Woman Denied US Citizenship Because of Atheism

reply to post by windword


Sweet, seems like some degree of common sense is taking root. Then again though this is to be expected, as America is turning into a Catholic nation:

www.catholicnewsagency.com...

Think of it this way: Catholics have outright control the US Supreme Court.
ivarfjeld.com...

Catholics have major pool in Congress
www.catholicnews.com...
www.catholicnews.com...

A good portion of illegal immigrants are Catholic, as most illegal immigrants are from Mexico, and most Mexicans are Catholic.
countrystudies.us...

The good thing I guess, is watching atheists heads explode.

I don't think people should be allowed "Conscientious Objection" based on ANY grounds.

A republic, from the Latin Res Publica, is "this public thing" that we all share.

Being a citizen of a republic originally meant PRECISELY that you could be relied on in times of danger (house-fires, floods, etc.) to aid the general public and defend the common good.

Refusing to actually do the dirty-work of citizen-hood, regardless of your "moral justification," amounts to simply saying that "I don't want to help, because I don't think it's a good idea," or some version thereof.

FIne.

No Quakers as citizens either. Their citizenship is in the kingdom of God, anyway. So why do they need to be Americans as well? The first Christians fought for the Emperor; many of them were soldiers in legions that were de facto christian fighting units, even when Christianity was still illegal.


The real problem is not her religion, it is the whole idea that "my personal reservations are more important than the common good." How can you have any public institution, if what I want is more important than what the rest of you want.

reply to post by korathin


I hardly think that Catholic percentages are going to make any atheists heads explode. They know that they are in the minority.

However, the Catholic Church has many reason to be worried.

The percentage of U.S. Catholics who consider themselves “strong” members of the Roman Catholic Church has never been lower than it was in 2012, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of new data from the General Social Survey (GSS). About a quarter (27%) of American Catholics called themselves “strong” Catholics last year, down more than 15 points since the mid-1980s and among the lowest levels seen in the 38 years since strength of religious identity was first measured in the GSS, a long-running national survey carried out by the independent research organization NORC at the University of Chicago.

However, over the past four decades, self-reported church attendance has declined among “strong” Catholics as well as among Catholics overall. The share of all Catholics who say they attend Mass at least once a week has dropped from 47% in 1974 to 24% in 2012; among “strong” Catholics, it has fallen more than 30 points, from 85% in 1974 to 53% last year.
www.pewforum.org...

Catholics don't all practice what they've been taught.

Some 98 percent of sexually active Catholic women have used contraceptive methods banned by the church, research published on Wednesday showed.
www.huffingtonpost.com...

27% of abortion patients say they are Catholics.
www.prochoice.org...

Not to mention their pedophilia problem.

"Inconsistency on the part of pastors and the faithful between what they say and what they do, between word and manner of life, is undermining the Church's credibility," the pontiff said in his homily.

Pope Francis says hypocrisy undermines Church's credibilitywww.reuters.com...

reply to post by tovenar


Yes, and in your view people are simply required to do as they're effing told, right?
No thanks.

Unless we VOTE on every act of war that view point is invalid.

Originally posted by tovenar

The real problem is not her religion, it is the whole idea that "my personal reservations are more important than the common good." How can you have any public institution, if what I want is more important than what the rest of you want.

Simplistic: Picking up a gun and killing another human is the only means of providing for common good?

Maybe she's good in a soup kitchen.

As a matter of fact, I think that is a damn good idea. I am beyond sick of these fascists lying their way into wars in the name of quarterly profits. There ought to be a national debate preceding EVERY act of military agression, with a vote. Pass or fail. Period.

Originally posted by JayinAR
reply to post by tovenar

 

Yes, and in your view people are simply required to do as they're effing told, right?
No thanks.

Unless we VOTE on every act of war that view point is invalid.

Or we only fight defensive wars. That might work, too.

But we'd have to be a republic, not an empire. To be honest, an empire doesn't really want conscripted troops anyway, for the very reason that they feel free to refuse when the cause is unjust. Empires really need professional soldiers, especially mercenaries. Like Blackwater, and Executive Outcomes before that.

Originally posted by Annee


Simplistic: Picking up a gun and killing another human is the only means of providing for common good?

Well, If I get to pick and choose, then I choose the kind of citizenship where I don't have to serve on a jury, or pay taxes, since I conscientiously object to both of them.

I'm ok with getting disability though. And Social security when I turn, what, 64?

Originally posted by tovenar

Originally posted by Annee


Simplistic: Picking up a gun and killing another human is the only means of providing for common good?

Well, If I get to pick and choose, then I choose the kind of citizenship where I don't have to serve on a jury, or pay taxes, since I conscientiously object to both of them.

I'm ok with getting disability though. And Social security when I turn, what, 64?

"Conscientious objector" is specific to meaning.

It is not pick and choose.

Originally posted by tovenar
The first Christians fought for the Emperor

Which emperor? Proof please.

The first Christians lived in the 1st Century and were persecuted during that time.

We have plenty of evidence showing that the earliest Christians objected to military service, and those who became Christians while serving in the army usually retired from service as a result. The emperor Diocletian went so far as to remove Christians from the army, and some Christians soldiers were even executed when their faith was discovered (e.g. Marinus of Caesarea).

It was not until the conversion of Constantine (4th Century) that military service became acceptable to the majority of Christians.

reply to post by tovenar


Well yeah. That was the charge given to our military. Apparently the problem is that once the machine gains enough funding, it needs to spend that capital in order to attain more funding. It feeds itself.

For instance, back in the day of the American Revolution I am confident the idea of leaving weapons in piles in enemy territory to save on transportation costs of taking them home would not only seem to be sheer lunacy, but would also border on treasonous.

Of course this perpetual war also happens to feed the energy companies because we pick on 2nd or 3rd world, oil rich nations. This is good for the economy so the media and legislature spin yarn that only idiots will accept. Problem is we got a lot of damn idiots in this country. A LOT

reply to post by Sankari


He means the Roman Emperor obviously. The rest is up for debate. I don't accept a first century christianity. At that time it wasn't organized and was more like a rag tag operation.

reply to post by tovenar


Interestingly enough, you don't HAVE to serve on jury duty. OR pay income tax.
Who woulda thunk, eh?

this just gos to show we live in a society still controlled by the Arabic religions conspiracy they hate everyone else and want as few people that disagree with then in this country

reply to post by truthontheloose


Could you expound on those remarks a bit? They sound sorta bigoted.

reply to post by JayinAR

you see middle eastern religions hate other beliefs or ideas (mostly because of their monotheism and their "holy book's" consent call for blood shed) so they try to stomp them out as much as possible

If you don't believe me about jury duty, try this.

Simply state in court that you do not want to participate. Tell them it is a hardship and you would rather be out earning earning money for your family. Money you don't plan on paying taxes on.

That is a can of worms no judge will open in court on an unrelated charge.

reply to post by truthontheloose


But that simply isn't true.

reply to post by JayinAR


oh really so i guess you believe all those history books were made up by pagans and atheist to make people feel sorry for them look how much blood is on the hands of the church

reply to post by truthontheloose