UHND.com - Notre Dame Football, Basketball, & Recruiting

I too respect the Pope's views. I follow Church Doctrine, so to the extent his views relate to binding doctrine, I agree with him 100%. This is different than just respecting his personal opinions, which I do. But, good Catholics need not give total deference to his personal views. They should give it consideration, and I do. I understand that the Church calls us to individual charity regarding all. I also understand that the Church does not require us to use the power of government to transfer wealth to other people. Some bishops have a different understanding, but the Magisterium does not teach that. Their views are allowed, not required.

Regarding gay marriage: Marriage has always been about the children which come from marriage...the new life that marriage generates. It has never been about congratulating people for finding someone to share their bed. Gay marriage is only the latter, not the former. I doubt the Church's position is ambiguous enough to allow change on this issue, but whatever.

Regarding protecting life:
-- You say you "would never encourage an abortion," to which I ask why you wouldn't. Do you believe it is the taking of a human life?
-- You say you "don’t condemn women who have to make difficult decisions." Neither do I; in fact, I try to help them. It is not my place to condemn anyone. But, even if we don't condemn someone, we do have to be able to be honest in making moral determinations regarding actions. We can morally decide that murder is wrong, for example. Condemnation of the individual is left to God; punishment by the State is in the discretion of the State. The Church does not call for punishment of women by the State for participation in abortion. But, the State should not promote or allow abortion, just like it should not promote or allow any type of unjustified homicide.

You said: "And like the Pope and teachings of Jesus, I reject cruelty, and believe that we should respect human dignity and help those in need." Agreed. We are called to individual charity to all, as individual charity is a means to an end, the end being the conversion of the souls of both giver and receiver. But then you mention government action (e.g., USAID). Jesus never called for Rome to help those in need. Use of government force to transfer wealth to help those in need is not a soul transformative event. It is a secular matter exclusively. I realize many Catholics support it, but such support of government power is not required by Church Doctrine (and it is arguably prohibited if it does not benefit the common good...a theological discussion we can have). You said, "denying basic due process to immigrants, and prioritizing the super wealthy over the poor, is not consistent with the Catholic faith." Maybe not...we would have to talk about what "basic due process" is, and how it relates to Catholic Doctrine. The tenets of our Constitution are not inherently included in Catholic dogma, so we can have secular discretion in how we interpret that; the Catholic Church does not require one belief on that. And note that encouraging human trafficking and prohibiting borders between nations with disregard to the common good is not consistent with the Catholic faith, which USCCB bishops acknowledged in their message posted to this board earlier.

You then asked, "Why don’t you care about life after birth?" I do care about life after birth. Just for example, my personal charity goes to help. Moreover, with regard to abortion, my personal charity goes to the women who choose life regardless of their personal situation, and to the children of those women. Does any of your personal charity go to homes for women with crisis pregnancies? I would invite you to support those wonderful charities.

As to separation of Church and State: I believe it in firmly. You make calls to religion for politics all the time, but I never do. Think about that. When I call upon religion, I'm calling for personal actions, not government actions. Granted, when it comes to discretionary issues, it is reasonable for anyone to allow their religion to inform them. Just for example, I would say that voluntary, adult gay sex is a right (because no one is harmed, and individuals can engage in it without state support, there is no interest of the state in stopping it...and I say this even acknowledging that it is sinful behavior per the Catholic Church), but gay marriage is discretionary (it is a benefit bestowed by government...an unnecessary endorsement of a particular behavior) and so reasonable people can disagree if that benefit of "marriage" should be bestowed so as to encourage that behavior (we make judgement calls like that all the time when we vote...what benefits do we, as a society, provide to encourage certain behaviors). That is separation of Church and State: rights are protected regardless of sinful classification; discretionary government acts can be influenced by a person voting in accordance with their faith. And note that my political position on abortion is supportable with purely secular logic (since it was developed when I was an atheist): homicides not in defense of life should be prohibited. We can have an entire conversation on that without referencing God or the Church. Tyrone always brings God and the Church into this, because he thinks he has a wedge on this issue, which he does not. Now he is trying to do so on immigration, in a cynical attempt to use religion to manipulate Catholics. But, he shows a lack of understanding of Church Doctrine, the scope of authority of bishops, etc. Regardless, I am not the one trying to get the government to be a theocracy.