Kilroy the Ninja Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 [quote name='jmjtina' date='Jan 4 2005, 12:07 AM'] The guy is a plain pscyho in theory and out. No one kills on his own authority. You can't do what you deem is right on your own when it comes to bombing the world. SHould we have killed Norma McCorvey before Roe vs. Wade? Should we have killed those abortion doctors who have converted and are some of the biggest pro-life witnesses today? Should they have killed St. Paul before he killed so many Christians? Should we go to war with the abortion industry? No. It would set back the pro-life cause AND truly be a double standard of being pro-life. It is through peace and prayer...... The Pro-Life movement has not done enough to unite ALL pro-lifers......I mean come on! Look at the National Right to Life voting AGAINST a pro-life law! There is alot of work we need to do and I myself don't pray hard enough. I think that's the only way we can help the mothers and children overcome the lie and illusion of the abortion industry. Through prayer. Agnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi, miserere nobis. Agnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi, miserere nobis. Agnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi, dona nobis pacem. [/quote] Who is psycho? Just curious... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmjtina Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 [quote name='Monoxide' date='Dec 28 2004, 09:58 PM'] There is a man. .............This man lives in todays society [/quote] the man in theory...... but if his name is Neo and he wears a black coat....I might change my mind.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q the Ninja Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 cathqat, I think one post is out of context slightly. He said: [quote]Gaudium et Spes is a Pastorial Constitution it is pastorial opinion it is not protected from Error in the same way [b]as is a Dogmatic statement.[/b][/quote] This is true. Dogmas are defined. You can disagree with Vatican II's definitions, but the teachings are still infallible. May I make the suggestion that I think many, many people have gone so far that they no longer realize what it is they disagree on? This may be one case where you're both right (as far as I can tell). Where you're wrong is actually in the fact that you disagree. I suggest that this thread take a break, if I may. I would love to finish it soon, but it seems that it's progressed far beyond what it was about originally. Just my .02. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q the Ninja Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 I would like to petition that this thread stay open though, I think it's an important discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmjtina Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 Q the ninja?! Kilroy, you have a sibling on phatmass?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q the Ninja Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 (edited) Hey Flowery's sis. Edited January 4, 2005 by Q the Ninja Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmjtina Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 Whooooooooooo are you? :ph34r: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cathqat Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 [quote name='Kilroy the Ninja' date='Jan 3 2005, 11:49 PM']What exactly are you calling the root causes of abortion?[/quote] If you want to know the reasons that women get abortions, they have been studied. We have been discussing them here. Women get abortions because they feel, due to a lack of practical and social resources, that they have no realistic, viable alternative. I am not saying that anything justifies abortion. I am not arguing in favor of abortion in any way. I work full time in the pro-life movement because I am opposed to abortion and want to support both women and children. What I am saying is that if you really want to put an end to abortion, arguments and legislation are not enough. We must also work to provide the resources these women so desperately need. It is our responsibility as Christians to support both the women and their children, so that both may live. And we have certainly not done all that we can do in this regard. Organizations which work to provide practical and social resources to pregnant women are, generally speaking, desperately underfunded and understaffed. So the idea that we must now resort to violent measures because we have "exhausted all other means" is absurd. We have not exhausted all other means. We have barely even scratched the surface of nonviolent ways to prevent abortion. And if there really are enough of us to succeed in a "just war" scenario, then there are enough of us to fund and staff all those pregnancy resource centers that need our help. [quote]I'm having a hard time feeling empathy for people who allow others to influence them in such a grave matter.[/quote] Then I really, sincerely hope you will pray for that empathy. I have not ever had an abortion. But when I examine my conscience, I know I have sinned in grave matters without facing even a fraction of the pressures many of these women face. I have made so many bad choices in my life, and sometimes for the most trivial reasons imaginable. Knowing that, I believe it takes a real hero to overcome the pressures and isolation these women face. And I believe we should be empowering these women to make life-affirming choices for both themselves and their children. With God's grace and our help, they will believe they can do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cathqat Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 [quote name='voiciblanche' date='Jan 3 2005, 11:55 PM']I don't understand why you're explaining or justifying an argument with which you say you don't agree.[/quote] Explaining and justifying are not the same thing. I am not arguing in favor of abortion. I am arguing in favor of providing the practical and social resources to women in need. [quote]I think there's right and wrong ways to address the causes.[/quote] I do too. We should be providing practical and social support to pregnant women. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cathqat Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 [quote name='Q the Ninja' date='Jan 4 2005, 12:22 AM'] This may be one case where you're both right (as far as I can tell). Where you're wrong is actually in the fact that you disagree. [/quote] I have said, as [i]Gaudium et Spes[/i], [i]Pacem in Terris[/i], the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and other Church teachings say, that human beings have a right to education. Don John interprets the Syllabus to say that is a heresy. I don't see how that is an agreement. I agree with you that this element is not the central point itself, however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q the Ninja Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 Reread that again, I think that there may be something else in that paragraph that's called heresy...but that may just be me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don John of Austria Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 Socrates [quote]How many "terrorist" saints do you know? (not soldiers, but revolutionary killers) [/quote] Well by your definition Sure no problem lets try Joan of Arc she wnet to a revolutionary who was fighting the Legitimate governement ( Henry V defeated the French and they signed the Treaty the English where the legitimate government of what was no longer France but part of the English Empire.) I would say she was responsable for an aweful lot of killing in her little revolution, one she failed to win by the way. Lets see other Terrorist, well He wasn't a revolutionary but Blessed Charlemagne was certianly a terrorist, if you where a Pagan that is, He cut off 4500 heads atthe "Massacre of Verdun" until the Saxsons woud agree to be baptised. I bet if you where a pagan you where pretty scared. [quote]The facts about Constantine do not change my point. Constantine was an actual general in an actual war and had a legitimate claim to the throne. He was not just some guy who decided to wage violence against society for a righteous cause. [/quote] No the FACTS about Constantine don't change your position, but they shatter your point, less than 10% of the Empire was Christian when God told Constantine to conquer in the sign of the Cross. he had legitimate claim to nothing more than he already held and marched on Rome because Maxentius was throwing down thqe Statues of Him an saying he was a tyrant, Maxentius had yet made no military move on Him, constantine Struck first in What would be concidered very flimsy cause fror a War y us mmoderns I assure you. It was only After the Miraculous Vision that His war takes on legitamacy, only after he became just a guy fighting for a rightous cause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q the Ninja Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 I do wish to mention right now, for clarification, not rebuking anything said, but a good outcome doesn't make the acts good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cathqat Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 [quote name='Q the Ninja' date='Jan 4 2005, 12:45 AM'] Reread that again, I think that there may be something else in that paragraph that's called heresy...but that may just be me. [/quote] In what paragraph? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q the Ninja Posted January 4, 2005 Share Posted January 4, 2005 The one he quoted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now