Therefore, the beast we end up with is likely to have faults, unfortunate compromises, false-starts, and less than ideal portions to it.

I think Garret and I disagree. I think that we will end up with a reform, not an utter change. (To use his terminology.)
I think that it will probably be for the better. I believe that the current debate is long over due: in my opinion, the status quo is not only impractical and inefficent it is also immoral.

What do you think, neighbor Michael?

After giving it some thought, it occurs to me that it’s biblical: when a person is engaged in evil, after they have been confronted, if they do not repent, to remove them from the church.
(I think it’s an open question as to whether “evil” is an accurate description of his position. But I’m willing to grant that it’s reasonable to disagree with me on this point and think that the Catholic — or any church– has the right to carve it’s position on this matter)

Reform suggests that the system isn’t working properly or efficiently or as intended. The purpose of reform is to identify the core elements that are sound and CONSERVE them.

What we have going on today is CHANGE. While we could argue that it’s what the people voted for, i find it more interesting and to the point to argue that “healthcare reform” is labeled such as a semantics ruse to obfuscate the true purpose of the present process.

THIS is a ‘lipstick on a pig’ argument. You can dress this ‘reform’ debate and process up any way you like but at it’s heart it is something else. Ontologically speaking the nature of this thing is a power grab. Why else would the original bill have been rushed through in the dead of night on a weekend in July?

There are many more responsible ways of challenging the system and improving it so that it works better for more people…if that really is the goal.

i also don’t have a problem with any group or person trying to influence the “process”. It’s what we do. Who would know anything if we weren’t exposed to what other people think?

Consider if a Bishop of even a lay-person were to be mute or sit idle as each person’s perspective were allowed to become doctrine. Where does one draw the line? Why should the Bishop let PK overshadow the CC position on moral issues? From PK’s seat of power there is great potential for him to lead others astray.

If PK wants to stray that far away, he should probably take a hard long look at choosing to follow the path of his heart. What he is advocating is corrosive and disingenuous.

Bishop O’Malley would be remiss to not present to PK the gravity of his choices.

That is all I have to say.

Of course the church will oppose abortion. Reasonable people can disagree on whether denying heaven to congressmen who favor increased access to abortion is appropriate. Reasonable people can also disagree on whether it makes sense to try to stay within the Church to reform it (which has worked in the past). I’m not so sure that reasonable people can disagree on whether disclosure about church coercion is appropriate.

The media is being demonized for attacking the church in this affair. I don’t see that. I just see that the incident is newsworthy.

And garret, while I don’t reject your insight, let me just say that by suggesting that those particular tenets decide the outcome of the argument, you’ve engaged in what logicians call “begging the question.”

The questions are, “is it on purpose?” and “if it is, what is the purpose?”

The foundations of politics are built upon self-interest. Very few people are motivated by anything else when either voting or representing.

Unfortunately, the result of such motives is that we never quite understand an issue or its cause/effects. Notice how the debate almost always erodes to ad hominum jousting. It is the greatest trick of the Adversary.

As long as we believe, think, and act as if our battle is with each other, truth loses.

Listen to God. He levels the playing field so that we can see over our own swelled heads: we all suck, and deserve to die, now choose death or grace.

If we agree that murder, theft and coveting are wrong, let’s procede from there.