“Same Sex ‘Marriage’ isn’t” – Southern Baptists

June 21, 2012

The Southern Baptists tell it like it is. Not always and not perfectly but they understand the role of religion in a free society.

Fox News quotes from the Baptists’ findings on same sex “marriage.”

marriage is “the exclusive union of one man and one woman” and that “all sexual behavior outside of marriage is sinful.”

It acknowledges that gays and lesbians sometimes experience “unique struggles” but declares that they lack the “distinguishing features of classes entitled to special protections.”

I’m reminded of the Catholic Church’s official teaching on homosexuality.

2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. They do not choose their homosexual condition; for most of them it is a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

see http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_P85.HTM

Also I’ve posted about this previously April 2009.
I’ll say this just so it gets said.  God made all people.  Some are attracted to people of the same-sex.  (and some  have disordered attractions to all manner of things).  That is not bad or good; only acting on these disordered attractions is wrong.  This doesn’t in anyway affect the Church’s – or any decent thinking person’s – love for them as God’s created handiwork.  The Church uniformly tells us also to absolutely love these people.
https://deliberateengagement.wordpress.com/2009/04/10/not-prolife-specifically-but-an-attack-on-the-church/

Same Sex Marriage is NOT “Just as Good” for Children

June 21, 2012

A rigorous scientific study reveals that if you choose a valid study group not the small non-random populations that homosexual activists use then the outcomes for children are far worse than when the children have their mom and their dad as parents. Not always possible of course but that does not justify lying about the facts.

The study appears in the July issue of Social Science Research. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0049089X12000610

Thanks to Austin Nimocks for pointing this out in his article at Town Hall.


Here is a wonderful article about a troubling problem

April 30, 2012

We need to know what is legal that is popularly thought to be illegal.  (False “Separation” of Church and State.)  Here is a wonderful – if troubling – article by the Alliance Defense Fund.

El Paso City Leaders Declare War on Civil Liberties of Christians

  • BY ALAN SEARS POSTED APR 3, 2012

It leads with:

The penalty for opposing the policies of El Paso mayor John Cook are getting stiffer – maybe as stiff as “sign a petition, go to jail.”

and later states:

“El Paso citizens should not live in fear of being arrested and jailed for exercising their constitutionally protected right to free speech,”

I made a reply to a comment by a person stating the (false) opinion that “Church’s (sic) can’t be political”

http://blog.telladf.org/2012/04/03/el-paso-city-leaders-declare-war-on-civil-liberties-of-christians/#comment-485198460


NC Amendment 1

April 3, 2012

The Baptists are leading the way on the defense of traditional marriage.  They held a conference last week on the importance of marriage to our society.  It included necessarily a religious viewpoint but also secular and practical reasons to defend marriage.  http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?id=37523

Tami Fitzgerald, executive director of North Carolina Values Coalition, said that “when marriage is redefined as genderless, there are legal consequences for anyone who disagree with it.”

“Everything from inheritance laws to property rights must then change,” she said. “If you disagree with this, you’re treated as a racist and as a bigot.”

Also the Bishop of the Catholic Diocese of Raleigh has weighed in – clearly and I think effectively – in favor of the amendment.

Bishop Burbidge Discusses Religious Liberty and Marriage Amendment

On May 8, 2012, voters in North Carolina will have the opportunity to make the traditional definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman part of the North Carolina Constitution.  On this week’s Catholic Perspective and Catholic Weekly, Bishop Michael F. Burbidge explains Catholic teaching on marriage and encourages the faithful to vote for the marriage amendment.  Bishop Burbidge also discusses the ongoing efforts to overturn the recent Department of Health and Human Services mandate requiring employers and insurers to provide contraception, sterilization and abortion-inducing drugs.

Watch Catholic Perspective online (Windows Media)

from: http://www.dioceseofraleigh.org/news/view.aspx?id=1436


Obama-Care Mandates Employers Cover Sterilization, Contraception and Abortion as “Healthcare”

October 14, 2011
An included religious exemption clause is so narrow as to not allow most organizations that reasonable people would call “religious” to follow their conscience.

Catholic Bishops in the US call Obamacare regulation an “Unprecedented Attack on Religious Liberty”

In an “urgent” call to action distributed as a bulletin insert at Catholic churches across the country on Sunday, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops said that a new federal regulation proposed under President Barack Obama’s health-care law “poses an unprecedented threat to individual and institutional religious freedom.”

The proposed regulation would require all private health-care plans to cover sterilizations and “all FDA-approved contraceptives”–which include “emergency” contraceptives such as ulipristal (or “Ella”) that can cause an abortion both before and after an embryo implants in the mother’s womb.

The bulletin insert asked Catholics to visit a page on the website of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (U.S.C.C.B.) from which they could send an email message to the Department of Health and Human Services protesting the proposed regulation.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/catholic-bishops-obamacare-reg-unprecedented-attack-religious-liberty-even-jesus

Organizations like Catholic Universities and individual private business owners will not be permitted to opt out of paying for insurance that covers these morally objectionably procedures.

Indeed this article notes that a “layperson” as defined by the regulation doesn’t qualify for the Exemption.  Jesus was an non-ordained itinerant preacher; he would not have qualified for the religious exemption.

You can see the NATIONWIDE BULLETIN INSERT here
Conscience Rights Violated by Sweeping HHS Contraceptive Mandate
http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/religious-liberty/conscience-protection/upload/hhs-mandate-bulletin-insert.pdf

From this article of August 30, 2009, the President argued that the Administration’s Healthcare plan does not fund Abortion.  Cardinal Justin Regali said it would. President Obama is ‘Fabricating’—Not Cardinal Rigali and the Catholic Bishops—About Abortion Funding in Health Care Plan.  Turns out the Cardinal was right.
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/president-obama-fabricating-not-cardinal-rigali-and-catholic-bishops-about-abortion

We’ve mentioned this previously here, here, here, here and here.

It’s too late to formally respond to the proposed HHS regulations.  I may write directly to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius (herself a lapsed-Catholic.)  I have written congress via the Catholic Bishops’ site which is in turn a link to the NCHLA the National Committee for a Human Life Amendment.  http://www.nchla.org/actiondisplay.asp?ID=292


Marx’ philosophy on display

March 24, 2010

Eulogy to Karl Marx

by E. Christian Brugger, Ph.D., Senior Fellow in Ethics

In his eulogy for Karl Marx deceased on March 14, 1883, his friend and fellow revolutionary Friederich Engels wishfully prophesized that Marx’s name “will endure through the ages, and so also will his work.”  Hardly could he have imagined that his friend’s social vision would suffuse common political dynamics in the United States a little over a century later; that the eminent Speaker of the House would play his handmaid and the powerful President his dupe.  The disaster that played out last weekend set the high water mark of Marx’s influence on our great country.  If we don’t see this we won’t understand recent events.  His name wasn’t mentioned and his rhetoric wasn’t explicit.  But his vision was alive: a reckless mendacity in the pursuit of goals; an almost savage disregard for democracy; a savioristic reliance on politics to transform the social order; and a forceful use of naked power as the principle of social change.

We witnessed the demonization of a class of people, the bourgeois in Marx’s scheme, the U.S. middle class, who from last summer have shouted a crescendoing “NO!” to a government health care revolution.  They were called Nazis, bigots, obstacles to progress; they were bullied by thugs, characterized as stupid, and censored by the liberal media.  Their reasons for opposing the revolution didn’t matter.  The mere fact of it placed them on the wrong side in the dialectic of history, so they needed to be opposed.  ‘What our fathers and our fathers’ fathers couldn’t do, we’ve accomplished against all odds.’  The ‘odds,’ of course, were the majority of honest Americans who naively still believed that their voices meant something in the political process.  They weren’t opposed to the end of securing decent health care for all.  They questioned the means that Liberal Democrats were proposing for achieving that end: an enormous extension of federal authority into a most delicate area of social concern, a massive surreptitious expansion of abortion liberties, fears of conscience violations, unjust rationing, the depersonalization of health care, offensive values from Washington D.C. filtering into Main Street America: “we’re just not sure we trust you, Government, with our health care; whatever you touch turns to gold—for you; but it complicates and disorders our lives.”  Over their heads the Democrats shouted: “the people deserve healthcare, and you’re trying to prevent it!”  In the Manifesto Marx writes: “The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles, oppressor and oppressed, in constant opposition to one another.”  Marx’s simplistic ‘class struggle’ paradigm was the operative model for the healthcare debate.  The only reality is political; the only relevant question is who possesses and exercises power.  The proletariat, the marginalized, are the voiceless uninsured, oppressed by intolerant, religious, self-satisfied Americans.  Progressive change is necessary; neutrality in its regard is impossible.  This polarization was nowhere more clear than at the President’s so-called “health care summit” on February 25: ‘side with the Democrats and so with the poor, or with the Republicans against the poor.  Make your choice.  Get on board, or we’re leaving without you.’

No amount of deception was too great.  How many times in the past eight months did Speaker Pelosi, Senator Reid, Secretary Sebelius and President Obama look straight into the camera and proclaim: “The Hyde Amendment forbids federal funding for abortion.  That status won’t change under our bill”?  They knew the statement was false; how couldn’t they, after all, they were the bill’s authors?  But they counted on the credulity of their audience stemming from ignorance as to the bill’s actual content.  The sharpest screw was twisted last weekend with the fraudulent executive order meant to make people believe that Stupak’s pro-life demands had finally been conceded.  Again, smoke and mirrors, but no substance.  Kathleen Parker writes in today’s Washington Post: “The executive order … is utterly useless, and everybody knows it. First, the president can revoke it as quickly as he signs it.  Second, an order cannot confer jurisdiction in the courts or establish any grounds for suing anybody in court… The order is therefore judicially unenforceable.  Finally, an executive order cannot trump or change a federal statute.”  Don’t ever doubt the utility of the Nietzchian will to power operationalized in the Marxist schema.  It gets results.  But it also sows resentment.  Peace doesn’t follow.  People only get mad.  And people presently are very mad.

So what now?  As in the wake of Roe, we must begin a rear guard offensive.  After the President signed the bill into law on Tuesday, fourteen States attorneys general filed suit over the constitutionality of the legislation.  Find out if your State is one of them and support the effort.  Learn the provisions of the new law.  You will be forced to purchase insurance.  But at least one insurance carrier in each State exchange is required not to provide abortion coverage, which means the majority of carriers will.  Do your homework; find that carrier and support it.  Next, when your representatives come home for Spring break, tell them what’s on your mind.  Finally, polish your pointing finger for the November elections.

quoted in full from: http://culture-of-life.org//content/view/628/1/

If you’re not mad you’re not paying attention.


Why rational faithful people can oppose ObamaCare

March 24, 2010
Call To Action
March 24, 2010Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ:

As you know, the National Health Care Reform Act has been signed into law by President Barack Obama.

With the possibility of federal funding for abortion remaining in the act and in light of a few other deficient areas, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) opposed its passage. It was a difficult decision and came after decades of support for health care reform by the Bishops’ Conference.

So that you may understand exactly why the bishops chose not to support the health care reform act we direct you to a statement released by the USCCB. Click here to read the statement.

We would like to thank the thousands of Catholic Voice North Carolina participants who took the time to contact to their legislators in support of Catholic values in this bill.

Please be assured of our continued vigilance on this matter as health care reform is enacted in the coming days and months.

Sincerely,


The Most Reverend Peter J. Jugis
Bishop of Charlotte


The Most Reverend Michael F. Burbidge
Bishop of Raleigh