Catholic-in-name-only politicians need to be called out
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QonhcyuS_sM[/youtube]
When Obama’s immoral and unjust health care plan was heading down to defeat in the US Congress, it was a handful of Catholic lawmakers that snatched passage from the jaws of defeat and got it over the line with just enough votes.
They were encouraged by a nun who lied about the reality of Obamacare regarding abortion. Now… contraception… sterilization and the lack of conscience clause for Catholic hospitals and health care workers… all these chickens are coming home to roost.
~ Michael Voris describing the “Catholic Traitors Rogues Gallery,” a listing of Catholic politicians who have betrayed basic Catholic teachings with their political agendas, Real Catholic TV, October 4

I’m not even Catholic and I have to give a ‘here, here!’ Why so many people claim religions that they don’t follow is beyond me.
Micahel Voris has been pounding that point for a long time.
I didn’t know Panetta was catholic until I watched the video.
Those catholics should have listened to us, but noooo. Time to sleep in that little ole bed of yours.
Yep, there be too many foxes sleepin’ in our henhouse. By their fruits we can know them. It’s also no suprise that certain politicians deliberately court and reward anti-Catholic ‘catholics’. Our church has stood firm for two thousand years. We endured worse than this and will prevail again, but it is time to sweep up and clean up. It is time for the bishops to put the approval of God ahead of the approval of men.
Very much agreed, Jespren. Thank you for that.
As someone who attempts to live the Catholic faith (not as faithful as I’d like to be, but I’m working on it), I can say that I and pretty much every faithful Catholic to whom I’ve ever spoken would very much like all the CINO’s to drop their “Catholic” label and identify themselves as they truly are.
Granted, this would reduce the number of avowed Catholics in North America by, what, 10%? 90%? Honestly, we really don’t care; at least we’d know where people stand, and we wouldn’t have to answer for the actions of others claiming to act in the name of Catholicism.
Seriously, not rocket science.
Maestro, np. I think i’d have to lean more towards your second statistic though, of the ‘catholics’ I’ve known in real life I can only think of 4 that would qualify as ‘practicing’ Catholics that believed the full faith of the Catholic Church.
My mother-in-law will occassionally refer to herself as ‘catholic’. Reality? She’s more of an ambigious new age non-practicing wiccan. (Which is no more annoying than my pro-choice, pro-homosexual marriage, ‘anything goes’, evolutionists of a sister-in-law calling herself ‘Christian’.)
Unnoticed by the mainstream media the Catholic Church is actually gaining converts every year, and in recent years whole congregations have been converting from Anglican and Lutheran and other more liberal churches. People are hungry for the real thing and no longer satisfied with watered-down soft-serve religion. I think if we worked harder and behaved better, we’d lose a few at first but gain much more later.
I am Catholic, but a practicing MS Lutheran. It angers me to no end how many US bishops are so namby-pamby about pro-abort politicians. Remember when Nancy Pelosi was asked what her favorite word was, and she answered “The Word, “meanign Jesus. There was a very courageous reporter there who asked her something to the effect about whether Jesus had any rights in the womb. That was when I saw the full truth on how insane and evil Democrat Catholic politicians were.
Ted Kennedy had a full Mass funeral–he is one of the few politicians who watched a video of a partial birth abortion and still voted for it.
I thought you had one….your boy Obama. The Christian right was NEVER duped by Obama. We knew from the beginning he was an abortionist at heart. Remember the “mistake” comment? And what was the first thing he did as president…reverse the Mexico Policy agreement? He is morally bankrupt, right down to that social justice “church” he belonged to for 20 years, but had no idea how non-Christian the pastor was.
Yeah, Biggz. He’s definitely one of you.
I most definitely agree with Voris and ninek.
How can one be Catholic but a practicing MS Lutheran?
That’s like someone who was born in the USA, move
to Canada, becoming a Canadian citizen,
but still call themself an American. Sounds to me
like a “pick and choose” Christian. I’m reminded what
Jesus said in John, Chapter 6–the Bread of Life
discourse–to the end of the chapter.
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops turned around, and started dealing with the abortion in Obamacare, after getting a memo from Pope Benedict, wihich clearly stated its foremost priority. Prior to that, there was the seamless cloth idea from Archbishop Bernardin, which was used to excuse all the social “justice” Catholics for ignoring the abortion issue while, voting for those who wished to redistribute wealth.
Before that time, only a select group of U.S. bishops was paying attention to what was really going on.
It’s most interesting to see the obvious uphill battle for the Bishops to persuade Catholics, who were misdirected for years regarding abortion and birth control, to now write to their congressmen to ask for it not to be covered in health insurance.
DUH!
Jim, it’s ok. The Lutheran church is where my family and I now worship. I am probably was a pick and choose Catholic, but it is my church and I’ll love it forever. My husband and I are of one mind about this, and we are raising our children to know and love Jesus. My focus is on Him. But thanks for your concern, and God bless you.
“As someone who attempts to live the Catholic faith (not as faithful as I’d like to be, but I’m working on it), I can say that I and pretty much every faithful Catholic to whom I’ve ever spoken would very much like all the CINO’s to drop their “Catholic” label and identify themselves as they truly are.”
I’d love to know what ecclesiastical mandate you draw on to judge someone a “Catholic in name only”, or in fewer words, a fake Catholic. That seems like a lot of authority for a layperson who is admittedly “not as faithful as they’d like to be” to assume.
So the “moral and just” thing is to go back to when people with pre-existing conditions could be denied coverage – when maximums could bankrupt families. Yes, lovely!
Take a great plan and continue to modify it and make it better. To throw it out leaves too many people vulnerable.
Most civilized societies are now moving beyond universal medical care into universal dental care as well.
There is absolutely no reason why basic medical/dental care and education should not be free or very close to free in any so-called advanced society.
We’ve seen what a huge success the DOE has made out of American education.
I don’t want the government going ANYWHERE near my doctor or dentist. Yikes.
My Bro-in-law has that socialized medicine thing where he grew up in Sweden. Of course, he gave 80 cents out of every dollar he made for the privilege. Maybe you should move there, Reality.
Oh, and all the free abortions you want! You’ll love it!
Joan: you can’t be pro-choice and be Catholic (or Christian, for that matter.) Goes against everything Jesus stood for.
They should just be nothing, which is what they are, anyway.
Courtnay – I take no greater comfort at the thought of huge companies that have to report profits quarterly with my care in their hands.
Reality. Amen. Part of me hopes Obamacare is repealed just because it would usher in a singer payer system MUCH faster.
A serious examination of universal health care shows that they do not interfere with your relationship with your doctor. You also have the option to pay for additional/private/alternative medical care if you wish.
“he gave 80 cents out of every dollar he made for the privilege.” – I don’t think so.
“all the free abortions you want” – as it ought to be with universal health care.
Courtnay -
Health care costs in the US are 16% of our GDP – in Sweeden it is 9%
Those evil, evil health care companies!! EVIL, they want to make a profit. THAT IS SOOOOOOOOO EVIL!!
80% tax rate, Reality. I know so.
Don’t you have a protest to attend???
Courtnay – I’m not saying they are evil, nor am I saying government is evil. I’m simply saying that I don’t see one of the two entities and say “wow, for sure they have my best interests in mind”. They both have faults. I do know that insurance companies aren’t going to get rid of pre-existing condition clauses out of the goodness of their hearts. Or max benefits.
Tax rates in Sweeden aren’t that high – if you have a link to provide though, i’m all ears (or eyes I suppose!)
“80% tax rate, Reality. I know so.” – you are either misinformed, misled or didn’t quite get all the facts.
“Don’t you have a protest to attend???” – nah, I let people get on with their lives as long as they don’t interfere in others.
“he gave 80 cents out of every dollar he made for the privilege”
“A basic national income tax of 20% is levied on taxable income exceeding SEK 372,100 (approx $USD55K)(for 2010). A higher national tax of 25% is levied on taxable income in excess of SEK 532,700 (for 2010). In total, a maximum rate of approximately 57.77% is levied on average”
http://www.taxrates.cc/html/sweden-tax-rates.html
“I’d love to know what ecclesiastical mandate you draw on to judge someone a “Catholic in name only”, or in fewer words, a fake Catholic.”
And I will be happy to identify it for you, joan.
It is true that both myself and CINO’s do not properly follow the teachings of the Catholic Church. I do not claim that my failures in that regard are in any way less damaging.
However, I recognize and acknowledge these actions (or inactions, as the case may be) to be sinful and contrary to said teachings and don’t try to portray them otherwise. CINO’s, on the other hand, not only fail to recognize them as such, but also encourage others to do so as well. In this way, whereas I recognize my faults and seek to correct them, CINO’s persist in their error for various reasons.
An important point to remember is that I’m not accusing CINO’s of being universally and intentionally malicious or deceitful; many are simply ignorant of the Church’s teachings and don’t think (or don’t have occasion) to educate themselves.
In such a case, it’s somewhat analogous to someone who’s never received proper driver’s training (and is obviously oblivious to some extent to other drivers’ habits) and doesn’t use turn signals, doesn’t use mirrors, doesn’t shoulder check, doesn’t give proper right-of-way at four-way stop signs, etc. They’re not intentionally being dangerous, they just don’t know any better.
In a sense, you could them “incidental CINO’s”, since they just happen to act against the Church’s teachings. There is no malice or ill-intent, and certainly no intended conflict.
Of course, I have known or known of many CINO’s (some personally, most through the news) who are not so innocent. These people are fully aware of their conflict with the Church’s teachings and still insist on claiming to be a faithful member, misleading others and causing scandal. A number of high-profile politicians are in this group, especially since quite a few of them have received letters from their bishops personally admonishing them to repent of their deviance or at least own up to it publicly.
So, I guess to sum up simply, the difference between myself and a CINO is not how well we follow the Church’s teachings, but rather in the fact that I seek to be more faithful and CINO’s do not (and sometimes quite the opposite in fact).
I hope this answers your question, joan. If not, however, I can try to clarify it further, or perhaps another commenter can word it better than I.
God bless.
“Health care costs in the US are 16% of our GDP – in Sweeden it is 9% ”
How many illegal immigrants does Sweden cover?
Jasper – information on that:
http://www.loc.gov/lawweb/servlet/lloc_news?disp3_l205402566_text
Best I can tell, up until that law, it was emergency services care, much like in the US.
“he gave 80 cents out of every dollar he made for the privilege.” – I don’t think so.
Courtnay is absolutely right. My middle class relatives in Sweden also pay more than 75% of their income in taxes. The 20% and 25% are basic income taxes — there are other taxes that take it above 50%, just as we have federal tax, state tax, medicare, medicaid, social security, etc, all taken by the government out of our paychecks on a non-voluntary basis. That’s tax.
Eric, I am reminded of a quote (although I can’t remember who said it): liberals are people who feel a deep debt to their fellow man, a debt they intend to pay with your money.
It’s not that I don’t think that in Utopia everyone has open access to healthcare, it’s that you can’t use a wrong to make something right. Socialized healthcare (socialism period) robs Peter to pay Paul as the saying goes. Is it unfortunate that people’s lives are destroyed by medical debt, of course (my family is in a debt pit we are unlikely to ever climb out of thanks to medical bills and we had private insurance!), but absconding with people’s hard-earned monies to pay for someone else’s need isn’t the way to correct it, either ethically, Biblically, or economically. Is it unfortunate that not everyone gets top teir healthcare? Equally of course. But life isn’t fair, and trying to make it fair by forcing person A to pay for person B only tips the unfair in the other direction.
Eric – link please
Jespren – how far do you take that view? Should we eliminate the federal regulations regarding providing emergency care to all who need it?
“Courtnay is absolutely right. My middle class relatives in Sweden also pay more than 75% of their income in taxes.” – that simply is not the case. Read the link I provided or anything similar.
Eric, “Federal regulation”? Absolutely. There is nothing in the Consitution that allows the Federal government to mandate such. There’s no reason why states or local governments couldn’t make such a requirement mandatory. Now, as to ‘would I vote for it?’ in my state or town that’s a hard question. People who are criminals or who simply have no intention of paying often use this ‘requirement’ to get non emergent care and leave the hospitals and thus the rest of us, on the hook for their care. I’ve even overheard discussions about what to ‘present with’ to get the care you want (here’s how to get an STD test, here’s how to get an ultrasound, complain about this to get pain meds, this to get an MRI, etc) so, for me, it would depend upon the exact wording of the law. This abuse of the system is systemic and makes up a great deal of the inflated costs associated with the American medical system. Also, since physicians swear to give aid and hospitals are just made up of physicians I think the ’emergency’ care mandate should be more along the line of the medical board punishing, suspending, or revoking a doctor who refuses emergency care rather than the civil law punishing hospitals who refuse.
Look, healthcare is not a ‘right’. It’s nice, and *pursuing* it is certainly a right. But pursuing something doesn’t mean you will obtain it. It’s not the government’s job to make sure it’s citizens are happy (or healthy), it’s their job to make sure they are free to pursue such things. If you look at history where there were doctors there was access to care. People traded fish for physicals, or townships got together to pay the town doc out of a big pot (willingly, not by force), or doctors donated their services. There have been charity hospitals for as long as their have been hospitals. Absent federal mandates that just frustrate and add layers of regulations, buerocracy, and middle-man price drives, there is absolutely no reason to believe that healthcare wouldn’t continue to work in this manner. Most ‘healthcare’ problems before this mess of mixed socialism with capitalism (not all, most) came more from lack of doctors than anything else. When you have to travel 3 days to find a doctor the poor are going to be primarily out of luck, most of them just can’t travel, even if they need the care. But we have more doctors per capita than ever before (refering to this last generation not this year specifically). If doctors were actually allowed to interact with their patients or their patient’s choosen representatives then there is no reason the system wouldn’t work as it had (which is to say quite well). Insurance companies should be, just like any other entity, to their contractual obligations, but exactly what that contract is should be between them and their users.
I’m sorry, that was to Ex-Gop, not Eric. It won’t let me edit.
As I said Reality, your link discusses only the basic tax rate, akin to our federal tax rate. However, there are deductions from a paycheck above that rate (state/local income taxes, medicare, medicaid, social security).
From the Swedish Taxpayers Association
“Taxes Still Too High in Sweden”
http://www.thelocal.se/17964/20090303/
Jespren – thanks for the honest answer – most dodge that question completely!
I think if we want to attribute our country to being a “Christian” nation at all, things like emergency services comes with the territory. I’d hate to go to what I feel some legitimately want – a society where those can’t afford it are left to die. It is a complicated question that will simply get more complicated as resources become more scarce.
Personally, I’d like healthcare for all. I’d like more of a socialistic answer in regards to health care (and only health care). I think it is unique in that, anybody at anytime can become a multi-million dollar liability to society through little or no fault of their own. To pay as much as we do as a country on healthcare, and to leave so many people without insurance – I think that is very sad.
Is it constitutionally mandated? Certainly not.
Yes there are Eric, but if you read the link I provided or others which show the Swedish tax scales and systems then you will work out that no-one pays an overall rate of 75% or 80% on every ‘dollar’ they make, which were the claims made.
Agree with Reality on this. I’ve seen nowhere near this rate.
Regardless of the rate – it is nice looking at what a person gets for it. For instance, in America, we talk about how much we value families. Sweden has a cool aspect where a new parent gets 16 months paid – and the minority parent (father typically) has to take a couple months of it.
Expensive? Sure – but nice to see instead of what I see at my work, where a LONG time off is 3 months – and I’ve seen people back in 6 weeks.
Ex-Gop, I disagree strongly that those type of things are required in a ‘Christian’ nation. Christians are called to do what *they* as an individual and as a collective church (with money that is freely given) can do for those less fortunate. But it is absolutely anathama to force anyone to participate in that charity. Charity hospitals, charity drives, and medical charities are vitally good, and if we had extra money would definately be something that would get our help. But requiring citizens to put forth money to be used charitably is distinctly un-Christian. It’s just ‘legalized’ theft, which is distinctly un-Biblical. Not only that but it’s just extremely poor stewardship! And Christians are called to be good stewards of our resources. There is nothing more wasteful than bureaucracy. You earn 10 dollars and give one to a hospital to help treat patients, they have one dollar to spend on patient care. OR you make ten dollars, the government takes one dollar from you. The IRS takes 10 cents for it’s overhead and passes the 90 cents on to the federal treasury, which takes it’s 10 cents for overhead and passes it on to the appropruate federal organization, which takes it’s 10 cents in overhead, then passes the now 70 cents onto the state treasury, which takes it’s 10 cents, then the appropriate state fund gets the money, taking it’s 10 cents for overhead, then the remaining 50 cents gets passed to the hospital bureaurcacy which uses 10 cents in overhead to verify it gets spent ‘appropriately’ given all the strings attatched via the previoys hands it passed through. In the end the hospital has 40 cents for patient care. This is the basic problem with socialistic governments. The more people in a supply chain the more expensive the end product. Making sure *all* money for medicine funnels through the government’s supply chain (socialized medicine) just guarentees there will be *less* to go around, not more. I’d rather have the dollar to give to help my fellow man than have the government take a dollar and give 40 cents (or 20 cents) to who they feel needs help.
Jespren – a couple of things:
1) The amount of money that goes through private insurance that actually ends up being spent on healthcare is lower than it should be. Government has waste, but so does private insurance.
2) I don’t think the Bible definitively makes a case that we should have no or very little taxes. Or furthermore, I wouldn’t read my Bible and say “this is the definite model, but I’m going to ignore the parts about charging no interest and wiping out debt”.
3) I don’t know if I’m right. I don’t know if you are right. If you take my argument to its fullest, you have people taxed higher and paying for others healthcare (and you pointed out the issues). If you take yours further, a person in a remote area without Christian charity would be left for dead if his/her neighbors wanted to keep extra money for a 2nd yacht.
Jespren – do you also feel that your reasoning applies to the military and a police force – that the Bible would be against both? (as a forced item paid by taxes)
Ex-Gop,
1) I really haven’t said anything about private insurance. Private insurance, as it stands today, has a huge amount of government interference. Without government interference overhead would be *much* lower. Insurance should be between the company and the signee. And insurance isn’t a charity, it’s a business, just like life insurance or car insurance. It’s a contractual business, much different than a charity.
2) the Bible gives us an example of a ‘perfect’ government in the Old Testament theocracy, and ‘taxes’ where 10% and military was voluntary. God warned the Israelites that is they insisted on a king they would end up paying more in taxes and have their sons taken for compulsitory military. Am I saying we should be a theocracy? It’s impractical given our current social cultural. But it gives a format, then the New Testament advises us to obey whatever civil authority we are under unless it specifically contradicts God’s law. The U.S.A. is (supposed) to be beholden to the Constitution. So it is Biblical for me to obey the Consitution (until it conflicts with God’s law), which includes objecting to unconstitutional laws and intrusions of government. If you want to pull for things like socialized medicine it should be through changing the Constitution, not by doing an end-run around it’s prohibitions by appealing to worst case senarios to frighten the populous (someone dying because their neighbor wants a 2nd boat for instance) into allowing unconstitutional laws. As for forgiving debt, we have bankruptcy laws, not as simple as the Old Testament jubilee year or as personal as the New Testament’s expectation that Christians not take each other to court over a debt, but it still serves the same general purpose from a legal standard. And, for the record, the Christian churches I have belonged to condem lawsuits between Christians and advise not to charge interest on personal loans.
3) actually, if you take your idea to the fullest you have the government deciding who dies, both in populated and remote areas. Like Oregon willing to pay for assisted suicide by not cancer treatments, like other states’s insurance refusing to pay for organ transplants, like U.K. intentionally wait listing people for non-emergent surgeries for longer than necessary hoping they will go outside the system and pay for it themself, or the serious problem with euthanasia without consent in some scandinavian countries, or like the all but non-existant patient consent or autonomy in many societ block countries. It’s been said insanity is doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting a different result. While socialistic healthcare has worked for short periods of time in some countries, it has been proven time and again to cause extreme rationing, lack of patient autonomy and consent, and lack of inovation. People come from all over the world (from social medicine) to get treated in the U.S., very infrequently do they seek (legal or legitament) healthcare from the U.S. to a socialised medical country. Yes, it’s possible that some people will die from lack of help in a truly capitalistic/charity driven medical society, but historically more people get better care and less die than under countries that have adopted truly socialized medical care (have you ever read anything about the Russian or Chinese healthcare system??)
As for military or police force. The point to government is to protect it’s people. People join a government specifically so they can have a military and police force to protect them. Under the Constitution one of the enumerated Federal powers is to maintain a military force. (Police force should be maintained by the states) Do I personally feel we need to spend the amount of money or have the world-wide presence we do today? No, and I don’t feel that the Constitution allows for us to police the world. But just like if I lived in ancient Rome I’d follow the law of the land by carrying military equipment is asked by a solider (this is the original meaning behind the ‘if you are required to go one mile, go two’, Roman soliders could legally demand any private citizen to carry their equipment for 1 mile. Remember the solider demanding a citizen to carry the cross for Jesus when Jesus stumbled and fell?) I will pay taxes towards our military and police force update. But laws that are illegal on their face do not require submission to them. Until they amend the Consitution certain things are on their face illegal, even if it becomes ‘accepted’ law of the land. Now, since the Consitution (and other applicable documents) allow for uncivil disobedience only as a last resort I’m not anxious (or find it necessary) to be revoluntionary (violently so) or to end up in jail, but I will vote and do my best to civilly convince others to follow the actual law of the land instead of the unconstitutional ‘policies’ currently in place. Meanwhile I can do everything I can to opt out of things I can, like refusing to be part of the federally messed up public education system by not sending my kids to a public school or voting against all taxes or bonds for unconstitutional organizations even if I think the basic idea would be good on a state or city level. (And, for the record, in the ideal theocracy of the Old Testament the military was voluntary as was what amounted to their police force, and in times of war the military was self-supporting, people brought their own weapons and horses and food for example)