Comments (152)

My concern isn't that Obama "is" a Catholic, but that he's aligned with the Vatican's policies regarding the takeover of the United States political machinery. They don't care whether he's "one of them" if he is allied with them. The Empire of Rome hasn't been sleeping all these centuries. Their colonization of the U.S. from Ireland, Poland, Portugal and now from Mexico and Central America over the past hundred years or so is part of that policy. Notice that gun control is law in the areas that have already been taken over: Maryland, New York, New Jersey, California, etc. Why was (Irish Catholic) McCarthy so big on finding communists in the STate Department in the 1950's? It was a distraction so no one would notice that Catholics were taking over the State Department. And subsequently, the CIA. As soon as those Catholic colonists' U.S. citizen babies grow up to be registered voters, the world will be in for big trouble.

How well does ex-Catholic Muslim Victoria tolerate criticism of Islam? She has this to say about Paul, the celibate Apostle of Jesus ---

"interesting that you inutited the homophobia present in paul's writngs-
there are some catholic theologians who have theorized that the mysterious weakness of the flesh- that paul referred to several times but never identified- were his own honmosexual urges."

July 12, 2008 1:42 PM

Consider a more realistic explanation - the Catholic theologians who "intuited" Paul's homosexuality, although there is no mention of it by Paul himself, could have been plagued by homosexual feelings themselves which they were merely projecting on Paul. Paul being celibate could well have been plagued by heterosexual desires of the flesh.

After the Black Liberation Theology Church he attended for 20+ years, I can’t see how he can claim to be anything even close to catholic.

Try maybe Christian….. But definitely not catholic.

Stating that he is a catholic after all the Rev Wright bigotry going on, is a slap to the face and an insult to those of us that actually attend real catholic churches…

I have worked on events with Jewish, Catholic, Wiccan, athesis and of course Prebs which is the faith I nominally hold, and have supported Islamic groups in discussions and debates before. Which religion would the idiot author believe I hold to?

"Not losing any economic or security ground earned during the Bush years" What planet are you on?
McBush would continue the worst econimic and security mess in history, Obama is the only choice.

Here's my list of factors I'm considering when voing in November:

1. Not losing any economic or security ground earned during the Bush years.

Dwight wrote: "as far as the catholic pedophile scandal goes, it taught us there are limits to tolerance for gays..."

You obviously have no clue what "pedophilia" or "gay" mean. Its like linking rape with heterosexuality. Get a clue.

Spiderman, I agree with Paul C.

And catholics believe in loving your neighbor's kids in the most literal sense. Although catholic leadership has demonstrated itself to be chock full of pedophiles, I don't think that other protestant denoms are much better.

And the catholic church continues to believe that it has a moral voice in its leadership. (Only for people foolish enough to believe its leaders).

Thanks for your correction...I enjoyed the link. The cover story in this week's Newsweek mentioned he attended a Catholic School in Indonesia when he first arrived there at age 6. This article covers a lot of territory on Obama's faith: http://www.newsweek.com/id/145971/page/1

Punahou School was founded by Congregationalists, not Catholics.

http://www.punahou.edu/page.cfm?p=12

If more people would read Obama's two books, Dreams from My Father and The Audacity of Hope, comments to this and other Blogs might make more sense. It is my understanding that he won a scholarship to a Catholic High School in Honolulu, which he attended from age 11 or 12 until he graduated. Confirm or Deny--whatever you want to believe, he is well-educated and, win or lose the presidency, has already made remarkable contributions to many aspects of our culture.

Oe can act according to the social philosophy of Christ without believing in His Theology.

A qoute from Jose Rizal:

"Oh what blindness!! What Lack Of Undersatnding!!"

" Consider well that kind of religion that they are teaching you. See whether it is the will of the God or according to the teachings of Christ that the poor be succored and those who suffer alleviated. Consider what they are preaching to you, the object of the sermon, what is behind the masses, novenas, rosaries, scapularies, images, miracles, candles, belts, etc., etc.; which they daily keep before your minds; ears and eyes; jostling, shouting, and coaxing, INVESTIGATE whence they came and WHETHER THEY GO and then compare that religion with the pure religion of Christ and SEE whether the PRETENDED OBSERVANCE of the life of Christ does not remind of the fat milk cow or the fattened pig, which is encouraged to grow fat not through love of the animal, but for grossly mercenary motives. "

Paul C., Please also note that Jose Rizal loved his neighbor. He even died for them.

Spiderman2:
It would be much more Christian of you to highlight what you like about your religion than to constantly rail against Catholicism, particularly since you really know so little about it. Do you feel you need to degrade Catholicism to justify your protestantism? Christ taught us to love our neighbor as ourself. How are you doing that here?

Could Obama be a secret Catholic?

Was John Kerry a secret Catholic?

It seems that both Obama and Kerry were too secretly Catholic for the Catholic laity that votes in Presidential elections.

"candide: Most American Catholics don't give a damn about Dorothy Day or her socio-economic activities and thought."

Maybe not, but the Church sure seems intent on making her a Saint.

The Post was rather interesting, since right now in the local Arch Diocese "The big read is looking at just the terms presented here in 'Forming a proper conscience for voting.'

Obama drifting into becoming a Catholic?

I'd love to be at the Easter Vigil service where that happens.

OBrien wrote " Plenty of anti-Catholic bigotry in the US still. "Faith and good works" versus "Amazing Grace by Faith alone" ? "

I've seen lots of "good works" Catholicism has been doing. They promote SOCIAL ACTIVISM" but in reality, it's POVERTY (communism, rebelion, corruption, etc) that they are really promoting. Catholic nations are almost always at the top ten of most corrupt countries.

Judas once chided a woman for "wasting" oil into the feet of Jesus instead of giving it to the poor. That is what true Catholicism is. They preach good works but you can never see it in their action. Chaos and poverty is what governs almost all Catholic countries.

In fact almost all atheists and pagans here are former Catholics. The same can be said of liberal protestantism. They embrace almost similar doctrines.

"For we are His wormanship created in Christ Jesus unto good works".

It is salvation first before good works. False religions like Catholicism, etc does the reverse and usually because it's not by the power of Christ, the so called "good works" becomes very bad works. The killing continues in many parts of the world where their so called SOCIAL ACTIVISM was planted.

So stupid.

anon: I must note that in your response you did not explain how you reconcile supporting McCain and adhering to the Commandments at the same time.

As for you questions to me: Please remember that I am not required to do something that is not illegal. Also, remember that caesar's law is different than God's law. Therefore, I consider committing a sin (as you also admit it is), adultery in this instance, a transgression. To the best of my recollection, Obama has not killed anyone, so I do not believe that he has committed that sin. If you maintain that a vote is tantamount to killing, then you must admit that Bush/Cheney/McCain and every Senator and Congressman who voted to go to war in Iraq has killed hundreds of thousands and created millions of refugees. By extension anyone who supports them is guilty of the same.

As for the ordering of the Commandments, there are two sets: the first set refer to man's obligations to God and the second set refer to man's obligations to man (or society). I do not recall anything in the Old or New Testaments that ranks them in order of importance, nor anything that allows for full or partial adherence, based on the individual's choice.

The title of this piece is:

"Is Senator Obama a secret Catholic?"

Emphatically, NO!

He is not a secret Catholic, not a covert Catholic, not an overt Catholic, not an out in the open Catholic etc., etc. Not even a "wanna be" Catholic. Why?

No true Catholic votes against the "Infants Born Alive Act" as Obama did not once but four times as a state Senator.

Senator Obama is not a secret Catholic. PERIOD!

Next topic?

(PS. Ms. Quinn, please stay away from Catholic communion).

Gee, sure looks like we have a bunch of
scholars here. Of course, not one of you
has been able to convince the other to
change their thinking, because each one
thinks that he or she is so correct !
Religion is a wonderful idea, but it
is all about control, mind, money, etc.
Thank God we have the Roman Catholic Church
which everyone has such a high respect for, yea
right. This Pope is going to take the Roman
Empire down ! I sure God is looking down
and laughing away at the stupidity of these
creatures called human beings ! Keep
fighting amongst yourselves, it makes you
all look so intelligent ! Ha Hah !!

Why are you bringing back this silly discussion of Obama's alleged Catholicism? Is it a way of letting Sally Quinn off the hook?

To AMVIENNAVA:

All commandments are not of equal priority. There is a reason they are numbered as they are, 1 -10. Sins against God such as worshipping idols are worse than sins against man. Murder is worse than lying. Killing is worse than cheating on your wife. You cite McCain's alleged infidelity. Okay. What about Obama's votes for abortion? Killing innocent babies (or helping others to via laws you approve and money you give) is 100% worse than cheating on your wife.

What about Obama is appealing to Catholics? His "social policy" to help "those in need"? What good is social justice if you are in support of abortion, which kills precisely those babies most in need? The most basic right, human and constiutional, is the right to life... liberty and happiness and food and healthcare and all that are meaningless if you are dead! If Obama were a pro-life, anti-baby killing candidate, then maybe Catholics with a conscience could support him over another pro-life candidate like McCain. But in this election, I cannot see how a Catholic can support the most pro-abortion candidate in U.S. history over McCain, who has an excellent pro-life record.

Obama actually voted against an Illinois law that would simply save babies who SURVIVED the abortion from being left to die. How do you justify supporting that??

And ditto on Right POV's comments... WAPO is not really interested in a true Catholic representing their views, because that would be counter to WAPO's views - that's why they hired this guy for this column.

What about Obama is appealing to Catholics? His "social policy" to help "those in need"? What good is social justice if you are in support of abortion, which kills precisely those babies most in need? The most basic right, human and constiutional, is the right to life... liberty and happiness and food and healthcare and all that are meaningless if you are dead! If Obama were a pro-life, anti-baby killing candidate, then maybe Catholics with a conscience could support him over another pro-life candidate like McCain. But in this election, I cannot see how a Catholic can support the most pro-abortion candidate in U.S. history over McCain, who has an excellent pro-life record.

Obama actually voted against an Illinois law that would simply save babies who SURVIVED the abortion from being left to die. How do you justify supporting that??

And ditto on Right POV's comments... WAPO is not really interested in a true Catholic representing their views, because that would be counter to WAPO's views - that's why they hired this guy for this column.

The Post is trying oh so hard to make Obama look like the messiah. Why are all the religion articles about Obama these days? Hello...he went to a political organization disgused as a "church" for 20 years that spewed hatred. Please make the Religion section of the Post reflect religion. Stop making this into a political forum. It is a disgrace.

There seem to be some very strict self-labeled 'Christians' and 'Catholics' here (Catholics please note that some of those 'Christians' do not consider you or me to be sufficiently Christian). Out of curiosity: McCain had a wife and mistress (the current saintly Mrs.) at the same time. That is a sin. It also shows incredibly poor judgment, since having a wife and a mistress is very expensive. It also shows a strong tendency to lie to one or the other, or both. (I know these because I have worked with many capable but also stupid people).

Since all commandments are of equal priority, can you really support, let alone vote, for McCain? If so, what is your justification and how do you reconcile it with the 'strict' and absolute interpretations you present.

You know, I have no idea why I read these crap articles. I must be a masochist.

Maybe some day WAPO will ask someone who knows Catholicism to write about Catholicism. What a novel concept.

I have serious, serious concern over the line:
"Thus, instead of pitting the Church-related groups against non-religious groups in the Bush-Dobson style, Obama says he’ll put them together."

For instance?

How can you throw out such an accusationa nd not provide evidence.

And as for Obama "putting them together" you are right- he sure will. Once he tells the Orthodox Jews who run the drug counciling center that they MUST hire an atheist to get funding. Or the Catholic nuns MUST hire this person, or the Protestant shelter MUST hire that person. He will stick them all together: stripped of their identity, of their religious core and their effectiveness.

Many people of faith were AGAINST faith-based initiatives exactly for this reason. Because under Bush it works. Under a pragmatist, leftist, hate filled, religion despising radical- it loses all it's purpose and becomes another way to paganize America.

I will stop reading these crappy articles. I will stop reading these crappy articles. I will strop reading these crappy articles....

My premise...any one of us who has more than he/she needs, has that "extra" at the expense of any one who has less than he/she needs. Per God's/Nature's rules, because of this, we are UNSAVABLE. To put it in a Christian perspective, all fall short of the rightiousness of God and ought to be thrown into the fires of hell (i.e., all are sinners). Only by God's Grace are we SAVABLE. So, having read all the self-righteous comments here, from all sides, I ask a simple question. Do you have more than one set of clothes? Are there naked people on the Earth? Then why don't you share your extra to clothe the naked? Do you ever throw away old food from your kitchen? Then why don't you share your extras to feed the hungry, before you purchase things ultimately to be wasted? I believe all children who die (abortion, starvation, abuse) go right to heaven to be comforted by God Himself. The rest of us have to admit out sinfulness and ask for God's mercy and Grace. So, why do we fight and call each other names and do just the opposite of God's command...Love one another? We are indeed a bunch of weak-minded and heartless souls, are we not?

Anyone who thinks Obama even remotely resembles Catholic teaching would be an easy mark, er, prospect to buy that bridge in Brooklyn.

interesting that you inutited the homophobia present in paul's writngs-
there are some catholic theologians who have theorized that the mysterious weakness of the flesh- that paul referred to several times but never identified- were his own honmosexual urges.

Tomfrom:

"And to ANGELA who seems to be almost deifying Dobson, You quote extensively from St. Paul, but I have no idea where you found that translation. I just checked a half dozen bible translations from very different traditions and I can find nothing mentioning “male prostitutes.” In fact, I am not sure such thing existed back then although clearly homosexuality did. But when you make these things up or translate the Greek to suit yourself, that calls into question your motives. In that, I believe you are indeed very similar to what I have seen of Dobson."

Well, Tom, it's been a while since I heard this bit discussed, so I can't quite recall the specifics. If you have had a crack at the Greek, yourself, you may know what I'm talking about:

In one of Paul's verses that Christian conservatives use to justify homophobia, there's a Greek word *no one can actually really translate:* it's either obscure slang or a forgotten slur or who-knows what, but it's been translated different ways to suit a number of purposes, anything from 'catamite' to 'effeminate' to (male) homosexual to (male receptive) homosexual, to, well, whatever suits.

(Yeah, Christian Scripture doesn't overtly say anything about the queer girls, except for Paul claiming men should 'naturally use' us, but that doesn't stop moderns from presuming 'God hates' us, too.)

You can be pretty certain male prostitutes existed, ...apart from common sense, there's nothing in the culture of the time to argue against it: the rather staid patriarchal family values of that part of the world were all about married men living up to certain obligations, not so much about *not* doing anything else: it was a societal obligation to have and raise a family, (Apparently even if one was really gay, it was no Utopia of romantic love that way) but sex-workers were seen as part of that system and even a civilizing influence.

There were also much-commented-upon 'temple prostitutes' in many Goddess temples of the time, including, at least, people we'd call 'transsexuals' today, something the Jews despised as a foreign religious practice (that's why it was a ritually-unclean 'abomination' to have gay sex before entering the sanctum of the temple of Jerusalem, alongside other 'abominations' like eating certain things, touching pigskin, or wearing mixed fibers, (probably that bit is to keep a distance from the colorful regalia of some neighboring religions' clergy, I digress...)

...But in any event, these 'temple prostitutes,' of both sexes and all, were part of a notion that sex and sexuality weren't inherently unclean and nasty, but rather the opposite: sex itself particularly in the context of the Goddess was actually seen as cleansing and life-affirming, particularly to make a man fit for civilized life again after the red work of warfare: a far cry from the presumption of 'moral degradation' that monotheist eyes see the notion in terms of.

Not that there weren't a lot of people who tended to see this as superstition that might distract some from their obligations to settle down and make more citizens for the state (A real concern in those days, when numbers meant survival)

It's a problem for homophobic translators of the Bible, (as in, 'translators of the Bible, really) that the concept of 'A Homosexual' didn't really exist in the modern way... the much-commented-upon traditions of pederasty (*not* pedophilia, I'm talking about people considered to be coming into sexual maturity) and idealization of beautiful youth obviously had its own capacities for abuse and exploitation, but in many ways it was not the same as when that happens modernly: in large measure because it was seen, like in some tribal societies with similar traditions, not as a violation or 'robbing' of manhood, but actually *conferring* it.

And that's not to condone anything, as a modern Pagan that's simply not acceptable. But all that sexuality-and-religion-and-society stuff had its *own* context in the culture of the time: there wasn't a pre-existing notion that what Christians don't like was sinful and awful and selfish and degraded and all the rest.

Personally, I have a not-original pet theory that Paul *was* abused somehow, and saw the new religion as a way to get back at those that hurt him, ...he's got that homophobia in spades, after all, (If he wrote it in the first place, mind you, but it makes sense if he was hurt bad, then walked out into the Classical world with serious issues about anything resembling what hurt him. He was on a lead-spitting *tear* about all that. People try to take that absolutism as 'gospel,' and figure there's something inherently awful about anything 'homosexual,' but the category didn't actually exist as such in the world he frothed at. )

You can be assured there were male prostitutes, though. Few would bat an eyelash at it, unless someone wasn't 'growing up' and living up to their obligations to raise more citizens for the state.

That's not to endorse anything in particular, which I'm sure people will leap to do. But it was a different world, where people married young (Not a wonderful deal for most women unless you liked the same kind of barefoot-and-pregnant lifestyle modern Christian fundies advocate,) and always had practical concerns about populations of free citizens and warriors.

Trying to translate that into modern ideas of homosexuality and monotheist forms of homophobia would be misleading even if *not* for people trying to use whatever translation they can make up for a forgotten word as an excuse to oppress a minority, though.

First Things First:

Our War on Terror and Aggression:

An update (or how we are spending or how we have spent USA taxpayers’ money to eliminate global terror and aggression)

The terror and aggression status via a Partial and Recent Body Count

1) Assassination of Benazir Bhutto

2) 9/11, 3000 mostly US citizens killed, 1000’s injured

3) The 24/7 Sunni-Shiite centuries-old blood feud currently being carried out in Iraq, 4100 US troops and 85,318 – 93,060 Iraqi civilians http://www.iraqbodycount.org/

4) Kenya- In Nairobi, about 212 people were killed and an estimated 4000 injured; in Dar es Salaam, the attack killed at least 11 and wounded 85.[2]

5) Bali-in 2002-killing 202 people, 164 of whom were foreign nationals, and 38 Indonesian citizens. A further 209 people were injured.

6) Bali in 2005- Twenty people were killed, and 129 people were injured by three bombers who killed themselves in the attacks.

7) Spain in 2004- killing 191 people and wounding 2,050.

8) UK in 2005- The bombings killed 52 commuters and the four radical Islamic suicide bombers, injured 700.

Other elements of our War on Terror:

1. Saddam, his sons and major henchmen have been deleted. Saddam's bravado about WMD was one of his major mistakes.

2. Iran is being been contained. (beside containing the Sunni-Shiite civil war in Baghdad, that is the main reason we are in Iraq. And yes, essential oil continues to flow from the region.)

3. Libya has become almost civil. Apparently this new reality from an Islamic country has upset OBL and his “crazies” as they recently threatened Libya. OBL sure is a disgrace to the world especially the Moslem world!!! Or is he???

4. North Korea is still uncivil but is contained. With the opening up of rail traffic between North and South Korea after 50 years and with the assistance of the US Navy in retrieving NK ships and personnel, a fresh sense of civility is afoot.

Recently NK destroyed most of its uranium enrichment facilities.

5. Northern Ireland is finally at peace.

6. The Jews and Palestinians are being separated by walls. Hopefully the walls will follow the 1948 UN accords and the Annapolis Peace Conference is at least somewhat successful.

7. Bin Laden has been cornered under a rock in Western Pakistan since 9/11.

8. Fanatical Islam has basically been contained to the Middle East but a wall between India and Pakistan would be a plus for world peace. Ditto for a wall between Afghahistan and Pakistan.

9.Timothy McVeigh was executed. Terry Nichols will follow soon.

10. Eric Rudolph is spending three life terms in prison with no parole.

11. Jim Jones, David Koresh, Kaczynski, the "nuns" from Rwanda, and the KKK were all dealt with and either eliminated themselves or are being punished.

12. Islamic Sudan, Darfur and Somalia are still terror hot spots.

13. The terror and torture of Muslims in Bosnia, Kosovo and Kuwait were ended by the proper application of the military forces of the USA and her freedom-loving friends.

14. And of course the bloody terror brought about the Japanese, Nazis and Communists was with great difficulty eliminated by the good guys.

WHOOPS That should have read "4 of the 9" not "4 of the 5." Sorry for being so careless.

I have no idea if this blog does a Cinderella at midnight, but for what it is worth, I want to post a few responses.

First to MACAMELE, thanks for the kind words. I would say that the chasing of the money lenders from the Temple is a condemnation of greed, hypocrisy (as you no doubt recall, He was very big on criticizing the hypocrisy of the established religious leaders of the time – a lesson we should never forget).

And to ANGELA who seems to be almost deifying Dobson, You quote extensively from St. Paul, but I have no idea where you found that translation. I just checked a half dozen bible translations from very different traditions and I can find nothing mentioning “male prostitutes.” In fact, I am not sure such thing existed back then although clearly homosexuality did. But when you make these things up or translate the Greek to suit yourself, that calls into question your motives. In that, I believe you are indeed very similar to what I have seen of Dobson.

Like most conservatives, he picks and chooses to serve his political agenda, not the Lord’s. To make my point, when is the last time the Conservatives called upon the government to practice “turning the other cheek,” turning swords into plowshares,” “love your enemies,” “do good to those who hate you.” I admit I have a hard time practicing some of these in my every day life – but nobody said Christianity is easy. But just maybe our country would not be in the mess we are in if had followed more of what God said instead of honing in on a few principles that are not too difficult to follow. As a male, I have no trouble not having an abortion. As a heterosexual, homosexuality is not a temptation so it is easy to be against them, but loving that guy who just took my parking space is not so easy. Remember is was these same so-called Christians who went after Dukakis who gave perhaps the most Christian answer to Bernard Shaw’s question about his wife being raped. If I am going to claim to be a follower of the same Jesus who said “Father forgive them,” who put the ear back after Peter tried to defend Him in the garden. I say if we take literally what we say each day about “forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us,” then Dukakis is a much better Christian than I am. But who came after him and condemned him? Not the left. I have no problem with people debating his or any other person’s politics, but the Conservatives apparently feel they cannot win that so they attack the person and with regard to religious values. Does the word “Pharisee” ring a bell?

And I see hypocrisy throughout. Isn’t it odd that the same people who are so critical of criticizing judges for overturning the vote of the majority and thus “legislating from the bench” have literally rejoiced when the same court voted 5-4 to overturn a law favored by the majority of voters in DC and thus try to reinstate the attitude of the old west which our ancestors had the good sense to change. Oh, they will argue, this is a guaranteed right. But what it really is is exactly the same as what they condemn – the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the right. If one does not think that is true, note that 4 of the 5 did not agree.

I hope this gets on in time for someone to read it.

Rights for the dignity of Lesbians, Bisexuals, Gays and Transsexuals (LGBT) is a human rights issue.

LGBT are created by the same God as the heterosexuals and have as little choice about their sexual orientation as heterosexuals do. It is not right to play God and deny them their human right for happiness in a committed relationship.

Since Senator Obama seems to fit the Vatican II Catholic bill, Catholics only need to ask what his support for what is being infanticide means.

Offering legal abortion in the earliest stages to protect the health and life of a mother who would otherwise seek the services of a quack is one thing, but to kill a child that is born in spite of attempts to kill it is another.

Since it is a man made law, it can be changed. But a dead infant cannot be brought back to life.

Comprehensive sex education, availability of contraceptives for all women is a must. It has to do with reducing the number of abortions and STDs.

Dr. S-A is a strong Democrat and this, like other articles, is meant to show how Catholics could support Obama.

Anybody using the term "Catholic Vote" doesn't know what he's talking about. There's no such thing.

Anonymity is fertilizer to the cowardice of racism.

Obama is courting the Catholic vote which explains the Catholic language he's using. Doug Kmiec is helping Obama deceive Catholics into voting for him despite his support for abortion on demand and infanticide. Faithful Catholics will not vote for Obama!

Nice list! Here are my top five Protestant issues. I have placed an asterisk by the ones that are grounded in my faith.

1. Health care*
2. The War in Iraq*
3. The Economy*
4. The Environment*
5. Our Constitutional Rights

Numbers 1,2,3 and 4 are pro-life issues. It's amazing to me how Christians hate abortion but are supportive of not providing food or life-and-death health care after a child is born.

If the key to heaven is faith, not works, is being gay not a 'work'? We are all sinners, and the hierarchy of sin is up to God. If He judges that greed and war are worse than being gay, many so-called Christians are in BIG trouble.

" Fred:

""Words? Just Words? When Obama said bitter people "cling to their guns and religion.""

In context, what he was saying that often people *cling* to gun control and religious issues instead of economic and labor issues that would actually better their lives.

Yes, people bitterly cling to those issues and instead vote for 'conservatives' that funnel our national wealth, the future, and their tax dollars to the very wealthiest.

Frankly, the reaction proves it.

"Words? Just Words? When Obama said he was ashamed of his white grandmother's "typical" white person talk."

There's a new one. But it was pretty typical of white folks to not exactly speak kindly of their daughter marrying a black guy. That's reality.

"Words? Just Words? When Obama said he could no sooner disown Rev. Wright than he could the black community -- then went on to disown him anyway."

Breaking ties is different from 'disowning.' Even repudiating.

"Words? Just Words? When Obama said he wouldn't want his daughter to be "punished" witha baby"

Let's face it, those who want to enforce their 'pro-life,' anti-contraception, anti-sex-ed agenda on the whole nation are in fact trying to 'punish' 'wayward women' for not obeying their religious commands.

That agenda is nothing *but* punitive. If it were about *babies* they'd be passing out condoms, demanding paid parental leave and job security, and making sure no result of an unplanned pregnancy ever ever went hungry or homeless.

TomfromNJ1... I enjoyed your post, just interesed to know how would you interpret Jesus throwing the money lenders out of the Temple (one of the few times that Jesus was portrayed as truly angry)?

Mortal stated: I am a Catholic, and my Top 10 issues for this presidential election are (in no particular order):

1. The War in Iraq
2. The Environment
3. The Economy
4. Science and Research (to include the space program)
5. The Federal Deficit
6. Our Constitutional Rights
7. National Infrastructure (roads, bridges, etc.)
8. Disaster Preparedness (no more Katrinas)
9. International Relations, and our Image Abroad
10. Health Care

Hmmm... "pro-life" nowhere on that list."

I am also Catholic, Mortal, and I have to disagree... I think that #s 1 & 10 are 'pro-life' issues. I also think that the other 8 of your issues are very much about official Catholic Social Teaching which the Bishops have stated should all be informing the way we vote. It amazes me the Catholics who scream the loudest against abortion and say nothing about some of the documents that are still heralded by the Bishops as the foundation of Catholic Social Teaching:
Rerum Novarum (On the Condition of Labor) which talks to the dignity of work and and rights of workers
Pacem in Terris (Peace on Earth)
Mater et Magistra (Christianity & Social Progress)
It is these, broader and more inclusive Catholic Social themes perhaps that Obama is speaking of, and it is about time that somebody does instead of 1-issue politicians highjacking the discussion of what it means to be "pro-life", "christian", or "Catholic"

Words? Just Words? When Obama said bitter people "cling to their guns and religion."

Words? Just Words? When Obama said he was ashamed of his white grandmother's "typical" white person talk.

Words? Just Words? When Obama said he could no sooner disown Rev. Wright than he could the black community -- then went on to disown him anyway.

Words? Just Words? When Obama said he wouldn't want his daughter to be "punished" witha baby.

I don't think the columnist actually intended to suggest Obama's really Catholic, never mind about to become one; just pointing out that he approves of some similarities he sees.

can BLACK Obama enter WHITE house

Let's stick to reality, here, shall we? I know Obama engenders a great deal of fantasy in people's minds, but there is nothing about the man that indicates he is going to "become a Catholic."

This is standard politician pandering, working the Catholic vote, and nothing more.

How funny that President Bush was denigrated for seeming "too Catholic" (because he's prolife) but Obama is being touted as "SO Catholic!"

What an intellectually dishonest article.

Alex: I'd like to remind you of some bible quotes (old and new testament): Exodus 20:13; 13 "You shall not murder (abortion), Leviticus: 20:13; 'If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads (homosexuality); ---NEW TESTAMENT: 1 Corinthians 6:9-13; 9Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God., Romans 1:21-32: 21For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

24Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

26Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

28Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. 29They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them. NOW IF YOU SAY YOU'RE A CHRIST FOLLOWER, DO YOU PICK AND CHOOSE WHAT YOU BELIEVE OR DO YOU NOT BELIEVE THE BIBLE IS GOD'S WORD. I BELIEVE JAMES DOBSON BELIEVE'S GOD'S WORD...John 14:21; Whoever has my commands and obeys them, he is the one who loves me. He who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love him and show myself to him.". DO YOU BELIEVE AND OBEY GOD'S COMMANDS...OR DO YOU MAKE UP WHAT YOU BELIEVE GOD BELIEVES NOW AS I GUESS HE'S CHANGED HIS MIND...Mark 8:38; If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his Father's glory with the holy angels."

So Tom thinks that "pro-life" is the most important issue for Catholics in this election?

I am a Catholic, and my Top 10 issues for this presidential election are (in no particular order):

1. The War in Iraq
2. The Environment
3. The Economy
4. Science and Research (to include the space program)
5. The Federal Deficit
6. Our Constitutional Rights
7. National Infrastructure (roads, bridges, etc.)
8. Disaster Preparedness (no more Katrinas)
9. International Relations, and our Image Abroad
10. Health Care

Hmmm... "pro-life" nowhere on that list.

neb nilknarf: How dare you? Good works don't get you into heaven nor does taking communion. Evidently, you should read the Holy Bible and stop criticizing James Dobson and look at Jesus instead of being filled w/religiosity. If you are someone who professes to be a Christian and doesn't think abortion and gay marriage is wrong, please meditate on Exodus 20 and also 1 Corinthians 13:5.

neb nilknarf: How dare you? Good works don't get you into heaven nor does taking communion. Evidently, you should read the Holy Bible and stop criticizing James Dobson and look at Jesus instead of being filled w/religiosity. If you are someone who professes to be a Christian and doesn't think abortion and gay marriage is wrong, please meditate on Exodus 20 and also 1 Corinthians 13:5.

"3. A president's religion is relevant - at least Kennedy thought so, and he addressed it head on.
Not like this guy."

What, like by going on television and giving a long talk about what his religion and controversial ex-pastor *does* mean to him, so roundly-ignored by those who'd rather claim he should, rather, be suspected of being anything but what he is?

While I enjoyed the article, I think many of these comments went off the deep end. May I offer a little reality check.

When it is convenient, James Dobson bills himself as a doctor of psychology and claims to speak from that platform. But if that is the case (and I doubt that many of his views are in sync with the mainstream of that field, but I will give him his claim), then why should he be able to pontificate on theology?

I do have a graduate degree in theology and I find many of the claims people make here to be totally out in left field. For example, people throwing the word “Communist” around to attack social justice. I see absolutely nothing in the Bible about capital