I am also Roman Catholic. What's wrong with that?
Posted By: abc on 2008-11-15
In Reply to: Exactly s/m - gourdpainter
Aren't Catholics, Protestants, Greek Orthodox, Roman Orthodox etc....all Christians? I not understand.
And I am pro choice, up to the 4th month. I think it is better than bringing a child into this world, for which I am not prepared and deep down do not welcome, out of different reasons.
And I prefer an abortion to giving up my baby for adoption. I would not be able to sleep a single night, having given my baby to strangers.
Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old. To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
roman catholic
The Roman Catholic church believes that any nonbarrier birth control method is abortion. That includes birth control pills, I.U.D, patch, anything.
They also believe that every sexual act should be open to the gift of a baby by God, therefore condoms and diaphragms are not really keeping things "open."
They also believe that avoiding sex during your fertile period using the "rhythm method" is also bad because theoretically you could avoid having children altogether.
However, it is not a mortal sin not to have children, just follow the above rules.
So Pro-Life really is not a political issue. It really is a religious issue that they turned into a political issue.
SC Roman Catholic priest says Obama supporters shouldn't receive
By MEG KINNARD | Associated Press Writer 9:04 PM EST, November 13, 2008 COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) _ A South Carolina Roman Catholic priest has told his parishioners that they should refrain from receiving Holy Communion if they voted for Barack Obama because the Democratic president-elect supports abortion, and supporting him "constitutes material cooperation with intrinsic evil."
The Rev. Jay Scott Newman said in a letter distributed Sunday to parishioners at St. Mary's Catholic Church in Greenville that they are putting their souls at risk if they take Holy Communion before doing penance for their vote.
"Our nation has chosen for its chief executive the most radical pro-abortion politician ever to serve in the United States Senate or to run for president," Newman wrote, referring to Obama by his full name, including his middle name of Hussein.
"Voting for a pro-abortion politician when a plausible pro-life alternative exists constitutes material cooperation with intrinsic evil, and those Catholics who do so place themselves outside of the full communion of Christ's Church and under the judgment of divine law. Persons in this condition should not receive Holy Communion until and unless they are reconciled to God in the Sacrament of Penance, lest they eat and drink their own condemnation."
During the 2008 presidential campaign, many bishops spoke out on abortion more boldly than four years earlier, telling Catholic politicians and voters that the issue should be the most important consideration in setting policy and deciding which candidate to back. A few church leaders said parishioners risked their immortal soul by voting for candidates who support abortion rights.
But bishops differ on whether Catholic lawmakers and voters should refrain from receiving Communion if they diverge from church teaching on abortion. Each bishop sets policy in his own diocese. In their annual fall meeting, the nation's Catholic bishops vowed Tuesday to forcefully confront the Obama administration over its support for abortion rights.
According to national exit polls, 54 percent of Catholics chose Obama, who is Protestant. In South Carolina, which McCain carried, voters in Greenville County traditionally seen as among the state's most conservative areas went 61 percent for the Republican, and 37 percent for Obama.
"It was not an attempt to make a partisan point," Newman said in a telephone interview Thursday. "In fact, in this election, for the sake of argument, if the Republican candidate had been pro-abortion, and the Democratic candidate had been pro-life, everything that I wrote would have been exactly the same."
Conservative Catholics criticized Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry in 2004 for supporting abortion rights, with a few Catholic bishops saying Kerry should refrain from receiving Holy Communion because his views were contrary to church teachings.
Sister Mary Ann Walsh, spokeswoman for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, said she had not heard of other churches taking this position in reaction to Obama's win. A Boston-based group that supports Catholic Democrats questioned the move, saying it was too extreme.
"Father Newman is off base," said Steve Krueger, national director of Catholic Democrats. "He is acting beyond the authority of a parish priest to say what he did. ... Unfortunately, he is doing so in a manner that will be of great cost to those parishioners who did vote for Sens. Obama and Biden. There will be a spiritual cost to them for his words."
A man who has attended St. Mary's for 18 years said he welcomed Newman's message and anticipated it would inspire further discussion at the church.
"I don't understand anyone who would call themselves a Christian, let alone a Catholic, and could vote for someone who's a pro-abortion candidate," said Ted Kelly, 64, who volunteers his time as lector for the church. "You're talking about the murder of innocent beings."
___
On the Net:
St. Mary's Catholic Church: http://www.stmarysgvl.org/
Not being Catholic........ sm
I don't know all the intracasies of the rite of communion in the Catholic Church, but as a Baptist, I do know that our pastor asks each person to examine their own heart before taking communion as we believe that taking communion with unrepented sin does bring damnation on the individual. HOWEVER, at least in my church, he would never go so far to tell a person whether or not they were "worthy" of taking communion. That decision is between the individual and God alone.
Catholic Church
Nancy Pelosi's big mouth is the last problem the Obama campaign wanted to contend with.
In its newly ratified platform, the Democratic Party reinvigorates its commitment to abortion.
This time Nancy Pelosi has truly gone too far -- which isn't good news for Joe Biden either.
Found at spectator.org. Other info at wnd.com
I don't know about the catholic Bible sm
but have you ever really sat down and read your Bible or are you depending on a priest to interpret for you. You should sit down with your Bible and pray for the Holy Spirit to reveal his word to you.
Catholic Archbishops Are Speaking
Here is a mere sampling of responses to Nancy Pelosi's attempt to rewrite the abortion issue on Meet The Press on Sunday. Flame their words all you want, but this goes back throughout the archives at the Vatican. Also, Pope John Paul was just as outspoken regarding this subject as Pope Benedict is.
If someone can find a way to justify abortion after reading these posts, all I can say is "good luck." Do your own research and you'll see where many Catholics "in charge" are far from impressed with this. Search Pelosi abortion, Biden, etc., and you'll find plenty. Evangelicals feel the same way.
http://thehill.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=75650&Itemid=70
And another from the Washington Post:
Archbishop scolds pro-choice Biden
Valerie Richardson and Julia Duin Tuesday, August 26, 2008
DENVER | Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. arrived at the Democratic National Convention on Monday amid rumblings over whether his pro-choice Catholicism would help or hurt the Democratic ticket.
An Irish-Catholic from a working-class upbringing, Mr. Biden won the nod as presumptive presidential nominee Barack Obama's running mate in part because of his appeal to blue-collar Catholics, the same voters who swung during the primary for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.
Although he represents Delaware in the Senate, Mr. Biden grew up in Pennsylvania, a must-win state for Democrats in November.
But the party's hopes of winning the critical Catholic vote took a hit Sunday when Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver said Mr. Biden should avoid taking Communion as a result of his pro-choice stand on abortion.
Archbishop Chaput, who was scheduled to lead a pro-life candlelight vigil Monday night here in front of Planned Parenthood, called Mr. Biden's support for abortion rights "seriously wrong," said archdiocese spokeswoman Jeanette DE Melo.
"I certainly presume his good will and integrity," said the archbishop, "and I presume that his integrity will lead him to refrain from presenting himself for Communion if he supports a false 'right' to abortion."
The archbishop, who was not invited to speak at any convention events in what appeared to be a deliberate snub, told the Associated Press that he would like to speak privately with Mr. Biden.
The debate underscored what has emerged as a central theme of this year's convention: the tension between the Democratic Party's renewed outreach to religious voters and its long-standing support for unfettered access to abortion.
At a panel discussion Monday sponsored by Google on "The Shifting Faith Vote: What It Means for the Election," panelists said that concerns over social issues, such as poverty, are moving some faith-based voters away from the Republican Party.
At the same time, they haven't aligned with the Democrats, primarily because of the abortion issue.
"The push for the Democratic Party is to have a new position on abortion," said Steve Waldman, Editor of the religious Web site beliefnet.com. "When you look at Catholics and evangelicals, you see that they agree with 80 percent of what [Mr. Obama] says, but there's this stumbling block with abortion."
Whether pro-choice Catholics should take Communion became a major issue in 2004 during Democrat John Kerry's run for the presidency when more than a dozen bishops, including Archbishop Chaput, publicly asked the senator from Massachusetts not to present himself for the Eucharist.
Their stance may have given a boost to President Bush, who increased his share of the Catholic vote from 47 percent in 2000 to 52 percent in 2004.
Catholics, the nation's largest religious voting bloc, represent 26 percent of the electorate. Alexia Kelley, executive director of Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, said that 11 percent of those this year are considered "swing voters," more than in any recent election year.
Catholic advocacy groups didn't wait long before weighing in on the "wafer wars." The conservative Catholic group Fidelis condemned the selection of Mr. Biden.
Your Catholic propaganda belongs on the
*
I didn't take this as catholic propaganda
Yes, it's obvious it was created by catholics, but the overall message was vote your conscious (p.s. I'm Athiest so if anyone I would be offended). Yes, I could have done without putting catholic this or catholic that up there, but the message was clear to me - vote your conscious (and they didn't tell me who I should vote for - that's a plus in my book).
If I were Catholic, think I would have more things to worry about.
First, I find it hard to believe that any religious group would want to run such a slanted story. A prolife group could turn around with abortion films to say some of these would have turned out to be priests. With all the abuse going on in the Catholic church, I think some of their energy would be better spent in cleaning their own home first.
o.k., inside the catholic school....nm
nm
bone up - he also attended Catholic school
so do you think he is the antichrist now?
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/01/22/obama.madrassa/
The catholic school offered several choices of
--
I blame the Catholic church for allowing this to go on for so very long. SM
I have a lot of conservative friends and I seriously doubt they would condone this. I knew there was a reason I stayed away from these boards. As the poster above said, your post came up in a headline or I would never have come here.
He attended only 4 years in this Catholic School in Jakarta,
1st to 5th grade, age 7-11 years, from 1968 till 1972.
Can you beat my research?
not THEIRS, mother is American and Catholic, father and stepfather Muslim..
yes and Islamic teachings only t h e s e 4 years in Jakarta, Indonesia, and maybe only 2 years.
Barack was 7-11 years old at that time.
wrong, full of wrong statements, see my upper post...nm
nm
Wrong Woman - Wrong Message
http://www.truthout.org/article/palin-wrong-woman-wrong-message
Wrong, wrong, wrong, clueless Lu.
Horse hockey
Not quite- 2 years Catholic, 2 years Muslim. NM
X
huh? He did this after school hours, in the catholic school...nm
nm
Sorry about that...wrong board, wrong name
nm
You're right. Something is definitely wrong
Not with the priests who do the molesting.
Not with the Senator who absolves the priests of blame and instead blames the Liberals.
No. Instead something is definitely wrong with ME for my outrage that a Republican Senator can make such an outlandish, IRRESPONSIBLE statement, instead of trying to SAVE these children and condemning what the priests are doing. Unfortunately, this is typical of the Republican party these days. Typical of the "We are perfect and make no mistakes" mentality that's prevalent in this country. They couldn't be honest if their lives depended on it.
Well, tell us what's wo wrong about what he says?
You can't, because he just pegged the lot of you like he always does which is why he has the top rated radio show in the country
You got it wrong....
Many of us liberals do not have delicate thoughts about terrorists. But get it through your brain, if you can, that many of us feel that invading Iraq for oil and power WAS NOT THE WAY TO attack or deal with the terrorists. Apparently they're mostly in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan and what are we doing? Messing around in Iraq. We are LESS safe and I think time will prove that.
WRONG. You know what is
Not everyone is a liar. Only the ones who have done it on this board before and don't deserve to be trusted or believed again.
It's quite simple. If you want to be believed, stop lying.
Then that was wrong
absolutely wrong, and the teacher and school administration were clearly in the wrong. Shouldn't have happened, period.
Wrong.
What posts are you talking about? Either I wasn't here then or you're wrong. I've read through most of the posts but don't remember seeing that. Prove it.
WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU??!
You called her an elitist pig, claiming to mean it in a good way.
She replied with Yup, elistist pig here..Yeehhaaww~~
And now youre claiming she said she speaks for God.
WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU??!
So was I wrong? And if not...
...what are you getting so huffy about? Just for the fun of it? There's no arrogance in assuming you aren't one of the 1% of the richest people in the country. It's a natural assumption considering you spend so much time here, and why would you bother if you could be off doing whatever pleased you with money being no object? I'm certainly not one of the 1% and you bet I'd be doing something rather than putting up with your petty indignation if I had a virtually limitless income. So I didn't assume a thing about you that you were not free to assume about me in return. What's the big deal -? Are you ashamed anyone might think you're not in the top 1% of wealthiest Americans? Mighty fragile ego, that. Better face reality and get a grip - that's a pretty exclusive club.
What is WRONG with you? sm
Seriously what IS wrong with you? This has nothing to do with anything in this thread. Except yet one more occasion to use the word LIAR.
WRONG!
I corrected myself. I admitted to my mistakes. I always admit to my mistakes, and believe me, I make a lot of them. I'm even harsher on me than the neocons are.
If the neocons could just admit to theirs, the dialogue might be more productive.
and *what if* you are wrong?
We both could be wrong. I find debating what if's a waste of time.
The simple answer to any what if question is:
If you're right then I'm wrong. However, I find dealing in knowns a better way to logistically deal with any scenario. You can what if yourself all day long and never get anywhere.
Wrong. nm
Richard Cohen was right. Sad.
You are all three wrong. TI
Despite the UN ruling that Israel completed its withdrawal from southern Lebanon (UN, June 18, 2000), Hizballah and the Lebanese government insist that Israel still holds Lebanese territory in eastern Mount Dov, a 100-square-mile, largely uninhabited patch called Shebaa Farms. This claim provides Hizballah with a pretext to continue its activities against Israel. Thus, after kidnapping three Israeli soldiers in that area, it announced that they were captured on Lebanese soil. Israel, which has built a series of observation posts on strategic hilltops in the area, maintains that the land was captured from Syria; nevertheless, the Syrians have supported Hizballah's claim. According to the Washington Post, the controversy benefits each of the Arab parties. For Syria, it means Hizballah can still be used to keep the Israelis off balance; for Lebanon, it provides a way to apply pressure over issues, like the return of Lebanese prisoners still held in Israeli jails. For Hezbollah, it is a reason to keep its militia armed and active, providing a ready new goal for a resistance movement that otherwise had nothing left to resist. In January 2005, the UN Security Council adopted a resolution condemning violence along the Israel-Lebanon border and reasserted that the Lebanese claim to the Shebaa farms area is not compatible with Security Council resolutions.
Wrong. I did not.
I never said this person was sent to SHUT DOWN down the board, as I was accused of saying by the rude, rabid person you're defending.
I said this person was sent to crash the board (as in INVADE the board, as in someone who would CRASH A PARTY).
Yes, I made the mistake of posting on the other board twice before I read further and realized the nature of these boards. I haven't repeated that mistake since.
I suppose I can expect 3,869 more posts from you to make us even for my two posts.
After reading some posts by you on your board (such as Prophecy certainly is being fulfilled. So much of the world has turned their back on Israel.), I can totally understand your blind, unquestioning loyalty to Israel. You obviously believe the end times are near, and if you don't support Israel, you won't get to spend eternity with people like Ann Coulter. People like you scare me because I believe you will do anything it takes to self-fulfill that prophecy. That is yet another reason why religion and politics don't mix; I can't help but wonder if God told Bush to bring the end times about, which he seems to be intent on doing with his bomb first, ask questions later tactics. After all, God told Bush to go to war with Iraq, and Bush obeyed that order.
I was wrong....sm
He said Fox was off his meds or *acting.* {{same thing}}
Enjoy your show! (and all its *cough* facts).
You are wrong. sm
Noam Chomsky and Ward Chamberlain both made comments that we got what we deserved on 9/11.
you got this one wrong.
I have been to the boards in the last 2 or 3 weeks once. I did not post whatever you are referring to and when I do post I always use my name. I have yet to come up with a reason to hide behind another. It was not me.
Wrong again...
I don't know what other liberals are doing or if they are mad about TV coverage. Secondly, I am reacting to a 1-hour broadcast, nothing more, nothing less. Maybe the new War Czar will see the necessity of administration presence at soldier's funerals. I agree with Democrat that this convocation was quite a bit more pomp and circumstance than Katrina where he showed up in shirtsleeves, made promises and left. I am not mad because liberal causes are not on TV...this has not a thing to do with liberal causes or TV coverage. It was my response to an event.
Wrong AGAIN....
President Bush declared a national day of remembrance for the Katrina victims and there was a great bit of pomp and circumstance as I remember it. I have never seen any administration order half-staff for a natural disaster, no matter who was in power.
you are just wrong
your facts and thoughts are so twisted and convoluted that further discussion with you is futile. Step aside. Next.
Okay, that's just wrong, wrong, wrong!
I'd say that is right up there with Hillary attacking Obama's kindergarten essay. What's wrong with these people and their campaign? Isn't anyone telling them when they have stepped off the deep end into the abyss of bull....
when I'm wrong I'm wrong
Everyone is wrong at one time or another...gotta suck it up and admit it. That's what makes us human. My MIL...she will never admit that she's wrong - infurates DH. When he tries to tell her the truth about certain things if she doesn't want to hear it, mysteriously something will be on the stove burning and she'll have to hang up immediately. Then she doesh't have the decency to call back. LOL
I'm sorry....but you are wrong.
Clinton was impeached on two counts, grand jury perjury and obstruction of justice, with the votes split along party lines. The Senate Republicans, however, were unable to gather enough support to achieve the two-thirds majority required for his conviction. On Feb. 12, 1999, the Senate acquitted President Clinton on both counts. The perjury charge failed by a vote of 5545, with 10 Republicans voting against impeachment along with all 45 Democrats. The obstruction of justice vote was 5050, with 5 Republicans breaking ranks to vote against impeachment.
So....even though he was not convicted and not told to step down from office....he was still impeached. Only one president has been impeached and told to step down and that was President Andrew Johnson...I do believe. President Nixon chose to resign rather than be impeached.
wrong, wrong
True "feminists" are going to vote for Obama, issues over politician. Any true Hillary followers who followed her for issues will follow her to Obama instead of McCain. Only those few who followed her solely because she was a woman and no other reason will vote for McCain now. Fortunately they will be cancelled out by what one journalist called the "caveman" vote, in this case voting against McCain or just not voting at all because he has a woman on the ticket and no other reason. Oh yeah, they're still out there.
Wrong again, Sam.
It is not that the Soup Nazi didn't have any soup, it is just that he was free to deny soup to anyone he felt was not deserving of it. The same goes for us. We are not obligated to respond to your demands for documentation if we feel you are not deserving of it. Therefore, no soup for you!
You are so wrong!
They're trying to do it in Alaska!!!
Don't get me wrong here
I guess I am always thinking of the future, and about the choices we make today and how it could affect our future. As I said, I have two wonderful lesbian friends (partners) who I love dearly. They are the sweetest women on earth. They mean to harm no one. They have 5 children (3 offsprings of one of the women and 2 they are foster parents to - children of one of the women's sisters, who is a crack addict, and cannot take care of them). These women are wonderful "parents" to these children. It is not that I am against it. I just don't understand it, I guess. I too have nothing against gays or lesbians, as long as they do not try to push their lifestyle off on me. I am just thinking how it just does not seem to be right in the sense of the future, or past for that matter. If same-gender marriage was to be then where would there be offspring? Are you getting where I am coming from here.
Once again you are wrong
You really need to do some research. What does Iran and the 911 attack have to do with the federal research and bailouts. OP posted a good well researched post. You are just throwing out more rhetoric for the hatred you have toward Sarah Palin. And for what? OP was correct. Stop blaming each side. This started a long time ago and both parties have been in power since it began. For me the question is who has been profiting from it. I'm not blaming either side, but it just goes to show me how corrupt Washington is when people on both sides are making money off of it, then will tax the american people more and tell us we should feel patriotic about it.
As for the 911 attack... there's a lot more involved that one day we will know the whole story (not what is being hand fed to us). SP has been correct in what she has said. We have to stop the fundamentalist no matter what country they are in.
I believe you are wrong, Sam!
The first post regarding Alinsky was posted by someone named Jules regarding a link to the Boston Globe entitled "Son of Communist organizer Saul Alinksy praises Democratic convention and Obama campaign for using his father's methods." You're response to that post was, "holey moley...gonna have to put research into overdrive. Thanks for posting." This can all be found on page 16 of the political forum archives dated 09/02/2008. Since that post on 09/02/2008, you have been dropping Saul Alinksy's name as often as possible.
If you can prove that you were posting messages about Saul Alinsky with regards to the election prior to the above post on 09/02/2008, please provide the archive page number and date for verification.
We look forward to your response.
I said "I believe.." and I did believe, and I was wrong....
I do admit when wrong. However, everything I have posted about Alinsky and Obama regarding Alinsky is true. It can be confirmed.
|