Perhaps other blogs will pick this up and help.
An article from the ultra-liberal New York Times (“Hell’s Bible”) is posted on the even more liberal MSNBC.
The article concerns the objections of the USCCB against pressure from the Obama Administration and/or states to force Catholic adoption agencies to allow homosexual “couples” to adopt.
You have to scroll down to the bottom of the MSNBC webpage to find the poll form. You can leave comments.
Click HERE!
I am not going to tell anyone how to vote.. but… as of now here are the results.
UPDATE: 14:47 GMT:
Loading ...
I went there and voted
As of 11:45 p.m. December 28.
47%
Yes
7,124 votes
51%
No
7,849 votes
I voted “yes” and offered in the combox something to the effect that full responsible participation in public life regardless of one’s religion (or lack of it) is the American way, and that American liberty is for religion, not from it.
I continue, however, to have serious doubts about the usefulness of micro-blogging platforms (viz. 140 char. max) as tools for facilitating public debate.
I am all for pith, though the format seems rather to encourage polemical point-scoring, even as it makes development of arguments and genuine consideration of interlocutors’ positions extremely cumbersome, to say the least.
As of 7am this am, the Yes votes are only 73 votes short of the No votes.
Done and done. Give it a few hours and the YESes will overtake the NOs.
The Yes votes are now 563 short of the No votes. It is New York, after all. This will take effort.
This administration’s use of the term “freedom of worship” is not the same as the Bill of Rights “freedom of religion”. The first upholds the right of people to go to the church, synagogue or mosque or their choice. The second, most importantly, defends the right to public discourse about religious views in politics, the media, in schools, etc. If the trend continues, we shall not have religious programming, or this blog, or the ability to pray outside abortion clinics. Only people, outside of secularists, and atheists, who are not living a faith on a daily basis, Sunday Christians, for example, are not concerned about this. I am very concerned and think in my lifetime I shall see serious fines and the curbing of freedom of religion. Shades of Elizabeth I, Mao, Stalin, etc. all in the name of “civil rights” for sin.
I would likely vote “No.” As of yet, I can still attend Mass and receive the sacraments in the open and without worrying about secret police or suicide bombers. My priests and Bishop have not been imprisoned for remaining faithful to the Holy Father, and I am free to express my faith in the public square if I choose to do so.
Do I believe this administration has much respect for the Church or the consciences of individual Catholics? NO. But that is a far cry from our rights being “trampled on.” Thinking that they are in this country would seem to trivialize what our brothers and sisters in China and Nigeria are enduring.
It may one day come to that over here, but I don’t think it has yet.
I believe Dan raises a worthy point in his comment above. The “trampling on religious rights” rhetoric currently being employed by the USCCB against the Obama Administration in reference to a variety of proposed and actual federal government regulations regarding issues such as contraception and adoption does risk seeming like hyperbole in comparison with government complicity in the outright persecution of Catholics in China and Nigeria. However, one should bear in mind the early history of the Catholic Church’s treatment by the National Socialist Party in pre-war Germany. History shows that the Nazis increased their persecution of the Catholic Church and its educational and charitable institutions only slowly and incrementally, especially between 1933, when Hitler became Chancellor, and 1936, a period during which the persecution was slow but steady. After 1936 the persecution increased, but once again only incrementally, up to 1939. By then it no one would deny that the Church and its institutions had been crushed.
Dan raises good points, but I voted yes.
It’s 10:30 and the yes’s are only slightly behind the no’s. Amazing on a site sponsored by msnbc!
I voted “Yes”.
It’s ironic, is it not that today is the memorial of St. Thomas Becket, Bishop and Martyr, who died defending his church against the encroachments of the state.
O God, who gave the Martyr Saint Thomas Becket the courage to give up his life for the sake of justice, grant, through his intercession, that, renouncing our life for the sake of Christ in this world, we may find it in heaven.Through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son, who lives and reigns with you in the unity of the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. – Amen.
Fr. Z,
You’re updates are not showing up on the post.
In Jesus, Mary, & Joseph,
Tito
Pingback: THURSDAY POLITICS EXTRA | ThePulp.it
Thanks Fr. Z, the pics are showing up now!
When I voted it was 49% to 49%…Oh and I did vote yes!
“Are religious rights being trampled on by government?”
Does King Kong like bananas?
At the time I voted, it was almost equal – 49%, 49% and 2%. The 49% no still had a majority of votes saying no (8851 to 8819) but the margin is closing.
The government scares me, but Obama’s so-called Catholics like Sebelius and Pelosi scare me even more.
David Zampino, I think you mean it’s coincidental. ;)
Dear Father Z,
I went in and voted. I agree with schmenz. It’s a tie as of now. 49% to 49%. I am afraid this is more and more of Revelations coming true. Anything Religious is being taken away. This political correctness makes me sick.
This administration has stampeded upon the religious freedom of the members of the United States Armed Forces by lifting DADT.
BTW: per the new military ID cards, we Army, Navy, Air Force, & Marines are no longer members of the “Armed Forces”; we’re now referred to as “Uniformed Services” – along with TSA I guess. It’s demoralizing how we are regarded by this current government.
We now enjoy a narrow lead. 9,115 to 8,874…. 50% to 48%, with a very determined 2% remaining undecided.