Poll: U.S. Catholics Lean Left On Social Issues

[Rage for Order]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2009-03-31-catholics-liberal_N.htm

American Catholics are more liberal than the general population on social issues like divorce and homosexuality, despite the Catholic Church's longstanding conservatism on both issues, according to a new survey.

Catholics are more likely than non-Catholics to say that homosexual relations, divorce, and heterosexual sex outside wedlock are morally acceptable, according to an analysis by Gallup pollsters released on Monday.

In other areas, Catholics are nearly identical to the population at large. For example, 4 in 10 Catholics say abortion is "morally acceptable," compared to 41% of all Americans. And 63% back embryonic stem cell research, compared to 62% overall.

The Gallup survey was based on interviews with 3,022 Catholics adults conducted in May of 2006, 2007 and 2008. The margin of error is plus or minus 2 percentage points.

More at the link, including an interesting graph of poll findings not mentioned specifically in the article. Will this be enough to prove to the anti-Catholic contingent on DU that we should be reaching out to Catholics rather than bashing them at every turn?

[EFerrari]

1. This is the paradox of American Catholics.

Mostly social justice oriented and to the left.

[LostinVA]

2. I've been saying this for years

The majority of people at our wedding were devout Catholics.

[Ardent15]

99. Catholics were Demcoratic until the culture war bullshit

Now that's changing, with the takeover of the GOP by white Protestant fanatics.

[walkaway]

3. Why don't they get rid of those monsters in the Vatican?

Or break off from Europe like so many other churches. If they are that liberal I'm sure they can't agree with their pope on many issues.

[JerseygirlCT]

12. Well, there is no way for them TO get rid of the

Vatican monsters. As I was often reminded, the RCC is no democracy.

In time, I might not be surprised to see an American Catholic church develop.

In the meantime, there will continue to be a sad dichotomy between the bigoted hierarchy and most of the folks in the pews.

[defendandprotect]

43. The Vatican is moving the church into Evangelicalism . . . and sees its

fortunes rising in Africa and Asia ---!!!

They've pretty much written off America, Canada, Europe --

[MillieJo]

116. A lot of the newer Priests are from Asia and Africa

at least the Jesuits are... I live in the heart of a Jesuit Parish in London..
I think the Jesuits Collages in the US may also have an influence on the left-learning
American Catholics.. My parish Priest is an American who attended The University Of Saint Louis,
and he is a gifted Jesuit and a delightful Priest in a pretty liberal Parish.. He also lived in London during the whole of the last nine years, teaching before he moved to this parish...And he has only just begun to behave as though he is happy to mention he is an American.... If you look of the Freerepublic you will see how much Jesuits are despised by the far right and the Traditionalist Catholics because they are Liberal..... Maybe a big change would happen with a Jesuit Pope...

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

15. Most Catholics (in the US and Europe) disagree with the Vatican

[Two Americas]

88. no need to

Why?

The Church is not a corporation, nor a political movement.

Do you think the churches that have broken off are better? For the most part, no.


...

[OhioChick]

4. I'm Catholic and have no problem with anything that is mentioned above. n/t

[vaberella]

5. No it won't. I've been defending Catholics for a while here..

Yet, it means nothing. As a Catholic and someone who went to Catholic school all their lives, even all girls high school, I've never heard the negativity people say Catholics have. Sure they have some weird views at times. However, when it comes to abortion---surprisingly enough...it's not advocated by any stretch of the imagination but they do believe, or I was raised to believe in case of rape or the mother's life it is all right. The only type of abortion I was raised to believe was wrong was late-term abortions. Not other types. I of course went to school in NYC so that could be a reason. But the only videos we ever saw bashing abortion was late term ones. Abortion was NEVER advocated ONLY celibacy was, but abortion was never seen as the ultimate sin---that was for the individual to believe. Homosexuality was another thing...it was basically maligned but in my all girls school about 30% of the population were experimental lesbians or "straight" lesbians. ^_^ And the rest of us were friends with them, so it was never a big deal. Divorce is the one thing they have laws about in the catholic church. Like if you were in an abusive marriage...the Church allows you to get remarried in the church after a letter from your Archbishop or Cardinal. Stem cell research, we're supportive of...or that's what know. Most advanced medical treatments we're open too.

I think this thing bashing Catholics is nonsense. However, I don't know what it's like in the South. Most of the people who I heard bashing it were coming from the South and if was in that area I'd report them to either their Archbishop or Cardinal. And if it's one of them, I'd publicly advocate against them. The Church hates negative news like that.

[proud2BlibKansan]

7. You would report them to their bishop??

Were you always a tattle tale or did you just adopt that behavior?

[vaberella]

54. I should have been more clear in my final statement.

A lot of the bashing I have heard against Catholics were people who went to Catholic churches in the South. Apparently some of the Priests and the Church itself was passing out rather racially charged and disgusting defamation accounts against President Obama, nee Candidate Obama at the time. Hence, the reason I said they should be reported to their Bishop. So it was in regards to Catholic churches that go to that extent in their sermon and activities which I don't believe is advocated by the Church, they should be reported.

[proud2BlibKansan]

58. Thanks for the explanation

But do you really think it would make any difference?

[vaberella]

59. Unlikely, but it's worth a try.

I just find that my teaching including some of the Nuns and Priests are people who are way liberal even though conservative on some issues. They just wouldn't take kindly to the weirdly conservative people. Well in actuality they can't. I don't know the numbers...I just know in my school of 150 incoming freshman my class had about 10-15 pregnant girls. And it was steadily increasing every year. And I know many of the girls went to advising with the priests and nuns before aborting. So around my way they have a bit more lenient before spouting out trash. Plus around my area they supported President Obama. ^_^ But didn't go on any pulpit or pass out trash about another candidate or pass out supporting paper for President Obama either.

[Kalyke]

109. I'm a Catholic in the South and I can report that didn't happen in

my area.

[Iris]

29. The church does not believe abortion is acceptable in the case of rape or to save the mother's life.

However, most Catholics I know don't really think the church needs to be in their bedrooms.

[defendandprotect]

46. There was a great movie . . . I think it was "Brides of Christ" ... I think made in Australia?

Probably a decade or more ago -- but it showed some part of the great pain of

families who were subjected to the authority of the church in the denial of birth control!

Pain, guilt -- the harm done to relationships, families!

And the fact that when pregnancies did happen, it was often the life of the female

that was put on the line -- usually with a self-treatment to end the pregnancy ....

In America, many women lost their lives to illegal abortion ---

and it is those stories which show us more than anything else how cheaply the lives

of women/females are held by the Catholic Church!!!

I think when the priests and nuns all left, those still subjecting themselves to the

Vatican tune-callers should have left with them!

[vaberella]

53. I never said the Church believed it.

I said though that I was raised to believe it. Even in my school, they had a more liberal viewpoint on things and it could be because I was raised in NYC. But I never said it was the Church. Plus the OP had nothing to do with the Church, but just Catholics in general and I was speaking from the background of a Catholic, in a Catholic school upbringing.

[Iris]

62. ok, I see.

I've just seen a couple of posts lately suggesting the church allows these exceptions and it doesn't, which is one HUGE reason why I'm no longer a practicing Catholic. Like you, I was raised in a fairly progressive parish and family and when I learned what the Church REALLY taught, and especially to people in poor countries w/o the info resources WE have, I just couldn't participate in Mass with a clear conscience.

[Two Americas]

89. no power

The Church as no power to allow or not allow anything. The government, however, does.

The Mass does not really belong to the hierarchy, does it?

If all of the leftists leave the Church, as a personal gesture, the Church will continue to move to the right.


...

[tigereye]

108. that's exactly how I feel, as an RC- raised, Catholic school educated female

with relatives who were priests and nuns, etc. My uncle was a somewhat "radical" priest in Korea, quite involved in progressive causes, and the repudiation of those efforts by the last 2 popes really rubs me the wrong way. Not withstanding all the anti-choice crap and other anti-progressive efforts.


I don't always recognize the current RC trends compared with the past ones...

[defendandprotect]

75. But we have the shocking example of the Pope telling Serbian women that they

should bear the children conceived in RAPE . . . !!!

some weird views at times. However, when it comes to abortion---surprisingly enough...it's not advocated by any stretch of the imagination but they do believe, or I was raised to believe in case of rape or the mother's life it is all right.


They have also pushed the "partial birth abortion" legislation in Congress . . .
some of it has been approved, if I recall correctly, without the "right to life" for the
Mother!

The only type of abortion I was raised to believe was wrong was late-term abortions. Not other types.

and . .

Homosexuality was another thing...it was basically maligned but in my all girls school about 30% of the population were experimental lesbians or "straight" lesbians. ^_^ And the rest of us were friends with them, so it was never a big deal.

If you don't find homosexuality "a big deal," isn't it difficult to sit and listen to intolerance
and hatred being preached for homosexuals from the pulpits on Sunday? The common phrase is still
that homosexuality is "an abomination" . . . isn't it?

And, how can any female support a church/Vatican which does not acknwoledge the full personhood
of females as it acknowledges the full personhood of males?

[drm604]

6. Interesting.

Not really surprising, but interesting. I think it's probably pretty common in this country for people to identify with a religion, and even worship regularly, but disagree with it on many issues.

[Pirate Smile]

8. No surprise here. Obama won Catholics. I don't think he won Protestants.

The Pope and the crazy Bishops are ignored. You don't see a lot of 12 kid Catholic families anymore. People think for themselves.

This would only be surprising if someone didn't know anyone who was Catholic (or only knew RW Catholics - there are too many of them, just like in the general population).

[Rage for Order]

9. More results from the poll

[marmar]

14. Death penalty 61 % acceptable among Catholics and 68 % among non-Catholics?

:wtf:

I will never understand the blase tolerance for the death penalty that exists in this country.

[defendandprotect]

47. It's the authoritarian streak . . . runs right thru the chuch from top to bottom -- !!!

There's a kind of bullying mentality that the officials of the church display,

from my experiences -- used to be quite clearly exhibited among nuns, for one-!

And from the pulpits. There was an "infallible" Pope, but many officials of

the church and members took up that feeling of being right and everyone else wrong.

[struggle4progress]

67. I've never heard a pro-death penalty homily in a Catholic church. I've heard more than one priest

denounce the death penalty in the strongest terms. The current official church position seems to be that the death penalty can only be justified in rare cases where the execution is required for public safety reasons, which in the modern world essentially means never

[defendandprotect]

68. Poll sugests 61% of Catholics support it --

Death penalty 61 % acceptable among Catholics and 68 % among non-Catholics?

Otoh, it's pretty much the same with war -- the church will oppose war,

but they don't push for nor finance "anti-war" movements as they have done "pro-life"

movements -- nor do they push "anti-death penalty" movements.

When the church wants to be involved, it does so --

In fact, the Catholic and Mormon Church were very involved in fighting the Equal Rights

Act here in the US -- heavily financed with tax-exempt dollars!

Proposition 8 is another example!

[struggle4progress]

82. Uh, yes, I read threadtop. DP is one of the rare issues where Catholic laity is more conservative

than the church hierarchy. I've never heard a pro-DP homily in a Catholic church, but I have heard parishioners complain when exiting after a service with an anti-DP homily.

[defendandprotect]

98. interesting . . .

I still attribute to authoritarian teachings --- and examples of church dictates.

[Two Americas]

90. other way aroiund

The authoritarianism is all throughout society. The Church reflects that.

Of all institutions, however, the authoritarianism in the Church is not expressed as arresting, detaining, torturing, killing or impoverishing you. Our government does all of that.


...

[defendandprotect]

100. Totally disagree . . .

No ... members reflect the authoritarian nature of the church -- church dictates/hierarchy.

And PLENTY of that within the church --

other way around
The authoritarianism is all throughout society. The Church reflects that.

Rather we are controlled in society by hierarchies . . . think about them all!

Of all institutions, however, the authoritarianism in the Church is not expressed as arresting, detaining, torturing, killing or impoverishing you. Our government does all of that.

Well, a good part of the Vatican's history is with "arresting, detaining, torturing, killing
and impoverishing" -- !!!

Papal Bulls called for the enslavement or death of the native American --
same for the African in America -- enslave or kill!

The Vatican's 1,100 year war on Jews - holding them in Papal ghettoes -- barring them
from participation in society -- from education, from professions --
forcing them to wear YELLOW STARS. After the Jews were released, the Vatican undertook
a 100 year vile and vicious propaganda campaign against the Jews!
This is basically why after WWII the world called upon the Vatican to ...
"Sign a Confession of Co-Responsibility for the Jewish Holocaust in Germany."
Indeed, the hatred and intolerance for Jews had been laid long before by the Vatican
throughout Europe.

Note the Witch Hunts -- based on the "Hammer of Witches" by the Vatican . . . this was
the final subjugation of females which hadn't yet been entirely successful.
This was also after the Crusades when many of the males were dead, leaving widows rather
well off. All of that disappeared with the Witch Hunts -- the women's holocaust --
and that period was the final sledgehammer against women which barred them from property
rights, inheritance - and even their own children!


PS: and the Crusades, of course, set new precedents for violence/torture.

[struggle4progress]

102. Sicut Dudum (Pope Eugene IV 1435)

... And no less do We order and command all and each of the faithful of each sex, within the space of fifteen days of the publication of these letters in the place where they live, that they restore to their earlier liberty all and each person of either sex who were once residents of said Canary Islands, and made captives since the time of their capture, and who have been made subject to slavery. These people are to be totally and perpetually free, and are to be let go without the exaction or reception of money. If this is not done when the fifteen days have passed, they incur the sentence of excommunication by the act itself, from which they cannot be absolved, except at the point of death, even by the Holy See, or by any Spanish bishop, or by the aforementioned Ferdinand, unless they have first given freedom to these captive persons and restored their goods ... http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Eugene04/eugene04sicut.htm

[struggle4progress]

103. Sublimis Deus (Pope Paul III 1537)

... The enemy of the human race, who opposes all good deeds in order to bring men to destruction, beholding and envying this, invented a means never before heard of, by which he might hinder the preaching of God’s word of Salvation to the people: he inspired his satellites who, to please him, have not hesitated to publish abroad that the Indians of the West and the South, and other people of whom We have recent knowledge should be treated as dumb brutes created for our service, pretending that they are incapable of receiving the Catholic Faith ... Desiring to provide ample remedy for these evils, We define and declare by these Our letters, or by any translation thereof signed by any notary public and sealed with the seal of any ecclesiastical dignitary, to which the same credit shall be given as to the originals, that, notwithstanding whatever may have been or may be said to the contrary, the said Indians and all other people who may later be discovered by Christians, are by no means to be deprived of their liberty or the possession of their property, even though they be outside the faith of Jesus Christ; and that they may and should, freely and legitimately, enjoy their liberty and the possession of their property; nor should they be in any way enslaved; should the contrary happen, it shall be null and have no effect ... http://historyscoop.wordpress.com/2006/07/13/papal-bull-sublimis-deus-and-the-humanity-of-native-americans/

[struggle4progress]

105. In Supremo Apostolatus (Pope Gregory XVI 1839)

... It is at these practices that are aimed the Letter Apostolic of Paul III, given on May 29, 1537, under the seal of the Fisherman, and addressed to the Cardinal Archbishop of Toledo, and afterwards another Letter, more detailed, addressed by Urban VIII on April 22, 1639 to the Collector Jurium of the Apostolic Chamber of Portugal. In the latter are severely and particularly condemned those who should dare 'to reduce to slavery the Indians of the Eastern and Southern Indies,' to sell them, buy them, exchange them or give them, separate them from their wives and children, despoil them of their goods and properties, conduct or transport them into other regions, or deprive them of liberty in any way whatsoever, retain them in servitude, or lend counsel, succour, favour and co-operation to those so acting, under no matter what pretext or excuse, or who proclaim and teach that this way of acting is allowable and co-operate in any manner whatever in the practices indicated ... In our time Pius VII, moved by the same religious and charitable spirit as his Predecessors, intervened zealously with those in possession of power to secure that the slave trade should at least cease amongst the Christians ... The penalties imposed and the care given by Our Predecessors contributed in no small measure, with the help of God, to protect the Indians and the other people mentioned against the cruelty of the invaders or the cupidity of Christian merchants, without however carrying success to such a point that the Holy See could rejoice over the complete success of its efforts in this direction; for the slave trade, although it has diminished in more than one district, is still practiced by numerous Christians. This is why, desiring to remove such a shame from all the Christian nations, having fully reflected over the whole question and having taken the advice of many of Our Venerable Brothers the Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church, and walking in the footsteps of Our Predecessors, We warn and adjure earnestly in the Lord faithful Christians of every condition that no one in the future dare to vex anyone, despoil him of his possessions, reduce to servitude, or lend aid and favour to those who give themselves up to these practices, or exercise that inhuman traffic by which the Blacks, as if they were not men but rather animals, having been brought into servitude, in no matter what way, are, without any distinction, in contempt of the rights of justice and humanity, bought, sold, and devoted sometimes to the hardest labour ... http://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/G16SUP.HTM

[struggle4progress]

106. Your dishonesty or ignorance about history is quite depressing. Facts matter.

[defendandprotect]

110. There are other Papal Bulls which we will have to dig up for you . . .

FURTHER, I suppose the Catholic Church didn't run Mission schools to take language
and heritage from the native American . . . of course, so did the Mormons, the
most notorious of the schools.

These children were basically kidnapped from their parents ---

Meanwhile, we also do seem to have possession of this continent -- !!
A bit of evidence that seems quite clear.
Our brutality and violence against the Native American in trying to enslave these
totally free people is also clear!
Would you have sold Manhattan Island for $24?
There was no concept of private ownership -- nature and the earth belonged to all,
as is still true today.

As the Native Americans says . . .

"When they came, they had the book and we had the land...
When they left, we had the book and they had the land."

[struggle4progress]

111. blah blah blah. no links. personally i don't care if you aren't enthusiastic about catholicism but

i think accuracy and honesty matter. as far as i can tell, you just make shit up to support your prejudices

[defendandprotect]

114. Obviously , you don't seem ready to . . .

try to deal with alternate info --

However, when I have time, I'll be happy to give you "links" --

I'm not "enthusiastic" about any organized patriarchal religion ---

nor patriarchy!

And I'm a "recovering Catholic."

[defendandprotect]

118. Now, normally . . .

I wouldn't have responded at all to comments like yours, however,
I do think that organized patriarchal religion -- which is the underpinning
for patriarchy -- does have a way of convincing members that there is no
other truth. Perhaps you will also decide that the United Nations is lying
to you . . . . ?

1452 (June 18) Dum diversas Nicholas V Authorises Afonso V of Portugal to reduce any Muslims, pagans other unbelievers to perpetual slavery.

1455 (January 8) Romanus Pontifex Nicholas V Sanctifies the seizure of non-Christian lands discovered during the Age of Discovery and encourages the enslavement of natives.

And here you will note that in 2006, the United Nations is asking Pope Benedict to REVOKE and
RENUOUNCE the Papal Bulls which encouraged the "conquering of lands, enslaving their
non-Christian populations -- and expropriating their possessions and resources . . .

the U.N. Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues has called on Pope Benedict XVI to revoke and renounce those documents.

Here are the details . .

Pope asked to revoke papal bulls Posted: May 26, 2006

by: Gale Courey Toensing / Indian Country Today NEW YORK -

There is no ambiguity in the language of the 15th-century

papal bulls issued by the popes of the Roman Catholic Church as they encouraged the kings of Portugal and Spain to conquer ''undiscovered'' lands, enslave their non-Christian populations and expropriate their possession and resources.

Now, more than 500 years later, the U.N. Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues has called on Pope Benedict XVI to revoke and renounce those documents. The bulls, according to the forum, formed the ''doctrine of discovery'' - a philosophy that sanctified the massacre of millions of indigenous people and continues to influence U.S. Supreme Court decisions today.

The Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues held its fifth conference at the United Nations in New York from May 15 - 26. More than 1,200 delegates from all over the world attended.

The forum was established by the U.N. Economic and Social Council in 2000 with a mandate ''to discuss indigenous issues within the mandate of the council relating to economic and social development, culture, the environment, education, health and human rights.''

A May 18 event called ''Papal Bulls, Manifest Destiny and American Empire'' featured Oren Lyons, Faithkeeper of the Onondaga Nation (Haudenosaunee); Tonya Gonnella Frichner, Onondaga Nation; Esmeralda Brown, of Panama, chair of the Non-Governmental Organizations for Sustainable Development's southern caucus; and Yolanda Teran, Kichwa from Quito, Ecuador, and a member of Ecuador's National Council of Indigenous Women.

The Rev. Robert Meyer, a representative from the office of the Permanent Observer of the Holy See at the United Nations, was invited to join the panel, but declined. ''I'm not really an expert historian, so I'll have to be an expert listener,'' Meyer said.

The papal bulls include a Jan. 8, 1455, edict by Pope Nicholas V that grants the ''right of conquest'' to Alfonso, king of Portugal, and authorizes him ''to invade, search out, capture, vanquish and subdue all Saracens and pagans whatsoever and other enemies of Christ wheresoever placed, and the kingdoms, dukedoms, principalities, dominions, possessions and all movable and immovable goods whatever held and possessed by them and to reduce their persons to perpetual slavery.''

The ''movable and immovable goods'' were to be used for the benefit and profit of Alfonso and his heirs forever.

The term ''Saracens'' was used by medieval Europeans to mean Arabs and Muslims in general.

Portugal and Spain were rivals in the conquest game, and by 1493, a new pope - Alexander V - issued another papal bull urging his King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella of Spain to ''seek out and discover certain islands and mainlands remote and unknown and not hitherto discovered by others'' so that the ''barbarous nations be overthrown and brought to the faith itself.''

Lyons, the first speaker on the panel, wove stories from the past to the present, juxtaposing the spirituality of indigenous people with organized religion.

The two have ''different ideas,'' Lyons said, ''and even in today's dialogue we still don't quite connect because we're on a different spiritual level. They don't quite understand relationship. We never gave up our relations with the earth.''

Lyons quoted a Buddhist spiritual leader who had supported the American Indians' 1978 Long Walk from California to the White House, seeking justice for the depredations of history.

''When he was asked why he had joined the Long Walk, he said, 'I have studied the issue of peace around the world, and I've studied the peoples around the world and it is my conclusion that the most consistently persecuted people in the history of modern times is American Indians, and I am very amazed and impressed that in spite of all this persistent persecution, you have maintained your beliefs and your ways. Even today I see them as very crystallized and very strong, and I consider from all of this that the spiritual center of the world lies her in your hands,''' Lyons said.

Lyons provided a lyrical ancestral memory of life on Turtle Island B.C. - ''Before Columbus'' - as a pristine land of plenty where ''peace was prevalent'' because everyone understood the basic unwritten law that is the foundation of peace: respect for each other and the land, Lyons said.

''Then our brother came from across the water, and my grandmother said it was like a black cloud rolling towards us, a rolling black cloud coming at us, and it covered us. That's how she described it,'' Lyons said.

Last September, Lyons co-signed a letter urging Pope Benedict XVI to rescind and revoke the papal bulls.

''These bulls provide the foundation for the theft of indigenous lands throughout the world that continues up to this day. These bulls subjugated innocent and unsuspecting Native peoples and subjected them to more than 500 years of slavery, genocide and a less than human identity. We continue to suffer from what could be called an international conspiracy of nations, now ... become nation-states, to continue to perpetuate this racist doctrine promulgated by the Roman Catholic Church. This doctrine is a crime against humanity,'' Lyons wrote.

Lyons told Indian Country Today he has not received a response to, or an acknowledgement of receipt of, his letter from the pope.

Meyer, the Vatican representative who attended the panel discussion, left the event during an emotional reading of Lyons' letter by Brown. Reached by phone later, Meyer declined to comment and had not responded to questions by press time.

Frichner said the doctrine of discovery was an agreement among European nations that whichever nation arrived first had the right to explore, colonize and expropriate the land's resources. The non-Christian indigenous peoples did not have the right to own the land, only to occupy it.

''I think of it as a sort of gentlemen's agreement ... kind of like the Mafia - this is my neighborhood and you stay out,'' Frichner said.

She explained how the doctrine of discovery continues to play out in Indian country. Last year, the Supreme Court ruled that the Oneida Indian Nation of New York (owner of Four Directions Media, which publishes Indian Country Today) was required to pay property taxes on aboriginal lands it had bought back from the city of Sherrill, N.Y.

''The first footnote refers to the doctrine of discovery ... so if you think we're talking about some archaic notions that have no place in today's contemporary world, you're making a mistake,'' Frichner said.

She urged people who are working to rescind the papal bulls to become familiar with the doctrine of discovery, its history and impact.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_papal_bulls

And . .

1452 (June 18) Dum diversas Nicholas V Authorises Afonso V of Portugal to reduce any Muslims, pagans other unbelievers to perpetual slavery.

1455 (January 8) Romanus Pontifex Nicholas V Sanctifies the seizure of non-Christian lands discovered during the Age of Discovery and encourages the enslavement of natives.

http://www.indiancountry.com/content.cfm?id=1096413051

[struggle4progress]

119. Thanks for the links. It looks like Pope Nicholas V in the mid-1400's was an SOB.

Your sweeping claims about the general teachings of the Roman Catholic church cannot be supported by examples involving one pope about 550 years ago. I provided several from popes after that time going in exactly the opposite direction, which has been the general direction of the Church's teachings

I'm not an authoritarian and I share your antipathy to hierarchy, religious or otherwise -- and I'll certainly agree with you that we ought always to oppose patriarchal attitudes, noting in particular that the Roman Catholic hierarchy is distastefully patriarchal

Still, one ought to examine historical phenomena accurately and without cherry-picking. Slavery in the Americas, for example, cannot be laid at the door of the Catholic church. The still-Catholic countries of Europe were not the primary slave-traders, and Catholic Latin America abolished slavery before the mostly-Protestant US did. Moreover, the roots of slavery are not philosophical: the system was not motivated by theoretical patriarchal views but by the willingness of some people to exploit others for profit, which the church's teachings have generally opposed

[defendandprotect]

122. The Crusades, the Hammer of Witches, the Vatican's 1,100 year ...

oppression of Jews are not "sweeping claims" --

I'm sure you are quite familiar with the Crusades --

and you will find information on the Woman's Holocaust/The Hammer of Witches
just about anywhere, including your library.

Same for the Vatican's holding of Jews for 1,100 years in Papal Ghettoes --
and, if you don't immediately understand that all of this is true . ..

from barring Jews from education, from professions --
forcing them to wear YELLOW STARS.

and more, check the internet and your library. Yes, that period was the FIRST
of the forcing of Jews to wear "Yellow Stars."

If you're not totally familiar with the Crusades and the tortures introduced at
that time -- "setting new precedents for violence" -- you'll also find information
on that on the internet or in your library.
Will and Mary Durant referred to this Medieval period, as well, as being a
"moral setback for humanity."

Additionally, this whole concept of conquest and conversion -- "introducing the cross
with the sword" holds to this day. Just as "Manifest Destiny" and "Man's Dominion
Over Nature" also hold to this day. They are the license for the elite to exploit
nature, animal-life, natural resources -- and even other human beings according to
various myths of "inferiority."

Needless to say, the end result on this continent was GENOCIDE for the Native American
and this continent passing into the hands of the conquerers.

Same is true of the African in America -- enslavement or death!
And that period of enslavement went on for a few hundred years -- followed by
100 years of Segregation.

[struggle4progress]

123. It is not my intention to justify anything: I simply take the view that one cannot learn lessons

from historical struggles unless one understands those struggles in their particularity

I will certainly share your view about the ugliness of the Western notions of superiority that were encoded in a view such as "manifest destiny" and led to the extermination and enslavement around the world and are still represented in a modern contempt for the natural world. Where I will differ with you is in the analysis of what has driven such phenomena and exactly how one ought to struggle against them: my view is that people are largely driven by their material interests and that they tailor their ideologies to justify their behaviors, so I do not expect that one can fight effectively by attempting to understand and expose such ideologies themselves -- one must instead expose how the ideologies are used to obscure and mystify the real motives. You want, for example, to blame ugly western history on the Catholic church, whereas in fact enslavement and extermination of First Peoples has been driven by a desire to accumulate riches and appropriate land

[defendandprotect]

124. The real motive, as always, is manipulation for profit/power . . .

Until the time of the Bible, all history was oral --
and even at the time of the Bible, only 3% could read -- and they were church scholars!
Essentially the Bible - Old Testament -- was written to cement patriarchy.

Again, power to manipulate, the power of propaganda rests at the top -- with hierarchies.

And in regard to this . . .
It is not my intention to justify anything: I simply take the view that one cannot learn lessons
from historical struggles unless one understands those struggles in their particularity

Let's look at the Civil War. Had there not been a compromise with slave states, there
would not have been a civil war. Small folk did not take part in any of these decisions.
They were made by those in power.
Slavery was a system of exploitation - harvesting slave labor.
Still going on right now as our trade agreements help the elite to move around the world
"harvesting slave labor."

I will certainly share your view about the ugliness of the Western notions of superiority that were encoded in a view such as "manifest destiny" and led to the extermination and enslavement around the world and are still represented in a modern contempt for the natural world.

Those "western notions" were given license by Christian teachings.
Nor was it simple "superiority" -- it was Christian/male superiority.
And, yes, we can certainly look to the war on nature engendered in "Man's Dominion Over Nature."


And here . . .

Where I will differ with you is in the analysis of what has driven such phenomena and exactly how one ought to struggle against them: my view is that people are largely driven by their material interests and that they tailor their ideologies to justify their behaviors, so I do not expect that one can fight effectively by attempting to understand and expose such ideologies themselves -- one must instead expose how the ideologies are used to obscure and mystify the real motives. You want, for example, to blame ugly western history on the Catholic church, whereas in fact enslavement and extermination of First Peoples has been driven by a desire to accumulate riches and appropriate land

We are talking about Vatican edicts.

Whether you look at Columbus or patriarchy . . .
they are/were underpinned by organized patriarchal religion.
There is no way patriarchy can declare itself "superior" -- it would be humorous.
However, to say that "god" has declared man superior to inferior females is something
that evidently people will buy!

In much the same way, Columbus would have looked rather silly arguing that he had the
personal right to enslave or kill Native Americans or Africans. But declaring "Manifest
Destiny" was another matter many were ready to believe!

Keep in mind that we are still in the same gene pool --!!!

[walkaway]

17. I guess they didn't ask about condom use to help stop Aids

too bad. Imagine how many Africans may die thinking that using a condom could increase their chances of contracting Aids.

I was born into the religion but never believed a word of it even as a child. I don't understand how good people can support such a backward group. One of the major points of this religion is that the pope is infallible. That means if you are a catholic you HAVE to agree with him. According to their own religion, these poll results mean that a large percentage of American Catholics are misguided and sinning against the church.

[Rage for Order]

20. Um, no...

You're not even close to being correct, but that's understandable given the fact that you admittedly didn't pay attention during CCD when you were growing up :)

[walkaway]

24. Here you go.....

Explanation of papal infallibility

The Vatican Council has defined as "a divinely revealed dogma" that "the Roman Pontiff, when he speaks ex cathedra -- that is, when in the exercise of his office as pastor and teacher of all Christians he defines, by virtue of his supreme Apostolic authority, a doctrine of faith or morals to be held by the whole Church -- is, by reason of the Divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, possessed of that infallibility with which the Divine Redeemer wished His Church to be endowed in defining doctrines of faith and morals; and consequently that such definitions of the Roman Pontiff are irreformable of their own nature (ex sese) and not by reason of the Church's consent" (Densinger no. 1839 -- old no. 1680). For the correct understanding of this definition it is to be noted that:

* what is claimed for the pope is infallibility merely, not impeccability or inspiration (see above under I).
* the infallibility claimed for the pope is the same in its nature, scope, and extent as that which the Church as a whole possesses; his ex cathedra teaching does not have to be ratified by the Church's in order to be infallible.
* infallibility is not attributed to every doctrinal act of the pope, but only to his ex cathedra teaching; and the conditions required for ex cathedra teaching are mentioned in the Vatican decree:
o The pontiff must teach in his public and official capacity as pastor and doctor of all Christians, not merely in his private capacity as a theologian, preacher or allocutionist, nor in his capacity as a temporal prince or as a mere ordinary of the Diocese of Rome. It must be clear that he speaks as spiritual head of the Church universal.
o Then it is only when, in this capacity, he teaches some doctrine of faith or morals that he is infallible (see below, IV).
o Further it must be sufficiently evident that he intends to teach with all the fullness and finality of his supreme Apostolic authority, in other words that he wishes to determine some point of doctrine in an absolutely final and irrevocable way, or to define it in the technical sense (see DEFINITION). These are well-recognized formulas by means of which the defining intention may be manifested.
o Finally for an ex cathedra decision it must be clear that the pope intends to bind the whole Church. To demand internal assent from all the faithful to his teaching under pain of incurring spiritual shipwreck (naufragium fidei) according to the expression used by Pius IX in defining the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin. Theoretically, this intention might be made sufficiently clear in a papal decision which is addressed only to a particular Church; but in present day conditions, when it is so easy to communicate with the most distant parts of the earth and to secure a literally universal promulgation of papal acts, the presumption is that unless the pope formally addresses the whole Church in the recognized official way, he does not intend his doctrinal teaching to be held by all the faithful as ex cathedra and infallible.

It should be observed in conclusion that papal infallibility is a personal and incommunicable charisma, which is not shared by any pontifical tribunal. It was promised directly to Peter, and to each of Peter's successors in the primacy, but not as a prerogative the exercise of which could be delegated to others. Hence doctrinal decisions or instructions issued by the Roman congregations, even when approved by the pope in the ordinary way, have no claim to be considered infallible. To be infallible they must be issued by the pope himself in his own name according to the conditions already mentioned as requisite for ex cathedra teaching.
Proof of papal infallibility from Holy Scriptur

[SharonAnn]

37. Re - infallibility: Lord Acton said "Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely"

That statement was made specifically in reference to the announcement of the Pope' infallibility.

Lord Acton was a prominent Catholic theologian who was very involved in Church theology and politics back then and he strongly disagreed with the Doctrine of Infallibility.

[walkaway]

25. Sorry..that was right out of the Catholic Encyclopedia on the New Advent site.

What a bore really. I was never forced to go to catholic studies but there's always Google.

[Rage for Order]

28. Sorry, I wasn't exactly clear in my earlier post

You said:

"One of the major points of this religion is that the pope is infallible. That means if you are a catholic you HAVE to agree with him."

To which I replied:

"Um, no...You're not even close to being correct."

By which I meant to say (from your post #24):

"...infallibility is not attributed to every doctrinal act of the pope, but only to his ex cathedra teaching; and the conditions required for ex cathedra teaching are mentioned in the Vatican decree" (It then goes on to list a slew of conditions that are required to be met for the pope to be considered teaching ex cathedra)

So no, one does not HAVE to agree with everything the pope says in order to be a Catholic. In fact, call me a heretic, but I don't think one has to agree with all ex cathedra teachings either, but that may not be the official view of the Catholic Church.

[CatholicEdHead]

30. Ex Cathedra only came about 1860s

during the loss of the Papal States. It was a way for the Church to have standing again in the people in a time of renewed orthodoxy. :puke: Before that time it was actually an attack on the Pope to infer or call him infallible in any way shape or form.

[WindRiverMan]

34. Yes, and St. Thomas Aquinas also believed

that prositution was a "necessary evil". The Catholic Church as evolved over the centuries, despite what some say.

[defendandprotect]

42. Catholic Church also permitted abortion until the 5th month . . .

until the time of animation --- !!!

The RCC has "evolved" but mainly in backwards fashion recently . . .
expecially with the right-wing coup on Vatican II.

[defendandprotect]

48. ...and Pope John XXIII in Vatican II pretty much kicked infallibity in the ass . . .!!!

[WindRiverMan]

32. Wrong

Catholics do not believe that the Pope is infallible, the Pope may make a statement or he may speak ex cathedra. Only when the Pope speaks ex cathedra which is very very rare do Catholics believe it is truly the world of God coming through the Pope. Many Catholics take issue with a lot of their Pope's statements. Bottom line in Catholisms, unless the Pope speaks from his official chair, he is simply speaking as a man, not the representative of God. There are many conditions for the Papal policy to be considered ex cathedra, see this wiki article.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_infallibility#Ex_cathedra

[defendandprotect]

49. Yes . . . but Papal infallibility is self-declared . . . similar to

patriarchy's need to have "god" declare them superior to females --- !!!

Organized patriarchal religion is the underpinning for patriarchy ---

the Bible was written to cement patriarchy.

[MillieJo]

117. A Jesuit Priest that I knew and recently passed away...

Said that Papal Infallibility meant that occasionally the Pope is right....
The day this Priest died, he had married a Catholic to a Buddist in the Church....His funeral took two days, both days packed with
people and he was basically a lefty, liberal in a Parish where birth control is never mentioned but people stop at two or three children, abortion is forgiven in confession and never judged, that sells Fairtrade products, feeds the homeless twice a week and is therefore one of the biggest Parishes in London with eight well attended Masses on a Sunday....Last Easter, the adults that were baptised were all living with partners, one was pregnant, yet it wasn't an issue...
I think people love to attend Mass and finding a Parish that is active, inclusive and has it's own bar, is a treasure to many people..maybe it is the Jesuits that make it special...In a big city like London, which is lonely and often unfriendly, going to Mass and being involved in church life can be very important to people because it gives them social interaction and friends that can be hard to come by, when nobody has the time to say hello. I have to say that in the UK it would be unseemly to tell people who to vote for from the pulpit... the only comment I have ever heard from my Parish Priest is that we have to vote to prevent the BNP from gaining any foothold in our country.

[rockymountaindem]

38. High swinging, free-wheeling Catholics...

Some things never change. Those crazy kids!

[burning rain]

44. Not a surprise to me...

that in a democratic state such as the US, most Catholics would insist on a measure of democracy in their religion, no matter how much the Vatican might moan and groan. If on one hand they're discontent with rebellious American and European Catholics, at the same time they know that they depend greatly upon these wealthier, more liberal Catholics to keep the Church in money, so I think the Vatican will take some care so as not to push them away entirely.

[Rage for Order]

10. Still more results...

[progressoid]

27. So, the more one attends church (any church)...

the more one moves to the right on social issues.

[Rage for Order]

31. I suppose you could look at it that way

But is it a cause and effect relationship? There's not enough information in this poll to make that determination.

[progressoid]

52. OR the more you attend church, the more likely you are to be socially conservative.

[Two Americas]

87. or the other way around

The more socially conservative you are, the more likely you are to attend church. That has a lot to do with the politicization of the church. The churches are being used as fronts for a right wing political movement. That drives way and alienates leftists. Who wants to go to a fascist rally disguised as a church service?


On edit - you may have been saying the same thing.



...

[defendandprotect]

69. When the Vatican tells Americans not to vote for pro-choice Kerry that seems clear--!!!

Again -- when the church is opposed to something it raises movement --

i.e., "pro-life" movement one example --

They have not supported/financed an "anti-war" movement nor a "anti-capital punishment"

movement.

Otoh, the RCC and the Mormon church were very involved in campaigning against the

Equal Rights Amendment here in US -- financed with tax-exempt dollars!

And Prop 8 is another more recent example!

[struggle4progress]

107. Do you have a link for that claim or is this another historical fiction?

[defendandprotect]

115. Vatican Decree 2003: Catholics who vote for Kerry commit mortal sin . . .

The Vatican says there is a problem with John Kerry: Catholics who vote ...
Voting for Pro-choice or Pro-Abortion is a Mortal Sin. Senator John Kerry has publicly opposed a Vatican decree issued in 2003 which stated that Catholic politicians ...www.tldm.org/News6/VotingPro-ChoiceJohnKerry.htm - 63k - Cached

Senator Kerry has publicly opposed a Vatican decree issued in 2003 which stated that Catholic politicians have a duty to uphold the Church’s “non-negotiable ethical principles,” such as opposition to abortion and same-sex unions. This Vatican decree warns politicians “who are directly involved in lawmaking bodies have a grave and clear obligation to oppose any law that attacks human life. For them, as for every Catholic, it is impossible to promote such laws or to vote for them…. In this context, it must be noted also that a well-formed Christian conscience does not permit one to vote for a political program or an individual law which contradicts the fundamental contents of faith and morals.”<6>

This Vatican decree speaks directly to Senator John Kerry.

The Vatican Says No To Kerry, Wake up sleeping Catholics.
http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=15474

There are better links but that should do except for those who want to ignore
reality.

[WildEyedLiberal]

64. Except for the death penalty

Devout RCs were the least likely to support the death penalty of all the groups polled.

I find it very interesting that devout Catholics, though overwhelmingly against abortion per that poll, were nevertheless *less* anti-abortion than devout non-Catholics, given how much the church hierarchy emphasizes that issue to the exclusion of all others.

[CatholicEdHead]

11. Much of the current clergy comes from the sex scandal

and their inability to deal with it. They are scared over it and JPII encouraged promoting only those you can trust. They want this to go away or the "perfect society" which they teach in seminaries will bring down their lives. An "perfect society" would never do those things hence this problem is the people who told law enforcement.

This neo-retro group gets more whiny all the time and people just turn it out and live their lives as the clergy make themselves more and more irrelevant as you can only get small numbers of mindless followers who follow their preference of 100% dogma following. :puke:

[defendandprotect]

73. As the right wing has come to power over decades . . .

and that is only by means of assassination, violence and intimidation --

they solicit and promote those like them, i.e., thugs, those lacking spiritual

connection to nature or humans or animal-life --

Whether you look at organized patriarchal religion or police enforcement --

or corrupt government -- this is true.

Keep in mind that at the time of the assassination of President Kennedy, Dallas

police were 50% KKK --

At the time of Bobby Kennedy assassination in California, LAPD was 50% John Birchers!

As the liberalizing of society progressed during the revolution of the 1960's, the

right wing fought back with more thuggery, more violence, more right wing propaganda.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

13. So do ex-Catholics. I'm an Anarchist, my wife's a Marxist. Both ex- beadrattlers.

[Rage for Order]

16. But are those mutually exclusive?

Anarchist and Catholic, or Marxist and Catholic?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

18. Nope. There were a lot of Marxist priests and nuns in Latin America.

Remember the much opposed by the Vatican, "liberation theology"?

[defendandprotect]

51. Yes, they finally overturned "liberation theology" ... but brought in Opus Dei-!!!

[anonymous171]

86. Yep. Marxism is a no-no but Fascism is A-OK according to Ratz. nt

[Tyler Generation]

19. I'm agnostic, and my family has always been non religion

Speaking from a totally laymen perspective, Catholics just seem more in tune with reality.

It always seems like the backwards ass loud mouths are Protestant.

[Joey Liberal]

21. I'm an Ex-Catholic

It's much more fun being a UU with Buddhist leanings. I don't have to hate anyone.

[Rage for Order]

22. Who did you have to hate in order to be a Catholic? n/t

[Lance_Boyle]

66. Reason. n/t

[Rage for Order]

84. Um, how so?

Catholics aren't pushing for Intelligent Design to be taught in schools. In fact, the official church position supports evolution.

[Joey Liberal]

74. Catholics are really into hate these days

They've become the Faux News religion.

[Rage for Order]

83. Can you give me some concrete examples?

I'd be interested to see a handful of the things or people that "Catholics are really into hating these days".

[Two Americas]

91. what?

That is a bizarre remark.

[Fla Dem]

112. ??????????????? What the Sam Hill are you talking about? Are U drunk?

That is the most inane comment I think I have ever read here.

[Doctor_J]

23. Not the newest US Catholic

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=3807924&mesg_id=3807924

I wondered why an elitist sociopath would make such a show of converting.

That said, when I bitch to my Catholic SO about the extremism, selective compassion, and bigotry of the Bishops, she says, "they're not the Catholic Church, the people are"

[eridani]

26. That's always been the case. Protestants with that kind of disagreement with their hierarchy--

--go off and form new denominations. Catholics stay put and believe what they want to believe, figuring that if the Church has had room for both Torquemada and Francis of Assisi it probably has room for them, too.

[CatholicEdHead]

33. Some of them are schisming into the Catholic Church

so they can keep the ultra-conservative approach knowing Rome agrees with much of it and they try to kick everyone else out.

[Davis_X_Machina]

35. Deleted. Slow-server dupe.

[Davis_X_Machina]

36. "Will this be enough to prove to the anti-Catholic contingent on DU...

...that we should be reaching out to Catholics rather than bashing them at every turn?"

No.

This has been another edition of Simple Answers to Simple Questions™

[C......N......C]

39. I am Catholic non church goer. Confession when I was practicing

was the big mitigator. Forgive and forget.

[FrenchieCat]

40. Europe is full of Catholics,

and they too are socially liberal.

[defendandprotect]

41. Just as many Catholic women have abortions as any other women . . .!!!

And the church lost the battle on birth control long, long ago--

The problem is that they can't acknowledge that because after they have

officially lost the birth control issue . . . the next issue they'll lose

will be abortion!!!

[defendandprotect]

45. Why? Catholics have to decide for themselves NOT to support this church

financially or in any other way . . .

Still intolerance for homosexuals is preached from their pulpits ---

the "inferiority" of females is taught by the church ---

"Manifest Destiny" and "Man's Dominion Over Nature" which are the licenses

for the elite to exploit nature, natural resources, animal-life -- and even

other human beings according to various myths of inferiority.

It's up to Catholics to STOP.

And they pretty much have done it over the sexual abuse by priests - they very

well understand that they contributions to the church have made the church

wealthy while so many are poor -- and have paid for SILENCE of farmilies and

children who were harmed, rather than for truth.

[Two Americas]

95. response

"Catholics have to decide for themselves NOT to support this church financially or in any other way . . ."

No organization does ore for the poor and indigent and elderly, and many of us contribute to that.

"Still intolerance for homosexuals is preached from their pulpits."

Not that I have ever heard.

"The 'inferiority' of females is taught by the church."

No it isn't.

"'Manifest Destiny' and 'Man's Dominion Over Nature' which are the licenses for the elite to exploit nature, natural resources, animal-life -- and even other human beings according to various myths of inferiority."

You are thinking of Protestantism here, and capitalism - a product of WASP culture.

"And they pretty much have done it over the sexual abuse by priests."

The Catholics in general are not responsible for that, and there is no evidence that the problem us any better in public schools or Protestant churches.

"...they very well understand that they contributions to the church have made the church wealthy while so many are poor..."

As I said before, no organization does more to help the poor, and most parishes are very poor - many are closing.

"...have paid for SILENCE of families and children who were harmed, rather than for truth."

Settlements have been made after people spoke out, not as hush money.


...

[struggle4progress]

120. The only homily I ever heard on homosexuality was about the evil of homophobia:

the church does teach that homosexuality is immoral, and the church may well include people obsessed with it, but any Catholic church I ever attended emphasized other issues -- and the only time I ever heard the topic mentioned from the pulpit, the message was that gay-bashing was wrong

[redqueen]

50. I always suspected that was the case. (nt)

[Reverend_Smitty]

55. I think if you look at the states with the largest Catholic populations...

they tend to be amongst the bluest of the blue states. It's a chicken or the egg thing, are the states so liberal because of the Catholic population or is the Catholic population so liberal because they live in a blue state?

1 Rhode Island 63%
2 Massachusetts 47%
3 New Jersey 42%
Vermont
5 New York 39%
6 New Hampshire 35%
7 California 34%
Connecticut
9 Arizona 31%
10 Illinois
Louisiana
North Dakota

[wickerwoman]

57. It's a class thing, I think.

Since most American Catholics are of Irish, Italian or Polish descent and all of these were immigrant groups which were vilified by WASP society for generations. Most of them ended up in blue collar union jobs like teachers, cops, firemen, railroad workers, longshoremen, teamsters, steel workers, meat packers, etc. They also tended to have huge families compared with WASPS which kept them poorer but produced a huge group of liberal baby boomers who were Catholics or ex-Catholics.

Most of the observing Catholics I know are Irish and Italian union activists of my parents' generation. They're economically very liberal and range all over the spectrum on social issues depending on how seriously they take the Pope (most of them not very seriously.)

It's no surprise to me (based on the admittedly anecdotal evidence in my family) that Catholics are more liberal than the general population. Only one of my twelve aunts and uncles is conservative. Seven are liberal ex-Catholics and four are liberal practicing Catholics.

[Fla Dem]

113. Exactly..great explanation. As a grandchild of both Irish and Italian

immigrants, and obviously Catholic.....and brought up in Massachusetts, my family and extended family all Dems. Pictures of Pope John XXIII and JFK adorned many of our homes.

[cboy4]

56. I'm not sure I buy all of that data .. particularly the part about

American Catholics being more liberal than the general population on social issues like homosexuality.

You'd think if this were the case, Prop 8 would have perhaps won.

I dunno .. lots of times people say one thing and then do something else once they get in the voting booth.

[trotsky]

61. Well, a majority of US Catholics also voted for Bush in both 2000 and 2004.

So let's just say that drawing ANY conclusions about such a large and diverse group is a little suspect.

[cboy4]

63. And all you have to do is listen to that despicable president

of the Catholic League, William Donohue. :puke:

Not only is he a rotten human being, he's living in the dark ages.

[Occam Bandage]

72. The President of the Catholic League is not the President of Catholics

any more than the head of Focus on the Family is the head of the nation's families.

[cboy4]

76. Well listen, he's the poster child of the Catholic Church in the U.S.

He's essentially their White House press secretary equivalent.

He goes on television (I've seen him a million times spouting his hateful talking points) any time an issue comes up.

The family is not an organization .. I mean, there's no comparison.

It's apples and oranges, right?

[Occam Bandage]

77. The Catholic League is an independent organization with no ties to the Church.

Bringing him up is only relevant to discussing the political leanings of members of his particular political-advocacy organization.

[cboy4]

79. Yea, no official ties, but this motherfucker was one of the

main cheerleaders rallying Catholics to vote for Prop 8 in California.

And he's a huge George W Bush supporter.

I'm very familiar with the guy Occam Bandage.

And before you accuse me of hating Catholics, I went to Parochial school from first through 8th grades, was an Altar Boy, I've been confirmed, etc.

So I feel I have a right to speak out about this issue.

The Catholic League is a fiercely right wing organization vis-a-vis its social positions.

And Donohue is an angry man.

Every time I've seen him on television, he's gotten huffy.

I can't stand the Catholic League and I can't stand the Knights of Columbus.

They're lousy excuses for Christians.

[Occam Bandage]

81. No doubt. He's a first-rate douchebag and should be seen as an embarrassment to anyone

who calls themselves "Catholic" yet has not denounced him. I just don't think it's fair to say that he's representative of anything but the right wing of American Catholicism (which, I might add and which we can undoubtedly agree on, is more than well-represented in the official Church hierarchy).

[Two Americas]

97. agreed

But he does not represent all, or even most Catholics.

[Two Americas]

96. no he isn't

He speaks for himself.

We can combat him and his allies from the inside more effectively from the outside.


...

[quiller4]

101. He is a media hog who is president of a small organization n/t

[trotsky]

60. Well this is probably wasted typing...

but you do realize that the "anti-Catholic contingent" is actually an anti-Catholic-CHURCH contingent, right? A lot of Catholic DUers can't seem to understand that.

[Rage for Order]

85. More often than not, I find that not to be the case

Hence the references to sky-gods, fairy tales, delusional people, etc. To be fair though, most of the members who bash Catholics bash all religions (except Islam, because that's different) with the sky-god, fairy tale, delusional lines.

[Two Americas]

92. not true

Read this thread.

[trotsky]

94. As I figured.

Wasted typing.

[WildEyedLiberal]

65. This is not at all surprising to me

Liberal Catholics are the silent majority. Why do you think the Vatican and hierarchy are unleashing so many ultra-orthodox, spittle-flecked right-wing tirades? They're desperate and cornered because they know their days are numbered.

[Jennicut]

70. We have plenty of them right here in our govt: Pelosi, Kerry, Biden

The fact is most feel this way and yet are also religious. Catholics should not be punished for the Pope's unwillingness to change with the times.

[rvablue]

78. Don't forget Uncle Teddy! n/t

[Occam Bandage]

71. Well, duh. Most Catholic-bashers don't know a thing about them. nt

[cherish44]

80. I know a lot of Catholics who are one issue voters

The issue: abortion

[Two Americas]

93. lots of Americans

Some of who happen to be Catholics.

I know a lot of people under 6 foot tall who are one issue voters.


...

[bridgit]

104. ------>

--------------------------> :yourock:

[mdmc]

121. Poll: U.S. Catholics Lean Left On Social Issues

http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2009-03-31-catholics-liberal_N.htm

American Catholics are more liberal than the general population on social issues like divorce and homosexuality, despite the Catholic Church's longstanding conservatism on both issues, according to a new survey.

Catholics are more likely than non-Catholics to say that homosexual relations, divorce, and heterosexual sex outside wedlock are morally acceptable, according to an analysis by Gallup pollsters released on Monday.

In other areas, Catholics are nearly identical to the population at large. For example, 4 in 10 Catholics say abortion is "morally acceptable," compared to 41% of all Americans. And 63% back embryonic stem cell research, compared to 62% overall.

The Gallup survey was based on interviews with 3,022 Catholics adults conducted in May of 2006, 2007 and 2008. The margin of error is plus or minus 2 percentage points.