The Complex Catholicity of Newt Gingrich
As outlined in “It’s Gingrich Time!” (http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=9629), the Obamian attack machine, led in Congress by its High Priestess of Vacuity and Obama idolatress, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, has begun to mobilize against Newton Leroy Gingrich.
The carefully-designed Democrat deconstruction of the latest front-runner in the Republican sweepstakes for the nomination had Pelosi hinting at a ton of allegedly unethical dirt she was prepared to dump on Gingrich, a threatened dumping that made no mention of her own alleged ethical breaches nor of the slew of Obama administration unethical and questionably legal machinations.
Rep. Pelosi withdrew the threat the same day she made it.
As I concluded in “It’s Gringich Time!” “The worst is yet to come in the Destroy Gingrich Campaign.” This will be a long and dirty political year and one of the most reprehensible Dem tactics is already becoming apparent: Tar Newt as a religious hypocrite, a newly-baptized papist fanatic, or both.
The ploy’s success is totally dependent on how well Democrats can get away with smearing Gingrich without smearing his new religion and his new wife lest they be seen as trampling on the First Amendment and the feminine gender. They usually have to be sly about it as in the case of the NewYork Times shortly after his 2009 conversion to Catholicism.
In “Gingrich Gets (a New) Religion,” the Times commented, “But even before his conversion, Mr. Gingrich was branded a hypocrite in the blogosphere after he wrote in a recent Twitter post that President Obama had ‘anti-Catholic values’ ” after he criticized the invitation to President Obama to speak at Notre Dame.
Do note: The blogosphere, not the Times, called Gingrich a hypocrite. Still, the lambasting had begun and mostly relates to his marriages.
In “Newt Gingrich’s Religion,” Salon.com is less subtle, delineating the differences between the religion Newt had left and the one he had adopted, pointing out the basic tenets of the Baptist faith and that, ”With Gingrich’s conversion to Catholicism, he has, in effect, publicly renounced them.”
Salon not only snidely attacks Gingrich but takes digs at his wife, citing why Newt converted and casting aspersions on Callista Bisek with snide references to her immorality: “The first reason he mentions is the fact that his current wife, Callista, is a devout Catholic.”
Then Salon goes for the real dirt: ”Not so devout, however, that she minded carrying on an affair with the married Speaker of the House. The affair lasted for at least five years while Gingrich was married to his second wife.”
As we all know, ultra-moral liberals take great umbrage at such things, especially when liberals are not involved.
Sounding more envious than chagrined, Salon also threw in another shocker: “Not that it really matters, but Gingrich is 23 years older than Callista. When their affair began, she was in her late 20’s, Gingrich in his 50’s.”
If it didn’t matter, why mention it–other than to paint Mrs. Gingrich as a bimbo and her husband as an aging, hypocritical roue’?
Bill Clinton married once, Ronald Reagan twice, Newt Gingrich thrice.
By all indications, Clinton’s marriage has been something other than one made in heaven, Reagan’s first marriage to Jane Wyman ended amicably and his second to Nancy Davis was the stuff of marital legend. Gingrich’s first two weddings have been mischaracterized by the media as something akin to marriages by Jack the Ripper to his victims.
Newt’s third marriage, which has lasted eleven years, is the one that most sticks in the MSM craw.
Gingrich lately seems more than a bit happy, content, and at peace with himself and his philosophy, none of which sits well with the mainstreamers who distrust him because his father was career military and because they’re still peeved over 1994.
The stickiest issue is that Ms. Bisek is a Roman Catholic and now so is Newt and we all know how sinister those Catholics are, right? . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=9752.)
Showing posts with label catholic. Show all posts
Showing posts with label catholic. Show all posts
Saturday, December 10, 2011
Saturday, October 29, 2011
Catholics, Crucifixes, and Muslims
Catholics, Crucifixes, and Muslims
Those darned papists are at it again!
It’s bad enough they established tens of thousands of Catholic elementary and high schools throughout America as alternatives to public school systems, a transparent affront to the quality of public education, but then they went and founded their own institutions of higher learning!
Now, their universities feel they have the right to display crucifixes and other fundamental symbols of Catholicism on their premises, thereby insulting, humiliating, and infuriating members of other faiths, particularly Muslims!
When will this madness end?
According to census.gov, there are over 4,000 colleges and universities in the United States in addition to 3,660 post-secondary vocational and technical institutions. Of that number, 244 are “Catholic.”
Regrettably, some of those 244 have become Catholic in name only, indeed only nominally-religious in any way. Among them is Georgetown University and the University of Notre Dame, both of which prestigious schools have “secularized” themselves in the interests of gaining acceptance as mainstream rather than being labelled “Catholic universities” which they seem to believe is a pejorative description.
In 2009, Georgetown invited avid abortion advocate President Barack Hussein Obama to speak at the school and accommodated his objections to the deeply-religious letters “IHS” (In Hoc Signo) by covering them during his speech. Georgetown observed the beginning of the holy season of Lent with “Sex Positive Week” featuring discussions on homosexuality and pornography with one hosted by a porn movie director.
For its secular part, Notre Dame abandoned the moral principles on which it was founded by proudly featuring the Abortionist in Chief as its 2009 commencement speaker despite widespread alumni and Catholic media condemnation. Notre Dame President Fr. John Jenkins won accolades from the liberal media even as he shamed the Irish and his religion.
(See “Apostate Universities,” http://tiny.cc/mxqsj.)
The one hundred twenty five year old Catholic University of America just outside Washington, D.C. hasn’t, as yet, totally succumbed to secularism and political correctness but that’s not due to a lack of effort by an infinitesimal if existent number of its student body, Muslims.
CU has seen a recent 100%+ spike in its Muslim population, from 41 in 2006 to 91 in 2011 out of a total of nearly 7,000 graduate and undergrad students. Life must be challenging for worshipers Of Allah and Muhammad in a Catholic institution . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5836.)
. . .
Those darned papists are at it again!
It’s bad enough they established tens of thousands of Catholic elementary and high schools throughout America as alternatives to public school systems, a transparent affront to the quality of public education, but then they went and founded their own institutions of higher learning!
Now, their universities feel they have the right to display crucifixes and other fundamental symbols of Catholicism on their premises, thereby insulting, humiliating, and infuriating members of other faiths, particularly Muslims!
When will this madness end?
According to census.gov, there are over 4,000 colleges and universities in the United States in addition to 3,660 post-secondary vocational and technical institutions. Of that number, 244 are “Catholic.”
Regrettably, some of those 244 have become Catholic in name only, indeed only nominally-religious in any way. Among them is Georgetown University and the University of Notre Dame, both of which prestigious schools have “secularized” themselves in the interests of gaining acceptance as mainstream rather than being labelled “Catholic universities” which they seem to believe is a pejorative description.
In 2009, Georgetown invited avid abortion advocate President Barack Hussein Obama to speak at the school and accommodated his objections to the deeply-religious letters “IHS” (In Hoc Signo) by covering them during his speech. Georgetown observed the beginning of the holy season of Lent with “Sex Positive Week” featuring discussions on homosexuality and pornography with one hosted by a porn movie director.
For its secular part, Notre Dame abandoned the moral principles on which it was founded by proudly featuring the Abortionist in Chief as its 2009 commencement speaker despite widespread alumni and Catholic media condemnation. Notre Dame President Fr. John Jenkins won accolades from the liberal media even as he shamed the Irish and his religion.
(See “Apostate Universities,” http://tiny.cc/mxqsj.)
The one hundred twenty five year old Catholic University of America just outside Washington, D.C. hasn’t, as yet, totally succumbed to secularism and political correctness but that’s not due to a lack of effort by an infinitesimal if existent number of its student body, Muslims.
CU has seen a recent 100%+ spike in its Muslim population, from 41 in 2006 to 91 in 2011 out of a total of nearly 7,000 graduate and undergrad students. Life must be challenging for worshipers Of Allah and Muhammad in a Catholic institution . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5836.)
. . .
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Governor Andrew Cuomo's Morality
Governor Andrew Cuomo's Morality
In our morally ambivalent age, morality is often considered a subjective concept by which one man’s sense of immorality may be another’s lifestyle but nevertheless, even today, there are certain objective standards on which the vast majority should agree.
AllAboutPhilosophy.org explains that morality relates to a system of standards of right or wrong behavior which, in turn, incorporate moral standards, moral responsibility, or sense of conscience, and a moral identity and can be termed synonymous with ethics, principles, virtue, and goodness.
The only problem there involves the chicken or the egg dilemma, i.e., what comes first, morality or the conscience which dictates ethical values.
Some of us believe the act of abortion, taking a human life, is of its nature an act of immorality of the highest order. Enter government and agitators, and abortion becomes less a moral issue as a legal and human rights issue. Likewise with other contemporary issues, the question could be asked whether teachers abandoning their students, legislators abandoning their responsibilities, dictators acting like dictators, as well as men copulating with other men or women marrying women, are also acts of immorality of a lower order.
Because of the moral ambiguities intentionally created by those same teachers, legislators, dictators, and those men and women–they all seem to have some fabricated rationale for their actions–the only reasonable standard one can use in making moral judgments about any individual is the views of institutions to which those individuals have voluntarily committed themselves.
Essentially, if one joins a group of his own volition, one should adhere to its rules or get out, which brings us to Andrew Mark Cuomo, the 56th governor of the state of New York who has as much business being a member of the Catholic Church as a rabbi. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=3716)
In our morally ambivalent age, morality is often considered a subjective concept by which one man’s sense of immorality may be another’s lifestyle but nevertheless, even today, there are certain objective standards on which the vast majority should agree.
AllAboutPhilosophy.org explains that morality relates to a system of standards of right or wrong behavior which, in turn, incorporate moral standards, moral responsibility, or sense of conscience, and a moral identity and can be termed synonymous with ethics, principles, virtue, and goodness.
The only problem there involves the chicken or the egg dilemma, i.e., what comes first, morality or the conscience which dictates ethical values.
Some of us believe the act of abortion, taking a human life, is of its nature an act of immorality of the highest order. Enter government and agitators, and abortion becomes less a moral issue as a legal and human rights issue. Likewise with other contemporary issues, the question could be asked whether teachers abandoning their students, legislators abandoning their responsibilities, dictators acting like dictators, as well as men copulating with other men or women marrying women, are also acts of immorality of a lower order.
Because of the moral ambiguities intentionally created by those same teachers, legislators, dictators, and those men and women–they all seem to have some fabricated rationale for their actions–the only reasonable standard one can use in making moral judgments about any individual is the views of institutions to which those individuals have voluntarily committed themselves.
Essentially, if one joins a group of his own volition, one should adhere to its rules or get out, which brings us to Andrew Mark Cuomo, the 56th governor of the state of New York who has as much business being a member of the Catholic Church as a rabbi. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=3716)
Saturday, January 8, 2011
The War on Catholics
The War on Catholics
. . . Perhaps the worst was the witless, masculinity-challenged Bill Maher “joking how the Catholic Church should ‘go gay’ and chant ‘We’re here, we’re queer, get Eucharist’ and . . . ‘Jerry Springer: The Opera’ that mocked the ‘little biscuit’ of a genital-fondling Jesus character who admitted he was ‘a little bit gay:’ ” http://tiny.cc/qggoa
The consequences of comparable desecrations committed against Mohammed or insults directed at Islam and Muslims are almost beyond imagining. For that matter, abusing the sacred tenets of Jews or Buddhists or Hindus is not just beyond imagining, it’s unheard of.
Maybe it’s time for Catholics to declare their own version of a fatwā. (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=3354)
. . . Perhaps the worst was the witless, masculinity-challenged Bill Maher “joking how the Catholic Church should ‘go gay’ and chant ‘We’re here, we’re queer, get Eucharist’ and . . . ‘Jerry Springer: The Opera’ that mocked the ‘little biscuit’ of a genital-fondling Jesus character who admitted he was ‘a little bit gay:’ ” http://tiny.cc/qggoa
The consequences of comparable desecrations committed against Mohammed or insults directed at Islam and Muslims are almost beyond imagining. For that matter, abusing the sacred tenets of Jews or Buddhists or Hindus is not just beyond imagining, it’s unheard of.
Maybe it’s time for Catholics to declare their own version of a fatwā. (Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=3354)
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Observations on . . . Mother Teresa
Observations on . . . Mother Teresa
After spending a great deal of time on and devoting a good deal of space to the two previous subjects in this series on recent anniversaries, 2005’s devastating Hurricane Katrina and the world-changing 1963 “I Have a Dream” speech by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., I had looked forward to writing an innocuous, little piece on one of the two saints I have ever known.
Pope John Paul II was one, Mother Teresa was the other.
Not that I personally met with either the pope or the Catholic nun Agnes Gonxha Bojaxhiu, later to be known as Mother Teresa, but I felt that a few words commemorating the anniversary of her birth in Shkoder, Albania on August 26th, 1910 were in order.
Agnes’ middle name, Gonxha, meaning Rosebud, may be somewhat difficult to pronounce in English but this woman who committed herself at age 12 to a life of religious, missionary work for the Catholic Church led a life of service that wasn’t difficult to evaluate.
I had an old Irish Uncle Mike whom my son labelled a saint and he might indeed have been one. With Agnes Gonxha Boxahiu, there was far less doubt and following her death in 1997 at age 87 she was beatified, made blessed, on her path to sainthood by Pope John Paul II.
There is no need here to detail Mother Teresa’s life or contributions to humanity which were recognized even by the Nobel Peace Prize Committee which awarded her its Peace Prize in 1979.
What is almost as remarkable as her selfless, almost half-century devotion to the poorest of the poor, the sickest of the sick in India is the controversy even such a life could generate among people who have contended that Mother Teresa was a dishonest fraud and an evil, immoral individual. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1873)
After spending a great deal of time on and devoting a good deal of space to the two previous subjects in this series on recent anniversaries, 2005’s devastating Hurricane Katrina and the world-changing 1963 “I Have a Dream” speech by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., I had looked forward to writing an innocuous, little piece on one of the two saints I have ever known.
Pope John Paul II was one, Mother Teresa was the other.
Not that I personally met with either the pope or the Catholic nun Agnes Gonxha Bojaxhiu, later to be known as Mother Teresa, but I felt that a few words commemorating the anniversary of her birth in Shkoder, Albania on August 26th, 1910 were in order.
Agnes’ middle name, Gonxha, meaning Rosebud, may be somewhat difficult to pronounce in English but this woman who committed herself at age 12 to a life of religious, missionary work for the Catholic Church led a life of service that wasn’t difficult to evaluate.
I had an old Irish Uncle Mike whom my son labelled a saint and he might indeed have been one. With Agnes Gonxha Boxahiu, there was far less doubt and following her death in 1997 at age 87 she was beatified, made blessed, on her path to sainthood by Pope John Paul II.
There is no need here to detail Mother Teresa’s life or contributions to humanity which were recognized even by the Nobel Peace Prize Committee which awarded her its Peace Prize in 1979.
What is almost as remarkable as her selfless, almost half-century devotion to the poorest of the poor, the sickest of the sick in India is the controversy even such a life could generate among people who have contended that Mother Teresa was a dishonest fraud and an evil, immoral individual. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1873)
Friday, April 9, 2010
Lifetime Achievement Award Goes to Reverend Michael Pfleger?
Lifetime Achievement Award Goes to Reverend Michael Pfleger?
As if the Catholic Church doesn’t have enough scandal on its hands, in Chicago it seems to go begging for even more.
The Church’s “lifetime achievement award” has been conferred on a known radical racist, good pal of Prof. Cornel West and of the Revs. Jeremiah Wright, Louis Farrakhan, and Al Sharpton, Chicago’s defiant priest and self-loathing white man, Father Michael Pfleger.
Aptly-termed “Obama’s white cheerleader” by Michelle Malkin, Pfleger defied Chicago’s previous Catholic bishop, Joseph Cardinal Cody by adopting and living with two local boys, and current leader Francis Cardinal George has now rewarded him with a prestigious honor despite his chequered past, and present. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1621)
As if the Catholic Church doesn’t have enough scandal on its hands, in Chicago it seems to go begging for even more.
The Church’s “lifetime achievement award” has been conferred on a known radical racist, good pal of Prof. Cornel West and of the Revs. Jeremiah Wright, Louis Farrakhan, and Al Sharpton, Chicago’s defiant priest and self-loathing white man, Father Michael Pfleger.
Aptly-termed “Obama’s white cheerleader” by Michelle Malkin, Pfleger defied Chicago’s previous Catholic bishop, Joseph Cardinal Cody by adopting and living with two local boys, and current leader Francis Cardinal George has now rewarded him with a prestigious honor despite his chequered past, and present. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1621)
Saturday, March 6, 2010
The Final Prejudice: Catholicism
The Final Prejudice: Catholicism
L. Brent Bozell concludes his brief essay, “A Year of Anti-Religious Bigotry” with this passage: “Catholicism is the single largest religious denomination in America. In our news and entertainment media today, anti-Catholicism remains ‘the last acceptable prejudice.’ It is not that the cultural left is out of touch. It is out to destroy.”
Sound exaggerated? As a Roman Catholic, I would suggest Bozell’s remarks seem exaggerated only to non-Catholics and to the leftists to whom he refers.
In his book, The Enemy at Home, conservative writer Dinesh D’Souza defines the cultural left as referring mainly to “the left wing of the Democratic Party . . . [including] the American Civil Liberties Union, the National Organization for Women, People for the American Way, Planned Parenthood, Human Rights Watch, and Moveon.org.”
According to D’Souza, among the stars of that group are Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Michael Moore, George Soros, Barbara Boxer, Bill Moyers, Noam Chomsky, and the late Ted Kennedy and its influential allies in Congress, Hollywood, the media, the non-profit sector, and the universities: http://bit.ly/cfEEFR
That’s some powerful army!
D’Souza’s controversial book focuses on the relationship between the cultural left and September 11th, 2001 as opposed to Bozell’s immediate interest in its effect on religion, specifically on Catholicism, which leads to the obvious question of, Why? . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1542)
L. Brent Bozell concludes his brief essay, “A Year of Anti-Religious Bigotry” with this passage: “Catholicism is the single largest religious denomination in America. In our news and entertainment media today, anti-Catholicism remains ‘the last acceptable prejudice.’ It is not that the cultural left is out of touch. It is out to destroy.”
Sound exaggerated? As a Roman Catholic, I would suggest Bozell’s remarks seem exaggerated only to non-Catholics and to the leftists to whom he refers.
In his book, The Enemy at Home, conservative writer Dinesh D’Souza defines the cultural left as referring mainly to “the left wing of the Democratic Party . . . [including] the American Civil Liberties Union, the National Organization for Women, People for the American Way, Planned Parenthood, Human Rights Watch, and Moveon.org.”
According to D’Souza, among the stars of that group are Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Michael Moore, George Soros, Barbara Boxer, Bill Moyers, Noam Chomsky, and the late Ted Kennedy and its influential allies in Congress, Hollywood, the media, the non-profit sector, and the universities: http://bit.ly/cfEEFR
That’s some powerful army!
D’Souza’s controversial book focuses on the relationship between the cultural left and September 11th, 2001 as opposed to Bozell’s immediate interest in its effect on religion, specifically on Catholicism, which leads to the obvious question of, Why? . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1542)
Friday, February 5, 2010
Prop 8: R.I.P.?
Prop 8: R.I.P.?
Notwithstanding an impassioned defense of the defenders of California’s Proposition 8 by the Family Research Institute, the plaintiffs are set to eventually win Perry vs Scharzenegger if not in federal district court in San Francisco then in the Supreme Court of the United States.
To get readers up to snuff on the trial in question, please see “The Gay Battle against the Will of the People,” Parts One and Two.
At issue is whether Prop 8, a part of California’s constitution since it was passed by voters on November 4th, 2008, is constitutional. More fundamental is the question of whether citizens of any state in the union are entitled to amend the document that defines the “nature, functions and limits” of a governing body.
In California they are so legally entitled and a majority of Californians decided that what constitutes a marriage in that state can be reduced to 14 words, “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”
Surprised that the measure had passed in one of the most liberal states in the nation, the gay lobby first demonstrated in protest then mobilized its formidable forces to attempt to get a court to override the will of the people, alleging that the people had unfairly infringed on homosexual rights.
David Boie, co-principal counsel for the homosexual plaintiffs with Ted Olson, has linked that infringement to the Catholic Church specifically and generally to Christianity which made this just-concluded trial one in which basic precepts of Christianity are called into question: http://bit.ly/9eT4F7 . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1476)
Notwithstanding an impassioned defense of the defenders of California’s Proposition 8 by the Family Research Institute, the plaintiffs are set to eventually win Perry vs Scharzenegger if not in federal district court in San Francisco then in the Supreme Court of the United States.
To get readers up to snuff on the trial in question, please see “The Gay Battle against the Will of the People,” Parts One and Two.
At issue is whether Prop 8, a part of California’s constitution since it was passed by voters on November 4th, 2008, is constitutional. More fundamental is the question of whether citizens of any state in the union are entitled to amend the document that defines the “nature, functions and limits” of a governing body.
In California they are so legally entitled and a majority of Californians decided that what constitutes a marriage in that state can be reduced to 14 words, “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”
Surprised that the measure had passed in one of the most liberal states in the nation, the gay lobby first demonstrated in protest then mobilized its formidable forces to attempt to get a court to override the will of the people, alleging that the people had unfairly infringed on homosexual rights.
David Boie, co-principal counsel for the homosexual plaintiffs with Ted Olson, has linked that infringement to the Catholic Church specifically and generally to Christianity which made this just-concluded trial one in which basic precepts of Christianity are called into question: http://bit.ly/9eT4F7 . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1476)
Friday, October 23, 2009
Rep. Patrick Kennedy, Theologian
Rep. Patrick Joseph Kennedy, Theologian
Could there be a finer Irish name than Patrick Kennedy?
Sure and begorrah, there could not, and, Patrick, you’ve done a foine job at presenting yourself, indeed.
Could there be a worse exemplar of Irishness and Catholicity than Congressman Patrick Kennedy? Sure, now, there couldn’t!
Catholic theologian-wannabe Patrick has now weighed in on the abortion-in-Obamacare controversy and the right of the Catholic Church to express an opinion on the matter: http://bit.ly/zt9Wr.
He declared that the Church is sowing the seeds, “flames of dissent and discord,” he called it, by its opposition to Obamacare simply because Obama’s cure for the nation’s health care issue incorporates provisions for solving any health problems of the pre-born by killing them.
Patrick, Patrick, Patrick, me-boy, are you not aware that the other Irishman, Barack O’Bama, has said abortion will not be incorporated in Obamacare? If not, would you be beating a dead horse?
And, how can you say, “I can’t understand for the life of me how the Catholic Church could be against the biggest social justice issue of our time, where the very dignity of the human person is being respected by the fact that we’re caring and giving health care to the human person–that right now we have 50 million people who are uninsured?”
That number, by the way, seems to grow and blow in the wind.
Patrick, in the immortal words of Irish playwright, Sean O’Casey, surely you don’t believe that “The whole world’s in a state of chassis” or that health care supersedes the issue of killing pre-born babies as “the biggest social issue of our time?”
For the life of me, I can’t fathom your thinking!
Is not ending the lives of some 50,000,000 human beings long before their time more consequential than inaugurating a socialistic welfare program?
Patrick, Patrick, Patrick! . . .
(Read the rest at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1279)
Could there be a finer Irish name than Patrick Kennedy?
Sure and begorrah, there could not, and, Patrick, you’ve done a foine job at presenting yourself, indeed.
Could there be a worse exemplar of Irishness and Catholicity than Congressman Patrick Kennedy? Sure, now, there couldn’t!
Catholic theologian-wannabe Patrick has now weighed in on the abortion-in-Obamacare controversy and the right of the Catholic Church to express an opinion on the matter: http://bit.ly/zt9Wr.
He declared that the Church is sowing the seeds, “flames of dissent and discord,” he called it, by its opposition to Obamacare simply because Obama’s cure for the nation’s health care issue incorporates provisions for solving any health problems of the pre-born by killing them.
Patrick, Patrick, Patrick, me-boy, are you not aware that the other Irishman, Barack O’Bama, has said abortion will not be incorporated in Obamacare? If not, would you be beating a dead horse?
And, how can you say, “I can’t understand for the life of me how the Catholic Church could be against the biggest social justice issue of our time, where the very dignity of the human person is being respected by the fact that we’re caring and giving health care to the human person–that right now we have 50 million people who are uninsured?”
That number, by the way, seems to grow and blow in the wind.
Patrick, in the immortal words of Irish playwright, Sean O’Casey, surely you don’t believe that “The whole world’s in a state of chassis” or that health care supersedes the issue of killing pre-born babies as “the biggest social issue of our time?”
For the life of me, I can’t fathom your thinking!
Is not ending the lives of some 50,000,000 human beings long before their time more consequential than inaugurating a socialistic welfare program?
Patrick, Patrick, Patrick! . . .
(Read the rest at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1279)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)