US Bishops: Save SNAP

[SMGS127]

See Pope Francis.

I’ve been reading your posts, and I have to tell you that you are not a practicing Catholic. Sorry. You oppose every major moral issue the Church teaches on, and as such, you cannot consider yourself practicing, nor should you receive communion.

In addition, stop slandering Pope Francis. He said that he does not judge those who have SSAs from seeking Christ in their life and practicing a Christian life; that INCLUDES being celibate, and it’s worth noting the question to him directly referenced priests with SSA, who (in the Western world) are celibate by their very nature.

Not only that, but he said to get people’s hearts FIRST so that they may come to the Truth about the evils of same-sex “marriage” and especially abortion on their own through the help of the Church. He merely said trying to drumbeat moral issues into people without bringing them to Christ first was leading us to the losing side of the war.

I don’t understand how any Catholic can support killing children like you do. Do not act like you believe in the Catholic Faith and then attack other Catholics for standing up for the rights of innocent children not to be brutally murdered by their mothers.

As for voting for Democrats, it depends on the race. If you’re voting for a position like…State Agricultural Commissioner, it doesn’t really matter what their abortion stance is. If the Democrat is pro-life, you can licitly vote for them. If both candidates are pro-abortion, you can licitly vote for one. But you absolutely cannot vote for a pro-abortion candidate over a pro-life candidate in a race where doing so would lead to the maintaining of legalized abortion. Stopping the murder of children overshadows all other issues, and that goes both ways. All Republicans are virtually mandated to vote for Democrats in races where the Democrat is more pro-life, and vice versa.

 

[SaintAugustine]

Don’t you judge me. Hopefully the changes our Pope is making will stifle responses such as yours.

What changes? The Pope…today:

The Pope told the medical professionals present that every fragile person one encounters is an invitation to recognize the face of Christ, who in his flesh, “experienced the indifference and loneliness that often condemn the poorest, both in the developing world and in affluent societies.” The face of Christ he said can be seen in the unborn children condemned to abortion as well as the elderly and the sick. “You cannot discard them!,” the Pope exclaimed.

Concluding his address, the Holy Father invited the participants to be witnesses in their professions of a culture of life. Your being Catholic entails greater responsibility: first of all to yourself , for the effort to be consistent with the Christian vocation, and then to contemporary culture , to help recognize the transcendent dimension in human life , the imprint of the creative work of God, from the very first moment of her conception."

Christ, he concluded, is counting on them to spread the Gospel of Life

ewtn.com/vnews/getstory.asp?number=126793

 

[estesbob]

Thats not entirely true. There are several other provisions in there directed at adults which essentially will affect children. The reduction also affects school lunches by degrading what is considered quality food.

Specifically excludes families with children. There are no cuts in school lunches

 

[BigBlueCane]

I’ve been reading your posts, and I have to tell you that you are not a practicing Catholic. Sorry. You oppose every major moral issue the Church teaches on, and as such, you cannot consider yourself practicing, nor should you receive communion.

LOL!!! Thank you Pope SMGS. I’m so impressed that you were able to read my soul based on a few internet posts. You don’t know me and you just made a blanket judgement on me. I have a bad memory but I’m pretty sure they didn’t teach that in my 14 years of catholic education.

In addition, stop slandering Pope Francis. He said that he does not judge those who have SSAs from seeking Christ in their life and practicing a Christian life; that INCLUDES being celibate, and it’s worth noting the question to him directly referenced priests with SSA, who (in the Western world) are celibate by their very nature.

I think I understood his message pretty clearly that not judging is a pretty universal concept. I don’t think it only applies to priests. Perhaps its you that are misreading what he is saying.

Not only that, but he said to get people’s hearts FIRST so that they may come to the Truth about the evils of same-sex “marriage” and especially abortion on their own through the help of the Church. He merely said trying to drumbeat moral issues into people without bringing them to Christ first was leading us to the losing side of the war.

And I agree with that and have said that many times in the past. The Church, at least in this country, should focus more on issues involving the poor and immigrants instead of abortion and gay marriage. That doesn’t mean they should change any dogma in regards to those issues but just a change in priorities.

I don’t understand how any Catholic can support killing children like you do. Do not act like you believe in the Catholic Faith and then attack other Catholics for standing up for the rights of innocent children not to be brutally murdered by their mothers.

I don’t support killing children and I don’t attack other catholics for standing up against abortion. I just think their energies would be better served elsewhere and are much more needed in other areas.

As for voting for Democrats, it depends on the race. If you’re voting for a position like…State Agricultural Commissioner, it doesn’t really matter what their abortion stance is. If the Democrat is pro-life, you can licitly vote for them. If both candidates are pro-abortion, you can licitly vote for one. But you absolutely cannot vote for a pro-abortion candidate over a pro-life candidate in a race where doing so would lead to the maintaining of legalized abortion. Stopping the murder of children overshadows all other issues, and that goes both ways. All Republicans are virtually mandated to vote for Democrats in races where the Democrat is more pro-life, and vice versa.

I absolutely can because abortion is not the only issue. A lot of republican candidates also support horrible things that affect the lives of everyday people. So who are you to say what is more important. I think I can make my own decision on that. Sorry I just think that voting against a democrat just because they are pro choice is ill advised especially when you vote for the republican that may negatively affect the lives of living people.

No candidate is perfect and NO candidate fits perfectly every catholic stance on an issue. So in EVERy case you have to make a decision and I just don’t think abortion is a priority. That doesn’t make me any less catholic than you.

 

[SMGS127]

LOL!!! Thank you Pope SMGS. I’m so impressed that you were able to read my soul based on a few internet posts. You don’t know me and you just made a blanket judgement on me. I have a bad memory but I’m pretty sure they didn’t teach that in my 14 years of catholic education.

I think I understood his message pretty clearly that not judging is a pretty universal concept. I don’t think it only applies to priests. Perhaps its you that are misreading what he is saying.

And I agree with that and have said that many times in the past. The Church, at least in this country, should focus more on issues involving the poor and immigrants instead of abortion and gay marriage. That doesn’t mean they should change any dogma in regards to those issues but just a change in priorities.

I don’t support killing children and I don’t attack other catholics for standing up against abortion. I just think their energies would be better served elsewhere and are much more needed in other areas.

I absolutely can because abortion is not the only issue. A lot of republican candidates also support horrible things that affect the lives of everyday people. So who are you to say what is more important. I think I can make my own decision on that. Sorry I just think that voting against a democrat just because they are pro choice is ill advised especially when you vote for the republican that may negatively affect the lives of living people.

No candidate is perfect and NO candidate fits perfectly every catholic stance on an issue. So in EVERy case you have to make a decision and I just don’t think abortion is a priority. That doesn’t make me any less catholic than you.

Quotes from this thread:

“Its only your opinion that [abortion] is intrinsically evil. Thankfully we live in a democracy not a theocracy.”

“It is also why most of America REJECTS the concept of today’s conservative cuz all they care about are guns, gays, and getting into a woman’s uterus.”

(emphasis mine)

So if I got this straight, you are claiming that you oppose abortion but view a ban on abortion as “getting into a woman’s uterus” and claim that it is a matter of opinion over whether abortion is an intrinsic evil. You also claim that the murder of children is less important than economic or other issues. And you’re arguing that I’m judging you by telling you that a practicing Catholic cannot possibly think it is a matter of “opinion” that abortion is intrinsically evil.

A) Abortion IS intrinsically evil; there are no ifs, ands, or buts about it. The Fifth Commandment specifically bans murder of any kind. This extends to children.

B) Supporting abortion DOES, in fact, preclude you from communion.

C) If you truly oppose abortion, why do you feel the need to use pro-abortion language, defend pro-abortion politicians, and oppose the ability of us to encode into law abortion bans?

D) Stopping the senseless genocide of children in this country is much more important than whatever immoral things Republicans do (which is a lot), because life is the single most important gift God gives us on Earth. We do not have the right to take it away from anyone. That comes first before any other issues.

 

[ProVobis]

It wasnt-its the same chart that was widely circulated during the last election and was widely debunked by just about every news organization in the country

Heres what has really happenned
http://www.aei-ideas.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/052412obamaspending.jpg

Wasn’t most of this “spending” tax cuts and bailouts for state teachers? I heard some of that $800 billion stimulus has still not been spent.

Interesting that the increase in spending dropped so much under Clinton.

 

[SaintAugustine]

Wasn’t most of this “spending” tax cuts and bailouts for state teachers? I heard some of that $800 billion stimulus has still not been spent.

Interesting that the increase in spending dropped so much under Clinton.

Newt Gingrich

 

[SMGS127]

Newt Gingrich

And these Republicans were so budget-conscious that, under President Bush, Speaker Hastert continued to cut sp…oh wait.

No, it’s very clear that Democrats tend to reduce the growth in the deficit well more than Republicans. Republicans just like to make a loud show about it every time Democrats are in power, especially after they hand them budgets that are essentially unbalanceable from the previous Republican administration.

 

[ProVobis]

No, it’s very clear that Democrats tend to reduce the growth in the deficit well more than Republicans.

Well, yeh, because deficits don’t matter under Republicans.

 

[saintjohnxxiii]

LOL!!! Thank you Pope SMGS. I’m so impressed that you were able to read my soul based on a few internet posts. You don’t know me and you just made a blanket judgement on me. I have a bad memory but I’m pretty sure they didn’t teach that in my 14 years of catholic education.

I think I understood his message pretty clearly that not judging is a pretty universal concept. I don’t think it only applies to priests. Perhaps its you that are misreading what he is saying.

And I agree with that and have said that many times in the past. The Church, at least in this country, should focus more on issues involving the poor and immigrants instead of abortion and gay marriage. That doesn’t mean they should change any dogma in regards to those issues but just a change in priorities.

I don’t support killing children and I don’t attack other catholics for standing up against abortion. I just think their energies would be better served elsewhere and are much more needed in other areas.

I absolutely can because abortion is not the only issue. A lot of republican candidates also support horrible things that affect the lives of everyday people. So who are you to say what is more important. I think I can make my own decision on that. Sorry I just think that voting against a democrat just because they are pro choice is ill advised especially when you vote for the republican that may negatively affect the lives of living people.

No candidate is perfect and NO candidate fits perfectly every catholic stance on an issue. So in EVERy case you have to make a decision and I just don’t think abortion is a priority. That doesn’t make me any less catholic than you.

Abortion will remain legal until Obama Catholics come to love the unborn, more than they hate the GOP.

Also the idea that the poor and the immigrant require a greater focus to the point where one doesn’t care at all about abortion doesn’t fly as look at Mother Theresa. No one has done more for the poor than she has and no one is more pro-life than her.

 

[phil19034]

Hypothetical Question: Let’s compare two hypothetical people for President:

1. Choice A - personally condemns abortion, but is Pro-Choice due to women’s rights & political reasons, and is anti-death penalty. Person A also is a strong, positive advocate for the poor, and has been on record has never approving military force and that nuclear weapons should never be used.
2. Choice B - is pro-Life but also very pro-death penalty. Person B also says that all entitlements including public transportation should be eliminated, and has is often arguing that military force should be flexed in several situations and that the nuclear option should remain an option.

— Yes, I know this is extreme, but — Which is the correct Catholic choice? (Keeping in mind that of the 9 current Supreme Court justices, 6 are Catholics)

The problem I have is that I seriously doubt the Supreme Court will ever overturn Roe v Wade (I wish they would, but I doubt they will). This is why I want a Catholic Party. If you can’t take communion, you can’t gain the nomination of the Catholic Party!

(NOTE: I’m not liberal, but I am a moderate Republican from the Northeast)

 

[SMGS127]

Hypothetical Question: Let’s compare two hypothetical people for President:

1. Choice A - personally condemns abortion, but is Pro-Choice due to women’s rights & political reasons, and is anti-death penalty. Person A also is a strong, positive advocate for the poor, and has been on record has never approving military force and that nuclear weapons should never be used.
2. Choice B - is pro-Life but also very pro-death penalty. Person B also says that all entitlements including public transportation should be eliminated, and has is often arguing that military force should be flexed in several situations and that the nuclear option should remain an option.

— Yes, I know this is extreme, but — Which is the correct Catholic choice? (Keeping in mind that of the 9 current Supreme Court justices, 6 are Catholics)

The problem I have is that I seriously doubt the Supreme Court will ever overturn Roe v Wade (I wish they would, but I doubt they will). This is why I want a Catholic Party. If you can’t take communion, you can’t gain the nomination of the Catholic Party!

(NOTE: I’m not liberal, but I am a moderate Republican from the Northeast)

The problem is it’s hard to know if someone can’t take communion. If they support abortion, that’s one thing, but, for example, if they’ve had a history of same-sex relationships for example, how do you know they haven’t confessed and repented if they aren’t open about their personal life? Do you believe that everyone’s personal life should be on display to ensure they’re not in mortal sin? If so, who determines that? It gets murky. I guess you could have a straight ban on all those who support abortion and just leave it with that.

 

[SaintAugustine]

And so the long-standing CAF tradition continues-- when the bishops agree with my politics they are speaking as the successors of the apostles and must be followed; when they disagree with my politics, they are expressing private opinions and may be ignored.

I take it, as someone who has been here for 6 years, you are including yourself as part of that CAF tradition? Or, are you somehow special and superior?

 

[Julian_Bashir]

Again, how is the moderators allow a topic that lies about its title continue to exist? They disallow lifesitenews and blogs, and they have changed topics or closed them before when the title doesn’t match the article. Have the rules changed since the last time someone had started a topic from a news article?

If we can start making up our titles, the board is going to be overrun.

 

[ishii]

Again, how is the moderators allow a topic that lies about its title continue to exist? They disallow lifesitenews and blogs, and they have changed topics or closed them before when the title doesn’t match the article. Have the rules changed since the last time someone had started a topic from a news article?

If we can start making up our titles, the board is going to be overrun.

No kidding - what’s up with the deliberately misleading title? Hard to imagine something so deceptive being allowed, but who am I to question.

Ishii

 

[LiberalPrincess]

THANK YOU US BISHOPS for standing up for what is right. These are the issues that the Church needs to be at the forefront in, rather than trying to hold back the civil rights for gays.

 

[ishii]

THANK YOU US BISHOPS for standing up for what is right. These are the issues that the Church needs to be at the forefront in, rather than trying to hold back the civil rights for gays.

Really? I missed the part where this involved the US bishops. It is only Bishop Blaire talking. The title of this thread is misleading. You are entitled to your opinion but not your own facts.

Ishii

 

[estesbob]

Hypothetical Question: Let’s compare two hypothetical people for President:

1. Choice A - personally condemns abortion, but is Pro-Choice due to women’s rights & political reasons, and is anti-death penalty. Person A also is a strong, positive advocate for the poor, and has been on record has never approving military force and that nuclear weapons should never be used.
2. Choice B - is pro-Life but also very pro-death penalty. Person B also says that all entitlements including public transportation should be eliminated, and has is often arguing that military force should be flexed in several situations and that the nuclear option should remain an option.

— Yes, I know this is extreme, but — Which is the correct Catholic choice? (Keeping in mind that of the 9 current Supreme Court justices, 6 are Catholics)

The problem I have is that I seriously doubt the Supreme Court will ever overturn Roe v Wade (I wish they would, but I doubt they will). This is why I want a Catholic Party. If you can’t take communion, you can’t gain the nomination of the Catholic Party!

(NOTE: I’m not liberal, but I am a moderate Republican from the Northeast)

*3. Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia./I]

Pope Emeritus Benedict XV!*

 

[SaintAugustine]

THANK YOU US BISHOPS for standing up for what is right. These are the issues that the Church needs to be at the forefront in, rather than trying to hold back the civil rights for gays.

“Rather than?” The Bishops speak out on all moral issues, as they should. I disagree with this individual Bishop’s assessment, as SNAP isn’t in need of being “saved” (the increase is being decreased, but it is still increasing), but I would hope he still speaks out against gay “marriage” and civil unions.

 

[Darryl1958]

I think it is rather gauche to carry popes and bishops around in our political quivers and shoot them as arrows at those who have a different political philosophy than us.

We are to be united by a common faith and a common teaching. The considered opinions of any particular pope or bishop may or may not be a part of that common faith. To the extent though that bishops do not even agree with each other politically, the positions they hold are not what unite us.

It is a dishonest ruse to pretend that these political opinions are anything more than that, and that Catholics who disagree are less Catholic on that account.