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 (1,671 Views)
PJD

“Racism is in a category of it's own. It is the easiest thing in the world to condemn. However, how many of us have a hidden racist streak in us ? If we own a very expensive house in a nice suburban neighbourhood would we would be happy if the next door house was bought by travellers or people of a different colour or culture, if our daughter decided to marry into a different colour, would we be happy. If a mosque was built at the end of our street . would be happy ? How many of us complain about the treatment of illegal immigrants ? If a Scot or an Irishman supports any team from anywhere in the world who is playing against England (as they do) is he a racist. Just a few random thoughts. [Joe Valente] “


I found Joe’s contribution interesting inasmuch as it directed my thoughts more so to prejudice than racism.. However what prompted me regarding what he has said was memory of a footnote contained in the works of St. John of The Cross – Ascent of Mount Carmel. (St. John is dealing with ‘removal of joy from moral goods’).


The footnote reads as follows, and if you bear with me, can be related to Joe’s text above:-


"John alludes fleetingly to the concupiscible and irascible appetites. Aquinas divided the appetite into sensitive and intellectual insofar as things are apprehended by the senses or the intellect. The sensitive appetite in turn is divided into the concupiscible (inclination to seek the good and flee the evil) and irascible (inclination to resist what either hinders the good or inflicts evil)."

[I have highlighted in bold the point I wish to introduce.]


Thus if for example we take Joe’s words


“If we own a very expensive house in a nice suburban neighbourhood would we would be happy if the next door house was bought by travellers or people of a different colour or culture”


Now this implies indirectly that there must be some experiences whereby the peace of a ‘nice-neighbourhood’ has been disturbed by a new situation; just a class of twenty children happily learning their lessons can be disrupted by the intake of a disruptive pupil thus upsetting the whole class.

Obviously this turns upon individuals and not on the universality of the term groups. But if legislative justice stands in the way of correcting those that are disruptive, then there will be a natural inclination to turn what is individually disruptive into groups via the statistics of ‘association’.


What therefore I am saying amounts to the fact that generally speaking there are two sides to the coin of prejudice (or racism come to that). Thus prejudice should not be presupposed without taking into account whether the definitions contained in the bold type above have some validity. Catholics for example can be seen as prejudicial against abortion, and thus those groups including politicians who advocate it, by in effect addressing their natural (quite apart from theological) inclination to resist what both hinders the good or inflicts evil – which what the our secular policy does.


PJD
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Joe Valente
Member Avatar

B: What relevance is it to Jack Straws position? Should the Son pay for the sins of the Father?

I thought that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, rated a capital S, but Jack Straw ?
Edited by Joe Valente, Friday, 23. October 2009, 18:18.
What doth it profit a man if he gains the whole world but suffers the loss of his soul
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Clare
Member Avatar
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
Shame Nick Griffin didn't bring up Jack Straw's own Communist past instead...
S.A.G.

Motes 'n' Beams blog

Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
PJD
Friday, 23. October 2009, 14:56
“Racism is in a category of it's own. It is the easiest thing in the world to condemn. However, how many of us have a hidden racist streak in us ? If we own a very expensive house in a nice suburban neighbourhood would we would be happy if the next door house was bought by travellers or people of a different colour or culture, if our daughter decided to marry into a different colour, would we be happy. If a mosque was built at the end of our street . would be happy ? How many of us complain about the treatment of illegal immigrants ? If a Scot or an Irishman supports any team from anywhere in the world who is playing against England (as they do) is he a racist. Just a few random thoughts. [Joe Valente] “


I found Joe’s contribution interesting inasmuch as it directed my thoughts more so to prejudice than racism.. However what prompted me regarding what he has said was memory of a footnote contained in the works of St. John of The Cross – Ascent of Mount Carmel. (St. John is dealing with ‘removal of joy from moral goods’).


The footnote reads as follows, and if you bear with me, can be related to Joe’s text above:-


"John alludes fleetingly to the concupiscible and irascible appetites. Aquinas divided the appetite into sensitive and intellectual insofar as things are apprehended by the senses or the intellect. The sensitive appetite in turn is divided into the concupiscible (inclination to seek the good and flee the evil) and irascible (inclination to resist what either hinders the good or inflicts evil)."

[I have highlighted in bold the point I wish to introduce.]


Thus if for example we take Joe’s words


“If we own a very expensive house in a nice suburban neighbourhood would we would be happy if the next door house was bought by travellers or people of a different colour or culture”


Now this implies indirectly that there must be some experiences whereby the peace of a ‘nice-neighbourhood’ has been disturbed by a new situation; just a class of twenty children happily learning their lessons can be disrupted by the intake of a disruptive pupil thus upsetting the whole class.

Obviously this turns upon individuals and not on the universality of the term groups. But if legislative justice stands in the way of correcting those that are disruptive, then there will be a natural inclination to turn what is individually disruptive into groups via the statistics of ‘association’.


What therefore I am saying amounts to the fact that generally speaking there are two sides to the coin of prejudice (or racism come to that). Thus prejudice should not be presupposed without taking into account whether the definitions contained in the bold type above have some validity. Catholics for example can be seen as prejudicial against abortion, and thus those groups including politicians who advocate it, by in effect addressing their natural (quite apart from theological) inclination to resist what both hinders the good or inflicts evil – which what the our secular policy does.


PJD
PJD do you mean, for instance, if our neighbourhood has new residents the majority of whom are disruptive, it follows that most people will blame the group, rather than individuals?

All human beings are children of God. I am cautious when I see what I perceive to be a gang of yobs, but they might not be yobs, so until there is evidence they are up to no good, I will give them the benefit of the doubt whilst exercising caution. If muslims moved in next door to me, I would hope to get on well with them, but if I found the whole area was changing culturally to be more like Pakistan than England I would not be happy. Is that prejudice or bigotry? No. It is a desire to feel that I belong in my environment.

The assumption that the muslim neighbours are violent extremists would, I think, be prejudice.
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Clare
Member Avatar
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
Rose of York
Friday, 23. October 2009, 20:37
If muslims moved in next door to me, I would hope to get on well with them, but if I found the whole area was changing culturally to be more like Pakistan than England I would not be happy. Is that prejudice or bigotry? No. It is a desire to feel that I belong in my environment.
Quite. That is perfectly reasonable. And I'd expect people in other countries to feel the same. But if British people feel that way, it is "racial prejudice". Whereas it's perfectly acceptable for other countries to want to preserve their identities.

It's a racist double standard!
S.A.G.

Motes 'n' Beams blog

Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Anne-Marie

OsullivanB
Friday, 23. October 2009, 14:02
As this thread is in the General Catholic Section of the forum, and not in one of the "secular" sections, perhaps we could drag it back to the gist of the inaugural posting which raised questions of the engagement of Christianity with the BNP.
What a lovely, gentle way to remind us, OSB.
:thanks:
Anne-Marie
FIAT VOLUNTAS DEI
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
PJD

"PJD do you mean, for instance, if our neighbourhood has new residents the majority of whom are disruptive, it follows that most people will blame the group, rather than individuals?"

Rose: I was merely reflecting upon a situation in relation to the theological text. You cannot blame groups, but natural language invents them for simplicity especially where for example an individual disruptive habit is associated with similar actions of people of similar cultures, and is seen a likely to be repetitive. For example if an alcoholic of 'the road' makes a pitch nearby and as a result lots of discarded bottles etc. are suddenly left lying around, then by association reference is made to such in the terms of this or that group. In either case peace can be disturbed or seen as being disturbed - but the disturbance in itself need not necessary be sinful. However if people move house for example that also is not necessarily sinful, but refers to the essence of my text which in this case is:-


(inclination to seek the good and flee the evil)

[inclination to seek the good (peace elsewhere as it was) and flee (what one sees that is) the evil staying put in unpeace]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Anne-Marie

Whatever anyone here thinks of the BNP, as Catholics we really do now need to consider the Catholic/Christian implications of the latest opinion poll by YouGov of more than 1300 voters since the Question Time broadcast:
22% of those questioned said they would "seriously consider" voting BNP in a local, European or general election;
More than half of those surveyed agreed with the BNP or thought the party "had a point" in wishing to "speak up for the interests of the indigenous, white British people
.

What are the issues which might now give rise to concern?
What can we, or should we, do about any concerns?
Do we care?
Does it matter?


Anne-Marie
FIAT VOLUNTAS DEI
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Angus Toanimo
Member Avatar
Administrator
From even just the Question Time, you can see clearly that there has been a big campaign orchestrated to rid politics of any politician or political party who wants to put Britain and her people first.

I read yesterday that the immigration policies of the Labour Party were deliberately changed to allow massive influx of immigrants in order to make sure Britain became a thoroughly multicultural society.

Thanks "New" Labour!
Posted Image
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
K.T.B.

Patrick
Sunday, 25. October 2009, 12:21
From even just the Question Time, you can see clearly that there has been a big campaign orchestrated to rid politics of any politician or political party who wants to put Britain and her people first.

...with the B.N.P.only wanting to put a certain group of Britain's people first, of course.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Angus Toanimo
Member Avatar
Administrator
Katie B
Sunday, 25. October 2009, 14:45
Patrick
Sunday, 25. October 2009, 12:21
From even just the Question Time, you can see clearly that there has been a big campaign orchestrated to rid politics of any politician or political party who wants to put Britain and her people first.

...with the B.N.P.only wanting to put a certain group of Britain's people first, of course.
Ah, you mean like the group of people who, through either birth or naturalisation (or other legal means), are entitled to be in the UK? What's wrong with wanting to put them first?
Posted Image
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CARLO
Member Avatar

Patrick
Sunday, 25. October 2009, 12:21
From even just the Question Time, you can see clearly that there has been a big campaign orchestrated to rid politics of any politician or political party who wants to put Britain and her people first.

I read yesterday that the immigration policies of the Labour Party were deliberately changed to allow massive influx of immigrants in order to make sure Britain became a thoroughly multicultural society.

Thanks "New" Labour!
The Conservative governments of the 1950s and early 1960s encouraged immigration for economic purposes. I doubt very much that the present government has encouraged immigration for 'cultural' reasons although EU citizens now have rights that make encouragement or the lack of it an irrelevance.

Racist groups and those who support them are opposed to those whose racial background is different to theirs and this includes people born and bred in the UK who have different coloured skins. Their views appeal only to the weak minded and insecure. No intelligent person believes in the superiority of any particular race or colour of skin.

The difficulty is that during times of economic recession levels of insecurity and fear rise enormously making so many people vulnerable to the poison and lies of racism.

The Church should continue to stand firm against racism in all its forms and against all its apologists and supporters.

Pax vobiscum
Peace to you all


CARLO
Edited by CARLO, Sunday, 25. October 2009, 18:16.
Judica me Deus
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Angus Toanimo
Member Avatar
Administrator
CARLO
Sunday, 25. October 2009, 18:14
I doubt very much that the present government has encouraged immigration for 'cultural' reasons although EU citizens now have rights that make encouragement or the lack of it an irrelevance.
Quote:
 
The huge increases in migrants over the last decade were partly due to a politically motivated attempt by ministers to radically change the country and "rub the Right's nose in diversity", according to Andrew Neather, a former adviser to Tony Blair, Jack Straw and David Blunkett.

He said Labour's relaxation of controls was a deliberate plan to "open up the UK to mass migration" but that ministers were nervous and reluctant to discuss such a move publicly for fear it would alienate its "core working class vote".


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/6418456/Labour-wanted-mass-immigration-to-make-UK-more-multicultural-says-former-adviser.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1222769/Dishonest-Blair-Straw-accused-secret-plan-multicultural-UK.html
Edited by Angus Toanimo, Sunday, 25. October 2009, 18:23.
Posted Image
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Clare
Member Avatar
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
Are there many black or white Japanese people? Perhaps there should be.
Edited by Clare, Sunday, 25. October 2009, 18:23.
S.A.G.

Motes 'n' Beams blog

Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Angus Toanimo
Member Avatar
Administrator
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???

Posted Image
Posted Image
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