You might not have a church to go to if you don't vote right.

Fantine · Sep 26, 2016

LivingWordUnity said:
Hillary Clinton (Obama's third term) would result in more judges that always decide against Christians, and it would kill the Pro-Life movement. All we would be able to do if she gets elected is pray for Jesus' Second Coming to happen soon.

What a cop out! Jesus never walked away from a difficult challenge.

All that is needed is candidates who care about the already born as much as they allege they care about the unborn. After all, if candidates don't care about hunger, war, environmental hazards, etc. how in the world can we trust that they care about the unborn? If they can totally ignore the needs they can readily see with their own eyes, why in the world should I trust they can "see" the needs that aren't visible to the eyes?

We can't--and I don't.

Miss Shelby · Sep 27, 2016

Cosmic Charlie said:
No, can you hook me up ?

For some Zoloft you got it

Miss Shelby · Sep 27, 2016

Fantine said:
I'm boycotting Domino's pizza for supporting a university that promotes ideas such as these.

Good. You won't have diarrhea.

Miss Shelby · Sep 27, 2016

Fantine said:
What a cop out! Jesus never walked away from a difficult challenge.

he knew when to shake the dust,

Cosmic Charlie · Sep 27, 2016

Miss Shelby said:
For some Zoloft you got it

Milk and cookies.

I have Clonazepam. But I don't take it often because I have a tendency to take advantage of myself.

Tallguy88 · Sep 28, 2016

Cosmic Charlie said:
Milk and cookies.

I have Clonazepam. But I don't take it often because I have a tendency to take advantage of myself.

Is that like clonopen?

Cosmic Charlie · Sep 28, 2016

Tallguy88 said:
Is that like clonopen?

I thought it was spelled Klonopen but yes, K/Clonopen is a brand name for Clonazepam.

Tallguy88 · Sep 28, 2016

Cosmic Charlie said:
I thought it was spelled Klonopen but yes, K/Clonopen is a brand name for Clonazepam.

Ok. A friend takes it for anxiety. It makes her very chill.

Cosmic Charlie · Sep 28, 2016

Tallguy88 said:
Ok. A friend takes it for anxiety. It makes her very chill.

More about this stuff than you probably want to know:

For guys with mood disorders (like me) it's used for one of it's (many) side effects: it inhibits the pooling of dopamine in the synaptic receptors. At high enough doses it basically interferes with the brain's executive functions and just sort of puts you into a semi-lethargical inert state. This actually corrects the brain chemistry in a bi-polar person putting them to sleep.

In a non-bipolar person this messes up the brain chemistry and puts a person in a suggestive state and interferes with the short term memory.

Hence, it's a date rape drug.

dzheremi · Sep 29, 2016

How is Clinton going to take away your churches, exactly? With 'activist judges' who will decide against Christians, right?

Now I'm not a big city lawyer, but it seems to me that in the vast majority of the cases where Christians have been decided against, it has been because of their attempt to have places that aren't churches treated as though they are: a county clerk's office (not a church), some random bakery or flower shop (not a church), a bed and breakfast (not a church), etc. Never have I seen, under Obama or Clinton's husband, a case where a church in the USA was shut down or somehow 'taken away' due to its stance on abortion or contraception (and that's kind of a big deal, considering how American law generally functions on the basis of precedent). And that's with the 'activist judges' who have upheld a right to abortion for all this time, under both Republican and Democratic administrations.

Can we please try to live in reality, no matter which party we belong to or plan to vote for? It's not right that every Chicken Little be treated like a new Jonah just because he is wearing a clerical collar.

Miss Shelby · Sep 29, 2016

dzheremi said:
How is Clinton going to take away your churches, exactly? With 'activist judges' who will decide against Christians, right?

Now I'm not a big city lawyer, but it seems to me that in the vast majority of the cases where Christians have been decided against, it has been because of their attempt to have places that aren't churches treated as though they are: a county clerk's office (not a church), some random bakery or flower shop (not a church), a bed and breakfast (not a church), etc. Never have I seen, under Obama or Clinton's husband, a case where a church in the USA was shut down or somehow 'taken away' due to its stance on abortion or contraception (and that's kind of a big deal, considering how American law generally functions on the basis of precedent). And that's with the 'activist judges' who have upheld a right to abortion for all this time, under both Republican and Democratic administrations.

Can we please try to live in reality, no matter which party we belong to or plan to vote for? It's not right that every Chicken Little be treated like a new Jonah just because he is wearing a clerical collar.

so if its not actually taking place on Church property doesn't count? Heres a newsflash for ya. Some people actually practice what their churches teach outside of Sunday service.

dzheremi · Sep 29, 2016

Yes, but the focus of the piece in the OP is right there in the title: "You might not have a church to go to if...", not "You might not have a bakery to run" or "You might not get to be a county clerk anymore" or any of that other stuff. The entire point is that churches are exempt from anti-discrimination laws that govern other places that are not churches, not that nobody practices their faith outside of Sunday service.

So the priest is wrong. Unless Hillary Clinton is somehow going to do away with the first amendment, you absolutely will still have a church to go to even if 'a certain party' is elected.

Miss Shelby · Sep 29, 2016

dzheremi said:
Yes, but the focus of the piece in the OP is right there in the title: "You might not have a church to go to if...", not "You might not have a bakery to run" or "You might not get to be a county clerk anymore" or any of that other stuff. The entire point is that churches are exempt from anti-discrimination laws that govern other places that are not churches, not that nobody practices their faith outside of Sunday service.

So the priest is wrong. Unless Hillary Clinton is somehow going to do away with the first amendment, you absolutely will still have a church to go to even if 'a certain party' is elected.

The point is lost on you, obviously.

pdudgeon · Sep 29, 2016

dzheremi said:
How is Clinton going to take away your churches, exactly? With 'activist judges' who will decide against Christians, right?

Now I'm not a big city lawyer, but it seems to me that in the vast majority of the cases where Christians have been decided against, it has been because of their attempt to have places that aren't churches treated as though they are: a county clerk's office (not a church), some random bakery or flower shop (not a church), a bed and breakfast (not a church), etc. Never have I seen, under Obama or Clinton's husband, a case where a church in the USA was shut down or somehow 'taken away' due to its stance on abortion or contraception (and that's kind of a big deal, considering how American law generally functions on the basis of precedent). And that's with the 'activist judges' who have upheld a right to abortion for all this time, under both Republican and Democratic administrations.

Can we please try to live in reality, no matter which party we belong to or plan to vote for? It's not right that every Chicken Little be treated like a new Jonah just because he is wearing a clerical collar.

the answer is yes, that's exactly what can happen.
all it takes is for martial law to be declared, and any church or other establishment could be shut down as a public menace to the regime.
It happens today in the world--India, China, and North Korea are fine examples.
Churches there are shut down all the time, crosses are knocked down from buildings,
walls torn down or bulldozed.
Historically it's happened in England, France, Spain, Japan, Africa, Poland, Russia, etc.

Cosmic Charlie · Sep 30, 2016

Miss Shelby said: ↑
I don't know, are you?
No, can you hook me up ?

I see the original comment has been removed. But the missed the response.

@Cosmic Charlie If i offended you by asking if you are on drugs after your musing about whether the priest who authored the OP was on them i apologize. didn't think i did as you and i have a ten year plus history of going back and forth that way but apparently someone thought i was goading you as i was cited for the offense. I do not think youre on drugs. But if you are i wish you would share as i feel I need them every time I enter here at Dantes Inferno.

I'm baffled. More than baffled, bewildered - flummoxed I say.

1) When was the last time I was offended by ANYTHING you said to me

and...

2) When was the last time I was offended by ANYONE suggesting I was on drugs ?

Let's face facts: I'm in a state of chemically induced cerebral disorientation most of the time on on this board.

LoAmmi · Sep 30, 2016

pdudgeon said:
the answer is yes, that's exactly what can happen.
all it takes is for martial law to be declared, and any church or other establishment could be shut down as a public menace to the regime.
It happens today in the world--India, China, and North Korea are fine examples.
Churches there are shut down all the time, crosses are knocked down from buildings,
walls torn down or bulldozed.
Historically it's happened in England, France, Spain, Japan, Africa, Poland, Russia, etc.

It also takes people willing to do those actions. I'd like to think that we have enough people in positions of power in the police and military who would not act upon those kinds of illegal orders. Because if you're telling me that those people would act on orders to destroy churches and other religious institutions, we're already in trouble and electing Trump or Hillary hardly matters.

dzheremi · Sep 30, 2016

pdudgeon said:
the answer is yes, that's exactly what can happen.
all it takes is for martial law to be declared, and any church or other establishment could be shut down as a public menace to the regime.
It happens today in the world--India, China, and North Korea are fine examples.
Churches there are shut down all the time, crosses are knocked down from buildings,
walls torn down or bulldozed.
Historically it's happened in England, France, Spain, Japan, Africa, Poland, Russia, etc.

Hillary Clinton is not running for president of any of those other nations, and she does not have time travel powers that would give her any means to influence what has happened historically in other nations, either.

This is really reaching to find something to be alarmed about. Do you sincerely believe that if martial law is declared and the government starts cracking down on things that represent a 'menace to the regime', the first concern of most Catholics in the United States would be about the possibility of not going to mass, rather than securing their own homes and provisions for their immediate families? Last I checked, mass attendance in the USA is nothing to brag about, and that is without any government coercion attempting to keep Catholics from going to church.

pdudgeon · Sep 30, 2016

LoAmmi said:
It also takes people willing to do those actions. I'd like to think that we have enough people in positions of power in the police and military who would not act upon those kinds of illegal orders. Because if you're telling me that those people would act on orders to destroy churches and other religious institutions, we're already in trouble and electing Trump or Hillary hardly matters.

no one today would like to believe that the things that happened in Germany could ocur somewhere else in the world. But the mere historical fact that Germany was not alone in it's excesses does indeed prove that these things are possible, given the right political climate.

and that right there is the key to the whole thing.
building a 'right' political climate that singles out one group as a target for elimination,
and which target has a popular "political think" public background of approval to back it up.

now i ask you, of the two candidates, which one is in the process of building up such a public background of support that would accept the rightness of persecution against Christians and religion of any sort?

and if they would not stop at closing a church, why would they stop at closing a synagog?

pdudgeon · Sep 30, 2016

dzheremi said:
Hillary Clinton is not running for president of any of those other nations, and she does not have time travel powers that would give her any means to influence what has happened historically in other nations, either.

This is really reaching to find something to be alarmed about. Do you sincerely believe that if martial law is declared and the government starts cracking down on things that represent a 'menace to the regime', the first concern of most Catholics in the United States would be about the possibility of not going to mass, rather than securing their own homes and provisions for their immediate families? Last I checked, mass attendance in the USA is nothing to brag about, and that is without any government coercion attempting to keep Catholics from going to church.

but if she is elected president, she will already have the emergency powers necessary (provided for her by Obama's executive orders) to do exactly that and much more.
and if the Church is declared to be a menace to the regime, the doors would be shut.

It happened in England with King Henry VIII who decided to create a state church and thus bypass the Pope.
Catholic churches and monestaries were looted, sacked, the priests and monks turned out, and the doors were shut.
Priests were hidden by sympathetic Catholics, mass was celebrated in secret, and people who were complicit in this 'crime' were hung. Convents were raided, desicrated, and nuns were violated.

In Germany priests were sent to concentration camps and gassed. or starved to death.

These are actual things that have happened.
all that is necessary is for there to be a leader
and a sympathetic public, ready and willing to follow orders.

LoAmmi · Sep 30, 2016

pdudgeon said:
no one today would like to believe that the things that happened in Germany could ocur somewhere else in the world. But the mere historical fact that Germany was not alone in it's excesses does indeed prove that these things are possible, given the right political climate.

and that right there is the key to the whole thing.
building a 'right' political climate that singles out one group as a target for elimination,
and which target has a popular "political think" public background of approval to back it up.

Of course what happened in Germany could happen anywhere. Centuries of a specific group being singled out as being horrible people, blamed for everything, made it very easy to not see them as humans. Driven out of Spain, England, and other European nations. Pogroms happening in many of these countries. Locked in ghettos. It's easy to see how singling out a group as all the ills of a nation make it easy to oppress them. They're causing the problem, right? Why not make it so they are no longer around?

now i ask you, of the two candidates, which one is in the process of building up such a public background of support that would accept the rightness of persecution against Christians and religion of any sort?

and if they would not stop at closing a church, why would they stop at closing a synagog?

Do you want me to argue that one of the candidates has directly stated that we need to take a closer look at mosques because they are harboring terrorists in the nation?

You might not have a church to go to if you don't vote right.

Dona Quixote

Legend

Legend

Legend

The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated

We shall see the King when he comes!

The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated

We shall see the King when he comes!

The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated

Coptic Orthodox non-Egyptian

Legend

Coptic Orthodox non-Egyptian

Legend

Traditional Catholic

The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated

Dispassionate

Coptic Orthodox non-Egyptian

Traditional Catholic

Traditional Catholic

Dispassionate

Similar threads