How is he “up to his neck”??? Very few people know about this issue outside of pro-life groups, his job doesn’t appear to be in jeopardy, and enrollment doesn’t seem to have gone down. So what exactly is he up to his neck in?Fr. Jenkins conjured up a storm and finds himself up to his neck in the result.
Why are you into tautology? You are saying it is a tresspass case because they have been charged with trespass. What is at issue is more than a simple matter of trespass. As for the comparison, you seem to be saying that sitting at the lunch counter of that privately-owned store is more NOBLE than what the ND88 did. ** I assume that you mean that the cause of those yung black people was itself more NOBLE. ** I Know that many people are upset by any comparison of the issues of abortion/slavery-segregation, because, for the most parts, the civil rights groups are in the same political camp as Planned Parenthood, NOW, etc. As for the “whinning”, the complaints are directed at fellow Catholics who seem to be playing the role of “Uncle Tom” here.First of all, those sitting-in were rarely arrested for trespass, being on public property. Secondly, I cannot remember them whining about their fate; and some got six months in jail for ‘disorderly conduct’. Thirdly, civil rights workers were involved in civil disobedience and were willing to pay the price; unlike those lamenting the hard heart of Father Jenkins.
The two situations are dissimilar. And I note that this is the 50th anniversary of the first sit-in in Greensboro, NC.
This is a trespass case. It has gone on this long because the protesters made political theater out of it.
The last sentence deals with what is at issue. The marchers were aiming at more than getting arrested: they were aiming at making a loud statement. and it is this that Fr. Jenkins seems to dislike. Others were permitted to make “quiet” statements, in the next room and did little that would take media attention away from his “show”.It’s not really anything more than a simple matter of trespass. There is no evidence that the trespassers were arrested for being pro-life. They were arrested for trespassing. Many more pro-lifers were welcomed on ND’s campus on commencement day, even as they protested the Obama honor. Those who were arrested did not participate in the orderly, prayerful protest but instead went to Notre Dame with the intention of doing what was necessary to get arrested. And they were. Randall Terry’s website even says “mission accomplished” because of this.
Just because the state of Indiana is following through with the just punishment for trespassing on private property does not all of a sudden make this case a matter of discrimination against pro-lifers. Trespass laws are just laws. Justice does not require lifting the penalty of violating these just laws, though I would think the Christian concept of mercy recommends dropping the charges, given the circumstances.
This appears to be exactly the case. People could quietly protest as long as it was under university control and did not solicit outside attention.The last sentence deals with what is at issue. The marchers were aiming at more than getting arrested: they were aiming at making a loud statement. and it is this that Fr. Jenkins seems to dislike. Others were permitted to make “quiet” statements, in the next room and did little that would take media attention away from his “show”.
Were any demonstrators with pro-abortion, pro-choice posters arrested? Aside from Fr. Weslin, who was carrying a cross, were there any other people arrested who were not carrying a poster?It’s not really anything more than a simple matter of trespass. There is no evidence that the trespassers were arrested for being pro-life. They were arrested for trespassing. Many more pro-lifers were welcomed on ND’s campus on commencement day, even as they protested the Obama honor. Those who were arrested did not participate in the orderly, prayerful protest but instead went to Notre Dame with the intention of doing what was necessary to get arrested. And they were. Randall Terry’s website even says “mission accomplished” because of this.
Just because the state of Indiana is following through with the just punishment for trespassing on private property does not all of a sudden make this case a matter of discrimination against pro-lifers. Trespass laws are just laws. Justice does not require lifting the penalty of violating these just laws, though I would think the Christian concept of mercy recommends dropping the charges, given the circumstances.
The NDResponse protest was very prayerful, but prayerful doesn’t mean quiet. They were anything but quiet. There were over 3,000! None of whom were arrested. Why would they be? It’s a Catholic University and they had permission by the university to protest Obama’s honorary degree. ND88 did NOT have permission to protest on campus and went in with the intention to get arrested and create a circus. Let’s see, 3000 protestors and all abide by university rules and no one gets arrested. Eighty-eight decide to do their own thing and trespass on private property and do get arrested. Both group’s carrying the same message…It is a simple matter of one group breaking the law and the other group not breaking the law…period.This appears to be exactly the case. People could quietly protest as long as it was under university control and did not solicit outside attention.
“a simple matter of one group breaking the law and the other group not breaking the law…period”, No, I think it is a shame and an outrage that Notre Dame created the need for either group to demonstrate! I say shame on Notre Dame for ignoring the requests of the bishop of their dioceses and the requests of a fewl hundred other bishops.The NDResponse protest was very prayerful, but prayerful doesn’t mean quiet. They were anything but quiet. There were over 3,000! None of whom were arrested. Why would they be? It’s a Catholic University and they had permission by the university to protest Obama’s honorary degree. ND88 did NOT have permission to protest on campus and went in with the intention to get arrested and create a circus. Let’s see, 3000 protestors and all abide by university rules and no one gets arrested. Eighty-eight decide to do their own thing and trespass on private property and do get arrested. Both group’s carrying the same message…It is a simple matter of one group breaking the law and the other group not breaking the law…period.
Thousands of people celebrating an open-air Mass, participating in a rally for life on the quad including several speakers, flooding the Grotto to capacity to pray the Rosary with graduates…these are quiet statements? Even when dozens of media are present and when the demonstration is clearly visible to anyone on campus that day for Commencement Exercises? Quiet, really?The last sentence deals with what is at issue. The marchers were aiming at more than getting arrested: they were aiming at making a loud statement. and it is this that Fr. Jenkins seems to dislike. Others were permitted to make “quiet” statements, in the next room and did little that would take media attention away from his “show”.
We don’t have a stance on abortion and all life issues? We are a Catholic university. We are a pro-life institution. We have one of the most active pro-life clubs in the nation.“a simple matter of one group breaking the law and the other group not breaking the law…period”, No, I think it is a shame and an outrage that Notre Dame created the need for either group to demonstrate! I say shame on Notre Dame for ignoring the requests of the bishop of their dioceses and the requests of a fewl hundred other bishops.
You want to pass Notre Dame off as a Catholic university, this is the school that is still in the process of formulating their stance on pro-life. The Catholic position not fitting they need to develop a different one??? Also, a little late.
Notre Dame had an opportunity to stand united with the Catholic Church against abortion; they choose not to take that opportunity. Any former domers care to defend that?
Not if the president is not going to speak again. The folks were protesting a specific incident. Now, all that is left is a trespass case. So, this is different than the sit-ins.Why are you into tautology? You are saying it is a tresspass case because they have been charged with trespass. What is at issue is more than a simple matter of trespass.
Please don’t presume to tell me what I am saying. You’re wrong, by the way – I did not make a comparison of nobility.As for the comparison, you seem to be saying that sitting at the lunch counter of that privately-owned store is more NOBLE than what the ND88 did.
Really? Conservatives now are trying to submit that they were really civil rights supporters. That claim is inaccurate, by the way.I Know that many people are upset by any comparison of the issues of abortion/slavery-segregation, because, for the most parts, the civil rights groups are in the same political camp as Planned Parenthood, NOW, etc.
An “Uncle Tom” is a person infected by the ‘Stockholm syndrome’ who adopts the views and value systems of the oppressor. In this case, Catholics could certainly say that the abortion protesters are whining. Such a statement does not make one pro-choice.As for the “whinning”, the complaints are directed at fellow Catholics who seem to be playing the role of “Uncle Tom” here.
We don’t have a stance on abortion and all life issues? We are a Catholic university. We are a pro-life institution. We have one of the most active pro-life clubs in the nation.
On January 14, 2010 you posted the following with an attachment.
The University of Notre Dame is making bold pro-life statements and the initiatives are bearing fruit!!!
I CAN’T BE HAPPIER!!!
Although, I cannot say I agree (at all) with the decision of bearing an honorary doctorate of laws to the most pro-choice President of all time, I honestly believe this chaotic time for Notre Dame and her administration caused the institution to dig deep and really analyze their Catholic identity and dedication to life.
And what was the first of these bold pro-life suggestions being made:
• That the University formulate and adopt a policy statement indicating its support for Catholic teaching on the sanctity of human life from conception to natural death.
In mid-January you were thrilled that they were starting the development of a policy to support Catholic teachings and today you respond to me with “We don’t have a stance on abortion and all life issues? We are a Catholic university.” Which is it?
Reportedly, over three hundred thousand Catholics have sent letters of protest to Notre Dame many of those letters, such as mine, ended generations of high esteem for the university. ND let a lot of Catholics and their bishops down, many of us will not forget it.
No, an Uncle Tom is a black person who “acts white.” This according to certain black people, even though the character was intended by Mrs Stowe as the very model of a Christian saint. Not many blacks have read the book. Their notion of the character is based on the stage character, an old man with wooly white hair. In the book, he is young and virtuous, a Christ-figure. Certain urban blacks don’t like Christ-figures, of course.Not if the president is not going to speak again. The folks were protesting a specific incident. Now, all that is left is a trespass case. So, this is different than the sit-ins.
Please don’t presume to tell me what I am saying. You’re wrong, by the way – I did not make a comparison of nobility.
Really? Conservatives now are trying to submit that they were really civil rights supporters. That claim is inaccurate, by the way.
An “Uncle Tom” is a person infected by the ‘Stockholm syndrome’ who adopts the views and value systems of the oppressor. In this case, Catholics could certainly say that the abortion protesters are whining. Such a statement does not make one pro-choice.
Hmm… I think you are making statements for which you have no basis.Not many blacks have read the book. Their notion of the character is based on the stage character, an old man with wooly white hair. In the book, he is young and virtuous, a Christ-figure. Certain urban blacks don’t like Christ-figures, of course.
Try reading the book. Furthermore, the play was dramatized for the stage and widely performed for many years. This version was made into a silent film.Hmm… I think you are making statements for which you have no basis.
Many Catholics seem to be embarrassed about the talk against abortion getting too loud and brash. Lighting a candle in a dark quiet place assuages the conscience for them at least, but to actually generate some negative attention, or any attention at all, is just a little too much.The last sentence deals with what is at issue. The marchers were aiming at more than getting arrested: they were aiming at making a loud statement. and it is this that Fr. Jenkins seems to dislike. Others were permitted to make “quiet” statements, in the next room and did little that would take media attention away from his “show”.
See? You jump to the conclusion that I have not. Actually, I have read it several times and have a copy.Try reading the book. Furthermore, the play was dramatized for the stage and widely performed for many years. This version was made into a silent film.
The ND Response demonstrations were not the equivalent of “lighting a candle in a dark quiet place,” nor was it an effort designed to “assuage the conscience”.Many Catholics seem to be embarrassed about the talk against abortion getting too loud and brash. Lighting a candle in a dark quiet place assuages the conscience for them at least, but to actually generate some negative attention, or any attention at all, is just a little too much.