Cardinal Stafford Stands by Criticism of Obama
November 21, 2008 by Ryan J. Reilly 
Print This Post
Cardinal J. Francis Stafford, head of the Apostolic Penitentiary of the Holy See, is standing by controversial comments he made about President-elect Barack Obama during an on-campus lecture last Thursday. In an address hosted by the John Paul II Institute on Marriage and Family, Stafford called President-elect Barack Obama’s policies “aggressive, disruptive and apocalyptic,” said that his election was “a cultural earthquake” and that Obama campaigned on an “extremist anti-life platform.” (YouTube Video)
Photo by Ryan J. Reilly / Tower Staff
The story about the Cardinal’s comments was posted on CUATOWER.com on Friday and audio of his remarks was added on Monday. Since its posting, the story went viral online and has been picked up by CNN, CBS, ABC, Catholic News Service, National Catholic Reporter and the Drudge Report.
When CNN reached Stafford in Rome, he stood by his remarks and said he has no regrets. He said he does believe his remarks can be misunderstood because his take on the word apocalyptic is different from common western references to the end of the world.
“Apocalyptic,” in Stafford’s understanding, means resistance to the divine and natural laws on reproduction and the preservation of human life, he said. Stafford said he does not speak for the Vatican.
Stafford told CNN he does believe Obama’s stance on abortion rights condones violence towards unborn children, and he does not understand how a Catholic voter could look favorably at the president-elect when “he is hostile to the life of an unborn child.“
During a preview of the CNN segment on Tuesday, “Situation Room” host Wolf Blitzer, who delivered the main commencement address at the University in 2006, categorized Stafford’s comments as a “diatribe,” and as both a “scathing” and a “blistering rant.”
Stafford “wants to make sure we understand that this is not a political thing with him,” CNN’s Brian Todd reported. “He said he himself has come out critical against President Bush for the war in Iraq, for interrogation programs, etc. So he says this is not any kind of a political message,” said Todd. “He just firmly believes in the anti-abortion message that he always espouses and he thinks Barack Obama goes directly against it.”
CNN also contacted the Vatican and the Obama transition team. Both choose not to comment on the story.
University President Rev. David M. O’Connell was not on campus when the lecture took place and cannot comment on something he did not hear, according to Victor Nakas, Catholic University spokesman. Nakas also clarified that the John Paul II Institute on Marriage and Family, which resides in McGivney Hall, is a “separate institution and organization with its own board, institutional authorities, budget, staff, curriculum and operations” which is “assessed by CUA monthly for operating costs, utilities, etc.”
The JPII Institute is a graduate school of theology affiliated with both the University and the Pontifical Lateran University in Rome. It is a pontifical institute and, like CUA, is directly accountable to the Vatican, said Nakas. Degrees issued by the Institute are granted through the Pontifical Lateran University in Rome, not through the University.
Carl Anderson and the Knights of Columbus gave $8 million to Catholic University to restore Keane Hall and rename it after Rev. Michael J. McGivney, the founder of the Knights of Columbus. The building boasts four classrooms, the 120-seat Keane Auditorium and office space for the JPII Institute.
Doug Kmiec, the former dean of the Columbus School of Law at Catholic University who endorsed Obama, called Stafford “a great churchmen and defender of the Faith,” but believes he was reacting to the false portrayal of Obama as anti-life.
“Sometimes all of us — even the wisest among us – are given to speak not from personal knowledge, but from that which has been portrayed as true, but is really a caricature,” said Kmiec in an interview with The Tower.
“When Stafford gets to know Obama better, said Kmiec, he will readily see that Obama “has far more in common with our great faith tradition than any political administration in recent memory.” [FULL KMIEC COMMENTS].
Stafford’s remarks were prepared and he offered a copy of them, according to a CNN producer. His prepared remarks were obtained by Catholic News Agency last night.
The entire lecture was video taped using three video cameras by CUA Digital Media Services for the JPII Institute. According to those who now have the files, they have not yet decided what to do with the video. David L. Schindler, provost and dean of the Institute, was out of town and not available for comment.
Word Cloud of Cardinal Stafford's Prepared Remarks by Ryan J. Reilly
Related posts:
- Letter to the Editor: Cardinal Stafford Right on Obama’s Abortion Views I was surprised to read Prof. Kmiec's editorial about Cardinal...
- Cardinal at CUA: Obama is ‘Aggressive, Disruptive and Apocalyptic’ His Eminence James Francis Cardinal Stafford criticized President-elect Barack Obama...
- Prof. Doug Kmiec on Cardinal Stafford’s Obama Comments The Cardinal is a great churchmen and defender of the...
- CUA Tower Story on Cardinal’s Comments about Obama Goes Viral A CUATOWER.com story on a Cardinal who called President-elect Barack...
- Pro-Life Former Law School Dean Supports Obama with Book Douglas W. Kmiec, the former dean of the Columbus School...
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
I just don’t see how Catholics can go around accusing people of being murderers and represent the message of Jesus and forgiveness at the same time.
I called a bunch of Catholic priests to ask why third world countries are so impoverished when they and the royal families they lead to those countries in the age of colonialism have been there for so many centuries. The only lands outside of Europe that do not have majority populations suffering at the brink of poverty are ones that have not allowed the Catholic Church to play a major role in their government. Most poverty stricken countries are all places that the church has played an integral role in educating and bringing into the 20th and 21rst century.
I was told repeatedly by the priests I talked to that the church’s role is not to eliminate poverty or make the world a better place but to prepare souls for Christ’s return. So it seems when it comes to providing leadership that would eliminate the kind of poverty that leads to despair and unwanted pregnancy, the church takes a neutral position in order to preserve its virginity for saving souls. But when it comes to the abortion issue, they become political wanting to nation build while insulting woman who bare a most heavy burden of abortion with having already had to let go of an unborn - FETUS.
The Catholic Church has always needed heretics to persecute to distract its followers from its perverted child molesting priests.
If there is a hell, surely the church’s hierarchy will all burn there one day. If there is not, I have no doubt they will find a way to invent one to put anyone in that doesn’t see the world through their twisted eyes.
The Catholic Church is despicable and should tend to its own downfalls of Grecian style man/boy love rather than persecuting young woman who got pregnant by young men who were told not have sex nor to masturbate by the church who had never been taught how to control their urges.
But then those same young men are also easy pickings for old men in frocks too then aren’t they?
Will one of Cardinal Stafford’s many supporters on this site (and there are many - check the reader comments on the original story) please provide ANY reference or documentation regarding Stafford’s new definition of the word “apocalyptic.”
For Stafford to assert that the millions of people how heard this story on CNN, ABC, CBS and elsewhere are somehow misinterpreting his hateful and incendiary remarks due to silly “western” meanings of the word apocalyptic is a gross insult to our intelligence.
So now according to Stafford, apocalyptic really means “resistance to the divine and natural laws on reproduction and the preservation of human life.”
OH, REALLY? If the word has ever, ever been used or defined in that context will someone please provide some documentation or pointers to it?
What a disgusting display. A Cardinal directy equates President-Elect Obama with the apocalypse, that is, the “expectation of an imminent cosmic cataclysm” and the has the audacity to say what his meaning was “resistance to natural laws on reproduction”???
Does he really think we’re that STUPID? Does he really think he can just INVENT new definitions for words in order to justify his hate speech?
Nice attempt at damage control, but I think this is only going to make the story grow larger and continue. Even Catholics no longer will tolerate this garbage from their leaders. 54% of Catholics VOTED for Obama, and support him, and don’t want this Cardinal speaking for them.
The Webster’s definitions of Apocalypse and Apocalyptic, including the word’s Latin and Greek origins, are below. Where is any evidence of this word used in context of natural laws of reproduction?
apocalyptic
apoc·a·lyp·tic
Function:
adjective
Date:
1663
1 : of, relating to, or resembling an apocalypse
2 : forecasting the ultimate destiny of the world : prophetic
3 : foreboding imminent disaster or final doom : terrible
4 : wildly unrestrained : grandiose
5 : ultimately decisive : climactic
apocalypse
One entry found.
Sponsored Links
What is Armageddon?
Is it a Place? An Event? Is it the end of the World? Now You can know!
http://www.TheRCG.org/Armageddon
apoc·a·lypse
\ə-ˈpä-kə-ˌlips\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
Middle English, revelation, Revelation, from Anglo-French apocalipse, from Late Latin apocalypsis, from Greek apokalypsis, from apokalyptein to uncover, from apo- + kalyptein to cover — more at hell
Date:
13th century
1 a: one of the Jewish and Christian writings of 200 b.c. to a.d. 150 marked by pseudonymity, symbolic imagery, and the expectation of an imminent cosmic cataclysm in which God destroys the ruling powers of evil and raises the righteous to life in a messianic kingdom bcapitalized : revelation 3
2 a: something viewed as a prophetic revelation b: armageddon
3: a great disaster
CHARLES, HE KNOWS ,AND HE KNOWS ,THAT WE KNOW, EXACTLY WHAT HE SAID AND WHAT HE MEANT, AND NOW HE’S CAUGHT BETWEEN THE SUGARTY AND THE TRICKERY,HE MAY HAVE HAD ONE DRINK TOO MANY WHEN HE MADE THOSE COMMENTS?I’M NOT SAYING HE WAS DRUNK OR EVEN HIGH, IN FACT ,HE MAY NOT DRINK AT ALL,BUT YOU KNOW HOW WE CATHOLICS HAVE NOTHING AGAINST ALCOHOL , SOMETIMES YOU NEED A GLASS OF WINE OR A BEER, MAYBE EVEN A COCKTAIL OR TWO, IN THIS WORLD WE LIVE IN, RIGHT?,AS A MATTER OF FACT ONE OF OUR PRIEST BACK IN THE EARLY SIXTIES, HE’S DECEASED NOW ,SO I COULD SAY HIS NAME, BUT I’M SURE HE STILL HAS LIVING RELATIVES SOMEWHERE ,SO I WON’T, BUT HE WAS ONE COOL PRIEST, A LITTLE ON THE CRAZY SIDE, HE USE TO WEAR THAT CASSOCK,,LEANING TO THE SIDE, THE BELT WITH THE ROSARY AROUND IT ,HE WOULD KIND OF HAVE IT WITH A SLANT, AROUND HIS HIP, OMG, I WOULD HAVE TO SHOW YOU,HE THOUGHT HE WAS SO HIP, AND HE WAS, WHEN I THINK ABOUT IT NOW I START LAUGHING, BECAUSE HE WOULD HAVE THAT CIGGARETTE IN HIS HAND AND SMOKED LIKE A CHIMMNEY, HE LOVE THOSE CAMEL CIG, AND HE COULD DRINK, AND WHEN THE BOYS WHO WERE IN OUR CLASS AS ALTAR BOYS ,WOULD ALWAYS TELL US HOW HE WOULD BE ASKING FOR MORE WINE DURING THE OFFERECTORY TO DRINK, SAYING MORE , MORE, AND BELIEVE ME IT WASN’T BECAUSE IT WAS THE BLOOD OF CHRIST, I WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN SUPRISE TO LEARN AND NETHEIR WOULD ANYONE ELSE WHO KNEW HIM THAT HE GAVE UP THE PRIESTHOOD FOR MARRIAGE, BECAUSE WE ALWAYS THOUGHT HE LIKED OUR FIFTH GRADE TEACHER, SISTER —–, BECAUSE SHE WAS NO LONGER A NUN BY THE TIME I GOT INTO THE SIXTH GRADE, AND THEY WERE TELLING US WHAT TO CALL HER WHEN SHE CAME TO OUR ANUAL CHRISTMAS PARTY, I WILL SAY THERE IS NOTHING LIKE GOING TO A CATHOLIC SCHOOL, BECAUSE THE NUNS KEEP IT LIVELY, THEY ARE SMART, THEY CERTAINLY LOVE GOD ,AND OH YES WE KNOW ABOUT THE MEAN ONES RIGHT? THEY DON’T TAKE ANY BS OFF OF ANYONE, AND THEY, ALOT OF THEM ESPECIALLY IN THE SIXTIES AND EARLY SEVENTIES WERE AS I AWAYS SAY WOMEN SO AHEAD OF THEIR TIMES, ESPECIALLY IN ALL BLACK CATHOLIC SCHOOLS, THE ONE I WAS IN MADE US THINK THERE WAS NOTHING, NOT A THING WE COULD NOT DO IN LIFE, WANTING US TO EXCHANGE PHONE NUMBERS, WITH WHITE CATHOLIC SCHOOL CHILDREN,VISITS IN EACH OTHERS HOMES, ALL THE FIELD TRIPS WE TOOK, AND YOU KNOW ALL THOSE NUNS AND PRIESTS WERE WHITE IN MOST OF THE CATHOLIC SCHOOLS AND CHURCHES AT THAT TIME,WOW, I’VE GONE DOWN MEMORY LANE, GETTING OFF THE SUBJECT, AND EVERYTHING, BUT I MUST SAY SOMETHING TOO,THE CATHOLIC CHURCH BELEIVE ME IS NOT THE ONLY ONE WITH SO MANY SINS, BECAUSE WE KNOW THE SOUTHERN BAPTIST CHURCH HAD MEMBERS WHO CERTAINLY HELP START THE KKK,THE WHITE CITIZEN COUNCIL, IT WAS A METHODIST CHURCH IN BIRMINGHAM ALA. WERE SOME MEETINGS TO PLAN BOMBINGS ,WERE HELD, AND CARRIED OUT,WE SHOULD SAY MOST RELIGEONS ARE SEEPED IN BLOOD, SO WE DON’T NEED TO START TALKING ABOUT GETTING RID OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH,WHAT IS SO CRAZY, IS HOW MOST OF THESE RELIGEONS ARE HIJACKED BY SO MANY PEOPLE WHO PROFESS TO LOVE GOD SO MUCH, SOMEONE THEY CAN’T SEE, BUT ACTUALLY HATE THE PERSON THEY CAN SEE, AND YET WE ARE ALL MADE IN THE IMAGE OF GOD,THEY MUST BE TWISTED,
Hi Crystal, I hear ya! It sounds like you been witness to some real classic and funny examples of Catholicism in action.
Especially on the wine thing, I used to be an altar boy and remember a certain priest who on a couple occasions would be chugging two glasses of wine “backstage” before mass as well. This was at a major cathedral, mind you! I figured hey as long as he’s not asking me a for a blow job I guess he can do what he wants, what was I supposed to do, report him??
Anyway one suggestion for you… please stop typing your comments in ALL CAPS! It makes it much harder to read.
All the best,
Charles
God Bless You Cardinal, for having the courage to speak out against our dear Marxist leader elect. That the blind may one day see him for who and what he really is, is my continued prayer. The “Change” that this country wanted so badly is coming…Father forgive them for they know not what they have done! Continue to speak out while you can. Soon, you will be thrown into a concentration camp to make your “mind right”. Very scary stuff happenning. Check out Germany 1938. A charismatic youn leader with a message of hope and change…Look at the change they got! God. please to not abandon us, there are still many here who see Obama and the people who put him in office for who and WHAT he is!Where is the tolerance and understandin and acceptance for his point of view? Hypocrits!
How sad, you people. Don’t you at least are a bit afraid of what God will tell you on your Judgment Day? Let’s not blame the Bishops, the Church or other denominational churches that speaks about the number 6 of the Ten Commandments, “You Shall Not Kill.” What do you think is ABORTION then, a termination of a callus or a wart? Come on people, be more afraid of your souls instead of criticizing churches, priest and pastors who are with God’s law and obey them. Yes, apocalyptic for speaking the truth of GOD’S LAWS. Whoever enters the House of God, even a sinful priest, pastor and other people it is not the fault of the Church that Jesus has left or of the entire priesthood, God will see to the sinful on Judgment Day. But to blame good priest and pastor of all churches who are with God and for God it is a tragedy for you to judge. Wait till you die, maybe tomorrow, who knows and wait until you face GOD ALMIGHTY, your soul will shake and you’ll feel very lonely, ashamed and horrible at that point. Before you judge others, learn to have respect for yourself first and then you’ll respect the rest. Don’t wait for our dead in sin, clean your mouth, your heart and your soul. Death does not have calendar!
Yet another so-called “Christian” hater drawing direct comparisons between President-Elect Obama and Hitler.
Make it stop!! Please, make it stop!!
A couple questions for you, Ann:
1. If Obama is the next Hitler, why did the Pope call with his congratulations? Is the Pope one of these hypocrites of which you speak?
2. If Obama is like Hitler, who was socialist and then fascist, is he also a Marxist? Which one is he currently, or can you please explain how, philosophically, he could be all three at once.
Thanks,
Charles
I stand with this cardinal.
America continues to take long, sharp steps away from God. Obama, with the appointments of Tom D. and Hillary, is surrounding himself with politicians who refuse to protect the human rights of the unborn, and the sacred nature of the family.
I am all for a black president, but not if he ironically is an oppressor. With his messianic zeal, he will lead us not to greatness, but to the doom that lurks to devour us.
The truth: any country that kills its own children has no future. Obama rises to power, and America descends; the blood dripping from his pro-abortion hands is one of the many signs of the times blooming before our eyes.
CHARLES AND CRYSTAL, GO JOIN ANOTHER CHURCH! YOU DON’T STAND UP FOR CATHOLIC ORTHODOXY!!!
Of course the Cardinal is right on about Obama. Anybody who doesn’t know that hasn’t been paying much attention to his well known agenda. From what I have been seeing on the news, Obama supporters are mostly unaware of what he is all about. All they heard was that he’s going to “spread the wealth around” and cut taxes. He promised to pass FOCA as soon as possible which could lead to closing of many hospitals and medical personnel, including doctors, choosing to leave for other fields rather than perform abortions. Can you imagine the impact that would have, especially on the poor? By the way, the Catholic Church is one of the greatest charities, very visible and effective and extremally wide-spread.
Dear Cardinal Stafford;
I read every word of your talk before the Catholic University of America and I was captivated by your wisdom and intellect regarding the scientific-technological world we are living in. Surely God the Father when he granted you the gifts of memory, Intellect and Free will, placed them within you to use His gifts wisely.
I stand with you completely in Faith knowing you spoke from your heart. Thank you for the illumination of our consciences through your words that found their way into our minds and hearts. May Almighty God continue to bless you with the courage to stand your ground against any critism, from whatever source it spills from. I will pray for you always, knowing that too is the will of God, that we remember His priests in prayer.
Thank you your Eminence for your yes to the Lord many years ago.
Pax et Bonum
Richard
Charles and the others: When I was in college I thought much like you. In fact I was on the verge of leaving the Catholic Church for a non-denominational one. I decided to investigate before I left though to find out the TRUTH about the Catholic Church and Christianity. My sense of justice told me that it wasn’t right to pass judgement on a Church and a bunch of priests if I didn’t. I wanted to know 1st. what exactly did the Church believe? (I read the Catechism & looked up the meaning to things that weren’t clear.) 2nd. Why did they believe that? and 3rd. Where did those beliefs originate?. Then I studied about the Crusades (not a good time in history for the church). Then about Vat. II and what changed the church and why priests disagree with each other on what their own church believes. (that area made me realize that there are an awful lot of priests and Jesuits in particular that are using their status & positions to LIE to students about what the Catholics believe and getting away with it still!!) I can’t believe the crap they taught me at MY Catholic University, cuz I didn’t know better!! Lastly what was the cause for the Child Sex Scandal? What I found out would absolutely blow your mind! Most of what you think you know about the Catholic Church or even Christianity you’ll find is badly scewed. Sort of like tabloids will do with things. Other things you’ll find out are the coolest things in the world! The shocking part is that this hasn’t been taught with the amount of proof that is out there to back up the info. We believe it, we have proof, but for years were afraid to teach it for fear of offending people’s delicate ears! Trust me, don’t believe anything your profs tell you and look up stuff yourself, but make sure your resources aren’t biased, cuz there’s a LOT of Bias against the Church based on the amount of misinformed people that think they know what Catholics believe. Please contact me and I’ll be happy to talk more to anyone about the stuff that I found out! My email is marystech@charter.net . I will tell you one thing though and you can be pretty trusting in this as a general rule(course there’s always exceptions) The young newly ordained DIOCESAN priests are usually much better at being able to answer the hard questions, since they pretty much cleaned that up. (course I don’t know how it is in that area.) Also, catholic.com is usually good at answering tough questions too. Trust me, this is one of those things that the more you say now, the dumber you’ll feel later once you find out the real truth behind the story. It’s not a pretty picture either,( ex. like the Catholic Church didn’t do anything wrong and was falsely accused,) nope, the various members of the church did plenty wrong and there are still a lot of them that have no business being there; but to say that the entire Catholic Church or all the priests are rotten would be like me saying EVERYONE at your University AND CUA was rotten just because some or even half of those in authority there and some students broke it’s laws or hurt people. A comment like that wouldn’t be fair to an awful lot of good people or the University. So do yourself a favor and email me for some unbiased info. or at least study objectively what the Catholic Church believes from it’s own Catechism (though if someone knowledgeable doesn’t show you how to read it it’s hard to figure out cuz it’s laid out funny.) and writings of the earliest of Christians (The Faith of the Early Fathers by Jurgens is good for that) I know that you are all smart and there’s no way anyone half intelligent wants to be duped by anyone. God Bless! Mary
Charles,
Why don’t you take a pill and settle down, dear? I can understand why you’re so upset, though — really I can. After all, it’s obvious that you are troubled when folks compare American leaders to Hitler. Since the Left has been comparing Bush to Hitler for the past eight years, I guess you’ve had your fill.
Oh, and by the way, the Pope called Bush too. I’m just sayin’ is all.
Obviously, the one who is out of touch is Doug Kmiec, or he has not heard Obama in his own words speaking out about partial birth abortion. He says that even if a baby survives an abortion attempt it must be killed because the mother’s intent was to abort the baby! I don’t know how anyone can call that attitude pro-life. Mr. Kmiec is deluded, and blinded by the eclat surrounding Obama. He is a lemming. Cardinal Stafford is right to correctly and clearly explain the teachings of the Catholic Church. And all so called Catholics who do not with to listen can continue on in their delusion.
For Charles:
If you disagree with what the Roman Catholic faith clearly determines as teaching, and are not a Roman Catholic, then why should this bother you and why should you care? And if you profess to be Roman Catholic, then you should analyze what that means. You have to believe in all the tenets of the religion, and not pick and choose. It’s the cafeteria Catholics or lapsed Catholics who always seem to have the all the vemon. TO cite a statistic like ‘54% of Catholics voted for Barack Hussein Obama’ is a bit lame; what was left OUT about that statistic is how many of those same people do not regularly attend Mass at all. Anyone can claim affiliation of Roman Catholic.
Cardinal Stafford is correct to teach his flock of the problems because that is his role. IT IS an apocalyptic thing for a political leader to advocate supporting abortion, and Barack Hussein Obama does just that. The destruction of Human Life trumps everything else. And if you do not agree with his frank assessment, then you should assess, if you say you are Catholic, whether you truly are or not.
Great to have a Cardinal who can call a spade a spade. Obama will facilitate the further murder of millions of babies, and open the doors for the open persecution of Christians in America. So, yes, if I could agree with anything that the anti-Catholic hypocrites on this thread are saying, it would be, don’t back-peddle on the word “apocalyptic.” Let it stand.
How can a Catholic whose against the murder of the most innocent persons on earth not speak out against Obama and the Democracts about the abortion issue.
If social justice doesn’t begin in your mother’s womb, then exactly what age should we give the baby the right to life? Just remember this.
EVERYONE WHO SUPPORTED SLAVERY WAS FREE
EVERYONE WHO SUPPORTS ABORTIION WAS BORN
THIS IS HOW OPPRESSION WORKS
They’re not really people. We’ve heard that before!
University president “cannot comment on what he did not hear in person” is reminiscent of our bishops who are so unconcerned about abortion as to blithely tolerate giving communion to the likes of Biden. That is simply incomprehensible!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
God bless this Cardinal for having the moral courage to speak the Truth. We need many more like him. Those who are awake by and in communion with God’s Spirit will agree with my comment and also with the the comment above from Ann Novak. She is absolutely correct to compare BO with Hitler. Many of you on the left have been comparing Bush to Hitler all these years, and while I won’t defend him, that analogy has now historically been proven incorrect. But, BO is a naked Marxist in an era when a majority of Americans are living godless pagan lifestyles. Even, unfortunately many so called Christians and Catholics. Many Catholics have simply become heretics in supporting the candidate of abortion and infanticide, not to mention socialism and Marxism. Be afraid. Be very afraid. Those who do not study history are condemned to repeat it.
Melissa, I don’t understand your point about the pope calling Bush as well as Obama. Presumably he doesn’t think Bush is apocalyptic or the second coming of Hitler.
But if the pope agrees with Stafford’s comments, then wouldn’t calling him amount to tacit acceptance and recognition? Sounds like the Catholic church appeasing Hitler (the first one) all over again…
Charles, The pope calls presidents or president-elects because he is a leader of a foreign country. The Vatican is in fact an actual country. I believe it is considered the smallest country in the world. Not only that, but in order for a true Christian to evangelize anyone, they must first start by loving them. As you may have already experienced in your own life, it’s very difficult, if not impossible, to want to listen to anyone’s views if you think that they don’t like you. The pope or Cardinals, as any Christians are not perfect or sinless so they can make mistakes and sin like anyone. The sign of a good Christian though is that they do their best to keep improving on their love for their fellow man and their understanding of Christ.
Please don’t mistake love to mean that they must always approve or say “nice” things about people. Sometimes “True” love means “Tough” love. Just like a good parent sometimes has to correct the behavior of their child with firmness and discipline. A good Christian tries to blend criticism with praise.
If you believe in the Christian God ask yourself “Why would Satan want to attack the Catholic Church if it leads people AWAY from God? Wouldn’t he want people to flock to it and therefore make it look the absolute best in the media and elsewhere? Something isn’t quite right about that.
If you don’t believe in God at all, I ask you to look up at the sky and ask yourself this question. ” Where does the universe end?” If your answer is that it doesn’t, ask yourself, “how can that be?”, if your answer is that it does, ask yourself, “What then is outside it?” If man, knowing that the planets are in fact real and the universe truly exists, can’t answer these simple questions, then perhaps the conclusion is that our brains are too simple to understand many things and there must truly be a designer that is intelligent and infinite. That is God.
Keep searching. I know with your brains and some humility, you’ll find Him. Christ said, “seek and you will find”. That’s all he asks of you. Simply that you seek to know if He truly exists. Ask Him, pray for HIm to show you. It may not happen instantly, because He may be testing your sincerity of heart, but if you are sincere (and only YOU know if you are) then He will let you find Him. What have you got to lose? If He doesn’t exist than you’ve lost nothing. If He does, then you’ve gained everything. Lovingly, Mary
Pope B16 calling and congratulating Obama, reminds me of Pope JP2’s visit to Cuba and his meeting with Fidel Castro in 1998. Perhaps the Popes, having a pastoral duty to care for the souls of even the enemies of God who are at risk of eternal damnation, as well as for the well-being of those governed by them, made a (non-infallible) assessment that such contacts would serve the good of said leaders and/or the people of their countries. After JP2’s visit to Cuba, Castro eased somewhat the persecution of Christians and allowed some Catholic churches to reopen. Besides, now that he is apparently battling cancer and may be called to final account for his life and deeds of oppression, he will desperately need to trust that God still loves him and wants to forgive him. Perhaps the human love shown to Castro by God’s earthly representative will make a difference for him towards final trust and repentance. I know it’s speculative, but I’m convinced a Shepherd of the Church can never give up on any enemy as long as that enemy is still alive and the fate of his soul is not sealed.
Regarding the accusations of appeasement towards Hitler, oh boy, here we go again. The clergy in Netherlands came out publicly condemning Hitler, they got deported and couldn’t save anyone. Pope Pius 12 did not condemn him publicly, but secretly opened the enclosure of monasteries and convents in Italy so that they could harbor and hide Jewish people who would have been otherwise deported to concentration camps.
Regarding voting on Obama, I think those who put him in a position of power enabled him to promote the murder of the unborn on a grander scale and thus to endanger the salvation of his own soul even more. As someone else has put it, “this man needs our prayers, not our votes”. If he will pass FOCA (Freedom of Choice Act), that will amount to the persecution of Christian healthcare providers who refuse to participate in his agenda of the culture of death. Where’s MY FREEDOM OF CHOICE in this, as a pro-life pharmacist or doctor, not to stock and dispense birth control pills, abortion-inducing drugs, and not to perform abortions? Where’s my freedom of choice as a taxpayer not to sponsor abortions in the USA and abroad, with my tax money? FOCA will also attack parental authority and protection of children in the family, by abolishing parental notification and consent to abortions performed on minors. We will end up with mature men secretly taking their 14-y.o. girlfriends to abortions, to cover up their crimes that amount to statutory rape, and the parents’ ability to protect their minor daughters will be diminished. Cardinal Stafford’s assessment was accurate - these are aggressive, disruptive, and apocalyptic policies.
Joseph,
Where is your “freedom of choice” as a racist restaurant owner not to serve blacks?
Where is your “freedom of choice” as an anti-Semitic landlord to not rent to Jews?
You had those freedoms once. Society decided you’re not allowed them anymore.
Same thing with reproductive rights. When you’re operating within a multicultural society, reasonable people can and do disagree on moral questions like abortion.
Most people accept to learn to live within the system even as they work to change it. You’re always free to try changing laws you don’t like, but you’re expected to follow them in the meantime. I suppose civil disobedience or violence or would be your other alternatives but be careful with those, they often backfire.
As for “your tax money” being used to fund abortions, what about “my tax money” being used to start wars in Iraq? I didn’t support the war but I still pay my taxes.
If my wife wants to run down to my local Walgreens and pick up legal, doctor-prescribed Plan B I think the pharmacist there should be required to sell it to her, end of story. I hope that’s part of FOCA.
I don’t care if the pharmacist is an orthodox Catholic just like I don’t care if that restaurant owner is a racist or my landlord hates Jews. Their opinions no longer matter because I’m part of society too and I HAVE RIGHTS UNDER THE LAW.
Denying me legal pharmaceuticals prescribed by my doctor because your personal religious beliefs contradict mine is immoral and reprehensible. If you can’t follow the law, you won’t be working at Walgreens much longer. Get used to it.
God bless you Cardinal Stafford for doing your duty and standing up to the culture of death and it’s new leader in the U.S.- Obama.
Faithful JPII Catholics such as myself support you wholeheartedly- and so do our numerous children!
Charles, why would you want your wife to go to the pharmacist for a pill to kill your own child? You’re against financing the war in Iraq, yet you would finance your wife’s war against your kid?
Where’s your conscience, dude?
Charles,
you have a point on your tax dollars being used to fund the war in Iraq. Even though you were not required to enlist in the armed forces if you didn’t want to, and the Senate voted for the Iraq war with 76 votes supporting it and only 23 against, I still wish you had a choice to withhold your tax dollars from this particular expenditure if you wanted to. Although I don’t mind supporting our troops with my tax money, and would have enlisted if I were not too old - there is such thing as a righteous war, but there is no such thing as a righteous abortion.
Now regarding FOCA, I assure you that your wife or anyone else for that matter will never receive a birth control pill, an abortive drug, or a poison for euthanasia-assisted suicide from my hands, even if those drugs are “legal”. Likewise, I will never use fetal abortive tissue for pharmacological testing of drugs being developed in my laboratory, and I will never participate or cooperate in any scientific projects to use my drugs for embryonic stem cell research. You, Obama, or anyone else get used to it. It won’t happen, and my niece who is studying to be a medical doctor, will never perform abortions, sterilizations such as vasectomy for men or tubal ligation for women, and the killing of elderly or disabled people. Obama and likeminded people are making one mistake here - they think they can just make it into a law and force us to participate in their crimes. I used to work in the agriculture as a teenager and I could also become a truck driver if the laws will no longer respect my freedom of conscience as a health professional. But I don’t see why, for example the WalMart pharmacies, being that Samuel Walton was a committed Christian, couldn’t decide not to stock any BC pills whatsoever. It’s not like they would selectively discriminate against blacks or Jews, because they would not dispense BC pills to anyone. The pill and abortion are also not life-saving treatments (in fact they are murder itself and are rejected by large numbers of healthcare providers), and therefore the government must not be in the business of forcing private pharmaceutical companies, pharmacies and hospitals, or individuals to do such reprehensible things. What’s next, forcing privately owned kosher restaurants to serve pork, in the name of non-discrimination? Forcing the vegetarian restaurants to serve meat? Why not mandatory draft for military service, but mandatory participation of healthcare providers in the murder of innocents?
These are exactly the aggressive, disruptive and apocalyptic policies, or if you will, totalitarian dictatorship, that the Cardinal was talking about. After all, if the Obama government is so concerned that women will have nowhere to go to kill their children, it could always set up dedicated pharmacies and hospitals for the purpose, with voluntary participants to do the dirty job. There’s no need to force privately owned pharmacies and hospitals to go along with such murderous plans if they don’t want to. But I am sure there will always be plenty of them, and individuals also, who will be more than willing to participate in murder for a high enough profit or salary…
Joseph thanks for the reply. I see your points. I think you’ll be pleasantly surprised by Obama actually. He’s a smart reasonable guy and he really does want to dramatically reduce the number of abortions. Instead of calling him apocalyptic the church should be more constructive and try to find some common ground. Americans are ready to come together and actually start to solve some of these problems. That was Obama’s message and it is too bad it was so vile and offensive to you and Cardinal Stafford.
Are you against all stem cell research, and do you think all good Catholics should refuse all medical treatment derived from all stem cell research?
To me the distinction between embryonic stem cell research and the more recent research being done on non-embryonic stem cells is a total sham, designed to make people like you feel better. Isn’t it fact that any stem cell therapy will have origins in the embryonic research that’s already been done?
Most of our knowledge about stem cell therapies, isolation techniques, growth techniques, genetic manipulation, etc etc was originally developed using embryonic cells. There’s no “do-over” in scientific discovery - discoveries can only happen once (kind of like losing your virginity).
So even if you use adult stem cells from now on, you’re still benefiting from all the previous embryonic research. It’s not like the scientists “started over” with adult cells and pretended not to know everything that had already been figured out.
Also scientists using adult stem cells still continue to share and exchange research with scientists using the embryonic ones. If you’re in the field I’m sure you know how that works. It’s impossible to separate scientific discovery into two camps - embryonic and non-embryonic - because there is so much happening all at once and discoveries and learning happen and get exchanged in relatively small increments.
I’m curious to see how the church either tries to carve out and defend such a phony distinction, OR, tell all the Catholics that they’re simply not allowed by God to participate in the most promising medical breakthroughs of our time. What are your thoughts as a medical person with the type of views on vasectomies, contraception, etc that you’ve already shared?
Charles,
thanks for your thoughts. One thing that impressed me about Obama’s plan for healthcare is that he wants to make the coverage universal and ordinary people would have access to the same group policies that are now available to federal employees. Thus, if someone would be suddenly diagnosed with cancer, diabetes, or some other expensive illness, the insurance companies could not reject covering his treatment on the grounds that “this is not covered by our policy”, or on the grounds that the person had no health insurance when he was first diagnosed with the illness. I don’t know how expensive this universal health coverage will be, but it will certainly create a more humane and caring society.
Regarding embryonic/adult stem cell research, at this time it seems that the breakthroughs came from adult stem cells. The latest success story published in a leading journal (New England J Med) was about a woman with tuberculosis who needed a windpipe (trachea) transplant. Doctors isolated stem cells from her own bone marrow, and used them to create a windpipe that could be transplanted and her body would not reject it. Adult stem cells isolated from adult subjects are easier to control and have been successfully used on a number of occasions. The problem with embryonic stem cells seems that they are impossible to control and they are really dangerous because they can grow into some sort of undifferentiated cancerous tissue that, if implanted, would kill the patient. There have not been successful medical applications of embryonic stem cells so far, and from government standpoint, sponsoring adult stem cells might yield more tangible and faster benefits. Even so, embryonic stem cells can be isolated and used for research in ways that the Catholic Church does not object to, e.g. from the umbilical cord blood of embryos/babies. I guess the proponents of the type of research that involves the creation and killing of a human embryo insist on their right to do so based on a philosophical stance that the Church has obstructed science previously (Galileo Galilei) and must not be allowed to do so again, because frankly these embryonic stem cells haven’t worked out so far and contrary to the hype, it seems that they will not benefit the patients anytime soon. cont next post
Charles,
I personally struggled with trying to understand why a 48-hour old or 96-hour old embryo should be protected, since it doesn’t have a beating heart or a brain yet, it lacks the anatomical structures with which to think, have emotions, feel pain etc. I can’t convince someone who doesn’t want to protect such an embryo. The situation is a lot easier with a 22-week old or older fetus, because these are little babies that already can survive in an incubator after a premature birth, they clearly feel pain just like us, and they even communicate, e.g. they will grab your finger with their little hands. Thus for a scientifically minded person it’s a lot easier to understand that, say, abortions performed in the 2nd or 3rd trimester are an evil thing. Frankly, what shook my worldview was the texts in the Bible, such as where God tells to Prophet Jeremiah that “before I formed you in the womb, I knew you”. Also, King David tells in his Psalms something like “you knitted me in the womb of my mother” and “due to your goodness, I was able to rest peacefully in the womb of my mother”. I don’t know how I could ever persuade someone on purely scientific basis, not to create an embryo and destroy this little human being after 96 hours, for the sake of embryonic stem cell research. I avoid being involved in such research, because I believe that God really exists and He really spoke to Jeremiah, and God’s Holy Spirit really influenced King David’s Psalms, and those words are consistent with the Catholic Church’s teaching that a human person is created at the moment of fertilization of an egg with the sperm cell, and the life of this human being is sacred because God “knows this person”. But I can see how someone who doesn’t believe that God is real would disagree with me and would feel that the government’s refusal to sponsor that kind of embryonic stem cell research amounts to obstruction of his/her academic freedom.
Charles,
I guess your question or challenge was also this: does the Catholic Church (CC) have sufficient scientific credentials to be in the business of formulating teachings on bioethics, or is it just a bunch of nuts who promote pseudoscience and phony ideas? Actually as I learned about the CC I became more and more impressed. The bioethics course in my PhD program was taught by a Jesuit priest who was an MD and was Professor of Bioethics at the U of Toronto. In 1993-94, he taught me of everything that’s out there today in the field of bioethics, except for stem cells because those were not discovered yet. Also, when I read Pope JP2’s biography, I learned that in the 1960s at the time of 2nd Vatican Council, there was a special committee made up of doctors and ethics professionals, that looked in-depth into the issue of whether the BC pill should be accepted or rejected from the CC’s standpoint. So, the CC did not take those decisions lightly. Obviously, the CC will still come to fundamentally different conclusions than many secular authorities, e.g. the secular standpoint now in the USA is that it’s OK to kill the fetus at any stage of development before birth, and in the UK it was suggested that it’s also OK to kill the newborn baby if the baby is disabled, while the CC’s standpoint is that the human fetus must be protected at any stage of development, even if it’s clear that the baby will be disabled. However these starkly opposite standpoints of the CC vs. secular authorities on matters of bioethics do not originate from the fact that the CC would be ignorant in scientific matters, and in fact the CC probably believes that the secular authorities are committing a grave mistake because they are ignorant in matters of supernatural realities: that man has a soul created by God, that the soul is a supernatural reality that cannot be measured by scientific means, that the human person even in embryonic stage possesses a soul and the life of this human person is sacred, that God has a supreme authority over man’s life because God created our souls, and God has forbidden us to kill human beings because they are embryos, or because they are elderly and disabled and a financial burden, or whatever.
Another sad bioethics controversy that grows bigger and bigger exists in the area of organ transplants, and it involves the question of whether it is OK not to resuscitate someone after an auto accident, or not to resuscitate a baby with a healthy heart who is disabled in some other way, so that the heart of this accident victim or disabled baby could be removed and transplanted into someone else who needs a heart transplant. I recently removed my designation as an organ donor from my driver’s license, because in case of car accident I may fall in the hands of an MD who is more interested in transplanting my heart in another person, than in making a real effort to save my life.
Abuses such as these pushed me to believe that secular scientists and doctors are often blinded to reality despite being well educated, and generally I or my loved ones would be in safer hands in hospitals that strictly follow Catholic principles of bioethics.
Sorry to take one more shot at Barack Obama, but consider this: he is well-educated, intelligent, and yet he didn’t realize that a baby who is born alive after a botched abortion is a human person, a US citizen, and must be protected. In fact, Obama voted 3 or 4 times against BAIPA (Born Alive Infant Protection Act) in the Illinois Senate.
If you search “Gianna Jessen” on youtube, you will find some interviews with just such a person: Gianna is a beautiful, sweet lady, who shouldn’t be alive today, because her mother tried to abort her when she was 7 and 1/2-month pregnant with her. Somehow Gianna was not killed by the abortion and against all odds, she was born alive. So, did the nurse at the abortion clinic do the right thing by calling 911 and trying to save Gianna’s life? You bet she did!
How I wish Kmeic is right when he said and I quote, “Obama has far more in common with our great faith tradition than any political administration in recent years……”
How can he be when he is so radical and so liberal!
Surely he is one in common with the rest of the catholic faithful who is not only ignorant with the church’s teachings but also blasphemers.
Let’s get this straight once and for all. The Catholic Church has determined and teaches that abortion is murder. According to the Ten Commandments murder is a mortal sin. Hence all who commit or support murder are in a state of mortal sin. Cardinal Stafford is telling it like it is. Rationalize it away all you want. The facts speak for themselves. The taking of a human life is a mortal sin and any baptized Catholics (practicing or lapsed) who voted for Obama should haul themselves to confession ASAP.
Doug Kmiec is obviously the one who is misinformed (or deliberately obtuse) since Obama, as an Illinois Congressman voted that the live born children of botched abortions should be left to die. There is no way of sugar coating Obama’s stance on human life. Cardinal Stafford is not reacting to a “caricature”. He is commenting on Obama’s public and proven record.
Bobby Fontaine,
Could you please tell me where this info is available. I’d like to look it up:
The only lands outside of Europe that do not have majority populations suffering at the brink of poverty are ones that have not allowed the Catholic Church to play a major role in their government. Most poverty stricken countries are all places that the church has played an integral role in educating and bringing into the 20th and 21rst century.
thanks
I have seen the effects on children of adults who do not follow the natural law (I am not talking about religion). I have seen how destroyed and sad children are because of the divorce of their parents. Parents who are supposed to be there, help their children through the tough times (we all must face), and parents who as adults must be responsible and teach their children about life and morals.
The family is the nucleus of society and as the family goes so does society. So enter other issues such as gay marriage. What is a child supposed to think if he is able to be adopted by two mommies or two daddies. This is not just an un-informed remark based on religion but on human anatomy and nature itself. Who and what is made to fit and work together? Seriously!
Then you have the idea of abortion for many of those that support Obama. What if Obama’s mother had made the pro-choice decision and decided he is such a burden and not worth giving the opportunity to live. She could have chosen to terminate his life before he had a chance to live it. What would be of all those who are supposedly his supporters and admirers. How many other individuals (who could have made a difference on our society) have been refused the opportunity to live? THINK ABOUT THIS: If Obama had been aborted, where would you be today? What about the opportunity of the millions that have been aborted and not given the opportunity at life and what effect they could have or would have had on all of us?
The Catholic church has its defects and things that it must work through yet what it is talking about isn’t to restrict others or force their will upon others. What they are talking about are the most basic laws of nature that if not followed will end up in the self-destruction of society, not because of religion but because of the laws of nature.
Those that know history will know the future (look at and research the reasons behind the collapse of some of the greatest empires in the history of humanity). Most of them lead to the same, the collapse of basic natural values and morals. The destruction of human life as if it were nothing and the imposing of these ideals upon everyone. The loss of looking for the good of everyone else and the focusing of everything on me and I, and not caring about anyone else. The main problem we are dealing with is the DESTRUCTION OF THE FAMILY AS THE MOST BASIC HUMAN NUCLEAS OF SOCIETY. A natural family (defined and based on the proven anatomy of a man and woman) when together and working for each other through love provides…love, morals, support, ideals, and a foundation of success that not only provides support for its individual members but also for our wonderful country as a whole.
I love my country with all of my heart and pray for the good of everyone around me and especially for my country. I understand that there are some that are confused and some that will not agree with me, yet you must ask yourself…What if you were not given the opportunity to live and voice your opinions?
Anyways, just some personal thoughts and as a final thought may God bless, protect and help all of us regardless of how different our opinions might be. Especially, because of the fact that no matter how liberal or conservative you are… all of us go through good and bad times, and must suffer in one way or another.
We must look at what is best for our society (and trully reflect on this), and for those that do not believe in God, I invite you to think about what life is for if it is not for a greater reason. I also invite you to think about what you live for, if life has no meaning and ends at the moment you die.
Think about the effects a Godless society will have on others…if people do not believe in God then what can it hurt to steal or deceive others, kill life, hurt your neighbor…and the list can go on and on. If there is no objective and life is the beginning and end of everything, then everyone will just work for themselves and their own good, losing the perspective of the common good which benefits all. This can only lead to a collapse of what unites us as humans.
May God bless Cardinal Stafford. He is someone who sees reality and is not afraid as so many are to speak the truth. If you read what he wrote, he is not attacking Obama per se, but the ideals he is fighting to achieve at this time. He is speaking against what will ultimately could lead to the destruction of society (please think about this).
Respectfully,
Bernard
Hi Joseph I thought my questions were pretty clear but your didn’t really answer them. I wasn’t asking about the church’s credentials. Of course the church spends all kinds of money on bioethics committees and forums and the rest but that is just part of the act. At the end of the day the church can never view harm reduction objectively and therefore the outcomes are always predetermined.
There’s no compromise on religious principle even in cases like birth control in Africa where it can be proven to reduce poverty and suffering. None of that ever matters and therefore a priest like a PhD in Bioethics just sounds like a bad joke to me. Bioethics deals in balance not absolutes, and the church refuses to deal with anything but absolutes.
Anyway, abortion is one easy argument. It’s easy to be anti abortion, especially if you’re a man like all church leaders are (why is that, by the way?).
Stem cells is where the debate is going to get really, really fun. The adult stem cell advances you cite still required the previous knowledge gained by using embryonic cells. In fact the exact techniques for growing new adult cells were developed using embryonic cells. I don’t see how adult cells are suddenly OK to use if what we know about how to use them we learned from “murdered babies.”
It’s going to be sad watching Catholic hospitals and Catholic health care workers refuse to provide the most revolutionary cures of our generation.
All the researchers in Europe are still using embryonic cells. Europe unlike the US has moved past the abortion debate. Are Catholic hospitals going to refuse to provide life-saving stem cell treatments developed by European companies?
It’s REALLY easy to sit in church and rail against poor young women having abortions. Especially if you’re middle class, middle age, had your kids already, etc. It’s really easy to sit and judge issues you’re not directly affected by.
What’s going to be much harder, but a lot more painful to watch, are these same people telling their grandmothers that they should not be allowed the cure for Alzheimer’s that the neighbor down the street received (stem cells!). Or maybe we’ll get to see priests visiting cancer kids in the hospital telling them that their reward is in heaven, because that cancer cure was developed by a French scientist using embryonic cells.
I think then we’ll see the TRUE colors of the “apocalyptic” types and the consequences of their beliefs.
Barnard, gay marriage is not a threat to straight marriage. The same arguments used to be made against interracial marriage, how it was going to destroy society, blah blah blah. Society is still here, stronger and more united than ever.
Go on hating but you’re fighting a losing battle. Gay marriage is a clear inevitability for this generation and the next. Look at the trends, look at the demographics.
Even in CA it only lost by 6 points. A few years ago it lost by over 20 points.
The church doesn’t need to offer gay marriage. But states are secular and the licenses are civil licenses. It’s immoral to deny one group their equal civil rights.
Hi Charles,
good to see you back. Regarding the embryonic stem cells, it is not my area of research, thus I might have missed out on the latest developments. But do you know of any real treatment or cure, not hypothetical but already successfully used, for Alzheimer’s disease or cancer or any other illness, that involves the actual use of stem cells of embryonic origin? Recently (less than 1 month ago) I heard 2 interviews with the President of Christian Doctors and Pharmacists Association of USA and with a stem cell researcher, and they said that not a single patient was ever cured using embryonic stem cells. What’s also quite funny is that although the government did not support the creation of new embryonic stem cell lines in the USA since Bush’s executive order in August 2000, the private pharmaceutical/biotech companies were free to put their money into whatever research they wanted to, and they basically chose not to do such research - why? Because they realized the whole embryonic stem cell field is speculative and they would be wasting their money chasing wild geese, when in the other hand the adult stem cell field is already successful and generates profits while providing real therapeutic benefits. If my info is correct, than those who overhype the promise of embryonic stem cell research are being unreasonable on multiple levels, because they mislead sick people with false promises, and would also compel the government to redirect taxpayer money from the already successful adult stem cell research to the area of embryonic cells which may not work out anytime soon.
But to be more accurate, the Catholic Church never objected against obtaining embryonic stem cells by such means that do not involve the killing of a human being. It’s perfectly OK, from a Catholic standpoint, to isolate stem cells from the umbilical cord blood, or from an embryo that was spontaneously aborted and not deliberately killed.
Charles, I have another real world example where one human being benefits medically from the murder of another one. If I need a kidney or liver transplant, the waiting time in North America is 1-3 years. But I could travel to China, pay for it, and they would get a donor organ for me in 1-4 weeks. How so fast? There is substantial evidence that there are huge state-run secret prison camps in China, where the prisoners (mostly political, Christians, and Falun Gong members) are being murdered and their organs removed for use as transplants, for financial profit. Now if I or someone in my family would be in need of a kidney or liver transplant, we would not travel to China to get one, even if we could afford it. I could not bear the thought that another human being in concentration camp was maimed or even murdered in order to secure a transplant organ for me, and I would rather live with my health problem and possibly die of it, and my soul would go to meet my Creator. Yes, I would love to be cured and my suffering alleviated, but NOT AT ANY PRICE.
From my standpoint, I agree that Catholic hospitals should refuse to help patients if the help would come from killing a human being - whether that human being is an embryo or a grown-up person.
In my research, I could also use some human organs for testing my experimental drugs aimed for cancer therapy. Would you approve that I randomly shoot one person on the street every month, so that I would have a continuous supply of human organs for testing my drugs? Would it be justified to kill 20-30 people, in order to develop a new drug that will possibly cure thousands of cancer patients? Don’t worry, I’m not going to shoot anybody on the streets. I will test my drugs on animal organs, genetically manipulated human cell lines that were obtained WITHOUT endangering anyone’s life, and human organs obtained post-mortem from cadavers. I will develop my anti-cancer drugs using morally acceptable methods. Why can’t embryonic stem cell researchers do the same??
Also, I would like to have a yellow Lamborghini like the one parked on my street. But I will not rob the owner of that car. I will either obtain a Lamborghini for myself with legitimate means, or I will learn to live without one.
[...] From the CUA Tower, student newspaper at the Catholic University of America, 11.21.2008. [...]
Labeling Obama a Marxist, pro-abort candidate etc. does disservice to terminology. There is no question to his stands. He is a radical Marxist at best and a believer in destroying life on a greater scale than any apocalyptic scale yet on the scene of sanction homicide by an elected official. To state that referring to his stand as apocalyptic is somehow misleading to the meaning of the word as related to abortion is strange. Have not over 40 million children murdered in the mothers womb sanction by a government and now being offered to make it easier by an individual with the ability to remove all restriction deserving to be labeled apocalyptic? It’s ok to stick you head in the sand as his upcoming action will not effect you as you are already a viable living person. Guess again!
As to Doug Kmiec idea that Obama is being misrepresented, I’ll be sure to hire him when I am a guilty of a crime beyond any reasonable doubt, to cast doubt on reasonableness. I doubt any court systems would give him the statue of the “reasonable man” on the issue that Obama is misunderstood by the Cardinal. Get rid of you excess baggage go to confession I know I need to due to my lack of charity to my fellow man who think expecially with their ……
To Charles, the Priest and everyone on this website, I would love to give my opinion on the subject matter hand, but can’t today,we’re going home for THANKSGIVING,dont you just love that holiday?the only thing that is expected gift -wise ,is the present of yourself, to your friends and especially your family, but I would like to leave you-guys with something that is posted on our fridge at home, and that is, You may have been in charge,but GOD is in control, he is the OMNIPOTENT one ,because HE is FASTER ,then immediate, SOONER, then right now, HE will defintely flip the script, HE means more for you, then to just only survive, but to thrive, so make peace with your past,so you can grow in your destiny and up into your future, Happy Turkey Day and God Bless/Peace 2008
James, even 40 million dead is about 5 billion 960 million short of an apocalypse. Apocalypse means implosion of the cosmos, dude.
I’m not sure how you can claim Obama wants to kill “on a greater scale than any apocalypic scale yet.”
The restrictions he’s talking about repealing - if they were to happen - would mean a low single-digit percentage increase in abortions, at best. The sex education programs he wants back in schools would compensate for that many, many times over. The net result will be Obama will reduce abortions more than George W did after 8 years in office. Then, sir, you wake up, realize the world hasn’t imploded and “guess again.”
By the way did you see Obama’s economic team announced today? Personally I was expecting a couple more “radical Marxists” in the top jobs. I guess Obama is a big enough radical Marxist that he doesn’t need any others on his team.
Crystal, Happy Thanksgiving to you too!! I hope you and your family have a wonderful holiday.
I agree, Thanksgiving is my favorite holiday. I even like it a lot better than Christmas, although I’m sure there are people on this site who would shoot me for saying something like that, too.
I really enjoy your messages. Proof we can discuss and sometimes disagree without being so hateful!
Charles
Hi Charles,
First of all thank you for your response. I don’t think that disagreeing with something or someone deserves being called a hater. There is nothing wrong with sharing ideas, and we all have the freedom to agree or disagree on some topics. It is through sharing ideas that individuals can help each other.
I understand your comment about demographics in certain regions of our country, yet I invite you to think about this: Just because everyone says that something is right, does it really make it right? It was not very long ago that the majority did not believe in certain items or topics (correct or incorrect), but did that make everything correct in society because of the majority? We might disagree on what is right or wrong, yet I think we can both agree that just because the majority might believe in something it does not make it right or correct.
I believe in giving the unborn an opportunity at life, how can that hurt anyone? I believe the ideals of some must not be (forcefully) imposed upon those that do not agree. Such as not having an option of others using my money to support things that I do not agree with in anyway (stem cell research, abortion, etc.). Would you like it if someone told you that you had to give 15% of your earnings to support the pro-life movement or to a church/entity that you do not agree with? How would you feel if someone is trying to force you to do something and you have no say about it?
As a final thought please take the opportunity to review some pictures of what actually takes place in an abortion: http://www.priestsforlife.org/images/index.htm. After doing this please tell me if it did not affect you in anyway. Wishing you and yours the best this Thanksgiving and throughout your life.
Hi Bernard, the images are what I’d expect you to send. With all the advances in medical imagery and technology I think most people have seen pictures of living embryos by now, so I’m not sure gruesome images like yours have the impact they once did, ten or twenty years ago. It just looks like bad propaganda. Selling 3×5 cards of chopped up body parts exploit the victim, in my view. Why not keep it positive and sell 3×5 cards of beautiful living embryos instead of going for the shock value and selling 3×5 cards of dismembered limbs.
I’m against abortion. But that doesn’t mean I think Obama signifies the end of the world. I think he’s going to reduce abortions by finding common ground and working together with the other side instead of viciously attacking them. I’m sorry but I don’t see how you can call someone “apocalyptic” and then say it’s not hate speech.
Have you ever spent time with children raised by gay parents? Have you ever spent time with well-adjusted adults who have gay parents? Have you ever spent time with a committed, loving gay couple? As you say… after doing this please tell me if it did not affect you in anyway.
Wishing you and yours the best this Thanksgiving and throughout your life.
Charles,
Thank you once again for your response.
I am finding it difficult to understand your statement of disabled body parts in a 3X5 image. Even if it is 20 years old, what was true yesterday is still true today. Be it of dismembered human beings (or what you call embryos), in my mind it is still something that shocks me and always will. What if people did that to their pets nowadays what would the response be?
If Obama can reduce this, then good for him and I will support him if he chooses to do the right thing. You spoke previously of hypocrisy and so you say that Obama will reduce abortions but pass laws to make it easier for this to happen at any stage prior to birth. Where is the logical connection?
If Obama turns out to be a good president and help life then good for him (and as I mentioned I will support him), but what I am seeing is a disconnection right now from walking the walk and talking the talk. I must tell you that I understand your point when you state it might be more effective to show pictures of showing pictures of life at the earliest stages and thank you for the insight. People look for hope and are more willing to support the positive. I am still curious abour your response to:
I believe the ideals of some must not be (forcefully) imposed upon those that do not agree. Such as not having an option of others using my money to support things that I do not agree with in anyway (stem cell research, abortion, etc.). Would you like it if someone told you that you had to give 15% of your earnings to support the pro-life movement or to a church/entity that you do not agree with? How would you feel if someone is trying to force you to do something and you have no say about it?
Thank you,
Bernard
Hi Bernard, Obama recognizes the right to an abortion. That doesn’t mean he wants abortion to happen. It just means that he thinks the right to have one should be upheld. We’re living in a multicultural democracy and not every person or religion views abortion the same way. It’s an imperfect resolution, but society has basically decided that individuals can decide the issue based on their own conscience.
It’s been that way for 30 years now, in the courts and in the legislatures. If the only acceptable solution is to change Roe v Wade, then Obama is not your guy. But then again, pro-life Republicans have been president for a total of 24 years since Roe v Wade and Democrats were president for only 12. So the pro-lifers had twice as much time to try to change things and still they couldn’t.
Obama wants to reduce abortion not by curtailing or eliminating the right to have one. He wants to reduce abortion by reducing demand. If sex education and contraception were more readily available, the number of abortions would go down.
For 8 years we had Bush in the White House. His policy was to stop teaching teenagers about sex! Well that sounds like a good idea to some people, but it didn’t work. Studies about his abstinence programs showed teenagers still had as much sex as ever, but without knowing the facts. Suddenly a lot more young women are seeking an abortion! So then the anti-abortion types try to make it harder and harder to get one. Well to me that is just a backwards way to solve the problem. Same thing with contraception. OK, the church doesn’t believe in it. But that is a very costly position to take in terms of the results, which has been proven again and again to be that more women will want abortions.
As for using my money for things I don’t like, it happens all the time. I was against the Iraq war and the financial bailout, for starters. I still pay my taxes though.
You don’t answer my questions about gay marriage. Why do you think gay people should not have the same civil rights as everyone else? Why do you think gay people can not be parents? Do you know any gay parents? Do you realize there are thousands of gay couples raising happy and successful children? It’s ironic that so many of those children are adopted. I don’t understand how you can be against abortion but also against two loving, committed adults who want to provide a loving home for an adopted child. I really think if you knew some gay families you wouldn’t make silly arguments about body parts fitting together. That has nothing to do with a good family environment for children. There is no proof anywhere that kids in gay families turn out any differently than kids in straight families. But there is plenty of evidence that shows it’s better to be adopted than to grow up in a foster home.
Charles
Charles,
You’re throwing stats around that unfortunately show that you do not know what you’re talking about. Sex education was in fact found to reduce the amount of unwanted pregnacies, by abstanance. Teens are in fact having less sex than they did 8 years ago.
Yes, the Republicans held office for the past 8 years and despite having control were not able to change the Abortion laws. Why? Not because of the Republicans, but because of the Democrats! They used every tactic in their arsenal to block all laws from even being Voted on that they didn’t like! Is that representing your country when you don’t even allow things to come to a vote? So don’t blame the Republicans for not getting changes through, blame the Democratics!
You said if sex ed and contraception were more readily available than abortions would go down. Do some studying. They are both more then readily available with condoms being handed out in public city schools, etc. It has been statistically proven that this did NOT reduce the amount of abortions. Also, statistics have shown that most abortions are NOT done because of women in poverty, but as a matter of CONVENIENCE. Statistically few are done because of economic struggles!
I AM a woman. I have given birth! Have YOU! Before you decide to start speaking for WOMEN perhaps you should THINK that you have NO IDEA of what you’re talking about. YOU have the nerve to chastise other men for not knowing how women feel, yet YOU HAVE NO IDEA how a women feels! I have lost a baby at 3 months gestation and he was born whole into my husband’s hands. I have a Catholic and very Christian friend that aborted her first child and could tell you how a woman feels after she’s done such a thing; both Psychologically and Physically. Studies have shown that woman suffer physically years after abortions are done and put themselves at a much higher risk of Cancer, etc. Did you even know this??
Gay couples: My brother is gay and has a partner so I KNOW about this area and it IS DESTROYING the FAMILY UNIT (not my own, but societies) which in FACT has been shown to be detrimental on society! That’s a FACT look it up! Check your history. (cont.)
Charles, It is also obvious from your posts that you are not well educated on how abortions are done. Oh, you know the basics that is true, but not the whole truth. If you did you wouldn’t be talking about it like you are. There are websites that you can go to that give a point by point description of what exactly happens, and while all this is happening the baby is on a monitor so that the doctor can aim carefully at it. It describes how the child pulls away from the tools before that stab him and then how he squirms