Author Topic: Rothbards idiotic defense of libertarianism (Read 4743 times)

jlamos · « **Reply #45 on:** August 04, 2013, 04:26:01 PM »

Quote from: Capt McQuigg

Quote from: Matto
Quote from: Capt McQuigg

How would you categorize your political views now?

If I could choose, I would choose a Catholic Monarch who recognized Christ as King. But I don't think I will live to see it. There are not a lot of Monarchists in the good old USA.

A Catholic monarchy would be ideal. The first step in the direction of a monarchy is for tradition to take up residency in the Vatican and for modernism to be evicted.

Are you saying that the apostates currently occupying the Vatican have to be tossed out and replaced by a true Catholic magisterium before a Catholic monarchy can exist anywhere in the world?

jlamos · « **Reply #46 on:** August 04, 2013, 04:41:00 PM »

Quote from: Capt McQuigg

Quote from: Traditional Guy 20
In conclusion one cannot be for both. One must either be a traditionalist or one must be a libertarian.

I sure wish that was the choices in front of us.

In the absence of a Catholic monarchy or a Catholic republic, then I say keep the state as small as possible. Big, strong, atheistic states have a nasty habit of placing the boot firmly on man's neck. After all, why shouldn't they? The atheist state sees man as a commodity to do with as it wishes.

But, like I said either I said in this thread or any other, until the modernists are evicted from the Vatican, a "Catholic"state would actually be a conciliar state, whether that is actually worse than an atheist state is the topic of another thread. :wink:

If your only goal is to limit the power of our current ungodly state because you think that the creation of a Catholic state is out of reach, then I say you have too little faith.

If you think that the Catholicity of a state is in any way limited by the Catholicity (or lack thereof) of the apostates currently occupying the Vatican then you may as well say that you can't keep the true faith because Casual Frank doesn't, or that you can't be a Catholic because Mr. Bergoglio isn't.

What nonsense! The Holy Roman Catholic Church exists whether or not it resides in Rome. The gates of hell cannot prevail against it even if Happy John and Paul the Sod opened the very gates in St. Peter's Basilica itself!

Capt McQuigg · « **Reply #47 on:** August 05, 2013, 03:51:49 PM »

Quote from: jlamos

Quote from: Capt McQuigg
Quote from: Matto
Quote from: Capt McQuigg

How would you categorize your political views now?

If I could choose, I would choose a Catholic Monarch who recognized Christ as King. But I don't think I will live to see it. There are not a lot of Monarchists in the good old USA.

A Catholic monarchy would be ideal. The first step in the direction of a monarchy is for tradition to take up residency in the Vatican and for modernism to be evicted.

Are you saying that the apostates currently occupying the Vatican have to be tossed out and replaced by a true Catholic magisterium before a Catholic monarchy can exist anywhere in the world?

For every one tough as steel Catholic soul out there there are a dozen or more weak souls who need a shephard. The strong ones need a shephard too but that's just to keep their vanity under control. So, in short, yes. Rome returning to the Catholic Faith would be an anchor for this world.

It's possible that in the next few decades the U.S. may break apart. Unbloody, God willing. The establishment of a small Catholic republic would be beautiful.

Maybe in the Spokane, WA area :wink: The CMRI and a small SSPX chapel is there and the novus ordo diocese is in bankruptcy (that's financial bankruptcy in addition to the spiritual bankruptcy!)