House Speaker Says Lawmakers Must 'Live the Gospels' Through Their Policies

[Seabee1973]

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/nuns-nancy-pelosi-rock-stars-progressive-catholics/story?id=10584299

Not content to bask in waves of pro-health legislation gratitude from about 100 sisters, priest, academics and activists, she went straight on to the next challenge: immigration.

Nancy Pelosi

"The cardinals, the archbishops, the bishops that come to me ... say, 'We want you to pass immigration reform,'" said Pelosi. "And I said, I want you to speak about it from the pulpit. Some (who) oppose immigration reform are sitting in those pews, and you have to tell them that this is a manifestation of our living the gospels."

Click above to read more.

And here i thought Liberals were all about seperation of church and state

[Teller]

There should be a brand-new religion called CWC.

"Catholic When Convenient"

[TheMan CC47]

There should be a brand-new religion called CWC.

"Catholic When Convenient"

Would that mean that Barry is MWC?

[Burgundy Burner]

how does she explain the abortion thing?

this woman needs to lose her speakership this fall.

[Teller]

how does she explain the abortion thing?

this woman needs to lose her speakership this fall.

But she prays for all the lil chilrens AFTER their born! That makes it OK, right?

[Duckus]

Smart. Making Healthcare and Immigration a moral issue is a good strategy from a political standpoint.

[Teller]

Would that mean that Barry is MWC?

Psh.

Don't even get me started on the first president I know of who quit going to church entirely because he was "too much of a distraction."

Please.

If he believes that, the actual problem is getting his head through those ginormous double doors.

[Teller]

Smart. Making Healthcare and Immigration a moral issue is a good strategy from a political standpoint.

Interesting.

How bout abortion?

[Duckus]

Interesting.

How bout abortion?

I don't understand the question. What about abortion?

I am just saying - it is a smart political strategy to make Healthcare and Immigration a moral issue. Not saying it is right. Not saying it is consistent with any other beliefs. Only saying that as a strategy, tying those issues to a moral calling of the religious is smart.

[Teller]

I don't understand the question. What about abortion?

I am just saying - it is a smart political strategy to make Healthcare and Immigration a moral issue. Not saying it is right. Not saying it is consistent with any other beliefs. Only saying that as a strategy, tying those issues to a moral calling of the religious is smart.

I gotcha. I think I misunderstood your point.

I was going to make the argument that if it makes sense to make healthcare and immigration moral issues, than abortion certainly is one as well. But then, I guess that's how it's broken down anyway.

Personally, I get really frustrated with people who want to use religion and morality to push certain parts of their agenda, but then ignore it entirely when it doesn't fit said agenda.

Just reeks of phony, IMO.

[Duckus]

I gotcha. I think I misunderstood your point.

I was going to make the argument that if it makes sense to make healthcare and immigration moral issues, than abortion certainly is one as well. But then, I guess that's how it's broken down anyway.

Personally, I get really frustrated with people who want to use religion and morality to push certain parts of their agenda, but then ignore it entirely when it doesn't fit said agenda.

Just reeks of phony, IMO.

No worries. I agree - it is completely phony, but it works so well. Religion has always been the pawn of politics. It all about framing an issue.

I was reading and article a several months ago about how Democrats were breaking Republicans on Early Education funding by framing it as a National Security issue (qualified candidates for military in the future).

Republicans attempted to frame the invasion of Iraq as a liberation of people under tyranny to pull at the moral stings of Democrats.

Its all about framing your issues. It is all phony - but smart.

[Destino]

Interesting.

How bout abortion?

Question, if Abortion were off the table how do you think Christians would vote? Catholics would almost all go democrat. I wonder how many others would realize that greed and social darwinism aren't in line with doctrine.

[Teller]

Question, if Abortion were off the table how do you think Christians would vote? Catholics would almost all go democrat. I wonder how many others would realize that greed and social darwinism aren't in line with doctrine.

Honestly, I started a thread here about two years ago, asking the question "Is it possible to do what Jesus would do, and be a republican."

It's one of those internal dilemmas I've had for a while. And frankly, it's one of those things that's softened some of my more hardline stances on things like welfare. Whereas I was opposed to it almost completely when I was younger, I now realize that there are people who genuinely try to make a life for themselves and fail. When that happens, we should help pick them up.

For those who don't try, that's a different story. And I'm pretty sure Jesus would be cool with that.

And lest there be any confusion, not all conservatives are filthy rich white guys. I honestly am at the lowest point in my life financially ever. I could get all kinds of government help right now if I chose to. But principle trumps convenience for me. And when I'm back on top, I will be able to rightfully say "I picked myself up. You can too."

So honestly, Des, I can't answer your question, because I haven't answered it in my own mind. I appreciate where you're coming from though, and this discussion will know doubt have me focusing on this inner-argument with myself again.

[mjah]

There should be a brand-new religion called CWC.

"Catholic When Convenient"

Ohhh, the priests-with-kids photos I'm sorely tempted to post in response to the notion of Catholic convenience...

Invoking religion in government is nothing more than sad politics, plain and simple. This Pelosi quote probably won't make the same waves or have the same real-world implications as when a certain former President (whose name eludes me at the moment) tried to convince Jacques Chirac that the Iraq War was about fulfilling biblical prophecies and stopping Gog and Magog at work in the Middle East. But it's still despicable, cynical, manipulative politics.

Business as usual in Congress.

[Teller]

(whose name eludes me at the moment)

Bush. The letters of whose last name -- not coincidentally -- appear in the word "bull****." And that was.

I'm just saying that if someone is morally consistent, and lives by WWJD in all areas if that's what they so choose, I respect that a lot more than someone who picks and chooses.

Abortion IS a moral issue. Abortion IS a privacy issue. It's fair to come down on either side, my personal feelings aside. But if you're going to ignore morality when it comes to life itself, don't preach to me about morality in other areas.

But honestly, the reason injecting religion and morality into politics works, is because the PEOPLE on that side are generally genuine and consistent. And when they feel their politicians (whether they ACTUALLY are or not) are thinking and believing the same way, they buy into it.

DISCLAIMER: I do not believe a person has to be religious to be morally upstanding.

[mjah]

Bush. The letters of whose last name -- not coincidentally -- appear in the word "bull****." And that was.

Yes, that was the gentleman's name! Thanks -- I was having some trouble remembering.

Strangely though, I'm not convinced that it was fully cynical. The notion of using fundamentalist Christian religious-war doctrine to convince the President of France -- France! -- THAT President of France! -- to support a flimsy war case built of yellowcake marshmallows and aluminum-tube toothpicks seems truly beyond the reach of even the most optimistic cynic. To this day I believe that it was only a partially cynical appeal. So in a sense, the partially-genuine aspect of it is endearing. In every other sense, though, it remains totally terrifying.

Anyway...

I'm just saying that if someone is morally consistent, and lives by WWJD in all areas if that's what they so choose, I respect that a lot more than someone who picks and chooses.

No argument there -- and not just WWJD, but WWAD or WWBD or WWMD or WWASHD or WWTFSMD. (Some fun ones to decipher, there.)

DISCLAIMER: I do not believe a person has to be religious to be morally upstanding.

Fully agreed. I recently got into a very long but (eventually) civil Facebook debate with a fundamentalist Christian who could not fathom the idea of morality separate from religion. His argument of "where do you think secular morality came from?" naturally led me to question how he could know that religion came before morality, and why the ancestry couldn't have been reversed. But of course, when one presupposes a particular conclusion about the origins of certain important moral rules, these arguments don't find the traction they deserve...

[Teller]

Yes, that was the gentleman's name! Thanks -- I was having some trouble remembering.

Well, at least you didn't misremember. I always had you pegged for more of a decider.

No argument there -- and not just WWJD, but WWAD or WWBD or WWMD or WWASHD or WWTFSMD. (Some fun ones to decipher, there.)

OK, I got Allah and Buddha right away. WM....White males? Hmm....ASH...A **** head? WTFSM.....WTF, Sassy Molassy? :pfft:

Fully agreed. I recently got into a very long but (eventually) civil Facebook debate with a fundamentalist Christian who could not fathom the idea of morality separate from religion. His argument of "where do you think secular morality came from?" naturally led me to question how he could know that religion came before morality, and why the ancestry couldn't have been reversed. But of course, when one presupposes a particular conclusion about the origins of certain important moral rules, these arguments don't find the traction they deserve...

Hmm....Fundamentalist Christian can be interpreted a lot of ways, so I won't nitpick. I'll say this though. Many religions, including Christianity and Islam have pretty ugly parts of their past that I'm sure they'd like to excise if they could. (I should say "we," truth be told.) You don't have to go to far back in human history with any one of virtually any major religion to be able to question the morality of some of the horrors they perpetrated.

It frustrates me greatly that something potentially so great, so rewarding, so fulfilling, can be manipulated in ways that can be considered downright evil. For every great Christian man or woman, there's a money-grubbing televangelist out to make a buck. For every cleric who preaches peace, there's a terrorist killing innocents. (OK, so it's not one-for-one, but you follow me, I'm sure.)

I've long been intrigued by Buddhism. The idea of inner peace, living in the moment, and doing good by and for all things is pretty tough to manipulate. And I can't remember the last time a Buddhist monk told me I could buy health or salvation at 2 in the morning on the upper channels.

I'm getting way the hell off the topic now, but I'll just end with this. I wish those in Washington talking about the Gospels, or a greater morality, or any number of such grandiose ideas cared as much about those things as those of us plunking away on our keyboards where the rubber meets the road.

[ACW]

WWMD=Muhammad?

[twa]

Smart. Making Healthcare and Immigration a moral issue is a good strategy from a political standpoint.

As is calling it forced charity and breaking the laws

Most every issue is a moral one and involves others imposing theirs on you

[Veretax]

Liberals only care about religion when it supports their causes. When it doesn't they should butt out. Does this sound familiar to anyone else?

Conservatives believe in most cases that religion is based on some fundamental truth and if they agree with said religion, well, then they must agree with said truth.

[Burgold]

Liberals only care about religion when it supports their causes. When it doesn't they should butt out. Does this sound familiar to anyone else?

Conservatives believe in most cases that religion is based on some fundamental truth and if they agree with said religion, well, then they must agree with said truth.

Meh, I think you would have been better off saying politicians only care about religion when it suits their cause. We certainly have seen enough Conservative hypocrisy when it comes to morality and religion that you needn't pretend that their **** don't stink.

That said, I think everyone has a few fundamental beliefs and things they think are imperative moral truths. Everyone has their windmills. Things worth fighting for. So, if a politician wants to invoke good on subject A and not subject B it is possible that to them A represents something more central. Then again, it's just as likely that they are invoking religion as a tool of manipulation... though I really don't believe many or any of our Congress people are evil or tools of the Devil.

[Zguy28]

Honestly, I started a thread here about two years ago, asking the question "Is it possible to do what Jesus would do, and be a republican."

It's one of those internal dilemmas I've had for a while. And frankly, it's one of those things that's softened some of my more hardline stances on things like welfare. Whereas I was opposed to it almost completely when I was younger, I now realize that there are people who genuinely try to make a life for themselves and fail. When that happens, we should help pick them up.

For those who don't try, that's a different story. And I'm pretty sure Jesus would be cool with that.

And lest there be any confusion, not all conservatives are filthy rich white guys. I honestly am at the lowest point in my life financially ever. I could get all kinds of government help right now if I chose to. But principle trumps convenience for me. And when I'm back on top, I will be able to rightfully say "I picked myself up. You can too."

.

[Zguy28]

Liberals only care about religion when it supports their causes. When it doesn't they should butt out. Does this sound familiar to anyone else?

While that may be generally true, it is also true IMHO of many conservative politicians.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Here's what I think is funny. When the GOP folks try to co-opt Christianity its a matter of moral convictions, but when Dem does it then their faith is a matter of convenience. Ya'll are ridiculous.

[Hubbs]

ASH...A **** head?

:rotflmao:

That's exactly what I thought of, too.