P
pnewton
Guest
That is one way of putting it. I would rather say that they will withold their political opinions to that which is allowable by law, even if they believe their opinions to be true.
- Status
R
ringil
Guest
Actually, the Catechism is the normative statement to Catholic Doctrine. Fatima and the message there are approved by the Church but Catholics are totally free to not even pay attention to them. Marian apparitions are not Doctrinal. Not so with the CCC.
I’m just pointing this out, not to be snarky, so please don’t take it that way. The CCC is where we should be going primarily for questions of Catholic doctrine. You will see some folks around here putting equal weight to previous Cathechisms and touting papal bulls of 1200’s but I believe that is wrong-headed. Yes, we can look to earlier statements but only as they have been more fully developed in our current doctrinal statements.
R
ringil
Guest
I, largely agree with your post. I simply wrote my earlier one in brevity. I have put in a lot of work in forming my conscience through my life. I struggle with it in light of admitted grave issues with the Democratic Party. In my life and in my study, and my work one to one with folks, I retain my left leaning emphasis. In many aspects I am much more left leaning than what we have seen from the President. I do not believe in American exceptionalism for instance, and I really believe we could learn a lot from more European social policy. I simply do not hold sacred, some aspects of American life and culture which some others do.
However, America still does serve as a “light to the world” with our levels of international and Government charity, and even, at times, millitary action to strike out against evil in the world. I have real issue with our selective and self-serving use of force, but that’s another matter. I’m not an isolationist. My views would not be appreciated by many in the Left leaning US and in the European community.
But, yes, I have, and continue to put in my time in forming my conscience, and it sure as heck, isn’t GOP Conservatism as far as the role of Government in the economy.
S
Swiss_Guy
Guest
You better rethink what you said. 1. Fatima can be ignored, and the CCC is required to believe (give your religious assent to the ordinary magisterium). 2. Christ can protect the Magisterium. As a Catholic you should know that. 3. The Church hasn’t changed her teaching on slavery, usury, and interreligious marraige. I don’t want to derail the thread, but I strongly recommend you look more in depth about those things. Christ and the Church are one, and Christ can’t contradict himself.
L
LovePatience
Guest
This issue comes up frequently. The Church HAS changed its teaching. It is not infalliable and has never claimed to be so except on a few issues. Since you are saying things that are easily proven false, read Judge Noonan’s book: The Church that Can and Cannot Change or simply browse through the direct texts of Papal Encyclicals in the appendix of Father Fanzer’s book: The Popes and Slavery.
Nevertheless, the statement by Mary does not contradict with the Cathechism. If you don’t want to believe it, you don’t have to as it is private revelation. But Fatima has been declared “worthy of belief” by the church after a canonical enquiry and Popes Pius XII, Paul VI, John Paul II and Benedict XVI all voiced their acceptance of the supernatural origin of the Fátima events in unusually clear and strong terms. (line from wikipedia) No good reason exists not to believe it.
S
Swiss_Guy
Guest
You are wrong, but if you want to start another thread you can. I don’t want to derail this one.
p.s: I’m not a dissenter, even though I’m not Catholic yet.
L
LovePatience
Guest
You start another thread if you want to discuss since you raised the issue, as Popes have obviously disagreed with each other, and it is stupid to deny otherwise.You are wrong, but if you want to start another thread you can. I don’t want to derail this one.
p.s: I’m not a dissenter, even though I’m not Catholic yet.
R
rlg94086
Guest
First of all, dropping nuclear bombs on Japan did not end the Holocaust. That is the funniest, ignorant statement I’ve ever read on the subject. Thank you for the quick laugh.Yes, dropping nuclear bombs on Japan was ok to end the Holocaust. The fact that conservatives opposed intervention in the Holocaust in the first place and opposed immigration of the Jews into the United States due to anti-semitism despite their persecution in the Holocaust is the reason why they justly lose many votes.
Secondly, I believe that WWII was a just war, so the rest of your comments are moot in regards to me. No comment about Viet Nam, eh?
What are my thoughts? You seem to know, even though I didn’t present them. Feel free to spell them out for me.Have read the Cathechsim and your thoughts on just war and the death penalty are not supported by it. Can you show how they are?
Who told you contraception is a venial sin? As far as “prioritizing,” who has prioritized it? The Bishops are angry with the Obama administration right now because of contraception. Do the Bishops consider contraception a “relatively unimportant issue?” Are the Bishops in error?
E
estesbob
Guest
He will re-institute the Mexico City policy that prohibits funding ot overseas abortion pproviders, he will reinstate the conscience clauses that used to protect people of faith from being forced to particiapte in medical activities that violated their religious bleiefs, he will appoint pro-life judges, especially to the USSC, he will work with the congress to cut off funding for planned parentohood and other abortion providers.
In fact every single restriction on abortion since Roe was imposed on the country, from parental consent, to sonograms lawas, to informed consent laws and waiting period, from bans on partial Birth abortion ,to the born alive act have come excluxively from the Republicam Party in the face of nearly unanimous oppostion of the democrats. If not for Democrat intrangience in confrming Robert Bork Roe woud have been overturned in 1992.
E
estesbob
Guest
The issue comes up frequesntly from Catholic desperately trying to rationalize their rejection of the Church in favor of their politics. Dogmas of the Church and theoir teachings on Faith and Morals will never change. If you did some study you would find the church NEVER supported slavery and that the Pope was the first European leader to categorically condemn the African Slave trade.You nwould also have to edcuate yourlef in the diggeence between the slaver practiced in the time of Christ and the Chatel slavery insituted in the second millenium.
A
_Abyssinia
Guest
Fareed Zakaria Defends Romney From Media Taking ‘Very Poor’ Remark 'Entirely Out of Context’
Read more: newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/02/05/fareed-zakaria-defends-romney-media-taking-his-very-poor-remark-entir#ixzz1lX8tFhal
Read more: newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/02/05/fareed-zakaria-defends-romney-media-taking-his-very-poor-remark-entir#ixzz1lX8tFhal
I
ishii
Guest
It might be that more people tune out when it gets negative - as Florida certainly did. That would explain the lower turn out. The desire to defeat Obama doesn’t necessarily translate into high turnout in the primaries. Wait until the general election. I don’t think even Romney will have to worry about a fired up base - they will be fired up to defeat Obama if they aren’t so fired up to elect Romney. I think the question will be which way the independents and moderates will go. Obama got a lot of them with talk of “hope and change” and a new way, going beyond partisanship, there are no red or blue states, just American, etc. Then he ended up being very partisan. Also, look at the Catholic vote - much of which went to Obama in 2008. Whether or not you agree with Obama’s forcing the Catholic organizations to go against their consciences, you have to admit that he is taking the support of Catholics for granted in doing so. He will get the committed liberal Catholics to vote for him, but the “muddled middle” might well abandon him. Take away enough catholic votes from Obama in key states like Pennsyvania, Ohio, Michigan, etc. and he loses the election. His arrogance migh be his downfall. He may have gone just a bit too far with the recent actions he took against the Catholic Church and it will hurt him. That gives me hope.
Ishii
I
ishii
Guest
Kennedy? He was the 3rd choice after Bork, and then Ginsburg (who was disqualified after it was revealed that he smoked ganja with his students). Anyone who thinks Reagan could have gotten a proven constructionist past Teddy Kennedy, Joe Biden, et al in the Democrat dominated senate in 1988 doesn’t understand politics or history.
Does that answer your question?
Ishii
M
Monte_RCMS
Guest
There is a long and detailed list of what President Bush II did to reduce abortion.
There is every reason to believe that a new Republican administration will do at least the same.
Does it matter to the pro-life cause whether a President is pro-life or not? Does it matter how many pro-life people are elected to Congress?
Part of the responsibility pro-life educational organizations like Priests for Life is to familiarize people with the electoral process and its implications.
The present document, therefore, explores the progress made for the pro-life cause under a pro-life administration, and the possible impact of a pro-abortion one.
PRO-LIFE ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION
- Appointed Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. The appointments resulted in the upholding of the federal partial-birth abortion ban by a 5-4 decision.
- Reinstituted the Mexico City Policy, begun by the Reagan Administration and reversed by the Clinton Administration (when Congress tried to reinstitute the policy, Clinton vetoed the bill), that bars foreign aid funding to groups that perform or advocate for abortions. In 2003, the Bush Administration expanded the Mexico City Policy to include not just funds dispensed by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), but also the State Department.
- Discouraged advancement of pro-abortion legislation by announcing early in his administration that he would veto legislation that threatened pro-life policy.
- Signed the Born-Alive Infant Protection Act, which made it a federal crime not to treat babies who survive abortion.
- Signed the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban of 2003.
- Signed Unborn Victims of Violence Act, recognizing the unborn child as a separate crime victim if injured or killed during an assault.
- Cut off all federal funds to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) for its involvement in China’s one-child policy which includes forced abortion and sterilization. President Bush sent a fact-finding mission to China which found that the nation’s one-child policy was indeed coercive in nature and that the UNFPA was an integral part of implementing that policy, placing the UNFPA in clear violation of the Kemp-Kasten Amendment that prohibits any aid to any program that involves forced abortion or forced sterilization. Tens of millions of dollars that otherwise would have gone to the UNFPA were redirected to maternal and child health programs.
- Thwarted efforts at the United Nations to promote abortion by instructing U.S. delegates to state at every appropriate opportunity that America does not regard anything in any document before the U.N. to establish any international right to abortion.
- Issued Executive Order banning the use of new lines of embryonic stem cells in federally funded experiments. Later vetoed legislation passed by Congress to permit federal funding of embryonic stem cell research.
- Signed the Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research Act of 2005, which will fund research using umbilical cord and adult stem cells. The measure provides funding to increase the inventory of cord blood units available to match and treat patients and to link cord blood banks so that doctors have a single source to search for cord blood and bone marrow matches. It also reauthorizes the National Bone Marrow Registry.
- Launched public awareness of adoption campaign, working with the National Council for Adoption and pregnancy help centers across the country. The campaign sponsored conferences encouraging faith based communities to promote adoption and produced public service announcements featuring the First Lady urging the adoption of foster children.
- Established the first federal government and national website listing and showing children available for adoption across the country (www.AdoptUSKids.org).
- Increased the tax credit for adoption related expenses from $5,000 to $10,000; for special needs children, the credit was raised from $5,000 for qualified adoption related expenses to $10,000 for any adoption related expenses. This was done as part of the President’s tax relief bill.
- Annually declared Sanctity of Human Life Day.
- Issued a federal regulation allowing states to include unborn children in the federal/state S-CHIP program, which provides health insurance for children in poor families. This allowed states to include pre-natal care in the health insurance they offer to poor children under the program.
- The Bush Administration did what it could to stop assisted suicide from taking further hold in Oregon. The state of Oregon passed an assisted suicide law that allows doctors to prescribe federally controlled drugs in lethal amounts to certain of their patients who say they want to die. Federal law holds that federally controlled drugs may only be prescribed for legitimate medical purposes. During the Clinton Administration, Attorney General Janet Reno decreed that assisted suicide was a legitimate medical purpose in those states that permit it.
- Signed legislation making it possible for a federal court to hear whether Terri Schiavo’s constitutional rights had been violated by being denied hydration and nutrition.
- Dramatically increased funding for abstinence education through the Department of Health and Human Services, although Congress did not approve the full amount the Bush Administration requested.
I
ishii
Guest
Quite impressive, Monte RCMS. I have seen those accomplishments posted numerous times on these forums. Its too bad some of our Democrat/liberal catholic voters seem to have a short memory and require you to re-post it. Obviously the strategy of Democrat catholics is to make the argument that the Republican party isn’t pro-life or just goes through the motions. They’ll say that abortion is still legal after 30 years - and proceed to make all kinds of simplistic arguments. Ultimately it comes down to a choice: do Democrat catholics truly believe in the sanctity of life? Which is it going to be, help protect the unborn or help elect the Democrat? I believe they have made their choice.
Ishii
M
Monte_RCMS
Guest
S
Swiss_Guy
Guest
:yawn:
L
LovePatience
Guest
This isn’t true. Planned Parenthood vs. Casey came from Democrat Robert Casey, and it was an opportunity to overturn Roe v. Wade that Republican appointed justice Kennedy refused to undertake.
I doubt that Romney will “work with the congress to cut off funding for planned parentohood and other abortion providers.” He has never said he would so why do you think so?
E
estesbob
Guest
\As president, I will end federal funding for abortion advocates like Planned Parenthood. I will protect a health care worker’s right to follow their conscience in their work. And I will nominate judges who know the difference between personal opinion and the law. It is long past time for the Supreme Court to return the issue of abortion back to the states, by overturning Roe v. Wade. - Romney’s speech at the Value Voters Conference, October 8, 2011
L
LovePatience
Guest
False, it gets old when conservative Catholics misrepresent the truth to twist the facts. People who do not know what they are talking about deny the Pope’s support of slavery, and it hinders belief in Catholicism when nonCatholics can see the obvious lie and rightly doubt our sincerity. The Pope not only supported the slave trade but encouraged it. The frequent denials of Christians regarding their involvement in slavery may be one of the biggest reasons why many convert to secularism instead of Christianity.
For reference though, John Thomas Noonan, Jr. (born October 24, 1926) is a Senior Circuit Judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, with chambers in San Francisco, California. He was appointed in 1985 by President Ronald Reagan. So if you read his book on the other issues in addition to slavery that have changed through the years, a Reagan appointed judge would hardly be one to rationalize rejection of the Church for their politics.
And you don’t know my politics anyways. You just know that I take issue with misrepresentation of the truth.
- Status