To: Polycarp IV
If it didn't come from the NY Times, I would also call it fair and accurate. However, considering this source, I can't help but feel that there is a slant somewhere. I'm sure a few good freepers will find some spin somewhere in this article.
Here's a challenge. . .
Can you spot the spin?
7 posted on
05/30/2004 11:14:32 AM PDT by
mgist
To: mgist
On political matters, evangelicals and Catholics will not fall on the same side of the divide on every issue. The Vatican opposed the war in Iraq, while many evangelicals were hawkish. And many Catholics still profess a strong social-justice, pro-union, Democratic orientation that makes them natural antagonists of evangelicals, who largely swing Republican. This looks suspicious...most Catholics on this forum sided with their evangelical brethren, not the Vatican, on this issue.
And the latter claim is an old cliche that no longer rings true either for mass going Catholics.
9 posted on
05/30/2004 11:20:31 AM PDT by
Polycarp IV
(PRO-LIFE orthodox Catholic--without exception, without compromise, without apology. Any questions?)
To: mgist
Did you say spin? That was easy:
Christianity Today says in a June editorial that it is "certainly appropriate" for bishops to expect a Catholic president to submit to Vatican authority.
"submit to Vatican authority" is the spin to try to cause fear about a "Christian" theocracy running the country...like in the 60's when they tried the same with kennedy.
Didn't work then - won't work now. Why?
Because Christians are good ... leftist democrats are evil!
23 posted on
05/30/2004 12:57:12 PM PDT by
steplock
(http://www.gohotsprings.com)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson