Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
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:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Racism and religious hatred
Topic Started: Monday, 6. April 2009, 14:21 (1,669 Views)
Angus Toanimo
Member Avatar
Administrator
Katie B
Sunday, 25. October 2009, 21:51
Quote:
 
If you have bothered to look at their policies on Policing and Crime... most people would probably agree that they are rather good, and far much better than what the present Labour and previous Conservative governments have done.

Their policy of executing some criminals is "rather good"? What happened to Christian belief the sacredness of human life? One more clear reason why the B.N.P.may not say they are standing up for Christianity.
CCC 2267.
Posted Image
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Clare
Member Avatar
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
Richard Hannay.
Sunday, 25. October 2009, 20:37
I do not understand how a Christian website can allow the support of the BNP that you are offering, I would press the report button but what would be the point your hardly likly to ban yourself.
The purpose of this thread was for Christians to petition to prevent the BNP using Christianity as a cover for their despicable policies. It is clear that it has failed.

Oh what the heck :giveup: I shall press report anyway.
Will you report any posts where, for example, Obama is praised? Or how about when Carlo leaps to the defence of the indefensible Blairs, at every opportunity?

Or how about that thread where a dissenting bishop was lauded, and the pro-abortion Mandela was hailed as a hero?

Some things are obviously more despicable than others.

You can praise a pro-abortion politician, and noone hits the report button. But, show any fair-mindedness towards Nick Griffin, and off with your head!
S.A.G.

Motes 'n' Beams blog

Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Clare
Member Avatar
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
Katie B
Sunday, 25. October 2009, 21:51
Their policy of executing some criminals is "rather good"? What happened to Christian belief the sacredness of human life? One more clear reason why the B.N.P.may not say they are standing up for Christianity.
In addition to Patrick's CCC citation, I submit:

Catechism of the Council of Trent:

Quote:
 
Execution Of Criminals
Another kind of lawful slaying belongs to the civil authorities, to whom is entrusted power of life and death, by the legal and judicious exercise of which they punish the guilty and protect the innocent. The just use of this power, far from involving the crime of murder, is an act of paramount obedience to this Commandment which prohibits murder. The end of the Commandment is the preservation and security of human life. Now the punishments inflicted by the civil authority, which is the legitimate avenger of crime, naturally tend to this end, since they give security to life by repressing outrage and violence. Hence these words of David: In the morning I put to death all the wicked of the land, that I might cut off all the workers of iniquity from the city of the Lord.
S.A.G.

Motes 'n' Beams blog

Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
OsullivanB

Ah me, how I yearn for the return of the Tridentine lawful slayings.

However, I fear that David was somewhat lax in his approach. If we only use mornings for the slaying of the wicked, we may never catch up with the backlog.
Edited by OsullivanB, Monday, 26. October 2009, 00:02.
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation." Herbert Spencer
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
Patrick
Sunday, 25. October 2009, 18:39
Putting the BNPs immigration policy aside, they still look like a party that will do what they say - look at their policy on Crime and Policing. I rather like the idea that police will be able to do their jobs properly, that criminals will be sentenced properly (ie Life meaning Life!). I rather like the idea that British servicemen and women will be defending our borders rather than being placed in a warzone that has nothing to do with the UK whatsoever. I rather like their Health policy, too. And their policies on the Economy and Education.

Now, I wonder WHY Nick Griffin wasn't questioned on any of those???

How can their immigration policy be set aside? It is the reason for BNP's existence.
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Angus Toanimo
Member Avatar
Administrator
Rose of York
Sunday, 25. October 2009, 22:28
Patrick
Sunday, 25. October 2009, 18:39
Putting the BNPs immigration policy aside, they still look like a party that will do what they say - look at their policy on Crime and Policing. I rather like the idea that police will be able to do their jobs properly, that criminals will be sentenced properly (ie Life meaning Life!). I rather like the idea that British servicemen and women will be defending our borders rather than being placed in a warzone that has nothing to do with the UK whatsoever. I rather like their Health policy, too. And their policies on the Economy and Education.

Now, I wonder WHY Nick Griffin wasn't questioned on any of those???

How can their immigration policy be set aside? It is the reason for BNP's existence.
Not set aside, but I was referring to their other policies, rather than the immigration one.
Posted Image
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
K.T.B.

Patrick
Sunday, 25. October 2009, 21:59
CCC 2267.
http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/2267.htm
The Church teaches that the cases where the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare if not practically non-existant".

This ain't what the B.N.P. are saying.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
Clare
Sunday, 25. October 2009, 22:16
Katie B
Sunday, 25. October 2009, 21:51
Their policy of executing some criminals is "rather good"? What happened to Christian belief the sacredness of human life? One more clear reason why the B.N.P.may not say they are standing up for Christianity.
In addition to Patrick's CCC citation, I submit:

Catechism of the Council of Trent:

Quote:
 
Execution Of Criminals
Another kind of lawful slaying belongs to the civil authorities, to whom is entrusted power of life and death, by the legal and judicious exercise of which they punish the guilty and protect the innocent. The just use of this power, far from involving the crime of murder, is an act of paramount obedience to this Commandment which prohibits murder. The end of the Commandment is the preservation and security of human life. Now the punishments inflicted by the civil authority, which is the legitimate avenger of crime, naturally tend to this end, since they give security to life by repressing outrage and violence. Hence these words of David: In the morning I put to death all the wicked of the land, that I might cut off all the workers of iniquity from the city of the Lord.
I submit the words of the Catechism of the Catholic Church

Quote:
 
2266 The State's effort to contain the spread of behaviors injurious to human rights and the fundamental rules of civil coexistence corresponds to the requirement of watching over the common good. Legitimate public authority has the right and duty to inflict penalties commensurate with the gravity of the crime. the primary scope of the penalty is to redress the disorder caused by the offense. When his punishment is voluntarily accepted by the offender, it takes on the value of expiation. Moreover, punishment, in addition to preserving public order and the safety of persons, has a medicinal scope: as far as possible it should contribute to the correction of the offender.67

2267 The traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude, presupposing full ascertainment of the identity and responsibility of the offender, recourse to the death penalty, when this is the only practicable way to defend the lives of human beings effectively against the aggressor.
"If, instead, bloodless means are sufficient to defend against the aggressor and to protect the safety of persons, public authority should limit itself to such means, because they better correspond to the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.
"Today, in fact, given the means at the State's disposal to effectively repress crime by rendering inoffensive the one who has committed it, without depriving him definitively of the possibility of redeeming himself, cases of absolute necessity for suppression of the offender 'today ... are very rare, if not practically non-existent.'[John Paul II, Evangelium vitae 56.]


Methods of security have improved somewhat since the production of the Council of Trent
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Angus Toanimo
Member Avatar
Administrator
Katie B
Sunday, 25. October 2009, 22:38
Patrick
Sunday, 25. October 2009, 21:59
CCC 2267.
http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/2267.htm
The Church teaches that the cases where the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare if not practically non-existant".

This ain't what the B.N.P. are saying.
Quote:
 
Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.


Not a totally unreasonable punishment for a serial killer or child murderer, surely? Why should we taxpayers pay for their upkeep in jails for the rest of their existence? Why should the taxpayer pay towards their upkeep in cushy jails for 15-20 years (where many of them have an existence - unlike the existence they denied their victim(s) ) until they're released into society only to continue killing?
Edited by Angus Toanimo, Sunday, 25. October 2009, 22:43.
Posted Image
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
Patrick
Sunday, 25. October 2009, 22:42
Not a totally unreasonable punishment for a serial killer or child murderer, surely? Why should we taxpayers pay for their upkeep in jails for the rest of their existence? Why should the taxpayer pay towards their upkeep in cushy jails for 15-20 years (where many of them have an existence - unlike the existence they denied their victim(s) ) until they're released into society only to continue killing?
Why? I think it is something to do with respect for life, and with the Commandments of God, not the policies of a political party. I wonder how many people in the UK served many years in prison, for murder, and were then released because new evidence proved their innocence.

Adolf Hitler fooleded people with his "good policies". He knew from the start that he would end up ordering the extermination of Jews, gypsies and people with mental and physical disabilities.
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Angus Toanimo
Member Avatar
Administrator
Rose of York
Sunday, 25. October 2009, 22:50
Patrick
Sunday, 25. October 2009, 22:42
Not a totally unreasonable punishment for a serial killer or child murderer, surely? Why should we taxpayers pay for their upkeep in jails for the rest of their existence? Why should the taxpayer pay towards their upkeep in cushy jails for 15-20 years (where many of them have an existence - unlike the existence they denied their victim(s) ) until they're released into society only to continue killing?
Why? I think it is something to do with respect for life, and with the Commandments of God, not the policies of a political party. I wonder how many people in the UK served many years in prison, for murder, and were then released because new evidence proved their innocence.

Adolf Hitler fooleded people with his "good policies". He knew from the start that he would end up ordering the extermination of Jews, gypsies and people with mental and physical disabilities.
A respect for life Rose isn't a reason to hand out pathetic prison terms for serious criminal offences!
Posted Image
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Richard Hannay.

The opening remarks
Quote:
 
It turned out a fortunate for me to-day that destiny appointed Braunau-on-the-inn to be my birthplace. For that little town is situated just on the frontier between those two States the reunion of which seems, at least to us of the younger generation, a task to which we should devote our lives, and in pursuit of which every possible means should be employed. (Landsberg am Lech)


The plot develops
Quote:
 
The authority of the State can never be an end in itself; for, if that were so, any kind of tyranny would be inviolable and sacred. ... ... ... Generally speaking, we must not forget that the highest aim of human existence is not the maintenance of a State or Government but rather conservation of the race. ... ... ... Human rights are above the rights of the State.(1921)


Sound Good so far?

I shall not quote any more but surfice it to say Patrick I have read the policies of the BNP and like the document from which I have just quoted, which I have also studied in some detail, it is purpose built to attract the disillusioned and confused. But as Christians we should not be disillusioned or confused we should recognise the guile of those who would seduce us. I am not an American so can make no difference to the position of Barack Obama, Clare, and I cannot bolt the stable door on the current abortion policy but I have consistently spoken of the sanctity of life in this forum so do not insult me by saying, “You can praise a pro-abortion politician". I have dealt with the refugees of the Central European terror and many atrocities in Central Europe that the UN stood by and ignored, I have a friend who witnessed the massacres of hundreds in Ruanda, and could do nothing to help because the UN would not allow the British and Canadian troops to act. Defence of the BNP or any of applauding any of their policies on what claims to be the "Leading Catholic Website in the UK" is to me offensive and I choose to show my protest by exercising my right to push the report button. It was a waste of time. So this will be my final post on this website for I wish not to be associated with it any more.

Oh and in case your wondering the book I was quoting from.

Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler.

Know thine enemy, and I recognise his work on this thread
"Be calm and keep watch. The Devil, your enemy, is circling you like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour. Resist him, strong in faith. 1 Peter 5:8-9 "

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
OsullivanB

However, there is an appropriate route to justice somewhere between execution and too-short prison sentences. Though I can honestly say that in almost thirty years of practice in the criminal courts I have never myself been present when a sentence which seemed to me to be too short was passed. Of course the difference is that when I was present I knew all the facts, not just those reported in the newspapers.
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation." Herbert Spencer
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
OsullivanB

I should be sorry to see you go, Richard. But I should be sorrier to see this forum closed to free speech which is not manifestly contrary to the doctrines of the Church; however distasteful, even despicable, I might from time to time find the views of those who are free-speaking. I have great confidence in the power of free and intelligent debate to overcome falsehood. It was Hitler and his cohorts who suppressed free speech, not those who opposed Nazism and other Fascisms.
Edited by OsullivanB, Sunday, 25. October 2009, 23:05.
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation." Herbert Spencer
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
SeanJ
Member Avatar
Administrator
Patrick
Sunday, 25. October 2009, 22:54
A respect for life Rose isn't a reason to hand out pathetic prison terms for serious criminal offences!
Then we need to revise the process by which prison sentences are determined.

I remember the first time I heard somebody say "Don't forget that Hitler did some good things: he built autobahns for example." I was absolutely disgusted that somebody could attribute anything good to Hitler.

And, as far as the BNP is concerned, when they have got rid of those foreignors with dark skin, they will start on those foreignors who have pale skin and a funny accent, otherwise known as the Irish, or those who don't abide by the state religion, otherwise known as Catholics.

SeanJ
Edited by SeanJ, Sunday, 25. October 2009, 23:18.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · General Catholic Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply