OrthodoxChristianity.net
August 22, 2014, 12:04:21 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: No Communion for Arnold?  (Read 14104 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Seraphim Reeves
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 450



WWW
« Reply #90 on: May 05, 2004, 06:27:33 PM »

Jennifer,

Quote
No it's not even remotely close enough.

Mmm..depends how you look at it.  Far be it from me to say much nice about the Antiochians (snicker), but the truth is (from my exposure to both Antiochians and Roman Catholicism) most Antiochian parishes are "more Catholic" in terms of their agreement with the "official" faith and morals of the RCC than most of the RC parishes I've been in.  And certainly, in terms of liturgy, they're "more Catholic than the Pope."

Quote
But I find it incredibly bizarre that an Orthodox Christian would be so 'supportive' of an ultimate expression of 'western' catholicism.

I find it bizarre that a RC would be so unsupportive of same "ultimate expressions." Smiley

Quote
I think it proves something that I've believed for some time, scratch an Orthodox convert and you'll find a western christian lurking underneath.  Sure he/she likes to play 'eastern.'  Icons are 'cool' and we all like to pretend we're unique.  But when it comes down to it, he/she's just as western as a Roman Catholic.

As the famous Sedevecantist Mel Gibson once put it in an interview he gave to Barbara Walters (years before The Passion was in production), he felt that the RC institution had let people down, that it had "broken a promise" that it had implicitly made with Roman Catholics.

I think for many westerners getting in touch with the "ancient church", the old RCC would have probably been their first option.  Unfortunately, save for various unapproved (in fact, much maligned) "schisms", that Catholicism is all but dead...and you can thank your own heirarchs for this, Popes included.

I know it's considered good form for "conservative" RC's to take shots at western converts to Orthodoxy...to claim that such conversions are nothing more than aesthetics, or the result of a fascination with all things oriental, etc.  The truth of the matter is something more basic - aside from the workings of grace, the bread and butter reality is that these people would have no other place to go.  Why on earth would anyone looking for something remotely resembling the ancient way, go into a Lutheranized "RC" parish?  To hear Sr.Sinbad go on about "Goddess spirituality" or hear Fr.Feelgood's homily on social justice and tolerance, his hand out for a heirarchy of homo-protectors (your collections in increasingly large part going towards paying legal settlements)?

Quote
Which of course raises an interesting question, can Orthodoxy survive in the west?  I'm not optimistic.

While (apart from a miracle) I do not see Orthodoxy being something "big" in the west any time soon, my real "concern" is for the institutional RCC as we currently know it - whether or not it will have a future beyond the next generation.  THAT, all things considered, is seeming increasingly less likely.

Seraphim
Logged

Seraphim Reeves
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 450



WWW
« Reply #91 on: May 05, 2004, 06:34:06 PM »

Jennifer,

Quote
BTW, Nacho you are essentially a protestant.  You have not jettisoned your protestant background.  You still don't understand what it means to be a catholic.  It's not something that can be learned from a website or from reading a book.  It's something that comes about through living a catholic life in a catholic community.

Well if experience makes one an authority, I suppose that makes me something of one.

My "experience" of living a "catholic life" in a "catholic community" was one of growth - growth from simple unease, to a horrifying conflict of conscience.  No matter how "bad" the Orthodox parish I've been in, I've never seen anything resembling the mockery of God and Christianity that I'd experienced in several RC parishes...nor the level of ambivilence to such outrages (which you'll inevitably find in the RC heirarchy should you throw up a fuss about such sacrelige.)

You must be wondering why I'm bothering to reply to your posts to Nacho - simply put, I'm replying because I find them nauseating and incredibly "pollyanna" given the reality of the RCC.  Nacho the "protestant Antiochian" is worlds closer to the Roman Catholicism your immediate ancestors lived (before the Vatican II debaucle) than what you see in 99 % of the parishes which constitute the so called "Catholic Church."

Seraphim
Logged

Seraphim Reeves
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 450



WWW
« Reply #92 on: May 05, 2004, 06:37:54 PM »

Jennifer,

Quote
And people like Nacho definitely substantiate my fears about western converts to Orthodoxy.  He's obviously a frustrated Roman Catholic.  I guess Orthodoxy was more 'exotic' or he maybe he got turned off by a whacko RC priest, but it's obvious that he thinks like a western christian.

Really?  Since you're such an authority, perhaps you can tell us all precisely how an eastern Christian thinks?  Give us that crucial differntiation, and point out just where it is (based upon your incredible first hand experience of such things, of course) we western converts are falling short?

Of course, the distinctions you're making are imbecillic - there is ultimatly no "western" or "eastern" distinction to be had that is any more important than the one would make between a "Greek" or an "Arab" or a "Russian", etc.  While our respective cultures cannot help but dispose us to certain manners of expression, what ultimatly matters is the truth.  It is this, which unites all Orthodox - it is this which also once united the western Latin Orthodox believers to their brethren abroad.  It is now what unites occidental converts to Orthodoxy in the modern day.

Seraphim
« Last Edit: May 05, 2004, 06:38:52 PM by Seraphim Reeves » Logged

Seraphim Reeves
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 450



WWW
« Reply #93 on: May 05, 2004, 07:02:16 PM »

Jennifer,

Quote
But as a western christian with a western patrimony why should you be forced to embrace a 'foreign' patrimony?  If western christianity wasn't in such trouble there would no need for western christians to embrace eastern christianity.

Who said anything about a 'foreign' patrimony?  St.Ireneos, St.Ambrose, St.Vincent of Lerins, St.John Cassian, St.Gregory the Great...they're all still mine.  If anything, they are more so, since I now hold the same faith as they - and not a system of beliefs containing leaven they would have been totally unfamiliar with (papal infallibility, indulgences, etc.)

I think it is fair to say that the break down of Roman Catholicism over the last fourty years has been the worldly, human means for a lot of contemporary conversions to Orthodoxy - I would also say the communist revolutions and other old world waves of migration to the west also contributed (on a human, material level) to this phenomenon.  I would argue, however, that ultimatly these rather human considerations, became instruments of grace - they have re-introduced to the western man that which was once his.  It may not have been the faith of my grandfather, but it certainly was the faith of my ancestors a little further down the line (at least of the Spaniards and Celts in my ancestory.)

Quote
I understand how western christians can feel 'drawn' to eastern spirituality.  But western christians are also 'drawn' to hinduism and all other kinds of 'exotic' things.

I've yet to meet anyone this superficial who has gone over from some western confession to Orthodoxy.  That's not to say that it doesn't exist - but it certainly is something outside of my own experience, and that of people I've had the privilege of coming to know.

Quote
 I think that many Orthodox converts will struggle throughout their lives with the 'patrimony' issue and may never feel at home being 'eastern' which is understandable given that they're not 'eastern.'

I'd feel better if you'd start simply speaking for yourself, or at the very least, speak about those personal issues of others which you are actually familiar with.

I think you're making too much of the "eastern"/"western" thing.  Ultimatly, we're all human beings, with the same basic problems, and the same basic questions facing us.

Quote
This fundamental 'problem' is what makes me suspect that the convert phenomenon won't last.  How can 'confused' people pass eastern patrimony onto their children?

You might want to ask second and third generation western "convert" families this.

Seraphim
Logged

Seraphim Reeves
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 450



WWW
« Reply #94 on: May 05, 2004, 07:05:22 PM »

Schultz,

Here you are a man speaking for my own heart - I am very much a "social conservative" and equally a "fiscal liberal."  Figures I have no one to vote for, here in wild and whacky Canada (though I suppose the situation would be little different if I lived in the U.S.)

Seraphim
Logged

Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,444


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #95 on: May 05, 2004, 07:09:05 PM »

Seraphim

I think much like you politically. I think we are basically reverse libertarians. In political science class this position was defined as "populist."

anastasios
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodo
Seraphim Reeves
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 450



WWW
« Reply #96 on: May 05, 2004, 07:15:56 PM »

Jennifer,

Quote
They opposed abortion because of eugenics.  In Nazi Germany, "good" German women couldn't get abortions but people of 'inferior' stock were forcibly sterilized (if not killed).  

The Communists didn't like abortion because they wanted to have a high birth rate.  In Romania no birth control or abortion coupled with an immoral communist state led to many many children being deposited in state run orphanages where they were exposed to aids.

While for our own moral/spiritual hygeine it does matter why we do things - the truth is an objectively good deed, is an objectively good deed.  Quite frankly, a child saved from death via abortion is hardly going to care whether it was because of the edict of a saintly king, or the pragmatism of a commie boss.

Seraphim
Logged

Seraphim Reeves
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 450



WWW
« Reply #97 on: May 05, 2004, 07:19:52 PM »

Anastasios,

Quote
I think much like you politically. I think we are basically reverse libertarians. In political science class this position was defined as "populist."

Well I've heard conflicting definitions of just what a "populist" is, so I'm not sure.

In times past, the greatness of a king was determined in large part by how deep he was willing to dip into the royal treasury to aid the least of his brethren, while standing up for the rights of the Church.  Transfer that way of thinking to a parliamentary democracy, and you pretty much have my idea of what "good government" would consist of (at least here in Canada.)  Suffice it to say, I'm still waiting.

Seraphim
Logged

Mor Ephrem
"Mor is right, you are wrong."
Section Moderator
Hoplitarches
*****
Online Online

Posts: 16,122


In solidarity with Iraqi and Syrian Nazarenes


WWW
« Reply #98 on: May 05, 2004, 07:42:11 PM »

True, but I think we can all agree that there is a fundamental difference between catholic culture and protestant culture.  I disagree with Zollars in his contention that there is a fundamental difference between southern and northern culture.  


How can I know what that fundamental difference is?  Regarding my original questions on "catholicism", you wrote:

Quote
It's not something that can be defined precisely.  But we know it when we see it and we know what isn't it.

How do I know that there really is a fundamental difference between "catholic culture" and "protestant culture" if I don't know what "catholic culture" is to you?  Speaking personally, I can see a few trends here and there, but nothing substantive with which I would be able to define "catholic culture".  "Knowing it when you see it" is not good enough.  People think they know a lot of things when they see it, but they aren't always right.
Logged

Apolytikion, Tone 1, by Antonis

An eloquent crafter of divine posts
And an inheritor of the line of the Baptist
A righteous son of India
And a new apostle to the internet
O Holy Mor Ephrem,
Intercede for us, that our forum may be saved.


"Mor is a jerk." - kelly
Jennifer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 1,154


« Reply #99 on: May 05, 2004, 09:09:57 PM »

Linus tries to put me in the "liberal" box and Seraphim tries to put me in the "conservative Catholic" box.  It's the same kind of labeling and equally silly.

Mor, "knowing it when you see it" is good enough.  We know catholicism more in what it isn't than in what it is.  In all its variants (and using the term "culture" is probably misleading), catholicism differs from protestantism in terms of recognition of authority.  

"Authority" is walking a tight rope so it's hard to identify but it's easier to identify the lack of authority.  

But of course it's more than authority to people.  The conservative catholics are 'obedient' to the current leadership in the Church but not strictly to the history of the Church.  
Logged
Nacho
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: EasternOrthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,482

The face of Corporate America


« Reply #100 on: May 05, 2004, 10:38:25 PM »

Jennifer, you could do us all a favor & not vote for Kerry who will be bent on stacking the court with pro abortion secularist judicial nominees. Anyways, as I have posted from reputable Catholic websites, to be a "faithful" Catholic you are not permitted to vote for any candidate that is pro abortion. Since I know you going to come up with some lame excuse on why I'm wrong or those sites have it wrong, here's another great source straight from the Bishops themselves.

It's called "Living the gospel of Life: A challenge to American Catholics."

http://www.nccbuscc.org/prolife/gospel.htm

Jennifer, the Bishops of your own church in this statement want you to support a "gospel of life." Voting for Kerry & the democrat machine is quite contrary to this. The Vatican also wants you to hate what God hates, & God hates the blood shed of the innocent.



 
Quote
Linus tries to put me in the "liberal" box and Seraphim tries to put me in the "conservative Catholic" box.  It's the same kind of labeling and equally silly.

What's even more silly are the labels you are slapping on people & disregard the "content" of thier arguements to suite you own agenda of skirting your "moral" duty to honor your faith when it comes to the issue at hand. The whole your just a cunfused convert who is really, "catholic, or "western catholic", or "protestant", or a "confused Roman Catholic" doesn't really wash here & people see right through it.

Your "freedom of conscience" you have also brought up before also don't wash here. If anything, this makes you sound very "western", or "protestant" because the only Catholics that use that arguement are ones that are in direct conflict with the Pope & the magesterium. So, it looks like you are the "protestant" here, not me. Wink  I also find it humurous because I agree with ALL the teachings of Holy Orthodoxy as being true.  You, on the other hand are obviously conflicted with your church's teachings.

You also didn't address the questions I posted from EWTN on a Catholic's voting responsibility. I'm interested in what you have to say about the last question:

14. Is it a mortal sin to vote for a pro-abortion candidate?

Except in the case in which a voter is faced with all pro-abortion candidates (in which case, as explained in question 8 above, he or she strives to determine which of them would cause the let damage in this regard), a candidate that is pro-abortion disqualifies himself from receiving a Catholic’s vote. This is because being pro-abortion cannot simply be placed alongside the candidate's other positions on Medicare and unemployment, for example; and this is because abortion is intrinsically evil and cannot be morally justified for any reason or set of circumstances. To vote for such a candidate even with the knowledge that the candidate is pro-abortion is to become an accomplice in the moral evil of abortion. If the voter also knows this, then the voter sins mortally.

---It says here that voting for a pro abortion candidate is to become a accomplice in the moral evil of abortion. You are also in mortal sin if you do. By th way, I have been consistant in my views in NEVER voting for pro abortion candidates. Any thoughts on this Jen?Huh?
Logged

"If I find in myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world."--Mere Christianity
Fr. David
The Poster Formerly Known as "Pedro"
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA, Diocese of the South
Posts: 2,828



WWW
« Reply #101 on: May 05, 2004, 11:08:33 PM »

Jennifer...perhaps you can tell us all precisely how an eastern Christian thinks?...there is ultimatly no "western" or "eastern" distinction to be had...what ultimatly matters is the truth.

Thank you, Seraphim!!  This is one thing I am sick of hearing -- that the convert boom within Orthodoxy in general (I'm in the OCA, and have heard some at the Cathedral -- cradle and convert! -- grumble about this) is this grave threat to Orthodoxy because we, as western thinkers, just don't, as Jennifer has said, get "it", whatever "it" is.  This "it," however, which apparantly comes from rejecting all things labeled Western (which ranges from support for the Antiochian Western Rite Vicariate to asking analytical questions about the Faith) is the key to becoming "Truly Orthodox."  What no one seems to be able to tell me is when or how I would achieve this hesychistic (sp?), apophatic "Nirvanna."

Guess I'm doomed to a lifetime of western thinking with an eastern faux finish.
Logged

Priest in the Orthodox Church in America - ordained on March 18, 2012

Oh Taste and See (my defunct blog)

From Protestant to Orthodox (my conversion story)
Fr. David
The Poster Formerly Known as "Pedro"
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA, Diocese of the South
Posts: 2,828



WWW
« Reply #102 on: May 05, 2004, 11:16:59 PM »

Jennifer, the Bishops of your own church in this statement want you to support a "gospel of life"...The Vatican also wants you to hate what God hates, & God hates the blood shed of the innocent. "

Nacho -- is God a one-issue candidate??  Does God's hatred for abortion overshadow, say, the unprovoked invasion of a country, many of whose innocent[/i] citizens will die due to the shortsightedness of a man you say will foster a "gospel of life"?!?

Does His hatred of abortion overshadow this same man's abuse of the death penalty??

Why is this issue, though it may be obvious which side the Church should be on, the one that "trumps" everything else?
Logged

Priest in the Orthodox Church in America - ordained on March 18, 2012

Oh Taste and See (my defunct blog)

From Protestant to Orthodox (my conversion story)
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,444


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #103 on: May 05, 2004, 11:23:21 PM »

Pedro,

I'd say yes, because of the gravity of abortion, it outweighs every other consideration. 1.4 million deaths in the US alone each year is a heck of a lot more than have died in Iraq or from the death penalty.

anastasios
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodo
Jennifer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 1,154


« Reply #104 on: May 05, 2004, 11:26:13 PM »

Jennifer, you could do us all a favor & not vote for Kerry who will be bent on stacking the court with pro abortion secularist judicial nominees. Anyways, as I have posted from reputable Catholic websites, to be a "faithful" Catholic you are not permitted to vote for any candidate that is pro abortion. Since I know you going to come up with some lame excuse on why I'm wrong or those sites have it wrong, here's another great source straight from the Bishops themselves.

I've discussed this with my confessor.  

Quote
It's called "Living the gospel of Life: A challenge to American Catholics."

http://www.nccbuscc.org/prolife/gospel.htm

Jennifer, the Bishops of your own church in this statement want you to support a "gospel of life." Voting for Kerry & the democrat machine is quite contrary to this. The Vatican also wants you to hate what God hates, & God hates the blood shed of the innocent.



 What's even more silly are the labels you are slapping on people & disregard the "content" of thier arguements to suite you own agenda of skirting your "moral" duty to honor your faith when it comes to the issue at hand. The whole your just a cunfused convert who is really, "catholic, or "western catholic", or "protestant", or a "confused Roman Catholic" doesn't really wash here & people see right through it.



Your "freedom of conscience" you have also brought up before also don't wash here. If anything, this makes you sound very "western", or "protestant" because the only Catholics that use that arguement are ones that are in direct conflict with the Pope & the magesterium. So, it looks like you are the "protestant" here, not me. Wink  I also find it humurous because I agree with ALL the teachings of Holy Orthodoxy as being true.  You, on the other hand are obviously conflicted with your church's teachings.

Of course I sound "western" because I am "western."  I've never advanced a "freedom of conscience" argument.  As a Catholic, I don't believe in a "freedom of conscience" in the typical understanding of the phrase.  I believe that as practicing Catholic I have a moral obligation to advance 'morality' but that does not mean that I'm required to be a "single issue" voter.  There are other issues that are just as important as abortion because they are also life issue.  Unfortunately we don't have any candidate who is 100% in compliance with the Church's teachings so we are left with a 'lesser of 2 evils' decision and I've discussed this with my confessor who supports my choice.  

Discussing these things with your confessor is what it means to be a catholic.  Like I've said before, we don't turn on the tv for spiritual guidance.  We don't read the Bible and get 'insight' outside of the Church.  We struggle to figure out the truth and turn to the legitimate authority of the Church as manifested in our confessor.  Those voter guides you've mentioned are helpful but are the product of a 'protestantization' of the Catholic Church.    

Quote
You also didn't address the questions I posted from EWTN on a Catholic's voting responsibility. I'm interested in what you have to say about the last question:

14. Is it a mortal sin to vote for a pro-abortion candidate?

Except in the case in which a voter is faced with all pro-abortion candidates (in which case, as explained in question 8 above, he or she strives to determine which of them would cause the let damage in this regard), a candidate that is pro-abortion disqualifies himself from receiving a Catholic’s vote. This is because being pro-abortion cannot simply be placed alongside the candidate's other positions on Medicare and unemployment, for example; and this is because abortion is intrinsically evil and cannot be morally justified for any reason or set of circumstances. To vote for such a candidate even with the knowledge that the candidate is pro-abortion is to become an accomplice in the moral evil of abortion. If the voter also knows this, then the voter sins mortally.

---It says here that voting for a pro abortion candidate is to become a accomplice in the moral evil of abortion. You are also in mortal sin if you do. By th way, I have been consistant in my views in NEVER voting for pro abortion candidates. Any thoughts on this Jen?Huh?

I trust my confessor over EWTN.  EWTN is not the Catholic Church.  BTW, my confessor is hardly a 'liberal' which I'm sure you're ready to accuse him of being.  He's very traditional except he thinks the Mass should be in the vernacular.
Logged
Jennifer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 1,154


« Reply #105 on: May 05, 2004, 11:35:59 PM »

Thank you, Seraphim!!  This is one thing I am sick of hearing -- that the convert boom within Orthodoxy in general (I'm in the OCA, and have heard some at the Cathedral -- cradle and convert! -- grumble about this) is this grave threat to Orthodoxy because we, as western thinkers, just don't, as Jennifer has said, get "it", whatever "it" is.  This "it," however, which apparantly comes from rejecting all things labeled Western (which ranges from support for the Antiochian Western Rite Vicariate to asking analytical questions about the Faith) is the key to becoming "Truly Orthodox."  What no one seems to be able to tell me is when or how I would achieve this hesychistic (sp?), apophatic "Nirvanna."

Guess I'm doomed to a lifetime of western thinking with an eastern faux finish.

Why do you say "doomed" to a lifetime of western thinking?  That's hardly qualifies as "doom."  You're from the west.  You're the product of a culture that is just as venerable and just as catholic as the 'eastern' culture.  The idea that you are "doomed" by being who you are is tinged with ethnocentricism.  

It's true that the west has squandered her cultural heritage.  The Roman Catholic Church is the 'repository' and guard of western culture and unfortunately the official RC has been asleep at the wheel.  

My question to you is why do you need to reject your native culture in order to be orthodox?  I'd disagree with those who say the support for Western Orthodoxy is 'western.'  I'd say Orthodoxy should support western Orthodoxy.  Western Orthodoxy IMHO is a much better 'fit' for western converts than Eastern Orthodoxy.  I think that western Christians can be truly Orthodox and still be western.  

But if they're not western Orthodoxy then there's a falseness, a striving to be something that they're not.  Unfortunately given the state of western Christianity, some have no choice but to take that path in order to be catholic.  

IMHO the ideal would be for there to be a legitimate western catholic alternative.  
Logged
Jennifer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 1,154


« Reply #106 on: May 05, 2004, 11:46:47 PM »

Nacho -- is God a one-issue candidate??  Does God's hatred for abortion overshadow, say, the unprovoked invasion of a country, many of whose innocent[/i] citizens will die due to the shortsightedness of a man you say will foster a "gospel of life"?!?

Does His hatred of abortion overshadow this same man's abuse of the death penalty??

Why is this issue, though it may be obvious which side the Church should be on, the one that "trumps" everything else?

We have a real delimma.  We're faced with two anti-life candidates.  Neither is acceptable from a moral standpoint.  

Choosing not to vote at all is probably the 'pure' moral choice.  However, that means the withdrawal from the political process alltogether and we're called to be part of society.  

I'd also ask how we know his "hatred of abortion" equates to an attempt to get rid of abortion?  I suggest that he's done nothing to stop abortion so a vote for him is not a vote against abortion.  

I think some 'purists' want catholics to withdraw from society because it's too 'tainted' but how can we 'transform' society if we're not a part of it?  Good things can come from our being part of the process.  The council of Catholic Bishops, for example, has been key in getting some very good legislation passed.  Take the family leave act, for example.  Is the FLMA act 'pro-life?'  Or support for organized labor.  

Being pro-life is more than being anti-abortion.  And if we remove ourselves from the process because it's too 'impure' and will 'taint' us then we can't assert that fact.  
Logged
Fr. David
The Poster Formerly Known as "Pedro"
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA, Diocese of the South
Posts: 2,828



WWW
« Reply #107 on: May 05, 2004, 11:58:23 PM »

I'd say yes, because of the gravity of abortion, it outweighs every other consideration. 1.4 million deaths in the US alone each year is a heck of a lot more than have died in Iraq or from the death penalty.

So the idea, to your way of thinking, is to go with the lesser of two "evil" candidates to repeal the "greater evil?"

I see your point, but the reality of the situation seems to be this: the "planets are aligned," if you will, to bring about an immediate change in our policy of international relations and pre-emptive war.  A vote for Bush, as Jennifer has said, would definitely hinder this, while not necessarily guaranteeing (sp?) a repeal of abortion.

I would say we need to play our cards in the most advantageous way possible overall -- not put all our chips on one number.

That having been said, I can't justify voting for Kerry.  Please don't think I don't see abortion is irrelevant or secondary; it's why I can't vote for him, either.
Logged

Priest in the Orthodox Church in America - ordained on March 18, 2012

Oh Taste and See (my defunct blog)

From Protestant to Orthodox (my conversion story)
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,444


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #108 on: May 06, 2004, 12:02:06 AM »

Pedro,

I was not and am not opposed to the war in Iraq anyway, so the question for me is moot.  But generally, I would vote the lesser of two evils.

anastasios
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Disclaimer: Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodo
Fr. David
The Poster Formerly Known as "Pedro"
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA, Diocese of the South
Posts: 2,828



WWW
« Reply #109 on: May 06, 2004, 12:05:07 AM »

The idea that you are "doomed" by being who you are is tinged with ethnocentricism.  

This was sarcasm; sorry.  I don't feel doomed at all.  I see no problem with being a western thinker in Orthodoxy.  It's others I've gotten this "vibe" from.

Quote
It's true that the west has squandered her cultural heritage.

Examples?

Quote
My question to you is why do you need to reject your native culture in order to be orthodox?

You don't.  Neither do I.  And neither does anyone at St. Peter's (WR Parish) here in Ft. Worth or at my ER home, St. Barbara's.  I agree with you that the WR would seem to be a better fit for many people...the big hurdle would be truly embracing the doctrinal differences, since so much would still seem the same in terms of rite.
Logged

Priest in the Orthodox Church in America - ordained on March 18, 2012

Oh Taste and See (my defunct blog)

From Protestant to Orthodox (my conversion story)
Nacho
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: EasternOrthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,482

The face of Corporate America


« Reply #110 on: May 06, 2004, 12:47:10 AM »

Quote
I've discussed this with my confessor.
Let's hope he gave you the right direction in line with church teaching.


Quote
Discussing these things with your confessor is what it means to be a catholic.  Like I've said before, we don't turn on the tv for spiritual guidance.  We don't read the Bible and get 'insight' outside of the Church.  We struggle to figure out the truth and turn to the legitimate authority of the Church as manifested in our confessor.  Those voter guides you've mentioned are helpful but are the product of a 'protestantization' of the Catholic Church.    

I'm sorry, but that is one of many things that makes you  Catholic. I also hope your spiritual advisor has enough wisdom in him to tell you that abortion is "instrically" evil & that supporting such politicians that promote it is risking seperation from God. I would never vote for any politician that supports the continued genocide of the innocent for fear of being in grave sin.  By the way, the Catholic Voters Guidlines was put togethor by the staff apologists for Catholic Answers who happen to also be Priest. Your claim that they are a "protestantization" is just another lame attempt to skirt your duties as a Catholic. It also doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Anything that disagrees with Jen must be a "protestantization." It's also laughable that calling something that comes from a reputable well known website such as Catholic.com a "protestantization." Could you please move beyond the labels & please explain why it is a "protestantization."Huh??

For you benefit, I'll post the 5 main points from the Catholic Voters Guidlines & tell me which are a protestantization??

You can't vote for any candidate that violates any of these 5  evils:

1. Abortion
2. Euthanasia
3. Fetal Stem Cell Research
4. Human Cloning
5. Homosexual "Marriage"

Kerry violates 4 out of 5 points.
Bush doesn't violate any of these. You keep telling us you aren't a one issue voter. Well, here's 4 good reasons to vote against Kerry & 5 good reasons to vote for Bush.

So Jen, please explain how these points are not in conformity with the teaching of the Catholic Church???


Quote
My question to you is why do you need to reject your native culture in order to be orthodox?  I'd disagree with those who say the support for Western Orthodoxy is 'western.'  I'd say Orthodoxy should support western Orthodoxy.  Western Orthodoxy IMHO is a much better 'fit' for western converts than Eastern Orthodoxy.  I think that western Christians can be truly Orthodox and still be western.

This sounds very "protestant." So your saying we can't have both?? Why can't people just simply add to their faith?? I don't think I need to reject the good things of "western" culture to be a good Orthodox christian.  

Quote
I was not and am not opposed to the war in Iraq anyway, so the question for me is moot.  But generally, I would vote the lesser of two evils.

I think along these same lines. I mean come on, what's the UN good for if Iraq was going to continue to break their resolutions. After 17 broken resolutions in a span of 12 years I think we had the justification to go in. It's not like Bush was acting with a gross misuse of his power like Clinton did with going into Serbia without a UN resolution to support the war. Bush gave Sadam 1 full year & numerous warnings on our intentions & he blew it. Sorry, but the blame Bush crowd is wanning with "facts" on this one.
Logged

"If I find in myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world."--Mere Christianity
Jennifer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 1,154


« Reply #111 on: May 06, 2004, 06:40:57 AM »

Let's hope he gave you the right direction in line with church teaching.I'm sorry, but that is one of many things that makes you  Catholic. I also hope your spiritual advisor has enough wisdom in him to tell you that abortion is "instrically" evil & that supporting such politicians that promote it is risking seperation from God. I would never vote for any politician that supports the continued genocide of the innocent for fear of being in grave sin.  By the way, the Catholic Voters Guidlines was put togethor by the staff apologists for Catholic Answers who happen to also be Priest. Your claim that they are a "protestantization" is just another lame attempt to skirt your duties as a Catholic. It also doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Anything that disagrees with Jen must be a "protestantization." It's also laughable that calling something that comes from a reputable well known website such as Catholic.com a "protestantization." Could you please move beyond the labels & please explain why it is a "protestantization."Huh??

The confessional relationship is different than writing things and dispersing them.  

Quote
For you benefit, I'll post the 5 main points from the Catholic Voters Guidlines & tell me which are a protestantization??

You can't vote for any candidate that violates any of these 5  evils:

1. Abortion
2. Euthanasia
3. Fetal Stem Cell Research
4. Human Cloning
5. Homosexual "Marriage"

Kerry violates 4 out of 5 points.
Bush doesn't violate any of these. You keep telling us you aren't a one issue voter. Well, here's 4 good reasons to vote against Kerry & 5 good reasons to vote for Bush.

So Jen, please explain how these points are not in conformity with the teaching of the Catholic Church??? This sounds very "protestant." So your saying we can't have both?? Why can't people just simply add to their faith?? I don't think I need to reject the good things of "western" culture to be a good Orthodox christian.  I think along these same lines. I mean come on, what's the UN good for if Iraq was going to continue to break their resolutions. After 17 broken resolutions in a span of 12 years I think we had the justification to go in. It's not like Bush was acting with a gross misuse of his power like Clinton did with going into Serbia without a UN resolution to support the war. Bush gave Sadam 1 full year & numerous warnings on our intentions & he blew it. Sorry, but the blame Bush crowd is wanning with "facts" on this one.

Logged
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,395



« Reply #112 on: May 06, 2004, 07:20:47 AM »


For you benefit, I'll post the 5 main points from the Catholic Voters Guidlines & tell me which are a protestantization??

You can't vote for any candidate that violates any of these 5  evils:

1. Abortion
2. Euthanasia
3. Fetal Stem Cell Research
4. Human Cloning
5. Homosexual "Marriage"

Well, for your benefit I'll post a link to the web page of the USCCB saying how they can't actually post such a "guide".

This is a stupid rationale for voting anyway. If you cannot vote without taking repsonsibility for every sinful attitude of the candidate, then you can't vote without sinning.
Logged
Fr. David
The Poster Formerly Known as "Pedro"
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA, Diocese of the South
Posts: 2,828



WWW
« Reply #113 on: May 06, 2004, 08:32:48 AM »

It's not like Bush was acting with a gross misuse of his power like Clinton did with going into Serbia without a UN resolution to support the war. Bush gave Sadam 1 full year & numerous warnings on our intentions & he blew it. Sorry, but the blame Bush crowd is wanning with "facts" on this one.

Bush's real ultimatum - disarm, or we will invade - came in late Feb, 2003, along with a deadline to meet the ultimatum...less than a month.  Can't very well disarm completely in a month.

And I don't think Clinton was justified going over to Serbia w/out a UN resolution, either.
Logged

Priest in the Orthodox Church in America - ordained on March 18, 2012

Oh Taste and See (my defunct blog)

From Protestant to Orthodox (my conversion story)
JoeS
(aka StMarkEofE)
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,122


Global Warming Enthusiast.


« Reply #114 on: May 06, 2004, 09:21:19 AM »

This morning Governor McGreevy of New Jersey stated that because of his pro-choice stance he will not receive Holy Communion publicly.  My question is: will he be allowed to receive privately?   At least he has the good sense to admit it.

JoeS  Cool
Logged
Fr. David
The Poster Formerly Known as "Pedro"
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA, Diocese of the South
Posts: 2,828



WWW
« Reply #115 on: May 06, 2004, 09:24:00 AM »

At least he has the good sense to admit it.

And the integrity.
Logged

Priest in the Orthodox Church in America - ordained on March 18, 2012

Oh Taste and See (my defunct blog)

From Protestant to Orthodox (my conversion story)
Brendan03
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 544



« Reply #116 on: May 06, 2004, 10:00:16 AM »

"Bush's real ultimatum - disarm, or we will invade - came in late Feb, 2003, along with a deadline to meet the ultimatum...less than a month.  Can't very well disarm completely in a month."

The reality is that they had decided to invade well before the inspections even began.  The only reason they went to the UN to begin with was because Blair told Bush that the UK could not join the USA in the war unless we had gone to the UN first.  Therefore the whole UN thing and the ultimatum relating to inspections was a canard, at best window dressing for a decision that the US administration had already made.  In fact, the adminsitration pressed for a wording of the UN resolution that would give them cover to invade Iraq no matter what the Iraqis disclosed and what the weapons inspectors discovered.  This is also one reason why the US didn't let the inspections play out fully before invading ... because they were going to invade anyway and the military advised that the latest they could invade under the plan they had developed was March.  And even March was "pushing it" because of ths sandstorm season (and we can remember how that actually ended up being a factor in the invasion because they waited until March).  But in any case the reality is that the UN process and the inspections were a sideshow ... the administration had already planned to invade Iraq long before it decided to go to the UN, and had also basically decided that it would do what it wanted in Iraq regardless of the UN process, even before that process played itself out.  So the war in Iraq had basically nothing to do with the inspections at all.

I can highly recommend for people to read Woodward's book if they want to understand how we came to this war, in reality.

Brendan
Logged

B
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,884


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #117 on: May 06, 2004, 10:24:40 AM »

"Abortion was a big issue in the recent PA primary where Spector (the supposed liberal) won.  If 90% of republicans are pro-life as you claim, then how could Spector win his party's nomination?"

The vote was extremely close 51% to 49%. I don't claim to know how many Republican ,or Democrats for that matter, are pro-life.  Specter won the nomination because unfortunately many people who are pro-life do not take  a stand and vote soley based on this issue as they should.  Instead they look at the fact that Specter is an influential senior senator that is on many important committees and feel this is more improtant than his stance on abortion.  This is why President Bush and Senator Santorum endorsed him and he won the nomination.  

Fr. Deacon Lance
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #118 on: May 06, 2004, 10:45:06 AM »

Quote
Jennifer:
Linus tries to put me in the "liberal" box and Seraphim tries to put me in the "conservative Catholic" box.  It's the same kind of labeling and equally silly.

Honestly, I don't think about you that much, Jennifer.

I read your posts, however.

They build your "box" if there is one.

When I walk by a house that someone has painted yellow, I look at it and think, "Yellow house."

There is a similar sort of process involved in identifying what sort of person posts the things you do.

Logged

The first condition of salvation is to keep the norm of the true faith and in no way to deviate from the established doctrine of the Fathers.
- Pope St. Hormisdas
Seraphim Reeves
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 450



WWW
« Reply #119 on: May 06, 2004, 10:49:07 AM »

Jennifer, Jennifer...

Quote
Why do you say "doomed" to a lifetime of western thinking?  That's hardly qualifies as "doom."  You're from the west.  You're the product of a culture that is just as venerable and just as catholic as the 'eastern' culture.  The idea that you are "doomed" by being who you are is tinged with ethnocentricism.

...

My question to you is why do you need to reject your native culture in order to be orthodox?  I'd disagree with those who say the support for Western Orthodoxy is 'western.'  I'd say Orthodoxy should support western Orthodoxy.  Western Orthodoxy IMHO is a much better 'fit' for western converts than Eastern Orthodoxy.  I think that western Christians can be truly Orthodox and still be western.

I'm still waiting on just what this profound difference is, between the "western" vs. the "eastern" mind.  I'm not saying there are not cultural differences between a Frenchman and a Serb...but then again, there are differences between a Serb and a Greek!  I'm awaiting enlightenment, since you keep throwing this up, but have yet to offer the slightest reason why we should accept that this profound difference exists, and that it has any bearing upon the apostolate of the Orthodox Church in western lands.

Let us crawl into a time machine, and go to say, Gaul, sometime in the 7th century.  What would I find?

Why, I'd find Priests, clueless that the Patriarch of Rome was infallible.  I'd also find men not at all convinced that the philosophers of the "classical" world are for all purposes the equals to the Apostles.  If I walked into one of their Churches, I'd be less likely to find opulent staturary, and more likely to see "two-dimensional", indeed rather "iconographic" portrayals adorning their Temple.  Why, I might even be surprised to find a "rood screen", which looked errily like a less ornate version of the "iconostasis" found in East-Roman (aka "Byzantine") practice.  I'd also find a fast cycle which in terms of rigor and season, was practically the same used in the East Roman Empire (and still practiced in Holy Orthodoxy to this day).  Even more secondary/tertiary liturgical matters would be similar (such as the clergy growing beards in imitation of Christ and the Prophets.)

This is ultimatly not an "East-West" issue.  While it is true that current "Byzantine" liturgical usage is not identical to what many western Christians knew before the schism, it is actually quite similar, particularly if you're talking about the Gallican liturgies which were diffused throughout much of western Europe.  In many respects, it's far more similar even to ancient Latin usages in Rome than the Tridentine Missal is (keep in mind that in Rome, liturgies were attended standing, the bread used in the liturgy was leavened, communion given under both species, etc).  Certainly the similarity is greater between the two, and say, what now passes for "Mass" in Latin parishes.

What you are perhaps calling "western", are in many respects the very things which began to transform western Christendom into something "the East" could no longer recognize.  The Islamically distilled, Latin filtered Aristotelianism which took hold of the medieval west...perversions of praxis, or fasting.  In everything, even the smallest things, what you have is Rome changing it's spots and moving away from the other local Churches.  If this is what you mean by "being western", than I suppose someone converting to Orthodoxy does have to abandon these things - in much the same way someone converting to Orthodoxy in the Middle East must "abandon things from his past" if one wants to make "Islam" synonymous with "being an Arab."  If that be so, then it is not a bad thing at all, but necessary.  We are all being called out of this world, in so far as it's made war against the truth.

Seraphim
Logged

Linus7
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #120 on: May 06, 2004, 10:50:48 AM »

Quote
Keble: This is a stupid rationale for voting anyway. If you cannot vote without taking repsonsibility for every sinful attitude of the candidate, then you can't vote without sinning.

The things Nacho posted are very real moral, social, and political issues.

The wrong positions on them are not merely "sinful attitudes."

No one is talking about taking responsibility for every possible sinful attitude a candidate may have.

We are talking about refusing to vote for those who advocate positions on these important issues with which we cannot agree and which, in fact, we believe are evil.
« Last Edit: May 06, 2004, 10:54:29 AM by Linus7 » Logged

The first condition of salvation is to keep the norm of the true faith and in no way to deviate from the established doctrine of the Fathers.
- Pope St. Hormisdas
ania
Life according to Abe Simpson:
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,097



« Reply #121 on: May 06, 2004, 11:20:27 AM »

For me (and I know, I will get flogged for this), at the moment the war in Iraq is a more important issue for me than abortion.  <<everyone gasps in horror, and whispers "Unclean! Unclean">>  Why?  Rather simple actually.  
Abortions, wether legally or illegally will be preformed, both alone by the mother & with assistance.  If they got illegal, well, people are gonna do them anyway, just as they've done for more than 2000 years (from herbal miscarriage inducers to coathangers, take your pick).  Though I consider abortion a great sin, it is done of the sinner's free will.  
War on the other hand, we have no will in at all.  For example, despite my being against the war, my tax dollars aren't going to issues important to me, such as education, environment, etc.  No, they are going to finance a war I protested against.  The money I send the government out of every paycheck I get is being used for bombs & bullets that are killing innocent & guilty alike.  It's sending my own former classmates, friends, peers, & neighbors to a country far away from their families where they might die.  It's being spent so that, at the moment, we're probably one of the least favorite nationalities in the world.  It's being spent so the government can cover up & lie straight to our faces about a war they claimed completely justified.  
Once again, I am against abortion, & that is why I'm not voting at all... I can not in good consience vote for either Kerry or Bush.
Ok... that's about it...  
Logged

Now where were we? Oh yeah - the important thing was I had an onion on my belt, which was the style at the time. They didn’t have white onions because of the war. The only thing you could get was those big yellow ones...
Fr. David
The Poster Formerly Known as "Pedro"
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA, Diocese of the South
Posts: 2,828



WWW
« Reply #122 on: May 06, 2004, 11:22:57 AM »

In everything, even the smallest things, what you have is Rome changing it's spots and moving away from the other local Churches.  If this is what you mean by "being western", than I suppose someone converting to Orthodoxy does have to abandon these things - in much the same way someone converting to Orthodoxy in the Middle East must "abandon things from his past" if one wants to make "Islam" synonymous with "being an Arab."  If that be so, then it is not a bad thing at all, but necessary.  We are all being called out of this world, in so far as it's made war against the truth.

I agree, Seraphim.  Any relinquishing of one's past must be done because it is WRONG, not merely because it is DIFFERENT.

Excellent post.
Logged

Priest in the Orthodox Church in America - ordained on March 18, 2012

Oh Taste and See (my defunct blog)

From Protestant to Orthodox (my conversion story)
Fr. David
The Poster Formerly Known as "Pedro"
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA, Diocese of the South
Posts: 2,828



WWW
« Reply #123 on: May 06, 2004, 11:26:06 AM »

We are talking about refusing to vote for those who advocate positions on these important issues with which we cannot agree and which, in fact, we believe are evil.

And if we believe the war on Iraq to be morally reprehensible, what then?

Quote
Though I consider abortion a great sin, it is done of the sinner's free will.  War on the other hand, we have no will in at all.

Good call, ania.
Logged

Priest in the Orthodox Church in America - ordained on March 18, 2012

Oh Taste and See (my defunct blog)

From Protestant to Orthodox (my conversion story)
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,395



« Reply #124 on: May 06, 2004, 01:08:54 PM »

The things Nacho posted are very real moral, social, and political issues.

And so are war, corruption, and so forth. In fact, more so. You are making distinctions that simply do not stand up to any sort of criticism.

The president of the USA is very narrowly proscribed in his ability to act on your litmus test issues. Three years of Bush have made no appreciable dent in any of them. But war: well, that certainly is his. Tax policy: ditto. Corruption: it would fall to him as well.

My bold prediction: Kerry's election would have no effect whatsover on the abortion landscape. He couldn't have an effect on homosexual "marriage" because the states regulate that.  On the other issues, the real issues, he could make a great difference. Those are the issues I see a point in voting by, because after all, the point to having elections is to have one's will counted in what happens. If you're willing to live with all the other fallout of voting only according to abortion and such, then it's on your head. You don't get to pick one issue of sin and dismiss all the others. And at the moment I feel like interpreting not voting as meaning, "I don't care how it comes out."
Logged
Brendan03
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 544



« Reply #125 on: May 06, 2004, 01:17:18 PM »

"And at the moment I feel like interpreting not voting as meaning, "I don't care how it comes out.""

That is pretty much where I am at, so that is a fair interpretation.  I do not support Kerry on numerous issues, even though I may think he has a better idea about Iraq.  I cannot reward the Bush admin for the current debacle in Iraq, so I can't vote for him either.  So, as between these two, I really don't care which one wins, because no matter what happens we are looking at a poor chief executive from 2005-2008.

Brendan
Logged

B
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,467


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #126 on: May 06, 2004, 01:34:39 PM »

Quote
So, as between these two, I really don't care which one wins, because no matter what happens we are looking at a poor chief executive from 2005-2008.

Reminds me of my younger, more impressionable days when as a budding armchair anarchist, one of my favorite lines was, "Whoever you vote for, government wins!".  :-P

I seriously don't know who I'm voting for yet.  Chances are it won't be Bush or Kerry.  I can't in good conscience not vote at all.  

Maybe I'll write in Vladyka Roberto. Wink
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
Bogoliubtsy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,268



« Reply #127 on: May 06, 2004, 01:35:50 PM »

It's being spent so the government can cover up & lie straight to our faces about a war they claimed completely justified.  

Ania, are you an evil doer? I think you need to be brought to justice. Better barricade that foxhole, cause we're going to smoke you out.  Smiley
Logged

"When you give food to the poor, they call you a saint. When you ask why the poor have no food, they call you a communist". - Archbishop Hélder Pessoa Câmara
The young fogey
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,645


I'm an alpaca, actually


WWW
« Reply #128 on: May 06, 2004, 01:59:08 PM »

Well put, ania, except I still say outlaw abortion because even though it's always been done as you say, it's a kind of murder, and even though other kinds of murders always have been committed, there are still laws against them. So it should be with medically unnecessary abortions - again.

Well put, too, Keble and Jennifer.

Of course Mr Schwarzenegger functionally is an excommunicate if he's proabortion, just like Messrs Davis or Kerry.

John Kerry isn't running for Roman Catholic Layman of the Year. He isn't campaigning to be canonized some day. He isn't a potential family member by marriage. He isn't even about to be my neighbour. So I'm not going to act like he is or vote accordingly.

No, he just wants to be president.

If he makes noises about stopping the war, he'll get my default vote pretty much for the reasons Keble gave.

There are candidates and parties who don't suck - two examples are Mr Peroutka of the Constitution Party and a favourite of mine, Aaron Russo campaigning for the Libertarian Party nomination - but of course if one wants to really be in the political process and try to do something - something worthwhile like stop the war - then one must consider double effect and vote for the lesser evil of the two mainstream candidates.

A vote for the lesser evil, a symbolic conscience vote for a third party and not voting are all options I respect.
« Last Edit: May 06, 2004, 02:00:11 PM by Serge » Logged

David
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of the South)
Posts: 1,952


Retired GM


WWW
« Reply #129 on: May 06, 2004, 03:54:28 PM »

Good points, everyone.  I plan on voting for whichever third party candidate with the largest following.  Our two parties are far more alike than different, and I'd rather try to help some other group get the 5% for matching campaign funds than more fuel for the fires of empire.  Which will probably mean either Green or Libertarian.  I don't really agree with those groups on most issues, but neither do I with Democrats or Republicans.
Logged

"When looking at faults, use a mirror, not a telescope."
-Yazid Ibrahim
Nacho
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: EasternOrthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,482

The face of Corporate America


« Reply #130 on: May 06, 2004, 04:47:04 PM »

Quote
Good points, everyone.  I plan on voting for whichever third party candidate with the largest following.  Our two parties are far more alike than different, and I'd rather try to help some other group get the 5% for matching campaign funds than more fuel for the fires of empire.  Which will probably mean either Green or Libertarian.  I don't really agree with those groups on most issues, but neither do I with Democrats or Republicans.  

I like really don 't there will ever be an up & coming third party for a very long time. Ross Perot came somewhat close the first time around, but I didn't last for long. I think Buchanan could have had a chance back in 96' if he would have darted the party when his campaign was hijacked by the uninspiring Dole & the other "Checker Pants Republicans" during the primaries. He could have taken a large part of the party with him & could have garnered alot of other independent voters, along with the dixiecrats also.

In all honesty, if people want change it's going to have to be done in one of the two major party's. It's something that has to be started at the grassroots level & trickles on up to the main leadership. What Christians need to do is take a look at what party platform most resembles thier views. I would say that the democrats are already disqualified from the get go because they are wrong on the issues that matter most to christians. Now, since the republican party has a platform that represents life we are more than half way there. Other issues such as fiscal policy could be changed by just having a presence in the party if we have enough people calling for change.

I also don't think voting for libertarians (I call them losertarians because they never win) will do much of anything. If people believe in libertarian values, they can bring that into one of the two major party's & loby for legislation in line more with those beleifs. There is something called the Republican Liberty Caucaus that has this goal in mind.
Logged

"If I find in myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world."--Mere Christianity
Fr. David
The Poster Formerly Known as "Pedro"
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA, Diocese of the South
Posts: 2,828



WWW
« Reply #131 on: May 06, 2004, 04:58:35 PM »

I plan on voting for whichever third party candidate with the largest following....I don't really agree with those groups on most issues, but neither do I with Democrats or Republicans.  

I feel the same way...so what're folks like us to do?  It's more of a vote against the current two parties than for anyone in particular, which is sad.

Sort of an "I care about the nation, not these two shmucks" idea, huh?
Logged

Priest in the Orthodox Church in America - ordained on March 18, 2012

Oh Taste and See (my defunct blog)

From Protestant to Orthodox (my conversion story)
ExOrienteLux
Waning: Spoilers
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 183



« Reply #132 on: May 06, 2004, 05:02:13 PM »

I also don't think voting for libertarians (I call them losertarians because they never win) will do much of anything. If people believe in libertarian values, they can bring that into one of the two major party's & loby for legislation in line more with those beleifs. There is something called the Republican Liberty Caucaus that has this goal in mind.  

Ever heard of the Free State Project?  I'm pretty sure that that'll get something done.

Check it out: www.freestateproject.org.

And I'm torn between voting for the Constitution Party or the Libertarians.  I have yet to check Peroutka's platform and I'm still waiting for the Libertarian's to decide which candidate they're going to run.  It'll probably end up being the Constitution Party, if only because they're explicitly Christian, albeit primarily Protestant.  Oh well.  Can't win 'em all.

----EDIT----
Quote
Pedro: Sort of an "I care about the nation, not these two shmucks" idea, huh?

I hear you on that one, Pedro.  That's one of the reasons I like the Constitution Party: they're explicitly committed to upholding the Constitution, especially Amendments IX and X.
« Last Edit: May 06, 2004, 05:05:49 PM by ExOrienteLux » Logged

Arise, O God! Judge the earth, for to Thee belong all the nations!
Jennifer
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 1,154


« Reply #133 on: May 06, 2004, 05:10:49 PM »

For me (and I know, I will get flogged for this), at the moment the war in Iraq is a more important issue for me than abortion.  <<everyone gasps in horror, and whispers "Unclean! Unclean">>  Why?  Rather simple actually.  
Abortions, wether legally or illegally will be preformed, both alone by the mother & with assistance.  If they got illegal, well, people are gonna do them anyway, just as they've done for more than 2000 years (from herbal miscarriage inducers to coathangers, take your pick).  Though I consider abortion a great sin, it is done of the sinner's free will.  
War on the other hand, we have no will in at all.  For example, despite my being against the war, my tax dollars aren't going to issues important to me, such as education, environment, etc.  No, they are going to finance a war I protested against.  The money I send the government out of every paycheck I get is being used for bombs & bullets that are killing innocent & guilty alike.  It's sending my own former classmates, friends, peers, & neighbors to a country far away from their families where they might die.  It's being spent so that, at the moment, we're probably one of the least favorite nationalities in the world.  It's being spent so the government can cover up & lie straight to our faces about a war they claimed completely justified.  
Once again, I am against abortion, & that is why I'm not voting at all... I can not in good consience vote for either Kerry or Bush.
Ok... that's about it...  


Ania, I don't know you but I'm certain that you are committing a very serious sin.  Some people would think twice before spiritual guidance to someone they don't know but not me.  I'm sure that I'm right and that you're wrong.   Wink

I think you're exactly right about abortions happening anyway regardless of whether they are illegal.  I don't think that means we should give up and not work towards making it illegal but IMHO it mitigates treating abortion as a single issue.  Abortion is a complex social problem.  

Logged
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


"Look At Me! Look At Me Now! " - Bono


« Reply #134 on: May 06, 2004, 05:17:30 PM »

I am sick of being a modernist and will vote as in the old days -- whomever supplies me with the most whiskey! Bring back Andrew Jackson!
Logged
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 »  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.17 seconds with 72 queries.