Ramirez on the American pontiff

posted at 12:15 pm on February 4, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Michael Ramirez’ work at Investors Business Daily is always brilliant, but yesterday’s editorial cartoon may be one of his best ever.  The two-time Pulitzer Prize winner takes on the Church of Government, as my friend John Hinderaker calls it at Power Line, and skewers Barack Obama’s pretensions of being a faith leader while shredding the Constitution — in the cartoon, literally.  Do not miss the details of this work, one of Ramirez’ most richly illustrated entries ever.  Click on the image if you need a closer look:

Michael Gerson wrote earlier this week that Obama has declared war on religion, and has betrayed those who sought to work with him:

The implications of Obama’s choice will take years to sort through. The immediate impact can be measured on three men:

Consider Catholicism’s most prominent academic leader, the Rev. John Jenkins, president of Notre Dame. Jenkins took a serious risk in sponsoring Obama’s 2009 honorary degree and commencement address — which promised a “sensible” approach to the conscience clause. Jenkins now complains, “This is not the kind of ‘sensible’ approach the president had in mind when he spoke here.” Obama has made Jenkins — and other progressive Catholic allies — look easily duped.

Consider Catholicism’s highest-ranking elected official, Vice President Joe Biden. Biden had encouraged engagement with the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops on conscience rights. Now he will be remembered as the Catholic cover for the violation of Catholic conscience. Betrayal is always an inside job.

Consider Catholicism’s most prominent clerical leader, Cardinal-designate Timothy Dolan, head of the Conference of Catholic Bishops. Dolan had pursued a policy of engagement with the administration. In November 2011, he met face-to-face with Obama, who was earnestly reassuring on conscience protections. On Jan. 20, during a less-cordial phone conversation, Obama informed Dolan that no substantial concession had been made. How can Dolan make the argument for engagement now?

The implications of Obama’s power grab go further than contraception and will provoke opposition beyond Catholicism. Christian colleges and universities of various denominations will resist providing insurance coverage for abortifacients. And the astounding ambition of this federal precedent will soon be apparent to every religious institution. Obama is claiming the executive authority to determine which missions of believers are religious and which are not — and then to aggressively regulate institutions the government declares to be secular. It is a view of religious liberty so narrow and privatized that it barely covers the space between a believer’s ears.

He wants, in short, to be the Pope of America.  And that’s a strange arrogance to display in an election year.

Also, be sure to check out Ramirez’ terrific collection of his works: Everyone Has the Right to My Opinion, which covers the entire breadth of Ramirez’ career, and it gives fascinating look at political history.  Read my review here, and watch my interviews with Ramirez here and here.  And don’t forget to check out the entire Investors.com site, which has now incorporated all of the former IBD Editorials, while individual investors still exist.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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

Nice art, but pretty lame overused message.

The Nerve on February 4, 2012 at 12:19 PM

Ramirez and Henry Payne are about the best political cartoonists out there.

fiatboomer on February 4, 2012 at 12:22 PM

As Cartman would say:
Sweeeet!

abobo on February 4, 2012 at 12:23 PM

Actually, this one seems to summarize the last couple of weeks at Hot Air….

fiatboomer on February 4, 2012 at 12:23 PM

Ramirez hits it out of the park again-fabulous!!

jeffinsjvca on February 4, 2012 at 12:23 PM

How amazing it is that Jugears seems to hate everything that made America great. Everything. It is simply stunning in its scope.

platypus on February 4, 2012 at 12:24 PM

There is a simple reason Ramirez is the best in the business. Its on display here http://news.investors.com/IBDEditorials.aspx every day. Remember click the cartoon to get a bigger version with a nav button for previous. Click the image again to get the very large version. Never miss my Ramirez.

Bmore on February 4, 2012 at 12:25 PM

Ed
I’ve been meaning to thank you for posting his work. Thank you!

Bmore on February 4, 2012 at 12:26 PM

Bmore on February 4, 2012 at 12:25 PM

Ramirez is the first site I go on when I turn the computer on every day. I usually love his work and this is a good one!
L

letget on February 4, 2012 at 12:27 PM

haha! funny…darn funny

DHChron on February 4, 2012 at 12:27 PM

Ed
I guess you have noticed ho the Ramirez 0 head has evolved over time. Subtle to some a beautiful burn to others.

Bmore on February 4, 2012 at 12:28 PM

ho=how

Bmore on February 4, 2012 at 12:29 PM

letget on February 4, 2012 at 12:27 PM

The best at summing it up with out all the typing and reading.

Bmore on February 4, 2012 at 12:30 PM

Ramirez seems to have just about as much contempt for Alfred Hussein Newman as I do.

Cleombrotus on February 4, 2012 at 12:31 PM

The man has no problem with leaving babies born alive during botched abortions in a closet to starve and freeze. What morons in the Catholic church ever thought anything about him was sensible?

Kelligan on February 4, 2012 at 12:32 PM

Ed
One more thing before I leave. Why don’t you have him on your show sometime? Didn’t you have him for an interview once? At some conference.

Bmore on February 4, 2012 at 12:32 PM

How to win friends and influence people – BO style.

climbnjump on February 4, 2012 at 12:32 PM

People who don’t believe in religion don’t believe in religious freedom, end of story.

Knott Buyinit on February 4, 2012 at 12:32 PM

I guess I should say – How stupid do you have to be -

Kelligan on February 4, 2012 at 12:33 PM

how are we going to avoid abortions without contraception?

nathor on February 4, 2012 at 12:34 PM

Ed
I guess you have noticed ho

Bmore on February 4, 2012 at 12:28 PM

Ed’s married. He don’t notice no ho.

platypus on February 4, 2012 at 12:34 PM

Note to Obama: “You may kiss my ass.”

Midas on February 4, 2012 at 12:35 PM

Nice art, but pretty lame overused message.

The Nerve on February 4, 2012 at 12:19 PM

Yea, I’m pretty sick of obambi myself.

VegasRick on February 4, 2012 at 12:35 PM

When JugEars went to Notre Dame to speak in 2009…weren’t all the religious symbols that the camera’s might catch…covered up?

KOOLAID2 on February 4, 2012 at 12:35 PM

That’s an awesome cartoon! Ramirez rocks!

ghostwriter on February 4, 2012 at 12:35 PM

The anti-American Marxist community agitator strikes again.

The Rogue Tomato on February 4, 2012 at 12:36 PM

The man has no problem with leaving babies born alive during botched abortions in a closet to starve and freeze. What morons in the Catholic church ever thought anything about him was sensible?

Kelligan on February 4, 2012 at 12:32 PM

That would be the Nancy Pelosi/John Kerry/Kennedy wing of the Catholic Church, I suppose.

Midas on February 4, 2012 at 12:36 PM

fiatboomer on February 4, 2012 at 12:23 PM

Funny because it’s true.

abobo on February 4, 2012 at 12:37 PM

Ed’s married. He don’t notice no ho.

platypus on February 4, 2012 at 12:34 PM

Lol, I corrected it. Ed just doesn’t like me for some reason.

Bmore on February 4, 2012 at 12:38 PM

how apropo…..if only it were not true

thedevilinside on February 4, 2012 at 12:38 PM

how are we going to avoid abortions without contraception?

nathor on February 4, 2012 at 12:34 PM

Really nathor? I mean really?

Bmore on February 4, 2012 at 12:40 PM

What morons in the Catholic church ever thought anything about him was sensible?

Kelligan on February 4, 2012 at 12:32 PM

Unfortunately there are morons in every institution. Their existence, however, does not invalidate the institutions they are part of. Morons come and go, the church stands forever.

neuquenguy on February 4, 2012 at 12:42 PM

He’s good but I miss C&F, the one who drew the HA logo IIRC.

Yakko77 on February 4, 2012 at 12:42 PM

“Genuflect, genuflect, genuflect …”

Gosh… Tom Lehrer and “The Vatican Rag.”

Tom C on February 4, 2012 at 12:43 PM

how are we going to avoid abortions without contraception?

nathor on February 4, 2012 at 12:34 PM

I know many people who haven’t used contraception in decades and have not had any abortions, how is that possible?
But nathor, after seeing your 100 posts in the Pelosi thread no reply is necessary, I know all I need to know.

neuquenguy on February 4, 2012 at 12:46 PM

how are we going to avoid abortions without contraception?

nathor on February 4, 2012 at 12:34 PM

Just say no to murdering unborn babies.

davidk on February 4, 2012 at 12:48 PM

Note to Obama: “You may kiss my ass.”

Midas on February 4, 2012 at 12:35 PM

I wouldn’t offer it up if I were you. He’s been doing a whole lot more than kissing the last three years.

neuquenguy on February 4, 2012 at 12:49 PM

how are we going to avoid abortions without contraception?

nathor on February 4, 2012 at 12:34 PM

I have absolutely no problem with contraception… in fact I find the Catholic Church’s position on contraception to be unhelpful( and built on Aristotelianism via Aquinas than anything in the Bible), but this is a religious freedom issue.

But lets look at history… did legalizing contraception really reduce the incidence of abortion? I don’t think so because it came with a moral revolution and made people less responsible about sex. Shotgun weddings(like the ones my parents went through even in late 70s) are pretty rare now.

ninjapirate on February 4, 2012 at 12:49 PM

I love this illustration. Sums it up nicely.

JAM on February 4, 2012 at 12:49 PM

lest we forget……had our “BORN ALIVE INFANT PROTECTION ACT” Illinois State Senator (before he became the Progressive Pope of America) been around in the 1400′s a lady named Caterina could have tried to have her unborn son aborted and if he would have survived the botched abortion, Obama would have supported letting the child die without medical assistance.

How many Leonardos are we losing today?

Leonardo di ser Piero da Vinci (April 15, 1452 – May 2, 1519, Old Style) was an Italian Renaissance polymath: painter, sculptor, architect, musician, scientist, mathematician, engineer, inventor, anatomist, geologist, cartographer, botanist and writer whose genius, perhaps more than that of any other figure, epitomized the Renaissance humanist ideal. Leonardo has often been described as the archetype of the Renaissance Man, a man of “unquenchable curiosity” and “feverishly inventive imagination”.[1] He is widely considered to be one of the greatest painters of all time and perhaps the most diversely talented person ever to have lived.[2] According to art historian Helen Gardner, the scope and depth of his interests were without precedent and “his mind and personality seem to us superhuman, the man himself mysterious and remote”.[1] Marco Rosci points out, however, that while there is much speculation about Leonardo, his vision of the world is essentially logical rather than mysterious, and that the empirical methods he employed were unusual for his time.[3]

Born out of wedlock to a notary, Piero da Vinci, and a peasant woman, Caterina, at Vinci in the region of Florence….

all hail the Pope of “Choice”

PappyD61 on February 4, 2012 at 12:51 PM

He wants, in short, to be the Pope of America. And that’s a strange arrogance to display in an election year.

Yes, but you can hardly blame Barry for thinking it won’t matter. After all, he displayed the same arrogance in 2008 and got elected anyway.

AZCoyote on February 4, 2012 at 12:52 PM

When he spoke at Notre Dame is when he demanded that all the religious iconography present in the hall (i.e. crosses, crucifixes, etc) be covered up for the cameras.

aquaviva on February 4, 2012 at 12:53 PM

Obama is claiming the executive authority to determine which missions of believers are religious and which are not — and then to aggressively regulate institutions the government declares to be secular. It is a view of religious liberty so narrow and privatized that it barely covers the space between a believer’s ears.

You’d think the DOJ position in Hosanna-Tabor would have tipped them off.

Obama, Hillary, and the rest of the left only recognize “freedom to worship,” which means you can do what you want in your house of worship on your sabbath (unless, of course, you’re in the military, in which case the government will review the sermon ahead of time).

But when you come out the doors, you live in a secular world in which you use a secular vocabulary and conform to the secular left ideology of “tolerance”. You cannot “impose your values” on anyone else, but must accept that secular liberals will impose theirs on you.

If your religion requires wearing some article of clothing, such as a hijab or ceremonial knife (Sikhs), it may be allowed, as it is part of your “culture.”

Wethal on February 4, 2012 at 12:54 PM

But lets look at history… did legalizing contraception really reduce the incidence of abortion? I don’t think so because it came with a moral revolution and made people less responsible about sex. Shotgun weddings(like the ones my parents went through even in late 70s) are pretty rare now.

ninjapirate on February 4, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Indeed. It objectified sex, which went from a beautiful expression of total conjugal giving of oneself to the another (with the possibility of bringing forth life) to a recreational act of self-satisfaction. By divorcing the unitive and reproductive aspects of the conjugal act it diminished both, so not only sex became a commodity but also did babies, making abortion much more acceptable.

neuquenguy on February 4, 2012 at 12:58 PM

But lets look at history… did legalizing contraception really reduce the incidence of abortion? I don’t think so because it came with a moral revolution and made people less responsible about sex. Shotgun weddings(like the ones my parents went through even in late 70s) are pretty rare now.

ninjapirate on February 4, 2012 at 12:49 PM

yes, contraception came before abortion was legal. and it reduced the number of abortions that at those days where illegal. also, many of the abortions we not done by married women that had no access contraceptives and just had too many children already.

nathor on February 4, 2012 at 12:59 PM

Indeed. It objectified sex, which went from a beautiful expression of total conjugal giving of oneself to the another (with the possibility of bringing forth life) to a recreational act of self-satisfaction. By divorcing the unitive and reproductive aspects of the conjugal act it diminished both, so not only sex became a commodity but also did babies, making abortion much more acceptable.

neuquenguy on February 4, 2012 at 12:58 PM

that culture war is long lost. sexual freedom is here to stay, so lets be pragmatic. should we propagate information about contraception as much as possible to avoid the need to abortions or not? is the catholic church being helpful in this or not.

nathor on February 4, 2012 at 1:04 PM

how are we going to avoid abortions without contraception?

nathor on February 4, 2012 at 12:34 PM

Let me adopt my best Father explaining things to a five year old:

Well Nather, the Church explains that you should refrain from creating a baby until you are married and then if God blesses you with a pregnancy, you welcome the child with open arms and love just as God will welcome you to heaven some day if you don’t act like a jerk

KW64 on February 4, 2012 at 1:04 PM

Consider Catholicism’s most prominent academic leader, the Rev. John Jenkins, president of Notre Dame. Jenkins took a serious risk in sponsoring Obama’s 2009 honorary degree and commencement address — which promised a “sensible” approach to the conscience clause. Jenkins now complains, “This is not the kind of ‘sensible’ approach the president had in mind when he spoke here.” Obama has made Jenkins — and other progressive Catholic allies — look easily duped.

They were easily duped. Anybody that was paying attention should have seen Obama coming a mile away.

ghostwriter on February 4, 2012 at 1:05 PM

that culture war is long lost. sexual freedom is here to stay, so lets be pragmatic. should we propagate information about contraception as much as possible to avoid the need to abortions or not? is the catholic church being helpful in this or not.

nathor on February 4, 2012 at 1:04 PM

Who is we?

ghostwriter on February 4, 2012 at 1:07 PM

Obama’s actions aren’t interesting or surprising; anyone could see them coming from before the election, and most of us here did. What will be interesting is to see how the US Catholic hierarchy reacts. Around the world, priests have been imprisoned, tortured and killed for obeying their faith rather than the secular power. Will Reverend Jenkins take a bold stand of defiant civil disobedience and dare the government to enforce this unjust edict? Or will he write a very sternly-worded op-ed and host a couple of fundraisers? I’m betting the latter, but I’ll be delighted to be proven wrong in the unlikely event that happens.

Fabozz on February 4, 2012 at 1:11 PM

Obama conned them with his “social justice” spin, which has been very popular on many Catholic campuses, as well as with some US cardinals (Benedict is slowly replacing the lefty cardinals with conservatives). Pairing with the government on “social justice” made it look like the lefty Catholics cared about the poor without having to pay the full tab for the care.

Kathleen Kennedy Townsend wrote an op-ed a few months ago on how Jesus would want big-government welfare programs. That “render unto Caesar” stuff and parables about private charity being an individual obligation were no longer relevant.

Wethal on February 4, 2012 at 1:11 PM

Obama and the Dems are trying to substitute “Freedom of Worship” for “Freedom of Religion”. “Freedom of Worship” to them means you are free to believe whatever you want to believe as long as that belief never leaves the confines of your head. Once you actually try to act on that belief, we’ll stop you. So if your belief impells you to not purchase a product that violates your morals, well and we say you have to purchase that product, then THAT’S what you’re going to do. Period.

PackerBronco on February 4, 2012 at 1:11 PM

yes, contraception came before abortion was legal. and it reduced the number of abortions that at those days where illegal. also, many of the abortions we not done by married women that had no access contraceptives and just had too many children already.

nathor on February 4, 2012 at 12:59 PM

I understand those those cases for married couple but I think it was canceled out by how contraception changed mores.

Listen, I think both the Catholic Church and those who think contraception are the only answer are wrong. One wants nature to be the only guide and one wants technology to be the only guide. One wants to follow an ideal social(and sexual) order and one doesn’t even acknowledge an ideal to peruse.

ninjapirate on February 4, 2012 at 1:12 PM

NO religion, is religion. The general public, has some belief system. Society should not be forced to accept the NON religion, religion, of others just as those who don’t believe, shouldn’t be forced to take part in a particular belief system.

TX-96 on February 4, 2012 at 1:14 PM

Just say no to murdering unborn babies.

davidk on February 4, 2012 at 12:48 PM

The Pro-Life community uses words like babies, people, and murder.

Have any of you actually read what the Bible has to say about when the unborn gains value as a human ? The Bible doesn’t use the terms that you do to describe the unborn, it doesn’t call them babies or children, it uses the term “fruit”, or “fruit of the womb”. And it expressly says that they are not people unless they have been in the womb for more than a month. And even if the fruit has been in the womb for more than a month, it is not murder if it is killed by a man punching the mother in the gut. Now if the man rapes her after hitting her, then it is murder.
If you need the scriptural refs just ask and I’ll find them.
I’m not saying all this because I am pro abortion, i am pro life. I just think our argument should make more sense.

Haldol on February 4, 2012 at 1:14 PM

that culture war is long lost. sexual freedom is here to stay, so lets be pragmatic.
nathor on February 4, 2012 at 1:04 PM

Indeed, as Jesus said: “Blessed are the pragmatic because they shall receive …” wait, what do they receive?

PackerBronco on February 4, 2012 at 1:15 PM

how are we going to avoid abortions without contraception?

nathor on February 4, 2012 at 12:34 PM

Not content just being a dolt, you have to scream it to everybody at every chance you get. This isn’t about contraception or abortifacients. It’s about the government trampling on religious freedom and forcing the Catholic Church to act against one of its core tenets. How many freedoms are you willing to give up before you get it?

Trafalgar on February 4, 2012 at 1:16 PM

Let me adopt my best Father explaining things to a five year old:

Well Nather, the Church explains that you should refrain from creating a baby until you are married and then if God blesses you with a pregnancy, you welcome the child with open arms and love just as God will welcome you to heaven some day if you don’t act like a jerk

KW64 on February 4, 2012 at 1:04 PM

but I am an atheist and i dont believe all that sillyness of god and heaven.
anyway, culturally, americans disobey this church wisdom and engage in sex well before marriage. many such as myself actually had children before marriage because in my personal view marriage only makes sense after children. as such, should not the church help provide contraception to avoid the greater evil of abortion?

nathor on February 4, 2012 at 1:17 PM

Who is we?

ghostwriter on February 4, 2012 at 1:07 PM

society in general.

nathor on February 4, 2012 at 1:18 PM

that culture war is long lost. sexual freedom is here to stay, so lets be pragmatic. should we propagate information about contraception as much as possible to avoid the need to abortions or not? is the catholic church being helpful in this or not.

nathor on February 4, 2012 at 1:04 PM

People are free to do whatever they want, this is a principal tenet of the Catholic Church. However there are consequences to our choices. If I choose to walk into traffic I will probably get run over, if I chose to have sex I will probably create a baby. It can be well argued that contraception and abortion have actually deprived women the freedom from pressure from men to consent to sex. Now that men don’t have to bear any responsibility for their actions they can use women as sex objects.
With respect to your questions:

should we propagate information about contraception as much as possible?

The church teaches that abortion and contraception are intrinsically evil acts that are never justifiable, so why would they promote or enable these acts?

is the catholic church being helpful in this or not?

The church is very helpful by teaching the truth and making as aware of the consequences of our wrong choices, also by providing help and support in many ways in our struggles to live up to these truths.

neuquenguy on February 4, 2012 at 1:20 PM

Obama conned them with his “social justice” spin, which has been very popular on many Catholic campuses, as well as with some US cardinals (Benedict is slowly replacing the lefty cardinals with conservatives). Pairing with the government on “social justice” made it look like the lefty Catholics cared about the poor without having to pay the full tab for the care.

I suppose that’s possible. Catholics really should be too smart to fall for that social justice crap…

ghostwriter on February 4, 2012 at 1:20 PM

Consider Catholicism’s most prominent academic leader, the Rev. John Jenkins, president of Notre Dame. Jenkins took a serious risk in sponsoring Obama’s 2009 honorary degree and commencement address — which promised a “sensible” approach to the conscience clause. Jenkins now complains, “This is not the kind of ‘sensible’ approach the president had in mind when he spoke here.” Obama has made Jenkins — and other progressive Catholic allies — look easily duped.

Jenkins’ quote makes is sound as if he still really, really wants to believe that what Obama thought in 2009 is somehow different than what Obama thinks today, and that the Barack Obama he supported has in some way been corrupted in the past 2 1/2 years.

If that’s the case, you can expect Jenkins and other Catholic Obama supporters who are angry at the president now to walk back their anger if Ob. If he backtracks, they will convince themselves that he’s ‘seen the light’and wouldn’t possibly bring back the mandates to violate church teachings once he was re-elected.

jon1979 on February 4, 2012 at 1:22 PM

society in general.

nathor on February 4, 2012 at 1:18 PM

Don’t do it, but if you do, use a rubber is a pretty incoherent message.

ghostwriter on February 4, 2012 at 1:22 PM

as such, should not the church help provide contraception to avoid the greater evil of abortion?

nathor on February 4, 2012 at 1:17 PM

Argue with the Church on that one. But the Church’s teaching on contraception has been clear and consistent and the issue is not whether you agree with it or not, but whether the government should be able force the Church to purchase health insurance that pays for a procedure they find immoral.

I think the problem here is that you disagree with the Church and therefore you don’t really see the moral issue involved. So let’s take the moral issue out of the discussion for a second, okay?

We both agree that slavery is immoral, but let’s say the government mandated that you, as a an employer, must purchase a policy so that your employees could receive a slave if they wanted one. Now, you are not going to buy a slave and it’s possible that none of your employees will buy a slave, but they might. Can’t you see that forcing you to enter a finacial agreement to support a immoral act (by the tenets of your faith) is a violation of your constitutional rights to freedom of religion?

Now put yourself in the Church’s shoes. They have a strong moral stance against contraception. You may not agree with it, but at least appreciate the seriousness of the government’s action in this case.

PackerBronco on February 4, 2012 at 1:23 PM

Haldol on February 4, 2012 at 1:14 PM

Hmm… I used to be an Objectivist before I learned of Ayn Rand’s view on abortion.

To equate a potential with an actual, is vicious;

http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/abortion.html

The fundamental difference between Christianity and Objectivism is that to Christians a potential(mainly the Kingdom of God) is an Actual. To explain this potential the metaphor of a pregnant woman is used multiple times. It is “Already, but not Yet”.

ninjapirate on February 4, 2012 at 1:24 PM

Hmm… I used to be an Objectivist before I learned of Ayn Rand’s view on abortion.

Was she pro?

ghostwriter on February 4, 2012 at 1:25 PM

The fundamental difference

A fundamental different with regard to morality between…(It’s not THE fundamental difference)

ninjapirate on February 4, 2012 at 1:26 PM

but I am an atheist and i dont believe all that sillyness of god and heaven.
anyway, culturally, americans disobey this church wisdom and engage in sex well before marriage. many such as myself actually had children before marriage because in my personal view marriage only makes sense after children. as such, should not the church help provide contraception to avoid the greater evil of abortion?

nathor on February 4, 2012 at 1:17 PM

Atheists also benefit from having neighbors who feel called by faith to have concern and compassion for all people and not just for themselves. To throw that altruism out along with the bathwater (and babies too, I guess) that you see as silliness in religion is a mistake that the left makes at the peril of a successful social fabric (which is what civilization really is).

KW64 on February 4, 2012 at 1:26 PM

Indeed, as Jesus said: “Blessed are the pragmatic because they shall receive …” wait, what do they receive?

PackerBronco on February 4, 2012 at 1:15 PM

as an atheist I think they will get nothing. however, the failure of using contraception will lead to women committing abortion even if abortion was illegal.
aren’t you incensed at the “killing of millions of innocent babies” that goes on today? the best way to avoid this tragedy is trough contraception. so, as a prolifer, you should support it!

nathor on February 4, 2012 at 1:26 PM

Was she pro?

Yes, she was very pro abortion. She was also somewhat squeamish about evolution too for some reason.

ninjapirate on February 4, 2012 at 1:27 PM

Requiring religious institutions to provide birth control and the morning after pill is significant in itself; more importantly, this move is the camel’s nose under the tent. How long do you think it will be before Catholic hospitals have to provide abortions?

As many have said, this is the French Revolution all over again, but in slo-mo. They’re much smarter this time.

PattyJ on February 4, 2012 at 1:30 PM

By summer Obama will be whiter than his mother was and more Christian than Christ, even though he’s likely Agnostic.

He has lost the W VA and VA white “bible-thumping and gun-toting” rubes and needs them back.

Schadenfreude on February 4, 2012 at 1:34 PM

I go to a PCA Presbyterian church in SE Texas, but I called the offices of the Archdiocese of Galveston and Houston to offer my praise and support for their stance against Obama and his attempt to remove religious liberty in America. Our church is also standing with the Catholic churches in our area. Stand up and support the churches in your area. Let them know that we’ll all stand together against this regime’s attempt to strike out the very first amendment to our Constitution; the very document Obama swore to uphold. He’s broken his oath. Obama may have divided America, but he’s doing more to unite the church than any other administration…united against him and the federal government.

Weight of Glory on February 4, 2012 at 1:34 PM

aren’t you incensed at the “killing of millions of innocent babies” that goes on today? the best way to avoid this tragedy is trough contraception. so, as a prolifer, you should support it!

nathor on February 4, 2012 at 1:26 PM

Are you not incensed at a government policy that makes it illegal to practice Catholicism in a country that supposedly enshrines religious freedom? Even if you do not agree with Catholic teaching, protecting their ability to follow their practice also preserves the principle that you have a right to practice no religion at all. Some countries do not respect that principle and you would suffer for your lack of belief just as Christians have suffered for their belief.

KW64 on February 4, 2012 at 1:34 PM

aren’t you incensed at the “killing of millions of innocent babies” that goes on today? the best way to avoid this tragedy is trough contraception. so, as a prolifer, you should support it!

nathor on February 4, 2012 at 1:26 PM

I wouldn’t make it illegal.

But I also support the Church in its teaching. I’m not going to restate all of the reasons for the teaching (I would refer you to Humane Vitae, which was absolutely prophetic if you’re interested.) I will however relate a story from my marriage prep many years ago.

The priest was given the Church’s teaching on contraception. He was doing a very poor job (most priests do, unfortunately). One of the young men also going through marriage prep asked at the conclusion of the presentation, “So, this is just the ideal right?”
And then satisfied with that, the young man sat down, giving the impression that if it was just the ideal, we could all ignore it.

You see, the Church has to be one who upholds the ideal. It’s the rest of the world that can be pragmatic. But if a Church only stands for the pragmatic, in the end it stands for nothing.

PackerBronco on February 4, 2012 at 1:36 PM

nathor on February 4, 2012 at 12:34 PM

Contraception leads to abortion. If you are already using contraception to avoid pregnancy there is little reason, especially if you are told an embryo or fetus is a “clump of cells” or a non-person, to not have an abortion. It’s a nice little business.
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/new-study-links-contraception-hike-with-increased-abortions/

quiz1 on February 4, 2012 at 1:36 PM

How did this thread become about atheism? Who gives a rat’s ass about atheism? The point is that Obama is far overstepping his Constitutional limitations. He doesn’t get to tell anybody in this country what they must believe. And he doesn’t get to tell them what they believe is unimportant, and theat they have to act against their consciences.

ghostwriter on February 4, 2012 at 1:37 PM

People are free to do whatever they want, this is a principal tenet of the Catholic Church. However there are consequences to our choices. If I choose to walk into traffic I will probably get run over, if I chose to have sex I will probably create a baby. It can be well argued that contraception and abortion have actually deprived women the freedom from pressure from men to consent to sex. Now that men don’t have to bear any responsibility for their actions they can use women as sex objects.

and women have no pleasure in sex? maybe they also want sexual pleasure without the consequences. some might even want to use men as sexual objects and i am sure many do.

The church teaches that abortion and contraception are intrinsically evil acts that are never justifiable, so why would they promote or enable these acts?

promote contraception to avoid the much greater evil of abortion. but why the church think sex with contraception is an evil act?

The church is very helpful by teaching the truth and making as aware of the consequences of our wrong choices,

truth? as an atheist i think the church is full of falsehood.

also by providing help and support in many ways in our struggles to live up to these truths.

neuquenguy on February 4, 2012 at 1:20 PM

but if your truth is the horrible sin of “killing innocents” even if these the parents of these innocents are unbelievers, should the church not help these unbelievers get contraception to avoid the greater evil of abortion?

nathor on February 4, 2012 at 1:37 PM

as such, should not the church help provide contraception to avoid the greater evil of abortion?

nathor on February 4, 2012 at 1:17 PM

No, because that would be contrary to the church’s beliefs. Again, the church teaches that contraception is “intrinsically evil” (CCC 2369). This phrase means that the act is evil regardless of the circumstances (culpability is another matter and depends on the degree of freedom one has to choose to commit the act i.e. gun to the head scenario) An intrinsically evil act does not become acceptable simply because, by it’s commission, we hope to avoid another intrinsic evil.

neuquenguy on February 4, 2012 at 1:38 PM

The Chosen One and Her Highness of Health Care are full of bluster at the moment. Only now are they beginning to realize that they’ve really stepped into it Big Time.

Or is King Obama going to opine “Just how many Divisions do the Catholics have?”

GarandFan on February 4, 2012 at 1:38 PM

that culture war is long lost. sexual freedom is here to stay, so lets be pragmatic.
nathor on February 4, 2012 at 1:04 PM

What you assume to be the culmination of a “culture war” has been nothing more than the delineation of sides. Not only have the culture wars not ended, they’ve barely begun. We’ve not gone anywhere and we wont acquiesce to what you deem to be practical in executing children for some esoteric, 100 year old ideal of “sexual freedom”, when all it does is enslave our sons and daughters to their base desires, only to merely “liberate” them from their own conscience but not the consequences, as millions of women will attest.

Weight of Glory on February 4, 2012 at 1:43 PM

I don’t believe in the silliness of atheists.

redmama on February 4, 2012 at 1:44 PM

How long do you think it will be before Catholic hospitals have to provide abortions?

PattyJ on February 4, 2012 at 1:30 PM

The Church will close all of its hospitals rather than allow that to happen. There are 615 Catholic hospitals in the US, providing 15% of all health care in the country, 15.4 million emergency room visits and more than 86 million outpatient visits annually.

Trafalgar on February 4, 2012 at 1:45 PM

yes, contraception came before abortion was legal. and it reduced the number of abortions that at those days where illegal. also, many of the abortions we not done by married women that had no access contraceptives and just had too many children already.

nathor on February 4, 2012 at 12:59 PM

I just tried to run that post through an English translator. It crashed.

Yoop on February 4, 2012 at 1:46 PM

I just tried to run that post through an English translator. It crashed.

Yoop on February 4, 2012 at 1:46 PM

yes, contraception came before abortion was legal. and it reduced the number of illegal abortions. also, many of the abortions were done by married women that had no access contraceptives and just had too many children already.

nathor on February 4, 2012 at 1:48 PM

The Church will close all of its hospitals rather than allow that to happen. There are 615 Catholic hospitals in the US, providing 15% of all health care in the country, 15.4 million emergency room visits and more than 86 million outpatient visits annually.

Trafalgar on February 4, 2012 at 1:45 PM

QFT

ghostwriter on February 4, 2012 at 1:53 PM

nathor on February 4, 2012 at 1:37 PM

The Church teaches that contraception is evil because it violates the very purpose and nature of the human sexual act, and therefore violates the dignity of the human person. The sexual act naturally leads to procreation, and when you remove the procreative element you are left with the sexual act devoid of any real sacrifice – that sex (and therefore other persons) is purely for the pleasure and benefit of each individual. Contraception then naturally leads to abortion. The explosion of porn and sex-trafficking. The explosion of the divorce rate. The increase in STD’s. The consequences of removing pregnancy from the sexual act and how it alters human behavior has far-reaching implications. None of which are good for individuals and society.

quiz1 on February 4, 2012 at 1:53 PM

and women have no pleasure in sex? maybe they also want sexual pleasure without the consequences. some might even want to use men as sexual objects and i am sure many do.

Sure, however from the church’s perspective, the only way you can have sex “without consequences” is if you do it within the sanctity of marriage, in a infertile moment and without destroying the beauty and integrity of the conjugal act through contraception. The men and women you refer to can exercise their “sexual freedom” without the consequence of a baby but I don’t know about any other physical, emotional, or spiritual consequences.

why the church think sex with contraception is an evil act?

I would refer you to the Catechism of the Catholic Church (2369), to Pope Paul VI “Humane Vitae” or to Pope John Paul II “The Gospel of Life”

truth? as an atheist i think the church is full of falsehood.

That’s your prerogative

nathor on February 4, 2012 at 1:37 PM

neuquenguy on February 4, 2012 at 1:54 PM

What you assume to be the culmination of a “culture war” has been nothing more than the delineation of sides. Not only have the culture wars not ended, they’ve barely begun. We’ve not gone anywhere and we wont acquiesce to what you deem to be practical in executing children for some esoteric, 100 year old ideal of “sexual freedom”, when all it does is enslave our sons and daughters to their base desires, only to merely “liberate” them from their own conscience but not the consequences, as millions of women will attest.

Weight of Glory on February 4, 2012 at 1:43 PM

ah! our desires are nature given, but somehow the church managed to paint them as a evil if done outside their societal rules. and this is what it is all about, imposing Christian morality on the rest of us.

nathor on February 4, 2012 at 1:54 PM

Contraception leads to abortion. If you are already using contraception to avoid pregnancy there is little reason, especially if you are told an embryo or fetus is a “clump of cells” or a non-person, to not have an abortion. quiz1 on February 4, 2012 at 1:36 PM

You might as well add; “and the world is flat” to your first sentence.
It is the Bible that says that the “clump of cells” is NOT a person. See my earlier post for details.

Haldol on February 4, 2012 at 1:54 PM

As a Catholic myself who did not vote for Obama, I have little sympathy for those that did and now cry foul. It’s like stroking a snake and being surprised when it bites you.

oregano on February 4, 2012 at 1:55 PM

nathor on February 4, 2012 at 1:48 PM

Ugh.

quiz1 on February 4, 2012 at 1:58 PM

Haldol on February 4, 2012 at 1:54 PM

What is a person

quiz1 on February 4, 2012 at 2:00 PM

ah! our desires are nature given, but somehow the church managed to paint them as a evil if done outside their societal rules. and this is what it is all about, imposing Christian morality on the rest of us.

nathor on February 4, 2012 at 1:54 PM

Wow. can you dig up an older worn out response? You can’t even see you poor logical formation of the phrase “nature given” as being inconsistent with you critique of the evil oppressive society, that‘s out to ruin your fun frolic in the fields of sexual liberty. Reading you is like watching a rerun of a 1996 documentary on the History channel. “People were all having a great time…until the Christians came along.” But don’t fret, you just rage against the “system” and “society” as whatever you’ve created those to be in your little head.

Weight of Glory on February 4, 2012 at 2:01 PM

Remember the whole mandate to purchase health insurance is before SCOTUS more controversy like this may be very helpful in convincing a majority to rule against the whole darn thing.

skatz51 on February 4, 2012 at 2:02 PM

QFT

ghostwriter on February 4, 2012 at 1:53 PM

Pardon me?

Trafalgar on February 4, 2012 at 2:08 PM

The Church teaches that contraception is evil because it violates the very purpose and nature of the human sexual act, and therefore violates the dignity of the human person. The sexual act naturally leads to procreation, and when you remove the procreative element you are left with the sexual act devoid of any real sacrifice

why there must be a sacrifice to have pleasure?

– that sex (and therefore other persons) is purely for the pleasure and benefit of each individual. Contraception then naturally leads to abortion. The explosion of porn and sex-trafficking. The explosion of the divorce rate. The increase in STD’s. The consequences of removing pregnancy from the sexual act and how it alters human behavior has far-reaching implications. None of which are good for individuals and society.

quiz1 on February 4, 2012 at 1:53 PM

porn is harmless. sex trafficking is horrible but seems to be more a result of economic unbalances and globalization. STD’s are much worse in countries where contraception is is also unavailable(africa AIDS comes to mind).
i dont agree with your conclusions.

nathor on February 4, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Obama has made Jenkins — and other progressive Catholic allies — look easily duped

Because they were easily duped?

tom on February 4, 2012 at 2:12 PM

i dont agree with your conclusions.

nathor on February 4, 2012 at 2:09 PM

You are a product of your society. I wouldn’t expect you to understand even though all the evidence of the Church’s wisdom is in full display.

quiz1 on February 4, 2012 at 2:14 PM

Obama has made Jenkins — and other progressive Catholic allies — look easily duped

Because they were easily duped?

tom on February 4, 2012 at 2:12 PM

But it must be pointed out that this was not without the protest, outrage and campaigns of many,many good Catholic individuals, groups, and clergy, including Jenkins’ own bishop.

neuquenguy on February 4, 2012 at 2:15 PM

Comment pages: 1 2