More Catholic Than the Pope: Biden and Pelosi?
From The Weekly Standard, September 29 edition, by Joseph Bottum, editor of First Things…
Do they think this is a debate they’re actually going to win? Do they imagine the Catholic theologians of America – from Avery Cardinal Dulles all the way to Sister Sara Butler – are suddenly going to whack their heads and say, “My God, we never thought of that”? What impulse makes Catholic politicians try to argue theology with their own church?…
On and on it went, as stylized as a Kabuki performance – until, with his typical impatience, Denver’s archbishop, Charles Chaput, summed up: “Meet the Press has become a national window on the flawed moral reasoning of some Catholic public servants.” Fourteen bishops have now issued public statements on the Pelosi and Biden gaffes….
The default position used to be the one established by Mario Cuomo, in a famous talk he gave at Notre Dame in 1984, which claimed that Catholic officials may resist Church teaching by being personally opposed to abortion even though they publicly support it….
Now, however, the position seems to have become the notion that Catholic officials must resist Catholic teaching, since opposition to abortion is inherently religious – a matter solely of narrow sectarian definition, like not eating meat on Fridays. The fact that the Catholic Church holds a view has become the reason that Catholic politicians are required to oppose it. As Biden told Tom Brokaw on Meet the Press, “I voted against telling everyone else in the country that they have to accept my religiously based view.” Perhaps one shouldn’t read too much into those particular comments, for the babbling brook that is Joe Biden often overflows its banks.
Campaigning in MO, for example, he noted the praise that has come to Sarah Palin for her care for her Down syndrome baby, and he demanded that Republicans be asked, “If you care about it, why don’t you support stem cell research?”
Leave aside the fact that, even back in the 2004 glory days of overinflated claims for stem cells, no one seriously claimed they would soon cure Down syndrome. Leave aside, as well, the fact that the use of embryonic stem cells is what the pro-life community rejects. Leave aside, for that matter, the fact that the recent scientific breakthroughs with reprogrammed cells taken from adults have pushed much of the issue off the political table. Consider just the fact that Biden was declaring his own Catholic position on embryonic stem cells to be uncaring. As the philosopher Francis Beckwith observed of the incident, this is a man who won’t even force his beliefs on himself.
(Great line!)
But Joe Biden – like Nancy Pelosi and other Catholic supporters of the Obama campaign – are caught in a bind that is, in many ways, even tighter this year than the one that squeezed John Kerry and his Catholic followers 4 years ago….
So what’s Joe Biden to do? What, for that matter, is any Catholic supporter of Obama to do? The ledge on which they are trying to stand is crumbling beneath their feet. Douglas Kmiec, a former legal counsel in the Reagan administration, has gotten the most publicity for his Catholic praise of the Democratic ticket. Indeed, he’s made a new career for himself out of being a Catholic Republican who supports Obama: pouring out op-eds, delivering speeches, and penning a just-released book, Can a Catholic Support Him?–Asking the Big Question About Barack Obama.
The title is a tease, as you might expect. “What’s wrong,” he writes, “is for Republican partisans to claim” that support for abortion is Obama’s position. “It’s not. Rather, Obama believes there are alternative ways to promote the ‘culture of life,’ even given the law’s sanction of abortion.” The trouble, of course, is that Obama has given little indication he believes anything of the sort, and, in the months Kmiec spent writing the book, the Democrats have systematically undermined its premise by explicitly endorsing Roe v. Wade and refusing any concessions that abortion might be even a necessary evil.
In response to it all, Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden were reduced to the idiocy of trying to argue theology on the Sunday morning shows, and Kmiec’s claims have dwindled down to a kind of old-fashioned double-effect argument: The Republicans are so wrong about other issues, especially the Iraq war and the economy, that Catholics should vote for the Democratic party and accept the Democrats’ support for legalized abortion as an unintended consequence….
Things have tightened over the last few years, the Catholic position is firmer in the public’s mind – firmer in the Catholic mind, for that matter. McCain was a long way from the pro-lifers’ first choice for a Republican nominee, but the Democrats this election cycle are determined to force the issue. They’ve pushed, and they’ve pushed, and they’ve pushed, until Catholics are falling off the cliff. Poor Doug Kmiec and his sad question, “Can a Catholic Support Him?” As a matter of good conscience, the answer looks increasingly like no, a Catholic can’t support Obama….
This was a great column to read in its entirety.
[HT: moderator Carder]



I don’t see how anyone who is Christian or Catholic could possibly support Obama/Biden.
I am very disappointed to learn that Ron Paul has endorsed Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party for President. Baldwin has a good philosophy but he cannot win and can only take votes from John McCain, potentially givng the power to make Supreme Court appointments to Barack Obama. This would be a disaster for the pro-life movement.
If you are pro-life, please resist the siren song of third party candidates who cannot win.
The best way to be able to do anything to stop the killing of unborn children is to vote for John McCain and Sarah Palin and for pro-life Republicans for Senate and House of Representatives and for all state and local offices.
Please vote rationally. The lives of unborn children depend on it.
Now, however, the position seems to have become the notion that Catholic officials must resist Catholic teaching, since opposition to abortion is inherently religious – a matter solely of narrow sectarian definition, like not eating meat on Fridays. The fact that the Catholic Church holds a view has become the reason that Catholic politicians are required to oppose it. As Biden told Tom Brokaw on Meet the Press, “I voted against telling everyone else in the country that they have to accept my religiously based view.”
Clearly Joe Biden is a patriotic American who loves his country and as such, he puts the Constitution and the American people first when he goes to work as a public servant.
The pope doesn’t get to run the United States. Even if every elected official were Catholic, they vow to uphold the Constitution, not the Bible; and serve the American people, not the pope.
Reality…
“[Biden]puts the Constitution..first!”
Reality, there is no “right to abortion” in the constitution. It is, at best, and extrapolation of an extrapolation. However, the “right to life” was explicitly stated by our founding fathers.
Support of abortion is not support of the constitution. You have no argument here. If, say, his religion said that we should kill people, then perhaps you would have a point that he should oppose his religion and stand for the consitution, but his stance is the exact opposite.
Don’t pretend that Biden is any sort of strict consitutionalist. It’s absurd.
Reality —
Most religions condemn murder — is it forcing religious views on others if we have laws against murder? With your reasoning, we should be able to kill anyone who gets in our way, right?
Oliver,
Reality, there is no “right to abortion” in the constitution.
The Supreme Court disagrees with you.
LB,
With your reasoning, we should be able to kill anyone who gets in our way, right?
The Constitution gives born Americans a right to life. No religion necessary.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.amendmentxiv.html
Off-topic:
Looks like you’ve got some competition in the abortion ad wars, Jill.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0908/Another_TV_ad_hits_McCain_on_abortion.html?showall
“I don’t see how anyone who is Christian or Catholic could possibly support Obama/Biden.
Posted by: Joanne at September 23, 2008 10:10 AM”
——————————————
These would be Christians/ Catholics in name only…but we continue to pray for these poor souls that they find the true meaning before it’s too late.
Reality–
Actually there if you look at that article, it talks about two different entities — citizens and persons.
“No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Notice the NOR.
If it only applied to citizens — then we would be able to kill, at our pleasure any non-citizens who happened to be within our borders.
You may not think of pre-born children as persons, but the majority of people expecting children do. Otherwise why do they name them and also speak to them before birth?
they also say, “we’re going to have a baby.” Not that they already have one.
Hal,
Don’t you and your wife say “We’re going to have an abortion”instead?
Children only have a 50% survival rate in your family.
* the Anonymous @ 11:17 was me..for some reason, the comment boxes removed my name/ email…
We also prosecute people who kidnap and kill fetuses (persons).
Kidnapping: http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/04/04/pregnant.slaying/index.html
Murder: http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2007/11/22/Court_Fetus_death_can_bring_murder_charge/UPI-41511195784220/
I’ll catch-up with you later Hal, enjoy another day as a pay-for-post employee. I’m only on my lunch break.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0908/Another_TV_ad_hits_McCain_on_abortion.html?showall
Posted by: reality
Hey, I like that ad….. it brings out the contrast between Obama and McCain very vividly!
And I love the line “Making abortion illegal won’t stop abortion, it will make abortion extremely dangerous”.
Making MURDER illegal didn’t stop murder either, did it? And abortion is ALWAYS EXTREMELY DANGEROUS FOR THE BABY!!!
“I’ll catch-up with you later Hal, enjoy another day as a pay-for-post employee. I’m only on my lunch break.” Posted by: LB
LB, Planned Parenthood is just awash in so much money it’s getting in their way… they have to spend some of it and get it out of the way quickly so they can have room to do abortions in their abortuaries. What better way than to pay doofus proaborts who sit around all day and try to heckle prolife websites?
Chaput is being interviewed this week by Peter Robinson on NRO TV. There are 5 segments total and two have been released so far. Here’s the link: http://tv.nationalreview.com/uncommonknowledge
Oliver @ 10:54 was me.
Reality sayd “the supreme court disagrees with you”
No, Reality, the Democrats of the supreme court disagree with me. Actually, they don’t disagree, they just think that it’s appropriate to extrapolate extrapolations and call them constitutional. Hince why I say they are NOT strict constitutionalists.
Reality:
I think God runs the country, the world, the universe, not Joe Biden, not the President, not the Pope.
And we disobey Him at our own peril.
Oliver said: “Reality, there is no “right to abortion” in the constitution.”
Reality said: The Supreme Court disagrees with you.
The Supreme Court of 1973 disagreed with us. They made a mistake and it’s time to correct it.
We sometimes see the “persons born or naturalized” bit to justify abortion. There are three problems with this:
1.) As has already been mentioned, that phrase only defines who is a CITIZEN, not who is a PERSON. If your uncle from Canada is coming to visit you, he still has the right not to be killed while within U.S. borders.
2.) Just because a statement is true doesn’t mean the converse is necessarily true. If I say, “If I live in Billings, Montana, then I live in the United States,” that doesn’t mean that the converse, “If I live in the United States, then I live in Billings, Montana,” is true. Likewise, pointing out that all persons born or naturalized in the U.S. are citizens doesn’t mean that all citizens need to have been born or naturalized in the U.S., see?
3.) And, of course, a law does not trump biological fact. Because we know that, according to scientific fact, these human embryos and human fetuses are human beings, no written law can alter that.
doyle,
not to be niave but, does PP pay people to blog? or are you guys just being sarcastic?
Reality –
In the colonial times the courts upheld the right to own slaves. Did that mean owning a slave was a “constitutional right”? Nope. Even the 19th and 20th centuries Supreme Court upheld the “right” to own slaves.
The Supreme Court upholds are laws BASED on the constitution – not because the consitution “says so”. There have been many times where the court was wrong. They agreed with Slavery. They agreed with the force sterilization of the mentally unfit. They agreed that women were unfit to vote. All these were supreme court rulings. Are you trying to tell me that these rulings MADE them constitutional? Nope – Only until the CONGRESS made women’s right to vote an AMENDMENT did it become constitutional. This is way Obama is hell bent on getting the freedom of choice act through – an attempt to get an amendment stating the right to an abortion is constitutional. This is because it is not a constitutional right at this moment.
Since you are obviously confused at how our government works I suggest you start reading up on the 3 branches.
We sometimes see the “persons born or naturalized” bit to justify abortion. There are three problems with this:
…………………………..
No justification for abortion is necessary. Compelling reasoning for removal of women’s rights is necessary.
Sally: “No justification for abortion is necessary. Compelling reasoning for removal of women’s rights is necessary”
Apples should be outlawed…only oranges should be allowed in stores.
Makes about the same level of sense as your argument Sally.
Is this compelling enough for you, Sally?
http://pregnancyandbaby.com/pregnancy/baby/Listen-in-A-babys-heartbeat-and-a-birth-728.htm
For the rest of you, how about some language from Roe v. Wade:
“[A]ppellant and some amici argue that the woman’s right is absolute and that she is entitled to terminate her pregnancy at whatever time, in whatever way, and for whatever reason she alone chooses. With this we do not agree.”
And, more disturbingly…
“We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins. When those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus, the judiciary, at this point in the development of man’s knowledge, is not in a position to speculate as to the answer.”
Ironically, they decided it was ok to create a ‘right to privacy in abortion’, using the Constitutional amendment that was meant to stop the government from requiring you to quarter troops. But, it’s just way too out there for them to speculate as to when life begins. They did speculate – they said post-natal.
reality @ 11:15 AM
Apparently you’re saying something Obama disagrees with.
As I usually say – when you get done arguing with yourself let us know. We wouldn’t want to disturb you.
The pope doesn’t get to run the United States. Even if every elected official were Catholic, they vow to uphold the Constitution, not the Bible; and serve the American people, not the pope.
Posted by: reality at September 23, 2008 10:45 AM
I don’t disagree with you.
Our elected officials are not religious leaders. They wouldn’t be running for public office if that was their goal. You don’t have to worry, about the Pope running the U.S. – he is not on the ballot, there has never been a U.S. born Pope so he couldn’t be president, he only comes here once every five years and I’m sure he wouldn’t want the job if it was handed to him on a platter.
See the expression on George Bush’s face? I bet he’s thinking, “Now why did you have to go and do that, Nancy?”
Alex @ 2:04,
For the rest of you, how about some language from Roe v. Wade:……
Thank you for your comments! Obama and the Supreme Court have something in common! When asked to determine when life begins, they both decided it was above their pay grade.
Which is just chilling, wouldn’t you agree?
I mean, whether or not somebody is worthy of civil rights doesn’t seem like it should be something we can agree to disagree about…
I would love to see a study of pro-abort commenters on this site and look at their posting times. It seems to work on a shift basis — Sally is on now and Hal is off. Hal usually takes off if someone asks if he is paid to comment… wonder why?
Just curious, has anyone ever looked at the logs?
Jill’s story is powerful and this blog are is an active vehicle for it; the story is harmful to PP interests. As a business (of low repute), it is in their best interest to have the blog monitored constantly — especially to derail discussion. Some commenters here are very adept, or at least persistent, at throwing out red herrings and bogging down discussion.
Makes me wonder about paid commenting — after all pro-aborts seem fixated on $$$.
Alex @ 2:04,
Roe v. Wade:
“We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins. When those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus, the judiciary, at this point in the development of man’s knowledge, is not in a position to speculate as to the answer.”
The language of the Supreme court ruling seems to leave the door open for a future reconsideration of Roe v. Wade. After 35 years, perhaps philosophers, theologians and physicians could arrive at a consensus. We are certainly much more advanced in medicine today than in 1973. I think they have an ethical obligation to do so, regardless of the political climate.
“Hal usually takes off if someone asks if he is paid to comment… wonder why?”
I wasn’t aware of that. I come and go throughout the day, on days when I’m here. I will tell you, as I have stated before, I’m not paid to post. I wish I was, that would be fun. However, I consider it more of a charitable contribution. Doing my part for my country, and all that.
I’m sure no one noticed, but over the past three weeks or so, I haven’t been here nearly as much.
I am a religious person and have been my whole life. However, my belief that abortion is murder is based on scientific data and not religious sentiment.
From the American Pregnancy Association
http://www.americanpregnancy.org/duringpregnancy/fetaldevelopment1.htm
By week 3 gestational age:
“The embryo is going through lots of basic growth at this time, with the beginning development of the brain, spinal cord, heart, and gastrointestinal tract. ”
By week 4 & 5 gestational age:
“The heart is now beating at a steady rhythm. The placenta has begun to form and is producing some important hormones including hCG. There is movement of rudimentary blood through the main vessels.”
By week 6 gestational age (apprx 29% of abortions happen at this time according to the CDC):
“The brain is continuing to form into its complex parts. A vaginal ultrasound could possibly detect an audible heartbeat at this time.”
By week 7 gestational age (appx 18% of all abortions):
“every essential organ has begun to form in the embryo’s tiny body even though it still weighs less than an aspirin. The hair and nipple follicles are forming, and the eyelids and tongue have begun formation. ”
By week 8 gestational age (appx 15% of all abortions):
“Everything that is present in an adult human is now present in the small embryo. The bones are beginning to form, and the muscles can contract. The facial features continue to mature, and the eyelids are now more developed.”
By Weeks 9-13 Gestational age (apprx 30% of all abortions):
“The fetus has grown to about 3 inches in length and weighs about an ounce. The genitalia have clearly formed into male or female, but still could not be seen clearly on an ultrasound. The eyelids close and will not reopen until the 28th week of pregnancy. The fetus can make a fist, and the buds for baby teeth appear. The head is nearly half the size of the entire fetus. ”
Week 14 – 16 gestational age (apprx 6% of all abortions):
“The fetus begins sucking and swallows bits of amniotic fluid. Fingerprints which individualize each human being have now developed on the tiny fingers of the fetus. Meconium is made in the intestinal tract and will build up to be the baby’s first bowel movement. Flutters may be felt in the mom’s growing abdomen as the fetus begins to move around more. Sweat glands have developed, and the liver and pancreas produce fluid secretions. ”
And so on and so on.
This is called “life developing”. This is something Humans do until death. We are in a constant state of development.
Upon the moment of conception our DNA pattern is intact, meaning the new cluster of cells is a human being. At that moment, life has begun. This is all scientific, not religious.
All abortions happen after the heart starts to beat.
All abortions happen after the blood begins to circulate through the veins.
All abortions happen after the beginning of the formation of the brain.
An abortion is called a “termination” Which is by definition: “To put an end to” in this case, putting an end to a pregnancy. A pregnancy is ” carrying developing offspring in the body” An offspring is “A child of particular parentage”. None of this says “inanimate” “not living” “without human rights” on the contrary – it says this is a living developing human life.
The surgically or medically aborted baby is a victim of the natural process of life.
Ready, Fire!, Aim.
Blackmun’s wonderfully circular logic – no one knows when “life” begins, but I’ll write an opinion that states when life is valuable.
There’s only one question that needs to be resolved – “What are the unborn?”
If they are human beings, then they have all the rights of every human being.
If they are not human beings – then what’s the fuss all about?
so, what’s your suggestion? Ban abortions?
I suppose these paid educators could be bloggers…
Become PAID PEER EDUCATOR and help us out with spreading the word…(NEXT TRAINING JULY 16th)* get paid to talk about SEX Planned Parenthood Reno (myspace)
http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=199358090
Whenever I see Nancy Pelosi kissing Pope Benedict’s ring, it makes me want to puke.
Kinda like Judas betraying his Master with a kiss.
Hal @ 2:41,
so, what’s your suggestion? Ban abortions?
Well Hal, could it be considered
a crime against a person.
Generally we tend to outlaw
those sorts of things.
For example:
Types of crime
Note: Crimes vary by jurisdiction.
Not all types are listed here.
Against the person
Assault · Battery
Extortion · Harassment
Kidnapping · Identity theft
Manslaughter (corporate)
Murder
Sexual assault · Rape
Robbery
Against property
Arson · Blackmail
Burglary · Deception
Embezzlement
False pretenses
Fraud · Handling
Larceny · Theft
Vandalism
Against public order
Drug possession
Against the state
Tax evasion
Espionage · Treason
Against justice
Bribery · Misprision of felony
Obstruction · Perjury
Malfeasance in office
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal
yes Hal we want to outlaw abortion because abortion is the DEATH of a baby – a person.
IF there were no “right” to abortion, two of your kids would be alive and having a wonderful life….choosing colleges, dating, doing sports…
NO practicing Catholic can in good conscience, vote for Obama. If they did and he is elected and passes FOCA, then those Catholics will be in the same boat as Pelosi and Biden are now, because they will have participated in the great evil of promoting and in legislating abortion. The evil of abortion is so great, and Obama’s explicit intent is to pass this act once elected, that they can have no other, valid serious reason for voting for him. Not the war in Iraq (although maybe unjust), not the economy – NOTHING.
“IF there were no “right” to abortion, two of your kids would be alive and having a wonderful life….choosing colleges, dating, doing sports…”
and two of my other kids, who are doing all these wonderful things, would never have existed.
Hal —
It is a true shame that you see children as an either or proposition. Like property, not living beings or maybe it’s more like pets for you. Did you drown kitten when you were a kid?
Do you lack the heart to have more than two or was it just a matter of money to you? If one of the living kids had problems, would you have killed it in order to have $$ for a perfect kid?
Do your living children know you killed their siblings? Do you plan on helping them kill your grandchildren if they want to?
I have so many questions for you as a man who is proud of your wife’s abortions. I understand the people who regret abortions – but a man who loves telling about his family’s abortions blows my mind — no shame — no heart — no morals.
Jasper’s QOTD: you know you can’t really expect these people to be reasonable in one area of their lives when they live such outrageous, unreasonable lives in every other aspect. I refer to the SNL skit and other media coverage of Sarah Palin.
I mean think about it: they show no restraint in their sexual lives, and likely in other aspects of their personal lives etc. So how can you expect restraint in what they do for a living? A life of dwelling in the garbage pit only produces garbage. Hopefully, Sarah Palin knows and understands who and what these scumbags are.
“IF there were no “right” to abortion, two of your kids would be alive and having a wonderful life….choosing colleges, dating, doing sports…”
and two of my other kids, who are doing all these wonderful things, would never have existed.
Posted by: Hal at September 23, 2008 3:49 PM
No Hal. This is YOUR big lie to yourself. And what’s more, I think you know it. That’s why you keep telling it over and over to anyone who will listen.
You’re a taker. Not a giver. A giver would have made room for those 2 children. And your life would be infinitely richer….
I see so much anger and bitterness among the pro-life single mothers on this site. It makes me wonder if there is some sort of psychological reason for it.
Elizabeth, you are the exception, from what I can see. Keep your sunny disposition, and try not to become old and bitter!
LL —
Who are you talking to? Elizabeth hasn’t posted on this string.
I know I’m not a bitter single mother. I am just a women who doesn’t like to let paid commenters and pro-death folks, like Hal, get off easy. Hal promotes abortion on this site and he had two of his children aborted; I think it needs to be called out for any new visitors.
In my experience, pro-abortion/post-abortive women are very bitter. They post here with the mantra of no regrets, but attack any single mom they come across. They are especially harsh to any mom who regrets an abortion in their past.
Is it your turn now? Has the shift clock sounded?
Hal specifically said he was not paid to post here. I don’t think he’s a liar. And while Elizabeth has not posted on this site, she does post here frequently.
Who are some post-abortive women who have been attacking single mothers? I haven’t seen any, at least not for quite a while.
Honestly? You sound very, very bitter to me.
There is a great disconnect between the Catholic elite priests and those who they supposedly serve and even in many cases those they oversee. It is not that the facts have changed, but rather that the facts were different than the elite assumed because they were not and are not aware of the actualities of life.
Rather than argue for economic justice (which is given only lip service) the Catholic elite tell you to suck it up and have 12 kids on one income. Rather than deal with molestation as a national issue they continue to cover it up and drag their feet.
In my area, even with well-known bishops, we cannot get a single priest to show up to serve food to the poor. And the bishop, being too worried about his constantly-being-renovated house cannot spare the time. It highlights all the more how out of touch the leadership is. My family might go on sunday morning, but we don’t give -we just don’t trust the bishop with the money, and we barely trust him with our prayers.
I would love to see a study of pro-abort commenters on this site and look at their posting times. It seems to work on a shift basis — Sally is on now and Hal is off. Hal usually takes off if someone asks if he is paid to comment… wonder why?
Just curious, has anyone ever looked at the logs?
Jill’s story is powerful and this blog are is an active vehicle for it; the story is harmful to PP interests. As a business (of low repute), it is in their best interest to have the blog monitored constantly — especially to derail discussion. Some commenters here are very adept, or at least persistent, at throwing out red herrings and bogging down discussion.
Makes me wonder about paid commenting — after all pro-aborts seem fixated on $$$.
Posted by: LB at September 23, 2008 2:23 PM
……………………………….
Apparently you enjoy conspiracy theories as well as baseless opinionating. There would be no discussion on this blog without pro choicers posting.
Jill’s agenda is to illegalize abortion. She doesn’t really care if preemies die in rooms with pretty wallpaper or linen closets. She doesn’t care that there are no available medical measures to prolong the life or death of non viable premature infants. Her only goal is to outlaw abortion no matter what the toll such nonsense would take in women’s lives and preproductive health. Her method is preying on fears by projecting emotional hypotheticals upon actual situations. Jill is the professional around here. She gets paid to spout anti-choice propaganda. Perhaps it is her financial motivation that should be called into question.
Hi Yo La Tango.
“Catholic elite tell you to suck it up and have 12 kids on one income.”
Which document do you have in mind that states this?
Hal said”and two of my other kids, who are doing all these wonderful things, would never have existed.
”
Hal, you’ve stated that your first abortion was prior to the birth of your living children, and your second was after their birth. This has no impact on your living children.
You’re a taker. Not a giver. A giver would have made room for those 2 children. And your life would be infinitely richer….
Posted by: Patricia at September 23, 2008 4:05 PM
My life is rich enough, thank you.
My life is rich enough, thank you.
Posted by: Hal at September 23, 2008 5:23 PM
_________________________________________________
Thank you for that statement, it’s clear. It is all about you. Your children are just about you.
Sally —
This is a site advocating for life; why do you comment here?
You favor abortions and leave bitter comments on a very regular basis — why do you come here to spew an anti-life message? Is it for $$ or to convince yourself that abortion is a noble thing? Are you here to try to convice women in crisis pregnancy to abort? Just curious…
I posted a comment about the possibility that some are paid to comment here — it’s not an unknown practice just google the phrase ‘paid to comment’ and you will see some offers. Trolls, Sock Puppets and Astroturfers are all part of the internet scene.
I would find it interesting to analyze the comment logs, though. There seem to be some interesting patterns there.
Thank you for that statement, it’s clear. It is all about you. Your children are just about you.
Posted by: LB at September 23, 2008 5:31 PM
Patricia was commenting that MY LIFE would be infinitely richer.” She was commenting about ME. MY LIFE. I declined any interest in a richer life. Is that selfish?
test
Hal, it’s one thing to “decline interest,” it’s another to kill to achieve your dream life.
Hi Yo La Tango.
“Catholic elite tell you to suck it up and have 12 kids on one income.”
Which document do you have in mind that states this?
Posted by: Bobby Bambino at September 23, 2008 5:01 PM
Yo La Tango: this has never been the CC teaching.
I declined any interest in a richer life. Is that selfish?
Posted by: Hal at September 23, 2008 5:45 PM
I second what Lauren wrote. How many children would you have killed Hal, to achieve this so-called richer life?
How can you possibly know how rich your life might have been, since you refused to accept those 2 children into your life.
Maybe one would have been an outstanding musician. Maybe the other child would have been a great comfort in some trying time aheaad…..
My ex wasn’t happy when I was pregnant with our third child – yet today, she is the brilliant musician….
Patricia, I guess we just see the world very differently. I treasure the children I have, don’t worry about the ones I don’t have.
I have 3 nephews and 2 neices that came to our family via adoption. They have rich lives and have added immeasurably to our family’s richness. Their birth parents thought about the lives of others and we are all grateful for it.
Hal, If it wasn’t about you, you might have considered adoption. Your statement stands, as you wrote it. The abortions were about your life and that makes you selfish.
I second what Lauren wrote. How many children would you have killed Hal, to achieve this so-called richer life?
How can you possibly know how rich your life might have been, since you refused to accept those 2 children into your life.
Maybe one would have been an outstanding musician. Maybe the other child would have been a great comfort in some trying time aheaad…..
My ex wasn’t happy when I was pregnant with our third child – yet today, she is the brilliant musician….
Posted by: Patricia at September 23, 2008 6:02 PM
……………………………
………………and you are divorced.
Most people have children for selfish reasons, why should abortion be any different?
In my area, even with well-known bishops, we cannot get a single priest to show up to serve food to the poor. And the bishop, being too worried about his constantly-being-renovated house cannot spare the time. It highlights all the more how out of touch the leadership is. My family might go on sunday morning, but we don’t give -we just don’t trust the bishop with the money, and we barely trust him with our prayers.
Posted by: Yo La Tango at September 23, 2008 4:46 PM
It might interest you to know Yo la, that many priests do not generally have time to dish out food to the poor. Do you KNOW why? Because there aren’t even enough of them to attend to the baptizing and the dying in most parishes, let alone to spend time at the soup kitchen. Try spending some time with a parish priest and see just how many sick calls they attend in one 24 hour period. See how many people, individuals and families show up at the parish rectory and receive food from the priest’s own refrigerator, money from his wallet as well as that put aside for these emergencies. My parish priest could, on some days, show up to grap a meal from the soup kitchen, IF he had the damn time! Lord knows he doesnt have much in his own kitchen.See how many people come to the door to unload their problems on the priest, come for guidance for a wayward child, an alcoholic spouse. Then there are the day to day parish obligations. The couples to speak with and prepare for marriage, the First Communicants and those teens receiving the Holy Spirit, the classes at the elementary schools to visit.
I’ve seen my parish priest say Sunday Mass, after being up all night hearing the confessions of the dying in cities and towns a hour drive from our parish.
And as for being an elite priest – we don’t have any of those where I live. We have priests struggling to get their parishoners to stay faithful to the Church that is ALWAYS there for them.
You should be ashamed of yourself. Your post was ignorant and uncharitable.
Patricia —
I’m so glad you are on this board defending life. Looks like Sally is lashing out in bitterness again, nothing new.
Children are a blessing and there is nothing they can say to make us think otherwise. Life is great!
AMEN patricia!
my husband and i are constantly praying that more young men will be moved to become priests because we see the restraints put on even our tiny little parish. priests are very aware of the acualities of life, that is why they are so burdened and sometimes feel unreachable. they are NOT spending all their time out molesting kids, they are busy running a parish!
Hal says “Most people have children for selfish reasons, why should abortion be any different?”
Ok, Hal there’s a small difference here that I think should be pointed out. It might seem insignificant to you that abortion kills a child while birth brings life, but I think most people would disagree with you.
Your statement sounds something like this “Well most people marry for selfish reasons too, so it should be totally ok to kill your girlfriend if it’s in your best interest!”
Becky: we have THREE vocations from our small parish. Two priests, and one sister who is in the US! Our priest has us all praying up a storm so that there will be a priest there when he kicks the bucket!! lol
Thanks, LB! All life is sacred!
attacks continue on Sarah Palin from vicous liberals:
“She’s a puffed-up dimwit with primitive religious beliefs”
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2008/09/23/rolling-stone-throbs-hate-palin-american-people
“Save us from Sarah Palin”
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2008/09/23/abc-sportscaster-tina-fey-should-bash-sarah-palin-every-week
“Supremely Unqualified…American Idol”
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2008/09/23/pbs-star-ken-burns-bashes-palin-supremely-unqualified-american-idol-pick
Rampant child sex abuse in LA schools…where’s the MSM? oh yea, it’s not a Catholic sex abuse story, therefore it doesn’t get reported.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/dave-pierre/2008/09/22/not-catholic-church-part-ii-l-school-sex-abuse-scandal-continues-grow-w
Jasper, attacks on Gov. Palin need no defending. They need to continue (and increase) with a vengenge. She is indeed Suprememly Unqualified. I don’t blame Palin, I blame McCain for putting our country at risk in his attempt to win an election. Thankfully, Obama’s lead is holding.
By the way, see George Will attacking McCain today?
So how can people get paid to post? I could really use some extra cash.
“By the way, see George Will attacking McCain today?”
Yes Hal,
George Will is upset because McCain is for holding government accountable, Chris Cox is the SEC chairman, he should have raised the red flag.
That is what leaders do. Tough for you George Will.
btw: In 2005 Republicans tried to pass regs on Fanny and freddie, all Dems on the commitee opposed it..
“Thankfully, Obama’s lead is holding.”
Not really Hal. You should follow the Rassummen poll, it’s most accurate. It has the race 48-48.
McCain is leading in Ohio and Florida.
“She is indeed Suprememly Unqualified”
Wasilla City Council
two terms as the mayor/manager of Wasilla
Head of Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission
Governor of Alaska (highest approval ratings)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2073551/posts
..and what has Obama done? -> Chicago street thug
Jasper, if you have ever been to Wasilla you couldn’t say any of that with a straight face. As for high approval ratings, she is governor at a time when the state is swimming in oil cash (partly because she RAISED TAXED on oil companies–you like that?) Being Governor when you have excess Billions to dish out is not a hard job. Of course people love her, she’s sending them checks and raising levels of state servcies. Good for her. Why does she lie about Alaska producing 20% of America’s energy if she’s such an Oil and Gas expert?
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/
Alaska did produce 14 percent of all the oil from U.S. wells last year, I believe she said nearly 20%, still a big chunk of energy.
what did Obama ever have responsibilty over?
Jasper, attacks on Gov. Palin need no defending. They need to continue (and increase) with a vengenge. She is indeed Suprememly Unqualified. I don’t blame Palin, I blame McCain for putting our country at risk in his attempt to win an election. Thankfully, Obama’s lead is holding.
By the way, see George Will attacking McCain today?
Posted by: Hal at September 23, 2008 6:44 PM
And so you think Biden is qualified? I don’t think so.
The man morally is not qualified to even be representing ANY town, village or hovel in AMerica.
oh I’m sorry, you don’t know about morality… that it explains YOUR views…
http://www.dog.dnr.state.ak.us/oil/
It appears they also produce a huge ammount of Natural Gas. She said “energy” which includes both (among other things).
Pro-aborts on this site will defend Obama at any cost because he not only supports abortion at any stage, but also infanticide when needed. He is on record supporting infanticide and can’t spin his way out of it.
All other issues pale in comparison.
Of course they don’t like Palin on issues, but MOST of all because she is a pro-life woman.
Sally: “No justification for abortion is necessary. Compelling reasoning for removal of women’s rights is necessary”
Apples should be outlawed…only oranges should be allowed in stores.
Makes about the same level of sense as your argument Sally.
Posted by: Oliver at September 23, 2008 2:00 PM
………………………………..
You’ve got it. Saying something should not be allowed simply because you say it should be not allowed isn’t compelling reasoning. Thanks for the example.
> Thank you for your comments! Obama and the Supreme Court have something in common! When asked to determine when life begins, they both decided it was above their pay grade.
Posted by: Janet at September 23, 2008 2:19 PM
LOL!
Sally —
This is a site advocating for life; why do you comment here?
You favor abortions and leave bitter comments on a very regular basis — why do you come here to spew an anti-life message? Is it for $$ or to convince yourself that abortion is a noble thing? Are you here to try to convice women in crisis pregnancy to abort? Just curious…
I posted a comment about the possibility that some are paid to comment here — it’s not an unknown practice just google the phrase ‘paid to comment’ and you will see some offers. Trolls, Sock Puppets and Astroturfers are all part of the internet scene.
I would find it interesting to analyze the comment logs, though. There seem to be some interesting patterns there.
Posted by: LB at September 23, 2008 5:44 PM
………………………..
Some comments are quite interesting and quite enlightening as to the poster’s agenda.
You made the goofy comment that the PC most be getting paid to comment on this blog. You are probably correct that the content of this blog is below comment worthiness without monetary compensation, but some of us like to pull a few chains from time to time here any way. Go slumming if you will.
Personally, I enjoy pointing out dishonest inuendos and flat out lies to those eager to buy them. I can be extemely sarcastic and scornful. Bitter, I am not. Patricia has that one covered enough for everyone.
And FYI, I favor choice and keeping choice legal. As well as difficult decisions being left between a woman and her doctor. Obviously you favor legal interference in medical decisions. I find that quite irresponsible as well as irrational. What is your reward for this thinking?
And so you think Biden is qualified? I don’t think so.
The man morally is not qualified to even be representing ANY town, village or hovel in AMerica.
oh I’m sorry, you don’t know about morality… that it explains YOUR views…
Posted by: Patricia at September 23, 2008 7:25 PM
…………………………….
Patricia, you are not an American. You have little understanding of American government, the American economy, American health care………….
Bitter, I am not. Patricia has that one covered enough for everyone.
SAlly, I’m not really sure why you and Amanda think that I am bitter. I am certainly not. What happened to me was certainly tragic but not insurmountable and I assure you I am quite at peace. :-D
Maybe because I just don’t happen to share your ideology of free sex, free and open marriage, contraception, free abortion on demand, homosexual marriage, teen sex etc. This does not make me bitter, it merely makes me a reasonable person, who uses rational thought and understands truly what it means to be human. And what IS rational thought – re abortion. It is rational to believe that a baby is a person with all the rights that we all enjoy, including the right to life as a paramount right. The fact that I don’t believe anyone has the right to snuff that life out, does not make me a bitter person. In fact, it is your beliefs that demonstrate bitterness – towards the baby in the womb and towards femininity in general.
And Sally, one does not need to be entirely intimate with American life to know that Biden is NOT Catholic either in practice or beliefs, that he is morally deliquent and therefore, simply incapable of being able to lead such a magnificent country such as America.
Patricia, from what I have read of your posts — you have a profound understanding of many issues. And you are not bitter :D
Thank-you Eileen NO 2!
I’m certainly always trying to understand the issues much better….
And Sally, one does not need to be entirely intimate with American life to know that Biden is NOT Catholic either in practice or beliefs, that he is morally deliquent and therefore, simply incapable of being able to lead such a magnificent country such as America.
Posted by: Patricia at September 23, 2008 8:27 PM
………………………….
Patricia, you often sound quite bitter about not finding a husband. You have blamed the lack of eligible men upon other women givin’ it up for free. That’s bitter Patricia. Especially when you consider that there just really aren’t many men worth dating that are free to do so in our age brackets. Blaming the lack of the even fewer marriage worthy men on women wanting a sexual relationship without necessarily wanting a wedding is really pretty flimsy. Men that don’t want marriage aren’t going to change their minds to get sex at your age Patricia. And it is most likely because they already know what lousy husbands they are or have been.
Blaming is bitterness Patricia.
If you understand anything about American government you would know that a person’s religious beliefs or perceived adherance to a religious organization’s edicts have nothing to do with ability to effectively govern if they put their country before their religion. Biden managed to author the Violence Against Women Act without sponsership of the RCC or a pat on the back from the Pope. He is paid to serve his country. Not his chosen church. I really could not care less if you don’t think he’s Catholic enough to suit you. He’s obviously not too Catholic to be prevented from representing my interests and that is all that matters.
Bitterness towards embryos? Oh please! You are bitter for not being worshiped for gestating. Like you invented it or something.
once again, nevermind the pro-life atheists.
Sal,
I am just giggling at your responses. Bitter, bitter, bitter. You comment here, but it’s Below You. You are Slumming — poor dear You are cracking me up. Careful on the high horse.
Why care that I think you are paid to post — why the offense? It may be better to collect money to promote abortion than to do it for your own pleasure.
I love how you constantly go after Patricia and Jill personally — so non-bitter. But what is to be expected from someone who spends a great deal of time promoting abortion — really such a bitter little topic.
Keep posting, Sal, you are a real card!!! Careful of the high horse — they have been know to kick their riders in the A$$ every now and then….
Patricia, you often sound quite bitter about not finding a husband. You have blamed the lack of eligible men upon other women givin’ it up for free. That’s bitter Patricia. Especially when you consider that there just really aren’t many men worth dating that are free to do so in our age brackets. Blaming the lack of the even fewer marriage worthy men on women wanting a sexual relationship without necessarily wanting a wedding is really pretty flimsy. Men that don’t want marriage aren’t going to change their minds to get sex at your age Patricia. And it is most likely because they already know what lousy husbands they are or have been.
Blaming is bitterness Patricia.
Well Sally thank you for telling me WHAT I think and feel. First of all, I hold accountable the men and women of my generation who have participated wholeheartedly in the sexual revolution and destroyed society and the family by their wholesale acceptance of contraception and abortion. We have the kind of society we do today because women have bought into the lie that in order to be equal to men, they must be LIKE men. They have adopted the masculine model and rejected their feminine gifts – one of which is the gift to bear children. We would most definitely not have the society we have today if women had chosen a different path – but alas, the radical feminist ideology (which you spout) hates men and hates women’s femininity which they perceive as weakness.
And yes, this has affected my life in a very intimate way and will affect my daughter’s lives. It is their lives that I worry about. The fallout of the contraception/abortion culture is that fewer people marry, they marry later if they do at all, and they have fewer children. It is very hard for anyone of any age to find a spouse. Recognizing this and recognizing the factors that are responsible for this is not a problem. Unlike radical feminists who are too afraid to face up to what their ideology and policies have done to society, I see no problem in assigning the BLAME directly to such.
A man does not need to marry to have sex. And likewise a woman does not need to marry to have children and to be financially independent.
These are not reasons to marry, to be sure, but they were the prime factors that encouraged people to find a good spouse and marry and have a family.
It is you who are bitter Sally. Stop projecting your feelings onto others. You need lots of help. Get it!
No show priests can cry me a freaking river. We recently had two preists go off message about a legal action in our diocese and both of them were afraid for their jobs even as they were trying to apologize for the bone-headedness of the bishop.
We have faith in God but most of the time you just have to laugh at the church. I hasten to think of what they have done with all my family’s money… oh yeah, they bought two houses and renovated the church – and still couldn’t find funding for special education at the church school.
i would be bitter If I hadn’t long ago decided that they were’nt worth a dime. It’s others like my parents that I’m kinda sad about. I thought scams were only supposed to happen to followers of televangelists. Guess not. Trying to find a priest whose bishop will actually let him be a good priest is like playing Roman Roulette. You never know if you’re going to get a liar, an embezzler, a self-aggrandizer or an actual good priest.
RE: the priests too busy to help the poor. You know there would be more priests if they were actually a bit choosey about who they let be priests. Right now the only qualification is that you cannot be a leftist and you cannot be gay. Beyond that you can be the biggest meglomaniac in the world. Heck that might make you bishop in a few years.
Yo La — You are no longer a Catholic and your opinion of the Church is worth — what?
Are you upset that your family gave $$ to the Church instead of you? Is that the reason for your bitterness?
Well Sally thank you for telling me WHAT I think and feel. First of all, I hold accountable the men and women of my generation who have participated wholeheartedly in the sexual revolution and destroyed society and the family by their wholesale acceptance of contraception and abortion. We have the kind of society we do today because women have bought into the lie that in order to be equal to men, they must be LIKE men. They have adopted the masculine model and rejected their feminine gifts – one of which is the gift to bear children. We would most definitely not have the society we have today if women had chosen a different path – but alas, the radical feminist ideology (which you spout) hates men and hates women’s femininity which they perceive as weakness.
And yes, this has affected my life in a very intimate way and will affect my daughter’s lives. It is their lives that I worry about. The fallout of the contraception/abortion culture is that fewer people marry, they marry later if they do at all, and they have fewer children. It is very hard for anyone of any age to find a spouse. Recognizing this and recognizing the factors that are responsible for this is not a problem. Unlike radical feminists who are too afraid to face up to what their ideology and policies have done to society, I see no problem in assigning the BLAME directly to such.
A man does not need to marry to have sex. And likewise a woman does not need to marry to have children and to be financially independent.
These are not reasons to marry, to be sure, but they were the prime factors that encouraged people to find a good spouse and marry and have a family.
It is you who are bitter Sally. Stop projecting your feelings onto others. You need lots of help. Get it!
Posted by: Patricia at September 23, 2008 9:30 PM
…………………….
Every bit of this tirade screams bitterness and denial Patricia.
Your fantasy world has never existed and never will. Get your nose out of the romance novels and get real with your life. Or don’t. What ever serves you best.
Why do you spend so much time posting on this blog when American laws have nothing to do with your life or that of your children?
Sal,
I am just giggling at your responses. Bitter, bitter, bitter. You comment here, but it’s Below You. You are Slumming — poor dear You are cracking me up. Careful on the high horse.
Why care that I think you are paid to post — why the offense? It may be better to collect money to promote abortion than to do it for your own pleasure.
I love how you constantly go after Patricia and Jill personally — so non-bitter. But what is to be expected from someone who spends a great deal of time promoting abortion — really such a bitter little topic.
Keep posting, Sal, you are a real card!!! Careful of the high horse — they have been know to kick their riders in the A$$ every now and then….
Posted by: LB at September 23, 2008 9:30 PM
…………………
There may be hope for at least your sense of humor LB.
You raised some interesting questions you really should ask yourself.
Why does Jill really have this blog? Who sponsered her 527 and how much is she being paid to front it? Why does her nose get out of place if the media doesn’t refer to her as a nurse? When was the last time she was employed as a nurse? Lots and lots of questions for Jill that she will never answer.
As for Patricia, she enjoys making personally insulting comments. She’s very bitter over her lack of love life and it’s everyone’s fault but her own.
There is no need for selling abortion any more than there is need to sell gestation. Women know what is best for them.
What are you trying to sell LB?
Every bit of this tirade screams bitterness and denial Patricia. Your fantasy world has never existed and never will. Get your nose out of the romance novels and get real with your life. Or don’t. What ever serves you best.
Why do you spend so much time posting on this blog when American laws have nothing to do with your life or that of your children?
Posted by: Sally at September 24, 2008 12:33 AM
hahaha – You make me laugh too hard, Sally!
Apparently you are too old or stupid to remember what society WAS like a mere 25 years ago when you were a young woman, when most children grew up in family with ONE mother and ONE father. Homosexuality was considered a treatable disorder and not an alternative and preferred lifestyle to “breeders”. Women gave birth to their babies rather than have them chopped to pieces in the name of autonomy and equality.
Men and women more often than not showed some respect for one another. Women didn’t routinely dress like hookers and men actually saw marriage as an option. Society was not perfect – it never will be.
AS for me commenting on here – I am a citizen of the world as are you, Sally. Maybe this IS news to you. I know many Americans such as yourself THINK the world revolves around your country and no other country is of consequence. My country’s laws are DIRECTLY influenced by your country’s laws. Not always, as we move more and more to a socialist totalitarian society here. Therefore, I have a stake in what happens in America.
And finally abortion is a human problem Sally. It doesn’t stop at your borders. All of mankind is engulfed in this horror. I’m betting you have no knowledge what-ever of situations in other countries.
STOP YOUR NAVEL-GAZING SALLY. Grow up and get out of your perpetual adolescence.
Girls, girls, girls…I love you both.
Sally, you come here to rile someone up. Usually Patricia. Patricia, please do not get riled up. :)
Hi Carla! How are you?!! :-D
Sally only bothers me when she calls me bitter. Anyone who knows me, knows this is not the case. In fact, many of my friends are bitter for me!! lol
Carla: I can’t remember all of Sally’s problems or situation, but I certainly think it’s outrageous telling someone they can’t post on a blog because they don’t live in the country and therefore don’t have a stake in what happens there.
I wonder how many of you know that we have our elections in a mere 2 weeks?
Hello Patricia,
I am wonderful. Thank you! I am so glad to know of what Canada is up to. I often think of you when I read of what is going on outside my little house. You are not bitter. I know that. Sally has her own reasons for coming here, not that she will share them but I am glad you are both here!
Good morning, Sally!!
Hi Patricia,
I know you are having elections in Canada only because you have mentioned it. Shame on our media for not talking about it. I haven’t heard a word on TV or radio. I’d be interested to hear more….
Have an awesome day!
Sally,
Lighten up. God bless you.
Janet
Well, I didn’t read this thread yesterday and I just saw that people were talking about me! Thanks, that makes me feel special!
LL,
Thanks for your nice comments about me! I don’t know how many other pro-life single mothers comment here, or if they’re really bitter or not. But either way, thanks!
Hi Elizabeth —
I’m a prolife single mom too. I’m not bitter, no matter what anyone says about me. Busy and a bit unorganized — yes — bitter no.
My daughter is 17, how old is Gabriella?
Have a great day.
“First of all, I hold accountable the men and women of my generation who have participated wholeheartedly in the sexual revolution and destroyed society and the family by their wholesale acceptance of contraception and abortion.”
Destroyed society? I live in a very nice society with a lot of decent people. It’s certainly not perfect, but a whole long way from “destroyed.”
Busy and a bit unorganized
haha, tell me about it LB!
Gabriella is 2 1/2. I think her attitude is far beyond her years, though!
Gabriella —
At 2 1/2 all the personally comes out. Loads of fun to see it.
But, oh so tiring to have to run after…
“First of all, I hold accountable the men and women of my generation who have participated wholeheartedly in the sexual revolution and destroyed society and the family by their wholesale acceptance of contraception and abortion.”
Destroyed society? I live in a very nice society with a lot of decent people. It’s certainly not perfect, but a whole long way from “destroyed.”
Posted by: hal at September 24, 2008 10:26 AM
yes Hal, I’m sure it’s very nice for YOU. You destroyed two of your own children to achieve your happiness. What a price to pay!
Blaming is bitterness
Posted by: Sally at September 24, 2008
All that bitterness of blaming Catholics for your deathsex family traditions, makes Sally a invincible anti-Catholic bigot.
Sally’s bigotry squeezes on her brain, removing simple facts of reality. Such as, a willed abortion isn’t a miscarriage. But, when one is infected with untreated deathsex, compounded with anti-Catholic family traditions, one becomes bitter towards those that didn’t die in a manner befitting the dignity of Sally.
Well, Patricia, you think society has been destroyed. I don’t see it that way. I’m sorry life is so bad for you.
Well, Patricia, you think society has been destroyed. I don’t see it that way. I’m sorry life is so bad for you.
Posted by: Hal at September 24, 2008 1:54 PM
NO Hal. My life is actually quite good. I HAD all my children. They are all alive and working towards their God-given potential.
What grieves me, is that two of YOUR children are dead by your own hand and you have no remorse what-so-ever.
A society where fathers can kill their children without the slightest remorse is a dying society. You have not contributed to society to make it better, Hal. Instead you have contributed to the culture of death. If you think there is no culture of death – think again. 1.5 million DEAD babies per year is a culture of death. And two of those years saw a baby of yours in that count.
“In my area, even with well-known bishops, we cannot get a single priest to show up to serve food to the poor.”
Jesuits in Latin America have died to help those who need them the most. They have been martyrs in a corrupt society. They continue to call for more social justice than what right-wing conservatives can offer. And in America other Catholics seem to have real problems with that. “Don’t get me started on the Jesuits…”
I am not Catholic. Why does a priest need to show up and serve food to the poor??
If you have two hands best get to work and serve.
God uses His people to do His work.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oscar_Romero
It’s not the fact that they stand up for social justice, PiP. It’s that they tend to rebel quite openly against Church teaching in other areas. I would be just as against Dominicans if they (in general) rebeled against the Church’s social teachings; if they taught that we have no obligation to help the less fortunate.
It’s wonderful that the Jesuits fight for the poor and vulnerable; that’s part of Catholic teaching, which really was brought forth with the 1891 encyclical of Leo XIII Rerum Novarum. Wiki has a great article on Catholic social teaching.
“Why does a priest need to show up and serve food to the poor??”
We aren’t literally demanding all priests work at a soup kitchen. We however would like to see a priest work for economic justice as well as being a teacher for his people.
culture of death,,culture of death….seriously P, you need to relax a bit.
culture of death,,culture of death….seriously P, you need to relax a bit.
Posted by: hal at September 24, 2008 3:35 PM
nice to see you have such a cavalier attitude towards your children’s deaths
you are quite the piece of work Hal. That you can “relax” over what you’ve done boggles my mind….
Pip,
Are you Catholic? When you say WE you mean…who?
another good encyclical was the encyclical letter of JP II , “On Human Work” – Laborem Exercens. This was issued on the 90th anniversary of Rerum Novarum.
The Catholic Church has always supported the rights of workers, the right to work and the dignity of work. After all JP II spent a few years working in a stone quarry during the Nazi occupation of Poland.
Carla,
I’m sort of a Catholic outsider right now, in the ‘examining’ process. I think by ‘we’ it was YLT and I, I was in general agreeing with him, I had been unsatisfied with our archbishop here, but thank god, he was moved into a different position
Gotcha Pip. I was a tad confused. No worries.
Was this article shown?
http://www.lifenews.com/nat4350.html
Pip: If you want to see proof of “priests working for economic justice”, all you need to do is pick up the weekly Catholic newspaper from any archdiocese and you’ll see plenty of evidence.
Not only are priests doing such work, there are numerous brothers and nuns doing exactly the same thing.
This has long been an area of enormous concern to the Catholic clergy.
“They continue to call for more social justice than what right-wing conservatives can offer. And in America other Catholics seem to have real problems with that. “Don’t get me started on the Jesuits…”
Posted by: prettyinpink at September 24, 2008 2:51 PM
Say, PIP, did you know that research that has been done has shown that conservatives generally give more to charity than liberals? Politicians may not be proposing the right policies but at least the people are doing something of their own volition.
Anon. was me — sorry!!!
Eileen,
That really doesn’t have anythign to do what I was saying. By ‘conservatives’ I meant generally political policies both in our country and abroad. El Salvador being one example (see above).
And it’s not like I’m saying liberals are a cakewalk, either. But, conservatives are generally favored by the Church– and the Jesuits generally demand more than that.
“But, conservatives are generally favored by the Church– and the Jesuits generally demand more than that.””
Posted by: prettyinpink at September 25, 2008 12:09 PM
I’m not sure what you mean by that, PIP. The Church doesn’t endorse specific politicians.
Eileen,
From my personal experience the Jesuits generally work for something above just conservativism and just liberalism. That’s all I”m saying.
The Church doesn’t ‘endorse’ politicians but don’t tell me they don’t have a favored ‘party.’
PIP @ 10:54,
Eileen, From my personal experience the Jesuits generally work for something above just conservativism and just liberalism. That’s all I”m saying.
The Church doesn’t ‘endorse’ politicians but don’t tell me they don’t have a favored ‘party.’
Yes, the Church as Christ’s representative on earth is beyond politics. Read the Catechism and you will know what the Church teaches. Pope John Paul II’s Encyclicals are wonderful summations of the Church’s social teachings. They are available in paperback form at most Catholic bookstores and can be ordered on-line. Since the pro-life issue is more important to most Republican voters, I suppose you could say that the Church favors them on that one issue. There’s no guarantee that Rep’s are going to heaven and Dem’s are going to hell. Individuals are responsible for making good judgements on ALL of the “issues” throughout their lives. If this is what you mean when you state “the Jesuits generally work for something above just conservativism and just liberalism”, I think you make a valid point and they should be commended. Unfortunately, those that don’t adhere to the full teachings of the Catholic Church sully the reputation of the religious group.
Janet, good points! Thanks!
PIP, there are some pro-choice Republicans — they would not be “favored” by the Church.
LB – My concern is not for myself but rather for the church itself. It is breeding hypocrites like bugs in stale holy water. If it is going to have any cred for the good stuff it does it should at least be consistant and honest in the things that it does that I oppose. Fine oppose abortion, but what about the murderers that we are breeding in our armed forces. Our enemies lives have value as well. The state of the soul of good men and women are wasted on tragic wars and the church does not hold congress accountable. Only when the intangible issue of abortion (intangible because it isn’t something done (or at least not spoken about) in middle class and upper class homes) is brought up are members of congress held to task. What of Pelosi’s vote for the wars? Surely penance is needed for that.
They’re not just loosing me, they’ve lost a generation in my family (about 30 people across our combined family). Who wants to raise their kids inconsistantly? Then why would anyone send their kids to the most inconsistant church for an hour every sunday. The holy water is rotten with enough hypocrites. No sense in subjecting children to Ratzinbeger’s Disease.
YoLa, The Church has spoken out against the war. John Paul II was very adamant. Not all issues have the same moral gravity or weight. The right to life has more weight — if the littlest of us does not have a right to life, what good is any other right? Pope Benedict XVI has reminded our President that since we did get involved in a war then we have the duty to make sure that we continue with reconstruction, etc.
Yes, we have had our scandals (priest – abuse) but there are plenty of holy people who have done much to carry on Jesus’ mission — Mother Teresa of Calcutta for instance. There are so many known saints — priests, nuns, and lay people as well as humble, hidden people that we may never hear about. I encourage you to learn more about the Church before you leave her. Maybe you could provide some light for your family.
We are one, holy, catholic, church because we were founded by Jesus Christ but that doesn’t mean that we are sinless.
Yo La Tango,
LB – My concern is not for myself but rather for the church itself. It is breeding hypocrites like bugs in stale holy water. If it is going to have any cred for the good stuff it does it should at least be consistant and honest in the things that it does that I oppose. Fine oppose abortion, but what about the murderers that we are breeding in our armed forces. Our enemies lives have value as well. The state of the soul of good men and women are wasted on tragic wars and the church does not hold congress accountable. Only when the intangible issue of abortion (intangible because it isn’t something done (or at least not spoken about) in middle class and upper class homes) is brought up are members of congress held to task. What of Pelosi’s vote for the wars? Surely penance is needed for that.
They’re not just loosing me, they’ve lost a generation in my family (about 30 people across our combined family). Who wants to raise their kids inconsistantly? Then why would anyone send their kids to the most inconsistant church for an hour every sunday. The holy water is rotten with enough hypocrites. No sense in subjecting children to Ratzinbeger’s Disease.
Posted by: Yo La Tango at September 26, 2008 10:43 PM
To an extent I can understand your bitterness, you are certainly not alone. But what you may have forgotten is that the Church was established by God and our first duty is to love God with all of our hearts, mind and soul and to praise and worship Him in our everyday lives. Our prayer should not be for one hour a week at mass. Each second of our day can be offered up to God and the suffering of the world, including those who are dying in war, being killed by abortion, dying from starvation, etc. Look at the Beatitudes (“Blessed Attitudes”) – this is how God asks us to live each day. Look at the Catechism of the Church and read the Church Fathers. You can remind your family of the basic goodness of the Church instituted by Christ.
Since we, the members of the Catholic Church, are not perfect, we fail, we sin. The Church does not “breed hypocrites”. We ask forgiveness and try to do better. Sometimes we fail again and again. Only those who never try to do good are exempt from being called a hypocrite. Think about that.
The Church does not need “credibility” on earth. We are asked to be in the world but not of the world. The Church must admonish those who publicly,misrepresent the teachings of the Church. But the Church cannot address every sinner in the world, including members of Congress, for understandable reasons. As Eileen #2 mentioned, the sin of abortion has the most weight, because it is upon the right to LIFE that all other rights are hinged. Remember it is only recently that the Church has begun to voice itself more strongly on this issue. We should be happy about this and not be embarrassed by the sins of others. The sins of a few members of the Catholic Church are not a reflection of the WHOLE Church whether lay people or religious, even in the hierarchy, nor are they a reflection of the rest of us Catholics.
As for losing a whole generation of your family, I pray that you will ask God to come back into your lives, and that you will teach the goodness of the Holy Catholic Church as instituted by Christ to your children. Read the Bible with your family, find a good traditional parish to for worship that has a Eucharistic Adoration Chapel. If you have never been to an Adoration Chapel, I assure you if you go you will never be the same. It is awesome in the true sense of the word. Pray for a renewed respect for our Holy Father who is Christ’s representative on Earth. Remember that our Holy Father and our priests and deacons and religious are not perfect and confesses their sins just like the rest of us. I wish you peace. God bless you and your family.
Clarification:
“The Church must admonish those who publicly,misrepresent the teachings of the Church.”
By “the Church”, I mean the church hierarchy.
By “those who publicly misrepresent”, I’m referring to those in the public eye who misrepresent the teachings of the Church.
For more information, see the following document
Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship
by the US Council of Catholic Bishops
http://www.usccb.org/faithfulcitizenship/FCStatement.pdf