Posted on 06/12/2004 1:29:05 PM PDT by wagglebee
On June 3, I asked Maryland's Gov. Robert Ehrlich about California's federal Judge Phyllis Hamilton's ruling that Congress' overwhelmingly passed law against partial-birth abortion is unconstitutional.
And I also asked about what I thought was the ACLU – but later realized it was Americans United for Separation of Church and State (the Rev. Barry Lynn) who wrote the IRS to complain about alleged "electioneering" by the Colorado Springs Catholic Bishop Michael Sheridan's pastoral letter about Catholic politicians receiving Communion.
QUESTION: Since there was no such objection to New Orleans Catholic Archbishop Joseph Rummel's excommunication of arch-segregationist Leander Perez in 1962, do you believe that there would be anything wrong if Cardinal Keeler excommunicated Sen. Barbara Mikulski for her supporting partial-birth abortion?
GOV. EHRLICH: Well, I'm a confirmed Methodist so this is not my business. I am surrounded by Catholics, however – in fact a varsity Catholic named Michael Steele, my partner and lieutenant governor.
QUESTION: What does he think?
GOV. EHRLICH: You'll have to ask him! But Mike, I'm sure, has strong opinions. Mike, as you know, studied for the priesthood, spent a number of years in a monastery. In a very serious way he is a scholar and a very religious and moral person. He's a family man with a terrific family.
In response to Gov. Ehrlich's suggestion that I ask his lieutenant governor, I contacted the Steele press secretary, Regan Hopper – who refused to disclose the whereabouts of the lieutenant governor, except that he was attending two graduations.
She then asked what I wanted to ask him (such "tell us-in-advance" I have never heard in a quarter century of covering the White House). When I replied that it concerned partial-birth abortion, she replied:
"I don't think he wants to discuss partial-birth abortion. Today is his private schedule."
And I was denied the right to ask Lt. Gov. Steele even the one question suggested to me by the governor. (So much for Lt. Gov. Steele's press secretary's concern about the semi-infanticide of ripping open the skull of a very-nearly-born fetus, inserting a hose and sucking out his or her brain.)
I also asked Gov. Ehrlich:
QUESTION: Well, you are opposed to partial-birth abortion.
GOV. EHRLICH: Well, like 98 percent of the people – 99 percent of the American public are most assuredly opposed to it as well. Obviously, I'm not going to opine on issues relating to the Catholic Church. I'm not a Catholic and it's not my business.
As for the Court of Appeals decision, that particular judge, it just again reinforces the issue of the importance of a presidential election. Or a gubernatorial election for that matter.
Executives choose judges. When you vote for a governor, when you vote for a president, you're not simply voting for that person or that philosophical platform. You're voting for dozens – sometimes HUNDREDS, sometimes THOUSANDS of selections of people who will be nominated to boards, commissions and judgeships.
For the most part, those individuals will reflect the philosophical orientation of the executive. So with John Kerry, you know what to expect. With George Bush, you know what to expect as well.
A good point. We need to get rid of these activist judges gone now.
Kinsolving is a good man. He asks questions that nobody else asks.
Don't you think the question should be 'which bishop has the intestinal fortitude' to do this? The bishops seem to be basically afraid of federal-level politicians.
One thing that bishops want to avoid is the appearance of parisianship and trying to influence elections.
I wouldn't expect much Catholic action from Keeler on this or any other point of orthodoxy.
They publically support abortion, knowing that many of their left wing supporters favor abortion, even though, on a personal level, they know it is wrong. If they lie so easily about this issue, what else are they lying about?
I'd like to see some primcipled Republican Catholic put together the public words on abortion of these weasels and petition the appropriate authorities for exclusion. Does that make us as evil as they are, using religious doctrine/position for political ends? No, it does not rise to the same level. There is nothing wrong with asking a religious authority to weigh the evil in the words a so-called believer has publically used for a political end to measure his dotrinal integrrrity. If he/she would lie regarding one issue, he/she'd lie about any issue.
ping.
She should be encased in resin and made into a paperweight. A very ugly paperweight.
I'll give them a small benefit of doubt that they believe their ascension to power will do a great good and that if compromising a core belief is what is necessary to achieve power then that is acceptable. So they toss aside their personal beliefs. But one may remind them of which road is paved with good intentions.
If the congregants of the diocese want it, and Keeler doesn't have the 'nads to do it, I'm sure that having the majority withhold their weekly envelopes for as long as it takes would make him GROW a pair real fast!.
The governor should NOT be asked what he thinks of a Church decision - especially one that is not even his Church!
Inappropriate questions by this reporter. Especially asking the governor what somebody else thinks about it.
She then asked what I wanted to ask him (such "tell us-in-advance" I have never heard in a quarter century of covering the White House). When I replied that it concerned partial-birth abortion, she replied:
"I don't think he wants to discuss partial-birth abortion. Today is his private schedule." And I was denied the right to ask Lt. Gov. Steele even the one question suggested to me by the governor. (So much for Lt. Gov. Steele's press secretary's concern about the semi-infanticide of ripping open the skull of a very-nearly-born fetus, inserting a hose and sucking out his or her brain.)
So the man didn't drop everything he was doing just to talk to this guy. That doesn't say anything about his stance, nor his press secretary.
And why on Earth would you ask the Governor or the Lt. Gov., about a decision that rests in the hands of the Church? I don't ask my barber about my payroll taxes.
The whole point of this article is ridiculous. Why not contact a parish priest, a bishop, the Cardinal, or some other member of the Catholic Church?
Several churchs are tearing themselves apart this century. Willingly. Demanding that $$$$ go away and leave them alone. So? Need a road map?
YESSS!
Then that means, if that premise is true, they don't have the power of their faith convictions?
I suppose burning at the stake is out huh?
Trussing her up and throwing her in a pond, out huh?
Dang, well there's always a lamp post with her name on it!
I take exception to that malicious characterization. I'll have you know that I was voted the fifty-first most attractive girl scout in her troop! There are manatees that would envy my figure, so keep a lid on those "ugly" jokes. I'm a woman, after all. It's been confirmed by several well respected gynecologists.
I vote for Exorcism, THEN Excommunication.
Demons be gone!
Senior, supervisory priest:
Son, that's not her head.
Junior priest:
Good Lord! Satan sure has been busy, hasn't he?
Other people have no right/no business sticking their noses into someone's life and asking or even demanding anyone be excommunicated when its being done for political reasons. That is as low and despicable an act as anyone can commit. And, I'm a practicing and very devout Catholic. Trying to separate someone from their religion for political reasons is nothing short of despicable. Spin it that someone's trying to enforce the Catholic Doctrine or whatever. The bottom line is its political and despicable.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.