“Yes You Did”: Fellow Roman Catholics Got What They Asked For
Posted by: bernie in UncategorizedIt is rare to see the clergy of my parish church get spurred into political action for a conservative cause.
My parish tends to be, more or less, slightly to the right of the rest of The Church. For better or worse, right or wrong, legal or illegal, the Catholic Church in America does not officially get involved in choosing one political candidate over another.
Note that I said “officially.” We all know, however, that if there is an illegal immigrant that has committed felonies in the United States who is on the brink of deportation, or a transgendered prisoner in need of a sex change operation at taxpayer expense, you can be certain that a priest or nun in good standing with the Catholic Church will be there right next to the ACLU lawyer, advocating for the candidate who is going to fight for their rights.
Ask if a Republican candidate can come to a women’s guild meeting or simply say “hello” to parishioners in the parking lot after Mass and watch the Church administrator suddenly become a deputized IRS agent. Having run for political office, I know of which I speak.
With regard to issues, such as abortion, however, some leaders in The Church can be quite vocal. Indeed, some brave and courageous church leaders have even gone on record to oppose a particular political candidate because of their beliefs.
Take for example The Most Reverend Archbishop of St. Louis, Raymond Burke, Bishop Joseph F. Martino of Scranton, PA, or Archbishop Chaput of Denver, CO. These men actually had the stones to tell then-Vice Presidential candidate and renowned plagiarist Joe Biden that he would be refused Holy Communion in his diocese because of his consistent pro-abortion positions.
I remember a few years ago reading about Rev. Ed Kavanaugh, who ran St. Patrick’s orphanage somewhere in California. Rev. Kavanaugh refused to allow then-Governor Gray Davis distribute gifts to children at Christmas because of his public stance on abortion. When asked what he would do if a pro-abortion politician would come to his church, he would not allow them in, but politely tell them to “get lost.”
These men stand in stark contrast to the majority of priests and bishops in The Church who claim that they don’t want to “politicize” these issues, or “alienate” their elected politicians, or that there are other important “social justice” issues that are equally important (if not more important,) like union workers rights, so they demand nothing at all from their politicians. They say nothing, except for the occasional limp-wristed request by a liberal bishop to a rogue, fellow- liberal priest to “tone it down” lest they make the hierarchy of the Church appear too leftist.
Point of proof – The Rev. Michael Pfleger is still at his job, still in vocal support of his friend Louis Farrakhan, as pastor of St. Sabina Catholic Church. His comment to his supervisor and bishop after an embarrassingly pathetic two week suspension was, “I’m not going to change.” If you don’t understand his reply, let me clear it up for you. His statement to his supervisor had the same effect as lifting his arm and extending his middle finger to the Church.
Real men in positions of authority in the Church who speak out publicly on the correct side of moral issues, and who aren’t afraid to publicly stand against candidates who support them are rare, and usually end up getting shipped to do mission work in the Sahara desert. Don’t be surprised to see Pfleger in the running for Archbishop of Chicago.
It is rarer, still, to have The Church pushed into a church-wide, organized, and unified action over proposed legislation. Yesterday at Mass, as I attempted to listen to the homily over the distractions of my 5 and 7 year-olds, a sense of disappointment and sullenness came over me. Not because my kids were fighting over a pen and a tithe envelope during the Ordo Missae, but because I couldn’t help but think about how much of this effort to block evil and despicable legislation could have been avoided had more church leaders simply taken a stand on this issue during the campaign season when it really mattered.
Of course, I am talking about the “Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA)” which will codify a woman’s right to kill an unborn child and which would forbid, under criminal penalty, any group or individual’s interference with that right. Not only was the priest at St.Elizabeth Ann Seton railing against it yesterday, I read today that His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI was publicly speaking against it. Every where you look, The Church appears to have been awakened. Unfortunately, it is about three months too late.
By the way, there’s real hope for this Ratzinger fellow, look for more good things to come as long as he leads The Church. But I digress.
How much easier would the battle have been BEFORE ELECTION DAY if the leaders of the Catholic Church had been able to cut through all the empty and meaningless rhetoric of “Yes We Can” at a time when it really could have made a difference?
It was and remains no secret that during the campaign season, then-candidate Barak Obama promised, before God and all, that one of the first things he would do as president would be to remove all present restrictions on abortion and to dramatically increase funding for it. How many Catholics, leaders and lay alike, bought into this nonsense and supported the pro-death Obama candidacy anyway, erroneously believing that his bogus message of “social justice” and support for social and economic programs that help the poor was more important?
The Church has finally felt the stab to its back, thrust there by the sweetheart whom brought it to this dance. It hurts. It especially hurts me to say, “I told you so.” Well, it hurts a little, anyway.
Nationally, fifty-three percent (53%) of so-called Catholics voted for Obama. Staggeringly, forty- four percent (44%) of those who identify themselves as weekly church-going Catholics voted for him, and in so doing, gave tacit approval to this immoral nonsense we are having to fight today.
To those who sat in the pew the Sunday last and listened to the plea by their priest to help fight the pro-death left (of which Obama is their leader) I have to ask you, wasn’t the protection of an unborn human being the most important aspect of “social justice” one could have stood for on election day? Why didn’t you see this coming? Didn’t we tell you so? Now, do you realize that you get what you asked for? Saint Joan of Arc, we need you!
Depressingly, I sat there at the end of Mass, shook my head thinking “to little too late,” and wondered quietly how many Catholics understood that the real opportunity to fight FOCA was at the ballot box in November. Sadly, 53% of the sheep in the pews on Sunday chanted “Yes We Can” in November , but are now symbolically chanting “No You Shouldn’t.” I wonder if they are now thinking about a different slogan, perhaps “No We Shouldn’t Have” with regard to pulling the lever for BHO. I prefer the slogan, “How dumb were we.”
To those who fought the good fight then as well as now, I say Deo Gratias. Our letters to our Senators probably won’t do any good, but maybe our prayers from the pew will.
Entries (RSS)
Bernie – I had almost exactly the same thoughts sitting in St Andrews church in Boulder City on Sunday! I love going to church up in Big Bear where Father Mike gave his parishoners hell after the election. Keep up the good work. Thanks, Chay
Thanks for the kind words, Chay.
I agree with you.We as Catholics DESERVE what we are getting now..Chaos,killing of the unborn and the church just stood by.Pelosi/Biden got away with revolting remarks…Republicans should campaign about this MEDIA very much in love with OBAMA..We chose,(a liberal,disquised as Conservative and we LOST!!!Wake up and boycott liberal newspapers/tv stations..Watcht only Fox news!!!and read WSJ…Thanks
Hello Mr. Chairman,
I still can’t understand why the world has fallen in love with Barack Obama! Especially when his stances on a topic all Catholics should be fiercely against and that is abortion! I too sat in mass this last week when the pamplets and postcards were passed out and wondered why CatholicVote was the only organization fighting to elect a candidate against abortion. I think that the media and the Bush Haters brain washed the voters into thinking that Obama was the best candidate for the job and people didn’t awake until after the new year! By the way, what happened to the Conservative Republican base and the 100 million or so that did not vote for either candidate?
You are doing a great job!
Joseph Ruggeroli
Hello Bernie,
I appreciate all you do for the Republican Party. Here are my thoughts on the issue:
If 53% of Catholics voted for Obama and 44% of weekly church-going Catholics voted for him, does that not sent a message that times have changed and the Republican Party needs to change also? We can and should promote family values, but we are a party that promotes less government and therefore we should stay out of people’s bedrooms and bodies! The term “Pro-death” offends a lot of people who think otherwise, but are still Republicans.
Great! Thank you very much!
I always wanted to write in my site something like that. Can I take part of your post to my blog?
Of course, I will add backlink?
Sincerely, Reader
Reader’s last blog post..От: admin
Thanks for the post Rita, but I couldn’t disagree with you more. When the Republican Party stops standing up for innocent life, I wil leave the party. Protection of innocent life isn’t a slogan, and a Roman Catholic who is true to the Magisterium of the Church has an obligation to defend it. Indeed, the Church teaches Catholics that God has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life and must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. (Gaudium et spes 51 sect. 3) and the Catechism teaches that the inalienable right to life of every innocent human being is a constitutive element of a society that is dependent neither on any individual, parent, or state. It is a right conferred upon a human by virtue of a the creative act. Let’s see, “stay out of people’s bedrooms and their bodies” versus “before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you.” I think I’ll stand and promote the latter.
Thanks again for your comments.
Bernie
Dear “reader:” take what you will to your blog!
Bernie
Bernie I agree with you in regard to the “Holocaust of the Unborn”, as a fellow Christian, volunteer and supporter of Women’s Pregnancy Centers (where women are helped to pick up the pieces of their lives after the experience of abortion) and as a Republican.
God help us all and our beloved country as He ALLOWS us the consequences of our political actions.
Oh, the Republican Party stands up for innocent life? Have I been asleep for the last eight years of the Bush administration? And what about killing innocent Iraqi babies? Or is that kind of Rupblican baby killing ok with your God?
Julie: Wake up from your eight years of sleep. Accusing GB of killing innocent babies is a tactic of the left and it won’t fly on this blog. It’s garbage, and it is laughable to suggest that George Bush targeted babies in the war on terror. You are a fool if you believe so, and you’re a fool if you believe that the Democratic Party stands for innocent life. Are you one of those clowns who would protest our soldiers as being “baby killers?” Because if you would accuse GB of giving orders to kill babies, it follows logically that you would also have to accuse the soldier on the ground in Iraq who received the orders and then acted upon them of the same thing. Is that what you are suggesting, John Kerry, I mean Julie benincasa? Julie!, Julie! wake up! you’ve been asleep for eight years and you’ve got a lot of learning to catch up on.
Furthermore, GB appointed solid conservative Republicans to the Supreme Court bench, who have stood as the last line of defense of the unborn. It is well recognized by legal scholars that the high court is just one vote away from being able to overturn Roe v. Wade, thereby further guarding the sanctity of innocent life. Democrats appoint pro-abortion judges. None of the judges on the Supreme Court who have been appointed by Democrats are pro-life. The choice for me is simple, and if the teachings of “my God” aren’t clear to you, you should probably go read about him.
Dear Bernie,
I have a lot of Catholic friends, strangely enaugh the majority of them are pro-choice. How can that be? They were brought up with the same values as yours, yet their view is that this is a personal and moral issue each person has to deal with. I am not trying to argue who is right about pro-choice (I resent you calling it pro-death) or pro-life, my concern is, is the Republican Party an exclusive “club” for pro-life people only? Is this the most important issue in the platform? I would hope that the most important issue right now should be the ecomomy and how to get Obama out of office in 4 years before he has a chance to ruin this nation (the way he is going, it might be too late by than). That’s what we need to concentrate on, not how to offend the millions of people whose views are different that yours. Let’s stick with our core values, low taxes, small government pro-business and “family values”.
To Julie:
You missed my point which I stated above. Does the Republican party stand for pro-life only and has no tolerance for people who think otherwise?
Hi Rita:
The fact that your pro-choice Catholic friends have views that are contrary to church law is of no consequence to what the law of the church actually is. Your friends can have beliefs about what the church law is that are wrong, it doesn’t change the law. Perhaps they know and understand what the church law is, but purposely reject it? I can’t speak for your friends’ motivations but I do know that Nancy Pelosi and John Kerry tried to argue the point that you are making, which is in essence that individuals have the right to choose for themselves, and they were sternly reminded by many Catholic Bishops, including the Holy Father himself, of what Catholic Doctrine is, and it wasn’t what your friends are suggesting to you that it is. Church leaders had to remind John Kerry and Nancy Pelosi that they cannot even accept communion if they continue to advocate a pro-death position. One need only consult the Catechism of the Catholic Church to find out what The Church Law is; it’s right there in black and white and the point is not debatable. Rita, I’m not a “cafeteria catholic,” I don’t pick and choose which moral doctrine of the church I will choose to believe in and follow, and which one I will reject for myself. As a person of faith in communion with Rome, I don’t have that luxury. That is not a comment upon whether we, as humans, stained with the concupiscense of original sin, from time to time fail to live up to what we believe in. It is a question of Church Doctrine, and the doctrine is VERY clear.
You are free to believe what the most important issue in the Republican party is. If it is the economy for you, great. We can work together on that issue and many of the others. The great thing about being a Republican is that there are many issues that unite us. Nobody ever said anything about “no-tolerance” for other positions. I think it is clear that we do, as a party, tolerate other positions. For me personally, however, standing for the natural right to life on behalf of those who cannot speak for themselves is the most important thing about being a Republican. I’m not concerned one iota about who I offend with my beliefs. I stand behind them 100%. If I offend one or a billion, so be it, I’m not going to lose any sleep over it because at the end of this life, those whom I offend will not stand in judgment of me. I will not change my position so that I can be popular with people who are wrong on this issue. Thanks for the post.
Bernie
Bernie, My friend your original post sounds like you are a bit frustrated! Do not loose heart, we have read the back of the BOOK and we know who wins!
There are many clear differences between Republicans and Democrats that the American people are often just not aware of because of the deliberate intent of the MSM.
When it comes to the issue of Life in the womb the platforms of the Democrat party and the platform of the Republican party stand in stark contrast. One upholds abortion on demand from conception to delivery, the other states that children should be welcomed into life and protected under the law.
But in the years that I have been serving the Catholic Church in the pro-life office, I have come to the realization that this issue is not black and white, in fact there is a spectrum running from pro-abortion to anti-abortion.
On the far left end of the spectrum are the 3-5% I call pro-abortion, those who believe in eugenics, the survival of the fittest (Planned Parenthood, NARAL, NOW, etc) they have no problem with forcing some people to be sterilized or aborted.
The larger group, approximately 42-43% I call pro-choice, I do believe these people for the most part have a misplaced sense of compassion. They fail to see the humanity of the unborn child, and may be unaware of the long term consequences (physical, psychological, and spiritual) to the mother. A large number of these want some kind of restriction on abortion such as only in the case of rape, incest, or the life of the mother.
The next group is approximately 47%, the pro-life people who not only are involved politically (the post card campaign, and thank you to everyone that filled one out!) but also assist with crisis pregnancy centers, diapers and formula for moms in need, maternity homes for women in crisis pregnancies and even providing emotional support through a crisis pregnancy which by definition is a temporary crisis.
And finally the 3% or so that I call anti-abortion, these are people who are simply against but not for anything, not doing anything constructive to reach out to women in need.
Where do you stand?
Doug, For all of your talk about intellectual honesty it is simply scientifically inaccurate.
Human life begins at conception scientifically. If you extract a sample of DNA it is different from either the mother or the father.
At it’s earliest “fertilized egg” stage it has all 46 chromosomes that determine the physical characteristics of this new human life. It is a matter of stages of development just as infant, toddler and teenager are stages of development.
Although I am not a scientist, when I had this debate regarding embryonic stem cell research with a scientist from Johns Hopkins he did not dispute these facts.
In fact it does take both the mother and the father to begin a new life, therefore it is not just a women’s issue, it also affects fathers.
That can be either a positive or a negative as many of the women who come to me for counseling after an abortion have been either coerced into the abortion or abandoned by the irresponsible father.
So there is indeed intellectual dishonesty going on, but it is not from those who defend the most vulnerable human life.
I AM a CATHOLIC! I am also one of those that believe that politics needs to stay out of the CHURCH! The Pope needs to correct the problems of the church. Priests that get politics mixed up with religion need to be defrocked. They are there to be spiritual leaders. NOT telling us how great the DAMNED-O-CRATS are, or hiding their sexual proclivities and then crying foul when they are discovered. I trust no one in politics. The’re virtuosity is suspect immediately. Politicians don’t get elected to serve the people, they get elected to ROB us of our rights. We need to rid ourselves of politicians, and get people elected that care about this nation. We don’t need afro-americans, or mexican-americans, or whatever else they call themselves. WE NEED AMERICANS!
Rita Hickey has me confused as to what she believes when she says “We can and should promote family values, but we are a party that promotes less government and therefore we should stay out of people’s bedrooms and bodies!”, then she adds, ” Let’s stick with our core values, low taxes, small government pro-business and “family values”.”, so then why would Rita want to force American citizens to fund programs such as those mentioned by Kathleen M. “(Planned Parenthood, NARAL, NOW, etc)”?
Rita holds the double standards of the left. Bernie, please tell me how I can help defund these programs. Is there a way to approach local leaders on this to let them know that none of the tax base should help to remove a just LIFE and the liberty that belongs to it? Rita, it’s time to change. Your friends have been propogandized by the double standards of the left. They need your help, now! Help them to know the truth that government needs to back out of our individual liberty.
KT, I guess you are confused. Nowhere in my comments do I mention anything about funding any programs. All I am saying is that the churches have every right to teach and preach what they want. However, the Republican party is not, nor should it be an exclusive club for the pro-life and religious agenda. If we want to win elections, we should get back to the basics: low taxes and small government!
KT, Iguess you missed the point of Rita’s concerns. For us to define family values for others is difficult and presumptuous. As is Bernie, I am A Roman Cathlic. I don’t try to convince my freinds or acquaintances of much more of my beliefs than to be a good person but, I respect those who do at some level. I think Rita’s original posting was an attempt to get back to basics. The Republican Party does not make a doctrine of: no contraception, or no premarital sex,a part of our platforn or list those as the most important issues that should concern Republicans. I think, Rita was trying to say the Party should get back to basics and those are: small government, low taxes strong international relations and core family values. Let the candidates interpret these to their constituency. A wise man once said “A friend is one who has the same enemies as you have.” We need to look carefully at our goals and figure out what is the basic reason why we are not democrats. That same wise man said ” The best way to destroy an enemy is to make him a friend. “
Since 44% of weekly church-going Catholics voted for Obama you may see that the majority of weekly church-going Catholics did not support his candidacy. I am one of them. You ask the Republican party to change based on that statistic. Well, just what changes do you have in mind? One change you wish to see it make is for the term “Pro-death” to be taken out of the debate the Republican Party is holding because the term offends a lot of people.
Your phrase, “We should stay out of people’s bedrooms and bodies!” is also offensive for it is not what the pro-life movement stands for. We can cool the rhetoric and have a civil conversation for the moment, if you agree. The point we do agree on is that we aspire for less government intrusion in our lives and lower taxes which means less government spending and more responsible priorities.
Let us remember that in no uncertain terms that everybody is endowed with the Unalienable Right of LIFE by our Creator. Even in one’s own bedroom, there is no right to deny another of this truth. Programs such as Planned Parenthood, NARAL and NOW are funded with much help from tax dollars and has no right to tamper with this Declaration made for us by our forefather’s. People have given their property, fought for and some have died that we may enjoy this right and the right to remind our leaders of this as well.
I have been with the Republican Party since 1972 and I wish that my fellow republicans would stop changing with the wind but rather continue to uphold our earned legacy.
http://www.ewtn.com/library/BISHOPS/duckfox.htm
Commentary from a few years ago by Archbishop Chaput (pronounced “Shapyoo”) regarding the issue. A good read.
As a Catholic I am all in favor of keeping abortion legal. Those who oppose it are not getting the proper message from it. Each time a woman has an abortion she is making a legal and moral decision. The Supreme Court upheld that a woman has a right to do what she wants with her body, in regards to abortion. Personaly I think that should extend to prostitution as well. Yes we all know that prostitution is morally wrong. However again those who oppose it miss the point, it is a womans body, and if she wishes to use it for immoral purposes, who am I to say she can’t? Yes she may very well catch some hidious STD, but isn’t that her right? Keep abortion legal! That means one less liberal that I will need to take care of, through my taxes.
Thank you NamMP, glad to see I am not the only one who thinks like this. As far as prostiution, I grew up in a country where it’s legal. The government actually makes money on it by collecting taxes and issuing health cards (and the crime associated with it is almost non-existant). What a novel idea!
What really ticks me off is that abortions always have and always will be performed. The only difference is, that once they are illegal, women die.
To KT: How dare you say my phrase “We should stay out of people’s bedrooms and bodies!” is offensive to the pro-life movement. It is very offensive to me that you think you have a right to stick your hypocritical nose into my bedroom and my body!!!!!!
Great arguments in favor of abortion and prostitution.
NOT!
Sorry Rita, but those arguments are so sophomoric and easily refuted. Next, I suppose you would argue in favor of distribution of needles for heroin addicts, since that will keep them from using dirty needles. And hey, the government could tax the needles and sell the heroin, too, and make great money from it, because that’s all we care about as Republicans – making money, right? And why stop there??? Then we should legalize drugs, because, by your logic, we could make a lot of money at it, and we could make it “safe.” And the Republican party and the government and lawmakers should stay out of our bedrooms if we choose to do drugs and stick needles in our arms in the privacy of our own bedrooms also. Yeah! Yeah!
To hell with the notions of morality, human dignity, and respect for life. Those silly notions stand in they way of “basics” which seem to only be less taxes and less government for you. Everything else is just secondary.
All I can say is, thank goodness I don’t live in the county you grew up in. It has serious problems. I’ll take the hypocritical-nose-poking, good ole USA instead. Pardon me if I don’t take your argument very seriously.
Bernie
To all: We have far more pressing issues than abortion and prostitution to worry about. This nation is in a severe depression. We have a Congress that is made up of repressionists that want to liberate us of our Constitutional Rights, and this is the best that Bernie can come up with?
How sad that this is so short sighted. Keep the non-sensical issues alive and to hell with the rest. If you are not concerned with all of the soda-pop news that is being forced down our throats, you should be! If you think micheal jackson is more news worthy, than what is happening on Wall Street, God help us!
NamMP:
Good comeback with the soda-pop news, and Michael Jackson comparisons. Says alot about YOU that you view the sanctity and inalienability of a human being’s right to life (since you have proven youself a bit slow, let me equate these issues for you: the abortion issue), and the denigration of basic human dignity (prostitution) as equal to “soda pop news” and “michael jackson.” I, for one, am capable of chewing gum and walking at the same time. I am also able to “worry” about more than one pressing issue at a time. That is why you find a variety of subjects that I believe are VERY IMPORTANT on this blog, which have included wall street and related issues, such as tax policy. I realize that you are not so capable (by virtue of your pitiful blog responses), so perhaps you should find a little slower blog to post on; This one is way too fast for you. I am capable of responding to and talking about many pressing issues. If you doubt it, read some of the other blogs. If you feel you want to continue to engage in this debate, you’re going to have to do so on an intellectual level that is a little bit higher than what I think you are capable of. Nevertheless, if you want to debate the importance of the abortion and prostitution issues, I’m ready to respond, so “bring it.”
Regards,
Bernie
I recieved your last missive. Say to me in public what you did in private you two bit punk! While I and others served this nation punks like you sat on a deferment. How dare you refer to me as slow! You want a public fight and see just how slow I am? It’s people like you that have a mess of nation! You make a public outcry, but in reality you will stab any one in the back in order for you to gain an inch! You’re no hero although you want every one to think you are. You envy Rush Limbaugh, yet you have neither the talent not the mentality to do what he does! Now who’s slow you two bit punk!?
Bernie,
In my first comments I tried to be polite and respectful towards your views. I respect that your believes are different than mine. It’s not enough that you show no respect for my believes, you are attacking my moral values! How dare you think that my values are less than yours, just because I am not a Catholic and don’t hink the way you do!
Your personal attacks on NamMP are just as pitiful!
In this country, the U.S.of A., we the people have an unalienable right to life for one, of many rights. In the Republican Party, we maintain principles such as this basic one that you seem to have a problem with. I do not see the right to pro-choice anywhere in our founding documents. You say you want to get back to basics so could you explain yourself a little clearer?
I do not want taxpayer’s money spent on agenda pushing organizations such as Planned Parenthood but I am not succeeding in my wish because people like you have such a mass entitlement mentality that is far beyond the reasonable authority of the government we have. I do believe our government exercises unreasonable authority in many ways, particularly through taxation and mandates.
When a woman conceives, her body is not her own. She shares hers with a second life. In fact, she has already shared it with her husband and so beyond her and the baby there is the husband (normally) who she is one with. I am not sure you can say, in that case, that your body is your own. I would like to hear your spouse’s thoughts on that as well.
I love traditional, American values.
NamMP:
I’ll say to you in public what I say on this blog anytime, anywhere. Your weak attempt at a debate on the issues, and then your jump to “two bit punk” only prove my point. I’m laughing at your “deferrment” comment!! You should do your research. I know, too much to ask.
Rita:
I guess we’re even then. Your comment to KT about sticking her “hypocritical nose” into your bedroom are offensive to me, as well. Hypocritical? Really? Why is it that you feel that you can throw invective around calling people “hypocrites” , but shouldn’t be subject to it yourself? You know the old saying, you have to be able to take it if you’re going to dish it out.
As for values that show no respect for unborn, completely innocent human life, well, what can I say. That’s simply not a POSITION I can ever respect, separate and apart from respect for the dignity of the human person. Yes, a position that respects the sanctity of human life, which includes the unborn, IS a morally superior position to one that does not. I make no apologies for this belief. As I told you before. I am unapologetic about my beliefs and I defend them to the best of my ability. But here’s my question to you, why would you engage in this debate on this blog topic, knowing what I wrote, and expect me to take a position that is either contrary, inapposite, or not supportive of my own opinion, and then be offended when I defend my own opinion? I don’t understand that. If you want to talk about tax policy and fiscal responsibilty, positions we presumably agree, then we can stroke each other and talk about how right we are. But don’t expect me to be a shrinking violet on issues we don’t agree.
WOW! If I were a visitor in someone’s home, I would certainly try to be respectful of his or her thoights and would expedt the same in return. I think some of you have forgotten where you are. This is The “World According to Bernie” and if you do not feel welcome, leave; he expresses his thoughts and he is allowed to; he is at home. If you think he is rude to you, leave, he probably doesn’t want you there anyway. I may not agree with some of the words and ideas expressed in some of the posts, but would fight to the death to protect the right of someone to say them. I think the problem with this electronic communication we all now enjoy(?) is that some just use it for fun, some for effect, and some take it to personal. If you don’t like the world according to Bernie, start your own world. Bernie obviously doesn’t want you here.
Bernie,
Look at the top, I never said anything about pro-life or pro-choice in my first comment. I used the term to “stay out of people’s bedrooms”, because I didn’t want to get into a discussion about pro-life (gay marriage falls into that category too).
I totally agree with NamMP, that we have many more pressing issues to worry about than a pro-life or pro-choice debate. We will never agree on this issue, therefore I and many others think that it should not be part of the party platform. The party is not a religious organization.
I will fight and work to keep a women’s right to choose, just as you will fight for the unborn. I just don’t want to fight that battle within the party, especially at this time when we should all be united.
PS: Sure wish Ron Paul would have been our presidential nominee. He is a true Republican!