URRight, a wife and children are our first responsibility, and what we personally would like to do has to take second place.
With just Ginny and I, we tend to forget about those who are responsible for a family.
Nevermind. :-)
JH
Posted on 03/30/2002 7:53:37 PM PST by malakhi
| Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. - John Adams |
You see, there were only four out of thousands of flights that ended up killing people on 9/11, but you wouldn't be a coward to chose not to fly that afternoon if they hadn't caught everyone and the terrorists were saying "we're going to get more". It was still statistically safer to fly that day than to do lots of things, yet the authorities were still not wrong to shut things down until they got a handle on what was going on.
Nobody has a handle on this guy yet.
Is he going to run my life? Heck No! I'm going to work and Jen is doing her necessary shopping and taking the kids to play group etc.etc.etc.
But I don't see any reason to put my sons in a wagon and walk them around the neighborhood. And it really affects me thinking about losing by wife or son to this idiot or leaving them alone while they grow up.
Is there a difference? Yes!
I would gladly go off to war if needed to defend something we believe in. I wouldn't deny Christ to a man with a gun to my head just so my wife wouldn't be alone. Would I put my life on the line to defend America knowing that it would be even MORE likely to widow my wife than this shooter is? YES! Just like my father and his father before him. Don't mistake this for cowardice. I just don't see any reason to take chances that are just as easily avoided when I have a wife and kids to protect and a madman out there who would love nothing better than to make another headline.
No. There is definitely a change in me since getting married, and a bigger one since the kids showed up. Somehow, I think that's a good thing...
Might be a percentage in it.
But I don't see any reason to put my sons in a wagon and walk them around the neighborhood. And it really affects me thinking about losing by wife or son to this idiot or leaving them alone while they grow up.
Is there a difference? Yes!
Amen, Amen, Amen.!!!!!
Don't mistake this for cowardice. I just don't see any reason to take chances that are just as easily avoided when I have a wife and kids to protect and a madman out there who would love nothing better than to make another headline
This is not cowardice, it's COMMON SENSE. Anyone who doesn't see that is a fool.
Hang in there IMRight.
Becky
For one, the speed limits on winding roads where deer can pop out seem more reasonable with my daughter in the back seat.
SD
URRight, a wife and children are our first responsibility, and what we personally would like to do has to take second place.
With just Ginny and I, we tend to forget about those who are responsible for a family.
Nevermind. :-)
JH
Darn! I may have to change my mind since both Becky and Reg agree with me. I'm not sure that's ever happened before. My whole world is spinning.
And the two of them agreeing with Dave may be a real problem. I'm going to have to review Revelations again for signs of the Apocalypse.
I think a verse of KUM-BY-YAH is in order.
Becky
The Cubs aren't in the World Series. ;-)
SD
What part of my comment do you want credit on, the part where you allude that Catholics are free to decide what's right and what's wrong? As Reggie asked you, give me a few other beliefs you are free to decide on, besides the one you get nailed with.
I know. It's against your religion to consider Catholics to be other than liars. In fact, it's based upon the proposition.
It's not I who determines whether you are lying or not, it's up to the scripture to support or condemn you, we simply point to the scripture to decide.
JH
I said there are areas where freedom exists, and areas where it does not. Catholics are free to believe what they want in these areas.
As Reggie asked you, give me a few other beliefs you are free to decide on, besides the one you get nailed with.
OK, you have to believe that Mary was Assumed into heaven at the end of her life. You are free to believe she died forst, or that she did not die first. There are arguments for either side, and no definitive position has been made.
Similarly, you can believe that Mary appeared in Lourdes, or you can not. The Church has determined that these aperitions are worthy of belief, but it is not required that you do so.
There are any number of areas that are open to free inquiry and belief. Granted, it's not the toatl freedom of being your own pope, but neither is it being a total slave.
SD
The difference being that the 200+ murders annually in D.C. are mostly confined to certain areas, and mostly are related to gangs or drug violence. In other words, they are mostly avoidable. As opposed to the sniper murders, which so far appear to be quite random.
I think Reggie's objection might be that the Church itself retains the right to pick and choose, but doesn't allow the same to its members.
I have a question for you. Why do you think (in your own opinion) the Pope did not accept Cardinal Law's offer to resign? I asked this of another Catholic on a different thread yesterday, and the reply was nonresponsive.
I think Reggie's objection might be that the Church itself retains the right to pick and choose, but doesn't allow the same to its members.
If that's the case he should say that, rather than criticising the discernment process for what it is. Of course the possibility exists that he likes to be unclear on purpose, just to get a rise out of me.
If his objection is to the Church not freeing eveyrone to make thier own decisions, then we have a basic question of authority. If there is no central authority, then there is nothing to hold on to and nothing to transmit and the "teachings" of the Church become nothing but a consensus of the present membership.
That's fine and dandy if one is inclined to be that way. But for a conservative organization (literally one entrusted with preserving something), that's no way to run a railroad.
SD
SD
Can you believe Anaheim? And what's up with all these runs being scored? It seems like last year at this time it was all pitching duels, until that unfortunate Korean kid got put in.
I don't know why the Pope does what he did. Remember there were rumors of his being bumped "upstairs" into a makework position. That hasn't happened. (Yet.) It could be something as noble as expecting a man to clean up after himself or as reactionary as simply not allowing the Boston Globe to decide who is Archbishop. I don't know.
SD
One of the linguists gently reminded him that "there's no 'j' in Latin."
"There is now." He said.
SD
He defines "Faith".
He defines "Morals".
His carefully chosen words can either, cloud the issue so it can be argued many ways, or can make it perfectly clear he is exercising his "infallibility".
Your "freedom" is illusory.
The "Fallen Angels" are the 2002 version of "Damn Yankees". Disney clearly has made a pact with Satan.
I think Reggie's objection might be that the Church itself retains the right to pick and choose, but doesn't allow the same to its members.
I accuse Dave of many things; but, not of being stupid (as opposed to saying stupid things). He knows full well what my objection is, he simply doesn't have a good answer. Thus the 
(Thanks angelo).
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.