i am a political liberal - and i prove it

[Lounge Daddy]

[quote name='hot stuff' date='Oct 17 2005, 10:00 PM']But you seem to confuse liberalism with Liberal Catholicism.  While Liberal Catholicism can be justifiably seen as dangerous, liberalism isn't the same thing. 

People can accuse me of liberalism.  No one can accuse me of being liberal with Catholicism.
[right][snapback]761853[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Oh – don’t worry…
We see very clear differences (at least I do)


Liberalism – is dangerous and destructive politically
Heterodoxy – is dangerous and destructive religiously

And you don’t have to be active in both groups – only one – to be part of something corrosive
But God bless you, just the same

[crusader1234]

Given that its the 'English' language, and the English people spell it with a U, you'd think that certain people would - yknow - catch on.

[Lounge Daddy]

[quote name='zwergel88' date='Oct 17 2005, 07:03 AM']supporting medicare, and social security, and opposing war and the death penalty is sinful?  I definatly don't think my kind of liberalism is sinful.
[right][snapback]760961[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
No – but any government [i]forcing[/i] people’s money into “charity programs” is still stealing… especially when money “earmarked” for social programs is taken from taxpayers but then some of it is diverted to other things --- this is dishonest

When our government takes our money and tells us where its going to go – to a failing social security system -that it also doesn’t want us to have any about- or anything else, this is socialism ---- or even Communism
We are FORCED to pay into social programs, this isn’t wrong?
I WANT to help people - but not if I am FORCED to
Its not charity if some one holds a gun to my head
This is “distribution of wealth” ... don't you think?

[Aloysius]

don't use the word distribution! distribution of wealth is good!

distribution does not necessarily connotate some sort of agency taking money from someone and giving it to another person.

"distribution" can be done through any means, many of which are just means.

distribution is actually something contrary to socialism. socialism doesn't let the property actually exist in a state of [i]distributed[/i]... it is never in the private possession of an individual

private property should be properly [i]distributed[/i]

-Aloysius the Distributist

[Lounge Daddy]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='Oct 18 2005, 12:20 AM']don't use the word distribution!  distribution of wealth is good!
.........
-Aloysius the Distributist
[right][snapback]762087[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

well who is the cute little distributionist?
Aloysius! that a cute distributionist... :

[Lounge Daddy]

Sorry – I decided to be childish

What I meant by that is – are you all for distribution of wealth – via the government?

[ryanmeyersmusic]

i try to vote as best I can in line with both the Church's teachings on respect to life and her teachings on social justice, particulary the preferential option for the poor and vulnerable.

[Anastasia13]

[quote name='philothea' date='Oct 17 2005, 07:47 PM']Sorry for being so snarky, but "Pro-War"??

Do you like all wars?  The more war the better? See a bunch of likely places we ought to invade next?  Hey, look at all those nations out there doing their own thing... can't have that.

[i]Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God.[/i]
[right][snapback]761824[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Just don't tell me your a totaly pacifist and I won't have issues.

[Anastasia13]

[quote name='Lounge Daddy' date='Oct 17 2005, 09:49 PM']Oh – don’t worry…
We see very clear differences (at least I do)
Liberalism – is dangerous and destructive politically
Heterodoxy – is dangerous and destructive religiously

And you don’t have to be active in both groups – only one – to be part of something corrosive
But God bless you, just the same
[right][snapback]762041[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Should I leave here then? I'm a politicial liberal and I am a generally active Protestant.

Edited October 18, 2005 by Light and Truth

[Aloysius]

[quote name='Lounge Daddy' date='Oct 18 2005, 01:38 AM']Sorry – I decided to be childish

What I meant by that is – are you all for distribution of wealth – via the government?
[right][snapback]762143[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
yeah, that's wrong. well, it actually never happens the way I defined distributed. if someone is distributing something then at some point that thing ends up in a state that it has been [i]distributed[/i]. seeing as money is less and less something with any real inherent value, a welfare check or a social secuirity check really doesn't distribute anything of value. that "wealth" never really becomes the distributed private property of the person it was "given" to anyway, any more than a slave who gets room and board really has been distributed room and board.

distribution of wealth is something that must in the end result in settled private property in the hands of private individuals.

trade is the only thing that can really accomplish distribution. :

what you are against is the robbing from the rich to enslave the poor-- something that is absolutely evil on both ends of the spectrum.

[Ziggamafu]

[quote name='philothea' date='Oct 17 2005, 08:47 PM']Sorry for being so snarky, but "Pro-War"??

Do you like all wars?  The more war the better? See a bunch of likely places we ought to invade next?  Hey, look at all those nations out there doing their own thing... can't have that.

[i]Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God.[/i]
[right][snapback]761824[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

i agree. how can you be "pro war" and "pro life"?

[Ziggamafu]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Oct 17 2005, 08:12 PM']This is a nonsensical argument indeed.  It makes a false and silly either/or dichotomy that one has to either set up a totalitarian theocracy  where verything is rigidly controlled by the government, or a complete moral anarchy where everything is legal.

The American republic was never set up specifically as a "capitalist democracy" (whatever that means), and in the early days of the republic (when there was much less federal government power), there were state laws in force against such things as fornication and sodomy, as well as state Churches.

And why a "capitalist" economy dictates that everything must be legalized is beyond me.  It's hardly socialist or communist to outlaw a few criminal industries! 

A government that condones and profits off of prostitution and illegal drugs becomes no better than organized crime itself.  This would be institutionalized corruption at its worst.  Is "helping the economy" a reason to profit off of the lives destroyed by the drug and prostition trades?

Don't get me wrong - I'm not at all socialist and am against most beaurocratical unneccesary laws.  However, I believe intrinsically evil businesses should not be condoned by government.  The economy and absolute freedom are not absolute gods.

(And if prostitution, etc. is to be allowed on the basis of not interfering with a free economy, why should it have all this government taxation and regulation you propose??)

By your own logic, there would be little reason to outlaw abortion.

And legalizing abortion did nothing to lessen that evil.

As a Catholic, you're completely schizoid.
[right][snapback]761776[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

hmm...well, it makes sense (my silliness, that is) because i have an extremist personality. i'm constently drifting between legalism and toxic scrupulosity and an "i give up" attitude of despair. not that i think that's good. just how i am, for now.

what did prohibition do to organized crime? and there's a major difference between the evil businesses i mentioned and abortion; one threatens the mortality of another human being, the other (if carefully monitered) does not.

[philothea]

[quote name='Light and Truth' date='Oct 18 2005, 12:57 AM']Just don't tell me your a totaly pacifist and I won't have issues.
[right][snapback]762146[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Nah, I'm not a [i]total[/i] pacifist. I think at times war has been justified.

[theculturewarrior]

I'm a pacifist. Not for all situations, though. I do think there have been a few too many wars in American history.

[Anastasia13]

[quote name='philothea' date='Oct 18 2005, 09:42 AM']Nah, I'm not a [i]total[/i] pacifist.  I think at times war has been justified.
[right][snapback]762435[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Good. I'm very anti-total pacifis. It kills.