A classic example of a Paralipsis.
Posted on 05/28/2008 7:04:38 AM PDT by shrinkermd
...Sebelius would help the Illinois senator in several obvious ways -- she's a woman, a Catholic and a Democratic officeholder who has successfully reached across the aisle to make strong Republican allies in a deeply red state.
When she was selected to give her response to President Bush's State of the Union address last January, she began: "In this time, normally reserved for the partisan response, I hope to offer you something more: An American response."
Sebelius, in other words, is a Democratic politician who not only talks the Obama talk but walks the Obama walk.
Recently, however, she has run afoul of Archbishop Joseph F. Naumann of Kansas City in Kansas. As the Catholic News Service reported earlier this month, the bishop has told the governor that she "should stop receiving Communion until she publicly repudiates her support of abortion and makes a 'worthy sacramental confession.' " In a column for his diocesan newspaper, Naumann wrote that he was particularly outraged by Sebelius' veto of an antiabortion bill, which she -- and nearly every legal scholar who examined it -- believed was unconstitutional.
Naumann dismissed Sebelius' insistence that she personally opposes abortion, and her assertion that because of her pro-adoption policies and improvements in public health services for pregnant women, Kansas' abortion rate has declined significantly. The prelate said that in a private conversation he'd had with Sebelius, the governor said she was "obligated to uphold state and federal laws and court decisions related to abortion." Naumann said he demanded that she show "a similar sense of obligation to honor divine law and the laws, teaching and legitimate authority within the church."
Now there's about as nasty and as utterly avoidable a church-state confrontation as you're likely to see.
.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
"...Putting aside the question of whether there's anything like an "abortion industry," how does this laundering work? Well, according to Novak channeling Operation Rescue, a Wichita doctor who performs abortions contributed $120,000 two years ago to the Democratic Governors Assn. The governors have since distributed $200,000 to a Kansas political action fund controlled by Sebelius. Given the strictures of the campaign reporting laws -- and the fact that the DGA has also given millions to other political action funds -- that doesn't seem like much of a laundering operation.
But hey, guilt by association is fun to play -- and almost nobody is as practiced at it as Novak -- so why not take it in a different direction? Novak is a relatively recent convert to Catholicism, and the priest who helped him into the church is Father C. John McCloskey, who also has been instrumental in obtaining the conversions of, among others, Alfred Regnery, the country's foremost publisher of extreme right-wing literature; Lewis Lehrman, the former New York gubernatorial candidate and conservative think-tank impresario; former GOP presidential hopeful Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas; and economist and CNBC host Lawrence Kudlow.
McCloskey also happens to be a priest of the ultra-conservative and secretive -- some would say sinister -- Catholic organization Opus Dei. You don't have to buy into Dan Brown's preposterous caricature of Opus Dei in "The Da Vinci Code" to know that it really never has fallen all that far from its roots in Francisco Franco's Spain.
Good for Bishop Naumann. I hope he continues to urge Sebelius to get her mind (and soul) right.
It seems that if someone is elected to an office and gets paid, they should uphold the state/fed laws before any divine laws, otherwise, they shouldn’t be in office and take an oath.
How does she get elected in a conservative state like Kansas ?
That will be an impossible task. She is a Rat!
few if any people strongly opposed to abortion would vote for Obama even if he put Father McCloskey on the ticket. Such voters are already lost to the Democrats.
Because Kansas has a lot of fiscally liberal republicans.
But by signing a bill, she is not violating her oath. Her job as governor includes the power to sign new bills into law.
The Republican party in Kansas is very liberal.
And are you aware what the bill was she vetoed? It was only a bill that required abortion providers to report the reason for any abortion which occurred after 22 weeks. How does signing such a bill violate her office oath? In fact, most abortions after 22 weeks are already illegal in the state with only a few exceptions. This bill would have just given the government a tool to ensure compliance existing laws.
I completely disagree. That's what got us into the moral tailspin we're in now. Our country was not founded to be so secular. God first.
This article was written by Tim Rutten. Rutten happens to be a reporter of the ultra-liberal and secretive — some would say sinister — newspaper the Los Angeles Times.
(borrowed that last sentence from the article)
That’s true. I was responding to the comment made by the Archbishop in the next to last para.
sounds like an excommunication is inorder
I do not believe that our country was founded to put God first. Besides, with the different religions in our country, would you want someone in office that put God first, it their’s was a religion you disagreed with?
Please see my #14
What makes this author think that Obama is a unifier?
“The prelate said that in a private conversation he’d had with Sebelius, the governor said she was ‘obligated to uphold state and federal laws and court decisions related to abortion.’ Naumann said he demanded that she show ‘a similar sense of obligation to honor divine law and the laws, teaching and legitimate authority within the church.’”
Go get her, Archbishop Naumann!
If she’s pro abortion she’s not a Catholic...regardless of what she might claim.She is,at best,a Unitarian/Universalist.
Rutten calls Regnery a publisher of "extreme right-wing literature" which raises the frightful spectre of Nazism and the Klan, when in fact Regnery's "worst" offense has been publishing books by authors such as William F. Buckley, Newt Gingrich, and Ann Coulter.
He calls Opus Dei an "ultra-conservative and secretive -- some would say sinister -- Catholic organization" when it is, in fact a prelature (non-geographical diocese) of the Church which "secretively" runs this "sinister" website and hosts conferences on "Finding God in Ordinary Life."
But wait, after displaying this tableful of rhetorical hype, he slyly throws a napkin over it and says, "So, does that make Novak's rhetorical shivving of Sebelius part of a right-wing plot to bring the United States under the sway of neo-fascist clericism?... Of course not; it's an absurd and rather vicious notion..."
A classic example of Paralipsis: making a series of outrageous claims, getting them out there in print, and then "taking them all back" so he's made his rhetorical point and yet his hands are clean.
What a piece of work.
Once again, the DBM just keeps repeating a canard. Kansas USED to be a very conservative, Republican controlled state. Today, the Governor is Democrat, two of its four congressional representatives is Democrat, and the state's Attorney General was a Democrat until he had to leave the office because he was porking the staff. The Republican party in Kansas today is split. Liberals who fled the horrible schools in Kansas City, Missouri moved to Kansas for its excellent schools. They joined the Republican party because Kansas used to be a one party state. Also, Johnson County, a conglomeration of suburbs of Kansas City, Missouri is home to a lot of corporate types. They move every three or four years, and import their politics with them. These two groups of RINOs have split the Republican party and they would rather elect a Democrat than a conservative Republican. But it fits the DBM reporter's purpose to pretend that Kansas is still a firey-red state. Ain't so anymore.
It can be changed by the vote of 5 justices in the next abortion case.
That's not really "law" in a democratic country - maybe in some sort of totalitarian set up, but not what was intended by the Founders.
Anything we put above God is our "idol."
Yes, I do want someone in office that will put God first. And there is only one God. It will be a long time before anyone with a religion that disagrees with that (athiest, muslim) could be elected president in this country.
What is required is that she stop deliberately, and of her own volition, using state power to preserve and advance the morally repugnant practice of killing babies. She should repent of her veto of a bill intended to strengthen the state's own protection --- paltry as it is --- of babies of prenatal age 22 weeks, and older.
In fact, Sibelius has not just cravenly tolerated this slaughter: she has vocally defended and actively promoted it. As governor, she has the power to carry out this gross violation of human rights. She does not have the right to do so and at the same time receive the Holy Communion, which would be a profanation of the Sacrament.
The Bishop isn't telling her how to be a Governor so much as he's telling her how to be a Catholic.
As a Kansan, I’d like to see her get the h311 out of my state, but not at the expense of the entire country.
Wrong: And even if so, it doesn’t excuse her veto of an anti-abortion bill (which isn’t even law yet, but needs Governor aproval to become law)-She is just the typical leftist democratic hypocrite in a pro-life majority nation! Say whatever to take the ‘heat’ off..
Lie?
Exactly! Well said.
This, sadly is a scenario that has happened in ALMOST all of the lower 48 states that used to be very conservative-Why couldn’t we just build a fence and keep the liberals (RINOS included) on their side??
This is all about Governor Sebelius and her extraordinary actions taken to protect Dr. “Tiller the Killer” from prosecution for violating the laws of Kansas. Her disgraced Attorney General failed to uphold his oath of office and she has done the same.
Most conclude that the Governor is doing this for two reasons:
Liberals will defend abortion at all costs - the more babies that are killed, the better
Dr. Tiller has donated lots of money to Liberal and Democrat cause and he wants what he paid for.
She’s a Catholic for convenience, just like she’s a Kansan for convenience. Whatever works for her, the state, the country, and God be damned.
A lot of us here in Kansas are still asking ourselves that question ...
Not to mention that we had a Republican candidate last time around that really wasn't aggressively seeking the position because the liberal media basically said Sebelius is going to win a 2nd term.
Organizations which teach people to be better Catholics by doing wicked, horrible things like praying at set times during the day, trying to attend daily Mass, and making a monthly confession are "ultra-conservative," "sinister," "secretive", and have roots in Francoist Spain. (I drive a car with "roots" in Nazi Germany. Boo!)
Governors who do everything possible to defend a man who injects poison into the hearts of babies -- kids in the late 3rd trimester, kids who are sometimes only hours from being born -- and who has a full-size crematory oven in his "clinic" to incinerate his young victims ... those governors are vice-presidential material.
Is it time to kiss America goodbye yet?
A classic example of a Paralipsis.
I am not discussing abortion. As I said, I am responding to the comment made by the Archbishop.
We all have our beliefs.
OK
OK
“What makes this author think that Obama is a unifier?”
His stand on killing unborn children will bring the Death Cult Party back together?
That’s a personal choice each candidate must face that may impact public policy .....
Do they enforce a law that violates their moral and religious tenants or not?
Then if the elected official takes such action do we vote them in or out?
What does leadership mean?
If a Catholic cannot discharge the responsibility of their position without violating divine law, that's a position they cannot hold.
If you want to argue that, effectively, the constitution and laws of either the US or Kansas disqualifies believing Catholics from holding public office, be my guest. That's technically a religious test for office, and at least the US constitution claims to prohibit it for federal office.
The liberal lie is that their social doctrines liberate people. They enslave more people than they liberate; they restrict more freedoms than they grant. If you're content to build a society where believing Christians are disqualified from holding office, at least have the honesty to call it what it is: persecution, bigotry, and closed-mindedness.
I work in advertising, so it's interesting to note strategies and rhetorical devices by which the Dems promote misinformation and propaganda, amazing to know that we actually have names to track such phenomenon, a la “triangulation”.
In the agency that I used to work for I used to refer to the PR office as the Department of Perpetration and Obfuscation.
This moniker was received as complimentary.
I work for myself these days.
Slightly, off topic.
Are you familiar with The National Catholic Reporter?
ncronline3.org
Seems to be a front for liberal Catholic propoganda?
Lots of VotF, secularism, “I’m okay, you’re okay, it’s ALL good.” and other such subversion?
Don't muddy the water. Do you believe Archbishop Joseph F. Naumann is calling for her removal from office? He is considering church discipline. {not just his right, but his duty} No one forces you at gunpoint to be Catholic, Baptist, etc. You join willingly, knowing you are subject to those over you.
Unless you also have this idea that the individual gets to tell God {and His church} what is right and wrong, what His word says and what it means.
I’m guessing it means something different to different people.
I’ll have to leave that to a Catholic.
The water is muddy to start with. I don’t know what the Archbishop wants, and as I said, if it conflicts with someone’s beliefs, they shouldn’t take the job.
You see the argument between anti-abortionists all the time. "Abortion is wrong except in the case of incest or rape"
Well what make the baby of incest or rape any less important than any other baby, it's innocent life?
I could never cross that line however their are plenty of folks that will and believe in that quote.
Well, I happen to think that the widely acceptable collateral killing of innocents during war is wrong also. The line moves for each of us.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.