D
Dale_M
Guest
wcco.com/local/Steven.Miles.church.2.715035.html
Considering Dr Miles wasn’t going to speak about abortion, was the archdiocese’s decision correct?
- Status
Considering Dr Miles wasn’t going to speak about abortion, was the archdiocese’s decision correct?
P
peregrinus_WA
Guest
What surprises me is that St. Joan of Arc Church would even obey the diocese. Maybe the new Archbishop is finally laying the smackdown on that parish that has been needed for a very long time. 
C
Cajetan
Guest
Good move.
Being an advocate for abortion says enough about an individual’s character – enough for the Church to soundly determine that he or she should not be speaking to the faithful in a Catholic parish, regardless of the topic but especially on moral issues (like torture). Evidently the man is morally unsound on the greatest moral tragedy of our times, abortion; and thus we have reason to believe that his thoughts on torture would also be morally unsound. Moreover, he has blood on his hands.
Being an advocate for abortion says enough about an individual’s character – enough for the Church to soundly determine that he or she should not be speaking to the faithful in a Catholic parish, regardless of the topic but especially on moral issues (like torture). Evidently the man is morally unsound on the greatest moral tragedy of our times, abortion; and thus we have reason to believe that his thoughts on torture would also be morally unsound. Moreover, he has blood on his hands.
A
Atreyu
Guest
If Dr Miles advocated infanticide, but wasn’t going to talk about it, do you think it would then be correct to uninvite him?
P
peregrinus_WA
Guest
Abortion and Infanticide are the same thing in my book.
It seems that more and more of the bishops are starting to get the guts (I could use a couple of other terms here but I do not think even I could get away with it with Walt
) to go after the “progressives” in the Church.Eventually, it WILL come down to excommunications.
As for St. Joan’s, I have said in the past that they may be a lost cause and the parish may have to be suppressed.
D
Dale_M
Guest
Good point
N
NewUlm1976_2000
Guest
I disagree with the Archdiocese on this. Abortion was not the topic at all. He was to speak on tourtue, had no intention to mention at all. Some of the material dug up goes back to 1979.
This policy limits lots of speakers if you ever at one point in your life speak out on one issue.
This policy limits lots of speakers if you ever at one point in your life speak out on one issue.
D
Della
Guest
I’m sure the parish can dig up someone qualified to speak about torture who also is pro-life. This cancellation was proper and correct because having a pro-abortion person speak at a Catholic parish sends the wrong message. It’s about time our bishops stood up for the teachings of the their own Church over placating the sensibilities of those who promote the slaughter of innocent unborn children.
I
irenaeus1
Guest
It doesn’t matter whether abortion was not going to be mentioned. The statement “The Catholic community should not provide speaking platforms for those who act in defiance of our basic moral principals” makes no reference to the topic of the speech. Besides, if abortion is not torture, what is? Just because you cannot hear their screams?
If you actually knew what abortion was, if we could actually see abortion, I don’t believe any sane person would not call it torture. You can watch a kidney transplant or brain surgery being conducted on Discovery Health or some other television network, but you will never see an abortion procedure aired. Why? Because then the evil would be exposed for what it is, and even more would come to understand the utter depravity and heinousness of the act. And then it would be even more apparent that one who supports legal protection for such a ‘procedure’ is unfit to speak at any Catholic Church.
N
NewUlm1976_2000
Guest
It appears there is a fixation solely on the abortion issue. Other topics should be able to be discussed without that intruding in. Otherwise it ends up in a situation where it is too narrowly focused as every issue has to somehow pass an abortion test before it can be mentioned or discussed about. That does many other worthy issues disjustice.
I
irenaeus1
Guest
So you think it acceptable to invite a speaker to address the issue of, say, child abuse or domestic violence, although the speaker may be known for his public support of burning crosses in the front yards of African-Americans’ homes. I mean, let’s not let a single issue obstruct an otherwise worthy topic of discussion.
It’s amazing how some obviously do not understand the grave depravity of abortion. Your above statement is a case in point.
I
irenaeus1
Guest
You also act as if there is some shortage of ‘qualified’ speakers to speak on worthy topics - as if these deficient speakers are not allowed a platform, then there would be no one else to pick up the slack. Why is that?
E
estesbob
Guest
A person who supports abortion is so deeply flawed morally that their opinion on ethical matters is worthless.
S
Steven_Miles
Guest
I appreciate the discussion on the forum. This is a link to the text that I was to give at St. Joan of Arc.
dailykos.com/story/2008/5/4/133550/4535/639/508896
Best regards,
Steven Miles, MD
dailykos.com/story/2008/5/4/133550/4535/639/508896
Best regards,
Steven Miles, MD
E
estesbob
Guest
The question is not whether your speech was worthwhile-the question is why a Catholic School would let someopne who publicly supports an abject evil be given a platform to speak on anything.
J
jmcrae
Guest
Considering what I know of St. Joan’s this is an astounding and happy step in the right direction - they rejected a pro-abortion speaker?
Sounds like there is some conversion going on at that parish! :extrahappy: :extrahappy: :extrahappy:
A
AHapka
Guest
Yes, the decision was correct.
After all, it would be kind of like inviting an unrepentant serial killer to talk about (name any topic) inside of the church. The grave moral evil that the person is involved in taints anything else he or she has to say.
Now if it was a repentant serial killer who was truly reforming his life and living according to church teaching, it might be different. But the Dr. still supports abortion, so he is as far as I can tell unrepentant.
There are many available soapboxes out there. Speaking inside the church or with church approval should be reserved for those who are in obedience to the Magesterium.
C
Contarini
Guest
Would you also support rejecting a prolife speaker who supports torture?
Do we really need to get into the question of which is worse? Surely they are both great evils.
Edwin
Do we really need to get into the question of which is worse? Surely they are both great evils.
Edwin
E
estesbob
Guest
If a Catholic School invites somene to speak who supports torture they should be soundly ctiticized for it. Of course they are not bound to accept the very broad definition of torture that is prevalent among the left today. It should be noted that the church says NO issue rises to the level of Abortion.
J
jmcrae
Guest
I don’t know about anyone else, but I would. I was a proud supporter of Amnesty International until they started coming out in support of abortion last year. (It makes no sense to me that they did that, either.
) Anyhow, they lost my dollars over that, but I am still an opponent of torture.Yes, they certainly are, and anyone who supports either one is missing the meaning of the value and sacredness of human life. We are literally icons of God (see Genesis 1:27) which means that to harm or to kill a human being is to commit the greatest sacrilege of all.
- Status