Praise God.

I became a Catholic three years ago (from the Southern Baptist persuasion). Almost all of the congregation that I knew personally were some sort of Republican. To stand up and say that I believe in what this woman (and others) are now proclaiming, based on their religious beliefs, would have been considered very shocking. Politics be damned. Government has no place in our religious beliefs. If a political party tries otherwise…. get out. And scream from the roof tops.

Thank you for standing up for what is right.  It gives me hope that this country can be turned around.  I hope more leaders will follow in your footsteps and stand up.

Obama’s beliefs on so-called gay marriage “evolved” to support it - and Congresswoman Nardelli’s political beliefs “evolved”, in a way, out of the Democrat party.  One is praised, the other ridiculed.

Proving once again that liberals are the least tolerant among us.

Thank you for standing on faith and principles, Congresswoman.

I fully support the freedom of religious beliefs. It’s part of our Bill of Rights. I am a little shocked at David’s comment though. I agree wholeheartedly that the government has no place in the religious beliefs of Americans, regardless of their religion. On the flip side our religions should have no bearing on our government. With a population of 300+ million people there is certainly a variety of beliefs that are out there and not everyone should be forced to accept those beliefs due to the laws our elected officials are making.

I believe I am hearing correctly what Matt C is saying, and all that I can say is that religious freedom in the constitution was not included to keep faith out of government, but to keep government out of religion. while I happen to agree with the Committeewoman’s position, I must say that I am surprised if this revelation, about the democratic party’s positions being in conflict with Catholicism, being new. For how many years have pro-abortion activist been prominent in the party? And gay marriage advocates have long been very strong voices within the Democrat party. Was it not difficult to support candidate Obama when you learned that not only did he support late term abortion, but in Illinois he supported the death of those babies that Survived efforts to abort them?  The time has come for all Catholics, all Christians, and all Jews to walk the walk of their faith. No longer is it ok to support candidates that support abortions and still go to church and know that life is at the basis of the faith they associate themselves with.

Wondrous thing…what a breath of fresh air.

Richard, knowing the region, the Democrats tend to be more socially conservative than anything you find on either coast.  Some even speculate that many of them are really Repulicans running as Democrats so they stand a chance of winning.  Her defecting is the only thing that actually surprises me, not that she stuck around hoping against hope, or that they find themselves increasingly of touch with Management.  Better late than never, I think.

I applaud her for being a woman of conviction. Knowing she would face ridicule and harassment, she did the right thing.

@Richard - “religious freedom in the constitution was not included to keep faith out of government, but to keep government out of religion” is not the exactly the case. Rather, it is correctly interpreted as prohibiting both of these. Abortion and gay marriage clearly run against Catholic doctrine, and it is your right to disagree with those who support them, but your position is based on your religious views. You seem to favor laws based on your faith, which is contrary to the 1st amendment. You can’t have it both ways.

Outstanding. Some folks still have spines.

Great story; tough choice. Ronald Regan made the same journey, & said the same thing. Conversion comes at a price; a good example is John Henry Cardinal Newman, whose Apologia Pro Vita Sua is must reading.

This is exactly how I feel! God be with you Ms. Nardell and know, there are others like you who have disaffiliated themselves with the Democratic party because of recent events. I have decided for the first tim in my life, since I was old enough to vote, I will NOT vote this year and neither will the people in my family of who I have influence. I do not support the direction the Democratic party has taken with this adminstation and have decided: I am Catholic first.  In these times of struggle, I turn to my God and not my government to help me through. I know the Way. My Church has been around for more than 2000 years and this country, a mere blip in the radar of that time. I choose to stand my Catholic faith as it has endured through many years.  I commend you and and so proud of you Ms. Nardell. May the Lord bless you for taking a stand for what is right. I’m with you and pray there are many more to make the same stand. Support is out there. Prayer as well. Thanks for doing the remarkable thing you did! I wish you peace in your new endeavors. Amen.

Jo Ann Nardelli…what you did is nothing short of heroic. May God bless you in abundance for your courage.

@Richard and @Zeke,

My position on gay marriage and abortion is based on my moral beliefs which my Catholic religion has the courage to support in the face of public opinion. The fact that gay marriage and Abortion (and most other things liberals support) is wrong can be known through reason. It can be known to all who think clearly, whether of any religion or no religion.

I am proud of you for making a decision that was very difficult but proper.  Christ will reward you for your Faith and, please know that you have the admiration of many folks out here who feel the same way you do, but get very little publicity.  God bless you and Peace be with you.

I went through the same decision almost 20 years ago, out in Montana.  All the big shots who ran the county central committee were rich snobs, and for them, it was abortion that had to be accepted or else.  For me it rapidly became a NO GO situation. 

I am glad Mrs. Nardelli was sifted OUT.  I think she will be better off.

Ms. Nardelli, I hope that you inspire a lot of people, especially women, to choose the Catholic faith over politics, power and money. Thanks for inspiring hope in this.

The Line has been drawn in the sand. God Bless you Ms. Nardelli. How far will people be pushed before common sense kicks in? I pray, like Ms. Nardelli, it will not take too long for folks to wake up.

Great witness. Only one person, but the wave and ripples from her jumping out of the pool will be seen, and heard and felt for a long while. There are too many who say I am a Catholic BUT and too many of them who do not see that the Choice is between JESUS and the GOSPEL or CAESAR. Especially when Caesar plays Messiah.

My journey out of the Democratic Party was similar. In my case however my faith was weak to nonexistent. When God kicked me in the rear and I had a rebirth of my faith I soon noticed how much in conflict my politics and faith were. In 2008 I left the Democratic Party. For me the final straw was listening to Jeremy Wright and trying to figure out how one could sit and listen to this for 20 years and not agree. I had always tried to pull the Democrats to the center to respect life and to worry about other things than gay marriage. I found the Republicans more open to my beliefs and my faith is not in conflict with most of their ideas.

I am a cradle Catholic and a graduate of a fine Catholic university.  My faith in total, it is complete.  And it is precisely because of both my Catholic faith and my Catholic education that I am and will remain a Democrat.  I could never join a party and stand alongside radical Protestants who attack my faith and Church simply because they too oppose abortion.  My faith tells me that I must oppose all murders including those carried out by the State in the form of capital punishment.  My faith also instructs me to care for the poor and those rejected by society, the same groups Jesus surrounded himself with.  I find the greed and hierocracy advocated and demonstrated by the current Republican Party to be inconstant with my Catholic faith.  When one joins a group, one must look around and see who else is among them.  I pass no judgement upon those of you who are comfortable joining a party that counts among its most powerful members radical Protestants who attack the Church and Holy Father perpetually.  But as for me, I will stay in with the party of Al Smith and Dorothy Day.

I got involved in the Republican Party to pull it farther right, because I thought it had become too liberal.  I have encouraged my Democrat friends who share many of my viewpoints to be involved in their party (but vote with mine for the time being!) to do the same.  Both parties have become interested in government involvement in everything in our lives.  We have a wonderful Constitution that is concerned with limiting the government.  Good luck to all with the courage to change the direction in which our country is hurtling.  Freedom of religion, freedom of thought are essential to our development as humans.

@Francis - My support for gay marriage and abortion (BTW, pro-abortion simply means that women should be able to make the decision for themselves) is based on my moral beliefs. What makes your morals right and mine wrong? Has every other religion (or lack thereof) got it all wrong?

God bless you Jo Ann Nardelli, a brave and courageous lady, standing

up for your Catholic faith and your freedom of religious speech!!

You are in my prayers.  I say my Rosary for you. Remember Padre Prio

said, “The Rosary is our Weapon.”  We pray for our Nation!

Thanks Be To God!  JoAnn, you are so admired by me and I support you 100%.  You did the right thing and God will reward you greatly.  The people are saying hateful things are nothing but the Devil’s tools to try to persuade you to “come back”. You are wonderful!!!!  God Bless you!

Congratulations Ms. Nardelli.  Perhaps at last President Obama has gone too far!! We must be Catholics first, and yes there are things that require change in the Republican party. We must first of all, live our faith.  Then we must return to the constitution if we are to have “liberty and justice for all.”

This area (yes I live here) has a tradition of hard work, strong opinions and handing down your Faith and Political party. The unions are strong here because they were needed to provide safe working conditions in the coal mines.
My family are Republicans. We are Catholic and are not afraid to show our faith in public. We have also had many time when comments have been made where we can hear them about our affiliations.
So I understand how much strength it took for her to do what she did. God gave her the strength and prayer will keep her strong.

Morgan D Lerner has a point. Catholics should not run to the Republican Party simply because they are dissatisfied with the Democratic Party.
.
The Republican Party is the party of America’s white Protestant majority. The Democratic Party is the party of everyone else and has become increasingly secular. NEITHER party represents Catholic values. The choice is one of error vs. error.
.
This is why the Catholic vote is split so evenly. But Catholics are divided by ethnicity far more than ideals: English speaking Catholics lean Republican, probably because they see more in common with white Protestants than secularists; Hispanic Catholics are overwhelmingly Democratic, probably because they see Republicans as hostile to them.

Morgan, there are self-professed, “ardent” Catholics within the Democrat party that attack Holy Mother Church and the Holy Father - it is not an exclusively “radical Protestant” practice.  As for caring for the poor, I am sure you are aware of the research that shows the most generous people when considering time and money given to charitable causes are those who identify as religious conservatives (most in the Republican party).  Don’t fall for the false meme “liberals care, conservatives don’t.”  The facts simply don’t bear out this oversimplification.  I think Dorothy Day would be appalled by what passes for the Democrat’s platform.  Note well, I don’t think the Republican party is perfect, either.

I also left the democratic party- or it left me. It changed from defender of the weak and poor into the very thing it used to hate. I can’t stand with them anymore. Wish I could, but I can’t. I’m a default republican (though I have issues with that party as well- just not as many as with the current democratic party)

The decision by the Democratic Party was made long ago. In the 1970’s, I proposed language to the Indiana State Platform Committee at the platform hearings that would support life rather than abortion and the committee liked the language. The Central Committee woman assigned to the committee would not allow that language to be used. The language could not prohibit abortion.

I applaud your decision and pray that you have peace !

The person has to decide in her own conscience about whether to leave OR he stays with or leaves a Party. There are valid reasons for leaving and joining either one;neither sadly it is not possible to register in all States of the USA for an Independent, the powers pretend there is a two-party system but seem to forget that whoever topped the poll in the beginning was POTUS and # 2 was VP, today it is winners take both.  One is free of course at the General election to switch and match parties and candidates.ABOVE ALL-  no Party can be a safe-home and cosy haven for the Church or any believer because the GOSPEL is not in chains to any ideology or Party. The bishops and the official Church’s moral agenda is not that of any current party platform which has little to do with religious affinity or ethnic identity as such. Ms Nardelli had a more public role in her Party so her decision was not the exact same as others to stay or decide to leave quietly.

Morgan-
I share your distaste for greed and misuse of my tax dollars.  Can anyone really look at the “Solyndras” and the Obama administration and continue to cry foul on ONLY the Republican party?

When you look around you in the Democrat party, do you not see Al Sharpton - A Protestant - Baptist?
There are numerous Protestants who are Democrat leaders, though smaller in number than the Republican party.
All Republicans are not Protestant.  Rick Santorum is Catholic and Republican.

Here is a breakdown of the faiths of Democratic and Republican leadership

http://www.pewforum.org/Government/Faith-on-the-Hill—The-Religious-Composition-of-the-112th-Congress.aspx#2

....................................................................
69% of congressional Republicans are Protestant, fewer than half of Democrats (43%) belong to Protestant denominational families. On the other hand, Catholics make up a greater share of Democratic members (34%) than they do of GOP members (25%).
....................................................................

I am a cradle Catholic and am Republican because I believe America is the land of opportunity for the INDIVIDUAL to succeed or fail on their OWN ability, not whether the governments deems I am worthy of a hand out of other people’s tax dollars.

I believe CHURCHES do a far better job taking care of the poor, especially the Catholic Church, which is under assault by the Obama administration.
One of two things will happen with Obama’s HHS mandate.
1) Catholics will be forced into civil disobedience and possibly go to jail.
2) The Catholic Church will shut down all it’s schools, hospitals, orphanges, etc. 
The Catholic Church is the leading provider of aid and assistance to the poor in this country.  How will shutting down all their vehicles of aid help the poor?

Catholic Democrats who support the HHS mandate which violates the religious freedom and consciences of pro-life Catholics, have chosen the Obama administration over the Catholic Church and its teachings.

Thomas Moore and you,thank God.

@Zeke:  My support for gay marriage and abortion (BTW, pro-abortion simply means that women should be able to make the decision for themselves) is based on my moral beliefs. What makes your morals right and mine wrong? Has every other religion (or lack thereof) got it all wrong?

In a word, in ll charity: Yes. You have it all wrong. And the question of “How do you know” has been answered for centuries by better minds thn mine.

If the question is sincere, we can recommend some reading. But strt with this:  what mental gymnastics are required to justify the ending of a life in the womb?  It isn’t 1970 anymore. We know exactly what is going on with the preborn at the moment a woman becomes aware she’s pregnant. So, how do you justify killing that person at any point? If your moral beliefs tell you anything other than that it can’t be justified, ask yourself next why it wold be wrong to ” return a two-week old kid by killing it, or a two HOUR or two MINUTE old kid. Then…explain the difference between those children.

Reason will tell you abortion is wrong. Leave God out if you like.

I am moved by this story. When I came back to the practice of my Catholic faith 6 years ago I started to realize that progressive Democratic politics was functioning like a competing religion in my life and I had to get out of it. It was difficult because that had previously been very important to me and I had many valued friendships because of that. Listening to the Church and forming my conscience by her natural law based teaching was absolutely the RIGHT CHOICE. I realized how little I had understood up till then about how to reason about moral truth. There is NO WAY that Jo Ann Nardelli was motivated in this difficult choice by personal bias. She prefers Christ. There just doesn’t seem to be a place for faithful Catholics in the Democratic Party anymore. I agree with others who said the Republican Party cannot be thought the “Catholic Party” either, though they are moderately to strongly pro life and pro natural marriage. I have had to conclude that those who point to these as priority issues today are right.

The Faith doesn’t change.  Political parties do.  So it is not logical to choose a party based on what it used to be or who used to be in it.  One must look at what a party stands for and who is in it currently.  As for me, I choose to be independent of party and vote for pro-life candidates—who in my 30 years of voting have always been Republican.

What makes you wrong Zeke, is that you acused Ms. Nardelli of “favoring laws” based on her faith. Where did she say she favored that? Nowhere. The only people initiating laws to favor their own “religion” (secularism) are Democrats.
In Massachusetts, gay “marriage” was decided by a Democrat judge and Democrat politicians, not the voters. Liberal abortion laws are more often the creation of Democrat politicians, not Republican ones.
Democrat presidents cozy up to Planned Parenthood and sign onto legialtaion over and over again to keep the money of all of us going into the abortion mills.
As a Senator, Obama voted three times to keep the law that babies should die in a sink rather than be recesitated in a botched abortion. You can’t get anymore evil than that.
These are just small examples of Democrats’ “laws based on their faith”.

@Zeke,

I don’t think you read my posting carefully. I will restate the important part:

The fact that gay marriage and Abortion (and most other things liberals support) is wrong can be known through reason. It can be known to all who think clearly, whether of any religion or no religion.

You state that “pro-abortion simply means that women should be able to make the decision for themselves” And what decision is that? To kill a human being. Science, common sense and reason say that the offspring of human beings is a human being. It has a unique DNA. It is not part of the mother; it lives there. If it is a “Blob of protoplasm, then so are you and me. If what is right or wrong is what you or I say it is, then you have no legal right to prosecute me for killing my wife or neighbor if I say it is OK. And if you prevent me because you have the majority on your side, you are merely exercising raw power. There are moral absolutes and killing innocent human beings is one of them. Law must be based on moral absolutes. How hard is that to understand?

It would be nice if more “Catholic Democrats” in politics did the same, but that would take COURAGE!!

As a life-long Democrat, I couldn’t agree more with the Congresswoman’s stance.  The Democratic party position on same-sex marriage has been the “straw that broke the camel’s back” on my decision to no longer vote Democratic. God comes first. That said, GOP positions on child labor laws, climate change, the working poor, minimum wage, tax breaks for the richest, foreign wars that costs trillions of dollars against nations that pose little or no threat to our national security, deregulation of corporations that for short-term profit persist in engaging in market manipulation trading practices that drive our equity markets into free fall and 401(k)s into disintegration—are not policies I find worthy of my vote either. Both ends of the political spectrum are seriously out of whack with the principles of the Catholic faith I hold so dear.

I am so proud of you!  Standing up for our Faith is not easy, especially for Democrats—Now if Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, Harry Reid, Kathleen Sebelius, the Kennedy’s, etc. would just listen.  May God continue to bless you!  You will make a big difference in my home State of Pennsylvania!

@Zeke and others who somehow think that the first amendment was intended to keep faith out of government.  Really?  So your argument is that the framers of the first amendment were worried that religious reasoning would influence the laws of the Republic?  Are we to believe our founding fathers were so naive as to believe that a man can leave his faith at the door when he serves his country in elected office?  Frankly that is the dumbest thing I have ever heard.  The founding fathers, regardless of their own religious beliefs, knew that religion would play a key role in forming the world view of the future leaders of the Republic.  It is unreasonable to believe that any elected official leaves their world view behind when they serve.  The religious beliefs of public figures have often played a key role in the formation and evolution of public policy in this country, or have you forgotten the abolition and temperance movements? 

So yes, it would be wrong for Catholic politicians to impose Catholic religious beliefs and teachings on the American Public.  It is not wrong, however, for a politician to use the ontological morality of Catholicism when determining the positions he will support as an elected official.

Just saw a map of the US that had the breakdown by State of the Religious Faiths in the country.  95% are Christian.  Mormons are 2% and Muslims 1%.  This is a Christian nation.  Just sayin’

@Dennis McDaniel

I suggest you read “Indivisible” by James Robison and Jay Richards, “The Cube and the Cathedral” by George Weigel, “Against the Grain” by George Weigel, “The Housing Boom and Bust” by Thomas Sowell, “What’s So Great About Christianity” by Dinesh D’Souza, “Basic Economics” by Thomas Sowell and similar thoughtful books before mouthing vague emotional statements propogated by the proponents of big government.

Yes, Republicans also have their problems, but primarily in also being big government statists. Morally you should have no problem in any of the areas you mention if you support the Paul Ryan and Rick Santorum wing of the Republican party.

I also suggest “The Road to Serfdom” by Hayek.

The regulation of the housing market primarily advocated by liberal democrats like Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, etc. etc is what provided the means for banks and investors to take risks they should not have taken.

The panic over climate change has of course been proven a farce.
Minimum wage hurts the poor as any economist will tell you. Some wars are necessary (again read Weigel). Certainly Clinton and Obama led us into unwarranted wars so the Democrat record there is no better. Congress caused the freefall that decimated your an my 401K; Congress is what is keeping energy prices high by legislating putting food (corn) into gas tanks and legislating unnecessary restrictions on oil drilling.

All,

I always say that being “Pro-Life” is not a religious belief; it is a moral truth. It is the pro-abortion side that always tries to make this a religious arguement.

I promise as a Catholic (And so does the Magesterium) to NEVER try to legislate religious belief. You will see no support for a law that you must believe in the Virgin birth. We will however legislate moral beliefs; it is the only legitimate thing to legislate. And sometimes, even that should not be legislated. As an example, there is no support for outlawing premarital sex and that is immoral; it would serve no purpose.

How can I say thank you enough!  May God bless you abundantly, Jo Ann, and fill your life with people and a role to play beyond anything you imagined in the Democratic Party.  God’s Word in today’s liturgy proclaims Jesus saying that anyone who gives up mother, brother, sister for His sake will be rewarded in this life and the next.  You will be repaid many times what you have given up for His sake.  He will turn your mourning into dancing.  Many of us have experienced that in our lives, and you probably have in other ways in your life.  You certainly will now.  The Lord keeps His promises.  May God bless you in every way.  Your sacrifice overcomes and replaces the horrible scandal of so many Catholics and other Christians who publicly denounce the Truth of the Gospel.  Keep up the good work.

I am so encouraged by this woman. I have been praying that Catholic’s in the public eye will put their faith first!

Francis Ruffing:  Yes, yes, yes!!!!  If only the mainstream media gave the truth as you have.  It was the DEMOCRATS, not George Bush, who got us into this mess.  Barney Frank refused to do what Bush and his administration warned him needed to be done to stop the glut.  Uninformed people, hoping to get more than what they could pay for, were lulled into doing things the Democrats told them they could do with impunity.  The Democratic Congress did what was hurtful and refused to do what was helpful.  President Obama looks mean, puny, and narcisistic next to the gentle, honest, spiritual man of integrity that George Bush was and is.  May God bless him.

I think the “Christian nation” idea has to be parsed. Most are Christian, yes. But the divisiveness among “Christians” ranges from presuming that the world is only 6000 years old, to Epsicopalians (Anglicans) who voted to let the birth control flood sweep over the walls in 1930, and today is for abortion, women priests and probably now same-gender unions= “marriage”. I know the PM of the UK is for that in Parliament and he is upper class Anglican Eton educated. Many US Catholics are Demc. first and believers later, same for GOP- neither in great numbers question or push their leaders on the Consistent Ethic of Life teaching. I repeat the Catholic Christian Church cannot be co-opted by any political partry, and the tendency for Evangelicals to vote GOP is mainly on sexual ethics issues and not for the C-E-L Consistent Ethic of All Human Life.

“God is the reason for our being. We have to follow our faith.” (Jo Ann Nardelli) That pretty much says it all. Anything less than that is sinful.

Congratulations JoAnn for having the courage to follow your faith!!!!!! I am so proud of you. In this day and age it is too easy to dismiss the teachings of our faith so that we might be politically correct or popular. We have been called to be in the world and not of it which means we shall always go against the current which is never easy at any time(check out the saints). Remember, “Blessed are you when men reproach you, and persecute you, and speaking falsely, say all manner of evil against you, for My sake. Rejoice and exult, because your reward is great in heaven; for so did they persecute the prophets who were before you.”-Matthew 5:11-12. Hang in there and know that you are in prayers and most importantly you are pleasing God with your actions.

Morgan D:

I am happy to hear that your “faith is complete”. I too, am a cradle Catholic; but did not have the opportunity to attend a fine Catholic University. I did learn from my parents, grandparents, and the good Sisters of the Bernadines that my faith journey is continuous. I may think to myself that I have done a good job so far; but in reality, I know there’s always room for growth and improevment.

Like St. Paul, I hope at the end of this lifetime journey to have “fought the good fight and to have run the race to the finish line”. I can only hope that one day, I will get to see Jesus face to face and I so hope to hear Him say, “Job well done, My good and faithful servant”.

As for politics, I left the Democrat Party about 12 years ago. I joined the Republican Party, but have become disenchanted with their leadership, also. We live in a very impefect world. I doubt there will ever be a political party that will stand up for all the temets of the Faith. The best we can do is hope and pray and elect good people (from both parties - there are good people in BOTH parties) to office that will stand up for that.

“If God is for us, who can be against us?”  Stay strong, Jo Ann, and you will continue to accomplish great things!
Years ago, I referred to myself as a Pro-life Democrat and a very liberal Democrat friend just laughed and said, “You must be very lonely.”  As the party moves farther and farther to the left, I now consider myself politically unaffiliated.

this same thing happened to me nearly fourteen years ago! Once I truly realized the inevitable direction of the Democratic party, I had no choice but to leave.

Congratulations! We’re proud of you and will be praying for you. May the Angels and Saints protect you.

Rust belt PA resident here. My husband and I come from a long line of working class Catholic Dems.. Steel workers, Coal miners, etc. After Obamacare passed a couple of years ago, we just couldn’t do it anymore and changed our party affiliation to GOP (that hurt!) to ensure that we could still vote in PA primaries.

JoAnn is not alone. As the saying goes, our party left us. It’s great to see a high profile Dem take a stand.

As an older former registered Democrat, who could not declare Independent in the Primaries, I am heartened to see the large number of posts to compliment this brave woman for making her choice to exit the primary Party of Death, let us work on the GOP to back the GOSPEL and go all the way in promoting the Ethic of Life for immigration, death penalty and all the issues. Believers must take what we get but never take our eyes off the goal- JESUS’ GOSPEL above all, short and long term.

Praying for grace for Mrs Nardelli, and for her to have the perseverance to walk through this difficult time. May the Holy Spirit give her the strength to carry this burden. She did the right thing in choosing God’s Will over the will of men.

“...as she and her husband were getting ready for Mass and watching Meet the Press when Joe Biden, a Catholic, cited his support for gay marriage.
This shocked her.”

Really?  It was shocking?  That’s because as with most Democrats who call themselves Catholics, their political party affiliation takes precedence over their faith. 

What a woman!  And she’s following in the footsteps of some high rollers like James Cagney and Ronald Reagan—and Abe Lincoln. 

God Bless her.

Contemptuous imposters like Biden, Pelosi and the Kennedy’s attempt to re-invent Catholism by claiming to be “Catholic.”  Luckily, the fool only fools.

You got it, Max—we can always count on the degenerate Left to “re-invent” God in their own image.

Praise God!  It is reassuring to know there are people who will stand with the church even if it means personal criticism.

Thank you and bless you for your courage and integrity and your straightforward statement of what you are doing. ReEjoice and be glad when you are persecuted for doing what is right ...  for there is a reward far greater than political honor and success.

Dear Jo Ann Nardelli, 
Thank you for listening to your well formed conscience and following it!
There are plenty of people who admire you for your courage!

If additional Catholic politicians actually live the Catholic Faith, the public square will be a much different place.

It’s time, it’s necessary, it’s right that Catholics should act like Catholics and live the Faith boldly in public 24/7/365(6).

Thanks be to God for Jo Ann Nardelli.

The fundamental social teachings of the Catholic Church center on the defense and protection of LIFE and FAMILY. There is one political party in America that works in direct and open opposition to those non-negotiable teachings. They do so proudly and daily, trying with all their political might to attack, to re-define, to destroy the very things the Church says all Catholics must defend. The protection of Life and the defense of the traditional Family and Marriage are NOT up for reasoned debate when Catholics enter the voting booth. These are the key issues, and until they are gotten right, every other social issue that liberal Catholics wrongly deem more important will never be corrected. Is there any way that a person can call himself a Democrat and a Catholic at the same time with any semblance of integrity? Only because Liberalism trumps Catholicism, because politics trumps Faith, can “Catholics” go on voting for the most openly pro-abortion and openly anti-traditional family president in history and keep supporting a political party that arrogantly defies both the Catholic Church and the Truth.

You don’t get more Democrat than my mother’s side of the family.  Her grandfather was a steelworker and self made man, who helped found the AFL CIO.  I’m sure if he were alive today, he would side with his solid Catholic faith, just like my mother has.  Yes!  Thank you for your powerful witness.  God Bless you.

I too left the party of death when John Kerry, supporter of partial birth abortion, ran for president.  That was the last straw for me and I haven’t looked back.  I encourage other Catholics who are dissatisfied with the Democrat party to do the same.  It’s the only way they will get the message. If the majority in this country vote pro-life, you better believe Democrats will change their tune if it means losing elections. Maybe they will actually get a moral clue.  Making it the law of the land to kill innocent babies in the womb has been the downfall of this country. We need some courageous patriots to turn things around.  Unfortunately, we won’t find them in the Democrat party.

I would offer these observations to those who struggle with past loyalty to the Democratic Party:

1) The Declaration of Independence lists the goods of Life, Liberty, & the Pursuit of Happiness. Like the petitions in the Our Father, these are in the proper order, as each succeeding good is dependent on the preceeding. So the preservation of life has a higher priority than securing liberty or improving the quality of life. Consequently life issues are paramount; a baby has to survive birth before any other needs must be met. When I was younger, I was more interested in other issues, but have come to realize the vile evil that is abortion. That was Mother Teresa’s message, over & above all the good that she did.

2) Like it or not, we have a 2 party system in the US, & we have a duty to exercise our right to vote. I do not have any particular enthusiasm for the presumptive Republican nominee, who may or may not achieve good results, but he HAS to be better than the current incumbent. In case you haven’t noticed, the goals of the HHS mandate are twofold, and entirely evil:
A) Sever the Church’s health care, education, & social ministries from her, so they can be thoroughly secularized. Those who are saying “we’ll close the doors” are just being silly as it would be necessary to dispose of those assets in a prudent manner.

B) Once these impediments are out of its way, the Administration will proceed with mandated abortions to naturally follow contraception. Since abortion will be seen as a Constitutional right which must prevail over individual conscience, doctors & other health care workers will be compelled to participate in providing abortions. Large portions of the medical profession will be closed to faithful Catholics.

These outcomes are as evil as they are inevitable should BHO be re-elected. He owns the media (all of 19 seconds coverage for the history-making lawsuits), entertainment, education, unions, and access to obscene amounts of money.

It is not enough to abstain, you have a duty to resist this evil. You are confronted with a terrible choice: your Church or your party.

God be with you Ms. Nardelli - You made the right choice ... it will serve as a powerful example to others. Will be praying for you.

Thank you for living to your convictions. It has great effect.
Frank

God Bless you Jo Ann.  This is an answer to our prayers.  Hopefully you will be an inspiration to other Catholics who need to send a message to the current Democratic Party.

Good for her. Maybe she and some other pro-life Democrats can start a party that will actually uphold the sanctity of human life and normal marriage.

Liberalism’s motto: “What was once a mortal sin is now an act of virtue.”  So much for reason.  It’s all emotion now.

If only all Catholic Democrats in the U.S.A. would follow in her footsteps…!
Maybe it is time to create a new (Christian) party…?

God bless Ms. Nardelli.  She is setting an example for all of us who profess to be Catholic.  She has sacriced her professional career for her faith in Christ.  We all may face such decision in the months and years ahead as our country embraces a new secularism that has no room for us who believe in Christ and his mission for us.

@Deacon:  “Yes. You have it all wrong. And the question of “How do you know” has been answered for centuries by better minds thn mine.”
-
More than a bit arrogant to confidently state that only Catholics have the correct interpretation of God and that all others are mistaken…. but leaving God out of this as you say, I agree that if we as a society allow the killing of a fetus, we must ask ourselves why we wouldn’t allow killing a 2 week old infant?. Clearly, we don’t, nor are there any advocating for this, but that is an excellent question. Difficult question, and morally I suppose there is not a significant difference. However, a fetus is not a person under our laws, nor do we have funerals for a fetus after a miscarriage, and there is unanimous agreement that killing a child after they have been born is murder. But that is not the same as saying that a mass of cells smaller than the period at the end of this sentence is the same as an eight-month old fetus, legally, morally, or even from a common sense point of view. Leaving God out of this of course.
-
@Linda (also confident that any divergence from Catholic doctrine is wrong): if you read my post, I accuse Ms. Narelli of no such thing (favoring laws based on her faith); rather I was directly replying to a post by Richard who does support such legislation. Ms. Nardelli seems to me to be quite a conscientious and admirable politician, but what saddens me the most is that such a compassionate and ethical woman has been driven to side with the Republicans, who wrap themselves in the Bible but are completely at odds with other important elements of Cathoic doctrine that are utterly foreign to the Republican party - care for the poor, universal access to health care, no pre-emptive war, elimination of the death penalty, just to name a few.
-
@Francis: I’m interesting in hearing about your non-religious reasoning for why gay marriage is wrong.
Of course what is right or wrong is what you and I, as a society, say it is. What’s the alternative, the moral absolutes in the various holy books? Sure, Christianity and the Bible is an excellent source of morality, but you obviously don’t advocate stoning adulterers to death, or genocide, or any of the other nasty bits that we can all agree are abhorrent ways to run a society. You and I select what is right or wrong, what is illegal, what acts deserve punishment. Is a “blob of protoplasm” the same as a human being? Is using birth control pills which prevent fertilized embryos from implanting on the uterine wall the same as murdering an human being outside the womb? Of course not, that’s what simple reasoning tells us, as does our system of laws. That’s why nobody in their right mind fears some bizarre scenario where someone could legally murder your wife or your neighbor.

I congratulate Jo Ann Nardelli, but what took you so long? You should have seen the writing on the wall for a long time. The Democratic Party went over the left cliff a long time ago. I too was a Catholic Democrat and came from a long line of Democrats in my family. I changed when I started watching the DNC and RNC conventions in 1992. When I saw that the DNC wouldn’t even let a pro-life speaker on stage (who was by the way Bob Casey, Sr. who was really pro-life compared to his pro-choice son), I made up my mind then to become a Republican. I don’t think that Republicans are perfect, but they certainly are more in line with Catholic teaching on many intrinsically evil issues. For me, the Democratic Party became the Party of Death….death for millions of unborn children, death for millions of embryos, death to traditional marriage & family and death to the souls of those involved in these issues.  If you have no regard for life you can’t be trusted on any other issue:

“It is impossible to further the common good without acknowledging and defending the right to life, upon which all the other inalienable rights of individuals are founded and from which they develop.”

Pope John Paul II, The Gospel of Life

Bravo, Ms. Nardelli! 

You have the heart & courage of the great Renaissance humanist, St. Thomas More -  lawyer, statesman, and philosopher.

For those who argue that Religion should have no effect on government:  Would you support repealing governmental laws against murder because “Thou shalt not murder!” is one of the Ten Commandments?
Historically, much of the contents of civil law, in the original thirteen colonies and later, was based on the religions held by the settlers.  Doctrinal differences between different Christian sects w/b repealed when such items had made it into civil law; and some beliefs were held by Jewish immigrants as well as Christians, and did not represent a problem.
Holding that any civil law that has a basis in Religion s/b repealed is the equivalent of establishing atheism as the governmental religion.
TeaPot562

@ Zeke -

Even if you don’t believe in the 10 commandments (in particular, the 5th commandment that thou shall not kill), surely you can’t believe that cruelty to babies is an okay choice. 

I challenge you to head over to YouTube and watch “The Silent Scream video - Abortion as Infanticide”  - Dr. Bernard Nathanson’s classic video that shocked the world. He explains the procedure of a suction abortion, followed by an actual first trimester abortion as seen through ultrasound. The viewer can see the child’s pathetic attempts to escape the suction curette as her heart rate doubles, and a “silent scream” as her body is torn apart. (Make sure that you view the high def version)

Please let us know your thoughts after watching this video. 

Dear Mrs. Nardelli,

Thank you for your courage and know that you will find many who will stand beside you. And, remember:

“Blessed are they who are persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is hte kingdom of heaven.  Blessd are you when they inslut you and utter every kind of evil against you falsely because of me. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward will be great in heaven.  Thus they persecuted the prophets before you.”

Hold your head up high and know that you stand amidst “a great cloud of witnesses”.

You will be in my prayers.

Darn slow learner.

We all must act according to our faith…real faith whether its Catholic or Protestant is to believe in our Lord and
God Jesus Christ Our Savior and live according to those principles of the faith which means sometimes going it alone rather than in a group or party…esp the Democratic party which I use to belong myself…but no longer…because the democratic party is the party for choice and that is not the choice of life but to choose only abortion as the means of choice. So life is short and when the time comes to make these decisions…we must act out of reason and faith and move away from the wrong side of the argument.

“I didn’t leave the Democrat Party, the Party left me”- Ronald Reagan.  I have heard this over and over again over the past 50 years going back to the late Sam Yorty, Los Angeles Mayor.  Bravo to JoAnn for staying by her faith.

May 29th: We need to pray for this woman.  What courage! What faith! Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden and other ‘Catholic’ politicians who stand defiantly against the Church and the Bishops and urge others to do so should follow JoAnn’s example.

I am also a catholic, however lately I feel i should just call myself a Christian. The Catholic church is becoming more of a political party than Faith based religion. The role of government and the laws of the church should never intermingle. We as Catholics do not have the right to decide what is constitutional; nor do we have the right to judge others. If the President comes out in favor of gay marriage, that is his right as an American. We as catholics should practice faith, as it is our own personal choices that matter. Am I in favor of abortion? absolutely not; however I am an American who believes that my faith and values dont belong in constitutional debate. It is possible to be a good Catholic as well as a good citizen of this country. The government is not asking the church to marry gays. It is a matter of civil rights. This country is a melting pot of faith and belief systems. and at the end of the day, ultimately it is between each individual and God.

God bless you for putting Faith over political doctrine, Jo Ann Nardelli.

Thank you,,earlier today my womens group was discussing how i wished Catholics would have the courage to do what I just read about you.
Thank you

“The crown of victory is promised only to those who engage in the struggle.” ~St. Augustine #quote

Thanks to God,May the lord God continue to strengthen her catholic faith!love you much u are a very strong woman wish to be strong as you.

@ Zeke

I have a comment regarding your most recent response to Deacon. It doesn’t specifically address your statements, but I believe it relevant to your discussion.

You stated-
“However, a fetus is not a person under our laws, nor do we have funerals for a fetus after a miscarriage, and there is unanimous agreement that killing a child after they have been born is murder. But that is not the same as saying that a mass of cells smaller than the period at the end of this sentence is the same as an eight-month old fetus, legally, morally, or even from a common sense point of view.”

It can be argued that a human embryo has the same right to live as an infant, child, or adult in that the embryo WILL grow into an adult human being if nothing obstructs or interrupts the process. Terminating an embryo or fetus removes the adult that they will be from existence. The fact that an embryo is not yet an adult, and does not have the same qualities or abilities as an adult, does not mean that its life lacks value. A human embryo is a genetically distinct living organism which is generated from its parents, and the fact that its appearance differs from that of a post-uterine human does not mean that it is not a human being. There is no clear point at which it can be stated that an embryo or fetus has become a human being (and thus has a right to live) because there is no point at which it is not, in fact, human.  Termination of a pregnancy is the termination of a human life, which is generally held not to be morally permissible.

These are simply my beliefs on the subject, but I hope you will give them due consideration. Thank you.

You are an inspiration.  Surely, the Lord will bless you.  There are so many TAY (Twice a year) Catholics out there that is reasuring to read about someone who is committed to our faith.  I am sure that you will be a touchstone to encourage others to “keep the faith!”

I’m a cradle Catholic from Canada and I can only say that I thank God for people like Ms. Nardelli.

Jo Ann Nardelli you are a real hero.  The Catholic Church needs more people with the courage you have demonstrated.  So many of the Catholic politicians seem to be Catholic in name only who obviously do not follow the teachings of the Church. 
Bishop Charles Caput (Philadelphia) is a must read on this very topic of Church/State relations called : Render Unto Caser.
Stay well,Jo Ann, and don’t give up the good fight and be assurred you will be in my prayers.

It’s nice to know that there are Catholic Democrats who actually try their best to live their Catholic faith…....
Vice President Biden, and fellow “Catholic” politicians, what line are you on?  In sixty years, where are you going to be?  Just remember as a child in catechism…....eternity in HEAVEN? or in HELL?

Been there. Done that. I was ALSO a Catholic Democrat for most of my life. I was also “gay” and a member of DIGNITY until about the age of 32.  With the help of Father John Harvey of COURAGE, I left that whole lifestyle behind me and am now married with 3 children.  Like Ann Nardelli, I had to follow my Faith. Been there. Done that.

I also left the Democrat Party for the same reasons. Now, with the war on faith there is even more reason.

There is no reason to pigeonhole yourself as a slave to the Democratic Party.  Unless you hate God and want to shred His Commands and then spend eternity in Hell with the rest of the Democrats.

God bless you, Mrs. Nardelli!  This takes courage.
My dad was a life-long Democrat till he died, but voted Republcan for president since Kennedy.  He got real excited one year when for congress the Democrat was pro-life and the Republican was pro-choice.
Please compare the Republican platform with the political issues suggested by the Bishops.  I find they are very similar.  Then please consider running as a Republican.  We need good candidates with your experience.

How odd that there are so many who do not understand the primary importance of moral law over situational ethics.
There is NO political “party” which is unblemished by moral failings ... none. If you vote a party line you are invariably turning your back to crimes and moral outrages of one kind or another. You must vote for the individual ... if you feel there are any who are honest.

@Zeek

You state that “Of course what is right or wrong is what you and I, as a society, say it is.”. Follow that to its logical conclusion. One day it is immoral to kill a one year old; at a later date it is moral? That makes no sense. What society determines is what is legal or illegal, not what is moral or immoral; the morality of an act does not change. If society determines what is moral or immoral, what happens to human rights under your assumptions? Do you want human rights to be determined by (an often fickle) majority or by a fixed moral standard? That is why we celebrate that we are a consitutional republic not a democracy. We determine the way we ought to live, not leave it to the passion of the moment. We recognize God Given human rights that can not be abrogated by the majority.

Your comment that “You and I select what is right or wrong, what is illegal” shows that you have not thought this through. Morality and legality are not the same thing as your comment implies. Yes society can use raw power to brutalize individuals, but that does not make it moral. And that is what has happened with legal abortion. The powerful have brutalized and killed the weak.

You use the term “blob of protoplasm”. That is a very unscientific meaningless term adopted by the purveyors of abortion to minimalize the moral reality of a small human being. Yes, a human being of 1 minute or 1 day or 1 week or 1 month or 1 year (Peter Singer) after fertilization is a human being as much as a teenager, a productive farmer or a senile old person.  It has a unique DNA and as the offsping of humans is a human just as the offspring of chickens are chickens. The offspring of humans are not rocks or plants or cows or computers or amoeba. If it were something else, you could identify it as something else. A fetus is a stage of life; it is merely a young human. Don’t kill them. They have committed no crime, had not trial, had no chance to confront their accusers and are not mortally attacking you.

You ask “Is using birth control pills which prevent fertilized embryos from implanting on the uterine wall the same as murdering an human being outside the womb?”. The answer is yes. IF birth control pills only prevented ovulation, that would be less serious, but still immoral for different reasons, but killing an embryo is killing a human person. If done with knowledge it is murder.

You say that “nobody in their right mind fears some bizarre scenario where someone could legally murder your wife or your neighbor”. But in Rome and Greece, child abandonment (infanticide) was common. In our society euthanizing adults is becoming common. In Germany killing Jews was state policy. What makes you think other forms of murder (in addition to abortion) will not find an apologist?

Please open your mind to reason and reality.

My deepest respects for Mrs . Nardelli. An example for all Catholics. God Bless her and give her strength

A very principled and brave lady indeed. Unless one suffers from schizophrenia or is an utter hypocrite, it is impossible to believe one thing in private and do something else in public. Politics and faith simply cannot be separated, at least for the honest, conscientious people.

Cardinal Francis George told me in 1992 neither the Republican nor Democratic Parties were 100% correct in regards to Catholic doctrine.  I served in the WA State Legislature for 12 years as a Pro-life Catholic Republican—and actively supported policy to protect all life and traditional marriage (DOMA) between one man and one woman.  It’s disheartening my Vice President Biden, my two U.S. Senators Murray and Cantwell, WA State Governor Gregoire, and many former colleagues (practicing Catholics) have worked relentlessly to strengthen gay/homosexual partnerships and pro abortion policies, even when they publicly state their position is not supported by their Church.
I am encouraged and optimistic by Jo Ann Nardelli’s actions and pray Catholic voters and Catholic elected officials will follow her example.  One person can make a difference—more by their actions than by their words.  God, please bless & protect Jo Ann & her family and America—please give us the grace to turn to You, Oh Lord.

Mark 10: 28 - 31
28 Peter began to say to him, “Lo, we have left everything and followed you.”
29 Jesus said, “Truly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or lands, for my sake and for the gospel,
30 who will not receive a hundredfold now in this time, houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and lands, with persecutions, and in the age to come eternal life.
31 But many that are first will be last, and the last first.”

In other words - following Jesus may not always be pleasant in this life but you will be first in eternal life.

My sincere admiration for this brave woman and true follower of Jesus.  Her courage puts the alleged Catholics Pelosi, Sibelius, and Biden to shame.  I wonder if the Komen founders have ever considered, as they send many dollars to Planned Parenthood, whether one of the thousands of babies torn from the wombs with their financial help, might have become the man or woman who would find the cure for breast and other cancers.
As I hear that support of homosexual marriage is the right choice to make I also wonder where the compassion is that we should be sending to these brothers and sisters who have moved to this painful lifestyle.
Giving marriage to a union that has no natural make-up is like planting a flower with the bloom in the ground and the roots standing up to dry in the sun.  Saying this kind of marriage is warranted is telling the homosexuals that it will make their alliance natural and normal.  As this will not be the result, it is one more painful lesson being sent to them by the misguided.

Bless Ms. Nardelli!  I too left the Democratic Party because of my Catholic faith.  A combination of the Democratic Party 1) supporting or having no stated position on fundamental moral principles we should all be agreeing on, and thereby risking losing the Catholic vote, and 2) apparently taking the Catholic vote for granted (otherwise why alienate us with such positions) rather than working to keep the Catholic vote (which sadly may be due to too many Catholics not living out their faith) tells me that the Democratic Party does not deserve the vote of any Catholic Americans, especially after “Catholic” Democrats defeated the Respect for Rights of Conscience Act in the Senate.  I think the best way to help the Democratic Party is to leave it and let it be known why, and thereby either force it to change to get us back, or else let it die and be replaced by a better party.  And it wasn’t easy to switch parties either, so I know how Ms. Nardelli feels.  You can tell her, if you have contact with her, that she’s not alone, and that she’s to be congratulated.  (Also I like her quoting former President Ronald Reagan: “I did not leave the party, the party left me.”)

I applaud Nardelli’s decision.  Over the 50 years of my adult life I have watched with increasing dismay at the erosion of morality in this country.  It isn’t just liberal democrats.  My family were democrats for many years.  Yes, I even voted for Kennedy - not because he was Catholic, but because I didn’t know any better.  After his presidency I changed parties because I saw the handwriting on the wall.  Little by little morality was made to sound “prudish” and “old fashion”.  And look where it’s taken us.  I see the Democratic Party as leftist liberalism.  And it goes against my Catholic beliefs.  Even if I weren’t Catholic I believe that I would think the same. I’m glad my time here is short, but I hate to see what’s ahead for my children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren and beyond.  I’m not sure God will let it go on much longer.

Bravo on standing up for what’s right.  I am a Catholic liberal myself and will be unable to vote for the Obama administration again as the views of the party are more of a caricature than that of a legitimate stance to help the nation.

If God wills it, Ms. Nardelli, you’ve got to stand up for what is both reasonable and temperate!  You can represent the voice of the people and not some extremist view for either party, especially your wonderful liberal views that aren’t from a bizarre extreme.  Yes, I said wonderful LIBERAL views!

THANK YOU FOR YOUR STANCE WITH THE CHURCH AND WITH THE PEOPLE OF THE CHURCH!

@Ann Marie: you are correct - I don’t believe that cruelty to babies is an OK choice, as you put it. It is clear that there is a point of fetal development where what was once a minute embryo now is better described as a “baby”, and I suppose the argument over where this point is will go on forever. But neither do I believe we should join the small list of countries where abortion is banned even if continuing the pregnancy would cause the death of the mother, or under circumstances of rape, or where massive fetal defects are apparent. Abortion is not an ideal choice, but it should remain a choice. BTW, I didn’t have the stomach to watch the video.
-
@Torin: yes, you can argue that a human embryo has the same right to live as an infant, child, or adult, it’s just that the courts don’t find this argument very compelling. It’s factual that the embryo will (likely) grow into an adult human being if nothing obstructs or interrupts the process, I guess the main disagreement we have is that I don’t believe in any “rights” in the normal sense of the word. I certainly respect your right to hold these beliefs, as well as the considerate tone of your comments.
-
@Francis: whose fixed moral standards shall we choose? You dodged the question about the huge swaths of Biblical “morality” that even you plainly ignore. I sincerely doubt that you lay awake at night fearing that secular lawmakers will one day make it legal to murder 1 year olds, when we have clear examples of theocratic societies where honor killings and stoning women to death for adultery are permitted. Yes, we as a society determine what acts are legal and illegal, how else do you feel our laws have come into being? You also alluded to non-religious reasoning that gay-marriage is wrong, please share.
-
How ironic (or just plain sloppy) that you accuse me of using the meaningless unscientific term “blob of protoplasm” - I put it in quotes because these are your very words, not mine. I agree, it is quite meaningless and unscientific. However your point seems to be that a human being of 1 minute old is no different an adult, and in fact should enjoy similar legal rights as adults. To use your words again, this shows that you have not thought this through. Shall we prosecute women for child abuse if they smoke, drink, or eat poorly during pregnancy? Shall we investigate the cause of death after miscarriages? Can women sue for wrongful death if another person causes them to miscarry?
-
I suppose your answer would be “yes” to the above, given your statement that using birth control pills to prevent embryos from implanting (with knowledge) is murder. Sorry, I just can’t get my mind around that, and thankfully you are vastly in the minority in this thinking. What makes me think that other forms of murder will not find an apologist? I don’t exactly know, really. Maybe it’s because we have a pretty good system of laws here in the US (wars aside) that seems to have thus far prevented it and I’ve grown complacent. And I find those systems superior to your proposed system of morality and rules imposed by the Bible and the Vatican.

I sooo am praying for the brave move you have made.  God’s protection & peace of His Holy Spirit, through Christ Our Lord.

Thank you, Rep. Nardelli. The Democratic Party of our fathers is no longer the same party. As a Pennsylvanian born and raised, I am proud to congratulate you for your courage and Faith. Please know that you are not despised, but loved, by those of us who have seen our once beloved party become a force of immorality in our society. Deus te benedicat.

Mrs. Nardelli, I am from a very strong Democratic family, but, as I tried to tell my mother, this party is NOT the same as the party of her parents, and it is now only a party of hate. I finally quit calling myself a ‘democrat’ and I only vote for the person, not the party. Romney is no prize, neither is Scott Brown (a closet Democrat), but, what choice do we really have?  Sue, not being on the bright side, won’t vote, and as one Bishop said, this could be considered as a sin, maybe, maybe not, only God knows, BUT, it is a automatic vote for Obama. ZEKE, you are trying to play God, but, He doesn’t like competition, and only His Ways are right, which makes you on the side of the goats, which is not the place to be. ALL life belongs to God, no matter if it is only one second old, and despite your word-playing, that is a child of His and you, nor anyone else can say when and how it should be murdered. I use to fall for the same lies about the health of the mother, rape and/or incest; but, thankfully, Judie Brown of the American Life League, straightened me out. You should get in touch with A.L.L. before you have to face Jesus when you take your last breath.  GOD WILL NOT BE MOCKED!! As for all of you that don’t know the true facts of our American History, but, only the “facts” of what the un-american ACLU tries to tell you: there is no separation between Church and State. +JMJ+

I, too, am a cradle Catholic and was raised in a family that was solidly in the Democratic party.  We were Italian-Americans, Catholics and Democrats.  But when Bill Clinton endorsed partial-birth abortion, I could take it no more.  I started to vote as an Independent then as a Republican.  The Democrats allowed radical feminists and radical homosexuals to take over the party.  They have become blind to the consequences of their actions.

I’m so happy that the scales have fallen, and now she sees what the Democratic party has become. My dad was a very active card-carryin’ Dem with liberal leanings for decades. Then it dawned on him one day that the party was not exactly supportive of some issues that hit close to home. It was like watching a house of cards fall. In the years before he passed he had become a fairly conservative Republican, and Life Member of the NRA. Sadly he didn’t come home to the Church, but I believe to this day that if he had more time that he would have.

Let Nothing Disturb You

Here is a wonderful prayer by St. Teresa of Avila. This prayer is so simple yet meaningful. It strengthens the weak, removes all fears and calms our inner most torments.

Let nothing disturb you;
Let nothing frighten you,
All things pass away.
God never changes.
Patience obtains all things.
He who has God,
finds he lacks nothing.
God alone suffices.

Dear Jo Ann-I am adding you to my daily Mass prayer list, along with the name of my own sister JoAnn. What you have done is like the early Catholics walking into the coliseum knowing they will be torn apart by wild beasts. You are now receiving a baptism of blood. May the Lord bless you and keep you and always hold you safe in the palm of His hand. guy mcclung rockport tx

I just don’t get it.  Jo Ann and others like her have played to the Democratic Party for so long that they didn’t realize what was happening. In fact the Catholic Church is moving to the left.  I go to church and hear about the evils of capitalism and the greatness of so called liberal “social justice”.  The church supports breaking US laws by encouraging illegal immigrants,  talks about the right of “health care” and how big government is going to take of the disenfranchised.  I have actually attended mass where a practicing homosexual GAVE THE homily, discussing how coming out has solved all of his ills.  The Catholic Church has left (literally and figuratively) our country and its basic tenants.  Freedom does not mean people cannot fail.  Faith and Christianity doesn’t mean that people cannot be held accountable for their failings.  Hate the sin (and don’t condone the sin) but love the sinner.
I sit in church and listen to the Catholic Bishops preach to me about how the Obama administration is infringing on their religious rights when they got in bed with the devil to begin with by supporting such a ridiculous and imposing government movement.  The Bishops doctrines sound nearly like the communist manifesto and embrace globalism, stupidity of global warming etc. 
Yes Jo Ann the Dem party has gone nuts to the left but so has the Catholic Church.  Don’t be surprised you wake up one day and find the Church has left you as well. 

Thanks Jo Ann for putting God first in your life. In the end all we have is God. HE is the one who will be greeting us after we take our last breath. There will be only a few questions, which HE already knows the answer by the way, did you love me and love others, and how did you show it?

God bless you and your famly. You did the right thing.

Rather, it is correctly interpreted as prohibiting both of these.

You are mistaken.  First, the Constitution applies to the government, and what it can and cannot do.  A private citizen or organization can base its opposition to anything on whatever it wants.  When voting for a candidate or proposition, private citizens can use any (or no) moral system they so desire.  Therefore, it is improper for you to criticize someone for voting based upon their religious convictions.

As an aside, the pro-life position is one of those issues supported by both religious and non-religious reasons, much like opposition to murder.

Thank you JoAnn for your courage to be Catholic.  You are an inspiration to those in public service.  All truth can be found in our Faith and no one can change natural law.  There is a feverish battle for souls. God’s richest blessing upon you and your family.

Congratulations Mrs. Nadelli for your courage and may the good Lord grant you and your family peace and joy. I respect what you did a lot more than politicians like Sen. Casey who is running for re-election in Penna. and runs around proclaiming he is a pro-life Catholic while voting to fund planned parenthood. After I wrote him and told him of what I thought of his vote, he wrote me back and told me how much good they do for women`s health, so I sent him an undercover video of Planned Parenthood workers advising underage illegal immigrant prostitutes how to get government paid abortions and free help for venereal disease. Never heard back from him. You made the right decision. Neither party is perfect, but the Democrates have moved to far left of California and not only do they not support life, they at times, don`t even support the Constitution. God Bless you and yours.

Ms. Nardelli, I support you standing with Jesus over the world.  I’ve had to do the same thing (in another situation).  It’s hard but remember Jesus said he had overcome the world.  I pray for public officials who support evil so they may repent.  Most of the time, I’m thinking it won’t do any good but it’s good to see prayers do get answered. God bless you.

Praise God.  This woman is indeed a breath of fresh air in our country and in our Holy Catholic Church.  I thank God for her courage and fortitude.

I admire any person who is willing to put it all on the line for their beliefs.
When this act of faith happens, many people are encouraged in their own faith,,, similar to the way the the early church men and women were willing to die rather compromise to the government, and the church grew because of them.

Well done! and I think our Heavenly Father is saying the same thing!

You go, Girl! Thank you for setting the example. God will bless you for all the heat you take for this.  I’m sure it will bear fruit and encourage others!

Francis Ruffing, you have my vote.  Zeek, are you drunk?

God Bless this wonderful example of courage.

@Daryl: do you mean the Church, or do you mean some hypocritical clergy therein?  Because if you believe in Catholic Christianity, you believe the gates of hell will not stand against Christ’s Church.  Even the first Pope, Saint Peter the Apostle, did wrong things—even AS Pope, and had to be corrected by someone else—but that’s different from saying the CHURCH was in error.  Have faith!  The one thing Satan wants most is for us to be all divided, and to lose faith in our authority.

@c matt: read closer friend. I made no statements remotely criticizing Ms. Nardelli for voting based on her religious convictions. In fact, the only time I even mentioned her name was to state “seems to me to be quite a conscientious and admirable politician”. We’ll see how tolerant you are of the sanctity of religious convictions if Romney is elected, and helps to prepare Jackson county, Missouri for the second coming. Cuz that’s where the Garden of Eden and Adam and Eve were really located, dontcha know, as his Mormon faith holds as true.
-
@David: yeah, a little.

Nice if the entire Kennedy family got the same message.  They seem to be dropping like flies.  Something about the sins of father (old Joe Sr.) will be visited upon the sons down to the 3rd and 4th generation.

@Zeke and others:
Long story short…
For many years I was a fallen-away Catholic, despite an excellent Catholic education. As a child of the 60s-70s, I got caught up in the counter-culture movement and became an ardent feminist and arrogantly pro-choice.  After living in many different counties, I developed my own “world-view” on many moral, social, & religious issues.
Many years and many blunders later, I decided to come home to the Church (but on my own terms). At first, I was a pick & choose cafeteria catholic - my own moral authority on doctrine, scripture, and ethics.  Spiritual dryness was my constant companion while I thirsted for truth. God, in his infinite wisdom, allowed me to continue to blunder about in utter ignorance for some time.
But after I opened my heart and totally submitted myself totally to Jesus, the scales fell off my eyes.  I became a voracious reader and listened to podcast after podcast on Catholic apologetics. (I still cannot get enough). However, I must confess that I continued to resist – oh did I resist -  the Church’s wise and consistent teaching on abortion and contraception. I avoided every EWTN Barbara McGuigan and Teresa Tomeo (and sometimes Mother Angelica) program because they made me feel so uncomfortable;  I was so afraid of the truth , because that would have made my personal beliefs wrong!
By the grace of the Holy Spirit, I finally saw the light and was able to put everything into perspective. It took a great deal of humbleness and humility to admit that many of my beliefs were so totally flawed. 
I encourage you all to read Humana Vitae: it is a beautiful beacon of truth – a gift from Our Lord. It teaches us the true meaning of love and the dignity of life.
Zeke, my brother, please realize that no matter how small God’s new creation might be in its early stages of development, it is still a baby with its own unique set of DNA code. From the moment of conception, God breathed life into this new soul. 
No one, not you, not me has the right to end a life of a baby – it is not a choice one has. We cannot play God.  Please don’t bring up the rape or incest issue – I have been the victim of both. But let me say this, those courageous girls and women who make the right decision to not abort their babies (no matter what the horrendous circumstances) can bring the joy of a new life to many others.
Instead of participating in the Culture of Death and perpetuating the fallacy of “choice, I implore you to focus your efforts on assisting and supporting these mothers through one of the most difficult times in their life.
May you be blessed with the all good things…

From the Center for Bioethical Reform website:
WORLDWIDE ABORTION FACTS
Number of abortions per year: Approximately 46 Million
Number of abortions per day: Approximately 126,000
Abortion averages:
Worldwide, the lifetime average is about 1 abortion per woman.
http://www.abortionno.org/world.html

Thank God! The lights are starting to go on. To Quote St Thomas Aquinas..“Truth Himself speaks truly or there’s nothing true!” and Mother Mary Francis, PCC….
“Salvation is the only success there is, and it is given” Looks like the gentle lady from Pennsylvania has found her way home. God Bless Her.

The House vote on Obamacare, with Bart Stupak switching sides, proved for all-time that there is no such thing as a pro-life Democrat of any note.

The charades are over.

Too much praise: she suppressed her ‘revulsion’ for abortion long enough - in favor of other poor working stiff values. Her family ties to the Democrats were no longer enough. Has she been paying attention to the culture of death of the last 40+ years?

Dave , the number one cause of abortion in this country is the mortal sin of greed.  Time to stop pretending:  The free market that conservatives like so much is buit on the genocide of the poor and refusing to pay people a family wage, thus encouraging abortion.

Matthew 5:11

The Body of Christ is the Body of Christ so no matter if she doesn’t know any Republicans yet. Those that are “in Christ” will reach out to her!  Praise be to God—a politician with a conscience, and common sense!

I pray that Mrs. Nardelli will be comforted by the grace of God and that her courage and faithfulness to Christ will be returned to her many times over.

Pax et bonum,
Keith Töpfer

I think this was an easy decision for Jo Ann Nardelli.  No soul- searching, no angst, no second-guessing.  Just a simple, that’s it.  And a huge sense of relief.

Hi Ann Marie: very sorry to hear about your suffering due to rape and incest, I can’t imagine the pain that caused you. With regards to finally finding the light and being able to put things in perspective by the “grace of the Holy Spirit”, I think you should give yourself and your own strength of character more credit for getting past these tragedies. Does it not give you pause to know that millions of other people have had similar revelations about their life and attribute the peace they found to a completely different God? Or to no God whatsoever? Are they completely delusional but you are not, or is it more likely that such revelations have nothing to do with God but from within ourselves? You should be proud of yourself rather than giving credit where none is due. The glory is very much your own.

@Zeke:

May I humbly suggest just a little reading in the Bible, if for no other reason than to prove your respondents wrong? Read Job, starting with Chapter 38, & challenge yourself to come up with good answers to the questions posed to Job. For purposes of this exercise, forget the source of the questions and just consider them on their own terms.

Your final assertions remind me of the following quote (near as I can recall) from Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen:

“There really are very few true atheists. Most of them end up worshiping themselves.”

Don’t be one of those. Before you pick up that ancient text (the most examined book in history), say a prayer like this: “God, if you are really there, please speak to my heart through Your Word. Help me to shed the blindness of pride that I might rightly perceive the Truth with the necessary humility. Amen.”

Do you have the guts to this? Go ahead - I dare you!

God bless!

It is difficult to believe that so many of my fellow Democrats failed to abandon the party following Jimmie Carter’s term.  At that time he was ProLife, although proven not to be much of a leader.  The socialists, abortionists, and Gaydom has taken hold and the old school is taking a long sorrowful time to see the light.
God Bless them and Holy Spirit guide all of us, including them..
We have a big big mess to iron out here, and we can not stand back on others laurels while the country is pirated by those blind to the devil, nor to those who see and follow at will.
What say ye?  Will you stand for God and Faith?

Poor Zeke. Still struggling with the basic “first right” that our founders so eloquently stated, the right to life! Such forethought and wisdom they had. And he can’t for the life of him see that clearly 250+ odd years later.

@Morgan Lerner, are you serious?  “Radical Protestants?”  By the way, why don’t you use your “fine Catholic education” to know that Jesus was extremely radical.  If you cowtow to political correctness and public opinion you deny and betray your faith and are NOT practicing Catholicism.  It is a MONARCHY, it is all or none, and you cannot be a Catholic if you deny Catholic Teaching.  Your affiliation with either political party or non- affilation with it has nothing to do with others that are in it.  Wake up man, it is NOT the Democratic party who ensures the corporal works of mercy…..................most of those are Repbulican or Independents….......I must concede with this wonderful lady and with Zell Miller, ” I didn’t leave my party…..my party left me.”

Claire Smith, it was Ronald Reagan who said that B4 Zell Miller.  And as for Catholic Democrats, a lot of people identify themselves as “Catholic” because that’s the only church they know and likely grew up with in childhood.  Of course they will not say they are Presbyterian since they aren’t.  Very likely these “Catholic” Democrats haven’t been at mass in over 20 years.  Pelosi, Kerry, Cumo, Leahy, Durbin, Biden —all high profile so the media points to these people as legitimate Catholics.  Then again, what does the media know?  PEW Research in Washington reports that 88% of the media are largely unchurched themselves.  That should tell you where their slant comes from in the cultural war.  If you were to ask them anything about the Bible they would look as stupid as the people on Jaywalking with Leno.  Another example is Obama.  He calls himself a Christian while Catholic Democrats say they are Catholic.  Obama’s “fruit” says otherwise.  Pastor Jeremiah Wright preaches Black Liberation Theology which is false doctrine and apostate.  Yet, Obama calls himself a Christian while supporting abortion.  St. Paul refers to Obama’s brand of Christianity as “Doctrine of Demons” in 1 Timothy 4.

Awesome. Everyone needs to take a stand for God!

@David: with all due respect, if I believed that the Bible was anything but a collection of myths and fables, reading the book of Job might support whatever point you are trying to make, which I must admit eludes me. If you wish to point out a few specific questions posed to Job which you feel only the Bible can answer, I will be glad to share my opinion, for what it’s worth. I used to be a practicing Catholic and have some familiarity with the Bible, but I didn’t reject the faith easily or without a great deal of pain and soul-searching. It’s quite easy for the faithful to quote disparaging remarks about atheists, just as it’s easy for atheists to do the same. Cheers.
-
@Carol: thanks for your pity. To address your point however, the right to life is indeed enshrined in the constitution, and I agree with you on the wisdom of it. However you will note that even when your most zealous brethren attempt to modify our laws to attempt to extend this right to humans at the moment of conception, it is voted down, even in our vastly Christian nation.

@Zeke “You should be proud of yourself rather than giving credit (to God)where none is due. The glory is very much your own.”

This is chilling. Adam and Eve. Original Sin. The Screwtape Letters. The perfect Aryan Man. Same lie. Different age.

Satan could not have said it better my dear Zeke. Keep giving glory to Yourself and you will surely join your leader in hell. Wake up and repent.

@Dave Get your facts straight dude. The biggest determinate of abortion is marital status not income:
Number of abortions per year: 1.37 Million (1996)
Number of abortions per day: Approximately 3,700

Who’s having abortions (age)?
52% of women obtaining abortions in the U.S. are younger than 25: Women aged 20-24 obtain 32% of all abortions; Teenagers obtain 20% and girls under 15 account for 1.2%.

Who’s having abortions (race)?
While white women obtain 60% of all abortions, their abortion rate is well below that of minority women. Black women are more than 3 times as likely as white women to have an abortion, and Hispanic women are roughly 2 times as likely.

Who’s having abortions (marital status)?
64.4% of all abortions are performed on never-married women; Married women account for 18.4% of all abortions and divorced women obtain 9.4%.

Who’s having abortions (religion)?
Women identifying themselves as Protestants obtain 37.4% of all abortions in the U.S.; Catholic women account for 31.3%, Jewish women account for 1.3%, and women with no religious affiliation obtain 23.7% of all abortions. 18% of all abortions are performed on women who identify themselves as “Born-again/Evangelical”.

Who’s having abortions (income)?
Women with family incomes less than $15,000 obtain 28.7% of all abortions; Women with family incomes between $15,000 and $29,999 obtain 19.5%; Women with family incomes between $30,000 and $59,999 obtain 38.0%; Women with family incomes over $60,000 obtain 13.8%.

Why women have abortions
1% of all abortions occur because of rape or incest; 6% of abortions occur because of potential health problems regarding either the mother or child, and 93% of all abortions occur for social reasons (i.e. the child is unwanted or inconvenient).

At what gestational ages are abortions performed:
52% of all abortions occur before the 9th week of pregnancy, 25% happen between the 9th & 10th week, 12% happen between the 11th and 12th week, 6% happen between the 13th & 15th week, 4% happen between the 16th & 20th week, and 1% of all abortions (16,450/yr.) happen after the 20th week of pregnancy.

Likelihood of abortion:
An estimated 43% of all women will have at least 1 abortion by the time they are 45 years old. 47% of all abortions are performed on women who have had at least one previous abortion.

@Morriec [The biggest determinate of abortion is marital status not income.] Very likely this is correct.  It also proves people largely have bought into the lies of pop culture advocates to wit adulterers and fornicators can sin against God . . . . . and get away with it.  That’s exactly what our High Schools do when they hand out condoms.  It’s interesting that supporters of Planned Parenthood, the Sen Barbara Boxers and Barak Obama’s are never around to address the psychological, emotional and heartbreaking aftermath (often lasting a lifetime) of these women (and men) who have bought into their view that sin has no consequence.  Forgiveness is the message of Christianity.  But whether one is (or is not) a believer, sin always produces a consequence.

@Morriec: I sincerely wish I knew what you are talking about. I’m familiar with C.S. Lewis, and if you believe that our lives are affected by invisible angels and demons, or a literal Adam and Eve, I’m afraid we will find very little to agree on philosophically. These views are based on your faith and as such are immune to reason.

@Zeke- what they’re all talking about is a mental disorder that you’re exhibiting- has almost nothing to do with religion, though it can be a hidden cause of destruction of faith in the invisible.  The problem is previous replies have tried to suggest to you ancient church teachings surrounding this disorder, rather than speaking to you in a language you can accept.  Look up Narcissistic Personality Disorder in the DSM-IV.

Here’s the Wikipedia article on the subject, though I’d point out that Wikipedia is never to be considered a primary source, and one should always talk to a counselor, priest, or therapist about personality disorders and should NEVER self-diagnose.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissistic_personality_disorder

@Zeke who writes [@David: with all due respect, if I believed that the Bible was anything but a collection of myths and fables, reading the book of Job might support whatever point you are trying to make, which I must admit eludes me.]    Zeke, men do not lay their life on the line over myths and fables.  “We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty.”  That’s 2 Peter 1:16.  Myths and fables are associated with heroic people.  To the contrary, the Bible is filled with historic men and women sinful and seriously flawed with imperfection.  The Good News is that He has made a way of escape for you.  Unfortunately, Paul also explains in 1 Corinthians 1:18 “The word of God is foolishness to a perishing man.”  Zeke, my hope is that you will take time to reconsider your position.

Zeke,
I commend you for maintaining a civil conversation. You have some good in you. Your heart points to a consideration of human compassion. You are wrong however when you talk about conversions of people who have fallen away from their faith. You will never find someone who understands their faith, and has achieved it through reason to distance themselves from their faith. You will never find someone who has reverted to their faith completely, yet fall back into disbelief.
As for Adam and Eve; get out of your head the glorious religious paintings that depict them, and see it from a human evolution stand point if you wish. At one point in time, one homo-erectus could have finally become the first homo-sapien, and through his knowledge, helped a fellow women homo-erectus become the first homo-sapien. You know the difference in between the word homo-erectus and homo-sapien? Homo-erectus means, “Man that stands erect” and homo-sapian means “man that knows, or all knowing man”. He is still erect, yet, he finally knows stuff. We know God is spirit, so why is it so hard to believe that he finally bestowed upon his ultimate creation—mankind—his spirit, knowledge and view of the world? Did you know that chapter 1 in the bible says that creatures were created before man, and then chapter 2 says seemingly insinuates that creatures were created after man? Do you really think the Bible would contradict itself? You have your head so far up into the annals of human *enlightenment* that you fail to see something that is eternally true. The divine word of God is so beyond your limited understanding that you dismiss it entirely. You have made your own word more than that of God’s and for that my friend…well… deep down you know what will happen. Remember, everything in the old testament is true, and some of it, actually happened! All those stories set the table for the coming of Jesus, and his teachings in the New Testament. If the Bible is too hard for you to understand, then read http://www.catholicbasictraining.com/apologetics/coursetexts/ and see if you disagree with something there. Even if its just to come back and point out to me something crazy. May God Bless you, oh and why don’t you go ahead and pray for God to increase your faith? Say it every day and let’s see if it happens so. Say “Hello supposed God, increase my faith towards you, Amen”. “Do not be afraid!”

God bless Jo Ann Nardelli !!  It took an incredible amount of courage and moral integrity to do what she did!  It’s so refreshing to hear about a politician with moral conviction!  I feel the same way she does about the Democratic party.  It’s certainly not my father’s party anymore!

@ForTheCommonGood: I see the lamestream media made no mention of this on the nightly news re Nardelli.  No doubt they will be compelled to report when Obama’s Campaign Chairman (and Svengali)—David Axelrod, a high profile Catholic also finally sees the light.  I wonder if the Archbishop of Chicago has had any conversations with Mr. Axelrod?  Not very likely.

@in the pew, who wrote:  “Zeke, men do not lay their life on the line over myths and fables”. Of course they do, I just think you choose to ignore that fact. I assume that you find it astonishingly easy to dismiss all of the non-Christian religions as mere fabrications (as do I), yet there are millions of such believers that are utterly convinced that Christianity is false. And they lay their lives on the line (martyrdom in the name of Allah, for example) daily. Do you have any doubt that had you been born and raised in a Muslim culture that you would be a practicing Muslim? Are over a billion Muslims utterly mistaken about God? What of the Mormons, who have a genuine chance at having one of their own as president if the sentiments in these comboxes are any indication. The early Mormons laid their lives on the line based on some terrifyingly bonkers and demonstrably false beliefs. Sure, I think they’re mistaken too, I just think Christianity falls in the same category. Maybe I’m wrong, I admit that. Do you allow for the possibility that you may be wrong as well?
-
@ioannes: thank you for noticing my attempts to be civil, especially when faced with the certainty of others here that I am dead wrong, going to hell, and have a serious mental disorder (wow) because I don’t share the Catholic view of our existence. Nasty comments like these don’t seem to square with Christian teachings, but I will refrain from attributing this intolerance to all Christians, because I know this is not the case. Whether it’s possible to fall into disbelief after having complete faith, well, I disagree with you, it happens quite often and it happened to me. This happens to children raised in religious families regularly, although you may say that they never truly understood their faith in the first place. In that case, I agree with you.
-
You’re joking about everything in the OT being true, right? C’mon, you really expect me to wade through the homework you gave me? We disagree on the one big thing – that there is a God. If your catechism is based on that premise, what makes you think I would I agree with it? I think the worst thing is that because of Christian teachings on homosexuality and abortion, there are many people who will cast a presidential vote for a person who reads the Book of Mormon and thinks “yes, this sounds plausible”. Frightening.

@Zeke- my comment was not meant as hatred or intolerance, but rather concern for a fellow human being.  I urge you once again to look into the symptoms of NPD and compare them to your posts in this thread that set up a materialist, selfish worldview as being more correct than every other philosophy on the planet and yourself as being better than the rest of us.

@Zeke:  All the belief systems you mention are man-made.  Religion is of men.  Christianity is not just another religion, it’s relational,—that of life with Christ personally.  You cannot know Allah, Buddah, Joseph Smith or Confucius personally.  You can know Jesus (the Christ) personally.  The groups you mention (including Islam, your life is wholly dependent upon what YOU do in the name of Allah or someone else.  In Christianity, it not about what you do, it’s what Jesus has done **for you.**  In all these systems, in all the world, no one ever made the claims of Jesus and principally that He alone is the Way, the only Way to eternal life.  Ultimately, each man will have to account for this question—either Jesus is the only Way and told the truth or that Jesus is the greatest fraud who ever walked the planet.  My hope is that your heart will not be so militant and allow God’s grace to rain down upon you with His peace —a peace the world cannot give you.

I personally cast my first vote for a Democrat, Jimmy Carter, & have never been 100% comfortable as a Republican.However, because of the Democratic platform on abortion I could never in good conscience vote for a Democratic presidential nominee.Maybe their platform will “evolve” one day, but for now I vote GOP.

Why do the athiests read National Catholic Register?  Many searching to fill that God void?

TG, it’s often the case and happens with many Protestant blogs as well.  The Bible is the only vestige serving as a reminder to atheists against doing whatever they want.  Removing prayer from school and civic events, removing the Ten Commandments from Courthouse walls and enforcing “Happy Holidays” instead of Merry Christmas all amount to the same thing.  Many have a hatred of God’s word reminding them they will be held accountable to someone other than themself.  This is why the Bible, the church and Christian leaders are rountinely under attack.  Catholics and Christians alike only feed the negativity when we act like hypocrites among one another with hateful comments in response or when church leaders try to cover up sinful sexual activities.  This is why sin in our life and especially sin by church leaders harms the reputation of those who claim Jesus is Lord over their life.

I still shocks me at how many people in this country think they have the right to impose their religious beliefs on others.  It is expressly NOT the job of a publicly elected official to vote based upon his or her religious beliefs.  This runs expressly foul of the First Amendment and is a violation of their oath of office to uphold the Constitution.  How are so many people so blind to this fact?  I am encouraged by the courage of the First Circuit Court of Appeals today striking down DOMA.  If you know anything about the law, you know this will be upheld by the US Supreme Court by June 2013.  Then what will you do?

Funny,Chad, how people who are not willing to “force their religous belifs upon others” are perfectly willing to murder a million children a year to force their religious beliefs upon others.

Ted:  and what religious beliefs are those people forcing upon others?  Please state what religion you believe they belong to?  Also, let’s keep this discussion factual and according to the law - under what law do you call pro-choice people murderers?  please state the law.  thank you.

  I state thThey are Eugenicists- they believe that inconvienent people have no right to life.  They are joined by the Malthusians, who believe that the world is overpopulated and that we need to reduce the human birth rate.  I State the Natural Law, which is built into our DNA and which all othe legitimate law is based on.  And I am sur you belong to one. Of the above groups, whose sacrament is nothing more than human sacrifice.  And those, siir, are FACTS that cannot be sanely denied.

It still shocks me at how many people in this country think politicians do not come into office with the values that have shaped their lives.  In doing so, they are imposing their ways of seeing things (i.e., religious/secular beliefs and convictions) upon the people they represent.  It is foolish to believe that it is NOT the job of the publicly elected official to vote in conformance with these perspectives.  Legally inscribed, even though permissible according to society, does not mean morally correct.  God’s law trumps human law and it’s about time people with conviction start speaking up for the sake of the generations to come.  I applaud Jo Ann Nardelli’s action and am extremely humbled by all those who agree with her on this board.

now i’m REALLY confused.  I’ve never heard of either of those “religions.”  if you think they are organized religions trying to promote themselves through promoting abortion, i think that is not only illogical, but a little mentally unbalanced.  that said, the world clearly is overpopulated.  “natural law” is a myth used by people who have no real law to cite to.  there is no “natural law” that labels people murderers, or anything else for that matter.  so US tax law is based upon this “natural law?”  where in nature do taxes come from?  so, i haven’t read any facts in your post yet.  i invite you to join us in the 21st century and cite real law and real facts, not ones you make up.  thank you

abimopectore:  2 points - 1) so if a majority of muslims were elected to Congress they could impose islamic law and kill their daughters for dating a non-muslim?  require your wife and daughters to wear burquas, deny them the right to drive and vote?  you see, if elected officials are allowed to impose their personal religious beliefs upon the general pubic, any religion could do so - i don’t think you want to put is in that position.  2) in a US court of law, God’s law does NOT trump man’s law - please re-read the Constitution.  If you don’t like what is says please contact congress and tell them to start the process to change it.  let’s not pretend the US Constitution says otherwise please. this is what i am talking about when i say you people do not cite to real facts and current law.  you live in a fantasy word outside the corners of the US Constitution

Chad,

1)  Hypotheticals are not real examples.

2)  You’re trolling on a religious cite and I made this point clearly to demonstrate that folks on this cite see things differently than you.  Your ad hominem doesn’t negate the reality.  And if you read today’s decision you’d realize that the court conceded marriage to being a state question and if this is the case as written per their opinion, there’s a great possibility that SCOTUS will side with the states on this question and not make it a 14th amendment issue.

LOL.  “trolling” - real nice. it’s always the Christians that resort to name-calling and meanness when they know the law is not on their side.  but i won’t go down that whole hate and bigotry road - it’s old and we all know it’s true in our hearts.  you are completely right that SCOTUS will side w/ the states.  marriage has always been left to the states - which means they will uphold the ruling.  if a state wants to legalize gay marriage, that is their right, it’s not in the province of the federal government to interfere, and the federal government will have to recognize it.  of course, the states that choose not to legalize it have the same right, and the federal government will respect that as well.  so SCOTUS MUST side w/ the states under the 10th Amendment, and that it will do - requiring the federal government to recognize the choice of each state - including the ones that choose to legalize gay marriage.  sorry again to burst your bubble by accurately citing the US Constitution

To quote the venerable John McClain in Die Hard, “Welcome to the party pal!” Ms Nardelli, you had the courage to leave the plantation. Now you know what the rest of us have been putting up with and truly I would not wish this upon you, unfortunately, it is what it is! In spite of your new situation, you’re truly among friends…and yes some of us are conservative Republicans and Catholic!

Chad,

You came to this site to clearly demonstrate on your part that folks here don’t understand the law.  If this is not a definition of what a troll does on internet website, then you tell me otherwise.  Don’t take it personal.  There are lawyers among those you so nonchalantly accuse of not knowing the law. ; )

one could also call it educating, rather than trolling.  the First Amendment was expressly written so that no one religion could impose it’s will upon the populace.  our Founding Fathers knew all too well the dangers of establishing a national religion, and expressly prohibited it. The Tenth Amendment was expressly written to prevent the federal government from interfering in matter of the individual states - including defining marriage.  therefore, the federal government must recognize whatever each state decides.  the Fourteenth Amendment was written to ensure ALL citizens equal protection under the law - it does not say everyone except gay people.  under what section of the US constitution do you relegate gay citizens to 2nd class citizen status?  when you look at the US constitution in a focused, unbiased manner, it’s amazing how clear the document actually is.  you are free to practice your religious and moral beliefs in your homes and churches.  you are NOT free to force me to live by them, nor will you ever be free to do so. and the Supreme Court will soon tell you so.  Kennedy has made his views clear - there are clearly 5 votes there to say so.  i just hope you’re not too disappointed when it happens.

Chad,

Let’s just wait for the Supreme Court decision and leave all the legal polemics to those who will decide because each case that is pending is coming to the Courts from different perspectives and using different parts of the Constitution to establish their legality.  I know what the Constitution says and if you were honest you’d realize that the Founding Fathers didn’t write the First Amendment to prevent the practice of these values in the public square.  If it is as you claim, then what would be the purpose, for example, of the Quakers (i.e., choose any of the religious groups at that time) to want to be part of the republic if the practice of their faith was relegated solely to their homes and churches.  Your historical anachronism is clearly showing.  Don’t be silly, nobody is forcing you to do anything in this country.  If anything, the recent actions of this government and courts are clearly forcing others to adopt practices that are contrary to their faith.  This was a nation founded on Christian principles whether you like it or not.  Yes the Constitution protects you from being forced to practice any faith, but it’s also there to protect those who practice a faith from being forced to accepting practices that go contrary to their religious beliefs.

@Chad- just because you’re too stupid to know that laws are discovered (what the government does is just religion and shared myth) and that you’ve never heard of Eugenicists or Malthusians, does not mean they do not exist. 

The fact that you believe the world is overpopulated is proof that you are a Malthusian, even if your education is so incredibly bad that you’ve never heard of Malthus.  The fact that his equation did NOT predict the future is proof that this world is not overpopulated.  In fact, because 2/3rds of the people in this world are over 60 and the younger generations have failed to breed, we will see a world population of only 2 billion within 50 years- everybody else will die of old age.

Natural law is not a myth- if it was, gravity would not exist, because The Law of Gravity is an example of Natural Law.  Natural Law is discovered through observation of Nature, as opposed to legislated like your idiotic government does.

Let me know when you stop worshiping myths and learn to think for yourself.  If you are ever able to set aside your worthless “legal” degree to see actual facts instead of stupid myths, anyway.

Oh, and the Constitution itself is the basis of a religion called Americanism- considered a heresy by the Roman Catholic Church, and since you’re on a site that is about that religion, that makes you a heretic, worthy only of ignoring.  Have a nice life, Chad the Idiot.

Truths please.  Stop abortion holocaust by promoting Humanae Vitae and Caritas in Veritate. Promote Turin Shroud website to Muslims who actually believe and teach that prophet Jesus was never crucified, is not Son of God in Trinity. Allah is unseen Deity of 9-11 zealots. also download Mother Teresa of Calcutta’s Nobel Peace Prize Address re: prolife among poor, lepers. Obama is black, and highest abortion rate occurs among blacks.  Is there a conspiracy of silence regarding these prophetic encyclicals? Pastors whould promote to engaged and married couples for NFP instead of Pill. Solzhenitsyn from Gulag distilled truth that “freedom is self-restrictioin”—self-control! Response?

@Edward: response? Sadly no response can adequately address your bigotry and hatred of non-Christians and black people.
-
@Ted Seeber: I’ve been respectful and considerate of others’ beliefs. Your intolerance and name-calling betrays the Christian principles you claim to live by. Other Christians here should call you out on that.
-
@abimopectore: God’s should never never trump human law, as evidenced by the theocratic Muslim societies where their God demands death for apostates and adulterers. That’s the reason the founding fathers aimed to ensure separation of church and state, because there is more than one church. Hypotheticals must be considered; this is what legislators and the courts do, yet you dismiss Chad’s as not worthy of consideration. Sure our nation was founded on Christian principals, but that doesn’t mean that all Christian principals are (or should be) the law. If the Catholic Church had their way, they would ban contraception. I understand the doctrine behind it, but this puts you in the vast minority, even among Catholics.

The most obvious question I have; What the hell took her so long?  The democrats have been the culture of death since the country’s inception.  The platform that the democrats use for their foundation is abortion.  This is abundantly clear in today’s prolific communication world.  This has been abundantly clear for the last 60 years, so why would any Catholic support the democrats?  She knows all of this and clearly has an agenda that has nothing to do with Catholicism.  We’re likely seeing the next phase of attacks by the democrats as they infiltrate the republican party.  Let’s face it, if you want to destroy the country, just fill republican seats with devout democrat RINOs.  All democrats support abortion and 49% of the republicans do as well.  That’s 3 out of every 4 politicians supporting abortion.  So obviously, you must secure the remaining seats to start mandating sterilizations, infanticide, gender selection, suicide and the ultimate goal, genocide.  Wake up people! If you have the ability to run for office, run as a democrat and start filling their seats with devout pro-American, small government, truly faithful Catholics.

Posted by Zeke on Friday, Jun 1, 2012 8:20 AM (EST):

“If the Catholic Church had their way, they would ban contraception. I understand the doctrine behind it, but this puts you in the vast minority, even among Catholics.”
****
You are certainly entitled to your opinion but what do you base it upon?Are you aware of Vatican efforts to ban contraception?
Thanks!

Zeke- at leasst I don’t legalize the murder of people I disagree with.  You and Chad and every other abortionist on the planet earth are far mor intolerant than I will ever be.

Zeke- you have finally surprised me.  Atheists, of all people, should know THAT REALITY IS NOT DEFINED BY EMOTION OR POPULAR VOTE, BUT RATHER BY OBSERVATION.

I don’t know why Mrs.Nardelli didn’t get out sooner. Thank God that the “scales” have been lifted from her eyes.  God bless her!

Perhaps in the days before his death when Ted Kennedy asked Obama to carry his letter to the Pope to pray for his soul, it was Ted who came to understand all the evil he and his fellow Catholic Kennedy family politicians have perpetuated by voting in favor of abortion and for pro-abortion justices at the Federal level and on the Supreme Court.  What Ted still failed to understand is that forgiveness by God is not achieved by having the Pope pray for you.  He needed to confess directly to God himself.  And Massachusetts Catholics who kept voting for pro-abortion Ted and his family bear responsibility as well for this evil.

Zeke,

As I told Chad, you came to a Catholic website and to think that folks here would share your view, you guys are either really kidding yourselves, naive, or for that matter something else.  Me doth believe that the internet can make folks say things we probably wouldn’t say face to face.  We have differences and that’s fine.  The fact that you can’t realize that politicians bring their values into office clearly shows why you don’t understand the statements on this site less even argue in a manner that would even try to convince those who don’t share your perspectives.  Hypotheticals are valid basis for argument when used within the context of the current situation.  To compare our country to a Theocratic society shows an evident lack of knowledge of our republic form of government.  In other words, we are not a Theocratic society and far from becoming one, since it would literally require a re-writing of the entire constitution.  Secondly, your statement regarding the separation of church and state is correct and does not invalidate what I stated above.  To think that any of the different religious groups that signed on to the Constitution believed that by doing so would prevent them from practicing their values and faith within the public square, relegated solely to their church and homes, is out right ludicrous and anachronistic.  For many of them, being able to live out their faith openly was precisely their reason for coming to America.

You might not believe in Christianity less any of the values that faithful Christians embrace, but to think that these values should be swept away as if they weren’t valid and instead to create laws and policies that run counter to these principles demonstrates your naiveté on what is going on.  Laws, either thru policy directive or court action, are being established in order to violate the religious beliefs of others.  Nobody is writing a law against contraception; but paying for contraception/abortifacients is being forced upon institutions and individual business owners even though it may violate their conscience and beliefs.  Terms that have been consistently defined for thousands of years are being re-defined in a manner that goes against people’s beliefs.  All the states that have passed laws that define marriage between one man and one woman contradict your statement about who is in the minority opinion regarding this particular issue.  The fact that there are those who use contraceptives that contradict their own religious beliefs does not make it any more morally valid nor will the Church ever agree to change their position because belief is not based on polls.

If anything, I foresee a country that may remain divided regarding this issue and others where certain states allow for gay marriage and others don’t, unless the courts step in and decide the issue based on 14th amendment considerations.  But I hardly think anybody truly knows the answer to this until the Supreme Court decides the issue(s).

Zeke, the idea that a practicing Christian or Jew once elected to office should then be sterilized of their religious beliefs concerning ethics, integrity, and their morality of what is right and wrong based upon their religious faith is ridiculous.  You may applaud those who have done so and have compromised who they “claimed” to be while running for office.  The rest of us see them for who they are.  Hypocrites, intellectually dishonest and apostate.

Posted by In the pew on Friday, Jun 1, 2012 11:34 AM (EST): ” What Ted still failed to understand is that forgiveness by God is not achieved by having the Pope pray for you.”
**
If Ted Kennedy,as a Catholic, believed having the Pope pray for him would achieve forgiveness he was confused indeed.The Sacrament of Reconciliation doesn’t work quite that way.

I will now leave this conversation with this Poem I wrote for Memorial Day.
http://outsidetheautisticasylum.blogspot.com/2012/05/i-am-unfit.html

Committeewomen Jo Ann Nardelli you are in very, very, very good company namely Father Benedict Groeschel ... Fr. Groeschel said: “I am a traditional Catholic. Politically right now we have been driven out of the Democrat party. You know, we did not leave the party, the party left us and I won’t vote for anyone who is not Pro-Life; or is pro-abortion, ANYONE, under NO circumstance; and I think that it is awful when you grew up and belonged to a Party that was concerned, at least officially, about the poor and civil rights; but the party has been co-opted into a lot of “causes” which I think are destructive to the country and to the fabric of Society.”

God is smiling down on you for what you did .  God bless you. Please pray for our Church & our country.  Both are in big trouble. Thank for what you did.

I wonder how anyone can call the Democratic party the party of Dorothy Day when Day never voted and actually came out firmly against FDR’s social security program.  Day would apparently not have identified herself as a Democrat and was as opposed to big government as she was to big capitalism.  She identified with the Distributists like Chesterton and Belloc, not the Democrats like FDR and LBJ.  She was a pacifist, she was pro-life, she hated government regulation, and governments taking over social programs that she believed should be the responsibility of Christians.  Read her letters, read her journals, and the only conclusion you can come to is that she would be protesting against the current administration, and every other administration that’s been in office since she died.  She was no Republican, but she was also no Democrat.

I would like for all of them to abandon the Dem. Party,  However they would probable ruin the Rep. Party—that is already on self destruct with the Presidential choices it provides.

God Bless you, Mrs. Nardelli!  Your courage inspires me. 

@in the pew & abimopectore: you are attributing statements and positions to me that I never made. Of course politicians bring their religious values with them to their office. Nor should any politician, or any citizen, be prevented from practicing their faith. Please point out where I said any such thing. In fact I applauded Ms. Nardelli for having the integrity to act on her convictions. But there’s an ocean of difference between holding political positions because “my faith teaches this” and “this is my opinion on this”. Opinions can change and evolve, what someone’s faith teaches is immune to rational thought and change. The opposition to the U.S. Civil Rights movement in the 20th century was founded in part on the same religious ideas that had been used to justify slavery in the 19th century.
-
What saddens me most about Nardelli is that the Catholic position on gay marriage has driven her to endorse the GOP, that shares few of the Catholic principles (which I largely share and admire) that she claims to cherish. What about Republicans who would pre-emptively bomb Iran back to the stone age? The US Council of Bishops and the Pope have denounced the idea of preventive war. What about the GOP opposition to any form of universal health care, as advocated by the Conference of Catholic Bishops? Advocacy of the death penalty? The Pope begs to differ. The Catholic Council of Bishops demand the withdrawal of Israel from Palestinian territories. Santorum denies there is even any such thing as a Palestinian. Somehow these do not offend her Catholic sensitivities, yet the Democratic support for gay marriage was the last straw?
-
Can we also stop pretending that Catholics like yourselves wouldn’t enact laws against contraception if at all possible? Of course there are currently no such laws on the books, since there is absolutely zero support for such laws outside of a hard-core minority of Catholic zealots. There are no laws against abortion on the books yet you support laws banning it, do you not? You support banning gay marriage, agreed? So spare me the pretense that you wouldn’t try to ban contraception. I get the Church opposition to the HHS mandate on contraceptives in health care plans. Good luck on this, maybe you will win this fight, I really couldn’t care less. I personally think that a victory for the Church will only alienate more of your members, since it’s clear that most of them think the teaching isn’t worthy of following.
-
@Seeber: sorry to hear you’re leaving the conversation. I’ll miss your on-line diagnoses of mental disorders, the textbook examples of Christian intolerance, and 4th grade logic and poetry.

I believe she could have stayed and been faithful - may peace be with her. How sad - over two thousand years and little has changed.

Zeke,

You seem to opine and affirm what’s “logically reasonable” when it conforms to your way of thinking and yet you deny others from using reason when it does not match what you’re thinking.  At the same time, you tend to distort reality by buying into the fear that religious zealots will begin to dictate how you must live because they’re going to start passing laws that don’t agree with your view.  Both of your viewpoints are falsely rooted in your own presuppositional viewpoints.  I’ll use your own words to demonstrate this.

“You seem to favor laws based on your faith, which is contrary to the 1st amendment. You can’t have it both ways.”

There are quite a few laws, both federal and state, that borrow from this religious “faith” that you obviously don’t understand (i.e., look at the Ten Commandments for a few of them).  But this is besides the point, since you obviously overlooked what I stated previously.  The 1st amendment does not preclude the possibility that certain values cannot be stipulated or even codified in law if they were beneficial to society.  For you to deny this demonstrates that you just don’t like religion because you can’t admit that certain things from within a faith can be beneficial to society and have been codified in law.  More importantly, the issue at hand, within this article (i.e., gay marriage and HHS mandate) are issues that are currently being debated because they have NEVER been codified into a law, with the exception of the states who have approved SSM, or policy (i.e., HHS mandate) previously before in many parts of this country until recently, hence the reason for the debate.  As I state, the legal merits of these cases will be decided ultimately by the Supreme Court when these cases reach the court.  But to claim what you’ve stated, demonstrates your own presuppositions and are not necessarily valid as I’ve clearly demonstrated.

“what someone’s faith teaches is immune to rational thought and change.”

This is not necessarily true and it shows you don’t understand the Catholic faith.  All I will say is that within Catholicism reason is used extensively in the search for truth.  It is precisely because of reason and faith that we hold certain inviolable truths that should be adhered to once we understand why.

“What about Republicans who would pre-emptively bomb Iran back to the stone age? The US Council of Bishops and the Pope have denounced the idea of preventive war. What about the GOP opposition to any form of universal health care, as advocated by the Conference of Catholic Bishops? Advocacy of the death penalty? The Pope begs to differ. The Catholic Council of Bishops demand the withdrawal of Israel from Palestinian territories. Santorum denies there is even any such thing as a Palestinian. Somehow these do not offend her Catholic sensitivities, yet the Democratic support for gay marriage was the last straw?”

There are plenty of problems within both parties and I won’t make excuses for either party since I have serious issues with both of them.  However, the issues that concern life and religious freedom are tantamount and need to be seriously discerned.  What has been made clear by the Democrats is that they’re willing to violate our freedom to practice and believe what our faith asks of us with the HHS mandate and this is something that any faithful Catholic will need to consider in the coming elections.  Your statement lacks any respect for her decision as you claim above especially with that last sentence because I’m pretty sure that some Catholics who have voted for Democrats believed that their views (i.e., pro-life, etc…) had a place within the Democratic platform and given what’s happened, it appears that this is no longer the case.

“Can we also stop pretending that Catholics like yourselves wouldn’t enact laws against contraception if at all possible?”

The fact is THERE ARE NO LAWS against contraception and you’re arguing a red herring and if anything showing your anti-Catholic bias although you claim the opposite.  It would be more sincere on your part to admit you just don’t believe in the Catholic position and just leave it at that.

“So spare me the pretense that you wouldn’t try to ban contraception. I get the Church opposition to the HHS mandate on contraceptives in health care plans. Good luck on this, maybe you will win this fight, I really couldn’t care less.”

Again, what happened to your ability to use “reason.”  It’s obvious you don’t agree with the Catholic position and that’s fine.  A faithful Catholic doesn’t need human laws to follow their faith but neither should they shrug from those who are insisting that they violate they’re beliefs just because the government says so.

“I personally think that a victory for the Church will only alienate more of your members, since it’s clear that most of them think the teaching isn’t worthy of following.”

The Church is not here to endear itself to its members but to proclaim the Gospel of Jesus Christ and lead those who are open to this message toward salvation.  If you haven’t got this at this point, it’s no wonder you’re exasperated.  In all honesty, you haven’t come to engage but to instigate without providing any rational reason why your position should be any more valid than the Church’s position.  If you’re going to make a valid argument, please do it or, since you “really couldn’t care less,” respect those who disagree with you.

@Abimopectore: Noticed that you didn’t apologize for your previous criticism of me based on statements I never made, but whatever. Yet here you go again, inventing another Zeke straw man to make your points.
-
There are indeed numerous laws which are based on, borrowed from, or parallel Christian principles, that is plainly obvious. Maybe my posts weren’t clear, or I took it for granted that the Catholics here realize that all atheists don’t oppose laws beneficial to society just because they mirror religious principles. Neither do I believe that Catholic priests are pedophiles or that the “God Hates Fags” crew in the Westboro Baptist Church are representative of all Christian thought on homosexuality. So once again I must deny that I wrote this, and if I implied this in any earlier comments then I poorly communicated my thoughts, my fault. (Full disclosure - I was born, raised, schooled Catholic and a church-goer until about 10 years ago, so I’m not unfamiliar with it) 
-
First of all, let’s start with the phrase “logically reasonable” which you put it in scare quotes as if you copy and pasted it from earlier comments I made. This is dishonest and any reader not already bored by this exchange can quickly verify that I’ve so far used neither of these words. Then this statement - “you tend to distort reality by buying into the fear that religious zealots will begin to dictate how you must live because they’re going to start passing laws that don’t agree with your view.” I’m not buying into the fear, I have the fear, because the political arm of the evangelical Christians, the GOP, are attempting to pass such laws more frequently as this party continues to veer wildly to the right. But the fear is not that that such laws don’t agree with my view, but rather that they’re not beneficial to our society.
-
Virginia nearly passed a law requiring transvaginal ultrasounds for women seeking an abortion. Who could possibly benefit from a requirement to jam a vaginal probe into a woman at this difficult moment in her life? Is there any doubt that that this law is religiously motivated? The effort to continue to ban homosexuals from openly serving in the military is driven by Christians, despite nearly unanimous agreement by the military leadership that it’s a non-issue. Christian groups lobby school boards, sometimes successfully, to have creationism taught as an equally valid theory to evolution in science classes. These are just a few I can think of, so, yeah, I have the fear, don’t you? I know that Catholics oppose abortion for any reason, but doesn’t the Virginia bill that almost passed bother you? I know that you would prohibit gays from marrying but would you deny them serving our country in the military too? And since I know that the Catholic position on evolution is probably the most advanced and enlightened of all the Christian religions, don’t you have a problem that other Christians want to teach our children that the earth is 6,000 years old?
-
You further reply that it’s “not necessarily true and it shows you don’t understand the Catholic faith” to my statement that doctrine is immune to rational thought and change. Abimopectore, I think I really do understand the Catholic faith, and though I agree with and even admire a great deal about the Catholic church, I just don’t believe in God. You can reason all you want, but despite what your reasoning tells you, a Catholic must agree with the Magisterium’s interpretation of the Bible and Scripture, or they are not Catholic. That’s what I mean that the political stances like Ms. Nardelli’s are immune to reason - until the Church changes it’s position, she cannot change hers and still deem it a Catholic position. Do we really want our politicians to be beholden to what the Vatican decrees, any more that we want them guided by Imams, Rabbis, or (gulp) the insane descendants of Brigham Young?
-
So back to enacting laws. You dance around the GOP positions in clear conflict with the Church, and dismiss them with “the issues that concern life and religious freedom are tantamount and need to be seriously discerned” as if there’s a hierarchy of importance of Church teachings listed somewhere. Then you plainly accuse me of planting a red herring on contraception laws when I clearly stated that indeed there are no laws against contraception. However, you again dodge the question, so I will ask it again and ask for your honest answer. If you could wave a magic wand and pass a law banning artificial contraception, would you do so? If not, why not? You favor laws to ban abortion and gay marriages, why not ban contraception that seems to qualify, in your words, as “issues that concern life”?
-
Finally, when I say I couldn’t care less whether the Church wins the HHS fight, the “reasoning” that seems to escape you is that those affected can still buy contraceptives. And politically, since I obviously fear a Romney presidency, I believe the outcome is irrelevant. If the Church wins or loses, it’s only a small percentage of Catholics who follow the church teaching that have a dog in this fight, and they probably voted GOP in 2008 as well. My opinion. Please note - I understand that the HHS mandate is not about banning contraception, which I will repeat again is not a law being considered anywhere, so please refrain from claiming that I believe this.

Zeke,
-
“Noticed that you didn’t apologize for your previous criticism of me based on statements I never made”
-
What statement am I attributing to you?  Please be specific and I’ll apologize if it’s called for. 
-
“First of all, let’s start with the phrase “logically reasonable” which you put it in scare quotes as if you copy and pasted it from earlier comments I made.”
-
Quotes are used not only to quote but to emphasize a point.  If you took it personal, it was not intended in this manner.
-
Your next two paragraphs state your fear regarding certain possible legislation.  People are always going to suggest legislation whether its good or bad but it doesn’t mean it’s going to pass and as for the Virginia law, last I heard, it was modified precisely because of the push back that was done by certain groups.  This is part of the deliberative process where all sides need to take a stand and make their views known otherwise certain things can happen, as Catholics are now realizing what happened when they supported Obama’s health care plan and couldn’t foresee that policy contrary to their personal objections was going to be stipulated by the head of HHS, even though promises were made that these objections would be considered before any policy directive was issued.  To put it plainly, Catholics were lied to and now because we supported a bill for all the social reasons you stated previously, we made a deal with people who obviously don’t respect our perspectives and beliefs.  As for potential legislation, I don’t worry as you do regarding this fear because I really think it’s more fear than reality.  The deliberative process and mass media prevent legislators from getting away with doing things that easily.  I don’t worry about school boards because I encourage my children to read about everything and discuss the merits of these issues so they can see what make sense and what doesn’t.  You obviously know that the Catholic position regarding creation is not what these folks are thinking.  Gays are going to serve in the military and there’s no going back regarding this.
-
“I think I really do understand the Catholic faith, and though I agree with and even admire a great deal about the Catholic church, I just don’t believe in God. You can reason all you want, but despite what your reasoning tells you, a Catholic must agree with the Magisterium’s interpretation of the Bible and Scripture, or they are not Catholic. That’s what I mean that the political stances like Ms. Nardelli’s are immune to reason - until the Church changes it’s position, she cannot change hers and still deem it a Catholic position. Do we really want our politicians to be beholden to what the Vatican decrees, any more that we want them guided by Imams, Rabbis, or (gulp) the insane descendants of Brigham Young?”
-
Although I respect your tone, your disbelief in God doesn’t prevent you from examining with reason the position(s) the Church makes with its argument(s) regarding certain positions.  The Church employs reason in explaining most things.  In fact, the pro-life arguments are based on reason.  Nevertheless, the Church is not asking to codify in legislation its Canon like your stating in your fear of politicians that could be beholden to any religious decrees.  But this is not the point I want to make regarding your paragraph.  The Constitution would not allow legislation that would violate somebody’s religious belief.  In fact, this is exactly what has happend with the new health care law, hence why it’s being challenged. The policy portion of it has now been clarified to the extent where it is going to force people to violate their conscience and religious belief by forcing employers and institutions, especially those that are self-insured, to pay for services that go directly against their religious beliefs.  What’s happened to the Church is the exact opposite of what you’re fearing, a secular state dictating to people of faith what they’re going to do even though it violates their faith.  And this is my answer to your question whether I would pass such a law.  The Church is not attacking society with a proposed law, it’s the secular government that is putting in place rules/laws that violate people’s convictions.  So when you try to make the Church or religious faith the aggressor when it’s not, you’re the one that is being disingenuous.
-
“Finally, when I say I couldn’t care less whether the Church wins the HHS fight, the “reasoning” that seems to escape you is that those affected can still buy contraceptives.”
-
Why are you even arguing since you prove the Church’s point with your statement that the problem is not contraception and I never claimed that you stated precisely this.  You were using this as a hypothetical that is not applicable here because we are not proposing anything but trying to defend ourselves from being forced into doing something we don’t believe in.  The government has taken upon itself to violate people’s faith with their new directive.  If you can see this, then you should be the first to defend the Church because it’s precisely the same thing you wouldn’t want to happen to you, to force you to do something that goes against what you believe.  The thing you need to realize is that there are changes being enacted that are forcing people to stand up against things they don’t believe in because it wasn’t like this before.  These things are happening right now and it’s not just a legislative proposal.  There’s a big difference between the two.  I’m not expecting you to agree with me but it’s clear that the government is the one playing unfairly with respect to the Church.

Abimopectore,

Friday at 12:17p – “The fact that you can’t realize that politicians bring their values into office clearly shows why you don’t understand….” Flat out never said that. Actually, as I write this, it seems like I’m being a bit over-sensitive and petty here, don’t worry about it, I was probably mad at the guy calling me a troll :)
-
Yes, the Virginia bill was modified to remove the requirement to jam a vaginal probe into women undergoing an abortion, but the law still passed and requires a conventional abdominal ultrasound, completely contrary to the advice of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. It also requires printing out the ultrasound and offering her a chance to view the fetal image, and placing a copy of it in her file for 7 years. While most women will of course decline the viewing, they should be thankful they’re not in Texas, Oklahoma or North Carolina where women are required to hear the provider’s verbal description of the ultrasound. Yes, you read that correctly, the doctor must verbally describe the fetus to her. There is no benefit here to anyone, and we should fear the pious thinking that leads to laws like these.
-
You don’t worry about school boards because you encourage your children to read and discuss the merits of these issues? I’m not suggesting that you don’t care about other kids’ heads being filled with dangerous lunacy, but it sort of comes across that way. I don’t worry about my kids either since they’re also in Catholic schools where I know that they’re not being taught creationism. But we’re not just talking about your kids and my kids; we’re talking about all kids, our society’s kids. I certainly care what they’re taught, since these kids are our future leaders. Do you really not worry about this? Teaching them that God created the heavens and the earth about 2000 years after the Sumerians learned to brew beer has consequences. But then again, your position seems to be that all faiths are worthy of respect, as well as that it’s perfectly fine to temper political decisions with one’s faith, so it would be difficult for you to admit otherwise despite some truly zany religious beliefs out there. But I’ll also guess that your comfort with an alliance between politics and faith disappears when the politicians are Muslim, Jewish, or Hindu. Or politicians with no faith. Hey, look at me putting words in your mouth now, sorry, correct me if I’m wrong.
-
I see your point about the HHS mandate, and I understand that the Bishops feel betrayed by the Obama decision. Even though I lack any religious faith, I do have faith in the wisdom of the constitution and the 1st amendment. So you make a good point that it is disingenuous of me to simply say “I don’t care” about the HHS battle. So let me clarify, at the risk of being further accused of harboring anti-Catholic sentiments. My opinion, as I’ve expressed in other forums (quick side note – this is how I stumbled across this website several months ago, reading an article about the HHS mandate, not “trolling”) is that I feel that Obama’s move to absolve Catholic institutions from paying for contraceptives directly, by requiring the insurance companies to provide it directly and at no cost to plan members should satisfy the Bishops. You may call it accounting trickery, I don’t see it that way. Furthermore, while the 1st amendment prevents government from impeding the free exercise of religion, covering contraceptives in a health care plan doesn’t prevent freely exercising the Catholic religion. There are a few (very few) that feel this “violates their conscience” but there is nothing in the 1st amendment that prohibits conscience violations. The Catholic high school my kids attend have a health plan for their employees which covers contraceptives, nobody seems to care. In fact, it’s already required by law in most states, long before Obama was president. And we know that many, if not most Catholics use contraceptives anyways, so obviously they don’t care. Yes, yes, I know, the moral teachings of the Church will not be dictated by its members, but shouldn’t that signal the Bishops (with already a shaky hold on the moral high ground these days) that they are making a big political deal out of something that few of its members really care about? Anyways, that’s my opinion, which I hope better explains my “I couldn’t care less” remark.
-
The reasoning behind the Church’s pro-life arguments make little sense to me, as I’m sure you’re not surprised to hear. I don’t mean on abortion, and I admit I’m very uncomfortable with late-term abortions, but don’t consider it murder and would not deny a woman the choice to terminate an unwanted pregnancy. Nor do I believe that a tiny formation of cells smaller than the period at the end of this sentence is infused with a soul, or protected by the same rights as a newborn baby. I’m talking specifically about birth control. Sure, it’s based on reason – Catholic reason, from which comes the teaching that that sex without being “open to life” is sinful. As Mencken noted, “It is now quite lawful for a Catholic woman to avoid pregnancy by a resort to mathematics, though she is still forbidden to resort to physics and chemistry.” Even I am not so arrogant as to say that there is no God beyond any doubt, and I can imagine a million different ways that I could be convinced that there is a God, but I cannot conceive of a God would permit couples to deliberately space pregnancies using NFP but not a condom. I can even see how your reasoning makes sense with regards to the birth control pill, since it can result in the failure of an embryo to implant, which you consider an abortion. But a condom dude? So I think your reasoning is flawed, you think mine is flawed, we’ll clearly never agree and there’s no way to prove who’s right. Let’s note though, that of all the religions, even within the many Christian ones, only Catholics follow this reasoning. Are you really that confident that everyone else has got it wrong? Would it really surprise you to learn upon entering heaven that God really didn’t care if you used a condom rather than NFP? Or rather, is it more likely that you just happened to be born and raised in a Catholic family, and that is why you’re a Catholic?
-
Once again you decided not to answer my question asking if you would favor banning contraception, and if not, why not? Although I suppose we both sense by now that your answer either supports my argument or makes you seem like a hypocrite. Never mind. I appreciate your respectful tone as well, and your willingness to chat about these things. I don’t think we’re really all that different. Cheers.

It won’t take long for Obama’s beliefs to “Evolve” into Sharia Law and a much more flagrant attack on Christians.

KCP,
Gutsy post - it’s about time someone pointed out he’s a secret Muslim. I heard on Fox News he keeps a Koran in his desk in the oval office. The only reason he went to Christian churches all those years were to figure out how to better attack us once the Illuminati made him president. I also heard that the HPV vaccine was developed by Obama, and the shots turn you Muslim on your 18th birthday. Right on brother, let’s vote that anti-Christ out of office this fall and get a real Christian like Romney in charge! Someone born in America! Fight the power!

This is in response to the post which claims views against abortion and the redefinition of marriage do not belong in the public square. On the contrary, I can hardly imagine anything more fundamental to human flourishing than respecting human life (and science is clear about when human life begins…at fertilization). Where does human life come from? Again science is clear: a procreative act by a man and a woman.  How is human life best nurtured?  Another clear answer, this time from social science: by a married man and woman who are the biological mother and father of the child. Thanks to God for political activists who will defend those goods so fundamental to our culture.

I struggle with the same concerns as Ms. Nardelli. I remain a Democrat because one cannot vote in the primary as an independent. The Republican party does not offer any better promise because from my perspective they have no concern for the underprivledged and are even less Christian than the Democrats.

Barbara—are you saying the government is supposed to take care of us? Government is not my mommy or daddy, nor husband, etc.  Aren’t we supposed to take care of ourselves?  So you vote for a Party that is going to take care of you? In other words, as long as they help you, you will vote for the party that funds abortion and anti-moral policies, just as long as it takes care of YOU? Selfish.

Barbara, the underprivileged are not helped by burdening the middle class with more taxes and increased loss of freedoms.  I agree with helping all people who are incapable or incapacitated, but equal opportunity for the able-bodied does not mean equal outcome.  Please remove your hands from my wallet.

Jo Ann Nardelli is a profile in courage. She stands as a Thomas More in a sea of Henry the Eighths. God bless this brave and honest political martyr.  I’m a pro-life Catholic Democrat who condemns the Party’s current embrace of the Culture of Death and will not support such policies.  I get push back too. There is a reason my blog is called http://reflectionsofthelastdinosaur.blogspot.com/  Pro-choice Catholics in both parties are intellectually dishonest and moral cowards especially when they twist theology into heresy in defense of their indefensible point of you.  God love you Ms. Nardelli! Once our party was the party of life.

Mary Meehan,Consistency demands concern for the unborn
Mary Meehan, The Progressive, September 1980
“It is out of character for the Left to neglect the weak and helpless. The traditional mark of the Left has been its protection of the underdog, the weak, and the poor. The unborn child is the most helpless form of humanity, even more in need of protection than the poor tenant farmer or the mental patient or the boat people on the high seas. The basic instinct of the Left is to aid those who cannot aid themselves—and that instinct is absolutely sound.”

“The pro-choice forces, however, are so intent on removing all obstacles to abortion that eugenics is no specter to them.”  Nat Hentoff
The Washington Post, May 25, 1991

The Indivisible Fight for Life
by Nat Hentoff. Presented at AUL Forum, 19 October 1986, Chicago. This article is part of no violence period.
“….back in 1971, two years before Roe v. Wade, in the state of New York, the legislature, after much pressure, decided to decriminalize abortion and make it a good deal easier. At the time, a significant editorial was delivered on the local CBS station by Sherri Henry, who has since become a big-time talk show host. And she wrote then, “[A]bortion is no longer illegal in New York. It is nothing to be ashamed of, nothing to fear. It is one sensible method of dealing with such problems as overpopulation, illegitimacy, and possible birth defects. It is one way of fighting the rising welfare rolls and the increasing number of child abuse cases.
Very simple. When there are no children, they can’t be abused. When there are no severely handicapped children or adults, we will all save money. When everyone in failing health has to die by a certain age, how much more aesthetic our society will be.
Most people will begin to understand the lethal logic of the abortionists, the advocates of euthanasia, and the AMA, if this logic is presented lucidly, persistently and on the basis of the indivisibility of all life. All life.”

Rick,
Yet here we are in 2012, abortion rates in the US continue to decline and are at a lower rate than they were in the 1970’s, despite wider availablity than at any other time. Fertility is the highest since the 1960’s, and our population has increased about 50% since Roe v. Wade and has never experienced an annual decrease. My 94 year old grandmother hasn’t been hauled in front of the death panel. Your fear-mongering seems unfounded.

Posted by Zeke on Monday, Jun 4, 2012 8:09 AM (EST):Rick,
“Yet here we are in 2012, abortion rates in the US continue to decline and are at a lower rate than they were in the 1970’s…”
***
And recent polls claim that more folk say they’re pro-life than ever before.Praise God.

Kathleen,
Rick quoted 20+ year old articles predicting that easy access to legal abortions necessarily would lead to population control, more abortions, and (somehow) euthanizing the elderly. My point was that this clearly hasn’t transpired. What’s your point?
-
Gallup polls on the pro-life issue indeed show that you are correct, although only about 20% favor banning abortion under any circumstances. The same polls show that more than 50% of Americans support same-sex marriage. Again, what’s your point?

Zeke, the “point”—- is that the laws of God are not subject to popularity polling data within the culture.

Zeke,
Re: “abortion rates in the US continue to decline and are at a lower rate than they were in the 1970’s,”  That’s wonderful news, indeed. Praise God that the rate of killing unborn babies is falling!
No wonder the St. Louis PP is having a conniption over the medical mobile clinic in front of Planned Parenthood providing free pregnancy tests and free ultrasounds. The 1,000 babies that were saved through these pregnancy tests and life-saving ultrasounds must have caused a substantial loss in revenue to PP. - $750 x 1000 = $750,000 – that’s quite a hit to PP’s bottom line!
-
Re: Your quotes, “However, a fetus is not a person under our laws, nor do we have funerals for a fetus after a miscarriage, and there is unanimous agreement that killing a child after they have been born is murder. But that is not the same as saying that a mass of cells smaller than the period at the end of this sentence is the same as an eight-month old fetus, legally, morally, or even from a common sense point of view.” “Nor do I believe that a tiny formation of cells smaller than the period at the end of this sentence is infused with a soul, or protected by the same rights as a newborn baby.”

1. You are wrong about your statement that there are no funerals for miscarried babies. Quite to the contrary - there are indeed funerals for both stillborn and miscarried babies.
2. I am glad to hear that you agree that killing a child after they are born is murder. Unfortunately, Pres. Obama doesn’t agree – he actually supports infanticide. As a member of the Illinois Senate, he opposed a state version of the federal Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, a measure that would make sure babies who survive abortions are given proper medical care.  Don’t believe me? Read the transcripts of his arguments before the legislature. They are chilling….
To make matters worse, he lied when questioned about it in a 2008 televised CBN interview with David Brody.
3. How is it that you know when a baby is “infused with a soul”? 
4. How do you feel about the recent essay published in the “Journal of Medical Ethics” which attempted to “logically” argue in favor of infanticide. The two supposed ethicists who authored the study referred to the practice as “after-birth abortion,” in an effort to avoid the negative connotations associated with taking the life of a helpless newborn infant. This is so Orwellian…
-
Re; your reporting of US population statistics. You omitted some other important facts. According to the US census bureau, the U.S. population growth rate is slowing. Around the year 2030, the U.S. population will be older than it is now.
-
Which leads me to your 94 yr old grandmother – God bless her! It’s a good thing that she doesn’t live in the Netherlands where forced euthanasia is the norm. And, you really should be worried about her! Can you believe that there is actually a push to transform the most ill and disabled living human bodies into so many organ farms? This dialogue continues among some bioethicists and within organ transplant ethical discourse. Now, an article in the American Journal of Bioethics, written by organ surgeon and medical professor Paul E Morrissey, urges that patients who are going to have life support removed and then become organ donors after death, instead have their kidneys harvested while still alive.
And you, my brother, should be concerned about your own life…what will happen to you when you reach your grandmother’s age? Who will protect your right to medical care?
This all reminds me of when I was working on my master’s degree some 20 years ago and took a course in medical ethics entitled “Who Shall Live and Who Shall Die?”. The course instructor was Dr. Lonnie Edwards”, Cook County Commissioner of Public Health. His predictions regarding the erosion of ethics, the loss of regard for the sanctity of life, and the continued decline of Western civilization have all come true. Oh, how I regret my (and those of my fellow classmates) arrogant skepticism of his predictions! 

Posted by Zeke on Monday, Jun 4, 2012 3:14 PM (EST):Kathleen,
Rick quoted 20+ year old articles predicting that easy access to legal abortions necessarily would lead to population control, more abortions, and (somehow) euthanizing the elderly. My point was that this clearly hasn’t transpired. What’s your point?
-
Gallup polls on the pro-life issue indeed show that you are correct, although only about 20% favor banning abortion under any circumstances. The same polls show that more than 50% of Americans support same-sex marriage. Again, what’s your point?”
***************
I’m not really attempting to make points, just celebrating the good things happening in our nation.
There are plenty of negative things to worry about but it’s heartening to see change for the better.Some dire forecasts from 20, 30, 40+ years ago have come to pass, others not so much.I’m glad that a few were wrong.There’s always hope.

@Kathleen/In the pew:  OK, so your point has nothing to do with my response to Rick. Fine. You cite polls that support your Catholic point of view, yet also proclaim piously that God’s laws are “not subject to popularity polling data within the culture” when they don’t support your view. Well, why bother citing polls then? My only point, clearly, is that these dire predictions 40 years ago have failed to come true. Full stop.
-
@Ann Marie:  If you say there are indeed funerals for stillborn and miscarried babies, then sorry, I stand corrected. I’ve just never heard of one despite being born and live in a largely Catholic community for 50+ years, and I’m aware of many miscarriages (which you will agree are not uncommon, perhaps up to a third of all pregnancies). So let’s follow this line of reasoning. When should we have a funeral? If a child is stillborn? OK, maybe. What if a mother loses the baby after 3 months? Doubtful. 6 weeks? A few days? Never. Why not? The answer to that supports my point – even Catholics treat the death of an embryo differently from the death of a stillborn full-term baby.
-
How is it that I know when a baby is “infused with a soul”?  I never claimed that I did, or that there is any point where this happens. I don’t think that there is a soul, period. If I did, I would believe there’s a God, since the soul is a religious creation, immune to detection by humanity, at this point anyways.
-
How do I feel about the recent essay published in the “Journal of Medical Ethics” which attempted to “logically” argue in favor of infanticide? Well, just having read it 20 minutes ago, yeah, chilling. But despite your Orwellian concerns, you must agree that this essay was merely exploring the ethical implications of abortion, not advocating infanticide. Actually, it’s a question that needs to be asked and difficult to answer morally if you support abortion. But essays on ethics like these are no different than essays I’ve read exploring the implications of the opposite position, where human rights are extended to embryos at the moment of conception. Then shall we charge mothers with murder or child abuse if they cause harm to the fetus due to their lifestyle, eating habits, or smoking and drinking? Have you ever met, or even heard about, people that favor infanticide, or wish to enact laws legalizing it? Me neither, although there probably are whack jobs out there who are OK with the concept, but we both know it will never be legal.
-
“ According to the US census bureau, the U.S. population growth rate is slowing. Around the year 2030, the U.S. population will be older than it is now.” C’mon Ann Marie, it’s called the “baby boom”, and the large segment of the population born between WWII and the early sixties (like me and perhaps you) will indeed be old in 2030. If you want to suggest that population growth is a myth, because birth control and abortion is leading to the extinction of the human race, you’re going to have to find facts to support your arguments. Social scientists that study population growth are concerned with how the planet can support our increasing population, not worrying about a decreasing population or how to increase birthrates.
-
Which leads us to my 94 yr old grandmother who thankfully doesn’t live in the Netherlands, which you state is a good thing, lest she be euthanized and her organs harvested. Well that’s some relief to me I suppose, as is the fact that she also doesn’t live in any number of other places you also know nothing about yet imagine fictitious laws there that prevent people from living as long as they please.  Let’s overlook the fact that this secular country enjoys a higher life expectancy than in the US, and that they don’t permit their poorest citizens to die because they can’t afford health care, and don’t execute criminals. Not only is forced euthanasia not the norm there, it is not even legal, which anyone with an internet connection can easily verify. The fact that you possess a Master’s Degree yet would even write such a thing, my sister, much less believe it is true, worries me more than any concerns I may have about my rights to medical care in my old age.
-
People that have specific instructions or living care directives that clearly state they do not wish to linger on life-support, and wish to be organ donors, what could possibly be wrong with them consenting to donate their kidneys before life-support is removed? I would assume that this increases the viability of the organs and increases the chances of successfully transplanting them into someone who needs them, possibly saving their life. Why is this a problem for you?

zeke,
Thanks for your posts.Just curious, do you spend time in discussion with Catholics because you want to learn more about Catholic teaching?

Zeke:  I have not cited any polls.  The fact that abortion is legal does not equate to abortion being moral.  It is a violation of the law of God.  If Christ is living within you, your desire is to please Him.  It’s called the denial of self (which, by the way, is not very difficult at all due to His grace).  On the other hand, if Christ is not living within you, then your first desire is always to please yourself.  You are thus your own God.  That said, I totally understand where you are coming from.

Kathleen, it’s not about Catholic teaching.  People like Zeke have been around for centuries from the time of Nimrod, to Pharaoh, to Nebuchadnezzar, to Herod & Caiaphas, the Caesars, Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot and the like.  The truth of God’s word is not in them.  The Bible says they will continually walk in spiritual darkness.  Proverbs 16:25 says “There is a way that seemeth right to a man, but its end is the way to death.”

In the pew ,
I’m the one who cited the most recent poll re the number of Americans identifying themselves as pro-life.My daughter believes that she will see Roe vs Wade overturned in her lifetime.Many young people’s hearts & minds are changing on this issue & technology is giving us an increasingly clear picture of the developing child’s humanity.Abortion can be seen as a civil/human rights issue by many, Catholic & non.  Views on the unborn are changing & evolving for the better.Much like racial civil rights issues did decades ago.It takes time.

Kathleen, that many young people have their hearts and minds changing to that of “pro-life” is a positive.  Those same polls are showning young prople are highly supportive of gay marriage.  As I wrote to Zeke above, just because something becomes legal does not make it moral.  Slavery was once legal.  Prostitution is legal in Clark County, Nevada.  Gay marriage is legal in 7 states and in some European countries.  If you say Jesus is Lord, you can never accept behavior which the Bible calls sin.  He sets the standard.  The courts, Hollywood and the culture do not.

In the pew,
This is a Catholic site & it’s appropriate to discuss things through a Catholic filter.I’m a devout Catholic & am with you in upholding Catholic teaching.But my point was simply that the rights of an unborn child can be seen as a human rights/civil rights issue by those of differing faiths, or even by those who profess no faith.Just like segregation, women’s suffrage,slavery,etc were years ago.

Hi Kathleen,
I don’t know exactly, but I must admit to becoming somewhat obsessed with these comment boards! I think it was about 6 months ago that I clicked on a link in an article somewhere (I think it was Andrew Sullivan’s blog on the Daily Beast) that led me to the NCRegister, and I’ve had many interesting discussions here since. I suppose it’s probably because I find it fascinating to discuss the Really Big Things like religion here, which is much easier here than in person with Catholics I know (i.e. 90% of my friends and family). As you might imagine, sharing with friends and family that you are an atheist that no longer believes in the things that they cherish can have some pretty bad consequences. I think it’s almost easier to come out as a gay person (not that I am or that there’s anything wrong with that, as Seinfeld said) than as an atheist. Thanks for asking, because I never really thought about why I’ve spent countless hours putting my thoughts on paper, so to speak, until now, and I feel a little better about the time I’ve wasted here when I should have been doing work or something with the family :)
-
So no, it’s not because I want to learn more about Catholic teaching, but I certainly have in the past 6 months or so. They are really quite beautiful and consistent, and I like the way the Church has a central authority in these matters that separate it from the other strains of Christianity. I guess I also wish to demonstrate that atheists are not by definition terrible people with no moral code, and that we mostly hold Christian values. It would be hard not to in North America, growing up in a society based on Christian morals. And who cannot help but admire the wonderful teachings of Jesus, and the charitable works he has inspired around the world? You may have read somewhere that I stated that I was raised Catholic, which is true. Received all the sacraments, attended all Catholic schools, and married in the Church. I find no conflict with living by Catholic teachings (well, most of them) despite being an atheist, because I guess that’s the way I was raised, and continue to raise my kids.
-
So there you go, thanks for the chance to go to Confession again. This is faint praise, but if I had to bet on which religion is true, I’d bet Catholic, although that’s the only one I’m familiar with. I think a lot of Catholics are Catholic for this very reason, not that they grew up in a secular household, investigated all of the world religions, and decided on Catholicism. I suppose that’s partially what led me down the path to disbelief, that of the wide variety of religions, only one of them could be right. Or that none of them were right. I’m not so arrogant as to claim that I couldn’t be wrong, so I’m constantly surprised by commenters here that are utterly convinced that only Catholics have it correct, and all others are necessarily mistaken. Sorry for the long-winded response. Can I ask why you spend time commenting on articles like this?

In the pew,
You’re right, you didn’t cite any polls, reading back I realize it was someone else, sorry. But in a pluralistic society, if polls only show 20% support for a law banning something, wouldn’t a law based on your specific religious views that bans it concern you?
-
Hitler? Dude, really?

Zeke, if polls showed only 5% in support of what the Bible calls sin, it’s still sin.  Abortion is sin.  Gay marriage is sin.  You have a problem with the God’s word, the Bible.  You atheists would like it removed from society.  The idea of Jesus Christ as your Lord makes you uncomfortable and you refuse to submit to His authority over your life.  You prefer your own supremacy and to create your own godhead.  Re Hitler, yes. Why not?  Is he any better or worse than the other names listed?

Zeke,
Thanks again for your comments.
The most charitable,& I think accurate, explanation of Church teaching & truth I’ve heard was from a priest years ago.He said that while we believe the Catholic Church holds the entirety of Christ’s teachings, other faiths hold some as well.If it were a pie, you could say Catholics have the pie in its entirety,other denominations may have varying amounts.That’s a bit different than “we’re right, they’re wrong.“And even if some denominations may have discarded a slice or two of the pie back in the day, they may currently demonstrate some of Christ’s teachings better than the average Catholic does.Take the Amish for example, or the Mennonites.
I think you’re correct that many Catholics are Catholic because they grew up in a Catholic household.As such, they often have little reason to explore other faiths.They also often have not had great catechesis & don’t understand the basic teachings of the Faith.Or they understand their Faith from an elementary school level & never really moved into an adult understanding with greater depth.
I enjoy conversation with others on matters I believe are important.It can be difficult to discuss things with civility at times.The internet seems to encourage some folk to vent in anonymity when they’d likely show better manners offline.
God bless!

Kathleen,
That’s a good way of looking at it, nice chatting with you. Know what you mean by people showing better manners offline, which brings me to….
-
In the pew,
We’re not talking about sin, but about laws. Why is your view of sin more worthy of a punishment by law than those of another religion? The Bible is clear that the punishment for homosexual acts is death. Do you support that? Why not? Atheists don’t want the Bible stricken from society, but they do want to be protected from Biblical views like the above being imposed on society. Or Koranic views. So given that hundreds if not thousands of religions exist in our society, laws must come down to votes. Otherwise you get a theocracy, as exists in the middle east that are truly horrible places to live.

Kathleen, I congratulate you on your very fine explanation.  The USCCB’s would be wise to take your comments and have every parish post them in the vestibule of each church in their diocese.  If more Catholics were accepting of your viewpoint there would be far greater undertanding between Catholics and Protestants.  As a Catholic, I have plenty of Evangelical friends and neighbors of whom we share so much in common regarding faith in Christ.  We don’t always agree on every doctrinal issue, but I am always confounded at the number of Catholics and Protestants on these blogs who only seek to sow discord among believers.  You are absolutely correct that many people have never graduated from their elementary school training in the faith.

Hello Zeke,
-
I hope your day is going well.
-
“Once again you decided not to answer my question asking if you would favor banning contraception, and if not, why not? Although I suppose we both sense by now that your answer either supports my argument or makes you seem like a hypocrite. Never mind.”
-
My answer to you is this is settled law.  Look at Griswold v. Connecticut, where the Supreme Court ruled by 7-2 that a Connecticut law that prohibited the use of contraceptives violated the “right to marital privacy”.  So to continue to question whether I would support such a law as I’ve stated previously because of my religious beliefs is really not truly understanding that there are Catholics that understand our form of government which is NOT in danger of becoming a Theocracy as you repeatedly suggest in your posts.
-
“So given that hundreds if not thousands of religions exist in our society, laws must come down to votes. Otherwise you get a theocracy, as exists in the middle east that are truly horrible places to live.”
-
Laws do come down to votes AND VALUES.  As Catholics we are called to live our faith openly and this is what the 1st amendment guarantees.  All of us should not be afraid of discussing values that we can all share as a common humanity.

Zeke, I am not in favor of a theocracy nor do I wish to impose biblical principles over your life.  However, in the markeplace of ideas, one atheist telephone call to your local school board is enough for a High School to not allow prayer at a graduation event.  The same is now occuring for United States Military Chaplains who are being told they cannot use the term “in the name of Jesus” when praying because someone might be upset.  Governments establish laws (and too many of them in my view).  Citizens are required to abide by the rule of law even if you disagree.  Abortion may remain legal. Gay marriage may become legal nationally one day.  Abiding by the law does not indicate one’s acceptance.  You are correct that laws all come down to votes.  Votes have consequences good or bad.

Hey abimopectore!
Hope your day is going well too, I’m supposed to be studying but…damn computer….
-
Fair enough, your response to hypothetical laws banning contraception (“this is settled law”) makes sense on one hand, but I can’t help but note that Roe v. Wade also fits that category. How do you reconcile that, especially given that the Catholic view of birth control pills is that they are essentially causing abortions? I don’t mean this as a “gotcha” question or trying to be a dickhead, I mean it sincerely.
-
“All of us should not be afraid of discussing values that we can all share as a common humanity.” Well put. We all need to chill out once in a while and try to understand each other better to try to reverse this polarization we are experiencing these days. Cheers.

In the pew,
You write “I am not in favor of a theocracy nor do I wish to impose biblical principles over your life.” Yet you favor banning my daughter from getting an abortion should she become pregnant after being raped, or if continuing the pregnancy would lead to her death. You would prevent me from serving in the military, adopting kids, or legally marry if I was gay. Because “Abortion is sin. Gay marriage is sin.” These things affect peoples lives.
-
I think the expansion of the marketplace of ideas in the past several decades are more to blame for the examples you gave than atheists. Christian elements in the public square which were once accepted without a second thought, or non-Christians dared not complain, now receive complaints. Are you sure it’s atheists objecting to Christian prayer at school, or to Military Chaplains being told to tone down the Jesus talk? Wouldn’t Muslims or Jews be equally or more likely to complain? Since the constitution prevents government from favoring one religion over another, how else can the courts react to complaints like this? The concept of separation of Church and State also has consequences, good or bad.

Zeke, separation of church and state does not mean religious views should be prevented in the formation of establishing lawful governance.  The 10 Commandments (Jewish in source) are the basis for outlawing murder and theft.  Should we then eliminate laws which punish killing and stealing because these laws are Jewish in origin?  btw, Christians do not object if an Islamic cleric wants to praise Allah when Muslim members of the military pray.  I cannot stop your daughter from having an abortion nor from gay people marrying where it’s legal.  Legality, though, does not compel me to accept certain action or behavior as OK when the word of God says otherwise.  At the end of life, the US Supreme Court will not be my judge.

Wow. God Bless you Rep. Nardelli… I have always been what we call in Texas a “yellow dog Democrat.” I live in the bluest county in the Reddest state but this year… To Jesus Through Mary…

In the pew, agreed, any religious view should not be prevented from consideration in the formation of lawful governance. Nor should the government favor or promote a set of religious views over another. Can’t we simply leave it at that?
-
The 10 Commandments have no place in courthouses or government buildings for this reason alone. Even a zealous Christian like yourself cannot be so naive as to believe that American laws are, or should be, based on the 10 Commandments, despite our laws having 2 of the 10 in common and the truly hideous and terrifying morality of the Old Testament. Gladly, our society has examined these particular Christian views, deemed them barbaric, and resisted basing laws on a moral code that prescribes death for any number of offenses to God, including homosexuality, adultery, bestiality, rape, cursing a parent, worshiping other Gods, witchcraft, taking the Lord’s name in vain, and women found not to be virgins on their wedding night.
-
And yet I repeatedly read comments here that we are now living in a culture of death.

Zeke [“The 10 Commandments have no place in courthouses or government’]    Zeke, I don’t know your educational background, but the Ten Commandments are the foundation of all law in Western Civilization.  The acts you mention in which punishment by Levitical law now seems barbaric were for a purpose and time following the Exodus.  After 420 years in bondage, the Hebrews needed to be disciplined and de-Egyptianized from all their habits, practices and false gods they worshipped.  Such human offenses before a Holy God were abhorent so the seriousness of sinful ways needed to be impressed upon the Hebrews.  Since they were to be “His” people, they needed an understanding of what it meant to be sanctified and “set apart” from other unholy nations.  What you have failed to understand, Zeke, is that the Lord has made a way for all men to be brought into the light and to reject the darkness.  That way is the cross of Jesus Christ.  Christianity is about forgiveness, not condemnation.  Unlike the Jews who carried the burden of keeping the law out of fear, Christianity is about obeying the Lord out of love for what He has done for us now—and in the life to come. 

God bless her! I knew plenty of Catholics who grew up Democrat who ended up leaving the party—or rather acknowledging the disconnect (the party left them) and letting it be known they were no longer Democrats. I don’t call myself a Republican, either, though I’ve often voted for Republican presidential candidates because I could not in good conscience vote for the Democratic candidate. I’m not exactly excited about the 2012 presidential race, but right now the moral gap between Obama and Romney seems to be growing, and if it comes down to those two, I have no qualms about voting for Romney.

SarahL,
I do call myself a Republican because that’s the way I end up voting most of the time, but I’m not really comfortable with that title.The Democratic party left me behind, too.But I don’t quite fit in at some GOP functions.There’s still the old,country club set there, even though it’s changing.

Hope you will be independent. I’ll trust in Jesus not the Republican Party

GOD BLESS YOU JOANN NARDELLI!  I am so proud of the stand you have taken.  I’m sorry for the abusive comments you have had to endure. I wonder if some of it comes from knowing in their hearts you are right, and it is pricking their conscience?  And it is sad that the Democrat party has chosen this path.  I think there is many, many Catholic Democrats struggling with this dilemma.  Maybe there’s room for a different “Democrat” party, that supports our Catholic moral ideals.
Stay strong and trust in Our Lord to guide you.

Kathleen, the old guard Washington Republicans forced Romney upon us just like they did with John McCain and Bob Dole.  TEA Party true conservatives are not happy with Romney but when contrasted with a self deluded community organizing socialist, Romney is the guy.  It’s a no brainer.  That Catholics voted in droves for such a partial birth pro-abortion candidate is beyond contempt.

Zeke.

I would like very much to respond to all of your points, but due to some serious time constraints I am going to limit this to one to your comment regarding my lack of knowledge about involuntary euthanasia in Holland and your unfortunate comment – “...live in any number of other places you also know nothing about yet imagine fictitious laws there that prevent people from living as long as they please.”

Gosh, I don’t know where to begin, so in the interest of time I will be as brief as possible. Please forgive any misspellings or grammatical errors – needless to say, I am quite upset over your unfounded remarks. (I waited 24 hours before I responded in order to temper my rejoinder.)

1) I am half Dutch and half Belgian – born in Holland. I have lived in 10 different countries.
2) I just returned from Holland 8 weeks ago. I usually go to Holland, Belgium, and other European counties twice a year. Unlike you, I have first-hand knowledge of what is going on over there. Over 50% of Dutch & Belgian seniors are scared that they will fall prey to the culture of death. Some of them have even a plea (please don’t kill me) tattooed on their arms!

3) My Dutch grandmother was a victim of involuntary euthanasia. Dutch doctors are very good about hiding their outright murders of innocent elders. Had it not been for the intervention of my husband (a fairly well-known prosecutor), her doctor would have gotten away with it. My husband worked very closely with the Dutch authorities and long story short, this criminal is now behind bars for murdering at least 18 other unsuspecting seniors. It is believed that he killed even more.
—-
As to my so-called lack of knowledge, listed below are some indisputable facts. I am a careful researcher and never shoot from the hip when it comes to making factual statements. I hope that you don’t continue the folly of believing everything you read on the internet!  Google searches can be manipulated so that the first several pages only contain information that certain groups want you to see. 

1) The 2005 study of End-of-Life Practices in the Netherlands that was published in the New England Journal of Medicine found that in 2005 there were 550 deaths without explicit request or consent in the Netherlands.
2) Three studies that were recently published concerning euthanasia in Belgium found that: a. 32% of euthanasia deaths that were done by physicians in the Flanders region of Belgium were done without explicit request or consent. b. A similar study that analyzed euthanasia deaths that were done by nurses in Belgium found that 45% were done without explicit request or consent. c.. The third study concerning the reporting of euthanasia in Belgium found that only 52.8% of all euthanasia deaths were reported.
3) A committee (Committee to Investigate the Medical Practice Concerning Euthanasia) was appointed by the Dutch government and was ordered to conduct a nationwide survey of the practice of euthanasia. Very reliable methods of study were adopted and the researchers working for the committee had taken every effort to obtain full and truthful information.
Here are some of their findings:
***EVERY FIFTH PERSON EUTHANIZED—In other words, every fifth person in the country dies of euthanasia.  Euthanasia is not limited to patients in terminal condition. According to the doctors’ own assessments, in 21 percent of the cases euthanasia shortened the patients’ lives by one to six months; in eight percent of cases, by more than six months. Further, the handicapped newborn babies and the psychiatric patients are certainly not terminal, and yet, euthanasia is practiced in these cases.
***EUTHANASIA WITHOUT CONSENT - According to the data published in the report, 14,691 people died in one year alone by involuntary euthanasia, which means the suspicions that doctors had arbitrarily cut short patients’ lives were justified. When this occurred in the hospital, in 45 percent of the cases, euthanasia was carried out not only without the knowledge of the patients but also without the knowledge of the family.
The death of 8,750 persons was caused by withdrawing life-prolonging treatment without the patients’ knowledge. And the lives of 5,941 persons were actively terminated without the involved persons’ consent or knowledge by administering lethal injections. Fourteen hundred persons who underwent active, involuntary euthanasia were fully competent. In 8 percent of the cases, the doctors proceeded to perform active involuntary euthanasia while they believed that other courses of action were still possible. “Low quality of life,” “no prospect of improvement,” and “the family could not take it any more” were among the most frequently cited reasons to terminate the patients’ lives without their consent.
So it happens in Holland that when a person is admitted to a hospital, which they are supposed to trust, a doctor will evaluate the quality of his life, will make up his mind, and without asking the patient whether he wishes this or not, will give him an injection which stops the breathing and the heartbeat. One Dutchman out of 22 dies in this way. The report of the governmental committee is the first official acknowledgment that involuntary euthanasia is practiced in Holland.
Some of the patients whose lives were cut short without their consent or knowledge were conscious at the time they “euthanized”. Some of them were competent. The number of fully competent, not partially, but fully competent patients who, according to the doctors themselves, could well evaluate their own situation and make decisions, and in spite of that were not asked about their own wishes and lives, totaled 1,474. These patients underwent involuntary euthanasia — 1,474 fully competent people who never asked for it, never required it, never requested it, and did not know it.
***GUIDELINES WIDELY DISREGARDED—The report of the governmental committee is the first official acknowledgement that involuntary euthanasia is practiced in Holland, not as some sporadic act committed by outcasts, but as part of regular medical practice. The report also showed that the rules of so-called careful conduct officially accepted as guidelines for euthanasia are widely disregarded by the physicians. In cases of voluntary euthanasia, 19 percent of the general practitioners disregard the rule to consult another physician. And 54 percent do not record the proceedings in writing, as required by the rules. Sixty percent of the general practitioners do not consult another physician before carrying out involuntary active euthanasia. On the death certificates, 72 percent of the doctors conceal the fact that the patient died by voluntary euthanasia. In cases of active involuntary euthanasia, the doctors, with a single exception, never stated the truth on the death certificates. The total number of cases in which the death is deliberately hastened by action or omission, is perhaps the most striking finding published in the report. There were 130,000 deaths in Holland in 1990. Of these, 43,000 people died suddenly due to accidents or sudden cardiac death, and this precluded any medical decisions about the end of life in the wording of the report. Of the remaining 86,700 non-sudden deaths, in about 49,000 cases (which is 56.5 percent!) the physicians made decisions that possibly or actually shortened the patients’ lives. This figure exceeds all previous estimates!
***FEAR AND UNCERTAINTY —What is happening to the society which has embraced euthanasia? Of course, life and work go on very much as usual. You shouldn’t imagine that there are horrors seen in the streets of Dutch cities. It’s not apparent at first glance. It takes some insight to perceive the future danger even now. But change there is. In general, you can say that the message society sends to its members is changed now. Instead of the message humane society sends to its members, “everybody has the right to be around, we want to keep you with us, every one of you;” the society that has accepted euthanasia tells its people, “we wouldn’t mind getting rid of you.” And this message reaches not only the elderly and the sick, but all the weak and dependent.
As a consequence, some groups live in fear and uncertainty. The Dutch Patients’ Association (DPA) stated in 1985, “The fear of euthanasia among people has considerably increased.” Now the DPA operate a hotline for anxious patients and families, and this line is very busy every day. A group of severely handicapped adults from Amersfoort wrote in their letter to the Parliamentary Committees for Health Care and Justice, “We feel our lives threatened… We realize that we cost the community a lot.… Many people think we are useless… often we notice that we are being talked into desiring death .… We will find it extremely dangerous and frightening if the new medical legislation includes euthanasia.”
There were several reports that out of fear of euthanasia, elderly people refused to be placed in old-age and nursing homes, refused to be admitted to hospitals, or to see doctors or to take medicines. A study of the elderly done by Segers showed that 47 percent of those living in their own homes, and as much as 93 percent of those living in the homes for senior citizens, oppose euthanasia “because later on when they won’t be in command of the situation any more, their lives, against their will, will be put to an end by others.”
Pathetic attempts are made to protect oneself from imposed medical death. The Sanctuary Association printed “Declaration of the Will to Live” cards which anyone can carry on his person stating that the signer does not wish euthanasia performed on him. You can buy such a card for two guilders fifty, which is about one dollar and 30 cents, and fill it in.
Since euthanasia has become an option, it is now up to every disabled and dependent person to justify his staying alive. It is now he who owes an explanation to his attendants, to the community, to his own family. And this is being clearly felt at the unavoidable turning points when his condition deteriorates, or as new and unpleasant chores are required of his attendants, or when there is a shortage of nursing staff.
***MANY FEAR THEIR FAMILIES—When analyzing the changed public scene, Attorney General Schalken, one of the members of the governmental committee, revealed , that changes have already occurred in the way some people view their own families. Indeed, in a society which embraces euthanasia, the families are no longer the beings who enrich our lives, lend it scope, purpose, and meaning.
A study conducted among patients showed that many fear their own families because these are the people who decide upon euthanasia or pressure the patient to request it. There is an uncomfortable awareness that if a doctor arbitrarily cuts short your life, he would get away unpunished. The impunity of involuntary euthanasia means that the articles of the Dutch Constitution protecting life and person have been de facto suspended. Those passports for life, the pitiful papers saying that the signer does not wish to undergo euthanasia, show that for protection of their lives, people can no more rely on the rule of law.
The members of the committee fear that when the present practice of euthanasia on handicapped newborns is legalized and, practically speaking, it is has been permitted, if not legal, this will mean the doctors, acting as they do everywhere under state supervision, will issue some newborn citizens permits to live while destroying the lives of others. To exist, a human being will have to be approved by the government which is a reversal of the democratic principle that the governments, in order to exist, have to be approved by the people.
***COMPULSORY EUTHANASIA - Compulsory euthanasia for the demented elderly, as advocated by some in Great Britain and discussed very broadly by the Royal Society of Medicine, is presently practiced on a small scale in Holland.
______________________________________________________________________________
And they say that there is no slippery slope in the Netherlands! That is only because they are already at the bottom of the slope.  Zeke, it seems as if your sense of ethics may be headed in the same direction!

Ann Marie, I’m very sorry to hear about your grandmother, and congratulate your husband for assisting the Dutch authorities on prosecuting a murderer. We may disagree on right-to-life issues, but we can agree that involuntarily ending someone’s life should remain illegal.
-
I’m afraid that’s all we agree on though.  Yes indeed, we must be careful of what we read on the internet. We should also be careful of what we copy from the internet and suggest that we wrote it. As I read through your quite lengthy post I was at first impressed and amazed, given that you prefaced it with “in the interest of time I will be as brief as possible. Please forgive any misspellings or grammatical errors.” But then a quick google search of Committee to Investigate the Medical Practice Concerning Euthanasia immediately turns up this article
-
http://pop.org/content/a-gentle-man-speaks-of-fear-1073
-
from which you copy and pasted virtually your entire post. That was when my amazement began to fade considerably. Then I noticed that you omitted some rather important paragraphs in the article, specifically the ones that mention that this 1990 study was based entirely on data when there were no laws controlling euthanasia, and in fact acknowledges that the results of this study are what led to the laws enacted in 2001 that expressly makes euthanasia illegal without specific, repeated, voluntary consent. What was left of my amazement turned to disappointment when I then noticed that http://pop.org is the website of the Population Research Institute, which states its mission as to “debunk the myth of population control” and explicitly opposes contraception, surgical sterilization, and family planning. It was therefore no surprise to me learn that this organization was founded by Fr. Paul Marx, and that its president, Steven W. Mosher, is a pro-life Roman Catholic.
-
I also realized that I had read similar figures to these recently, and quickly discovered that the right wing Catholic hate factory Rick Santorum had quoted them as fact from the same study. The Washington Post fact checker looked into this in February of this year and found these claims utterly bogus. Only 2.3 percent of all 136,058 deaths in the Netherlands in 2010 involved euthanasia. More than 80 percent of these people were suffering from cancer, and almost 80 percent died at home. The agency that monitors this found only 9 cases in which “the physician had not acted in accordance with the due care criteria.” If you care to read it, the Post article also examines Santorum’s claim that the elderly wear bracelets requesting they not be euthanized, eerily similar to your “first-hand knowledge” that some elderly are tattooing themselves with “please don’t kill me”. Readers will not be surprised to learn that this is also bogus.
-
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/euthanasia-in-the-netherlands-rick-santorums-bogus-statistics/2012/02/21/gIQAJaRbSR_blog.html
-
One could attribute your post to mere biased and sloppy research. A less charitable way to describe it, given the extensive and selective plagiarism, would be as dishonest, purposely misleading, possibly illegal, and decidedly non-Christian. Since you preface your comments as based on “undisputable facts” and that you are a “careful researcher”, I think you know what I think. Ironic that you, a Catholic, question my atheist sense of ethics.

I don’t think Zeke goes away. I think his job is posting all day.

Zeke,

Somehow my p.s did not get posted that i submitted 2 min later. I sent the p.s.
because I immediately realized that the paragraph I wrote attributing the english translation/analysis of this report was inadvertently deleted. So much for trying to work from more than one computer. (actually 3) part of the
missing para states that I had collaborated with Dr. Fenisgan to abridge his article for purposes of brevity.
I most certainly did mention that these were pertinent excerpts of the article and that I had done so with the permission of the author. You see, the original 2 volumes of the full reports that I have are in Dutch &  Flemish. It would have taken days for me to translate them. This all came about after Dr. Fenisigan saw your initial “rant” and ( 2 phone calls later) insisted that I abridge his article because it was too long and perhaps too technical for the reader.
Zeke, if you doubt the veracity of my explanation, he will be happy to join you on this post. He would very much like to hear why his translation is inaccurate and why it is not of merit.
But the again, you blow off the facts that. All of us offer you and fling red herring arguments & straw men as diversions from the issues posed to you. We’re all aware of your sophmoric “rhetoric”,
—sorry if this isn’t clear, I’m writing on an iPad.

I will be happy
I only had the complete text in
Pp
Pso with the authors permission

Ly realized that a para

Zeke,
So…you think that the data cited in the Dutch government’s commission is inaccurate?  Do you believe everything you read in the Washington Post? The facts in the study are accurate and were frequently cited during the trial of my grandmother’s murderer.  There are plenty of Dutch doctors and nurses behind bars for killing innocent seniors. And that is an indisputable fact!

Just because my correcting paragraph didnt upload to this post, still does not negate the facts! I do know what I’m talking about. You need to retract your crack about countries I know nothing about. If i had the wherewithal, I’d have you on a KLM flight and I’d take you around and let you see for yourself.

Zeke, you are impossible to reason with - as I am sure many others here would agree. I am going to leave this with this thought. Think about how you will explain all of your negative, fallacious posts to God when you die. Yes, you say you’re an atheist, but I think deep down inside - in your heart of hearts - you known he exists. There is a high price to be paid for your recklessness.

Well, I need to leave for mass now. I will pray for you each and everyday. God bless your soul.

In the pew,
Thanks for your comments.While I share some goals with the Tea Party folk,I don’t feel at home there either.Ditto for Ron Paul, though I tend to agree with a lot of his views on personal responsibility & freedom.I enjoyed watching him in the debates.He was the only one who didn’t come across as a warmonger, but his foreign policy is pretty weird.
My first choice would have been John Huntsman.
I agree that voting for Mr. Romney over Pres. Obama is a no-brainer if you’re pro-life.I actually like Mitt Romney & would have preferred him as the GOP candidate in the last election.

Dear Anne Marie,
I’ve been looking at your posts & while it’s common knowledge euthanasia’s been an issue in Holland & other parts of Europe for some time, it’s important to provide links to the original documents for readers to verify the facts.I understand translation can be a problem but there are often citations of those documents/studies in English that can be used as well.

Ann Marie,
You claim that a paragraph went missing that attributed your remarks to Dr. Fenisgan (sic), and you spoke with him to get permission to abridge his article. Fine, I accept and understand your explanation. I also ask you to understand that most of my remarks were based on the lack of this information, not a “diversion” from the issue.
-
But this doesn’t change my response substantially. You claimed that forced euthanasia is the norm in the Netherlands and worry about “organ farms”. His article acknowledges that a consequence of the report he cites is the enactment of new laws in 2001 that make it illegal. You abridged that part of the article, which is disingenuous. You accuse me of “blowing off the facts” despite that I linked to an article that took the time to examine theses claims and found them unsubstantiated. Are the facts that forced euthanasia is the norm and that people now tattoo themselves to prevent it, or that as I stated in my “rant” that it is indeed illegal in the Netherlands? Who’s flinging red herrings here? Do you even doubt that I also disagree with forced or involuntary euthanasia? Only your atheist straw men do.
-
Your willingness to bend the facts to support your position makes it very difficult to believe that Dr. Fenisgen (whose name you spell wrong) called you personally to insist that you abridge his article to suggest that forced euthanasia is legal. Would it not be easier, and carry far greater credibility, if Dr. Fenisgen simply posts his own comments? Hopefully he will do so, and trust that he notes that nowhere did I even suggest that his translation of the report is inaccurate or not of merit; simply that the report predates the laws enacted in 2001, the statistics since then tell a different story, and that you misrepresent them. Is “every fifth person” euthanized in the Netherlands Ann Marie, or is it closer to 1 in 50 as the 2010 statistics show. Do the laws continue to allow 14,691 people to be euthanized without consent, or is it 9, according to the 2010 annual report of the Dutch Regional Euthanasia Review Committees?
-
Sophomoric? Really Ann Marie? You hold yourself out to be a thoughtful researcher and possess intimate knowledge of Dutch society, yet attribute plagiarism to computer glitches and cite 20+ year old statistics as if they are accurate portrayals of the current law of the land. And you question my sense of ethics.

Ann Marie,
Didn’t see your last post until I already posted my response. You may know what you’re talking about but it’s clear we are talking about different things, or you simply choose to ignore my point. The fact that doctors and nurses are behind bars supports the only point I made - that involuntary euthanasia is INDEED ILLEGAL AND IT SHOULD BE. No, I don’t believe in everything the WaPo, but I have no reason to doubt the official Dutch report from 2010 that the article links to, which you clearly failed to read as I did.
-
If I thought God existed, I would say so. You believe that your God is true, and find it remarkably easy to deem all other religions as false and disbelieve in their Gods. I just disbelieve in one more than you.

Zeke [“You believe that your God is true’]  No, Zeke, we KNOW our God is true.  Over 500 eyewitnesses have testified to having seen the risen Christ and verifiable manuscripts testify to the truth.  You are in denial of truth and denial of Jesus as Lord.  Your continual cynicism mirrors that of Pontius Pilate when having heard truth then asked Jesus “What is truth?”  Truth is not a “thing”—but a person—Jesus the Christ.

PS: here’s a very good article from the Guardian about US voters.It ties in with the article above.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/jun/05/why-working-class-people-vote-conservative?INTCMP=SRCH

In the pew,
You’re arrogant, and delusional. If you were born in the middle east, you would have the same sure knowledge that a billion Muslims posess that proves to them that Islam is true. You believe that Obama, who shares your belief in the resurrection, is deluded, and so support for president a man who believes that the garden of Eden was in Missouri, Jesus walked around in the United States after his resurrection, and that a charlatan named Joseph Smith was visited by an angel in the recent past and told him this all was true.

Zeke, the LDS church is as phony as a $3.00 bill.  Joseph Smith and his mother were practioners of witchcraft in upstate NY.  Mormonism is a false religion of the highest degree.  They are a cult.  There is no historical or geographical evidence for anything they teach.  You’re off topic on the issue of your rejection of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Agreed, yet here you are advocating that a cult member holding truly zany beliefs should lead our country merely because he tells you he’s pro-life despite a political career demonstrating the contrary. It’s topical because it’s an example of poor reasoning and an inability to admit that you could be wrong, as I do.

Dear Zeke,
Assuming from a strictly secular position that all religions are based on fiction, why would Mormons hold “zanier” beliefs than Christians? Is there a sliding scale to rate religious sects?
I’d rather look at the views/values each candidate holds & whether they would make the best leader of our country.

Zeke, it’s not on the basis of who has the correct faith.  On that, both candidates are extremely poor choices, in fact, awful choices. But we are not electing a Pastor of the United States.  Obama says he is a Christian.  His enthusiastic support for abortion (even partial birth) as well as his support for gay marriage violate both the Torah and NT teachings of Christianity.  His belief in the resurrection is distorted —that being 20 years with his former (now disavowed) Pastor Jeremiah Wright of Chicago.  Wright teaches Black Liberation Theology which is “collective” salvation.  Wright is a false teacher in an apostate church.  The Bible teaches a man is saved individually and personally by the cross of Christ.  A lot of people claim many things under the banner of Christianity even when there is no biblical foundation for support.

Hi Kathleen,

You are right about the citation in English issue. You see, I searched Dutch, Belgian, and French websites for these stats - where else to better search?. I translated the statistics from Flemish to English.

When I have the time, I will try to find their English counterpart. But rest assured, those stats are accurate.

Thank you for your interest.

Zeke ,
Ok, so what – I have dyslexia! So what if I misspelled the good Dr. Fenigsen’s name? And, pray tell, how does that change the facts?  Seriously, you remind me of my some of my third graders (from long ago) who cheekily pointed out that I misspelled the word orange by writing oranje (the Dutch spelling)  - oops a little “uitspraak”.
__
So tell me-  do you dispute the 2005 study of End-of-Life Practices in the Netherlands that was published in the New England Journal of Medicine that found that in 2005 there were 550 deaths without explicit request or consent in the Netherlands?  (http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsa071143)
__
You may find the following blog rather chilling -  Wesley.Smith’s article : Euthanizing the Mentally Ill in the Netherlands.  “The latest report from the Netherlands on euthanasia practice includes a case study of a woman killed by her psychiatrist solely due to mental illness, specifically, depression”
http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/secondhandsmoke/2012/02/22/euthanizing-the-mentally-ill-in-the-netherlands/
__
Because the majority of readers on this blog do not speak Flemish/Dutch, or perhaps German), it is useless for me to cite what I have read (highly reputable, academic sources) and know to be true . Many writers and students of ethics still compare the Groningen Protocol to policies adopted in Nazi Germany.  Their most common argument is that when one person has the capability of making the decision of who shall live and who shall die, the whole moral fiber of society is in danger of being eroded.
___
Zeke you are blowing smoke and hot air on a subject that you know little about. I highly recommend that you educate yourself by visiting the Hasting Center’s website http://www.thehastingscenter.org/.  They are an “an independent, nonpartisan, and nonprofit bioethics research institute founded in 1969. The Center’s mission is to address fundamental ethical issues in the areas of health, medicine, and the environment as they affect individuals, communities, and societies”.

I am going to leave it here because I have better things to do with my time; quite obviously, you do not. I am beginning to think that you are dangerously close to that slippery slope descending to the “troll” level. Most certainly you don’t want to be viewed as that “Mayhem guy” on the Allstate commercials.
And for the record, you got it wrong - Dr. Fenigsen did not call me, I called him.
P.s Kindly overlook my occasional misuse of American/English idioms: English is not my mother tongue.

I salute congresswoman Nardelli for her courage and will pray that others will follow her heroic example. This is a great story and timely. 
Comment to Zeke, Chad and all those trying to dialogue with these guys.  Forget about it.  Faith is a gift from God, not an intellectual conversion or rationalization exercise.  And as Kierkegaard lays out pretty clearly, people who have not taken the ‘leap of faith’ - have no clue what those that have, are even talking about.  Some of you talked of the surrender that came with your own leap - guys like Zeke and Chad will never surrender, never even fathom the ‘leap’ - and trying to dialogue with them is a waste of time and energy - it’s much like a sober person encouraging an alcoholic about how awesome life will be when they’re not enslaved by their addiction.  They just look at you like a dog would, wondering what the heck you’re talking about.  Pray for them, pray that Christ will reach out to them so that they can experience the joy and peace that comes with surrendering to our Lord. But I suspect, that that has nothing to do with why they are on this site to begin with.

Zeke,
-
Hello Zeke again.  I hope your day is going well.  I’ve been pretty busy but I want to answer your question before I forget.
-
“but I can’t help but note that Roe v. Wade also fits that category. How do you reconcile that, especially given that the Catholic view of birth control pills is that they are essentially causing abortions? I don’t mean this as a “gotcha” question or trying to be a dickhead, I mean it sincerely.”
-
If you read the legal reasoning following Roe v. Wade, you’ll see the decision is not as clear cut, as much as some would have you believe, and in fact the decision is highly criticized by both liberal and conservative legal interpreters of the Constitution.  Many lament that a decision of this nature did not arrive at through a clearer/simpler court decision (e.g., based solely on the right to privacy per 14th amendment considerations for those in favor), or, better yet, by legislative means.  On the other hand, there are those against it that clearly state that the rights stipulated by the decision are not defined in the Constitution but are being made up by the Court.  It appears that this decision has not had it’s final hearing before the Supreme Court and will most likely be revisited sometime in the future.  So I don’t believe Roe v. Wade fits within the same category as Griswold v. Connecticut although it does derive some of its justification with its 14th amendment arguments.
-
Of course, as I Catholic, abortion is never the answer.  Wishing you the best.

John Paul,—good points.  Even Jesus said to “shake the dust from your feet” so that’s a good reminder.  In His teaching, Jesus never clubbed people over the head with a 2x4.  He stated truth and moved on.  At some point these conversations end.  Some sooner rather than later.  The Holy Spirit is responsible for the results (or lack thereof).  We are only responsible to bear witness of Truth —that of Jesus.

“For the word of God is foolishness to a perishing man, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.”  1 Corinthians 1:18

Jean Paul,

Bravo! You are absolutely right. Your comment was brilliant!

John Paul,
I know that non-believing folk “troll” religious websites & orthodox Catholic sites are probably a good target for them. But as a Christian I’d want to always show respect & charity to other posters & seek common ground in conversation.We may not share faith but sometimes we share values.Respect should be one of those.

Sue, if you do not vote, you have voted for BO, abortion and gay marriage. Hold your nose and pull the lever for Romney.  He may not be the best choice, but he is by far better than BO. You better tell your family to do the same or you will all answer to God for choosing death over life.
Richard you don’t have a clue.  Read “Original Intent” and you will learn that government was to be kept out. It has only been in the last 100 years that the Libs or new term “Progessives” have started destroying the Constitution.  Learn your history and the truth, as there is only one truth and the one you are adhering to is not it.

Everyone read “Original Intent” and educate your friends and family before our country is totally destroyed.

Ann,  re BO, no doubt the signers of our Constitution in 1789 have all turned over in their collective graves.

Ann Marie,
Nope, don’t dispute the 2005 study at all, which was in the WaPo link I posted a few days ago. But I’m surprised you would cite a study that is completely at odds with your frantic claims that EVERY FIFTH PERSON IS EUTHANIZED in the Netherlands.  One can simply click on Table 1 in the study to see that in the period from 1990 to 2005, the rate of euthanasia remained a very uncommon way to die in the Netherlands (1.7%). Most importantly, the cases where there was “no explicit request by the patient” has decreased from 0.8% in 1990, to 0.4% in 2005. You will also note that of these cases, 60% of these patients had expressed a previous wish for the act, presumably being unable to express their consent again due to unconsciousness or incompetence. The 2010 Dutch study found only 9 such cases. Will you walk back your hyperbolic rhetoric? I doubt it.
-
But I suppose you will now ask me again to refrain from blowing smoke and hot air, and ask “do you believe everything you read in the New England Journal of Medicine?” and insist that I am a troll for pointing out obvious false statements. This is from someone who posted that almost 15,000 Dutch people were euthanized without their consent in 1990, that the elderly and infirm live in so much fear that they have resorted to tattooing themselves, and foresee nightmarish organ farms where seniors are harvested like crops. I get the slippery-slope argument, but time to crank the fear-o-meter down a few notches Ann Marie. I respectfully ask - wouldn’t your right-to-life passions be better directed to oppose the death penalty here in our own country?

Hi Kathleen,
-
“Assuming from a strictly secular position that all religions are based on fiction, why would Mormons hold “zanier” beliefs than Christians? Is there a sliding scale to rate religious sects?”
-
That’s a good question. True, I’m not aware of a Top 10 Zany Religions list, but since it’s fair to say if any religion were proven true somehow, all others would be by definition false. Arguing that certain religious beliefs are delusional shouldn’t be that difficult or even controversial. We know with certainty that all of them are wrong, except for one. Or as I believe, none.
-
I think it’s fair to analyze various religious beliefs based to what we know to be true about the universe and the natural world and how reasonable they are. Some say it’s not possible to attribute human emotions or reasoning to God; others will cite the Bible which describes God variously as angry, jealous, loving, spiteful, caring, vindictive, lonely, etc. but that aside…
-
Mormonism for example. It shares many core beliefs with Christianity, and many (well, the ones running for political office anyways) will tell us that they are indeed Christians. But they make other claims too, some of which are easily disproven. Just to name a few: Native Americans are the descendents of the lost tribes of Israel who sailed to America. The Garden of Eden was located in present day Jackson County, Missouri. God cursed Cain with black skin thus creating the African race. Joseph Smith was visited by an angel about 200 years ago in upstate New York, who led him to buried golden plates, gave him magic glasses to translate them, and then disappeared with the plates and the glasses. I suggest this should rank above Christianity on the zany scale.
-
Other ones off the top of my head. How about faith that the world is several thousand years old? Or that the apocalypse is coming soon so why bother about global warming? Or the restoration of the caliphate? These go beyond zany into truly dangerous ways to think as a society, because thinking like this has consequences for everyone. Boarding an aircraft now is often a nightmare because a small minority of Muslims possess the sure knowledge that their God commands them to martyr themselves and kill as many Christians as possible as they did on 9-11. Thus we have thousands of fine young American men and women dying in the middle east because of these beliefs. I am frequently cautioned to respect religious views however.
-
Views and values are important for politicians, and I agree that this is what should merit our vote. I think the zany scale should be considered as well, since politicians can invent views out of thin air just to get elected. Romney was clearly pro-choice during his political career, until he began running for president. He created the model for what we call Obamacare and now demands it be repealed. Clear political pandering. But he can’t easily walk back his ridiculous religious views, which we are told we must respect.
-
How about you, do you feel that other religions are as worthy of respect as Catholicism?

Zeke:
“How about you, do you feel that other religions are as worthy of respect as Catholicism?”
*****************
My personal answer would be,yes, absolutely.
Do you feel there are particular religions that are unworthy of respect? Perhaps you meant something else by your choice of words?
I think in saying Catholicism holds the fullness of Christ’s teachings, we are not saying all other religions are wrong.And certainly not that they are unworthy of respect.
Mr. Romney may or may not be sincere in his pro-life change of heart.I give him the benefit of the doubt just as I’d give that to the Southern Democrats who switched from pro-segregation to pro-integration/civil rights.We don’t really know what’s in a politician’s heart & it’s wise to be skeptical.But it’s partisan to only suspect pandering from one side’s actions & not the other’s.

Kathleen,
No, you interpreted my remarks correctly. To be honest, I don’t think certain religions are worthy of respect. I don’t think that I’m obligated to respect zany religious beliefs like the ones I mentioned any more than I’m obligated to respect someone’s belief that they saw Elvis in their backyard. That doesn’t mean I shouldn’t refrain from telling them to their face that I think they’re bananas though.
-
“Catholicism holds the fullness of Christ’s teachings”. That is a beautiful statement and a wonderful point of view. If Christianity is true though Kathleen, does it not at least invalidate the religions that deny His divinity, despite that your obvious kindness and tolerance seems to prevent you from saying so?

Zeke,
The original article was in regards to politics & faith & I think the comments have strayed off topic a bit.
Respect & belief are two different things.I can respect your right to be an atheist, agnostic, secularist, or what have you, and I do. But I can also hold differing beliefs than you do.That doesn’t indicate disrespect, just difference.
Christianity doesn’t “invalidate” other faiths but we can have more or less common ground depending upon the denomination.It’s not “all or nothing”, it’s “more or less.”
You know, even if you don’t personally have belief in spiritual matters, study of religion at least gives one a foundation of understanding other faiths, other cultures.You write well. I hope you find what you are searching for.
God bless.

+JMJ - In the end we all will meet our Maker.  As for your faithfulness to Jesus teachings, all of heaven will be thankful in welcoming you since you stood firm by Jesus Teachings and was not afraid.  May the Holy Spirit infuse graces and resources needed to do the same as well.  Let’s continue to share the Fullness of the Truth prayerfully and with loving kindness.

God bless you Jo Ann! Heaven will rejoyce more for the salvation of a sinner than a saint.  I don’t understand how anyone could be a faithful ‘Catholic’ and support the ‘democrat’ party. Biden, Pelosi, Cuomo, Kennedy etc. have done serious harm to the Church, and the silence of their priests and bishops is on a par with the silence in response to the ‘pedofile’ scandals. We do not vote for the ‘greater good’ when we support ‘pro life’ ‘gay marriage’ or ‘contraceptives’ simply because the majority of people may be in favor.

This country needs many more political parties and its existing parties need bigger umbrellas. It’s best to be an Independent or at least independent-minded, letting your faith shape your politics and not vice-versa.
I don’t buy into either party’s platforms entirely, and that’s a big part of the problem. The Democrats are wrong about social issues, while the Republicans are wrong about economic issues (in my opinion). I will vote for a Democrat if there are either pro-life or not in a position to change legislation on abortion.

THANK YOU for reporting this encouraging story!!! 

My husband and I both come from families with Pro-Life Democratic leanings, his even more devotedly than mine (my Dad is very conservative on all fronts and now my mom is too), but it’s been a long time since I even considered the possibility of voting Democrat. 

To Rep Nardelli, if you read this YOU ARE AN INSPIRATION and ENCOURAGEMENT to myself and so many - GOOD FOR YOU, WOMAN!  :)  And good for us Catholics to count you among our closest brothers and sisters. 

We will be praying for you.

LPatter:  [My husband and I both come from families with Pro-Life Democratic leanings]  I didn’t know there were any Democrat candidates for the House and Senate who have run as Pro-life.  Who are these people you have been voting for in past elections?

Posted by In the pew on Monday, Jun 11, 2012 4:51 PM (EST):LPatter:  [My husband and I both come from families with Pro-Life Democratic leanings]  I didn’t know there were any Democrat candidates for the House and Senate who have run as Pro-life.  Who are these people you have been voting for in past elections?
***
I’d like to know, too.I truly wish there were some serious pro-life Democrats out there but I’m not aware of hearing about any in the news since Gov. Casey of PA.

Kathleen:  You are correct.  And Gov. Casey of PA (back in the 90’s) was barred from speaking at the Democratic National Convention when Clinton was nominated because he was, in fact, a Pro-Life Dem.  Since Casey, who are these Pro-Life Democrats?  Even if you were a Pro-Life Democrat in the House or Senate, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid would make sure you got the worst parking lot stall and rat infested office in the Capital Building along with being assigned to lesser committees assignments.

Posted by In the pew on Tuesday, Jun 12, 2012 10:28 AM (EST):Kathleen:  You are correct.  And Gov. Casey of PA (back in the 90’s) was barred from speaking at the Democratic National Convention when Clinton was nominated because he was, in fact, a Pro-Life Dem”
************
That’s what I seem to remember, too.

God bless the lady from Pennsylvania.  48 years ago I buried my first child; this past July I buried my second.  The saintly intercession of the first got us past the second.  Life comes from God, and only God has the moral authority to make pronouncements about it.

Jo Ann Nardelli you are my hero.  If only more Christians would do what you have done we may save our country .  May God Bless you and reward you in ways you will be surprised.  I get persecution from my 7 children, their spouses, my 10 bro/ sis. and believe it or not many priest and others for the work I do to try to get people to realize what is going on in our world against out Catholic Faith.  So I share your pain.  So much unconcern. God help us but especially those of little concern for their faith. I will keep you in my prayers and put you on the altar at daily Mass.You are a true Christian and I’d vote for you if you’d run for anything.  I’m from Ky. Call me Ms.Nancy!

Ms. Nardelli, I am so proud of you for standing up for your Catholic faith.  I admire your courage and strength of character.  I pray that all Catholics would follow the Lord in everything.  My prayers are with you.

Very good news but only a tiny step.  The Church MUST stand up for its own principles as well.  Any priest who puts the living Christ into the palm or upon the tongue of Nancy Pelosi or Joe Biden at the Divine Liturgy on Sunday or Any day should have his head examined!  As should the President of the University of Our Lady (Notre Dame) for inviting Obama to give the Commencement speech. In the USA the Church says one thing and does another. That MUST stop!! Praise Cardinal Dolan here in the “Peoples Republic of NYC” for his energy in the law suit pending now in federal court.  Congratulations Congresswoman. Perhaps the Men will take your lead and have the hutzpah you do!

Good for this courageous woman. It is sad that she is now seeing how tolerant the liberals are as opposed to the hater bigots.

We have a choice: l. Don’t vote at all -or- 2. Vote for the person who will listen to what Christians believe on the whole. The Catholic Church has always leaned toward the Democrat Party, because that party promotes helping people by “giving”. The Republican Party would prefer you work for what you need. That is the gist of the whole thing. I am on SS and Medicare and all I hear is how much money we elders cost the government. It is the Democrats who impossed SS and Medicare/Medicaid on us. Now our President want to aid those going to college and those who overspent on mortgages. People have to learn to be self-sufficient and not rely on the government, for when the government controls so much in our lives, we have Marxism or Socialism. Read about other countries, like Argentina, [90% Catholic], in the past the government controlled the Catholic religion, and havoc reigned. [The Dirty War} For those Catholics who “won’t vote at all”, then we have to accept that Obama will get in and take control of as much as he can. He has a lot of people, just like him, backing him. Remember it is CONTROL AND EGO. I have never voted “Party” but have voted for the best man who is running. This is not a ball game, it is our lives in the future. Die-hard Democrats and die-hard Republicans have to learn to vote their conscience. Just check the background of both candidates running for President and then make your decision, not a decision on party alone.

As a lifelong Democrat, it appears to me that the Democratic party of immigrants and blue collar working people has transformed itself to become the party of the chic and secular by squeezing morality out of law and government. I join Jo Ann Nardelli in looking for a new political party.

This courage needs to be replicated. I agree with James L. Every Chuch - priest needs to step up too. A friend of mine expressed his frustations clearly:“We are born into a war.  It is called good and evil.  In America it is called secularism.  Very soon, if we follow the path of Europe, it will be called Islam.  And the Catholic church in America is happy living in a box called 501c3.  We don’t talk about hate, we talk about love—a limp, feel-good love that we put on Sunday morning.  We don’t talk about politics or politicians, though they talk about us.  We don’t talk about secularism, humanism, earth-worship, socialism, communism, atheism and every other liberal agenda that is working to destroy us, but they talk about us.  Liberal politicians have bankrupted California, and will very shortly bankrupt the federal government.  The median family income fell 40% from 2007 to 2012, yet these gutless politicians can’t do their job because they are too busy socially engineering the country… from federally funded abortion on demand, to homosexual marriage, to sharia law, to what we can teach our own children.  Liberals control over $100B in non-prophet organizations, not counting government labor unions, while conservatives control just $10B.  But we Catholics can rest assured because since the 1950s the courts have determined that the church is separated from the state.  Do you see a trend?

I think maybe it is time to take the gloves off and engage in the war for America.  The secular/socialist agenda is organized and we are asleep.  We have lost two generations.  The people we battle are cowards.  They don’t have the guts to trust in God, or pay the price for freedom.  Their god is government, and their glory is sin.  They fear, and therefore demonize faith.  If we engage in the war, we must be more efficient in killing them than they are in killing us.  War is not a feel-good thing you do on Sunday morning.

War is also fought in the hearts of men.  If we teach the homosexual how to use the power of Christ to not sin, we win.  If we teach the muslim not to hate, we win.  If we teach the atheist to believe, we win.  We must be rooted and grounded in our faith.  Without Christ the King, we are as good as dead.  We must train and equip soldiers before we can fight the battle.Here an inspiration:”

“For Catholics to defend the Faith, the Church and the Lord today…..we all need to put on the true and tested Spiritual Armor; that of Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition and Sacred Teaching! (Dei Verbum)

Compliment such with the spiritual ammunition tools of prayer and fellowship and frequent dinning at the Eucharistic banquet table, and you have ordinary laity ready to be used for extraordinary assignments”

Maria: I admire your tenacity, but your comments to wit “If we teach . . .” presupposes there is a student.  The people you want to teach do not wish to be students.  We are already in the last days.  That can be 200 years from now, 500 or 1,000.  Of note is that Jesus had plenty of scoffers at His time as well.  He did not get into long arguments with people pleading that they agree with and believe Him.  He spoke and preached truth—and kept moving.  St. Paul describes the culture we see now in Romans 1.  The people you wish to teach have already been given over to their delusion of sin and God has placed them on the shelf.  They have what Paul calls a “seared conscience”—which is an inability to make biblical, moral judgment.

Maria [“For Catholics to defend the Faith, the Church and the Lord today…..we all need to put on the true and tested Spiritual Armor; that of Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition and Sacred Teaching! (Dei Verbum)

Maria, you may want to send some priests from your diocese to mine since no programs exist by which Catholics are trained nor equipped to share the Verbum Dei.  At best, a Catholic will only refer someone to watch EWTN or place a Catholic Radio bumper sticker on their car.  The priests in my diocese all live in their own sheltered world insulated from the culture you describe.  That’s one reason the priesthood is in so much trouble today.  If you have no personal testimony to share with an unbeliever, referring someone to watch Mother Angelica is not evangelism.

We can not give up hope on teaching. We plant the seeds, we leave the rest on God’s hands. My comment was more as an acknowledgment of the sad state of a lot of our priests and churches who don’t want to get involved and if any of the clergy is reading it, hopefully they get encouraged to be courageous.  But is is up to US, lay people to do it.Watch Michael Voris site and videos and write to him. He may refer you to some lay groups in your area. We are the church too. we must educate ourselves first - Jeff cavin bible study is great! Inmaculate heart radio and yes EWTN have wonderful resources.What is past is past, we need to look forward and do our part.

Look at the filth “daocteagf” has posted above my post.  This is what we are up against:  a culture of death and immorality.

Meanwhile, the scales are beginning to fall from the eyes of individuals like Ms. Nardelli. 

We need to vote Obama out of office.  Oppose the HHS mandate.  Attend rallys and participate in the prayer fortnight that begins on June 21, 2012.  Mark your calendars!

I am (along with 5 other family members) voting for pro-life Republicans. I never have voted any other way, because I have not found a pro-life Democrat. I hope to see the removal not only of Obama—but every abortion supporting “catholic” politician.

@Mark Brylski: I agree with you….I am surprised that this was allowed on this blog site.  It should not have been posted. Must have been a slip up. I for one will not vote for Obama or anyone in this Administration; but, unfortunately, there are a lot of Catholics who are die-hard Democrats who will vote for their Party, no matter who is running. That is why I am not a “Party Person”. In this age of computers it surprised me to learn that so many people do not vote or just don’t know anything about the people running for office.
  Now the President wants to get the illegal immigrants to vote, [for him] ....well he is wrong…my parents were immigrants [1895 & 1910]and they learned the language and they became citizens and voted because they loved this country and did not pay homage to their mother country once they were here. They rec’d nothing and did not ask for anything from the government and THEY ARE THE IMMIGRANTS WHO BUILT THIS COUNTRY, not the illegals who are here now. As their daughter, my husband and I paid for our children to go to college and on his salary {I was the old-time housewife} Our government cannot handle Medicare/medicaid yet he wants us to have government controlled healthcare, so that he can hire 5,000 people to oversee them. I pay over $100 for Medicare..$240 for Supplemental and $45 for RX, so the gov. should not say we seniors get healthcare “free”. I am a child of the Great Depression and a Teenager of WWII., so don’t anyone tell me anything about what “A Depression” is or is not or how to sacrifice. I know!

I recently converted to Catholicism(this year) and I’m an Independent. Personally, I’m not a fan of political parties in general. I can understand where the congresswoman is coming from. Just because you believe in one thing that the party supports, people think you believe everything the party supports, which is really not the case. This is why I just went without a party at all.

Sue—I am in the same boat. I pay for Medicare and then must supplement it.  Those who do not, do not get the proper attention. Under Obamacare—health insurance will be a NIGHTMARE. Nobody gives you anything for free. You may own your home (have it paid for), but if you do not pay the annual “property tax” you lose it. America, land of the free? I wonder… Our politicians get EVERYTHING because we are forced to pay for them. They are treated like Kings and Queens while we are considered their lowly subjects…

If any Pro Life Dems actually exist, they sure are afraid to let anyone know.  Even Catholic Dems in the House are too busy kow towing to Nancy Pelosi hoping she is Speaker again.  Obama has own Dream Act announced yesterday with Sec Napolitano (another Catholic).  Under the Obama-Napolitano plan, this will enable upwards of one million people here illegally to compete for jobs rightly belonging to American citizens.  The sad part is that our Catholic Bishops are supporting this nonsense under their social gospel agenda.  They have lifetime job security including free room, board, healthcare and meals.  We do not.

@Patt: by the way I am (old)Sue, there if another Sue on this blog. But you spoke of Medicare, so I knew you were referring to me. I agree with you 100%. If Obama was serious about helping the “lowly”, then he and his cohorts should take a cut in pay as the people have had to do, better yet, most of them should lose their jobs also. Remember the government took our SS money for their own purposes and never paid it back. Like you said, they live high-on-the-hog on our taxes….so he decides to make the government even bigger so that we have to pay more taxes to support all the new government employees.  This is simple arithmetic, what is the guy thinking, if he can think for himself and I doubt it. He is a social worker, not a man who can run a whole country.

Dear Sue (old)—AMEN. God bless you lady!! Let’s get the man out of the White House and all Socialists destroying this country (for our children and grandchildren).

It is so refreshing to hear of a person in your position who is clear about their Catholic values and sees the importance of publicly standing for integrity.  The scandal of so called “Catholic Democrats” who state heresy as fact has become a serious problem for Catholics and Christians everywhere. Obama is very deliberate in his choices for his inner circle and your courage reinforces that not every politician can be used.  Those in public life have an obligation to serve and are held to a higher standard with regard to matters of faith. The Holy Spirit has given you the wisdom and discernment to make a difficult choice, however you are not alone.  I was a radical in the 60’s and a Democrate until the late 90’s and have not voted Democrate in the last 2 presidential election. 
God Bless you, I hope you will focus your efforts to support the milions of practicing Catholics who are also citizens of this great country.

JoAnn,

Thanks to God! It took much more than courage to take the stand that you did!  How I wish political leaders would care more about the US,faith, religious freedom & morals; & looking out for our neighbor’s good than how to WIN Votes!  Your priorities are definitely in right order;your words have come accross loud and clear!!!!

Are they hurting you??  In any way, shape or form are they hurting you?
If 2 people of the same sex want to enter into a leagaly binding contract to share property and medical decisions let them. It is their RELIGIOUS DECISION in a country that says they have RELIGIOUS FREEDOM. Nobody said Catholics have to marry gay people or they have to get married in the Catholic Church.

I find gay sex disgusting but that does not mean I want to put on cone shaped hate and join the KLU KLUX CATHOLIC in a public lynching.

What happened to the Catholic Church that had some kindness and compassion. 

Mike Comcowich said: [“Nobody said Catholics have to marry gay people or they have to get married in the Catholic Church.”]  Not yet.  Just like “It’s not a tax.”

July3, 2012:  I could be wrong, but the Church is against gay marriage not gay civil unions which would enable them to share property and medical decisions, etc.  AND the Catholic Church is not now, nor has it ever been hateful of gays or pedophiles or murderers or adulterers…they stand against the sin, not the sinner.  The Church has deep compassion - no one does more for victims of AIDs than the Catholic Church…Mother Teresa’s community gives compassionate care to the victims of AIDs and other sexually transmitted diseases.  The Catholic Church will not marry gay people nor will they pay to insure abortifacient drugs, sterilizations, etc…I’m not sure Mike who you are asking: “Are they hurting you?”  I hope no one is hurting you…

@florin: Agreed, the Church is compassionate toward all people. I can understand why gays would not like to belong to the CC. That is their prerogative. When you join a religion, you follow the rules. Gays can always have a civil union and share property, etc. Remember many yrs. ago people were married civilly and religiously. Remember Grace Kelley from Monaco, that was the law there. My own parents were married that way many yrs. ago in this country. The Church never accepted these civil marriages and still don’t….it was the State that accepted Church marriages as legal…not all that long ago. I have heard some nasty remarks about gays on this blog and it is not Christian and they should be ashamed…that is not what the CC teaches.  The Catholic Church should not be forced by the government to change its beliefs. The Catholic Church has always been for “life” and if there are religions out there who do not believe this, then don’t join them. [I am talking about sharia law and honor killing.] In this country you do not kill, just as the Commandment says “Thou shalt not kill”

@florin: you said [“but the Church is against gay marriage *not* gay civil unions which would enable them to share property and medical decisions, etc.].  Were you born yesterday?  Do you really think people in gay civil unions are not also having sex?

New Observer: Are you a Cathoic? A Christian? What a nasty tone you have, self righteous are you?  If you haven’t the intelligence or the charity to engage in a debate without self-righteous idignation, then go elsewhere.

Sue (old) - I don’t think it’s just gays that don’t want to belong to a Church with deep moral values but remember Pope John Paul saying over and over again: “Do not be afraid!” and Pope Benedict telling us that we should try to present the Catholic faith not in a negative way: “You must not do this or that.” but rather to show the beauty and the goodness and the joy of Catholicism lived fully.  We need to bring people towards a relationship with Christ in the Church otherwise what reason would they have to turn away from sin?  As for homosexuals - remember that they have a tremendously heavy burden to bear.  Most pople who fall in love can marry and have a family and share their lives but homosexuals are kind of in an in between world and, for the most part, not by choice. I think something happens which prevents them from maturing sexually or they seek affection they never received from a parent.  But there are many who try hard to live a celibate life but we never hear of them; we only see and hear the radical gays who march in obscene ways and demand marriage - I worked with inner city boys who came from abusive, dysfunctional families, who never knew a healthy relationship and I used to explain to them that love is never wrong, it’s only how we express love…and then we talked of the many many ways to express love - not just sexually. And many homosexual men and women have learned to express love in many ways trying to live chaste lives. We really need to pray for each other, help each other, support each other…love each other as Christ loves us…

@florin:we have two gay intelligent men in our family. Their parents go to Mass and 24 Hours, Benediction, etc in church, the father is a K of C member. They went through Catholic grade, H.S. and Cath.College. They are a very loving family. They are accepted by all the members of their family, including mine. I really believe that their rearing has nothing to do with it as both are attorneys and as one said to his mother, “I would never choose to be gay as society does not approve of us, but I am”.  I am convinced, from what I have read medically, that they are born this way, just as someone is born lacking in something else. Remember how complex the body and mind is.  The parents of these men could not have more giving and loving sons. I empathize with them for they lead a life where so many people hate them.
@“new observer” shame at you for what you said….it is none of anyone’s business if they have sex or not. They are not a member of the Catholic Church and it is their business what happens in their bedroom and what happens in anyone’s bedroom.  As Jesus said “don’t take the splinter out someone eye until you take it out of your own first”
Allow me to make another comment: When my new Baptist ‘friend’ took the body of Christ off of the Cross and tossed it aside with an ugly sound, saying it is no good, my heart sank, I was furious….when she did that to my Crucifix, it hurt. Then she proceeds to tell me “I like Catholic people but not their religion”. The first thought that came to my mind was “I like gays but not their lifestyle”.  People should learn to be kinder…we live in a terrible hateful world.

Sue (old) - no one knows what causes homosexuality. The friends I have who are gay came from ordinary families but there was, they felt, something missing…I won’t go into all of it. I don’t understand how you equate “I like Catholic people but not their religion” with “I like gays but not their lifestyle.”  The lifestyle of gays is not a ‘religion’ - and people have a right not to like their lifestyle…unless they express their dislike in a nasty, self righteous manner. Marriage is between a man and a woman…we were created with bodies that ‘complement/fit’ each other just as a key is made to fit into a lock - there is a purpose to each thing, there is a purpose to our lives, and for our bodies. We can manipulate bodies so men can have sex with men and women with women but that is not the purpose for which they were formed/created. There are those who want us to accept that adults can have sex with children; there are those who suggest a married person can have multiple partners; those who suggest that adultery is no one’s business etc…it is not unkind to believe that sex outside of marriage or sex between men/men or women/women is not acceptable - we are now living in a pretty much ‘anything goes’ society/culture but the Church founded by Christ does not accept this culture…a culture where a woman can have the life of her unborn baby terminated and no one can stop her - not even the father of the baby.  An underage girl can have an abortion without the knowledge of her parents but a school Nurse can’t given an aspirin without the permission of parents…once we say anything goes, then everything will go…

@Sue (old) + florin:  You would have to be pretty naive to think gay people in a civil union are not having sex.  In fairness, the same can be said of unmarried straight “partners”.  The idea they are only roommates is a fallacy.    Of course it is “their” business until it now has become culturally shoved down our throats and taught as a normal lifestyle in our schools.  Tolerance is one thing.  Demanding an “in your face” approval is another.

New Observer - you are strangely obsessed with whether or not gay people are or are not having sex in their bedrooms…that’s none of your business. That is between them and God…if it’s something done in public, that’s another story; if they are radicals trying to force their way of life on others, that’s another story. There are gay people who are room mates and nothing more…there are co ed dorms where men and women live in the dorm but not all have sex with each other…why are you so obsessed with sex????  Homosexuals and heterosexuals struggle with temptation and many try hard to live chastely…which is not easy is such a sexualized culture…

@florin:  Yes, it is none of my business.  That is, until certain behaviors are demonstrated in public.  Do you also think it’s no business of the church as well?  What do you tell your children when they ask about two men or two women kissing mouth to mouth on the TV?  Even adolescent children innately become uncomfortable because they know something seems wrong.  Do we not have right to protect our children?  How do you react when two men hold hands coming into church?  Do you want the priest to say “That’s really none of my business as a Pastor?”

@floria: I thought you were my friend, but I found your response condescending to an elderly lady of 85. I already know everything you sermonized on, the elderly are not stupid. As to “no one knows what causes it,and they felt, something missing”....yes, something was missing, normal sex feelings. Humans are sexual, thus we propagate, but with gays their brains tell them something different. I was at Duke Univ. Medical Ctr in a waiting room reading abt. this many, many yrs ago. They had a scale and if it was in the center, your sexual feelings were normal, a little to the right and it started to be a little too abnormal on the feminine side and to the left masculine. [just one of thousands of theories] We all know if you move your arm, your brain does it…everything about a human being comes from the brain, so it is very natural to think that if a person is “gay” then there is a ‘disability’ of sorts in the brain or whatever word one wants to use. Anytime the brain is not performing “normal” it is disabled in some way or another. Did you ever notice the eyes of a gay person, yes, they look like “something is missing”.  This family I spoke of, wondered very hard, how come? and they did come up with uncle so and so who was gay….could it be hereditary???  Who knows but the fact is they are different and they do not choose to be different, they were born that way and they are children of God, who created them in the womb. My heart goes out to them and as for the flamboyant ones, they do that on purpose to snub their noses back at non-gays who desecrate them. I know a number of gays and they are not flamboyant and do believe that type makes it harder for the “normal gay person”
How do I equate “I like Catholic people but not their religion” with “I like gays but not their lifestyle.”  When she said it to me,  it was like someone telling me I like you but not your mother. [insult!] If your church means anything to you, then you would take that as an insult also, which I did. [and she was in my home, when she said it.]When you tell a gay person the same thing, you are insulting them. [You are saying, I like you even though you happen to be gay, but I don’t like you having a partner, etc] They cannot help it that they are gay, they can only try to control their sexual feelings…. [if they are Catholic & want to stay in good standing with the Church] Remember, Catholics have to do the same thing with Family Planning, but at least they get to do “it” a few times a month ;o)
@ New Observer: I find it just as repulsive to see hetero couple kissing & pawing one another in public. People today have no respect for how others ...that is the world today…which your children live in…and it up to you to teach them…how to behave. When I was 5 or 6 the big thing was the kidnapping of a child, which scared the living daylights out of me and when I asked my mother if that could happen to me, she said no, we aren’t rich..they only kidnap rich peoples kids. [which was true at the time] There is always an explanation…just be honest with the child and tell them it is wrong to do that in public…Yes, we now live in a culture where everything goes. Keep this in mind: though ‘the Church founded by Christ does not accept this culture’…it was the priests and bishops who have set a bad example by not following the teachings of God. [now our Church is suffering for it]  Children are very observant, have big ears and learn much by example. I know, I was one of them and I always found adults actions and conversations very interesting.  So now I’m sermonizing. ;o)

Upset because gays are holding hands or kissing in public and what do you tell your children?  First of all, don’t lump all gays together. I have neer seen gay men or gay women holding hands or kissing in public except during gay pride parade on tv…which came on the news and it was more than kissing and hugging - it was disgusting! and I feel the same way about heterosexual men and women kissing passionately in public, hands on each others butts etc…this I have seen often…it’s a matter of decency. Never have I seen homosexuals walking into a Church holding hands…there is a radical homosexual agenda aggressively trying to introduce homosexuality and homosexual behavior as natural in elementary school agendas - pushed by Obama’s school czar Jennings…but the majority of homosexual men and women try to live decent lives so please don’t be offended. As for this article - I admire the woman’s courage but am surprised that she was so surprised by Joe Biden supporting gay marriage. As Mother Teresa said (I worked with her in Calcutta, India) ‘If we would kill the baby in the womb, what would we not do. Joe Biden not only supports the killing of the unborn baby in the womb here in our country, he went to a poor country in Africa and told the government there that if they would include abortion rights in their new constitution then the money would flow, if not….all we can do is to witness with our lives the love of Christ…only His love alive in us will draw people out of the darkness of sin while purifying our own selves, always in need of purification..

Does she believe in the death penality like some republicans do?

BG: So, you equate innocent babies in the womb with criminals on death row!! Typical liberal.  And don’t fool yourselves, plenty of Dems. approve of the death penalty.  I don’t but there’s no comparison ... strange that you should make one…very strange indeed.

I felt for years that as a Catholic, I HAD to be Democrat.  Now, many Catholic politicians ARE Republican for the reasons stated.  A member of my church in Virginia Beach is now the governor of Virginia, Bob McDonnel.  There are also many Republicans (Catholic and otherwise) who oppose the death penalty in line with our church teachings.  Many Democrats support the death penalty, including President Obama.  The Republican Party is not perfect, but it better fits me with my Catholic faith.

 

P.S. What do you think about Windows 2012?

@princessanne:  Well, that is changing the subject.  Here is another one: I moved to SC less than a year ago.  I met a Republican who is Baptist and hates the Catholics:  I also met a Church-going Catholic, who will vote for Obama “because she feels sorry for him, no one gives him a chance”. If I speak about abortion, etc. with her, she does not answer.  A friend from the State I used to live in hates Romney for his Mormonism and stated all the weird things they do in their church:  I answered her and reminded her of how John Kennedy a Catholic was persecuted the same way and how some Protestants think we do weird things in church [I personally know abt. this because half my family are protestant]  .....you figure.

Well the President won the Catholic vote by a large margin so I think that settles that.  And for the record it is the Democratic Party, not the Democrat Party, aside from the fact that it is a political epithet and therefore has no place in civil discourse; it is not proper…adjectives are used to modify nouns in the English language.

@Morgan Lerner: I see the English/Grammar teacher has shown up.  Everything on the Internet is shortened. There are more abbreviations than any other place. Most of the time I like Dems & Reps.  You should read the young crowd on Face Book, talk about grammar? Actually one should never say Bush or Obama but President Bush and President Obama in respect for the Office, not the man. Actually the term “Democrat Party” goes back to 1890. Republican are as democratic as the Democrat Party. We live in a Democratic Society here in the U.S.  Big problem back then, and now you bring it up again. Read about it on Wikipedia bloggers, as Mr. Lerner and I did. Meanings change over the years.
[hope my grammar and punctuation marks are okay] ;o)

I prefer to call it the DEMONcrat Party—since they seem to promote that agenda. The Catholic vote? Are you speaking of the ones that go to Church twice a year and ignore most Church doctrine?

A person who belongs to the Democratic Party is called a Democrat] taken from the fact that we have a Democratic form of Government]
A person who belongs to the Republican Party is called a Republican [taken from the fact that the United States is a Republic]

Now that should please everyone.

Morgan,

(Old) Sue has it right.  The word “democrat” or “democratic” is NOT mentioned in the Constitution.  We are a REPUBLIC established “under God.”

As to the Catholic voter who supposedly voted for the culture of death leader, you need to understand that whenever a so-called Catholic openly defies the Church’s infallible teaching - i.e., abortion, he or she automatically excommunicates themself from the Church.  They are no longer part of the Church, even though they like the monaker.  Examples would be Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi, and their heretical followers.  No, real Catholics DID NOT VOTE FOR Omama!

It would be interesting to know how many people refer to themselves or call themselves Catholic in these voter exit polls.  How many can only identify themselves as “Catholic” simply because they were raised as children in a Catholic home yet they have not been in church in 20 years or only go to church at Christmas and/or Easter.  Catholicism is the only church they are able to say belong to because that’s all they know.  This is why the perception of “who is Catholic” is all over the map and non Catholics are mystified about Catholicism when you have so many Catholics voting for politicians holding unbiblical positions like gay marriage and abortion rights.

I AGREE WITH JOHN! No person seriously following their Catholic Faith and its teachings voted for Obama.
However they still like to call themselves “Catholic
” and they give the church a bad name not to mention the scandal…

@casting crowns:  How true…I see it in my own Church on Sunday. A couple living together without marriage and receiving The Eucharist…an adult man playing games on his i-pod all through Mass, even Communion, with his little children sitting next to him….a woman who claimed [to me], that she recites the Rosary every day and reads her Bible, loves her Church, yet told me she voted for Obama, even after I informed her of what Bishop Paprocki said. I have never belonged to a Catholic Church with 2,000 families before and the Reverence during Mass is almost nil. [I am new in this Parish and this is what I personally know/seen] It is so sad. People can say negative things about the “new Mass” since Vatican II but I have lived with it since the beginning [when the Altar was turned around] in two different States and the Mass has always been respectful and beautiful, even the Folk Mass with the guitars. The 23rd Psalm and The Our Father played with guitars was absolutely beautiful.  My personal opinion is that with the past two generations attending college, they have become so liberal being taught by liberal professors, that they started leaving the Church and now the Pastors are afraid to say anything for fear that those who attend would leave. They have become tolerant of almost anything just to keep the people in the Church.
Isn’t that the same thing our Bishops do with people like Biden and Pelosi. It has come down to the local Parishes.

I’ve been a Democrat most of my adult life, worked on political campaigns and served as an Elected Delegate to The Democratic National Convention in 1984 and in 1987 worked on a draft campaign for Al Gore that got me onto NPR’s “All Things Considered”

I am Catholic.

My father was a Democrat all his life and he even ran for elective office twice nearly winning a seat on Boston City Council taking after my Great Uncle Peter who was a City Councilman in Boston.

Up until tonight I had not hear of Ms Nardelli but I am impressed because what she said IS exactly how I feel.

The Democratic Party has left me, not the other way around.
To them, Same sex marriage seems to be more important than anything else including jobs.

That’s why last year I changed my registration to Independent and it was a big decision on my part because I had never thought I could do it permanently but I just may change to Republican.

May 4th:  My family has always been Democrat - I left when I realized they were actively and passionately and consistently making their party an anti-life organization.  This became more obvious at their last convention when they took the name of God out of their agenda and aggressively promoted the killing of the unborn - and Ms. Kennedy even did this while proclaiming: “I am Catholic and I am pro-choice” - Obama has called into his Administration Catholics like Kathleen Sebelius and Joe Biden to stand with him against infants in the womb…to promote his killing agenda. When the Dems. realized that taking God out of their agenda publicly, they had their speaker on the stage ask for a vote to put God back in—and God lost.  They decided to put God back in anyway and their audience booed loudly when they heard this.  After watching Fox News documentary last night about the Gosnell abortuary where he mercilessly killed babies in and out of the womb, where one staff saw a baby who had been delivered into a toilet try to swim to get out - I became more aware than ever that the Dem. anti-life agenda is evil…I always knew this but seeing the face of the horrors of ‘abortion’ made me sick…I could barely watch and I realized that whether an unborn infant’s life is terminated in a sparkling clean facility of an bloody filthy one - that baby is still dead.  And this evil will not stop…evil begets evil, and what Gosnell did is not as rare as people think.  And there is no horror about this from the Dem. Administration - Obama was the only senator to vote AGAINST the born alive infant act which would have mandated care and comfort for a baby who survived an attempt to abort him/her…abortion is the silent, hidden holocaust…now it is becoming exposed for the grotesque evil that it really is. And just as Gosnell killed babies in the womb and outside the womb, so will others - unless people stand together now against this evil, whatever their politics or religion, it will spread to born babies, the handicapped, the elderly. Let’s remember that the founder of Margaret Sanger had one goal - to eliminate the ‘undesirables’ : blacks, Hispanics, the poor and uneducated, handicapped…she did not want them to breed and went to Europe to work with Hitler’s henchmen to learn how to carry out this elimination…the war on women is being carried out by those who aggressively promote the killing of the unborn, telling women it is good for them - it has never been and will never be good for a woman to terminate the life of her child…the baby’s heart stops and the woman’s heart breaks forever…please pray that all may see and understand this and stop the killing…