Archbishop bars Pelosi from communion over support for abortion rights

a reply to: The2Billies

Um again - you asked for Bible verses about abortion.

I did not.

In the time the Bible was written, THERE WAS NO ABORTION as we know it.

Medicine has advanced, but there most certainly was abortion "as we know it".

Saying someone can't take communion is NOT a threat.

No, it not. It's an actual attack. But, the bishop is using Pelosi as an example. Pelosi is not guilty of have an abortion, performing abortion or even the Roe V Wade ruling, which is currently the "law of the land".

There is no "canon law" on how politicians MUST legislate Catholic teachings into law. Yet, this bishop has decided to dip into political discourse by weaponizing the Eucharist if Catholic law makers don't force Catholic teachings onto the masses.

Of course this is a message to the Catholic justices sitting on the Supreme Court that they MUST rule the Catholic way, or face the same, or even worse alienation for The Body of Christ. After all, Pelosi is only defending the Constitution and the Law of the Land, but the Catholic SCOTUS justices have the opportunity right now to either rule that woman have an autonomous right to decide reproductive issues for themself, or if the Catholic Church, through theocratic legislation does.

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus


Pelosi being Catholic is temporarily barred from 'communion' the rite of eating the body-&-blood of christ

instead Pelosi must subsist only on the Spirit-Cooking rite of eating martyrs (cake effigies of victims)

whoa... both rites are ritual cannibalism

Its funny how in certain groups its all about my choice my choice my choice.

But let someone make a choice you dont agree with and its pitch forks and torches, the archbishop has the right and authority to make that choice, they only have to answer to the church and to god for their choices.

*shrugs*

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Justices don't make religious rulings, they make Constitutional rulings. If they base their rulings on their religious beliefs they should be fired.

originally posted by: RegularJo76
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Numbers 5:11-31

I already proved that is not discussing abortion at all and proved that poster wrong. He gave up.

You can read the post here.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

We should try to contact Nancy Pelosi for comment. To get a hold of her just draw a pentagram on the ground and say "I summon thee" 3 times.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
No, it not. It's an actual attack.

Hilarious. You think that they can't choose who is or is not part of their religion?

Now you are for murdering babies AND the end of religious freedom. Better and better.

a reply to: Xcathdra

No thanks, the less she speaks the better.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Your idea terrify's me. I guess you'll have everyone arrested and jailed as soon as it is made legal to do so if one disagree's with the Democratic Party and liberal/progressive ideas.

The justices are NOT outlawing abortion. That is a big lie. They are saying the constitution says the decision belongs to the states. So you want them arrested and jailed for following the constitution? Well that too is an idea embraced by the Democratic Party.

I recall Obama and others saying the constitution is an outdated document that needs replacing. So your idea to arrest and jail justices for following the constitution appears to be a very mainstream Democratic Party ideology.

This is why the Democratic Party's totalitarian bent scares me and what it means for the future of the nation.

It used to be that someone like you would demand doxing/social media destruction/firing/personal destruction of someone who didn't worship at the feet of Democratic Party ideology. Now you are demanding people be arrested and jailed for not submitting to liberal ideology and giving the "only correct" ruling allowed by liberal and Democratic Party ideology.

Have you called the FBI on me yet and demanded my arrest and jailing for saying things you don't like in a public forum?
What's after that?

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Sookiechacha

Justices don't make religious rulings, they make Constitutional rulings. If they base their rulings on their religious beliefs they should be fired.

How can they not? How can we possibly believe their decision isn't tainted by the bishop's threat? If the Catholic church can't stay out of politics an stop punishing government official for not forcing Catholic teachings on masses, maybe Catholics should be barred from serving, as they can't be trusted to obey their oath for fear of eternal damnation.

a reply to: The2Billies

Ginsburg said South Africa would be a far better country to look to in terms of how to write a Constitution. It's no surprise these people hate our country and what is is founded on, they admit it publicly.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Hilarious. You think that they can't choose who is or is not part of their religion?

Please show me the canon law that Pelosi has broken.

originally posted by: St Udio
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus


Pelosi being Catholic is temporarily barred from 'communion' the rite of eating the body-&-blood of christ

instead Pelosi must subsist only on the Spirit-Cooking rite of eating martyrs (cake effigies of victims)

whoa... both rites are ritual cannibalism

Not both. The body and blood of Christ represents as a symbol the sacrifice he made of himself on the cross of Calvary.
The breaking and eating of bread and the wine is done in remembrance of that great sacrifice.

It doesn't represent cannibalism. Spirit cooking is more likely to be what you refer to.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Xcalibur254

Exo 20:13
“You shall not murder.

Jer 1:5
“Before I formed you in the womb I knew[fn] you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.”

Upon being formed in the womb, God knows us. God doesn't know us at birth, but before that. Killing another human without just cause is murder last I checked.

When does 'original sin' come into play, is it conception or birth?

Not trying to troll, just very rusty on my Bible but raised Roman Catholic and told all unbaptised kids are sent to Hell as God considers everyone to be a born sinner.

a reply to: The2Billies

Your idea terrify's me.

A theocratic SCOTUS that rules based on threats by the church terrifies me.

In Catholicism receiving Holy communion is literally becoming one with Christ. There is strict rule within the Catholic church that only those in communion with the church can receive Holy Communion. In other words, only those who are united in the same beliefs are allowed to receive Holy Communion.

pelosi, by way of her beliefs on abortion, is not in communion with the church who view abortion as murder. She can therefore be excluded from receiving Holy communion.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Because no Justice is going to talk about how their Catholic faith is why they are ruling a certain way. They don't make religious rulings. Your post is laughably ignorant.

But, since you believe people who target Justices should be arrested, you believe the Democrats who are saying to protest their houses to pressure them should be arrested, right?

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: The2Billies

Your idea terrify's me.

A theocratic SCOTUS that rules based on threats by the church terrifies me.

Now show me evidence of one.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: The2Billies

Your idea terrify's me.

A theocratic SCOTUS that rules based on threats by the church terrifies me.

There are no threats by the Catholic Church that can do any actual harm to SCOTUS.

Their decision DOES NOT outlaw abortion.

If you are terrified by theocracy remember the justices can go to a Christian church and take communion, no big deal.

There is no threat made that endagers their lives or endangers them.

Pro-abortion activists on the other hand have made real threats to the life of Supreme Court Justices, they have purposely terrorized the families of Supreme Court Justices by marching in front of their homes where their families live.

You want to arrest and jail someone for basically saying "if you do this then you can't eat or drink in our facility" if you make this decision. Yet the pro-abortion crowd can threaten to kill and engage in terrorizing their families for making a decision it is perfectly ok. Once again, you demonstrate the depths of terrifying totalitarianism within the doctrine of Democratic Party liberalism.

Liberal ideology:
It is ok to threaten to arrest, jail, kill and terrorize families for telling someone they can't eat and drink with them or make a decision the liberal left Democratic Party doesn't like.

It is a jailable offense to tell someone they can't eat or drink with you, if the person is a conservative.

Did I get the liberal ideology correct?

Conservative: You can't eat or drink with me if you do ..... that I don't agree with.
Liberal: arrest and jail the conservative

Liberal: I'll kill and terrorize your family if, a conservative makes an important decision on ... that I don't agree with.
Liberal: arrest and jail the conservative, it is also ok to threaten to kill and terrorize their families.

Conservative: You can eat and drink with anyone else you choose to, I don't care, just not with me
Liberal: arrest and jail the conservative for terrorist threats

Remember as an atheist, there is NO difference between communion which is eating and drinking together and going to a restaurant and eating and drinking together. As communion has zero value or importance to the atheist who finds it simply eating and drinking.

Conservative - I'd say nearly all: abortion after 24 weeks if the XX and infant are healthy is immoral
Liberal - I'd say nearly all: It is moral and necessary for abortion to be legal up until the infant is in the birth canal at full
term even if XX and infant are healthy

a reply to: The2Billies

This is what she does. She can't address the topic or defeat logical arguments so she moves goalposts and makes outlandish posts and ignores anything that doesn't agree with her.