NATION

PASSWORD

The Christian Discussion thread IX: Pelagius Rising.

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

What is your denomination?

Roman Catholic
273
34%
Eastern Orthodox
67
8%
Non-Chalcedonian (Oriental Orthodox, Church of the East, etc.)
6
1%
Anglican/Episcopalian
53
7%
Lutheran or Reformed (including Calvinist, Presbyterian, etc.)
95
12%
Methodist
29
4%
Baptist
89
11%
Other Evangelical Protestant (Pentecostal, Charismatic, etc.)
52
7%
Restorationist (LDS Movement, Jehovah's Witness, etc.)
18
2%
Other Christian
113
14%
 
Total votes : 795

User avatar
Hakons
Senator
 
Posts: 4910
Founded: Jul 14, 2015
Moralistic Democracy

Postby Hakons » Sat Sep 09, 2017 1:47 pm

Tarsonis Survivors wrote:
Hakons wrote:
I have a... low opinion of secularism. It has been largely destructive to Christianity as people pushed for secularism beyond its original intent, in my opinion.

It is a Christian duty to help refugees, secular nation or not. The United States is secular, yet we must push for national policy that is suggested by the Gospel. No other nation on Earth has as much capacity to do good works than we.


The gospel doesn't suggest a national policy, Christ had little interest in the affairs of state. Any national policy derived from the Gospel or Christian theology at large, would largely be open to interpretation.

Additionally you're presenting an overly simplistic problem in which the question is "do we help them or not". With no other considerations the obvious answer is A: help them. But in the course of national policy, there is no simple issue.


Consider this thought experiment. You're on a life boat that's almost almost full. There are people in the water who will drown if you do not help them. But if you help too many, the boat will sink and you'll all drown. How do you decide who to help and who not to help? And you've already got all those people on the boat, who already have the perilous task of surviving at sea i na row boat, you're potentially risking their lives to bring on more people, more mouths to feed, let alone the risk of sinking.

What do you do?


An interesting scenario :p

We would ask for volunteers of who would be willing to parish at sea for the sake of people in the water. Presumably, there wouldn't be very many volunteers, so the people in the water that are the smallest would be rescued. This is because they are most in peril in the water, and they also need less food and water. We would take in as many as we could fit.

Now, I don't think the United States is anywhere close to being full or almost full of refugees. Once again, it is our Christian duty to advocate for refugee programs.
“That word, ‘conservative,’ is understood by people in different ways. Suppose you say that when we did arithmetic, we learned that two plus two equals four. It’s still the same, so am I then ‘conservative’ for saying so?” - Cardinal Arinze

User avatar
The Parkus Empire
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43030
Founded: Sep 12, 2005
Ex-Nation

Postby The Parkus Empire » Sat Sep 09, 2017 1:50 pm

Tarsonis Survivors wrote:
Hakons wrote:
I have a... low opinion of secularism. It has been largely destructive to Christianity as people pushed for secularism beyond its original intent, in my opinion.

It is a Christian duty to help refugees, secular nation or not. The United States is secular, yet we must push for national policy that is suggested by the Gospel. No other nation on Earth has as much capacity to do good works than we.


The gospel doesn't suggest a national policy, Christ had little interest in the affairs of state. Any national policy derived from the Gospel or Christian theology at large, would largely be open to interpretation.

Additionally you're presenting an overly simplistic problem in which the question is "do we help them or not". With no other considerations the obvious answer is A: help them. But in the course of national policy, there is no simple issue.


Consider this thought experiment. You're on a life boat that's almost almost full. There are people in the water who will drown if you do not help them. But if you help too many, the boat will sink and you'll all drown. How do you decide who to help and who not to help? And you've already got all those people on the boat, who already have the perilous task of surviving at sea i na row boat, you're potentially risking their lives to bring on more people, more mouths to feed, let alone the risk of sinking.

What do you do?

You jump off the boat.
American Orthodox: one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church.
Jesus is Allah ن
Burkean conservative
Homophobic
Anti-feminist sexist
♂Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know men and women aren't the same.♀

User avatar
The Parkus Empire
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43030
Founded: Sep 12, 2005
Ex-Nation

Postby The Parkus Empire » Sat Sep 09, 2017 1:53 pm

Well it looks like the Palestinian Orthodox want their Patriarch gone. Again. Same thing as for the last one, for selling church property to Israel. The last one was defrocked.
American Orthodox: one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church.
Jesus is Allah ن
Burkean conservative
Homophobic
Anti-feminist sexist
♂Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know men and women aren't the same.♀

User avatar
United Muscovite Nations
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 20773
Founded: Feb 01, 2017
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby United Muscovite Nations » Sat Sep 09, 2017 1:54 pm

The Parkus Empire wrote:Well it looks like the Palestinian Orthodox want their Patriarch gone. Again. Same thing as for the last one, for selling church property to Israel. The last one was defrocked.

It's a little more complicated than that, I think. IIRC, a lot were angry at him because he lost the court case against Israel about that previous land sale.
Formerly United Marxist Nations, Dec 02, 2011- Feb 01, 2017. +33,837 posts Eastern Orthodox Christian. Christian Anarchist and Monarchist. Supporter of Pan-Arabism. 22-year old Doomer
Even the apologists of industrialism have been obliged to admit that some economic evils follow in the wake of the machines. These are such as overproduction, unemployment, and a growing inequality in the distribution of wealth. But the remedies proposed by the apologists are always homeopathic. They expect the evils to disappear when we have bigger and better machines, and more of them. Their remedial programs, therefore, look forward to more industrialism.
Pro and Anti: https://www.nationstates.net/nation=uni ... id=1166847

User avatar
The Parkus Empire
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43030
Founded: Sep 12, 2005
Ex-Nation

Postby The Parkus Empire » Sat Sep 09, 2017 1:58 pm

United Muscovite Nations wrote:
The Parkus Empire wrote:Well it looks like the Palestinian Orthodox want their Patriarch gone. Again. Same thing as for the last one, for selling church property to Israel. The last one was defrocked.

It's a little more complicated than that, I think. IIRC, a lot were angry at him because he lost the court case against Israel about that previous land sale.

Yes, but now they're accusing him of selling church property to Israel and saying the books should be examined.

I think a lot of the issues would be fixed if the Greeks stopped having a monopoly on that see, and a Palestinian was appointed more often.
American Orthodox: one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church.
Jesus is Allah ن
Burkean conservative
Homophobic
Anti-feminist sexist
♂Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know men and women aren't the same.♀

User avatar
Minzerland II
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5589
Founded: Aug 27, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby Minzerland II » Sat Sep 09, 2017 7:41 pm

Pasong Tirad wrote:
Minzerland II wrote:Truly, if we were to do as you say we should, then we would be overwhelmed with the sheer number of the unfortunate coming to us for help. We cannot help nor welcome everyone, not always; we have our own problems to deal with without adding more to the mix. We should do as much as we can according to our teachings, of course, but not suicidally so, not at the expense of ourselves and our sense.

Magis, dude. We must always be asking "What more can I be doing for Christ?" There's always more that can be done. Always. Restricting borders just because you're able to take in an arbitrary quota is ridiculous.

We should do as much as we possibly can without the expense of ourselves and our sense. This foolishness will only make the situation of our people and theirs even worse, untenable even. As I said, we cannot help everyone. We will help more people in the long term, in fact, if we don't go so overboard.
Previous Profile: Minzerland
Donkey Advocate & Herald of Donkeydom
St Anselm of Canterbury wrote:[…]who ever heard of anything having two mothers or two fathers? (Monologion, pg. 63)

User avatar
Pasong Tirad
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9222
Founded: May 31, 2007
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Pasong Tirad » Sat Sep 09, 2017 8:03 pm

Minzerland II wrote:
Pasong Tirad wrote:Magis, dude. We must always be asking "What more can I be doing for Christ?" There's always more that can be done. Always. Restricting borders just because you're able to take in an arbitrary quota is ridiculous.

We should do as much as we possibly can without the expense of ourselves and our sense. This foolishness will only make the situation of our people and theirs even worse, untenable even. As I said, we cannot help everyone. We will help more people in the long term, in fact, if we don't go so overboard.

If you're American, I don't think you're even close to having done as much as you can. I can think of very few countries who have done as much as they realistically can. The problem is, we CAN help everyone. Many nations out there just aren't willing to. Imagine if V4 were willing to take in their fair share of refugees, for example. Saint John Paul II would be weeping now for what Poland is doing (unless I'm mistaken and they've already taken in a good amount of refugees).

User avatar
Pasong Tirad
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9222
Founded: May 31, 2007
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Pasong Tirad » Sat Sep 09, 2017 8:04 pm

The Parkus Empire wrote:
Diopolis wrote:To a much lesser extent than the other protestants at the time. The KJV reads fairly similarly to a more awkwardly poetic douay-rheims. Both are fairly good translations liberal Christians randomly demonize because of who uses them, albeit complicated by the difference in vocabulary between the seventeenth century and modern day.

They demonize the translations precisely because they are accurate. Liberal Christian translations tend to be...liberal.

Okay I have to ask, what the hell is a "liberal Christian translation?" I use NABRE same as everybody else here.

User avatar
Bari
Diplomat
 
Posts: 873
Founded: Jun 27, 2012
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Bari » Sat Sep 09, 2017 10:34 pm

Pasong Tirad wrote:
The Parkus Empire wrote:They demonize the translations precisely because they are accurate. Liberal Christian translations tend to be...liberal.

Okay I have to ask, what the hell is a "liberal Christian translation?" I use NABRE same as everybody else here.

I use Douai-Rheims, Challoner revision, almost exclusively. But I guess you weren't speaking on my behalf.
Hiram Ier
Royaume de Bari
Que Dieu bénisse la Bari
Pour la plus grande gloire de Dieu

User avatar
Pasong Tirad
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9222
Founded: May 31, 2007
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Pasong Tirad » Sat Sep 09, 2017 11:16 pm

Bari wrote:
Pasong Tirad wrote:Okay I have to ask, what the hell is a "liberal Christian translation?" I use NABRE same as everybody else here.

I use Douai-Rheims, Challoner revision, almost exclusively. But I guess you weren't speaking on my behalf.

Apologies. By "same as everybody else here," I meant my country, where if you're not using the Filipino translations, NABRE is the go-to translation for Catholics.

User avatar
Minzerland II
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5589
Founded: Aug 27, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby Minzerland II » Sun Sep 10, 2017 12:23 am

Pasong Tirad wrote:
Minzerland II wrote:We should do as much as we possibly can without the expense of ourselves and our sense. This foolishness will only make the situation of our people and theirs even worse, untenable even. As I said, we cannot help everyone. We will help more people in the long term, in fact, if we don't go so overboard.

If you're American, I don't think you're even close to having done as much as you can. I can think of very few countries who have done as much as they realistically can. The problem is, we CAN help everyone. Many nations out there just aren't willing to. Imagine if V4 were willing to take in their fair share of refugees, for example. Saint John Paul II would be weeping now for what Poland is doing (unless I'm mistaken and they've already taken in a good amount of refugees).

I am not American, but Americans are among the most generous and charitable people in the world, along with my very own country of Australia. They are not lacking in either charity or generosity. No you cannot, that is literally logistically impossible; countries and organisations already have difficulty feeding, housing and caring for their own populations, no doubt it would be much harder to do the same for every unfortunate person in the world. You would do well not to drown in your compassion.
Previous Profile: Minzerland
Donkey Advocate & Herald of Donkeydom
St Anselm of Canterbury wrote:[…]who ever heard of anything having two mothers or two fathers? (Monologion, pg. 63)

User avatar
Pasong Tirad
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9222
Founded: May 31, 2007
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Pasong Tirad » Sun Sep 10, 2017 5:30 am

Minzerland II wrote:
Pasong Tirad wrote:If you're American, I don't think you're even close to having done as much as you can. I can think of very few countries who have done as much as they realistically can. The problem is, we CAN help everyone. Many nations out there just aren't willing to. Imagine if V4 were willing to take in their fair share of refugees, for example. Saint John Paul II would be weeping now for what Poland is doing (unless I'm mistaken and they've already taken in a good amount of refugees).

I am not American, but Americans are among the most generous and charitable people in the world, along with my very own country of Australia. They are not lacking in either charity or generosity. No you cannot, that is literally logistically impossible; countries and organisations already have difficulty feeding, housing and caring for their own populations, no doubt it would be much harder to do the same for every unfortunate person in the world. You would do well not to drown in your compassion.

And I believe you can, people just aren't willing to inconvenience themselves for the convenience of the suffering.

"We cannot be Christians who continually put up “do not enter” signs, nor can we consider that this space is mine or yours alone, or that we can claim ownership of something that is absolutely not ours. The Church is not ours, brothers and sisters, she is God’s; he is the owner of the temple and the field; everyone has a place, everyone is invited to find here, and among us, his or her nourishment. Everyone"

https://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco ... ellin.html

User avatar
Minzerland II
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5589
Founded: Aug 27, 2016
Ex-Nation

Postby Minzerland II » Sun Sep 10, 2017 6:55 am

Pasong Tirad wrote:
Minzerland II wrote:I am not American, but Americans are among the most generous and charitable people in the world, along with my very own country of Australia. They are not lacking in either charity or generosity. No you cannot, that is literally logistically impossible; countries and organisations already have difficulty feeding, housing and caring for their own populations, no doubt it would be much harder to do the same for every unfortunate person in the world. You would do well not to drown in your compassion.

And I believe you can, people just aren't willing to inconvenience themselves for the convenience of the suffering.

"We cannot be Christians who continually put up “do not enter” signs, nor can we consider that this space is mine or yours alone, or that we can claim ownership of something that is absolutely not ours. The Church is not ours, brothers and sisters, she is God’s; he is the owner of the temple and the field; everyone has a place, everyone is invited to find here, and among us, his or her nourishment. Everyone"

https://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco ... ellin.html

Exactly, not everyone is willing to inconvenience themselves, their families, their friends, their countries, their countrymen, etc.; they choose to prioritise them, as do I, not some foreigner in need of help somewhere far away, who may not even help them if they were ever in need. Not everyone is Christian in America or Australia, either. This all ignoring the fact that I cannot see any feasible way in which to help everyone, as you suggest we do. I think your proposition is rather shortsighted and unrealistic, instead of alleviating the problem you'll exacerbate it so much so that it becomes untenable, as has been said previously by another poster, leading to even more suffering.

EDIT: Spelling
Last edited by Minzerland II on Mon Sep 11, 2017 12:14 am, edited 1 time in total.
Previous Profile: Minzerland
Donkey Advocate & Herald of Donkeydom
St Anselm of Canterbury wrote:[…]who ever heard of anything having two mothers or two fathers? (Monologion, pg. 63)

User avatar
Pasong Tirad
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9222
Founded: May 31, 2007
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Pasong Tirad » Sun Sep 10, 2017 7:03 am

Minzerland II wrote:
Pasong Tirad wrote:And I believe you can, people just aren't willing to inconvenience themselves for the convenience of the suffering.

"We cannot be Christians who continually put up “do not enter” signs, nor can we consider that this space is mine or yours alone, or that we can claim ownership of something that is absolutely not ours. The Church is not ours, brothers and sisters, she is God’s; he is the owner of the temple and the field; everyone has a place, everyone is invited to find here, and among us, his or her nourishment. Everyone"

https://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco ... ellin.html

Exactly, not everyone is willing to inconvenience themselves, their families, their friends, their countries their countrymen, etc.; they choose to prioritise them, as do I, not some foreigner in need of help somewhere far away, who may not even help them if they were ever in need. Not everyone is Christian in America or Australia, either. This all ignoring the fact that I cannot see any feasible way in which to help everyone, as you suggest we do. I think your proposition is rather shortsighted and unrealistic, instead of alleviating the problem you'll exacerbate it so much so that it becomes untenable, as has been said previously by another poster, leading to even more suffering.

It's not about you. It's not about whether or not they will return the kindness. That doesn't matter. They need help now. You, have the capacity to help but choose not to. Firefighters don't ask people in a burning building if they're Muslim, if they voted Liberal or if their house is insured. They just go in.
Last edited by Pasong Tirad on Sun Sep 10, 2017 7:05 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
The Parkus Empire
Post Czar
 
Posts: 43030
Founded: Sep 12, 2005
Ex-Nation

Postby The Parkus Empire » Sun Sep 10, 2017 7:14 am

Pasong Tirad wrote:
The Parkus Empire wrote:They demonize the translations precisely because they are accurate. Liberal Christian translations tend to be...liberal.

Okay I have to ask, what the hell is a "liberal Christian translation?" I use NABRE same as everybody else here.
I refer to liberal Protestant translations.
American Orthodox: one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church.
Jesus is Allah ن
Burkean conservative
Homophobic
Anti-feminist sexist
♂Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know men and women aren't the same.♀

User avatar
Tarsonis Survivors
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15693
Founded: Feb 03, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Tarsonis Survivors » Sun Sep 10, 2017 7:42 am

Hakons wrote:
Tarsonis Survivors wrote:
The gospel doesn't suggest a national policy, Christ had little interest in the affairs of state. Any national policy derived from the Gospel or Christian theology at large, would largely be open to interpretation.

Additionally you're presenting an overly simplistic problem in which the question is "do we help them or not". With no other considerations the obvious answer is A: help them. But in the course of national policy, there is no simple issue.


Consider this thought experiment. You're on a life boat that's almost almost full. There are people in the water who will drown if you do not help them. But if you help too many, the boat will sink and you'll all drown. How do you decide who to help and who not to help? And you've already got all those people on the boat, who already have the perilous task of surviving at sea i na row boat, you're potentially risking their lives to bring on more people, more mouths to feed, let alone the risk of sinking.

What do you do?


An interesting scenario :p

We would ask for volunteers of who would be willing to parish at sea for the sake of people in the water. Presumably, there wouldn't be very many volunteers, so the people in the water that are the smallest would be rescued. This is because they are most in peril in the water, and they also need less food and water. We would take in as many as we could fit.

Now, I don't think the United States is anywhere close to being full or almost full of refugees. Once again, it is our Christian duty to advocate for refugee programs.


Why would you ask people to get out of the boat? What makes their value less than the people in the water. And presumably if nobody volunteers, and you only want to take the small ones, try conveying that reality to the people already in the water.

The point is not to be an obvious parallel to the current situation, but to illuminate the point you keep seeming to over look: there's always other considerations, and it's more than just the doom and gloom considerations. There's social, economic, political, and ethical considerations. Take a look at Canada, they took in refugees and now they're facing a potential economic crisis over the cost of supporting them.

Also consider this: Saudi Arabia had facilities already in place that could house a majority off these refugeess. They could have stayed in the Middle East, instead of being transported to a foreign region, but SA didn't take any, and nobody put pressure on them too. Why should the west shoulder this burden.

Again the claim "it's our duty to take refugees" sounds good on paper, but it ignores the messy reality of governance.
Ecclesiastes 1:18 "For in much wisdom is much vexation, and those who increase knowledge increase sorrow"
Galatians 6:7 " Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for you reap whatever you sow."
1 Corinthians 5:12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?
T. Stevens: "I don't hold with equality in all things, but I believe in equality under the Law."
James I of Aragon "Have you ever considered that our position is Idolatry to the Rabbi?"
A. Lincoln: "My concern is not whether God is on our side, My greatest concern is to be on God's side."
Debating Christian Theology with Non-Christians pretty much anybody be like

User avatar
Bari
Diplomat
 
Posts: 873
Founded: Jun 27, 2012
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Bari » Sun Sep 10, 2017 8:20 am

Pasong Tirad wrote:
Bari wrote:I use Douai-Rheims, Challoner revision, almost exclusively. But I guess you weren't speaking on my behalf.

Apologies. By "same as everybody else here," I meant my country, where if you're not using the Filipino translations, NABRE is the go-to translation for Catholics.

Okay, I see what you meant. He or she may have been referring to how many mondern biblical translations aren't really translations at all, as they are more like paraphrasing of current English translations. One example is "The Message" and also the Contemperary English Bible.
Hiram Ier
Royaume de Bari
Que Dieu bénisse la Bari
Pour la plus grande gloire de Dieu

User avatar
The Norgan Alliance
Minister
 
Posts: 3152
Founded: Feb 17, 2013
Democratic Socialists

Postby The Norgan Alliance » Sun Sep 10, 2017 9:16 am

Hakons wrote:
The United Neptumousian Empire wrote:oh no now i dont got an option to vote for :(


There's a way to fix that :blush:

Vulkata II wrote:Thoughts on the Westboro Baptist church?


A group that is quite similar to a cult. They claim to be Christians, yet they lack basic knowledge of the Gospel and the Apostles.

The Federation of Kendor wrote:I think they are radicals. They make modern pop songs into their propaganda songs preaching their values, and more things.

Also, how do you think of Gilead from The Handmaid's Tale (I know this isn't a Handmaid's Tale discussion thread but Gilead is christian)


The Handmaid's Tale is a ridiculous attempt to portray radical Puritanism. Of course, pro-abortionists now dress up as "handmaids" to protest restricted their "healthcare."

Well, to be fair The Haindmaid's Tale is based off of the religious revolution in Iran, and the author was trying to make it more personal for Americans who know a lot more about Christianity than Islam.
Call me Norga and I'll give you a cookie
|No Left Turn|
"When life gives you lemons, you clone those lemons, and make super lemons." ~ Principle Scudworth, 2003
The Liberated Territories wrote:Ancestry: Murican
Ethnicity: Murican
Race: Murican

Murica

User avatar
Libertas Omnium Maximus
Diplomat
 
Posts: 517
Founded: May 31, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Libertas Omnium Maximus » Sun Sep 10, 2017 9:18 am

The Federation of Kendor wrote:What is the difference between Catholicism and Protestanism



They are different sects of Christianity, Protestant usually are less religious and have more foreword thinking ideas.

Catholicism is usually more conservative thinking, and more strict.


I am An Episcopalian, another sect, Episcopalianism is closer in ideology to Protestantism. But some of my closest friends are Catholic.
Last edited by Libertas Omnium Maximus on Sun Sep 10, 2017 9:21 am, edited 1 time in total.
Speaker of the International Democratic Union
General Moderator of, All Quiet on the Western Front (a political intrigue and conflict RP)
Culture Minister of the International Democratic Union
69th Baptism of Fire - 3rd Place
IDU Olympic Committee President 2018-2019
IDU Football Championship Quarter-Finalist (2018)

"Government is not the solution to our problem. Government is our problem."
-Ronald Reagan

"The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money"
-Margret Thatcher


User avatar
Angleter
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 12350
Founded: Apr 27, 2008
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Angleter » Sun Sep 10, 2017 9:21 am

Tarsonis Survivors wrote:
Hakons wrote:
An interesting scenario :p

We would ask for volunteers of who would be willing to parish at sea for the sake of people in the water. Presumably, there wouldn't be very many volunteers, so the people in the water that are the smallest would be rescued. This is because they are most in peril in the water, and they also need less food and water. We would take in as many as we could fit.

Now, I don't think the United States is anywhere close to being full or almost full of refugees. Once again, it is our Christian duty to advocate for refugee programs.


Why would you ask people to get out of the boat? What makes their value less than the people in the water. And presumably if nobody volunteers, and you only want to take the small ones, try conveying that reality to the people already in the water.

The point is not to be an obvious parallel to the current situation, but to illuminate the point you keep seeming to over look: there's always other considerations, and it's more than just the doom and gloom considerations. There's social, economic, political, and ethical considerations. Take a look at Canada, they took in refugees and now they're facing a potential economic crisis over the cost of supporting them.

Also consider this: Saudi Arabia had facilities already in place that could house a majority off these refugeess. They could have stayed in the Middle East, instead of being transported to a foreign region, but SA didn't take any, and nobody put pressure on them too. Why should the west shoulder this burden.

Again the claim "it's our duty to take refugees" sounds good on paper, but it ignores the messy reality of governance.


Quite. We have an obligation to help the vulnerable, but we don't have an obligation to accept (let alone encourage) the large-scale migration of people into our countries. With the Syrian/Iraqi crisis, for instance, it's perfectly reasonable to focus on helping improve conditions in the refugee camps in Turkey, Jordan, &c. That provides safe, habitable conditions for the refugees, discourages people from trying to make the dangerous crossing into Europe, and alleviates the concerns of Western countries.
"I gotta tell you, this is just crazy, huh! This is just nuts, OK! Jeezo man."

I am: British, English, Catholic, Unionist, Conservative, Pro-Market, Civil Libertarian, Cultural Nationalist, Constitutional Monarchist, Brexiteer, Localist/British Federalist, Anti-Technocracy, Pro-Democracy, Pro-Parliament, Pro-Zionism.

Defend Parliamentary Sovereignty - Elections Are Advisory - Luttrell for Middlesex 1769 - Bring Back Zac

User avatar
Salus Maior
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15686
Founded: Jun 16, 2014
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Salus Maior » Sun Sep 10, 2017 9:29 am

Tarsonis Survivors wrote:
The gospel doesn't suggest a national policy, Christ had little interest in the affairs of state. Any national policy derived from the Gospel or Christian theology at large, would largely be open to interpretation.


Not necessarily related to the refugee argument (which I largely agree with you on), but I think it's definitely possible to create a more Christian-centered state at least morally speaking.
Traditionalist Catholic and Constitutional Monarchist.

This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief. -1 Timothy 1:15

“My entire endeavor has always been to clearly recognize the Will of God in all things and to follow it as completely as possible.” -Blessed Charles of Austria, last Habsburg Emperor

User avatar
Salus Maior
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15686
Founded: Jun 16, 2014
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Salus Maior » Sun Sep 10, 2017 9:31 am

Angleter wrote:
Tarsonis Survivors wrote:
Why would you ask people to get out of the boat? What makes their value less than the people in the water. And presumably if nobody volunteers, and you only want to take the small ones, try conveying that reality to the people already in the water.

The point is not to be an obvious parallel to the current situation, but to illuminate the point you keep seeming to over look: there's always other considerations, and it's more than just the doom and gloom considerations. There's social, economic, political, and ethical considerations. Take a look at Canada, they took in refugees and now they're facing a potential economic crisis over the cost of supporting them.

Also consider this: Saudi Arabia had facilities already in place that could house a majority off these refugeess. They could have stayed in the Middle East, instead of being transported to a foreign region, but SA didn't take any, and nobody put pressure on them too. Why should the west shoulder this burden.

Again the claim "it's our duty to take refugees" sounds good on paper, but it ignores the messy reality of governance.


Quite. We have an obligation to help the vulnerable, but we don't have an obligation to accept (let alone encourage) the large-scale migration of people into our countries. With the Syrian/Iraqi crisis, for instance, it's perfectly reasonable to focus on helping improve conditions in the refugee camps in Turkey, Jordan, &c. That provides safe, habitable conditions for the refugees, discourages people from trying to make the dangerous crossing into Europe, and alleviates the concerns of Western countries.


Honestly, I think the best response would be to establish secured zones in the country in question itself so the people can remain in their own country and be secure.

Anyway, I feel like that's a conversation for another thread.
Traditionalist Catholic and Constitutional Monarchist.

This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief. -1 Timothy 1:15

“My entire endeavor has always been to clearly recognize the Will of God in all things and to follow it as completely as possible.” -Blessed Charles of Austria, last Habsburg Emperor

User avatar
Luminesa
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 52628
Founded: Dec 09, 2014
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Luminesa » Sun Sep 10, 2017 9:37 am

Pasong Tirad wrote:
Minzerland II wrote:Exactly, not everyone is willing to inconvenience themselves, their families, their friends, their countries their countrymen, etc.; they choose to prioritise them, as do I, not some foreigner in need of help somewhere far away, who may not even help them if they were ever in need. Not everyone is Christian in America or Australia, either. This all ignoring the fact that I cannot see any feasible way in which to help everyone, as you suggest we do. I think your proposition is rather shortsighted and unrealistic, instead of alleviating the problem you'll exacerbate it so much so that it becomes untenable, as has been said previously by another poster, leading to even more suffering.

It's not about you. It's not about whether or not they will return the kindness. That doesn't matter. They need help now. You, have the capacity to help but choose not to. Firefighters don't ask people in a burning building if they're Muslim, if they voted Liberal or if their house is insured. They just go in.

You do have to bear in mind that even the CCC tells us that we are obligated to be reasonable. We who are more fortunate have the option to take-in immigrants, and we only require them to respect the laws of the country. If an immigrant comes into the country and refuses to follow the law, or flaunts their hatred of the law in some way, we are not obligated to continue to show charity. Of course, on the flip-side, those who do respect the law, and who are here because they need shelter and they want to live a decent life, should receive as much charity as possible. But it is entirely impossible to help all people at all times. Even Francis de Sales writes about that. Do what good you can at that time.
Catholic, pro-life, and proud of it. I prefer my debates on religion, politics, and sports with some coffee and a little Aquinas and G.K. CHESTERTON here and there. Not that I need the coffee, but you know... :3

So apparently I am an ENFP!

Unofficial #1 fan of the Who Dat Nation.
"I'm just a singer of simple songs, I'm not a real political man. I watch CNN, but I'm not sure I can tell you the difference in Iraq and Iran. But I know Jesus, and I talk to God, and I remember this from when I was young:
faith, hope and love are some good things He gave us...
and the greatest is love."
-Alan Jackson

User avatar
Angleter
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 12350
Founded: Apr 27, 2008
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Angleter » Sun Sep 10, 2017 9:39 am

"I gotta tell you, this is just crazy, huh! This is just nuts, OK! Jeezo man."

I am: British, English, Catholic, Unionist, Conservative, Pro-Market, Civil Libertarian, Cultural Nationalist, Constitutional Monarchist, Brexiteer, Localist/British Federalist, Anti-Technocracy, Pro-Democracy, Pro-Parliament, Pro-Zionism.

Defend Parliamentary Sovereignty - Elections Are Advisory - Luttrell for Middlesex 1769 - Bring Back Zac

User avatar
Salus Maior
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 15686
Founded: Jun 16, 2014
Iron Fist Consumerists

Postby Salus Maior » Sun Sep 10, 2017 9:40 am

The Norgan Alliance wrote:
Hakons wrote:
There's a way to fix that :blush:



A group that is quite similar to a cult. They claim to be Christians, yet they lack basic knowledge of the Gospel and the Apostles.



The Handmaid's Tale is a ridiculous attempt to portray radical Puritanism. Of course, pro-abortionists now dress up as "handmaids" to protest restricted their "healthcare."

Well, to be fair The Haindmaid's Tale is based off of the religious revolution in Iran, and the author was trying to make it more personal for Americans who know a lot more about Christianity than Islam.


I don't know much about Iran, but I'm pretty sure they don't have institutionalized sex slavery.
Traditionalist Catholic and Constitutional Monarchist.

This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief. -1 Timothy 1:15

“My entire endeavor has always been to clearly recognize the Will of God in all things and to follow it as completely as possible.” -Blessed Charles of Austria, last Habsburg Emperor

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Abserdia, Aggicificicerous, Ancapistanana, Anollasia, Arthenius, Aureumterra, Auzkhia, Evaropi, Google [Bot], Gormwood, Greater Miami Shores and La Habana Cuba, Grenartia, Hanafuridake, Heloin, Ifreann, Jean-Paul Sartre, Kohr, Mattantia, MSN [Bot], Nakena, Necroghastia, New haven america, Ngelmish, Northern Davincia, Ors Might, Outer Sparta, Post War America, Senkaku, Serconas, Sundiata, Tarsonis, The Corparation, The Free British Commonwealth, The Two Jerseys, The United Provinces of North America, Totenborg, Xuloqoia

Advertisement

Remove ads