With Jesus it was the publicans.
With us, it's the Re-publicans.
Are you saying they should become the Re-re-publicans? :think: :chuckle:
chrysostom
- Thread starter chrysostom
- Start date
With us, it's the Re-publicans.
Are you saying they should become the Re-re-publicans? :think: :chuckle:
Unfortunately, I don’t see any sign of Jesus in the Republican Party.
Right. And since He's not in the Democratic party either, let's just get rid of both and go back to a monarchy.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
I am so thankful you are not a republican ...
I'm so thankful that you're thankful... :cloud9:
Horrible idea. It is so vastly inferior as system of government (unless you're the king of a favorite of him). It's on par with suggesting we reconsider adopting slavery as an integral part of our economic policy.
So God chose a "vastly inferior" system over democracy for His chosen people? It wasn't like democracy wasn't a thing back then... In fact, He rejected democracy out of hand, killing those who brought it up.
You need to be careful what you believe, because ideas have consequences.
That's an example of one.
God didn't use a "vastly inferior" system of government to rule His people.
He chose the most stable form of government, one that lasted for several hundred years, if not nearly a millennium. And let's not forget the fact that God will reign as king over the earth for another thousand years, with a rod of iron. Oh, and let's not forget that monarchies reigned (no pun intended) when it came to governments, for over 3500 years.
You see, God liked the idea of a monarchy, so much so that He planned to use it for His nation, and included it in the Mosaic law, fully fleshed out.
If I were to set up a government, I would use the same government God did, not what sinful man could come up with.
That made no sense whatsoever...
Um, no, it's not. This is the kind of prima facie statements you keep making.
Though, if I may ask, which kind of slavery are you talking about? Because I am fully against the slavery that we had 200 years ago.
hear, read, think, write, talk
A Means
to improve yourself. Learn to listen. Learn to read. Learn to think. Learn to communicate what you know. These are skills promoted by Jordan Peterson who believes our schools are doing more harm than good. Parents are also complicit in not holding the young responsible for what they do. The liberal academia does not want to listen to this kind of stuff and knows how to "destroy and devalue opposition", a phrase worth borrowing.
Home
A Means
to improve yourself. Learn to listen. Learn to read. Learn to think. Learn to communicate what you know. These are skills promoted by Jordan Peterson who believes our schools are doing more harm than good. Parents are also complicit in not holding the young responsible for what they do. The liberal academia does not want to listen to this kind of stuff and knows how to "destroy and devalue opposition", a phrase worth borrowing.
Home
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
Is it necessarily exclusive to have an autocratic king /queen /monarch, and to still be a vibrant classically liberal country?
I'm not certain that it is. I acknowledge that our constitutional republic separates powers deliberately in an attempt to protect all of our basic human rights from being stolen by our government, and also with our constitution's Bill of Rights, which is targeted directly at that government.
But is it impossible for an autocrat to faithfully preserve our rights, instead of a constitutional republic with a bill of rights? I'm just not sure it necessarily is.
I admit that the question of succession becomes more and more important the further out from any particular monarch that you get. If the monarch has absolute power, and they just aren't classically liberal, then that does seem to contend with a monarchy being inherently able to be a sustained classically liberal state.
But perhaps a persistent test is required of the monarch, a classically liberal test, a test that survives each subsequent monarch's death, and each monarch must pass it, and it's up to us and not them to determine if they do pass is. This sounds more like the UK's constitutional monarchy, something closer to that, than to our constitution's government.
Study philosophy to learn language. Philosophy understands language. Psychology is a branch of philosophy. Peterson's doctorate is in philosophy.
Where I'd say the Constitution follows the expressed intent of the Declaration in an affirmative sense, to establish before nations our belief in rights that the government is established to protect for the benefit of its citizens, in service to their interests.
That's a bit off though. It may be possible for a good king to preserve it as an expression of his will, but who wants their rights subject to the breath of one man?
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
We agree on these words as far as we as individuals use them. I suspect however that we might disagree on how to interpret "rights," "benefits," and "interests," especially wrt how they integrate together cogently.
If he's a good classical liberal king I don't see any necessary conflict. But what about succession? That to me is much hairier, and lends credence to a constitution of some sort that is a higher authority than any monarch, to keep monarchs in line. And who administrates the constitution? That lends to a republic. And should we enumerate the rights? That lends to a bill of rights as part of the constitution.
do you need
A Safe Place
to avoid being offended? Stay in school until you are able to deal with confrontation. Stay out of politics where ideas are proposed and resisted. Limit yourself to small groups that agree with you. Don't talk politics at family gatherings. Stay away from religious forums. Better yet go to a country where free speech is not allowed. You know where they are. The ones with walls to keep people in.
Home
A Safe Place
to avoid being offended? Stay in school until you are able to deal with confrontation. Stay out of politics where ideas are proposed and resisted. Limit yourself to small groups that agree with you. Don't talk politics at family gatherings. Stay away from religious forums. Better yet go to a country where free speech is not allowed. You know where they are. The ones with walls to keep people in.
Home
No. Are you one of those of the empowered majority who pretend at a victim's status by creating absurd categories of slight, like the "war" on Christmas?
Colleges should be the place where people learn how to identify and confront poor thinking, by developing critical reasoning skill sets and by inhabiting beliefs that are foreign to them and learning how to address them as serious constructs. Sadly, too many liberal arts colleges seem to be deficient at the undergraduate level these days. It's a cause for concern, but one that's also echoed in a conservative transformation of many institutions of higher learning into glorified trade schools, where the point is commerce and relation to it to the near if not complete exclusion of the beneficial other, among which is that skill set.
And learn to call ideas different from your own unpatriotic or unAmerican.
Like conservative or liberal forums, where divergence is discouraged. And be sure to only subscribe to non-fake news outlets like Fox or CNN, depending on your views.
That's probably a good idea for anyone who is over thirty.
No, get an ear full of them. You'll find a wide range of opinions, many of them scary. You need to see what religion does to otherwise decent people when they confuse faith with mechanics and their bedclothes with judges' robes.
And you'll meet the occasional saint who'll uplift your hope in a gentler walk and a loving evolution in Christ.
He's just being silly at this point, mostly because Chrys only really sees half the problem.
You don't have to go anywhere else for that, just reelect this president and stick around. He's already working on one of those walls, but it's just to keep out an "invader"...honest. Cross his heart and hope to divide.
Last edited:
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
When I'm napping, I guess
nah, go out in the world, work to support yourself and get a real education
If your plans necessitate a degree or certification, get it while you're working. Full time college without a paying experiential element is a sucker's game
Don't be a sucker
Always remember that those who are successful in politics are almost always corrupt and will only do what they promise if you hound them
So get yourself some hounds
Co-workers are good, all working toward a common goal
Can I talk family at political meetings?
:noid:
Like canada?
Or scotland?
:think:
Spoiler
you have
A Right
only because you belong to a group. Why does your group need a right? We have the "Bill of Rights" but they apply to every citizen of the United States. That is a big group that includes all genders, all religions, all races etc. Now your subgroup must have a particular right. Why? That right may interfere with the right of another group. Do two guys have a right to get married in a Catholic church? What is the opposite of a right? Responsibility according to Jordan Peterson. A right is something you have coming to you. A responsibility is something you owe. A duty. Who is talking about that besides Jordan Peterson? That is a problem for many. Why?
Home
A Right
only because you belong to a group. Why does your group need a right? We have the "Bill of Rights" but they apply to every citizen of the United States. That is a big group that includes all genders, all religions, all races etc. Now your subgroup must have a particular right. Why? That right may interfere with the right of another group. Do two guys have a right to get married in a Catholic church? What is the opposite of a right? Responsibility according to Jordan Peterson. A right is something you have coming to you. A responsibility is something you owe. A duty. Who is talking about that besides Jordan Peterson? That is a problem for many. Why?
Home
We sometimes have to establish laws that deal with specific groups because the majority has had a way, historically, of forgetting that everyone should have the same rights, balanced between one another as equally in exercise as we can.
No, though they have a right to be married. A Catholic church isn't a business and isn't holding itself out as one.
He's just playing with language if he's serious about that. There's no opposite involved, only a distinction between what we are entitled to do and what we do because we accept that it is owed by us. Those aren't logical opposites. And all sorts of people talk about that every day. Peterson's gift is in making the simple sound complex and literary, if only after an I've completed an undergraduate reading list at a decent college fashion.
milo vs jordan
A Public Therapy Session
between Milo Yiannopoulos and Jordan Peterson, two very interesting people. Jordan presses Milo on the effects of a priest molesting him when he was 14 years old. Milo resists and will not confirm what Jordan suspects. Milo refuses to play the victim card which most likely led to his downfall. He also suggests Jordan is being compromised. Very interesting. Well worth your time.
Home
A Public Therapy Session
between Milo Yiannopoulos and Jordan Peterson, two very interesting people. Jordan presses Milo on the effects of a priest molesting him when he was 14 years old. Milo resists and will not confirm what Jordan suspects. Milo refuses to play the victim card which most likely led to his downfall. He also suggests Jordan is being compromised. Very interesting. Well worth your time.
Home
jordan and the bishop
A Dialogue
between Bishop Barron and Jordan Peterson. Way too long and not so interesting but I suffered through it just to see if Jordan would talk about homosexuality. At the end Jordan gets the bishop to admit that he read the book and would be willing to talk about it at their next session. The book is " In the Closet of the Vatican". Looking forward to that one.
Home
A Dialogue
between Bishop Barron and Jordan Peterson. Way too long and not so interesting but I suffered through it just to see if Jordan would talk about homosexuality. At the end Jordan gets the bishop to admit that he read the book and would be willing to talk about it at their next session. The book is " In the Closet of the Vatican". Looking forward to that one.
Home
jonathan morris, dolan, cuomo
A Coincidence
or a sequence of events. Cuomo signs the abortion bill. Jonathan Morris is critical and soon placed on administrative leave by Timothy Dolan. Cuomo calls for an end to statute of limitations for rape which would include priest victims. Dolan was bothered by the abortion bill but knew it would take a lot of money to settle old claims. Go ahead and connect the dots.
Home
A Coincidence
or a sequence of events. Cuomo signs the abortion bill. Jonathan Morris is critical and soon placed on administrative leave by Timothy Dolan. Cuomo calls for an end to statute of limitations for rape which would include priest victims. Dolan was bothered by the abortion bill but knew it would take a lot of money to settle old claims. Go ahead and connect the dots.
Home
a family
A Trinity
made in Their Image. The child joins the man and woman together. Be fruitful, and multiply, Let the children come. To save the family and the child, we must protect marriage and life. You can't vote for Democrats. They are destroying the family. They are destroying life. Let the children come and you must protect them. Abortion kills babies. Democrats support abortion. You can do something about it. Do it.
Home
A Trinity
made in Their Image. The child joins the man and woman together. Be fruitful, and multiply, Let the children come. To save the family and the child, we must protect marriage and life. You can't vote for Democrats. They are destroying the family. They are destroying life. Let the children come and you must protect them. Abortion kills babies. Democrats support abortion. You can do something about it. Do it.
Home
an abomination
A Divorce
hurts the child. Let not man put asunder. Till death do you part. This is what the Church teaches. The reason for this is to protect the child. There is a reason, a meaning, and a purpose for everything. You will find it if you look for it. You have an obligation, a duty to respect it. The child should not suffer the convenience of an adult.
Home
A Divorce
hurts the child. Let not man put asunder. Till death do you part. This is what the Church teaches. The reason for this is to protect the child. There is a reason, a meaning, and a purpose for everything. You will find it if you look for it. You have an obligation, a duty to respect it. The child should not suffer the convenience of an adult.
Home