Who is the St. Leo the Great of today?

Traditional Guy,

Your posts expressing your anger reflect a collectivist attitude.  Remember, what "society" or "others at large" are doing doesn't mean that it applies to you or to others.  I mean, if abortion being legal and encouraged doesn't mean that the lovely ladies at the Traditional Chapels are visiting abortion clinics.  And it also means that you have to think for yourself and behave in a manner that is consistent with Traditional Catholicism and have to remain aloof from the culture at large, which we as individuals can't fix.  

Live a Catholic life.  

Bemoan the common culture.

Do not be deluded into thinking that joining up with some political activist group will make a significant difference.

Read the classics (Catholic and Secular, read the great liberal writers too).

A Catholic's soul is saved by adhering to the Catholic faith and if Providence put you into such a morally wretched time as this it's for a reason.  So find that reason.

I'm not angry and neither am I 'collectivist." I just don't follow this nonsense about freedom, free trade, democracy, "following the Constitution," etc.

Quote from: Capt McQuigg

Traditional Guy,

Your posts expressing your anger reflect a collectivist attitude.  Remember, what "society" or "others at large" are doing doesn't mean that it applies to you or to others.  I mean, if abortion being legal and encouraged doesn't mean that the lovely ladies at the Traditional Chapels are visiting abortion clinics.  And it also means that you have to think for yourself and behave in a manner that is consistent with Traditional Catholicism and have to remain aloof from the culture at large, which we as individuals can't fix.  

Live a Catholic life.  

Bemoan the common culture.

Do not be deluded into thinking that joining up with some political activist group will make a significant difference.

Read the classics (Catholic and Secular, read the great liberal writers too).

A Catholic's soul is saved by adhering to the Catholic faith and if Providence put you into such a morally wretched time as this it's for a reason.  So find that reason.

I'm not angry and neither am I 'collectivist." I just don't follow this nonsense about freedom, free trade, democracy, "following the Constitution," etc.

Of course you are.  The examples you referred to were all based on macro conclusions with referring to gαys, abortion and the destruction of the family. Even your response to me dealt in generalities such as a disclaimer that you don't follow "freedom".  What would it mean to renounce freedom? Where would you discard your freedom?  

My point to you is that you cannot control the behavior of others and even in a wretched society you can still strive to live a life faithful to The Catholic faith. You will only infuriate yourself if you focus on aggregate details and ignore or not pay enough attention to your own interior life and activities.

Obama is an American liberal who is really a leftist collectivist and not a classic 19th century liberal.  Of course Obama isn't the antichrist because the guy needs a TelePrompTer everywhere he goes and he makes tremendous gaffes that would get a conservative republican hounded out of town (remember his referring to the 57 states). American contemporary liberals are really just leftists masquerading to fool the ignorant or lazy but the real constituency of the American left is the vicious and the avaricious.

One thing to always remember is that the u.s. is a Masonic country and led by impious men with lust for power and aggrandizement in their very hearts and with the dependency state that the u.s. is now and will continue to get worse we can always hope that out of the broken pieces when it all collapses under its own dead weight there may just arise a Catholic republic (yes, a Catholic monarchy would be optimal) but the Catholic world is largely enslaved to what future Church historians may just call the Concilliarist heresy so we have no option but to stand fast in the Catholic faith.

Traditional Guy,

No offense was intended to you personally but as for the collectivism that I accused you of...  That wasn't in reference to any political theory but in the examples you provided, I even left some out.  And it really only pertains to this thread.  

American liberalism of the hard left Democratic party is actually collectivism, if not outright socialism (but with a soft touch).  Today's American liberalism is statism and not the unbridled freedom of the classical liberal writers.  

If you haven't already, take some time and read F. Hayak's "The Road to Serfdom" and Ludwig von Mises' books and definitely read Jean-Jacques Rousseau's "Emile: On Education" and even Ayn Rand's literature.  Of course there are others but these books will be a primer for classical liberal and libertarian thought.  It's best to go to the source and read these writers so you aren't merely going off someone else's opinion.      

To keep this from becoming a food fight, I do want to make clear definitive thatement that since the U.S. is an atheist state (not individual americans, but the official format of our government) we really are to remain aloof and we can't actively participate as active members of a political party without endangering our souls (because how does one make close ties with people who are indifferent and truly give the assent of their will to abortion).  The Democrats not only engage in warfare (they pretend to be against it, and actually are against it when the Republicans are in charge) and the Democrats are not only pro-abortion but want our tax dollars to fund this repulsive act.  The republicans give lip service to the pro-life cause but 40 years of no real legislative action should make us realize that the republicans use the pro-life jargon to get votes, and nothing else.  Both parties support an ever increasing government with ever increasing laws and rules.  

If you haven't already, take some time and read F. Hayak's "The Road to Serfdom" and Ludwig von Mises' books and definitely read Jean-Jacques Rousseau's "Emile: On Education" and even Ayn Rand's literature.  Of course there are others but these books will be a primer for classical liberal and libertarian thought.  It's best to go to the source and read these writers so you aren't merely going off someone else's opinion.

Why would I waste my time reading this literary puke? I know what libertarian thought is thank you very much and it is despicable.

There is no "food fight" going on here, we're just debating.

To keep this from becoming a food fight, I do want to make clear definitive thatement that since the U.S. is an atheist state (not individual americans, but the official format of our government) we really are to remain aloof and we can't actively participate as active members of a political party without endangering our souls (because how does one make close ties with people who are indifferent and truly give the assent of their will to abortion).  The Democrats not only engage in warfare (they pretend to be against it, and actually are against it when the Republicans are in charge) and the Democrats are not only pro-abortion but want our tax dollars to fund this repulsive act.  The republicans give lip service to the pro-life cause but 40 years of no real legislative action should make us realize that the republicans use the pro-life jargon to get votes, and nothing else.  Both parties support an ever increasing government with ever increasing laws and rules.  

To really stop abortion one must create laws to deter it, no law forces a woman to have an abortion, women do it freely and eagerly I might add. In regards to warfare that in itself is not a bad thing if there is a real enemy nor is militarism or conquest necessarily a bad thing either. The problem occurs when we fight countries in the Middle East for the state of Israel and for our own Trotskyist fascination with converting the world to America's ideology.

Quote from: Capt McQuigg

If you haven't already, take some time and read F. Hayak's "The Road to Serfdom" and Ludwig von Mises' books and definitely read Jean-Jacques Rousseau's "Emile: On Education" and even Ayn Rand's literature.  Of course there are others but these books will be a primer for classical liberal and libertarian thought.  It's best to go to the source and read these writers so you aren't merely going off someone else's opinion.

Why would I waste my time reading this literary puke? I know what libertarian thought is thank you very much and it is despicable.

There is no "food fight" going on here, we're just debating.

How do you know it's puke?  Error filled from a traditional Catholic point of view yes, but vastly superior to what the Big D's and the Big R's are offering.  You would actually be pretty impressed with Hayek's read on pre-WWII Germany.

Since you like debate, please respond to ServusSpiritusSanctus' question about why you think Obama won't take our guns?

For example, there is a bill being run through now by Sen. Feinstein and it calls for the ban of 153 separate guns, most of course are military-looking but not automatic (those actually are legal but you need a class C license to own one) but semi-auto and just plain scary looking.  

So, that's a bill being pushed through and Obama will sign it if it passes.  You know as well as I do that this law is just a big first score and that there will be more calls for more gun bans.  

As for Sen. Feinstein, she actually did say in a 60 Minutes interview back in 1994 that if she had the votes she would have said "Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in."  Please note that her comment was directed at your average man or woman citizen and not the "unhinged, criminal element that shouldn't have any guns..."

So, what made you think Obama wouldn't want to ban guns?

How do you know it's puke?  Error filled from a traditional Catholic point of view yes, but vastly superior to what the Big D's and the Big R's are offering.  You would actually be pretty impressed with Hayek's read on pre-WWII Germany.

Since you like debate, please respond to ServusSpiritusSanctus' question about why you think Obama won't take our guns?

For example, there is a bill being run through now by Sen. Feinstein and it calls for the ban of 153 separate guns, most of course are military-looking but not automatic (those actually are legal but you need a class C license to own one) but semi-auto and just plain scary looking.  

So, that's a bill being pushed through and Obama will sign it if it passes.  You know as well as I do that this law is just a big first score and that there will be more calls for more gun bans.  

As for Sen. Feinstein, she actually did say in a 60 Minutes interview back in 1994 that if she had the votes she would have said "Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in."  Please note that her comment was directed at your average man or woman citizen and not the "unhinged, criminal element that shouldn't have any guns..."

So, what made you think Obama wouldn't want to ban guns?

It's puke because it is the liberal viewpoint and no it is not vastly superior, since the insane economic theory it supports of tax cuts, free trade, open borders, etc. leads to the misery and ruin of the working class.