Great idea…will follow through.
Perhaps other designs recalling Archbishop Becket, Archbishop Romero, Cardinal Sin, etc.

What happened to the separation of Church and State.  And why is the State trying to force the Church to do anything.  Government needs to but out of Church business.

when the church enters into the real (non mythical) world, governments will be involved.  Churches creating hospitals, schools, and other mostly secular orgs don’t IMHO deserve exemptions from secular law.  To force the lunch lady at Notre Dame to not have birth control is just too much.

Atheism is myth understood.

I agree with all of these, but this might not be as good of an idea as some think. I’m not even sure the Bishops will like it…the issue that they are emphasizing is “freedom of religion and freedom of conscience”, not necessarily emphasizing the Catholic aspect. This could happen to anyone. No one should be forced to violate their conscience. Also, some who support us, may actually be offended by the slightly triumphalistic tone.  IMO, it is better to emphasize the fact that it goes against the constitution, and is a slippery slope for ALL people of faith.

Nobody ever claimed being a warrior in the Church Militant would be easy. Or popular.

It’s time to start stepping on a few toes.

Rover,

How does one put a play on the word misunderstanding next to a statement like “...To force the lunch lady at Notre Dame to not have birth control is just too much” expect to be taken seriously.  It’s bad form to criticize an idea only to turn around and espouse the same idea two minutes later.  Clearly you misunderstand the Church, this specific battle and yourself.

The lunch lady at Notre Dame is perfectly well aware that she can visit the nearest Planned Parenthood and pick up some free contra, if she wants it.

Even the average public school 5th grader knows how to walk into the nearby WalMart or Rite-Aid and pick up a box of contra . . . for about the price of a latte or a few tunes on the iPod.

Speaking of believing things that aren’t real: isn’t it rich? The proponents of the Culture of Death advance their delusional claim that unless contra is provided free through their employers’ insurance plan, that many people who want to use contra will somehow have to go without.

Poor zombies! Poor robots! Wandering aimlessly, without the contra that they want and need because it isn’t provided free through their employers’ health plan!

Ridiculous! Such a claim is ridiculous. Talk about delusional!

As if most people who want contra didn’t know that contra is as already cheap as dirt.

Another delusional claim of the propents of the Culture of Death: that oral contraceptives are “good” for women’s health.

The Pill is not “good” for women’s health; it is bad for women’s health, and that according to a study by the World Health Organization, which finds that using the Pill leads to a significant increase in the rate of cervical and other cancers in women.

Drugs that can cause cancer are *not* good for women’s health; that delusional proponents of Obama’s plan continue to claim that oral contra represents health and progress for women, in the face of the scientific findings of the W.H.O. is yet another instance of sad delusional twisting of reality.

What I can’t figure out is whether the proponents of the Culture of Death actually themselves believe these delusional claims, or if they simply parrot them, without thinking. I suppose depending on whom you talk to, it may be some of one, and some of the other.

It’s all very sad. I hope no Catholic believes a word of any such nonsense.

Rover Seton,

How would you defend the U.S. military recruit who refuses a direct order by his commanding officer to torture a prisoner or to kill unarmed non-combatants? Given that the law is on the side of the commanding officer, and it is a lawful order he is giving.

I’ll answer for you: given your logic, you can’t defend that recruit. Based on your logic, the must obey all lawful directives, and later say, “I was just following orders.”

“I was just following orders” is what the the guards at Auschwitz said at Nueremberg trial, after the War.

Faithful Catholics don’t follow immoral orders. No matter whom they come from.

By your logic, it’s “obey all orders, no matter how wicked or immoral.”

Sorry, no thanks. Jesus Christ is my King and my Commander, not Obama.

A few faithful Catholic Germans defied the Nazi regime and were imprisoned, tortured, and / or executed.

I know many people on this thread would have been on the sidelines cheering the executioners. “Must obey the law! Who do they think they are, not doing what they are told by their lawful betters?”

The Nazis believed it was delusional to assist the disabled, the handicapped and the elderly. “Useless eaters”, they called these poor people. They’re not adding any value to society, so why not let them die off? Which they very well may.

And which some on this thread would be glad to see.

We delusional Christians will continue to care for the poor and the sick as much as possible, according to the ways Christ commands, until the jack-booted thugs of the Culture of Death come for us.

@ Marion:
Not to nit pick with you, BUT…..  Any order to torture anyone or kill innocent civilian on the battlefield would be an UNLAWFUL order.  It would be a violation of the UCMJ and the Law of Land Warfare, and as such, the law would be on the side of the recruit.  The commander would be facing the death penalty for ordering murder.

I get what you are saying, but that is just a bad example.  The recruit would be REQUIRED to DISobey in that case.  Ergo the Nuremberg trial.  Those Germans were supposed to disobey too, they did not, so they were executed.

Back a million years ago when I was a cadet our Professor of Military Science told us that, in case of orders like that, “Say no!  Refuse!  Go to jail if you need to.  But do the RIGHT thing!  NEVER follow an illegal command!”  That from a Colonel.  (Nothing like the movies, made by atheist liberals who’ve never been there.)

Used to Post mentions that “an order to torture anyone or kill innocent civilian on the battlefield would be an UNLAWFUL order”

Sure!

It would be NOW!

But for how much longer?

All it would take under the present Obama regime would be the stroke of a pen to change that law, or any U.S. law.

Any pen Obama happens to be holding in his hand.

Why? Because Obama said so. That’s why.

That’s what America has come to, folks.

Obama decides that relgious organizations must pay for their employees to have birth control . . . and presto! With the stroke of pen, The Law is Enacted to make it so.

That’s what an Executive Order does. Makes a new law. Or changes an old one.

Obama could tomorrow decide that prisoners may be tortured, that U.S. citizens may be indefinitely detained without trial, or that civilians may be shot on sight, no questions asked.

And all of those would become the law of the land.

Some of these already have become law.

This is NOT the America we once knew. This is NOT the America your fathers and grandfathers served to defend.

This is NOT “My country ‘tis of thee.”  Anymore. It’s gone. Phooosh! Vanished. Vamoose. Bye-bye.

America, we hardly knew ye.

And even if President Culture-of-Death were to sign an order or a directive authrorizing and thus MAKING LEGAL the mistreatment of prisoners, I hope that Christian military recruits would resist obeying any command to do so.

Because of their consciences.

Of course, proponents of the culture of Death in the military would have no problem mistreating prisoners, if to do so were authorized by the SECULAR LAW. “If it’s legal, it’s legal! What do we care?” they would say. “Do as you’re told, and stay out of trouble.”

Mistreating and killing unarmed civilians was LEGAL AND THE LAW in Germany and in Poland during the 1930s, too.

But some folks who didn’t want to OBEY THE LAW actually helped these unarmed civilians escape to safety. And they were often punished for doing so.

As we will be. Not to the same extent, perhaps. But punished nonetheless.

It’s not a bad thing to be found worthy to suffer for the sake of the Name.

@rover

Thank you for saying that religious people should not be helping anyone but themselves…

The lunch lady at Notre Dame is quite free to use artificial birth control if she chooses. Obama insists that everyone else be forced to chip in and buy it for her, even if they disagree with her choice to do something they believe is evil.

You show quite astutely that atheism is rational thinking & logic suspended.

I think we Catholics should go on a general strike, like they do in Europe. I don’t mean don’t show up to work and march in the streets. That would only hurt us and accomplish very little.

We should go on a Consumer General Strike.

Don’t BUY anything. Don’t buy anything beyond the basics. (Basics for my family would be staple food items, prescriptions, toilet paper, laundry detergent, First Aid items, and gas, and very little else. Your mileage may vary.)

Don’t buy clothes, shoes, gifts, flowers, plants, candies and pastries, home improvement or home decorating items, alchoholic beverages, art supplies. Don’t eat out. Don’t buy lattes or ice cream. Don’t go to the movies or order Netflixes or OnDemand. Buy nothing except the bare bones basics necessary to maintain the essentials of civilized living.

On Strike.

And we stay on strike until they Back Down.

@Marion,
LOL! Catholics will do anything but sacrifice their own comfort. What would they do without Fox News and Rush Limbaugh, etc. to make them feel righteous? Do you think their kids will be able to live without video games?
Since it is contraceptives they want to ban, I suppose they should boycott health care, hospitals, and other services that accept money from insurance or Medicare/Medicaid.
You Catholics want it both ways—freedom for your religion but not for anyone else.

ChuckuFarley

I’m afraid you’re confused. Nobody has spoken about wanting to “ban” anything. People have spoken about not wanting to “pay” for contraception and abortion.

Suppose I managed to get a law passed that demanded that you Chuck pay for my kids’ Catholic school education, his tuition, books, everything. And suppose you said you didn’t want to pay for that.

Does that mean you want to “ban” my kid from receiving a Catholic school education?

Of course not.

It means that you shouldn’t have to pay for something that you feel I should pay for privately, if that’s what I want.

Like my kid’s Catholic school education.

I can respect that.

See how simple that was?

You want me to stay out of your bedroom?

Gladly. And you stay the hell out of my pocketbook, and we’ll get along just fine.

@Marion,
Actually, I do want to ban Catholic education—I think is is misleading at best and downright lying at its worst. But, yes, I see your point.

If the Catholic Church dosen’t want its members to pay for contraception (which has other medical purposes as well as preventing conception for convenience), then it should stop participating in a system that supported by a government that was established to serve ALL its citizens, not just Catholics. Catholic hospitals should stop accepting reimbursement from insurance companies and Medicare/Medicaid, and be established by the Church as religious entities. Stop providing services to us baby-killers.

The Catholic Church has a heluva lot of property for which it doesn’t pay taxes. If it’s going to involve itself in public politics, it can pay those property taxes and stop taking a free ride.
P.S. We are all paying Oklahoma Senator Shortey’s to propose a bill to ban fetus food products: 
http://www.newser.com/story/138341/oklahoma-bill-would-ban-fetuses-in-food.html

“Catholic hospitals should stop accepting reimbursement from insurance companies and Medicare/Medicaid”

I know that that would please you, but to do so would have ZERO effect on the President’s overreaching mandate to force not only Catholic medical centers, but also Catholic schools, universities, service agencies of various kinds, gift shops, book stores, and businesses of all kinds to violate the conscience of the Catholic men and women who own and staff them.

This has nothing to do with Medicare / Medicaid, and everything to do with the government attempting to enforce religiously unethical requirements upon a gamut of privately-run religious institutions, most of which do not participate with any government fee-reimbursement program.

I know it can be difficult to keep track of the many ways in which our government is trying to force Catholic institutions to violate our conscience, (instead of, you know, helping people create jobs, getting the economy straightened out, and dealing with Islamic terrorism), but the government attempts to force Catholic hospitals (which do participate with Medicare and Medicaid) to commit abortion and sterilization is distinct from the government attempts to force any Catholic-run enterprise - hospital, school, or agency - to cover contraceptives, including abortifacient drugs, and sterilization on the employee health insurance plans.

Which our government is also busy doing. (With the resources that could be going to helping people create jobs, getting the economy straightened out, and dealing with Islamic terrorism.)

But, forcing Catholics to violate their conscience is just too VITAL an initiative for Obama to ignore. So it gets his tip-top attention.

Isn’t that special?

Interesting that other faiths are standing with us, unlike many CINOs. And that atheist organizations screaming and suing for separation of church and state have no problem when the state tries. To take control of the church. Hypocrites.

I know that that would please you, but to do so would have ZERO effect on the President’s overreaching mandate to force not only Catholic medical centers, but also Catholic schools, universities, service agencies of various kinds, gift shops, book stores, and businesses of all kinds to violate the conscience of the Catholic men and women who own and staff them.

@Marion.
If you’re upset that Catholic employees have to pay for insurance they get through their work, you still have choices. The Church can start their own insurance companies that are owned and financed by the Vatican. The Vatican has its own government and many European governments provide healthcare to their citizens.

Plan B—In line with your suggestion that Catholics boycott luxuries, Catholics should boycott employment. If you don’t work, you won’t have to pay for immoral health insurance provided by employers—just suck off the government like all the other people who don’t want to work. It’s not right that you should work for corporations that you believe are supporting contraception and abortion.

Even better—why not just secede from the union, as suggested by Rick Perry? You don’t want to be part of secular society that extends privileges to homosexuals and unborn child killers. If you don’t love America, leave it.

Aside to other readers:

Interesting to note, isn’t it, that the Catholic Register permits comments by anti-Catholic propents of the Culture of Death, who basically tell Catholics where they can get off, while *Catholics* supposedly the bastion of “hate”, and “intolerance”; *Catholics* who are all about “taking away people’s freeedoms” and “controlling others” . . . and yet the *Catholic* Register is perfectly glad to allow all kinds of dissenting opinions on its pages.

Even to people who order Catholics to leave the country.

And *Catholics* are “intolerant.”

Kind of makes you think, doesn’t it?

I’ll tolerate you when you tolerate homosexuals (outside the priesthood).

Good post, but the problem is the vast majority of “catholics” in America do not practice Roman Catholicism, but Anglicism, even though they attend “Catholic” church on Sunday.

For the life of me, I can’t understand why these people insist on calling themselves Catholic. If they don’t accept the Pope as infallible on matters of faith and morals, why is the name Catholic so important to them?

Obama is making smart use of this schism, because he knows it exists, and that the precepts of Rome will not dramatically alter the Catholic vote.

Aside to other readers:

Notice how Mr. Farley introduces a new topic - homosexuality - and accuses me, whom he doesn’t know anything about - of being “intolerant” of homosexuals.

Not only intolerant . . . but clairvoyant.

I wonder what he will do for an encore?

@C*****Farley

The Church is tolerant of homosexuals. In fact, the Catechism specifically states that all forms of discrimination against homosexuals is forbidden. Does it teach that the practice of homosexual acts is sinful? Yes, but taken in context, note that it teaches that the practice of masturbation is sinful and intrinsically disordered, for the very same reason that homosexual acts are. Thus, the Catholic Church is “intolerant” of homosexuals in the same way that it is intolerant of teenage boys, yet many of them grow up to become practicing Catholics, anyway. Why? Because they come to realize that truth is the antithesis of intolerance.

I am not called to be “tolerant” of homosexuals; they are children of God, whom I am called to *love,* each and every one, as Jesus loves me.

I am called to love homosexuals, heterosexuals, tiny babies, old people, truck drivers, housewives, bankers, farmers, Americans, Brits, Guatemalans, Chinese people, French people, Sudanese people. I am called to love showgirls, transvestites, musicians, prostitutes, confidence artists, gangsters, murderers, my fellow parishoners, college professors, college students, schoolchildren, my dentist, the telemarketer who just called me, the U.S. Conference of Catholic bishops, their staff, and the folks who cut their grass and clean their offices.

I am called to love everyone on God’s green Earth, without exception and without condition. I am called to love them as God loves them, that is, to desire and to work for their happiness with God in the next life, as well as their good in this life insofar as that conduces to their happiness in the next.

@Tom R on Wednesday, Feb 15, 2012 6:43 PM (EST):
“For the life of me, I can’t understand why these people insist on calling themselves Catholic.”

Whoever can figure that conundrum out deserves many acknowledgements and nods of assent.

My goodness! You people are sure good at splitting hairs! You can’t tolerate the actions of people you “love”, but you are commanded to “love” them. Is that honest?

Does the store on this site sell chastity belts?

My six-year-old nephew wails on his little sister because she grabbed one of his toys. If I want to say I love my nephew, must I approve of his smacking the little one?

If I reprimand him and make him say he’s sorry, he says I’m a “mean” aunt, and that I don’t love him.

From the perspective of a six-year-old, he’s right.

Some drug runners cross the border and return with millions in cash. One of them has a 15-year-old daughter. She was always her daddy’s girl, but can’t understand why he got involved with the cartels. She often begs him to get out of the business.

“I’m afraid for you, Papa!” she says over and over. He’s very macho, and pretends to be offended, “Hey, you think your silly Papa can’t take care of himself? That he’s not a man? What did I ever do to let you insult me like that, eh?”

So she stopped asking, and just cries herself to sleep at night.

She doesn’t like what her father is doing, but she still loves him.

I’m pretty sure the drug dealer’s daughter is a straw man fallacy (do you know what a fallacy is?), so let’s stick with your story.

When your nephew turns 21, and he decides to “come out” to you and move in with his lover, would you tolerate his behavior and still eat Christmas dinner with him?

Dear ChuckyCheese: I am sorry that Lubbock Christian University (the source of one of your many email addresses) may not have provided you with a sufficient framework for critical thinking. This really is very simple.

I love my kids, but I don’t tolerate certain behavior from them. For instance, we don’t allow fires in the living room unless they are in the fireplace. Now, if you call this basic distinction between a fundamental choice to love someone and an expectation of healthy behavior “splitting hairs,” then our only recourse with you is prayer, not reason.

However, feel free to continue to keep us entertained if you like.

Dear ChuckyCheese: Regarding logic, you have a particular gift for the non-sequitur. But, I must also commend you for your skilled demonstration of bifurcation and false dilemmas. Regarding your well stated question about the outed newphew, the answer is, I eat with sinners every day, so did Jesus. I am grateful that he allows me to the table. The invitation also stands for you.

Do you speak for Marion? I was responding to her, not you.
And yes, I have a number of different mailboxes as I travel. I also sometimes use false emails to protect myself against malicious Catholics.

Do I “know what a fallacy is”?

A fallacy is similar to but not identical with the wrong-headed belief that it pays to continue to stay in dialogue with individuals who insult your intelligence.

Buh-bye! It’s been real. And have a nice life.

@Marion
Nice cop out. bye

Rover, nobody is forcing the lunch lady to not purchase birth control. If she on her own time and money decides to purchase it, there’s no such thing as a “Catholic Gestapo” who visits the houses of each of the institution’s workers to make sure they don’t have birth control. She is gravely sinning, and the Church will preach that, but nobody is forcing her not to have birth control. This is obvious on its face.

What is happening, however, is that the Church is the one being forced to pay or it. It is the State forcing the Church, not the other way around. The Church does not require anyone to work for their insitutions. Nobody is being led with a gun to their head to work for Notre Dame against their will. They choose to work for a Catholic institution. This is so obvious on its face. Why doesn’t anyone understand this simple fact? Churches create hospitals, universities, and other institutions, and you say they don’t deserve an exemption? They provide countless charitable services to society, and now in gratitude we want to force them to violate what they hold dearer than anything else?

No, dear sir, atheism is illogic and hypocrisy understood if this is the train of thought that you fellas follow.

Educate yourself on the Constitution of the United States and Declaration of Independence. Nowhere is birth control a right imposable by the government, but the free exercise of religion is not only mentioned as a right, but mentioned in the FIRST Amendment to the Constitution. Not the Second, or Eigth, but First. These documents are inundated with rights similar to this in one way or another.

The whole premise of this nation was religious liberty. That’s the precise element of this country that made it exceptional at its time, and sustains its exceptional value today. Religious liberty is the bedrock of this nation.

And that exceptional value is eroding quickly. You, and anyone adopting this same ridiculous opinion, need to start learning how to think responsibly and honestly instead of spewing nonsense based on secular bias and intellectual blindness, not to mention a profound lack of charity toward an institution that provides copious amounts of critical services to society.

I stand with the Catholic Church! In particular I stand with Georgetown University, arguably the most prestigious Catholic university in America, in its steadfast refusal to condone contraception by allowing it to be offered through its insurance plans…oh wait, no, Georgetown’s been offering it for years.

Well, I stand with DePaul University, the largest Catholic university in the United States, in its steadfast refusal…wait, them too?

Ok, ok, I stand with Fordham University…Really? They offer contraception coverage too?

So the Church’s teaching is openly and flagrantly ignored by its own institutions—in addition to several million Catholic lay people?

I’ve always wondered why the Catholic Church is against barrier methods of contraception and yet is all for the rhythm method.  I’ve been told the use of barrier methods is bad because they allow the act to be performed outside of its original intent, that of procreation.  However, the rhythm method is DEFINED by the intent to avoid procreation but still perform the act.  So, in effect, the Catholic Church should be talking out against the rhythm method also, yet it doesn’t.
For those who would like to see contraception totally banned, take a nice long trip to a third world country where babies are born everyday without the benefit of having had prenatal care and without the hope of surviving a year because of starvation.  Hold a little skeleton of a baby who is at death’s door and tell it that it should have been conceived to do this.  Tell a child whose belly is distended and who no longer has tears to cry that its suffering is good and right in the eyes of the Church.  And please don’t tell me every child makes a difference.  Most of these poor children die without anyone noticing other than God, and I do believe he cries.  When we have a perfect world, contraception can be banned.  Until then, women will be forced to conceive for a multitude of reasons that middle-class Americans can probably not even comprehend.  Without at least a barrier form of contraception, women will give birth to babies that they cannot care for.  And with every social program under attack and threat of dissolution by the same entities who would like to see contraception severely limited or banned, American children do and will continue to die in the same way.  Until every person who is against contraception is willing to adopt at least 2 or 3 of these poor children, you just pay lip service to your beliefs.  And, yes, I am a devout Catholic, I HAVE spent much time in the third world countries and among the poor of which I speak, and I am an adoptive mother.

Good post, LH!
Unfortunately the Catholic faith does hold that suffering is a virtue and the only place a man can deposit seed is in the appropriate woman’s organ. Pope Benedict will tell you those babies are blessed and that sex is only for making babies, even if you don’t want them. It’s also appropriate to give false information about contraception (both pill and barrier methods), so long as people stay ignorant and follow the rules.

I wonder why you are still Catholic.

Laura, I am still Catholic because I see the truth and lack of hypocrisy in MOST of its teachings, much more than any other Christian church I’ve been a member of (I am not a cradle Catholic).  I also see the fullness of faith in its veneration of Mary who is so ignored by every other Christian sect I’ve been involved with.  However, maybe because I am NOT a cradle Catholic, I don’t feel the need to unquestioningly follow all of the Church’s teaching, some of which I clearly see as manmade rather than put forth by God.  The institution of the Church itself, though spoken about by Christ, is a manmade entity comprised of fallible human beings.  Again, since I am not a cradle Catholic, this does not surprise or dismay me.  But I do believe in having a voice.  I am always open to a clear, well-founded argument that changes my views.  When it comes to barrier methods of birth control, I have not gotten one yet.

After looking at some of the comments at this site, you have excommunicated yourself and are not a real Catholic because you support contraception.
You are also open to an argument and might change your views. Some people who blog or visit this site may become hostile to you.

Laura, if you’d like to judge, feel free.  I don’t believe in it nor do I believe in the idea of excommunication.  You might be surprised how many feel the way I do.  Regarding people becoming hostile towards me, how absolutely un-Christian is that?  Again, I don’t worry about how others decide to behave, just myself.  I am very much at piece with myself and God.  If asking questions and searching for answers is objectionable to some, so be it, and I wish them well.  Whether or not I am truly Catholic is between my soul and God.

Hey, LH—I’m in no position to judge you! You have the right to think as you choose. I’m just saying the views of some of the bloggers that I have read here.

I’m glad you are at peace with your God—more power to you! It’s just unusual to find someone who also likes to ask question and search for answers rather that take the commands of the Pope.

Good to know you.

We need to run these democrats and librals out of the country.  They are ruining what our forefathers built for us as “One Nation Under God”.  It’s we the people, not we the government.  They are a bunch of baby killing, immoral & godless, selfish lot. 

VOTE Straight Ticket Republican in 2012

LOL, teddy beare! You sound just like the other bigots on this site! If only the rest of them can see how they look to non-theists! They have no shame.

caught the episode of the Journey Home with you today (3/27) Thank you for your witness…..it hit home…..faith seeks understanding…..and now we continue the journey…..

@ChuckUFarley I will pray for you - seems to me you may need the love of Christ to break into your life and bring you to the truth, We were created by God in Love and for Love and with the hope we spend eternity with Him in paradise…you my friend need many prayers…I call for all who read these posts to pray for the conversion of souls….

Yes, the liberal infection of the mind causes frequent half truths. You forgot the hate the sin part. Love the sinner and hate the sin. Remember when Christ forgave the the harlot that was to be stoned to death. He said “Then Jesus lifting up himself, said to her: Woman, where are they that accused thee? Hath no man condemned thee? 11 Who said: No man, Lord. And Jesus said: Neither will I condemn thee. Go, and now sin no more.” Christ did not say I love you and your sins are forgiven. Be honest and accurate to the gospel or you will corrupt its message and open the flood gates to satan and his evil doers. Christi Fidelis

We are created by God in his own image and likeness but we’re not perfect like him.Our journey here on earth is just a temporary living,we need to leave according to His will and power,what ever mistake we commit,we need to move on and use the lowest point in our as a beginning to stand again doing what is right.

to Rover
“Churches creating hospitals, schools, and other mostly secular orgs”
THE Catholic church founded the first hospitals and the first Universities and otyher organizations.
Jesus Christ wanted us to live our faith by reaching out to others and helping others and telling them about him. that is t he ultimate goal of all Catholic orgianization.

“To force the lunch lady at Notre Dame to not have birth control is just too much.”  Their is no Catholic commado squad following people around forcing them NOT to buy things!

Our position is that you are making us buying things against our conscience. Birth-control is cheap if that caafeteria lady wants condoms then she can buy them at the drug store for about the same price of a six pack of beer.

What if the HHS found that praying daily lead to better health (there is some evidence for this) and mandated ALL people show up for afternoon prayers? Would they then be treading on your conscience rights?

“An atheist is a man who has no invisible means of support.” Fulton Sheen

The atheist can’t find God for the same reason that a thief can’t find a policeman

Read more: http://www.ncregister.com/blog/dan-burke/i-stand-with-the-catholic-church#ixzz1ssvm5T6e

LH: So much to debunk, I don’t know where to start.
.
The ineffective Rhythm Method is obsolete and has been for a generation. Modern methods of fertility awareness can be used to avoid pregnancy rate that is as high as artificial methods of contraception. So there is no “need” for artificial contraception to prevent pregnancy.
.
The Catholic Church does not consider limiting conception to be illicit at all, if done for just reasons. However, it must be done through proper means. The couple must respect their bodies, respect the sexual act, and respect any new life that is created. Artificial contraception violates one or more of these principles. Avoiding conception through fertility awareness does not harm the body of either partner, does not alter the sexual act, and does not destroy a new life, therefore, it is in itself morally licit.
.
The “poor starving third world children” sob story has been around for years, but is contraception really the solution? Getting the third world to use contraception involves getting contraception to the third world. How would you feel if you were starving and “aid” organizations decided to give you condoms? You can’t eat latex. Furthermore, the “beneficiaries” in the third world must actually use them. The cultural resistance to artificial contraception is very high and the lack of proper medical care to deal with possible side effects are serious issues. Fertility awareness has no recurring costs, empowers the couple, and is far more culturally acceptable.
.
Finally, starvation in the third world is usually caused by problems that have nothing to do with population pressures. Instead, it is usually some sort of political or economic issue where the government lets people starve.

I like the one that begins “If what happens in the bedroom….”  It states my sentiments completely.

I am a woman who believes it is my right to choose to not use contraception, to not support abortion, and to not pay for someone else’s contraception or abortion.  And it is as simple as that.

My business is not what goes on in your bedroom.

We can not stand with the Church when so many do not know accurately what the Church teaches in all matters of Faith and Morals.

In order to spread the Faith accurately, we must encourage everyone including non-Catholics to read the “Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition” (-dark green cover).
Give the CCC as gifts so everyone will know the truth.
Encourage your Pastor to write about the CCC in your Parish bulletin, and put link to the CCC on your Parish web site.
“….the Catechism has raised throughout the world, even among non-Christians, and confirms its purpose of being presented as a full, complete exposition of Catholic doctrine, enabling everyone to know what the Church professes, celebrates, lives, and prays in her daily life.”  – Pope John Paul II (pg xiv)

It is too bad that many US Cardinals and Bishops do not openly and actively encourage all Catholics (over age 16) within their Diocese to read the CCC.  Therefore, we must do their job for them.

Dan Burke,  If you truly stand with the Catholic Church than you should be horrified that youth beginning in kindergarten in the parochial schools are getting high doses of scandalous materials that teach they have a right to their own sexual gratifications.  Innocent, unsuspecting youth are given information about sexual matters not only too soon, but information in classrooms that has been condemned by the Pontiffs of the Roman Catholic Church.  See Motherswatch.net part 1 and part 2 on the series, “Growing In Love” and be prepared to be shocked at how youth in parochial schools and CCD classes are being raised as the ‘new barbarians’ as detailed in the book, “Sex Education, The Final Plague” by Randy Engel.  What are you willing to do to protect our youth from these curriculae?  You’ve got the mike; you’ve got the platform; you’ve got the gift of writing.  Will you use these God given talents and opportunities to protect our most valued resource – our youth, or will you be silent and accept these atrocities?

Dear Dan,
Are there bumperstickers available,too?
Thanks!

Jim, you stated:  “Avoiding conception through fertility awareness does not harm the body of either partner, does not alter the sexual act, and does not destroy a new life, therefore, it is in itself morally licit.”

Holy Mother the Church allows only the Rhythm Method.  I know that will shock you.  Furthermore, married couples must always be open to the acceptance of new life.  It is only by special permission that couples can purposely avoid conception of new life. 

Many believe as you do and that is one of the reasons for the skyrocketing annulments.  The conciliar church does not know how to prepare spouses for marriage.  Spouses can easily can get out of the ‘contract’.  But first they must get a civil divorce before advancing with the annulment process.  How crazy is that!!??  Love in marriage is denatured by your conceptions, Jim.

What is remarkable to me about the HHS mandate is that it would appear that our government is baiting us with the contraception issue. What is remarkable to me about Catholic teaching on contraception is that it could have changed as much as it has since Augustine and yet we still find ourselves in an insoluble conflict with our wider society. The Church has failed to make family planning through fertility awareness widespread among Catholics anywhere in the world. Given that it does allow people to limit the size of their families this failure is inexplicable except for the facts that 1) other methods are preferred by most cultures for reasons which may be related to wanting to sell people consumer goods and 2)the Church itself lacks faith in what is really a very new set of ideas about contraception.

William Walsh, what is remarkable is that the Obama administration is aware that only 10% of those who instruct ou youth U S bishops’ schools accept the teachings of the Catholic Church in regards to birth controlling.  As you can see the families are not taught that the only acceptable way to limit family size is abstinence, but instead they are taught to determine family size by their own conscience of how, when and how many.

@Dan Burke,  To clarify – I am a Roman Catholic who believes in all the infallible Magisterial Teachings of Holy Mother Church without exception.  You claimed in another discussion just before closing it that I was a protestant.  Quite the contrary.  I do my feeble upmost to defend the Catholic Faith and can understand why you could confuse me as being outside the fold.  I would welcome any questions even in an e-mail to me.