Story: "Prominent clergy are duking it out on social media over Joe Biden calling himself Catholic."

[whatistrue]

Please do us a favor and condemn the violence displayed toward federal agents.

Right after you condemn people doing nothing illegal being rounded up or tear-gassed for no good reason.

 

[CaptainPrudeman]

Have I “shamed” you by pointing out the facts of the matter?

They aren’t facts. They don’t have to be true. If you and people with your opinion would stop saying it and encourage people to vote for their true preferred party for a change, things would be different. I can’t count how many people want to have other options but can’t because “a third party vote is a waste” is such a common opinion.

It is an undeniable truth that this election will be won either by Trump or by Harris, sorry, Biden. Voting third party, or not voting at all, will have no effect on that.

Once again, the self-fulfilling prophecy. Saying this dissuades third party voters, which causes the two party system to be upheld.

As I said, if you see absolutely no difference between the two candidates, that it makes no difference which of them wins, then your position is reasonable.

I see a lot of differences between them. I just don’t like either one as much as my preferred candidate. I don’t have to be blind to their differences to think they both suck.

As for condemning the “lesser of two evils”, if the church recognizes its validity why should we object to it? I am disinclined to make the perfect the enemy of the good…or to accept worse when better is an option.

It’s a valid strategy, but one that holds us back and keeps us in an oppressive system that is too rigid to allow change. We have to make sacrifices to improve the country, maybe allow the “bad guy” to win once in order to make things better in the long term.

Continue speaking the way you are and you won’t be arrested, you won’t sin, you won’t get hurt. I just want you to realize what the things you’re saying do in the long term and how your jaded outlook on third parties creates itself.

 

[whatistrue]

they were labeled as police,

The “secret” in “secret police” refers to membership not existence. Police officers exercising police powers (such as arrest or interrogation) should be required to identify themselves as individuals (at a minimum by badge or ID number), not just that they are officers.

 

[Nepperhan]

yes, it was once the party of rare. they were more respecting of religion and now they are the party of the “nones”

Is it now the party of “well dones”?

 

[CaptainPrudeman]

He didn’t refuse, he asked to trade denouncements of abhorrent acts on both sides of the political spectrum. A quid pro quo, if you will. Just do it, and you’ll get what you want.

 

[StudentMI]

Why not just say you’re against those things. You already said you don’t agree with looters and rioters.

 

[StudentMI]

To you. You’re a Catholic. Not only are such actions immoral but we are to respect legitimate authority. We’re not called to rebel and revolt. We’re supposed to be better than that.

And he asked you to first.

 

[whatistrue]

And he asked you to first.

No. He demanded submission to his version of reality. I declined.

Not only are such actions immoral but we are to respect legitimate authority

Never said they weren’t, and the actions that I was speaking about were not legitimate exercises of authority under our Constitution. We are basically talking about 2 different things, but he seems to be stuck in this “I am right and you better admit it or I’ll do bad things to you” mode. Not a position that I react well to.

 

[StudentMI]

Hardly demanded. And to bring up ‘bullying’ in this is a little silly.

 

[whatistrue]

I consider it bullying to make threats.

 

[CaptainPrudeman]

No, it doesn’t. It implies that whatistrue wants a condemnation of something they find deplorable for you to get the same. I don’t know where you’re getting all these random conclusions about the secret agenda of another poster, but it’s really not a great look.

 

[VonDerTann]

Yet it’d be so easy. And it’s whatistrue who wants me to offer all sorts of qualifications to what federal agents shouldn’t do.

I have an easier one: don’t assault cops with bricks and urine not try to blind them with lasers.

Sad but typical that on a catholic board we can’t get agreement with that statement.

 

[whatistrue]

I consider it a violation of the Constitution and oath of office for law enforcement agents to use excessive force against U.S. citizens engaged in legal and even protected activity.

And yet you won’t condemn those things.

Disgraceful.

And for the record, I have actually said more and closer to what you have asked than you have to what I have asked. Just look at the record.

 

[CaptainPrudeman]

Right after you condemn people doing nothing illegal being rounded up or tear-gassed for no good reason.

These aren’t unreasonable qualifications. Tear-gassing peaceful protesters is wrong, period. Doesn’t matter what cause they support. Why can’t you just say that’s wrong so you can get your condemnation of assaulting officers? Why this childish “Nuh uh you first” mentality? You afraid whatistrue is going to go full comic book villain and refuse the trade after you give what he wants?

 

[whatistrue]

And it’s whatistrue who wants me to offer all sorts of qualifications to what federal agents shouldn’t do.

The request was for a statement that one particular activity (okay, two) on the part of law enforcement is beyond the pale. Hardly “all sorts”.

 

[CaptainPrudeman]

On abortion, Joe’s public stance mirrors that of 56% of American Catholics (according to an August, 2019 Gallup poll) who say that abortion should remain legal.

Just because Vice President Biden agrees with a large portion of heretical American catholics doesn’t mean he’s free to.

 

[MNathaniel]

Joe is about as much of a Catholic as the other parishioners in the pews. He has empathy and compassion for the most vulnerable among us, values the dignity of work, shows care for God’s creation and values family life. On abortion, Joe’s public stance mirrors that of 56% of American Catholics (according to an August, 2019 Gallup poll) who say that abortion should remain legal. However, if priests and bishops want to deny him the eucharist, obviously that’s a call they can make.

On judgement day none of us will be measured against the standard of “other parishioners in the pews”.

If all but one parishioner support child-murder, all but one parishioner is wrong.

And if all but one parishioner were as public about their support for child-murder as certain politicians, I hope all priests would deny the Eucharist to all but one parishioner.

Out of mercy for all those parishioners who don’t realize that by their own lack of mercy for the innocent murdered children, they are cutting themselves off from the mercy of God.

The sooner they realize that and are willing to be merciful to other innocents, the sooner they can again receive God’s mercy themselves.

But priests allowing parishioners to wallow in ignorance about the reality of how they’ve severed themselves from God’s mercy (by their own lack of mercy) is not merciful.

The “most vulnerable among us” are preborn children helpless to defend themselves against the metal tools that tear their bodies apart. If you tolerate their murder, you can’t claim to have compassion for the most vulnerable at all.

 

[whatistrue]

There’s no need for me to condemn things that haven’t happened.

If you deny that peaceful protesters were tear-gassed in DC to make way for a person who will remain nameless to walk to a photo op, then we have nothing further to discuss.

For the record:
I worked enough around lasers while I was in the military to know that playing with them is a VERY BAD IDEA, and they should never be pointed at anyone. I don’t think that federal, or state, or local agents are better than or more deserving of protection than citizens, and in fact that the purpose of these officials is to protect and server the citizens, not assault them or illegally imprison them. Throwing a brick is assault. Throwing a bottle of urine is disgusting, but does not rise to the level of dangerous in my mind.

And I DID ask you first, BTW.

And I am responding last.

That being said, welcome to the Ignore bucket.

 

[VonDerTann]

That’s OK - lots of people ignore me.

(Usually because they don’t like what I have to say!)

 

[Dr_Meinheimer]

I keep thinking about glass houses, motes and beams.

As an outsider, Biden appears to be an honourable man (with faults). Trump? The polar opposite.

Comical. You basically said:

“The Bishop has enough of his own sins to worry about than to comment on someone else’s”

followed quickly by:

“Oh by the way - Trump’s a huge sinner.”

This is why I roll my eyes at people who quote this particular passage, most of the time. The passage is quite valid, but for one to throw that in people’s face basically mandates the thrower is living a virtually sinless life for them to be taken seriously.