Priest: No communion for you
UPDATE, 11-17, 1:10p: Got this report from someone who attended one of Fr. Newman’s church services yesterday [HT: moderator Carder]:
Fr. Newman gave the shortest homily he has ever given. He is responding with humility and obedience. He said that he should have been more careful with what he previously wrote, but he was rushing to meet the bulletin deadline. He also said that Friday was the darkest day of his life, but the support of parishioners and the Dominican sisters there moved him to tears. So I am sure he still needs lots of prayers. There were a few vulgar protestors, but mostly present were supporters of Fr. Newman outside the church grounds. Thank goodness it is a heavily Christian/Baptist area.
_______________
UPDATE, 11-17, 1:05p:LifeNews.com is reporting the Charleston diocese has “rebuked” Fr. Newman.
_______________
UPDATE, 11-17, 1p: Father Newman’s original bulletin insert has apparently been scrubbed, according to reader Quinn Q.:
Well, it appears that the bishop of the Charleston diocese gave the decent and brave pastor of St. Mary’s an ultimatum or at least a direct order to take that bulletin asking those that voted for Obama to repent before taking part in communion off of the church website.
The bulletin is nowhere to be found. It’s missing from the archives in fact.
In the section… he has a link to the diocese of Charleston website where this emasculated/ballless “monsignor” basicly has a video ambiguously teaching that Catholics can vote for whoever they want since they should vote the right way since they have had their “consciences formed” correctly over the years. Just sickening stuff.
_______________
UPDATE, 11-14, 4:40p: The priest discussed in the article below, Fr. Jay Scott Newman, did not say what the AP said he said. Read his explanation on his church’s website. [HT: reader Dolores]
_______________
From MSNBC, November 13 (click to enlarge)…
Look, if the Catholic Church believes voting for a pro-abort, particularly after one has been warned, jeopardizes one’s soul, why shouldn’t all priests make this statement?
The other day Bishop Paprocki made a strong statement against Obama’s intended pro-abortion plans, but yesterday on Fox News Paprock got mushy again, saying if a Cathoilc’s primary intent wasn’t to vote for a political nominee because s/he was pro-abortion, the rules were different. I’ve read this logic before and to me it’s moral relativism.
The dilemma is that some Obama voters will simply stop coming to church rather than repent. So the Church loses the opportunity to speak to their darkened souls. But now am I being morally relativistic?
Very tough situation.
[HT: reader Charles C., daughter Daena, son Tim; photo courtesy of CBS]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
There is more detail in the endtimes church in the book of Revelation. The cold church is run by the laeity. God’s churches are led by the annointed. When the followers call all the shots, the churches go downhill just as fast as the years when the monarchies called the shots at the church.
The other day Bishop Paprocki made a strong statement against Obama’s intended pro-abortion plans, but yesterday on Fox News Paprock got mushy again, saying if a Cathoilc’s primary intent wasn’t to vote for a political nominee because s/he was pro-abortion, the rules were different. I’ve read this logic before and to me it’s moral relativism.
It’s hard to comment without knowing the exact words of Bishop Paprocki and the question of the interviewer. Depending on the question, “the rules” the Bishop refers to may in fact be “different” according to the teachings of the Church.
I don’t remember reading of the cold, but it was revealed that the lukewarm church is in trouble too.
From what I understand, a catholic can only vote for a pro-choice candidate if and only if, both candidates are pro-choice, then you have to take other considerations (traditional family, economy, healthcare, etc.) when choosing to vote for a candidate.
You can’t generalize. Just becasue someone voted for Obama does not mean they need to go to confession. I am still running into people who voted for Barack Hussein Obama and thought he was pro-life…. ugh
But people who knew his anti-life agenda and enabled his agenda by putting him in ofice are in need of catechism and reconcilliation. Not such a tough question. The job of the church is form conscience, not to make you feel good about everything you do.
So there’s no communion for McCain voters too?
McCain and Obama have both either submitted, or voted for legislation that results in tax-payer funded child killing.
While Obama is more determined than McCain to push all child killing legislation, it does not forgive either one for misrepresenting their beliefs during the campaign. Just continue knowing every politician by their fruit, not just their words.
And before you want to throw the Saddleback Church forum discussion soundbites out in defese of McCain, do your research on the bills supported by by both candidates when it comes to the life. Or, ask yourself when you heard McCain, or Obama speak out in support of Colorado’s Personhood Amendment 48, South Dakota’s Vote Yes for Life on 11 initiative, or the current Bill 3111, the Life at Conception Act before the U.S. Senate.
What’s that I hear? Crickets chirping? Not even, just the sound of silence.
Just becasue someone voted for Obama does not mean they need to go to confession. I am still running into people who voted for Barack Hussein Obama and thought he was pro-life…. ugh
A Priest on Relevant Radio(Catholic Radio) recommended the Sacrament of Reconcilliation immediately for any Catholic who voted for Obama, regardless of motivation.
The Church can do whatever they want, but if they throw out Obama voters, people who use birth control, those who support the Iraq war and the death penalty, it will be pretty lonely at Sunday Mass.
Janet, 10:03a: Yes, I tried to find a YouTube clip of the segment or something on Fox and couldn’t. I would have liked to read over what he said myself.
theonlything2fear @ 10:39 AM,
So there’s no communion for McCain voters too?
McCain and Obama have both either submitted, or voted for legislation that results in tax-payer funded child killing.
While Obama is more determined than McCain to push all child killing legislation, it does not forgive either one for misrepresenting their beliefs during the campaign. Just continue knowing every politician by their fruit, not just their word.
No, McCain voters can receive communion.
Here are the voting guidelines, for your perusal.
http://www.usccb.org/faithfulcitizenship/FCStatement.pdf
“The Church can do whatever they want, but if they throw out Obama voters, people who use birth control, those who support the Iraq war and the death penalty, it will be pretty lonely at Sunday Mass.”
I agree.
I find this incredibly ridiculous. I’m glad I’m not Catholic. I’m not sorry i voted for Obama, and if I were being bullied into “repenting” of my “sin” then you would never see me darken the door of that church ever again.
This looks like a textbook case of SoreLoseritis to me.
No, McCain voters can receive communion.
Especially since many of voted for McCain not to support McCain himself, but mostly to against Obama’s stance on abortion. In this case voting against something evil was an act of good.
JKeller,
I”m glad I’m not Catholic either. It seems like they are overreaching their boundaries here, but if they want to go that far into the personal lives, they can risk alienating as many people as they want. But then, there’s no room to complain if the numbers are down.
Ugh. It’s their choice but not bringing me anywhere closer to the Church.
The dilemma is that some Obama voters will simply stop coming to church rather than repent. So the Church loses the opportunity to speak to their darkened souls. But now am I being morally relativistic?
We need to pray for these people that their faith will sustain them. The opportunity to discuss the matter with a priest in humility is always there. It would certainly be their loss if they left the Church over such a matter. If they leave for a while and decide to return, the Sacrament of Reconciliation is always available to them.
For non-Catholics out there, a Catholic is always welcome to come to the mass (the Catholic worship service), even if they are in the state of mortal sin. They may not receive the Holy Eucharist until they receive the Sacrament of Reconcilliation. There is no moral relativism in this. This has long been the teaching of the Church.
Sunday Mass wouldn’t be lonely because it wouldn’t be full of “cafeteria catholics” who pick and choose what to agree on.
I voted for McCain because he wasn’t going to Force taxpayers to pay for abortions, force paying for overseas abortions, because he wasn’t promising signing the FOCA bill and many other reasons.
PiP, J Keller, Hal,
You may want to read the Catechism of the Catholic Church before knocking it. Who knows, you may want to join someday. That would be a blessing for us.
What I would like to know is what is the church doing about politicians such as Biden, Pelosi, Kerry, etc who consistently vote pro abortion?
Those people who are actually voting in favor of death should be held even more accountable.
Likewise with Reid who I believe is a Mormom.
And then there is that extremely deceptive Matthew 25 network that called Obama “prolife.” It was one of the most dishonest PACS I have ever come across. I’m sure the people that were running that will one day have to answer for what they did. On their web site they even take credit for helping Obama win states like Virginia and Indiana that normally vote Republican.
Actually I think Obama can thank ACORN for that, but that is another subject.
“Biden, Pelosi, Kerry, etc who consistently vote pro abortion?”
Oh, they freak out over them. Of course, not heard a lot about Rudy in NYC, or Ahnold in California getting the same treatment.
“Likewise with Reid who I believe is a Mormom.”
I think he is pro-life.
“You may want to read the Catechism of the Catholic Church before knocking it. Who knows, you may want to join someday. That would be a blessing for us.”
Maybe someday. But not right now. This kind of stuff is just too annoying.
PIP @ 11:22,
Well, you’re honest. The invitation is always there. :)
Jill,
I’ll post it if I find it!
Prayer After an Election
God of all nations,
Father of the human family,
we give you thanks for the freedom we exercise
and the many blessings of democracy we enjoy
in these United States of America.
We ask for your protection and guidance
for all who devote themselves to the common good,
working for justice and peace at home and around the world.
We lift up all our duly elected leaders and public servants,
those who will serve us as president, as legislators and judges,
those in the military and law enforcement.
Heal us from our differences and unite us, O Lord,
with a common purpose,
dedication, and commitment to achieve liberty and justice
in the years ahead for all people,
and especially those who are most vulnerable in our midst.
Amen.
Prayers excerpted from Catholic Household Blessings and Prayers revised edition (Washington, DC: United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2007). The “Prayer After an Election” by Cardinal Adam Maida, Archbishop of Detroit is used with permission.
“The Church can do whatever they want, but if they throw out Obama voters, people who use birth control, those who support the Iraq war and the death penalty, it will be pretty lonely at Sunday Mass.”
I agree.
Posted by: prettyinpink at November 14, 2008 11:01 AM
The church is a lonely place when the communion of the faithful is not based on Christocentric teaching and thinking. I want a church that serves Jesus Christ before they try to be popular. If the Catholic Church were to change her positions to keep the pews full they would self-destruct. If they maintain a Christocentric perspective then the faithful would be so filled with the Holy Spirit that people would want to join in communion.
I, for one, don’t urge the Church to change her positons to keep the pews full. I would urge those who don’t agree with the Church on issues like Obama, birth control, death penatly, war, etc, leave the Church. We cannot abide by cafeteria Catholics. The Church has should not tolerate dissent. It’s not a democracy.
Hal,
I agree with you that the Catholic Church should not change her positions to keep the pews full. Some fundamental issues, like “life” issues for example, are not changeable. I disagree however that people should leave the Cathiolic church if they disagree on issues. At least without first seearching out the answers in the Catechism. For example, you could look at the Iraq War. The Catechism contains something called the Just War Doctrine. Read it and see if you disagree with them. Birth Control is in there too. A Catholic should take a look at these social issues and why/how the church came to their position. Then, if they disagree with what is in the Catechism on Christocentric grounds they should discuss it with Pope. He does have an e-mail address you know.
I believe the Pope doesn’t think the Iraq war fits the “just war doctrine.” Anyway, I’m not a Catholic, nor a Christian, nor a believer of any kind. I shouldn’t be debating theological issues with you. I do like learning a bit about these things, but mostly, it’s above my pay grade. :)
BTW Hal. You probably actually agree with the Pope on the Iraq War.
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2008/mar/16/pope-denounces-iraq-war/
He was also against our deceision to go into it the way we did:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1895998/Pope-criticises-US-for-shunning-Iraq-diplomacy.html
Now imagine the Early Christians taking the same kind of mush position today.
They preferred death rather than deny the Faith. Of course there were plenty of turncoats, but it was the tried and true christians that stood their ground and got crucified, burnt to death, eaten by wild animals, etc. Ironically, the church GREW.
Fast forward to 2008 and we got these wimps threatening to leave the church because they practice selective mercy. Empty churches? Good, let them leave then! It’s evident they’ve been worshipping their own idols this whole time.
truthseeker @ 12:54,
Then, if they disagree with what is in the Catechism on Christocentric grounds they should discuss it with Pope. He does have an e-mail address you know.
Gotta love it! Well said, on the rest of the post too!
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
carder @ 1:07,
Now imagine the Early Christians taking the same kind of mush position today.
They preferred death rather than deny the Faith. Of course there were plenty of turncoats, but it was the tried and true christians that stood their ground and got crucified, burnt to death, eaten by wild animals, etc. Ironically, the church GREW.
Amen!
I was one of the dissenters for years and complained and left the Catholic Church. What I refused to do at first was investigate what I was complaining about. Why did the church teach certain things? I started to challenge the church by looking into these things(birth control, sex outside of marriage)and discovered the truth about what they taught and why it was good for my soul. I went to confession after 25 years away and have not looked back. I’m not an idiot or a stooge, I have not been brainwashed, I just educated myself. Most who have a problem with the teaching of the church have no idea what the church’s teaching actually is. And ya know what, if you sin and are a Catholic, the Pope will not send the Swiss guard after you.
Hal wrote-“I do like learning a bit about these things, but mostly, it’s above my pay grade”
great line
Jeff at November 14, 2008 1:21 PM
Amen, Jeff! Praise the Lord.
I am so disappointed that you all would go this far.. I now understand what type of people you are on this site.
I am one of the mothers that wrote in the other day.. and I am seriously opposed to this site after seeing the implicit judgement being shown.
You all are really proving to be not only judgemental and self righteous,but not the type of community that is going to change any minds.
Jill, as far as being a leader… your leadership has made you into a angry, judgemental and un-Christ like figure.
May the mercy of God watch over all of you..
Anon,
changing minds through implicit judgement…lol
Posted by: Anonymous at November 14, 2008 1:57 PM-
“I am so disappointed that you all would go this far.. I now understand what type of people you are on this site. May the mercy of God watch over all of you..”
Judgmental huh?
Anon,
Get things right with yourself and your actions and don’t worry so much about the “type of people” you pass implicit judgement upon just because they are on this site.
Anti-lifers should concern themselves with the judgement they bring upon themselves when they support/promote abominable agendas like abortion. And is not the judgement of man that should concern them most.
According to the latest Pew research poll 92% of people in the US say they believe in God.
According to the latest Pew research poll 92% of people in the US say they believe in God.
Posted by: truthseeker at November 14, 2008 2:12 PM
So did Thomas Jefferson, but not the divinity of Jesus.
Unless we know what they mean by “God” we can’t draw too many conclusions.
Sorry, carder, both of these paragraphs should be in italics on my post at 1:18. They were written by carder @ 1:07, not me.
Now imagine the Early Christians taking the same kind of mush position today.
They preferred death rather than deny the Faith. Of course there were plenty of turncoats, but it was the tried and true christians that stood their ground and got crucified, burnt to death, eaten by wild animals, etc. Ironically, the church GREW.
1 Corinthians 5:1-11
It is actually reported [that there is] sexual immorality among you, and such sexual immorality as is not even named among the Gentiles — that a man has his father’s wife! 2 And you are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he who has done this deed might be taken away from among you. 3 For I indeed, as absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged (as though I were present) him who has so done this deed. 4 In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when you are gathered together, along with my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, 5 deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. 6 Your glorying [is] not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump? 7 Therefore purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new lump, since you truly are unleavened. For indeed Christ, our Passover, was sacrificed for us. 8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened [bread] of sincerity and truth. 9 I wrote to you in my epistle not to keep company with sexually immoral people. 10 Yet [I] certainly [did] not [mean] with the sexually immoral people of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. 11 But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner — not even to eat with such a person.
Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump?
I like that.
Hi Anonymous.
Please pick a name, as further “anon” posts will get deleted. This rule was passed months and months ago.
I would like to line up in front of you the 48 million or so children destroyed by choice and have you repeat your humble statement.
Fr. Jay Scott Newman -> amen brother!!
The church should not comprimise the truth just to keep the ‘numbers’ up. Just proclaim the truth. Do not listen to the liberal forces who are trying water down the church and bully preists…
I truly do wish that the people like pip would make the slightest iota of effort to learn the first thing about Holy Communion before bashing the church and/or priests for saying that people in a state of mortal sin should not receive Communion.
According to St. Paul and the Bible, if you receive Communion while in a state of mortal sin, YOU ARE COMMITTING SIN. You are “eating and drinking judgement upon yourself”. A person in a state of mortal sin needs to go to Confession and have a firm sense of amendment in order to be able to go to Communion again without falling deeper into sin.
A priest who does not forbid those parishioners of his who are in a state of mortal sin from receiving the Eucharist is allowing their souls to be in serious danger of Hell.
So those of you who think that Obama voters who had full knowledge of his pro-abortion views should NOT to be told to avoid Communion until they go to the Confessional? You are essentially condemning them to burn for eternity.
The Church can do whatever they want, but if they throw out Obama voters, people who use birth control, those who support the Iraq war and the death penalty, it will be pretty lonely at Sunday Mass.
Posted by: Hal at November 14, 2008 10:53 AM
so what? the Catholic Church is not a democracy nor is it a popularity contest.
Either follow the teachings of the church or leave.
Jeff: welcome back! Many blessings!
John L @ 9:28,
A priest who does not forbid those parishioners of his who are in a state of mortal sin from receiving the Eucharist is allowing their souls to be in serious danger of Hell.
Thank you for the clarification.
“I truly do wish that the people like pip would make the slightest iota of effort to learn the first thing about Holy Communion before bashing the church and/or priests for saying that people in a state of mortal sin should not receive Communion.”
John, once again you completely miss the point. I don’t have a problem with communion practices. What I have a problem with is the idea that a vote is a mortal sin. Like, “sorry, you are going to hell, because you voted the wrong way in 2008.” Seriously. It’s just a bit, annoying. That’s why I’m not Catholic. I don’t want to put up with it, I just want to be spiritual on my own.
Appreciate the fact I’m not “polluting” your church, at least, John, before you go on tangential tirades.
I’ll put you back on mute now.
John, once again you completely miss the point. I don’t have a problem with communion practices. What I have a problem with is the idea that a vote is a mortal sin. Like, “sorry, you are going to hell, because you voted the wrong way in 2008.” Seriously. It’s just a bit, annoying. That’s why I’m not Catholic. I don’t want to put up with it, That’s why I’m not Catholic.
Appreciate the fact I’m not “polluting” your church, at least, John, before you go on tangential tirades.
John, once again you completely miss the point. I don’t have a problem with communion practices. What I have a problem with is the idea that a vote is a mortal sin. Like, “sorry, you are going to hell, because you voted the wrong way in 2008.” Seriously. It’s just a bit, annoying. That’s why I’m not Catholic. I don’t want to put up with it, I just want to be spiritual on my own.
Appreciate the fact I’m not “polluting” your church, at least, John, before you go on tangential tirades.
I’ll put you back on mute now.
Posted by: prettyinpink at November 15, 2008 1:52 AM
This from a person who perused the sins of Germans, under the Nationalist Socialist German Workers Party.
But, like a child, she writes, “I’ll put you back on mute now”.
Yep, the old trick of putting your hands over your ears and saying, I don’t hear a thing your saying.
And that line, “That’s why I’m not Catholic”, finishes off any reason for Pip to write about Catholic doctrine, except from being a practicing Catholic basher, or just a plain Jane, anti-Catholic bigot.
It’s none of your business, is it PIP?
Go float your spiritual boat, and do as you please, creating those thoughts that think your pro life, when actually your for planned, wanted life, as surely as a pro deather is.
It’s just sad that “pro-life” pip is more concerned about the church telling people that their souls are in jeopardy since they voted for the killing of children than she is about the fact that pro-abortion politicians and laws exist in the first place.
If there were no pro-abortion politicians, then it could not possibly be a mortal sin to vote for them.
“Catholic” Obama supporters were way too enthusiatic about voting for a man who is extremely pro-abortion. I supported John McCain, but only because he’s not a complete abomination like Obama. He’s still bad. He still supports some anti-life policies, and I wasn’t very happy about the choices presented to me in this election, largely because RINOs and Democrats voted in droves in the Republican primaries.
But “Catholic” Obama supporters were ecstatic about the opportunity to vote for the most pro-abortion Senator of all time. And when it came to his pro-abortion stance, they either didn’t care, or agreed with him! If that’s not mortal sin, then there’s no such thing.
Posted by: prettyinpink at November 15, 2008 1:52 AM
pip,
We don’t need you to be Ctholic. We just need you to support Democrats who are not pro-aborts. People who support tearing babies from their mother’s womb are on the path spiritual death.
“We just need you to support Democrats who are not pro-aborts.”
I do, in fact, I contributed to the campaigns of many pro-life Dems running this year.
Hal and Pretty in Pink have it right. The reason all Catholic churches will not refuse to give Holy Communion to parishioners who voted for Obama is the pews will be even emptier…. and the collection baskets as well!
The Catholic church is in decline and wants to do all it can to survive. That’s why it now turns a blind eye to such things as birth control, premarital sex and remarriage after divorce.
Note I didn’t refer to the Catholic Church as “she”. Does anyone not see the irony in doing so?
“Hal and Pretty in Pink have it right. The reason all Catholic churches will not refuse to give Holy Communion to parishioners who voted for Obama is the pews will be even emptier…. and the collection baskets as well!
The Catholic church is in decline and wants to do all it can to survive. That’s why it now turns a blind eye to such things as birth control, premarital sex and remarriage after divorce.”
The reason that the Church will not withhold communion from those who voted for Obama is that there is no precedent in canon law for doing so. By definition, voting is a private matter, and the church does not have the authority to publicly punish someone who has not committed a public sin. Canon 915 is the one that is often sited, and Archbishop Burke wrote a great article http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/holycom/denial.htm on this and how it applies. So there is no reason why they should deny it to someone for committing a private sin.
So why does this particular priest feel he has the authority to tell his parishoners they are unworthy of communion Bobby?
Well, a couple of things Virginia. As Canon 915 states, “Those upon whom the penalty of excommunication or interdict has been imposed or declared, and others who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin, are not to be admitted to holy communion.” So those who are aware of having committed grave sin without having gone top confession should not receive communion. That means THEY should not go up to the alter to receive it, not that (in general) the priest is to refuse them communion.
Now, that being said, the question is “is voting for Barak a mortal sin?” And as much as it pains me to say this, I don'[t see anything in Catholic doctrine that makes voting FOR BARAK OBAMA grave matter. Voting for someone because they support abortion is grave matter. Voting for someone because they support ESCR is grave matter. But does the church go so far as to say voting for a specific person is grave matter? I don’t see it. If someone has some documents that they think might, I”m open to seeing them. Now personally I don’t see any way a Catholic in good conscience could vote for Obama, but that is just me, and I am not the Catholic Church.
So I guess in answer to your question, Virginia, I’d have to say that I disagree with what this priest is saying. God love you.
prettyinpink said:
“That’s why I’m not Catholic. I don’t want to put up with it, I just want to be spiritual on my own.”
SPIRITUAL = NO ABSOLUTE MORAL TRUTH TO OBEY SO YOU CAN FEEL BETTER ABOUT PROMOTING/SUPPORTING EVIL
NOTE: “EVIL” IN THIS SPECIFIC CASE MEANS YOUR VOTING FOR A RADICAL PRO-ABORT AND INFANTICIDE DEFENDER LIKE BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA
FYI – MY HOME CHURCH WOULD NOT LET YOU BE PART OF OUR CHURCH IF YOU EVEN ARGUED THAT ITS OK TO VOTE FOR A TICKET AS MORALLY DEFECTIVE AND ANTI-CHRISTIAN AS OBAMA BIN BIDEN
Ezek, frankly, you scare me with your use of capitals. Seriously.
Oh Ezek, and your last FYI line says more about you and your church than it does about pretty in pink. FYI.
“So there is no reason why they should deny it to someone for committing a private sin.
Posted by: Bobby Bambino at November 15, 2008 4:30 PM”
So, you seem to understand or try to understand every person’s view, and I respect you a lot. Really.
I voted for Obama, and I am happy he won. I will pray that he doesn’t go through with any pro-choice (I think pro-abort is silly. Especially because they’re really ARE pro-abort forums… people literally want EVERY baby to be killed.) legislation.. and if he does, well… I will feel badly about it. However, there aren’t numbers to show how many lives can be saved by his health insurance plans.. how many babies can be prevented by birth control (which I totally support. I don’t care if I’m not supposed to… I mean, it stops abortions? I don’t think there will be a day when people stop having sex.) I guess I can just hope everything works out. I mean, He knows what he’s doing, right?
Josephine, you’re right about Bobby. He’s smart as heck and knows how to read and pay attention. He rocks.
Bobby @ 6:43,
The priest I heard on Relevant Radio said he’d recommend a Catholic who voted for Obama go to Confession immediately. A well-formed Catholic conscience would preclude voting for Obama. I don’t have time now to check, but didn’t the Faithful Citizenship guide from the USCCB say as much? I’m confused by your answer that you don’t think it is a grave matter. God love you.:)
I do, in fact, I contributed to the campaigns of many pro-life Dems running this year.
Posted by: prettyinpink at November 15, 2008 3:03 PM
And stop supporting radical anti-life Dems like Obama. What pro life Dem campaigns did you contribute to?
Note I didn’t refer to the Catholic Church as “she”. Does anyone not see the irony in doing so?
Posted by: Virginia K at November 15, 2008 4:00 PM
What is your point? Are you also unable to understand the concept of “mother earth”?
The reason that the Church will not withhold communion from those who voted for Obama is that there is no precedent in canon law for doing so. By definition, voting is a private matter, and the church does not have the authority to publicly punish someone who has not committed a public sin. Canon 915 is the one that is often sited, and Archbishop Burke wrote a great article http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/holycom/denial.htm on this and how it applies. So there is no reason why they should deny it to someone for committing a private sin.
Posted by: Bobby Bambino at November 15, 2008 4:30 PM
BB,
I think you got this one wrong. Enabling a pro-abort to get in a position where they can spread their agenda of death upon the public is not a private sin.
“MY HOME CHURCH WOULD NOT LET YOU BE PART OF OUR CHURCH IF YOU EVEN ARGUED THAT ITS OK TO VOTE FOR A TICKET AS MORALLY DEFECTIVE AND ANTI-CHRISTIAN AS OBAMA BIN BIDEN”
Ezek, in case you haven’t noticed, I really don’t give a bunny’s behind what your church thinks. Your exclusion game isn’t going to work. Spirituality is not a popularity contest and churches that remind me of high school cliques annoy the shit out of me.
TS,
Some of the politicians I have supported include Bobby Bright and Kathy Dahlkemper. DFLA also endorsed Parker Griffith and Steve Driehaus who also won in their states. This is very exciting news. A total of 5 picked up seats this year.
pip, could this be a setup to knock out a republican in the pro-life south?I see he received $5000 campaign donation from Planned Parenthood and $40,000 from “Emily’s List” which is a group dedicated to supporting pro-choice agendas. And why do you support him when he opposes gay marriage. I thought that was your pet-peeve against pro-lifers.
“SPIRITUAL = NO ABSOLUTE MORAL TRUTH TO OBEY SO YOU CAN FEEL BETTER ABOUT PROMOTING/SUPPORTING EVIL”
Uh, oh, you got me. I know it only counts to you if I started spouting jingoistic religious nonsense. But in reality, your definition of spiritual is limited and I could give a f**k less, really.
TS,
A southern democrat is better than a southern republican. And yes, turning the state more blue is quite the point of Dems for life. We are trying to put in more democratic seats and more specifically those with pro life stances. You’d think the title would set you off, I’m not sure why people are surprised.
Also, from what I can tell his pro-life stance is pretty solid. If there are discrepancies in his record I will sure look at it; I don’t live in alabama.
Also TS, I do plan on holding all of the pro-life dems accountable. If they don’t hold up to pro-life standards (such has opposition to FOCA) then we most definitely need to hold them accountable for their actions. However, I do believe in increasing the amount of democrats that are friendly to the unborn. As Mary said, right now they may be our closest allies.
Well I’m off to bed but would love to continue this discussion tomorrow with you! :)
Night
pip, I think the voters in the South will take care of that if he votes anti-life. PIP, do you think Planned Parenthood is pro-life?
pip, do you consider yourself to have a greater allegiance to making a state “blue” or to stopping babies from being kiled by abortion?
Josephine,
“I voted for Obama, and I am happy he won. I will pray that he doesn’t go through with any pro-choice (I think pro-abort is silly. Especially because they’re really ARE pro-abort forums… people literally want EVERY baby to be killed.) legislation.. and if he does, well… I will feel badly about it. However, there aren’t numbers to show how many lives can be saved by his health insurance plans.. how many babies can be prevented by birth control (which I totally support. I don’t care if I’m not supposed to… I mean, it stops abortions? I don’t think there will be a day when people stop having sex.) I guess I can just hope everything works out. I mean, He knows what he’s doing, right?”
Ive said it before- I hope I’m proved utterly and totally wrong about what I think Obama will do as President. I’m willing to give him a chance and see how it goes, and I can look back at all this and say how silly it was to go worrying all over nothing. Ya never know. He’s President-elect now, let’s just see where he takes us…
Janet,
“The priest I heard on Relevant Radio said he’d recommend a Catholic who voted for Obama go to Confession immediately. A well-formed Catholic conscience would preclude voting for Obama. I don’t have time now to check, but didn’t the Faithful Citizenship guide from the USCCB say as much? I’m confused by your answer that you don’t think it is a grave matter. God love you.:)”
So as far as I remember, the USCCB guide gives you principles fro voting and helps you form your conscience. But to me it seems that the situation is similar to the use of NFP. The Church gives us guidelines about when it is appropriate and when it is not as far as using NFP goes, right? There are situations where couples can legit use NFP, but there are also situations when NFP can turn into more than it is intended for, and hence be sinful. The church doesn’t say what those situations are, though; they only give guidelines. But it still can be a sin to use NFP.
That’s how I kind of understand voting. As much as it pains me, it seems that there is nothing that would specifically say “If you vote for the MORE pro-choice candidate, this is grave matter” or “if you vote for an extreme pro-choice candidate, this is grave matter.” Like I said before, if you or anyone else has something in mind, I would be glad to read it and perhaps change my mind. Does that kinda make sense? I know it sounds a little bit like I’m spouting a wishy-washy understanding of conscience, but I just don’t see where the church comes flat out and says that it is grave matter to vote for Obama or gives some other guideline that he irrefutably fits. God love you.
Hey Truthseeker,
“I think you got this one wrong. Enabling a pro-abort to get in a position where they can spread their agenda of death upon the public is not a private sin.”
All I mean by this is that this is not a sin that causes scandal (unless they are perhaps going around telling everyone). No one is supposed to know who anyone voted for, and so it is private in that sense. It’s like adultery; that is a private sin. It’s not done in the limelight, usually. But that is different than a public figure who is seen by nearly every American on television telling people he supports abortion.
On the other hand, of course, all sin whether it be public or private, affects the body of Christ. There is no such things as a “private” sin in the sense that “this sin won’t affect anyone else.” But when I mentioned private sin above, I meant it in the context of whether or not it causes scandal i.e. whether or not many people are a witness to this sin. Does the distinction make sense? God love you.
One final thought. This is somewhat of a rumor, but if true, would all but prove that the USCCB document does not say that voting for Obama would be considered grave matter. From the Laura Ingraham show:
Laura Ingraham: Here is the problem, how many of the bishops voted for Obama.
Raymond Arroyo: …The bishops I spoke to say that maybe half of their brother bishops if not more voted for Obama because they thought the symbol of Obama would overcome racism and be a great healer and unity.
So according to Arryo (who I would trust) over HALF the bishops themselves, the very same ones who wrote the voters guide, voted for Obama. Hence, they could not possibly have intended that the voters guide they put out was to say that voting for a pro-choice candidate was a mortal sin. Of course, the problem is that many bishops are cowards, and if I recall, the document is ambiguous enough to find many a way to argue that based on how you weigh certain issues, you can vote for whomever.
So that is very depressing, if true, and while I can’t see any way how voting for Obama can not be a sin, I am not God and I do not go further than his bride, the Church. And while it may in fact be a sin, it doesn’t seem that it has been DEFINED as such, and so I simply can not go beyond that.
“pip, I think the voters in the South will take care of that if he votes anti-life.”
Yup probably.
“PIP, do you think Planned Parenthood is pro-life?”
Really,w hat kind of question is that? Obviously that’s a ‘no.’
“pip, do you consider yourself to have a greater allegiance to making a state “blue” or to stopping babies from being kiled by abortion?”
I’d say we can accomplish both. Hence the name DEMOCRATS for LIFE. That means,we support democrats that are pro-life.
This really isn’t a hard concept.
“pip, do you consider yourself to have a greater allegiance to making a state “blue” or to stopping babies from being kiled by abortion?”
I’d say we can accomplish both. Hence the name DEMOCRATS for LIFE. That means,we support democrats that are pro-life.
This really isn’t a hard concept.
Posted by: pip at November 16,2008 11:45 AM
pip,
not a hard concept but I see you found it difficult enough to avoide answering my question.
“PIP, do you think Planned Parenthood is pro-life?”
Really,w hat kind of question is that? Obviously that’s a ‘no.’
Posted by: pip at November 16, 2008 11:45 AM
pip, tell me then. How could a pro-lifer” supported a prsdient who is in complete agreement with the Planned Parenthood agenda?
Truth, I think the fact that so many Catholics and other Christians voted for Obama speaks for itself.
It appears they recognized in Obama a better path to reducing the number of abortions: Reduce the demand rather than increase legislation. They also recognized other aspects of his platform that were more in tune with their own value systems. And thought he was the better candidate fro President. Is that so hard for you to understand?
Virinia,
Do you think Planned Parenthood is pro-life?
Truthseeker, I think pro-choice is pro-life. No one is against life. You’re gonna have to be more specific about what you are asking.
Do you think Planned Parenthood is being pro-life when they build abortuary fortresses throughout the US to suck babies from their mother’s womb’s in bloody pieces are pro-life?
Oh, do you mean that you want to know if I think Planned Parenthood is part of the Pro-Life movement? Well my understanding of the Pro-Life movement is that it believes life begins at conception and therefore they oppose abortion, and their strategy to date has been to make abortion illegal in an attempt to reduce or stop it. Right?
Well, no… I don’t think Planned Parenthood is part of that movement because as you said, they assist in abortions. Isn’t that obvious? Is this a trick question?
I didn’t ask you if they were part of the pro-life movement, I asked “you” if in your opinion they are pro-life.
Perhaps the question is above your pay-grade and that is why you find it to be so tricky to answer. PIP had no trouble answering a 11:45a.m. so why do you suppose you find it so difficult?
PIP, I think Virginia is just looking to attack/disagree with anything I post so her responses to my posts are usually irrational. Maybe you could help her out and explain to her why Planned Parenthood is not pro-life.
Maybe this will answer your question truthseeker. I’m sorry but you haven’t been really clear with what you are asking. I honestly thoguh you were referring to the Pro- Life movement.
It seems you are actually asking me do I think Planned Parenthood is against life or for life? Well, since they perform abortions it’s safe to assume that they do not believe that it is human at conception. So they would not see abortion as murder. Therefore I see no evidence that they are anything but pro-life, as most humans are (I say most because murderers probably wouldn’t be considered to be pro-life)
Bobby,
The priest on Relevant Radio may not have been suggesting voting for O was always a grave sin (I don’t think I heard all of the conversation); not knowing the conscience of a particular voter, I believe he implied that it would be “safer” to go to confession immediately than not. Make sense? The penance would be up to the confessor. I beg to differ that a vote for most is a private matter. Many people make it known, unfortunately when they don’t realize their choice may cause scandal. Personally, I think the Faithful Citizenship document suggests it is sinful, perhaps not gravely, to have supported O. One could also say it wasn’t very smart, but that wouldn’t be very charitable, would it? We reap what we sow – sometimes that is punishment enough.
I don’t have time now to do more research on the voting issue – I’m tired of it all to be honest. Thanks for your input.
Virginia, what species of animal are unborn babies if they are not human?
They aren’t a different species you twit! Stop the stupid questions. I’m not answering anymore dumb ones from you. Got it?
“We reap what we sow – sometimes that is punishment enough.”
Oh yes. That I most definitely know.
“I don’t have time now to do more research on the voting issue – I’m tired of it all to be honest. Thanks for your input.”
Me too, and thank you as well! God love you, Janet.
You are the one who said that it is not until birth that babies are scientifically and undebabteably human. I thought it was kind of stupid when you said that too. I was just questioning the premise you had put forth. I also thought it was really a kinda very stupid thing when you said it at 8:17. Here, read it for yourself:
********
It seems you are actually asking me do I think Planned Parenthood is against life or for life? Well, since they perform abortions it’s safe to assume that they do not believe that it is human at conception. So they would not see abortion as murder. Therefore I see no evidence that they are anything but pro-life, as most humans are (I say most because murderers probably wouldn’t be considered to be pro-life)
Posted by:Virginia K at November 16, 2008 8:17 PM
******
Now Virginia, does it look as stupid to you as it did to me?
Nope!
Well, since they perform abortions it’s safe to assume that they do not believe that it is human at conception.
Posted by:Virginia K at November 16, 2008 8:17 PM
lol… If not human then what species is it Virginia?
Virginia, you said “I see no reason that they ‘Planned Parenthood’ are anything but pro-life. Holy smokes Virginia. Does it bother you that you completely disassociate yourself from reality of 99.9999% of people who understand that Planned Parenthood kills thousands of lives every day?
Virginia, you said “I see no reason that they ‘Planned Parenthood’ are anything but pro-life.” Holy smokes Virginia. Does it bother you that you completely disassociate yourself from reality of 99.9999% of people who understand that Planned Parenthood kills thousands of lives every day?
The reason your denial of killing is bothersome is that denying that the fetus is alive is a method that Planned Parenthood uses to deceive insecure girls/women into commiting abortion. Pro-choice people do not try and deceive the woman who is considering abortion. Have you ever had an abortion? I often wonder if women with denial like yours act the way they do because they don’t want to face their own past.
You know what I am talking about. Just like you said earlier, they’ll tell an girl who is eight weeks pregnant that the baby inside is just a blob of cells.
By providing birth control, Planned Parenthood also prevents thousands of abortions, and they prevent the spread of STD’s…
Doesn’t sound like Planned Parenthood is exactly anti-life to me. They do NOT want to just give out abortions. The idea of Planned Parenthood is to prevent pregnancies, not just wait until a woman is pregnant and then terminate the pregnancy.
Josephine,
Half of all abortions are from pregnancies RESULTING FROM failed birth control.
ONE HALF!!!
By passing out birth control, PP is reducing abortions?? No, they aren’t.
HOW IN THE WORLD CAN YOU SAY PLANNED PARENTHOOD IS NOT ANTI-LIFE?? A PRO-LIFE CLINIC DOESN’T DO ABORTIONS. PERIOD.
Do you know Virginia that SOMEONE in an abortion clinic has to piece the baby back together after it is in pieces? If all of the pieces are not there the “doctor” has to keep using the vacuum, forceps etc. until all of the body parts are out. But then again some are sloppy and leave the body parts in and then you have a dead baby and a dead woman.
Let us all remember that Josephine is 19. She has grown up with the prochoice rhetoric that abortion helps women, that Planned Parenthood is there for teenagers to help them make positive life choices while having sex like using birth control and condoms and taking care of any unwanted pregnancies or STD’s that somehow “happen” in spite of all of that PROTECTION.
PP is a business. Abortion is big business.
Truthseeker, good job last night.
“By passing out birth control, PP is reducing abortions?? No, they aren’t.”
Do you have ANY idea how many MORE abortions there would be if people couldn’t get birth control from planned parenthood?? I sure know a lot of girls that would still have sex even if they weren’t on birth control, and I KNOW a lot of them wouldn’t be willing to have babies. And, I would like to see the numbers you’re talking about… where HALF of abortions are from women who are using birth control PROPERLY. Could you give me a link or something??
Do you have any idea how many more beautiful children there would be if they were welcomed into life by those willing to take responsibility for their actions?
hi, im fairly new to this blog, I was wondering if someone could explain to the concept of bodily domain? I recently came across someone arguing that abortion fell under this concept, but im not sure what it really means, I know to hide behind any concept or make any excuse to make abortion seem less is 100% wrong, im not a religious person but I see abortion for what it really is and that is murder.
also, a person commented that half of all abortions are to woman who have used contraception, that particular statistic states that 50 something % used contraception in the month they conceived, that ranges anywhere from using a condom once, using the pill or using the withdrawal method on occasion, or any other method one time in that month.
Jill,
In the section… he has a link to the diocese of Charleston website where this emasculated/ballless “monsignor” basicly has a video ambiguously teaching that Catholics can vote for whoever they want since they should vote the right way since they have had their “consciences formed” correctly over the years. Just sickening stuff.
I was not able to view the video, but read the PDF at
http://www.catholic-doc.org/
Monsignor Martin T. Laughlin, Administrator of the Charleston, South Carolina diocese wrote a letter that was vague, but I agree after reading the documents issued by the Catholic Church that a vote for Obama cannot be presumed to be a mortal sin without knowing the person’s conscience. The suggestion by Father Newman to go to confession is a good one, IMO, because the priest can counsel the penitent, and dispense the proper penance. Unfortunately, many Catholics are not regular recipients of the Sacrament of Confession so even this suggestion will not be well received by them.
With all due respect, I must also say that as a Catholic I take offense to your choice of words describing the Monsignor (I’m not sure why you put monsignor in quotes) as “emasculated/ballless”. Whether or not we agree with a priest, I believe he deserves our respect as an ordained member of the Catholic clergy. Thank you.
Josephine, I’m pretty sure I have bookmarked the link to the statistic on abortions/failed birth control, but I’ll have to look for it and get back to you when I find it… Another commenter here may have it handy.
Josephine,
Do you have ANY idea how many MORE abortions there would be if people couldn’t get birth control from planned parenthood?? I sure know a lot of girls that would still have sex even if they weren’t on birth control, and I KNOW a lot of them wouldn’t be willing to have babies.
Actually, I don’t know what the studies say. You’d probably find a wide range of estimates depending on your source. Do you have any links?
What would be so bad about having the child? I dont know many woman who regret NOT having an abortion, but how many do you think regret having the abortion?
Hi Crystal.
“I was wondering if someone could explain to the concept of bodily domain?”
The idea is the following: For the same of argument, the one who is trying to defend abortion assumes that the embryo from the moment of conception is fully human and a person, with all the exact same rights as you or me. Now, the embryo is in a position where it is “using” the woman’s body in order for survival; it is an intruder and leeching off of the woman’s body. In essence, the embryo acts as a parasite. We as human beings, have the right to defend ourselves from any intruder or anyone who is doing bodily harm to us, as the embryo does in the case of pregnancy. Hence, we are within our moral rights to remove that intruder, even if such removal results in death. For a more thorough defense of this, see the original defense of bodily ownership, Judith Jarvis Thompson’s article “A Defense of Abortion” where she makes the (in)famous violinist analogy. http://spot.colorado.edu/~heathwoo/Phil160,Fall02/thomson.htm
Very sick, I know… God love you.
Janet, 1:57p: Those weren’t my words or quotes around “monsignor,” those were the words of Quinn.
“Actually, I don’t know what the studies say. You’d probably find a wide range of estimates depending on your source. Do you have any links?”
Janet, I don’t know the answer to that myself. That was my point: no one knows. Planned Parenthood could have prevents millions of abortion. We don’t know. Do I think Planned Parenthood should stop abortions? YES. Do I think they will? KNOW.
But unless a pro-life Planned Parenthood-like organization opens up, what choice are young girls being offered? Abstinence or get pregnant? I just don’t think that will fly. I think if anything, they’ll go back to using only condoms which are NOT as effective.
This makes me sick. I have lost confidence in the organized church. Gutless. But thank you God for Fr. Pavone.
Maria,
Try not to lose hope. The Church has weathered scandals throughout Her history and will get through this one. We may be a smaller Church but hopefully stronger. At least solid bishops are starting to speak out strongly — that is good. And we have strong, holy priests like Fr. Pavone to battle evil with the Truth.
Josephine,
“Actually, I don’t know what the studies say. You’d probably find a wide range of estimates depending on your source. Do you have any links?”
Janet, I don’t know the answer to that myself. That was my point: no one knows. Planned Parenthood could have prevents millions of abortion. We don’t know. Do I think Planned Parenthood should stop abortions? YES. Do I think they will? KNOW.
Thanks for your response, but I wasn’t implying, nor do I believe that “no one knows”. You sound so sure of your statement, I thought you would have a source to support your claim. I’m sorry, but I don’t have time to get into it more today.
Jill @ 2:18,
Janet, 1:57p: Those weren’t my words or quotes around “monsignor,” those were the words of Quinn.
My apologies to you Jill. My mistake.
But how would that ever be tested? You can tell how many people would have had abortions… unless you just make up a number.
Do you want to take away birth control and find out? I sure don’t.
Josephine,
Here is what I would like. I would like husbands and fathers to cherish their wives and their daughters. Treat them with respect and love and care and make sure they know how very precious they are. Precious enough to wait for. :)
Please remember that I have “been there, done that” and have much wisdom to share with my children when it comes to what can happen when you are not given any reason to wait.
Good answer Carla. I’m pretty sick of the whole “I need sex” nonsense. No one NEEDS sex. They WANT sex. And because they need instant gratification they want birth control rather than using NFP and waiting until marriage.
Kristen,
:)
They gotta have it dontcha know and who are we as parents to stand in the way of their raging hormones? PP knows our children better than we do, silly.
Carla– I agree with you completely. I REALLY do. However… I just don’t think it will happen like that. Especially with so many single parent homes, with the divorce rates the way they are. I know it’s sad. I don’t agree with it, I just don’t think things will change. I still think it should happen, I just know it won’t happen in every family. That’s why I think there should be options.
It’s a shame there aren’t pro-life organizations like Planned Parenthood… but until someone wants to offer another option.. I just don’t see where America can afford to lose Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood doesn’t just offer birth control. They offer exams too.. married people still go there.
I just don’t know. I think it’s a no-win unless someone offers a pro-life version of Planned Parenthood.
You mean like a good doctor that has the exams women need? Prenatal care? Information on NATURAL FAMILY PLANNING? (which is NOT the Rhythm method)
Pro Life groups may have some of this information. Some are more likely to not refer women to doctors for BC or other CONTRA-ceptives, though.
Thanks Josephine.
I an raising my children to know that abortion isn’t an option.
That’s why I think there should be options
“prolife Planned Parenthood” is an oxymoron.
There are prolife organizations and there is Planned Parenthood.
The options that would be acceptable are
1. remain chaste until marriage (very doable, I assure you)
2. for pregnant unmarrieds the encouragement and support to carry the pregnancy to term either to keep the baby or
3. the support and promotion of adoption instead of the bad rap it gets today.
Since the hook-up culture was not made in a day, it will take time to repair our culture, bring back respect for women,encourage men to treat women with dignity, and women to act with dignity.
Carla, I think that’s great. I don’t plan on having children, but you never know what will happen. If I do end up with kids, they will sure as heck know adoption isn’t an option. And… well, as long as I was on the subject, I’d probably tell them lots of bad stuff about the opposite sex so they’ll stay away until they’re, I don’t know..30.. so, it’s probably best I don’t want kids. :)
since the HT is from Carder (update that is) Can you tell me what the Dominican sisters order is called. I am wondering if it is the new teaching order that my girlfriends daughter belongs to?
Josephine: why are you yet another young woman that does not want children?
Patricia, married women use birth control too.. not every couple can afford 15 children. So married couples that can’t afford kids should stop having sex? That’s not really fair.
I didn’t say anything about pro-life Planned Parenthood. I said an organization that was LIKE Planned Parenthood only pro-life. As in, they could off cheap/free birth control, offer the exams, but instead of offering abortions.. they could offer counseling and other services. What would be wrong with an organization like that??!
adoption ISN’T an option? *raises an eyebrow* So you would not (if you had children) encourage placing the child for adoption (if a crisis pregnancy occurred) so that a childless couple with a LOT of love to give, could raise the baby?
Liz– That was an unfortunate spot for me to have a typo! I meant ABORTION. I would let my child know ABORTION isn’t an option. Very unfortunate area to mistype.
Patricia– I don’t want kids because I don’t want them. I am very much in love and happy that way. I have BIG career goals, and bringing a child into this world that would have to get raised by a nanny isn’t really fair. If I got pregnant, I would keep it and raise it and make it work. I’m sure I’d fall in love with the kid. But I don’t like the idea of having kids, I don’t want them, and I’m not sure why you asked… it’s not a big deal. Oh, plus I’m just a little over 100lbs, and I’m pretty sure it would put me in EXTREME physical discomfort if I were to get pregnant.
Hey Josephine, I was just curious, that’s all. I’m not gonna run you through with a sword or anything like that! (at least not until I’m done playing with you!! ;-D)
BTW: I was 91 lbs when I had my first of four kids. Size doesn’t matter. I even had a home birth and my shortest birth was 2 hours. Sometimes petite women do VERY VERY well having kids!!
Just so you know, ok!! :-D
BTW, as a practicing Catholic I do agree with the church’s teaching that contraception is not morally licit. There are ways to effectively space children in a marriage. God does not expect all couples to have 9 children as one of my friends has done. But, certainly, many western couples could afford to have and are physically capable of having more than the 2.1 children they currently have.
Well, I’m sorry I’m snapped. I thought you were saying that in a mean way. I apologize.
And, really? You were that little and it didn’t hurt at all? I’m about 100ish pounds, and 5’1″. I’ve always heard how painful it would be if I were to get pregnant. Not necessarily the birth, but carrying the child?
I have no problem with birth control. In fact, I got on the shot three months before I left for basic, so that I wouldn’t have a period while I was in basic. I obviously wasn’t having sex, I just needed to be able to do everything as well as the boys (I’m extremely competitive!) and I didn’t need that little burden once a month.
Josephine, Half of all abortions are from pregnancies RESULTING FROM failed birth control.
Since you asked for a source of the statistic I gave here goes:
Guttmacher Institute says 54% of abortions occurred among the group of women who were using contraceptives the month they became pregnant. Whether the failure was due to their misuse of BC or “bad luck”, the fact is that they were using the BC the month they became pregnant.
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/sfaa/illinois.html
yes I just posted this on the most recent Jill post Janet!
Thanks for the link.
of course it hurt Josephine! I was having a baby. But that’s the way it just is!
I learned to take care of myself and I found a great doctor and had a doula.
Patricia,
I don’t know which Dominican community was there with Fr. Newman. I understand that his parish has a school, so my guess is as good as yours.
That email was from a friend of a friend of a friend who has a daughter that attends that parish. Amazing.
thank-you Carder.
Virginia, the argument that people usually use is not that it’s not “human” but not a “person.” Because denying that its a human assumes that its…well…not human. What is it, then?
That it isn’t a person is a dangerous thing to presume though. I’m not sure I wanna get into it, I just wrote a paper about it.
Nice try, Somg. You’re banned, remember?
Posted by: Patricia at November 17, 2008 5:32 PM
Hmm. I still don’t have any intention of having kids. I just don’t want ’em. I was just interested ’cause I don’t know many people as small as me. :) Thanks for the info. I was curious.
“LifeNews.com is reporting the Charleston diocese has “rebuked” Fr. Newman.”
There should be a new bumper sticker:
YOU CAN BE CATHOLIC AND PRO-ABORTION
no wonder there are so many pro-abort catholic politicians!
emasculated/ballless “monsignor”. Sorry Janet, it’s fits.
Hey Josephine,
For the record, I’m five feet and pushed out my little 10 pounder without meds. The midwife was scared/impressed!
The cool thing, is that once that baby was out, I INSTANTLY forgot the pain I went through.
Just my eight cents.
Ok. I can’t resist. All 4 of my 7-8 pounders without drugs.
But I am waaaaaay taller at 5’4. :)
DALLAS, Texas (Zenit.org) – Voting for a pro-abortion candidate when there is an alternative option is to cooperate in evil, and therefore morally impermissible, clarified two Texas bishops.
In a message made available to the faithful during this Respect Life month, bishops Kevin Farrell of Dallas and Kevin Vann of Fort Worth seek to “dispel any confusion or misunderstanding that may be present among you concerning the teaching contained in” the U.S. bishops document on faithful citizenship.
“‘Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship’ clearly teaches that not all issues have the same moral equivalence,” the bishops explained. “Some issues involve ‘intrinsic evils’; that is, they can never under any circumstance or condition be morally justified. Preeminent among these intrinsic evils are legalized abortion, the promotion of same-sex unions and ‘marriages,’ repression of religious liberty, as well as public policies permitting euthanasia, racial discrimination or destructive human embryonic stem cell research.”
Thus, bishops Farrell and Vann stated, “we cannot make more clear the seriousness of the overriding issue of abortion — while not the ‘only issue’– it is the defining moral issue, not only today, but of the last 35 years. […] This electoral cycle affords us an opportunity to promote the culture of life in our nation.
“As Catholics we are morally obligated to pray, to act and to vote to abolish the evil of abortion in America, limiting it as much as we can until it is finally abolished.”
Janet,
Does this help? I’m tired of it too but there still seems to be some confusion, although it is a little late now. :l
carder: a 10 lb baby!
My biggest was 8lbs 7oz and she was tough but born in two hours!
I think you deserve a medal!
Somg was back! Wow wish I hadn’t missed the scoundrel!
Eileen #2,
Thank you. You know I thought I understood before the election, it’s been pretty cut and dried, but there’s been so much “he said, she said” about this issue since the election, my brain needs a break.
I think the Bishops need to stop stating their interpretations of the Faithful Citizenship Document and just quote from the actual text! If it’s still confusing, then they should start at square one. We don’t paraphrase legal statutes or other writings of such importance so why this??
@Patricia, Carder, and Carla: My mom is 5’7″ and she had a 10 pound 4 oz, 21″ baby…my youngest brother- without pain meds. She had to be induced because he was getting HUGE.
She had me and my other younger brother w/o pain meds too- however we were 7 pounders because she couldn’t eat dairy during her pregnancy with us because it had too much fat in it and she had severe gall bladder problems during her pregnancy. Had she not had the gall bladder issues, we probably would have been over 10lbs too.
The poor, poor woman.
That poor, poor woman has beautiful children to show for the pain of childbirth!! :)
For the record, I’m five feet and pushed out my little 10 pounder without meds.
[shudder] Wow, Carder….
Do you want to take away birth control and find out? I sure don’t.
Posted by: Josephine at November 17, 2008 2:43 PM
I am married eighteen years, never used birth control and never got my wife pregnant when I wasn’t trying. Real men use self-control, not birth control. :)
The priest, bishops, and as far as I know everyone at Relevant Radio and every other Catholic media. NEVER TOLD ANYONE NOT TO VOTE FOR OBAMA. They uses the 501c3 preserving weasel words about the greater importance of certain issues, and conscience forming and non-negotiables
Has Rick Santorum gone to confession over his support of Spectre in ’04? He has spoken at Catholic conferences since then and I haven’t seen his admission of any mortal sin. Should he receive communion? You want to publicly do examinations of conscience – start here or explain why Joe Pewsitter should be denied for an uninformed private vote and Santorum shouldn’t be denied for a public proclimation with no evidence of repentance?.
The Priest should go to confession for NOT telling his flock in clear and specific terms (“Voting for Obama would be a mortal sin because…”). Only a mortal sin (only that would prevent communion) at several masses in the weeks preceeding. There have been more homilies on the actual mortal sin of artificial contraception – and when was the last time you heard it as a major point of a homily.
The Catholic church wants to have it both ways. They want to be a “government approved charity”, yet when they self-censor the gospel to government standards, they then want their flock to be responsible for being confused at their uncertain trumpet.
Back before the poor parishioners were taxed to the point deductions were important, Priests would be VERY clear.
Tax deductibility and exemptions trump the Gospel of Life. Politics and Economics are more important than the Life issues – and the Bishops and Priests are leading by their example.
Perhaps President Obama will finally pry their greedy fingers from their government subsidy and they will be truly free to proclaim the full gospel clearly instead of trying to word confusing tracts properly to keep their deduction but explain that something involving the government – besides comprimising with it – is sinful.
Truthseeker, I commend you: To admit that you have been married 18 years , never used birth control and never got your wife pregnant without trying means that either your fertility or sex-drive is abnormally low. Not too many men would share that. Kudos
Has Rick Santorum gone to confession over his support of Spectre in ’04?
I don’t know, but whew – that guy is seriously creepy.
OMG! He’s an embarrassment.
Truthseeker, I commend you: To admit that you have been married 18 years , never used birth control and never got your wife pregnant without trying means that either your fertility or sex-drive is abnormally low. Not too many men would share that. Kudos
Posted by: Virginia at November 19, 2008 3:01 PM
Thanks for the kudos but you are mistaken on both the sex-drive and the fertility.