Posted on 07/22/2014 5:58:17 AM PDT by Teófilo
Brethren: Peace be with you.
I wanted to share with you this press release issued by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB):
|
| "'Freedom of conscience'? What's that?" |
WASHINGTON–The bishop-Chairmen of two USCCB Committees responded with great concern to President Obama’s July 21 executive order to prohibit federal government contractors from what the Administration deems “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” discrimination and to forbid “gender identity” discrimination in the employment of federal employees. The problems the bishops identify in the order relate both to the flaws in its core prohibitions, and to its lack of religious freedom protection.
Two USCCB Chairmen – Archbishop William E. Lori of Baltimore, Chairman of the Ad Hoc Committee for Religious Liberty and Bishop Richard J. Malone of Buffalo, Chairman of the Committee on Laity, Marriage, Family Life and Youth – together issued the following statement.
Today’s executive order is unprecedented and extreme and should be opposed.Commentary. Brothers and sisters: President Obama's arrogance and abuse of power knows no limits. Personally, I am not against discrimination on the job for any reasons, for everyone deserves to eat and therefore, everyone deserves to work. Yet, this latest Presidential diktat is not only unnecessary in my view, but also another frontal attack against our First Amendment liberty, ostensibly under the guise of achieving a relative "good."
In the name of forbidding discrimination, this order implements discrimination. With the stroke of a pen, it lends the economic power of the federal government to a deeply flawed understanding of human sexuality, to which faithful Catholics and many other people of faith will not assent. As a result, the order will exclude federal contractors precisely on the basis of their religious beliefs.
More specifically, the Church strongly opposes both unjust discrimination against those who experience a homosexual inclination and sexual conduct outside of marriage, which is the union of one man and one woman. But the executive order, as it regards federal government contractors, ignores the inclination/conduct distinction in the undefined term “sexual orientation.” As a result, even contractors that disregard sexual inclination in employment face the possibility of exclusion from federal contracting if their employment policies or practices reflect religious or moral objections to extramarital sexual conduct.
The executive order prohibits “gender identity” discrimination, a prohibition that is previously unknown at the federal level, and that is predicated on the false idea that “gender” is nothing more than a social construct or psychological reality that can be chosen at variance from one’s biological sex. This is a problem not only of principle but of practice, as it will jeopardize the privacy and associational rights of both federal contractor employees and federal employees. For example, a biological male employee may be allowed to use the women’s restroom or locker room provided by the employer because the male employee identifies as a female.
In an attempt to avoid these needless conflicts, states that have passed “sexual orientation” or “gender identity” prohibitions have overwhelmingly included protections for religious employers. When the U.S. Senate, which is controlled by the President’s own party, passed the similar Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) last year, it included religious liberty protections as well. Indeed, all prior versions of ENDA had at least some religious liberty protections. But the executive order is an anomaly in this regard, containing no religious liberty protections. In this way, the order, which is fundamentally flawed in itself, also needlessly prefers conflict and exclusion over coexistence and cooperation.
Regarding federal contractors, the Executive Order will take effect after rules to be promulgated by the Department of Labor implementing the Executive Order become final. Regarding federal employment, the Executive Order is effective immediately.
Maybe it's because their political goals/views weren't conservative back then. They're hardly so even today.
The Church is indeed short sighted but in fact many of us Catholics would prefer being stoned in the public square rather than pulling the lever for a democrat. Any democrat.
I think you need to study the Democrat party of old to come to that conclusion. JFK was not a flaming radical and he would not be allowed to be a Democrat in today’s environment. The definitions of what is conservative and liberal do tend to change and shift.
But too few, sir, too few.
Don't believe me? Think how many of the people you know who don't have a clue what Free Republic is? Can't name an elected public official under President. They have other concerns. It drives me crazy. I have people who are really good people but they know more about Dancing with the Stars then they do about politics.
Then throw in a media that portrays the Nancy Pelosi's of the world as a sympathetic concerned grandmother. (I know makes me want to vomit). This is not just Catholics BTW. We just get the brunt of it.
The GOP is making the same mistake it made with the Irish. I don't want an illegal invasion, but we are losing the PR on this and the die is already cast.
For later.
And faithful Lutherans are?
To be honest, most Catholics are more welcome in the elite more than faithful Protestants. Catholic’s in this country are very much cultural (CINO’s). Faithful Protestant and Catholic people are viewed as a threat.
Honestly growing up we would fight with the German Catholics in town a lot, but when the Swedes from the next town over came, we joined forces. I thought it was just a Nebraska thing, till I read up on the 30 Years War.
They did too little too late. That includes the Catholic bishops. Writing papers and letters does not get the job done. That’s the same issue with this current situation.
Frankly I no longer care. Just saying beating people over the head night and day does not generally make them want to cooperate with you.
I am a Catholic and for that I do not apologize. Despite being demonized in my Church and on this forum I have persevered. Because there is a TRUTH, and no naysayers of either side can change that.
I would and was far more comfortable in the Democrat Party of old. But.... Ronald Reagan was the man we needed and came at time when JPII was new. I was young and idealistic and dyed in the wool Democrat as that is where I lived.
But between my maturing faith and an openness to the truth, I voted for Ronald Reagan in 1984. It was my first Presidential vote. I hid my allegiance for years. I thought that there was no one like me. I lived in the bluest of the blue areas. Except in those days the map was red for rats and blue for pubs.
Finally I escaped the Catholic, city , Democrat ghetto. But there are days when I wish I was not quite and bright and inquisitive. Life was much easier as a blind sheep. But I continue on, because going back is not only impossible, but it would be to deny the truth both of Jesus Christ and of Natural law.
In closing Catholics may not be completely welcome in America's GOP, but we really have no where else to go. I am trying to enlighten as many fellow Catholics as I can, but it's a long process.
And Lutherans do get attacked here, go look at those same threads that you were mentioning and see how often certain Catholic posters bash us. I have been personally told that I am going to hell, worse than a muslim (because islam has a high view of Mary you know!), and damned for eternity because I don't beg for St Mary to intercede with her Son for me. The difference is that I tend to look at it as a source of amusement, which has more to say about me that anything else. The mud flinging on the FR religion forum these days is very tame compared the to Great Flame thread of five or more years ago.
In the political process, most Lutherans, being German, Russian, and Scandinavian immigrants, were not welcome in the old GOP. Many either kept to themselves (my great grandfather came here to get away from central government of the Kaiser. He had no interest in politics), or they moved to the various immigrant parties that nominally aligned with the Democrats.
The shift happened after Roe vs. Wade. It took a while, but many had to decide if their faith was worth their politics. Now, many Lutherans had a smaller barriers than many Catholics. For one thing, there was not a strong ethnic tie to the party. Irish Catholics in the East Coast have been tied to the Democrats for a long time. Finnish Lutherans were outside the pale for both parties for long enough that switching sides wasn't an issue.
The other was the man called Woodrow Wilson. As a Democratic president, he ended the liturgy of many Lutheran synods by the point of the gun. My grandfather was just old enough to remember having to burn the old German hymnals. Never mind that his father fled what became Germany to get away from the new German state. That ended the association with the Democratic party.
Catholics, for what ever reason, have yet to chose their faith over their party. You said it yourself, it is very hard. My late Father in Law HATED Republicans, because he was Catholic. He didn't like that the Dems were pro abortion, anti gun, and wanted more of his money, but they were better than the REPUBLICANS because of JFK.
"The other was the man called Woodrow Wilson. As a Democratic president, he ended the liturgy of many Lutheran synods by the point of the gun. My grandfather was just old enough to remember having to burn the old German hymnals. Never mind that his father fled what became Germany to get away from the new German state. That ended the association with the Democratic party.
I never knew this. I am going to have to check this out. Not that I don't believe you. I just find that sort of think interesting. You know history. I know there was a strong anti-German sentiment during WWI, I just had no idea it involved the Lutheran Church's liturgy.. So I learned something. Thanks.
Yes. I'd come to the same realization intellectually long ago, but "emotionally" very recently.
~Theo
The liturgy that was forced was a variation of the Book of Common Prayer in the Episcopal church (or the old Red Hymnal for Lutherans). I have an old hymnal from that time, and it is so close as to be the same. The goal was to get all the churches in the US to have the same liturgy.
In the late 70’s or so, they starting using a variation of the liturgy of St John, which is similar in many places to the Catholic liturgy and the old Lutheran rite. I think ours is better than yours, but that is because Lutherans sing like no other. And I am biased.
Old habits die hard.
Like I said, growing up the German Catholics and German Lutherans in town never got along, till the Swedes showed up.
That bias is at least 300 years old. Yet it persists today.
It would be easier to be on the same side if they did not slice and dice every word we utter. Just saying. Just like thread. “They say we worship Mary, we say no we don’t”. They will never accept our what we see to be truth or know to be truth.
LOL, Fair enough! Catholics could use some voice lessons, I won’t deny that!
I disagree with that assessment. As you say, many of the immigrants are "nominally Catholic." I expect fully a third to convert to Pentecostalism or other branches of the Evangelical churches shortly after arrival. Hispanics are a socially conservative bunch and makes for a natural conservative constituency until alienated - no pun intended - by people afraid of their "cooties" (I'm not talking about you).
The issue is far more complex and its description cannot be reduced to soundbites easily.
~Theo
I suppose it is because the Germans think the Swedes are blonde in all the wrong places and vice-versa...
~Theo
I am Irish. By descent of course. Born, bred and will die an American Catholic with nothing but disdain for socialist and communists whatever their religion. I expect St Peter and I will discuss that someday becauseost everything you said is true.
I have a lot of questions for St. Peter, myself. We can double team him. :)
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.