CathInfo.com

Oh geez Tele. Of course it has a serious affect on me; my own family has lived through it. But just because it can stir emotion doesn't remove my ability to remain logical. When you got upset over how you were treated in the past, did it affect your logic?

I'm pointing out that you're not responding to my point as to their motivations.  If you want to see their motivations as having no natural basis and instead being based on hatred then you aren't being fair.  You took it as a terrible slight that they walked out.  It seems to me the real disgrace was the reaction of the SSPX, and that the foolish acts of those who walked out are of relatively minor consequence, except that the SSPX caved to them.

And who's talking about what's "natural" to hear or not? We're talking about masonic government's (our's in particular) taking advantage of other countries (with the help of THEIR masonic governments) and peoples. If someone can ignore that, it doesn't make them racist, just daft.

Our government is letting them in opposition to popular will.  That causes resentment.

And as I said, it's natural to want to hear sermons in your own national language.  Not a foreign language.

Oh, please.  The United States and its people didn't play by the rules in taking all of that land from Mexico; now they are expecting different behaviour from Mexicans and whining about how it is "American" land that belongs to "Americans," who, it should be noted, are expected to speak the English language.  One cannot have it two ways.  Either the principles of the US are universal and apply to everybody, or it is nothing but an over-ambitious Anglo-Protestant, Masonic country that has invaded and squatted on other peoples' land.  As far as I am concerned, the imperial jurisdictions on this side of the Appalachians are simply large scale modular housing schemes for industrial- and service-oriented migrant workers and their families.  It doesn't seem like the US has ever pretended to be much more than a rude Anglo syndicate that doesn't play by its own the rules and fumes when others do the same.  They don't have the necessary luxury of being in Massachusetts for them to complain about "foreign" languages; not in California or Texas or New Mexico or Arizona, anyway.

So if we want to understand the motivations of those who walked out, you should try to recognize that it is opposition to having their own language supplanted in their own land and place of worship.

It's a Catholic place of worship.  As for whose land it is and what it means for any land to be "American," well, that's rather debatable.  The US has always represented itself as an exception to the natural associations the constitute every other country in history; thus, it also does not qualify for the deference to customary law and ownership that every country based on natural associations does.

Quote from: PereJoseph

Oh, please.  The United States and its people didn't play by the rules in taking all of that land from Mexico.

You may not respect America's borders...

I just want to clarify that I dissent from your insistence upon using the word "America" as a synonym for the United States.

...but that hardly bears on what language Americans wish to hear their sermons in.

The wishes of these Anglo-Americans hardly bear on whether or not Spanish-speaking Catholics should be provided with sermons in Spanish.

It's pretty clear that it's not negotiable to those who encroach on it.  They have nothing but insults for anyone who discusses the topic.

"Encroach."  That's kind of begging the question, no ?  As for feeling insulted, well, if somebody believes he is being encroached upon and another doesn't, he might feel as if he is being insulted while the supposed encroacher is not aware of any insult on his part.

"The US has always represented itself" - oh brother, it really is impossible to talk to silly French people.  I've learned that the hard way.  The US has a nationality and the people have a right to that nationality.

Sure, I don't deny that the US is a real country; just not on this side of the Appalachians.

Your curt dismissal of that right to nationality based on the universalist propaganda that has become ever more anti-national over the years is unworthy of consideration.

My dismissal of US propaganda is not based on any universalist propaganda.  As for whether or not my dismissal is worthy of consideration, well, you say no and I say yes; we are at an impasse.

All nationalities have national prerogatives except Americans.

United-Statesians have the typical national prerogatives within their own original, pre-imperial, natural borders.  But, even then, the US has based itself explicitly on unnatural and speculative foundations, retroactively applied to the thirteen English colonies though this basis might be.  Upon this false basis's utter failure, the normal prerogatives and privileges that might be extended to a country should not be extended.

Very similar to the idea that only white countries must accept colored migration.

Not at all.  I don't believe in your silly and incoherent usage of the spurious concept of "whiteness," nor the corresponding term "colored."  Likewise, I don't believe in the Marxist ideology you seem to enjoy assigning me.  The US is a liberal, artificial collective, not a real country in any traditional sense of that term.  Sorry, but your talking points about whiteness and language, borders, culture (and so on) don't really apply here.

United-Statesians cannot both eat their cake and have it, too.