Mostly Meritorious on the Monday Political Open Thread

[Mike]

ow do you know you can trust someone who loudly expresses their moral opinions for most of their life,

I don't trust her. I have no idea.

I trust her completely…. to do what she believes to be in her own best self-interest. She knows she’s on the Court for the remainder of her life if she wants, and she knows she wields extreme power and cannot be touched for whatever opinion she runs with. She was appointed specifically for this situation and knows it. Furthermore, she also knows there are folks on her ‘team’ who are willing to do physical harm to those who stand in the way of their agenda.

[GuideToACrazyWorld]

I trust her completely…. to do what she believes to be in her own best self-interest. She knows she’s on the Court for the remainder of her life if she wants, and she knows she wields extreme power and cannot be touched for whatever opinion she runs with. She was appointed specifically for this situation and knows it. Furthermore, she also knows there are folks on her ‘team’ who are willing to do physical harm to those who stand in the way of their agenda.

What's in her self interest about weakening Roe v Wade? How will that help her in any way?

[Mike]

I trust her completely…. to do what she believes to be in her own best self-interest. She knows she’s on the Court for the remainder of her life if she wants, and she knows she wields extreme power and cannot be touched for whatever opinion she runs with. She was appointed specifically for this situation and knows it. Furthermore, she also knows there are folks on her ‘team’ who are willing to do physical harm to those who stand in the way of their agenda.

What's in her self interest about weakening Roe v Wade? How will that help her in any way?

She’s devoutly Catholic. It will help her get right with her ‘maker’, thus winning her a seat to His right for all eternity. It will also help her politically with that constituency, should she decide to move to other pursuits in the future.

[GuideToACrazyWorld]

It will help her get right with her ‘maker’

That's an interesting interpretation of the bible. I have no idea if it is hers or not. I would say you can't do God's work by taking away his greatest gift, free will.

[Mike]

It will help her get right with her ‘maker’

That's an interesting interpretation of the bible. I have no idea if it is hers or not. I would say you can't do God's work by taking away his greatest gift, free will.

You’re not familiar with how various religious denominations function? Really?

Here’s the rundown for Christianity. in the Catholic faith family, generally salvation is tied to works and faith. You have to believe, and you have to do good works. In the Protestant faith family, launched by Martin Luther crazily nailing lumps of feces to church doors, works are no longer important. All that counts for salvation is faith.

But your final sentence is interesting. If we were to apply it generally, no religious society would make laws against murder. Nor would they make requirements for tithing, for not committing blasphemy or adultery or idolatry or sodomy etc. Yet ALL the Abrahamic religion societies make prohibitions on these things, often at the cost of your very life. So then. How do we reconcile your statement about free will with the behaviors of EVERY ABRAHAMIC RELIGION??

[GuideToACrazyWorld]

You’re not familiar with how various religious denominations function? Really?

That is not what I said. I'm actually very familiar with Catholicism, I married into a Catholic family. There is nothing in the Catholic faith that would say you gain points with God by stopping others from sinning.

Here’s the rundown for Christianity. in the Catholic faith family, generally salvation is tied to works and faith. You have to believe, and you have to do good works. In the Protestant faith family, launched by Martin Luther crazily nailing lumps of feces to church doors, works are no longer important. All that counts for salvation is faith.

Both very accurate, but even if we accept that abortion is a sin, it isn't a work of faith to control others. Works of faith are about controlling your self and helping others. There are limitless ways to twist the bible. I'm aware there are people who think as you describe, but it's not a teaching that is inherent to the Catholic denomination.

If we were to apply it generally, no religious society would make laws against murder.

Laws are secular. The bible itself makes the distinction between man's law and God's law. The only time the two are intertwined is with Israel. Murder is illegal because it's obviously damaging to any society not because someone thinks passing that law will get them into heaven. Again I'm not saying that there is no one who interprets the bible the way you present it, I'm simply saying that that interpenetration is wrong in my opinion. Religiously I can only speak for myself.

How do we reconcile your statement about free will with the behaviors of EVERY ABRAHAMIC RELIGION??

I think the last paragraph covered that, but if you disagree let me know and I can expand.

[Mike]

Really? If abortion is murder, which the Church says it is….
And if it’s a sin to know of murder being committed, especially against the helpless, but not intercede if you can - which the Church contends is the case,

Then indeed you would “gain points” by interceding. And it is in fact doctrine in that church today. So for you to claim it’s a teaching that is “not inherent to the Catholic denomination” is, at the very least, not a well thought out consideration on your part.

Historically? Church and state were one, and in many cases still are. Many of our own states started as religious structures (Rhodesia Island, Maryland among others), and their bodies of state law come down from those roots. Some states even today still have “blue laws” that prohibit certain business on the lord’s day. So your contention that laws are secular is also n9t well thought out, at the very least.

[Mike]

Btw, here’s what Christianity’s representatives in America think about free will:

“Even when life begins in the horrible situation of rape, it is something that god intended to happen.” - Richard Mourdock (R), former Indiana state treasurer

“Rape victims should make the best of a bad situation. Accept what god has given to you.” - Rick Santorum (R), former US Senator, former presidential candidate

Plenty of other notable anti-abortion folks have expressed similar thoughts. Some go further, such as Clayton Williams (R) of Texas who said “rape is kinda like the weather. If it’s inevitable, relax and enjoy it.”

Clearly then, the position of the Right on this topic is that god sends the rapist, that the resultant pregnancy is the direct will of god**. That the life conceived by god is inviolate. That is, until she turns 14 and gets raped by another messenger of god. If the rapist is doing god’s work on earth, and the rape victim has been chosen by god to receive the rapist’s seed, how can we delude ourselves about free will?

**isnt it fascinating how closely this conceptualization of rape mirrors the virgin birth of Jesus. The seed gets planted, with the woman not given a choice in the matter. Is it any wonder the patriarchy has such clear ambivalence on the issue? Any doubts, look at the testimony of the gymnasts before Congress. The team doctor abused scores of girls. The team itself did not respond to the girls. Two FBI investigators, both men, essentially protected the doctor by 14+ months of total inaction. It’s sickening. Yet some celebrated ‘intellectuals’ such as Jordan Peterson see the patriarchy as good and valuable, and the efforts for women’s rights as silly and superfluous.

Hey… I got it! How do we get the Right to finally accept that it lost the election? Just tell them that, like Mary and all the other rape victims, they have been f#@ked by god.

[GuideToACrazyWorld]

Really? If abortion is murder, which the Church says it is….
And if it’s a sin to know of murder being committed, especially against the helpless, but not intercede if you can - which the Church contends is the case,

It is not a sin to know a sin was committed. It's possible that there are some denomination that thank that way, but I haven't heard such a thing from any church I've been to. Certainly not a teaching of the Catholic church.

Historically? Church and state were one, and in many cases still are. Many of our own states started as religious structures (Rhodesia Island, Maryland among others), and their bodies of state law come down from those roots. Some states even today still have “blue laws” that prohibit certain business on the lord’s day. So your contention that laws are secular is also n9t well thought out, at the very least.

I'm not sure what your point is in reference to our conversation.

**isnt it fascinating how closely this conceptualization of rape mirrors the virgin birth of Jesus.

No what is funny is that you don't want to contend with my ideas because they don't fit your bigotry so you bring in easily dismissed arguments from others. SMH.

[Mike]

Really? If abortion is murder, which the Church says it is….
And if it’s a sin to know of murder being committed, especially against the helpless, but not intercede if you can - which the Church contends is the case,

It is not a sin to know a sin was committed (1). It's possible that there are some denomination that thank that way, but I haven't heard such a thing from any church I've been to. Certainly not a teaching of the Catholic church.

Historically? Church and state were one, and in many cases still are. Many of our own states started as religious structures (Rhodesia Island, Maryland among others), and their bodies of state law come down from those roots. Some states even today still have “blue laws” that prohibit certain business on the lord’s day. So your contention that laws are secular is also n9t well thought out, at the very least.

I'm not sure what your point is in reference to our conversation. (2)

**isnt it fascinating how closely this conceptualization of rape mirrors the virgin birth of Jesus.

No what is funny is that you don't want to contend with my ideas because they don't fit your bigotry so you bring in easily dismissed arguments from others. SMH.

1. Oy. It is a sin to know a sin is being committed, but to not intercede. Present tense, not past. The Catholic Church in this nation is a hotbed of antiabortion activity. And as a parallel, isn’t that the rationale also of the whole Kim Davis anti-gay concept? I cannot knowingly bake a cake that will be used at a gay wedding, it goes against Jesus! I cannot sign a a Kentucky marriage certificate for two men, it would make me complicit in their sin! Same concept here. Else why does the church even bother with abortion at all? But there they are, ALL Christian denominations in this nation, trying to outlaw/limit abortion by any possible path.

2. You stated that all law is secular. Historically, this is essentially untrue. It’s untrue in parts of the world right now!

Yet you say I don’t want to contend with your ideas… in today’s other thread, where I do exactly that, you say you will ignore me. For doing exactly that.
:FACEPALM: lol