PDA

View Full Version : Obama LIES to Catholic Cardinal/Archbishop



soonercruiser
3/31/2012, 08:59 PM
THis President has absolutely no scruples........that is why the efforts and recent activity by the administration on MidEast peace are merely about Obama's re-election chances.


THE WALLSTREET JOURNAL. The WEEKEND INTERVIEW.


WHEN THE ARCHBISHOP MET THE PRESIDENTBy JAMES TARANTO
New York
When the Archbishop Met the President Cardinal Dolan thought he heard Barack Obama pledge respect for the Catholic Church's rights of conscience. Then came the contraception coverage mandate..

The president of the U.S. Conference of Bishops is careful to show due respect for the president of the United States. "I was deeply honored that he would call me and discuss these things with me," says the newly elevated Cardinal Timothy Dolan, archbishop of New York. But when Archbishop Dolan tells me his account of their discussions of the ObamaCare birth-control mandate, Barack Obama sounds imperious and deceitful to me.

Mr. Obama knew that the mandate would pose difficulties for the Catholic Church, so he invited Archbishop Dolan to the Oval Office last November, shortly before the bishops' General Assembly in Baltimore. At the end of their 45-minute discussion, the archbishop summed up what he understood as the president's message:

"I said, 'I've heard you say, first of all, that you have immense regard for the work of the Catholic Church in the United States in health care, education and charity. . . . I have heard you say that you are not going to let the administration do anything to impede that work and . . . that you take the protection of the rights of conscience with the utmost seriousness. . . . Does that accurately sum up our conversation?' [Mr. Obama] said, 'You bet it does.'"

The archbishop asked for permission to relay the message to the other bishops. "You don't have my permission, you've got my request," the president replied.
...............
...........
An insular attitude, Archbishop Dolan suggests, plays into the hands of ideologues who favor an ever-more-powerful secular government: "I get this all the time: I would have some people say, 'Cardinal Dolan, you need to go to Albany and say, "If we don't get state aid by September, I'm going to close all my schools."' I say to them, 'You don't think there'd be somersaults up and down the corridors?'"

What about the argument that vast numbers of Catholics ignore the church's teachings about sexuality? Doesn't the church have a problem conveying its moral principles to its own flock? "Do we ever!" the archbishop replies with a hearty laugh. "I'm not afraid to admit that we have an internal catechetical challenge—a towering one—in convincing our own people of the moral beauty and coherence of what we teach. That's a biggie."

For this he faults the church leadership. "We have gotten gun-shy . . . in speaking with any amount of cogency on chastity and sexual morality." He dates this diffidence to "the mid- and late '60s, when the whole world seemed to be caving in, and where Catholics in general got the impression that what the Second Vatican Council taught, first and foremost, is that we should be chums with the world, and that the best thing the church can do is become more and more like everybody else."

The "flash point," the archbishop says, was "Humanae Vitae," Pope Paul VI's 1968 encyclical reasserting the church's teachings on sex, marriage and reproduction, including its opposition to artificial contraception. It "brought such a tsunami of dissent, departure, disapproval of the church, that I think most of us—and I'm using the first-person plural intentionally, including myself—kind of subconsciously said, 'Whoa. We'd better never talk about that, because it's just too hot to handle.' We forfeited the chance to be a coherent moral voice when it comes to one of the more burning issues of the day."

Without my having raised the subject, he adds that the church's sex-abuse scandal "intensified our laryngitis over speaking about issues of chastity and sexual morality, because we almost thought, 'I'll blush if I do. . . . After what some priests and some bishops, albeit a tiny minority, have done, how will I have any credibility in speaking on that?'"

Yet the archbishop says he sees a hunger, especially among young adults, for a more authoritative church voice on sexuality. "They will be quick to say, 'By the way, we want you to know that we might not be able to obey it. . . . But we want to hear it. And in justice, you as our pastors need to tell us, and you need to challenge us.'"

The archbishop sees a parallel irony in his dispute with Mr. Obama: "This is a strange turn of the table, that here a Catholic cardinal is defending religious freedom, the great proposition of the American republic, and the president of the United States seems to be saying that this is a less-than-important issue."

hawaii 5-0
3/31/2012, 09:03 PM
This will obviously cost Obama the election.

It's all Gingrich's to lose now.

5-0

Turd_Ferguson
3/31/2012, 09:13 PM
This will obviously cost Obama the election.

It's all Gingrich's to lose now.

5-0With all the *******s in the US voting for Obama, I doubt it...

Ike
4/1/2012, 12:26 AM
One hypothetical question (and I don't know if this is the case anywhere, but its certainly not outside the realm of possibility):

It is not impossible that simply adding birth control coverage actually saves money in insurance premiums through a reduction in prenatal/birth care. If that were to be the case, is the church really then paying for someones birth control?

LiveLaughLove
4/1/2012, 01:15 AM
One hypothetical question (and I don't know if this is the case anywhere, but its certainly not outside the realm of possibility):

It is not impossible that simply adding birth control coverage actually saves money in insurance premiums through a reduction in prenatal/birth care. If that were to be the case, is the church really then paying for someones birth control?

That's a good question. Not being Catholic, I don't have a problem with birth control, just abortion.

The quandary is, it doesn't matter. Its not about savings money or not. Its about their consciencely held beliefs.

One can ridicule them as dumb, outdated, etc and it wont change those beliefs.

The government is overstepping into religion. It is violating church/state seperation in the name of fairness. That doesn't cut it.

soonercruiser
4/1/2012, 02:03 PM
One hypothetical question (and I don't know if this is the case anywhere, but its certainly not outside the realm of possibility):

It is not impossible that simply adding birth control coverage actually saves money in insurance premiums through a reduction in prenatal/birth care. If that were to be the case, is the church really then paying for someones birth control?

If we were to euthanize everyone over 70 years old, wouldn't that save a lot of Medicare money?
That's how good a question yours is.
Shall we start a survey to see what most folks think is the price of a human life?
(...and when does a life just cost too much?)
:dispirited:

cccasooner2
4/1/2012, 02:46 PM
One hypothetical question (and I don't know if this is the case anywhere, but its certainly not outside the realm of possibility):

It is not impossible that simply adding birth control coverage actually saves money in insurance premiums through a reduction in prenatal/birth care. If that were to be the case, is the church really then paying for someones birth control?

I would prefer human sacrifice, the virginer the better.

Ike
4/1/2012, 02:54 PM
If we were to euthanize everyone over 70 years old, wouldn't that save a lot of Medicare money?
That's how good a question yours is.
Shall we start a survey to see what most folks think is the price of a human life?
(...and when does a life just cost too much?)
:dispirited:

Right, because preventing pregnancy is exactly the same as euthanization.

What planet are you from?

StoopTroup
4/2/2012, 12:13 AM
If we were to euthanize everyone over 70 years old, wouldn't that save a lot of Medicare money?
That's how good a question yours is.
Shall we start a survey to see what most folks think is the price of a human life?
(...and when does a life just cost too much?)
:dispirited:

Should we put in a President who's own faith has had trouble with polygamy? Albiet they cleaned that up and only a handful of them create a mess out of their lives now but yet....we do see some holdouts of their old ways. We also could believe that he might push to outlaw all stimulants like Coffee, Tea and Cigarettes. No Thongs.....only those sexy white long johns with the back flaps.

Separation of Church and State is required of our Politicians. Not so much from say Churches that don't allow Drinking or dancing or the ones that drink Strychnine and dance with rattlesnakes.

diverdog
4/2/2012, 05:02 AM
Most American Catholics could give a shi t about birth control. Gas prices...well that is a game changer.

olevetonahill
4/2/2012, 07:56 AM
Ya coulda just left the thread title at "Obama LIES

KantoSooner
4/2/2012, 09:20 AM
I prefer a bright line between church and state. And a bright line between church and commerce. I think I'm standing on firm ground in this. Something about rendering unto Caesar and all that.
I would never tell a church what a priest's health care package should include. But when that church decides to open a steel mill or grocery store chain, then I don't really have an issue with the state telling the church (owners/proprietors) that they must obey industrial standards/regulations/laws on safety, pay scale, discrimination and, yes, health insurance.
The church doesn't like it? The church can get out of commerce and go back to being a ... church.

TitoMorelli
4/2/2012, 09:30 AM
So if the church is running a soup kitchen or homeless shelter and has salaried employees working there, should it be forced to adhere?

KantoSooner
4/2/2012, 10:28 AM
I'd be inclined to carve out an exception, particularly if they were working from the church itself; but, if pushed, yeah, I'd enforce the rules. (in the same way I'd enforce rules on racial or ethnic bias and the provision of safety equipment in the kitchen, etc. Just because they're churches don't make them above the law to me.)
They could, however, use volunteers, in the spirit of charity.

Soonerjeepman
4/2/2012, 03:30 PM
Obama said "that you take the protection of the rights of conscience with the utmost seriousness. . "

doesn't mean he'll do jack about it..but will take it serious...ummm...ok.

as far as BC and being Catholic...47/ born and raised...still practicing...was married 18 yrs...had sex with no BC other than trying to time it or not....had 2 kids...guess I'm saying it's pretty simple if ya TRY...and YES the Catholic church DOES believe in BC..just not unnatural...condom/pills/abortion

TitoMorelli
4/2/2012, 04:58 PM
Obama said "that you take the protection of the rights of conscience with the utmost seriousness. . "

doesn't mean he'll do jack about it..but will take it serious...ummm...ok.

as far as BC and being Catholic...47/ born and raised...still practicing...was married 18 yrs...had sex with no BC other than trying to time it or not....had 2 kids...guess I'm saying it's pretty simple if ya TRY...and YES the Catholic church DOES believe in BC..just not unnatural...condom/pills/abortion

An homage to you sir. You've definitely got it:

lE-D1j01Nr0

cccasooner2
4/2/2012, 06:18 PM
An homage to you sir. You've definitely got it:

lE-D1j01Nr0

Who could ask for anything more? :)

StoopTroup
4/2/2012, 08:17 PM
I'd be inclined to carve out an exception, particularly if they were working from the church itself; but, if pushed, yeah, I'd enforce the rules. (in the same way I'd enforce rules on racial or ethnic bias and the provision of safety equipment in the kitchen, etc. Just because they're churches don't make them above the law to me.)
They could, however, use volunteers, in the spirit of charity.

I tend to agree. It seems folks are looking for a perfect system that supports everyone's beliefs and/or ideas. It's just never been that way in the history of the World. We allow you Freedom of Religion in this Country. That is one of the things that so many other Countries can't do. Now we have people saying a Politician needs to iron out an individual Religion's Problems with a law that we are passing? It doesn't really step on their Freedom of religion and it doesn't force Birth Control or Abortion on them in any way. What it does is force a Trade-off. You get freedom of religion in America but as an American...you must accept the fact that not everyone believes in your way of life or your religion so in order to give you Freedom of Religion....you are going to need to understand that some of the taxes individuals pay in this Country will go to pay for things you don't agree with. Right now Catholics sit outside Penitentiaries asking them to stop killing folks who were sentenced with Tax payer Money to die because of their crimes. We all pay for that to happen and we (If Catholic) give to our Church to support putting an end to the Death Penalty. The trade off is....the money we give the Church is to a Non-Taxable Charity who hires employees and supplies volunteers with signs and a voice.

All of this has gotten out of hand IMO and it's funny how some of you can bash Catholics in one thread but support them in another as long as you can use some speech that happened between the POTUS and a Hierarchy of the Catholic Church in America.

Talk about hypocritical.

Yeah some Catholics don't abide to the ideals of Family Planning that the Church asks them to try and adhere to. God asks us as Children to remain faithful and true as we grow older but we all kknow how difficult that is so as we make mistakes....we ask for forgiveness or in some folks religions....they go get washed in a kind of State Fair Dunk Tank. Whatever it is....it's a way to let him know that we understand that we are weak sometimes and that we will try to do better as we wait until our passing and sitting beside him before we go onto living a life eternal that will make sense to us finally and allow us to live without the trappings of this World.

TheHumanAlphabet
4/3/2012, 10:28 AM
Why the Jews and the Catholics vote for this guy is beyond me... O'Bummer is no friend of the church or the synagogue and esp. no friend of Israel.

Soonerjeepman
4/3/2012, 11:31 AM
An homage to you sir. You've definitely got it:

lE-D1j01Nr0

your pic/video/whatever not coming up at work...sure you're bashing..but that's cool...freedom of speech alive and well...guess I'll look tonight at home.. ;-)

if not bashing...then accept my apologies before I look...

Should add...I don't think you should force this on the Catholic organizations...my take is if you want that in YOUR health care then go work for someone that does have it...no one forces you to work for the organization...just my 2 cents....

TitoMorelli
4/3/2012, 02:28 PM
your pic/video/whatever not coming up at work...sure you're bashing..but that's cool...freedom of speech alive and well...guess I'll look tonight at home.. ;-)

if not bashing...then accept my apologies before I look...

Should add...I don't think you should force this on the Catholic organizations...my take is if you want that in YOUR health care then go work for someone that does have it...no one forces you to work for the organization...just my 2 cents....

Not bashing at all, jeep. I linked a YouTube of Judy Garland singing (and Mickey Rooney butting in to do a God-awful job of singing) "I Got Rhythm." If you managed to keep the numbers down with natural BC, then you've definitely "got it" too.

And don't miss cccasooner2's great follow-up.