Obama the Theologian invokes Christ while endorsing unnatural sexual acts, same-sex “marriage”. Fr. Z rants.

Please use the sharing buttons!  Thanks!

With the endorsement of the amendment for the State Constitution of North Carolina, I thought that the true “ground zero” for the same-sex debate would now be Minnesota.  It will also now be every ballot in every state in November.

From FNC:

President Obama on Wednesday endorsed same-sex marriages, becoming the first sitting U.S. president to take that position following days of speculation about his “evolving” stance on the issue.
The president used a hastily called TV interview to make his position clear.
“At a certain point, I’ve just concluded that for me personally, it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same-sex couples should be able to get married,” Obama told ABC News.

[…]

BUT WAIT… THERE’s MORE.

In endorsing unnatural sex, Obama invoked Christ’s Sacrifice on the Cross.

“This is something that, you know, [Michelle and I have] talked about over the years and she, you know, she feels the same way, she feels the same way that I do. And that is that, in the end the values that I care most deeply about and she cares most deeply about is how we treat other people and, you know, I, you know, we are both practicing Christians and obviously this position may be considered to put us at odds with the views of others but, you know, when we think about our faith, the thing at root that we think about is, not only Christ sacrificing himself on our behalf, but it’s also the Golden Rule, you know, treat others the way you would want to be treated…”

Christ’s Sacrifice?  The “Golden Rule”?

Christians understand that both are reflections of sacrificial love, charity, the former the ultimate example of the God man, the later human and earthly which echoes the former (cf. Luke 10:25-28).

Obama instrumentalized the Lord’s Sacrifice, the ultimate act of the love which is charity, to promote unnatural sex and the overturning of one of our most important societal bonds.

We, according to charity, must act for the true good of the other. It is not for the true good of another person to help them to sin or to undermine Christian morals.  But that is exactly what Obama is doing. This is an astounding example of both scandal and blasphemy.   It is beyond absurd to to invoke the Lord’s Sacrifice in an attempt to violate our human nature and God’s laws.

Obama invoked the Sacrifice of the Cross for the sake of justifying the destruction of the definition of “marriage”, as if that is “good” for people.  It is NOT for the good of anyone, because it promotes and condones a sin that cries to heaven.

We cannot wish that people sin.
We cannot help them sin.
We cannot tell them that sin is good.
We cannot give them the means to sin so that they will sin.
We cannot defend the sins of others.

In charity, we must treat people with the affliction of sex-sex attraction according to their God-given dignity.  In charity, we can NEVER condone their sinful acts.

It is the sin that we repudiate, not the people.

It can NEVER… NEVER be an act of Christian charity to call evil acts good, or to condone them, or to say that they are acceptable, or publicly to undermine morals that stem from our human nature.  It can NEVER… NEVER… be a matter of “Golden Rule”, which is rooted in the true sacrificial love which is charity, to promote a change in the definition of marriage so that “same-sex marriage” can be marriage’s equivalent in any way.

What the President did was vile.  Even though everyone knew that was his position, how vile to hear it framed in that way, publicly given voice.

He is an embarrassment to the United States.  He is actively tearing at one of society’s most important social bonds. What he did is harmful to our country and to every citizen of every age, even those of same-sex attractions.  It was NOT a reflection of either charity or the Golden Rule in any Christian sense.   The Golden Rule does NOT mean “you do what you want and I’ll do what I want”.

Pres. Obama MUST be voted out of office.

St. Augustine teaches about charity, about real love, in his commentaries on the First Letter of John.  Augustine describes three kinds of love.  He explains that the greatest way of earthly love is enemy love, true charity for those who wish you ill and harm you.

I pray that I will be able to come to this sort of charity, in which I – may God have mercy on me and give me grace- fail so very often.

UPDATE:

In other new, Life News reports that a horrible case of church vandalism in Portland was claimed by a group called “Angry Queers”.

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in One Man & One Woman, Our Catholic Identity, Religious Liberty, The Drill, The future and our choices, Wherein Fr. Z Rants and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

86 Responses to Obama the Theologian invokes Christ while endorsing unnatural sexual acts, same-sex “marriage”. Fr. Z rants.

  1. “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”

    I sure hope that if I were involved in actions that risked my temporal well-being and eternal salvation, others have the CHARITY to tell me the truth, not urge me on in fostering the destruction of my body and soul.

    God help us.

  2. Augustin57 says:

    Obama, as we say so exquisitely here in Alabama, is as dumb as a sack of hammers. [I think that is not, in fact, the case.]

    If someone hadn’t invented a teleprompter, he would have never been elected to office.

    I still can’t believe someone like him got elected in this country. It’s surreal!

  3. Midwest St. Michael says:

    Augustin57 says (in part):

    “…is as dumb as a sack of hammers.”

    With apologies to the hammers, Gus? ;)

    How many “you knows” did we count in that little snippet? Six!

    “If someone hadn’t invented a teleprompter, he would have never been elected to office.”

    No doubt! The man sounds like a teen-ager trrying to explain something he has no clue about.

    Yes indeed EtVerbum – God help us.

    MSM

  4. Clinton R. says:

    Obama is such a hateful and arrogant man. The audacity of him justifying his approval of the abomination of homosexuality by invoking the Lord is revolting. True love is to love God and to please Him. Pandering to the to vulgar desires of the masses is to please the prince of this world. May Obama’s heart be softened. There will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth when Our Lord comes again.

  5. I am sure that many so-called Christians on the left are rejoicing. Lord have mercy.

  6. Tim Ferguson says:

    a sad day for our country

  7. Philangelus says:

    Pray for his soul. We don’t have to feel charitable to ask God to bless our president and bring our president closer to Him in whatever way God wants his soul to benefit.

  8. plemmen says:

    Amen, Father Z. I have consistently written about the influence of the cultural Marxists and their effect on our society and nation, being the major cause of the death of America as a moral force in the world. I see the fine hand of Satan behind all the evil and sinful policies and choices being made and foisted on not only our political and societal lives, but our spiritual journey as well. Think of all the scandals, the blasphemies and the scandals affecting our nation and our Church. Trace them back, through the deluded and venal human fronts, back through the cultural Marxists in our media/entertaiment and government , back through their professors, back to Satan himself. I ask the Blessed Mother to intercede for us, the poor battered children of Eve, wailing and weeping in the vale of tears! Deliver us Lord, Hear the cry of your children!

  9. EXCHIEF says:

    The Great Pretender can’t string two consecutive, coherent sentences together but sometimes his stumbling and bumbling is worse than others. It seems no coincidence that when he goes off the reservation morally or alleges that he is christian the stammering becomes more pronounced. No matter. His lips are moving so it is clearly all a lie.

  10. aviva meriam says:

    In a weird way, I’m grateful he “came out of the closet” regarding his true beliefs. Now there is much less doubt of what he believes and therefore no excuse for supporting him in November.

    I am sad (and highly concerned) for our country.

  11. Supertradmum says:

    It is all on the news here in Europe He has done this for votes, and ruined our efforts here. God have mercy

  12. BaedaBenedictus says:

    Obama could argue that he has just come around to the view shared by a majority of American Catholics.

    Lord have mercy. Satan has us Catholics and Christians in general destroying ourselves as the dark secular forces close in on every side.

    Very apropos for now, I think:

    Until modern times no thinker of the first rank ever doubted that our judgements of value were rational judgements or that what they discovered was objective. . . . The modern view is very different. It does not believe that value judgements are really judgements at all. They are sentiments, or complexes, or attitudes, produced in a community by the pressure of its environment and its traditions, and differing from one community to another. To say that a thing is good is merely to express our feeling about it; and our feeling about it is the feeling we have been socially conditioned to have.

    But if this is so, then we might have been conditioned to feel otherwise. “Perhaps,” thinks the reformer or the educational expert, “it would be better if we were. Let us improve our morality.” Out of this apparently innocent idea comes the disease that will certainly end our species (and, in my view, damn our souls) if it is not crushed; the fatal superstition that men can create values, that a community can choose its “ideology” as men choose their clothes.

    C.S. Lewis, “The Poison of Subjectivism”

    (full text of this prophetic essay, written almost 70 years ago, here: http://www.philipfiles.com/Articles/Truth-PoisonSubjectivism.htm)

  13. Supertradmum says:

    Bad things are happening very fast here. Obama’s moral collapse mirrors the financial collapse of Greece, Spain and the new era of communism. He is part and parcel of the death of the West. His timing of this blasphemy is not an accident or coincidence. Texting

  14. frjim4321 says:

    I was very surprised that President Obama endorsed marriage equality today. Frankly, I thought that he would save this for his second term. Whether a person opposes or favors marriage equality, I would think most would agree that this was a gutsy move.

    I would certainly agree with those who would suggest that this announcement followed a very careful political analysis. Polls show that more voting-aged U.S. citizens favor marriage equality in 2012 than did in 2008. But does that equate to a majority of actual voters? Politically, this is a very b@@@@y move. I don’t know if this exactly took courage, but certainly it took a lot of nerve.

    Personally I do believe that U.S. citizens should not be denied constitutional rights on the basis of their sexual orientation. At the same time I do support the right of the bishops to determine how the church itself will regulate ecclesiological marriage. I do believe their authority does not extend to interpreting the Constitution of the United States. [Personally, I believe that man’s laws should reflect the laws of nature and of nature’s God. Calling a sexually active same-sex relationship the equivalent of marriage is a lie.]

    Pastorally I know the agony of parents and grandparents who are trying to love and support their children and grandchildren who have discerned a homosexual orientation. Knowing that they may soon have an equal status in society is a consolation and encouragement to them.

    All that being said, I would agree with the Reverend Blogmaster that our dear POTUS is not much of a “theologian in chief,” nor were most of his predecessors. Perhaps the most theologically astute in recent memory was Jimmy Carter. Which brings up an interesting question – I wonder if Jimmy Carter will chime in regarding this recent development? I would find that very interesting.

  15. ContraMundum says:

    In some sense, of course, this was the worst-kept secret in America. Still, two aspects of it are particularly disturbing:
    1. Obama clearly believes it is to his political advantage to endorse “gay marriage” — he believes it will win him more votes than it will cost him. What is disturbing is that he may be right.
    2. He has endorsed gay marriage and directly picked a fight with the US bishops before the election. What will he be willing to do after the election?

    Also, am I the only one who thinks the bit about “we are both practicing Christians” was a straight-faced joke? A joke at the bishops and others who will oppose him on Christian grounds, and a joke at that portion of the population who believes he is a Muslim? (He is no more a Muslim than a Christian; I see no evidence that he “practices” anything but narcissism.) It appears that he is not only confident of his re-election; he is so confident he feels free to mock his adversaries.

  16. ContraMundum says:

    O blind your eyes and break your heart and hack your hand away,
    And lose your love and shave your head; but do not go to stay
    At the little place in What’sitsname where folks are rich and clever;
    The golden and the goodly house, where things grow worse for ever;
    There are things you need not know of, though you live and die in vain,
    There are souls more sick of pleasure than you are sick of pain;
    There is a game of April Fool that’s played behind its door,
    Where the fool remains for ever and the April comes no more,
    Where the splendour of the daylight grows drearier than the dark,
    And life droops like a vulture that once was such a lark:
    And that is the Blue Devil that once was the Blue Bird;
    For the Devil is a gentleman, and doesn’t keep his word.

    — G.K. Chesterton, in “The Aristocrat”

  17. mwk3 says:

    Very sad indeed, though of particular concern is that there are many who will be scandalised by his erroneous invocation of Christ, thus misleading many possibly well-meaning, albeit credulous and naive people. Is that a millstone that I hear?

    Yes, the Demo(n)crats must be voted out.

  18. jasoncpetty says:

    frjim4321, I hope the “fr” in your handle is short for farmer, and your use of “pastorally” refers to sheep; otherwise you have me pretty worried that you might be in charge of someone’s soul other than your own—yikes.

  19. Springkeeper says:

    Re: FrJim
    Jimmy Carter has already stated his support for gay “marriage” in his recently published book “NIV Lessons From Life . Carter interview (Huffington Post) quote: “Homosexuality was well known in the ancient world, well before Christ was born and Jesus never said a word about homosexuality. In all of his teachings about multiple things -— he never said that gay people should be condemned. I personally think it is very fine for gay people to be married in civil ceremonies.”

  20. Supertradmum says:

    Obama is a Black Liberation Theology adherent…look up the links.. He is not a Christian in any normal usage of the word. I feel physically ill at his reference to my God, an act of defiance..non serviam. Christians were just getting an edge ahead on this issue here in England. The election of Hollande, also for same sex marriage has given an impetus to evil…all hell is breaking loose for real

  21. Springkeeper says:

    I am disappointed and disgusted but sadly, not surprised. Why doesn’t President Obama just flat out get it over with and further his heresy by saying that Jesus is also in support of killing babies (pre or post born), confiscating all even remotely wealthy people’s money, and taking over the Church (and all her affiliations and operations) in America.

  22. crifasi says:

    I’ve taken to quoting Dorothy Day lately against liberals:

    “St. Paul, who wrote so beautifully, so warmly of love, said ‘Let these things be not so much as mentioned amongst you,’ so great was his repugnance to homosexuality… And now in this perverse generation, it is proclaimed from the housetops.” (Sept 9, 1975)

    http://books.google.com/books?id=JvT0cepfbbkC&pg=PA587&dq=%22St.+Paul%2C+who+wrote+so+beautifully%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=QOeqT8bMNcrO2AXzr52mAg&ved=0CDkQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22St.%20Paul%2C%20who%20wrote%20so%20beautifully%22&f=false

  23. ContraMundum said: “What will he be willing to do after the election?”

    He will be in the position to do whatever he wants! I pray God has mercy on this country in November.

    My spiritual director taught me a very short but most effective prayer, “O God, clean up the mess”, adding that we can’t tell God when, how, why, etc., just have faith that HE will see to it. As a pray-er of this prayer consisting of five words, believe me, it is quite effective and can move mountains.

  24. Burke says:

    I don’t think Mr Obama would have finished his ‘evolution’ on this subject until after the election if it hadn’t for Mr Biden’s recent gaffe. So a debt of gratitude is owed to the VP for that – now, at least, there is clarity (even though most had no doubt as to the president’s position – & from his statement it sounds like he has held this position for quite some time) … as to the effect this will have on the elections, I’m not so sure he’ll find this to be a vote getter. It will certainly get him some cheers in Europe which tends to be very liberal; but the US remains, certain quarters apart, deeply conservative. This could backfire on him yet.

  25. Bob B. says:

    Let’s see…
    One of the Sins that Cry Out to Heaven for Vengeance (Sodomy)
    One of the Six Sins against the Holy Ghost (Resisting the known truth)
    One of the Nine Ways we participate in other’s sins (Consent)
    I’m sure someone could make a case for a few more, too.

  26. Bea says:

    You know, I don’t really think he knows.
    You know, I guess since he and Michelle must agree upon it, then it must be right.
    And, you know, since he’ calls himself a Christian
    And, you know, since he never lies it must be true, he must be one
    You know, I think he forgot his teleprompter today.
    You know, that don’t you.

  27. teomatteo says:

    When the man said that he could not answer the question of when a baby gets human rights bestowed upon them “that’s above my pay grade”; I knew that I could not pay him to be my president. But he seems to know (all of a sudden) that his christian beliefs clearly define two men getting married. After 2000 years of development. Wow.

  28. Cosmos says:

    Contra Mundum,
    You said “1. Obama clearly believes it is to his political advantage to endorse “gay marriage” — he believes it will win him more votes than it will cost him.”
    I wouldn’t draw the same conclusion. People were saying something similar when the HHS mandate came out: “If he did it, it must have been strategic, since he is a master politician.” In my opinion, the HHS statement was a gigantic blunder brought about by having a myopic and insular set of advisors. He was clearly taken off-gaurd by the backlash. No one, especially the President, had any idea that the Bishops were going to unite against him the way that they did. He ended up coming out on the wrong side of religious liberty, which is a real loss.
    Here, there is a strong argument to be made that Biden’s pro-same sex marriage statement was, indeed, intended to draw attention away from the economic numbers released the previous Friday. They did that successfully. But Biden’s comment has ultimately led to very unfavorable impression of Obama in the elite media. His “evolving” opinion looked disingenuous and contrived. They press corps were actually laughing at the White House Press Secretary because his explanation of Obama’s position was so opaque. I think Obama felt like he had to come out with this statement to look serious and please his base. This is not going to help him. Go look what just happened in North Carolina. This pleases people who already loved him, and may demotivate the Christian African American community. They are not going to vote Republican, but they may stay home.

  29. plemmen says:

    frjim4321: Sin is sin, period. Hate the sin, love the sinner does not include socially approving the continuation of their sin. The next step, since to this satanic administration we do not have the right to freely express our religious beliefs nor legally adhere to them, only to openly worship, is to require that all religious institutions perform same sex unions inside their facilities or face revocation of their non-profit status and retroactive levy of taxes, revocation of the priests ability to perform marriages recognized by the government and jail anyone who does not comply. Same as in the Soviet Union and Germany under their (very different) institutions of socialism.
    BTW, are you actually a canonical Catholic? The beliefs you espouse raise the question in my mind as to the actuality of your adherence to the teachings of the Church.

  30. poohbear says:

    frjim4321 says: Pastorally I know the agony of parents and grandparents who are trying to love and support their children and grandchildren who have discerned a homosexual orientation. Knowing that they may soon have an equal status in society is a consolation and encouragement to them.

    And what does knowing they are putting their immortal souls at risk do for them?

  31. frjim4321 says:

    [Personally, I believe that man’s laws should reflect the laws of nature and of nature’s God. Calling a sexually active same-sex relationship the equivalent of marriage is a lie.]

    Well, I guess I can agree that human laws should reflect the laws of nature and of nature’s God. Then we probably part company when we start digging into various approaches to Christian anthropology.

    We had Joseph Donceel which I loved. This might be an occasion for me to re-read him.

  32. haribo says:

    Can you imagine the outcry from the left that would ensue if a conservative used the phrase “Christ sacrificing himself on our behalf” to pronounce ANY social issue, let alone same-sex marriage? It’s funny how that “wall of seperation” seems to disappear as soon as it’s a liberal politician speaking. Makes you wonder what the left really fears: religion in government or traditional morality?

  33. plemmen says:

    From this evenings Vespers:
    Psalmus 129 [3]
    129:1 De profundis clamávi ad te, Dómine: * Dómine, exáudi vocem meam:
    129:2 Fiant aures tuæ intendéntes, * in vocem deprecatiónis meæ.
    129:3 Si iniquitátes observáveris, Dómine: * Dómine, quis sustinébit?
    129:4 Quia apud te propitiátio est: * et propter legem tuam sustínui te, Dómine.
    129:5 Sustínuit ánima mea in verbo ejus: * sperávit ánima mea in Dómino.
    129:6 A custódia matutína usque ad noctem: * speret Israël in Dómino.
    129:7 Quia apud Dóminum misericórdia: * et copiósa apud eum redémptio.
    129:8 Et ipse rédimet Israël, * ex ómnibus iniquitátibus ejus.

    A thoroughly appropriate Psalm in this instance, in more ways than one …

  34. frjim4321 says:

    LOL, I’ll hear about this.

    Dear Joseph was a Jesuit. Fordham. Died at 88 in 1994 on 12/15, the same year I got my M.A. from the Jebbies.

    Well, I guess I’m more Jesuit that I knew.

  35. Tina in Ashburn says:

    “I’ve just concluded that for me personally, it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same-sex couples should be able to get married” …yea, to ensure he isn’t labeled a “hater” and to get votes. This is all about opportunism. I do wonder if the Muslim influence created the indecisiveness, as Muslims don’t tolerate that nonsense. I agree with ContraMundum that Obama is more a narcissist than a Christian or a Muslim, however.

    It IS sickening to hear a President say such things, and pull Jesus Christ into it as an affirmation of supporting sin. Ab. So. LUTELY sickening.

  36. haribo says:

    @frjim
    “Personally I do believe that U.S. citizens should not be denied constitutional rights on the basis of their sexual orientation”
    I think it’s safe to presume that if the founding fathers knew there would ever be a day in the United States where homosexual unions might be mistaken for marriage, they would have written it explicitly into the constitution. The Equal Protection Clause, which is probably what you’re referring to, guarantess the right to have any true marriage recognized by the state. But since marriage’s orientation toward procreation is constitutive of the institution, and is also principal reason the government takes any interest in marriage to begin with, a homosexual union could never under any circumstances consitute a true marriage and fall under the Equal Protection Clause. The US Supreme Court itself affirmed in Skinner v. Oklahoma that “[m]arriage and procreation are fundamental to the very existence and survival of the [human] race.” Given the the state’s interest in procreation, the courts have a duty to defend conjugal marriage from attack.

  37. Tina in Ashburn says:

    As some here may be aware, those that don’t support the homosexual lifestyle and all the trappings are labeled “haters”. [I suffer this in my very own neighborhood.] What hypocrisy. In reality ‘haters’ are those who are indifferent to the salvation of souls, who bully those who uphold morality, natural law, and the laws of our Creator.

  38. Pingback: BREAKING: OBAMA SUPPORTS SAME-SEX “MARRIAGE” | The Pulpit

  39. a. I think the whole problem in the gay marriage debate goes exactly back to the 1968 Loving vs Va decision. In my opinion the SCOTUS correctly sided against the ban on interracial marriage…however incorrectly argued their point. When they said that marriage was fundamental right, this was in error on their part because marriage can be renounced (2nd half of the definition of inalienable), we don’t have a right to someone else’s sovereignty, nor is there a legal guarantee of faithfulness to marriage….They simply should have said that marriage is not impeded by skin color…that’s it. Since marriage is a fundamental right according to the SCOTUS, by definition, marriage can’t be denied to those who seek it without due process. When marriage incorrectly became a fundamental right…this messed everything up.

    b. I pray that this political move on the part of Obama will backfire. I pray that the so called African American base will be deeply offended enough by his support of “gay-marriage.” to assist in his relocation from 160o Pa Ave in November. The fact that he quoted Jesus is outright disgusting…and will be making an act of reparation.

  40. wmeyer says:

    No one, to my knowledge, wishes to deny anyone any constitutional right based on their sexual activities. Marriage is not a constitutional right. Neither is health care, nor insurance of any sort.

  41. Imrahil says:

    Dear @frjim,

    Actually, it is to me an (only ad hominem, but still) argument against homosexuality that homosexuals seemingly cannot help to demand acknowledgement of their unions as marriages. Hence, the argument about “homosexual acts are sinful” might be counterproductive. For whatever homosexual acts are (and that they’re intrinsically bad on natural grounds is a truth, yes, but a truth which I’d at the moment not be able to prove by argumentation), it is a fact as plain as a pikestaff that Marriage, the institution at the origin of Family (and indirectly, at the foundation of State, if anyone’s interested) and the private fun of some unnormally-bent people are different things that have nothing in common with each other, and that the State need not nor should send signs of acknowledgement or tax benefits or the like to the latter. That is clear even if the said private fun were a legitimate one, which it is not.

    Equality is about treating equal things equal. I doubt the U.S. constitution contains a phrase such as “who dwells in a homosexual union has a right to be treated equally with one who is married (though I’m not too familiar with the U. S. constitution).

  42. ContraMundum says:

    @Cosmos

    I don’t think Obama is a master politician, but I *do* think he is a politician. Whenever a politician does something not calculated to gain him votes, it is because he momentarily lost his head. Obama’s support for “gay marriage” is not a mere political calculation, I’m afraid, but his decision to publicly endorse it is certainly the result of a political calculation.

    I hope that he is mistaken in his calculation. Since more than half the states have taken legal steps to define marriage as being between one man and one woman, there is reason for hope.

  43. Maltese says:

    Augustin57, I have to agree with Fr. Z, Obama is, in fact, one of the most brilliant people to occupy the White House. [I don’t agree with that either. He is of above average abilities. Those who have vaulted him into his present position are the one’s with the real brains.] I know that as fact, not conjecture (e.g. I know people close to POTUS.) But, you know what, Mao was brilliant in his way as well.

    Many people opposed to Catholicism were brilliant; just think Satre or Anthony Flew.

    But the ultimate question is, what IS “marriage”? I think people are confused on that point.

    Not to judge, but are even most non-Catholic marriages valid? And, of course, you can’t marry two men, sacramentally.

  44. Peggy R says:

    Midwest St Michael,

    I have also characterized Michelle and Barry’s speech as “high-school-ese”. I have been accused of insulting them b/c of the great institutions from which they graduated. They must be really intelligent. Precisely b/c they were educated at such highly regarded bastions of intellect and erudition, they ought to speak and write at a superior quality than I do, a mere midwestern State U graduate. Frankly, the quality of their speech should be an embarrassment to those schools.

    frjim,
    You must really work hard to produce posts that completely twist the teaching of the Church and are contrary to the views of our host and most commenters here. May St John Vianney pray for you.

  45. Kathleen10 says:

    FrJim: With all due respect, I disagree. There is nothing “gutsy” about President Obama’s “revelation” on same-sex marriage. His opinion on it has not likely been evolving, as he has said. He was just waiting for the right time to spring it, the most politically expedient time for him, which may have come once Biden let the cat out of his own bag, probably also premedidated. I don’t ever feel this President does anything without checking the political winds, for himself, of course. He’s a liberal, and it’s a liberal’s opinion, what’s the surprise? I believe the victory in North Carolina facilitated his now open support for same-sex marriage. I don’t know why of course, but this man has a tremendous ego, and does not like to lose.

    What will be interesting, although I think I already can intuit the answer, is what will voters of color do this November? Voters of color do not generally agree with his position. In California, Prop 8 was successful due to voters of color, who are often guided by principles which don’t agree with same-sex relationships, marital or otherwise. But, they vote for Obama in droves, so, I guess it’s a matter of which matters more to voters of color, faith, or perceived racial allegiances.

    Also, polls have shown to be incredibly misleading. For example, in North Carolina (US state) an amendment to the state constitution was just voted in overwhelmingly by the people. Polls said this was not going to happen. But it was a landslide, a blowout. When the people have been ALLOWED to vote, in 32 out of 32 states now, same-sex marriage has been soundly rejected, but you won’t hear that in the media.
    No doubt more people claim to support same-sex marriage now than 2008. Each generation seems to grow more liberal, seems to, maybe it’s not, let’s hope, but seems to. People get tired of being on the unpopular side of issues. But clearly, what people say to pollsters is proven to NOT be what they do when they actually vote! This is very good news, for those of us who disagree with same-sex marriage. We must make sure our young are well informed and educated on the Christian perspective on this critical issue. If we leave it to our public schools, our children will be soundly indoctrinated to be “non-judgmental”. (all part of the plan)

    You may certainly know parents and grandparents who feel sad that their children have chosen a homosexual lifestyle for themselves. I feel sorry and sad for people in this situation too, as most of us do. But that does not mean we ought to dramatically alter our entire society and civilization in order for them to feel “accepted” and “normal”. This is not the truth! This is a lie, and as been so well pointed out here, it is not loving in the truest sense to tell a lie of such proportions, no matter how much the lie is sought! The gay lifestyle is an empty one, rife with all manner of terrible behaviors and effects, psychological, emotional, and medical. Every family member and friend of a person with homosexual inclinations needs to love them, accept them, support them, but do not tell them that their lifestyle is healthy and good! That is not love. Our culture believes it is love, and will tell you so, but it’s not.

    And you have wondered correctly, Jimmy Carter has just come “out” and said he thinks same-sex marriage is a dandy idea. He was arguably the worst president ever, after the current one, and Clinton, all for different reasons.

    I agree with you, Fr. Z., completely, and I thank you for expressing so well, what most of us feel. It is shocking to see evil rationalized by using the sacrifice of our Lord Jesus Christ. Appalling.

    We must vote him out of office this November. We must encourage others to vote against him, and help others to get to the polls. This will be a very crucial election.
    By the way, to those in Europe. Don’t lose heart! The change that has taken place in America (growing conservatism) started as a grassroots effort! It is increasing, ever increasing, and yet it started out so small. Get together, organize, study the Tea Party movement in America, and other groups in other countries that have taken on the zeitgeist. You have nothing to lose, and much to gain. I’m a middle-aged woman, but personally I’d rather go down fighting than give in to the blatant evil plague that threatens our children’s culture, our world.

  46. frjim4321 says:

    Springkeeper, thanks, I did not know that.

    Burke, I don’t know, I think President Obama could have still danced around the topic in spite of Vice President Biden’s comment. I really have a hard time believing that the only reason the President came forward was because of Biden’s possible gaffe.

    Crisafi, thanks, interesting about Dorothy Day. Usually considered a liberal, and a recipient of an abortion, I was surprised to hear that quote of hers about homosexuality.

    Plemmen, I don’t know what you mean by “canonical Catholic.” Are you one of those people who takes it upon themselves to decide who is a real Catholic and who is not? The last time I checked, baptism, confirmation and communion incorporated a person into the Church, and that’s not contingent on a litmus test that a particular segment would like to impose.

  47. Supertradmum says:

    I am dreading the positive and poison-like responses when Europe wakes up in a few hours. The Guardian, which I quote on my blog, had the first news here, but the hue and cry will all be positive, I am sure…I hope the Vatican makes a swift and clear counter-statement. The Pope must say something. That the president had a special tv spot for this is also sickening.

    It is late here, about 1:20, but there is a terrible storm outside with high winds and rain and I cannot sleep. A great monster has been let loose. I knew intuitively that the election of Hollande in France and the acceptance of his far-left agenda was like the opening of Pandora’s box. That Obama felt the need to clarify his position was most likely tied to Biden’s stupidity, but also, Obama has been sliding in the polls and this will help his position. He was encouraged by other events, I do believe. Again, on my blog, I have listed the link to the responses of the Latino community, which is mixed, and the politicians of New York , which almost all have come out in support of O.

    Any Catholic who supports O. must think of his or her immortal soul

    Father, I pray for you to forgive and pray for this president, as he is surely placing his immortal soul, those in his family, and now the entire nation’s at risk of losing heaven. This is a turning point in American history, and a tragic one.

    I pray the Pope says something immediately.

  48. Kerry says:

    “…the values that I care most deeply about and she cares most deeply about is how we treat other people”. We have seen clearly these past three years how he and the FLOTUS treat other people.
    I think he tosses out the verbal sops to collect single issue votes and clinch-nail their support.

    Homosexual marriage, “Wherein the fish copulates with the bicycle”

  49. digdigby says:

    They want your children’s minds. That has been the battle plan since the seventies. What will you do? Homeschooling? How long do you think they will let you ‘teach your children hate’. They will take your children away. They are already doing it in Germany.

  50. JARay says:

    I would say that your President’s recent outburst concerning his christianity and affirmation of his belief in the salvific nature of Jesus’ crucifixion was a clear, contrived, political statement. He aims to get such as those CINOs to vote for him and also he contrived this sop to the homosexual brigade to ensure their support as well.
    He certainly is not as dumb as a bag of hammers. He is cunning. He is devious. He wants to be re-elected and is setting about ensuring that this is achieved.
    Over here, in Australia, we have Julia Gillard, an avowed atheist and one who cohabits with her male ‘partner’. She has just affirmed her opposition to same-sex ‘marriage’ although she will not make it Labor Party policy and hence it is extremely likely that many of her Party will support this when the matter comes up in Parliament. In contrast, Tony Abbott who is a practicing Catholic, has made it Party policy for his Liberal Party to oppose same-sex ‘marriage’ although I am sure that there do exist some of his Party who support it! If any do support it when the matter comes up in Parliament they will be called in to his Office to explain themselves to Tony Abbott.
    We actually have an Act of Parliament which was passed in the last Parliament which states that Australia affirms that marriage is between a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others. This Act must then be overturned if the homosexual brigade are to have their way.
    It may amuse some of you to read that there was a letter in one of our national newspapers which compared the re-definition of “marriage” to include spouses of the same sex, with an attempt to re-define vegetables to include meat so that some vegetarians could then eat meat because it was actually a vegetable!!!!

  51. FROM THE PEANUT GALLERY:

    This love note comes from the beery genius of

    Jane
    dt1844@aol.com

    Message:
    You are conservaitive to the extream and a real asshole, you pompus
    ass.

    And thanks, Jane, for your IP address!

  52. MEANWHILE:

    In other new, Life News reports that a horrible case of church vandalism in Portland was claimed by a group called “Angry Queers”.

  53. robtbrown says:

    FrJim4321,

    1. No, it wasn’t a gutsy move. Obamaco wanted to be on both sides of the issue, with Biden and Duncan favoring it, and Obama saying nothing. It backfired, and Obama had to admit his ideology.

    2. Who said it is a constitutional right for homosexuals to “marry”?

    3. Your comments seem to indicate that you don’t think homosexual acts are sinful.

    4. Like Karl Rahner Joseph Donceel was lost in an Existentialist fog.

  54. Peggy R says:

    It was about money. The gay movement knows it lost big and can never win if the people can vote. 1 out of 6 Obama bundlers are apparently homosexual. They hold the purse strings. They wanted his commitment in the face of this great loss. Obama had to come out or lose their support.

    From earlier WashPost story we learn of gay bundlers. (yikes…)
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/biden-comments-on-same-sex-marriage-expose-internal-white-house-divisions/2012/05/07/gIQAd0A88T_story.html

  55. wmeyer says:

    frjim4321:
    We are called to discern right from wrong. For my part, when I am told something which seems open to question, I turn to the CCC. I pray you will not mislead any souls, and I pray for you.

  56. benedetta says:

    To say that he is principled by the Golden Rule and “Do unto other” is so preposterous. We all know that Obama believes in infanticide and voted for it and against the protection of children born alive after abortion. [Good point.] If he really was guided by the Golden Rule he would do unto all other persons and protect the sanctity of human life in all stages. Gays vote, thus, the pandering. He doesn’t care about human lives that are so little they are yet unable to vote for him. If only they could, tens of millions and counting

    Fr. Z's Gold Star Award

  57. Fr. Jim, I have two passages of Sacred Scripture for you:

    Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, for you know that we who teach shall be judged with greater strictness.- St. James the Apostle, 3:1

    For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a base mind and to improper conduct. They were filled with all manner of wickedness…- St. Paul the Apostle, 1:26-29

    It is undeniable that homosexuality expressed in a mockery of the marital act, and in a mockery of marriage, is a grievous sin, and the Roman Catholic Church has always understood it as the principle sin that cries to Heaven for the wrath of God Almighty. For the first three centuries of its existence, the Church was ground under the heal of a massive and powerful pagan giant of a society, but like her Lord, she only grew stronger. She grew stronger to eventually eclipse the strength of the Empire by remaining faithful to her Lord, her Faith, and the Truth of her teachings. She was not shy to tell members of society that they were wrong, and in the end, the Church influenced, eclipsed, and finally dominated society in the West and the East, creating a Christendom that was glorious to behold.

    Weakly capitulating in cowardice to the evils of our day is not the way to fight for the return of the greatest civilization in the history of mankind, the Christian civilization. We are the salt of the earth and the light of the world, and you think we should *not* influence the way society operates and the institutions it recognizes, especially something as important as the family? That’s the quickest way to resume the Martyrdoms while letting the West die.

    Some people just make your head spin.

  58. ContraMundum says:

    @Peggy R

    Your theory highlights an interesting dilemma: Obama could have done more for them after being elected, but then again, after the election he doesn’t really need them. It’s a dilemma familiar to the pro-life side in its interactions with Republicans.

    I still think Obama did this as a result of a calculation, but the more I think of it, the less sense that calculation makes. Everyone who strongly favors “gay marriage” was going to back Obama anyhow. It’s like Mondale’s selection of Ferraro for VP; all it did was drive potential voters away, since the feminists were already going to vote for the Democrat.

  59. benedetta says:

    I tend to agree that the gutsiness factor speedily diminishes after you’ve had your VP essentially out you on something and stealing your thunder. Obama was forced to confirm his position, it’s pretty obvious.

  60. aviva meriam says:

    OK…. the real question is : Given Obama’s public announcement, what are the potential policy implications (where does he intend to go with his)? Where can he (by executive order, or through implementation or non implementation) take this? And how should voter respond?

    [A voter responds by voting. And before voting contributing time or money to an opponent’s campaign. I, for one, would support even the corpse of Millard Fillmore if it meant the defeat of this President in November.]

  61. frjim4321 says:

    I think Jane needs Chrome or something that will spell check her posts. But I don’t think there are any browsers that check for extreme rudeness (sadly).

    Peggy: Obama had to come out or lose their support. That’s an interesting spin and I don’t disagree. With Axelrod running the show I would suspect some careful calculations went into the decision, and not just one thing like Biden. The money seems more likely.

  62. frjim4321 says:

    re: Jane . . . wonder if that is a real address, I’m not getting any search hits.

    [It is likely that this dimwitted coward supplied a fake address.]

  63. catholicmidwest says:

    Forced blunder on the part of the Democrats. Thank you, Joe Biden!

  64. Kathleen10 says:

    Supertradmum, don’t worry dear, we already knew his position on same-sex marriage. I don’t think anybody in America relies on President Obama in regards to faith and morals. People in Europe seem to care more about his opinion on these topics than Americans do. But then, liberals send up rockets and flares whenever they get something they can use.

    I don’t get the feeling Obama is highly intelligent. If he were, he wouldn’t keep putting his foot in his mouth whenever he speaks off the cuff, or teleprompter as it were. When he’s on his own, he bumbles. George Bush did too, but, he proved in other ways he was very intelligent. (Do you know any dumb pilots?) I think he is “handled”, and his handlers probably treat him like their own personal presidential hand puppet. Sorry for the rude analogy.
    He never takes casual questions. His question and answer sessions are stacked with people and questions that have been pre-approved. He is kept far from the media, although I don’t know why, they genuflect when he walks to the podium.

    Fr. Z., you’ve arrived! Hate mail! [I “arrived” a long, long time ago, friend. You wouldn’t believe how much I get.]
    “Blessed are you when you are persecuted for my sake…rejoice…for so did they persecute the prophets who came before you”…I’m paraphrasing, but with so many versions of the Bible out there, I am hoping nobody notices….
    P.S. Great Coq AuVin!

  65. Benedetta, brilliant comment. We are all in the position of those unborn because we were all at that stage at one time, weak and vulnerable. What a nation we live in.

  66. Centristian says:

    This homosexual young man has an opinion that you and your readers might applaud (I know I did):

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0yJ1HpUhmEY

  67. robtbrown says:

    Obama’s campaign really had no choice. He can’t run on his economic performance, which has flatlined. He can’t run on Obamacare, which, despite having some good points, is unpopular and might be undermined or even overturned by SCOTUS. So they had to change the subject.

  68. catholicmidwest says:

    No, frjim,
    It was a forced error. The news media cornered him on it and he had to cough up something. Joe Biden’s probably under house arrest this weekend. :D

  69. lhuizenga says:

    A little piece I wrote some weeks ago on what Jesus thinks of marriage when Rod Dreher and Andrew Sullivan got into it on pseudogamy: http://touchstonemag.com/merecomments/2012/04/does-jesus-care-about-sex-and-marriage/

  70. Johnno says:

    I hope and pray that Ron Paul wins over Romney and ends the stranglehold the satanic establishment has over both parties equally; then I’d love to see him tear Obama apart on all the other issues and restore liberty to America. Don’t just pray that Obama loses. Pray that a good and worthy man becomes President. And neither Obama nor Romney are good men. Stop falling for the illusion of choice. Take the clear and moral path. You don’t have to choose from either offering of the devil’s hands. Ignore them both. Pick the right one, or else you’ll always be sliding into corruption little by little.

  71. pm125 says:

    Fish on! Hocus pocus!
    Rich and powerful added to campaign and coffers.
    Sort of ‘use them as they would use us’. Shills for the cause.
    O wants to create perception that he, too, is giving himself up for others.
    Dividing God’s people is imperative to further demoralization.

  72. ContraMundum says:

    It was a forced error. The news media cornered him on it and he had to cough up something.

    You know, you may be right.

    I don’t see how he could fail to have a speech prepared for this. He must have known he would eventually have to let the cat out of the bag; I would have thought this was even his plan. His actual response, on the other hand, is nearly incoherent, even by his standards (and he is no great speaker).

    The possibility that Obama could have failed to prepare his remarks ahead of time is a feat of poor planning that reminds me of Saddam Hussein’s failure to prepare a workable escape plan from Iraq. He had 10 years to prepare and should have seen it coming. I was so disappointed — if *I* were a ruthless dictator, I would have left body doubles in the palace and would watch the bombing of Baghdad on CNN from a hammock somewhere in the Caribbean while drinking something with an umbrella in it.

    Then again, Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf (the former Iraqi Information Minister) would fit right in with the Obama cabinet.

  73. Angie Mcs says:

    I watch very little Television but I turned it on this evening to catch up on the news and to see how it is being reported via this media form. The cynicism and unprofessionalism of the anchor people is quite a contrast to what Existed just a few years ago. But what really moved me to tears was Obama’s interview and comments on gay marriage. I was holding my little month old granddaughter in my arms as he spoke about how he and his family discuss this, how he can justify it to his children. All in a saccharine tone of concern for humanity and comments that as a Christian, he and Michele felt he needed to do the right thing. So many thoughts came flooding into my mind about this man: abortion, The HHSMandate and religious rights to conscience, his broken promises to good men like Cardinal Dolan and the sad catholics whom he chooses to turn to when he needs them.We all know the list. I looked down at the innocent little face sleeping on my lap. What is happening to her country? I literally felt sick and had to turn off the TV. Yes, I will vote in November, but in the meantime I will also pray that the veil of darkness will be lifted from his heart. And benedetta, you are so right, my baby granddaughter doesn’t have her voters card yet.

  74. Imrahil says:

    People in Europe

    do not care about his opinion in the sense that they really positively think his opinion should be victorious. These exist, but they are few, and easily to make out for that matter. What the bulk is is perplexed by the invincible or seemingly invincible force of the time spirit, the but-today-you-can-no-longer; and then they grumble back to their corners to say where they will still make differences between marriages and registered partnership, according, as it were, to positive law as it stands around here, but with a whisper: “Don’t speak loudly about that, but after all, it must still be possible to say” etc. etc. Of course only if the topic should occur. If it doesn’t occur, it is generally left unspoken-of.

    The appeal Obama made on the Europeans rests on
    – the fact that he succeeded President Bush – while I wonder whether that was because of President Bush’s real failures or rather because of the wonder to see an openly religious man in this high office who even makes some decisions against the time spirit (interestingly often taken the form that even defence of his actions is only done singularly with a “President Bush was a failure but” as opener),
    – the fact that he introduced Public Insurances into the U.S. (or so it is the impression here), which a European can’t think to live without*,
    – the fact that he is black – know that proportional representation is an important thing around here, and with over forty white male presidents previously, an European electorate would have dismissed Senator McCain from the feeling alone to owe the blacks a presidency (however, in this then-Senator Obama would have been at equals with Senator Clinton),
    – [Germany] the fact that he openly allowed himself to be praised as a charismatic leader, and did use rhetorics (teleprompter or not), which compares favorable to the bureaucratic attitude of our own politicians, but which we are too ashamed to allow as far as our own politics are concerned.

    [*and which should not be called Socialism, as as critical a mind as Hilaire Belloc sharply distinguishes it from Socialism. Belloc calls it “secure capitalism” for want of a word.]

  75. Midwest St. Michael says:

    Thinking beyond the implications of our fearless Leader’s take on the “Golden Rule” – in light of his mandate for coverage of contraceptives, abortaficients and abortion – if he does get re-elected, will he:

    Then mandate health care for those in “same-sex marriages” who have HIV, AIDS, and other related diseases?

    Think about it. Supreme Court hearings/rulings notwithstanding – If he can can mandate institutions (like the Catholic Church) to provide what the HHS mandate demands of employers – can he also demand such employers to provide health care for STDs?!

    If a person who is in a state recognized same-sex “marriage” – happens to be also employed by the Catholic Church in one form or another (parish or diocese or Catholic university) – what is stopping this president from mandating “health coverage” for their potential STDs? (whether or not said entities know of these individuals “marriage”)

    Just askin’.

    MSM

  76. plemmen says:

    FrJim4321: No, I am not the one who is the Judge, only a bystander who, because of a long string of answers that do not appear to be in conformance with the Magisterium and which, at times, even edge on the appearance of unbelief in basic tenets of our faith. As one who was in error to the extent of invalid and illicit ordination as Deacon, Priest and eventual consecration as Bishop in a splinter Orthodox Church and who has recanted those errors and repudiated the illicitly and invalidly obtained Holy Orders, I am well aware of what is required of a Priest as well as of a Catholic lay person. I asked the question to hopefully spark a reconsideration of your position and to hopefully inspire a good examination of your soul. Pax.

  77. Peggy R says:

    ContraMundum & frjim,

    I can’t take credit for originating the money theory. I think the WashPost article implies that factor. Conservative media (NRO) seem to find it plausible. It was a political calculation to reveal what he really has always thought, whether it was a financial calculation or what. So, what will black voters do? Hold their noses? This is a great opportunity (which the GOP will miss) to show blacks that they share many values with the GOP/conservatives.

    Benedetta, yes! Some “Golden Rule” the man espouses. But what are his principles about liberty? Religious freedom? Right to life? Well…we know.

  78. plemmen says:

    I also noted the appropriatness of this portion of the Invitatory from Matins today (10 May 2012):
    Quadragínta annis próximus fui generatióni huic, et dixi; Semper hi errant corde, ipsi vero non cognovérunt vias meas: quibus jurávi in ira mea; Si introíbunt in réquiem meam.
    Ant. Regem Confessorum Dominum * Venite adoremus, alleluia.

  79. plemmen says:

    Appropriateness even! Please pardon my error, in my haste I did not recognize my fat fingered text.

  80. Peggy R says:

    P.S. Not to belabor the point of the Money Theory. I just saw this article however that O raised $1M in 90 minutes after revealing his commitment to gay “marriage.” It may be a one-off. So, take it as you wish…

    http://www.buzzfeed.com/zekejmiller/gay-marriage-reversal-means-cash-for-obama

  81. BenedictXVIFan says:

    If one is going to appeal to Christ to prop up one’s position on marriage, it ought to go like this:

    In Matthew 19 Christ affirmed Genesis 2. (1) a man shall leave his father and mother (this prevents any future appeals to incestuous marriage, clearly) and (2) to be joined to his wife (ONE man, ONE woman, simultaneously knocking down both polygamy and same sex “marriage”, and hopefully any other warpage of matrimony waiting in the wings) and they shall become one flesh (quite obviously a prescription against the divorce of a valid marriage).

    THAT’S how it’s done, if one wants to be faithful to Christ, Mr. President.

  82. PA mom says:

    With how infrequently he and Michelle “practice” their faith (attend church of any kind…) it is little wonder that his rational is expressed at the level of those mass produced inspirational signs. Maybe, without someone else’s help, he doesn’t remember much more than that.

  83. catholicmidwest says:

    Obama’s no more a theologian than my cat is, but I hope the media pushes this theologian business really good and hard. It brings back visions of the not-so-Rev. Wright, and his base is turned off by it.

    I see today that Obama said “Biden was a little out over his skis” on this issue, and that’s what forced this. That’s probably the first honest thing I’ve ever heard this man say. Watch him fail to sign executive orders on this issue, claiming it was only a personal distinction he was making, though. He’s not really for gay marriage. It’s an expedient. His campaign is in big trouble, and he wants to talk about ANYTHING but the economy and Obamacare.

  84. Maria says:

    Thank you for this post Fr. Z.

    Although I live here in England and was born here, I feel exactly the same as you do and besides this I would like to add that I watched some of this ‘saleman’ type strategy he employed to sell himslef.
    The whole thing disgusted me to the heart where he had the audacity to use his soldiers as a lever to try to get his point across.
    Whilst I have every sympathy and understanding for homosexual differences and orientation, I have to say that I have no tolerance for the homosexual act itself.

    I am equally disgusted that he used Our Lords’ Name in vain basically, to try to lever this issue further towards favouring same sex ‘marriage’.

    How on earth has anyone got the audacity and despicable hypocricy to quote the following:

    “This is something that, you know, [Michelle and I have] talked about over the years and she, you know, she feels the same way, she feels the same way that I do. And that is that, in the end the values that I care most deeply about and she cares most deeply about is how we treat other people and, you know, I, you know, we are both practicing Christians and obviously this position may be considered to put us at odds with the views of others but, you know, when we think about our faith, the thing at root that we think about is, not only Christ sacrificing himself on our behalf, but it’s also the Golden Rule, you know, treat others the way you would want to be treated…”

    How sick, when he also endorses quite freely that unborn children can be slaughtered where they should be safer than anywhere else in the world…….the mothers’ womb.

    Rant over Father Zuhlsdorf, forgive me if I have been too bold on your Blog, but this mortal makes my blood boil.

  85. Pingback: America Missing In Scripture « ProfessorJT2012's Blog