What is Digg?768 Comments
- kismetropolis, on 11/14/2008, -34/+355As is usual with people having extreme reactions, this is a reaction to a misrepresentation of Obama's position.
His real position is: http://fightthesmears.com/articles/15/wildaccusati ...
And for the record, the term is pro-choice, NOT pro-abortion. Very few people in the pro-choice movement actually want MORE abortions. They just don't want the option taken away until we can find a way to prevent more unwanted pregnancies --or make every pregnancy one that is wanted. - kentkanouse, on 11/14/2008, -53/+362Another reason the Catholic church (and other so-called Christian churches) should lose their tax-exempt status...
- inactive, on 11/14/2008, -49/+275and they say liberals are intolerant... I'm not religious but this is just beyond ridiculous. Could you imagine if a Black Priest did this to parishners that voted for McCain? It'd be a ***** race war!
Please red states, just secede already:
"We believe this split will be beneficial to the nation, and especially to the people of the new country of New California. To sum up briefly: You get Texas, Oklahoma and all the slave states.
We get stem cell research and the best beaches.
We get the Statue of Liberty. You get Dollywood.
We get Intel and Microsoft. You get WorldCom.
We get Harvard. You get Ole' Miss.
We get 85% of America's venture capital and entrepreneurs.
You get Alabama. We get Hollywood and Yosemite, thank you.
We get two-thirds of the tax revenue; you get to make the red states pay their fair share.
Since our aggregate divorce rate is 22% lower than the Christian Coalition's, we get a bunch of happy families.
You get a bunch of single moms.
Please be aware that Nuevo California will be pro-choice and anti-war, and we're going to want all our citizens back from Iraq at once.
If you need people to fight, ask your evangelicals.
They have kids they're apparently willing to send to their deaths for no purpose, and they don't care if you don't show pictures of their children's caskets coming home.
We do wish you success in Iraq, and hope that the WMDs turn up, but we're not willing to spend our resources in Bush's Quagmire.
With the Blue States in hand, we will have firm control of 80% of the country's fresh water, more than 90% of the pineapple and lettuce, 92% of the nation's fresh fruit, 95% of America's quality wines, 90% of all cheese, 90% of the high tech industry, 95% of the corn and soybeans (thanks Iowa!), most of the U.S. low-sulfur coal, all living redwoods, sequoias and condors, all the Ivy and Seven Sister schools plusStanford, Cal Tech, Berkeley, UCLA and MIT.
With the Red States, on the other hand, you will have to cope with 88% of all obese Americans (and their projected health care costs), 92% of all
U.S. mosquitoes, nearly 100% of the tornadoes, 90% of the hurricanes, 99% of all Southern Baptists, virtually 100% of all televangelists, Rush Limbaugh, Bob Jones University, Clemson and the University of Georgia.
Additionally, 38% of those in the Red states believe Jonah was actually swallowed by a whale, 62% believe life is sacred unless we're discussing the war, the death penalty or gun laws, 44% say that evolution is only a theory, 53% that Saddam was involved in 9/11 and 61% of you crazy bastards believe you are people with higher morals than we lefties.
Finally, we're taking all the good pot, too.
You can have that dirt weed they grow in Mexico
Peace out,
-- the Blue States"
source: http://www.craigslist.org/about/best/sfo/80714812. ... - stonecircle, on 06/11/2009, -13/+191The head of the Catholic church, Pope Benedict XVI is a staunch critic of the U.S. led invasion of Iraq. On one occasion before the war, he was asked whether it would be just. "Certainly not," he said, and explained that the situation led him to conclude that "the damage would be greater than the values one hopes to save." I fail to understand how this South Carolina priest can take the stand he has, but refuse to take a similar stand against war.
- TsarSimeon, on 11/14/2008, -19/+158As a thinking atheist, I am alarmed by people like you.
- authorfriendly, on 11/14/2008, -18/+141Religion and politics just don't mix.
- Maxamegalon2000, on 11/14/2008, -2/+106Any form of political endorsement should result in loss of tax-exempt status, your former church included.
- inactive, on 11/14/2008, -5/+69they should refrain from putting money in the collection plate too
- sanman, on 11/14/2008, -4/+64totally agree
how can you meddle in politics and claim tax-exempt status? - valosdarling666, on 11/14/2008, -10/+69Yeah, one of our priests once told us that if we could see any situation in which abortion would be acceptable, we couldn't take communion.
He was gone like 2 weeks after that. - inactive, on 11/14/2008, -12/+71Obama won. Lets all Americans take this man as our President. As a nation, divided we fail.
- matrixbandit, on 11/14/2008, -11/+66lol, you "pro-lifers" are so touchy. And hypocritical. :O Stem cell research!? NO NO NO, Must protect the sanctity of life! What? You mean these stem cells are just going to be thrown away anyways and if they are used in experiments they have the potential to save millions of lives of people ACTUALLY alive right now? Too bad! That's just the price we pay to take the "moral highground!"
I have a theory about these conservative folk, that maybe the reason they don't want anyone to get an abortion is because they realize that in the long run we'll need all those children to grow up to be good little soldiers for all the future religious wars they plan on starting/continuing.
Personally, I say ***** that. The humane thing to do is to go ahead and abort the babies now, save them the hassle and heartache of growing up in a world that thinks so little of them as to allow these problems to continue.
Go right ahead and call me pro-abortion if that makes you feel somehow smugly superior. - Lomstradamus, on 11/14/2008, -8/+63Then NO tax exempt status for you father!
- kanabiis, on 11/14/2008, -9/+63Thats right....
Personally I can't sleep at night without at least killing ONE baby each day. My fridge is stocked with dead babies..... the raging libural in me compels me...
Your kids are next!!! - snafflepaffle, on 11/14/2008, -6/+58His church can also be free from tax exemption like any other political organization.
- zip000, on 11/14/2008, -10/+60Because he's a typical douchebag Republican.
- c010rb1indusa, on 11/14/2008, -6/+53"We may not agree on abortion, but surely we can agree on reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies in this country."
-Barack Obama, 2008 Democratic National Convention
Abortion is mostly a result of poverty, and lack of an education, maybe if we worked together to solve these problems we can work towards significantly reducing the amount of abortions, as well as solving some of societies other problems. - sanman, on 11/14/2008, -19/+63The Christian Right will always hew their interpretations to their own selfish purposes. So the misinterpretation is intentional.
- Dumbledorito, on 11/14/2008, -9/+51Yes, I myself just passed a pro-abortion rally out in front of a hospital, where the mob was demanding to be let into the maternity ward with their chainsaws and baby bottles full of arsenic-laced milk.
- Gerz1219, on 11/14/2008, -3/+43And your old church should lose its tax-exempt status too. Churches should spend more time fulfilling the individual spiritual needs of their parishioners, and less time petitioning the government to inscribe their beliefs into law. If they choose to do the latter, they cease to be religious institutions, and become political lobbying organizations, which should be taxed and regulated accordingly.
It's perfectly acceptable for a priest to tell his individual parishioners that abortion is morally wrong, and even to withhold communion from those who personally get an abortion. The problem is when they exploit their elevated (tax-free) social position as a religious leader for the purpose of getting a specific candidate from a specific party elected. Even if the priest in question is supporting a Democrat.
As far as the article's subject, Obama's election basically guarantees that Roe v. Wade will never be overturned. Abortions will be legal in some form for the duration of the Republic, so the religious right ought to let go of all the frustration and focus on preventing their own from making the choice to get one. - bowens44, on 11/14/2008, -7/+45What this country needs is a LOT more lions......
- ohplease, on 11/14/2008, -12/+49
I support the legal right for me to get a root canal. This does not mean I am pro root canal. They are painful and they suck.
So do abortions. So does your post. - dswinscoe, on 11/14/2008, -18/+53Can anyone deny the political agenda of the religious right? Using the age-old fear tactics of eternal damnation as a means of controlling conventional wisdom and ultimately the behavior of parishioners, this priest has demonstrated a complete and total disregard for the importance of secularism in our political discourse, and instead perpetuates the typical sectarian attacks against a woman's rational and reasonable right to make choices about her own health and happiness. Just as every human being should have the freedom to follow their own spiritual guide, everyone should be protected against these politically-motivated, transparently overt campaigns to subvert secularism in our country. Teach your parishioners to be tolerant and forgiving, but don't pretend to offer them a substitute for rational judgment. Animals are governed by fear; humans should be governed by reason.
- werkerholic, on 11/14/2008, -27/+60Funny! God put us on earth with total freedom, this is the freedom that even SATAN is afforded until the day of judgement. But man wants to control MAN so much it's freaking ridiculous. Funny also, the SC church didn't say a thing about all those molested children by Catholic Priests. Can't have one w/o the other
- boardthis, on 11/14/2008, -5/+37ps. abortion laws will not fix the economy, environment and international relations.
- c010rb1indusa, on 11/14/2008, -6/+36Killing uborn babies is illegal but support the death of close to a million people in Iraq, over 4K US troops, not to mention all the people getting killed by air raids in Afghanistan, and he says that somehow he's the holy one because he opposes the destruction of something that at its end is less advanced than an ant.
- benfish1113, on 11/14/2008, -2/+29I am a Catholic myself and I know that Catholic priests are not allowed to tell people who to vote for. They can tell people what topics are the most important when voting, but the Catholic Church is not allowed to tell people who to vote for.
- mikesoba, on 11/14/2008, -4/+31Being a heretic yourself, you're also unable to accept communion according to Catholic belief - what do you have to say about that?
- zombiedog, on 11/14/2008, -2/+28You are most correct sir. And equally correct is the right of the disenfranchised parishioners to withhold financial support to the church, or to seek out a place of worship that has views consistent with their own.
Personally I'd love to see the repeal of tax exempt status for all churches. Why should we as a society take on the tax burden for these political special interest groups? - misterjangles, on 11/14/2008, -3/+28I'm sure the IRS won't do anything, but it seems to me this is a blatant disregard for their rules regarding tax exempt status:
http://www.irs.gov/charities/charitable/article/0, ...
"Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. " - jud420, on 11/14/2008, -17/+42Jesus would have voted Obama.
- boardthis, on 11/14/2008, -13/+37and to the priest...
no tax cut for you! - jmpeagle, on 11/14/2008, -15/+38Roman Catholics are supposed to be against all abortions (yes, even in cases of rape and incest)....they are even against condoms and birth control. The Pope has called western culture especially the U.S. a culture of death, so this isn't surprising.
Maybe these people need to realize how ***** up some of the beliefs out of the Catholic Church are and maybe they should leave it. - DigitalisAkujin, on 11/14/2008, -13/+36If you are a patriot you WILL keep your religion out of our government!
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." - LordRahl72, on 11/14/2008, -11/+34But it is ok for them to be born and live say 18 years so they get a good taste of life before we send them off to DIE!!!
You pro life sick ***** are a bunch of evil bastards. Go back to hell were you came from and leave us alone!!
So take this high road and stick it up your A$$.
Have a good day. - altgeeky1, on 11/14/2008, -9/+32You're also a traitor to the Constitution, but I'm sure that doesn't bother you either.
- BungDiddy, on 11/14/2008, -8/+30that sounds fair, priest. now your church can start paying taxes because you have become a political institution.
- inactive, on 11/14/2008, -8/+30Abortions lead to falling crime levels:
http://www.google.com.au/search?num=100&hl=en&neww ...
Why? Neglected / unwanted babies have a higher chance of ending up as criminals. - inactive, on 11/14/2008, -9/+31But calling it 'pro-life' is ok?
How about 'Pro-neglect' or 'Pro unwanted babies'. Pro-distraught mothers.
Or Pro-criminals?
Pro-crime?
Idiot - Quaterni0n, on 11/14/2008, -2/+24http://www.uhaul.com/
- zip000, on 11/14/2008, -4/+25tl;dr...but, who says liberals are intolerant? Only intolerant conservatives that want to demonize liberals with anything that they can throw at them.
Liberals are about inclusion not exclusion. - kanabiis, on 11/14/2008, -7/+28I call *****.... a baby capable of surviving an abortion alive would be called a late term abortion.
From Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late-term_abortion#Un ...
"The United States Supreme Court decisions on abortion, including Roe v. Wade, allow states to impose more restrictions on post-viability abortions than during the earlier stages of pregnancy.
As of April 2007, 36 states had bans on late-term abortions that were not facially unconstitutional (i.e. banning all abortions) or enjoined by court order.[16] In addition, the Supreme Court in the case of Gonzales v. Carhart ruled that Congress may ban certain late-term abortion techniques, "both previability and postviability".
Some of the 36 state bans are believed by pro-choice organizations to be unconstitutional.[17][18]The Supreme Court has held that bans must include exceptions for threats to the woman's life, physical health, and mental health, but four states allow late-term abortions only when the woman's life is at risk; four allow them when the woman's life or physical health is at risk, but use a definition of health that pro-choice organizations believe is impermissibly narrow.[16] Assuming that one of these state bans is constitutionally flawed, then that does not necessarily mean that the entire ban would be struck down: "invalidating the statute entirely is not always necessary or justified, for lower courts may be able to render narrower declaratory and injunctive relief."[19]
Also, 13 states prohibit abortion after a certain number of weeks' gestation (usually 24 weeks).[16] The U.S. Supreme Court held in Webster v. Reproductive Health Services that a statute may create "a presumption of viability" after a certain number of weeks, in which case the physician must be given an opportunity to rebut the presumption by performing tests.[20] Therefore, those 13 states must provide that opportunity. Because this provision is not explicitly written into these 13 laws, as it was in the Missouri law examined in Webster, pro-choice organizations believe that such a state law is unconstitutional, but only "to the extent that it prohibits pre-viability abortions".[17]
Ten states require a second physician to approve.[16] The U.S. Supreme Court struck down a requirement of "confirmation by two other physicians" (rather than one other physician) because "acquiescence by co-practitioners has no rational connection with a patient's needs and unduly infringes on the physician's right to practice".[21] Pro-choice organizations such as the Guttmacher Institute therefore interpret some of these state laws to be unconstitutional, based on these and other Supreme Court rulings, at least to the extent that these state laws require approval of a second or third physician.[16]
Nine states have laws that require a second physician to be present during late-term abortion procedures in order to treat a fetus if born alive.[16] The Court has held that a doctor's right to practice is not infringed by requiring a second physician to be present at abortions performed after viability in order to assist in saving the life of the fetus.[22]"
So, your story is practically impossible in any state in the US. The states that do not completely abolish and make late term abortion illegal, REQUIRE the hospital or doctor BY LAW to keep that child alive under penalty. Your description of people walking in finding live babies every day is total hyperbole, mistruth, or a total ***** lie.
But, hey, lets not let facts get involved BABIES ARE DYING!! OH NOES!!!1111 - OPR8R, on 11/14/2008, -1/+21I think a more accurate way of putting that is "Religion and politics shouldn't mix."
Unfortunately religion is all up in politics' business... - inactive, on 11/14/2008, -7/+27@ kelly
Your argument is similar to this one:
Liberal Statement: I am anti the death penalty
Conservative Response: So you support murderers
Both arguments are as full of ***** as each other. Conservatives spin so much they start believing their own emissions. - uncleosbert, on 11/14/2008, -1/+20and this is why we have a secret ballot and a wall between church and state.
- gllopc, on 11/14/2008, -8/+27I hate statements like that. It's 3rd grade logic.
- inactive, on 11/14/2008, -1/+20Good point
Also, many anti-abortionists are, ironically, pro death-sentence and pro-guns.
What a topsy-turvy world they live in - spookyttws, on 11/14/2008, -11/+30My church (St Bonaventure Catholic Church) explicitly told us to vote yes on Prop 4 and Prop 8 here in California. They didn't go so far as telling us to vote for McCain but I still think they crossed the line and should keep ***** like that to themselves. I'm sure many of my retarded fellow parishioners helped pass prop 8 just because the church told them to.
- acroyear2, on 11/14/2008, -13/+31@RossPelton
That's right Ross! No communion! Bomb Iran! God Hates Fags! No N-s in the white house! I ***** my cousins! The "Jesus" archetype has nothing to do with ancient egyptian mythology because jesus is fo' real! Bush/Cheney FTW!
and so forth - Entroper, on 11/14/2008, -0/+18And what about the other issues? Polling data shows that the most important issues to voters in this election were the economy, the war in Iraq, and health care, NOT abortion rights or gay rights or any other social issues. So what about Catholics who voted for Obama because they supported his tax plan, his health care plan, his foreign policy, his environmental policy, or his education plan, even if they aren't pro-choice? Is it a mortal sin to choose NOT to base your vote on one single issue?
Apparently, Newman thinks so. Just check out his quote from the article: "In fact, in this election, for the sake of argument, if the Republican candidate had been pro-abortion, and the Democratic candidate had been pro-life, everything that I wrote would have been exactly the same." So remember, humble followers, abortion is the ONLY valid reason to vote for a candidate. No matter what else is at stake in an election, especially when we're in a war and a massive recession, if you vote "pro abortion" (because that's why these people pulled the lever for Obama -- they wanted more abortions), you're going straight to hell! -
Show 51 - 100 of 777 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is