ASU denies honorary degree to Obama because he hasn’t accomplished anything
posted at 8:45 pm on April 9, 2009 by Allahpundit
The university decided against awarding Obama the degree because it is customarily awarded for “lifetime achievement,” ASU spokeswoman Sharon Keeler told POLITICO.
“It’s normally awarded to someone who has been in their field for some time,” she said. “Considering that the president is at the beginning of his presidency, his body of work is just beginning.”
Obama was invited by the university to be its commencement speaker and accepted the invitation in March. But a separate six-member committee that determines the awarding of honorary degrees did not nominate him to receive such a degree.
Meanwhile, the Notre Dame nonsense continues to fester. I didn’t realize that Bush had delivered a commencement address there in 2001; knowing that now, I’d say O’Donnell has the better of the argument with Buchanan from tonight’s Hardball. A quote from the Church’s official catechism:
Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.
If, however, nonlethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.
Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm – without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself – the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity are very rare, if not practically nonexistent.
Buchanan’s point about innocent versus guilty life is well taken but seemingly irrelevant to Church teaching. Why is Obama’s pro-choice invite a problem when Bush’s pro-capital punishment invite wasn’t?
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
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 Next »
Hot dog, I learned something today. I didn’t know the Catholic Church was against the death penalty. Their history doesn’t seem to bear that out very much.
That’s surprising that Obama gets a big no on the degree. The tidal wave Ingraham predicted is beginning! Or not.
Spirit of 1776 on April 9, 2009 at 8:48 PM
The argument there, I assume, would be that you can’t sufficiently protect other human lives as long as the man who’s shown that he’ll kill is still breathing.
amerpundit on April 9, 2009 at 8:48 PM
Dammit, I wanted to use that Simpsons reference for my comment.
BadgerHawk on April 9, 2009 at 8:49 PM
Hrm. Can’t we just all agree that Catholics are hypocrites and go home happy?
(Don’t shoot! I’m a Catholic. More of the brand that AP’s family apparently is; Don’t go to church, don’t really follow the teachings, but have a sense an overriding sense of ingrained shame that only comes with a Catholic upbringing.)
jimmy the notable on April 9, 2009 at 8:49 PM
I used to work in Tempe, AZ. ASU is as Lib as you can get. This is surprising. Maybe they will wait until after his second term…
Vigilante on April 9, 2009 at 8:49 PM
I’m not an alumni, but I’m gonna give to that Institute of Higher Learning… I encourage others Universities to do the same.
Kini on April 9, 2009 at 8:49 PM
Dissed and dismissed by one of America’s best party schools.
I’ll drink to that.
JammieWearingFool on April 9, 2009 at 8:49 PM
Ooo…No Soup For You!!!
Brought to you by Obama’s Condensed Creamy Socialist Gumbo.
BigWyo on April 9, 2009 at 8:52 PM
What do you mean “one of” that’s just insulting.
petunia on April 9, 2009 at 8:53 PM
Perhaps because one is about society killing terrible sinners who have themselves killed the innocent and helpless, and the other is about society itself killing the innocent and helpless? Could that be it?
drunyan8315 on April 9, 2009 at 8:54 PM
Go Sun Devils! My niece is scheduled to attend ASU in the Fall.
I could not be more proud!
FireBlogger on April 9, 2009 at 8:55 PM
But…but…he’s accomplished so much, he had to write two autobiographies to fit it all in!
jgapinoy on April 9, 2009 at 8:57 PM
Um, you guys, he’s still giving the commencement address at ASU. Its not like they’re a conservative haven or something. What would really deserve celebration is if they uninvited him and hired a Reagan impersonator to give the address instead.
jimmy the notable on April 9, 2009 at 8:57 PM
As an ASU alumni, I’ve never been prouder of my Alma Mater.
FORK YOU Barry!!
SUNDEVILS!
omnipotent on April 9, 2009 at 8:58 PM
That’s it in a nutshell. Very well said.
sherry on April 9, 2009 at 8:58 PM
Please don’t. They’re still liberal. Just not quite as much as, say, Michigan.
jgapinoy on April 9, 2009 at 8:59 PM
It’s just one of, because no party school can top Wisconsin. It’s science.
BadgerHawk on April 9, 2009 at 8:59 PM
Because all aspects of the culture of death, that people like you and the filthy liar support, are not equal. It’s one thing to demand a fetus get their Master’s degree from a top tier university before considered a life is one thing. It is another thing to accept the idea that some people are so evil that the only justice is capital punishment. Dumbed down for ya- there is a difference between protecting the innocents and punishing the evil.
It’s a faith thing. You wouldn’t understand.
highhopes on April 9, 2009 at 9:02 PM
What a great party prank!!
ASU should pants The (stuttering) One during his commencement speech, too.
Right_of_Attila on April 9, 2009 at 9:03 PM
Although some may be incapable of understanding the differences, there are nevertheless distinct differences between slaughtering innocent, helpless human life before birth and executing a convicted murderer.
rplat on April 9, 2009 at 9:03 PM
Here’s the difference, Obama is full out for abortion and is making it a mission to expand access etc. The Catholic Church is against abortion without qualification. There was disagreement on death penalty, which has qualifications, but overall Bush’s positions were much closer to the Church’s. Bush was overall pro religion too, this is really a crap argument, IMO.
msmveritas on April 9, 2009 at 9:04 PM
I don’t understand why Obama being pro-choice should bar him from speaking at all. So the church is pro-life, Obama isn’t. Ok. The church is pro-life, Obama isn’t. How does that logically translate to “Obama can’t speak”?
DaveS on April 9, 2009 at 9:04 PM
Which is the point a lot of us raised in our criticisms of Notre Dame’s decision to bestow the honorary degree on Lightworker. Irrespective of the Church’s teachings, the guy simply has not accomplished much, certainly not in the legal profession.
As for the question of why such a fuss now when there was no fuss over Bush, I think one big difference is that there was a clear statement made by the U.S. bishops a few years ago, well after Bush was at Notre Dame. Notre Dame’s actions, including failing to discuss their decision with Bishop D’Arcy, were in flagrant disregard for the bishops’ 2004 statement. Notre Dame might have been able to justify him speaking at commencement, but the HDr went too far.
Secondly, I am not aware (although I could certainly be mistaken) of a major effort by Bush while President to federally mandate or promote the death penalty. In contrast, Obama has made it a priority to increase the availability of abortions in the U.S. and used his authority as President to do so. In other words, there’s a much clearer trail from President Obama’s beliefs and actions to the promotion of abortion than there was for President Bush and the death penalty, notwithstanding Bush’s views on the death penalty.
BTW, I noticed more bishops have come out in opposition to ND’s actions.
ps. Good for the Sun Devils!
Y-not on April 9, 2009 at 9:05 PM
BadgerHawk,
You are right.WisMad is crazy !
nagee76 on April 9, 2009 at 9:06 PM
It is widely taught in the Catholic church that there are certain positions that are unconscienable and rise above the others as far as deciding whether or not to vote for/support a politician. It is a sin to vote for these politicians if there is an alternative. Among these are support of embryonic stem cell research/cloning, abortion, euthanasia. Supporting a candidate that supports the death penalty is not included. Supporting abortion is much more grievous than supporting the death penalty for a murderer.
poljunkie on April 9, 2009 at 9:06 PM
Tell that to LSU.
P.S. There is no way that any Freshman child of mine is going to a “Party School.” Yes, even at LSU one can get a good education but the culture matters too and it is far easier to be led astray at a school with a party culture.
A co-worker’s kid got sucked up into the frat/party culture at a “party school” and blew through a semester’s living money in a matter of the first couple months and e-mailed home for more money lest he starve. My co-worker, a no nonsense doctor, mailed protein pills with his best wishes.
highhopes on April 9, 2009 at 9:07 PM
The crux of the issue is that in 2004 the U.S. council of Catholic bishops specifically instructed Catholic institutions to avoid bestowing honors upon public figures who are in active opposition to Church teaching on life issues. The commencement address may or may not be considered an “honor,” but in academe, conferring an honorary doctorate is a big deal — the biggest honor most academic institutions can bestow on someone. Notre Dame’s president, a Catholic priest, flagrantly ignored the Catholic bishops’ instruction.
Y-not on April 9, 2009 at 9:08 PM
Let’s make sure that Obama gets no honorary degrees, and make sure that he accomplishes nothing.
BottomLine5 on April 9, 2009 at 9:09 PM
Nothing is going to change until we stop worshiping our politicians.
JohnJ on April 9, 2009 at 9:09 PM
Because a child that is in the womb is innocent. A criminal sitting on death row and gets the needle has been convicted and sentenced to death.
HornetSting on April 9, 2009 at 9:11 PM
Ugh! I just hurled in my RedBull!
Sweet_Thang on April 9, 2009 at 9:11 PM
You missed the key point. The filthy liar isn’t speaking at the South Bend Rotary Club. He’s speaking at a Catholic university- funded in part and supported by the very “clingers” the filthy liar hates. In other words, it isn’t about the evil liar’s ability to speak or not- it is about the venue and the stated values of that organization.
highhopes on April 9, 2009 at 9:11 PM
No honorary degree for He Who Farts Perfume? What’s up with that?
Look forward to a “scheduling conflict” in the near future.
hillbillyjim on April 9, 2009 at 9:11 PM
Good for ASU!!!
I really want to see President TelePrompter’s grades/papers from Harvard & Columbia……..
TN Mom on April 9, 2009 at 9:11 PM
I’m not Catholic, or anything at all for that matter, but my understanding is that opposition to abortion is an essential doctrine while opposition to the death penalty and general moonbattery are not.
Xrlq on April 9, 2009 at 9:12 PM
Get a grip. The whole friggin’ school is not “liberal.”
If folks want to donate, they can give to ASU’s general scholarship fund or, for warm fuzzies, I’d recommend the Barry M. Goldwater Center for Science and Engineering.
Y-not on April 9, 2009 at 9:13 PM
BUCHANAN KICKS ASS!!!
Anybody who disagrees is a dumbass (excluding my friend AP, who would never ban me).
The Wall on April 9, 2009 at 9:14 PM
Honarary degrees are worthless anyway but the filthy liar seems to be doing a good job accomplishing nothing all by himself. One example, coming back from the G-20 declaring it an unqualified success. The filthy liar knows nothing about diplomacy. Such summit meetings accomplish nothing.
highhopes on April 9, 2009 at 9:14 PM
highhopes on April 9, 2009 at 9:11 PM
Well, certainly a large university is going to have faculty and staff that hold values which conflict with those of the organizaiton. Certainly some of the students will. Why not let the guy speak?
I can understand the honorary degree part, but I don’t get the speech.
DaveS on April 9, 2009 at 9:14 PM
Can an honorary degree from Yeshiva University be far off?
JammieWearingFool on April 9, 2009 at 9:15 PM
Spirit, the Church is not against the death penalty. The quote says that traditional teaching does not exclude recourse to the penalty. It’s only used in very rare situations where necessary to defend human life. Like for unrepentant murderers who will kill again (even if in prison, etc.)
The use of the DP is a prudential judgment subject to reason. The use of abortion, by contrast, is always and everywhere evil.
Sydney Carton on April 9, 2009 at 9:15 PM
Maybe,Obama needed more cowbell in his Articulation!
canopfor on April 9, 2009 at 9:19 PM
Maybe he can get an honorary degree from the Obama elementary school. Pretty much his educational level.
JammieWearingFool on April 9, 2009 at 9:20 PM
I hate to agree with Lawrence O’Donnell, but his overall point is correct. Both Bush and Obama hold political views akin to the Catholic church and hold views against the Church. It seems to me that Presidents, whether Republican, Democrat, Pro-Life, Pro-Choice, have ALWAYS spoke at that university. It was a jester they gave to George Bush in 2001 and now it is a jester they are giving to Barack Obama in 2009.
And last time I checked, he is just speaking at the University. He’s not receiving any degrees or getting a prize.
Now with that said, O’Donnell does go overboard in his presentation. He accused Bush of killing criminals. Not so. He was simply following the laws of Texas, and reviewing the court cases.
Buchanan is correct that there’s a significant difference between killing an innocent human life (abortion) and killing a guilty life for the sake of protection (capital punishment), but the Church believes that we should protect and preserve life from conception to natural death. So both Bush and Obama have disagreements with the Catholic Church on the life and death issues.
btw, I am Catholic, pro-life, pro-capital punishment, and anti-Obama.
Frank T.J Mackey on April 9, 2009 at 9:22 PM
Unfortunately, because Notre Dame’s president decided to not consult with Bishop D’Arcy, in whose diocese Notre Dame resides, before pulling the trigger on the HDr and commencement address issue, we’ll never know if it would have been ok for Obama to speak at the commencement. The U.S. bishops’ statement included something about not providing a platform for people who work actively against life, so I suspect Bishop D’Arcy would have advised Notre Dame to not extend the invitation… but we’ll never know.
Obedience and humility are pretty big tenets for clergy in Roman Catholicism. Reverend Jenkins (ND’s president) has shown neither.
All he has to do is call Obama and apologize to him profusely for making a dog’s breakfast of this whole thing (I don’t like Obama but it is terrible how this whole thing played out and he is the POTUS so he shouldn’t have been dragged into this mess), but withdraw the invitation and HDr, explaining that he (Jenkins) failed to follow protocol and check with his bosses.
He can offer Obama the chance to participate in a conference on life or something similar where Obama’s voice is not the only one being heard.
Problem solved.
Y-not on April 9, 2009 at 9:22 PM
You’re mistaken. Obama is receiving an honorary doctorate in Law.
Y-not on April 9, 2009 at 9:24 PM
In the dark recesses of the White House……………
……… a “special” map is visited, and a big red “X” has just been placed over ASU!
Seven Percent Solution on April 9, 2009 at 9:25 PM
Y-not on April 9, 2009 at 9:22 PM
They were going to have Obama there talking about abortions?!?! I find that hard to believe.
Either way, I agree… handled horribly.
DaveS on April 9, 2009 at 9:25 PM
More like common sense HH. Unfortunately secularists and leftys don’t get it. Instead they walk hand in hand on the issue.
AlreadyKnownAs on April 9, 2009 at 9:25 PM
At Notre Dame?
Frank T.J Mackey on April 9, 2009 at 9:25 PM
Wow, AP thinks that O’Donnell got the better of the argument.!
Is there no difference between the abortion of innocents and death penalty given to convicts who were convicted of the crimes in a trial by a jury of his/her peers ?
of course O’Donnell would be the same guy who thinks abortion is not murder and yet cites it as a proof of the Church’s anti-death stance !
Buchanan should have said that he was ok with Obama being invited to ND if O’Donnell admitted that abortion was murder.
nagee76 on April 9, 2009 at 9:26 PM
Yes.
Y-not on April 9, 2009 at 9:27 PM
When we approach a good start at 1.5M executions a year of first degree murderers, convicted by a jury, and procedurally cleared, get back to me on this lame argument.
Leopold Stotch on April 9, 2009 at 9:28 PM
Exit Answer: Abortion is considered an intrinsic, not debatable evil because it kills an innocent child. The Church does recognize that capital punishment, like war, can have a just cause.
AbaddonsReign on April 9, 2009 at 9:30 PM
Community organizers get no respect.
conservative pilgrim on April 9, 2009 at 9:30 PM
Indeed!
SouthernGent on April 9, 2009 at 9:30 PM
I hate Odonnel more than any pundit on the planet.
They should give him a show on MSNBC. Maybe replace that flopping broad that follows olberdouche.
The Wall on April 9, 2009 at 9:30 PM
Well, either “Would you say that to Tom Petty?” is the quote of the day, or, “How do you like them apples?”
Pasalubong on April 9, 2009 at 9:30 PM
The reasons many or most Christians don’t fight the death penalty:
“Whoever sheds the blood of man,
by man shall his blood be shed;
for in the image of God
has God made man.”
Genesis 9:6
also
“If anyone takes the life of a human being, he must be put to death.”
Leviticus 24:17, 21
In context God was talking about premeditated murder, not accidental killing.
yellow_railroad on April 9, 2009 at 9:30 PM
Yeah, because we’ve ALL gotten 65 million people to vote for us…and we’ve ALL been elected President of the United States. Yeah, he hasn’t accomplished anything.
dcwvu on April 9, 2009 at 9:31 PM
I doubt that, although I doubt that Obama is going to have his speech cleared through the Catholic Church either.
I think the biggest issue is the honorary doctorate part. That is clearly in violation of the letter and spirit of the bishops’ statement.
The commencement address was probably up for interpretation. I’ve been at institutions where it’s not a big honor to give the address, but at others it is a big deal… Notre Dame used to have bishops and others give the commencement, and in fact one bishop gave it several times (so I am not sure if he even got an honorary degree), but ND has been trending towards politicians and other luminaries in recent years… I assume for publicity.
What a mess.
Y-not on April 9, 2009 at 9:31 PM
Name his legal accomplishments.
Y-not on April 9, 2009 at 9:32 PM
I believe on The Simpsons when the plot called for an unnecessary award that was necessary to be given they came up with the “First Annual Award for Excellence in the field of Fabulousness” or something. I suggest universities follow suit, rather than law degrees.
Marcus on April 9, 2009 at 9:35 PM
Ok, thanks for the information, but this is not disprove my points that:
a) Notre Dame invites Presidents to speak at their commencement address. It has become a tradition at the college. They have invited Democrat Presidents and Republican Presidents.
b) There are areas where both Bush and Obama disagree with the Catholic Church, and there are areas where they are completely in line. If you strip away O’Donnell’s bad anti-Bush rhetoric, you will see that he’s making a good point that you don’t need to line up perfectly with the Catholic Church in order to be a commencement speaker.
c) Bush does support capital punishment, and that is a big no-no in the eyes of the Catholic Church. Catholics are opposed to abortion and capital punishment because it violates the “conception-to-nature-death” principle.
Frank T.J Mackey on April 9, 2009 at 9:39 PM
Well Hell, if that’s the criteria, 90% of the broadcast and print media, 100% of the ACORN staff, and George Soros should be in line for a degree too.
BigWyo on April 9, 2009 at 9:40 PM
Why is Obama’s prochoice invite a problem!
Well,from Obamas own mouth,his quote certainly doesn’t
help!
————————
“I’ve got two daughters.9 years old and 6.I am going to
teach them first of all about values and morals.But if
they make a mistake,I don’t want them punished with a
baby”.
-Barack Obama
canopfor on April 9, 2009 at 9:43 PM
Anyone???
BigWyo on April 9, 2009 at 9:43 PM
Thanks
Spirit of 1776 on April 9, 2009 at 9:48 PM
So do we agree that the University of Notre Dame should not have decided to give Obama an honorary doctorate in law? I just want to see if we are reaching some agreement here.
In terms of the Bush issue, what I’d say is
(1) it was not as clear in 2001 as it is in 2009 that the Church did not want Catholic organizations bestowing honors on people who “act in defiance of… fundamental moral principles [of the Catholic Church].” The U.S. bishops’ statement came out after Bush spoke at Notre Dame.
(2) it is not clear to me that President Bush acted in defiance of Catholic teaching with respect to the death penalty while president. The bishops’ statement makes a pretty clear point of mentioning actions, not just beliefs. If you look at past HDr recipients at Notre Dame, you’ll find quite a few folks whom I suspect (based on their reputations as literary types, artists, actors, and whatnot) are personally for abortion. The distinction is that President Obama has used his office to actively promote abortion.
(3) I actually think Allahpundit is misinterpreting Church teaching on the death penalty. As others have mentioned, it — like war — can be justifiable under Church teaching. Abortion is much more black and white.
Y-not on April 9, 2009 at 9:51 PM
Heres another problem,from Obama lips to God’s ears!!
Obama says a Baby is a Punishment?
Exihibit”B”.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNzmly28Bmg
canopfor on April 9, 2009 at 9:51 PM
LOL…he still won’t have accomplished anything, beyond eye-popping levels of debt. They may throw a sop to his teleprompter though.
ddrintn on April 9, 2009 at 9:53 PM
“Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm …”
The flaw in the Church’s argument is that in a world with Democrats this is not a fact, but a fantasy.
Dusty on April 9, 2009 at 9:55 PM
Unfortunately, I know my alma mater better than that. They’ll cave the first time someone accuses them of racism.
Shay on April 9, 2009 at 9:58 PM
Oh yeah, I forgot. He was editor of the Harvard Law Review and a community organizer.
ddrintn on April 9, 2009 at 10:04 PM
What do you mean “HASN’T ACCOMPLISHED ANYTHING?”
1 appointment of Tax-cheat Tim Geithner as Treasury Secretary has guaranteed American bankruptcy.
2 Appointment of Horrible Harold Koh as State Department Legal Counsel with his international Marxism guarantees American subservience to europe and bypasses the US constitution.
3 Massive military cutbacks have guaranteed another 9-11.
4 Tacky gifts to diplomats and heads of state have made America a world laughing stock.
MaiDee on April 9, 2009 at 10:06 PM
Obama does not really have any accomplishments to point to, so I totally agree. Now on the issue of Obama’s support of abortion versus Bush’s pro-death penalty: There has to be a line drawn between an innocent life and a multiple rapist/murder, there is no moral equivalence. There are some people that just do not deserve to live.
TXMomof3 on April 9, 2009 at 10:12 PM
It would be like inviting the head of the NAACP to be the honored speaker at a KKK rally.
F15Mech on April 9, 2009 at 10:19 PM
Not true. The Bible is pro-death penalty.
Genesis 9:6:
“Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.” (KJV)
carbon_footprint on April 9, 2009 at 10:19 PM
I could consider a even trade for no death penalty and no abortion.
Cindy Munford on April 9, 2009 at 10:26 PM
Are there New Testament examples?
Cindy Munford on April 9, 2009 at 10:27 PM
Hi Cindy.
There are several and it would be easier to check out this essay, with specific verses from the New Testament with commentary.
carbon_footprint on April 9, 2009 at 10:31 PM
Come on AP, you are way too smart for this. Abortion is murder of unborn babies.
Capital punishment is the ultimate penalty for those who commit murder.
The Biblical eye for an eye factor fits in there somewhere as well.
FireBlogger on April 9, 2009 at 10:32 PM
F15Mech on April 9, 2009 at 10:19 PM
No, it would be nothing like that.
(Also, that’s an unfortunate analogy.)
DaveS on April 9, 2009 at 10:43 PM
Even a murderer is allowed to appeal his life without parole sentence. Could the murderer then be released? Could the murderer kill someone in prison?
A baby has no appeal process. I guess your question, AP, was rhetorical?
Vince on April 9, 2009 at 10:47 PM
-
One sick sucker this Obastard.
RalphyBoy on April 9, 2009 at 11:12 PM
This leaves an opening for the possibilty of capital punishment. On the other hand, the Church does not support abortion for any reason.
Deanna on April 9, 2009 at 11:12 PM
Obama’s only “body of work” is flushed into the sewer 2-3 times daily.
Sharke on April 9, 2009 at 11:13 PM
Oh, and Lawrence O’Donnell is a psychotic putz. Nothing he says could ever be true.
Deanna on April 9, 2009 at 11:14 PM
Says who? You that did not understand why it would be a problem in the first place?
Why is it an unfortunate analogy?
Am I a RACIST now? (oh please give me that title)
The Catholic Church is so strongly opposed to abortion that having someone, that sees no problem with leaving babies in closets to die, as a honored guest speaker is a huge problem.
Do you see the dichotomy here?
F15Mech on April 9, 2009 at 11:14 PM
Because disposing of human garbage is done after they have had a fair trial and all the evidence is in. A jury of peers decides if the scum is worthy to live.
Babies are murdered with no defense or civil rights considered.
csdeven on April 9, 2009 at 11:42 PM
Really? That’s your thoughtful exit question?
Embarrassing.
geckomon on April 9, 2009 at 11:45 PM
No, this is all wrong. Everything is not the same as everything else. This is a common mistake.
The difference is: The pro-choice advocates the taking of innocent life. The pro-death penalty advocates only the taking of the lives of the guilty. Even the Catholic Church leaves room in doctrine for this difference.
That’s why Obama invite = problem; Bush invite = not problem.
seanrobins on April 9, 2009 at 11:45 PM
Because if you actually did some research AP you’d see that the biggest sticking point being brought up by bishops and priests is the mandate from the Council of US Bishops that stated in no uncertain terms no speaking platforms or awards for proponents of abortion or other anti-Catholic stances. This mandate was published in 2004. Bush gave his speech in 2001. I’m actually disappointed by your lack of research on this one. You fumbled an easy one.
chicagojedi on April 9, 2009 at 11:51 PM
There’s nothing in the Catechism about moonbattery, but, as you can see, there certainly is on the matter of the death penalty.
The Church is saying that “shooting fish in a barrel” is a sin — that once the aggressor is under the control of the State, there is no reason for the death penalty (or at least none the Church can see — since the Church stands opposed to revenge). The rest of it serves to cover people like policemen who might kill an aggressor caught in the act in order to prevent further loss of life.
So Bush fails the test of Catholic Correctness too. That said, in the realm of these things, millions trumps 152 easily. And two wrongs certainly do not make a right.
unclesmrgol on April 10, 2009 at 12:36 AM
I guarantee ASU will buckle under the pressure and award him an honorary degree….The AZ Republic newspaper has aleady written a whinning editorial imploring the University to do so…wait for it 3…2….1.WWAAAAAAHHHHHHHHhhhhhhh….
sirpatrick on April 10, 2009 at 12:38 AM
I think we’re all waiting for Allah’s clarification on his logic for why Obama’s invitation to speak at a Catholic University is the equivalent of Bush’s.
Blue Eyed Soul on April 10, 2009 at 12:38 AM
The reason is because the church does not forbid capital punishment or declare it a sin, it opposes it due to alternatives available.
It specifically declares abortion and euthanasia not only sins but sins of such a dire nature that a person is automatically excommunicated for being involved in either.
All of this is in the Catechism of the Catholic Church that is available online at the Vatican site or in book form from Amazon.
I would suggest since you have the Captain as a reference you might want to run questions of Catholic theology by him first since the question is easily answered. That way you can critique actual Catholicism if you choose instead of a straw pseudo Catholicism as most critics of the church prefer.
petertheslow on April 10, 2009 at 12:40 AM
One is an innocent life, the other is not.
The Death Penalty is not now nor will it ever be completely proscribed by the Church. The death penalty is allowed by God in the Old Testament and Jesus himself supports this in the Gospels. If you read the Encyclical from which the passage you site in the Catechism comes from you will see that the position is more nuanced than it seems in the Catechism. In any case “very rare” is not never so it is perfectly acceptable to support the Death Penalty. Supporting abortion is not.
“very rare, if not practically nonexistent.” JP II was and most Bishops are against the death penalty and this is an attempt to reduce it to whatever extent possible with the knowledge that it is not possible for the Church to ever teach that the Death Penalty must be eliminated.
Judges might have the option of not being Strict Constructions but the Vatican does not.
A better way to understand this is one of the explanations the Church used in proscribing women as priests. The Church sites that Jesus specifically did not choose women as Apostles so it is not even within the Churches power to make a woman a priest.
The same is true with the death penalty. It’s not really within the Church’s power to proscribe it.
Rocks on April 10, 2009 at 12:45 AM
AP — you’re wrong.
The Catholic Church’s position on abortion is clear. It ain’t gonna fly. Got it?
As for capital punishment, while the Catholic Church does does not advocate it as the norm, it does make exception for the use of capital punishment in certain instances:
Why don’t you look it up? The Catechism of the Catholic Church, Part 3, Section 2, Chapter 2, Article 5, Line #2267.
Bush’s beliefs are clearly more in line with the Catholic teaching on matters of faith than Obama.
Lawrence O’Donnell is a liar; his self-proclaimed “catholicism” and catholic school education are disingenuous. The a$$hole deliberately misrepresents Catholic teaching for political expediency like Nancy Pelosi. Perhaps he can catch up on his catechism studies while he’s roasting in hell.
D2Boston on April 10, 2009 at 1:29 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »