Pope’s Message a Dismal Failure in USA.

[SirJosephPorter]

Recently Catholic Church has been a lot in the news. There have been Pope’s rants against contraception, against condoms. Then there is the Catholic outrage (from the Catholic leadership, not form Catholic ranks) about Notre Dame inviting Obama to give the commencement address. And of course, there is the continuing condemnation of homosexuals by the Catholic Church, damming them all to Hell for eternity. There is also the continuous talk of denying communion to Catholic politicians, such as Pelosi and Biden.

Well, the Gallop organization conducted a poll to gauge the attitude of Catholics, and guess what? Catholics are actually more liberal than the rest of USA. That is right, not more conservative, but more liberal.

Catholics Similar to Mainstream on Abortion, Stem Cells

Thus, Catholics are less approving of death penalty, more approving of divorce (horrors!), more approving of premarital sex (double horrors!), more approving of having a baby outside marriage (what is this world coming to?) than non Catholics.

But the ultimate ignominy as far as the Pope is concerned, the ultimate shame of it, Catholics are more accepting of homosexuality than the non Catholics.

Clearly the Pope has a lot of work to do to convince American Catholics of his views. American Catholics have a lot more sense, lot more intelligence than I gave them credit for; they don’t blindly follow the official party line of the church.

 

[Cliffy]

Whoda thunk! This will give the Fundies who think the catholic church is the scarlet ***** of revelations more fodder for their cannon.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Cliffy, we always think Catholics as more conservative than the society in general. Or may be that is the propaganda put out by the Pope and the Catholic Church. But that seems to be far from the truth, if anything, Catholics are more liberal than the rest of the society.

I have seen all kinds of explanations as to why Catholics vote more Democratic than Republican, even though they are more conservative more traditional.

Well, now we know they are not. They vote more Democratic than Republican precisely because they are liberal in outlook.

 

[Cliffy]

Whoda thunk W.H.O.R.E was a banned word?

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Whoda thunk W.H.O.R.E was a banned word?

They really should publish a list of banned words somewhere. Or does such a list exist and i am unaware of it?

 

[YukonJack]

What the spiritual leader of Catholics says is not a RANT. What SirJosephPorter says IS.

Notre Dame's invitation was a mistake, no doubt, in the name of political correctness. A baby-butcher who would prefer and propose to kill even those babies who survived the abonimable act of abortion has no place to be on a campus of a Catholic University, let alone deliver the commencement address. If this guy - who is clearly in over his head in the office of the President - had any integrity, he would find a way to avoid embarrassment of hearing all the boos he is sure to hear if he has the stupidity and audacity to go in front of a Catholic audience and deliver his hateful, anti-Catholic, pro-abortion message.

SirJosephPorter, I believe Gallop about the same degree as you believe Rasmussen. It is easy to quote smorgassbord/salad bar Catholics. Gallop should talk to those of us who go to Church every Sunday.

If Obama had any, ANY integrity, he would find a convenient excuse not to deliver a speech, which would do nothing but display his own hypocrisy. And the hypocrisy of those who still believe in this charlatan.

 

[YukonJack]

SirJosephPorter, I must admit, I underestimated you.

I always knew that you could NEVER resist an urge and an opportunity to bash America and Americans, but it seems that your hate is not limited there.

You also never stop with your abuse when it comes to people of faith, Christians, and Catholics in particular.

You know fully well that you can say - and you WILL say - anything and everything abusive and offensive about Christians in general and Catholics in particular, because you know you can get away with it.

You would never have the guts to say anything similar to what you say about Christians and Jesus relating to Muslims and Mohammed.

Don't presume to tell the Holy Father what he has to do regarding American Catholics. There is a good chance that those so-called Catholics interviewed by Gallop were no better than the large percentage of copy-cat "victims" of abuse.

If and when I see a survey by Rasmussen or Zogby showing results similar to the extreme left-wing Gallop poll, I will believe.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Notre Dame's invitation was a mistake, no doubt, in the name of political correctness.

Yukon Jack, I understand it is traditional for Notre Dame to invite the President to give commencement speech at the university. I think Bush and Clinton also have given speeches there. So why not Obama? Notre Dame has a perfect right to invite whom they wish.

A baby-butcher who would prefer and propose to kill even those babies who survived the abonimable act of abortion has no place to be on a campus of a Catholic University, let alone deliver the commencement address.

Now that is just your opinion isn’t it? Other Catholics disagree with you.

If this guy - who is clearly in over his head in the office of the President - had any integrity, he would find a way to avoid embarrassment of hearing all the boos he is sure to hear

Now, why would he do that? Just as it is the right of Notre Dame to invite whoever they choose, it is Obama’s right to accept or not. He has accepted the invitation, he is going to speak. Get over it, deal with it.

As to boos, you may be surprised. No doubt there will be some yahoos who will boo, but by and large I think Obama will receive a polite and favorable reception by the student body at large. I assume security will be tight and if the police do their job of keeping the hotheads, far right nuts out, there should be no problem.

SirJosephPorter, I believe Gallop about the same degree as you believe Rasmussen.

That is your right, Yukon Jack. Gallop is (I think) the oldest polling organization and is highly respected. And it was proved right in the presidential election.

Rasmussen and Zogby consistently predicted a very close race. I remember a few days before the election, Rasmussen tracking poll showed Obama ahead by just 3 or 4 points. What is more, the last day of the three day tracking showed McCain ahead, 47 to 46. Rasmussen made a big deal of it. He claimed that McCain had momentum, and the next few days would show him pulling ahead. There were celebrations on far right website such as Townhall.

Rasmussen and Zogby are obviously in the pocket of the Republican Party, and it is only right and proper that a right winger such as you should believe them.

If Obama had any, ANY integrity, he would find a convenient excuse not to deliver a speech, which would do nothing but display his own hypocrisy.

Why should he? He has been invited, he has accepted, what is it to you?

 

[YukonJack]

Gallop poll is obviously in the pocket of the Democratic Party. And it is only right and proper that a left-wing extremist, such as you, should believe it.

"Rasmussen and Zogby consistently predicted a very close race. I remember a few days before the election, Rasmussen tracking poll showed Obama ahead by just 3 or 4 points. What is more, the last day of the three day tracking showed McCain ahead, 47 to 46. Rasmussen made a big deal of it. He claimed that McCain had momentum, and the next few days would show him pulling ahead. There were celebrations on far right website such as Townhall."

Links, please.

Or at least tell me what key words to use on a google search. Stomped? No wonder! You are full of it!!

 

[SirJosephPorter]

I always knew that you could NEVER resist an urge and an opportunity to bash America and Americans, but it seems that your hate is not limited there.

You also never stop with your abuse when it comes to people of faith, Christians, and Catholics in particular.

Sorry Yukon Jack, but there is no bashing of anybody here. All I have done is quoted the Gallop poll. If you have any issues with it, take it up with Gallop.

You would never have the guts to say anything similar to what you say about Christians and Jesus relating to Muslims and Mohammed.

I have said similar (and worse) about Islam and Fundamentalist Muslims in these very forums. I wouldn’t dream of trashing all Muslims, any more than I would trash all Christians. My problem is with religious right and right wing extremists, same as I have a problem with Fundamentalist Muslims.

Don't presume to tell the Holy Father what he has to do regarding American Catholics.

Now why would I do that? On the contrary, I hope the Holy Father keeps doing what he does, it is clearly alienating American (and I assume Canadian) Catholics.

There is a good chance that those so-called Catholics interviewed by Gallop were no better than the large percentage of copy-cat "victims" of abuse.

Gallop is a well established, highly reputable polling organization, and I have no doubt that their poll was carried out scientifically, among US Catholics.

And if you think about it, empirical evidence does suggest that Catholics may be more liberal that the rest of American population. Which was the first state to legalize gay marriage? Massachusetts, which has a large Catholic population. There are also many prominent liberal politicians, who are Catholic. Pelosi, Biden, Kennedy etc.

So it does not at all seem implausible that Catholics may be more liberal than the rest of the population. And Gallop poll confirms that.

If and when I see a survey by Rasmussen or Zogby showing results similar to the extreme left-wing Gallop poll, I will believe.

Don’t’ hold your breath. Rasmussen or Zogby wouldn’t publish any poll that shows the right wing in an unfavorable light.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

"Rasmussen and Zogby consistently predicted a very close race. I remember a few days before the election, Rasmussen tracking poll showed Obama ahead by just 3 or 4 points. What is more, the last day of the three day tracking showed McCain ahead, 47 to 46. Rasmussen made a big deal of it. He claimed that McCain had momentum, and the next few days would show him pulling ahead. There were celebrations on far right website such as Townhall."

Links, please.

That is easy. Look at the daily poll results by Rasmussen. Particularly, on 29th October, he has the election at 50:47, and on 31st October, he has the election at 51:47.

Rasmussen Reports™: The Most Comprehensive Public Opinion Data Anywhere

I think it was the 50:47 result which showed McCain leading Obama 47:46 on the third day (of three day tracking). Rasmussen held out high hopes that next couple of days would show McCain pulling ahead. Apparently the first day of three day tracking was good for Obama, which would drop off the next day.

Rasmussen hoped that the trend of McCain leading would continue and McCain will pull ahead. But that was just a blip.

 

[darkbeaver]

Whoda thunk W.H.O.R.E was a banned word?

CCC has a secret list of banned bible words.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

CCC has a secret list of banned bible words.

Maybe they could publish it. It will be a 'secret publication'.

 

[Cannuck]

Whoda thunk!

Me for one. It backs up what I've been saying nicely and it's good to see SJP is finally starting to come around. It's evident that there is method to my madness.

One down a few hundred thousand to go.

 

[Cannuck]

Cliffy, we always think Catholics as more conservative than the society in general. Or may be that is the propaganda put out by the Pope and the Catholic Church.

Or the propaganda put out by atheists in their feeble attempts to smear Catholics (and all religious people for that matter).

 

[YukonJack]

SirJosephPorter said in post #8:

"Rasmussen and Zogby are obviously in the pocket of the Republican Party, and it is only right and proper that a right winger such as you should believe them."

But then he quotes the Rusmussen poll in order to support his argument.

He obviously hopes that nobody will look at the poll figures he quotes. Please go ahead and prove SirJosephPorter exactly what he is.

 

[RanchHand]

The stats you provided are for non-practicing Catholics as measured by Gallop. Note that if you were to provide the stats for practicing Catholics the numbers are much closer to the church's teachings and wouldn't raise an eyebrow. It's misleading for Gallop to not make this very clear and for you to take advantage of it to promote your various agendas. The Catholic church would view this poll with alarm first because of the amount of non-practicing Catholics, not because the non-practicing Catholics are too liberal. In fact, almost by definition, a non-practicing Catholic rejects some part of the Church's teachings. It's a meaningless population to sample for the attitudes of 'Catholics'.
Honesty is the best policy SirJosephPorter.

 

[YukonJack]

Re #17.

As I said in another post, Gallop obviously did not poll practicing Catholics i.e. those of us who go to church each Sunday.

If I did not believe in what the Holy Father says, I would not have the temerity and the audacity to claim to be a Catholic. If and when the time comes that I doubt his words and his guide lines, I will have the honesty and the integrity to leave the Catholic Church and join some other faith.

I also repeat: (my opinion only): those who claimed to be abused Catholic clergy, are about 90% copy cats who hope to get a profit by claiming false charges. After all, what can be easier? Kick a Catholic, get rich.

 

[Spade]

After all, what can be easier? Kick a Catholic, get rich.

Dear Yukon,

Please bend over! I need an infusion of cash... just a million or two! If I had more funds, I would start lending again. And, not just to family, but to more distant relatives such as Ms. BMO, or Mr. CIBC, or that dashing RBC! I'm sure the PM would agree that then bright times would be just around the corner. "After all, that's his job!"

So, please Yukon, bend over! I promise, it'll be quick if not painless.

Your friend,
Spade

 

[YukonJack]

Spade, just claim that a monk or a priest buggered you twenty, thirty or even forty years ago. Proof? Don't worry about it. Not needed. Being buggered by a Catholic priest/monk is a given.

Please explain what your post #19 means after "Dear Yukon", because it is totally incomprehensible.