So is there anything that the Catholic Church would accept outside of fucking over women? They would probably consider using taxes to pay for their employees' contraception just as bad. They are currently demanding absolutely no free contraceptive coverage for employees even if the employer is not required to do anything to facilitate it.
(obvious joke is obvious)
They won't support anything that is against doctrine. IIRC current church teachings is that it's fine to be gay, but if you CHOOSE that then you also choose to not act on it or some bullshit. I don't see that changing anytime soon. They just accepted that the sun is what we orbit around for Zeus' sake.
So is there anything that the Catholic Church would accept outside of fucking over women? They would probably consider using taxes to pay for their employees' contraception just as bad. They are currently demanding absolutely no free contraceptive coverage for employees even if the employer is not required to do anything to facilitate it.
Immunity for child rape?
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Why do we not see more priests railing against the church's insistence on controlling their followers and ignoring whatever the fuck it is that they believe in? I mean, isn't the Catholic Church supposed to be a representative republic that serves the interests of Christendom or something?
Yea, no. The Church is very much still in the Absolute Monarch style of thing.
The thing that pisses me off about this is that it all boils down to forcing Catholics to follow dogma without any respect for their freedom of conscious. It's almost like all the people who make up the Church don't really give a fuck what the Church says!
I'm not sure why you think religions (which espouse the idea that they have the one right answer), would ever be any sort of democratic institution.
I'm assuming your comment is in response to the second statement and not the first. Free Will is a pretty large part of Catholic Doctrine (any non-Calvinist Christianity really.) This whole thing now appears to be based around them afraid somebody will make the wrong choice. That the option to make the wrong choice is (to them) a god given gift......yeah.
The point of free will is supposedly to choose not to use it.
I was reading an Economist article today (just cause I like getting a perspective of a world I will likely never be a part of)...
I guess this was an off-hand remark, but I'm curious why you feel this way? The Economist covers geopolitics, global (domestic) politics, and obviously global economics in a kind of snarky, neoliberal accent. Which of those coverage areas do you feel you're not a part of?
Why do we not see more priests railing against the church's insistence on controlling their followers and ignoring whatever the fuck it is that they believe in? I mean, isn't the Catholic Church supposed to be a representative republic that serves the interests of Christendom or something?
Yea, no. The Church is very much still in the Absolute Monarch style of thing.
The thing that pisses me off about this is that it all boils down to forcing Catholics to follow dogma without any respect for their freedom of conscious. It's almost like all the people who make up the Church don't really give a fuck what the Church says!
I'm not sure why you think religions (which espouse the idea that they have the one right answer), would ever be any sort of democratic institution.
I'm assuming your comment is in response to the second statement and not the first. Free Will is a pretty large part of Catholic Doctrine (any non-Calvinist Christianity really.) This whole thing now appears to be based around them afraid somebody will make the wrong choice. That the option to make the wrong choice is (to them) a god given gift......yeah.
The point of free will is supposedly to choose not to use it.
I'm not big on Christian theology -- because frankly Islam is more interesting and "exotic" -- but is it still A Thing to talk about some kind of Platonic ideal of Free Will in a worldview where an invisible man in the sky already knows every decision you've ever made, are making, or will make in the future?
0
Options
AManFromEarthLet's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered Userregular
Why do we not see more priests railing against the church's insistence on controlling their followers and ignoring whatever the fuck it is that they believe in? I mean, isn't the Catholic Church supposed to be a representative republic that serves the interests of Christendom or something?
Yea, no. The Church is very much still in the Absolute Monarch style of thing.
The thing that pisses me off about this is that it all boils down to forcing Catholics to follow dogma without any respect for their freedom of conscious. It's almost like all the people who make up the Church don't really give a fuck what the Church says!
I'm not sure why you think religions (which espouse the idea that they have the one right answer), would ever be any sort of democratic institution.
I'm assuming your comment is in response to the second statement and not the first. Free Will is a pretty large part of Catholic Doctrine (any non-Calvinist Christianity really.) This whole thing now appears to be based around them afraid somebody will make the wrong choice. That the option to make the wrong choice is (to them) a god given gift......yeah.
The point of free will is supposedly to choose not to use it.
I'm not big on Christian theology -- because frankly Islam is more interesting and "exotic" -- but is it still A Thing to talk about some kind of Platonic ideal of Free Will in a worldview where an invisible man in the sky already knows every decision you've ever made, are making, or will make in the future?
Well the best case of this is God telling Moses to tell the Pharaoh to let the Hebrews leave. And if Pharaoh doesn't then God will punish Egypt. And everytime Moses asks God hardens Pharaoh's heart to keep him from letting it happen.
Now they main pov on this in American evangelical Christianity is that God makes us sinful at birth because we fucked up with that whole free will thing so humanity is cursed but it's up to us to us Free Will to decide to do what God tells us. Unless you're a dead baby, then you get the express ticket to heaven. Or a "blameless heathen".
So is there anything that the Catholic Church would accept outside of fucking over women? They would probably consider using taxes to pay for their employees' contraception just as bad. They are currently demanding absolutely no free contraceptive coverage for employees even if the employer is not required to do anything to facilitate it.
Immunity for child rape?
Hey, they don't offer Immunity. They just straight up cover it up and hope no one goes to the cops.
I was reading an Economist article today (just cause I like getting a perspective of a world I will likely never be a part of)...
I guess this was an off-hand remark, but I'm curious why you feel this way? The Economist covers geopolitics, global (domestic) politics, and obviously global economics in a kind of snarky, neoliberal accent. Which of those coverage areas do you feel you're not a part of?
I was casually remarking how the publication's target audience tends to be those who work in the big business crowd (maybe that's not true anymore?). It's not a knock against them - I think they and Reuters editorials provide a good perspective of that crowd without the douchebag overtones of the WSJ - but I've never really desired to get into that spectrum of work (nor do I talk about economics in an in-depth manner with anyone). Thus sources like the Economist provide a slightly different (informed) view on political events that I may not get from reading say, Al Jazeera English.
Well like I said, they're liberals, so they tend to see markets (read: multinationals) as the answer to all problems.
It's shocking how many supposed "economists" don't understand the primary founding principles of economic theory, or how and when they can be appropriately applied.
It's been a while since I graduated college, but I'm really having trouble recalling any of my economics professors positing that the free market is the best system for finding solutions to every problem imaginable.
Nowadays, I can't help but think all this "free market" talk is just code for "giving priority to large corporations so they can exploit situations for their own gain."
Bah that's just what a godless socialistcommunistislamofascistjihadisthargalbaleh would say!
I'm sure that's how it would go down.
Truth is, the free market system is best way to create and maintain a stable scarcity-based economy. I don't feel that system applies at all in regard to goods and services we do not collective wish to be scarce, and in many cases, those goods and services don't necessarily need to be scarce.
Just like we don't leave it up entirely to the free market to ensure our children are being educated, we shouldn't leave it up the free market to ensure other needs, like public safety, healthcare, and public infrastructure.
Bah that's just what a godless socialistcommunistislamofascistjihadisthargalbaleh would say!
Just like we don't leave it up entirely to the free market to ensure our children are being educated, we shouldn't leave it up the free market to ensure other needs, like public safety, healthcare, and public infrastructure.
Bah that's just what a godless socialistcommunistislamofascistjihadisthargalbaleh would say!
I'm sure that's how it would go down.
Truth is, the free market system is best way to create and maintain a stable scarcity-based economy. I don't feel that system applies at all in regard to goods and services we do not collective wish to be scarce, and in many cases, those goods and services don't necessarily need to be scarce.
Just like we don't leave it up entirely to the free market to ensure our children are being educated, we shouldn't leave it up the free market to ensure other needs, like public safety, healthcare, and public infrastructure.
Wait are you proposing a balance/regulation of priorities between a government's public sector, and the desires of businesses in the private sector? I.. think you need to step out of this thread, that's just getting too radical, like what that guy Saul Alinsky did. Y'know.. he was radical! Don't touch my invisible free market hands! Also you need to worship god, free will and all that.
Also am I the only one who finds it ironic that, in a country that used to fear of the "popediles," and how JFK would have a phone to the Vatican, we now have this "crisis" over contraception where (social) conservatives demand the president adhere to... the wishes of people working for the vatican? Maybe this has already been brought up.
So is there anything that the Catholic Church would accept outside of fucking over women? They would probably consider using taxes to pay for their employees' contraception just as bad. They are currently demanding absolutely no free contraceptive coverage for employees even if the employer is not required to do anything to facilitate it.
(obvious joke is obvious)
They won't support anything that is against doctrine. IIRC current church teachings is that it's fine to be gay, but if you CHOOSE that then you also choose to not act on it or some bullshit. I don't see that changing anytime soon. They just accepted that the sun is what we orbit around for Zeus' sake.
Let's be honest: they're pretty selective about the enforcement of doctrine.
It's "birth control? We can't have that. Child rape? Oh, just sweep that under the rug." And while supposedly the official Catholic position is pretty universally anti-war, you didn't see any Catholic priests threatening to withhold Communion from politicians who supported invading Iraq; just the ones who supported a woman's right to choose.
Basically, the only doctrines the Church cares about are the ones that involve fucking over women.
Wait are you proposing a balance/regulation of priorities between a government's public sector, and the desires of businesses in the private sector? I.. think you need to step out of this thread, that's just getting too radical, like what that guy Saul Alinsky did. Y'know.. he was radical! Don't touch my invisible free market hands! Also you need to worship god, free will and all that.
I'm actually a big fan of the free market! I think it can work really well in many instances!
But it's kind of like saying you have an economy based on LEGOs, where everyone trades pieces and builds for themselves whatever they need, but it's all coming out of the same one bucket. You can't just say, "Free market rules!" and keep building a system based on always having more LEGOs.
And that's what the pro-corporation wing of the GOP is definitely doing, just shouting "Free Market Forever!" and rolling in their piles of cash while unemployment skyrockets and they're spending more and more on increasingly scarce raw materials.
Florida 'inspirational message' bill goes to Scott
A bill allowing school boards to permit student-initiated prayer and other "inspirational messages" at public school assemblies went to Gov. Rick Scott on Thursday after heated debate in the Florida House.
"Before inspirational messages were removed from our schools, the No. 1 problem was talking out of turn," said Rep. Charles Van Zant. "Today it is drug abuse. Before, the number two problem was chewing gum. Now it is alcohol abuse." The bill was sponsored by Sen. Gary Siplin, D-Orlando. Van Zant, R-Keystone Heights, sponsored a similar House measure.
"The reality is we are going to get sued on this," said Rep. Jim Waldman, a Coconut Creek Democrat who led the opposition. "It's not even a close call."
This will be yet another in a long line of Tea Party and Scott bills that will cost the State of Florida, which would run a massive deficit if it didn't have a crippling Balanced Budget Amendment and an overwhelming willingness to gut education and other social spending, a metric fuck ton of money.
Proponents of the bill defend themselves because it covers "inspirational speech" rather than prayer. After all, who could be against inspirational speech? However,
Rep. Rick Kriseman, D-St. Petersburg, cited a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that rejected an attempt by a New Mexico school district to allow student-led inspirational messages before football games in a failed attempt to get around the constitutional ban on government-sponsored religion.
And the most damning of all?
Scott said he has not seen the bill but added: "As you know I believe in Jesus Christ and I believe that individuals should have the right to say a prayer."
This goes to the heart of a discussion further up thread, and a bigger question for religious freedoms: at what point does one's exercise of religion interfere with another's right to not believe? I would contend that mandatory periods of prayer, sponsored by the school and/or school affiliates is beyond that line.
Turns out God's a big guy, so if you want to say a prayer go ahead and do it. In fact, the bible routinely encourages people to pray alone and not in public.
Thought this story was good enough to resurrect the thread.
0
Options
KalTorakOne way or another, they all end up inthe Undercity.Registered Userregular
Guess what Scott, individuals do have the right to say a fucking prayer. In school.
They dont' have the right to make the student body say it. Go fuck yourself and your false rhetoric.
Posts
(obvious joke is obvious)
They won't support anything that is against doctrine. IIRC current church teachings is that it's fine to be gay, but if you CHOOSE that then you also choose to not act on it or some bullshit. I don't see that changing anytime soon. They just accepted that the sun is what we orbit around for Zeus' sake.
Immunity for child rape?
I guess this was an off-hand remark, but I'm curious why you feel this way? The Economist covers geopolitics, global (domestic) politics, and obviously global economics in a kind of snarky, neoliberal accent. Which of those coverage areas do you feel you're not a part of?
I'm not big on Christian theology -- because frankly Islam is more interesting and "exotic" -- but is it still A Thing to talk about some kind of Platonic ideal of Free Will in a worldview where an invisible man in the sky already knows every decision you've ever made, are making, or will make in the future?
Well the best case of this is God telling Moses to tell the Pharaoh to let the Hebrews leave. And if Pharaoh doesn't then God will punish Egypt. And everytime Moses asks God hardens Pharaoh's heart to keep him from letting it happen.
Now they main pov on this in American evangelical Christianity is that God makes us sinful at birth because we fucked up with that whole free will thing so humanity is cursed but it's up to us to us Free Will to decide to do what God tells us. Unless you're a dead baby, then you get the express ticket to heaven. Or a "blameless heathen".
Hey, they don't offer Immunity. They just straight up cover it up and hope no one goes to the cops.
I was casually remarking how the publication's target audience tends to be those who work in the big business crowd (maybe that's not true anymore?). It's not a knock against them - I think they and Reuters editorials provide a good perspective of that crowd without the douchebag overtones of the WSJ - but I've never really desired to get into that spectrum of work (nor do I talk about economics in an in-depth manner with anyone). Thus sources like the Economist provide a slightly different (informed) view on political events that I may not get from reading say, Al Jazeera English.
It's shocking how many supposed "economists" don't understand the primary founding principles of economic theory, or how and when they can be appropriately applied.
It's been a while since I graduated college, but I'm really having trouble recalling any of my economics professors positing that the free market is the best system for finding solutions to every problem imaginable.
Nowadays, I can't help but think all this "free market" talk is just code for "giving priority to large corporations so they can exploit situations for their own gain."
I'm sure that's how it would go down.
Truth is, the free market system is best way to create and maintain a stable scarcity-based economy. I don't feel that system applies at all in regard to goods and services we do not collective wish to be scarce, and in many cases, those goods and services don't necessarily need to be scarce.
Just like we don't leave it up entirely to the free market to ensure our children are being educated, we shouldn't leave it up the free market to ensure other needs, like public safety, healthcare, and public infrastructure.
Yet.
Wait are you proposing a balance/regulation of priorities between a government's public sector, and the desires of businesses in the private sector? I.. think you need to step out of this thread, that's just getting too radical, like what that guy Saul Alinsky did. Y'know.. he was radical! Don't touch my invisible free market hands! Also you need to worship god, free will and all that.
Also am I the only one who finds it ironic that, in a country that used to fear of the "popediles," and how JFK would have a phone to the Vatican, we now have this "crisis" over contraception where (social) conservatives demand the president adhere to... the wishes of people working for the vatican? Maybe this has already been brought up.
It's "birth control? We can't have that. Child rape? Oh, just sweep that under the rug." And while supposedly the official Catholic position is pretty universally anti-war, you didn't see any Catholic priests threatening to withhold Communion from politicians who supported invading Iraq; just the ones who supported a woman's right to choose.
Basically, the only doctrines the Church cares about are the ones that involve fucking over women.
I'm pretty sure Jesus never talked about Just Wars. That's an anachronism created by Emperor Constantine to justify his wars.
I'm actually a big fan of the free market! I think it can work really well in many instances!
But it's kind of like saying you have an economy based on LEGOs, where everyone trades pieces and builds for themselves whatever they need, but it's all coming out of the same one bucket. You can't just say, "Free market rules!" and keep building a system based on always having more LEGOs.
And that's what the pro-corporation wing of the GOP is definitely doing, just shouting "Free Market Forever!" and rolling in their piles of cash while unemployment skyrockets and they're spending more and more on increasingly scarce raw materials.
The Invisible Hand was never actually supposed to apply to the financial sector / capital markets, according to Smith himself.
You filthy red communist bastard.
http://www.salon.com/2012/02/15/rep_issa_to_air_bishops_complaints/
It is like playing find the black person except with women.
People ain't buying the outrage.
ed: whoops, thought long urls got automatically shortened.
Florida 'inspirational message' bill goes to Scott
This will be yet another in a long line of Tea Party and Scott bills that will cost the State of Florida, which would run a massive deficit if it didn't have a crippling Balanced Budget Amendment and an overwhelming willingness to gut education and other social spending, a metric fuck ton of money.
Proponents of the bill defend themselves because it covers "inspirational speech" rather than prayer. After all, who could be against inspirational speech? However,
And the most damning of all?
This goes to the heart of a discussion further up thread, and a bigger question for religious freedoms: at what point does one's exercise of religion interfere with another's right to not believe? I would contend that mandatory periods of prayer, sponsored by the school and/or school affiliates is beyond that line.
Turns out God's a big guy, so if you want to say a prayer go ahead and do it. In fact, the bible routinely encourages people to pray alone and not in public.
Thought this story was good enough to resurrect the thread.
They dont' have the right to make the student body say it. Go fuck yourself and your false rhetoric.