Some in U.S. voting with their feet

[Richardols]

Scott_Lafrance:

Could you please educate us “unenlightened” conservatives what exactly a “Shi’ite Evangelical” is so I can avoid them, if necessary. Sounds like it could be Grand Mufti Ayatollah al’Creflo Dollar.

Why do you call yourself unenlightened?

Shi’ite Evangelicals are the right wing Fundies and Evangelicals who confuse faith and politics and who helped elect Bush.

Of course, he didn’t get the Mandate from Heaven they wanted, but they are getting something else from Mr. Bush. He said that he wasn’t going to push for a constitutional amendment regarding marriage and he also said that though he wants conservatives on the Supreme Court, he’ll not insist on their being anti-abortion.

 

[Richardols]

Scott_Lafrance:

Even though I am one of those nasty Shi’ite Fundamentalist conservative Catholics

You’re anti-Catholic? You agree that Catholics aren’t really Christians but that they were useful in helping elect Bush?

Surely not.

Why not just be a conservative Catholic and eschew the connection to the Fundies?

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Hmm, I guess that I am one then, because I allow my political perspective to be colored in the light of my faith. To me, personal belief and public belief are intrinsically tied together. You cannot be a person of integrity if your private beliefs differ from your public positions. That is the very definition of hypocricy.

Richardols:

Why do you call yourself unenlightened?

Shi’ite Evangelicals are the right wing Fundies and Evangelicals who confuse faith and politics and who helped elect Bush.

Of course, he didn’t get the Mandate from Heaven they wanted, but they are getting something else from Mr. Bush. He said that he wasn’t going to push for a constitutional amendment regarding marriage and he also said that though he wants conservatives on the Supreme Court, he’ll not insist on their being anti-abortion.

 

[jlw]

Richardols:

You’re anti-Catholic? You agree that Catholics aren’t really Christians but that they were useful in helping elect Bush?

Surely not.

Why not just be a conservative Catholic and eschew the connection to the Fundies?

More Catholics voted for Bush.

Catholics voting pro-life and pro-marriage?? Who woulda thunk it??

 

[Richardols]

jlw:

More Catholics voted for Bush.

Yes, a bit more than 50%. But the way some spoke, you’d think that 100% would vote for Bush. Unfortunately, not all Catholics approved of the war, of the terrible deficits, and the bad economy. But, he did surely get a majority of us.

 

[Richardols]

Scott_Lafrance:

Hmm, I guess that I am one then, because I allow my political perspective to be colored in the light of my faith.

Not like the Fundies, I’d hope.

To me, personal belief and public belief are intrinsically tied together. You cannot be a person of integrity if your private beliefs differ from your public positions. That is the very definition of hypocrisy.

Good thought. I agree. With that same principle, you are a conservative and, one hopes, also an orthodox Catholic, and I am a liberal, and most certainly an orthodox Catholic.

 

[Kevin_Walker]

Thanks to the ongoing forced busing debacle, White Flight is common here in Boston.

Boston’s population has declined from 620,000 to 580,000 according to the 2000 Census. One of my South Boston High School buddies actually moved to New Zealand.

Being taxed to support affirmative action, forced busing, minority quotas, wrongful incarcerations; and then the sexual abuse crisis here in Boston, has caused a lot of good American citizens to reassess their priorities.

I don’t see how you could expect a person who did 20 years in prison to later be found innocent by science to still respect the legal system.

Massachusetts has the second highest rate of wrongful incarceration in the nation, and Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney just declared last month in his speech that “its a broken system”.

Before being elected as Congressman, Stevie Lynch was opposed to Gay Marriage, and now that he has been elected, Massachusetts Congressman Stevie Lynch has been pressuring the State House to support Gay Marriage.

Voting with your feet seems to be more effective than voting in the ballot box.

 

[Mac6yver]

Scott_Lafrance:

Greeeeeeeat!!! Let us all know when you’ve figured out what exactly it is your fighting against and enlighten us.

I am fighting for my ideals. What you would consider liberal ideals.

 

[jlw]

Richardols:

Yes, a bit more than 50%. But the way some spoke, you’d think that 100% would vote for Bush. Unfortunately, not all Catholics approved of the war, of the terrible deficits, and the bad economy. But, he did surely get a majority of us.

Yeah, and many think war is worse than pre-meditated murder of a defensless child by ripping their limbs off and sucking their brains out of their soft skulls. Ah, yes, the horribly catechized liberal US Catholics at work.

Forgive the graphic nature of my post and I hope the moderator can forgive me as well.

Being Catholic also doesn’t mean you have a basic underatanding of economics either.

 

[Richardols]

jlw:

Yeah, and many think war is worse than pre-meditated murder of a defensless child by ripping their limbs off and sucking their brains out of their soft skulls.

War is not necessarily any worse, but certainly as bad if large numbers of children are being killed as “collateral damage,” or if they’re starving to death in a refugee camp or dying of AIDS or malaria in Africa and elsewhere.

 

[jlw]

Richardols:

War is not necessarily any worse, but certainly as bad if large numbers of children are being killed as “collateral damage,” or if they’re starving to death in a refugee camp or dying of AIDS or malaria in Africa and elsewhere.

Yeah, and democrats have done “better” in this regard?? You know, the democrats win the “hot air” contest on those issues. They “feel their pain” and allocate millions (and Bush doesn’t???) but their results are pretty fruitless for a myriad of reasons (relying on the UN is one of many).

Nice how your focus was on war, and not the clinical killing of “undesireables” just down the block from where you sit.

 

[Richardols]

jlw:

Nice how your focus was on war, and not the clinical killing of “undesireables” just down the block from where you sit.

Well, there are enough folks who focus on abortion to cover that issue pretty well. I belong to Democrats for Life and have said more than a few rosaries on Saturday mornings in front of abortion clinics.

But, I am also aware that there are too many people who don’t see all the other things that kill children and continue to kill children. So I’ll gladly focus on those things as other good people focus on abortion.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Mac6yver:

I am fighting for my ideals. What you would consider liberal ideals.

And what are those ideals. I find a great deal of variance within the ranks of “liberalism”. In fact, one of my truest friends here at the CA forums considered himself a liberal, although he and I saw eye to eye on just about everything.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Richardols:

War is not necessarily any worse, but certainly as bad if large numbers of children are being killed as “collateral damage,” or if they’re starving to death in a refugee camp or dying of AIDS or malaria in Africa and elsewhere.

If a bomb were falling in your direction, would you rather be in the collateral damage risk zone, or the intended target area? Where would you consider your survival rate to be higher?

 

[Mac6yver]

Scott_Lafrance:

And what are those ideals. I find a great deal of variance within the ranks of “liberalism”. In fact, one of my truest friends here at the CA forums considered himself a liberal, although he and I saw eye to eye on just about everything.

Honestly there are too many to go into. I have some basics, such as gun control, more social healthcare, seperation of Chruch and State…etc.

 

[Jeffrey]

Scott_Lafrance:

That is the very definition of hypocricy.

You just described pretty much all libs right there. :clapping:

 

[Jeffrey]

Right…we value the baby’s life and the sanctity of marriage above $$$$.

Richardols:

Yes, a bit more than 50%. But the way some spoke, you’d think that 100% would vote for Bush. Unfortunately, not all Catholics approved of the war, of the terrible deficits, and the bad economy. But, he did surely get a majority of us.

 

[Richardols]

Jeffrey:

Right…we value the baby’s life and the sanctity of marriage above $$$$.

Ad your candidate won - and not two months after his victory, he’s announced that he is not going to push for a marriage amendment to the US Constitution and that he will not require any of his conservative appointments to the bench to be anti-abortion.

 

[gilliam]

Richardols:

Ad your candidate won - and not two months after his victory, he’s announced that he is not going to push for a marriage amendment to the US Constitution

actually he did push for it in the state of the union

and that he will not require any of his conservative appointments to the bench to be anti-abortion.

No litmus test has always been his stated policy, where have you been DU?

 

[Brad]

I caught the CBC news last night.

After 10 minutes, I could take no more.

In those 10 minutes, I saw:

• Them belittle Bush for saying it was a “lean” budget, showing there were cuts in education, healthcare, etc and “massive” increased in defense spending
• Show side by side video comparisons between Iraq and Vietnam - complete biased propaganda
• Showed the battle raging in Canada over same-sex marriage, with, of course, a painting of all opponents of same-sex marriage as “bad” except the Muslims that oppose it.
• Showed the battle parents in Canada are facing from sex-“education” peddlars to their very young children.

I just about threw up my dinner.

If this is the real state of affairs in Canada (and I know there are exceptions from people like the great Bishop in Calgary), then I say the 45%+ of the population that are Catholics had best start making a lot of noise - otherwise, shame on you.