Please stop defending the Church with ridiculous rants.
Ok Mark, I think you made an omission here. You simply post the article without any comment and the article is problematic. The object of the article is let us be nice to people and let niceness supercede truth. Let me show you where that happens. Where Ms de Solenni equates adoption among two lesbians as a church approved adoption.
“Additionally, are we now suggesting that there’s something unCatholic about adoption? ”
We are saying that there is something uncatholic about adoption that the church does not approve and had to put some Catholic adoption agencies out of business. Yes, we are saying there is something unCatholic about some adoptions. This is classic Saul Alinsky, taking one argument and dressing it in in something different and calling the whole thing the same.
I think that the statement you quote from the article was not meant to contradict the Church’s teaching and practice regarding adoption, but rather to point out that the CL tweet makes a mistake by insinuating that raising biological children is more difficult than raising adopted children. Besides the sufferings inherent in pregnancy, I’m not sure how such a comparison makes any sense.
Additionally, the article is not about niceness superseding truth, but about speaking the truth in love, and not speaking the truth like someone completely oblivious to how truth is received. The CL tweet is not completely truthful anyway, because it leaves room for misunderstandings about what the Church actually teaches regarding adoption and homosexuality. I think that’s her point.
In Him, RobP
I’ll go one better. Dear “Catholic League”, stop equating ‘Catholic’ with ‘hateful and mean’ in eyes of the unbelieving world. Not going to win any converts that way.
I came here from Twitter and I interpreted the tweet to mean she was going to be a spokeswoman for the CL. Much like a headline some months ago “Mark Shea to Patheos”. Frankly her becoming a spokeswoman for CL may not be such a bad idea…
Speaking of Truth, let’s be honest: The Catholic League is an embarassment.
I’m sure they mean well. But their methods contain nothing of the Sermon on the Mount. You really can defend the Faith without being mean and rude about it — something the CL just doesn’t seem to understand.
Is there a ‘they,’ or is it just Mr Donahue? Seems like he needs somebody to bounce ideas off of before he publishes – make sure the message is getting across, instead of just anger, expressed with varying degrees of churlishness.
I’m also somewhat disappointed in the Catholic League. When I first heard of them, soon after Dr. Donahue took over, I thought it was a great idea to have a group that would combat anti-Catholic bigotry. But the first time I saw him on TV, his whole manner put me off.
Yes, CL has gone after true anti-Catholicism and has even scored some victories. Yet in some cases, it has made mountains out of molehills, like when it went after Joan Osbourne in 1996. Dr. Donahue was also strangely silent when Sean Hannity savaged Fr. Euteneuer on air a few years ago. None of us knew then what we know now about Fr. Euteneuer, so surely CL should have taken on such a public excoriation of a Catholic priest. Would they have remained silent if a liberal talking head on CNN had done the same thing?
Also, as Dan C. points out below, this current situation has nothing to do with Catholicism anyway. So why is CL injecting itself into this controversy? How does this help fight anti-Catholic bigotry?
What did the CL say that was incorrect?
Rosen is a lesbian. She did adopt twins. She did say what she said about Ann Romney. She stuck to her guns until someone told her to back off (WH?) Nobody seems to claim she worked for them, meaning they wanted no part of this.
It’s sadder that the comments on Miss De Solenni’s seem to say, “yeah Rosen shouldn’t have said it, but she’s right” and that no one should “feel sorry for Ann Romney because she has the money to buy her cures for cancer and MS”…..real charitable…
CL said Ann Romney had kids of “her own” and that Rosen “had to adopt.” This implies that if you adopt children they are not your own. I have an adopted son. We have no genetic connection but he is MY OWN SON. It was a dumbass comment from CL.
Rosen’s comment was stupid and insensitive to say Ann Romney never worked. CL then turned around and out-stupided and out-insensitived Rosen by basically snidely saying “oh yeah? well that LESBIAN had to adopt kids!”
And guess what? Rosen’s point WAS right. Mitt claims his wife knows what women really care about is the economy. How is Ann Romney qualified to judge this? She is a woman that married into wealth that became super-wealth. Staying at home with the kids is a great choice for her. But how can a woman who makes decisions like which of her Cadillacs to drive that day appreciate the situation of “I could stay at home with the kids, but how could we pay our mortgage” or “I’m a single mother, how could I stay at home with my kids?” or “we are in debt and late on rent every month, how can we afford another child?”
Firstly, God bless you for choosing to adopt. I have many friends and family members who have made the same choice. Your child and theirs are just as much yours as my “home grown” kids are. No argument from me there.
However (you knew that was coming…), basically you’re saying Romney’s wealth, etc. disqualifies them from relating to people they have talked to (Remember, Rosen has made a butt-load of money, i.e. millions, too) who actually are stuggling? So rich democrats can relate better to the great unwashed than rich republicans? Hogwash, all of it!
My mistake…..I should have said, “Dr. de Solenni” instead of “Miss”….I just read her bio.
Rosen never said she herself was qualified, just the Ann Romney isn’t, so for Mitt to talk about his wife being some kind of adviser on women’s issues is not valid. Give us some statistics or polls or something, but to say “I asked my wife” is kind of tone deaf.
Fact of the matter, regardless if you’re male or female, or whatever race, creed or wherever you live, people are struggling. But instead of either side trying to solve the problem, they all decide, with the MSM stirring the pot and egging everyone on, to make any and all struggle a political football.
Truth is, they are all full of crap (Mark says it’s us versus the ruling class, not left vs right), and none of their stupid ideas will solve the problems we’re having.
If anyone thinks the government will help out, they are sorely mistaken.
Being right doesn’t give anyone license to be unkind.
As my grandmama used to tell me, “Bein’ right don’t give you an excuse to be a jackass.”
The Catholic League could meditate on that one a while.
One reason I come to CAEI is that here CL is as likely to mean Catholic League or Creative Loafing, or Craigslist, rather than something else.
The Catholic League is a nothing but a drift. It is a loud mouthed bully with a fax machine getting rich from donations ginned up by faux outrage. Let’s also remember what he said in 2004 as well, that hollywood is “run by secular Jews”.
I do not like the direct Dr. Donohue has taken the League since Father Blum was in charge. However, he is one of the few Catholics who point out the Anti-Catholic bias that exists in this society. Unlike certain host of The O’Reilly Factor and Hardball who almost always act like the Stereotypical Self-Hating Catholic. If more did what he did we would not have the need for the League.
Sometimes the truth cuts like a knife. Let’s be honest at least acknowledge that the gay and lesbian communities’ *leaders* are actively waging war against the Catholic Church and other religious based adoption agencies who don’t agree with their lifestyle, nor will they accommodate same sex couples’ requests for adopting children. Rosen was not just some lesbian off the street who they just happen to ask what her opinion of the Rum-knees was, she is an activist in many different organisations. This is another Sandra Fluke situation in my mind. Say something against the extreme lefties (i.e. democrats) and all hell breaks loose; say something against the moderate lefties (i.e. republicans) and it’s all truth and honesty. It’s all political bullshit and we are all playing the parts of the fools.
Sure there’s Anti-Catholic bias and bigotry out there. Lots of it in the MSM. But the Catholic League would do well to remember that our Lord did NOT say:
“Blessed are ye when men shall reproach you, and persecute you, and say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad : for at that time it shall be your right to rant and protest, organize petitions and boycotts, and verily shall you get on all the talk shows to whine and complain.”
Just because we can, doesn’t mean we should. There’s a lot to be said for turning the other cheek.
Turn the cheek, yes. But boycotting or peacefully protesting something, even using some strong language, is not un-Christ-like. Remember His overturning the tables of the money changers. Zeal for your faith should be a controlled zeal (i.e. we shouldn’t use violence, etc.).
Jesus cleansed the Temple with a whip. But he didn’t do the same to Herod’s house or the Roman Senate.
When the Apostles were persecuted, they didn’t organize protests and marches. They responded with love … and so conquered Rome.
Agreed. But we do have a right to defend ourselves. CL may have been too caustic, but imagine being in their shoes being bombasted from all corners on a regular basis. The folks at CL are human made by God, whereas our Lord is human and God.
The right to defend oneself does not excuse bad behavior. Rights must always be tempered with responsibility, and every Christian has the responsibility to love our enemies, no matter how awful those enemies may be behaving.
I don’t particularly follow all the work of the Catholic League. They may do a lot of good. But every time I see their name pop up in the news, I feel nothing but embarassment. Whenever they do something big enough to blip on my radar, I just don’t see anything of the Sermon on the Mount or Christian charity in their methods. Good intentions matter little when the means are bad.
Is CL my cup of tea? Does CL say things the way I would? No. But with that said, it wasn’t that disastrous. Those who would be outraged are, in all likelihood, outraged at what the Church teaches on the subject already. Do I wish CL could calm a little and extend a little more balance and charity in its responses? Sure. But not enough to go all lilarose on it. Let’s keep the focus where it needs to be, and not use the snapping of the football as yet one more chance to turn around and tackle our own teammates. If CL comes out and says something truly deplorable, OK. But for now, he could have said it better, point taken, let’s get back to the focus at hand.
The comment about kids of “her own” versus “had to adopt” is pretty offensive.
But ds, the lifestyle she *chose* put her in the situation of “having to adopt” as there was no physical way her relationship with her female partner would bring about a natural-born child.
I don’t think CL was targeting people in your situation since the Catholic Church is very much involved with adopting. Like I said before, I applaud you, and I have no doubt that you’re a darn good parent and that your child (yes, your child) has one of the best parents in the world…next to me, of course! 😉
Infertility puts women in the position of “having to adopt.” Lesbians sometimes are inseminated to carry, as you called them, “natural born” children. Although still that child will only carry the genetic heritage of one mother.
I have no doubt that the Catholic League would support adoption by heterosexual married couples. But they were too busy tripping over their own feet to yell at a lesbian to care how offensive they sounded to me, or anybody else.
Any time the CL makes a splash it is with some ridiculously stupid or offensive comment like this. Do you really think the CL does the church any good at all?
Thanks for your blind faith in my parenting skills and I’m sure you do well also.
I have teenagers…from their perspective…..
But I do like to think my wife and I do alright. Your passion in your comments tell me you are doing, and will continue to, do fine.
I would agree that in defence of someone or somebody, comments can be more caustic than could be necessary. God knows I am guilty of it. I don’t envy CL, while they are defending the Church, they are also getting attacked for doing so, so we should pray for them and hope they continue to defend the Church and not sound or act like their attackers.
It makes me wonder if the original article writer had ever read the Catechism.
Don’t you get it? The CL managed to turn a lot of the conversation away from the class concerns of the Rosen vs. Romney exchange into a conversation about Rosen’s sexual identity and her children. This is much more comfortable ground for avowed conservatives (who are CL’s audience and donors). CL is banking on this. And exactly where is the Catholic “angle” in this? None-but Rosen is apparently a lesbian and has adopted-again “red meat” opposition for conservatives in the culture wars.
This tweet is geared to stir passions, not enlighten members of the faith or public or defend the Church.
Donahue and his apparatus avoid defending the faith against evangelical Christian bigots, but pick fights where there is no Church attack.
Adoption is generally the rescue of a child. It’s a good thing. Some people do it as much because they WANT a child as because they want to help a child, but that’s true of having kids, too. God willing, people grow in generosity and love as they realize what it takes to raise (a) kid(s). But even if we could see inside their hearts and pick at their motivations, adoptive parents, even if they’re gay, should be presumed to have done a good and generous thing. The lifestyle is a different issue. Donahue’s coment came across as mocking adoption and mocking Rosen for being a lesbian – it sounded childish. So have some of his other comments. He needs to edit himself better, or link up with someone who can.
(We (lay Catholics) should do whatever we can (time, $) to keep Catholic Charities facilitating adoptions, without gov’t funds; but gettign the Church off Caesar’s teat is a whole ‘nother topic.) .