Interesting. I'm just now "checking back" to see how this thread is going. I see someone identifying as "Writein" addressed a comment toward me. However, my original comment was apparently pulled.
Writein...To answer your post, Yes I've heard of Osama. I am sitting down. Everything I wrote is true. I do not hate anyone.
God bless you and keep you.
This comment was removed by the user.
This comment was removed by the user.
This alleged assassination of Osama bin Laden, with the "body" conveniently being dumped into the ocean, comes a day after the same military, also representing We the People, took out the children and grandchildren of another leader, Qaddafhi, with the same government who rejoiced over the alleged assassination of bin Laden basically excusing the real murders as "colateral damage." They're not "colateral damage." They're real people who lost their lives in an illegal, immoral act of war against a people that has neither the inclination nor the resources to harm the United States of America.
Meanwhile, in case you didn't notice, while our best and brightest who volunteer for military service for a noble purpose are sent all over the globe in illegal, unconstitutional incursions, losing their lives and limbs and psyches, our borders are unprotected. Osama bin Laden has been reported as dead by reliable sources many times, the first as early as April 2002. The President of Pakistan stated unequivocally that bin Laden was dead several years ago, then she was unceremoniously assassinated.
I apprecited victoriagal posting the remarks by Fr. Frederico Lombardi. And, thewaywardwind, what does the Vatican not being attacked have to do with anything? Even the Vatican were attacked, his statement would still be true because it reflects accurately the Truth.
Meanwhile, the Global Lie on Terror goes on.
Althea...Well said! Well said! And did I mention that it was well said?! If there were an applause emoticon available I would deploy it several times.
Yours is the best and most succinct defense of God-given parental responsibilities and rights I have ever read! Thank you, Althea. God bless you and your family.
Pilot...First of all, thank you for sharing about your son; bless you for it.
I agree with you about entering into the debate in a forum that can make a difference in laws and policies. But here, at least for me, if there is "debate," it is only about seeking understanding, and, yes, admittedly influence others in their hearts and minds. But at the end of the day, I can't force you to accept a set of beliefs other than your own, and you can't force me to accept a set of beliefs other than my own. Phrasing it another way, if this is a competitive debate, I may win or you may win or it may be a draw, but in any of those outcomes, we both lose. We would be not only no closer to understanding each other, but very likely would have further alienated one another and closed off the line of communication.
I, too, willingly have used and will continue to use when I feel it necessary my full name -- and for the record -- in standing up for what is precious to me and in attempting invite others to reconsider. In fact, my name on this forum is simply a contraction of my full name.
Now to respond to your statement at hand, during pregnancy, from the moment of conception, there are two (sometimes more) human bodies at stake. It was the U.S. Supreme Court who "unlegislated" the legal protections for the unborn. And with all due respect, please, with all due respect, neither you nor I was EVER a tadpole. Each of us was just as human at the moment each of us was conceived as each of us is today. Being human means being made in the image and likeness of our Creator. Pilot, you and I had that Divine spark from the get-go.
God bless you and keep you.
These are obviously hot-button topics, and, in my humble opinion, we need not shrink from them.
Many here have expressed much anger and disdain for the consistent teachings of the Catholic Church, and even for the Church itself. And you, of course, have every right to express yourself. Yet the fact remains that no one forced you to 1) read this Letter to the Editor and the comments and 2) to post a comment of your own.
While a few who expressed their disagreements did so respectfully, with an eye toward, if not coming to agreement, at least coming to better understand the viewpoint. Others, unfortunately, have resorted to vitriolic name-calling behind the anonymity of the internet. It's the classic ad hominem approach; I disagree with the other person's statement but I can't counter it effectively, so I just call him or her names and then duck and run.
It is to those mainly that I address my invitation. I truly desire to understand the source of your anger with eye not toward "winning a debate" but about understanding where you're coming from, and, I'll be candid, with the hope that you will reciprocate. We may still staunchly disagree at the end of the process. But I promise I will continue, as I do now, respect you as a human being.
Basically my question is, If these topics cause you so much upset, why did you continue participating, even to the point of posting? For example, if "you are glad I'm not married to a Catholic and was never brainwashed to be one," why do even engage in these exchanges?
God bless you all.
Mike, your statement that Don Meredith's "passing was another reminder that I am getting old" hit home with me earlier this week when I was visiting with a couple of other football fans and mentioned Meredith's death. I'm 54, and I was visiting with a 59-year-old and a 26-year-old. Right after I mentioned Meredith, it hit me that the 26-year-old never had first-hand experience of Meredith's work, as a football player or as an announcer, since Don has been out of the public eye for 25 years. He mentioned that he's heard the name but really didn't know much about him. The 59-year-old and I regaled him with a few of our favorite memories of Don Meredith (with the Cowboys and as a analyst on ABC and NBC), but we stopped short because we didn't want to be boorish. It struck me that even though while he was playing and especially on Monday Night Football, Don Meredith was larger than life to millions of people how fleeting that fame can be. Just a generation after Meredith stepped away from the glaring lights, here's a young man who is a knowledgeable NFL fan who attends a Texans game or two in person every season but barely knows who the famous DANDY DON MEREDITH is. Indeed, "turn out the lights, the party's over." Rest in peace, Don.
Awesome article. It is really encouraging to see so many solid men offering their lives. Pax et bonum.
Oh, Jared already said that. Well, you took the words right off my keyboard, Jared!
God bless all our seminarians.
No matter the particulars of the case, the Advocate's story highlights the frustrations many families have experienced in dealing with CPS: encountering power-hungry CPS staffers (often people with no children of their own) who execute a removal of children (kidnapping) from the family home on barely credible, sometimes merely circumstantial evidence; the follow-up line of communication is closed off (chided for "calling too often" -- about her own children!, not updating the family on the whereabouts or the health of their own children); and exuding an air of suspicion toward home-schooling parents and parents of strong religious faith.
The issue is not about abusive parents: sadly, and throughout history and across every cultural and social line, there have been those who do not value their own children.
The issue here is about the government. Do your research, folks. Almost all of what the government does or proposes to do in regard to children is only superficially about the good of the children; at its heart, every government program, especially but certainly not limited to the government-run public school, is about control of the citizenry.
The name, Child Protective Services, is a safe-sounding label that is designed to deceive. While some children may have been assisted over the years, the agency is designed to further put the citizenry on edge against one another, making us easier to control.
Newsletter
Interesting. I'm just now "checking back" to see how this thread is going. I see someone identifying as "Writein" addressed a comment toward me. However, my original comment was apparently pulled.
Writein...To answer your post, Yes I've heard of Osama. I am sitting down. Everything I wrote is true. I do not hate anyone.
God bless you and keep you.
This comment was removed by the user.
This comment was removed by the user.
This alleged assassination of Osama bin Laden, with the "body" conveniently being dumped into the ocean, comes a day after the same military, also representing We the People, took out the children and grandchildren of another leader, Qaddafhi, with the same government who rejoiced over the alleged assassination of bin Laden basically excusing the real murders as "colateral damage." They're not "colateral damage." They're real people who lost their lives in an illegal, immoral act of war against a people that has neither the inclination nor the resources to harm the United States of America.
Meanwhile, in case you didn't notice, while our best and brightest who volunteer for military service for a noble purpose are sent all over the globe in illegal, unconstitutional incursions, losing their lives and limbs and psyches, our borders are unprotected. Osama bin Laden has been reported as dead by reliable sources many times, the first as early as April 2002. The President of Pakistan stated unequivocally that bin Laden was dead several years ago, then she was unceremoniously assassinated.
I apprecited victoriagal posting the remarks by Fr. Frederico Lombardi. And, thewaywardwind, what does the Vatican not being attacked have to do with anything? Even the Vatican were attacked, his statement would still be true because it reflects accurately the Truth.
Meanwhile, the Global Lie on Terror goes on.
Althea...Well said! Well said! And did I mention that it was well said?! If there were an applause emoticon available I would deploy it several times.
Yours is the best and most succinct defense of God-given parental responsibilities and rights I have ever read! Thank you, Althea. God bless you and your family.
Pilot...First of all, thank you for sharing about your son; bless you for it.
I agree with you about entering into the debate in a forum that can make a difference in laws and policies. But here, at least for me, if there is "debate," it is only about seeking understanding, and, yes, admittedly influence others in their hearts and minds. But at the end of the day, I can't force you to accept a set of beliefs other than your own, and you can't force me to accept a set of beliefs other than my own. Phrasing it another way, if this is a competitive debate, I may win or you may win or it may be a draw, but in any of those outcomes, we both lose. We would be not only no closer to understanding each other, but very likely would have further alienated one another and closed off the line of communication.
I, too, willingly have used and will continue to use when I feel it necessary my full name -- and for the record -- in standing up for what is precious to me and in attempting invite others to reconsider. In fact, my name on this forum is simply a contraction of my full name.
Now to respond to your statement at hand, during pregnancy, from the moment of conception, there are two (sometimes more) human bodies at stake. It was the U.S. Supreme Court who "unlegislated" the legal protections for the unborn. And with all due respect, please, with all due respect, neither you nor I was EVER a tadpole. Each of us was just as human at the moment each of us was conceived as each of us is today. Being human means being made in the image and likeness of our Creator. Pilot, you and I had that Divine spark from the get-go.
God bless you and keep you.
These are obviously hot-button topics, and, in my humble opinion, we need not shrink from them.
Many here have expressed much anger and disdain for the consistent teachings of the Catholic Church, and even for the Church itself. And you, of course, have every right to express yourself. Yet the fact remains that no one forced you to 1) read this Letter to the Editor and the comments and 2) to post a comment of your own.
While a few who expressed their disagreements did so respectfully, with an eye toward, if not coming to agreement, at least coming to better understand the viewpoint. Others, unfortunately, have resorted to vitriolic name-calling behind the anonymity of the internet. It's the classic ad hominem approach; I disagree with the other person's statement but I can't counter it effectively, so I just call him or her names and then duck and run.
It is to those mainly that I address my invitation. I truly desire to understand the source of your anger with eye not toward "winning a debate" but about understanding where you're coming from, and, I'll be candid, with the hope that you will reciprocate. We may still staunchly disagree at the end of the process. But I promise I will continue, as I do now, respect you as a human being.
Basically my question is, If these topics cause you so much upset, why did you continue participating, even to the point of posting? For example, if "you are glad I'm not married to a Catholic and was never brainwashed to be one," why do even engage in these exchanges?
God bless you all.
Mike, your statement that Don Meredith's "passing was another reminder that I am getting old" hit home with me earlier this week when I was visiting with a couple of other football fans and mentioned Meredith's death. I'm 54, and I was visiting with a 59-year-old and a 26-year-old. Right after I mentioned Meredith, it hit me that the 26-year-old never had first-hand experience of Meredith's work, as a football player or as an announcer, since Don has been out of the public eye for 25 years. He mentioned that he's heard the name but really didn't know much about him. The 59-year-old and I regaled him with a few of our favorite memories of Don Meredith (with the Cowboys and as a analyst on ABC and NBC), but we stopped short because we didn't want to be boorish. It struck me that even though while he was playing and especially on Monday Night Football, Don Meredith was larger than life to millions of people how fleeting that fame can be. Just a generation after Meredith stepped away from the glaring lights, here's a young man who is a knowledgeable NFL fan who attends a Texans game or two in person every season but barely knows who the famous DANDY DON MEREDITH is. Indeed, "turn out the lights, the party's over." Rest in peace, Don.
Awesome article. It is really encouraging to see so many solid men offering their lives. Pax et bonum.
Oh, Jared already said that. Well, you took the words right off my keyboard, Jared!
God bless all our seminarians.
No matter the particulars of the case, the Advocate's story highlights the frustrations many families have experienced in dealing with CPS: encountering power-hungry CPS staffers (often people with no children of their own) who execute a removal of children (kidnapping) from the family home on barely credible, sometimes merely circumstantial evidence; the follow-up line of communication is closed off (chided for "calling too often" -- about her own children!, not updating the family on the whereabouts or the health of their own children); and exuding an air of suspicion toward home-schooling parents and parents of strong religious faith.
The issue is not about abusive parents: sadly, and throughout history and across every cultural and social line, there have been those who do not value their own children.
The issue here is about the government. Do your research, folks. Almost all of what the government does or proposes to do in regard to children is only superficially about the good of the children; at its heart, every government program, especially but certainly not limited to the government-run public school, is about control of the citizenry.
The name, Child Protective Services, is a safe-sounding label that is designed to deceive. While some children may have been assisted over the years, the agency is designed to further put the citizenry on edge against one another, making us easier to control.