How do you feel about the Catholic Cardinal who is going to boycott our president's speech.

[olegramps]

What a kick in the face by one of the top members of the Catholic hierarchy of our president. I am sure that he wouldn't have had any problem attending one of Bush's illiterate speeches even though the draft dodging bastard launched a war that killed thousands, tortured people and spied on his fellow citizens. I suppose those are the new Christian principles that we should all admire. I wonder what President Obama thinks about his support for "faith based initiatives" now.

[proud2BlibKansan]

1. I think he is an ass who needs to clean his own house.

[merh]

2. I was raised catholic - I've been boycotting their speeches

for years. They have trouble following the messages of Christ - love thy neighbor as thyself.

I don't care what that cardinal does.

[Itchinjim]

3. As a lapsed Catholic let me say this about that:

Fuck 'em.

[SalmonChantedEvening]

4. If his seat's free, can I have it?

I'd consider it an honor to attend.

[bigwillq]

5. I've been boycotting the Catholic Church

for over 10 years now.

[Critters2]

9. My family and I have been doing it for well nigh unto 500 years.

So far, so good.

[ProfessorGAC]

81. Make It 38 For Me

Not completely true. I went to my dad's and mother in law's funerals. We got married in the church (after refusing to attend pre-cana) for our families' comfort. And i went to my brother's wedding, since i was best man

But, other than those 4 things i haven't gone since i was 14. And, i didn't pay any attention when i was there!
GAC

[rurallib]

6. Is there a link? What speech where?

[Mz Pip]

12. Obama is scheduled to give

The Commencement speech at Notre Dame University. Some cardinal has his Prada knickers in a twist over it. It's a scandal!!!

http://notredamescandal.com/Home/tabid/437/Default.aspx

[Critters2]

7. Oh, I missed this. Which Cardinal is making an ass of himself? nt

[Kitty Herder]

8. It's his right to do so.

I think he's an asshat, but he can boycott all he wants if it makes him happy.

[bluestateguy]

10. Catholic cardinals covered up for molesters

So, no, I don't care.

[tabbycat31]

11. they're too set on a single issue (abortion)

last time I checked, starting a war and torture were not "pro-life"

[CatholicEdHead]

18. Yep, the follow the Religious Right

because they think they can get converts from the Fundie ranks by trying to out-Fundie them. :crazy: But that is what this current neo-retro movement thinks.

[dflprincess]

21. For every Fundie they gain

they probably lose 5 of us who were raised Catholics. Of courese, converts always take the rules more seriously so they'd probably rather have the unquestioning newbies rather than listen to those who are leaving.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

14. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[NC_Nurse]

15. Don't give a shit.

[hedgehog]

16. I think this report from The Observer is of more significance:

Members of the Campaign for Human Dignity presented the Office of the President a petition asking that sexual orientation be added to the University's nondiscrimination clause Wednesday.

Currently, the clause states the University does not discriminate based on "race/ethnicity, color, national origin, sex, disability, veteran status or age."

Group members and students gathered outside the Main Building to present a unified front, according to sophomore Mary Dewey, chair of the campaign.

Dewey said the group garnered over 2,300 student signatures supporting the aims of the petition.

"We wanted to show solidarity," said sophomore Bridget Flores, president of the Progressive Student Alliance. "We wanted to show that this is something a lot of students care about."





http://media.www.ndsmcobserver.com/media/storage/paper660/news/2009/03/19/News/Group.Petitions.Office.Of.The.President-3676481.shtml?reffeature=textemailedition

[AndrewP]

17. Who?

[krispos42]

20. Some idiot with a head too small for his hat...

...and a brain too small for his skull.

[alarimer]

19. To hell with them.

They have no say at all with government policy. Well, they can vote like every other citizen. Other than that, they should spend the rest of their time covering up their own crimes.

[AngryOldDem]

22. He can stay home if he wants.

I think the Church would rather take its colleges and universities back to the Dark Ages, if it had its way. The purpose of a higher education is to make one well-rounded and expose one to a wide range of thought and experiences. If that's too much to handle, well, open up more Domino Pizza Universities such as the one opened by uber-Catholic Thomas Mongahan in Florida, and further insulate yourself from the world.

Like you, I've never been able to square their unwavering support of George Bush and the GOP as great defenders of life -- odd interpretation of many a Church teaching there, IMHO.

[RagAss]

23. Fuck him...Fuck his church...and Fuck Notre Dame !

[Catherine Vincent]

24. The only folks that care about that are Obama haters.

Everyone else wouldn't give a hoot.

[rcrush]

25. Dont care.

I normally like to hear constructive cristicism but not from the Catholic Church.

[anigbrowl]

26. I'll add it to the list of things I don't care about

I seriously doubt this will affect anything beyond his own ego.

[steelmania75]

27. As a Catholic, disappointed.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

28. I feel smug that Catholics voted for Obama over McCain. Sucks to be him.

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

30. Another lovely post bashing Catholics with the pedophilia thing, with a healthy touch of homophobia

[MrSlayer]

32. Are you saying that didn't happen?

That it wasn't widespread and covered up? Indeed it was and still is. It is disgusting and that is what they represent to a lot of people. It is only one of many major failings of that particular cult.

Homophobia? Where?

[Critters2]

35. Seriously?

You don't think the term "cocksucker" is homophobic?

[MrSlayer]

36. No.

I do not.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

38. Well, it is, but I'm not surprised you think it's okay

:eyes:

[MrSlayer]

47. I'm sorry but I disagree.

I don't believe it is. It's a generic insult like asshole or fuckface. Besides, homosexuals do not have exclusive provence over sucking cock. You can just as easily be running to the defense of prostitutes or women in general. I think we get a bit too caught up in looking for something to be offended about around here. There is no malice against any particular group. I'm the furthest thing from a gay basher, woman basher or prostitute basher. As I said it's simply a stand alone, generic insult. I'm not the only person who uses the term and it's not against the DU rules.

What is your "not surprised" comment supposed to mean? You think you know something about me without ever having conversed with me? I should be insulted if anyone should. But I'm not.

[Two Americas]

50. this I don't understand

Why don't people just say "yes I see" and then that would be the end of story?

It is not necessarily about anyone being "offended" - let alone looking for things to be offended about.

This business of saying that something is OK - providing people deny having malicious intent - is just silly.

Complaining about the language police, portraying people who point out bigotry as merely being "offended," and denial of malicious intent used as a defense, are all right wing talking points. It is a way to turn things upside down and backward, and can be used to defend, deny, and promote any sort of bigotry. For that reason, we should not use those rhetorical tricks and spread those illogical ideas, and we should call others on them when they do.


...

[dem629]

53. LOL

You say that people talking about political correctness are using "right wing talking points," and then, in the very next sentence, you complain about people turning things upside down and backward. That's what you did: Anyone who does not adhere to your view of the proper use of certain words must be a right-winger. Beautiful!

There are PC police, on both sides. Some people on the left AND right tell others how they should speak, what words to use, what subjects are taboo, etc.

Screw both groups.

(Is "screw" okay?)

[Two Americas]

54. you missed my point

I don't even know how you got that interpretation.

I can not fathom why or how any Democrat would read what I posted and feel an urge to argue about it. What is there to argue about? And what is this "both sides" nonsense? Bigotry doesn't have "two sides."

I am not trying to tell people how to talk, I am giving my opinion about what they said. Hit a nerve, apparently.



....

[dem629]

58. I didn't say anything about bigotry having two sides.

I said that Language Cops exist on both sides.

I don't think you hit any nerves. You'd have to make a coherent argument in order to achieve that.

[Two Americas]

90. ok

You said "there are PC police, on both sides."

The idea of "PC police" is, and always has been, a right wing concept used to defend bigotry. You insist that this is about language. I am not talking about language. The right wingers do the same thing - they will not discuss bigotry, so they talk about "PC police" and about how things "go both ways," the classic example being the "reverse racism" argument.


...

[dem629]

52. Please do not use logic when interacting with the Language Police.

[Two Americas]

55. that isn't "logic"

It is self-serving justifications and defensive excuses.

And I am not "the language police." That is a right wing idea. I know. I am old enough to remember when they made it up.

[dem629]

57. Oh, I see.

So it's purely a right-wing idea. There's nobody on our side who tries to tell people what kind of language is appropriate?

You can't be saying that...can you?

[Two Americas]

59. it isn't about language at all

That was the main point of my post.

What on earth are you arguing about?

[ProfessorGAC]

82. There Is Certainly Logic There

You may disagree with it, but that doesn't make it illogical.
GAC

[Two Americas]

89. here is what is illogical

It is illogical to say that because the insult could be generic, that therefore it is not legitimate for anyone to suggest that it promotes bigotry.

It may not promote bigotry, but it us not logical to say that because it could be a generic insult, therefore it cannot promote bigotry.

Classic case of a logical fallacy.

It is also illogical to say that because the speaker claims he did not intend to insult the readers, therefore he didn't insult the readers.

But what is it about this that is motivating people to so vigorously defend it, and deny the comments I and others have made? Odd thing to get so worked up about.


...

[Bluebear]

69. "Homosexuals" - - I bet you pronounce it "homossssSECT-yuals" too. nt

[mitchum]

67. Maybe you should have qualified it as "criminal cocksuckers"...

since there is nothing wrong with cocksucking, but sucking underage cock is a crime

[Two Americas]

96. or we could just say "criminals"

We could just say "criminals" when we are referring to criminals, and not implicate millions of innocent people from the two communities that are being smeared on this thread.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

37. I'm not saying it didn't happen

I'm just saying that you can't mention Catholic around here without the "haha...pedophile" shit. The rates are actually higher amongst evangelicals and certain Jewish sects.

Homophobia? Try your "cocksucker" comment.

[Scout]

44. there are probably more women than men who suck cock....

how is it homophobic again?

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

45. He's calling a MAN a cocksucker

How is that not homophobic, scout?

[silverojo]

64. Because this man probably sucked little boys' cocks

And if he didn't do it himself, he defended it. Making him a pedo or pedo enabler, not a homosexual.

And, because the last time I checked, "c*ntlicker" isn't in common use as an insult.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

73. Not all Catholics are pedophiles or pedophile enablers

Your post is sick.

[Goblinmonger]

86. The hierarchy of the church in the United States enabled them

This guy is a member of the hierarchy of the church in the United States. Ergo...

I would be with you if this were a rant against some random priest in some small parish somewhere. But the pedophile shuffling falls cleanly in the lap of the Bishops of the US, the Cardinals of the US, and the Pope. It's not anti-catholic to say so.

[Two Americas]

91. by that logic

By that logic, all of us and everyone in the administration is to blame for anything any Democrat says or does from here on out.

Was every Democrat to be attacked and discredited because the party hierarchy - the Johnson administration - was waging the war in Viet Nam?

Was every Democrat to be attacked and discredited because the party hierarchy - the FDR administration - interned Japanese-Americans?


...

[Two Americas]

97. got your smears in

You got your smears in, so you head off on your merry way I see.

[Goblinmonger]

101. Sorry

I don't hover around this thread waiting with anticipation for your response so I can immediately respond.

I don't quite get how, exactly, what I said was smears. Is is your argument that the hierarchy of the church in the US did not knowingly cover up the pedophile scandal? Or is it your argument that this cardinal is not part of the hierarchy of the church in the US? Cause that is pretty much my entire argument.

And your Democrats doing bad things argument is ridiculous. I am not saying that all Catholics need to be judged by one random Catholic. I AM saying that the hierarchy of the church gets to be judged by what the hierarchy of the church does. Big stretch there, huh. Now if I said that all Catholics are pedophiles because a few priests are pedophiles, you might have a point. But I said that the hierarchy of the church covered up the pedophiles and this guy is a member of the hierarchy. So, nice try on your analogy but it pretty much fails at face value.

[Two Americas]

102. sure you did

You responded to this: "Not all Catholics are pedophiles or pedophile enablers."

With this:

"The hierarchy of the church in the United States enabled them. This guy is a member of the hierarchy of the church in the United States. Ergo..."

You didn't like my analogy. Here is another one:

I Senator Leahy guilty because of what Cheney did? Why not? They are both part of the US government hierarchy, are they not?


...

[Two Americas]

92. you protest a little too much

What is going on?

No one in the Church "defended it." Virtually no one tried to defend the cover up, other than a handful of people directly implicated.

The cases involved adolescents - ergo, pedophilia is inaccurate.

There is no evidence that the prevalence of abuse was any greater than in Protestant churches, or public schools. We don't and wouldn't accuse everyone associated with those institutions of "being pedophiles." The whistle was blown by Catholics. Perhaps in other institutions the whistle has yet to be blown? Perhaps the relentless attacks on Catholics are to distract us from places where the whistle has not been blown?

Perhaps we are seeing some denial and projection?


...

[Vanje]

56. There are certainly more woman candy-makers

but "fudge-packer" does not refer to those.
There are certainly women who fellate, but the word, "cock-sucker" does not refer to those.

[Scout]

99. right. women who suck cock are not referred to as cock suckers

they are fellatio artists.

[Scout]

100. 'scuse me, but butt fucking is butt fucking, whether the butt belongs to a

woman or a man.

so fudge packer is any man who butt fucks.

fudge packer doesn't refer to ANY gender of candy maker, so that was a stupid attempt at an analogy.

[Two Americas]

51. absurd

You can't judge the group by the individual, and you can't judge the individual by the group.

What is so difficult for people to grasp about this simple concept?

[silverojo]

61. Catholics deserve to be bashed

I should know--I used to be one. That is, until they covered up for pedophilia. Hell, even a priest at my church was a pedo.

"Cocksucker" is a general perjorative term, but since you insist on taking it literally, the pedos have most likely sucked the private parts of little boys. So that's contempt for pedophilia, not homosexuality.

[Two Americas]

95. "they"

Those who covered up for pedophilia and "Catholics" are not the same people.

Pedophilia means abuse of pre-pubescent children.

We don't know that the incidence in the Catholic church of abuse, and of cover ups, is any greater than it is in the rest of society - public schools and Protestant churches for example.

The attacks on Catholics are being fomented by the Protestant religious right. As is often the case with the religious right, they are projecting and are more guilty than anyone of the things they charge others with. The attacks also part of a long-standing history of anti-Catholic bigotry. It may well be that the difference between the Protestant churches and the Catholic church is that Catholics blew the whistle on this problem, and Protestants have not.

Conservatives in the Catholic church look at the possibly high rate of consensual homosexual activity between older teens and young priests in the abuse cases, and are using that as an excuse for promoting bigotry and the exclusion of GLBTQ people from the Church.

It could also well be that homophobia is a factor in the attacks on the Church. Some 16 and 17 year old boys engage in sex with women in their 20's or 30's, and often women in positions of trust such as teachers. They may or may not have been abused or taken advantage of by the women. That is often seen as "coming of age" or "boys will be boys" or "getting experience." On the other hand, having a same sex encounter in the same circumstances may or may not be abuse, but most certainly could lead to self-loathing and denial because of the pervasive bigotry and homophobia in the society.

All things being equal, many people "see" same sex encounters as "disgusting" or "perverted" where they would not if it were a heterosexual encounter. The fact that one of the participants is under 18 makes it OK to express this disgust and revulsion, when it would not be acceptable to do so otherwise. Using the word "pedophilia" to describe that could be cover for something else.

Spreading the blame and accusations across a broad group of people lessens the blame of the actual perpetrators and makes it more difficult to detect and apprehend them. This is similar to seeing all Moslems as potential terrorists and placing them all under suspicion. That does not serve to find and stop the actual wrong doers, it is an obstacle to justice and places us all at greater risk, not less risk.



...

[mitchum]

65. I think most of those priests are actually ephebophiles; they like to molest boys after...

the onset of puberty.
I know it sounds like I am splitting hairs...er...pubic hairs, but still...

[csziggy]

31. *YAWN* I boycott religious assholes every chance I get. n/t

[Canuckistanian]

33. And what does Rev. Moon think?

Cult leaders are oh-so-boring in their predictable responses.

[buckshotdad1960]

34. The catholic church is evil!

Don't support them!

[ejpoeta]

39. good. his bad vibes won't interfere with the president's speech.

[PA Democrat]

40. He won't be missed by the vast majority of people attending the graduation.

Let him stay home and sulk. Most people won't care.

[melm00se]

41. whether he

is a Catholic Cardinal or not makes no difference (regardless what all the Catholic bashers and religious intolerants think):

He is a private citizen and can choose to attend or not.

As to the OP: grandiose statement "I am sure that he wouldn't have had any problem attending one of Bush's illiterate speeches even though the draft dodging bastard launched a war that killed thousands, tortured people and spied on his fellow citizens" that.

I am curious: do you have any evidence to back it up?

This is just another anti-christian/anti-religious dog pile. way to be tolerant and inclusive.

[olegramps]

80. Well, by the way, yes.

I have read where the Catholic hierarchy had encouraged their flocks to not vote for Kerry or Obama thereby tacitly endorsing Bush and McCain for their anti-abortion stance. I never saw an statement by any Catholic bishop that they would refuse to attend any of Bush's speeches or invitations to White House.

The fact of the matter is that our Republic provided the Catholic Church protections under the Constitution that allowed it to thrive amidst general contempt for the Catholic Church by the majority of the citizens. I consider it an insult to our president and our constitution for a major spokesman of any religion to boycott a speech by the president. I would include this to extend to Bush and company as much as I despise the bastard. It is a disrespect of the office of the president who is president of all Americans some who oppose abortion and some of whom do not.

[forintegrity]

42. As someone who worked in the Catholic Church

I could care less.

Priests, bishops, cardinals...they are the worst bunch of arrogant Christians I have ever met! Liars, cheats, hypocrites, lazy asses...you name it. All they care about is their little kingdom and their image in the "big boys club." Needless to say, none of that has anything to do with the people they are supposed to be shepherding!

And talk about no financial oversight...our failing corporations have been taking lessons from the Catholic Church!

[forintegrity]

43. They all need to stay out of politics

and focus on their own issues!

[Bill McBlueState]

46. Wow, a Christian leader is theatrically opposing the Democrats

Stop the presses!

[lunatica]

48. I'd say thanks for the favor. Please do stay away

[DailyGrind51]

49. As a Catholic who supports Obama, I stopped caring about the hierarchy years ago.

[silverojo]

60. I'd say he should go fuck himself

Instead of fucking unwilling little boys. :mad:

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

62. Who cares? Peaceful protest is good for our culture.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

103. Hmmm.

Consistent. Not.

I thought you disliked censorship?

[mitchum]

63. Con man in a dress

[Canuckistanian]

66. Irrelevant

Or certainly headed that way, along with his whole church structure, judging by the recent antics of the Pope and other apologists of recent outrageous Catholic leadership scandals.

FSM is the true messiah.

[cliffordu]

68. Fuck him and the pope he rode in on.....

[gauguin57]

70. Who cares what a bunch of pedophile-protecting, misogynist old men in dresses think?

Extremely lapsed Catholic, just checking in!

Hey Popie and Friends ... it's 2009 ... let women be leaders in the church or go f*ck yourselves.

[northernlights]

71. he's welcome to boycott

all of our politics. The pope, too. No interest in their opinions on anything.

[northernlights]

72. he can boycott

all politics. The pope too. Not interested in their opinions. No desire for their favor. They can just stfu for all I care.

[Vinca]

74. I would love the Cardinal to tell us why anyone should attend

a church that protects pedophiles and uses parishioners' tithes to pay molestation lawsuits.

[ShortnFiery]

75. Also, One that censures young men and women about pre-marital sex, all people about birth control

while failing to denounce State Sponsored Executions and Unjust War. :crazy:

[Mudoria]

76. One of the best things about this country is that you're

free to associate or disassociate yourself with other people or their political philosophy. If he doesn't agree with the President's positions he's free to do what he pleases about attending.

[dembotoz]

77. same old same old

as time goes on
as i get older
I become more and more convinced
i could never be a catholic

nope
no how
no way
just ain't gonna happen

[saltpoint]

78. The U.S. Catholic higher-ups have made things difficult for Democrats

in recent years.

I attribute this to those higher-ups' objections to reproductive freedom generally and a woman's right to choose especially, and I side with the women demanding choice and the Democrats who support them.

[davidinalameda]

79. never did find out which cardinal it was

I'm sure it wasn't Cardinal Newman since he's been dead for several decades

[Tommy_Carcetti]

83. He has a right to do it.

As a practicing Catholic, I would hope he'd be a little more open minded, but I'm not going to lose any sleep over it one way or another.

[TahitiNut]

84. He's not a "Cardinal." He's a Bishop.

:shrug:

[Deep13]

85. I don't care what another private citizen does. nt

[olegramps]

87. I hope that Catholics don't believe that I am bashing their Church.

Those who have committed horrendous acts with children account for only a small percentage of Catholic priests. The major crime was that it was covered up by those in positions of authority. Even some of these people should not be lumped in with those who purposefully covered up the crime to solely protect the church's image. Some had been led to believe, upon the advice of professionals, that these sick people could be cured. Even for these well meaning people, after several attempts at curing them, they should have realized that it was a hopeless cause and they were enabling these misfits. The vast majority of all religious leaders are descent people who are primarily concerned with assisting their fellow mankind. Now, I may not agree with their beliefs, but to not recognize the immense good that they do is ridiculous. I can assure you that they would be sorely missed if they suddenly disappeared.

I am only taking exception with religious leaders that use their position to attempt to impose their personal beliefs on the entirety of society causing intense dissension. I consider this an abuse of the very freedoms that they have been afforded to operate under the protection of the constitution. The president is the president of all the people. This is the concept that was totally lost on the some of the most recent Republican presidents who used our diverse beliefs to divide the nation rather than to unite us. E pluribus unum must still be goal.

[AngryOldDem]

88. Your point is well taken.

It's just that whenever there is any thread anywhere on DU about the Catholic Church, there is at least one obligatory post dredging up the pedophilia scandal. It's like no such thread would be complete without at least one reference, and one resulting flamewar, such as you see above. The subject could be Mother Theresa and the issue would still be brought up.

As a former Catholic myself, what gripes me the most is the fact that most of these bishops who are now raising holy hell about Obama and his policies were strangely silent during most of the Bush years. A war that did not meet the Church's own Just War policy was conveniently ignored and excused -- because Bush was pro-life. Torture the likes of which we have never seen done under our name was passingly commented on, if at all -- because Bush was pro-life. Our essential rights and freedoms have been slowly eroding -- again, silence. Homelessness, poverty, and general social inequality have been quickly growing -- has there been any kind of substantive statement issued by any bishop now sounding the hue and cry over Obama? (Note that I am criticizing the hierarchy here. There are many within the Catholic rank and file, from religious to social activist groups, who are shedding much needed light on these concerns.)

I'm sure D'Arcy would have no problem with Bush addressing the Notre Dame commencement (although the very thought of that makes my head want to explode). But therein lies MY problem -- just as "Cafeteria Catholics" are told they can't pick and choose which teachings to follow, neither can those who claim to be their leaders.

The entire abortion plank has made the Catholic (with a big c) Church blind to the bigger picture of what it really means to be pro-life, and by extension, truly catholic (note the small c). Therefore, to my mind, it is becoming irrelevant as any force -- moral, political, or otherwise. The good bishop can just stay home if he wants -- and I have a copy of Catholic Social Teaching that he can borrow if he gets bored.

[Two Americas]

93. bash away

Bash the Church hierarchy. Many Catholics - probably almost all - agree with you. Your OP was fine.

It is the guilt by association attacks on all who identify as Catholic that some engage in that is the only problem.

[LWolf]

94. I think that organized religion's comments and opinions

about politics are irrelevant.

[Autumn]

98. It's okay. I've boycotted mass for thirty

years.