The rise of the religious left

[donsnow]

fine

what about my other reply that was actually to you?

Well, sir, with all due respect, I think that when government stays out of religion, there cannot be a state-religion coalition to enslave people, in this nation. I think that to preserve our freedoms and rights from such a coalition, that we should firmly protect our 1792 Constitution as the one and only law of the land and be very firm in rejecting Sharia nor any other Islamic law. Because, Islam seems a political religion.

 

[donsnow]

Don, you’re free to think and believe whatever you want. But trust me I’ve believed healthcare was a right far longer than this Administration. And I believe Christ taught as much. If healthcare is not a right according to Christ, He wouldn’t have said in the Gospel to care for the sick. And when obviously the Church and individuals can’t do it all themselves, and a nation steps up to help, I say go for it.

And again if you yourself follow Church teaching on everything, then you don’t need to wonder whether the Church calls me a Catholic. Peace.

CMatt25,

Peace be with you.

I believe that Jesus Christ taught individuals and religion to care for the sick, imprisoned, thirsty, naked, ill and starving. Also, charitable private organizations can also do this. I also believe that when government becomes involved in these things, that bureaucrats’ and other official individuals’ greed and prejudice and bigoted judgement prevents more money from going to the needy than is lost by individuals, religion and private organizations.

I think that our Church does teach the things I just stated.

You see, CMatt25, I believe that all governments and other than Catholic religions are temporary, until Jesus Christ comes in person and imposes his rule (a Theocracy in every sense).

Now, we are to obey the scriptures and honor earthly governments of every type which are given authority over us. But, that is because these are only temporary until the return of our Good Shepherd in person. Also, satan has influence in government as well as in education, because these things are administered by individuals. And, people sometimes try to serve two masters, which the Lamb of God says we can’t succeed in doing.

That is why you find me as skeptical of government as most skeptics are skeptical of religion.

May you find and abide in the truth of God,
Don

 

[donsnow]

Donsnow wrote that a Catholic won’t “whine about justice”. I thought that this was a glaring untrue suggestion (that Catholics won’t care about justice), and in the matter of gays specifically, I had carefully read the document from the American Bishops Council, which specifically stated that care had to be taken not to contribute to the injustice toward gays.

I know that this is not an endorsement of homosexuality nor homosexual marriage. I did not say it was.

It was a clear Catholic endorsement of justice toward gays.

Mr. Larkin,

Please do not misquote me. Gay Rights have nothing to do with justice and I wrote, “…whine about Gay Rights.”:

As I wrote in an earlier post today, and it bears repeating and embellishment, not only Gay Rights but also their twin brother Gay Pride, are satanic traps, to keep sinners in sin and drag them down to the fires of Hell.

I respectfully repeat and embellish my humble opinion, that gay individuals have, always have had and many of them have always enjoyed, the exact same civil and criminal rights and liberties when the blacks didn’t have those. And, that Gay Rights hi-jacks the pertinent Civil Rights movement, which has always been, is now and always will be open to all individuals, with no extra nor imaginary rights necessary to enjoy them.

Thank you,
Don D. Snow

 

[CMatt25]

CMatt25,

Peace be with you.

I believe that Jesus Christ taught individuals and religion to care for the sick, imprisoned, thirsty, naked, ill and starving. Also, charitable private organizations can also do this. I also believe that when government becomes involved in these things, that bureaucrats’ and other official individuals’ greed and prejudice and bigoted judgement prevents more money from going to the needy than is lost by individuals, religion and private organizations.

I think that our Church does teach the things I just stated.

You see, CMatt25, I believe that all governments and other than Catholic religions are temporary, until Jesus Christ comes in person and imposes his rule (a Theocracy in every sense).

Now, we are to obey the scriptures and honor earthly governments of every type which are given authority over us. But, that is because these are only temporary until the return of our Good Shepherd in person. Also, satan has influence in government as well as in education, because these things are administered by individuals. And, people sometimes try to serve two masters, which the Lamb of God says we can’t succeed in doing.

That is why you find me as skeptical of government as most skeptics are skeptical of religion.

May you find and abide in the truth of God,
Don

Don, thank you and to you.

I could perhaps buy into that belief a bit more if I saw the Church, individuals, and private charities getting the job done all themselves. But I don’t. I also don’t see with govt helping, it all getting done either. But I believe every entity can help. I know for instance if I lived in Canada I would have had any pre-existing conditions covered. And I wouldn’t have had to pay thousands and thousands of dollars in 5 figures out of pocket for surgeries I needed.

But I too believe when He comes again, everything will be worked out.

May you as well.

Peace.

CMatt

 

[larkin31]

Mr. Larkin,

Please do not misquote me. Gay Rights have nothing to do with justice and I wrote, “…whine about Gay Rights.”:

As I wrote in an earlier post today, and it bears repeating and embellishment, not only Gay Rights but also their twin brother Gay Pride, are satanic traps, to keep sinners in sin and drag them down to the fires of Hell.

I simply and directly, with full disclosure, quoted the USCCB letter directing the ministry toward gays.

Secondly, to dismiss gay rights as having “nothing to do with justice” and calling them only a “satanic trap” to “drag” sinners “to the fires of Hell” is simply to trumpet in Jeremiad tones and lose all persuasiveness. Justice, in this country, frequently overlaps the borders of religious morality–religions beyond Christianity as well. Anyone who studies these matters knows the situation.

I respectfully repeat and embellish my humble opinion, that gay individuals have, always have had and many of them have always enjoyed, the exact same civil and criminal rights and liberties when the blacks didn’t have those. And, that Gay Rights hi-jacks the pertinent Civil Rights movement, which has always been, is now and always will be open to all individuals, with no extra nor imaginary rights necessary to enjoy them.

But this wasn’t even true for blacks or women or the poor or gays or Catholics through our history. You are simply denying, in a long sentence, the history in this country of the broadening of justice and rights in this country.

Do you deny the charge that sodomy laws were enforced in a discriminatory manner towards gays?

 

[Andrew1983]

But in 1 Samuel 8 and also in Chapter 10 it clearly shows the the people wanted a government which at that time was a King. They wanted a ruler to guide them and lead them.

And we all know how well that worked out. Within the reign of the fourth king (no I don’t count Absalom) the Kingdom of Israel was split in two and nearly all the leaders were terrible.

Learning from the errors of the past help to better navigate the present.

 

[colliric]

Our founding fathers from England had a national history of the Catholic Church running the government and then of the Monarchy running the Anglican Church. They’d seen abuses from both sides.

Keeping in mind that in those days, the military was an establishment, the law was an establishment, etc, then the words, “Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of religion;” goes much deeper than congress starting a state religion. The government has no business in religion, and that establishment clause was meant to protect religion from government infringement and abridgment, imho.

and also from taxation.

When the Monarchy in England first took control of the Church under Henry 8th, they ripped it financially to shreds, took the majority of the monastic lands, evicted and sometimes killed the monks and handed the land to the english aristrocracy(against the major will of the population). The laws against Taxing religion in the american state were setup to protect religious organisations from such actions by governments.

 

[ishii]

correct, thanks

but the document said “justice,” not just “respect”

Thanks for responding. Here is the passage that we are both referring to:

“*It is deplorable that homosexual persons have been and are the object of violent malice in speech or in action. Such treatment deserves condemnation from the Church’s pastors wherever it occurs.”3
Those who would minister in the name of the Church must in no way contribute to such
injustice. *

So obviously its an injustice to treat anyone (gays included) in a violent, malicious way. However, that does not imply that gays are to be given a different set of rights that they never had before - the right to marry, for example. The gay sexual lifestyle is inherently wrong (just like some other lifestyles are wrong too) and our culture and mass media today embrace the homosexual lifestyle that is inherently sinful. Loving the sinner doesn’t mean we have to accept their sin.

Ishii

 

[josephdavid]

And we all know how well that worked out. Within the reign of the fourth king (no I don’t count Absalom) the Kingdom of Israel was split in two and nearly all the leaders were terrible.

Learning from the errors of the past help to better navigate the present.

I agree and that is why we have a democracy. With out a govenrment we would be in big trouble, or worse like Somalia.

We just do not hold our politician accountable. We do not especially hold our corporate executives accountable! Want to have less burden on government and taxes. Want to keep taxes as they are now? Increase the tax base. That means jobs and that means jobs with living wages.

 

[Janet_S]

I have to agree with Matt. I have known many abortion supporters who have actually struggled long and hard with the ethical and social and legal dynamics of this.

In the same way that I know some Catholics who have struggled with the same things, although they have come to other conclusions. Just because people disagree in the end, does not mean that they have not been thinking hard along the way.

Matt: It wasn’t for me. I wrestled with the issue. Still do on occasion. But I had to decide how I was going to deal with it in a democracy of plural beliefs on it. We may just have to agree to disagree. But again God bless you on your journey, Janet. And peace.

If people say they struggle, who am I to say they’re wrong. But I can speak from my own experience because I’ve been both pro-choice and pro-life, and it’s easier to be pro-choice. You have the full force of the government, academia, the media, the UN, and Hollywood on your side.

The difficulty of being pro-life is especially noticed for people in the health care field when they are told they can find a new job if they refuse to do x, y, or z. Imagine being pro-life and a new medical school grad who wants to go into gynecology. You’re pretty limited in where you can go. There sure won’t be any "pro-choice"er’s coming to your defense, because there’s only one “choice” they are willing to defend.

So when pro-choicers say they struggled, I can’t say they didn’t, but in the end they chose the easiest path–the wide gate instead of the narrow one.

 

[CMatt25]

If people say they struggle, who am I to say they’re wrong.

So when pro-choicers say they struggled, I can’t say they didn’t, but in the end they chose the easiest path–the wide gate instead of the narrow one.

First you say who are you to say they are wrong. But then you end by saying they have chosen the wrong gate. Or at least this is the implication given when you use the narrow/wide gate analogy from Scripture. Thanks for your judgement. I trust though you don’t walk on water any more than the rest of us. So God bless you and peace.

 

[Janet_S]

First you say who are you to say they are wrong. But then you end by saying they have chosen the wrong gate. Or at least this is implication given when you use the narrow/wide gate analogy from Scripture. Thanks for your judgement. God bless you and peace.

Did you think I meant if a person struggles, they cannot be wrong? Or that I have no right to discern right and wrong behavior? That wasn’t what I intended to say. What I meant to say is this: if people say they struggle, who am I to say that they didn’t. In this case, you said you struggled, and I believe you. I have no right to say you did not struggle.

I do believe that there are people who struggle and are still wrong in spite of their struggling.

Yes, I did and do make judgements about people who choose to be pro-choice. Just like you make judgments about people who choose to be pro-life.

 

[Catherine_D]

First you say who are you to say they are wrong. But then you end by saying they have chosen the wrong gate. Or at least this is the implication given when you use the narrow/wide gate analogy from Scripture. Thanks for your judgement. I trust though you don’t walk on water any more than the rest of us. So God bless you and peace.

You’re right, none of us walk on water.

But when one Catholic is noting the teachings of the Catholic Church to another Catholic, they’ve got the authority of Jesus, who did walk on water, on their side. Big difference.

 

[donsnow]

Don, thank you and to you.

I could perhaps buy into that belief a bit more if I saw the Church, individuals, and private charities getting the job done all themselves. But I don’t. I also don’t see with govt helping, it all getting done either. But I believe every entity can help. I know for instance if I lived in Canada I would have had any pre-existing conditions covered. And I wouldn’t have had to pay thousands and thousands of dollars in 5 figures out of pocket for surgeries I needed.

But I too believe when He comes again, everything will be worked out.

May you as well.

Peace.

CMatt

Well, sir,

Neither of us live in Canada, so that’s moot, what Canadians do and get, with health benefits.

For a long time, Insurance companies not withstanding, these USofA had the best health system on this planet. That’s the health system, at great financial cost to you, which gave you the surgeries you needed. As long as you got what you paid for, you could be grateful.

Now, President Obama’s idea of health care is trashing the finest health system on God’s green earth. That’s all that I see.

I’m sorry, CMatt25, but I seriously doubt that you’ll have the health care you hope for under Obama care. I think the government is selling us a bill of goods that’s not worth the price it costs. Price includes money, waiting time, government denial of services, etc.

I really care, and I really feel for you. I also really believe that Obama care will provide much less to everybody than our present system has provided to everybody.

Peace,
Don

 

[josephdavid]

Well, sir,

Neither of us live in Canada, so that’s moot, what Canadians do and get, with health benefits.

For a long time, Insurance companies not withstanding, these USofA had the best health system on this planet. That’s the health system, at great financial cost to you, which gave you the surgeries you needed. As long as you got what you paid for, you could be grateful.

Now, President Obama’s idea of health care is trashing the finest health system on God’s green earth. That’s all that I see.

I’m sorry, CMatt25, but I seriously doubt that you’ll have the health care you hope for under Obama care. I think the government is selling us a bill of goods that’s not worth the price it costs. Price includes money, waiting time, government denial of services, etc.

I really care, and I really feel for you. I also really believe that Obama care will provide much less to everybody than our present system has provided to everybody.

Peace,
Don

What facts from the new Law that causes you concern on the quality of care you will receive?

 

[donsnow]

Mr. Larkin,

When I bring you to task for deliberately misquoting me, I neither expect, appreciate nor am mollified by an arrogant and unapologetic reply. OK?
I have feelings, too.

Now, to your post.

I simply and directly, with full disclosure, quoted the USCCB letter directing the ministry toward gays.

Secondly, to dismiss gay rights as having “nothing to do with justice” and calling them only a “satanic trap” to “drag” sinners “to the fires of Hell” is simply to trumpet in Jeremiad tones and lose all persuasiveness. Justice, in this country, frequently overlaps the borders of religious morality–religions beyond Christianity as well. Anyone who studies these matters knows the situation.

Maybe we all should be prophets, declaring the snares of Satan to any who will hear.

I did not dismiss the Gay Rights agenda…I bluntly pointed out what it really is: a snare of Satan. And, that snare does have nothing to do with justice. I have as much a concern for your soul as for the souls of individual gays. And you sir, jepordize you soul. That’s up to you. But when you jeopardize the souls of thousands of sinners by lamely justifying their sins, then that’s up to God. You would do well to repent justifying sin. I now will leave you to His, not my, correction.

But this wasn’t even true for blacks or women or the poor or gays or Catholics through our history. You are simply denying, in a long sentence, the history in this country of the broadening of justice and rights in this country.

Do you deny the charge that sodomy laws were enforced in a discriminatory manner towards gays?

As of now, you’re on my ignore list. Some discrimination is required in this life.

Cry to God, I’m his prophet and I’m done with you.

 

[donsnow]

and also from taxation.

When the Monarchy in England first took control of the Church under Henry 8th, they ripped it financially to shreds, took the majority of the monastic lands, evicted and sometimes killed the monks and handed the land to the english aristrocracy(against the major will of the population). The laws against Taxing religion in the american state were setup to protect religious organisations from such actions by governments.

Hi, colliric,

I thank you kindly for bringing that up.

Don

 

[CMatt25]

Did you think I meant if a person struggles, they cannot be wrong? Or that I have no right to discern right and wrong behavior? That wasn’t what I intended to say. What I meant to say is this: if people say they struggle, who am I to say that they didn’t. In this case, you said you struggled, and I believe you. I have no right to say you did not struggle.

I do believe that there are people who struggle and are still wrong in spite of their struggling.

Yes, I did and do make judgements about people who choose to be pro-choice. Just like you make judgments about people who choose to be pro-life.

It’s debatable though in our democratic society of plural beliefs whether or not you do have the right to force your belief on this issue about life at conception onto those who disagree. There lies the difference. And we as nation have struggled to reach a law of the land on this matter. Peace be with you.

 

[CMatt25]

Well, sir,

Neither of us live in Canada, so that’s moot, what Canadians do and get, with health benefits.

For a long time, Insurance companies not withstanding, these USofA had the best health system on this planet. That’s the health system, at great financial cost to you, which gave you the surgeries you needed. As long as you got what you paid for, you could be grateful.

Now, President Obama’s idea of health care is trashing the finest health system on God’s green earth. That’s all that I see.

I’m sorry, CMatt25, but I seriously doubt that you’ll have the health care you hope for under Obama care. I think the government is selling us a bill of goods that’s not worth the price it costs. Price includes money, waiting time, government denial of services, etc.

I really care, and I really feel for you. I also really believe that Obama care will provide much less to everybody than our present system has provided to everybody.

Peace,
Don

It’s not exactly moot if the Canadians are doing a better job of caring for the sick. All the sick. Not just those who can afford care. Of course we depart on whether the US has had the finest healthcare system on God’s green earth. It may be the finest healthcare system on earth for those who can afford to pay for it.

Thanks for your concern. Nothing life threatening though. I am grateful for that. I actually had complications though and still need another due to complications. Of course I had to sign a paper beforehand that I understood there could be complications. So no I wouldn’t say I got exactly what I pd for.

But I agree this yr’s healthcare legislation did not deliver enough on fixing our healthcare problem in America and in bringing about the healthcare I believe we should have in this country for all. I pray with all my heart it helps. But I fear short of single payer, nothing short of a public option for increasing competition would have done that.

Peace.

 

[CMatt25]

What facts from the new Law that causes you concern on the quality of care you will receive?

Can’t he keep what he has?