Red and Blue Bishops

Every year, the Catholic bishops of the United States meet in the fall, before the start of the new liturgical … Continued

Every year, the Catholic bishops of the United States meet in the fall, before the start of the new liturgical year. The official agenda is often less interesting than the unofficial agenda. Because the bishops are all human, I suspect the switch in the nationwide Catholic vote from mostly Republican to mostly Democratic was this year’s 800-pound gorilla in the room. The discussions are heated because, like most of Catholic America, the divisions in politics make for some red bishops and some blue bishops.

I don’t believe that speaking about the humanity of the bishops lessens their dignity. Like any annual conference of executives (that is what each bishop is for his diocese), there is button-holing, idle talk about the golf game, campaigning for open positions in bigger and more important places, promotion of worthy protégées, etc. The red and blue divisions always surface because they roughly correspond to theological tendencies and pastoral priorities. For example, the blue bishops tend to advocate social and welfare services such as delivered by Catholic Charities, while the red bishops are focused on abortion and stem-cell research.

As a body of bishops, all of them together tend to balance out the issues so that BOTH perspectives are reflected in collaborative statements. But these collaborative statements come only after a long process of debate and majority vote. In the interim, decisions are left to committees of bishops who act in the name of the Church. In a calm atmosphere, the organization tends to allow each bishop to join committees that best reflect a particular interest. By a process of self-selection, the bishops who speak out on social issues or against war tend to be the blue bishops. On the other side, those who repeat Church teaching on abortion and stem-cell research are the red bishops who consider these issues paramount. This makes for public statements by bishops’ committees which sometimes are further left or right that what the entire group is willing to endorse. It also makes for confusion.

Compromise for religious believers is always difficult, even if you happen to be a bishop. Thus, at their annual meeting this week, the fissures were obvious. While blue bishops appealed to the Magisterium reflected in the collaborative document of Faithful Citizenship, the red bishops complained that they did not agree to any interpretation of that document which would deny that abortion is the most important basis for casting any Catholic vote. And so it goes.

In seeking common ground, this year the bishops have decided to target the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA). In a collaborative statement issued in the name of the bishops’ conference, passage of this legislation is equated with an “attack on the Church.” It is particularly pleasing to the red bishops because early in his campaign, Barack Obama promised to vote for this bill.

Without getting into details regarding this legislation, it is worth noting that support for FOCA is NOT in the Democratic Party Platform and that the Obama website dropped this measure from the list of issues regarding the right to abortion. From my perspective, this is evidence of the input of Pro-Life lawyer, Douglas Kmiec – who wrote part of the platform and is adviser to President-elect Obama. I think the blue bishops know that FOCA is no longer likely to be promoted by the incoming administration. Denunciation of FOCA helps satisfy their red colleagues’ ire, but does not blow up the agenda of the Democrats. Beating a dead horse, so to speak, safely achieves internal unity. While those outside the Church might see one-sidedness with the attack on FOCA, it really is not what it appears. After all, the color for a bishop’s cassock is purple.

  • Mary_Cunningham

    “When South Dakota passed a law banning all abortions in a direct effort to have Roe overruled, I was the only candidate for President to raise money to help the citizens of South Dakota repeal that law. When anti-choice protesters blocked the opening of an Illinois Planned Parenthood clinic in a community where affordable health care is in short supply, I was the only candidate for President who spoke out against it. And I will continue to defend this right by passing the Freedom of Choice Act as president.”

  • MikeL4

    Stop twisting our Church to fit YOUR political viewpoint. The Bishops are not Red or Blue to fit the Republican or Democratic parties. They are there to serve God through his Church.YOUR presidential candidate said he WOULD sign FOCA. You cannot back away from this as much as you wish to mislead. You do not wish to get into the details of this legislation because it would wipe away most state restrictions on abortions.Your support for President Obama and his support for Obama supports the evil of Abortion and the culture of death.This is to your shame Stephens-Arroyo. You are the wolf in sheeps clothing.

  • CCNL

    Red and Blue Bishops?? Give us a break!!!President-elect Obama rode to the Blood-Red House on the backs of 35+million aborted womb-babies!!!(The fastest growing USA voting bloc: The 70 million “mothers and fathers of aborted children” whose ranks grow by two million per year.)i.e. the Immoral Majority now rules the land and will do so in the foreseeable future. How very sad and disturbing!!!

  • persiflage

    Humans have complete control of their reproductive processes – get used to it. 50% of Catholics in the USA support freedom of choice – get used to it….they voted for Obama. Expect stem cell research to take off like a big bird in the very near future.If you don’t live in the USA, by all means migrate to a land that suits your religious and ethical proclivities – how about Ireland??The Supreme Court will gravitate back to the center and may even keep going in the same direction, given the momentum – count on it. If you’re a devout Catholic that supports the doctrinaire and official position of the Catholic Church as regards reproductive rights, perhaps you can convince the Vatican of the wisdom of employing conventional birth control methods, for starters. This might even impact the current abortion rates – otherwise, the Church position in these matters is moot.Welcome to the real world……

  • paulc2

    persiflage:The birth control mentality is devasting from a social perspective as the above clearly shows. You will say its better than having unprotected sex. But that fails to recognize that it has changed the mentality from sex is sacred to sex is recreational and with that the startling statistics above.

  • persiflage

    PaulC – unfortunately for your point of view, sex is a tremendously fun thing to do – does this lead to irresponsible behavior? By all means…as does every other stimulus that strokes our neural and hormonal constitution. I don’t know about you, but I chased sex for decades – and Lord was it fun! On the other hand, I loved my partners – and still do. Actually I miss those days, but in our elder years, spirituality seems more appropriate! And I have to say, the barriers between the sacred and the profane are of human origin, to the best of our knowledge. Sex begets humans, even when it shouldn’t – as you say, birth control eliminates the risk of pregnancy, the vast majority of the time. Paul, if you imagine that you’re going to turn back the hands of time and implement your values (and apparently the values of the Catholic Church), you are living in the past. You have to change your point of view and work with ‘what is’ – the cat is out of the bag and the horse is out of the barn……what will the Catholic Church do in the face of this new reality? Here’s the simple truth of the matter – a celibate (?) clergy is making rules for sexually active congregents. Of course celibacy is followed in other religions – for example, Buddhist monastics follow the rules of celibacy in order to facilitate the enlightenment experience. This committment is made in order that they might return to the earthly life as bodhisattvas – so as to help the unenlightened see the truth of Reality, thus freeing themselves from the endless round of birth and death. On the other hand, while sex is a big distraction, celibacy is not a requirement for seeing the truth of the Absolute – whether you be a Catholic or a Buddhist. It’s just a very, very difficult thing to do…….

  • paulc2

    Persiflage,When people see things that don’t work, they can make changes, can’t they. The Sexual revolution is a tremendous social failure.

  • explorers100

    The Catholic Church needs a makeover–European style. In Europe the church has really been relegated to being religious museum curators of the beautiful church buildings they take care of. Except for the elderly, the Church is not taken all that seriously.Here in the U.S. the Church still benefits from fear and ignorance–its primary recruiting and retention tools.When a bishop threatens withholding communion, it summons up the past for me as I received sex education from a priest who committed sex crimes against boys all the while teaching that we had to follow “natural law”. Abortion was reprehensible and birth control was against natural law–overpopulation would be left up to God and high numbers of birth were the only way that families in the third world could ensure having children that would last their lifetime and take care of them. How it was natural that this man existed without an adult sex partner was even then troubling to me.I feel badly about the Priests in my school who went to prison (one for eighty years), and for those who escaped under the statute of limitations. I feel badly for the boys who were molested. Its not just the Catholics–priests, pastors, ministers…all have outlived their usefulness and are now holding humanity back–dangerously back. I wish I could live long enough to see all of them become museum curators and that we would stop spending billions on their new buildings when so many are suffering.

  • villella7

    One question I have been asking myself for years now is: ‘does the Catholic Church have a place for a Monsignor Charles Owen Rice if abortion is the only issue we are to concern ourselves with?’ Unfortunately, I think that Monsignor Charles Owen Rice would be roundly condemned, perhpas even silenced in today’s church because of his pro-labor, anti-Republican sentiments. I would hope that we recognize that abortion is an issue, albeit and important one, but not the only issue we as Catholics need to examine.

  • ScottChallenger

    These bishops should be embarassed to have issued a Taliban-like “warning” incoming President Obama and his administrative policies.And what exactly are they warning against or threatening to do? Insurrection? Revolution? Being struck down by God himslef? Turning their church against the state?Give us a break. You make fools of yourselves.

  • formerheap

    My mother is a cradle catholic and I have a bachelor’s degree from a private catholic university. There has never been so much political jockeying within the walls of the catholic church which have stimulated so many to become involved in matters that don’t even affect them. The faith itself has evolved over the years to become progressive and realistic in its teachings and culpability in regard to sexual deviance among its clergy and administrators, yet now there are implications that a color determines political affiliations. If a person walks through a catholic church to debate politics while professing their sins to all, then the administrators of this faith have more problems then what they will be able to resolve with the beating of the proverbial dead horse. Anyways, one of the commandments is, thou shalt not kill, is there a loophole to defend their behavior if the beast is already dead when the beating occurs?

  • drpat2001

    if the bishops had any decency left in them, the first thing they would have done was to congratulate Obama’s tremendous victory. He brought together many catholics, and especially hispanic catholics in coalition unheard of in the United States with African Americans, women, and above all the young, something the catholic bishops could never do. where is the love for humanity here? clearly it is on the Obama side of this story.

  • kburnett1

    The Catholic Church, like all religions, has always been about money and power. Their hypocrisy regarding the sex scandals will forever blight any reason to care what their opinions are.

  • enaughton27

    Lordy, is this the only Catholic commentator they can find? Just throw a rock at CUA and you can hit someone better than Mr. Arroyo.

  • October10S

    FOCA or no FOCA, the Catholic Church and her sister harppies have not convinced the majority of Americans that abortion should be illegal. And guess what? THEY NEVER WILL!!! I am a Catholic who has the unfortunate burden of being unable to subordinate my intellect to the teachings of the Church. I roundly reject ALL of the church’s teachings on sex and reproduction. Moreover, I sincerely believe that God has a place for the unborn inasmuch as HE chooses to abort millions of babies a year through miscarriage. But no matter whether that is true or not, the fact remains that the majority of Americans support abortion rights, and that the size of that majority is increasing (rather than decreasing) with younger generations. This is a battle that will NOT EVER be won by the pro-lifers. And if all they do is put their energies into this loosing battle, they make themselves irrelevant in the modern time. For your own sakes, PICK ANOTHER PET PEEVE! Your service to God is futile if all you do is bang your head against an immovable wall.

  • enaughton27

    Posted on November 14, 2008 10:05 October10S : — You forget that it was one man who decided for Americans that abortion SHOULD be legal. Mr. Blackmun. Perhaps you’ve heard of him?

  • csintala79

    There is much more to be concerned about than one’s position on abortion. This is to be the litmus test for anyone seeking public office? Would one judge the competency of a pilot or surgeon on their stance on abortion? There is much that endangers us as a nation, and abortion is mighty low on that list. Yes, it is a great moral question, but it is one that concerns individuals. Sorry, but a politician’s position on economic questions is much more important to the nation that his or her stance on abortion, but, then, the Church seems to have no qualms about encouraging people who can barely feed themselves due to being mired in abject poverty to have more children. If a priest in SC can tell parishioners they shouldn’t take communion for voting for Obama since he is pro-Choice, shouldn’t a priest in Alaska tell the same thing to his parishioners who voted for Ted Stevens? After all, Stevens is a “convicted” felon; due process was carried through, and he was found guilty. Also, what is the correct guidance from a priest to those who voted for McCain who has proposed unending war in Iraq; would Christ propose unending war for any cause? The one issue that almost prevented John Kennedy from being elected president was the concern that he, as a Catholic, would have to have his decisions and policies approved by the Church. He very publically stated that his conduct in office would not be dictated by the Church. Now it appears that this was a valid concern, and he may have been put to the test. The fact that many other Christians and others, probably some secularists, share the view of the Catholic Church on the abortion issue diverts attention from the fundamental fact that the Church is actively intruding into the political process (which, according to regulation, should result in loss of its tax exempt status). There are other issues where Christians disagree. What would be the reaction if a priest told his parishioners not to take communion if they voted for a candidate who attended a church ministered by a woman? What if the same command were given if the candidate attended a church that considers the Catholic Church the product of the “Great Apostasy” or would require a convert from Catholicism to be re-baptized, which is required for converts to most Baptist churches? This is a list that can grow, eventually to demanding avoidance from communion for any Catholic voting against a Catholic candidate? What is to stop this from happening? Now is the time for the Church to nip this in the bud before the concern over Catholics in national office will reemerge, i.e4., Protestant ministers could begin to tell their congregations that anyone voting for a Catholic will go to hell (if the truth be known, there are still some who probably do that). Separtion of church and state is not a trivial principle.

  • marcedward1

    FFS – what percentage of Arroyos columns are about abortion? It seems like at least 75%, and I have to wonder if he gets paid by the number of comments he elicits by hitting this hotbotton issue.

  • marcedward1

    paulc2 writesWhich means birth control leads to fewer unwanted pregnancies, not more.”condoms are 86% effective in controling births for one year.”Horse manure.”that means 1 out of 7 couples having sex with Condoms will in fact generate a pregnancy in a given year.”Horse manure. If you’ve ever TRIED having kids you’d know that even if you have unprotected sex every night during the period of ovulation you are still not going to get pregant right away.”They likely believe however, that if they use condoms, they will not generate any pregnancies”You assume that couples ONLY use condoms, while couples are probably also using spermicide and/or the pill (not to mention engaging in sex that isn’t intercourse).”Since the advent of readily available birthcontrol in 1960″Griswold allowed legal birth control, and that was in 1967, no?”Also 25% of teenage girls now have an STD.”Doesn’t that mean we should encourage condom use, which would prevent more STDs, rather then discourage condom use? “You will say its better than having unprotected sex. But that fails to recognize that it has changed the mentality from sex is sacred to sex is recreational”You presume that there was a time in America where people thought ‘sex is sacred’. I don’t buy it. Shouldn’t you be arguing for more oral sex and masturbation, which is very unlikely to spread STDs? Maybe that should be the church’s position.

  • persiflage

    PaulC – I think the sexual revolution you refer to occurred back in the 1960′s – all of us old farts from those days are living on memories for the most part – if we happened to participate to a greater or lesser degree in that highly touted, severely flouted ‘revolution’. I’m afraid relativity applies here, as it does everywhere in our self-constructed world. We live by certain rules and standards, and break others as circumstances dictate. We used to call it ‘situational ethics’. I know that many religious believers try to follow behavioral codes that are promoted and supported by their religious faith – and since I’m very familiar with Catholicism, I know how that works in the Catholic Church. Still, when we have American Bishops threatening to withhold communion from parishioners that voted for Obama because of the abortion rights issue, what kind of religious hegemony is going on here? Whatever happened to the ecumenical mindset of a Cardinal Bernardin from Chicago back in the 1980′s? And are parish priests going to be required to take a voter survey – perhaps the first step in the ex-communication process? Beyond ridiculous, I think you will admit. If the Church had hired a PR specialist to spin the most negative campaign imaginable, they couldn’t have done a better job than the Bishops have done themselves! We live by our own moral/ethical code, and typically teach our children that same code…all the while realizing that what their peers are doing is shaping their behavior on a daily basis -beyond any direct parental influence to the contrary. TV, movies, video games – all huge influences that shape that peer culture to the maximum. to be continued……..

  • vicsoir

    Any Catholic who bothers to investigate the history of that religion will inevitably abandon it because of its evil origins and the corrupt choices it has traditionally made in the politics of its leaders. The scandals in the selection of its popes by bribery alone and the salacious behavior they manifested throughout the centuries is a secret the Catholic Church hopes none of its congregation will bother to investigate. The worst thing that this Church fears is the education of the masses when they find out that there is really nothing at all to this negative religion whose ultimate hubris was to declare its teachings “infallible.”

  • persiflage

    Paul, to continue…..And consider the kids and teens that have no real parental influence – the latchkey generation, or the ones being raised by a single parent (mother). I know about this one first hand from my present relationship. These women are to be applauded for their efforts, believe me – but now I’m drifting off into sociology and away from the topic of sex ….. or can I? Life is really all of a piece – inseparable parts. Compared to my early days, I’m fairly conservative in certain respects – and I’m glad I’m not trying to raise a teenager these days! On the other hand, folks have been ‘doing the dirty’ on the sly for millenia…looking at our divorce rate, it would appear that folks are having plenty of extra-marital sex inside the bounds of marriage, as well as outside the boundary of holy matrimony. How religion may shape sexual behavior while maintaining a healthy,sensible and responsible orientation to our powerful biologically-based reproductive drives …… without including comprehensive sex education and birth control information, remains a mystery. What kind of outcome might we reasonably expect? We know good and well that the ‘abstinence only’ philosophy for teens is pretty ineffective without including information on what to do if abstinence fails – and biology and peer pressure triumph. It’s all about information – if the young ones don’t get it from the grown-ups at home, in school, and in their churches, they’re going to rely on whatever their peers tell them, in combination with media-created fantasia and under-developed, hyper-active deductive processes. And that’s when the trouble starts….. PS. lengthy posts are held

  • Bill_Holland

    The catholic church should be identified as what it actually is, a “corporation”. Any thinking Christian should seriously consider a different faith tradition when you are being told what to believe and how to act. You should be living an informed life in Christ and not a priest.

  • titleguy

    It amazes me how the politically correct will so carefully avoid any word or action that would others might perceive to be bigoted or racist, but easily display open bigotry toward religious groups. That is how Hitler started the genocide in Germany. He made it alright to single out a particular group as a social evil. I am not saying that it would happen to Catholics… but I worry when it becomes acceptable to display public bigotry against any group in this fashion

  • MikeL4

    Again, this false Catholic, Stephens-Arroyo attempts to foist his political viewpoint on the Bishops of the Catholic Church. The Bishops of the Church represent the Catholic Church only, not the political views of the Republican or Democratic Party.The Bishops are right to point out to Catholics the sin of cooperation in evil by voting for politicians like Obama who support the killing of unborn children with their votes.Obama said he would sign the Freedom of Choice Act. This would repeal many state restrictions on the killing of unborn children. Obama has not rescinded this promise. Obama is pro-abortion. Catholics who voted for him and other politicians who support abortion join him in this evil.

  • marcedward1

    titleguy writesThat’s called ‘politeness’, not politically correct.”but easily display open bigotry toward religious groups.”Critisizing the RCC leadership in Rome or the nitwit Bishops in the USA isn’t being bigoted towards religion. “That is how Hitler started the genocide in Germany. He made it alright to single out a particular group as a social evil.”I haven’t seen anyone talking about keeping Catholics from working, owning property, etc., so I think you have nothing to worry about.

  • Mary_Cunningham

    Titleguy:Well, it’s not too bad today. You should see it when some of the regular anti-Catholics get warmed up. Some of the stuff posted is actually obscene. I wrote that “Catholic America” really should be titled “Anti-Catholic America” and got a whole lot of dung dunked on me personally.Remember WaPo is run by the left and many of these have always *hated* religion, Catholicism especially. The ‘faith’ section is run by two atheists, that has to tell you something.IMHO the blog SHOULD have been titled ‘No Faith’ but the web designer was dyslectic.

  • GaryC

    Contrary to what Mr. Stevens-Arroyo says, Obama has said that he wants the Freedom of Choice Act to be one of the first bills he signs into law as president.

  • Mary_Cunningham

    PS to TitleguyBut I wouldn’t be too concerned.. The Church has been around 2000 yrs & I don’t think a little leftie hostility on what is really an atheist blog should bother her too much. As well, she thrives in adversity and persecution. Look at Ireland: the faith was never so strong as when it was proscribed, although maybe that tells you more about the Irish than about Catholicism.

  • Mary_Cunningham

    But has the majority voted FOR abortion? As a single issue? This year what voters have voted for is some protection against a bad economy and no more war in the ME. As well as punishing an admin and party that got them into this mess. I don’t think 2008 is a mandate for unlimited abortion, although Obama will probably sign FOCA anyway.

  • root66m

    I am so happy that i am a recovering Catholic.I am still working on my recovery. I have not been inside a Catholic Church in 25 years . Let my tell you it feels great to be away from All the Teachings of this fath.I tell everyone i know to Stay away from the Church.

  • Vonnie932

    The Catholic church is the biggest hypocrite. How do they chose which sin to support or overlook? The many Africans murdered during slavery, many families are murdered in Iraq, the Bush Administration have lied, stolen, murdered, sex scandals, increased proverty in America, and you name it. I am a Christain and I don’t condone abortion but I don’t condone liers, racism, thefts, sex scandals, etc. I believe God is the best judge. He give man free will. In the end, He will seperate good from evil. Rev. 22:11,12.

  • logcabin1836

    If some of the Catholic hierarchy continues to make harsh comments about President-elect Barack Obama I guarantee you there will be a ground swell of negative feelings toward the Catholic faith. The bishops should focus on issues that will bring our nation together such as poverty, global warming, and senseless wars.

  • csintala79

    If Catholics were to seriously apply the principle of cooperation with evil to their choice of political candidates they wouldn’t vote. They would reach the same conclusion as the most fundamentalist Christian groups, the Amish and conservative Mennonites and would not participate in the political process, along with not taking grievances to the courts. Jesus rejected Satan’s offer of worldly domination. What would Jesus say of the Catholic Church’s use of sophistry to condone killing in the service of the state, i.e., Caesar? Is that not cooperating with evil? Live your faith in Christ fully, and do not impose fragments of your belief on non-believers or those of little faith; God will judge all.

  • bruce18

    “Go therefore and make disciples of (or teach depending on the translation)all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,”Seems like a pretty clear message for how the church is supposed to conduct herself. Whether you agree with her views or they are popular is not part of the command.

  • keino83

    @ Mary Cunningham.The majority had plenty if time to examine Obama’s position on the Abortion issue and still elected him with a pretty significant majority of the popular vote. Nobody is arguing that the ’08 Election results are a mandate of unlimited abortions. In fact you make my previous point for me……The abortion issue as a single issue is not more important to the vast majority of Americans than issues dealing with human beings who are already living and breathing….economy, war, current administration’s handling of the same, etc.Obama has a 100% rating with Planned Parenthood and NARAL pro-choice America. Either the majority of the electorate favor his view or don’t think the issue is important enough to drive their vote.Meanwhile, the Catholic bishops are hypocritically trying to indict Catholics who decided, like most Americans, that Women’s reproductive decisions are way down the list in terms of the priorities of this nation. And Shame on the Catholic church for teaching that contraception is sinful. Given the realities of AIDS and other diseases, condoms are as much a public health device as they are a contraceptive device.

  • MikeL4

    Practicing Catholics did not elect Obama President on his pro-abortion platform. Many of those who claim Catholic are the once a year Catholic types, who do not practice their faith. Like many, regular church goers, Catholics are more conservative and adhere to their religious beliefs and do not follow the latest political pied piper.Those of you who left the Church because of the Church’s refusal to bow to the morality of the world, good for you. At least you were honest with yourself. Those so called Catholics though who still cling to the title Catholic, like Stephens-Arroyo, please find another faith that allows you to find the morality of the killing of the unborn acceptable.

  • tceb

    I wonder if the mean spirited comments made by pro-life suppporters regarding this article are also true natural familiy planning supporters? My guess would be that many pro life supporters also have no problem with the use of artificial contraception.

  • CCNL

    Our bishops and priests can preach and teach until they are red and/or blue in the face about politicians who do not respect the life of 35+ million womb-babies.Once again:President-elect Obama rode to the Blood-Red House on the backs of these 35+million aborted womb-babies!!!The fastest growing USA voting bloc: The 70 million “mothers and fathers of aborted children” whose ranks grow by two million per year.i.e. the Immoral Majority now rules the land and will do so in the foreseeable future. How very sad and disturbing!!! What the bishops and priests however should now preach and teach with even more vim and vigor:The following commandments/rules of humankind that have evolved over 60,000+ years:”Love Thy Neighbor as Thyself””Thou Shall not Kill””Thou Shall not Steal””Thou Shall not Bear False Witness””Thou Shall not Commit Adultery””Thou Shall not Covet Thy Neighbor’s Wife/Husband/Children”And then maybe the Moral Majority will return to its rightful place as a strong voice for the unborn!!!!

  • Garak

    Hey, CCNL, how many little boys does one have to molest to become a bishop?

  • msbhong

    CCNL, if these “Love Thy Neighbor as Thyself””Thou Shall not Kill””Thou Shall not Steal””Thou Shall not Bear False Witness””Thou Shall not Commit Adultery””Thou Shall not Covet Thy Neighbor’s Wife/Husband/Children”were practiced as well as these should be by the Christian European settlers of America, then it would look very different geographically and socially as it is today, because they broke these repeatedly throughout its history.

  • CCNL

    Thou shall nots and these two big ones:”Thou Shall not commit adultery””Thou Shall not Covet Thy Neighbor’s Wife/Husband/Children”A lesson learned the hardway by a number of RCC bishops and that is why they must continually preach and teach about these weaknesses in priests and the rest of humankind. Said weaknesses have been a constant challenge for the last 60,000+ years.One million abortions a year, 19 million cases STDs a year, as per Google- 1.6 million porn sites on the Internet, and a 50% divorce rate are ample proof that the message is still not getting through.

  • paulc2

    Mary Cunningham,Furthermore, there are far more Non-catholic contributors to this blog than Catholics. In my experience, most of them are not in the least bit interested in learning about the faith. In fact, most of them are just interested in tearing down the faith without ever bothering to understand that which they attack. The moderators show no interest in addressing that. There are now only a handful of Catholics that even bother to post on this board because its so hard to have a meaningful discussion on a topic of interest. I mean, how many times can you discuss Abortion with people who are fixated on their personal freedom at the expense of another’s life. I personally have found a couple of other blogs that are much more interesting to me. Try this one: forums.catholic.comGood luck and God Bless

  • usapdx

    ROMA LEADERSHIP IS AFTER CONTROL OF THE MEMBERSHIP AS IT HAS BEEN SINCE 400 A.D.. THE EMPTY PEWS OF EUROPE ARE SPREADING HERE. THE YOUNG PEOPLE ARE NOT BUYING HELL FIRE DAMNATION. ROMA SHOULD HAD A WAKE UP CALL 1520 A.D..THE PRINTING PRESS WOKE UP THE PEOPLE JUST LIKE THE COMPUTER DOES TODAY. THE PROBLEM WITH CATHOLICS, THEY DO NOT KNOW TRUE CHURCH HISTORY OR DO NOT WANT TO KNOW. ALWAYS ASK QUESTIONS.IF CHRIST CAME BACK, THERE WHOULD BE SOME LEADERSHIP IN THE TARMACK.

  • Mary_Cunningham

    Thanks for the site, Paul C. See you there!PS We are getting ready here for the canonization of a new saint: Cardinal John Henry Newman, one of the towering intellects of the Church. And maybe, just maybe, if we’re lucky, Pope Benedict will come to preside at the ceremony. That would be wonderful for the faithful in these isles: England, Ireland ,Scotland and Wales. I’ve always said the existence of the faith here at all is one of the minor proofs for God’s existence.God bless you, Paul. This will be all here from me.Mary C.

  • paulc2

    USAPDX: Since you do have internet access (and maybe EWTN on cable) , it might make sense to investigate the Church a little more thoroughly before you condemn it

  • marcedward1

    Howdy PaulCBTW, your link was dead (I take your word for it anyway) but I’d like to know how many people were having condom malfunctions.

  • Mary_Cunningham

    should translate from the Cockney rhyming slang. Last word rhymes with the word the Cockney wants to say.Porkie pies=liesDon’t tell porkies…marc

  • mbc7

    Let’s think about it. A Republican President blundered the nation into 2 wars that the people did not support (and botched up at least one of them), failed completely to control government spending and crashed the economy on the eve of the election. And anyone voted for John McCain? I’d say the Bishops beat the point spread, big time. Next election, with George off building houses with Jimmy, things will be different.

  • CCNL

    The economy is suffering from an over-supply of homes, cars, apartments, condos, shopping centers and office buildings. This resulted in too many mortgages and banks. The correction has started. The construction boom has been going on through both Democratic and Republican administrations. Alan Greenspan, the Fed Chairman under Reagan, Bush, Clinton and Bush should have put the brakes on the boom years ago but did not.

  • marcedward1

    Mary before you call somebody a liar, you might bother to read what they wrote.

  • marcedward1

    paulc2 writesYou really need to read up on your history. The Catholic Church has been interested in power here on earth for most of it’s history. How else do you explain

  • CCNL

    The history of the conduct of the RCC is very tainted. The history of the theology of the RCC is even more so.To wit:Jesus was an illiterate Jewish peasant/carpenter/simple preacher man who suffered from hallucinations and who has been characterized anywhere from the Messiah from Nazareth to a mythical character from mythical Nazareth to a mamzer from Nazareth (Professor Bruce Chilton, in his book Rabbi Jesus). Analyses of Jesus’ life by many contemporary NT scholars (e.g. Professors Crossan, Borg and Fredriksen, On Faith panelists) via the NT and related documents have concluded that only about 30% of Jesus’ sayings and ways noted in the NT were authentic. The rest being embellishments (e.g. miracles)/hallucinations made/had by the NT authors to impress various Christian, Jewish and Pagan sects. The 30% of the NT that is “authentic Jesus” like everything in life was borrowed/plagiarized and/or improved from those who came before. In Jesus’ case, it was the ways and sayings of the Babylonians, Greeks, Persians, Egyptians, Hittites, Canaanites, OT, John the Baptizer and possibly the ways and sayings of traveling Greek Cynics. For added “pizzazz”, Catholic/Christian theologians invented bloody and bodily communion based on some mythical last supper. They also divided god the singularity into three persons and invented atonement as an added guilt trip for the “pew people” to go along with the trinity of overseers. By doing so, they made god the padre into god the “filicider”.

  • Mary_Cunningham

    MBC7″Crashed the economy on the eve of the election”I’m still aghast. *What* was Paulson thinking? If the Dems. could give out awards, Paulson should get the very highest. After letting LEH go bust, the Reps were doomed. Overlay a chart of the s&P with an Intrade chart of McCain’s chances of being elected: two swan dives, falling knives the drop beginning 14th Sept…unbelievable. As far as self-inflicted errors has to rank with firing the entire Iraqi police force after the Americans took Baghdad? Or maybe hiring an incompetent to deal with a hurricane?

  • Mary_Cunningham

    CCNL:Next to the follies and foolishness of the Bush II administration, today’s RCC shines like a beacon of sanity. And sanctity.

  • CCNL

    Mary, Mary, Mary,The RCC a beacon of sanity???In no particualar order: 1. original sin based on a myth??2. 24/7 “bloody body” ritual??3. atonement “theology”??4. closed old European “white” boy society??5. females cannot lead us to heaven??6. salvation sacraments based on embellished/mythical NT stories??7. a “filiciding” father figure??8. violation of first commandment with the trinity theology??9. honoring a “not so virgin” virgin??10. believing in “pretty/ugly, wingie, talking thingies”??11. demanding “natural” birth control when all birth control uses nature-based methods??12. expecting miracles and/or favors from simply reiterating prayer beads??13. believing a simple preacher man was somekind of “trinitized” god, once human now bodily resurrected??

  • patsnruss

    We Catholics must be very, VERY careful about how we play ‘defenders of the faith’… When we make statements about historical facts of Church actions we give MONSTROUS SCANDAL to those who know better . . . “Creeping Infallibility” is the view that because the Pope speaks without falsehood or only with truth when speaking ‘ex cathedra’ DOESN’T mean that all the priests do, or did or even HAVE TO. Or even the Popes, by the way (Look up Alexander VI and his treatment of Savonarola and Alex. own children, notably Lucretia Borgia. There is no other truth here except that Alexander VI was totally amoral and evil. Period.) Denying such facts just makes us look like TRUE IDIOTS!!! Though it, no doubt, may make YOU FEEL virtuous. But stupid, nonetheless.

  • washpost18

    The church would do well to take a page from the Constitution and come to an understanding that there is a freedom of and from politics when members are in the sanctuary.

  • tanzentina

    Interesting article. More interesting comments. Has anyone been following what has been going on out west with the legislative disaster expanding the safe haven law language from ‘newborn’ to ‘child’…that has some parents driving across 2 and 3 states to drop off children as wards of the state? where is that related to this feed? for all the staunch pro-lifers…what do you intend or propose to do with the millions of new, unwanted children that would be born of the legislation you so strongly propose be passed? where is the discourse about the thousands of new orphanages, hundreds of thousands of new foster parents, child welfare workers and agencies,and/or comensurate social services and/or jail systems that would become absolutely necessary should such a law actually pass? has any one of you thought about it consequences to society once all those infants enter the world? while the possibility to mandate birth legally exists, there is no effective way to mandate good parenting. this is already obivous in the world and in statistics. so, my question is, what do you propose? there are already overfull orphanages, over taxed foster care systems, and overwhelmed social services agencies. to make this issue THE singular issue in politics is COMPLETELY IRRESPONSIBLE AND IMMORAL. the YEARS it takes to evolve societal band aids for social issues, even to the point of a minimal addressing would mean many infant deaths anyway. MY proposal: leave well enough alone and for all those that feel so adamant on the pro-life issues-put your money and time where your mouth is. there are plenty of children in your area with no home and no parents waiting for adoption already. there are plenty of children in your area with little or no guidance who need a good mentor already. there are plenty of social service agencies serving abandoned or abused children who could use your help. PUT YOUR TIME AND MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS, AND LEAVE THE REST OF US ALONE. NO ONE IS KEEPING YOU FROM FOLLOWING YOUR BELIEFS FOR YOUR LIFE. YOU DON’T HAVE THE RIGHT TO IMPOSE YOUR BELIEFS ON MY LIFE, NOR ANYONE ELSE’S.

  • tharper1

    washpost18 said: And where, exactly, in the Constitution does it say that? The first amendment says: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;…” Nowhere does it say what the man in the pulpit can say. That came from the IRS and government weenies who want to use tax status to silence preachers. Interestingly, before the election the Vatican said that the Democrats were “the party of death.” Funny how that never made it onto the pages of the WaPo.

  • expat51

    Please, please stop calling President-elect Obama and those who favor a woman’s right to choose “pro-abortion.” I can’t think of anyone I know who is “pro-abortion” although we may be pro-choice. I could never abort, it wouldn’t feel right for me (unless the circumstances were criminal – i.e., incest, rape). However, that is MY opinion and my opinion should have no bearing on what others choose to do. STOP using the term “pro-abortion.”

  • usapdx

    CHURCHES THAT FILE TAX EXAMPT MUST COMPLY WITH TAX EXAMPT RULES. ALWAYS ASK QUESTIONS.

  • paulc2

    CCnl:

  • washpost18

    tharper1:Read again – I didn’t anywhere make the claim the Constitution said anything of the sort. Stop being selfish and demanding that you get it both ways – it’ll help clear your head of your biases.

  • marcedward1

    paulc2 writesI call it realistic, based on reality.’the crusades ==> The original goal of the crusades was to open up the holy land and protect the Christian pilgrims’Which had what to do with Christ’s teachings? Where did Jesus say ‘if you can’t go on a pilgramige, wipe out the population of a city’? Have you read any contemporary accounts of the sack of Jeruselem? The murder of the Jews there? The city streets running knee deep in human blood?- the inquisition ==> ‘- the 30 years war ==> The Thirty Years’ War was a continuation of the Bourbon-Habsburg rivalry for European political pre-eminence, and in turn led to further warfare between France and the Habsburg powers.’Horse manure and you ought to know it. It was the Spanish king, in the name of the church, with the blessing of the church, trying to get church lands by with the sword. At least 8 million german dead for the glorification of the RCC, and in the end they got nothing back.’- Papel attacks on the spread of Republics in Europe during the 19th century ==> this was about protection of the Faith as the Republics’You are only believing what you want to believe. Maybe you need to read some books not made by the RCC. If you were a little more honest you’d know how the church has threatened to declare bankruptsy in certain parts of the USA in order to force victims to take smaller settlement.Again I have nothing against Jesus’s teachings (as in the 4 gospals, not the crud after that) or Catholicism, but I do believe that the ‘leaders’ greatest concerns are about power.BTW, how many millions did the RCC spend promoting prop8 in california? Guess feeding the hungry isn’t as glamourous.

  • patsnruss

    To Paulc2: Do you NOW know what I mean by looking like an idiot, and making us Catholic Church members look the same? See the posting by MARKEDWARD, and get your facts straight. . . And don’t lie, or expect all church members to be perfect, or faultless, or wise . . . They AREN’T. We aren’t. . . perfection isn’t one of the requirements of Catholicism, only a belief in Jesus and his teachings. So shut your ‘mouth’ and OPEN YOUR EYES.

  • mikem5

    to markedwards:Do you think the RCC doesn’t already spend millions on feeding the poor. Come on..have a little common sense and objectivity.We feed the poor and fight against same sex marriage…both can be done at the same time.

  • CCNL

    Paul, Paul, Paul,A summary of the conclusions by most contemporary historic Jesus exegetes as found in their books:In no particualar order: 1. original sin is based on a myth.2. The RCC eucharist is a 24/7 “bloody body” ritual.3. atonement “theology lacks common sense.4. the RCC is a closed old European “white” boy society.5. females in charge of the RCC can lead us to heaven.6. salvation sacraments are based on embellished/mythical NT stories.7. RCC’s god the father is a guilty of filicide.8. the RCC violates the first commandment with the trinity theology.9. it also honors a “not so virgin” virgin.10. mythical “pretty/ugly, wingie, talking thingies” need to be deleted from all religions.11. all birth control methods use nature-based procedures.12. expecting miracles and/or favors from simply reiterating prayer beads is complete nonsense and a waste of time.13. believing a simple preacher man was somekind of “trinitized” god, once human now bodily resurrected is false theology.

  • patsnruss

    To Mikems: So you see the summary of our duty as Catholic Christians is to ‘feed the poor and fight against same sex marriage’? You, TOO, need to open your eyes. (By the way; does it somehow seem to you . . . ODD. . . that we should be so offended by two human beings who love each other so much that they wish to commit to each other legally and permanently? Or is it just the SEX part of this that offends you. Which, of course, they will have regardless of the commitment or lack of same.)

  • the1joncook

    From the perspective of time I believe this whole conversation is a moot point. Within the next 20 years, “a blink of the eye”, the white, western Catholic Church will be a thing of the past. And so I quote from the famous words of Glinda to the Wicked Witch of the West (the Catholic Church)….”Be gone you have no power here, before someone drops a house on you.”

  • marcedward1

    mikem5 writesIt’s pretty clear the RCC leadership priority has more interest in interfering with American elections than helping anybody. Spending money to take rights away from American citizens rather than helping the poor (which was Jesus’s #1 priority) only shows how brain dead the current leadership is.Oh and Paul C, I forgot to mention the St. Barthelamews day massacre, which was applauded by the Pope – another 100000 innocents slain with the blessing of the RCC leadership.

  • msmart2

    Whether red or blue, the Catholic church is just another oppressive organization. People should learn to think for themselves. I have always considered myself an adult. It frustrates me to see people seek figures to elevate to a position of authority and reverence. Beyond mutual respect, nothing else is owed.

  • plaza04433

    USAPDX wrote:The Catholic Church has one mission: To preserve it’s control and power.

  • fredfawcett

    One of the posts dredges up all that nonsense about the Silent Majority and the great Slumbering right wing. It says that Gays,Jews, Blacks and the other traditional blame-ees are getting a bit too uppity and THATs going to wake up these hibernating Nazis. Then, all us leftys better start quaking in our boots.Badloser talk in the wake of the right wing getting beat like a drum. It’s got to be hard to adjust to reality when Fox news has convinced you of so much BS, and then the voters of the country speak LOUD and CLEAR in the opposite direction.We’ve all heard everything we have any desire to hear from the neocon right. They no longer hold power and their reputation is in the toilet. When they get behind Sarah Palin as their party leader, we’ll know that they’re done, toast.

  • plaza04433

    Braveheart43Spoken like a true totalitarian.Anyone see a pattern here with these luneytunes?It’s not JUST about pro-choice, Freedom of Choice act… or any other choices.It is about wanting to take away ALL choice.

  • Mary_Cunningham

    PatnRussRe: “making us Catholics look like idiots”All I could think of here, was–who’s the idiot? PaulC gave a reasoned responce. If you OTOH believe the *truth* of all Marc’s charges what in God’s name are you still doing in the Catholic Church?This is an anonymous blog, so when someone claims to be Cath. whilst agrees with virulent anti-Cath. propaganda I wonder about their religion. Someone really slammed me as causing shame to “us” Catholics and a week later I found the same poster affirming herself a Unitarian!So, are you really Catholic? Could you possibly prove it by making a little comment about the second reading at yesterday’s Mass? If you can’t remember, tell me something about what the priest was wearing, colourwise? Choose one:

  • eaglehawkaroundsince1937

    Oh the pain of growing up in the Catholic church years ago. I might say the same of my Lutheran friends in the neighborhood. If we had been taught the truth that Religion is much based on opinion and is really only to be a guide and not an Authority. I wonder how a person can get close to his Creator with so many sub-gods in the way. Let this past election teach us again the horrible lessons of the past when it comes to seperation of church and state. I could have had such a beautiful childhood without all the religious dribble drabble. “LOVING KINDNESS IS MY RELIGION” – Dali Lama (a true christian) :)

  • Mary_Cunningham

    Last things:But I would say this, Marc E. Blaming Catholics for the 8 million deaths of the Thirty Years War is like blaming Protestant evangelicals for the two million dead during the American Civil War.The number is wrong, the charge is false and the man making the allegation reveals a lamentable ignorance of history.

  • Mary_Cunningham

    EagleHawkSpeak for your own Catholic childhood,sunshine.Mine was sweet.

  • mikem5

    Plaza044..My good friend,You betcha we want to take away the right to kill a baby! I bet the baby wants us to take it away too.God bless,

  • eaglehawkaroundsince1937

    Mary Mary being Catholic does not make you correct. Live my 71 years and then tell me about the sins of the churches. Some of the greatest biggots were born under the control of the church. Sin and Sex is so $rofitable, where would the church be without them? “Loving kindness is my religion Dali Lama” Step aside Mary, let the Creator God have HIS way.

  • eaglehawkaroundsince1937

    Mary Mary, I speak for my own and you speak for your own as it should be. Was Sunshine added as a little religious barb with intent to belittle? Mary Mary, use less starch.

  • Mary_Cunningham

    What is it about old men and not-so-old women? I should introduce you to Concerned the Catholic now Liberated, he usually adds Mary Mary Mary. I’m surprised you didn’t add quite contrary–’fess up, sunshine, you know you wanted to. Being 71 years old does not mean you know anything about the Thirty Years War, let’s keep it specific. Going from the specific to the general is a rhetorical trick, but I don’t need to tell you that. Or do I? Sunshine is a Cockney term. I was using it ironically as you are certainly not sunny.

  • Braveheart43

    The other factor that the Left seems always to forget and which is evident in the Prop 8 question, you can’t always keep your interest groups together. The blacks sunk prop 8 this time. Blacks are for the most part conservative in their beliefs: the oppose gay marriage by a wide margin, primarily pro-life, want school choice, lower taxes, etc, etc. They’re kept on the reservation during general elections by a well coordinated and thoroughly oppressive federal bureaucracy (The Left!) whichkeeps them mired in awful schools, relying on govt handouts for sustenance, and enthralled with a pop culture that idolizes punks and criminals (we can think our Leftist Jews and gays for most of the latter).

  • seamoon

    The Catholic Church may believe whatever it wants to, but here in Texas, it has been engaging in voter intimidation. The voter turnout has been dropping in those precincts which have a preponderance of Hispanic voters because they have been threatened with loss of Communion for signs in their yards and told they’ll go to hell if they vote for Democrats.

  • missgrundy

    As a Catholic and a recipient of Catholic education from first grade through college, including seven years of boarding school education, I have a very skeptical eye toward the conference of bishops who have actively sought to deter Catholics from voting democratic. The idea that being pro-choice is being pro-abortion is stupid. But then, I have never gone to church on Sunday and heard the pastor talk about the problems that we have with the foster system here in America. Why is it that the Catholic Church isn’t willing to help the system and these children who have been disposed of by their parents, relatives or society? And why do they continue to hide pederast priests by transferring them from diocese to diocese, state to state, or country to country? The Catholic Church needs to clean its own house. It needs to deal with the selection process for semanarian candidates and it needs to realize the realities of life instead of hiding in their rectories. Perhaps, if priests and nuns actually lived in the real world, they would then have a different view of their teaching.

  • anders1

    The past several years have made it obvious why the Catholic ‘clergy’ (read pedophiles) want people to have lots and lots of babies.

  • EnemyOfTheState

    Although not true for all Bishops that hold a pro-life view, I believe the real agenda for some is control of women, not saving the unborn.There is a sub-group of all Christian churches that believes women are incubators first, human beings second (if that).

  • cornbread_r21

    Mary_Cunningham:I find it odd that anyone can apparently take consolation in the fact that their religious brethren murdered *only* 5,000 Huguenots in the 30 Years War. I suppose the survivors should be grateful that their persecutors were being guided by an all-loving holy spirit.

  • marcedward1

    Braveheart43 writes Nope, you’re just a liar, and not a very good liar. It wasn’t black churches that funded prop 8, it was the RCC and the mormons. It was the white areas (and mostly old people) who voted to take rights away. ‘Blacks are for the most part conservative in their beliefs’Yeah, I’m sure you know so many black people…not.’Just as the Right will wake from its long slumber’What long slumber? The ‘right’ has been active for decades. Problem is your ‘ideas’ have been tried and proven to be wrong beyond any reasonable doubt. Reaganism is dead and buried, period.

  • Mary_Cunningham

    Cornbread:I find your charge that I gain *consolation* from the Huguenot massacre a gross deception. Pointing out that 5,000 were killed, not 100,000 does not constitute *consolation*. He exaggerated the deaths by a factor of 20 and I pointed that out. Similarly, I gain no consolation either from the 300,000 Irish who died from in the 17th century from the English onslaught in Catholic Ireland either. But I do not charge the English Puritan and/or Protestant government with murdering 6,000,000.What right–what *right*–do atheists have to come on a blog called ‘Catholic America’ and make false charges and offensive comments? I am going to quote Jamil51 who said this about such commentators:====>There are some persons, cleaver enough not to disclose their own creed or ideas.They keep attacking the faith of the opponents, they keep on asking the others to clarify and give explainations. What is their qualifications and who make them examiners.Serious discussion is most welcome but use of offensive language and disrespect for other’s religion cannot be appreciated.No one else, let alone the hate mongers, knows the religion which one follows.Abusive language,mixed with pack of lies can impress no one.===<

  • marcedward1

    Mary_Cunningham writesAs the 30 years war was started by Catholics for the Catholic church, it is certainly the responsibility of the leaders of the Catholic Church. Our Civil War was foght to keep the nation united, and had nothing to do with protestant evangelicals.’The number is wrong, the charge is false’Citation please? I have read several books on the subject and the number 8 million is low.you also writeWiki is not a reliable source as you ought to know.’”The exact number of fatalities is not known, but it has been estimated that over 2,000 Huguenots were killed in Paris and over 3,000 in the French provinces.’From a quick google search, among the 1st 12 hits I got the following.”The number of victims in the provinces is unknown, the figures varying between 2000 and 100,000″”An estimated 3,000 were killed in Paris, 70,000 in all of France. News of the massacres was welcomed by the Pope and the King of Spain.””By October, about 3,000 Huguenots had been murdered in Paris and probably tens of thousands more in the provinces.””Modern estimates suggest that c.70,000 people died.””Once again estimates vary widely, and range from 30,000 to 100,000″You writeYou are quoting the lowest estimate available, which isn’t very honest is it?PS if you want the original URLs I’ll be more than happy to supply them.

  • eaglehawkaroundsince1937

    Oh Mary Mary tongue of spice Is your heart that full of ICE? You would do far better attracting your faith to others rather then Promoting. My Religion is Loving Kindness, is yours? Your Sunshine – Eaglehawk

  • willandjansdad1

    A million infinity Angels can dance on the head of a pin!…There, I said it and I feel better.

  • MikeL4

    MissGrundy:You must of slept through your Catholic education.First off, killing unborn human beings is evil. To pro-choice is pro-abortion. Follow along if you can. You say you are pro-life, yet you allow others to kill their unborn children.You say you are pro-life, yet you fight to have the “right” to kill unborn children “found” in our constitution.You say you are pro-life, yet you fight against every restriction against those who would kill their unborn children.You say you are pro-life, yet you will not lift one finger to stop the killing of unborn children.Yes indeed. Pro-Choice is Pro-Abortion.To vote for politicians who support the killing of unborn children is to join in that evil. If you find the killing of unborn children acceptable, I would suggest you find a church that thinks like you.The Catholic Church does not.

  • marcedward1

    MikeL4 writesYou’d be right if outlawing abortion would make abortion end or would lower the number of abortions. There is no evidence to support that position. Because the legal abortion is tied to the right to privacy, ending legal abortion ends the right to privacy, which gave us the right to get birth control legally. Actually the Republican dominated SCOTUS has said that for nearly 40 years. How many law degrees do you have that gives you insights over all those SCOTUS members.’You say you are pro-life, yet you will not lift one finger to stop the killing of unborn children.’Actually that would be what you and the Republican leadership have been doing for decades. The Republican leadership have passed no laws seeking to end legal abortion, nor have they tried to amend the constitution to end legal abortion. Further no Republican President has tried to bring the country over to the pro-life side the way President Bush brought the country over to supporting an invasion of Iraq. In terms of results, there is no difference between the Republican and the Democratic parties.

  • MikeL4

    marcedwardI do not look to the Supreme Court of the United States to define what is moral. Neither should you. The killing of unborn children in the womb is evil, whether it is tied to a supposed “right” to privacy or not.And to the contrary, there is evidence that placing a societal stigma on something does reduce its occurrence. Actually, this President did sign the Partial Birth Abortion Ban that a Democrat president would not.The president to be says he will sign the FOCA if it is passed by Congress. The abortion view of who holds the presidents chair does matter.Finally, I do not speak for a political party. I do not belong to one. A political party does not define my vote.Abortion kills unborn children. There is no escaping that. Obama aligned himself with the culture of death.

  • cornbread_r21

    Mary_Cunningham wrote: “I find your charge that I gain *consolation* from the Huguenot massacre a gross deception. Pointing out that 5,000 were killed, not 100,000 does not constitute *consolation*.”Perhaps I can be forgiven for misinterpreting your feelings in view of the fact that nowhere in your attempted mitigation of this horror did I see one word of regret for even *one* of these murders.

  • MikeL4

    Marcedward:The reason “they” scuttled the one Clinton wanted was that He wanted so broad a “health” exception as to render the ban meaningless. Your further statement cannot be evaluated.As to the Supreme Court, remeber the Supreme Court at one time also found that Human Beings were property in the Constitution. They can and have been wrong before.As to S. America, where do you get your statistics? Since it is illegal, who is doing the counting? Abortion proponents?

  • marcedward1

    MikeL4 writesNo it was a health exception. Are you saying doctors can’t be concerned with the health of their patients? Isn’t the patients health part of the job?’As to the Supreme Court, remeber the Supreme Court at one time also found that Human Beings were property in the Constitution.’You’d have a point, but in this case reversing the right to privacy TAKES AWAY rights – the right to birth control and abortion. Of course the majority of Americans have no interest in making abortion illegal.’As to S. America, where do you get your statistics?’Feel free to read ‘In the Land of God and Man’

  • ward29800

    All I see, year after year, is a bunch of old white men trying to get the Republican party elected because that’s their natural inclination. Abortion blather is simply a tactic towards that end. It’s rather clear that neither the president nor the drain commissioner have anything to do with abortion since it is clearly a religious issue. Like all Republicans, the bishops never seem to catch on that they better switch tactics since everyone has long since tuned them out. In the old days, the Republican bishops sounded the alarm about socialism and bosheviks. Something new and fresh, please.

  • MikeL4

    Marcedward: as far as the Supreme court goes, again, the majority of Americans would have an interest in making the killing of unborn children illegal. The people of this country functioned just fine without a “privacy” right in the constitution and they would do just fine again. as to your health argument, those who wish to justify the killing of unborn children have used the health argument to include the “psychological” stress of having to have a child that don’t want to justify killing the unborn child. The health exception became meaningless. As always we must remember, we are talking about human beings. No one has the right over another human beings life.

  • TheRealDerf

    A blue christian is a pseudo christian. A blue catholic is a pseudo catholic.

  • marcedward1

    MikeL4 writesIf you want to dispute the statistics, there is ample room in the piece describing their methodology (that means how they came by their stats). What is wrong with their methodology?’Yes, then I do believe I will discount the validity of these statistics.’Based upon what? Your side often quotes Guttmacher on abortion rates in the USA because Guttmacher studies show the trend to fewer abortions started under Clinton continued under Bush. Trying to have it both ways? Of course I also gave you the name of a book which documents the same thing.

  • CCNL

    Some more famous adoptees- god bless their compassionate parents!!!!Mark Acre – athlete

  • marcedward1

    TheRealDerf writes Wow, talk about being more interested in this world rather than the next world. You might want to spend more time reading the gospals because clearly you don’t get Jesus’s message at all.