Catholics Attack Kerry on Abortion Stance

[rodbarnett]

Feb 6, 4:06 AM (ET)

By RICHARD N. OSTLING


When John F. Kennedy ran for president 44 years ago, his faith became a major campaign issue that energized support from fellow Roman Catholics but cost Protestant votes.

Now the Democratic front-runner is another Catholic senator from Massachusetts. But for John Kerry, Protestant-Catholic antagonism is negligible; instead, he faces criticism from conservatives in his own denomination who are upset about his stands on abortion and same-sex unions.

The Vatican raised the issue with a decree last year that said Catholic politicians have a duty to uphold the church's "nonnegotiable ethical principles" - specifically mentioning opposition to both legalized abortion and recognition for same-sex couples.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040206/D80HLI5G0.html

[placton]

1. One of the reasons I am no longer RC

is this crap. Bush (who, it is rumored, participated in an abortion when younger) gives lip service to "pro-life," along with right wing GOP-ites. So the Catholic Church says "vote for them" NO MATTER WHAT ELSE THEY DO (war, screw the poor, lie, cheat, ad nauseam). But, hey, no problem with church/state separation, eh?

[PaDUer]

60. Who really cares what the RC's believe

anymore..hate to say this, but w/ the actions of the priests, bishops, and whatever else going on, they can keep their mouths shut...hypocrites.....Ever wonder where some of those children in the orphanages are from?..It's not None (nun) of this, and a little of that..

[saigon68]

121. Check this out--- Cardinal Maida taking Bold Action.

Vatican backs Detroit cardinal on priests in abuse cases

Published: 2004-01-19

http://www.georgiabulletin.org/world/2004/01/19/US-4/


DETROIT (CNS) -- The Vatican has supported actions taken by Detroit Cardinal Adam J. Maida to laicize one priest who pleaded guilty to a sex abuse charge and to place another priest on leave and restrict him from public ministry over a substantive allegation of sex abuse.


There is Reform going on.

[metisnation]

113. I am RC

Womens lives should not be jeopordized by the birth of a child. What a joke the Catholic leadership is...I like my parish they are good people and never talk about this stuff.

[arwalden]

2. RCC = Out Of Touch

[demnan]

3. Expletive Deleted the Vatican

Two words: Priest Pedofiles

And this bunch thinks they have the moral authority to tell someone else what to do?

[Alopenia]

6. You do not have the right to disparage anyone else's faith

Yes, there were some 'pedofiles' who disobeyed the vows they made. A few bad apples does not nullify the faith of millions world wide. Tell me, do you disparage Islam because of the terrorist acts of some of its members....acts that are far more egregious and horrific? I bet not.

[The Stranger]

7. Not to quibble, but actually, while you're at it,

Catholics engage in terrorism as well. There is this place called Ireland . . .

[Muddleoftheroad]

10. Every group has done wrongs

It is silly and bigoted to blame an entire group for the wrongs committed by members of that group.

[MisterC2003]

24. So, the Nazis were a group

who shouldn't be blamed for the actions of Hitler and friends?

:eyes:

[Muddleoftheroad]

45. Ah, the classic strawman

Thanks.

[Jeff in Cincinnati]

51. As a community of faith...

individual catholics aren't responsible for the actions of the church (any more than I'm responsible for the actions of my neighbors). But clearly an institution that turned a blind eye to clerical child molestatione -- they had numerous warnings that it was occuring -- is in no position to lecture others about their moral failings. I'm talking about the hierarchy of the Catholic Church here, and not its individual members.

[Muddleoftheroad]

52. You need to take into account

The two concepts of confession and forgiveness. When you base your whole religion on those two concepts, it muddies the water considerably.

[Jeff in Cincinnati]

56. Forgiveness comes from a contrite heart

...not from the fear of a wanking huge lawsuit. The fact is that the church did nothing about the problem other than cover it up (confession anyone?) until forced into action by negative press and huge settlements.

No confession + no contrition = no forgiveness.

I'd be more inclined to get spiritual guidance from Joey Bishop than from one of these people.

[Muddleoftheroad]

57. Forgiveness comes as part of confession

In their case, it's a sacrament. If you confess, you are forgiven. Also, if you confess, they can't reveal what you say.

[Jeff in Cincinnati]

61. In this case, I think it's called a "deposition"

If your "confession" is the product of multiple subpoenas, which you fought with every last legal resource available to you -- and lied for decades to prevent people from knowing the truth in the first place -- I would hardly place that among the rites of the holy church.

[Muddleoftheroad]

65. If you confess internally

It cannot be discussed. They call that a sacrament.

[Jeff in Cincinnati]

78. The sacrament is never "internal"

It's sometimes called auricular confession and it must be spoken aloud to a priest in order to be considered a sacrament. That's one of the principle differences between catholic and protestant theology. But what's more important, the church as an institution has no soul to be saved, so the nature of confession is pretty much a moot point.

The point here is that the leadership of the Catholic Church has, for decades, allowed sexual abuse to exist among its priests and it did little to stop the offenses. Any organization that has a history of placing its public image ahead of the well-being of its most vulnerable members has no place lecturing other people about their morality.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but every one of those priests who was molesting young boys received the sacraments the entire time. To deny Kerry the eucharist because of his stand on civil unions (Kerry is opposed to gay marriages) is to suggest that child molestation is not nearly as serious as two people of the same gender who want to have insurance coverage.

[Muddleoftheroad]

85. It is internal -- between God and the sinner

The priest is merely an intermediary. That means he can't discuss what was said outside the confessional. Kinda puts a crimp in your ability to act on the knowledge.

And the church can excommunicate whoever it dang well pleases.

[Voice_of_Europe]

72. Great Apostles of Polititianism teach you otherwise...

Forgiveness comes as part of lying

- "It wasn't me who had done it!"
- "It was HIM who had done it"
- Or you best haven't been caught at all...


(bible of the politician, phrase 17, § III, line 8)

[shooga]

86. cheney pacemaker on full throttle

I wuz wonderin' why cheney made that hurried visit to the Pope.


http://www.geocities.com/jaak7777/LIHOP.html

[roughsatori]

8. The Constitution gives me the right to disparage whomever I want

Maybe you are not familiar with that document. And I find as many Islamic Clerics as repulsive as the Catholic ones who promote bigotry against tax paying American citizens and cover up pedophilia. Not to mention the Catholic church's history of amassing wealth and political power in the name of fishing for souls.

[Muddleoftheroad]

11. Amassing wealth?

Most of that alleged "wealth" you rail about is in historical art (happens when you've been around 2,000 years), buildings and the land that churches and schools sit atop. Not exactly stocks and bonds.

[Fenris]

16. They do have that bank, though.

Kind of a dirty history there.

[Muddleoftheroad]

20. The Vatican is a state

They need a bank.

[Fenris]

23. I don't disagree

But they have had some shady dealings in the past.

[Voice_of_Europe]

74. Invested...

No bank needed..
They invested it all!

-Big churches
-Golden Altars
-Wine (which will turn to blood after you swallow it and gets processed by your stomach)
-Crusades

doesn't come cheap at all!

[Muddleoftheroad]

98. Not exactly a fair summary of 2,000 years

Your bias is showing.

[roughsatori]

18. IT is still amassing wealth

It seems bizarre to me that one would not count the jewels on the Popes slippers as wealth due to it not being stocks and bonds.

I know of many Catholic's who do, and have done great, Charitable deeds. I also know that Catholic Charities rank highest in getting the actual donations to the intended people in need. I posted last night about my prayers and admiration for the Nuns who hammered the nuclear silos. I have posted links to the Catholic Worker. That does not erase the dichotomy of Jesus's words and the Catholic Church's holdings (and in many cases doctrine).

[Muddleoftheroad]

21. You must be joking

History, pageantry, etc. are part of the religion. If something has only a ceremonial use, then to claim value for it is damn silly. That's like saying they could sell the art on the Sistine Chapel. Sure, they COULD in some fantasy world. But not in the real one.

[roughsatori]

25. I do wonder if you are being obtuse on purpose.

A jewel by any other name is still a jewel. Or maybe this will help: "A fortune by any other name is still as sweet."

[Muddleoftheroad]

31. Holy relics

Cannot and will not be sold. Their value is as church relics, not as stocks and bonds. Church history also cannot be bought and sold.

[roughsatori]

32. The Church takes in annual Revenues of 7.5 billion $

I did not know the beach-front retreats and television stations were "Holy Relics." They really must have re-written the Catechism since I graduated from Catholic school

According to Time Magazine:

The current (June 3, 2002) issue notes that the church takes in annual revenues of $7.5 billion. "Even more impressive are its vast property holdings, which include everything from cathedrals and schools to beach-front retreats, stately mansions, golf courses and television and radio stations."

I wonder if the Sistine Chapel will fit through the eye of a needle. But the Church would have to examine the beem in its eye before looking at that mote.

[Muddleoftheroad]

33. The church is huge

It does tons of work worldwide. Inevitably, as all big concerns, it brings in and sends out huge amounts of cash -- charity, salaries, upkeep on buildings, travel, food, etc. That cash level must be maintained so it can continue to exist and operate. That means it must invest. Only a fool invests all he or she has in one investment vehicle like stocks.

[roughsatori]

39. Neither of us will change the others thinking

It is clear that we have quite different ideas on the intersection of teaching the Gospel and capitalism (which I consider to be state sanctioned greed and gluttony).

[Muddleoftheroad]

41. The Catholic Church isn't capitalism

And I don't expect to change your view. But others do read what we post.

If I have $100, I can leave it sitting in a bank and not worry. But if I bring in and send out billions of dollars every year, I need to grow up and act like I live in the real world so I can continue doing so.

[roughsatori]

48. I don't recall the Gospel that advised investing to spur growing up

Perhaps my concordances are out of date, or the Aramaic and Greek have been mistranslated in my translations of the "Bible."

[Muddleoftheroad]

49. So, in your mind, the Catholic Church

Should take all of its cash and put it in a big pile in the Vatican and dole it out to charities and churches how?

Banking, investing, bill paying, etc. are ALL realities of the world we live in. No large institution can avoid them.

[Malva Zebrina]

55. fed funding

Catholic Charities receives federal funding. We all pay for it. Oversight is required from this organisation. Just to let you know. NOt saying they do not do good. I am sure they do--Like the Salvation Army, who also receives federal funding. I am not sure if, like the Salvation Army, they use thousands and thousands of dollars on lobbying activities.

[Name removed]

84. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Alopenia]

17. Perhaps. But DU rules do not

permit bashing of any religion. Please take a moment to read them.

[roughsatori]

22. DU rules do not trump the Constitution either

Facts are not bashing. Please link to where I have ever bashed "Religion" any where on the Internet or DU.

[MisterC2003]

29. There seems little point in discussion religion at all

if you can only say nice things about a religion.

But that's what you want, isn't it? Sorry, the Catholic Church has a recent history of sexism, pedophilia, child slavery, attempting to foist their political views on non-Catholics and promoting ignorance. And those are the facts.

[Unforgiven]

82. Oh

now we are calling the cops?

[bleedingheart]

14. Okay I am a Roman Catholic and I am sick of the

pedophile priests and the ban on birth control.
I also think priests should marry and that woman should be able to become priests.

[nolabels]

27. The disparage Islam is done by operatives of the GOP and the * ..........

cabal looking for new enemies after the Ruskies folded up their Evil Empire tent and the Pentagon started running out things to waste five hundred billion dollars of money on.

I would have no doubt that * and cabal would be more than willing to hook up any Judea-Christian organization in a quest for a new crusade and the hunt for evil-doers.

[arwalden]

44. Yes I Do.

You, Madam, do not have the right to prevent me from doing so. If you want me to "shut-up" then just come right out and say it. Trying to redefine what rights I actually have in an effort to shut me up... well... that's just not fair.

There are fundamental flaws in the RCC organization... from the TOP-DOWN. "Few bad apples" my foot! This is a systemic problem with the RCC that still exists. Arrogance, furtiveness, secretiveness, intrusiveness... it's all there. Did I mention hypocrisy? That's there too. In abundance.

-- Allen

[progressivebydesign]

58. Last time I checked, we still had free speech.

I can disparage any religion. It's my right. Any of us can. It's natural for you to disagree, if that is your religion. I find the hypocrisy of the Catholic Church to be staggering. It's no more than a corporation run by the men,of the men, and for the men. Their stance on birth control is killing people in poor countries who cannot sustain families of 10... Why are their most stringent laws ones that control WOMEN???

[Unforgiven]

80. The Issue

may not so much be the faith, as it is the people professing that faith, and anyone here does indeed have that right to disparage those individuals who abuse that faith for political/personal agendas.

[veganwitch]

4. apparently the pope forgets that...

we (americans) dont live in a theocracy (at least according to our constitution, though its questionable with asshat in the white house) and therefore he doesnt get to dictate american policy.

[Alopenia]

5. Following his faith would also be a wise political move

I have to confess (no pun intended), as a Catholic, I am very troubled by so-called Catholic politicians who abandon a core belief of the Church: the affirmation of life.
My feeling is that it would benefit a candidate like Kerry in the general election to adhere to the tenets of and taking a stand consistent with the religious body he claims to be a part of. In addition to being the morally correct thing to do, such a position would be attractive to the large numbers of moderates and even conseratives who share the same view...in addition to appealing to the millions of Catholics of both parties who share the pro-life view. And many who hold the pro-choice view would respect a man who is true to what he claims is his faith, even if it differs from their own view.
On the other hand, I am in agreement with the bishops who say someone who outwardly rejects such an important church teaching should not be allowed to participate in all the privileges of the Church; namely, receiving the Holy Eucharist. You either take a stand with the Church or don't accept any of the political benefit of calling yourself a follower of a religious faith when you are not.

[bleedingheart]

9. As a pro-choice Roman Catholic I have to state that if

the church wants to start denying people the Eucharist because they don't march in lock step with them then they should also turn down our donations or those of us who don't agree with some of the rules should just stop donating and going altogether.

By the way I am a descendent of a Roman Catholic priest who found it hard to keep the vow of celibacy but it didn't prevent him from presiding over mass.

[Fenris]

15. Very well stated

I am not well versed in Latin, but doesn't "catholic" mean universal?

My grandparents were extremely devout French Catholics. They loved the Church, they loved the clergy, and they loved Christ. They did not take biology lessons from the Pope, however. I wonder if they're in Hell now because they didn't "affirm life?"

[Alopenia]

19. If you disagree with important Church teachings

then why on earth do you call yourself Catholic?

[lovedems]

34. I am a Catholic, send my kids to Catholic school and still don't agree

with all of the teachings of the church. I understand why the church feels the way it does about abortion, that doesn't mean that I have to agree with it and that doesn't make me any less Catholic. I go to mass on sudays, I go to confession and I receive the holy communion.

Just because the church says its so, doesn't make it so. My husband grew up southern Baptist and was raised that Catholics will go to hell. Does that make it so?

John Kerry owes his constituents first, that is his job. He has to be respectful of the non-catholics that he represents.

[bleedingheart]

42. because I can think for myself

and I don't think the abortion and birth control issues are fundamental cornerstones of the RC faith.

In fact I know a priest who has stated to me that there are more pro-life issues than abortion like a living wage, healthcare etc. He has backed Democratic pro-choice candidates who were all around better on other pro-life and living issues.

So if a priest can be an individual then I can too!

My brother-in-law is in the RCIA program and will become a Roman Catholic this spring. He is still pro-choice yet I don't think the church is going to turn him down as a convert.

[Alopenia]

63. The Catholic Church is not a democracy

I am amazed at all the people that don't seem to know that. If you are to be a member in good standing, you WILL subscribe to the official teachings of the church. What is right was right 1000 years ago and will be right 1000 years hence. Morality and righteousness do not ebb and flow by the whims of man.
Now as for individual priests, if you want to follow them, go right ahead..doesn't mean it's right. Don't you remember all the heat the Church has taken over pedophile priests? Were they right? And ifyou don't consider the issue of human life the cornerstone of the faith, pray tell, what is ???

[bleedingheart]

75. first have you ever heard of the term "laying over"

it was a term used in the middle ages when the peasant mothers used to smother their infants because they didn't have enough food. They would appear before a Catholic court and be exonerated because they would tell them the child was "accidentally" smothered because the mother rolled over on the child while sleeping....that was okay a 1000 years ago...

I also called my rectory this morning and asked them if I was supposed to resign from the church because I didn't agree with the church on certain issues and the woman I talked to laughed about it.

So apparently the church is more than happy to keep me in the parish no matter what my personal views are.

I don't see abortion issues as a cornerstone of the church and I have a feeling you would be shocked at the number of pro-choice catholics out there.

"Morality and righteousness do not ebb and flow by the whims of man. "

It was the hand of man that wrote the bible and I really wonder how much of it was divine inspired and how much was inspired by personal politics and gain.

Oh and once again...I have FREE WILL... I don't HAVE to do anything I don't want to..

[Alopenia]

88. Of course you have free will

But if you oppose many teachings of the church, just don't try to call yourself this great Catholic, that's all. You can call yourself a 'sometimes Catholic' or 'Catholic when it suits you'. You just can't have it both ways like some of these politicians are trying to have it.

[bleedingheart]

114. I can have it both ways

because the church has yet to excommunicate me for my beliefs.
The church recognizes me as a Roman Catholic in their census...as far as I know I don't count as .5 catholic by their standards...in fact they are asking that I teach my son his religious lessons at home which give me even more latitude! Its great! I teach him from their guide and I can give him ...My perspective! I have to say the church is a lot more hip than you think.

signed...a roman catholic bleedingheart liberal...

[Alopenia]

116. As I said

you can call yourself whatever you like. Probably no one will notice the disconnect except maybe your son. I only hope someday you don't find yourself in the uncomfortable public position Mr. Kerry finds himself in, but I am sure you are safe on that count.

[smirkymonkey]

90. And the United States is not a Theocracy...

therefore no reprsentative of government should forfiet his/her duty as a public servant to serve his personal religious beliefs. What is it about separation between Church and State that is so difficult for religious fundamentalists to understand.

Suppose the public servant in question belonged to a faith that required all "non-believers" to be put to death. Suppose you were outnumbered. Then what would you think about religion having a place in a democratic nation?

Also, who are you to decide what "morality", a highly subjective term, is for others. Morality and righteousness are socially constructed concepts created by "the whims of man" and differ in each society.

[Alopenia]

93. The example is ludicrous

What is right is right and what is wrong is wrong. It doesn't matter what somebody thinks about it. The Catholic Church, which is what we are discussing here, would never issue an edict which says 'all non-believers' will be killed. Now to get back to reality. You cannot separate doing your political duty from doing what is right.

[Sandpiper]

97. And what if you don't buy into the absolutist world view

What is right is right and what is wrong is wrong.

Really, according to whom?

Their are many world views other than Catholicism, and those of us who aren't Catholic tend not to recognize the Roman church as the final arbiter of what constitutes right and wrong.

It doesn't matter what somebody thinks about it.

Actually, that's exactly what matters. In terms of religious philosophy, what is "right" or "wrong" is dictated to you by some religious authority figure, or out of some "holy" book that codified the thoughts of others on what is right/wrong.

Absolutism does not mirror reality. Real life is not a black/white proposition. It's full of shades of grey.

[Muddleoftheroad]

99. There are some moral absolutes

[smirkymonkey]

102. It's not ludicrous, it's hypothetical and I

used it to illustrate a point. That is, a public servant's religious affilliation should never - in a democratic society - be permitted to dictate the law of the land. Not to mention the fact that it would be a violation of the U.S. Constitution. I suggest that if you can't accept that, you might be happier living in Vatican City.

Your black and white, simplistic views of morality are not absolute and my example which states that "all non-believers will be killed" was rhetorical - Not meant to be taken literally.

Well, time for me to get back to the real world and volunteer to work on the campaign of a presidential candidate that places his duty to his country over his personal moral beliefs.

[Muddleoftheroad]

103. Religion DOES influence decisions

It is the basis of morality for many of us. It is the foundation for our choices. It is an essential part of who we are. You can't separate that from the choices we make.

[Alopenia]

108. The last sentence of your post

is scary as hell. I certainly hope your candidate wouldn't really put politics over his moral belief system. Is there anyone that unprincipled running?

[TankLV]

125. Kinda like Mr. Christopher (formerly saint Christopher)?

Ever hear of Galileo? The "sun revolves around the earth" bullshit?

Abortions wasn't even an issue until recently - in the last century or so.

So don't give me the "1,000" year infallability crap.

And catholic priests are allowed to marry. OOR priests have been married in our parish. Have children, too. 2 of which died in WWII. Last time I checked, my family was still catholic. In fact, we celebrated the 100th anniversary of our parish complete with a proclamation from the pope.

[Rockholm]

43. What would happen.....

If a state senator or representative voted for abortion rights and for gay marriage when instructed by their bishop not to. Would they be denied communion? I mean, could you imagine going to the altar to receive communion and being told "Sorry, you can not receive communion." I would pop a vein!

[veganwitch]

83. I love how the catholic church uses the eucharist...

as a bargaining chip.

i know one woman who was not allowed to have communion at her own husbands funeral because she was not baptised catholic and he was.

i was lutheran for a bit and i really appreciated the fact that the pastors said EVERYONE was welcome to recieve communion.

[Muddleoftheroad]

100. Not a bargaining chip

I think it's a pretty reasonable request to withhold a sacrament to those who are members of that religion.

[veganwitch]

101. last time i checked..

catholics, lutherans, methodists all forms of christianity believed that christ had the last supper and during that night the bread was his body and the wine was his blood.

they all believe in the same sacrament of holy communion. so to withhold it from someone who doesnt believe in it the exact way you do is pure arrogance.

[fishwax]

105. But Catholics believe

that the sacrament is the actual physical body and the actual physical blood of Jesus. To Protestants it is a wafer and a sip of wine (or grape juice or water) that is taken to provide symbolic communion with Christ at the last supper. Since most other denominations see it as merely symbolic, there is less resistance to sharing this symbol with outsiders. The Catholic church withholds the Eucharist from non-Catholics because they do not want to hand over the actual physical body of Christ to someone who sees it as just a piece of bread.

Now, you could easily make the case that the idea that a wafer is magically (ahem, miraculously) transformed into the actual physical body of Christ is a pretty silly idea, and I probably wouldn't argue with you. But given that it is a sincerely held belief, keeping the Eucharist away from people who don't share that belief seems reasonable.

[Muddleoftheroad]

112. No, arrogance is someone trying to dictate how a religion operates

I am not that arrogant. They can believe as they wish. More power to them, in fact.

[papau]

12. the affirmation of life is in child care/education/universal health/senior

treatment

It is not in 4 cell - or even 32 cell - embryo research prohibitions.

The Church pre-1857 had a Doctrine that was forever - and many still feel that way.

Post 1857 the Pope decided God had decided he, the Pope, was infallible and could announce new doctrine, and that a new doctrine was that Mary was free of original sin when she died.

Then we worry about condoms, and we fear a return to the early church (pre-1000) of married priests, and the even earlier church of women as priest (granted that in most congregations immediately after the Crucifixion these ladies were called "prophetess")

So what is a Catholic - even what is a Church of Rome Catholic - is a bit up in the air - for some of us.

peace

:-)

[yellowcanine]

13. So RC politicians should speak out against contraception and divorce also?

Or not be allowed to receive the Eucharist? These are after all core beliefs of the church. And by the way, have you ever seen a priest refuse the Eucharist to a supplicant? My understanding is that it is up to the supplicant to determine whether he/she is worthy to receive the Eucharist. These Bishops now have the ability to determine whether people have been absolved of their sins? I thought confession was supposed to be confidential.

[Alopenia]

28. A bit of a difference here.

How can you suggest some of these pro-abortion politicians might be 'confessing their sins' in a private manner when they at the same time are taking very public pro-abortion stands and voting accordingly? And BTW, my feeling is that they should speak out against divorce and contraception. But since those issues are not as serious as ending human life, bishops have at least chosen the right issue to call these alleged 'Catholic' politicans on.

[yellowcanine]

35. But you didn't address my question...

Is it not true that it is up to the supplicant to determine whether he/she is worthy to receive the Eucharist? The Bishops have every right to be critical of a politician's position on abortion, RC or not. They do not have the right to start making judgements about the worthiness of a supplicant to receive the Eucharist.

[Muddleoftheroad]

38. Yes, bishops do have that right

They are leaders of the church. They have EVERY right to decide who receives sacraments in the church. They also have the right to excommunicate you.

[yellowcanine]

47. But since Vatican II they haven't exercised it that way.

And the fact that they could do it doesn't mean they should. I have never heard of a U.S. politician being refused the Eucharist or excommunicated for a vote. I think it would be very unwise for the Bishops to start it now.

[Muddleoftheroad]

50. Unwise, perhaps, but still their right

[arwalden]

40. Pro Choice and Pro Abortion Mean Two Different Things

I think they know that and I think people use the term deliberately to imply that someone is actively encouraging and recommending the abortion option over all others. Nonsense.

I see much hypocrisy in people who do as you suggest. Just as I see hypocrisy in people who cherry pick which bible passages to condemn others about.... while ignoring other passages when it comes to their own behavior.

The vatican and the pope need to keep their noses out of American politics. Falwell, Robertson... I'm talking to you too.

-- Allen

Ed: Typo

[nolabels]

59. Is it Anti-Feminist or just plain Anti-Women ?

They seem deeply troubled of things they can't control or control others from being attracted to or being a part of. It seems to me to be one more of being against the freedom of others than of helping or saving anyones life.

They would wish to truncate the rest of these ideas anti-choice, No-tolerance dictatorial mono-culture as the only way to live. They seem to think limiting others will somehow give them greater power controlling them. They seem think that these other issues they wish to win is wedded to this issue.

It seems their undemocratic ways are building a even larger wall up against them. The people who love freedom and the opportunity to be who they are, recognize this to be one and the same because of the issues involved. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is never safe when others believe they can derive of their power from taking away.

Freedom to control ones body is what one was born with. There is this idea of all life being secrete but it is also part that every life must eventually pass on so others can follow. Life is not a static issue, it evolves just like everything else

[nolabels]

67. Case in point, lets just let others know about this end in hostilities

other fanaticisms of how things should run

http://www.equalityiniraq.com/htm/story040204.htm

Stories from Baghdad - No. 2
Victories for Women and Death Threat on Me

February 3, 2004

Having been in Baghdad for a week, the vision is clearer now. This invasion has turned it into another Algeria with ghosts of terrorism haunting the country. Undefined ghosts that Americans cannot locate, see or fight.

By overthrowing Sadam’s regime, an enormous political vacuum has given way to every bearded fanatic to draw his sword at our necks and claim his right to power … in the name of God almighty.

Actually, I wish it were as bizarre and unreal as I put it, but it is not. These individuals do not work by themselves. They have established political parties and organized militias. Their agenda is quite clear … it is either their way or no way at all. Any objections will be considered against the will of God … and the pointed sword is ready.

Worst of all is that the Americans have made them the upper hand in Iraq. Almost half the Governing council have those beards (sometimes long, short or invisible).

As for millions of women in Iraq, the verdict has already been given. They are 2nd rate citizens who should be ashamed of their mere existence, and therefore should cover up and be thankful to get what they are allowed. Oh … and also praise the lord and promise not to go against his wishes in every occasion whether social or political.



Women on the Streets

This month has witnessed the beginnings of a women’s movement in Baghdad. All of this started when the Governing council proposed resolution 137 that gives action to Islamic Shariaa to rule every single detail of the civil law and evetually our lives. It also overwrites all modern ammendments that came around as a result of the struggles of the Iraqi women’s movement.

By the second week of January, more than a hundered women demonstrated in Al Fardawse square denouncing this resolution. These women belonged to different organisations (it was said to be 80of them). Some of them were affiliated with members of the GC that did not agree with the resolution. Their announcements were clear although quite moderate and timidly touched on the women’s issue. Still, this was one of the first pulses to a women’s opposition that could not be scared off or oppressed by the Islamic Sultans throned on some of the seats of the Governing Council.
(snip)

[Alopenia]

73. The Church operates with the purest intentions

as it is the extension and legacy of Jesus Christ. I assure the Church's pro-life stance is just that and not intended to persecute women. I hardly see how protecting life persecutes women, anyway.
I reiterate, the church's concern is not in following the fashionable or fickle whim of man. Thank God, that is so. That the Church has been around since the time of Christ speaks volumes about its righteousness. Ideas based upon anything pure and virtuous do not stand the test of time.

[nolabels]

76. The mono-thesis of mono-culture, this thing you say, the word "man"

This word and idea is antiquated, maybe in days prior it was necessary. Most any wild animal, uncivil culture or other invading forces are mostly unable to penetrate this modern culture. As a matter of fact most of them have been eliminated by it, with this thing you call "man" as it's head. The world has become to much too small for the rest of us to live in this dream of a Patriarchal dream.

We are being threatened by own existence, a threat of Eco-collapse, of suffocating in the very wastes we produce. But somehow some feel the need to tell others there can be only one way, the way of tradition. I am not buying it

I guess some might be opposed to Darwin here, but this does make for the interesting

http://www.dhushara.com/book/socio/rq.htm#anchor1104985
(about a quarter the way down)
(snip)
It is worth noting in passing that many anthropologists have hypothesized the idea of trading women as possessions as a founding process in human society and used this to advance a linkage between females moving between family groups and patriarchal power and possession. However it is clear from Bonobo society that the females are socially ascendant in a patrilocal family grouping. Thus a bias towards male offspring among elites in human society does not demonstrate patriarchal dominance over evolutionary timescales. In early human gatherer-hunter societies, cooperation among the females during gathering could likewise occur in a patrilocal context. The egalitarian nature of the !Kung is consistent with this picture, suggesting the hierarchial superstructure of patriarchal hegemony is more recent.

Such beliefs in elite male desirability also permeate however into the social customs of whole societies. Chinese, deprived of a chance to have more than one child killed more than 250,000 baby girls between 1979 and 1984. In some age groups in China there are 122 boys for every 100 girls, consistent with 17% of all girls being killed at birth. In one recent study of clinics in Bombay, of 8,000 abortions, 7,997 were of female fetuses, leading to a move to ban ultra-sound for sexual differentiation. In one hospital 96% of mothers who were told they had a daughter aborted, while 100% with sons carried to term. Such a bias towards males is harmful to the societies which allow such processes, because they lead to further male domination and competitive violence.

The Peacock's Tale

In sexual selection there is an inevitable dissonance between female selection and male competition. Tim Halliday as late as 1983 stated "where female choice has been described, it plays an ancilliary, and probably less significant role than competition between males." However by the mid-1980s the evidence, such as that of Moller and of Hoglund had begun to accumulate that in many species , females had a large say in the matter of their mating partner, and a more significant one than inter-male competition, even to the extent of preferring long feathers which are a survival risk to he male.

An explanation for the excess of many male birds, such as the peacocks tail, is so-called runaway selection: once the females establish a preference for a certain trait it becomes disadvantageous for any female to select for less such preference because her offspring will not be able to compete in the eyes of the female group. Such selection applies to both polygamous and monogamous species. Both genders are making a choice in such courtships.
(snip)

[Alopenia]

89. I agree that the Chinese's wholesale extermination of girls

by abortion is an incredible horror and affront civilization. Your point is well-taken.

[yellowcanine]

81. How much church history have you read?

I don't like to get argumentative, but I can't let this go by. Just read the history of the crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, and the Reformation. Believe me, there wasn't anything rightous about what the Church did to Jews, Waldensians, and Anabaptists. The Church has been pretty selective about when it was going to be pro-life. As for abortion, the Church wasn't much concerned about it for most of its history. Your assertion that the Church does not follow the "fickle whim of man" is not supported by historical events. If that were true, the Church would not have aligned itself with Emperor Constantine as a means of gaining political power and wealth.

[Alopenia]

91. I was talking about the original foundation of the Church

as passed on from Christ that was completely pure because it was divine. Certainly the influence of imperfect humans along the way made for some bad practices. Fortunately, the unyielding commandments of God have withstood the whims of man over the centuries and remain intact today. This is why so many millions throughout the world seek the Church for its uncompromising guidance.

[yellowcanine]

95. I don't think you can cut it that cleanly

Of course the original motivations/foundations were pure. But the Church is made up of people. Many of the teachings of the Church are based on those unyielding commandments, many or not. Furthermore, it is in the interpretation of those unyielding commandments and which unyielding commandments are going to be emphasized that the trouble begins, isn't it? The Church has cleverly covered this problem by claiming infallibility for the Pope (also a fairly recent invention, by the way). As for commandments, there are many unyielding commandments in the book of Leviticus, but the Church has chosen to only emphasize the one about homosexuality. Why is that?

On edit - forgot a point about abortion, the topic of the thread. Where does the Church get its doctrine that life begins at conception - the basis for its abortion stance? That notion certainly isn't supported by scripture. The Old Testament treatment of the life of a fetus was that if a fetus was harmed it wasn't considered murder unless the fetus was already "viable". Look it up - I think it might also be in Leviticus, but could be wrong. But it is there.

[Alopenia]

107. I think it's pretty much common sense

that life begins at conception. After all, at conception, we are dealing with a living human being. No different than, say, a five-year old, except at a different stage of development.

[yellowcanine]

122. So now we are basing abortion policy on "common sense"

What happened to using those unyielding commandments you spoke of? You have just done a nice job of shifting the goal posts. When I pointed out that there is no Biblical teaching that supports the "life begins at conception" notion you decided to base your position on common sense instead. Okay, for my part I think it is common sense that a fertilized egg is no baby. For that matter, life doesn't even begin at conception. The unfertilized egg and sperm are every bit as much alive as the fertilized egg. They are all potential human beings. I also dispute your point about the 5 year old and the fertilized egg. There is a huge difference. The 5 year old survives outside the womb, the fertilized egg is a parasite on the mother. It has no life of its own. That difference is a lot more than just a different stage of development.

[TankLV]

126. Ah, but they are not "pro-abortion" - they are "pro-choice".

BIG difference!

Again, to educate you, since you seem to be woefully ignorant on this issue:

"PRO-CHOICE" IS NOT THE SAME AS "PRO ABORTION".

ONE CAN BE BOTH "ANTI-ABORTION" AND "PRO-CHOICE".

Do you understand now?

Kerry, and other catholics like him, are not "pro-abortion". Far from it.

They are "pro-choice". It's up to OTHERS, NOT THEM to choose what OTHERS do to their own bodies.

[rlpincus]

26. Following faith

is bad politics. "Thou shalt not kill" is rather unambiguous, although apologists will attempt the impossible.

RC's used to be called Papists, and Protestant America's fear of RC politicians--codified in the 1800's by the Know-Nothing movement--had nothing to do with faith. The great fear was that a RC president would answer to the Pope--Kennedy specifically addressed this in the 1960 campaign-- which interstingly enough is born out by this abortion flap.

The logical extension of introducing religion into politics is frightening. Suppose the Pope speaks Ex Cathedra and announces that war is immoral (seemingly Christ's position btw). A RC President would then be morally bound not to fight a war.

[atreides1]

46. Following his Faith would be Promoting a Religion...

...and this would violate the US Constitution, you remember that part about the government promoting a religion, that in turn would make Kerry subject to impeachment for high crimes and misdemeanors.
For what could be a higher crime then to disregard the Constitution
just to get some votes.

Then perhaps you would be better off living in a country where the politicians follow the dictates of the Catholic church, if you can find one.

The affirmation of life, like during the Crusades, or the millions of Jews who were saved from the gas chambers by the church. By the way perhaps you should look up the history of the church and its "so called" affirmation of Life belief. This affirmation only took affect in the late 19th Century, under a ultra-conservative Pope and
church that was losing political power in Europe. Prior to 1869 the church did not seem to have a problem with abortion as long as it was
done before an established time period.

As a former Catholic I am troubled by a church that went out of it's way to protect child molesters, by moving them around. Not once did the "affirmation of life" seem to have played a part in these decisions. The life of the children that were molested were adversely
affected by the actions of those priests that committed these crimes.

And even after the numbers increased, the Church still had the "don't
ask, can't tell" policy. Until it started hitting their coffers, then
all of a sudden they got with the program. Just think how many children went through this hell, mainly because their parents were not willing to go against the Church, being good Catholics.

Yours is a narrow vision, one that has led to historical crimes like the Inquisition, the Salem Witch Hunts, and even lynchings. Maybe it's time for you and those like you to remove the blinders, and look
at "All" of the Church and not just the good it has done. Take a look at it's dark and evil underside, it's history of persecution of people who were different, and didn't tow the party rhetoric.

The Cathars are a good example, they were a Christian sect that didn't want to worship the way the church said they should. That's why they don't exist today, or the Jews during the Inquisition who
were so pleasantly converted to Catholicism, and were then killed.

No thanks, I would rather have Kerry denounce the church, any church he belonged to, that would require him to violate the Constitution.

What has been forgotten with this current administration is that the President is supposed to represent all Americans, not just those of his voting base, or religious following.

And let us not forget!!!!

[Alopenia]

71. "Former Catholic"?

That says it all. The idea that following one's faith causes him to violate the Constitution is utter nonsense. I wish I could couch that sentiment a little, but I just can't. The Church's foundation is one of ultimate virtue and goodness, regardless of the stumblings of some of its imperfect human members. You are asking politicians to abandon something based on pure virtue, the legacy of Jesus Christ. Tell us, do you think politicians should abandon everything their religion teaches in order to follow the constitution?
I admit. The mission the Catholic Church calls its members to follow is indeed rigorous. For many, the burden is too great. I understand this. But please do not allow that shortcoming to cause you to denigrate the faith shared by millions worldwide.

[lastliberalintexas]

69. What about pro-death penalty RC politicians?

I'm not a Catholic, so I try to stay out of these debates on DU. But I've always found it very hypocritical of the Church leaders to go after pro-CHOICE (not pro-abortion :eyes:) Catholic politicians while ignoring those who favor the death penalty.

At the same time that the Diocese of Beaumont was threatening excommunication of local RCs who were pro-choice, they were wholly silent on Guy James Gray's prosecution and seeking of the death penalty in the Byrd slaying. Guy James is a Catholic, yet the Church gave him a pass for not only supporting the death penalty, but for actually working to have it imposed.

When the Church stops being hypocritical and treats abortion like just one of many issues voters face, then I might start to thin kbetter of them. Until then, the Church is simply placing a premium on being anti-choice and ignoring the important social justice issues of child care, health care for all, feeding the poor, etc.


And for clarity- I don't mean to disparage individual Catholics. It is the dictates of the Church "leaders" with which I disagree, not the members. Just like as a (former?) Baptist, I know that there are many good people who belong to what has become an otherwise insupportable institution (esp the Southern Baptist Convention!). :-)

[TankLV]

124. You don't understand your own statement.

Kerry believes and practices just as his church proscribes.

HE doesn't believe in abortion, and HE doesn't encourage others to have one. HE won't have an abortion (duh - he's a male). I'm sure his wife won't/hasn't had one, either, unlike bunkerboy).

HE just believes it's not his place to tell OTHERS what to do with their own bodies. That is "pro-choice".

It's not his position to force his church's religious prejudices down the throats of the rest of the population. That is not doing something that is against the church's teachings.

Being "pro-choice" is not being "pro-abortion"

CHOICE - get it - CHOICE.

Kerry and other pro-choice persons are indeed faithful to their faith.

Don't believe in abortions? Don't have one.

[Jane Roe]

30. sounds like Candidate Kerry needs my advice . . . .

on how to: (1) keep his promise to fully support Roe V. Wade; and (2) simultaneously come off as more balanced on abortion law issues. I believe that doing these two things in accordance with my instructions would greatly increase his chances of winning if he is lucky enough to make it to the general election.

[DinahMoeHum]

36. Given that the RC still has problems re pedophile priests. . .

they are not in ANY position to preach to the rest of us about morals.

Speck in your brother's eye, plank in your own, and all that stuff.


:grr:

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[GoldenOldie]

53. And the final answer is????

As a non practicing Methodist who had a devoted Catholic mother and now adult children and grandchildren who are all Catholic's, where I attend many of the Catholic functions that my children are involved in, I find it humorous that many self-righteous Catholic's, Protestant's and atheists seem to think they "know", just what all others of their persuasion think or feel. Just as Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson does not speak for all christian's, neither does the Pope and a majority of the priest's speak for all Catholic's, nor the Methodist leaders speak for all Methodist's. If it were to be believed that all faiths listened and heeded the rules laid out by the leaders of their faiths, the population of the world would be exploding. The Pope and wacko catholics only believe in the rhythm method for birth control ...... now how many of you are that naive to think that the ones yelling the loudest about abortion are also the same ones that are secretly using come form of pharmaceutical device to control their reproductive abilities.... Pedophile Priests are a totally other and serious problem with the Catholic church....but this is about abortion and woman's rights. Priest's and ministers of all faiths themselves hold varying views and do not agree with all their leaders orders.....they have a higher leader they must answer to....and for that belief, their members will always follow. Let's get the old male farts out of the equation, it is always the old or nerdy evangelical nerdy males who seem to have all the answers on what is good for woman's reproduction. They have made it a political and a religious cause for their own self-aggrandizement.

[Unforgiven]

79. Whooooo Hoooooooo!

that was a slam dunk if I ever saw one!

[Alopenia]

87. I've never understood how protection of life

is something that the feminists say shouldn't include men. I mean. Didn't people take Bio 101? It takes a woman AND a man.
Also using a term "wacko catholics"is a violation against DU terms of service. Please stop the generalized slanderous remarks. Since you are not a practicing church member, let alone non-Catholic, I can't see that you are qualified to speak about the Church's point of view anyway.

[IndianaGreen]

54. I am ABK all the way, so I welcome the Vatican bashing Kerry

except I would bash Kerry for ignoring the Pope's warning about the war in Iraq being an unjust war.

[Sandpiper]

62. Whenever I hear

A bunch of sexless old men railing about how women's reproductive choices need to be restricted, I think of the saying:

"If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament."

[Catt04]

64. Particularly Catholic priests.

Even as a Catholic, I have never understood why they insist on crossing the line of separation between church and state.

Should the Church even attempt shunning Kerry or other candidates that are pro choice, then the gates are wide open. The Catholic Church will have then become very much political and are fair game with; finances, investments, sexual abuse and history of "man made" dogma.

[Solly Mack]

66. The church just can't accept it lost power a long time ago

Give it up already.

[Lucille]

68. The headline is misleading

I'm not really interested in the debate here about good Catholics/bad Catholics, but I note that the SFChronicle and the Boston Globe use a very different headline:

Kerry faces criticism from Catholic hierarchy as he makes presidential bid

which does seems to fit the tenor of the article much better; while the article notes disapproval of "conservative Catholics", it really is about the opinions within the church heirarchy as opposed to the voting public.

Last week there were articles about how well Kerry ran with Catholics in Mass. and NH, and the punditry agreed that Catholics' strong support spelled trouble for Bush. Call me nutty, but I expect this is the reason for the coverage of Kerry's supposed "Catholic" problem. "Catholics" object to Kerry, huh? I seriously doubt that Catholics are going to vote with Church hierarchy because of Kerry's stand on abortion or homosexuality, and my opinon is supported by none other than the pollster Zogby.

Here are some anectdotes from a speech Zogby gave at Catholic University, in which he talked about his research of the opinions of over 4,000 American Catholics:

http://ncronline.org/NCR_Online/archives2/2004a/013004/013004t.php

--snip
American Catholics, said Zogby, are “Americans first, Catholics second.” They “will not tolerate Catholic leaders who fail to acknowledge that their leadership is accountable to both God and man.” Moreover, the Americanism of U.S. Catholics crosses doctrinal lines. “Both conservative Catholics and liberal Catholics are Americans first.”

--snip
Meanwhile, on issues such as abortion and stem cell research, the death penalty and priestly celibacy, American Catholics “have much more in common with American Protestants than they have in common with Catholics of other nations.” The global church’s conservatism, particularly in Southern Hemispheric nations that are a growth-center for the church, stands in sharp contrast to U.S. liberalizing instincts, said Zogby.

--snip

I think this information of Zogby's puts this AP article in perspective, don't you?

Do you suppose next week the AP will run a story on how the Pope's strong disapproval of Bush's war will affect Catholic voters? I don't either. Why not, I wonder?

[rocktivity]

70. Abortion and homosexuality may be sins, but they're not crimes

And religious doctrine is not the law of this land. I expect all political leaders to uphold what is lawful in this country even if it interferes with their personal beliefs. Anything else is the substitution of religious doctrine for constitutional law. If you don't believe in abortion for whatever reason, don't have one. And I'm sick of the slightest amount of any kind disagreement or criticism being defined as "bashing."


rocknation

[Alopenia]

94. I'm just wondering what your thought

about when slavery was the law of the land. How about Japanese internment? Do you think a politician would have been right to go against those laws? How about Rosa Parks? Didn't she disobey the law? Do you think she was evil for doing so? Tell you what. I'll place my lot with a never-waivering faith and not some ever changing political whim.

[Sandpiper]

96. Well good for you

Tell you what. I'll place my lot with a never-waivering faith and not some ever changing political whim.

And I'll tell you what. Not to put too fine a point on this, but as a non catholic, I could care less what the Pope has to say regarding any matter of public policy. And frankly, he can stick it in his left ear if he wants to have catholic belief codified into law in this country.

And if a public official believes in putting the religious dogma of an old man in the vatican above the wishes of their constituents who elected them, and more importantly, above the laws of the United States, they are unfit for office and should be voted out.

[smirkymonkey]

104. Bravo Sandpiper...

you couldn't have said it any better!

[Unforgiven]

106. Hey!

would you settle for impeachment?



Oh BTW, On Edit............... Great Reply! :)

[Alopenia]

109. The Pope, vicar of the Catholic church

is a member of an uninterrupted linear progression dating directly to Jesus Christ. Although it appears you have issues with males (even though that sex is equally involved in the procreation of life..(refer to your Bio 101 textbook)), the fact is that politicians who claim to be Catholic need to follow the guidance of earthly leader of Jesus' church. If they do not, then, as you say, they are not fit for office.

[Unforgiven]

110. By your standard

yes, but since the catholic church has failed to take over this country as of yet, we won't be addressing that issue now, will we?

[Crowdance]

111. Agenda revealed!

Males?!!

[Alopenia]

117. LOL. I picked up on that, too.

I think her anger is directed mostly at males; not abortion, per se.

[bleedingheart]

115. Oh those Borgia popes! they sure make me proud

oh and there was a female pope...she didn't last long and to my knowledge isn't "officially" counted.

http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~pardos/PopeJoan3.html

Also there were at least two different periods in which there were as many as three popes due to political struggles.
You see the popes were sometimes used as pawns in political struggles or they themselves were controlling the politics.

Some popes kept mistresses openly and I think one of them actually passed on his title of Pope to his son....I have to research to find the name but I am very sure of it.

To be honest a lot of them were unfit for office and they are supposed to be God's representative...maybe its part of the divine message that even god isn't perfect...otherwise how can we explain the platypus...

read up on the Borgias...

http://www.crimelibrary.com/serial_killers/history/borgias/2.html?sect=6

[Alopenia]

118. Yep. Even popes are human

and thus, imperfect. Fortunately none of them spoke on matters of faith and morals. Nonetheless an unbroken string dating back to St. Peter the Apostle and Jesus Christ himself.

[Unforgiven]

77. Hip,Hip Hooray!

Let's all hear it for organized religion! This is why we have/had Separation of Church and State.

[Endangered Specie]

92. When is the last time I gave a damn what the RC clergy said

probably never

[0007]

119. The new movie "Amen" sez it all about the Catholic Church

The church goes which ever way the wind blows.

[PA Democrat]

120. "Pro-life" verses "pro-choice" is a FALSE choice

Before the 2002 elections, my RC church had a "voters guide" in the weekly church bulletin. There were check marks indicating whether each candidate was "pro-life".

I am the mother of a disabled child and and advocate for the disabled and as such I was very informed on the voting records of the candidates in question. The "pro-life" candidate had a DEPLORABLE record when it came to his votes on issues that impacted the quality of life for people with disabilities, for the poor, and for the elderly. The other candidate, on the other hand, had been a champion of causes to help the least fortunate, but alas he didn't have a check mark in the "pro-life" column according to the church.

Personally, I am tired of the RC church being suckered by these false "pro-lifers".

[Robin Hood]

123. They're anti-choice and anti gays.

Yet, they don't seem to have a problem with screwing children. Hypocrite pedophiles.