1 posted on
07/13/2005 12:03:44 PM PDT by
NYer
To: NYer
Isn't this slightly Un-consti-freakin-tutional?........
2 posted on
07/13/2005 12:05:22 PM PDT by
Red Badger
(HURRICANES: God's way of telling you it's time to clean out the freezer...............)
To: NYer
Feh, now WE can scream separation of Church and State!
3 posted on
07/13/2005 12:07:17 PM PDT by
Dominick
("Freedom consists not in doing what we like, but in having the right to do what we ought." - JP II)
To: NYer
Please say that this is really from Scrappleface. Please?
I can barely believe that even Bostonians would be this stupid.
4 posted on
07/13/2005 12:07:53 PM PDT by
KarlInOhio
(Bork should have had Kennedy's USSC seat and Kelo v. New London would have gone the other way.)
To: NYer
I'm certain the archdiocese has "had a thought" or concern regarding those that will be hurt by the closings. Maybe the city could pony up some money to the church to help feed these poor that they are so worried about?
5 posted on
07/13/2005 12:08:29 PM PDT by
kjam22
To: american colleen; Lady In Blue; Salvation; narses; SMEDLEYBUTLER; redhead; Notwithstanding; ...
Councilors said the archdiocese has gone ahead with closings without thought for the city's most vulnerable citizens, Catholic and non-Catholic alike, who use church-based food pantries and 12-step programs. Would this not be a violation of Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act
Catholic Ping - Please freepmail me if you want on/off this list
![](http://www.vatican.va/gpII/immagini/index_pent_en_40.jpg)
6 posted on
07/13/2005 12:09:17 PM PDT by
NYer
("Each person is meant to exist. Each person is God's own idea." - Pope Benedict XVI)
To: NYer
They should just condemn the churches under eminent domain, and then they can run the soup kitchens and the AA meetings themselves. Or they could hand the land over to a private developer and get all that sweet, sweet tax revenue.
Of course, the same could be said of your church...
8 posted on
07/13/2005 12:11:49 PM PDT by
gridlock
(ELIMINATE PERVERSE INCENTIVES)
To: NYer
Whaddaya know, this is an instance where when you say "seperation of church and state" there is really a church involved. Most of the time when libs say "seperation of church and state" they really mean "seperation of faith and state"; two totally different things.
9 posted on
07/13/2005 12:11:57 PM PDT by
joebuck
To: NYer
Where's the ACLU? This is a blatant interference by the government into a religion's affair.
~croak......ribbit, croak.....silence....
10 posted on
07/13/2005 12:12:11 PM PDT by
OpusatFR
(Try permaculture and get back to the Founders intent. Mr. Jefferson lives!)
To: NYer
Whaddaya know, this is an instance where when you say "seperation of church and state" there is really a church involved. Most of the time when libs say "seperation of church and state" they really mean "seperation of faith and state"; two totally different things.
12 posted on
07/13/2005 12:16:19 PM PDT by
joebuck
To: NYer
Making political hay over something they can't do diddlesquat about, I see....
14 posted on
07/13/2005 12:21:08 PM PDT by
Knitting A Conundrum
(Act Justly, Love Mercy, and Walk Humbly With God Micah 6:8)
To: NYer
Brighton City Councilor Jerry P. McDermott, the lead sponsorhmmmmm....let's see. Jerry has been a member of Ward 2 Democrat Committee and a legislative aide to Joseph P Kennedy II. But he's also a Catholic. Must be a John Kerry kind of Catholic. And his wife's name is Aoibheann(???) according to his bio.
16 posted on
07/13/2005 12:25:00 PM PDT by
daybreakcoming
(May God bless those who enter the valley of the shadow of death so that we may see the light of day.)
To: Abram; Alexander Rubin; AlexandriaDuke; Annie03; Baby Bear; bassmaner; Bernard; BJClinton; ...
![](http://www.triplettschool.org/pages/images/a_statlib.gif)
Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here
To: NYer
The anti-religion forces seem to be lining up an arsenal of weapons to use against churches. The Kelo ruling will also allow them to take away church properties on the grounds that a Safeway or some other taxpaying business would provide a greater tax income compared to a tax-exempt church. This is just one piece of the arsenal being arrayed.
19 posted on
07/13/2005 12:40:34 PM PDT by
highlander_UW
(I don't know what my future holds, but I know Who holds my future)
To: NYer
This is... just... wow...
20 posted on
07/13/2005 12:45:44 PM PDT by
Romish_Papist
(The times are out of step with the Catholic Church. God Bless Pope Benedict XVI.)
To: NYer
23 posted on
07/13/2005 1:10:57 PM PDT by
BenLurkin
(O beautiful for patriot dream - that sees beyond the years)
To: NYer
Not that I doubted you, but I couldn't believe this was for real. I still don't believe it. This article is going to get a lot of e-mail mileage.
Wonder what these brains had to say about Bush's Faith Based Initiative.
To: NYer
This is strait out of atlas shrugged. The lawyers are allowed to pillage the church until it is bankrupt for child abuse scandals, but then the libs hollar when it shuts down social services. Would like to see more info on this.
26 posted on
07/13/2005 2:02:39 PM PDT by
traviskicks
(http://www.neoperspectives.com/scotuspropertythieving.htm)
To: NYer
Oh I see. If we want to interfere with a religion, that is O.K., but if you have a religion, keep it secret or you'll be labeled as interferring with the government.
That must be the new definition of "separation of church and state".
29 posted on
07/13/2005 2:32:01 PM PDT by
Wuli
To: NYer
Bump for the afternoon crew.
31 posted on
07/13/2005 4:13:23 PM PDT by
Blue Champagne
(Quomodo cogis comas tuas sic videri?)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson