birdog1960 Posted September 28, 2015 Share Posted September 28, 2015 I completely agree. and this comes from one who can still feel the sting of the ruler on his knuckles, fifty years later. me too. i'd be getting more than a few smacks for my grammar and punctuation right about now. I hated that they were under attack recently by a few American bishops. I expect that will cease for at least a little while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted September 28, 2015 Share Posted September 28, 2015 Do we really want to be following the advice of someone who knows so little of our country he is surprised that our cities have different personalities? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted September 28, 2015 Share Posted September 28, 2015 Do we really want to be following the advice of someone who knows so little of our country he is surprised that our cities have different personalities? he speaks universal and timeless truths: emphasize families, the golden rule, respect for all life. these apply everywhere and all the time. they are what differentiate us from wild animals (sometimes). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted September 28, 2015 Share Posted September 28, 2015 he speaks universal and timeless truths: emphasize families, the golden rule, respect for all life. these apply everywhere and all the time. they are what differentiate us from wild animals (sometimes). So he preached strong conservative values? Wow so now conservative values are timeless truths? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted September 28, 2015 Share Posted September 28, 2015 So he preached strong conservative values? Wow so now conservative values are timeless truths? sorry "do unto others" seems more in line with liberal values to me. dog eat dog and every man for himself seems to better define modern American conservatism. many conservatives favor the death penalty while many liberals favor choice so that's a wash. emphasizing families is not unique to either side. all in all, I like his positions better than either groups on these issues.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted September 28, 2015 Share Posted September 28, 2015 sorry "do unto others" seems more in line with liberal values to me. Oh, please. The liberal line is more like "do unto me as you've done unto others or it won't be fair and I'll whine like a little B word until you do." You keep trying to push this whole "dog eat dog" thing and, really, you need to give it up because the majority of conservatives cheer for every man and woman to use the resources around them to succeed, while the majority of Democrats (as you see in Baltimore, Detroit, Chicago, LA, SFO) want to hand out everything they can to keep people stupid and in poverty so they can teach their children how to stay in poverty and keep voting for Democrats. You may personally have lofty hopes for people, but your party wants people as slaves. Period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 28, 2015 Share Posted September 28, 2015 Oh, please. The liberal line is more like "do unto me as you've done unto others or it won't be fair and I'll whine like a little B word until you do." I thought it was "Do unto others to force them to do for others what others won't do for themselves, while you do what you want?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted September 28, 2015 Share Posted September 28, 2015 Oh, please. The liberal line is more like "do unto me as you've done unto others or it won't be fair and I'll whine like a little B word until you do." You keep trying to push this whole "dog eat dog" thing and, really, you need to give it up because the majority of conservatives cheer for every man and woman to use the resources around them to succeed, while the majority of Democrats (as you see in Baltimore, Detroit, Chicago, LA, SFO) want to hand out everything they can to keep people stupid and in poverty so they can teach their children how to stay in poverty and keep voting for Democrats. You may personally have lofty hopes for people, but your party wants people as slaves. Period. then to crystalize your stance: impoverished people have no real reason to be poor other than liberals holding them down. got it. that's almost as good as "just say no". that worked out so well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted September 28, 2015 Share Posted September 28, 2015 then to crystalize your stance: impoverished people have no real reason to be poor motivation to not be poor because liberals give them just enough to get by in return for votes. got it. Yes, you got it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 (edited) Yes, you got it. not that it will likely have any effect on you but what i've got is the basis for much of the pope's social justice message. you won't find a mention of fishing classes. do you think this aligns more with liberal or conservative philosophy? Matthew 25:35-40New International Version (NIV)35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’ 37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’ 40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’ Edited September 29, 2015 by birdog1960 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 The conservative message. Force isn't mentioned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 not that it will likely have any effect on you but what i've got is the basis for much of the pope's social justice message. you won't find a mention of fishing classes. do you think this aligns more with liberal or conservative philosophy? Matthew 25:35-40New International Version (NIV)35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’ 37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’ 40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’ Except the liberal version says... 35 For I was hungry and Caesar forced you to give me something to eat, I was thirsty and Caesar forced you to give me something to drink, I was a stranger and Caesar invited me in to your home, 36 I needed clothes and Caesar gave me your clothed me, I was sick and Caesar looked after me, I was in prison and Caesar made you come to visit me.’ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 Except the liberal version says... 35 For I was hungry and Caesar forced you to give me something to eat, I was thirsty and Caesar forced you to give me something to drink, I was a stranger and Caesar invited me in to your home, 36 I needed clothes and Caesar gave me your clothed me, I was sick and Caesar looked after me, I was in prison and Caesar made you come to visit me.’ yes, because we still have a powerful occupying government in the middle east that shows outright contempt for those under it's control….oh,wait. lets try that again. yes, because in 2000 years we haven't advanced enough as a species to systematically incorporate these wise ideas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 yes, because we still have a powerful occupying government in the middle east that shows outright contempt for those under it's control.oh,wait. lets try that again. yes, because in 2000 years we haven't advanced enough as a species to systematically incorporate these wise ideas. I know. If we could only come up with something that would do all those things. I'll work on it this week. I've been thinking about it for a while now and I've come up with a name for it. Charity. It has a good ring to don't you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 I know. If we could only come up with something that would do all those things. I'll work on it this week. I've been thinking about it for a while now and I've come up with a name for it. Charity. It has a good ring to don't you think? yes. it's working so well for the Syrian refugees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 yes. it's working so well for the Syrian refugees. That's it? That's your argument? That American Charities (I really don't care about Europe) are not taking care of Syrian refugees? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 yes, because we still have a powerful occupying government in the middle east that shows outright contempt for those under it's control….oh,wait. lets try that again. yes, because in 2000 years we haven't advanced enough as a species to systematically incorporate these wise ideas. Actually, there are multiple examples in the last century of advocates of government force killing thousands of people in an attempt to bend them to the whims of their preferred ideology. I have to imagine it's one of the primary reasons that Jesus never advocated force or used force himself. He preached peace, and peace is incompatible with the applied force of government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 (edited) That's it? That's your argument? That American Charities (I really don't care about Europe) are not taking care of Syrian refugees? it's an example. the argument began as a proof of the timeless and universal relevance of the popes teachings. the fact that we now have as ruthless and evil regimes as in biblical times makes the point more salient. a systematic rather than piecemeal approach to the problem is required. 2000+ years of failure is enough proof. Edited September 29, 2015 by birdog1960 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 not that it will likely have any effect on you but what i've got is the basis for much of the pope's social justice message. you won't find a mention of fishing classes. do you think this aligns more with liberal or conservative philosophy? Matthew 25:35-40New International Version (NIV)35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’ 37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’ 40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’ As they say in North Carolina, you really got your tittie in a ringer on this one. First, the King didn't reply "Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine using someone else's money, you did for me." Because the right tends to identify as Christian FAR more than the left, it is also is the most charitable group in the political spectrum, addressing the hungry, the homeless, and seeking ways to help provide a hand up. Period. They give of their money and time, and serve their communities through their church, at a far greater clip than the left, which spends all of it's time trying to convince everyone that the Bible is a bunch of bunk until they can quote it out of context in hopes of making a point that makes no sense. And the next time you mock the entire concept of 'teach a man to fish," I'll remind you how much time you waste trying to explain how important it is to spend money on education. You know, because the Bible doesn't talk about fishing classes, amirite? Dumbass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted September 29, 2015 Share Posted September 29, 2015 As they say in North Carolina, you really got your tittie in a ringer on this one. First, the King didn't reply "Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine using someone else's money, you did for me." Because the right tends to identify as Christian FAR more than the left, it is also is the most charitable group in the political spectrum, addressing the hungry, the homeless, and seeking ways to help provide a hand up. Period. They give of their money and time, and serve their communities through their church, at a far greater clip than the left, which spends all of it's time trying to convince everyone that the Bible is a bunch of bunk until they can quote it out of context in hopes of making a point that makes no sense. And the next time you mock the entire concept of 'teach a man to fish," I'll remind you how much time you waste trying to explain how important it is to spend money on education. You know, because the Bible doesn't talk about fishing classes, amirite? Dumbass. you like this one better from a Catholic bible? 35 For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you made me welcome, 36 lacking clothes and you clothed me, sick and you visited me, in prison and you came to see me." 37 Then the upright will say to him in reply, "Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and make you welcome, lacking clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we find you sick or in prison and go to see you?" 40 And the King will answer, "In truth I tell you, in so far as you did this to one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did it to me." to you literalists I guess a few stylistic words make all the difference. I assume you know what it goes on to say. to your other point, perhaps charitable on their own terms. to be fair, we should look at total taxes paid by liberals versus conservatives and the amounts going to the needy. I won't concede even the notion that voluntary giving as a percentage or absolute number among cons is higher as this is nearly impossible to measure unless the irs opens the book on deductions. even then, when the poor give its generally not deductible since they don't make enough. you do remember that story of the widow's mite, don't you? finally, you once again change a question with another options into an either/or question. it's not only a question of giving a fish or teaching to fish. one can do both and should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts