I think that **Nava *is talking about is the tendency ( which I suspect is not restricted to the US) for Catholic parishes to require either proof of baptism or registered parishioner status/training for certain roles or events. For example, US parishes typically have lectors who have had some amount of training and are assigned to regularly scheduled Masses and events- they generally don’t look for volunteers from the attendees except for funerals and weddings, where they are still chosen in advance. Another example is my Catholic uncle and his Catholic wife - they were married in a Lutheran church because her annulment hadn’t come through yet. A Catholic parish would not have conducted a wedding ceremony for two non-Catholics. To be my nephew’s godmother, I technically needed a letter from my pastor stating that I was a registered parishioner in good standing and had been baptized and confirmed. ( I don’t know if a non-Catholic “Christian witness” would have needed proof of baptism.)
But even in the US, Catholic churches don’t card everyone who attends Mass or gets into the Communion line.
I didn’t actually need it because I was a member of the same parish.
Abortion still isn’t legal in the Republic of Ireland, although that’s currently in the process of changing. I mean, we talk about abortion rights in the U.S.? I’d hate to have to deal with that in Ireland.
And it’s only been 1995 since they legalized divorce.
The Just So story we teach in elementary school social studies does not reflect the reality of state religion (eight out of thirteen) and discrimination (try being a quaker in early Massachusetts).
Many people left because they were being hassled, not because of some general desire for everyone to have religious freedom.
I fail to see how almost every debated issue doesn’t come down to some sort of morality choice on each side. Take abortion: It is immoral to kill unborn children, or it is immoral to attempt to control a woman’s reproductive choices. Take tax cuts for the rich: It is immoral that those who have means should shoulder less of the burden. Or, it is immoral that just because you are successful in business that the government should keep asking you to pay more and more.
Some issues have secondary utilitarian consequences, but almost everyone’s view of the issue is shaped by his or her personal morality.
I have not encountered it outside the US, although I must admit I didn’t go to Mass much in Germany or Greece (just once each and the only words I exchanged with the priest were for Communion). Ireland, Costa Rica, Mexico, France, Switzerland, Italy, England, Spain: there was no requirement to either register as a parishioner (which one pastor in the US required that I do just in order to attend Mass! - I just didn’t attend there again) or provide proof of anything (a different US parish required proof of Confirmation to act as a Lector; in other countries I’ve been asked if I was confirmed before being allowed to give out Communion but they just accepted my word for it).
Honestly, that’s less about morality and more about narcissism.
If you have a successful company that’s thriving, it’s because the country you live in is providing the conditions for it to thrive. The Government (as a shortcut to mean “everyone else in the country”) makes sure your business has water and power, The Government makes sure the roads are adequately maintained enough that your factory/restaurant/office can have the shit it needs delivered, The Government makes sure these shipments are not highjacked nor the output product, The Government ensures you don’t have to pay kickbacks to the local bandits because it’s a nice business you’ve got and it’d be a real shame if someone were to take a shotgun to your motherfucking knees if you don’t give up the goods right now (some mafiosi are less subtle than others, y’ken ?), The Government ensures the bank you’re storing your money in doesn’t just take it and run, or your competitors hire mercenaries to blow you up and so on and so forth. The Government also ensures that a majority of people have enough money and feel safe & healthy enough to buy the probably useless shite you’re peddling.
None of that shit is free. None of that shit is you self-making your fortune and being an entrepreneur. All of the things I’ve mentioned happen or have happened elsewhere, where The Government wasn’t quite so keen on giving individuals the means to be successful. Those places where you wouldn’t even consider living, let alone building a company.
So pony up your taxes and say “thanks” already, you colossal jerk.
The government provides all of what you mentioned to both very successful and very unsuccessful businesses. It seems pretty clear that the differing element between me, a successful business, and the guy down the road, an unsuccessful business is not because the government protected me from marauding pirates.
There’s no point to what you’re saying. Of course they offer this to all businesses, regardless of their success level.
The idea is NO businesses would be successful without a government effectively providing the trappings of a modern nation-state. And the evidence shows it; in free, orderly countries where the rule of law is upheld and the government functions in providing basic services, business flourishes.
So who disputes that the government should provide the service of a modern state like police protection and municipal water? Because Republicans do not support the extensive bloated government that requires high taxes to function does not mean that we want a return to the Dark Ages.
The argument is a total non-sequitur. Just because I don’t believe that the federal government should have a Department of Education doesn’t mean I am against a paved road in my town.
That’s a non-sequitur. So you’re more better at business than the next guy over. More power to you. Now pay up because your business depends upon all the things I’ve listed all the same as that of the guy whose dog vajazzling shop tanked.
Tough shit. We (We The People, ergo We The Government) have collectively decided that society would be better off if people were compelled to not be dumb as shit (and history has proven us right). For one thing, educated people tend to make more money and to make better life/health decisions - meaning they are better clients for whatever service your business provides and they cost less in terms of various social programs. Also they more rarely vote for fucking Nazis, so there is that too.
There are lots of things I wish my government wouldn’t do or incentivize. There are lots of ways I wish my tax euros would not flow. As long as I’m part of this specific The People, however, I get to pay for all of it. Nobody gets to pick and choose - or rather, everybody gets to choose and the end result is a shitty compromise that satisfies nobody - that’s what a society is. If I wasn’t OK with that social contract I could either try and vote away the things I didn’t like, or leave. You, UltraVires, are also free to vote or leave the US.
As long as you don’t leave, however, pay your fucking taxes. And don’t forget to say “thanks”.
On paper they (you) don’t. But in the actual accounting books, a lot if not all of those “reduce amount of government workers” policies ends up meaning more-expensive private subcontractors, many of which have very little or inappropriate training, lousy working conditions, etc.
The relationship between amount of government workers and amount of taxes isn’t a straight line. It goes through the pockets and fingers of many, many people.
And there are many people in the US who complain about having to pay for municipal water when they have a well. And many who think that if they get a well, they can skip on getting and paying for municipal water. For example, it’s an ongoing problem in Miami, where idiots who just retired from parts up north open wells into soil which is actually a former landfill and has really high levels of heavy metals.
Some businesses flourish without the benefit of government. Yes, they use infrastructure, but they are happy to work outside of the protections and limits of law.