| We hope you enjoy your visit! You're currently viewing Catholic CyberForum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our online cyberparish, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! Messages posted to this board must be polite and free of abuse, personal attacks, blasphemy, racism, threats, harrassment, and crude or sexually-explicit language. If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Left Wing, Right Wing, moderate, extreme | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Tuesday, 1. June 2010, 12:27 (2,138 Views) | |
| Mairtin | Friday, 4. June 2010, 18:39 Post #46 |
|
Errr .... what part of "elected" do you not understand, Clare?
It's not the government or the media's job to spread the Good News, Clare, it is our responsibility and if it's not happening then we are the ones to blame.
We might agree on the basic principle but probably not in the detail. If by "resisting" and "objecting" and "action" you mean things along the lines adopted by the pro-life movement than I think you're wasting your time; I cannot think of a single example of them changing legislation anywhere in the world, |
![]() |
|
| Mairtin | Friday, 4. June 2010, 18:49 Post #47 |
|
Actually, I can think of one example very close to home. Although abortion was illegal at the time in Ireland, the pro-life movement in 1983 pressurised the government into holding a referendum to put a constitutional ban on abortion in order, as they saw it, to prevent any future government changing the law without referring the changes to the people in another referendum. Unfortunately, they misjudged the whole thing entirely and the clause inserted into the Constitution with the words "with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother" actually created a potential onus on the government to not only make abortion legal where the mother's life is at risk but to actually provide abortion facilities in such cases. No case has yet been taken to test it but majority opinion amongst legal people and constitutional experts seems to support that conclusion. |
![]() |
|
| Derekap | Saturday, 5. June 2010, 10:53 Post #48 |
|
When, Clare, you arive in Heaven I think you will be surprised (maybe even shocked!) to find that the majority of people weren't even Christian, let alone Catholics, on earth. Throughout history of mankind (or should it be personkind!) Christians willl be a minority and I very much doubt if God's Judgement and Mercy will condemn all non-Christians to Hell! I suppose if I take a photgraph of a semi-nude young lady and present it as art, it is not sinful unless it appears on page 3 of a tabloid or in an advertisement. In the days of many of the world-famous artists there was no photography; does that make their work artistic and not sinful? Perhaps I should start painting nude models in the hope my heirs will gain money |
| Derekap | |
![]() |
|
| Clare | Saturday, 5. June 2010, 20:57 Post #49 |
|
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
|
I understand the word elected. Did you know we have postal votes here, and that you can get one or more without needing any proof of existence?
It is not the government's or media's job to do a lot of things they do. Corrupting society and endangering souls is noone's job.
We might agree on the basic principle but probably not in the detail. If by "resisting" and "objecting" and "action" you mean things along the lines adopted by the pro-life movement than I think you're wasting your time; I cannot think of a single example of them changing legislation anywhere in the world,[/quote] Doing the right thing is never a waste of time. As a matter of interest, what do you think they should do, Mairtin? |
|
S.A.G. Motes 'n' Beams blog Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz! | |
![]() |
|
| Clare | Saturday, 5. June 2010, 21:01 Post #50 |
|
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
|
If I arrive in Heaven, I will only be surprised or shocked that I am there. |
|
S.A.G. Motes 'n' Beams blog Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz! | |
![]() |
|
| Rose of York | Saturday, 5. June 2010, 21:52 Post #51 |
![]()
Administrator
|
The system is not fool proof. What alternative to elections would you suggest? |
|
Keep the Faith! | |
![]() |
|
| Derekap | Saturday, 5. June 2010, 22:27 Post #52 |
|
"If I arrive in Heaven, I will only be surprised or shocked that I am there." Send me a text message when you're on the way, Clare, and I'll open the back door for you. We must continue haggling! |
| Derekap | |
![]() |
|
| Mairtin | Sunday, 6. June 2010, 04:11 Post #53 |
|
Some of the things I would do:
|
![]() |
|
| PJD | Sunday, 6. June 2010, 18:24 Post #54 |
|
Well put in my opinion Mairtin. Just one point. "most politicians are not particularly antireligious, they are areligious, they just don’t see religion as having any importance or relevance" Areligious? - to me anyone so is surely in some respects 'lacking' in the intellectual sense. I am not saying that they are backward as one would say; but I am getting close to it. PJD |
![]() |
|
| Rose of York | Sunday, 6. June 2010, 18:40 Post #55 |
![]()
Administrator
|
I would think all politicians, including atheists, know that religion affects society at large. Education and medicine in particular have religious aspects. So does adoption. Sometimes antipathy towards a religion necessitates police activity. Edited by Rose of York, Sunday, 6. June 2010, 18:41.
|
|
Keep the Faith! | |
![]() |
|
| Clare | Sunday, 6. June 2010, 20:04 Post #56 |
|
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
|
The two things are inseparable. The problem is not pro-lifers who take a consistent view, but with those who believe that contraception is acceptable.
If we cannot be sure life begins at conception, we cannot be sure it doesn't. Best to err on the side of caution, isn't it? Besides, the Church has never said that early abortion is ok. The Church's stance will never be credible to the worldly. They must convert and change their way of thinking. It takes grace for that to happen, of course. One thing the Church must not do is make her position more "credible" by changing it to suit the world. If the world doesn't like it, it is the world that is wrong. |
|
S.A.G. Motes 'n' Beams blog Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz! | |
![]() |
|
| Mairtin | Sunday, 6. June 2010, 20:52 Post #57 |
|
QED |
![]() |
|
| Clare | Sunday, 6. June 2010, 20:59 Post #58 |
|
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
|
Really, Mairtin. If a practising Catholic perceives areas where the world and the Church are at odds with each other, the Catholic ought to support the Church. I can understand non-Catholics taking the world's side, but not Catholics. Abandoning the truth for error is failure. If the Church were to become "credible" to her enemies (whether witting or unwitting enemies), the gates of Hell will have prevailed. |
|
S.A.G. Motes 'n' Beams blog Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz! | |
![]() |
|
| Mairtin | Sunday, 6. June 2010, 21:46 Post #59 |
|
That's exactly what I mean about the pro-life movements being dominated by people who are absorbed with their own views of "the message" and who immediately label anybody who dares suggest any different approach as a bad Catholic; feeling good about their activities seems far more important than actually achieving anything. It's why I long ago gave up any attempt at having a rational discussion with them and, no harm to you Clare, but I have no intention of entering into a debate here which is simply going to descend into yet another example of you attacking what you see as my personal lack of faithfulness to the Church. I'm fed up with that sort of rubbish and I'm sure other people are too. Edited by Mairtin, Sunday, 6. June 2010, 21:47.
|
![]() |
|
| Clare | Sunday, 6. June 2010, 21:58 Post #60 |
|
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
|
I'm a bit fed up with Catholic teaching being dismissed as "not credible". Not every pro-lifer is Catholic, Mairtin, and even some of the pro-lifers who oppose contraception are also non-Catholic. So if even they "get it" (ie the fact that to be consistently pro-life, you need to oppose contraception), why can't some Catholics? |
|
S.A.G. Motes 'n' Beams blog Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz! | |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Archived Discussions · Next Topic » |







7:53 PM Jul 11