Pro-life Democrat voting stats on healthcare bill

From Jill Stanek:

# The only pro-life Democrat to change his vote from a yes to a no due to the failure to include the Stupak-Pitts amendment was Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-IL), …. (Lipinski is the congressman for the district in which Christ Hospital, my [Jill Stanek's] former employer, is located. His father, Congressman Bill Lipinski, was a co-sponsor of the Born Alive Infants Protection Act.)

# Other pro-life Democrats who had previously threatened to change their votes from a yes to a no, agreed to an Executive Order reiterating the Senate bill’s accounting scheme in exchange for their votes at the last minute. 20 of the Members who were urged to change their vote from a "yes" to "no" on pro-life grounds, but failed to do so are: Carney (PA), Costello (IL), Dahlkemper (PA), Donnelly (IN), Doyle (PA), Driehaus (OH), Ellsworth (IN), Hill (IN), Kanjorski (PA), Kaptur (OH), Kildee (MI), Langevin (RI), Mollohan (WV), Oberstar (MN), Ortiz (TX), Perriello (VA), Pomeroy (NC), Rahall (WV), Stupak (MI), and Wilson (OH)….

# 19 pro-life Democrats voted against the Senate bill and for the motion to recommit. They are Altmire* (PA), Barrow* (GA), Berry* (AR), Boren (OK), Bright (AL), Chandler* (KY), Childers (MS), L. Davis (TN), Holden (PA), Lipinski (IL), Marshall (GA), Matheson (UT)*, McIntyre (NC), Melancon (LA)*, Peterson (MN), Ross (AR)*, Shuler (NC), Skelton (MO), and Taylor (MS). (* denotes Members with a limited or mixed pro-life voting record.)

# Representatives Costello (IL) and Donnelly (IN) both voted for the Senate bill, but also vote for the motion to recommit.

# Representatives Artur Davis (AL), Lynch (MA), Space (OH), and Tanner (TN) voted against the Senate bill, but also voted against the motion to recommit despite having voted for a similar amendment offered last fall.

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in SESSIUNCULA. Bookmark the permalink.

43 Responses to Pro-life Democrat voting stats on healthcare bill

  1. doanli says:

    Thank you for this, Father.

    I am very upset and angry this morning; I’m praying a lot of Hail Marys!

  2. No such thing as a “pro life” Democrat- never has been, never will be. By joining the Party of Death and Eugenics, their lack of good moral character and lack of principle are clearly demonstrated. Only the “D” after their name matters, period.

  3. Martial Artist says:

    What a sick charade the Executive Order is. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that a statute may not be overturned by E.O. or by regulation. That is why there was a Hyde amendment in the first place—anything less than an amendment would have been of no effect. SCOTUS requires the wording of the legislation, as amended, to explicitly prohibit the expenditure of federal funds for any purpose which is otherwise included in the legislation. Any attempt to use an E.O. prohibit the use of federal funds to pay for abortions given the plain text of the legislation now sent to the President, is null and void on its face, absent a new ruling from the Supreme Court, and I would be willing to wager that the author(s) of this tactic were fully aware of that fact.

    Our own elected government is now determined to implicate each and every taxpayer in the taking of innocent human life. I never thought I would live to see such an abomination. I will be joining doanli in praying.

    Pax et bonum,
    Keith Töpfer

  4. rusti999 says:

    Also remember how the Senate bill got to the House in the first place, with the support of so called pro-life Democratic senators like Ben Nelson and Bob Casey.

    Pro-life Democrats, you can’t count on them when it really counts.

  5. ssoldie says:

    I think the word pro-life is an oxymoron as I have always said I’am Anti-Abortion, kinda lets one know where I stand no,-if,-and, or – buts. Let your yes be yes and your no be no. There is life, there is death.

  6. Peggy R says:

    I called and called Costello. His staff and last week media interviews indicated that Costello opposed the bill. Costello did not join Stupak on the dias. Press reports believed that Costello was still a no. Today’s local paper (Belleville, IL, News Democrat) said that Costello changed his mind at the last minute.

    I called Costello’s office today. The staffer didn’t care too much for having to defend Costello’s vote and lies to the media.

    Pro-life Dems are only pro-life when it doesn’t get in the way of their leftist agenda. A lot of people put a lot of hope in Stupak and are feeling very betrayed today.

    Good on Mr. Lipinski for standing firm.

  7. irishgirl says:

    I am so sick about this.

    I wonder how many of these so-called ‘representatives’ were on the podium at the March For Life in Washington this past January?

    Politicians-you can’t trust ‘em!

    [Mad as you-know-what]

  8. TJerome says:

    When is Nancy Pelosi going to be excommunicated? If not, let’s not waste our time hyperventilating on this issue anymore. The Church’s “leaders” are worthless. Nothing will change except that truly fervent Catholics will become more discouraged and disheartened by the lack of firm direction.

  9. Heather says:

    I’m with you TJerome. However, it’s perfectly obvious why the bishops don’t enforce anything–they are addicting to suckling the government teet. That’s why a few bishops are allowed to speak out, to keep up appearances, while nothing actually gets done. They sold the soul of the American Church for the government dollars.

    Not to rub it in, but there is a reason why the SSPX schools don’t take government money–no government financial aid at St. Mary’s–because when you accept the government dollars, you accept government control. Period.

    You won’t see any real enforcement until they cut the financial cord.

  10. ckdexterhaven says:

    Kildee is the one who announced from the floor yesterday that his priest said it was ok to vote for this bill.

    I’m unsure why the bishops thought their last ditch memo would make a difference. Why would any democratic Catholic lawmaker care what the Bishops say? The bishops (USCCB) said nothing in 08 when Pelosi made her St Augustine comment. They have said nothing as all these Catholics claim it’s ok to vote for a socialist healthcare bill (with or w/out abortion). Sorry, but socialism leads to communism and communism is the enemy of the Church. Communism kills millions. I’m sorry this is so angry. But the bishops can no longer turn a blind eye to Nancy Pelosi and her cohorts in Washington.

  11. ckdexterhaven says:

    Rush just said there may not be a “pro life church anymore, the left is taking over every institution.”

  12. The Astronomer says:

    The mere fact anyone is surprised that at the end of the day, a Democrat is a Democrat is Democrat is a surprise…..’Catholic’ lawmakers fear Nancy Pelosi more than they love Our Lord.

  13. Bryan says:

    Unfortunately, the cravenness of our elected masters knows no bounds. They just proved, in open session, that observation.

    They were successful, in many ways though, in establishing once and for all (unless the sheeple go back to their barbecues and gardens):

    1. Politicians can not be trusted. Like Lincoln said (paraphrased) “the problem with wrestling with a pig is that you get real dirty and come to realize that the pig likes it”. The people who voted for this did what they were told/threatened/bribed to do. Bart Stupak sold out his conscience (if he has one…I’m of the opinion that the first thing that’s jettisoned when you decide to run for office is your conscience) while visibly putting on a greek tragedy show. Lesson learned that in the end, the vote counts, words are worth zippo.

    2. We called the second-previous occupant back of the White House “slick”. Nah, he was a rank amateur compared to this guy. For all his proclivities, Clinton was pragmatic. Obama is a self-absorbed idealogue with an agenda born of indoctrination and perpetual victimhood. There is a difference. One will, when faced with overwhelming odds, consider the opposition and accept compromise. The other will dig their heels in, lecture, cajole, and threaten to get their way, because ‘they know better’. Ya gotta give him credit for that.

    3. In line with #2…he used the structural limpwristedness of our hierarchy to further his own aims. He gave them 99% of what they’ve been whining for since the 60′s. That the other 1% was something that they had to oppose, all the while making them look like fools since the other 99% is something they agreed with…kind of eliminated any of the congresscritters in the Party of Death from considering their points as being worthy of notice. After all…since the 60s…most, if not all of their ‘pastoral letters’ pretty much parrotted the Party Line. So, now you’re all against this? Which side are they on?

    4. Sun Tzu teaches that one of the keystones to ensuring victory is to divide the opponent’s troops by whatever means necessary, even to seducing groups of the other side to oppose their own aims. Statements from the superannuated pant-suit nun brigade anyone? Don’t for a moment think that there was not an intense amount of lobbying and deal making going on there, and the lanyard pulled at the time it was pulled, as a random fluke of nature.

    5. This had to happen now. The election is 8 months away. The majority of the population is ticked at the banality of the whole thing. But…lots of time for damage control in concert with the useful idiots in the MSM. My prediction? Day after election day…the demoncrats will still be in control, albeit with less of a majority. The tendency is to see politicians as scum…but not your own, since it “brings home the bacon for my district”. GRIP: Get Rid of Incumbent Politicians. Of EITHER party. Time to clean house.

    6. It is, once his claw scratches out his name on the bottom of that monstrous piece of legislation, the law of the land. You’ll need a veto-proof majority to override it. And, hidden in the law itself is a section that forbids any future Congress from nullifying the original bill.

    So…we have the beginnings of socialized medicine. From the kind of folks that brought you Social Security (bankrupt), the Post Office (on life support), Amtrak (on life support), FDIC (no comment there), Freddie Mac (ditto), Sallie Mae (ick), and your local DMV.

    St. Michael the Archangel…pray for us.

  14. doanli says:

    When are our leaders here going to publicly rebuke Nancy Pelosi and refuse to give her and her co-horts Holy Communion?

    We need leaders!

  15. kat says:

    ckdexterhaven
    I heard Rush say it too, and he said “nothing is sacred; not the Catholic Church…not anything else…”
    Not that I could ever get on, but i wanted to call him so badly and tell him and his listeners how wrong he is.

    Because the Catholic Church is the Mystical Body of Christ. It IS Sacred; and renegade nuns, bishops, etc. are NOT the Church. And Its Doctrines are holy and Sacred, regardless of what leftist infiltrators try to say.

    The Pope is the Head; anyone who does not uphold Her Faith, Morals, and Doctrine IS NOT CATHOLIC.

    I know, I know…preaching to the choir. But I felt the need to speak up against Rush somewhere, on this issue…

    Our priest spoke yesterday about putting nothing else in our minds for Passiontide but the Passion of Our Lord. I hate that this vote happened last night, because I’m very interested in it all. But I think I’ve got to just shut it all out and keep my peace of soul in preparation for Holy Week and Easter. An agitated soul is what the devil loves. Ultimately we all need to remember, despite all that it looks like, that GOD IS STILL IN CHARGE!

    Sacred Heart of Jesus, we put our trust in Thee.

    Pray, pray, pray.

  16. soutenus says:

    I do not understand how even the pro-abortion people out there could tolerate this bill.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/21/opinion/21holtz-eakin.html

  17. ikseret says:

    Instead of calling it the “Senate” bill, we should call it the “Democrats’” bill since this was ram-rodded on the nation by pro-abortion Democrats intolerant of any differing views.

  18. mattwcu says:

    Abortion aside… Does this bill also fund contraception? I assume it does. Could you imagine if we had Catholic politicians stand against that?

  19. tewter says:

    Remember that Rep. Cao of Louisiana is the one who made all this possible with his vote last fall.

    The bishops of all Dems who voted for this bill need to make a public declaration of their excommunication. They voted publicly for this bill carried on television. It’s time for the bishops to man up.

    Lastly, people are very near-sighted about this death bill. It is not only the babies who will be killed. It will be the disabled and elderly as well.

    We need some health care reform. We do not need the government to design it and legislate it and control it.

  20. ckdexterhaven says:

    Hi kat, I agree with everything you’re saying. I should have said the “AMERICAN” church. The left is trying to take over the American church. They’ll never succeed in bringing down THE Church! We already know how that story ends…

    Rush is right as far as the American church goes. Look at the USCCB’s own list of the recipients of all the CCHD $$. It’s all community organizing groups! Look at the nuns that spoke out in favor of abortion last week. Scary times.

  21. DisturbedMary says:

    I think the UCCB lobby was cooperated somehow with Stupak and his Stupak and his “pro-life” gang in becoming the deciding votes for the healthcalf bill.

    In his memorandum on Sunday at 11:15 to Congressional Aides, Richard Doerflinger wrote: “We’ve consulted with legal experts on the specific idea of resolving the abortion funding problems in the Senate bill through executive order. [When did they know that an EO might be offered? Was it days before Stupak agreed to it?]. We know Members [Stupak et al?] have been looking into this in good faith [some things are not looked into in good faith?], in the hope of limiting [not to eliminate!] the damage done by abortion provisions in the bill. We believe, however, that it would not be fair to withhold what our conclusion was [so the UCCB was thinking of withholding their conclusion. Weren't they helping Stupak? What?] as it may help members in assessing the options before them:”

  22. James the Less says:

    Maybe instead of attacking the Bishops and bemoaning the lack of leadership in the public square, we should all look in the mirror.

    It is easy to say the problem is out there and complain about contradictions.

    BTW, every day a pregnant woman turns a way from an abortion clinic because of
    the actions of a faithful Catholic. Every day faithful Catholics deliver food and
    shelter to moms and babies in need.

    The victory will be won from the bottom up on the street. Despair and discouragement is the work of the prince of lies.

  23. Wayne NYC says:

    Is this the seismic shift that finally matters?
    The pro life sites say this bill will produce
    more misery than Roe v Wade ( also with every
    taxpayer complicit in the deed ).
    Has the time finally come when ALL THIS NATIONS
    BISHOPS DENY THESE DEMOCRAT PRO ABORTS COMMUNION?

  24. Wayne NYC says:

    How many more infants must die before Canon Law
    is followed?

  25. TJerome says:

    James the Less, although I don’t disagree that Catholics should offer assistance, I believe Cardinal George publicly excommunicating a Congressman for voting for this abortion bill would make a lot more impact on the public discourse than you or me. People like Cardinal George have far more to answer to God for on this issue than you or me.

  26. TNCath says:

    And, now, Bishops of the United States, what are you going to do next? Better yet, are you going to start taking your cues from the LCWR? They sure won this round.

  27. bookworm says:

    “An agitated soul is what the devil loves. Ultimately we all need to remember, despite all that it looks like, that GOD IS STILL IN CHARGE!”

    I agree. I went to confession last night, but am struggling again today with feelings of despair and hatred and confusion.

    On one of my favorite conservative blogs today, a commenter actually said — seriously — that he believes conservatives should immediately end all friendships, all commerce, and all social contact with liberals, and treat them with the contempt and hatred they deserve because it is the only way to get them to stop and think about their actions. He even argues that real conservatives should stop giving ANY money to charity because after all, they have nothing left to give now that the government has taken it all away from them, and anyone who works for a charity is just a bleeding heart liberal who deserves no respect. I thought this person was being sarcastic. He wasn’t.

    Yes, I despise the fact that this bill will mean thousands upon thousands more abortions per year, paid for with my tax dollars. Yes, I do want to vote any and all Democrats out of all offices this year to send them a message. Yes, I do think action has to be taken against Catholic individuals and groups who have given scandal.

    But what have we gained if we win back Congress, the White House and the Supreme Court but lose our souls to pride, anger and hatred in the process? How is that pro-life? “I thank thee, Lord, that I am not like the rest of men, liberal, pro-abort, tax-eating, ignorant sheeple, or like that Democrat over there….”

    Also I have to wonder if I’m getting a highly distorted view of the situation since of late I have been reading nothing but conservative and traddie Catholic blogs (I don’t have TV). I have no actual flesh and blood friends, except for my co-workers (who never mentioned a word about healthcare today; I think they are avoiding talking about it because they know it’s so controversial) and my husband (who has no interest in discussing anything political, since “they are all crooks anyway”).

    So tell me… I know this is bad — very bad — and requires serious response and much prayer, but is it REALLY the end of the world, or the end of the Republic, or the end of the Church in the United States as we know it? And if it’s not, do we do others any favor by acting as if it is?

  28. Jerry says:

    “hidden in the law itself is a section that forbids any future Congress from nullifying the original bill.”

    What is the legality of such a stipulation?

  29. kelleyb says:

    God is not finished with us yet. We must pray and renew. We must and strong and be courageous in our faith.
    Father Z, Please advise me. My husband and I have made a pledge to our Bishop for financial support. We will Complete our obligation for this year.
    we want to write the Bishop and explain that we will not support his future projects. until the Bishop begins holding politicians accountable for their public abortion votes, we do not want to donate an additional dime. Can we morally do this? We will continue to support our parish.

  30. AJP says:

    The events of the last 2 years have taught me that, with a few notable exceptions, the American bishops are like many of the laity – Democrats first, Catholics second. As other posters have noted, the bishops have been pushing for the other non-abortion provisions of this bill for 40 years. This combined with the idolatrous slobbering over JFK and RFK, the utter lack of silence on excommunicating politicians, the seamless garmet, the debacle at Notre Dame, the lack of action on dissident nuns, liberation theology, “social justice” replacing the Gospel at the parish level, and so on and so on . . . .

    As far as I’m concerned, the bishops have blood on their hands. Since the late 1960s they’ve chosen to throw the 5th commandment under the bus for labor unions, socialized medicine, the cult of the Kennedys, and white guilt. And look where it has led us.

    Seriously I am at my breaking point with this. Combine this with the sex scandals and it just boggles my mind. I struggle to understand how God can continue to let this happen, especially in light of the indefectibility of the Church. It literally shakes the foundations of my faith – I start to see why some folks become sedevacantists and an old friend of mine became Eastern Orthodox.

    I try to find comfort in looking at the history of the Church and how we’ve overcome lousy leadership in the past. But this is unprecedented. This is so much worse than the corruption of popes and bishops in earlier centuries. Those guys were, at worst, utterly indifferent to the faith and defending it against error. Meanwhile our bishops (with a few notable exceptions) seem to be actively working to support the forces of death, Marxism, and heresy. The worst of the worst Renaissance popes were too pre-occupied with sex to go out a shill for Luther. Seriously, how much worse can it get before we reach the “gates of Hell prevail” stage?

    Kelleyb, continue to support your parish, and support other worthy causes within the Church – especially in your diocese’s area – but do not feel bad at all about not supporting your diocese. Definitely write that letter to the bishop. I am trying to convince my husband to do the same w/our family’s contributions to the local Church. Unfortunately because of where I live and the sensitive nature of my employment situation at the moment, I cannot have a record of my name attached to anything that could be construed as political. Therefore I cannot write a letter to the bishop.

  31. A word’s just a word til you mean what you say…never did I think I’d have the chance to quote a disney song on Fr. Z’s blog. What is the next step…I’m praying for public excommunications.

  32. isabella says:

    I cried myself to sleep last night; in my time zone, I knew the vote result before I went to bed. It was so sickening to wake up this morning to pictures of stupak with obama and the rest of them laughing and hanging out. I don’t know if they are all excommunicated automatically or not, and it seems like a sin against charity to wish for them to be. But . . . I guess I need to go to Confession.

    I still have family in stupak’s district, and my own father didn’t believe him – I wish I had listened to my father instead of the press. Well, I will vote as a Catholic from now on regardless of party. My Congressman voted against the bill, and I wonder if stupak’s so-called coalition ever really existed, except as a red herring to keep naive people like me feeling secure enough not to have a “plan B”. It will be interesting to see what they bribed him with.

    OK, they win for now, and I might be stupid, but God isn’t. Hope we can all still remember this when they come up for re-election. Stupak’s pro-life opponent had over 10,000 new Facebook friends by midnight here, and most of them said on his wall they had donated – specifically because of stupak’s betrayal that gave us obamacare. I don’t vote there any more, but money travels just fine.

    I need a break from politics, seems like they are all just as corrupt as obama. Doesn’t excommunication mean anything any more to these people? I wish the old medieval ceremony still existed; it is chilling.

  33. robtbrown says:

    “hidden in the law itself is a section that forbids any future Congress from nullifying the original bill.”
    What is the legality of such a stipulation?
    Comment by Jerry

    Good question. I would think that only a Constitutional Amendment can do such a thing.

  34. Peggy R says:

    BW: I will pray for you. I understand your situation. We do need to be wise as serpents, but charitable. How about your fellow parishioners? Meet one for coffee or lunch maybe…

    isabella: I feel like an idiot too for believing what the newspapers said about my congressman’s position. He didn’t have the guts to stand on the dias with Stupak to inform the public of his change to yes.

    Gateway Pundit had a story of Stupak, Costello and others of their coalition boozing it up celebrating Sunday night. They’ve made a pact with the devil.

    AJP: YOu are quite right about the past 50 years, the Kennedy adulation, the continued tie with the Dems. The bishops need to think more about what Abp. Burke said calling the Dems The Party of Death. What are they not trying to kill these past 2 years: private transactions, businesses, babies, sick and elderly, future economic growth, political freedom, Israel…

  35. John 6:54 says:

    There are 89 reps who are Catholics who voted for this abomination. Where are the Bishops?
    Only 9 Catholic Democrats voted against the bill. Where is the outrage?

    YES VOTES from “catholic” Democrats
    Joe Baca, California
    Xavier Becerra, California
    Timothy H. Bishop, New York
    John Boccieri, Ohio
    Robert Brady, Pennsylvania
    Michael E. Capuano, Massachusetts
    Dennis A. Cardoza, California
    Christopher P. Carney, Pennsylvania
    William Lacy Clay, Missouri
    Gerald E. Connolly, Virginia
    Jim Costa, California
    Jerry F. Costello, Illinois
    Joe Courtney, Connecticut
    Joseph Crowley, New York
    Henry Cuellar, Texas
    Kathy Dahlkemper, Pennsylvania
    Peter DeFazio, Oregon
    William D. Delahunt, Massachusetts
    Rosa L. DeLauro, Connecticut
    John D. Dingell, Michigan
    Joe Donnelly, Indiana
    Michael F. Doyle, Pennsylvania
    Steve Driehaus, Ohio
    Brad Ellsworth, Indiana
    Anna Eshoo, California
    Kirsten E. Gillibrand, New York
    Charlie Gonzalez, Texas
    Raul M. Grijalva, Arizona
    Luis V. Gutierrez, Illinois
    John J. Hall, New York
    Phil Hare, Illinois
    Brian Higgins, New York
    Maurice D. Hinchey, New York
    Ruben Hinojosa, Texas
    Paul Kanjorski, Pennsylvania.
    Marcy Kaptur, Ohio
    Patrick J. Kennedy, Rhode Island
    Dale E. Kildee, Michigan
    Mary Jo Kilroy, Ohio
    Ann Kirkpatrick, Arizona
    Dennis J. Kucinich, Ohio
    James R. Langevin, Rhode Island
    John B. Larson, Connecticut
    Ben Ray Lujan, New Mexico
    Dan Maffei, New York
    Betsy Markey, Colorado
    Ed Markey, Massachusetts
    Eric Massa, New York
    Carolyn McCarthy, New York
    Betty McCollum, Minnesota
    James P. McGovern, Massachusetts
    Jerry McNerney, California
    Michael H. Michaud, Maine
    George Miller, California
    Harry E. Mitchell, Arizona
    James P. Moran, Virginia
    Patrick J. Murphy, Pennsylvania
    John P. Murtha, Pennsylvania.
    Grace F. Napolitano, California
    Richard E. Neal, Massachusetts
    James L. Oberstar, Minnesota
    David R. Obey, Wisconsin
    Frank Pallone, New Jersey
    Bill Pascrell, New Jersey
    Ed Pastor, Arizona
    Nancy Pelosi, California
    Tom Perriello, Virginia
    Charles B. Rangel, New York
    Silvestre Reyes, Texas
    Ciro D. Rodriguez, Texas
    Lucille Roybal-Allard, California
    Tim Ryan, Ohio
    John T. Salazar, Colorado
    Linda T. Sanchez, California
    Loretta Sanchez, California
    Jose E. Serrano, New York
    Joe Sestak, Pennsylvania
    Carol Shea-Porter, New Hampshire
    Albio Sires, New Jersey
    Hilda L. Solis, California
    Bart Stupak, Michigan
    Ellen Tauscher, California
    Mike Thompson, California
    Paul Tonko, New York
    Nydia M. Velazquez, New York
    Peter J. Visclosky, Indiana
    Diane E. Watson, California
    Peter Welch, Vermont
    Charles A. Wilson, Ohio

  36. John 6:54 says:

    I posted in a hurry above with the list. Rep Jack Murtha is obviously dead and did not vote. I pull the 9 Catholic NO votes out of the list and forgot about the dead guy, although had Jack been alive to cast his vote I’m sure he would be in the yes vote company.

    Looks like there are plenty of Bishops who can and should publically rebuke those Catholics who voted for this.

  37. catholicmidwest says:

    Are there really any pro-life democrats? I’m not sure there are. I think all of them would betray their grandmothers for a vote or two. It’s just how politicians (not to mention lawyers!) are.

  38. Heather says:

    Does Bigfoot really exist? Of course not. There is no such thing as Bigfoot. All sightings are a figment of the imagination. Ditto for the so-called “pro-life Democrat”.

    Let them be anathema!

  39. catholicmidwest says:

    They won’t, John 6:54. They don’t rebuke them for anything no matter what they do. So they keep doing it.

  40. catholicmidwest says:

    Is Stupid Stupak even Catholic?

  41. catholicmidwest says:

    I’m starting to think something really old-fashioned. The goal of religion is to know and love God and your fellow man as you find him, but mostly God, just like Scripture says.

    I think that the rest of this–politics and all–is just a pile of distractions from that goal. I even think that the goofiness of the bishops might be distractions from that goal. I think Catholic hospitals are a distraction from that goal. Ditto Catholic schools, the way they run now (or not). Seriously, our bishops have acted like idiots for years, but that doesn’t have to stop a person from striving for holiness.

  42. Wayne NYC says:

    Stupak is a catholic…today he attacked the US
    bishops as a bunch of hypocrites for calling into
    question obama’s executive order…and just to
    rub salt in the wound he defended Planned Parenthood.
    That said…the “distraction” of politics and the
    “goofiness’ of bishops has resulted in the deaths of
    fifty million unborn human beings. Saving these
    little ones is the unhappy vocation of anyone who
    calls themselves catholic.

  43. catholicmidwest says:

    You sure he’s still a catholic, Wayne? Or an ex-catholic?