I'm Going To Talk About Nd

[Jaime]

[quote name='ariaane' post='1871615' date='May 20 2009, 06:51 AM']Gladly.



Pray tell, Jamie, where does Mary Ann Glendon say that it is “silly and rude” for any disruption or protests to occur during Obama’s speech? Because, I seem to have missed it.

Where does she attack protestors?

Where does she say [b][i]"i just feel that those who opposed the president speaking, made themselves look silly"[/i][/b], as Lost has said?

Where does she label the President's speech "classy" and "appropiate"?

This is what is being debated, not whether it was licit for Obama to speak, but whether it is called for to label those who protest in the midst of Obama's speech as "rude and silly".

And no. she may have accepted Obama speaking at ND, but not without some hesistation.

Upon learning that Obama would speak at ND, Mary Ann Glendon said:

"Last month, when you called to tell me that the commencement speech was to be given by President Obama, I mentioned to you that I would have to rewrite my speech. Over the ensuing weeks, [b]the task that once seemed so delightful has been complicated by a number of factors."[/b]

She acknowledges that what was a delightful occasion for her had been negatively impacted and so she had to rewrite her speech. It doesn’t seem that she is overjoyed at the mere idea of Obama speaking.

But I digress, as all this is beyond the point. Mary Ann Glendon has not been so judgemental to those protesting, either before or during Obama's speech, like Lost has been. I doubt she has made such a statement because she also said:

"In order to avoid the inevitable speculation about the reasons for my decision, I will release this letter to the press, [b]but I do not plan to make any further comment on the matter at this time. "[/b][/quote]

Wow you seem to have a problem with applied knowledge.

She was going to accept her award and give her speech then she found out that President Obama was speaking and she changed her speech. She said she was looking forward to it. She turned it down after she heard he was getting an honorary degree. So Yeah unless you think she was looking for a good seat to to protest the President's speech, then you're left with Glendon was ok with the President speaking.

As btw were all the bishops who were vocal.

[dominicansoul]

[quote name='lost_in_this_world' post='1870459' date='May 18 2009, 05:48 PM']ok let me have it.[/quote]
Why are you getting upset? You asked for this...

[quote name='dominicansoul' post='1871125' date='May 19 2009, 03:38 PM']I agree with this 100% IT's what I was getting at, but you have put it in even better words than I.

The trouble with the pro-life movement is the divisiveness, brought upon by people who wish to "play nice" with the abortionists and who fail to recognize that [i]our enemy is Evil, himself[/i]. There's no playing with the devil, and it looks like ND has embraced him, and that school has sold it's soul out to the "political correctness" and "tolerance" that cripples the pro-life movement...[/quote]
I think this post would've clarified what I meant...

[quote name='dominicansoul' post='1871172' date='May 19 2009, 05:00 PM']in the same light as hitler was the devil, stalin was the devil, and every other being who was in a position of power and used that power to slaughter millions[/quote]
and this one...

[quote name='Socrates' post='1871347' date='May 19 2009, 08:41 PM']This probably won't come as any surprise, but I'm behind dominicansoul and ariaane 100% here. I don't have a whole lot to say which they haven't already said.

I find it really sad that so many "pro-life Catholics" on here don't seem to know whose side they're really on.

Seems they have nothing but contempt and criticism for anyone who dares speak out against evil and call it by it's true name, and routinely defend or make excuses for politicians like Obama who actively support the killing of the innocent, while deriding pro-lifers who make too much noise speaking out against this evil.

Ironically, while these bleeding hearts regularly condemn vocal pro-lifers as "divisive" and "uncharitable," they themselves are hardly charitable towards those pro-lifers, and would rather divide themselves from them, than from those who promote child-murder through laws and funding.
It seems a sad number of "pro-life Catholics" prefer to be politically-correct and hold hands and sing Kumbayah with pro-abortion politicians and liberals, than take a stand [i]with[/i] (rather than against) those pro-lifers who actually speak out against abortion and those who promote it.
I mean, God forbid anyone call us "right-wing religious fanatics"![/quote]
THANK YOU SOC!! Again, you have put the words much better than I could have!

[quote name='Socrates' post='1871365' date='May 19 2009, 08:55 PM']A pretty speech does not do anything to change the fact that Obama in his political career has never met a bill supporting abortion and/or infanticide he didn't support, and already as President has enacted policies granting federal money to directly fund abortions.

If Obama was sincere about preventing reducing abortions, why would he want them funded with federal money? You don't fund something you wish to prevent! That should be obvious.

Obama is merely trying to lull pro-lifers with pretty words, while continuing to directly support abortion with his actions. He is a hypocrite and a liar, plain and simple.

You people need to stop letting yourselves be charmed and lulled by the words and personality of slick politicians, but pay attention to their actions instead.

After all, words are cheap.
And abortion continues to be supported with your tax dollars.

It's past time to wake up![/quote]

this common sense is lost on liberals...


[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1871367' date='May 19 2009, 08:59 PM']It is sad, and it is not limited to pro-life issues.[/quote]
yes, sadly, Notre Dame showed the world how divided the Church is between those who feel we should defend life and those who feel we should defend the prez. He's not the victim. Millions of aborted human beings are.

Did you happen to see how Fr. Brian treated Fr. Pavone during the interview? And people don't want to admit that Satan himself was there on Sunday?

[quote name='BG45' post='1871410' date='May 19 2009, 09:46 PM']Then may I ask if you consider God to be the Devil? I would imagine that your answer, no I pray that your answer, would be a resounding NO. To do so would be the utter antithesis of Christian thought, to do so would be to deny the divinity of our Lord, to do so would be to deny God the Father, to do so would be to deny the Holy Spirit. Yet, if one takes your words as they are written, then by default, the Old Testament smitings and the eternal damnations promised within the book of Revelation would mean that He is.

Sometimes semantics are more than just that. I think that's part of what makes people seize upon one another's throats so easily online, when they might be agreeing. In speaking out loud one can normally tell if there is an issue of mere semantics, but in text form, the human ability to reason and to be creative combine to sometimes lead from what one actually means.[/quote]
Thanks, BG....you are correct, the semantics of my statement was totally taken out of the context in which i meant it....

BTW, i would most definitely not call God a murderer, as He is the Author of Life and He can do as he wishes, give it or take it away...

certainly a human being cannot be the devil incarnate, what I was trying to say is the presence of Satan is definitely in obama, the devil himself, because obama is a murderer who didn't think twice about using his executive power to ensure the death of millions of babies...

[quote name='HisChildForever' post='1871420' date='May 19 2009, 10:14 PM']I actually ran across an explanation of this, due to a debate I was in with a Protestant (who used this as an argument against Peter as our Pope).

Source: [url="http://bfhu.wordpress.com/2009/01/30/jesus-called-peter-satan-how-could-he-have-been-pope/"]http://bfhu.wordpress.com/2009/01/30/jesus...have-been-pope/[/url]

Q. If Jesus was making Peter His Prime Minister in the Church then why did He call Peter Satan a few verses later?
A. Peter was still very human, subject to sin, and the influence of Our Enemy. Because, Peter, in trying to dissuade Jesus from the cross, came under the influence of Satan and tempted Jesus not to take up His cross, Jesus clearly perceived the true source of Peter’s seemingly compassionate words and denounces Satan and his influence on Peter.

“Get behind me Satan”. [b]He was addressing Satan not calling Peter Satan.[/b] Then, speaking to Peter, Jesus says,
You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men.”

This was Peter’s first lesson in learning how to discern the voice of Satan and the Voice of Christ.[/quote]
Thanks, HCF, this is something I always wondered about...you have made it more clear to me!

[quote name='Didymus' post='1871448' date='May 19 2009, 10:40 PM']How the hell do you know how she used it?? The second time she posted that nonsense she said "obama is the devil himself" --far beyond the words Christ used as we know of them in the Bible..

You people are insane... INSANE...

why do I even put myself through this and check out these political threads only to see this gibberish and nonsense? You can't tell the difference between a man and the devil himself???? Even the man spoken of in the Bible who deserves to have a millstone thrown around his neck and thrown into the sea wasn't even the devil...

What she SAID was that he's the devil.. THE DEVIL... If that's the pro-life movement then to hell with it.. there are no babies and women being saved by this insanity... honestly, did we actually run out of the perfectly fine arguments we had only to spew this gibberish?

And i dont care if i get a warning for this. I deserve it and need it.. and should probably take a break from phatmass for awhile. The ignorance of the few here astounds me.. it just completely baffles me that we feel the need to stoop to this..[/quote]

So you can insult me and call me insane, but I can't call obama the devil? Remind me not to walk beside you during a pro-life march, you are liable to start hitting me over the head with your protest sign....

you are my brother in Christ, you shouldn't get so worked up over defending that murderous man....

I think this thread clearly shows that we are failing in this pro-life battle because we don't even know who our enemy is....instead we make enemies out of each other...

our enemy is Satan...and he's clearly in the prez and all those who are working hard to propagate the murder of the innocent...

let's aim all our hostility on him, shall we?

Edited May 20, 2009 by dominicansoul

[Thy Geekdom Come]

The Vatican said it's not supposed to happen. Therefore, Notre Dame, under the law of the Church, acted wrongly.

There's really no legitimate room for debate.

[Jaime]

[quote name='Raphael' post='1871647' date='May 20 2009, 09:49 AM']The Vatican said it's not supposed to happen. Therefore, Notre Dame, under the law of the Church, acted wrongly.

There's really no legitimate room for debate.[/quote]

Acted wrongly in conferring the degree.

Read the thread Micah

[Era Might]

Personally, I wouldn't even invite a pro-abortion politician to speak, even if there were no honorary degree being awarded. I would only invite them if it was in the context of a debate. I would rather hear a simple friar speak at my commencement, than a pro-abortion politician.

[dominicansoul]

btw KofC, thanks for defending me...you are such a sweetheart!

[dominicansoul]

[quote name='Era Might' post='1871653' date='May 20 2009, 09:00 AM']Personally, I wouldn't even invite a pro-abortion politician to speak, even if there were no honorary degree being awarded. I would only invite them if it was in the context of a debate. I would rather hear a simple friar speak at my commencement, than a pro-abortion politician.[/quote]


yes, it makes me wonder what the actual intention was for having this murderer speak at a prestigious Catholic University?

[Jaime]

[quote name='Era Might' post='1871653' date='May 20 2009, 10:00 AM']Personally, I wouldn't even invite a pro-abortion politician to speak, even if there were no honorary degree being awarded. I would only invite them if it was in the context of a debate. I would rather hear a simple friar speak at my commencement, than a pro-abortion politician.[/quote]

I agree with that 100% Era. I think Glendon would have preferred a friar. I'm not suggesting that she, the bishops or myself thought Obama was the best choice. But you can do a lot of stuff that isn't the best choice and not go against Church teaching. Those who think some pro-lifers on this forum are "confused" don't seem to get that concept.

[ariaane]

[quote name='hot stuff' post='1871642' date='May 20 2009, 03:41 PM']there is this


I don't lie sweetheart. You said it[/quote]

[mod]personal attack --hugheyforlife[/mod]


Ill copy and paste what I wrote to Knight about this.

_____________

I did not say that Lost was a CINO. My exact words were:

"and which has caused CINO's to argue abortion to be a lesser issue than the DP, war and other issues."

You assumed I was referring to her. I wasn't.
_______________________

And

_________________________

"To the faithful, however, you look like a CINO. Think about that."

Knight, with all due respect, I'd ignore Jamie's claims.

Saying someone looks like a CINO is not tantamount to saying someone is a CINO.

[b]I said what I said in the form I did because lost first said that protestors look silly and rude, and I needed to show her how her statement could be turned back on her.
[/b]
__________

[mod]personal attack --hugheyforlife[/mod]

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='hot stuff' post='1871650' date='May 20 2009, 09:53 AM']Acted wrongly in conferring the degree.

Read the thread Micah[/quote]
You keep insisting that Mary Ann Glendon was okay with his giving a speech, but not with his getting a degree. However, Mary Ann Glendon said (quoting the bishops), "this, as you must know, was in disregard of the U.S. bishops' express request of 2004 that Catholic institutions 'should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles' and that such persons 'should not be given awards, honors or [b]platforms[/b] which would suggest support for their actions.'"

Here's what I think happened. I think Mary Ann Glendon was dismayed from the start of the whole thing, not just about the diploma, but planned to rewrite her speech in an attempt to counterbalance Obama's or perhaps upstage the whole situation by pointing out the request of the bishops. However, when it became clear that he would also receive a degree, she was so disgusted that she simply said no to her award. In any event, it's clear that she knows of and agrees with the request of the bishops that no platforms be given to such people. Your own quote of Mary Ann Glendon cites one of several pieces of evidence proving that ND was wrong not only in conferring a degree, but in inviting Obama to speak at ND.

So no, ND acted wrongly in conferring the degree, ND acted wrongly in having Obama speak, ND acted wrongly in inviting him to the campus, and in my humble opinion (though the bishops don't go this far), ND acted wrongly in not banning Obama and arresting him for trespassing.

There can be no denying that Obama was not supposed to be permitted to speak according to at least the US bishops.

The fact that the protesting bishops were not vocal about his speaking doesn't mean they weren't against it; perhaps they were willing to let that slide for whatever pastoral reasons they may have had, but it would still be wrong for him to speak. Finally, there's a difference between asking him to come for a "discussion" on a political topic and asking him to give an address, which is one-way.

[ariaane]

[quote name='hot stuff' post='1871645' date='May 20 2009, 03:48 PM']Wow you seem to have a problem with applied knowledge.[/quote]

Oh, the irony.

[quote name='hot stuff' post='1871645' date='May 20 2009, 03:48 PM']She was going to accept her award and give her speech then she found out that President Obama was speaking and she changed her speech.[/quote]

I have not said otherwise.

[color="#FF0000"][b]Again READ the post before proceeding to comment.[/b][/color]

[quote name='hot stuff' post='1871645' date='May 20 2009, 03:48 PM']She said she was looking forward to it. She turned it down after she heard he was getting an honorary degree. So Yeah unless you think she was looking for a good seat to to protest the President's speech, then you're left with Glendon was ok with the President speaking.
As btw were all the bishops who were vocal.[/quote]

This has NOTHING whatsoever to do with my comments.

[mod]personal attack --hugheyforlife[/mod]

My points were:

1. Mary Ann Glendon took the news that Obama was to speak at ND negatively, yet she accepted it

[color="#FF0000"][b]2. She never, unlike Lost and Kujo, insulted pro lifers who wished to protest whilst Obama was speaking.[/b][/color]

COMPRENDE???

[ariaane]

[quote name='dominicansoul' post='1871654' date='May 20 2009, 04:01 PM']btw KofC, thanks for defending me...you are such a sweetheart! [/quote]

And at least when he rides in to defend people he actually reads the comments of his opponents and so actually knows what he's talking about.

Some others could take some tips from him

[franciscanheart]

see below (to my next post)

[Jaime]

Well then Micah you have an issue with the bishops.

Bishop D'Arcy's letter states

[quote]6. As I have said in a recent interview and which I have said to Father Jenkins, it would be one thing to bring the president here for a discussion on healthcare or immigration, and no person of goodwill could rightly oppose this. We have here,[b] however, the granting of an honorary degree of law to someone whose activities both as president and previously, have been altogether supportive of laws against the dignity of the human person yet to be born.[/b][/quote]

Its the honor of the degree, not the fact that he's speaking at commencement that the bishop is upset about.

[franciscanheart]

[size=3][color="red"]Please watch how you are addressing other members in this phorum. Personal attacks are against guidelines and will be edited. Being edited has consequences.

Further, Open Mic is not the Debate Table. And even further, Catholic vs. Catholic debate is not allowed here. The bishops have spoken on this matter.

Thread closed.[/color][/size]