Posted on 04/18/2008 7:22:50 AM PDT by knarf
Why ...
Catholicism.
OK Catholics .. I'm not trying to pick a fight with you, but it it is unusual that every manner of Christianity is scoffed, but the promotion of the Papal visit sure seems to be royalized .......
but any other reference to Christianity, and especially Jesus is worthy of getting little kids suspended from school and parents in jail for defending their children's beliefs.
Where is this promoted as a ‘state’ religion. Remember, in addition to being the head of a religion, the Pope is also the head of an independent country.
This thread could get a little rough. As a Catholic I could get it started but I’ll just sit this one out.
Where is the aclu?
Probably in a rat whole somewhere.
The Pope is a head of state, and the President is entitled to give him a full diplomatic welcome.
The Pope also happens to be beloved by tens of millions of Americans, and news organizations and newspapers are certainly playing to anything that will net them more viewers or readers.
On what possible grounds could the ACLU object to diplomatic protocol or private media reportage?
OK .. I said I wasn't trying to pick a fight ...
We Joe six-packs see .. Catholicism.
The percentages of thinking, rational people (when it comes to religion) are not as large as those that just see .. "The Pope is in town"
I’m Protestant, but I welcome the Pope, and his “God bless America” was music to my ears.
His visit to the U.S. is a gift to American Catholics. I’m happy for them.
Given the attack on Christianity that seems to be gaining ground, I hate to hear one flavor of Christianity bash another. I believe that we are all brothers and sisters in Christ.
There was no laws made here respecting, establishing, or prohibiting religious freedom.
What do the Federalist papers say about this? Specifically in Federalist 69, it states: The one has no particle of spiritual jurisdiction; the other is the supreme head and governor of the national church!
ie, the founders were attempting to prevent our leaders from becoming de facto leaders of a State church. I suggest you look at what happened in the English Civil War in the 1600s that triggered the mass religious immigration here in the first place.
Next you’ll be wanting to know if bears poop in the woods...
I hope so. One out of every four Joe Six-packs is Catholic. Actually, given the teetotalist inclinations of many American Christian denominations, more like one out of every three.
It certainly does that enormous chunk of Joe Six-packs some good to see their way of life symbolically welcomed and validated by the larger culture every once in a while.
The percentages of thinking, rational people (when it comes to religion) are not as large as those that just see .. "The Pope is in town"
So the argument is what, exactly?
Should people feel angry because the religious leader of millions and millions of their neighbors is welcomed and treated with respect?
Is this envy? Resentment? What is it?
Remember the days immediately after 911, how for a brief time the Libs were scared to be Anti-American? The probability is that the Libs can cow down the philosophy of Christianity because most people are uninformed about their own history and legal rights, but when faced with a person who embodies that philosophy and focuses it in the minds of the masses, the forces of religious persecution are hard pressed to apply the same pressure.
We should be spending our time yelling at the Libs, not faith-baiting within Christianity. It is like Ben Franklin said, if we don't all hang together, we shall certainly hang seperately.
A reasonable question.
Kids can't wear a t shirt with the words "John 3:16" on it, or a picture of the resurrected Christ.
I just think it is an eerie symbolism to see a vestured man with outspread arms fawned over as a savior figure.
Although Baptist, one thing I will say for the Catholic Church (aside from the coolness of keeping the faith alive in the dark ages and fighting the Muslim hoards) is that it gives that branch of Christndom a uniformity of policy. I pity the poor Muslim...any tinpot idjit that declaires himeself an Imam can set policy in whatever way he sees fit. How could you belong to a religion that can reinvent itself depending upon what the local rep decides this morning?
Legally preventing the latter is just as much of a Constitutional atrocity as the former. The first amendment guarantees freedom of religion, not freedom from religion.
Click on my profile page for more on the guidelines pertaining to the Religion Forum.
Actually, they can: It's been established by the Supreme Court. The problem is that petty little bigoted athiest smart@ss schoolboards and administrators have the illusion that they have the power to regulate this, and must be challenged in court in an effort to better educate them about the Law. The real problem is that teachers can't wear a t shirt with the words "John 3:16" on it, or a picture of the resurrected Christ. THAT is a real problem, and you would best address it by giving support to the Rutherford Institute or the ACLJ so that they can fight it, rather than attacking members of your own platoon.
*******************
How does that relate to the supposed purpose of this thread?
Given the attack on Christianity that seems to be gaining ground, I hate to hear one flavor of Christianity bash another. I believe that we are all brothers and sisters in Christ.
I agree. I am very happy to see the Pope and I hope his message will resonate throughout the country and bring Christianity back where it belongs and relativism out the door.
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.