Skip to main content

Corrupted Women Take the Stage at the DNC: Abortion is Not a Woman's Prize Comments

The Democratic National Convention is featuring their favorite female "stars" this week.  They will be used to highlight this administration's "commitment to women's rights and health."  They will stand front and center as advocates of the only man who really understands them or cares about their needs. They'll be hailed by the media as the true American woman. I can't tiptoe around the truth.  I say with as much kindness as ... Continue Reading

11 - 20 of 91 Comments

  1. Stephany
    2 years ago

    Karl, don't misunderstand my post. In 1961, abortion was not the available option it became in the 70s when Roe v Wade was declared constitutional. JFK died in 1963. I proudly voted as a very young wife and mother for a Catholic. Abortion was not an issue.
    Perhaps today he would have "evolved" and would have been as corrupted as the rest of the family of elites who selfishly promote the radical feminist agenda. When JFK died, he was a popular president with a young family and big dreams about what this country could do.
    Sadly, the democrat party has fallen to something that would have been almost unimaginable back then.
    It is NOT an option for me to promote the values or that party. I am Catholic with deep roots and by the grace of God will hold dear to that faith. Satan is at war with the Faith and many have fallen,losing their authenticity by which the faith could be spread. We all are called to be counter cultural during these times and stand firm for what is right and true. Nothing I see within the democrat party would rise to those standards. They lost credibility years ago and have regressed deeper ever since. The recent convention had it all on display. We Catholics must stand and defend our faith. Beyond ourselves, many souls are at risk.

  2. vance
    2 years ago

    KarlVDH, your post on JFK being pro-abortion if he were alive today, jolted me into an unbelievable position. Are you ready for this?? I agree with you.

  3. KarlVDH
    2 years ago

    Stephany... while I understand your attachment to him, the odds are pretty good that were he alive today, JFK would have been very vocally pro-abortion. I'm not passing judgement on the Kennedys, but they DO fall way left of center, generally, and, despite their faith and stated love for the Church, which none of us is in a position to judge, it's not as if they- and Jack particularly- were really afraid of crossing OTHER Church teachings, values, ideals, and mores.
    Really... it's HIGHLY unlikely he'd be anti-abortion now.

  4. Jim
    2 years ago

    @Rob: I partially agree but partially do not. Women were needed in factories during WWII because men were off in the military. This gave women a taste of money and the "power" that came with it. When the men returned the women did not want to give this up. To this very day many women do not want to give up the satisfaction money seemingly provides. Sure, some men dishonorably dealt with women but most did not. I do not think poor treatment of some women by some men is at the root of the feminist movement. It is the love of power and the age old sin of PRIDE. All humans are guilty of it.

  5. Rob
    2 years ago

    Judy, I wish I could believe that. In my opinion the very fact that the RR ticket is the "best" we can do given our choices speaks volumes regarding the the whole process. The American people have sadly been forced to endure candidate after candidate who we know deep down inside won't do too much to change the status quo. Every administration leaves their mark, but in the end we fight and fight about things that really never change.

    Judy, I think so long as we continue to vote for one or the other, we've guaranteed ourselves that nothing will change. And it's this lack of change that is causing people to walk away. It's becoming a lot more obvious that the real choice occurrs for those who fund the candidates. We are left with their choices and sadly their interests aren't ours.

    But maybe electing RR put's planned parenthood and all the accompanying issues back in the closet. Perhaps the best we can do is just pretend they aren't out there. I have absolutely zero faith that in regards to life, nothing will change. And while I can appreciate Paul Ryan's sudden moniker as a budget hawk, his voting record suggest anything but. So I guess with both Romney and Ryan, I guess we'll have to wait and see who exactly we get.

  6. Judy Claar
    2 years ago

    Rob, Evening Party Post...Interesting. A lot of people feel that way, and have felt that way, but we know that in order to try for a win/win outcome, (No Abortion etc.,change of heart and mind on etc., etc., etc., ), we first must have at least a Win somewhere. In fact, a lot of wins in a lot of different somewheres. (Bad Eng.) If we give our vote to Obama, by not voting for him or R/R, but someone else, we do not help our win/win Goal. Our Goal and Main Objective is and must be Pro-Life and Catholic SJ. And right now, to get even close, it is the R/R ticket.
    WE THE PEOPLE, should not have let it get this far to Begin with!!! IF we had not, we would not be having this thinking problem or feeling that some have. And I would venture to guess, that it is the younger generations that are having the thinking feeling problem. If they do not, I would venture to say that they are caught in a the youth of Hitler, and side w/Obamamites. Dem. Socialist, Poor, and Elite. And we All know Obama plays the Race card.
    Now, your last paragraph I would agree with. Blessings Always...

  7. Rob
    2 years ago

    Stephany, your comment regarding self-indulgence is spot on. It's the age old love of self that is the root of all of these social issues. A majority of the things we discuss are merely symptoms. The heart of these issues is self-indulgence pure and simple. And so many of our problems can be explained by that.

    I have always viewed abortion as a symptom of men's treatment of women. If men had not treated women as property, perhaps the corrupted form of women's liberation would not be what it is today. If men stopped using women as mere outlets of self indulgence, then perhaps the idea of abortion would have died with Margaret Sanger.

    I strongly believe that the heart of this issue is the self-indulgence of men and the failure of men. The only war on women that I see is the abject failure of men being men. Instead we have boys running around creating life and leaving a women to fend for herself. We have men that refuse to lay down their lives for their wives and families but instead watch porn or the whole host of other things that objectify women. And it's gone on for so long that it's completely corrupted our entire society.

    When men and women rise up to their true identies in Christ, only then will these issues ever right themselves.

  8. Stephany
    2 years ago

    JFK got my very first vote back in 1960. Seeing Caroline Kennedy and hearing her invoke her catholicism and what her dad stood for while promoting abortion seems utterly ridiculous to me. To imagine that JFK would want his grandchild to be torn from the womb of his daughter or granddaughter is noxious. Caroline does a disservice to our faith as well as to her father.
    No, this country has slid into a morass of self indulgence, populated with wimpy people who are unable to handle personal responsibility. I don't recall JFK presenting any ideas of this sort during his short term as president. "Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what YOU can do for your country" was his philosophy.
    This country has bought the lie that the Kennedys were some sort of royalty. What a crock!
    They, plus Sebelius, Durbin, Dodd, Leahy, Obama, and the rest of the bunch will each stand before God and status, political party, or family name will have no influence at all.
    They will each stand alone at the final judgement, as will we. .
    It is Christian charity to remind ourselves of that.

  9. Lou Iorio
    2 years ago

    If we are to separate church from state, then pro-choice catholic politicians should be prohibited from identifying with the church. Kick them out. They may still speak freely under their God-given right, but not as Roman Catholics. That should satisfy their quest for separation of church from state.

  10. Rob
    2 years ago

    vance, this is just what people do. It's know difference than the selective appreciation of Ronald Reagan. Suffice to say the party he led is not the same party either.

Leave a Comment

Comments submitted must be civil, remain on-topic and not violate any laws including copyright. We reserve the right to delete any comments which are abusive, inappropriate or not constructive to the discussion.

Though we invite robust discussion, we reserve the right to not publish any comment which denigrates the human person, undermines marriage and the family, or advocates for positions which openly oppose the teaching of the Catholic Church.

This is a supervised forum and the Editors of Catholic Online retain the right to direct it.

We also reserve the right to block any commenter for repeated violations. Your email address is required to post, but it will not be published on the site.

We ask that you NOT post your comment more than once. Catholic Online is growing and our ability to review all comments sometimes results in a delay in their publication.

Send me important information from Catholic Online and it's partners. See Sample

Post Comment

Newsletter Sign Up

Daily Readings

Reading 1, Hebrews 9:15, 24-28
This makes him the mediator of a new covenant, so that, now ... Read More

Psalm, Psalms 98:1, 2-3, 3-4, 5-6
[Psalm] Sing a new song to Yahweh, for he has performed ... Read More

Gospel, Mark 3:22-30
The scribes who had come down from Jerusalem were saying, ... Read More

Saint of the Day

January 26 Saint of the Day

St. Timothy
January 26: Born at Lystra, Lycaenia, Timothy was the son of a Greek father ... Read More