the presidential debates

Quote:

---

I will never understand people carrying a "label" to their grave when they never believed in the religion in reality.

---

Pam it is possible to be of a certain religion and not believe 100% of their teaching, for example I know lots of people that are Catholic but don't believe in every little thing they teach. Many women don't agree with their view on birth control. If a woman wants to use it then she should. What if a woman is married but isn't ready for children. She should abstain even though she is married because she wants to wait before having children? So just because you don't agree with a few small things doesn't mean you need to toss out the entire religion.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Uabassoon
Pam it is possible to be of a certain religion and not believe 100% of their teaching, for example I know lots of people that are Catholic but don't believe in every little thing they teach.

---

I suppose for some it may be. It wouldn't work for me. I have to embrace my faith/religion entirely or not at all. I don't want to be misunderstood here. It's not my intention. My dad was born a Catholic but somewhere in his 20's he abandoned his church because he, like many, didn't agree with a lot of the doctrine. He then met my mom, who is Protestant, and over time came to embrace her religious faith. In my dating years I dated boys of the Catholic faith and Jewish faith and which prompted me to study what they believed and then had to sort it all out for myself. That's basically what I mean when I say we all have to choose for ourselves. I know there are many people who wear their religion as a label but in reality it doesn't mean much for them. Hope you understand what I am saying. :)

Pam, I pretty much understand what you are saying. That is the reason why I left the Catholic religion and chose not to get confirmed during my early teens, despite my family wishes. However I do feel that sometimes there are one or two small things that you might not agree with, but you have to look at the big picture. I didn't like the big picture, so I left.

I understand what you're saying, Pam:)

Although I do belong to an organized religion, love my church, hold true to it's doctrines and have great faith in God, ultimately, for me, it is not the credo of an organized group that defines my belief in God or directs my behavior. It IS my guidepost and beckon, but in the end, it is my heart, my conscience that guides me.

Institutions, like indiviudals are falible. The "church" that teaches us to love thy neighbor is also that church that at one time, foisted upon the world the Inquistion and the Crusades and the Salem Witch Trials, all in the name of God and his word and will. God was not at fault, humans were.

Growing up, my Catholic friends were told that if they ate meat on Fridays, they were damned to eternal Hell. After reconsideration by the Vatican, that edict was reveresed. Divorce was once prohibited by the church and to do so, meant excommunication; no longer. Today, all of the above examples have been either reconsidered and reversed, as with meatless Fridays and divorce, or deemed by the church as horrific misapplications, misrepresentations of their religions. Sadly, throughout the ages, autrocities have been perpetrated upon the world, justified in the name of religion and God. It does not necessarily reflect of the efficacy of organized religion, only that as humans, we are not perfect.

I was reading an article the other day regarding the history of religion in politics. One revelation in particular struck me. In essence it stated this. Over 40 years ago, when JFK, the first Catholic to run for Pres., decided to do so, he was compelled to provide a leary and fearful electorate with the reassurance that we would indeed run for the presidency, but only with the proviso that he would keep his religion OUT of the White House! It was feared that the White House would be under the direct control of the Vatican. Today, we cheer, support and defend a president for doing just the opposite; for speaking openly about his religious convictions and assuring us all that unlike JFK, his beliefs do guide his decisions and will affect his policy. A lot has changed over the past 50 years.

Except Bush has not kept religion out of his political (esp. re: Saddam) decisions. if the urls i posted don't say enough, just do your own google search. there is plenty of reading material there and Bush himself acknowledges that he "wears his religion on his sleeve".

Yeah, he wears his religion on his sleeve and doesn't attend church.

It is good that Bush has his religion with him, and it is what we were all originally founded from.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Mkitty
it is what we were all originally founded from.

---

Excuse me?? Explain please.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by lizzielou742
Yeah, he wears his religion on his sleeve and doesn't attend church.

---

Lizzie, my husband is not a member of my church and does not attend frequently either but that makes him no less of a Christian than I.

I have a question about this from your article:
A recent Kerry campaign pool report included this observation: "Both Mr. and Mrs. received communion, taking the host from the priests in their hands (others took direct to mouth). They spent ample time on the kneeler."

I was under the impression that Mrs. Kerry is not a Catholic. Is this true? If so, how is she able to take communion in a Catholic church? Recently I attended two Catholic weddings and the priests admonished the attenders: "communion is only for Catholics in good standing." I did not take communion at these weddings because I am not a Catholic in good standing and not even a Catholic at all. Do you know what Mrs. Kerry's story is? Just curious.

By the way, there is no such instruction before communion in my church. It is open to anyone who believes in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord.

All of the above aside, I will be so happy when all of this is over. The incessant fighting and reporting is getting to be too much really, and I mean on both sides. *sigh*

Nevermind. I just did a little search on Google and here is what I found out:


“After a brief courtship, a short period of cohabitation, and the signing of a prenuptial agreement, the Kerrys were married in a civil ceremony on Nantucket in 1995.”

There is a world of meaning here for Catholics, and for anyone who takes Kerry’s professions of faith seriously. He and his wife, both baptized Catholics, are living together in defiance of Catholic teaching. In the eyes of the Church, their marriage is invalid: Catholics may not marry outside the Church. The issue of abortion aside, the Kerrys are both ineligible to receive Communion.

I'm not trying to create a fuss here. I just don't understand why they are calling themselves Catholics since they don't seem to consider the teachings of their church important and their taking of communion is apparently not permitted.

Pam,

That is an interesting question. I had heard reports on Kerry's faith, but never on his wife's. Personally, I don't know much about Catholicism and taking communion rules, so I can't respond to your questions on that.

I also agree, I will be glad when Nov. 2nd is over with!!! :)

I can't wait until it's over! I'm sick of the local political ads, as well. I hate election year!

I agree Dukedogsmom. After this is all over, we can kiss and make up! LOL! :p (no matter who wins, and I really mean that. I am sick of it!)

Some of you may not believe this, but we were all originally founded by judeo-christianity. That's all I have to explain. I'm not trying to get on people's nerves though.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Mkitty
Some of you may not believe this, but we were all originally founded by judeo-christianity. That's all I have to explain. I'm not trying to get on people's nerves though.

---

I wasn't "founded by" anything. I evolved from apes.

Hee hee :)

Seriously though - not everyone believes what you believe. I'm not trying to be rude. I guess I'm just a bit taken about by your posts on this subject.