Notre Dame’s Betrayal

By Patrick J. Reillypresident, Cardinal Newman Society In recent weeks, liberal pundits have rallied to the defense of the University … Continued

By Patrick J. Reilly
president, Cardinal Newman Society

In recent weeks, liberal pundits have rallied to the defense of the University of Notre Dame, which plans to honor President Barack Obama with an honorary law degree on Sunday. The award has been protested by 74 Catholic bishops and more than 360,000 Catholics signing The Cardinal Newman Society‘s petition at NotreDameScandal.com.

Washington Post Columnist E.J. Dionne suggests that “the Catholic right’s over-the-top response is rooted at least as much in Republican and conservative politics as in concern over the abortion question.” Fox News Channel’s Alan Colmes complains, “So while Obama speaks about bringing people together, and the plurality of religious practices that make a great nation, it’s some of those who oppose him who use religion to divide.”

Catholic groups and publications that have fawned over Obama and other pro-choice politicians–like Catholics United, Catholic Democrats, National Catholic Reporter and the Jesuits’ America magazine–also hypocritically accuse Notre Dame’s critics of political motives. But these voices of the left are guilty of exactly what they have accused faithful Catholics of doing: abusing religion to score political points.

They consistently describe the Notre Dame controversy in reference to politics, but it is not about politics. It is about a Catholic university’s betrayal of the Catholic bishops and lack of consideration for Catholic moral teaching. It is precisely about putting faith ahead of politics and secular prestige.

The individuals responsible for creating this debacle are the president of Notre Dame, Father John Jenkins, and the university’s trustees–not President Obama, not Notre Dame’s critics, and certainly not the dozens of outraged bishops.

In 2004 the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops issued a statement which reads, in part: “The Catholic community and Catholic institutions should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles. They should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions.”

Such a mandate from the bishops’ conference is rare, but it was more than justified, following numerous commencement scandals at Catholic colleges and universities for more than a decade. Since 1993 these have been documented by The Cardinal Newman Society, which seeks the renewal of Catholic identity in Catholic higher education.

And there is nothing political or partisan about it.

A few years ago, we raised concerns about pro-choice presidential hopeful Rudolph Giuliani at Loyola College in Baltimore; just like Notre Dame’s bishop, Cardinal William Keeler of Baltimore criticized the choice and refused to attend the commencement ceremony. When we raised the same concerns about Hillary Clinton at Marymount Manhattan College and Eliot Spitzer at Marist College, both New York institutions chose to admit that they were no longer Catholic institutions.

Catholic principles don’t change with party affiliation, and all serious Catholics would be happy if abortion and other intrinsic evils were opposed by both Democrats and Republicans.

Likewise, we would be thrilled if both parties–and all Catholic universities–would embrace the Church’s just war principles, social justice teachings and commitment to subsidiarity.

Those seeking to politicize the Notre Dame honor have been touting a poll by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life that found strong support for Notre Dame’s honor to President Obama even among self-identified Catholics. However, a subsequent Rasmussen Reports poll found that Catholics oppose the honor by an overwhelming 60% to 25% margin.

Why the difference between the polls? Rasmussen first informed respondents of the U.S. bishops’ policy against Catholic honors to public opponents of Catholic moral teaching, while Pew framed the issue through a political lens as “criticism of Notre Dame by abortion opponents.”

Understandably most people don’t want issue politics to interfere with commencement ceremonies. But, as the Rasmussen poll accurately captured, the Notre Dame honor is not about politics and is properly understood within the context of Catholic teaching and the university’s Catholic identity.

It’s understandable that President Obama’s admirers want to shield him from the embarrassment of controversy. But when they impose politics on the Catholic Church, and demand that deference to President Obama take precedent over preserving the Catholic identity of Notre Dame, they only succeed in revealing their own biases.

Patrick J. Reilly is president of The Cardinal Newman Society, a national organization that works to renew and strengthen Catholic identity in Catholic higher education.

  • tony55398

    I think the Bishops should stay out of politics as Christ did, the Pope as well.

  • CCNL

    BO’s opening statement for his Notre Dame speech:”Do you realize that I am president because the majority of the “mothers and fathers” of 35 million aborted babies voted for me???”

  • christhevet

    Where does Mr. Reilly get his authority to be the inquisitor in chief of Catholic Universities? Surely the Church, through the academic mandatum and other tools, is responsible for this, not some self-appointed grandiose wacko.

  • lives7

    This issue is not about Bishops, Priest, Catholics, Liberals, Conservatives, or President Obama.This issue is the 50 million children murder by abortion in the United States.Jesus Christ was born through a woman, like each and every child murder through abortion.To Proclaim Jesus, is to Proclaim Life.Notre Dame is wrong. President Jenkins is wrong. Not by my choice, but by the very ACTIONS of Jesus Christ.To deny the outward sign instituted by Christ is Sin in Catholicism.There is no honor in the murder of a defenseless child. There is no honor in helping the poor while slaughering their unborn children.This is not my personal choice or judgement, but a Commandment from God to Moses, to every Christian today:

  • Farnaz1Mansouri1

    Well, sure it is that Mr. Reilly is a pompous fool, who should seek to coneal rather than advertise his idiocy.I don’t know if this is comforting, but all religions can bemoan the presence of such as he. Hopefully, this non-essay will wither away sooner rather than later.

  • Alex511

    fr lives7:>Notre Dame is wrong. President Jenkins is wrong…Nope, not “wrong”. Just because they didn’t invite roger mahoney of LA diocese, well known for his role in the priest scandal, shifting pedophiles from one parish to another without telling parishoners.

  • usapdx

    ROME NEEDS ANOTHER POPE JOHN 23 TO TURN THE CHURCH AROUND. THE MAN IS CALLED MARTIN.

  • CCNL

    Are there any Baha’ists or Mormons attending Notre Dame??

  • Nosmanic

    All this contraversy is really that repubs don’t want to have dialogue with any liberal.

  • Farnaz1Mansouri1

    Actually, P.R. Reilly might find guidance in the C.C.Nut-Lousian interpretation of the NT:C. Christian Nut-Louse. The New in the New Testament. Anatarctic UP. Antarctica, 1957. Available in Deep Drifts, Antarctica. Also, contains CC Nut-Lousian schedule of holidays, honorary degrees for American presidents, etc., based on the C.C. Nut-Lousian reading.

  • Mortal

    I have ZERO respect for any Catholic opposing Obama’s speaking at Notre Dame who did not also oppose every member of the Bush administration from doing the same. The crimes of that administration – in invading Iraq, in trashing our constitution, in despoiling our environment, in torturing our captives, and in siding with the rich and powerful against the poor and helpless at every turn, (in general, in doing the opposite of what Christ and the Church teaches whenever they could) far outweigh any imaginable (or imagined) shortcoming Obama may have.

  • CCNL

    CNN’s Quick Vote as of 11:54 PM 05/16/2009Should Notre Dame give President Obama an honorary degree?Yes 50% 97613

  • BurfordHolly

    Let me put it this way – if the priciples of good Catholics are endangered by any contact with nonCatholics and the federal government, then will Scalio and the rest of the Catholics RESIGN FROM THE SUPREME COURT since there is no way for them to be part of a secular government and practicing Catholics.Unless it’s actually all just crass grubbing for political power….

  • captainkona

    I fully understand the Catholic Right’s resentment of a woman’s choice.No self respecting pedophiles like having their toy factories shut down.

  • rkrishna100

    Dear Mr.Patrick J. Reilly,

  • VinIL1

    I wish these people who are putting so much time and effort into turning four years of hard work by the graduating ND students into a circus would instead devote their time, effort and travel budgets to helping the many children who were NOT aborted and need help TODAY — the ones who are hungry; the ones who are homeless; the ones who are sick and have no health insurance; the ones who attend substandard schools; the ones whose father or mother were killed or maimed in a war built on lies; the one who have been exploited, abused and betrayed by Catholic priests and the Catholic hierarchy. This is a church whose leader, the pope, does not believe that condoms help prevent AIDS! This is a church that turns its back on gays, the divorced, and the very unwed mothers whose choice they are screeching about. President Obama is the elected leader of the United States. To treat him, and the celebration of commencement, with this level of disrespect is hypocritical, NOT what Jesus would do, and just plain sad.

  • Timintaiwan

    In response to BURFORDHOLLY: This issue is not about head-in-the-sand Christianity. It is about giving a political figure with values in opposition to Catholicism a forum in an ostensibly Catholic institution. The same institution, in this case Notre Dame, could be and probably is very active in reaching out to the community, Catholic or non-Catholic. A supposedly Catholic institution of higher learning certainly has no moral obligation to invite opposing voices into its walls, especially when the only seeming motivation is to bask in the dubious prestige of having a sitting president speak at its commencement ceremony, not, as you might wish, making fearless contact with non-Catholics. But then, by the end of your comment, it sounds like you’re more concerned about Catholics in government, and that’s not really the issue, either.

  • nihao1

    “Church’s just war principles” – would that include the Pope’s support of Hitler? What about Iraq. Was the Pope doing anything to stop the genocide in Bosnia? The list is long, and not very supportive of anything “just” when it comes to the Catholic Church, and the Pope. I don’t mean to suggest that all Catholics are bad people, but this editorial is just posturing, and it is obviously for political gain as many other posters have pointed out. No such outrage over Republicans in the past 8 years? We are not that gullible.

  • bflagg

    Where was all the indignation and outrage when Bush 43 was at ND? War, torture, deceit, incompetence and hubris are not worthy of Catholic condemnation, but support of individual liberty is? This is exactly why we need a much larger separation of church and state. Or, a much overdue tax code change requiring these religious institutions to start paying their fair share, in order that they have equal voice in our democracy.

  • wasaUFO

    Notre Dame and the Catholics can think anyway they like, but if opposed to Obama’s thinking, why invite him.? Newt Gingrich converted to the Catholic religion a month ago, he’s been divorced, why not have him speak to all the little angels at Notre Dame.? I think Notre Dame is lucky to have an American President speak at their graduation.

  • rpb1

    The Catholic Church apolitical? You have to be joking. Thou shalt not kill? How many have been murdered in the name of God. No other Western church has been involved in as many killings as this church. How many pro-lifers own guns? How many willingly condone the murder of children, sorry, collateral damage? How many send their young to war? How many innocent children have been led to believe they were safe? Led to have faith, only to have it ripped away from them in the most humiliating way possible – sodomy. How much is still being practiced behind these oh so holy walls? Where is the Catholic Church in Dafur? Myanmar? Where were they when the Nazis liquidated millions? Clean up your own act before you tell others what is right and wrong. “He who casts the first stone”

  • downeast5

    “Likewise, we would be thrilled if both parties–and all Catholic universities–would embrace the Church’s just war principles, social justice teachings and commitment to subsidiarity.”notice he doesn’t say anything about the death penalty– also a life issue the church is opposed to– but that might bring trouble with GOP… what a hypocrite-

  • dblakeross

    It is reasonable to be pro-life or pro-choice. It is even reasonable to protest a pro-choice president. To march around with shocking pictures of bloody abortions makes you sensationalists and scum. This is what has gone seriously wrong with the Christian right. Their message is so extreme and revolting that only al-qaeda can relate.

  • monk55

    Why is the Vatican silent about this issue while some two-bit dogma pusher from a society no one has ever heard of rants about moral superiority? Btw, most of those bishops opposed to this appearance are among the numerous religious hypocrites involved in the pedophile scandal, either hiding it or actively participating in it!

  • case3

    The problem with entire abortion debate at this point is no one discusses: Why Abortion is legal. The opponents have even went as far a to suggest the people who are pro-choice get some kind of sick pleasure out of the act… This is unhelpful to say the least. Roe V. Wade hinges on rights a woman has over her own body, not the life of the unborn. If Roe is overturned and woman has an abortion (does is herself) should she be charged with murder? What if it was by behave such as alcohol. What if she ride a motor cycle recklessly or skydives causing loss of her unborn. Do you charge her with Murder? This could lead to an entire legal framework for what a woman can and can’t do with her body when pregnant. — this needs to be the discussion. No whether abortion is good or bad…. it always bad, but does that mean it should be illegal? note for thought… if your against abortion..then you should be for smoking bans (to protect the unborn of course).

  • murphyp

    Funny. Where was all the outrage when Ronald Reagan spoke at commencement? This was the President whose policy in Central America was a moral outrage. It would eventually contribute to an environment where government troops would feel empowered to murder four Jesuit priests, their housekeeper, and her daughter. I wonder what Mr. Reilly reconciles that with his notion of “moral teaching.”

  • cjweid10

    As a student who goes to a catholic college, i find this protestation of the President’s address tomorrow quite untenable. There are literally millions of college graduates who would love to hear the President, any President indeed, speak at their graduation – what a memory. First, most obviously, it is my understanding that Notre Dame has invited the President, regardless of party affiliation, to deliver a graduation address every time the office changes. Second, perhaps more importantly, Notre Dame is a Catholic institution of higher learning. As a school devoted to both faith and reason, as the Church at large continuously has attempted to be, isn’t it only natural that Notre Dame serve as a forum for discourse and dialogue, not nasty protestations and, as happened recently, a liberal teacher at ND receiving a mutilated baby doll on her doorstep for supporting the President’s address? Finally, what about all the ND students who are not Catholics? Are they to be designated differently from their Catholic peers? Should they not receive their degrees, speak up in class? As someone whose family has largely graduated as Domers yet having not attended ND myself, ultimately I consider my opinion infinitesimally secondary: not attending ND, humility of opinion and reticence to judge should be one’s first reaction. Ultimately, it is only up to the Notre Dame community, as a tightly knit Catholic institution of higher learning, to decide their graduation protocol.

  • islesonthecoast

    I get so tired of hearing about the “Catholic Right” or “Liberal Catholics.” There are only true Catholics and those who pretend to be. The Catholic Church is not a democracy. It is an institution of 2000+ years, and will remain consistant in its doctrine long after those who would see it change or destroyed are gone.

  • rcarpenter1

    As if it were not frightening enough that a “majority” of Americans have signed on as Obama worshipers, we now endure the spectacle of Notre Dame denouncing core beliefs only to become another of his legions of mindless sycophants. No doubt there will be thunderous applause and tears of hysterical joy as our narcissistic Anointed One reads his teleprompter and accepts his defiled title.

  • scoates2482

    How is it that each and every life, pregnancy, whatever is somehow considered a “miracle”? It happens ALL THE TIME. Without divine intervention. My cat can do it. There are millions of little “miracles” pumped out every year that we all eventually have to find a way to feed and support (with ever depleting resources). Kids born in misery to drug addicted mothers with mutliple siblings from multiple men (who disappear) – what a MIRACLE! Let’s make more!!Human life is not a miracle. It is not “sacred”. It just IS. It is what we do with our lives that counts and bringing millions more into this world for no better reason than this is the true sin against God: it defies the intelligence and common sense that we were given.

  • MarkS1

    Despite claims to the contrary, this is about politics – narrow and intolerant Republican politics. But because this is America, I can be fairly confident that people like Mr. Reilly will never be in a position to dictate to me what I must or must not believe.The intolerance of those protesting President Obama’s invitation to Notre Dame follows a tradition that is as “American as apple pie”. The Puritans, for example, considered having women take the veil and regularly expelled dissenters from their communities (excommunication). The “take it or leave it” attitude of the righteous here comes with a long history.Many of our founders who sought religious liberty from England were vehemently against granting any religious liberty to those with whom they disagreed. It is the genius of our Constitution that it is very difficult to our home grown Imans to achieve sufficient political power to enforce their will upon the rest of us. I thank God for this every day and pray that it continues. The last time a self-righteous mission to protect life and freedom at all costs was linked with political power in the US, over 600,000 Americans died in a violent civil war. When the core dissenters here believe that everyone opposed to them is condoning murder, how far away can a world be where those who don’t agree with them are dealt with very harshly?This is not really a matter of “liberal” versus “conservative” either. You regularly find the same stridency against disagreement in both liberal and conservative congregations. “We are tolerant and welcoming of everyone except those who are intolerant of our values”.The Catholics have been at this for a long time too. In fact, that is key to understanding what being Catholic means. Sure, there can be some discussion of Church policy, often in large highly publicized Councils, but once decisions have been made, everyone universally must get in line or hit the road. Notre Dame has long been seen as a fairly liberal institution (which makes it “not really Catholic” to conservatives). (It most certainly is not a Pontifical University.) More importantly, however, it has also been known as a strong university with wise people who are open to divergent ideas. I am glad that it has chosen to remain strong in the midst of this crisis.

  • Timintaiwan

    Those who ignore Catholic history are doomed to repeat it, to anybody who will listen, hoping people will just give up on what they see as a crazy old sodomite, fat-assed institution of purse-fatteners.Fortunately, the issue here is not past abuses of the Catholic church. However, since people routinely bring up the past abuses of the church, (a similar tactic of the abortion protesters mentioned by DBLAKEROSS, I might add) how about what they are doing right now? The Catholic church IS in Darfur, RPB1, providing relief through Catholic Relief Services partners and working with the U.N.The Catholic church in Myanmar, having been officially expelled from the country in 1966, has now almost doubled its presence of clergy and other church workers from 1966 levels, despite official opposition and a proclamation to “wipe out Christianity.”Jesus Christ is really the only guy who can safely use the hypocrisy argument without getting burned. The rest of us have to keep doing our best to stick to our convictions. There will be mistakes, there will be hypocrisy. Does that mean we just let everything go? Of course not.

  • scoates2482

    So “mindless sycophants” such as yourself?

  • scoates2482

    The “debate” is rooted in the belief that human life is somehow a “miracle”.It isn’t.

  • JRinBellingham

    I wonder if Catholics know that Saint Augustine of Hippo has direct quotes, documented and in Catholic possession, supporting the right and innocense of a woman to choose to have an abortion so long as the “quickening” (perceptible movement) had not yet occurred. If not for Augustine much of the Catholic church would have disappeared into the dark ages. Saved by a Saint who saw nothing wrong with a woman’s right to choose. The whole spectrum seems so steeped in hypocrisy and back and forth decisions that the only reliable notion of who’s right and who’s wrong lies in the individual who has the opinion. So, with that said, if you don’t believe in abortion – don’t have one. Let those who do be damned, or let them be admitted to heaven. That is not the government’s job to monitor that – it’s God’s. So stop posturing to pretend that you’re somehow holier than you really are.

  • JMD1

    Which is the worst torture; suctioning apart a living baby or pouring water on a rag on a terrorists face? Do you think living babies don’t feel pain as they are dismembered? Which is worse giving a mass murderer a painless injection or sticking a sharp pair of scissors in the head of a partially born baby? Deep down you know it isn’t right. You can try and justify it but deep deep down inside you know “it just ain’t right”.

  • msgr

    I don’t know what brings out ignorance on the internet and all the hate, but could we please have a reasoned debate? Some points:1. Of course the bishops have a say–they’re supposed to–it’s a Catholic university and they can yank it’s title to be Catholic if they want to. It’s their job to make sure Notre Dame is Catholic.2. Pres. Obama would be welcome to speak at a forum on the subject of abortion–but this is graduation, and to receive an honorary degree bespeaks an acceptance by the university of Pres. Obama’s moral views.3. The criticism of Bush speaking at ND would be valid if he was invited after the Iraq war began. Instead, he was invited and spoke long before that war and before he had any real presidential record.4. The commenters still seem to be confused over Catholic teaching. Opposition to the death penalty and opposition to abortion are not apples and apples in the Catholic faith. The Church does see occasions when the death penalty may be applied morally. Not so for abortion.5. The ND problem is not Obama’s. I don’t begrudge him for accepting the invite. He’s not Catholic, why should he understand? My problem is with the officials of ND who seem like lukewarm Catholics trying to be on the side of Christ and the secular world and being all righteous about it. Fraid they can’t have it both ways.

  • the_critic

    It is sad that so many readers of the Post, and others, do not comprehend what is really going on. This famous Catholic University invited President Obama to speak at the commencement. It is appropriate for all of our students nation wide to have the thoughts of the brightest–be they Catholic or atheist. I believe the founding fathers desired this. All we Catholics are really saying is that he should not be given any honor other than a speaker who happens to be President Obama. To honor him with even a trinket of Catholicism–let alone a honorary law degree is wrong. The President intends to pass the FOCA and one must remember he introduced the bill in the Illinois House to destroy accidental “born alive” children! BK’r Pelosi does the same thing in the FOCA bill. To give the President an honorary Law Degree is synonymous with The Catholic Church agreeing with President Obama’s long held beliefs on abortion. It would be wrong. I suggest those who do not believe in anything –or something–go back to whatever they were doing.sincerely,An American Catholic

  • scoates2482

    Suck him out now or pay to imprison him later. Ahhhhh, the “miracle” of prison…

  • gr8pop

    We can only imagine that part of preserving Catholic “fundamental moral principles” is the requirement to protect pedophile priests. Where was or is the outrage from Patrick J. Reilly … or his Cardinal Newman Society??? Okay, skip outrage, how ’bout just some religiously heartfelt comments???I didn’t think so. I guess wrongs aren’t wrong when they’re done by nice people like you Mr. Reilly.

  • reader502

    It’s difficult to talk about abortion and not talk about the death penalty. Angry dialogues in blogs/comments are just common and useless. What would help is to first end the death penalty. Then we should talk about unborn children, please. Anything else is just politics having nothing to do with the love of Jesus.

  • scoates2482

    I would rather see us keep both: The right of a woman to choose abortion, and the death penalty for those who need to be removed.

  • davewinps

    When I was young, in the 1960′s, I was proud of a President that shared my religion. My aunt was especially proud of President Kennedy: she reminded me that only 40 years earlier she couldn’t get a job teaching school in our state because she was a Catholic. But human nature being what it is, some Catholics are now quite eager to put the shoe on the other foot. While the Ku-Kluk-ers of my aunt’s day objected to having their children taught by Catholics, now the Catholics can’t even tolerate the President being allowed to speak to their students. If the Klu — oh, please pardon my inadvertent slip of the tongue — if the SHOE fits, wear it.

  • Maerzie

    EXCELLENT post, “VINIL”!! Where was the outcry when Bush, who signed execution papers as Governor, when he started a selfish war for personal reasons which has murdered thousands of innocent civilians, pregnant women, babies, and soldiers.Does pro-life only mean pregnancies and infants? How hypocritical it is for anyone who CLAIMS to be pro-life to take the liberty of this kind of NARROW-minded thinking! How many of these protestors have had, or procured for another, an abortion? How many pretend “Catholics” practice or have practiced birth control, another form of PREVENTING LIFE?An educated person is obligated to use his God-given brain for THINKING! Brainwashing is NOT “thinking”! To believe and proclaim that “Thou shalt not kill” means ONLY babies, while ignoring the murders of older humans is ignorance and hypocrisy personified! You are telling the WORLD that you are all phonies who don’t know how to think and are very particular WHO may be murdered before it OFFENDS you!Educated parents, even phonies, teach their children (both daughters AND sons) about sex, pregnancy, and guide their behavior so they have the emotional tools to handle their raging hormones. The majority of people shirk and evade this responsibility. How many thousands of unplanned pregnancies would not have occurred if parents would have loved their children enough to teach them and gain their friendship and understanding?

  • pease504

    From 1992-1994 there was a pro-choice President and a pro-choice Congress. Abortions declined by 30,000 each year.From 1995-1999 there was a pro-choice President and a pro-life Congress. Abortions declined by 70,000 each year.From 2000-2005 there was a pro-life President and a pro-life Congress. Abortions declined by 6,000 each year.So what do you want? An actual reduction in abortions or talk about reducing abortions?Because when pro-life politicians were in charge, abortions declined 5 times faster than when pro-choice politicians were in charge.

  • emisoul

    You stated that Bush was invited to speak before he became President of United States; however you forget to comment that the Catholic church was also against death penalty. Do you know who till date has the record on executions in Texas as Governor; G.W. Bush. J. Emeka – Houston, Texas

  • gt92102

    Love the fetus; hate the child. If all of you Christians REALLY lived as Christ taught, there wouldn’t be nearly the demand for abortions that their are. If you REALLY lived as Christ taught, the poor would be fed and housed and given medical attention. Young men and women would be counseled in how to healthily satisfy their intimacy needs without unwanted pregnancies. But, I’m afraid that most of you Christians don’t want to forego that 2nd or 3rd bathroom, or that 2nd or 3rd TV, or that 2nd or 3rd car, or that trip to the beauty parlor, or those football season tickets. God forbid that you give up all your worldly possessions as Christ asked you to. No, this abortion issue is used by yourselves to distract yourselves from the fact that you really aren’t following Christ at all.

  • Stoptheswamp

    So it was okay to give George W. Bush the same honors at Notre Dame, even though he supported capital punishment? And lets talk about the Pope…the world should be outraged that the Pope told African Catholics to not use condoms. Shame!

  • wiilwaal

    giving obama a honor degree has nothing to do with faith but also i do not like abortion of babies and torture of people.

  • gnowthi

    As I read these comments I conclude that many posters are not Catholics and the Catholic posters are either ignorant of Church teaching or reject it. The isuue at Fracis J. Donovan

  • Maerzie

    Also, there are about 365 U.S. Bishops, 46 U.S. Archbishops, and 12 U.S. Cardinals.There are also over 60,000,000 baptized Catholics in the United States, many who no longer practice their Faith. Our new Mexican neighbors, historically Catholics, should add to this number. Perhaps these 360,000 ONE ISSUE ZEALOTS should spend their time and money educating and preventing unwanted babies BEFORE the fact, NOT after!!Damning Judgment is for God Alone! Each person has a conscience, developed according to his mind and life education. Each person has been given a conscience so he can judge himself! Education usually also makes a wiser conscience, as then each teaching is incorporated into his thinking, including prejudices.

  • scoates2482

    Fracis: why so much pride in being a part of such a backward religion? You may see this debate as being a “family affair” but the Church and its members have absolutely NO problem in trying their best to dictate to other families how they should live their lives. Get out of our politics and perhaps we will get out of yours.

  • asoders22

    Since Catholics is such a big group, this maybe cannot be a family affair. Only in discussions with others, only subjected to the view of others – even those with whom you do not agree – can you grow and mature.Catholics do need to do some soul-searching. The moral teachings of the church are obviously not in line with the moral teachings of Jesus, which they should be. The pope is not infallible, neither is the church. Christianity started out as a small, humble congregation of both men and women, which talked of forgiveness, the need of a humanistic view before a rigid upholding of the law, poverty and mildness. The church has developed into a gigantic, male-dominated, narrow-minded and rich power structure that oppresses people. It forgives war and greed but jumps all over the humanistic view-point. It allows bombing of thousands of babies but shuns women doing even very early abortions, and keeps them down through banning contraception. It’s a monster.Honoring Barack Obama, who at lest partly has a humanistic view, is far more Christian than a lot of other thing the Church is doing.

  • Curious21

    I don’t believe one has to be a Catholic to attend Notre Dame, or hold catholic views for that matter. What’s the difference between earning a degree or having it bestowed even if you believe in abortion. I am sure the State of Indiana has authorized Notre Dame to offer the various academic degrees not because of Catholic doctrine but because they fulfill the academic requirements set by the state.A religous litmus test is not required to be President, nor should it be. I believe the President is a good and decent person and is trying his best to be President to all Americans, difficult as that may be.

  • buzz6

    Why do representatives of an institution responsible for the largest and most obscene pedophilia scandal get to pontificate in the national media about issues of what they consider “morality?” The Catholic Church preaching about ethics is like a fast food restaurant talking about healthy eating. And the self-identification of the Newman Society as a “national organization that works to renew and strengthen Catholic identity in Catholic higher education” is laughable. How about “a national organization that serves as an ideological ally for the Republican Party and far-right politicians.”

  • uanrew15

    Though I respect Mr. Reilly’s view on right to life I would ask if he is willing to reject every financial gift or tithe made to the Roman Catholic church or its educational/charitable affiliates without a signed document (perhaps even sworn statement) attesting to the the fact that the donor’s beliefs are lock step with the views of his church? Works both directions, don’t you think?

  • Dalva1

    What a pity then it is that Ann Dunham did not abort her fetus in 1961.

  • wkorn

    Patrick, the number of signatories to your website is impressive, so long as one takes them out of context.You state that 74 Bishops have signed the petition at Notredamescandal.com. But the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops reports there are 424 Bishops in the U.S. So your 74 represent only 17.5 percent of the total.You state that over 366,000 Catholics have signed the petition. This represents one half of one percent of the 67,117,016 Catholics in the U.S. (again, as reported by the USCCB).This suggests to me that the support of your position is very limited even within the Catholic Church. Or is it your position that 350 Bishops and 66,700,000-odd Catholics in general are also betraying the Church?

  • jrw1

    I am so glad I left the Catholic Church 50 years ago.

  • stuck_in_Lodi

    My grandfather left the Catholic church in his youth. He and his descendants never returned to it. Reilly’s comments remind me why.

  • AustininDC

    I pray the moral and ethical people of this historic organization eventually find the strength and courage to topple its immoral, weak, and defensive leadership.

  • rcharlesv

    What a phoney number P J Reilly posts when he alleges that over 350,000 thousand, “Catholics” have signed his petition against President Obama speaking at Notre Dame and receiving an honorary degree. First of all you do not have to be Catholic to sign his “Petition without Portfolio”. Next, there is no way to verify that the signatories were Catholic. Reilly cannot confirm that the so called signtures are from individuals and not a scam high tech generated vote.I close with the following quote by Father Theodore Hesburg, former President of Notre Dame. “At Notre Dame we have always maintained an open speakers policy. That means we do not have hard-and-fast criteria for speakers, other than that they have something intelligent to say and can attract an audience. Most particularly, we do not require speakers to agree with what we stand for as a university or as Catholics.”— From “God, Country, Notre Dame,” the 1990 autobiography of the Rev. Theodore M. Hesburgh, president emeritus, University of Notre DameThrow the protestors in the cooler till the commencement is over.

  • Anaxagoras500bc

    Either ND is an institution of higher education and a place where ideas are exposed and debated or it’s a sectarian religious outfit where only concepts in line with the strict Catholic doctrines may be exposed.Now if we accept only the second alternative then we have to run a short inventory of the Catholic church stances on moral issues, to see whether those stances are really moral and qualifies the Church to pontificate on ethics:I’m an ND grad and I didn’t particularly liked President Regan coming to the campus although I was very much in favour of his right to do so. When it comes to morality I had a much bigger problem of having President Bush invited since his lies cost about five thousands American and close to a million Iraqi lives. Thou shall not kill except when seeking non existent WMDs.

  • katavo

    We are not a political organization, we have no political motivations, our demands are strictly based on principle!The democrats, now, and Obama and all his supporters, everything they say, do, think, feel and rant about is strictly political.And besides, if we are political, so are the democrats.Nothing identifies you more as a republican stooge than the denial, accusation of the democrats, then the self-forgiving by claiming the democrats do it too.

  • dmooney

    Why didn’t the Cardinal Newman Socierty criticize the Pope for recently sharing a platform with French President Nicholas Sarkozy, who describes himself as a “lapsed Catholic”, supports abrtion rights and has been divorced twice. Why didn’t they criticize Notre Dame’s invitation to George W. Bush, who gleefully imlemented the death penalty in Texas, though it is against Church teachings. This whole “scandal” is about the use of religion to take sides in a domestic political battle. Fortunately, most AMerican Catholics do not want to play this destructive and divisive game.

  • wilkestraphill

    Laugh OR cry? This is the question.LAUGH: How ludicrous it is to attempt a Theocratic style government in America. What we need in America is an American Catholic Rite. CRY: I was enthralled with Catholicism until The Vatican endorsed G. W. Bush.This type of thinking caused me to convert to Catholicism. Little did I know the RC Church was no better.There are some aspects of the RC Church I believe so deeply it is engrained on my soul.I consider the Jesus Movement as the beginning of -what we now call- the Catholic Church. I think of it as Jesus’ Movement yet. It has had and still does have some stewards that I think is destroying what Jesus started.ABORTION: If one is opposed to an abortion- DO NOT have one. Do not act sanctimonious toward others who think ALL persons have the right and privilege to assess their reality. PRO-CHOICE is for every woman. She came into this world with FREE WILL. Yet the EXTREME FAR RIGHT seems determined to take this right from women if it is NOT what THEY believe.Homosexuality: Isn’t it clear that chromosomes determine the sexuality and personality of ALL of us? AGAIN, the extreme right seems to think THEY have the right to take FREE WILL from them. WHO are you to play God, Judge and JURY?GOLDEN RULE: my perception is the EXTREME RIGHT wants their view LEGISLATED by the president, congress and Superior Court.NO way in America. This is not a Theocratic form of government or a Dictatorship. The Roman Catholic hierarchy cannot say we are not allowed to receive Communion because we are PRO-CHOICE. Jesus would approve of this? Don’t think so.Rev. Jenkins is on the right path. He is one I can admire and respect. Go Notre Dame – you CAN be Catholic and American.

  • anders1

    How dare the hierachy of the Church of Pediophia tell/sanction academic institutions and United States law! That silly cult should just shut up. I am so damn tired of their interfering in the civil live of this country, I almost wish the First Amendment of the Constitution be amedened to protect only belief that is not bigoted and intolerant.

  • nyrunner101

    I am Catholic and I work for a Catholic Organization and commentary from a man like Reilley makes me angry and disgusted. When I read that there would be protests against Obama I thought it was because of his recent decisions about torture (Yes, he is against it but he refused to release the photos and supports the unsupportable military tribunals). Now THAT would be a reason to protest. Instead I read an article against Obama’s appearance not because of the torture issue but because he is pro-choice. Reilly never even mentions the turnaround on torture. This man is as morally bankrupt as the Catholic Bishops in Colorado who actually published to the web that gay marraige was WORSE than the death penalty, that men loving men was WORSE than men killing men. Over and over in the last few decades the Catholic establishment has proven that they are hippocrites and taken positions that are completely at odds by any real definition of morality. They no longer speak for me and people like Reilly could do us all a service by keeping his mouth shut.

  • tarryh

    Patrick, most of us go to mass, pray to god, and ignore the political bishops. I would have thought that the leadership would have understood by now that their attempts to control us only alienates us all the more. It is a graduation speech for God’s sake by the President of the United States. You have turned this into a very embarassing moment for the Church in America. Even our impolitic Holy Father has remained silent.

  • gr8day4bsbll

    This type of thinking from Catholic “leaders” is PRECISELY why I now consider myself a Christian but no longer a Catholic. The hypocrisy just FLOWS out of Mr. Reilly’s piece, as he (and many Catholic “leaders”) is willing to condemn Notre Dame for having pro-choice President Obama as a commencement speaker, while remaining silent on Notre Dame’s having pro-torture, pro-death penalty, anti-poor and pro-war former Pres. G.W. Bush as a prior commencement speaker. As Jesus himself said, “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the kingdom of heaven in men’s faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to.” (Matthew 23:13). In their hypocrisy, Mr. Reilly and many of the “leaders” of the Catholic church have become no better than the Pharisees, which is a big reason why the church will continue to lose members as many of us who were raised on the church seek other, less hypocritical and less judgmental, avenues to do God’s good work and to live Jesus’s word here on earth

  • djah

    The author and the hierarchy have failed to come to grips with two fundamental facts.

  • cashmere1

    The Catholic Church is so hypocritical! How they stood by their pedophile priests abusing children, overlooking their sins and crimes and instead of ridding the church of those creeps, covered up for them! A member of my family was an alcoholic, womanizing priest! They shielded him for him for years and years, transferring him to different parishes to protect him. With a shortage of priests, they didn’t want to lose even this sinful priest! In his final years as a priest, one of his lovers was living with him in the rectory and the hierarchy knew it!Obama has committed no sin, is FOR abortion RIGHTS!. If the church feels so strongly about the right to life, why did they allow other presidents like george bush come to Notre Dame and speak while bush believes in capital punishment and illegal pre-emptive war, torturing, and lies? If I were President Obama, I would decline the honorary degree and skip going to Notre Dame. They do not deserve the honor of his being there. They should be ashamed of their insulting the president of the United States, ashamed of their hypocrisy! Some priests are not worthy to be called Catholics!

  • wmboyd

    What was to be a celebration of successful completion of 4 yrs. at one of the best Universities was twisted into a media opportunity by Fox & Fringe. Try as they might to up their ratings, Fox has been unable (even after purchasing exclusive rights to back the riot) to get higher than #3. And, to think, Fox spent well over $2 million to stage the event. Well, that’s what road kill is all about (and what it attracts).

  • ashleybone

    Patrick,Just wanted to let you know how much I love it when you religious folk squabble, especially over politics, and especially with members of your own sect. It’s almost enough fun to make me believe in a higher power.

  • cashmere1

    No wonder membership in the Catholic Church is declining and there is a shortage of priests. It is because of the hypocrisy of the church itself, expecting so much of Catholics while the hierarchy is sinning or condoning sinners! It is because they are much too political from the pulpit!What is happening at Notre Dame is another illustration of the church’s hypocrisy! It is all political, nothing more!I am a baptized Catholic who left the church 20 years ago when my eyes were opened to the hypocrisy! I could no longer believe in the church teachings, the priests or the hierarchy! The way they could shun couples who had divorced while sinning themelves blew me away! Everyone was a sinner but them!

  • timebanded

    I was born and educated catholic but their hypocrisy is anti-everything Christ ever said. My respect for all forms of organized religion is out the window.

  • MikeL4

    Wow. Nice to see all the bigots out on this page. Well, a couple of points. All of you who are proud you left the Church, I am glad you found churches that find it morally acceptable to kill developing human beings in the womb. May God forgive you. To those who think killing developing human beings is a political issue and not a moral issue, I can’t help you. That is why Churches are involved; killing is a moral issue. Not a political one. Remember, Thou shalt not kill. Yeah, that’s why its a moral issue, not political.To the bigots, I can’t help your hate for Catholics or religion in general, only God can soften your heart. I pray that you will let Him.To those within the Catholic Church who find it acceptable to kill developing human beings in the womb or that another human has a “right” to kill that developing human being, you have lost your way. Human life is sacred. Killing an unborn child is a great evil and you know it in your heart.May God forgive us all.

  • samchannar

    If Mr. Reilly believes that only those who practice “The Catholic Doctrines” in its entirety are the only ones to be admitted into “Catholic Domains”, then he is no different from any of the ayatollahs who preach for shariah to cover the earth. Why is he not fighting to stop the admission of top athletes into ND without a “Catholic Test”? How many in their football squad will pass this test? Why doesn’t the Catholic universities prohibit non-Catholics altogether? You can even extend this to demanding a state exclusively for the Catholics. So, everything is based on convenience and expedience. The conservatives have been foaming in their mouth ever since the country turned solidly against the Bush-Chenny-Gingrich Republicanism. Obama’s ascendancy is the most unbearable thing, which is behind all of these ranting.

  • johnmoran175

    I’m no longer RC, but I grew up when the Church was much more cosmopolitan, i.e., when it still had vestiges of its medieval role as a repository of learning and intellectual discourse. At that time (60s and 70s) there were abstract, liberal-minded priests rubbing shoulders with more conversative clergy. Things were different among the laity as well. I remember my FBI agent, Knights of Columbus father telling a parish council in the 1970s that he couldn’t embrace their anti-abortion efforts “in good conscience” because he was pro-choice. No one shunned him because of that conviction, or threatened to deny him the sacraments. Those days seem to be as much a part of the past as Erasmus.

  • julian2

    To drag up that hoary old expression, “Some of my best friends are Catholics.” Actually, most of my best friends have been Catholic. Let’s all thank a higher power that today’s Catholics are not the frightened little children they used to be. No earthly figure has the wisdom or the right to divine the intentions of the almighty.

  • thesuperclasssux

    mikel4 –Hmmmm . . . so, anyone who dares! to disagree with you, is a “bigot” — right? Yeah, that sounds about right . . .just get your copy of Frank Luntz’s new book, “The Neocon’s Complete Thesaurus of Jibberish” — ???Post all the ipse dixits you want — Foxsnooze has made a killing, doing the same thing for decades . . .You’re nothing more than a typical rightwing coward — it’s so much easier to bully young women, right? — than to after pedophile priests . . . who molest and rape young kids.

  • Dalva1

    What a pity then it is that Ann Dunham did not abort her fetus in 1961

  • Utahreb

    Does anyone actually believe that President Obama will use the podium to promote abortion? He is not pro-abortion, he is pro-choice and there is a difference. The President was invited as the leader of our country, not as a lightning rod pro or con on one single facet of his beliefs. He will, I am sure, give the graduates a speech on serving our country and our people, having hope for the future and will congratulate them on their special day.President Obama seems to believe, as many of us do, that prevention of pregnancy is much better than abortion. However, the Catholic Church does not believe in birth control, so there you have the difference. And it still boils down to choice.

  • Alsatian1

    I’m glad the arch catholics were out protesting when George Bush gave the commencement. Afterall he believes in capital punishment and illegal pre-emptive war. These simpleton, abortion-obsessed groups are embarrassing. They hate when non-catholics go through a medical procedure fraught with theological ambiguity, but they love when their country–their republic–kill on their behalf. Really, shut up, unless your solution is to only allow Catholic bishops to give the commencement speech.Brendan Meyer

  • Dalva1

    Dont ever compare Bush to Obama. Obama will never ever come even near to George W.Bush class.

  • analyst72

    As a Catholic it repugnant to me to se such extreme rith-wing hypocrites shouting bloody murder when a university (means “universal”) invites the president of the United States to address its commencement.

  • crossroadsteam

    I can understand the intolerance for opposing views by the Bishops when the issue is as inflammatory as abortion. But a University setting should be given a little more latitude, I think. How else to get to the type of dialog that may someday bring our nation to a solution to this life and death matter?

  • mburix

    Here’s the decision that all high-caliber colleges with Catholic roots need to make: Do you view your primary mission to be a) A place where students can get a top education, or b) A place that educates based on the teachings of the Catholic church. Either is fine but the reality is that if option b) is selected, the caliber of the school will drop to Bob Jones University levels in a few years. At that point, nobody will care who gives the commencement address.

  • franco-b

    As a liberal democrat, an ardent Fighting Irish supporter, but a Roman Catholic first and beyond all other considerations, I am reminded of St. Thomas More’s final words before his beheading at London Tower: “The king’s good servant, but God’s first!”

  • theodorebrown

    Channeling SNL’s “Church Lady”, Mr. Reilly is out of touch and out of line. It’s his kind of thinking that encourages a disturbing number of American right wing ding dongs to take over a great percentage of the church. Reilly’s lack of acknowledgment for the RCC’s own short comings, coupled with his misreading of litmus test issues, only feeds into the equally clownish and misinformed ramblings on religion by self-proclaimed experts Sam Harris and other twits who, like Reilly and other right wing windbags, can only have a discussion at the intellectual and spiritual level of high school freshmen. Would you guys just go away and leave us alone already?

  • xxioxro5

    This is a storm in a tea-cup upgraded to the level of a hurricane.Inviting President Obama and giving him a degree will not erode the nature of Notre Dame as a Catholic University. Something pernicious is at at work here.Ironically we are quick to condemn Islamic fundamentalism.What hypocrisy?

  • walter-in-fallschurch

    dblakeross, you said,well said. to some people it’s all about the extremes, the absolutes. compromise is anathema. it’s divisive and a shame.

  • melvin_polatnick

    Religious devotees claim they alone know what is right and what is wrong. They are supported by the written word of God. But there are those that dispute the validity of Gods word and rely on their own moral compass. Many have had an abortion. They are called heathens. But the right to have an abortion is protected by the constitution. The presidents support of abortion rights is under attack. He will be speaking at Notre Dame despite the anger of those that are devoted to the word of God.

  • md78

    craziness. I was brought up Catholic and still really love the faith, but in all honesty it’s things like this that are leading me to look for other churches to join. Now that I’m an adult, I really have serious doubts about whether I want to raise children in a church this narrow-minded. totally their preference and right to be this way, but completely my call to leave.agree with the poster who said why are we so quick to condemn Islamic fundamentalism yet find it so hard to see in our own traditions? very hypocritical, if you ask me.

  • coloradodog

    Notre Dame and O’Reilly Catholics (like his fellow Irish Catholic bigot Reilly) betrayed America and the President by inviting Obama to speak there in the first place. This was purely political because, if it were based on only their insincere cherry-picked “traditional Christian values”, the Church would have never extended their deceptive invitation to publically lynch Obama at Notre Dame in the first place.It’s a cheap, thuggish Rovian political tactic to set Obama up to attack him because these “Christians” can’t accept America elected a Black Democrat President.The American Catholic Church of the “O’Reilly’s has become the new American Taliban with the fall of the Dobsonites last November.I suppose you think your Jesus is real proud of your political cunning, don’t you?

  • walter-in-fallschurch

    rcarpenter1,catholics around the world, and even catholic students in the audience don’t have to denounce anything to listen to him. obama will be talking about other things – probably things like the value of education, the challenges ahead, the need for peace, love and cooperation. he probably won’t even mention abortion. even if he does, it’s only because of the silly “controversy” catholics have stirred up. obama is not going to force any catholics to have abortions. his speaking at notre dame is not going to cause any more abortions.if your problem is listening to someone with a viewpoint other than yours, well…that’s life. grow up. everything’s not black-and-white. how do you think atheists feel when people recite [the NOT IN THE ORIGINAL] “under god” in the pledge of allegiance? or when congress opens every session with a PRAYER, from a religios MINISTER?

  • Scholarly_Wolffe

    Wow. Just what we need: The Catholic Thought Police. You, Mr. Riley, are setting up a choice between the Catholic Church and the U.S. Constitution. Not a wise move on your part. I much more feel the need to protect the freedom of speech and the freedom of religion than the dogma of one particular faith even though I am Catholic.That is the purpose of a college education: Listen with respect even to those you disagree with. There is no lack of intolerance in the world, Mr. Riley, so we don’t need yours.

  • jplannert

    Mr. Reilly’s column brilliantly illustrates how the ossified intolerance of the liberals to opinions contrary to their own is so un…catholic.

  • baddog123

    You know what is funny when all those preists were and are sleeping with young boys why didn’t anyone protest at duke. So I think the preists think abortion is wrong, and should be protested, but molesting minors is just a little misunderstanding. Abortion is giving a woman a rigt to control her body, and molesting kid is giving preist the right to control your kids body. I guess it all comes down to control. If you give the preist the control he is ok. If God gives you free will, and the church can take it away I think the church is more powerful than God.

  • lmcphers

    I’m surprised to see so many ill-thought posts on this topic.1. A religion is supposed to provide clear moral standards on how life is to be lived and this puts the Roman Catholic church squarely in the homes.

  • daweeni

    I don’t think Presidents should be accepting “honors” from nut-job religious, wacko, extremist groups, but I guess Obama decided to accept the hand that was fraudulently extended to him.

  • bevjims1

    Patrick Reilly wrote: “A few years ago, we raised concerns about pro-choice presidential hopeful Rudolph Giuliani at Loyola College in Baltimore; just like Notre Dame’s bishop, Cardinal William Keeler of Baltimore criticized the choice and refused to attend the commencement ceremony. When we raised the same concerns about Hillary Clinton at Marymount Manhattan College and Eliot Spitzer at Marist College, both New York institutions chose to admit that they were no longer Catholic institutions. Catholic principles don’t change with party affiliation…”Oh I would respectively disagree. All those above have been in disfavor with the Republican party. But George Bush was invited to and spoke at Notre Dame in spite of his explicit support for the death penalty and actually participated in the practice by not preventing those who were about to be executed from commuting the sentance to life in prison many many times as Govenor of Texas and he continued to speak in support of the death panalty as president. Where was the furor? Where were the Catholics standing up for their moral principles? It seems pretty clear that when it is a republican the moral outrage is set aside. Why?

  • krankyman

    Obama has committed no sin, is FOR abortion RIGHTS!. 35 million citizens and counting. That is the real issue. Makes Mr. Hitler look like an amateur.And for those who forgot – Obama made sure that on his first day in office he would open up funding for abortion all around the globe.So my fellow citizens do you wish to fight for life or do you wish to stand with Hitler, Stalin et al.?

  • ejs2

    Aren’t unjustified wars of aggression contrary to Catholic doctrine? Isn’t torture (the Inquisition excepted) contrary to Catholic doctrine? Doesn’t the Catholic Church believe that society should assist the sick, disabled and others who need assistance? Doesn’t the Catholic Church believe that truth and honesty should prevail in the work place and the market place (think of Jesus driving out the money changers)? When Catholic Bishops start denying Communion to right-wing Republican politicians and business “leaders” who daily violate one, or more, or all of these precepts I’ll start thinking about whether the University of Notre Dame should have invited our first African-American President, a man who honors almost all Catholic precepts and teachings, save on the issue of a woman’s right to decide to have an abortion. Notre Dame is honoring President Obama, the man, for his overall accomplishments, not because of his views on abortion. The days of “shunning” and “stoning,” thank God, are over, except in much of the Middle East, which harbors the Islamic fundamentalists with whom we are supposed to be at war for hating our “freedoms.”

  • dragoon2

    The “Catholic” position on matters concerning commencement speakers and conferring of honorary degrees has been hypocritical, especially from the Catholic right, and Catholic extreme right, that portion of the right wing that Mr. Reilly demonstrably expouses.Reilly’s ilk are fond of quoting the Catholic bishops’ “The Catholic community and Catholic institutions should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles. They should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions.”One is reminded of the only commencement invitation proferred to President Bush by a Catholic school post 9/11, the Iraq war, and the revelations involving torture (not to exclude Bush’s record on capital punishment (Saint Vincent College, Latrobe Pa, May 2007). These elements, too, are retrograde to Catholic teaching, yet Mr. Reilly and his kind did not raise their heads in “shock and awe” when Bush received the invitation from Saint VincentJim Towey, president of Saint Vincent College, and former minion and current apologist of President Bush, would certainly agree with Reilly and the minority of Catholic Bishops protesting the Obama/Notre Dame matter. This is certain, given Towey’s overt display of “Catholicism” in any venue in which he finds hinmself. Yet, Towey (illustrative of the sort of hypocrisy cited above) in defense of the Bush invitation wrote in one of his insufferable blogs: “It is true, President Bush is my friend and I have an abiding respect and affection for him. But even if I didn’t know him personally, I would support an invitation to the duly-elected president of our country, period. So at a minimum we have a “Sitting U.S. Presidents are welcome” policy at Saint Vincent. The fact is that virtually any individual you invite to campus – especially a political leader – may have some views that don’t fully square With Catholic, Benedictine, values.”Towey Blog, April 30, 2007, at http://www.stvincent.edu, president’s blog.

  • gaga19832002

    Which is the bigger sin? Abortion or not making a commitment to make sure that every BORN child is guaranteed healthcare

  • Doowadiddy

    It’s becoming more and more difficult to understand exactly what the profound “moral” axiom of God is, which these “Catholic” (universal) clerics believe they are preserving. Their entire “spiritual” focus seems to be on the “santity” of unborn, future, or “potential” human beings. And their “moral” imperatives appear to ascribe very little value, and often none at all, to the lives and “sanctity” of the extant, real, living human beings in the world. They appear to be placing too much value on the “egg”, over the “hen”. And since genuine “wisdom” is always grounded in the “common sense” which God has given to humanity, a fool should easily know that the “hen” can produce many “eggs”, but an “egg” left to itself can produce nothing!

  • candle96

    I’d be less angered and critical with some Catholics’ protests of Obama at Notre Dame if it weren’t so hypocritical. In 2001, George W. Bush, proponent of the death penalty, spoke at Notre Dame’s commencement. This is a man who personally signed off on the death of 152 individuals in the state of Texas, including a mentally retarded man. Where was the outrage then, Catholics? Until this hypocrisy is acknowledged, it WILL be about politics.

  • walter-in-fallschurch

    MarkS1,

  • majordmz

    I left the Catholic Church because of its hypocrisy. Looks like that hypocrisy is still alive and well. George Bush authorized torture, started an unnecessary war which has killed thousands of innocent people, never championed human rights anywhere, presided over executions in Texas, and supported economic policies which have brought our economy to its knees. So he speaks at Notre Dame. Nice job, Catholics. No wonder people are leaving the church in droves.

  • mcnallyjp

    I remember when I was a teenager and JFK was running for President. The issue that was raised again and again was the fear that the Church would tell Catholic voters for whom they must vote. At the time, it seemed ridiculous…

  • EdMenaunt

    Forty years ago when I started in Catholic higher education it was not difficult to define a Catholic univerity. Today there are fewd, if any, who are either Catholic or catholic. Unless the professor tells the students that he is approved by the bishop to teach theology one does not know what brand is being taught. Such is the state of affairs.We should be aware when the pot is being sitrred, as in this case, by ideologs. The Notre Dame administration is to be applauded.

  • EdMenaunt

    Forty years ago when I started in Catholic higher education it was not difficult to define a Catholic univerity. Today there are few, if any, who are either Catholic or catholic. Unless the professor tells the students that he is approved by the bishop to teach theology one does not know what brand is being taught. Such is the state of affairs.We should be aware when the pot is being sitrred, as in this case, by ideologs. The Notre Dame administration is to be applauded.

  • linguine33

    The history of the Church is a bloody one, from the murdering of heretics, forced conversions and the condoning of genocide of native peoples in the process, its part in the Holocaust, the historical killing of Protestants, Muslims and Jews, the bloody Crusades, and the Inquisition, to name a portion. My question – at what point in history did life become sacred to the Church?

  • walter-in-fallschurch

    i posted this elsewhere, but it seems relevant again,abortion is truly horrible – but i don’t think you can base opposition to it on religious grounds.Is God “pro-life”? Though He makes no specific statements about “abortion,” in Exodus 21:20 we get a rare, almost accidental, glimpse into what He thought about fetuses. While describing penalties for various transgressions, He says,“If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows.”In those days a “premature” baby was a DEAD baby. The fine was remuneration for causing the miscarriage. It’s just a fine. If God considered the fetus a human life, the penalty would have been death. In the next verse, God goes on to say,“But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.”We can surmise that God would probably be in favor of abortion (and murder) if the mother has other Gods. Surely some of Joshua’s victims were pregnant and in Hosea 13:16, God warned unbelievers in Samaria that they would have their “little ones dashed to the ground and pregnant women ripped open.” True, they were infidels, but it’s not very fetus-friendly.Later Jesus warned specifically of woe unto unbelieving expectant mothers at the tribulations (Mt24:19).concern for an “unborn child” is a humanist concern.

  • walter-in-fallschurch

    nyrunner101,

  • bitterpill8

    I had hoped the President would have sent his regrets. The last thing we need is to see Catholics fighting among themselves. They have a sad history of neglect and abuse of their own young ones, which they were obliged to defend in the Courts. This said a great deal about their ability to be truthful about their own deficiencies. So all this indignation about inviting the President is pretty synthetic.

  • Doowadiddy

    “A solemn, unsmiling, sanctimonious old iceberg who looked like he was waiting for a vacancy in the Trinity” – Mark TwianA quote which aptly describes Mr. Reilly!

  • sundog2

    A Catholic ideologue is still an ideologue. Catholics have a lot more to worry about than Obama’s speech at UND. Try working on the following:The positions taken by the more right-wing Bishops are neither Catholic, nor a catholic approach to leading their flocks.

  • douglaslbarber

    Franco_B wrote, “As a liberal democrat, an ardent Fighting Irish supporter, but a Roman Catholic first and beyond all other considerations, I am reminded of St. Thomas More’s final words before his beheading at London Tower: ‘The king’s good servant, but God’s first!’”Amen.

  • dicesare1

    The Notre Dame furor is absolutely typical of what Roman Catholicism has come down to in the last forty-five years. I remember the joy and the hope when Papa Giovanni threw open the windows to let in fresh air, and the despair when his successors rapidly slammed those windows shut and returned to the good old days of subjugating women in virtually every aspect of RC “faith and morals.” Blatant hypocrisy. Blatant male privilege. Shameful.And it goes on. Abortion is a complex, difficult, and painful subject. Nobody I know is “for” abortion, though very many support a woman’s right to choose. Those who shout the loudest have the least to say. When is a fetus viable? When is the “soul” infused? You don’t know, but you keep legislating and harassing and damning women as if you did know. Aquinas thought it might be in the middle or even later of gestation. Did you world beaters know that? Or doesn’t he count — after all, he was in the Middle Ages! As for ND’s having ole Bush there — that was surely the most damning thing of all. One of the most immoral presidents in our history, as well as one of the the stupidest and most damaging, is perfectly ok with those good “catholics.”

  • multreda23

    All of those Bishops knew about the pedophile priests-moving them from parish to parish so they could damage more children. So when they sit their ample behinds down and criticize Obama they just make me want to vomit.What have they ever done to help anyone?And, for all these “good” catholics to be so sanctimonious about this-where were you when the priests were being protected. They make me sick, too.

  • EarlC

    From the column, I quote:* * * * * This statement was in direct response to the nomination of John Kerry as the Democratic Party’s presidential nominee. Of course, this same group could have written the same resolution in 1960. Contrary to the column writer’s statements, it IS all about conservative politics. Let me restate the year of such a resolution: 2004. This is all of the evidence that is needed. All of a sudden it became very important not to serve communion to Cathlics who did not espouse on the political level those things that were espoused in the church. Hence, we have a radicalized part of the Catholic church that is willing to trample all over the rights of poor people so that their stand on abortion can be pure. Of course these Catholic conservatives can be proud of the the additional four years of George W Bush, a non-Catholic, who essentially allowed every major moral principle in this country to get turned on its ear. I give you illegal wars, torture, and deceit.The statement above is so all exclusive that I dare say that all except possibly the Pope would not qualify for any awards, etc. Is the above statement retroactive?

  • EarlC

    Just one last aside, where was the Catholic outrage in Germany during the Hitler years? A worse time to be either Catholic or Lutheran, I cannot think of any.Save your platitudes for yourselves. God has extended his salvation to all people. All are created in God’s image. What right does anyone have to stifle President Obama’s speech anywhere in America under our Constitution? Afterall, he was invited. He did not force himself on Notre Dame.

  • noslok

    So President Obama and Catholics have greatly different views on abortion and other related subjects.By all means then, the Bishops’ solution is to try to prevent discussion. Yes, the much better course of action is rail against the beliefs of others while preventing them from expressing those ideas in an open forum.Pardon the pun. But, thank God I was not raised Catholic.

  • FridayKnight

    Obama’s being honored has made one decision easier. I teach at the University of Maryland and every single one of my students who is a supporter of Obama is getting an F for the semester.

  • a_cascadian

    I am glad that the author has chosen to limit his interpretation of “intrinsic evils” so that it begins and ends with the issue of abortion.Torture? “Wars of choice”? Global Warming? Social inequality? Tax policies that favor the rich at the expense of the poor? Denial of health care to those in need? Fortunately, Reilly realizes that these issues can be conveniently ignored because they clash with existing Republican Dogma, which is far more important than anything you’ll ever read in the Bible.

  • FridayKnight

    Every Obama supporter in my classes is getting an F for the semester. Better luck on graduating NEXT year, losers.

  • rlj1

    Where were these priests when Bush spoke? He presided over more executions when he was Gov. yet no one protested.Are all these students celibate? Are students who aren’t celibate using birth control pills?How many of these protestors also protested the wars that Bush began?Why aren’t these questions asked so the public can see what hypocrites these people are especially the priest and some of the right to lifers?These so called “good” Catholics don’t like Pres. Obama and this is an opportunity to try to stifle/embarrass him. Can you say HYPOCRISY?

  • ejs2

    Mr. Reilly gives away his agenda when he disapprovingly notes what he calls “fawning” over Obama. I’ll bet he did more than “fawn” over George W. Bush.

  • Instructor5

    Notre Dame made a mistake by offering President Obama an honorary degree. It would have been better if they invited him as a commencement speaker. That would have served the purpose of offering the President a platform for engaging people with different views in a dialogue.This mistake handed those who are afraid of dialogue grounds for taking the official moral high ground within the Catholic Church, and undermine Pres. Obama’s effort to be President of all citizens of the United States.Some pro-choice people use “dialogue” to vanquish their opponents. But I have not seen President Obama do that. I hope the media coverage of this event that benefits from “high drama” of religious conflict will not further undermine the President’s effort to seek a resolution of this deeply divisive issue.

  • forrest3

    Where are the organized protests against all of the politicians who recognized that people have a legal right to decide to use birth control?Birth control is against the express teachings of the Church, the Pope, and the Bishops. So how come the Cardinal Newman Society is not organizing protests against politicians who support birth control?Why are the pure-hearted Bishops, who would never think of being political, so accepting of Politicians who disagree with the this teaching?Friends, it is about reactionary, conservative politics. Which means all of this blowing and snorting about ethics is nonsense. This is about hypocracy and politics.

  • dutchess2

    Its the hypocrisy!The Catholic pope earned his creds relocating raping priests to unsuspecting parrishes where he could do it again.A long line of recipients of an honorary degree did not meet standards catholics now want to use to justify denying an honoary degree to our President.There are very few practicing catholics that approve of the Church threatening elected officials. What its boiling down to is that no catholic can ever run for public office in America.Shame on you!

  • forrest3

    Mr. Reilly, here is some news that will shock your conscience!President George W. Bush gave a commencement speech and received an honorary doctor of laws degree from Notre Dame.President Bush, of course, took positions contrary to almost every ethical teaching of the Catholic Church, except abortion. President Bush funded birth control, engaged in a pre-emptive war, advocated tax and spending policies that disproportionately hurt the poor, targeted immigrants, conducted pre-emptive wars, participated (as Governor) in death sentences; and tortured captives.Where was the Cardinal Newman Society then?At the very least, Mr. Reilly and the Cardinal Newman Society and the Bishops should also demand that President Bush return his honorary degree of laws from Notre Dames since the honoring of President Bush is so contrary to the Church’s teachings. (doctor of laws, Jesus, Joseph and Mary!).But, of course, they won’t. Why not? Politics and hypocricy.

  • Judy-in-TX

    “Every Obama supporter in my classes is getting an F for the semester. Better luck on graduating NEXT year, losers.”

  • cdierd1944

    The Pope is the ultimate spokesperson for the Catholic church. I believe his position re: Obama is much more moderate than some of the radical bishops who are single issue wingnuts. Anyone who doesn’t understand that the GOP is trying to use this for political leverage must be asleep. I don’t know why Notre Dame invited the president to speak but invite him they did. It is truly sad that we can’t be civil and listen to people with whom we disagree. Those Catholics who are so outraged by Obama’s speech must come from the Bush Administration who would not speak to, let alone listen to, anyone who disagreed with their position. How sad!

  • cashmere1

    The Catholics believe in protecting the life of the UNBORN, but go on to protecting the pedophile priests who rape and abuse them AFTER they are born! Makes sense, doesn’t it? The hierarchy has paid out billions in lawsuits over the abuse of children in the church! I am a former Catholic, and would not give another DIME to the church because of the way they protect their sinful and criminal priests!Also, the Catholic hierarchy “err on the side of life”….. but do not protest innocent people dying in wars or capital punishment! I am ashamed, surprised, and disappointed in the political stand the University of Notre Dame has taken, but I blame it all on the desperate right wing conservatives who will do ANYTHING to embarrass or criticize President Obama because HE WON! They are the ones behind this protest!

  • John1263

    What a load of nonsense. You mean that the only thing that mater to these Catholoics is that president of the United States thinks he should follow and uphold the Consitutional right to privacy and not use the power of gevernment to force religion into citizen’s personal life decisions? HOGWASH. This is politics, pure and simple. repthuglicons had been making some inroads into the Catholic vote by making sure no one was paying attentionto the issues Catholic voters usually care about, like social equity, social justice, just war, care for the downtrodden. republicons don’t give a hoot about taking care of people, but they managed to convince Catholics that the only thing that mattered was keeping some woman they never met from making a life decision for herself. Since most Catholics are regaining there sense and vopting Democrat again republicons are using this tempest in a teapot to try to cloud the waters wonce more. Disgraceful and dispicable. Hail to the Chief. President Obama is the first president that we have had that is totally focused on making life better for most Americans since LBJ. Clinton was on the right track, but the spirit of Teddy, FDR, Kennedy and LBJ are showing themselves once again in a politics that recognizes that we the people is not just the Walton family and a few rich bankers.

  • archie136

    I only wish the Catholic Bishops and their supporters were as opposed to the sexual and physical abuse of boys and some girls who attended Catholic institutions in order to obtain that good moral upbringing we are hearing about now.

  • dkmjr

    First of all, this opposition is without a doubt purely political despite the good father’s protestations. If it were about Catholic morality, neither Bush II nor Ronald Reagan would have been allowed to give the commencement.Second, those one-note Catholics who look at everything through the abortion microscope have truly lost what it means to be a christian. There is much more to being a follower of Christ than opposing abortion.And for those who are infatuated with the 2000 year traditions of the Catholic Church, you need to read history to see how much it has changed through the years. You would be surprised at how changeable the “eternal” church really is.

  • JudgeRoyBean

    On the subject of abortion President Obama takes a measured, open-minded approach, that tries to find middle ground upon which both sides in this dilemma can try to come up with a workable approach that can prevent unwanted pregnancies. This approach will render all arguments moot. But, Im afraid, that the zealots on both sides have nothing to gain by working through this issue. It seems that the religious zealots, especially, have an agenda that goes beyond the pro-life issue. It is the same type of agenda that has divided Irish Catholics and Protestant Catholics; that divides Sunni and Shiite Muslims. Religion, it seems, has a message of love thy brother on the first page, but really prospers when it can rally the forces against thy brother. Notre Dame did the right thing inviting one of the most dynamic, constructive leaders of our time to speak to these graduates about how we have more to agree on than disagree, no matter the noise from the zealots.

  • forrest3

    Charko825The question is should the Church be tolerant of politicians who take political positions contrary to the Church’s teachings?Personally, I think the Church should stay out of the political arena. Almost everytime the Church has tried to intervene in politics, it causes harms and loses credibility. But if the Church jumps into the cesspool of politics, it should be careful not to get captured by one wing of the political spectrum. Here we have the right wing playing the Church like a violin. “We must protest because this politician rejects core Church teachings!”I could respect this approach more if it was evenhanded and if proponnets called for similar protests of right wing politicians for rejecting core Church moral teachings like objection to the death penalty, objection to birth control, objection to preemptive war, objection to torture and degregation of captives, call for economic distributions, support of immigrants, which are all core moral teachings of the Bishops and the Church — routinely ignored by the many “one note” Catholics who enjoy getting so sanctimonius about the difficult matter of abortion.How about the Church focus on “this is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you. No one has greater love than this, to lay down one’s life for one’s friends.” Or “turn the other cheek.” Or “go and sell your possessions and give them to the poor.” Or this, the hardest of all, “have faith.” Do you think Mr. Reilly or the political bishops have time to talk about the Church’s real teachings instead of raising the great wedge issue of our times?

  • jimsr1

    The 2004 Conference of Catholic Bishops statement quoted by Mr. Reilly goes on to state:“Catholics need to act in support of these principles and policies in public life. It is the particular vocation of the laity to transform the world. We have to encourage this vocation and do more to bring all believers to this mission. As bishops, we do not endorse or oppose candidates. Rather, we seek to form the consciences of our people so that they can examine the positions of candidates and make choices based on Catholic moral and social teaching.” And, this writer suggests, therein lays the rub. In political terms, as opposed to religious, and without delving into the issues of the religious and the secular, the holy and the profane, reason and faith, theology and metaphysics, and within Christianity Luther et.al. vs Rome, the RC Church has been throughout its history and remains today a fundamentally totalitarian institution. Although vastly oversimplified: the given pope is God’s infallible representative on earth and speaks in God’s name; his encyclicals on all questions of faith and morals must be followed by all Catholics; from which it follows that…see first sentence above, “Catholics etc.”. As noted by other posters, the bishops’ statement does indeed counter “render unto God, etc.” and in fact blurs the constitutionally anchored principle of the separation of church and state. In vulgar terms: does a RC elected official and all RCs in their “public lives” answer (“make choices”) to their constituents and all, RC and non-RC, agonistics and atheists, gay and straight, male and female, their fellow citizens as well as his/her individual conscience and sense of responsibility or do they in their public life support and follow the policies and principles (i.e. teachings) of the Vatican? My generation knows how JFK answered this question. Lastly this poster further suggests that it is always beneficial to read (re-read) Dostoyevsky’s Grand Inquisitor passage from his “The Brothers Karamazov”.

  • MPatalinjug

    Yonkers, New YorkIt is a pity that many Catholic leaders as well as laymen are blind to the brutal fact that there are more critical issues with which millions of Americans are rightly concerned over than abortion, or gay marriage, or stem cell research.These millions of Americans are now having to deal with issues that have to do with nothing less than their very existence or survival.The fact that, on the other hand, many Catholic leaders and laymen are making quite an issue of the fact that Notre Dame University has invited President of these United States Barack Obama as its Commencement Speaker, and will, in addition, give him an honorary Doctor Laws degree, is convincing evidence that they are completely out of touch with reality and therefore irrelevant to the lives of millions of Catholics.These die-hard Catholics are not doing the Catholic Church and the Catholic faith a favor. To the contrary, they are acting like termites blindly gnawing at the very foundation of their Catholic faith.That diaspora away from Catholicism is not going to slow down anytime soon, thanks to those Catholic leaders and laymen who are hopelessly held hostage by Catholic doctrine and dogma.Mariano Patalinjug

  • jimsr1

    The 2004 Conference of Catholic Bishops statement quoted by Mr. Reilly goes on to state:“Catholics need to act in support of these principles and policies in public life. It is the particular vocation of the laity to transform the world. We have to encourage this vocation and do more to bring all believers to this mission. As bishops, we do not endorse or oppose candidates. Rather, we seek to form the consciences of our people so that they can examine the positions of candidates and make choices based on Catholic moral and social teaching.” And, this writer suggests, therein lays the rub. In political terms, as opposed to religious, and without delving into the issues of the religious and the secular, the holy and the profane, reason and faith, theology and metaphysics, and within Christianity Luther et.al. vs Rome, the RC Church has been throughout its history and remains today a fundamentally totalitarian institution. Although vastly oversimplified: the given pope is God’s infallible representative on earth and speaks in God’s name; his encyclicals on all questions of faith and morals must be followed by all Catholics; from which it follows that…see first sentence above, “Catholics etc.”. As noted by other posters, the bishops’ statement does indeed counter “render unto God, etc.” and in fact blurs the constitutionally anchored principle of the separation of church and state. In vulgar terms: does a RC elected official and all RCs in their “public lives” answer (“make choices”) to their constituents and all, RC and non-RC, agonistics and atheists, gay and straight, male and female, their fellow citizens as well as his/her individual conscience and sense of responsibility or do they in their public life support and follow the policies and principles (i.e. teachings) of the Vatican? My generation knows how JFK answered this question. Lastly this poster further suggests that it is always beneficial to read (re-read) Dostoyevsky’s Grand Inquisitor passage from his “The Brothers Karamazov”.

  • Farnaz1Mansouri1

    Coloradodog writes;”It’s a cheap, thuggish Rovian political tactic to set Obama up to attack him because these “Christians” can’t accept America elected a Black Democrat President.”Yes, well, there is that.One recalls a certain Jimmy Carter, pro-choice, who gave the commencement address at Notre Dame in 1977.One did not see the hysterica among some Catholics that one sees now.Of course, Carter was white.This is the United States of America, not Vatican Nation. Those who would seek to impose foreign laws on this nation, who would seek to superced the rights of the citizenry would do well to relocate.The time has not yet come for Catholic Jihad.

  • Frank57

    Once again the religious wingnuts of the catholic church — one of the most evil cults ever to inhabit the earth — are trying to muscle their way into the mainstream of protestant America and the government of the people — all while STILL protecting a bevy of pedophiles and child abusers.What horrific hypocrisy. Amazing.

  • enaughton27

    Abortion is an intrinsic evil, the taking the life of an innocent.– End of story.

  • CCNL

    BO’s opening statement for his Notre Dame speech should have been:”Do you realize that I am president because the majority of the “mothers and fathers” of 35 million aborted babies voted for me???”

  • arancia12

    President Obama is not a Catholic, but neither was President George H.W. Bush when he spoke at Notre Dame. Neither was President Reagan or President George W. Bush. So the issue is not about being a Catholic it is about abortion. But Notre Dame’s students apparently had no problem inviting President Bush who did not even attempt to make abortion illegal. Nor President Reagan or President George H.W. Bush.One wonders just how many students are pro-choice. Is that issue used as a litmus test to attend?The hypocrisy of the students of Notre Dame is astonishing.

  • Fei_Hu

    The ANti Abortio Fanatics in reality are PRO Abortion..They would not lift a finger to help the infrastructure that was caused by their Neoconservatives quest for power..Neocos who could care less about the public good. Except when they can steal a Votefor their corrput agenda.Which the so called Antiabortioists are supporting..They are a contradiction in terms…All emotion..No facts..No Nothings..IMHO Partial Birth Abortioin is really about thier followers happily putting their heads uup their asrses so far they cannot put it out.AND it is permanent.As their brains were already sucked out of their heads by Talk Radio ad Right Wing Propaganda..So the Neocons have a permanent another useless cannot fix will – not fix – do ot want to fix Catch22 issue..Fei Hu

  • arancia12

    To those within the Catholic Church who find it acceptable to kill developing human beings in the womb or that another human has a “right” to kill that developing human being, you have lost your way. Human life is sacred. Killing an unborn child is a great evil and you know it in your heart.Then surely you protested George W. Bush too since the Pope spoke out against the war in Iraq. I’m sure you despise the killing of innocent grown human beings just as much. Surely you protested the Bush administration for its invasion of Iraq and its torture of birthed human beings. Surely you have spoken out against pre-emptive war. Remember this?”In the weeks and months before the U.S. attacked Iraq, not only the Holy Father, but also one Cardinal and Archbishop after another at the Vatican spoke out against a “preemptive” or “preventive” strike. They declared that the just war theory could not justify such a war. Archbishop Jean-Louis Tauran said that such a “war of aggression” is a crime against peace. Archbishop Renato Martino, who used the same words in calling the possible military intervention a “crime against peace that cries out vengeance before God,” also criticized the pressure that the most powerful nations exerted on the less powerful ones on the U.N. Security Council to support the war. The Pope spoke out almost every day against war and in support of diplomatic efforts for peace.”

  • markrondeau

    This “Cardinal Newman” Society is indeed a Republican front group. This has been documented. I encourage people to check this out.The president is wrong about abortion, but he is very right about climate change and nuclear disarmament, two issues which could end life on earth.Where was this non-partisan “society” when pro-abortion, pro-Iraq War and pro torture Condeleeza Rice was being honored by Catholic Boston College a couple of years ago?

  • walter-in-fallschurch

    charko825,have you heard the MADISON quote?or the JEFFERSON one?those are great quotes, the problem is the are all FAKE QUOTES.see:

  • MikeL4

    Arancia:You asked if I protested President George W. Bush at Notre Dame because of the Iraq War? Well, no. President Bush spoke at Notre Dame in 2001, well before the Iraq War took place.The topic on this page is the pre-meditated killing of millions of developing human beings. In the United States, the number of those killed since 1973 is 45 million human beings killed in the womb. These are war numbers alright. Millions of human lives thrown in the medical waste-basket and you think that is just fine. I am sorry, I don’t. Our current President thinks it is morally acceptable to kill developing human beings in the womb and that people should have the “right” to kill developing human beings in the womb. And the slaughter continues. Human life is sacred. In your heart, you know it is wrong.

  • Farnaz1Mansouri1

    Coloradodog writes;Yes, well, there is that.One recalls a certain Jimmy Carter, pro-choice, who gave the commencement address at Notre Dame in 1977.One did not see the hysterica among some Catholics that one sees now.Of course, Carter was white.This is the United States of America, not Vatican Nation. Those who would seek to impose foreign laws on this nation, who would seek to supercedr the rights of the citizenry would do well to relocate.The time has not yet come for Catholic Jihad.It is really too bad that none of the many Catholics, who support the decision of Norte Dame, not exactly a bastion of liberalism, do not come forward. Their silence gives the impression that the Catholic theocrats are the majority. I’m sure they know the rap.

  • JPRS

    Of course this is a 100 percent political protest.A narrow subset of Catholics has reduced the doctrine down to the issue of abortion. They ignore every other area of concern — be it questions of poverty, civil justice, or prohibitions against state sanction murder. These people are no different than the Pharisees as portrayed in the New Testament.

  • Farnaz1Mansouri1

    “These people are no different than the Pharisees as portrayed in the New Testament.”All of which is mythical, hate-promoting, etc. Stick-figure opponents, a Greek convention, etc.Maybe, Vatican Nation needs to take a closer look at its reading matter, detoxify it, etc.Then, maybe, they might not protest the Black President speaking at Notre Dame, stop perscuting Jews, psychologically, and physically, killing Muslims, etc.Read your own Catholic theologians who have called for the purging of the unathentic from your Testament, O You Who Vilify and Hate in the name of The Lord, Whom You Know Not and Who Knows Not you.The time has not yet come for Catholic Jihad.Vade.

  • JPRS

    “It is really too bad that none of the many Catholics, who support the decision of Norte Dame, not exactly a bastion of liberalism, do not come forward.”Actually quite a few have come forward. The Jesuits have said their peace — the very fact that the president of Notre Dame stood his ground is a sign that he had at least some support. In terms of Church politics too, it is a signal when only about one in 5 of the Bishops come forward and takes a stance on this political issue.Your point about the hypocrisy is fair given that Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and even George H.W. were not similarly harassed. I’m sure there is an element of racial hatred intermingled with these protests. These are by and large hate-filled people. They are coalition destroyers, not builders.Given that some of these people pushing the abortion issue are recent converts to Catholicism, I also wouldn’t be surprised if some of these converts actually desire to destroy the Church from within.

  • Gerry7

    Mr. Reilly,Isn’t also the Church’s belief that the death penalty is also wrong? So why the double-standard? Or do you claim that no pro-death penalty politician has never spoken at Notre Dame? Pro-choice and Pro-life disagree on when life begins, not if it is okay to kill. With the death penalty there is no disagreement. The only way you can justify protesting Obama and not a death penalty proponent is politics covered in hypocrisy and I find it interesting you left this out of your transparent argument.

  • JPRS

    Farnaz1Mansouri1,The fact that you refer to an entity called “Vatican Nation” is an absurdity unto itself. It shows ignorance about American Catholicism generally. If there was in fact this “unified” presence that you allege, than how do you account for the 2008 vote tallies amongst Catholics? (e.g. the Catholic support levels for Obama mirrored the national numbers). Clearly their are differences of opinions between Catholics when it comes to political issues.Either you are willfully ignorant about this matter, or just a plain old sh-t stirrer.

  • Farnaz1Mansouri1

    “Your point about the hypocrisy is fair given that Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and even George H.W. were not similarly harassed. I’m sure there is an element of racial hatred intermingled with these protests.” Actually, according to the Notre Dame web site, Bill Clinton was never a commencement speaker.As for the lack of protests regarding George Bush, that is telling. Here we have a president who supported tax “reform” designed to steal food from the poor, whose inattention to health care was a national embarassment, and who actively supported the death penalty–all of which he made quite clear during his campaign–and who nevertheless addressed the graduates at Notre Dame.Where were the Catholic protesters then?Yes, some have spoken out, some amongst the clergy. Some Muslims spoke out when extemists were braying everywhere. Under circumstances such as this, which are not good, which do not make the RCC look very good at all, one needs many more voices.There are many Catholics who are appalled by the behavior of the bishops and signatories. They need to make themselves heard above the din.

  • Farnaz1Mansouri1

    JPRS:The Vatican is a nation. Don’t make me regret not thinking you an A*hole. As in, don’t prove me wrong in taking you seriously.

  • FridayKnight

    “The evil of discrimination has invaded even the halls of academia.Posted by: Judy-in-TX | May 17, 2009 1:52 PMHey, Judy, ever hear of something called TENURE? I am here for good and I am here for balance…do you really think that conservative students have never been failed by liberal professors for their political views? I have many colleagues who have done just that FOR YEARS. What goes around, comes around, baby.

  • Farnaz1Mansouri1

    “Hey, Judy, ever hear of something called TENURE? I am here for good and I am here for balance…do you really think that conservative students have never been failed by liberal professors for their political views? I have many colleagues who have done just that FOR YEARS. What goes around, comes around, baby.”Posted by: FridayKnight What you and your colleagues have done is despicable. Given the current curricular emphasis on citizenship, multi-cultural perspectives, etc., “politics” figure in many courses. There is nothing for it, and those who can’t handle it have no business being in a classroom.Academia should be preparing students to think critically, to weigh and inquire. This past semester I required that students write a critique of a scholarly article that took a position opposite to one they held. They were to analyze and evaluate based on rigorously applied criteria.We have a word for this sort of thing in academia: teaching.

  • Thependulumswings

    Regardless of what the protesters may say, rational beings watching their behavior see their actions as political rather than religious. They do not act as religious beings.

  • FridayKnight

    “Don’t know where you teach, but I wouldn’t quit my night job just yet. Faculty have been and will continue to be de-tenured.Posted by: Farnaz1Mansouri1 | May 17, 2009 7:05 PMAnd they have a word for Democrats who are foolish enough to enroll in my classes. It’s called: failing.

  • walter-in-fallschurch

    FridayKnight,that’s despicable. you’re despicable.

  • Farnaz1Mansouri1

    “And they have a word for Democrats who are foolish enough to enroll in my classes. It’s called: failing.”And they have a word for people like you who worm their way into the profession: incompetent.Students are neither your friends nor your political opponents. They are students. Frankly, although there is no lack of fools within the academy, most faculty are more capable of thought, have more facility with the language than you demonstrate.My guess is you are a simple fool, who was never graduated from high school. This should not be read as a slur against those all who did not; the majority of those I’ve met are far more sophisitcated in their thinking than you appear to be.

  • FridayKnight

    Your righteous indignation and high dudgeon would be a little more persuasive if you demonstrated at least a smidgen of as much umbrage at liberal professors who fail their conservative, Republican students.

  • Farnaz1Mansouri1

    “Your righteous indignation and high dudgeon would be a little more persuasive if you demonstrated at least a smidgen of as much umbrage at liberal professors who fail their conservative, Republican students.”I know neither liberals nor conservatives who fail students due to political disagreements. Academics are supposed to evaluate arguments, using disciplinary tools and to teach students to do the same.Serious issues do arise when students produce overtly racist work and the like. These kinds of problems, however, are best addressed with explanations of “evidence.”Frankly, I’m not so much indignant by what you say, or even disgusted, as I am disappointed.

  • FridayKnight

    “I know neither liberals nor conservatives who fail students due to political disagreements. Academics are supposed to evaluate arguments, using disciplinary tools and to teach students to do the same.”Your naivete would be laughable if it weren’t so appalling and pathetic. The academic environment you describe hasn’t existed on a university campus for at least two generations. Quite simply, you need to get out more and come up for air. The reality is that liberal professors routinely flunk students who do not agree with their ideology. It is high time that conservative professors (I know there are not many of us) repay the liberals in kind. Face it. It is a cultural war, and I am glad to be on the front lines.

  • Farnaz1Mansouri1

    “Your naivete would be laughable if it weren’t so appalling and pathetic. The academic environment you describe hasn’t existed on a university campus for at least two generations. Quite simply, you need to get out more and come up for air. The reality is that liberal professors routinely flunk students who do not agree with their ideology. It is high time that conservative professors (I know there are not many of us) repay the liberals in kind. Face it. It is a cultural war, and I am glad to be on the front lines.”I will say, and I am a liberal, that extremists exist on both sides of the “political correctness” wars. Students can experience themselves as being bullied, and there are faculty, on both sides of the political spectrum, extremists, nincompoops, et al, who use the classroom to propagandize.To fail students with whom one disagrees is not to educate. Whatever the issue, classroom discussions, papers, etc., evaluate evidence. If you cannot teach your students to do this, you cannot teach. This concerns you and your students, not your sense of what others may do. Really, my friend, none of this is difficult to understand. Some savvy students, of a practical bent, will read you immediately, will mindlessly endorse the positions you advocate, and the best among them will despise you. Whatever consideration some may have given your politics will be sacrificed.Quite simply, what you are doing is not only unethical but self-defeating.

  • MikeL4

    There are plenty here who wish to change the subject I see, but here it is. President Obama supports the right to kill developing human beings in the womb. To practicing Catholics, this is an evil act. The killing of innocent lives. To non-practicing “Catholics”, its do what you want to do. Sorry, the Catholic Church doesn’t work that way. We believe God set up a way of life to live by, and when you don’t (sin) occurs. The deliberate killing of innocent lives is about as evil a decision as one can make in life. So in the end it is this. President Obama believes people have the “right” to kill developing humans in the womb. He lectured a Catholic University today that his view should be “respected”. This is to Notre Dames and Rev. Jenkins shame.

  • FridayKnight

    To Farnaz1Mansouri1,In the words of St. Dick Cheney, “So?”

  • Farnaz1Mansouri1

    So, you will lose students you might have convinced.But, then, I don’t think this is about them. Nor is it about politics, conservative or otherwise.It’s about you. So, indeed.

  • CCNL

    Once again:BO’s opening statement for his Notre Dame speech should have been:”Do you realize that I am president because the majority of the “mothers and fathers” of 35 million aborted babies voted for me???”

  • CCNL

    Hmmm, Farnaz, (supposedly a Jewish atheist with Baha’ist leanings??) says she has taught at several colleges and five universities. We must ask for evidence (names, classes, areas of expertise, publications??) for this considering her past issues with being honest.

  • Farnaz1Mansouri1

    CCNL’s dishonesty is matched only by his racism, sexism, and homophobia, and seemingly limitless ability to bear false witness.Nevertheless, credit where credit is due, and one wants P.J. Reilly to have all available theological resources at his disposal.He might, therefore, consult:C. Christian Nut-Louse. The New in the New Testament. Antartica UP. Antarctica, 1957.Available in Deep Drifts, Antarctica. Starting at $1.29 (ending at 1.34)Contains information on rites, rituals, holidays, rationale for why African American Presidents should not give commencement speeches at Notre Dame, etc., based on the C.Christian Nut-Lousian perspective.

  • Farnaz1Mansouri1

    And as CCNL’s remaining brain cell struggles vainly for life, it asksWWHDWhat would Hitler do?

  • CalSailor

    Dear Mr O’Reilly:First of all, while your petition totals sound impressive, they represent only about 3/10 of one percent of Catholics in America…that’s basically zero (about 100 MILLION Catholics in America). Secondly, would you please tell me, on the subject of abortion, how far you would go to prevent a pregnant woman from having an abortion, or, alternatively, how far are you prepared to go to REQUIRE that a pregnant woman who does not feel she can have the baby carry the child to turn? (I’ll even grant that the pregnancy in question is NOT the result of rape or incest, or that she will die if she carries the infant to term.)Since birth control is also forbidden by the teachings of the church, I would ask for your feedback. And then I would suggest you sit down and talk with a variety of women who have been in that position. I submit, for you as a man, that this is an academic (or theological…take your pick) debate. You cannot KNOW what it means that this might be a very real issue for you in the future. Any young women as she grows knows at some level that this might happen to her. And it is especially a possibility if she is unmarried, and will have no real support network at the time she has to deal with this.So, unless you are prepared not only to jail the woman until she gives birth, and THEN RAISE AND PAY FOR THE CHILD THROUGH COLLEGE, preferably, you are in a limited position from which to argue.In a perfect world, there would be no unwanted children. There would be no children with severe birth defects. There would be no women who are raped, or whose husband/significant other who made her pregnant is threatening her if she DOES give birth…but we don’t live in a perfect world. In God’s grace, he gave us freedom of choice in all sorts of matter, and somehow sin is also involved. And that means that not every woman is going to be able to make the decision you want her to make. But, you, and the bishops, who are not only male but celibate, are blowing smoke. You have very little standing compared with the young women who have to cope with this issue.Pr chris

  • CalSailor

    Msgr:I would just like to comment on one point. You say:3. The criticism of Bush speaking at ND would be valid if he was invited after the Iraq war began. Instead, he was invited and spoke long before that war and before he had any real presidential record.Later in your post you state that abortion and capital punishment are not necessarily equal in Catholic theology. JPII said that capital punishment was justified only in very rare circumstances, essentially, if I can remember the quote, when it proves impossible to restrain the one convicted from committing further crimes. The “supermax” prisons, such as the notorious prison at Pelican Bay, in CA, makes the necessity for capital punishment virtually zero, since convicts confined there have NO other opportunity to commit crimes of violence against another, for they never contact another (that many go insane due to the harshness of their confinement is a separate issue).BUT, although Bush had not yet started the Iraq war, he already had a track record of cavalier indifference to the nearly 200 inmates executed while he was Governor of Texas. He stated he didn’t bother to review them, he just signed the documents because they wouldn’t have come to that point if they hadn’t already gotten justice. Apparently having your attorney sleep through your trial means you got “justice.”Surely, you aren’t arguing that Bush is a better candidate from the Catholic point of view to speak at graduation than President Obama? Pres. Obama has reversed Planned Parenthood’s funding, but he has stated that he did it because by so doing, women’s health care other than abortions could be supported again. Planned Parenthood among others has been prohibited from using US funds for abortions for decades; during the Bush administration they were prohibited from receiving ANY US money for ANY purpose, because they provided abortion counseling advice, even if they did not do any abortions themselves. In so restricting their funds, the Bush administration deleted 3rd world funding for children’s wellness and women’s health care programs that PP HAD been doing.I think the stand on President Obama has been one of demonizing…as he said today, he wants to decrease the need for abortions, but he doesn’t want to make them illegal. I find the Catholic position that condemns abotion on the one hand, and simultaneously denies women the possibilities of preventing the need for abortion through its stand on birth control pretty hypocritical, especially when the decision making is all an ivory tower exercise by a bunch of celibate men who have no first hand experience with the issue. When the RCC brings women into the highest decision making authority levels of the church, then perhaps you will have much more credibility on issues that reflect the reality of the half the population you exclude from the decision making.Pr chris

  • CCNL

    From the mouths of 35 million aborted children are heard these cries:THOU SHALL NOT KILL!!!ADOPT ME!!!

  • daniel12

    To me all of this seems depressingly trivial–on all sides I might add. First Notre Dame. What is this self-importance of institutions of higher learning that they feel honorary degrees in general let alone from themselves are worth a damn? And then this controversy at Notre Dame over whether to honor Obama. Would you not think that if a controversy were to erupt over something so trivial in the first place as an honorary degree that the whole thing would be called off? But no, Notre Dame not only had to wade into the controversy, they called into question their entire integrity (and is there any other?) about whether or not they are a conservative not to mention Catholic institution. And then we have Obama. I see no integrity from him at all on this matter. You would think he would reflect a bit on whether he deserves such a thing for the simple reason why would any man be eager for an honorary degree, would feel deserving of such without having done any work for such–no matter if in the first place the whole notion of honorary degrees is trivial. Then we would ask why a man would be willing to accept one if a controversy exists about whether or not he should be so honored. You would think at least the person receiving the honor would question himself as to whether he was ever such as to receive the honor without controversy, and generally you would expect the person receiving the honor to state that he will modify his behavior (or whatever) to be worthy of the honor without controversy. But no, Obama just steps forward and accepts the honor.Who is more corrupt, Obama or Notre Dame? Then we have the students of Notre Dame without a shred of integrity themselves, more a pack of noisy animals than anything else, although I suppose Notre Dame can be blamed for corrupting them–for they are corrupt, not at all thinking about what is taking place. It just stinks on all sides. Not least because I am reading Machiavelli with his descriptions of VIRTU and all the astounding character traits and decisions of great military leaders. In Machiavelli’s terms, Notre Dame is not an army worth joining, and Obama is not worthy of being in any army. However, ironically, he might be worthy of Notre Dame. Yes, Obama and Notre Dame deserve each other.

  • MikeL4

    There are plenty here who wish to change the subject I see, but here it is. President Obama supports the right to kill developing human beings in the womb. To practicing Catholics, this is an evil act. The killing of innocent lives. To non-practicing “Catholics”, its do what you want to do. Sorry, the Catholic Church doesn’t work that way. We believe God set up a way of life to live by, and when you don’t (sin) occurs. The deliberate killing of innocent lives is about as evil a decision as one can make in life.

  • walter-in-fallschurch

    TO: all who protest obama’s speaking at notre dame,to see how stupid, narrow-minded and faux-principled you’re being, imagine if i told you i agree with you. he should not have been ALLOWED to speak there. what if i got on my separation-of-church-and-state high horse and protested the use of my taxpayer dollars going to pay for his security, transportation etc… and all the time he wasted. it is the government FAVORING the catholic religion – all but declaring it our national religion. there are many catholic teachings i find offensive: for instance, “transubstantiation” amounts to cannibalism – and i’m against cannibalism. he should only be allowed to speak at secular colleges…you’d rightly laugh me off as crazy.

  • cthesis

    In my experience, university teachers are simply too busy to be bullying their students about politics.We have a very limited time to get a great many things done. I suppose there have been times when I might have indicated a student would get a higher grade if they mouthed my disdain for Bush, but I can’t say I’ve ever been tempted.What people who are not teachers don’t seem to understand is how thrilled we are when a student learns to articulate almost ANY political ideas. (We’d rather our students not be fascists, I suppose.) A young Republican student who wants help with a letter to the editor or a research project on a political topic would be as rewarding to work with for me as a young liberal student doing the same sort of work.I’ve worked with a number of young men returning from Iraq, and it has been a privilege to see them developing ways of thinking about and writing about their experiences. Most of the generalizations above about what is happening in universities sound like they’re written by people who don’t really know what they’re talking about. Here’s a rule of thumb: if you’re just aping something said by Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh, chances are you’re wrong.

  • cthesis

    In my experience, university teachers are simply too busy to be bullying their students about politics.We have a very limited time to get a great many things done. I suppose there have been times when I might have indicated a student would get a higher grade if they mouthed my disdain for Bush, but I can’t say I’ve ever been tempted.What people who are not teachers don’t seem to understand is how thrilled we are when a student learns to articulate almost ANY political ideas. (We’d rather our students not adopt some views, I suppose, but I can’t think of anything on the Republican party’s platform that qualifies as something we’d punish our students for espousing.) A young Republican student who wants help with a letter to the editor or a research project on a political topic would be as rewarding to work with for me as a young liberal student doing the same sort of work.I’ve worked with a number of young men returning from Iraq, and it has been a privilege to see them developing ways of thinking about and writing about their experiences. Most of the generalizations above about what is happening in universities sound like they’re written by people who don’t really know what they’re talking about. Here’s a rule of thumb: if you’re just aping something said by Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh, chances are you’re wrong.

  • cthesis

    In my experience, university teachers are simply too busy to be bullying their students about politics.We have a very limited time to get a great many things done. I suppose there have been times when I might have indicated a student would get a higher grade if they mouthed my disdain for Bush, but I can’t say I’ve ever been tempted.What people who are not teachers don’t seem to understand is how thrilled we are when a student learns to articulate almost ANY political ideas. (We’d rather our students not adopt some views, I suppose, but I can’t think of anything on the Republican party’s platform that qualifies as something we’d punish our students for espousing.) A young Republican student who wants help with a letter to the editor or a research project on a political topic would be as rewarding to work with for me as a young liberal student doing the same sort of work.I’ve worked with a number of young men returning from Iraq, and it has been a privilege to see them developing ways of thinking about and writing about their experiences. Most of the generalizations above about what is happening in universities sound like they’re written by people who don’t really know what they’re talking about. Here’s a rule of thumb: if you’re just aping something said by Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh about education or universities, chances are you’re wrong.

  • cthesis

    In my experience, university teachers are simply too busy to be bullying their students about politics.We have a very limited time to get a great many things done. I suppose there have been times when I might have indicated a student would get a higher grade if they mouthed my disdain for Bush, but I can’t say I’ve ever been tempted.What people who are not teachers don’t seem to understand is how thrilled we are when a student learns to articulate almost ANY political ideas. (We’d rather our students not adopt some views, I suppose, but I can’t think of anything on the Republican party’s platform that qualifies as something we’d punish our students for espousing.) A young Republican student who wants help with a letter to the editor or a research project on a political topic would be as rewarding to work with for me as a young liberal student doing the same sort of work.I’ve worked with a number of young men returning from Iraq, and it has been a privilege to see them developing ways of thinking about and writing about their experiences. Most of the generalizations above about what is happening in universities sound like they’re written by people who don’t really know what they’re talking about. Here’s a rule of thumb: if you’re just aping something said by Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh about education or universities, chances are you’re wrong.

  • cthesis

    In my experience, university teachers are simply too busy to be bullying their students about politics.We have a very limited time to get a great many things done. I suppose there have been times when I might have indicated a student would get a higher grade if they mouthed my disdain for Bush, but I can’t say I’ve ever been tempted.What people who are not teachers don’t seem to understand is how thrilled we are when a student learns to articulate almost ANY political ideas. (We’d rather our students not adopt some views, I suppose, but I can’t think of anything on the Republican party’s platform that qualifies as something we’d punish our students for espousing.) A young Republican student who wants help with a letter to the editor or a research project on a political topic would be as rewarding to work with for me as a young liberal student doing the same sort of work.I’ve worked with a number of young men returning from Iraq, and it has been a privilege to see them developing ways of thinking about and writing about their experiences. Most of the generalizations above about what is happening in universities sound like they’re written by people who don’t really know what they’re talking about. Here’s a rule of thumb: if you’re just aping something said by Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh about education or universities, chances are you’re wrong.

  • Anaxagoras500bc

    TO : FridayKnightFirst I don’t think you teach at all and specifically not at ND!

  • walter-in-fallschurch

    Anaxagoras500bc,

  • FridayKnight

    “So, you will lose students you might have convinced.Posted by: Farnaz1Mansouri1 ___________________________________________And your point is?

  • FridayKnight

    Did you ever stop to figure out why college syllabi are now typically longer than War and Peace? I have at least five hundred justifications built into my syllabus for giving someone an F. It is all constructed so I can give my liberal students a flying leap off the ivory tower.

  • walter-in-fallschurch

    FridayKnight,you should be fired. (not because you’re “conservative”, but because you’re unfair.)

  • FridayKnight

    “you should be fired. (not because you’re “conservative”, but because you’re unfair.)Posted by: walter-in-fallschurch | May 18, 2009 6:10 PMWell, we all want something, now, don’t we? Too bad your wish will go ungranted. Can’t have everything, bozo.

  • walter-in-fallschurch

    “bozo” – good one!

  • FridayKnight

    “bozo” – good one!You must think I have a Ph.D in Stupidity and another one in Simplicity. Either that or you believe that I am an Obama voter or that I am as stupid as my students.

  • Anaxagoras500bc

    TO: FridayKnight

  • FridayKnight

    Feel better feeling sorry for morons? Good. You will feel even moreso when I finish grading my final exams. There will be great wailing and gnashing of teeth.

  • Anaxagoras500bc

    The only person I could feel sorry is for you. OK assume you’re going to flunk (if you’re really who you pretend you are) a few kids. Your impact on the University’s and the student population’s life in the US? about the same a seagull’s drop in the Atlantic or alternatively, as far as your satisfaction is concerned, winning a debate contest with a first grader. Feel better great KNIGHT? If you’re a Christian you’ll rot in hell, if you’re not then as JP Sartre said (look him up great “Ph.D” man): “hell resides in the others” meaning you’re already there (rise to the occasion, THINK, you may understand). Sleep well and have pleasant (wet) dreams “teacher”.

  • FridayKnight

    You just keep thinking, Butch.

Read More Articles

colbert
Top 10 Reasons We’re Glad A Catholic Colbert Is Taking Over Letterman’s “Late Show”

How might we love Stephen Colbert as the “Late Show” host? Let us count the ways.

emptytomb
God’s Not Dead? Why the Good News Is Better than That

The resurrection of Jesus is not a matter of private faith — it’s a proclamation for the whole world.

noplaceonearth
An Untold Story of Bondage to Freedom: Passover 1943

How a foxhole that led to a 77-mile cave system saved the lives of 38 Ukrainian Jews during the Holocaust.

shutterstock_148333673
Friend or Foe? Learning from Judas About Friendship with Jesus

We call Judas a betrayer. Jesus called him “friend.”

shutterstock_53190298
Fundamentalist Arguments Against Fundamentalism

The all-or-nothing approach to the Bible used by skeptics and fundamentalists alike is flawed.

shutterstock_178468880
Mary Magdalene, the Closest Friend of Jesus

She’s been ignored, dismissed, and misunderstood. But the story of Easter makes it clear that Mary was Jesus’ most faithful friend.

shutterstock_186795503
The Three Most Surprising Things Jesus Said

Think you know Jesus? Some of his sayings may surprise you.

shutterstock_185995553
How to Debate Christians: Five Ways to Behave and Ten Questions to Answer

Advice for atheists taking on Christian critics.

HIFR
Heaven Hits the Big Screen

How “Heaven is for Real” went from being an unsellable idea to a bestselling book and the inspiration for a Hollywood movie.

shutterstock_186364295
This God’s For You: Jesus and the Good News of Beer

How Jesus partied with a purpose.

egg.jpg
Jesus, Bunnies, and Colored Eggs: An Explanation of Holy Week and Easter

So, Easter is a one-day celebration of Jesus rising from the dead and turning into a bunny, right? Not exactly.

SONY DSC
Dear Evangelicals, Please Reconsider Your Fight Against Gay Rights

A journalist and longtime observer of American religious culture offers some advice to his evangelical friends.