Vatican bank image hurt as JP Morgan closes account [Is the government attacking the Church?]

[Love_God_Too]

In all honesty…Do you see your contradiction here? Conservatives make the same statement about our government, less bureacrats,transparency…

I haven’t been against transparency in any post that I wrote. Perhaps you can find it. I’m no more in favor of govt. wasting money than anyone else. That’s why I believe we should eliminate tax breaks for oil companies that are bringing in more profit than any other industry in the history of the world, or tax break funding corporations that take production jobs overseas to have their products built by Chinese children. They do so because the people YOU vote for take buckets of money from these US economy rapist. What I can’t figure out is why so many of you are supporting them while claiming to be Catholic. There is a moral to the story to the New Testament, you don’t seem to get it. The Bible tells that a rich man has as much chance of getting into heaven as a camel passing through the eye of a needle. This is exactly what is being referred to here. That is also why I would be pleased if some of you would actually read the New Testament instead of watching Fox News. They are not one in the same. The message of the Bible is accurate, Fox News? Not so much…

You seem to want to go back to some morality of a day gone by… How about the tax rate too??? Reagan would be fine…Eisenhower would be better… You say you support family values? Oh really? Can a mom stay home and raise their children today? I can count on one finger the parents that I know who can do that… How about you…Everyone that I know is working everyday…They have been for years…

 

[Love_God_Too]

Meanwhile, the National Park Service, administered by the U.S. Department of the Interior, asks us to “Please Do Not Feed The Animals.” This is because the animals may grow dependent on ‘handouts’ and not learn to take care of themselves.

Why am I not surprised that you consider the poor to be the same as the beast of the field. Survival of the fittest, Where can I find that in the Bible…Hmmmmmmm

 

[Love_God_Too]

Oh and by the way…

Here endeth the TRUE lesson:thumbsup:

 

[ishii]

When you actually make a point, I’d be glad to respond to it…

Why the snarky attitude? Is it your goal to annoy or do you want people to listen to your points?

Here are some points that I made that you may not agree with, but you never really responded:

*There is a just war theory that the Church acknowleges. However, there isn’t a “just abortion theory” or a “just contraception theory”. The Church does not say ** how ** we are to help the poor, only that it is the responsibility of all of us to do so. So your statement that the Holy See is opposed to those who call for different policies to help the poor - e.g. different than the ineffective redistributionist policies of the left which basically rob Peter to pay Paul (and conveniently get the votes of Paul) - your statement is wrong. *

and:

*The Church allows for the death penalty in certain circumstances. In America there were 43 executions last year. There were 827,609 abortions reported in the US in 2011. Yet you only focus on the 43 executed and ignore the 827,609. Why? Perhaps your political faith is getting in the way? *

here was another good point:

Obama hasn’t created jobs, it is the private sector that creates jobs through investment and risk taking. Unfortunately Obama’s huge spending and increased deficits makes business wary of taking risks right now. And, increases in fuel costs has to hurt as well. Too bad Obama is so in the pocket of the green energy lobby that he can’t authorize building a pipeline that would create jobs and help reduce energy costs…

Not too late to respond subtantively to these points, (if in fact you’re really interested in an honest discussion…)

Ishii

 

[maryj]

I haven’t been against transparency in any post that I wrote. Perhaps you can find it. I’m no more in favor of govt. wasting money than anyone else. That’s why I believe we should eliminate tax breaks for oil companies that are bringing in more profit than any other industry in the history of the world, or tax break funding corporations that take production jobs overseas to have their products built by Chinese children. They do so because the people YOU vote for take buckets of money from these US economy rapist. What I can’t figure out is why so many of you are supporting them while claiming to be Catholic. There is a moral to the story to the New Testament, you don’t seem to get it. The Bible tells that a rich man has as much chance of getting into heaven as a camel passing through the eye of a needle. This is exactly what is being referred to here. That is also why I would be pleased if some of you would actually read the New Testament instead of watching Fox News. They are not one in the same. The message of the Bible is accurate, Fox News? Not so much…

You seem to want to go back to some morality of a day gone by… How about the tax rate too??? Reagan would be fine…Eisenhower would be better… You say you support family values? Oh really? Can a mom stay home and raise their children today? I can count on one finger the parents that I know who can do that… How about you…Everyone that I know is working everyday…They have been for years…

I’ve read the new testament, and I loved being able to stay at home with my daughter when she was young,she owns her own home now…but most importantly I belong to Jesus Christ not a political party! I shake the dust from my sandals now…God bless

 

[exoflare]

Ugh… guys, please stop feeding the trolls.

 

[Love_God_Too]

Why the snarky attitude? Is it your goal to annoy or do you want people to listen to your points?

You calling my points snarky, that’s rich.

Here are some points that I made that you may not agree with, but you never really responded:

There is a just war theory that the Church acknowleges. However, there isn’t a “just abortion theory” or a “just contraception theory”.
I have already posted about Pope John Paul’s opposition to YOUR wars and I have already told you I am pro-life.

The Church does not say ** how ** we are to help the poor, only that it is the responsibility of all of us to do so. So your statement that the Holy See is opposed to those who call for different policies to help the poor - e.g. different than the ineffective redistributionist policies of the left which basically rob Peter to pay Paul (and conveniently get the votes of Paul) - your statement is wrong.

I’ve already posted and documented Pope John Paul’s appeal to the governments of the world to do more for the poor. I don’t think that meant to spend less to help them do you? I doubt he’d compare them to animals that should not be fed due to dependency on handouts do you?

*The Church allows for the death penalty in certain circumstances. In America there were 43 executions last year. There were 827,609 abortions reported in the US in 2011. Yet you only focus on the 43 executed and ignore the 827,609. Why? Perhaps your political faith is getting in the way? *

I have already posted, and documented Pope John Paul’s practically universal opposition to capital punishment. He wasn’t that fond of water boarding that you guys seem to enjoy so much either.

here was another good point:

Obama hasn’t created jobs, it is the private sector that creates jobs through investment and risk taking. Unfortunately Obama’s huge spending and increased deficits makes business wary of taking risks right now. And, increases in fuel costs has to hurt as well. Too bad Obama is so in the pocket of the green energy lobby that he can’t authorize building a pipeline that would create jobs and help reduce energy costs…

So let’s get this right, when the unemployment rate goes up, it’s all Obama’a fault. When his policies result in almost 3 million jobs in the last two years he has nothing to do with it.

Obama’s deficit is decreasing, it was your guy that took a 1.5 trillion dollar surplus and turned it into a 1.5 trillion dollar deficit. Obama’s deficit has been declining 1.2 tril. in 2010 and 1.1 in 2011 check Bloomberg News.

While oil and gas production was down 13% during the Bush Administration it’s up almost 10% under Obama. Oil prices hit this level under Bush and I know you blamed it on his policies at the time right? The US president does not control world oil prices. If production did increase overwhelmingly in the US the oil would go on the world market. DO you think the US oil companies would hold it just for us so we could have lower prices? They won’t even pay their taxes!

Not too late to respond subtantively to these points, (if in fact you’re really interested in an honest discussion…)

The one that hasn’t responded to a single point is YOU.

 

[Love_God_Too]

Thank God you belong to a church that believes in reconciliation. You should look into it.

 

[lax16]

Thank God you belong to a church that believes in reconciliation. You should look into it.

You claim to be Catholic - shouldn’t you say: Thank God WE belong to a church that believes in reconciliation?

 

[lax16]

My mom is 91 and I don’t think she is using birth control either. The article I posted referred to women most apt to get pregnant. 15-44 is that group. I guess I don’t know what you are defending when 98% of Catholic women in their child bearing years use birth control. Even if you disagree with those numbers, you can’t disagree, reasonably anyway, with the fact is the overwhelming majority of Catholic women, just like all women, use birth control.

I can’t help but feel that if men could get pregnant, birth control would be handed out every Sunday with the bulletin at the back of the church!

Love God Too - I have decided to post this article so that you too will stop repeating Obama’s and Pelosi’s mantra and read the facts for yourself. There is no doubt that women who consider themselves Catholic are using birth control, but it is not 99%.

Also, you must remember that this age group of women may be poorly catechized and may not know the Church’s teaching on this subject. I believe the numbers might drop if more women knew the Church’s position on it.

Obama’s 99% Birth Control Figure So Wrong the Washington Post Notices
by Bob Laird | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 2/20/12 11:42 AM

The Washington Post and its “Fact Checker,” Glenn Kessler, gave the media a rating of “two pinocchios” for failing to verify a claim made by President Obama and repeated by others including the press concerning the number of Catholic women using birth control.

In a February 10th press briefing, the President used a “nearly 99 percent” figure. This was repeated by Rep. Nancy Pelosi later when she said “Ninety-eight percent of Catholic women, I am told by all of you [referring to the media], use birth control to determine the size and timing of their families.” This misinformation follows the old adage that if you keep repeating a lie, people will actually believe it.

The story erupted over the continuing battle between religious organizations led by the Catholic Church and the Obama Administration over religious liberty. Obama, in a hollow gesture to the Catholic Church, noted that he could not understand why the Catholic Church was so concerned about birth control because “Nearly 99 percent of all women have relied on contraception at some point in their lives.” The president’s data came from a CDC report stating that “more than 99% of women 15-44 years of age who have ever had sexual intercourse with a male (referred to as “sexually experienced women”) have used at least one contraceptive method.”

This data is similar to that presented by the Guttmacher Institute, formerly an arm of Planned Parenthood, in an April 2011 study based on a 2006-2008 study by the National Survey of Family Growth. The careful language of the President included “at some point in their lives.” This is as factual as saying that “nearly 99 percent of all car drivers have exceeded the speed limit at some point in their lives.” In his “Fact Checker,” Kessler decided to look into the numbers, especially since Pelosi cited the media as her source of information.

He found that the 98% figure didn’t make sense because population groups did not include those women who have never had sexual intercourse. The Guttmacher study provided a glimpse of this number. The study reported that overall, 79% are sexually experienced (that is defined as one encounter of sexual intercourse in a lifetime). Among Catholics, Guttmacher reports that number to be 89%. Furthermore, the report cites the fact that “never-married women of reproductive age who attend religious services every week are less likely to ever have sex than those who attend less frequently (48% vs. 74-80%).”

An additional parsing of the data presents a quite different picture by looking at current birth control use by Catholic women (a more relevant figure). The survey defined this as “those who had had sex in the three months prior to the survey and were not pregnant, postpartum or trying to get pregnant.” For those women:

2% use Natural Family Planning
32% use sterilization
31% use the Pill or other hormonal contraceptives
5% use the IUD
15% use the condom
4% use other methods
11% use no method at all.
This still misses a large demographic among women between the ages of 15 and 44 – those women who are not sexually active, not pregnant, postpartum, or trying to get pregnant.

Is there good news from this data? One finding is that the 99% number is incorrect because it only looks at sexually active women who have had intercourse at least once in their lives. **It also shows that there are a significant number of Catholic women who have never had sexual intercourse (11%), another significant number of women who are sexually active who either use no birth control or use Natural Family Planning (13%), and an unreported number of women who are pregnant, postpartum, or trying to get pregnant.**Kessler concludes that the media have gotten it wrong. The journalistic short hand has been that ’98 percent of American Catholic women have used contraception in their lifetimes.’” While this is not exactly overwhelming data in the opposite direction, it does show the fabrication of the concept that nearly everyone between the ages of 14 and 44 is having sexual intercourse in the United States. This is not the time for the American Catholic bishops and leaders to throw up their hands. It is an opportunity to portray the beauty of natural family planning (NFP) and how it can be used to both postpone a pregnancy, and to bring about a level of respect and honor among couples not found in the contraception, sterilization, and abortion world.

LifeNews Note: Bob Laird is the President of the Cabrini Center for Catholic Healthcare and a member of the Board of Directors of the Couple to Couple League.

 

[Erich]

So let’s get this right, when the unemployment rate goes up, it’s all Obama’a fault. When his policies result in almost 3 million jobs in the last two years he has nothing to do with it.

It is true that 4.4 million jobs disappeared during the 2007-08 panic. But after Obama took office, an additional 4.3 million jobs disappeared. So when Obama says “we’ve added 3.7 million new jobs,” he’s not giving you the full story. We are still 5.6 million jobs below where we were at the peak in 2007. Add to that the 4.9 million new jobs that would have had to be created just to soak up new entrants into the workforce, and all told we have a jobs deficit of 10.5 million.

COSTELLO: I want to talk about the unemployment rate in America.
ABBOTT: Good Subject. Terrible Times. It’s about 8 percent.
COSTELLO: That many people are out of work?
ABBOTT: No, that’s 16 percent.
COSTELLO: You just said 8 percent.
ABBOTT: 8 percent unemployed.
COSTELLO: Right 8 percent out of work.
ABBOTT: No, that’s 16 percent.
COSTELLO: Okay, so it’s 16 percent unemployed.
ABBOTT: No, that’s around 8 percent…
COSTELLO: Waits a minute. Is it 8 percent or 16 percent?
ABBOTT: 8 percent are unemployed. 16 percent are out of work.
COSTELLO: If you are out of work aren’t you unemployed?
ABBOTT: No, you can’t count the “Out of Work” as unemployed. You have to look for work to be unemployed.
COSTELLO: But they are out of work!!!
ABBOTT: No, you miss my point.
COSTELLO: What point?
ABBOTT: Someone who doesn’t look for work, can’t be counted with those who look for work. It wouldn’t be fair.
COSTELLO: To who?
ABBOTT: The unemployed.
COSTELLO: But they are all out of work.
ABBOTT:No, the unemployed are actively looking for work … Those who are out of work stopped looking. They gave up. And, if you give up, you are no longer in the ranks of the unemployed.
COSTELLO: So if you’re off the unemployment roles, that would count as less unemployment?
ABBOTT: Unemployment would go down. Absolutely!
COSTELLO: The unemployment just goes down because you don’t look for work?
ABBOTT: Absolutely it goes down. That’s how you get to 8 percent. Otherwise it would be 16 percent. You don’t want to read about 16 percent unemployment do ya?
COSTELLO: That would be frightening.
ABBOTT: Absolutely.
COSTELLO: Wait, I got a question for you. That means ther’re two ways to bring down the unemployment number?
ABBOTT: Two ways is correct.
COSTELLO: Unemployment can go down if someone gets a job?
ABBOTT:Correct.
COSTELLO:And unemployment can also go down if you stop looking for a job?
ABBOTT: Bingo.
COSTELLO: So there are two ways to bring unemployment down, and the easier of the two is to just stop looking for work.
ABBOTT: Now you’re thinking like an economist.
COSTELLO: I don’t even know what the hell I just said!

Obama’s deficit is decreasing, it was your guy that took a 1.5 trillion dollar surplus and turned it into a 1.5 trillion dollar deficit. Obama’s deficit has been declining 1.2 tril. in 2010 and 1.1 in 2011 check Bloomberg News.

This from the same guy who swore that his health care bill would not “add one dime to the deficit, now or in the future, period,” and that your health insurance premiums would be $2,500 lower by the end of his first term in office. How’s that working out for you?

The Administration’s repeated under-estimation of the president’s budget deficits can be attributed to three factors: unrealistic economic outlooks, inaccurate technical assumptions, and taking credit for non-existent budget policies. The only Obama deficit that’s decreasing is his reality deficit. Dear Leader’s own budget for 2013 does nothing to slow the growth of debt – which has increased more under Obama than under any President in American history.

The debt was $10.626 trillion on the day Mr. Obama took office. The latest calculation from Treasury shows the debt has now hit $15.589 trillion. It’s the most rapid increase in the debt under any U.S. president. The national debt increased $4.9 trillion during the eight-year presidency of George W. Bush. Obama exceeded that in just 3 years!

While oil and gas production was down 13% during the Bush Administration it’s up almost 10% under Obama. Oil prices hit this level under Bush and I know you blamed it on his policies at the time right? The US president does not control world oil prices. If production did increase overwhelmingly in the US the oil would go on the world market. DO you think the US oil companies would hold it just for us so we could have lower prices? They won’t even pay their taxes!

It is disingenuous of the president to claim credit for increased production, particularly when that increased production has occurred on private and state lands. The fact remains that his administration has done very little to encourage new future production on federal lands onshore or offshore, and has in fact done more to thwart it.

 

[Love_God_Too]

Obama bad Bush good…Ugh…

 

[Love_God_Too]

Oh by the way all those additional jobs lost were in his first year prior to his stimulus bill even taking effect, but hey who needs facts when you have rhetoric…Blinded by the Right…

 

[Love_God_Too]

Just one more fact since you never respond directly to any of them. Bush had the largest 2 tax cuts in American history… You know the thing the creates all the jobs? The right’s only economic policy? He netted ZERO jobs after **8 **years.

 

[Love_God_Too]

You claim to be Catholic - shouldn’t you say: Thank God WE belong to a church that believes in reconciliation?

I stand corrected. Even though you are trying to deny my faith. There’s that false witness thing again…

 

[lax16]

I stand corrected.

 

[Love_God_Too]

Oh yeah one more point…

Abbot and Costello…

Not snarky at all…

 

[JReducation]

---

58% of Catholics voted for him why would he want to attack us? As far as birth control goes more than 98% of Catholic’s use birth control. See below. Obama is just a Democrat, he’s not the anti-Christ.

salon.com/2012/02/02/catholics_need_to_preach_what_we_practice/

Whoever gave you those stats is not a reliable source. With families getting smaller since 1950, the number of women past child bearing age is greater than the number of younger women. With the religious fallout that hit every religious commuity in the West, the numbers of young women went down even further.

Parishes are reporting a higher population over 50. The number of Catholic women over the age of 50 is almost 60%. Therefore, it’s impossible for 98% of Catholic women to be using brith control.

The stats do not say that 58% of Catholics voted for him. There are 25 million Catholics in the USA. That would mean that 15 million Catholics went to the poles. We have trouble getting that many Americans to vote, never mind 15 million Catholics. The stat may say that 58% of those whe voted for President Obama ientify themselves as Catholic. We have no way of knowing if this number is true, since these are usually exit polls. There certainly was a very large number of Catholics who voted for him, but given the voting record of Americans since FDR, I doubt that you can get 58% of Catholics to the polls when we can’t get 58% of Americans to the polls. Most presidents elected since JKF have been elected by less than 50% of the American voters.

To answer the question, “Is the government attacking the Church?” It certainly seems that it has an ax to grind with Catholicsm. Catholics are the safest religious group to bully. We don’t blow up buildings with people in them or empty ones either. We don’t pull our money out from under Wall Street. We don’t claim racial discrmination. And many Catholics take great pleasure in stepping on the Church just to punish the clergy. The number of Catholics who are going to stand up to bullying is very small.

Try this on other religious communities, ethnic groups or women’s groups and there would be heck to pay.

I’m not encouraging Catholics to become militant. I’m saying that Catholics are a safe target, because we’re not militant and we don’t punish our people for turning on us, unlike other groups that make the life of dissentors impossible. In some places, you may as well pack up and leave the country.

If not attacking, at least making life more difficult for Catholics who are orthodox.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Love_God_Too]

Whoever gave you those stats is not a reliable source. With families getting smaller since 1950, the number of women past child bearing age is greater than the number of younger women. With the religious fallout that hit every religious commuity in the West, the numbers of young women went down even further.

Parishes are reporting a higher population over 50. The number of Catholic women over the age of 50 is almost 60%. Therefore, it’s impossible for 98% of Catholic women to be using brith control.

The stats do not say that 58% of Catholics voted for him. There are 25 million Catholics in the USA. That would mean that 15 million Catholics went to the poles. We have trouble getting that many Americans to vote, never mind 15 million Catholics. The stat may say that 58% of those whe voted for President Obama ientify themselves as Catholic. We have no way of knowing if this number is true, since these are usually exit polls. There certainly was a very large number of Catholics who voted for him, but given the voting record of Americans since FDR, I doubt that you can get 58% of Catholics to the polls when we can’t get 58% of Americans to the polls. Most presidents elected since JKF have been elected by less than 50% of the American voters.

To answer the question, “Is the government attacking the Church?” It certainly seems that it has an ax to grind with Catholicsm. Catholics are the safest religious group to bully. We don’t blow up buildings with people in them or empty ones either. We don’t pull our money out from under Wall Street. We don’t claim racial discrmination. And many Catholics take great pleasure in stepping on the Church just to punish the clergy. The number of Catholics who are going to stand up to bullying is very small.

Try this on other religious communities, ethnic groups or women’s groups and there would be heck to pay.

I’m not encouraging Catholics to become militant. I’m saying that Catholics are a safe target, because we’re not militant and we don’t punish our people for turning on us, unlike other groups that make the life of dissentors impossible. In some places, you may as well pack up and leave the country.

If not attacking, at least making life more difficult for Catholics who are orthodox.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Why is it when facts do not go certain people’s way, we always attack the messenger. Catholics that voted, the only ones that matter in elections, voted 58% for Obama. Polling is a scientific process used both left and right to demonstrate support. If it’s your position that it doesn’t matter if they did, that’s one thing. To deny it is another.

The 98% does refer to child bearing age. Whether that is 98 or 97 or 90 it is still an overwhelming majority. If it’s your position that it doesn’t make it right, that’s one thing. To deny that the over whelming majority of Catholic women, of child bearing age, are using birth control is mere denial.

 

[Love_God_Too]

I do have to acknowledge something. I really always considered myself a loyal, middle of the road, Catholic. 12 years of Catholic school, attend church regularly, work with different charities, etc. With that said, if this site is indicative of our faith as a whole, I now believe I am a radical leftest Catholic.