Nuns get involved in the battle for the White House

[Yerusalyim]

When the average age stops, it won’t matter. These women are a dying breed. They’re the Corvair, or Beta-max of religious orders.

They have made themselves an irrelevant and largely unrespected group.

 

[CMatt25]

Hopefully Catholics and all will follow Peter’s example and not be like the rest. That same opportunity is open to you, to come back home where you belong.

No idea what this means.

 

[CMatt25]

And so was Jesus.

I only know I don’t believe Jesus would have endorsed today’s Republican economic policy. This is where I believe Sister Simone gets it.

 

[Nimzovik]

That is your opinion. In mine, the HHS has the potential both to help and to hurt and it is up to the people to whom it applies to make the choice for life or against it.

Easing the burden of health insurance (a major issue for many parents and caregivers) can only ease the concerns over ability to provide for a child - a common contributor to decisions for abortion - particularly in families who already have sick kids or a history of hereditary illness. **On the other hand, making it easier to pay for an abortion could have the opposite effect, making the choice against life an easier one. Ultimately, people motivated by financial concerns will generally find a way to pay for an abortion regardless. So from my viewpoint the potential benefits outweigh the risk. **

You may not agree, but I’m not clear on which point you think I’ve missed.

Bolding Mine:

Oh yes? So we pave the road for people to have abortions eh?

No… Not everyone who has to spend their** own** hard earned money will indulge in recreational sex with the loving arms of Planned Parenthood to catch them with our dollars. This is difficult to assimilate?

Which points did you miss? * All* of them -unfortunately.

 

[CMatt25]

What are you having trouble with?

She states her Faith as Catholic.

Yes. She is allowed to state herself a Catholic according to Catholic teaching. I’m having no problem with her. I find her emphasis or pay grade on social justice very refreshing and Christ-like.

 

[Nimzovik]

That is correct - there are no ‘death panels’…

…unless you consider death panels to be the personnel which EVERY insurer presently relies on to decide what to cover, and to determine what constitutes medical necessity.

Better an insurance company (of** my** choosing BTW - this is called capitalism - that stuff that made America great right?) than a self appointed **Government **official like …ahem … **Pelosi ** or Sebellius, that does not agree with my *voting *proclivities. You know… Kinda of what is like happening in Tombstone Arizona and the water situation with love from the Obama admisitration…

 

[iloveangels]

I only know I don’t believe Jesus would have endorsed today’s Republican economic policy. This is where I believe Sister Simone gets it.

So, it’s a problem to have policies designed to get people jobs…but it’s not a problem to have an abortion? CMatt, that’s backwards.

 

[Elizabeth502]

Just for everybody’s edification, a little background:

First Century Palestinian Jews, of which Jesus, in His humanity, claimed membership, thoroughly repudiated what modern society refers to as “abortion on demand.” They also thoroughly repudiated homosexual behavior. Both were built enough into the Jewish consciousness that they were not, nor would have been, subject for discourses by Jesus.

What remains of the written tradition is a reflection of the oral tradition, which was passed down via memorization, or nearly that. The miracle narratives and the later discourses were important for how they framed His divinity; the parables for how they illustrated the principles of justice and mercy which He identified as attributes of His Father; the sayings and discourses for how those interpreted Jewish law and how Jewish law continued into and beyond Jesus’ ministry.

The idea that any position, any movement, any group of people could be called “Christ-like” while selecting only a portion of the kerygma and excising that from the rest of New Testament morality, has no credibility and deserves no respect for such a misrepresentation of early Christianity.

 

[Crescentinus]

Just for everybody’s edification, a little background:

First Century Palestinian Jews, of which Jesus, in His humanity, claimed membership, thoroughly repudiated what modern society refers to as “abortion on demand.” They also thoroughly repudiated homosexual behavior. Both were built enough into the Jewish consciousness that they were not, nor would have been, subject for discourses by Jesus.

What remains of the written tradition is a reflection of the oral tradition, which was passed down via memorization, or nearly that. The miracle narratives and the later discourses were important for how they framed His divinity; the parables for how they illustrated the principles of justice and mercy which He identified as attributes of His Father; the sayings and discourses for how those interpreted Jewish law and how Jewish law continued into and beyond Jesus’ ministry.

The idea that any position, any movement, any group of people could be called “Christ-like” while selecting only a portion of the kerygma and excising that from the rest of New Testament morality, has no credibility and deserves no respect for such a misrepresentation of early Christianity.

:clapping:

 

[seekerz]

Bolding Mine:

Oh yes? So we pave the road for people to have abortions eh?

No… Not everyone who has to spend their** own** hard earned money will indulge in recreational sex with the loving arms of Planned Parenthood to catch them with our dollars. This is difficult to assimilate?

Which points did you miss? * All* of them -unfortunately.

Which points of mine did you miss? Nobody is asking you to pay for abortions - the president specifically signed a directive to that effect. Increasing insurance coverage will only mean that some people will find it easier to use THEIR own money to pay for abortion. Do I think that the uninsured/under-insured should continue to suffer, die or go destitute just to NOT prevent something that people have been doing legally for decades anyway? My answer is a resounding, “No”.

 

[seekerz]

Better an insurance company (of** my** choosing BTW - this is called capitalism - that stuff that made America great right?) than a self appointed **Government **official like …ahem … **Pelosi ** or Sebellius, that does not agree with my *voting *proclivities. You know… Kinda of what is like happening in Tombstone Arizona and the water situation with love from the Obama admisitration…

Thanks for mentioning Arizona. Maybe that is what those of you claiming death panels have been referring to: the decision a year or two ago to “pull the plug” for some Medicaid/Medicare recipients with kidney failure needing transplants…I do believe that in this case one or two actually died or at least were reported to be at death’s door. Thanks for clearing up the confusion on the ‘who’ and ‘what’ of death panels.

 

[seekerz]

Just for everybody’s edification, a little background:

First Century Palestinian Jews, of which Jesus, in His humanity, claimed membership, thoroughly repudiated what modern society refers to as “abortion on demand.” They also thoroughly repudiated homosexual behavior. Both were built enough into the Jewish consciousness that they were not, nor would have been, subject for discourses by Jesus.

What remains of the written tradition is a reflection of the oral tradition, which was passed down via memorization, or nearly that. The miracle narratives and the later discourses were important for how they framed His divinity; the parables for how they illustrated the principles of justice and mercy which He identified as attributes of His Father; the sayings and discourses for how those interpreted Jewish law and how Jewish law continued into and beyond Jesus’ ministry.

The idea that any position, any movement, any group of people could be called “Christ-like” while selecting only a portion of the kerygma and excising that from the rest of New Testament morality, has no credibility and deserves no respect for such a misrepresentation of early Christianity.

“Deserves no respect”? I’m puzzled, we are not to respect the ‘misrepresentation of early Christianity’ with regard to abortion…and what else? What about respect for those who misrepresent the nature and history of God Himself and His relation to human beings, including the main figures of our Catholic faith? Is it okay to respect them as long as they do not misrepresent abortion?

 

[Lapey]

And so was Jesus.

Oh really, Jesus was a socialist who believed in taxing people to feed teh poor? So where is the rest of the “Rich Young Man” story, you know, the part where Jesus told him he had to sell everything and give it to the poor, I thought sure He left that up to the RYM to decide, “…and he left very disapointed, because he was very wealthy.”

Please show me that in scripture…

I was planning to exit, you dragged me back in with this ludicrous statement!

 

[Lapey]

The question was in two parts and you are right, it was clearly questioning her on whether doctors should be legally penalized for performing abortions, rephrased as “should abortion be illegal”. Again, in a country where it is legal for a woman to seek an abortion, what would be the logic behind prosecuting doctors for doing it?

Oh, I don’t know, maybe the unborn children’s safety??? To protect them from the two groups of people normally would be the ones to die for them, mothers and doctors. How’s that for an answer?

 

[Lapey]

No idea what this means.

Simple, Peter stayed with the Truth, Jesus, even though he didn’t understand what Jesus was teaching him. Peter conformed his way to that of Christ, he didn’t leave to find a group of people who he could agree with. The ones who left in Jn 6 did that. This is formation of conscience. If our conscience puts us at odds with Mother Church, it puts at odds with Christ the Head. So if we choose to follow our wrongly formed consciences we choose to follow something other than Jesus’ teachings.

Does that help?

 

[Lapey]

I only know I don’t believe Jesus would have endorsed today’s Republican economic policy. This is where I believe Sister Simone gets it.

What about the republican policies are indifferent to Jesus’ teachings? I mean the actual policies, not what is reported about them, especially where it comes to the generalizations like, “the republicans disdain for the poor.” Those are partisan attacks and are not reality. What are the actual policies to which Jesus would say are bad; and secondly, what in those policies are as bad or worse than support for the intrinsic evils the democrats support?

I’m open here, if you can convince me that there are proportionate reasons to vote against Romney, I pledge to swop right here right now. Give it your best shot.

 

[seekerz]

Oh really, Jesus was a socialist who believed in taxing people to feed teh poor? So where is the rest of the “Rich Young Man” story, you know, the part where Jesus told him he had to sell everything and give it to the poor, I thought sure He left that up to the RYM to decide, “…and he left very disapointed, because he was very wealthy.”

Please show me that in scripture…

I was planning to exit, you dragged me back in with this ludicrous statement!

Where did the poster say that Jesus was a socialist?The idea that using taxes to help the poor is ‘socialist’ is what is ludicrous to me.

Maybe it’s just that many of our faithful Catholics don’t read the lives of the saints anymore. Were our saints in leadership positions also socialists for imposing taxes that went to the upkeep of the poor?

 

[Lapey]

Yes. She is allowed to state herself a Catholic according to Catholic teaching. I’m having no problem with her. I find her emphasis or pay grade on social justice very refreshing and Christ-like.

She is allowed but it is false, she does not conform to Catholic social teaching or the teaching on moral issues. This group of nuns, in defiance of the Magisterium, supports the democrat party platform and candidates on intrinsic evil. She dodged the question because she wants her cake and eat it too. If she had answered she would have been hailed as queen of the democrat party, but hammered by the Churches leaders rightfully so. She and this group bring public scandal to the Church.

One can call ones self whatever they want, but it doesn’t make it so. You like her simply because she espouses what you believe, even though it is in direct conflict with the Church and Jesus; remember, He is the head of His Church.

 

[seekerz]

What about the republican policies are indifferent to Jesus’ teachings? I mean the actual policies, not what is reported about them, especially where it comes to the generalizations like, “the republicans disdain for the poor.” Those are partisan attacks and are not reality. What are the actual policies to which Jesus would say are bad; and secondly, what in those policies are as bad or worse than support for the intrinsic evils the democrats support?

I’m open here, if you can convince me that there are proportionate reasons to vote against Romney, I pledge to swop right here right now. Give it your best shot.

Disdain for the poor is a generalization? I’ve been posting my views about it for months on this forum and the attitudes I criticized seemed rather specific. Besides, in how many ways does Romney have to say it? Before the 47% comment there was, the not caring about the poor because they have a ‘safety net’ (which incidentally, is up for the axe), and liking to fire people (unemployment tends to contribute to poverty) - a repetitive theme, not just one statement. Romney was not alone either, during the primaries, Gingrich was actually the worst in his condescending attitude to the poor.

Call it a generalization if you like, I call it an ideological stance which goes something like this: the poor are losers (victims…choose your synonym), their predicament is their fault (they are lazy, lack ambition, lack work ethic, are jealous of the ‘haves’) or perhaps even a result of not being ‘blessed’ by God; helping them is voluntary* for Christians* (we can skip the major prophets and all the Gospels 'cause only the Bible had genuinely poor people)…I could go on: just from this forum alone I have learned that some posters do not even believe that the poor are really poor because they are not thin as rakes…and on and on.

All this leaves me to wonder is: how is it possible to genuinely care for the babies of those for whom such contempt is expressed? Who is fooling who here?

 

[seekerz]

She is allowed but it is false, she does not conform to Catholic social teaching or the teaching on moral issues. This group of nuns, in defiance of the Magisterium, supports the democrat party platform and candidates on intrinsic evil. She dodged the question because she wants her cake and eat it too. If she had answered she would have been hailed as queen of the democrat party, but hammered by the Churches leaders rightfully so. She and this group bring public scandal to the Church.

One can call ones self whatever they want, but it doesn’t make it so. You like her simply because she espouses what you believe, even though it is in direct conflict with the Church and Jesus; remember, He is the head of His Church.

You’re concerned about direct conflict with Christ and His Church…Might I suggest that you’re looking in the wrong direction?