If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above.
You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Now I understand. You have a vested interest in redefinition.
BTW you can go Alinsky and call those who support traditional marriage and family names. I'm not worried by it.
1 Corinthians 4
4 Think of us in this way, as servants of Christ and stewards of God’s mysteries. 2 Moreover, it is required of stewards that they be found trustworthy. 3 But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged by you or by any human court. I do not even judge myself. 4 I am not aware of anything against myself, but I am not thereby acquitted. It is the Lord who judges me. 5 Therefore do not pronounce judgment before the time, before the Lord comes, who will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart. Then each one will receive commendation from God.
*sigh* No, what we're saying (the Pontiff and I) is that family is a place of love and inclusion beyond ideology. Children need both of those things, and supplying them with that is "family", beyond whatever a side considers to be ideal.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
He also said "Children have a right to grow up in a family with a father and a mother capable of creating a suitable environment for the child's development and emotional maturity."
That was within a different context (finances), as I've already pointed out 3x before. He wasn't stressing the gender of the parents, he was pointing out that two parents offer more support than one.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
2202 A man and a woman united in marriage, together with their children, form a family. This institution is prior to any recognition by public authority, which has an obligation to recognize it. It should be considered the normal reference point by which the different forms of family relationship are to be evaluated.
I'm aware of what's said in the Catechism, it's officially the same within nearly every other jurisdiction, but that still doesn't run counter to what Pope Francis said:
".. we can not qualify it based on ideological notions, or concepts that survive during a certain point in time, but eventually they crumble. We can't think of progressive or conservative notions, family is family, it can't be qualified by ideological notions. Family is per se, it is a strength per se." - Pope Francis
(
Last edited by Cap'n Tightpants; Nov 25, 2014 at 02:46 PM.
)
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
Trying to console a distraught little boy whose dog had died, Francis told him in a recent public appearance on St. Peter’s Square, “Paradise is open to all of God’s creatures.”
Charles Camosy, an author and professor of Christian ethics at Fordham University, said it was difficult to know precisely what Francis meant, since he spoke “in pastoral language that is not really meant to be dissected by academics.” But asked if the remarks had caused a new debate on whether animals have souls, suffer and go to heaven, Mr. Camosy said, “In a word: absolutely.”
The question of whether animals go to heaven has been debated for much of the church’s history. Pope Pius IX, who led the church from 1846 to 1878, longer than any other pope, strongly supported the doctrine that dogs and other animals have no consciousness. He even sought to thwart the founding of an Italian chapter of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.
Pope John Paul II appeared to reverse Pius in 1990 when he proclaimed that animals do have souls and are “as near to God as men are.” But the Vatican did not widely publicize his assertion, perhaps because it so directly contradicted Pius, who was the first to declare the doctrine of papal infallibility in 1854.
John Paul’s successor, Benedict, seemed to emphatically reject his view in a 2008 sermon in which he asserted that when an animal dies, it “just means the end of existence on earth.”
To some there is no differnce between mocking and blasphemy, what I belive Pope Francis speaks of, and valid criticism.
Blasphemy is still protected speech and always should be.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
Blasphemy is still protected speech and always should be.
Many countries have anti blasphmey laws on the books. There is not a Federal laws but several US states do. Most western countries have jail time as as the sentence, but blasmphemy is punishable by death in most Islamic countries. Islamic countries also have apostacy laws as well, also punishable by death.
Many countries have anti blasphmey laws on the books.
You really care about what other countires do? Because I got a whole load of liberal policies I could justify that way.
Originally Posted by Chongo
Most western countries have jail time as as the sentence, but blasmphemy is punishable by death in most Islamic countries. Islamic countries also have apostacy laws as well, also punishable by death.
I, uh, are you defending the Pope's position by comparing his stance to Islamic nations?
You really care about what other countires do? Because I got a whole load of liberal policies I could justify that way.
I, uh, are you defending the Pope's position by comparing his stance to Islamic nations?
No, I was replying to the Cap'n's comment that blasphemey is protected speech when numerous countries have blashmey laws on the books. Some enforce them, some don't.
Originally posted by FEDERATION PRESIDENT: Let us redefine progress to mean that just because we can do a thing it does not necessarily follow that we must do that thing.
Many countries have anti blasphmey laws on the books. There is not a Federal laws but several US states do.
The difference is, those countries and states don't enforce them, and if any state's anti-blasphemy law was ever challenged it would be found unconstitutional. No civilized place would ever kill someone over blasphemy, which is the whole point.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
"'He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters. Therefore I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. And whoever says a word against the Son of man will be forgiven; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come" (Matthew 12:22-32).
The difference is, those countries and states don't enforce them, and if any state's anti-blasphemy law was ever challenged it would be found unconstitutional. No civilized place would ever kill someone over blasphemy, which is the whole point.
While I agree in freedom of speech there's also a lot of common sense in "don't say shit to provoke the evil savages", (and let's face it, that's what Muslim extremists are). There's a guy who lives down the road from me, 6 and a half feet tall, 300lbs, and he's not completely stable (was cracked in the back of the head with a crowbar many years ago). If you say anything derogatory about his mother he will **** you up. (You should probably avoid saying anything bad about Dale Earnhardt Jr. too, just for good measure.)
Not too long ago a fella in a bar, a friend of his, jokingly called him an SOB... and the guy immediately lost several teeth. Everyone around here simply knows, you don't say shit about Dennis' momma, at least not within earshot of him. If you do, and you know how he is, well, you won't get much sympathy from me if you end up drinking your meals through a straw for the next several months. It's like poking a grizzly bear with a sharp stick, just don't. The Muslims in question are the same way. The French journalists at that paper kept jabbing, ceaselessly prodding them, and they wound up pushing daisies. While their speech was, and should always be, legally protected, it was also very stupid. I'm not condoning what happened, it was inexcusable, but at the same time, sometimes the bear gets you.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
Manila, Philippines, Jan 16, 2015 / 03:47 am (CNA/EWTN News).- Warning that “every threat to the family is a threat to society itself,” Pope Francis called on the people of the Philippines to be a prophetic witness in a world facing attacks on marriage and life.
“The family is also threatened by growing efforts on the part of some to redefine the very institution of marriage, by relativism, by the culture of the ephemeral, by a lack of openness to life,” warned Pope Francis, speaking Friday to families gathered at the Mall of Asia Arena in Manila during his Jan. 15-19 visit to the Philippines.
(
Last edited by Chongo; Jan 16, 2015 at 02:24 PM.
)
Manila, Philippines, Jan 16, 2015 / 04:07 am (CNA/EWTN News).- Pope Francis took the opportunity during an address to families in the Philippines to praise Blessed Pope Paul VI’s encyclical opposing contraception and affirming Church teaching on sexuality and human life.
The Pope spoke Friday to families gathered at the Mall of Asia Arena in Manila during his Jan. 15-19 visit to the Philippines.
After discussing various threats to the family, including “a lack of openness to life,” he deviated briefly from his prepared remarks, transitioning from English to his native Spanish in order to speak from the heart about the subject.
“I think of Blessed Paul VI,” he said. “In a moment of that challenge of the growth of populations, he had the strength to defend openness to life.”
In 1968, Pope Paul VI released the encyclical Humanae Vitae, which upheld Catholic teaching on sexuality and the immorality of artificial contraception, predicting the negative consequences that would result from a cultural acceptance of birth control.
“He knew the difficulties that families experience, and that’s why in his encyclical, he expressed compassion for particular cases. And he taught professors to be particularly compassionate with particular cases,” Pope Francis said.
“But he went further. He looked to the peoples beyond. He saw the lack and the problem that it could cause families in the future. Paul VI was courageous. He was a good pastor, and he warned his sheep about the wolves that were approaching, and from the heavens he blesses us today.”
“When families bring children into the world, train them in faith and sound values, and teach them to contribute to society, they become a blessing in our world,” he said. “God’s love becomes present and active by the way we love and by the good works that we do.”
In other words...people are breeding stock to further the cause of the worlds largest cult.
This thread is about Pope Francis, not Frances Swaggart
It's the practical result of the message of the Catholic church. People have a moral duty to get married and raise a family, regardless of their *GASP* "selfish" concerns. They then have a moral duty to raise their children in a manner that is consistent with the church teachings and support the church, so that they can grow up and repeat the cycle.
That IS the message of an organization that preaches no birth control, no abortion, a moral duty to breed anyway, and a moral duty to serve the church God. You are breeding stock, put here on Earth to serve those who deserve it least and to suffer as your lord suffered...and squirt out more people to do the same. As many as possible.
Well, it wasn't until a few hundred years ago this became a poor plan. We were basically in a constant state of war, and had ridiculous infant mortality stats.
The way humanity survived this was by zoning women as baby factories.
Well, it wasn't until a few hundred years ago this became a poor plan. We were basically in a constant state of war, and had ridiculous infant mortality stats.
The way humanity survived this was by zoning women as baby factories.
Are suggesting that the RCC should philosophically get out of the 17th century?
It's the practical result of the message of the Catholic church. People have a moral duty to get married and raise a family, regardless of their *GASP* "selfish" concerns. They then have a moral duty to raise their children in a manner that is consistent with the church teachings and support the church, so that they can grow up and repeat the cycle.
That IS the message of an organization that preaches no birth control, no abortion, a moral duty to breed anyway, and a moral duty to serve the church God. You are breeding stock, put here on Earth to serve those who deserve it least and to suffer as your lord suffered...and squirt out more people to do the same. As many as possible.
The purpose of marriage is the raisng and instrcution of children. Until the 1930's, all of Christianity was opposed to artificial birth control and abortion.
Odd for Pope Francis to declare a "Year of Consecrated Life" if we have a moral obligation to marry, we don't. St.Paul deals with the subject of marriage in chapter 7 of I Corinthians. Pope issues letter for Year of Consecrated Life Vatican Radio
The Church has never taught that every conjugal act result in a child, just that they be open to new life. Bl. Paul the VI addressees this in Humanae Vitae. # 16 Couple can take recourse to the infertile periods to space children. Bl. Paul VI nailed in #17, Consequences of Artificial Methods
(
Last edited by Chongo; Jan 17, 2015 at 12:05 PM.
)
Manila, Philippines, Jan 18, 2015 / 04:39 am (CNA/EWTN News).- The Vatican's spokesman said that papal history was made Sunday during Pope Francis' visit to the Philippines where an estimated 6-7 million people attended his closing Mass.
“The official number that has been given to us is between six and seven million,” Father Federico Lombardi told journalists at a press conference in Manila on Sunday, calling it the "largest event of the history of the Popes."
(
Last edited by Chongo; Jan 18, 2015 at 02:13 PM.
)