There should be a war...

[tenderlynew]

I am not a baptized Catholic, in fact I am not baptized at all, this is a problem for me which I seek to correct and now the Lord is beginning to lead me that way again (just went through a major life change and geographical relocation), so I feel tired, and sad.

But I am praying the novena my Project Rachel counselor sent to me to prepare for the Pope’s consecration of *the whole world *to Mother Mary, and am torn between prayer, and action. I do not understand completely the ways and means allowed by the Church in her position of non-violence and prayerful methods, but I do hope for action in this matter which has touched me (and my living son) so sadly, so badly; but I hope for him, my son, to be among the caring young, after having experienced much too much, in so many ways, through the immorality I learned from the society of the 60’s and 70’s, nd lived out so sadly.

I am on my way to the pharmacy wearing the Catholic radio station t-shirt and the* two *little feet pins, one blue pair, one pink pair, of the portrait I placed on my profile. I’m all in. 'Tsall I can do.

 

[tenderlynew]

Going now. The Lord tells me, you will wear this shirt and these pins and this cross for your lost daughter every Sunday until the day you die. That is how you “live with” abortion, as the Priest told you. He (the Lord) says, you don’t stay away from baptism because of this sin, you go for baptism BECAUSE you’re in mortal sin.

 

[mikekle]

A distressing thing to reflect upon, but I understand you to be right about this.

I say, leave it to the next generation, post-Obama (who will be president next tho?) to fight a legal battle, a political battle, taking some lessons from the black civil rights movement in understanding how to “change things” for a just cause in this mixed up society.

I think your right, and if you look back at all the black people that were arrested and killed during the civil rights battle, some by police and other law enforcement, are in todays world, thought of as heroes for doing what they did. I think it could be similar to those willing to stand up to the evil taking place today, sure there will many arrested and maybe killed by law enforcement and other people in authority, but eventually, they will be considered heroes and those in law enforcement and anyone siding with them, will be thought of as criminals.

This fight (abortion) is very similar to the civil rights, but unborn babies are not able to fight. The odds were against them in the civil rights fight, they were clashing with the fed govt and law enforcement, but in the end, they won, but not without alot of violence and trouble, same thing will be required to win this battle over abortion, but in the end,(although it may take many decades), I think good will win, and those who choose to fight will go down in history as heroes, and those siding with law enforcement and authority at the time will be considered in the same light as we see the KKK and white racists today.

 

[tenderlynew]

 

[tenderlynew]

I wanted to say, as a post-abortive woman, that Project Rachel is great, they give you some peace and, especially, religious guidance. But I don’t think anybody really knows about this issue, me neither, I only know that I prayed and feared for the children I lost, for their souls, Project Rachel assures you that they go directly to Heaven in a state of grace, but, I had a Jewish psychiatrist years ago who was well-informed on faith issues and he let me know that the Catholic Church itself used to say that unborn children b4 the age of 3 months had no souls. This was to obviate the problem of how to attend to miscarried babies. No offense to the Church. Similarly, there was a theory relating to cremation, I can’t remember the details, but I believe it was later deemed erroneous–based on an erroneous interpretation of the resurrection of the body. The Church is composed of humans, even Peter denied Christ.

I believe that the first child I lost would have been extremely ill, the pregnancy felt unholy. The second, I was taking dangerous medications but healthier, and it is her who has driven me to the most pain and grief, to the point of my ruining my son’s life. I love him, and I also love her, and I believe her spirit was still alive in some way, as it just wouldn’t stop, the grief, the pain, came on me at certain times of the day. Anyway like I said I have gained some peace with this through Project Rachel but somehow I feel her spirit singing now through this thread so, thank you, I just said a Hail Mary and a Hail Holy Queen for her. The point is, they do talk: talk to their mothers and fathers.
praying
and through me she fights for her right to live

 

[tenderlynew]

Nd now he, the eldest, is tugging at my sleeve saying he wants to sing too. The eldest always has the hardest time of it.

Don’t know whether to laugh or cry, feeling more like crying,

Please, let there be research. That is where to start. Let there be research, interviews with mothers and fathers about practical facts of abortion and whatever it is that can be known about these lost children and the effects on mothers, fathers, siblings, half-siblings, et cetera. I can’t but think that this would lead to a change.

This is the way to change people’s hearts and minds.
praying

 

[Usagi]

I think your right, and if you look back at all the black people that were arrested and killed during the civil rights battle, some by police and other law enforcement, are in todays world, thought of as heroes for doing what they did. I think it could be similar to those willing to stand up to the evil taking place today, sure there will many arrested and maybe killed by law enforcement and other people in authority, but eventually, they will be considered heroes and those in law enforcement and anyone siding with them, will be thought of as criminals.

This fight (abortion) is very similar to the civil rights, but unborn babies are not able to fight. The odds were against them in the civil rights fight, they were clashing with the fed govt and law enforcement, but in the end, they won, but not without alot of violence and trouble, same thing will be required to win this battle over abortion, but in the end,(although it may take many decades), I think good will win, and those who choose to fight will go down in history as heroes, and those siding with law enforcement and authority at the time will be considered in the same light as we see the KKK and white racists today.

Note that the civil rights heroes are known for having *endured * violence, much like our martyrs, not for having committed violence. That is the difficulty with this position. If we start killing people we are not going to change the laws; we will be branded terrorists and the opposition will be strengthened. If, as sentbyGod states, we are aiming to discourage abortion by making people fear for their lives, then we would deserve to be called terrorists.

Usagi

 

[Skadi]

• If a revolution were to occur, I don’t think it would be mainly Christian.
• We don’t have religious freedom now, so it would hardly be a step backward if evangelicals took over.

We do have religious freedom,its not perfect but its better than it has been. If we were living under Evangelical government, I am without doubt I wouldnt have many if any religious rights. Here’s just one example of them trying to oppose religious freedoms for Pagans.

washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/daily/june99/wicca08.htm

this is old, but one of the most well known instances. The comments by the senators are what bother me the most. That people in the government would say that disgusts me.

 

[Skadi]

Not to change the subject, but alcohol should most definitely be banned!! Talk to any ER staff and ask about all the problems caused by alcohol, yet at the same time, our leaders and law enforcement tell us this is the very reason street drugs are made illegal, to protect the public safety and health, so why does alcohol get a free pass? after all, everything can be used in moderation, I know many people who use Heroin in moderation and function just like anyone else, go to work, have families, etc. IMO, the only reason alcohol is still legal, is because the big tax dollars it brings in and the large companies that produce and distribute it, they have alot of sway on politicians.

Oh im aware, Alcohol is worse for a person than most illegal materials.

But im a libertarian/anarchist. I believe Crack-Cocain should be legal. The government has no right to tell me what I can and cant put into my body. Its not about whats good for society as a whole, but that dosnt mean the government can tell people what they can and cant do to themselves. I despise Authoritarian Communism over all other governing systems, but Theocracy is right behind at #2.

 

[janeway529]

Interesting fact: Jews believe that a child is fully formed at birth, not in the womb.

 

[sent_by_God]

Okay, this is a lot of replies. I’m not going to be able to QC everything, so I’ll have to abbreviate.
St Francis:

Your message being… don’t kill people?

There’s a huge difference between killing an innocent person and killing a murderer.

tenderlynew:

I believe that the young will be so severely impacted, in the quality of their lives, by the immorality passed down through, or from, the liberalism of the 60’s and 70’s, that they will rise up to do this. I pray it.

Most of the young support the immorality. Besides, you’re basically saying that future generations will be moved by the evil and will do what I intend. This is a concession of the entire dispute.

tenderlynew:

I say, leave it to the next generation, post-Obama (who will be president next tho?) to fight a legal battle, a political battle, taking some lessons from the black civil rights movement in understanding how to “change things” for a just cause in this mixed up society.

If Obama were to run a third time, who do you think would stop him? With each year he’s in power, the situation gets worse, and it’s already reached the point where I’m apparently the only one in my social sphere who wants to do anything physical. People have been pacified. If he ran again, who would fight him? Surely not the judicial branch, considering it’s extreme pro-life-ness and constitutionality… Surely not all his loyal worshippers. And sadly, not even people like you. Not even the catholics dare to lift a finger.

 

[Usagi]

Okay, this is a lot of replies. I’m not going to be able to QC everything, so I’ll have to abbreviate.

There’s a huge difference between killing an innocent person and killing a murderer.

Morally, yes, but even then God has authorized primarily the state (after a proper trial) and people in immediate danger (via self-defense) to do the killing. Individuals taking it upon themselves to assassinate “the bad guys” (even if the bad guys are really, really bad) are generally considered to be crazy people, not moral paragons.

Plus, this thing you want to do is going to escalate. Even if it were perfectly moral to assassinate abortionists on individual initiative (and I’m far from convinced that it is), you’ve also talked about killing politicians (who generally have not personally committed murder) , and eventually you’re going to find yourself killing cops or soldiers or whoever they send after you for being a crazy serial killer. Eventually, desensitized to taking life and obsessed with your righteous cause, you or some of your comrades may well start killing “collaborators” or taking hostages or blowing up buildings full of innocents just to “send a message.”

Most important of all, of course, is that Christians spread their faith and influence by dying, not by killing. (Well, we’ve done both, but there’s one we celebrate and one we’re ashamed of. I’ll let you guess which.) Even if killing a murderer is perfectly okay on the morality scale, we know that Jesus prefers other ways. He didn’t permit violence to prevent His own unjust execution, and later he turned St. Paul, a guy who was on his own righteous crusade to kill “the bad guys” (Christians, in his case), into one of His top agents, whose later work was done by preaching and writing, not killing. (And the Romans in Paul’s day had not only abortion but outright infanticide as a socially condoned practice.)

Most of the young support the immorality. Besides, you’re basically saying that future generations will be moved by the evil and will do what I intend. This is a concession of the entire dispute.

I believe the hope is that future generations will be moved in heart and mind and enough of them will stop supporting the evil that it can be stopped through normal channels, not that future generations will actually take up this violent revolution you espouse.

Usagi

 

[sent_by_God]

usagi:

Morally, yes, but even then God has authorized primarily the state (after a proper trial) and people in immediate danger (via self-defense) to do the killing. Individuals taking it upon themselves to assassinate “the bad guys” (even if the bad guys are really, really bad) are generally considered to be crazy people, not moral paragons.

The moral law is the same for everyone, and God has not “authorized” the state to inflict the death penalty. First, if the state were just then there would be no need to kill anybody here. Second, the state was hardly appointed by God. Lastly, the just are always considered crazy. That’s part of being just.

usagi:

Plus, this thing you want to do is going to escalate. Even if it were perfectly moral to assassinate abortionists on individual initiative (and I’m far from convinced that it is), you’ve also talked about killing politicians (who generally have not personally committed murder) , and eventually you’re going to find yourself killing cops or soldiers or whoever they send after you for being a crazy serial killer. Eventually, desensitized to taking life and obsessed with your righteous cause, you or some of your comrades may well start killing “collaborators” or taking hostages or blowing up buildings full of innocents just to “send a message.”

Okay, first, when I asked tenderlynew if what she was proposing extended that far, I wasn’t necessarily saying it should. I was asking, not telling.
Second, I would never blow up a building full of innocents. Innocent life is what I wish to protect. I would not hesitate to blow up an abortion clinic if there is no one in it, but that’s not at all the same.

usagi:

Most important of all, of course, is that Christians spread their faith and influence by dying, not by killing. (Well, we’ve done both, but there’s one we celebrate and one we’re ashamed of. I’ll let you guess which.) Even if killing a murderer is perfectly okay on the morality scale, we know that Jesus prefers other ways. He didn’t permit violence to prevent His own unjust execution, and later he turned St. Paul, a guy who was on his own righteous crusade to kill “the bad guys” (Christians, in his case), into one of His top agents, whose later work was done by preaching and writing, not killing. (And the Romans in Paul’s day had not only abortion but outright infanticide as a socially condoned practice.)

My objections:

• I’m not a Christian, so what catholics teach has no bearing on me.
• Dying does not accomplish anything. Dying is something that we should try to avoid, because once we die we can no longer do any more good.
• Why would God disprefer something that is “perfectly okay”?
• Jesus’s death was, according to the church, so that he could redeem us. Thus, he had a good reason for dying. He meant to die, because the good accomplished would be worth it.
• Paul wasn’t killing badguys before his conversion, he was killing goodguys that he thought were badguys.
• He didn’t kill because his job was to evangelize, which can’t be done by killing the people that are to be evangelized. While it would have been right for him to kill the people persecuting his religion, once again I am not catholic, so the example of a catholic does not refute me.

usagi:

I believe the hope is that future generations will be moved in heart and mind and enough of them will stop supporting the evil that it can be stopped through normal channels, not that future generations will actually take up this violent revolution you espouse.

Keep in mind that I was quoting tenderlynew, not you. You can’t speak for her.
Also, by the time the “next generation” comes, how many unborn lives will have been lost? Are you willing to sacrifice that many babies? Just so we can avoid killing a few badguys?

 

[St_Francis]

…Keep in mind that I was quoting tenderlynew, not you. You can’t speak for her.

Altho I know you wrote this in response to what Usagi said, I am responding.

He is not speaking for her, he is adding his own thoughts. You put your thoughts out there, *anyone *can respond. *You *can choose not to reply.

One thing to remember is that this is a public board that anyone can read. Sometimes people respond not for the sake of the poster but for the sake of others who might be reading.

 

[St_Francis]

First, why do you call yourself “sent by God”?

Nooooo! You were not ill! You were full of divine inspiration! How could you just switch sides like that? You betrayed your creator!

Why do you think your idea of what is or it not a betrayal of one’s Creator is correct?

When I read the OP, I actually dared to think for a second that I had finally met another Awakened person. But of course, it was just another false hope raiser. Next time I won’t trust so easily.

What makes you think *you *are “Awakened” and that that is a good thing?

---

Why on earth are you advocating committing violent acts in this thread and anarchy in another thread?

---

Consider this: C S Lewis, God in the Dock: “Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the ‘good’ of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”

Written not by me but by CS Lewis in God in the Dock.

 

[sent_by_God]

Francis, usagi was speaking for her. Read his post again and you will find him doing just that.
St Francis:

First, why do you call yourself “sent by God”?

Because God has sent me. I realize now that it doesn’t sound like a very good username, and I would probably change it if I could, but I’m called that now, and BTW, can I ask you the same thing?
St Francis:

Why do you think your idea of what is or it not a betrayal of one’s Creator is correct?

I did the big text and all because I was emotional, which was understandable (and I really hope some moderator doesn’t come along and give me an infraction for that last sentence. I would change it if I could). Based only on the OP, I really thought tenderlynew was another Awakened one, or at least an Aspiring one (I can explain this in more detail if you like). But, more relevant to your question, you are really asking why I think my religion is right. This is a stupid question. It is impossible to not believe that one’s beliefs are correct.
St Francis:

What makes you think you are “Awakened” and that that is a good thing?

I know that I am awakened because I have discovered the Truths. I am the only person I know that knows even half of the Truths. Lastly, I know that this is a good thing because it is defined as being aware of the Real Conflict (it follows that even the minions of evil are Awakened, though they are not Aspiring, which is the prerequisite step if one is to choose God’s side of the Conflict).
St Francis:

Why on earth are you advocating committing violent acts in this thread and anarchy in another thread?

I only advocate what I believe in. Also, it’s not entirely accurate to say that I am “advocating” anarchy in that thread.
St Francis:

Consider this: C S Lewis, God in the Dock: “Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the ‘good’ of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”

If taken literally, Lewis is absolutely WRONG about the bold highlight. But I think what he meant is that it would seem better to someone who isn’t on God’s side.