therefore, you really shouldn’t use the term in the manner you do.

Can you give an example of me using the term ‘as I do’? I never called anyone a neoconvervative, I just pointed out, as others have, that it is a self imposed label. Neo conservatives proudly proclaim themselves as such.

Since a GOP congress and GOP whitehouse have vigorously pursued a neo conservative policy (PNAC has been proposing the invasion of Iraq for the purposes of strategic self interest since 1997), and the GOP leadership has put self proclaimed neo-cons into many positions of great power, GOP supporters have an ownership stake in neo conservatism. If you find the policy offensive, vote differently. If it is just the term that bothers you, take it up with the folks who coined it and continue to use it.

I said nothing about calling Democrats Communists…you assumed that’s what I meant when I said “liberal.” ).

I’m sure that would crack them up on talk radio, but I actually take this quite seriously. Hate speech dehumanizes the target. It is, fundementally, a rejection of the Second Vatican Councils definition of the human person. In other words, it is a rejection of the underpinnings of my faith’s position on abortion.

I’ve seen men die for God and country, sometimes while I still frantically tried to shovel their insides back into them. The divisions we dwell on, things like skin color, socio-economic status, or even political affiliations, are largely superficial.

 

[mary_bobo]

Well, judging by the way it’s used, it appears to be intended to offend.

But I really would like to know what a “neo-con” is – especially as used by some who post here.

I would like to know also, and, further, I would like to have the names of some of those who are self-identified neo-cons.