Pope Benedict Urges Government Subsidy of Faith-Based Schools

  • Thread starter Thread starter buffalo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
vern_humphrey said:
So is anarchy a game for the strong – and the weak surrender or die.

But is that how a nation should be governed?
Click to expand...
The nation has always had groups with conflicting ideas on issues. It has them now. What’s the big deal?

Anarchy is a game for the strong. However, our system has developed a way of reconciling competing ideas so we avoid anarchy. Those who are strong and work for their ideas have a chance of seeing their ideas adopted. Those who are weak and overly concerned that others don’t agree with them are probably destined to see their ideas discarded.

So, yes. It’s a very good way to govern a nation. It works well.
 
FishMonger said:
The nation has always had groups with conflicting ideas on issues. It has them now. What’s the big deal?
Click to expand...
The big deal is that government was neither so powerful nor so centralized in the past. There was no one in the 18th Century mandating that your children receive education on homosexual relations – and no one with the power to enforce it, if there had been. There was no one in the 19th Century demanding words like “mother” and “father” and “christmas” be excised from the vocabulary – and no one with the power to enforce it, if there had been.
FishMonger said:
Anarchy is a game for the strong. However, our system has developed a way of reconciling competing ideas so we avoid anarchy. Those who are strong and work for their ideas have a chance of seeing their ideas adopted. Those who are weak and overly concerned that others don’t agree with them are probably destined to see their ideas discarded.

So, yes. It’s a very good way to govern a nation. It works well.
Click to expand...
Actually, what we see now is** very** new. The extent to which government power has encroached on individual rights in recent years is enormous. And the centralization of government is almost breath-taking when you look back just a few decades. One person, or a handfull of bureaucrats now makes intimate, personal decisions for us all – and has the power to enforce those decisions.

That is not how we have been governed in the past and it is neither a good way to govern, nor does it work well.
 
vern_humphrey said:
The big deal is that government was neither so powerful nor so centralized in the past. There was no one in the 18th Century mandating that your children receive education on homosexual relations – and no one with the power to enforce it, if there had been. There was no one in the 19th Century demanding words like “mother” and “father” and “christmas” be excised from the vocabulary – and no one with the power to enforce it, if there had been.

Actually, what we see now is** very** new. The extent to which government power has encroached on individual rights in recent years is enormous. And the centralization of government is almost breath-taking when you look back just a few decades. One person, or a handfull of bureaucrats now makes intimate, personal decisions for us all – and has the power to enforce those decisions.

That is not how we have been governed in the past and it is neither a good way to govern, nor does it work well.
Click to expand...
Well, let’s say someone is demanding that “mother” and “father” be excised from the vocabulary. Who is it? Is it central government? Has a law been passed? Has a law been proposed? Has a regulation been issued? Has a regulation been proposed?

There probably was nobody in the 19th century with such a proposition, and very few in the 21st Century would pay any attention to it. Who takes something like this seriously, and who would see it as an impediment to implementing vouchers?

If this is what you object to, then I’d suggest you have little chance of implementing your ideas. I choose to ignore such things and proceed regardless of the fact that someone disagrees with me. That’s what I mean by strength.
 
FishMonger said:
Well, let’s say someone is demanding that “mother” and “father” be excised from the vocabulary. Who is it? Is it central government? Has a law been passed? Has a law been proposed? Has a regulation been issued? Has a regulation been proposed?
Click to expand...
California – haven’t you been following these forums?
 
vern_humphrey said:
California – haven’t you been following these forums?
Click to expand...
Is it now illegal to use the word “mother” or “father” in California?

Who in California says so? State government? Governor? Legislature? Courts?

Is it a law? Is it a regulation? Has it been enforced? Has a legislator submitted a bill? Is there a referendum vote scheduled? Has any city, county, or municipal government passed such a statute?

Are there any other words which are illegal in California? What are they?

Taking this stuff seriously is not a path to enacting vouchers.
 
FishMonger said:
Is it now illegal to use the word “mother” or “father” in California?

Who in California says so? State government? Governor? Legislature? Courts?

Is it a law? Is it a regulation? Has it been enforced? Has a legislator submitted a bill? Is there a referendum vote scheduled? Has any city, county, or municipal government passed such a statute?

Are there any other words which are illegal in California? What are they?

Taking this stuff seriously is not a path to enacting vouchers.
Click to expand...
“Ignorance is exasperating. Wilful ignorance is bullet-proof.”
– Uncle Herbivore:p
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=191083&highlight=mother+father
‘Mom’ and ‘Dad’ banished by California
Click to expand...
Schwarzenegger signs law outlawing terms perceived as negative to gays:
Click to expand...
worldnetdaily.com/news/ar…TICLE_ID=58130
Click to expand...
Words fail me.
Click to expand...
 
FishMonger said:
Is it illegal to use the words “mother” and “father” in California?

Can anyone from California help out here? Has the government excised the words “mother” and “father” from the language? Are you aware of this? Has the First Amendment been repealed in California?
Click to expand...
You know, the great danger in playing the fool is that people may come to think you’re not playing.😛

Don’t pretend to ask others. Go to the cited article and read it.
 
vern_humphrey said:
You know, the great danger in playing the fool is that people may come to think you’re not playing.😛

Don’t pretend to ask others. Go to the cited article and read it.
Click to expand...
Is it possible that it’s perfectly OK to use the words “mother” and “father” in California? Is it possible there is no threat to the language? Is it possible it’s silly to think there is a threat out there? Is it possible there is no violation of the First Amendment? Is it possible the weak make up excuses for non-action?

It seems very reasonable to ask Californians if they are prohibited from using the words “mother” and “father.” Who would know better?

Remember, you told us, “There was no one in the 19th Century demanding words like “mother” and “father” and “christmas” be excised from the vocabulary – and no one with the power to enforce it, if there had been.”

And we can all be thankful there is no threat to the words today.
 
vern_humphrey said:
Again, people may come to think you’re not playing.😛

Go read the article.
Click to expand...
I’m not playing. I actually think it’s perfectly OK to use the words “mother” and “father” in California. It is OK, isn’t it? Nothing to worry about? No plots to excise the language? No hidden agendas? No need to worry about jack-booted language thugs? No secret meetings in cellars where people light candles, hold hands, and softly chant, “Mother…Father…Mother…Father…?”

It’s really refreshing to dismiss such silliness.
 
vern_humphrey said:
You’re beginning to convince me.😛
Click to expand...
Excellent. I don’t want even you to be under the impression that a jack-booted California government is excising the words “mother” and “father” from the language. Who would even suggest such a thing? Better yet, who would ever believe it? And what would you think of someone who told you that?
 
FishMonger said:
Excellent. I don’t want even you to be under the impression that a jack-booted California government is excising the words “mother” and “father” from the language. Who would even suggest such a thing? Better yet, who would ever believe it? And what would you think of someone who told you that?
Click to expand...
The question is, what do I think of someone who keeps trying to recast the debate, and pole vault over mouse droppings?😛
 
vern_humphrey said:
The question is, what do I think of someone who keeps trying to recast the debate, and pole vault over mouse droppings?😛
Click to expand...
Recast? Well, here’s what you told us:
“There was no one in the 19th Century demanding words like “mother” and “father” and “christmas” be excised from the vocabulary – and no one with the power to enforce it, if there had been.”

So, I asked where this was happening and who was doing it. Your answer was :
“California – haven’t you been following these forums?”

Now, I contend it’s nonsense to think the words “mother” and “father” have been excised from the language in California. Do you contend they have been excised?
 
FishMonger said:
Recast? Well, here’s what you told us:
“There was no one in the 19th Century demanding words like “mother” and “father” and “christmas” be excised from the vocabulary – and no one with the power to enforce it, if there had been.”

So, I asked where this was happening and who was doing it. Your answer was :
“California – haven’t you been following these forums?”

Now, I contend it’s nonsense to think the words “mother” and “father” have been excised from the language in California. Do you contend they have been excised?
Click to expand...
'Fraid you’re gonna have to play with yourself on this one.😛
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top