Posted on 06/05/2007 2:50:36 PM PDT by TexanSniper
It all started when Rev. Thomas Tobin was invited to attend a "Rudy for President" fundraiser for $1500.
In response the Catholic Bishop of Providence, R.I. (who's not even a Republican) wrote "My RSVP to Rudy Giuliani," which indicates a certain level of dissatifaction with the former Mayor's stance on abortion:
Rudy’s explanation is a classic expression of the position on abortion we’ve heard from weak-kneed politicians so frequently in recent years:
“I’m personally opposed to but don’t want to impose my views on other people.” The incongruity of that position has been exposed many times now. As I’ve asked previously, would we let any politician get away with the same pathetic cop-out on other issues: “I’m personally opposed to . . . racial discrimination, sexual abuse, prostitution, drug abuse, polygamy, incest . . . but don’t want to impose my beliefs on others?”
Why is it that when I hear someone explaining this position, I think of the sad figure of Pontius Pilate in the Gospels, who personally found no guilt in Jesus, but for fear of the crowd, washed his hands of the whole affair and handed Jesus over to be crucified. I can just hear Pilate saying, “You know, I’m personally opposed to crucifixion but I don’t want to impose my belief on others.”
Interestingly, he asks the question I think all of us want answered: Why does Rudy "hate abortion" and believe it's morally wrong?
I'll bet this is the last "Rudy for President" function Bishop Tobin receives. Read the whole thing.
“I’m sorry you have such distrust of LDS people. You can ask the people who lost their homes to Katrina what they think of the LDS people they met.”
My real problem isn’t with mormons per se, it is with mormonism. It is a cult, a false belief system that pretends to be Christianity when it is not. There is more to being than being “nice.” I’ve met many “nice” and “decent” folks from all different beliefs (hindus, buddists, atheists, etc.). However, they all - regardless of how “nice” or “charitable” they may be - are pushing systems that will result in the eternal destruction of souls. I’m certain that there are adherents to L. Ron Hubbard’s Scientology that do “good things.” However, most sensible persons would agree they are just plain looney to believe such nonsense that charatan put out (a not so good science fiction writer turned cult leader). I wouldn’t trust a scientologist to lead because they are intrinsically gullible. Joseph Smith, the founder of mormonism, was a 19th century huckster as was Brigham Young to followed him after Smith was strung up for forming his own private army and threatening the regular community - he was the David Koresh of his time. So, I don’t trust someone who buys into that nonsense. They are not fit to lead.
“The Catholic Church doesn’t recognize Mormon baptism, but it does have a good relationship with the Mormon Church.”
I would certainly hope not in that mormon’s practice “proxy” baptism to “save” their dead ancestors. That is why geneology is so important to them. Of course, this isn’t too far away from the sale of indulgences to buy a relative out of purgatory - something the Roman church abandoned a very long time ago.
“Mitt has the vision, the ideas, and the organization to get the job done”
He could have used his executive power to try and stop homosexual marriage in Mass. What did he do.....nothing.
Many Freepers use this logic to deny Romney the White House. This logic is bigoted because they prejudge a person's intellect and capability based solely on their faith. We tell Iraqis to get beyond their religious differences, yet we have Freepers posting ignorant and bigoted statements about one of the largest churches in the country, simply because they are different (almost 13 million members worldwide).
In addition, the Church does not comment on elections nor does it encourage people to vote for one party or another. It encourages its members to vote their conscience. As for this Catholic Bishop, he would be wise to follow this counsel and leave the politics out of the church.
Actually, I was responding to HitmanLV’s comment - the Founding Father’s detested democracy with good reason, they thought it was mob rule. Pilate gave in to the mob on the crucifixion. Thus my comment on the wolves and sheep voting for dinner. You are correct about King Herod being evil - I don’t think Pilate was; he was in a difficult position and did not want Jesus’s death.
For an interesting analysis of politics, read “Democracy, the God that Failed.” by Professor Hoppe.
Of course, quite correct about Pilate. The Passion and Death of Our Lord as described by the Evangelists is also gripping political drama. Always wondered how the chief priests would make good on their threat to denounce Pilate as `no friend of Rome’.
Did they have Emperor Tiberius’ email address?
;^)
“Freepers posting ignorant and bigoted statements about one of the largest churches in the country, simply because they are different (almost 13 million members worldwide).”
A cult is a cult is a cult. I don’t care how large it grows, it will NEVER be legitimate or even errant Christianity - it is a perversion of Christ’s teaching started by the David Koresh of his time. It may no longer present an outward temporal danger (the militia that Smith ran), but it produces a much more insidious one, it leads men to hell and blinds them to the truth.
“Working together, the different faiths in this country can do much good.”
Is the enemy of my enemy always my friend? No, of course not. We are just simply co-beligerents that have a common enemy. Look I’m not advocating wiping out mormons, I’m just not going to do ANYTHING to give them legitamacy by electing one to high office, anymore than I would a homosexual or other deviant.
We don’t need your vote to be legitimate. That view is far too arrogant.
Pure democracy is mob rule and exactly the reason the Founders gave us the Republic.
However, I don’t understand how any Christian can be pro-life and pro-war. It isn’t consistent. The sad thing is, if you look back in history, there are more wars fought “in the name of God” than for any other reason.
This is why we really need to at least listen to Ron Paul as he is the only candidate that is pro-life and anti-war. We, as Christian Americans, need to take the higher moral ground here. We should love the unborn and the born even if they don’t believe or live the same way we do. Instead of killing them(in the name of spreading the democracy that we don’t have), why don’t we be an example of Christ and love them anyway?
BTW - Ron Paul attends a Baptist Church regularly.
“Who is Ted Kenedy?”
Let’s see....he let a girl drown in his car while he’s drunk.....and he’s not pro-life.
That would make him pro-death is both situations, right?
If I had was threatened and had to make a choice between Ted and Rudy, I’d take Rudy cuz you can’t kill someone with a flip-flop.
“We don’t need your vote to be legitimate. That view is far too arrogant.”
Deal with it, I’m called the Religious Right and a force to be reconded with. You MUST have my vote to win a primary and a general election. We can’t stomach Rudy because he is liberal and Romney because he is a cultist.
Those of my “ilk” are the base of the party. If we say “back off”, to proceed is folly. This isn’t arrogance, it is fact.
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.