quote:The Holy Roman Catholic Church is the only thing that stands between humanity and the ULTIMATE EVIL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
quote: ..."which lurks just outside the range of even the most sensitive, long-range detectors which we feel gives conclusive evidence as to The Ultimate Evil's nefarious intent."
quote:Not if you believe in the sanctity of life. It isn't consistent to be against abortion and FOR the death penalty. Life is life and we aren't supposed to judge.
I'm against murder. I'm in favor of allowing people to kill in self-defense. Almost every American holds that belief. So obviously thinking killing is wrong in SOME circumstances is logically self-consistent.
Dagonee P.S. TSS, you are a raving as...well, you can fill in the blanks.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
If the intent is still to kill even when in self defense--by the teaching of catholic theology, it's still murder.
Posts: 14745 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Even the American Bishop Conference, which opposes the death penalty, says, ""We believe that in the conditions of contemporary American society, the legitimate purposes of punishment do not justify the imposition of the death penalty." (Emphasis added.) cite
posted
In ancient society, where it was nigh impossible to keep a murderer away from society and keep him from murdering again. Now with our ability to incarcerate indefinitely, capital punishment isn't needed.
Posts: 14745 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
But that's an entirely different statement than it is illogical to be anti-abortion and pro-death penalty.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I can recognize the difference. But since I say I am pro-life I believe that I have to be against the death penalty as well. By killing someone you take away their ability to repent. I mean this is pretty horrible.
And in any case sin isn't really supposed to be compared as in this one is worse than that one.
As far as the self defense thing I believe that killing in self defense is not a sin. I mean it's just like being raped doesn't mean you've committed adultry. But the death penalty isn't really self defense in my opinion.
I guess my point was I don't like generalizations. It's just a me thing. I think they hurt people. I think they stop important dialog and impede understanding. And when this type of thing happens I feel like people stop understanding each other and just get mad. But I don't know whose fault it is media misinterpreting statement, poor wording, or somethign else. It's usually hard to tell and I don't know a lot about this particular situation. I'm actually probably a little biased by what happened in Lincoln. This statement was a "those engaging in _____ should not recieve communion" where as when I read about the thing in linocln it was a "those part of ____ are excommunicated". I guess there's a difference.
Posts: 872 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am also pro-life and anti death penalty. I used to be pro death penalty, and at the time I felt pretty confident that it was not a contradiction, that there was a huge difference between the taking of a completely innocent life (unborn baby) and taking the life of someone that had proved themselves to be a danger to society and that might be a danger again someday.
Now, like sarahdipity, I feel that taking away a person's opportunity to repent is decidedly not a stance I think Jesus would take. Every person is a sinner and every person deserves the same opportunity for redemption. Society has no place taking that away from someone, not when life in prison provides society ample protection from a murderer.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
However, death penalty and abortion are treated very differently by the Catholic Church, which means different treatment for abortion rights supporters and pro-death penalty folks is internally consistent. That's all I've been saying.
posted
Was it not the Catholic church that coined the term “consistent ethic of life,” meaning anti-abortion, anti-death penalty, anti-assisted suicide, etc? Or was that just specific Catholic ethicists, and not official church teaching?
(The idea that it’s one consistent ethic, I mean. I know that official church teaching is anti-all of the above.)
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Occasionally he posts while not under chemical influence (or less so?), and is fairly coherent. Last night would not be one of those times . . .
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:The first post of his I ever saw was easily the most offensive thing I've ever seen on Hatrack.
Wow.
That's a big bowl of chunk you are chewing on Dagonee. Which post was it? Was it the one about how religion did not create God, or was it the one about how Ben Affleck was a lousy Daredevil?
This is all a very interesting debate, a good question...
How much moral authority does the Catholic Church have right now?
More than Michael Jackson and less than Jesus Christ, but is it higher than Susan Summers or L. Ron Hubbard?
Of 6.8 people on Earth we sure come up with cool questions.
I judge got an urge for the new caramel ho-ho!
Posts: 2752 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Our church (LDS) doesn't have a firm stance on stem cell research, but they also don't have a firm stance on In Vitro Fertilization or condoms, for that matter.
Still, I find it repugnant that an LDS senator from Utah, Orrin Hatch, supports stem cell research and the death penalty. It's because he known the baby boomers are very concerned about medical treatments.
I don't know how many regenerated livers one unborn baby's life is worth. Aside from my belief that they never will learn how to regenerate a liver. The Parkinson's disease treatment is somewhat more likely, but I still wonder... what it means when we give doctors the right to do things that would be considered monstrous for a regular person to do. I guess they are rather like priests that way.
quote: what it means when we give doctors the right to do things that would be considered monstrous for a regular person to do. I guess they are rather like priests that way.
OK, Pooka, I'll bite. What monsterous things do we (LDS) give priests the right to do?
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Out of interest, Dag, why isn't the Church the hierarchy? I can understand that claim when made about, say, Baptists, but I don't see it for Mormons, Catholics, or any other group that still believes that their leaders are divinely inspired.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually, that was a comment posted by someone else to condemn the Communion warning - I was using it ironically to further separate the Church as institution from the bad acts of some of the members of the hierarchy.
Formally, however, the statement is true in many ways. Here's a summary from the Catechism:
quote:777 The word "Church" means "convocation." It designates the assembly of those whom God's Word "convokes," i.e., gathers together to form the People of God, and who themselves, nourished with the Body of Christ, become the Body of Christ.
778 The Church is both the means and the goal of God's plan: prefigured in creation, prepared for in the Old Covenant, founded by the words and actions of Jesus Christ, fulfilled by his redeeming cross and his Resurrection, the Church has been manifested as the mystery of salvation by the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. She will be perfected in the glory of heaven as the assembly of all the redeemed of the earth (cf. Rev 14:4).
779 The Church is both visible and spiritual, a hierarchical society and the Mystical Body of Christ. She is one, yet formed of two components, human and divine. That is her mystery, which only faith can accept.
780 The Church in this world is the sacrament of salvation, the sign and the instrument of the communion of God and men.
This means that the hierarchy (especially limited to the current hierarchy) is a small part of the Church. In the context of this thread, it is important to note that priests are responsible for administering the Sacraments, and part of that responsibility is to take needed care to assure they are administered in accordance with Catholic beliefs. But it is the community of believers in Christ throughout history that comprise the Church.
posted
I just figured out my mistake. Lalo is Daedelus (sp?), not Dagonee. I am still trying to keep straight the multiple names... *sigh*
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
