Jump to content
THE BROWNS BOARD

Pope says weapons manufacturers can't call themselves Christian


OldBrownsFan

Recommended Posts

I few folks on this board should read some history. Did the Resistance in

WWII have boms, airplanes, and howitzers?

 

Nope. Did the colonists in early America have massive manpower, horses, cannons?

 

Regardless of the odds, mankind has an innate fervent desire to be free.

 

Our 2nd Amendment makes it very unlikely we will ever have to fight for our freedom

again.

 

It's insurance against something that will surely never happen. But like home fire insurance,

just in case that one in a million lightning strike hits your house or something..

that insurance is very important anyways.

 

Except our Right to Bear Arms insurance is also preventitive. Against any kind of tyranny - governmental,

or local violent group threats.

 

A group of hoodlums if you are out in the country, alone. If you are black, a group of KKK skinheads, if you

are a Jew - a group of neonazies...or democrat liberal sumbeech extremists.................

 

The right to protect you and your family and your home. The police never had any chance of getting to that

church where that nutcase shot the innocent church goers in a "gun free zone".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 116
  • Created
  • Last Reply

but is against those possessions owning His people.

 

welcome to American capitalism....where your soul is slowly sucked from you in the name of consumption. Seriously, that's what's happened here and why capitalism has gotten a bad rap. The U.S is a conglomeration of free market distortions. The concept of a free market isn't the problem, it's what American society has not just done with it inside our own borders...but has done to places inside other people's borders in the name of "our" consumption.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Crony capitalism is a term describing an economy in which success in business depends on close relationships between business people and government officials. It may be exhibited by favoritism in the distribution of legal permits, government grants, special tax breaks, or other forms of state interventionism.

 

I think this is part of the problem. ^^^^^^^^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Crony capitalism is a term describing an economy in which success in business depends on close relationships between business people and government officials. It may be exhibited by favoritism in the distribution of legal permits, government grants, special tax breaks, or other forms of state interventionism.

 

I think this is part of the problem. ^^^^^^^^

 

without question it is. This is how things became centralized. And when centralization occurred than a handful of small companies could go about marketing our brains out to be their slaves. There are many products that should never have been allowed to be produced by so few.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but crony capitalism is how it works across the board. I think it's a little hypocritical to ban it and insider trading etc in business while you me or any other guy on this board would tip his friends off if they knew something was coming.

 

WSS

 

But that's the breaks when you're dealing in multi billion $ transactions. Me making a street deal with you is a minor perturbation of the free market. The ramifications of what some of these finance companies have done on wall st with their buddy buddy system is system breaking and has global consequences.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but crony capitalism is how it works across the board. I think it's a little hypocritical to ban it and insider trading etc in business while you me or any other guy on this board would tip his friends off if they knew something was coming.

 

WSS

Free Market Capitalism vs. Crony Capitalism

Unlike in a free market capitalist system, under crony capitalism it is often more profitable for businesses to spend resources lobbying legislators for handouts in the form of grants, loans, or tax advantages, and protections against competition in order to increase their profits. In turn, the government's willingness to hand out special privileges promotes the politically well-connected rather than those who seek to earn the preference of investors and consumers based on merit. The gains of such activities usually accrue to the businesses and politicians involved at the expense of consumers and taxpayers. Consumers have to pay higher prices due to decreased competition, and taxpayers have to foot the bill for loans, grants, bailouts, and tax breaks. Thus, crony capitalism creates a system of privatized gains and "socialized losses."

 

http://www.intellectualtakeout.org/library/business-and-economics/free-market-capitalism-vs-crony-capitalism

Link to comment
Share on other sites

guns and religion. a perfect topic for this mess.

 

if not for either we'd probably be living in some utopian society (lol).

 

what a sad lot we turned out to be. i'm sure if someone or something did create 'us' they/it must be damn proud of themselves now. what'd it take a couple hundred thousands of years to ruin a planet?

 

but as long as those that 'got' are happy while they're here it's all good for them and fuck everyone else cuz they ain't livin forever.

 

i'd really like to see a show of hands from those of you 'gun nuts' who actually served your country.

 

yeah thought so.

Seven years usaf. Operation enduring freedom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Free Market Capitalism vs. Crony Capitalism

Unlike in a free market capitalist system, under crony capitalism it is often more profitable for businesses to spend resources lobbying legislators for handouts in the form of grants, loans, or tax advantages, and protections against competition in order to increase their profits. In turn, the government's willingness to hand out special privileges promotes the politically well-connected rather than those who seek to earn the preference of investors and consumers based on merit. The gains of such activities usually accrue to the businesses and politicians involved at the expense of consumers and taxpayers. Consumers have to pay higher prices due to decreased competition, and taxpayers have to foot the bill for loans, grants, bailouts, and tax breaks. Thus, crony capitalism creates a system of privatized gains and "socialized losses."

 

http://www.intellectualtakeout.org/library/business-and-economics/free-market-capitalism-vs-crony-capitalism

of course that is in the bastardized system of capitalism we use. in a pure form there wouldn't be bailout and thered be plenty of competition as other groups of cronies would want to take a broadside hit at the first group of cronies. when we force everyone to share and give up political and financial advantage nothing works smoothly and the consumer doesn't really benefit.

 

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Free Market Capitalism vs. Crony Capitalism

Unlike in a free market capitalist system, under crony capitalism it is often more profitable for businesses to spend resources lobbying legislators for handouts in the form of grants, loans, or tax advantages, and protections against competition in order to increase their profits. In turn, the government's willingness to hand out special privileges promotes the politically well-connected rather than those who seek to earn the preference of investors and consumers based on merit. The gains of such activities usually accrue to the businesses and politicians involved at the expense of consumers and taxpayers. Consumers have to pay higher prices due to decreased competition, and taxpayers have to foot the bill for loans, grants, bailouts, and tax breaks. Thus, crony capitalism creates a system of privatized gains and "socialized losses."

 

http://www.intellectualtakeout.org/library/business-and-economics/free-market-capitalism-vs-crony-capitalism

 

 

Yep. At first glance that statement makes one wonder why we have govt at all. But then I think about all the incredible things companies were getting away with in the early part of last century because nobody knew they were doing it. How would consumers know a company is using our waterways as their mercury diluter and thus punish them through the free market? There has to be a regulatory body to say if you do that we're gonna catch you and THEN they have to have the authority to sodomize the company in horrible ways. But how do you keep the regulatory body, whatever you wanna call it govt or citizen consumer protection blah blah, from becoming corrupt and letting things go for payments? The only answer I can come up with is that you have to pay the people in that regulatory body "very" well. Citizens have to agree that the taxes they do pay don't go to anti competitive things like mentioned before...but a lot of goes to the salaries of the people protecting our market.

 

That is what govt to me is. A small agile entity that stays in the background till it's needed and then it can drop the hammer on those that seek to subvert our free market. And for those grey areas they perform in an advisory type functionality. Like Cigarrettes...it's not the govt's business to tell people they cannot smoke, but they can make it perfectly and clearly known what the ramifications are. The only caveat to that is where children are concerned, govt should absolutely not allow certain things in our market to be readily available to children and in a lot of cases we see directly marketed to.

 

One of the best examples of this is when SF wanted to ban those stupid little toys in happy meals....there was this huge outcry from the right. I don't want govt telling me what I can and cannot feed my kids. But they missed the point...it wasn't telling anybody what they can and cannot feed their children. SF had it right, they were trying to outlaw the circumvention of the parent child relationship by fast food companies directly marketing to children. And I agree with that. And most of you with children would be utterly "outraged" if a porn company for example was trying to market porn for children.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

guns and religion. a perfect topic for this mess.

 

if not for either we'd probably be living in some utopian society (lol).

 

what a sad lot we turned out to be. i'm sure if someone or something did create 'us' they/it must be damn proud of themselves now. what'd it take a couple hundred thousands of years to ruin a planet?

 

but as long as those that 'got' are happy while they're here it's all good for them and fuck everyone else cuz they ain't livin forever.

 

i'd really like to see a show of hands from those of you 'gun nuts' who actually served your country.

 

yeah thought so.

United States Army.

 

You're running out of feet to shove in your mouth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well at least three of us are ex military. Diehard makes 4. You failed big on that one.

 

i failed? i am ex-military. how many spouting pro-gun people on here aren't? that's my question?

 

all of a sudden people want to have their own arsenal of weapons and either be patriotic or anti-gov't.

 

i say where were you when you had the chance to sign up and join to help and protect this country that gave you the rights to bear arms?

 

so either i can't understand where you stand on this issue because you aren't making yourself clear or you just don't get it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The bible says there will come a day when the nations will beat their swords into plowshares. That day has not come yet. If any nation is unwise enough to do this today they will end up plowing the fields for the nations who kept their swords. In the world today there is only peace through strength. Manufacturing of weapons is necessary. ISIS (among many others) would love to see nations lay down their arms. Weapons are needed for self defense as well as a being a deterrent from being attacked. One day weapons won't be necessary but let's not get ahead of ourselves.

 

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/pope-says-weapons-manufacturers-cant-call-themselves-christian-184139430.html

 

Not being a biblical scholar I'd have to agree with him. The New Testament, which of course are second hand accounts, seem to describe Jesus Christ as a charitable, tolerant, pacifist, who believes "you'll get yours in the afterlife" kinda guy. Now that type of mentality doesn't lend itself to overtaking the world so the incarnation of Christianity probably supports the arms race.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

i failed? i am ex-military. how many spouting pro-gun people on here aren't? that's my question?

 

all of a sudden people want to have their own arsenal of weapons and either be patriotic or anti-gov't.

 

i say where were you when you had the chance to sign up and join to help and protect this country that gave you the rights to bear arms?

 

so either i can't understand where you stand on this issue because you aren't making yourself clear or you just don't get it.

You are the one that failed to make yourself clear "let's see a show of hands from you gun nuts that actually served our country" definitely implies to me that you're insinuating the pro gun people didn't serve. As it turns out most of the pro gun people on this site did serve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, I took it the same way Cysko said.

 

But the connection between gun ownership and being a veteran...

 

I don't get it. A lot folks didn't join for good reasons, some did for good reasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there are too many people that latch onto having the right to bear arms for reasons of their own that have nothing to do with why those words were written.

 

there are plenty of people on here and elsewhere who have not picked up a pen let alone a weapon to serve their country but yet find a way to denounce everything certain gov't officials do because of their stances on certain policies one being gun control.

 

a deaf, dumb and blind person could see that there is an over proliferation of guns in this country. it's amazing that those with all senses do not.

 

i'm done. sorry folks, this is why i don't do the political board. geezuz h. christ some of you are dimwits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

a deaf, dumb and blind person could see that there is an over proliferation of guns in this country. it's amazing that those with all senses do not. Mik

************************************

Wait...THAT was your point? Seriously? Any politician that goes to attack our freedoms and our 2nd Amendment,

as well as our 1st, and others....

 

is a complete sumbeech. Most always a dem. Or a "Pope". I don't care what they say. You don't go after

millions and millions and millions of terrific, innocent Americans because nutjob violent criminals commit crimes.

 

It's dumbass, reeks of ulterior motives like their culture war. Take guns from those who aren't allowed to have them.

Wait, a lot of them don't have money in fees and licenses etc etc et.... oh, and they wouldn't pay them if they did

have the money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way, I don't care what the pope says.

 

Me neither. This Pope is too socialist for me. Now we find out the Pope's top adviser on climate change is an atheist and I read where the Pope refused to even hear both sides of the argument on climate change.

 

"Since Pope Francis’ encyclical about “Climate Change/Global Warming” came out last week, supporters have gone crazy extolling the Pope’s wisdom. But, as we reported here, the Pope’s position has been heavily influenced by left-wing radicals who have infested the Vatican.

 

Now, it has come to light that not only has the Pope taken an extremist “green” position on “Global Warming/Climate Change”, but that he refused to even listen to the other side of the argument.

 

The sad truth is that Francis’ pleas to “save the earth” will do very little to solve the very real problems of poverty, disease, and starvation in the world. More environmentalist socialism will only make those problems worse. It’s just a shame he wasn’t willing to listen to all the facts before closing his mind to the truth."

 

http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/world/pope-refuses-to-hear-both-sides-on-climate-change

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pope too socialist? Isn't the pope *supposed* to be socialist? I mean, if any man alive should be about helping the poor and the rest, I'd expect it from him.

 

As I have posted before the early church had a form of socialism where those churches that could share did so with other churches that were lacking. That system could work in the early church but it does not work in the world. Look no further than Cuba or Russia or anywhere else socialism has tried and failed. If you want the highest standard of living for people it is shown to be the capitalist system not the model of Cuba or Russia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right, but capitalism basically shits on the poor people, and it's up to the pope to stick up for the poor people, that's kind of his job. I get that Americans have this grand vision of the great American dream where anybody can work hard and make it to the top - but this tends to overlook the fact that 'the top' is only a small percentage, so by definition most people get shit on by those living the dream.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...