Rep. Paul Ryan now supports gay adoption

[Prodigal_Son1]

I don’t believe there is any final word on Paul Ryan’s views.

Nor has the Holy Wisconsin Bishop come out and criticized Representative Ryan as far as we know. I will accept his interpretation.

catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=15264

I see…

 

[wynnejj]

I’m not persuaded yet that Ryan, if you look at what he actually said, is saying anything contrary to any teaching of the Church. He said “a person”. Perhaps I can be convinced that he meant some openly homosexual “couple” or other scandalous person. But I’m not yet.

According to the ThinkProgress website, the 1999 bill was about the right of same-sex couples to adopt in Washington DC. He said he would vote otherwise today.

He also said that he would support civil unions for support benefits reasons – something that I thought the church would be for – but there is a church document that says:

When legislation in favour of the recognition of homosexual unions is proposed for the first time in a legislative assembly, the Catholic law-maker has a moral duty to express his opposition clearly and publicly and to vote against it. To vote in favour of a law so harmful to the common good is gravely immoral.

I like Paul Ryan and would support him over a Pro-Abortion candidate in a heartbeat, but it has to be acknowledged that there are some positions that do depart from Catholic teaching.

 

[BroomWagon]

According to the ThinkProgress website, the 1999 bill was about the right of same-sex couples to adopt in Washington DC. He said he would vote otherwise today.

He also said that he would support civil unions for support benefits reasons –something that I thought the church would be for – but there is a church document that says:

I like Paul Ryan and would support him over a Pro-Abortion candidate in a heartbeat, but it has to be acknowledged that there are some positions that do depart from Catholic teaching.

And though you thought this, there was some sort of a “quote in the press” per a Vatican official or Vatican radio related to exactly what is emboldened. It was a story here I wanted clarified and I was excoriated a bit for bringing up another “gay” issue but I was earnestly interested in it. I could not find the exact thread but did find this:

Another veteran Vatican figure has signalled openness to civil recognition of same-sex unions in the wake of similar comments in early February from the Vatican’s top official on the family, reports NCR Online.

It’s a position also once reportedly seen with favour by the future pope while he was still Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio in Buenos Aires, Argentina.

cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=35954

Now, let’s be fair, I believe this view has been repudiated but it would seem to show things are not always that clear.

The above NCR Online I just want to make clear is the “Reporter” and not the “Register”.

All the facts, good or bad. Let Rome Speak!

 

[brandonjennings]

Good for Him!

Finally people are acknowledging the hate and harassment homosexuals have received throughout the history of humans. I have many friends with ssa and they deserve to be treated like humans, right to marry right to adopt children who nonetheless would go hungry.

I hear of many cases where people with ssa have committed suicide because they were at the end of a very cruel prank or joke or just other people making there life complete hell. it breaks my heart hearing these stories.

Tonight we should all pray that violence against people with ssa and the world will open its eyes to justice and stop future suicides. Amen

God Bless

 

[Tony_Micelli]

No, God reminds us none of us are perfect. You judge others

Please read what I wrote, I in no way judged him but only his position which we are supposed to do.

 

[ProVobis]

I like Paul Ryan and would support him over a Pro-Abortion candidate in a heartbeat, but it has to be acknowledged that there are some positions that do depart from Catholic teaching.

I’m not saying you’re wrong but seems like saying something which will expand adoptions is definitely making a pro-life statement. I wonder if the resistance is due to the fact that Ryan is being applauded by a progressive group.

 

[LisaA]

Oh? Perhaps you can cite us to where the Church teaches that no chaste person with same sex attraction who does not push or exhibit homosexuality, can be allowed to adopt a needy child. I have never seen that.

Isn’t the problem one of scandal in the usual “homosexual adoption”? Perhaps molestation potential? But if the adopting person is in no way causing scandal and does not molest?

I’m not persuaded yet that Ryan, if you look at what he actually said, is saying anything contrary to any teaching of the Church. He said “a person”. Perhaps I can be convinced that he meant some openly homosexual “couple” or other scandalous person. But I’m not yet.

Ridge thanks to you, Ishii and CaptFun for the rational and reasonable posts. I did wade through all of the posts so not to come late to the party. I think Ryan gave a very limited assent to the possibility of gay adoption…maybe meaning he would not vote for a bill that prohibited all adoptions other than to married heterosexual couples. Or maybe in certain limited cases. One of my very conservative Jewish friends knows of a homosexual couple who have taken on special needs children. While he says in general he opposes single adoptions (gay or straight) or same sex couples from adopting, he doesn’t think they should be absolutely prohibited. It may be that Paul Ryan’s comment was with respect to special situations.

None of us know about the bill he said he opposed so in saying he would vote differently, he is not saying he approves of gay adoptions. Nor does this rather vague and unspecific statement suddenly make him into an unacceptable candidate IMO. But then I’m not a purist.

Frankly I still haven’t gotten over the number of people who allowed Mr Pro Abortion and Most Incompentent President in history to be elected because Romney wasn’t perfect. God help us if this continues to be the standard.

Lisa

 

[BroomWagon]

Captn Fun’s post mentioned the “gotcha” deal. I’ve checked out Brent Bozell’s newsbusters.org site a few times and haven’t seen anything on this. I believe the original source for this story is “thinkprogress” and obviously, that sounds progressive, I’ve visited it a limited time or two.

So, as has been indicated, we may not have the real meat and potatoes of this story, I just hesitate to pass judgement based on the news source and would like for an authority of the Church to clearly assess what Ryan said. I know there is that Vatican document. There are also these stories such as the one from Cath News that seems to lend confusion to the issue from my layman’s point of view.

cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=35954

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20030731_homosexual-unions_en.html

I thank Tony Micelli, Wild Catholic, WynneJJ and ProdigalSon1 for the earnest inquizzitiveness and reasoned debate posts on this issue and sound posts.

 

[ishii]

hey darlin’, I’m not a Democrat. See posts above.

That’s right - you can think for yourself, unlike us hopeless partisans on the right and left. Actually, Julianna - I have read criticisms of Romney, e.g. from Democrat Catholics saying that “he’s just a politician like the rest - he’s a flip flopper.” Meaning: don’t trust a Republican who says they’re pro-life because they only do it for votes. So your comment reminded me of all the times I’ve read comments like that from Democrat liberal Catholics.

Ishii

 

[ishii]

Are we suppose to be surprised? This is the same guy who has upheld Ayn Rand–a devout anti-catholic atheist–as formative in his economic philosophy and who adopted Romney’s pro-choice exceptions in abortion which also was at odds with the catholic faith.

Face it, the GOP only “conserve” mistakes made by progressives in the past.

Well, Mr. Micelli - perhaps you can tell us which of Paul Ryan’s positions or votes on economic and fiscal matters violate Catholic teaching?

Ishii

 

[BroomWagon]

Well, Mr. Micelli - perhaps you can tell us which of Paul Ryan’s positions or votes on economic and fiscal matters violate Catholic teaching?

Ishii

Undeniably there is flack, Paul Ryan is going to speak at Benedictine College in Atcheson Kansas and there may be a slight stir, slight my choice of words mind you, about him doing so.

And the stir is about this Ayn Rand deal mostly, it’s there to read:

kansascity.com/2013/04/28/4207469/sanchez-ryan-gig-in-atchison-tests.html

I thank Tony Micelli, Wild Catholic, WynneJJ, Holley and ProdigalSon1 for the earnest inquizzitiveness and reasoned respectful debate posts on this issue, reading every single post. We don’t have to always agree to discuss matters civilly.

 

[LisaA]

Undeniably there is flack, Paul Ryan is going to speak at Benedictine College in Atcheson Kansas and there may be a slight stir, slight my choice of words mind you, about him doing so.

And the stir is about this Ayn Rand deal mostly, it’s there to read:

kansascity.com/2013/04/28/4207469/sanchez-ryan-gig-in-atchison-tests.html

I thank Tony Micelli, Wild Catholic, WynneJJ, Holley and ProdigalSon1 for the earnest inquizzitiveness and reasoned respectful debate posts on this issue, reading every single post. We don’t have to always agree to discuss matters civilly.

Apparently, one dose of cafeteria Catholic is close enough.

This is frankly silly and specious. From the world of academia that thought Barack Obama was just fine at a Catholic university…Notre Dame no less. Or how about TIller the Killer’s Favorite Abortion FaIry at Georgetown?

Then there was the misleading if not erroneous comment that Ryan’s budget “went after the poor first…”

Really? Are we to be considered so stupid as to not notice the pot kettle problem?

Lisa

 

[BroomWagon]

Apparently, one dose of cafeteria Catholic is close enough.

This is frankly silly and specious. From the world of academia that thought Barack Obama was just fine at a Catholic university…Notre Dame no less. Or how about TIller the Killer’s Favorite Abortion FaIry at Georgetown?

Then there was the misleading if not erroneous comment that Ryan’s budget “went after the poor first…”

Really? Are we to be considered so stupid as to not notice the pot kettle problem?

Lisa

I don’t think the article is well written but I wasn’t looking for Shakespeare, it is an opinion piece, I searched earlier for stories on this. It is what it is. It is like some people’s opinions here I am widely divergent on but so it goes.

Except that the positions that Ryan took during the campaign on abortion are not completely in line with Catholic doctrine. The Romney/Ryan ticket opposed abortion except in the case of rape, incest and the life of the mother. Catholic doctrine doesn’t allow for those exceptions.

Apparently, one dose of cafeteria Catholic is close enough.

Read more here: kansascity.com/2013/04/28/4207469/sanchez-ryan-gig-in-atchison-tests.html#storylink=cpy

And for the record, one has to comb the records very closely, Ryan said as has Ron Paul as well, that they believe “life begins at conception”, so indeed, I believe Paul Ryan’s view is totally in accordance with Catholic Teaching, I never heard him put in any “ifs and or buts” as they say.

The article simply states similar objections to those of individuals here, I don’t agree with the view but it serves to get one up to speed. Next time, I suppose I will spend 5 minutes on a google search and find an article from the American Thinker to please you.

 

[wynnejj]

I’m not saying you’re wrong but seems like saying something which will expand adoptions is definitely making a pro-life statement.

Tell me it’s not so. Unless we expand adoptions, the babies will be put down like dogs?

 

[triumphguy]

Ryan also states in the same video he supports sodomite civil unions.

U.S. Congressman Paul Ryan–Some “Conservative”.

He sounds more like a Liberal Conservative to me.

By sodomite do you mean the many men who engage in such behaviour with their wives?
Or are you referencing men with SSA, many of whom do NOT engage in such behaviour?

Confused in Calgary.

 

[rlg94086]

By sodomite do you mean the many men who engage in such behaviour with their wives?
Or are you referencing men with SSA, many of whom do NOT engage in such behaviour?

Confused in Calgary.

Yeah, because there are a heck of a lot of gay men who are seeking civil unions and/or “gay marriage” and never engage in any sexual acts.

I love the faux incredulity.

 

[triumphguy]

Yeah, because there are a heck of a lot of gay men who are seeking civil unions and/or “gay marriage” and never engage in any sexual acts.

I love the faux incredulity.

Calling people with SSA “sodomites” is

1. Confusing (as stated above).
2. Makes the one making the statement look narrow-minded and vicious.
3. And therefore does not further the arguments against Same Sex unions in any meaningful way.
4. Probably against Church teaching in that it is a way of dehumanizing people with SSA so as to make them an easy target.

 

[triumphguy]

Yeah, because there are a heck of a lot of gay men who are seeking civil unions and/or “gay marriage” and never engage in any sexual acts.

I love the faux incredulity.

BTW am I wrong?

In raw numbers there are probably far more heterosexual sodomites than homosexual.

 

[rlg94086]

BTW am I wrong?

In raw numbers there are probably far more heterosexual sodomites than homosexual.

Sure. But, your point is irrelevant.

The Church still teaches against “gay marriage,” civil unions and gay adoption…in addition to sodomy. The sin of sodomy is something committed by both heterosexuals and homosexuals, but heterosexual couples don’t do “gay marriage” or gay adoption.

Pointing out the sin of sodomy among heterosexuals and making a crazy claim that there are “many” gay men who don’t engage in sodomy but seek civil unions, “gay marriage” and gay adoption cheapens your point.

 

[ishii]

And for the record, one has to comb the records very closely, Ryan said as has Ron Paul as well, that they believe “life begins at conception”, so indeed, I believe Paul Ryan’s view is totally in accordance with Catholic Teaching, I never heard him put in any “ifs and or buts” as they say.
.

Totally in accordance with Catholic teaching is of course the ideal. And we should aim for that. But right now I would settle for a president who does not say God bless Planned Parenthood. Liberal Democrat Catholics who are criticizing Paul Ryan are disingenuous. And also very phony when one considers who they have defended in the past election.

Ishii