For passage of marriage amendment

The following appeared May 11 on Catholic World News.

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops has issued a statement praising the voters of North Carolina for approving marriage amendment to their state constitution.

The amendment, which passed by a wide margin (61%-39%), declares that “marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this state” and thus prevents the legalization of civil unions as well as same-sex marriage.

“The success of this amendment demonstrates people’s awareness of the essential role that marriage, as the union of a man and a woman, plays for the common good,” said Bishop Salvatore Cordileone of Oakland, chairman of the bishops’ Subcommittee on the Promotion and Defense of Marriage. “Despite his comments yesterday, I would hope that President Obama would recognize this essential role as well.” 

“This is not a partisan issue, but a matter of justice, fairness and equality for the law to uphold every child’s basic right to be welcomed and raised by his or her mother and father together,” Bishop Cordileone added.

“I extend my gratitude to all of the people in North Carolina who worked tirelessly to make this a reality. The people of North Carolina join millions of other Americans in affirming the importance of marriage in our society.“



Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 1:36 AM By uji
people in favor of same-sex marriage are not attacking heterosexual marriage. they simply want a public recognition of their commitment to each other and their capacity to form a family. how selective the bishops are in their outrage!

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 5:17 AM By Sandra
Let’s pray the judges in NC don’t legislate from the bench like they did in California.

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 5:59 AM By Ted
Not knowing a lot about the Oakland diocese, I wonder why this bishop isn’t heading the Los Angeles archdiocese instead of Gomez. Is Bishop Cordeleone in Oakland to remedy problems, or was this assignment (and the one in L.A.) just an error ?

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 6:40 AM By Alicia G. Mendiola
Hallelujah! The next move and should have been done long long time ago is to activate and to bring into Partnership the Laity (adult and youth). Intense Laity formation so they know relative to Gospel of Life, Theology of the Body, Marriage According to God’s Plan, Warning on New Age Christless Spirituality, Violence & Pornography in Mass Media, & Existing Church Encyclicals and other Pope’s wrritings. We, the Laity, must be evangelized so we can be an effective partner of the Church.

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 6:54 AM By max
i like this bishop’s moxie…but each time i see his name i can’t helpp but think of the movie THE GODFATHER. come to think off it, his laslt name means “the lion hearted,” which iss not a bad name to have for a bishop…

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 7:25 AM By Catherine
“I extend my gratitude to all of the people in North Carolina who worked tirelessly to make this a reality.” = “The only thing necessary for evil to flourish, is for good bishops, good priests, good men and good women, to do nothing.” God bless the faithful people in North Carolina.

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 8:39 AM By MD
This is the second issue I am so thankful our bishops are speaking out against now. I am so thankful our bishops have stepped up to the plate to speak out against abortion and homosexual unions, two anti-life issues permeating evil in our world today. God Love You.

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 8:53 AM By Anne T.
Thank you, Bishop Cordileone, for speaking out and defending marriage between one man and one woman. We know divorce has injured children and caused harm to society, but rebuilding one man and one woman marriages is the answer. Giving benefits that were meant by our United States Founding Fathers and the first citizens of the state of Californian to go to traidional families and widows and widowers so they could properly raise their families not for so-called same-sex marriages where a child will deliberately be without a mother or a father, is not the answer. It would just put another nail in the coffin of traditional families and harm society as the good bishop well knows. I pray if America has to go it alone, we will go it alone, and the Good Lord will go with us as he was with the traditional family in the first book of Genesis and at the Wedding Feast of Cana.

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 9:04 AM By MAC
Over 31 US States have State Constitutional Amendments regarding marriage between one man and one woman. Bishops need to be stronger in their teaching and telling all Catholics they may NOT vote for politicans who support immoral or sinful policies. And also to handle the public Scandals by Catholic politicans swiftly and publically.

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 9:19 AM By Elaine
NB: The Bishop’s last name is ” Cordileone ” the mafia don was “Corleone”. If you meet him, be careful–people mis-pronounce his name all the time!

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 9:43 AM By Anne T.
Yes, thank you North Carolina. I will look for your products in the store, or buy them online.

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 9:51 AM By PETE
The judges in CA are elected or appointed by the elected politicians. Now you know why educating oneself – and VOTING morally at all levels is important.

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 9:56 AM By tee
“…..plays for the common good.” Thank you, Bishop Cordelione for going this far, but how many are aware of what that “common good” in marriage truly is? Is this not the opportunity for the Cathollc Church in America to counteract their acknowledged abduction of their rightful moral pulpit in not supporting Humnae Vitae? Is this not the opportunity to teach, specifically spell out, what a Catholic priest at a recent sacramental marriage pointed out was not penitently removed after the expulsion from the Garden of Eden nor the Flood: the primary- the procreation of children – and secondary – the alliance of concupiesence – purposes of marriage? It this not the opportunity to teach that the use of contraception is inherently sinful? In our “therapeutic culture,” does it not appear that the hentes have become so dense, that moral matters need to be specifically spelled out? Carpe dieum, your Excellency. Will not many will thank you for clarifying their vincible ignorance? Some think they they will.

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 10:09 AM By JonJ
Wow, the Church needs to drop that “natural right to be raised by their father and mother together”. Its a horribly constructed piece of PR. I think its pretty clear what the Church is trying to say. The Church doesn’t want homosexuals raising children. It also doesn’t approve of in vitro fertilization; and gay married couples using in vitro fertilization to have children is an order of magnitude worse in its eyes. I also understand that whoever constructed this position wanted to be “fighting for children’s rights” rather than taking an “anti gay” position or emphasize their attack against couples using in vitro fertilization. The problem is, on a literal level, this position is a blatant lie. The Church has no real problem with children being raised by someone other than their natural mother and father, since they have run adoption agencies for hundreds of years. Plus, its a backhanded slight to adoptive families, that I don’t think the Church really intends. Rather than use an obviously manufactured position, the Church should simply state that they fear that gay marriage would naturally lead to more people utilizing in vitro fertilization to create families. While they are sympathetic to the desire of childless couples to raise children, then you point out how it causes problems. I think this position accurately states the Church’s theological position without “we hate homo’s” implications. Plus, they don’t sound like slimy politicians or a public interest group looking to manufacture litigation.

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 10:47 AM By Peggy
Oh, if only someone like Bp. Cordileone could be the next bishop of San Francisco!!

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 10:49 AM By Abeca Christian
Amen! Catherine!

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 11:01 AM By bud
For UJI, You are either pushing for gay marriage, repeat marriage not what most people are in agreement with: giving same sex couples the right to Civil Unions. Actually, most of the legalities they are screaming about are available thru any good lawyer. They can say “I do” for the next million years and never be equal to marriage and it’s responsibilities. Marriage is in enough problems now without a bunch of drones inable to procreate and properly raise children with a father and a mother. There is a difference you know.

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 11:26 AM By MD
JohnJ-This is not just about the Church’s stance on in vitro. Look closely at what our bishops and even the Pope are saying. A child has a right to be raised by a father and mother; the Church does not state the child’s biological father and mother, but a male and female so the child grows in an environment of balanced sexuality, of masculinity and femininity. Same sex couples cannot provide this balance and deprive the child of the necessary compliments of masculinity and femininity. Yes in vitro is a grave sin, but it is not the main motivation for our bishops speaking out against gay marriage. Same sex relations is in and of itself a grave action and the Church is opposed to all sexual practices outside of marriage, the life-giving union of one man and one woman. This is about the meaning of sexual intimacy. So-called gay marriage and in vitro fertilization is the result of separating the two necessary elements of marriage, being unitive and procreative. Church teaching is very clear that it is both and, that both the unitive and procreative elements are necessary together in the marital bond. God Love You.

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 12:49 PM By Maryanne Leonard
Max, my last name is a shortened version of “Lion-hearted” too, and versions of the same name show up in many countries and several languages. Cordileone is indeed a great name for a bishop such as the one who carries this name so well!

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 1:34 PM By Catholic Joe
A final thought…Bishops had roughly 10-25 years to MAYBE curb things. They chose NOT to discuss Humanae Vitae. They never promoted radically the sanctity of FAMILY and it’s fundamental importance or preach about fornication. In fact, they changed the word in the Bible to: “Immorality” (NAB) to be politically correct. Now they see the consequences of ‘sleeping’ as Adam did in the garden. Always be vigilent. The sexual revolution came to fight and we went to sleep.

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 1:38 PM By k
Bishop Cordileone says that the people of North Carolina “voted to affirm every child’s right to be welcomed and raised by his or her mother and father together”. No, Sir, that ain’t what they voted on. The majority of people in North Carolina are bible believing Christians- Baptist, Methodist, Evangelicals, Pentacostal. They voted the way they believed God willed them to based on his revelation in Holy Scripture.

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 1:39 PM By Dana
Earth to Jon…why do you keep spewing your hateful rhetoric at this site? Did someone appoint you the official voice of malcontents and the disenchanted? I thought you were a scientist. Shouldn’t you try for a bit more reserve and balance? Jesus loves you, Jon…never forget that. Back to the subject at hand, some of you may remember in the 1980’s & 90’s N.Carolina advertised in CA to attract Calif. businesses and residents to come to N.Car. Many Californians did move there…I’ll bet they’re counting their blessings! I join the rest of you in thanking the hardworking people who made this vote possible…and especially those prayer warriors who REALLY helped unite hard work with ‘the will of our Loving Father.

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 4:25 PM By JLS
k, sorry to hear that you fell out of your roller coaster. Hope you get well soon.

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 4:27 PM By JLS
Ahmn, Maryanne, of course “leo” means lion, but “nard” means perfume. Leonard thus means perfumed lion.

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 4:30 PM By JLS
uji, any involvement in any aspect of same sex attitude or activity is a grave sin. There is not only no redeeming value in homosexuality, but in itself it is destructive of the individual, society and nature, not to mention the salvation of the individuals involved.

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 5:16 PM By Anne T.
K, I am sure the “Bible Believing” people of North Carolina are smart enough to understand that Bishop Cordileone is just saying that children being raised by their own mother and father is the God desired ideal. Most of them know about Mark 10:8 and Ephesians 5:31 that says, “the two ( a man and woman) will become one flesh (the child from the union of his or her parents)”. It is the ideal from the Bible. Only because of mankind’s fall is it not always reached and adoptions by other herterosexual couples or ophanages are required at times.

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 5:26 PM By JonJ
Dana, I used to practice biotechnology patent law. Consequenty, I have both a science background and law background. Currently, I work for an early stage company that produces health care information technology. In this case, I’m not really disputing the Church’s position to the extent that I agree that its better for adoptive children (and in any gay marriage the children cannot be natural children of both parents) to be raised by heterosexual parents. Since the vast majority of children will grow up to be heterosexual (97%), it makes perfect sense that heterosexual parents would better understand the “growing pains” of heterosexual children. I’m simply commenting on this as PR. Good PR (and such a thing DOES exist, it need not all be about dishonesty and “spinning”) should not need to be constructed or “thought about”. It should immediately resonate on both emotional and literal levels. I am certainly aware that the Church most likely means no disrepect to adoptive parents and can recognize the crafting behind this phrase. But, when you contrapose “natural rights” and “mother and father” it suggests “natural parents” until you start doing lawyerly word splitting. You can write a contract or a statute like that, but that’s not what you want out of PR. This phrase will emotionally resonate with the already converted, because well, the Church could say “Ga Ga, goo goo” and the converted will shout “Brilliant!” (to paraphrase the keystone beer commercial). Good PR should persuade those on the fence, and this construction makes them at least wonder about “what about adoptive parents?” unless they carefully examine the language. You don’t want this kind of “countercurrent” when creating a PR phrase. Instead, you want instinctive, unquestioned support. Sort of a “heck Yeah that’s right!”. This phrase also sounds like the Church is lining up some kind of quasi constitutional law fight and people are rather cynical about the whole legal profession these days.

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 5:28 PM By Catherine
Shame on k’s very un-sacerdotial response to Bishop Cordileone, “No, Sir, that ain’t what they voted on.” You see, in k’s limited activist view, respect and love is only important if you are defending drag queen shows or other homosexual or gender identity issues. When it comes to an important victory in the Defense of Marriage, then all love and respect flies out the window. This is more evidence of inconsistency and duplicity. Notice how k even left the word Catholics out of the bible believing Christians group. k, You can apologize to Bishop Cordileone for your very own brand of “heresy of the heart”.

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 5:30 PM By Anne T.
MD, your post to Jon at 11:02 AM is an excelletn one. Invitro fetilization causes many problems. In one area a man admitted on a liberal call-in radio station that he had donated his sperm about a hundred times in the same area. Can you imagine if most of the women who conceived from his sperm stayed in the same area how many children in that area could be related and not even know it? One young man on the same radio station told about his fears of marrying his own half-sister if his girlfriend was born from invitro fertilization too. Many times these children might not even be told how they were conceived.

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 5:35 PM By Anne T.
Many of the children born from invitro and their future spouses will probably have to go through costly DNA testing to ease their fears when they marry. The chances of being related from adoption when the children are born the normal way are no where near as high.

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 6:51 PM By k
I thank all the posters who have treated me with Christian charity and I will be praying for you. I will pray for those others too.

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 7:32 PM By Maryanne Leonard
JLS, a professor of Modern European Languages at Stanford University told me that the derivation of leon comes from the word for lion, and the derivation of ard came from the word heart or hearted, and that the name could often be traced back to France, but also Italy, England, and several other countries in Europe. He told me this before I married the man whose name I’ve now carried for almost 41 years. Once I married him, I learned how few people in this world can spell the name Leonard. Most are just stumped and need it to be spelled a couple times more, but I have to laugh when some folks correct me. I tell them it is spelled L-e-o-n-a-r-d, and pronounced “LEN-ard,” just like the man’s first name. The people that slay me most tell me, “No, that’s LEO-nard. Leonard is spelled Lenard.” Oh. Well, at least now I’ve been corrected, correct? I’d advise young girls to seek to marry someone named Smith, a family name, or White, another family name of ours, had I not witnessed progenitors of mine having to spell out those names for the less bright among us upon repeated request as well.

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 7:40 PM By Elizabeth
Maybe the Good Bishop wants to move to San Francisco???? Let us all pray for an orthodox AB and that he has NO history with San Francisco !!!!!

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 8:38 PM By Anne T.
Maryanne Leonard and JLS, according to several sites, Maryanne is right. The name “Leonard” is of Old German origin and means “lion strength or lion hearted”.

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 8:41 PM By Anne T.
Another meaning of “Leonard” is “brave lion”.

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 9:03 PM By Anne T.
K, I am sorry that I got somewhat “snippy”, but I felt your criticism of what the bishop said was spliting hairs and being somewhat unjust to him as the real reasons for the bishop and the people of North Carolina to want mothers and fathers for children is that it IS doing the will of the God of the Old Testament and the New Testament, and it IS the desire of Nature’s God (simple biology that tells us our bodies are so constructed and that children are hardwired to desire both a mother and father). One Lesbian celebrity’s son has already mentioned that he really wishes he had a father in his life too.

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 9:31 PM By Cody in Tucson
JonJ – You state “gay married couples using in vitro fertilization to have children”, how does that work? Let’s say that this gay couple is female A and female B. A and B both have eggs. Does A in vitro B with her eggs or visa versa? Is that how it works? Is that the natural law created by God? How DOES that work?

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 10:16 PM By MarkF
JonJ, I see what you’re saying. The bishop brought up the idea that children have a right to be raised by their mother and father. And while this issue does relate to the one at hand, that of same-sex marriage, his words can be confused as a slam against adoption. You’re right that the Church runs many adoption agencies and so she cannot be against adoption. The issue is homosexuality, as you rightly point out. Now for the hard part. Isn’t it obvious that the best place for a child to be raised is at home with his own mother and father? I’m not saying that adoption is evil, and I’m not saying that some parents are terrible parents. These issues are not the ones at hand. Life is not perfect but we should know what is the best way, and what is the next best way, and what is not a good way at all. We’re talking about standards here, not specifics. How can anyone deny that as a standard that the best place for a child is with his own mother and father?

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 11:02 PM By JLS
Maryanne, you win this one … but then that is what lion’s do. The lion is a symbol of Christ, “the Lion of Judah”.

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 11:06 PM By JLS
Maryanne, the dypthong “eo” is pronounced differently from a short “e”. Listen carefully to both yourself and your husband as you say it … the way you normally say it.

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 11:09 PM By JLS
JonJ, why do you presume that religion should be dealt with via credentials from the business, marketing, and applied science professions? Haven’t I been trying to clue you in on this fallacy for over a year?

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 11:09 PM By k
Catherine, the Bible says that homosexual “unions” are a sin. That is why the marriage amendment passed in NC. It doesn’t have anything to do with whether kids live with a mother and father. In the South, we don’t mind saying that we vote for God. My point was that they didn’t vote that way for secular reasons. They stand up for God. I am sure that Bishop Cordileone understood what I meant. I did not include Catholics because Catholics tend to be split on this issue and I cound not find an exit poll. They are about 5 % of the population in NC and in the rural areas where the vote was 80% in favor of the amendment, there are less than 2% Catholics. And Anne T.- the bible believing Christians don’t think a bishop in the Catholic Church is a Christian. They consider us idolators. They don’t worry about natural law, either. The Bible is the Word of God and is to be obeyed. They don’t worry about why-the fact that the Bible says it is enough.

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 11:12 PM By Anne T.
Cody in Tucson, your post of 9:31 PM gave me my laugh for the day. Thank you. I am patiently waiting for Jon J’s answer.

Posted Monday, May 14, 2012 11:15 PM By k
Catherine, I know that you have made it your cause to paint me as a “homosexual apologist” even to the point of lying. You said that you used to stage drag shows. I never defended the drag show. I am not an activist. Satan is the father of all lies and in your post where you said that you used to stage drag shows you called youself “Faust”.

Posted Tuesday, May 15, 2012 1:09 AM By JonJ
MarkF, maybe a better construction to express this position is something along the lines of “Extensive research shows that children simply do better when raised by both a mother and father that live in the same residence. Gay marriage and civil unions simply make these kinds of child-rearing environments less and less likely.

Posted Tuesday, May 15, 2012 1:14 AM By JonJ
Cody, gay and lesbian couples would need donor sperm or eggs to do in vitro fertilization. This is actually been done many times by Hollywood gay couples. One example is Melissa Etheridge. Of course gay couples with prior hetero relationships will still have parental rights to their natural children (at the very least a gay parent will have parental rights and obligations to their natural children).

Posted Tuesday, May 15, 2012 11:34 AM By Anne T.
K, I am well aware that some Bible believing Christians have no historical knowledge that it was the Catholic Church that actually compiled the New Testament and decided which books would be accepted by the Church around 200 AD. They also do not know that they actually got their Bible first from the Catholic monks who patiently and carefully copied it by hand, and that it was only later that some Protestant leaders made changes to the Scriptures. Many, also, do not know that Martin Luther wanted to take out the book of James since it clearly states that we are saved by faith AND works. But that is all “water under the bridge” as they do understand natural law whether they know that they understand it or not. (Lots of laughs.) Now that I have “insulted” some people of your state, I still want to thank them again for doing the right thing.

Posted Tuesday, May 15, 2012 12:27 PM By Catherine
Anne T, Thank you for *consistently* defending the Catholic Church.

Posted Tuesday, May 15, 2012 1:16 PM By Cody in Tucson
JonJ – No kidding, so you admit that these gay females, A and B, DO need an unnatural boost against the natural law of God to procreate. By the way, who gives a *@!& what the Hollyweird people do anyway? I certainly do not follow their lead!

Posted Tuesday, May 15, 2012 2:46 PM By k
I am glad that NC did the right thing. too. Not to be critical-NC is late to the party. There are 30 other states that have done likewise. The people of California voted for an amendment and the right to do so is being challenged, as you well know.

Posted Tuesday, May 15, 2012 3:06 PM By Anne T.
Jon J, I am sure that Cody in Tucson knows all about in vitro fertilization, He just knows that the magesterium of the Church is against it and why and was just being sarcastic.

Posted Tuesday, May 15, 2012 3:52 PM By JLS
JonJ, there is no way to donate sperm without committing a mortal sin. Also, the donation of eggs is a mortal sin for two reasons: a. it is complicit in the sin of the sperm donar, and b. it is an act of mayhem.

Posted Tuesday, May 15, 2012 5:57 PM By Cody in Tucson
Anne 306p – Very observant. Many times being absurd to illustrate an argument helps to flush out the other side. Rush Limbaugh does this all the time and you sure know when he has gotten to the meat of an argument by using this technique. CCC 2376, 6th Commandment, speaks to in vitro, especially that version encouraged by JonJ and practiced in Hollyweird as he seems to advocate.

Posted Tuesday, May 15, 2012 10:48 PM By k
Catherine, truthfully, I am a faithful traditional Catholic. I am a housewife and mother. I am not worth going to hell for. I am not worth spending years in Purgatory for. Whatever is triggering your “need” to break the 8th commandment repeatedly, you need to repent and confess. Your soul is more important that any petty little vendetta.

Posted Wednesday, May 16, 2012 12:23 PM By JonJ
Gee, Cody, maybe you should learn to read. I clearly stated that I agreed that a hetero couple is a better child rearing enviroment than a gay marriage. I was just saying the Church’s canned statement about “natural right of children to be raised by their parents” is a poorly constructed piece of PR. Obviously, this position has been thought out and considered by the USCCB, because you see many of them repeating this formulation. All I have been doing in this thread is pointing out how the Church has not been effectively expressing its position from a PR standpoint. Finally Cody, I don’t view people like Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and Rachel Maddow as intellectual examples to emulate. To me, such individuals are clowns who only know how to make people react in an emotional and irrarational manner. Primarily, they only excite their base without ever resorting to rational thought.

Posted Wednesday, May 16, 2012 2:18 PM By Abeca Christian
k how dare you say those things to Catherine! You are coming off ……….You figure it out. It’s not good, it’s all i can say!

Posted Wednesday, May 16, 2012 3:33 PM By k
abeca, Catherine’s soul is more important than how I come off.

Posted Wednesday, May 16, 2012 3:48 PM By JLS
JonJ, does or did your biology work ever involve any human embryo or baby?

Posted Wednesday, May 16, 2012 3:53 PM By JLS
k, Catherine is analyzing, evaluating and criticising what your posts reflect. Your posts are what she has to go on. You cannot expect to paint a fence red and then force everyone to call it white.

Posted Wednesday, May 16, 2012 4:09 PM By Angelo
k, My advice to you is to never answer such people or those like them, as they are giving calcathdaily a very bad name. Do you remember what peter said, “Nothing like a good witch hunt, Huh….?” It is best to ignore them, and to defend our Holy Catholic Faith, completely ignoring their personal attacks. Of course they are self proclaimed perfect! But the obvious is most certainly obvious.

Posted Wednesday, May 16, 2012 4:58 PM By MD
JonJ-Please read my response to you from 11:26 on Monday. Understand the Church is proclaiming the necessity to be raised by both a male and female. Yes it is ideal for the parents to be the biological parents, but not necessary. Bishop Cordileone is speaking aobut the balance that a man and woman bring into a household. It is necessary for a child to grow up in a household that has both the feminininty of a woman and masculinity of a man. If you understood this position correctly, you would understand why the Church is now moving out of the adoption industry. The Church refuses to adopt children to same-sex couples and is having to stop because of state mandates. The Church has been very clear that same-sex couples should not raise children and has stated the theological reasons as well. The fact that it is unnatural for two people of the same sex to be together in an attempt to be romantic is a lie and unnatural according to the natural order and in my opinion we should all applaud North Carolina for taking a moral stance. God Love You.

Posted Wednesday, May 16, 2012 5:21 PM By Cody in Tucson
Anne – See how easy it is to flush out JonJ!

Posted Wednesday, May 16, 2012 6:27 PM By Abeca Christian
k you sound absurd! If her salvation you are concerned with, working against her goodness is not truly what you call being concerned with her salvation? I don’t think you are very honest here! She is the one who is displaying that she is concerned for your salvation. Reflection is good k.

Posted Wednesday, May 16, 2012 6:42 PM By Angelo
k, Keep up the good posts. Don’t even answer all the bruhahas.

Posted Wednesday, May 16, 2012 8:03 PM By Anne T.
Well, Cody and Jon J, I do not listen to Rush Limbaugh very often, and he does get a little mouthy at times but I will say this. It takes an absolutely shameless woman to tell the whole world she and her friends are sleeping around, and that she expects the American taxpayers fo pay for it, many of whom are not sleeping around.

Posted Wednesday, May 16, 2012 10:01 PM By JonJ
No JLS. I worked in the Midwest, and most of what I did was patent genetically modified agricultural products.

Posted Wednesday, May 16, 2012 10:26 PM By Cody in Tucson
JonJ – So what is wrong with the way that God designed these foods that man thinks that they need to modify them? I read some articles a few years ago that Hillary Clinton was a big time pusher of modified crops and she was in bed with Monsanto to accomplish this. I know that the man who exposed Love Canal is very concerned with this genetic modification.

Posted Thursday, May 17, 2012 6:35 AM By JLS
JonJ, the Church opposes genetically modified crops. They do not taste nearly as good as natural crops either.

Posted Thursday, May 17, 2012 7:03 AM By MAC
Jon J., if you are Catholic I hope you adhere to ALL the teachings in the “CATECHISM of the CATHOLIC CHURCH, Second Edition”. And if you have better suggestions on how things should be presented by Bishops or others, please give your best examples.

Posted Thursday, May 17, 2012 9:18 AM By Dana
Thanks Jon. I think I understand what you’re saying…that the Church is using legalese in their language which is off putting to the general public and weakens their stance? I think I remember your saying that you have 7 children too. Sometimes we don’t spend enough time pondering just what the other commentators are really saying here. I used to teach speech to Navajos (now there is a challenge) and one of the most glaring faults of most speakers is they don’t LISTEN. (I’m including myself in that judgment)

Posted Thursday, May 17, 2012 9:22 AM By Anne T.
From what I have read some genetically altered crops are killing off bees. Also, the farmers in India are being bankrupted as they are being sold genetically altered seed, and the seeds from their crops from the genetically altered seeds are not fertile for more than one or two crops.. Thus the famers have to keep coming back to the seed suppliers and buy new seed to sow the next or the year after’s crop, and it is bankrupting them. What is super scary is that there are only about five producers of seeds in the world, therefore it is a good way to get ahold of the world’s food supply. Very, very scary! Now I know where Jon J. is coming from. He is part of the elite who is pushing genetrically altered crops, contraceptives, which can be abortifacients, among other things that are harmful to people.and taking away their true freedom to choose how they live their lives in a healthy, fruitful way if they so desire. Infertile seed goes right along with infertile people which is what this group wants and is pushing at any cost to the harm of the human body, especially women but men, too, by sterilization. What a con game they have going on. You know, we will give you United States money at the price of your fertility and our completely running your lives for you. But then some people fall for it since they lack discipline and just will not control their sex drives for the good of their family’s and society, so they exchange their freedom for pills and sterilization.

Posted Thursday, May 17, 2012 9:25 AM By Rick DeLano
Sheesh. This site has turned into an unreadable swamp of gossip and petty personal grudge matches. How about everyone who has posted more than twenty times in the last month just take a vacation.

Posted Thursday, May 17, 2012 9:31 AM By Anne T.
Oh! and the Birthcontol Pill is polluting our drinking water in many areas, deforming our fish, which makes one wonder what the drinking water is doing to humans, and causing breast cancer. So Jon and the elite are sure doing a good job of getting rid of our “excess” population, or should I say the naive (to put it politely) or just plain foolish who fall for it. Sorry folks for being so direct about it, but that is exactly how I see it, and I believe that is just what Pope Benedict XIth sees also.

Posted Thursday, May 17, 2012 10:30 AM By Anne T.
Cody in Tucson, regarding your post May 16, at 5:21 p, I flushed him out even further in my previous post. He is just a puppet of the elite Anti-catholic crowd. Of course the woman whom Rush Limbaugh talked about was just a puppet, though willing, of such a crowd. We all know those pushing Planned Parenthood, inculding President Obama, put her up to it. That was why the figures were so inflated, just to get more money. When you cut off the head of some snakes, they just grow another one. Rush Limbaugh’s method is looking better and better, although he is human too.

Posted Thursday, May 17, 2012 10:34 AM By Anne T.
Of course the comment about the snake is just an expression. Real snakes do not grow back their heads. Once crushed they are goners.

Posted Thursday, May 17, 2012 10:37 AM By Kenneth M. Fisher
JLS, 6:35 AM, Please give us proof that the Church, not some individual bishop, “opposes genetically modified crops”! God bless, yours in Their Hearts, Kenneth M. Fisher

Posted Thursday, May 17, 2012 3:54 PM By JonJ
Mac, scroll up. I posted what I thought was the best expression of this position on Tuesday, May 15, 1:05 pm. Rather than couch it as a quasi constitutional right tied to legalese, and without creating any hint of criticism for adoptive families you state that “Extensive research shows that children are better adjusted when raised by both a mother and father who live in the same residence. Gay marriage and gay unions make such a rearing enviroment less and less likely.”

Posted Thursday, May 17, 2012 4:44 PM By JonJ
Anne T, please, you couldn’t “flush out” a flock of radio-tagged quail with the help of 1,000 hunting dogs and a synched GPS. First of all, I never have worked for, participated in the sale of, nor have I been remotely connected in any way to the sale, manufacture or production of birth control. I did once post a very long refutation of some radical catholic site that someone here directed me to that accused the medical industry of “conspiring to lie to women” about the cancer risks of some oral contraceptives. To summarize: I know this accusation is false because throughout the 90’s the medical community went back and forth on the idea of hormone replacement therapy for post menopausal women. Elite academics heavily debated whether providing hormones to post menopausal women created less cancer risk or created more, because hormone therapy tended to reduce IIRC cervical and uterine cancers but increased breast cancer risk. At the time. this was the cutting edge of medical debate (and I watched this happen in small way because I flipped slides for my dad’s annual medical conference when I was a student). Since birth control also contains the same (or very similar hormones) to HRT, the effects of OC’s on cancer risk were also heavily debated, with many thinking they caused a net reduction of cancer risk. Hence, busy doctors weren’t “fooled” by drug manufacturers who conspired to lie about risks. And, refuting lies is in no way morally unsound.

Posted Thursday, May 17, 2012 5:20 PM By JonJ
AnneT, GMO’s get a bad rap. First of all, GMO’s are not fundamentally different than what has been done in the ag business for more than a century (which has included hybrid grafting, and developing new strains of crops). Using genetic mechanisms is simply a faster method to modify crops than traditional techniques. That being said, biologists and agriculture researchers are very well aware of the risks posed by GMO’s. The true danger is too much genetic uniformity in our crops, which would leave the world food supply vulnerable to some kind of new crop pathogen that could suddenly wipe out a large portion of annual global production. As for the “sterility” of GM seeds, uhhhh safety dictates that you DON’T want these crops reproducing. The anti GMO crowd yells and screams about changing the natural ecological balance by introducing radically altered species. To characterize my role as a patent attorney as part of the “elite” is laughable. I was a technician with no strategic influence over how the products were marketed, sold, priced or over how, where and when they were introduced. I did not work for an ag manufacturer, but an outside independent firm and I only saw these products years before they came to market. Now, in my current company, I do hold founder stock and do have strategic influence (but, its an entirely different industry: health care information technology). But, we are only a very small player in a field of over 400 certified products which includes corporate behemoths like Wal-Mart (they bought e-clinical works), Cerner, GE, IBM, ect. Now, we do have what we think are sound reasons why we can succeed in this field, and have drawn interest from some venture capital firms, but the idea that I am part of some kind of “elite” would require both a distorted view of reality and a monumental ego. While many here likely will think that description fits me to a “T”, I am not THAT crazy.

Posted Thursday, May 17, 2012 6:16 PM By JLS
JonJ, no, you are not crazy, but you are not forthcoming either. You basically danced around what Anne T. posted. I especially like your “outside company”, with no ties to anyone other than absolute inviolable, and unquestionable impartiality. Yep, we can trust these entities that present themselves as actually honest. Yep, no need whatsoever to question anyone in control or gaining control of the global food production means, as they all have the common good at heart.

Posted Thursday, May 17, 2012 6:18 PM By k
Rick DeLano, I’ll try and I’m sorry it got like that.

Posted Thursday, May 17, 2012 6:21 PM By JLS
Kenneth, A. read what Anne T. posted on the topic; B. One example is Europe which bans genetically engineered crops and after all according to that pal of GK Chesterton Europe is the Church and the Church is Europe; C. I read that the Vatican opposes GM food. It does not taste good. And this means it ain’t as good as natural food. One good thing, however about GM crops is that they do not eat one another like the beef industry has their cattle doing. But can this be wrong since the fish we eat eat other fish? HMN, actually plants eat other plants in that after harvest the remains of plants decay and are consumed by the next crop.

Posted Thursday, May 17, 2012 8:39 PM By JLS
JonJ, from your legal background would you venture to guess whether an organic farmer could sue a gmo farmer for polluting his seedstock?

Posted Thursday, May 17, 2012 8:52 PM By Abeca Christian
JonJ I would have to disagree with you. I did my research on GMO’s and they are bad.

Posted Thursday, May 17, 2012 9:49 PM By Anne T.
Jon J, all I know is that you defended the use of the birthcontrol pill in previous posts, and all I know is that my life was saved over twenty years ago because a priest told me NOT to take the Pills a doctor had given me. Right afterward I found out that I had cancer at that time which the estrogen in the Pill would have made worse, and from what the doctors told me, I probably would not be writing this now as I most likely would have been dead over twenty years ago. So as I said before, I don’t want the Poison, you take it.

Posted Thursday, May 17, 2012 10:07 PM By Anne T.
By the way, Jon J, the specialist on the Eternal Word Television Network still say that the Birthcontrol Pill helps cause or makes worse certain types of cancers, and a lot of women far younger than I have died from those types of cancers. I know it would make you and others happy if I had not survived to tell the truth, just as many wished some had not survived abortion to tell the truth. So I will listen to those Catholic doctors and certainly not listen to you. You just want to push the Pills for you own reasons, whatever they are. It is just common sense that any pill that causes a woman’s body to think it is pregnant every month and causes changes in the breast area and more changes in the breast when her time of fertility would have passed is going to screw up that area. One cannot mess with ones body like that and expect it to be normal. It is like this quackery regarding sex-change operations.

Posted Thursday, May 17, 2012 10:20 PM By Anne T.
Regarding you last post, Jon J., my point is that you are a puppet of that elite whether you know it or not, and therefore “part” of that elite’s possible deception to gain control of the world’s food supply. When you admit that the genetically altered crops are not fertile, you admit that farmers have to keep buying them from the same people over and over again, as in India. That surely sounds to me as if it is a monoply. I also know that the United States and some other countries have kept a supply of the natural seeds that will reproduce, but how long will the general public be able to buy them? It is my guess not for long if some tyrant takes over. All this is on line for people to read.

Posted Thursday, May 17, 2012 11:18 PM By Kenneth M. Fisher
JLS, Do you honestly believe that GK Chesterton or his pal would say that today if they saw the sad state Europe in, especially the Church, today? God bless, yours in Their Hearts, Kenneth M. Fisher