He isn't. He's a washed-up old man who would be swallowed up by present day Iraq were he to be released. The mullahs and Islamic radicals now call the shots. Hussein's power structure is in ruins. We saw to that. The danger is radical Islam. Saddam's execution will not alter this one iota and I'm citing the present situation in Iraq as evidence of this, not "changing the subject."
Your Catechism spin is tortured. It's no better than your tortured reading of Sacrosanctum Concilium to mean that Latin is to be eliminated, when it says precisely the opposite. And quit putting words in my mouth. The truth is that the Catechism makes provision for use of the death penalty as a last resort when no other alternatives are available. Got it? Call them "weasel words". Call them whatever you want. But that's what it says.
Last I heard, neither JPII or B??? were experts in criminology, and, since the topic of civil application of the death penalty is not a "matter of faith or morals", their opinions on the subject are no better than yours and mine.
The application of the death penalty is not a matter of "faith or morals"? Really? If matters of life and death have nothing to do with faith or morals, then nothing does. If you think the present and former Pope's opinion on this subject are no better than yours then you're mistaken. A constant characteristic of saints and holy men and women is that they see with the eyes of God. All of human affairs is within their jurisdiction, especially human conflict and matters of life and death. Those inspired by the Holy Spirit invariably have insights into matters into which they have no secular training. The lives of the saints speak to this very clearly.
Anyway, I'm done here. Have the last word and enjoy the execution. We'll all be so much safer when he's gone.
Never made any such argument. Saddam is a danger to IRAQIS, and should be executed for that reason.
"It's no better than your tortured reading of Sacrosanctum Concilium to mean that Latin is to be eliminated, when it says precisely the opposite.
Again-I never made any such argument. What I actually said was that saying the Mass in the vernacular has advantages in faith and understanding, which is what Vatican II said.
Neither Scripture nor Tradition support the idea that the Mass should be said in any one supposedly "sacred language".
"And quit putting words in my mouth. The truth is that the Catechism makes provision for use of the death penalty as a last resort when no other alternatives are available. Got it? "
So, what are those "alternatives", genius boy?? Right now, none exist, as I pointed out previously.
"The application of the death penalty is not a matter of "faith or morals"? Really? If matters of life and death have nothing to do with faith or morals, then nothing does.
Faith and morals apply to individuals--not to the actions of society taken according to law, which is what this is all about.
"{If you think the present and former Pope's opinion on this subject are no better than yours then you're mistaken. A constant characteristic of saints and holy men and women is that they see with the eyes of God.
In certain narrow areas at certain times, yes. But no saints nor any popes are infallible in all of their statments and opinions, which is what you are implying.
"All of human affairs is within their jurisdiction, especially human conflict and matters of life and death. Those inspired by the Holy Spirit invariably have insights into matters into which they have no secular training. The lives of the saints speak to this very clearly."
"Invariably" covers a lot of ground. At root, you're saying that all of their judgements are infallible. The Church teaches differently.