Hot Air Mobile
Home The Vault Gear About
Hot Air -- get your fill


An open letter to our fellow Catholics on Election Eve

posted at 12:15 pm on November 3, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | regular view

Our Faith Begins At Life

by Edward Morrissey and Elizabeth “The Anchoress” Scalia

Many of our Catholic friends support Barack Obama in the upcoming election, despite being the most radically pro-abortion presidential candidate in American history.  Other Catholics have publicly declared support for Obama as Catholics, arguing that their faith leads them to choose Obama over the pro-life candidate, John McCain.  We believe that they have overlooked in their arguments of “social justice” the foundation of our faith and of social justice: the sanctity of human life, and its origin.

It is not our intent to argue legalistically from the Catechism to our brethren.  We have both covered that extensively in posts over the last few months.  We want to remind our parishioners of the central fact that social justice has to start with the protection of innocent human life, and that our faith does not allow a trade between abortion and other social-justice policies.

A few months ago Doug Kmiec, a former official with the Reagan administration and prominent Catholic, made a public endorsement of Barack Obama and stated that Obama’s noble intentions on a full range of social issues made the Senator’s stance on abortion negligible. As Obama addressed every injustice, righted every wrong and wiped the tear from every eye, Kmiec seemed to reason, all of the complex social ills of the ages, from poverty, to war, to the death penalty and human rights would be suitably resolved and abortion would simply fall by the wayside as an issue.

Except, Obama has said himself that his very first act as President will not be some sweeping anti-poverty legislation; it will not be an end to war. “The first thing I’d do as president” Obama told NARAL, “is sign the Freedom of Choice Act“.

Kmiec’s argument might sound compelling to some – Denver’s Archbishop Charles Chaput admits to having reasoned similarly about Jimmy Carter in 1976 – until one considers Obama’s priorities. Under the heading of “human rights” Obama has made it clear – despite suggesting that the question of when a baby gets human rights as being “above” his “paygrade” – that in his mind a “woman’s right to choose” is a most basic human right; a singular priority. So passionately does Obama believe this that the Senator, who rates a perfect 100% with NARAL, unhesitatingly supports the procedure known as “partial birth abortion,” – an act so nakedly inhumane that his own running mate voted to ban it in 2003. And beyond that savagery, Obama has clearly articulated his position that a baby born alive during an attempted abortion should be refused medical attention.

Logically, then, a President Obama – whose presidency, we are told, will usher in a heyday for fundamental human rights – will always support abortion, even at its most extreme, even when its very definition changes to infanticide.  We have already seen Obama protect infanticide in a disturbing attempt to protect abortion in Illinois, and nothing he has said since shows any change of heart on this question.

The “abortion reduction agenda” which Obama mush-mouths and others, like Kmiec, seem to interpret as they wish, is a kind of “trickle down social economics:” once poverty is eradicated – presumably through higher taxes, higher energy prices, higher unemployment and the redistribution of wealth – once all of the priorities of war, famine, capitalism and injustice are taken care of (this would include absolutely ensuring “a woman’s right to choose” in any circumstance) and all the complex and messy matters of humanity have been sufficiently resolved, well, then the abortion issue will simply melt away.

Excuse us, but we see this as nothing more than fantasy – the mirror image, in fact, of another fantasy, one that holds that a reversal of Roe v. Wade will simply “solve the problem” of abortion. In each case, the fiction is misplaced because it refuses to look at the human heart. President Bush said in 2005, “a true culture of life cannot be sustained solely by changing laws. We need most of all, to change hearts.” He was given grief for that by some pro-lifers, but he was quite correct. Abortion has always existed, and it will always exist, as long as something remains broken within the human heart.

Even beyond this, though, consider why the Church supports social-justice issues.  Our faith does not emphasize fighting poverty and oppression as mere Boy Scout merit badges, or to give Catholics something to do on the weekends.  The emphasis on social justice springs from the foundational belief that all human life is sacred, anointed by God for His purposes, and not ours.  The need for social justice is for us to recognize the spark of divinity in all of us.

What does abortion says about human life?  It reduces it to commodity, and values it based on convenience.  If that is what we think about human life, then that rejects the entire idea that God created humankind at all, let alone for any divine purpose.  Without that fundamental understanding of the faith, then all kinds of horrors become possible — abortion, euthanasia, genocide on massive scales, war for acquisition, and the exploitation of the poor.

Why care about the poor if humans have no divine purpose?  If we can kill millions of our offspring without a second thought, why not leave the poor to their own devices?   Abortion represents the ultimate rejection of God and God’s plan.

And bear in mind that Barack Obama is no moderate on abortion.  The FOCA will federalize the question of abortion with the specific intent of striking down every moderating state law concerning abortion: parental notification, waiting periods, term limitations, and information requirements will end with its passage.  It will also re-impose federal subsidies of abortions by repealing the Hyde Amendment, forcing taxpayers — including Catholics — to pay for the abortions of others.

The question, then, boils down to one of reason: does your reason tell you that Sen. Barack Obama – a mere human being with a thin resume and a seeming propensity for shutting down, punishing, intimidating or otherwise harassing those who do not fall in line (through the force of government, if possible) – is going to heal the human heart through his social programs and his redistributionism?

Matters of the heart are never resolved through worldly machinations. More importantly, to expect a human man – who because he is human carries within him another broken, imperfect heart – to successfully, righteously and most of all disinterestedly resolve issues which have tested mankind for thousands of years is to assign onto him inhuman abilities; this smacks of idolatry and thus flies in the first and most fundamental priority of a believer: to have no gods before the One, the Creator.

Catholicism does not reject reason for faith but demands integration of the two, and prayerful discernment, before taking any action.

One’s vote should come after weighing reason.

Reason tells us that a human fetus is a human being and as such deserves inclusion into the whole notion of “human rights.” A candidate with consistent notions of human rights should be able to acknowledge that.

Reason tells us that an “abortion reduction agenda” is inconsistent with the stated priority of signing into law a sweeping, tax-payer funded abortion-rights legislation.

Reason insists that an ideology embracing the idea of genocide – whether that means eliminating people conceived with an extra chromosome or of wiping a sovereign nation off the map – is a warped ideology that is inconsistent with a commitment to human rights. Reason wonders why an electorate is not permitted to hear what a presumptive president might say to some such ideologues, and reason becomes very uncomfortable.

Reason tells us that one human man will not eradicate poverty. One human man will not eradicate war. One human man will not distribute justice to the nations. History is pockmarked with the graves of those slaughtered to the ambitions of human men who have tried to perfect and justify the world, according to their lights.

Barack Obama – inconsistent though he be – is no Hitler, or a Stalin or a Pol Pot. However, developing a fanciful notion of Obama’s ability to do and be more than man has ever done or been before – based on nothing more than a bit of charisma and an highly overprotective press – is to surrender, rather than apply, one’s use of reason.

Tomorrow is Election Day. By all means, each of us must vote for the candidates we believe will best serve the nation. ACORN aside, you only get one vote. Before your pull the lever, take some time to consider whether you have really applied your God-given gift of reason to it. And as Catholics, consider carefully which candidate best fits within our view of human life and God’s purpose for it.


Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

The pedophile priest issue is a classic example of Liberal policies adopted by the Church in the last 50 years. That’s why Pope Benedict reversed the policy of allowing homosexuals admission into the priesthood.

Preaching the moral doctrine of Intrinsic Evil is “ineffective evangelism”? Are you kidding me?

So the Church should preach from a financially beneficial perspective? Did Jesus not toss out the money changers from the temple?

FiveWays on November 3, 2008 at 1:46 PM
What I’m saying is that the soft touch is the better way to preach against abortion. Many people firmly believe that while life may begin at conception, human rights do not “attach” to the unborn until viability (i.e. the “I don’t want to impose my personal morality on others” people). You are not going to persuade people to dial back abortion rights until you persuade people that human rights begin at conception, too. Angrilly lecturing people on Intrinsic Evil and “you’re going to Hell!!!” does not move the ball.

As for throwing “money changers” from temples… Capitalism creates the most wealth and prosperity of any type of economic system known to man. Doesn’t it bother you that the Catholic Church preaches democratic socialism as the ideal political ideology? The idea that Christianity compels the government to rob from those who produce wealth to distribute, via an indirect, unaccountable, half-assed system, to those who do not produce wealth?

Outlander on November 3, 2008 at 2:11 PM

He’s not a socialist; that’s just a last-minute attempt by McCain to try to knock him off his game. ***
username on November 3, 2008 at 2:11 PM

He wants to effect “redistributive change.” He wants to “spread the wealth around.” He wants to nationalize the health insurance industry (and, eventually, the health care industry). He believes that opposition to high taxes reflects “greed.” He openly advocates bankrupting entire industries for no reason apart from a dislike of CO2 emissions. His supporters want to nationalize the banks and 401(k) plans. He supports radical pro-union bills like Card Check.

He fits the definition of a democratic socialist to me. I expect him to rule this country in a manner reminiscent of Hugo Chavez. Look out!!

Outlander on November 3, 2008 at 2:14 PM

Bogeyfre on November 3, 2008 at 1:52 PM

You’re asking about religious folks. That is quite a different person that one who has a relationship with God. If you look, there are religious folks who blow themselves up and commit murder.

The young person you are talking about has allowed God to come into some rooms (if indeed she has at all, I don’t know.) It is very easy to “follow a few rules and Heaven is yours!” That allows a person to “pick and choose” what they will follow or not.

The lady has not followed the thought to its ultimate conclusion. God is not interested in rules – He is interested in souls.

One frightening scene (and heart-breaking as well) is where Christ tells us that there are those who call themselves by His name by He never knew them.
What is truly sad, is when He turns them away, He will have more tears than they will. Like someone mentioned about throwing stones, it is not for us to wonder about this young woman’s heart, but our own. We need to be sure we are right before God first, then we can see what needs to be done.

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 2:15 PM

username

You do not know what a socialist is.. I suggest you get a dictionary fast! You are one of those Obamabots to clog up conservative sites.. Stop with the Republicans lie BS.. I have had enough, the only lies are every word that comes out of Obama’s mouth…
Frankly, we on this site actually work to earn a living… get away and collect your dole (look it up,too)

beththebaker on November 3, 2008 at 2:17 PM

beththebaker on November 3, 2008 at 12:36 PM

Sorry Beth, I am concerned it could come down to something like that. My parents survived the 1st go round of those in Germany. I don’t intend to go and will leave or die fighting it if it came to that.

skatz51 on November 3, 2008 at 2:19 PM

He’s not a socialist; that’s just a last-minute attempt by McCain to try to knock him off his game. Obama told his supporters like myself that he would be called names the last few days of this election. But God knows McCain is only lying for political reasons.

username on November 3, 2008 at 2:11 PM

McCain never said BO was Socialist. Was after BO’S true colors came out. We saw the tape no National TV. I love how empty your excuses are. He is a Socialist! A communist! they are all the same. Did you read both of his books? Oh, You Liberal’s have a way of reading and changing facts in your minds. Forgot that. Name a reason why you are for BO. And don’t give me the Change and hope shi& either! What has he done? Besides being a present Senator for 143 days?

sheebe on November 3, 2008 at 2:19 PM

Very thoughtful and cogently argued post Ed & Elizabeth.

dedalus on November 3, 2008 at 2:20 PM

By the way, Obama is a socialist (if not out-right Communist) telling others what to do and how to vote is intrenched in that mindset. Your protest is hilarious!

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 1:36 PM

He’s not a socialist; that’s just a last-minute attempt by McCain to try to knock him off his game. Obama told his supporters like myself that he would be called names the last few days of this election. But God knows McCain is only lying for political reasons.

username on November 3, 2008 at 2:11 PM

Share the wealth? Ever hear of it. That is a Socialist idea. The idea is nobody has a right to his or her own wealth – apart from the good of the group.
If I said I was going to kill people, and told you that others would call me a homicidal maniac, you’d be smart to believe me. Duh!

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 2:22 PM

He’s not a socialist; that’s just a last-minute attempt by McCain to try to knock him off his game. Obama told his supporters like myself that he would be called names the last few days of this election. But God knows McCain is only lying for political reasons.

username on November 3, 2008 at 2:11 PM

oh yeah communist revolutionary Ayers supports obama a capitalist pig…right.

right4life on November 3, 2008 at 2:22 PM

skatz51 on November 3, 2008 at 2:19 PM
9 out of 11 of my great grandfather’s brothers and their whole families perished… i have two young kids.. my husband and i have been talking about possible Militias… I will fight like hell…. Our relatives didn’t risk their lives almost 100 years ago to come to the land of opportunity only to have their desendents “fundamentaly transform” this nation!
We can’t let it happen!

beththebaker on November 3, 2008 at 2:24 PM

It’s absolutely amazing that Obama is polling so well among Catholics. His extreme views on abortion should be a huge strike against him with that voting block. But just like Jewish voters who ignore his pro-Palestinian friends, many Catholic voters will ignore his support for abortion.

Pistol Pete on November 3, 2008 at 2:24 PM

Wanted to say this the Open Letter was magnificent! I feel the Catholic Church got a lot of bad press for years. Don’t mean that they are the only ones though. There are good and bad in every Church. Some brilliant postings also.

sheebe on November 3, 2008 at 2:26 PM

Beth, you are right! We cannot let that happen here.

Actually, an armed populous is one of the deterrents to it happening here.

Thank God and the Constitution!

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 2:26 PM

Jews and Catholics both overwhelmingly support Obama because both groups overwhelmingly vote liberal, despite the cognitive dissonance that ignores his support for anti-Semites and his support for abortion. For most Jews and Catholics, this is not enough to turn them away from their inherent ideological bias.

The Catholic Church in the 20th century has a strong force for left of center thought on virtually every major issue; anti-war, pro-welfare, anti-big business, pro-union, anti-death penalty, pro-immigration, and pro social-justice. So Catholics are not bucking their Church when they vote democrat. Far from it. Abortion is the only issue that bucks that trend, and in light of society’s diminishing moral base, that one issue is even less important to Catholics, and as such can not hope to trump all the other issues with which they are in sync with the democrat ideology.

As far as Jews, well, the secular ones are very liberal and do not view terrorism, or the arabs that perpetrate it, as being an existential threat. To them it is only a distraction. Even orthodox Jews find it distasteful to vote right of center. Many feel they have more in common with Osama bin laden, than George Bush. Ironically, culturally, historically, even religiously, they do. Even in Israel, where Jews are really under constant threat, at least half of them remain committed to liberal ideologies and view the arabs as sort of their maddening, but lovable, oafish uncle – someone they fight with everyday, but for whom they will go to bat for if necessary.

In other words, old habits die hard.

keep the change on November 3, 2008 at 2:28 PM

It is hard being a Catholic at times. For example, while the whole Pro Life issue is compatible, Outlander above cites the whole socialism issue. The Pope was bashing Capitalism 2 weeks ago. So, yes, it is hard at times being a Catholic, or at least an educated and politically independent one. I think, though, that the Pro Life issue trumps the whole socialist one in Church teachings. Someone needs to educate the Pope and his hierarchy though on the socialism thing. While the early Christian communities and many ascetic communities were essentially socialist in nature, I think that they ought to take John Paul II’s experience in Eastern Europe under Communism, and his subsequent taking down of that system with the help of Reagan, Thatcher, and others, into more thoughtful account before condemning capitalism or boosting socialism.

It is my firm view that religion suffers more under socialist regimes and systems. The Church should know this for you know who’s sake. (sigh again)

BTW our new young (Irish American) pastor (RC Priest) has been saying a lot lately in the lead up to the election, on abortion and “respecting life” and for us to consider that. He can’t say vote for so and so, but he is really pushing the abortion guilt buttons HARD. Funny though that he is a legendary Springsteen fan. LOL!

worlok on November 3, 2008 at 2:31 PM

We are in agreement Beth. I grew up without many Aunts, Uncles, or Grandparents because they were murdered by the State, in the camps.

Camps which were State-sanctioned and lawful from the State’s perspective. It could happen here, it could be starting now, if obama wins. He is a cypher, we know nothing about him. The media has covered up much for him. The masses mindlessly cheer him on because of the free rides he promises.

I will weep for America and what she will become.

skatz51 on November 3, 2008 at 2:33 PM

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 2:26 PM

for now… think about a trifecta of power… let’s say Obama appoints Supremes, had fillibuster proof majorities..whose to say he couldn’t change the constitution? In as little as one year, America as we know could look a lot like Cuba. Scary, huh?

beththebaker on November 3, 2008 at 2:33 PM

Jews and Catholics both overwhelmingly support Obama because both groups overwhelmingly vote liberal, despite the cognitive dissonance that ignores his support for anti-Semites and his support for abortion. For most Jews and Catholics, this is not enough to turn them away from their inherent ideological bias.

keep the change on November 3, 2008 at 2:28 PM

The latest IBD poll shows the majority of Jews supporting Obama, and the majority of Catholics for McCain.

As of yesterday, they show only 38% of Catholics for Obama, with 51% for McCain and 11% undecided.

Among Jews, 78% were for obama, 19% for mcCain, 3% undecided.

The numbers for both groups have varied considerably over the past week. I will be very interested to see the final results. I would think that at least one criteria for choosing/belonging to a particular religion would be to know if your fellow parishoners/congregants are morons or not.

JiangxiDad on November 3, 2008 at 2:35 PM

Jews and Catholics both overwhelmingly support Obama because both groups overwhelmingly vote liberal

keep the change on November 3, 2008 at 2:28 PM

Catholics are almost evenly split between Obama and McCain according to the polls I’ve seen. See for example:

Oct 13, 2008 / 04:40 pm (CNA).- A new Zogby poll claims that the presidential race between Republican Sen. John McCain and Democrat Sen. Barack Obama is again narrowing, with Monday results showing Obama leading McCain 47.9 percent to 43.6 percent. Obama enjoys a slightly greater lead among Catholics.
Among self-described Catholics, Obama leads by 49.5 percent to 44.3 percent

I would be interested to know who “self-described Catholics” are. My guess is that includes a lot of non-practicing Catholics.

Historically, Catholics have voted for both parties. See my earlier post on this thread.

Y-not on November 3, 2008 at 2:37 PM

Think about it, he already has the majority of the media as propagandists and any “unfriendly” media outlet get punished.. he will have no opposition to the “fairness doctrine” ,he has Joe the Plumber “investigated” for speaking out (freedom of speech?) next will be outlawing guns.. then..?
Right out of the communist handbook.

beththebaker on November 3, 2008 at 2:38 PM

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 2:08 PM

I think I am largely in agreement with N4646W. In each religion, there is a mythology (assertions about history and metaphysics), ceremony (gathering, celebrations, etc.), and morality (how a person should act).
I am interested in the morality (not so much the mythology, or ceremony), and I imagine that N4646W is the same.
It is the morality of Christianity that figures heavily in the Constitution, not the mythology or the ceremony.

Count to 10 on November 3, 2008 at 2:39 PM

As of yesterday, they show only 38% of Catholics for Obama, with 51% for McCain and 11% undecided.

JiangxiDad on November 3, 2008 at 2:35 PM

That’s great news!

I think Obama’s camp is worried. I’ve gotten some “no more Bush” emails today. If they are having to revive that old theme, they’re in trouble.

Y-not on November 3, 2008 at 2:39 PM

If you really want to know someone’s charecter, look at how he or she treats or considers the most helpless or unfortunate.

Can we really afford the kind of hope and change we’ll get from a man who doesn’t mind the killing of the least amoung us? If he cares not for them, what makes anyone think he really cares for the rest of us?

See now how we’ll be cogs in the machine. Easily warn out, easily replaced. No one cries over lost cogs.

karl9000 on November 3, 2008 at 2:40 PM

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 2:26 PM

for now… think about a trifecta of power… let’s say Obama appoints Supremes, had fillibuster proof majorities..whose to say he couldn’t change the constitution? In as little as one year, America as we know could look a lot like Cuba. Scary, huh?

beththebaker on November 3, 2008 at 2:33 PM

Eventually, the world gets a lot scarier than it is now. The Bible explains that in Revelation.
However, your point – though cogent and scary – neglects a couple of things.
1. An armed populous (along this line, an army that despite the press about them – has never been an army of conquering, but a force for good.)
2. To change the Constitution will take more than “power Trifecta” – it takes votes and states.

I agree the idea is horrifying and beyond imagining. One day it will indeed happen, but it won’t be this election cycle – Thank God!

Socialism has happened here and still goes on – limitedly. Fascism still has a way to go for a real foothold here.

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 2:41 PM

Very thoughtful and cogently argued post Ed & Elizabeth.

dedalus on November 3, 2008 at 2:20 PM

Ditto. Courage, wisdom and fidelity have diminished in modern times and the future of reason and faith is in doubt. The meaning of virtue has changed – it now means the surrender of free thought. The government knows best. Kinda scary.

Fuquay Steve on November 3, 2008 at 2:41 PM

That’s great news!

I think Obama’s camp is worried. I’ve gotten some “no more Bush” emails today. If they are having to revive that old theme, they’re in trouble.

Y-not on November 3, 2008 at 2:39 PM

If it is accurate, it is indeed good news. There are so many Catholics–it could make a great difference.

Fwiw, I don’t think Obama will get as many Jewish votes as kerry. Kerry got approx. 70% I believe.

JiangxiDad on November 3, 2008 at 2:41 PM

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 2:15 PM

The young person you are talking about has allowed God to come into some rooms (if indeed she has at all, I don’t know.) It is very easy to “follow a few rules and Heaven is yours!” That allows a person to “pick and choose” what they will follow or not.

So we can “pick and choose”? No sarcasm meant, but I missed that memo.

Thanks….

Bogeyfre on November 3, 2008 at 2:42 PM

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 2:41 PM

I hope it won’t… I hope you are right, but the influence and power this guy already enjoys, before he is even elected, is just a preview of what would be under an Obama administration. I am adding to my gun collection regardless.
I hope this moot… we’ll know after tomorrow.

beththebaker on November 3, 2008 at 2:47 PM

I think I am largely in agreement with N4646W. In each religion, there is a mythology (assertions about history and metaphysics), ceremony (gathering, celebrations, etc.), and morality (how a person should act).
I am interested in the morality (not so much the mythology, or ceremony), and I imagine that N4646W is the same.
It is the morality of Christianity that figures heavily in the Constitution, not the mythology or the ceremony.

Count to 10 on November 3, 2008 at 2:39 PM

You are so right! That is exactly how my husband put it. Why I love him so much.

sheebe on November 3, 2008 at 2:48 PM

You mean Deism?
deism isn’t the founding philosphy of this government. calling all the founders deists is an atheist tactic.

Thank you right4life, real history lessons (instead of revisionist history) proves your point. Here are a few quotes from our Founding Fathers that show they were NOT deists (those who think God is out there somewhere but not present among us or concerned with the daily affairs of men).
“And now, Almighty Father, if it is Thy holy will that we shall obtain a place and name among the nations of the earth, grant that we may be enabled to show our gratitude for Thy goodness by our endeavors to fear and obey Thee. Bless us with Thy wisdom in our counsels, success in battle, and let all our victories be tempered with humanity.” George Washington, June 1779

“In the beginning of the Contest with G. Britain [Revolutionary War], when we were sensible of danger, we had daily prayer in this room for Divine protection. Our prayers, Sir were heard & they were graciously answered. All of us who were engaged in the struggle must have observed frequent instances of a superintending Providence [God] in our favor.” Benjamin Franklin, June 1787 as he urged the Constitutional Convention to pray. (A deist does not believe that God answers prayer.)

“Almighty God, Who has given us this good land for our heritage; We humbly beseech Thee that we may always prove ourselves a people mindful of Thy favor and glad to do Thy will. Bless our land with honorable ministry, sound learning, and pure manners. Save us from violence, discord, and confusion, from pride and arrogance, and from every evil way. Defend our liberties and fashion into one united people the multitude brought hither out of many kindreds and tongues.” Thomas Jefferson, March, 1805.
Revisionist history tells us that all three of these men were deists, but their own writings and speeches deny that! And we could go on with those as much as or more devoted to Christ: John Adams, John Quincy Adams, John Jay, Alexander Hamilton, etc., etc., etc.
Finally, “We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal. That they are endowed BY THEIR CREATOR with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” No wonder the teachers unions want to remove the Declaration of Independence from the walls of our schools!

Christian Conservative on November 3, 2008 at 2:49 PM

Count to 10 on November 3, 2008 at 2:39 PM

When it comes to a document like the Constitution, I wholeheartedly agree with both of you – Christian Philosophy all the way. We are not meant to be ruled by a theocracy. What I meant, and obviously failed to convey, is in daily life, just a Christian Philosophy does not cut it consistently enough to not get corrupted.

Secular document for a secular society? Perfection! Or as close as it is getting on this planet, before His return. It is a foundation that can stand the test of time – proof is how this country has fared.

Personal life and day to day – it is easily corrupted to personal beliefs apart from the One those principles are based on.

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 2:49 PM

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 2:08 PM

Read my initial post, I am an Atheist, therefore I do not believe in a Deity. But I do chose to guide my decisions buy the Christian principals and/or philosophy as they were initially set forth. Because I do not believe in a Deity, does not mean that I cannot believe in or should desire to change the basic philosophy used to set forth this nation and to set it apart from other nations. Therefore if I or anyone wishes to change these principals, are they not in effect subverting the basic principals and philosophy of this nation? This was the point I was trying to get across, the Constitution and its basic principals and philosophy do not fit Obama’s needs or agenda, therefore he is subverting the basic principals and philosophy of this nation as it was derived.

N4646W on November 3, 2008 at 2:52 PM

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 2:15 PM

The young person you are talking about has allowed God to come into some rooms (if indeed she has at all, I don’t know.) It is very easy to “follow a few rules and Heaven is yours!” That allows a person to “pick and choose” what they will follow or not.

So we can “pick and choose”? No sarcasm meant, but I missed that memo.

Thanks….

Bogeyfre on November 3, 2008 at 2:42 PM

Okay, maybe I was not clear enough, and for that I apologize. I meant that the person has chosen to follow a few of the rules, not the Maker of those rules. We think we can pick and choose.
God repeatedly in the Old Testament punishes Israel for not only doing that, but for showing others that they can do it as well. He does not want our lip-service. He wants our devotion. If I say that I love my wife, but cheat on her, do I really love her?
We are inconsistent human beings, but the whole person needs to be considered here. She may be simply fooled in this one area, but otherwise a true Christian or she may be completely fooled altogether and not even know Christ at all.
Don’t know. Just saying that some folks think they can pick and choose – they’re sadly mistaken.

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 2:55 PM

On the subject of “social justice,” I don’t see how the marxist redistribution of resources serves this at all. This is not the feudal age: in the US, more than any other place in the world, wealth comes to those who generate it. Oh, sure, there is the odd playboy (or girl) heir to wealth, but all that means is that their benefactors found their happiness to be worth that much.
If you still want to benefit those who are not as wealthy, you can use your own resources in any number of ways you see fit to benefit them directly. It is immoral, however, to use those resources leverage money taken by the force of government to satisfy your desire for charity. I dare say it is even more immoral for one of said pour to get together and try to leverage said government to give them the benefit of the resources the government collects.

So, don’t go all “Obama would be fine if not for abortion” on me. At this time, the Democrats represent the collection of all that is immoral in this country.

Count to 10 on November 3, 2008 at 2:58 PM

Finally, “We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal. That they are endowed BY THEIR CREATOR with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” No wonder the teachers unions want to remove the Declaration of Independence from the walls of our schools!

Christian Conservative on November 3, 2008 at 2:49 PM

The quotes from Jefferson and from the Declaration seem to reinforce his Deism. The Declaration points to a Creator, but not the doctrine of a specific sect, nor does it look to revelation in scripture for guidance.

dedalus on November 3, 2008 at 3:02 PM

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 2:08 PM

Read my initial post, I am an Atheist, therefore I do not believe in a Deity. But I do chose to guide my decisions buy the Christian principals and/or philosophy as they were initially set forth. Because I do not believe in a Deity, does not mean that I cannot believe in or should desire to change the basic philosophy used to set forth this nation and to set it apart from other nations. Therefore if I or anyone wishes to change these principals, are they not in effect subverting the basic principals and philosophy of this nation? This was the point I was trying to get across, the Constitution and its basic principals and philosophy do not fit Obama’s needs or agenda, therefore he is subverting the basic principals and philosophy of this nation as it was derived.

N4646W on November 3, 2008 at 2:52 PM

N4646W (is that a coordinate by the way?)
I got that you are a declared Atheist. That is why I said as a fellow defender of the Constitution – greeted you as a brother in fact. You feel it works because it has a good foundation. I agree with you there too.
Seriously, all I was saying that I disagree that it was the principles that make the document in question a lasting thing – I think it is the Person. Do I think this is a Christian nation? Nope, never has been. A nation founded on those principles – you betcha!
Yes, I think Obama – because he is not a Christian, but perhaps a Christian Philosopher, wants to change the Constitution to suite a purpose that not only contradicts what its Founders believed, thought, and died for, but is NOT Christian at all, but the antithesis of Christian Philosophy.

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 3:03 PM

Lest we all forget, this is the reason why we have a separation of Church and State. For those of you who are devout history buffs, recall that of those that signed the constitution and drafted it, some were considered to be atheist or agnostic, yet they guided by Christian principals and philosophy in doing so.

N4646W on November 3, 2008 at 3:06 PM

“We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal.”..No wonder the teachers unions want to remove the Declaration of Independence from the walls of our schools!

Maybe its the bad grammar.
/

Count to 10 on November 3, 2008 at 3:06 PM

So, don’t go all “Obama would be fine if not for abortion” on me. At this time, the Democrats represent the collection of all that is immoral in this country.

Count to 10 on November 3, 2008 at 2:58 PM

Egads, on this I whole-heartedly agree with you as well. If Obama were as Right-to-Life as Billy Graham, I still would never vote for him!

One is the War on Terror – uhm – we still have enemies. But even more than that – The Supreme Court! I would never allow this person, if I can help it, to chose justices to suite his nature.

Never.

Then, there is his talk of dismantling the Constitution! There is no America apart from that document. Why is it that people do not understand that?

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 3:07 PM

Great post! Lutheran dittos to my Catholic brothers and sisters.

WWCathodeRay on November 3, 2008 at 3:09 PM

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 2:55 PM

Ok, we’re on the same page.

That is the crux of my concerns with her and many liberals. She used her religion to extol her virtues on one issue than ignores it for others.

That causes me not to trust your judgment and integrity.

Bogeyfre on November 3, 2008 at 3:13 PM

N4646W on November 3, 2008 at 3:06 PM

Okay, not going to walk into the “Separation of Church and State” – nope, wouldn’t be prudent.

Dang…okay, that “Wall” exists to keep the government away from the Church. The founders wanted worship protected for the worshippers. They wanted Freedoms, not bondage for either the Church or the State.

The founding principals are concerned about inalienable rights – not rights granted from the State, but rights inherent to all men granted by their Creator. This only gets to be a sticky wicket if we insist on Who the creator is or if there is one at all. It actually has not place in a discussion on the Constitution, as long as we are talking about it – not why it works.
Apart from its Source, if the Source were fake or non-existent, then it would have failed, it would simply be a construct of men’s ideas.
However, its Source is a Living Being in Whom all Truth resides; therefore, our beloved Constitution has a Living Foundation, but is NOT a living document.
You want to change it – follow the rules!

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 3:13 PM

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 3:03 PM

Then we have no disagreement other than Obama being a Christian Philosopher.

Now, how do “We the People” get this nation back on track?

N4646W on November 3, 2008 at 3:15 PM

N4646W (is that a coordinate by the way?)

It’s an N number for a plane he/she is a pilot. In fact a SCHWEIZER SHU-40B. Just a guess……….

Bogeyfre on November 3, 2008 at 3:18 PM

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 2:55 PM

Ok, we’re on the same page.

That is the crux of my concerns with her and many liberals. She used her religion to extol her virtues on one issue than ignores it for others.

That causes me not to trust your judgment and integrity.

Bogeyfre on November 3, 2008 at 3:13 PM

I assume that last is a statement of explanation and not a rebuttal.

I agree, just like Sheebe is concerned about hypocrisy, I have to wonder when someone professes to belief in something, but only parts. Then that person really does not believe in it at all.

Personally, I am not exactly a shimmering example of a follower of Christ. I fail and fail and fail – a lot. He did not make perfect creations of Himself. He died to free us from our sinful natures. He rose from the dead so that that freedom can be had for certain. We, on the other hand, in our finite understanding and day-to-day lives make choices. We can either follow Him or our own sinful flesh.
The closer we follow Him, and not our own “rules” the clearer that way becomes.
In the prayer He modeled for us, He talked about our daily bread. We tend to only use that bread once and awhile, instead of daily.
The bread being our coming to Him daily for our needs, cares, confession, and petitions.

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 3:20 PM

Now, how do “We the People” get this nation back on track?

N4646W on November 3, 2008 at 3:15 PM

Rejecting Obama would be a good start.
After that? Personally, I think the federal government needs to get out out the “Domestic Policy” business. Take everything the federal government is doing in terms of welfare, social security, etc, and the taxes that pay for them, and divvy it out to the states. The military is the one expense that congress is justified in making.

Count to 10 on November 3, 2008 at 3:22 PM

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 3:20 PM

LOL, sorry not you, it was directed at her and liberals like her..

Bogeyfre on November 3, 2008 at 3:24 PM

Bogeyfre on November 3, 2008 at 3:18 PM

Yes, that was the numbers on his plane. Great eye you have. Are you a fellow pilot?

sheebe on November 3, 2008 at 3:26 PM

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 3:03 PM

Then we have no disagreement other than Obama being a Christian Philosopher.

Now, how do “We the People” get this nation back on track?

N4646W on November 3, 2008 at 3:15 PM

One – VOTE!

The other is simply acknowledging that the principals you and I both value – and others as well, are not about religion. They are about how to live in a way that is beneficial to others.
It is not about prayers in schools – which by the way never actually left, it just stopped being mandated. It is about realizing that human being need a humane concept of our nation and ourselves.
The Founding Fathers got that. Education for them was paramount. Not multiculturalism, but actual philosophy, science, history, and literature. This country needs to be put back on track, by simply ceasing the “derailment” in culture, education, and in government itself.
Put the legislative powers of the Supreme Court back into the legislature where it belongs. Remove government from things it has no business being in!
Any of these working for you?

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 3:27 PM

N4646W (is that a coordinate by the way?)

It’s an N number for a plane he/she is a pilot. In fact a SCHWEIZER SHU-40B. Just a guess……….

Bogeyfre on November 3, 2008 at 3:18 PM

Thanks for the explanation. I had not realized that.

Know your planes do you?

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 3:28 PM

Bogeyfre on November 3, 2008 at 3:18 PM

Those were the tail numbers of my old Rockwell Commander. It has been decommisioned in the states and presently resides in Mexico. From what I can tell, the SHU-40B is an experimental, to which the tail number have now been assigned. Have not been able to garner further info on it. N4646W was often referred to as “Whisky Runner” by tower and ground personel. Logged over 3000 hours in her, a great portion in Mexico.

N4646W on November 3, 2008 at 3:31 PM

sheebe on November 3, 2008 at 3:26 PM

Once held a Lighter than Air license for Hot Air Balloons. It was a long time ago, a company I worked for used them at Grand Openings and such…….

Bogeyfre on November 3, 2008 at 3:31 PM

What I’m saying is that the soft touch is the better way to preach against abortion. Many people firmly believe that while life may begin at conception, human rights do not “attach” to the unborn until viability (i.e. the “I don’t want to impose my personal morality on others” people). You are not going to persuade people to dial back abortion rights until you persuade people that human rights begin at conception, too. Angrilly lecturing people on Intrinsic Evil and “you’re going to Hell!!!” does not move the ball.

you seem to be confusing religious doctrine with political pandering. If people do not believe the Church’s doctrine that life begins at conception- THEN WHY ARE THEY IN THE CHURCH IN THE FIRST PLACE? Did Christ use a “soft touch”?

The entire reason the Catholic Church is even divided on abortion is precisely because it had too many priest who have used a soft touch in the past.

How on earth do you “persuade” the mind that believes human rights do not “attach” to ALL LIFE?

How do you persuade the mind that believes that the defence of innocent life is not to be imposed on others?

If they’re not convinced by now- then get out.

FiveWays on November 3, 2008 at 3:32 PM

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 3:20 PM

I misunderstood your first answer. Being I been sick over the thought of BO winning. I profusely apologize to you. You have some excellent views.

sheebe on November 3, 2008 at 4:32 PM

Great post.

Obama talks a big game about social justice, but he is against funding faith based initiatives. How can one truly support the Catholic concept of social justice while refusing to acknowledge the legitimacy and necessity of the role of faith based providers of charity–the MOST fiscally efficient proponents and providers?

The concept of a non-sectarian/secular government does not preclude the existence and role of religion in our society. It precludes state endorsement of religion. As we see by different PAC’s donating money to political opponents, it is evident that in US society, giving money to an organization is not tantamount to an endorsement.

It is in the interest of the Catholic Church [not only on the issue of life and social justice] to vote for McCain-Palin who support government contracts with fiscally efficient faith-based initiatives over expensive government bureaucracy. Capitalism and privatization does in fact benefit the Catholic Church.

tmq on November 3, 2008 at 3:33 PM

Barack Obama – inconsistent though he be – is no Hitler, or a Stalin or a Pol Pot. However, developing a fanciful notion of Obama’s ability to do and be more than man has ever done or been before – based on nothing more than a bit of charisma and an highly overprotective press – is to surrender, rather than apply, one’s use of reason.

This is superb stuff. But it needed to be said sooner, by more people and it also needed to be said loudly by a Catholic hierarchy that is currently too cowed into submission.

schiehallion on November 3, 2008 at 3:43 PM

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 3:20 PM

I misunderstood your first answer. Being I been sick over the thought of BO winning. I profusely apologize to you. You have some excellent views.

sheebe on November 3, 2008 at 4:32 PM

I’m just glad I had not offended. I too am heartsick at the idea of Dark Barry winning the election.

However, I honestly believe that it will be a 40 state victory if not all 50 states, with those 7 of Barry’s to boot!

And thank you for your compliment.

(If I understood correctly you and N4646W are husband and wife? Just curious and making sure I got that right)

Enjoyed talking with you. I think Hot Air is an enjoyable place to vent – pun intended – in a respectful, thoughtful way.

Of course, being snarky does overwhelm me from time to time (laugh)

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 3:44 PM

The entire reason the Catholic Church is even divided on abortion is precisely because it had too many priest who have used a soft touch in the past.

If they’re not convinced by now- then get out.

FiveWays on November 3, 2008 at 3:32 PM

A Catholic’s faith consists of more than a vote in a single election over a single issue. If a Catholic comes to a reasoned judgment on how to vote in a particular election, they might be incorrect but they don’t cease to practice the rest of their faith.

We should be wary of looking for too much Vatican involvement in the U.S. voting booth. As a nation we aren’t going to outlaw everything the Vatican considers intrinsically evil.

dedalus on November 3, 2008 at 3:44 PM

N4646W on November 3, 2008 at 3:31 PM

“Whiskey Running” in Mexico sounds like fun…:)

Bogeyfre on November 3, 2008 at 3:44 PM

Check out this article on the devastating impact to Catholic hospitals.

lclark1706 on November 3, 2008 at 3:45 PM

A Catholic’s faith consists of more than a vote in a single election over a single issue.

dedalus on November 3, 2008 at 3:44 PM

It’s no longer good enough for Catholics to cop out on abortion. Look at the opposition. The minute they knew Palin was anti-abortion she was done for by the feminists and the liberals. For the opposition abortion is the single defining issue.

It’s time Catholics showed the same singularity of purpose in standing up for what is truly important.

schiehallion on November 3, 2008 at 3:52 PM

It’s time Catholics showed the same singularity of purpose in standing up for what is truly important.

schiehallion on November 3, 2008 at 3:52 PM

I agree with the point that a Catholic should vote against abortion and Obama, but those who claim that a vote in a given election can invalidate a lifetime of faith are either overstating their case or don’t understand the scope of faith in a Catholic’s life.

dedalus on November 3, 2008 at 3:56 PM

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 3:03 PM

Then we have no disagreement other than Obama being a Christian Philosopher.

Now, how do “We the People” get this nation back on track?

N4646W on November 3, 2008 at 3:15 PM

I will concede he is a Christian Philosopher as long as we agree he is not a philosopher who is a Christian in carrying out his agenda. Those are two different things. Not trying to nitpick, just clarifying the cases.

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 4:01 PM

A Catholic’s faith consists of more than a vote in a single election over a single issue. If a Catholic comes to a reasoned judgment on how to vote in a particular election, they might be incorrect but they don’t cease to practice the rest of their faith.

We should be wary of looking for too much Vatican involvement in the U.S. voting booth. As a nation we aren’t going to outlaw everything the Vatican considers intrinsically evil.

dedalus on November 3, 2008 at 3:44 PM

See this. This is exactly what I’m talking about. Abortion isn’t just a single issue with the same moral relevance as any other issue. It is intrinsically evil. There is no debate. There is no grey area. What reasoned judgement can a Catholic come to that would override 2000 years of wisdom, meditation, mysticism, reason and rationale, based on Jesus Christ and the Holy Sacred Scriptures?

And your faith should come BEFORE your country. Especially when Ceasar has passed laws that are in direct violation of God’s laws and the Natural Law.

Again I say- the Church needs to lose all these confused “catholics”. It would be better to have fewer Catholics, than to have Catholics who follow heresy.

FiveWays on November 3, 2008 at 4:01 PM

Again I say- the Church needs to lose all these confused “catholics”. It would be better to have fewer Catholics, than to have Catholics who follow heresy.

FiveWays on November 3, 2008 at 4:01 PM

Is your point that Catholics must push for U.S. laws against everything their faith tells them is intrinsically evil?

dedalus on November 3, 2008 at 4:06 PM

I agree with the point that a Catholic should vote against abortion and Obama, but those who claim that a vote in a given election can invalidate a lifetime of faith are either overstating their case or don’t understand the scope of faith in a Catholic’s life.

dedalus on November 3, 2008 at 3:56 PM

On the contrary, those who minimize a vote for a candidate who openly opposes all limits on abortion (when a pro-life candidate option is available) share the guilt of the abortion activists and wears the blood of the innocent on their hands.

This culture of death has been sold to the masses as some sort of merciful act borne out of moral equivalence and justified by an imaginary separation of the immortal soul and the State. This heresy needs to end, now.

FiveWays on November 3, 2008 at 4:12 PM

Is your point that Catholics must push for U.S. laws against everything their faith tells them is intrinsically evil?

dedalus on November 3, 2008 at 4:06 PM

Only if there are laws promoting intrinsic evil.

FiveWays on November 3, 2008 at 4:13 PM

Only if there are laws promoting intrinsic evil.

FiveWays on November 3, 2008 at 4:13 PM

Laws that provide for the commercial sale of contraceptive products?

dedalus on November 3, 2008 at 4:19 PM

Catholic single issue voter here.

Vote McCain/Palin

Annie on November 3, 2008 at 4:25 PM

Laws that provide for the commercial sale of contraceptive products?

dedalus on November 3, 2008 at 4:19 PM

Oooooooo What a gotcha!

I certainly have seen that aurgument before…..no wait….yes I have.

In fact, Ed pointed out the distinction:

Just to anticipate an argument that arose in earlier threads, the Catholic Church also opposes contraception, at least artificial methods of contraception. That gets two mentions in the catechism, paragraphs 2370 and 2399. Note, though, that the Church does not apply excommunication as a latae sententiae consequence of using contraception, and in fact never mentions a penalty at all, other than being in sin. That demonstrates the seriousness with which the Church takes abortion; it considers it a form of murder.

FiveWays on November 3, 2008 at 4:31 PM

Should have been:

I certainly haven’t seen that aurgument before…..no wait….yes I have.

FiveWays on November 3, 2008 at 4:32 PM

This culture of death has been sold to the masses as some sort of merciful act borne out of moral equivalence and justified by an imaginary separation of the immortal soul and the State. This heresy needs to end, now.

FiveWays on November 3, 2008 at 4:12 PM

Except it’s not and another 10 million abortions will be performed over the next decade plus. Even if McCain wins and gets a couple of appointments–say replaces Stevens and Ginsburg–the court might not overturn precedent. If they do overturn Roe and send it back to the states, it is a certainty that NY and CA (and many others) quickly enact laws to provide abortion rights. At best a couple of states outlaw all abortions, but what does that achieve?

I agree that a Catholic should vote against Obama on the abortion issue, but one who doesn’t might realize that there isn’t a political process that can end abortions in the U.S. within their lifetime and they may choose a non-political path to reducing abortions rather than only cast a vote to relieve their conscience for 4 years.

dedalus on November 3, 2008 at 4:32 PM

Thank you both so much for your excellent plea for sanity, Ed and Anchoress.

A point to make to all our fellow voters: From 1974 (Roe v Wade) to sometime in 1990, over 22 million children were aborted who would have been eligible to vote in this election. Let’s vote on behalf of those who can’t.

Rosmerta on November 3, 2008 at 4:35 PM

dedalus on November 3, 2008 at 4:32 PM

No excuse for not fighting the good fight. No matter how little victory. No matter how long it takes. When we face the Lord, he will want to know; “What did you do to fight the good fight?”

FiveWays on November 3, 2008 at 4:36 PM

Thank you both so much for your excellent plea for sanity, Ed and Anchoress.

A point to make to all our fellow voters: From 1974 (Roe v Wade) to sometime in 1990, over 22 million children were aborted who would have been eligible to vote in this election. Let’s vote on behalf of those who can’t.

Rosmerta on November 3, 2008 at 4:35 PM

I think you are confusing us with the Democrats. They vote dead people; we don’t.

unclesmrgol on November 3, 2008 at 4:38 PM

Jesus said, “Let the children come to me, and do not prevent them; for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.”

FiveWays on November 3, 2008 at 4:41 PM

I repeat: 22 million potential voters.

That’s the population of Ohio plus Michigan. Or a little more than NY State, a little less than Texas.

Rosmerta on November 3, 2008 at 4:42 PM

FiveWays on November 3, 2008 at 4:31 PM

We were discussing what the Pope and the Magisterium had identified as “intrinsically evil”. Now it is OK to ignore Papal encyclicals because of some language in the recently written Catechism?

If your point is that some of what the Magisterium identifies as intrinsically evil matters and some doesn’t what is the mechanism used to determine that?

dedalus on November 3, 2008 at 4:42 PM

If your point is that some of what the Magisterium identifies as intrinsically evil matters and some doesn’t what is the mechanism used to determine that?

dedalus on November 3, 2008 at 4:42 PM

The infallibility of the Papacy and the authority of the Church itself as bestowed upon Peter by Christ, and passed down through these 2000 years to the present. But of course a Catholic should know that.

What is your mechanism to determine what is or isn’t intrinsically evil?

FiveWays on November 3, 2008 at 4:47 PM

I’d be voting McCain/Palin even if I weren’t Catholic and Pro-life. I very seriously question Obama’s character. I also fear for our country’s security if he is elected. Thank you for this article. I am continuing to pray for whatever God’s will is for our country. I have to laugh at myself, because whether I pray or not, God’s will will be done. I think it would be better for me to pray that I accept God’s will.

Maggie45 on November 3, 2008 at 5:02 PM

It galls me that 50% of all Catholics are going to vote for Obama. I know some that are on Respect Life committees who are voting for him – how hypocritical can they get?

In order to vote for Obama Catholics and Christines must answer this question:

What can be more important than killing nearly 1 million unborn babies each year?

I know some who are big enviros – how do they put vegetation over human life?

But they will justify it through the most tortured of logic.

winged on November 3, 2008 at 5:07 PM

I think Obama’s camp is worried. I’ve gotten some “no more Bush” emails today. If they are having to revive that old theme, they’re in trouble. – Y-not on November 3, 2008 at 2:39 PM

Worried? No. They are PANICKED. Their own internals are telling them that Barry is going to lose. Their only hope lies in voter suppression – hence the full court press on the part of their lackeys in the Drive-By media.

It will fail. Barry will lose. Bank on that.

ManlyRash on November 3, 2008 at 5:17 PM

It will fail. Barry will lose. Bank on that.

ManlyRash on November 3, 2008 at 5:17 PM

But Manly…..banks are failing….

FiveWays on November 3, 2008 at 5:20 PM

Bogeyfre on November 3, 2008 at 3:44 PM

Actually I was a drug runner. Used to ferry donated pharmaceuticals and some equipment down to the clinics in Mexico. The commander could get in and out of places others could not, and was able to take off and land in hot weather.

N4646W on November 3, 2008 at 5:23 PM

I am a catholic and I believe in protecting a woman’s right to choose abortion.

Fine, if that’s your stance…now how do you feel about supporting late term abortion? How about letting a baby die after being born?
That is the liberals, and the Dems stance…and that is certainly Obama’s stand…if a child is born alive, let it die.

right2bright on November 3, 2008 at 5:40 PM

Jesus said, “Let the children come to me, and do not prevent them; for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.”

FiveWays on November 3, 2008 at 4:41 PM

Unless they may be a burden, then just kill them…
Obviously you have not read the new revised democrat bible.

right2bright on November 3, 2008 at 5:43 PM

I am a catholic and I believe in protecting a woman’s right to choose abortion.

Then you don’t believe in protecting the baby’s right to life. Then you are not a Catholic.

FiveWays on November 3, 2008 at 5:43 PM

As a Catholic, I strongly endorse your comments and linked to your statement on my blog.

gocatholic on November 3, 2008 at 5:44 PM

Unless they may be a burden, then just kill them…
Obviously you have not read the new revised democrat bible.

right2bright on November 3, 2008 at 5:43 PM

So true…….*sigh*

FiveWays on November 3, 2008 at 5:44 PM

One – VOTE!

The other is simply acknowledging that the principals you and I both value – and others as well, are not about religion. They are about how to live in a way that is beneficial to others.
It is not about prayers in schools – which by the way never actually left, it just stopped being mandated. It is about realizing that human being need a humane concept of our nation and ourselves.
The Founding Fathers got that. Education for them was paramount. Not multiculturalism, but actual philosophy, science, history, and literature. This country needs to be put back on track, by simply ceasing the “derailment” in culture, education, and in government itself.
Put the legislative powers of the Supreme Court back into the legislature where it belongs. Remove government from things it has no business being in!
Any of these working for you?

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 3:27 PM

Works for me, but the trick is to get the country back to that position with out the states becoming renegades. The only way to limit the scope of power the elected officials have is to enact some form of the Fair Tax. I like the principal of it, but the percentage of it is too high. At 23% it allows the government to maintain it’s current glut, therefore the citizenry gain only a small trade off, and Washington keeps going on it’s merry way. Allowing politicians to buy their status-quo has got to stop. Getting people to stop being ashamed of this Nations status is a priority. If we could do that, we might be able to get the politicians back on track.

N4646W on November 3, 2008 at 5:46 PM

Many of our Catholic friends support Barack Obama in the upcoming election, despite being the most radically pro-abortion presidential candidate in American history.

Maybe the Catholic Church has served its time. Maybe Ed, it is time to move on.
If the Catholic Church can’t make a simple plea, make it known in the simplest of terms that taking a child’s life is against the most fundamental Church Doctrine, maybe they have reached a point of not being effective.
If the Catholic Church cannot make there most basic tenet followed, then their usefulness of a Church has passed.
If they can’t say to their followers and convince them that taking a child’s life is against the teachings of Jesus…then how are they ever going to understand the more complex issues, like; no adultery, faithfulness, honesty, any of the 10 commandments.
You haven’t left the Church, the Church has left you…high and dry, crying out for justice, and they cry out in fear of rejection.

right2bright on November 3, 2008 at 5:51 PM

will concede he is a Christian Philosopher as long as we agree he is not a philosopher who is a Christian in carrying out his agenda. Those are two different things. Not trying to nitpick, just clarifying the cases.

kybowexar on November 3, 2008 at 4:01 PM

I correct myself, he is neither a philosopher nor a Cristian. He is an opportunist, and appears to have neither morals or scruples. With out the help and backing of other of the same lot, he would never have made it this far.

N4646W on November 3, 2008 at 5:52 PM

I doubt that 50% of Catholics are for Obama. My son goes to a Catholic school in Michigan and in his class of 21 there are only 3 children voting for Obama, the rest of course are for McCain/Palin.

clarifides on November 3, 2008 at 5:54 PM

I doubt that 50% of Catholics are for Obama. My son goes to a Catholic school in Michigan and in his class of 21 there are only 3 children voted for Obama, the rest of course are for McCain/Palin.

clarifides on November 3, 2008 at 5:55 PM

The infallibility of the Papacy and the authority of the Church itself as bestowed upon Peter by Christ, and passed down through these 2000 years to the present. But of course a Catholic should know that.

What is your mechanism to determine what is or isn’t intrinsically evil?

FiveWays on November 3, 2008 at 4:47 PM

My point is that all of the Magisterium needs to be followed by Catholics. According to the Magisterium abortion and contraception are both intrinsically evil.

Papal infallibility is a different topic, clarified in 1869 and not one that I raised or is essential for the current topic.

dedalus on November 3, 2008 at 6:00 PM

If nothing in life is worth dying for, when did this begin–just in the face of this enemy? Or should Moses have told the children of Israel to live in slavery under the pharaohs? Should Christ have refused the cross? Should the patriots at Concord Bridge have thrown down their guns and refused to fire the shot heard ’round the world? The martyrs of history were not fools, and our honored dead who gave their lives to stop the advance of the Nazis didn’t die in vain. Where, then, is the road to peace? Well, it’s a simple answer after all.
You and I have the courage to say to our enemies, “There is a price we will not pay.” There is a point beyond which they must not advance.
Ronald Reagan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXaR4POAQiU
A video of hope for all to see.. If our people need strength, hope and resolve… This is the video to see… A masterpiece… only because the great communicator has blessed it’s screen… A must See!!!!
Share and email link for all… Thank you…

convative on November 3, 2008 at 6:03 PM

All I know is I broke down sobbing at the computer a couple of weeks ago and cried out to the Lord with real pain in my heart…stopping abortion has been on my mind ever since grade school when two of our nuns were crying and holding each other in the hallway when it was legalized in New York state and we said the rosary as a school. I have prayed and prayed, written Senators and Congressmen, written newspapers and hospitals, everything I could do ever since then. When I read in black and white what is forecast to happen, how with the Presidency, veto-proof Congress and possible new Supreme Court judges in charge of everything and how they will roll back every little dent in the law we’ve worked so hard for, I felt that evil will have triumphed at the expense of the innocent unborn and I wept for them. Abortion the only factor for Catholics?…it is for this Catholic. Holy Mother of God, God help us all for the holocaust we are about to unleash upon this land because of our more supposedly sophisticated consciences that consider other things as more important than the slaughter of the innocent unborn.

If you want to feel good about what Obama promised to do when talking to Planned Parenthood:”the first thing I’d do as President is sign the Freedom of Choice Act.” (just love his priorities)…well, click on this article and take a trip down memory lane. For those of you for whom abortion wasn’t the main factor, perhaps you don’t remember it. It was in the first couple of days when Bill Clinton was elected President and he slapped us in the face with his public signing of 5 executive orders to wipe out abortion/family planning restrictions put in place during the Reagan years…on the 20th anniversary of Roe vs. Wade while we were marching 75,000 strong outside. I’ll never forget the smug looks on the faces of the pro-choice women’s faces surrounding him, all smiling away…was Mary weeping for the toil of the marchers outside?

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F0CEED91538F930A15752C0A965958260

deedledee on November 3, 2008 at 6:05 PM

But Manly…..banks are failing…. – FiveWays on November 3, 2008 at 5:20 PM

Not the Bank of Manly. It’s solid as a rock. Now get out there and vote for McCain.

ManlyRash on November 3, 2008 at 6:08 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4


You must be logged in to post a comment.