nothing like hanging salvation over the heads of the faithful. to me it sounds like they are trying to manipulate the catholic faithful into voting for a particular type of candidate or they are going to hell.
..and Greenpeace tries to guilt and scare you into voting for a particular candidate or type of candidate. Really it's no different.
I don't think the church is making anything up or adding new doctrine by reminding their congregation that they are accountable for their actions including voting. As such your actions should follow your beliefs and morals. Any church that adheres to the bible in any conceivable way would not go anywhere near to saying that the church has the authority to judge and condemn you to hell and I don't think a single church goer believes this either. At worst the church uses scare tactics which is ultimately the exact same tactic used by Greenpeace.
So why do we think it's fine when Greenpeace uses scare tactics on their followers but it's not alright when a church does the same? They both have the same lack of power of damnation.
“One good thing about music,
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
Everyone is brainwashed by some ideology or another.
The rest of us, don't vote.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
..and Greenpeace tries to guilt and scare you into voting for a particular candidate or type of candidate. Really it's no different.
I don't think the church is making anything up or adding new doctrine by reminding their congregation that they are accountable for their actions including voting. As such your actions should follow your beliefs and morals. Any church that adheres to the bible in any conceivable way would not go anywhere near to saying that the church has the authority to judge and condemn you to hell and I don't think a single church goer believes this either. At worst the church uses scare tactics which is ultimately the exact same tactic used by Greenpeace.
So why do we think it's fine when Greenpeace uses scare tactics on their followers but it's not alright when a church does the same? They both have the same lack of power of damnation.
yes it is very different. there is a separation of church and state. period. the minute the church tries to influence politics and elections by telling their members who to vote for they are infringing on that principle. i have read stories of bishops telling their flock that there are serious consequences and their salvation is at risk if they vote for a candidate or social issue that is not in step with the catholic teachings. that sure as hell sounds like a threat to me.
i have never heard of greenpeace threatening anyone for voting a certain way. i am in the midwest and am 1000 miles away from the nearest ocean so greenpeace's activities have never applied to me. my point is that people should be able to vote their conscience without threats about what will happen to their souls in the afterlife, if there is such a thing.
me, i vote my conscience, if a church or greenpeace or anyone tries to dictate who i vote for, they can all blow me.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
maybe because there is not a concept of separation of rock and roll and politics....
Since when does a priest or preacher talking politics violate the concept of the separation of church and state (it is not like the church is government run). From what I know about about US government the Separation of Church and state is based on the first ammendment which should give bishops the right to support anyone they want.
..and Greenpeace tries to guilt and scare you into voting for a particular candidate or type of candidate. Really it's no different.
I don't think the church is making anything up or adding new doctrine by reminding their congregation that they are accountable for their actions including voting. As such your actions should follow your beliefs and morals. Any church that adheres to the bible in any conceivable way would not go anywhere near to saying that the church has the authority to judge and condemn you to hell and I don't think a single church goer believes this either. At worst the church uses scare tactics which is ultimately the exact same tactic used by Greenpeace.
So why do we think it's fine when Greenpeace uses scare tactics on their followers but it's not alright when a church does the same? They both have the same lack of power of damnation.
it is vastly different from greenpeace. greenpeace might appeal to your emotions and guilt but does not tell you your very soul is at risk any time you vote.
but i do agree that a church raising awareness of church morality is reasonable. i just don't like the idea of saying "you cannot vote for person x becos of y." to me, that is akin coercion or bribery.
Comments
I don't think the church is making anything up or adding new doctrine by reminding their congregation that they are accountable for their actions including voting. As such your actions should follow your beliefs and morals. Any church that adheres to the bible in any conceivable way would not go anywhere near to saying that the church has the authority to judge and condemn you to hell and I don't think a single church goer believes this either. At worst the church uses scare tactics which is ultimately the exact same tactic used by Greenpeace.
So why do we think it's fine when Greenpeace uses scare tactics on their followers but it's not alright when a church does the same? They both have the same lack of power of damnation.
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
The rest of us, don't vote.
yes it is very different. there is a separation of church and state. period. the minute the church tries to influence politics and elections by telling their members who to vote for they are infringing on that principle. i have read stories of bishops telling their flock that there are serious consequences and their salvation is at risk if they vote for a candidate or social issue that is not in step with the catholic teachings. that sure as hell sounds like a threat to me.
i have never heard of greenpeace threatening anyone for voting a certain way. i am in the midwest and am 1000 miles away from the nearest ocean so greenpeace's activities have never applied to me. my point is that people should be able to vote their conscience without threats about what will happen to their souls in the afterlife, if there is such a thing.
me, i vote my conscience, if a church or greenpeace or anyone tries to dictate who i vote for, they can all blow me.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
Since when does a priest or preacher talking politics violate the concept of the separation of church and state (it is not like the church is government run). From what I know about about US government the Separation of Church and state is based on the first ammendment which should give bishops the right to support anyone they want.
it is vastly different from greenpeace. greenpeace might appeal to your emotions and guilt but does not tell you your very soul is at risk any time you vote.
but i do agree that a church raising awareness of church morality is reasonable. i just don't like the idea of saying "you cannot vote for person x becos of y." to me, that is akin coercion or bribery.