[Torie]

I don't think the unfair trade practices act or the fraud laws apply here. If they do, this the bishop should sue in civil court. How long do you think that case would last?

[wideawake]

Oh, I forgot.

You believe it's a good thing to murder small children.

You already knew that your objections to the bishop's statements are absurd, you're just protesting his statements because he objects to the coldblooded murder of babies.

I read you loud and clear.

[Notwithstanding]

I was referring to the principal involved, thank you.

The principal is the same - morally and legally.

And in any event, the bishop knows ha cannot actually stop Daschle from saying whatever he wants. For you to suggest the bishop is even pretending to hold any sway LEGAL sway over Daschle illustrates that you don't quite understand the significance of what the bishop is doing. He is forcing Daschle to come clean. Thats all. He can no onger claim he is in any way Catholic without appearing an utter fool - as well as disrespectful toward the bishop he claims as his own.

The bishop is just making it known that the Church considers his behavior as blatantly wrong - so much so that the Church will single him out by name as one who is not Catholic, in fact.

This is highly unusual and does not even come near any civil law or constitutional law - other than to reiterate that the government cannot tell a Church how to conduct its internal affairs - which means the bishop can demand whatever he wants of Daschle (even if he can't force him to comply).