- Status
S
Shoshana
Guest
Code:
K
Kaninchen
Guest
I expect that other liberals here are like me, hard skinned enough to cope with the predominantly right-wing atmosphere - not only that but we can take heart at the idea that they’d only be creating mischief elsewhere!
C
CapIV
Guest
It might be worth mentioning that where I am originally from, there is a large Italian, Irish, and Polish Catholic population. Anti-Abortion democrats have been in power for years.
S
surfinpure
Guest
Attacked by the Taliban, who had strong military ties to Iraq. Let’s think for about three seconds if there is a group of people on the face of this planet who would like better to get their hands on WMDs … anyone? anyone? …
R
ribozyme
Guest
No, you are not hard skinned. You are a lazy person who “just sit at home collecting welfare checks” based on your location. (I live in a computer game)I expect that other liberals here are like me, hard skinned enough to cope with the predominantly right-wing atmosphere - not only that but we can take heart at the idea that they’d only be creating mischief elsewhere!
.I am not attacking you, but I am just being jocular while referring to a remark made by Paul Krugman.
truthout.org/docs_2006/011108O.shtml
So I can understand why you are a leftist. Should we be afraid of the “European bogeyman” you can answer that because you are from Europe?
K
Kaninchen
Guest
Absolutely, we Europeans are very, very naughty and the poorest American is richer than the richest European so we’re terribly, terribly jealous - the only thing we can think to do is to drag America into the web of socialized medicine.
Hey, I’ve been on this forum long enough to know the ritual responses!
D
duskyjewel
Guest
I am not using the UN to justify our actions. I was using it to show how Saddam had violated the treaty he made WITH THE UNITED STATES. We had every right to attack him based on that alone. The only reason I brought up the UN was because the leftists put such stock in it.
By whom was the U.S. attacked? Are you serious? Al Qaeda, the operatives of which were known to be in both Afghanistan and Iraq BEFORE we went into those countries.
By whom was the U.S. attacked? Are you serious? Al Qaeda, the operatives of which were known to be in both Afghanistan and Iraq BEFORE we went into those countries.
O
Orionthehunter
Guest
Actually, the Church clearly does not put them on par with abortion. I suggest that you read this from the Bishops. Abortion is intrinsically evil always and its effect (murder) is a greater evil than even slavery.
usccb.org/faithfulcitizenship/FCStatement.pdf
S
Shoshana
Guest
Code:
Main article: Organizers of the September 11, 2001 attacks
Nineteen men boarded the four planes, five each on American Airlines Flight 11, United Airlines Flight 175 and American Airlines Flight 77, four on United Airlines Flight 93. Fifteen of the attackers were from Saudi Arabia, two from the United Arab Emirates, one from Egypt, and one from Lebanon.[74]
The group consisted of six core organizers, which included the four pilots, and thirteen others. In sharp contrast to the standard profile of suicide bombers, the hijackers were well-educated, mature adults, whose belief systems were fully formed.[75]
T
tomarin
Guest
i’m sure there’s plenty of hyprocrisy to go around on both sides of the political spectrum.
when did i accuse him of sinning? i do think it’s a little presumptuous to arbitrarily decide there are too many people of whatever persuasion on a forum you have just started visiting. too many compared to what? but presumption isn’t a sin, or if it is it’s a fairly minor one.
the point of my post was to remind him that to some people we pro-lifers – even relatively liberal ones such as myself – are considered too right-wing.
S
SoCalRC
Guest
But, again, I made no such statement - DIRECT EUTHANASIA is an infallible teaching. So, a vote to permit such on the basis of financial need would seem to be prohibited (I’m talking about legislative acts that make it easier to remove hydration and nutritian from patients already being treated on their ability to pay)
Rather or not the opposing political agenda is effective or warranted is a seperate subject. But, in this instance, stopping health care professionals from euthanizing patients for simply not having means, is an objective that is more in keeping with the teaching.
Patients have a right to nutrition and hydration - that is, the right to life is inalienable. Rather they have the right to free hip replacments and Viagra is another subject.
C
CapIV
Guest
Many Catholics believe the government should be in charge of welfare, social security, health care. (which I disagree with). But it isn’t right to attack the goals of liberals on these issues. At least with these, they want the same basic ends that conservatives do. More affordable healthcare, a reduction of poverty, etc. They just differ on the means to get those ends. The problem is that officially, the democratic party will only nominate pro-abortion candidates. In this situation, the democrats want a different end than conservatives. A gravely evil end I might add.
E
edwest2
Guest
Sad that politics, especially in the United States, should be viewed this way. As far as I know, there is no book defining all of the positions of the Left and Right. God is not concerned about politics per se, but about people living out their faith. The Holy Bible is our guide book, along with the teachings of the Catholic Church.
It saddens me how some people vote Democrat or Republican as if “their” party is always right. I’ve seen bad ideas come out of both parties. These are not football teams, but our country’s leadership.
As far as Marxism, there are people who love it. Unfortunately, the “new man” that fought in World War II had to live under an atheist, barbaric and murderous regime. Perhaps some people don’t know, but for decades, Americans lived under constant threat of Soviet ICBM attack, with, perhaps, 20 minutes warning. We were constantly reminded that the enemy was Godless Communisn, now the enemy is Godless Americanism.
God bless,
Ed
It saddens me how some people vote Democrat or Republican as if “their” party is always right. I’ve seen bad ideas come out of both parties. These are not football teams, but our country’s leadership.
As far as Marxism, there are people who love it. Unfortunately, the “new man” that fought in World War II had to live under an atheist, barbaric and murderous regime. Perhaps some people don’t know, but for decades, Americans lived under constant threat of Soviet ICBM attack, with, perhaps, 20 minutes warning. We were constantly reminded that the enemy was Godless Communisn, now the enemy is Godless Americanism.
God bless,
Ed
S
SoCalRC
Guest
I think you might want to study the document carefully:
If you think that the USCCB is overstepping, go to the root directory:
usccb.org/faithfulcitizenship
Then click on “Vatican Statement”. It is a copy of this document:
vatican.va/roman_curia//congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20021124_politica_en.html
In #4 we have:
There are then nine examples of non-negotiable moral principles highlighted in the following text. Abortion is one of them. However, from the Church’s perspective it is not coherent to elevate abortion to special status about other attacks on the inalienable right to life. I happen to agree. If you cannot treasure human life it its more obvious forms, how can you truly treasure it at the very margins of existance?
S
surfinpure
Guest
I would sincerely hope, however, that the Catholics of which you speak do not espouse the “end justifies the means” philosophy. Of course the Church wants to see the needy cared for, and we go to great efforts to try to accomplish that very thing. But the means by which the needy are given help is not unimportant! It is one thing if they are given aid by way of charity; it is another if they are “given” aid by a government who forcibly “took” aid from its people. I cannot see how this can fall into line with the teachings of the faith. We are commanded to give, yes. But we are not commanded to rob others in order to do it.
S
SoCalRC
Guest
That was my point.
I didn’t. It is just a reiteration of my previous point. Both devoted ‘left’ and ‘right’ voters often occuse the other of being ‘hypocrits’, but, being, themselves, hypocritical, it is probably a hollow debate.
D
duskyjewel
Guest
What, exactly, is this supposed to prove? The citizenship of the hijackers means that al Qaeda operatives were not in Afghanistan and Iraq before we went to war in those countries? The Taliban government was openly supporting and helping al Qaeda and protecting their training camps from us. There are documented meetings between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda operatives. The hijackers were part of a larger organization, which we are now fighting.
O
Orionthehunter
Guest
Please show me directly where torture and “modern forms of slavery” are on par to abortion. I’ve tried to study it carefully. Thank you for the suggestion. I am just not seeing what you are seeing.
S
SoCalRC
Guest
I’ve showed you in your document (#23) where torture “can never be tolerated” and in a Doctrinal Note (prepared by our current pope and signed by the last) that lists torture and abortion both as principles that cannot be compromised (#4).
I’m not sure what else I can do, ‘not permitting abridgement or compromise’ seems crystal clear to me. It also makes very good sense, abortion is not a stand alone teaching, but one of many manifestations of the inalienable right of the human person declared by the Second Vatican Council. In this regard, I have already quoted CHRISTIFIDELES LAICI (#38) in this thread.
EVANGELIUM VITAE makes the same argument, tying abortion, murder, euthanasia, and even the death penalty to the same underlying teaching.
Perhaps we could turn it around. Perhaps you could show me where, in your document (or any other Church document) that asserts that we can comromise on slavery, torture, or stem cell research for the sake of perceived political progress. Another part of your document clearly states that Good ends do not justify Evil means.
- Status