What I want to be careful not fail to say is that I have a personal relationship with the Lord. When I have questions, when I need answers and guidance. I do as the Lord has taught me. I go to Him in prayer. I have no middle man/woman nor do I need one. It is my belief the Lord wants me to depend upon Him for all things. That is not to say that I disregard the personages of Church Leaders, Teachers and Ministers. What is means is that I do not believe, at least my experience is the Lord always guides me to do what He thinks I should do. If I somehow fail find common ground with anybody else, I accept that and trust the Lord is doing in my life exactly what He said he would do.
I respect Ms Glendon???s opinion, but it is not one I could make. I have been taught the benefit of purposely not passing judgment on others, especially in a public way. Now, if I have something against someone, I can easily go to that person, discuss the issue and see how things work out. But as far as me ridiculing, passing judgment on others in a personal way; I do not think I know enough to accurately do so. For those that believe they have the knowledge, wisdom and license to make those judgments, that is your affair. I am just a man.
I do not think I need to do anything other than try to do the best I can to live according to the teachings of Christ. I am certain I do not know enough to accurate pass judgments on people of different life experiences, sexuality, religious beliefs, etc??? My hands are busty trying to live decently in this troubled society. I am more than willing to allow God, through the Holy Spirit, with faith in Jesus Christ to do what he has always said he would do in my life. But then again, I suspect a lot of you are much more intelligent than me. So do what you think is best, but do not be surprised when your best results in divisiveness, confusion and an inadvertent calamity. Something tells me that may not be what the Lord desires in this case.
POLITICS
An Open Letter to Notre Dame
The flap over Obama's appearance grows as a prominent Roman Catholic leader bows out.
Apr 27, 2009
-
Posted By: bosmith @ 04/28/2009 1:32:12 PM
-
Posted By: pandahays @ 04/29/2009 10:03:40 AM
The problem with your comment, is that you are acting like Ms. Glendon is passing judgment on Obama as if what he's doing is something minor. This goes far beyond passing judgment...Standing for abortion is, in the eyes of a Catholic, murder. This is not judging him for skipping church on Sunday or not putting enough money in the collection plate, this is a highly disturbing act of murder toward the most innocent in our society and you expect her to just stand by and let that happen? Would God really want that? I thought the ten ocmmandments mentioned "Thou Shall not Kill"...?
-
Posted By: sms29s66 @ 05/04/2009 1:16:38 PM
I am pro-life, but I have a problem with the pro-life position. If you truly believe that abortion is murder, then the woman who has an abortion should be prosecuted and imprisioned. If it is premeditated (which is certainly has to be) then she should face the death penalty (in most states). If you do not agree with thie, then you don't REALLY think abortion is murder and you are really in agreement with most people in this country who rule out abortion for themselves but do not chose to legislate morality for others.
-
Posted By: whitejasminetea @ 07/08/2009 2:47:34 PM
How can you be pro-life but advocate the death penalty?
-
-
Posted By: bosmith @ 04/29/2009 2:45:40 PM
pandahays, You are actually saying that what President Obama is doing is worse? Worse than what? What has he done other than acknowledge federal law; a law that states a woman has the right to choose?" It appears as if the President upholds the law, you criticize, and what the heck is the President supposed to do. Even if President didn't want to uphold the law, he swore an oath to do so. I actually take no issue with those that are disappointed in current law. However, I take note of anybody that is not satisfied with current law is willing to place blame for the law on a person. It seems as though some Americans are mlooking for any reason at all to create a platform they pretend justifies their criticism. In my opinion all these attempts to place President Obama at blame for a law that was on the books since the seventies is nothing more than a fabricated platform used to criticize someone they had nothing to do with. I think that is a little childish and dishonest. By the way, where was all of these recriminations in regards to the "Gipper?" What did he or any other Republican President do in regards to abortion that President Obama has not done? Can you not see the bias you portray? Not only in regards to abortion, but the reality that political bias has affected you in such a way it appears you are willing to use the teachings of the Lord to support your political bias. Not to worry. Nothing new here. Some Americans have twisted and used the teachings of the Lord to justify their bias as long as this nation has been around. In this case, you seem to be no different.
-
Posted By: pandahays @ 04/29/2009 6:03:40 PM
False, I believe, through both my religion and morals that all termination of life at human hands (death penalty, war, abortion) is WRONG. Period. I was extremely unhappy that our nation was at war, no matter which party sent them to war, I want the death penalty to disappear, I'd like Roe V. Wade overturned. What is wrong with using my faith to make a judgment on who I feel should represent my country? Its what I live by.... I don't see what is wrong with that. And why is it that my political bias is wrong, but yours is okay? Aren't you just as biased?
-
Posted By: bosmith @ 04/29/2009 6:24:16 PM
Pandahays, I see nothing wrong with your views and or religious views. I simply cannot understand how you attach your disagreement with abortion to President Obama. The notion that he is killing babies is shameful to even repeat.
-
Posted By: pandahays @ 04/30/2009 10:38:12 AM
I didn't say he killed babies..I said he's standing for abortion, which is murder. If you stand by and allow one human to kill another human you should have great guilt on your conscience. I wish someone would do something about this INCLUDING a republican president. I just think it is so sad that our value on life these days is so skewed. Foreign citizens who happen to live in the same country as a terrorist are not valued as human lives, criminals are not valued as human lives, babies are not valued as human lives. I can't align myself with either party in this respect. But the truth is, I'm only one person and I'm not anyone who can change the laws so I live by them for now, but I vote for those that MOST represent what I believe in. That's all I can do aside from writing letters to my congressmen etc.
-
-
-
-
Posted By: ep122 @ 04/29/2009 10:16:15 AM
It never fails to amaze me how much of an issue abortion is to religious conservatives. In the Bible G-d orders the DEATHS of women, men and SUCKLING BABIES and does it MANY times.
-
Posted By: pandahays @ 04/29/2009 1:26:54 PM
So just to clear up any confusion, in this day and age, is it God that is ordering the deaths of the unborn babies? Or is it selfish women who "accidentally" ended up pregnant? Big difference.
-
Posted By: ep122 @ 04/29/2009 3:29:55 PM
You are right. Personally I do not like the idea of abortion and abhor late term abortions. Late term abortions should be outlawed, but I do not judge other people who have differing opinions. My point was that you cannot use the Bible to say that abortion was morally wrong, because innocent babies were killed at the command of G-d.
-
-
-
-
Posted By: bojack27 @ 04/28/2009 5:50:01 PM
Then why even comment on this post if you don't want to express your opinion or view of the subject. You seem to be lukewarm over the things of God and now you judge others because they are standing on principles that they believe in. GET REAL!
God didn't call you to sit on the sidelines and to let the world got o hell without Christians taking a moral stance on issues! The world is going to hell and you are throwing in the towel. Read the scriptures and know that you are called to speak out in season and out of season....Selah!-
Posted By: ep122 @ 04/29/2009 3:17:21 PM
Hi Bojack27. Notre Dame has given honorary degrees to people who have done worse than Pres. Obama. A great portion of the country does not even believe that abortion is murder. Notre Dame has given honorary degrees, for instance, to people who support the death penalty, but not a word from their alumni about that. I wonder why they would make a fuss about Obama? This is not just about abortion, but about politics and "other issues". The country is becoming very polarized, and it is sad. Sad that people could insult a sitting President of the United States for such an issue. It is NOT about moral principles. If you speak of moral principles and follow the Bible then you could be put to death for a number of things, including adultry, having sex with your WIFE during her period, sorcery, beating a slave (if he dies too slowly) and other silly things. Even children could be put to death for being disobedient. I do read my Bible.
-
Posted By: bosmith @ 04/28/2009 11:37:13 PM
Bojack, I f you comment was directed at me; I did express my opinion. My opinion is that I do not believe I have enough knowledge to pass judgment on anybody. One more thing I believe is quite important. I am not a Catholic. What I think I have in common with Catholics is our mutual belief in Christ as Savior. Having said that, I will say something that once happened to me, that to this day I have not qualified the experience. In other words I do not know what happened or why. I never formed an opinion, never passed judgment, simply moved on. What am I talking about? Why even at my age I am certain that I do not know enough to make judgments with my limited, sometimes biased opinions and personal experiences.
When I was a young man, I was walking down the street of a large city I had never been in before. I moved there and hardly new anybody. I did not have a Bible at the time. But I thought I got lucky. As I was walking down the street, I found myself in front of a large Cathedral. I am certain it was a Catholic Church. There were a few people standing outside of the Church dressed in clothing that made me think they were part of the Church. I stopped, spoke politely, stated that I was new in the city and that I did not have a Bible and would they have one around they could give me? I admit my surprise. It was almost as if I were speaking unintelligibly. The next thing that happened was the people went inside the Church and did not return. They never said they didn???t have a Bible. They never said they would not give me a Bible. They just left.
That was about thirty years ago. Some time later I discovered the Catholic Bible is different in some way than the King James Holy Bible. I did not know that at the time in my youth. Prior to that all I knew about the Catholic Church is they sponsored a Church Basketball League when I was a kid. As a kid I played basketball in their gym, and also participated in their communion one Sunday with all the rest of the youth players on the basketball teams. I guess my point is that to this day I have no idea why I was not offered a Bible, didn???t get mad about it. Didn???t form an opinion about it.
Later some Christian at a Baptist Church gave me a Bible and I was satisfied. In fact, that Bible became very important to me. It was instrumental in leading me towards a better understanding and a closer personal relationship with my Lord. You are more than welcome to pass judgment on me in any way you prefer. I happen to be certain that anything you or anybody else says or thinks about me is of no consequence. You see I am a child of the most High. Anybody that has business with me must do so with the loving, saving grace of God pointed directly at my life. The Lord has taught me that. What was your point?-
Posted By: bojack27 @ 04/29/2009 11:53:41 AM
Like I said before you are lukewarm and sitting on the fence of indecision is not what God called you to do! What happen to speaking out for those who are oppressed or the innocent. You sit up here saying I have no opinion.... I think I will just leave it at this.........GESSSH!
-
-
-
-
Posted By: Fernadez @ 05/13/2009 5:05:44 PM
Republcan the party of NO, have nothing intresting except the Tea-Baggars keeps talkng about Women's Womb for another 100 years more.
-
Posted By: keith2366 @ 05/08/2009 5:57:38 PM
I have enjoyed reading all the comments. It is quite obvious that most commentors here are not expressing their anit-abortion views nor their morals and principles. They do not like Obama and can find no other way to express their dislike for the man. Obama has not caused the deaths of anymore unborn than Bush, Clinton or any previous president. It is unfortunate that all you religious nuts have ruined the Republican party for me. I would suggest to all you religious nuts to write yourself in as a candidate for president in 2012 and to vote for yourself. If you actually believe that you will find any politician who agrees with your religious views and your political views you are kidding yourself. The Republican party had done nothing to stop abortion, stop gay marriage or put prayer in schools. That is all fine by me anyway, I vote for political leaders not religious leaders.
-
Posted By: Mike Shelton @ 05/05/2009 1:38:41 AM
Dear Ms Glendon, I hope you read these post so that I can convey my admiration of you for your strong and unyielding stance on your beliefs. I wish all Christians would stand on their convictions instead of trying to be politically correct. Thank you again for your strength and courage. Sincerely, Mike Shelton
-
Posted By: HolyRoller @ 05/03/2009 4:57:08 PM
Genocidal MURDER of the unborn is WRONG...no ifs...buts...or why's...and the absolute glee that so many have...there are even Congratulation cards for sale, to mark the event...Planned Parenthood was founded by a Nazi Witch (Margaret Sanger) for the sole purpose of genocide against minorities and the poor...it continues today.....To not only endorse...but...to get all "happy" about this act is DEMONIC.....and PrezBo-Zo seems to really like the idea...
NOBAMA!!!-
Posted By: sms29s66 @ 05/04/2009 1:08:56 PM
How many of us out there are aware that the laws against abortion originated to protect women from their husbands who did not want more children?
-
-
Posted By: Bella's a Pug @ 04/28/2009 1:40:47 PM
bojack, here's another curious thing about the republican's stand on abortion. from 2001 to 2006, the gop had majorities in the u.s. house and senate, the majority on the supreme court and the presidency. except for the partial birth abortion bill, no other legislation came to either floor. they didn't try to make new law or overturn current law. no cases were filed or heard by the supremes for overturning roe v wade. why not? simple, this issue is the nuclear weapon of political waepons that the gop can not afford to lost. so they bring it out every election cycle and return it to the vault when it's over, this is the issue that distracts the isouthern state's voter from the facts that their states are total failures and are really welfare staes where they recieve more tax money back than they pay in. 22 ot the 23 red states get more back than they pay in. only 7 blue states get more back. i don't want to go off point here but the gop is as phony as a 3 dollar bill.
-
Posted By: bojack27 @ 04/28/2009 3:38:00 PM
Ok this so called evidence has prevented how many tangible abortions? This type of reasoning is totally misguided and shows no clear proof that sex education, condoms, birth control pills or devices have reduced the number of abortions.
What you are aassuming is that since they didn't get pregnant, whatever the precentage that it prevented all of them from having abortions. This is speculation and not true reduction.
http://theologica.blogspot.com/2008/11/abortion-rates-under-clinton-and-bush.html
http://www.factcheck.org/society/the_biography_of_a_bad_statistic.html
http://www.lifenews.com/nat886.html-
Posted By: Bella's a Pug @ 04/28/2009 4:18:47 PM
i'll play... we agree, i'm pretty sure, that the reason for using birth control is to prevent pregnancy. you say this doesn't prove that it also reduces abortions. that means that none, zero, ziip of those using birth control would have opted for an abortion if they had become pregnant. because if that's not what your saying and if even one abortion was prevented you'd be wrong. right/ get real here. denying that birth control works and prevents unwanted pregnancy and therefore must prevent some abortions is the fuzzy thinking you reps. do. guess what if everyone had access to the morning after pill abortion could be drastically reduced. but no, that would be telling them it's ok to have sex. we can't do that.same old bad thinking and no has the guts to admit it.
-
Posted By: bojack27 @ 04/28/2009 5:02:12 PM
It is not about playing. It is just a bunch of double talk to say that you or others reduce abortions buy giving birth control out. The reduction in abortions should not come through means where you cannot measure the causing factors. Because the main factor did not occur, that is that the young woman or girl didn???t become pregnant.
Speculating on how many would have been reduced is the only thing one can do. But this is not tangible proof of reduction. This is playing politics and you and others have bought into the garbage. As for republican thinking I will say the same thing for them as well. Abstinence doesn???t reduce abortion; it only reduces pregnancy along with birth control.
Having births instead of abortion reduces abortion, not performing abortions reduces abortions, passing laws against and tearing down facilities reduces abortions. These are tangible evidence one can measure the reduction of abortions by. Not speculating on what could happen but what actually did happen.-
Posted By: not-fooled-by-slick-talking-charlatans @ 05/01/2009 2:53:59 PM
There is no tangible evidence that "passing laws against and tearing down facilities" actually reduces abortions. It reduces the amount of abortions performed in American hospitals and clinics. Before Roe vs. Wade, wealthy females travelled to other countries to have their pregnancies aborted and women of less financial means found other (often deadly) sources.
-
Posted By: bojack27 @ 05/01/2009 4:40:50 PM
You don't know what you are talking about! Passing this law increased the amount of abortions and terminating or overturning Roe vs. Wade, and making it a crime will decrease abortions period. That richer female nonsense is just rhetoric and you have no statistics to back it up.
Pro-abortionists grossly exaggerate the number of illegal abortions and deaths before Roe vs. Wade. One of the major ongoing lines of defense offered to keep abortionon-demand legal is to insist that the Roe decision did not result in an increase in abortion: that the same number of abortions is now done legally which were formerly done illegally. Significantly, however, the minute they are asked for data to back up their charges, in their typical "hit and run" debating style, they rush off to another topic.
An all-too-common example of this mode of attack appeared in an article by Suzanne Gordon in the April 4, 1989 Washington Post Health Magazine. She stated, "more than 1.2 million women are estimated to have had illegal abortions each year before Roe v.Wade, and approximately 5,000 died annually as a result." Obviously, no official record
of the number of illegal abortions exists. Pro-abortion public relations firms may make such estimates of more than 1 million illegal abortions and 5,000 deaths annually. But anyone who looks at the actual figures of abortions after 1973 and the number of all pregnancy-related maternal deaths before 1973 would disagree. These statistics prove
that the pro-abortion estimates have no basis in either fact or logic.-
Posted By: bojack27 @ 05/01/2009 4:43:58 PM
During 1973, after the Supreme Court had legalized abortion-on-demand nationwide in January of that year, 744,600 abortions were done (according to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, an affiliate of Planned Parenthood, which surveys abortion providers and compiles abortion statistics). If abortion supporters want to claim that more than 1.2 million illegal abortions took place before 1973, then they must also explain why the legalization of abortion caused an immediate drop of more than 450,000 in the number of abortions!
The number of legal abortions did not reach 1 million until 1975, the third year of legalization. It was not until 1977 - four years after Roe v. Wade and with 2,688 abortion providers in operation - that the number exceeded 1.2 million, according to the Guttmacher Institute. The total number of legal abortions today is more than 1.3 million per year.
As for the number of deaths from illegal abortions, in 1960 the total number of all pregnancy-related deaths (from abortions as well as from childbirth and other problems during pregnancy) was 1,579 (according to the Vital Statistics of the United States, Vol.II, Mortality, Part A. 1960-77). To believe the pro-abortion argument that over 5,000 illegal abortion deaths occurred, one must believe that the 1,579 officially recorded maternal deaths were all caused by illegal abortions and an additional 3,421 deaths were also caused by illegal abortions and the death certificates were falsified to attribute the death to something such as "heart attack" or "cirrhosis of the liver," and that no woman
died from any other pregnancy-related cause. But in fact, for 1960, Vital Statistics attributes 289 of those 1,579 deaths to abortion (legal and illegal).-
Posted By: bojack27 @ 05/01/2009 4:48:44 PM
In 1968, Vital Statistics reports 859 total pregnancy-related deaths; 133 of the 859 attributed to abortion.
By 1972, the year before the Supreme Court legalized abortion-on-demand nationwide, there were 24 deaths from legal abortions and 39 from illegal abortions (according to the Centers for Disease Control Abortion Surveillance, Annual Summary, 1978). Not only have pro-abortionists grossly exaggerated the number of illegal abortions and deaths, they misrepresent what caused the decline in the number of abortion-related deaths. It had nothing to do with legalization of abortion.
The number had been dropping steadily long before the first states legalized abortion. The real explanations are such
factors as the availability of better antibiotics, such as penicillin, the establishment of intensive care units and better surgical techniques.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Posted By: julieclayville @ 05/01/2009 12:50:29 PM
God bless Mary Ann G. Whether or not you argree with her, it is refreshing to see someone not afraid to take a stand and behave with consistancy. She is acting on what her CONSCIENCE tells her to do, and I think her letter expalined her position with grace. I am a grad of a catholic Jesuit university and believe me, if it was my school, I'd be crushed about the President receiving an honorary degree. I would then forever withhold future donations to the school. Everyone needs to reflect and act according to what their conscience tells them. I beleive ND has made an enormous mistake in judgement and although I expect and hope commencement will be a peaceful event, I thnk the school will know many disagree with the decision of their administration.
-
Posted By: Janekoppmorris @ 04/30/2009 8:31:41 PM
I am a Notre Dame grad (1982), and I am very embarrassed by this whole controversy. Barack Obama is our president. You do not have to agree with everything he believes to recognize his accomplishments and importance. I saw Jimmy Carter speak at my brother's Notre Dame commencement years ago while he was still president. It was very exciting. This controversy makes Notre Dame look small minded and parochial.
-
Posted By: alcraft92 @ 04/30/2009 6:37:13 PM
My congratulations go to Ms. Glendon. What a crock for Notre Dame to want to recognize her life accomplishments and then in the same breath put her on the same stage as someone so counter to her ideals. What an insult! That's no way to honor someone. I'm glad she backed out.
- Notre Dame Class of 92 graduate
-
Posted By: Simpleton @ 04/30/2009 3:37:02 PM
If Notre Dame does not want to invite Obama for *any* reason, it is their right. What's the hullabaloo about?
-
Posted By: romad @ 04/30/2009 12:50:16 PM
Obama is praise for ordering the murder of three teenage pirates/terrorists, is praised for his vote to allow the death of botched abortion babies that survive, and his vote to allowpartial birth abortions (where the baby's skull is punctured and the brains are sucked out. Do you believe that in all three of these cases the victims felt REAL PAIN?? You be they did. Then how can Obama attack and prosecute our military interrogators for enhanced interrogation techniques that cause no real physical pain or death; yet saved thousands of lives without killing anyone.? The Great Liar in Chief has spoken; and we the stupid sheeple stick our noses further up his behind for more of this hope and change and destruction of our country, it's values, its core beliefs and its security.
-
Posted By: mcrziegler @ 04/28/2009 11:58:30 AM
I am proud of my alma mater's decision to bring Obama to campus, and I find Prof. Glendon's backing out to be little more than sour grapes over Notre Dame's refusal to cave to the conservative party line that has dominated its culture for so long. Students and alums should be proud to be a part of an institution that can command such noteworthy and diverse speakers as the current and former Presidents. Goodbye, Prof. Glendon; your absence will quickly be forgotten.
-
Posted By: bojack27 @ 04/28/2009 12:18:58 PM
This is coming from one of the lowest members of the alma matta criticizing one of it's highest members! GET REAL!
-
Posted By: kmescall @ 04/28/2009 12:30:45 PM
Get your facts straight. Glendon's "alma matta" (sic) is the University of Chicago, not Notre Dame.
-
Posted By: bojack27 @ 04/28/2009 12:41:35 PM
Doesn't matter she still represents the views of the Bishops and church doctrine better than mcrziegler. So I stand by my statement you still have someone who is not prominently known or recognized by his very own Alma mater criticizing someone who has represented them at the highest office and was recognized as such a person to receive the award stating so.
-
Posted By: kmescall @ 04/28/2009 1:15:50 PM
Your ignorance is astounding. Glendon never represented Notre Dame. She was previously a commencement speaker. As another alumnus of Notre Dame, I strongly support mcrziegler's position. What are your "credentials" to be able to expound on Church doctrine?
-
Posted By: bojack27 @ 04/28/2009 2:58:38 PM
Your Comprehension is lacking. I just stated in the previous post that she still represents the views of the Bishops and church doctrine better than mcrziegler.
As a the former U.S. ambassador to the Vatican, her views of church doctrine higher than yours or mcrziegler. As a alumnus you and mcrziegler went to a Catholic university and don???t uphold the positions of the doctrines which make them different. The credentials I have to expound upon Church doctrine are simple. I believe them and uphold them-
Posted By: kmescall @ 04/28/2009 3:42:46 PM
If you are going to write on issues as important as this you ought first to educate yourself. As U. S. Ambassador to the Vatican, Glendon did not represent the Vatican but insted represented the People of the United States. George Bush did not selct her and the Senate did not confirm her based upon her theologic qualifications, nor should they have. Instead, Glendon was selected presumably because she was perceived as someone with the necessary diplomatic credentials to represent the United States. This puts her in no better position to speak for the bishops or the Church than anyone else, including yourself. In order to develop an informed conscience one must first understand the doctrine in question and then make a free choice to accept same. It is clear from your writing that you are ill-informed about the doctrines of the Church and merely choose to believe what others have related to you. Life should be as simple for all of us as it appears to be for you. To be able to believe in something that you don't understand and then to justify your belief by claiming to be in compliance with same.
-
Posted By: bojack27 @ 04/28/2009 5:37:59 PM
Educate yourself on her.
Glendon graduated from University of Chicago Law School, where she served on law review.
She was appointed by President Bush to the President's Council on Bioethics, and is also the author of Rights Talk; A Nation Under Lawyers, and A World Made New: Eleanor Roosevelt and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The National Law Journal named Glendon one of the "Fifty Most Influential Women Lawyers in America" in 1998. In 1994, she was a signer of the document Evangelicals and Catholics Together.
Evangelicals and Catholics Together is a 1994 ecumenical document signed by leading Evangelical and Roman Catholic scholars in the United States. The co-signers of the document were Charles Colson and Richard John Neuhaus, representing each side of the discussions. It was part of a larger ecumenical rapprochement in the United States that had begun in the 1980s with Catholic-Evangelical collaboration in para-church organizations such as Moral Majority during the Ronald Reagan administration.
So why would the president assigned someone who is not abreast in these matters? She was put in this position because she is outspoken and very knowledgeable about Catholic doctrine. This put her in a better position to learn first hand what the head of the Roman Catholic Church stance and opinions where on this matter. The doctrine which you speak of is the Bible and teachings of the Catholic church. If you think that I'm ill-informed then inform me why would a Catholic University representing Catholics around the world give honor to one who is bent on the destruction of human life?
Life is simple or should I say black and white! It is when you try to call Good, Evil and Evil, Good it is when one starts living in the gray area. They think they are standing for something when there stance leaves them nowhere.-
Posted By: kmescall @ 04/28/2009 10:45:33 PM
Well at least we now know that the extent of your research has been liited to the depths of Wikipedia. Your blatant ingonrance again shines through and exposes you as the ffraud that you are. Glendon not only received a law degree from the University of 'chicago but also receoived a Bachelor of Arts degree from the Univesity of Chicago in 1959. Couldnd't you even bother to check out her background in detail before espousing the virtues of someone you know kittel or nothing about? Again, your simpleminded statment that life is always viewed in black and white belies your inability to think for yourself and to allow others to do the heavy intellectual lifting on yoour behalf. Life is never black and white and is always seen in varying shades of gray. The sooner you realize this the sooner you will be free to think and believe for yourself instead of blindly relying on what others tell you to believe.
-
Posted By: bojack27 @ 04/29/2009 12:47:16 PM
Life is Black and white! Sorry that you live int he gray area. If you want to remain ignorant about her appointment to this office had nothing to do with her beliefs then remain ignorant.
A Ambassador does represent the United States and the siting presidents point of view on certain issues. If you fail to see this then your stupidity has no bounds. Your assumption of that this person doesn't need to know anything about the Vatican or their viewpoints is ludicrious. I posted her background to show you that she has a vested interest in the teachings and writings of the church and thus is familiar with the keeping of its doctrine!
So if that is too hard for your stupid mind to comprehend then let me know. Now having served in such a high position regarding Catholic doctrine you now say that she doesn't know what she is talking about! Well inform me on the church doctrine that says it is okay to honor someone who is in opposition to their beliefs?
Instead of sticking your head up others butt and ignoring the teaching of what the Church stands for and what the University is suppose to be representing do your own research and quit relying on others opinions and blindly supporting them!
So you agree that the University should honor someone who is taking the life of the unborn? Well they can do what they want to do but then quit calling themselves a Catholic University.-
Posted By: bosmith @ 04/29/2009 1:04:37 PM
Bojack, you said, "So you agree that the University should honor someone who is taking the life of the unborn? Well they can do what they want to do but then quit calling themselves a Catholic University." That is a flat out lie. President Obama has not taken the life of any unborn. I think you know that but blinded by your partisan zealousness, your personal bias; you cannot even see reality. Name one incident when President Obama has taken the life of an unborn. Everybody else can continue to satisfy your seemingly innate desire to denigrate, lie and angrily, falsely denigrate others, I am done. Incedentally, I tend to not communicate very often with fabricators. You are among the best of them. I hope your Catholic beliefs someday teach you better than to lie.
-
Posted By: bojack27 @ 04/29/2009 6:34:52 PM
1997: opposed bill preventing partial-birth abortion. (Aug 2008)
Opposed legislation protecting born-alive failed abortions. (Aug 2008)
Voted against banning partial birth abortion. (Oct 2007)
Opposed born-alive treatment law because it was already law. (Oct 2008)
Supports Roe v. Wade. (Jul 1998)
Voted NO on defining unborn child as eligible for SCHIP. (Mar 2008)
Voted NO on prohibiting minors crossing state lines for abortion. (Mar 2008)-
Posted By: bosmith @ 04/29/2009 8:13:35 PM
Bojack, if that is your proof that President Obama has killed unborn children; I think it is time for me to end this conversation. I admit I cannot see any valid point in regards to President Obama killing unborn children. If in your mind President Obama and/or any other Lawmaker voting on a Congressional Bill is equivalent to killing anybody, I give up. By the way, I pretty much know for certain their are Federal and Stet Laws that promise indictment, trial, and conviction for any known murderer. Have you also imagined an appropriate sentence of president Obama for committing your alleged crimes? I must get out now. Anything further I comment on your imaginations will probably sound insulting, that is not my intent. It is not anybodies fault you do not know the difference between a crime and your apparent zeal to judge someone guilty of a crime; even if you have to make the whole thing up. Goodnight. I respect your desires to voice your opinion, yet I feel a little sorry that at your age you do not seem to understand and accept that you cannot make anybody guilty of anything just because you oppose them for one reason or another.
-
Posted By: bojack27 @ 04/30/2009 11:34:29 AM
Bojack, if that is your proof that President Obama has killed unborn children; I think it is time for me to end this conversation. I admit I cannot see any valid point in regards to President Obama killing unborn children. If in your mind President Obama and/or any other Lawmaker voting on a Congressional Bill is equivalent to killing anybody, I give up.
Hmmm this is very interesting, we seem to blame bush for the deaths in Iraq and now we cannot blame Obama for the deaths of the unborn. Don???t be such a hypocrite, if you or anyone else causes the death of something living then they cannot just wash their hands and say I have nothing to do with it! When Obomination had the chance to vote for life he gave the thumbs down for death of the unborn. Now your blowing snot bubbles saying he had nothing to do with it because he didn???t actually carry out or perform the abortion himself. Stupid logic on your part he is guilty of accessory and is not innocent period.
By the way, I pretty much know for certain their are Federal and Stet Laws that promise indictment, trial, and conviction for any known murderer. Have you also imagined an appropriate sentence of president Obama for committing your alleged crimes?
Yes, but for your sake I will not tell you LOL. Federal and State laws are only as good as those who enforce them. The failure to establish when life begins by this government is no reason to excuse the murders of the unborn.-
Posted By: bojack27 @ 04/30/2009 11:38:22 AM
I must get out now. Anything further I comment on your imaginations will probably sound insulting, that is not my intent. It is not anybodies fault you do not know the difference between a crime and your apparent zeal to judge someone guilty of a crime; even if you have to make the whole thing up.
Is it my imagination or is it yours and others who sit around thinking that killing the unborn is not a crime against humanity. You are the type of people who champion the cause against torture and turn a blind eye to the torture that goes on daily in the womb in which you call free choice. It is not my fault that you don???t know the difference between life and death. Anyone who cast their vote to continue such murderous actions is guilty and the bloods of these innocent children are on their hands.
Goodnight. I respect your desires to voice your opinion, yet I feel a little sorry that at your age you do not seem to understand and accept that you cannot make anybody guilty of anything just because you oppose them for one reason or another.
Understand one thing to excuse a person or to give them a pass for their vote against the unborn is not what anyone should do including you. Guilty means you are responsible for a crime, wrong action, or error and deserving punishment, blame or criticism. Obama is guilty of his judgment over the life of the unborn and if you want to excuse him of this crime go right ahead. But just as I posted the article of When Human Life Begin, Obama shouldn???t make decisions since this question is above his pay grade. Don???t feel sorry for me but feel sorry for yourself when you close a blind eye to things going on and then say it is ok because the law says it is ok to do these things. You yourself are guilty in your response and share the blame for the unborn if you voted for those who terminate the life of the unborn.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Posted By: archmsu @ 04/28/2009 3:28:34 PM
Why is it when someone stand up for thier personal values they pigon-holed as freaks by people like you? But when someone from the left champions a minority cause or just goes along with what mainstream America thinks is the social cause of the week, you call them heros. Hero's, for making us all one and destroying individuality and personal ideas? Political correct people make me sick because they suck the zest out of life.
-
-
Posted By: Concerned Canadian @ 04/29/2009 9:17:20 PM
Barack HUSSEIN Obama has supported abortions globally with American taxpayers money. All of his attempts to send a US envoy to the Vatican were turned down because of his afront to the Roman Catholic church and all his choices for envoy to the Vatican were also pro-abortion. The Pope didn't even acknowledge Nancy Pelosi, who is Roman Catholic, and give her communion because she is pro-abortion. The Vatican now wants Nancy Pelosi excumunicated from the Roman Catholic church and rightfully so. Obama is a phoney , a liar , a Muslim but won't admit it and he is not cut out for the job. Obama gets offended easily when he is criticized and he is not vigilant in ensuring the safety of the United States against the radical Muslim nut job terrorists.
-
Posted By: bosmith @ 04/29/2009 11:30:03 PM
Concerned Canadian, How many members of the American electorate do you think cares one whit what you think?
-
-
Posted By: chikapoo @ 04/29/2009 5:13:39 PM
What an excellent and reasoned response. Bravo Ms. Glendon for demonstrating grace and courage in the public square. The "talking points," reference is indeed a "deal breaker" in my view. By floating her presence at the event as somehow fostering a format for competing ideas and a balance of viewpoints is just laughable. This is a commencement ceremony, not a debate!
Oh the curse of identity politics. Ideas mean nothing only personalities.
Notre Dame is acting in clear defiance to the request by the Bishops. The school administration knew this from the day the invitation was sent. What they misjudged was the negative response from the faithful. What they also underestimate is the disgust across Middle America with the phony doctrine of "academic freedom."
-
Posted By: chikapoo @ 04/29/2009 5:13:13 PM
What an excellent and reasoned response. Bravo Ms. Glendon for demonstrating grace and courage in the public square. The "talking points," reference is indeed a "deal breaker" in my view. By floating her presence at the event as somehow fostering a format for competing ideas and a balance of viewpoints is just laughable. This is a commencement ceremony, not a debate!
Oh the curse of identity politics. Ideas mean nothing only personalities.
Notre Dame is acting in clear defiance to the request by the Bishops. The school administration knew this from the day the invitation was sent. What they misjudged was the negative response from the faithful. What they also underestimate is the disgust across Middle America with the phony doctrine of "academic freedom."
-
Posted By: earthfallsintosun @ 04/29/2009 3:08:10 PM
As a ND alum I am so embarrassed about the way people are reacting to Obama speaking at commencement. Having the President speak at graduation is an HONOR and you should be GRATEFUL. If you don't like it, give your precious commencement tickets to people who can appreciate the experience.
I have to admit that I am not surprised. During my 4 years at ND, I was continuously surprised how selfish and self-important the majority of the students were. Coming from a hard working middle class family, I was totally unprepared for the way that the "privileged" see themselves and the world. At least I learned the lesson that they refused to- how to work with different kinds of people and respect their ideas, even if you don't agree with them.
-
Posted By: js123 @ 04/28/2009 9:04:59 PM
If only 10% of this moral outrage against Obama appearing at this graduation was put toward getting rid of all the criminal sex offenders masquerading as priests then the Catholic church would be on a much greater moral footing and have a whole lot more money to help the poor and needy.
-
Posted By: janeyre @ 04/29/2009 2:10:13 PM
js123, you said it, much better than I. Thank you for your honesty.
-
-
Posted By: bosmith @ 04/29/2009 12:38:18 PM
Bojack, since you refuse to not accept the fallacy that you can, or should speak to me in the place of the Lord, Just what is it that you have determined the Lord has said to me when I am confronted by a person that somehow has decided he knows what the Lord has said to me/; for me to do. I???m listening, what has the Lord said for me to do. How should I respond to a denigrating comment towards another person, including the President of the United States when a person has judged the President and others as somehow not seeing things right if they do not see them the same way as he does? You have implied that President Obama is at fault somehow; and I suppose that applies to me as well. Just what has President Obama and others done wrong. Is disagreeing, refusing to support your thoughts and opinions synonymous with disobeying God, not knowing the Lord? I dare you to actually say such a foolish thing, I dare you. Your words are not gospel. You are a sinful man just like every other person; born in sin, hopefully seeking Salvation in Christ as other Christians. What part of the message of Christ gives you license to judge me, President Obama and/or anybody else.?
I think you are nothing more than an example of a partisan zealot ,unlearned enough to not realize that you have absolutely no authority to judge me or anybody else. You do have a right to your own opinions. But, you know the old saying, they are like ***holes. Everybody has one. What makes you think your opinions are more relevant than anybody else. Do you think you can venture into the real world in regards to opinions? Or do you actually believe your opinions are gospel. Are somehow the same as truth and gospel?
I have no idea how you think you can respond with any sort of veracity, unless you believe that all other people has decide to believe that what you think is more pertinent than what others think. Can you possibly be that naïve? Let???s see. I dare you to respond in regards to anything I just said. On the other hand you can hide behind your farcical ego, think you are correct, disrespect and discount all opinions of those that have called upon the Lord because you know better. I dare you. I dare you.-
Posted By: bojack27 @ 04/29/2009 1:04:42 PM
Not only will I respond to this post but your first post as well. It will take sometime but it will be done today.
-
-
Posted By: mars7578 @ 04/29/2009 12:54:33 PM
I am no catholic., Where do christans get the view that non christains are to live as a believer?.Although it may appear good, it has no bilbical base.Christ teaches us that we sin in our hearts and by putting emphasis on outward practices without an inner conviction is creating a self satisfying illusion.Catholics especially should know this because of how a satanic spirit was able to manifest itself in some members of the leadership although they religious kept the rites.Although it would have been religiously correct for senator Palin daughter to get marry because of her pregenancy,I believe it would be a mockry of what Christ taught of what a marriage is.A marriage is ia commmitment to God ,more than a legal way to have sex.Finally ,Chirst taught us to give reverance to Ceasar, God has given us certain blessed tools and dispositions.We cannot be lured away by popuplist and good sounding ideas, but our conduct and decisions must realize that GOD is at work.
-
Posted By: ronkerney @ 04/28/2009 8:45:10 PM
Lawrence O'Donnell put it best: If President Bush who signed more death warrants than any governor in America can receive an honorary degree from UND. Then President Obama can receive one too. The right-wing of the Catholic Church should be consistent about abortion and the death penalty but they are not. Furthermore President Obama's work as a community organizer on the South Side of Chicago was funded by Catholic Social Services.
-
Posted By: bojack27 @ 04/29/2009 12:49:23 PM
What a stupid comment!
Read the bible before you spout off such stupidity!
-
Report Abuse
Enter comments if any for reporting abuse
- Dead on arrival to the Senate Sen. Lindsey Graham on House bill CBS
- We did what we promised Rep. Steny Hoyer on passing health-reform NYT
- That was easy Nancy Pelosi after passing health care bill PLTCO
- Germany unity is not yet complete Angela Merkel on Berlin Wall anniversary CNN
- This one is for The Boss Joe Girardi on the Yankees’ 27th World Series titleNYDN
Discuss