It would be nice if that nutcase, opportunist prick Randall Terry, who exploited Terry Schiavo's "existence," fomented hatred of women trying to get legal abortions and the clinics who help them and is now getting himself in the news over Notre Dame's commencement invitation to Pres. Obama would just do himself in once and for all. I hope he takes the ANTI-CHOICE movement down with him. He is certainly not PRO-LIFE. He is only pro-Randall Terry. To me, pro-life is keeping the government's hands out of decisions that can only be determined by the woman who bears the child--whether she can provide an upbringing that nurtures that child and is not fraught with desperation and physical and emotional deficiencies from the get-go.

And then there's the death penalty. Some of our state governments have done a great job with that one. Not. WTF?

The religious extremists' campaign against abortion has nothing to do with being "pro-life." After all, the vast majority have no problem with the death penalty, unprovoked wars of aggression, torture, or any interest in the welfare of children once they're born.

The zealots' real motivation is that they're anti-sex: Anti-contraception, anti-sex education, anti-homosexuality, anti-masturbation -- any form of non-procreative sex.

They are so revulsed by sex that if a means were found to reproduce without the act, many would campaign against heterosexual, marital intercourse.

They're not "pro-life," just afflicted with a severe form of sexual deviancy.

People like Randall Terry do more to destroy Christianity than any other single reason. All one has to do is look at him to see just how evil fanaticism is. That's all people like him are fanatics. It makes no difference if it's Christian, Muslim, Hindu or Jewish it is an evil the dwells in religion. Anyone with any eyes eventually sees it and either joins it or rejects it. All it does is eventually bring on a new liberal age. Because people quickly grow tired of fanatics like him!

The local Catholic High school in my area has a fair number of Jewish kids attending as well as many non Catholics. It is a very well respected school. Catholic Schools are not Catholic Fundamentalist institutions and yes they often allow a wide range of views, while teaching the Catholic values. Teaching the dogma is generally the job of Catechism. Many non Catholics don't understand this and in fact, many Catholics don't understand this because they themselves didn't attend a Catholic University.

Randall Terry is new to Catholicism and I suspect, converted to hitch his wagon to its establishment. Operation Rescue wants nothing to do with him.

http://www.operationrescue.org/three-statements-concerning-randall-terrys-unbiblical-lawsuit-against-troy-newman/

Here are some Randall Terry quotes.

http://exchristian.net/exchristian/2002/03/randall-terry-quotes.php

Finally, Terry and Allan Keyes have something in common, hatred of Obama and kids who came out of the closet who they then threw out of their lives.

Let this guy get the Camera, by all means. Give him the mike. This will go over very big with the Notre Dame alumni, many of whom are in the Chicago area.

I spoke with a friend of mine yesterday, who is a student at Notre Dame.

He said all the protests were coming from people off campus.

Just another Right Wing-Nut manufactured controversy.

Love that photo. Got me to thinking.

"I'm sorry officer, you need to be this high to get on this ride."

Sorry, couldn't resist.

I don't understand the utter failure of the media to point out that Catholic theology views abortion and death penalty executions as the same sin-- the taking of life. How is the hypocrisy of bishops objecting to Obama on the grounds of his abortion rights support, but welcoming George W. Bush, a man who personally signed death warrants, overlooked?

Randall Terry is alive? Who knew?

In the 4th, 5th, or 6th (not really sure) year of the reign of Paul VI, when Nixon was Tetrarch of the U. S., a decree went forth from Rome that all invited Catholic psychologists, sexologists, gynecologists, and related disciplines should assemble in a conclave for the purpose of reexamining the Church's teaching on birth control. Inasmuch as this was not thought to be just some idle curiosity exercise, but a real second look at the infallible and unchanging magisterium stand on this area of faith and morals (constant since Pius XI's encyclical "Castii Conubii" ca. 1930s), some news journalists (this was a time when they still existed)wondered out loud if a change in the Church's teaching on birth control (only "rhythm" was permitted, and that only for a good cause that could be reconciled with the Genesis biblical mandate, taken literally by Holy Mother Church, to "increase and multiply and fill(literally) the earth")might be imminent.

At a press conference during the gathering, a reporter asked a Vatican spokesman if the reexamining of the Church's teaching meant that the Church was in a state of doubt about its present proscription of birth control for any reason whatsoever. What was really behind the question was an obscure canon law principle known as the principle of "probabilism." Simply stated, this principle held that "an obligation that was not certain did not bind." That is, if there was at the present time a state of doubt about what the Church's formal teaching was on the subject (and many priests, some 50,000 or more who would leave the Church over this issue, were already counseling penitents to "follow their conscience on the matter" per the principle of probabilism) then Catholics were free to practice birth control until the Church made up its mind. The Vatican spokesman, sly fox that he was, saw the trap in the loaded question. His response to the reporter was that the Church was in no doubt about its present teaching. "Well," replied the reporter, "What then if the Church, as a result of the deliberations of the conclave should change its teaching on birth control?" The spokesman's eyes narrowed, and a slight smile appeared on his lips as he replied, "That merely means that the Church will have moved from one state of certainty to another."

The above account is from my memory. I don't have enough imagination to have conjured it up out of fantasy. The point I'm wanting to make is that given this iron clad canonical mentality, it is easy to understand why, at the time of Nixon's carpet bombing of Vietnam, with the blowing to bits of 3 million mostly civilians and many of whom may have been carrying zygotes, blastocysts, hydatidiform moles, etc. in their wombs, Vatican spokesmen saw no contradiction between giving a pass on genocide while holding the line on birth control. The saying at the time was that if they were dropping contraceptives on the Vietnamese instead of bombs, the Catholic Bishops would have been in the streets in protest.

Locally today the Bishop of Scranton, Pa. threatens a U. S. Senator with denial of the sacraments and excommunication for voting for one of Obama's cabinet picks who is anti-compulsory pregnancy. Even though the Senator (Casey) has made a political career out of being pro-compulsory pregnancy. What is needed is for our "heroes" in Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Gaza to start dropping contraceptives on civilians, and we will see Holy Mother Church put an end to preemptive wars.