Free Republic 3rd Quarter Fundraising Target: $85,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $70,319
Woo hoo!! And we're now over 82%!! Less than $15k to go!! Let's git 'er done!! Thank you all very much!!

Posts by Seraphicaviary

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • A Word About Orthodox Apologetics

    07/25/2014 12:41:18 PM PDT · 20 of 30
    Seraphicaviary to don-o

    And I always heard it said that nobody ever believed in anything they did not first think was rational. I think it was John Cardinal Newman who said that.

    Maybe you cannot noodle out every detail, but nobody just submits to irrationality. Assurance of things not known is not the same as embracing the irrational. It just means you don’t have everything you need for a syllogistic proof. Even the simplest person who is not trained in ordering his thoughts still thinks, and he may not know all the why, but if he is to act upon his beliefs and spread it to others, it must be intelligible.

  • GOP Front-Runner Compares Gay Marriage to Polygamy

    06/27/2014 5:03:37 AM PDT · 15 of 19
    Seraphicaviary to Ann Archy

    I can’t remember where I read it, but there was a Supreme Court decision a long time ago against polygamy. The underlying reasoning was that a polygamous marriage would necessarily have two members of the same sex, which was not allowed. Now all that reasoning is out the window. Based on that legal reasoning, there is nothing preventing eventual legal polygamy should those few who want it are willing to pursue it back to the court.

  • ‘The door is always open’: Celibacy for priests not unchangeable dogma, Pope Francis says

    06/12/2014 11:28:26 AM PDT · 106 of 116
    Seraphicaviary to Elsie
    Tsk tsk... That's NO way to; ahem; turn the other cheek...

    Just my application of Aquinas' Just War Theory. Proportional response, meaning proportional to what is necessary to prevent further "assault".

  • ‘The door is always open’: Celibacy for priests not unchangeable dogma, Pope Francis says

    06/11/2014 1:42:15 PM PDT · 74 of 116
    Seraphicaviary to Gay State Conservative

    I had heard there were Lavender Mafia in the seminaries, so I was on guard when I went there. I did see some men that are more effeminate than the average guy, but if there was a Lavendar Mafia, they did not approach me. Maybe it was because I was 40 at the time and former Navy. Anyone who did approach me like that would lose teeth.

    I knew one seminarian who had difficulty fitting in with the population. After his second year he left. About 6 months later we all had to unfriend him on Facebook because every post was flaming pro-homosexual. He joined the Episcopalians, who are much more amenable to homosexuals. He just could not stomach staying with a religion that tells him there is something wrong with his tendencies. I figure any homosexual who makes it to high office in the RCC has to have more discipline than a Soviet deep-cover agent, because at every turn he would be face-to-face with teaching that is offensive to him.

    It should be noted that I started attending at the time that Pope Benedict XVI put out the word that a man with those tendencies should not be ordained. By my third year the seminary was full, and they had to turn prospective students away. I heard other seminaries were also at capacity.

  • ‘The door is always open’: Celibacy for priests not unchangeable dogma, Pope Francis says

    06/11/2014 1:24:48 PM PDT · 73 of 116
    Seraphicaviary to PapaBear3625

    Diocesan priests do not take vows of poverty. They take obedience, celibacy, and prayer 5 times a day. Monastics take vows of obdeience, celibacy, and poverty.

    Some priests retire rather well, since there usually is someone in the parish who is a good money manager that gives free financial advice to the priest.

  • ‘The door is always open’: Celibacy for priests not unchangeable dogma, Pope Francis says

    06/11/2014 10:23:12 AM PDT · 48 of 116
    Seraphicaviary to Gay State Conservative

    Since I was a seminarian, I can assure that there is a very intense program explaining how and why celibacy is a much greater gift than married love. Every man who is ordained knows a long time beforehand the nature of the vow. He has plenty of time to consider it (6 years minimum) before taking that vow. This is because any provable deception, fraud, or misunderstanding on the part of the man taking the vow invalidates the ordination. All the men I saw ordained knew celibacy was a greater gift and embraced it. That is essential for it to be a sacrifice. One leaves behind one good for the sake of obtaining a greater good.

  • Hearing: Electric Grid Vulnerable to EMP

    05/09/2014 8:11:27 AM PDT · 23 of 37
    Seraphicaviary to Cringing Negativism Network

    Is this not the original plot line for the Dark Angel series with Jessica Alba? An EMP sets everyone back to the pre-transistor technology.

    EMP will generate a charge in all the conductors and fry anything needing a pure crystal semi-conductor, but the lines will still be there. How soon would we be able to remake breakers and switches pre-semiconductor? We would be out for a bit, and mass chaos will ensue, but we will recover.

    Start putting fiber optic in your home. Glass fiber is immune to EMP because it does not depend on an ordered crystal structure, and you only need to Faraday cage the transmitters.

  • Seattle Catholic church members outraged to learn of violations by longtime priest

    05/09/2014 7:24:26 AM PDT · 45 of 68
    Seraphicaviary to daniel1212
    Since Scripture is reduced to being a servant to support church teaching, and the veracity of which is not dependent upon the weight of Scriptural substantiation, but upon the premise of the assured veracity of your church, then you are operating out of a cultic model, which comes from Hell.

    But of course scripture is a servant to Church teaching, because Scripture was written as a result of Church teaching in order to preserve it. But Scripture is silent on a lot of things, so Church teaching continues to be necessary. Anything else is idolatry of a book and not worship of the God the book is about.

    No matter. I got what I wanted, i.e. an accusation from you that I am following a model from Hell. Push long enough and it comes out. As you might have noticed, most of this came off the top of my head. I have neither the time or inclination to spend time researching and pulling exact quotes. We have long since left anything relevant to a rogue priest in Seattle. Maybe see you on the next thread, but this one has played out.

  • Seattle Catholic church members outraged to learn of violations by longtime priest

    05/08/2014 8:40:33 PM PDT · 38 of 68
    Seraphicaviary to metmom

    All those sacraments are valid. Prohibition does not affect validity. If the priest was laicised, then the sacraments would not be recognized. That requires Vatican approval. You are right that the bishop should have taken more active steps to get rid of the guy considering the confusion it causes.

    Look up Ex Opere Operato. The grace of the sacrament is God’s, not the priest’s. It explains a lot.

  • Seattle Catholic church members outraged to learn of violations by longtime priest

    05/08/2014 8:27:10 PM PDT · 37 of 68
    Seraphicaviary to daniel1212

    I wrote this out twice and deleted it accidentally, so I am going to keep it short>

    First, you are wrong on “unScriptural”. “On this Rock...” That is enough.

    Second, I do hold to imputed righteousness as well as imputed sin. Sin came through one person, and righteousness came through one person. Did anyone today gain sin directly though Eve? As such, though God can act directly, He chooses to act through His Church. We are only arguing over method. Righteousness is imputed... through His Church.

    You want grace to act only between God and each person. While that process exists, there is also grace to each person through other people. This points to a greater glory of God than individual action alone.

    As for the rest: Yes, I do not believe I have a charism to authoritatively interpret Scripture. Neither do you. Only the bishops have it because it is core to their function, their purpose on earth. As a former seminarian, I have more personal experience with bishops than most. If the Holy Spirit gave me anything, it is the ability to discern hypocrisy, and the men I have seen are not hypocrites. They live the same faith they preach.

    I have also seen faith lost, and by extension according to you, salvation lost. I have also seen that faith regained. It was not a false faith first replaced by a true faith. It was faith lost and then regained. I have personally seen this, and no words by you will convince me in place of “my lying eyes”.

  • Seattle Catholic church members outraged to learn of violations by longtime priest

    05/07/2014 8:57:17 PM PDT · 31 of 68
    Seraphicaviary to daniel1212
    One part interested me:

    That is error begetting error, which is that innocent infants need salvation, though they have done neither good nor evil. (Rm. 9:11) Sin is not imputed when there is no law, (Rm. 5:13) and the curse of sin which affect all creation will not extend into the next, in which souls are damned for their own sins, not that of their fathers. (Dt. 24:16; Rv. 20:12-15) Culpability is according to the principle in giving, "it is accepted according to that a man hath, and not according to that he hath not." (2 Corinthians 8:12)

    Infant are born with a sinful nature, and into a cursed world in which all sin and all die, but an infant is not going to Hell due to Adam, not shut out of Heaven due to simply being born with a sinful nature, which all believers also die with. I would argue that "innocent" infants need salvation. Our interpretation of those same citations are that all are born under the law, so sin is imputed to all until baptism. After baptism, Original Sin is gone and people are condemned for their own personal sin. That is the meaning of "next" in Rm 5:13 - the life you have after baptism.

    Were it not so, then who is under the law? Only the circumcised? If so, then the Romans all got away scott free, even without faith, because sin was not imputed to them. There is nothing to say the law only becomes active with the age of reason and only with regard to your personal choices. That is an error of the modern era.

    I know you will not agree. It does not matter. You seem to know something about Catholic theology, but reject it on a personal interpretation of Scripture, whereas we believe the Holy Spirit gives that particular charism only to the bishops. I trust that the Holy Spirit is smart enough to not give such a gift to men who would abuse it for personal gain, and my personal experience with the bishops has confirmed this belief. I cannot believe that lowly men could defeat or corrupt the will of the Holy Spirit.

    Even our preists do not have authority to interpret scripture on their own. They must teach what the local bishop tells them to teach.

  • Seattle Catholic church members outraged to learn of violations by longtime priest

    05/07/2014 4:39:19 PM PDT · 28 of 68
    Seraphicaviary to daniel1212

    A complete response to your post involves a post-graduate level course in the theology of Baptism that I had in 2009 and would bore to tears most people reading it here. Since the situation is about what Catholics believe and how they view Baptism, a Protestant theology of Baptism is irrelevant and off topic. This thread is not about comparative theology.

    In accord with the above, I make two notes:

    1. The charge of “Unscriptural” means little to us where Scripture is silent. That is why we have Tradition and the Magisterium. In this case, absence of scriptural record regarding infant baptisms is not proof that they are invalid.

    2. Sacraments are not just signs, but actually confer the grace of which the sacrament is a sign. It is the power of God working through men, not works of men. Baptism actually wipes away all mortal and venial sins, though not the temporal effects of sin. If they were just signs that required cognizance of their condition and desire for absolution, then we have again the question that was raised during the various plagues and disasters about what happens to children before the age of reason. Are they to be deprived of grace because some considered them “too young for Baptism”? You try telling a mother that her child cannot be baptised because he is too young to understand when aforesaid child may not live long enough. We have a hard time believing God would withold grace because of an age limit.

  • Seattle Catholic church members outraged to learn of violations by longtime priest

    05/06/2014 7:21:02 PM PDT · 18 of 68
    Seraphicaviary to Gamecock

    The priniciple is Ex Opere Operato. The power of the sacrament is Christ’s, not of the priest or minister. In Baptisms, so long as the one baptizing has the intention of what the Church intends and use the proper form and matter(i.e. must say the right words), the sacrament is valid. The sinful state of the minister is not relevant. In Marriage, the ministers of the sacrament are the people being married, not the priest.

    The sacramments needing a priestly ordination are Eucharist, Annointing the Sick, and Reconciliation, all of which have a absolution component. The sacraments by the priest would be considered valid because the priest was not laicised (which requires Vatican approval), but illicit because he did not have the permission of the bishop. They will not have to be “re-done”.

    If the preist had not used the words “In the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” during Baptisms, then it would have been a Chinese Fire Drill trying to find everyone affected to let them know the Baptisms were invalid.

    Much of Catholic theology follows Aristotelian philosophy with regard to Form and Matter to make something real. Such it is with the Sacraments.

  • Your Government Owes You a Job

    04/29/2014 2:58:17 AM PDT · 17 of 53
    Seraphicaviary to 2ndDivisionVet
    Ok, the guy is a law student. He is not a historian or economist. The idiot does not know that it has been tried before. Back then, it was the Second French Republic. Ask anyone who knows economic history how that turned out. It quickly turns into straight up welfare. One person paid to dig a hole, another to fill it. Mind you, Paul Krugman thinks that is a great idea, even though nothing has been gained and yet money changed hands.

    Raul also makes the idiotic argument that starts “In the richest country in the world....” Hey progressives, guess what? There are things even the richest country in the world cannot afford. Being richest is not the same as having infinite resources.

    This idea of government as employer of last resort has gotten traction over the last year or so in mainstream media, as if it has never been tried before and is elegantly simple. Read a history books some time, will ya!

  • Vatican responds to Francis’ call to Argentinian woman; more details emerge

    04/25/2014 3:28:33 AM PDT · 85 of 140
    Seraphicaviary to Iscool

    First I need to say you misunderstand my use of charity and humility. You apparently think I understood them as works, which I do not. They are virtues; behaviors observable in a person to see the Spirit in a person. They are not works, but they are gifts of the Holy Spirit and evidence when He is there. Are saying a person can be a total jerk and still have the Spirit in him?

    And anyway, the verses you picked out actually proved my point. When two or more bishops get together, He is among them. The thing they have that the average person does not is the teaching office of the Church. When bishops get together, the Spirit promotes authentic teaching that is not available to just any group of Christians that get together.

    Were that not so, then how could there be any fractioning of the Church with regard to teaching? If the same Holy Spirit were guiding every small group of Christians that came together, then all would come up with the same teaching on their own. The fact that this does not happen means some group is getting it right and another is getting it wrong. Some group is not getting the teaching direct from the Holy Spirit. All the rest is just figuring out which group has it right.

  • Vatican responds to Francis’ call to Argentinian woman; more details emerge

    04/24/2014 10:08:24 PM PDT · 80 of 140
    Seraphicaviary to metmom

    Logic error here. jjotto is implying the voice is not really the Holy Spirit. Indeed, Catholics believe you need the Holy Spirit to interpret Scripture. The question is how does the Spirit do this?

    In the Catholic Church, the Spirit is present when the bishops act in concert. “Where two or three are gathered...” I’m sure you know the rest. That is how the Church claims authority to interpret Scripture. When they are in the councils, the Holy Spirit is the authorizing agent for the pronouncements of the council. Yes, this includes things not directly referenced in the Bible. For a Catholic to deny what comes out of a council is functionally equivalent to denying God. In the past this was covered by anathemas directed against whatever heresy with which the council was concerned.

    The Holy Spirit may contact a person directly, but it would be very difficult to prove. Good luck to whoever tries that, especially if the claimant shows a lack of charity and humility.

  • Vatican responds to Francis’ call to Argentinian woman; more details emerge

    04/24/2014 5:33:25 PM PDT · 44 of 140
    Seraphicaviary to PapaNew

    This is the same Sola Scriptura argument that Catholics and Protestants have disagreed on for centuries.

    Protestants believe that if something is silent in the Bible then God has no position on the matter, so depending on the version of Protestant belief it is either 1) prohibited, or 3) allowed according to the whims of the interpreter.

    Catholics believe that God is bigger than can fit in all the books in all the libraries that will ever exist. Though the Bible has all that is necessary and sufficient for salvation, there is so much more of God to be explored. One who truly loves God will naturally seek more than what is in the Bible. So long as it is not contradicting what is stated in the Bible, it is worthy of consideration. That is why priests have to learn philosophy and theology, which involve investigations about God beyond what is in the Bible for a deeper understading. It is also this need for more that we have Magisterium and Tradition to tell us more about God.

    It is as if you do not know or understand yet what Catholics are about. Saying something is not strictly scriptural and therefore allowed/not allowd has no effect on us, because we have also to consider Tradition and Magisterium.

    We will not convice you here. You will not convince us either. Both sides are just talking past each other. As it is an internal matter to the Catholic Church, why are you even concerned?

  • US headed for more conservative future, even if only by birth rates

    04/21/2014 11:49:22 PM PDT · 17 of 55
    Seraphicaviary to MinorityRepublican

    Look up James Taranto’s Roe Effect. Taranto has been pushing this idea for years.

  • John Paul II enabled abuse, should not be canonized

    04/21/2014 8:22:00 PM PDT · 59 of 67
    Seraphicaviary to aMorePerfectUnion

    The crux of your three questions is so that you would no longer have doubt. Sorry. That is not how it works. You must have a possibility to doubt.

    You are free to not believe. It is not my job to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. I am only commanded to make a reasonable case, i.e. witness, and the rest is up to you. If you wait for evidence, then you will not see it until the afterlife....

    And then it will be too late.

    Oh, and the definition of a saint I am using is all those in heaven (Church Triumphant), not all believers on earth (Church Militant). You are free to change the definition , but then we are talking about different things, and your argument will have no force. Call it un-Bibilical if you want. It was not meant to be “Biblical”. I am doing theology here, not Biblical studies.

  • John Paul II enabled abuse, should not be canonized

    04/21/2014 6:02:11 PM PDT · 51 of 67
    Seraphicaviary to TigerTown

    After seeing some of the discussion, time to weigh in as one who attended a Catholic seminary...

    The model is of a heavenly court. You CAN go direct to the King and get the healing you ask for, but that is only a two-way channel of relation. The King wants more from us than that. It is a higher good that we ask others to pray for us and to pray for others than to take everything directly to the King all the time and leave our neighbors out of it.

    The point of the miracle is that it shows the putative saint is in heaven and next to God, and therefore able to intercede on the behalf of the petitioner and relay the prayer to God, like a court messenger. All the prayers go to the King, who is the only one with the power to grant the request.

    If you are looking for “proof” of a miracle, then what criteria would you use? The only thing we have so far is that it usually happens in a relatively short period of time and is “unexplainable” to science, not necessarily an acual violation of the laws of chemistry and physics. Extreme unprobablility is enough, becuase the point is to foster faith that the King listens to the cries of His people.

    Philosopher David Hume also though miracles never happened, because it was always more likely the reporter of the miracle lied than for something unlikely happen in nature. Such a dark world in which he lived! If it could be proved, then faith would not be necessary. Uncertainty about the situation is critical to a miracle. There must be a possibilty for doubt, otherwise you would “know”, and not “believe”. Faith here is defined the way it is in Hebrews 11:1 - An assurance of things not seen.

    I could go on for hours, but there are other threads to see. Laters.

  • Sympathy For The Devil

    04/01/2014 12:03:22 PM PDT · 5 of 10
    Seraphicaviary to My hearts in London - Everett

    I had to read St. Ireneaus’ Against Heresies when I was at St. Meinrad Seminary and School of Theology (run by the Benedictines). I have not seen the movie, but thanks for the heads up.

    Gnosticism keeps popping up every couple hundred years. Saint Augustine also had to deal with them. The last blatantly Gnostic movie I saw was Matrix Reloaded. The current Starz series Davinci’s Demons is also blatantly Gnostic. There is nothing of any real educational value in such things.

  • Against Heterosexuality

    03/03/2014 10:08:10 AM PST · 56 of 69
    Seraphicaviary to Tax-chick

    FYI... the initial quote from Alasdair MacIntyre is from his “Whose Justice? Which Rationality?”, which I have almost finished reading. It is not an easy text for anyone with less than a MA in Philosophy. I have an MA in Catholic Philosophical Studies, and have read MacIntyre’s other books, and I still struggle with it.

  • Müller: “Catholic Church doctrine is clear on the issue of remarried divorcees”

    02/26/2014 7:45:58 PM PST · 8 of 18
    Seraphicaviary to Nifster

    The person in the situation you describe can still receive communion. It is not the divorce, because the church does not recognize the divorce as spiritually existing. It is the putative “second marriage” i.e. adultery that turns communion into sacrilege. The Church has advised civil divorce to get out of abusive relationships, but the person is to live as a celibate thereafter until reconciliation or the death of the abusive spouse.

  • FDA weighs risks of 3-person embryo fertilization

    02/25/2014 9:37:20 AM PST · 21 of 34
    Seraphicaviary to ColdOne

    Paging Kahn Noonien Singh... a Captain Kirk wants to talk to you...

  • Surgical 3D printing BioPen writes in bone, nerve and muscle

    02/07/2014 9:27:47 AM PST · 25 of 30
    Seraphicaviary to SeekAndFind

    Cue the reconstitution scene from The 5th Element.

    Can they make clones with that? The world could use a few more Milla Jovovichs.

  • A Catholic Showdown Worth Watching

    02/06/2014 11:02:21 AM PST · 14 of 21
    Seraphicaviary to cornelis

    I had read both from Murray and MacIntyre when I was in the seminary. I am more of a philospher, and MacIntyre makes more sense to me because his case is based on the philosphy of St. Thomas Aquinas. It has totally different presuppositions from Murray, who is operating from the Modern Liberal Individualism that was around at the time of the Founding Fathers. This is also why Pope Francis is confusing to Conservatives and Progressives alike here in the US. Francis is operating from a 13th century philosophy, and has different underlying assumptions than any of our current batch of political philosophers and commentators. They are trying to fit Francis into philosophical boxes that do not fit him. The Pope makes perfect, coherent sense to us Thomists.

    This fight is local only to the US Catholicism. Worldwide, the three way fight in moral theology between Neo-Thomists, German Jesuits under Karl Rahner, and the French Jesuits pushing Patristic studies, will have a much more lasting effect on Catholicism.

  • Google DeepMind Deal Hastens Computers That Think Like People

    01/31/2014 1:07:01 PM PST · 26 of 40
    Seraphicaviary to RoosterRedux

    A good critique from a few years ago that leads me to think the artificial intelligence crowd are heading for a brick wall is “What Computers Still Can’t Do” by Hubert Dreyfus.

    One of the main problems is we do not have that good an idea of what the human will is. Kurzweil may be good at figuring out the process of thinking, but he sucks at figuring out the purpose of his machine intelligence. People act with a purpose in the world, a purpose which is put into us from above.

    Kurzweil does not have the necessary philosophical base to build more than a tabula raza brain. It could backup a human brain, but it could not develop a personality without experiencing life the way humans do. What happens when it gets hurt by a human? Many people learn to live with it, but a few humans act out in vengence, and if the machine does this then you have Skynet.

    There is no real reason to develop an artificial personality in a machine unless you want to develop a servant race, such as in “I, Robot”. The best use of Kurzweil’s technology would be to develop enhancing-brains in the manner of Masamune Shirow’s Ghost in the Shell.

  • Atheists/Materialists Are Closet Moral Objectivists

    01/17/2014 9:50:38 AM PST · 26 of 47
    Seraphicaviary to dmz

    More precisely, the philosophical materialist would not admit to the concept of a purpose. A purpose is most definitely not a process, but everything is process to the materialist. They may say the illusion of a purpose is a process, but in order to say that they must use language that assumes the existence of purpose, because the use of language is not just random sounds, but rather sounds specifically ordered to convey an idea such that the purpose in one mind is copied to another mind. Each time the materialist communicates an idea, he betrays his own ideals.

    We have been fighting this point since Democritus and Leucippus, yet they are still arguing it today, and the materialists of today are still no closer to explaining purpose.

    David Hume tried, but came up with “You can’t get an ought from an is.” ... and he is right. An ought, meaning a purpose, has to be a self-evident concept or nothing else happens.

    Materialists like Hawking and Dawkins have been trying to jam through the equivalence of purpose with a thought process, but they get no traction because it violates the everyday experience of nearly everyone with the ability of abstract thought.

  • Free Exercise of Virtue Prohibited as of Today in USA

    01/02/2014 2:59:50 AM PST · 18 of 19
    Seraphicaviary to stevie_d_64

    I am not forgetting the “unalienable rights” - I am denying they exist. I am flat out saying that the Authority higher than governments gave us virtues rather than rights.

    Knowledge of virtues is older than the Bible. They were known by the Apostles and Evangelists, who did not know of rights in the Roman Empire beyond what the Empire granted to its citizens.

    There is no “just right” or “just wrong”. Rather, God gave us the answers to the question of how to live well until we grew up and learned the reasons why a given thing was right or wrong. This was the overall lesson of St. Paul in Galatians.

    This country will be blessed again when the people are once again virtuous.

  • Free Exercise of Virtue Prohibited as of Today in USA

    01/01/2014 10:30:02 AM PST · 12 of 19
    Seraphicaviary to Kaslin

    One vital difference between Rights and Virtues is where falls the onus of the action.

    In the exercise of Rights, you are petitioning an authority to grant something due to you. It does not require any effort or improvement of character on your part to get what is due. If the ones who are charged with guaranteeing your Rights do not themselves have Virtues (especially Prudence and Justice) then the situation is indistinguishable from having no Rights at all.

    In the exercise of Virtues, which are habits according to Aristotle, you become a better person. It requires effort to change yourself so that the Virtues become more pronounced in you over time. The onus is on you for good social behavior.

    This is where I have a major disagreement with Jefferson. Virtues are self-evident. Anyone can see Virtue in a man by observing his behavior. The ancients knew who had Virtue and who did not. Rights, on the other hand, are a recent development. They are not self-evident by observing behavior. One needs to be raised in an environment where you are told that people have rights before it becomes “self-evident”, as it was for the Founding Fathers. Anyone prior to 1500 AD would beg to differ that Rights were self-evident.

    For Thomists like me and those trained in the theology of the Catholic Church, Rights are asserted without proof, but are convenient for interfacing with society. Given the current Administration, who show no Virtue in themselves and precious little respect for Rights, I would not trust Rights to protect me, but rather the Virtues.

    The primary Virtue is Prudence, which allows you to determine who else has Virtues, and therefore who can be trusted in society. Exercise it whenever you can.

  • Just wanted to say Thanks to GLAAD for showing their Intolerance

    12/25/2013 6:35:53 AM PST · 29 of 39
    Seraphicaviary to AzNASCARfan

    It is amazing how the Left has changed the common definition of bigotry. It used to mean intolerance of ideas or opinions, especially religious. Now they made it a catch-all for intolerance of anything.

    Bigotry is what is being done to Phil, not what is coming from Phil.

  • Can science explain Tea Party rage? [another "study"]

    11/07/2013 1:32:31 PM PST · 58 of 73
    Seraphicaviary to Cincinatus' Wife

    Scientists pretending that what belongs properly to philosophy is not philosophy, but can be determined by psychology. These guys need to read David Hume: “You can’t get an ought from an is.” Apparently, these researchers must have phone in their humanities credits when they went to college.

    Morality that is emotion-based is not morality that Aristotle would recognise. They confuse the chemical reactions in the brain, which is measurable, with morality, which is not measurable.

    But then this is Bill Moyers. Anyone could have predicted the outcome before he reported it.

  • Twelve-year-old hacks government sites for Anonymous

    10/28/2013 10:21:18 AM PDT · 11 of 17
    Seraphicaviary to rightwingintelligentsia
    You may be assured the kid is now being interviewed for a position at the NSA. Apparently he is eminently qualified.
  • In Search of Republican Grown-Ups (Do really need to put Barf's the NYT)

    10/25/2013 6:46:00 AM PDT · 5 of 6
    Seraphicaviary to Beave Meister

    I would really like to know how the Slimes defines adult. I always thought an adult takes responsibility for the care of those in his or her charge. That’s Ted Cruz, et al.

    The GOPe has not been adult for a very long time, and the Dems never. The Dems are permanent teenagers, and the GOPe are like the parents who would rather be friends with their children than actually do parenting.

  • Can a Pro-Life Activist Defend The Inquisition?

    10/22/2013 1:21:26 PM PDT · 26 of 51
    Seraphicaviary to juliosevero

    My understanding of the Inquisition is the stated goal was a molehunt, not genocide.

    Common Jews were not targeted, and had nothing to fear. All those brought before the Inquisition were officials in the Spanish government, because the king wanted only Catholics in official positions. Still, there never is a reason for torture.

    The Church did not condone the torture. You had a situation similar to the Vietnam war where local officials acting in the name of the Church went off the deep end, but it was not a general policy of the Inquisition. The Church is still responsible because it put them in that position, and that is why the pope apologized.

    There is a huge difference between saying torture happened during the Inquisition and saying it was the purpose of the Inquisition. Even during the Inquisition, those brought forth preferred the Church courts to the State courts, because they had better rules of evidence and had a better chance of getting out unscathed.

    Also, the difference between the Holocaust and the Inquisition is in the original documents that survive from the times. No serious researcher depends on an edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica as their source because it is subject to editorializing. The original documents trump any encyclopedia or a stack of PhD opinions, and the original documents do not bear out the Inquisition as a death campaign against the Jews.

    Indeed, the Holy Office in the Vatican today is the inheritor of the responsibilities of the Inquisition. The whole point, and the only point, is to determine who is Catholic and who is not. Torture is not part of the program.

  • Pope: Cupidity destroys relations between people and leads to idolatry

    10/21/2013 6:06:47 AM PDT · 5 of 9
    Seraphicaviary to txrefugee

    The primary consideration of the art and finery in the Vatican is to lead the minds of those who see it to God. No action is allowed that distances those things from this purpose.

    To that end, note the following:

    1. Much of the art was given by the artists on the condition that it would be displayed to believers, and as such the Vatican is not at liberty to sell it.

    2. To whom would they sell it? That stuff is not meant to sit collecting dust in a private collection, and anyone who would buy it should immediately re-donate it back to where he got it, so you end up as you started.

    Your criticism is exactly that to which the Pope is referring when he spoke against “Poverty for poverty’s sake”. You are thinking that the only value of a thing is what someone will pay for it, when the real value is what it means as reminders of the Kingdom of God. Not that you are alone. There are many people who know the cost of a thing without knowing the value of a thing.

  • Sowell: A Return to Keynes?

    10/14/2013 12:07:03 PM PDT · 18 of 23
    Seraphicaviary to jazusamo

    I thought Keynes was just smoking something when he came up with his economic theory, but then when I studied philosophy I found out Keynes studied at the knee of G.E. Moore, a philosopher so bad that Wittgenstein reputedly said Moore was an example of how far you could get in philosophy without actually knowing anything. I have little doubt that Keynes learned his progressivism from Moore.

    Moore was the master of the confusing argument and ethical relativism. His philosophy allowed his followers to justify anything. This is probably why Keynes could come up with such a crazy economic theory that others would sell as a means to cure the ills of the Great Depression, despite later economists showing it probably prolonged the Depression by seven years.

    Sound familiar? Obamacare anyone?

  • Fukushima radiation worse than feared - experts

    10/14/2013 11:46:49 AM PDT · 21 of 32
    Seraphicaviary to justa-hairyape

    Being an engineer employed in an operating US plant of similar design to Fukushima-Daiichi, take my words with a grain of salt.

    Within a day after the accident, the US Navy parked ships at the edge of the area that could be considered dangerous. (The Navy has huge experience, since there are reactors on all operating submarines, carriers, and most destroyers. It is where I first learned nuclear safety.) The upshot is we know where it is safe to fish and where it isn’t. The whole ocean did not get immediately contaminated. Rather, there are a lot of fission products with short half lives that are already gone, and the long-lived isotopes are really heavy, so they won’t be drifiting very far. The people in Hawaii have no reason to fear long term from contamination from Fukushima.

    The Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (formed as a result of Three Mile Island) had people onsite in Japan within a week after the accident. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), and the World Association of Nuclear Operators (WANO, formed after Chernobyl) also had people there. TEPCO and the Japanese government had worldwide expertise from near the beginning of the accident. All this talk about a takeover of the goverment of Japan for the sake of world safety is insane. It would not acheive any better results than if we had the same accident in the US.

    Chernobyl was much worse than Fukushima. The core of Chernobyl unit 4 went prompt-critical and it was the steam explosion that blew the core apart that stopped the reaction, since the material was distributed. This distribution also accounts for the high radiation in the area to this day. The TMI core melted, but stayed in containment, so there was less radiation release. It was estimated that 378.4 million curies were released from Chernobyl. I have not heard any numbers that large released from Fukushima.

    The building explosions at Fukushima were hydrogen explosions, not the core exploding, so the releases across the area are mild by comparison. I did see a rough calculation that the current release from Fukushima amounted to about 1.3 cubic kilometers of ocean at the legal limit of 50 millisieverts per liter. We still have a lot of ocean left.

    Indeed... the solution to polution is dilution. Between radioactive decay and the flora and fauna in the ocear around Fukushima taking the heavier elements out of the food chain. Remember when the former head of BP said the oil spill Deepwater Horizion would be gone quickly? He was laughed out of his job, but he also had a PhD in Geology, and about a year later he was proved correct.

    All this alarmism is not helping anyone.

  • The Inventions of Rome

    10/08/2013 10:27:53 AM PDT · 47 of 165
    Seraphicaviary to Gamecock

    Trent is not semi-Pelagianism. It does not say the human will cooperates in it’s own salvation, but prepares the path. The salvation is still totally up to God. The person can cooperate to prepare the path, and still not end up being saved. It is logically necessary, since salvation could be refused, which we know to be true. If salvation were irresitable, then we are only meat puppets - machines. If so, then salvation has lost its value. Salvation only has value if the one saved has a free will to reject it.

  • The hunting rifle of the future is here at CES (video)

    08/30/2013 11:41:53 AM PDT · 9 of 13
    Seraphicaviary to KarlInOhio

    A word on firepower… 3000 round clip with bursts of 3 to 300. With Replay, another Zorg invention, it is even easier. One shot… (bang) with Replay sends every following shot to the same location.

    - The Fifth Element

  • (UPDATED with Diagrams) Real Leak of at Least 300 Tonnes of Highly Contaminated Water (Fukushima)

    08/20/2013 12:59:37 PM PDT · 13 of 19
    Seraphicaviary to BenLurkin

    And don’t forget all the Soviet subs that were dumping off the Sea of Japan for decades. There is probably some stuff left from them.

  • Yet another Elysium review: It IS political, and it stinks.

    08/13/2013 4:55:28 AM PDT · 40 of 49
    Seraphicaviary to Salgak

    Real world would have to have a full closed ring for a station of that size to hold atmosphere. At least Larry Niven, being an engineer himself, knew that the Ringworld had to have sides miles high to keep in the atmosphere.

  • Yet another Elysium review: It IS political, and it stinks.

    08/12/2013 12:20:14 PM PDT · 28 of 49
    Seraphicaviary to Seraphicaviary

    And Astroboy. Rich in the clouds and poor scrounging on Earth has been overplayed for years now.

  • Yet another Elysium review: It IS political, and it stinks.

    08/12/2013 12:16:45 PM PDT · 27 of 49
    Seraphicaviary to rocksblues

    It is also the major plot of the anime and manga series Battle Angel Alita.

  • Yet another Elysium review: It IS political, and it stinks.

    08/12/2013 12:14:25 PM PDT · 26 of 49
    Seraphicaviary to hattend

    If you like Greek mythology, then is a decent series as far as young adult fiction. The author (Riordan) is trying to re-popularize the myths. It is infinitely better for young adults (like my nieces) to read than Twilight, which should be banned worldwide.

  • Yet another Elysium review: It IS political, and it stinks.

    08/12/2013 9:55:36 AM PDT · 19 of 49
    Seraphicaviary to Salgak

    I call it visionary because few movies up to now have shown it. I am more preferential to the orbital cylinders (called Sides or Plants)of the Gundam Series.

    Those are also a design from the ‘70s. The remake of Lockout with Guy Pearce also had good space visuals of a potential near-future station.

    The interesting part of the Elysium colony is the open side. Even if you spin the colony sufficiently to produce ground-level acceleration to simulate gravity, the size of the colony is not large enough to produce the proper breathable air density at ground level. They must leak tons of atmosphere every day.

  • Yet another Elysium review: It IS political, and it stinks.

    08/12/2013 6:58:20 AM PDT · 15 of 49
    Seraphicaviary to jdsteel

    I saw it just for the action and visuals. The plot is schlock, but whoever designed the visuals on the station was visionary. Wait for it to come out on the cable channels and watch it with the sound off.

    As for other movies, I saw the second Percy Jackson film. Though it is about Greek mythology, it had a more believable plot than Elysium.

  • Journal of Medical Ethics Says Newborn Babies not People, Can be Killed

    08/12/2013 6:06:55 AM PDT · 41 of 53
    Seraphicaviary to NYer

    They went wrong from the beginning:

    “We take ‘person’ to mean an individual who is capable of attributing to her own existence some (at least) basic value such that being deprived of this existence represents a loss to her.”

    Redefine “person” in any way you want and you can do anything you want with them. Dehumanization is the normal first step for tyrants and bigots. It is how the Fabian Socialists did it. It is how the Nazis did it. These “Ethicists” are just following the established Socialist tradition.

  • “Elysium” is implausible, because it’s based on a medical device manufacturer with no salespeople

    08/12/2013 5:39:59 AM PDT · 32 of 35
    Seraphicaviary to grundle
    The most unplausible part of the movie is a minister of defence who is obviously a cheese-eating surrender monkey. She speaks French and is has a French name (Delacroix if I heard right).
  • Disney's 'Jessie' Features Mean Girl Named ... Breitbart

    08/12/2013 5:31:09 AM PDT · 20 of 22
    Seraphicaviary to Nachum

    This is just more proof that Andrew is still living... rent free... inside their heads!