Posted on 02/19/2012 1:54:30 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
...JoanWalsh at Salon writes that she was raised Catholic, but has since turned into "a secularfeministliberaldemocrat." Last Friday evening, when Obama's supporters were still clinging to their belief that his announcement of a compromise would steal all the wind out of the bishops' sails, she asked this:
Why did we spend 10 days listening to prominent Catholics, including even some liberals and Democrats, insist that the White House had overreached and trampled on "religious freedom" - in this case, the "freedom" of the Catholic hierarchy to impose rules that even most Catholics don't live by? ("Catholic tribalism and the contraceptive flap").
Ms.Walsh can't imagine that Catholic rules being defined and preached by Catholic pastors without government interference is a matter of religious liberty, whether individual Catholics choose to obey those rules or not.
.........The progressive conceit is that human history is a continuum, clawing on vestigial fins inexorably away from abject ignorance and superstition at one end toward a science-based utopia at the other. Europe's atheists traced the pathology of religion to the neurotic imaginations of terrorized savages, and the result is that modern intellectuals routinely assign religious believers to the Neanderthal-Superstitious segment of human evolution. Today's American Smart Set expect the ultimate -- no, make that the imminent -- extinction of religion with far more certainty than they do all that cynical hooey about anthropogenic planetary destruction. But rather than go extinct, we survive, an anomaly, taking up space right there amongst all the iPhones, mice-cloning labs, and transgendered celebrities, the milestones of how far we've come.
Is it any wonder that when the Catholic bishops' balked at the HHS mandate, frustrated liberals had outbursts like this one from Rep.DianaDeGette,D-Colorado: "I woke up this morning in the 21st century, not in the Middle Ages." ("Contraception controversy consumes D.C., campaign").........
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Those who fail to study history are doomed to repeat it.
From http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_reli.html
In the end, many supporters of the Constitution, including one of the most prominent, James Madison, agreed to support a bill of rights in the Constitution, if it could be ratified. Several of the states included suggested amendments, including rights of the people, in their ratification documents. The push was on for a bill of rights in the Constitution. Madison was true to his word — on June 8, 1789, Representative James Madison rose and gave a speech in the House where he introduced a series of articles of amendment. One concerned religious freedom:
The civil rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall any national religion be established, nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience be in any manner, or on any pretext, infringed.
Madison’s proposal follows the proposals of some of the states. New Hampshire’s read:
Congress shall make no laws touching religion, or to infringe the rights of conscience.
Virginia was much more verbose:
That religion, or the duty which we owe to our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence, and therefore all men have an equal, natural and unalienable right to the exercise of religion according to the dictates of conscience, and that no particular sect or society ought to be favored or established by law in preference to others.
New Yorkers had the same to say, but more succinctly:
That the people have an equal, natural, and unalienable right freely and peaceably to exercise their religion, according to the dictates of conscience; and that no religious sect or society ought to be favored or established by law in preference to others.
Aside from New Hampshire’s wide-reaching “no touch” proposal, all of these have a few elements in common. First, no national religion should be established, in contrast to several European nations of the time (and to this day) which have an official state church. Second, that no one sect of any religion be favored by the government. Third, that all persons should be free to worship in whatever manner they deemed appropriate for them.
Through the debates in the House, Senate, and conference committees, the wording of all of these proposals was whittled down to the religion clauses of what is our 1st Amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.
That’s REAL hate...and we all know the source.
IF you are a practicing Christian, there is NO way you would not be uniting with ALL good Christians against this radical administration bent on destroying the free exercise of religion in this nation!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You probably think this...
...is bigoted hogwash too?
________________________________________________________
Are you insane or what?
Another good line from this morning's sermon. "Pregnancy is not a disease, and fertility is not a pathological condition." Too bad our Bishop wasn't listening.
Eunuchs for the sake of Christ. But as for tyranny, New England was founded by Puritans whose mandate was a charter issued by the King of Great Britain. The only true theocracy that ever existed in our country followed Protestant principals. In Great Britain Roman Catholics were denied the rights of citizenship, enjoying the same measure of religious liberty, that they enjoy in Pakistan today, until 1829. Charles Calvert obtained a charter from Charles I permitting Roman Catholics religious liberty in Maryland . But after the Glorious Revolution, toleration was abolished, and not re-established until the American Revolution. William Penn, whose Quaker sect was persecuted in England, obtained a land grant from Charles II. and allowed all sects freedom of worship. As did Roger Williams, who had to flee from Massachusetts Bay, in his colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations. Religious toleration is one of the upsides of Christian disunity, although it would not be necessary except for the disunity. For more than anything else, it has made the Church dependent on the state.
Ah, the antireligious wing sounds off. Faith is a great thing - it may be the only thing. Without it, you are just a very small and temporary part of this reality.
With faith, you see the voice of the Creator all around you and you begin to understand your part in it.
Then I would recommend that you listen very carefully. Our Creator does speak to us if we are willing to listen.
“In many cases that’s Liberalism. Trouble is, liberalism is also a mental disorder - see Michael Savage’s book by that name.”
Also G. K. Chesterton’s “Orthodoxy,” written in 1908.
Regarding taking money from the state to help with the cost of care and social services, remember that the Catholic Church does not restrict her ministry and aid to only Catholics and therefore, the differences in cost and donations from the faithful to support these charities has greatly grown in disparity.
Hostility and bigotry go hand in hand.
“provide a quote please”
If I did, you’d just call it hearsay. Even if you stipulated that I believed that something had been communicated to me, you’d write it off as delusion, probably induced by drugs or insanity.
My question is, why do you ask for something that you would never accept?
“no direct quotes ....... hearsay”
Someone asked Peter Singer (I think) what he would do if God manifested before his eyes and spoke to him. He replied that he would have himself admitted to a mental hospital.
Who ya’ gonna’ believe—atheist dogma, or your lyin’ eyes?
Are there any criteria which, if met, would satisfy you as to the authenticity of a communication from God?
“You are confusing “faith” with reality, as most religious people frequently do.”
It seems that you are assuming that faith is the only basis for knowledge of God, as most god-haters do.
There is objective, empirical proof of God’s existence.
Everything good about America is being called bad or being changed. It can't be coincidence. When we're challenged, we pull together. One example: The space program has been slowed and will soon stop. It was a good American symbol that drove excellence and national pride and now we are told we have lost, that America has too much. It is stuff like this that is weakening us and leaving us to fight one another versus having our flag, inspiring goals and God to rally behind.
So very true!
I wrote my senators and representative and asked that same question about BO’s “recess” appointments. Sen. Rubio responded about a different matter. Cong. Miller wrote a nice explanatory, but bland, response. Sen. Nelson has not bothered to answer.
Our elected officials should be shouting from the Capitol steps everyday. Why are they so quiet? Who, what, is keeping them from doing their jobs?
That's the problem with direct revelations. Singer actually has a point. Not a great point, but a point.
OTOH, public, observable, unexplainable phenomena are actually more reliable evidence of the supernatural.
Examples include the Shroud of Turin, the Eucharistic Miracle of Lanciano, and the tilma of Juan Diego. These phenomena cannot be dismissed as halucinations.
These phenomena have existed for hundreds of years, been studied by scientists, observed by countless people, and the phenomena are all unexplainable by natural means.
These phenomena cannot be dismissed out of hand. One can only judge their authenticity by examining the evidence oneself.
That's the problem with direct revelations. Singer actually has a point. Not a great point, but a point.
OTOH, public, observable, unexplainable phenomena are actually more reliable evidence of the supernatural.
Examples include the Shroud of Turin, the Eucharistic Miracle of Lanciano, and the tilma of Juan Diego. These phenomena cannot be dismissed as halucinations.
These phenomena have existed for hundreds of years, been studied by scientists, observed by countless people, and the phenomena are all unexplainable by natural means.
These phenomena cannot be dismissed out of hand. One can only judge their authenticity by examining the evidence oneself.
Good to hear. I hope those truths were being echoed in many churches.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.