NFL Kicker Harrison Butker’s unhinged commencement speech

[Anonymous]

Perhaps I missed, but sounds like Harrison Butker's comments may have been shaped by Leonard Leo and others, always looking to launder their stuff:

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/chiefs-kicker-butker-antisemitic-lies-college-graduation-speech-1235021459/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s so weird as a spiritual, but not religious, person having to watch the organized religions who the hold the most political and social power try to imbue their values on the rest of us who don’t hold them.

Like clearly this speech is pushing traditional values where women raise kids and stay home.

To suggest otherwise is to insult our intelligence.

I believe in a merciful God, but I don’t hold any of these odd rigid social beliefs found in things like Catholicism essentially mandating women stick to a “vocation”.

It’s fked up yall hold so much sway over the rest of us just trying to exist in America.

This is NOT Catholicism. He's an idiot.

To you it’s not. To some it is.

This is the problem with religious “interpretation” in general and the most compelling reason society should rely on the Golden rule, but also insist on a neutral playing field whereby the observable world perceivable to all people is employed in policy making, and why we should not allow organized religion to guide policy.

There’s like 7000 religions in the world. I don’t give a fk if one adherent to one of them says “my religion is this!” And another says “no! It’s this!”

Because frankly these organized religions are all nuts. And they are all used for control.

We need a neutral system reliant on treating others as you’d like to be treated.

Wrong. As other posters have stated, with cites, much of what he said is actually contrary to Catholic teaching. That is not an "interpretation." It's a different belief altogether. Also, the response was to PP saying: "odd rigid social beliefs found in things like Catholicism essentially mandating women stick to a “vocation”. " Catholicism does no such thing, which should be obvious even to the least religiously informed person who simply knows Catholic women in the workplace. Even freaking ACB has always worked.

Again, how do you even know what you claim to profess? How do you know that’s not “real Catholicism”. Are you a self proclaimed expert? It’s weird. You argue in absolutes on -‘ issue not grounded in observable reality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s so weird as a spiritual, but not religious, person having to watch the organized religions who the hold the most political and social power try to imbue their values on the rest of us who don’t hold them.

Like clearly this speech is pushing traditional values where women raise kids and stay home.

To suggest otherwise is to insult our intelligence.

I believe in a merciful God, but I don’t hold any of these odd rigid social beliefs found in things like Catholicism essentially mandating women stick to a “vocation”.

It’s fked up yall hold so much sway over the rest of us just trying to exist in America.

This is NOT Catholicism. He's an idiot.

To you it’s not. To some it is.

This is the problem with religious “interpretation” in general and the most compelling reason society should rely on the Golden rule, but also insist on a neutral playing field whereby the observable world perceivable to all people is employed in policy making, and why we should not allow organized religion to guide policy.

There’s like 7000 religions in the world. I don’t give a fk if one adherent to one of them says “my religion is this!” And another says “no! It’s this!”

Because frankly these organized religions are all nuts. And they are all used for control.

We need a neutral system reliant on treating others as you’d like to be treated.

Wrong. As other posters have stated, with cites, much of what he said is actually contrary to Catholic teaching. That is not an "interpretation." It's a different belief altogether. Also, the response was to PP saying: "odd rigid social beliefs found in things like Catholicism essentially mandating women stick to a “vocation”. " Catholicism does no such thing, which should be obvious even to the least religiously informed person who simply knows Catholic women in the workplace. Even freaking ACB has always worked.

Again, how do you even know what you claim to profess? How do you know that’s not “real Catholicism”. Are you a self proclaimed expert? It’s weird. You argue in absolutes on -‘ issue not grounded in observable reality.

Because people who are real Catholics have posted real Catholic teaching which show his opinion is against Catholic teachings. … including a link to a statement from the order who started that college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps I missed, but sounds like Harrison Butker's comments may have been shaped by Leonard Leo and others, always looking to launder their stuff:

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/chiefs-kicker-butker-antisemitic-lies-college-graduation-speech-1235021459/

I posted something alluding to this earlier. Yes, this wasn't an one-off commencement speech. He has $$$$ backers who are extremists and want to rule over American society in a truly sick way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the ones who remain uncritical and accepting of this AHole's speech..

This guy said a lot of things and maybe you agree with most of it and don't believe it was offensive. However, what he DID SAY EXACTLY was that:

Women have their place in the world and that is as a homemaker. Someone who should NOT have a career/NOT make a career an option and only aspire to be a mother and wife.

For this alone, it's offensive. There were women in this school who intend to use their degrees they just received to build a career. How do you actually defend his speech in the context of this? That it's a conservative Christian school is irrelevant because his speech was not just about Christianity but specifically demeaning all female students in the audience - he's suggesting they not only wasted their time but are garbage for even considering having a career.

I mean, it's not about his entire speech that matters. No matter how you slice it and dice it about whether what he said was on pointe about Christianity, his words about women are an indisputable insult to the female audience and that in itself is outrageous. That those who defend him don't even see this or care about this is what is wrong with our society.

That is NOT exactly what he said.

Here is what he said, emphasis added:

“ How many of you are sitting here now about to cross this stage and are thinking about all the promotions and titles you are going to get in your career? Some of you may go on to lead successful careers in the world, [/b]but I would venture to guess that the majority of you are most excited about your marriage and the children you will bring into this world.”

***
“ I can tell you that my beautiful wife, Isabelle, would be the first to say[b] that her life truly started when she began living her vocation as a wife and as a mother.”

As a woman who was once 21 and as the mother of a 21 y.o. female college student, I can guarantee you that the last thing the vast majority of college-educated women that age are thinking about is marriage and children. Who is he to speak for the "majority" of women?

When he said the "majority of you" he was specifically reference the female graduates of a conservative Catholic college, not all female college graduates across the U.S. In this case, the "guess" he is venturing could well be correct.

The majority of young women graduating from even a Catholic college are not eagerly awaiting the day they can have back-to-back babies for the remainder of their fertile years. It’s hard to understate just how fringe a view it is that even NFP is “disordered.” You realize that being subservient to your husband + no masturbation + no NFP = having 10+ pregnancies, if not more?

Exceedingly few 21 year old women want to be pregnant every 12-24 months until menopause.

Those exceedingly few women congregate at schools like Benedictine, University of Dallas and Franciscan University in Steubenville.

I’ve attended mass at one of those schools when I was passing through town and the pews were full of 6+ children families and women with lace head coverings. The parking lots are packed with those 15 seater vans. This is a fact that anybody who has even marginally looked into it would understand. Those schools are at the forefront of conservative Catholic education. Their graduates are engaged and/or married at a much higher rate at graduation as they send a measurable number of students to seminary and monastery every year.

There is a reason why he got a standing ovation.

They have 6 kids and not 12. They use NFP.

His views on NFP are kooky but not blasphemous or heretical, so I defend his right to espouse them. And everyone else's right to ignore them.

Okay then I can say abortion is not murder in a speech to catholic women and it's not heretical?

These are not at all equivalent. NFP is something Catholics may do, but are not required to do. Abortion is something Catholics may not do.

Also Catholicism does not opine on whether an act is criminal, which murder is, or not. That is up to the law. It opines only on whether something is a sin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the ones who remain uncritical and accepting of this AHole's speech..

This guy said a lot of things and maybe you agree with most of it and don't believe it was offensive. However, what he DID SAY EXACTLY was that:

Women have their place in the world and that is as a homemaker. Someone who should NOT have a career/NOT make a career an option and only aspire to be a mother and wife.

For this alone, it's offensive. There were women in this school who intend to use their degrees they just received to build a career. How do you actually defend his speech in the context of this? That it's a conservative Christian school is irrelevant because his speech was not just about Christianity but specifically demeaning all female students in the audience - he's suggesting they not only wasted their time but are garbage for even considering having a career.

I mean, it's not about his entire speech that matters. No matter how you slice it and dice it about whether what he said was on pointe about Christianity, his words about women are an indisputable insult to the female audience and that in itself is outrageous. That those who defend him don't even see this or care about this is what is wrong with our society.

That is NOT exactly what he said.

Here is what he said, emphasis added:

“ How many of you are sitting here now about to cross this stage and are thinking about all the promotions and titles you are going to get in your career? Some of you may go on to lead successful careers in the world, [/b]but I would venture to guess that the majority of you are most excited about your marriage and the children you will bring into this world.”

***
“ I can tell you that my beautiful wife, Isabelle, would be the first to say[b] that her life truly started when she began living her vocation as a wife and as a mother.”

As a woman who was once 21 and as the mother of a 21 y.o. female college student, I can guarantee you that the last thing the vast majority of college-educated women that age are thinking about is marriage and children. Who is he to speak for the "majority" of women?

When he said the "majority of you" he was specifically reference the female graduates of a conservative Catholic college, not all female college graduates across the U.S. In this case, the "guess" he is venturing could well be correct.

The majority of young women graduating from even a Catholic college are not eagerly awaiting the day they can have back-to-back babies for the remainder of their fertile years. It’s hard to understate just how fringe a view it is that even NFP is “disordered.” You realize that being subservient to your husband + no masturbation + no NFP = having 10+ pregnancies, if not more?

Exceedingly few 21 year old women want to be pregnant every 12-24 months until menopause.

Those exceedingly few women congregate at schools like Benedictine, University of Dallas and Franciscan University in Steubenville.

I’ve attended mass at one of those schools when I was passing through town and the pews were full of 6+ children families and women with lace head coverings. The parking lots are packed with those 15 seater vans. This is a fact that anybody who has even marginally looked into it would understand. Those schools are at the forefront of conservative Catholic education. Their graduates are engaged and/or married at a much higher rate at graduation as they send a measurable number of students to seminary and monastery every year.

There is a reason why he got a standing ovation.

They have 6 kids and not 12. They use NFP.

His views on NFP are kooky but not blasphemous or heretical, so I defend his right to espouse them. And everyone else's right to ignore them.

Okay then I can say abortion is not murder in a speech to catholic women and it's not heretical?

These are not at all equivalent. NFP is something Catholics may do, but are not required to do. Abortion is something Catholics may not do.

Also Catholicism does not opine on whether an act is criminal, which murder is, or not. That is up to the law. It opines only on whether something is a sin.

He said women shall NOT use NFP. He said it’s an unnatural choice, hence immoral. He sad it’s NOT a choice.

That is dangerous and wrong and immoral to state.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the ones who remain uncritical and accepting of this AHole's speech..

This guy said a lot of things and maybe you agree with most of it and don't believe it was offensive. However, what he DID SAY EXACTLY was that:

Women have their place in the world and that is as a homemaker. Someone who should NOT have a career/NOT make a career an option and only aspire to be a mother and wife.

For this alone, it's offensive. There were women in this school who intend to use their degrees they just received to build a career. How do you actually defend his speech in the context of this? That it's a conservative Christian school is irrelevant because his speech was not just about Christianity but specifically demeaning all female students in the audience - he's suggesting they not only wasted their time but are garbage for even considering having a career.

I mean, it's not about his entire speech that matters. No matter how you slice it and dice it about whether what he said was on pointe about Christianity, his words about women are an indisputable insult to the female audience and that in itself is outrageous. That those who defend him don't even see this or care about this is what is wrong with our society.

That is NOT exactly what he said.

Here is what he said, emphasis added:

“ How many of you are sitting here now about to cross this stage and are thinking about all the promotions and titles you are going to get in your career? Some of you may go on to lead successful careers in the world, [/b]but I would venture to guess that the majority of you are most excited about your marriage and the children you will bring into this world.”

***
“ I can tell you that my beautiful wife, Isabelle, would be the first to say[b] that her life truly started when she began living her vocation as a wife and as a mother.”

As a woman who was once 21 and as the mother of a 21 y.o. female college student, I can guarantee you that the last thing the vast majority of college-educated women that age are thinking about is marriage and children. Who is he to speak for the "majority" of women?

When he said the "majority of you" he was specifically reference the female graduates of a conservative Catholic college, not all female college graduates across the U.S. In this case, the "guess" he is venturing could well be correct.

The majority of young women graduating from even a Catholic college are not eagerly awaiting the day they can have back-to-back babies for the remainder of their fertile years. It’s hard to understate just how fringe a view it is that even NFP is “disordered.” You realize that being subservient to your husband + no masturbation + no NFP = having 10+ pregnancies, if not more?

Exceedingly few 21 year old women want to be pregnant every 12-24 months until menopause.

Those exceedingly few women congregate at schools like Benedictine, University of Dallas and Franciscan University in Steubenville.

I’ve attended mass at one of those schools when I was passing through town and the pews were full of 6+ children families and women with lace head coverings. The parking lots are packed with those 15 seater vans. This is a fact that anybody who has even marginally looked into it would understand. Those schools are at the forefront of conservative Catholic education. Their graduates are engaged and/or married at a much higher rate at graduation as they send a measurable number of students to seminary and monastery every year.

There is a reason why he got a standing ovation.

They have 6 kids and not 12. They use NFP.

His views on NFP are kooky but not blasphemous or heretical, so I defend his right to espouse them. And everyone else's right to ignore them.

Okay then I can say abortion is not murder in a speech to catholic women and it's not heretical?

These are not at all equivalent. NFP is something Catholics may do, but are not required to do. Abortion is something Catholics may not do.

Also Catholicism does not opine on whether an act is criminal, which murder is, or not. That is up to the law. It opines only on whether something is a sin.

He said women shall NOT use NFP. He said it’s an unnatural choice, hence immoral. He sad it’s NOT a choice.

That is dangerous and wrong and immoral to state.

He did not say "women shall NOT use NFP." He said: "No matter how you spin it, there is nothing natural about Catholic birth control." He even called it "Catholic"....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the ones who remain uncritical and accepting of this AHole's speech..

This guy said a lot of things and maybe you agree with most of it and don't believe it was offensive. However, what he DID SAY EXACTLY was that:

Women have their place in the world and that is as a homemaker. Someone who should NOT have a career/NOT make a career an option and only aspire to be a mother and wife.

For this alone, it's offensive. There were women in this school who intend to use their degrees they just received to build a career. How do you actually defend his speech in the context of this? That it's a conservative Christian school is irrelevant because his speech was not just about Christianity but specifically demeaning all female students in the audience - he's suggesting they not only wasted their time but are garbage for even considering having a career.

I mean, it's not about his entire speech that matters. No matter how you slice it and dice it about whether what he said was on pointe about Christianity, his words about women are an indisputable insult to the female audience and that in itself is outrageous. That those who defend him don't even see this or care about this is what is wrong with our society.

That is NOT exactly what he said.

Here is what he said, emphasis added:

“ How many of you are sitting here now about to cross this stage and are thinking about all the promotions and titles you are going to get in your career? Some of you may go on to lead successful careers in the world, [/b]but I would venture to guess that the majority of you are most excited about your marriage and the children you will bring into this world.”

***
“ I can tell you that my beautiful wife, Isabelle, would be the first to say[b] that her life truly started when she began living her vocation as a wife and as a mother.”

As a woman who was once 21 and as the mother of a 21 y.o. female college student, I can guarantee you that the last thing the vast majority of college-educated women that age are thinking about is marriage and children. Who is he to speak for the "majority" of women?

When he said the "majority of you" he was specifically reference the female graduates of a conservative Catholic college, not all female college graduates across the U.S. In this case, the "guess" he is venturing could well be correct.

The majority of young women graduating from even a Catholic college are not eagerly awaiting the day they can have back-to-back babies for the remainder of their fertile years. It’s hard to understate just how fringe a view it is that even NFP is “disordered.” You realize that being subservient to your husband + no masturbation + no NFP = having 10+ pregnancies, if not more?

Exceedingly few 21 year old women want to be pregnant every 12-24 months until menopause.

Those exceedingly few women congregate at schools like Benedictine, University of Dallas and Franciscan University in Steubenville.

I’ve attended mass at one of those schools when I was passing through town and the pews were full of 6+ children families and women with lace head coverings. The parking lots are packed with those 15 seater vans. This is a fact that anybody who has even marginally looked into it would understand. Those schools are at the forefront of conservative Catholic education. Their graduates are engaged and/or married at a much higher rate at graduation as they send a measurable number of students to seminary and monastery every year.

There is a reason why he got a standing ovation.

They have 6 kids and not 12. They use NFP.

His views on NFP are kooky but not blasphemous or heretical, so I defend his right to espouse them. And everyone else's right to ignore them.

Okay then I can say abortion is not murder in a speech to catholic women and it's not heretical?

These are not at all equivalent. NFP is something Catholics may do, but are not required to do. Abortion is something Catholics may not do.

Also Catholicism does not opine on whether an act is criminal, which murder is, or not. That is up to the law. It opines only on whether something is a sin.

He said women shall NOT use NFP. He said it’s an unnatural choice, hence immoral. He sad it’s NOT a choice.

That is dangerous and wrong and immoral to state.

He did not say "women shall NOT use NFP." He said: "No matter how you spin it, there is nothing natural about Catholic birth control." He even called it "Catholic"....

NFP is the only Catholic birth control

Any birth control that is unnatural is immoral in the Catholic Church.

He's a heretic and dangerous.

He said if you use NFP you are immoral and a sinner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the ones who remain uncritical and accepting of this AHole's speech..

This guy said a lot of things and maybe you agree with most of it and don't believe it was offensive. However, what he DID SAY EXACTLY was that:

Women have their place in the world and that is as a homemaker. Someone who should NOT have a career/NOT make a career an option and only aspire to be a mother and wife.

For this alone, it's offensive. There were women in this school who intend to use their degrees they just received to build a career. How do you actually defend his speech in the context of this? That it's a conservative Christian school is irrelevant because his speech was not just about Christianity but specifically demeaning all female students in the audience - he's suggesting they not only wasted their time but are garbage for even considering having a career.

I mean, it's not about his entire speech that matters. No matter how you slice it and dice it about whether what he said was on pointe about Christianity, his words about women are an indisputable insult to the female audience and that in itself is outrageous. That those who defend him don't even see this or care about this is what is wrong with our society.

That is NOT exactly what he said.

Here is what he said, emphasis added:

“ How many of you are sitting here now about to cross this stage and are thinking about all the promotions and titles you are going to get in your career? Some of you may go on to lead successful careers in the world, [/b]but I would venture to guess that the majority of you are most excited about your marriage and the children you will bring into this world.”

***
“ I can tell you that my beautiful wife, Isabelle, would be the first to say that her life truly started when she began living her vocation as a wife and as a mother.”

As a woman who was once 21 and as the mother of a 21 y.o. female college student, I can guarantee you that the last thing the vast majority of college-educated women that age are thinking about is marriage and children. Who is he to speak for the "majority" of women?

When he said the "majority of you" he was specifically reference the female graduates of a conservative Catholic college, not all female college graduates across the U.S. In this case, the "guess" he is venturing could well be correct.

The majority of young women graduating from even a Catholic college are not eagerly awaiting the day they can have back-to-back babies for the remainder of their fertile years. It’s hard to understate just how fringe a view it is that even NFP is “disordered.” You realize that being subservient to your husband + no masturbation + no NFP = having 10+ pregnancies, if not more?

Exceedingly few 21 year old women want to be pregnant every 12-24 months until menopause.

Those exceedingly few women congregate at schools like Benedictine, University of Dallas and Franciscan University in Steubenville.

I’ve attended mass at one of those schools when I was passing through town and the pews were full of 6+ children families and women with lace head coverings. The parking lots are packed with those 15 seater vans. This is a fact that anybody who has even marginally looked into it would understand. Those schools are at the forefront of conservative Catholic education. Their graduates are engaged and/or married at a much higher rate at graduation as they send a measurable number of students to seminary and monastery every year.

There is a reason why he got a standing ovation.

They have 6 kids and not 12. They use NFP.

His views on NFP are kooky but not blasphemous or heretical, so I defend his right to espouse them. And everyone else's right to ignore them.

Okay then I can say abortion is not murder in a speech to catholic women and it's not heretical?

These are not at all equivalent. NFP is something Catholics may do, but are not required to do. Abortion is something Catholics may not do.

Also Catholicism does not opine on whether an act is criminal, which murder is, or not. That is up to the law. It opines only on whether something is a sin.

He said women shall NOT use NFP. He said it’s an unnatural choice, hence immoral. He sad it’s NOT a choice.

That is dangerous and wrong and immoral to state.

He did not say "women shall NOT use NFP." He said: "No matter how you spin it, there is nothing natural about Catholic birth control." He even called it "Catholic"....

NFP is the only Catholic birth control

Any birth control that is unnatural is immoral in the Catholic Church.

He's a heretic and dangerous.

[b]He said if you use NFP you are immoral and a sinner.

He did not say this. If you still think he did, please serve up the quote here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the ones who remain uncritical and accepting of this AHole's speech..

This guy said a lot of things and maybe you agree with most of it and don't believe it was offensive. However, what he DID SAY EXACTLY was that:

Women have their place in the world and that is as a homemaker. Someone who should NOT have a career/NOT make a career an option and only aspire to be a mother and wife.

For this alone, it's offensive. There were women in this school who intend to use their degrees they just received to build a career. How do you actually defend his speech in the context of this? That it's a conservative Christian school is irrelevant because his speech was not just about Christianity but specifically demeaning all female students in the audience - he's suggesting they not only wasted their time but are garbage for even considering having a career.

I mean, it's not about his entire speech that matters. No matter how you slice it and dice it about whether what he said was on pointe about Christianity, his words about women are an indisputable insult to the female audience and that in itself is outrageous. That those who defend him don't even see this or care about this is what is wrong with our society.

That is NOT exactly what he said.

Here is what he said, emphasis added:

“ How many of you are sitting here now about to cross this stage and are thinking about all the promotions and titles you are going to get in your career? Some of you may go on to lead successful careers in the world, [/b]but I would venture to guess that the majority of you are most excited about your marriage and the children you will bring into this world.”

***
“ I can tell you that my beautiful wife, Isabelle, would be the first to say[b] that her life truly started when she began living her vocation as a wife and as a mother.”

As a woman who was once 21 and as the mother of a 21 y.o. female college student, I can guarantee you that the last thing the vast majority of college-educated women that age are thinking about is marriage and children. Who is he to speak for the "majority" of women?

When he said the "majority of you" he was specifically reference the female graduates of a conservative Catholic college, not all female college graduates across the U.S. In this case, the "guess" he is venturing could well be correct.

The majority of young women graduating from even a Catholic college are not eagerly awaiting the day they can have back-to-back babies for the remainder of their fertile years. It’s hard to understate just how fringe a view it is that even NFP is “disordered.” You realize that being subservient to your husband + no masturbation + no NFP = having 10+ pregnancies, if not more?

Exceedingly few 21 year old women want to be pregnant every 12-24 months until menopause.

Those exceedingly few women congregate at schools like Benedictine, University of Dallas and Franciscan University in Steubenville.

I’ve attended mass at one of those schools when I was passing through town and the pews were full of 6+ children families and women with lace head coverings. The parking lots are packed with those 15 seater vans. This is a fact that anybody who has even marginally looked into it would understand. Those schools are at the forefront of conservative Catholic education. Their graduates are engaged and/or married at a much higher rate at graduation as they send a measurable number of students to seminary and monastery every year.

There is a reason why he got a standing ovation.

The women graduates did not appreciate his message. Many are speaking out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the ones who remain uncritical and accepting of this AHole's speech..

This guy said a lot of things and maybe you agree with most of it and don't believe it was offensive. However, what he DID SAY EXACTLY was that:

Women have their place in the world and that is as a homemaker. Someone who should NOT have a career/NOT make a career an option and only aspire to be a mother and wife.

For this alone, it's offensive. There were women in this school who intend to use their degrees they just received to build a career. How do you actually defend his speech in the context of this? That it's a conservative Christian school is irrelevant because his speech was not just about Christianity but specifically demeaning all female students in the audience - he's suggesting they not only wasted their time but are garbage for even considering having a career.

I mean, it's not about his entire speech that matters. No matter how you slice it and dice it about whether what he said was on pointe about Christianity, his words about women are an indisputable insult to the female audience and that in itself is outrageous. That those who defend him don't even see this or care about this is what is wrong with our society.

That is NOT exactly what he said.

Here is what he said, emphasis added:

“ How many of you are sitting here now about to cross this stage and are thinking about all the promotions and titles you are going to get in your career? Some of you may go on to lead successful careers in the world, [/b]but I would venture to guess that the majority of you are most excited about your marriage and the children you will bring into this world.”

***
“ I can tell you that my beautiful wife, Isabelle, would be the first to say that her life truly started when she began living her vocation as a wife and as a mother.”

As a woman who was once 21 and as the mother of a 21 y.o. female college student, I can guarantee you that the last thing the vast majority of college-educated women that age are thinking about is marriage and children. Who is he to speak for the "majority" of women?

When he said the "majority of you" he was specifically reference the female graduates of a conservative Catholic college, not all female college graduates across the U.S. In this case, the "guess" he is venturing could well be correct.

The majority of young women graduating from even a Catholic college are not eagerly awaiting the day they can have back-to-back babies for the remainder of their fertile years. It’s hard to understate just how fringe a view it is that even NFP is “disordered.” You realize that being subservient to your husband + no masturbation + no NFP = having 10+ pregnancies, if not more?

Exceedingly few 21 year old women want to be pregnant every 12-24 months until menopause.

Those exceedingly few women congregate at schools like Benedictine, University of Dallas and Franciscan University in Steubenville.

I’ve attended mass at one of those schools when I was passing through town and the pews were full of 6+ children families and women with lace head coverings. The parking lots are packed with those 15 seater vans. This is a fact that anybody who has even marginally looked into it would understand. Those schools are at the forefront of conservative Catholic education. Their graduates are engaged and/or married at a much higher rate at graduation as they send a measurable number of students to seminary and monastery every year.

There is a reason why he got a standing ovation.

They have 6 kids and not 12. They use NFP.

His views on NFP are kooky but not blasphemous or heretical, so I defend his right to espouse them. And everyone else's right to ignore them.

Okay then I can say abortion is not murder in a speech to catholic women and it's not heretical?

These are not at all equivalent. NFP is something Catholics may do, but are not required to do. Abortion is something Catholics may not do.

Also Catholicism does not opine on whether an act is criminal, which murder is, or not. That is up to the law. It opines only on whether something is a sin.

He said women shall NOT use NFP. He said it’s an unnatural choice, hence immoral. He sad it’s NOT a choice.

That is dangerous and wrong and immoral to state.

He did not say "women shall NOT use NFP." He said: "No matter how you spin it, there is nothing natural about Catholic birth control." He even called it "Catholic"....

NFP is the only Catholic birth control

Any birth control that is unnatural is immoral in the Catholic Church.

He's a heretic and dangerous.

[b]He said if you use NFP you are immoral and a sinner.

He did not say this. If you still think he did, please serve up the quote here.

You literally quoted his statement.. read your own post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps I missed, but sounds like Harrison Butker's comments may have been shaped by Leonard Leo and others, always looking to launder their stuff:

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/chiefs-kicker-butker-antisemitic-lies-college-graduation-speech-1235021459/

I posted something alluding to this earlier. Yes, this wasn't a one-off commencement speech. He has $$$$ backers who are extremists and want to rule over American society in a truly sick way.

I’m another pp who posted something similar that this is for amplification and connected to the whole project 2025.

Regardless of where the speech falls on the spectrum of Catholic teachings is less important in my mind than the fact that MAGA wants to impose this ideology on all of us and there’s a lot of money backing it up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps I missed, but sounds like Harrison Butker's comments may have been shaped by Leonard Leo and others, always looking to launder their stuff:

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/chiefs-kicker-butker-antisemitic-lies-college-graduation-speech-1235021459/

I posted something alluding to this earlier. Yes, this wasn't a one-off commencement speech. He has $$$$ backers who are extremists and want to rule over American society in a truly sick way.

I’m another pp who posted something similar that this is for amplification and connected to the whole project 2025.

Regardless of where the speech falls on the spectrum of Catholic teachings is less important in my mind than the fact that MAGA wants to impose this ideology on all of us and there’s a lot of money backing it up.

You may be onto something about his speech being part of something larger. In our backyard, Gov Youngkin just vetoed several bills that sought to ensure access to birth control.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s so weird as a spiritual, but not religious, person having to watch the organized religions who the hold the most political and social power try to imbue their values on the rest of us who don’t hold them.

Like clearly this speech is pushing traditional values where women raise kids and stay home.

To suggest otherwise is to insult our intelligence.

I believe in a merciful God, but I don’t hold any of these odd rigid social beliefs found in things like Catholicism essentially mandating women stick to a “vocation”.

It’s fked up yall hold so much sway over the rest of us just trying to exist in America.

This is NOT Catholicism. He's an idiot.

To you it’s not. To some it is.

This is the problem with religious “interpretation” in general and the most compelling reason society should rely on the Golden rule, but also insist on a neutral playing field whereby the observable world perceivable to all people is employed in policy making, and why we should not allow organized religion to guide policy.

There’s like 7000 religions in the world. I don’t give a fk if one adherent to one of them says “my religion is this!” And another says “no! It’s this!”

Because frankly these organized religions are all nuts. And they are all used for control.

We need a neutral system reliant on treating others as you’d like to be treated.

Wrong. As other posters have stated, with cites, much of what he said is actually contrary to Catholic teaching. That is not an "interpretation." It's a different belief altogether. Also, the response was to PP saying: "odd rigid social beliefs found in things like Catholicism essentially mandating women stick to a “vocation”. " Catholicism does no such thing, which should be obvious even to the least religiously informed person who simply knows Catholic women in the workplace. Even freaking ACB has always worked.

Again, how do you even know what you claim to profess? How do you know that’s not “real Catholicism”. Are you a self proclaimed expert? It’s weird. You argue in absolutes on -‘ issue not grounded in observable reality.

? Are the Benedictine nuns not "real" Catholics?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s so weird as a spiritual, but not religious, person having to watch the organized religions who the hold the most political and social power try to imbue their values on the rest of us who don’t hold them.

Like clearly this speech is pushing traditional values where women raise kids and stay home.

To suggest otherwise is to insult our intelligence.

I believe in a merciful God, but I don’t hold any of these odd rigid social beliefs found in things like Catholicism essentially mandating women stick to a “vocation”.

It’s fked up yall hold so much sway over the rest of us just trying to exist in America.

This is NOT Catholicism. He's an idiot.

To you it’s not. To some it is.

This is the problem with religious “interpretation” in general and the most compelling reason society should rely on the Golden rule, but also insist on a neutral playing field whereby the observable world perceivable to all people is employed in policy making, and why we should not allow organized religion to guide policy.

There’s like 7000 religions in the world. I don’t give a fk if one adherent to one of them says “my religion is this!” And another says “no! It’s this!”

Because frankly these organized religions are all nuts. And they are all used for control.

We need a neutral system reliant on treating others as you’d like to be treated.

Wrong. As other posters have stated, with cites, much of what he said is actually contrary to Catholic teaching. That is not an "interpretation." It's a different belief altogether. Also, the response was to PP saying: "odd rigid social beliefs found in things like Catholicism essentially mandating women stick to a “vocation”. " Catholicism does no such thing, which should be obvious even to the least religiously informed person who simply knows Catholic women in the workplace. Even freaking ACB has always worked.

Again, how do you even know what you claim to profess? How do you know that’s not “real Catholicism”. Are you a self proclaimed expert? It’s weird. You argue in absolutes on -‘ issue not grounded in observable reality.

? Are the Benedictine nuns not "real" Catholics?

Apparently not. They don’t worship power and Supply Side Jesus.