|
|
Post by Tenarke on Jun 13, 2005 19:07:39 GMT -5
That’s a conundrum Wyndham. Assuming that the Canadian Tories are the party of the affluent and privileged as the Republicans tend to be down here, to forbid them their traditional rights of sinful excess surely won’t fly as an acceptable party policy.
If the Diocese of Perth wishes to preserve the popular acceptance of a Sunday Sabbath, they might consider substituting Fosters as the communion quaff.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wyndham on Jun 13, 2005 19:35:48 GMT -5
We don't have that yet here, Tenarke. The Liberals, actually, are the party of wealth and power (because they usually win -- the rich and powerful don't like losers). The Conservatives, alas, are becoming more and more the bible belt angry party -- which, double alas, makes them almost unelectable outside the bible belt. Growing it is, but the majority of people in my province (Ontario: half the country by pop) think of them as a pack of kooks and know-nothings. In Quebec they usually run somewhere behind the Marxist Leninist, direct-action-Islamic-Jihad Faction. This corruption of what use to be a national party essentially means that in most of the country you have one federal party to vote for.
Ah. Regarding my notorious sin. Much over-rated. A very brief period in my life, which I wasn't very good at. Recently, other than a six pack on Friday, I might as well be John Wesley . . . or just as well, the year might as well be 1890.
|
|
|
|
Post by RobertGraves on Jun 14, 2005 15:19:39 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Wyndham on Jul 9, 2005 8:05:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Wyndham on Oct 3, 2005 11:06:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Aravis on Oct 3, 2005 12:02:36 GMT -5
Hm, I don't think he fully grasps the way organized religion is continuously trying to hurt us in the U.S. Or at least the nutjob heads of some of these religions. And the average middle class person doesn't have a lot of time or money to play the stock market as extensively as he seems to think. That would be upper middle class or the wealthy people who play that game. Middle class people are too prone, however, to place their faith and their retirement funds on the market, and to believe all that the media tells them. I'll agree with that.
He spent a great deal of time in that article sharing what he believed made up a fool, and not enough on what he feels "really matters." His superior attitude was a bit of a turn-off, but he did make a couple of good points.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wyndham on Oct 7, 2005 15:58:18 GMT -5
Here's a really interesting viewpoint. Author is an American conservative who like most conservatives loathes the Neo-Comms. Seems to believe that, at heart, the movement is revolutionary, warmed over, Trotskyism perfectly exemplified by the recent transformation of Christopher Hitchens. www.amconmag.com/2005/2005_10_10/article3.html |
|
|
|
Post by RobertGraves on Oct 7, 2005 16:33:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Tenarke on Jan 3, 2006 15:21:01 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Wyndham on Mar 17, 2006 19:08:32 GMT -5
This is interesting. Article is about the New Light Evangelicals, and their relationship to Jefferson's separation of Church and State. The author essentially argues that Jerry Falwell et. al., might be good Republicans, but by the standards of the founders, they are piss poor Baptists. www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2006/0604.waldman.html |
|
|
|
Post by Tenarke on May 30, 2006 12:25:49 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Tenarke on Jul 2, 2006 19:16:48 GMT -5
It’s ironic. Though I am apparently one of the least religious members of this group, I seem to be hogging the “Religion” conversation. The latest from the Vatican: www.nytimes.com/2006/07/01/world/europe/01vatican.html?th&emc=thIt seems that anyone defiling the sacred stem cell is beyond salvation. What next; do we bring back heliocentricity to astronomy? |
|
|
|
Post by Wyndham on Jul 3, 2006 11:26:30 GMT -5
An odd thing this. I'm not to sure what to make of it, and whether separation of church and state is violated by erruptions into science/ national life or not. During our last election, the Catholic Church pulled out all stops to bring down the Martin Government, as friendly to homosexual civil union, and as insufficiently anti-abortion. The attack was particularly effective in that Martin and many of his leading Cabinet Ministers were Catholic, and they were effectively excommunicated. This is bad. On the other hand, Rome has no authority except that voluntarily given to it by Catholics, and it cracks the whip, in the main, on issues of conscience rather than strictly politics. Don't really know what to thing (but am glad I'm not RC!).
|
|
|
|
Post by Tenarke on Oct 16, 2009 16:20:00 GMT -5
We’ve heard much in the past in re the parish priests and altar boys. However, it seems that they don’t neglect straight sex with consenting adult parishioners either. www.nytimes.com/2009/10/16/us/16priest.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&th&emc=thConsidering the history of the church, from the Borgias on back; the more things change, the more things stay the same. |
|
pinkozcat
Full Member
Remember - pillage first, THEN burn.
Posts: 233
|
Post by pinkozcat on Oct 16, 2009 21:39:36 GMT -5
Tenarke said: "It’s ironic. Though I am apparently one of the least religious members of this group, I seem to be hogging the “Religion” conversation." I have no religion at all. Nominally I am an Anglican but the realisation that the story of the resurrection was just so much cow poo, which hit me as soon as I read the dynamics of crucifiction, put me off Christianity. Later I had a fairly long relationship with an Anglican clergyman and when I tackled him about it he told me that they were taught in the seminary that Jesus could not, and did not, die on the cross but "we don't tell people that ... " On LibraryThing I am a member of a group called Happy Heathens.  |
|
