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

(no message)

(no message)

What about his stances on abortion and gay marriage?!??

It’s your simpleton way of not having to deal with the 216-5 vote by the Bishops. It’s always easier to deflect, deflect, deflect.

(no message)

the truth.

Here, it was the Pope condemning Trump's immigration policies. Unless you think that Ned just happened to want to talk about abortion and gay marriage, and it was all a coincidence.

It helps MAGA simpletons sleep at night, because they can assure themselves that the fundamental hypocrisy of the left actually excuses everything Trump does. Both sides do it! Whatabout Obama!

...for political purposes selectively, and not because they truly stand with Pope Leo. I think my point was proven by subsequent posts by conor and Tyrone, in spite of your attempt to put me in a box with ad hominem attacks.

When a Leftist raises the Chuch's supposed free immigration stance (not its position, but let's assume for a second), I've always been willing to trade a free immigration policy if the Left is willing to embrace all Church positions, such as banning abortion (definitely the Church's position). Interestingly, no Leftist wants to take me up on that. They are just using the Church when they want to use it, and then discarding it when they don't like what it says.

...whataboutism campaign against me. Domer has been fooled by Chris on this.

no rebuttal either because they feel safety in numbers rather than in any fact or logic that they can present to the discussion.

I'm not trying to use Dem bad behavior to justify GOP bad behavior. I'm trying to expose hypocrisy by pointing out selective behaviors conor and Tyrone are engaging in, to use faith as a political tool.

to "Whatabouts"..."TDS"..Silence...or Faux "Ignores". Also, if you push them enough for an answer, they'll start impugning your character for not bending to their unbendable position. Such is life on an internet message board...

...soley for political purposes.

This isn't rocket science. And the fact that you would chime in to defend them is a bit bizarre. Surely you are smart enough to see what they are doing, and an honest academic would acknowledge my point.

But it seems that you are defending them (by attacking me, rather than the substance of my post) because they are your political allies on this board. I know you aren't a particularly religious person, if indeed you are religious at all, but there are honest atheists out there, and you don't have to defend them.

(no message)

Even late term abortion of a viable fetus or any sort of sexual perversion?

on their bodies and what they decide to do, I leave with them, the same way I want them to leave me up to my own decisions about my body.

You all are so ridiculous trying to control others through the use of high jacking spirituality and faith.

If it’s the question of do I like abortion as a choice, I don’t but then I keep my mouth shut because it’s not my decision to make.

Quite frankly, you all should fuck-off when it comes to a woman’s right to choose.

Point blank - The discussion is over.

Both have a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The only difference between us is that you believe that with regard to one of those two people, whereas I believe it for both of them. But that is why this is a difficult problem, since two fundamental rights (life and liberty) are in conflict. Notably, I don't believe liberty trumps life (that is anarchy). Life should come first.

If a woman doesn't like her baby why should she be stuck with raising the child?

It should be her right to choose!


Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticide

(no message)

(no message)

Once we have your answer, I will engage with you on separation of church and state.

Actually, everyone who posts and reads this forum knows what your answer is. You (and Tyrone) don't actually stand with Pope Leo. Like Tyrone, you just use Pope Leo and the Catholic Church for your political gain, and you pretend to stand with him and the Church when it suits you, and when it does not, you repudiate him and the Church. But, it would be nice for you to have the courage to admit your true position on Church Doctrine primacy vs. Democrat Platform primacy.

I do hope the Church would recognize gay marriages.

As to protecting life, I fully agree. I would never encourage an abortion, but I don’t condemn women who have to make difficult decisions. My counsel to them would be consistent with Pope Leo, assuming no life threatening medical complications in play.

Edit: And like the Pope and teachings of Jesus, I reject cruelty, and believe that we should respect human dignity and help those in need. Terminating USAID, denying basic due process to immigrants, and prioritizing the super wealthy over the poor, is not consistent with the Catholic faith.

Why don’t you care about life after birth?

circumstances except where the life of the mother is TRULY at risk ie when the choice is to save the mother's life, or lose both mother and child.

If one supports the action of abortion, by supporting it's legality and availability to those whose life is not at risk, then one supports an act of evil and becomes a participant in the process.

True repentance, and the Act of Reconciliation (Confession) with the intent to never do so again is the solution (as it is for all sins, but most importantly for those mortal sins which would prevent us from entering into it to heaven with God).

When we die, there is no more do-overs. Our life and actions are done. I hope and pray that none of us dies with mortal sin on our souls. Abortion really is one of those grave mortal sins that has been made easy to rationalize by our present day society.

(no message)

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.

when they don't. This is how you effortlessly shift from quoting the Beatitudes to wishing death upon the unvaxxed. I think you're about as much of a Christian as Trump is.

(no message)

issue...Where do you stand...with or against Pope Leo?

Link: https://www.npr.org/2025/10/01/nx-s1-5560169/pope-leo-xiv-says-inhuman-treatment-of-immigrants-in-the-u-s-isnt-pro-life

(no message)

(no message)

(no message)

saying as well. I'm simply agreeing with them...and letting you know. Having a problem with being called out by the leaders of the RCC?

(no message)

treatment of immigrants...where do you stand on that issue?

(no message)

pleased to address yours.

(no message)

then we can discuss any other issue you'd like...

…in a mess hall where the menu selections are curated for you…

…by the DNC.

by the Trump administration against immigrants? Put your skin in the game, Knute.

(no message)

what Pope Leo had to say about the treatment of immigrants by Trump and his administration?...With Leo or against him?...if against, explain why.