What troubles me about using the Nazis as an example is that one did not have the option under the Nazi state of stating the point of conscience and resigning. In Spain, and here for that matter, it's the simplest thing in the world to resign on a point of conscience. No on will shoot you or turn you over to the secret police. My point earlier is that if you can't take the oath in good conscience, don't. And, if having taken it, you can no longer fulfill it, then resign. And don't complain when your fellow citizens do not elect you because they don't want you to put your religious views ahead of your oath of office.
Dear CatoRenasci,
"What troubles me about using the Nazis as an example is that one did not have the option under the Nazi state of stating the point of conscience and resigning."
What troubles me is that in your view, then, as the laws of a regime become increasingly immoral, if the regime permits devout Catholics to abjure political or civil service, then the end result is that Catholics must voluntarily leave the political or civil service.
I disagree.
If we are forced out, then so be it. If folks don't want to elect us, so be it. If the West fully reverts to paganism, and by force of arms and numbers, persecutes us, so be it.
But we should not close in on ourselves, becoming modern Amish, refusing to participate in the governance of the society. We should not voluntarily leave the public square because we wish to change it, to at least partly redeem the laws and governments under which we live, that they may better reflect the law of love.
sitetest
Yet. Remember, the Nuremberg Laws preceded Auschwitz. The first step was to remove Jews from government service. Here, the first step is to remove Catholics from government service. I'm surprised that you don't see the parallel.