Thank you Bush

[Ben Kenobi]

And yet, more people than ever are now requiring charity. Some gift of opportunity.

In the US? In the world?

The poor will always be with us. You can provide the opportunity, but it's just that, opportunity. There never is anything that's a guaranteed success.

Which you aren't one of, as you've mentioned before.

I'm a Canadian, and yes, we are under their umbrella. I really don't see the issue wrt to the war on terror. We were targets too, all of us were in the west.

So does the culture of life only value Americans?

Are you saying that the terrorists value the life of other Muslims? I don't think they value anyone's life, Muslim or not. I'd be willing to bet that the terrorists have killed more Muslims then America.

So why didn't he and his administration do more in the early years to provide them the equipment they needed? Why have they repeatedly given the short shrift to the VA?

And why did it take so long for the surge? The idea behind it was to avoid the troops on the ground and avoid the casulties associated with such. Once they committed to the ground troops, the equipment likewise improved. Casulties have been extraordinarily low for any conflict in recorded history. I don't think you can argue that they didn't care about their own troops.

So, actually improving the lives of those still living is somehow not pro-life?

Not if it funds killing babies. Improving peoples lives, by sacrificing others is a utilitarian concept, and has nothing to do with any concept of objective morality. One could argue that if Americans were happier in war, that war was a good thing for America through the same process you are arguing here.

You're confusing causation with correlation.

And USAid funds abortion. GSM. Thanks for the quote from them.

I'm no longer Catholic.

Then you ought to stop lecturing Catholics who actually believe in the church.

Well, for one thing, social help. Like subsidised child care for them so they can, y'know. Keep going to school and possibly get the opportunity to lift themselves from poverty.

So why do you care so much about the condoms? I mean really. Condoms are irrelevant to the whole process. If you were so interested in social help, why didn't you mention that first off? Unless of course you believe that wealth is accrued through killing children.

[DaShi]

If that were the case then I'd still be a protestant.

Obviously, I had to change and reconsider some of the things that I believed in order to convert to Catholicism in the first place. I don't have the correct answer on everything, but I believe that the Church does.

That's why you're still a protestant. Being Catholic isn't just changing what parts of the Bible you wish to believe. It's about how you think and percieve the world and religion. In this way, you are wholly protestant. That's why it bring shame to Catholics whenever you speak.

[Ben Kenobi]

That's why you're still a protestant. Being Catholic isn't just changing what parts of the Bible you wish to believe.

I didn't say that I said it was an INTERNAL CHANGE ie, changing me, not changing the bible. Did you not see what I said, or just skipped over that part?

I said, and I'll repeat it I HAD TO CHANGE. I, I, and not the bible, the way that I understood things to be in order to understand the truth. THE BIBLE DID NOT CHANGE. I did.

I understood that before when it comes to the question, for protestants of "I should be able to interpret the bible as I see fit", which makes no sense at all. I realised the reason all of them have certain books, is because they need tradition, and they don't have it so they have to do as best as they can.

It's about how you think and percieve the world and religion.

In terms of seeing things on a worldwide basis? The whole ecclesiastical structure makes more sense to me then it did before.

I'm not sure about what you mean by religion, but as far as I can see your way of seeing 'religion' in not faithful to Catholic teaching. You've either been misinformed or are out for something else here.

In this way, you are wholly protestant. That's why it bring shame to Catholics whenever you speak.

You've still evaded answering every question I've asked you. If it doesn't matter where I go, why are Catholics forbidden to take the Lord's supper elsewhere?

Yes, it does matter that I go to the mass, in fact it's required.

As for Protestants, it doesn't make sense the decision they faced. Martin Luther did not just have the choice of splitting or letting his reforms go. He made the conscious choice to form his own church. He could have stayed in the church and fixed many of the abuses. Because he left, he put his soul in danger, as he did the souls of everyone who followed him, and those of everyone else who followed his example over the next 500 years.

That, however, doesn't change the fact that these are still our sisters and brothers in Christ. You may call them what you wish, heretics, etc. I'd be very impressed actually, if you had the fortitude to call them such in public. However, I think this is all a show for here on Poly, and you don't believe in any of this hooey in real life.

So, show me Da Shi. Show me I'm wrong about you.

[DaShi]

Only a moron would believe that hooey in real-life. The whole thing is a parody of you.

[Q Classic]

Are we? I don't think so. I think you made this decision long before.

Unlike many other non-theists, I think there is a place in life for some people for religion.
People like you make it harder and harder for me to justify that feeling.

Why would I join if I didn't feel it was the right choice for everyone else too? I believe the Catholic church is closest to the truth then anybody else. If I felt otherwise, I would not have felt compelled to join. I honestly don't see what is wrong with saying everyone ought to be Catholic, and that they would be better off being Catholic.

Then why do you get irked why some of us who left the Church feel otherwise?

Ok, glad we have that straight, and you are repudiating your earlier statement.

I'm not repudiating my earlier statement, you just seem fundamentally incapable of comprehension. Nowhere did I claim I held him responsible for her death. Nowhere did I even suggest that.
In fact, since you think I'm blaming him, point out the ****ing line where I even hint at it.

Anyone who was prolife in that argument understood that she was still responsive. All the choicers parroted what you say here.

Anyone who understands modern medical science understands that she was not responsive in any true sense of the term.

I'm just happy somebody cared about her and tried to save her life.

She was no more alive than an automobile or computer.

Obviously because I'm a jackbooted, heartless nazi. Next?

You're the one who is giving Bush a pass on torture. I suppose those people in Guantanamo, whether there rightly or wrongly, don't have a right to a certain quality of life?

In the US? In the world?

The poor will always be with us. You can provide the opportunity, but it's just that, opportunity. There never is anything that's a guaranteed success.

None of his policies mitigated their problems.

Are you saying that the terrorists value the life of other Muslims? I don't think they value anyone's life, Muslim or not. I'd be willing to bet that the terrorists have killed more Muslims then America.

I'm not arguing that. But Bush's policies have not been conducive to generating a culture of life.

And why did it take so long for the surge? The idea behind it was to avoid the troops on the ground and avoid the casulties associated with such. Once they committed to the ground troops, the equipment likewise improved. Casulties have been extraordinarily low for any conflict in recorded history. I don't think you can argue that they didn't care about their own troops.

Then why all of the errors so early on? They didn't care until they realized their PR was collapsing.

Not if it funds killing babies. Improving peoples lives, by sacrificing others is a utilitarian concept, and has nothing to do with any concept of objective morality. One could argue that if Americans were happier in war, that war was a good thing for America through the same process you are arguing here.

Not really. You're mistaking my refusal to ban abortion as support for abortion. You're mistaking my support of contraception as support for abortion. You're mistaking my support of social programs that would ease the burden of the poor and needy as somehow supporting war.

And USAid funds abortion. GSM. Thanks for the quote from them.

The point of that article was more to refute your irresponsible and erroneous claim that condom use leads to higher HIV infection rates.

So why do you care so much about the condoms? I mean really. Condoms are irrelevant to the whole process.

They reduce the rates of unwanted pregnancies? Statistics have shown that the states where condom use is more prevalent (i.e., the Midwest, Pacific West, and Northeast) have far lower rates of teen pregnancy than states who rely on abstinence-only education or have low rates of condom use (the Southeast). Those rates have an inverse correlatton to rates of STIs: higher condom use leads to lower rates of STIs among teenagers.

If you were so interested in social help, why didn't you mention that first off? Unless of course you believe that wealth is accrued through killing children.

If when we mention items is a mark of how highly we value them, clearly you don't value social aid at all, since it's only after I mentioned them that you did.

As far as "accruing wealth through killing children": if rhetoric like that is your attempt to convince me that your twisted beliefs are correct and mine are erroneous, you're failing miserably. Indeed, you're sabatoging your own efforts, in my view pushing you closer and closer to odious hatemongers like Ted Haggard.

[Ben Kenobi]

Only a moron would believe that hooey in real-life. The whole thing is a parody of you.

Here I thought we might have someone who was actually Catholic.

Forgive me for thinking so highly of you, and that you were sincere.

[DaShi]

I am Catholic. You're not. Get over it.

[Q Classic]

You know what? I'm done. There's nothing productive in trying to talk with Ben; as a representative for the Church, he's more offensive and counterproductive to its image than priests quickly shuffled off to other parishes.

****, I'd rather chat with Ned or Fez, at least they were good for some lulz.

[DaShi]

I was just thinking that Ben is as much of a joke as Wiglaf here, only Wiglaf is more likable. Plus, Wiglaf understands what is said to him.

[Q Classic]

Oh, yeah, Wiglaf. Forgot about him.

[duke o' york]

I was just thinking that Ben is as much of a joke as Wiglaf here, only Wiglaf is more likable.

I like Ben, I think he's a great guy.

I just don't talk religion with him. I accept that he believes, and respect the strength of his belief, but I already know that's not for me.

[Ben Kenobi]

Unlike many other non-theists, I think there is a place in life for some people for religion.
People like you make it harder and harder for me to justify that feeling.

Fair enough. I didn't blame my choices on someone else's perceived failings. If you sincerely believed that it wasn't for you why blame other people?

Then why do you get irked why some of us who left the Church feel otherwise?

I get irked when people who feel otherwise lecture as if they still were a part of the Church. I've seen it many times. It's easy to hold people to standard when you don't have to live it yourself. Some of us actually get joy and pleasure out of church.

I'm not repudiating my earlier statement, you just seem fundamentally incapable of comprehension. Nowhere did I claim I held him responsible for her death. Nowhere did I even suggest that.
In fact, since you think I'm blaming him, point out the ****ing line where I even hint at it.

You called him out for 'grandstanding'.

I apologise. I don't see anything to suggest he was anything but sincere.

Anyone who understands modern medical science understands that she was not responsive in any true sense of the term.

Yet, modern science said that she was responsive. Had it not been for her husband she'd be in the care of her family right now. The only one who said she was unresponsive was Michael Schiavo.

She was no more alive than an automobile or computer.

Is that in your considerable, modern, medical opinion?

You're the one who is giving Bush a pass on torture. I suppose those people in Guantanamo, whether there rightly or wrongly, don't have a right to a certain quality of life?

When I see articles that say they whine about not getting the right foods, no I don't think they are mistreated in Guantanamo. I think they probably eat more calories then I do on a daily basis. Compare that to the treatment of folks like Mr. McCain.

None of his policies mitigated their problems.

Arguable. The tax cuts were probably the biggest wealth creating engine over the last 8 years. Would the poor be better off if taxes were greatly increased?

I'm not arguing that. But Bush's policies have not been conducive to generating a culture of life.

WRT to the war, I don't think you can argue more people are dead because of his actions. You've not brought any of his other work into play, so I am just asking the question as to why don't you take the rest into consideration?

Then why all of the errors so early on? They didn't care until they realized their PR was collapsing.

People make mistakes. I like Bush. That doesn't mean he was perfect. Unlike LBJ, he saw his own mistakes and corrected them.

The point of that article was more to refute your irresponsible and erroneous claim that condom use leads to higher HIV infection rates.

I don't trust any source that funds abortions on this issue. They make a considerable amount of money off selling condoms and abortions, why should we trust them to be objective? It would be like me citing that Bud Light has the best drinkability, by quoting Budweiser. Incestuous sourcing anyone?

They reduce the rates of unwanted pregnancies?

Thanks, that's what I was after.

How so? Since condoms have been in use, more pregnancies are unwanted then ever before. Do you sincerely believe that before say 1940, that there were as many unwanted pregnancies as they are now.

Unwantedness is less a function of condom use, but more a function of the overall culture and society. Since society nowadays prizes sex without consequences, it's no surprise that unwanted pregnancies go up.

Statistics has shown this: the states where condom use is more prevalent (i.e., the Midwest, Pacific West, and Northeast) have far lower rates of teen pregnancy than states who rely on abstinence-only education or have low rates of condom use (the Southeast). Those rates also correlate to rates of STIs.

You said unwanted pregnancies, not teen pregnancies. Why are teen pregnancies bad? Are all teen pregnancies 'unwanted'? Are they unwanted by the girls or simply by the families, or simply by society?

[Ben Kenobi]

I like Ben, I think he's a great guy.

Thanks Duke.

I never intended this to be a religion thread. It says right on it. "Thank you Dubya".

I don't see how folks can complain about discussing religion when they threadjack into it.

[DaShi]

I like Ben, I think he's a great guy.

I just don't talk religion with him. I accept that he believes, and respect the strength of his belief, but I already know that's not for me.

The problem isn't what he believes about religion and God. It's about what he believes about other people, along with his blatant lies, bigotry, and his inability to comprehend anything outside his own myopic view of the world.

[Q Classic]

the problem isn't what he believes about religion and god. It's about what he believes about other people, along with his blatant lies, bigotry, and his inability to comprehend anything outside his own myopic view of the world.

qft.