What Rush just said about the Catholic Church

[Richardols]

Brad:

You are right. The “tolerant” left is all about forcing their opinions on the rest of society.

And you think the right isn’t trying to force its opinions on the rest of society? Be serious. Look at what the Republicans were trying to do with their “nuclear option.”

 

[Richardols]

Brad:

Reactionary? You think same-sex marriage and abortion is progressive and non-reactionary? I thought you were an orthodox Catholic.

Did I say that? Did I even mention those two terms? Do you have trouble reading other people’s posts?

 

[buffalo]

Richardols:

And you think the right isn’t trying to force its opinions on the rest of society? Be serious. Look at what the Republicans were trying to do with their “nuclear option.”

C’mon. The nuke option was to get the Dems to finally give the judges an up or down vote. By asking that the judges get a vote is not forcing any idea down their throat.

And BTW the majority does get to make the rules as the Dems have done since the 30’s.

 

[Richardols]

1.) Bluntly secular: Wall Street

The big banking interests and big company interests at the forefront as well.

As for Rush Limbaugh…

I agree with your opinion of him. Someone told me Limbaugh’s not a windbag any more because he’s lost so much weight. Right.

 

[jlw]

Richardols:

And you think the right isn’t trying to force its opinions on the rest of society? Be serious. Look at what the Republicans were trying to do with their “nuclear option.”

Oky-dokey, Rich. Senate procedure, and…gay marriage.

Exactly the same.

Riiiiiiight.

 

[Richardols]

jlw:

Oky-dokey, Rich. Senate procedure

Oh, is that what it’s all about? A little piece of Senate procedure?

Or maybe a little bit about trying to get some right-wing judicial activists on several courts?

Yes, I know, the liberals have had their activists pushing their agenda, so now it’s the right-wing’s turn to cram its agenda down our throats. Tit for tat. Sigh…

I’m glad that the moderates have prevailed so far. No one is well served when either side forces itself on our courts.

 

[Fitz]

buffalo:

I don’t know. It just looks like Rush searches harder for the truth. The other two are commited to their respective traditions.

Rush is good at calling a spade a spade. He sees discrimination against the Catholic church and he is not afraid to say so. Especially if it is the left doing the discriminating!

 

[Thekla]

It creeps me out to hear that Rush is talking about the Catholic Church because I find serial marriers extremely repulsive. The NY Post reported that he may be working on Wife Number 4 - CNN newsreader, Daryn Kagan.

So for the person above who thought Rush might convert to Catholicism, he’s just courting the Catholic vote. Look out or he’ll marry you too.

 

[MrS]

buffalo:

Rush isn’t Catholic but he sure does respect the Catholic Church. Any chance he might convert?

sounds like he is open to it - whether he realizes it or not

then GWB will join his brother in the Church

then Tony Blair will join his wife and children in the Church

awesome.

 

[jlw]

Or maybe a little bit about trying to get some right-wing judicial activists on several courts?

ACTIVISTS. Hmmm. Activists. Originalists are activists??

Is the word abortion in the constitution?? When privacy is mentioned, is it ever in the context of anything but the 4th amendment–illegal search of and seisure of PROPERTY, not about the womb and life??

Is equal protection under the law about race, color, creed, and gender, AND behavioral choices??? I’m not talking 1st amendment law here, but the 14th.

Are the two main functions of the federal government to provide a common defense and promote the general welfare, or PROVIDE the general welfare??

Does the 1st amendment say that government should not make any law that *abridges *religious expression, or does it say it must make no law that *allows *religious expression??

You would call a judge that makes abortion a state issue an “activist” or one that is correcting an activist of another court??

You would call a judge that makes admissions policy a socio-economic issue rather than a skin issue an “activist” or one that is correcting an activist of another court??

You would call a judge that makes it ok for a kid to pray over a pb&j without having to be sent to the principals office an “activist” or one that is correcting an activist of another court??

 

[Bobby_Jim]

Brad:

Scott Hahn does an excellent analysis of the analogy between the court and the mass. Robes, biblical language, swearing oaths, respectful and honorable language etc.

And it was once explained to me that some of this stuff in the Mass comes from old Roman court traditions. well, I guess not Biblical language. hmm…

 

[gnjsdad]

Thekla:

It creeps me out to hear that Rush is talking about the Catholic Church because I find serial marriers extremely repulsive. The NY Post reported that he may be working on Wife Number 4 - CNN newsreader, Daryn Kagan.

So for the person above who thought Rush might convert to Catholicism, he’s just courting the Catholic vote. Look out or he’ll marry you too.

Yes, he does have that problem, doesn’t he? While I have no doubt that Rush respects the Chruch, IMO he is far from ready to become Catholic.

He squandered the chance to make a real impact on the abortion holocaust years ago when he caved in to pressure and ended his caller abortions.

He’ll talk about religion or abortion within the safe confines of the neoconservative agenda (blind support for Israel; an American foreign policy that relies primarily on brute force) and go no further.

 

[HagiaSophia]

Thekla:

It creeps me out to hear that Rush is talking about the Catholic Church because I find serial marriers extremely repulsive. The NY Post reported that he may be working on Wife Number 4 - CNN newsreader, Daryn Kagan.

So for the person above who thought Rush might convert to Catholicism, he’s just courting the Catholic vote. Look out or he’ll marry you too.

Since he isn’t running for office just whose votes for what agenda is he supposedly courting? And as for serial marriages “creeping you out” – I heard the church was for sinners, so I just showed up.

 

[Brad]

Richardols:

And you think the right isn’t trying to force its opinions on the rest of society? Be serious. Look at what the Republicans were trying to do with their “nuclear option.”

Interestingly enough, I followed that quite closely. The “nuclear option” was a ridiculously named idea for simply restoring fairplay in the Senate under conditions of unforseen minority tyranny. Tyranny generally describes conditions of forcing opinions on the population at large. That is what the filibuster was all about. They couldn’t get there way in the election of the President. They couldn’t get their way in the election of the House or the Senate. So good old Schumer comes up with the brilliant idea to force their way through using the filibuster technique.

The Republicans have their opinions but they obviously are much more reflected by the American people than those of the minority. Isn’t that why we have elections? That’s not forcing your opinion. That is acting on why you were elected.

 

[Brad]

Richardols:

Did I say that? Did I even mention those two terms? Do you have trouble reading other people’s posts?

For what other reasons do you call the Republicans reactionary? Abortion and same-sex marriage are the 2 biggest reasons most of the left calls Republicans and the Pope reactionary. What issues are the Republicans so “reactionary” on that you think it better to support Democrats whose 2 hot button issues are issues in direct conflict with your Church?

 

[Brad]

1.) Bluntly secular: Wall Street

So when did everyone that benefits from Wall Street become Republican? You mean to tell me that every person that makes money from a company associated with Wall Street is a “conservative” and not a “liberal”?

Nice try.

 

[Richardols]

Brad:

So when did everyone that benefits from Wall Street become Republican? You mean to tell me that every person that makes money from a company associated with Wall Street is a “conservative” and not a “liberal”?

Nice try.

No. Right on point. Did I say “everyone”? Did I say “every person”?

 

[Richardols]

Fitz:

He sees discrimination against the Catholic church and he is not afraid to say so. Especially if it is the left doing the discriminating!

If the left is doing it, huh? Most interesting. And, if the right-wing were vilifying the Church, you’d not likely hear a peep out of the likes of Limbaugh.

 

[Richardols]

HagiaSophia:

Since he isn’t running for office just whose votes for what agenda is he supposedly courting? And as for serial marriages “creeping you out” – I heard the church was for sinners, so I just showed up.

But, wasn’t Christ’s command to “sin no more”? The Church is for sinners, sure, but it doesn’t encourage sinners to continue in their sins. My opinion, of course. I could be wrong.

 

[buffalo]

Richardols:

Oh, is that what it’s all about? A little piece of Senate procedure?

Or maybe a little bit about trying to get some right-wing judicial activists on several courts?

Yes, I know, the liberals have had their activists pushing their agenda, so now it’s the right-wing’s turn to cram its agenda down our throats. Tit for tat. Sigh…

I’m glad that the moderates have prevailed so far. No one is well served when either side forces itself on our courts.

I disagree. The truth has to be central in this. Whatever wing pushes the agenda of truth I will support.