If You Believe in Abortion You Are Not Catholic And Cannot Take Communion

[Colin norris]

So why should religious doctrine determine domestic policy in a secular nation? If we let that happen we are no better than half the nations in the Mideast where religious leaders run the country.

You don't get it , BT. The bishops of the RCC don't determine policy for the government.

They determine policy for the church and the requirements for church membership.

And if Sleepy Joe wants to be a member of the RCC in good standing, the bishops of the RCC have a right to enforce the rules. And Biden always has the option of quitting the RCC and joining with Episcopalianism , agnosticism, or other religion if he doesn't want to follow the rules.

I remember when I was over in the war and my wife and me would send tapes back and forth. My little girl sent me one and she said "daddy please come home alive." I sent her one back and I told her "baby girl you're dad is coming home...alive." You think I would abort her? No way dude. I kept my promise.

It's too bad we don't understand that the kids in other countries want the same thing.

So people in the United States of America are supposed to feel guilty? Fuck you.

Absolutely. You seem to be another that only pretends to be pro-life. Life doesn't end at birth.

Look you goddamn communist,life begins at inception and when a man and woman love each other he follows through with his manly obligation.

Firstly, how is this discussion related to communism? You're paranoid about them.

There is no scientific evidence to suggest life as we know it begins at conception.
You say it does because you want to close off any time available for an abortion because of your filthy religion.
You have no right to interfere with a woman's legal right to an abortion because you believe in some hideous God. You don't even have approval from your religion to say anything.
You are just another brain dead hypocritical godbother.

Of course life begins as conception. You might mean a distinct separate human life with a soul and all of that but scientifically there is zero question that a life begins at conception.

To note, the Supreme Court in RvW noted when it was indeed legal to interfere with a womans ability to abort. Now you did make the distinction "legal" which does restrict the argument to that but the reasoning was viability and that line has become shorter since 1973.

My belief of life's beginning is not similar to yours. I'll need proof from science to verify that and until then I'll dispute your religious reasons as being justification to not allow women cont rtol over their body.

I'll assume you are married for this exercise. Your wife would probably use contraception against the church's will.
How do you justify that to your God?
Are not not allowing the natural process of life to begin?

My reasons are not religious. It's a simple fact that there is a life. I'm not Catholic so I have no need to justify anything.

If you were an atheist, as you are suggesting, you would agree to give a woman her legal right.

What you call a fact of life doesn't align with that of research. Its your personal opinion and stop lying about your view does not come from religion.

How's that question about contraception? Bit if a curly one attempting to get out of that ay?
Sort of destroys all godbotherers position of obeying gods laws.

Please, no more silly views. Just facts.

I've never suggested I was an Atheist. I'm an though wasting my time.

Do you ever read what you write?
You said, my reasons are not religious.
How could that not be interpreted as an atheist as I "suggested".

 

[Colin norris]

So why should religious doctrine determine domestic policy in a secular nation? If we let that happen we are no better than half the nations in the Mideast where religious leaders run the country.

You don't get it , BT. The bishops of the RCC don't determine policy for the government.

They determine policy for the church and the requirements for church membership.

And if Sleepy Joe wants to be a member of the RCC in good standing, the bishops of the RCC have a right to enforce the rules. And Biden always has the option of quitting the RCC and joining with Episcopalianism , agnosticism, or other religion if he doesn't want to follow the rules.

I remember when I was over in the war and my wife and me would send tapes back and forth. My little girl sent me one and she said "daddy please come home alive." I sent her one back and I told her "baby girl you're dad is coming home...alive." You think I would abort her? No way dude. I kept my promise.

It's too bad we don't understand that the kids in other countries want the same thing.

So people in the United States of America are supposed to feel guilty? Fuck you.

Absolutely. You seem to be another that only pretends to be pro-life. Life doesn't end at birth.

Look you goddamn communist,life begins at inception and when a man and woman love each other he follows through with his manly obligation.

Firstly, how is this discussion related to communism? You're paranoid about them.

There is no scientific evidence to suggest life as we know it begins at conception.
You say it does because you want to close off any time available for an abortion because of your filthy religion.
You have no right to interfere with a woman's legal right to an abortion because you believe in some hideous God. You don't even have approval from your religion to say anything.
You are just another brain dead hypocritical godbother.

Of course life begins as conception. You might mean a distinct separate human life with a soul and all of that but scientifically there is zero question that a life begins at conception.

To note, the Supreme Court in RvW noted when it was indeed legal to interfere with a womans ability to abort. Now you did make the distinction "legal" which does restrict the argument to that but the reasoning was viability and that line has become shorter since 1973.

My belief of life's beginning is not similar to yours. I'll need proof from science to verify that and until then I'll dispute your religious reasons as being justification to not allow women cont rtol over their body.

I'll assume you are married for this exercise. Your wife would probably use contraception against the church's will.
How do you justify that to your God?
Are not not allowing the natural process of life to begin?

My reasons are not religious. It's a simple fact that there is a life. I'm not Catholic so I have no need to justify anything.

If you were an atheist, as you are suggesting, you would agree to give a woman her legal right.

What you call a fact of life doesn't align with that of research. Its your personal opinion and stop lying about your view does not come from religion.

How's that question about contraception? Bit if a curly one attempting to get out of that ay?
Sort of destroys all godbotherers position of obeying gods laws.

Please, no more silly views. Just facts.

I've never suggested I was an Atheist. I'm an though wasting my time.

Do you ever read what you write?
You said, my reasons are not religious.
How could that not be interpreted as an atheist as I "suggested".

You are right about wasting your time.
All you've done is make a fool if yourself.
It's best you say nothing next time you get a rush of blood to the head.

 

[pknopp]

So why should religious doctrine determine domestic policy in a secular nation? If we let that happen we are no better than half the nations in the Mideast where religious leaders run the country.

You don't get it , BT. The bishops of the RCC don't determine policy for the government.

They determine policy for the church and the requirements for church membership.

And if Sleepy Joe wants to be a member of the RCC in good standing, the bishops of the RCC have a right to enforce the rules. And Biden always has the option of quitting the RCC and joining with Episcopalianism , agnosticism, or other religion if he doesn't want to follow the rules.

I remember when I was over in the war and my wife and me would send tapes back and forth. My little girl sent me one and she said "daddy please come home alive." I sent her one back and I told her "baby girl you're dad is coming home...alive." You think I would abort her? No way dude. I kept my promise.

It's too bad we don't understand that the kids in other countries want the same thing.

So people in the United States of America are supposed to feel guilty? Fuck you.

Absolutely. You seem to be another that only pretends to be pro-life. Life doesn't end at birth.

Look you goddamn communist,life begins at inception and when a man and woman love each other he follows through with his manly obligation.

Firstly, how is this discussion related to communism? You're paranoid about them.

There is no scientific evidence to suggest life as we know it begins at conception.
You say it does because you want to close off any time available for an abortion because of your filthy religion.
You have no right to interfere with a woman's legal right to an abortion because you believe in some hideous God. You don't even have approval from your religion to say anything.
You are just another brain dead hypocritical godbother.

Of course life begins as conception. You might mean a distinct separate human life with a soul and all of that but scientifically there is zero question that a life begins at conception.

To note, the Supreme Court in RvW noted when it was indeed legal to interfere with a womans ability to abort. Now you did make the distinction "legal" which does restrict the argument to that but the reasoning was viability and that line has become shorter since 1973.

My belief of life's beginning is not similar to yours. I'll need proof from science to verify that and until then I'll dispute your religious reasons as being justification to not allow women cont rtol over their body.

I'll assume you are married for this exercise. Your wife would probably use contraception against the church's will.
How do you justify that to your God?
Are not not allowing the natural process of life to begin?

My reasons are not religious. It's a simple fact that there is a life. I'm not Catholic so I have no need to justify anything.

If you were an atheist, as you are suggesting, you would agree to give a woman her legal right.

What you call a fact of life doesn't align with that of research. Its your personal opinion and stop lying about your view does not come from religion.

How's that question about contraception? Bit if a curly one attempting to get out of that ay?
Sort of destroys all godbotherers position of obeying gods laws.

Please, no more silly views. Just facts.

I've never suggested I was an Atheist. I'm an though wasting my time.

Do you ever read what you write?
You said, my reasons are not religious.
How could that not be interpreted as an atheist as I "suggested".

I stated what it was. You say the product of conception is a rock or something similar. Whatever, your science is from somewhere unknown.

 

[Papageorgio]

Democratic Rep. Ted Lieu accuses Catholic bishops of hypocrisy, 'dares' the Church to deny him Communion

Rep. Ted Lieu went on a rant this weekend against the Catholic Church calling U.S. bishops "hypocrites" and "nakedly partisan" for seeking to update Communion guidance that could rebuke politicians like President Biden and Speaker Nancy Pelosi for supporting abortion policies.

www.foxnews.com

I would reject your communion in a heartbeat. Yeah that would be the heartbeat of the child you want to MURDER!

Do you really think our VP should knuckle under to the kiddy diddling Catholic church? You're probably not even Catholic.

No one is asking anyone to "knuckle under", the church has a right to have guidelines for their communion. If you don't like the guidelines, maybe you and the church are not a good fit because their beliefs and yours don't match. You would then need to find a church that matches your beliefs. It is pretty simple.

 

[Colin norris]

So why should religious doctrine determine domestic policy in a secular nation? If we let that happen we are no better than half the nations in the Mideast where religious leaders run the country.

You don't get it , BT. The bishops of the RCC don't determine policy for the government.

They determine policy for the church and the requirements for church membership.

And if Sleepy Joe wants to be a member of the RCC in good standing, the bishops of the RCC have a right to enforce the rules. And Biden always has the option of quitting the RCC and joining with Episcopalianism , agnosticism, or other religion if he doesn't want to follow the rules.

I remember when I was over in the war and my wife and me would send tapes back and forth. My little girl sent me one and she said "daddy please come home alive." I sent her one back and I told her "baby girl you're dad is coming home...alive." You think I would abort her? No way dude. I kept my promise.

It's too bad we don't understand that the kids in other countries want the same thing.

So people in the United States of America are supposed to feel guilty? Fuck you.

Absolutely. You seem to be another that only pretends to be pro-life. Life doesn't end at birth.

Look you goddamn communist,life begins at inception and when a man and woman love each other he follows through with his manly obligation.

Firstly, how is this discussion related to communism? You're paranoid about them.

There is no scientific evidence to suggest life as we know it begins at conception.
You say it does because you want to close off any time available for an abortion because of your filthy religion.
You have no right to interfere with a woman's legal right to an abortion because you believe in some hideous God. You don't even have approval from your religion to say anything.
You are just another brain dead hypocritical godbother.

Of course life begins as conception. You might mean a distinct separate human life with a soul and all of that but scientifically there is zero question that a life begins at conception.

To note, the Supreme Court in RvW noted when it was indeed legal to interfere with a womans ability to abort. Now you did make the distinction "legal" which does restrict the argument to that but the reasoning was viability and that line has become shorter since 1973.

My belief of life's beginning is not similar to yours. I'll need proof from science to verify that and until then I'll dispute your religious reasons as being justification to not allow women cont rtol over their body.

I'll assume you are married for this exercise. Your wife would probably use contraception against the church's will.
How do you justify that to your God?
Are not not allowing the natural process of life to begin?

My reasons are not religious. It's a simple fact that there is a life. I'm not Catholic so I have no need to justify anything.

If you were an atheist, as you are suggesting, you would agree to give a woman her legal right.

What you call a fact of life doesn't align with that of research. Its your personal opinion and stop lying about your view does not come from religion.

How's that question about contraception? Bit if a curly one attempting to get out of that ay?
Sort of destroys all godbotherers position of obeying gods laws.

Please, no more silly views. Just facts.

I've never suggested I was an Atheist. I'm an though wasting my time.

Do you ever read what you write?
You said, my reasons are not religious.
How could that not be interpreted as an atheist as I "suggested".

I stated what it was. You say the product of conception is a rock or something similar. Whatever, your science is from somewhere unknown.

I never said there was science. I said I would like to see scientific evidence.

Again, I never "said" it was anything. It was you who said it was life.
You're not learning anything from this debate. The religious aspect has you on the back foot and I will say now, your statement regarding you view is not religious, is a lie. How does lying fit with your God?

Every time you reply I get another whack at you. Keep going.

 

[Papageorgio]

So why should religious doctrine determine domestic policy in a secular nation? If we let that happen we are no better than half the nations in the Mideast where religious leaders run the country.

You don't get it , BT. The bishops of the RCC don't determine policy for the government.

They determine policy for the church and the requirements for church membership.

And if Sleepy Joe wants to be a member of the RCC in good standing, the bishops of the RCC have a right to enforce the rules. And Biden always has the option of quitting the RCC and joining with Episcopalianism , agnosticism, or other religion if he doesn't want to follow the rules.

You don't get it..by refusing to enact or support religious doctrine (anti-abortion laws) he is doing his job a leader of a secular nation...and he is being punished for it by religious leaders and the political right (republicans). It is the religious faction along with the political faction of conservatives who intermingling church doctrine with secular policy.

The church has always been antiabortion, it is their right as a religion to accept or deny people the right to their services and/or rules. He is proabortion, thus his beliefs don't align with church, he might want to find a new church.

The church has a right to set and uphold their belief system and set requirements.

 

[pknopp]

So why should religious doctrine determine domestic policy in a secular nation? If we let that happen we are no better than half the nations in the Mideast where religious leaders run the country.

You don't get it , BT. The bishops of the RCC don't determine policy for the government.

They determine policy for the church and the requirements for church membership.

And if Sleepy Joe wants to be a member of the RCC in good standing, the bishops of the RCC have a right to enforce the rules. And Biden always has the option of quitting the RCC and joining with Episcopalianism , agnosticism, or other religion if he doesn't want to follow the rules.

I remember when I was over in the war and my wife and me would send tapes back and forth. My little girl sent me one and she said "daddy please come home alive." I sent her one back and I told her "baby girl you're dad is coming home...alive." You think I would abort her? No way dude. I kept my promise.

It's too bad we don't understand that the kids in other countries want the same thing.

So people in the United States of America are supposed to feel guilty? Fuck you.

Absolutely. You seem to be another that only pretends to be pro-life. Life doesn't end at birth.

Look you goddamn communist,life begins at inception and when a man and woman love each other he follows through with his manly obligation.

Firstly, how is this discussion related to communism? You're paranoid about them.

There is no scientific evidence to suggest life as we know it begins at conception.
You say it does because you want to close off any time available for an abortion because of your filthy religion.
You have no right to interfere with a woman's legal right to an abortion because you believe in some hideous God. You don't even have approval from your religion to say anything.
You are just another brain dead hypocritical godbother.

Of course life begins as conception. You might mean a distinct separate human life with a soul and all of that but scientifically there is zero question that a life begins at conception.

To note, the Supreme Court in RvW noted when it was indeed legal to interfere with a womans ability to abort. Now you did make the distinction "legal" which does restrict the argument to that but the reasoning was viability and that line has become shorter since 1973.

My belief of life's beginning is not similar to yours. I'll need proof from science to verify that and until then I'll dispute your religious reasons as being justification to not allow women cont rtol over their body.

I'll assume you are married for this exercise. Your wife would probably use contraception against the church's will.
How do you justify that to your God?
Are not not allowing the natural process of life to begin?

My reasons are not religious. It's a simple fact that there is a life. I'm not Catholic so I have no need to justify anything.

If you were an atheist, as you are suggesting, you would agree to give a woman her legal right.

What you call a fact of life doesn't align with that of research. Its your personal opinion and stop lying about your view does not come from religion.

How's that question about contraception? Bit if a curly one attempting to get out of that ay?
Sort of destroys all godbotherers position of obeying gods laws.

Please, no more silly views. Just facts.

I've never suggested I was an Atheist. I'm an though wasting my time.

Do you ever read what you write?
You said, my reasons are not religious.
How could that not be interpreted as an atheist as I "suggested".

I stated what it was. You say the product of conception is a rock or something similar. Whatever, your science is from somewhere unknown.

I never said there was science. I said I would like to see scientific evidence.

Again, I never "said" it was anything. It was you who said it was life.
You're not learning anything from this debate. The religious aspect has you on the back foot and I will say now, your statement regarding you view is not religious, is a lie. How does lying fit with your God?

Every time you reply I get another whack at you. Keep going.

LOL. You seem to be unable to explain what the product of conception is if not a life. A simply fact long taught in basic biology 101.

 

[Blackrook]

Anyone who believes abortion should be legal has murder in his heart and cannot call himself a follower of Christ.

 

[Papageorgio]

"Next time I go to Church, I dare you to deny me Communion," Lieu tweeted.

Or you'll do what?

You have no right to call yourself a Christian if you support baby murder.

I am calling myself a Christian. This is not a theocracy so to say it is murder is unsupported. There is no scientific evidence to support it.

Murder isn't scientific, murder is a legal term.

Definition of murder​

(Entry 1 of 2)
1: the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethoughtwas convicted of murder

Since abortion is legal it is not considered murder.

Now, abortion is scientifically the ending of a life and since science defines life at conception, then it is killing or taking the life of an unborn baby or zygote for those that try to dehumanize life.

Life Begins at Fertilization with the Embryo's Conception.

 

[Polishprince]

I read this and thought it interesting.

US Catholics need a crash course in Church teaching on Communion. Biden gave an opening.

What the Catholic Church believes might sound bizarre. But once you accept the teaching, then the debate over receiving Communion makes more sense.

www.yahoo.com

Whatever the U.S. Catholic bishops do regarding this document on the Eucharist, I’m grateful we’re having this conversation. Asked about it by a reporter, Biden responded that it was a “private matter.” But given that Biden is open about being Catholic and also open about his pro-abortion position (one which I’d argue goes against science as well as Catholicism), the matter is rightly public.

But herein lies the rub. Are catholic politicians to be denied the eurcharist for opposing a permanent expansion to the child tax credit that would undisputedly put families over the poverty line? What about Catholic pols who support the death penalty?

It's not a one size fits all. And I left the Episcopal church for decades when the did not officially protest the Vietnam War. Later I decided in my youth I'd been too extreme. I've never thought gays should be discriminated against, and my neighbors are a gay married couple who've been together longer than I've been married for 30 years, and I see them at church. It's terrible thing their generation couldn't adopt, cause they'd have been great parents. But I was opposed to the Episcopal church taking any political stand one way or another. the writer is wrong because all people, pols or Catholics or whatever, have to make up their own minds, on divisive issues that have reasoned people on both sides, by following their conscience. It's not up to a church to decide what is right and wrong. It's up to the individual.

If the bishops want to excommunicate politicians because they oppose tax credits or support the Electric Chair, they are certainly free to do so.

Its a free country, you know, and they have the right to run the church the way they see fit.

 

[bendog]

I read this and thought it interesting.

US Catholics need a crash course in Church teaching on Communion. Biden gave an opening.

What the Catholic Church believes might sound bizarre. But once you accept the teaching, then the debate over receiving Communion makes more sense.

www.yahoo.com

Whatever the U.S. Catholic bishops do regarding this document on the Eucharist, I’m grateful we’re having this conversation. Asked about it by a reporter, Biden responded that it was a “private matter.” But given that Biden is open about being Catholic and also open about his pro-abortion position (one which I’d argue goes against science as well as Catholicism), the matter is rightly public.

But herein lies the rub. Are catholic politicians to be denied the eurcharist for opposing a permanent expansion to the child tax credit that would undisputedly put families over the poverty line? What about Catholic pols who support the death penalty?

It's not a one size fits all. And I left the Episcopal church for decades when the did not officially protest the Vietnam War. Later I decided in my youth I'd been too extreme. I've never thought gays should be discriminated against, and my neighbors are a gay married couple who've been together longer than I've been married for 30 years, and I see them at church. It's terrible thing their generation couldn't adopt, cause they'd have been great parents. But I was opposed to the Episcopal church taking any political stand one way or another. the writer is wrong because all people, pols or Catholics or whatever, have to make up their own minds, on divisive issues that have reasoned people on both sides, by following their conscience. It's not up to a church to decide what is right and wrong. It's up to the individual.

If the bishops want to excommunicate politicians because they oppose tax credits or support the Electric Chair, they are certainly free to do so.

Its a free country, you know, and they have the right to run the church the way they see fit.

Well yes, but they are hypocrites to criticize some but not others for going against gods will ... selectively. And that's the charge against the bishops. That and still not coming clean on the children they were parties to raping.

The point is that by leaving people of conscience to reach their own position on issues of politics and faith, they avoid hypocrisy. But by claiming one is a hypocrite on one issue, but not another issue, because it suits the Bishops' poltitics of the moment, they devalue their own church even more. And I was guilty of that sin too, once.

 

[busybee01]

So why should religious doctrine determine domestic policy in a secular nation? If we let that happen we are no better than half the nations in the Mideast where religious leaders run the country.

You don't get it , BT. The bishops of the RCC don't determine policy for the government.

They determine policy for the church and the requirements for church membership.

And if Sleepy Joe wants to be a member of the RCC in good standing, the bishops of the RCC have a right to enforce the rules. And Biden always has the option of quitting the RCC and joining with Episcopalianism , agnosticism, or other religion if he doesn't want to follow the rules.

When are Evangelicals going to follow the rules over their glorification of that shitstain Trump when he's just about broken every commandment there is & still does?

What people are missing is the Church refusing Biden communion is because he is openly promoting abortion and serving Biden communion would make one complicit in Biden's sin. This is why Biden was refused an audience with pope Francis last week.
As for TRUMP the difference is TRUMP isn't promoting the sins he committees.

There are plenty of things you are missing. Biden is not actively promoting abortion. He is supporting the right for a woman to decide. This is not a theocracy. To impose laws that limit a woman's right to decide is establishing a Christian version of Iran. The bishops do not support the death penalty but Republicans support it. The bishops do not support Trump's immigration policies but Republicans support it. So Republican politicians should not be allowed to take communion. By engaging in partisan politics, they should be stripped of their tax exemption.

 

[busybee01]

Democratic Rep. Ted Lieu accuses Catholic bishops of hypocrisy, 'dares' the Church to deny him Communion

Rep. Ted Lieu went on a rant this weekend against the Catholic Church calling U.S. bishops "hypocrites" and "nakedly partisan" for seeking to update Communion guidance that could rebuke politicians like President Biden and Speaker Nancy Pelosi for supporting abortion policies.

www.foxnews.com

I would reject your communion in a heartbeat. Yeah that would be the heartbeat of the child you want to MURDER!

Do you really think our VP should knuckle under to the kiddy diddling Catholic church? You're probably not even Catholic.

Born and raised. He should go with the Church. But he won't because he is a piece of shit. Either you're loyal or you're not. Baby murder is not Christian.

It depends on the situation doesn't. If a woman aborts her pregnancy she's a cold blooded murderer but if we kill some kids in an airstrike in some war zone we just calmly dismiss it as an unavoidable part of war, collateral damage..no big deal.

Don't even try to compare the two. A baby in a womb is innocent. When we launch airstrikes against the enemies of liberty it's because they are complete assholes.

At what point is it a baby? You want to turn this into a Christian version of Iran.

 

[busybee01]

So why should religious doctrine determine domestic policy in a secular nation? If we let that happen we are no better than half the nations in the Mideast where religious leaders run the country.

You don't get it , BT. The bishops of the RCC don't determine policy for the government.

They determine policy for the church and the requirements for church membership.

And if Sleepy Joe wants to be a member of the RCC in good standing, the bishops of the RCC have a right to enforce the rules. And Biden always has the option of quitting the RCC and joining with Episcopalianism , agnosticism, or other religion if he doesn't want to follow the rules.

You don't get it..by refusing to enact or support religious doctrine (anti-abortion laws) he is doing his job a leader of a secular nation...and he is being punished for it by religious leaders and the political right (republicans). It is the religious faction along with the political faction of conservatives who intermingling church doctrine with secular policy.

The church has always been antiabortion, it is their right as a religion to accept or deny people the right to their services and/or rules. He is proabortion, thus his beliefs don't align with church, he might want to find a new church.

The church has a right to set and uphold their belief system and set requirements.

Then they need to be evenhanded. If they want to play politics then they should lose their tax exempt status.

 

[busybee01]

Anyone who believes abortion should be legal has murder in his heart and cannot call himself a follower of Christ.

By that logic, anyone who supports the death penalty cannot call them a follower of Christ.

 

[bendog]

So why should religious doctrine determine domestic policy in a secular nation? If we let that happen we are no better than half the nations in the Mideast where religious leaders run the country.

You don't get it , BT. The bishops of the RCC don't determine policy for the government.

They determine policy for the church and the requirements for church membership.

And if Sleepy Joe wants to be a member of the RCC in good standing, the bishops of the RCC have a right to enforce the rules. And Biden always has the option of quitting the RCC and joining with Episcopalianism , agnosticism, or other religion if he doesn't want to follow the rules.

When are Evangelicals going to follow the rules over their glorification of that shitstain Trump when he's just about broken every commandment there is & still does?

What people are missing is the Church refusing Biden communion is because he is openly promoting abortion and serving Biden communion would make one complicit in Biden's sin. This is why Biden was refused an audience with pope Francis last week.
As for TRUMP the difference is TRUMP isn't promoting the sins he committees.

There are plenty of things you are missing. Biden is not actively promoting abortion. He is supporting the right for a woman to decide. This is not a theocracy. To impose laws that limit a woman's right to decide is establishing a Christian version of Iran. The bishops do not support the death penalty but Republicans support it. The bishops do not support Trump's immigration policies but Republicans support it. So Republican politicians should not be allowed to take communion. By engaging in partisan politics, they should be stripped of their tax exemption.

Not to defend the bishops, but the argument is they only single out Biden because he is a church going Catholic. But yes, Biden is in tune with the Church's position on other issues. So the bishops are elevating abortion over children in poverty, and child abuse (to which they are still a party), immigration, "the wealth gap," and no doubt others.

To me its not about the morality or immorality of an issue that reasonable people disagree on. Rather, any church that engages in such selective outrage ultimately diminishes its own claim to morality. But it would be totally unworkable to demand consistency from pols on every issue.

Perhaps the problem is a bit like Dostoyevsky. If (g)od gave us free will, and people are incapable of using it to their benefit, then God has doomed them to suffer and not even achieve redemption. Or to my reading, God created a world where children and innocents suffer sometimes horribly not only from illness but also from those with power (like Bishops). So the only answer is democracy so people have the power to demand treatment and overthrow the powerful peacefully, and Christ may still be personally relevant, but the Inquistor was right about him. Let him go in peace, but he has no answers for the oppression of humans.

 

[Papageorgio]

So why should religious doctrine determine domestic policy in a secular nation? If we let that happen we are no better than half the nations in the Mideast where religious leaders run the country.

You don't get it , BT. The bishops of the RCC don't determine policy for the government.

They determine policy for the church and the requirements for church membership.

And if Sleepy Joe wants to be a member of the RCC in good standing, the bishops of the RCC have a right to enforce the rules. And Biden always has the option of quitting the RCC and joining with Episcopalianism , agnosticism, or other religion if he doesn't want to follow the rules.

You don't get it..by refusing to enact or support religious doctrine (anti-abortion laws) he is doing his job a leader of a secular nation...and he is being punished for it by religious leaders and the political right (republicans). It is the religious faction along with the political faction of conservatives who intermingling church doctrine with secular policy.

The church has always been antiabortion, it is their right as a religion to accept or deny people the right to their services and/or rules. He is proabortion, thus his beliefs don't align with church, he might want to find a new church.

The church has a right to set and uphold their belief system and set requirements.

Then they need to be evenhanded. If they want to play politics then they should lose their tax exempt status.

It’s not politics it is their belief system. I am against tax exempt religions so that is fine by me . Start with political parties not being tax exempt.

Forcing beliefs on a religion is just plain stupid.

If your beliefs don’t align with the church, go find one that does or form your own.

 

[Polishprince]

So why should religious doctrine determine domestic policy in a secular nation? If we let that happen we are no better than half the nations in the Mideast where religious leaders run the country.

You don't get it , BT. The bishops of the RCC don't determine policy for the government.

They determine policy for the church and the requirements for church membership.

And if Sleepy Joe wants to be a member of the RCC in good standing, the bishops of the RCC have a right to enforce the rules. And Biden always has the option of quitting the RCC and joining with Episcopalianism , agnosticism, or other religion if he doesn't want to follow the rules.

When are Evangelicals going to follow the rules over their glorification of that shitstain Trump when he's just about broken every commandment there is & still does?

What people are missing is the Church refusing Biden communion is because he is openly promoting abortion and serving Biden communion would make one complicit in Biden's sin. This is why Biden was refused an audience with pope Francis last week.
As for TRUMP the difference is TRUMP isn't promoting the sins he committees.

There are plenty of things you are missing. Biden is not actively promoting abortion. He is supporting the right for a woman to decide. This is not a theocracy. To impose laws that limit a woman's right to decide is establishing a Christian version of Iran. The bishops do not support the death penalty but Republicans support it. The bishops do not support Trump's immigration policies but Republicans support it. So Republican politicians should not be allowed to take communion. By engaging in partisan politics, they should be stripped of their tax exemption.

Not to defend the bishops, but the argument is they only single out Biden because he is a church going Catholic. But yes, Biden is in tune with the Church's position on other issues. So the bishops are elevating abortion over children in poverty, and child abuse (to which they are still a party), immigration, "the wealth gap," and no doubt others.

To me its not about the morality or immorality of an issue that reasonable people disagree on. Rather, any church that engages in such selective outrage ultimately diminishes its own claim to morality. But it would be totally unworkable to demand consistency from pols on every issue.

Perhaps the problem is a bit like Dostoyevsky. If (g)od gave us free will, and people are incapable of using it to their benefit, then God has doomed them to suffer and not even achieve redemption. Or to my reading, God created a world where children and innocents suffer sometimes horribly not only from illness but also from those with power (like Bishops). So the only answer is democracy so people have the power to demand treatment and overthrow the powerful peacefully, and Christ may still be personally relevant, but the Inquistor was right about him. Let him go in peace.

Biden is not on the same page with the church on Gay Matrimony or sodomy either.

It isn't just abortion.


The RCC is still opposed to the idea of men taking it in the caboose, at least at the current time.

 

[bendog]

So why should religious doctrine determine domestic policy in a secular nation? If we let that happen we are no better than half the nations in the Mideast where religious leaders run the country.

You don't get it , BT. The bishops of the RCC don't determine policy for the government.

They determine policy for the church and the requirements for church membership.

And if Sleepy Joe wants to be a member of the RCC in good standing, the bishops of the RCC have a right to enforce the rules. And Biden always has the option of quitting the RCC and joining with Episcopalianism , agnosticism, or other religion if he doesn't want to follow the rules.

When are Evangelicals going to follow the rules over their glorification of that shitstain Trump when he's just about broken every commandment there is & still does?

What people are missing is the Church refusing Biden communion is because he is openly promoting abortion and serving Biden communion would make one complicit in Biden's sin. This is why Biden was refused an audience with pope Francis last week.
As for TRUMP the difference is TRUMP isn't promoting the sins he committees.

There are plenty of things you are missing. Biden is not actively promoting abortion. He is supporting the right for a woman to decide. This is not a theocracy. To impose laws that limit a woman's right to decide is establishing a Christian version of Iran. The bishops do not support the death penalty but Republicans support it. The bishops do not support Trump's immigration policies but Republicans support it. So Republican politicians should not be allowed to take communion. By engaging in partisan politics, they should be stripped of their tax exemption.

Not to defend the bishops, but the argument is they only single out Biden because he is a church going Catholic. But yes, Biden is in tune with the Church's position on other issues. So the bishops are elevating abortion over children in poverty, and child abuse (to which they are still a party), immigration, "the wealth gap," and no doubt others.

To me its not about the morality or immorality of an issue that reasonable people disagree on. Rather, any church that engages in such selective outrage ultimately diminishes its own claim to morality. But it would be totally unworkable to demand consistency from pols on every issue.

Perhaps the problem is a bit like Dostoyevsky. If (g)od gave us free will, and people are incapable of using it to their benefit, then God has doomed them to suffer and not even achieve redemption. Or to my reading, God created a world where children and innocents suffer sometimes horribly not only from illness but also from those with power (like Bishops). So the only answer is democracy so people have the power to demand treatment and overthrow the powerful peacefully, and Christ may still be personally relevant, but the Inquistor was right about him. Let him go in peace.

Biden is not on the same page with the church on Gay Matrimony or sodomy either.

It isn't just abortion.


The RCC is still opposed to the idea of men taking it in the caboose, at least at the current time.

Sure, but that's not the bishop's bitch

 

[Polishprince]

So why should religious doctrine determine domestic policy in a secular nation? If we let that happen we are no better than half the nations in the Mideast where religious leaders run the country.

You don't get it , BT. The bishops of the RCC don't determine policy for the government.

They determine policy for the church and the requirements for church membership.

And if Sleepy Joe wants to be a member of the RCC in good standing, the bishops of the RCC have a right to enforce the rules. And Biden always has the option of quitting the RCC and joining with Episcopalianism , agnosticism, or other religion if he doesn't want to follow the rules.

You don't get it..by refusing to enact or support religious doctrine (anti-abortion laws) he is doing his job a leader of a secular nation...and he is being punished for it by religious leaders and the political right (republicans). It is the religious faction along with the political faction of conservatives who intermingling church doctrine with secular policy.

The church has always been antiabortion, it is their right as a religion to accept or deny people the right to their services and/or rules. He is proabortion, thus his beliefs don't align with church, he might want to find a new church.

The church has a right to set and uphold their belief system and set requirements.

Then they need to be evenhanded. If they want to play politics then they should lose their tax exempt status.

Would you agree with the same rules applied to the Religious Left? Fellows like Jim Wallis, radical Episcopalianists and the Manhattan NYC church that threw Trump out?