>>534143
The facts in this post are based on what I've read in modern popular literature…
I say 'generality' in the sense that, even though a Merchant of Venice hi-jacked the 4th Crusade and took it to Constantinople, there were still Roman Catholics aboard those ships who probably knew exactly what they were doing (that they were attacking fellow Christians). I don't believe the Pope had anything to do with the 4th Crusade's attack on Constantinople, though. If what I've read in popular literature is accurate.
So I say, perhaps this statement is a 'generality'. Perhaps the Roman Catholics really are guilty of causing violence and whatnot against the Orthodox (historically).
I would say it is only relevant because both the history of the Roman Catholic Church and the history of the Orthodox Church is relevant to its modern existence, in that its decisions in history supposedly represent Divine Commands given by God to us on Earth.
Is the authority of the Roman Catholic Church and the Pope still considered infallible tofday (to the Roman Catholic Church)?
I'm not sure, but one of these days I want to study the hell out of modern Roman Catholic Church doctrine.
Regarding the OP's post:
>>534108
The Constitution is a valid defence of our rights because that is the "reasoning of law" that our nation is founded upon, in theory. Many respectable and admirable citizens do a good job (IMO) at keeping the Constitution alive today.
The military, police, and media-industrial complex in the U.S.; I think their favorite amendment is the 1st Amendment. Right to free speech.
It is a valid defense of our rights. Please do not take it away from us. We need to bear arms to defend us from Obama and the blacks, as well as the Federal Government.
In popular history the state of Texas since around the time of George Bush has taken the federal government to court and various different court cases against the Federal Government, such as those concerning environmental regulations. Even though it might be a loss for the environment in Texas, it is a win for liberty. I personally think Texas is a lovely place.
I do not know the answer to Question #2.
Regarding Question #3, I don't know the answer either but I'm sure Rome wouldn't view it the same way that Americans view it.
What's funny is one of the many reasons publicly cited (the good old fashion American way) for the American Revolution was that the government of Britain had a newfound partnership with the Catholic Church, what with various politicking and alliances and such, especially since Britain had recently come into control of Catholic New France, just to the north of the United States colonies.
Many of the first leaders of the United States were not only Protestant, but Freemason in their beliefs, actually. An overwhelming majority of those in favor of the Revolution if I'm not mistaken (according to popular literature) in the colonies at the time were Scottish Freemasons.
At the time of the Revolution, Maryland was of course the heart of Roman Catholic culture (named MARYLAND) north of Spanish Florida.