Whyand How I'm a "liberal"

[Socrates]

This is complete nonsense.

Abortion did not become commonly accepted and legal in this country until after contraception had become easy, effective, and commonly accepted.
The common use and acceptence of contraceptives, both outside of and within marriage, has led to a "contraceptive mentality" in which sex and having children are divorced from one another in the common mind. Sex is seen as "just for fun," and children are seen most of the time as an unwanted inconvenience, which can be avoided with contraception. If contraception fails, or if the couple was "careless," and pregnancy results, no big deal - it's still not to late for an abortion.

Fr. Eutenauer of the pro-life organization [url="http://www.hli.org"]Human Life International[/url] has said that the pro-life movement will not make any significant headway until the contraceptive mentality is overcome.

[Snarf]

To Socrates: So, you want to call it quits. Fine. If you want to know what I have to say to the points you addressed, then fine, I'll state them. But I'm not so immature as to fight over the "last word". The one point I wanted to make is that HISTORICAL socialism is young and inchoate, but if done properly it can be a beautiful thing. I'm a economical relativist, so I think that it would be best if socialism were phased in and out of usage. Heavy taxation may be more suitable to one era than the next, and vice-versa. Such a view is in fine accordance with the Church.

And your bringing up my "Hello, I don't rep the Church" thing is just immature as well. I was not given that title because of my political leanings, and if I had been then that'd just be a grave error on part of the admins. I personally think that EVERYONE, minus confirmed Clergy, have that title. I DO represent the Church in that I am a practicing Catholic, and the vast majority of practicing Catholics today have grievances with the Church far more serious than my own. I DO NOT represent the Church in that I am not her minister, and I do have very trivial disputes as to minute details of doctrine. I'd have more respect for your opinions on my "heresies" if you had actually read my book, which I offered to be done without costing you a penny.

I presently have an ordained priest reading my book, and I'll carefully wage whatever he has to say about it.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Snarf' date='Feb 12 2006, 07:17 PM']To Socrates: So, you want to call it quits.  Fine.  If you want to know what I have to say to the points you addressed, then fine, I'll state them.  But I'm not so immature as to fight over the "last word".  The one point I wanted to make is that HISTORICAL socialism is young and inchoate, but if done properly it can be a beautiful thing.  I'm a economical relativist, so I think that it would be best if socialism were phased in and out of usage.  Heavy taxation may be more suitable to one era than the next, and vice-versa.  Such a view is in fine accordance with the Church.

And your bringing up my "Hello, I don't rep the Church" thing is just immature as well.  I was not given that title because of my political leanings, and if I had been then that'd just be a grave error on part of the admins.  I personally think that EVERYONE, minus confirmed Clergy, have that title.  I DO represent the Church in that I am a practicing Catholic, and the vast majority of practicing Catholics today have grievances with the Church far more serious than my own.  I DO NOT represent the Church in that I am not her minister, and I do have very trivial disputes as to minute details of doctrine.  I'd have more respect for your opinions on my "heresies" if you had actually read my book, which I offered to be done without costing you a penny.

I presently have an ordained priest reading my book, and I'll carefully wage whatever he has to say about it.
[right][snapback]885147[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
The point is not "quitting" or "having the last word."

The point is about format - that there are way too many different issues being debated in this one thread.

Ideally a debate thread should be on one topic - this thread has about five or six, which continue to branch in new directions.
I don't have the time nor energy to continue debating each of these topics over and over again - and this debate is getting circular - I've heard your points and I've made mine.

And calling people immature is immature.
If this is simply going to devolve into a name-calling contest, I've already lost interest.

All myself and others have suggested is that if you wish to keep debating, to [b]make seperate threads - each on a specific defined topic[/b].
This helps keep the debate focused, and allows each issue to be discussed in more depth.

Feel free to start seperate threads on any of the specific topics on this debate! :

As for socialism, I happen to think Narnia is a beautiful thing, but when discussing political systems we must stick with the real world, not utopian fantasies. (Feel free to continue this discussion in another thread.)

And saying that opposing Satanism is "simply bigotry" most certainly does not "rep the Church."
And trying to trivialize your dissent from Church teaching does not make it any less dissenting. Either one is faithful to Church teaching or one is not. Simply being a "practicing Catholic" (as in going to church) does not mean one's thought is in accord with Church teaching. Catholic church pews (and often pulpits) are full of "practicing" heretics.