Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Utah Installs Nation’s First 72-Hour Abortion Waiting Period
3 views
Skip to first unread message
J
May 7, 2012, 11:52:10 PM5/7/12
to
There is no logical reason why this law should not be implemented. It
can only save lives; both of the woman and her unborn baby. Women, by
their very nature, can be irrational when they are hysterical. This law
gives women a chance to calm down and deal with their situation more
rationally. More children will be given a chance at life and less women
will suffer the anguish of having killed their child. This law makes sense.
http://www.lifenews.com/2012/05/07/utah-installs-nations-first-72-hour-abortion-waiting-period/
This week, Utah officials are implementing the nation’s first law that
requires women to wait 72 hours before having an abortion that will
destroy the life of an unborn child. Abortion advocates are up in arms
about the new law, that allows women considering an abortion a greater
period of time for reflection and time to find abortion alternatives.
“For some people that may be a point of celebration,” said Planned
Parenthood of Utah Director Karrie Galloway. “For others it may be a
point of heartache.”
“The reality of doing a legal challenge is daunting — the cost and time,
all of that,” Galloway said. “We will be looking at it to see how it
affects people, how it affects our providers as well as women.”
Gayle Ruzicka, head of the Utah Eagle Forum, told the Salt Lake tribune
she thinks the law will be upheld if challenged in court.
“We made sure we didn’t have anything in that bill that would be
challenged,” Ruzicka said. “Every concern that Planned Parenthood or the
ACLU or anybody had, we fixed.”
--
J Young
jdyo...@ymail.com
SkyEyes
May 8, 2012, 1:40:56 AM5/8/12
to
On May 7, 8:52 pm, J <jdyou...@ymail.com> wrote:
> There is no logical reason why this law should not be implemented.
Sure there is: many women have to travel long distances to get
> There is no logical reason why this law should not be implemented.
abortions, since you forced-birthers have chased abortion clinics out
of many states. That means that a woman wanting an abortion will have
to wait 3 days - days she should probably be at work - and maybe have
to spend the money for a hotel room - just because you loons want to
make it as hard as possible for her to get the medical help she needs.
Not to mention women who are aborting for medical reasons, like a
friend of mine, who first found out she was pregnant by throwing blood
clots. If you forced-birthers had your way and made her wait 72
hours, she'd be dead now.
> It
> can only save lives; both of the woman and her unborn baby. Women, by
> their very nature, can be irrational when they are hysterical.
there myself, I can attest to the fact that hysteria soon passes,
after finding out one is pregnant when one doesn't want to be. After
that, logic and will take over.
Face it, IBen, you *hate* women.
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes nine at cox dot net OR
skyeyes nine at yahoo dot com
Seth lePod
May 8, 2012, 2:47:13 AM5/8/12
to
On May 7, 10:40 pm, SkyEyes <skyey...@cox.net> wrote:
> On May 7, 8:52 pm, J <jdyou...@ymail.com> wrote:
>
> > There is no logical reason why this law should not be implemented.
>
> Sure there is: many women have to travel long distances to get
> abortions, since you forced-birthers have chased abortion clinics out
> of many states. That means that a woman wanting an abortion will have
> to wait 3 days - days she should probably be at work - and maybe have
> to spend the money for a hotel room - just because you loons want to
> make it as hard as possible for her to get the medical help she needs.
>
> Not to mention women who are aborting for medical reasons, like a
> friend of mine, who first found out she was pregnant by throwing blood
> clots. If you forced-birthers had your way and made her wait 72
> hours, she'd be dead now.
:
> > It
> > can only save lives; both of the woman and her unborn baby. Women, by
> > their very nature, can be irrational when they are hysterical.
:
> Who says that women requesting abortions are hysterical? Having been
> there myself, I can attest to the fact that hysteria soon passes,
> after finding out one is pregnant when one doesn't want to be. After
> that, logic and will take over.
HAH! that is friggin HYSTERICAL!
> On May 7, 8:52 pm, J <jdyou...@ymail.com> wrote:
>
> > There is no logical reason why this law should not be implemented.
>
> Sure there is: many women have to travel long distances to get
> abortions, since you forced-birthers have chased abortion clinics out
> of many states. That means that a woman wanting an abortion will have
> to wait 3 days - days she should probably be at work - and maybe have
> to spend the money for a hotel room - just because you loons want to
> make it as hard as possible for her to get the medical help she needs.
>
> Not to mention women who are aborting for medical reasons, like a
> friend of mine, who first found out she was pregnant by throwing blood
> clots. If you forced-birthers had your way and made her wait 72
> hours, she'd be dead now.
:
> > It
> > can only save lives; both of the woman and her unborn baby. Women, by
> > their very nature, can be irrational when they are hysterical.
:
> Who says that women requesting abortions are hysterical? Having been
> there myself, I can attest to the fact that hysteria soon passes,
> after finding out one is pregnant when one doesn't want to be. After
> that, logic and will take over.
Ladies and gents, on the one hand we have
Brenda. On the other, J.
I ask you, based on past postings, which one
is the one who argues logically and which one
merely posts drama queen hysteria about gays
and lesbians and blacks and evil Japs and
poor, poor misunderstood Nazi war criminals?
Seth
JLS
May 8, 2012, 5:08:23 AM5/8/12
to
On May 7, 11:52 pm, J <jdyou...@ymail.com> wrote:
> There is no logical reason why this law should not be implemented. It
> can only save lives; both of the woman and her unborn baby. Women, by
> their very nature, can be irrational when they are hysterical. This law
> gives women a chance to calm down and deal with their situation more
> rationally. More children will be given a chance at life and less women
> will suffer the anguish of having killed their child. This law makes sense.
>
> http://www.lifenews.com/2012/05/07/utah-installs-nations-first-72-hou...
> There is no logical reason why this law should not be implemented. It
> can only save lives; both of the woman and her unborn baby. Women, by
> their very nature, can be irrational when they are hysterical. This law
> gives women a chance to calm down and deal with their situation more
> rationally. More children will be given a chance at life and less women
> will suffer the anguish of having killed their child. This law makes sense.
>
>
> This week, Utah officials are implementing the nation’s first law that
> requires women to wait 72 hours before having an abortion that will
> destroy the life of an unborn child. Abortion advocates are up in arms
> about the new law, that allows women considering an abortion a greater
> period of time for reflection and time to find abortion alternatives.
>
> “For some people that may be a point of celebration,” said Planned
> Parenthood of Utah Director Karrie Galloway. “For others it may be a
> point of heartache.”
>
> “The reality of doing a legal challenge is daunting — the cost and time,
> all of that,” Galloway said. “We will be looking at it to see how it
> affects people, how it affects our providers as well as women.”
>
> Gayle Ruzicka, head of the Utah Eagle Forum, told the Salt Lake tribune
> she thinks the law will be upheld if challenged in court.
>
> “We made sure we didn’t have anything in that bill that would be
> challenged,” Ruzicka said. “Every concern that Planned Parenthood or the
> ACLU or anybody had, we fixed.”
>
> --
> J Young
> jdyou...@ymail.com
> This week, Utah officials are implementing the nation’s first law that
> requires women to wait 72 hours before having an abortion that will
> destroy the life of an unborn child. Abortion advocates are up in arms
> about the new law, that allows women considering an abortion a greater
> period of time for reflection and time to find abortion alternatives.
>
> “For some people that may be a point of celebration,” said Planned
> Parenthood of Utah Director Karrie Galloway. “For others it may be a
> point of heartache.”
>
> “The reality of doing a legal challenge is daunting — the cost and time,
> all of that,” Galloway said. “We will be looking at it to see how it
> affects people, how it affects our providers as well as women.”
>
> Gayle Ruzicka, head of the Utah Eagle Forum, told the Salt Lake tribune
> she thinks the law will be upheld if challenged in court.
>
> “We made sure we didn’t have anything in that bill that would be
> challenged,” Ruzicka said. “Every concern that Planned Parenthood or the
> ACLU or anybody had, we fixed.”
>
> --
> J Young
Now here's your instructions: As soon as the federal judge declares
this new law unconstitutional and issues an injunction against the
enforcement thereof, you be ready to howl out and screech and caw and
hiss that the federal government should keep its paws off of Utah.
Get ready, J, you good ol' TENTHER and Cathalick Interleckchul, you!
Be alert! A ruling will come soon.
June G
May 8, 2012, 6:13:08 AM5/8/12
to
"J" <jdyo...@ymail.com> wrote in message
news:5k6qqe....@news.alt.net...
>
[snip
>
> This week, Utah officials are implementing the nation’s first law that
> requires women to wait 72 hours before having an abortion
Why not go the whole hog and require a 9-month waiting period? Or is this
> This week, Utah officials are implementing the nation’s first law that
> requires women to wait 72 hours before having an abortion
just an incremental step in that direction?
--
June G
# 364
Devils Advocaat
May 8, 2012, 7:35:35 AM5/8/12
to
On May 8, 4:52 am, J <jdyou...@ymail.com> wrote:
> There is no logical reason why this law should not be implemented. It
> can only save lives; both of the woman and her unborn baby. Women, by
> their very nature, can be irrational when they are hysterical. This law
> gives women a chance to calm down and deal with their situation more
> rationally. More children will be given a chance at life and less women
> will suffer the anguish of having killed their child. This law makes sense.
[snipped for brevity and focus]
> There is no logical reason why this law should not be implemented. It
> can only save lives; both of the woman and her unborn baby. Women, by
> their very nature, can be irrational when they are hysterical. This law
> gives women a chance to calm down and deal with their situation more
> rationally. More children will be given a chance at life and less women
> will suffer the anguish of having killed their child. This law makes sense.
If a female relative of yours was in a position of actually needing an
abortion would you expect her to wait for three whole days before
being allowed to have it?
MarkA
May 8, 2012, 8:59:30 AM5/8/12
to
On Mon, 07 May 2012 20:52:10 -0700, J wrote:
>
>
> There is no logical reason why this law should not be implemented. It can
> only save lives; both of the woman and her unborn baby. Women, by their
> very nature, can be irrational when they are hysterical. This law gives
> women a chance to calm down and deal with their situation more rationally.
> More children will be given a chance at life and less women will suffer
> the anguish of having killed their child. This law makes sense.
>
This is a good thing. The GOP, and their new allies-but-not-really, the
>
>
> There is no logical reason why this law should not be implemented. It can
> only save lives; both of the woman and her unborn baby. Women, by their
> very nature, can be irrational when they are hysterical. This law gives
> women a chance to calm down and deal with their situation more rationally.
> More children will be given a chance at life and less women will suffer
> the anguish of having killed their child. This law makes sense.
>
Mormons, continue to make themselves less and less appealing to all but
the most radical social conservative fringe. The pool of straight, white,
Christian male billionaires is getting smaller and smaller every year.
The alliance between the GOP and the LDS church is amusing in its own
right. It reminds me of the Allied-Soviet alliance during WWII: everybody
knew that they SHOULD be mortal enemies, but the presence of a mutual
threat made them temporary allies.
--
MarkA
Keeper of Things Put There Only Just The Night Before
About eight o'clock
de...@dudu.org
May 8, 2012, 9:02:45 AM5/8/12
to
On Mon, 07 May 2012 20:52:10 -0700, J <jdyo...@ymail.com> wrote:
>
>
>There is no logical reason why this law should not be implemented. It
>can only save lives; both of the woman and her unborn baby. Women, by
>their very nature, can be irrational when they are hysterical. This law
>gives women a chance to calm down and deal with their situation more
>rationally. More children will be given a chance at life and less women
>will suffer the anguish of having killed their child. This law makes sense.
>
>
You don't.
>
>
>There is no logical reason why this law should not be implemented. It
>can only save lives; both of the woman and her unborn baby. Women, by
>their very nature, can be irrational when they are hysterical. This law
>gives women a chance to calm down and deal with their situation more
>rationally. More children will be given a chance at life and less women
>will suffer the anguish of having killed their child. This law makes sense.
>
>
Message has been deleted
W.T.S.
May 8, 2012, 3:37:34 PM5/8/12
to
In article <ssfiq759oj23fs07p...@4ax.com>,
Dontb...@netportusa.com says...
> On Tue, 08 May 2012 07:02:45 -0600, de...@dudu.org wrote:
> >>
> There is one concern, that can not be fixed, women can not morally be
> oppressed by a religion. Pro-life is a religious organization,and religious
> stance that is oppressive toward women. Women need to be protected from
> religious oppression.
Excellent points! The Pro-Lie movement is concerned only with imposing
religious hate and bigotry on women, turning them into gender slaves and
brood sows. I only hope women and those who truly love them will
remember that in November.
Abortion and sterilization, they save the lives, health and futures of
women and men alike!
>
http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/print/14481
>
http://www.jennyjerrome.org/
>
http://tinyurl.com/3j3fkch
>
http://www.egalitarian.biz/Plan-B--Remedy-of-a-Lifetime.html
>
http://www.thelizlibrary.org/liz/004.htm
>
Breed like rabbits, live like pigs, die like rats!
>
Modern Christian: Someone who can take time out from
complaining about "welfare mothers popping out babies we
have to feed" to complain about welfare mothers getting
abortions that PREVENT more babies to be raised at public
expense.
>
http://www.imnotsorry.net
>
http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/17gbnyv0yzhevjpg/original.jpg
>
http://tinyurl.com/7q2ft38
Dontb...@netportusa.com says...
> On Tue, 08 May 2012 07:02:45 -0600, de...@dudu.org wrote:
>
> >On Mon, 07 May 2012 20:52:10 -0700, J <Jerk...@Liar.com> wrote:
> >
> >>There is no logical reason why this law should not be implemented. It
> >>can only save lives; both of the woman and her unborn baby. Women, by
> >>their very nature, can be irrational when they are hysterical. This law
> >>gives women a chance to calm down and deal with their situation more
> >>rationally. More children will be given a chance at life and less women
> >>will suffer the anguish of having killed their child. This law makes
> >>sense.
>
> >You don't.
>
> >>http://www.LieNews.com/Lies/Disinformation/Propaganda/
> >On Mon, 07 May 2012 20:52:10 -0700, J <Jerk...@Liar.com> wrote:
> >
> >>There is no logical reason why this law should not be implemented. It
> >>can only save lives; both of the woman and her unborn baby. Women, by
> >>their very nature, can be irrational when they are hysterical. This law
> >>gives women a chance to calm down and deal with their situation more
> >>rationally. More children will be given a chance at life and less women
> >>will suffer the anguish of having killed their child. This law makes
> >>sense.
>
> >You don't.
>
> >>
> There is one concern, that can not be fixed, women can not morally be
> oppressed by a religion. Pro-life is a religious organization,and religious
> stance that is oppressive toward women. Women need to be protected from
> religious oppression.
Excellent points! The Pro-Lie movement is concerned only with imposing
religious hate and bigotry on women, turning them into gender slaves and
brood sows. I only hope women and those who truly love them will
remember that in November.
Abortion and sterilization, they save the lives, health and futures of
women and men alike!
>
http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/print/14481
>
http://www.jennyjerrome.org/
>
http://tinyurl.com/3j3fkch
>
http://www.egalitarian.biz/Plan-B--Remedy-of-a-Lifetime.html
>
http://www.thelizlibrary.org/liz/004.htm
>
Breed like rabbits, live like pigs, die like rats!
>
Modern Christian: Someone who can take time out from
complaining about "welfare mothers popping out babies we
have to feed" to complain about welfare mothers getting
abortions that PREVENT more babies to be raised at public
expense.
>
http://www.imnotsorry.net
>
http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/17gbnyv0yzhevjpg/original.jpg
>
http://tinyurl.com/7q2ft38
Message has been deleted
elizabeth
May 8, 2012, 4:09:38 PM5/8/12
to
much more clean cut ... they never really got rid of polygamy, just
had a 'code of silence' about it and say of them, as the more vile of
the antiabortniks, that they don't support those "radicals" who do
that ... but they don't exactly try to get rid of them either, like
"good cops" covering up for the "bad cops"
And I am very tolerant of other beliefs, but come on, those mormons be
whack .. .how can anyone buy that joseph smith story? I say it was
all humbug, he was the l ron hubbard of his day.
Syd M.
May 8, 2012, 4:18:50 PM5/8/12
to
On May 7, 11:52 pm, J <jdyou...@ymail.com> wrote:
> There is no logical reason why this law should not be implemented.
I can think of several.
Like, "What business is it of yers what people do with their bodies",
asshole.
PDW
Syd M.
May 8, 2012, 4:31:38 PM5/8/12
to
On May 8, 6:13 am, "June G" <juneg...@btopenworld.com> wrote:
> "J" <jdyou...@ymail.com> wrote in message
That IS their ultimate plan, yes.
PDW
> "J" <jdyou...@ymail.com> wrote in message
PDW
Christopher A. Lee
May 8, 2012, 6:37:36 PM5/8/12
to
On Mon, 7 May 2012 22:40:56 -0700 (PDT), SkyEyes <skye...@cox.net>
wrote:
>On May 7, 8:52 pm, J <jdyou...@ymail.com> wrote:
>
>> There is no logical reason why this law should not be implemented.
>
>Sure there is: many women have to travel long distances to get
>abortions, since you forced-birthers have chased abortion clinics out
>of many states. That means that a woman wanting an abortion will have
>to wait 3 days - days she should probably be at work - and maybe have
>to spend the money for a hotel room - just because you loons want to
>make it as hard as possible for her to get the medical help she needs.
The religious loonies in the Republican party are doing their best to
lose their woman voters.
It's usually the Democrats who can't keep their fringe loonies under
control, with the Republicans presenting a united front.
The majority including women in the US support abortion and
contraception rights.
So how many women are gong to vote for a party that passes laws to
discourage them using punitive tests eg transvaginal ultrasound, 72
day restrictions, religiously biased one-sided "counseling", etc?
Or that permits employers to remove contraception from medical
insurance cover?
All because the religious loonies that have taken over the party
imagine their views are mainstream.
wrote:
>On May 7, 8:52 pm, J <jdyou...@ymail.com> wrote:
>
>> There is no logical reason why this law should not be implemented.
>
>Sure there is: many women have to travel long distances to get
>abortions, since you forced-birthers have chased abortion clinics out
>of many states. That means that a woman wanting an abortion will have
>to wait 3 days - days she should probably be at work - and maybe have
>to spend the money for a hotel room - just because you loons want to
>make it as hard as possible for her to get the medical help she needs.
lose their woman voters.
It's usually the Democrats who can't keep their fringe loonies under
control, with the Republicans presenting a united front.
The majority including women in the US support abortion and
contraception rights.
So how many women are gong to vote for a party that passes laws to
discourage them using punitive tests eg transvaginal ultrasound, 72
day restrictions, religiously biased one-sided "counseling", etc?
Or that permits employers to remove contraception from medical
insurance cover?
All because the religious loonies that have taken over the party
imagine their views are mainstream.
W.T.S.
May 8, 2012, 7:32:22 PM5/8/12
to
In article <e2viq79b6g9mreml2...@4ax.com>,
Dontb...@netportusa.com says...
> "J" has for years been a staunch champion of irrationality, in
> addition to being a woman hater!
>
> >Seth
> >
Good point, Seth. Thanks!
Dontb...@netportusa.com says...
> On Mon, 7 May 2012 23:47:13 -0700 (PDT), Seth lePod
> <v.infe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On May 7, 10:40 pm, SkyEyes <skyey...@cox.net> wrote:
> <v.infe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On May 7, 10:40 pm, SkyEyes <skyey...@cox.net> wrote:
> addition to being a woman hater!
>
> >Seth
> >
Good point, Seth. Thanks!
> >>
> >> Face it, IBen, you *hate* women.
> >>
> >> Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
> >> BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
> >> EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
> >> skyeyes nine at cox dot net OR
> >> skyeyes nine at yahoo dot com
> >> Face it, IBen, you *hate* women.
> >>
> >> Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
> >> BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
> >> EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
> >> skyeyes nine at cox dot net OR
> >> skyeyes nine at yahoo dot com
Patrick
May 9, 2012, 8:50:32 AM5/9/12
to
That is now 30 states that ban gay marriages.
Patrick
May 9, 2012, 8:52:05 AM5/9/12
to
Rise in US seminary numbers brings 'big smile' to Pope's face
By David Kerr
Vatican City, May 6, 2012 / 04:06 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Bishop James D.
Conley of Denver said the news of rising seminarian numbers across the
United States has delighted Pope Benedict XVI.
"He was very happy to receive that information," Bishop Conley told CNA on
May 4 after meeting the Pope at the Vatican.
"He said he had heard that vocations were going up in the United States and
he said this is very positive news and, in fact, he had a big smile on his
face when he heard the news."
Bishop Conley was one of ten bishops from Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico and
Wyoming who had an audience with Pope Benedict as part of their five-day "ad
limina" pilgrimage to Rome which concludes tomorrow.
He explained to the Pope that there is now a year-on-year increase in the
numbers of young men opting for the priesthood across many US dioceses.
"I told him that in the Archdiocese of Denver both of our seminaries, St
John Vianney Theological Seminary and Redeptoris Mater Neo-catechumenal
seminary, are full," the bishop added.
"In fact we have more applicants than we have space so for the first time in
many years we have to create a waiting list which is a good problem to
have."
The most recent statistics show a similar story across the United States.
Last year the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate at Georgetown
University estimated that the 2011 seminary intake was up 4 percent on the
previous year and had reached its highest figure in 20 years. Meanwhile,
Rome's North American College is full to its 250 capacity for the first time
in decades.
Upon hearing that Bishop Conley was from Denver, Pope Benedict warmly
recalled World Youth Day 1993 which was hosted by the Colorado city. At
present the Archdiocese of Denver is vacant following the departure of
Archbishop Charles J. Chaput to Philadelphia in September 2011.
Bishop Conley said he does not know when a successor will be appointed but
he is certain that they will "carry on the great work of Archbishop Chaput
in his 14 years and Cardinal Stafford before him," describing their legacy
as "a great flourishing of the faith" where "a lot of new movements, a lot
of new evangelization" took place.
He believed that elsewhere could learn from "the Denver experience" as the
universal Church approaches the "Year of Faith" later this year.
In particularl, he thought people should take note of Archbishop Chaput's
ability to "teach the truth in all its clarity, even when challenging people
against what the trends are in society, but yet doing it with love and
compassion."
This approach, said Bishop Conley, is particularly successful with young
people who have a "genuine openness to truth."
By David Kerr
Vatican City, May 6, 2012 / 04:06 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Bishop James D.
Conley of Denver said the news of rising seminarian numbers across the
United States has delighted Pope Benedict XVI.
"He was very happy to receive that information," Bishop Conley told CNA on
May 4 after meeting the Pope at the Vatican.
"He said he had heard that vocations were going up in the United States and
he said this is very positive news and, in fact, he had a big smile on his
face when he heard the news."
Bishop Conley was one of ten bishops from Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico and
Wyoming who had an audience with Pope Benedict as part of their five-day "ad
limina" pilgrimage to Rome which concludes tomorrow.
He explained to the Pope that there is now a year-on-year increase in the
numbers of young men opting for the priesthood across many US dioceses.
"I told him that in the Archdiocese of Denver both of our seminaries, St
John Vianney Theological Seminary and Redeptoris Mater Neo-catechumenal
seminary, are full," the bishop added.
"In fact we have more applicants than we have space so for the first time in
many years we have to create a waiting list which is a good problem to
have."
The most recent statistics show a similar story across the United States.
Last year the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate at Georgetown
University estimated that the 2011 seminary intake was up 4 percent on the
previous year and had reached its highest figure in 20 years. Meanwhile,
Rome's North American College is full to its 250 capacity for the first time
in decades.
Upon hearing that Bishop Conley was from Denver, Pope Benedict warmly
recalled World Youth Day 1993 which was hosted by the Colorado city. At
present the Archdiocese of Denver is vacant following the departure of
Archbishop Charles J. Chaput to Philadelphia in September 2011.
Bishop Conley said he does not know when a successor will be appointed but
he is certain that they will "carry on the great work of Archbishop Chaput
in his 14 years and Cardinal Stafford before him," describing their legacy
as "a great flourishing of the faith" where "a lot of new movements, a lot
of new evangelization" took place.
He believed that elsewhere could learn from "the Denver experience" as the
universal Church approaches the "Year of Faith" later this year.
In particularl, he thought people should take note of Archbishop Chaput's
ability to "teach the truth in all its clarity, even when challenging people
against what the trends are in society, but yet doing it with love and
compassion."
This approach, said Bishop Conley, is particularly successful with young
people who have a "genuine openness to truth."
Patrick
May 9, 2012, 8:52:33 AM5/9/12
to
Pope tells American colleges to strengthen Catholic identity
By Francis X. Rocca
Catholic News Service
VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- Pope Benedict XVI called on America's Catholic
colleges and universities to reaffirm their Catholic identity by ensuring
orthodoxy in theological studies and accepting the oversight of bishops.
The pope made his remarks May 5 to U.S. bishops from Colorado, New Mexico,
Arizona and Wyoming, who were making their periodic "ad limina" visits to
the Vatican.
While he acknowledged recent efforts by America's Catholic institutions of
higher education to "reaffirm their distinctive identity in fidelity to
their founding ideals and the church's mission," Pope Benedict said that
"much remains to be done."
The pope emphasized the need for compliance with canon law in the
appointment of theology instructors, who are required to possess a "mandate"
from the "competent ecclesiastical authority," ordinarily the local bishop.
The requirement for a mandate was underscored in 1990 by Blessed John Paul
II in his apostolic constitution "Ex Corde Ecclesiae," but many Catholic
theology departments in the U.S. have yet to comply.
Pope Benedict said that the need for a mandate was especially clear in light
of the "confusion created by instances of apparent dissidence between some
representatives of Catholic institutions and the church's pastoral
leadership."
"Such discord harms the church's witness and, as experience has shown, can
easily be exploited to compromise her authority and her freedom," the pope
said.
U.S. bishops have clashed with the administrations of Catholic colleges and
universities on a number of occasions in recent years, with some of the most
prominent cases involving invited speakers who dissent from Catholic moral
teaching.
In March, Anna Maria University in Worcester, Mass., retracted its
invitation to Victoria Reggie Kennedy, widow of the late Sen. Edward
Kennedy, D-Mass., to speak at the university's commencement, after Bishop
Robert J. McManus objected to Victoria Kennedy's support for legalized
abortion, contraception and same-sex marriage.
On May 4, Jesuit-run Georgetown University announced that Kathleen Sebelius,
secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, will give the
commencement speech at the university's public policy institute on May 18.
Sebelius, a Catholic, is currently at odds with U.S. bishops over the Obama
administration's plan to require that the private health insurance plans of
most Catholic institutions cover surgical sterilization procedures and
artificial birth control. Chieko Noguchi, director of communications for
Washington's Cardinal Donald W. Wuerl, said the cardinal had no comment on
Georgetown's announcement.
In his speech to U.S. bishops, Pope Benedict said that preservation of a
university's Catholic identity "entails much more than the teaching of
religion or the mere presence of a chaplaincy on campus."
"In every aspect of their education, students need to be encouraged to
articulate a vision of the harmony of faith and reason capable of guiding a
life-long pursuit of knowledge and virtue," the pope said.
The pope contrasted the Catholic ideal of education with a current trend
toward academic overspecialization.
"Faith's recognition of the essential unity of all knowledge provides a
bulwark against the alienation and fragmentation which occurs when the use
of reason is detached from the pursuit of truth and virtue," he said. "In
this sense, Catholic institutions have a specific role to play in helping to
overcome the crisis of universities today."
Pope Benedict said that reaffirming Catholic identity in education is part
of a broader effort to build a distinctively Catholic "intellectual culture"
in the U.S., and a "society ever more solidly grounded in an authentic
humanism inspired by the gospel."
Although his remarks principally concerned higher education, the pope also
praised the "generous commitment, often accompanied by personal sacrifice"
of teachers and administrators in America's Catholic elementary and high
schools.
Pope Benedict acknowledged the schools' efforts to ensure that Catholic
education "remains within the reach of all families, whatever their
financial status."
In a possible reference to proposals for greater public funding of religious
education, the pope said that Catholic schools' "significant contribution
... to American society as a whole ought to be better appreciated and more
generously supported."
END
By Francis X. Rocca
Catholic News Service
VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- Pope Benedict XVI called on America's Catholic
colleges and universities to reaffirm their Catholic identity by ensuring
orthodoxy in theological studies and accepting the oversight of bishops.
The pope made his remarks May 5 to U.S. bishops from Colorado, New Mexico,
Arizona and Wyoming, who were making their periodic "ad limina" visits to
the Vatican.
While he acknowledged recent efforts by America's Catholic institutions of
higher education to "reaffirm their distinctive identity in fidelity to
their founding ideals and the church's mission," Pope Benedict said that
"much remains to be done."
The pope emphasized the need for compliance with canon law in the
appointment of theology instructors, who are required to possess a "mandate"
from the "competent ecclesiastical authority," ordinarily the local bishop.
The requirement for a mandate was underscored in 1990 by Blessed John Paul
II in his apostolic constitution "Ex Corde Ecclesiae," but many Catholic
theology departments in the U.S. have yet to comply.
Pope Benedict said that the need for a mandate was especially clear in light
of the "confusion created by instances of apparent dissidence between some
representatives of Catholic institutions and the church's pastoral
leadership."
"Such discord harms the church's witness and, as experience has shown, can
easily be exploited to compromise her authority and her freedom," the pope
said.
U.S. bishops have clashed with the administrations of Catholic colleges and
universities on a number of occasions in recent years, with some of the most
prominent cases involving invited speakers who dissent from Catholic moral
teaching.
In March, Anna Maria University in Worcester, Mass., retracted its
invitation to Victoria Reggie Kennedy, widow of the late Sen. Edward
Kennedy, D-Mass., to speak at the university's commencement, after Bishop
Robert J. McManus objected to Victoria Kennedy's support for legalized
abortion, contraception and same-sex marriage.
On May 4, Jesuit-run Georgetown University announced that Kathleen Sebelius,
secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, will give the
commencement speech at the university's public policy institute on May 18.
Sebelius, a Catholic, is currently at odds with U.S. bishops over the Obama
administration's plan to require that the private health insurance plans of
most Catholic institutions cover surgical sterilization procedures and
artificial birth control. Chieko Noguchi, director of communications for
Washington's Cardinal Donald W. Wuerl, said the cardinal had no comment on
Georgetown's announcement.
In his speech to U.S. bishops, Pope Benedict said that preservation of a
university's Catholic identity "entails much more than the teaching of
religion or the mere presence of a chaplaincy on campus."
"In every aspect of their education, students need to be encouraged to
articulate a vision of the harmony of faith and reason capable of guiding a
life-long pursuit of knowledge and virtue," the pope said.
The pope contrasted the Catholic ideal of education with a current trend
toward academic overspecialization.
"Faith's recognition of the essential unity of all knowledge provides a
bulwark against the alienation and fragmentation which occurs when the use
of reason is detached from the pursuit of truth and virtue," he said. "In
this sense, Catholic institutions have a specific role to play in helping to
overcome the crisis of universities today."
Pope Benedict said that reaffirming Catholic identity in education is part
of a broader effort to build a distinctively Catholic "intellectual culture"
in the U.S., and a "society ever more solidly grounded in an authentic
humanism inspired by the gospel."
Although his remarks principally concerned higher education, the pope also
praised the "generous commitment, often accompanied by personal sacrifice"
of teachers and administrators in America's Catholic elementary and high
schools.
Pope Benedict acknowledged the schools' efforts to ensure that Catholic
education "remains within the reach of all families, whatever their
financial status."
In a possible reference to proposals for greater public funding of religious
education, the pope said that Catholic schools' "significant contribution
... to American society as a whole ought to be better appreciated and more
generously supported."
END
Patrick
May 9, 2012, 8:52:56 AM5/9/12
to
Study shows US Catholic population stood at nearly 59 million in 2010
WASHINGTON (CNS) -- The U.S. Catholic population stood at 58.9 million in
2010, according to a new census of religious congregations. The number of
Catholics is lower than the 62 million Catholics reported in 2000, but the
difference is due to a change in the way data was collected during this
go-round, said Cliff Grammich, a researcher working for the Glenmary
Research Center who compiled statistics from 20,589 parishes, missions and
other places with regularly scheduled weekend Masses. The 2010 U.S. Religion
Census: Religious Congregations and Membership Study released May 1 showed
that the number of Catholics is three times that of the country's second
largest religious body, the Southern Baptist Convention, with nearly 19.9
million members. Sponsored by the Association of Statisticians of American
Religious Bodies, the study is conducted every 10 years and coincides with
the once-a-decade U.S. census. It also collected data from Protestant,
Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist and other religious congregations. Grammich
told Catholic News Service that he analyzed statistics provided by
individual parishes on the number of registered households, registered
individuals, infant baptisms, burials and Mass attendance to arrive at the
final count. In earlier studies, less specific data was sought from
individual dioceses rather than from parishes, he said. "The counts are the
best that could be supported by religious data, sacramental statistics and
survey data," Grammich explained.
WASHINGTON (CNS) -- The U.S. Catholic population stood at 58.9 million in
2010, according to a new census of religious congregations. The number of
Catholics is lower than the 62 million Catholics reported in 2000, but the
difference is due to a change in the way data was collected during this
go-round, said Cliff Grammich, a researcher working for the Glenmary
Research Center who compiled statistics from 20,589 parishes, missions and
other places with regularly scheduled weekend Masses. The 2010 U.S. Religion
Census: Religious Congregations and Membership Study released May 1 showed
that the number of Catholics is three times that of the country's second
largest religious body, the Southern Baptist Convention, with nearly 19.9
million members. Sponsored by the Association of Statisticians of American
Religious Bodies, the study is conducted every 10 years and coincides with
the once-a-decade U.S. census. It also collected data from Protestant,
Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist and other religious congregations. Grammich
told Catholic News Service that he analyzed statistics provided by
individual parishes on the number of registered households, registered
individuals, infant baptisms, burials and Mass attendance to arrive at the
final count. In earlier studies, less specific data was sought from
individual dioceses rather than from parishes, he said. "The counts are the
best that could be supported by religious data, sacramental statistics and
survey data," Grammich explained.
Patrick
May 9, 2012, 8:53:30 AM5/9/12
to
US bishops discuss LCWR reform, visitation with Vatican officials
By Cindy Wooden
Catholic News Service
VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- Recent Vatican investigations of religious women have
created opportunities for growth through reflection and for dialogue with
their bishops, two U.S. bishops said after discussing the matter with
Vatican officials.
Archbishop Michael J. Sheehan of Santa Fe, N.M., and Bishop Gerald F.
Kicanas of Tucson, Ariz., told Catholic News Service May 2 that they had
discussed the Vatican visitation of U.S. communities of religious women and
the more recent order to reform the Leadership Conference of Women Religious
earlier the same day with officials from the Congregation for Institutes of
Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life.
Archbishop Sheehan said that during the meeting, attended by bishops from
Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona and Wyoming, who were making their "ad limina"
visits to the Vatican, "the point that was made was that although some
people were unhappy with the decision to make corrections" in the LCWR, it
would be "an opportunity for dialogue" between the religious and the
bishops.
The archbishop said he told Cardinal Joao Braz de Aviz, congregation
prefect, "that if this would have happened some years earlier, it might have
been better. But, anyway, it's going on now and I think it will be the
occasion for some dialogue."
It also should help "some of the orders to pull back a little bit from some
areas they have gone that maybe they shouldn't have," he said.
Citing "serious doctrinal problems" revealed in an assessment originally
ordered in April 2008, the Vatican announced April 18 a major reform of the
LCWR, a group which includes about 1,500 leaders of U.S. women's
communities, representing about 80 percent of the country's 57,000 religious
women.
The Vatican appointed Archbishop J. Peter Sartain of Seattle to provide
"review, guidance and approval, where necessary, of the work" of the LCWR
and to ensure fidelity in conference programs and meetings to Catholic
teaching in areas including abortion, euthanasia, women's ordination and
homosexuality.
Religious women in the United States also are awaiting the results of an
apostolic visitation of their communities; the congregation for religious
ordered the visitation in 2008, particularly in light of the steep decline
in the number of religious women in the country. The visitation's final
report was submitted in December but has not been made public.
Bishop Kicanas said that during the May 2 meeting, congregation officials
made clear "the profound respect they have for the work our religious women,
and I certainly share that. Our religious women in the diocese are doing a
phenomenal job in our prisons, in our hospitals, in our schools, in our
religious education programs, in our parishes, in our retirement homes. I
don't know what we would do without our religious women."
"It was good to hear the congregation for religious be so positive about the
work religious women are doing and I hope that the publication of the
visitation reports will be beneficial," he said. Review processes like the
visitation, he said, are helpful because they give "an idea of what you can
do better to accomplish what you are trying to do."
The bishops of the region began their day by celebrating an early morning
Mass at the tomb of St. Peter in St. Peter's Basilica.
Archbishop Sheehan was the principal celebrant and homilist and told his
fellow bishops that the gift of the unity and universality of the Catholic
Church sometimes requires that people accept decisions -- like the new
translation of the Mass or the reform of the LCWR -- they may be
uncomfortable with or not understand.
"There are small prices to pay" for the unity and universality of the
church, he said.
"Some Catholics dislike this decision of Peter and his successor (the pope)
or that decision, whether it is in the area of translations or texts or
whether dealing with the issue of the LCWR in the United States," he said.
Differences are "part of the reality of being a human being," but accepting
the pope's authority "is a small price to pay for our unity with our mother
church," Archbishop Sheehan said.
St. Peter's Basilica, he said, offers people a concrete experience of the
reality of Catholic Church: it was built on the rock of St. Peter, who is
buried under the main altar; the church has been strengthened by the blood
of the martyrs; it is universal and its members come from every language,
race and nation; and "the church is one in the Eucharist that is celebrated
throughout the entire world, one in the sacraments, one in the official
teachings, one under the guidance of Peter's successor, Benedict XVI."
"The church is one and this basilica shouts it out," the archbishop said.
By Cindy Wooden
Catholic News Service
VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- Recent Vatican investigations of religious women have
created opportunities for growth through reflection and for dialogue with
their bishops, two U.S. bishops said after discussing the matter with
Vatican officials.
Archbishop Michael J. Sheehan of Santa Fe, N.M., and Bishop Gerald F.
Kicanas of Tucson, Ariz., told Catholic News Service May 2 that they had
discussed the Vatican visitation of U.S. communities of religious women and
the more recent order to reform the Leadership Conference of Women Religious
earlier the same day with officials from the Congregation for Institutes of
Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life.
Archbishop Sheehan said that during the meeting, attended by bishops from
Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona and Wyoming, who were making their "ad limina"
visits to the Vatican, "the point that was made was that although some
people were unhappy with the decision to make corrections" in the LCWR, it
would be "an opportunity for dialogue" between the religious and the
bishops.
The archbishop said he told Cardinal Joao Braz de Aviz, congregation
prefect, "that if this would have happened some years earlier, it might have
been better. But, anyway, it's going on now and I think it will be the
occasion for some dialogue."
It also should help "some of the orders to pull back a little bit from some
areas they have gone that maybe they shouldn't have," he said.
Citing "serious doctrinal problems" revealed in an assessment originally
ordered in April 2008, the Vatican announced April 18 a major reform of the
LCWR, a group which includes about 1,500 leaders of U.S. women's
communities, representing about 80 percent of the country's 57,000 religious
women.
The Vatican appointed Archbishop J. Peter Sartain of Seattle to provide
"review, guidance and approval, where necessary, of the work" of the LCWR
and to ensure fidelity in conference programs and meetings to Catholic
teaching in areas including abortion, euthanasia, women's ordination and
homosexuality.
Religious women in the United States also are awaiting the results of an
apostolic visitation of their communities; the congregation for religious
ordered the visitation in 2008, particularly in light of the steep decline
in the number of religious women in the country. The visitation's final
report was submitted in December but has not been made public.
Bishop Kicanas said that during the May 2 meeting, congregation officials
made clear "the profound respect they have for the work our religious women,
and I certainly share that. Our religious women in the diocese are doing a
phenomenal job in our prisons, in our hospitals, in our schools, in our
religious education programs, in our parishes, in our retirement homes. I
don't know what we would do without our religious women."
"It was good to hear the congregation for religious be so positive about the
work religious women are doing and I hope that the publication of the
visitation reports will be beneficial," he said. Review processes like the
visitation, he said, are helpful because they give "an idea of what you can
do better to accomplish what you are trying to do."
The bishops of the region began their day by celebrating an early morning
Mass at the tomb of St. Peter in St. Peter's Basilica.
Archbishop Sheehan was the principal celebrant and homilist and told his
fellow bishops that the gift of the unity and universality of the Catholic
Church sometimes requires that people accept decisions -- like the new
translation of the Mass or the reform of the LCWR -- they may be
uncomfortable with or not understand.
"There are small prices to pay" for the unity and universality of the
church, he said.
"Some Catholics dislike this decision of Peter and his successor (the pope)
or that decision, whether it is in the area of translations or texts or
whether dealing with the issue of the LCWR in the United States," he said.
Differences are "part of the reality of being a human being," but accepting
the pope's authority "is a small price to pay for our unity with our mother
church," Archbishop Sheehan said.
St. Peter's Basilica, he said, offers people a concrete experience of the
reality of Catholic Church: it was built on the rock of St. Peter, who is
buried under the main altar; the church has been strengthened by the blood
of the martyrs; it is universal and its members come from every language,
race and nation; and "the church is one in the Eucharist that is celebrated
throughout the entire world, one in the sacraments, one in the official
teachings, one under the guidance of Peter's successor, Benedict XVI."
"The church is one and this basilica shouts it out," the archbishop said.
Patrick
May 9, 2012, 8:55:04 AM5/9/12
to
Priestly celibacy
There are quite a number of similarities between the priesthood in the Old
Testament and the priesthood of the New Testament continued and developed in
the Christian religion. One of the points of similarity is the lack of
property for inheritance. Priests in the Old Testament had no land
apportioned to them which they could bequeath to their descendants. The Lord
was the portion of their inheritance, and so they lived out of the offerings
presented to the Lord.
Similarly, priests in the New Testament have no property of their own which
they might leave for their children to inherit. They live entirely dependent
on the offerings of the community of believers and on the property of the
entire Church. Thus, in both the Old and the New Testament, the priest
depends entirely on Church possessions for his living.
The practice of celibacy in the primitive Church was hindered for two
reasons: (i) Jewish law required every healthy male to procreate; (ii) Roman
law discouraged celibacy, placed penalties on bachelors and rewarded women
.who gave birth to three or more children.
The real reason and basis for priestly celibacy in the Catholic Church has
always been the religious one, and it must always remain so. Economic and
social environments may be of some assistance to the realization of the
religious reason as long as they are taken in subordinate relationship to
the basic reason. Taken individually and in isolation from the religious
basis, the social and economic reasons may even distort the true meaning of
priestly celibacy reducing it to a meaningless, frustrating practice as we
have been trying to show above. Yet, even the religious aspect of priestly
celibacy must also be carefully and fundamentally analyzed and given proper
orientation if it is to give the true meaning of that sacred institution.
As the Holy Father, Pope John Paul II, put it, the true meaning of priestly
celibacy is profoundly connected with ordination whereby a man takes on the
likeness of Jesus Christ», the true and only Savior of humanity. By thus
being connected with the person of Jesus Christ, priestly celibacy ceases to
be a power for salvation independent of the only Saviour of mankind. It is
no longer a merely negative act of self-denial; rather it is an act of
self-giving to and in union with Christ.
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cclergy/documents/rc_con_cclergy_doc_01011993_prob_en.html
Patrick
May 9, 2012, 8:55:34 AM5/9/12
to
recidivism rates - Maybe the Bishops knew something
The recidivism rates for released prisoners in the United States of America
is 60%. The United States Department of Justice tracked the rearrest,
re-conviction, and re-incarceration of former inmates for 3 years after
their release from prisons in 15 states in 1994.[10] Key findings include:
· Released prisoners with the highest rearrest rates were
robbers (70.2%), burglars (74.0%), larcenists (74.6%), motor vehicle thieves
(78.8%), those in prison for possessing or selling stolen property (77.4%),
and those in prison for possessing, using, or selling illegal weapons
(70.2%).
· Within 3 years, 2.5% of released rapists were arrested
for another rape, and 1.2% of those who had served time for homicide were
arrested for homicide. These are the lowest rates of re-arrest for the same
category of crime.
· The 272,111 offenders discharged in 1994 had
accumulated 4.1 million arrest charges before their most recent imprisonment
and another 744,000 charges within 3 years of release.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recidivism#Recidivism_rates
The recidivism rates for released prisoners in the United States of America
is 60%. The United States Department of Justice tracked the rearrest,
re-conviction, and re-incarceration of former inmates for 3 years after
their release from prisons in 15 states in 1994.[10] Key findings include:
· Released prisoners with the highest rearrest rates were
robbers (70.2%), burglars (74.0%), larcenists (74.6%), motor vehicle thieves
(78.8%), those in prison for possessing or selling stolen property (77.4%),
and those in prison for possessing, using, or selling illegal weapons
(70.2%).
· Within 3 years, 2.5% of released rapists were arrested
for another rape, and 1.2% of those who had served time for homicide were
arrested for homicide. These are the lowest rates of re-arrest for the same
category of crime.
· The 272,111 offenders discharged in 1994 had
accumulated 4.1 million arrest charges before their most recent imprisonment
and another 744,000 charges within 3 years of release.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recidivism#Recidivism_rates
Patrick
May 9, 2012, 8:56:39 AM5/9/12
to
In the United States, "Every male will be arrested equivalent of twice by
65, reducing male income by more then 50% to 18 cents of every house hold
dollar spent. Cutting tax revenue and credit ratings of local and national
government. The recidivism rate for prisoners released from prison within
one year is 44.1%; this number rises to 67.5% within three years of being
released from prison. Sixty-seven percent of the people who were rearrested
were charged with 750,000 new crimes, which include property offenses, drug
offenses, public-order offenses, other offences, unknown, and over 100,000
of these crimes were violent crimes. Of the new violent crimes committed,
2,871 were murder and 2,444 were rape.[1] Male prisoners are exposed and
subject to sexual and physical violence in prisons today. Each year, as many
as 70% of inmates in prisons are assaulted by another inmate. When these
events occur, the victim usually suffers emotionally and/or physically.
Further, leading the inmate to accept these types of behaviors and value
their life and the lives of others less when they are released. These
dehumanizing acts combined with the learned violent behavior have much
influence in the causes of recidivism."
A 2002 study by the United States Department of Justice indicated that
recidivism rates among sex offenders was 5.3%; that is, about 1 in 19 of
released sex offenders were later arrested for another sex crime.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_offender
65, reducing male income by more then 50% to 18 cents of every house hold
dollar spent. Cutting tax revenue and credit ratings of local and national
government. The recidivism rate for prisoners released from prison within
one year is 44.1%; this number rises to 67.5% within three years of being
released from prison. Sixty-seven percent of the people who were rearrested
were charged with 750,000 new crimes, which include property offenses, drug
offenses, public-order offenses, other offences, unknown, and over 100,000
of these crimes were violent crimes. Of the new violent crimes committed,
2,871 were murder and 2,444 were rape.[1] Male prisoners are exposed and
subject to sexual and physical violence in prisons today. Each year, as many
as 70% of inmates in prisons are assaulted by another inmate. When these
events occur, the victim usually suffers emotionally and/or physically.
Further, leading the inmate to accept these types of behaviors and value
their life and the lives of others less when they are released. These
dehumanizing acts combined with the learned violent behavior have much
influence in the causes of recidivism."
A 2002 study by the United States Department of Justice indicated that
recidivism rates among sex offenders was 5.3%; that is, about 1 in 19 of
released sex offenders were later arrested for another sex crime.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_offender
Patrick
May 9, 2012, 8:57:05 AM5/9/12
to
Excommunication A spiritual censure by which one is excluded from the
communion of the faithful and suffers consequences inseparably attached by
canon law to such exclusion. It is also called anathema, especially when
inflicted with solemnities described in the Roman Ritual. While not
vindictive, excommunication is the Church's most serious penalty, its chief
purpose being the correction of the guilty. This correction takes the form
of exclusion from the spiritual benefits of the Church as a society and
Mystical Body of Christ. Excommunication directly affects only the
individual, who does not cease thereby to be a Christian, owing to the
indelible character of Baptism.
http://www.catholic-forum.com/Saints/ncd03169.htm
Automatic excommunication
There are a few offenses for which Latin Rite Roman Catholics are
automatically excommunicated (the Latin term is Latæ Sententiæ):
1.. Apostasy (canon 1364),
2.. Heresy (canon 1364),
3.. Schism (canon 1364),
4.. Desecration of the Eucharist (canon 1367),
5.. Physical force against the Pope (canon 1370),
6.. Attempted sacramental absolution of a partner in adultery (canon
1378),
7.. Ordination of a bishop without a Papal mandate (canon 1382),
8.. Violation of the sacramental seal of confession by a priest or bishop
(canon 1388),
9.. Procurement of a completed abortion (canon 1398), or
10.. Accomplice in any of the above (canon 1329).
These excommunications are not incurred when certain mitigating
circumstances apply (canons 1323 and 1324), e.g., depending on age,
ignorance, culpability
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excommunication
Catholics cannot be excommunicated unless for some personal, grievously
offensive act.
This List of Excommunications is a list of persons excommunicated officially
by the Roman Catholic Church. This list should not include those who are
thought to have automatically excommunicated themselves.2000-present
a.. Marek Bozek and six followers were excommunicated because Bozek left
his assigned parish without permission in order to head a more autonomous
parish that was without a priest.
b.. Edwin Gonzalez Concepcion of Puerto Rico and his followers were
excommunicated for preaching that Concepcion was the reincarnation of Pope
John Paul II.
c.. Genevieve Beney of France was excommunicated for claiming to be an
ordained priest, even though she was married and female.
d.. Gert Petrus of Namibia was excommunicated for practicing witchcraft.
e.. Christine Mayr-Lumetzberger and six other members of the Danube Seven
who were excommunicated for being ordained against Canon Law by a renegade
former South American bishop who had left the Church to join a sect, as
priests.
Patrick
May 9, 2012, 8:57:40 AM5/9/12
to
Why do Catholics believe the Pope is infallible in his teachings when he is
a human being, with a finite human intellect, like the rest of us? What is
the scriptural basis for this belief?
The doctrine of Papal Infallibility does not mean the Pope is always right
in all his personal teachings. Catholics are quite aware that, despite his
great learning, the Pope is very much a human being and therefore liable to
commit human error. On some subjects, like sports and manufacturing, his
judgment is liable to be very faulty. The doctrine simply means that the
Pope is divinely protected from error when, acting in his official capacity
as chief shepherd of the Catholic fold, he promulgates a decision which is
binding on the conscience of all Catholics throughout the world. In other
words, his infallibility is limited to his specialty--the Faith of Jesus
Christ.
In order for the Pope to be infallible on a particular statement, however,
four conditions must apply: 1) he must be speaking ex cathedra . . . that
is, ``from the Chair'' of Peter, or in other words, officially, as head of
the entire Church; 2) the decision must be for the whole Church; 3) it must
be on a matter of faith or morals; 4) the Pope must have the intention of
making a final decision on a teaching of faith or morals, so that it is to
be held by all the faithful. It must be interpretive, not originative; the
Pope has no authority to originate new doctrine. He is not the author of
revelation--only its guardian and expounder. He has no power to distort a
single word of Scripture, or change one iota of divine tradition. His
infallibility is limited strictly to the province of doctrinal
interpretation, and it is used quite rarely. It is used in order to clarify,
to ``define,'' some point of the ancient Christian tradition. It is the
infallibility of which Christ spoke when He said to Peter, the first Pope:
``I will give (o thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou
shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven.'' (Matt. 16:19).
Certainly Christ would not have admonished His followers to ``hear the
church'' (Matt. 18:17) without somehow making certain that what they heard
was the truth--without somehow making the teaching magisterium of His Church
infallible.
For a complete understanding of the Pope's infallibility, however, one more
thing should be known: His ex cathedra decisions are not the result of his
own private deliberations. They are the result of many years--sometimes
hundreds of years--of consultation with the other bishops and theologians of
the Church. He is, in effect, voicing the belief of the whole Church. His
infallibility is not his own private endowment, but rather an endowment of
the entire Mystical Body of Christ. Indeed, the Pope's hands are tied with
regard to the changing of Christian doctrine. No Pope has ever used his
infallibility to change, add, or subtract any Christian teaching; this is
because Our Lord promised to be with His Church until the end of the world.
(Matt. 28:20). Protestant denominations, on the other hand, feel free to
change their doctrines. For example, all Protestant denominations once
taught that contraception was gravely sinful; but since 1930, when the
Church of England's Lambeth Conference decided contraception was no longer a
sin, virtually all Protestant ministers in the world have accepted this
human decision and changed their teaching.
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/a/faq-cc.html
a human being, with a finite human intellect, like the rest of us? What is
the scriptural basis for this belief?
The doctrine of Papal Infallibility does not mean the Pope is always right
in all his personal teachings. Catholics are quite aware that, despite his
great learning, the Pope is very much a human being and therefore liable to
commit human error. On some subjects, like sports and manufacturing, his
judgment is liable to be very faulty. The doctrine simply means that the
Pope is divinely protected from error when, acting in his official capacity
as chief shepherd of the Catholic fold, he promulgates a decision which is
binding on the conscience of all Catholics throughout the world. In other
words, his infallibility is limited to his specialty--the Faith of Jesus
Christ.
In order for the Pope to be infallible on a particular statement, however,
four conditions must apply: 1) he must be speaking ex cathedra . . . that
is, ``from the Chair'' of Peter, or in other words, officially, as head of
the entire Church; 2) the decision must be for the whole Church; 3) it must
be on a matter of faith or morals; 4) the Pope must have the intention of
making a final decision on a teaching of faith or morals, so that it is to
be held by all the faithful. It must be interpretive, not originative; the
Pope has no authority to originate new doctrine. He is not the author of
revelation--only its guardian and expounder. He has no power to distort a
single word of Scripture, or change one iota of divine tradition. His
infallibility is limited strictly to the province of doctrinal
interpretation, and it is used quite rarely. It is used in order to clarify,
to ``define,'' some point of the ancient Christian tradition. It is the
infallibility of which Christ spoke when He said to Peter, the first Pope:
``I will give (o thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou
shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven.'' (Matt. 16:19).
Certainly Christ would not have admonished His followers to ``hear the
church'' (Matt. 18:17) without somehow making certain that what they heard
was the truth--without somehow making the teaching magisterium of His Church
infallible.
For a complete understanding of the Pope's infallibility, however, one more
thing should be known: His ex cathedra decisions are not the result of his
own private deliberations. They are the result of many years--sometimes
hundreds of years--of consultation with the other bishops and theologians of
the Church. He is, in effect, voicing the belief of the whole Church. His
infallibility is not his own private endowment, but rather an endowment of
the entire Mystical Body of Christ. Indeed, the Pope's hands are tied with
regard to the changing of Christian doctrine. No Pope has ever used his
infallibility to change, add, or subtract any Christian teaching; this is
because Our Lord promised to be with His Church until the end of the world.
(Matt. 28:20). Protestant denominations, on the other hand, feel free to
change their doctrines. For example, all Protestant denominations once
taught that contraception was gravely sinful; but since 1930, when the
Church of England's Lambeth Conference decided contraception was no longer a
sin, virtually all Protestant ministers in the world have accepted this
human decision and changed their teaching.
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/a/faq-cc.html
• R. L. Measures.
May 9, 2012, 11:14:25 AM5/9/12
to
In article <QtCdnf2JS7s59DfS...@posted.localnet>, "Patrick"
• That's an appropriate name for it since it was largely invented there
in the 4th Century.
--
Richard L. Measures. AG6K, 805-386-3734, www.somis.org
<bark...@erinot.com> wrote:
>Excommunication A spiritual censure by which one is excluded from the
>communion of the faithful and suffers consequences inseparably attached by
>canon law to such exclusion. It is also called anathema, especially when
>inflicted with solemnities described in the Roman Ritual. ...
>Excommunication A spiritual censure by which one is excluded from the
>communion of the faithful and suffers consequences inseparably attached by
>canon law to such exclusion. It is also called anathema, especially when
• That's an appropriate name for it since it was largely invented there
in the 4th Century.
--
Richard L. Measures. AG6K, 805-386-3734, www.somis.org
Alan Ferris
May 9, 2012, 12:39:44 PM5/9/12
to
On Wed, 9 May 2012 08:53:30 -0400, "Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com>
wrote:
>"The church is one and this basilica shouts it out," the archbishop said.
Yet they deny it is one when it comes to child abuse. They really
need to make their minds up.
"+ This was a bump in the road.
+ To be forgotten in 5 years."
- P Barker on priestly abuse
wrote:
>"The church is one and this basilica shouts it out," the archbishop said.
need to make their minds up.
"+ This was a bump in the road.
+ To be forgotten in 5 years."
- P Barker on priestly abuse
Alan Ferris
May 9, 2012, 12:41:28 PM5/9/12
to
On Wed, 9 May 2012 08:52:56 -0400, "Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com>
wrote:
Rather than asking people, they asked the institutions.....so all
those who left Catholicism are still counted....great honesty there!
"+I married a woman, adopted children, I lived the Catholic life that
the Church teaches. I did not demand that I be allowed to live a
sinful life. I lived the life laid doen by the Church and the Bible.
+Today I have two lovely daughters. They have grown up understanding
my need to dress in womens clothes. They understand that we are all
sinners and can be forgiven each week.
+They understand the times that I have been week and allowed my lust
to overcome me. They understand that I can be forgiven."
- P Barker
Message-ID: <885e59d699ffec86...@news.teranews.com>
wrote:
those who left Catholicism are still counted....great honesty there!
"+I married a woman, adopted children, I lived the Catholic life that
the Church teaches. I did not demand that I be allowed to live a
sinful life. I lived the life laid doen by the Church and the Bible.
+Today I have two lovely daughters. They have grown up understanding
my need to dress in womens clothes. They understand that we are all
sinners and can be forgiven each week.
+They understand the times that I have been week and allowed my lust
to overcome me. They understand that I can be forgiven."
- P Barker
Message-ID: <885e59d699ffec86...@news.teranews.com>
Alan Ferris
May 9, 2012, 1:28:30 PM5/9/12
to
On Wed, 9 May 2012 08:52:05 -0400, "Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com>
wrote:
>"In fact we have more applicants than we have space so for the first time in
>many years we have to create a waiting list which is a good problem to
> have."
would that be because they closed so many seminaries:
Regina Cleri Minor Seminary (Tucson) 1974
Our Lady Queen of Angels High School Seminary (Los Angeles) 1994
St. Anthony Seraphic College (Santa Barbara) 1987
St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary (Denver) 1995
St. Thomas Seminary (Hartford) 1990's
St. Stephen Minor Seminary (Honolulu) 1976
Archbishop Quigley Preparatory Seminary (Chicago) 2007
Archbishop Quigley Preparatory Seminary North (Chicago)1990
Archbishop Quigley Preparatory Seminary South (Chicago) 1990
Our Lady of the Angels Major Seminary (Quincy) 1987
St. Joseph Seraphic College (Teutopolis) 1967
St. Joseph Seraphic College (Westmont) 1978
Tolentine College (Olympia Fields) 1973
Our Lady of the Lake Seminary (Syracuse) 1975
St. Thomas Minor Seminary (Louisville) 1970
St. Charles Seminary (Catonsville) 1977
Carmelite Junior Seminary (Hamilton) 1969.
St. Francis Seraphic Seminary (River Road, Andover) 1977
St. Augustine Seminary (Holland) 1977
St. John Provincial Seminary (Plymouth) 1988
Crosier Seminary (Onamia) 1987
Precious Blood Minor Seminary (Liberty) 1983
St. Louis Preparatory Seminary North (Florissant) 1987.
St. Louis Preparatory Seminary South (Shrewsbury) 1991.
St. Stanislaus Seminary (Florissant) 1971
St. Thomas Aquinas Preparatory Seminary (Hannibal) 2002
Divine Word Seminary (Bordentown) 1983
St. Joseph Preparatory Seminary (Princeton) Closed in 1992
Capuchin Theological Seminary (Garrison) 1972
Cathedral Preparatory Seminary (Brooklyn) 1985
Don Bosco Seminary (Goshen) 1985
Eymard Seminary (Suffern) 1966
Immaculate Conception Seminary (Troy) 1977
Loyola Jesuit Seminary (Shrub Oak) 1973
Mount Alvernia Seminary (Beacon) 1967
Our Lady of Hope Mission Seminary (Newburgh) 1971
St. Albert Junior Seminary (Middletown) 1991
St. Alphonsus Seminary (Esopus) 1985
St. Andrew-on-Hudson Major Seminary (Hyde Park) 1969
St. Anthony of Padua Seminary and High School (Watkins Glen) 1968
St. Anthony-on-Hudson Major Seminary (Rensselaer) 1988
St. Francis Seminary (Staten Island) 1997
St. John's Atonement Minor Seminary (Montour Falls) 1967
St. Joseph Seraphic Seminary (Callicoon) 1968
St. Pius X Seminary (Garrison) 1969
St. Charles Seminary (Staten Island) 1966
Wadhams Hall Seminary College (Ogdensburg) 2002
Cardinal Muench Junior Seminary (Fargo) 2001
Cardinal Muench Major Seminary (Fargo) 2011
Brunnerdale Minor Seminary (Canton) 1981
Our Lady of the Angels Seminary (Cleveland) 1964
Precious Blood Seminary (Carthagena) 1969
St. John Vianney Seminary high school (Bloomingdale) 1968
St. John Vianney Seminary (Bloomingdale) 1978
Mary Immaculate Seminary (Allentown) 1990
St. Fidelis College Seminary (Herman) 1979
St. Mary Junior Seminary (North East) 1987
St. Pius X Seminary (Dalton) 2004
St. Edward Seminary (Kenmore) 1976
St. Thomas the Apostle Seminary (Kenmore) 1977
Holy Name Minor Seminary (Madison) 1995
St. Francis de Sales Preparatory Seminary (Milwaukee) 1979
--
Ferrit
()'.'.'()
( (T) )
( ) . ( )
(")_(")
wrote:
>"In fact we have more applicants than we have space so for the first time in
>many years we have to create a waiting list which is a good problem to
> have."
Regina Cleri Minor Seminary (Tucson) 1974
Our Lady Queen of Angels High School Seminary (Los Angeles) 1994
St. Anthony Seraphic College (Santa Barbara) 1987
St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary (Denver) 1995
St. Thomas Seminary (Hartford) 1990's
St. Stephen Minor Seminary (Honolulu) 1976
Archbishop Quigley Preparatory Seminary (Chicago) 2007
Archbishop Quigley Preparatory Seminary North (Chicago)1990
Archbishop Quigley Preparatory Seminary South (Chicago) 1990
Our Lady of the Angels Major Seminary (Quincy) 1987
St. Joseph Seraphic College (Teutopolis) 1967
St. Joseph Seraphic College (Westmont) 1978
Tolentine College (Olympia Fields) 1973
Our Lady of the Lake Seminary (Syracuse) 1975
St. Thomas Minor Seminary (Louisville) 1970
St. Charles Seminary (Catonsville) 1977
Carmelite Junior Seminary (Hamilton) 1969.
St. Francis Seraphic Seminary (River Road, Andover) 1977
St. Augustine Seminary (Holland) 1977
St. John Provincial Seminary (Plymouth) 1988
Crosier Seminary (Onamia) 1987
Precious Blood Minor Seminary (Liberty) 1983
St. Louis Preparatory Seminary North (Florissant) 1987.
St. Louis Preparatory Seminary South (Shrewsbury) 1991.
St. Stanislaus Seminary (Florissant) 1971
St. Thomas Aquinas Preparatory Seminary (Hannibal) 2002
Divine Word Seminary (Bordentown) 1983
St. Joseph Preparatory Seminary (Princeton) Closed in 1992
Capuchin Theological Seminary (Garrison) 1972
Cathedral Preparatory Seminary (Brooklyn) 1985
Don Bosco Seminary (Goshen) 1985
Eymard Seminary (Suffern) 1966
Immaculate Conception Seminary (Troy) 1977
Loyola Jesuit Seminary (Shrub Oak) 1973
Mount Alvernia Seminary (Beacon) 1967
Our Lady of Hope Mission Seminary (Newburgh) 1971
St. Albert Junior Seminary (Middletown) 1991
St. Alphonsus Seminary (Esopus) 1985
St. Andrew-on-Hudson Major Seminary (Hyde Park) 1969
St. Anthony of Padua Seminary and High School (Watkins Glen) 1968
St. Anthony-on-Hudson Major Seminary (Rensselaer) 1988
St. Francis Seminary (Staten Island) 1997
St. John's Atonement Minor Seminary (Montour Falls) 1967
St. Joseph Seraphic Seminary (Callicoon) 1968
St. Pius X Seminary (Garrison) 1969
St. Charles Seminary (Staten Island) 1966
Wadhams Hall Seminary College (Ogdensburg) 2002
Cardinal Muench Junior Seminary (Fargo) 2001
Cardinal Muench Major Seminary (Fargo) 2011
Brunnerdale Minor Seminary (Canton) 1981
Our Lady of the Angels Seminary (Cleveland) 1964
Precious Blood Seminary (Carthagena) 1969
St. John Vianney Seminary high school (Bloomingdale) 1968
St. John Vianney Seminary (Bloomingdale) 1978
Mary Immaculate Seminary (Allentown) 1990
St. Fidelis College Seminary (Herman) 1979
St. Mary Junior Seminary (North East) 1987
St. Pius X Seminary (Dalton) 2004
St. Edward Seminary (Kenmore) 1976
St. Thomas the Apostle Seminary (Kenmore) 1977
Holy Name Minor Seminary (Madison) 1995
St. Francis de Sales Preparatory Seminary (Milwaukee) 1979
--
Ferrit
()'.'.'()
( (T) )
( ) . ( )
(")_(")
Alan Ferris
May 9, 2012, 2:21:05 PM5/9/12
to
On Wed, 9 May 2012 08:50:32 -0400, "Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com>
wrote:
>That is now 30 states that ban gay marriages.
>
Were you cheering when states banned blacks from schools?
"+ My parents were never married."
- P Barker 29Dec2001 admiting he is illegitimate
wrote:
>That is now 30 states that ban gay marriages.
>
"+ My parents were never married."
- P Barker 29Dec2001 admiting he is illegitimate
Alan Ferris
May 9, 2012, 2:35:46 PM5/9/12
to
On Wed, 9 May 2012 08:57:40 -0400, "Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com>
wrote:
> Why do Catholics believe the Pope is infallible
Lets see what Barker thinks of his Pope:
"+ You and Cardinal Ratz can go pound sand.
+Neither of you have any authority over me."
- P.Barker 10/08/04
"+ You know what would be ironic?
+ If they selected Ratzinger to be pope.
+ Now that might cause some consternation!"
- P.Barker 2/4/05
"+ Cardinal Ratz has made many, many enemies along his way.
+ As soon as Pope JP2 departs the living, Ratz will be history."
- P.Barker 7/8/04
"+ Although I do not think much of Cardinal Ratzinger,
and I personally think he should go pound sand, I have
not told him (personally) to do so."
- P.Barker 9/9/04
"+ Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was born in Germany in 1927.
+ He is 77 years old now. with many enemies. He hasn't got a
chance."
- P.Barker 8/8/04
"+ I am certainly aware of what the real Cardinal Ratzinger.....
he is a human, a man, a person who overstepped his boundaries
on more than one occasion. He is the pope wannabe and his
glorious reign (as you seem to think he has) will soon be over."
- P.Barker 1/9/04
"+ Personally I have no respect for Cardinal Ratzinger.
+ But that is another discussion.
+ Ratzinger is a pope wannabe. He says things that are not
100 percent clear. I give him the benefit of doubt, but I
certainly haven't spent any time trying to figure him out. I
don't have the time or energy."
- P.Barker 13/3/04
"+ Ratzo is a power hungry cardinal well placed in the Vatican
who will never have any backing to become Pope. He does
what he needs to do. He provides comic relief for many of us."
- P.Barker 6/10/03
wrote:
> Why do Catholics believe the Pope is infallible
"+ You and Cardinal Ratz can go pound sand.
+Neither of you have any authority over me."
- P.Barker 10/08/04
"+ You know what would be ironic?
+ If they selected Ratzinger to be pope.
+ Now that might cause some consternation!"
- P.Barker 2/4/05
"+ Cardinal Ratz has made many, many enemies along his way.
+ As soon as Pope JP2 departs the living, Ratz will be history."
- P.Barker 7/8/04
"+ Although I do not think much of Cardinal Ratzinger,
and I personally think he should go pound sand, I have
not told him (personally) to do so."
- P.Barker 9/9/04
"+ Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was born in Germany in 1927.
+ He is 77 years old now. with many enemies. He hasn't got a
chance."
- P.Barker 8/8/04
"+ I am certainly aware of what the real Cardinal Ratzinger.....
he is a human, a man, a person who overstepped his boundaries
on more than one occasion. He is the pope wannabe and his
glorious reign (as you seem to think he has) will soon be over."
- P.Barker 1/9/04
"+ Personally I have no respect for Cardinal Ratzinger.
+ But that is another discussion.
+ Ratzinger is a pope wannabe. He says things that are not
100 percent clear. I give him the benefit of doubt, but I
certainly haven't spent any time trying to figure him out. I
don't have the time or energy."
- P.Barker 13/3/04
"+ Ratzo is a power hungry cardinal well placed in the Vatican
who will never have any backing to become Pope. He does
what he needs to do. He provides comic relief for many of us."
- P.Barker 6/10/03
duke
May 9, 2012, 3:05:05 PM5/9/12
to
On Wed, 09 May 2012 08:14:25 -0700, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.) wrote:
>In article <QtCdnf2JS7s59DfS...@posted.localnet>, "Patrick"
><bark...@erinot.com> wrote:
>
>>Excommunication A spiritual censure by which one is excluded from the
>>communion of the faithful and suffers consequences inseparably attached by
>>canon law to such exclusion. It is also called anathema, especially when
>>inflicted with solemnities described in the Roman Ritual. ...
>
>• That's an appropriate name for it since it was largely invented there
>in the 4th Century.
With you, everything is invented in the 4th century, including ice cream cones.
>In article <QtCdnf2JS7s59DfS...@posted.localnet>, "Patrick"
><bark...@erinot.com> wrote:
>
>>Excommunication A spiritual censure by which one is excluded from the
>>communion of the faithful and suffers consequences inseparably attached by
>>canon law to such exclusion. It is also called anathema, especially when
>>inflicted with solemnities described in the Roman Ritual. ...
>
>• That's an appropriate name for it since it was largely invented there
>in the 4th Century.
duke, American - American
*****
1 John 3:4-6
4 Everyone who sins breaks the law; in fact,
sin is lawlessness. 5 But you know that he
appeared so that he might take away our sins.
And in him is no sin. 6 No one who lives in
him keeps on sinning. No one who continues to
sin has either seen him or known him.
*****
• R. L. Measures.
May 9, 2012, 5:33:16 PM5/9/12
to
In article <1uflq7l54qfttl5c3...@4ax.com>, duke
American debut at the 1904 Saint Louis World's Fair. Ice cream in a cone
was served up by several vendors at the Fair - but they were in use in
England before the Fair. .
<duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>On Wed, 09 May 2012 08:14:25 -0700, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.) wrote:
>
>>In article <QtCdnf2JS7s59DfS...@posted.localnet>, "Patrick"
>><bark...@erinot.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Excommunication A spiritual censure by which one is excluded from the
>>>communion of the faithful and suffers consequences inseparably attached by
>>>canon law to such exclusion. It is also called anathema, especially when
>>>inflicted with solemnities described in the Roman Ritual. ...
>>
>>• That's an appropriate name for it since it was largely invented there
>>in the 4th Century.
>
>With you, everything is invented in the 4th century, including ice cream cones.
>
• Mass came to be in 394. The walk-away edible ice cream cone made its
>On Wed, 09 May 2012 08:14:25 -0700, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.) wrote:
>
>>In article <QtCdnf2JS7s59DfS...@posted.localnet>, "Patrick"
>><bark...@erinot.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Excommunication A spiritual censure by which one is excluded from the
>>>communion of the faithful and suffers consequences inseparably attached by
>>>canon law to such exclusion. It is also called anathema, especially when
>>>inflicted with solemnities described in the Roman Ritual. ...
>>
>>• That's an appropriate name for it since it was largely invented there
>>in the 4th Century.
>
>With you, everything is invented in the 4th century, including ice cream cones.
>
American debut at the 1904 Saint Louis World's Fair. Ice cream in a cone
was served up by several vendors at the Fair - but they were in use in
England before the Fair. .
panamfloyd@hotmail.com rade
May 9, 2012, 5:37:14 PM5/9/12
to
snip
Oh, so nothing to worry about, then. Thanks for the tip.
I always thought it meant that you were once capable of communication,
but not so much here lately.
This series of spam you've posted in alt.atheism could be taken as a
data point in my hypothesis..
-Panama Floyd, Atlanta.
aa#2015, Member Knights of BAAWA!
"..the prayer cloth of one aeon is the doormat of the next."
-Mark Twain
Religious societies are *less* moral than secular ones:
http://www.rationalist.com.au/archive/73/p20-27_paul_ar73_web.pdf
Oh, so nothing to worry about, then. Thanks for the tip.
I always thought it meant that you were once capable of communication,
but not so much here lately.
This series of spam you've posted in alt.atheism could be taken as a
data point in my hypothesis..
-Panama Floyd, Atlanta.
aa#2015, Member Knights of BAAWA!
"..the prayer cloth of one aeon is the doormat of the next."
-Mark Twain
Religious societies are *less* moral than secular ones:
http://www.rationalist.com.au/archive/73/p20-27_paul_ar73_web.pdf
Alan Ferris
May 9, 2012, 5:57:26 PM5/9/12
to
On Wed, 09 May 2012 14:33:16 -0700, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.)
Cream cones were from the 4C I wonder what they were doing with them
as Ice cream did not come along till much later
"The first concoction resembling ice cream was made in China during
the Tang period (A.D. 618 to 907)"
wrote:
>In article <1uflq7l54qfttl5c3...@4ax.com>, duke
><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 09 May 2012 08:14:25 -0700, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.) wrote:
>>
>>>In article <QtCdnf2JS7s59DfS...@posted.localnet>, "Patrick"
>>><bark...@erinot.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Excommunication A spiritual censure by which one is excluded from the
>>>>communion of the faithful and suffers consequences inseparably attached by
>>>>canon law to such exclusion. It is also called anathema, especially when
>>>>inflicted with solemnities described in the Roman Ritual. ...
>>>
>>>• That's an appropriate name for it since it was largely invented there
>>>in the 4th Century.
>>
>>With you, everything is invented in the 4th century, including ice cream cones.
>>
>• Mass came to be in 394. The walk-away edible ice cream cone made its
>American debut at the 1904 Saint Louis World's Fair. Ice cream in a cone
>was served up by several vendors at the Fair - but they were in use in
>England before the Fair. .
And before the edible cone it was paper. But if Earl thinks Ice
>In article <1uflq7l54qfttl5c3...@4ax.com>, duke
><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 09 May 2012 08:14:25 -0700, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.) wrote:
>>
>>>In article <QtCdnf2JS7s59DfS...@posted.localnet>, "Patrick"
>>><bark...@erinot.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Excommunication A spiritual censure by which one is excluded from the
>>>>communion of the faithful and suffers consequences inseparably attached by
>>>>canon law to such exclusion. It is also called anathema, especially when
>>>>inflicted with solemnities described in the Roman Ritual. ...
>>>
>>>• That's an appropriate name for it since it was largely invented there
>>>in the 4th Century.
>>
>>With you, everything is invented in the 4th century, including ice cream cones.
>>
>• Mass came to be in 394. The walk-away edible ice cream cone made its
>American debut at the 1904 Saint Louis World's Fair. Ice cream in a cone
>was served up by several vendors at the Fair - but they were in use in
>England before the Fair. .
Cream cones were from the 4C I wonder what they were doing with them
as Ice cream did not come along till much later
"The first concoction resembling ice cream was made in China during
the Tang period (A.D. 618 to 907)"
Doc Smartass
May 9, 2012, 8:43:23 PM5/9/12
to
"Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com> wrote in
news:QtCdnf2JS7s59DfS...@posted.localnet:
> Subject: Excommunication
Meaningless "we're kicking you out of our club, you poopy head" horseshit
from a group of scumbags with no moral legitimacy.
--
Doc Smartass, BAAWA Knight of Heckling aa # 1939
Kooks! http://kookclearinghouse.blogspot.com/
Books! http://jw-bookblog.blogspot.com/
Proud to be everything the right wing hates.
news:QtCdnf2JS7s59DfS...@posted.localnet:
> Subject: Excommunication
Meaningless "we're kicking you out of our club, you poopy head" horseshit
from a group of scumbags with no moral legitimacy.
--
Doc Smartass, BAAWA Knight of Heckling aa # 1939
Kooks! http://kookclearinghouse.blogspot.com/
Books! http://jw-bookblog.blogspot.com/
Proud to be everything the right wing hates.
Doc Smartass
May 9, 2012, 8:46:48 PM5/9/12
to
"Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com> wrote in
news:komdnSM3K41a9DfS...@posted.localnet:
> Subject: Infallibility
Something the doddering Dunning-Kruger-ridden scumbag leaders of ancient
religious clubs claim to have--while being the most fallible, weak-willed
law-breaking parasites imaginable.
news:komdnSM3K41a9DfS...@posted.localnet:
> Subject: Infallibility
Something the doddering Dunning-Kruger-ridden scumbag leaders of ancient
religious clubs claim to have--while being the most fallible, weak-willed
law-breaking parasites imaginable.
Doc Smartass
May 9, 2012, 8:47:32 PM5/9/12
to
"Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com> wrote in
news:B7adnQUnvauH9TfS...@posted.localnet:
> Subject: North Carolina stomps the fags
Patrick now living alone.
news:B7adnQUnvauH9TfS...@posted.localnet:
> Subject: North Carolina stomps the fags
Patrick now living alone.
kni...@baawa.com
May 9, 2012, 8:50:15 PM5/9/12
to
On Wed, 9 May 2012 08:57:05 -0400, "Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com>
wrote:
>
>
>
>
his god doesn't want you in heaven.
Excommunication has got to be the ultimate superstitious bullshit.
Morons that don't fuck deciding the mind of a god.
Warlord Steve
BAAWA
wrote:
>
>
>
>
>Excommunication A spiritual censure by which one is excluded from the
>communion of the faithful and suffers consequences inseparably attached by
>canon law to such exclusion.
Short version - Some asshole Shaman got pissed off and decided that
>communion of the faithful and suffers consequences inseparably attached by
>canon law to such exclusion.
his god doesn't want you in heaven.
Excommunication has got to be the ultimate superstitious bullshit.
Morons that don't fuck deciding the mind of a god.
Warlord Steve
BAAWA
Doc Smartass
May 9, 2012, 9:09:41 PM5/9/12
to
"Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com> wrote in
news:luCdnYxYssEJ9TfS...@posted.localnet:
> Subject: Pope tells American colleges to strengthen Catholic identity
Americans tell Nazinger to go fuck himself, mind his own business.
news:luCdnYxYssEJ9TfS...@posted.localnet:
> Subject: Pope tells American colleges to strengthen Catholic identity
Americans tell Nazinger to go fuck himself, mind his own business.
linuxgal
May 9, 2012, 9:14:31 PM5/9/12
to kni...@baawa.com
kni...@baawa.com wrote:
>
> Excommunication has got to be the ultimate superstitious bullshit.
> Morons that don't fuck deciding the mind of a god.
They believe they are the keeper of God's Killfile, as it were.
>
> Excommunication has got to be the ultimate superstitious bullshit.
> Morons that don't fuck deciding the mind of a god.
Seth lePod
May 9, 2012, 10:09:09 PM5/9/12
to
> who were excommunicated for being ordained against Canon Law by a renegade
> former South American bishop who had left the Church to join a sect, as
> priests.
http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=library&page=flynn_29_2
> former South American bishop who had left the Church to join a sect, as
> priests.
Seth
SkyEyes
May 10, 2012, 1:49:54 AM5/10/12
to
get my person back. I don't want the catlicks counting me among their
numbers.
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes nine at cox dot net OR
skyeyes nine at yahoo dot com
John Ritson
May 10, 2012, 5:32:46 AM5/10/12
to
"Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com> wrote in
news:gomdnfPdvva29DfS...@posted.localnet:
Completely out of date. The Roman Catholic church has now abandoned the
principle of priestly celibacy. Married Anglican priests who switch to
Roman Catholicism do not have to leave their wives. Thus there are now
married Roman Catholic priests.
--
John Ritson
news:gomdnfPdvva29DfS...@posted.localnet:
principle of priestly celibacy. Married Anglican priests who switch to
Roman Catholicism do not have to leave their wives. Thus there are now
married Roman Catholic priests.
--
John Ritson
duke
May 10, 2012, 6:48:15 AM5/10/12
to
On Wed, 09 May 2012 19:46:48 -0500, Doc Smartass <Fortbr...@yahoobrick.com>
wrote:
>"Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com> wrote in
>news:komdnSM3K41a9DfS...@posted.localnet:
>
>> Subject: Infallibility
>
>Something the doddering Dunning-Kruger-ridden scumbag leaders of ancient
>religious clubs claim to have--while being the most fallible, weak-willed
>law-breaking parasites imaginable.
God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. Best learn to live with it.
wrote:
>"Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com> wrote in
>news:komdnSM3K41a9DfS...@posted.localnet:
>
>> Subject: Infallibility
>
>Something the doddering Dunning-Kruger-ridden scumbag leaders of ancient
>religious clubs claim to have--while being the most fallible, weak-willed
>law-breaking parasites imaginable.
duke
May 10, 2012, 6:48:50 AM5/10/12
to
On Wed, 09 May 2012 14:33:16 -0700, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.) wrote:
>In article <1uflq7l54qfttl5c3...@4ax.com>, duke
><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 09 May 2012 08:14:25 -0700, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.) wrote:
>>
>>>In article <QtCdnf2JS7s59DfS...@posted.localnet>, "Patrick"
>>><bark...@erinot.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Excommunication A spiritual censure by which one is excluded from the
>>>>communion of the faithful and suffers consequences inseparably attached by
>>>>canon law to such exclusion. It is also called anathema, especially when
>>>>inflicted with solemnities described in the Roman Ritual. ...
>>>
>>>• That's an appropriate name for it since it was largely invented there
>>>in the 4th Century.
>>
>>With you, everything is invented in the 4th century, including ice cream cones.
>• Mass came to be in 394.
You still don't get it, rl, but that's not surprising.
>In article <1uflq7l54qfttl5c3...@4ax.com>, duke
><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 09 May 2012 08:14:25 -0700, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.) wrote:
>>
>>>In article <QtCdnf2JS7s59DfS...@posted.localnet>, "Patrick"
>>><bark...@erinot.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Excommunication A spiritual censure by which one is excluded from the
>>>>communion of the faithful and suffers consequences inseparably attached by
>>>>canon law to such exclusion. It is also called anathema, especially when
>>>>inflicted with solemnities described in the Roman Ritual. ...
>>>
>>>• That's an appropriate name for it since it was largely invented there
>>>in the 4th Century.
>>
>>With you, everything is invented in the 4th century, including ice cream cones.
>• Mass came to be in 394.
duke
May 10, 2012, 6:50:06 AM5/10/12
to
On Wed, 09 May 2012 17:50:15 -0700, kni...@baawa.com wrote:
>On Wed, 9 May 2012 08:57:05 -0400, "Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com>
>wrote:
>>Excommunication A spiritual censure by which one is excluded from the
>>communion of the faithful and suffers consequences inseparably attached by
>>canon law to such exclusion.
>
> Short version - Some asshole Shaman got pissed off and decided that
>his god doesn't want you in heaven.
Shorter version. You're dead wrong, pardon the pun.
>On Wed, 9 May 2012 08:57:05 -0400, "Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com>
>wrote:
>>Excommunication A spiritual censure by which one is excluded from the
>>communion of the faithful and suffers consequences inseparably attached by
>>canon law to such exclusion.
>
> Short version - Some asshole Shaman got pissed off and decided that
>his god doesn't want you in heaven.
> Excommunication has got to be the ultimate superstitious bullshit.
>Morons that don't fuck deciding the mind of a god.
>Warlord Steve
>BAAWA
duke
May 10, 2012, 6:50:51 AM5/10/12
to
Argue Blop
May 10, 2012, 6:51:33 AM5/10/12
to
Argue Blop
May 10, 2012, 6:51:48 AM5/10/12
to
duke
May 10, 2012, 6:54:45 AM5/10/12
to
On Wed, 09 May 2012 20:09:41 -0500, Doc Smartass <Fortbr...@yahoobrick.com>
wrote:
>"Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com> wrote in
>news:luCdnYxYssEJ9TfS...@posted.localnet:
>
>> Subject: Pope tells American colleges to strengthen Catholic identity
>
>Americans tell Nazinger to go fuck himself, mind his own business.
No, not Americans, just smart asses..
wrote:
>"Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com> wrote in
>news:luCdnYxYssEJ9TfS...@posted.localnet:
>
>> Subject: Pope tells American colleges to strengthen Catholic identity
>
>Americans tell Nazinger to go fuck himself, mind his own business.
Argue Blop
May 10, 2012, 6:55:47 AM5/10/12
to
duke
May 10, 2012, 7:24:57 AM5/10/12
to
On Thu, 10 May 2012 12:51:33 +0200, Argue Blop <net....@speed.1s.fr> wrote:
>On 10/05/2012 12:48, duke wrote:
>> On Wed, 09 May 2012 19:46:48 -0500, Doc Smartass<Fortbr...@yahoobrick.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> "Patrick"<bark...@erinot.com> wrote in
>>> news:komdnSM3K41a9DfS...@posted.localnet:
>>>
>>>> Subject: Infallibility
>>>
>>> Something the doddering Dunning-Kruger-ridden scumbag leaders of ancient
>>> religious clubs claim to have--while being the most fallible, weak-willed
>>> law-breaking parasites imaginable.
>>
>> God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. Best learn to live with it.
>What about Americans
>On 10/05/2012 12:48, duke wrote:
>> On Wed, 09 May 2012 19:46:48 -0500, Doc Smartass<Fortbr...@yahoobrick.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> "Patrick"<bark...@erinot.com> wrote in
>>> news:komdnSM3K41a9DfS...@posted.localnet:
>>>
>>>> Subject: Infallibility
>>>
>>> Something the doddering Dunning-Kruger-ridden scumbag leaders of ancient
>>> religious clubs claim to have--while being the most fallible, weak-willed
>>> law-breaking parasites imaginable.
>>
>> God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. Best learn to live with it.
What about us?
duke
May 10, 2012, 7:25:26 AM5/10/12
to
duke
May 10, 2012, 7:28:01 AM5/10/12
to
On Thu, 10 May 2012 12:55:47 +0200, Argue Blop <net....@speed.1s.fr> wrote:
>On 10/05/2012 12:54, duke wrote:
>> On Wed, 09 May 2012 20:09:41 -0500, Doc Smartass<Fortbr...@yahoobrick.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> "Patrick"<bark...@erinot.com> wrote in
>>> news:luCdnYxYssEJ9TfS...@posted.localnet:
>>>
>>>> Subject: Pope tells American colleges to strengthen Catholic identity
>>>
>>> Americans tell Nazinger to go fuck himself, mind his own business.
>>
>> No, not Americans, just smart asses..
>What fucking Americans
>On 10/05/2012 12:54, duke wrote:
>> On Wed, 09 May 2012 20:09:41 -0500, Doc Smartass<Fortbr...@yahoobrick.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> "Patrick"<bark...@erinot.com> wrote in
>>> news:luCdnYxYssEJ9TfS...@posted.localnet:
>>>
>>>> Subject: Pope tells American colleges to strengthen Catholic identity
>>>
>>> Americans tell Nazinger to go fuck himself, mind his own business.
>>
>> No, not Americans, just smart asses..
France has never won a war.
• R. L. Measures.
May 10, 2012, 7:46:33 AM5/10/12
to
In article <s77nq79mka27h5e9r...@4ax.com>, duke
"Unlearned in history, they allow themselves to be governed by the Unknown
Past."
- - historian John Acton
<duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>On Wed, 09 May 2012 14:33:16 -0700, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.) wrote:
>
>>In article <1uflq7l54qfttl5c3...@4ax.com>, duke
>><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 09 May 2012 08:14:25 -0700, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.) wrote:
>>>
>>>>In article <QtCdnf2JS7s59DfS...@posted.localnet>, "Patrick"
>>>><bark...@erinot.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Excommunication A spiritual censure by which one is excluded from the
>>>>>communion of the faithful and suffers consequences inseparably attached by
>>>>>canon law to such exclusion. It is also called anathema, especially when
>>>>>inflicted with solemnities described in the Roman Ritual. ...
>>>>
>>>>• That's an appropriate name for it since it was largely invented there
>>>>in the 4th Century.
>>>
>>>With you, everything is invented in the 4th century, including ice
cream cones.
>
>>• Mass came to be in 394.
>
>You still don't get it, rl, but that's not surprising.
>
• the trouble is that I get secular history.
>On Wed, 09 May 2012 14:33:16 -0700, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.) wrote:
>
>>In article <1uflq7l54qfttl5c3...@4ax.com>, duke
>><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 09 May 2012 08:14:25 -0700, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.) wrote:
>>>
>>>>In article <QtCdnf2JS7s59DfS...@posted.localnet>, "Patrick"
>>>><bark...@erinot.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Excommunication A spiritual censure by which one is excluded from the
>>>>>communion of the faithful and suffers consequences inseparably attached by
>>>>>canon law to such exclusion. It is also called anathema, especially when
>>>>>inflicted with solemnities described in the Roman Ritual. ...
>>>>
>>>>• That's an appropriate name for it since it was largely invented there
>>>>in the 4th Century.
>>>
>>>With you, everything is invented in the 4th century, including ice
cream cones.
>
>>• Mass came to be in 394.
>
>You still don't get it, rl, but that's not surprising.
>
"Unlearned in history, they allow themselves to be governed by the Unknown
Past."
- - historian John Acton
Alan Ferris
May 10, 2012, 1:50:45 PM5/10/12
to
On Thu, 10 May 2012 05:54:45 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>On Wed, 09 May 2012 20:09:41 -0500, Doc Smartass <Fortbr...@yahoobrick.com>
>wrote:
>
>>"Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com> wrote in
>>news:luCdnYxYssEJ9TfS...@posted.localnet:
>>
>>> Subject: Pope tells American colleges to strengthen Catholic identity
>>
>>Americans tell Nazinger to go fuck himself, mind his own business.
>
>No, not Americans, just smart asses..
And certain catholics:
>On Wed, 09 May 2012 20:09:41 -0500, Doc Smartass <Fortbr...@yahoobrick.com>
>wrote:
>
>>"Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com> wrote in
>>news:luCdnYxYssEJ9TfS...@posted.localnet:
>>
>>> Subject: Pope tells American colleges to strengthen Catholic identity
>>
>>Americans tell Nazinger to go fuck himself, mind his own business.
>
>No, not Americans, just smart asses..
"+ You and Cardinal Ratz can go pound sand.
+Neither of you have any authority over me."
- P.Barker 10/08/04
"+ You know what would be ironic?
+ If they selected Ratzinger to be pope.
+ Now that might cause some consternation!"
- P.Barker 2/4/05
"+ Cardinal Ratz has made many, many enemies along his way.
+ As soon as Pope JP2 departs the living, Ratz will be history."
- P.Barker 7/8/04
"+ Although I do not think much of Cardinal Ratzinger,
and I personally think he should go pound sand, I have
not told him (personally) to do so."
- P.Barker 9/9/04
"+ Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was born in Germany in 1927.
+ He is 77 years old now. with many enemies. He hasn't got a
chance."
- P.Barker 8/8/04
"+ I am certainly aware of what the real Cardinal Ratzinger.....
he is a human, a man, a person who overstepped his boundaries
on more than one occasion. He is the pope wannabe and his
glorious reign (as you seem to think he has) will soon be over."
- P.Barker 1/9/04
"+ Personally I have no respect for Cardinal Ratzinger.
+ But that is another discussion.
+ Ratzinger is a pope wannabe. He says things that are not
100 percent clear. I give him the benefit of doubt, but I
certainly haven't spent any time trying to figure him out. I
don't have the time or energy."
- P.Barker 13/3/04
"+ Ratzo is a power hungry cardinal well placed in the Vatican
who will never have any backing to become Pope. He does
what he needs to do. He provides comic relief for many of us."
- P.Barker 6/10/03
Alan Ferris
May 10, 2012, 1:59:11 PM5/10/12
to
On Thu, 10 May 2012 06:28:01 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>On Thu, 10 May 2012 12:55:47 +0200, Argue Blop <net....@speed.1s.fr> wrote:
>
>>On 10/05/2012 12:54, duke wrote:
>>> On Wed, 09 May 2012 20:09:41 -0500, Doc Smartass<Fortbr...@yahoobrick.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Patrick"<bark...@erinot.com> wrote in
>>>> news:luCdnYxYssEJ9TfS...@posted.localnet:
>>>>
>>>>> Subject: Pope tells American colleges to strengthen Catholic identity
>>>>
>>>> Americans tell Nazinger to go fuck himself, mind his own business.
>>>
>>> No, not Americans, just smart asses..
>
>>What fucking Americans
>
>France has never won a war.
"...and a certain unconscious brutality of hurry and gesture in the
>On Thu, 10 May 2012 12:55:47 +0200, Argue Blop <net....@speed.1s.fr> wrote:
>
>>On 10/05/2012 12:54, duke wrote:
>>> On Wed, 09 May 2012 20:09:41 -0500, Doc Smartass<Fortbr...@yahoobrick.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Patrick"<bark...@erinot.com> wrote in
>>>> news:luCdnYxYssEJ9TfS...@posted.localnet:
>>>>
>>>>> Subject: Pope tells American colleges to strengthen Catholic identity
>>>>
>>>> Americans tell Nazinger to go fuck himself, mind his own business.
>>>
>>> No, not Americans, just smart asses..
>
>>What fucking Americans
>
>France has never won a war.
men is related to their inexhaustible and extraordinary military
courage. (…) Let a fool hate France."
- G.K. Chesterton
"The French soldiers are grand. They are grand. There is no other word
to express it."
- Arthur Conan Doyle, A visit to three fronts (1916)
"Their business is war, and they do their business."
- R. Kipling, France at war (1915)
duke
May 10, 2012, 2:02:21 PM5/10/12
to
On Thu, 10 May 2012 04:46:33 -0700, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.) wrote:
>In article <s77nq79mka27h5e9r...@4ax.com>, duke
><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 09 May 2012 14:33:16 -0700, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.) wrote:
>>
>>>In article <1uflq7l54qfttl5c3...@4ax.com>, duke
>>><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Wed, 09 May 2012 08:14:25 -0700, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>In article <QtCdnf2JS7s59DfS...@posted.localnet>, "Patrick"
>>>>><bark...@erinot.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Excommunication A spiritual censure by which one is excluded from the
>>>>>>communion of the faithful and suffers consequences inseparably attached by
>>>>>>canon law to such exclusion. It is also called anathema, especially when
>>>>>>inflicted with solemnities described in the Roman Ritual. ...
>>>>>
>>>>>• That's an appropriate name for it since it was largely invented there
>>>>>in the 4th Century.
>>>>
>>>>With you, everything is invented in the 4th century, including ice
>cream cones.
>>
>>>• Mass came to be in 394.
>>
>>You still don't get it, rl, but that's not surprising.
>>
>• the trouble is that I get secular history.
I know. You should try instead for spiritual history.
>In article <s77nq79mka27h5e9r...@4ax.com>, duke
><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 09 May 2012 14:33:16 -0700, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.) wrote:
>>
>>>In article <1uflq7l54qfttl5c3...@4ax.com>, duke
>>><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Wed, 09 May 2012 08:14:25 -0700, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>In article <QtCdnf2JS7s59DfS...@posted.localnet>, "Patrick"
>>>>><bark...@erinot.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Excommunication A spiritual censure by which one is excluded from the
>>>>>>communion of the faithful and suffers consequences inseparably attached by
>>>>>>canon law to such exclusion. It is also called anathema, especially when
>>>>>>inflicted with solemnities described in the Roman Ritual. ...
>>>>>
>>>>>• That's an appropriate name for it since it was largely invented there
>>>>>in the 4th Century.
>>>>
>>>>With you, everything is invented in the 4th century, including ice
>cream cones.
>>
>>>• Mass came to be in 394.
>>
>>You still don't get it, rl, but that's not surprising.
>>
>• the trouble is that I get secular history.
Alan Ferris
May 10, 2012, 3:40:19 PM5/10/12
to
On Thu, 10 May 2012 13:02:21 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>• the trouble is that I get secular history.
>
>I know. You should try instead for spiritual history.
some history for you duke:
>>• the trouble is that I get secular history.
>
>I know. You should try instead for spiritual history.
"A. Archdiocese leaders were aware that priests were sexually abusing
hundreds of children, and that their continued ministry
presented great danger.
B. Archdiocese leaders employed deliberate strategies to conceal
known abuse.
1. Archdiocese leaders conducted non-investigations designed to
avoid establishing priests’ guilt.
2. The Cardinals transferred known abusers to other parishes
where their reputations were not known and parents could
not, therefore, protect their children.
a. The decision whether to transfer a known abuser was
determined by the threat of scandal or lawsuit, not by
the priest’s guilt or the danger he posed.
b. Parishioners were not told, or were misled about, the
reason for the abuser’s transfer.
c. Sexual Offenders were transferred to distant parishes
where their reputations would not be known.
d. The Archdiocese harbored abusers transferred from other
dioceses.
3. Archdiocese leaders made concerted efforts to prevent reports
of priest abuse to law enforcement.
4. Church leaders carefully avoided actions that would
incriminate themselves or the priests.
5. Archdiocese officials tried to keep their files devoid of
incriminating evidence.
6. Church leaders manipulated abusive priests’ psychological
evaluations to keep them in ministry.
a. Officials used therapy and evaluation to give false
reassurances.
b. Cardinal Bevilacqua instituted a test that falsely
purported to exclude pedophiles.
c. Church officials interfered with evaluations.
d. The Cardinal attempted to evade personal liability for
retaining abusers by claiming to rely on therapists’
recommendations.
7. Church leaders invented Limited Ministry, which they
documented in Archdiocese files but did not enforce.
8. Archdiocese officials used investigation and intimidation to
fend off lawsuits and silence victims and witnesses.
9. The Cardinals shielded themselves from direct contact with
victims.
10. Even in 2002, Cardinal Bevilacqua continued to mislead the
public and give false assurances.
C. The Archdiocese’s strategies for handling abuse cases multiplied
the number of victims and increased the harm done to them.
D. Dioceses throughout the United States employed the same strategies
to conceal their priests’ crimes and keep abusers in ministry."
- 2005 Philadelphia Grand Jury Report
"Notes in Archdiocese files prove that the Church leaders not only
saw, but understood, that sexually offending priests typically have
multiple victims, and are unlikely to stop abusing children unless the
opportunity is removed." - 2005 Philadelphia Grand Jury Report
"For most of Cardinal Krol’s tenure, concealment mainly entailed
persuading victims’ parents not to report the priests’ crimes to
police, and transferring priests to other parishes if parents demanded
it or if “general scandal” seemed imminent."
- 2005 Philadelphia Grand Jury Report
"In Massachusetts, the Boston Archdiocese accused a priest’s young
victims of being negligent for allowing their own abuse."
- 2005 Philadelphia Grand Jury Report
"A nun in Saint Gabriel, Sister Joan Scary, expressed concerns about
the safety of children in her parish who were exposed to a priest
convicted of possessing child pornography. After she tried to pressure
the Archdiocese officials to act and began talking to parents, she was
fired as director of religious education."
- 2005 Philadelphia Grand Jury Report
• R. L. Measures.
May 10, 2012, 6:29:14 PM5/10/12
to
In article <kk0oq71menclq58kr...@4ax.com>, duke
<duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>On Thu, 10 May 2012 04:46:33 -0700, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.) wrote:
>
>>In article <s77nq79mka27h5e9r...@4ax.com>, duke
>><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 09 May 2012 14:33:16 -0700, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.) wrote:
>>>
>>>>In article <1uflq7l54qfttl5c3...@4ax.com>, duke
>>>><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Wed, 09 May 2012 08:14:25 -0700, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.) wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>In article <QtCdnf2JS7s59DfS...@posted.localnet>, "Patrick"
>>>>>><bark...@erinot.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Excommunication A spiritual censure by which one is excluded from the
>>>>>>>communion of the faithful and suffers consequences inseparably
attached by
>>>>>>>canon law to such exclusion. It is also called anathema, especially when
>>>>>>>inflicted with solemnities described in the Roman Ritual. ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>• That's an appropriate name for it since it was largely invented there
>>>>>>in the 4th Century.
>>>>>
>>>>>With you, everything is invented in the 4th century, including ice
>>cream cones.
>>>
>>>>• Mass came to be in 394.
>>>
>>>You still don't get it, rl, but that's not surprising.
>>>
>>• the trouble is that I get secular history.
>
>I know. You should try instead for spiritual history.
>
• I have little interest in fiction.
>On Thu, 10 May 2012 04:46:33 -0700, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.) wrote:
>
>>In article <s77nq79mka27h5e9r...@4ax.com>, duke
>><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 09 May 2012 14:33:16 -0700, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.) wrote:
>>>
>>>>In article <1uflq7l54qfttl5c3...@4ax.com>, duke
>>>><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Wed, 09 May 2012 08:14:25 -0700, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.) wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>In article <QtCdnf2JS7s59DfS...@posted.localnet>, "Patrick"
>>>>>><bark...@erinot.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Excommunication A spiritual censure by which one is excluded from the
>>>>>>>communion of the faithful and suffers consequences inseparably
attached by
>>>>>>>canon law to such exclusion. It is also called anathema, especially when
>>>>>>>inflicted with solemnities described in the Roman Ritual. ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>• That's an appropriate name for it since it was largely invented there
>>>>>>in the 4th Century.
>>>>>
>>>>>With you, everything is invented in the 4th century, including ice
>>cream cones.
>>>
>>>>• Mass came to be in 394.
>>>
>>>You still don't get it, rl, but that's not surprising.
>>>
>>• the trouble is that I get secular history.
>
>I know. You should try instead for spiritual history.
>
• R. L. Measures.
May 10, 2012, 6:36:26 PM5/10/12
to
In article <gc6oq75uih5k5sf4i...@4ax.com>, Alan Ferris
• Alan == I'm wondering if this is the same Fr,Bevilacqua I met in Ojai,
CA c. 1968?
CA c. 1968?
Doc Smartass
May 10, 2012, 10:18:31 PM5/10/12
to
Argue Blop <net....@speed.1s.fr> wrote in
news:jog6jr$arf$1...@dont-email.me:
> On 10/05/2012 12:48, duke wrote:
>> On Wed, 09 May 2012 19:46:48 -0500, Doc
>> Smartass<Fortbr...@yahoobrick.com> wrote:
>>
>>> "Patrick"<bark...@erinot.com> wrote in
>>> news:komdnSM3K41a9DfS...@posted.localnet:
>>>
>>>> Subject: Infallibility
>>>
>>> Something the doddering Dunning-Kruger-ridden scumbag leaders of
>>> ancient religious clubs claim to have--while being the most
>>> fallible, weak-willed law-breaking parasites imaginable.
>>
>> God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. Best learn to live
>> with it.
(piggybacking, since dook the dick is in killfile hell)
There's no god. Get over it.
>> duke, American - American
>>
>> *****
>> 1 John 3:4-6
>> 4 Everyone who sins breaks the law; in fact,
>> sin is lawlessness. 5 But you know that he
>> appeared so that he might take away our sins.
>> And in him is no sin. 6 No one who lives in
>> him keeps on sinning. No one who continues to
>> sin has either seen him or known him.
>> *****
> What about Americans
Doooook hates Americans.
news:jog6jr$arf$1...@dont-email.me:
> On 10/05/2012 12:48, duke wrote:
>> On Wed, 09 May 2012 19:46:48 -0500, Doc
>> Smartass<Fortbr...@yahoobrick.com> wrote:
>>
>>> "Patrick"<bark...@erinot.com> wrote in
>>> news:komdnSM3K41a9DfS...@posted.localnet:
>>>
>>>> Subject: Infallibility
>>>
>>> Something the doddering Dunning-Kruger-ridden scumbag leaders of
>>> ancient religious clubs claim to have--while being the most
>>> fallible, weak-willed law-breaking parasites imaginable.
>>
>> God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. Best learn to live
>> with it.
There's no god. Get over it.
>> duke, American - American
>>
>> *****
>> 1 John 3:4-6
>> 4 Everyone who sins breaks the law; in fact,
>> sin is lawlessness. 5 But you know that he
>> appeared so that he might take away our sins.
>> And in him is no sin. 6 No one who lives in
>> him keeps on sinning. No one who continues to
>> sin has either seen him or known him.
>> *****
> What about Americans
duke
May 11, 2012, 7:21:59 AM5/11/12
to
On Thu, 10 May 2012 21:18:31 -0500, Doc Smartass <Fortbr...@yahoobrick.com>
so you turn to the kill file. Very good.
wrote:
>Argue Blop <net....@speed.1s.fr> wrote in
>news:jog6jr$arf$1...@dont-email.me:
>
>> On 10/05/2012 12:48, duke wrote:
>>> On Wed, 09 May 2012 19:46:48 -0500, Doc
>>> Smartass<Fortbr...@yahoobrick.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Patrick"<bark...@erinot.com> wrote in
>>>> news:komdnSM3K41a9DfS...@posted.localnet:
>>>>
>>>>> Subject: Infallibility
>>>>
>>>> Something the doddering Dunning-Kruger-ridden scumbag leaders of
>>>> ancient religious clubs claim to have--while being the most
>>>> fallible, weak-willed law-breaking parasites imaginable.
>>>
>>> God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. Best learn to live
>>> with it.
>
>(piggybacking, since dook the dick is in killfile hell)
Very good, doc. You can't participate in a public discussion as you well show,
>Argue Blop <net....@speed.1s.fr> wrote in
>news:jog6jr$arf$1...@dont-email.me:
>
>> On 10/05/2012 12:48, duke wrote:
>>> On Wed, 09 May 2012 19:46:48 -0500, Doc
>>> Smartass<Fortbr...@yahoobrick.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Patrick"<bark...@erinot.com> wrote in
>>>> news:komdnSM3K41a9DfS...@posted.localnet:
>>>>
>>>>> Subject: Infallibility
>>>>
>>>> Something the doddering Dunning-Kruger-ridden scumbag leaders of
>>>> ancient religious clubs claim to have--while being the most
>>>> fallible, weak-willed law-breaking parasites imaginable.
>>>
>>> God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. Best learn to live
>>> with it.
>
>(piggybacking, since dook the dick is in killfile hell)
so you turn to the kill file. Very good.
duke
May 11, 2012, 7:22:40 AM5/11/12
to
• R. L. Measures.
May 11, 2012, 8:32:40 AM5/11/12
to
In article <9jtpq7poutpi8okfj...@4ax.com>, duke
• Denial of reality
a key component in a TBRC's personality
a key component in a TBRC's personality
linuxgal
May 11, 2012, 1:56:58 PM5/11/12
to
duke wrote:
> France has never won a war.
So you're saying France lost World War I.
> France has never won a war.
sbalneav
May 11, 2012, 2:12:12 PM5/11/12
to
In alt.atheism duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 09 May 2012 19:46:48 -0500, Doc Smartass <Fortbr...@yahoobrick.com>
> wrote:
>
>>"Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com> wrote in
>>news:komdnSM3K41a9DfS...@posted.localnet:
>>
>>> Subject: Infallibility
>>
>>Something the doddering Dunning-Kruger-ridden scumbag leaders of ancient
>>religious clubs claim to have--while being the most fallible, weak-willed
>>law-breaking parasites imaginable.
>
> God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow.
Yeah, non-existant.
> On Wed, 09 May 2012 19:46:48 -0500, Doc Smartass <Fortbr...@yahoobrick.com>
> wrote:
>
>>"Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com> wrote in
>>news:komdnSM3K41a9DfS...@posted.localnet:
>>
>>> Subject: Infallibility
>>
>>Something the doddering Dunning-Kruger-ridden scumbag leaders of ancient
>>religious clubs claim to have--while being the most fallible, weak-willed
>>law-breaking parasites imaginable.
>
> God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow.
> Best learn to live with it.
Patrick
May 11, 2012, 3:21:22 PM5/11/12
to
"linuxgal" <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote in message
news:ApqdnSl3JLEXzjDS...@giganews.com...
> duke wrote:
>
>> France has never won a war.
>
> So you're saying France lost World War I.
They did until others jumped in to help.
>
>> France has never won a war.
>
> So you're saying France lost World War I.
Uergil
May 11, 2012, 3:32:17 PM5/11/12
to
In article <chtpq7to0pjgvlpkj...@4ax.com>,
there is none today,
and there is not likely to be any tomorrow,
so learn to live with that!
--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less
remote from the- truth who believes nothing than
he who believes what is wrong.
Thomas Jefferson
duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. Best learn to live
> with it.
There was no objective physical evidence for any god yesterday,
> God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. Best learn to live
> with it.
there is none today,
and there is not likely to be any tomorrow,
so learn to live with that!
--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less
remote from the- truth who believes nothing than
he who believes what is wrong.
Thomas Jefferson
linuxgal
May 11, 2012, 3:46:35 PM5/11/12
to
War. What I'm talking about is who paid reparations.
duke
May 11, 2012, 4:58:42 PM5/11/12
to
On Fri, 11 May 2012 18:12:12 +0000 (UTC), sbalneav <sbal...@alburg.net> wrote:
>In alt.atheism duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, 09 May 2012 19:46:48 -0500, Doc Smartass <Fortbr...@yahoobrick.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>"Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com> wrote in
>>>news:komdnSM3K41a9DfS...@posted.localnet:
>>>
>>>> Subject: Infallibility
>>>
>>>Something the doddering Dunning-Kruger-ridden scumbag leaders of ancient
>>>religious clubs claim to have--while being the most fallible, weak-willed
>>>law-breaking parasites imaginable.
>>
>> God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow.
>
>Yeah, non-existant.
Our universe, something form nothing into nothingness, had to come from
>In alt.atheism duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, 09 May 2012 19:46:48 -0500, Doc Smartass <Fortbr...@yahoobrick.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>"Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com> wrote in
>>>news:komdnSM3K41a9DfS...@posted.localnet:
>>>
>>>> Subject: Infallibility
>>>
>>>Something the doddering Dunning-Kruger-ridden scumbag leaders of ancient
>>>religious clubs claim to have--while being the most fallible, weak-willed
>>>law-breaking parasites imaginable.
>>
>> God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow.
>
>Yeah, non-existant.
somewhere. God did it. If you have a better answer to offer, please do so.
>> Best learn to live with it.
>We have. We're wondering when you're going to.
Alan Ferris
May 11, 2012, 5:10:45 PM5/11/12
to
On Fri, 11 May 2012 15:21:22 -0400, "Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com>
wrote:
Like America did against the French.
"I love comparing verbage, writing style, and
mis-spelled words. They tell me lots o stuff."
- P Barker 20Jul02
wrote:
"I love comparing verbage, writing style, and
mis-spelled words. They tell me lots o stuff."
- P Barker 20Jul02
Mike Lovell
May 11, 2012, 5:11:31 PM5/11/12
to
On 2012-05-11, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> Our universe, something form nothing into nothingness, had to come from
> somewhere. God did it. If you have a better answer to offer, please do so.
So God also could not come from nothingness,
> Our universe, something form nothing into nothingness, had to come from
> somewhere. God did it. If you have a better answer to offer, please do so.
Who made God? *Super*-God? Who made him?
"The universe couldn't just exist, so something almost infinitely
more complex 'just existed' in order to create it."
Great logic ;-)
--
Jews, Christians & Muslims
The content of your posts will show how much you
really believe God is looking over your shoulder
Patrick
May 11, 2012, 6:41:33 PM5/11/12
to
"linuxgal" <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote in message
news:vYqdnZ0-ipCk8DDS...@giganews.com...
France didn't pay shit.
Did you know that most French soldiers have sun burn UNDER their
arm pits?
linuxgal
May 11, 2012, 8:23:58 PM5/11/12
to
Alan Ferris wrote:
> On Fri, 11 May 2012 15:21:22 -0400, "Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com>
> wrote:
>
>> "linuxgal" <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote in message
>> news:ApqdnSl3JLEXzjDS...@giganews.com...
>>> duke wrote:
>>>
>>>> France has never won a war.
>>> So you're saying France lost World War I.
>> They did until others jumped in to help.
>>
> Like America did against the French.
Just repaying the favor, when France jumped in against the dern redcoats.
> On Fri, 11 May 2012 15:21:22 -0400, "Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com>
> wrote:
>
>> "linuxgal" <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote in message
>> news:ApqdnSl3JLEXzjDS...@giganews.com...
>>> duke wrote:
>>>
>>>> France has never won a war.
>>> So you're saying France lost World War I.
>> They did until others jumped in to help.
>>
> Like America did against the French.
Uergil
May 11, 2012, 8:57:08 PM5/11/12
to
In article <mavqq7l2a82h9lsn0...@4ax.com>,
Godidit? Actually there is absolutely no reason to suppose so!
And it is, at most, pure supposition.
The various big bang hypotheses are not the only hypotheses still
extant. There are several, as yet unfalsified and thus still in the
running, which postulate our universe extending infinitely backwards in
time with no "creation" or beginning at all, and few, if any, big bang
versions specifically require anyGodidit?
duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> Our universe, something form nothing into nothingness, had to come from
> somewhere. God did it. If you have a better answer to offer, please do so.
Says Duck, the Armenian Armenian
> Our universe, something form nothing into nothingness, had to come from
> somewhere. God did it. If you have a better answer to offer, please do so.
Godidit? Actually there is absolutely no reason to suppose so!
And it is, at most, pure supposition.
The various big bang hypotheses are not the only hypotheses still
extant. There are several, as yet unfalsified and thus still in the
running, which postulate our universe extending infinitely backwards in
time with no "creation" or beginning at all, and few, if any, big bang
versions specifically require anyGodidit?
panamfloyd@hotmail.com rade
May 12, 2012, 12:46:37 AM5/12/12
to
On May 9, 8:52 am, "Patrick" <barker...@erinot.com> wrote:
> Rise in US seminary numbers brings 'big smile' to Pope's face
snip
Well, he needed some good news after that embarrassment at the Vatican
last week...
http://imgur.com/m2y59
-Panama Floyd, Atlanta.
aa#2015, Member Knights of BAAWA!
"..the prayer cloth of one aeon is the doormat of the next."
-Mark Twain
Religious societies are *less* moral than secular ones:
http://www.rationalist.com.au/archive/73/p20-27_paul_ar73_web.pdf
> Rise in US seminary numbers brings 'big smile' to Pope's face
snip
Well, he needed some good news after that embarrassment at the Vatican
last week...
http://imgur.com/m2y59
-Panama Floyd, Atlanta.
aa#2015, Member Knights of BAAWA!
"..the prayer cloth of one aeon is the doormat of the next."
-Mark Twain
Religious societies are *less* moral than secular ones:
http://www.rationalist.com.au/archive/73/p20-27_paul_ar73_web.pdf
duke
May 12, 2012, 7:49:28 AM5/12/12
to
On Fri, 11 May 2012 18:57:08 -0600, Uergil <Uer...@uer.net> wrote:
>In article <mavqq7l2a82h9lsn0...@4ax.com>,
> duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> Our universe, something form nothing into nothingness, had to come from
>> somewhere. God did it. If you have a better answer to offer, please do so.
>
>Says Duck, the Armenian Armenian
That's American-American.
>In article <mavqq7l2a82h9lsn0...@4ax.com>,
> duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> Our universe, something form nothing into nothingness, had to come from
>> somewhere. God did it. If you have a better answer to offer, please do so.
>
>Says Duck, the Armenian Armenian
>Godidit? Actually there is absolutely no reason to suppose so!
point of mass and energy appeared from whence there was nothing before, not even
outer space, which is part of the infinitely small point. The only reality that
makes sense to human beings is a supreme Creator, God by name.
>And it is, at most, pure supposition.
nothingness. If you could, you would.
>The various big bang hypotheses are not the only hypotheses still
>extant.
- be it an explosion or branes or whatever.
> There are several, as yet unfalsified and thus still in the
>running, which postulate our universe extending infinitely backwards in
>time with no "creation" or beginning at all, and few, if any, big bang
>versions specifically require anyGodidit?
Patrick
May 12, 2012, 8:46:58 AM5/12/12
to
"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:g9jsq7tum4qmqt642...@4ax.com...
news:g9jsq7tum4qmqt642...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 11 May 2012 18:57:08 -0600, Uergil <Uer...@uer.net> wrote:
>
>>In article <mavqq7l2a82h9lsn0...@4ax.com>,
>> duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Our universe, something form nothing into nothingness, had to come from
>>> somewhere. God did it. If you have a better answer to offer, please do
>>> so.
>>
>>Says Duck, the Armenian Armenian
>
> That's American-American.
I used to know an Armenian.
>
>>In article <mavqq7l2a82h9lsn0...@4ax.com>,
>> duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Our universe, something form nothing into nothingness, had to come from
>>> somewhere. God did it. If you have a better answer to offer, please do
>>> so.
>>
>>Says Duck, the Armenian Armenian
>
> That's American-American.
duke
May 12, 2012, 8:50:49 AM5/12/12
to
On Fri, 11 May 2012 13:32:17 -0600, Uergil <Uer...@uer.net> wrote:
>In article <chtpq7to0pjgvlpkj...@4ax.com>,
> duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. Best learn to live
>> with it.
>
>There was no objective physical evidence for any god yesterday,
>there is none today,
>and there is not likely to be any tomorrow,
>so learn to live with that!
The evidence is 13.7 billion years old. Take your blinders off.
>In article <chtpq7to0pjgvlpkj...@4ax.com>,
> duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. Best learn to live
>> with it.
>
>There was no objective physical evidence for any god yesterday,
>there is none today,
>and there is not likely to be any tomorrow,
>so learn to live with that!
duke
May 12, 2012, 8:52:13 AM5/12/12
to
duke
May 12, 2012, 8:53:54 AM5/12/12
to
were fighting themselves.
duke
May 12, 2012, 8:54:46 AM5/12/12
to
On Fri, 11 May 2012 18:41:33 -0400, "Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com> wrote:
>"linuxgal" <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote in message
>news:vYqdnZ0-ipCk8DDS...@giganews.com...
>> Patrick wrote:
>>> "linuxgal" <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote in message
>>> news:ApqdnSl3JLEXzjDS...@giganews.com...
>>>> duke wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> France has never won a war.
>>>> So you're saying France lost World War I.
>>>
>>> They did until others jumped in to help.
>>
>> France jumped in to help the first George W. to win the Revolutionary War.
>> What I'm talking about is who paid reparations.
>
>America did.
>France didn't pay shit.
>Did you know that most French soldiers have sun burn UNDER their
>arm pits?
Haahaahaa. Haahaahaa.
>"linuxgal" <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote in message
>news:vYqdnZ0-ipCk8DDS...@giganews.com...
>> Patrick wrote:
>>> "linuxgal" <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote in message
>>> news:ApqdnSl3JLEXzjDS...@giganews.com...
>>>> duke wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> France has never won a war.
>>>> So you're saying France lost World War I.
>>>
>>> They did until others jumped in to help.
>>
>> France jumped in to help the first George W. to win the Revolutionary War.
>> What I'm talking about is who paid reparations.
>
>America did.
>France didn't pay shit.
>Did you know that most French soldiers have sun burn UNDER their
>arm pits?
duke
May 12, 2012, 9:11:08 AM5/12/12
to
linuxgal
May 12, 2012, 9:28:03 AM5/12/12
to
duke wrote:
> On Fri, 11 May 2012 10:56:58 -0700, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
>> duke wrote:
>>
>>> France has never won a war.
>> So you're saying France lost World War I.
>
> I repeat, France has never won a war. One time they came out even, but they
> were fighting themselves.
I will provide the answer. France won World War I. They kicked every
> On Fri, 11 May 2012 10:56:58 -0700, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
>> duke wrote:
>>
>>> France has never won a war.
>> So you're saying France lost World War I.
>
> I repeat, France has never won a war. One time they came out even, but they
> were fighting themselves.
German out of France, liberated Belgium, and seized most of the
positions of the Hindenburg Line. After the war they helped occupy the
Rhineland. France obtained the region of Alsace-Lorraine back from
Germany after it had been seized in the Franco-Prussian war. Germany
was required to pay war reparations to France, and the final payment was
made in 2010.
Mitchell Holman
May 12, 2012, 9:54:13 AM5/12/12
to
linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote in
news:Nb-dnYQCebWe-zPS...@giganews.com:
> duke wrote:
>> On Fri, 11 May 2012 10:56:58 -0700, linuxgal
>> <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>
>>> duke wrote:
>>>
>>>> France has never won a war.
>>> So you're saying France lost World War I.
>>
>> I repeat, France has never won a war. One time they came out even,
>> but they were fighting themselves.
>
> I will provide the answer. France won World War I.
And the Hundred Years War.
news:Nb-dnYQCebWe-zPS...@giganews.com:
> duke wrote:
>> On Fri, 11 May 2012 10:56:58 -0700, linuxgal
>> <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>
>>> duke wrote:
>>>
>>>> France has never won a war.
>>> So you're saying France lost World War I.
>>
>> I repeat, France has never won a war. One time they came out even,
>> but they were fighting themselves.
>
> I will provide the answer. France won World War I.
Patrick
May 12, 2012, 1:12:35 PM5/12/12
to
"linuxgal" <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote
> I will provide the answer. France won World War I. They kicked every
> German out of France, liberated Belgium, and seized most of the positions
> of the Hindenburg Line. After the war they helped occupy the Rhineland.
> France obtained the region of Alsace-Lorraine back from Germany after it
> had been seized in the Franco-Prussian war. Germany was required to pay
> war reparations to France, and the final payment was made in 2010.
France is over-rated, and underqualified to do anything.
> German out of France, liberated Belgium, and seized most of the positions
> of the Hindenburg Line. After the war they helped occupy the Rhineland.
> France obtained the region of Alsace-Lorraine back from Germany after it
> had been seized in the Franco-Prussian war. Germany was required to pay
> war reparations to France, and the final payment was made in 2010.
France did not win WWI. England and the USA did.
After we won WWII for them, they showed their true colors.
They demanded the USA to get totally out of France later.
We asked if they wanted our dead soldiers out also.
We almost had to dig up all our heros who died over there.
We did ask for Uncle Jimmy to come back from Metz.
He is now buried in Geraldine, Montana.
France forced Germany to purchase new uniforms for eveRY
French soldier who served in French quarter of Berline. Guess
what! Every new French soldier recruit is sent immediately
to Berlin so Germany can buy their full comlpliment of uniforms.
This went on into the 1990's.
------------
What's more? "The French spend more time eating and drinking, sleeping and
shopping than any other nationality," according to a new study-and are far
less likely than other nationalities to have "performed an act of kindness
in the past month." Yes: the vast majority of French residents are more
likely to have hissed at a woman in a burqa than to have given a tourist
directions. When will we start bombing France?
http://www.theawl.com/2011/04/france-this-country-sucks
-----------
There is no hell. There is only France.
Frank Zappa
Patrick
May 12, 2012, 1:16:44 PM5/12/12
to
"Mitchell Holman" <nomailcomcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA05159564BB56...@216.196.121.131...
+ Wrong, and wrong....
Gallic Wars: Lost. In a war whose ending foreshadows the next 2000 years of
French history, France is conquered by of all things, an Italian.
Hundred Years War: Mostly lost, saved at last by a female schizophrenic who
inadvertently creates The First Rule of French Warfare - "France's armies
are victorious only when not led by a Frenchmen."
Italian Wars: Lost. France becomes the first and only country ever to lose
two wars when fighting Italians.
Wars of Religion: France goes 0-5-4 against the Huguenots.
Thirty Years' War: France is technically not a participant, but manages to
get invaded anyway. Claims a tie on the basis that eventually the other
participants started ignoring her.
War of Devolution: Tied; Frenchmen take to wearing red flowerpots as
chapeaux.
The Dutch War: Tied.
War of the Augsburg League/King William's War/French and Indian War: Lost,
but claimed as a tie. Deluded Frogophiles the world over label the period as
the height of French Military Power.
War of the Spanish Succession: Lost. The War also gave the French their
first taste of a Marlborough, which they have loved ever since.
American Revolution: In a move that will become quite familiar to future
Americans, France claims a win even though the English colonists saw far
more action. This is later known as "de Gaulle Syndrome", and leads to the
Second Rule of French Warfare: "France only wins when America does most of
the fighting".
French Revolution: Won, primarily due to the fact that the opponent was also
French.
The Napoleonic Wars: Lost. Temporary victories (remember the First Rule!)
due to leadership of a Corsican, who ended up being no match for a British
footwear designer.
The Franco-Prussian War: Lost. Germany first plays the role of drunk Frat
boy to France's ugly girl home alone on a Saturday night.
WWI: Tied and on the way to losing, France is saved by the United States.
Thousands of French women find out what it's like not only to sleep with a
winner, but one who doesn't call her "Fraulein." Sadly, widespread use of
condoms by American forces forestalls any improvement in the French
bloodline.
WWII: Lost. Conquered French liberated by the United States and Britain just
as they finish learning the Horst Wessel Song.
War in Indochina: Lost. French forces plead sickness, take to bed with Dien
Bien Flu.
Algerian Rebellion: Lost. Loss marks the first defeat of a Western army by a
Non-Turkic Muslim force since the Crusades, and produces the First Rule of
Muslim Warfare -"We can always beat the French." This rule is identical to
the First Rules of the Italians, Russians, Germans, English, Dutch, Spanish,
Vietnamese, and Eskimos
news:XnsA05159564BB56...@216.196.121.131...
Gallic Wars: Lost. In a war whose ending foreshadows the next 2000 years of
French history, France is conquered by of all things, an Italian.
Hundred Years War: Mostly lost, saved at last by a female schizophrenic who
inadvertently creates The First Rule of French Warfare - "France's armies
are victorious only when not led by a Frenchmen."
Italian Wars: Lost. France becomes the first and only country ever to lose
two wars when fighting Italians.
Wars of Religion: France goes 0-5-4 against the Huguenots.
Thirty Years' War: France is technically not a participant, but manages to
get invaded anyway. Claims a tie on the basis that eventually the other
participants started ignoring her.
War of Devolution: Tied; Frenchmen take to wearing red flowerpots as
chapeaux.
The Dutch War: Tied.
War of the Augsburg League/King William's War/French and Indian War: Lost,
but claimed as a tie. Deluded Frogophiles the world over label the period as
the height of French Military Power.
War of the Spanish Succession: Lost. The War also gave the French their
first taste of a Marlborough, which they have loved ever since.
American Revolution: In a move that will become quite familiar to future
Americans, France claims a win even though the English colonists saw far
more action. This is later known as "de Gaulle Syndrome", and leads to the
Second Rule of French Warfare: "France only wins when America does most of
the fighting".
French Revolution: Won, primarily due to the fact that the opponent was also
French.
The Napoleonic Wars: Lost. Temporary victories (remember the First Rule!)
due to leadership of a Corsican, who ended up being no match for a British
footwear designer.
The Franco-Prussian War: Lost. Germany first plays the role of drunk Frat
boy to France's ugly girl home alone on a Saturday night.
WWI: Tied and on the way to losing, France is saved by the United States.
Thousands of French women find out what it's like not only to sleep with a
winner, but one who doesn't call her "Fraulein." Sadly, widespread use of
condoms by American forces forestalls any improvement in the French
bloodline.
WWII: Lost. Conquered French liberated by the United States and Britain just
as they finish learning the Horst Wessel Song.
War in Indochina: Lost. French forces plead sickness, take to bed with Dien
Bien Flu.
Algerian Rebellion: Lost. Loss marks the first defeat of a Western army by a
Non-Turkic Muslim force since the Crusades, and produces the First Rule of
Muslim Warfare -"We can always beat the French." This rule is identical to
the First Rules of the Italians, Russians, Germans, English, Dutch, Spanish,
Vietnamese, and Eskimos
Mike Lovell
May 12, 2012, 1:36:06 PM5/12/12
to
On 2012-05-12, Patrick <bark...@erinot.com> wrote:
> [...]
Although I agree that France did sweet F.A. I think you're forgetting
one, rather massive country that actually won the war.
The USA, not wanting the entirety of Europe to become communist, joined
in the European theatre to stop that happening.
It was a race to Berlin.
In fact once the Germans and British captured German soldiers they often
kept their enemies weapons close to hand just in case they had to re-arm
them.
If Russia didn't stop at Berlin and continued West into the rest of
Europe USA, Britain and Germany would then have been allied against
them. Although Germany of course would have had a "change of
management" even in that scenario.
> [...]
> France did not win WWI. England and the USA did.
> [...]
Although I agree that France did sweet F.A. I think you're forgetting
one, rather massive country that actually won the war.
The USA, not wanting the entirety of Europe to become communist, joined
in the European theatre to stop that happening.
It was a race to Berlin.
In fact once the Germans and British captured German soldiers they often
kept their enemies weapons close to hand just in case they had to re-arm
them.
If Russia didn't stop at Berlin and continued West into the rest of
Europe USA, Britain and Germany would then have been allied against
them. Although Germany of course would have had a "change of
management" even in that scenario.
Mike Lovell
May 12, 2012, 1:52:42 PM5/12/12
to
> American Revolution: In a move that will become quite familiar to future
> Americans, France claims a win even though the English colonists saw far
> more action. This is later known as "de Gaulle Syndrome", and leads to the
> Second Rule of French Warfare: "France only wins when America does most of
> the fighting".
Actually other European powers were key to the Americans gaining
> Americans, France claims a win even though the English colonists saw far
> more action. This is later known as "de Gaulle Syndrome", and leads to the
> Second Rule of French Warfare: "France only wins when America does most of
> the fighting".
independence. It doesn't make as good of a story, but history is
written by the winners!
Washington took the advice (against his own ideas) of European generals,
and of course Britain had to secure its own country against European
powers at home.
It could not dedicate its full might to a colony at the expense of the
homeland.
The colonies 'vs' Britain's full military, with no assistance from other
European powers, would not have gained their independence (at this point)
they would have gained it eventually as all the other colonies did.
Not that you've presented this in your post (yet) but
this is one of the problems with Americans view of their own history,
it's very much *hero worship*. The historical figures are held up as
faultiness and saintly. The founding fathers, Lincoln, even Eisenhower.
They're almost mythical figures.
You do seem rather anti-French!
Mitchell Holman
May 12, 2012, 3:15:35 PM5/12/12
to
"Patrick" <bark...@erinot.com> wrote in
news:5M2dnYo97ptjBzPS...@posted.localnet:
> "Mitchell Holman" <nomailcomcast.net> wrote in message
> news:XnsA05159564BB56...@216.196.121.131...
>> linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote in
>> news:Nb-dnYQCebWe-zPS...@giganews.com:
>>
>>> duke wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 11 May 2012 10:56:58 -0700, linuxgal
>>>> <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> duke wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> France has never won a war.
>>>>> So you're saying France lost World War I.
>>>>
>>>> I repeat, France has never won a war. One time they came out even,
>>>> but they were fighting themselves.
>>>
>>> I will provide the answer. France won World War I.
>
>> And the Hundred Years War.
>
> + Wrong, and wrong....
>
> Gallic Wars: Lost. In a war whose ending foreshadows the next 2000
> years of French history, France is conquered by of all things, an
> Italian.
>
> Hundred Years War: Mostly lost, saved at last by a female
> schizophrenic who inadvertently creates The First Rule of French
> Warfare - "France's armies are victorious only when not led by a
> Frenchmen."
"The Hundred Years War ended in July 1453 when the
French finally expelled the English from the continent
(except for Calais)."
http://ehistory.osu.edu/osu/archive/hundredyearswar.cfm
news:5M2dnYo97ptjBzPS...@posted.localnet:
> "Mitchell Holman" <nomailcomcast.net> wrote in message
> news:XnsA05159564BB56...@216.196.121.131...
>> linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote in
>> news:Nb-dnYQCebWe-zPS...@giganews.com:
>>
>>> duke wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 11 May 2012 10:56:58 -0700, linuxgal
>>>> <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> duke wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> France has never won a war.
>>>>> So you're saying France lost World War I.
>>>>
>>>> I repeat, France has never won a war. One time they came out even,
>>>> but they were fighting themselves.
>>>
>>> I will provide the answer. France won World War I.
>
>> And the Hundred Years War.
>
> + Wrong, and wrong....
>
> Gallic Wars: Lost. In a war whose ending foreshadows the next 2000
> years of French history, France is conquered by of all things, an
> Italian.
>
> Hundred Years War: Mostly lost, saved at last by a female
> schizophrenic who inadvertently creates The First Rule of French
> Warfare - "France's armies are victorious only when not led by a
> Frenchmen."
French finally expelled the English from the continent
(except for Calais)."
http://ehistory.osu.edu/osu/archive/hundredyearswar.cfm
• R. L. Measures.
May 12, 2012, 4:57:33 PM5/12/12
to
In article <e7nsq7lu19ivb9sdt...@4ax.com>, duke
• Probably everybody but it takes more of it for a True Believer RC to
swallow the transubstantiation artifice.
--
Richard L. Measures. AG6K, 805-386-3734, www.somis.org
swallow the transubstantiation artifice.
--
Richard L. Measures. AG6K, 805-386-3734, www.somis.org
Uergil
May 12, 2012, 5:18:17 PM5/12/12
to
In article <e7nsq7lu19ivb9sdt...@4ax.com>,
Atheists merely reject certain claims that which are unsupported by any
objective physical evidence. That is more in the nature of accepting
ONLY reality than rejecting it.
>
> Duck Armenian - Armenian
duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 11 May 2012 05:32:40 -0700, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.) wrote:
> >• Denial of reality
> >a key component in a TBRC's personality
>
> And atheists.
Wrong!
> On Fri, 11 May 2012 05:32:40 -0700, r...@somis.org (• R. L. Measures.) wrote:
> >• Denial of reality
> >a key component in a TBRC's personality
>
> And atheists.
Atheists merely reject certain claims that which are unsupported by any
objective physical evidence. That is more in the nature of accepting
ONLY reality than rejecting it.
>
> Duck Armenian - Armenian
Dakota
May 12, 2012, 7:25:47 PM5/12/12
to
invasion of Iraq, France deserves another checkmark in the win column.
The US and it's coalition allies earned another defeat. The only winners
in Iraq were Cheney and his Haliburton buddies and the other war profiteers.
linuxgal
May 12, 2012, 7:23:10 PM5/12/12
to
Patrick wrote:
> France did not win WWI. England and the USA did.
The USA? What a joke. We got into the war in July 1917 and Pershing
> France did not win WWI. England and the USA did.
spent a year training his doughboys before they even saw combat. Then
we were present for a grand total of three major battles. The Battle
of Saint-Mihiel, a mostly US action, two months before the end of the
war, was the third and easiest operation to straighten out the remaining
German salients in the Western Front before the main Allied thrust to
break the Hindenburg Line could begin.
The_Echo_Chamber
May 12, 2012, 7:36:42 PM5/12/12
to
On May 9, 8:52 am, "Patrick" <barker...@erinot.com> wrote:
> Pope tells American colleges to strengthen Catholic identity
>
The bank accounts must be getting low and they're in search of new
sources of funding...
Alex W.
May 12, 2012, 8:05:06 PM5/12/12
to
population. Try to imagine 15 million dead Americans. They had
more dead soldiers than the US and the entire British Empire put
together. 11 French soldiers died for every American fatality.
If any Yank tourist is ever surprised at the reception they get
when they swan about Paris telling the natives in a LOUD voice
how they won the war ... the answer is right there.
Mitchell Holman
May 12, 2012, 8:18:21 PM5/12/12
to
Dakota <ma...@NOSPAMmail.com> wrote in news:jomrhi$1sb$1...@dont-email.me:
> On 5/12/2012 8:54 AM, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>> linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote in
>> news:Nb-dnYQCebWe-zPS...@giganews.com:
>>
>>> duke wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 11 May 2012 10:56:58 -0700, linuxgal
>>>> <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> duke wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> France has never won a war.
>>>>> So you're saying France lost World War I.
>>>>
>>>> I repeat, France has never won a war. One time they came out even,
>>>> but they were fighting themselves.
>>>
>>> I will provide the answer. France won World War I.
>>
>> And the Hundred Years War.
>>
> By choosing not to participate is George W. Bush's adventuristic
> invasion of Iraq, France deserves another checkmark in the win column.
Unfortunately the French sided with Bush and helped
his disasterous invasion of Afghanistan.
> On 5/12/2012 8:54 AM, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>> linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote in
>> news:Nb-dnYQCebWe-zPS...@giganews.com:
>>
>>> duke wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 11 May 2012 10:56:58 -0700, linuxgal
>>>> <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> duke wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> France has never won a war.
>>>>> So you're saying France lost World War I.
>>>>
>>>> I repeat, France has never won a war. One time they came out even,
>>>> but they were fighting themselves.
>>>
>>> I will provide the answer. France won World War I.
>>
>> And the Hundred Years War.
>>
> By choosing not to participate is George W. Bush's adventuristic
> invasion of Iraq, France deserves another checkmark in the win column.
his disasterous invasion of Afghanistan.
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages