[narses]

How special.

[JohnnyZ]

That is SO gay.

[sinkspur]

What's wrong with hospital visitation rights? If somebody's family has abandoned them because they're gay, maybe the partner is the only person they've got.

I don't know what "bereavement rights" are, but if it's just a representation at the funeral home, I've got no problem with that either.

[Antoninus]

Can you say "incrementalism", bishop? Yeah, I knew you could.

[Loyalist]

Having read Bishop Reilly's comments, two presumptions come to mind about his diocese:

1. The recent homosexual scandal has hit his diocese harder than most.

2. His diocese has an especially severe vocations crisis, aggravated by large numbers of heterodox priests, religious, and chancery officials.

Anyone with particular knowledge about the Diocese of Worcester is invited to confirm or rebut these presumptions.

[Bob J]

Click Here for the RadioFR website!

Tonight on Radio FreeRepublic

Unspun with AnnaZ
October 23rd, 2003 -- 10pmE/7pmP

"At least when right-wingers rant, there's a point!"

Click HERE to listen LIVE while you FReep!

Would you like to receive a note when RadioFR is on the air? Send an email to radiofreerepublic-subscribe@radioactive.kicks-ass.net!

Click HERE to chat in the RadioFR chat room!

[Loyalist]

PING

[secret garden]

Trouble brewing in Beantown ping.

[Jorge]

Reilly said the church is firmly against gay marriage and civil unions, but believes that the state should provide gay couples with certain economic and social benefits, including bereavement and hospital visitation rights.

This sounds reasonable to me.

[Cicero]

As I read this, I think it's just the media trying to make more trouble for the Church.

The only rights mentioned are hospital visitation rights and bereavement rights. It would be cruel and inhuman not to let someone's closest friend visit another in the hospital, regardless of their relationship.

And Christians have traditionally been lenient in allowing people latitude at funerals. In the course of a book I was researching a couple of years ago, I found that after the Protestant Reformation in England, one circumstance where everyone was tolerant was in not asking any questions when a family showed up at the cemetery with a corpse. Was the corpse Protestant or Catholic? Don't ask. Let him be buried in the cemetery if that's what the family want.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

One of the side effects of "partner benefits" is that you don't have to be gay to get them. We could be paying for every single person's partner's benefits. It'll be another large cost passed onto the customers of these companies. IBM is an example.

[Coleus]

Maybe he can convert Congressman Barney Frank and have him run his male escort business from a church.

http://www.worcesterdiocese.org/contact.html

http://www.worcesterdiocese.org/bishop.html

http://www.macathconf.org/contact.htm

[Dan from Michigan]

What a disgrace to my Faith and those with my first name.

[AEMILIUS PAULUS]

Cannot we have a splended Auto Da Fe'? Just once in our time!

[Spunky]

From Article:"....but believes that the state should provide gay couples with certain economic and social benefits, including bereavement and hospital visitation rights."

I would like to know under what law is a homosexual prevented right now from going in to see his homosexual partner?

With the new Health Initiative Privacy Act (HIPA)When you go to the hospital, doctor, dentist, eye doctor etc; you fill out a form naming all those you want to see you or have information given out to.

They just want some special law on the books saying Homosexuals can have this or that or do this or that.

[philetus]

Worcester(Fake) Bishop Daniel Reilly

[SuziQ]

Reilly said the church is firmly against gay marriage and civil unions, but believes that the state should provide gay couples with certain economic and social benefits, including bereavement and hospital visitation rights

Can't anyone make arrangements for situations like this? It just takes some paperwork to be filed determining who can visit, who inherits, etc.

I'm glad he's standing firm on the homosexual 'marriage' issue. Sometimes he can get TOO compassionate with social issues.

[american colleen]

I haven't read through this entire thread, but I'm wondering how the Massachusetts bishops disregarded this:

"In those situations where homosexual unions have been legally recognized or have been given the legal status and rights belonging to marriage, clear and emphatic opposition is a duty. One must refrain from any kind of formal cooperation in the enactment or application of such gravely unjust laws and, as far as possible, from material cooperation on the level of their application. In this area, everyone can exercise the right to conscientious objection" - from this past summer in "CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING PROPOSALS TO GIVE LEGAL RECOGNITION TO UNIONS BETWEEN HOMOSEXUAL PERSONS"

Please keep the bishops of Massachusetts in your prayers, especially. We are a diocese adrift in social justice and peace with no clear rudder.

[utahagen]

I caution Freepers to read more about this before assuming the article's conclusion is accurate. It is possible this Catholic bishop is saying that a dying person may cite any person as the one he wants besides him as he dies; whether this person were a lover (homosexual or heterosexual) would be irrelevant. This bishop may not intend to be acknowledging "gay couples" per se.