Thursday, May 31, 2012

House Defeats Bill Protecting Women from Murder Based on Gender

With the House Defeating a Bill prohibiting mothers from killing their female children because they're not boys and the Massachusetts court of appeals taking whack at the Defense of Marriage, it must have been an very, very busy day up at the Archdiocese mowing laws.

I heard through the grapevine they are running out of lawns to manicure, but the yoga classes are coming in very handy for tendinitis they are developing from pulling the weeds.

To be fair, the Cardinal's spokesperson did release a statement last week about proabortion politicians. When Catholics objected to yet another archdiocesan display of honoring proabortion politicians, Terry Donilon said honoring politicians who act in defiance of our moral principles is prohibited.


For the record, here's what Cardinal O'Malley believes comports with Catholic moral principles on abortion:

Pro-choice politicians -- or pro-choice citizens, for that matter -- do not support legislation to require or even encourage women to have abortions; they simply refuse to make abortion a crime punishable under non-church law. The pro-choice position recognizes that the United States is a diverse, pluralistic society where a woman has the constitutional right to make a decision based upon her own conscience, religious beliefs and medical needs.


Mrs. Kennedy is asking what is the grip? When people want to kill other people, all they did was simply refuse to make it a crime in a pluralistic society.

That's all.

Even if your values were debased enough to believe a career spent working against the criminalization of killing other people, that's not exactly what happened.

So, I hope you'll excuse Catholics, Mrs. Kennedy, but we reject that caricature of your husband's 40 years of lobbying for funding of educational programs that demoralize women and children and then pay for their four million abortions.

And here's a ridiculous question from Mrs. Kennedy that the Cardinal has evidently failed to answer:

Would those who are trying to force non-Catholics by law to follow the teachings of the Catholic Church be willing to accept the governmental imposition of the laws of another faith on them?


Let us be perfectly clear. We are talking about killing other people.

So yes, if laws of another faith object to the government's imposition of legalized killings of human persons, Catholics are more than willing to accept it, we will actively work against it.

Specifically, whatever "freedoms" legally protects killing people for gender, creed religion, race - abortion, ethnic cleansing, sharia law, the Catholics will join any Protestant, Jew, Buddhist or member of any other religion to free people from the murdering tyrants elected to the government. Even when certain members of the Episcopal Conference have spent their entire lives working to these people elected. refusing to enforce doctrine, the Canons and publicly honoring them.

How's that for clarity. Any more questions?

I'll tell you something. The folks in the Chancery ought to be very glad today I am not wealthy. If I had expendable income, tomorrow, I'd have a parade of rideable lawnmowers that would circle the Chancery. We'd all have bullhorns for a loud and clear message to Bishop Scizzorhands and his political cronies occupying our Chancery: You have let your political proabort allies come onto Catholic property to hoodwink and scandalize a generation of children and you are accountable sirs for the continuation of the legal freedom to kill female children at will.

And when we were done with that, we'd head to St. Ceclia's. Then St. Catherine's of Norwood. It would take us a year of Sunday's to visit the priests in Boston who have done this to our children and our country. But by the Christ, I would stick with it until the truth was pinned on every one of them.

And, by the way, the Cardinal's spokesperson really earned his income this week. On Tuesday, a group of "supporters" of "reprimanded nuns" from the notorious group of heretics from Call to Action showed up at the Cathedral of the Holy Cross to 'express anger and dismay over the rift'.

When the press caught up with Terry Donilon, he told them to dial 1-800-Vatican.

A spokesman for the Archdiocese of Boston referred questions about the group and the vigils to the Vatican.


Any responsible spokesperson for the Catholic Church would articulate the pastoral purpose of disciplining the doctrinal dissent and chaos. It's a free platform for a sentence or two to debunk the portrayal of this in the media as a war against women. Heal the wounds. Restore unity. Bring peace.

Instead, he dismisses the opportunity by implying the Cardinal doesn't support the Pope so you'll have to ring the Popemobile for an explanation.

The cowardice is truly mind boggling.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Any comment from His Eminence or His Lackey on vetting their sales agreements with the ACLU?

Boston archdiocese drops restrictions on parish property sale after ACLU objects

Catholic World News – May 31, 2012
http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=14486

The Archdiocese of Boston has agreed to go forward with the sale of a parish property without legal guarantees that the property will not be used to house clinics or laboratories engaging in abortion, euthanasia, or embryonic stem-cell research.

The restrictions had originally been written into a purchase agreement for the sale of St. James Church in Wellesley, an affluent suburb of Boston. The archdiocese had reached an agreement to sell the property to the town of Wellesley, but sought assurances that the parish land would not be used for immoral purposes. Those legal restrictions drew protests from the American Civil Liberties Union, which charged that the purchase agreement gave the Church power over the use of town property.

* * *

Carol said...

Wouldn't you love to believe they wouldn't do that to consecrated ground?

But if it's one thing we've all learned here in Boston. The man has checked out of anything and everything that doesn't involve cash flow.

A disgrace.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.