AmericanPapist Comments
I completely agree. I do not support a two-party system since I try always to vote my conscience. Our goal as Catholics should be to get the person elected who will be best for the common good - with all the moral implications that go along with that decision. Thanks for the article.
if they vote for pelosi for speaker then they aren't pro-life at all.
All of these will probably support Pelosi, and some of them supported Obama. Many of them, after all, owe their election to some degree to Democratic party support, which in turn is financed by pro-abortion organizations. Doesn't mean they shouldn't be supported in their pro-life efforts--obviously they should, and they potentially are valuable allies in things like opposing the Freedom of Choice Act. But we have to be realistic about what they're going to do in office after getting elected as Democrats.
Perhaps someone has some more data on actual voting records for these pro-life Democrats. A quick check of the DLA web site lists Henry Reid and Mark Pryor as "Democrats for Life All-Stars" presumably for their partial birth abortion votes in 2004. Yet in 2007 each of these 2 has 100% ratings from NARAL.
Thomas, I believe that you are half-way there. The issue isn’t whether or not to support one party over the other, but to support Catholics who look to the rich tradition of the Church for guidance.
For the past few days, I’ve been writing about a concept that I call the Catholic Statesman. These are political leaders guided by all seven themes of Catholic Social Teaching, which, in itself, transcends party affiliation.
It is here where I believe Catholics should focus their energy in the next few years. Encourage Catholics to seek office at all levels, promote all of Catholic Social Teaching not just life, and commit ourselves to voting for those that do. If there is not candidate who reflects our faith, it may be more appropriate not to vote for either, forgoing “the lesser of two evils.”
As I type I listen to Colin Cowherd on ESPN Radio. Noting how 49ers muffed final play in Monday Night game to cough up game with Cardinals. Noting that new Niners Coach Mike Singletary's name at top of marquee so his responsibility. Same here with Pro-Life Dems. Like idea of little known trend and so forth. But Nancy Pelosi's name is still at top of pecking order. You guys got work to do. Until then, you're still the Death Party. Oh- Pelosi and Singletary come from same city- San Francisco. Start there for evangelism.
I have a feeling that many of these were elected because of the implosion of the Republican party, not because they are "pro-life".
My parish is located just south of the Mason-Dixon line, so we have parishioners from both PA and MD and voting guides are handed out for both states. I was astounded at the number of pro-life Democrats running in PA. In the People's Republic of Maryland, Democrat and Pro-Life are mutually exclusive.
Hopefully pro-life Dems will hold their ground and prevent FOCA.
I'm captivated by the Democrats for Life as well, but the problem I have with them at present as that they will not condemn Barak Obama on their web site.
I asked them about this and have received no response. In years past they seemed to condem politicians like Kerry for their positions, but they didn't do so this time around.
Not sure if this is a tactical move or what, but it is confusing given the arguments of people like Kmiec. Is the DFLA suggesting that Obama is more pro-life than McCain because of his social programs?
They further seem sympathetic to the notion of using condom based programs as a means of reducing abortions.
I remain puzzled by these guys and their "silence".
Senator Reid is Mormon and opposes abortion.When Senator Boxer added an amenment to the partial birth ban which affirmed Roe v Wade despite the ban,it passed the Senate.Senator Reid was in the minority who voted NO on the amndment.He voted for the ban.The amndment did not make it through the House.
Senator Reid is Mormon and opposes abortion.
That may be but last year there were 5 pieces of pro-choice advocated by NARAL and Sen. Reid voted their way each time. One of the votes was the Unborn Child Regulation which lost by 1 vote. This would have given health coverage under SCHIP to the pre-born baby. Abortion supporters were opposed because this could have been a big opening to challenge Roe v. WAde. While Sen. Reid has supported some legislation it is really a mixed bag. Plus as the Sen. Majority leader it would seem he would have a real opportunity to push a pro-life agenda as opposed to say a Pres. Bush who can't introduce legislation but who is always criticized for failing to do more in defense of life.
Absolutely. However, I'll bet it's insanely difficult for a pro-life Democrat to be elected. In his book Render Unto Caesar, Abp Chaput gave an anecdote of a young politician in his diocese- a pro-life Democrat- who couldn't raise very much money for his campaign because no "women's groups" would support him.
It seems a terrible irony that the party championing the poor, disenfranchised, and other "least of these" refuses to classify unborn children as "least of these," or indeed even as persons.
Washington predicted a two-party system would be a terrible idea... and guess what?
They better fight against FOCA, or else they might as well be nominal Catholics.
I voted for a pro-life Dem for Michigan's House this election. Rep. Espinoza has been the only case I've seen so far where a candidate from each party had the Michigan RTL endorsement.
I knew about Senator Reid's Mormonism, but did not know about his votes against certain pro-choice legislation. That is encouraging, but I can imagine he keeps that pretty well under wraps. Imagine if that ever hit the mainstream media?? Horrors!
I sure hope those pro-life Dems can block FOCA. I'd hate to see 35 years of work down the drain.
"I know I would love to support pro-life candidates within the democrat party."
That is a little hard to believe when instead of referring to the Democratic Party by its name, you use the butchered form of it some Republican Party focus group found sounded less pleasant to the ear. It has about the same credibility as those who insist on using the President Elect’s middle name.
[I crossed the lined of decency and have received my first warning - AmP.]
KATHERINE SAID: "I don't support a candidate who favors abortion. I support Senator Obama."
AND THEN KATHERINE SAYS, "I oppose FOCA and disagree with Senator Obama on that issue."
Do you see how she talk out both sides of her mouth?
HAY KATHERINE!!!!!.....TELL KURT THANKS FOR SENDING US HERE TO FIND YOU!.......YAHOOO KRABKAKES.....TOGETHER AGAIN!!!!......BY THE WAY BOOM BOOM CAN YOU TELL ME HOW YOU GOOD CATHOLICS ARE GOING TO KILL THOSE THREE MONTH OLD CHILDREN, AND AS I ASKED ON YOUR SITE BUT GOT CENSORED WILL YOU DEMOCRATS TOLERATE THE CHILDREN TO SCREAM.
And just what line of decency are you talking about? Is this a Democrat site like Katherine's where you are also censoring free speech?
Is this a Democrat site like Katherine's where you are also censoring free speech?
No but it is a site where we don't have to listen to maniacal rants like yours, even if we dislike what Katherine has to say. There are such things as courtesy and gentlemanliness, decorum, respect, etc. I rather liken a blog as my personal kingdom. You are welcome as long as you abide by my rules. If not, good bye.
I should clarify my previous comment that I am speaking of my own blog which is obviously not AmP. But I'm glad he moderates such wild rants as yours Rustler. I've read a number of your comments on Katherine's blog and they were often way over the line often re-inforcing the image of conservatives as ranting lunatics rather than an articulate criticism of her erroneous statements.
FYI,
Katherine posts lies on her blog on a regular basis. My favorite was that David Duke was supporting John McCain. When confronted with the fact that on Duke's own website he stated that he wasn't supporting anyone, Katherine refused to retract her statement. Just the other day someone confronted her with the fact that, after voting for Obama, she should go to confession before she went to Communion again. She BRAGGED that she had already gone to Communion without the benefit of confession. She is an arrogant supporter of all things Obama. I truly believe she would sell her soul to the devil before she would say anything against him. She probably already has. Don't trust a word she says.
But do pray for her.
Kathy, her site is locked down for only those comments that are politically correct. You are accurate in everything you said. I witnessed it myself.
There is NO free speech on her blog.
"...rather than an articulate criticism of her erroneous statements."
She deletes the articulate ones more readily than any others.
You haven't spent much time there have you?
Do you have an answer for this Joannes? Or do you consider it a mere rant?
"Obama wants to withhold birth certificates until the baby is 3 months old! That's so the mother can choose. When she chooses to kill it how is that going to happen? Are they going to have kit at Wallmart so you can do it yourself, grind it up and flush it down the toilet, or do you just take it back to the doctor so he can pull its arms and legs off and squash its head, or do you just take it to the funeral home and let them incinerate it?"
How do you think they are going to do it Joannes?
Great post. Evidence that the election of Barack Obama was not about his liberal social policy, but other reasons (the economy). Another example was the passing of prop 8 in California (of all places!). Talked about that and marriage here today: http://tinyurl.com/6jphyf
Another note: I praise the growing number of pro-life democrat politicians. But I'm afraid many of the "catholic democrats" try to use the very few pro-life dems who are actually pro-life as a rationalization for supporting the overall party - which as you noted is still staunchly pro-death.
You haven't spent much time there have you?
Yes I have and I have been very critical but never had a post deleted.
"Yes I have and I have been very critical but never had a post deleted."
You haven't spent much time there. And you must not have been that critical.
I just copied this from her blog.
FinishTheRace said...
Why was my comment deleted? I had no bad language or anything. I simply stated challenging points to consider. I guess my words pierced someone's heart.
Time will tell, but often their definition of pro-life is quite different from mine.
Remember Harry Reid is suppose to be pro-life while opposing pro-life justices and supporting ESCR.
"Pro-life" Senator Casey has quite a mixed record in the last two years including voting for funding of abortion by foreign organizations.
I certainly hope that there will be truly pro-life members with in the Democratic party. But often they will go along with their pro-abortion counterparts or else will be shunned.
"democrat" party? Your true red colors are showing. Hope the IRS has joined your blog.
"Obama wants to withhold birth certificates until the baby is 3 months old! That's so the mother can choose. When she chooses to kill it how is that going to happen? Are they going to have kit at Wallmart so you can do it yourself, grind it up and flush it down the toilet, or do you just take it back to the doctor so he can pull its arms and legs off and squash its head, or do you just take it to the funeral home and let them incinerate it?"
Is there not one of you outraged about this? Why isn't there a single post about it?
Are you afraid of offending the liberals or are you afraid of offending Thomas Peters?
You think you're going to accomplish something by reasoning with an "articulate criticism?" Let me tell you. You'll NEVER get anywhere debating with liberals by being nice to them. They are dishonest and LIARS of the first order. The playing field is not level. They understand one thing. Getting theirs axes kicked (I so hope no one is offended by the word axes).
Go to Katherine's blog. Look up what they say about Archbishop Burke and Bill Donohue and what kind of names they call them! And you think that you can reason with them and not have them call you names?
Are you afraid of their telling you that you are ranting and raving "re-inforcing the image of conservatives as ranting lunatics rather than an articulate criticism."
If you are afraid of that you deserve what they are preparing for you.
Pius X said that kindness to a liberal is foolishness. You better rethink your fear of appearing to be unreasonable.
Rustler,
You won't get me enraged with a block of text. I think most of the regular readers of this blog are already extremely unhappy with Obama's positions on abortion and infanticide. I also think that most of us refuse to let our strong passions about these matters overwhelm our sense of civility. I know that is is a common practice in blog culture to virtually scream and rant, but you can't win the fight against the utter inhumanity of abortion by allowing yourself to lose hold of a sense of common decency, even while talking to the proponents of evil. This blog is a relatively sane island in the savage waters of the web. We'd like to keep it that way and I for one thank Thomas for enforcing a little restraint in these comboxes.
By the way, Rustler, can you please give us a citation for your quote about Obama and birth certificates? I just can't get worked up about something simply because you put a quote into a combox. Where did the quote come from?
peace
"...know that is is a common practice in blog culture to virtually scream and rant, but you can't win the fight against the utter inhumanity of abortion by allowing yourself to lose hold of a sense of common decency."
Dannyboy, I don't scream and rant without purpose. I did win though. I will not reveal it here. You can go to my forum and send me a private message and I will tell you about it.
As to Obama and the birth certificates. I don't make things up. One of my techniques for winning is to never ever lie. I cannot for the life of me remember where I read it. Don't tell you didn't see it coming. Abortion in the first trimester, then abortion in the second trimester.....and then infanticide disguised with the term partial birth abortion. Next withholding life support for babies who survive abortion.... and then?
You guessed murder of live fully born infants. First withholding the birth certificate and then.... you get the picture.
You don't need a citation unless you are totally naive.
Don't you read the thread? I quoted myself. Look up above.
Civility is wonderful, but it will get you nowhere. The liberals make a big deal about it to scare you into being civil so they can win. They were successful into scaring many into putting away their posters with graphics of aborted fetuses.
Now just why do the liberals want you to put them away? You got it. They are effective and they make the liberals feel bad.
Dannyboy said: "You won't get me enraged with a block of text."
Ya know something Danny? I didn't say enraged I said outraged. Big difference. You are rationalizing.
Just think about it. The Garden. Eve. She wanted to be reasonable. The Serpent used reason and logic against her. If she had ranted and raved and been totally unreasonable and stomped in his head.... Guess what?
It's time to stop the civility. They are going to take away your birth certificate next. Stop kidding yourself.
Katherine is a snake. I stomped her head. She just doesn't know it yet.
Wow, what a pleasant little combox.
*roll eyes*
This is American Papist, not Kos or crazyland. Please behave yourselves, people.
If anyone here visits the website of the DFLA, you will notice a conspicuous silence about their position towards Barak Obama. I emailed the organization, since I wasn't sure how to interpret this silence. Were they subscribing to the view that Obama's policies would reduce abortions, or was it their way of distancing themselves from him on account of his pro-abortion policies??
Here's the response I got, which disturbed me...
"We have enjoyed an extraordinarily successful relationship with Senator
Obama and are confident about his commitment to decreasing the abortion
rate in America. Best Wishes,Chrissy Kendall DFLA."
What this basically amounts to is that the DFLA apparently believes that Obama was the most pro-life candidate and they support him!
Astonishing, given the fact that in the past the DFLA condemed individuals like John Kerry. What a complete reversal!
I put this out there for anyone who thinks, as I once thought, this organization was a beacon of hope. Apparently, they are not.
I am stunned right now, as you can see.
I would encourage all to visit the web site and email this organization letting them know how you feel.
[Rustler45 was banned for abusive language -AmP.]
Gadfly,
Thanks for the information. I was willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, but, to be honest, that was rather difficult. I couldn't shake the common sense that they aren't who they say they are, and you just confirmed that suspicion.
Banned Oh Hoorrorrs!
Thomas, thank your patron saint that I was never your drill sergeant.
Wow! 43 pro-life Democrats out of how many hundred??? They're just going to be sidelined in the caucuses and ignored at the convention.
Wake up, this is not your parent's Democratic party - it belongs to Lenin now!
On the Catholics for Obama blog:
First posted by rustler45:
"We should be asking the bishops how they intend to kill the 3 month old babies. Nobody in this blog knows. Maybe the bishops do.
They ALL need to understand that when we use the word TRAITOR it is meant with the full force of its definition and that we are not exaggerating.
A traitor is someone who deserves hanging."
+ + +
Ringo Stalin, trying to claim credit for what rustler45 wrote:
"by the way rustler is not upsetting you with talk about the bishops...............I am..."
+ + +
And true catholic wrote:
(quoting rustler45) They ALL need to understand that when we use the word TRAITOR it is meant with the full force of its definition and that we are not exaggerating.
A traitor is someone who deserves hanging.
(And then commenting) You got it, Rustler45.
Mahoney, Wuerl, George, should be the first to be hung. Then with most of the rest.
+ + +
--> The sad fact is that these guys(?) play right into the hands of the liberals. That't why they are allowed to post at the Catholics for Obama website, and still they scream about censorship. It's so ridiculous, it's sad.
Wake up, this is not your parent's Democratic party - it belongs to Lenin now!
That's what I've been saying. People don't like to hear that though. It's nasty.
I think a lot of liberal Catholics love to hear folks like you say and write such nonsense.
Yes, Obama is all for expanding abortion rights/privileges. But he is not a Leninist or a socialist.
Folks like you who keep parroting such silliness simply turn off more and more reasonable young educated young Catholics and I count myself as one of them. Please note that the youth vote went 70-30% to Obama. That surely shows which way the wind is blowing.
Truly, you are your own worst enemy.
Churchill: Any 20-year-old who is not a liberal has no heart. Any 40-year-old who is not a conservative has no mind.
Heaven forbid we decline to blow with the latest prevailing wind! That's just not hip!
And I'm not. Thank God!
"But he is not a Leninist or a socialist."
Some people are so stupid they actually think that, just because Obama favors "income redistribution", that makes him a socialist.
(Pries tongue out of cheek again)
"Heaven forbid we decline to blow with the latest prevailing wind! "
When you are outside in the real world, you need to know which way the wind is blowing or your pant leg will wind up getting mighty wet.
Churchill is dead and he spoke for his generation. He was not sitting on any throne in Rome when he said that so he was not speaking a timeless truth. Times change.
Income redistribution in favor of the rich is class warfare.
Income redistribution in favor of the poor and middle class is charitable and a matter of justice.
What Churchill meant was that liberalism is an emotional position. It appeals to the heart. But when one applies one's mind, one sees that liberalism doesn't work. If one allows his emotions to do his thinking for him, he will not see this.
Problem is, istm, is that you symptomatically define conservatism in this day and age in a way that makes it dysfunctional, just like liberalism.
li'l whey aka Milktoast said: "The sad fact is that these guys(?) play right into the hands of the liberals. That't ...blah blah blah."
OH WOW, ONE OF THOSE HARD HITTING AMERICAN PAPIST'S WHACKS ME WITH HIS LIMP WRIST!
ooooooooh THAT HURT Soooooo BAD.
Do pushups for "trite, colorless, dull, wishy-washy, characterless." Are you having a bad day whey? Did your mommy take away your Barbie? Or is your urinary tract infection acting up?
You definitely belong in this blog whey. You can't even deliver an insult. You earned yourself a big fat zero for originality, but I have to give you credit for trying because it was better than these other pantywaists could do.
And btw, your sissy name fits. Just where did you come up something that dumb?
"I think a lot of liberal Catholics love to hear folks....Yes, Obama is all for expanding abortion rights/privileges. But he is not a Leninist or a socialist."
Now just what is it here that gives YOU away as a Marxist?
Wouldn't be your communist rhetoric would it?
It doesn't appear that anyone here understands liberalism.
This is the definitive work on the subject.
LIBERALISM IS A SIN
http://sacredcowpunchers.sosblog...Punchers-
b1.htm
I'm a woman so I am allowed to have limp wrists, maybe, huh? What an offensive ignorant dolt this Rustler is! That Kurt guy from Catholics for Obama sent him here on purpose to disrupt any kind of discussion. It was like this guy Kurt threw a bone towards this website, egged Rustler on saying sic 'em, and like an obedient trained dog, Rustler did exactly what his master entreated him to do.
As far as buzzsaw is concerned, your calling me a communist is resented and displays his or her ignorance.
Again, these are the type of folks who give pro-life advocates a bad name and make our struggle more and more difficult.
"Again, these are the type of folks who give pro-life advocates a bad name and make our struggle more and more difficult."
I doubt that you're a real pro-life advocate of any kind. You're a Marxist. I bet if we really get down to it you're pro-choice. You use the same kind of insulting language as the Marxists and the same ignorant reasoning. You know if it walks like a duck....
And you don't like the aborted fetuses on billboards do you? Makes pro-lifers look bad doesn't it?
"Income redistribution in favor of the poor and middle class is charitable and a matter of justice."
What's charitable about government mandated income redistribution? What's just about taking from those who have earned their money and giving to those who haven't? True charity is when we voluntarily help our neighbors.
lil whey
do you ever wonder if the reason the american catholic church's prayers have not been answered on abortion is because the vast majority of catholics practice birth control and never confess it and go to communion anyway every sunday as if it did not matter.
LIL' WHEY,
are you going to answer me or not
Ooops Li'l whey has been caught.
Marxist. Liberal. Pro-choice. Pro-birth control. What else?
Did you ever hear of "the Little Way"? I'm sure not. What we have here in Rustler, Ringo Stalin (there's a wonderful pen name) and buzzsaw are prime examples of sadistic, compulsive cybernetic onanism. Insulting people and calling them names is the closest they come to any kind of climatic experience. Talk about being insulting and saying it is a Marxist trait? Then you not-gentleman are Maoists of the worst kind. Shame on you. You are more responsible for abortion than the worst liberals because you all perform like monkeys to an organ grinder. Or maybe the latter analogical reference is the more fitting.
"Rustler, Ringo Stalin (...) and buzzsaw are prime examples of sadistic, compulsive cybernetic onanism. Insulting people and calling them names is the closest they come to any kind of climatic experience."
HAR HAR HAR HAR!
Oh there you go again Fulla Whey. I suppose that was a ladylike expression?
Who taught you that? You don't have the intellect to come up with it on your own. In order to insult someone you have to know what you're talking about. Next, it has to be something that actually sticks (i.e., true). You're just not making it Fulla Whay. You're insults are flaccid, lackluster, and coined by someone else. You're just mad because you know that what I say is true. You can't really think of anything so you just start mouthing off. Notice-- what I said is true so you are authorized to turn on the insulted switch--now.
It appears to me that you are certainly having some kind of a sexual problem. Is it unfulfilled fantasy of some sort?
"You are more responsible for abortion than the worst liberals because you all perform like monkeys to an organ grinder."
Oh that's soooo awful. How can you say such awwwwful things. I am soooo offended. hahahahaha (i.e., HAR HAR HAR)
C'mon now, admit that you're a liberal.
Don't bother with the insult Thesaurus. You can't make them stick. Notice, I didn't even call you an idiot. Doesn't mean you're not one though.
You obviously think women are bereft of any intellect and scorn for sadists. That's why you post on the internet pretty much 24/7.
FULL WHAY SAID: "You obviously think women are bereft of any intellect and scorn for sadists. That's why you post on the internet pretty much 24/7."
HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR!
You're cracking me up Whay. This is Whay too funny. Just because you're bereft of the intellect required to write an insult does not mean that other women are like that. So don't be incinuating such. You are obviously applying your problem to the entire female population because I never said a thing about "women." I said it about you.
And what I said about someone else coining your trite remarks is shown to be absolutely true by your last statement. It's the old liberal attack--"You obviously think all women...." It just doesn't work on me so quit acting the nincompoop.
As to 24/7 on the internet. What's your excuse? HAR HAR HAR!
CAUGHT IN YOUR OWN TRAP AGAIN WHAY!
Now that we know:
1. you are a liberal (i.e., Marxist),
2. are pro-choice,
3. and pro-birth control
What else are you? Let's hear it. Don't be shy.
Why won't you answer Ringo about abortion and Catholics who practice birth contol?
Go ahead it won't killya. Answer him.
I guess Little Whey just couldn't take any more. Are you gone yet Whay?
If you scroll up I posted an email that I received from DFLA in response to a question about the silence on their web site regarding Obama.
The response indicated that Democrats for Life supports Barak Obama. Since then, I've been in additional correspondence with these guys and am stunned at their conviction that somehow Obama's election will reduce abortions.
Here's a follow up email that they sent me,
"We at DFLA feel as though Senator Obama will work with the pro-life
community, as he has promised, to reduce the abortion rate in the country. To us, THAT is what matters - not which legislation happens to be
reenacted or rescinded depending on who is in office.Best Wishes,Chrissy Kendall DFLA"
I am absolutely stunned by this. To these people think that FOCA doesn't matter? or that overturning Roe V. Wade doesn't matter?
I understand the need for grassroots solutions to the abortion problem, but to just disregard the impact of law on society is mind-boggling.
I strongly encourage those of you who might support this group to voice your concern to them by email. Go to their web site and remind them why they were established in the first place!
"That surely shows which way the wind is blowing."
I watched "A Man For All Seasons" last night. The above reminds me of the scene in which the Duke of Norfolk tries to convince Sir Thomas More to give in and sign the oath recognizing Henry VII as head of the Church in England.
More's reply: And when we die, and you are sent to heaven for doing your conscience, and I am sent to hell for not doing mine, will you "come along, for fellowship"?
Blowing with the prevailing wind--not because it is right, but BECAUSE it is the PREVAILING wind--is cowardice.
Bill I agree with what Moore concluded.
But you missed my point, admittedly more pedestrian than eloquent like Moore's missive.
There are times when people who might say they support our cause pee into the wind, and because they don't know which way it is blowing, they stain and attenuate the good the rest of us are doing are attermpting to do.
Thank you for confirming the points I have made. Now, a suggestion: GROW UP! And keep your vulgarity to yourself.
So sorry if I offended your delicate sensitivities. Please, however, voice the same admonition to others who get decidedly more vulgar and offensive than my use of the word "pee." And you still, obviously, didn't get my point. So be it.
[I've been re-banned for being a troll ~AmP.]
Quick Question: If I tell Li'l Whey that she's a dumbass bitch, is that going to get me banned as well? If so, I won't say it. And you can just delete this.
Katherine, where are you? Come here.
Katherine, tell the truth. You're not really a steel worker are you?
You're a secretary to the union boss. And we know what that means.
Come clean Katherine.
Commenting by HaloScan
