An edgy video about Pres. Obama’s lies

Fr. Leo Patalinghug, who does some cooking now and then, has a good video commentary on how Pres. Obama is undermining the 1st Amendment and, well, lying to us.

This is the sort of video that could appeal to young people, and therefore WDTPRS sends kudos to Fr. Patalinghug.


About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Dogs and Fleas, Lighter fare, Mail from priests, Our Catholic Identity, Priests and Priesthood, Religious Liberty, The Drill, The future and our choices, The Last Acceptable Prejudice and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. NoTambourines says:

    Oh, that’s delightful. I hope Catholic campus ministries invite speakers like Fr. Patalinghug. I bet he’d bring the house down.

  2. pm125 says:

    Articulate or what. Agree about the appeal when I think of kids in my acquaintance – imagine first the fingers get practiced, then the message sinks in. It’s good and will keep attention centered. (I saw them ‘Te – bowing” with running starts etc. )

  3. catholicmidwest says:

    Excellent. And all without a teleprompter.

  4. Batfink says:

    @pm125 – that was me practising the finger!

    I won’t be using it as my kids in England won’t have a clue what it’s about, but I’ll look out with interest to see if he posts videos on any other topics.

  5. Kerry says:

    Supposedly, giving the “finger” was a gesture of defiance by longbowman who, if captured, that finger was cut off. Prior to battles, they would stand with middle finger raised, a gesture of “Oh yeah!” (As I heard this tale from a guy, who knew a guy, who was with a guy who knew someone whose great uncle was there, it could be apocryphal.)

    I think the raised ring finger is a gesture we should adopt at any public protest events. It will be confused with the longbowman finger, and then the issue of fidelity and marriage can be broached.

  6. catholicmidwest says:

    I have a feeling that if this whole culture war takes a really nasty turn, the oh-so-polite-while-murdering-your-own-kids crowd is going to be more than a bit scandalized by the ancient and basic Catholic faith, which is really very earthy, dramatic and kinda punk when you think about it. So much so it’s really funny in too many ways. They worry about movie stars wear to their soirees on their blogs; we blatantly proclaim that you can’t marry if you can’t do the deed on ours. ROFLOL.

    They may have a much bigger fight on their hands, and a much more subtle fight, than they are planning on.

  7. catholicmidwest says:

    There are tons of links to this story about the finger on the Internet, Kerry. For what it’s worth, The Straight Dope, a myth debunking site, says that it predates the wars between the French and the English (darn) and that it really originated long, long ago. There is evidence that Romans were using it in ancient times and I won’t describe on good Fr. Z’s blog what the meaning was. :D The Romans probably brought it to Britain, and then it probably came here with British settlers to this continent, some of whom were a rowdy lot.

  8. nsummy says:

    I have a friend of mine who is a priest. He is constantly sending me posts from this blog. I have to say without a doubt that a majority of these posts on here are misguided at best. As a Catholic, this contraception thing has been blown completely out of proportion. Its funny everyone is jumping on Obama’s back but seemed to turn a blind eye to Bush when it came to wars, death penalty, and the treatment of the poor. A few things:

    1. Over 90% of Catholic women use birth control. Think that stat is made up? Take a look next time you go to mass. How many familes do you see with 5+ kids. Hardly any. You think a married couple could regularly have sex for 2 decades and only have 1 kid without contraception?

    2. Why is there no talk of Viagra or vasectomy? Why is it ok for a man to get surgical birth control? Why aren’t we limiting Viagra to only married men?

    3. What about those women who need birth control for medical reasons? I know a girl who works at a Catholic hospital that has to pay hundreds per year. This is not to have casual sex but to correct a medical condition.

    Its time for the church to get out of the dark age.

  9. DanielKane says:

    1. The sad fact that 90% of Catholic couples are in mortal sin is a call for repentance, not a call for the voiding of the sin(s) of contraception, fornication or chemical abortion. The Church (any church for that matter) does not poll the members to determine morality. The sin of sacrilege – receiving Holy Communion in a state of sin – like un-confessed contraception is common and indeed VERY GRAVE.

    2. Viagra restored an injured or diseased organ to normal function. Oral contraceptives take a normal organ (fertility is normal) and make it dysfunctional. Huge difference. Oral contraceptive are the only drugs that DO NOT treat a disease or restore normalcy. Vasectomy is mutilation of a normally functioning and disease free organ and is always sinful.

    3. Taking oral contraceptives for a medical condition is by intention, the authentic treatment of disease, not contraception. On this point, I am calling you mistaken, mislead or misinformed. Please name the hospital, I am sure that she is not the only female employed there. Taking BCPs for the treatment of disease has always been allowed.

    If you think that the mandate is about who pays for a little white pill, I pray that you inform yourself. It is about forcing the Church to cooperate with authentic evil – like the balance of our corrupt society.

  10. nsummy says:

    Danielkane – I agree, the church does not poll members to determine morality. This does not mean church teaching remains static. For an example of this take a look at the difference in church policy on the Death Penalty during John Paul II. Furthermore a majority of the Pontifical Commission on Birth Control ruled that it is ok, yet the Pope only said natural methods are ok. I digress though, my point is, if so many Catholic women take birth control, why don’t we go to the root of the problem? The root is obviously the congregation. Funny you never hear a priest railing against women during a homily but you will hear him talk about Obama like he is the boogey man.

    2. Erectile Dysfunction is not an inury or disease. Just like its not normal for a woman to have childern after menopause, it is not normal for some men to continue having sex. At this point of their life they are not doing it for procreation. But lets get back to my point. Why does insurance in these Catholic hospitals and schools cover vasectomy? It is sinful yet these bishops seemed to have no problem with it before.

    3. I will not name the hospital she works at. I will simply say that the insurance there does not cover contraception period, regardless of how it is used. Are you suggesting that the Bishops will allow to it to be covered for authentic medical conditions?

  11. DanielKane says:

    1. The Church’s position is that the death penalty is unnecessary in the west because we have adequate prisons. It is still allowed see Catechism 2267 “Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty.” It is simply more nuanced. With respect to marriage, the is undoubtedly a grave lack of formation that falls on both the priesthood and the married. Contraception, is a sin of those in the married state and it properly falls on those in the married state to be properly formed in their sacramental duties. We are, after all, adults.

    2. Normal penises have the capacity to develop an erection sufficient for the martial embrace. If it loses this capacity, there is some dysfunction. Today, there are drugs to treat this dysfunction and their use is licit in the context of the married. Every woman eventually loses her fertility. This is normal and expected. Birth Control Pills make normal, fertile, women infertile by intent. In doing so they remove the creative intention of God from their marriage. Since only those in the sacrament of marriage may do this act, it is a particularly grave sin against the Creator, the Sacrament and the couple. It is a sin with an accomplice which is an amplifying factor.

    It is immoral in every instance for a Catholic Hospital to cover vasectomy and if I knew of one that did that procedure, I would do my best to stop it.

    3. If the drug is not on the insurance plan (called the formulary) then it is not covered no matter the indication. Not every drug is covered by insurance, for instance allergy shots and some psyche drugs are often excluded. It is not (and never has been) immortal to take birth control pills for the treatment of a disease. Cardinal Dolan (on TV) and Bishop Lori (before Congress) both said that BCPs for non-contraceptive indications are fine. BCPs for contraception is always mortal sin. However, insurance has never covered each and every drug, procedure and disease treatment and it could very well exclude BCPs from coverage regardless of the indication. This is a business decision not a moral one.

  12. nsummy says:

    Lets forget I ever mentioned Viagra or Death Penalty, I don’t want it to detract. My question is this. Why are these bishops so quick to blame Obama when their own flock is to blame? They openly bash his policy when no one in the church follows church policy. When will a priest have enough guts to stand up and point blank call out women who take birth control during the homily. You will never see it happen.

    Secondly, you have to be kidding about Catholic hospitals and vasectomy. Current stats alone show that Catholic hospitals have tied the tubes of over 20,000 women in the past few years: Funny Bishops will blame Obama but not themselves.

  13. wmeyer says:

    nsummy: The mandate from Obama is a violation of the 1st amendment. He has no power to violate the Constitution, nor any of the lawfully passed amendments. To ignore this is to sanction tyranny. The bishops had to take a stand. As to whether the bishops blame themselves, or for what they may blame themselves, you have no way to know. The job of the bishops is to lead, to teach, and to protect their flocks.

    It is not so much that the bishops have drawn a line. They have acted in response to what should rightly be called an act of treason by the chief executive.

  14. nsummy says:

    wmeyer – Luckily this is why we have the Supreme Court. The Bishops can take a stand all they want but they do not determine whether laws are constitutional or not. Only the highest court can decide that. As far as treason goes, I think you better reexamine the word.

  15. Johnno says:

    nsummy – No human court of law is above the law of God and His moral dictates. By going against God, the court, the society and people like you who live and support its immoral decisions gravely endanger your souls and the lives of others that are: the unborn, those who will succumb to the sufferings of STDs, those who will succumb to the sufferings of the consequences of immoral sexuality in their relationships and in their psyche, and all this contributing to a lifestyle that gravely disorders itself from the natural world God created, misunderstanding reality and thus misunderstanding God, and thus making them more inclined to deny God and choose hell when they die. You have a moral obligation to stop this at all costs!

Comments are closed.