Sunday, November 2, 2008

My Sunday



It was an interesting Sunday, right before the election. Our friends at Catholics United have launched a national campaign to protect the faith by preventing the distribution of unauthorized material on church property, particularly church parking lots. An extremist Republican who is also a priest has been caught on tape telling his political operatives to violate the authority of the canonical pastor of a parish if he forbade material in the parking lot. From the reports I have heard, Catholics United has had success.

However, where I am volunteering, our pro-life Democratic congressional candidate planned to distribute materials in church parking lots. I had some unease about it for the same reasons Catholics United has. However, I don't find it unacceptable to have an open forum. Since when I arrived at the church lot the Republican were already there, I felt it was acceptable to distribute our material. Being tardy also allowed me to put our Democratic fliers on top of the GOP ones, giving us the better visibility when Mass goers returned to their car.

I made a point to say hello to the two Republican volunteers from whom I was not far behind. They were friendly, kind and civil. I made a joke to one of them "well, folks will have lots to read after Mass!"

THEN THE COPS ARRIVED!

Well, not that dramatic. A police officer pulled up to my Republican friend and told her to stop distributing fliers. He cited an anti-littering ordinance. He later spoke to me and made the same point, nicely and politely. My Republican friend and I both chatted briefly. She was unhappy and felt she had a First Amendment right to be distributing, but we both decided not to question the officer's authority. I would not be surprised if the parish made a request to the police department.

Now, I am a loyal Democrat and no fool. I hung around for a while to make sure my Republican friends didn't come back after the police and I had left. Sure enough, another guy showed up and started passing around brochures. I took the ones he left on my car. It was two of the pamphlets the right wing nut case Randall Terry and his Operation Rescue produced. The theme was that it was a sin for a Catholic to vote for Barack Obama.

My Democratic colleagues and I pondered what we should do. Resume distribution? Take them off the cars? Call the police?

In examining the brochure, we consulted with a long standing member of the parish and our superiors at Headquarters. All of us agreed that we should do nothing to impede their distribution. The Randall Terry pamphlets were so wonderfully inflammatory we were all convinced they would backfire. We even considered helping to distribute them!!!! (but did not).

The lack of civility by some of our opponents is frustrating and can be hurtful. It is comforting to remember, however, that all evidence is that the public rejects this type of rhetoric. Those who engage in it only hurt their cause and help ours.

14 comments:

Anonymous said...

You are a liar.

martin m. said...

In deep denial, Anonymous?

Kurt said...

Email me, friend. I will give you names, places, times.

Rustler45 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Rustler45 said...

Here's our friend Kmiec again. Remember? Yeah, he's the "conservative pro-life" Catholic professor.

Check this.

"Pope" Kmiec Corrects Archbishop Chaput

I grow weary of pseudo-Catholics like Kmiec and others who routinely contradict the teachings of the Church and those bishops who faithfully hand on those teachings to the faithful. Kmiec's recent article in the National UNCatholic Reporter is titled:
'Why Archbishop Chaput's abortion stance is wrong'

From Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam

http://slatts.blogspot.com/search?q=Pope+Kmiec

Rustler45 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Randall said...

Dear Fellow Catholics:

I see that you are affiliated with Senator Obama for president. I have looked over your lies to the BAIPA act.

I would like to know how supporting a candidate who favors abortion will reduce abortion. More importantly, what issue can compare with ~3000-4000 babies being killed per day.

First of all, the fact that other pro-choice Democrats and Republicans voted against the bills mean absolutely nothing and are a smokescreen to the real argument.

Secondly, the 1975 law that was in place that Senator Obama said that it wasn't necessary to have another law in place is false, because that law was filled with so many loop-holes that it was unenforceable.
http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/viewarticle.php?selectedarticle=2008.10.16_George_Robert_Obama%20and%20Infanticide_.xml

As to Senator Obama's support for FOCA, I would like to hear your position on that, because Senator Obama stated to Planned Parenthood Action Fund (July 17, 2007) on that the first thing he would do is sign the Freedom of Choice Act. This act would sweep away any abortion restriction enacted by the states (i.e. parental consent for minor and overturn other laws).

And if you still think abortion is an important issue, please read the following. By supporting Senator Obama you are implicity supporting abortion, whether one wants to admit to it or not. Here is some excerpts from federal court and one from an abortionist handbook on what some abortions do. Please note these excerpts were taken from the priestsforlife.org website.

The statements are from actual abortionists under oath in court or are from an abortion textbook.
First Trimester Suction Abortion
"Question: Can the heart of a fetus or embryo still be beating during a suction curettage abortion as the fetus or embryo comes down the cannula?
Answer: For a few seconds to a minute, yes." (Sworn testimony given in US District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin (Madison, WI, May 27, 1999, Case No. 98-C-0305-S)

"The fetus passes through the catheter and either dies in transit as it's passing through the catheter or dies in the suction bottle after it's actually all the way out."

(Sworn testimony given in US District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin
(Madison, WI, May 27, 1999, Case No. 98-C-0305-S)

Second Trimester D&E Abortion
"A long curved Mayo scissors may be necessary to decapitate and dismember the fetus…" (From the medical textbook Abortion Practice – Dr. Warren Hern, p.154, describing legal activity).

"The friction causes the fetus to tear apart. For example, a leg might be ripped off the fetus as it is pulled through the cervix." (US Supreme Court, Gonzales vs. Carhart, April 18, 2007, describing the D&E procedure, which is legal).

"We would attack the lower part of the lower extremity first, remove, you know, possibly a foot, then the lower leg at the knee and then finally we get to the hip."
(Sworn testimony given in US District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin
(Madison, WI, May 27, 1999, Case No. 98-C-0305-S)

"And typically when the abortion procedure is started we typically know that the
fetus is still alive because either we can feel it move as we're making our initial
grasps or if we're using some ultrasound visualization when we actually see a
heartbeat as we're starting the procedure. It's not unusual at the start of D&E
procedures that a limb is acquired first and that that limb is brought through the
cervix … prior to disarticulation and prior to anything having been done that would have caused the fetal demise up to that point." "When you're doing a dismemberment D&E, usually the last part to be removed is the skull itself and it's floating free inside the uterine cavity…So it's rather like a ping-pong ball floating around and the surgeon is using his forcep to reach up to try to grasp something that's freely floating around and is quite large relative to the forcep we're using. So typically there's several misdirections, misattempts to grasp. Finally at some point either the instruments are managed to be place around the skull or a nip is made out of some area of the skull that allows it to start to decompress. And then once that happens typically the skull is brought out in fragments rather than as a unified piece…" (Sworn testimony given in US District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin (Madison, WI, May 27, 1999, Case No. 98-C-0305-S)


Most importantly, at least 90 shepherds of the Church (the bishops) have spoken that abortion is the top issue of the election; including Senator Biden's bishop in Scranton.

I would like your comments and opinion on the following article: http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/viewarticle.php?selectedarticle=2008.10.14_George_Robert_Obama%27s%20Abortion%20Extremism_.xml

Thank you for your time and I hope to hear from you.

Sincerely and God Bless,

RandyB

Katherine said...

Dear Fellow Catholics:
Thank you for acknowledging our common faith.

I see that you are affiliated with Senator Obama for president.

We have no formal affiliation, but he is our candidate for President.

I have looked over your lies to the BAIPA act.

We will look over you calling us liars as a preface to dialogue, assuming you have a true interest in dialogue.

I would like to know how supporting a candidate who favors abortion...

I don't support a candidate who favors abortion. I support Senator Obama.

More importantly, what issue can compare with ~3000-4000 babies being killed per day.

It is a serious issue. Eight years of Bush and this tragedy continues unabated.

As to Senator Obama's support for FOCA, I would like to hear your position on that,

I oppose FOCA and disagree with Senator Obama on that issue. Given I find no candidate perfect, I am more concerned with matters the new President may actually find presented to him than ones that will not be. FOCA has no chance of passing even a single chamber of Congress and most likely will not even get a subcommittee vote.

if you still think abortion is an important issue,...

I do think it is an important issue.

please read the following.

I don't need to. I am well aware of what abortion is.

By supporting Senator Obama you are implicitly supporting abortion

You have not convinced me of that and, unconvinced by your assertion, I must follow my judgment and conscience.

Most importantly, at least 90 shepherds of the Church (the bishops) have spoken that abortion is the top issue of the election; including Senator Biden's bishop in Scranton.

That assertion has been widely put forward in the conservative blogosphere yet has been disproven. The statement can be dismissed based on the inaccurate citation of Vice President elect Biden's bishop. Joe Biden is canonically subject to the bishop of Wilmington and the Archbishop of Washington.

Thank you for your time and I hope to hear from you.

Sincerely and God Bless,

RandyB


Thank you, Randy, and may God bless you as well. I would very much like your assistance on this Wednesday and thereafter of analyzing the approach the dominant voices in the Right to Life Movement took in this election and what could be revised so that their colossal failure in Tuesday's election might not be repeated. How do we build a pro-life movement that achieves electoral results for legislation for the unborn rather than lead the Republican Party to its greatest defeat since 1964?

Anonymous said...

Katherine,
You are full of it.

Randall said...

Katherine,

I apologize, but you took one remark out of context. The part where I stated, "I have read your lies on the BAIPA", meant I read the section on the RomanCatholicsforobama website that has a section with a similar label.

I should have reviewed that material and I am sorry.

RandyB

Randall said...

Katherine,

As for my responses to your post.

From the Diocese of LaCrosse, Wisconsin website is a link to several bishops who have spoken on abortion.

http://www.dioceseoflacrosse.com/vote2008b.htm

http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/18548449.html

From the blog "Singing In The Reign" by Professor Michael Barber.
http://www.singinginthereign.blogspot.com/

Cardinal Francis George OMI of Chicago (USCCB president; 15 Oct)
Cardinal Edward Egan of New York (23 Oct)
Cardinal Justin Rigali of Philadelphia (USCCB Pro-Life Chair; 23 Oct, 12 Sept)
Archbishop Daniel Buechlein OSB of Indianapolis (3 Oct)
Archbishop Eusebius Beltran of Oklahoma City (5 Oct)
Archbishop Michael Sheehan of Santa Fe (8 Oct)
Archbishop Charles Chaput OFM Cap. of Denver (18 Oct)
Archbishop Alfred Hughes of New Orleans (11 Oct)
Archbishop Timothy Dolan of Milwaukee (28 Sep)
Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City in Kansas (8 Sept)
Archbishop Jose Gomez of San Antonio (10 Oct)
Archbishop John Nienstedt of Saint Paul and Minneapolis (19 Oct)
Bishop Patrick Zurek of Amarillo (24 Sept)
Bishop Robert Vasa of Baker (16 Oct)
Bishop Robert Baker of Birmingham (20 Oct)
Bishop William Lori of Bridgeport (USCCB Doctrine Chair; 28 Sept)
Bishop Joseph Galante of Camden (6 Oct)
Bishop Peter Jugis of Charlotte (26 Oct)
Bishop Michael Sheridan of Colorado Springs (17 Oct)
Bishop Kevin Farrell of Dallas (8 Oct)
Bishop Samuel Aquila of Fargo (23 Oct; 8 Oct)
Bishop Kevin Vann of Fort Worth (8 Oct)
Bishop David Ricken of Green Bay (17 Oct)
Bishop Larry Silva of Honolulu (20 Oct)
Bishop Jerome Listecki of La Crosse
Bishop William Higi of Lafayette in Indiana (28 Sept)
Bishop Glen John Provost of Lake Charles (7 Oct)
Bishop Earl Boyea of Lansing (22 Oct)
Bishop Robert Morlino of Madison (16 Oct)
Bishop Alexander Sample of Marquette (17 Oct)
Bishop Arthur Serratelli of Paterson (15 Oct)
Bishop Thomas Olmsted of Phoenix (18 Sept)
Bishop David Zubik of Pittsburgh (28 Oct)
Bishop Thomas Tobin of Providence (29 Oct)
Bishop Michael Burbidge of Raleigh (26 Oct)
Bishop Thomas Doran of Rockford (24 Oct)
Bishop Paul Coakley of Salina (17 Oct)
Bishop Joseph Martino of Scranton (30 Sept; 19 Oct)
Bishop Walker Nickless of Sioux City (4 Sept; 23 Oct)
Bishop Timothy McDonnell of Springfield in Massachusetts (3 Oct)
Bishop Leonard Blair of Toledo (3 Oct)
Bishop J. Vann Johnston of Springfield-Cape Girardeau (3 Oct; 26 Sept)
Bishop Robert Hermann, archdiocesan administrator of St Louis (17 Oct; 24 Oct)
Bishop Robert Finn of Kansas City-St Joseph (17 Oct; 8 Sept)
Bishop Paul Swain of Sioux Falls (2 Oct)
Bishop Gerald Barbarito of Palm Beach (24 Oct)
Bishop Michael Jackels of Wichita (24 Oct)
Bishop Bernard Harrington of Winona (2 Oct)
Bishop Robert McManus of Worcester (24 Oct)
Bishops of Florida (7 diocesans, 2 auxiliaries; 15 Sep)
Bishops of Kansas (4 diocesans; 2006 statement reissued 15 Aug 2008)
Bishops of New York State (8 diocesans, 11 auxiliaries; 1 Oct)
Bishops of Pennsylvania (7 diocesans, 6 auxiliaries; 10 Oct)
Bishops of Virginia (2 diocesans; 1 Oct)

(Source: Whispers in the Loggia.)

***UPDATE: Bishop Finn Weighs In***

Hear Bishop Finn's interview here. Here's an excerpt:

Chris Stigall: There are Catholics listening right now who are thinking strongly or are convinced that they will vote for Barack Obama. What would you say to them?

Bishop Finn: I would say, give consideration to your eternal salvation.

As for FOCA, not becoming law, what makes you think it wouldn't pass a Democratic Senate and House, with a Democratic president if that should happen? The bill has already been introduced in Congress by Senator Obama.

House co-sponsors of it (109)
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:HR01964:@@@P

Senate co-sponsors (19)
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:SN01173:@@@P

From Senator Obama's campaign site
http://www.barackobama.com/2008/01/22/obama_statement_on_35th_annive.php

Also, what is to stop the Democrats repealing the Hyde Amendment which prohibits federal funding of abortion.

Thank you and God Bless,
RandyB

Katherine said...

Randy,

Thank you for your responses.

Certainly all the prelates you have named as well as almost all others have spoken on the issue of abortion, as they well should. As if the question if all of them said that no Catholic may vote for Senator without sinning, that is not true. You have listed names and dates but not the text of their remarks. Some bishops, like the bigoted Bishop Garcia, have said this. Other bishops (including my own) have made statements rejecting the proposition that every Catholic who votes for Obama is sinning.

As for FOCA, not becoming law, what makes you think it wouldn't pass a Democratic Senate and House, with a Democratic president if that should happen? The bill has already been introduced in Congress by Senator Obama.

First of all it was introduced by Senator Boxer, not Senator Obama. Senate Boxer is 5 feet tall, a woman, Jewish, and white. Senator Obama is African-American, over 6 foot, male and Christian. They are a rather difficult to confuse. The link you provided proves my statement.

I think it won't pass because I know people on Capitol Hill and they have explained this to me. There are no plans to even hold a hearing on the bill next session. No hearings have been held since it was introduced yet alone any votes in the Democratic controlled Congress.

Also, what is to stop the Democrats repealing the Hyde Amendment which prohibits federal funding of abortion.

The Hyde Amendment is not permanent law but a rider included each year on the appropriations bill. It is a not an issue of repealing as it expires each year. One has to ask why in six years of controlling the White House and both chambers of Congress, the Republicans didn't even TRY to make this permanent legislation (can you tell me why they did not?). Nevertheless, the Democrats in the House and the Senate (with Senator Obama voting for it) included the Hyde Amendment in the Labor/HHS Apropriations bill for both the two years they have been running Congress.

Best wishes to you randy. Don't forget to vote tomorrow.

Rustler45 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
shiloh said...

Comment deleted

This post has been removed by the author.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Rust/Ma, don't delete your posts brother. Be proud of your nonsense!

take care, blessings