Remaining an American and remaining a Catholic are analogous.

[Gravitycollapse]

Both are voluntary associations.
Both are voluntary associations with corrupt organizations and bad people.

Both identities are somewhat removed from the source of corruption and wrong. We can be Americans and not ethically support all of the atrocities committed by our government.

Still, one must be willing to admit that there is a certain level of culpability for the actions of organizations you identify with. That is not to say that, as Americans, we are responsible for torture or murder that we did not commit. The same can be said about Catholics and the atrocities of the Roman Catholic Church. If you are a Catholic, you are not responsible for the rape of children.

What this ultimately comes down to is the truth that there is a real disparity between the upper echelons of both organizations and ground level participants. Our taxes or tithes may end up in the hands of evil men. But that is not due to any maliciousness on our part. That's the nature of the beast.

Telling Catholics to abandon the Church is like telling Americans to abandon the US. And, by doing so, you ignore the incredible complexity and tacit levels of association with good people who do good things.

Life is not so black and white that we can look at a group of 315,000,000 Americans or 1,200,000,000 Catholics as irreducible entities.

None of us are wholly innocent or wholly responsible. It's not even 50/50. It's nuanced. It depends largely on your beliefs and actions.

[ananda]

1. Here's an analogy!

Catholic is to Episcopal as Liberal is to Progressive.

You could probably fill in the blanks.

[hrmjustin]

51. That is because Episcopalians are Catholic.

[redqueen]

2. I disagree.

It's very expensive to emigrate. Leaving the church saves you $$$.

[Gravitycollapse]

3. Leaving a supportive community is always expensive.

[freshwest]

7. +1. NGOs, of which churches are a major part, often take no money from members or clients.

It's a myth that tithing pays for all of these things. Since Bush began the faith-based social services funding, it's tax dollars mixed in with volunteer labor that provide services in many cases.

So every one in this country as part of the social contract pays for the evil that is done as well as the good. Every one who pays taxes also pays the RCC, and that association is not voluntary. It just is.

Democrats who want to keep the social safety net need to realize the same entity that provides those services, makes wars. As far as churches go, the same entities which aggravate and grieves us, provides things no other agency does. We are all part of this, good and evil.

This is the logic that people are denying, trying to escape and be pure and holy in their own way. It's past time we grew up and took responsibility for being part of a whole, not pointing fingers or hating each other for part of the problems.

There is no escape from being human.

[MNBrewer]

10. Who says it's necessarily "supportive"?

[nadinbrzezinski]

20. Since not all revolves around money

For people railing about support groups I guess that does not apply to Catholics.

[Johonny]

23. You can simply vote to change you country

Can you vote to change your religious leader or God?

The analogy between Churches and countries only works on the believers... to everyone else it doesn't work.

Leaving your country has real life consequences
Leaving your church... only if you believe in it does it have any real consequences

Why this idea keeps being pushed on the DU I have no idea other than people are trying very hard to push some weird correlation that Democrats are anti-catholic even though must Democratic catholic voters have no problem in this area. John Kerry and Joe Biden have no problem being catholic, being democrats and voting on legislation that was directly in line with church doctrine. Polls generally find most Democratic catholic voters are the same way. Disliking the anti-gay stance of the current catholic church in no way appears to be "driving" catholic from the Democratic party. There is pretty much zero evidence of this. Anymore than the churches anti-war stance drove Catholics from the Republican party...

[nadinbrzezinski]

25. Leaving a church, or any other religion

Means leaving family, missing events such as births and deaths in some cases, and a support structure. Incidentally, moving from one country to another also means leaving that support structure behind. I can speak of that as an immigrant

So it's not as false as you think.

Though in larger cities it is easier to find a new support structure, and perhaps you missed this, but humans are social animals. .

[jeff47]

53. I find it interesting that you think "families value their church more than each other"

is a compelling argument.

[redqueen]

27. I think it is a few comments frim some DUers implying/asserting that Catholics are unwelcome.

Or that they feel it is impossible to be a Catholic and also a liberal or good democrat or whatever.

There have only been a few such comments that I've seen, so why anyone would infer that any sizeable number of Dems or progressives agree I have no idea.

[nadinbrzezinski]

54. It's been enough where non Catholics have noticed.

I am not one.

[Gman]

4. I'm Catholic. If people here at DU think that's a bad thing

They can kiss my ass.

[Itchinjim]

6. +1

[Lionessa]

9. Huh, I can think it's a bad thing and NOT kiss your ass either, lucky me.

This is a forum, I don't even have to see your ass, much less kiss it.

Supporting pedophiles, misogynists, homophobes, in anyway, and proudly claiming attachment to such is, imo, bad.

[rhett o rick]

15. Now hold on, you should at least give him points for his machismo.

It takes a real man to challenge someone to "kiss his ass" on a anonymous blog.

[Gman]

18. Well then get TF over it

Last edited Wed Mar 20, 2013, 09:03 AM - Edit history (1)

As a matter of fact, you can take your self-righteous bullshit faux outrage and shove it.

[Lionessa]

19. Spoken like a true Republican...

Have you been taking lessons from Repubs as to how to respond to us progressives that think everyone should have the right to marry, and women should have the right to planned parenthood, and young boys have the right to expect to NOT be raped, because telling us all to get the fuck over it is exactly what very conservative Republican, Tea Partier even, would say.

Thank you for exposing your true self.

[Gman]

24. So now get TF over it

It's hilarious that you can't think much better than the average teabagger and paint almost 1 billion people like you do. What the hell. Muslims, Catholics, they're all the same, right?

[rhett o rick]

12. Hello? This isnt Jr High. nm

[treestar]

5. If the citizenship voluntary though?

One cannot necessarily pick countries that will recognize one as a citizen.

[Lionessa]

8. Actually Citizenship isn't voluntary for very many born here. Not same at all.

Then realize that re-locating is expensive, just the paper work which won't guarantee citizenship anywhere else, and of course they have their rules about immigration, many poor Americans cannot afford the citizenship rules of other countries. Sorry, not the same at all.

[rhett o rick]

13. I believe it's very difficult to immigrate even to Canada. Not sure about Mexico. nm

[Lionessa]

14. I checked Mexico, to do it legally you have to show a certain amount of worth, income, and/or job

waiting, for the visa to stay long and get citizenship. I am essentially broke and homeless and my biz is slowly re-starting, so I didn't bother remembering the required amounts, I just knew I didn't have them. Now I've heard they are making all manner of exceptions for folks from the US and Europe, but I didn't see that when I went on line to look at the Mexican gov site.

[rhett o rick]

17. I would guess that poorer countries would welcome American immegrants if they had

wealth. If no wealth, probably not.

Good luck with your biz.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

44. Retirees with a certain level of income are welcome

others, not so much.

[MNBrewer]

11. If analogous it's a very very bad analogy.

[rhett o rick]

16. They are not at all analogous. nm

[Xyzse]

21. It goes deeper than that for some

Because being born to a religion, even though some may equate it sometimes to being close to a citizenship it can range towards being part of a family.

Where if being compared to a family, it would be like:

Both are associations one is born in to.
One can leave it but its influence is ingrained in one's identity.

Which is why I completely agree that "Telling Catholics to abandon the Church is like telling Americans to abandon the US. And, by doing so, you ignore the incredible complexity and tacit levels of association with good people who do good things." Since in many ways, to abandon a religion means abandoning family, social contacts and many other relationships that one can easily take for granted.

This is a very complex personal choice that no one else can set for any other individual. All I could say is, respect the person's choice and their beliefs, asking someone to leave their religion(no matter what it is), is equivalent to ramming your own beliefs down their throats.

[liberal_at_heart]

38. "asking someone to leave their religion is equivalent to ramming your own beliefs down their throat.

exactly.

[edhopper]

22. The fallacy of the false analogy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_analogy

[TM99]

26. Ah, those who profess to understand logic

based on Wiki entries.

The correct false analogy in this whole Catholicism discussion is the equating of a rank & file Catholic parishioner as being as equally culpable and 'evil' as an individual Catholic priest who did despicable pedophilic acts. Therefore due to this false analogy, any DU Catholic member must immediately renounce their religion completely and leave the church or they support pedophilia.

See, I corrected it for you.

[edhopper]

28. That would truly be a false analogy

And I believe you just used the "strawman" fallacy to argue about why most here condemn those who still support the Church. Voting Republican doesn't mean you are evil as Dick Chenney, just that you support his actions. That is the analogy mostly being made.

But I think the analogy of being a Catholic and being American is equally false. Feel free to sit a different logical fallacy if you think one is more appropriate.

BTW I did not learn the concepts of logical fallacies from Wiki. They are just an easy link.

[TM99]

29. I don't have a dog in this fight

so I have been merely observing the arguments from both sides.

In point of fact, many here have made the false analogy as I pointed out. Specific posts from DU members say that if you give money to your church then you are supporter of pedophilia, misogyny, etc. So, no that was no 'strawman' in pointing out the false analogy.

I will agree that the being Catholic and being American is a weaker analogy perhaps, but it is not a false one. Arguments from analogy are not always false, and in fact are valid forms of inductive reasoning. As adults, we can voluntarily choose to leave either church or country. Whether there are emotional or practical reasons are irrelevant, because we ultimately make the choice to stay for good or ill.

So this particular analogy is being used now to point out the hypocrisy of those who say, leave the church (this organization) because it has done evil things in the past or continues to in the present. Yet, at some time or another we are all members of a class, a group, an organization, etc. that has done despicable things or continues to. Why haven't we left? Why are there still Protestants even though an incredibly large number in America are frothing fundamentalists? Why was I Republican even during the Bush years? Why would you remain a Democrat if the current party weakens Social Security? Why am I still an American given the tragic lies of the Iraq War?

Ultimately, the ones attacking are hurting - justifiably so in most cases. They are angry at abuses they have suffered. They are still burning that wood emotionally. They can't attack perhaps the person or persons who actually did hurt them directly, so instead they lash out here at a class of members who are associated with those who may have hurt them. They consider them complicit in the pedophilia, the misogyny, the sexism, etc. Eventually, it will settle back down once the wood is burned through.

This is an emotional argument started by those with emotional hurts. Once they attack, those attacked are then emotionally upset. All forms of logic whether true or false, formal or informal, etc. are still being used in service of an emotional Tête à tête.

Too many use Wikipedia as a primary source. I apologize for the accusation if it is untrue. I tend to wince when it is cited rather instinctively these days given the number of students I see using it and 'the Google' as their research tools.

[edhopper]

32. Thanks for the reasoned response

The reason i find it a false analogy is the hierarchical structure of the Church and the US are so different that I find the argument facile. From my point of view the clergy don't even consider the churchgoers the real Church, just the congregation they administer. The priesthood itself acts more like a cult, protecting itself above everything else. We American's can stay and change things when they are bad, 2008 for example. Catholics have no control over who runs the Church and what it's agenda is, they don't even have a say in who the priest is in their own church.
So it may not be false, but I find it so weak as to be irrelevant to the discussion.

[TM99]

33. Fair point

But this confirms my assessment that any attack here on DU of Catholic churchgoers for the responsibility of the actions of their clergy are indeed a false analogy.

If the congregation is indeed that separate from the hierarchy then they can never be held responsible for the hierarchy's actions. Now of course, this also means they can never affect any positive change in the hierarchy either, but that is another line of thought.

Thanks for an intelligent reply and debate without rancor.

[edhopper]

39. But they can

"starve the beast" as Grover Norquist would say.

[TM99]

40. Not likely though as

the Vatican itself has funding from large estates and bank investments.

The collection plate often only financially impacts a local parish and the outreach that they can accomplish in the nearby community.

[edhopper]

41. Actually, from what I have read

the Vatican considers America it's piggy bank.

[TM99]

42. Yes, but those are large estates

Last edited Fri Mar 22, 2013, 02:42 AM - Edit history (1)

given after rich Catholic donors die. Things like that are the norm for the large amounts of funding. Most dioceses are extremely strapped for funds. The source for my information & understanding is a close high school friend who is now a Bishop in North Carolina.

[edhopper]

50. Thanks

[FreeJoe]

30. It's a poor analogy

I left the Catholic Church. It was pretty easy. I just quit going. No fuss. No stress.

I've known a few people that have emmigrated from the US. Each time was a very substantial endeavor. Leaving or joining a church is much simpler than leaving and joining another country. Maybe it shouldn't be, but it is.

[backscatter712]

31. Analogy fail.

Why don't you try skipping across the border and saying "I want to be Canadian today," and see how easy it is.

[Apophis]

34. Analogy fail.

[JVS]

35. Nope. Not even close. Changing citizenship is a lot harder than sleeping in on Sunday.

[sabrina 1]

36. And yet, millions of people do it every day and have throughout history. I guess it all depends

on how much you are willing to sacrifice for what you believe in. It's nice being able to benefit from all of our foreign adventures and theft of resources from other nations. But as you say, we can't just leave in order not to be a part of these crimes. Or, maybe it's better to stay and try to stop them.

But it is hypocritical to ask other people to give up what you yourself are not willing to do. For some people their faith is way more important than their citizenship so asking them to give it up is asking for more than simply leaving a country. Why do you think so many people fled to this country, even though they did not want to do so? Some of them could have stayed in their home countries if they had merely been willing to give up their beliefs. Their faith however was more important than where they were born.

[JVS]

37. citation needed

which countries are taking in these millions of immigrants? Millions a day would mean that every year over 700,000,000 swich citizenship. That's bullshit.

[DCBob]

46. about a million per year immigrate legally into the US.

I have no idea how many do across the entire planet.

[TheKentuckian]

49. Beating up on a little rhetorical flourish doesn't change the meat of the argument

People have left their homes for new ones throughout history, we are here should be credence enough to support the point. Immigration laws around the world would also indicate purpose.

People migrate in real numbers. Why do we have fuckers foaming at the mouth and hollering about building fences and walls patrolled by soldiers and drones? Due to a figment?

I think is inarguable that a fair amount of folks are here now because an ancestor found giving up their citizenship, associations, friends, language, families, and birth places rather than their faith. Hell, many have given up their lives rather than renounce a faith throughout history.

If the poster had said thousands then what would you have leaped on to evade the point?

[jeff47]

52. And people have left their church for a new one throughout history.

Minimizing the difficulty of immigration makes the ease of leaving one's church even more obvious. The former requires navigating a byzantine labyrinth, and in many cases it's utterly impossible. The latter requires will.

Sure, summoning up the will to leave is not trivial, but that is the only barrier preventing someone from leaving their church.

I think is inarguable that a fair amount of folks are here now because an ancestor found giving up their citizenship, associations, friends, language, families, and birth places rather than their faith.

The idea that people emigrated to the US for religious freedom is false. Only a tiny fraction ever did. But it makes a great Sunday story, so we teach our kids that everyone was like the pilgrims.

And we carefully leave out the racism that actually motivated the pilgrims.

[99Forever]

43. Great. How do I go...

... ending my "voluntary association" with being an American? Short of dying that is. Because, I for one, find very little good in what this nation has become, and I would damn sure love to go to a country that still has a conscience.

Get back to me right away, PLEASE. I have no health care and don't know if I can hang on much longer.

Thanks for your help.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

45. If you're under 40 and have an in-demand skill, it's easy

If you're not, it's not.

My college friend was able to remain in Norway after a stint of study abroad, because she heard that Norway was short of IT personnel. Having a good math background, she figured correctly that she could pick up computer science easily, so she enrolled in a training program and has been working ever since.

Each country has odd little exceptions. For example, you can get into Canada if you have agricultural experience and are willing to farm in the prairie provinces. The UK publishes a list of "shortage occupations" that lists the types of job expertise that will give a wannabe immigrant a leg up. A few years ago, the daughter of a friend got in because there was a shortage of elementary school teachers. However, that exception is no longer true, as I understand.

If you're retired, there are countries in Latin America and Southeast Asia that accept retirees. The only Western European country that has a specific program for retirees is Malta (Mediterranean island near Italy), and there the income requirements are pretty high.

[Warren DeMontague]

47. ...but anyone who has ever watched consenting adults screw on film, is responsible for slavery and

child abuse.

....The important thing is that the 15 minute hate be aimed in the proper, pre-approved direction, right?

[liberal_at_heart]

48. +1

Any of these analogies are ridiculous. I think that is the point.