Paul Ryan's bishop defends him from attacks

Earlier this year, when Georgetown University announced that Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., the chairman of the House Budget Committee, would defend his budget in a public address, almost 90 faculty members at the Jesuit institution publicly denounced his interpretation of Church doctrine.

While the media generally presented the harsh judgment as a sign that Ryan’s budget proposals violated core beliefs of his Church, most news stories failed to examine why the subsequent appearance of Kathleen Sebelius, the secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, at a Georgetown graduation event did not provoke a comparable furor. Sebelius is widely viewed as the architect of a federal contraception mandate denounced by the U.S. bishops as an “unprecedented” threat to the free exercise of Catholic institutions, but the same group of Georgetown faculty apparently saw no need to register their disapproval.

During the final bruising months of a presidential election that could hinge on the shifting views of Catholic “swing” voters, Americans can expect to witness further disputes that showcase legitimate questions about the practical impact of Ryan's policies and partisan hit jobs that fail to provide a holistic treatment of Catholic teaching.

Continue reading at www.ncregister.com

« Previous Article

Posting Policy

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.

If you find a comment offensive, please flag it as inappropriate by hovering over the down arrow to the right of that comment and clicking on the "Flag as inappropriate" text. Once a comment receives three "flags," it will be hidden from further view.

mallen11

Catholics have been known to vote on the demoRat ticket; I hope they will listen to their church leaders such as this bishop regarding who and what -0 really is and how he wants to take our freedom that has been fought for and destroy it. He hates America and what it stands for and he needs to be voted out. Pray for our country and for the eyes of those who believe in -0 be opened. Many have and we can be thankful for that.
- http://twitter.com/BradNova Brad Nova
  
  The president allows each woman to decide for herself whether or not to ask her insurance company to cover contraception. If this violates a woman's religious principles, she would never ask. A woman would make such a request only if contraception fit her principles. In short, the president has guaranteed that each woman can act according to her religious principles. He has made a strong defense of freedom of religion.
  - mallen11
    
    The GOVERNMENT should never tell an insurance company what they can cover and what they cannot. -0 has no concept of freedom of religion. He does nothing but blaspheme the Word of God and all praise for the religion of islam.
    - http://twitter.com/BradNova Brad Nova
      
      There have been government standards for health insurance companies as long as there have been health insurance companies. Why do you think this is bad?
      - mallen11
        
        I understand that; the problem is that -0 has taken it too far with 0-Care that is extremely dangerous to medical care in our country. This is bad. Government should not have CONTROL of private businesses. It has ruined everything it touches; example like the Post Office.
      - petroskhan
        
        True, there have been "standards", but not mandates from the government as to which services they MUST offer.
        
        Idealogically, there is no difference between them mandating what is to be covered, and ordering restaurants what foods to serve. Would you approve of them ordering restaurants to stop serving coffee, since they feel it's bad for you? Or maybe they should only offer vegan dishes, if the government decides that meat is too high in fat, and they feel it falls under "health care" to ban it?
        
        The government has no business getting involved in business. If a company isn't offering the services that people want, they will get those services from a competitor. That's the way this country has worked, and the less government intrusion, the better. I don't need, or want, Big Brother telling me what I can and can't purchase, or from whom I should make that purchase. Do you?
  - Evermyrtle
    
    The government should not have anything to do with women having babies or in her insurance concerning it. The government has full intention of taking over the complete lives and business of every citizen in the USA. We can continue to allow them to make these advances or we can vote to replace those liberals in office and put a stop it and hopefully gain ground lost.
  - Patriot
    
    The president hasn't the right "to allow" each woman… he is not God, despite his thinking he is. He is making us ALL pay for contraception whether or not we believe in it. That is against Freedom of religion and Freedom of Speech. He has told the Catholic Church they are not Catholic enough because they help anyone, no matter their religion. They don't ask if you're Catholic before they'll feed, clothe, or give you shelter. They accept students of other religions into their schools. They accept patients of other religions into their hospitals. Therefore, Sebelius has said because they do NOT serve ONLY Catholics, they are not Catholic enough. How ridiculous can this administration become? We are all supposed to help one another – the government is not supposed to be mommy, daddy, babysitter, nanny, etc. to us – we are supposed to help each other. Romney/Ryan 2012!
    - http://twitter.com/BradNova Brad Nova
      
      We all pay for war whether or not we believe in it – how is that any different?
      
      Except it is not our tax dollars paying for contraception, it is our insurance premiums.
      - http://www.answersingenesis.org/ keyboardshark
        
        War is (presumably) an effort by the armed forces to protect the citizens from invading forces. This is not in any way comparable to government mandates to provide contraception. In fact, it's about as incomparable to war as you can get. A very poor analogy, I'm afraid.
        
        The function of government is supposed to be to protect its citizens and not trample their rights. Anything beyond that is meddling in the free market, and redistributing wealth by taking it from one group of citizens and giving it to others is particularly wrong because it amounts to theft.
      - http://twitter.com/BradNova Brad Nova
        
        Your opinion about the free market was not shared by the people who founded this country.
        
        http://americanvision.org/5333/americas-free-markets-the-startling-historical-truth/
        
        I think my analogy is quite fitting. Patriot is complaining about how his/her taxes are spent and I am giving an example of how some people feel about their taxes being spent.
      - http://www.answersingenesis.org/ keyboardshark
        
        But just because some of the early legislators started the slippery slope to meddling doesn't make it right. Not all the early legislators fell for it:
        
        From The Life of Colonel David Crockett,
        by Edward S. Ellis (Philadelphia: Porter & Coates, 1884)
        
        "Davy Crockett was then the lion of Washington. I was a great admirer of his character, and, having several friends who were intimate with him, I found no difficulty in making his acquaintance. I was fascinated with him, and he seemed to take a fancy to me.
        
        I was one day in the lobby of the House of Representatives when a bill was taken up appropriating money for the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. Several beautiful speeches had been made in its support – rather, as I thought, because it afforded the speakers a fine opportunity for display than from the necessity of convincing anybody, for it seemed to me that everybody favored it. The Speaker was just about to put the question when Crockett arose.
        
        Everybody expected, of course, that he was going to make one of his characteristic speeches in support of the bill. He commenced:"Mr. Speaker – I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as much sympathy for the sufferings of the living, if suffering there be, as any man in this House, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has no power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member upon this floor knows it.
        
        We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right so to appropriate a dollar of the public money. Some eloquent appeals have been made to us upon the ground that it is a debt due the deceased. Mr. Speaker, the deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of his death, and I have never heard that the government was in arrears to him. This government can owe no debts but for services rendered, and at a stipulated price.
        
        If it is a debt, how much is it? Has it been audited, and the amount due ascertained? If it is a debt, this is not the place to present it for payment, or to have its merits examined. If it is a debt, we owe more than we can ever hope to pay, for we owe the widow of every soldier who fought in the War of 1812 precisely the same amount. There is a woman in my neighborhood, the widow of as gallant a man as ever shouldered a musket. He fell in battle. She is as good in every respect as this lady, and is as poor. She is earning her daily bread by her daily labor; but if I were to introduce a bill to appropriate five or ten thousand dollars for her benefit, I should be laughed at, and my bill would not get five votes in this House.
        
        There are thousands of widows in the country just such as the one I have spoken of, but we never hear of any of these large debts to them. Sir, this is no debt. The government did not owe it to the deceased when he was alive; it could not contract it after he died. I do not wish to be rude, but I must be plain. Every man in this House knows it is not a debt. We cannot, without the grossest corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt. We have not the semblance of authority to appropriate it as a charity.
        
        Mr. Speaker, I have said we have the right to give as much of our own money as we please. I am the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week's pay to the object, and if every member of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks."
        
        He took his seat. Nobody replied. The bill was put upon its passage, and, instead of passing unanimously, as was generally supposed, and as, no doubt, it would, but for that speech, it received but few votes, and, of course, was lost."
        
        http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig4/ellis1.html
        
        He was also confronted while on the campaign trail by a citizen who questioned him thus:
        
        ""No, Colonel, there's no mistake. Though I live here in the backwoods and seldom go from home, I take the papers from Washington and read very carefully all the proceedings of Congress. My papers say that last winter you voted for a bill to appropriate $20,000 to some sufferers by a fire in Georgetown. Is that true?"
        
        "Certainly it is, and I thought that was the last vote which anybody in the world would have found fault with.""Well, Colonel, where do you find in the Constitution any authority to give away the public money in charity?"Here was another sockdolager; for, when I began to think about it, I could not remember a thing in the Constitution that authorized it. I found I must take another tack, so I said:
        
        "Well, my friend; I may as well own up. You have got me there. But certainly nobody will complain that a great and rich country like ours should give the insignificant sum of $20,000 to relieve its suffering women and children, particularly with a full and overflowing Treasury, and I am sure, if you had been there, you would have done just as I did."
        
        "It is not the amount, Colonel, that I complain of; it is the principle. In the first place, the government ought to have in the Treasury no more than enough for its legitimate purposes. But that has nothing to do with the question. The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous power that can be entrusted to man, particularly under our system of collecting revenue by a tariff, which reaches every man in the country, no matter how poor he may be, and the poorer he is the more he pays in proportion to his means.
        
        What is worse, it presses upon him without his knowledge where the weight centers, for there is not a man in the United States who can ever guess how much he pays to the government. So you see, that while you are contributing to relieve one, you are drawing it from thousands who are even worse off than he."
        
        Not to mention, the article you have cited points out the follies that have resulted from such government intervention.
      - Evermyrtle
        
        Radical anti-GOD liberals cannot understand anything Christian, they read a verse here and a verse there and think that they can understand the WORD OF GOD and where we are coming from.
      - http://twitter.com/BradNova Brad Nova
        
        Take everything out of the bible except what Jesus said and it is pretty easy to find his message of love.
    - Evermyrtle
      
      I believe he has convinced himself that he is above GOD.
  - Washington22
    
    The "president' allows……….? It's not what he allows, but what God says, you moron.
- Evermyrtle
  
  It seems that in the last three years Obama should be credited with enough hatred toward them, that not one Catholic would vote for him.
  - mallen11
    
    Yes, you would think but some people are blinded by his "shining light" and forget what God has to say in His Word.
    
    Eph 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
http://twitter.com/BradNova Brad Nova

A recent Gallup Poll has shown that, in the US, 82 percent of Catholics think that birth control is "morally acceptable." Ninety percent of non-Catholics believe the same. Overall, 89 percent of Americans agree on this. In the May 2012 poll, Gallup tested beliefs about the moral acceptability of 18 issues total, including divorce, gambling, stem cell research, the death penalty, gay relationships, and so on. Contraception had by far the greatest approval rating. Divorce, the next
on the list, had only 67 percent approval compared to 89 percent for contraception.
- Evermyrtle
  
  I believe that the method of birth control is what is in question, here. Birth control today ranges fro keeping your pants on to murdering the child. Of course there in nothing wrong with keeping your pants on and legs together for birth control. Murdering your child is not acceptable to any true child of GOD. There are several in between those two method of birth control is acceptable , I believe.
  - Evermyrtle
    
    Whoever believes, or the number believing in birth control by murder, should not be considered by one complimenting it. This is not between you and how many agree or disagree, for or against, but between you your mate and GOD, nobody else. If GOD is not included in the decision, it is automatically wrong.
- Retired guest
  
  Those are "Catholic Wannabes" not real Catholics! They don't believe in what the church teaches why are they there. They think it cool to be a Catholic.
  - mallen11
    
    Just like the elite thinks its "cool" to be DemoRats — especially Hollywood types. I doubt that they will ever learn either.
- http://www.answersingenesis.org/ keyboardshark
  
  Brad:
  
  It wouldn't matter if the percentage was 100%. That is not the issue. The problem is the government meddling in the free market by mandating private businesses to take a certain action whether it is in their best interest or not.
Washington22

No real, NO true Catholic could support or vote for a Democrat. I'm not saying that some won't, but if you are a real Catholic who follows doctrine and is following and receiving the sacraments, you cannot be a Democrat. I have relatives who claim to be Catholic and yet vote for Dems……….They are WRONG. You can't have it both ways. Catholics cannot support abortion or even birth control. If the church as a whole has "modernized", { that's code for LIBERALIZED} they go against God Almighty and will pay for their sins. The Catholic Church has greatly disappointed me personally, that's why I have found peace in God's word from other churchs, ones who actually follow the BIBLE.
- Patriot
  
  Washington22, AMEN! You are so very right and said it so well. God bless~
- dadavis65
  
  It is hard to find a Church, any of them that truly follow the bible. Sad…
- http://www.facebook.com/people/Andrew-Patton/592034163 Andrew Patton
  
  There are a tiny remnant of faithful Catholic Democrats, though I'm not sure why they continue to identify as Democrats when their party hates them.
dr. Stefan Semchyshyn

I believe in sharing whealth but on a voluntary basis not forced, Obama kind.
Democrats seem very happy distiributing someone else's whealth. I am glad to see that religious leaders began to voice their opinions on the issues affecting human lives and faith teachings.
Evermyrtle

How close Ryan is or is not to GOD will mean a lot in the treatment from what is known as "liberals!" If he follows the commandments of GOD closely, they will badger him on every point, possible. Truth will not enter into the hatred that will be spewed forth. GOD'S people need to be in constant touch with GOD concerning Ryan and the work he promises to do, to keep him strong, that the hate word will roll off, like water off of the roof. With the hate and the rage, I have seen, he cannot make without GOD.So people let us pray.
- Rosebud15
  
  Totally agree, lots of prayer support!
- Washington22
  
  You are so right, Evermyrtle. I'm asking God…………………….
Chris

Are we going to have a war between Bishops of the two cults? This is ludicrous. What they say should have NOTHING to do with the election. I say we take away their tax exemption. One fake religion versus another.
- Patriot
  
  Chris, just because someone is of any religion, does not mean they give up their beliefs as a citizen when it comes to voting or obeying just laws. By the way, churches do pay taxes, just not on sanctuaries.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Ruth-Walker/528948232 Ruth Walker

Kathleen Sebelius has not produced a ruckus because every thinking person understands that the Catholic Church just wants them to be exempt from laws they don't believe in, but who thinks they believe others should have the same rights? Pacifists should be exempt from paying federal income taxes because a huge amount goes for wars? The FDLS leaders can have as many wives as they believe God allows? (The bible doesn't limit them, after all – just think of wise King Solomon with all his wives and concubines!)
The Supreme Court has been consistantly clear from at least 1878 with the unanimous decision in Reynolds v United States, where they wrote that freedom of religion is in regard to beliefs and opinions, rather than actions and practices which are covered by laws. Government could not otherwise work at all!
Oh, don't forget that the nuns for social justice took down Paul Ryan during their bus tour!
- Patriot
  
  Ruth, the Catholic Church is not one that has a menu of options in which you will believe or not believe. Their dogmas/tenets are for all Catholics. Anyone who does not obey them, actually excommunicates himself/herself. There is natural family planning for birth control and that is taught and encouraged by the Catholic Church. Artificial means of birth control and abortion are against the tenets of the Catholic church. Read Humanae Vitae. It might help you understand.
  
  As for the nuns, they are LWCR Leaders of Women Catholic Religious and is a group founded by the Vatican. They are those women who are in administrative positions of orders and represent about 75-80% of religious nuns. At its inception, it was a good group. However, it has taken a left wing
  turn as have many people who think they are Catholic, but are actually
  CINOs – Catholics in Name Only because they do not obey the tenets of the church. There are other orders that have chosen not to belong to that group. The LCWR is in error because they have taken the vows of poverty, chastity and OBEDIENCE. The Vatican has given them 25 years to clean up their mess and they have kicked the can down the road. Now, the Vatican is telling them, they must obey the tenets of the Church. Mind you, Ruth, those women do not speak for the rest of their congregations. Many of the members of their congregations do not agree with the stance that LWCR has taken – sort of like a union and its leaders support a candidate or position, but the membership does not.
  
  As for the Catholic Church not believing other religions haven't the same rights as they do, please tell me EXACTLY where you found that misinformation. It is so outlandish, one wonders how you could even post such a preposterous statement. Have you done any research or are you just spewing the lame stream media trash?
  
  I suggest you do some research before you pontificate.
  
  Romney/Ryan 2012!
  - Washington22
    
    You are correct Patriot…………..agreed………………..people nowadays don't want ANY restrictions on themselves. They have accepted the concept that anything goes, anything is alright, there is no black or white, but rather everything is gray……………….no self restraint………….and so we have what we have today. I'm glad I'm me and not them because when I meet God Almighty, I'll be ready.
- http://www.answersingenesis.org/ keyboardshark
  
  Ruth says: "The bible doesn't limit them, after all – just think of wise King Solomon with all his wives and concubines!"
  
  But the Bible does limit them:
  
  "15 Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the Lord thy God shall choose: one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee: thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother.
  16 But he shall not multiply horses to himself, nor cause the people to return to Egypt, to the end that he should multiply horses: forasmuch as the Lord hath said unto you, Ye shall henceforth return no more that way.
  17 Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away: neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold."
  
  Deuteronomy 17
  
  It was also clear that in spite of Solomon's wisdom in other matters, his multiple wives caused great spiritual problems in his life:
  
  "1 But king Solomon loved many strange women, together with the daughter of Pharaoh, women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Zidonians, and Hittites:
  2 Of the nations concerning which the Lord said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall not go in to them, neither shall they come in unto you: for surely they will turn away your heart after their gods: Solomon clave unto these in love.
  3 And he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines: and his wives turned away his heart.
  4 For it came to pass, when Solomon was old, that his wives turned away his heart after other gods: and his heart was not perfect with the Lord his God, as was the heart of David his father.
  5 For Solomon went after Ashtoreth the goddess of the Zidonians, and after Milcom the abomination of the Ammonites.
  6 And Solomon did evil in the sight of the Lord, and went not fully after the Lord, as did David his father."
  
  I Kings 11
http://www.facebook.com/people/Ruth-Walker/528948232 Ruth Walker

Paul Ryan's Etch-a-Sketch history with his love of Ayn Rand is worth observing too. http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/14/opinion/weiss-ryan-rand/index.html
Tumbleweed Tex

In two groups as large as the Republicans and the Democrats, they will be made up of people of both views, depending on what the subject is. Your questions in the survey are ridiculous…you will not be able to tally the votes and announce the results and be taken seriously. I am a Baptist, and consider myself to be conservative most of the time, but because I am planning to vote for Obama, you would identify me as a liberal and you would be way off the mark. I believe Romney would love to have you in his collection of writers of the lies he posts on the TV and internet and newspapers, etc. Over the years, I have voted for 3 different parties and even once written in a name. I research where each party's candidate stands on the issues and then make my decision but most of our voters, I would say, seem to only vote for their party line and never change. Children will likely vote as their parents do, which is really dumb and the results turn out to defy the description of our country being a democracy.

A quote of Wikipedia's definition for 'democracy' is"A democratic government contrasts to forms of government where power is either held by one, as in a monarchy, or where power is held by a small number of individuals, as in an oligarchy or aristocracy. Nevertheless, these oppositions, inherited from Greek philosophy, are now ambiguous because contemporary governments have mixed democratic, oligarchic, and monarchic elements. Karl Popper defined democracy in contrast to dictatorship or tyranny, thus focusing on opportunities for the people to control their leaders and to oust them without the need for a revolution. Nixon was ousted when he was found out, but if voters do their research BEFORE voting, it might be that the wrong person might not be elected in the first place. I believe you might learn more about the division of our country's voters if you took a survey on whether voters always vote for the same party, or do a lot of research before making their final decision. If the survey-takers are honest, I think the results would be very interesting. Marie Dickens
- aceituna
  
  Our country is not a Democracy — it is a democratic republic. Study to learn the difference.
  - mallen11
    
    We are not a democracy – majority rule –
    
    We are a Republic – ruled by law not by people.
    
    A few ruling the many:
    Socialism, Nazism, Communism – the rulers were the law.
    
    Under
    a Constitutional Republic, it is one
    man, one vote and the Country operated under the RULE of LAW AND THE MAJORITY RULES.
    
    Under
    a Democracy, it is more or less mob
    rule with those who have the loudest voice and the most money ARE OFTEN THE
    WINNERS which means that it is the minority who wins out over the majority.
    This is why ONE person can end school or public prayer and why a FEW can win
    gay rights.
- Washington22
  
  If you are baptist, you have NOT read the bible…….otherwise you would not feel as you do. We live under God's law, not Obama's…………………….It is NOT off the mark to lable you as a liberal………..Please keep reading and studying as you say you do and wise up……….we need your vote and support as a Chiristian…………….a true Christian, one who knows God's word.
- petroskhan
  
  If you don't mind, would you care to explain why on earth you would vote for Obama, knowing that he is anti-Christian, pro-muslim, and has done enormous harm to this country, and its reputation?
  
  Just a brief explanation of the reasons you have for voting for him would be enough.
SicOfObama

The Christians, the Jewish, and anyone else who wants freedom, had better get it together and UNITE, as in The United States of America, and fight for our freedom. People who do not usually vote needs to get out there and take a stand in November. The demonrats have made this a war, a war to defend our Constitution, our freedoms and our rights. They have declared war on our Christian faith and our God, and every person in our nation. They have declared war on everyone who does not want our country to be a communist muslim state. People had better wake up from their slumber and the love of obama, instead of God and our country. Putting a man on a pedestal and making him above everyone, and think he cannot do any wrong is pure stupid! Wanting the state to watch your every move and make your every decision, and restrict you from everything but what they say you can do is insane, and this IS what obama and his dems are doing. Any man is capable of lying, cheating, fraud, and murder. obama is guilty of all and our citizens are blinded by this enchanter. No one has ever dragged the entegrity of our White House down like obama has. He embarrasses us with the gutter in our government. He and his gutter goons have disgraced us before the world. Not only to OUR citizens, but to the world. He treats our citizens like they are dirt, and embraces islam and communism. Everything muslim is a praise to him. He only gives lip service to our God and His word. When he does quote from our Bible, he misquotes. But his quotes from his Quran are accurate. He has NEVER studied our Bible and the scripture that he is given he reads his own interpretation into it because he just reads that one scripture and does not read before it or after it to get the true meaning. This shows any Christian that he does not read the Bible or study it, but he DOES study the Quran. Wake up, people and get a grip on reality!
aceituna

Birth control is a matter on conscience and should be respected. One should not be forced to support something he doesn't believe in. The Govt. has no right to legislate either way on Birth Control.
petroskhan

Why should we care what this pagan has to say on the subject of politics?

Ryan is a catholic…so what. I don't care what his religion is, since his religion doesn't require that he oppose American values and freedoms, unlike our current impostor-in-chief, whose muslim leanings are so clearly evident.

This is a political decision, and while I do firmly believe that this nation was founded, not on Christianity, but on Christian principles (big difference there), the religious leanings of the candidates should have no bearing on deciding for whom one should vote, with the exception noted above. His experience, qualifications, goals, and economic plans for the country should be our deciding factors. His religion (misguided, in this case) is of no significance, since we do NOT have a theocracy in this country, and his religion doesn't, as I mentioned, require that he work to oppose American laws and values.

Let's focus on the important issue. Getting Obama OUT. The rest will come…
James

So called social justice should be called social injustice. This is 19th century European economic philosophy that lazy clergy including catholics adopted. It turns christianity on it's head and aids and assists the growth of Caesars kingdom not Gods. As Caesar reign grows Gods influence inevitably shrinks. There are no exceptions. Look at Europe and those nations that are imbibing the poison that emanates from that Godless continent. These so called clergy that endorse the same policys that led to Europes secularization are either incredibly stupid or know exactly what they are doing in building the govt bulldozer that will reduce their religion to a trivial pursuit item. I think its the later.
- mallen11
  
  It is an ecumentalism organization that teaches social justice; not Christianity.
  
  Social justice is not Christianity for we are not saved by good works toward mankind. There is a difference between human good and Divine Good. We are not to love people first
  and then God – this is not Biblical. We are to be charitable but our objective is to grow in grace first and the works that we do will be rewarded. We lost this objective many years ago and we have allowed the government to do what believers should be doing to help those in need.
http://www.facebook.com/frances.carney.1 Frances Carney

There are over 70 Million Catholics in the USA and if 50 milllion vote to put America back the way the Fathers of this Great nation intended…then Obama will call a moving van. If you are a Catholic and cannot understand that Obama and his governmental policies clash with the teachings of morality of Your Catholic Faith….e.g.Abortion etc.. Then you are in the wrong frame of mind…and should exam your conscience.
- Kronae
  
  And you should shut up. Everyone catholic or not has the right to choice…it is the LAW of this land and it rules not your stupid false beliefs.
- http://www.facebook.com/people/Andrew-Patton/592034163 Andrew Patton
  
  Problem with your numbers: you are including children in your figure as well as non-citizens. The number of eligible voters is substantially smaller than the 70 million you quote or the 50 million you wish to turn out.
cmjay

It is disgusting that a so called CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY would even invite Sebelius -the SEC.OF ABORTION and INHUMANE SERVICES. The ALUMNI should take note of this and stop their support for the school. How can a CATHOLIC institution reconcile this action with the teachings of the CHURCH ?
- Kronae
  
  Because they take a lot of free government money.,,,MONEY TALKS and they get a lot.
kymmy 1071

Is he behind the church hiding the priest problem. Check his bishop out to see if he did the same thing. Ryan is behind the person act without invitro my children would not have been born. Ask his running mate his sons had children via invitro. What would he say to them
Kronae

Yes indeed, his venerable bishop supports him and Ryan supports this wonderful bishop who has given his diocese so many pedophiles and perverts and covered it up like any cat covers up his excrement.
What a wonderful endorsement. How about Ryan wanting laws placed against extra uterine pregnancy? What a great guy! Wonder what the four wonder boys produced by the moromenys who have all had fertility treatments and implants for each of their strange kids.
They would be better off having been impregnated by space aliens…perhaps they have…take a close look at moromney and listen to him stutter in true alien fashion.
- http://www.facebook.com/people/Andrew-Patton/592034163 Andrew Patton
  
  For the record: the Church does not oppose treatments that merely provide mechanical assistance to the marital act and/or increase the probability that it will result in conception. The Church only condemns means that bypass the marital act.
smogdew

The Church is beginning to worry me/anger me – if they want to come out against somebody, they surely do not dump on someone going up against the world's biggest enemy of the Church -Obama . And where were they in 2008 when pro-abortion Obama was running for President? Didn't hear one word against him from my Priest. And Cardinal Dolan invites Obama to the 'lampooning dinner'? Granted a politician has to be invited but one whose health policy is hurtful to Christians and has turned into a bone of huge contention? I sure am gettting mixed signals from my church – Bring back pre-Vatican II when we had NO liberals in the church.
http://www.facebook.com/belinda.dearing.9 Belinda Dearing

paul ryan's pastor should have kicked him out for denying Jesus and bowing to a mormon
Washington22

The above article said NOTHING……………..what was it's point?