Psamathe wrote: ↑23 Oct 2021, 5:02pmHow much "cherry picking" are Catholics permitted to still be considered Catholic by the church? If you attend church regularly, do confession, but reject the contraception bit is that OK? What about if you reject the existance of God, still OK? At what point do you cease to be a Catholic and become just somebody who believes in God (or doesn't)?
1 A lot.
2 Roughly yes.
3 and 4 Same rule as the Hotel California. Until excommunication.
"Biden says pope said to keep receiving communion amid abortion row"
"President coy when asked if abortion came up in Vatican meeting, as US Catholic bishops weigh whether to deny him the sacrament" https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/ ... ions-cop26
Psamathe wrote: ↑23 Oct 2021, 5:02pmHow much "cherry picking" are Catholics permitted to still be considered Catholic by the church? If you attend church regularly, do confession, but reject the contraception bit is that OK? What about if you reject the existance of God, still OK? At what point do you cease to be a Catholic and become just somebody who believes in God (or doesn't)?
1 A lot.
2 Roughly yes.
3 and 4 Same rule as the Hotel California. Until excommunication.
I used to go out with a German Catholic woman. Sex before marriage, yes; contraception, yes; but she'd never had had an abortion; she went to Mass fairly often, including services which were somehow 'in lieu' of confession (so she didn't go into a confessional box).
I'd describe her as Catholic and l imagine her priest did too. And of course just by going to services she adhered to her religion vastly more than most people who tick the 'C of E' box.
I've read somewhere this morning something along the lines that it's a convention that the major parties don't contest the bye-election triggered by the murder of an MP. I hope it doesn't become so frequent that a convention develops.
thirdcrank wrote: ↑4 Feb 2022, 9:56am
I've read somewhere this morning something along the lines that it's a convention that the major parties don't contest the bye-election triggered by the murder of an MP. I hope it doesn't become so frequent that a convention develops.
They didn't contest the by-elections caused by the murder of Cox. They did for those caused by the murders of Gow (1990) and Berry (1984).
I remember those other murders. The points I failed to make are that each of those was abhorrent in its own right and I hope such crimes don't become so frequent that there's an accepted routine for our response
thirdcrank wrote: ↑4 Feb 2022, 9:56am
I've read somewhere this morning something along the lines that it's a convention that the major parties don't contest the bye-election triggered by the murder of an MP. I hope it doesn't become so frequent that a convention develops.
They didn't contest the by-elections caused by the murder of Cox. They did for those caused by the murders of Gow (1990) and Berry (1984).
Jonathan
Both killed by IRA bombs, I note from a very quick google.
The "non-contest" seems an honourable approach to me, whether or not it is documented. Does anyone have an opinion on why Amess and Cox were treated differently to the IRA victims?
mattheus wrote: ↑4 Feb 2022, 12:06pm
...
The "non-contest" seems an honourable approach to me, whether or not it is documented. ....
I can't see the "honourable approach" myself. I see there are two aspects, the horrendous murder and then separate the electorate choosing who they want to represent them in Westminster. Making the assumption that who a small group of Conservative Party members chose is the democratic choice just because their selected candidate is "Conservative" seems very undemocratic. One is assuming votes for David Ames in past elections were due to him being a Conservative and ignoring the other aspects e.g. animal welfare, religious beliefs, campaigning for region, etc. Could be he was taking a lot of Labour & Lib Dem votes because of his reputation? My impression is local electorate have had a new MP appointed whatever they may think of the individual.
mumbojumbo wrote: ↑4 Feb 2022, 5:38pm
All elections should be contested.What satisfaction can the victor derive?
The decision of other parties not to contest this by-election is a closing of ranks to assert that murdering an MP, any MP, will not be a way of changing which party represents a constituency. I think it is a good approach. The constituency now continues with an MP from the same party as the one who was murdered. It is analogous to the situation you get in a football match when a player is injured and in pain, and the opposing team kick the ball out of play to allow swift treatment. When play resumes they are given the ball back when it is thrown in. In this particular instance the message is that our democratic politicians stand together when faced with political violence. If an MP is murdered we replace them like-for-like so that the murderer does not get the satisfaction of precipitating change.
