Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Majority of Cardinal Dolan's Seminarians Are Pro-Abortion
Eyewitness | 121113 | Arthur McGowan

Posted on 11/13/2012 10:30:37 AM PST by Arthur McGowan

On November 4, 2012, a debate was held at St. Joseph's Seminary in Dunwoodie, N.Y.

At the end of the debate, out of 52 seminarians, 19 voted for Romney.

Cardinal Dolan lectures his fellow bishops on the need for "conversion," while he is running a seminary in which a majority of the seminarians are pro-abortion.


TOPICS: Catholic; Current Events; Moral Issues; Religion & Politics
KEYWORDS: blowhard; catholicvote; chat; dolan; hypocrisy; sellout; unverifiableanecdote; vanity
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-120 next last
To: Arthur McGowan
The Majority of Cardinal Dolan's Seminarians Are Pro-Abortion Oblivious to the Culture War

I think that's the correct interpretation of the data which you've presented. Who knows what they think about abortion. It's a stretch to extrapolate candidate preference to a positive choice in favor of abortion which is what your headline says.

I'm fairly certain that if you asked them, they'd say they were not pro-abortion but were looking at the "bigger picture"; i.e. Cardinal Bernardin's flawed "seamless garment" theology.

IOW, they're clueless.

41 posted on 11/13/2012 11:46:03 AM PST by marshmallow (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow
Good point.
42 posted on 11/13/2012 11:57:48 AM PST by Rashputin (Jesus Christ doesn't evacuate His troops, He leads them to victory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Arthur McGowan

Hearsay + No source = BS.

“An eyewitness” somehow gathered all that information on 52 seminarians? Really?

Not buying.


43 posted on 11/13/2012 12:06:39 PM PST by ScottinVA (I've never been more disgusted with American voters.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

A general election is a binary choice. In such a case, voting for the lesser of two evils is the morally correct choice.

Refusing to vote, or voting for someone who has no chance of winning is a narcissistic choice, for those who place self-centered preening about their own “purity” above voting for the best available real-world choice.


44 posted on 11/13/2012 12:14:34 PM PST by Arthur McGowan (If you're FOR sticking scissors in a baby's neck and sucking out her brains, you are PRO-WOMAN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: ScottinVA

A debate is held. Then the audience votes. You are saying that it is impossible for an eyewitness to remember what the vote was?


45 posted on 11/13/2012 12:16:04 PM PST by Arthur McGowan (If you're FOR sticking scissors in a baby's neck and sucking out her brains, you are PRO-WOMAN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

In the election of 2012, Obama was the MOST pro-abortion, anti-Catholic candidate. Voting for the most pro-abortion candidate in an election is what I MEAN by the term “pro-abortion.”


46 posted on 11/13/2012 12:18:49 PM PST by Arthur McGowan (If you're FOR sticking scissors in a baby's neck and sucking out her brains, you are PRO-WOMAN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Dutchboy88

Actually it’s infer.

Yes or no, Dutchboy?


47 posted on 11/13/2012 12:24:48 PM PST by JCBreckenridge (They may take our lives... but they'll never take our FREEDOM!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Arthur McGowan

All I know for sure is that my family and I, my fellow Latin Mass parishioners, our priests, bishop and pope are all aghast and opposed to every single abortion and any other atrocity that occurs against Jesus’ precious children, born or unborn.


48 posted on 11/13/2012 12:28:24 PM PST by steve86 (Acerbic by Nature, not Nurture™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

I appreciate that you have offered a small ray of hope (if being “clueless” can offer hope!)to this dismal thread.

I am old, so you will have to excuse me for dating myself; but when I was young, many years ago, we called this kind of information “hanging our dirty linen out for the neighbors to see.”

I don’t say that we Catholics should ignore our problems. Far from it. I’ve done my share of confronting them in my lifetime.

But I do see a value in keeping a certain discretion and prudence in regard to opening it all up to those of an antagonistic or secular position.


49 posted on 11/13/2012 12:39:13 PM PST by Running On Empty (The three sorriest words: "It's too late")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: JCBreckenridge

The word should have been “implying.”


50 posted on 11/13/2012 12:46:22 PM PST by Arthur McGowan (If you're FOR sticking scissors in a baby's neck and sucking out her brains, you are PRO-WOMAN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: JCBreckenridge
"Actually it’s infer.

Yes or no, Dutchboy?

It's imply. The sender implies, the receiver infers. If you are referring to something I said, you would say, "Are you implying that if one did not vote for Romney they are pro-abortion." I would then ask, "Are you inferring that from what I said?"

But, frankly, I cannot tell how you would infer that from what I said. Help me out, here.

One would certainly infer from someone voting for Obama that the person was a liberal, deeply committed to the radical left causes such as abortion, homosexuality, re-distribution of wealth, breakdown of nuclear family, hatred of Scriptural perspective of morality, fiscal recklessness, etc. I just have no idea where your question came from.

The thread is about a bunch of "bishops" getting grief from a "cardinal" because they all voted in favor of abortion. Where is Romney?

51 posted on 11/13/2012 12:47:00 PM PST by Dutchboy88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Arthur McGowan

Disgraceful!


52 posted on 11/13/2012 12:51:02 PM PST by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Arthur McGowan

Disgraceful!


53 posted on 11/13/2012 12:51:02 PM PST by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Dutchboy88
The thread is about a bunch of "bishops" getting grief from a "cardinal" because they all voted in favor of abortion. Where is Romney?

No! The thread is about the biggest blowhard in the episcopate, who laughed his way through an evening dining with the most odious, anti-Catholic, pro-abortion President in history, lecturing his fellow bishops on the need for "conversion." Meanwhile, his own seminary is turning out pro-abortion voters.

54 posted on 11/13/2012 1:01:24 PM PST by Arthur McGowan (If you're FOR sticking scissors in a baby's neck and sucking out her brains, you are PRO-WOMAN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Dutchboy88

“I just have no idea where your question came from.”

And you’re a skilled liar as well.

Answer the question Dutchboy.

Funny how you post everything but an answer to question that I asked.


55 posted on 11/13/2012 1:04:56 PM PST by JCBreckenridge (They may take our lives... but they'll never take our FREEDOM!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Arthur McGowan

“No! The thread is about the biggest blowhard in the episcopate, who laughed his way through an evening dining with the most odious, anti-Catholic, pro-abortion President in history, lecturing his fellow bishops on the need for “conversion.” Meanwhile, his own seminary is turning out pro-abortion voters.”

And thus truth outs itself.

Whom do you serve? Christ?


56 posted on 11/13/2012 1:06:24 PM PST by JCBreckenridge (They may take our lives... but they'll never take our FREEDOM!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Arthur McGowan

Dear AM,

I believe you have a problem.

It appears that you do not agree with those seminarians who voted for Obama.

It also seems like you are very uncomfortable with the reality that this seminary in NY tolerates that.

Well my friend your problem is the real estate industry would call a problem of location, location, location.

You need to give up the moral pollution of the blue state of new york for the clear air of the red states.

At least you will be appreciated.

Regards,
Lurking’


57 posted on 11/13/2012 1:14:20 PM PST by LurkingSince'98 (Catholics=John 6:53-58 Everyone else=John 6:60-66)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arthur McGowan

What were they voting on? Were they saying who they’d vote for in the election or were they voting on which debater did a better job? Before I complain to the rector of the seminary I’d need more information that this. It’s a matter of fairness.


58 posted on 11/13/2012 1:19:02 PM PST by stellaluna
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arthur McGowan
In the election of 2012, Obama was the MOST pro-abortion, anti-Catholic candidate. Voting for the most pro-abortion candidate in an election is what I MEAN by the term “pro-abortion.”

It might be what you mean but on it's face, your headline says that these men are "pro-abortion". You have no idea whether or not that is the case and therefore your headline is entirely misleading. Sorry.

All you know is that they didn't vote for Romney. Period.

Is it really necessary to say that among those who voted for Obama (and I'm talking generally, not only seminarians) there will be a continuum of subjects from, at one extreme, those for whom free access to abortion is the pre-eminent issue to those at the other extreme, for whom abortion is simply not an important issue at all such that their vote is determined by other economic/cultural/political considerations?

The former can truly be classified as "pro-abortion." The latter, simply as "asleep at the wheel".

59 posted on 11/13/2012 1:20:12 PM PST by marshmallow (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

People who don’t care that 55 million American babies have been killed are pro-abortion. People who, in some tiny region of their brain, are “against” abortion, but who do not trouble themselves to find out which candidates are pro-abortion, are pro-abortion. (This would include the millions of Latinos who are, reputedly, “against” abortion, but vote pro-abortion.)

A person is pro-life who:

1) understands that Roe v. Wade (and the other pro-abortion decisions of the USSC) is the undoing of the Declaration and the Constitution—regardless of how many or how few abortions there are;

2) makes sure to vote for the least pro-abortion candidate in every election at every level.


60 posted on 11/13/2012 1:32:57 PM PST by Arthur McGowan (If you're FOR sticking scissors in a baby's neck and sucking out her brains, you are PRO-WOMAN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-120 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson