Obama to Give Commencement Speech at Notre Dame

[JUAN_CAMPOS]

Yes, many Catholics seen the Notre Dame “scandal” as unbelievable, shock, angry, etc. Why? If the majority of Catholics voted for this man - President Obama. I see this kind of unfortunate behavior response as Jesus saw it in his life time. Jesus looked at Pilate’s eyes, and stated "I am the truth… " Yet, Pilate could not believe in the truth, so he had Christ crucified. So, now we need to be like Christ and not give in to the liberalism of this country, and of this President, and look at the President’s eye saying to him ‘We know the truth, and you are not the truth’. I pray that our Catholic family of this country will open their eyes and ears to see the real motive of this President and his cabinet members. They are in a delusion believe that they can control our freedom of faith, and I don’t believe they will ever listen to the People of faith. They will make statements like, “We will listen… respect debates… We are for the poor… We give good medical benefits…etc” Why believe someone whos actions speak the loudest.

 

[Follower]

Pardon me if I decline to defer to wikipedia’s statutory interpretation skills.

And why should we defer to yours? You have asserted that the Cardinals and the Bishops Conference of the United States are crying wolf on this. That, in effect, you are smarter and more informed than they. Let’s hear what your credentials are and whether the pridefulness and condescension you exhibit has any reliable basis. All you’ve said so far is that you’ve read FOCA and see no danger in it. Let’s have specific cites and quotes, and links. In particular, address specifically why the right to bring civil action in federal court against anyone who would “interfere” with the sweeping abortion right that FOCA claims to be “the policy of the United States” would not result in forcing Catholic Hospitals to be stripped of their licenses or close, as at least one other recent poster has noted.

The membership of this forum is far too informed and intelligent to take the word of someone who doesn’t back up the claims they make. We are certainly all fans of Our Lord, and Our Lord did speak as one having authority. However, Our Lord backed up the claims he made by, among other things, performing miracles, accurately predicting subsequent events, and fulfilling Old Testament prophecies. Since Our Lord did not expect to be believed based on His word alone, neither should you.

 

[toughcritic]

THIS POLITICAL CORRECTNESS HAS GONE FAR ENOUGH AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED. Obama is about the last person who should be allowed to speak at a Catholic institution of any kind let alone Notre Dame. What in God’s name is wrong with the school’s president, Father Jenkins? Is he so celebrity conscious that it doesn’t matter that this poor excuse for a U.S. president is a baby butcher even after live birth? That he has reinstituted experimentation on embryonic stem cells when they have produced nothing of scientific value. The real value comes from adult stem cell research with proven cures. That this fool now is going to force Catholic hospitals to perform abortions. This is Notre Dame’s opportunity to say NO, we don’t agree with you and your current status doesn not give you the forum to speak on our hallowed ground. This makes as much sense as inviting the head Klegle of the KKK to speak at Howard University! Instead of the Archbishop of South Bend leaving town why doesn’t he assert himself in the name of the Church and tell Jenkins this is WRONG and it will not be tolerated. Along with that why are gay pride groups, feminist groups, anti war groups allowed to function on campus? Why are there Muslim professors on campus? Do you think that this would be allowed at reverend Jerry Falwells’s Liberty University? You better believe it wouldn’t. Those Baptists BELIEVE what they preach! We only have about 4 or 5 truly Catholic institutions of higher learning in the U.S.: Ave Maria, Thomas Aquainas and Christendom being the most prominent. The rest are Catholic in name only with gay groups, feminist groups and non Catholic groups given free reign over the campuses with either atheist, non Catholic, Muslim or Jewish professors on staff. It sickens me!

 

[RobbyS]

Ouch!

It’s a prestige thing to have the president of the U.S. speak at your commencement. No doubt about it. And I’m sure that was the motivation in ND making the request.

Obama’s motivation in accepting? The same one he had in appointing Daschle, then Sebelius and the other 100% pro-abortion cabinet “Catholics”. He wants to cement the fact that there are two Catholic Churches in this country; one dissident that can and will follow him, and one faithful that will follow the Church. The former is what he actively promotes, and the latter is what he wants to marginalize. Put bluntly, he wants to accentuate and encourage schism.

There are indisputably faithful, prolife Catholics at ND. No question about it. So, their commencement speaker will be the most pro-abortion politician in America. They can grit their teeth and go to their own graduation; no small thing at ND and quite an accomplishment, or they can refuse to “walk” and get their diplomas in the mail.

Those are the ones who are the most ill-served by this; the ones whose graduations from a school, where they worked hard and kept the faith, a school that once stood for all that was good about Catholic higher education, are morally befouled. The school didn’t need to do this, but it did.

Obama “capturing” Notre Dame, which once meant so much to Catholics of every walk of life in the U.S. He accomplished much in this. He surely did.

I agree with every word. Thanks.

 

[jay29]

60% of all voting Catholics voted for that baby butcher. That bishops statement was appalling. I’ve ridiculed my fellow Catholics for putting their politics before the Faith. In my opinion, most Catholic don’t study their faith and they pick and choose what they want to believe. An overall sad situation.

When I read the statistics that 60% of Catholics voted for the butcher, I was horrified and embarrassed.

 

[RobbyS]

In the end, I hope that the response of the ND pro-life students is strong, apparent and above all dignified. Candlelight vigils, open public prayers for the unborn and for the souls of those who persecute them, and other quintessentially Catholic modes of communication show ample respect for the office of President, while at the same time expressing the horror of the office being filled with the only President with a voting record in favor of not just abortion of the unborn, but infanticide of the unwanted.

There is no dignity in catcalls, turning ones back or the thousand and one other ways that leftists students have disrespected the office of president in former times. As troubling as it may seem to go into this fight as it were with one hand tied behind one’s back, and deferring from the same effective tactics used against other presidents, there is dignity in restraint, in allowing the prayers of the unborn rise like a cloud from heaven in the smoke of the candles, and on the lips of the faithful.

There is more than one way for the Irish to fight this.

Thereis also the possibility–if enough are concerned–which is to demand an alternative ceremony with speakers of one’s choosing. It is not too late to ask for this, so not an unreasonable request.

 

[RobbyS]

Beautiful, just beautiful. :angel1::angel1:

 

[Darryl1958]

Unfortunately they can’t have a candlelight vigil at the commencement, so they will have to come up with something else. Red envelopes. Quiet, BUT visual.

I am not up to date on all the facts as to why this not possible, but wouldn’t having a candlelight vigil during the commencement be as easy as lighting a candle during the speech?

It is good to hear that the plan is for quiet, dignified protest at any rate.

 

[Darryl1958]

See my post 217 with links to the student organizations.

That is where I got the quote from. I though that that quote in particular was worthy of comment, because it would not be my first reaction.

lifenews.com/state3988.html

We want to emphasize that we are not attacking the office of the President, but taking issue with his moral stances.

 

[edwest2]

This is an act of Public Disobedience:

catholicexchange.com/2009/03/27/117065/

Peace,
Ed

 

[patriciamn09]

The issue at ND is at least shedding light on FOCA. More and more people are being made aware of the secular impact on catholic education. It’ s been going on for decades. The new age movement is at the root of this secular infiltration into catholic institutions. For decates catholic preists and nuns acted as new age practitioners. They infiltrated and tried to destroy the true catholic church. These practioners, including many bishops,need to be weeded out. “If they are not with us they are against us.” Not to worry, the church under Our Lord, Jesus will live on. But many will need to take a stand. We are either with Jesus or against Him. Let’s line up with the Lamb of God.

 

[patriciamn09]

The issue at ND is,at least, shedding light on FOCA. More and more people are being made aware of the secular impact on catholic education. It’ s been going on for decades. The new age movement is at the root of this secular infiltration into catholic institutions. For decades many catholic preists and nuns acted as new age practitioners. These practioners, including many bishops, need to be weeded out. “If they are not with us they are against us.” Not to worry, the church under Our Lord, Jesus will live on. But many will need to take a stand. We are either with Jesus or against Him. Let’s line up with the Lamb of God.

 

[Darryl1958]

This is an act of Public Disobedience:

catholicexchange.com/2009/03/27/117065/

Peace,
Ed

“It is a public act of disobedience to the Bishops of the United States,” said the bishop, who cited the U.S. bishops’ 2004 directive that pro-abortion politicians “should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions.”

“I pray that you come to see the grave mistake of your decision, and the way that it undercuts the Church’s proclamation of the Gospel of Life in our day,” Olmsted concluded.

Yes it is. Honoring and giving a platform to a pro-abortonist goes directly against what the the bishop had decided in 2004.

 

[elts1956]

I am not up to date on all the facts as to why this not possible, but wouldn’t having a candlelight vigil during the commencement be as easy as lighting a candle during the speech?

It is good to hear that the plan is for quiet, dignified protest at any rate.

I hope all Pro Life groups honor the dissenting grads. wishes to let them handle the controversy. I have written an email to those students involved in the protest to give them support.

On second thought, the candle idea is a good one too. I just hope that whatever their form of protest, it gives a loud enough bang bo wakes up and notices it.

 

[patriciamn09]

The students who decided to accept their diplomas by mail might be on the right track. This may be a necessary sacrifise. The loudest voice would be one of a united group, not attending the graduation ceremony at all. They could instead hold devotions to Our Lady at another church or at the Notre Dame cathedral, as could many supporters. United Christian groups thoughout the US could show our support by holding our own vigils and devotions to Our Lady in our parish churches.

Pat

 

[ChristinaM]

The students who decided to accept their diplomas by mail might be on the right track. This may be a necessary sacrifise. The loudest voice would be one of a united group, not attending the graduation ceremony at all. They could instead hold devotions to Our Lady at another church or at the Notre Dame cathedral, as could many supporters. United Christian groups thoughout the US could show our support by holding our own vigils and devotions to Our Lady in our parish churches.

Pat

I have thought about this and I’m not sure that skipping the graduation ceremony would be the right way for these students to go. If the ones who are opposed skip the ceremony, the only people present would be the ones who love Obama and couldn’t care less about the rights of the unborn. Would it not be better for the dissenting students to go so that he can see that not everyone is clapping for him, not everyone is receiving him with the adoration he craves?

Students sitting with hands folded in their laps while their peers give the president a standing ovation…now there’s a message. Just a thought that I had, I don’t know if it will work.

 

[TMC]

And why should we defer to yours? You have asserted that the Cardinals and the Bishops Conference of the United States are crying wolf on this. That, in effect, you are smarter and more informed than they. Let’s hear what your credentials are and whether the pridefulness and condescension you exhibit has any reliable basis. All you’ve said so far is that you’ve read FOCA and see no danger in it. Let’s have specific cites and quotes, and links. In particular, address specifically why the right to bring civil action in federal court against anyone who would “interfere” with the sweeping abortion right that FOCA claims to be “the policy of the United States” would not result in forcing Catholic Hospitals to be stripped of their licenses or close, as at least one other recent poster has noted.

The membership of this forum is far too informed and intelligent to take the word of someone who doesn’t back up the claims they make. We are certainly all fans of Our Lord, and Our Lord did speak as one having authority. However, Our Lord backed up the claims he made by, among other things, performing miracles, accurately predicting subsequent events, and fulfilling Old Testament prophecies. Since Our Lord did not expect to be believed based on His word alone, neither should you.

I am confident that I understand the law well, but I do not blame you for not taking my word for it. On the other hand I don’t think performing miracles is a reasonable standard of proof.

Many solid and unbiased legal analysts have looked at the proposed bill and concluded its much ado about nothing. The trouble is that the long-standing practice here to is label anyone that disagrees with what is perceived to be the “party line” as a heretic, a liberal or a pro-abortionist. (Even Sen Brownback is called a liberal pro-abort by some here.)

Nonetheless, I will make the attempt. Here is an analysis of FOCA from the John P. Murphy Foundation Professor of Law and Professor of Theology at Notre Dame, Cathleen Kaveny. She concludes that FOCA would be a very bad law, but that both sides are overstating its possible effects.

commonwealmagazine.org/article.php3?id_article=2423

 

[patriciamn09]

Why the concern about Obama’s cravings or perceptions? That’s not what this is about. The ND officials who approved inviting Obama should be considered. Who? Why? What are their motives? This is an opportunity for pro-life advocates to question why any catholic school administrator is involved in promoting the culture of death. ND is only one of many such afflicted catholic institutions. The weeds and the wheat have grown together within the catholic church…The focus here should be on weeding out corruption within the catholic church’s hierarchy. Graduates sitting with their hands in their laps isn’t the answer. Prayers to Our Lady led to the fall of communism in Russia. Communism and the culture of death are one and the same. The purpose is to destroy our christian heritage.

 

[Wowbagger]

Nonetheless, I will make the attempt. Here is an analysis of FOCA from the John P. Murphy Foundation Professor of Law and Professor of Theology at Notre Dame, Cathleen Kaveny. She concludes that FOCA would be a very bad law, but that both sides are overstating its possible effects.

commonwealmagazine.org/article.php3?id_article=2423

Without comment on the content of your article or the dispute over FOCA, might I suggest that citing a Notre Dame professor as an authoritative source may not be the wisest or most effective source citation at this juncture?

 

[TMC]

… The trouble is that the long-standing practice here to is label anyone that disagrees with what is perceived to be the “party line” as a heretic, a liberal or a pro-abortionist. (Even Sen Brownback is called a liberal pro-abort by some here.)

Without comment on the content of your article or the dispute over FOCA, might I suggest that citing a Notre Dame professor as an authoritative source may not be the wisest or most effective source citation at this juncture?

I think that comments on the content of the article would be more effective than suggesting a Catholic theologian who is also a respected legal scholar is not a good source without addressing the substance of her analysis. As I pointed out in my earlier post, the tactic of simply declaring those that disagree with you must be wrong is becoming increasingly common, but not getting any more effective.

Prof. Kaveny says many of the same things I said in my earlier post - that the language and drafting history of FOCA make clear that it is meant to codify the holding of Roe v Wade in federal statute. It is a bad bill that would be a bad law. It purports to ‘protect’ the same ‘rights’ described in Roe. It does not mandate forced abortions, overruling Hyde, closing hospitals, etc.

The key to the pro-life argument is that the life argument is right, and true. You can’t convince people that you are right and that others should embrace the truth by spinning, twisting and distorting the truth. Many of the major pro-life organizations have lost credibility by resorting to disingenuous tactics. The pro-choice groups have sacrificed credibility in the same way. The difference is that they only need to keep the status quo - a tie is the same as a win for them.