AmericanPapist Comments
This bishop is a HERO.
This is our future if we continue the same path as Europe.
Brave New Socialist World in the UK to collect human tissue from the mentally infirm without their permission, to create human-animal hybrids for experimentation:
On Wednesday MPs will vote on a bill which would allow the creation of human/animal hybrid embryos to be used for stem cell research, change the conditions for granting IVF, and possibly liberalise the abortion laws.
The passage through Parliament of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill has been dogged by controversy. Failed attempts to outlaw late abortion have dominated the debate, while scientists, medical ethics experts and religious leaders have clashed over the hybrid embryo issue.
Defenders of the bill have repeatedly stressed the importance of gaining consent from anyone whose tissue is taken for the creation of human/animal hybrid embryos.
It can now be revealed that a Government amendment, agreed after the main parliamentary debates, would allow tissue to be used from people who lack the "mental capacity" to give consent, children whose parents give permission, and anyone who has previously donated samples to hospitals for medical research but can no longer be traced.
Medical ethics experts and religious leaders are furious that the provisions, which they say ride roughshod over basic human rights, have already been agreed by an all-party committee of 17 MPs charged with scrutinising the bill, without any public debate or discussion in the main chambers of Parliament.
Prof David Jones, director of the Centre for Bioethics and Emerging Technologies at St Mary's University College, London, said: "In May we had a public debate about whether or not it is a good thing to create hybrid embryos.
"Now it transpires that just weeks later, with no public debate at all, the Government inserted these amendments which cross a fundamental line in medical ethics by presuming consent in many cases. I think it is totally objectionable, and I really worry that this will create a backlash against medical research."
He said he feared that someone who had strong ethical concerns about the creation of embryos could have their original wishes overruled, if they developed a disease such as Alzheimers and decisions about consent were taken by someone who did not know them.
Prof John Haldane, director of the Centre for Philosophy and Public Affairs at the University of St Andrews, described the draft legislation as a "mess" which would sweep away 25 years of progress in medical ethics.
"The most intimate thing over which you have control is your body and its fate; and this is total violation of that basic right," he said.
Under the amendment, if a person was deemed unable to give consent their carer would make a decision on their behalf. If the person did not have a carer, researchers would nominate a person to make the judgement. If scientists wanted to use human tissues already d
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/...r-
research.html
God bless you, Archbishop Chaput. Please keep up the plain speaking!
Here comes the threat of the tax-exempt stick.
Although if it is used, wouldn't that free the Church to start naming names and actually being more of a direct voice in politics?
I'm with Atheling, The Acchbishop is fantastic.
Ditto by me with all who have commented above. Our hero is clearly at the forefront of the new Episcopal Spine Alert trend. And none too soon. As the cherry on top of the sundae, he also calls out the Uncle Toms at Catholics For Obama. I do not doubt that an Obama Administration will engage in open warfare with the Catholic Church, particularly over FOCA. I am pleased to see that we will clearly see Archbishop Chaput as one of the generals in the front of the line.
Given that a majority of self-identified Catholics will support Obama (a practicing Christian) and a solid minority of highly observant Catholics (such as me) will vote for him, I doubt Obama and his administration (which will be full of Catholics) will have any animus to the Catholic Bishops or the worldwide Church.
The sure losers in this elections will be radicals like Chaput whose purely political agendas will fall.
Thank you for your contribution, Wormwood.
Chaput - my hero.
Chaput's political agenda???? Radical?? Your comments are ridiculous, George.
Catholic and still voting for Obama.
I have no hidden agenda, and I speak as a private citizen with the right to vote.
As it so happened, this week's lesson in my certification course on bioethics deals with the principle of cooperation with evil. I have tried to use this principle to put forth an argument of why it is morally illicit to vote for Barack Obama. I cannot begin to match the wisdom and eloquence of Archbishop Chaput, but it is an attempt to use established moral reasoning to justify this position.
God bless Archbishop Chaput.
St. Thomas More would be proud.
Ditto, Fr. Sean.
The sure losers in this elections will be radicals like Chaput whose purely political agendas will fall.
As Fr. said at Mass today, if you aren't being persecuted for your faith, you aren't living it. Way to go Archbishop Chaput.
When the IRS comes knocking and fining how quick will the counter-suit come from the Archdiocese for meddling with the affairs of the church.
George: Chaput's agenda is nothing but Civil Rights for all, Unborn to Immigrant & on. Tragically your boy Obama is completely against the most innocent of those.
Guess who's diocese is still reaping the fruits of hosting JPII & WYD 98?
"Catholic and still voting for Obama."
"They boast of their shame."
Archbishop Chaput is awesome, and I might add, grew up in my home diocese, very proud of him I am.
"The sure losers in this election" will be the ones who chose the wide road and not the narrow way.
Sorry. The 11:20 and 11:22 comments were mine.
"Catholic and still voting for Obama"
I can believe I'm an elephant too, but that doesn't make it true.
God Bless Abp. Chaput!
I'm glad to hear the word get out, because to be honest, I wince every time I hear about Catholics voting for Obama.
highly observant Catholics (such as me) will vote for him,
Somebody better look up the definition of oxymoron. "Observant" Catholics wouldn't vote for the Obortionator because "Observant" Catholics follow the Church's teaching.
"Self-deluded cafeteria catholics" on the other hand ...
"observant Catholic" george? This is bad comedy. Your rap stinks, Georgie porgy. If you're gonna go kiss the girls and make em cry that's your business, but the reason the girls georgie porgy is because you supported a candidate who denies his support for infanticide, stupid pharisee.
Bravo for Archbishop Chaput!
Not only St. Thomas More, but St. John Fisher would be proud of him, too!
Take off the blinders, Georgie...
george collie, you must be kidding? Archbishop Chaput a radical? Jesus was considered a radical so that might not be the worst thing you can call the good Archbishop. But you, are an apostate, a heretic,a subverter of the Faith. Have a nice day! Tom
Obama (a practicing Christian)?
NOT a 'christianity' that Christ would recognize.
There are many hardened hearts out there. We can never under any circumstances embrace intrinsic evils and that is what abortion is. It is the murder of the most innocent. And there are effects on the mother--psychological and physical. NOt to mention the death of grace in the souls of her and all those involved. These crimes cry out to heaven! Those involved commit MORTAL sin and if not repented of, is called habitual sin and does not lead one to heaven.
No true Catholic, who obeys and assents to the teachings of Christ through His Church, can vote for those who promote murder. Period.
Nor can they in conscience present themselves for Holy Communion.
magdalen,
Beware the "no true Scotsman" fallacy.
I can think of several things that would lead a Catholic to vote for a pro-Abortion candidate.
1) CINO. The Catholic-in-name-only self-identifies as Catholic when asked, but doesn't practice the faith, follow its tenets, or really care what "some guy in a white robe" has to say about anything. They would indeed count (at least, in my mind) as "no true Catholic".
2) Uninformed Catholic. This is probably the largest group, honestly, and most likely includes us all in some way on different issues (meaning, for example, that I am uninformed on certain things that go along with being truly Catholic). This group just doesn't know what to really accept as authentic Catholic teaching. They are especially hampered by conflicting messages coming from different priests and sisters, and a lack of clear direction from the Bishops. One priest says contraception is ok, while another condemns it. Abortion can be presented as a major issue by one group within the church, while another group minimizes it and focuses instead on other issues. It leaves those who haven't really looked into the issue at sea, and they vote their uninformed conscience. They should count as "true Catholics".
3) Self-deluding Catholics. These are the ones who justify their support for pro-Abortion candidates by citing other issues, or coming up with fantastical numbers claiming that supporting the pro-Abortion candidate will actually reduce abortions, because of support for social programs they believe will help those most likely to obtain abortions (even though the track record for most social programs is abysmal with regard to that goal.) There may be some cross-over between this group and group 2, but this group might include those who are remaining intentionally uninformed/ignorant on what the Church teaches and why. True Catholics? I can't really say.
4) New Age Catholics. This is the group that wants to remake the Catholic Church in their own image. They believe that the Church needs to get with the times, accept "reality", and stop being so judgmental. They left the church long ago, but refuse to admit it.
All of the above need our prayers (and, truly, we need their prayers, too).
It's hard to understand how any person who really delves into this issue can be pro-Choice. But it's easy to see how people can claim to be pro-Choice because they haven't actually spent any time studying what abortion really is and when life really begins.
There are all sorts of logical problems with the pro-Abortion argument, even ignoring religious beliefs. Life begins at conception. Science shows it. So they redefine things, and talk of "personhood" and try to figure out when rights are bestowed upon the living, growing organism. Viability shifts as medical procedures improve (my 4th child is proof of that...26 weeks gestation, but the size of a 22-week baby...she turns 2 next month!) A
Matthew:
Yes, we've labeled them "Katholik".
"The sure losers in this election"... will have to deal with their poor decisions on Judgment Day.
Catholics who think McCain's pro-ESCR stance makes him just as much in favor of intrinsic evil as Obama have a pretty clear road to voting as they like based on prudential matters.
Those who are calling for excommunication for Catholic Democrats are being pretty damned uncharitable. Granted, if any of you has the power to discern the state of a total stranger's soul, hey, props.
What does excommunication have to do with "the power to discern the state of a total stranger's soul"?
Kate B., pay attention to the world around you before you comment next time. The president of the USCCB (Cdl. George) and the vice-prez (Bp. Kicanas) have both stated in interviews recently that the discussion of possible excommunication of Biden, Pelosi, and friends will take place this November at the synod. Biden continues to run his mouth after being corrected by multiple bishops. He is increasing the likelihood that he and his buddies will be officially excommunicated this November. So, unless you intend to call the U.S. bishops uncharitable, you'd better hush, honey.
I can just see the nutcase liberals if Biden is excommunicated. They'll make a saint out of him!!
Joseph--
I've seen a number of commenters on this site call for the excommunication of Catholics who vote for Obama. As far as I know, that's not on the bishops' table for discussion. It's merely bile spilled on the Internet. As is telling someone who is not your "honey" to "hush." Please treat me respectfully. I'm a human being, after all.
bill912--
For those commenters who are calling for the excommunication of Catholics based on a secret ballot--yep, they'd have to be able to discern things not open to the natural senses for that.
Pardon me if I'm expressing myself badly. But seriously, labeling people "Katholiks" and talking about how evil they are doesn't change how they're voting. Also, it doesn't do the name-callers any moral good. It's not one of the spiritual works of mercy, unless I'm seriously mistaken. (Correcting the ignorant is, yes. Calling the ignorant names is not.)
If you think you don't know any Catholics who are voting for Obama, you are probably wrong. For a lot of Catholic voters, McCain's support of ESCR makes the two men morally equal. That's flawed reasoning, true, but they're using it honestly--not trying to justify something they know is wrong. For anyone to say--to a total stranger--"Aha! You knew it was gravel wrong and did it anyway! Mortal Sin! Keep away from the Communion line!" is awfully presumptuous. We should not engage in it.
Also, Joseph, the US bishops are men, and they sin like other men. There has been no shortage on this and other sites of calling their spades spades. If they are, in fact, uncharitable, it would not be wrong to call them so.
And boy do those bishops ever sin! Aiding and abeiting child rapists and covering up the crimes and making victims sign secrecy agreements. yuck!! I say excommunite mahoney, law,egan, george etc...
Please consider posting the linked video. It shows a clear distinction between McCain and Obama iin regards to the abortion issue. Thank you and God bless your work... Ernesto
http://americaschoicenow.com/
Commenting by HaloScan
