The Bitter Tears of the American Christian Supermajority

[PatsFanInVa]

PF13, straying back to the more radioactive territory in defense of those near and dear to me (OMG!!! Ban them! There's two of them in one house!) I noticed that you ask Mrs. P if she "supports" abortion.

My understanding (but check with the Mrs., of course,) is that Mrs. P supports the right of a woman to choose for herself rather than have the state play God.

Now - I'm not a Catholic, and ex-Catholic, or a wanna-be Catholic (although I am pleased to see that there is now a Pope who concerns himself with Jesus' teachings, which by and large aren't a bad gloss on the Judaism of his day.)

But I'd be interested to see the catholic stricture, from the catechism or anywhere else, dictating (1) the necessity of a state to enforce one law or another as regards abortion, and (2) the necessity that every Catholic actively work toward conforming that state's laws to the Church's dictates.

Thank you. That will clear up the question of whether a Catholic is obligated to actively oppose one or another political program on the subject of abortion. Please don't reply with ideology. I am interested in your thorough knowledge of what the Catholic church considers binding on its adherents, not a fake "well you can draw a line from A to B and B to C and C to D" type argument. Is it in black-letter law that you have to oppose choice, in the political sphere, if you are Catholic?

PFnV

 

[RI Patriots fan]

I doubt the Pope would agree with calling Progressives vastly worse than Fred Phelps.

I realize that you feel obligated to throw your weight behind everything RIPF says, because he expresses such disdain for left-wingers and espouses right-wing viewpoints, but this fairly pathetic.

"Sorry, young liberals — Pope Francis isn't going to be an ally on abortion rights.

The pontiff made his harshest remarks on record about abortion during his yearly "State of the World" address to diplomats sent to the Vatican on Monday. In one word, he made clear that he's not the progressive many women had hoped for, calling the practice of abortion "horrific."

"It is horrific even to think that there are children, victims of abortion, who will never see the light of day," he said during a section on the rights of children.

"Unfortunately, what is thrown away is not only food and dispensable objects, but often human beings themselves, who are discarded as unnecessary."


In One Word, Pope Francis Makes Clears He's Not the Progressive We Hoped For - PolicyMic



Pope Francis said Tuesday in his first apostolic exhortation that no matter how progressive-minded the world turns, the Catholic Church can never compromise on its “no abortion” rule — it’s a matter of human dignity.

“I want to be completely honest in this regard,” he said, Catholic News Service reported. “This is not something subject to alleged reforms or ‘modernizations.’ It is not ‘progressive’ to try to resolve problems by eliminating a human life.”

This isn’t the first time the pope has run counter to progressive policies. Just a week ago, on Vatican Radio, he spoke against “adolescent progressivism,” and said believers should keep fast to faith and avoid the pull of the world.

“Today also brings us this desire to be progressive, following a single thought,” he said, days ago on radio.

But when it comes to abortion — progressive thoughts are the enemy, he made clear, in his exhortation.



Read more: Pope Francis takes veiled swipe at 'progressive' Democrats - Washington Times
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter



In his daily homily Pope Francis cautioned against modern society's push for a unified secular ideology, saying that this does not create positive globalization but rather an “adolescent progressivism.”

“The spirit of worldliness also exists today, today also brings us this desire to be progressive, following a single thought,” the Pope said during his Nov. 18 daily Mass.

“This is precisely the fruit of the devil, of the prince of this world, which leads us forward in a spirit of worldliness. And after, the consequences occur,” he added, highlighting how not only did the people of God take the “customs of the pagans,” they took it “a step further.”



http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/pope-warns-against-dangers-of-adolescent-progressivism/

 

[RI Patriots fan]

PF13, straying back to the more radioactive territory in defense of those near and dear to me (OMG!!! Ban them! There's two of them in one house!) I noticed that you ask Mrs. P if she "supports" abortion.

My understanding (but check with the Mrs., of course,) is that Mrs. P supports the right of a woman to choose for herself rather than have the state play God.

Now - I'm not a Catholic, and ex-Catholic, or a wanna-be Catholic (although I am pleased to see that there is now a Pope who concerns himself with Jesus' teachings, which by and large aren't a bad gloss on the Judaism of his day.)

But I'd be interested to see the catholic stricture, from the catechism or anywhere else, dictating (1) the necessity of a state to enforce one law or another as regards abortion, and (2) the necessity that every Catholic actively work toward conforming that state's laws to the Church's dictates.

Thank you. That will clear up the question of whether a Catholic is obligated to actively oppose one or another political program on the subject of abortion. Please don't reply with ideology. I am interested in your thorough knowledge of what the Catholic church considers binding on its adherents, not a fake "well you can draw a line from A to B and B to C and C to D" type argument. Is it in black-letter law that you have to oppose choice, in the political sphere, if you are Catholic?

PFnV

Yes....better for Mrs.P to "play God" and decide if her child should live or die rather than the state.





Abortion

2270 Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person - among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life.72


Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you.73
My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately wrought in the depths of the earth.74

2271 Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law:


You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish.75
God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes.76

2272 Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. "A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae,"77 "by the very commission of the offense,"78 and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law.79 The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.

2273 The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation:

"The inalienable rights of the person must be recognized and respected by civil society and the political authority. These human rights depend neither on single individuals nor on parents; nor do they represent a concession made by society and the state; they belong to human nature and are inherent in the person by virtue of the creative act from which the person took his origin. Among such fundamental rights one should mention in this regard every human being's right to life and physical integrity from the moment of conception until death."80

"The moment a positive law deprives a category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation ought to accord them, the state is denying the equality of all before the law. When the state does not place its power at the service of the rights of each citizen, and in particular of the more vulnerable, the very foundations of a state based on law are undermined. . . . As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be ensured for the unborn child from the moment of conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child's rights."81

2274 Since it must be treated from conception as a person, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being.


http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a5.htm

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Yes....better for Mrs.P to "play God" and decide if her child should live or die rather than the state.

Again, you personalize to snipe.

Did Mrs. P tell you that she had had an abortion herself? Was I talking about Mrs. P's decision, as a Catholic or as an ex-Catholic, to have an abortion?

What I was discussing was the contention that one cannot be Catholic and believe that the state has no role in dictating such a decision to all women regardless of unknown factors, including but not limited to that woman's own religion.

Being pro-choice is not being pro-abortion. It does not mean one is raring to get an abortion or two or three or eight. It means one does not believe the state should dictate the choice.

Are you without any Catholic source forbidding Catholics to be politically pro-choice?

Thanks, and try to stick to the subject at hand.

PFnV

 

[IcyPatriot]

 

[everlong]

::Shrug:: That goes to me, Everlong. I opened a post that touched on religion.

It's really not the topic of religion but one poster who makes it intolerable to me and makes me want to ban all religious talk. He's so full of crap its not funny and bends every topic to his rhetoric. Calling people worse than Phelps to me should have been a bannable offense.

 

[fpraven88]

"Sorry, young liberals — Pope Francis isn't going to be an ally on abortion rights.

The pontiff made his harshest remarks on record about abortion during his yearly "State of the World" address to diplomats sent to the Vatican on Monday. In one word, he made clear that he's not the progressive many women had hoped for, calling the practice of abortion "horrific."

"It is horrific even to think that there are children, victims of abortion, who will never see the light of day," he said during a section on the rights of children.

"Unfortunately, what is thrown away is not only food and dispensable objects, but often human beings themselves, who are discarded as unnecessary."


In One Word, Pope Francis Makes Clears He's Not the Progressive We Hoped For - PolicyMic



Pope Francis said Tuesday in his first apostolic exhortation that no matter how progressive-minded the world turns, the Catholic Church can never compromise on its “no abortion” rule — it’s a matter of human dignity.

“I want to be completely honest in this regard,” he said, Catholic News Service reported. “This is not something subject to alleged reforms or ‘modernizations.’ It is not ‘progressive’ to try to resolve problems by eliminating a human life.”

This isn’t the first time the pope has run counter to progressive policies. Just a week ago, on Vatican Radio, he spoke against “adolescent progressivism,” and said believers should keep fast to faith and avoid the pull of the world.

“Today also brings us this desire to be progressive, following a single thought,” he said, days ago on radio.

But when it comes to abortion — progressive thoughts are the enemy, he made clear, in his exhortation.



Read more: Pope Francis takes veiled swipe at 'progressive' Democrats - Washington Times
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

That's not even close to the same thing and you trying to equate them is intentional dishonesty.

What's the Pope say about the fact that you're a liar?

 

[fpraven88]

It's really not the topic of religion but one poster who makes it intolerable to me and makes me want to ban all religious talk. He's so full of crap its not funny and bends every topic to his rhetoric. Calling people worse than Phelps to me should have been a bannable offense.

Agreed, I've been corrected here a few times (no complaints), but what he said was completely out of bounds.

 

[RI Patriots fan]

That's not even close to the same thing and you trying to equate them is intentional dishonesty.

What's the Pope say about the fact that you're a liar?

Sure it isn't....lol.


The Pope calls Progressivism...."the fruit of Satan, of the prince of this world" and that's not worse than Phelps. Sure.

 

[RI Patriots fan]

Agreed, I've been corrected here a few times (no complaints), but what he said was completely out of bounds.

Ok, so let me get this straight.....you can call Phelps despicable but I can't call another group even more despicable (which it is) because you believe it's "out of bounds". How predictably hypocritical but not unexpected from Progressives who would rather silence opposition than respond to it.

I say it again....Progressivism is far far worse then Phelps. I stand with the Pope in saying that Progressivism is a fruit of Satan.

 

[fpraven88]

Ok, so let me get this straight.....you can call Phelps despicable but I can't call another group even more despicable (which it is) because you believe it's "out of bounds". How predictably hypocritical but not unexpected from Progressives who would rather silence opposition than respond to it.

I say it again....Progressivism is far far worse then Phelps. I stand with the Pope in saying that Progressivism is a fruit of Satan.

This Pope would quickly walk away from you if you stood next to him.

 

[RI Patriots fan]

Again, you personalize to snipe.

Did Mrs. P tell you that she had had an abortion herself? Was I talking about Mrs. P's decision, as a Catholic or as an ex-Catholic, to have an abortion?

What I was discussing was the contention that one cannot be Catholic and believe that the state has no role in dictating such a decision to all women regardless of unknown factors, including but not limited to that woman's own religion.

Being pro-choice is not being pro-abortion. It does not mean one is raring to get an abortion or two or three or eight. It means one does not believe the state should dictate the choice.

Are you without any Catholic source forbidding Catholics to be politically pro-choice?

Thanks, and try to stick to the subject at hand.

PFnV

So if I'm ok with other people owning people (slavery), as long as I don't personally want to own a slave or actually own a slave than I'm not pro-slavery, I'm just pro choice?

I posted the catechism's response to abortion already. BTW, in the case of abortion, the teaching is directed at all people and not just Catholics.

 

[fpraven88]

Sure it isn't....lol.


The Pope calls Progressivism...."the fruit of Satan, of the prince of this world" and that's not worse than Phelps. Sure.

See, while I may believe that you are more hateful than Phelps, I don't believe you to be worse than Phelps.

Phelps was a disgraceful human being that picketed funerals and preached messages of hate that people (though thankfully few and far between) actually listened to.

You're a sad, bitter, angry little man that hates "progressives" and minorities, but ultimately, you have no real effect on the world as a whole.

 

[IcyPatriot]

.....................

 

[PatriotsReign]

.....................

The most profound post of this idiotic thread!

 

[PatsFanInVa]

So if I'm ok with other people owning people (slavery), as long as I don't personally want to own a slave or actually own a slave than I'm not pro-slavery, I'm just pro choice?

I posted the catechism's response to abortion already. BTW, in the case of abortion, the teaching is directed at all people and not just Catholics.

It was a one-liner response when I responded.

I see nothing in that catechism that dictates how individual Catholics are to vote or advocate, or their political beliefs about replacing a pluralist system with a theocracy following Catholic preferences.

You might have a leg to stand on, were you facing people urging all women to have an abortion. However, you are not. The vast majority of all pro-choice people state that it should be up to the woman herself, regardless of her religion. If she reads and follows this catechism, she will choose not to have an abortion, or to leave the Catholic church. If, however, she is not a Catholic, she will follow whichever religious or personal creed she feels is binding on herself, taking into account her own personal position in life as a pregnant woman, a perspective that often illuminates such a decision in the individual's life, and one that is unavailable in the personal experiences of the authors of the catechism.

I am not pro-abortion; I have never been faced with the decision, but I believe that those who do should have the choice to follow such a catechism or to have the abortion.

I see nothing here that would ban me from the Catholic church.

As to your slavery analogy, it may be valid within that set of Catholics who are not what you call "cafeteria Catholics" - that is, a small minority within the Catholic church, if they exist at all. After all, capitalism itself is built on coveting; and though that is from the actual decalog rather than your sunday school lessons, I am sure that Catholicism has retained some of the commandments in its instruction to the faithful, particularly among the Top 10. I think it would be difficult not to be a "cafeteria Catholic" to one extent or another, were one a Catholic.

However, for those of us who are not Catholics, cafeteria or otherwise, it's irrelevant.

It's as if I were to say to you, "Sure you can not root for the Jets, just like you can not personally hold a slave... but if you don't lobby for the Jets to be declared illegal for all time... (emoticon -> )

Even within your best shot from the catechism, there is no "black-letter law" that one cannot be pro-choice.

PFnV

 

[PatsFanInVa]

So, consider that the end of the conversation on abortion, RIPfan. Please open an abortion thread if you would like to continue it.

Regarding the "persecution" of Christians, I still find it a curious claim. However, it's almost as strange to me that atheists/agnostics are not "persecuted" even to the rare extent that Catholics are, or even the more rarely persecuted protestants.

Once again, I'm using the hate crime stats as a proxy for "all persecution."

Are there other data sets we should consider? Some other way we can get at this by way of hard numbers?

Every year we're treated to claims of a "war on Christmas," which is defined by free individuals greeting each other with "happy holidays," or by the horror of a business doing likewise.

These are cases of other people doing as they like rather than including themselves in Christianity. This is what's called a "war."

And this is trotted out as the distilled essence of the persecution of Christians in America.

Are there any other data that support the premise that the American Christian super-majority is "persecuted"?

PFnV

 

[reflexblue]

Ones in a pretty sad state of affairs when one has to arrange for ones own persecution. Seems to me that persecution and paranoia are closely related. In fact there is something called a persecution complex. And maybe to one degree or another a lot of people suffer from it. I'd bet that some people who are Christian feel that they're being persecuted for being Christian because they have to pay taxes. etc.

 

[Mrs.PatsFanInVa]

So, consider that the end of the conversation on abortion, RIPfan

You are one with Pope Francis!!

“We cannot insist only on issues related to abortion, gay marriage and the use of contraceptive methods. This is not possible. I have not spoken much about these things, and I was reprimanded for that. But when we speak about these issues, we have to talk about them in a context. The teaching of the church, for that matter, is clear and I am a son of the church, but it is not necessary to talk about these issues all the time."

A Big Heart Open to God | America Magazine

 

[PatsFanInVa]

It's worth noting, on the subject of persecution, that among those who really are the predominant targets of religious persecution in the U.S., this country is considered a beacon of religious liberty.

Speaking as a Jew (but of course, certainly not for all Jews,) I have to say that from what little I know of the rest of the world, this little patch of land, for all its problems, is comparatively hate-free on religious grounds. Looking at the hate crime stats, I'm speaking as a member of the "most persecuted" religion.

YMMV of course; I once told my chasidic brother-in-law that it's "just bigotry" for him to refuse to be in the vicinity of my wife, who is not Jewish. His point of view was something along the lines of "Jews have always been in a minority." There may be some connecting tissue missed there - something along the lines of "you just don't do that," on my part. And to the credit of most of the Orthodox, he seems to magnify prohibitions based not on some rabbi's instructions or the common minhag (custom) of his sect, but on the basis of his own arcane understandings in service of what I think is simply a personality defect.

Still, I don't think even he would say that America is "persecuting" Jews. Strange - he's somewhat given to emphasizing Jewish persecution in general, and Jews are, by what I could find in the stats, the most persecuted religious minority.

Although this may be the difference between a majority and a minority. No Jew would demand that every American greet each other with a hearty "Happy Chanukah" on the appropriate day, and claim there's a "war on Chanukah" if people use some other greeting. Honestly, we're just glad that we're allowed to say "Happy Chanukah" to each other, or sometimes even to non-Jews as a reply to "Merry Christmas," without fear of some sort of outbreak of violence. To us, that's religious freedom in America.

To the majority, if I understand the claim correctly, they are being persecuted unless everybody else reinforces their creed.

It's sort of the "stand your ground" of religion.

PFnV