Catholic Online Forum

The first interactive Catholic Forum on the web
It is currently 18 May 2013 14:10

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 276 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: 26 Dec 2012 19:56 
Offline
Master Member
Master Member
User avatar

Joined: 05 Oct 2004 07:39
Posts: 8515
Location: Northern VA, USA
Daniel,

What sorts of firearms do you believe you have a right to own?

Would you please demonstrate why you have a right to own those particular firearms?

_________________
ImageJeff StevensImage


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Dec 2012 10:49 
Offline
Master Member
Master Member
User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2003 13:32
Posts: 4917
Kardinal wrote:
Daniel,

What sorts of firearms do you believe you have a right to own?

Would you please demonstrate why you have a right to own those particular firearms?


Any I wish to own.

I will demonstrate nothing. WHY? God endowed me the right to life and the right to self defense necessarily emanates from this God given right. This truth is self evident...

_________________
Daniel

"Do you think that I have come to establish peace on the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division." -- Luke 12:51


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Dec 2012 11:12 
Offline
Master Member
Master Member
User avatar

Joined: 05 Oct 2004 07:39
Posts: 8515
Location: Northern VA, USA
dlm wrote:
Kardinal wrote:
Daniel,

What sorts of firearms do you believe you have a right to own?

Would you please demonstrate why you have a right to own those particular firearms?


Any I wish to own.

I will demonstrate nothing. WHY? God endowed me the right to life and the right to self defense necessarily emanates from this God given right. This truth is self evident...

Any firearm?

Does that include a 50 caliber machine gun?

20mm gatling gun?

155mm self-propelled howitzer?

B-2 Stealth bomber?

8MT thermonuclear-tipped Titan II Intercontinental Ballistic Missile?

As for self-evident, I think it fails that test. It is not self-evident that a private citizen has the right to own any firearm he wishes to.

It is reasonable to ask someone why they believe something. To answer that it is "self-evident" strikes me as a copout.

In fact, Scripture tells us to always be ready to give an answer for why we hold our faith.

_________________
ImageJeff StevensImage


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Dec 2012 11:57 
Offline
Forum Staff
Forum Staff
User avatar

Joined: 13 Jul 2002 11:50
Posts: 18820
Location: USA
Jeff,

Some of those are not really a Firearm.

Of course the 2nd Amendment guarantees the right to Bear Arms, so I suppose that if one could Bear a Titan II then the argument could be made......

_________________
Bob C


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Dec 2012 12:05 
Offline
Master Member
Master Member
User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2003 13:32
Posts: 4917
BobC wrote:
Jeff,

Some of those are not really a Firearm.

Of course the 2nd Amendment guarantees the right to Bear Arms, so I suppose that if one could Bear a Titan II then the argument could be made......


:)

One could argue that what is needed to defend oneself is necessarily predicated upon what exactly is being defended against. This decision is a personal matter of judgment -not a decision open to mob rules BECAUSE the mob may just be who one is going to defend themselves from...

As Obama has stated: "If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun"

Let me add that defense of property is as well something some consider a right.

_________________
Daniel

"Do you think that I have come to establish peace on the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division." -- Luke 12:51


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Dec 2012 12:19 
Offline
Master Member
Master Member
User avatar

Joined: 05 Oct 2004 07:39
Posts: 8515
Location: Northern VA, USA
BobC wrote:
Some of those are not really a Firearm.

Well, that's an interesting question. And it's why I asked Daniel what he meant, and what the limits were.

_________________
ImageJeff StevensImage


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Dec 2012 12:30 
Offline
Master Member
Master Member
User avatar

Joined: 05 Oct 2004 07:39
Posts: 8515
Location: Northern VA, USA
dlm wrote:
Let me add that defense of property is as well something some consider a right.

I would be one of them.

Along with the Church, I do not regard the defense of property as a legitimate reason to use deadly force.

_________________
ImageJeff StevensImage


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Dec 2012 13:46 
Offline
Veteran Member
Veteran Member
User avatar

Joined: 28 Feb 2009 15:57
Posts: 2758
For those who are not convinced the government is on a gun grab witch hunt, here is the current senate legislation, unlikely to pass I hope:

http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/assault-weapons.

Nearly every 9mm and many up to .45 cal semi-auto hand pistols have a built-in capacity greater than 10 rounds (gun grab); many non-military style sporting/hunting rifles are capable of accepting magazines of greater than 10 round capacity (gun grab); registering every gun owner in the US in a government database (nothing short of gutting the intent of the Second Amendment); many, many, many legitimate gun owners with weapons covered under the "grandfather" clause will not register themselves and their their weapons (creates a new criminal class numbering in the millions), think that might make the police a bit nervous?; creates a criminal underground that will make the alcohol prohibition of the twenties seem like child's play.

Would you consider a gun with the capacity of 90 deadly projectiles an assault weapon? Consider a 12 gauge shotgun loaded with typical buckshot; 6 shells at around 12-15 pellets per shell - depends on the size of the pellets - and you have a capacity of 72 to 90 deadly projectiles; assault weapon? Is that the next gun grab target, trap and skeet shooters?

_________________
BobA

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Dec 2012 13:57 
Offline
Master Member
Master Member
User avatar

Joined: 05 Oct 2004 07:39
Posts: 8515
Location: Northern VA, USA
Doesn't change my belief they want to ban all guns at all.

_________________
ImageJeff StevensImage


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Dec 2012 14:30 
Offline
Master Member
Master Member
User avatar

Joined: 10 Dec 2003 01:07
Posts: 14605
Location: Sydney, Australia
Leo,

Quote:
The humor to me is the topic always finds it's way to including Hitler!


Yes. See Godwin's Law:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

_________________
James Daly

"It is the Lord." (Jn 21:7)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Dec 2012 14:52 
Offline
Veteran Member
Veteran Member
User avatar

Joined: 28 Feb 2009 15:57
Posts: 2758
Kardinal wrote:
Doesn't change my belief they want to ban all guns at all.


Not all guns, merely those that are effective in self and home defense.

_________________
BobA

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Dec 2012 16:36 
Offline
Advanced Member
Advanced Member

Joined: 05 Oct 2008 20:28
Posts: 1608
Location: Dorchester, MA, USA
Okay, here's one area under the topic...

Quote:
...under current laws the bureau [ATF] is prohibited from creating a federal registry of gun transactions.


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/26/us/le ... .html?_r=0

Related to what was said much earlier in the conversation - yeah, this is (at least on the face) in the category of affecting people who are already law-abiding and concerns investigation more than prevention. I'd disagree at least in part, though.

_________________
Rob


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Dec 2012 17:19 
Offline
Veteran Member
Veteran Member
User avatar

Joined: 28 Feb 2009 15:57
Posts: 2758
Charivari Rob wrote:
Okay, here's one area under the topic...

Quote:
...under current laws the bureau [ATF] is prohibited from creating a federal registry of gun transactions.


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/26/us/le ... .html?_r=0

Related to what was said much earlier in the conversation - yeah, this is (at least on the face) in the category of affecting people who are already law-abiding and concerns investigation more than prevention. I'd disagree at least in part, though.


The word "current" means something has to be changed, nothing more. It seems no one understands that by definition criminals do not obey laws, law abiding people obey laws so hamstringing the law abiding gun owner does nothing to solve the problem at hand.

_________________
BobA

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Dec 2012 18:20 
Offline
Master Member
Master Member
User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2003 13:32
Posts: 4917
bali wrote:
The word "current" means something has to be changed, nothing more. It seems no one understands that by definition criminals do not obey laws, law abiding people obey laws so hamstringing the law abiding gun owner does nothing to solve the problem at hand.


What about the 'laws' aspect of current laws. The writer as well implies that this 'hurdle' preventing further federal power is simply a matter of legislation. In reality, the federal is limited by the Constitution and has no direct power to regulate gun sales and ONLY does so now via an indirect liberal interpretation of the commerce clause.

The government overlords and their useful idiots have a delusional dream; however, I know at least one person that stands in the way of them obtaining it -me. :wink:

_________________
Daniel

"Do you think that I have come to establish peace on the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division." -- Luke 12:51


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Dec 2012 18:32 
Offline
Veteran Member
Veteran Member
User avatar

Joined: 28 Feb 2009 15:57
Posts: 2758
dlm wrote:
bali wrote:
The word "current" means something has to be changed, nothing more. It seems no one understands that by definition criminals do not obey laws, law abiding people obey laws so hamstringing the law abiding gun owner does nothing to solve the problem at hand.


What about the 'laws' aspect of current laws. The writer as well implies that this 'hurdle' preventing further federal power is simply a matter of legislation. In reality, the federal is limited by the Constitution and has no direct power to regulate gun sales and ONLY does so now via an indirect liberal interpretation of the commerce clause.

The government overlords and their useful idiots have a delusional dream; however, I know at least one person that stands in the way of them obtaining it -me. :wink:


So what part of our government do you foresee preventing further "liberal" interpretations of the constitution? I doubt the liberal Senate will do it, the House has no backbone to do it and the SCOTUS has not done so to date. I'm sure the government understands the resistance it will encounter if it tries to enact and enforce the Feinstein Bill, I'm equally confident that the government has a plan in place address that resistance.

_________________
BobA

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Dec 2012 19:23 
Offline
Master Member
Master Member
User avatar

Joined: 16 Jul 2002 05:16
Posts: 15696
Location: Southern California, Catholic
It is reported that the Bishops have come out in support of gun control legislation.
Quote:
Catholic bishops call for gun control, mental health reforms The governing body of the U.S. Catholic Church is calling for lawmakers to tighten gun regulations and improve access to mental healthcare in the wake of last Friday's mass shooting in Newtown, Conn.

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops released a statement Friday as the National Rifle Association prepared to address the public for the first time since a shooter murdered 27 people, mostly children, at Sandy Hook Elementary School. ...
I think they just took a stroll in a mine field. It is a safe bet that they can't make any statement regarding limiting Constitutional Rights to defend children that the media won't use against them.

_________________
- Joe Kelley

Death is only a shadow across the path to Heaven.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Dec 2012 19:57 
Offline
Veteran Member
Veteran Member
User avatar

Joined: 28 Feb 2009 15:57
Posts: 2758
gabriel wrote:
It is reported that the Bishops have come out in support of gun control legislation.
Quote:
Catholic bishops call for gun control, mental health reforms The governing body of the U.S. Catholic Church is calling for lawmakers to tighten gun regulations and improve access to mental healthcare in the wake of last Friday's mass shooting in Newtown, Conn.

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops released a statement Friday as the National Rifle Association prepared to address the public for the first time since a shooter murdered 27 people, mostly children, at Sandy Hook Elementary School. ...
I think they just took a stroll in a mine field. It is a safe bet that they can't make any statement regarding limiting Constitutional Rights to defend children that the media won't use against them.


I agree, a lot of potential collateral damage. Does anyone think about the consequences of their actions anymore? In addition to the loss of credibility on Life issues, they are risking alienating a number of law abiding, gun owning Catholics.

_________________
BobA

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Dec 2012 20:00 
Offline
Master Member
Master Member
User avatar

Joined: 10 Dec 2003 01:07
Posts: 14605
Location: Sydney, Australia
Joe,

Here is the full text

Quote:
Call for Action in Response to Newtown Tragedy

Bishop Stephen E. Blaire of Stockton,
Bishop John C. Wester of Salt Lake City,
Bishop Kevin C. Rhoades of Fort Wayne-South Bend


The Lord Jesus Christ, in his Sermon on the Mount, teaches us, "Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted," and "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God" (Mt 5:4, 9).

In the face of the horrific evil that occurred at Sandy Hook Elementary School on December 14, 2012, as people of faith we first and foremost turn to God and pray. We pray for those whose lives were robbed from them. As Catholic Bishops, we join together with the President of our Conference, Cardinal Timothy Dolan, who on the day of the horrible tragedy expressed his profound solidarity with and prayers for the families, friends, neighbors, and communities whose hearts have been rent by the loss of a child or loved one. No words can capture your suffering. We look to Christ, his words and deeds, and ultimately to his Cross and Resurrection. It is in Jesus that we place our hope.

The Sandy Hook tragedy has caused great anguish for parents and others who attempt to safeguard our children. In addition to the outpouring of prayers and support from around the nation, understandably this tragedy has given rise to discussions about national policies and steps that can be taken to foster a culture that protects the innocent and those most vulnerable among us. It is time for our nation to renew a culture of life in our society.

Sacred Scripture reminds us time and again to "be not afraid." Indeed, we must find within ourselves the faith-filled courage to address the challenges our nation faces, both in our homes and in our national policies. These challenges encompass many areas with various complexities. Here, we offer particular words regarding the issue of the regulation of fire arms, the standards for the entertainment industry, and our service to those with mental health needs.

As religious leaders, we are compelled to call on all Americans, especially elected leaders, to address these issues.With regard to the regulation of fire arms, first, the intent to protect one's loved ones is an honorable one, but simply put, guns are too easily accessible. The Vatican's Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, in their document, "The International Arms Trade (2006)," emphasized the importance of enacting concrete controls on handguns, for example, noting that "limiting the purchase of such arms would certainly not infringe on the rights of anyone."

Secondly, our entertainers, especially film producers and video game creators, need to realize how their profit motives have allowed the proliferation of movies, television programs, video games and other entertainment that glorify violence and prey on the insecurities and immaturity of our young people. Such portrayals of violence have desensitized all of us. The massacre of twenty little children and seven adults causes each of us to reflect on our own understanding of the value of human life. We must improve our resources for parents, guardians and young people, so that they can evaluate entertainment products intelligently. We need to admit that the viewing and use of these products has negative emotional, psychological and spiritual effects on people.We must also reflect on our own fears as we grapple with our prejudices toward those with mental health needs. Our society must provide health services and support to those who have mental illnesses and to their families and caregivers. As a community we need to support one another so no one feels unable to get help for a mentally ill family member or neighbor in need. Burdensome healthcare policies must be adjusted so people can get help for themselves or others in need. Just as we properly reach out to those with physical challenges we need to approach mental health concerns with equal sensitivity. There is no shame in seeking help for oneself or others; the only shame is in refusing to provide care and support.

The events in Newtown call us to turn to our Lord in prayer and to witness more profoundly Christ's perfect love, mercy and compassion. We must confront violence with love. There are glimmers of hope in this tragedy. Many people, including some of the victims, made extraordinary efforts to protect life. In particular, the teachers, the principal, the children, the first responders and other leaders showed tremendous courage during the tragedy. Some sacrificed their own lives protecting others.

In their memory and for the sake of our nation, we reiterate our call made in 2000, in our statement, Responsibility, Rehabilitation and Restoration: A Catholic Perspective on Crime and Criminal Justice, for all Americans, especially legislators, to:

1. Support measures that control the sale and use of firearms
2. Support measures that make guns safer (especially efforts that prevent their unsupervised use by children and anyone other than the owner)
3. Call for sensible regulations of handguns
4. Support legislative efforts that seek to protect society from the violence associated with easy access to deadly weapons including assault weapons
5. Make a serious commitment to confront the pervasive role of addiction and mental illness in crime.


As we long for the arrival of the Prince of Peace in this Advent and Christmas season, we call on all people of goodwill to help bring about a culture of life and peace.



http://www.news.va/en/news/us-bishops-a ... newtown-sh

_________________
James Daly

"It is the Lord." (Jn 21:7)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Dec 2012 21:27 
Offline
Master Member
Master Member
User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2003 13:32
Posts: 4917
Quote:
With regard to the regulation of fire arms, first, the intent to protect one's loved ones is an honorable one, but simply put, guns are too easily accessible.


The statement loses all credibility with that one sentence...

The statement should address actions -good or bad with intentions as considerations when ascertaining sinfulness of an act

The statement intentionally and erroneously conflates intent with an inanimate object.

The statement implies good action with good intent as simply 'honorable' (that which is actually a grave duty) while implying an inanimate object is the cause of bad intent. In essence, the statement absolves bad actions while at the same time it negates the tools necessary for good actions

I have a feeling this was penned by remnants of the social justice league yet to be purged.

The Bishops should stick to teaching matters of absolute truth with a focus on salvation rather than publishing personal opinions on matters of prudential judgment.

_________________
Daniel

"Do you think that I have come to establish peace on the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division." -- Luke 12:51


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 28 Dec 2012 12:03 
Offline
Master Member
Master Member
User avatar

Joined: 16 Jul 2002 05:16
Posts: 15696
Location: Southern California, Catholic
Two in a month is too many! Maybe we need to control subway trains also: lower speed limits, better checking of track before moving forward, etc
Quote:
'Mumbling woman' pushes man to his death in front of NYC subway trainPolice searched for a woman who killed a man by pushing him in front of a subway train and released surveillance video Friday of her running away from the station.

Commuters, meanwhile, absorbed the news of the second fatal subway shove in the city this month....


Or maybe mental checks on people who wish to enter subway.

_________________
- Joe Kelley

Death is only a shadow across the path to Heaven.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 28 Dec 2012 12:06 
Offline
Master Member
Master Member
User avatar

Joined: 16 Jul 2002 05:16
Posts: 15696
Location: Southern California, Catholic
Seamas O Dalaigh wrote:
Joe,

Here is the full text

....
What is the probability that the media will read the full text when a quote out of context will fit their story?

_________________
- Joe Kelley

Death is only a shadow across the path to Heaven.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Dec 2012 12:44 
Offline
Intermediate Member
Intermediate Member

Joined: 17 Feb 2004 15:28
Posts: 349
Location: Los Angeles
Quote:
The Bishops should stick to teaching matters of absolute truth with a focus on salvation rather than publishing personal opinions on matters of prudential judgment.


I completely agree with the message from the Catholic Bishops. The Church's message should be one that encourages a culture of life and peace among its followers.

In regards of "prudential judgment", it is the responsibility of the Church to express opinions. Especially in matters that effect our daily lives. These are the areas that most effect our spiritual growth. Unfortunately, we have our turned our backs on subjects we just feel conflicts with our personal desires.

One area they mention, is the level of violence that is acceptable. It is true that movies and other media are a big influence. However, all of these seem to be welcomed within a Christian household. We have no problem watching the sex and senseless violence. The worse part is many of us watch this as a family. The propagation of these poor spiritual values are evident with how openly people have become with using profanity and our insistence of carrying on with our lives in the manner we wish.

We are than perplexed when these events play out within our society. Of course we are than quick to blame others because we cannot possibly have any fault in these outcomes. No single proposal is going to resolve our problems as a society. However, we need to start moving in a more spiritual direction.

_________________
Leo


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Dec 2012 13:33 
Offline
Master Member
Master Member
User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2003 13:32
Posts: 4917
Leo wrote:
However, we need to start moving in a more spiritual direction.


What is stopping you -the lack of a government mandate?

It seems both you and those who penned the Bishop's statement imply collective guilt and as well suggest collective salvation through government imposition is the answer.

The government is the enemy today -wake up and smell the coffee.

_________________
Daniel

"Do you think that I have come to establish peace on the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division." -- Luke 12:51


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Dec 2012 15:11 
Offline
Forum Staff
Forum Staff
User avatar

Joined: 13 Jul 2002 11:50
Posts: 18820
Location: USA
Quote:
I completely agree with the message from the Catholic Bishops. The Church's message should be one that encourages a culture of life and peace among its followers.

In regards of "prudential judgment", it is the responsibility of the Church to express opinions. Especially in matters that effect our daily lives. These are the areas that most effect our spiritual growth. Unfortunately, we have our turned our backs on subjects we just feel conflicts with our personal desires.



Except where were all the "Catholics" back in November when the Bishops were warning of the coming election, and to be sure to vote for the Candidate who more closely stood for Catholic Principles.

_________________
Bob C


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Dec 2012 15:12 
Offline
Master Member
Master Member
User avatar

Joined: 10 Dec 2003 01:07
Posts: 14605
Location: Sydney, Australia
dlm wrote:
Quote:
With regard to the regulation of fire arms, first, the intent to protect one's loved ones is an honorable one, but simply put, guns are too easily accessible.


The statement loses all credibility with that one sentence...

The statement should address actions -good or bad with intentions as considerations when ascertaining sinfulness of an act



Quote:
The statement intentionally...


You know your bishops' intentions?

Quote:
The statement intentionally and erroneously conflates intent with an inanimate object.


"Intentionally conflates intent with..."?

Quote:

The statement implies good action with good intent as simply 'honorable' (that which is actually a grave duty)...


A good action with good intent is not necessarily a morally obligatory action (eg, buying one's wife some lovely red roses for no particular reason).

Quote:
...while implying an inanimate object is the cause of bad intent.



No. The sentence in question does nothing to imply that.

Pease note: I am neither agreeing nor disagreeing with the statement issued by the three American bishops, nor do I understand its canonical or juridicial force; I simply find your analysis of that particular sentence disappointing.

_________________
James Daly

"It is the Lord." (Jn 21:7)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Dec 2012 15:16 
Offline
Forum Staff
Forum Staff
User avatar

Joined: 13 Jul 2002 11:50
Posts: 18820
Location: USA
James,

Quote:
eg, buying one's wife some lovely red roses for no particular reason



I often buy my wife flowers, while there is not always an occasion, there is always a reason. :wink:

_________________
Bob C


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Dec 2012 15:18 
Offline
Veteran Member
Veteran Member
User avatar

Joined: 28 Feb 2009 15:57
Posts: 2758
Leo wrote:
Quote:
The Bishops should stick to teaching matters of absolute truth with a focus on salvation rather than publishing personal opinions on matters of prudential judgment.


I completely agree with the message from the Catholic Bishops. The Church's message should be one that encourages a culture of life and peace among its followers.

In regards of "prudential judgment", it is the responsibility of the Church to express opinions. Especially in matters that effect our daily lives. These are the areas that most effect our spiritual growth. Unfortunately, we have our turned our backs on subjects we just feel conflicts with our personal desires.

One area they mention, is the level of violence that is acceptable. It is true that movies and other media are a big influence. However, all of these seem to be welcomed within a Christian household. We have no problem watching the sex and senseless violence. The worse part is many of us watch this as a family. The propagation of these poor spiritual values are evident with how openly people have become with using profanity and our insistence of carrying on with our lives in the manner we wish.

We are than perplexed when these events play out within our society. Of course we are than quick to blame others because we cannot possibly have any fault in these outcomes. No single proposal is going to resolve our problems as a society. However, we need to start moving in a more spiritual direction.


If we cannot defends ourselves, our families, our businesses even our churches there will be no "peace" there be a life of virtual terrorism at the hands of the armed crazies. I happen to know of one priest who is in the process of acquiring a concealed carry permit to protect his congregation and I suspect there are others around the country as well. The Holy Father himself has an armed guard, a small army of them in fact; the bishops and clergy are so at peace with the world that US churches are locked at all times when there is no service, what kind of peace is that when we cannot even enter our churches at will because of the fear of crime.

I don't know what you and your family call entertainment but in our house we don't watch sex and violence on TV, at the movies or listen to it on the radio nor is there profanity smoking, drinking or drug use.

_________________
BobA

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Dec 2012 15:21 
Offline
Master Member
Master Member
User avatar

Joined: 10 Dec 2003 01:07
Posts: 14605
Location: Sydney, Australia
Bob C,

Perhaps so. But it is logically possible to buy flowers for someone for no particular reason (eg, well, they were there and were on special and I thought "why not?").

In any case, my point was simply that not every good action with good intent is a duty.

_________________
James Daly

"It is the Lord." (Jn 21:7)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Dec 2012 15:23 
Offline
Master Member
Master Member
User avatar

Joined: 16 Jul 2002 05:16
Posts: 15696
Location: Southern California, Catholic
Leo wrote:
Quote:
The Bishops should stick to teaching matters of absolute truth with a focus on salvation rather than publishing personal opinions on matters of prudential judgment.


I completely agree with the message from the Catholic Bishops. The Church's message should be one that encourages a culture of life and peace among its followers.

In regards of "prudential judgment", it is the responsibility of the Church to express opinions. Especially in matters that effect our daily lives. These are the areas that most effect our spiritual growth. Unfortunately, we have our turned our backs on subjects we just feel conflicts with our personal desires. ....
Many years ago there was a request that the Bishops distinguish clearly between their teachings and their prudential judgements. They refused to do so on the ground that people would not give sufficient weight to their judgements. As a result people equate their teachings to judgements and ignore both.

_________________
- Joe Kelley

Death is only a shadow across the path to Heaven.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Dec 2012 15:25 
Offline
Master Member
Master Member
User avatar

Joined: 10 Dec 2003 01:07
Posts: 14605
Location: Sydney, Australia
Bob A,

Quote:
I happen to know of one priest who is in the process of acquiring a concealed carry permit to protect his congregation and I suspect there are others around the country as well.


Interesting. It was my understanding a clerk in orders is forbidden to bear arms.

_________________
James Daly

"It is the Lord." (Jn 21:7)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Dec 2012 15:39 
Offline
Forum Staff
Forum Staff
User avatar

Joined: 13 Jul 2002 11:50
Posts: 18820
Location: USA
Seamas O Dalaigh wrote:
Bob C,

Perhaps so. But it is logically possible to buy flowers for someone for no particular reason (eg, well, they were there and were on special and I thought "why not?").

In any case, my point was simply that not every good action with good intent is a duty.


But isn't loving your wife/mother/daughter both a duty and a reason to purchase flowers? And it doesn't hurt if they were on sale.

Once upon a time I had 78 Rose Bushes planted in my yard, till a sudden unexpected freeze hit.......only one bush survived.

_________________
Bob C


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Dec 2012 15:43 
Offline
Master Member
Master Member
User avatar

Joined: 10 Dec 2003 01:07
Posts: 14605
Location: Sydney, Australia
Bob C,

There exists no moral duty to purchase flowers for anyone.

_________________
James Daly

"It is the Lord." (Jn 21:7)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Dec 2012 15:54 
Offline
Veteran Member
Veteran Member
User avatar

Joined: 28 Feb 2009 15:57
Posts: 2758
Seamas O Dalaigh wrote:
Bob A,

Quote:
I happen to know of one priest who is in the process of acquiring a concealed carry permit to protect his congregation and I suspect there are others around the country as well.


Interesting. It was my understanding a clerk in orders is forbidden to bear arms.


Apparently not or why would he be getting a permit to carry one unless he intended so to do! Going to look into that.

_________________
BobA

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Dec 2012 16:05 
Offline
Forum Staff
Forum Staff
User avatar

Joined: 13 Jul 2002 11:50
Posts: 18820
Location: USA
Seamas O Dalaigh wrote:
Bob C,

There exists no moral duty to purchase flowers for anyone.


Purhaps not, but there is a moral duty to love your wife, and providing flowers to her is a manifestation of that love.

_________________
Bob C


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Dec 2012 16:07 
Offline
Master Member
Master Member
User avatar

Joined: 10 Dec 2003 01:07
Posts: 14605
Location: Sydney, Australia
Bob C,

Certainly.

_________________
James Daly

"It is the Lord." (Jn 21:7)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Dec 2012 18:01 
Offline
Master Member
Master Member
User avatar

Joined: 16 Jul 2002 05:16
Posts: 15696
Location: Southern California, Catholic
Seamas O Dalaigh wrote:
Bob A,

Quote:
I happen to know of one priest who is in the process of acquiring a concealed carry permit to protect his congregation and I suspect there are others around the country as well.


Interesting. It was my understanding a clerk in orders is forbidden to bear arms.
I think that he is also forbidden to use one, but don't have a source for that.

_________________
- Joe Kelley

Death is only a shadow across the path to Heaven.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Dec 2012 18:23 
Offline
Master Member
Master Member
User avatar

Joined: 10 Dec 2003 01:07
Posts: 14605
Location: Sydney, Australia
Joe,

I remember that at his "trial" St Robert Southwell was asked hypothetically that were the Pope's army to invade England, would he serve as a fighting soldier in the English or the Papal army; he neatly deflected the trick question by stating that as a priest he was forbidden to fight in either.

_________________
James Daly

"It is the Lord." (Jn 21:7)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Dec 2012 18:32 
Offline
Master Member
Master Member
User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2003 13:32
Posts: 4917
Seamas O Dalaigh wrote:
Pease note: I am neither agreeing nor disagreeing with the statement issued by the three American bishops, nor do I understand its canonical or juridicial force; I simply find your analysis of that particular sentence disappointing.


I find it hard to believe you simply find anything.

_________________
Daniel

"Do you think that I have come to establish peace on the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division." -- Luke 12:51


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Dec 2012 19:01 
Offline
Master Member
Master Member
User avatar

Joined: 10 Dec 2003 01:07
Posts: 14605
Location: Sydney, Australia
Daniel,

Notwithstanding your clumsy ad hominem, you still fail to explain what it is about the American bishops' statement you happen to disagree with, or in what way they have failed in the application of Catholic teaching.

Guns are a subject about which I know very little. I'm interested in seeking a proper understanding of Catholic teaching on guns, inasmuch as there might be one - it's not easy to find anything, let alone anything detailed. The recent statement by the three American bishops seems to provide a good starting point for discussion.

_________________
James Daly

"It is the Lord." (Jn 21:7)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Dec 2012 19:18 
Offline
Advanced Member
Advanced Member

Joined: 05 Oct 2008 20:28
Posts: 1608
Location: Dorchester, MA, USA
I know of a priest or two who are likely to have carried a Beretta more recently than they've worn a biretta.

On a more serious note, though...

I've heard of priests who hunt. I'm sure there are priests who belong to target shooting clubs for the sport.

I've never heard of anything that suggests that Holy Orders generally* supersedes one's right to self-defense or obliges one to some vow of pacifism.

*by "generally" in this context I mean there might be some religious orders whose charism and Rule does lead to such obligations/vows.

Is a military chaplain forbidden to bear arms?

_________________
Rob


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Dec 2012 20:30 
Offline
Forum Staff
Forum Staff
User avatar

Joined: 13 Jul 2002 11:50
Posts: 18820
Location: USA
Quote:
I'm sure there are priests who belong to target shooting clubs for the sport.



I shoot with one such priest occasionally.



Quote:
Is a military chaplain forbidden to bear arms?



All US combat Chaplains are assigned, Chaplain assistants whose jobs are to assist them in all things but especially to keep them alive. They are most definitely armed.

_________________
Bob C


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Dec 2012 22:53 
Offline
Master Member
Master Member
User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2003 13:32
Posts: 4917
Seamas O Dalaigh wrote:
Daniel,

Notwithstanding your clumsy ad hominem, you still fail to explain what it is about the American bishops' statement you happen to disagree with, or in what way they have failed in the application of Catholic teaching.


Maybe one day I will be able to ad hominem as eloquently as you think you do?

Anyway -as to a specific disagreement and most obvious that I emphasized was the sentence with the but in it.

For instance, if one were to say abortion was bad, BUT.... This would imply that abortion is not always bad...

Let us carry this exercise one step further by defining the but.

For instance, if one were to say abortion was bad; BUT, we suffer from overpopulation...

Why you continue to be blind to this glaring error is for you to ponder.

When one speaks clearly there are no ifs, ands, or buts...

_________________
Daniel

"Do you think that I have come to establish peace on the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division." -- Luke 12:51


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 30 Dec 2012 23:50 
Offline
Master Member
Master Member
User avatar

Joined: 06 Mar 2008 23:35
Posts: 5268
Location: Europe
BobC wrote:
All US combat Chaplains are assigned, Chaplain assistants whose jobs are to assist them in all things but especially to keep them alive. They are most definitely armed.

Bob,
I understand from this that definitely the assistants are armed. What about the chaplains?

_________________
Grace

As to the past, let us entrust it to God's mercy, the future to Divine Providence. Our task is to live holy the present moment. - Saint Gianna Molla


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 31 Dec 2012 07:58 
Offline
Forum Staff
Forum Staff
User avatar

Joined: 13 Jul 2002 11:50
Posts: 18820
Location: USA
Quote:
What about the chaplains?


Not in my experience, but I do not know if that is by choice. Remember it used to be Medics were never armed but that is no longer true.

_________________
Bob C


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 31 Dec 2012 09:36 
Offline
Veteran Member
Veteran Member
User avatar

Joined: 28 Feb 2009 15:57
Posts: 2758
BobC wrote:
Quote:
What about the chaplains?


Not in my experience, but I do not know if that is by choice. Remember it used to be Medics were never armed but that is no longer true.


It's possible that the military does not arm chaplains in order to protect them; sounds contrary but a non-combatant I believe is subject to somewhat different treatment than a combatant, possibly under the Geneva Convention.

_________________
BobA

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 31 Dec 2012 20:16 
Offline
Forum Staff
Forum Staff
User avatar

Joined: 13 Jul 2002 11:50
Posts: 18820
Location: USA
Quote:
It's possible that the military does not arm chaplains in order to protect them; sounds contrary but a non-combatant I believe is subject to somewhat different treatment than a combatant, possibly under the Geneva Convention.


That is the way it used to be, but now days those red crosses on vehicles, choppers, and even helmets are just marking targets.

_________________
Bob C


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 13 Jan 2013 15:32 
Offline
Master Member
Master Member
User avatar

Joined: 10 Dec 2003 01:07
Posts: 14605
Location: Sydney, Australia
Quote:
A study has found Australians now own as many guns as they did at the time of the Port Arthur shootings in 1996.

More than one million guns were destroyed in the aftermath of the massacre, but research shows Australians have restocked over the last 10 years, importing more than one million firearms.

Despite that, the number of gun-related deaths have halved since the gun buyback.



http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-01-14/a ... 96/4463150

_________________
James Daly

"It is the Lord." (Jn 21:7)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 13 Jan 2013 18:05 
Offline
Master Member
Master Member
User avatar

Joined: 05 Oct 2004 07:39
Posts: 8515
Location: Northern VA, USA
Seamas O Dalaigh wrote:
Quote:
A study has found Australians now own as many guns as they did at the time of the Port Arthur shootings in 1996.

More than one million guns were destroyed in the aftermath of the massacre, but research shows Australians have restocked over the last 10 years, importing more than one million firearms.

Despite that, the number of gun-related deaths have halved since the gun buyback.



http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-01-14/a ... 96/4463150

I believe they are different guns, no? That is, anything close to high capacity is substantially unattainable to the average citizen?

_________________
ImageJeff StevensImage


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 13 Jan 2013 19:08 
Offline
Master Member
Master Member
User avatar

Joined: 10 Dec 2003 01:07
Posts: 14605
Location: Sydney, Australia
Jeff,

Correct. But as Mick Matheson of Sporting Shooter mentions in that inteview, New Zealand has no laws against high capacity guns and yet has not had a massacre since 1997. It has not been demonstrated that the 1996 Australian restrictions have been the cause of the absence of massacres.

(The interview in question is the second video in the above report.)

_________________
James Daly

"It is the Lord." (Jn 21:7)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 13 Jan 2013 19:15 
Offline
Master Member
Master Member
User avatar

Joined: 28 Jul 2003 21:49
Posts: 7731
Location: Los Angeles, California
Interesting article on Real Clear Politics:

Quote:
SWANN: The U.S., despite being number one in gun ownership, is number 28 in gun homicides, with a rate of 2.97 per 100,000 people. Of course, Piers Morgan isn't calling for the U.S. to be more like El Salvador and Honduras; he's calling for us to be more like Great Britain. So what do the numbers look like there?

The U.K. has the second highest overall crime rate in the E.U. The U.K. has the fifth highest robbery rate, the fourth highest burglary rate. But more importantly, the E.U. named Britain as the most violent country in the E.U. In the U.K., there are 2,034 per 100,000 people. That puts it way ahead of even South Africa with a rate of 1,609 per 100,000 people. In the United States, we're not even in the top 10. The U.S. has a violent crime rate of 466 crimes per 100,000 residents.


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/ ... N.facebook

_________________
Valerie Garcia
vals1990@yahoo.com

"Listen, O my son, to the precepts of thy master, and incline the ear of thy heart, and cheerfully receive and faithfully execute the admonitions of thy loving Father, that by the toil of obedience thou mayest return to Him ....." St. Benedict


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 276 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group