Bill O'Reilly on abortion and gay marriage and adoption

I was sitting here half listening to a rerun of a PBS show The Kalb Report and I heard something interesting.

On Saturday, September 27, 2008, Fox News host Bill O’Reilly stepped out of the “No Spin Zone” and joined Marvin Kalb to discuss Journalism, Commentary, and The O’Reilly Factor.

I heard a popular news reporter speak out against abortion and gay marriage in his own way. He apparently approves of gay adoption.O’Reilly’s bio reflects that he is Roman Catholic.

BILL O’REILLY: Abortion, I believe is a private decision that the public square, public square is probably …(inaudible). The government has to decide what the human rights element of abortion is. The government never has decided that. So we know DNA is present at conception. So that takes away any kind of, “Well, it’s a—a fetus is just something you can throw in the garbage,” or something like that. It elevates it up. There is DNA present at conception. Okay. So start there. So then I say to myself, it’s not the government’s job to basically tell people what to do. But there’s another potential person involved here, the fetus. So I use potential person because you can’t argue with that.
So I say, okay, let’s get a sane—let’s get a sane policy on this. We don’t have a sane policy now. We have a lot of emotion. We have a lot of political stuff. And I think that most Americans say, “If we could eliminate all abortions, that would be the best.” But I also think most Americans don’t want a law against it because that is not going to eliminate the abortions. You see? You see how complicated it is? If we could eliminate abortions, I think 90% of Americans would say, “That’s good. Let’s do that.” All right? “It’s not a good thing.”
But you can’t eliminate it by outlawing it. It doesn’t work. And then you create unintended consequences and more problems, all kinds of stuff. So the government, I think should basically take this much more seriously than it does. It is really a human rights issue. When you have more than a million babies, potential human beings terminated, I think you’ve got to think about that.
MARVIN KALB: It’s pro choice.
BILL O’REILLY: You know, I wouldn’t encourage anyone to have an abortion. I’ll tell you a story and I wrote about this in Culture Warrior. A girl came to me, a friend of mine, and said, “Look, I’m pregnant and can’t have the baby and I have to have an abortion. I don’t have any money. Will you help me? Will you lend me money?” And I really liked this person and I knew that she was in a real jam. And I said, “No. I’m not going to do it. I can’t have that on my sheet, my conscience. But what I will do is, I’ll support you monetarily. I’ll find a place for you to live and give you money until you have the baby and then I’ll arrange for Catholic Charities to put it up for adoption. I’ll do it all. That’s what I’ll do for you.”
MARVIN KALB: Okay. Gay rights. Where do you stand or sit on that?
BILL O’REILLY: Gay rights. I mean—
MARVIN KALB: Should gays have rights?
BILL O’REILLY: Sure. They are Americans.
MARVIN KALB: Right, including the right to marriage, any time, any place?
BILL O’REILLY: No. Here is my problem with gay marriage deal. If you let the gays marry, then the polygamists have to marry, too. Then the commune people marry. The triads marry. And then you marry your cousin. Then you marry a duck, right? I mean, you get into that thing like, okay, you want the gays to—and, by the way, do I care about this? Not really. I don’t care what Lenny and Squiggy do. I don’t care. They want to get married, let them get married.
MARVIN KALB: Oh, so you don’t have–
BILL O’REILLY: But if you are going to do equal justice–
MARVIN KALB: Right.
BILL O’REILLY: Then if you open it up for one group, you’ve got to open it up for all the groups. And they have done that in Holland, by the way.
MARVIN KALB: In terms of gays, you would have no problem with marriage.
BILL O’REILLY: Personally?
MARVIN KALB: Yeah.
BILL O’REILLY: I don’t care.
Read More

Bill O’Reilly is a decent man, and while he comes off as wishy-washy, I think he has the best intentions. Let me type out a few paragraphs from a section of a book I read with him in it. The book is called Being Catholic Now, and it has exerts from popular and well known Catholics and ex-Catholics.

I don’t go at it from a protecting Catholicism point of view (in referring to himself in the television industry and his political views). It’s protecting the culture. It’s quite clear to any honest person reading about the formation of the country that the foudning fathers had no problem with the cross or any other public display of religion. The ten commandments are in the Suprme Court. The secular progressives understand that what stands between them and their vision of secular niervana are religious people who make judgments about abortion, gay marriage, euthanasia, legalized narcotics, war and peace, all the way down the line.

That’s what the Christmas battle is all about: Get it out. Deemphasize all religion and spirituality in the marketplace. Then you’ll have children who have no frame of reference at all who will be easily persuaded to go the secular route. If you’re offended by the manger scene, then you’re nuts. It’s a baby in a stable surrounded by his loving parents. We’re not set up to give in to somebody’s nutty neurosis. before I got involved with the Christmas battle, the secular progressives were winning. They had big corporations ordering employees not to say “Merry Christmas” and banishing Christmas from the storefronts. We turned the assault on Christmas around fast. The Christmas battle’s won now, but it’ll come back again.

I think the Catholic Church in the modern era is making two major mistakes. Number one is not applying theology to America’s relevant social issues. How many times do I need to hear about the mustard seed? I got it. It fell on fallow ground. But every year I’ve got to listen to the guy tell me about the mustard seed. My three-year-old’s got it. OK, take it, apply it to what we’re doing, how we’re living. That’s why only 25 percent of American Catholics show up every week. There’s no relevancy. The Catholic Church’s got to get out of the narrow-minded “This is our tradition” and apply the faith to the modern world. It does not do it on a general basis. So if I were in power as, let’s say, an adviser to the Vatican, I would say, get your bishops, get a senate in here, and explain to them that the homily matters. It should be ten minutes long and it should deal with stuff that people have to deal with instead of this mustard seed business.

Number two is that the Church doesn’t have leadership in the clergy. The cardinal of New York never comes out of his mansion. What’s he doing? Go up to Harlem, tell people who you are, why you do what you do, and what you believe, instead of sitting up there in your mansion, doing jack and closing Catholic schools.

I stay a Catholic because I believe in the faith if you look at it from top to bottom. It’s very pure. And if everyone lived the way that Jesus lived, we wouldn’t have any problems on this earth. I have no problem with the fundamental tenets of the faith; it’s the men who implement it that screwed it up. I respect some of them. I give a lot of money to them.

Catholic school is different than it was when I was there. The administration is enlightened. My kids go to Catholic school. I see the difference between the way my daughter and her friends behave as opposed to the public school kids. The crudities that are accepted in public school are enormous. I don’t want that. I want my kids to be kids as long as they can be. I don’t want them quoting rap lyrics. There’s no brainwashing; my daughter doesn’t memorize the catechism, but the teachers make it fun and interesting. She likes the rituals, she sings the songs, and she’s happy. That’s my primary goal, to protect her and make sure she’s happy.

I quoted the Christmas passage because I liked that, and I agree. Secular America wants to destroy the birth of Jesus. They are doing that as it is by turning it into a materialistic whore holiday.

I also agree with him on the homily. It does need to be more relevant to what is going on today. Americans, Catholics included think that God should conform to our society, not the other way around.

Obviously, he isn’t as orthodox a Catholic as many of us would like. He doesn’t scream Catholic from head to toe. But I believe he lives a decent life, and compared to many others in his industry and others, he represents Catholics much better than others.

I had a similar thread posted a few months ago: US government is promoting non-religion, which is a form of religion in itself. By doing so, it is the main-line religions that are discriminated indirectly. But there is difficulty in convincing ourselves of the danger there. People are oblivious until it gets into their basic choices, which by then, like the Jews in Nazi Germany, will be too late to do something about it.

O’Reilly might not be as orthodox as some of us would have him but his intentions appear good. Show me a perfect Catholic. Aren’t we all becoming something?

He is in a position to make big difference in the lives of others. I pray he doesn’t waste his talents. The story of how he helped the young pregnant woman stands on its own yet having a popular journalist/reporter publicly share it adds volume to the Pro-Life issue. This is encouraging. Retiring doesn’t have to mean to be washed up on the great complacent shores of the academia world. I’d like to see him take his journalism and reporting a little further in this direction.
People reveal themselves when they speak. Listen to Bill and pray for him.
Bill is missing a couple of important points but if God Wills, he will come through and serve.

I hate to criticize O’Reilly, but suggesting that the “mustard seed business” is irrelevant to us is wrong. He obviously does not “get it”, because he can’t even tell us what happens in the parable. The “mustard seed business”, which he is forced to hear about so many times a year, and the seeds which fall on fallowed ground are two different parables. By the way, I’m not even sure that they use the word fallowed when talking about the man who went into the field to sow his seeds. And there are two very different parables in which Jesus uses the mustard seed, to which one is he referring?

O’Reilly’s confusion of the parables and misunderstanding of why the Gospel is cycled and recycled is indicative of his own hunger and need for Truth. He is calling for clearer homilies that are applicable to today’s world. I don’t think he would rather do away with the Gospel reading and homily. O’Reilly’s inference is correct. We need better homilies. I pray he is fed and nourished beyond his expectations so that he may realize his talents and put them to good use.

I don’t take my theology from people that sound like a heretic

He needs a refresher course on Catholicism

Is it really necessary to make such a snide remark? I think many of us could use a refresher course on what the Catholic Church teaches. And as for homilies, perhaps our bishops could get together on ONE explanation on many things. Their ambiguity is baffling. I think that is probably what O’Reilly meant.

Considering the things that come out of this mans mouth my remark was very tame

Indeed.

Yes, I agree that O’Reilly needs the Truth; we all do. He should read up on the Bible a little more to see how every bit of it is in fact appliable to today’s world, but then again, so do I.

Orielly I thought used to be a good guy but I suspect he is interested in ‘traditional’ America because its kind of a nationalism rather than because he wants to be a good Catholic. Granted, I cant know that for sure.

He has gotten much more wishy washy and dare I say pick and choosey when it comes to Catholic teaching. I remember one episode where he just told a guest that they should “just give them contraception” in a supportive way. Although I cant remember the exact issue they were talking about.

I think either I have moved further right or he has gone a little liberal lately. Especially with his psuedo-acceptance of Obama. He seemed to get soo upset about Obama’s economic policy but I dont think ever once mentioned Obama’s view on abortion.(correct me if i’m wrong). Used to watch him all the time, now, rarely.

I heard a popular news reporter speak out against abortion and gay marriage in his own way. He apparently approves of gay adoption

Well if you make abortion illegal, you will have to stuff those babies somewhere, since he obviously isn’t going to adopt all of them.

When you have more than a million babies, potential human beings terminated

WAIT! so now they aren’t human beings anymore? That’s admiting that “humans =/ fetus”.

If you let the gays marry, then the polygamists have to marry, too. Then the commune people marry. The triads marry. Then you marry a duck, right?

:confused: He’s insane…

So I say, okay, let’s get a sane—let’s get a sane policy on this. We don’t have a sane policy now.

& his suggestion would be?

Round & round his answers go, where they stop, nobody knows. He just goes in circles & doesn’t give specific answers until pushed, even then he just goes “I don’t care”, even though his position shows he’s against. Real nice evasion.

I like Bill, even though at times his conceit gets on my nerves. Nonetheless, he fight The Good Fight, and helps the conservative cause in America. Hannity does a better job, however, due to his more humble disposition. Bill looks bad, often, by surrounding himself with sycophantic, young, attractive women, whom he oftens ‘encourages’ to praise him on the show. It’s a bit too much.

I do agree with this.

While I think that in our own Church, we should not have gay marriage, etc., we are not greater society. If we want to make any successful gains in the pro-life movement, we NEED to make adoption easier ON EVERYONE, as long as the families won’t be abusive (seriously, and I’m sick of hearing the “gay people are more likely to be pedophiles” when most of them are men who identify as heterosexual).

When you actually look at the numbers and realize that half of all women in this country will have had an abortion by age 45, that many abortions are repeat abortions and that many of these women are simply not ready to raise a baby, those kids have got to have a home to go to. We can’t just merely wait for things to get better while these kids do time in our abhorrent foster care system and we do need to give women options for adoption. I’m not just talking gay adoption, I’m talking single adoption, etc.

But then again, I just want women to feel they can have their babies and have good options for their babies once the baby is born. Understandably, many women feel that all society wants of them is to have the baby and once the baby is born, they’re left to the curb. Not to mention that young single moms get stigmatized everywhere, including many Christian groups. That’s a part of the culture that needs to change.

I pretty much gave up on any “gay” statistics: I check one study, it shows one result, check another, they show something else; & all have some agendas & it takes too long to actually study & research all of their methodologies to determine which one is closest to the truth.
Furthermore, even if homosexual were more prone to having sexual attraction to children, so what? Men are naturally more aggressive due to physiology, should we be somehow “removed” from society or limited just because we’re pumped with too much testosterone?

But then again, I just want women to feel they can have their babies and have good options for their babies once the baby is born. Understandably, many women feel that all society wants of them is to have the baby and once the baby is born, they’re left to the curb. Not to mention that young single moms get stigmatized everywhere, including many Christian groups. That’s a part of the culture that needs to change.

Yeah… I love the irony: if you abort the kill you’re a bloody murderer; if you keep & raise it, the people around will most likely be going around pointing fingers & claiming how you’re a … you know… behind your back, since you’re not married but with a kid. This is not true for all & there are welcoming, supportive communities, but more would be good.

If we could eliminate abortions, I think 90% of Americans would say, “That’s good. Let’s do that.” All right? “It’s not a good thing.”
But you can’t eliminate it by outlawing it. It doesn’t work.

Reality check, Bill. Is there anything we can totally eliminate by outlawing it? For example: robbery is illegal but it still happens. Outlawing something may never completely eliminate the behavior, but it reduces the behavior because most people obey the laws.

There are actually far more people who want to adopt than babies available for adoption. I think adoption should be encouraged more often. Out-of-wedlock parenthoood is so glamorized in this culture that adoption rates have gone way down, and this hurts the children. Adopted(at birth) kids do far better than those raised in poverty.

as an adopted at birth kid, i can say thats not statistically true. they may go to better funded homes (because it costs dough to adopt a kid) often times the couples go on to have their own kids, leaving the adopted one in the dust, or they could be just horrible parents.

would i have rather been adopted by two gay dudes or chicks who loved me and treated me well, or a hetero family, in which i was molested by my cousin and beat by my mother at a young age? at this point, i dont worry about it, but had you asked me then?

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.