Ash Wednesday Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 In my state of Washington we don't have to register as anything when we vote. I rather like that. Would that not also help prevent voter fraud if it was done elsewhere? What say you? Because of moral issues, I usually hold my nose and vote Republican. But a trend that has been bothering me are prominent Republicans going pro-choice -- Giuliani, Schwarzeneggar, Colin Powell... Though with the emergence of "Values Voters" hopefully we will see more pro-life politicians given more room to breathe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
God Conquers Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 I think the early 20th century distributists had it right, and believe that teh system will work, especially as outlined by Hillaire Belloc, GK Chesterton and their group in London..... We should have another thread on this subject..... Catholic economic theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatholicCrusader Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 (edited) [quote]Huh? These are just two quotes from this thread. And you call others extremists, fundamentalists, and neo-cons? You guys need to wake up. Seriously. Perhaps you should think twice before exercising your right to free speech you so quickly condemn. You're living in a dream world.[/quote] I guess the Church Who defined that is, too... [quote]The way our government is set up will only allow for a two-party system. I think I might start calling some of you extremists, fundamentalists, and neo-fascists. Before spouting somthing like this, you should read some of Pope John Paul II's writings. I recommend starting with "Freedom of Conscience and Religion" and "Solicitudo Rei Socialis."[/quote] There is no such thing as freedom of religion or freedom of conscience. You don't have "freedom of conscience" to be able to disagree with a Dogma of the Church, and no one has the "freedom" to be any Religion other than Catholic. You have the ABILITY (from free will) but not the RIGHT. Everyone has free-will and therefore the ability to commit any number of sins: abortion, murder, rape, heresy, etc., etc., but that does NOT mean that ANYONE is entitled by right to do that which is wrong. You, not I, it seems, misunderstand what the Church teaches in this area. Either that, or you just think the Church is "too extremist" and "behidn the times" in saying that She alone is the True Religion and there is no freedom to be a different religion. [quote]It's no wonder so many people are turned off by the arrogance displayed by some in the Church.[/quote] If by arrogance you mean teaching without hesitation what the Church has infallibly declared and bound all to believe, then I am arrogant. Edited November 10, 2004 by CatholicCrusader Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatholicCrusader Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 [quote name='Sojourner' date='Nov 9 2004, 02:04 PM'] I briefly looked at Peroutka, but I was really turned off by his thoughts on immigration. [/quote] I was turned off by his support of a republic diriving its authority from the people (and not God) and the Constitution, both of which have inherent errors. I was also turned off by his protestantism that wanted to outlaw gambling and the like. What was bad about his immigration policies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pio Nono Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 [quote name='CatholicCrusader' date='Nov 10 2004, 11:43 AM'] I guess the Church Who defined that is, too... There is no such thing as freedom of religion or freedom of conscience. You don't have "freedom of conscience" to be able to disagree with a Dogma of the Church, and no one has the "freedom" to be any Religion other than Catholic. You have the ABILITY (from free will) but not the RIGHT. Everyone has free-will and therefore the ability to commit any number of sins: abortion, murder, rape, heresy, etc., etc., but that does NOT mean that ANYONE is entitled by right to do that which is wrong. You, not I, it seems, misunderstand what the Church teaches in this area. Either that, or you just think the Church is "too extremist" and "behidn the times" in saying that She alone is the True Religion and there is no freedom to be a different religion. If by arrogance you mean teaching without hesitation what the Church has infallibly declared and bound all to believe, then I am arrogant. [/quote] CatholicCrusader, you really need to read "Freedom of Conscience and Religion" because what you are saying is COMPLETELY at odds with what His Holiness Pope John Paul II has said. In fact, you are treading very close to heresy here, much closer in fact than any Protestant because you know what they Church teaches and are therefore responsible for it. [url="http://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/JP2FREED.HTM"]http://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/JP2FREED.HTM[/url] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JP2Iloveyou Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 sorry, that was me responding to Crusader. I forgot to log Pio Nono out again. My bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 [quote name='CatholicCrusader' date='Nov 10 2004, 11:43 AM'] There is no such thing as freedom of religion or freedom of conscience. You don't have "freedom of conscience" to be able to disagree with a Dogma of the Church, and no one has the "freedom" to be any Religion other than Catholic. You have the ABILITY (from free will) but not the RIGHT. Everyone has free-will and therefore the ability to commit any number of sins: abortion, murder, rape, heresy, etc., etc., but that does NOT mean that ANYONE is entitled by right to do that which is wrong. You, not I, it seems, misunderstand what the Church teaches in this area. Either that, or you just think the Church is "too extremist" and "behidn the times" in saying that She alone is the True Religion and there is no freedom to be a different religion. [/quote] People should choose the True Faith out of love and their own free will, not out of fear of being punished or killed by the government! Using force to "convert" is wrong. God gave us free will and intellect to know and choose the Truth. Christ Himself never forced anyone to accept Him. He sacrificed Himself on the cross for love of us, rather than send legions of angels to "convert" the Jews. Men are converted by love and example, not by law or force. A system in which religion is enforced by the government against the will of the people will lead to false conversions, resentment, and a likely armed revolt against the Church. Besides, in a gov't where religion is enforced by the state, what is to prevent the state from using this power to turn against the Church, and declare itself the head of the Church (as Henry VIII did)? CatholicCrusader, you'd do more good trying to work to influence the (existing system) to choose people more in line with Catholic teaching, rather than refusing any participation in the political process until some hypothetical perfect government (which will never appear on this earth) somehow arises. By refusing to support anyone unless they are perfect, you only allow the enemy to gain more control over the political system! And Crusader, I think you, of all people, should be thankful that you have the freedom to express your political and religious views! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JP2Iloveyou Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 Socrates, couldn't have said it better myself. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sojourner Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 [quote name='CatholicCrusader' date='Nov 10 2004, 11:47 AM'] I was turned off by his support of a republic diriving its authority from the people (and not God) and the Constitution, both of which have inherent errors. I was also turned off by his protestantism that wanted to outlaw gambling and the like. What was bad about his immigration policies? [/quote] Mr. Peroutka had a really simplistic approach to immigration issues. From his Web site: [quote]As President, one of my top priorities would be to really secure our borders and deport all individuals who are here illegally.[/quote] This fails to recognize that there are literally thousands of people brought to the U.S. as children, who have grown up in the U.S., are contributing members of society, but are not legal residents. Also, Peroutka fails to recognize the fact that many businesses rely on legal immigrants to do work that citizens will not do. We are economically dependent on the labor of immigrants, both documented and undocumented, and removing that source of labor would severaly cripple our economy. It's a short-sighted viewpoint that shows Peroutka would rather say things that appeal to his constituency than accurately understand the issues. I suppose that makes him no worse than other candidates, but it also makes him no better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JP2Iloveyou Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 You know what's crazy? I never would have guessed this, the Holy Father calls immigration a bad thing, not just illegal, but legal immigration. He says sometimes it's a necessary evil, but still it is better if people use their skills to better the economies of their own countries. I think it's in Laborem Exercens, but I'm not sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 Without immigration we would be in the same boat Europe. In fact, WE have a definite advantage with our immigrants, many of them are Catholic! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sojourner Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 I just get really twigged off at how badly we treat immigrants, who come to this country for the same reasons our foreparents came to this country. Their employers refuse to pay them for honest work. Their landlords make them live in scumholes and don't bring the properties up to code. We argue they shouldn't be able to get in-state tuition at state colleges, even though many have been living here, working, and paying taxes (the benefits of which they'll never see) for years. Our treatment of immigrants has been SHAMEFUL, and this guy wants to clear up the problem by shipping them all back to their home countries. Whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatholicCrusader Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 [quote name='Socrates' date='Nov 10 2004, 04:43 PM'] People should choose the True Faith out of love and their own free will, not out of fear of being punished or killed by the government! Using force to "convert" is wrong. God gave us free will and intellect to know and choose the Truth. Christ Himself never forced anyone to accept Him. He sacrificed Himself on the cross for love of us, rather than send legions of angels to "convert" the Jews. Men are converted by love and example, not by law or force. A system in which religion is enforced by the government against the will of the people will lead to false conversions, resentment, and a likely armed revolt against the Church. Besides, in a gov't where religion is enforced by the state, what is to prevent the state from using this power to turn against the Church, and declare itself the head of the Church (as Henry VIII did)? CatholicCrusader, you'd do more good trying to work to influence the (existing system) to choose people more in line with Catholic teaching, rather than refusing any participation in the political process until some hypothetical perfect government (which will never appear on this earth) somehow arises. By refusing to support anyone unless they are perfect, you only allow the enemy to gain more control over the political system! And Crusader, I think you, of all people, should be thankful that you have the freedom to express your political and religious views! [/quote] That's not what St. Thomas Aquinas says: I answer that, With regard to heretics two points must be observed: one, on their own side; the other, on the side of the Church. On their own side there is the sin, whereby they deserve not only to be separated from the Church by excommunication, but also to be severed from the world by death. For it is a much graver matter to corrupt the faith which quickens the soul, than to forge money, which supports temporal life. Wherefore if forgers of money and other evil-doers are forthwith condemned to death by the secular authority, much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death. On the part of the Church, however, there is mercy which looks to the conversion of the wanderer, wherefore she condemns not at once, but "after the first and second admonition," as the Apostle directs: after that, if he is yet stubborn, the Church no longer hoping for his conversion, looks to the salvation of others, by excommunicating him and separating him from the Church, and furthermore delivers him to the secular tribunal to be exterminated thereby from the world by death. For Jerome commenting on Gal. 5:9, "A little leaven," says: "Cut off the decayed flesh, expel the mangy sheep from the fold, lest the whole house, the whole paste, the whole body, the whole flock, burn, perish, rot, die. Arius was but one spark in Alexandria, but as that spark was not at once put out, the whole earth was laid waste by its flame." [url="http://www.newadvent.org/summa/301103.htm"]http://www.newadvent.org/summa/301103.htm[/url] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatholicCrusader Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 (edited) [quote name='Socrates' date='Nov 10 2004, 08:08 PM'] [/quote] I guess that's the only answer you can give. A simple "you were right; I was wrong," wouldn't hurt your humility, either... Edited November 11, 2004 by CatholicCrusader Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts