Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It is not a Catholic but the idea of a non parliamentary Monarch that is being opposed. Both Biden and Trudeau must adhere to existing constitutions and elected opposition's. In Canada we have had a lot of RC Prime Minister.s, especially French Canadian ones.
It would not even bother me if the Queen of England was susceded by a Catholic, I just do not want democracy to be replaced. Catholic, Protestants, Jewish, Buddhism or atheist I want democracy to continue and improve.
In 2005 when SSM first became a national issue or then PM Catholic Paul Martin was opposed to it on religious reasons but as soon as he started thinking of it as a human rights issue he stated he could no longer oppose it. Basically his words. We would have no reason to believe that a Monarch as you proposed would think along the lines of non religious reasons.
The bolded is a fair point. Do you believe that if Biden were installed as King rather than President and the US Constitution were scrapped, that he would suddenly rule more like Ferdinand II than like a post-French Revolution liberal as he does now?
The bolded is a fair point. Do you believe that if Biden were installed as King rather than President and the US Constitution were scrapped, that he would suddenly rule more like Ferdinand II than like a post-French Revolution liberal as he does now?
How Biden would rule does not matter as it is only one reign. I cannot answer your question as it is pure political as well assumes I consider Biden a liberal.
How Biden would rule does not matter as it is only one reign. I cannot answer your question as it is pure political as well assumes I consider Biden a liberal.
Just for clarification, I meant "liberal" in the broad, Lockean sense; as in being an alternative to monarchy. Maybe you'd have preferred the term "democratic"?
Just for clarification, I meant "liberal" in the broad, Lockean sense; as in being an alternative to monarchy. Maybe you'd have preferred the term "democratic"?
I would never create a system based on what Joe or John would do as I have no clue as to what Joe III or John IV may do.
Like Churchill said Democracy is the worst system other than the rest. I am simply not in favour of replacing democracy with other systems, especially those that have proven to be less suited for the minorities. That includes a religious monarchy, an atheist dictatorship or a corporate ran world.
And as you brought up a Catholic Monarch ran system there are far too many concept that I have a different opinion from your church there is no way I would be willing to be willing to surrender democracy for it. Bear in mind too I am Canadian hence your concept would not initially affect me. And would you be find with a Catholic Queen?
How Biden would rule does not matter as it is only one reign. I cannot answer your question as it is pure political as well assumes I consider Biden a liberal.
He's probably making the point that centrist Democrats anyplace but the US would be termed "conservatives". I won't say what Republicans would be termed.
Based on history, there are a number of things that we can be virtually assured would happen if the church (any church) were allowed to control the government in the United States.
First of all, we would all be taxed to pay for churches. Nine of the 13 American Colonies had taxes to pay for churches, and several European countries do so to this day. Some of the current taxes are as high as 20%. In a monarchy, there is no way to override the rule of the monarch, so you can be certain that your taxes would be used to pay for churches.
Secondly, rules that have no purpose beyond religion would become the rule of the land. Whereas we now have a few places where alcohol sales are prohibited (dry counties), those are few and are generally limited to the Bible Belt. These laws have been lessened a great deal in recent years, but a few remain. We, as citizens, can expect to see our ability to buy and consume alcohol severely curtailed.
Third, laws regulating when businesses can be open will become widespread. Most of the Sunday Blue Laws have been repealed, but a religious monarchy would, based on historical precedence, impose those laws, forcing businesses to close on Sundays. No more grocery shopping or restaurant meals on Sundays.
Fourth, laws hat were opposed by churches would be repealed and we would soon find that same sex marriage becomes illegal. interracial marriage becomes a felony, and all forms of commercial gambling becomes against the law, closing all the casinos in the country, including those on sovereign land belonging to the Native Americans. Nobody is exempt, and there is no appeal when a rule comes from a monarch.
Fifth, again based on history, religions that the monarch doesn't like will be closed and the leaders imprisoned. In the case of a Catholic Monarch, this would mean that all Protestant ministers who refuse to disclaim their religions would become political prisoners. Other religions most like wouldn't even get a chance to renounce their faith, but would be taken into custody, their churches seized, and heir followers put on police watch lists.
None of these things is even an exaggeration. They have real basis in US history, or they exist in the world today.
I think the are accurate points and in fact I think we are partway there already even without a monarchy.
In some cases these changes might not happen immediately if the first monarch were, say, hypothetically, a "benevolent" dictator. It would at the very least happen with his first or second successor, however. There's always someone who would think him too soft on the opposition. Or other forces in the regime might find him a useful fool to soften initial opposition and give them time to become entrenched before really taking the gloves of. Absolute power corrupts absolutely, usually sooner, but always later if nothing else.
He's probably making the point that centrist Democrats anyplace but the US would be termed "conservatives". I won't say what Republicans would be termed.
No, that wasn't what I had in mind.
"Liberalism" in the Lockean sense is a very broad category and encompasses both "liberals" (or progressives) and "conservatives" in the American (and Canadian) contexts.
Lockean Liberalism is "liberal" in relation to the political order of the time, which in his case was monarchy. Conservatives would have been monarchists and liberals would have been republicans.
Just an observation: Taking into account the public agendas of the current Pope and the fact that the chief executives of both the US and Canada are actually Catholic, I find it interesting that most of the respondents believe that the installation of a Catholic monarch in the US would mean a return to *their idea of* a Medieval, militant, and crusading Catholicism; complete with Inquisitions and all the accoutrements. I say *their idea of* because popular history is often biased and tends to exaggerate and/or mischaracterize certain things in order to promote a particular ideology.
Your question makes a faulty presumption, and that is that Truth cannot be known; or more precisely, that the state is not competent to determine what is True Religion. On the contrary, the state can and must make that determination.
so then you do not favor, support, honor, or have any use for freedom of religion. i find that disturbing, oppressive, dangerous, and the height of arrogance. You can not possibly know what religion is best for another person, another people or an entire nation.
God is not proprietary to any group, any religion, any path, any prophet, or any historic religious figure. Period. Full stop. Every person walking this planet is already a beloved child of God, and has access to Divinity, as close to each as their beating heart and the air they breathe.
Quote:
As for how I would personally feel about a Muslim monarchy... I really can't say, because that could look like any number of things. It's certainly not ideal, but would it be better or worse than what we currently have? Who could say?
and yet you want us to say. while you yourself are declining to answer the question.
certainly you are free to do so. but i am pointing out this is an example of lack of transparency, lack of sincere discussion, which quite naturally leads to lack of trust. you are asking others to do something which you yourself are not willing to do yourself. huge red flag.
Here is another sincere question for the OP, or anyone who cares to answer:
i am going to ask you a sincere question. what is behind your intention and motivation and desire to impose a Catholic monarchy in the USA?
is it to shore up membership of an organization whose members are leaving in droves?
is it to eliminate other religions?
is it to return to the glory days of forced conversions through coercion and violence?
is it to salvage bruised pride because people are choosing not to join Catholicism, and those already in it are leaving?
is it envy of other religions whose numbers are growing while Catholicism is shrinking?
is it to show others who is boss?
is it to force your will on others?
is it because you have such a low opinion of humanity that you think they are incapable of making their own choices?
is it because you claim to know what is best for other people (the words that come to mind are patronizing and condescending)?
is it to fill the financial coffers?
is it to access a robust military to have for use by the Catholic church?
or ______________ other, your answers here
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 07-05-2022 at 07:41 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
