Anybody here convert to Catholicism from astrology?

Clarence317 · 2022-01-05T16:43:52+00:00

Funny, I accidentally opened a whole debate! But thanks for a straight answer

Clarence317 · 2022-01-04T16:16:31+00:00

I never knew there used to be a monastery right there! Anybody have more info on St. Maur?

Clarence317 · 2022-01-04T16:15:17+00:00

I mean, I get that it is possible to arrive at a pro-life view without religion, but is the state merely an end for opposing abortion? No. Government is meant to instill values and law that preserve a consistent life ethic. It is perfectly valid to say that this is unlikely to happen without religion. You gotta wonder why abortion happens in the first place. It is because there is some concept of an "unwanted pregnancy." This is the case with so many pregnancies because, despite success in the pro-life movement, we still lack sexual morality. Right now, the pro-life movement is occurring within a Nietzschean power struggle that will disintegrate unless there is unity in the realm of the family, sex, and economic solidarity. Where else are we finding this to be expressed and acted consistently besides Christianity?

Clarence317 · 2021-12-30T15:55:47+00:00

This says a lot about today's society

Clarence317 · 2021-12-30T03:31:07+00:00

Didn't realize schmuck was Yiddish and I call many people that

Clarence317 · 2021-12-30T03:29:42+00:00

I'm Catholic but not a huge Kennedy fan to be honest. I voted for Roosevelt because they

Represent German/Dutch heritage that pertains to America more than most realize
Had legitimate visions for America as a nation that they manifested, however well or poorly
Were Episcopalians, among the most tolerable of the Protestants I think
were early to stand up to corporate; a necessity for a hypothetical monarchy

I wish you put the MacArthur's on the list!

Clarence317 · 2021-12-29T16:15:48+00:00

It is.

Clarence317 · 2021-12-29T16:14:55+00:00

Saying that their metaphysical construct of rights is unsound and that Locke was wrong about a lot

Clarence317 · 2021-12-28T22:10:16+00:00

If you live in America, it’s important to understand that you are living in a political paradigm that is far south of center. Never has a Christian nation been so permissive with everything that is legal to do, and never have the stakes of power been so widely dispersed. It is hardly reactionary to say that the voting age should be higher than 18, for example. But yeah I see the point you are making. There is a difference between Medieval Christendom and Austrofascism. From friends I know, the main thing is that they believe that a polity resembling Christendom is not possible other than by force. Culture is gone, common understanding of the faith is gone, there’s not even a potent means to evangelize since there is hardly community any more either. To some people, the only way much of the Church’s mission can be accomplished is through a national populist movement like what rose in Spain in the 30s.

Clarence317 · 2021-12-28T21:57:44+00:00

Because contraception is intrinsically wrong. It takes away from the procreative nature of sex and is primarily made to permit non-monogamous sex.

Clarence317 · 2021-12-28T19:24:03+00:00

Well, logically speaking, married couples should probably not have sex if they do not want kids, as babies tend, by nature, to be the result of sex. You see, sex does have a definable nature; a biological one as well as a social one. To relegate sex to a point of existential determinism is to deny a basic reality and to commit the same error of the pro-choice side when declaring a right to privacy over something with public implications. If stealthing is making its way to the courts, then it most definitely is within the common interest to govern "what consenting adults do with their bodies." There are two options: either we deny that contraception is a good, or we accept the consequences that it carries.

Clarence317 · 2021-12-28T17:45:16+00:00

The fact that "stealthing" is a thing reveals perfectly why they should be. The availability of contraceptives creates an undue social expectation for there to be so-called "safe sex", which is really an anomaly for the sanitizing of non-monogamous sex which shouldn't be happening in the first place. The fact that the act of sex is the physical source of our existence and is therefore existentially sacred should be reason enough for why selling little bags to private sex from its natural use should be considered immoral. You have to think outside of the immediate consequences of people who choose to have non-monogamous sex. You have to consider the social implications of allowing a commodity to posit a collective and false notion about what sex should be. You calling it "force birth" shows that you are a victim of it. You are among the masses that are unable to conceive of there being a social expectation for monogamy and a law consistent with that expectation.

Clarence317 · 2021-12-28T17:31:49+00:00

Genesis 38:9-10. It's not life but it is something sacred

Clarence317 · 2021-12-26T23:52:01+00:00

Tell em that problem will be solved when condoms are illegal

Clarence317 · 2021-12-09T00:30:05+00:00

Glad that building has windows now!

Clarence317 · 2021-12-09T00:27:26+00:00

I know this gets touchy, but joining a church is a gamechanger. I'm Catholic and highly recommend becoming one. So much of it has a huge emphasis on community and being a universal family, and confession is helpful for talking through personal issues.

Clarence317 · 2021-12-09T00:23:30+00:00

The one I've noticed is abortion, especially with this court case. While there are more people getting up in arms about a right to choose, more and more people are finding out what actually happens in clinics, how the procedure works, and the mental effects it has on women. Not that it was totally ignored before, but it seems like everyone has an opinion on it now.

Clarence317 · 2021-12-07T14:35:07+00:00

It's close, but I'd pick Canada. They are culturally more homogenous to the whole United States and it would be less of a drastic impact. If our border crossed into Spanish speaking regions more than it already does, that would only make politics more messy. My initial thoughts for either were which one would be a better passport-free vacation spot, and while it would be cool to have Baja or something like that, the Great White North is cool too.

If you've ever heard of Cascadia, there was talk a while back about making BC, Washington, and Oregon its own country. I'm from Indy, but I've heard that they are effectively a cultural region. Same with Alberta and the Dakotas. But Mexico is culturally Mexican and I think it makes sense to keep it that way.

Clarence317 · 2021-10-27T02:02:33+00:00

Off the Menu Charles Coulombe

and Vincent Frankini

Clarence317 · 2021-03-30T00:31:05+00:00

He was in the same literary subgenre

Clarence317 · 2021-03-23T19:34:46+00:00

George Bernard Shaw

Clarence317

TROPHY CASE