You know, being fairly convinced that a Catholic Confessional State is the way to go means that I'm not really into Free Speech as such.So, while the HRCs exist in the West, secularists cannot (logically) complain about The Inquisitions. The excesses thereof, maybe, but not The Inquisitions themselves.It occurs to me that the HRCs are perhaps a living proof that the state is a moral person. (At least, it certainly seems to act like it) and therefore owes allegience to Christ the King as its Head.If indeed the state is a moral person, then the absence of a Social Reign of Christ means that one will have a Social Reign of Something Else. (In such a case, there could not be a mere absence of a Social Reign).So it seems to me that in all honesty I have to say that I'm not really opposed to Inquisitorial type things, but that since I'm a Catholic it naturally follows that I would rather live in a Catholic Confessional State than an Atheistic/Secular/ Apostate Confessional State.I do think one can reasonably object to the HRCs on the basis that they are really not in accord with the Rule of Law (or whatever it is). E.g. in some models, the accused is presumed guilty and will incur expenses for the process, while the plaintiff (?) does not incur expenses.Just trying to nut this out.Ultimately I believe in Free Speech for Christ's Church.
Having said all that, I liked the clip.It did make me think of the N.I.C.E.I did also wonder whether Ezra was just going to thump her.
Post a Comment