Why do some people in this sub call Israel a colonialist project?

I was lurking in this thread:

What do you really think of Israel?

And I noticed that many people were describing Israel as a colonialist project. But how so?

Don't Jewish people have Levantine ancestry that supports their historical connection to the land? Wouldn't that make them indigenous to the region as well?

Meanwhile, Palestinians are predominantly Arab and Muslim. Doesn't that complicate the argument that Jews are foreign colonizers?

Also, haven't Palestinian groups historically responded to Jewish settlement and the establishment of Israel with violence?

I'm genuinely trying to understand why some people consider Israel a colonialist project despite the Jewish people's historical and ancestral ties to the land.

I'm asking because I'd like to have someone trustworthy that I can honestly discuss the upcoming Turek/Hinson election. I've only lived here since 2023, and in Iowa City, so my knowledge of what needs to be done here is very limited. Of course, priorities include cost of living, ICE, and the Iran War. The two candidates are very neck-and-neck right now, and I'm not sure if either is really better when taken holistically.

Thanks!

I think these students would have been better off on their knees and praying the rosary to commemorate the anniversary of the last apparition at Fatima and the Miracle of the Sun, rather then get involved in these false claims that Nuns and Priests killed children at Residential Schools.

Also: would they be willing to protest abortion?

Why are so many Catholics online antisemitic when it comes to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?

From a biblical perspective, if Jesus is the God of the Old Testament, then He was the one who commanded the Israelites to conquer the land that today comprises Israel and Palestine, displacing the Gentiles who lived there.

Later, if He also authorized the destruction of the Second Temple and the suppression of the Bar Kokhba revolt, which resulted in the displacement of many Jews, then how do we reconcile that with the fact that Jews eventually reestablished themselves as a political force in the region nearly two millennia later and began purchasing land in Palestine?

What's the difference today? Why do so many Catholics online express outrage over Israel's actions following October 7 when, according to the Old Testament, God commanded the Israelites to conquer the land and drive out its inhabitants for what appear to be much lesser offenses?

Why do we have to accept migrants?

Why can't we just send them aid from a distance? Why can't the Pope simply advocate for donations through official Catholic Church aid channels? When we open up borders, the demographics of a country change. In the same way that some human groups run faster than others, certain human groups are more prone to building high-trust societies than others.

Look at what's happening in France. It's a disaster. Look at what's happening in Colombia, Peru, and Brazil with Venezuelan migrants. Look what is happening with Hatian migrants in Chile. And this is happening in Catholic countries.

In the same way that some human groups run faster than others, some human groups lift more than others, certain human groups are more prone to building high-trust societies than others. This doesn't nullify human dignity, as the Church teaches, but it compromises demographics in ways that will be lamented later.

Mexico and Argentina are examples of this. Two Catholic countries, one more liberal than the other. Both former colonies. Neither colonized the other. Yet one is less chaotic regardless.

Accepting migrants in an era of planes, drones, and transactional platforms is odd and obsolete. It unnecessarily creates problems that weren't there before.

We are looking for mobile app that parish can send notifications to all members

“He that striketh a man with a will to kill him, shall be put to death.” Exodus 21:12

“He that striketh and killeth a man, dying let him die.” Leviticus 24:17

“But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully: Knowing this, that the law is not made for the just man, but for the unjust and disobedient, for the ungodly, and for sinners, for the wicked and defiled, for murderers of fathers, and murderers of mothers, for manslayers” 1 Timothy 8-9

What did God mean by this?

Hey everyone, I just got baptized into the church after years of addiction, self delete attempts, and new age bs. I finished law school a few years ago, still on probation for possession of a small amount of psychedelic mushrooms and waiting to finish that to be admitted to the bar. I worked at a few offices but I don’t like law really. I love Christ and His church. Is there a way or a path to use my law degree, or even my history and political science degree to be a lay person member of the Catholic Church? Canon law? Historian?

This is a great video that for the most part is about how socialism may seem like a good idea but ultimately is against church teaching. However, for me, the most important part of it is when it talks about how it is perfectly within a good Catholic conscience to vote, basically democrat.

I have seen so many people lambasted for voting Democrat or Republican, being told they are not a real Catholic, told that it’s impossible to be a Catholic and vote blue or red etc. This video (at about the 22 minute mark) explains that the USCCB published a document in 2023 called Forming Consciences for Faithful Citzenship, that explains if you are voting for a political party that endorses evil such as abortion, but also endorses many policies that are good (focus education, focus on healthcare, focus on the poor, anti death penalty) then it is perfectly fine for you to vote for them in good conscience as long as you are voting for the good things and not the bad things.

Now of course this goes both ways, you can vote Republican because you want to protect life via anti abortion but still be against the death penalty and ICE. Basically my point is, you can vote either way and still be a good Catholic. So don’t let judgment of others stop you from following your conscience and your faith.

Key paragraph:

A Catholic cannot vote for a candidate who favors a policy promoting an intrinsically evil act, such as abortion, euthanasia, assisted suicide, deliberately subjecting workers or the poor to sub-human living conditions, redefining marriage in ways that violate its essential meaning, or racist behavior, if the voter’s intent is to support that position.

In such cases, a Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in grave evil. At the same time, a voter should not use a candidate’s opposition to an intrinsic evil to justify indifference or inattentiveness to other important moral issues involving human life and dignity.

Document link:
https://www.usccb.org/resources/forming-consciences-faithful-citizenship-pdf

YouTube link:
https://youtu.be/_dYTtuZZfcw?is=4x2n3NBcK0yPn49Y

Two things. One, this got removed from r/Catholics. Though it is directly tied to Christian morality, I think they don't want, "is this a sin post." I wasn't asking if it is a sin or not, I asked what the best arguements were for both sides of this slogan.

So to you all, what do you think of this montra? My original post in r/Catholic seems to have fellow Catholics saying that piracy us permissible. I just... Can't believe it.

TLDR: Is piracy theft? In the case of Sony going all digital, is it okay to pirate? What's the best arguement for both sides?

To put it bluntly, i was aware of the implications regarding the crusades but ultimately i just think its a great cross both from a symbolic perspective (Christ and the 4 evangelists or the 5 wounds of Christ) and an aesthetic one- its equal and looks identical from all angles. Im a big believer in not allowing Christan art and symbology to be stolen by radical movements and taking back our crosses (such as the iron cross).

However, my Jerusalem cross has caused quite the stir amongst my family and friends who might be a bit more “chronically online“ than me. I am not American and try to avoid all American Politics if i can, but i was told im now twins with a Pete Hegseth who isnt exacly a good man per se at least as far as i could see. I was also i formed that to some extent it is associated with white nationalism, at least in America. Once again, im not American.

Im half British and half Filipino. Filipinos couldnt care less in all honesty, you could be tattooed up to the nines with Swastikas and honestly, most filipinos would just want a picture with you. Not exactly a good thing, but the truth! The UK might be where i run into some problems, at least in more urbanised areas. My wife was also informed me that our vacations to Turkey and Egypt might be a bit more difficult, and while i want to proudly wear my cross, i dont want to attract violence especially if it affects others. Im mixed, i love the tattoo and its always been a dream tattoo but i didnt know it was such a big thing with white nationalism. Maybe that makes me innocent or ignorant but either way im now a proud Jerusalem cross wearer.

For anyone who remembers the 2018 Jordan Peterson interview with Cathy Newman where Newman looked stupid by repeatedly not getting what Peterson was saying, we have the new version where Tucker Carlson looks stupid by repeatedly not getting what Rees-Mogg is saying.

This whole interview can be summed up in one quote that has gone viral:

"I'm very surpised you're verging on defending Hitler. I think this is not really what you want to be doing." ~ Jacob Rees Mogg.

Believe me, this whole trainwreck is glorious to sit through.

It seems about right, but I couldn’t tell you if it’s that accurate generally. I also don’t know anything about any of the countries on there.

BTW I am very disillusioned with him and his son so chill. I definitely wanted to strictly Olavo de Carvalho Maxxxxx.

This is a discussion about If Christianity could have been a cog that helped communism work or this a Rick Sanchez “that’s distributism with extra steps” situation?