President Obama to receive honorary degree from Notre Dame

[Luis_Santiago]

How true. Seems many people are easily deceived by smooth talking politicians. These politicians do the thinking for such people who blindly follow their leader.

Oh, so not blindly following a leader is a good thing then, except when Father Jenkins does it?

This is my idea of enthusiastic support.

Which is, exactly like I said, from two years ago, when he was courting pro-choice groups. This doesn’t contradict what I said, that he has listened to the people and moved away from that position.

 

[JimG]

Oh, so not blindly following a leader is a good thing then, except when Father Jenkins does it?

Which is, exactly like I said, from two years ago, when he was courting pro-choice groups. This doesn’t contradict what I said, that he has listened to the people and moved away from that position.

Wow, I would be extremely happy if he were to move away from his pro-choice position, away from support of NARAL and PP, away from the Mexico City policy and the funding of overseas abortions.

I would be excited even if he merely proposed limiting abortion to the first trimester and prohibiting it thereafter. I would be thrilled if he retracted all of his pro-abortion positions and repudiated any support for FOCA, clearly stating that he would not sign it.

I would be happy if he would support adult stem cell research.

I’d be happy if he went out to meet the March for Life group next year and promised to do all in his power to protect life from conception to natural death.

But, as a realist, I don’t expect any of that to happen.

 

[mapleoak]

You will notice that virtually all of the pro-abortion quotes of his are from 2007 or earlier. He’s moved away from that position since then

mapleoak:
Is that why one of his first moves in office was to begin funding of overseas abortions?

How true. Seems many people are easily deceived by smooth talking politicians. These politicians do the thinking for such people who blindly follow their leader.

Oh, so not blindly following a leader is a good thing then, except when Father Jenkins does it?

This is my idea of enthusiastic support.

Which is, exactly like I said, from two years ago, when he was courting pro-choice groups. This doesn’t contradict what I said, that he has listened to the people and moved away from that position.

mapleoak:
Is that why one of his first moves in office was to begin funding of overseas abortions?

And around and around… :juggle::harp:

 

[Luis_Santiago]

Wow, I would be extremely happy if he were to move away from his pro-choice position, away from support of NARAL and PP, away from the Mexico City policy and the funding of overseas abortions.

I would be excited even if he merely proposed limiting abortion to the first trimester and prohibiting it thereafter. I would be thrilled if he retracted all of his pro-abortion positions and repudiated any support for FOCA, clearly stating that he would not sign it.

I would be happy if he would support adult stem cell research.

I’d be happy if he went out to meet the March for Life group next year and promised to do all in his power to protect life from conception to natural death.

But, as a realist, I don’t expect any of that to happen.

I didn’t say he moved away from his pro-choice position, I said he moved away from the position of making passing FOCA a priority. And anyway, the Obama administration does support adult stem cell research, just not exclusively. But even so, there are many things we know today that we wouldn’t know if not for embryonic stem cell research. Chief among these is how to actually make pluripotent stem cells from adult cells. That is, the technology that you’re advocating depended on the research done on embryonic stem cells.

mapleoak:
Is that why one of his first moves in office was to begin funding of overseas abortions?

mapleoak:
Is that why one of his first moves in office was to begin funding of overseas abortions?

And around and around… :juggle::harp:

I can’t take you seriously. You’re not very bright, you never admit it when you’re wrong, and you come across as quite arrogant. Plus, you have such a short memory span that you apparently don’t realize I’ve already answered most of your questions, often several times. But that’s just the way you are, and there’s nothing I or anyone else can do to change that.

However, since this question was asked by someone else too, I’ll answer it. I’m sure you’ll forget my answer right away, but maybe someone else won’t.

The Mexico City Policy forbids all overseas NGOs that receive US money from performing abortions or actively promoting them. However, this condition is extremely broad, and it prevents funding from going to a number of organizations that, when given all the facts, few people would disapprove of. Take the UNFPA, for instance. They provide health services in many developing countries, and have prevented millions of abortions in China. However, in order to operate in certain countries like China, the Philippines, and South Africa, they may be required by law to inform women of abortion as an option. Under the Mexico City Policy, this precludes the entire organization from receiving any US funding, even though they perform no abortions themselves.

As a result, organizations that primarily support forms of family planning that aren’t abortion end up losing funding, and thus can’t support these methods, so women end up not doing anything about trying to avoid getting pregnant until they’re already pregnant. Essentially, the Mexico City Policy indirectly causes more abortions than it prevents.

 

[JimG]

Well, I guess the thread is actually about President Obama being honored by Notre Dame university. Given that over 50 bishops have spoken out AGAINST Notre Dame taking this action, including the bishop in whose diocese the university is located, (who was not even consulted beforehand), it would seem that the action is entirely indefensible.

For a Catholic university to give an honor to someone who not only disagrees with serious Catholic moral teaching, but intends to see that it is violated and that violation of the moral law will continue to be preserved as the law of the land, is clearly unconscionable.

Fr. Jenkins ought to rescind the invitation, and beg Mary Ann Glendon to be the only commencement speaker and honoree.

 

[redrosetea]

During the campaign I heard Obama with his own mouth say, I don’t want my girls punished with a baby…I will sign FOCA…It says a lot when a man views an innocent baby as a punishment

I wonder if he would think he was his mother’s punishment?

 

[Luis_Santiago]

Well, I guess the thread is actually about President Obama being honored by Notre Dame university. Given that over 50 bishops have spoken out AGAINST Notre Dame taking this action, including the bishop in whose diocese the university is located, (who was not even consulted beforehand), it would seem that the action is entirely indefensible.

For a Catholic university to give an honor to someone who not only disagrees with serious Catholic moral teaching, but intends to see that it is violated and that violation of the moral law will continue to be preserved as the law of the land, is clearly unconscionable.

Fr. Jenkins ought to rescind the invitation, and beg Mary Ann Glendon to be the only commencement speaker and honoree.

The thing is, not all bishops agree on this. Not all priests agree on this. My priest supported Obama, which actually kind of surprised me because he’s not the liberal type at all. And I think the award has more to do that he’s the first black president and the Catholic Church has always been against racism, than it is about any of his policy positions.

During the campaign I heard Obama with his own mouth say, I don’t want my girls punished with a baby…I will sign FOCA…It says a lot when a man views an innocent baby as a punishment

I wonder if he would think he was his mother’s punishment?

That answer wasn’t very tactful, and I don’t want to defend his position on the issue, but in his defense, that was in response to a question along the lines of “If your daughter was 16 and got pregnant and wanted to get an abortion, would you let her?” I think it’s safe to say, if his daughter was 16 and got pregnant and wanted to keep the baby (like his own mother did at 18), he’d let her do that too.

 

[redrosetea]

The thing is, not all bishops agree on this. Not all priests agree on this. My priest supported Obama, which actually kind of surprised me because he’s not the liberal type at all. And I think the award has more to do that he’s the first black president and the Catholic Church has always been against racism, than it is about any of his policy positions.

That answer wasn’t very tactful, and I don’t want to defend his position on the issue, but in his defense, that was in response to a question along the lines of “If your daughter was 16 and got pregnant and wanted to get an abortion, would you let her?” I think it’s safe to say, if his daughter was 16 and got pregnant and wanted to keep the baby (like his own mother did at 18), he’d let her do that too.

I wasn’t addressing you…It was a general statement and I think it is very pertinent, you are not the only person on this thread…He still called a baby a punishment…He told me who he was with that statement, and his mother wasn’t much older than that when she had him…by their fruits ye shall know them

 

[JimG]

The thing is, not all bishops agree on this. Not all priests agree on this. My priest supported Obama, which actually kind of surprised me because he’s not the liberal type at all. And I think the award has more to do that he’s the first black president and the Catholic Church has always been against racism, than it is about any of his policy positions.

I would be surprised to find a pro-abortion Catholic bishop, or even Catholic bishop who considers abortion such a minor issue that anything else might trump it. But I suppose there could be. In any case, the Bishop in which Notre Dame is located said that the honor should not be given. His own diocese. He was ignored.

It seems that some at Notre Dame care more about prestige and popularity than they do about a million dead unborn children each year.

 

[redrosetea]

I would be surprised to find a pro-abortion Catholic bishop, or even Catholic bishop who considers abortion such a minor issue that anything else might trump it. But I suppose there could be. In any case, the Bishop in which Notre Dame is located said that the honor should not be given. His own diocese. He was ignored.

It seems that some at Notre Dame care more about prestige and popularity than they do about a million dead unborn children each year.

We had clergy who didn’t have the intestinal fortitude to speak out against pedophile priests too…It didn’t make anyone respect them for it…Christ warned us that we could not serve God and Mamon, and he told us that he would vomit us from His mouth if we tried to be a person who was luke warm, and he has said often enough we all have to choose and enter by the narrow path

 

[Fitz]

It seems that some at Notre Dame care more about prestige and popularity than they do about a million dead unborn children each year.

It surely seems a scandal to all those attending, college students and parents. What a shame, and actually occasion of sin for the University.

 

[diggerdomer]

He was ignored.

No. He was not consulted before ND offered the invitation. That’s not the same as being ignored. That may not make a difference to you, but it is a difference. Personally, I think ND goofed in NOT consulting Bishop D’Arcy before the invitation.

It seems that some at Notre Dame care more about prestige and popularity than they do about a million dead unborn children each year.

Nice. Ok, you say this “seems” so.

If this is something you sincerely believe and feel strongly about, please give us ONE example, in fact, that this opinion of yours is true. Whom do you know, personally, or whom have you talked about this with, personally, that has told you such a thing?

 

[JimG]

No. He was not consulted before ND offered the invitation. That’s not the same as being ignored. That may not make a difference to you, but it is a difference. Personally, I think ND goofed in NOT consulting Bishop D’Arcy before the invitation.

Nice. Ok, you say this “seems” so.

If this is something you sincerely believe and feel strongly about, please give us ONE example, in fact, that this opinion of yours is true. Whom do you know, personally, or whom have you talked about this with, personally, that has told you such a thing?

I haven’t interviewed anyone at Notre Dame, nor can I read their minds. The simple fact that the school has decided to honor our most pro-abortion president speaks for itself. When better example can I give than a Catholic university inviting a pro-abortion president to receive an honor? Fifty-nine bishops have now spoken out against it. Surely the school administration is not unaware of that.

So why would a Catholic university invite a pro-abortion president to be honored? Why would they present an honor to someone who goes against everything that a Catholic university stands for?

 

[JimG]

This is what the Bishop of Wichita said about the matter, in a letter to Father Jenkins:

It would no doubt be considered a coup by the University of Notre Dame to have the President of the United States speak at its commencement exercises, and by the President to be invited by a university widely regarded as prestigious.

All that looks much different when it is a Catholic university and the President is outspoken on the wrong side of life issues. A statement about this invitation remarked that the University is “delighted that President Obama will follow in this long tradition of speaking from Notre Dame on issues of substance and significance.”

What issues are of greater substance and significance than those touching upon the sacredness of human life? What might he say that would inspire delight?

Bestowing on the President an honorary degree only adds insult to injury.
It is impossible to defend this invitation to the Catholic faithful who ask; it is an embarrassment. The President would surely understand if you were with all courtesy to disinvite him; he is an intelligent person. Please do so.
Source:
cdowk.org/advanceonline/2009/04/09/bishop-jackels-letter-to-notre-dame/

 

[Grace_Angel]

But, the point is if we each come to differing conclusions, and each claim we are justified, then there is no need for the bishops to tell us how to form our conscience as any conclusion can be justified.

Anyway, this is off topic.

Shame on Notre Dame and its governors.
The most virulent anti life President and is honoured?
Yeah right!!! How disappointing and sad.
GraceAngel.

 

[diggerdomer]

I haven’t interviewed anyone at Notre Dame, nor can I read their minds. The simple fact that the school has decided to honor our most pro-abortion president speaks for itself. When better example can I give than a Catholic university inviting a pro-abortion president to receive an honor? Fifty-nine bishops have now spoken out against it. Surely the school administration is not unaware of that.

So why would a Catholic university invite a pro-abortion president to be honored? Why would they present an honor to someone who goes against everything that a Catholic university stands for?

Obviously, not everyone thinks as you do that the President is “pro-abortion” and if you listened to his recent new conference the other night you might realize that yourself.

Yes, he is “pro-choice” but for most people that’s not the same as calling someone “pro-abortion.”

 

[JimG]

Obviously, not everyone thinks as you do that the President is “pro-abortion” and if you listened to his recent new conference the other night you might realize that yourself.

Yes, he is “pro-choice” but for most people that’s not the same as calling someone “pro-abortion.”

It comes down to the same thing. He wants no limits on abortion. He’s taken FOCA off the front burner, but still supports it, and that bill would ensure that no limits on abortion could be imposed.

To me, that’s pro-abortion. Professor Robert George has called him an “abortion extremist.”

 

[diggerdomer]

I He wants no limits on abortion.

I’ve honestly never heard him say that. Can you point me to where he did? Thanks.

 

[JimG]

I’ve honestly never heard him say that. Can you point me to where he did? Thanks.

Here’s the shortcut: he supports Roe V Wade and Doe v Bolton. Those two decisions ensure that abortion can be obtained throughout 9 months of pregnancy.

But let Robert George flesh out the details.

I think I’d better go back to the Politics Forum, as political controversies are probably more appropriately discussed there.

 

[diggerdomer]

Here’s the shortcut: he supports Roe V Wade and Doe v Bolton. Those two decisions ensure that abortion can be obtained throughout 9 months of pregnancy.

But let Robert George flesh out the details.

I think I’d better go back to the Politics Forum, as political controversies are probably more appropriately discussed there.

Thanks for responding, and for confirming what I thought, that you’re accusing him of something he never said. Very helpful. And of course charitable. Definitely something that furthers sincere honest dialogue on these forums.