There is not a direct relationship between Fox News and Fox 45. That is true.
But...
Fox 45 Baltimore is owned by the Sinclair Broadcast Group, and corporation with a definite pro-Trump bias, and a history of making editorial decisions pushing stories to the right.
So you can say that Fox News and Fox 45 don't have anything to do with each other in a corporate tree, but the are both pushing the far right narrative because they largely follow the same editorial dictates.
Glad you brought that up, since the concentration of ownership of stations is an entirely separate, but even more serious source of bias. Station ownership is way less obvious to consumers than network affiliation.
For example, Sinclair also owns some NBC, ABC, CBS, CW, and Univision stations (a fact I only just looked up myself). I am sure many consumers (like the parent) assume all Fox stations are owned or managed by Fox, NBC stations by NBC, and so on, when it's much more complicated for historical reasons, which is what I want to draw attention to.
Unless Trump is challenging the terms of service that he had to agree to when getting his account, this is largely a non-issue. Trump _agreed_ that Facebook/Twitter could ban him whenever he crossed their usage policy, which they can alter at any time.
Essentially, Trump agreed that they had the right to ban him before he posted anything to their services.
So sure, the government may be able to force people to host things they don't want to, but I don't think the government will force anybody to break a contract that both parties agreed to in this case.
Or because sequels often add new characters. And the Trump Republicans made themselves ridiculously easy targets...see the Four Seasons Landscaping fiasco, paying off Playboy models and pornstars, suggesting publicly that people inject themselves with bleach or somehow use sunlight internally...
People mock them because they do stupid things. Those are called consequences.
That is a definition of God that is so amorphous that it is completely useless. God is whatever you want it to be in that particular moment. So much so, that there is nothing concrete there.
You are simply living from moment to moment, with no grounding connecting your beliefs aside from your personal desires for them.
He still has a mind we can relate to, like a child can relate to their parent. If you cared to look into Aquinas’ idea of God you’d find many concrete ideas, but he’s describing the spiritual realm so obviously it’s not as concrete as describing a human person... that’s the whole point.
What’s very concrete is what God has revealed to us historically through his people Israel, and through his son’s incarnation. What the church does is try to take these revelations/projections and through reason map out the source.
Religion is a social organization and embodiment of a Spiritual practice.
Technically, not necessary, but that would be like saying, technically, humans do not need 'each other' or need 'education' In reality, we do, immensely. When we don't have it wee seek it out learning ans religion, couched in different terms.
A good example is 'Yoga'. Yoga is 100% a religious practice, it's Hatha Yoga, a subdomain of Hinduism. Yoga exists to help prepare the body to be enlightened, specifically via the Kundalini Fire.
By removing the direct, religious language from Yoga, it's promulgators hoped to make it more amenable and acceptable to Westerners and it has been. (I do Yoga myself).
But merely changing the words to make them 'not seem religious' doesn't really change the underlying religious practice.
"Virtually every youth-serving organization used to not handle abuse of youth properly."
This again? The existence of others committing the same crimes does not indemnify the Church.
Love the "Society has changed" argument. Clearly, recognizing that pedophilia is wrong by the Church is a product of changing times...not like they moved clergy from parish to parish to avoid them being caught.
There's a lot of conceit in this notion that just because _you_ can't understand or explain something means that it goes beyond understanding and explanation.
Religion exists because of that conceit, that notion that either something is immediately explainable or that it is supernatural. Science exists because the idea that something isn't understood now doesn't mean that we (as a species) won't ever understand it.
We stand on the shoulders who have come before us, and not one of them was a god.
"There are not one hundred people in the United States who hate The Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they wrongly perceive the Catholic Church to be."
Oh, that's crap. There are more than 100 victims of child sexual abuse by Catholic clergy where the Church itself covered up the crime. You can play with definitions however you want, but that is not a misperception of the Church, but a realistic view of the actions of the Church.
I've been Catholic, and the Church exists to extend the existence of the Church. Any other action is in service to that goal.
Catholic priests are less likely than the general population to be predators. You only hear about it because the media Is hostile to the church. School districts across the country have done similar things in terms of cover ups but I don't hear the outage there.
So the Church, an organization that sets itself up as the moral arbiter between God and man, doesn't have more of a moral responsibility than school districts across the country?
And there is plenty of moral outrage for coverups, no matter the source.
Please. People hate the Church because it says it is one thing and is another. The media is critical of the Church because the Church has tried to make itself the authority on people's behavior, yet itself behaves in a reprehensible manner. Maybe it should just go back to being the Mafia's bank and just obliquely supporting drug cartels and human rights abuses via loans?
Your whole comment is just whataboutism. You've an opportunity to refute the assertion that the Church knowingly covered up abuse of children, and you've decided that if others have done it, it can't be that bad.
The Church only claims that it is a hospital for sinners. It doesn't claim that it is a country club for saints relaxing on earth for a vacation. The surprise that such a hospital should be full of those who need its cures is not Biblical. The sadness that it is so, on the other hand, is, so thank you for your moral outrage!
And no one is claiming that there aren't sinners in the Church, and no one is outraged that there are. The problem is that the "hospital" was moving abusers around from floor to floor to avoid responsibility.
Heck, if the Church defrocked the abusers (those in need of its "cures") when they were reported, and took actions to keep them from abusing and answer for their crimes to the legal authorities, no one would have this (particular) problem. But the Church didn't, because it was protecting itself. The Church is more important to the Church than the victims of those crimes.
Hence, the Church exists to ensure the existent of itself, and all it's actions are in service of that singular goal.
Frankly, moral outrage at child sexual abuse and the systematic cover up of the abuse and protection of the abusers is justified. If the Bible is written in such a way that such moral outrage is a sickness, then it is truly awful foundation to base your morality upon.
But thank _you_ for minimizing the responsibility of those covering up the crimes and ensuring that they could continue.
My point is that the Church is not the churchmen and that those who cover up others crimes, like those who commit them are all in the beds. You do not see the Divine Physician and so conflate those under judgment with the One Who judges the living and the dead.
Moral outrage is not a sickness - moral outrage is thinking God's thoughts after Him and so is to be commended!
The Church is composed of the people in it. And should be judged by the actions of those that comprise it, otherwise you are abandoning all agency, and it may as well be dismantled as it could not be responsible for anything it does.
Also, no evidence of any god exists, but that is another argument. Let's stick with arguments that postulates the existence of a God in the Catholic tradition.
First, according to the Bible, papal infallibility has whatever the Church does held as law in Heaven. Stupid rule, but there you are. Therefore, if we judge that covering up and enabling child abuse is immoral, then the Church is by its own rule, immoral. Well, that doesn't work out so well for the Church. So let's leave that aside.
The Catholic Church (and other denominations) tries explain evil (and thus side step the "All Good, All Power, and All Knowing -- pick two problem of God), but claiming that it is all part of God's greater plan. The difficulty here is that it doesn't side step the problem, but tried to solve it by adding a layer of abstraction to it. What you end up with is that God's plan has to be definitionally immoral because it came from the mind of God.
The answer is, of course, who can know the mind of God? It sort of kicks the can down the road much the way the Millerites (now Seventh Day Adventists) do on the end of the world and QAnon does with Trump coming back (was it January 20th? Or March 6th? Or March 20th?). Evil exists because God's plan demands it, but somehow removes the responsibility of God's plan from God.
So, the children were abused by the men acting in God's name because God's plan demanded their suffering, but God owns none of the responsibility because you can't possibly understand the reason that God required the suffering of those children. Nice work, if you can get it.
Free will (in the Catholic tradition) allows the ability to see the harm that actions do upon others, but somehow we are supposed to turn a blind eye to that done under the protection of God. Because those children were clearly not under the protection of God.
I guess there’s someone willing to defend anything.
I don’t see anything about the general population, but to bring up schools is whataboutism. Unfortunately predators seek out jobs that will put them close to children. The Catholic Church coverups go up to the chain of command and they continue to let pedophile priests serve. These issues were well known to the church but they let abuse continue and did not turn priests over to the police. Are you not outraged by this? If your son or daughter was abused by a priest who has been abusing others for decades would you not blame the church?
But...
Fox 45 Baltimore is owned by the Sinclair Broadcast Group, and corporation with a definite pro-Trump bias, and a history of making editorial decisions pushing stories to the right.
So you can say that Fox News and Fox 45 don't have anything to do with each other in a corporate tree, but the are both pushing the far right narrative because they largely follow the same editorial dictates.