What do you think about lifesitenews?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JamalChristophr
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
They have recently run headlines that say “The Democrats have kicked out the last pro-life Democrat” when the following pro-life Democrats are active:
In my city, and in my state, there are a very, very few prolife Democrats still holding office. They were elected many years ago, and are sort of grandfathered in. They are permitted to hang on, for now, and they never say anything against the Democratic Party position on abortion. If they are insufficiently remorseful about their prolife position, the Party tries to knock them off in the primaries.

As they retire, the Democratic party nominates ONLY candidates who are explicitly and totally proabortion.

So yeah, LSN is exaggerating, but only slightly. The headline might have pointed out there are a very few, temporary exceptions granted, under conditions they keep somewhat quiet about their weakness, gradually being phased out. All exceptions are certainly to be replaced by those who meet “the screen”.

Would you prefer that headline? Kinda long.
 
Last edited:
LSN is pretty bad… probably shouldn’t be allowed to call themselves a news outlet because of how biased they are (as most so-called ‘news’ sites these days)… steer clear
 
Except I am not bitter. The feminists here are. I wonder why they hold such a low opinion of men. Tsk tsk tsk. Anyway signing off. I want to enjoy the rest of my Easter. Hope you do too! 🙂
 
Not everyone is left or right, there are those of us that just follow Jesus.
Absent any stipulation of what it means to “just follow Jesus,” that injunction is pretty much hollow. In the final analysis it will be Jesus and not ourselves who will determine how well any of us has “followed” him.

I am pretty certain that those at LifeSite would also claim to be “following Jesus,” as would the harshest critics of LifeSite on CAF.

Which of those seemingly contrarian views amounts to “following Jesus?” And let’s try to determine that without calling anyone else “partisan” or “hyper-Catholic” – which itself only reveals partisanship.
 
I am the mom of 7 who went to work when all the kids were in school. I do not hate men. I have been married to one for 46 years. I have also given some blunt advice in the Family Life section thatis from a feminine perspective. Sometimes guys do not have a clue. I mean no disrepect. I have a husband and 5 sons. There are things that men do not understand about being a woman in our society.
 
It would mean fact-checking Francis-related stories via the Vatican and not sensationalizing headlines to attract and feed an anti-Francis crowd.
Except that the Vatican press office hasn’t exactly been the paragon dispenser of fact-checked facts lately. The “lettergate” fiasco being one example and the lack of clarity regarding the Pope’s statement to Scalfari being another.

Former CA radio show host, Patrick Coffin has an episode dedicated to the first. You may want to acquaint yourself with how badly the Vatican press office handled the issue before citing them as a reliable source.
 
Even Karl Keating. I follow him on Facebook, his review of Phil Lawler’s book wasn’t negative. But of course, as someone who is formerly connected with CAF (ehem ehem), he can’t speak out against very explicitly, and it’s understandable.
 
That would be plainly false since it amounts to claiming that in order NOT to be “anti-Francis,” a person would have to agree with him on everything he says and does.
papalotry |pāpǝlätrē|: the belief or stance that everything the Pope says or does is without error.
 
Last edited:
I have also given some blunt advice in the Family Life section thatis from a feminine perspective. Sometimes guys do not have a clue. I mean no disrepect… There are things that men do not understand about being a woman in our society.
And I mean no disrespect, but there is no such monolithic thing as a “feminine perspective.” Women are individuals with varying perspectives on pretty much everything.

While true that some “guys” do not have a clue, there are also some “guys” that do have a clue.

And lumping all “men” into a category of beings that do not understand about “being a woman” leaves the impression that women in general – and you, in particular – understand clearly and completely what it means to “be a woman” in “our society.”

I would submit that NO woman adequately grasps what it means to “be a woman” in our largely dysfunctional society, although I do commend you for trying to salvage some view of what it might mean. Not having read any of your posts, I cannot comment on whether I agree with you or not.

However, I would refer you to John Calhoun’s “Behavioral Sink” as a pretty apt description of the dystopian state that our society currently finds itself in – with the caveat that the description applies almost exclusively to the situation in large cities, but is being spread infectiously through the media to the culture at large, which has been indoctrinated via the mass media into believing that the behavioural sink is actually some longed-for dawning of human utopia.


In fact, not a small number of Christians, even Catholics, appear to have the behavioral sink confused with the coming of the Kingdom, misinterpreting as they have the loss of roles in society – especially gender roles – as the realization of Paul’s words in Galatians 3, to the effect that there “… is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” As if abject confusion regarding what it means to be a human being is synonymous with heavenly bliss.
 
As they retire, the Democratic party nominates ONLY candidates who are explicitly and totally proabortion.
Except that they don’t.

One county over from me I could vote to send a Pro Life Democrat to Congress this fall.

There are others (did you bother to look at the National Candidates section that I linked above?

LSN twists things to fit their political agenda (and I do believe that their animosity toward the Holy Father is rooted in politics).
 
It is true that many CAFers claim to be orthodox Catholics but are in fact man hating feminist leaning Pope Francis apologistic liberal individuals.
What did we ever do to you, brah?
 
Last edited:
Oh no doubt our society ia a mess but a woman’s perspective does differ from a man’ unless gender is irrelevant. My words were not meant to be divisive but most women I know do believe that guys in many areas do not understand.A feminine perspective meant mine as a woman.
Sorry for the derail.
 
Last edited:
It’s telling that you attribute our Lord’s words 'to follow him" as Hollow. Maybe it’s time to have less website reading and more Bible reading.
 
I don’t think that is what she meant. I think she is saying that those at LSN may well be convinced that what they are doing is in accordance with following Jesus, though many here at CAF find it less than truthful and very poor on a purely impartial measure of what good journalism consists. of.

Serious followers of Christ can sometimes be at odds with one another.

That’s my 2 denarii.
 
Last edited:
It’s telling that you attribute our Lord’s words 'to follow him" as Hollow. Maybe it’s time to have less website reading and more Bible reading.
Actually, I was merely observing that your reiteration of the words “follow him,” as a trite reference in support of your opinion about LifeSiteNews isn’t very helpful or specific.

So if you care to point out just how those words of Jesus apply specifically to judgements about LifeSite, that would be helpful.

🙂
 
40.png
commenter:
As they retire, the Democratic party nominates ONLY candidates who are explicitly and totally proabortion.
Except that they don’t.

One county over from me I could vote to send a Pro Life Democrat to Congress this fall.

There are others (did you bother to look at the National Candidates section that I linked above?

LSN twists things to fit their political agenda (and I do believe that their animosity toward the Holy Father is rooted in politics).
To be fair, you listed five of the hundreds of Democrat representatives. That is hardly a boatload.

So while you might technically be correct that some Democrats portray themselves as pro-life and have some credentials to support those claims, I suspect that the truth is that the Democrat party will not carry them for long. Time will tell.

The Liberal Party in Canada, for example, have outright banned any candidates who are pro-life from running for that party. The leftist agenda, speaking globally, appears to be heading down a dark path. And the most vocal Democrats are pushing the party hard in that direction.
 
Coffin, Lawler, Voris – not a fan of anyone who makes his living criticizing the pope.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top