• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

SC priest: No communion for Obama supporters| Me: No tax break for your church!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Uh oh, various theocrats are getting uppity now. If they want to start pulling this 'no communion for Obama supporters' then there should be no tax break for your church since you are taking sides in a political matter. You can say what ever you want, but I don't want my tax dollars subsidizing your political speech.

And look you pedophiles, abortion is legal in Italy . . . home of the Vatican. Get Thy own house in order.

COLUMBIA, S.C. – A South Carolina Roman Catholic priest has told his parishioners that they should refrain from receiving Holy Communion if they voted for Barack Obama because the Democratic president-elect supports abortion, and supporting him "constitutes material cooperation with intrinsic evil."

The Rev. Jay Scott Newman said in a letter distributed Sunday to parishioners at St. Mary's Catholic Church in Greenville that they are putting their souls at risk if they take Holy Communion before doing penance for their vote.

"Our nation has chosen for its chief executive the most radical pro-abortion politician ever to serve in the United States Senate or to run for president," Newman wrote, referring to Obama by his full name, including his middle name of Hussein.

"Voting for a pro-abortion politician when a plausible pro-life alternative exists constitutes material cooperation with intrinsic evil, and those Catholics who do so place themselves outside of the full communion of Christ's Church and under the judgment of divine law. Persons in this condition should not receive Holy Communion until and unless they are reconciled to God in the Sacrament of Penance, lest they eat and drink their own condemnation."

During the 2008 presidential campaign, many bishops spoke out on abortion more boldly than four years earlier, telling Catholic politicians and voters that the issue should be the most important consideration in setting policy and deciding which candidate to back. A few church leaders said parishioners risked their immortal soul by voting for candidates who support abortion rights.

But bishops differ on whether Catholic lawmakers — and voters — should refrain from receiving Communion if they diverge from church teaching on abortion. Each bishop sets policy in his own diocese. In their annual fall meeting, the nation's Catholic bishops vowed Tuesday to forcefully confront the Obama administration over its support for abortion rights.

According to national exit polls, 54 percent of Catholics chose Obama, who is Protestant. In South Carolina, which McCain carried, voters in Greenville County — traditionally seen as among the state's most conservative areas — went 61 percent for the Republican, and 37 percent for Obama.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081113/ap_on_re_us/obama_catholics

An earlier story had a bunch of Bishops vowing to confront Obama on abortion:
Catholic bishops will fight Obama on abortion
By RACHEL ZOLL – 2 days ago

BALTIMORE (AP) — The nation's Roman Catholic bishops vowed Tuesday to forcefully confront the Obama administration over its support for abortion rights, saying the church and religious freedom could be under attack in the new presidential administration.

In an impassioned discussion on Catholics in public life, several bishops said they would accept no compromise on abortion policy. Many condemned Catholics who had argued it was morally acceptable to back President-elect Obama because he pledged to reduce abortion rates.

And several prelates promised to call out Catholic policy makers on their failures to follow church teaching. Bishop Joseph Martino of Scranton, Pa., singled out Vice President-elect Biden, a Catholic, Scranton native who supports abortion rights.

"I cannot have a vice president-elect coming to Scranton to say he's learned his values there when those values are utterly against the teachings of the Catholic Church," Martino said. The Obama-Biden press office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Archbishop Joseph Naumann of the Diocese of Kansas City in Kansas said politicians "can't check your principles at the door of the legislature."

Naumann has said repeatedly that Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, a Catholic Democrat who supports abortion rights, should stop taking Holy Communion until she changes her stance.

"They cannot call themselves Catholic when they violate such a core belief as the dignity of the unborn," Naumann said Tuesday.

The discussion occurred on the same day the bishops approved a new "Blessing of a Child in the Womb." The prayer seeks a healthy pregnancy for the mother and makes a plea that "our civic rulers" perform their duties "while respecting the gift of human life."

Chicago Cardinal Francis George, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, is preparing a statement during the bishops' fall meeting that will press Obama on abortion.

The bishops suggested that the final document include the message that "aggressively pro-abortion policies" would be viewed "as an attack on the church."

Along with their theological opposition to the procedure, church leaders say they worry that any expansion in abortion rights could require Catholic hospitals to perform abortions or lose federal funding. Auxiliary Bishop Thomas Paprocki of Chicago said the hospitals would close rather than comply.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5i64rYxpt7S59R2qV9ibf_Qqv-g1AD94D2FTG0
 
Shiggie said:
Isn't Vatican City a city-state and not part of Italy?
Yes . . . but they are closely related. And if they can't ban abortion in their heavily Catholic home turf of Italy, they shouldn't be getting all uppity about it here.
 

Wilsongt

Member
Yawn. Another day, another series of stories about mouthy McCain supporters still butthurt over the election...
 

Ela Hadrun

Probably plays more games than you
These dumbasses are just pissed that their congregants don't vote how they tell them to anymore (Catholics vote overwhelmingly Democrat nearly every time). They pulled this shit with Kerry, too, it's just that Kerry lost. They're trying to copycat the Evangelical right-wingers who have invoked one specific moral absolute to shoehorn all of their followers onto voting the same ticket.

Give up, American Catholic leaders. You sold out when you let Kennedy say he was more loyal to America than the Pope. Take a backseat to democracy in this country, and if you don't like it, move to Ireland (or, in fact, Italy, where there is enough political corruption to go around).

If I sound bitter, it's because shit like this is why my mom will vote for ANY JACKASS as long as he's pro-life. Blech. This woman would vote for an anti-abortion stalk of broccoli.
 

KiNeSiS

Banned
As someone who had a planned child aborted by a dumb bitch I am against it on a personal level....
It only applies to my life as I want a son....
For all others I believe in personal choice....

Pro-lifers are the biggest crock of shit....
Republicans support life, yet they send young men to become meat bags daily for unworthwhile causes....

Pro-Life Supporter + Death Penalty Supporter= Walking Contradiction

Bush was pro-life all 8 yrs, did it stop abortions hell no!
Why are people so stupid?
Why do people believe lip service instead of fact in front of there fat fucking faces?!?!?!

Pro-Life mere political propaganda that is meaningless in the grand scheme of things either away....

I do think these bitches get knocked up without precaution and abuse procedures.... (I've dated many that had 1 or more its disturbing when you hear a woman had 5)
Get a fucking IUD if you want to fuck raw woman!
Other woman accidents happen sometimes even the morning after pill can't fix....

At the same time who the fuck are you to tell someone what they can do to w/ their own bodies in a "free" country...?

Some people abuse it, others get raped or they don't want to carry the child to term if it's less then 3 months its pretty much a cluster of cells.....
These wackjob zealots believe a sperm and an egg is a life @ the point of impact and that is scientifically wrong....
 
typhonsentra said:
Bastards say NOTHING about Iraq but the second you suggest you don't want to overturn Roe v Wade YOU'VE CROSSED THE LINE!
Well . . . Pope John Paul was against the Iraq war. I'll give them that.
 

Ikael

Member
The fact that religious institutions doesn't pay taxes baffles me to no end. You enjoy the same public services as every other freaking business / organization in the country, then pay taxes as the rest of us goddamed mortals. Is religion an industry in dire need of goverment help or something?
 

Drek

Member
Pope Benedict, when still known as Cardinal Ratzinger, wrote a letter that most of these priests are trying to cite.

What his letter actually said was that while a Catholic can not vote for a pro-choice candidate simply for being pro-choice it is entirely understandable and not sinful for them to vote for a candidate who happens to be pro-choice for other reasons.

Basically, the bigoted and broken Catholic church in the U.S. is twisting and poisoning the words of what the current Pope had stated four years ago.

Bravo U.S. Catholic church, way to once again prove that you are the most intolerant and least progressive faction of the world's predominant christian faith which happens to be one of the more progressive faiths in the world when discounting the U.S. branch.
 

Nerevar

they call me "Man Gravy".
Shiggie said:
Isn't Vatican City a city-state and not part of Italy?

it is a state that thankfully will never have to worry about abortion because there are no women residents.
 

JayDubya

Banned
speculawyer said:
And look you pedophiles, abortion is legal in Italy . . . home of the Vatican. Get Thy own house in order.

a) Tsk, tsk.

b) Vatican City is not a part of Italy, so...

c) Catholics that vote for pro-abortion politicians are hypocrites; pick another religion or expect to have your religious leaders decry you. Wah.
 

WedgeX

Banned
typhonsentra said:
Bastards say NOTHING about Iraq but the second you suggest you don't want to overturn Roe v Wade YOU'VE CROSSED THE LINE!

Lets not forget the rest of Catholic social doctrine.

Ugh.

It's really damn annoying being told I'm not a real Catholic for having voted for Obama (and many fellow Catholics feel the same).

Church | State

Damnit!
 

JayDubya

Banned
aceface said:
It is possible to be anti-abortion and pro-abortion rights.

It is possible, but it's like supporting the legality of slavery while sternly suggesting that it's not a very nice thing to do to own slaves.
 
JayDubya said:
a) Tsk, tsk.
Tsk, tsk on them for fucking children.

JayDubya said:
b) Vatican City is not a part of Italy, so...
We already dealt with that in the thread.

JayDubya said:
c) Catholics that vote for pro-abortion politicians are hypocrites; pick another religion or expect to have your religious leaders decry you. Wah.
That's fine . . . I just want the church to have its tax exemption revoked for making political speeches about a particular candidate.
 
Hito mentioned this a while back, so I went a googling and found it,

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5502785

During the following break in the conference proceedings, I cornered Weyrich to make sure I had heard him correctly. He was adamant that, yes, the 1975 action by the IRS against Bob Jones University was responsible for the genesis of the Religious Right in

the late 1970s. What about abortion? After mobilizing to defend Bob Jones University and its racially discriminatory policies, Weyrich said, these evangelical leaders held a conference call to discuss strategy. He recalled that someone suggested that they had

the makings of a broader political movement—something that Weyrich had been pushing for all along—and asked what other issues they might address. Several callers made suggestions, and then, according to Weyrich, a voice on the end of one of the lines said, "How about abortion?" And that is how abortion was cobbled into the political agenda of the Religious Right.

The abortion myth serves as a convenient fiction because it suggests noble and altruistic motives behind the formation of the Religious Right. But it is highly disingenuous and renders absurd the argument of the leaders of Religious Right that, in defending the rights of the unborn, they are the "new abolitionists." The Religious Right arose as a political movement for the purpose, effectively, of defending racial discrimination at Bob Jones University and at other segregated schools. Whereas evangelical abolitionists of the nineteenth century sought freedom for African Americans, the Religious Right of the late twentieth century organized to perpetuate racial discrimination. Sadly, the Religious Right has no legitimate claim to the mantle of the abolitionist crusaders of the nineteenth century. White evangelicals were conspicuous by their absence in the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s. Where were Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell and Billy Graham on August 28, 1963, during the March on Washington or on Sunday, March 7, 1965, when Martin Luther King Jr. and religious leaders from other traditions linked arms on the march from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama, to stare down the ugly face of racism?

Falwell and others who eventually became leaders of the Religious Right, in fact, explicitly condemned the civil rights movement. "Believing the Bible as I do," Falwell proclaimed in 1965, "I would find it impossible to stop preaching the pure saving gospel

of Jesus Christ, and begin doing anything else—including fighting Communism, or participating in civil-rights reforms." This makes all the more outrageous the occasional attempts by leaders of the Religious Right to portray themselves as the "new abolitionists" in an effort to link their campaign against abortion to the nineteenth century crusade against slavery.

Abortion, epic political football.
 

aceface

Member
JayDubya said:
It is possible, but it's like supporting the legality of slavery while sternly suggesting that it's not a very nice thing to do to own slaves.

I'd like to avoid forcing my will on other people in all cases. If people would have just stopped owning slaves, we could have avoided a war.

Anyways...

Cardinal Ratzinger said:
"A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of the candidate's permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia.

When a Catholic does not share a candidate's stand in favor of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons.

The fucking pope said I can vote for a pro-choice candidate, I'll take him over you, thanks. link
 
JayDubya said:
It is possible, but it's like supporting the legality of slavery while sternly suggesting that it's not a very nice thing to do to own slaves.
This would have been more effective if you replaced "slavery" with "Hitler," I'm sure.

It's possible to support abortion without agreeing with it. If I had a wife/daughter who wanted it, I'd probably be against it, but I don't have any say in it because I'm not the woman.
 

WedgeX

Banned
electricpirate said:
Hito mentioned this a while back, so I went a googling and found it,

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5502785

Abortion, epic political football.

Yeah, and it's particularly more glaring in Catholic social teaching, since "pro-life" in Catholic speak includes a right to health care, anti-war (except "just" wars) and anti-death penalty (except in developing nations...) among others.

Of course, finding a politician that espouses all these positions is next to impossible...

Again, why state | Church

Argh.
 
JayDubya said:
It is possible, but it's like supporting the legality of slavery while sternly suggesting that it's not a very nice thing to do to own slaves.
Except slavery infringes upon other people's rights.
 

JayDubya

Banned
BrightYoungThing said:
Except slavery infringes upon other people's rights.

Let me save you some time here.

This is where I say, uh-huh, so they're exactly the same.

And then you say, nuh-uh, no "people."

And then I remind you that slaves weren't considered "people."

Now, having cut to the chase, avoiding all those steps, do you have anything novel to offer?
 

reilo

learning some important life lessons from magical Negroes
Do you have to fuck up every thread where abortion is mentioned? Can you let it go, just once? How have you not formed an ulcer by now and died?
 

Gaborn

Member
reilo said:
Do you have to fuck up every thread where abortion is mentioned? Can you let it go, just once? How have you not formed an ulcer by now and died?

So... he's not allowed to voice an opinion on the subject because he disagrees strongly with most of gaf on the subject? :lol :lol :lol
 
reilo said:
Do you have to fuck up every thread where abortion is mentioned? Can you let it go, just once? How have you not formed an ulcer by now and died?
If he's fucking this thread up, then every thread where God is mentioned is fucked up by atheists.
 

reilo

learning some important life lessons from magical Negroes
Gaborn said:
So... he's not allowed to voice an opinion on the subject because he disagrees strongly with most of gaf on the subject? :lol :lol :lol
Once you start doing it in every thread, then you just become a troll.
 
JayDubya said:
Let me save you some time here.

This is where I say, uh-huh, so they're exactly the same.

And then you say, nuh-uh, no "people."

And then I remind you that slaves weren't considered "people."

Now, having cut to the chase, avoiding all those steps, do you have anything novel to offer?
Yes, it doesn't matter what they were considered, it matters what they were.
 

Gaborn

Member
reilo said:
Once you start doing it in every thread, then you just become a troll.

Howso? He's posting intelligent arguments and engaging in the topic. If he went into every thread and said "abortion is murder" and didn't really engage dynamically and respond to the topic I'd see your point, but just because some people make the same arguments and he responds to them the same way each time does not mean that he's trolling.

BrightYoungThing - That's a cop out. Jay could just as easily claim that since in his view life begins at conception if he were right then that life is a person. You cannot prove when personhood begins any more than he can, but we CAN know that there was a serious debate about the person-hood of slaves at one time in history.
 

JayDubya

Banned
BrightYoungThing said:
Yes, it doesn't matter what they were considered, it matters what they were.

Well in this case, agreed.

Human beings should never be treated as the subhuman property of another human being.

What they're considered vs. what. they. are. Couldn't have paid someone to make my point better.
 

reilo

learning some important life lessons from magical Negroes
Gaborn said:
Howso? He's posting intelligent arguments and engaging in the topic. If he went into every thread and said "abortion is murder" and didn't really engage dynamically and respond to the topic I'd see your point, but just because some people make the same arguments and he responds to them the same way each time does not mean that he's trolling.

BrightYoungThing - That's a cop out. Jay could just as easily claim that since in his view life begins at conception if he were right then that life is a person. You cannot prove when personhood begins any more than he can, but we CAN know that there was a serious debate about the person-hood of slaves at one time in history.
Oh, yes, right, when I read JayDubya's post, I am always showered in all of that intelligence he oozes with his snarky and sarcastically laden posts.
 

xnipx

Member
i mean where do you anti-abortion people expect to go with this argument? NO politician is ever going to outlaw abortion so what's the point of voting based on that issue?
 

JayDubya

Banned
reilo said:
Oh, yes, right, when I read JayDubya's post, I am always showered in all of that intelligence he oozes with his snarky and sarcastically laden posts.

I don't believe in snark, it's bad for the digestion.
 

reilo

learning some important life lessons from magical Negroes
xnipx said:
i mean where do you anti-abortion people expect to go with this argument? NO politician is ever going to outlaw abortion so what's the point of voting based on that issue?
Irrational people tend to vote based on emotion rather than reason.
 

Gaborn

Member
reilo said:
Oh, yes, right, when I read JayDubya's post, I am always showered in all of that intelligence he oozes with his snarky and sarcastically laden posts.

Whether you agree with him or disagree with him he's intelligent and consistent on the topic, he's got a completely solid belief on the topic and just because it's different from other people does not justify calling him a troll any more than all of the posters promoting Obama in random threads (whether or not they were related to Obama) were necessarily trolling.
 

reilo

learning some important life lessons from magical Negroes
JayDubya said:
For someone who flings around accusations of trolling...
Hundreds of thousands of voting and polling data support my theory.
 

JayDubya

Banned
reilo said:
Hundreds of thousands of voting and polling data support my theory.

Oh, so this is a scientific observation then, based on your bountiful research? What's your operational definition of "irrational?"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom