In such a sensitive time like the present, in which international politics is focused on combating terrorism and fundamentalism, and Italian to quibble over what name to give to the reform of the rights of unmarried couples and homosexuals, it is quite normal for tempers heat up and become irreconcilable positions, dialogue impossible, and emphasize diversity.
So it happens that even within a small District Council will trigger an epistolary debate between "gentlemen", made up of mail and opinions that imbalance between the sacred and the political diversity ...
months ago at the Family Day, national demonstration in Rome in defense of the Family Traditional held last May, a Director of the DS has launched a reflection of how many Catholic areas are going to support even ideally aim of the event; consideration the commitment of the Church in dealing with matters considered amicable purely political, the scapegoating of people considered "different" because of their sexuality that they become victims of society, the defense of the secular state.
Needless to say, face a similar argument for its delicacy and complexity, and especially likely to involve issues of a more religious and spiritual than political, as well as national and international interest which the note terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism
... How then to respond to a vision too secular state? How to explain that certain religious and spiritual themes that appear also involve the political life of a nation? Understand how to do that everyday life consists of things essential and inalienable, that no education policy can change at will, use and consumption for the purpose of internal balance or ideological?
In a secular state like Italy (and this is a fact, otherwise we would not have a head of state Giorgio Napolitano called, but Benedict XVI), which is clearly and obviously not a fundamentalist, it is obvious that any review of the Church on what the leaders propose can be seen as interference in the interests of the state itself, just as it was judged the Church in matters of divorce, now is judged to say ...
wrong then how to give to the Church if the secular state intervenes when legislating on matters that are not just secular, but "touch" principles and religious values, just like marriage and family?
And I do not think the "fear" of the Church is limited to the legitimacy of incest and pedophilia: I challenge any government, any color, even the most anarchic, to legitimize pedophilia and incest!
I think rather that the Church's intention is to defend its interest in religion and identity, by a world and a changing society that is emerging, in which Christian values \u200b\u200band morals are increasingly fading in favor of an expansion of materialism and individualism.
Although traditionally associated with the Church Family, I recognize that in the past often expressed opinions on Italian political life, getting some irritation, for example at the time of the "penta" we used by the IEC, to express The identikit of the Prime ideal
... But as I said before, the limit state boundary between lawmaking and religious issues often coincide, so even if I disagree, I can understand the attitude of the Church.
As I understand the statements and the account is not too soft and sympathetic towards those who claim gay, knowing that even within the Church itself has been demonstrated (or assumed) multiple cases of pedophilia, homosexuality, depravity , violence ... But the Church's "religious" and still considered brothers also forgive perpetrators of these crimes, and no priests, while the Church "institution" strongly condemns.
a citizen of a secular state, I am certain that no one has ever claimed that gay people should be ashamed of them, or worse, remain hidden ... in the shadows as well as national political forces do not intend to deny these people, as the de facto heterosexual couples, no rights: simply make a few changes to the law to fill gaps, not create bills that would be complicated the whole regulatory framework; the impression is that it truly wants to get anything else ... and if I remember the art of .6 I say could be a good "out" to stabilize people who do not have any rights.
personally do not think gays and lesbians as abnormal or victims of society, indeed, as far as I'm concerned, each person in the private sector is free to love, live together and make sex with whoever he wants and how he wants ...
Rather, I see some form of self-exclusion, segregation and self-pity is not necessary: \u200b\u200bI mean the behavior that many considered the gay and become victims of society, accusing the company itself not understand, and then shamelessly flaunt their sexual condition.
to understand and not to be misunderstood me through so much trouble seeing two men or two women kissing each other and exchange effusions in public, doing the same thing as seeing a man and a woman!
A force to consider and say they are "different", you run the risk of being for real and I hope that the majority of homosexuals is more intelligent of those who participate in the various gay-pride ... Platinette for example, has made its "diversity" a strong point: then can like it or not as a character and columnist, certainly embodies much folklore, but it is certainly respected as a person.
therefore nothing to prevent gay couples living together, but before calling Families "put his foot on the brake."
What then is the family? It is that form of life that has as its fundamental purpose is to create another life, so for men than for animals. And Nature (not talking about God or science), requires us to maintain the cycle of life are living beings of the opposite sex. Then
true that in nature there are also people who unfortunately are sterile and can not procreate, but this is another totally different problem ... The left
ADJUDGED also the backwardness of Italy to Europe, in the usual defeatist tone: with time argues that we too will become like all other European states, but apparently Italy is the land of ideological confrontation and the other countries take note of a changing society, and monitor lizard and more liberal rules of civilization.
Instead, I believe, and it is evident that Europe has failed in its attempt to drive: (dear Romano) is unthinkable to create a united Europe politically and economically, if the first CULTURALLY not join!
were mixed together too many different cultures, and has not done anything to create mutual understanding and integration. We should therefore
we hope to become like other European states? No thanks, Italy has much to teach Europe and the Europeans ... but first must be able to get rid of the many social ills that afflict it, and rediscovering the core values \u200b\u200bfor civil society.
is still following the reasoning of the left will be confronted with the defense of certain principles and rights jeopardized by the integral and religious fundamentalism, pointing to the central issue in the relationship between Faith (personal matter and private) and the rules of living together (question of the public sphere).
fact, when one of the two invading the other, there are serious problems concerning the relationship between the state Republican and all religions, not just the Catholic ... The company turns out to be later than the current laws in this matter and for this reason must be established idea of \u200b\u200bsociety where the rights and duties are also reserved for those who have beliefs, habits and feelings different from our own.
More than fair, we say to the right, but it requires that respect, rights and obligations are reciprocal: we respect but we must also be respected, we recognize the rights and duties but we expect you to observe those rights and duties ...
is therefore true that serious problems are to be formed at a time when religious issues overlap with public issues, and this includes all religions, with very recent and current examples.
I am referring to the many protests by various Muslim communities on the request to remove the crucifix in schools ... According to this reasoning you should also remove from the court rooms and all public offices, and what about the inscription "In God We Trust" on the existing dollars? Imagine if the United States of America change its historic U.S. dollars!
But we are at home: how to define the demand more than ever senseless, part of a religious-Islamic and Koranic, to affix the photo identity card with a lot of women to veil?
Certainly the society in which we live today "runs" as fast as he can to enact laws, and we see it in all sectors, from technology, education, employment, finance it ... however, should not prevent the fundamental values \u200b\u200bof society are erased or distorted, or converted to a false solidarity of convenience more political propaganda than anything else.
Perhaps many do not realize it yet, especially on the left, but we're invaded by the Muslim world: a world that makes it hard to talk to us, not because we are deaf to their voice, simply because while we consider rules of life and religion two different things, Islam considers them the same thing, then basing the civil and political life on religious fundamentalism. How to open tables and discussion of peace with these people?
is why it is true that we must defend the principles and rights jeopardized by the integral and religious fundamentalism, but the danger and risk fundamentalist and fundamentalist drift embodies the Catholic Church?
In this period of international tension, where the real potential terrorists are not Muslims who live in the East, but those who are already living among us for some time, I would say that "I'm with Benedict XVI, a Pope who has inherited from John Paul II revived a religion, to defend Islam from attack and relativism.
Let me be clear, because words can be easily misinterpreted: when I say that the true potential terrorists are those among us does not mean all Muslims but, unfortunately, that part which is the predominant, and declares that it is fundamentalist and does not admit full integration, even religion, not respecting our culture and tradition.
Never thought that soon there may be a strong opposition, made not of words and dialogue as someone stubbornly utopian to believe, between the West and Islam? How will we do? Which way we'll be?
then I do not think its wrong to say, our religious certainty: at the bottom of our religion is among those that most inspire goodness, forgiveness, mutual aid, and on this the fine of Pope John Paul II has definitely closed the dark chapter of the Holy Inquisition and medieval Christianization.
After all, we can say that the first socialist in history it was Jesus of Nazareth. ...
disappeared when the beloved Pope John Paul II, they all said that we had lost a Pope of extraordinary size, and that it was very difficult to have another one of equal capacity.
We had the luck to meet two rather large Popes, one after another and one that carries forward the work of the other: if John Paul II was a great catalyst for the masses and especially young people, a media personality who has revived and regain the faith and love for Church, Benedict XVI uses these masses gathered around the Church to revive the message of Christianity.
The event that created a strong "arm wrestling" between the Christian West and Islam, or the words spoken by Benedict XVI in Germany a month ago, which I personally believe that just and specifically to raise an important question, has shown that the 'present Pope is of extraordinary size in dealing with resolve and determination of the 'Muslim question'.
believe the Pope is likely to confide in an outcry in his defense by the Western political world, it is found rather isolated and alone, except for some Catholic politicians Italian center-right ...!
The outcry there has been, perhaps because the 'powerful of the Earth' want to understand the purpose for which the Pope wants to go and which path will take, or perhaps because they are well aware that a sentence like that, if supported so strong, he could actually unleash an armed war between religions, and the western world is not ready for this, especially with the millions of Muslims potential suicide bombers scattered in all states ...
serious and tense, created by laws that are too permissive and permissive, which issued in the name of tolerance, integration and freedom of religion threaten to overwhelm cultures, traditions and religion of the Western world; are instead built mosques and Islamic cultural centers created spaces: be clear, everyone has to profess and practice their religion they prefer, and as we Italians are the first to defend our traditions and popular culture, even when we are abroad , who is a foreigner must be able to do the same in Italy. But
remove the crucifix from schools and public places, tolerating demand that women have the photo identification documents in the face with a veil, provide grants for activities that you do not have any control and you'll never hear the positions net against terrorism, taking refuge in the hopes of Europe weak means surrender and submit before an "invader" more real and potential. How
not agree then with Pope Benedict XVI in defense of Christianity? I'm with Benedict ...
So it happens that even within a small District Council will trigger an epistolary debate between "gentlemen", made up of mail and opinions that imbalance between the sacred and the political diversity ...
months ago at the Family Day, national demonstration in Rome in defense of the Family Traditional held last May, a Director of the DS has launched a reflection of how many Catholic areas are going to support even ideally aim of the event; consideration the commitment of the Church in dealing with matters considered amicable purely political, the scapegoating of people considered "different" because of their sexuality that they become victims of society, the defense of the secular state.
Needless to say, face a similar argument for its delicacy and complexity, and especially likely to involve issues of a more religious and spiritual than political, as well as national and international interest which the note terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism
... How then to respond to a vision too secular state? How to explain that certain religious and spiritual themes that appear also involve the political life of a nation? Understand how to do that everyday life consists of things essential and inalienable, that no education policy can change at will, use and consumption for the purpose of internal balance or ideological?
In a secular state like Italy (and this is a fact, otherwise we would not have a head of state Giorgio Napolitano called, but Benedict XVI), which is clearly and obviously not a fundamentalist, it is obvious that any review of the Church on what the leaders propose can be seen as interference in the interests of the state itself, just as it was judged the Church in matters of divorce, now is judged to say ...
wrong then how to give to the Church if the secular state intervenes when legislating on matters that are not just secular, but "touch" principles and religious values, just like marriage and family?
And I do not think the "fear" of the Church is limited to the legitimacy of incest and pedophilia: I challenge any government, any color, even the most anarchic, to legitimize pedophilia and incest!
I think rather that the Church's intention is to defend its interest in religion and identity, by a world and a changing society that is emerging, in which Christian values \u200b\u200band morals are increasingly fading in favor of an expansion of materialism and individualism.
Although traditionally associated with the Church Family, I recognize that in the past often expressed opinions on Italian political life, getting some irritation, for example at the time of the "penta" we used by the IEC, to express The identikit of the Prime ideal
... But as I said before, the limit state boundary between lawmaking and religious issues often coincide, so even if I disagree, I can understand the attitude of the Church.
As I understand the statements and the account is not too soft and sympathetic towards those who claim gay, knowing that even within the Church itself has been demonstrated (or assumed) multiple cases of pedophilia, homosexuality, depravity , violence ... But the Church's "religious" and still considered brothers also forgive perpetrators of these crimes, and no priests, while the Church "institution" strongly condemns.
a citizen of a secular state, I am certain that no one has ever claimed that gay people should be ashamed of them, or worse, remain hidden ... in the shadows as well as national political forces do not intend to deny these people, as the de facto heterosexual couples, no rights: simply make a few changes to the law to fill gaps, not create bills that would be complicated the whole regulatory framework; the impression is that it truly wants to get anything else ... and if I remember the art of .6 I say could be a good "out" to stabilize people who do not have any rights.
personally do not think gays and lesbians as abnormal or victims of society, indeed, as far as I'm concerned, each person in the private sector is free to love, live together and make sex with whoever he wants and how he wants ...
Rather, I see some form of self-exclusion, segregation and self-pity is not necessary: \u200b\u200bI mean the behavior that many considered the gay and become victims of society, accusing the company itself not understand, and then shamelessly flaunt their sexual condition.
to understand and not to be misunderstood me through so much trouble seeing two men or two women kissing each other and exchange effusions in public, doing the same thing as seeing a man and a woman!
A force to consider and say they are "different", you run the risk of being for real and I hope that the majority of homosexuals is more intelligent of those who participate in the various gay-pride ... Platinette for example, has made its "diversity" a strong point: then can like it or not as a character and columnist, certainly embodies much folklore, but it is certainly respected as a person.
therefore nothing to prevent gay couples living together, but before calling Families "put his foot on the brake."
What then is the family? It is that form of life that has as its fundamental purpose is to create another life, so for men than for animals. And Nature (not talking about God or science), requires us to maintain the cycle of life are living beings of the opposite sex. Then
true that in nature there are also people who unfortunately are sterile and can not procreate, but this is another totally different problem ... The left
ADJUDGED also the backwardness of Italy to Europe, in the usual defeatist tone: with time argues that we too will become like all other European states, but apparently Italy is the land of ideological confrontation and the other countries take note of a changing society, and monitor lizard and more liberal rules of civilization.
Instead, I believe, and it is evident that Europe has failed in its attempt to drive: (dear Romano) is unthinkable to create a united Europe politically and economically, if the first CULTURALLY not join!
were mixed together too many different cultures, and has not done anything to create mutual understanding and integration. We should therefore
we hope to become like other European states? No thanks, Italy has much to teach Europe and the Europeans ... but first must be able to get rid of the many social ills that afflict it, and rediscovering the core values \u200b\u200bfor civil society.
is still following the reasoning of the left will be confronted with the defense of certain principles and rights jeopardized by the integral and religious fundamentalism, pointing to the central issue in the relationship between Faith (personal matter and private) and the rules of living together (question of the public sphere).
fact, when one of the two invading the other, there are serious problems concerning the relationship between the state Republican and all religions, not just the Catholic ... The company turns out to be later than the current laws in this matter and for this reason must be established idea of \u200b\u200bsociety where the rights and duties are also reserved for those who have beliefs, habits and feelings different from our own.
More than fair, we say to the right, but it requires that respect, rights and obligations are reciprocal: we respect but we must also be respected, we recognize the rights and duties but we expect you to observe those rights and duties ...
is therefore true that serious problems are to be formed at a time when religious issues overlap with public issues, and this includes all religions, with very recent and current examples.
I am referring to the many protests by various Muslim communities on the request to remove the crucifix in schools ... According to this reasoning you should also remove from the court rooms and all public offices, and what about the inscription "In God We Trust" on the existing dollars? Imagine if the United States of America change its historic U.S. dollars!
But we are at home: how to define the demand more than ever senseless, part of a religious-Islamic and Koranic, to affix the photo identity card with a lot of women to veil?
Certainly the society in which we live today "runs" as fast as he can to enact laws, and we see it in all sectors, from technology, education, employment, finance it ... however, should not prevent the fundamental values \u200b\u200bof society are erased or distorted, or converted to a false solidarity of convenience more political propaganda than anything else.
Perhaps many do not realize it yet, especially on the left, but we're invaded by the Muslim world: a world that makes it hard to talk to us, not because we are deaf to their voice, simply because while we consider rules of life and religion two different things, Islam considers them the same thing, then basing the civil and political life on religious fundamentalism. How to open tables and discussion of peace with these people?
is why it is true that we must defend the principles and rights jeopardized by the integral and religious fundamentalism, but the danger and risk fundamentalist and fundamentalist drift embodies the Catholic Church?
In this period of international tension, where the real potential terrorists are not Muslims who live in the East, but those who are already living among us for some time, I would say that "I'm with Benedict XVI, a Pope who has inherited from John Paul II revived a religion, to defend Islam from attack and relativism.
Let me be clear, because words can be easily misinterpreted: when I say that the true potential terrorists are those among us does not mean all Muslims but, unfortunately, that part which is the predominant, and declares that it is fundamentalist and does not admit full integration, even religion, not respecting our culture and tradition.
Never thought that soon there may be a strong opposition, made not of words and dialogue as someone stubbornly utopian to believe, between the West and Islam? How will we do? Which way we'll be?
then I do not think its wrong to say, our religious certainty: at the bottom of our religion is among those that most inspire goodness, forgiveness, mutual aid, and on this the fine of Pope John Paul II has definitely closed the dark chapter of the Holy Inquisition and medieval Christianization.
After all, we can say that the first socialist in history it was Jesus of Nazareth. ...
disappeared when the beloved Pope John Paul II, they all said that we had lost a Pope of extraordinary size, and that it was very difficult to have another one of equal capacity.
We had the luck to meet two rather large Popes, one after another and one that carries forward the work of the other: if John Paul II was a great catalyst for the masses and especially young people, a media personality who has revived and regain the faith and love for Church, Benedict XVI uses these masses gathered around the Church to revive the message of Christianity.
The event that created a strong "arm wrestling" between the Christian West and Islam, or the words spoken by Benedict XVI in Germany a month ago, which I personally believe that just and specifically to raise an important question, has shown that the 'present Pope is of extraordinary size in dealing with resolve and determination of the 'Muslim question'.
believe the Pope is likely to confide in an outcry in his defense by the Western political world, it is found rather isolated and alone, except for some Catholic politicians Italian center-right ...!
The outcry there has been, perhaps because the 'powerful of the Earth' want to understand the purpose for which the Pope wants to go and which path will take, or perhaps because they are well aware that a sentence like that, if supported so strong, he could actually unleash an armed war between religions, and the western world is not ready for this, especially with the millions of Muslims potential suicide bombers scattered in all states ...
serious and tense, created by laws that are too permissive and permissive, which issued in the name of tolerance, integration and freedom of religion threaten to overwhelm cultures, traditions and religion of the Western world; are instead built mosques and Islamic cultural centers created spaces: be clear, everyone has to profess and practice their religion they prefer, and as we Italians are the first to defend our traditions and popular culture, even when we are abroad , who is a foreigner must be able to do the same in Italy. But
remove the crucifix from schools and public places, tolerating demand that women have the photo identification documents in the face with a veil, provide grants for activities that you do not have any control and you'll never hear the positions net against terrorism, taking refuge in the hopes of Europe weak means surrender and submit before an "invader" more real and potential. How
not agree then with Pope Benedict XVI in defense of Christianity? I'm with Benedict ...
0 comments:
Post a Comment