February 21, 2012

Those Catholics with Some Ifs and Buts

In the HHS mandate debate, we are enjoying at times the “erudition” of certain Catholics who use it as an opportunity to voice the predictable “I’m a Catholic, but…” whinge. They talk about and react to “the bishops’ extremism,” of course from a non-partisan point of view. Needless to say, they presume that “extremism”—and this is a little monument to freedom of speech and press!—is now to be defined as asserting a continuation of a church-state general understanding that has somehow existed since the ratification of the Bill of Rights in 1791. Well, here is a well-constructed counter argument from a moderate point of view—or “extremist,” it’s a question of opinions, as always... ;-)



Recommend this post on Google!


1 comment:

  1. That people belong to a organization but not believe in its values, beliefs, teachings or practices causes such cognitive dissonance. That someone like Nancy Pelosi who not only is pro-abortion but also has no problem with infanticide can call herself a Catholic is beyond me. The Kennedy family violated and violates nearly everything the Catholic Church practices and believes. Why are these people even saying they're Catholics? They're Secularists that worship the State, not God. If holding power is more important than one's religion, then leave the religion. Don't say "I'm a Catholic" then vote and pay for killing babies. Don't say "I'm a Catholic then denounce the Church and the Pope. Yet, when a practicing religious person falls short of their stated ideals and beliefs, they are denounced as hypocrites by Catholics rejecting Catholicism; and they don't see or understand what they're doing. Just makes me want to scream in frustration.

    ReplyDelete

Related Posts with Thumbnails