Posted on 03/09/2009 11:26:49 AM PDT by jmaroneps37
On March 5 the Connecticut State Legislature Judiciary Committee which is jointly chaired by Senator Andrew McDonald and Representative Michael Lawlor launched a direct attack on the Roman Catholic Churches in their state. The assault came in the form of a bill that would force Connecticut Catholic Bishops to relinquish control of their parishes and turn them over to a committee of lay parishioners. The view of the Diocese of Bridgeport is that this move “directly attacks the Roman Catholic Church and our Faith.”
If this bill becomes law it will exclude bishops from having any say in the workings of parishes and open each of them to secular influences that would certainly eventually lead to silencing the Church on important issues. If the wrong group of parishioners took power they could enforce rules directly challenging Catholic doctrine.
Since this is a blatant violation of the doctrine of separation of Church and State, and clearly at odds with the 1st and 14th Amendments and is a bill of attainder, it begs the questions: Why would this bill be introduced and cui bono ( who benefits)?
Research has provided some possible answers.
Why would anyone back this bill?
Connecticut based gay website, G.A.Y. (Good as You) said this about McDonald and Lawlor:
“The two co-sponsors of the bill, Andrew McDonald and Michael Lawlor, are both practicing homosexuals. While cloaked in the garment of demanding fiscal transparency, the real doctrinal intention of the bill is unmistakable.” Now WHAT could that mean?
These two have also joined forces to introduce and push the state’s Civil Unions law. There is every reason to believe one of the possible “improvements” to the way the Catholic Church in Connecticut conducts Her operations might softening the Church’s position on gay conduct.
What else could it be?
(Excerpt) Read more at collinsreport.net ...
A bill designed to direct a religion on how to manage it’s parishes? And this isn’t a 1st Amendment issue, because????
Separation of Church & State????
“Excessive entanglement” if there ever was it.
At most parishes, only "the wrong group of parishioners" ever take leadership.
A bill isn’t law, bill’s get introduced all the time and rejected. I don’t think the Church would accept this change even if it wasn’t homosexual’s pushing it. Plus you don’t go picking a fight with the Catholic Church, you lose. My expectation is this will get dealt with quietly behind the scenes and just disappear.
Although "Separation of Church and State" doesn't appear in the constitution, I believe that the "establishment of religion" language found in the first amendments is clearly written to prevent EXACTLY what this CT legislation is intending to do.
Not even the most liberal of Judges at the district level would allow this. It'll never pass for that very reason.
Why would they EVER accept anything, with regard to how they function, from an outside group? They're not a state entity. They're completely private.
They have no control over the Catholic Church, or any other church. It’s just a bunch of blowharts trying to push a point. The Catholic Bishops are, most likely, laughing up their sleeves at this one.
Better men than these have tried over the centuries to destroy the Catholic Church and failed every time. Good luck, guys!
“Connecticut’s Homosexuals” What chance do these “freaks” have? Little to none.
There was time in the not to distant past where I would have believed that.
If you knew the history of Lawlor...I am amazed he is still even in the game in CT...but then again he is gay so all past things are excused.
He is a poor excuse for human (and this has nothing to do with his orientation), I know this first hand. He is just NOT a good person on many levels.
People should go back and review history when he first ran for office some 20 years ago.
I agree with you and other posters that this has little chance of passing and little chance of being upheld in Court. I don’t think the homos expect it to (although in their highly distorted reality, I’m not sure what they really expect).
The point wasn’t to get it to pass...right now. It’s just more of the program of pressure. It’s a movement, and they are trying to move the country into their perverted hell, one step at a time.
New Haven CT is the home of the Knights of Columbus. We put up $1,000,000 to support Prop 8. They are bleeping with the wrong guys.
>A bill designed to direct a religion on how to manage it’s parishes? And this isn’t a 1st Amendment issue, because????
Because the 1st Amendment GIVES you the right to practice religion, and as such it is perfectly reasonable to have the Government regulate, restrict, and oversee any church’s functioning. [/sarc][/cynic]
My 83 y. o. Dad. A dyed in the wood leftist. Was incapable of believing the report posted on this forum about the gays that sued the Christian small entrepreneur photographer because they declined to shoot a same sex wedding. Perhaps one day I'll be dealt with quietly for my support, feeble as it it may be of the Church.
I keep thinking there must be more to this story, too. Otherwise, how could they get away with this? The First Amendment hasn't been repealed... yet.
This just SLIGHTLY unconstitutional. Why don’t they also make a law banning all newspapers.
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.