Skip to comments.
Heresy Case Pressed Against Kerry, Others
WorldNet Daily ^
| 21 January 2005
| NA
Posted on 01/21/2005 7:14:56 AM PST by Mershon
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-54 next last
To: mike182d
Can you cite a regulation for this. Hell, WJ> Bryan, certainly a man of God ran for president several times and came close once.
I think such a regulation would be an obvious rights violation. I distinctly remember the Catholic Church was the one that insisted this man not run for reelection.
21
posted on
01/21/2005 7:43:15 AM PST
by
furball4paws
("These are Microbes."... "You have crobes?" BC)
To: John123
For example, the clergy abusing children? The Roman Catholic Church cannot have it both ways.
The Catholic faith is not any single human person or collective group of persons, but is a foundational system of beliefs. If you're going to hold an entire religion accountable for the acts of one of its leading members, Christianity as a whole should have been written off from the beginning. One of the very first Apostles (bishops) appointed by Christ betrayed him and had him killed. With as evil as pedophelia is, I don't think it tops betraying and having the Son of God killed for money...
22
posted on
01/21/2005 7:43:47 AM PST
by
mike182d
To: furball4paws
No, you could be absolutely right. I was just pulling from what I've heard before. Maybe its the other way around and the Catholic Church won't allow clergy to run for office (just as it will not allow clergy to take up arms). I'm really not sure, to be honest.
23
posted on
01/21/2005 7:45:07 AM PST
by
mike182d
To: John123
It's not the "Church" that did the abusing of children...it was a hand full of sick priests. The Church is not going to change it's rules for the sake of modern society. It is what it is and will always be. Kerry does not want to follow the true Catholic doctrine and so as a public figure he is being called on his beliefs as a Catholic. He's a fake...
To: ladiesview61
"He's a fake..."
Definition of most politicians, especially Democrats
25
posted on
01/21/2005 7:49:12 AM PST
by
furball4paws
("These are Microbes."... "You have crobes?" BC)
To: NorCalRepub
Kerry just doesn't support the unborn. He fight's any effort to give them birth right, after conception. To me, on the scale of life v death, for the innocent child, he leans toward death each time: His record suggests the same, but, as others have stated, being pro-choice, doesn't necessarily mean pro-abortion, but where is the voice of balance for the unborn?? I don't see it. Anyway, here's a link I've been holding onto for a while: http://www.issues2000.org/2004/John_Kerry_Abortion.htm
~~~~~~~
- Voted against Laci Peterson law
- Voted NO on criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime.
- Voted NO on maintaining ban on Military Base Abortions.
- Voted NO on banning partial birth abortions.
- Voted NO on disallowing overseas military abortions.
- Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record.
- Expand embryonic stem cell research.
26
posted on
01/21/2005 7:50:34 AM PST
by
JesseJane
(KERRY: I have had conversations with leaders, yes, recently.That's not your business, it's mine.)
To: NorCalRepub
"....being pro choice is not ADVOCATING abortions..."
Sorry, but I disagree. All of life is a series of choices. I am pro choice on all issues bar none, however every choice has a price to be paid. In our society if you "Choose" to kill someone then the price for killing that person is death (or should be, I realize that in todays world we sometimes get a twisted result but ....). Just because a group of judges got together and said an unborn baby is not life doesn't mean they're right. Murder is still murder. As a Christian, a true Christian, I can not advocate someone the choice to commit murder without paying the price. As a Christian, a true Christian, I also can not vote for any politician who is pro choice for if you do you are enabling the crime. Even in our own country if you harbor a criminal you are guilty of aiding and abetting.
I believe the bible is quite clear on God's opinion of taking the life of a baby while it is still in the womb. If you choose, or anyone for that matter chooses, to throw out God's position / law's, then there is a price to pay for that also. God changes not and just because our society wants to allow others the luxury of not facing up to their responsibilities doesn't mean he's changed his mind on the subject. I'd rather be safe than sorry.
To: NorCalRepub
***...but being pro choice is not ADVOCATING abortions...***
Consistently voting in favor of abortion IS advocating abortion.
28
posted on
01/21/2005 7:52:31 AM PST
by
kitkat
To: John123
For example, the clergy abusing children? Personally, I think it is all related. To me it is not a coincidence that where you get the Kerry/Kennedy type Catholics (CINO) in the Church you also get abuse. Abortion, gay priests, etc. are all "personal life-style choices". It is about time the Church started taking a stand. Weed out the bad priests AND politicians. It is about repentence, but they won't repent if they do not think you are doing wrong. If the Kerry/Kennedy CINO's or the gay priests can continue being actively involved in the Church while insisting they are morally right in continuing in their ways, the Church must stand against them or stand for nothing.
To: Mershon
There's much in the Catholic Church that I don't understand, I do understand that they would lose too many Democratic "believers" if they were to impose their laws on Democratic party favorites.
In the end, the Catholic Church is a business that is bleeding money. The can't afford to upset shareholders by going by "The Book."
To: LibertarianInExile
"It's a canon law suit, not in the secular courts. This isn't a frivolous lawsuit in those courts"
Exactly correct, and it is not the business of non-catholics to pass judgement on or make fun of a strictly Catholic matter. When someone affiliates themselves with a particular Christian group, they are bound by the standards of conduct for that group....if they can't abide these standards they should leave, or be forced out. Whatever, I applaud Catholics that want to "police" their own. Other Christian groups could learn from them.
31
posted on
01/21/2005 8:08:31 AM PST
by
Sola Veritas
(Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
To: The Brush
"I do understand that they would lose too many Democratic "believers" if they were to impose their laws on Democratic party favorites."
I would say that those people were only "nominal" Catholics and it would be no great loss. However, I am not Catholic and don't have any say in this. This is as it should be.
32
posted on
01/21/2005 8:10:21 AM PST
by
Sola Veritas
(Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
To: Mershon
I doubt that either Kerry or Kennedy will care --
Carolyn
33
posted on
01/21/2005 8:14:46 AM PST
by
CDHart
(The world has become a lunatic asylum and the lunatics are in charge.)
To: ThisLittleLightofMine
Very insightful comment...right on target too.
To: mike182d
To the best of my knowledge, the United States does not allow clergy of any religion to hold office. That is not true. Any such law would be unconstitutional.
35
posted on
01/21/2005 8:17:21 AM PST
by
Modernman
(What is moral is what you feel good after. - Ernest Hemingway)
To: Modernman
Like I said earlier, you're probably right; I'm not basing this on anything I've read recently but what I've heard in the past.
Although, I just figured that the seperation of Church (Institutions not religion in general) and State would be compromised if clergy held offices within the government - there'd be a conflict of interest.
If anyone could find out for sure, that would be fantastic. I'm probably completely wrong on this matter :-)
36
posted on
01/21/2005 8:21:05 AM PST
by
mike182d
To: ladiesview61
It's not the "Church" that did the abusing of children...it was a hand full of sick priests. I am going to have to disagree with you on this one. My family went to Lockeford, CA church when I was a boy. Years later, I read that one of our priests was convicted of molestation. AT his trial, Cardinal Roger Michael Mahony (who was in charge of the regional area of Lodi, CA at the alleged times of molestation), testified that this priest didn't molest. In spite of Cardinal Mahony's testimony, the jury CHOOSE not to believe him.
My point is that there are many examples of those in power who chose to ignore what the "handful of sick priests" done and lied about the problem.
Another argument could be made of regarding ex-Cardinal Bernard Law, the archbishop of Boston. It is too easy to describe what a mess this was.
BTW, my mother told me that after this convicted priest served his time, he was deported to Ireland.
37
posted on
01/21/2005 8:39:38 AM PST
by
John123
(Good grief! The Palestinians cannot even organize a state funeral!)
To: mike182d
If you're going to hold an entire religion accountable for the acts of one of its leading members, Christianity as a whole should have been written off from the beginning.Good point. The history of the Catholic Church has largely been about the abuse of power over peasants. It is remarkable that the Church survived this long.
They say that history is written by the winners. I wonder what else the Church done that we will never know about.
I think you will agree that Jesus would NEVER have condoned these atrocities.
38
posted on
01/21/2005 8:48:05 AM PST
by
John123
(Good grief! The Palestinians cannot even organize a state funeral!)
To: John123
I think you will agree that Jesus would NEVER have condoned these atrocities.
I absolutely would agree, but that's not the issue. Jesus didn't come for the righteous but the sinners. Simply put, if you're not sinner, you don't need Jesus and can't be Catholic.
Anyway, my point is that these attacks are ad hominem in that all truth of the doctrines of the Catholic faith are being completely disregarded and rejected because of members of the Church who do not live up to those same doctrines; its not a fair criticism of the Catholic faith.
Some of the greatest Saints came from the Church's most corrupt periods, and when questioned why they would not leave the Church because of such corruption, they would tell people they had a responsibility to "be as Holy as they want the Church to be." The Bishops are not the Catholic Church. The Pope is not the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church is every single baptised member, especially the laity. The real scandal is with a laity that demands a perfect, holy, spotless clergy while refusing to be perfect, holy, and spotless themselves. How many lay people pray as much as priests do? How many lay people sacrifice and fast as much as priests do? How many lay people study the Scriptures and teachings of the Church as much as priests do. Just to put things in perspective, in Catholic theology divorce is as much a perversion of sexuality as pedophelia, and yet while 2% of priests have been found guilty of this crime, 50% of lay Catholics get divorced. The true hypocricy is the other way around, really.
39
posted on
01/21/2005 9:01:00 AM PST
by
mike182d
To: NorCalRepub
being pro choice is not ADVOCATING abortionsPerhaps, but Kerry in the second debate with Bush advocated government funding of abortions. That's pro-abortion, not just 'pro-choice'.
40
posted on
01/21/2005 9:12:13 AM PST
by
gbcdoj
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-54 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson