Previous 11 - 20 Next
In response to:

The Left Officially Declares War on God

Troglodite Wrote: 13 hours ago (3:29 PM)
Well, OK, perversions which you aid, abet, and support, even if you do not perform them yourself. You know, Dave, those who applaud fudge-packing without personally doing it are actually even MORE perverse than those who do it because they enjoy it.
In response to:

The Left Officially Declares War on God

Troglodite Wrote: 13 hours ago (3:25 PM)
Darby, You are, by your choice, not in communion with the vast majority of those calling themselves Catholic and do not even, if I recall, recognize the validity of their Masses and ordinations. Now, it is true that right and truth are not necessarily on the side of the larger numbers. Still, what is believed and accepted "ab omnibus" is not to be put aside except for better and weightier arguments than I have seen for the sede vacantist position.
In response to:

The Left Officially Declares War on God

Troglodite Wrote: 13 hours ago (3:21 PM)
David, Why do you want to regulate my religious life in the same way in which you erroneously fancy that I want to regulate what you do with your schlong? Or do you think that anyone who fails to applaud your perversions is, for that very reason, an enemy who must be crushed, subdued, and re-educated?
In response to:

The Left Officially Declares War on God

Troglodite Wrote: 13 hours ago (2:56 PM)
I am not insisting that you must be happy about it. I merely think that you are almost certainly wrong. Of those calling themselves Catholic, sede vacantists account for what fraction? A tenth of one percent? I am not sure that such a small fraction has much standing to, in effect, excommunicate all the rest without a much stronger case than has been made that all the rest have entirely lost their faith. And there is not much to be said, I think, for the argument that says, in effect, that you and I are just too good to have such cruddy popes as we have had, so they must not be real popes. As something of a peace offering, I will go so far as to suggest that, at some point in the future, the Church will have to come to terms with, and explain, the disastrous papacies that we have seen during the last 50 years. In the meantime, I strive to act and believe as Catholics always have and as I was taught before the conciliar fit hit the shan.
In response to:

The Left Officially Declares War on God

Troglodite Wrote: 13 hours ago (2:39 PM)
Carlos: Although I am not particularly sympathetic to Darby's "sede vacantism," I wonder at what seems to be your suggestion that the Catholic Church is nowise Christian. Is that what you are saying?
In response to:

The Left Officially Declares War on God

Troglodite Wrote: 13 hours ago (2:36 PM)
Chai Feldblum, a lesbian and "gar rights" activist and now an EEOC commissioner, had the following to say: “Sexual liberty should win in most cases. There can be a conflict between religious liberty and sexual liberty, but in almost all cases the sexual liberty should win because that’s the only way that the dignity of gay people can be affirmed in any realistic manner.” Read and heed.
What differentiates the American start-up of 1776 from the French start-up of 1789. I would submit that the difference is that the Americans built on the foundations that they had inherited from centuries and millennia before them, while the French tried abstract principles. We got a constitution that has lasted, more or less, two hundred years and more; the French got guillotines, republics, empires, and more so-called republics. A 17th century Englishman (or, for that matter, a Cicero or an Aquinas), brought forward in time, would recognize and understand the basic ideas behind out constitutional system. Our American Founders built prudently and well on the solid ground of what experience had shown would work. Today, yes, we are throwing it all away.
Obama disagrees with AE, but for all the wrong reasons. I would have no qualms about voting once again for Reagan, though I think that his "city on a hill" was, in some ways, an intellectually unfortunate flourish. The real point, I think, is that Americans are (or were) exceptional, but not quite for the reasons that people usually give. Conversely, the reasons that they usually do give do nothing to help us retain that which did make us somewhat exceptional.
In practice, how would that work? Would the judgments of ecclesiastical tribunals be enforceable by secular authority? In theory, I have little or no problem with your suggestion. As a practical matter, I fear that your suggestion is about 500 years too late.
A man and a woman, whether or not they are actually fertile, generally have what it takes to do that which typically results in children. If they do not, that is generally not obvious, hence no one ought to make it his business to inquire. A man and a man, or a woman and a woman, on the other hand, are radically incapable of doing that which results in children. No questioning or inquiry or invasion of privacy is needed, because the matter is obvious.
It says that the typical neo-con concept of AE is intellectually false and politically pernicious.
Previous 11 - 20 Next