Amb. Keyes arrested at Notre Dame

[Ana]

Hmm, are you really bi-racial Ana?

Because saying you’re half white and Puerto rican doesn’t really identify you racially since Puerto Rican is not a race, but an ethnicity. Puerto Ricans are a mix of races and cultures. The European, African and Taino.

To break it down a Puerto Rican can be of European(Spanish, French, Irish, German, Italian, ), West African, or even Chinese decent. They can be a mix of European and African, European and European( as non Spanish Europeans assimilated into the Spanish culture when they immigrated to Puerto Rico), European and Taino, African and Taino, or the what most PRicans claim European African and Taino.

Just something to ponder.
…yeah I know, I’m being a nerd. Sorry.


Now back to you regularly scheduled thread.
:dancing:

Hi RLT! I am familiar with the roots of PR, and yes I do feel that I am *really *biracial. But I tend to simplify things for myself and those I am speaking with. It may have been more accurate to say, Hispanic/Caucasion, instead of specifically Puerto Rican (a true mongrel).

I really myself do not think about race so much for me because I am simply tan
and can kind of blend in with whoever, being seen as a light skinned sister or even a tan Caucasion.

When dealing with filling out forms, I am forced to distinguish between Caucasion (Non Hispanic), or Hispanic (Non Caucasion). I feel with the “Non Hispanic” or “Non Caucasion” in parentheses, that I cannot choose that Caucasion without actively denying my Hispanic, and cannot put Hispanic without actively denying my Caucasion. So, if there is Biracial, I check that and if not I put Other.

All of the Puerto Ricans I have encountered in my life native and American born, typically refer to themselves as Puerto Rican and if identifying race claim Hispanic. Although there are a few that claim Taino, they are a sub set of Puerto Rican culture claiming they are a remnant of the original Island natives, before the introduction of the other races.

NERD PRIDE!!

God bless.

 

[Ana]

First off, I’m very glad to hear that you did have a change of heart about the issue. My problem isn’t with adults or even some mature teens from seeing such imagery, but with children seeing it. Parents have a right to spare their younger children from adult issues such as the details sexual reproduction until those children’s minds are more formed.

Hi Harvard!

We were discussing this issue on a former thread. I hope you don’t mind if I copy/paste my response on the issue you brought up concerning these graphic images and children.

I know of a few people personally whose views changed because of these visual images.

Consent … hmm… I have 4 young children. I have mixed feelings about the exposure to children and once had to deal with it in reality, when driving home there was a gathering along the side of the road with some very graphic pictures.

I did feel that I was surprised and would have liked a moment to prepare. My youngest was only three. But since it was already done, we TALKED. They had already known about abortion, being introduced to it in the form of mini crosses on our parish lawn during past pro-life weeks. My daughter (then four) nominated herself caretaker, and every morning after dropping off my son at school, would have me stop so she could get out and set upright the crosses that had fallen over. Then she would kneel in the middle of the cross strewn field and pray. Cars would slow down because the image was so striking. This little girl alone amidst the crosses kneeling with her hands folded in prayer. Even now, almost five years later. I must pause and cry just remembering.

But I digress … back to our surprise visual display. Like I said … we TALKED.
My children were shocked, but I can’t say they were traumatized or I would be lying. Moreover it strenghened their already formed convictions, and now 2-3 years later … I am pleasantly surprised by my children’s frequent entreats to pray the Rosary outside of our local abortion mill. Most kids beg for candy.

I know as a parent, our desire is to shield our children from danger, from evil. BUT danger and evil is in the world, better to teach them and guide them through it. We have nothing to fear from the truth, even if the truth is ugly. We can trust that God will bring it to the good of those who love Him. Maybe not to the ones who don’t, but who’s fault is that?

 

[peggytas]

If no one has pointed this out as yet, please recall that the president referred to himself as a mutt when discussing what kind of a dog the children would get. He said something like should be a mutt like me.

I am embarrassed that Mr. Keyes was arrested at Notre Dame. Just does more to enable pro death catholics to persist in their delusions of right conscience and the world to view us more as hypocrites or fanatics. We should not be surprised. The Lord did not promise us a rose garden, but a Garden of Gesthemane.

 

[juliamajor]

I think it is important to talk about how the general public is perceiving the arrest of Keyes. The “Catholic church” is being perceived as totally hypocritical, and hypocrital (lying) on the issue of life, an issue about which they have ostensibly been the moral leader in showing and telling “the world” the right way.

I think Keyes is a brilliant orator and probably a brilliant political strategist. I have learned not to vote for candidates because of their perceived bold and righteous stance on important issues and not to be impressed with people who have great oratory skills. Keyes ran for president in California as the American Independent Party (or something like that) candidate, an action which effectively killed Chuck Baldwin’s chances in California. To me, for the issue of pro-life, that was a sneaky injurious thing for Keyes to do.

Notre Dame has not been a “Catholic university” for many many decades. The “Catholic church” in the USA has not been “Catholic” for many decades.

Yes, legally, Notre Dame administration can do what they did to Alan Keyes, but Notre Dame and “the church” are only digging their graves even deeper.

The net effect of Keyes’ action, regardless of his motives or modus operandi, was to put “the church” and “Notre Dame” down. To me, “the church” and “Notre Dame” seriously need major public chastisement, and Alan Keyes accomplished that. For that, I say a big “thank you, Dr. Keyes.”

The church has been promoting one world government, which is by its nature, a death and slavery system for all but the world’s ruling elites. That is a mortal sin in my book.

The Catholic church has become politically correct and conformed to this corrupt world system, in stark defiance and disobedience to the One Who said He is Truth.

Dr. Keyes has exposed the truth about Notre Dame and the hypocrisy of the Roman Catholic church.

And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them. For it is shameful even to speak of those things which are done by them in secret. But all things that are exposed are made manifest by the light, for whatever makes manifest is light. Therefore He says: “Awake, you who sleep, Arise from the dead, And Christ will give you light.”

Ephesians 5:11-14

Oh get off your sanctimonious high horse with your pious quotations…I love it when 'Christians " denounce each other. more fuel for atheists because we don’t love each other as we say we do. Hypocrites-we say we love but we don’t. It’s obvious you are Archie.Archie Bunker , that is!In fighting among christians of all kinds only adds fuel to the fire of atheism and agnosticism- you just added a little more tinder to it. Congratulations for making a discussion about Notre Dame into a anti- catholic hate fest.You must be so proud! Does your halo ever get in way of you getting through a door?
One world Government? you really must get away from those conspiracy sites- they’ll melt your brain.
Proverbs10:12,14,18,19,21

 

[rlg94086]

Oh get off your sanctimonious high horse with your pious quotations…I love it when 'Christians " denounce each other. more fuel for atheists because we don’t love each other as we say we do. Hypocrites-we say we love but we don’t. It’s obvious you are Archie.Archie Bunker , that is!In fighting among christians of all kinds only adds fuel to the fire of atheism and agnosticism- you just added a little more tinder to it. Congratulations for making a discussion about Notre Dame into a anti- catholic hate fest.You must be so proud! Does your halo ever get in way of you getting through a door?
One world Government? you really must get away from those conspiracy sites- they’ll melt your brain.
Proverbs10:12,14,18,19,21

Yes…um…thank you for that example of Christians not denouncing each other and instead posting loving, fraternal correction.

 

[juliamajor]

Yes…um…thank you for that example of Christians not denouncing each other and instead posting loving, fraternal correction.

Your welcome! Gal2:11-14

 

[stuartsfeather]

I think it is important to talk about how the general public is perceiving the arrest of Keyes. The “Catholic church” is being perceived as totally hypocritical, and hypocrital (lying) on the issue of life, an issue about which they have ostensibly been the moral leader in showing and telling “the world” the right way.

I think Keyes is a brilliant orator and probably a brilliant political strategist. I have learned not to vote for candidates because of their perceived bold and righteous stance on important issues and not to be impressed with people who have great oratory skills. Keyes ran for president in California as the American Independent Party (or something like that) candidate, an action which effectively killed Chuck Baldwin’s chances in California. To me, for the issue of pro-life, that was a sneaky injurious thing for Keyes to do.

Notre Dame has not been a “Catholic university” for many many decades. The “Catholic church” in the USA has not been “Catholic” for many decades.

Yes, legally, Notre Dame administration can do what they did to Alan Keyes, but Notre Dame and “the church” are only digging their graves even deeper.

The net effect of Keyes’ action, regardless of his motives or modus operandi, was to put “the church” and “Notre Dame” down. To me, “the church” and “Notre Dame” seriously need major public chastisement, and Alan Keyes accomplished that. For that, I say a big “thank you, Dr. Keyes.”

The church has been promoting one world government, which is by its nature, a death and slavery system for all but the world’s ruling elites. That is a mortal sin in my book.

The Catholic church has become politically correct and conformed to this corrupt world system, in stark defiance and disobedience to the One Who said He is Truth.

Dr. Keyes has exposed the truth about Notre Dame and the hypocrisy of the Roman Catholic church.

And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them. For it is shameful even to speak of those things which are done by them in secret. But all things that are exposed are made manifest by the light, for whatever makes manifest is light. Therefore He says: “Awake, you who sleep, Arise from the dead, And Christ will give you light.”

Ephesians 5:11-14

Thank you Archie for shinning the LIGHT on the true problem here in this ND story.

It appears that this is your first post and that you do not identify yourself as Catholic, but more importantly as CHRISTIAN and in my opinion you chose the perfect subject. Speaking only for myself as a Roman Catholic, I appreciate your honesty and evaluation of our Catholic problem of contradictions between what we profess as our faith and what we allow our publically very visable institutions and ordained officials to espose to the world as acceptable.

It does appear to the non-catholic world that our church and a great portion of it’s leaders have sided with the one world policies of political correctness. It also seems that we the Roman Catholic Church have decided to not “fight the good fight” as unitedly as we did in decades past.

Oh dear God! I pray for a total revival of your church founded by our Lord Jesus through the Holy apostles headed by Blessed Saint Peter.

Fellow catholics take note that like the observation of a little child, this fellow Christian looking from without has given us a message as prophetic as if it had been delivered by Blessed Saint Gabriel himself. We best take heed and pick up the gaunlet thrown down by those who would denigrate and destroy us from within and without. The best news is that we know what our Lord said , that his church shall never be destroyed. However I personally beleive that he meant for us to be led by the Holy Spirit to fight for our church even if to the death of us individually, taking as inspiration the actions of those such as Saint Sebastion ,who after being shot full of arrows for defending the faith and left for dead, was nursed back to health and then went straightway to stop the chariot of the Emperor of Rome and called the “bum” out, right to his face for exactly what he was (my discription here) “A SINNFUL, HELLBOUND KILLER OF INNOCENT HUMAN BEINGS”. The Emperor immediately had Saint Sebastian stoned to death, but until we get that same enthusiasm for our church we will continue rightfully to be laughed at and scorned by non-catholics for the spineless creatures we are. Words without action are just an exhaust of used up gas.

Stuartsfeather

 

[Timbothefiveth]

Why is Keys being arrested? Will he be charged?Just goes to show you what the pro-abortion crowd means when they say “tolerant”.

 

[Archie]

I was raised as a Catholic and attended Ursuline Academy K through 12. I am no longer a practicing Catholic. I have not thrown out the baby with the bath water.

I want to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and that is what I did in my posting.

Calling people “conspiracy theorists” is very very old and weak. Research the word “conspiracy” in the scriptures.

Here are a few facts about Reverent Theordor Hesburgh, president of Notre Dame from 1952 to 1987.
1986—Rockefeller Foundation gives grants of $6.3 million to various population programs. (To the Rockefellers, “population programs” means forced abortions, genocide, and eugenics and trading food to starving women in exchange for sterilization procedure.) Rev. Theodore Hesburgh, a Catholic priest and president of the University of Notre Dame, has served as chairman of the foundation’s board of trustees from 1977 to 1982.

---

---

Concerning Catholics, in the mid-1960s the Rockefeller plan included trying to influence Pope Paul VI about the church’s opposition to IUDs. In 1972 David Rockefeller named Rev. Theodore Hesburgh (president of the University of Notre Dame) to the board of Chase Manhattan Bank, and from 1977 to 1982 Rev. Hesburgh was chairman of the Rockefeller Foundation.

despatch.cth.com.au/Books_D/Suter_Moyes.htm

---

8.PLANETARY CITIZENS
Suter quotes from members of “The Planetary Citizens”, who are they?
Cumbey’s "HIDDEN DANGERS OF THE RAINBOW":
"Planetary citizens enjoys the support of many and varied prominent personages from about the globe. David Spangler sits on its board of directors. Donald Keys, another individual publicly associated with Findhorn Foundation was a founder along with NORMAN COUSINS, the head of the invitor committee for the World Council of Wise Persons. U Thant was also involved in the original organizational work. Theodore Hesburgh of Notre Dame University and Peter Caddy, the founder of Findhorn Foundation, are also connected as committee chairmen. According to a description of Planetary Citizens in `New Age Politics’ by Mark Satin, their purpose is to aid the " World Servers everywhere." Since the purpose of the World Servers is to serve as the vanguard for the "reappearance
***of Christ" (not Jesus, according to this crew), it is not hard to figure that the purpose of Planetary Citizens, by extension, must be the same." ***[pg 196]

 

[KathleenElsie]

Who said anything about candy-coating? If you can responsibly distribute graphic pamphlets to adults, by all means do so.

Just because the abortion battle is a difficult one doesn’t mean you should cut corners and put our children’s welfare in jeopardy.

You mean like the welfare of those being murdered. There welfare is in jeopardy. Seeing the pictures of an aborted baby does not endanger the welfare of a child. If graphic images did so then TV would be illegal and banned.

Do right, period. Not wrong for right’s sake.

Distribution of pamphlets is like throwing money into a bottomless pit. The garbage cans at the end of the block are lined with them never opened.

 

[rlg94086]

Your welcome! Gal2:11-14

So, now you are saying Archie is the pope and you are St. Paul?

You can’t have it both ways juliamajor. Archie could cite the same passage in defense of his comments. Which is it? Do you think Christians should not denounce each other, or do you think Christians should?

 

[Insight]

1986—Rockefeller Foundation gives grants of $6.3 million to various population programs. (To the Rockefellers, “population programs” means forced abortions, genocide, and eugenics and trading food to starving women in exchange for sterilization procedure.) Rev. Theodore Hesburgh, a Catholic priest and president of the University of Notre Dame, has served as chairman of the foundation’s board of trustees from 1977 to 1982.

Concerning Catholics, in the mid-1960s the Rockefeller plan included trying to influence Pope Paul VI about the church’s opposition to IUDs. In 1972 David Rockefeller named Rev. Theodore Hesburgh (president of the University of Notre Dame) to the board of Chase Manhattan Bank, and from 1977 to 1982 Rev. Hesburgh was chairman of the Rockefeller Foundation.

Thanks Archie, that’s some interesting information you dug up. Although Notre Dame is way out of line, I do think the Catholic Church is trying to reel them in.

God Bless

 

[Havard]

Hi Kathleen,

I agree that television has certainly gone in a bad direction, but we also now have television ratings systems and parental controls. Plus there’s always the option of turning the tv off altogether, and reading with our children. I agree that children can be inundated with graphic images in this society, but I don’t believe we should just throw up our hands and let it happen.

 

[Ana]

Norwegian, Your siggie made me crack up!! Especially when I scrolled back to my post to you (#100) and I saw that I did exactly what your siggie said not to, and yes I speeled Havard incorrectly.

 

[Havard]

Hi Ana, no worries, I’m used to people misreading it. I just put the sig in because I don’t want people to get the wrong idea and think I’m trying to come off as some Ivy League poseur.

I’m sorry I didn’t see your response to me before, and I agree with pretty much everything you said. I’m sorry if I’m giving people the impression that I don’t have the stomach to look at the truth of abortion, or to show that to others - far from it. My only point is that I believe we should keep children in mind, and do our best not to expose them to things they are not ready for.

 

[Ana]

Hi Ana, no worries, I’m used to people misreading it. I just put the sig in because I don’t want people to get the wrong idea and think I’m trying to come off as some Ivy League poseur.

I’m sorry I didn’t see your response to me before, and I agree with pretty much everything you said. I’m sorry if I’m giving people the impression that I don’t have the stomach to look at the truth of abortion, or to show that to others - far from it. My only point is that I believe we should keep children in mind, and do our best not to expose them to things they are not ready for.

Your point in keeping children in mind IS what I was addressing, not your stomach for it. My children at the time of their exposure were ages 3, 7 and 8. They were not traumatized, I would be lying if I said they were. They were affected, yes. They were saddened, yes. But they were already saddened about the realities of abortion, and theexposure to the graphic images, (though I was unprepared for it) only served to strengthen their already formed convictions. I can see where they may be shocking to a child that has never heard of the concept of abortion. My children have been drilled on the sanctity of life since birth, and found out that some mothers find doctors to help them say NO to life. They were introduced to the concept through the mini cross cemetary in our Church, which I think is a nice and gentle way to introduce the reality of abortion to a young child WHO ASKS. I can see a child being shocked, but only one who has been either shielded from the whole concept of abortion, or lied to about the realities of it being an actual baby. Then whose fault is that?

 

[Ridgerunner]

Maybe Alan Keyes really did perform a service for the Church.

I, for one, did not favor his plan to protest and get arrested. It seemed a bit “drama queen” to me when I first heard about it, and I thought “so, what does he really intend to accomplish by this. People will just think him silly.”

And so people have, or worse. Keyes goes in there with the baby stroller, peacefully, and duly gets arrested. He’ll get charged with trespass and pay a fine or spend maybe a night in the can; perhaps more and perhaps both. In any event, he didn’t miss the cuffs and the ride to the PD and the booking and the bonding out and all that.

So, what’s the point?

Well, I, at least, have come to admire the man for it. It was a futile gesture and he’ll get punished for it. But in the Culture of Death that ND has decided, at least on this occasion, to endorse, what gesture is NOT futile? What action does NOT seem like a swim upstream, worthy of derision? Maybe there are others, besides me, who Keyes has touched.

All this talk of “seemliness” reminds me of something Chesterton once said. It’s not precisely on target in its terms, but it does cause me to regard “seemliness” in some things as not necessarily worthy of high regard. It goes something like this:

“The Catholic Church is for saints and sinners. For the merely respectable, the Anglican Church will do.”

“Respectable”. “Seemly”. How far apart in meaning are those words? In some sense, Keyes, in this protest is a sinner; having broken the law when it wasn’t absolutely essential to do it. Is he a saint? I don’t know, but he sure didn’t shrink from, what to most of us, including many in here, is making a “fool” of himself and suffering indignity in front of everyone, (including posters in here, and perhaps not a few ND students) for the sake of babies he’ll never see, and not one of which is his own.

I am not an Alan Keyes person. Never have been. But I’m liking him more and more as this thread progresses, and I’m sorely put to wonder whether more of us should be doing “unseemly” things.

 

[Havard]

Ana, you sound like a great parent, and your children are truly blessed to have you. I will keep your experience in mind, but I’m still not certain that every child will have the same reactions. I think it’s quite likely that it’s your good parenting that provided a framework for them to wrap their developing minds around the issue more maturely than would otherwise.

But what happens if children don’t have that framework? Sadly, I think the ones that do are in a very small minority.

 

[KathleenElsie]

Your point in keeping children in mind IS what I was addressing, not your stomach for it. My children at the time of their exposure were ages 3, 7 and 8. They were not traumatized, I would be lying if I said they were. They were affected, yes. They were saddened, yes. But they were already saddened about the realities of abortion, and theexposure to the graphic images, (though I was unprepared for it) only served to strengthen their already formed convictions. I can see where they may be shocking to a child that has never heard of the concept of abortion. My children have been drilled on the sanctity of life since birth, and found out that some mothers find doctors to help them say NO to life. They were introduced to the concept through the mini cross cemetary in our Church, which I think is a nice and gentle way to introduce the reality of abortion to a young child WHO ASKS. I can see a child being shocked, but only one who has been either shielded from the whole concept of abortion, or lied to about the realities of it being an actual baby. Then whose fault is that?

Good post. IMHO the public school mentality is lie to the kids when you can and hide the information when you can’t lie.

 

[Bennie_P]

Maybe Alan Keyes really did perform a service for the Church.

I, for one, did not favor his plan to protest and get arrested. It seemed a bit “drama queen” to me when I first heard about it, and I thought “so, what does he really intend to accomplish by this. People will just think him silly.”

And so people have, or worse. Keyes goes in there with the baby stroller, peacefully, and duly gets arrested. He’ll get charged with trespass and pay a fine or spend maybe a night in the can; perhaps more and perhaps both. In any event, he didn’t miss the cuffs and the ride to the PD and the booking and the bonding out and all that.

So, what’s the point?

Well, I, at least, have come to admire the man for it. It was a futile gesture and he’ll get punished for it. But in the Culture of Death that ND has decided, at least on this occasion, to endorse, what gesture is NOT futile? What action does NOT seem like a swim upstream, worthy of derision? Maybe there are others, besides me, who Keyes has touched.

All this talk of “seemliness” reminds me of something Chesterton once said. It’s not precisely on target in its terms, but it does cause me to regard “seemliness” in some things as not necessarily worthy of high regard. It goes something like this:

“The Catholic Church is for saints and sinners. For the merely respectable, the Anglican Church will do.”

“Respectable”. “Seemly”. How far apart in meaning are those words? In some sense, Keyes, in this protest is a sinner; having broken the law when it wasn’t absolutely essential to do it. Is he a saint? I don’t know, but he sure didn’t shrink from, what to most of us, including many in here, is making a “fool” of himself and suffering indignity in front of everyone, (including posters in here, and perhaps not a few ND students) for the sake of babies he’ll never see, and not one of which is his own.

I am not an Alan Keyes person. Never have been. But I’m liking him more and more as this thread progresses, and I’m sorely put to wonder whether more of us should be doing “unseemly” things.

Myself, I cannot handle to look at the pictures, but I think they do work. Would I protest using Randle’s and Keyes’ tatics, mabe not, I like kneeling before the abortion clinics and praying, or silently holding signs in protest, but do I support the other tactics? yes, why? They work and the public needs to see the truth, the bloody truth.

http://www.impiousdigest.com/hitler-and-sanger.jpg