Why the pro-life movement has failed
#21
Belloc Wrote:
kjvail Wrote:. By hitching their star to the Republican Party, and approaching the issue as a legal rather than a deeper philosophical theological and thus cultural crisis, the prospects for success were always likely to fail to the extent that there was an unwillingness to confront the broader "culture of choice" that is the hallmark of modern civilization.


Well put, the Constitution Party is 100% pro-life nationally, yet gets no mention or support at all...just blowing in the wind......better be at GOP King's table, I guess, then have the guts to finally leave GOP and start supporting another option, as did many in mid-1850's, leaving Whigs to crumble...

These guys are thinking even more radically than this.
The C.P. advocates a "return to the Constitution" or some such thing. These authors would argue that even in the Constitution the problem is manifest, as they reference in the above article Hobbes' Leviathan (1651). I think many postmodern authors would push it back even further to Machiavelli, as the founder of the basic concepts that would become liberalism. Liberalism is the political manifestation of a greater movement, secularism. A replacement religion that stems from the un-reconstructed pagan ideas (as opposed to the Christianized paganism of the Church fathers) that entered back into Western philosophy during the Renaissance. 

The problem is, as they and I see it, the radical autonomy of the individual. Milbank identifies the founding of this idea with the univocal ontology of Bl. Duns Scotus and I have to say he makes a good case. So now, we are talking late Middle Ages. (See Theology and Social Theory:Beyond Secular Reason for a complete discussion).

By 1789, modernity is already far advanced. The Constitution certainly represents classical liberalism which is predicated on the radical autonomy of the individual. It is in that autonomy that the roots of atrocities such as abortion can be found. It's this autonomy that allows the regime of "choice" in all its manifestations, so much so, I argue, that even "tradition" is a life style choice now.

Therefore a simple political solution, drawn up along the lines of liberalism, isn't going to work. It's not radical enough to purge the disease. Framing it as a battle for "the right to life" simply perpetuates the same error and plays the game according to liberal rules.

The disease is secularism itself, not a facile identification of liberalism with the contemporary Democrat party but rather the fundamental ideology of Western society that has replaced Christianity and has been in place for nearly 500 years. It's arguable, that outside of some very small circles, there simply is no non-secular reason in the West and very little outside the West. It's ontological, ethical and epistemological assumptions completely dominate all discourse, to the point that when a non-secular thought is suggested it simply isn't understood by most people.

THAT'S how radical the solution has to be.

BTW, none of this had anything to do with Jews... but rather was the subtle replacement of Christian ontology with a classical stoic ontology including the concept of creation by a restraining of chaos and the dominium of the individual.
Reply
#22
Thanks, that was an interesting link, thanks for posting. At least they're starting to get that it is a mindset problem.
No, it doesn't have anything to do with the jews; some support it , some don't. The Orthodox are extremely pro-life (as far as the unborn, anyway). That puts them in the same position as most Catholics now, I'm sorry to say; their religion is against it, but many don't care. Think Nancy Pelosi. Joe Biden. Plenty of them out there, you get the idea.
Reply
#23
Anastasia Wrote:Thanks, that was an interesting link, thanks for posting. At least they're starting to get that it is a mindset problem.
No, it doesn't have anything to do with the jews; some support it , some don't. The Orthodox are extremely pro-life (as far as the unborn, anyway). That puts them in the same position as most Catholics now, I'm sorry to say; their religion is against it, but many don't care. Think Nancy Pelosi. Joe Biden. Plenty of them out there, you get the idea.

It's easier to blame the other than to realize we did it to ourselves. Certainly if we follow the line of philosophers / theologians that are implicated by this line of reasoning we find it starts with BL. Duns Scotus, holiness does not necessarily imply philosophical accuracy; Descartes who was a faithful Catholic who sought to rescue philosophy from the nominalism that killed late Scholasticism; and plenty of other well-intentioned Catholics who simply followed the dominant currents in thought and sought to direct them to orthoodox ends. I think only now, in the late stages of modernity are the errors becoming clearer.

Reply
#24
The Pope should reintegrate the Society and Canonize Pius XII on Yom Kippur and ask that Jews repent of their calumnies of Pius XII on their day of atonement.
Reply
#25
StevusMagnus Wrote:The Pope should reintegrate the Society and Canonize Pius XII on Yom Kippur and ask that Jews repent of their calumnies of Pius XII on their day of atonement.

And invite them all to accept Christ, the Saviour of all men!
Reply
#26
Bonifacio Wrote:
StevusMagnus Wrote:The Pope should reintegrate the Society and Canonize Pius XII on Yom Kippur and ask that Jews repent of their calumnies of Pius XII on their day of atonement.

And invite them all to accept Christ, the Saviour of all men!
That would be antisemitic..........[Image: sneaky.gif]
Reply
#27
alaric Wrote:
Bonifacio Wrote:
StevusMagnus Wrote:The Pope should reintegrate the Society and Canonize Pius XII on Yom Kippur and ask that Jews repent of their calumnies of Pius XII on their day of atonement.

And invite them all to accept Christ, the Saviour of all men!
That would be antisemitic..........[Image: sneaky.gif]

Oops, sorry. Sometimes I get carried away.
Reply
#28
Telemaque Wrote:It's not tarring with the same brush. It's telling the truth, that the majority of Jews have an anti-Christian attitude because of their Jewish identity and a desire to promote abortion and their leaders work to that end. They must be held publically accountable for what they're doing. Linda Chavez's husband is "pro-life." You should read about the way their PAC scammed donations from pro-lifers.

Once again, that's diverting the discussion. I doubt you'd be accused of having some sort of "sinful" opinion if you pointed out that rabid secularists are promoters of abortion. If it is fair to say devout Catholics represent a strong force against abortion then it's fair to say anti-Christian Jews are a powerful force for abortion.
I really don't get the whole anti-Jewish thing, so I am just going to make one point.

Hitler was raised Catholic. Those pedophile priests were Catholic. The Borgias were Catholic.

And when anti-Catholic people say this sort of thing, we say that they were going against what it means to be Catholic and so the Church should not be judged by them.

The most Jewish of Jews are the Orthodox, and so I think we should judge Jews by them. They are not trying to take over the world. They are pro-life. They probably don't give a hoot about Catholics.

The Jews that y'all are talking about have left their faith. They are Jewish by blood only, just like the kazillions of my relatives who left the Church, and kazillion other cradle Catholics who left the Church. Should the Catholic Church be judged by those who have left the Church? Hitler left the Church--should the Church be judged according to him?

So basically, get over the Jewish conspiracy bullst*t. It makes you look so stupid. and drives people away from one of the most beautiful aspects of Catholicism.

And Yeah, I don't care if this gets me banned.
Reply
#29
newtolatin Wrote:
Telemaque Wrote:It's not tarring with the same brush. It's telling the truth, that the majority of Jews have an anti-Christian attitude because of their Jewish identity and a desire to promote abortion and their leaders work to that end. They must be held publically accountable for what they're doing. Linda Chavez's husband is "pro-life." You should read about the way their PAC scammed donations from pro-lifers.

Once again, that's diverting the discussion. I doubt you'd be accused of having some sort of "sinful" opinion if you pointed out that rabid secularists are promoters of abortion. If it is fair to say devout Catholics represent a strong force against abortion then it's fair to say anti-Christian Jews are a powerful force for abortion.
I really don't get the whole anti-Jewish thing, so I am just going to make one point.

Hitler was raised Catholic. Those pedophile priests were Catholic. The Borgias were Catholic.

And when anti-Catholic people say this sort of thing, we say that they were going against what it means to be Catholic and so the Church should not be judged by them.

The most Jewish of Jews are the Orthodox, and so I think we should judge Jews by them. They are not trying to take over the world. They are pro-life. They probably don't give a hoot about Catholics.

The Jews that y'all are talking about have left their faith. They are Jewish by blood only, just like the kazillions of my relatives who left the Church, and kazillion other cradle Catholics who left the Church. Should the Catholic Church be judged by those who have left the Church? Hitler left the Church--should the Church be judged according to him?

So basically, get over the Jewish conspiracy bullst*t. It makes you look so stupid. and drives people away from one of the most beautiful aspects of Catholicism.

And Yeah, I don't care if this gets me banned.
Yea you're right, all those Jewish orgs out there calling for Williamson's head and leaning on secular leaders against the Vatican are just figments of our collective overactive imaginations.[Image: eyes.gif]

Oh and Catholicism is not a race and nobody here gives a rats ass about the Fuhrer or apostate Catholics.

Your rant is moot.
Reply
#30
alaric Wrote:
newtolatin Wrote:
Telemaque Wrote:It's not tarring with the same brush. It's telling the truth, that the majority of Jews have an anti-Christian attitude because of their Jewish identity and a desire to promote abortion and their leaders work to that end. They must be held publically accountable for what they're doing. Linda Chavez's husband is "pro-life." You should read about the way their PAC scammed donations from pro-lifers.

Once again, that's diverting the discussion. I doubt you'd be accused of having some sort of "sinful" opinion if you pointed out that rabid secularists are promoters of abortion. If it is fair to say devout Catholics represent a strong force against abortion then it's fair to say anti-Christian Jews are a powerful force for abortion.
I really don't get the whole anti-Jewish thing, so I am just going to make one point.

Hitler was raised Catholic. Those pedophile priests were Catholic. The Borgias were Catholic.

And when anti-Catholic people say this sort of thing, we say that they were going against what it means to be Catholic and so the Church should not be judged by them.

The most Jewish of Jews are the Orthodox, and so I think we should judge Jews by them. They are not trying to take over the world. They are pro-life. They probably don't give a hoot about Catholics.

The Jews that y'all are talking about have left their faith. They are Jewish by blood only, just like the kazillions of my relatives who left the Church, and kazillion other cradle Catholics who left the Church. Should the Catholic Church be judged by those who have left the Church? Hitler left the Church--should the Church be judged according to him?

So basically, get over the Jewish conspiracy bullst*t. It makes you look so stupid. and drives people away from one of the most beautiful aspects of Catholicism.

And Yeah, I don't care if this gets me banned.
Yea you're right, all those Jewish orgs out there calling for Williamson's head and leaning on secular leaders against the Vatican are just figments of our collective overactive imaginations.[Image: eyes.gif]

Oh and Catholicism is not a race and nobody here gives a rats ass about the Fuhrer or apostate Catholics.

Your rant is moot.

The Synagogue of Satan is either something a person admits exists, or he "stand in solidarity" with it.

I know where the book of the Apocalypse and Pius IX stand on it.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)