bennyonesix wrote: ↑
Fri Sep 08, 2017 5:50 pm
Turdacious wrote: ↑
Fri Sep 08, 2017 2:34 am
http://freebeacon.com/politics/bannon-r ... -churches/
Former White House chief strategist Stephen Bannon condemned the Catholic Church's stance on immigration in an interview with Charlie Rose, saying they have an interest in illegal immigration to get "aliens to fill the churches."
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/45 ... al-nominee
This afternoon, during a confirmation hearing for 7th Circuit Court of Appeals nominee Amy Coney Barrett, Democratic senator Dianne Feinstein attacked the nominee for her Roman Catholic faith. Barrett is a law professor at the University of Notre Dame who has written about the role of religion in public life and delivered academic lectures to Christian legal groups. Drawing on some of these materials, Feinstein launched a thinly veiled attack on Barrett’s Catholic faith, asserting that her religious views will prevent her from judging fairly.
The far right is the left.
Typical dishonesty. I don't begrudge you lying for on behalf of the rich for your paycheck, but why do you do it here where you are anon?
Bannon is a Catholic criticizing the clerisy for what he sees as bad policy. Ultramontanism (which you surely know about since you are a "practicing Catholic") is a relatively recent phenomenon and was not the norm for most of Church History. Moreover, the clerics advocacy of no borders for white countries is an incredibly recent occurrence and at odds with every single Pope (but this one) who has ever held the office. So his criticism, even jf wrong, which it isn't, is valid.
Feinstein is a Jew criticizing a Catholic for being Catholic and seeking to impose a religious test on said Catholic. And Religious tests have ALWAYS been unconstitutional. I wonder how she would react to someone asking the inevitable Zionist replacement for the Fed Gov who just retired the same questions?
The Horseshoe theory is stupid and facile like you. It takes the fact that the Right and Left both correctly identify the maladies of modernity and conflates that into identity. The Right and Left attribute different causes to the maladies and recommend completely different treatments. Franco was same same as Pol Pot? Pinochet same same as Allende? Duterte same as Chavez?
What you are really arguing is that both sides oppose your pernicious "invisible hand" ideology which is just a cover for the financial elite who are currently running things.
More benwald nonsense.
1. Bannon's statement is at odds with American Catholic reality. Outreach to immigrants, especially illegal immigrants, is not done on any scale. Efforts to get them to church don't really exist. The Church's position is primarily about DACA kids and families: those who have been here a long time illegally, not immigration in general. And even calling Bannon a cultural Catholic is a stretch.
2. Nice use of a big word, but you're implying there's been a major shift in Church teachings and doctrine, or a push for papal leadership under the current pope. There hasn't.
3. Feinstein is not using a religious test, but a religiosity test. She voted for Sotomayor, but not for Roberts. In practice, a religious test has always been applied in US politics by voters and elected leaders.
4. Unite the Right and Antifa, both extreme groups, have more in common with each other than with either the center-right or center-left. Pol Pot and Allende were trying to bring about a Socialist paradise and bring about a permanent change in human nature for the surviving true believers; Franco and Pinochet weren't. Hitler was trying to do something similar to Communists (just on racial lines), which is why he has more in common with Commies than with other fascists.
I understand your anger. Your guy has been exposed as a New York Democrat. You feel betrayed.
"Liberalism is arbitrarily selective in its choice of whose dignity to champion." Adrian Vermeule