Will you get the vaccine?

[chrysostom]

2 hours ago, Winchester said:

Whether I take it or not, I stand with the unclean. The only reason to stand with the unvaxxed is to be behind enemy lines when they get violent.

What?

[Winchester]

7 hours ago, chrysostom said:

What?

You haven't heard the apartheid nonsense that's going on?

[Mercedes]

On 9/2/2021 at 11:28 AM, Winchester said:

Whether I take it or not, I stand with the unclean. The only reason to stand with the unvaxxed is to be behind enemy lines when they get violent.

What does this mean? "The only reason to stand with the unvaxxed is to be behind enemy lines when they get violent."  

Is that a threat against vaccinated people?

Edited September 3, 2021 by Mercedes

[Winchester]

14 hours ago, Mercedes said:

What does this mean? "The only reason to stand with the unvaxxed is to be behind enemy lines when they get violent."  

Is that a threat against vaccinated people?

How does self defense work in your culture?

[Mercedes]

8 hours ago, Winchester said:

How does self defense work in your culture?

Why are you talking in riddles?  

[Winchester]

2 hours ago, Mercedes said:

Why are you talking in riddles?  

I'm not. I'm asking you a question. You seem to think that warning people you will defend yourself or others is a threat. Where I come from, the threat comes from the person who gets violent, not the person who responds.

So how does self defense work where you come from?

[fides' Jack]

On 9/1/2021 at 8:37 AM, Peace said:

Oh please. False comparison. The issue being discussed there was economic justice, the rights of the worker to have a living wage, things of that nature, and nobody asserted that Mao type socialism was better than feudalism. The comparison was the type of mixed economies that most advanced nations today (like the US) have against the type of feudal economies of the past. And it's plainly obvious that our "socialist" economies like in the US today have produced much more wealth and prosperity for the common man than those feudal societies of the past. It's not even close.

That's ALWAYS what socialism leads to.

That's the direction this whole covid debacle is taking us.  

For us, though, it won't be 40 million, it will be billions.

And it's what we all deserve.

[Peace]

18 hours ago, fides' Jack said:

That's ALWAYS what socialism leads to.

Even it it does, who cares? There are very few if any truly socialist economies in existence today. Almost every major economy recognizes private ownership. So it's irrelevant. I am comparing modern economies to feudal systems. You are comparing feudal systems to something that does not exist. That is irrelevant to the discussion.

18 hours ago, fides' Jack said:

That's the direction this whole covid debacle is taking us.  

For us, though, it won't be 40 million, it will be billions.

And it's what we all deserve.

Yeah it sounds like you've been taking Terminator 2 Judgment Day a bit too literally again.

[fides' Jack]

On 9/5/2021 at 4:05 PM, Peace said:

Even it it does, who cares? There are very few if any truly socialist economies in existence today. Almost every major economy recognizes private ownership. So it's irrelevant. I am comparing modern economies to feudal systems. You are comparing feudal systems to something that does not exist. That is irrelevant to the discussion.

Honestly, so many of these discussions are kind of blending together, so I don't remember the context of this one.  I don't know what we're arguing about in this thread.

You're incorrect in saying, though, that there are very few if any truly socialist economies in existence today.  The entire world is now leaning in that direction.  Much of Asia (and therefore a significant percentage of the world population) is already there.  Thank God it looks like Russia is starting to lean the other direction (interestingly Our Lady has said in at least one apparition that she although the world would fall under the "errors of Russia", she would also work our deliverance from those errors through Russia).

I forgot why feudalism was brought into this discussion, and I don't particularly care.  

Socialism has been declared evil by the living magisterium.  That's all I need to know.

On 9/5/2021 at 4:05 PM, Peace said:

Yeah it sounds like you've been taking Terminator 2 Judgment Day a bit too literally again.

I've been kinda wanting to watch that one again.  Any idea which streaming service might have it?

Edited September 7, 2021 by fides' Jack

[Winchester]

On 9/5/2021 at 5:05 PM, Peace said:

Even it it does, who cares? There are very few if any truly socialist economies in existence today. Almost every major economy recognizes private ownership. So it's irrelevant. I am comparing modern economies to feudal systems. You are comparing feudal systems to something that does not exist. That is irrelevant to the discussion.

Yeah it sounds like you've been taking Terminator 2 Judgment Day a bit too literally again.

Ostensible private ownership with heavy government regulation. 

You can get hauled into court for not baking a cake someone demands.

You have to get permission slips to engage in trade.

There is no state that recognizes private property.

[Peace]

5 hours ago, Winchester said:

Ostensible private ownership with heavy government regulation. 

You can get hauled into court for not baking a cake someone demands.

You have to get permission slips to engage in trade.

There is no state that recognizes private property.

Nonsense. The very computer that I write this post on is my "private property".

Can the state take private property or cause me to forfeit it under certain circumstances? Certainly. But the Church has never recognized an absolute and untouchable right to property that contradicts the universal destination of goods. That is why it is not considered theft for a starving man to take food from a wealthy man who unjustly refuses to provide it to him out of his excess.

I suppose you think that when Jesus told people to pay their taxes that our Lord was also against private property?

[Winchester]

56 minutes ago, Peace said:

Nonsense. The very computer that I write this post on is my "private property".

Can the state take private property or cause me to forfeit it under certain circumstances? Certainly. But the Church has never recognized an absolute and untouchable right to property that contradicts the universal destination of goods. That is why it is not considered theft for a starving man to take food from a wealthy man who unjustly refuses to provide it to him out of his excess.

I suppose you think that when Jesus told people to pay their taxes that our Lord was also against private property?

The government can take your computer through civil asset forfeiture. The government does not believe in private property. It says it does, but it really doesn't. Just as it doesn't believe in human rights. It only believes in privileges. It calls them rights, but it treats every aspect of your life as a privilege.

 

He didn't say "pay your taxes" he said "render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, but unto God what is God's" in answer to whether or not it was morally acceptable to pay taxes. It wasn't an order, it was a reply to an attempt to trap Christ in a gotcha question.

So even though the US government intentionally kills children with economic sanctions and blockades designed to damage rival states ability to purify water, or import food, even though the US deliberately bombs weddings, funerals, and other civilian events and infrastructure in exacting disproportionate vengeance, even though it imprisons and tortures innocents, and people who attempt to reveal its crimes, even though is funds abortions, even though it kicks in doors, murders occupants, steals more property through civil asset forfeiture than privately operating burglars, it is still morally acceptable for you to pay your taxes. Even though your taxes fund the largest terrorist organization in the world. (I'm assuming you're an American, or a Texan).

[Peace]

41 minutes ago, Winchester said:

The government can take your computer through civil asset forfeiture.

I already wrote that the government can seize or otherwise infringe upon property. And the government can take my money via tax. From neither does it logically conclude that private property is not recognized. You seem to think that private property requires an absolute right to property that can never be infringed upon by the state under any circumstances. But the Church does not speak of private property in that way:

https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html

176. By means of work and making use of the gift of intelligence, people are able to exercise dominion over the earth and make it a fitting home: “In this way, he makes part of the earth his own, precisely the part which he has acquired through work; this is the origin of individual property”[368]. Private property and other forms of private ownership of goods “assure a person a highly necessary sphere for the exercise of his personal and family autonomy and ought to be considered as an extension of human freedom ... stimulating exercise of responsibility, it constitutes one of the conditions for civil liberty”[369]. Private property is an essential element of an authentically social and democratic economic policy, and it is the guarantee of a correct social order. The Church's social doctrine requires that ownership of goods be equally accessible to all[370], so that all may become, at least in some measure, owners, and it excludes recourse to forms of “common and promiscuous dominion”[371].

177. Christian tradition has never recognized the right to private property as absolute and untouchable: “On the contrary, it has always understood this right within the broader context of the right common to all to use the goods of the whole of creation: the right to private property is subordinated to the right to common use, to the fact that goods are meant for everyone”[372]. The principle of the universal destination of goods is an affirmation both of God's full and perennial lordship over every reality and of the requirement that the goods of creation remain ever destined to the development of the whole person and of all humanity[373]. This principle is not opposed to the right to private property[374] but indicates the need to regulate it. Private property, in fact, regardless of the concrete forms of the regulations and juridical norms relative to it, is in its essence only an instrument for respecting the principle of the universal destination of goods; in the final analysis, therefore, it is not an end but a means[375].

41 minutes ago, Winchester said:

The government does not believe in private property. It says it does, but it really doesn't. Just as it doesn't believe in human rights. It only believes in privileges. It calls them rights, but it treats every aspect of your life as a privilege.

Nice opinion. I disagree. There you go.

41 minutes ago, Winchester said:

He didn't say "pay your taxes" he said "render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, but unto God what is God's" in answer to whether or not it was morally acceptable to pay taxes. It wasn't an order, it was a reply to an attempt to trap Christ in a gotcha question.

Well is it morally acceptable to pay taxes or isn't it? Here you go:

https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html

355. Tax revenues and public spending take on crucial economic importance for every civil and political community. The goal to be sought is public financing that is itself capable of becoming an instrument of development and solidarity. Just, efficient and effective public financing will have very positive effects on the economy, because it will encourage employment growth and sustain business and non-profit activities and help to increase the credibility of the State as the guarantor of systems of social insurance and protection that are designed above all to protect the weakest members of society.

Public spending is directed to the common good when certain fundamental principles are observed: the payment of taxes [739] as part of the duty of solidarity; a reasonable and fair application of taxes;[740] precision and integrity in administering and distributing public resources.[741] In the redistribution of resources, public spending must observe the principles of solidarity, equality and making use of talents. It must also pay greater attention to families, designating an adequate amount of resources for this purpose.[742]

41 minutes ago, Winchester said:

So even though the US government intentionally kills children with economic sanctions and blockades designed to damage rival states ability to purify water, or import food, even though the US deliberately bombs weddings, funerals, and other civilian events and infrastructure in exacting disproportionate vengeance, even though it imprisons and tortures innocents, and people who attempt to reveal its crimes, even though is funds abortions, even though it kicks in doors, murders occupants, steals more property through civil asset forfeiture than privately operating burglars, it is still morally acceptable for you to pay your taxes. Even though your taxes fund the largest terrorist organization in the world. (I'm assuming you're an American, or a Texan).

Well I'm not getting into all of that.

Yes, it is moral for me as a American (a Virginian I might add) to pay my taxes to Uncle Sam.

Don't you pay your taxes wherever you are at?

[Winchester]

23 minutes ago, Peace said:

I already wrote that the government can seize or otherwise infringe upon property. And the government can take my money via tax. From neither does it logically conclude that private property is not recognized. You seem to think that private property requires an absolute right to property that can never be infringed upon by the state under any circumstances. But the Church does not speak of private property in that way:

 

Do you know how civil asset forfeiture works?

[Didacus]

OK i ended up getting the second shot on Monday, been feelong like croutons ever since, especially this morning.

My thoughts right now is if they insist a third shot is needed they can take that third shot and shoot a moose as far as I care, I'd rather take my chances with the real thing and get natural immunity.

 

 

Back to you Bob...