Posted on 05/25/2005 10:52:11 AM PDT by NYer
Oh yes, he is: He is now in support of civil unions for homosexuals.
Robert Scheer is the jackass who caused me to hate the Los Angeles Times, many moons ago.
They do. It's too bad that most people don't seem to fact-check on line. Most people at work think the abuse problem had to do with pedophilia, the solution being married priests.
What's your source for that?
The ban will not prevent the acceptance of gay culture, he acknowledges, nor will it prevent same-sex civil unions, which he now supports. What it will do, he says, is prevent those couples from actually saying they are married, even if they enjoy virtually the same rights.
"I don't like all-or-nothing approaches anymore," Donohue said.
#25
yep, that's pretty much the same response I received from an email I received from Donohue when I wrote and asked him his position.
I understand that you believe that's what he said but note...that particular statement is NOT in quotes. Given the liberty that the press takes with quotes now-a-days, I would be at all surprised if he didn't say that.
I hope he didn't, it's a waste of time because gays on other boards have said that while they welcome civil unions, they won't stop till they get marriage. That's their end-game.
Ahhhh, ick!
Idiot (him, not you)...
You and Salvation do a great job of bringing so many of us what we need to know!!!!
Their original enablers were by then bishops.
civil unions are tantamount to marrtiage in an age where cohabitation without marriage is rife. SO he is kidding himself.
I would be at all surprised if he didn't say that.
I gave him the benefit of the doubt and have called him on it, as both a supporter and in a professional capacity. If the press misquoted him, he would have said so.
You should read Stanley Kurtz' article about civil unions in Scandanavia. Civil unions cause the same damage that homosexual marriages do. It's an illusion to think you are protecting marriage when allowing civil unions.
The fact is Donohue should step down from his position, because he no longer represents the religion he claims to. Even lefties like Cardinal Martino and Cardinal Lehman are strongly agasinst civil unions and say Catholic teaching is against them. How can Donohue chide politicians who say they are allowed to pick and choose Catholic doctrines when he is doing it himself?
Donohue and I agree on everything but his position on "same sex unions"
I understand where he is coming from but I don't know if that is the solution...
He is kidding himself, plus he is undercutting all his arguments against other public figures who he criticizes for not following Catholic teaching.
These a dark times.
O Lord have mercy on us all and guide us in your ways. Thy will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven. Amen.
Thank you, Mr. Donahue, for correcting this oft-heard slander by the gay activists.
Ping -- don't know if you were pinged on this one...
This is the complete set of reflections written by then Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger for the 2005 Stations of the Cross. I have bookmarked them and refer back to them on a regular basis. In fact, they have been most useful in developing the Intercessions of the Faithful on those weeks when it is my turn to write them.
Thanks. I wasn't pinged. Scheer is very interesting here. He spends a lot of his time and writes a lot of articles pushing the Gay Agenda and loving the Gay activists.
http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=Robert+Scheer+Gay&ei=UTF-8&pstart=1&b=11
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.