President Obama to receive honorary degree from Notre Dame

[bbarrick8383]

Sure, there’s the occasional family like the one you mentioned, and if they have it in their heart to adopt that many unwanted children, they are truly exemplars of Christianity. There are a lot of children in foster care that I’m sure would love to be adopted.

Just think of the life we could provide those who are waiting to be adopted. If we stopped abortion, and just put the bailout and stimulus money into adoptions and foster homes. Man, those kids would be living the life. They should be, there is so much on so tiny little shoulders. If we could bring down taxpayer heaven on those children it would be awesome.

 

[magdelaine]

Just for a change of pace I thought I would post something that had to do with Notre Dame.

That’s refreshing.

I spoke with Bishop D’Arcy after mass today and gave him the hug one poster wanted to give him.

Thank you!!!

 

[NTOT]

What is this statistic based on. My experience with adoptees and adopters is much different. An example, one family here has eight adopted children, four are vietnemese, three from China with two being severly disabled, and two from Guatemala.

Sure, there’s the occasional family like the one you mentioned, and if they have it in their heart to adopt that many unwanted children, they are truly exemplars of Christianity. There are a lot of children in foster care that I’m sure would love to be adopted.

Occasional? Is that just your statistical hunch?

 

[mapleoak]

Sure, there’s the occasional family like the one you mentioned, and if they have it in their heart to adopt that many unwanted children, they are truly exemplars of Christianity. There are a lot of children in foster care that I’m sure would love to be adopted.

• An estimate of transracial adoption was performed by the NHIS in 1987 with their findings indicating approximately 8% of all adoptions were interracial.
• In Fiscal Year 1998, 15% of 36,000 total adoptions were transracial or transcultural adoptions. (US DHHS, 2000)
• The number is much higher when considering that approximately half of all total adoptions were by blood relatives or step parents.
• The remaining children were adopted within their own race.
• There is no shortage of foster families willing to adopt.

Government policy is a stumbling block to prospective adoptors.

 

[Luis_Santiago]

Amazing how with one hand he can write something like that while the other hand is so eager to sign the FOCA bill.
He is basically saying “Do as I say, not as I do”.

I don’t think he’s contradicting himself, he’s just saying that because we live in a pluralistic society, when we debate whether to pass certain pieces of legislation, we have to use reasoning that is accessible to people of any religion. I’m kind of ambivalent about this idea myself, but I can understand why he’d say that.

The key passage, I think, is here.

*Even those who claim the Bible’s inerrancy make distinctions between Scriptural edicts, sensing that some passages - the Ten Commandments, say, or a belief in Christ’s divinity - are central to Christian faith, while others are more culturally specific and may be modified to accommodate modern life.

The American people intuitively understand this, which is why the majority of Catholics practice birth control and some of those opposed to gay marriage nevertheless are opposed to a Constitutional amendment to ban it. Religious leadership need not accept such wisdom in counseling their flocks, but they should recognize this wisdom in their politics.*

I don’t think he sees that the issue of abortion does not lend itself to accomodation as birth control arguably does. Indeed, it shows the dangers of accommodation to legal contraception and to legalized sodomy. They beg the question why they were outlawed in the first place. It has to do with the broader question of whether unbridled sexual behavior canbe tolerated by any society. Obama is NOT going to have that discussion, because it is not simply a political one. He and Catholics are talking past one another, but he is pretending to be the reasonable one, here.

Our society was based on the idea of individual freedom. Now, I think for the most part, this is a good thing as far as Catholicism is concerned. But, pretty much every instance in which the Catholic Church clashes with this concept occurs when the US government permits something that the Church considers a major sin.

As for adoption, I don’t know very much about the statistics, and I won’t pretend to. But suffice to say, it’s not very common. The number of adoptions is nowhere near the number of abortions. It’s a partial solution, yes, but I’m not sure how it could deal with the majority of unwanted children.

 

[JimG]

We do live in a pluralistic society. Which is a good reason that the people, through their elected state legislatures, should decide issues like abortion, not courts composed of only a few non-representative individuals. Especially since our Constitution says nothing about abortion.

 

[Luis_Santiago]

We do live in a pluralistic society. Which is a good reason that the people, through their elected state legislatures, should decide issues like abortion, not courts composed of only a few non-representative individuals. Especially since our Constitution says nothing about abortion.

The courts at the time were processing a slew of civil rights cases. The one thing they all had in common was that a majority of people imposed laws that were unfairly harsh on a minority. Obviously, putting things up to a majority vote doesn’t always work. Now, the majority of people will never seek abortions, either because they’re not women or because they’re responsible. So the supreme court decided that in this case, letting the majority rule wasn’t appropriate. I don’t agree with this decision, but that’s how they reasoned it.

And yes, I know someone’s going to say unborn babies are much more of a persecuted minority; that’s obvious, it goes without saying. But that reasoning would require giving citizen status to babies before they’re born, which isn’t really possible. Secular law isn’t very good at laying down logical rules in these situations; right now it appears as though the personhood of a fetus depends on whether its mother wants it to be a person or not.

1. Perhaps in your own life, there are not many Catholics who believe all the teachings. If that’s the case, it’s regretable - and NOT to be emulated.

I’ve only met a handful of Catholics who agree with the Church 100% on the issue of birth control. Not every Catholic wants a family that’s the subject of a TV show called “18 Kids and Counting”.

 

[mmm1]

With President Obama, it really depends on who he is talking to. In July 2007, he said, “On this fundamental issue (abortion) I will not yield, & Planned Parenthood will not yield.”

After having read this entire thread I now have to leave, but will check back with you later. God bless…

 

[JimG]

Secular law isn’t very good at laying down logical rules in these situations; right now it appears as though the personhood of a fetus depends on whether its mother wants it to be a person or not.

Exactly. The child’s status depends on whether or not it is wanted. If it’s not wanted, executiion is the remedy. The same sort of illogic is beginning to be applied to the aged and the disabled.

 

[Luis_Santiago]

With President Obama, it really depends on who he is talking to. In July 2007, he said, “On this fundamental issue (abortion) I will not yield, & Planned Parenthood will not yield.”

After having read this entire thread I now have to leave, but will check back with you later. God bless…

Here’s the dirty secret about all politicians: when they’re at a fundraiser, they’ll say whatever they need to in order to get people’s money. I haven’t seen that speech, but I’ll bet you anything it was during the early primary campaign when he was running against a woman and had to raise money from pro-choice groups. It’s kind of like when John McCain got an endorsement from that one southern preacher who called the Catholic Church “the whore of Babylon”. If you’re a Democrat and you want to win an election, you need to court groups like Planned Parenthood, otherwise you don’t have enough money and you lose.

So you’re absolutely right, what he says does depend on who he’s talking to. But if it’s any consolation, I bet there’s some Planned Parenthood supporter out there who’s saying “He said the first thing he’d do as president was pass FOCA! He hasn’t even mentioned it yet!”

 

[magdelaine]

I’ve only met a handful of Catholics who agree with the Church 100% on the issue of birth control. Not every Catholic wants a family that’s the subject of a TV show called “18 Kids and Counting”.

You show not only a shocking lack of understanding of Church teaching but also of basic concepts like NFP. Have you ever considered becoming Episcopal? Because you show no willingness to learn, only to preach your false ideas.

(And don’t get me wrong, there are far too many “Catholics” who are exactly like you. That doesn’t mean, by the way, that you are right.)

 

[magdelaine]

Another really good article on this topic: americanthinker.com/2009/04/notre_dames_betrayal_of_faith.html

Favorite paragraph:

The bottom line is that Catholic institutions (if they are to be authentic) have a responsibility to apply Catholic dogma, not the secular variety. They have an obligation to draw Catholic lines, not merely replicate those of the Los Angeles Times. They have a duty to instill students with Catholic teaching, not that of Berkeley. Thus, in such an eminently sane setting abortion isn’t a debated issue. It’s a settled issue. And Barack Obama isn’t just another president. He is way over the line.

Worth a read.

 

[catharina]

I’ve only met a handful of Catholics who agree with the Church 100% on the issue of birth control. Not every Catholic wants a family that’s the subject of a TV show called “18 Kids and Counting”.

It’s obvious you need an upgrade of Catholic friends and acquaintances. ASAP.

As for the “TV family” you’ve referenced, they’re not Catholic, so your point is ???

 

[Luis_Santiago]

You show not only a shocking lack of understanding of Church teaching but also of basic concepts like NFP. Have you ever considered becoming Episcopal? Because you show no willingness to learn, only to preach your false ideas.

I actually understand NFP quite well, although I don’t understand the Church’s distinction between it and artificial contraception. They’re both examples of engaging in nonprocreative intercourse, which the Church has never been fond of.

I am more than willing to learn. I guess my problem is that I’m willing to learn from a wider variety of sources than you think I should?

(And don’t get me wrong, there are far too many “Catholics” who are exactly like you. That doesn’t mean, by the way, that you are right.)

About 90% of Catholics agree with me. Including the conference of Canadian bishops, apparently.

It’s obvious you need an upgrade of Catholic friends and acquaintances. ASAP.

Frankly, I suspect they’d enjoy my company about as much as you have. Perhaps it would be better for me to spare them that grief.

As for the “TV family” you’ve referenced, they’re not Catholic, so your point is ???

I know, but their philosophy on birth control is similar to the Catholic one.

I’m curious what you think of this article:
nytimes.com/2009/04/05/opinion/05kristof.html

 

[catharina]

I know, but their philosophy on birth control is similar to the Catholic one.

I’m curious what you think of this article:
nytimes.com/2009/04/05/opinion/05kristof.html

The TV family? re open to life? Yes, they’re open to life.

The NYTimes Op-Ed piece?
Typical NYTimes. Hold the presses - STOP THE BIRTHS!
Love God. Love your neighbor? Don’t bother - just control the neighbor’s birth rate.

Do you understand that to grow your faith, you don’t eat from garbage piles?
Have you any idea how anti-Catholic you sound and how often that occurs?

 

[mmm1]

Here’s the dirty secret about all politicians: when they’re at a fundraiser, they’ll say whatever they need to in order to get people’s money.

-----I don’t know how to quote multiple times, so I’ll interject my points in the body of your post. Sorry for the confusing style…I’m well aware of the dirty nature of politics, but some politicians lie more than others. President Obama is supposed to be above this, from what I hear. In President Obama’s case I believe he meant what he said in his speech to Planned Parenthood. His actions before & after his inauguration bear this out. I believe he lies when he tries to portray himself as a moderate on this issue.

I haven’t seen that speech, but I’ll bet you anything it was during the early primary campaign when he was running against a woman and had to raise money from pro-choice groups. It’s kind of like when John McCain got an endorsement from that one southern preacher who called the Catholic Church “the whore of Babylon”.

—Do you mean Rev. Hagee? This is nothing like that. Sen McCain did not “court” Hagee. It’s not like he attended his church for 20 years or anything. He did not agree that the Church is the whore of Babylon, nor did he vote multiple times in support of this idea. He did not sponsor a bill to please Rev. Hagee. In fact, he condemned his anti-Catholicism.

If you’re a Democrat and you want to win an election, you need to court groups like Planned Parenthood, otherwise you don’t have enough money and you lose.

—This proves Catherina’s point that it is very important to make wise decisions when you choose your friends. Obama’s agreement with & ties to PP are another reason many Catholics could never vote for him.

So you’re absolutely right, what he says does depend on who he’s talking to. But if it’s any consolation, I bet there’s some Planned Parenthood supporter out there who’s saying “He said the first thing he’d do as president was pass FOCA! He hasn’t even mentioned it yet!”

—That’s because it has not come up for a vote. So far, Congress seems to have gotten the message from the huge campaign against FOCA. Most people are against partial birth abortion & for parental notification laws, but our “moderate” president who claims to be interested in reducing abortions co-sponsored this bill.

 

[Trader]

It’s obvious you need an upgrade of Catholic friends and acquaintances. ASAP.

I would say his friends and acquaintences deserve a better friend, one who would stand up for the truth, even if that truth is unpopular.

The same goes for the students, alumni, faculty, and other supporters of Notre Dame.

Somehow this thread became about Luis.

 

[magdelaine]

I would say his friends and acquaintences deserve a better friend, one who would stand up for the truth, even if that truth is unpopular.

The same goes for the students, alumni, faculty, and other supporters of Notre Dame.

Somehow this thread became about Luis.

In light of your deft refocusing of the subject, I thought I would share this excellent post on what it really means to be Christian in this world.

Perhaps we should see success from how much we are misliked, rather than accepted.

 

[mapleoak]

And yes, I know someone’s going to say unborn babies are much more of a persecuted minority; that’s obvious, it goes without saying. But that reasoning would require giving citizen status to babies before they’re born, which isn’t really possible.

The fourteenth amendment of the constitution of the U.S. doesn’t specify citizenship when declaring that a person may not be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law:

*No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. - constitution, 14th amdmt
*

Secular law isn’t very good at laying down logical rules in these situations; right now it appears as though the personhood of a fetus depends on whether its mother wants it to be a person or not.

No it doesn’t appear that way. The mother does not determine such things. She only determines if the person is killed, not whether it is a person.

I’ve only met a handful of Catholics who agree with the Church 100% on the issue of birth control. Not every Catholic wants a family that’s the subject of a TV show called "18 Kids and Counting".

Why such a disparaging and ignorant remark against Catholics who agree 100% with the Catholic Church on birth control?

 

[Ronald_E]

I would say his friends and acquaintences deserve a better friend, one who would stand up for the truth, even if that truth is unpopular.

The same goes for the students, alumni, faculty, and other supporters of Notre Dame.

Somehow this thread became about Luis.

Did you just slander Luis?