VP Biden’s last ditch effort to fool Catholics. Revolting.

From LifeNews:

Pro-Abortion Biden Claims He’s a “Practicing Catholic” In New Ad
by Steven Ertelt

In a last-ditch effort to get Catholic voters to support pro-abortion President Barack Obama, Vice-President Joe Biden, who also backs abortion, has released a new web ad. In the ad, he claims he is a “practicing Catholic” and he claims Obama’s record matches Catholic doctrine. [So why are the Catholic bishops suing the Obama Administration?]

“As a practicing Catholic like many of you, I was raised in a household where there was absolutely no distinction between the values my mom and dad drilled into us and what I learned from the nuns and priests who educated me,” Biden says. “We call it Catholic social doctrine: ‘Whatever you do to the least of these, you do for me.’” [This is so hard to read.  It'll be harder to watch.]

Biden claims the Obamacare law, which funds abortions and prompts concerns over health care rationing, fulfills his claim that Obama has advanced Catholic doctrine as president. But Biden ignores the controversial HHS mandate that has sparked more than 100 lawsuits over its forcing religious groups to pay for abortion-inducing drugs and to fine them if they refuse.  [Biden said that Obamacare was a "big f-ing deal".]

The new ad comes as at least one Catholic bishop says Biden shouldn’t receive communion because of his abortion views.

Michael Sheridan, Bishop of the Catholic Diocese of Colorado Springs, says pro-abortion Vice President Joe Biden shouldn’t receive communion form the Catholic Church — at least in his diocese.

Canon 915.

CLICK TO BUY CAN. 915 STUFF

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in 1983 CIC can. 915, Dogs and Fleas, Liberals, The future and our choices and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

62 Responses to VP Biden’s last ditch effort to fool Catholics. Revolting.

  1. Stvsmith2009 says:

    Father, here is a story also from LifeNews.com about yet another CINO from catolics for choice (intentionally misspelled.)
    “Catholics for Choice” Leader Claims to be Faithful Catholic

  2. EXCHIEF says:

    You know many of us for years have been bemoaning the fact that cino’s like Biden, Kennedy, Pelosi, Brown, Sebilius and the list goes on and on get a pass from the hierarchy of the Church. By allowing these non catholics (and that’s really what they are by choice even though I realize that by virtue of their baptism they will always be Catholic whether they want to be or not) to spew their garbage in total rejection of Church teaching the hierarchy is really contributing to scandal by inaction.

    As tired as I am of these cino’s getting a pass I am frankly more tired of gutless Bshops who don’t have the spine it takes to publicly call out and chastize prominent cino’s. Too oncerned with their own popularity, or perhaps afraid of a loss of revenue, the vast majority of U S Bishops deserve a FAIL as much as Obama deserves his.

    So in my senior years I’ve taken the tact of challenging Priests and Bishops, respectfully but consistently, who are failing to do what any good Catholic knows they should be doing. And as a result I’m on more than one cleric’s bad guy list for having the intestinal fortitude to speak the truth. That’s OK…the good Lord, not those Priests and Bishops, will be my judge–and theirs.

  3. Jim says:

    Catholics are fooled because Catholics allow themselves to be fooled.

    St. Thomas Becket, pray for us!

  4. acardnal says:

    Political expediency. Perhaps Biden should read your post on Momento mori. He’s not that young.

  5. Miss Jensen says:

    In the past, bishops in the dioceses of such politicians and public figures may have kept quiet because of political expediency, but perhaps now– given the HHS mandate and everything else that has happened in the past four years– they are ready to act.

    If so, however, it is my feeling that they will say nothing until after the election, to avoid stirring up a big public spat and further division among Catholics, which could benefit the incumbent if enough Catholics were led to believe it was an 11th-hour political move by the Church to influence the election. I hope that however the elections play out, the bishops use their authority as quickly and wisely as possible.

  6. Andy Lucy says:

    @EXCHIEF: “…as a result I’m on more than one cleric’s bad guy list for having the intestinal fortitude to speak the truth…”:

    As the old saying goes, brother… if you’re not taking flak, you aren’t over the target. Standing for orthodox Catholic doctrine and dogma has left me on the bad side of an almost unbroken line of priests of a less than orthodox inclination. I grin and bear it and I offer up the insults and snide comments and continue to politely and respectfully fight the good fight.

    St Michael the Archangel… pray for us.

  7. NBW says:

    one word….excommunication. It’s so simple, and it sends a message that REAL Catholics will not tolerate the hijacking of their beliefs.

  8. EXCHIEF says:

    Andy
    That is one of the reasons (in addition to my profession) why I have worn a St Michael’s medal for nearly 50 years. He’s the patron Saint of WARRIORS and SHEEPDOGS as you know

  9. Father G says:

    I couldn’t even finish watching the video. It is revolting!

  10. Andy Lucy says:

    Roger that, EXCHIEF. Hooah! And even if the shepherd is napping instead of watching his flock, the sheepdog will still guard the flock to the best of his ability from the ever present wolves.

  11. Joan A. says:

    Not to detract from the seriousness of this matter, and thank you Fr. Z for bringing it to our attention, but what I have to ask myself is, How on earth did Biden stop laughing, grinning and cackling long enough to make this tape? Despite the grave look on his face, the lack of logic in his words is laughable. [The answer to your question is pretty obvious.]

  12. catholicmidwest says:

    The last time that Catholics voted as a national bloc was in November 1959, the Kennedy election. That’s been more than 50 years ago now, and it was a very important event for Catholics. It marked a historic transition for Catholics in the United States. In that year, Catholics “came of age” in American politics. They became as American as apple pie: the dream of a generation or more of immigrant Catholics who had known discrimination and hardship and prejudice. Yet, in 1960, Catholics were a still a distinct subculture with a strong self-identity. The American hierarchy had authority among Catholics over many matters, and they weren’t afraid to use it. Catholics tended to vote Democratic for very well-defined reasons stemming from their immigrant experience and early years in the United States. Democrats wouldn’t have dared attack the Church then, even if they had wanted to. The Catholic hierarchy in the USA would have ripped them apart, put them in their place and then had them voted them in, behaving themselves. Insurrection would have been impossible. It was unthinkable.

    Fast forward: Things have changed dramatically since then. Almost all of the factors that went into the Kennedy election have completely changed. Catholics tend to see themselves more like the general population sees itself than like each other. The strong sense of Catholic self-identity is gone–and it’s gone because the strong Catholic communities are gone and the sense of solidarity and authority are gone. The bishops themselves have been major agents in these losses, preferring to see themselves in other ways. Even coming from the highest offices of the Church itself in the US, being a Catholic seems now to be nearly optional, a devotional matter, a personal matter, a matter not open to evaluation in any way even by the Church itself, as in the case of high profile CINOs in government service. As a result, Catholic moral behavior has been dramatically loosened so that Catholics behave more like the general population than like each other. We no longer behave as a bloc morally, socially or politically, even those of us who still attend Mass together.

    About the only thing that remains of the past public behavior of Catholics is the scattered ruins of the Democrat hegemony over some Catholics, but curiously that’s been refocused and transmogrified into something else much more like the politicization of the poor. Perhaps it’s a public transference necessary for those who were once poor, but now politicized themselves. Many Catholics are still tempted to this, but even this no longer holds the power it used to have. As these alliances of the past fade, Catholics increasingly vote much more like the general population than like each other. There is no longer a Catholic voting bloc. And because there is no longer a bloc, the Democrat establishment no longer regards the Church as worthy of respect. We no longer have any power to put renegade organizations and individuals in their place when they transgress against us. Yet, they are happy to have our votes and are willing to pretend to earn them; they take advantage of us and some of us let them do so.

    All this has been built up and rewarded for years. The fact is that some of the things that we’re struggling with we, as Catholics, brought upon ourselves. That’s probably the first thing to accept. Accepting that is the first step to the problem solving that’s going to have to go on, in order to get out of this situation intact. A sense of identity needs to be rebuilt, with a sound Catholic sense of purpose. Only then, will Catholics look to the Church to see what it says again in the public square. And only then will we get any respect from the culture as an authority and a proper entity that deserves recognition and attention. Only then will we be able to re-erect the edifice of Catholicism in the US.

    If we’re not willing to do this, this rebuilding of the public edifice, then we must get out of the business of running public institutions such that we can be run over by them, clarifying once and for all who we are. One or the other. We cannot do both. This decision about what place Catholicism holds in a society, and what it is for the individual, is ultimately what we will have to come to terms with, either way. It’s not been done here. It’s also not been done satisfactorily in Germany or any number of other places in Europe, and the carnage in Europe is the predictable result. Make no mistake: the answer to this question is whatever the Church says it is; we all, those of us still on board with the Church, need to get on the same wavelength, working together in more clarity and that will be 50% of the cure.

  13. Kerry says:

    Joe Biden, the only stopped clock in the universe wrong twice a day, and thrice at all other hours.

  14. Clinton says:

    (Biden says) “We call it Catholic social doctrine: ‘whatever you do to the least of these,
    you do for me.’”

    Amazing. I do believe the unborn could be considered ‘the least of these’, Mr. Biden. Remind
    me– isn’t his party the one that enthusiastically promotes killing them?

  15. acardnal says:

    Clinton: touche.

  16. wmeyer says:

    NBW: I agree. The threat of excommunication is nothing if it is not used. And that these CINOs present themselves for communion, and are allowed to receive speaks louder than any letter, any lawsuit, or any homily.

    People learn by example, and the example set by Biden and others of his ilk is a scandal.

  17. Speravi says:

    So…
    Laymen (Ecclesia discens) are able to speak for the Church publically as to the faithfulness of president Obama in adhering to Catholic teaching…
    But the clerics of the Church (Ecclesia docens) are only able to give a few principles and tell everyone to follow their conscience???

    (N.B. the following sentence is purely my own, and I wish to impose on no one else):
    Dom Prosper Gueranger, if you are in heaven, please pray for the liberty of the Church!!!

  18. AnnAsher says:

    I note he leaves off the rest of the customary phrase: “in good standing with the Church”.

  19. don Jeffry says:

    Go to youtube.com and flag the video as “misleading information” or something. I did. As Fr. G said: “It is revolting!”

  20. Andrew says:

    There was a very nice commentary a week ago on the false divide of pro-life vs. social justice. http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pro-life-vs.-social-justice-a-false-dichotomy

  21. FloridaJoan says:

    I’m just now watching ( on EWTN ) an interview with Cardinal Burke who has just said that the time has come to address ( and act on ) these individuals who give scandal to our Faith and Church by their words and actions.

  22. Katheryn says:

    We all know who Biden is voting for, so wouldn’t canon 915 apply, in light of the whole voting for abortion thing?

  23. Luvadoxi says:

    We can talk about canon law, what Ed Peters says, canon 915, blah, blah, blah till the cows come home. All I know is this. My husband, a Presbyterian elder, an intelligent man who loves G.K. Chesterton, watched the vice-presidential debate with me and said, “Why doesn’t the Catholic Church do something about him?” My husband admires the Church but shows no signs of wanting to join it. And that, to me, is a big f-ing deal.

  24. Mary Jane says:

    Luvadoxi, I feel for you in your frustration, but I don’t appreciate the attempt of evading a word filter.

  25. teomatteo says:

    Has anyone heard from Doug Kmiek?

  26. Cathy says:

    Clinton, in regards to your statement regarding the unborn, I was thinking the same thing. Under the guise of popular government policy, pro-abortion Catholics have aborted Jesus over 55 million times without blinking an eye, and then go up at Mass to receive Him in Holy Communion. If that isn’t scandalous, what is? CRS has issued a statement, to the effect that formal association with groups that promote and perform abortion, sterilization and contraceptive services is not participation. I am praying that this conundrum of a Catholic charity be given to Bishop Bruskewitz who not only understands that association is participation, but has the courage to act accordingly with such association.

  27. wmeyer says:

    CRS has issued a statement, to the effect that formal association with groups that promote and perform abortion, sterilization and contraceptive services is not participation.

    It should be obvious, I would think, that the proper source of such a determination would be a bishop, or a national council of bishops, but certainly not a charitable organization whose own participation is in question.

  28. John V says:

    @ teomatteo

    From the L.A. Times last week: Douglas Kmiec on keeping the faith

  29. Giuseppe says:

    There will be a number of Roman Catholics (INO) who will self-excommunicate on Tuesday.
    Our bishops need to decide if they want to enforce the laws, which (I suspect) will lead to a smaller, purer church. There are other churches (Episcopal, Presbyterian, UCC, Methodist, etc) where those who have no intention of having an abortion or getting same-sex married but do not want to prevent others from having that option are welcomed. Many socially liberal Catholics could fit in perfectly in other churches. Why feign Catholicism? Why doesn’t the church say “you are either Catholic or you are not — no middle ground”? Does the church really think that endless accomodating is working and changing minds? Could it be fostering tolerance of obstinancy?

  30. Sissy says:

    Ok, now I get it. frjim4321 is Doug Kmiec! ; ) Thanks for that link John V. Ambassador Kmiec clearly needs a lot of prayer.

  31. rodin says:

    Anyone who can listen to that without feeling an urge to purge has to be a Democrat.

  32. chantgirl says:

    John V- thanks for the article link. Let’s just say that if I ever get my hands on the seamless garment, it’s going in the fireplace. That argument has given more Catholics justification to betray the unborn than any other. I pray that there will be a day when the Church publicly refutes this line of thinking.

  33. PostCatholic says:

    Vice President Biden seems to know his conscience and have a good sense of what is decent and right, but trying to square Catholic doctrine with that is either misguided (if he truly thinks, incorrectly, it can be done) or disingenuous (if he does not) and a lie. I really wish people who know their views don’t align with Catholic bishops would do the honest thing, which is to absent themselves and their donations from a religion in which they cannot believe.

  34. acardnal says:

    Well said, PostCatholic said and I agree. “I really wish people who know their views don’t align with Catholic bishops would do the honest thing, which is to absent themselves and their donations from a religion in which they cannot believe.”

    Unfortunately, I believe some “catholics”, especially politicians, find it expedient to use their faith to garner votes. I find solace in the fact that they will have to face God one day and answer for that duplicitous decision.

  35. acardnal says:

    Sorry for above. It should read as follows:

    PostCatholic said and I agree. “I really wish people who know their views don’t align with Catholic bishops would do the honest thing, which is to absent themselves and their donations from a religion in which they cannot believe.”

    Unfortunately, I believe some “catholics”, especially politicians, find it expedient to use their nominal Catholic faith to garner votes. I find solace in the fact that they will have to face God one day and answer for that duplicitous decision.

  36. The Masked Chicken says:

    Why, oh why, doesn’t someone just stop Biden (Ryan might have) in a debate and ask him some simple questions about what Catholics believe. The result, if he didn’t know the answers, would end his ability to use his Catholicism in support of his politics.

    The Chicken

  37. xavier217 says:

    This catholic caused me to go catholicvote.org and make a contribution.

  38. Luvadoxi says:

    Mary Jane–I’m not sure exactly what this “word filter” is you think I’m trying to evade; I didn’t even know there was such a thing, so please excuse my ignorance–I really wasn’t trying to do any such thing. What I was trying to do was *not* use a bad word while reflecting back on the comment in paragraph 3–and using that to emphasize my point. If that comment weren’t there, I wouldn’t have used the same word in the same format. It was for emphasis. I’m sorry if you couldn’t see that. And I really don’t think you feel for me at all.

  39. Panterina says:

    Mary Jane, Luvadoxi was just quoting the words used by Biden. Father Z did the same above in his comments. Perhaps the use of quotation marks would have helped to recognize that no offensive language was intended.

  40. David Collins says:

    rodin says, “Anyone who can listen to that without feeling an urge to purge has to be a Democrat.” What do you know. I must be a democrat. Or maybe a RINO.

    Come on, folks. Do we have to believe that everyone who, rightly or wrongly, thinks government needs to play a greater role in giving people a hand up, is going to hell?

  41. wmeyer says:

    Do we have to believe that everyone who, rightly or wrongly, thinks government needs to play a greater role in giving people a hand up, is going to hell?

    What we have to believe is that we have a personal obligation to charity, and that it is not fulfilled by the proxy of government bureaus. Government, especially at the Federal level, is the poster child for bad management, and unintended consequences. Do you really believe the “war on poverty” has been a success? Do you really believe you can support the government’s position on abortion and not endanger your soul? Can you really imagine that growing a government which is already out of control in its spending could be wise? Or responsible?

  42. LisaP. says:

    “Come on, folks. Do we have to believe that everyone who, rightly or wrongly, thinks government needs to play a greater role in giving people a hand up, is going to hell?”

    Oh, no! Certainly not! Absolutely not!

    But we do have to believe that unrepentant liars are going to hell. I hope for Biden that he is either somehow so ignorant, unintelligent, confused, mentally ill — something — that what appears to be blatant lying is not. I hope also that if he that’s not the case, he will repent and find God and spend eternity with him in heaven.

    But when someone in a position of power and influence tells lies about what my religion believes, and in doing so may gain greater power which will be used in a way that evidence suggests will cause pain and death to untold thousands — yes, I’m allowed to have a strong reaction against this.

    This is not about demonizing those with a rational, sincere different in perspective. This is far past that. I know many people who disagree on the specifics of how government should be run, of how power should be distributed — good, loving people who disagree with me. I don’t know anyone who believes, for example, that while they shouldn’t kill a fetus themselves we should express in our laws no disapproval of leaving a fetus who has been delivered alive after an attempted abortion to die of exposure because that’s the mother’s choice. That’s not a difference of opinion on means, that’s either a mental illness or a spiritual evil. And if that person tells me this POV is entirely consistent with the doctrine of the Catholic Church, when two minutes with a catechism makes clear it is not, that person is adding blatant deception to the pile.

  43. Luvadoxi says:

    Hi Paneterina–thank you for the support. I wish I’d thought of putting quotes around that phrase–that would have made it much better. And Mary Jane, I’m sorry for my harsh words to you.

  44. Luvadoxi says:

    oops–Panterina.

  45. David Collins says:

    Yes, wmeyer, we do have a personal obligation to charity. True, governments bureaus are not a proxy.

    Do you really believe the “war on poverty” has been a success? Yes; it would be catastrophic to shut it down.

    Do you really believe you can support the government’s position on abortion and not endanger your soul? The government’s position is that it should be legal for mother to pay a doctor to kill her child. That’s horrible but it is rather like the government’s position on alcohol. They don’t force anyone to drink themselves into a drunken stupor, a mortal sin by the way, nor do they force any woman to kill her unborn baby. So, yes, a Catholic can, or rather could, vote Democrat with a clear conscience since that party more clearly cares about social justice.

    Can you really imagine that growing a government which is already out of control in its spending could be wise? Or responsible? The spending is out of control because we have 700 military bases in 130 countries. We spend more on our bloated “defense” budget than the next seven nations combined. The Affordable Health Care Act would be extremely affordable if we stopped irresponsibly spending on an outsized military which has, nevertheless, still lost every war since WWII.

    Lisa P., the Vice President didn’t say that our religion countenances abortions. In the debate with Congressman Ryan, he stated that he accepts the Church’s teaching on life. Given the sad, so very sad, reality of our society, Catholic Democrats have little choice but to work with those who want to keep baby killing legal. You know the old saying, when you sup with the Devil, use a long spoon.

    That said, the HHS mandate dictating to Catholics that we must violate our consciences is unacceptable. To say the least! I’m sitting this election out.

  46. Sissy says:

    “So, yes, a Catholic can, or rather could, vote Democrat with a clear conscience since that party more clearly cares about social justice.”

    Could you explain how the Democratic Party “more clearly cares about social justice”? Is it their determination to keep the murder of unborn children legal? Their consistent efforts to keep poor children locked into failed schools? Their energy policies that make all commodities sky high for those least able to afford them?

  47. I noticed over at youtube there are zero comments but 326 “likes” and 318 “dislikes” (not including mine). When I left my comment “Canon 915 NOW” it said comments were moderated. Heh.

  48. wmeyer says:

    David Collins:

    What evidence can you offer for your claim of success in the War on Poverty?

    So you put alcohol abuse on a par with abortion? In the context of Catholic teaching, that’s bizarre.

    Your views on spending are entirely wrong. Past, present, and future spending and obligations with respect to entitlement programs are at the heart of the issues, as well as the federal actions which violate the 10th amendment.

  49. David Collins says:

    Entitlement programs are at the heart of the issue because the military-industrial complex absolutely refuses to let anyone dare suggest that maybe, just maybe, we could slow the growth in defense spending. So that leaves programs designed to benefit the least among us.

    Evidence for successful prosecution of the War on Poverty? Ummm, I don’t know; maybe if we got rid of all those programs we would find out the hard way just how successful they were.

    No, I am not putting alcohol abuse on a par with abortion. Abortion is worse. What I did say is our government is determined to keep both legal. Republicans controlled the White House and both houses of Congress for six years under George W. Bush and did nothing to disturb the legality of abortion. Which is sad; even sadder is that good, decent pro-lifers keep voting for the hypocrites.

    Sissy, the awful Teacher’s Unions keep the kids locked in terrible schools. Charter schools, home schools, etc. is something both parties should back.

    Republican talking points about energy policy were, most likely, written by lobbyists for energy companies. I accept the reality of peak oil, and think we should concentrate on a less affluent future. To quote chantgirl on another thread, “Our modern culture lacks the ability to make sense of the Cross, and certainly lacks the will to carry it…We are ultimately running away from correction, from reality, from death, from judgment.”

  50. rodin says:

    Catholic social doctrine does not include murder. Biden has aligned himself with those who have consistently proven they do not respect life. There are a lot of “old sayings” floating around including “birds of a feather flock together” and there is no need to “lie down with the dogs.”

    A key characteristic of the prevaricator is he/she/it BELIEVES nothing except that you are fool enough to believe everything he/she/it tells you. Politics is rife with those (fill in the blank).

  51. David Collins says:

    rodin, you are correct. Republicans prevaricate when they claim to be pro-life and they know republican pro-lifers will keep right on voting for them. Amazing.

  52. wmeyer says:

    Entitlement programs are at the heart of the issue because the military-industrial complex absolutely refuses to let anyone dare suggest that maybe, just maybe, we could slow the growth in defense spending. So that leaves programs designed to benefit the least among us.

    What is this, 1968? Utter nonsense. The FedGov records are all online. Budgets can be seen and compared. Trends analyzed. Ignorance of these things is unpardonable.

    Evidence for successful prosecution of the War on Poverty? Ummm, I don’t know; maybe if we got rid of all those programs we would find out the hard way just how successful they were.

    Uh-huh. Sounds like “jobs saved or created.” As Thomas Sowell has ably and endlessly pointed out, upwards and downward mobility are inescapable features of our economy. “The poor” is not a group imprisoned, rather it is a reference to people whose present situation is poor.

    …even sadder is that good, decent pro-lifers keep voting for the hypocrites.

    Sadder still that otherwise intelligent people will vote for a 3rd party, giving Obama a chance at a second term.

    To refer to “Republican talking points” and fail to acknowledge that it is as valid as referring to “Democrat talking points” is a measure of the madness and ignorance currently afoot.

  53. wmeyer says:

    Republicans prevaricate when they claim to be pro-life and they know republican pro-lifers will keep right on voting for them.

    Some do, some don’t. Where as Dems prevaricate when they move their lips. Obama made quite literally incredible claims in the debates, never substantiating them, just dropping them as little bombs.

    A voter without a grounding in economics is a loose cannon .

  54. wmeyer says:

    …I should add, just as some Catholics assert their own conscience takes primacy over Church teaching. There are ill-formed consciences at every turn. If in doubt, see Pelosi, Biden, Sebelius, et al.

  55. Southern Catholic says:

    @ David Collins, Even if the President and Congress are Republican, they can really do nothing with out Roe vs. wade being overturned. Perhaps you should read more from Dr. New.
    Finally, it is true that Supreme Court justices appointed by Republican Presidents have not been able to overturn Roe v. Wade. However, these justices have offered constitutional protection to various pro-life laws. These include state-level parental-involvement laws and informed-consent laws, both of which have been able to lower abortion rates. Furthermore, every Supreme Court Justice appointed by a Democratic president since 1973 has clearly and publicly voiced their support for the Roe v. Wade decision. That trend is unlikely to change.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/332155/catholic-pro-life-and-voting-obama-michael-j-new

    Furthermore, how can you say that the social programs in this country are successful when all that has been created is a cycle of poverty?

  56. rodin says:

    And then there are those who lie to themselves.

  57. LisaP. says:

    rodin, I think that’s an excellent point.

    Mr. Collins, I had not realized the level of analysis you were operating on. I am a little dazed at the idea that you believe Mr. Biden would be pro-life if he didn’t have to work with all those other, nonCatholic Democrats. He has himself made clear that is not the case. He distinctly says that his position is that abortion is wrong to HIM, but that he does not believe in making it against the law, and he has said that is consistent with Catholic thought. It certainly is not.

    But I have to say, where you really had me was on getting falling down drunk being a mortal sin. Even take away the comparison with abortion, where does that even come from?

    2290 The virtue of temperance disposes us to avoid every kind of excess: the abuse of food, alcohol, tobacco, or medicine. Those incur grave guilt who, by drunkenness or a love of speed, endanger their own and others’ safety on the road, at sea, or in the air.

  58. David Collins says:

    Thanks, Southern Catholic, for proving that Republicans have never done anything to disturb the legality of abortion. They’ve allowed restrictions but that doesn’t do anything to Roe v. Wade; no doubt, that’s the way the Republican party establishment wants it.

    Therefore, a pro-life considerations, in this heathen society, need to be broadened out into that seamless garment, the one that chantgirl would throw into the fireplace, if she ever got her hands on it : )

    Remember, the economy exists for the person, not the person for the economy. The repulsive idea that a mythical “free market”, which really means the powerful can act with no moral restraints, is compatible with Catholic teaching is enough to take your breath away.

    Which party does more to ensure adequate wage levels for workers? Which party pays attention to unions?

    Having skimmed the pdf file on the Catholics for Obama site called “America Undecided”, I’m still not reassured about the President’s exemptions for employers with religious objections to the contraceptive mandate. But there can be no doubt that the Republican party would throw the seamless garment into the fire if it could get it hands on it.

  59. Southern Catholic says:

    for proving that Republicans have never done anything to disturb the legality of abortion

    What exactly has the democrats done to disturb the legality of abortion? Oh wait, they have increased it’s funding and made it more wide spread through out this country.

    Therefore, a pro-life considerations, in this heathen society, need to be broadened out into that seamless garment, the one that chantgirl would throw into the fireplace, if she ever got her hands on it : )

    The seamless garment argument is why we have so many pro-abortion Catholics, and it is used as a loop hole to suppot “social justice” . It has been heavily criticised on this blog and other similar blogs.

    Remember, the economy exists for the person, not the person for the economy. The repulsive idea that a mythical “free market”, which really means the powerful can act with no moral restraints, is compatible with Catholic teaching is enough to take your breath away.

    So Catholics can’t be libertarians, it basically what you are saying.

    Having skimmed the pdf file on the Catholics for Obama site called “America Undecided”, I’m still not reassured about the President’s exemptions for employers with religious objections to the contraceptive mandate.

    You can’t be serious. The exemptions to the mandate are so narrow that very few organizations actually are exempt. Worse it is also an assault on the First Amendment because it is attempting to define what “religion” is. The bishops have spoken, every Catholic must be against the unjust mandate.

  60. wmeyer says:

    The repulsive idea that a mythical “free market”, which really means the powerful can act with no moral restraints, is compatible with Catholic teaching is enough to take your breath away.

    Academic, as the government has been interfering with the “free market” for over a century. What most who rail against the “free market” have not considered is that much of that interference has had very negative unintended consequences. Further examples of failing to consider all the consequences of an action.

  61. catholicmidwest says:

    Someday Biden will come to his own judgment and he will “explain” this. I’m pretty sure the “explanation” isn’t going to go over very well.