Posted on 09/21/2012 8:42:15 PM PDT by annalex
On Jan. 8, 1962, President John F. Kennedy wrote a letter expressing condolences on the death of James Cardinal Gibbons. Kennedy, who rarely discussed his Catholicism, did so while describing the Cardinal: "He nobly expresses the essential traditions of my church in the United States ... the deep sympathy for the plight of the working man and of minorities, the steady concern for the betterment of society and mankind."
Thus, it was somewhat startling to see JFK's daughter, Caroline, invoke her father's name and describe herself as a "Catholic woman" when espousing a passionate defense of abortion rights at the Democratic Convention. President Kennedy never publicly commented on abortion and, indeed, his brother Teddy was ardently pro-life when he began his political career. Of course, that changed over time as Sen. Kennedy evolved into a liberal lion and enthusiastically entered the pro-choice den.
Caroline Kennedy has to know that the Catholic Church condemns abortion. It is a mortal sin in the eyes of the institution. There is no debate on that. So for Ms. Kennedy to describe herself as a Catholic woman in the context of promoting "reproductive rights" is a direct insult to her religion. Why would she do that? Other Catholic politicians like Mario Cuomo say they don't personally believe in abortion but respect the legal process that allows it. Not Caroline Kennedy — she openly told the world that she is an abortion crusader.
A Gallup poll says 24 percent of practicing Catholics believe abortion is morally acceptable. At first glance that's hard to fathom, but not when you analyze the landscape. After Caroline Kennedy's speech, not one American Catholic leader publicly criticized her. There was complete silence from the Archbishops. Given a huge opportunity to explain why all life should be considered sacred, and why Ms. Kennedy is misguided — to say the least — the clerics passed. Call it the silence of the lambs.
It was obvious at the Democratic Convention that President Obama and the Democratic Party are extremely bullish on "reproductive rights" and are using the issue to promote a fabricated "war on women" by the Republican Party. In response, the GOP has little to offer. It fears being branded "anti-woman."
But theologians don't have to run for office or curry favor with any group. They supposedly have a moral obligation to define their beliefs and stand up for what they consider God's will.
Abortion eliminates life. That's what the procedure does. Human DNA is present upon conception. If the Catholic Church believes that abortion is against what God intended, then it should be just as adamant about stating its case as Caroline Kennedy is about stating hers.
It is not.
Bill O'Reilly hosts "The O'Reilly Factor" on Fox News and has written many books, including "The No Spin Zone."
Culture and community and the United States of America are what was destroyed, the chance to suck money out of America will not be seriously threatened, the only real changes are, and will be, the methods and techniques.
Corruption and greed are part of what we are importing and breeding, and making ever more, a requirement of financial success.
No, because the Kennedys have nothing that they could teach. In order to teach something you need to know the truths that you are teaching. The Kennedys cannot take the place of the bishops, but the bishops miss teachable moments like this one.
Well, one lesson we can extract from this: that it is the Catholic People of God that need to pray for better bishops and then better bishops will be given us. We have some good bishops now, and their number is growing. If, on the other hand, the American Catholics let the pro-aborts to hijack their voice, then the grace of God will go to some other country, and leave this one.
No, not yet. Young Catholics are better Catholics than the old ones; the pro-life positions gain in popularity; we are undergoing a revival of Catholic Tradition and -- all too slow -- our bishops recognize their lack of leadership. On a wider arena, we have the Tea Party that is, I think, succeeding in reshaping the GOP. Also not every immigrant is an economic one; some value American Culture and seek to absorb it. I am, for example, an immigrant, although as an asylum seeker from the Soviet Union I would have been here even faster without Kennedy Immigration act.
Wow, what a strange view, young Catholics are more democrat and liberal than even the older Catholics are and have been through our history, and it is already too late, the America of the past is already dead and buried, never to be seen again.
The 1965 Immigration Act ended the United States and turned us into this multi-cultural, multi-lingual, mass of humanity with nothing in common except economic interests.
Look at California, Catholic immigration finished it off, it ‘s future is the future of the city in Blade Runner, and it will never be conservative again.
The most conservative several churches I’ve been to were in California, headed up by young priests, and attended to by young, fecund families.
I understand that a non-Catholic might bee a stranger to all this.
Personal experiences are nice, but they don’t change polling data and voting data, the facts show that demographics is destiny, and our future is only getting worse.
We already lost California forever, and the left plans on Catholic immigration taking Texas out of the running in time.
All statistics and data are available to everyone, they are not restricted by religion.
I do not dispute your statistics; I am however a Christian man and as such I know that culture is made or destroyed not by the statistical units but by certain people lead by the Holy Spirit, whose number is few. In the Catholic Church, there is a revival in sufficient numbers that I was able to find a spiritual home both in California and now in Kansas City Metro. It just hasn’t reached all of the bishops yet.
I don’t think that you realize the purpose of the 1965 Immigration Act, it was to erase America and American culture, and to replace it with exotic third world foreigners who didn’t know, and do not care how we had built the greatest nation in the world.
Protestants don’t vote democrat, they only voted democrat in 1932, 1936, and 1964, the left had to replace the American Protestant voters, or they would never be able to survive, so they changed out immigration laws in 1965.
Immigration means the democrats take it all and the past disappears.
Protestants don’t vote democrat, they only voted democrat in 1932, 1936, and 1964
So they voted for the New Deal and Kennedy's successor. As to 1960, the election was close and stolen anyway.
But again, the real issue is not statistics but leadership. Both Protestant and the Catholics lose votes to the left, and they both lose their flock to those without a pronounceable religion; that is a shame, and that is happening because we don't have solid Protestant leaders any more that we have solid Catholic leaders.
Catholics voted for Obama, traditionally vote democrat (only straying 6 times), elected JFK with 80% of their vote and you choose to go after the Protestant vote of 1932, 1936, and 1964?
Catholics vote democrat, and soon, because of Catholic immigration, the Catholic vote will return to it’s normal place of NEVER going republican, all of America will vote like California.
Do you know how Catholic Hispanics that become Protestant vote? They vote more like Protestants.
I don't "go" after any particular voter: the entire statistical approach of yours is ridiculous. Let's say Protestants vote 55/45% Republican/Democrat and Catholics 55/45% vote Democrats/Republic every time. So? It is your 45% that give us lefwing governments because your 45% is numerically larger than our 55%. Further, except for Kennedy ALL US Presidents were Protestant. If Protestantism automatically produces conservatism, show me Protestants electing a Protestant president that turns the country permanently rightward. Since Reagan you cannot, and blue collar Catholics voted for Reagan in numbers that proved decisive; it is Catholics who gave Bush a second term.
However, the Protestant vote of 1932, 36, 64 cannot be dismissed. These were Protestant-majority elections that gave us Protestant presidents who gave us the pillars of liberalism: the New Deal and the Great Society welfare system. Own them, as I, Catholic, own the disaster of the Immigration act.
This article illustrates, of course the failure of Catholic leadership, but the Protestant leadership in matters of pro-life politics is simply non-existent. Can you, honestly, imagine a similar article written about a nominally Protestant celebrity politician (that is, virtually anyone of them) standing up on any national podium and saying things like "I am Protestant and as a Protestant woman I passionately defend the right to abortion"? Of course not. So you are a Protestant woman who is pro-abort? Duh, we have whole Protestant churches for the likes of you; lady, you are not newsworthy. At least we have national leaders in the position to condemn the Catholic pro-aborts, and we have a national cadre of pundits in the secular media to call on them when they fail to do so. A similar disciplinary apparatus is not even possible under Protestantism.
I would agree with you that as a Protestant project, America is about to fail if it hasn't failed already: the upcoming re-election of Protestant Obama over Mormon Romney would dot all the i's still in need of being dotted. The blame for that is on the Protestant leadership which allowed it to happen. The future of America is bright because this future is also Catholic. We are not going to be minority for very long, and we are not going to jerk our knee at the mention of the Kennedys for very long.
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.