On Sunday’s Meet the Press, during an interview with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, NBC host Tom Brokaw brought up Barack Obama’s recent declaration at the Saddleback Forum that the question of "at what point does a baby get human rights," is "above my pay grade." After playing the relevant clip of Obama from the August 16 candidates forum, Brokaw asked of Pelosi: "Senator Obama saying the question of when life begins is above his pay grade, whether you’re looking at it scientifically or theologically. If he were to come to you and say, ‘Help me out here, Madame Speaker, when does life begin?’ what would you tell him?"
After Pelosi, labeling herself as an "ardent Catholic," avoided giving a straight answer, and contended that "over the centuries, the doctors of the Church have not been able to make that definition," Brokaw jumped in: "The Catholic Church, at the moment, feel very strongly it begins at the point of conception."
Ed Morrissey writes about Pelosi's response to Brokaw's question, and includes video here.
Below is a transcript of the relevant exchange from the Sunday, August 24, Meet the Press on NBC:
TOM BROKAW: There was a very well publicized and very effective interview by Pastor Rick Warren to Saddleback Church in California, among the two candidates recently. And, on the right, especially, a response from Senator Obama to the question of when life begins has been getting a lot of attention. We want to just share with you how that went, and then you can taqka a look at it and respond to it.
PASTOR RICK WARREN, SADDLEBACK CHURCH, DATED AUGUST 16, 2008: At what point does a baby get human rights, in your view?
BARACK OBAMA: Well, you know, I think that, whether you’re looking at it from the theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity, you know, is above my pay grade.
BROKAW: Senator Obama saying the question of when life begins is above his pay grade, whether you’re looking at it scientifically or theologically. If he were to come to you and say, "Help me out here, Madame Speaker, when does life begin?" what would you tell him?
NANCY PELOSI: I would say that, as an ardent practicing Catholic, this is an issue that I have studied for a long time. And what I know is, over the centuries, the doctors of the Church have not been able to make that definition. And St. Augustine said at three months. We don’t know. The point is, is that it shouldn’t have impact on a woman’s right to choose. Roe v. Wade talks about very clear definitions of when the child, first trimester, certain considerations second trimester, not so third trimester, there’s very clear distinct, this isn’t about abortion on demand, it’s about a careful, careful consideration of all factors that a woman has to make with her doctor and her God. And so I don’t think anybody can tell you when life begins, human life begins. As a say, Catholic Church, for centuries, has been discussing this, and there are those who have decided-
BROKAW JUMPS IN: The Catholic Church, at the moment, feel very strongly it begins at the point of conception.
PELOSI: I understand that. I understand that. And this is like in 50 years or something like that. Again, over the history of the Church, this is an issue of controversy, but it is also true that God has given us, each of us, a free will and responsibility to answer for our actions. And we want abortions to be safe, rare and reduce the number of abortions. That’s why we have this fight in Congress over contraception. My Republican colleagues do not support contraception. If you want to reduce the number of abortions, and we all do, we must, it would be easier to support family planning and contraception, you would think. But that is not the case. So we have to take, you know, we have to handle this as respectfully, this is sacred ground. We have to handle it very respectfully, and not politicize it as it has been. And I’m not saying Rick Warren did because I don’t think he did, but others will try to.
—Brad Wilmouth is a news analyst at the Media Research Center.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
I just wish...
August 25, 2008 - 15:28 ET by BayshoremanI just wish somebody would ask these pro-choice politicos a very simple question: "If you ascribe to the U.S. constitutional right that a person accused of a crime is considered innocent until proven guilty, why would you not apply that same logic to the debate over when life begins, i.e. it begins at conception until it is PROVEN otherwise."
And if you can't be sure
August 25, 2008 - 17:55 ET by motherbeltAnd if you can't be sure when life does begin in the womb, shouldn't you err on the side of caution, rather than killing something that "might" be a human being?
they already know it begins
August 25, 2008 - 19:37 ET by TruthMongerthey already know it begins at conception
never-the-less they must find a way to get around that
the NAGS demand it
hence their bullsh*t term "pro-choice" and other comedic devices
ironically enough they've killed off millions of baby democrats over the last few decades
Journalism is the opium of the liberals
Right, TM...the Roe
August 25, 2008 - 22:00 ET by motherbeltRight, TM...the Roe effect.
A perfect example of being hoist on one's own petard.
Capital punishment without a
August 25, 2008 - 19:47 ET by Nortotrial, and no chance of appeal, that is what abortion is.
Norto... ....You put it
August 25, 2008 - 19:50 ET by bigtimerNorto...
....You put it all perfectly in a nutshell...
"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh
capitol punishment
August 25, 2008 - 20:04 ET by TruthMongercapitol punishment for innocent children
nice people these dems
Journalism is the opium of the liberals
Nancy Pelosi's Interpretation of Catholic Church Dogma.
August 25, 2008 - 15:30 ET by ledurchiIf some high ranking Catholic Church authority figure doesn't publically blast Pelosi soon for the remarks she made Sunday to Brokaw, then they might as well not bother correcting any other member of the flock for anything. I watched this with my jaw dropping to the floor because of two things. One, Brokaw actually pressed Pelosi on this issue and did not let her squirm out of it and two, Pelosi seemed to redefine the Catholic Church's stance on abortion without blinking an eye. Since 1958, according to Pelosi, the Catholic Chuch has been firmly against abortion. Before that? Hard to tell - according to Pelosi. Incredible.
HELLO? Pope Benedict? Bishops? Cardinals? Priests?
August 25, 2008 - 15:44 ET by SickofLibs"If some high ranking Catholic Church authority figure doesn't publically blast Pelosi soon..."
Dead on. What are they afraid of? They are letting her get away scot-free with these shameless lies and distortions.
Agreed
August 25, 2008 - 23:51 ET by KC MulvilleBut let me point out that, over the years, the bishops have issued endless condemnations, not only of abortion, but also of politicians in support of abortion. They have been firm in rejecting those pro-choice arguments. As for their public teaching, I mean, what else can they do? The underlying issue here is how to punish these weasel politicians. What should we do with Pelosi especially, because this was such an obviously deceitful (and yes, sinful) distortion? Bishops really only have two options.
You know what gets me? Suppose we locked all our pro-choice Catholic politicians in a room, and said, what's the holdup? Why is it you guys always cave on abortion, instead of standing up for what you claim to believe? And if they said that being pro-choice is the only way to survive in the Democrat party, I'd argue in reply: "Why? You are the Democrat party! Look around! Kennedy, Pelosi, Biden, Kerry, Durbin, and so on. You guys are the core of the party, so who the hell are you worried about? Please don't tell me you're afraid of Howard Dean or Harry Reid?"
Leadership in the Catholic Church
August 25, 2008 - 15:54 ET by GothampcIt's difficult to understand why the Catholic Church acts as it does. For example, Rudy Guiliani was reprimanded for taking Communion even though he had a pro-choice stance, yet Pelosi and Kerry have not been. And the Church doesn't seem to know what to do about Father Pflager's rhetoric. It is just poor leadership or has the Church become liberal?
Goth, I think some of it has
August 25, 2008 - 16:07 ET by Chris NormanGoth, I think some of it has to do with the leanings of the Archbishop of their particular diocese.
McNotObama '08
Priests and Communion re: Abortion
August 25, 2008 - 19:17 ET by cjbreischPriests have been directed by the Pope and by the American Bishop Council (that's not the name of it...it has a name, but I don't remember and dont' have time to look it up right now) to not offer communion to anyone that they know is pro-choice.
But Pelosi is right about one thing. Surprisingly enough, the Catholic Church doesn't have a clear stance on when life begins. She's word-parsing though, and if she's an 'ardent Catholic', she knows it. The Catholic Church does make a distinction about when your relationship with God begins. And that's at conception. And it's a bigger question to the Catholic Church than when life begins. The Catholic Church maintains that no one has a right to end your relationship with God except God and to do so is an incredible sin.
I'll look up that about communion when I get a chance and return here with a link.
In my opinion, the Catholic
August 25, 2008 - 16:16 ET by motherbeltThe Catholic Church in the United States has taken a turn to emphasizing more of the "social justice" issues instead of personal morality.
In my opinion, the Church should move the emphasis back to moral issues.
But what do I know?
if they don't then God will
August 25, 2008 - 19:39 ET by TruthMongerif they don't then God will do it for them
Journalism is the opium of the liberals
Now why would God do that?
August 25, 2008 - 19:46 ET by mandrakeNow why would God do that? Are the ideals of "social justice" and "personal morality" mutually exclusive?
seems to me you can't have
August 25, 2008 - 20:02 ET by TruthMongerseems to me you can't have one without the other
Journalism is the opium of the liberals
No they are not, but at
August 25, 2008 - 22:04 ET by motherbeltNo they are not, but at different times one has been emphasized over the other.
The British, around the time
August 25, 2008 - 15:37 ET by RainsfordThe British, around the time of the Revolution, redefined their abortion laws to be far more strict then they had been, mostly due to medical developments. My logic has always been, considering the fact that the Founders understood abortion quite well, wouldn't they have included it in the Constitution if they felt an unborn life was any different then a life post-birth? The fact that they don't make any specifics as to when you start getting basic, human rights seems to only point to the fact that they agreed it was at conception.
I believe it was included
August 26, 2008 - 09:14 ET by pbanks7I believe it was included in life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.
MSM - shaping all the perceptions you need to believe, then confirming it with a poll.
This, America, is your Top Democrat
August 25, 2008 - 15:39 ET by SickofLibsPELOSI: "That’s why we have this fight in Congress over contraception."
Holy Mother of Pearl, WTF is this flaming a-hole talking about?
This is who the Democrats elected as their leader, the cream of the crop.
Please, please, please Pelosi, keep these idiocies coming - every time you open your stupid moonbat mouth it just adds fuel to the fire.
"And we want abortions to be
August 25, 2008 - 15:48 ET by Dan The Man 2"And we want abortions to be safe, rare and reduce the number of abortions. That’s why we have this fight in Congress over contraception. My Republican colleagues do not support contraception" Ya like the whole thing is Republican fault for not supporting contraception? She is a class one clusterf@@k,. And if abortion is rare then I would hate to see it plentyful. We could really see some innocent blood spilt.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
My Republican colleagues do
August 25, 2008 - 16:43 ET by motherbeltMy Republican colleagues do not support contraception"
What she means is her Republican colleagues don't support giving contraceptives to 12- and 13-year-olds in school, without their parents' knowledge.
She also means the so-called "Plan B"
August 26, 2008 - 08:01 ET by lotrShe also means the so-called "Plan B", a high-dose, artificial chemical female hormone that shocks the female body into suppressing ovulation, or worse, preventing implantation of an already conceived zygote. Believe it or not, liberal dingbats will label this assault on the woman with the seemingly innocuous "contraception," just as they label abortion as "choice."
Gee, Nance. Like you
August 25, 2008 - 15:38 ET by Chris NormanGee, Nance. Like you thought the Church's position on abortion was little known and difficult to confirm ? Sheesh, you are dumb.
McNotObama '08
An "ardet Catholic" my clunes
August 25, 2008 - 17:24 ET by needle"You [Nancy Pelosi] thought the Church's position on abortion was little known and difficult to confirm?"
Yes, the Church's position on abortion was little known to Nancy and thus difficult for her to confirm.
Impunitas semper ad deteriora invitat.
Talk about out of touch
August 26, 2008 - 09:45 ET by KC MulvilleShe can't find the bishops' website, or her archdiocesan website, or the Vatican website, or the catechism, or the standard church teaching ... but ...
... wait for it ...
... she can quote (/misquote) St. Augustine (354-430 AD)
Oh man...I have posted
August 25, 2008 - 15:39 ET by bigtimerOh man...I have posted yesterday and today about this....and some of the rest of the interview, was glad to hear Rush cover it today.
Now there is a thread!
Dang it all...
Nancy is pathetic..and to think she has had what...five kids.
Life begins at conception, she knows it full well, but she is a communist political whore with an agenda...she, along with others will have some answering to do when they leave this earth.
"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh
bt...
August 25, 2008 - 15:42 ET by Clear thinker"she is a communist political whore"
Amen to that!
Making Fun of AGW http://giovanniworld.wordpress.com/
45 Communist Goals for America http://www.nationmakers.com/com_goal
St. Augustine said what? Oh
August 25, 2008 - 15:44 ET by Ruths husband BenSt. Augustine said what? Oh my God, what a liar!
“it is not the role of this Court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct.” - Justice Antonin Scalia
RhB... That she is and
August 25, 2008 - 15:53 ET by bigtimerRhB...
That she is and then some...we were both yelling at the television yesterday listening to the twisted lying tripe....
....along with the oil issue and her stock with Pickens in this interview from yesterday....
To think she is so close to being Pres. if something drastic ever happened.
"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh
I don't watch TV, but I was
August 25, 2008 - 15:59 ET by Ruths husband BenI don't watch TV, but I was yelling at my computer screen when I read this. She is a total hack and even San Francisco should be ashamed to have her representing them (I know they are not).
I have said it before and I still believe that our society will be judged by the abortion issue in the future, much like the mid-1800's are judged by the slavery issue. How we treat the helpless innocent (both young and old) determines how we will be viewed.
“it is not the role of this Court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct.” - Justice Antonin Scalia
Actually she is correct
August 25, 2008 - 16:56 ET by motherbeltActually she is correct about St. Augustine ( he talked about when a human soul is present, and "animation, at about 90 days) but she had to go back to the 4th century to get that. And that was only his opinion, with no authority, and it was not part of the Church's teaching.
Howver, much more recently, Pope Benedict, who really does have the authority to teach in the Church, said this:
...the Church wishes to make her own contribution to the service of the human community, while pointing out the relation [sic] that binds each person to the Creator of all life and the source of the inalienable dignity of each person, from conception to life's natural end." (emphasis added)
MB, you make an important distinction
August 25, 2008 - 18:20 ET by KC MulvillePelosi is either deliberately or (much more likely) ignorantly confusing the modern argument from the ancient arguments of the church.
The church was against abortion anyway. So when theologians speculated about when souls entered bodies, they weren't trying to justify abortion. Instead, they were worried about spontaneous abortions and miscarriages, and issues like whether to bury the body. Under the laws of primogenitur, the eldest child inherited the estate, so if the first pregnancy ended in a miscarriage or stillborn child, that raised the question whether an estate passed to the next child in line, or to someone else, as if the couple had died childless. And if the child was almost out of the womb but died during childbirth, do you baptize the child? And if so, isn't a child in the womb morally equivalent? There were hundreds of legalistic questions like that, and usually the theologians were trying to give families as much of a break as they could. But none of the theologians were trying to justify abortion.
The idea that the ancient theologians were ambivalent about abortion because they disagreed about when the soul entered the body is a sign of really bad theology. It's either a deliberate distortion or, as usual, clear evidence of a failure to understand history. Either way, it is clear evidence of ahistorical stupidity.
Also, Augustine and other
August 26, 2008 - 08:17 ET by lotrAlso, Augustine and other ancients didn't have the foggiest notion about what even goes on in the womb -- it truly was a "black box." They did not have access to ultrasound, so they did not know about fetal development. They did not have high-powered optical and electron microscopes, so they did not know about sperm and egg cells, nor did they know about the DNA "blueprint" (how quaint) of each human being.
In spite of this, it is quite profound that the ancients (e.g., Augustine) did know (probably from logical reasoning as well as divine revalation -- Scripture is very clear on the subject) that the life of a human being begins prior to birth. And like several have already stated here, one should err on the side of life, that is, even if we buy her argument that "we don't know when," then the only reasonable "choice" is to facilitate, not impede, the course of Nature.
Peggy Noonan had a better
August 25, 2008 - 15:51 ET by Ruths husband BenPeggy Noonan had a better line. She said something to the effect of "Something begins at conception. What is it? A car? A 1948 Buick?"
The reality is that human life begins at conception. This is really not debatable. Human life is something that is created when two zygotes come together to create a previously non-existent DNA. It is by the DNA that we identify individuals legally (we do this all the time in court).
So, grow some balls, pro-choicers! Admit that life begins at conception and then convince us that he or she doesn't have any rights until that individual is born. Of course, Obama would say that birth doesn't guarantee rights.
“it is not the role of this Court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct.” - Justice Antonin Scalia
Ben
August 25, 2008 - 15:57 ET by MrShyDid I just get called a "zygote"?
:p
* * * SOCKS THE CAT '08 * * *
For REAL Change
Well, I'm not a biologist
August 25, 2008 - 16:01 ET by Ruths husband BenWell, I'm not a biologist so I may have the terminology wrong. But I'm a zygote studying to be a moron.
“it is not the role of this Court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct.” - Justice Antonin Scalia
biology nitpicking
August 26, 2008 - 08:22 ET by lotrYou meant two gametes; but we knew you meant that....
more nitpicking
August 26, 2008 - 08:26 ET by Cool ArrowA nit is an unborn louse, isn't it?
Another question. Bill Hemmer just asked "are pumas the same as cougars"
Megen Kelly said "No"
I thought they were the same.
I ♣ my seal
Her Speakerness did that
August 25, 2008 - 17:24 ET by motherbeltSo, grow some balls, pro-choicers! Admit that life begins at conception
and then convince us that he or she doesn't have any rights until that
individual is born.
Her Speakerness did that. She said in the same interview:
The point is that that [when life begins] shouldn't have an impact
on a woman’s right to choose.”
No life, life, doesn't matter. Nothing should stand in the way of woman's "choice."
Contraception
August 25, 2008 - 15:57 ET by Gothampc"And we want abortions to be safe, rare and reduce the number of abortions. That’s why we have this fight in Congress over contraception. My Republican colleagues do not support contraception. If you want to reduce the number of abortions, and we all do, we must, it would be easier to support family planning and contraception, you would think."
Can anyone tell me what is the Catholic Church's position on contraception?
Here ya go Goth
August 25, 2008 - 16:31 ET by acumenThe Catholic Church supports both family planning and contraception as of course do Republicans in Congress. However, the only contraception suitable to the Church is the natural human rythym cycle. The reasons for this position is stated in The Catechism of the Catholic Church, Part Three, Number 2370 as provided below:
Periodic continence, that is, the methods of birth regulation based on self-observation and the use of infertile periods, is is conformity with the objective criteria of morality. These methods respect the bodies of the spouses, encourage tenderness between them, and favor the education of an authentic freedom. In contrast, "every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible" is intrinsically evil.
Thus the innate language that expresses the total reciprocal self-giving of husband and wife is overlaid, through contraception, by an objectively contradictory language, namely, that of not giving oneself totally to the other. This leads not only to a positive refusal to be open to life but also to a falsification of the inner truth of conjugal love, which is called upon to give itself in personal totality....The difference, both anthropological and moral, between contraception and recourse to the rhythm of the cycle....involves in the final analysis two irreconcilable concepts of the human person and of human sexuality.
That is not "rythm." Rythm
August 25, 2008 - 17:51 ET by motherbeltThat is not "rythm." Rythm was the old method, which involved guessing at when a woman's period would start and avoiding intercourse for a certain number of days beforehand. What you described is "natural family planning" using a woman's temperature and physical signs to frame the time of ovulation, which is when an egg is available and in condition to be fertilized.
Natural family planning is not just a schedule and instructions; it is taught, couple-to-couple.
But you are correct; the Church only approves of natural contraception, not artificial.
Not to nitpick more, but
August 26, 2008 - 08:29 ET by lotrNot to nitpick more, but technically the Church approves of natural birth control -- contra-ception refers to condoms, oral contraceptives, diaphrams, spermicide, i.e., devices which actively work "against conception." Natural methods aren't considered "against conception" because one is simply not engaging in intercourse, which is what all of us do regardless for the greater portion of our lives.
I think you
August 26, 2008 - 10:58 ET by acumenI think you would be better served offering your definition to the Catechism of the Catholic Church of whom I quoted - "...the rhythm of the cycle" -
First of all, it doesn't
August 25, 2008 - 16:03 ET by bradbenj5952First of all, it doesn't require any "high ranking" anybody to define when life begins. God himself has done that countless times throughout scripture. One does not have to run to so called "church fathers" or any such thing. One only needs to read and believe the scripture, to wit, "Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee" Jeremiah 1:5. Notice that God told Jeremiah that before He formed him in the belly He knew him. Wow! Eureka! A five year old can read that and understand it. It takes an adult to mess that up. It is especially easy for a PhD to redefine the meaning of that one. But, no other explanation is required. It doesn't take a pope, or a preacher, or a church father, or an apostle, or anyone else. God himself made it clear.
"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house." Acts 16:31
brad... Amen. "America
August 25, 2008 - 16:09 ET by bigtimerbrad...
Amen.
"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh
I'm not the bible scholar I should be...
August 25, 2008 - 17:04 ET by Indiana JoeBut your reference reminded me of a passage I've heard. It was about Mary visiting her sister while both were pregnant, and the sister's baby "jumped in the womb" in recognition of the baby Mary was carrying (Jesus). IIRC, that baby was John the Baptist.
Sounds like that baby was cognizant of the person in Mary's womb. Seems like two examples of "life" before birth.
I think the Church's stand has been pretty obvious for longer than 50 years, Nancy!
Indiana Joe
August 25, 2008 - 17:08 ET by Free StinkerYou remember correctly, that's from Luke 1:41
Your words demonstrate my
August 26, 2008 - 09:23 ET by bradbenj5952Your words demonstrate my point. You don't have to be a "bible scholar" to know and understand what God said. It is this simple, "Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness". When Mary says, "And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour" - Luke 1:47, it tells me that Mary recognized God as her Savior. It matters not how may letters follow someone's name, "To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them" - Isaiah 8:20
"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house." Acts 16:31
brad - you don't even have to believe in God to know when life
August 26, 2008 - 09:47 ET by Dee Bunkbegins. You only have to believe in something besides yourself and your own selfish desires.
Science and evolution would say that life begins when something starts growing. Heck you "kill" a plant by forgetting to water it but you forcefully intentionally disconnect food and blood to a growing baby and it's not killing to abortion proponents. It's just an innocent "choice" to them less egregious than forgetting to water a plant. Abortion proponents say it's just part of a womens body - like a kidney or something - but those things don't grow into anything on their own.
Buddhist, Hindus, Hare Krishna's, and Yogi's believe that you shouldn't even kill a bug because human souls and souls of bugs and animals are all the same to them (except they are at different levels of spiritual development).
There is no good justification for abortion no matter what faith or lack of faith one has. It's a purely selfish act. People who defend it have been brainwashed. I was once brainwashed about it so I know. Most are brainwashed at an age where reasoning skills are not fully developed. It's very very sad.
Nancy's distant cousin Judas...
August 25, 2008 - 16:10 ET by acumenPelosi - ....as an ardent practicing Catholic...
Evidently Nancy requires a bit more ardent practice...
Pelosi - That’s why we have this fight in Congress over contraception. My Republican colleagues do not support contraception.
...not politicize it as it has been.
Not politicize it as in the way you just politicized it three sentences before?
Speaker of the House is obviously above her pay grade. Can I get a refund?
BTW -- Was Brokaw able to keep a straight face?
"Not politicize it as in
August 25, 2008 - 17:08 ET by Indiana Joe"Not politicize it as in the way you just politicized it three sentences before?"
Yeah, I caught that too. Talking out of both sides of your mouth seems to be a required skill for the Dems these days.
Contraception ???
August 25, 2008 - 16:11 ET by LionKingI am confused. When have Republicans been against contraception?
Is she referring to the morning after abortion pill? Or, is she referring to schools providing condoms to teenagers? The former is not contraception and the latter is promoting sexual promiscuity in teenagers; the problem is teenagers are not always smart and probably do not use condoms often or correctly.
She's probably referring to
August 26, 2008 - 08:33 ET by lotrShe's probably referring to both -- see above discussions.
Asking that bitch any
August 25, 2008 - 16:40 ET by KJ_sezAsking that bitch any question will get you a nonsensical, fallacious, or completely illogical and contra-reality dimmicrat talking point for an answer, followed closely by "it's the Republicans' fault". I strongly believe that Pelosi is nothing more than a toy doll with a draw-string activated voice box. Too bad they couldn't have made the doll more attractive - then I could at least turn the sound off without having to change the channel.
If Nancy's answers the
August 25, 2008 - 17:23 ET by TruthMattersIf Nancy's answers the question, does that mean she is at a higher pay grade than Obama?
"over the history of the Church, this is an issue of controversy
August 25, 2008 - 17:34 ET by CarlosSNana Pelosi,
From the Didache, early second century,
"you shall not murder a child by abortion nor kill that which is born"
Any questions?
Not that Nancy would bother looking, but...
August 25, 2008 - 18:09 ET by NBFKeep going. It's pretty clear:
http://www.catholic.com/library/Abortion.asp
And when does spiritual life begin?
August 25, 2008 - 17:36 ET by needleClearly ascertaining when life begins is above Nancy level of competence, but certainly not above her pay-grade or Obama’s. It is not a matter of pay.
These two sound like people whose spiritual life has not yet begun.
Impunitas semper ad deteriora invitat.
Put it this way....
August 25, 2008 - 17:40 ET by doug1950There is more massive overwhelming evidence that life begins at conception than there is or ever will be that Global Warming is caused by man. Yet the debate is over in that regard for liberals.
Nancy Pelosi scandalous attacks on the Catholic Church
August 25, 2008 - 17:54 ET by Philly Pete 07I learned of this story today on-line because I happened to be at Mass when this TV show was aired. Not that I would have watched it anyway. The errors the Speaker spoke were so aggregious and blatant that it screams for an official and very public reply from the Catholic Church. That was the point I made when I wrote to her Archbishop today on this very subject.
The fact that she represented herself as an authority on the teaching of the Catholic Church and then proceeded to lie about the position of the Church on a very serious matter is in itself, scandalous, a serious sin. As the interview proceeded, Speaker Pelosi blamed the Republicans for a high abortion rate because of their opposition to federally funded contraception methods. In the eyes of the Catholic Church, which Pelosi claims to be ardently practicing, this too is a grave sin.
The writings on the Church's view on the subject is not hard to find. The Catholic Catechism is emphatically explicit in declaring that life begins at the moment of conception. The catechism is just as clear in denouncing any manner of birth control. Additionally, I am aware of encyclicals written by Pope Paul VI and Pope John Paul II that clearly spells out the Catholic Church's position on when life begins and the intrinsic evil of abortion and contraception. Pelosi has absolutely no ground to stand on with these scandalous falsehoods and she should be publicly called to task. This due to her position as US Speaker of the House of Representatives and her penchant to go on national television viewed by millions to pontificate on Church teaching! St. Augustine must be spinning somewhere! I demand that she produce documentation and quotes where this doctor of the Church has advocated the belief that life begins only after months in the womb. Not to mention, where he advocates contraception as the cure against abortion! This is so wrong it makes my blood boil!
Talking to liberals is rarely productive.
August 25, 2008 - 18:03 ET by NBFLet's assume the Nancy somehow really has no clue as to when human life begins. (Keep a straight face, please).
Ask her if she'd run over a human-shaped pile of clothes on the highway.
Pelosi is brazenly
August 25, 2008 - 18:14 ET by stratmanPelosi is brazenly stupid. How she got to where she is should be termed one of the great wonders of the planet. It is a complete mystery how this incompetent boob is an elected official at all drives home the axiom that we (those from San Fran in this case) deserve the government they elect.
The Archbishop of Denver, Charles J. Chaput, has released a statement in reply to Pelosi's imbecilic drivel:
There is a link to the full text at the end of the article. The Archbishop is spot on. Pelosi should know to not bring her (half) wits to debate/opine on the topic with an expert like Chaput ready to rebut the nonsense.
RRAM Tough!
Wonderful!! I am so glad
August 25, 2008 - 18:38 ET by motherbeltWonderful!! I am so glad he stepped forward to make this much-needed statement. I wonder if the MSM will actually report on it.
People like Pelosi cannot be allowed to simply spout their opinion as fact and get away with it.
Her Speakerness, in a battle of wits, is bringing a knife to a gunfight. I, for one, don't need to ever hear another word from her.
I wish her own bishop would follow the example of the bishop who asked Gov. Kathleen Sibelius not to present herself for Communion.
Better Things To Do
August 25, 2008 - 19:24 ET by stratmanArchbishop Chaput, leader of Colorado's largest denomination - 385,000 Catholics in Denver, was not invited to participate in the DNC festivities.
strat.... Well I'll be
August 25, 2008 - 19:36 ET by bigtimerstrat....
Well I'll be darned, this is good news, of course non-important to the msm.
Thanks for all the info. you are providing...I am trying to catch up here with all.
"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh
Good for him! They don't
August 25, 2008 - 22:10 ET by motherbeltGood for him!
They don't need a Bishop. They have Joe Biden, the "committed Catholic" and Her Speakerness Pelosi, an "ardent Catholic," both of whom support abortion. That's the kind of Catholic the Democrats like.
Outstanding!
August 25, 2008 - 18:57 ET by Indiana JoeGlad to know the Archbishop of Denver has a backbone. And Johnny-on-the-spot with it, too!
Too bad it will get less coverage than Pelosi's drivel.
DC Archbishop Responds
August 26, 2008 - 08:00 ET by BayshoremanCongrats to Archbishop Wuerl.
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/archbishop-pelosis-comments-on-abortion-are-false-2008-08-25.html
Washington archbishop rips Pelosi on abortion
By Bob Cusack
Posted: 08/25/08 11:29 PM [ET]
In a rare public rebuke of a top politician, the archbishop of Washington said Monday that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) was incorrect when she recently said the moment of conception has long been a matter of controversy within the Catholic Church.
In a release issued Monday night, Washington Archbishop Donald W. Wuerl said Pelosi's comments on "Meet the Press" on Sunday "were incorrect."
Wuerl noted that Pelosi responded to a question on when life begins by mentioning she was Catholic.
The release quoted Pelosi as saying the church has not been able to come with a definition of when life begins.
“After Mr. Tom Brokaw, the interviewer, pointed out that the Catholic Church feels strongly that life begins at conception, she replied, 'I understand. And this is, like, maybe 50 years or something like that. So again, over the history of the church, this is an issue of controversy,' " the release said.
Wuerl strongly disagrees.
He said, "We respect the right of elected officials such as Speaker Pelosi to address matters of public policy that are before them, but the interpretation of Catholic faith has rightfully been entrusted to the Catholic bishops. Given this responsibility to teach, it is important to make this correction for the record."
Wuerl pointed out that the Catechism of the Catholic Church is clear, and has been clear for 2,000 years. He cited Catechism language that reads, "Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception … Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law.”
A Pelosi spokesman did not immediately comment for this article.
The Speaker recently said she, unlike other Catholic politicians who support abortion rights, has not clashed with her church about receiving communion.
In an interview on C-SPAN that aired earlier this month, Pelosi was asked about how some church officials have raised objections about whether former presidential contenders — such as Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R) — should receive communion.
Pelosi, a Roman Catholic whose district includes most of San Francisco, said she has not encountered such difficulties in her church.
“I think some of it is regional,” she said, “It depends on the bishop of a certain region, and, fortunately for me, communion has not been withheld and I’m a regular communicant, so that would be a severe blow to me if that were the case.”
delete
August 25, 2008 - 18:30 ET by motherbeltdelete
Nancy, when you get to Hell, please send the rest
August 25, 2008 - 19:01 ET by YahooWatcherof us "ardent" Catholics a postcard.
And as for Archbishop Chaput and Auxiliary Bishop Conley, keep up the good work and God Bless you both.
An important aside from the
August 25, 2008 - 19:54 ET by jdhawkAn important aside from the inane uterrances of pelosi is the fact that 31 states have laws that protect the unborn (homicidal felony - full coverage, 11 states; homicidal felony - partial coverage, 13 states; criminalization of certain acts involving an unborn, 7 states).
In California, where pelosi is a senator, the law states, the killing of an unborn child after the embryonic stage is murder. Cal. Pen. Code ' 187(a) (West 1999).
In Illonis, where bambi (aka 57 states) is a senator: The killing of an "unborn child" at any stage of pre-natal development is intentional homicide, voluntary manslaughter, or involuntary manslaughter or reckless homicide. Ill. Comp. Stat. ch. 720, ''5/9-1.2, 5/9-2.1, 5/9-3.2 (1993).
So, apparently its not "above the pay grade" of the citizens of California, Illinois, their legislators, and governors regarding when life begans.
pelosi - dumb; obama - dumber . . .
Who Cares
August 25, 2008 - 20:03 ET by goldwaterfanMost catholics are pro-choice.
Most catholics are pro-choice
August 25, 2008 - 21:19 ET by sick_puppyI’m not a catholic, but my wife is. How do you know most Catholics are pro-choice?
Is this from your own personal extensive research?
If you can't remember . . . the claymore is probably pointed at you. Murphy’s Laws of Combat
well sick-puppy
August 25, 2008 - 21:32 ET bydo you expect an answer?
by definition Catholics are pro-life
"You can not support the Troops if you do not support their Mission"
Drive by troll.
August 26, 2008 - 08:36 ET by lotrDrive by troll.
Slick Tom
August 25, 2008 - 22:34 ET by mustangsallyAnyone notice the slick maneuver Tan Tom pulled by recasting the question as one of "when does life begin?" That is a moral, theological question - the one behind which Obama tried to hide at Saddleback: "above my paygrade".
The question I heard Pastor Warren ask, rather, was a legal, constitutional one, entirely fitting in a Presidential Debate: "when does a baby acquire legal rights?" Senator Obama, the highly touted "constitutional attorney", demonstrated his cowardice and calculation when he ducked the question. Simply put, if a candidate cannot or will not answer that question he is not fit to place his hand on the Bible and be sworn into the Office of the President of the United States.
Whatsoever you do to the least...
August 25, 2008 - 22:37 ET by cest moi49 MILLION LIVES LEGALLY ABORTED SINCE 1973.
Keep on practicing your faith, Nance - if you LIVED your faith, you'd KNOW your faith.
You braying ass.
All Catholics know that the
August 26, 2008 - 01:29 ET by Rush FanAll Catholics know that the the Church teaches life begins at conception. Pelosi knows this, but she is willing to lie her head off and contradict Catholic teachings for her Party. That's what LIBs are good at. Lying!
I've got to give Brokaw credit for bringing up some issues that made Pelosi uncomfortable:
MR. BROKAW: ...talking about the energy plan. And then we read in The Wall Street Journal that you and your husband have made a substantial investment in the plan that T. Boone Pickens has put forward, which has a heavy emphasis on natural gas as well.
REP. PELOSI: But let me see if you call substantial 03 three percent of our investments.
MR. BROKAW: Oh, it's what, between 100 and $200,000.
REP. PELOSI: No, no, it was between 50 and $100,000, and it's part of an, you know, entrepreneurial package. This is the package we sign up for, this is what they invest in. But that's not the point. I'm, I'm, I'm investing in something I believe in. I believe in natural gas as a clean, cheap alternative to fossil fuels.
MR. BROKAW: But you're also in a position to influence where the emphasis will be in where we're moving.
You can read the rest of the interview here. Brokaw also asked Pelosi about the success of the surge. Of course, she, like Obama, still refuses to acknowledge the success of the surge.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"They are actively promoting the decline of America." ~ Rush Limbaugh on liberals and Democrats
Catholic Pelosi
August 26, 2008 - 01:41 ET by Cool ArrowWoe unto them that call evil good, and good evil
- Isaiah 5:20
I feel better that she's studied the Bible. She is owed no new instruction in that which she embraces with eyes open.
Her interpretation of the Bible would have Joseph building crosses for the Romans.
I ♣ my seal
Hey Rush... Great
August 26, 2008 - 01:49 ET by bigtimerHey Rush...
Great post...
I commented since Sunday afternoon on this interview...I can't believe this whole thing got zilch coverage.... her being the Speaker of the House...
Brokaw did a pretty good job for a another leftist.
Really glad you have the link here.
She is absolutely outrageous to put it politely and showed that in spades Sunday.
"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh
Hi bigtimer
August 26, 2008 - 02:49 ET by Rush FanI've listened to Pelosi enough (I'm certain you have also) to know that she scares me. Really! She is so dumb it's hard to believe that she got elected, even in a state such as liberal California. I live in California so I've met my share of liberals out here. I can't imagine anyone voting for someone so stupid!
What scares me is that as Speaker of the House, she is second in line in succession to the presidency. Can you imagine Pelosi serving as President of the United States? My gosh, what a nightmare.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"How difficult must it be for her to find somebody less qualified than Obama?" ~ Rush Limbaugh on Caroline Kennedy vetting Obama's veep choices