OrthodoxChristianity.net
December 21, 2014, 11:27:42 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 14539 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
David
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

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


Retired GM


WWW
« Reply #135 on: May 06, 2004, 05:53:08 PM »



I also don't think voting for libertarians (I call them losertarians because they never win) will do much of anything.

I disagree with this.  I think that many people who currently vote Republican or Democrat have libertarian sensibilities, they just aren't as familiar with the party. The idea of I can do whatever I want as long as I don't infringe on the rights of others.  Democrats like it as it upholds abortion(I know not all libertarians are pro-choice), the ACLU, and is in favor of decriminization of drugs.  Republicans like it as it gives more power to corporations and more control over their wealth.  I really think it will grow in the next 20-30 years.  That said, I personally am very much opposed to much of libertarian platform positions and would consider myself on the opposite side; a social conservative and a financial liberal.
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 #136 on: May 06, 2004, 06:54:31 PM »

Quote
I disagree with this.  I think that many people who currently vote Republican or Democrat have libertarian sensibilities, they just aren't as familiar with the party. The idea of I can do whatever I want as long as I don't infringe on the rights of others.  Democrats like it as it upholds abortion(I know not all libertarians are pro-choice), the ACLU, and is in favor of decriminization of drugs.  Republicans like it as it gives more power to corporations and more control over their wealth.  I really think it will grow in the next 20-30 years.  That said, I personally am very much opposed to much of libertarian platform positions and would consider myself on the opposite side; a social conservative and a financial liberal.  

I pretty much agree with everything your saying. Even though I'm a republican, there's alot of things I don't like about the republican party. My main point in the previous post is that people in 3rd party's will never see any "real" change to our system because they have no power.There vote is merely symbolic. They will have much more "power" to change things if they actually were in one of the two party systems & worked from the grassroots level to slowly change things for the better.  

I wish we had something like Falwell's "Moral Majority", but something that is much more inclusive with many Roman Catholic  & Orthodox voices coming togethor to better influence our culture & politicians for the better.
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
David
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

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


Retired GM


WWW
« Reply #137 on: May 06, 2004, 07:03:16 PM »

Also talking in regard to what works and what doesn't...A sad thing is that many people only vote in presidential elections, where their vote has the least power.  Often times, local and state elections have much lower turnouts than national elections per capita.  I agree with you that any real change must be based in a grassroots effort, and for that we must become involved in the politics of our local communities.
Logged

"When looking at faults, use a mirror, not a telescope."
-Yazid Ibrahim
ExOrienteLux
Waning: Spoilers
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 183



« Reply #138 on: May 06, 2004, 08:18:43 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!

Amen, Tom!!! Give me alcohol and drag me to the voting booth!  Tongue

Josh  Grin
Logged

Arise, O God! Judge the earth, for to Thee belong all the nations!
Brendan03
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 544



« Reply #139 on: May 07, 2004, 06:31:04 AM »

I think Nacho's point resonates in an article in The Washington Post yesterday by David Broder.  Broder pointed out that over the last 10-15 years both parties have become increasingly radicalized.  Where 20 years ago you actually had conservative democrats in the south and progressive republicans elsewhere, increasingly now you have republican conservatives in those seats in the south, and liberal democrats in those formerly republican seats elsewhere.  Each party is becoming increasingly beholden to a more polarized, and polarizing, element rather than a centrist element.  His point is that this trend is leading to the increasingly shrill, partisan, polarized situation in Washington and elsewhere in our national political debate.

One one level this analysis seems facile, even obvious.  In thinking about it over the last day or so, however, I've found it increasingly interesting for me personally.  I have never been a registered member of either  party, because I have always felt that people and issues were more important to me in casting a vote than a particular political party (one of the reasons I do not like the European system very much).  Having said that, since 1988 (the first presidential election I could vote in), I have voted for the GOP candidate because, on balance, I preferred that candidate to the other major candidate.  I didn't care for Dukakis in 88 or Clinton in 92, and voted for Bush Sr. both times. Similarly, I voted for Dole in 96, and GWB in 2000.  However, looking back on things, I think in general that I liked Bush Sr. and Dole because they were not really *that* knee-jerk conservative ... they were pragmatic republicans, more centrist oriented. I actully liked them.  I voted for GWB more or less because of Clinton fatigue, and a distaste for Al Gore, whom I perceived to be more of a democratic radical than Clinton was.  I now believe that voting for GWB may have been a mistake, the man frightens me now.  The aministration is really much too conservative for my taste, and perhaps this reflects the trends that David Broder describes in his article.  In any case, I won't be voting for him again, and I won't vote for Kerry simply because he is *not* Bush (that was too much of a motivation for my vote in 2000, and that was a mistake, imo).  So perhaps I will find a third party candidate who reflects policies closer to what I can support, or perhaps I sit this one out.  I wish there were more political moderates available, however.  I think that most of the country is politically moderate, and that this radical hijacking of the major political parties has made many people tune out from politics altogether.

Brendan
Logged

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

Posts: 2,780



« Reply #140 on: May 07, 2004, 08:05:26 AM »

I enjoyed that last post of yours, Brendan. I follow your reasoning, and it makes a lot of sense.

I will vote for Bush simply to stop Kerry, whom I see as a dire menace, not because I think Bush is the ideal president.

Not the best of reasons, I know, but there you have it.

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 #141 on: May 07, 2004, 11:45:38 AM »

I've decided, I'm voting 3rd party this year (just dont know who yet)
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: 2,831



WWW
« Reply #142 on: May 07, 2004, 12:06:47 PM »

Yo tambi+¬n -- anybody got a list of 3rd partiers?
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)
MsGuided
Pharmakolytria
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 478


St. Anastasia


« Reply #143 on: May 07, 2004, 12:25:38 PM »

Yo tambi+¬n -- anybody got a list of 3rd partiers?

So far as I can see, this looks like such a list.
http://www.politics1.com/p2004.htm
Logged

"Forgive me that great love leads me to talking nonsense." Barsanuphius
TomS
Banned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 3,186


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


« Reply #144 on: May 07, 2004, 02:10:23 PM »

Ad Assails D.C. Cardinal for Stance on Communion

By Alan Cooperman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, May 7, 2004; Page A03

A Roman Catholic antiabortion group launched an advertising campaign against Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick of Washington yesterday, attacking him for saying he is not comfortable denying Communion to Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.) and other Catholic members of Congress who support abortion rights.

The Virginia-based American Life League said the advertisements are the beginning of a $500,000 print ad campaign targeting bishops who are reluctant to punish Catholic politicians for taking policy positions that defy the church. The first ad shows Jesus in agony on the cross and asks: "Cardinal McCarrick: Are you comfortable now?"

Under pressure from such groups and from the Vatican, a small but growing number of U.S. bishops have said they would deny the Eucharist, which Catholics believe is the body and blood of Christ, to elected officials such as Democratic presidential candidate Kerry and the governor of New Jersey.

But the increasingly aggressive, personal criticism of bishops and politicians is running into opposition from Catholics across the political spectrum. Some conservatives fear the tactics may backfire and raise sympathy for Kerry. Some liberals say the church is opening itself to charges of partisanship and could revive the charge that haunted John F. Kennedy, that Catholic politicians take orders from Rome.

Many in both camps question where those who begin denying Communion to elected officials will draw the line.

Judie Brown, president of the American Life League, said her organization believes that all priests and lay Eucharistic ministers who hand out Communion are obligated -- with or without instructions from their bishops -- to refuse Communion to any federal, state or local official who is known to disagree with church teaching on abortion, contraception, stem cell research, euthanasia or in vitro fertilization.

Karl Maurer, vice president of Catholic Citizens of Illinois, a conservative grass-roots group, said he would add sodomy and gay marriage to that list. Some liberal grass-roots groups have said they believe the church's teachings against war and the death penalty are worthy of equal treatment.

"Once you open this door, what's going to come rolling through it?" asked Deal W. Hudson, editor of the magazine Crisis and a key Catholic ally of the Bush administration. "Pretty soon, no one would be taking Communion."

Hudson said he believes the denial of Communion should begin, and end, with Kerry. Even better, he said, would be if priests would read letters from the pulpit denouncing the senator from Massachusetts "whenever and wherever he campaigns as a Catholic."

But the debate within the church has already moved beyond Kerry. On Wednesday, New Jersey Gov. James E. McGreevey, a Democrat, said he would voluntarily refrain from taking Communion. Three of New Jersey's bishops have said in recent days that politicians who support abortion rights should not take Communion, and two of them mentioned McGreevey by name.

Last year, Bishop Robert J. Carlson of Sioux Falls, S.D., reportedly warned Senate Minority Leader Thomas A. Daschle not to call himself a Catholic because of his stand in favor of abortion. Sacramento Bishop William K. Weigand made a similar remonstrance to Gray Davis, the former Democratic governor of California. And Archbishop Raymond L. Burke, of St. Louis and formerly of Wisconsin, went the furthest in January, instructing all churches in his former diocese to deny the Eucharist to three local politicians, including Rep. David R. Obey (D-Wis.), because of their voting records on abortion.

The American Life League's ad campaign targets McCarrick partly because he heads a task force of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops that is charged with developing guidelines on when to sanction Catholics who hold public office.

The cardinal's spokeswoman, Susan Gibbs, said he had not seen the full-page advertisement that began running yesterday in the Washington Times, the Catholic weekly the Wanderer and the conservative journal Human Events because he was in Italy following meetings with Pope John Paul II last week. But Gibbs responded to the campaign's rhetorical question about McCarrick's comfort by saying that he "is very comfortably in communion with the church on this issue."

"In our teaching, the primary responsibility is on the individual whether to receive Communion after serious reflection on whether they are in the proper state," she said. "The cardinal has been clear that he would be very reluctant to use the Eucharist as a political sanction."

David O'Brien, a professor of Roman Catholic studies at the College of the Holy Cross in Worcester, Mass., said McCarrick appears to be trying to find a middle road between punishing politicians and remaining silent. He said all bishops must "protect the integrity of the church's teaching" by speaking out against the "grave scandal" that results from high-profile Catholics flouting church doctrine.

But, he said, "if they push this too hard, it could easily backfire on them. People are going to say, 'Where is their moral leadership on a whole lot of issues? How many bishops have resigned because of their mishandling of sexual abuse? Why didn't they speak on the war in Iraq? What effort did they make to bring to the attention of their own people the positions they've taken on war, capital punishment and poverty?"

In short, O'Brien said, "when they come down personally on [particular politicians], people are going to say they have political motives -- and maybe some of them do."

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

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,494


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #145 on: May 07, 2004, 02:22:07 PM »

Oh my:

LEROY PLETTEN of Michigan
Prohibition Party
Vice Presidential Nominee  

Leroy Pletten -- a historian and anti-alcohol advocate -- first joined the Prohibition Party in 1998. Since then, he's become State Chair in Michigan and the National Secretary of the party. Pletten, 58, was originally from Minnesota. He each his B.A. degree in history from the University of Minnesota in 1967 and later served as a civilian employee of the Army. He lost a race for local school board in 2003 as the party's nominee (6%) -- but notes in party literature that he's "been elected twice to the board of directors of his condominium owner's association."
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
ania
Life according to Abe Simpson:
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,097



« Reply #146 on: May 07, 2004, 02:46:10 PM »

heeheee, this one looks like a good one...  
http://www.politics1.com/pfp04.htm
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...
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #147 on: May 07, 2004, 10:35:29 PM »

Re: third parties...

Go Pat Go!
Logged
Anastasios
Webdespota
Administrator
Merarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Old Calendarist
Posts: 10,487


Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Florina

anastasios0513
WWW
« Reply #148 on: May 08, 2004, 10:19:59 PM »

Locked due to moratorium on political discussion.
Logged

Please Buy My Book!

Past posts reflect stages of my life before my baptism may not be accurate expositions of Orthodox teaching. Also, I served as an Orthodox priest from 2008-2013, before resigning.
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 0.076 seconds with 41 queries.