John Kerry was the wrong choice... he sucks!

[JohnT]

Well, it's causing controversy:

Vatican cardinal fuels religious dispute
Friday, April 23, 2004 Posted: 5:45 PM EDT (2145 GMT)


VATICAN CITY (CNN) -- Just hours before Sen. John Kerry was scheduled to discuss his support for legalized abortion at a large women's rights rally Friday in Washington, a top Vatican cardinal called on priests to deny communion to Catholic politicians like Kerry who take that stance.

In a news conference to announce the release of a document aimed at a crackdown on possible abuses in celebrating Mass, Cardinal Francis Arinze was asked if a politician who supports abortion rights should be denied communion. (Full story)

"Yes. Objectively, the answer is clear," Arinze said. "The person is not fit. If he shouldn't receive it, then it shouldn't be given."

Asked about Kerry, Arinze said the decision would be up to U.S. bishops: "The norm of the church is clear. The Catholic Church exists in the U.S. There are bishops there. Let them interpret it."

Kerry supports a woman's right to an abortion and the promotion of family planning resources. He also has said he will only back judges to the Supreme Court who support abortion rights.

Kerry has said, "I fully intend to practice my religion as separate from what I do with respect to my public life."

Kerry campaign spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter said, "John Kerry takes his faith seriously, but he also believes in the separation of church and state and believes that public officials have a commitment to separate church and state and protect the lives of every American."

Some U.S. Roman Catholics have said Kerry should not receive communion because of his position. The senator from Massachusetts received it on Easter -- prompting further debate within the church.

After Arinze's comments, Frances Kissling, president of Catholics for a Free Choice, called on the Vatican not to "politicize sacraments."

"The Vatican has consistently shown itself to misunderstand the American principle of separation of church and state. ... It is time for church leaders to accept that Catholics in good faith disagree with the absolute prohibition of legal abortion demanded by the Vatican. It is time for church leaders to acknowledge that the threat of denying the sacraments to Catholics who disagree with their positions has no basis in church law. It is both bad politics and bad religion."

Asked about the push to deny communion, Cutter said, "For a generation, Catholics have believed in the freedom of conscience. ... At the end of the day, this is between John Kerry and his church."

Archbishop Theodore Egan McCarrick of Washington met privately last week with Kerry at the Archdiocese of Washington at the presidential candidate's request. McCarrick is heading up a commission of U.S. bishops to determine if Catholic politicians who support abortion rights should be denied communion.

That commission may resolve the issue at a meeting set for November -- after the presidential election.

[JohnT]

Not that I want to threadjack or anything, but this is precisely why people are so squeamish about Kerry:

"John Kerry takes his faith seriously, but he also believes in the separation of church and state and believes that public officials have a commitment to separate church and state and protect the lives of every American."

five paragraphs later...

Archbishop Theodore Egan McCarrick of Washington met privately last week with Kerry at the Archdiocese of Washington at the presidential candidate's request. McCarrick is heading up a commission of U.S. bishops to determine if Catholic politicians who support abortion rights should be denied communion.

[Boris Godunov]

Yeah, but they gave him Communion anyway, and his diocese doesn't seem to have a problem with it. This is just going to be another example where the Vatican blows lots of smoke and Catholics the world over more or less shrug and go their merry way.

[JohnT]

However, the decision isn't to be made until after November, largely upon Kerry's request.

[Boris Godunov]

I don't see how Kerry's meeting with the Archbishop is a contradiction of his statement.

[Imran Siddiqui]

DADT is essentially "You can be gay as long as nobody knows about it."

Yep... it's utterly silly. If people know you are straight it isn't an issue, but if they know you are gay, it is horrible!

Besides, Goldwater didn't ruin the party. Jeez, a guy who didn't even know who Goldwater was goes off on him . Reagan admits that if there wasn't a Goldwater, there would never have been a President Reagan. Goldwater allowed for a fiscally super conservative Republican to be taken seriously by the party. Of course, in order to take advantage, we needed a Reagan, but nevertheless, Goldwater was important.

[NeOmega]

Originally posted by The diplomat


The world changed on 9-11. Bush's "humble foreign policy" was no longer valid after 9-11. He had to change because the world had changed!

Nothing changed after Bush took office. He continued American interventionalism across the globe, which happened to be the first pre-cursor in the war on terrorism. Who fired the first shot? We did, in the Gulf War. No Islamic terrorist attackes occured in the US before the first gulf war. The reality of any global political scene is, you attack them, they attack us.

[Whoha]

Sava, who would the perfect candidate for you be?

[Ben Kenobi]

When they jumped back in, it no longer was the Republican party

Skywalker:

You assume that nothing the religious right believes is a part of the republican party.

That's a rather difficult statement to establish. First of all you need to give your definition of what constitutes a 'republican' party

[Ben Kenobi]

You're Canadian. What difference would it make who you would have liked?

If I were American, who would I vote for? Just because I reside in a different country has nothing to do with whether or not I support the ideology of the republican party.

[Ben Kenobi]

Jeez, a guy who didn't even know who Goldwater was goes off on him

After first reading the evidence, do I make this statement.

As for whether Goldwater destroyed the republican party, I think it can only be argued that he did so in the short term.

[Ben Kenobi]

As for John Kerry and the Catholic church, if you don't like the doctrine don't join the church, or leave the church.

He's trying to have his cake and eat it too.

[Ben Kenobi]

And no, a complete severance is NOT necessary. Only enough of a divergence to change the core values of the party.

So core values must be set in stone, so that they do not change?

Secondly, what do you consider the core values of the Republican party? I don't think that taking a stance against gay marriage and abortion need assume fiscal irresponsibility. Rather, I think a case can be made that both abortion and gay marriage are harmful to the country financially.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by NeOmega


Nothing changed after Bush took office. He continued American interventionalism across the globe, which happened to be the first pre-cursor in the war on terrorism. Who fired the first shot? We did, in the Gulf War. No Islamic terrorist attackes occured in the US before the first gulf war. The reality of any global political scene is, you attack them, they attack us.

Yup, we're such evil people, for liberating Kuwait and defending Saudi Arabia from invasion at the hands of a brutal ambitious dictator

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Skywalker:

You assume that nothing the religious right believes is a part of the republican party.

That's a rather difficult statement to establish. First of all you need to give your definition of what constitutes a 'republican' party

They may agree on some points. Everyone agrees on some points. For example, the Democrats and the Republican's both think randomly selecting people to be executed is not a particularly good idea

Specifically, I dislike the whole "I'm going to shove my morality down your throat" thing.