Obamessiah can’t answer simple question on abortion
August 17th, 2008 by Chris
Today the two US presidential candidates met for a conversation with Rick Warren. If you haven’t heard of Rick Warren, he’s the post-modernist pastor described as a simple mega-church pastor, famous for his book on the “purpose driven” life (thank the Lord we can opt for a Eucharist-driven life, eh?) Anyway, asked about what age a child begins to have human rights, The Annointed One said, “… whether you’re looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity … is above my pay grade.”
I suppose that’s a laugh line. A laugh line at the expense of babies’ lives. Brilliant.
Posted in Uncategorized | 
8 Comments »
August 24th, 2008 at 4:12 pm
McCain’s response: “And I can assure you that if I am elected president, advancing the cause of life will not be above my pay grade.” Wonder if he will pick a veep who feels the same way?
August 26th, 2008 at 4:05 pm
Referring to Sen. Obama as “Obamessiah” is offensive. Degrading the term “messiah” to poke fun at someone, public figure or not, is not in line with our Savior’s teachings. Remember, treat others as you’d like to be treated.
I hope you learn to change your ways and establish a kinder, more Catholic way to express your displeasure. God bless you.
August 26th, 2008 at 8:49 pm
You have to be paying attention to the context and hyperbole. I am not equating him with _the_ Messiah, but referring to the fact that he has been set up as _a_ messiah by the Democrat party, the MSM, and the dumb masses. People in his party have referred to him as being “sent by God” for example. He’s treated as the chosen one, it’s said he is sent by God, sounds like _a_ messiah to me. Clearly not _the_ Messiah. There’s a difference between messiah and Messiah, and I was clearly referencing the version with the lower case m.
Very magnanimous of you to lecture me on changing my ways though.
August 27th, 2008 at 11:47 pm
Thanks.
The trouble come election time is that too many of us focus on one issue –- abortion –- that we disagree with. That one issue cannot and should not be the case for one’s vote.
It’s safe to say that if we look at the root of Catholicism –- looking out for one’s neighbor (The Golden Rule), as Christ taught — the Democrats (lower taxes; improved and more affordable health care; promotion of world peace/no war; protection of Mother Earth/green initiatives; and an overall healthier economy and country, which in turn leads to larger tithes to the Church) are the more Catholic choice.
Our Savior was a liberal, and he saved us. Let’s hope a liberal voice can save us come election time.
Take care.
August 28th, 2008 at 7:53 am
Life issues trump all other issues…thus being so incredibly evil on this one issue can logically disqualify you regardless of other points some may perceive to be positive.
Your key disagreement is one of misguided good intentions. You have developed this bizarre notion that it is the job of the government to force us to be charitable. I seem to remember hearing something at some point about being a cheerful giver. You aren’t a cheerful giver when the government uses its police power to take what you have earned away from you and redistribute it to someone else. Further, the Democrat party has no history of standing for lower taxes, rather they have been the party of increased taxes. I know it will make your head explode, but lower taxes on individuals leads to higher revenue for the government as well as a healthier economy (more disposable income) and lower taxes on business leads to higher paychecks for employees (more disposable income, therefore higher revenues) and these two ingredients logically lead to more voluntary charitable giving by individuals and businesses. Both of these equate to a healthier economy. As for “green” initiatives, Democrats stand strong for radical environmentalism which at its root is anti-capitalism…and without capitalism, your arguments about healthy economies and lower taxes completely fall apart. Regarding promotion of “world peace” you forgot the phrase “at any price.” Your alleged promotion of world peace led to 9/11 and numerous other acts against American citizens. Unlike you, I have found that constitutionally one of the roles of government is protection of the populous. Peace is not the absence of conflict. Peace is when the protection of the people is insured through strength.
And I have obviously wasted precious seconds running this down, because you have bought into the total messiah package…suggesting the big O can “save” us. Jesus may have been a liberal, but he didn’t have it in for babies and he never said the government ought to use its big gun to force charity.
Haven’t you ever read the stats showing that Republicans do more charitable giving than Democrats?
August 28th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
I’ll pray for your guidance.
August 29th, 2008 at 9:10 am
A few thoughts …”Radical environmentalism” — is there any other kind? — of course is anti-capitalism. There are some places in our world where capitalism does not belong. Remember Jesus and the market vendors in the temple
“Life issues trump all other issues.” That is not limited to human beings. It includes ALL of God’s creations –- humans, plants, animals … That’s why we need to keep money-hungry industries out of Alaska’s wildlife, the rain forests, and it’s why the U.S. needs to sign the Kyoto Treaty.
It’s a mortal sin that we will do anything to protect God’s greatest gift –- life –- but do nothing to protect the place He has given us to enjoy it. We all need to answer the Vatican’s call to help stop global warming and environmental ignorance.
And we don’t need to strength to insure peace. Our Savior just turned the other cheek.
God bless.
August 29th, 2008 at 9:28 am
Hmm. Yes, there is wise environmentalism which focuses on conservation without putting “mother” earth (sloppily hidden wiccan reference) above human needs. Yes there are some places where capitalism doesn’t belong – but it does belong in the marketplace. Anything other than capitalism leads to less freedom and more poverty. Human life is above all other life because humanity is the only place you can find the soul, and only humanity is capable of Communion with God.
Drilling in a barren wasteland on a limited basis (the size of a chair leg on a room-sized rug) will not destroy the whole wasteland; as for the Kyoto Treaty, it’s an invalid treaty at this point, and would have punitive effects only on the USA while allowing China and India to do whatever they want. Shooting ourselves in the foot to sign that thing.
Where in the CCC are we told that protecting the planet is a mortal sin on the same level as the protection of human life?
And yes we do need strength to insure peace; our Church makes it clear we are responsible for protecting our families and that governments are responsible for protecting their people. You, like so many, have cleverly taken the “turn the other cheek” thing out of context. Most folks realize that the context of this mandate relates to situations in which we are ridiculed for our faith – a person slapping your cheek at that time meant an insult, not that he was trying to pick a fight with you – if a person insults you, you should take it. You would have to ignore much other Scripture in order to think that this is an order not to defend ourselves.