Wicked eBay
We read:
"Unfortunately, racial and ethnic prejudice still permeates some sections of society and is tolerated by one of the largest corporations in the world. Twenty four hours a day, seven days a week on any computer around the world any individual regardless of age can go on www.eBay.com and post or purchase racially and ethnically insensitive items.
Just days after the inauguration of America's first African American president, Barrack Obama and the first Catholic vice-president, Joseph Biden, eBay is hosting items offensive to both groups and most of the nation.
Items for sale include "coon" songs, a piece of piano music entitled "n-----" blues, anti-Catholic post cards and tracts from the Ku Klux Klan, and even the bones of Catholic saints.
Ebay has guidelines posted warning against these types of items but seems to be unable to police its own website and enforce its own policy.
Source
9 comments:
Don't worry, it won't be long and our government will be a truly socialist government. Then you won't be able to do or say anything without the 'ok' of the government.
Just remember that all a Liberal has to do is re-write history, and all that nasty Truth goes away.
Jesus was a liberal.
Hello Good Gentles All!
Hello Anonymous!
"Jesus was a liberal."
Indeed? Perhaps a little Scripture to back up this statement?
Pax,
InFides
you are wrong anonymous 5.00 am
Jesus being the Word incarnate is the author of the Bible . It was the liberals of the day that opposed him and plotted his death.
It could be said he is the Prime conservative being it was his origial intent at the foundation of the earth .
Ish Gebor
"Jesus was a liberal."
"Indeed? Perhaps a little Scripture to back up this statement?"
Dear InFides,
Whilst he was "hanging out" on the cross Jesus said:
"Father, forgive them. They don't know what they're doing." (Luke something or other)
I think he was referring to Barney Frank and his band of thieves.
That's a pretty liberal statement considering Jesus was generally clued into money lending.
Did they have mortgages in those days?
Hello Good Gentles All!
Sorry all, this post is long.
Hello grainnewale!
Let me help you.
"23:33 And when they were come to the place, which is called Calvary, there they crucified him, and the malefactors, one on the right hand, and the other on the left.
23:34 Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do. And they parted his raiment, and cast lots.
23:35 And the people stood beholding. And the rulers also with them derided him, saying, He saved others; let him save himself, if he be Christ, the chosen of God." From the book of Luke.
I take your part about Frank, et. al. of course, liberals every one. But my concerns are the way Frank and et. al. handled the people's money and not with the well considered and prudent use of money and credit which good and honorable men practice.
In so far as money lending, Jesus chastised the money lenders in the Temple for abusing and misusing the house of God and not for lending money or conducting trade as such. I am not sure that that incident should be interpreted as a blanket condemnation against mondey lending.
There were probably not mortgages as we understand them but there was credit.
The interesting thing is that the Biblical proscriptions on usury are in the Old Testament:
22:25 "If you lend money to any of My people who are poor among you, you shall not be like a moneylender to him; you shall not charge him interest.
22:26 "If you ever take your neighbor's garment as a pledge, you shall return it to him before the sun goes down.
22:27 "For that is his only covering, it is his garment for his skin. What will he sleep in? And it will be that when he cries to Me, I will hear, for I am gracious." From the book of Exodus.
This is the Old Law or the Law of Moses. It also includes things like not eating pork, circumcision and etc. There are other such Old Testament prohibitions on lending money. Yet money lending was an old custom even in the time of the Old Law.
It should be noted that in the quote from Exodus the people to whom the money is lent are poor. There seems to be an idea within the text that one should not abuse those in unfortunate circumstances or compund their poverty by asking of them what they can ill afford.
The is from the book of Luke:
"19:11 Now as they heard these things, He spoke another parable, because He was near Jerusalem and because they thought the kingdom of God would appear immediately.
19:12 Therefore He said: "A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom and to return.
19:13 "So he called ten of his servants, delivered to them ten minas, and said to them, 'Do business till I come.'
19:14 "But his citizens hated him, and sent a delegation after him, saying, 'We will not have this man to reign over us.'
19:15 "And so it was that when he returned, having received the kingdom, he then commanded these servants, to whom he had given the money, to be called to him, that he might know how much every man had gained by trading.
19:16 "Then came the first, saying, 'Master, your mina has earned ten minas.'
19:17 "And he said to him, 'Well done, good servant; because you were faithful in a very little, have authority over ten cities.'
19:18 "And the second came, saying, 'Master, your mina has earned five minas.'
19:19 "Likewise he said to him, 'You also be over five cities.'
19:20 "Then another came, saying, 'Master, here is your mina, which I have kept put away in a handkerchief.
19:21 'For I feared you, because you are an austere man. You collect what you did not deposit, and reap what you did not sow.'
19:22 "And he said to him, 'Out of your own mouth I will judge you, you wicked servant. You knew that I was an austere man, collecting what I did not deposit and reaping what I did not sow.
19:23 'Why then did you not put my money in the bank, that at my coming I might have collected it with interest?'
19:24 "And he said to those who stood by, 'Take the mina from him, and give it to him who has ten minas.'
19:25 ("But they said to him, 'Master, he has ten minas.')
19:26 'For I say to you, that to everyone who has will be given; and from him who does not have, even what he has will be taken away from him."
This parable is also found in Mathew.
The Christian idea, as I understand it, is not to abuse the borrower. For example, if I need a car I can rent one. I will return the car along with a reasonable fee for its use.
To borrow money is no different. The interest charged should be what the money would have been able to earn had it been employed in some other way.
For example, if the fee to rent the car yields the business a net profit of %5 then to lend money and obtain the same net profit is no worse morally speaking.
The difficulty may lie in the fact that usury has two meaings, lending money at interest and lending money at an exhorbitant interest.
From the Catholic Encyclopedia, 1913:
"Since the possession of an object is generally useful, I may require the price of the general utility, even when the object is of no use to me. There is much greater facility nowadays for making profitable investments of savings, and a true value, therefore is always attached to the possession of money, as also to credit itself. A lender, during the whole time that the loan continues, deprives himself of a valuable thing, for the price of which he is compensated by the interest. It is right at the present day to permit interest on money lent, as it is not wrong to condemn the practice at a time when it was more difficult to find profitable investments for money."
The article (later in the text) carries this admonition:
"Lending money at interest gives us the opportunity to exploit the passions or necessities of other men by compelling them to submit to ruinous conditions; men are robbed and left destitute under the pretext of charity. Such is the usury against which the Fathers of the Church have always protested, and which is universally condemned at the present day."
A very well reasoned argument.
The Church requires ecclastical administrators to place excess Church monies on loan at interest. There is nothing immoral avbout this so long as one behaves in accordance with the basic principle of fair trade.
The Golden Rule applies to money lending as it does to everything else concerning the actions of men.
Pax,
InFides
I understood that the temple incident was about exchanging money (not lending it) in order to get "clean" temple money to pay for the sacrificial birds and animals, which was just an excuse to rip off the pilgrims. Cleanliness and sacrifice was so much a part of Jewish culture - hence the ritual bathing and even Jesus himself as "a sacrifical lamb".
Hello Good Gentles All!
Hello Forex!
Well said. I was merely using the temple incident as an example of our Lord's dislike of people abusing His Father's house rather than His dislike of trade.
"And he went into the temple, and began to cast out them that sold therein, and them that bought;
Saying unto them, It is written, My house is the house of prayer: but ye have made it a den of thieves."
From the book of Luke.
The assertion was that Jesus was a liberal. I have yet to hear Anonymous defend this statement. Perhaps it is because he can not.
Let us see:
Our Lord opposed divorce:
"Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder."
From the book of Mathew.
In other words, no man shall divorce his own wife nor authorize or aid any other man to do likewise.
Our lord opposed abortion:
"But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea."
From the book of Mathew.
What offends a child more than to cut it to pieces and kill it?
He advocated paying ones taxes and supporting the lawful government:
"And he said unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar's, and unto God the things which be God's."
From the book of Luke.
He advocated personal charity (a hallmark of conservatives and not of liberals) and not the government taking from you and giving it to charity:
"But rather give alms of such things as ye have; and, behold, all things are clean unto you."
From the book of Luke.
To freely give of your wealth is charity, to have your wealth taken from you by force and given to others is not charity, it is merely the transfer of your goods to someone else by theft.
Our Lord advocated fair and equal treatment of our fellow man and the repayment of one's debts:
"And Zacchaeus stood, and said unto the Lord: Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have taken any thing from any man by false accusation, I restore him fourfold."
From the book of Luke.
He advocated doing one's duty and respecting lawful authority:
"And when Jesus was entered into Capernaum, there came unto him a centurion, beseeching him,
And saying, Lord, my servant lieth at home sick of the palsy, grievously tormented.
And Jesus saith unto him, I will come and heal him.
The centurion answered and said, Lord, I am not worthy that thou shouldest come under my roof: but speak the word only, and my servant shall be healed.
For I am a man under authority, having soldiers under me: and I say to this man, Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it.
When Jesus heard it, he marvelled, and said to them that followed, Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel."
From the book of Mathew.
These seem to be very conservative principles.
Respect for life, law, marriage and the honoring of one's debts and obligations are the conservative's daily mantras.
Pax,
InFides
Post a Comment