The Church's Position On Defense Of Oneself And Family.

[Akalyte]

I have a problem here,some catholics are saying that church teaching is that its wrong to intend

on defending yourself or your family. If so I highly disagree. 

after what lombardi said regarding the church agreeing with obamas gun control efforts, im kind of pissed they are agreeing with this wanna be dictator.

 

[Winchester]

Lombardi is clearly a simpleton and/or  a worshiper of the modern centralized state. Lapdogs like him have given us the HHS mandate.

 

Those officials in favor of the State as a means of "social justice" have never explained how it is that a few people with fancy titles are exempted from the normal moral laws surrounding theft and murder. A justly constituted state is never defined in all the reams of paper wasted on telling us that a few select individuals can claim a right of rule. The Church supports self defense against all unjust aggressors, including government officials, so how it comes to pass that a man who supports the murder of children by doctor or by drone, is somehow a justly constituted source of authority is beyond me. It's like Lombardi hasn't been paying attention to the perpetual war waged by the US. It's like he's forgotten the Iraqi children who starved in the name of sanctions, like he never heard of government agents blowing the head off a woman armed with a deadly infant, all because her husband cut a barrel shorter than the magical length deemed morally acceptable for ownership by a mere citizen (in what can only be described as an act of entrapment).

 

Lombardi's opinion lacks any merit. It is sickening support of a person so deranged in his morality that he justifies murder, imprisonment of people for taking medication of which he doesn't approve, and the execution of 16 year old boys, if their dead fathers were terrorists. Lombardi should retreat to a monastery, take a vow of silence, and trouble us no more.

 

He speaks in this regard as a politician, not a clergyman. As an operative of a political entity, the Vatican, he does not remotely represent the Magisterium. He's just another shill for the subjection of the people to the State.

Edited January 23, 2013 by Winchester

[Papist]

Perhaps he referring to the people that purchase tanks with depleted uranium rounds. 'Cause he certainly can't be referring to grandma purchasing a .38

[Groo the Wanderer]

what does vince lombardi have to do with any of this?   i thought he was retired anyway?

[4588686]

I have a problem here,some catholics are saying that church teaching is that its wrong to intend

on defending yourself or your family. If so I highly disagree. 

after what lombardi said regarding the church agreeing with obamas gun control efforts, im kind of pissed they are agreeing with this wanna be dictator.

 

Obama is not a wanna be dictator.  But let's all be as hysterical as possible.  

[Winchester]

I like Obama. is not a wanna be dictator.  But let's all be as hysterical as possible.  

 

fxd

 

You like what he seeks to dictate. That would make him a benevolent dictator. From your perspective. I say there's no such thing.

[4588686]

fxd

 

You like what he seeks to dictate. That would make him a benevolent dictator. From your perspective. I say there's no such thing.

 

Did I like what Bush sought to dictate?  Because I don't consider him a dictator either.  

[Winchester]

Did I like what Bush sought to dictate?  Because I don't consider him a dictator either.  

 

I consider Bush a dictator. I consider our government dictatorial, in general. We elect our dictators, here. Our defense is in the courts where citizens act as jurors. But the dictators have covered that up, nicely. In addition, they have created entities that create legislation, but avoid the nastiness of going through a process of voting to pass legislation. We call these legislative acts "regulations". Regulations dictate many things. Like the magical length of a proper shotgun barrel, or what sort of opening mechanisms for knives are to be reserved to an elite class of human, and on and on.

 

I'm sure there's some definition out there that will explain to us how elections mean that the ruling class isn't really dictating. I think that's bs. If the DEA tomorrow passed a regulation putting ibuprofen on the naughty list, and required us to turn it all in, little agents would happily kick in doors, subdue offenders, and judges would tell jurors that they had to judge the offense, not the law regulation (and there we see how a regulation is really a law. Shh, don't tell anyone).

 

That's a dictatorship. It's not a tort being punished--it's not justice being meted out. There is no aggrieved party. There is C telling A and B what they may do, even though no one is committing an act of aggression. That means we're all subjects.

[Nihil Obstat]

Lombardi does not speak with Magisterial authority. He has spent his entire career proving that. :hehe:

[Fidei Defensor]

From the CCC:

 

Legitimate defense

2263 The legitimate defense of persons and societies is not an exception to the prohibition against the murder of the innocent that constitutes intentional killing. "The act of self-defense can have a double effect: the preservation of one's own life; and the killing of the aggressor. . . . The one is intended, the other is not."

 

2264 Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality. Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one's own right to life. Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow:

 

• If a man in self-defense uses more than necessary violence, it will be unlawful: whereas if he repels force with moderation, his defense will be lawful. . . . Nor is it necessary for salvation that a man omit the act of moderate self-defense to avoid killing the other man, since one is bound to take more care of one's own life than of another's.

2265 Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for one who is responsible for the lives of others. The defense of the common good requires that an unjust aggressor be rendered unable to cause harm. For this reason, those who legitimately hold authority also have the right to use arms to repel aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their responsibility.

 

2266 The efforts of the state to curb the spread of behavior harmful to people's rights and to the basic rules of civil society correspond to the requirement of safeguarding the common good. Legitimate public authority has the right and duty to inflict punishment proportionate to the gravity of the offense. Punishment has the primary aim of redressing the disorder introduced by the offense. When it is willingly accepted by the guilty party, it assumes the value of expiation. Punishment then, in addition to defending public order and protecting people's safety, has a medicinal purpose: as far as possible, it must contribute to the correction of the guilty party.

 

2267 Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.

If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.

Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically nonexistent."

 

[Basilisa Marie]

I have a problem here,some catholics are saying that church teaching is that its wrong to intend

on defending yourself or your family. If so I highly disagree. 

after what lombardi said regarding the church agreeing with obamas gun control efforts, im kind of pissed they are agreeing with this wanna be dictator.

 

That is a hugely loaded statement. :) 

 

As tardis posted, it's obviously not wrong to want to defend your family.  But how we do that is a completely different issue.   The Church has no official position on gun control laws (that I'm aware of), so we're left to figure it out as best as we can. 

 

I agree with most of Obama's gun control efforts (if they can be called efforts, seeing as Congress is the one that passes laws).  The government doesn't want to take away Daddy's registered handgun or hunting rifle.  The problem is that we have a ridiculously high gun violence problem in our country.  There are so many kinds of guns that have absolutely no business being in private citizen hands.

 

Do you really need an assault rifle to protect your family?  

[Apotheoun]

Do you really need an assault rifle to protect your family?  

 

That would have to be determined on a case by case basis.  

The Vatican Press Office does not have the authority to alter the Church's doctrinal tradition on the right to self defense and the obligation to protect those in your care.

[Nihil Obstat]

That is a hugely loaded statement. :)

 

[...]

 

Do you really need an assault rifle to protect your family?  

 

:|

 

:|

 

:| :|

 

'Assault rifle' is a pretty loaded term too, at least when it comes to gun control debates, if we want to be careful about that. :smile3:

It does not help that the majority of people advocating for gun control do not really know what an assault rifle is.

[Winchester]

 

Do you really need an assault rifle to protect your family?  

 

Do I need to justify my purchases to the likes of you? Or any other human on this planet? It's none of your business.

 

How much tactical training do you have?

[4588686]

Do I need to justify my purchases to the likes of you? Or any other human on this planet? It's none of your business.

Yes, I can.  It's a natural right

 

 

 

 

How much tactical training do you have?

 

All of it.