Translate

Saturday, August 29, 2020

CARDINAL O'MALLEY OF BOSTON FORCES PRIEST TO APOLOGIZE FOR AGREEING WITH THE DEMOCRAT PARTY'S PRO CHOICE GENOCIDE POLICY




From CNA:
On Thursday, Fr. Garrity clarified that he is “totally against legalized abortion.”
“I am committed to upholding Church teaching regarding the sanctity of life from the moment of conception until natural death,” he said in his most recent Facebook post. Garrity added that he was “not prepared for the uncharitable responses” to his earlier post, and that “the last thing that I would ever want to do is hurt anyone with my words.”
On Thursday, Cardinal O’Malley, Archbishop of Boston, issued a statement saying that Catholics have “the right to expect the priests of the Archdiocese and those entrusted with handing on the faith to be clear and unequivocal on the Church’s teaching concerning respect and protection for life from the first moment of conception to natural death.”
“This teaching is of the highest priority for the Church,” he added.

108 comments:

Anonymous said...

Good for Cardinal O'Malley. The "priest" will nonetheless vote for the Party who will fight like hell to keep abortions going

Father McDonald, this story about Catholic schools re-opening will cheer you up (in stark contrast to the Union Goon Teachers Union who are keeping schools closed "for the children"):

https://nypost.com/2020/08/28/why-were-opening-catholic-schools-full-time-in-person-amid-covid-19/

Walter White said...

That sounds like a clarification, not an apology. I don’t see the “I’m sorry” part or that he retracted his support for Biden. Or that cardinal O’Malley asked him to. Joe is pro-life. Father Garrett is pro-life. I am pro-life. We agree that Biden’s policies will do more to prevent abortions than Trump’s phony and hypocritical lip service. It’s all good.

rcg said...

This guy is a liar and he thinks we are fools. His original statement was worded in the false positive that he believed a woman had the choice to bear the child and since his candidate is pro-choice then he supports that candidate. That misportrayal of pro-choice is dissembling and constructed mislead. I can’t imagine the the contempt the people he is trying to help must have for him.

Anonymous said...

Father McDonald,

I am sending you this quote from Conrad Black just for your reading pleasure:

This will be exposed as the most mistakenly overconfident launch of a major party campaign for the White House since the renomination of Governor Thomas Dewey of New York against President Harry Truman in 1948. The combination of the two sequential conventions and the performance of the Democratic media in covering them will be a shattering blow to the Democratic strategists who retrieved Joe Biden and Kamala Harris from the prenomination ash heap and put them forward as a respectable camouflage for the party’s outright Marxist program. Whatever possessed them to imagine that they could avoid any comment on the most widespread and most destructive urban rioting in America in over 50 years, could lay the public health crisis entirely upon the president, could maintain their advocacy of an immigration policy that would ultimately result in every poverty-stricken person in the world moving to the United States, while ignoring this administration’s reduction of illegal immigration by 90 percent; all of this and many other issues will be as much a matter of interest to psychiatrists as to historians.

EX DEMOCRAT said...

How can ANYONE with a pulse and a functioning IQ above 80 possibly call Joe Biden or ANY Democrat who affirms their platform "PRO LIFE"?

Faithful Catholic said...

Father McDonald:

As a Catholic voter, we need fair, objective information on how both Trump and Biden have practiced Chrstian principles in their lives.
Because you are honest and fair, I'd appreciate it if you could dig up this information -- sort of a Catholic-life box score -- and post the relevant numbers for all to see
Thank you in advance.
Keep up the good work

Trump vs. Biden:

Regular church attendance
Divorces
Confirmed marital affairs
Accused sexual assaults
Sum total of settlements paid to mistresses
Pounds of cocaine snorted
Family members who served in the military
Times found guilty of fraud
Times found guilty of racial housing discrimination
Number of videos discussing grabbing women's private parts

I can't make up my mind about which man is a better Christian, and maybe this would help. I'd appreciate if you could post this before November 3rd. Bless you!

Anonymous said...

EX DEMOCRAT,

Well there is a certain "priest" here that will explain it to you!!

Ridin’ With Biden said...

As explained by our bishop last year:
It is a mortal sin to vote for a candidate BECAUSE they are pro-choice.
It is problematic to vote for a candidate DESPITE being pro-choice, but it can be permissible depending on circumstances, such as dire, harmful alternatives. (The “Vote-against-Hitler” scenario.)
It is permissible to vote for a candidate who is pro-life but perhaps not absolutely so or supporting exceptions or who says “I will enforce the law.” Because elected officials must take an oath to do that. In case of dire, harmful alternatives, voting for such a candidate (Hello, Joe) is not just permissible but recommended.

Bee said...

Bee here:

Most of us believe expectant mothers need and deserve the very same things Msgr. Garrity iterates they need and deserve. Only we don't believe the State is responsible to provide those things, but it is the duty of the father of the child and family members on both sides to provide those things.

And the "Right to Choose" has never been understood to mean the right to choose to have the child, because everyone already has that. The right to choose has always meant the right to abort.

Oh, but wait....we're talking about Leftists here...so it appears we are taking a new tack and this is a new spin with new rhetoric, changing definitions of commonly understood terms. So now the "right to choose" apparently means the right to choose life without losing any advantages of the childless lifestyle, and maybe even getting an upgrade of lifestyle!

Joe Biden has promised to reinstate the HHS Mandate to force the Little Sisters of the Poor to pay for contraception and abortions in their insurance plan. That sure doesn't sound pro-life to me.

To lie like this...to pretend Joe Biden does not support abortion is such a deception. It's shameful for a priest to do this.

God bless.
Bee

Anonymous said...

Taken together, his two posts show us the opposite of what the Trump crowd here would like you to believe. A Catholic voter, even a priest, can fully support Church teachings & also support a pro-life (in EVERY sense) Democrat. He did not apologize nor did he renounce his support for Biden. He expressed his position so clearly and thoughtfully, compared to the insults and name calling we typically see from Trump voters.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Faithful Catholic, the Church allows us to support those with personal immorality except if they make that personal immorality a part of their platform. Of course, we all know about President Trump's immoral acts. With him, what you see is what you get.

The same is true with Biden. There are accusations about behavior, either sinful or criminal, towards him too. Who knows what is slander/libel or not. He hasn't been charged with anything and neither has Trump.

So let's take personal morality out of the equation, unless it is a part of their platform. Let's look at abortion and its heinous reality, that a particular life, human life, is allow to live or be murdered by the choice of the mother, as though that life, independent of the mother does not matter. All Lives Matter. The now cliche "Black Live Matter" is true and the media gets it for political expediency and so do the Democrats. But hypocritically, they refuse to attribute that to unborn children. That is a scandal that screams to God for justice.

Thus, if a pedophile candidate pledges he will support strong laws criminalizing these unjust acts of what pedophiles do, and his opponent who isn't a pedophile is in favor of relaxing laws and lowering the age of consent to 6 years old. Guess who I am voting for? Correct answer, the one who wants it outlawed.

Anonymous said...

The very choice that many today are waiting to make later this year, which is to vote for Joe Biden, would not be an option had abortion been legal back in 1942 and his mother had made the choice to abort him.

Anonymous said...

Trump’s personal immorality is part of his platform, it is his entire platform, and there is nothing else. You would be screaming bloody murder if Democrats nominated a man with Trump’s personal record. If that happened. Of course, you would not , as a priest, tell us to “take personal morality out of the equation.” Hopefully, someday you will realize how hypocritical that is, how you’ve squandered your moral authority for politics and shamed your church. Who would take instruction or guidance from a priest who advises us to “take personal morality out of the equation”?

Anonymous said...

RCG

Thank you for calling it as it is. Satan is a master with false positives.....and of course Lies.......

Anonymous said...

Joe Biden is just another grifter like the Clintoons and the Obamas, with they and their families making millions off of governmental service and fooling the rubes, including some priests, that they are for the "little guy." Harry Truman would call them crooks. They are also united in their devotion to abortion which hits the Black community disproportionately.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

A@ 12:15, Trump was a Democrat. He was pro-choice. If he had run for President as a Democrat, I suspect you would focus on what he wanted as a democrat in union with its party platform and made an informed decision to vote form him or his republican challenger. . But wait, would you feel the same about him if as a democrat he bucked the system and had a pro-life platform, with the exception he has enunciated in the past? VP Biden, supports his party’s platform. I don’t even think he says any longer, which he once said, that he was personallly opposed to abortion but supports a woman’s right to murder her unborn child or give him a particular birth abortion while being born, or alllow the baby to be born and then kill him. Degenerate is this position, degenerate.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Partial birth not particular birth, thank you auto correct!

Anonymous said...

Trump has never run for office as a a Democrat or taken part in party politics as a Democrat, although I don’t doubt he “identified” as one at some times but not at others. He has always been shifty about issues. In truth, he has no fixed ideology or values except for grasping for power and money. Sometime after turning 70, he conveniently decided he was pro-life and would run as a Republican. That was a smart move, as a person with his record of fraud & racism could likely never win a Democratic primary. Clearly he liked for an easier path to office, among voters who were gullible and easy to confuse. He’s all yours, Republicans. Aren’t you proud?

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

You are breathtakingly judgmental of him and others. But if he is a despicable heathen, his one redeeming feature is his desire to protect unborn babies. Thank God’s grace for that, not Donald Trump.

George said...


When we vote for a President, are we not in essence voting for the policies and regulations that person desires to put in place, and those ordinances that person hopes to enact and sign into law? What responsible voter would cast a vote for a candidate based just on such things as personality, lifestyle, religious beliefs, or church attendance? We can all envision an ideal candidate who in conduct and demeanor fits our own pre-conceived notions of what we consider to be best in these aspects - our perfect candidate if you will. What should be preeminent in our considerations though is what the person hopes to do once elected. It is critically important that we become informed and cast our vote in conformance with Church teaching which is what has been revealed to us by God.

Joe Biden has said among other things that he would rescind the Mexico City Policy as soon as he became President.

This policy requires nongovernmental organizations to agree as a condition of receiving any federal funding that they “would neither perform nor actively promote abortion as a method of family planning in other nations.”

Take Mr. Biden at his word. He would allow federal funding to organizations that "perform and actively promote abortion as a method of family planning in other nations". I myself as a Catholic, cannot vote for any candidate who would commit to doing such a thing.

Does this not give us an indication that he would place into positions of power and influence those who would share the same philosophy?

I myself would not like to one day stand before God and try to explain why I voted for such a candidate, when I did not heed or dismissed from my mind that the person would do what he said he would do, which is something that is so unutterably and unequivocally opposed to what our Lord desires.

Anonymous said...

I laugh when Dems talk about personal immmorality when you consider the Kennedy's, Clinton's, and Biden's record.

Anonymous said...

I wonder why it is that people are so judgemental about Mr. Trump over his past indiscretions yet have no qualms about Kamala Harris? Who, given Mr. Biden's age and cognitive issues, could very well end up in the Oval office?

Anonymous said...

Does this blog frown upon people being judgmental? Oh, dear, i hadn’t noticed. If so, does that apply only to judging Trump? I can understand why that would be a problem. Allow me to pause while I clutch my pearls.

We now return you to our regularly scheduled program: judging liberals, lay ministers, women, young people, black people, nuns, other priests, the media,..

Not K said...

Being a right-wing pol must be wonderful. Have affairs, get caught with prostitutes, pay for your girlfriend’s abortion, molest boys, molest girls, harass woman, proposition guys in a men’s room. All you have to do is announce that God forgives you and you’re good to go. Even better when corrupt preachers or morally flexible priests run interference & say it’s nobody’s business. I’m not saying Democrats are better — they’re not. But at least they’re less likely play the phony God card and they’re more likely to pay the price with voters for crimes against women & children. Oh, and don’t forget to blame the media. Because no guilty person ever blamed the media. LOL.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

But at least this basket of deplorables is pro life and finds abhorrent those who promote the genocide of babies. You must be a democrat Puritan.

Anonymous 2 said...

Now that I understand the personal morality and character of a candidate are irrelevant to voting, I wish I had a time machine and could return to the 1990s and consider voting for Bill Clinton instead of Sam Nunn (whose name I wrote in). Or is that different because the “acts” in question were committed in the White House? Because if it isn’t, everyone here must now give Clinton a pass regarding his relationship with Monica, no?

Coach K said...

Gotta love Trump voters. Everybody on the other side is a pedophile, a pervert,a "demoncrat," a Marxist, a Socialist, and so on and so on. Push back with some facts and they get weepy and offended. You can't be judge-ment-al. As my dad used to say, you can dish it out but you can't take it. Wimps, snowflakes and little kitty cats, every one of them.

Anonymous 2 said...

Sorry, not everyone here. I should have said everyone who considers personal morality and character irrelevant. A few posters here do think these things are relevant.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

The democrats certainly did and do, given Monica was an intern and a good case for sexual harassment could have been made given age and power differences. It seems to me more Republican resign over sexual sins in which they are caught than Democrats. But yes today, all Americans have caught up with their much less puritanical European counterparts when it comes to politicians and their peccadilloes. Italy even elected a blond bombshell porn star!

Coach K said...

Father, Republicans have lots and lots and lots of abortions. If you don't believe that, you're in La La Land. A red state like Georgia has one of the highest rates in the nation. People here just pretend they don't. Of course, your position seems to be that that's OK as long as people say the right thing publicly. One doesn't want to judge and personal morality isn't really part of the equation, right?

Anonymous 2 said...

The point is to understand that there is no sharp line between personal morality and policies. The personal morality and character (or lack thereof) of a candidate inevitably affect how they govern (or fail to govern), as is clearly the case with Trump. I believe one of the previous posters made essentially the same point.

What this thread seems to overlook entirely is the USCCB guidance on conscientious voting. Each election cycle, it seems, I have to remind people here about the existence of this guidance. Why is this I wonder?

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Atlanta is blue, blue , blue and of course Republicans and Catholics procure abortions. It is legal snd that’s the problem.

Anonymous 2 said...

Monica was not alone, of course, Paula Jones? Jennifer Flowers? Etc., etc. The conduct may well be symptomatic of a general tendency to abuse power and betray trust. These things can be forgiven, of course, but surely they cannot be ignored in reaching a judgment about a candidate? And yes, of course, this means we are judgmental. What else are we supposed to exercise when deciding how to vote, other than our judgment? Isn’t the USCCB guidance very clear that we are permitted to take a candidate’s character into account?

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

A 2 it isn’t infallible and now we have a party supporting partial birth abortion and killing babies immediately after birth.

Anonymous said...

The bishops’ quadrennial guidance inevitably comes down to two points:

1) Catholics can & should vote their conscience. The Church cannot tell you who you must or must not vote for.

2) Issues of life are most important, but abortion is not the only life issue. Catholics are not called to be one-issue voters, even though some political camp followers will try to spin it that way.

Think I’m wrong? Prove it. Don’t tell me what you think. Show me what the Church says.

Anonymous 2 said...

Also on the ballot is the conditional ascribed to Ben Franklin in answer to the question whether we had a monarchy or a republic: “A republic, if you can keep it.” Can we? What I saw on Thursday night looked awfully like a monarchy to me. Trump could have descended the staircase naked and no-one would have said anything. In fact, no-one does in Trump world because if they do, they suffer "cancellation by tweet." Just ask Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III; he’ll tell you.

Anonymous 2 said...

You and I disagree on the USCCB guidance, Father McDonald, although I agree it isn't infallible. I think I have made my position clear regarding the appalling position of the Democrats on the abortion issue. Despite this position, I still have to make a judgment informed by conscience in the circumstances presented by current realities and constraints.

The USCCB guidance allows me (or anyone) to vote for Biden while doing everything else in my power, personally and politically, to reduce the number of abortions. Of course, just because it allows me to vote for Biden doesn’t mean that is necessarily what I will do (although I will not vote for Trump).

I have also made it clear that I consider our politics corrupt and our political conversation seriously degraded. We need to clean house, restore political conversation, and advocate for a politics (and politicians) of virtue.

Bean0 said...

Faithful Catholic - Your list is a good one. Like you, I await Fr. McDonald's results.

"Faithful Catholic, the Church allows us to support those with personal immorality except if they make that personal immorality a part of their platform."

There is NOTHING in Catholic doctrine about personal immorality and platforms. You made thos up out of thin air.

"You are breathtakingly judgmental of him and others."

There is nothing "breathtaking" in noting facts.

Anonymous 2 said...

The only thing missing from the desecration of “The People’s House” on Thursday night was the orchestra playing Handel’s music for the royal fireworks!

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

A 2, no clergy person can tell you how to vote and "Faithful Catholic" as flawed as it is have some recommendations for Catholics. But this is the rub and Cardinal O'Malley makes it clear:


On Thursday, Cardinal O’Malley, Archbishop of Boston, issued a statement saying that Catholics have “the right to expect the priests of the Archdiocese and those entrusted with handing on the faith to be clear and unequivocal on the Church’s teaching concerning respect and protection for life from the first moment of conception to natural death.”
“This teaching is of the highest priority for the Church,” he added.

Yes, the Church isn't single issue, it would be great to have ethical presidents and candidates for the presidency, but the highest priority in the moral hierarchy is what the Cardinal wrote. The seamless garment of the Church's pro-life teaching (which I embrace as a Catholic and a priest) will unravel at its starting point if the thread of the protection of the innocent unborn is not the first and foundation priority of keeping the garment in tact.

Thus a Catholic must make a prudential judgement about a candidate who might be divisive and immoral but his actions show he is more pro-life than his challenger who advocates for the genocide of babies if the mother wants to do it.

Anonymous 2 said...

Father McDonald,

Your position is a perfectly reasonable one. But I would suggest amending it to say that Trump is not more pro life but more anti-abortion. For example, he seems quite prepared for many tens of thousands to die from Covid-19. I hope you will accept this as a friendly amendment.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous Coach K said...

"Father, Republicans have lots and lots and lots of abortions. If you don't believe that, you're in La La Land. A red state like Georgia has one of the highest rates in the nation"

Last time I checked the blue and many of the more Catholic states had the most abortions(New York, California, Massachusetts etc.) so what are you saying? I should then quit the Catholic church? And really, Georgia is more liberal than it used to be so why be surprised at the abortions?
So much straw and rationalization.

George said...

The words of Pope Francis, Wed 10 Oct 2018 07.31 EDT

Pope Francis makes one of his harshest criticisms of abortion, telling weekly audience ‘it is not right’

In one of his harshest criticisms of abortion, Pope Francis has compared the procedure to “hiring a hitman to resolve a problem”.

The pontiff told his weekly general audience at St Peter’s Square that “a contradictory approach to life allows the suppression of human life in the mother’s womb *in order to safeguard other values*”.

He added: “How can an act that suppresses an innocent and helpless life as it blossoms be therapeutic, civil or, simply, humane?”

All Popes since Pope St Paul VI have condemned abortin in the strongest terms.

Anonymous said...

All this talk just about Mr. Trump's indiscretions. What about Kamala Harris who could very well become President given Mr. Biden's cognitive issues?

Citizen said...

George @ 2:01, so good to “see” you! And yes, indeed, I absolutely agree with you:

“When we vote for a President, are we not in essence voting for the policies and regulations that person desires to put in place, and those ordinances that person hopes to enact and sign into law? What responsible voter would cast a vote for a candidate based just on such things as personality, lifestyle, religious beliefs, or church attendance?”.

As much as I can really hate personal lifestyles of Presidential candidates, and even recoil from their personal histories, I have always tried to vote for what he says is his agenda, particularly if he is already in office and has demonstrated following that agenda. Perhaps my biggest quandary was my first: Nixon vs. Humphrey. My family were conservative, military and Republican. I was in a NE liberal college and hated the Vietnam war (not a “Just War in any sense that I could see), that stole many friends and my brother in the draft. “Tricky Dick” was a proven sleazy politico, who had no history with social issues I thought important; Humphrey was an unknown to me, with an agenda that was flimsy, and I despised the incumbent Democrat Lyndon Johnson personally, moral history, and politically. BUT, he had made some strides with racial equality that were very important to me. Would Nixon end that un-winnable war? Would Humphrey end the war and continue the Civil Rights advances? What to do...?

Whew—Too much info I know, but just trying to make the point that none of this should be about personalities, foibles, moral turpitude, but often is. What to do? Vote with an informed Catholic conscience for the agenda that most closely matches accepted magisterial Church teaching. Then pray, pray, pray.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Of course Covid 19 is spiking throughout Europe now and a CNN reporter had to acknowledge in Berlin today at a massive protest against masks and other draconian policies of their leaders that the CNN meme against Trump’s leadership compared to Europe’s has come back to bite them. Of course the reporter lamented the protesters were on top of each other and not wearing masks which the requirements to wear them they were protesting.
And I was shocked that at the BLM rally in DC yesterday, CNN complained they were to close to each other and many maskless. Fortunately they did not blame Trump for that but did castigate his rose garden so each with many in attendance not masked.but at least those who attacked Rand Paul, his wife and others after the rose garden event were wearing masks, but I suspect to avoid recognition,

Anonymous said...

"The seamless garment of the Church's pro-life teaching (which I embrace as a Catholic and a priest) will unravel at its starting point..."

This is entirely true.

Also entirely true: The protection of human life will fail if at any level on the continuum that life is not respected. In marriage, in separating refugee parents from children, in war, in criminal justice - if respecting human life is not the highest priority in all of these cases we have only shreds of a garment left and damaged humans as a result.

Anonymous said...

"Your position is a perfectly reasonable one. But I would suggest amending it to say that Trump is not more pro life but more anti-abortion. For example, he seems quite prepared for many tens of thousands to die from Covid-19. I hope you will accept this as a friendly amendment."

As of the latest numbers, the top ten states for COVID mortality represent over 53% of all deaths.

Eight of the top 10 are blue states. That doesn't include Louisiana which has a Democrat governor.

Just the top 5 (all blue) states of New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Illinois and Pennsylvania have had 41% of all mortalities from COVID.
Joe Biden state of Delaware(in the top 13) has 620 deaths per million vs Georgia at 525.

Is Mr. Trump responsible for New York placing COVID patients in Nursing homes? Or what the governors of these states did or didn't do?

It is the responsibility of state governors to issue guidelines (or mandates) in dealing with the virus (not Mr. Trump's). Under the President, huge numbers of ventilators and medications, in addition to billions upon billions of dollars have been distributed out to the states.

Anonymous 3 said...


"Anonymous Anonymous 2 said...
Father McDonald,

Your position is a perfectly reasonable one. But I would suggest amending it to say that Trump is not more pro life but more anti-abortion. For example, he seems quite prepared for many tens of thousands to die from Covid-19. I hope you will accept this as a friendly amendment."

It is not a friendly amendment but an ugly lie. Is that what the loonies in the "faculty lounge" are saying? Balderdash. President Trump did not shove the thousands that died in New York State into nursing homes, Governor Cuomo did. Also, Governor Cuomo did not avail himself of the hospital ships President Trump sent. While your Party was pursuing a phony impeachment President Trump was working on protecting the US getting called "zenophobic and racist" by YOUR party's leaders for his pains.

Anonymous 3 said...

Anonymous 2,

Why not share with us your "prudential" reasons for voting for the rioting, looting, and burning Party? I bet they will not hold up to the slightest scrutiny. It can't be that they are the Party of the "little guy," that ended when the Grifter Clintoons took over and emulated by the Obamas. The last Democrat that was for the little guy, was Jimmy Carter, and his awful economic policies made things worse for the little guy.

Anonymous 2 said...

Well, if people are not observing “draconian” measures like wearing masks and social distancing, then I am not surprised the cases are rising in Europe as well. I have little time for those, whether in Europe or in the United States, who say in effect “let us eat, drink, and be merry for tomorrow you die.” And I have some pretty direct knowledge of this because I see the first part of the saying on some of our students who go out to bars and party and my wife sees the second part at her hospital where she and her team counsel the families of dying Covid patients. So, some at low risk have all the fun and others at high risk must bear the dreadful consequences of that fun. And Trump and those who are like-minded just feed the problem by discounting or even mocking the “draconian” measures, and he is quite happy to put people at risk on the White House lawn to gratify his insecure little ego. Sorry, but no, I don’t think Trump is “pro-life,” although I do agree he presents himself as “anti-abortion.”

Anonymous 2 said...

Yes, you’re so right Anonymous, Trump bears no responsibility at all for the high numbers of Covid deaths and debilitating illnesses in the United States. But he would if his name was Obama wouldn’t he?

Anonymous 2 said...

Also, I am rather tired of the blue state versus red state narrative, whether Republican or Democratic. Yes, discharging Covid-19 patients into nursing homes was stupid as was de Blasio telling people to go out for one last weekend of fun before the lockdown. We can all agree on this. But the situation is much more complex than that. What amazes me, but doesn’t really, is that Trump and Trump supporters accept none of the blame, none, even when they discount or mock “draconian” measures like mask wearing and social distancing, which we know helps reduce infection, There is no reasoning with such fanatics and I now give up

John Nolan said...

In Britain Canon 285 seems to be interpreted more strictly than it is in the USA. A priest would not be allowed to express publicly a preference for one political party over another, or to make public his voting intentions.

This seems sensible to me.

Clam Dude said...

This blog is a beautiful Dumpster fire. Seriously, the most entertaining “religious”!discussion on the Internet.
Is anyone’s mind getting changed? Doubt it. I’m giving this one to Team Biden on points.
Shall we all declare victory, move on and discuss clams?

Ayn Rand Paul said...

Rand Paul was not “attacked.” People yelled at him. Another scared little kitty cat, Rand is. As a US Senator, he has a habit of avoiding voter who haven’t shelled out $1,000 a plate, but it’s probably good for him to hear Once in a while what the riffraff have to say.

Anonymous said...


"Also entirely true: The protection of human life will fail if at any level on the continuum that life is not respected. In marriage, in separating refugee parents from children, in war, in criminal justice - if respecting human life is not the highest priority in all of these cases we have only shreds of a garment left and damaged humans as a result."

Pres. Trump has given us criminal justice reform, his administration has fought against human trafficking and he has not gotten us into a war. So what is your problem? As far as separating refugee parents from children, that was a policy carried over from the Obama administration.

Anonymous said...

John Nolan

In the U.S. they can, as long as they don't do it from the Church pulpit.

RANDom said...

Ayn Rand:
As far as Rand Paul goes: were you there?

Anonymous said...

"Yes, you’re so right Anonymous, Trump bears no responsibility at all for the high numbers of Covid deaths and debilitating illnesses in the United States. But he would if his name was Obama wouldn’t he?"

Trump is getting plenty of blame as would Mr. Obama if he was currently in office.
In either case it doesn't make it right or fair.

DT said...

For me, the portion of USCCB’s position on single-issue voting that carries the most weight is not voting "for a candidate who promotes an intrinsically evil act, such as legal abortion…"

42. As Catholics we are not single-issue voters. A candidate's position on a single issue is not sufficient to guarantee a voter's support. Yet if a candidate's position on a single issue promotes an intrinsically evil act, such as legal abortion, redefining marriage in a way that denies its essential meaning, or racist behavior, a voter may legitimately disqualify a candidate from receiving support.

Anonymous said...

I doubt that abortion would ever be made illegal by the Republicans, even if they had total control and completely stacked the Supreme Court for the next fifty years. It doesn't benefit them in any way to actually go through with it and isn't anywhere near their top priority. It's certainly not anything they're willing to sacrifice for. Far better to do just enough for the pro-life movement to get their votes, but never enough to turn off the pro-choice Republican voters. Trump appears at the March for Life to be the most pro-life president ever, and then the majority conservative Supreme court upholds the right to access abortion.

IMO, this pretty much renders abortion a non-issue when choosing who to vote for since you have two parties that are pro-abortion in practice (one just isn't being honest about it).

Anonymous 2 said...

My biggest problem with Trump does not concern this, that, or the other policy, or his generally vicious character. My biggest problem is with how he threatens the very foundation of our Republic.

Many posters here consider that abortion strikes at the foundation of every other “life” issue. Fair enough. But will we really be able to do anything about it, or indeed much of anything else, if the Republic is destroyed?

I could go on about Trump’s assault on the rule of law (which doesn’t just mean rule by law but means especially that the rulers themselves are ruled by law) and the independence of the judiciary. I could go on about his authoritarian, even monarchical, inclinations. But I won’t. However, I will go on about his incessant and pathological lying, gaslighting, and manipulation of our perception of reality. There are no “facts” for Trump, just those “alternative facts” that suit his twisted egocentric purposes. And when he gets called out, he calls it fake news. The corrosive effect of this on our Republic and our political conversation is incalculable.

If we are to have any hope of taking back our country and our political conversation from the diabolical forces that have stolen it from us, we must have a shared commitment to honesty and the truth. I know I won’t be able to change the minds of any of the Trump fanatics who post here, and I imagine they won’t even read the articles, but will dismiss them as “leftist,” or they will point out that Obama lied too. Yes, agreed. Obama lied sometimes, as all politicians do. But has anyone, except perhaps the Devil himself, lied and lied and lied like Donald Trump?

So, I cannot be silent, but am compelled by my conscience to speak. If you have the courage to look, then, here are some facts to consider:

https://twitter.com/ryanstruyk/status/1299197966687842304?s=20 [21 falsehoods during Trump’s acceptance speech]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/pr/2020/04/22/donald-trump-his-assault-on-truth-to-be-published-by-scribner/ [book about the 16,241 false or misleading claims Trump has made during the first three years as president]

Again, I understand that this may be a fruitless exercise, as explained in the following piece (“Belief, therefore, takes the place of fact”):

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/media/fact-checking-trumps-lies-is-essential-its-also-increasingly-pointless/2020/08/28/35fb41de-e947-11ea-bc79-834454439a44_story.html?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most

To the Trump supporters here I say: I respect your right as Catholics to vote in good conscience and good faith for Trump because of his announced opposition to abortion. Please respect my right as a Catholic in good conscience and good faith not to vote for our own Father of Lies.



Anonymous 2 said...

Having explained why I cannot in good conscience and good faith vote for Trump, let me now add that I have also tried to explain to those supporting the Biden-Harris ticket why the Democratic Party’s current position on abortion is so wrong-headed. The Democratic Party is simply disconnected from the reality of where voters are on the issue, and if the Biden-Harris ticket loses to Trump-Pence, it will be at least in part because the Democratic Party is as absolutist as the Republican Party. Whatever happened to “safe, legal, and rare”? The following article, although a bit out of date now (it is a year old), makes the point well:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/13/opinion/sunday/abortion-roe-2020-democrats.html

rcg said...

A2: for the same reason it is wrong to bigoted on special occasions.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

A 2, apart from the disconnect that the Democrat party platform has on pro-life, in favor the poor, migrants, Black Lives Matter, etc, the gaping hole is its promotion of a "woman's right to choose and abortion and whatever point including killing a baby after birth" that is so damnable and demonic. And in Atlanta, and most inner cities, where the Black Lives Matter slogan is so popular, it does not apply to black babies where abortions are marketed to poorer black women. I understand very well racism and even systemic racism, but let's be clear, all lives matter as it concerns the Catholic Church including the poorest of the poor, those who are voiceless, defenseless and dependent on their mother for their lives, no matter the race. Anne Beal in Macon fully recognizes abortionists' outreach to the black community and is heroically trying to persuade poor people, be they any race, to have their child.

But that's not the only issue. President Obama vehemently disagrees with the Catholic Church and other religious institutions that do not want to offer services inimical to our teachings through church insurance policies that could include birth control and abortion services. Thanks be to God that the Supreme Court sided with the Little Sisters of the Poor in thwarting President Obama's (via the Democrat Party) desire to force Catholics to eat "pork" on this issue. If the Democrat party had succeeded in what President Obama indicated, it would open to the door to forcing the Church to have same sex marriage (or) wedding receptions in our facilities we rent to others. It might have also given the government to meddle in the Sacrament of Holy Orders and demand the Church ordain women.

Religious liberty and a pro-abortion policy through birth and killing a child after birth are very heinous. Ant that is an institutional, systemic problem no less important than systemic racism in the USA.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

And in terms of dioceses and religious orders, if the Democrats and President Obama had been successful in forcing Catholic dioceses and order to provide birth control and abortion services under the euphemism of "women's health" the dioceses and orders would not have done so leading to mega fines. And it could have led to the imprisonment of bishops as corporation soles and heads of religious orders, even those who wear habits. Would they allow a fully habited nun, like the one in the video, to wear it in prison?

In terms of the Little Sisters of the poor, I pray that the lawyers representing them do so gratis. If not, you of all people, would know the astronomical about of money these poor nuns would have to dish out for legal and court battles. It is all so anti-Catholic to say the least, anti Christian, anti religion except if it is the secular godless religion of the state.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

A 2, no matter who wins, be it Trump or Biden, if the election is fair and the electoral college works the way it is suppose to work according the law, the people have spoken. If any party is trying to thwart the vote of the electoral college, then Houston, we have a problem. It seems to me the Democrats wanted to get rid of the electoral college because they have 3 million more votes than Trump, most of those from California. At least the electoral college prevents one state with a mega population rivaling any country to dictate who the president will be.
So as it concerns the Electoral College, I have only heard sore democrats speak about its elimination because they won the popular vote. That is very concerning to say the least.

Anonymous 3 said...

Anonymous 2,

Trump's "assault on the rule of law?" LMAO on that one. Where did you get your law degree, a correspondence school? You are engaging in MASSIVE projection. That is just what Obama did for 8 years and you have no problem with that. In stark contrast, Trump has not played Andrew Jackson, when some looney, left-wing judge issues an ultra-vires ruling Trump has gone through the courts faithfully and in most cases has prevailed. I really can't take you seriously anymore.

Anonymous said...

TJM says: "I really can't take you seriously anymore."

No one cares who you take seriously. Not before, not now, not in the future.

Anonymous 3 said...

Anonymous K at 9:57,

This is WHO you are supporting:

in your browser address bar and hit the ENTER key. Or click HERE – antifa.com

Your destination is…

joebiden.com

Anonymous 3 said...

Anonymous 2,

Antifa, BLM, and the Democratic Party are the biggest threats to our Republic. All of your arguments are feelings, not based on fact or reality. If Adolph Hitler had a "D" after his name, you would vote for him. There is no "prudential" case to be made for China Joe and Heels Up Harris. They represent intrinsic evil, period.

Anonymous 2 said...

Father McDonald (and Anonymous TJM 3)

I don’t believe that anything I wrote is inconsistent with what you have written in reply, although whether or not I agree with some of your speculations about what might have occurred under certain circumstances is a different point that is unnecessary to address here. What is necessary to address is that when the Little Sisters of the Poor issue came up some years ago, and there was a freak out about it on this blog, I appealed for calm and to let the legal system do its job. And, of course, that is exactly what happened, as I knew it would. And as far as I know, Obama has not attacked the judges who ruled in favor of the Little Sisters. And to Anonymous TJM 3’s point, this is one of the major differences between Obama and Trump.

Another example is that when SCOTUS upheld the invalidation of the DAPA program, Obama-Biden accepted the ruling without squealing about it and attacking the Court. Again, contrast this with Trump’s reactions to rulings that go against him, such as SCOTUS’ decision invalidating the rescission of DACA, which Trump then perverted completely by essentially claiming during his interview with Chris Wallace that it justified him now to rule by decree.

No, Trump cares not a fig for the Rule of Law. To him the courts are just one more transactional factor, one more weapon to wield, in his efforts to exercise power over everyone. And do I even need to mention the disgraceful (and unfortunately largely successful) efforts of his lapdog Attorney-General Barr who has tried to remove independent U.S. attorneys and install compliant replacements who will kill any investigations into Trump and his accomplices in crime. Much as I disagreed with some of A.G. Session’s actions, at least the man has integrity and respects the Rule of Law, for which of course he was duly punished by Trump. Here are some sources demonstrating Trump’s assault on the Rule of Law:

https://www.google.com/search?channel=tus2&client=firefox-b-1-d&q=trump+assault+on+the+rule+of+law

The only way Trump can win at anything is if he cheats, and everyone knows it even if they are reluctant to admit it publicly. You know it and I know it, and TJM especially knows it (methinks he doth protest too much).

Anonymous 2 said...

Anonymous TJM 3:

Playing your stupid little mind games as usual, I see, projectively accusing others of projection. And no, I did not get my law degree at a correspondence school. That was my father, who after being demobbed from the British army in 1947 worked at a lowly local government job in England while he took a correspondence law course from the University of London, getting up early in the morning for years to study before work. This led eventually to him earning an external LL.B, after which he went on to become a very accomplished lawyer and administrator, rising to the level of Chief Legal Assistant (equivalent of city attorney). Due to the sacrifices of my parents, I was privileged and had it much easier, earning my law degree from a university founded several hundred years before the printing press was invented.

How dare you bring your Trumpian insults and complete disrespect for decorum and civility onto this blog? It is disgraceful coming from a member of the legal profession and a Catholic. But, as I must, I forgive you, especially as I suspect you have a problem and are not completely in command of your faculties. Check out the ABA report of lawyer, well-being, distress, and dysfunction, and go get help (I mean it):

https://lawyerwellbeing.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Lawyer-Wellbeing-Report.pdf




Anonymous 2 said...

Correction – ABA report on lawyer well-being, distress, and dysfunction.

George said...

As Catholics true to our Faith, we are a People of Life, and this life-affirming spiritual and moral philosophy should be uppermost in informing how we vote. This is especially true when it comes to those things which adversely affect the very existence of human life. In the scheme of all things there exists a hierarchy of importance. The sun and moon are both important and both serve their purpose, but without the sun and what it provides, life could not exist, and so in order of importance, it ranks above the moon. This recognition of a hierarchy of importance in comparing and judging different things also applies when considering how we are to vote.

Being Catholic means that my faith is in a living God, who is the Author of Life and in whom we "live and move and have our being". Human life was created by God in His image and likeness and so no human being has the right to take away the life of another except in self-defense or in the defense of society. How we vote should be an affirmation and proclamation of our respect for human life, especially in its most vulnerable stages. "The Gospel of Life must be proclaimed, and human life defended, in all places and all at times. The arena for moral responsibility includes not only the halls of government, but also the voting booth as well. Laws that permit abortion, euthanasia and assisted suicide are profoundly unjust, and we should work peacefully and tirelessly to oppose and change them."
(from Living the Gospel of Life: A challenge to American Catholics)
With internet search tools we have available to us, it is not difficult to find which candidates support these kinds of laws and policies.

Yes, we should be concerned about the issues of hunger, poverty, unemployment, housing, and healthcare. Concern for our brothers and sisters, taught and instilled by our Catholic faith, demands our solicitude for those who are in need. Beyond the generous charitable giving of Catholics and others, spending on social welfare, education, and healthcare constitutes a very large part of government spending, regardless of which of the major political parties is in power. But life is foundational to all its necessities, since any and all needs are attendant to the existence of life. As the late Pope St. John Paul II wrote: "the right to life is the most basic and fundamental right and the condition for all other personal rights".

Anonymous 2 said...

George,

Thank you for your (as usual) eloquent and spiritually inspired and inspiring statement. Everything you say is, of course, perfectly correct and no-one here will disagree with it. Nor does the USCCB, which issued their voting guidance in Faithful Citizenship.

George said...

Despite President Trump's all too apparent flaws, whatever good qualities Mr Biden possesses place him on the wrong side of issues important to me as a Catholic. He is a person who supports embryonic stem cell research and abortion at every stage of fetal development. He also has said transsexualism is the “civil rights issue of our time.” His support for same-sex marriage could bode ill for the Church given the kind of people one would expect him to appoint as judges, nominate to the Supreme Court, and appoint to positions of power.
Mr. Biden has spoken of the limits of religious freedom. How will that influence his governance and policies? Unless he is advocating for certain things just for political purposes, the autonomy of the Catholic Church and other religious denominations to operate and function free of government interference could well be in peril under an administration of a President Biden.

Anonymous 2 said...

George:

There is no doubt that our Republic is in a bad place. What gives me hope is that we have been in bad places before and come through them to arrive at a better place, that unlike the two major political parties most Americans are not extremists (they certainly are not on the issue of abortion, for example), and that we may have learned a thing or two during the pandemic.

Trump is not the solution to our problems; he is a symptom and part of those problems. And you know what I think of what the Democrats have become. I am neither Republican nor Democrat, but wish very much for a third party, which I call the Party of Virtue. But there is a whole social and political theory informing that wish.

If we carry on as we are, however, I do not see much hope, just a constant alternating in power of extremist parties, or worse—the installation of a Trump dynasty, for example.

What we must do, I believe, is to take our country back from the powerful forces that have hijacked it, and restore a healthier grassroots political conversation that will then be reflected in a healthier political conversation among elected leaders. There were already some promising signs before the pandemic. I really do believe the chances of moving forward with this approach are greater under a Biden-Harris Administration than under another Trump Administration. But it certainly will not be easy, both because of the extremism of the Left and its influence within the Democratic Party and because Trump, if he loses, will not go gently into the political goodnight.

Our task as Catholics will be to remember that everyone along the entire political spectrum from left to right, and whatever their station in life, is a child of God with immeasurable value, and to be respected as such. And that in this process, a commitment to honesty, truth, and facts is indispensable.

On the abortion issue specifically, as I have written before on the blog, once the facts about human development within the womb are properly understood, the answers become essentially self-evident and undeniable. But I also believe that women must drive the conversation, although men of course also have a role to play. It is telling, for example, that other than Bee, all the conversation in this and related threads appears to be among men. But in the divine dispensation we men do not bear the developing child within our bodies for nine months. If we did, I suspect the conversation would go very differently, not necessarily in terms of outcome but certainly in terms of tone and human connection. Besides which, it is a matter of fundamental respect that those who are responsible for 99.99% of the biological process, and who have the actual or potential direct experience and understanding of what this process entails and means, should have the greatest say in the matter. If the shoe were on the other foot, wouldn’t we feel the same way? Wouldn’t we want to be properly and appropriately heard?

George said...


In the first sentence of my comment above it should have been:
...whatever good qualities Mr Biden possesses, some positions he has on certain issues place him on the wrong side of issues important to me as a Catholic.

(My typing was ahead of what I was trying to say)

Sophia said...

Sophia here: re-posting since some of you pro-abortion voters (and I am definitely aware that one person in particular, but maybe others also, uses different names) may not have seen these previous quotes or may need to see them again. But I shall add the following exhortation that those of you insisting that you are following your conscience while voting for the Joe Biden/ Kamala Harris, extreme abortion ticket, consult article 6 of the Catechism-Moral Conscience. Pay particular attention to culpable erroneous judgement as well-voting for that ticket would be a prime example of just that.
Re Catholics' obligation to vote according to a "well-formed conscience", not just "conscience" which can be independent of any objective standard. A "well-formed conscience" on the other hand is one which is informed by an objective set of criteria as found in the Bible or in the authentic teaching of the Catholic Church as found in its Catechism. Moral issues, have by necessity an intrinsic order of primacy. The "seamless garment" approach which Cardinal Bernadin used to explain how various moral issues are interrelated has been misinterpreted to mean that all moral issues carry equal weight. But he himself obviously did not believe that because that is patently false. Logically, there has to be a hierarchy to moral issues d be virtually impossible to make a moral choice when confronted with more than one. Innocent life has to be primary because without life all other -even moral-issues are irrelevant.

As the society became increasingly secularized, the Church (including its clergy) became increasingly influenced by the culture rather than she influencing the culture. And since "Nature abhors a vacuum", the void left by the Church's ( and other Christian Churches') abdication of her proper role in society has been increasingly filled by Godless ideologies, including Relativism (no objective truth/right and wrong), Marxism, Humanism, Satanism etc. So it should come as no surprise that even Catholics can justify voting for a members of a party that has unfettered abortion at every stage of the pre-born's development up to the point of birth, at the top of its list of non-negotiables and has been aptly named "the party of death". And since the Democrats in Congress refuse to vote for the passage of the Born Alive" Act, babies can even be left to die if they survive the hired executioner's efforts and are born alive. Correspondingly, for Catholics with "well-formed" consciences, abortion is also a non-negotiable and at the top of their list -they cannot morally vote for politicians who push policies which enshrine laws that enable, support and maximize the killing of the most innocent of all human beings-preborn babies and by extension embryonic stem cells and fetal tissue research. In fact these immoral behaviors are so egregious and so contrary to Natural Law that they are accurately characterized as intrinsic evils. So it's a no-brainer that such Catholics vote for Republicans who champion policies which are pro-life, pro- Religious Freedom and pro-the Constitution, of which Pius Xl said, "The whole American nation had ordained...even the Natural Law in general- in the American Constitution".


August 29, 2020 at 12:05 AM

Sophia said...

Sophia here: re-posting since some of you pro-abortion voters (and I am definitely aware that one person in particular, but maybe others also, uses different names) may not have seen these previous quotes or may need to see them again. But I shall add the following exhortation that those of you insisting that you are following your conscience while voting for the Joe Biden/ Kamala Harris, extreme abortion ticket, consult article 6 of the Catechism-Moral Conscience. Pay particular attention to culpable erroneous judgement as well-voting for that ticket would be a prime example of just that.
Re Catholics' obligation to vote according to a "well-formed conscience", not just "conscience" which can be independent of any objective standard. A "well-formed conscience" on the other hand is one which is informed by an objective set of criteria as found in the Bible or in the authentic teaching of the Catholic Church as found in its Catechism. Moral issues, have by necessity an intrinsic order of primacy. The "seamless garment" approach which Cardinal Bernadin used to explain how various moral issues are interrelated has been misinterpreted to mean that all moral issues carry equal weight. But he himself obviously did not believe that because that is patently false. Logically, there has to be a hierarchy to moral issues d be virtually impossible to make a moral choice when confronted with more than one. Innocent life has to be primary because without life all other -even moral-issues are irrelevant.

As the society became increasingly secularized, the Church (including its clergy) became increasingly influenced by the culture rather than she influencing the culture. And since "Nature abhors a vacuum", the void left by the Church's ( and other Christian Churches') abdication of her proper role in society has been increasingly filled by Godless ideologies, including Relativism (no objective truth/right and wrong), Marxism, Humanism, Satanism etc. So it should come as no surprise that even Catholics can justify voting for a members of a party that has unfettered abortion at every stage of the pre-born's development up to the point of birth, at the top of its list of non-negotiables and has been aptly named "the party of death". And since the Democrats in Congress refuse to vote for the passage of the Born Alive" Act, babies can even be left to die if they survive the hired executioner's efforts and are born alive. Correspondingly, for Catholics with "well-formed" consciences, abortion is also a non-negotiable and at the top of their list -they cannot morally vote for politicians who push policies which enshrine laws that enable, support and maximize the killing of the most innocent of all human beings-preborn babies and by extension embryonic stem cells and fetal tissue research. In fact these immoral behaviors are so egregious and so contrary to Natural Law that they are accurately characterized as intrinsic evils. So it's a no-brainer that such Catholics vote for Republicans who champion policies which are pro-life, pro- Religious Freedom and pro-the Constitution, of which Pius Xl said, "The whole American nation had ordained...even the Natural Law in general- in the American Constitution".


August 29, 2020 at 12:05 AM

Sophia said...

Sophia here: reposting the second of my 3 recent posts and for the same reason I reposted the first.
Sophia says

The USCCB at their last annual meeting reminded Catholics of the preeminence of abortion in making their decision about whom to vote for. And as recently as 2 days ago, Boston Cardinal Sean O'Malley had to reiterate the same message after a priest publicly supported the right to choose (euphemism for abortion). There was a time not that many years ago, when a majority of Catholics abided by Church teaching/Biblical teaching re abortion and would not vote for pro-abortion politicians. Now Catholicism is viewed as a smorgasbord by all too many Catholics who help themselves to whatever teaching they feel like accepting. They have succumbed to the same seduction as Adam and Eve did in the garden. They too will not serve, will not submit their wills to their Creator and His Commandments. They all want to be their own gods, "and do whatever they think is right in their own eyes"!

Let us all recognize that the Ten Commandments are not a "seamless garment"-they are in rank order of importance!

President Trump's incredible record of pro- life and pro-religious freedom policies would in no way be undermined even if, as the more cynical have proclaimed, they were motivated by totally selfish reasons. Very few people do good deeds out of purely altruistic motives- at the very least they get some satisfaction/pleasure out of doing them. Now if these incredible moral goods were achieved via evil means, then that would be a different matter. Because If you recall your Moral Theology 101- "The End does not justify the means"! And what must a person who holds that opinion of President Trump, think of a Joe Biden who proffers policies as intrinsically evil as unrestricted abortions solely to win the votes of pro-abortion voters-unless of course he has genuinely become pro-abortion?



https://www.dailywire.com/news/u-s-catholic-bishops-declare-abortion-the-preemininent-issue-over-all-else

https://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/boston-cardinal-catholics-have-right-to-clarity-after-priest-supports-right?utm_campaign=NCR%202019&utm_medium=email&_hsmi=94140844&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-9ZCt7IJi7j0avic07rEeQxNRAfzTMZ6V2-Okf4vOe_EaIejt5CzGJ6PgQclyPseHaEIospKroWFikbAYU9bE92KPsdvw&utm_content=94140844&utm_source=hs_email

Pax. Pray for the gifts of knowledge, understanding, and wisdom as you make this extremely important decision.

August 29, 2020 at 12:06 AM









Sophia said...

Sophia here:
I am a Black American who is well aware of the history of systemic racism in this country. However, over the past 40 years, increasingly I have seen more evidence for the opposite- systemic preferential treatment of minorities particularly in Academia, Government, Business Professional Schools such as Medicine and Law. Affirmative Action/Diversity has become the new measure of virtue. I am not so sure what systems are still racist-inequality of outcomes is not necessarily evidence for systemic racism. It has much more to with certain behaviors which are well-known predictors of success and failure. However, I have seen examples of bigotry in all groups of people-(there is only one race, the human race). And interestingly enough, I have seen more of it in Blacks than in Whites-Blacks seem much more inclined to perceive mistreatments, slights, marginalization in the behavior of Whites, (seem to be searching for it), than the reverse-much quicker to accuse whites of racism for example than Whites are to characterize Blacks from the same socio-economic class negatively.
A lawsuit brought By Asian American students highlights the problem at the undergraduate level.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/rejected-asian-students-sue-harvard-over-admissions-that-favor-other-minorities

rcg said...

Sophia makes an interesting point. In my experience the high rate of failure of minorities in preferential programs is a failure of the program, not of the minorities. This is because the selection process is based on the identification of the candidates as members of a particular minority rather than ensuring the best qualified Members of that minority are chosen. This inversion of quality opens the process to nepotism and the impatience of the selection committee. I have seen this in academia and in industry. The same process error seems to be at work in our politics, as well.

Anonymous said...

Sophia,

Thank you for some of the most articulate and informative posts on this blog. Usually when I see long posts I skim through......I was taken in by the first word and continued to the end and felt I had read something worthwhile. My guess is you majored in journalism. If you didn't, you should have! :)

Tom Makin said...

He speaketh with forked tongue. Garrity doesn't mean a word of it. Neither he nor Joe Biden "can have their cake and eat it too." It is well past the time to call a spade a spade everywhere we see this, hear this, or witness this. Cupich is the leader of this pack in the USA. Let's not forget him either in all this....among MANY others.

Anonymous said...

The word “Sophia” means “”wisdom” (:

Anonymous 2 said...

I have a request: Can we please stop referring to those who support the Biden-Harris ticket as “pro-abortion,” and this for two reasons? First, some might support the ticket not because of the Democratic Party position on abortion but in spite of it, a posture that is explicitly recognized and permitted by the USCCB document on Faithful Citizenship. How would those supporting Trump like to be called “racist” because his “platform” (such as it is) includes racist policies (and it unquestionably does)?

Second, based on my conversations with them, those who self-identify as “pro-choice” are typically deeply offended and angered by the suggestion that this means they are “pro-abortion.” In fact, many who are “pro-choice” regard abortion as deeply immoral (an “intrinsic evil” in our lexicon) and would never consider having an abortion themselves and may even do everything in their power to persuade others not to have one; they argue, simply, that the state should not dictate the decision. However wrong-headed we may think this may be, it does not make such people “pro-abortion.” I dare say that there are some disturbed individuals who may actually want there to be more abortions because they see abortion as some kind of “good” as opposed to a sometimes tragically necessary evil, but if there are I have not met them.

To call people “pro-abortion” is another example of how our language has been hijacked, and it is like calling people who self-identify as “pro-life” misogynists who wage a “war on women.” Our political conversation will never get back to a better place where we might actually be able to persuade people that abortion should be actively discouraged, minimized, and hopefully eradicated if we continue to alienate one another through the alienating issue of language.

Unlike some people (I am not suggesting anyone here is in that category) I actually want to reduce and hopefully eradicate abortions, not just make myself feel good about myself and that I am actually doing something about abortions by using the power and force of the state. Please don’t take this the wrong way, but that is relatively easy to do. It is much more difficult and uncomfortable to get down and dirty in the mess of human brokenness and to have uncomfortable conversations with those who are hurting—in other words, to be a Christian. Priests and others who engage in counseling women (and their male partners) facing an unwanted pregnancy surely know this. And it is in this context that real wisdom is necessary.


Anonymous 2 said...

Correction in third paragraph -- alienating use of language, not alienating issue of language.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Joe Biden gave a good speech today. Too bad he did not disavow the pro-choice agenda of his party or at least say, I am pro-life and will encourage women to find alternates to abortion. I will be the gruesome partial birth abortion and killing a child after birth. That he did not say. Very sad.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

I will end partial birth abortion....

Anonymous 2 said...

It is sad indeed—and it seems so short sighted. I wonder how many ex-Democrats there are now because of this egregious blind spot.

Sophia said...

Sophia says:
Anonymous 2 at 9:928p.m.- "On the abortion issue specifically...." I as a woman, am absolutely thrilled that you have (illogically) given my opinions on abortion infinitely more weight than anything you or any other man has to say on the topic. I intend to take full advantage of that.
Tragically, over the years, we have gone from the almost universally held position that moms would not hesitate to give their own lives to save those of their children to today when countless mothers are doing the exact opposite. It would have been unthinkable for most mothers to ask their physicians to kill their child for reasons of self-interest. Even in cases of high risk pregnancies and deliveries, moms would have begged their doctors to make every effort to save their babies even at the cost of their own lives. St Gianna Molla is a prime example of such mothers and died in childbirth. Then there are the mothers suffering from cancer who defer chemotherapy treatments in an effort to give their babies the strongest chance of survival-even in this age of easily procured abortions for any reason at any stage of the baby's development. On the other hand, there are all too many mothers today who too readily go to the abortion "option" because over the years abortion has increasingly been marketed as just another example of women's "healthcare"!

In the early days of Christianity, that was one of the ways Christians were distinguished from the rest of the population. They went to the dumps at night to rescue the babies abandoned there after their dads rejected them. Yes, in those days their dads had the absolute right over which children lived or died! To think we have come full circle to a time when it's their mothers who have the absolute right to decide which children live or die. This "power" is definitely nothing to be celebrated- that either parent, but especially a mother should have the right to end a child's life. It is indeed an intrinsic evil. That is why pro-lifers go to such lengths to counsel women about real options which do not kill their babies. The safest place for a developing baby ought to be in his mother's womb- someone would have to go through her to harm her baby! After birth, the most important early relationship for a child is still that with his mother (or other primary caregiver if the mother is not available for one reason or another).

One of the most poignant signs I have seen within the past few years was a billboard which read, "The Most Dangerous Place for an African American is in the Womb". It was part of a campaign by "Life Always" and was defended by Dr. Alveda King when it was criticized-the truth hurts. It was intended to counteract the presence of Planned Parenthood in mostly Black neighborhoods. In fact, apart from abortion when, paraphrasing Pope Francis, a mother basically hires a "hit man" to kill her pre-born baby, a majority of people even today are shocked when they hear that a mom has murdered her own child! It is that unnatural!

And let me remind you , Anonymous 2, I am a woman- so there!

Sophia said...

Sophia here: Joe Biden's speech may have been a good one, but it was filled with fallacious Democrat talking points. The rioting, violence including arson and murders, as well as the extreme harassment of law abiding citizens by Antifa and BLM adherents occur and certainly continue in cities including Atlanta run by Democrats, in states, run by Democrats (except for Ga which has a Republican Governor who quickly moves in to quell the looting, rioting, arson etc. in Atlanta). The mayors who are primarily responsible for law and order in the cities have so eviscerated the police response that it is basically not only ineffective but has exposed hundreds of police to grave injury. In a number of places the police are ordered to stand down, and even to abandon precincts. The governors of these states who should be backing up the local police have also provided anemic responses when they finally do so. Even when a few of those perpetrating the violence are arrested they are quickly back on the street. Some of these governors and mayors and even politicians in top leadership positions of the Democrat Party (check out speakers at their convention!) and in the halls of Congress actually make excuses for the chaos and the mayhem and tacitly and even overtly encourage them.

The Marxist playbook is consistently followed in every place to which Marxism has been exported in the world. Exploit grievances,-real or imagined- identify an enemy, coopt and manage the language, attach good words to evil behavior, silence the opposition, use violence to do so, control the news. Notice how for weeks now the Democrats and their propaganda arm (most media outlets) spewed the bilge that protests were "mostly peaceful", but President Trump, the Republicans and Fox News were fabricating and exaggerating reports of so called riots-this even after murders occurred in the "summer of love" autonomous zone in Seattle. Even Kamala was saying the unrest should continue. A few days ago the polls began to show that even the the mostly Democrats in the major cities where this violent chaos was occurring night after night were getting tired of having their livelihoods destroyed and their lives disrupted as well more of them being injured and even murdered. They were blaming the local governments which were clearly derelict in their duty. At that point, CNN's Don Lemon and others began to voice the reality that their wicked strategy was beginning to backfire so Joe Biden should be trotted out to condemn the violence. But even better yet, mouth the new party talking points that yes there was violence but it was the evil President Trump's fault. And in fact that's what he read. It's a fascinating thing to see the Democrat Party and their propaganda arm, the media use the exact same language to push a preposterous narrative and have people actually believe it. But then, I recall how communism and socialism, it's "softer, gentler" cousin have managed to successfully penetrate and conquer country after country using this same playbook.

Sophia said...

Sohia here:

At any rate, since most people were not following what was actually happening because they were not seeing it covered by most of the media, they had no way of knowing that the revolutionary Marxist organizations Antifa and BLM, are responsible for all the anarchy and that they were at least tacitly aided, enabled and abetted by local Democrat City and State Governments. They could not have known that President Trump repeatedly offered to send reinforcements to help the local governments to restore order but was not only repeatedly rebuffed but was demonized as a fascist for attempting to terrify and even brutalize the 'mostly peaceful" protesters. So they could not have known that these new talking points are not just the Democrat Party's standing the truth on its head; that they are not even merely projection (which technically is a mostly unconscious phenomenon) on their part; but that they a very conscious, calculated, deliberate narrative constructed to deceive the voters so the Democrats can achieve their ideological goals through victory in November. They are using the propaganda technique called "A Big Lie", coined by Adolf Hitler about a lie so "colossal" that no one would believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously"! Joseph Goebbels, Hitler's propaganda minister, used it extensively and very successfully. Take God out of any Party and there will no longer be any brakes on its use of "any means necessary" to achieve its end because there will be no objective "right and wrong"!
That my friends, is what we are up against. But fortunately we are getting more and more glimpses of what's still behind the curtain-for now!

Shalom

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

The collaspe of American dispassionate, unbiased news can be laid at the feet of the 24 hour news networks. Each has become a mouthpiece for particular parties CNN and MSNBC are clearly dominated by democrat operatives, not just democrats. The same for Fox, except they are Republican operatives. At least Fox is more transparent about their bias and deliver their bias in a more pleasant way. CNN is dour, overly serious about their bias and hard to watch.

The half hour news shows on NBC, CBS and ABC certainly have a bias in reporting but don't have enough time for editorializing. But one can certain detect the bias by tone and what is left unsaid. The man executed in Portland is described as a Trump supporter and from a right wing organization in Portland. The murderer is just described as a "man" who shot him. Fox stated he was a member of Antifa and BLM. Is that true? No other corroboration.

The three major broadcast networks have to counterpart that leans republican. I don't think Fox broadcast networks have an half hour national broadcast news program which is odd. That could add some balance.

And none of the broadcast news programs focus on anything other than American news. Hardly anything on Europe or around the world.

Anonymous said...

"The collaspe of American dispassionate, unbiased news can be laid at the feet of the 24 hour news networks."

No, the collapse must be laid at the feet of the poepl who WATCH the 24 hour news networks who WANT to hear their echo-chamber prattling, who REPEAT the falsehoods and the silliness. If folks did not watch , the news networks would fold in a month - or less.

The same is true for the blame people ascribe to "Hollywood." "Hollywood makes these movies that corrupt our young people!" is the cry.

No, if YOU and your young people did not go to these awful movies, Hollywood would stop making them.

It is just that simple.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Damnably false. There are enough watching that makes it self sustaining. The government could take draconian steps through the FCC to demand editorial and hard news be separated into separate networks. They could set up an independent watchdog group to fact check and shoe bias in news reporting. And like Hollywood productions were censured by a government backed watchdog group that was very effective, so too could this return. Supervision of the internet and banning pornography with effective technology is possible. In terms of broadcast and cable networks, these could have their license taken away by the FCC if they don’t maintain a federal standard similar to what was required of radios and television through the 1950’s early 60’s.

And if you don’t like these tried and true policies, let me also know you vehemently oppose the government’s draconian CIVID 19 restrictions that removed the civil rights of Americans to gather, go to exercise clubs and restaurants along with other businesses and forces a dress code of wearing a mask no matter if it is effective or not. All this based on protecting the public health.

Anonymous said...

To Sophia:

You go girl!!!

Anonymous said...

"There are enough watching that makes it self sustaining."

Thank you for agreeing with my point, exactly.

People watch, therefore it goes on. Were the people to stop, the networks would fold. They provide what people want, and what people want is reinforcement of their preconceived notions and biases. It really is just that simple.

The government CANNOT set up fact-checking bureaus - this is not Nazi Germany or Commjnist Russia. Our press is free; only a facist wants a restricted press.

I'm sure you would have been the the one person in town turning on all the lights in his house during a World War Two blackout. You would have railed aginst the "Draconian" restriction on your freedoms, forgetting altogether that your freedoms are necessarily restricted and circumscribed.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

You agree with draconian measures: I'm sure you would have been the the one person in town turning on all the lights in his house during a World War Two blackout. You would have railed aginst the "Draconian" restriction on your freedoms, forgetting altogether that your freedoms are necessarily restricted and circumscribed.

Well, to save yourself from damnable hypocrisy, you must agree with my draconian suggestions to crub fake news. And I guess our government was fascist in its ability to censor movies beginning around 1934 until the very early 60's as well as draconian FCC rules up until about the same time.

Anonymous said...

"You agree with draconian measures:...,"

When draconian measures are needed, yes, I agree with them.

Blackout rules during WW2 were not draconian. Wearing a mask today for the health and well-being of the community is hardly a draconian measure.

You suggestions aren't draconian, either. They are silly and, I am sure, illegal, ill though-out, self-serving, unworkable, and dumb.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

So you do not deny that you called American government fascist from aboyput 1934 through the 60's, but agree other draconian governmental measures are surly not draconian. Such duplicity aka, hypocrisy.

Anonymous said...

"So you do not deny that you called American government fascist from aboyput 1934 through the 60's,..."

I do deny it.

And I deny that it is in any way advisable to establish a givernment-run fact checking body to oversee the press.

That's flat-out un-American - you should be ashamed of yourself for suggesting it in the first place.

Concerned American said...

Sophia-
I agree with everything you say but it is not just that African Americans are aborting their babies in such large numbers.

There is and has been a larger problem in the white community when it comes to life.

Do you know that from the 1970's up to today the black community grew from 11% to 13.3% of the United State population? Now, one could say that this was due in part to a decline in the birth rate in the white community (which mirrors what has been going on in much of Europe and Canada).
But considering that the black population grew during this time frame during which there was unprecedented legal immigration into the U.S., I would say much of it was real growth. And this was during the time of post Roe V. Wade!

In fact, if not for immigration and the growth of the black community, our country would mirror the negative growth rates we see in many European countries.

Anonymous 2 said...

As we say in the law, “res ipsa loquitur” (“the thing speaks for itself”):

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/09/trump-americans-who-died-at-war-are-losers-and-suckers/615997/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=atlantic-daily-newsletter&utm_content=20200903&silverid-ref=NjM1NDY0ODUwNjM3S0

I am probably the least militaristic person on this blog but I respect and honor those who serve in the military, especially those who make the ultimate sacrifice or who are disabled, while opposing the policies that send them to war. And you wonder why I cannot vote for this man?

Anonymous said...

Maybe the priest could move to Savannah and find a trendy church like Asbury United Methodist, which has voted to leave the United Methodist Church so that the congregation can perform same-sex "marriages." Interesting that the denominations with the biggest membership losses are the ones which have become "anything goes" when it comes to morality---Episcopal, Presbyterian, United Methodist, Lutheran, United Church of Christ..feel free to fill in one I left out!