Religious Zealotry

[Idolater]

... You're a darn sight freer than people in other countries.

We absolutely are. And it's not a coincidence.

 

[Arthur Brain]

We absolutely are. And it's not a coincidence.

We're fortunate in that regard. It's something to be treasured, not usurped.

 

[Catholic Crusader]

You're a darn sight freer than people in other countries.

Thanks to the Judeo-Christian foundation of this nation, Einstein.

 

[Catholic Crusader]

We're fortunate in that regard. It's something to be treasured, not usurped.

And yet you Marxists are destroying as we speak.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Thanks to the Judeo-Christian foundation of this nation, Einstein.

Which some zealots if their ideal were in place would gladly do away with.

 

[Arthur Brain]

And yet you Marxists are destroying as we speak.

I'm not a "Marxist" despite you continually and ignorantly labeling me as one and furthermore your freedoms are hardy in peril.

 

[Catholic Crusader]

I'm not a "Marxist"

Yes you are. You are what you vote for.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Yes you are. You are what you vote for.

Well, sure didn't vote for Karl Marx or any other candidate resembling so, hmm, another fail on your part then.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Cleaned up the thread a bit.

Reminder: Provoking other members will result in a temporary ban. Please keep conversations civil.

 

[annabenedetti]

The punishment for homosexual acts as of 1776 in the original 13 colonies was the death penalty. It was the death penalty as of 1900. It wasn't until 1924 that homosexual activists began pushing for the legalization of homosexuality, the first state to decriminalize it being Illinois, which happened in 1962.

In other words, prior to 60 years ago, homosexuality had been a crime for the previous 3500 years or so.

Those homosexual activists SHOULD have been put to death. If they had been, we wouldn't be in the mess we're in today.

Why did you leave ... "of Judaism" off when you quoted me? You totally changed the meaning of the sentence, and so your reply has nothing to do with the sentence of mine that you quoted.

 

[annabenedetti]

Christianity is not to be compared with the savage barbarism of false religions.

What is it going to take for it to sink in that there are millions upon millions of Americans that aren't your sect of Christianity? They have the same rights as you do and are as much citizen as you.

 

[annabenedetti]

Most Christians even forget to ask this question...

It's very sad.

Catholicism doesn't interfere with my rights as a U.S. citizen, which is not sad at all. This is a good thing. The Church had its centuries as an actual political power and it doesn't anymore, which is also a good thing.

 

[marke]

What is it going to take for it to sink in that there are millions upon millions of Americans that aren't your sect of Christianity? They have the same rights as you do and are as much citizen as you.

I have a right to serve God and support the US Constitution and God Bless American patriotism, and so do they. They have no right to support or promote anti-American, anti-God radical hedonism.

 

[PureX]

It's interesting to me how dishonest and rude zealous ideologues tend to be in conversation with others. It seems the more ardently they hold to their own self-righteousness the more weak and defensive they become in relation to others. Where the open mind is calm and curious, the closed mind is angry and defensive. Any idea that doesn't comport with the zealot's is an "enemy" idea that must be destroyed in order to maintain the presumption of total self-righteousness. And this cuts the zealot off from any honest interaction with the rest of humanity, and makes everyone else his enemy.

Is the delusion of total self-righteousness really worth all that? And it certainly doesn't strike me a Christ-like as it places the zealot at enmity with everyone they encounter.

 

[Jefferson]

It's interesting to me how dishonest and rude zealous ideologues tend to be in conversation with others. It seems the more ardently they hold to their own self-righteousness the more weak and defensive they become in relation to others. Where the open mind is calm and curious, the closed mind is angry and defensive. Any idea that doesn't comport with the zealot's is an "enemy" idea that must be destroyed in order to maintain the presumption of total self-righteousness. And this cuts the zealot off from any honest interaction with the rest of humanity, and makes everyone else his enemy.

Is the delusion of total self-righteousness really worth all that? And it certainly doesn't strike me a Christ-like as it places the zealot at enmity with everyone they encounter.

You so accurately just described the woke left who live to "cancel" anyone who dares to disagree with them.

 

[PureX]

You so accurately just described the woke left who live to "cancel" anyone who dares to disagree with them.

And those here and elsewhere on the right that do the same thing. It's a very common tactic of ideological zealots. Any idea that doesn't comport with their own has to be eliminated by whatever means they can muster ... lies, insults, misrepresentations, slander, whatever makes them look and feel superior and righteous in their own eyes.

 

[Rusha]

It's interesting to me how dishonest and rude zealous ideologues tend to be in conversation with others. It seems the more ardently they hold to their own self-righteousness the more weak and defensive they become in relation to others. Where the open mind is calm and curious, the closed mind is angry and defensive. Any idea that doesn't comport with the zealot's is an "enemy" idea that must be destroyed in order to maintain the presumption of total self-righteousness. And this cuts the zealot off from any honest interaction with the rest of humanity, and makes everyone else his enemy.

Is the delusion of total self-righteousness really worth all that? And it certainly doesn't strike me a Christ-like as it places the zealot at enmity with everyone they encounter.

Nope, it’s not worth that. You can’t have discussions with the overly zealous. It’s like trying to have a civil discourse with Cujo. I disregard and ignore whatever rant they are currently on, but to each their own.

 

[Idolater]

Catholicism doesn't interfere with my rights as a U.S. citizen, which is not sad at all. This is a good thing. The Church had its centuries as an actual political power and it doesn't anymore, which is also a good thing.

'Hundred percent agree, and I also think it's a good thing that she learned, from that. When she now, with Pope St. John Paul II's (pray for us) authority, teaches us literally about inalienable rights (literally word-for-word a term in the Catechism), we know it isn't just her observation of what happened in America, but that, in the context of her failure when Church and State aren't separate. And this observation is used by the Holy Spirit to stir the bishops' individual memories, is there anything that I ever learned from the bishops who taught me, that resonates or corroborates or jives with any of this "inalienable rights" language? And things start to come to mind, things that otherwise, without her stumble in this public morality matter, she wouldn't have thought to recall. Something, I'm imagining, said by an Apostle or two, here or there, that persists and survives as a trope or a cliche or idiom, but not recognized as Apostolic in origin because of how it passed into common parlance so quickly.

Who knows. But I completely agree with your 100% of your post, make no mistake, I am just using it as a jumping off point, thank you for prompting my thought here.
Pope St. John Paul II pray for us. Amen.

 

[Idolater]

It's interesting to me how dishonest and rude zealous ideologues tend to be in conversation with others.

I am a zealous ideologue.

It seems the more ardently they hold to their own self-righteousness the more weak and defensive they become in relation to others. Where the open mind is calm and curious, the closed mind is angry and defensive. Any idea that doesn't comport with the zealot's is an "enemy" idea that must be destroyed in order to maintain the presumption of total self-righteousness. And this cuts the zealot off from any honest interaction with the rest of humanity, and makes everyone else his enemy.

Is the delusion of total self-righteousness really worth all that? And it certainly doesn't strike me a Christ-like as it places the zealot at enmity with everyone they encounter.

I just want to make sure that you know that when you say "zealous ideologue" that's me.

 

[Idolater]

Nope, it’s not worth that. You can’t have discussions with the overly zealous. It’s like trying to have a civil discourse with Cujo. I disregard and ignore whatever rant they are currently on, but to each their own.

I identify as overly zealous.