Kaine: No Apology Necessary for Clinton Team’s Mockery of Catholicism

[OldLady]

Time to play: You cant explain!

Starring the OP.

Todays question is: How did they mock Catholicism?


Annnnd go!

Ask the author of the story I posted, whose title is 'Kaine: No Apology Necessary for Clinton Team’s Mockery of Catholicism'.

The entire e-mail is copied in Post 7. It might be better if you read it and explained why YOU think it's a mockery of Catholicism. Rather than just spreading propaganda.

Re: Conservative Catholicism
From:[email protected]
To: [email protected], [email protected]
Date: 2011-04-11 21:10
Subject: Re: Conservative Catholicism

Excellent point. They can throw around "Thomistic" thought and "subsidiarity" and sound sophisticated because no one knows what the hell they're talking about.

Jennifer Palmieri <[email protected]> wrote:
I imagine they think it is the most socially acceptable politically conservative religion. Their rich friends wouldn't understand if they became evangelicals.

----- Original Message -----
From: John Halpin
To: John Podesta <[email protected]>; Jennifer Palmieri
Sent: Mon Apr 11 18:55:59 2011
Subject: Conservative Catholicism

Ken Auletta's latest piece on Murdoch in the New Yorker starts off with the aside that both Murdoch and Robert Thompson, managing editor of the WSJ, are raising their kids Catholic. Friggin' Murdoch baptized his kids in Jordan where John the Baptist baptized Jesus. Many of the most powerful elements of the conservative movement are all Catholic (many converts) from the SC and think tanks to the media and social groups. It's an amazing bastardization of the faith. They must be attracted to the systematic thought and severely backwards gender relations and must be totally unaware of Christian democracy.
WikiLeaks - The Podesta Emails

Really? Okay, "severely backwards gender relations" is harsh. Who was it said by? Did Podesta or Palmieri agree with him? Was Clinton involved in this rant in any way? Is this an official stance of the Democratic Party, the way conversation therapy is on the Republican agenda? I agree with Kaine. This one individual, Halpin, can have his nasty opinion, same as you can have yours about Muslims. Please remember Clinton never said a word about any of this and was not even in on the conversation. So stuff this conversation up your ***.

Dear Old Lady, I am too much of a lady to suggest you stuff your opinion up your whatnot. Here's the thing. Podesta is Clinton's boy. The email about reeducating Catholics is what it is. I'll spell it out. It's an outrage. Catholics are doing that thing known as Freedom. You don't like their beliefs, tough bleep. That the staff of a woman running for potus is talking about this at all should frighten everyone. Even leftists. You know. Today it's Catholics. Tomorrow it may be Baptists. The next day it may be Jehoviah Witness. Eventually, they will get around to squelching something YOU believe in. Maybe even Muslims.

Podesta never said a word for or against Conservative Catholicism, though, Compost, and neither did Palmieri. Halpin wrote to him and let off some steam. I don't like at all what Halpin said (and I'm not even Catholic) but everyone has bad days combating political foes.
That e-mail is not an official stance and I don't believe liberals actually want to take away anyone's freedom of religion. And no, I don't want to get in an argument about who can bake a cake.

I don't blame you...it's taking away religious freedom you said liberals don't and are not doing. A quandary or dilemma

I don't agree that it is taking away your religious freedom to insist it not interfere with the rights of others who do not believe as you do. And that's ALL I will say.

 

[OldLady]

OL, I posted the specific comments that were said about Catholicism. Kaine is right - what was said was opinion, but it was slightly insulting. If you do not see what is insulting I can not show it to you because YOU do not find them so. You will NOT see them insulting even If, as I did when I posted what was said, I showed them to you.

I also posted that is something extremely similar was said about the Muslim Faith versus the Catholic faith Libs would freak out, afraid we were insulting Islam/Muslims. Liberals SEEM to be more open to and worried about Americans insulting Islam than insulting the faith of Americans.

Liberals / the DNC seem to have an easier time mocking, making jokes about, and then defending their actions of racism, sexism, anti-Christian/Catholic religion, anti-Semitic homophobia when exposed, blaming Conservatives somehow - pointing fingers and saying, 'Yeah but THEY do this' - or blaming the person who hacked and released THEIR e-mails.

Again, these things may not be offensive to YOU, but they are obviously offensive to some. Like kaine said, these are beliefs and opinions, and should not have to apologize for opinions. At the same time that is so much BULLSHIT from the left because they demonize Conservatives all the time for having 'controversial opinions'. There's that double standard liberal BS again.

If you want to say Liberals don't have to apologize for their opinion then do so, but 1) Don't try to justify offensive things that are said, and 2) remember it was a LIB who said PEOPLE SHOULD NOT HAVE TO APOLOGIZE FOR OPINIPONS...even if others find them offensive.

I gotcha now. Thanks for making that more clear. The only thing I'm trying to say is, if it's that big a deal to Conservative Catholics, insist Halpin apologize. It was his words and no one else picked them up.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Time to play: You cant explain!

Starring the OP.

Todays question is: How did they mock Catholicism?


Annnnd go!

Ask the author of the story I posted, whose title is 'Kaine: No Apology Necessary for Clinton Team’s Mockery of Catholicism'.

The entire e-mail is copied in Post 7. It might be better if you read it and explained why YOU think it's a mockery of Catholicism. Rather than just spreading propaganda.

Re: Conservative Catholicism
From:[email protected]
To: [email protected], [email protected]
Date: 2011-04-11 21:10
Subject: Re: Conservative Catholicism

Excellent point. They can throw around "Thomistic" thought and "subsidiarity" and sound sophisticated because no one knows what the hell they're talking about.

Jennifer Palmieri <[email protected]> wrote:
I imagine they think it is the most socially acceptable politically conservative religion. Their rich friends wouldn't understand if they became evangelicals.

----- Original Message -----
From: John Halpin
To: John Podesta <[email protected]>; Jennifer Palmieri
Sent: Mon Apr 11 18:55:59 2011
Subject: Conservative Catholicism

Ken Auletta's latest piece on Murdoch in the New Yorker starts off with the aside that both Murdoch and Robert Thompson, managing editor of the WSJ, are raising their kids Catholic. Friggin' Murdoch baptized his kids in Jordan where John the Baptist baptized Jesus. Many of the most powerful elements of the conservative movement are all Catholic (many converts) from the SC and think tanks to the media and social groups. It's an amazing bastardization of the faith. They must be attracted to the systematic thought and severely backwards gender relations and must be totally unaware of Christian democracy.
WikiLeaks - The Podesta Emails

Really? Okay, "severely backwards gender relations" is harsh. Who was it said by? Did Podesta or Palmieri agree with him? Was Clinton involved in this rant in any way? Is this an official stance of the Democratic Party, the way conversation therapy is on the Republican agenda? I agree with Kaine. This one individual, Halpin, can have his nasty opinion, same as you can have yours about Muslims. Please remember Clinton never said a word about any of this and was not even in on the conversation. So stuff this conversation up your ***.

Dear Old Lady, I am too much of a lady to suggest you stuff your opinion up your whatnot. Here's the thing. Podesta is Clinton's boy. The email about reeducating Catholics is what it is. I'll spell it out. It's an outrage. Catholics are doing that thing known as Freedom. You don't like their beliefs, tough bleep. That the staff of a woman running for potus is talking about this at all should frighten everyone. Even leftists. You know. Today it's Catholics. Tomorrow it may be Baptists. The next day it may be Jehoviah Witness. Eventually, they will get around to squelching something YOU believe in. Maybe even Muslims.

Podesta never said a word for or against Conservative Catholicism, though, Compost, and neither did Palmieri. Halpin wrote to him and let off some steam. I don't like at all what Halpin said (and I'm not even Catholic) but everyone has bad days combating political foes.
That e-mail is not an official stance and I don't believe liberals actually want to take away anyone's freedom of religion. And no, I don't want to get in an argument about who can bake a cake.

I don't blame you...it's taking away religious freedom you said liberals don't and are not doing. A quandary or dilemma

I don't agree that it is taking away your religious freedom to insist it not interfere with the rights of others who do not believe as you do. And that's ALL I will say.

It is going against their religious freedom and of course that's all you'll say....that quandary after you yourself stated liberals are not trying to do it

 

[easyt65]

I gotcha now. Thanks for making that more clear. The only thing I'm trying to say is, if it's that big a deal to Conservative Catholics, insist Halpin apologize. It was his words and no one else picked them up.

I 100% agree. You and I both know, however, in the world of 'guilt-by-association politics there is going to be a politically motivated demand by a potential non-Catholic - or catholic, who is NOT offended but is instead motivated by political gamesmanship - who will demand the candidate apologize for what a friend, worker, volunteer, etc said.

 

[Compost]

Time to play: You cant explain!

Starring the OP.

Todays question is: How did they mock Catholicism?


Annnnd go!

Ask the author of the story I posted, whose title is 'Kaine: No Apology Necessary for Clinton Team’s Mockery of Catholicism'.

The entire e-mail is copied in Post 7. It might be better if you read it and explained why YOU think it's a mockery of Catholicism. Rather than just spreading propaganda.

Re: Conservative Catholicism
From:[email protected]
To: [email protected], [email protected]
Date: 2011-04-11 21:10
Subject: Re: Conservative Catholicism

Excellent point. They can throw around "Thomistic" thought and "subsidiarity" and sound sophisticated because no one knows what the hell they're talking about.

Jennifer Palmieri <[email protected]> wrote:
I imagine they think it is the most socially acceptable politically conservative religion. Their rich friends wouldn't understand if they became evangelicals.

----- Original Message -----
From: John Halpin
To: John Podesta <[email protected]>; Jennifer Palmieri
Sent: Mon Apr 11 18:55:59 2011
Subject: Conservative Catholicism

Ken Auletta's latest piece on Murdoch in the New Yorker starts off with the aside that both Murdoch and Robert Thompson, managing editor of the WSJ, are raising their kids Catholic. Friggin' Murdoch baptized his kids in Jordan where John the Baptist baptized Jesus. Many of the most powerful elements of the conservative movement are all Catholic (many converts) from the SC and think tanks to the media and social groups. It's an amazing bastardization of the faith. They must be attracted to the systematic thought and severely backwards gender relations and must be totally unaware of Christian democracy.
WikiLeaks - The Podesta Emails

Really? Okay, "severely backwards gender relations" is harsh. Who was it said by? Did Podesta or Palmieri agree with him? Was Clinton involved in this rant in any way? Is this an official stance of the Democratic Party, the way conversation therapy is on the Republican agenda? I agree with Kaine. This one individual, Halpin, can have his nasty opinion, same as you can have yours about Muslims. Please remember Clinton never said a word about any of this and was not even in on the conversation. So stuff this conversation up your ***.

Dear Old Lady, I am too much of a lady to suggest you stuff your opinion up your whatnot. Here's the thing. Podesta is Clinton's boy. The email about reeducating Catholics is what it is. I'll spell it out. It's an outrage. Catholics are doing that thing known as Freedom. You don't like their beliefs, tough bleep. That the staff of a woman running for potus is talking about this at all should frighten everyone. Even leftists. You know. Today it's Catholics. Tomorrow it may be Baptists. The next day it may be Jehoviah Witness. Eventually, they will get around to squelching something YOU believe in. Maybe even Muslims.

Podesta never said a word for or against Conservative Catholicism, though, Compost, and neither did Palmieri. Halpin wrote to him and let off some steam. I don't like at all what Halpin said (and I'm not even Catholic) but everyone has bad days combating political foes.
That e-mail is not an official stance and I don't believe liberals actually want to take away anyone's freedom of religion. And no, I don't want to get in an argument about who can bake a cake.

It's so much easier to say the subject is overacting, then to react to the issue, isn't it?

What's to react to? I thought it was a mean thing to say, I said that.

Well, Mary Poppins. Did this guy agree or that guy agree? Spit spot. The emails don't matter! Yeah. It was "mean". Gosh. Thanks. That means nothing.

 

[OldLady]

Time to play: You cant explain!

Starring the OP.

Todays question is: How did they mock Catholicism?


Annnnd go!

Ask the author of the story I posted, whose title is 'Kaine: No Apology Necessary for Clinton Team’s Mockery of Catholicism'.

The entire e-mail is copied in Post 7. It might be better if you read it and explained why YOU think it's a mockery of Catholicism. Rather than just spreading propaganda.

Re: Conservative Catholicism
From:[email protected]
To: [email protected], [email protected]
Date: 2011-04-11 21:10
Subject: Re: Conservative Catholicism

Excellent point. They can throw around "Thomistic" thought and "subsidiarity" and sound sophisticated because no one knows what the hell they're talking about.

Jennifer Palmieri <[email protected]> wrote:
I imagine they think it is the most socially acceptable politically conservative religion. Their rich friends wouldn't understand if they became evangelicals.

----- Original Message -----
From: John Halpin
To: John Podesta <[email protected]>; Jennifer Palmieri
Sent: Mon Apr 11 18:55:59 2011
Subject: Conservative Catholicism

Ken Auletta's latest piece on Murdoch in the New Yorker starts off with the aside that both Murdoch and Robert Thompson, managing editor of the WSJ, are raising their kids Catholic. Friggin' Murdoch baptized his kids in Jordan where John the Baptist baptized Jesus. Many of the most powerful elements of the conservative movement are all Catholic (many converts) from the SC and think tanks to the media and social groups. It's an amazing bastardization of the faith. They must be attracted to the systematic thought and severely backwards gender relations and must be totally unaware of Christian democracy.
WikiLeaks - The Podesta Emails

Really? Okay, "severely backwards gender relations" is harsh. Who was it said by? Did Podesta or Palmieri agree with him? Was Clinton involved in this rant in any way? Is this an official stance of the Democratic Party, the way conversation therapy is on the Republican agenda? I agree with Kaine. This one individual, Halpin, can have his nasty opinion, same as you can have yours about Muslims. Please remember Clinton never said a word about any of this and was not even in on the conversation. So stuff this conversation up your ***.

Dear Old Lady, I am too much of a lady to suggest you stuff your opinion up your whatnot. Here's the thing. Podesta is Clinton's boy. The email about reeducating Catholics is what it is. I'll spell it out. It's an outrage. Catholics are doing that thing known as Freedom. You don't like their beliefs, tough bleep. That the staff of a woman running for potus is talking about this at all should frighten everyone. Even leftists. You know. Today it's Catholics. Tomorrow it may be Baptists. The next day it may be Jehoviah Witness. Eventually, they will get around to squelching something YOU believe in. Maybe even Muslims.

Podesta never said a word for or against Conservative Catholicism, though, Compost, and neither did Palmieri. Halpin wrote to him and let off some steam. I don't like at all what Halpin said (and I'm not even Catholic) but everyone has bad days combating political foes.
That e-mail is not an official stance and I don't believe liberals actually want to take away anyone's freedom of religion. And no, I don't want to get in an argument about who can bake a cake.

I don't blame you...it's taking away religious freedom you said liberals don't and are not doing. A quandary or dilemma

I don't agree that it is taking away your religious freedom to insist it not interfere with the rights of others who do not believe as you do. And that's ALL I will say.

It is going against their religious freedom and of course that's all you'll say....that quandary after you yourself stated liberals are not trying to do it

It's not a quandary to me in the least. If it was, I'd say so. I think it's wrong to say you won't do business with a a homosexual because your religion says homosexuality is a sin. Fine, if it's a sin, don't be one, don't invite them to your picnic. Just don't discriminate. Aren't all the evangelicals saying they still support Trump because we all have sin? That we shouldn't judge? Handy how that only applies sometimes.

 

[OldLady]

Time to play: You cant explain!

Starring the OP.

Todays question is: How did they mock Catholicism?


Annnnd go!

Ask the author of the story I posted, whose title is 'Kaine: No Apology Necessary for Clinton Team’s Mockery of Catholicism'.

The entire e-mail is copied in Post 7. It might be better if you read it and explained why YOU think it's a mockery of Catholicism. Rather than just spreading propaganda.

Re: Conservative Catholicism
From:[email protected]
To: [email protected], [email protected]
Date: 2011-04-11 21:10
Subject: Re: Conservative Catholicism

Excellent point. They can throw around "Thomistic" thought and "subsidiarity" and sound sophisticated because no one knows what the hell they're talking about.

Jennifer Palmieri <[email protected]> wrote:
I imagine they think it is the most socially acceptable politically conservative religion. Their rich friends wouldn't understand if they became evangelicals.

----- Original Message -----
From: John Halpin
To: John Podesta <[email protected]>; Jennifer Palmieri
Sent: Mon Apr 11 18:55:59 2011
Subject: Conservative Catholicism

Ken Auletta's latest piece on Murdoch in the New Yorker starts off with the aside that both Murdoch and Robert Thompson, managing editor of the WSJ, are raising their kids Catholic. Friggin' Murdoch baptized his kids in Jordan where John the Baptist baptized Jesus. Many of the most powerful elements of the conservative movement are all Catholic (many converts) from the SC and think tanks to the media and social groups. It's an amazing bastardization of the faith. They must be attracted to the systematic thought and severely backwards gender relations and must be totally unaware of Christian democracy.
WikiLeaks - The Podesta Emails

Really? Okay, "severely backwards gender relations" is harsh. Who was it said by? Did Podesta or Palmieri agree with him? Was Clinton involved in this rant in any way? Is this an official stance of the Democratic Party, the way conversation therapy is on the Republican agenda? I agree with Kaine. This one individual, Halpin, can have his nasty opinion, same as you can have yours about Muslims. Please remember Clinton never said a word about any of this and was not even in on the conversation. So stuff this conversation up your ***.

Dear Old Lady, I am too much of a lady to suggest you stuff your opinion up your whatnot. Here's the thing. Podesta is Clinton's boy. The email about reeducating Catholics is what it is. I'll spell it out. It's an outrage. Catholics are doing that thing known as Freedom. You don't like their beliefs, tough bleep. That the staff of a woman running for potus is talking about this at all should frighten everyone. Even leftists. You know. Today it's Catholics. Tomorrow it may be Baptists. The next day it may be Jehoviah Witness. Eventually, they will get around to squelching something YOU believe in. Maybe even Muslims.

Podesta never said a word for or against Conservative Catholicism, though, Compost, and neither did Palmieri. Halpin wrote to him and let off some steam. I don't like at all what Halpin said (and I'm not even Catholic) but everyone has bad days combating political foes.
That e-mail is not an official stance and I don't believe liberals actually want to take away anyone's freedom of religion. And no, I don't want to get in an argument about who can bake a cake.

It's so much easier to say the subject is overacting, then to react to the issue, isn't it?

What's to react to? I thought it was a mean thing to say, I said that.

Well, Mary Poppins. Did this guy agree or that guy agree? Spit spot. The emails don't matter! Yeah. It was "mean". Gosh. Thanks. That means nothing.

Well, that's all I got. That particular e-mail does not lead me to believe the Democrats are trying to revolutionize every religion in America. Sorry, not buying it.

 

[JimBowie1958]

(From an email she quotes
Excellent point. They can throw around "Thomistic" thought and "subsidiarity" and sound sophisticated because no one knows what the hell they're talking about.

So, instead of you elevating your ignorant ass, we Catholics need to lobotomize ourselves and be as ignorant as the average Dimocrat?

No thank you.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Ask the author of the story I posted, whose title is 'Kaine: No Apology Necessary for Clinton Team’s Mockery of Catholicism'.

The entire e-mail is copied in Post 7. It might be better if you read it and explained why YOU think it's a mockery of Catholicism. Rather than just spreading propaganda.

Dear Old Lady, I am too much of a lady to suggest you stuff your opinion up your whatnot. Here's the thing. Podesta is Clinton's boy. The email about reeducating Catholics is what it is. I'll spell it out. It's an outrage. Catholics are doing that thing known as Freedom. You don't like their beliefs, tough bleep. That the staff of a woman running for potus is talking about this at all should frighten everyone. Even leftists. You know. Today it's Catholics. Tomorrow it may be Baptists. The next day it may be Jehoviah Witness. Eventually, they will get around to squelching something YOU believe in. Maybe even Muslims.

Podesta never said a word for or against Conservative Catholicism, though, Compost, and neither did Palmieri. Halpin wrote to him and let off some steam. I don't like at all what Halpin said (and I'm not even Catholic) but everyone has bad days combating political foes.
That e-mail is not an official stance and I don't believe liberals actually want to take away anyone's freedom of religion. And no, I don't want to get in an argument about who can bake a cake.

I don't blame you...it's taking away religious freedom you said liberals don't and are not doing. A quandary or dilemma

I don't agree that it is taking away your religious freedom to insist it not interfere with the rights of others who do not believe as you do. And that's ALL I will say.

It is going against their religious freedom and of course that's all you'll say....that quandary after you yourself stated liberals are not trying to do it

It's not a quandary to me in the least. If it was, I'd say so. I think it's wrong to say you won't do business with a a homosexual because your religion says homosexuality is a sin. Fine, if it's a sin, don't be one, don't invite them to your picnic. Just don't discriminate. Aren't all the evangelicals saying they still support Trump because we all have sin? That we shouldn't judge? Handy how that only applies sometimes.

So your argument is it's OK to persecute Christians and their beliefs under the guise of "discrimination"....got ya

 

[JimBowie1958]

I think it's wrong to say you won't do business with a a homosexual because your religion says homosexuality is a sin.

No one says that, idiot.

The objection is to being forced to PARTICIPATE in an EVIL CEREMONY THAT MOCKS REAL MARRIAGE.

THAT is the sin, dear.

 

[Compost]

Ask the author of the story I posted, whose title is 'Kaine: No Apology Necessary for Clinton Team’s Mockery of Catholicism'.

The entire e-mail is copied in Post 7. It might be better if you read it and explained why YOU think it's a mockery of Catholicism. Rather than just spreading propaganda.

Dear Old Lady, I am too much of a lady to suggest you stuff your opinion up your whatnot. Here's the thing. Podesta is Clinton's boy. The email about reeducating Catholics is what it is. I'll spell it out. It's an outrage. Catholics are doing that thing known as Freedom. You don't like their beliefs, tough bleep. That the staff of a woman running for potus is talking about this at all should frighten everyone. Even leftists. You know. Today it's Catholics. Tomorrow it may be Baptists. The next day it may be Jehoviah Witness. Eventually, they will get around to squelching something YOU believe in. Maybe even Muslims.

Podesta never said a word for or against Conservative Catholicism, though, Compost, and neither did Palmieri. Halpin wrote to him and let off some steam. I don't like at all what Halpin said (and I'm not even Catholic) but everyone has bad days combating political foes.
That e-mail is not an official stance and I don't believe liberals actually want to take away anyone's freedom of religion. And no, I don't want to get in an argument about who can bake a cake.

It's so much easier to say the subject is overacting, then to react to the issue, isn't it?

What's to react to? I thought it was a mean thing to say, I said that.

Well, Mary Poppins. Did this guy agree or that guy agree? Spit spot. The emails don't matter! Yeah. It was "mean". Gosh. Thanks. That means nothing.

Well, that's all I got. That particular e-mail does not lead me to believe the Democrats are trying to revolutionize every religion in America. Sorry, not buying it.

Yes. Well. As Mary Poppins says, a job begun is half done.

 

[JimBowie1958]

So your argument is it's OK to persecute Christians and their beliefs under the guise of "discrimination"....got ya

The leftists have been doing that ever since the Jacobins took over France, and in every leftist revolution, from the barricades of the French communes to Lenins terrorism against the Russian people to Mao, Pol Pot and now ISIS.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Kaine is a blubbering bag of stupid...much like all demoquacks

Kain't and Unable

Sillary thinks of herself as Snow White. That's why she picked Dopey as her running mate.

 

[OldLady]

Excellent point. They can throw around "Thomistic" thought and "subsidiarity" and sound sophisticated because no one knows what the hell they're talking about.

So, instead of you elevating your ignorant ass, we Catholics need to lobotomize ourselves and be as ignorant as the average Dimocrat?

No thank you.

I didn't say that--don't know what either of those words even mean, but your quote box looks like I said it. Can you fix it?

 

[OldLady]

I think it's wrong to say you won't do business with a a homosexual because your religion says homosexuality is a sin.

No one says that, idiot.

The objection is to being forced to PARTICIPATE in an EVIL CEREMONY THAT MOCKS REAL MARRIAGE.

THAT is the sin, dear.

Baking a cake isn't participating in an evil ceremony!!!!! And the point is, not everyone in this country believes that it is evil. That's where we differ. I don't believe you have the right to tell homosexuals they are evil for marrying. That is going beyond the bounds of practicing your religion and basically trying to tell others how to live their lives.

 

[OldLady]

You Christians are the nastiest bunch anywhere.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Excellent point. They can throw around "Thomistic" thought and "subsidiarity" and sound sophisticated because no one knows what the hell they're talking about.

So, instead of you elevating your ignorant ass, we Catholics need to lobotomize ourselves and be as ignorant as the average Dimocrat?

No thank you.

I didn't say that--don't know what either of those words even mean, but your quote box looks like I said it. Can you fix it?

Sure, but this was your post in full.

Re: Conservative Catholicism
From:[email protected]
To: [email protected], [email protected]
Date: 2011-04-11 21:10
Subject: Re: Conservative Catholicism

Excellent point. They can throw around "Thomistic" thought and "subsidiarity" and sound sophisticated because no one knows what the hell they're talking about.

Jennifer Palmieri <[email protected]> wrote:
I imagine they think it is the most socially acceptable politically conservative religion. Their rich friends wouldn't understand if they became evangelicals.

----- Original Message -----
From: John Halpin
To: John Podesta <[email protected]>; Jennifer Palmieri
Sent: Mon Apr 11 18:55:59 2011
Subject: Conservative Catholicism

Ken Auletta's latest piece on Murdoch in the New Yorker starts off with the aside that both Murdoch and Robert Thompson, managing editor of the WSJ, are raising their kids Catholic. Friggin' Murdoch baptized his kids in Jordan where John the Baptist baptized Jesus. Many of the most powerful elements of the conservative movement are all Catholic (many converts) from the SC and think tanks to the media and social groups. It's an amazing bastardization of the faith. They must be attracted to the systematic thought and severely backwards gender relations and must be totally unaware of Christian democracy.
WikiLeaks - The Podesta Emails

Really? Okay, "severely backwards gender relations" is harsh. Who was it said by? Did Podesta or Palmieri agree with him? Was Clinton involved in this rant in any way? Is this an official stance of the Democratic Party, the way conversion therapy is on the Republican agenda? I agree with Kaine. This one individual, Halpin, can have his nasty opinion, same as you can have yours about Muslims. Please remember Clinton never said a word about any of this and was not even in on the conversation. So stuff this conversation up your ***.

You seem to be the author, but I will change it for you anyway.

 

[Compost]

 

[JimBowie1958]

Baking a cake isn't participating in an evil ceremony!!!!!

IT is if the cake is a material component for the EVIL celebration, yes, it most certainly is.

And the point is, not everyone in this country believes that it is evil. That's where we differ.

No we differ on a lot more than that. And just because some dont think that fagot marriage is evil does not obligate the people who do to participate in it.

I don't believe you have the right to tell homosexuals they are evil for marrying. That is going beyond the bounds of practicing your religion and basically trying to tell others how to live their lives.

No, that is the right of Freedom of Speech.

If you dont like it move to the UK.

 

[TNHarley]

basically trying to tell others how to live their lives.

But bakers should bake the cakes?