Catholic Cardinal calls the election of Obama "Apocalyptic"

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: Alistar7
A president's personal or religous view on abortion is hardly enough to overturn Roe vs Wade, otherswise Reagan, Bush I, Bush II would have made it happen.

Having a belief and having the political power/ability to make it law are two totally different animals....

The laws are already on the books. The remaining element is changing the composition of the Supreme Court, which is one of the jobs of the president. Reagan and the Bushes have made some progress on this front, but a lot of the justices are hanging on until a more liberal-minded president is seated to ensure that the court's composition won't change.

 

[Lemon law]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: Alistar7
A president's personal or religous view on abortion is hardly enough to overturn Roe vs Wade, otherswise Reagan, Bush I, Bush II would have made it happen.

Having a belief and having the political power/ability to make it law are two totally different animals....

The laws are already on the books. The remaining element is changing the composition of the Supreme Court, which is one of the jobs of the president. Reagan and the Bushes have made some progress on this front, but a lot of the justices are hanging on until a more liberal-minded president is seated to ensure that the court's composition won't change.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If the religious right main goal was to over turn Row v Wade through packing the courts, they are the big loser in the election of 11/2008.

While both parties dream of capturing the vote of the religious right, the religious right still put all its eggs in the GOP basket. And the religious right still bought into the the GOP excuse that the GOP would not try by legislative means, because the repeal of Roe V. Wade is and remains against the national political will and thus political suicide for any party that advocated it in its legislative platform.

So the religious right accepted the GOP promise that the GOP would pack the supreme court instead, and thus back door the de facto repeal of Roe v Wade through the courts.

And even through the religious right came perilously close to accomplishing its goals with their lock step support for the moral depravity of GWB&co, they have still morally bankrupted themselves in the process of being in the Snidley Whiplash
curse foiled again position they now richly deserve.

With the landslide election of Obama and the democrats, its almost a given, that the soon to be future make up of SCOTUS will be very hostile towards any court
based back door repeal of Roe v Wade.

The religious right will not have any chance of a court based back door repeal of Roe v Wade for decades to come. Will the Religious right learn its lesson or will they embrace their failed position to the public disgust. And then really screw their own pooch by losing their tax exempt status? And then forever retreating to the lunatic fringe where they can enjoy preaching to their own ever diminishing choir.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: Alistar7
A president's personal or religous view on abortion is hardly enough to overturn Roe vs Wade, otherswise Reagan, Bush I, Bush II would have made it happen.

Having a belief and having the political power/ability to make it law are two totally different animals....

The laws are already on the books. The remaining element is changing the composition of the Supreme Court, which is one of the jobs of the president. Reagan and the Bushes have made some progress on this front, but a lot of the justices are hanging on until a more liberal-minded president is seated to ensure that the court's composition won't change.

Overturning Roe v. Wade would do much less than people imagine. All it would do is return the issue to the states. The red states would ban it, and the more liberal minded states would keep it legal. In effect, all it would do is add the cost of a plane ticket on top of the abortion fee for those living in the midwest and south. All it would do is add yet another reason not to live in those states. (and did we really need more?)

This would probably be a huge plus for Democrats in the long run to be honest, the Republicans would lose one of the last ties between the social conservatives and the economic conservatives, and a large bloc of single issue voters. I for one don't want Roe overturned just because I feel for the poor people stuck in those states that would be screwed, but in reality since I would never live in a state that would ban abortion anyway, it would never affect me personally.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
Overturning Roe v. Wade would do much less than people imagine. All it would do is return the issue to the states. The red states would ban it, and the more liberal minded states would keep it legal. In effect, all it would do is add the cost of a plane ticket on top of the abortion fee for those living in the midwest and south. All it would do is add yet another reason not to live in those states. (and did we really need more?)

This would probably be a huge plus for Democrats in the long run to be honest, the Republicans would lose one of the last ties between the social conservatives and the economic conservatives, and a large bloc of single issue voters. I for one don't want Roe overturned just because I feel for the poor people stuck in those states that would be screwed, but in reality since I would never live in a state that would ban abortion anyway, it would never affect me personally.

Nearly all states still have laws on the books that would go into effect immediately upon an appropriate court ruling.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
If the religious right main goal was to over turn Row v Wade through packing the courts, they are the big loser in the election of 11/2008.

While both parties dream of capturing the vote of the religious right, the religious right still put all its eggs in the GOP basket. And the religious right still bought into the the GOP excuse that the GOP would not try by legislative means, because the repeal of Roe V. Wade is and remains against the national political will and thus political suicide for any party that advocated it in its legislative platform.

So the religious right accepted the GOP promise that the GOP would pack the supreme court instead, and thus back door the de facto repeal of Roe v Wade through the courts.

And even through the religious right came perilously close to accomplishing its goals with their lock step support for the moral depravity of GWB&co, they have still morally bankrupted themselves in the process of being in the Snidley Whiplash
curse foiled again position they now richly deserve.

With the landslide election of Obama and the democrats, its almost a given, that the soon to be future make up of SCOTUS will be very hostile towards any court
based back door repeal of Roe v Wade.

The religious right will not have any chance of a court based back door repeal of Roe v Wade for decades to come. Will the Religious right learn its lesson or will they embrace their failed position to the public disgust. And then really screw their own pooch by losing their tax exempt status? And then forever retreating to the lunatic fringe where they can enjoy preaching to their own ever diminishing choir.

They took a calculated (or not-so-calculated) risk. People should always vote for the issues that are most important to them, so you can hardly fault them for sticking to their principles.

 

[evident]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: Lemon law
If the religious right main goal was to over turn Row v Wade through packing the courts, they are the big loser in the election of 11/2008.

While both parties dream of capturing the vote of the religious right, the religious right still put all its eggs in the GOP basket. And the religious right still bought into the the GOP excuse that the GOP would not try by legislative means, because the repeal of Roe V. Wade is and remains against the national political will and thus political suicide for any party that advocated it in its legislative platform.

So the religious right accepted the GOP promise that the GOP would pack the supreme court instead, and thus back door the de facto repeal of Roe v Wade through the courts.

And even through the religious right came perilously close to accomplishing its goals with their lock step support for the moral depravity of GWB&co, they have still morally bankrupted themselves in the process of being in the Snidley Whiplash
curse foiled again position they now richly deserve.

With the landslide election of Obama and the democrats, its almost a given, that the soon to be future make up of SCOTUS will be very hostile towards any court
based back door repeal of Roe v Wade.

The religious right will not have any chance of a court based back door repeal of Roe v Wade for decades to come. Will the Religious right learn its lesson or will they embrace their failed position to the public disgust. And then really screw their own pooch by losing their tax exempt status? And then forever retreating to the lunatic fringe where they can enjoy preaching to their own ever diminishing choir.

They took a calculated (or not-so-calculated) risk. People should always vote for the issues that are most important to them, so you can hardly fault them for sticking to their principles.

while i may agree, most pro lifers have a narrowminded and uninformed grasp of the entire problem. while dead fetus = kill life, the problem stems much deeper than that.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: evident
while i may agree, most pro lifers have a narrowminded and uninformed grasp of the entire problem. while dead fetus = kill life, the problem stems much deeper than that.

What you don't seem to realize (nor do most pro-choicers) is that they see you in the exact same light. A miniscule minority has any idea what the real foundations are around the legalities of abortion.

 

[Lemon law]

In terms of what would Jesus do on the questions of abortion and birth control, neither of those technologies existed during his time on earth. But as unchecked populations continue to plague many third world countries, the net effect on the catholic church is likely to be Apocalyptic as more and more will reject the catholic faith in favor of reality.

At some point in time, a future pope will change many of the church stances regarding at least birth control, or its not hard to predict the catholic church will have an ever diminishing influence and constituency.

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: L00PY


Best I can tell, you could argue that the study found that 78.5% of the US belong to a religion with a church (Protestant, Catholic, Mormon, Orthodox, Other Christian, and Unitarians).

Unitarians do not really believe in a god. -just sayin

 

[Eeezee]

I hate this. I know 100 Catholic Priests who are really great guys, very rational and accepting with nothing but love for others in their hearts, but it only takes one stupid bishop to make us all look like moronic zealots.

 

[Eeezee]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: Lemon law
If the religious right main goal was to over turn Row v Wade through packing the courts, they are the big loser in the election of 11/2008.

While both parties dream of capturing the vote of the religious right, the religious right still put all its eggs in the GOP basket. And the religious right still bought into the the GOP excuse that the GOP would not try by legislative means, because the repeal of Roe V. Wade is and remains against the national political will and thus political suicide for any party that advocated it in its legislative platform.

So the religious right accepted the GOP promise that the GOP would pack the supreme court instead, and thus back door the de facto repeal of Roe v Wade through the courts.

And even through the religious right came perilously close to accomplishing its goals with their lock step support for the moral depravity of GWB&co, they have still morally bankrupted themselves in the process of being in the Snidley Whiplash
curse foiled again position they now richly deserve.

With the landslide election of Obama and the democrats, its almost a given, that the soon to be future make up of SCOTUS will be very hostile towards any court
based back door repeal of Roe v Wade.

The religious right will not have any chance of a court based back door repeal of Roe v Wade for decades to come. Will the Religious right learn its lesson or will they embrace their failed position to the public disgust. And then really screw their own pooch by losing their tax exempt status? And then forever retreating to the lunatic fringe where they can enjoy preaching to their own ever diminishing choir.

They took a calculated (or not-so-calculated) risk. People should always vote for the issues that are most important to them, so you can hardly fault them for sticking to their principles.

It takes someone lacking in principles to be pro-war and pro-life at the same time.

 

[Eeezee]

Originally posted by: idiotekniQues
where is the outrage from catholics?

It's been a long day, I'm late to the discussion. If it were up to me, this bishop would face excommunication for his zealotry and idiocy (WWJD? He wouldn't be a zealot, that much is certain). Instead I'll just point out that most of us aren't like that.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
In terms of what would Jesus do on the questions of abortion and birth control, neither of those technologies existed during his time on earth. But as unchecked populations continue to plague many third world countries, the net effect on the catholic church is likely to be Apocalyptic as more and more will reject the catholic faith in favor of reality.

At some point in time, a future pope will change many of the church stances regarding at least birth control, or its not hard to predict the catholic church will have an ever diminishing influence and constituency.

This just tells me that you know absolutely nothing about the Catholic Church, nor how it works. I don't really feel like educating you, either.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: Eeezee
It takes someone lacking in principles to be pro-war and pro-life at the same time.

No, actually there is an extensive philosophical basis for the theory of "Just Wars" that does allow for war depending on the circumstances. The "Pro-War" label is flung around by the ignorant, just as the "Anti-War" label is by the other side (who are equally ignorant). I am generally against war and violence, but I still understand that they are both sometimes necessary.

 

[L00PY]

Originally posted by: TheRedUnderURBed

Originally posted by: L00PY
Best I can tell, you could argue that the study found that 78.5% of the US belong to a religion with a church (Protestant, Catholic, Mormon, Orthodox, Other Christian, and Unitarians).

Unitarians do not really believe in a god. -just sayin

Even if that were true, that wouldn't contradict my statement that Unitarians belonged to a religion with a church. But Unitarians believe in a single Christian God, and not the doctrine of the Trinity. Dismissing Unitarians as not believing in a god is as accurate as a Catholic dismissing Protestants as not really believing in a god.

 

[AnitaPeterson]

Originally posted by: BMW540I6speed
Here is how the desert religions work:

The infant is brought into the religious community and indoctrinated and trained from the earliest possible age using ceremony, gifts, fear, and threats. The child makes the connection promoted by the church - that God is the father and the father is God. The pathways of the child's brain are conditioned to have certain responses when stimulated by fathers, authority, certain types of words and music and images.

This works, in practical terms, as a fetish - the properly reared child makes a fetish of authority. Many of the proscriptions have to do with sex, so sexuality becomes part of the fetishization of feelings of authority and love. The properly reared child grows up to be a productive member of the community, which means that he goes out and earns money, which he gives to the church. He becomes a tool of the church - promoting doctrine and conformity, giving wealth, getting advice and an unfulfillable promise of "eternal life". He also gets to hate and fear others - that's an important part. Faith is subjective, religion is about conformity, power, and wealth. If you can't distinguish between the two, you will never understand what religion is for - it is for the consolidation of power, just like government, the military, etc.

Churches are afraid of divine retribution for tolerance of homosexuality & womens rights. Like when Robertson blamed 9/11 on "homosexuals and abortionists." And there are people who blame all of our failures of humanity on abortion and homosexuality & "sin". They really think that "God will stop protecting us" if we show tolerance. I'm afriad the churches' fears are not as logical as many so generously believes.

Wow!
Bravo! I like fearless diatribes against organized religion!

 

[evident]

Originally posted by: Eeezee
I hate this. I know 100 Catholic Priests who are really great guys, very rational and accepting with nothing but love for others in their hearts, but it only takes one stupid bishop to make us all look like moronic zealots.

pretty much. The USCCB is pretty lame and makes catholics look like backward thinking jerry falwell types

 

[evident]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: Eeezee
It takes someone lacking in principles to be pro-war and pro-life at the same time.

No, actually there is an extensive philosophical basis for the theory of "Just Wars" that does allow for war depending on the circumstances. The "Pro-War" label is flung around by the ignorant, just as the "Anti-War" label is by the other side (who are equally ignorant). I am generally against war and violence, but I still understand that they are both sometimes necessary.

The just war theory was created by St Augustine. Jesus did not create the just war doctrine.

sometimes war is necessary, and sometimes a war is just ( such as afghanistan) but for people trying to use the JWT to justify a lame war like iraq, let someone saying god wants us to be there is def. someone lacking in principles.

 

[evident]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: evident
while i may agree, most pro lifers have a narrowminded and uninformed grasp of the entire problem. while dead fetus = kill life, the problem stems much deeper than that.

What you don't seem to realize (nor do most pro-choicers) is that they see you in the exact same light. A miniscule minority has any idea what the real foundations are around the legalities of abortion.

unfortunately, it's because both sides have veered in extreme paths and slandered each other with hateful propaganda that does not encourage any dialogue whatsoever. it's really sad and as a catholic it pisses me off.

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: L00PY

Originally posted by: TheRedUnderURBed

Originally posted by: L00PY
Best I can tell, you could argue that the study found that 78.5% of the US belong to a religion with a church (Protestant, Catholic, Mormon, Orthodox, Other Christian, and Unitarians).

Unitarians do not really believe in a god. -just sayin

Even if that were true, that wouldn't contradict my statement that Unitarians belonged to a religion with a church. But Unitarians believe in a single Christian God, and not the doctrine of the Trinity. Dismissing Unitarians as not believing in a god is as accurate as a Catholic dismissing Protestants as not really believing in a god.

Not in my experience, if you are an atheist or an agnostic stuck around less "secular" people it is common knowledge that you tell them you are Unitarian so you get left alone. (and most christians have no clue what a Unitarian is anyhow)
Also Unitarians do not believe in a christian god. You may want to wiki them.
You can believe whatever you wish, or nothing.

from wiki:
"Although Unitarian Universalist congregations and fellowships tend to retain some Christian traditions, such as Sunday worship with a sermon and the singing of hymns, they do not necessarily identify themselves as Christians, nor do they necessarily subscribe to Christian beliefs."

From a Unitarian website:
Do you believe in God?

"We do not have a defined doctrine of God. Members are free to develop individual concepts of God that are meaningful to them. They are also free to reject the term and concept altogether.

Most of us do not believe in a supernatural, supreme being who can directly intervene in and alter human life or the mechanism of the natural world. Many believe in a spirit of life or a power within themselves, which some choose to call God."

So the poll is misleading as far as Unitarians go, besides the fact that saying you are Unitarian is a good way of telling someone to mind their own damn biz because you are atheist/agnostic.

 

[Eeezee]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: Eeezee
It takes someone lacking in principles to be pro-war and pro-life at the same time.

No, actually there is an extensive philosophical basis for the theory of "Just Wars" that does allow for war depending on the circumstances. The "Pro-War" label is flung around by the ignorant, just as the "Anti-War" label is by the other side (who are equally ignorant). I am generally against war and violence, but I still understand that they are both sometimes necessary.

Is a preemptive war against a nation that has no means of attacking your country a just one? I'm sorry, but your reasoning fails on too many levels. Try again

War hawks DO exist, there were many (particularly in the Bush administration and around the country) who were pushing for the Iraq War despite the evidence. You're ignorant if you think otherwise. There was a lot of bullshit being claimed at the time, and it was the warhawks trying to spread misinformation like the faux link between Al Queda and Saddam Hussein. If you don't call it pro-war, what do you call it? Is it willing deception of the public for no reason?

Did you write that post after major surgery or something? It's drivel. To cite Just War Theory (which is 99% of the time misunderstood) while completely ignoring the facts that the Iraq War was completely unjust is sheer LUNACY.

 

[L00PY]

Originally posted by: TheRedUnderURBed

Originally posted by: L00PY

Originally posted by: TheRedUnderURBed

Originally posted by: L00PY
Best I can tell, you could argue that the study found that 78.5% of the US belong to a religion with a church (Protestant, Catholic, Mormon, Orthodox, Other Christian, and Unitarians).

Unitarians do not really believe in a god. -just sayin

Even if that were true, that wouldn't contradict my statement that Unitarians belonged to a religion with a church. But Unitarians believe in a single Christian God, and not the doctrine of the Trinity. Dismissing Unitarians as not believing in a god is as accurate as a Catholic dismissing Protestants as not really believing in a god.

Not in my experience, if you are an atheist or an agnostic stuck around less "secular" people it is common knowledge that you tell them you are Unitarian so you get left alone. (and most christians have no clue what a Unitarian is anyhow)
Also Unitarians do not believe in a christian god. You may want to wiki them.
You can believe whatever you wish, or nothing.

from wiki:
"Although Unitarian Universalist congregations and fellowships tend to retain some Christian traditions, such as Sunday worship with a sermon and the singing of hymns, they do not necessarily identify themselves as Christians, nor do they necessarily subscribe to Christian beliefs."

From a Unitarian website:
Do you believe in God?

"We do not have a defined doctrine of God. Members are free to develop individual concepts of God that are meaningful to them. They are also free to reject the term and concept altogether.

Most of us do not believe in a supernatural, supreme being who can directly intervene in and alter human life or the mechanism of the natural world. Many believe in a spirit of life or a power within themselves, which some choose to call God."

So the poll is misleading as far as Unitarians go, besides the fact that saying you are Unitarian is a good way of telling someone to mind their own damn biz because you are atheist/agnostic.

Congratulations! You found a sect within Unitarianism that differs and goes by a slightly different name of "Unitarian Universalism". Who would've thunk that Christianity has different sects? Of course you could have also found the Biblical Unitarians that say "we believe in one God, the Father, and one Lord, Jesus Christ." Or the American Unitarian Conference that says, "Unitarian Christianity is, like other forms of Christianity, a religion that asserts the divine character, divine spirit, and divine foundation of the teaching of Jesus Christ," and who's Unitarian Confession begins with "We believe in one God, the Creator and Preserver of all things."

And since you brought up Wikipedia, why didn't you bother quoting the very first sentence of the article on Unitarianism which reads, "Unitarianism as a theology is the belief in the single personality of God, in contrast to the doctrine of the Trinity (three persons in one God)."

 

[AlienCraft]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Its the complete collapse of our economic system . Because its backed by paper .

If you think were going back to what we had . Your sadly mistaken .

But the TRUETH is Americas strength is her crops. This is going to some how be overlooked. WE can't drink oil or eat gold. The world well say we haven't anything to back up our dollars with . Isay there full of sh-- . We have our crops.

The Churches contribution to the decrepitude of man has been as vinger in the mouth of the saviour and spit out.

Why is the church talking about abortion. In a time of over population. A starving world . Whats going on in the middle east . Why isn't the church talking about the sin of WAR.

This is nothing more than a distration so as to get the real agenda in place.

I am not sure your aware . But One World Order is openly being talked about now. Why isn't HRCC commenting on that.

Because they are complicit. They are Friends of Bilderburger.

 

[AlienCraft]

Originally posted by: Skyclad1uhm1
Screw all of tha.... wtf is up with Clan of idiots? Nice placeholder....

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: evident
The just war theory was created by St Augustine. Jesus did not create the just war doctrine.

It was actually Aquinas. Nor did anyone say that Jesus say anything about it.

sometimes war is necessary, and sometimes a war is just ( such as afghanistan) but for people trying to use the JWT to justify a lame war like iraq, let someone saying god wants us to be there is def. someone lacking in principles.

Did anyone try to do that? Don't think so.

unfortunately, it's because both sides have veered in extreme paths and slandered each other with hateful propaganda that does not encourage any dialogue whatsoever. it's really sad and as a catholic it pisses me off.

Part of the problem with this issue is that it had already been settled by the people. Then, an oligarchy of judges decided to overturn the obvious will of the people on a whim with the flimsiest of excuses. Now, the people who had previously done things the proper way (i.e. getting laws passed) had no recourse but to try to pack the courts. Those on the other side of the argument had only the same recourse. Thus, the courts created the problem to which they are now the solution. How ironic.