Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Political Discussion
Reply to "NFL Kicker Harrison Butker’s unhinged commencement speech"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]It’s so weird as a spiritual, but not religious, person having to watch the organized religions who the hold the most political and social power try to imbue their values on the rest of us who don’t hold them. Like clearly this speech is pushing traditional values where women raise kids and stay home. To suggest otherwise is to insult our intelligence. I believe in a merciful God, but I don’t hold any of these odd rigid social beliefs found in things like Catholicism essentially mandating women stick to a “vocation”. It’s fked up yall hold so much sway over the rest of us just trying to exist in America.[/quote] This is NOT Catholicism. He's an idiot.[/quote] To you it’s not. To some it is. This is the problem with religious “interpretation” in general and the most compelling reason society should rely on the Golden rule, but also insist on a neutral playing field whereby the observable world perceivable to all people is employed in policy making, and why we should not allow organized religion to guide policy. There’s like 7000 religions in the world. I don’t give a fk if one adherent to one of them says “my religion is this!” And another says “no! It’s this!” Because frankly these organized religions are all nuts. And they are all used for control. We need a neutral system reliant on treating others as you’d like to be treated.[/quote] Wrong. As other posters have stated, with cites, much of what he said is actually contrary to Catholic teaching. That is not an "interpretation." It's a different belief altogether. Also, the response was to PP saying: "odd rigid social beliefs found in things like Catholicism essentially mandating women stick to a “vocation”. " Catholicism does no such thing, which should be obvious even to the least religiously informed person who simply knows Catholic women in the workplace. Even freaking ACB has always worked. [/quote] Again, how do you even know what you claim to profess? How do you know that’s not “real Catholicism”. Are you a self proclaimed expert? It’s weird. You argue in absolutes on -‘ issue not grounded in observable reality.[/quote] ? Are the Benedictine nuns not "real" Catholics?[/quote] They said: "One of our concerns was the assertion that being a homemaker is the highest calling for a woman." He did not actually say that. If he said that being a wife and mother was a higher calling than being a nun or that being a husband and father was a higher calling than being a priest or monk, that would certainly have been aberrant in terms of Catholic thought.[/quote] If he had said "the highest calling is for you to be a nun", then you have a point. But, he went straight for the "your greatest vocation is wife and mother". So, I guess even the Benedictine nuns didn't really understand what he was trying to say, eh? Maybe he has communication issues.[/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics