Liberal Catholic

[Martinius]

It is historical fact that the great majority of Senators in southern states 50 years ago were Democrats (southern species) and now they are almost exclusively Republican. Some Dixicrats switched parties back then, Strom Thurmond being a prime example. I can't say for certain that Byrd would be a Republican today, but he sure acted back then like he would fit right in that party today. He would have a hard time gaining traction as a Democrat, he just wouldn't fit.

Your view of what causes racial strife is so skewed as to make me think you have no concept of Americans, American society, or American politics. Conservatives, by definition, prefer the status quo. In the past, that would have meant favoring slavery, then later the forced separation of races, discrimination by law, and the denial of basic rights to minorities. Strife occurs when those who favor justice and equality push back and the conservatives in power resist change. Strife occurs when some people who are discriminated against and marginalized try to change that situation. The Civil Rights movement is a text book case of that process. The violence that occurred in the attempts to achieve equality were overwhelmingly on the side of the conservatives and the status quo (think Selma). The deaths were overwhelmingly on the side of those seeking the rights due them or others under the Constitution and moral law.

If any side was adversarial in the Civil Rights movement it was those who resisted granting all people their rights, and who fought every law that was offered to protect those rights. The strife was caused by the system they and their forebears created and sustained.

I truly feel sorry for you and the very poor education you must have received regarding history, culture and politics. That to me is the only explanation for such a mis-understanding of the liberal and conservative positions, both historically and today.

 

[mark46]

It is historical fact that the great majority of Senators in southern states 50 years ago were Democrats (southern species) and now they are almost exclusively Republican. Some Dixicrats switched parties back then, Strom Thurmond being a prime example. I can't say for certain that Byrd would be a Republican today, but he sure acted back then like he would fit right in that party today. He would have a hard time gaining traction as a Democrat, he just wouldn't fit.

Your view of what causes racial strife is so skewed as to make me think you have no concept of Americans, American society, or American politics. Conservatives, by definition, prefer the status quo. In the past, that would have meant favoring slavery, then later the forced separation of races, discrimination by law, and the denial of basic rights to minorities. Strife occurs when those who favor justice and equality push back and the conservatives in power resist change. Strife occurs when some people who are discriminated against and marginalized try to change that situation. The Civil Rights movement is a text book case of that process. The violence that occurred in the attempts to achieve equality were overwhelmingly on the side of the conservatives and the status quo (think Selma). The deaths were overwhelmingly on the side of those seeking the rights due them or others under the Constitution and moral law.

If any side was adversarial in the Civil Rights movement it was those who resisted granting all people their rights, and who fought every law that was offered to protect those rights. The strife was caused by the system they and their forebears created and sustained.

I truly feel sorry for you and the very poor education you must have received regarding history, culture and politics. That to me is the only explanation for such a mis-understanding of the liberal and conservative positions, both historically and today.

The discussions between President Johnson and the Southern Democratic senators is quite well known. Johnson was told that if the Civil Rights Act was passed, that the South would become Republican and remain so for decades. It has now been 50 years since the Civil Rights Act was pushed through by Johnson. And the South is still Republican. Some of the South will become Democratic as the proportion of old white men reaches a critically low level.

 

[mark46]

it is not like Byrd died in 1960 or something

he was a Democrat all his life

your speculations that Byrd would now be a Republican is just that, speculations

also it is not some claim that liberal views cause racial strife
look at the cities that had race riots recently
Baltimore, Ferguson (a suburb of St. Loius)
it is common sense that Liberalism seeks to cause strife
Republicans want all people to work together, to make a stronger America
while the Democrats keep people separated, with everything adversarial

Republicans stand for many things. They don't stand for enforcement of cvil rights or voting rights legislation. They don't favor steps to increasing the percentage of people voting. And they certainly don't stand for the weakest among us.

Are you looking for Republican cities that have had riots? Are there ANY Republican cities?

 

[mark46]

Wanting equal rights for all is conservative?

Conservatives have never supported any civil rights, voting rights or very many pieces of social legislation (not Medicare or Social Security).

 

[Fantine]

That was my experience, too, Martinius, until I moved to the Bible Belt. It Iis really
Sad to see hhow its backward ideas have infiltrated Catholicism here, but I have managed to find the good and try to ignore the bad.

 

[Martinius]

That was my experience, too, Martinius, until I moved to the Bible Belt. It Iis really
Sad to see hhow its backward ideas have infiltrated Catholicism here, but I have managed to find the good and try to ignore the bad.

I have not checked all the stats on this, but there is certainly a large movement of northerners to major southern cities, such as Atlanta, Nashville, Charlotte, and of course cities in Florida. Many of those people are Catholic, so aided by the influx of Latinos there has been an increase in the Catholic population. I know of one southern area that had just one Catholic parish in the whole county, but there are now at least three very large and growing parishes and at least one more on the way. My experience in the north is of parishes of mostly aging members and few young families. In the south I have seen parishes with much younger membership and lots of families. In my previous northern parish there were three funerals for every baptism. In a southern parish where some of family belongs, they have over 100 children receiving first communion each year but less than 40 funerals.

The Catholic Church worldwide is no longer Eurocentric, and will be dominated in the future by peoples and hierarchy of the Southern Hemisphere. Something similar is happening in the U.S., where the greatest Catholic growth is happening in the south while the north is rapidly declining. This could result in a lessening of the conservative majority as those pesky liberal Catholics from the north continue to infiltrate.