Democrats and Catholics.

Yahoo News (Reuters) ^ | 7/31/03 | Thomas Ferraro

[TastyManatees]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Senate Democrats angrily denied charges of religious bigotry on Thursday as they blocked the nomination of Alabama Attorney General William Pryor, an anti-abortion Catholic, to a federal appeals court.

During a stormy debate on the Senate floor, Democrats said they oppose Pryor not because of his faith but because of what they described as his extreme right-wing record on matters from civil rights to women's rights.

On a 53-44 vote, Pryor's Republican backers fell seven short of the needed 60 to clear the way for a Senate confirmation vote on President Bush (news - web sites)'s nomination of him to the Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (news - web sites).

Proponents of Pryor argued that many of his critics, on and off Capitol Hill, have held his personal beliefs against him.

"And what are his 'deeply held beliefs?' He's a traditional, pro-life Catholic," said Senate Judiciary Committee (news - web sites) Chairman Orrin Hatch, a Utah Republican.

"What we are seeing, de facto, from members of the other side is a religious test," said Sen. Rick Santorum, a Pennsylvania Republican.

Sen. Patrick Leahy, a Vermont Democrat, said such talk smacks of "religious McCarthyism," and that members of his party were unaware Pryor was Catholic until Hatch explicitly asked the nominee at his confirmation hearing last month.

"We're called anti-Catholic. This charge is despicable," said Leahy, who described himself as "a lifelong Catholic."

Said Hatch: "Apparently my friends on the other side are stung a little by this. But they should be." He blamed Democrats for injecting religion at Pryor's confirmation hearing by repeatedly asking him about his beliefs.

Sen. Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat, told Republican colleagues, "you are good people, but the arguments you are using are the last refuge of scoundrels."

A recent newspaper ad by a group backing Bush's judicial nominees ripped into Democrats by showing a closed courtroom door with the sign, "Catholics need not apply."

Pryor became the third of Bush's conservative judicial nominees to be blocked by Democrats with a procedural hurdle known as a filibuster.

Democrats say they have the votes to filibuster a fourth, California jurist Carolyn Kuhl. Bush has nominated her to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. A test vote on her is set for Friday.

Earlier this week, Democrats sustained filibusters against two other judicial nominees, Washington, D.C. attorney Miguel Estrada and Texas Supreme Court Justice Priscilla Owen.

Leahy sought to offer a resolution Thursday that a nominee's religious affiliation never again be asked at a confirmation hearing. Hatch objected, denying him needed unanimous consent.

Pryor's backers hailed him as a top-notch nominee who has earned a reputation as a "courageous" and "independent-minded" defender of the law who has broad bipartisan support in his home state.

Pryor sought to assure skeptical Democrats at his confirmation hearing that as a judge he would comply with the law -- even if it did not conform with his personal beliefs.

While Democrats have managed to block three of Bush's judicial nominees, they deny Republican charges of obstructionism, noting they have helped confirm 140 others.

[TastyManatees]

I am dumbfounded. I am an attorney, and Democrats have told me today that I am not welcome to serve in the Federal judiciary because of my personal faith. Even if I were the most competent and impartial attorney on earth, the Democratic Party leadership has just informed me that I will never be "impartial" in their eyes, because of my mainstream Catholic religious beliefs.

Tasty Manatees

[Digger]

Listen to RUSH right now on this issue.

[caisson71]

Sounds to me like you're also a pretty smart attorney. The liberal Democrats and RINOs are imposing their own anti-religious beliefs on us by their recent actions. I wonder what part of the Constitution "empowers" them to be anti-religion.

[cherry]

I have never understood the large disconnect between what orthodox Catholics are supposed to believe in and what passes now for the "Democratic" Catholic religion.....

we are all sinners, and there are no Catholics alive that can live up to the standards that are set out but sinning and actually legitimizing sin are two differant things....

[BillyBoy]

>> Sen. Patrick Leahy, a Vermont Democrat, said such talk smacks of "religious McCarthyism,"
Sen. Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat, told Republican colleagues, "you are good people, but the arguments you are using are the last refuge of scoundrels."
Democrats say they have the votes to filibuster a fourth, California jurist Carolyn Kuhl.
Earlier this week, Democrats sustained filibusters against two other judicial nominees, Washington, D.C. attorney Miguel Estrada and Texas Supreme Court Justice Priscilla Owen. <<

If the Dims want to prove they are not bigots, perhaps they could mension some DEVOUT Catholics with "deeply held religious beliefs" that they all voted to confirm to some high judiciary position in the last three years. That gives them plenty of time. Any day now, Dims.

Whether they will admit it or not, the Dim party of "tolerance" is overwhemingly bigoted against Orthadox Jews (even those in their OWN party!), Evangelical Christians, and devout Roman Catholic Christians. Perhaps we should start a thread with dozens of quotes from Dims to highlite this fact. One thing is for certain, they are adematly against "those" people having power.

[swilhelm73]

Religious bigotry lives on...

Democrat Party slogan 2000:

Disenfranchise the military, they don't vote for us anyway

Democrat Party slogan 2003:

Catholics and Evangelicals need not apply.

[gaspar]

It is time for the RNC to spend some bucks and go after Dems in Nevada, Washington, South Carolina and South Dakota. It is never too early to start kicking arse.

[kellynla]

The Democratic National Committee (DNC) like everyone else operates a website. On it they linked to a number of religious organizations. Under “Catholic” they listed only one group. I was amazed when I found out who they selected as a representative Catholic organization. It was not, as one might expect, the U.S. Catholic Conference which has statements on a gamut of political issues. Rather they listed an organization which is dedicated to destroying the Catholic Church. “I spent twenty years looking for a government that I could overthrow without being thrown in jail. I finally found one in the Catholic church,” stated its president, Frances Kissling. (Quote from Mother Jones Article.)

It calls itself Catholics for a Free Choice (CFFC), but it could more accurately be named Catholics for a Flat Choice or Catholics for an Echo. It seeks to silence the Church’s voice on controversial issues regarding human life and sexual morality. A while back CFFC led a campaign to expel the Holy See from the United Nations. The U.S. House of Representatives, by a near unanimous vote, denounced the campaign so it was surprising that the DNC would embrace such an extreme anti-Catholic organization.

The group, which has a miniscule membership, receives generous funding from foundations with an anti-Catholic agenda. The U.S. bishops have issued statements exposing Catholic for a Free Choice. Knowing all this, why would the Democratic National Committee list it at all, let alone as the sole Catholic organization?

[pogo101]

If the Dims want to prove they are not bigots, perhaps they could mension some DEVOUT Catholics with "deeply held religious beliefs" that they all voted to confirm to some high judiciary position in the last three years.

Good point. And in fairness, technically they're not being religious bigots. Suppose anyone -- anyone at all, including an atheist -- who got top ABA marks, etc., and who had published and spoken extensively about the wrongness of Roe and "legislating from the bench," were to be nominated. He or she, too, would be filibustered.

[swilhelm73]

Well, not really.

Any real Catholic following his church and faith *has* to be pro-life. It is an intrinsic part of their faith. The Democrats have basically vowed to block all pro-lifers. So, yes indeed it is religious discrimination.

[kellynla]

The bishops said nothing about the insult. After the recent scandals, they have understandably kept a low profile. However, some Catholic lay organizations did protest. On July 31, Catholic League president William Donohue wrote to DNC Chairman Terry McAuliffe imploring him to “act quickly and decisively by removing Catholics for a Free Choice from the DNC’s links of interest organizations.” On August 6, Donohue wrote to every Democrat in the House and Senate asking for assistance in this matter. But nothing changed, so he launched a formal campaign:

“We are asking all Catholics to contact the DNC and make known their outrage over the DNC-CFFC link. Frances Kissling, who heads CFFC, has said that it is her goal to ‘overthrow’ the Catholic Church. She has also lobbied the U.N. to kick the Holy See out of the world organization. No wonder she has twice been denounced as a fraud by the U.S. bishops. And this is the kind of Catholic that the DNC wants to associate with?"

The protest did bring a response, but not a very satisfactory one. Instead of removing the link to CFFC, they added other links, including one to yet another organization which seeks to destroy the Church: Call to Action (CTA). It portrays itself as desiring “reform” but in effect wants to eliminate anything distinctive about Catholic teaching and organization. Like CFFC, it is misnamed. CTA desires to reduce the Church to inaction by making it a kind of fraternal organization like the Eagles or Oddfellows. Fraternal organizations are fine, but Jesus did not die on the cross so the world would have one more social club. Rather he founded his Church upon Peter and gave her the Holy Spirit so she could teach authoritatively in Jesus’ name. To reduce the Church to a club – as CFFC and CTA seek to do – would be to deny her mission.

[bert]

said Leahy, who described himself as "a lifelong Catholic.".....

Let's see, would that ba a statement by a CINO?

[bert]

You make a strong point. The question that arises is "Are American Catholics Catholic?" It would seem that the reality is that many are not, including Kennedy and Lehey.

[kellynla]

This information was contained in the parish bulletin of Holy Family Parish, November 10, 2002 Father Bloom, Pastor.

[hilaryrhymeswithrich]

"Kissling: Three New York women -- Joan Harriman, Patricia Fogarty McQuillan, and Meta Mulcahy, who had been colleagues in the National Organization for Women -- chartered CFFC in 1973, the year of the US Supreme Court's Roe decision." All 3 from NOW. Need I say more?

[swilhelm73]

Living in CINO central - a weathly town on the outskirts of Boston, the answer is that most upper class Catholics do indeed ignore pretty much all the tenets of their supposed faith.

Your average middle or working class Catholics, be they hispanic Texans or irish/italian Bostonians are, however, pro-life, though they keep voting for the CINOs that lead the Democrat party.

Basically this is because the cowardly Reps refuse to make abortion a major issue...even though almost everytime is becomes one, it brings more votes to the pro-life candidate then the pro-abortion one.

So, the pro-abort CINOs can get away with theit little two step; I'm personally opposed to murder, but hey, who am I to stop the goverment from paying someone to stick forks in babies heads?

Heck, if the Reps had any political sense they'd run pro-life, real Catholic, center/left candidates in the Northeast. Pro-life libs can't do much in the Democrat party, so it would offer a major opportunity for them.

And it beats the pro-abortion left wing candidates the Reps run now - like Chafee and Snow.

[TastyManatees]

Now the Senate Majority Leader says Democrats are using their stand against Catholics as a way to obstruct an energy bill?! What is next, does Tom Daschle plan on burning down the Capitol building to stop welfare reform? http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=584&ncid=584&e=4&u=/nm/20030731/pl_nm/energy_congress_dc Tasty Manatees

[pogo101]

We'll just have to disagree, then. It's not the Catholic-ness per se that Dems object to. It's the part about daring to be against Roe.

[Plutarch]

"We're called anti-Catholic. This charge is despicable," said Leahy...

Really, some of his best friends are Catholic.

Turning the bigotry tables on the Democrats, you gotta love it!

[Sicon]

Democrats said they oppose Pryor not because of his faith but because of what they described as his extreme right-wing record on matters from civil rights to women's rights.

Gee, it would be nice if the "journalists" who wrote this (or the democraps themselves, for that matter) would be so kind as to actually enumerate his "extreme right-wing record" for us.

But that might contradict their claims, so of course, they won't.