The reason you are confused is that you have a different understanding of the afterlife than Catholics. Catholics, unlike Protestants, believe that those who have died are only dead in their earthly BODY, but not dead in SPIRIT. For example, my late husband Mike’s earthly body is in his grave. But his spirit is alive. And that being the case, I talk to him frequently. And I believe he can hear me. And I ask him–since he is not distracted by earthly concerns–always intercedes for me. It is actually better to ask those who are alive in spirit only (and dead in their earthly body) to pray for us because they always pray for us when we ask them. I know–God, have mercy on me–sometimes others ask me to pray for them, and I forget, because I am distracted by earthly concerns.
 September 24, 2015 at 9:44am
Catholics do not “pray to” saints, anymore than Protestants pray to “faith healers.”
As a Protestant, have you ever attended a revival? Are not certain persons believed to have a special grace–conferred in the laying on of hands–to aid in the healing of others? Why do you not go to every believer (in Jesus Christ) in such situations? I believe there are persons–both Catholic and Protestant–who have been designated by our Lord to have a special intercessory power. Read Corinthians. Such individuals are CONDUITS of God’s power to heal. The actual power can only be the grace of Jesus Christ, for He is the only One who can heal.
I do not understand why there is so much controversy over this.
 September 17, 2015 at 11:35am
I do not have a problem attributing a miracle to the presence of a particular human being. After all, the New Testament gives testimony to mere human beings being healers. Do we not engage in the “laying on of hands” in order to confer the Holy Spirit? There are teachers, preachers, healers, those with the gift of knowledge, the gift of discernment of spirits, etc. And they are all members of the body of Christ.
It's true that the Bible gives examples of God using humans for His service, including miracles. However, in those cases, God (or Jesus) always got the praise and glory, never the human vessel.
People who take Scripture seriously do not give credit to anyone even if a healing takes place because God is the one who guides our daily life and is the Creator and no other human should receive the honor and glory that belongs to Him in Jesus name. Exodus 20:4 "You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. 5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them;" In case you wonder why so many folks feel this way.
"People who take Scripture seriously do not give credit to anyone"
Perhaps this may be the issue. Christians are not the People of the Book; we are People of God.
[-2] August 27, 2015 at 7:52am
This has nothing to do with a matter at hand being “private” or “religious.” It is whether or not reality can be re-defined. Reality dictates that marriage is between a man and a woman.
If the government, in this case, the SCOTUS, concluded that the color red is blue, should the people follow suit and conclude the same? Should they be penalized if they disagree?
Yes, even moral issues have a basis in objective reality. And why people suddenly draw a line in the sand and put moral issues in a box all by themselves truly escapes me.
 August 24, 2015 at 10:53am
Not only is beauty “skin deep,” it is also subjective. Check out some yahoo images of her. I think she possesses a rare kind of beauty, at least IMHO.
 August 21, 2015 at 9:09am
Discrimination is not always wrong. Would not a hospital be discriminating against a man who applied for a job as a doctor but did not have the credentials? Yes, that is discrimination. Gay people do not have the credentials of what has always been understood as marriage–a man and a woman. The credentials that a man and woman have is the Natural Law. It is that simple.
Furthermore, baking a cake for someone is an act of love. But baking a cake for a “wedding” that is not in line with the Natural Law is “formal cooperation with evil.” The message is, “I support your act of joining together in something that is objectively wrong.” Now if the persons–in this case, the bakers–are held at gunpoint, or forced by a judge to bake the cake or suffer consequences, that is DURESS. And when someone does something under duress, it is “material cooperation with evil.” To resist evil while facing negative or very uncomfortable consequences, is called “virtue.” And virtue is the stuff of “saints.”
August 6, 2015 at 7:35am
Perhaps the reason nobody is talking about embryonic stem cell research is owing to the truthfulness of what you just said. The problem with embryonic stem cell research is that embryonic stem cells are poorly differentiated. That is why they cause tumour formation such as teratomas. “Poorly differentiated” is a characteristic that stem cells share with aggressive cancers.
[-1] August 6, 2015 at 7:11am
The SCOTUS ruling is the equivalent of saying 2 + 2 equals 5, as in “1984.” The SCOTUS has declared that illusion is reality. If the SCOTUS ruled that 2 + 2 equals 5, or that the color red is green, and a lot of people (rightly) objected, would those persons be wrong in objecting? Would these persons be discriminating against persons who go along with the SCOTUS in saying 2 + 2 equals 5? Would they be “discriminating” if they instead continued to assert that 2 + 2 equals four?
[-1] August 6, 2015 at 6:59am
Why did this woman stop issuing marriage licenses to heterosexuals? Discrimination? It was not “discrimination” prior to the SCOTUS ruling. What we are saying as Christians who uphold the Natural Law is that only heterosexual couples can truly marry and that the SCOTUS ruling is wrong. What am I missing?
 July 22, 2015 at 9:21am
And excessive use of Plan B will eventually take its toll on these young women. Excessive use of exogenous hormones is carcinogenic. That is the reason why doctors are discouraging older women from using a lot of exogenous hormones, which are believed to help protect women from heart disease and osteoporosis. Why younger women are being encouraged to use exogenous hormones is beyond me. Many of these women will develop breast cancer when they are older.
My hope is that a huge lawsuit will ensue and expose contraceptive use for what it truly is–cancer causing, just like x-radiation, asbestos, and tar (from cigarettes).
DEB, "...excessive use of Plan B.."
But what is "excessive"? Moderation in all things seems like a good rule to follow.
Although I think modern contraceptives, like any technology, can be a double edged sword your points are very valid. I do not trust big pharma.
Everyone talks about and walks for a cure for breast cancer (though I have no idea how walking for a cause is supposed to accomplish anything other than trick people into believing they are actually doing something "helpful").
Yet I argue that finding the cause of the incredibly high rates of breast cancer is more important than finding the cure. I think that no one wants to really research the cause because of where it would lead back to, and for the lawsuits that you have pointed out.
I agree, Deb. It is appalling that the Feds are severely cracking down on natural health options, yet making dangerous products like Plan B readily available for girls who are not fully developed. Either progressives all share a mutated gene which prohibits them from maturing beyond age 12, since they have an inability to see down the road and only value immediate gratification, or they have a plan which is far more sinister.
Just like excessive use of DepoProvera, which is being pushed in high school health classes for over a decade now. A lot of those women are now having a hard time getting pregnant now, when they WANT to.
The damage from these contraceptives can be irreversible,
Plan B Overview:
Plan B Side Effects
Plan B Interactions
July 7, 2015 at 8:11am
I think you are right.
 July 6, 2015 at 6:23pm
Gee, at first I thought that the Swedes had created a “caterpillar drive,” as in Clancy’s book–on which a film is based–The Hunt for Red October. Anyone else see that movie starring a very young and handsome–and probably not yet arrogant–Alec Baldwin and Sean Connery? Great movie!!
Agreed! Was a fantastic movie, one of my favorites! Have to give credit where credit is due though....Tom Clancy really knew how to keep your attention in his books. His loss will be felt by many.
Ah Debby....no one just becomes arrogant overnight. He always was arrogant. Just is less inhibited in his old age in showing it.
I think you are right.
The movie was good but the book was oh so much better.
 June 29, 2015 at 8:13am
Jinxe, it was the same with the Roe v. Wade decision. Faithful Christians who oppose abortion are persecuted, particularly in the workplace. I’ve been there. Pro-aborts invariably try to impose their beliefs onto those who oppose abortion. Pro-aborts have shown time after time after time they cannot and will not “peacefully coexist” with pro-lifers.
 June 29, 2015 at 8:08am
Because homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered and intrinsically evil. Evil ALWAYS expands of its own accord. It is NEVER content to limit itself in any way. Homosexual activists will try to force acceptance of their practices on orthodox Jews and faithful Christians. It goes without saying. Mark my words.
June 27, 2015 at 7:38am
I believe radical Islam is the only thing that will hold this homosexual ruling in check.
 June 27, 2015 at 7:34am
You are absolutely right, Puddle Duck.
 June 27, 2015 at 7:33am
Evil always expands of its own accord. It is NEVER content to be limited in any way. This is the beginning of the end of the United States of America. Christians who are sincere about their faith will be persecuted in the workplace. It is inevitable. Christian conscience is now on a collision course with this ruling. Mark . . . my . . . words. Never mind what Kennedy said.
 May 14, 2015 at 6:53pm
Indeed. No country has survived that has sanctioned–or has institutionalized–polymorphous sex. Ever. So our country is collapsing, and that will indeed affect everyone in every way. And Christians who live according to Sacred Scripture and the Natural Law will be persecuted.
So, everyone, hold onto your hats, your wallet, and your Bible.
May 11, 2015 at 9:03pm
No, actually, if you read the Catechism of the Catholic Church, you would see that it is definitely not “progressive.” However, there are “Catholics” who would like to see that happen. I wish they would just leave the Church and plant their seeds of corruption elsewhere.
No actually if you go to certain Catholic churches they have clearly slid left.
I could not care a whit about the Catechism of the Catholic church, as it like many other written codes of conduct have been tainted.
As far as those who would like to see that happen it is in certain places.
I wish I was wrong but I have seen it .
I appreciate the passion with which you defend the Catholic Church but wouldn't wish anyone to leave the church just because they disagree with it. That's what started the Reformation movement.
angeleyes63.... I know you could not care a whit for Catholic catechism, but at least you should give them credit for that Bible you read and quote from.
 May 11, 2015 at 9:01pm
Oh, how I wish Christ would come again . . . soon!!