An election factor that hasn't been discussed yet: the Catholic Church!

[IndianaGreen]

The Catholic Church, and I mean the Vatican as well as the US Bishops, are on a major PR campaign against gay marriage demanding that all public office holders take a moral stand against what they see as a "perversion" (their words) against the "sacrament" (also their words) of matrimony. Add to that the very aggressive stance the Catholic hierarchy has taken in denying communion to those that support gay marriage and abortion, one wonders how John Kerry will waffle himself out of confronting his own Church were he to become the Democratic nominee.

President Kennedy had no problem saying back in 1960, before abortion and gay rights became issues, that he was not going to be puppet of the Vatican as he did in his address to Southern Baptist leaders:

I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute -- where no Catholic prelate would tell the President (should he be a Catholic) how to act and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote -- where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference -- and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the President who might appoint him or the people who might elect him.

I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant nor Jewish -- where no public official either requests or accepts instructions on public policy from the Pope, the National Council of Churches or any other ecclesiastical source -- where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials -- and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all.

http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/facts/democrac/66.htm

The America of today has a very different landscape from the America in which President Kennedy uttered those words of religious tolerance. Kennedy did not conceive of an America in which one of the champions of sectarian intolerance would be his own Church!

We are living in an era where there has been a significant erosion in the wall that separates church and state, and we are on the verge of having the remnants of that wall being swept away altogether.

Can we expect Kerry to take a public stand against his own Church on abortion and gay marriage? I think not! Kerry won't be able to waffle out of this one either, the Church is demanding absolute obedience from Catholic office holders, and Kerry is no Kucinich.

[Justice]

1. Yeah, But Funny That the Debate Question On This Issue

was directed at Clark, but not at Kerry.

Right.

The Catholic church will pull out all the stops to prevent a Catholic democratic candidate from being elected - when that candidate does not support the strict teachings of the cardinals.

[dsc]

2. I think Kerry will

in any case he is a remarried divorce which kind of ends the sacraments for him anyway.

[Namvet04]

3. I heard several Catholics on tv saying this warning

The bishops are going to come after all the catholics (both parties) not only on gay marriages but abortion this year who are running for office. They are talking of kicking them out of the church. You need to think on this. Maybe like endorsement meaning nothing anymore, this will not amount to much but something to consider.

[Raven]

4. The Catholic Church has no moral sway anymore

with Catholics. I think people who are already against gay unions might respond to the Church but, the majority of us are so disaffected that it won't make a difference. I, for one, am really annoyed at the Church for taking this issue on when there is so much filth within its own ranks. It doesn't matter who the candidates are, the Catholic Church simply has no standing. I suspect that John Kerry knows that.

[Davis_X_Machina]

6. Catholic voting behavior is now virtually...

...undistiguishable from their non-Catholic counterparts, controlling for income, etc.

Not a factor.

[Namvet04]

12. I was told my some catholics that it is payback time

The bishops and cardinals were attack so bad (right to do and they cover the child molesting up) that they were going to crack down.

It may be like endorsements, they mean nothing anymore. I do not see it bothering Kennedy or Kerry but Dashle seems concern about it.

Catholic church and the Vatican are really political and deals can be made.

[DemBones DemBones]

67. I'm a Catholic and the Church "holds moral sway" with me and many

others. ALLof us are VERY angry at the wrongdoing by some priests and bishops, but they're not the entire Church.

It's the faith that matters to most of us.

To me, continuing in the Catholic faith is just like believing that the United States was founded on good principles, and needs to be taken back to those principles.

[Tinoire]

86. It holds sway for me too...

Because that is my faith and that is the institution that upholds/defines/defends my faith.

No matter how vociferously I defend gay rights and the right to choice when it comes to abortion, I also understand where the Church is coming from.

There is a middle-gound somewhere and I think it's closer than we think. The Catholic Church is not the enemy of Liberals.

During the 2000 election, most of our Bishops, even as they railed against abortion, were telling people not to allow abortion (Bush) to be a wedge issue and to remember that social justice (Gore/Nader) was even more important.

We're going to be ok.

[Alex146]

5. Speaking as a Catholic...

from a long line of Catholic Democrats, I'd say that what the pope says has no impact on how we vote. The people who are opposed to gay rights and aboration aren't going to vote for any Democrat regardless of what the church says.

[IndianaGreen]

7. This is true, but it also means that Kerry won't be able to appeal to them

The people who are opposed to gay rights and abortion aren't going to vote for any Democrat regardless of what the church says.

This is true, but it also means that Kerry won't be able to appeal to them on their economic interests. If they are already turned off about Kerry because he is a Catholic that does not share their own values, they won't listen to Kerry when it comes to issues such as jobs and security.

[pacifictiger]

9. One of my longtime dear friends

is catholic and, increasingly of late, she has been sending me cutesy emails that have the subtle republican religious right undertones of how its because god has been banned from school, courts etc that our society is going to hell. I took the time to give her some real facts and quotes about the founders beliefs on religion & politics etc. She just wrote me back, was bowled over, and asked if it was OK to share with her "group." There may be hope yet folks if we can get beyond the myths - truth in the end will always win out.

[Valjean]

68. Last time I checked

The last time I checked, the Lord thy God was omnipotent. So I really don't think the Supreme court can keep him out of schools ;-)

Prayer in school is NOT illegal. Prayer is a PRIVATE conversation between a person and god. What is disallowed is TEACHERS leading public prayers (which aren't even prayers according to JC).

[youngred]

8. What about Clark and Kucinich

?

THe Democrats need to win back Catholic voters.

[IndianaGreen]

10. I like and support Dennis because he is the most liberal of the candidates

However, I will point out that when Dennis told his Iowa backers to go to Edwards if they weren't viable, Dennis broke a cardinal rule in politics: never betray a core issue!

Opposition to the war is a core issue, as much as abortion rights and gay rights are core issues. Dennis's tactics in Iowa had the effect of giving a prowar candidate some delegates at the expense of an antiwar candidate, Howard Dean.

So, while I still like and support Dennis because he is the most liberal of the candidates, I now know that I cannot count on Dennis on going all the way with me on a core issue.

This is why I now favor Wes Clark as the prime antiwar candidate if Dean is unable to pull the rabbit out of the hat. I trust Clark more than I trust Dennis on my core issues, and that is a sad commentary on how Iowa has dampened my enthusiasm for Dennis.

[youngred]

14. The problem with that is

OK, Dennis was not going to be verry viable. He took the guy who would get him some delegates and who matched on MORE of the Core issues than anyone else.

What would you have liked him to do? Throw to Dean who is NOT the anti-war candidate he claims and is moderate at best? Throw to Kerry, that's as bad as Edwards on the war, doesn't match up as closely on cardinal issues, Kery didn't want him. Throw to Gep? Gep's worse than Kerry. Throw to Sharpton? Neither would be viable. Edwards has/had been talking up the parts of his beliefs that are closer to Dennis' than anyone else. Clark isn't in the race (though they are probably closest of all).

SO its either be blown out of Iowa completely or throw in with someone (not endorse or support, or let go on in other primaries) who could get him some votes to continue. This way he can take those people to the primaries, wield some influence on the platform and if its close be a dealmaker/concession getter come convention time.

my point in asking though, is both of them are Catholic.

[IndianaGreen]

17. Making a choice on viability is a political choice

Making a choice on the basis of one's vote on IWR is a moral and ethical choice. Dennis had the choice of either making a political choice or a moral choice. Dennis's decision to back Edwards tells me that his political values will trump his moral values. In other words, Dennis behaved as another Washington politician instead of as a moral authority.

Martin Luther King was severely criticized when he publicly opposed the war in Vietnam. Had Dr. King been a politician, he would have remained silent on Vietnam, but King was a moral authority and that is why he spoke against the war.

[youngred]

21. I disagree

He has made his decision on the Iraq war. He has demonstrated his opinion by opposing it from the very very very beginning. But when looked at in the balance he felt that the other issues trumped Iraq, especially given the fact that the war is now in the past and its what we plan on doing next that matters.

Again though, I would ask you what YOU think he should have done, or what you would have done in his position? You point to MLK, but acknowledge that he wasn't a politician so could be free to say what he wants...so which would you rather have? Dennis running and affecting politics, and being honest and straightforward (but having to make a tough decision every once in awhile, or Dennis completely out of it and his voice wasted?

[IndianaGreen]

29. The war is not in the past, it is still ongoing!

But when looked at in the balance he felt that the other issues trumped Iraq, especially given the fact that the war is now in the past and its what we plan on doing next that matters.

The war is not in the past, it is still ongoing! Iraq never surrendered! Iraq is under the same hostile military occupation than the Palestinians are under Israel.

I agree with you when you said that Kucinich "felt that the other issues trumped Iraq," and that is why I am so disappointed because the moral and ethical position is that the war is wrong, and the occupation of Iraq is still wrong. Kucinich made a choice based on political values rather than sticking on principle. We have attacked Kerry for doing precisely that, and I am not about to give a pass to Dennis for that when I wouldn't on Kerry.

[youngred]

35. I KNOW its still going on

but we've already started it. Like I said (but you didn't copy) it matters what we're going to do now.

I'm fully aware of the position in Iraq, and I fully support Dennis' policy of getting US troops out NOW. That is part of his platform, and it is still there, but it is not the only issue.

Here's my problem though. You consider the vote to start the Iraq war a moral issue. Yes it is. But to Dennis the other issues are moral as well as political. To him people without healthcare, education, jobs, etc are moral issues that he Considers to be extremely important. When faced with one moral issue vs other moral issues how do you balance that? He came to a different conclusion than you, but that doesn't make him a sellout or just another politician as many have said. Would I have liked to see him have thrown support to Edwards, not at all. I would have loved for him to have been viable on his own. Unfortunately that wasn't the case. SO he had to make a decision. Let me ask, what would you have done or had him have done?

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

90. Kucinich did NOT back Edwards

I can't believe how much people misunderstand caucuses! There was NO endorsement. As DK said, "John Edwards are I both agreed that we wanted more delegates" - that's a bad thing?

Kucinich is running for President, not guru (thank God)!

[Namvet04]

16. If you can't trust Dk, how can you trust a general?

I was shocked at Dennis, no logic to it. However, Clark is one day pro war and the next against it. DK has always been against it. I guess there is no logic in any of this.

[IndianaGreen]

22. I worked for generals before

Some are clearly nuts, some are bad, but many more are patriots that believe in the Constitution, which is something that Bush clearly does not.

I will always choose someone that believes in the Constitution, for it is the Constitution that kept us free from tyranny, until Congress abrogated its powers to the Executive with IWR and PATRIOT.

Attacking Iraq now will cause a lot of problems. I think the debate right now that's going on is very healthy. If you ask me my opinion, Gen. Scowcroft, Gen. Powell, Gen. Schwarzkopf, Gen. Zinni, maybe all see this the same way. It might be interesting to wonder why all the generals see it the same way, and all those that never fired a shot in anger and are really hell-bent to go to war see it a different way. That's usually the way it is in history. (Crowd laughter.)

— Gen. Anthony Zinni, August 23, 2002

[Namvet04]

30. I agree with your comment on Generals but

Dk let you down with a history of always being against the war and yet Clark from his record is all over the place and it all depends on what is good for Clark and he will say it. He was for bush and the war, DK or dean never were.

I guess no logic anymore. I have been a dem since I was in Viet Nam and it really bothers me that we have to go to the outside for a general who was for the war. We have 3 great dems, let us get behind Kerry, Dean or Edwards. Give Clark time to show us what he stands for not just states today and you only have to look how often he changes.

[IndianaGreen]

36. Wes Clark believes in Wes Clark

so the next question is what sort of man is Wes Clark. I am quite comfortable with what I have seen of Clark's judgment and character to say that he would make a fine President, and a non-waffling President at that.

Clark will not lead us to defeat in the Fall as Kerry would.

[Namvet04]

43. Kerry has been consistent, clark is all over the place

If your smart in any organization you never let newcomers come in and start at the top. You test them out to see if their loyal. The church, Mafia, any organization that is smart does this.

If you all would just think and look at clark and what he has stood for, you should be concerned. He was for bush that so many hate on here and Bush is the key thing everyone rallys around to defeat but some want a man a short time ago was praising him and the war.

We have 3 good leaders in Kerry, Edwards and Dean who have stood the test of time in the party. That should count more than a newcomer who was praising the other side and now poof he changed. What stops this lobbyist and corportate guy from doing it again?

I do not understand Clark being higher in the polls than DK. Amazing that we really do not stand for liberal values like we say we do and back liberal democrats.

[IndianaGreen]

45. If Kerry is elected, Iraq will become a Democratic war

If Kerry is elected, Iraq will become a Democratic war and Guantanamo will be a Democratic concentration camp!

This is what will happen unless Kerry pulls the troops out, repeals PATRIOT, gives POW status to the prisoners in Guantanamo, moves them to humane facilities and allows the Red Cross to visit them.

Anything less than what I mention above, and you will quickly see us marching for peace against Kerry as we did against Bush. This begs the question: will Kerry keep the "First Amendment Zones" that Bush/Ashcroft used?

Don't let Iraq become a Democratic war!

I personally think that Kerry is unelectable...

[Namvet04]

53. Nonsense - they would argue it the same way as Nam

Some would say it was JFK and LBJ. Others would say Ike, Nixon and most would not care.

[IndianaGreen]

66. We will see when the DC police has to arrest peace demonstrators

outside the White House during the Kerry Administration.

[mikehiggins]

73. You know, I love posting this

PERLE: (in regard to Clark’s testimony before the House committee) No, I don't believe it and frankly I don't think he made a very convincing case in support of that cliche but it was one of many cliches. A

t the end of the day when you sought to elicit from him a reconciliation of the view that time is on our side with what he acknowledged to be our ignorance of how far along Saddam Hussein is, he had no explanation.

He seems to be preoccupied, and I'm quoting now, with building legitimacy, with exhausting all diplomatic remedies as though we hadn't been through diplomacy for the last decade, and relegating the use of force to a last resort, to building the broadest possible coalition, in short a variety of very amorphous, ephemeral concerns alongside which there's a stark reality and that is that every day that goes by, Saddam Hussein is busy perfecting those weapons of mass destruction that he already has, improving their capabilities, improving the means with which to deliver them and readying himself for a future conflict. So I don't believe that time is on our side and I don't believe that this fuzzy notion that the most important thing is building legitimacy, as if we lack legitimacy now, after all the U.N. resolutions that he's in blatant violation of, I don't believe that that should be the decisive consideration.

So I think General Clark simply doesn't want to see us use military force and he has thrown out as many reasons as he can develop to that but the bottom line is he just doesn't want to take action. He wants to wait.

-------------------------

It seems to me that if Richard Perle testities to Congress that in his opinion Wesley Clark does NOT want to go to war, WTF is anybody doing saying he did?

[Namvet04]

78. Clark can't make up his mind what he wants to do

His answers change all the time. It will be interesting to watch Tim try to get a straight answer out of him. He makes me really nervous and I do not trust him.

I think NH voters do also. Maybe he will still beat out Joe for 4th place.

[youngred]

24. There IS logic in it

He matched Edwards on many many many policy positions (except one notable one). He did not match anyone else so well. It helps him.

It was a logical and smart move

[Namvet04]

37. He sold out and was always special to me until then

I did not agree with DK on a few things but really like how he stood for what he believe. He shock and let me down. If he had gone to dean, it would have been more logical.

He wants to have something to bargain with so sold out to me to get it.

[youngred]

39. NO, Dean would have been the worst choice (short of Lieberman)

Dean is NOT an Anti-War candidate. Dean is NO kind of liberal (against medicare, against social security, against Civil Unions until he found out he could use it, High NRA ratings, anti-union, etc, etc). Dean favoured Biden-Lugar while Kucinich was speaking at Anti-war rallies. This is no sellout.

[IndianaGreen]

42. While I still support Kucinich, as I do all other anti-IWR candidates

Kucinich's actions in Iowa has made some of us take another fresh look at Wes Clark. Clark is now the choice for President of many Dean supporters if were Dean to fold his cards and go home.

Kucinich has been stuck in the 2-3%, and whether it is fair or not, the point is that we need to rally around a candidate that did not vote for IWR if we are to stop the DLC from getting this nomination.

Wes Clark is that candidate!

[youngred]

52. Dennis will be my candidate til the day he drops out

but I think Clark will win the nomination and I think beat Bush. I like Clark and would vote and volunteer for him (haven't got any money to give myself let alone to a candidate right now).

[Namvet04]

44. I do not understand you, dean is against the war

DK even said it and was upset that they excluded him in the ads. That may be the real reason.

Dennis stood out from the crowd and with that act became like all politians to me.

[youngred]

50. While Dean supported Biden Lugar and acting against Iraq

Dennis was speaking at Anti-War rallies.

Like with the Civil Unions law he changed his position when he realized it would get him a lot of attention and support.

Dennis still stands above the others. He was faced with obliteration or compromise...and all those who scream ineffective idealist are now screaming compromising sell out. When he did neither, he made a smart political move that did not sacrifice his principles. It was a NON-BINDING SUGGESTION to his supporters, not a mandate.

[Namvet04]

57. Dean is not the one that changes postions it is clark

Dk use to be one who did not change and stood for something but he let us down with Edwards and I really like Edwards. I think it would be great to get it narrow down after NH to Kerry, Dean and Edwards. Thank the rest and send them back to congress.

There are so many smart people on here and few that will state how clark flip flops all the time and yet we attack long term dems and let the outsider come in with no challenges.

Dean was against the war and never for Bush like Clark was. Remember that. If your smart at any organization you never let an outsider come in and put him at the top without letting serve a while and see if he is what he is. Is he pro war like he was. Is he a lobbist and corporate guy like he was or has he changed. Let him prove it. So many of you just say he tells us this and we will trust him.

Tell me how dean has changed on key things. I think on minor things he changed and it hurt him. Going off to church with carter and bringing his wife in. Take a stand and I respected him for his wife doing her thing. It made him look like he cave in but it was minor compared to Clark.

[youngred]

59. Dean

He fought against Civil Unions until he was forced by the legislature to sign it. NOW he says its one of the things he's most proud of having done.

He supported Biden-Lugar and action against Iraq. Then changed his mind a little bit before he started running for President.

Things he hasn't changed on. His High Pro-Gun stance. His dislike of Social Security and Medicare. His opposition to Unions in favour of business.

I don't understand why Kucinich is viewed as such a sellout, he made a smart pragmatic move, that didn't compromise his principles

[Namvet04]

64. Did he ever speak highly of bush and the war like Clark?

Let us stick with long term dems.

I think we need to treat everyone the same. Ask the same questions of Dean and Clark. Dean has always been against Bush and the war. Clark was pro bush and war and then all of a sudden he is a lib. It raises all kinds of red flags for me but I guess some do not care. I guess somet think our own can't beat bush so we have to get one of the Bush team to join us. Be careful. Dean, Kerry, Edwards are great. DK also but he can't even interest our own people. Sorry. I think we should get behind one of the three and then tell americans what we are going to do to make things better. Who wants to listen to Clark and reliving the Viet Nam and who did what.

It is time after NH to get serious and narrow this down to dean, kerry and edwards. Don't worry about clark he will make tons as a corporate guy or lobbyist or he can work for our party and show us he is one of us.

[DemBones DemBones]

69. Dean was never in the military so he never had allegiance to

the Commander in Chief.

It's a career military thing, respecting the office, not the man. Maybe you can't understand that if you haven't been military (I served 19 years as a Navy brat so I know the terrain pretty well.)

I haven't decided yet if I can support Clark but I can NOT support Dean.

[Namvet04]

79. Serve several tours in nam and was not fired like Clark or have

Generals or Admirals speaking badly of me like Clark.

That is fine but you have two other dems in Kerry a miltary guy who was in some of the toughest fighting in nam and I know. Edwards is ok also. Why do we need to go outside the party?

[lazarus]

82. lol

And now it starts to come out. Do you know the details of Clark's "firing"? Who actually did it, and why?

And do you know how many generals and admirals have not said bad things about Clark, but good things?

It's no surprise they were able to dig up a couple of generals he beat out of that 4th star who are a bit pissy and don't have a problem saying something bad about him; the question is, where are they now?

[diamondsoul]

46. If he had gone to Dean,

he wouldn't be where he is in the race now.

Dean just wasn't the candidate he could recommend to his supporters. I hate to say it but there is a lot of animosity between the two groups right now, and a recommendation like that would have cost Dennis a lot more support than some seem to realize.

Howard Dean has shown a complete lack of respect for Dennis Kucinich from the outset. This is something I struggle with a lot, yet still manage to defend the Governor when he's wrongly attacked. It's a fact and one he can't get past when it comes to Kucinich's most loyal supporters. Can I personally put it behind me and worry about this Primary race and beating Bush? Sure, but I'm not everyone. I'm a forgiving sort anyway, otherwise I'd be opposed to every candidate we have.

The situation in Iowa was what it was- Clark wasn't competing, Sharpton had nothing to offer, and Kucinich people were not going to turn over to Dean or vice versa in large enough groups to make a difference. He had to get a bloc of voters he wouldn't have gotten any other way and somehow pull himself up in the ranks. He accomplished both, and that's what winners do.

[Namvet04]

49. He is like us all, will make the best deal for us, but you hit it

I think the real reason he did not go to dean is that ad that did not include him as being against the war.

He is cutting a deal for self as one his supporters said to have delegates. I just thought he stood out from most people that ran for office and then he was just like the rest.

It was schocking.

[Namvet04]

13. Bishop and Cardinal will take them on

both on gay marriage and abortion is what the thing I saw on tv said. They are going after all catholics running for office that go against the catholic church and rome.

I don't know if catholics listen to rome or their leaders anymore from what is post here and the catholics I know.

[youngred]

15. I don't

as a Catholic and liberal democrat.

The only people they are likely to convince with this is those devout Catholic types who would have voted R anyway.

The Democratic party though has to do SOMETHING to get back what was once a large part of its base. The Catholic vote has been split, though the edge still goes to the Dems.

[Namvet04]

18. It will be interesting to watch their power or lack of it

I was warn that they are not going to play around and kick out catholics from the church who support abortion and gay marriages. I really did not believe the leaders would do this and they are real political so someone could get to them to stop them.

I only think Dashle would be bother by being kicked out. Money works with Rome so you can do deals.

[youngred]

25. They won't kick any Catholics out

they're hurting for members and identification in this country.

[Namvet04]

32. Not what they said and I challenge them like you have

They are going to make examples and not just lib dems all of them.

Again they are political and you grease the right palms and you can stop it.

[Namvet04]

19. Never happen on our core issues

Abortion and gay marriages will stop that. But from listening here and to most the catholic's I know they do not care about what their leaders say and live like they want to. It is a tradition control by them not leaders.

[youngred]

27. but it can though

there is nothing against Gay marriage in the Bible. Perhaps marriage within the church will not be allowed, but I don't think many Catholics would be that against it (like you say, leadership and the community are different).

On abortion its a mite tougher, especially given the consistant life ethic. The answer to that is to convince people that the more sensible policy is PREVENTION and that that does NOT include Abstinence

[Namvet04]

34. This is not a religious board so we should be careful, however

they will use clear words of God from the bible against gays. I have had them show me what the word of God in the bible states.

I think the best way is to deal with the political leaders in their church. Money really works there and I can give many examples given me of how you can pay to get them to do things.

[youngred]

38. The word of God against Gays is overblown, and subject to interpertation

Many who have looked at it for themselves, or have a priest who isn't purely dogmatic (as most that I know are not dogmatic) will tell you that that is not necessarily the truth. THe problem is the Catholic Church has NO problem whatsoever with a person being Gay, its Gay sex that bothers them. Since to the Church the prupose of marriage is procreation, and you can only have sex to do that and not for fun, Gay marriage isn't for them. Plenty of heterosexual couples have sex for purposes other than procreation though, which is also a sin so.... you figure it out.

The Catholic Church isn't going to take bribes to look the other way, and the candidates aren't going to pay off the church so forget it.

and insomuch as religion is political its free to be discussed here and has been on many occasions

[Namvet04]

40. If your with people they will show you in both

Old and New Testament and it is very clear wording and you can't say it is open to debate with them.

I just do not understand why they want to be part of an organization that their manual condemns their ways. Join or start something else.

I think this post is good to think on and maybe we can put it down with endorsement, little value in this day and age.

[youngred]

41. It's not as hardline as many think it is

and there are many other "sins" that people commit on the level of Homosexual sex that no one pays attention to.

It's something that conservatives use to justify their bigotry...but it doesn't have to be

[Namvet04]

47. They would agree with you

The key question is will this hurt defeating Bush.

I think is is so crazy that some gays want to be part of an organization that there key book of how to operate in life states if your gay you will not go to heaven. Why do they want to be part of it.

Key again is this important that it could lead to our leader not defeating Bush.

[youngred]

55. That's not what it says

Particularly from a Catholic position.

There is NOTHING wrong with being Gay. There is a Problem with Gay Sex. I know its a bullshit hairsplit, but its there. I have two gay uncles one of whom is a very strong Catholic, and one who would like to be but doesn't feel tht way.

I don't think it will make that much of a difference though

[Namvet04]

58. Sound like to most it is no big deal

They will tell you all of the churches to hate the sin but love the sinner.

I just do not understand gay people wanting to be part of an oragnization that their manual for living life on earth states it is sin to have gay sex.

Stay out of it. It is like being a communist. I do not want to be one. I can read their books and say, they are not for me. However, I must change to their rules to be one.

If you want to be a real Christian you must obey the word of God the bible. Simple.

But I think I am seeing a concenus that like endorsements this will not mean much.

I am glad we look at things like this and be alert.

[youngred]

61. What of contradictions within the Bible though

Lord knows there are plenty, and there is more to being a Christian than what the Bible says, which is my problem with a lot of "Christians" in this country.

To get back to Catholicism though, I don't think this will matter much, they've been threatening this for years and nothing happens

[Namvet04]

65. I know they have but never raise in on here

however I think this is good to talk about and wish we do more of it. Be alert for what is coming.

I was concern when I saw a tv show and they were telling how the bishops were going to come out strong and kick out catholics who ran for office who stood for gay marriage and abortion. I then heard from Catholics that I said Oh sure you always say this but they said no, we are going to do it. They are mad at how hard they were attacked rightly so for abuse of Children.

I love of the life Jesus said to live on earth but few do it. It is amazing how many of the words He used are used on hear all the time. Love, Peace, treat others with respect, loving your enememies, etc.

I also note how everyone stayed calm and debated the right way on this issue. Thank you.

[MIMStigator]

11. Catholics don't listen to the pope but they like Catholic candidates

eom

[Woodstock]

76. I agree, many Catholics think the pope is far, far too conservative

The pope is well to the right of Bush, and that's pretty far right. He's incredibly conservative. He's anti-condom and has cost many people their lives and caused much suffering. Many of us Catholics are at odds with the pope.

[Bombtrack]

20. the pope will be dead by the election

Whoever the nominee is should push the vatican to appoint a more moderate pope, preferably from latin America, to replace him

[youngred]

31. Hate to tell you

but Latin America is one of the MOST conservative areas of the Church. Further...US presidential nominess should not be involved in vatican politics, like the Pope should not be involved in US presidential elections

[Bombtrack]

48. Well this pope helped us end the cold war, so I call that "being involved"

And I've read about a couple moderate possibilites from Brazil and Argentina.

It wouldn't be outrageous or anything for a nominee or president to say, off the cuff, that he thinks it would be a good thing for the Americas and the world to see a Latin Pope. First of all, it would be good for that region, seeing as how the lower classes of people could really use the inspiration, and secondly, and more cynically, if a catholic democratic president did annonce that preference, it would endear him to the hispanic vote for generations to come.

[Namvet04]

51. Sounds like the primary season is on for the pope's job

Politics everywhere and that is the answer to deal with this issue if you think it is a problem. Meet the catholic political leaders for a deal.

[youngred]

56. He was involved in defeating communism because he is Polish

because he thought it was wrong and because he wanted a lot of new Catholic converts.

And if the Pope turns out to be from Africa? Or Europe? There are some moderate possibilites, but there are also a LOT of Conservatives.

Also this Pope has elevated a LOT of Ultra-Conservatives to Cardinals (more than any other Pope) and the influence of Opus Dei is still large. I don't think we'll get a moderate, but we will probably get a ultra conservative from LA or Africa

[Namvet04]

60. Do the cardinals go and cook pancakes and things like that to

get the votes of the others.

Can you run a commercial saying why you should be elected pope?

I thought the book they say they believe in that states God picks the leaders not a political system.

Interesting. Things to use on them when they attack us.

[youngred]

63. LOL

They don't attack us, they attack positions which they consider to be wrong.

The Cardinals get together behind closed doors to vote on whome they think the next pope should be. Its a pure compromise

[IndianaGreen]

33. Unless Cardinal Cipriani of Lima, Peru becomes the next Pope

Cipriani is Opus Dei.

[DemBones DemBones]

54. People have been thinking John Paul II was about to die ever since

Hector was a pup.

Don't count JP II out until his death is officially announced. He's like the Energizer Bunny. When he announced the 2000 Jubilee Year in 1999, I prayed he'd live to see at least the first day of 2000. Now it's 2004.

On television, I watched him celebrate Christmas Eve Midnight Mass, and he's got a new chair that lifts him to a standing position now to make it easier on him to sit and stand, sit and stand, sit and stand, during Mass, and a couple of years back, he started entering St. Peter's Basilica to celebrate Mass seated in a chair on a wheeled platform, minimizing the amount of walking he has to do.

The man is determined to keep working until the end and I admire him for that. I also feel that he's giving the world a lesson in dying with dignity because we're all seeing his physical decline. Those who are old enough to remember (and you'd have to be about 35 -- 40, because he's been pope for 25 years) know he was a strong and athletic man in his younger days in office, going hiking and still skiing, I think.

LOL, I just had a "vision" of Il Papa speeding around on one of those scooters for the "mobility-impaired" in the private areas of the Vatican. I hope he has one -- and I'm thinking it would be a lot of fun to tool around in the Vatican Museums and Sistine Chapel when they're closed to the public! Lots of long halls there.

[nightperson]

23. The Catholic Church

has long been in a free fall far worse than Kerry's opponents. No offense intended, but I think most Catholics would agree that the Church has too much of its own housecleaning to do instead of monitoring Kerry's campaign. Politically, the Church is pretty irrelevant to Democrats (uh, we're pro-choice, remember?), and otherwise it's just plain hurting. Anyway, Kerry's hardly seen as a Catholic icon. For example, like Dean, he went to an Episcopalian boarding school.

[youngred]

28. Problems

We are not all pro-choice. there are many Ppro-Life Dem Catholics, and on that one issure we're alienating a lot of support because we've allowed the fundies and religious right to influence the terms of debate for too long.

[leyton]

26. I disagree.

"Add to that the very aggressive stance the Catholic hierarchy has taken in denying communion to those that support gay marriage and abortion,"

Not true. There is no poll they take at the door. Anyone can take Communion and if John Kerry approaches a eucharistic minister, he won't be turned down. Frankly, if gay marriage or abortions are sins then that's between the communicant and God.

And I disagree with your definition of church and state. The church has no power in the government, and it shouldn't. But it should be able to say what it wants to say, just as the Sierra Club should. Let's not make the Church any different from other organizations just because it's a religious organization, and not, say, the environmental lobby.

[David Zephyr]

62. More on Kerry.

As always, you ask pose valid and important questions.

One has to give Joe Lieberman his credit for fingering Kerry a long time ago as a "waffler".

John Kerry is running as "anti-war" in the North (in spite of his vote for the War in Iraq) and as "pro-war" already in the South.

John Kerry in New Hampshire is currently touting his being anti-war during the Reagan and Bush adventures in Central America. Just this morning he was in a town hall in New Hampshire repeating this again.

However, the facts about U.S. wars in Central America, as with the current one in Iraq, betray Kerry's words. Hear the words from Howard Zinn about George H. Bush's invasion into Panama (which is squarely in Central America for the Kerry fans). Zinn particularly makes the effort to mention John Kerry by name:

"Liberal Democrats (like John Kerry and Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts, and many others) declared their support of the military action. The Democrats were being true to their historic role as supporters of military intervention, anxious to show they were tough (or as ruthless) as the Republicans." --- Howard Zinn, A People's History of the United States.

How many children have died in Iraq as a consequence of U.S. weapons of mass destruction?

The War in Iraq is a travesty and a horror.

Think about that Democrats in New Hampshire as you vote next week.

[IndianaGreen]

70. Kerry did such a great job pursuing the cocaine trail in Panama....

Kerry held public hearings, but he didn't follow the evidence all the way. Kerry was more interested in PR than in exposing the entire network, perhaps because it would lead to the Oval Office:

As the Noriega case progresses toward trial, the media's treatment of key witnesses against the General may offer a case study in bias. Several of the witnesses have already testified on these matters in a very public forum--hearings before Senator John Kerry's Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Narcotics. At that time, February 1988, they fingered Nicaraguan contras as cocaine cohorts of Noriega operating under the umbrella of the CIA and Ollie North. The hearings were ignored or distorted by national media outlets, with Reagan/Bush officials and CIA dismissing the witnesses as drug trafficking felons. ( Extra!, Mar/Apr 88; Warren Hinckle, S.F. Examiner, 1/11/90). In a predictable turnaround, as soon as Noriega was apprehended, TV news brought forth experts to explain that "when one prosecutes someone like Noriega for drug dealing, witnesses will of necessity be drug dealers."

The Media Goes to War:

HOW TELEVISION SOLD THE PANAMA INVASION
by Mark Cook and Jeff Cohen

http://www.chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/panamainv.html

[Tinoire]

71. Yikes

"Liberal Democrats (like John Kerry and Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts, and many others) declared their support of the military action. The Democrats were being true to their historic role as supporters of military intervention, anxious to show they were tough (or as ruthless) as the Republicans." --- Howard Zinn, A People's History of the United States.


We all know this but it is painful to see it in writing. If I keep reading DU during the Primaries, I will probably have to drop my registration as a Democrat and go Socialist.

Democrats do, for the most part, throw us little people larger crumbs than the Republicans do but when it comes to overseas operations- they're almost all the same. The good ones who aren't get thrown out to serve as an example to any other Democrats thinking of getting out of line.

Yugoslavia, 8 years of the 13 year war against Iraq, Panama, Columbia, Haiti- argh.

[IndianaGreen]

72. Don't forget that Clinton gave us Plan Colombia

and that included the spraying of crops and livestock, which has led to birth defects among humans and cattle.

[Tinoire]

85. I won't & don't. Plan Columbia horrified me. Clinton is not my hero

especially when I found out that Clinton and Gore fought the Congress when it tried to impose certain human-rights' controls on the aid package.

Check this out:

Knight-Ridder/Tribune Media Services (August 30, 2000)
Philadelphia Inquirer (August 31, 2000)


Clinton in Colombia: The Ugly American

<snip>

The Clinton administration seeks not peace but rather a military solution to the 40-year old civil war in Colombia. About three-quarters of its record-breaking aid package to Colombia is for the military and police. Like Presidents Kennedy and Johnson in Vietnam, Mr. Clinton is convinced that superior firepower can destroy a deeply entrenched, armed insurgency. If this requires the continuing murder of 3000 civilians each year, or creating 300,000 refugees annually, that is a price that Mr. Clinton is willing to pay.

The term "human rights abuse" is a euphemism-- let's be honest about what our tax dollars are paying for in Colombia. "They drank and danced and cheered as they butchered us like hogs," reports a survivor of a recent massacre described in the New York Times. He was describing the slaughter of 36 people in the town of El Salado, by 300 paramilitary troops in February. The troops began bringing
their victims to the town square on a Friday, and according to the Times, "ordered liquor and music, and then embarked on a calculated rampage of torture, rape and killing" that lasted until Sunday. The victims included a 6-year old girl and an elderly woman.

<snip>

Nonetheless, President Clinton has now waived most of the human rights conditions that Congress attached to his military aid package, making it clear that these types of massacres would not affect US policy.

This war is not about "illicit drugs," and it never has been. According to our own Drug Enforcement Agency, there is drug-related corruption in all branches of the Colombian government, including its armed forces, which are now the third largest recipient of US military aid in the world (after Israel and Egypt). The paramilitary death squads, which are closely linked to the Colombian military and-- according to human rights groups-- responsible for the vast majority of political murders, are up to their necks in drug trafficking. Their leader recently admitted in a TV interview that 70 percent of their funding was from the drug trade. But our tax dollars will not be used to go after them.

<snip>
Meanwhile, 37 human rights and other non-governmental organizations in Colombia have stated that they will not accept any funds from "Plan Colombia," the program that our massive aid package-- $1.3 billion, with $860 million for Colombia-- is partially funding. And neighboring states-- including Ecuador and Peru-- are beginning to worry that continued escalation of the war will spill over into their
territories.

<snip>

http://www.cepr.net/columns/weisbrot/clinton_in_columbia.htm

[IndianaGreen]

87. Excellent post, Tinoire

So many DUers still see Clinton through the prism of puppy love, unable to see the horrors of the imperialist policies Clinton pursued in Latin America and Iraq, among others.

[youngred]

91. Amen to that

Clinton was not the liberal people claim. He had many many extremely disastrous policies.

[dansolo]

74. What about the Pope's view on the war?

Which, BTW, Kerry is also in conflict with the Pope.

[youngred]

92. The Pope is Anti-war

and Anti-Bush

[IndianaGreen]

93. And the Pope warned of the spiritual repercussions if US went to war

it was a prophetic warning. We are now seeing that we stood against God (actually we stood in opposition of the precepts of every religion on this planet by attacking a poor and defenseless nation, and turning its population into our slaves). We are going to pay dearly for this, as the Pope warned!

[cap]

75. the Catholic Church in MA is not like this

My mom died in a Catholic nursing home run by the Grey Nuns in Boston. During the mass we attended together in the nursing home, the priest was very outspoken against Bush.

Dorothy Day is up for sainthood. Read about Dorothy, IndianaGreen, and you will realize how truly broad the church is. I think you'll enjoy Dorothy, one of the founders of the Catholic Worker.

[IndianaGreen]

77. UPDATE: Pope calls on media to reject contraception, homosexuality

Pope calls on media to reject contraception, homosexuality
Saturday, January 24, 2004
TOM RACHMAN, Associated Press Writer

01-24) 10:52 PST VATICAN CITY (AP) --

Pope John Paul II criticized the media on Saturday, saying they often give a positive depiction of extramarital sex, contraception, abortion and homosexuality that is harmful to society.

The pontiff, in a statement issued ahead of the Church's World Communications Day in May, urged the media to promote traditional family life.

"All communication has a moral dimension," his statement said. "People grow or diminish in moral stature by the words which they speak and the messages which they choose to hear."

<snip>

"Infidelity, sexual activity outside of marriage, and the absence of a moral and spiritual vision of the marriage covenant are depicted uncritically, while positive support is at times given to divorce, contraception, abortion and homosexuality. Such portrayals, by promoting causes inimical to marriage and the family, are detrimental to the common good of society."

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2004/01/24/international1352EST0545.DTL

[Cocoa]

80. all the dems are pro-choice

surely you must know this.

[IndianaGreen]

81. No, they are not all pro-choice. Edwards is certainly not!

Any vote to restrict abortion rights is a vote that is not pro-choice. Those that voted for the ban on the Republican labeled "partial-birth" abortion are not pro-choice.

[Cocoa]

84. the Pope wouldn't like Edwards's abortion position

Standing Up For A Woman's Right To Choose

* Supporting Roe vs. Wade, Fighting For a Federal Freedom of Choice Act. Edwards is a strong supporter of Roe vs. Wade and a woman's right to choose. At a January 2003 NARAL event, Edwards said he would "help lead a fight to pass a federal freedom of choice act so that your right to choose is guaranteed and protected no matter what the court does." He has voted against Republican efforts to prohibit funding for choice for federal employees, DC residents and women overseas at international family planning centers. He also voted to eliminate a ban on abortions at overseas military facilities, which would ban abortion even if the woman paid for it herself.

* Opposing a Global Gag Rule. Edwards opposes President Bush's reinstatement of the "Mexico City policy" or "global gag rule," which prevents an organization from receiving federal funding—or UN funding—if they provide abortions or counsel patients about abortions.

* Opposing Anti-Choice Nominations. Edwards, a member of the Judiciary Committee voted against the nominations of John Ashcroft, Priscilla Owen, and Bill Pryor each strongly opposed by pro-choice groups such as NOW, NARAL, and

http://www.johnedwards2004.com/women_families.asp

[Constitution]

83. A number of the candidates have a Catholic background.

So what.

[nemo137]

88. do we have to go through this every time a Catholic is up for election?

this sounds like a retread of the old "hotline to the vatican" deal, where people said that kennedy would be the pope's puppet. can we all just accept that the candidates are people before they are catholic, and will therefore make their own descisions?

[IndianaGreen]

89. There has been a significant erosion in the separation of church and state

since the days that Kennedy was running in 1960. Back then abortion was not an issue, it was illegal in most states, and gays were deep in their closets.

Unlike 1960, the Vatican is now very active in pushing its sectarian agenda into the public sector, not just in this country but around the world.