Posted on 09/25/2005 12:57:52 PM PDT by Diago
I write in response to the article about nominee and practicing Catholic John Roberts. (UB, July 29)
John Roberts opposed equal rights for women as an aide to Justice William Renquist in the 1980s.
He played a pivotal role on President Bush's legal team that secured the presidency for him in 2000.
He wrote that there is no guarantee of privacy in the U.S. Constitution.
He sat on the three-judge panel that overturned the U.S. District Court ruling that the U.S. must treat Guantanamo Bay detainees in accord with the Geneva Conventions.
If this is a practicing Catholic, maybe an atheist judge would be better.
Editor's note: Father Jiminez is an associate pastor of St. Augustin Church in Cleveland
Ouch!
Saint Augustine
2486 W. 14th St.
Cleveland, OH 44113
781-5530, FAX 216-781-1124
And this disqualifies Catholics? as opposed to those who worked for pro-abortion, pro-gay Gore?
This statement tells us not only how wrong it is by itself, but also reveals the total stupidity of the person who thought it up.
Should read:
"LIBERAL Priest Opposes Roberts Nomination: "If (Roberts) is a practicing Catholic...",
One might wonder if the good Father is a practicing Catholic.
Sounds like a Kerry Catholic!!!
And note that this kook also complains about "the right to privacy" which is basically code words for "the right to kill children in the womb."
He sounds like a lefty priest. I'm no judge but I would tend to believe Roberts might be the better Catholic.
It also sounds like the Priest himself, if he holds this view, is closer to an avoid aethist than Roberts is...perhaps he should just discard hsi own "robes" and confirm what we can suspect from these publically stated views.
I thought that he opposed certain laws, including "equal pay for equivalent work" because it would be a bad idea for the government to be deciding whether a nurse deserves more or less pay than a truck driver or a coal miner. You don't suppose this priest is lying to us, do you?
Liberals always equate "opposition to government control" to "opposition to beneficial outcomes". It seems that nothing that liberals desire can be accomplished without government.
As opposed to not allowing women to be priests or popes?
He played a pivotal role on President Bush's legal team that secured the presidency for him in 2000.
The voters secured Bush's presidency.
He wrote that there is no guarantee of privacy in the U.S. Constitution.
I'm glad to see the church is concerned that what we do in private is private, like sexual lifestyles, birth control, etc.
He sat on the three-judge panel that overturned the U.S. District Court ruling that the U.S. must treat Guantanamo Bay detainees in accord with the Geneva Conventions.
Ununiformed fighters do not come under the convention.
If this is a practicing Catholic, maybe an atheist judge would be better.
What does religion or the lack of it have to do with being a good judge?
Is this really Fr. Jiminez's position? Is there an actual on-line reference to the letter? His positions seems so blatantly at odds with CHurch teachings that surely somebody has called him on them before.
> John Roberts opposed equal rights for women as an aide
> to Justice William Renquist in the 1980s.
No cite, I notice.
> He played a pivotal role on President Bush's legal team
> that secured the presidency for him in 2000.
And kept AlGore from stealing it. What exactly was the
crime here?
> He wrote that there is no guarantee of privacy in
> the U.S. Constitution.
Per se, there isn't. The 4th provides some specfically
enumerated protections.
> He sat on the three-judge panel that overturned the
> U.S. District Court ruling that the U.S. must treat
> Guantanamo Bay detainees in accord with the Geneva
> Conventions.
These detainees are illegal combatants. They wore no
uniforms and didn't take orders from a signatory of
the Accords. They are not covered by Geneva. Indeed,
they were subject to summary execution, which in
retrospect, would have been vastly less trouble.
This author needs to pen his own stuff and rely less on
DNC talking points.
So this is a pro-abortion associate pastor????? Maybe he is the one who ought to rethink his religion.
There isn't. Perhaps Father Jiminez should actually read the Constitution.
A little googling reveals Fr Jiminez is a long-time jerk who has protested the military's School of the Americas, among other flaky topics.
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.