Faith Focused Dating. Create your Free Profile and meet your Match! Sign Up for Free

info: Please Sign Up or Sign In to continue.

info: Please Sign Up or Sign In to continue.

A place to learn, mingle, and share

This room is for the discussion of current events,cultural issues and politics especially in relation to Catholic values.

Saint Thomas More was martyred during the Protestant Reformation for standing firm in the Faith and not recognizing the King of England as the Supreme Head of the Church.
Learn More:Saint Thomas More

Mar 18th 2013 new

(Quote) Anthony-761559 said: I am not sure of other state laws. But don't come to Colorado. You can have a civil union and the ...
(Quote) Anthony-761559 said: I am not sure of other state laws. But don't come to Colorado. You can have a civil union and the smoke pot at the reception. Wish Jesus would come back soon!
--hide--

Does it help that Hashish comes from the Middle East and was frequently given to soldiers in Christs time to get them in the mood, so to speak. It is likely that some incense used in the Temple was hasish to put the Levites into a trance, it was a common practice. So .......

LOCKED
Mar 18th 2013 new

(Quote) Paul-866591 said: But that is the problem with Canada's hate speech laws. Truth is not a defence becaus...
(Quote) Paul-866591 said:

But that is the problem with Canada's hate speech laws. Truth is not a defence because the "court" that "tries these cases defines whatever they wish as truth. Hence you cannot publicly speak out and say that homsexuality is cointrary to natural law, because offically Canada says there is nothing wrong with homsexuality, and natural law does not exist. You can say nasty things about Chritians but not Muslims. You can say derogatory things about heterosexual couples but not about homsexual couples.

--hide--

You mention Court are you sure you dont mean the Race Relations Conciliator/Commissioner, whos rullings are binding but do not have the force of law (that is a Court) their role is to maintain stable and calm society. They cant imprison you or anything, just make aruling on what is said. Religous freedom has always been a defense in law and RRC would have to bear that in mind, thought it is contextual. If its ahomily explaining Church Dogma then its covered, however if it strays into incitement to cause harm or discord then it would be acted on.

LOCKED
Mar 18th 2013 new

(Quote) William-607613 said: I wouldn't expect the Church to make its way into the medical aspects of the su...
(Quote) William-607613 said:




I wouldn't expect the Church to make its way into the medical aspects of the subject (and it doesn't, when the Catechism states that "(Homosexuality's) psychological genesis remains largely unexplained"), but the Church leaves no room for doubt with the line that the behavior is intrinsically disordered.

--hide--

What is your Med School again? Again you seem to misread the Churches teaching and disordered doesnt mean disease, please use a dictionary

LOCKED
Mar 18th 2013 new

(Quote) Patrick-624504 said: What is your Med School again? Again you seem to misread the Churches teaching and dis...
(Quote) Patrick-624504 said:

What is your Med School again? Again you seem to misread the Churches teaching and disordered doesnt mean disease, please use a dictionary

--hide--

Patrick, please be civil. William has provided at least some evidence to support his claims. You have provided repeated assertions with no source of authority and insults.

LOCKED
Mar 18th 2013 new

(Quote) Patrick-624504 said: You mention Court are you sure you dont mean the Race Relations Conciliator/Commission...
(Quote) Patrick-624504 said:

You mention Court are you sure you dont mean the Race Relations Conciliator/Commissioner, whos rullings are binding but do not have the force of law (that is a Court) their role is to maintain stable and calm society. They cant imprison you or anything, just make aruling on what is said. Religous freedom has always been a defense in law and RRC would have to bear that in mind, thought it is contextual. If its ahomily explaining Church Dogma then its covered, however if it strays into incitement to cause harm or discord then it would be acted on.

--hide--

That is why I put at least the first use of "court" in quotes.

As I understand it, it does have the power to fine, but not the power to enforce the fine. If my understanding is correct, that itself would be an aberration, The end result could well be that its "powers" are entirely meaningless.

Of course, it does have, by its very nature, the ability to intimidate, to cause bad publicity to the "accused". And since it can and does compel a person accused to defend themselves, it costs them time and money to do so.

In short a total unfair exercise of legislative power to have created it and allow it to operate.

But what else is new. In every society, from the most democratic to the most dictatorial, you always have people who believe that they know better than anyone else how others (usually with the exception of themselves) should think and act.

It even happens often enough in the Church.

LOCKED
Mar 18th 2013 new

(Quote) Patrick-341178 said: My goal isn't to bash the Commonwealth. I understand the US Constitution is unique ...
(Quote) Patrick-341178 said:



My goal isn't to bash the Commonwealth. I understand the US Constitution is unique and different countries are going to having different laws and constitutions. So, in the Commonwealth someone says something, is accused of being a liar, and then there are charges? We do have libel laws in the US, but those really only apply to blatant character assisination, are very hard to prove and are rarely prosecuted. It sounds like the burden is much lower in the Commonwealth.


I am more referring to "hate speech"- like the Ann Coulter link and I'll use the example you chose. Denying the Holocaust is insane, yet, I think someone should have to right to say that if they actually believe that. That shouldn't be against the law and subject to deportation. That sets a very bad precedent.

--hide--

Actually he wasnt deported he was never allowed in in the first place. The basis of the decision is while he is free to think and say what he wants he has to know there are consequences. Our government didnt want him to come because it would cause social unrest between the skin heads, the Moslems, the Jews and the sensible and rational. He is not a citizen of our country so we didnt want to have to pay the police and security cost, plus the deportation costs. So we just told him to get on his bike. We did allow Dr Dawkins the atheist anticreationist to come and talk. We also allowed several members of the Communist Party to come during the 1980s.

Our libel laws are very strict here. you can call someone a liar, so long as you have the proof or you say it under Parliamentary Priviledge, then basically you can say what you want and only Parliament Priviledges Committee can have you.

Hate speach is a crime here also, but it has to pass the hate test. For example. I can say all children should be hung by their heals because they are so rude. Thats not hate speech just a stupid thing to say and there is no law against being a Richard Cranium. But if I say we must got down town and hang every child by their heels and beat them to a bloody pulp to an audience of like minded people then thats hate speech and incitement to disorder both a crime/

As for precedents they can be set in NZ or by any country in the Commonwealth depending on where and when and at what level the ruling was made. Has be High Court of Appeal or above

LOCKED
Mar 18th 2013 new

(Quote) Jerry-74383 said: Patrick, please be civil. William has provided at least some evidence to support his clai...
(Quote) Jerry-74383 said:

Patrick, please be civil. William has provided at least some evidence to support his claims. You have provided repeated assertions with no source of authority and insults.

--hide--

Insults?????????? I asked him to use a dictionary and point by point went through his post. The site he gave is a fundamentalist site, but if he is a member then I appologise. I know you are his mate so sorry to you too didnt mean to insult either of you. Just wanted to stop the hate speech. And again sorry if quoting Christ and Pope Francis is an insult. I wont use either again.

I'll stick just to science and leave my Faith out of my posts. Is that OK?

As for my evidence you clearly havent read my posts there is evidence in EVERY post and further evidence in the post you closed on Gays in the Conclave. Not trying to say you did it deliberately, I think yours was just the last post so dont punish me No offence

LOCKED
Mar 18th 2013 new

(Quote) Paul-866591 said: That is why I put at least the first use of "court" in quotes. As I unde...
(Quote) Paul-866591 said:

That is why I put at least the first use of "court" in quotes.

As I understand it, it does have the power to fine, but not the power to enforce the fine. If my understanding is correct, that itself would be an aberration, The end result could well be that its "powers" are entirely meaningless.

Of course, it does have, by its very nature, the ability to intimidate, to cause bad publicity to the "accused". And since it can and does compel a person accused to defend themselves, it costs them time and money to do so.

In short a total unfair exercise of legislative power to have created it and allow it to operate.

But what else is new. In every society, from the most democratic to the most dictatorial, you always have people who believe that they know better than anyone else how others (usually with the exception of themselves) should think and act.

It even happens often enough in the Church.

--hide--

The Commissioner is appointed to the Organisation, but has a staff. The fine is enforcable but you could appeal to a real Court and have it thrown out.

These Commissions are common in the majority of the Commonwealth, and act much like your oversight committees but without the apparent powers

LOCKED
Mar 18th 2013 new

(Quote) Jerry-74383 said: Patrick, please be civil. William has provided at least some evidence to support his clai...
(Quote) Jerry-74383 said:

Patrick, please be civil. William has provided at least some evidence to support his claims. You have provided repeated assertions with no source of authority and insults.

--hide--

Oh sorry just reread my post, didnt know asking which Med School he went to when making a statement of medical certainty, as to the functions of the cirriculum in Med Schools. So I appoligise.

I forgot my evidence to back my statements. BA (Clinical and Human Sciences) Massey University NZ, BNursing (First) Western Institute if Technology NZ, DipInvestigations University of Canberra Aust, DipInvestigation Criminal Interveiwing University of Canberra Aust, DipLaw Unversity of Sydney Aust, Certificate of Theology (First) Massey University NZ, Dip Journalism Western Institute of Technology NZ. 30 years clinical experience in nursing in every specalty except Paediatric Critical Care, Senior Nursing Team Leader Critical Care, forensic Psychology for 2 years, Southern Truama Centre Sydney Aust.

LOCKED
Mar 18th 2013 new
(Quote) William-607613 said: For those who would suggest that there is no evidence suggesting that homosexuality is a mental illness, here...
(Quote) William-607613 said:

For those who would suggest that there is no evidence suggesting that homosexuality is a mental illness, here is some background on the pressure that was put on American Psychiatry Association members going back to 1970, before the decision was made in 1973 to remove this disorder from their list of mental illnesses:

conservativecolloquium.wordpress.com



Thankfully, we can refer to Holy Mother Church for the final word on the subject, who teaches us that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.


From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

2357 Homosexualityrefers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction
toward persons of the same sex.
It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures.
Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,140 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."141 They are
contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective
and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they beapproved.


--hide--
Yes! You are so correct on this matter. This topic has been automatically locked due to size. Any further discussion can be continued in a new topic.
LOCKED
Posts 191 - 200 of 200