Nancy Pelosi: A Cathollic Says What?? Vows to stand against her Church...Stands with Satan/Obama

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by jibeho

 

Two questions.

1) Do we really want people legislating based on what their religion tells them to do or do we want them to legislate based on what their constituents tell them to do?

2) Do all of you that are angry at Pelosi for this applaud Muslims that legislate Sharia law in other countries?

Interesting that you bring up Sharia.

Does the government make decisions that counter Islamic fath in the muslim schools that receive funds by the government in the states?

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by jibeho

 

Two questions.

1) Do we really want people legislating based on what their religion tells them to do or do we want them to legislate based on what their constituents tell them to do?

2) Do all of you that are angry at Pelosi for this applaud Muslims that legislate Sharia law in other countries?

The federal mandate for insurance coverage is forcing the hand in this debate. Without the mandate we would not have a problem.

I won't even go into our nations growing Sharia problem. Just look at the Oklahoma override recently.. Or the spending of public dollars for the Islamic faith. Remember the new foot baths that were installed at the University of Michigan back in 2007 and the growing cry for our public schools to add Muslim prayer rooms to their campuses while stripping away groups like Fellowship of Christian Athletes....

I am NOT a Pelosi fan (I hate her) BUT "if one does not TOTALLY AGREE WITH anything, in this case her church, then that person who does not "blindly follow" is considered "bad", "evil", etc. THAT IS WHAT IS WRONG WITH "Church & State, all organizations, groups, clubs, etc. YOU MUST BLINDLY FOLLOW OR ELSE ---- It is the dumbing down (and NUMBING Down) of America. What church, group, etc is "Totally Right" and "KNOWS ALL, as if GOD HAS SPOKEN"? NONE ------ It is about time that those who "think a bit" and "dare to say it" are NOT BURNED AT THE STAKE. ------ Time to move from "what man is" to "what man should be", a thinking, growing entity that can change and just BLINDLY FOLLOW. ---- The Earth really is NOT Flat! The Bible is NOT "God's Words" but words written and totally controlled and put together by "the rich and powerful" who could pay the few to write back then.

I salute legislative Nancy Pelosi for her courageous stand this instance. She stood for the sacred Constitution, of which not many would dare to conscionably.

America is a secular sovereign nation. There is a separation between religion and State.

Religion is a personal choice and issue, while the State is a societal issue. Pay unto Caesar what belongs to Caesar and pay unto that which belongs to the Kingdom of Heaven.

Religion is but a guide towards civilisation - to acheive peace and progress for the human race.

But for far too long, religion misinterpretated by bigots, robots and the selfish in mankind had sought to dominate the state, as recorded by history of the Roman Byzantine Empire , even after its fall and new centres of power arose, and saw its excesses, of uplifting only those in power but kept the masses in enslavement and stupidity.

It was not too long ago people like me would be burnt on the stake, for simply speaking out against such excesses and truth. It must and will end with this generation once and for all.

Catholics, Protestants or Muslims or atheists, are protected under the sacred Constitution, which is written and based upon the 'religious' civilisational guidelines taught over the centuries, for peace and progress. The most critical factor of the sacred Constitution is the right to vote.

With this vote, the masses have free will to make a choice for the direction of society.

IF we are truly 'religious faithful', then we must never fear the truth, veracity and relevance of what we had been taught, to discuss, debate, fellowship to find peaceful solutions to win over others to our beliefs, OR change if we had been wrong in our assumptions and presumptions.

Are the current laws morally wrong? How had we voted? Can the MAJORITY be wrong if they voted in a free election, or had WE been the ones whom had been wrong, either in our beliefs or our apathy and are only being selfish, to deny freedom to others whom share our space?

These, we must ask ourselves, instead of blaming others, so that we may correct errors, either in our apathy, or more critically, in our perceptions, or that ignorant passion will only fester into murderous hate and anti society behaviour.

May the Catholics calm down, reflect upon themselves. Those ignorant days of religious superiority are over, and found to be wanting, with numerous errors that had harmed mankind for centuries, with abuse and murders of innocents during the inqusitions and support of Nazi Germany amongst many more other vile issues done in the name of 'religion'.

Today, a new educated and independent innocent american catholic generation arises from the ashes of history. May they be wise and avoid the mistakes of past, and contribute towards the progress and evolution of humanity, in peace.

This is why religion needs to go away. We can't be an evolved species capable of seeing deep into the cosmos, landing on the moon, developing nano technology... and still believe such ridiculous nonsense. It's insane. Religion has been completely revealed to be a non-thinking-man's control scheme and we're just too much evolved thinkers to allow this nonsense. It's like being 40 years old and fretting over who is and who is not on Santa's list. The word "retarded" comes to mind.

I mean "Satan/Obama"? A catholic says crazy, that's what a catholic says.

I love how Catholics/Christians/evangelists. Call foul over the "sharia" takeover and are islamiphobic.

How about you take a step back and realize that to everyone else you look like Religious Extremists. I am more afraid of the right wing religious extremists in this country and for this country than I am about anything else, including terrorists.

Shows me that the majority of the population hasn't evolved mentally in the last couple thousand years, Pathetic.

The more I read about nancy, the more I think she has a few screws loose. Did she think ats wouldn't notice?

reply to post by Misoir


'Abstinence is the only moral contraceptive and if people get HIV/AIDS or some other disease by having sex outside of wedlock then I really have no sympathy for them.'

Wow. I mean really...wow. Any religion, or Person for that matter, that would state that one who suffers from AIDS by having sex out of wedlock deserves to suffer is just......wow. I dont even know what to say. And you believe this? YOUR RIDICULOUS RELIGION was created to control the masses. That is all. Nothing more. Do the childern born as AIDS babies deserve that too? Let me guess, to you, yes? Sins of the Fathers, right? You make me sick.

The separation of church and state means that there is to be no primary religion designated by the state. The state does not have control over religious dogma. Religion, any religion is to be separate from the dictates of the state.

In our current situation, the state is trying to replace religion. It (the state) is trying to usurpt religion with the states own dogma.

Many here object to the catholic faith. You are free to do so. You aren't forced to adhere to that specific belief.

Yet the state is trying to impose it's own dogma, it's own "faith" on the catholic church.
In essence, the state is telling catholics what to believe.

reply to post by jibeho

imho, contraception is fine, but morning after abortion pills, are disgraceful. Why? Because one prevents conception, but the other aborts one that's already occured. Couples ought to be entitled to express their sexuality, without being FORCED by their church to deal with the possibility of a child they might not be equipped to raise, or do not wish to have. Same thing for the third world, where Education and contraception, is infinitely better than the forced sterilization that's occuring via vaccination programs, and "the church" surely knows all about that, as it knows about most everything that goes on at that level.

Edit to add: Abortion ought to be discouraged wherever and whenever possible, thus preserving women's rights while protecting the rights of the unborn, yet already conceived, imho.

70 million abortions, many because they might have been "inconvenient" is a disgrace, especially for all those souls who had the courage to incarnate, only to be needlessly terminated shortly thereafter - must really screw things up, karmically, and there's bound to be blowback from that kind of thing at some level...? It short circuits the circle of life, and that can't be good. The human being, once conceived isn't a throw away object, a "thing", that's terrible that so many are given to think that way. When will we ever learn..?

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
reply to post by jibeho

 

imho, contraception is fine, but morning after abortion pills, are disgraceful. Why? Because one prevents conception, but the other aborts one that's already occured. Couples ought to be entitled to express their sexuality, without being FORCED by their church to deal with the possibility of a child they might not be equipped to raise, or do not wish to have. Same thing for the third world, where Education and contraception, is infinitely better than the forced sterilization that's occuring via vaccination programs, and "the church" surely knows all about that, as it knows about most everything that goes on at that level.

edit on 3-2-2012 by NewAgeMan because: edit

So you don't have a problem with the government telling religions what to believe, you just have a problem with religions believing a certain way.

Correct?

reply to post by beezzer

It's a very difficult issue, as we all know, see my edit for more on my view if you like.

These things shouldn't be about "belief" but about what's right, and the greatest possibly good for all, including the unborn yet alive.

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
reply to post by beezzer

 

It's a very difficult issue, as we all know, see my edit for more on my view if you like.

These things shouldn't be about "belief" but about what's right, and the greatest possibly good for all, including the unborn yet alive.

But all religion is, is "belief". Take that away and you're left with a sunday get-together with neighbors!

What is right , is subjective and predicated on. . belief.

Originally posted by Zippidee

Originally posted by spinalremain

Haha, yeah. And all Catholics abstain from sexual relation until marriage. All Catholics abide by not eating meat on Friday and they all do for others more than they do for themselves.

"Stands with Satan"? You're serious aren't you?


What a sad state our country is in. Phony Catholics choosing to embrace their church when it's politically convenient. I taste Bile when I read such threads.

Someone actually compared birth control to murder. There is no word in the English language to describe how utterly stupid that is.

That would be a basic reply from someone who has never practiced Catholicism or who has never researched the faith. Man is not infallible! Hence the Catholic sacrement of Reconciliation. Its a simple issue really. We do not want to participate in the act of abortion or contraception. By using contraception or having an abortion the culpability resides on us! But, this legislation forces Catholics to participate in contraception and abortion with regards to other individuals. This is a direct violation of the constitution and In our views, abiding by this law forces us to commit Mortal sin even though it was not done by us to us! Complacency does not reduce the act to a venial sin. Therefore, true Catholics must not comply.

Actually raised Catholic here. Why I'd say I have received holy eucharist at least 200 times. Can you remind me how contraception equates to murder again please? Also, can you show me where all Catholics must use birth control or have abortions now? Thx. It almost appears as if people are complaining and nitpicking for nothing.

reply to post by beezzer

I humbly disagree, about this thing you call "belief", which although it applies to most people, cannot serve as the foundation for such decision making as that involving abortion, and life and death. There IS what's real and true, good and right, which can be discerned, known, and "grokked", such that it's not a "belief" but an understanding, an awareness, an insight aka wisdom."Belief", God I hate I that word, which implies that there is no truth, no justice, no timeless, spaceless principals, just "belief in". It didn't used to be like that in the old old days, like in ancient Greece, back then we sought for and came to know "the good" for itself, as a quintessential and intrinsic, experiencial goodness out of which the decisions of a civil society flowed, at all levels.

In ancient India, they practiced the "supreme science" of "Brahmavidya", which was inner knowing of a "first cause" and that awareness and understanding formed the basis of everything else, and from those efforts arose all the great religious and spiritual traditions of the earth. Abraham the great patriarch himself came from this tradition.

So, I guess I missed how this was against the First Amendment.

Anyone care to explain it?

Wow. Just wow.

You wonder if the condoms they threw at the Catholic school girls were used or not?


‘Occupy’ Thugs Attack Catholic Girls – OpEd‘Occupy’ Thugs Attack Catholic Girls – OpEdWritten by: William Donohue


On January 25, Thomas Tobin, the Bishop of Providence, decided to reach out to “Occupy Providence” by allowing the homeless to seek shelter in Catholic churches; the city had turned down a request by the group to set up daytime shelters. The next day, “Occupy Providence” activists showed their gratitude by crashing a pro-life rally, shouting down a speaker, stopping a priest from offering a closing prayer, and throwing condoms at Catholic schoolgirls.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by Furbs
So, I guess I missed how this was against the First Amendment.

Anyone care to explain it?

The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.

en.wikipedia.org...

The key point is

impeding the free exercise of religion,

Originally posted by MechEng09
I love how Catholics/Christians/evangelists. Call foul over the "sharia" takeover and are islamiphobic.

How about you take a step back and realize that to everyone else you look like Religious Extremists. I am more afraid of the right wing religious extremists in this country and for this country than I am about anything else, including terrorists.

Shows me that the majority of the population hasn't evolved mentally in the last couple thousand years, Pathetic.

Not all Christians are Catholics or "evangelicals". We don't agree on certain things, just wanted to clear that up.

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by Furbs
So, I guess I missed how this was against the First Amendment.

Anyone care to explain it?

The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.

en.wikipedia.org...

The key point is

impeding the free exercise of religion,

How does this idea impede the free exercise of Catholicism?

Isn't it the Catholic's prerogative to not use all of the benefits under any particular health plan? The law requires it's purchase, not it's use, if I am understanding it correctly.

So I am still not understanding the problem.