| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"james g. keegan jr." |
| Date: |
13 Jul 2004 10:13:21 PM |
| Object: |
Church is playing politics |
By Rev Andrew Greeley, SJ
printed in the New York Daily News, Tuesday, May 4th, 2004
There is currently a discussion among some Catholic bishops about refusing
the sacraments to Democratic Sen. John Kerry for not opposing abortion,
thus doing the Republican National Committee's work for it.
But the Pope and the national hierarchy also have condemned the death
penalty and the war in Iraq. Are these bishops willing to deny the
Eucharist to Catholic politicians who support the death penalty or the Iraq
war? And if not, why not?
Moreover, will they tell Catholics that it is a sin to support an unjust
war and to vote for a candidate who is responsible for such a war? And,
again, if not, why not?
I can think of a couple of reasons. First, denouncing abortion will get you
attention in the Vatican. Attacking the death penalty and the war are not
likely to promote your career. Second, the rules are different for
Democrats and Republicans. It is curious, to say the least, that 30 years
after Roe vs. Wade, the issue of denying the sacraments would be raised
during this election year.
Bishops also threaten political leaders who support civil unions between
homosexuals. Given their tolerance for sexual abusers in the priesthood,
that looks a bit hypocritical. I have never heard any of them criticize gay
bashing. Followers of Jesus cannot tolerate hatred of anyone, especially
since the church now teaches that the homosexual condition is not freely
chosen.
Finally, some bishops have doubts about permitting women to participate in
the washing of feet during the Holy Thursday services. These men will
tolerate women distributing Communion only when it is absolutely necessary.
They are uneasy about females serving Mass. Such sentiments doubtless also
will promote their careers. Yet, unless I've missed it, they haven't spoken
out against rape. It is estimated that 12% to 13% of all women are victims
of rape in this country. Why is the Catholic Church so silent on the
subject? Why do Catholic leaders seem unaware of just how routine the abuse
of women is, not merely at the service academies and in the military and on
college campuses, but everywhere in our society? Why are they so obsessed
with keeping women out of the sanctuary and so uninterested in the constant
danger of their violation?
I realize that church leaders from Peter and his colleagues on down have
not been all that brilliant or all that courageous. I understand that with
some exceptions the current crowd is not much better. At least Peter and
his bunch had the decency to apologize. Those in the current crowd don't
apologize that much and, when they do, their words lose credibility because
of their actions (such as the current campaign led by Edward Cardinal Egan
to undercut the American bishops' National Review Board for the Protection
of Children & Young People, a campaign that can only convince Catholic
parents that their children are not safe on church premises).
I subscribe to the consistent ethic of life that the late Joseph Cardinal
Bernardin enunciated some years ago. I believe abortion is wrong. I believe
the death penalty is wrong. I believe preemptive war is wrong. I will take
seriously the "pro-life" enthusiasts when they are ready to protest against
and denounce the death penalty. I will take them seriously when they also
denounce criminally unjust wars.
.
|
|
| User: "Honey" |
|
| Title: Re: Church is playing politics |
14 Jul 2004 01:32:48 PM |
|
|
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message news:<Xns9525EC3B111DCkeegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4>...
By Rev Andrew Greeley, SJ
printed in the New York Daily News, Tuesday, May 4th, 2004
There is currently a discussion among some Catholic bishops about refusing
the sacraments to Democratic Sen. John Kerry for not opposing abortion,
thus doing the Republican National Committee's work for it.
Maybe they are learning their lesson for not publicly denouncing
Hitler?
But the Pope and the national hierarchy also have condemned the death
penalty and the war in Iraq. Are these bishops willing to deny the
Eucharist to Catholic politicians who support the death penalty or the Iraq
war? And if not, why not?
This is not Biblical. The death penalty was established by God in
several instances. The problem is we do not follow the stringent
guidelines that were laid out in Mosaic law. We follow some, but
not all. For instance a person should not be condemned on circumstantial
evidence.
Moreover, will they tell Catholics that it is a sin to support an unjust
war and to vote for a candidate who is responsible for such a war? And,
again, if not, why not?
Who says it is unjust? Saddam Hussein gassed his own people, invaded
a neighbor country that was peaceful, and has been trying to obtain
WMD. He transported most, if not all, of it to Syria. Saddam is a bad
boy.
I can think of a couple of reasons. First, denouncing abortion will get you
attention in the Vatican. Attacking the death penalty and the war are not
likely to promote your career. Second, the rules are different for
Democrats and Republicans. It is curious, to say the least, that 30 years
after Roe vs. Wade, the issue of denying the sacraments would be raised
during this election year.
Bishops also threaten political leaders who support civil unions between
homosexuals. Given their tolerance for sexual abusers in the priesthood,
that looks a bit hypocritical. I have never heard any of them criticize gay
bashing. Followers of Jesus cannot tolerate hatred of anyone, especially
since the church now teaches that the homosexual condition is not freely
chosen.
That is a lie. I choose to do an action. I recommend studying Romans 1.
Reject God -> rebrobate mind -> homosexuality.
Finally, some bishops have doubts about permitting women to participate in
the washing of feet during the Holy Thursday services. These men will
tolerate women distributing Communion only when it is absolutely necessary.
They are uneasy about females serving Mass. Such sentiments doubtless also
will promote their careers. Yet, unless I've missed it, they haven't spoken
out against rape. It is estimated that 12% to 13% of all women are victims
of rape in this country. Why is the Catholic Church so silent on the
subject? Why do Catholic leaders seem unaware of just how routine the abuse
of women is, not merely at the service academies and in the military and on
college campuses, but everywhere in our society? Why are they so obsessed
with keeping women out of the sanctuary and so uninterested in the constant
danger of their violation?
1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus. These are the books which describe how to
run a church. You should study them carefully.
Yes it is sad that women are abused. Abortion creates a climate of being
able to use women for sex without birth control and without concern for
the consequences, like pregnancy, child support, actually marrying her, etc..
Abortion availability demeans women, and yes tends to encourage men to
use women as sex objects. Many famous sports figures have killed their
girl freinds when they refused to have an abortion.
I realize that church leaders from Peter and his colleagues on down have
not been all that brilliant or all that courageous. I understand that with
some exceptions the current crowd is not much better. At least Peter and
his bunch had the decency to apologize. Those in the current crowd don't
apologize that much and, when they do, their words lose credibility because
of their actions (such as the current campaign led by Edward Cardinal Egan
to undercut the American bishops' National Review Board for the Protection
of Children & Young People, a campaign that can only convince Catholic
parents that their children are not safe on church premises).
I subscribe to the consistent ethic of life that the late Joseph Cardinal
Bernardin enunciated some years ago. I believe abortion is wrong. I believe
the death penalty is wrong. I believe preemptive war is wrong. I will take
seriously the "pro-life" enthusiasts when they are ready to protest against
and denounce the death penalty. I will take them seriously when they also
denounce criminally unjust wars.
You cannot beleive God, and be against the death penalty. To equate the
death penalty for a hardened criminal, and a child who has not been born yet
is a sick perversion of logic. Justice requires punishment. You cannot love
the victim, and not punish the criminal. Sometimes that punishment is death.
You pro-death people kill me. You oppose killing a mass murderer, but
support killing an unborn child. What kind of incongrous logic do your
use to arrive at your conclusions? Then you say I am illogical for
wanting to protect the innocent (unborn) and punish the guilty? Do
you know what double minded means?
David pre-emptively attacked the philistines. So I am supposed to condemn
King David? Do you deny that Saddam Hussein is a mass murderer, gassed,
tortured, and oppresed his own people? Do you deny that he paid the families
of palestinians that blew themselves up in terrorist atacks $50,000? Do
you deny that Saddam had nerve agents, and used them on his own people?
When people do not use facts to formulate their opinions, you cannot
use facts to convince them otherwise since facts are irrelevant to
their opinions.
---
Do not respond to this e-mail address it is an account created to catch SPAM.
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: Church is playing politics |
15 Jul 2004 07:43:28 AM |
|
|
(Honey) wrote in
news:f6854a9b.0407141032.4e34be06@posting.google.com:
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message
news:<Xns9525EC3B111DCkeegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4>...
You pro-death people kill me. You oppose killing a mass murderer, but
support killing an unborn child. What kind of incongrous logic do your
use to arrive at your conclusions? Then you say I am illogical for
wanting to protect the innocent (unborn)
those who favor the unborn over the rights of a woman consider women as
nothing more than breeding stock.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Krusty" |
|
| Title: Re: Church is playing politics |
16 Jul 2004 09:52:10 AM |
|
|
(Honey) wrote in message news:<f6854a9b.0407141032.4e34be06@posting.google.com>...
"james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com> wrote in message news:<Xns9525EC3B111DCkeegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4>...
By Rev Andrew Greeley, SJ
You cannot beleive God, and be against the death penalty. To equate the
death penalty for a hardened criminal, and a child who has not been born yet
is a sick perversion of logic.
Like you pervert "Thou shalt not kill"?
Justice requires punishment. You cannot love
the victim, and not punish the criminal. Sometimes that punishment is death.
So, you're just another cafeteria christian who picks and choose the parts
of the Bible you support?
You pro-death people kill me. You oppose killing a mass murderer, but
support killing an unborn child. What kind of incongrous logic do your
use to arrive at your conclusions?
Your God's logic. After all, your God states "Thou shalt not kill" but
he himself kills millions of innocent unborn children, every year,
UNNECESSARILY. You pro-lie people kill me. Aint hypocrsiy a *****, sweetie?
Then you say I am illogical for
wanting to protect the innocent (unborn) and punish the guilty? Do
you know what double minded means?
You mean two-faced, and yes, you are. How else can you rail against
abortion and support a god who murders millions of innocents every year?
When people do not use facts to formulate their opinions, you cannot
use facts to convince them otherwise since facts are irrelevant to
their opinions.
I can only hope that you'll understand you are talking about yourself.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Soeur Felicienne Angelica" |
|
| Title: Re: Church is playing politics |
15 Jul 2004 03:51:09 PM |
|
|
(Honey) wrote in message news:<f6854a9b.0407141032.4e34be06@posting.google.com>...
Honey, your post above was right on target. However, let me warn you
about what you're up against in these political newsgroups. As I'm
sure you're aware, just about every major social problem we now have
in this country can be traced directly to liberal policies and
attitudes. That and the complete jettisoning of the Judeo/Christian
ethic which served us so well in the past. They have systematically
ripped away the moral fiber of this once great country and have amde
"victims" of those whose vote they seek by way of maintaining
political power over the rest of us. This explains why they hate
religion so, because "victims" are hard to find in their ranks. Even
though they fail from time to time, they generally take responsibility
for their errors and misjudgements. In this connection you'll note
that by definition a liberal cannot be called a hypocrite. Quite a
system they have going here.
But here's the kicker, Honey. Liberals will never, ever, ever own up
to even their own current beliefs, much less the profound damage
they've done in the last 40 years. They deny everything. Nope, not us.
Uh, we didn't cause that. We should call these people the Where's
Waldo Party, not democrats.
And as if this isn't bad enough, there's only about three posters in
here who have ever expressed an original thought or put together a
coherent paragraph. What you can expect to any well-crafted post are
coarse insults from the Tommy and Tabitha one-liners in here. One
wonders why they even bother to post in these groups considering the
drivel they paste up in here.
Good luck - you'll need it. That and a thick skin. You are about to
experience a level of stupidity you never dreamed could exist. And
they vote, too!
Soeur Felicienne Angelica
.
|
|
|
| User: "james g. keegan jr." |
|
| Title: Re: Church is playing politics |
15 Jul 2004 05:24:05 PM |
|
|
(Soeur Felicienne Angelica) wrote in
news:a6287946.0407151251.6415aca9@posting.google.com:
Honey, your post above was right on target. However, let me warn you
about what you're up against in these political newsgroups. As I'm
sure you're aware, just about every major social problem we now have
in this country can be traced directly to liberal policies and
attitudes.
are you claiming that your blatant lie contained in the article below is
the result of "liberal policies and attitudes?"
for readers who may not know, the person now posting as Soeur Felicienne
Angelica previously posted under many, many other user names including the
one shown below. apparently when one of her usernames gets caught in too
many blatant lies, she begin to post under a different name.
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Didn't you know? Pregnancy doesn't cause a bleeding uterus
either.
From: "james g. keegan jr." <keegan@nycap.rr.com>
References: <ja6wb.284807$Tr4.876082@attbi_s03>
<vs5kg6hk3g3v9e@corp.supernews.com>
<1dc521ed.0311250855.3fa5d67b@posting.google.com>
Organization: t.s.a.k.c.
Message-ID: <Xns943ED0EA446A7keegannycaprrcom@24.24.2.166>
User-Agent: Xnews/06.07.17
Lines: 17
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 01:32:15 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.29.53.83
X-Complaints-To:
X-Trace: twister.nyroc.rr.com 1069810335 24.29.53.83 (Tue, 25 Nov 2003
20:32:15 EST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 20:32:15 EST
LetEmEatWMDs@yahoo.com (Marie A.) wrote in
news:1dc521ed.0311250855.3fa5d67b@posting.google.com:
Uh, sir/madam, please keep top posting! It will get your
comments read as opposed to them being buried six pages deep
into a thread nobody is going to bother scrolling down into.
Those who complain about the practice, like this Keegan twit,
also complain about snipping
since i have been posting in this newsgroup since it was created,
you should be able to find one instance of my complaining about
snipping, right?
of course if you are just blatantly lying again, you need not
respond with such evidence.
*chuckle*
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Attila" |
|
| Title: Re: Church is playing politics |
14 Jul 2004 06:18:42 AM |
|
|
On 14 Jul 2004 03:13:21 GMT, "james g. keegan jr."
<keegan@nycap.rr.com> in alt.abortion with message-id
<Xns9525EC3B111DCkeegannycaprrcom@130.133.1.4> wrote:
By Rev Andrew Greeley, SJ
printed in the New York Daily News, Tuesday, May 4th, 2004
There is currently a discussion among some Catholic bishops about refusing
the sacraments to Democratic Sen. John Kerry for not opposing abortion,
thus doing the Republican National Committee's work for it.
Of course it is. The RCC historically ran most of Europe for hundreds
of years by doing exactly this and power is hard to give up.
If they ever stop telling their followers how and what to think in
every aspect of their lives the organization runs the risk of having
independent thought appear, which it can not and will not tolerate.
.
|
|
|
|

|
Related Articles |
|
|