Christian Discussion Thread VIII: Augustine's Revenge.

[FelrikTheDeleted]

So I've already posted on the RWDT, but I'd like to see what my fellow Christians think about this...

So apparently, Christianity is a polytheistic religion derived from islam Of Jesus of which is monotheistic. islam Of Jesus died 200 years after Jesus. According to the Islam/Muslim Thread.

Check the last two pages of the Islam/Muslim Thread to see more.

(You'll have to check the Islam thread to know more)

Why so shocked ? This is rather basic knowledge about the beliefs held within the religion of Islam...
Did you not learn that in school ?

No my school didn't teach me the beliefs of Islam.

[Germanic Templars]

Why so shocked ? This is rather basic knowledge about the beliefs held within the religion of Islam...
Did you not learn that in school ?

No my school didn't teach me the beliefs of Islam.

Did you go private education?

[FelrikTheDeleted]

No my school didn't teach me the beliefs of Islam.

Did you go private education?

Yep.

[Germanic Templars]

Did you go private education?

Yep.

Weird. They didnt have a world religion class? Then again every catholic school and high school is different.

[FelrikTheDeleted]

Yep.

Weird. They didnt have a world religion class? Then again every catholic school and high school is different.

We had a world religion class, however, the word 'religion' is rather misleading, it was rare that we talked about the beliefs of any religion other than the main thing such as whether they worshiped God or gods, we'd actually talk about problems around the world, how to fix such issues and that kind of thing.

[Meranach]

So I've already posted on the RWDT, but I'd like to see what my fellow Christians think about this...

So apparently, Christianity is a polytheistic religion derived from islam Of Jesus of which is monotheistic. islam Of Jesus died 200 years after Jesus. According to the Islam/Muslim Thread.

Check the last two pages of the Islam/Muslim Thread to see more.

(You'll have to check the Islam thread to know more)

Anyone wishing to see a firsthand account of what Muslims think of Christianity ought to read the account of Patriarch Timothy of Baghdad speaking to Caliph al-Mahdi (8th century). Essentially the conversation was as follows:

Muslims see the Trinity as a form of polytheism. Timothy does not do a great job of explaining it.
Muslims deny that Christ died on the cross or is divine at all, but do acknowledge him as a prophet named Issa.
Christians living under Muslim rule saw Muhammad as a worthy man because he tore people away from polytheism...but couldn't criticize him anyway.
Christians could practice freely but were subjected to a crushing jizya (nonbeliever) tax.

Somewhat related to this specific work: The failure of the Eastern Christians to rein in the Monophysites (those in Egypt known today as Copts who believed Christ had one nature, not two as Chalcedonians do) led to many of these Copts jumping ship because they no longer wanted to deal with ecumenical councils and the will of Constantinople. The Patriarch in this passage is, however, a Nestorian and is also non-Chalcedonian.

[Free Rhenish States]

Yes, Felrik, I came here just because of you.

So I've already posted on the RWDT, but I'd like to see what my fellow Christians think about this...

So apparently, Christianity is a polytheistic religion derived from islam Of Jesus of which is monotheistic. islam Of Jesus died 200 years after Jesus. According to the Islam/Muslim Thread.

Check the last two pages of the Islam/Muslim Thread to see more.

(You'll have to check the Islam thread to know more)

Anyone wishing to see a firsthand account of what Muslims think of Christianity ought to read the account of Patriarch Timothy of Baghdad speaking to Caliph al-Mahdi (8th century). Essentially the conversation was as follows:

Muslims see the Trinity as a form of polytheism. Timothy does not do a great job of explaining it.
Muslims deny that Christ died on the cross or is divine at all, but do acknowledge him as a prophet named Issa.
Christians living under Muslim rule saw Muhammad as a worthy man because he tore people away from polytheism...but couldn't criticize him anyway.
Christians could practice freely but were subjected to a crushing jizya (nonbeliever) tax.

Somewhat related to this specific work: The failure of the Eastern Christians to rein in the Monophysites (those in Egypt known today as Copts who believed Christ had one nature, not two as Chalcedonians do) led to many of these Copts jumping ship because they no longer wanted to deal with ecumenical councils and the will of Constantinople. The Patriarch in this passage is, however, a Nestorian and is also non-Chalcedonian.

This is mostly, but not wholly correct.
1. Jizya is not a crushing tax, contrary to what most of you are liable to think. Jizya in Islam is a little sum that adult men who are fit for military service have to pay. Women, slaves, kids, the old and mentally ill people are freed from that duty.

Adam Metz, a Western historian wrote in the "Islamic Civilization in the Fourth Century of the Hegira":
The people of zimmah paid jizyah as per each one's ability. Jizyah was like civil defense tax. Therefore, only the person who was able to carry weapons paid such tax. Handicapped, hermits, and saints did not pay it unless they were well-off.

Omar Ibnul-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) ordered the leaders of armies: "Do not impose jizyah on women or children. Impose it only on those who are adults." The amount of jizyah was not beyond the ability of men; rather, it was easy to be paid. It did not exceed one dinar per annum during the age of the Prophet (PBUH) and four dinars during the age of the Umayyads. In this way, jizyah was imposed only on the third of the people of zimmah or even less.

Nabil Luqa Babwi, an orthodox Coptic Egyptian writer and scholar, wrote that, "Jizyah was a small amount of money. Over seventy percent of people of other beliefs rather than Islam were exempted: the old, women, children, and monks. It was not a punishment for not being a Muslim but rather a tax against the use of public facilities by non-Muslims and a defense tax against any external attack. This means that Islam did not spread by sword as stated by some Orientalists." Payment of jizyah exempted non-Muslims from two obligations of Muslims: defending the country and payment of Zakat. Is it logical that jizyah was a punishment or a burden on non-Muslims to embrace Islam? Is it logical that non-Muslims leave their beliefs to evade jizyah while in Islam they must pay Zakat which is more than jizyah and they must fight and may die? Comparing jizyah and Zakat, we will find a big difference. If jizyah was not more than four dinars under the Umayyads, Zakat is 2.5 percent from annual savings that are at least equal to twenty karats as determined by the Prophet (PBUH), 1150 US$, after one year of non-use. This is calls nisab or minimum amount. The one who pays the least amount of Zakat pays 28 US$ per annum (2.5% of 1150 US$). It is noteworthy that the one who saves more than 1150 US$ during one year has to pay 2.5% of the total amount as Zakat. Moreover, Zakat includes cattle, harvests, gold, silver, trade money among other things and amounts of Zakat are calculated for each of them in a different manner.



In asking non-Muslims living in an Islamic country to pay jizyah Islam treats them in such a fair manner that is hard to be found throughout history. Islam is the religion of mercy and justice. It was reported that Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) said about the people of zimmah: "whoever treats a covenanted citizen unjustly or takes away a part of his rights or overburdens him or forces something away from him, I will be his enemy on the Day of Judgment." The Prophet's (PBUH) Companions and followers followed in his footsteps. Omar Ibnul-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) told his leaders: "Who is not able to pay jizyah, reduce it for him and who cannot pay, help him." When he saw an old Dhimmi man begging people he said:"Omar said to him, "Old man! We have not done justice to you. In your youth we realized Jizyah from you and have left you to fend for yourself in your old age". He then ordered his leaders not to take jizyah from the old. Moreover, in that case the Muslim state was obliged to allocate a pension for its needy non-Muslim citizen. Caliph Omar Ibn Abdul-Aziz (may Allah be pleased with him) wrote to his Basra governor that, "consider the Dhimmi people in Basra. For the old and the weak give them an allocation from the public treasury."

In the reign of Omar Ibnul-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) collecting jizyah was mercifully done. One of the leaders brought a lot of jizyah money to Omar who then told him, "It seems you squeezed people." But the people told him that "No, we took only the right of the state voluntarily and without coercion." Omar said, "Thank Allah that He has not made such matters in may reign." When Omar was dying he did not forget to tell Muslims to take care of Dhimmi people, "I demand the caliph after me to treat Dhimmi people fairly, fulfill their covenant, defend them and do not overburden them."


In Brief

In brief, Muslims dealt fairly with non-Muslims in their state. Those were asked to pay jizyah, a small amount of money, as a contribution to the state. Not all Dhimmi paid jizyah; almost two thirds of them did not. To say that jizyah was a heavy burden to force non-Muslims to embrace Islam is misleading and ridiculous. Once they become Muslims they should have paid more than that in Zakat and they should have died in fight.

Jizyah was not a punishment for non-Muslims. It was rather a tax by which non-Muslims do not fight enemies and enjoy the protection of Muslims. In order to clarify this point, Shaikh Yusuf Al-Qaradhawi deliverd a word during Iqra Channel Fiqh-Media Forum held on 8-9 October 2005 in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia under the title of "Islam Considers Humanity as One Family" . He said:

For more clarification and for refuting each allegation and accusation I would like to mention what the noted historian Sir Thomas W. Arnold in his Call to Islam, states:

This tax was not imposed on the Christians, as some would have us think, as a penalty for their refusal to accept the Muslim faith, but was paid by them in common with the other Dhimmis or non-Muslim subjects of the states whose religion precluded them from serving in the army, in return for the protection secured for them by the arms of the Musalmans. When the people of Hirah contributed the sum agreed upon, they expressly mentioned that they paid this Jizyah on condition that 'the Muslims and their leader protect us from those who would oppress us, whether they be Muslims or others.' …the jizyah was levied on the able-bodied males, in lieu of the military service they would have been called upon to perform had they been Muslim men; and it is very noticeable that when any Christian people served in the Muslim army, they were exempted from the payment of this tax. Such was the case with the tribe of Al-Jurajimah, a Christian tribe in the neighborhood of Antioch, who made peace with the Muslims, promising them to be their allies and fight on their side in battle. In his covenant with the people of certain cities near Al-Haira, Khalid ibn Al-Walid recorded "If we are able to protect you, we deserve the collection of jizyah."
The seriousness with which the Muslims took their covenants with the non-Muslims is well illustrated by the following incident. During the reign of the second caliph, `Umar Ibn Al-Khattab, the Roman emperor Heraclius raised a huge army to repel the Muslim forces. It was thus incumbent upon the Muslims to concentrate their efforts on the battle. When the commander of Muslims, Abu `Ubaydah heard this news, he wrote to his officials in all conquered cities in Syria and ordered them to return the jizyah which had been levied in those cities. He also addressed the public saying, "We are returning your money because we know that the enemy has gathered troops. By the terms stipulated in the covenant, you have obliged us to protect you. However, since we are now unable to fulfill these conditions, we have returned to you what you paid to us. We shall abide by the terms agreed upon in the covenant, if Allah helps us to rout the enemy.

Thus, a huge amount was taken from the state treasury and returned to the Christians, making them very happy. They prayed for and blessed the Muslim commanders. They exclaimed, "May Allah help you to overcome your enemies and return you to us safely. If the enemy were in your place, they would never have returned anything to us, but rather they would have taken all our remaining property.

The jizyah was also imposed on Muslim men who could afford to buy their way out of military service. If a Christian group elected to serve in the state's military forces, it was exempted from the jizyah. Historical examples of this abound. Al-Jurajimah, a Christian tribe living near Antioch (now in Turkey), by undertaking to support Muslims and to fight on the battle front, did not have to pay the jizyah and were entitled to a share of the captured booty.

When the Islamic conquests reached northern Persia in AH 22, a similar covenant was established with a tribe living on the boundaries of those territories. They were consequently exempted from jizyah in view of their military services.

Other examples are to be found during the history of the Ottoman Empire. The Migaris, a group of Albanian Christians, were exempted from the jizyah for undertaking to watch and guard the mountain ranges of Cithaeron and Geraned (which stretch to the Gulf of Corinth). Christians who served as the vanguard of the Turkish army for road repairs, bridge construction, and so on, were exempted from the kharaj (land tax). As a reward, they were also provided with some lands, free of all taxes.

The Christians of Hydra were exempted when they agreed to supply a group of 250 strong men for the Muslim naval fleet. The Armatolis, Christians from southern Romania, were also exempted from the tax, for they constituted a vital element in the Turkish armed forces during the 16th and 17th centuries. The Mirdites, an Albanian Catholic clan who lived in the mountains of northern Scutari, were exempted on the condition that they would offer an armored battalion in wartime. The jizyah was also not imposed on the Greek Christians who had supervised the building of viaducts that carried water to Constantinople, nor on those who guarded the ammunition in that city, as just compensation for their services to the state. However, Egyptian Muslim peasants exempted from military service were still required to pay the jizyah.

2. Muslims also reject the original sin. Each soul carries and is responsible for the sins of itself and itself only, with an exception of people who lead people astray from the right path, these will also be responsible for the sins of those they had fooled.

[Nordengrund]

Weird. They didnt have a world religion class? Then again every catholic school and high school is different.

We had a world religion class, however, the word 'religion' is rather misleading, it was rare that we talked about the beliefs of any religion other than the main thing such as whether they worshiped God or gods, we'd actually talk about problems around the world, how to fix such issues and that kind of thing.

It was like that an SDA school I attended. We rarely discussed religion outside of Seventh Day Adventism. I generally like them, but when they talked about other Christian denominations, they acted like Sunday worship is apostasy.

The only time we really discussed other religions were the pagan religions found in the OT.

[Germanic Templars]

Weird. They didnt have a world religion class? Then again every catholic school and high school is different.

We had a world religion class, however, the word 'religion' is rather misleading, it was rare that we talked about the beliefs of any religion other than the main thing such as whether they worshiped God or gods, we'd actually talk about problems around the world, how to fix such issues and that kind of thing.

Yeah, no, we talked about different religions starting with Christianity, Judaism, and Islam and some of their branch offs. Then we went into Hinduism and that is where we stopped due to time.

[FelrikTheDeleted]

We had a world religion class, however, the word 'religion' is rather misleading, it was rare that we talked about the beliefs of any religion other than the main thing such as whether they worshiped God or gods, we'd actually talk about problems around the world, how to fix such issues and that kind of thing.

It was like that an SDA school I attended. We rarely discussed religion outside of Seventh Day Adventism. I generally like them, but when they talked about other Christian denominations, they acted like Sunday worship is apostasy.

The only time we really discussed other religions were the pagan religions found in the OT.

Unlucky in concerns to Sunday Worship being considered apostasy.

The only religion we went in depth about was Buddhism, keep in mind this is a Catholic school, most kids could hardly tell anyone about the bible, half of my class mates didn't even know who Joseph or Mary were.

[Nordengrund]

It was like that an SDA school I attended. We rarely discussed religion outside of Seventh Day Adventism. I generally like them, but when they talked about other Christian denominations, they acted like Sunday worship is apostasy.

The only time we really discussed other religions were the pagan religions found in the OT.

Unlucky in concerns to Sunday Worship being considered apostasy.

The only religion we went in depth about was Buddhism, keep in mind this is a Catholic school, most kids could hardly tell anyone about the bible, half of my class mates didn't even know who Joseph or Mary were.

I was raised Baptist, but I didn't know who Abraham was until I went to the SDA school.

[FelrikTheDeleted]

Unlucky in concerns to Sunday Worship being considered apostasy.

The only religion we went in depth about was Buddhism, keep in mind this is a Catholic school, most kids could hardly tell anyone about the bible, half of my class mates didn't even know who Joseph or Mary were.

I was raised Baptist, but I didn't know who Abraham was until I went to the SDA school.

Unfortunate.

[Nordengrund]

I was raised Baptist, but I didn't know who Abraham was until I went to the SDA school.

Unfortunate.

Quite

[United Marxist Nations]

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/6293

We created Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good to organize for a
moment like this. But I think it lacks the leadership to do so now.
Likewise Catholics United. Like most Spring movements, I think this
one will have to be bottom up. I'll discuss with Tara. Kathleen
Kennedy Townsend is the other person to consult.
On 2/10/12, Sandy Newman <sandynewman@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, John,
>
> This whole controversy with the bishops opposing contraceptive coverage even
> though 98% of Catholic women (and their conjugal partners) have used
> contraception has me thinking . . . There needs to be a Catholic Spring, in
> which Catholics themselves demand the end of a middle ages dictatorship and
> the beginning of a little democracy and respect for gender equality in the
> Catholic church. Is contraceptive coverage an issue around which that could
> happen. The Bishops will undoubtedly continue the fight. Does the Catholic
> Hospital Association support of the Administration's new policy, together
> with "the 98%" create an opportunity?
>
> Of course, this idea may just reveal my total lack of understanding of the
> Catholic church, the economic power it can bring to bear against nuns and
> priests who count on it for their maintenance, etc. Even if the idea isn't
> crazy, I don't qualify to be involved and I have not thought at all about
> how one would "plant the seeds of the revolution," or who would plant them.
> Just wondering . . .
>
> Hoping you're well, and getting to focus your time in the ways you want.
>
> Sandy
>
> Sandy Newman, President
> Voices for Progress
> 202.669.8754
> voicesforprogress.org

TIL, people high-up in the Clinton organization are unironically creating organizations with the hope of undermining the Catholic Church.

[Camaalbakrius]

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/6293

We created Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good to organize for a
moment like this. But I think it lacks the leadership to do so now.
Likewise Catholics United. Like most Spring movements, I think this
one will have to be bottom up. I'll discuss with Tara. Kathleen
Kennedy Townsend is the other person to consult.
On 2/10/12, Sandy Newman <sandynewman@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, John,
>
> This whole controversy with the bishops opposing contraceptive coverage even
> though 98% of Catholic women (and their conjugal partners) have used
> contraception has me thinking . . . There needs to be a Catholic Spring, in
> which Catholics themselves demand the end of a middle ages dictatorship and
> the beginning of a little democracy and respect for gender equality in the
> Catholic church. Is contraceptive coverage an issue around which that could
> happen. The Bishops will undoubtedly continue the fight. Does the Catholic
> Hospital Association support of the Administration's new policy, together
> with "the 98%" create an opportunity?
>
> Of course, this idea may just reveal my total lack of understanding of the
> Catholic church, the economic power it can bring to bear against nuns and
> priests who count on it for their maintenance, etc. Even if the idea isn't
> crazy, I don't qualify to be involved and I have not thought at all about
> how one would "plant the seeds of the revolution," or who would plant them.
> Just wondering . . .
>
> Hoping you're well, and getting to focus your time in the ways you want.
>
> Sandy
>
> Sandy Newman, President
> Voices for Progress
> 202.669.8754
> voicesforprogress.org

TIL, people high-up in the Clinton organization are unironically creating organizations with the hope of undermining the Catholic Church.

No. NO. NO! She cannot do this! The Church doctrine isn't chosen by democratic ways! You can't force democracy onto a religious system! IT DOESN'T WORK LIKE THAT

[Soldati Senza Confini]

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/6293



TIL, people high-up in the Clinton organization are unironically creating organizations with the hope of undermining the Catholic Church.

No. NO. NO! She cannot do this! The Church doctrine isn't chosen by democratic ways! You can't force democracy onto a religious system! IT DOESN'T WORK LIKE THAT

Well, the main issue Clinton's aides have is that they, indeed, do not understand how the Catholic Church works.

They don't force people to do anything. They tell you how to live your life, but you have a choice. You can either do it, or not.

Personally, I don't really care about following the anti-contraception stuff because I don't want to bring a child into the world with an unstable family and he'll have issues later on in life. If several denominations think I'm wrong that's fine, but I'm not placing much faith into the Catholic Church telling me what's best for my life.

[Salus Maior]

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/6293

We created Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good to organize for a
moment like this. But I think it lacks the leadership to do so now.
Likewise Catholics United. Like most Spring movements, I think this
one will have to be bottom up. I'll discuss with Tara. Kathleen
Kennedy Townsend is the other person to consult.
On 2/10/12, Sandy Newman <sandynewman@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, John,
>
> This whole controversy with the bishops opposing contraceptive coverage even
> though 98% of Catholic women (and their conjugal partners) have used
> contraception has me thinking . . . There needs to be a Catholic Spring, in
> which Catholics themselves demand the end of a middle ages dictatorship and
> the beginning of a little democracy and respect for gender equality in the
> Catholic church. Is contraceptive coverage an issue around which that could
> happen. The Bishops will undoubtedly continue the fight. Does the Catholic
> Hospital Association support of the Administration's new policy, together
> with "the 98%" create an opportunity?
>
> Of course, this idea may just reveal my total lack of understanding of the
> Catholic church, the economic power it can bring to bear against nuns and
> priests who count on it for their maintenance, etc. Even if the idea isn't
> crazy, I don't qualify to be involved and I have not thought at all about
> how one would "plant the seeds of the revolution," or who would plant them.
> Just wondering . . .
>
> Hoping you're well, and getting to focus your time in the ways you want.
>
> Sandy
>
> Sandy Newman, President
> Voices for Progress
> 202.669.8754
> voicesforprogress.org

TIL, people high-up in the Clinton organization are unironically creating organizations with the hope of undermining the Catholic Church.

LOL, they can try. If the Church hasn't changed doctrine for anyone in the past 400 years I doubt they will just because of some ambitious but ultimately foolish politicians trying to stir up trouble.

If the Gates of Hell can't prevail against the Church, these idiots won't.

[Camaalbakrius]

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/6293



TIL, people high-up in the Clinton organization are unironically creating organizations with the hope of undermining the Catholic Church.

LOL, they can try. If the Church hasn't changed doctrine for anyone in the past 400 years I doubt they will just because of some ambitious but ultimately foolish politicians trying to stir up trouble.

She even says that she has a lack of understanding of the Catholic Church. WELL CLEARLY SHE DOES, we cannot be swayed by democratic votes. The church isn't democratic. It won't be. She's stupid if she really thinks it can work.

[Salus Maior]

LOL, they can try. If the Church hasn't changed doctrine for anyone in the past 400 years I doubt they will just because of some ambitious but ultimately foolish politicians trying to stir up trouble.

She even says that she has a lack of understanding of the Catholic Church. WELL CLEARLY SHE DOES, we cannot be swayed by democratic votes. The church isn't democratic. It won't be. She's stupid if she really thinks it can work.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrzfbbgJu8M Reminds me of this.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

LOL, they can try. If the Church hasn't changed doctrine for anyone in the past 400 years I doubt they will just because of some ambitious but ultimately foolish politicians trying to stir up trouble.

She even says that she has a lack of understanding of the Catholic Church. WELL CLEARLY SHE DOES, we cannot be swayed by democratic votes. The church isn't democratic. It won't be. She's stupid if she really thinks it can work.

Like I said, is not ONLY the fact she doesn't understand the Church isn't democratic, is that people always have a choice in what to do anyways, and she is conflating church doctrine with the choices people have.

As far as I know, no priest is gonna tell you "you either stop using contraception or I'll put a gun to your head and blow your brains out". So you still have a choice what to do. You can either do what the Church says, or not. They're not gonna tell you what you're going to do, they tell you what you should do.

[The Alma Mater]

She even says that she has a lack of understanding of the Catholic Church. WELL CLEARLY SHE DOES, we cannot be swayed by democratic votes. The church isn't democratic. It won't be. She's stupid if she really thinks it can work.

Like I said, is not ONLY the fact she doesn't understand the Church isn't democratic, is that people always have a choice in what to do anyways, and she is conflating church doctrine with the choices people have.

As far as I know, no priest is gonna tell you "you either stop using contraception or I'll put a gun to your head and blow your brains out".

"or you will burn in Hell for all eternity" is somewhat comparable though

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Like I said, is not ONLY the fact she doesn't understand the Church isn't democratic, is that people always have a choice in what to do anyways, and she is conflating church doctrine with the choices people have.

As far as I know, no priest is gonna tell you "you either stop using contraception or I'll put a gun to your head and blow your brains out".

"or you will burn in Hell for all eternity" is somewhat comparable though

Eh, I've been told that hundreds of times it has lost its meaning

You come to realize, as an adult, that you can't always do what's noble for the Church. I particularly just tend to take the Church's teachings as "advice". It's certainly useful, but sometimes I have to deviate from their "high and noble path" in order to find a resolution.

[Camaalbakrius]

She even says that she has a lack of understanding of the Catholic Church. WELL CLEARLY SHE DOES, we cannot be swayed by democratic votes. The church isn't democratic. It won't be. She's stupid if she really thinks it can work.

Like I said, is not ONLY the fact she doesn't understand the Church isn't democratic, is that people always have a choice in what to do anyways, and she is conflating church doctrine with the choices people have.

As far as I know, no priest is gonna tell you "you either stop using contraception or I'll put a gun to your head and blow your brains out". So you still have a choice what to do. You can either do what the Church says, or not. They're not gonna tell you what you're going to do, they tell you what you should do.

Exactly. If you want to get an abortion, then ok. You do that. But know that it is still murder in the eyes of God. If you take your faith seriously, think about what consequences killing an unborn child will have on you when you die. If you take your faith seriously, then think about what is best for the child rather than thinking about yourself.

[Luminesa]

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/6293

We created Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good to organize for a
moment like this. But I think it lacks the leadership to do so now.
Likewise Catholics United. Like most Spring movements, I think this
one will have to be bottom up. I'll discuss with Tara. Kathleen
Kennedy Townsend is the other person to consult.
On 2/10/12, Sandy Newman <sandynewman@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, John,
>
> This whole controversy with the bishops opposing contraceptive coverage even
> though 98% of Catholic women (and their conjugal partners) have used
> contraception has me thinking . . . There needs to be a Catholic Spring, in
> which Catholics themselves demand the end of a middle ages dictatorship and
> the beginning of a little democracy and respect for gender equality in the
> Catholic church. Is contraceptive coverage an issue around which that could
> happen. The Bishops will undoubtedly continue the fight. Does the Catholic
> Hospital Association support of the Administration's new policy, together
> with "the 98%" create an opportunity?
>
> Of course, this idea may just reveal my total lack of understanding of the
> Catholic church, the economic power it can bring to bear against nuns and
> priests who count on it for their maintenance, etc. Even if the idea isn't
> crazy, I don't qualify to be involved and I have not thought at all about
> how one would "plant the seeds of the revolution," or who would plant them.
> Just wondering . . .
>
> Hoping you're well, and getting to focus your time in the ways you want.
>
> Sandy
>
> Sandy Newman, President
> Voices for Progress
> 202.669.8754
> voicesforprogress.org

TIL, people high-up in the Clinton organization are unironically creating organizations with the hope of undermining the Catholic Church.

Meanwhile, Chip Ke(k)lly is a terrible coach, and grass is green. Carry on my wayward son.

[Camaalbakrius]

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/6293



TIL, people high-up in the Clinton organization are unironically creating organizations with the hope of undermining the Catholic Church.

Meanwhile, Chip Ke(k)lly is a terrible coach, and grass is green. Carry on my wayward son.

Speaking of interesting news, did you hear? Scientists recently confirmed that yes, water is in fact wet.