Catholic Vote endorses Mitt Romney for president for his support of life, marriage, and religious liberty

Are you one of the millions of Catholics wondering how to cast your ballot this fall?  

CatholicVote.org has done the research for us.  Their breakdown makes the choice clear.  Mitt Romney is more in line with Catholic values than President Obama when it comes to crucial issues such as life, marriage, and freedom of religion.

Catholic Vote:  

We have life, marriage and religious liberty at the top of the list, because these issues are foundational. And on life, marriage and religious liberty, Mitt Romney is immeasurably better than Barack Obama.

We believe the choice is clear: Catholics should vote for Mitt Romney for President.

We have also included other areas of concern to Catholic voters, including fiscal responsibility, education and health care. On these issues, we also think Mitt Romney comes out on top. Unlike abortion which involves an intrinsic evil which can never be justified, Catholics are free to disagree on which approach is best on education, health care and education.

Go to CatholicVote.org for the specific policies of each candidate.

Are women responsible for porn?

Patrick Wanis asserts on Fox News that:

Porn is becoming a new ideal and value for young girls. And women are responsible. 

 Porn could never have become mainstream and socially acceptable without the support and endorsement by women. In human behavior, we call this ‘the law of frequency’ -- the more often two things are linked, the more powerful that association becomes until they become inseparable. And women and the media have linked consuming porn or behaving like a porn actress with instant money, fame, power, glamour, prestige, respectability and social acceptability. In other words, if you become a porn actress or behave like one, you will triumph with all of these things. 

 Accordingly, girls are more fascinated and driven by the desire to become famous than they are to become an engineer, doctor or scientist: Kim Kardashian has 14 million followers on Twitter.Thus, women are creating new values and morality promoting money, power and glamour as more important than intelligence, achievement, motherhood or contribution.

They say sex sells.  But customers can't buy what you refuse to sell.

‘To compare the homosexual dilemma to that of the Civil Rights Movement is a disgrace’

John Hawkins interviewed Rev. William Owens of the Coalition of African American Pastors about same-sex marriage. 

Right Wing News excerpts:

In every election, in every campaign where the marriage amendment has been on the ballot, blacks in large numbers have been against it and Americans have been against it. But he’s [President Obama] not interested in what the people want. He’s interested in what a few people who can give him big money want. And I don’t take back what I said about him being a Judas. He does not hope to win the election because more gays are going to vote for him. He endorsed homosexual marriage because of the large sums of money that it brought him. 

 I had two members of the board of NAACP call me and tell me why the NAACP endorsed same sex marriage. It was money. It was absolute and they gave the name of the person who gave the money. And they had to do it on the…cloak of darkness. Had they done it the way they should have done it, they never would have been endorsed by the NAACP. 

 Q. There are many people who make the argument that gay marriage is just like the Civil Rights struggle of the 60′s. What do you think of that comparison?  

It turns my stomach. I was in the Civil Rights Movement and…to compare the homosexual dilemma to that of the Civil Rights Movement is a disgrace. The person must not have been living there, like Obama wasn’t a part of it, or they don’t know what happened to black people in the South that brought on the Civil Rights Movement.

On behalf of CAAP, Owens is gathering support for pro-gender marriage at 100,000 Signatures for Marriage.

Franciscan University of Steubenville investigated for teaching Catholic beliefs on homosexuality

LIfeSiteNews:

The national agency which grants accreditation to social work courses is questioning Franciscan University of Steubenville over a course which lists homosexuality as a deviant behavior.  Attention was drawn to the course by a group of Franciscan University alumni, identifying themselves as “Franciscan Gay Alumni & Allies”, who are demanding publicly that the university “revise its course descriptions and to stop contributing the culture of hate and ignorance.” 

The course is called ‘Deviant Behavior’ and the part of the course description in question states, “The behaviors that are primarily examined are murder, rape, robbery, prostitution, homosexuality, mental illness, and drug use.”

You know what’s deviant?  Demanding that a Catholic university deviate from Catholic teaching.

Obamacare to Hobby Lobby: pay for abortion drugs or face fine up to 1.3 million daily

Reacting to the attack on Americans in Libya, President Obama said just yesterday, "the United States rejects efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others..."

And yet Obama's signature healthcare mandate denigrates the religious beliefs of millions of Americans who oppose abortions, contraception, and sterilizations.  

Case in point:  Hobby Lobby, a family owned business run on Christian principles with over 500 stores in 41 states.

Hobby Lobby CEO and founder David Green explained in USA Today:

We're Christians, and we run our business on Christian principles. I've always said that the first two goals of our business are 1) to run our business in harmony with God's laws, and 2) to focus on people more than money. And that's what we've tried to do. We close early so our employees can see their families at night. We keep our stores closed on Sundays, one of the week's biggest shopping days, so that our workers and their families can enjoy a day of rest. We believe that it is by God's grace that Hobby Lobby has endured, and he has blessed us and our employees. We've not only added jobs in a weak economy, we've also raised wages for the past four years in a row. Our full-time employees start at 80% above minimum wage. 

But now, our government threatens to change all of that. A new government health care mandate says that our family business must provide what I believe are abortion-causing drugs as part of our health insurance. Being Christians, we don't pay for drugs that might cause abortions. Which means that we don't cover emergency contraception, the morning-after pill or the week-after pill. We believe doing so might end a life after the moment of conception, something that is contrary to our most important beliefs. It goes against the biblical principles on which we have run this company since day one. If we refuse to comply, we could face $1.3 million per day in government fines. 

Our government threatens to fine job creators in a bad economy. Our government threatens to fine a company that's raised wages four years running. Our government threatens to fine a family for running its business according to its beliefs. It's not right. 

With the help of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, Hobby Lobby filed a lawsuit asking the government to stop the mandate.  Because this case is integral to religous liberty, the Becket Fund is taking on the job for no compensation.  However, they are up against the coffers of the government.  If you want to help defend religious liberty with a $10 donation, click here.

Clinging to Bible is bad but clinging to Koran is good?

The response to the tragic death of Americans in Libya begs the question:  Does the Obama administration have a double standard when it comes to freedom of religion?

We’re familiar with President Obama’s supercilious attitude towards Christians and Catholics.  Recall his comment about the bitter people who “cling to guns or religion” as a “way to explain their frustrations.”

The Obama administration has run roughshod over freedom of religion here at home.  They are campaigning on the right to force Americans to pay for birth control, abortions and sex change operations against their beliefs.  They refuse to defend DOMA, leaving Christian and Catholic business owners open to lawsuits by same-gender couples.  The Democratic National Convention stumbled over God and Jerusalem in their party platform.

But when it comes to Muslims, President Obama claims the U.S. “rejects efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others.”

Are we witnessing a double standard?

Chris Wysocki spells it out for us in his WyBlog post:  "No Mr. Obama, the U.S. does not always reject efforts to denigrate religious beliefs"

Mitt Romney is right — the Obama Administration is continually equivocating when it comes to condeming the Islamic attacks on our embassies in Libya and Egypt. Every single statement they release begins with some variation on "the United States rejects efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others". 

Here's Barry: 

"While the United States rejects efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others, we must all unequivocally oppose the kind of senseless violence that took the lives of these public servants," Obama said. 

And here's Hillary: 

"The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation." 

What they both mean, of course, is the United States opposes any denigration of Islam. Put a crucifix in urine and the United States Government will send you checks courtesy of the National Endowment for the Arts. 

And if they stood behind the religious beliefs of Jews they wouldn't get all tongue-tied whenever someone asks if Jerusalem is the Capital of Israel. 

For that matter, an Administration which honored religious beliefs wouldn't use Obamacare to trample all over the Catholic Church.

My Big Fat Greek Lawsuit: no opting out of sex ed in Ontario school

“They essentially told the father … that his religious beliefs must be suppressed in the name of ‘equity’”  Lou Iacobelli, The Parental Rights in Education Defense Fund

A member of the Greek Orthodox Church has sued a schoolboard in Ontario, Canada for violating his right to withdraw his children from controversial sexual education classes.

LifeSiteNews:

Dr. Steve Tourloukis, a dentist, says the suit comes after he has been asking for accommodation from the Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board since Sept. 2010. A member of the Greek Orthodox Church, he has a daughter in grade 1 and a son in grade 4. 

“[I want them] to acknowledge my inherent parental rights to direct the spiritual and moral education of my own children,” he said. “They’re my kids, not the government’s, not the Hamilton-Wentworth School Board’s. I don’t believe that teachers are ‘co-parents’ with equal say in my children’s religious beliefs.” 

Tourloukis filed an application Friday afternoon with the Ontario Superior Court seeking a court order declaring that as the parent of his children, he is the final authority over his children’s education. The order would require the Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board to provide him with advance notification of any class, session or material to be covered which conflicts with his sincerely held religious beliefs. 

“My request is reasonable. Just give me advance notice of lessons, activities or materials which touch upon certain subjects, and if I deem it necessary, permit me to withdraw my kids from that particular class or exercise,” he explained. 

Dalton McGuinty’s Ministry of Education has upheld the right of parents to withdraw their children from classes where instruction violates the family’s beliefs. But they have failed to enforce the policy. 

The Toronto District School Board has a formal policy forbidding withdrawals from its radical pro-homosexual curriculum and even of notifying parents in advance. Board chair Chris Bolton has insisted exemptions will “not be condoned.” 

The Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board appears to be adopting a similar policy. In 2010, an instruction document for teachers that was leaked to media laid out the school board’s position that they do not “condone” children being removed from classes on homosexuality just as they would not when it comes to classes on discrimination related to race or disability.  

“The solution offered to me was rather insulting. It was suggested I should leave the school board and enroll my children in private school or try homeschooling,” he continued. “Therefore, to accommodate the religious beliefs of my family in a manner that has been previously endorsed by the Ministry of Education – by opting out of certain lessons – would somehow be to discriminate against some children.” 

“However, telling my family that we were no longer welcome in the school system because of our beliefs was not considered discriminatory. I was stunned by the hypocrisy,” he added.

MA church responds to discrimination lawsuit: 'We didn't even know they were gay'

Are gay rights activists using lawsuits to impose their religious views on the Catholic Church?

The Washington Post:

A gay couple from Massachusetts sued a Roman Catholic diocese Monday for allegedly refusing to sell them a mansion because church officials were concerned they would host gay weddings there.

James Fairbanks, 59, and Alain Beret, 57, filed suit in Worcester Superior Court for loss of civil rights and dignity and for emotional distress. 

What about the Church’s right to freedom of religion?  And the right to uphold the dignity of pro-gender marriage?  And talk about “distress.”  Isn’t being sued a bit stressful?  

The married couple from Sutton planned to buy Oakhurst, a former Catholic retreat center in Northbridge, and restore it as a place they could live and host a special events business. 

But the Roman Catholic Diocese of Worcester ended negotiations in June, and the couple alleged they learned why in an email they inadvertently received in which diocesan Chancellor Thomas Sullivan cited concern “about the potentiality of gay marriages there.” 

The couple’s attorney, Sergio Carvajal, said it’s obvious his clients were discriminated against because they’re gay. 

“It is wrong and it is illegal,” he said. 

But James G. Reardon Jr., an attorney for the diocese, said the diocese stopped negotiations over concerns about whether the buyers could finance the purchase. The email refers only to the possibility of gay weddings being held at the site, not the couple’s sexual orientation, which Reardon said never came up during negotiations. 

“It wasn’t a case of discriminating against gay people. We didn’t even know they were gay,” Reardon said.

Do activists have the right to impose their religious views about human sexuality on the Church?