How will the Pres. back out of the N.D. mess?

[quiet52]

People who are this hostile towards our President actually frighten me.
He is not a media hound, he has learned a way to go directly to the people and to sidestep the media.

Those of us who are enraged by this scandal are hostile toward what President Obama stands for and what he wants to impose upon the nation when it comes to sanctity of life issues. We are hostile about the decision of the university president, and to the university trustees who support his decision. There is no doubt Obama is relying upon the media to highlight that he and Catholics are buddies.

Jesus was also hostile to sin. He exhorted us to speak up, not remain silent, about sin. We’re not to merely “roll over” for the sake of peace – that is false peace. The truth of Christ is like a sword. Those of us speaking against this Notre Dame scandal believe that the university administration has failed to yield the sword of truth as it should do as a Catholic institution.

Hating the sin is not the same thing as hating the sinner.

 

[Contarini]

In what way has the tolerance for pro abortion individuals by perhaps over 50% of Catholics (including those that voted for bo. ) in the past 45 years strengthened the Pro Life agenda?

That’s not what I’m talking about, but in fact I don’t think that taking a harder line would have been more politically effective. It might have been the right thing to do as a matter of principle.

Bo is the most abortion, POTUS who has ever existed. A school having Catholic values would not have invited him.

I think that’s too strong, but I am disappointed by this decision of ND. It smacks of pandering to power. People should be given honorary degrees and invited to speak for reasons other than the fact that they are popular or powerful.

TOLERANCE IS FOR THE PERSON WITH NO CONVICTIONS

This is a destructive falsehood which is plausible because of two groups of people: those like yourself who have no convictions and are intolerant, and those who are tolerant and have no convictions. It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy: as long as people set these two things against each other, of course they will be practiced by different people.

The only tolerance that is morally valuable is the tolerance practiced by those who have convictions. And the only convictions that gain moral credibility are those that are expressed with tolerance.

Edwin

 

[elts1956]

That’s not what I’m talking about, but in fact I don’t think that taking a harder line would have been more politically effective. It might have been the right thing to do as a matter of principle.

I think that’s too strong, but I am disappointed by this decision of ND. It smacks of pandering to power. People should be given honorary degrees and invited to speak for reasons other than the fact that they are popular or powerful.

This is a destructive falsehood which is plausible because of two groups of people: those like yourself who have no convictions and are intolerant, and those who are tolerant and have no convictions. It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy: as long as people set these two things against each other, of course they will be practiced by different people.

The only tolerance that is morally valuable is the tolerance practiced by those who have convictions. And the only convictions that gain moral credibility are those that are expressed with tolerance.

Edwin

Depends on the subject. Abortion is intolerable and of that I have convictions.

 

[Sean_Boyle]

There has to be a better way to promote the best interests of the unborn. Too many folks are turned off by what is being labeled at straight talk.

I’m sure many things like this were said about the Jews during WW2 and about slavery in this country over a century ago. “This sort of talk turns many folks off” was defense for the oppressors not the oppressed, and cause the human rights abuses in both cases to continue long after they should have. I’m also guessing that the “soft sell” never worked then because both instances ended because a war was fought for all humanity to end both of those practices.

Yes all three are very related. The Holocaust and slavery both came about because someone didn’t want to view a group of human beings as human, which is at the heart of the matter in abortion, now.

Pres. Obama doesn’t recognize the unborn as humans in fact he sees them as a punishment for a poor decision in some cases, according to his own words. Serious character flaw regardless of your polictical leanings!