PBS continuously recycling rotten, low-hanging fruit

Know-Nothingism was a widespread bias against Catholicism in this country, stemming from the suspicion that Catholics were not sufficiently patriotic or trustworthy, as they were controlled by the Pope and a secret Vatican cabal.

Now courtesy of your tax dollars, Know-Nothingism has made a 21st century comeback on PBS’s flagship Frontline investigative program.

Last week, in a documentary entitled “Secrets of the Vatican,” Frontline managed a remarkable feat: to haul out every old anti-Catholic canard that would make a Klansman beam. It was a 90-minute orgy of bigotry indulging every stereotype about the Church: criminal cover-ups, monetary corruption, gay clergy, and, of course, the ever-favorite and never-ending sex abuse storyline.

Link to story

Donahue on latest Frontline/PBS show: Catholic bashers love to focus on “persecuted” gays, without, of course, holding them responsible for anything.

Vatsecrets

Bill Donohue comments on tonight’s PBS “Frontline” 90 minute presentation, “Secrets of the Vatican”:

“Secrets of the Vatican” marks the 48th time PBS has addressed sexual abuse in the Catholic Church. Though this problem is practically non-existent in the Catholic community these days, and is rampant in the public schools, as well as in the Orthodox Jewish community, PBS has devoted a combined total of ZERO episodes on both.

More

Editor’s note: Frontline is the place to go to see everything negative – but not actually truthful – about the Catholic Church – historical, theological, political and otherwise.

Like a blind squirrel, they come across an occasional acorn of truth, but even those are  subject to their prevailing and constant bias against virtually all things Catholic.

Frontline ought to stick with subjects they actually understand, that are within their particular area of expertise. Their latest piece about Internet Social Media (Generation Like) for example, was very well done.

The mysteries of the Catholic faith however, remain way above their pay grade.

Don’t waste your time with this one – or pretty much ANY of their offerings – past or future – dealing with Catholicism. It will likely be a colossal waste of your time. 

A pertinent reader comment (by Steve) from the PBS site:

Lot’s of inaccuracies in this article. B16 did not orchestrate the Catechism definition of homosexual acts being deemed “disordered”; the CCC was written 12 years before his pontificate AND it merely explains Scriptural teaching that sex outside of marriage (regardless of what kind of behavior) is not what Christ taught.

Also, the sexual scandals referenced are decades old, and this article, like many others, merely rehash events that happened 20-50 years ago.

Ironically, the media and the “rehashing” then tries to promote homosexual acts, artificial birth control (FYI – cancer causing), etc. The hypocrisy is the media’s, not the Church’s.

If certain behavior violates Church teaching, even those who are ministers of the Church are subject to the same moral standard. Period.

Wouldn’t it be easier for the Church to simply say – “it’s alright go for it!”.

The illogical conclusions of these articles and poor journalism show nothing more than Catholic bigotry. Pope Francis, B16, JP2 or whomever, cannot change Christ’s teachings. And men, regardless of who they are, are sinners too.

That’s the “big news”.

Related story

Discussing marriage now without Justice Kennedy is like playing Hamlet without the first grave-digger.

In Section 3 of DOMA, the Congress stipulated that “marriage” would refer only to “a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife.” But to Justice Kennedy this affirmation of the meaning of marriage bristled with hatred and condemnation. In affirming marriage as the relation of a man and woman, Congress showed a disposition to “disparage” and “demean” gays and lesbians, to deny their “equal dignity” and affect them with a “stigma.”

As Justice Scalia pointed out, Kennedy was essentially charging with bigotry the people who had drafted this bill, but also the 85 Senators and 347 congressmen who voted for it, along with the president (Clinton) who had signed it. Hate-mongers all.

Read more

There are a handful of Americans for whom the protections of political correctness or common decency still don’t apply: fat people, smokers, and Catholics.

In 21st Century America, it’s perfectly acceptable to relentlessly mock all three groups without fear of being labeled a bigot. This cultural double standard was on its fullest, most egregious display during the media’s coverage of the Papal Conclave.

Read more

Sorry Pat Buchanan, truth is no defense against liberal’s false accusations.

Documented in the 488 pages and 1,500 footnotes of “Suicide of a Superpower” is my thesis that America is Balkanizing, breaking down along the lines of religion, race, ethnicity, culture and ideology, and that Western peoples are facing demographic death by century’s end.

Are such subjects taboo? Are they unfit for national debate?

So it would seem. MSNBC President Phil Griffin told reporters, “I don’t think the ideas that (Buchanan) put forth (in his book) are appropriate for the national dialogue, much less on MSNBC.”

Read more

Submitted by Doria2

NJ Catholic Bishops: It is not “unjust discrimination” to treat different things differently.

But isn’t prohibiting same-sex “marriage” unjust discrimination?

No.  We must always remember that every person has an inherent dignity.  Like all other human beings, our homosexual brothers and sisters are beloved children of God.  As a result, the Catholic Church affirms that they “must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity.  Every sign of unjust discrimination in this regard should be avoided” [Catechism of the Catholic Church no. 2358].

Clearly, the fundamental human rights of homosexual persons must be defended, and everyone must strive to eliminate any forms of injustice, oppression, or violence against homosexual persons.

But it is not “unjust discrimination” to treat different things differently.  Same-sex unions are not, in fact, the same thing as the union of one man and one woman in marriage.  One type of union may ever generate children, the other may never; one type of union respects and expresses the inherent complementarity of man and woman; the other does not.  Therefore, treating one type of union as “marriage,” and the other not, is not only permitted, but required.  Indeed, it is treating this differentiation as bigotry that constitutes an injustice.

Read more

Related articles

Seen on the web: Denying Jesus’ existence.

Posted by Babs on Friday, Jan 13, 2012 10:12 AM (EST):

I dated an atheist in college. I remember him questioning the existence of Jesus. I was flabbergasted.

“Do you believe Julius Caesar existed?” He did. “Then how can you question the existence of Jesus? I mean, I get that you don’t think he is God, but he did live. He did die. There are extra-biblical references to him and his followers you know.”

That relationship didn’t last long, but I remember coming away with the shocking knowledge that there could be such ignorance on the part of people who pride themselves on their superior knowledge. Sadly, I’m not as surprised when I come across it today.

Link