Attacks on Archbp. Nienstedt reveal a deep and diabolical and successful campaign

Sep 18, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Free Republic

The other day I wrote about how Archbishop John Nienstedt of St. Paul and Minneapolis delivered tough love about homosexual unions and that the deception in the same-sex marriage argument is from Satan.

Comments
1 - 20 of 27 Comments Last updated Sep 19, 2013
First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Michael

Hamilton, Canada

#1 Sep 18, 2013
Let me see! The catholic church around the world riddled by sex abuse scandals (including the dioceses in Minnesota) and these most grave sins covered up by the rest of the clergy making them all sinners and yet they the church leaders are now OUT screaming at others who molested no one.

Father Donald Cozzens Roman catholic priest claims homosexuality among catholic priests is higher than the general population.

Go figure! H-I-P-O-R-C-R-I-C-Y!!
Dan

Omaha, NE

#2 Sep 18, 2013
Michael wrote:
Let me see! The catholic church around the world riddled by sex abuse scandals (including the dioceses in Minnesota) and these most grave sins covered up by the rest of the clergy making them all sinners and yet they the church leaders are now OUT screaming at others who molested no one.
Father Donald Cozzens Roman catholic priest claims homosexuality among catholic priests is higher than the general population.
Go figure! H-I-P-O-R-C-R-I-C-Y!!
Hey, Pavlov's Dog-

Use spell check.

“ TRUTH : NOT EXPEDIENCE”

Since: Nov 07

town near Jax, Fl

#3 Sep 18, 2013
When you know that the RCC says that all Catholics except married strait couples are not allowed to have sex even with themselves or they commit grave sin.
It also goes so far as to tell married strait couples they can only have an orgasm in a manor that would produce pregnancy. None of the types of foreplay can result in orgasm or it is grave sin.
I guess this makes a lot of sense to the saints but to the rest of us it is non-sense.
Dan

Omaha, NE

#4 Sep 18, 2013
Catholic created gay wrote:
When you know that the RCC says that all Catholics except married strait couples are not allowed to have sex even with themselves or they commit grave sin.
It also goes so far as to tell married strait couples they can only have an orgasm in a manor that would produce pregnancy. None of the types of foreplay can result in orgasm or it is grave sin.
I guess this makes a lot of sense to the saints but to the rest of us it is non-sense.
Actually, they don't teach that.
Dan

Omaha, NE

#5 Sep 18, 2013
Catholic created gay wrote:
When you know that the RCC says that all Catholics except married strait couples are not allowed to have sex even with themselves or they commit grave sin.
It also goes so far as to tell married strait couples they can only have an orgasm in a manor that would produce pregnancy. None of the types of foreplay can result in orgasm or it is grave sin.
I guess this makes a lot of sense to the saints but to the rest of us it is non-sense.
Here's what they teach about sexuality.

It doesn't preclude married couples having orgasms. In fact, it doesn't even mention orgasms.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive...
Michael

Hamilton, Canada

#6 Sep 18, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey, Pavlov's Dog-
Use spell check.


hipocricy...HIPOCRICY!.....H-I -P-O-C-R-I-C-Y!

Is that better Dan?

Thanks for reading my posts and correcting my error.
Michael

Hamilton, Canada

#7 Sep 18, 2013
Catholic created gay wrote:
When you know that the RCC says that all Catholics except married strait couples are not allowed to have sex even with themselves or they commit grave sin.
It also goes so far as to tell married strait couples they can only have an orgasm in a manor that would produce pregnancy. None of the types of foreplay can result in orgasm or it is grave sin.
I guess this makes a lot of sense to the saints but to the rest of us it is non-sense.
My doctor says having orgasms and masturbating is natural. She says 70% men/women admit doing it and 30% lie.

Who cares what the church says. They have their hands full with their own sexual perversions.


UNBELIEVABLE!
Dan

Omaha, NE

#8 Sep 18, 2013
Michael wrote:
<quoted text>
hipocricy...HIPOCRICY!.....H-I -P-O-C-R-I-C-Y!
Is that better Dan?
Thanks for reading my posts and correcting my error.
Still incorrect.

"Hypocrisy".

Just giving information. We all want information, right?

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Peoples Bushes, Arizona

#9 Sep 18, 2013
Michael wrote:
Let me see! The catholic church around the world riddled by sex abuse scandals (including the dioceses in Minnesota) and these most grave sins covered up by the rest of the clergy making them all sinners and yet they the church leaders are now OUT screaming at others who molested no one.
Father Donald Cozzens Roman catholic priest claims homosexuality among catholic priests is higher than the general population.
Go figure! H-I-P-O-R-C-R-I-C-Y!!
Exactly !

Moreover, since the Roman Catholic Church is actively working to prevent the CIVIL marriages of people of OTHER religions, thus denying Americans to marry whom they choose, some in religious ceremonies, then this clearly shows that the RCC does NOT support the U.S. Constitution, nor the RIGHTS and LIBERTIES it protects.
THIS position is UN-AMERICAN and DANGEROUS to the republic.
Dan

Omaha, NE

#10 Sep 19, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
Exactly !
Moreover, since the Roman Catholic Church is actively working to prevent the CIVIL marriages of people of OTHER religions, thus denying Americans to marry whom they choose, some in religious ceremonies, then this clearly shows that the RCC does NOT support the U.S. Constitution, nor the RIGHTS and LIBERTIES it protects.
THIS position is UN-AMERICAN and DANGEROUS to the republic.
SSM isn't codified in the US constitution.

Anyone who may oppose SSM is un-American and dangerous to the Republic?

Wow. Who knew?

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Peoples Bushes, Arizona

#11 Sep 19, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
SSM isn't codified in the US constitution.
Anyone who may oppose SSM is un-American and dangerous to the Republic?
Wow. Who knew?
Well, if some religious groups, such as The Evangelical Lutheran Church In America (ELCA), the largest Lutheran denomination in the country, and other Protestant denominations allow same sex marriages in their churches, and the Roman Catholic Church works to have the governments DENY legal recognition of those marriages, then YES. THAT IS ANTI-AMERICAN because it clearly violates the First Amendment's protection of Freedom Of Religion.

And since the Roman catholic Church is apparently, and CLEARLY opposed to Freedom Of Religion, and thus does NOT support the U.S. Constitution, they are CLEARLY dangerous to the republic.

How can you dispute what is so OBVIOUS ?
dan

Omaha, NE

#12 Sep 19, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, if some religious groups, such as The Evangelical Lutheran Church In America (ELCA), the largest Lutheran denomination in the country, and other Protestant denominations allow same sex marriages in their churches, and the Roman Catholic Church works to have the governments DENY legal recognition of those marriages, then YES. THAT IS ANTI-AMERICAN because it clearly violates the First Amendment's protection of Freedom Of Religion.
And since the Roman catholic Church is apparently, and CLEARLY opposed to Freedom Of Religion, and thus does NOT support the U.S. Constitution, they are CLEARLY dangerous to the republic.
How can you dispute what is so OBVIOUS ?
Fallacy of logic.

Some churches permit it, some oppose it, thus the ones who allow it are "American" and those who don't are somehow "anti-American"?

Some churches performed SSM ceremonies before the state they were in allowed it civilly. Are they "anti-American"?

The difference illustrates freedom of religion. No one has to be ELCA or Catholic and neither have to do what the other does.

Can you show me where SSM is codified in the US Constitution? I missed it. By your logic, any state that doesn't permit it today is "anti-American".

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Peoples Bushes, Arizona

#13 Sep 19, 2013
dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Fallacy of logic.
Some churches permit it, some oppose it, thus the ones who allow it are "American" and those who don't are somehow "anti-American"?
Some churches performed SSM ceremonies before the state they were in allowed it civilly. Are they "anti-American"?
The difference illustrates freedom of religion. No one has to be ELCA or Catholic and neither have to do what the other does.
Can you show me where SSM is codified in the US Constitution? I missed it. By your logic, any state that doesn't permit it today is "anti-American".
Anyone opposed to Freedom Of Religion, as enshrined in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution IS Evil and UN-AMERICAN. I don't think that's a difficult concept to understand.

And marriage laws are the purview of the states as per the 9th Amendment and the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

For the Roman Catholic Church to work to prevent for example, the gay marriages performed in Lutheran churches from being legally recognized, THAT is working to deny Freedom Of Religion, a RIGHT protected by the U.S. Constitution.

How can you say that working to deny Freedom Of Religion in the U.S. is NOT evil ? What if a state wanted to ban, or deny legal recognition to, any marriages between people who are not Christians, because they are certainly not leading a "Christian lifestyle", and do not believe that Jesus Of Nazareth is the Promised Messiah ? Would you support that ?

And if one buys the "marriage is made by God" argument, then how can one support allowing Buddhists, Hindus and atheists to marry since none of those groups even believe in the existence of God ?
dan

Omaha, NE

#14 Sep 19, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
Anyone opposed to Freedom Of Religion, as enshrined in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution IS Evil and UN-AMERICAN. I don't think that's a difficult concept to understand.
And marriage laws are the purview of the states as per the 9th Amendment and the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
For the Roman Catholic Church to work to prevent for example, the gay marriages performed in Lutheran churches from being legally recognized, THAT is working to deny Freedom Of Religion, a RIGHT protected by the U.S. Constitution.
How can you say that working to deny Freedom Of Religion in the U.S. is NOT evil ? What if a state wanted to ban, or deny legal recognition to, any marriages between people who are not Christians, because they are certainly not leading a "Christian lifestyle", and do not believe that Jesus Of Nazareth is the Promised Messiah ? Would you support that ?
And if one buys the "marriage is made by God" argument, then how can one support allowing Buddhists, Hindus and atheists to marry since none of those groups even believe in the existence of God ?
Who's telling ELCA and any other denomination that they can't perform SSM ceremonies?

No one. They're doing it, thus no one's freedom of religion is being infringed.

As you said, marriage law is left to the states, not churches.

Silly Foxy.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Peoples Bushes, Arizona

#15 Sep 19, 2013
dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Who's telling ELCA and any other denomination that they can't perform SSM ceremonies?
No one. They're doing it, thus no one's freedom of religion is being infringed.
As you said, marriage law is left to the states, not churches.
Silly Foxy.
Since the Roman Catholic Church, and others, is working to deny legal recognition of gay marriages which ELCA and other Christian denominations permit, that violates the 1st Amendment's Freedom Of Religion clause, as well as the 14th Amendment's equal protection of the law clause. THAT IS EVIL.
dan

Omaha, NE

#16 Sep 19, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
Since the Roman Catholic Church, and others, is working to deny legal recognition of gay marriages which ELCA and other Christian denominations permit, that violates the 1st Amendment's Freedom Of Religion clause, as well as the 14th Amendment's equal protection of the law clause. THAT IS EVIL.
How does it restrict ECLA and others from performing SSM ceremonies?

It hasn't thus far, so how would that change?

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Peoples Bushes, Arizona

#17 Sep 19, 2013
dan wrote:
<quoted text>
How does it restrict ECLA and others from performing SSM ceremonies?
It hasn't thus far, so how would that change?
You are F***ING obtuse !

The RCC is working to have the state governments, and federal governments NOT legally recognize the same-sex marriages performed in Protestant churches, and other places of worship.

The governments picking and choosing which marriages to legally recognize, and which marriages not to legally recognize, because somebody "doesn't like" a particular religion's marriage beliefs and practices, is an OBVIOUS violation of the First Amendment's protection of Freedom Of Religion.
Michael

Hamilton, Canada

#18 Sep 19, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Still incorrect.
"Hypocrisy".
Just giving information. We all want information, right?
Shows you are reading my posts very closely.

“ TRUTH : NOT EXPEDIENCE”

Since: Nov 07

town near Jax, Fl

#19 Sep 19, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Here's what they teach about sexuality.
It doesn't preclude married couples having orgasms. In fact, it doesn't even mention orgasms.
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive...
I got my info from a priest who counselled married Catholics, he should know. And, I didn't say they can't have orgasms (if you can read), I said not from foreplay, like the big C and the big F, and no backdoor orgasms either.

“ TRUTH : NOT EXPEDIENCE”

Since: Nov 07

town near Jax, Fl

#20 Sep 19, 2013
Given the lastest interview with Pope Francis, I think big changes are coming and thank God for that.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Jamaican ends legal challenge to anti-sodomy law 3 min TomInElPaso 2
Biggest Gay Lies 3 min Frankie Rizzo 1,667
California Takes a Stand Against Gay and Trans ... 6 min NE Jade 37
Gay taunts 'a little bit like racism' 7 min Frankie Rizzo 10
Gay marriage (Mar '13) 10 min Rose_NoHo 54,866
7 Surprising Ways Your Company Can Still Discri... 14 min St Rick Saintpornum 2
Supreme Court: Was gay marriage settled in 1972... 16 min Frankie Rizzo 540
Gay Marriage Vs. the First Amendment 2 hr dduttonnc 398
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Gay/Lesbian People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••