Thursday, March 15, 2012

Thank you, but no.

How is it that some people can compel us to go beyond our ‘normal’ and to step outside of what is comfortable to us?  I think it requires a certain level of respect for and possibly admiration of the catalytic individual for us to respond in a way that we wouldn’t typically.  This is what I believe compelled me to move beyond my own comfort and to enter in to a discussion that I knew was going to be time consuming and wrought with deep-seated fundamental disagreements.
Dear American in Paris, in response to your most recent post:

First and foremost, I want to offer to you a most sincere expression of gratitude for prompting this conversation weeks ago.  It is as a direct result of your initial query and the consequent discussion that I was moved to actually read the legislation itself and research the basis of the opposition’s arguments.  It is through this independent study that I have actually come to form a firm and, what I believe to be, well grounded opinion on the issue at hand.  So thank you.  All too often, I choose apathy when issues do not impact me directly or immediately and I can’t be bothered to study issues enough to form my own opinion.  It is a good and healthy exercise to be challenged!  

In address of your above-noted post, it is impossible and futile to continue our discussion as long as your arguments are based on and in opposition to a misinterpretation/misunderstanding of the Catholic teachings about love, life, marriage, procreation, and contraception.  For a most direct approach to increasing your knowledge in this area, I recommend reading Humanae Vitae.  It may require subsequent review and supplemental study. There is a Wikipedia article with numerous links to related documents.
It is also apparent that your arguments are based on/supported by a misinterpretation/ misunderstanding of The First Amendment to the Constitution.  Please refrain from omitting all that follows the prohibition of Congress to establish a state church.
Another misunderstanding/misinterpretation that is made evident by your arguments is that of the Church’s opposition to the legislation in question (i.e. What is the Church opposing and why?). Read the letters from the Bishops themselves.  Watch the videos. Educate yourself regarding the actual position of the Catholic church, rather than relying on ‘reporters’ with their own agenda to summarize their positions for you.
And finally, to address what you claim is your greatest issue with ‘the opposition,’ and as if the thoughts, beliefs, and understanding of this intelligent, well-read, informed woman are somehow inconsequential, I recommend the works of Janet E. Smith and Kimberly Hahn; two educated, published women who have searched for answers regarding contraception and come to embrace the Catholic teachings that oppose their use.

As much as I would love to suggest we ‘agree to disagree,’ I simply cannot when I see from your arguments that you don’t know what you are arguing against.  I hope that we can arrive at that point eventually, although, I would not be surprised if, upon learning the true position of the Church and understanding their true opposition to the proposed legislation, you would no longer disagree.


  1. Bri, excellent article. Is this blogger someone you know? She doesn't have a clue what the Catholic church believes, or why they are opposed to the healthcare mandate. I responded to ner blog. She also can't interpret Scripture, or use it appropriately in her arguments.