Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Politics and World Leaders => Topic started by: poche on June 05, 2013, 04:02:13 AM
-
Nineteen-year-old Rose Marie Cawley has been praying a lot recently. She's been praying for inspiration from God, that he will reveal to her the name of the man she will marry.
"I could marry someone single or I could marry someone very married with three wives or 10 wives," she said. "You just have to keep your mind open."
Cawley will keep praying until inspiration strikes, just like her mother, and two other mothers before her, because in this Centennial Park, Ariz., polygamist community, God reveals to the women who they will marry.
"This is my choice," Cawley said. "I chose to basically give myself over to the heavenly father to place me with whoever he chooses."
Centennial Park, Ariz., is a remote town just over the Utah border and it is home to 1,500 fundamentalist Mormons. They still believe that plural marriage, one of the religious teachings of Mormon founder Joseph Smith, was ordained by God and that a man receives a higher form of Salvation when he has several wives.
http://news.yahoo.com/modern-polygamy-arizona-mormon-fundamentalists-seek-shed-stereotypes-001211578--abc-news-topstories.html
-
If the supreme court makes sodomite marriage the "law of the land" in the case that they have heard arguments and are due to release their decision later this month as expected, polygamy will soon be made a "constitutional right" as well.
There is a television show on a cable channel (called, I believe, "Polygamy USA") that is showing polygamous marriages in a positive light. The American public is already being prepared.
-
Polygamy is not a perversion like sodomy is.
-
Polygamy is not a perversion like sodomy is.
I agree with you. That's why it will actually be easier to get polygamy legalized and accepted by the majority of the people than sodomite marriage.
-
I wouldn't be so sure that it will be allowed. It doesn't appeal to a broad swathe of women voters. Unlike two grooms or two brides. (disgusting)
-
Polygamy will not be "officially" allowed due to tax and family law issues.
-
Polygamy will not be "officially" allowed due to tax and family law issues.
If enough women wanted it, (ie, if the media controllers entered into determined campaign in support of it), we would have it.
The secret rulers are obsessed with population control.
I believe the goal down the road is to continue to elevate the social status of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs, putting them in positions of authority, especially over heterosɛҳuąƖs, to glamorize unnatural vice among women and encourage young women to become bisɛҳuąƖs. The birth rate will be one child per two women - and that will be a new model family - two women raising one child.
-
ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs and Eunuchs have always been the "natural" high court officials of oriental and despotic governments.
-
Polygamy is not a perversion like sodomy is.
It is adultery.
-
I believe the goal down the road is to continue to elevate the social status of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs, putting them in positions of authority, especially over heterosɛҳuąƖs, to glamorize unnatural vice among women and encourage young women to become bisɛҳuąƖs. The birth rate will be one child per two women - and that will be a new model family - two women raising one child.
Yes, the groundwork has been laid for this.
I can already hear the apologetics for it now on a forum like FE.
"don't shun such people, the children aren't to blame, their children should play with Catholic children"
"You have no right to judge your gαy boss, you need to be charitable and keep the spirit of charity, and stick to your work"
Seriously, how many so-called Catholics would be fine with this?
How many nominal trads will try to get along with people who support such an outcome, while treating their own people with disrespect?
Seriously - already, there are a huge number of so-called Catholics, and possibly many trads, who prefer the above scenario to the "authoritarian" traditional family (though they may not admit it). Prefer the thought of living with a girlfriend (there were lots of jokes about room-mates being "husbands" or "wives" a couple years ago) having a professional career, and engaging in promiscuity while raising a child together, to the thought of being a loving wife and mother of many children. Really, many are far closer to the above scenario in their way of thinking and living than they are to the ideal of a Catholic wife and mother.
There will be many trads more embarrassed of coming from a large family or having relative with large families than they are embarrassed to get along with people who would support such a system.
-
Undoubtedly some of you think I'm exaggerating.
Am I really?
A man who wants a traditional family life gets his reputation destroyed for trying to talk to a girl who was encouraging him. It's just too "creepy" for a guy like that to say hello! Why he's "perverted" for being 14 years older!
These same people publicly befriend and associate with someon who sports an equal sign profile (pro-sodomy "marriage) picture on facebook.
So - Catholic "loser" with honorable intentions who never does any harm to anyone:
Destroy his reputation, attempts to sic the police on him.
Useful associate that publicly supports gαy rights? Publicly befriend.
And these are people with an intensely traditional identity.
I'm not exaggerating in my posts above about what is happening.
Neo-traditionalism is about selling out without losing face, while destroying the reputations of the authentic traditionalists.
And it will lead to the acceptance of the bisɛҳuąƖ society, euthanasia ridden, controlled reproduction society that the social engineers are planning, where true Catholic family life is a thing of the past.
-
The neo-SSPXers are for the most part no longer sincere.
Once they accepted selling their fellow Catholics down the river for the sake of the cult, once they accepted letting trashy Zionist scuм closely associate with the leadership, once they accepted double-talk about conciliarism, they accepted that resistance was futile.
They don't really care about serious resistance, they care about getting along in the world.
-
We need to be careful with rash generalizations.
1. Most resistance supporters are sincere tradition loving Catholics; not willing to out to the world.
2. Neo-Traditionalists would never support the resistance.
3. Not all of those who still attend the Neo SSPX, or support it, are insincere are not God Fearing. But all who aren't God-Fearing/ sincere, will certainly support it.
-
We need to be careful with rash generalizations.
1. Most resistance supporters are sincere tradition loving Catholics; not willing to out to the world.
2. Neo-Traditionalists would never support the resistance.
3. Not all of those who still attend the Neo SSPX, or support it, are insincere are not God Fearing. But all who aren't God-Fearing/ sincere, will certainly support it.
I'm not talking about the simple people who don't know better. Or even the genuinely mistaken people.
The people who write articles like the "Lessons of Hanukkah" and befriend the Zionist know exactly what they're doing.
Neotraditionalism is about keeping the simple people placated, saving face, while selling out.
It's very evident that the gradual sellout is taking place as the older generation passes away and into very old age and the younger generation comes of age.
Particularly among those for whom a public trad identity is very important: they want liberalization.
-
I'm not talking about the simple people who don't know better. Or even the genuinely mistaken people.
The people who write articles like the "Lessons of Hanukkah" and befriend the Zionist know exactly what they're doing.
Now I know that. I couldn't tell before. That's why I tried to make the clarification. When someone says, "The neo-SSPXers", they could be talking about any number and combinations of peoples; its not a defined term.
Neotraditionalism is about keeping the simple people placated, saving face, while selling out.
It's very evident that the gradual sellout is taking place as the older generation passes away and into very old age and the younger generation comes of age.
Particularly among those for whom a public trad identity is very important: they want liberalization.
Agreed.
-
Both polygamy and sodomy are mortal sins. Yuck!
-
Both polygamy and sodomy are mortal sins. Yuck!
Wrong for a Catholic, yes.
But sodomy is a perversion of nature, and one of the sins that cry out to heaven for vengeance. Polygamy is not.
In fact, many of the Fathers of the Old Covenant had multiple wives, and this was sanctioned by God. So it's FAR FROM against nature for a man to support and be married to many wives. Think about it: many children result from such a union.
One woman with several husbands -- THAT would be backwards, both because women shouldn't be "mistress" of a harem of men, and because it would result in a shrinking of the population.
Jesus Christ raised the bar on marriage (and many other things!) and that is what we must live by now. But let's not be inaccurate or exaggerate in our assessment of things.
The Mormons try to be Old-Testament, but they are very messed up in many ways. But family-values wise, at least they aren't "twisted". They're just in error.
-
If the supreme court makes sodomite marriage the "law of the land" in the case that they have heard arguments and are due to release their decision later this month as expected, polygamy will soon be made a "constitutional right" as well.
There is a television show on a cable channel (called, I believe, "Polygamy USA") that is showing polygamous marriages in a positive light. The American public is already being prepared.
Polygamy makes more sense than "gαy" marriage.
-
Both polygamy and sodomy are mortal sins. Yuck!
Wrong for a Catholic, yes.
But sodomy is a perversion of nature, and one of the sins that cry out to heaven for vengeance. Polygamy is not.
In fact, many of the Fathers of the Old Covenant had multiple wives, and this was sanctioned by God. So it's FAR FROM against nature for a man to support and be married to many wives. Think about it: many children result from such a union.
One woman with several husbands -- THAT would be backwards, both because women shouldn't be "mistress" of a harem of men, and because it would result in a shrinking of the population.
Jesus Christ raised the bar on marriage (and many other things!) and that is what we must live by now. But let's not be inaccurate or exaggerate in our assessment of things.
The Mormons try to be Old-Testament, but they are very messed up in many ways. But family-values wise, at least they aren't "twisted". They're just in error.
They have heretical doctrine about plural wives and heaven but when asked why the women will say to have Christian children.
Only the Fundamentalist LDS allow for polygamy, the "mainstream" LDS dropped the doctrine to become a state, and they constantly try to create PR distance from the FLDS. They still accept the plural marriage after-life doctrine though.
-
Jesus Christ raised the bar on marriage (and many other things!) and that is what we must live by now. But let's not be inaccurate or exaggerate in our assessment of things.
Just to clarify, because I otherwise concur with you. Monogamous marriage is the primitive (original) form of the family, as seen in Genesis. In relation to his time, Jesus raised the bar -- but viewed from a wider scope, he just put it back where it had always been.
-
Jesus Christ raised the bar on marriage (and many other things!) and that is what we must live by now. But let's not be inaccurate or exaggerate in our assessment of things.
Just to clarify, because I otherwise concur with you. Monogamous marriage is the primitive (original) form of the family, as seen in Genesis. In relation to his time, Jesus raised the bar -- but viewed from a wider scope, he just put it back where it had always been.
Same thing with divorce: "From the beginning it was not so..."
[6] Therefore now they are not two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let no man put asunder. [7] They say to him: Why then did Moses command to give a bill of divorce, and to put away? [8] He saith to them: Because Moses by reason of the hardness of your heart permitted you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.