Just imagine if a Muslim said these things…

I read the entire speech. What I found so ironic is how often he mentions “staying in one’s lane,” yet he judges SOO many people (including other Catholics and Catholic leaders).

Also, let’s be real: he’s a professional athlete. He can have as many kids as he wants and he can afford to have his wife stay home to be the homemaker. This just isn’t realistic for many people, including Catholics. Does that make us bad Catholics? According to him, yes.

He’s entitled to his opinion, obviously, but he is a religious zealot (if we’re calling a spade a spade), which goes beyond conservatism. It’s radicalism.

Anonymous wrote:We’ve had 50+ years of feminism discouraging girls from being wives and mothers. I think the younger generation is questioning that, and the pendulum is finally starting to swing back in the other direction a bit.

So what?
We’ve had thousands of years of men telling women what they can and cannot do.

Anonymous wrote:Unhinged? I found him to be well spoken and cogent.

What was "unhinged" about it?

He speaks blasphemy against the Catholic church at a Catholic college.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unhinged? I found him to be well spoken and cogent.

What was "unhinged" about it?

If you have to ask…

...then OP doesn't know what the word unhinged means.

Anonymous wrote:Unhinged? I found him to be well spoken and cogent.

What was "unhinged" about it?

If you have to ask…

Anonymous wrote:We’ve had 50+ years of feminism discouraging girls from being wives and mothers. I think the younger generation is questioning that, and the pendulum is finally starting to swing back in the other direction a bit.

Again, no one on this post is discouraging women from being mothers.
And Butker certainly seemed to be, with his comments against IVF.

We’ve had 50+ years of feminism discouraging girls from being wives and mothers. I think the younger generation is questioning that, and the pendulum is finally starting to swing back in the other direction a bit.

Unhinged? I found him to be well spoken and cogent.

What was "unhinged" about it?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So this whole thread is a bunch of whacky lefty extremists whining about people they perceive as extremists on the other side. Total clown show.

It’s wacky and extremist to reject the blanket argument that women’s primary goal in life is to marry, have kids, and be a homemaker?? Wow.

It is wacky and extremist to tell any members of a religious congregation what they should or should not believe amongst themselves.

He used the word “vocation” which has a very specific, doctrinal meaning within the Catholic Church. Nobody blinked in that audience because they know exactly what he means by that word. My guess is that you are offended because you are hearing that word in secular coding.

I read your post and just feel sorry you’re so confined by regressive ideology. I am wishing you well that you might one day become a more open minded and well rounded person.

I thank you for your well wishes. I’ll pray that someday you may learn tolerance for religious minorities.

Is Catholicism a religious minority?

This guy is espousing pre-Vatican II views. Yes, those people are a very small minority of Catholics who are already a religious minority.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So this whole thread is a bunch of whacky lefty extremists whining about people they perceive as extremists on the other side. Total clown show.

It’s wacky and extremist to reject the blanket argument that women’s primary goal in life is to marry, have kids, and be a homemaker?? Wow.

It is wacky and extremist to tell any members of a religious congregation what they should or should not believe amongst themselves.

He used the word “vocation” which has a very specific, doctrinal meaning within the Catholic Church. Nobody blinked in that audience because they know exactly what he means by that word. My guess is that you are offended because you are hearing that word in secular coding.

I read your post and just feel sorry you’re so confined by regressive ideology. I am wishing you well that you might one day become a more open minded and well rounded person.

I thank you for your well wishes. I’ll pray that someday you may learn tolerance for religious minorities.

Is Catholicism a religious minority?

Only 1/5 of the United States is Catholic. But it’s probably the largest religious group unless you count Christianity as a whole. Catholicism is a type of Christianity.

But the person you’re responding to does not understand Catholicism nor do they understand vocation. Also Jesus teaches that the greatest is not getting married. Get married weak because of lust. That is what the church teaches.

Like Eve biting the apple the previous poster up his blasphemous speech because it’s validating her life choices.

I’m sure most people are capable of understanding what you are referring to by “vocation”, even if they aren’t Christian. These aren’t some super ideas in a club. Just because I’m not Catholic doesn’t mean I can’t get the general gist.

Women get a role to play. Men get a role. Somehow the roles always seem to benefit the men in terms of authority, and in the modern age this could be interpreted as basically oppression, or internalized misogyny if you’re part of it all as a women, but hey who’s counting.

We all “understand” just fine. You’re not part of some super higher calling that is impossible to behold from the outside.

So much the bolded - somehow the concept of proper gender roles according to religion always allows men to have good careers that sustain them financially and intellectually, allow them to be out of the home while always making the decisions for the people they say must stay in it. Its religion as a cudgel.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So this whole thread is a bunch of whacky lefty extremists whining about people they perceive as extremists on the other side. Total clown show.

It’s wacky and extremist to reject the blanket argument that women’s primary goal in life is to marry, have kids, and be a homemaker?? Wow.

It is wacky and extremist to tell any members of a religious congregation what they should or should not believe amongst themselves.

He used the word “vocation” which has a very specific, doctrinal meaning within the Catholic Church. Nobody blinked in that audience because they know exactly what he means by that word. My guess is that you are offended because you are hearing that word in secular coding.

I read your post and just feel sorry you’re so confined by regressive ideology. I am wishing you well that you might one day become a more open minded and well rounded person.

I thank you for your well wishes. I’ll pray that someday you may learn tolerance for religious minorities.

Is Catholicism a religious minority?

Only 1/5 of the United States is Catholic. But it’s probably the largest religious group unless you count Christianity as a whole. Catholicism is a type of Christianity.

But the person you’re responding to does not understand Catholicism nor do they understand vocation. Also Jesus teaches that the greatest is not getting married. Get married weak because of lust. That is what the church teaches.

Like Eve biting the apple the previous poster up his blasphemous speech because it’s validating her life choices.

I’m sure most people are capable of understanding what you are referring to by “vocation”, even if they aren’t Christian. These aren’t some super ideas in a club. Just because I’m not Catholic doesn’t mean I can’t get the general gist.

Women get a role to play. Men get a role. Somehow the roles always seem to benefit the men in terms of authority, and in the modern age this could be interpreted as basically oppression, or internalized misogyny if you’re part of it all as a women, but hey who’s counting.

We all “understand” just fine. You’re not part of some super higher calling that is impossible to behold from the outside.

You said that you understood what the word “vocation” means in the Catholic Church. That is exactly exactly what you said…
In no way shape or form is the word vocation ever used in the Catholic Church to refer to being a wife and/or mother.

There is nothing general about the rules of Catholicism. There is no gist. It’s very specific. It’s quite illogical and that’s why you can’t apply logic to it either.

It’s hilarious that you are hearing that word and interpreting it’s as a secular word and then saying someone else is.

It’s also OK that you’re only a wife and or mother and that you could not dedicate your life to serving God, Though Jesus does think that is second fiddle to serving God, even for men.

You’re not Catholic, you don’t understand Catholicism, No you don’t understand that speech was blasphemous, I’m not sure why you’re on this thread.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So this whole thread is a bunch of whacky lefty extremists whining about people they perceive as extremists on the other side. Total clown show.

It’s wacky and extremist to reject the blanket argument that women’s primary goal in life is to marry, have kids, and be a homemaker?? Wow.

It is wacky and extremist to tell any members of a religious congregation what they should or should not believe amongst themselves.

He used the word “vocation” which has a very specific, doctrinal meaning within the Catholic Church. Nobody blinked in that audience because they know exactly what he means by that word. My guess is that you are offended because you are hearing that word in secular coding.

I read your post and just feel sorry you’re so confined by regressive ideology. I am wishing you well that you might one day become a more open minded and well rounded person.

I thank you for your well wishes. I’ll pray that someday you may learn tolerance for religious minorities.

Is Catholicism a religious minority?

Only 1/5 of the United States is Catholic. But it’s probably the largest religious group unless you count Christianity as a whole. Catholicism is a type of Christianity.

But the person you’re responding to does not understand Catholicism nor do they understand vocation. Also Jesus teaches that the greatest is not getting married. Get married weak because of lust. That is what the church teaches.

Like Eve biting the apple the previous poster up his blasphemous speech because it’s validating her life choices.

I’m sure most people are capable of understanding what you are referring to by “vocation”, even if they aren’t Christian. These aren’t some super ideas in a club. Just because I’m not Catholic doesn’t mean I can’t get the general gist.

Women get a role to play. Men get a role. Somehow the roles always seem to benefit the men in terms of authority, and in the modern age this could be interpreted as basically oppression, or internalized misogyny if you’re part of it all as a women, but hey who’s counting.

We all “understand” just fine. You’re not part of some super higher calling that is impossible to behold from the outside.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our society doesn’t need more mothers. It needs more workers.

How wrong you are.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/24/health/us-birth-rate-decline-2023-cdc/index.html
https://apnews.com/article/how-many-babies-are-born-us-25d99f438645908e5ed6ae29d3914b89
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/nchs_press_releases/2024/20240525.htm

Maybe the Rs should stop attacking women if they want more to reproduce.

Well, they're achieving a similar outcome with attacking a woman's right to choose. Which achieves their main goal of women's desires and needs being irrelevant so that women stay in their place.