All right, let's take it from the top.
I've previously commented on Catholics United here, here, and here. I trust that by now regular readers of my blog harbor no illusions that Catholics United is anything other than a radically leftist political front group.
The most recent thing to stir them to action involves a recent controversy at Georgetown University, which hosted Barack Obama for an April 14 speech on the economy. Though it is the oldest university in the United States with a Catholic charter, any resemblance between the Hoyas and orthodox Catholicism is purely coincidental, and generally frowned upon by the powers-that-be at Georgetown University. It came as no surprise, therefore, that when Obama requested that the university cover up all non-American symbols on the stage where he was to speak, the university readily agreed, even going so far as to cover up the initials IHS - symbolic of Jesus Christ Himself - per Obama's specifications. Obama apologists have been trying to argue that there was no offense meant to Catholics by this, as Obama requested all non-American symbols be removed from the stage where he spoke. The argument, of course, rings hollow because in a Catholic setting, virtually all symbols are religious and meant to remind those present that Jesus Christ takes a backseat to no man. It is not acceptable, therefore, to suppress religious symbols to accommodate secular authorities, a fact that was almost certainly considered and discarded as irrelevant by the Obama camp.
This outrageous accommodation, though it came from an institution well accustomed to such outrages, nevertheless merited scathing denunciation. It was with this in mind that on Thursday, April 16, The Catholic League issued the following statement:
"When President Barack Obama spoke at Georgetown University on April 14, the White House requested that all religious symbols and signage that might appear as a backdrop to where the president was to speak be covered up. Georgetown acceded to the request and made sure that the symbol “IHS,” a monogram of the name Jesus Christ, was not in sight.
Catholic League president Bill Donohue spoke to this issue today:
“The cowardice of Georgetown to stand fast on principle tells us more than we need to know about what is going on there, but the bigger story is the audacity of the Obama administration to ask a religious school to neuter itself before the president speaks there. No bishop who might speak at the White House would ever request that a crucifix be displayed behind him. Moreover, the same church and state fanatics who go nuts every time a polling place is set up in the basement of a Catholic school have been noticeably silent over this incident.
“Obama will be speaking at Notre Dame, and receiving an honorary award, on May 17. Will his advance team ask Notre Dame to scrub the campus clean of religious symbols? Or just the ones that might appear behind the podium? Obama is in enough trouble with Catholics—over his pro-abortion executive orders and appointees, his position on embryonic stem cell research and his war on the conscience rights of healthcare workers—that it seems almost suicidal for his administration to push the envelope one more time. This is getting old fast.”"
END OF STATEMENT
Catholics United, which has remained conspicuously silent on all manner of sacrilegious acts and other anti-Catholic outrages, is never so stoic when it comes to criticism of their beloved Caesar. Predictably, they posted a criticism of Bill Donohue on their own website the very next day. Under a blog post entitled, "Catholics United Challenges Bill Donohue to Debate Catholics Values and the Economy," Director of Organization and communications director James Salt wrote the following (all grammatical errors in the following statement are fully his):
"Asks Donohue for a more substantive debate than criticizing stage decorations.
In response to the far-right’s misleading attack on the White House preparations for Obama’s appearance at Georgetown University on Tuesday, Catholics United communications director James Salt issued the following statement:
“Far-right Catholic groups have become so irrelevant that they’ve reduced themselves to complaining about the stage setting at Obama’s April 14th appearance at Georgetown University. As the new Administration and Congress seek to fight unemployment, rescue the banks and end the senseless conflict in Iraq, all Bill Donohue and his friends at Fox News and the Drudge Report can do is complain about the President’s set decoration?
Americans are tired of this ideologically-driven nonsense. The American people - including Catholics – have made it clear that they want us to move past the political antics of fear and distraction to solve our nation’s urgent problems. Catholics United challenges Bill Donohue to a debate on how Catholic values should influence the economic recovery plan.’"
END OF STATEMENT
Allow me to provide a brief lexicon to help decipher Mr. Salt's text:
- "American:" Anyone who supports politically correct interests. All others are lumped in with the "far-right."
- "Catholic:" Anyone who favors a Catholic model in which: women, homosexuals, and those who are married are allowed to become priests; abortion, contraception, homosexual acts, and any other form of sexual gratification outside of marriage is seen as moral; the Pope, the Bishops, and other leaders are democratically elected by an uninformed and easily manipulated electorate; there is no talk of sin unless it is of a corporate nature or in reference to disagreement with politically correct interests; salvation has more to do with this life than the life that is to come, which is preferably never mentioned; and Jesus is seen not as a fully human, fully divine member of the Blessed Trinity, but rather as a hip philosopher who would have felt more at home at the Woodstock festival than in a temple. All self-identified Catholics who do not favor this model are uniformly lumped in with the "far-right".
- "Drudge Report:" A single internet news source that specializes in providing links to news stories that are of particular interest to enemies of politically correct interests and which are generally a source of embarrassment to politically correct interests. Often held up as a reason for why the internet needs to be regulated by politically correct interests.
- "Far-right:" A vague term generally referring to anyone who fails to enthusiastically and uncritically support Barack Obama's and Catholics United's agenda in its entirety. Often used to describe individuals provably to the right of Michael Moore. Deemed domestic terrorists by politically correct interests.
- "Fight unemployment:" To create economic conditions that maximize the number of individuals who depend on the federal government for their primary or sole means of sustenance. Deemed a priority by politically correct interests.
- "FOX News:" The only major news outlet not completely dominated by politically correct interests. The suppression of this rogue news source has been deemed a priority by politically correct interests.
- "Ideologically-driven nonsense:" Any attempts to highlight any affront to Catholicism in the words and actions of individuals with views similar to those held by Catholics United and those of a like mind. Deemed unacceptable use of language by politically correct interests.
- "Irrelevant:" A term used in reference to all those outspoken opponents of politically correct interests. Whenever possible, Catholics United and those of a like mind prefer to take the ignore-them-and-they-will-go-away approach with such individuals rather than answer their arguments. Use of the term "irrelevant" is part of that approach.
- "Misleading:" Any attempts to cast the actions of Catholics United and those of a similar ideology in anything other than a glowingly positive light. Deemed unacceptable use of language by politically correct interests.
- "Our nation's urgent problems:" Any problem that can provide a convenient distraction from "political antics of fear and distraction."
- "Political antics of fear and distraction:" The act of identifying or referencing truths deemed uncomfortable by or incriminating to politically correct interests. Deemed unacceptable use of language by politically correct interests.
- "Rescue the banks:" To impose financially disastrous demands on independently owned and operated banks so as to place said banks in dire financial straights, thus allowing the federal government to step in and regulate them in perpetuity, with no possibility of allowing these banks to return to independent ownership and operative status. Deemed a priority by politically correct interests.
- "Senseless conflict:" Any conflict instigated by opponents of politically correct interests. Deemed especially senseless if it causes those who commit crimes against humanity to be held accountable for their actions.
- "Set decoration:" See "Stage decoration."
- "Stage decoration:" A way of describing the use of items for the purpose of covering up all religious symbols, so as to keep President Obama from having to share the stage with any of his fellow Messiahs.
- "Stage setting:" See "Stage decoration."
There is an added bit of irony to James Salt's statement. Mr. Salt was the previously unnamed member of Catholics United who attempted to silence my criticism of Barack Obama's anti-Catholic agenda. My response to Mr. Salt's unseemly action was to challenge him to a debate on the merits of a Catholic case for and against support of Barack Obama and his agenda. I posted this challenge in several venues. Among them was Facebook, the place where he first accosted me about my criticisms of Obama. His response to my challenge was to drop me as a Facebook friend and to cut off all contact with me. Now that he has issued a challenge to debate Bill Donohue of the Catholic League, I know that there are no involuntary obstacles preventing him from engaging in debates. My original challenge to debate stands; and I will here reissue that challenge, in the hopes that Mr. Salt will break his self-imposed silence (which, as of the time of this posting, has lasted 43 days) and answer my challenge. I await his response...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
James Salt is a coward. What more can be said?
I think left wing apologist are right when they say they meant no offense by removing the symbol. Of course they meant no offense to radical islamists, Satan and all others offended by Jesus and his teachings.
Post a Comment