Love makes her hate Catholicism

I hold to trinitarian theology and wouldn't presume to say who does or does not get saved.

Therefore, I am not allowed to be a Unitarian-Universalist..

Therefore I get to sue U-U's.

Laura von Harten is making political decisions based on her religious beliefs.

Therefore she is imposing her values on me.

Therefore I get to sue von Harten.

What a stereotype. I'll bet she has eight cats. And I'll bet she wouldn't have said "boo" about a zoning request for a Southern Baptist church, or a mosque, or an orthodox synagogue.

Yeah, you right-wing cultural warriors NEVER do anything like this.

I agree in general with you on this, Rod. I would not have done what she did and think its a bit silly. But when Christianist school board members vote for crap like creationism, isn't that in the same league as this?

Rod, five words: thanks for getting the point.

The proper word for adherents to the Christian faith is "Christian", John M. That aside, you have a point. It's just that here in the Northwest, the culture warriors in power would agree with this sad champion of love and inclusiveness, and they generally make sure that we get love and inclusiveness good and hard.

"But, when you "lock and load" a culture war, these are the kinds of battles that break out."

In other words, when you exercise your right to vote and do so in a way that someone does not like, all bets are off. They violate existing laws, and then wipe you off the map.

I love this little "silly" talking point that's emerged here. If I poke her in the belly will she go "he he".

Don, when did anal sex come up in this exactly?

Don A.:

In other words, when you exercise your right to vote and do so in a way that someone does not like, all bets are off. They violate existing laws, and then wipe you off the map.

You got that right, Don. For the left, minority grievance justifies anything. The most you'll get out of folks like Daniel is, "Too bad, but they had it coming." There is nothing, literally nothing, that the Aggrieved Left can do to someone who holds incorrect views that can be condemned without qualification.

What I find particularly obnoxious about this is that the official didn't say outright that she just plain doesn't like Catholics, and doesn't want to cut them any slack. She couched her views in the moist therapeutic language of love and equality.

By the way, I don't think the commissioner was protesting the Catholic Church's position on homosexuality; I think she did so on feminist grounds.

This is why The Daily Show will always have fodder, whether the government is conservative of liberal, because people with power tend to grandstand in patently absurd ways.

Explain how this is different from a Catholic voting down a zoning change that would benefit a Planned Parenthood facility.

But Sig, she's just a bigot. It can't be about a deeply held religious or philosophical difference, it's because she HATES Catholics. Anyone who criticizes Catholics is a bigot and there's no room for disagreement.

"Or does that not balance the situation sufficiently for anyone? Comments?"

Franklin--I think she should resign from office. Likewise, a trial judge interpreting family law rules needs to unbiasedly follow the "best interests" formula. Typically, I think that means some form of stability in religious upbringing (ie. what was the typical practice or understanding while they were married). Thus, the judge should not favor the religion of the parent who later on becomes Christian. And--believe it or not, I can support this view from the perspective of natural rights of the family.

If people disrupt pagan ceremonies (or any religious ceremony) they ought to be arrested (just like the gays who invaded the church in Grand Rapids).

But as has been mentioned here--liberals always make qualifications.

sigaliris - "Explain how this is different from a Catholic voting down a zoning change that would benefit a Planned Parenthood facility."

Easy. One zoning change involves a church, your hypothetical would involve a facility that is set up to kill babies.

You can't look at these things apart from the content of the belief. But you knew that. So why do you hang out at a conservative Orthodox Christian's website, anyway?

A minority, but an intense one; most Unitarians are converts from other (usually more conservative) religions, often much lower on the socio-economic scale. The proverbial zeal of the convert often applies. Unfortunately for the Unitarian-Universalist Association, only about 1/3rd of their children keep even a nominal attachment to them when they grow up. Hence the reliance on a constant influx of converts from other traditions to keep even their very low numbers.
She very well may see herself as a minority of about 220,000 out of 305 million doing what's best for the 'natives', carrying on a 'prophetic ministry'. Unitarianism has always been a religion for the poor/downtrodden, not of them. Demographically, it's about as well integrated as Vermont or South Dakota, a fact about which they constantly wring their hands, to very little actual effect.
Putting the reason for her denial out so blatantly and publicly is a gift to the Catholics; they have her on record as denying them a routine easement for religious reasons. They should sue her for a nominal sum, plus court costs. This is unacceptable behavior.

"Explain how this is different from a Catholic voting down a zoning change that would benefit a Planned Parenthood facility."

the Catholic in all likelihood would vote against the zoning change for objective reasons, neighborhood impact etc while keeping their religious beliefs to themselves.

this is where Ms. Harten made her mistake. If she had found some practical, objective reason to vote against the zoning change ie increased traffic etc there would have been no problem. But she voiced her objection based upon her personal beliefs.

do you have any verifiable examples of a Catholic doing what you suggested?

sigaliris - Prior to the sex scandals, did you believe the truth claims of the Catholic faith in and of themselves? Things aside from the institutional nature of the Church, e.g. the Trinity, the fate of the soul, the things covered in the Creed? Did you stop believing them after the sex scandals? Did you lose faith in the institution only, or everything the institution taught as well? I am genuinely interested in hearing your story if you don't mind, reason this came to mind was some remarks you made early about Rod's Nativity fast, you taunted him about precisely how you would be not-fasting, in great detail. And that's also why I wondered why you would come here, because it seems from that and other remarks that you don't believe in any of it anymore, and stick around to mock believers.

The fruits of the Spirit are always in short supply, it is a tragedy. God bless you.

I'd call this the opposite of "judicial temperament."

Interestingly, it's exactly the kind of feeling Obama said he wants in Supreme Court justices.

So Sig sees abortion access as indestinguishable from religious faith.

[...noting well...]

I agree with Rod that we are likely to see increased animosity toward the Catholic Church. And I agree that the woman was stupid for not simply voting against it for "objective reasons." But there is plenty of this kind of beheviour from the right as well. And I submit that the Catholic Church is contributing to anti-Catholicism by running around telling the faithful that voting for Barack Obama is a mortal sin for which they must repent before being again accepted in the body of Christ. I find that insulting and lacking in theological basis. The majority of Catholics in America who voted for Obama obviously disagree. And it disturbs non-Catholic Christians like myself as well because it forces me to start thinking of the venerable and ancient Catholic Church as being in the same ilk as Paster Hagee, Pat Robertson, and the charlatans of the Right.

The more the established churches get involved in partisan politics, the less religious I become. And I'm saddened by that but I can't help it.

"On a broader note, it's also silly to use an obscure story like this to make grandiose predictions about the direction of the government, religion, the country etc. This is pure talk radio ranting, and I would hope for better here."

Well, you will be sorely disappointed. This level of hysteria is becoming more the rule than the exception in the past year or so. Go back and read the Sarah Palin swoons from September.

Any time a Christian is offended, count this blog to scream that the barbarians are at the gates. Some rude gay men in San Francisco clearly presage the dawning of a new anti-Christian inquisition. A dumb Unitarian public officials says something as rude as dumb Christian public officials have made in other times and places, and the sky is falling.

FYI to Steve K: not all Planned Parenthood facilities perform abortions. They don't all even offer medical services. Some just sell contraceptives.

Jason R. Your kidding. The Catholic Church standing by its teaching is insulting to you, a non-Catholic. Boy are you thin skinned or what. Here's a mantra for you "No one has the right not to be offended". As for lacking in theological basis, well, learn some theology here. If you lived in an autocracy, then you would incur no responsibility for the behavior of your monarch, but you don't. You live in what is supposed to be a representative republic. You do bear responsibility for the actions of your government, especially if you voted for those in power. The Catholic and Orthodox churches have, for two thousand years, taught that abortion is murder. Helping to facilitate abortions is therefore being accessory to murder. In a Republic such as ours that includes voting to put politicians is\n power when they clearly want to support abortion and make it easier for people to commit abortion. Its basic theology. god said Thou shalt not murder". The Church believed him. Its no more complicated than that but it is a very firm theological foundation that the Church is standing on.

Roland de Chanson

Best post of the day. :D

"See, this is how it happens: using moralistic, therapeutic language to deny religious people even the most banal liberties."

Would you be saying the same thing if the zoning request were from the World Church of the Creator, a racist "church"?

Ah, the vacuum jar as alter.

Sig: "My belief that all women WHO ARE LUCKY ENOUGH TO SURVIVE BEING IN THE WOMB OF A PRO-CHOICE WOMAN are created equal, and in possession of inalienable rights, is not indistinguishable from religious faith, but it is equal in value. I should certainly hope you would have noted that, by now."

There, fixed it for you.

Oh, and since half of the genetic material in the womb belongs to the father, when will we quit denying men their civil rights and allow them to abort babies even though the mother wants to give birth?

Dear Max: thanks, as always, for providing a living demonstration of why it is unlikely that most women would vote to submit themselves to your tender loving domination.

Oddly enough, from all the abandoned children in this world, the number of men who bully their girlfriends into getting an abortion, and the huge amount of whining and pouting men do when required to pay child support for their offspring, you'd almost think that many of them actually didn't care about their precious genetic material. Naah . . . that couldn't be true, because that would just be crazy, wouldn't it.

And just to ground us in reality, because you seem to need a reminder every now and then . . . . I've actually birthed and raised four children--two grandchildren now. And I've cared for the children of others all my life, both formally and informally. One of my daughter's friends was once sent over to my house with the request that she come to live with me now, please. I was startled, but I said okay, fine. You live here now. The arrangement only lasted a short time before peace was made somehow and she moved back home. But I was fully prepared to raise her if that's what it took. I am personally responsible for the birth of at least one child of a teenage pregnancy being born. This is work for which I was never paid, which lowered my social status, impeded my career and sapped my finances. I did it out of love because I actually cared about these children--these human beings who needed my help. As Robert Heinlein's cap troopers would say, "What were your drops?"

Max, I think your last post kinda speaks for itself, so I'm going to let it stand as an object lesson, without adding to it by argument.

However, I will remind you and other men that there's a simple way for you to stop abortion right now. Stop injecting your precious genetic material into any women who is not fully committed to the lifetime project of birthing and nurturing it. Just say no. Or, if you feel you must say "now" instead, use a properly deployed latex condom every time. Convince your fellow men to do the same. Control yourselves, gentlemen, and there will no longer be a need to control us. You could end abortion tomorrow, and save yourselves many hours now spent lecturing women. But maybe you like talking the talk better than walking the walk.

'Doesn't this example show that anti-Catholic bias is UNacceptable in most parts of society? "

nope just shows that the woman got caught on videotape which was shown around the world and she realized that she had to apologize. Even though she "apologize" I suspect that her opinion hasn't changed.

Er, no, fbc. That is not what I said. Rather, I suggested that the most direct route for men to use in stopping abortion would be to control their own behavior--stop getting women pregnant. It's interesting that apparently this idea seems so outrageous that you can't even grasp it, and must substitute something entirely different. Stop trying to control women, and control yourselves instead. What's so difficult about that? "Wait--she's saying that we men should control our own sexual behavior?? Buuuuh . . . but that makes no sense at all! It's just crazy talk!!!11!"

"However, I will remind you and other men that there's a simple way for you to stop abortion right now. Stop injecting your precious genetic material into any women who is not fully committed to the lifetime project of birthing and nurturing it. Just say no."

Just more sexist hate speech.

For the record, I do say, "No."

Interesting that it's "hate speech" to suggest that men express their sexuality responsibly. And in a conservative religious forum, too!

LOL . . . I think Max is going for Bingo on the Troll Bingo Card. Max, why were you up and frothing at 3 in the morning? Shouldn't you have been sleeping the sleep of the just, in preparation to get up and go to church on this lovely day, there to forgive all your enemies, pray for them and face the week with peace and love in your heart? I'm not going to church today, but I will pray for you in my own way.

"Interesting that it's "hate speech" to suggest that men express their sexuality responsibly."

Oh, is THAT what you think you did? Well, I shouldn't be surprised by that given the fortress of your hatred in the matter.

People like you usually are blinded by their own bigotry. Worshipping at a church of "women's rights" that sacrafices babies at the alter of the barren womb doesn't help your discerning faculties much either.

Publically proclaiming yourself a saint for caring for children (who are lucky enough to actually be breathing and walking around) as a way to justify your vivisectionist's creed does little to convince me your Happy Meal ain't short a couple o' fries.

Sig, you never miss an opportunity to justify yourself and your church by denigrating men in the most general and base manner possible.

As far as Troll Bingo goes, your card must nearly be blacked out at this point.

Oh, and Daniel, what, have you become a Sancho Panza here or someting? Shouldn't you be helping Sig down off that abortionmill, er, ah, windmill, and tell her it isn't a patriarchal dragon after all?