Warbler

RicOlie_2 said:

Oh boy, between you and Warbler, it looks like I won’t be getting a lot of homework done tonight. 😄 (That’s my fault though 😛)

I’ll get to you in a bit. I assume you mean “How do we account for corruption in the highest levels of the Church when it is supposed to be guided by God” or something like that?

Sorry, didn’t mean to keep you from your homework!

I wish I could believe that.

Well right now, the GOP seems to be kissing his ass.

DominicCobb said:

Now might be a good time to remember the Watergate scandal, wherein five men were arrested for breaking into the DNC headquarters in an attempt to obtain records and ultimately influence the election in favor of the president. While Nixon didn’t directly condone this specific action, he was in contact with the members of his election committee and was well aware that sabotaging, in general, was going on, and very much okay with it. Ultimately, though, his downfall came not because of the sabotaging, but because of the covering up of the sabotaging.

The parallels are to great to ignore. I remember reading All the President’s Men in high school and being appalled by the lengths these people went to influence the election in their favor. At the time I thought those days were behind us but it’s clear now that’s far from being the case.

If Trump doesn’t want to end up impeached or resigning, he should start getting honest about his Russian connection real fast. Either way, everybody needs to start accepting the fact that Russia is clearly trying to influence what’s happening in the US. We need to get our heads out of the “but where’s the evidence??” sand and start an investigation into this so we can find out what’s really going on once and for all.

With the fact that the Republicans control the House and Senate and may soon control the Supreme Court, I think impeachment is very unlikely.

Handman said:

TV’s Frink said:

She’s lying. As usual.

She never lies, she merely presents alternative facts.

Yes. Frink, you should have known that she was only presenting alternative facts. I’m disappointed in you.

RicOlie_2 said:

Why do you object to the idea of “conservative vs liberal” Catholicism. I thought in real life there were arguments within your church between the liberal and conservative minded.

The Church has a single, unified body of doctrine, with some room for personal interpretation in some areas. For this reason, speaking of it as if it were divided into two different camps with competing doctrine is harmful to the Faith, as it tends to polarize Catholics and pit them against each other instead of us all being united in our faith.

But if they are actually divided into two different camps, would it be wrong to depict it that?

There should be no “liberal” or “conservative” or “moderate” or whatever Catholics, we should simply be Catholic. If we start breaking off into factions, or talk about the Church as if it was made up of different political parties, we are violating the prayer Jesus prayed at the Last Supper, “that they may be one” (John 15 or something like that).

After a little research, I think you refer to ST. John 17:11

“And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.” (KJV)

“Liberal” or “conservative” in this context usually refers to political views, which should only be secondary to religious ones. The truth is that the middle ground is the best road to take. If you’re too conservative, chances are you don’t have the same concern for the poor or social outcasts that you should and that you favour doctrine over charity. If you’re too liberal, chances are that you are less appreciative of the Church’s traditions as well as being willing to accept some degree of moral relativism, thinking of doctrine as less important than being “nice.”

Neither of those is healthy, since we are called to love and we are also called to uphold the truth. These are both of equal importance. Leaning one way or the other is usually what gets someone pegged as conservative/traditionalist or libera/modernist, which detracts from our main goal and vocation of living Christlike lives.

Hopefully that makes sense, and I’m happy to ramble on some more if you want me to expand on anything. 😉

But isn’t there some division in church in regards to the changes made by Vatican II?

1. g3 d5
2. Bg2 Nf6
3. Nf3 c6
4. d4 Nbd7
5. Nc3 e5
6. Be3

1. g3 d5
2. Bg2 Nf6
3. Nf3 c6
4. d4 Nbd7
5. Nc3

She seemed to indicate that someone else was tweeting using her account??? How was that allowed to happen?

Unfortunately, I have not been able to see it. I do not have HBO. 😦 I was just curious what Catholics in general felt about TV shows and movies about their Church and the Pope.

Why do you object to the idea of “conservative vs liberal” Catholicism. I thought in real life there were arguments within your church between the liberal and conservative minded.

If, in your second story, the President conceals the fact that the National Security Adviser did this, that might also be treason . . .

suspiciouscoffee said:

^Post counter on bottom of the page is broken.

oh.

TV’s Frink said:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/02/14/trump-was-told-weeks-ago-that-flynn-misled-vice-president-about-russia-contacts-white-house-says/?utm_term=.422b4a8f839c

Spicer says that Trump has known about Flynn for weeks. Amazing.

Are you accusing our wonderful President of concealing important information from the American people? Shocking.

huh?

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

Tyrphanax said:

TV’s Frink said:

Whoa.

http://theslot.jezebel.com/oklahoma-lawmaker-pregnant-women-are-hosts-whose-bodie-1792303950

Women, you may think that the flesh that covers you and the organs and muscles and neurons that make you breathe and poop and eat are your own, but actually they are not. Oklahoma State Rep. Justin Humphrey can see how might “feel like that is” your body, but if you are pregnant, he regrets to inform you that your body is now a “host” and you are an interloping ghost that once used to inhabit it.

In an interview with the Intercept, this is how Humphrey justified the unconstitutional bill he recently introduced, which requires pregnant women to get the fetus’s father’s permission to obtain an abortion:

Ultimately, he said, his intent was to let men have a say. “I believe one of the breakdowns in our society is that we have excluded the man out of all of these types of decisions,” he said. “I understand that they feel like that is their body,” he said of women. “I feel like it is a separate — what I call them is, is you’re a ‘host.’ And you know when you enter into a relationship you’re going to be that host and so, you know, if you pre-know that then take all precautions and don’t get pregnant,” he explained. “So that’s where I’m at. I’m like, hey, your body is your body and be responsible with it. But after you’re irresponsible then don’t claim, well, I can just go and do this with another body, when you’re the host and you invited that in.”

“Congratulations on becoming a host and inviting that in!” is a truly beautiful thing to say to a pregnant woman. Hallmark should start printing that on cards for baby showers.

Oh yeah, I saw this insanity yesterday. I would have posted it here but for some reason I thought this was where I saw it.

Pure, unadulterated dark ages insanity.

It was dumb thing to say. I agree their is another life and body at stake when A woman becomes pregnant, but the way he said it was just dumb and stupid. Is at least and exception in that law if a woman is raped? I hope a woman wouldn’t be required to get the rapist’s permission.

Some Republicans want the rapist to have more rights than the woman who was raped.

Even though I lean pro-life, don’t count me in with them.

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

Warbler said:

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

By the same token, I find myself bothered when I see women wearing burqas in the U.S., England, etc. Especially on college campuses… it seems contrary to basic western cultural values, which presumably is part of what attracted them here. For that reason, it seems slightly hostile (even if not their intent) - and exactly how we would be viewed there if our women ambassadors were to refuse to wear a hijab during a visit to their country.

Apparently, you have forgotten that our western culture values freedom of religion and diversity and tolerance for those who do things differently. I have no problem with a woman wearing a burqa as long as she freely chose to do it.

Nonsense - there are many things that “bother” me, and that I view negatively, that I would not want to see banned. Heck, Christianity “bothers” me, but I would never suggest banning it. Both are protected by religious freedom, however kooky I might consider them, and I never would suggest disallowing either (except for adjustments in certain security-related situations, such as boarding a plane or taking a final exam).

Just what kind of adjustments are you talking about?

Having said that, I still feel that it is somewhat insulting to wear a burqa on a college campus. Colleges are supposed to be about opening oneself, sharing, critical thinking… closing oneself off from all direct interaction, especially since it is just one gender doing it (and one gender with whom they cannot interact), seems anathema to a basic tenant of higher education.

How does wearing a burqa equate to closing oneself off from all direct interaction? Burqas don’t prevent conversation. If Colleges are supposed to be about opening oneself, then be open to those who dress differently than you.

I’m not proposing any policy, just sharing my impression. Perhaps my view will change over time, although that usually requires some sort of discourse, and it is difficult for such discourse to occur since I’m a man and their religion doesn’t allow them to interact with me (which also seems anathema to higher education).

I wasn’t aware that their religion barred them from talking with non-Muslims. If so, how do they ask the professors any questions?

Tyrphanax said:

TV’s Frink said:

Whoa.

http://theslot.jezebel.com/oklahoma-lawmaker-pregnant-women-are-hosts-whose-bodie-1792303950

Women, you may think that the flesh that covers you and the organs and muscles and neurons that make you breathe and poop and eat are your own, but actually they are not. Oklahoma State Rep. Justin Humphrey can see how might “feel like that is” your body, but if you are pregnant, he regrets to inform you that your body is now a “host” and you are an interloping ghost that once used to inhabit it.

In an interview with the Intercept, this is how Humphrey justified the unconstitutional bill he recently introduced, which requires pregnant women to get the fetus’s father’s permission to obtain an abortion:

Ultimately, he said, his intent was to let men have a say. “I believe one of the breakdowns in our society is that we have excluded the man out of all of these types of decisions,” he said. “I understand that they feel like that is their body,” he said of women. “I feel like it is a separate — what I call them is, is you’re a ‘host.’ And you know when you enter into a relationship you’re going to be that host and so, you know, if you pre-know that then take all precautions and don’t get pregnant,” he explained. “So that’s where I’m at. I’m like, hey, your body is your body and be responsible with it. But after you’re irresponsible then don’t claim, well, I can just go and do this with another body, when you’re the host and you invited that in.”

“Congratulations on becoming a host and inviting that in!” is a truly beautiful thing to say to a pregnant woman. Hallmark should start printing that on cards for baby showers.

Oh yeah, I saw this insanity yesterday. I would have posted it here but for some reason I thought this was where I saw it.

Pure, unadulterated dark ages insanity.

It was dumb thing to say. I agree there is another life and body at stake when A woman becomes pregnant, but the way he said it was just dumb and stupid. Is there at least an exception in that law if a woman is raped? I hope a woman wouldn’t be required to get the rapist’s permission.

RicOlie_2, I am curious how you and other Catholics feel about the new TV series “The Young Pope”?

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

By the same token, I find myself bothered when I see women wearing burqas in the U.S., England, etc. Especially on college campuses… it seems contrary to basic western cultural values, which presumably is part of what attracted them here. For that reason, it seems slightly hostile (even if not their intent) - and exactly how we would be viewed there if our women ambassadors were to refuse to wear a hijab during a visit to their country.

Apparently, you have forgotten that our western culture values freedom of religion and diversity and tolerance for those who do things differently. I have no problem with a woman wearing a burqa as long as she freely chose to do it.

moviefreakedmind said:

http://www.dailywire.com/news/13421/swedish-first-feminist-government-wears-hijab-iran-ben-shapiro#exit-modal

So much for female empowerment.

I believe they call it diplomacy.

For something or another.

agreed.

*ahem*

Your move, Handman.

sounds like you got something that is going around. Hopefully time will get rid of it.

TV’s Frink said:

Well I guess Trump isn’t the big defender of the LGBT community he claimed to be after all.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/11/us/politics/trump-transgender-students-injunction.html

A nationwide injunction that has kept transgender students from using school bathrooms and other facilities that correspond with their gender identity will remain in place after the Trump administration decided not to challenge it in court. The move, announced Friday, ended an effort mounted by the Obama administration after the order was announced last year.

Can’t say I’m shocked.