We Need To Change Our Attitudes

[dUSt]

[quote name='Good Friday' date='Aug 19 2004, 11:05 AM'] I really don't know why dUSt has put up with you for all these years. [/quote]
Because he has big muscles?

hahaha... well, let me tell you about how I feel about Ironmonk. I don't like his brash approach, but I can't really say that I don't agree with 99% of his views.

Am I as loyal to the Republican party as him? No. I don't really like either party, because neither party is Catholic.

But, I do think it's in the best interest of the nation if Bush wins, simply do to the fact that Kerry supports an intrinsically evil act as defined by the Church. It's not so much that I like Bush (he's a good but not great president in my opinion), than it is about fighting the war against evil. In all honesty, if Kerry was staunchly pro-life, I'd support him over Bush.

So, with that said, I put up with Ironmonk because our goals are the same for the most part. I do find his approach to be uncharitable at times (and he knows I do), but ya know--that's life. When phatmass began to censor things, it wasn't meant to be as nit-picky as it seems to have become. Yes, we promote charity, and I wish that everyone would be charitable, for the sake of representing the church in a good light--but recognise that charity is somewhat subjective.

I kinda think of you and Ironmonk as the two extremes of phatmass. lol... If any member veers off to be more extreme than you or him in either direction, there's something wrong. I like to think of the phatmass phamily as a moderate group of people falling in between the Good Friday-Ironmonk Scale.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote]In all honesty, if Kerry was staunchly pro-life, I'd support him over Bush.[/quote]

Ditto. If Kerry was more pro-life than Bush, I'd vote for him, even if he would screw up the economy and appease our enemies.

[Ash Wednesday]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='Aug 19 2004, 12:25 PM'] hakakakaka! (popeye laugh) [/quote]

[Iacobus]

[quote name='Raphael' date='Aug 19 2004, 11:00 AM'] Phatmass should be, at least unofficially, in favor of Bush-Cheney '04. [/quote]
I disagree with there Micah. PhatMass shouldn't be in support of Kerry, we know that. But I wouldn't push for any support of Bush either. The GOP is only better than the dems because of their stance on life and same sex marriage issues. Many ecomonic experts and such disagree with GOP's ecomonic plan and I do, from the little econ I know, as well.

A Catholic group should never endorse one over another. They can say "Sen K is pro abortion and disagrees with Church teaching in X,Z, and Y areas." but they shouldn't favor the other mainstream side because of that. Esp when that sides leader states his intnet to run at BJU, about as anti Catholic as you can get.

There are many good Catholics running third party. The way the US poltical system works in with those 3rd parties. Casting a protest vote is not immoral. If it costs Bush the election, well good it should. The party isn't going to change unless it will get them votes. You may object to tenents of the GOP platfrom, as do most of us to the Dem, than don't vote for them. Being vocal is one thing. But forcing them to change isn't going to come from crying out in the nite. They are worried about votes. Don't cast a vote for them and tell them why.

This is what kinda shaped the Dem party of FDR. TR ran as a Bull Moose Progressive in 1912 against the "Old Hard Line" GOP. It costs Traft the election and put Wilsion in the White House. But it formed the parties. The progressives left the GOP in 1912 and became Bull Moose and when that died most went to FDR in 1932. That shaped the parties.

You need to make the big shots came to you and form their platform based on what the citizens want. They aren't going to want to change the status quo until it is costing them votes. Don't like Bush? There are better choices. Make them choese a better more Catholic platform (both parties) next time. Desent is how you are going to do that. Don't fall into line behind any one party fall into line behind the Church. And the Church isn't nice and neatly left or right. It is just True.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Iacobus' date='Aug 19 2004, 02:41 PM'] I disagree with there Micah. PhatMass shouldn't be in support of Kerry, we know that. But I wouldn't push for any support of Bush either. The GOP is only better than the dems because of their stance on life and same sex marriage issues. Many ecomonic experts and such disagree with GOP's ecomonic plan and I do, from the little econ I know, as well.

A Catholic group should never endorse one over another. They can say "Sen K is pro abortion and disagrees with Church teaching in X,Z, and Y areas." but they shouldn't favor the other mainstream side because of that. Esp when that sides leader states his intnet to run at BJU, about as anti Catholic as you can get.

There are many good Catholics running third party. The way the US poltical system works in with those 3rd parties. Casting a protest vote is not immoral. If it costs Bush the election, well good it should. The party isn't going to change unless it will get them votes. You may object to tenents of the GOP platfrom, as do most of us to the Dem, than don't vote for them. Being vocal is one thing. But forcing them to change isn't going to come from crying out in the nite. They are worried about votes. Don't cast a vote for them and tell them why.

This is what kinda shaped the Dem party of FDR. TR ran as a Bull Moose Progressive in 1912 against the "Old Hard Line" GOP. It costs Traft the election and put Wilsion in the White House. But it formed the parties. The progressives left the GOP in 1912 and became Bull Moose and when that died most went to FDR in 1932. That shaped the parties.

You need to make the big shots came to you and form their platform based on what the citizens want. They aren't going to want to change the status quo until it is costing them votes. Don't like Bush? There are better choices. Make them choese a better more Catholic platform (both parties) next time. Desent is how you are going to do that. Don't fall into line behind any one party fall into line behind the Church. And the Church isn't nice and neatly left or right. It is just True. [/quote]
Milton Friedman rules.

That is all.

[Lil Red]

if ignorance is bliss, why aren't there more happy people?

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Lil Red' date='Aug 19 2004, 03:14 PM'] if ignorance is bliss, why aren't there more happy people? [/quote]
LOL

Because their too stupid to know they're ignorant.

[ironmonk]

[quote name='Iacobus' date='Aug 19 2004, 03:41 PM'] I disagree with there Micah. PhatMass shouldn't be in support of Kerry, we know that. But I wouldn't push for any support of Bush either. The GOP is only better than the dems because of their stance on life and same sex marriage issues. Many ecomonic experts and such disagree with GOP's ecomonic plan and I do, from the little econ I know, as well.

A Catholic group should never endorse one over another. They can say "Sen K is pro abortion and disagrees with Church teaching in X,Z, and Y areas." but they shouldn't favor the other mainstream side because of that. Esp when that sides leader states his intnet to run at BJU, about as anti Catholic as you can get.

There are many good Catholics running third party. The way the US poltical system works in with those 3rd parties. Casting a protest vote is not immoral. If it costs Bush the election, well good it should. The party isn't going to change unless it will get them votes. You may object to tenents of the GOP platfrom, as do most of us to the Dem, than don't vote for them. Being vocal is one thing. But forcing them to change isn't going to come from crying out in the nite. They are worried about votes. Don't cast a vote for them and tell them why.

This is what kinda shaped the Dem party of FDR. TR ran as a Bull Moose Progressive in 1912 against the "Old Hard Line" GOP. It costs Traft the election and put Wilsion in the White House. But it formed the parties. The progressives left the GOP in 1912 and became Bull Moose and when that died most went to FDR in 1932. That shaped the parties.

You need to make the big shots came to you and form their platform based on what the citizens want. They aren't going to want to change the status quo until it is costing them votes. Don't like Bush? There are better choices. Make them choese a better more Catholic platform (both parties) next time. Desent is how you are going to do that. Don't fall into line behind any one party fall into line behind the Church. And the Church isn't nice and neatly left or right. It is just True. [/quote]
A Catholic group's first priority is to end abortion.

Listen to the Mother Mary.

Other things are secondary.

We should support Bush over Kerry... The Pope does!

3rd parties are worthless in this day and age.


-ironmonk

Edited August 19, 2004 by ironmonk

[MC Just]

I've been trying to tell people that the Pope supports Bush over Kerry, [color=red][Edited by dUSt: personal attack][/color]

Edited August 19, 2004 by dUSt

[Iacobus]

[quote name='MC Just' date='Aug 19 2004, 03:25 PM'] I've been trying to tell people that the Pope supports Bush over Kerry, but Prince of Fickle tried scolding when i said so.... [/quote]
And the Pope supports the better 3rd party Catholics over Bush than right?

[Good Friday]

[quote name='dUSt']I don't like his brash approach, but I can't really say that I don't agree with 99% of his views.[/quote]
I agree with 99% of his views too, because for the most part his views are Catholic teaching. As you said, it's his approach that I can't deal with.

[quote name='dUSt']But, I do think it's in the best interest of the nation if Bush wins, simply do to the fact that Kerry supports an intrinsically evil act as defined by the Church. It's not so much that I like Bush (he's a good but not great president in my opinion), than it is about fighting the war against evil. In all honesty, if Kerry was staunchly pro-life, I'd support him over Bush.[/quote]
And me too, and I've said several times that Catholics cannot morally vote for Sen. Kerry. But I think some people here are just taking it entirely too far. When most of the people on the phorum agree with them, and when the few who don't aren't going to be convinced otherwise, what is the point of driving this into the ground? There's maybe two people active on the phorum who are even thinking about voting for Sen. Kerry, and nothing we can do is going to make them feel otherwise. Other than that, everyone else is voting for Bush even if they don't like him, myself included, because of abortion. But I don't see why we need these threads, and I don't see why we need Kerry News Links that says, among other things, that Sen. Kerry hates Jews. It's one thing to expound on Catholic moral teaching, it's quite another to engage in a smear campaign -- many parts of which are all out lies -- against the man.

And it's certainly another thing to try to make us [b]like[/b] George W. Bush. Many of us just aren't going to, so they might as well save their time and energy. We don't have to like him, we have to vote for him.

[quote name='dUSt']So, with that said, I put up with Ironmonk because our goals are the same for the most part. I do find his approach to be uncharitable at times (and he knows I do), but ya know--that's life. When phatmass began to censor things, it wasn't meant to be as nit-picky as it seems to have become. Yes, we promote charity, and I wish that everyone would be charitable, for the sake of representing the church in a good light--but recognise that charity is somewhat subjective.[/quote]
Well, if there's a movement toward less censorship, then that's fine, as long it's applied consistently.

[quote name='dUSt']I kinda think of you and Ironmonk as the two extremes of phatmass. lol... If any member veers off to be more extreme than you or him in either direction, there's something wrong. I like to think of the phatmass phamily as a moderate group of people falling in between the Good Friday-Ironmonk Scale.[/quote]
We're really not that extreme in that we probably disagree with very little of what the other believes -- in fact, I think the only thing we probably disagree on is the worth of the Republican Party; I view it as the lesser of two evils and can't stand it, he views it as a moral good and likes it. But even in that disagreement, we agree that Catholics cannot vote for Sen. Kerry or any pro-abortion candidate. The extremism comes in when I get fed up with his approach to presenting his views, which then usually leads me to sink to his level or below it. And then of course we all know of my March Catholic/April Pagan routine, but that doesn't last very long.

Anyway, I shouldn't have gone off the way I did, so I'm sorry for disrupting the phorum. Carry on.

[jasJis]

[quote name='dUSt' date='Aug 19 2004, 12:57 PM'] I like to think of the phatmass phamily as a moderate group of people falling in between the Good Friday-Ironmonk Scale. [/quote]
I rate that comment as a 5.7 on the GF-I Scale.

[MichaelFilo]

We all love Kerry. If M.Sigga left for a while (and I think he is cool in so many ways, and he is a good person as well) because the truth made him leave, then I can be sorry for him and have pity for him. The important thing to remember is, Jesus's disciples walked away from the Truth (of course this isn't the same truth being discussed here, but I'm saying, inside the flock there maybe dissenters).

As Catholics we are to love our enemy. As Americans, we are to break down every belief, every thought, and everything our candidates stand for. These don't contradict themselves.

God bless,

Mikey