Get E-Mail Updates

God's Politics Blog

The Media's Favorite Catholic Culture Warrior

by John Gehring 10-23-2009 | 6:00pm
Print
80 Comments | Login or Register to post comments

Just in time for Halloween, Bill Donohue of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights is once again spooked about all those "radical secularists" lurking ominously behind ever corner. In case you didn't notice, these godless heathens are "waging war" against American culture and plotting to "smash the last vestiges of Christianity in America." So argues the irrepressible cultural warrior in a recent On Faith commentary and in his new book, Secular Sabotage: How Liberals Are Destroying Religion and Culture in America.

Related Reading

Take Action on This Issue

Tell the Senate: Don't Cut International Aid

Please join us in telling the Senate: Protect foreign aid programs that help the poor and the needy. 

You have to hand it to the guy. Donohue makes righteous indignation and throwing rhetorical bombs into an art form. He is about as subtle as a fist in your face. His latest depiction of cultural doom probably elicits a yawn from most religious Americans who are not obsessed with the bogeymen of multiculturalism, secularism, homosexuality, and Hollywood hedonism that Donohue rails against.

Keeping track of Donohue's latest offensive comment keeps the watchdogs at Media Matters for America busy. Here's a few of his signature gems:

  • "Hollywood is controlled by secular Jews who hate Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular
80 Comments | Login or Register to post comments
Sojourners relies on the support of readers like you to sustain our message and ministry.

Related Stories

Resources

Like what you're reading? Get Sojourners E-Mail updates!

by: BlueDeacon

10-30-2009 @ 4:42pm

Actually, the nuclear family was never all that viable, at least on a cultural
level. One of the reasons the nuclear family has been falling apart --
despite all the hoopla -- is because the nuclear family often shunned support.
I'm now beginning to understand the necessity of having older folks (esp.
grandparents) around to serve as advisers.

And Biblically speaking, at least in the early church, the local assembly
essentially BECAME family. In large part that was because many of the
believers had been ostracized from the rest of society, what with the Jews of
that day rejecting the claims of Christ and Roman law being subverted. In
fact, they were first called Christians because no one else knew what to call
them -- they had come from literally every tribe, race and culture of that
day.

by: BlueDeacon

10-30-2009 @ 4:42pm

Actually, the nuclear family was never all that viable, at least on a cultural
level. One of the reasons the nuclear family has been falling apart --
despite all the hoopla -- is because the nuclear family often shunned support.
I'm now beginning to understand the necessity of having older folks (esp.
grandparents) around to serve as advisers.

And Biblically speaking, at least in the early church, the local assembly
essentially BECAME family. In large part that was because many of the
believers had been ostracized from the rest of society, what with the Jews of
that day rejecting the claims of Christ and Roman law being subverted. In
fact, they were first called Christians because no one else knew what to call
them -- they had come from literally every tribe, race and culture of that
day.

by: scat

10-27-2009 @ 12:45am

Yesm comparing Media Matters to the KGB is besides the point, and most everyone knows it. Trying to impune a person or organization by demonizing the practice of keeping accurate records is just plain silly.

by: BlueDeacon

10-27-2009 @ 1:20am

The problem conservatives have with Hillary's adage is that it seems to devalue the family unit. Of course community can help a child grow, but it takes a family to raise a child.

Until the 1950s extended family, not the nuclear family, was the cultural norm. Most Christians don't realize this because they're already part of an extended family -- a local church.

by: WaveTossed

10-27-2009 @ 1:26am

"Including [homosexualty] with multiculturalism, secularism, and Hollywood hedonism is somewhat like comparing apples with rocks."

I couldn't agree with you more. However, this is a tactic used by those who are obsessed with anti-gay thought in order to attempt to discredit those who don't agree with them.

by: scat

10-27-2009 @ 12:45am

Yesm comparing Media Matters to the KGB is besides the point, and most everyone knows it. Trying to impune a person or organization by demonizing the practice of keeping accurate records is just plain silly.

by: BlueDeacon

10-27-2009 @ 1:28am

Power breeds bias, but I resent your implication that all conservatives are biased (more than liberals). Any ideology can be used to gain power by those who believe it.

It depends on where you get your information -- and the political right over the years built an institution that disseminates propaganda to dwarf anything that the "liberals," including the MSM, can come up with.

by: BlueDeacon

10-27-2009 @ 1:20am

The problem conservatives have with Hillary's adage is that it seems to devalue the family unit. Of course community can help a child grow, but it takes a family to raise a child.

Until the 1950s extended family, not the nuclear family, was the cultural norm. Most Christians don't realize this because they're already part of an extended family -- a local church.

by: WaveTossed

10-27-2009 @ 1:26am

"Including [homosexualty] with multiculturalism, secularism, and Hollywood hedonism is somewhat like comparing apples with rocks."

I couldn't agree with you more. However, this is a tactic used by those who are obsessed with anti-gay thought in order to attempt to discredit those who don't agree with them.

by: BlueDeacon

10-27-2009 @ 1:28am

Power breeds bias, but I resent your implication that all conservatives are biased (more than liberals). Any ideology can be used to gain power by those who believe it.

It depends on where you get your information -- and the political right over the years built an institution that disseminates propaganda to dwarf anything that the "liberals," including the MSM, can come up with.

by: nuclearferret

10-27-2009 @ 4:45pm

Until the "War on Poverty" the nuclear family was also viable. Now, what's the point? You can get more free stuff from the government if you don't get together, or if you lie about being together.

The local church (or global, for that matter) is a sorry substitute for "family."

by: nuclearferret

10-27-2009 @ 4:45pm

Until the "War on Poverty" the nuclear family was also viable. Now, what's the point? You can get more free stuff from the government if you don't get together, or if you lie about being together.

The local church (or global, for that matter) is a sorry substitute for "family."

by: jesse3

10-23-2009 @ 5:28pm

"most religious Americans who are not obsessed with the bogeymen of multiculturalism, secularism, homosexuality, and Hollywood hedonism that Donohue rails against."
--Do you really think most Christians are not alarmed by the values Hollywood promotes in tv and movies? Do you think Hollywood's depiction of sex, in particular, should not be troublesome to Christians?

There is an easy solution to Donohue...how bout left-leaning Christians start speaking out against the same issues that are troubling to most Christians and should be troubling to all Christians.

by: Titans1

10-23-2009 @ 6:20pm

I agree with you jesse. Is there not enough hatred and prejudice thrown at Catholics with out John doing it here . I don't get it . John used Media Matters as an example of fair reporting ? Yikes .
Many sincere Christians of the leftward persuasion know full and well the nastiness that comes from the secular media when they are not in line with their view points. Donohue gives a good perspective of many Catholics In
our nation , perhaps that is frightening to John . Maybe jealous ? But one thing John you sure sound angry.

by: WaveTossed

10-23-2009 @ 6:24pm

"There is an easy solution to Donohue...how bout left-leaning Christians start speaking out against the same issues that are troubling to most Christians and should be troubling to all Christians."

Really? You mean speak out about war, poverty, discrimination, exploitation, and abuse? Many what you term as "left-leaning" Christians speak out on these subjects and sometimes have laid their lives down for such issues. One who did so was our Savior, who was crucified over His concern about injustice to the oppressed.

by: NMRod

10-23-2009 @ 6:44pm

Same old, same old. Hypocrite denounces sins of others, ignores own.

Where in the scriptures does Jesus tell those called by His name to set themselves up as the moral arbiters of the lives and actions of the unsaved?

It would be more efficacious if they would lead by example. However, that would be embarrassing, when they have even higher divorce rates than the unsaved.

Best to keep harping on all the logs in those other eyes.

by: ando

10-23-2009 @ 6:56pm

"--Do you really think most Christians are not alarmed by the values Hollywood promotes in tv and movies? Do you think Hollywood's depiction of sex, in particular, should not be troublesome to Christians?"

Yes, and that's why people from Limbaugh and Beck to the Religious Right have been so attractive, because they're filling the void that the "progressive" Christians leave unattended. They're big issues for the "hicks" from the heartland. I remember my mother, a devoted Catholic from a rural Midwest town, telling me that she could never vote for someone like Kerry in 2004. And that's where the Democrats will run into trouble, because they could run the risk of losing the Blue Dogs and/or an even more significant number of rural voters as the Dems keep trending toward the more urbane, sophisticated vote.

It's so funny how the left portrays itself as being tolerant and open-minded. As Chesterton noted (paraphrasing): tolerance is just a word for those who are incapable of loving another person. Watch out, Mr. Gehring, your words might come back to bite you in the behind/

by: jesse3

10-23-2009 @ 5:28pm

"most religious Americans who are not obsessed with the bogeymen of multiculturalism, secularism, homosexuality, and Hollywood hedonism that Donohue rails against."
--Do you really think most Christians are not alarmed by the values Hollywood promotes in tv and movies? Do you think Hollywood's depiction of sex, in particular, should not be troublesome to Christians?

There is an easy solution to Donohue...how bout left-leaning Christians start speaking out against the same issues that are troubling to most Christians and should be troubling to all Christians.

by: Titans1

10-23-2009 @ 6:20pm

I agree with you jesse. Is there not enough hatred and prejudice thrown at Catholics with out John doing it here . I don't get it . John used Media Matters as an example of fair reporting ? Yikes .
Many sincere Christians of the leftward persuasion know full and well the nastiness that comes from the secular media when they are not in line with their view points. Donohue gives a good perspective of many Catholics In
our nation , perhaps that is frightening to John . Maybe jealous ? But one thing John you sure sound angry.

by: WaveTossed

10-23-2009 @ 6:24pm

"There is an easy solution to Donohue...how bout left-leaning Christians start speaking out against the same issues that are troubling to most Christians and should be troubling to all Christians."

Really? You mean speak out about war, poverty, discrimination, exploitation, and abuse? Many what you term as "left-leaning" Christians speak out on these subjects and sometimes have laid their lives down for such issues. One who did so was our Savior, who was crucified over His concern about injustice to the oppressed.

by: NMRod

10-23-2009 @ 6:44pm

Same old, same old. Hypocrite denounces sins of others, ignores own.

Where in the scriptures does Jesus tell those called by His name to set themselves up as the moral arbiters of the lives and actions of the unsaved?

It would be more efficacious if they would lead by example. However, that would be embarrassing, when they have even higher divorce rates than the unsaved.

Best to keep harping on all the logs in those other eyes.

by: WaveTossed

10-23-2009 @ 7:36pm

"Yes, and that's why people from Limbaugh and Beck to the Religious Right have been so attractive, because they're filling the void that the 'progressive' Christians leave unattended."

Please do me a favor. Please show where (what you term as) progressive Christians state where issues such as divorce, rampant sexuality, sexual abuse, sexual objectivization -- including those portrayals shown by Hollywood films, as well as in the real world -- should be ignored.

My experience is that Christians who are not part of Donaghue's belief system are very concerned with issues of sex, rape, divorce, assault issues.

by: kansasmennonite

10-28-2009 @ 1:29am

The individualism is why we can't get anyting done with healthcare. We can't get together as a society to acomplish much for the good of all. How sad!

by: ando

10-23-2009 @ 6:56pm

"--Do you really think most Christians are not alarmed by the values Hollywood promotes in tv and movies? Do you think Hollywood's depiction of sex, in particular, should not be troublesome to Christians?"

Yes, and that's why people from Limbaugh and Beck to the Religious Right have been so attractive, because they're filling the void that the "progressive" Christians leave unattended. They're big issues for the "hicks" from the heartland. I remember my mother, a devoted Catholic from a rural Midwest town, telling me that she could never vote for someone like Kerry in 2004. And that's where the Democrats will run into trouble, because they could run the risk of losing the Blue Dogs and/or an even more significant number of rural voters as the Dems keep trending toward the more urbane, sophisticated vote.

It's so funny how the left portrays itself as being tolerant and open-minded. As Chesterton noted (paraphrasing): tolerance is just a word for those who are incapable of loving another person. Watch out, Mr. Gehring, your words might come back to bite you in the behind/

by: BlueDeacon

10-30-2009 @ 6:42pm

Actually, the nuclear family was never all that viable, at least on a cultural
level. One of the reasons the nuclear family has been falling apart --
despite all the hoopla -- is because the nuclear family often shunned support.
I'm now beginning to understand the necessity of having older folks (esp.
grandparents) around to serve as advisers.

And Biblically speaking, at least in the early church, the local assembly
essentially BECAME family. In large part that was because many of the
believers had been ostracized from the rest of society, what with the Jews of
that day rejecting the claims of Christ and Roman law being subverted. In
fact, they were first called Christians because no one else knew what to call
them -- they had come from literally every tribe, race and culture of that
day.

by: Titans1

10-23-2009 @ 10:59pm

Best to keep harping on all the logs in those other eyes.

Sort of like an organization dedicated to the flaws of others ? I see your point , however not your consistency in pointing out the logs. . But I would say perhaps their is relevant times when Catholics in this culture get a very nasty rap , apparently targeted for their pro life views in a very strong pro choice media envirnoment. Bill Marr comical view points are common in many media outlets of our day. That spin and hatred is not helpful to people of any faith or non faith when presented as news or in the mainstream culture as accurate . Catholics who are pro life and dedicated tot heir religion are nice people too.

At times setting the story straight can be usefull. How well Donahugh does it may not meet up toward your
high religious standards . Forgive him.

by: kansasmennonite

10-28-2009 @ 1:29am

The individualism is why we can't get anyting done with healthcare. We can't get together as a society to acomplish much for the good of all. How sad!

by: ando

10-24-2009 @ 12:11am

Are you talking about Gehring or Donohue? Oh yeah, right, you don't have any political axe to grind, do you? Yeah, you just look in the logs of the people you don't like, because the left is alway so righteous.

by: WaveTossed

10-23-2009 @ 7:36pm

"Yes, and that's why people from Limbaugh and Beck to the Religious Right have been so attractive, because they're filling the void that the 'progressive' Christians leave unattended."

Please do me a favor. Please show where (what you term as) progressive Christians state where issues such as divorce, rampant sexuality, sexual abuse, sexual objectivization -- including those portrayals shown by Hollywood films, as well as in the real world -- should be ignored.

My experience is that Christians who are not part of Donaghue's belief system are very concerned with issues of sex, rape, divorce, assault issues.

by: Jesdisciple

10-24-2009 @ 1:37am

Gotta admit, I haven't seen any of that on here...

by: Titans1

10-23-2009 @ 10:59pm

Best to keep harping on all the logs in those other eyes.

Sort of like an organization dedicated to the flaws of others ? I see your point , however not your consistency in pointing out the logs. . But I would say perhaps their is relevant times when Catholics in this culture get a very nasty rap , apparently targeted for their pro life views in a very strong pro choice media envirnoment. Bill Marr comical view points are common in many media outlets of our day. That spin and hatred is not helpful to people of any faith or non faith when presented as news or in the mainstream culture as accurate . Catholics who are pro life and dedicated tot heir religion are nice people too.

At times setting the story straight can be usefull. How well Donahugh does it may not meet up toward your
high religious standards . Forgive him.

by: ando

10-24-2009 @ 12:11am

Are you talking about Gehring or Donohue? Oh yeah, right, you don't have any political axe to grind, do you? Yeah, you just look in the logs of the people you don't like, because the left is alway so righteous.

by: Jesdisciple

10-24-2009 @ 3:42am

Are you talking about Gehring or Donohue?
It is hard to tell without knowledge of NMRod's history... I think Donohue and Gehring should be locked in a room together to sort out their differences. =p Actually, that might do more harm than good... but they definitely need some dialogue.

by: Jesdisciple

10-24-2009 @ 1:37am

Gotta admit, I haven't seen any of that on here...

by: Minnesotan

10-24-2009 @ 11:12am

I agree with those who say that all of these issues on the left and right, like helping the poor, AND ending abortion are Biblical issues. The tone of this article is that Bill Donohue is pursuing the wrong issues, not that he has an incomplete list of issues that he champions, and that he needs to add some more. If we were to be honest, most progressive Christians think the focus on ending abortion and defining marriage as one man and one woman is misguided or wrong or a waste or time or immoral. I challenge those who are Sojourners supporters to show why the following statement is wrong - the Progressive Christians would be very happy with the United States resembling Holland or Scandinavia - massive government social welfare programs protecting everyone cradle to grave, but legalized abortion and same-sex "marriage," rampant secularism and little regard for the things of God or the Bible by most people in the society. We need a Biblical agenda that addresses all of these issues. My main complaint with Sojourners is that they think these "right wing social issues" are ones Christians should not be concerned about and that we are wrong to speak against them prophetically in the culture.

by: Minnesotan

10-24-2009 @ 11:46am

WaveTossed - your response demonstrates the very mindset that prevents effective dialogue between the conservative Christians and the liberal Christians. You are implying that Jesus would only be concerned with issues like war, poverty, etc., and that being concerned with other issues is wrong or misguided. You are implying that Jesus would not be concerned with no-fault divorce or a proper definition of marriage, yet He talked about exactly that in Matthew 19:1-5. Those are not issues Sojourners addresses, yet Jesus did. Fighting poverty in the inner city means addressing racism AND the distressing social practice of the people who live there of having children outside of marriage. I would like to see ALL Biblical issues addressed. I think the Progressive Christians communicate ineffectively when they say that Jesus would not be concerned about legalized abortion, a proper definition of marriage, rampant sexuality in the public media, increased secularization and censorship of Christians in the public square, etc. I think it is proper to argue that those Christians should have an expanded agenda to help the poor, but you lose me and many others when you claim abortion, etc., are issues Jesus would not be concerned about, and therefore, we should not be, either. WaveTossed, I really pray that you and other Progressive Christians would understand this, because if you did, I think there could be more uniting on more issues.

by: Jesdisciple

10-24-2009 @ 3:42am

Are you talking about Gehring or Donohue?
It is hard to tell without knowledge of NMRod's history... I think Donohue and Gehring should be locked in a room together to sort out their differences. =p Actually, that might do more harm than good... but they definitely need some dialogue.

by: Jesdisciple

10-24-2009 @ 4:26pm

And on all the other social issues that liberals might agree wth conservatives on, it seems that they think "Oh, well they have that covered." That's not how we can build a united Christian voice.

by: Minnesotan

10-24-2009 @ 11:12am

I agree with those who say that all of these issues on the left and right, like helping the poor, AND ending abortion are Biblical issues. The tone of this article is that Bill Donohue is pursuing the wrong issues, not that he has an incomplete list of issues that he champions, and that he needs to add some more. If we were to be honest, most progressive Christians think the focus on ending abortion and defining marriage as one man and one woman is misguided or wrong or a waste or time or immoral. I challenge those who are Sojourners supporters to show why the following statement is wrong - the Progressive Christians would be very happy with the United States resembling Holland or Scandinavia - massive government social welfare programs protecting everyone cradle to grave, but legalized abortion and same-sex "marriage," rampant secularism and little regard for the things of God or the Bible by most people in the society. We need a Biblical agenda that addresses all of these issues. My main complaint with Sojourners is that they think these "right wing social issues" are ones Christians should not be concerned about and that we are wrong to speak against them prophetically in the culture.

by: Titans1

10-24-2009 @ 6:19pm

"That's not how we can build a united Christian voice"

Totally agree. many strengths and gifts of the spirit are found in both Conservative and liberal Christians. Evil likes to keep them separated and attacking each other based on politics , doctrines, or too much self.

by: Minnesotan

10-24-2009 @ 11:46am

WaveTossed - your response demonstrates the very mindset that prevents effective dialogue between the conservative Christians and the liberal Christians. You are implying that Jesus would only be concerned with issues like war, poverty, etc., and that being concerned with other issues is wrong or misguided. You are implying that Jesus would not be concerned with no-fault divorce or a proper definition of marriage, yet He talked about exactly that in Matthew 19:1-5. Those are not issues Sojourners addresses, yet Jesus did. Fighting poverty in the inner city means addressing racism AND the distressing social practice of the people who live there of having children outside of marriage. I would like to see ALL Biblical issues addressed. I think the Progressive Christians communicate ineffectively when they say that Jesus would not be concerned about legalized abortion, a proper definition of marriage, rampant sexuality in the public media, increased secularization and censorship of Christians in the public square, etc. I think it is proper to argue that those Christians should have an expanded agenda to help the poor, but you lose me and many others when you claim abortion, etc., are issues Jesus would not be concerned about, and therefore, we should not be, either. WaveTossed, I really pray that you and other Progressive Christians would understand this, because if you did, I think there could be more uniting on more issues.

by: Jesdisciple

10-24-2009 @ 4:26pm

And on all the other social issues that liberals might agree wth conservatives on, it seems that they think "Oh, well they have that covered." That's not how we can build a united Christian voice.

by: Titans1

10-24-2009 @ 6:19pm

"That's not how we can build a united Christian voice"

Totally agree. many strengths and gifts of the spirit are found in both Conservative and liberal Christians. Evil likes to keep them separated and attacking each other based on politics , doctrines, or too much self.

by: WaveTossed

10-25-2009 @ 12:27am

"WaveTossed - your response demonstrates the very mindset that prevents effective dialogue between the conservative Christians and the liberal Christians. You are implying that Jesus would only be concerned with issues like war, poverty, etc., and that being concerned with other issues is wrong or misguided."

Let me ask you the same question that I asked Ando: Please show where (what you term as) progressive Christians state where issues such as divorce, rampant sexuality, sexual abuse, sexual objectivization -- including those portrayals shown by Hollywood films, as well as in the real world -- should be ignored and unattended.

My experience is that Christians who are not part of Donohue's belief system are very concerned with issues of sex, rape, divorce, assault issues.

by: WaveTossed

10-25-2009 @ 12:45am

"If we were to be honest, most progressive Christians think the focus on ending abortion and defining marriage as one man and one woman is misguided or wrong or a waste or time or immoral."

There most certainly are disagreements on the issue of marriage. This doesn't mean that progressive Christians believe in rampant secularism or show little regard for the things of God and the Bible.

Many Christians believe that limiting marriage according to gender is a wrong as limiting marriage according to race. However, that does NOT mean that progressive Christians don't believe in the Bible or morality. Perhaps they might not agree with YOUR INTERPRETATION of the Bible, but they most certainly do agree with the imporance of God and the Bible.

It's clear that you disagree -- further, it's clear that, given the stridency of such beliefs, these disagreements are litmus tests, "deal-breakers" as such. It appears that common ground cannot be found on this issue.

I can only say that, in the end, it will be God -- not you or I or Donohue or any other human being -- who will be the final Judge.

by: BrotherMarcus

10-25-2009 @ 1:04am

Catholics in Alliance is largely funded by billionaire George Soros. Soros also provides substantial funding to Planned Parenthood, the leading provider of abortion services in the US, and Catholics for a Free Choice, the notorious pro-abortion group that has twice been condemned by the Catholic bishops.

Does anyone think that Catholics in Alliance would receive funding from George Soros if they weren't actively working for a pro-choice agenda against the authentic teaching of the Catholic Church?

As a Catholic, I'm not surprised that the Protestants at Sojourners would give Gehring a forum, but please don't imagine that he is anything but a mouthpiece for the man who pays his salary.

by: WaveTossed

10-25-2009 @ 12:27am

"WaveTossed - your response demonstrates the very mindset that prevents effective dialogue between the conservative Christians and the liberal Christians. You are implying that Jesus would only be concerned with issues like war, poverty, etc., and that being concerned with other issues is wrong or misguided."

Let me ask you the same question that I asked Ando: Please show where (what you term as) progressive Christians state where issues such as divorce, rampant sexuality, sexual abuse, sexual objectivization -- including those portrayals shown by Hollywood films, as well as in the real world -- should be ignored and unattended.

My experience is that Christians who are not part of Donohue's belief system are very concerned with issues of sex, rape, divorce, assault issues.

by: WaveTossed

10-25-2009 @ 12:45am

"If we were to be honest, most progressive Christians think the focus on ending abortion and defining marriage as one man and one woman is misguided or wrong or a waste or time or immoral."

There most certainly are disagreements on the issue of marriage. This doesn't mean that progressive Christians believe in rampant secularism or show little regard for the things of God and the Bible.

Many Christians believe that limiting marriage according to gender is a wrong as limiting marriage according to race. However, that does NOT mean that progressive Christians don't believe in the Bible or morality. Perhaps they might not agree with YOUR INTERPRETATION of the Bible, but they most certainly do agree with the imporance of God and the Bible.

It's clear that you disagree -- further, it's clear that, given the stridency of such beliefs, these disagreements are litmus tests, "deal-breakers" as such. It appears that common ground cannot be found on this issue.

I can only say that, in the end, it will be God -- not you or I or Donohue or any other human being -- who will be the final Judge.

by: BrotherMarcus

10-25-2009 @ 1:04am

Catholics in Alliance is largely funded by billionaire George Soros. Soros also provides substantial funding to Planned Parenthood, the leading provider of abortion services in the US, and Catholics for a Free Choice, the notorious pro-abortion group that has twice been condemned by the Catholic bishops.

Does anyone think that Catholics in Alliance would receive funding from George Soros if they weren't actively working for a pro-choice agenda against the authentic teaching of the Catholic Church?

As a Catholic, I'm not surprised that the Protestants at Sojourners would give Gehring a forum, but please don't imagine that he is anything but a mouthpiece for the man who pays his salary.

by: Titans1

10-25-2009 @ 4:40am

I can only say that, in the end, it will be God -- not you or I or Donohue or any other human being -- who will be the final Judge.

Thank God

Comments sorted by highest rated. After voting you must refresh your page to see the sort order change.

by: jesse3

10-23-2009 @ 5:28pm

"most religious Americans who are not obsessed with the bogeymen of multiculturalism, secularism, homosexuality, and Hollywood hedonism that Donohue rails against."
--Do you really think most Christians are not alarmed by the values Hollywood promotes in tv and movies? Do you think Hollywood's depiction of sex, in particular, should not be troublesome to Christians?

There is an easy solution to Donohue...how bout left-leaning Christians start speaking out against the same issues that are troubling to most Christians and should be troubling to all Christians.

by: jesse3

10-23-2009 @ 5:28pm

"most religious Americans who are not obsessed with the bogeymen of multiculturalism, secularism, homosexuality, and Hollywood hedonism that Donohue rails against."
--Do you really think most Christians are not alarmed by the values Hollywood promotes in tv and movies? Do you think Hollywood's depiction of sex, in particular, should not be troublesome to Christians?

There is an easy solution to Donohue...how bout left-leaning Christians start speaking out against the same issues that are troubling to most Christians and should be troubling to all Christians.

by: Titans1

10-23-2009 @ 6:20pm

I agree with you jesse. Is there not enough hatred and prejudice thrown at Catholics with out John doing it here . I don't get it . John used Media Matters as an example of fair reporting ? Yikes .
Many sincere Christians of the leftward persuasion know full and well the nastiness that comes from the secular media when they are not in line with their view points. Donohue gives a good perspective of many Catholics In
our nation , perhaps that is frightening to John . Maybe jealous ? But one thing John you sure sound angry.

by: Titans1

10-23-2009 @ 6:20pm

I agree with you jesse. Is there not enough hatred and prejudice thrown at Catholics with out John doing it here . I don't get it . John used Media Matters as an example of fair reporting ? Yikes .
Many sincere Christians of the leftward persuasion know full and well the nastiness that comes from the secular media when they are not in line with their view points. Donohue gives a good perspective of many Catholics In
our nation , perhaps that is frightening to John . Maybe jealous ? But one thing John you sure sound angry.

by: WaveTossed

10-23-2009 @ 6:24pm

"There is an easy solution to Donohue...how bout left-leaning Christians start speaking out against the same issues that are troubling to most Christians and should be troubling to all Christians."

Really? You mean speak out about war, poverty, discrimination, exploitation, and abuse? Many what you term as "left-leaning" Christians speak out on these subjects and sometimes have laid their lives down for such issues. One who did so was our Savior, who was crucified over His concern about injustice to the oppressed.

by: WaveTossed

10-23-2009 @ 6:24pm

"There is an easy solution to Donohue...how bout left-leaning Christians start speaking out against the same issues that are troubling to most Christians and should be troubling to all Christians."

Really? You mean speak out about war, poverty, discrimination, exploitation, and abuse? Many what you term as "left-leaning" Christians speak out on these subjects and sometimes have laid their lives down for such issues. One who did so was our Savior, who was crucified over His concern about injustice to the oppressed.

by: NMRod

10-23-2009 @ 6:44pm

Same old, same old. Hypocrite denounces sins of others, ignores own.

Where in the scriptures does Jesus tell those called by His name to set themselves up as the moral arbiters of the lives and actions of the unsaved?

It would be more efficacious if they would lead by example. However, that would be embarrassing, when they have even higher divorce rates than the unsaved.

Best to keep harping on all the logs in those other eyes.

by: NMRod

10-23-2009 @ 6:44pm

Same old, same old. Hypocrite denounces sins of others, ignores own.

Where in the scriptures does Jesus tell those called by His name to set themselves up as the moral arbiters of the lives and actions of the unsaved?

It would be more efficacious if they would lead by example. However, that would be embarrassing, when they have even higher divorce rates than the unsaved.

Best to keep harping on all the logs in those other eyes.

by: ando

10-23-2009 @ 6:56pm

"--Do you really think most Christians are not alarmed by the values Hollywood promotes in tv and movies? Do you think Hollywood's depiction of sex, in particular, should not be troublesome to Christians?"

Yes, and that's why people from Limbaugh and Beck to the Religious Right have been so attractive, because they're filling the void that the "progressive" Christians leave unattended. They're big issues for the "hicks" from the heartland. I remember my mother, a devoted Catholic from a rural Midwest town, telling me that she could never vote for someone like Kerry in 2004. And that's where the Democrats will run into trouble, because they could run the risk of losing the Blue Dogs and/or an even more significant number of rural voters as the Dems keep trending toward the more urbane, sophisticated vote.

It's so funny how the left portrays itself as being tolerant and open-minded. As Chesterton noted (paraphrasing): tolerance is just a word for those who are incapable of loving another person. Watch out, Mr. Gehring, your words might come back to bite you in the behind/

by: ando

10-23-2009 @ 6:56pm

"--Do you really think most Christians are not alarmed by the values Hollywood promotes in tv and movies? Do you think Hollywood's depiction of sex, in particular, should not be troublesome to Christians?"

Yes, and that's why people from Limbaugh and Beck to the Religious Right have been so attractive, because they're filling the void that the "progressive" Christians leave unattended. They're big issues for the "hicks" from the heartland. I remember my mother, a devoted Catholic from a rural Midwest town, telling me that she could never vote for someone like Kerry in 2004. And that's where the Democrats will run into trouble, because they could run the risk of losing the Blue Dogs and/or an even more significant number of rural voters as the Dems keep trending toward the more urbane, sophisticated vote.

It's so funny how the left portrays itself as being tolerant and open-minded. As Chesterton noted (paraphrasing): tolerance is just a word for those who are incapable of loving another person. Watch out, Mr. Gehring, your words might come back to bite you in the behind/

by: WaveTossed

10-23-2009 @ 7:36pm

"Yes, and that's why people from Limbaugh and Beck to the Religious Right have been so attractive, because they're filling the void that the 'progressive' Christians leave unattended."

Please do me a favor. Please show where (what you term as) progressive Christians state where issues such as divorce, rampant sexuality, sexual abuse, sexual objectivization -- including those portrayals shown by Hollywood films, as well as in the real world -- should be ignored.

My experience is that Christians who are not part of Donaghue's belief system are very concerned with issues of sex, rape, divorce, assault issues.

by: WaveTossed

10-23-2009 @ 7:36pm

"Yes, and that's why people from Limbaugh and Beck to the Religious Right have been so attractive, because they're filling the void that the 'progressive' Christians leave unattended."

Please do me a favor. Please show where (what you term as) progressive Christians state where issues such as divorce, rampant sexuality, sexual abuse, sexual objectivization -- including those portrayals shown by Hollywood films, as well as in the real world -- should be ignored.

My experience is that Christians who are not part of Donaghue's belief system are very concerned with issues of sex, rape, divorce, assault issues.

by: Titans1

10-23-2009 @ 10:59pm

Best to keep harping on all the logs in those other eyes.

Sort of like an organization dedicated to the flaws of others ? I see your point , however not your consistency in pointing out the logs. . But I would say perhaps their is relevant times when Catholics in this culture get a very nasty rap , apparently targeted for their pro life views in a very strong pro choice media envirnoment. Bill Marr comical view points are common in many media outlets of our day. That spin and hatred is not helpful to people of any faith or non faith when presented as news or in the mainstream culture as accurate . Catholics who are pro life and dedicated tot heir religion are nice people too.

At times setting the story straight can be usefull. How well Donahugh does it may not meet up toward your
high religious standards . Forgive him.

by: Titans1

10-23-2009 @ 10:59pm

Best to keep harping on all the logs in those other eyes.

Sort of like an organization dedicated to the flaws of others ? I see your point , however not your consistency in pointing out the logs. . But I would say perhaps their is relevant times when Catholics in this culture get a very nasty rap , apparently targeted for their pro life views in a very strong pro choice media envirnoment. Bill Marr comical view points are common in many media outlets of our day. That spin and hatred is not helpful to people of any faith or non faith when presented as news or in the mainstream culture as accurate . Catholics who are pro life and dedicated tot heir religion are nice people too.

At times setting the story straight can be usefull. How well Donahugh does it may not meet up toward your
high religious standards . Forgive him.

by: ando

10-24-2009 @ 12:11am

Are you talking about Gehring or Donohue? Oh yeah, right, you don't have any political axe to grind, do you? Yeah, you just look in the logs of the people you don't like, because the left is alway so righteous.

by: ando

10-24-2009 @ 12:11am

Are you talking about Gehring or Donohue? Oh yeah, right, you don't have any political axe to grind, do you? Yeah, you just look in the logs of the people you don't like, because the left is alway so righteous.

by: Jesdisciple

10-24-2009 @ 1:37am

Gotta admit, I haven't seen any of that on here...

by: Jesdisciple

10-24-2009 @ 1:37am

Gotta admit, I haven't seen any of that on here...

by: Jesdisciple

10-24-2009 @ 3:42am

Are you talking about Gehring or Donohue?
It is hard to tell without knowledge of NMRod's history... I think Donohue and Gehring should be locked in a room together to sort out their differences. =p Actually, that might do more harm than good... but they definitely need some dialogue.

by: Jesdisciple

10-24-2009 @ 3:42am

Are you talking about Gehring or Donohue?
It is hard to tell without knowledge of NMRod's history... I think Donohue and Gehring should be locked in a room together to sort out their differences. =p Actually, that might do more harm than good... but they definitely need some dialogue.

by: Minnesotan

10-24-2009 @ 11:12am

I agree with those who say that all of these issues on the left and right, like helping the poor, AND ending abortion are Biblical issues. The tone of this article is that Bill Donohue is pursuing the wrong issues, not that he has an incomplete list of issues that he champions, and that he needs to add some more. If we were to be honest, most progressive Christians think the focus on ending abortion and defining marriage as one man and one woman is misguided or wrong or a waste or time or immoral. I challenge those who are Sojourners supporters to show why the following statement is wrong - the Progressive Christians would be very happy with the United States resembling Holland or Scandinavia - massive government social welfare programs protecting everyone cradle to grave, but legalized abortion and same-sex "marriage," rampant secularism and little regard for the things of God or the Bible by most people in the society. We need a Biblical agenda that addresses all of these issues. My main complaint with Sojourners is that they think these "right wing social issues" are ones Christians should not be concerned about and that we are wrong to speak against them prophetically in the culture.

by: Minnesotan

10-24-2009 @ 11:12am

I agree with those who say that all of these issues on the left and right, like helping the poor, AND ending abortion are Biblical issues. The tone of this article is that Bill Donohue is pursuing the wrong issues, not that he has an incomplete list of issues that he champions, and that he needs to add some more. If we were to be honest, most progressive Christians think the focus on ending abortion and defining marriage as one man and one woman is misguided or wrong or a waste or time or immoral. I challenge those who are Sojourners supporters to show why the following statement is wrong - the Progressive Christians would be very happy with the United States resembling Holland or Scandinavia - massive government social welfare programs protecting everyone cradle to grave, but legalized abortion and same-sex "marriage," rampant secularism and little regard for the things of God or the Bible by most people in the society. We need a Biblical agenda that addresses all of these issues. My main complaint with Sojourners is that they think these "right wing social issues" are ones Christians should not be concerned about and that we are wrong to speak against them prophetically in the culture.

by: Minnesotan

10-24-2009 @ 11:46am

WaveTossed - your response demonstrates the very mindset that prevents effective dialogue between the conservative Christians and the liberal Christians. You are implying that Jesus would only be concerned with issues like war, poverty, etc., and that being concerned with other issues is wrong or misguided. You are implying that Jesus would not be concerned with no-fault divorce or a proper definition of marriage, yet He talked about exactly that in Matthew 19:1-5. Those are not issues Sojourners addresses, yet Jesus did. Fighting poverty in the inner city means addressing racism AND the distressing social practice of the people who live there of having children outside of marriage. I would like to see ALL Biblical issues addressed. I think the Progressive Christians communicate ineffectively when they say that Jesus would not be concerned about legalized abortion, a proper definition of marriage, rampant sexuality in the public media, increased secularization and censorship of Christians in the public square, etc. I think it is proper to argue that those Christians should have an expanded agenda to help the poor, but you lose me and many others when you claim abortion, etc., are issues Jesus would not be concerned about, and therefore, we should not be, either. WaveTossed, I really pray that you and other Progressive Christians would understand this, because if you did, I think there could be more uniting on more issues.

by: Minnesotan

10-24-2009 @ 11:46am

WaveTossed - your response demonstrates the very mindset that prevents effective dialogue between the conservative Christians and the liberal Christians. You are implying that Jesus would only be concerned with issues like war, poverty, etc., and that being concerned with other issues is wrong or misguided. You are implying that Jesus would not be concerned with no-fault divorce or a proper definition of marriage, yet He talked about exactly that in Matthew 19:1-5. Those are not issues Sojourners addresses, yet Jesus did. Fighting poverty in the inner city means addressing racism AND the distressing social practice of the people who live there of having children outside of marriage. I would like to see ALL Biblical issues addressed. I think the Progressive Christians communicate ineffectively when they say that Jesus would not be concerned about legalized abortion, a proper definition of marriage, rampant sexuality in the public media, increased secularization and censorship of Christians in the public square, etc. I think it is proper to argue that those Christians should have an expanded agenda to help the poor, but you lose me and many others when you claim abortion, etc., are issues Jesus would not be concerned about, and therefore, we should not be, either. WaveTossed, I really pray that you and other Progressive Christians would understand this, because if you did, I think there could be more uniting on more issues.

by: Jesdisciple

10-24-2009 @ 4:26pm

And on all the other social issues that liberals might agree wth conservatives on, it seems that they think "Oh, well they have that covered." That's not how we can build a united Christian voice.

by: Jesdisciple

10-24-2009 @ 4:26pm

And on all the other social issues that liberals might agree wth conservatives on, it seems that they think "Oh, well they have that covered." That's not how we can build a united Christian voice.

by: Titans1

10-24-2009 @ 6:19pm

"That's not how we can build a united Christian voice"

Totally agree. many strengths and gifts of the spirit are found in both Conservative and liberal Christians. Evil likes to keep them separated and attacking each other based on politics , doctrines, or too much self.

by: Titans1

10-24-2009 @ 6:19pm

"That's not how we can build a united Christian voice"

Totally agree. many strengths and gifts of the spirit are found in both Conservative and liberal Christians. Evil likes to keep them separated and attacking each other based on politics , doctrines, or too much self.

by: WaveTossed

10-25-2009 @ 12:27am

"WaveTossed - your response demonstrates the very mindset that prevents effective dialogue between the conservative Christians and the liberal Christians. You are implying that Jesus would only be concerned with issues like war, poverty, etc., and that being concerned with other issues is wrong or misguided."

Let me ask you the same question that I asked Ando: Please show where (what you term as) progressive Christians state where issues such as divorce, rampant sexuality, sexual abuse, sexual objectivization -- including those portrayals shown by Hollywood films, as well as in the real world -- should be ignored and unattended.

My experience is that Christians who are not part of Donohue's belief system are very concerned with issues of sex, rape, divorce, assault issues.

by: WaveTossed

10-25-2009 @ 12:27am

"WaveTossed - your response demonstrates the very mindset that prevents effective dialogue between the conservative Christians and the liberal Christians. You are implying that Jesus would only be concerned with issues like war, poverty, etc., and that being concerned with other issues is wrong or misguided."

Let me ask you the same question that I asked Ando: Please show where (what you term as) progressive Christians state where issues such as divorce, rampant sexuality, sexual abuse, sexual objectivization -- including those portrayals shown by Hollywood films, as well as in the real world -- should be ignored and unattended.

My experience is that Christians who are not part of Donohue's belief system are very concerned with issues of sex, rape, divorce, assault issues.

by: WaveTossed

10-25-2009 @ 12:45am

"If we were to be honest, most progressive Christians think the focus on ending abortion and defining marriage as one man and one woman is misguided or wrong or a waste or time or immoral."

There most certainly are disagreements on the issue of marriage. This doesn't mean that progressive Christians believe in rampant secularism or show little regard for the things of God and the Bible.

Many Christians believe that limiting marriage according to gender is a wrong as limiting marriage according to race. However, that does NOT mean that progressive Christians don't believe in the Bible or morality. Perhaps they might not agree with YOUR INTERPRETATION of the Bible, but they most certainly do agree with the imporance of God and the Bible.

It's clear that you disagree -- further, it's clear that, given the stridency of such beliefs, these disagreements are litmus tests, "deal-breakers" as such. It appears that common ground cannot be found on this issue.

I can only say that, in the end, it will be God -- not you or I or Donohue or any other human being -- who will be the final Judge.

by: WaveTossed

10-25-2009 @ 12:45am

"If we were to be honest, most progressive Christians think the focus on ending abortion and defining marriage as one man and one woman is misguided or wrong or a waste or time or immoral."

There most certainly are disagreements on the issue of marriage. This doesn't mean that progressive Christians believe in rampant secularism or show little regard for the things of God and the Bible.

Many Christians believe that limiting marriage according to gender is a wrong as limiting marriage according to race. However, that does NOT mean that progressive Christians don't believe in the Bible or morality. Perhaps they might not agree with YOUR INTERPRETATION of the Bible, but they most certainly do agree with the imporance of God and the Bible.

It's clear that you disagree -- further, it's clear that, given the stridency of such beliefs, these disagreements are litmus tests, "deal-breakers" as such. It appears that common ground cannot be found on this issue.

I can only say that, in the end, it will be God -- not you or I or Donohue or any other human being -- who will be the final Judge.

by: BrotherMarcus

10-25-2009 @ 1:04am

Catholics in Alliance is largely funded by billionaire George Soros. Soros also provides substantial funding to Planned Parenthood, the leading provider of abortion services in the US, and Catholics for a Free Choice, the notorious pro-abortion group that has twice been condemned by the Catholic bishops.

Does anyone think that Catholics in Alliance would receive funding from George Soros if they weren't actively working for a pro-choice agenda against the authentic teaching of the Catholic Church?

As a Catholic, I'm not surprised that the Protestants at Sojourners would give Gehring a forum, but please don't imagine that he is anything but a mouthpiece for the man who pays his salary.

by: BrotherMarcus

10-25-2009 @ 1:04am

Catholics in Alliance is largely funded by billionaire George Soros. Soros also provides substantial funding to Planned Parenthood, the leading provider of abortion services in the US, and Catholics for a Free Choice, the notorious pro-abortion group that has twice been condemned by the Catholic bishops.

Does anyone think that Catholics in Alliance would receive funding from George Soros if they weren't actively working for a pro-choice agenda against the authentic teaching of the Catholic Church?

As a Catholic, I'm not surprised that the Protestants at Sojourners would give Gehring a forum, but please don't imagine that he is anything but a mouthpiece for the man who pays his salary.

by: Titans1

10-25-2009 @ 4:40am

I can only say that, in the end, it will be God -- not you or I or Donohue or any other human being -- who will be the final Judge.

Thank God

by: Titans1

10-25-2009 @ 4:40am

I can only say that, in the end, it will be God -- not you or I or Donohue or any other human being -- who will be the final Judge.

Thank God

by: Titans1

10-25-2009 @ 4:51am

"My experience is that Christians who are not part of Donohue's belief system are very concerned with issues of sex, rape, divorce, assault issues."

I would disagree . Say for chance the poverty associated with single parents . When addressed it use to be made to appear the Christian was degrading people in the secularist press. . Never meant to be , any honest person in their heart knew what even silly Dan Quall mant with Murphy Brown .

Now its not fun to mock the need for moms and dads sticking together anymore , even whites are effected .
I guess that makes secularists get involved . When the majority and problems were in minoritys it was ok by the left to even assign racism with speaking about single parents. Now the whole culture is involved . Not so many folks promoting their self righteous indignation any more . Kids need a mom and a dad . It was never brain science . Its not against gays but I have seen many take it that way. A gay dad is a better dad then a step dad . I believe the Bibical view supports that also , the Christ View is kids need their mom and dad.

by: Titans1

10-25-2009 @ 4:51am

"My experience is that Christians who are not part of Donohue's belief system are very concerned with issues of sex, rape, divorce, assault issues."

I would disagree . Say for chance the poverty associated with single parents . When addressed it use to be made to appear the Christian was degrading people in the secularist press. . Never meant to be , any honest person in their heart knew what even silly Dan Quall mant with Murphy Brown .

Now its not fun to mock the need for moms and dads sticking together anymore , even whites are effected .
I guess that makes secularists get involved . When the majority and problems were in minoritys it was ok by the left to even assign racism with speaking about single parents. Now the whole culture is involved . Not so many folks promoting their self righteous indignation any more . Kids need a mom and a dad . It was never brain science . Its not against gays but I have seen many take it that way. A gay dad is a better dad then a step dad . I believe the Bibical view supports that also , the Christ View is kids need their mom and dad.

by: RadicalChristianLibrarian

10-25-2009 @ 5:23am

I challenge those who are Sojourners supporters to show why the following statement is wrong - the Progressive Christians would be very happy with the United States resembling Holland or Scandinavia - massive government social welfare programs protecting everyone cradle to grave, but legalized abortion and same-sex "marriage," rampant secularism and little regard for the things of God or the Bible by most people in the society.

What are you smoking????? You have a strange, distorted view of "Progressive Christians." As a "progressive Christian" (actually, I'm a Christian first and foremost, trying to put God above and before ALL things including and especially politics-) I am equally concerned about the social issues you speak of. What is of concern to many of us is that conservative Christians seem to only speak out against these particular wedge issues, rather than focus on the Gospel in its entirety, you know, quaint notions like feeding the poor, taking care of the sick and elderly....

Conservatives may care about these issues as well, but it sure doesn't seem like it sometimes and Donohue's off the wall, ridiculous statements don't help to dispel this stereotype, nor do they serve to reconcile us with each other, only to divide. Which is the author's point.

by: RadicalChristianLibrarian

10-25-2009 @ 5:23am

I challenge those who are Sojourners supporters to show why the following statement is wrong - the Progressive Christians would be very happy with the United States resembling Holland or Scandinavia - massive government social welfare programs protecting everyone cradle to grave, but legalized abortion and same-sex "marriage," rampant secularism and little regard for the things of God or the Bible by most people in the society.

What are you smoking????? You have a strange, distorted view of "Progressive Christians." As a "progressive Christian" (actually, I'm a Christian first and foremost, trying to put God above and before ALL things including and especially politics-) I am equally concerned about the social issues you speak of. What is of concern to many of us is that conservative Christians seem to only speak out against these particular wedge issues, rather than focus on the Gospel in its entirety, you know, quaint notions like feeding the poor, taking care of the sick and elderly....

Conservatives may care about these issues as well, but it sure doesn't seem like it sometimes and Donohue's off the wall, ridiculous statements don't help to dispel this stereotype, nor do they serve to reconcile us with each other, only to divide. Which is the author's point.

by: RadicalChristianLibrarian

10-25-2009 @ 5:34am

Completely agreed.

by: RadicalChristianLibrarian

10-25-2009 @ 5:34am

Completely agreed.

by: BlueDeacon

10-25-2009 @ 11:52pm

That's not always the problem with divorce. The real problem, which I know about from personal experience, is that men and women are not taught how to relate to each other on a healthy basis and often don't know what a healthy partner looks like. And a lot of that has to do with the post-World War II breakdown of community for the sake of affluence and status, which the "family values" folks won't touch because it calls their own goals and status into question. Interestingly enough, many of those same folks pooh-pooh the concept of "it takes a village."

by: BlueDeacon

10-25-2009 @ 11:52pm

That's not always the problem with divorce. The real problem, which I know about from personal experience, is that men and women are not taught how to relate to each other on a healthy basis and often don't know what a healthy partner looks like. And a lot of that has to do with the post-World War II breakdown of community for the sake of affluence and status, which the "family values" folks won't touch because it calls their own goals and status into question. Interestingly enough, many of those same folks pooh-pooh the concept of "it takes a village."

by: WaveTossed

10-26-2009 @ 1:40am

"I would disagree . Say for chance the poverty associated with single parents . When addressed it use to be made to appear the Christian was degrading people in the secularist press. . Never meant to be , any honest person in their heart knew what even silly Dan Quall mant with Murphy Brown .

"Now its not fun to mock the need for moms and dads sticking together anymore , even whites are effected .
I guess that makes secularists get involved ."

Please show me where those Christians who don't agree with Donahue are mocking the need for parents to take care of their children. Please show me concrete evidence that progressive Christians don't care about sex, rape, divorce, and assault issues.

Otherwise, I will have to assume that you are bearing false witness about progressive Christians. Bearing false witness is a grievious sin which goes against one of the Ten Commandments.

by: WaveTossed

10-26-2009 @ 1:40am

"I would disagree . Say for chance the poverty associated with single parents . When addressed it use to be made to appear the Christian was degrading people in the secularist press. . Never meant to be , any honest person in their heart knew what even silly Dan Quall mant with Murphy Brown .

"Now its not fun to mock the need for moms and dads sticking together anymore , even whites are effected .
I guess that makes secularists get involved ."

Please show me where those Christians who don't agree with Donahue are mocking the need for parents to take care of their children. Please show me concrete evidence that progressive Christians don't care about sex, rape, divorce, and assault issues.

Otherwise, I will have to assume that you are bearing false witness about progressive Christians. Bearing false witness is a grievious sin which goes against one of the Ten Commandments.

by: scat

10-26-2009 @ 1:52am

I don't recall any progressives saying Jesus would not be concerned ab out abortion, marriage, etc. No one said you should not be concerned about abortion, but abortion is not the sole issue.

by: scat

10-26-2009 @ 1:52am

I don't recall any progressives saying Jesus would not be concerned ab out abortion, marriage, etc. No one said you should not be concerned about abortion, but abortion is not the sole issue.

by: Titans1

10-26-2009 @ 2:27am

If beared false witness I will be judged , but not by you.

Thank God

by: Titans1

10-26-2009 @ 2:27am

If beared false witness I will be judged , but not by you.

Thank God