www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Guess who is Happy with the Election

No.

Sir, I know that political conservatives can be Christians. I am surrounded by them: both where I live and here at this forum.

-- John

Now if only Mr. Limbaugh would live the moral positions he touts...

John,

Thanks for the clarifications. I do not hate anyone and am always very much disturbed when someone I know to be a Christian states that he hates someone. I hope that you can find it in your heart to love even those with whom you disagree.

-----

Michael,

You are correct that Mr. Limbaugh does not always live the moral positions he supports. I see a difference between those who try, fall, repent and try again and those who openly embrace what is sinful. Mr. Limbaugh is certainly in the first group. I hope you can see such a difference, too.

John

John,

Put not your trust in princes indeed.

I was really shocked by your post expressing your hatred of Limbaugh and Bush. Liberals (even moderate ones) usually express pride about their tolerance of diverse ideas. Is there therefore a limit to diversity and tolerance?

What has concerned me most in the past two years especially has been the virulent hatred that has been expressed by the left towards the likes of President Bush and Rush Limbaugh. It is one thing to contend honestly, thoughtfully, and even passionately in the arena of ideas. It is quite another to engage is vitriolic hate speech against two men made in the image and likeness of God.

Quite frankly, the expressions of the left border on adolescent rage at times and I am deeply surprised and disappointed by your own personal views in this regard.

My own unsolicited advice? Repent, rise above it, and place not your trust in princes - Democrat or Republican.

Gordo

Gordo:
Please don't think I'm accusing you personally of this, but for the sake of balance on this Forum, which leans very heavily not just to the right, but the far right, I would add that it has been my experience that there are a gracious plenty in the conservative camp who demonstrate "virulent hatred" towards their political opponents and engage in rants that "border on adolescent rage."
Sincerely,
Ryan

Dear John,

I do see a difference in the two, but I have not seem Mr. Limbaugh repent for anything. As far as I know or read, Mr. Limbaugh pretends to be on a moral high ground, knowingly denouncing others while committing multiple felonies. A twice divorced, thrice married "family values" man just oozes hypocrisy to me... Lord, forgive me if I am wrong.

John:

With all due respect, I believe that the man passed along what he was given from the intelligence community. That the British and Russian intelligence communities had the same information doesn't seem to have made any impression on our mass media which has been on a crusade to demonize and discredit the president since his first election.

That being said, I believe we should all back off political applications of our faith since they tend to divide. The Lord's call is for us to be of one mind, remembering that these things are not the real reason we are here.

In Christ,

BOB

Michael,

You are the one who is a hypocrite.

You really should check the facts before you post something that is incorrect.

Mr. Limbaugh admitted to a felony for illegally obtaining controlled painkillers. He openly admitted before 20 million people that he became addicted to painkillers to control excruciating back pain. He apologized to society for his moral failure and asked people to pray for him. Such things happen every day in our society and the offender is almost never prosecuted. Mr. Limbaugh was prosecuted only because he was a conservative. Had Mr. Limbaugh been a Hollywood celebrity not only would he have not been charged with anything he would have been celebrated as a hero for his attempt to overcome his addiction.

Where is that famous liberal tolerance for someone who became addicted to drugs to control excruciating pain?

Mr. Limbaugh also admitted on his radio show that his marriage had failed. He asked for forgiveness since he had let down a lot of people. He asked for prayers.

Where is that famous liberal tolerance and forgiveness for those who admit moral failure?

John

John,

First of all, I don't see where I am a hypocrite. Adding to that, I openly stated that "I have not seen or read". Secondly, where did I state that I was a liberal? I have noticed that whenever a "conservative" is criticized, the word "liberal" is thrown around like a dirty word. As to forgiveness, it isn't mine to give - he should apologize to the person he suggested should have the book thrown at him for the same type of illegal drug use.

According to CNN "in 2001, Limbaugh learned he had a hearing problem. He was diagnosed in May and told his listeners in October that he was almost entirely deaf as a result of an autoimmune inner-ear disease", obviously he was lying to his audience from 2001 until the newspapers broke the investigation story. That isn't asking for forgiveness out to repentance, that is being forced to admit failure due to media pressure. Gov. McGreevy was "outed" by the media in the same way, he didn't tell the truth out for truth, but out of necessity.

CBS news, "Limbaugh, who pleaded not guilty Friday, has steadfastly denied doctor shopping. Black said the charge will be dismissed in 18 months if Limbaugh complies with court guidelines.

"Mr. Limbaugh and I have maintained from the start that there was no doctor shopping, and we continue to hold this position," Black said in an e-mailed statement.

Limbaugh spokesman Tony Knight said the commentator signed the agreement Thursday, and that it called for him to enter the not guilty plea. "It's not in the system moving toward trial. It was all a formality. It's a concluded deal," Knight said." - Why would a "repentant forgiveness seeker" plead NOT GUILTY, then cut a deal knowing he did the deed, knowing that he promotes SEVERE punishment of drug offenses? That is the definition of hypocrisy - considering himself outside the rule he sets for others. Mr. Limbaugh suggested that people who use drugs illegally should either be in jail for life or exiled from the United States, has he volunteered for either?

I suppose if my statements of Limbaugh are incorrect, I can be forgiven by using his weak line - "If I was really wrong then I apologize"... even though, I like him, probably don't really mean it.

EDIT: I was wrong about one thing, Limbaugh is now THRICE divorced...

Michael,

Yep, you�re a hypocrite all right. And a very uncharitable one at that. You selectively quote from news accounts that do not tell the whole story and that omit the part about becoming addicted to pain killers to control excruciating pain. You don�t bother to quote anything he has said himself or even provide context for it. You purposely tell a distorted story and then condemn the man. You really ought to consider being fair to the people you dislike.

For the record, Mr. Limbaugh has not promoted one rule for him and another rule for everyone else. Certainly if the prosecutor was looking to applying the law equally to everyone he never would have charged Limbaugh (since the statue is almost never enforced). Also, Mr. Limbaugh has never stated that those who use drugs illegally should be jailed for life or exiled. The only harsh worlds he has had regarding drugs are for those who push and distribute them to make a profit. And there has been no change in his position in the many years I�ve listened to him.

If you actually listened to him on occasion you�d know all this.

But it�s pretty clear that your hatred of the man outweighs any interest in truth and charity.

Admin

isn't it strange for an administrator to start using "ad hominems" like hypocrite for a poster??

OK, I have calmed down since yesterday.

First, I apologize to anyone who was offended or scandalized by my remarks.

Second, I acknowledge it's a sin to hate people; and I will have to repent of that.

Third, this is why I generally avoid political discussions: because I can lose my equanimity and my temper; please forgive me.

Gordo, you asked a good question: namely, why do liberals get so upset over George W. Bush and the recent Republican leadership? I know you don't mean to provoke, etc., but you are just asking the question. My answer is that I and others find their policies to be so offensive and so detrimental to the welfare of the U.S. and the world as to be aggrieved and angered to our core. But, you were entirely correct: the solution is not to immerse ourselves in anger but to repent, so that we do not become dominated by anger but by Christ's love and peace.

-- John

John,

And I thank you for a good example of how to do so.

-- John

Gentlemen, Gentlemen!!

Let's not go further down this road. I do believe that the election of persons who are Democrats signals a serious failing of our American electorate. The majority of the populace have voted for people who support baby killing and the destruction of the family. But then, many Catholics do both regularly. Moreover, while I agree with public stands against abortion and the destruction of the family through support of the gay agenda I am extremely disappointed with the Republican support for wasteful spending and come to disagree with our approach to Iraq. This article may help to explain why: http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2006/06/1833899

John H: "far right"????? Hardly. You must lead a sheltered life indeed if you think any position ever taken on this forum is "far right". I'm not even sure what that is supposed to mean. For that matter, though I disagree with some positions taken here I would not charicterize anyone's position as "far left" either.

Politics is a shifting sand at best. It is difficult to know who is the worst in any given election. I wish we had a Catholic Monarchy, but since that's unlikely we must follow Catholic principles and impose them in the election booth. We are pro-life and pro-family. Since the Republicans don't support that well and the Democrats tend to oppose both positions I will not vote Democratic and vote Republican with great reservation.

In truth we need a third party. I voted for a third party candidate for Governor of Illinois as a write in candidate. I couldn't even find the vote count for Stufflebeam in the any of the media the next day. Perhaps I was the only one who voted for him.

The Democratic Governor supports baby killing and the destruction of families. The Republican candidate supports the destruction of families. My candidate supports life and families. So I voted for him.

Will it do any good? I don't know. But at least I didn't add anything to Satan's charge that I belong in hell.

CDL