Posted on 03/08/2002 8:57:43 AM PST by j.frank.dobie
Some constitutional law experts suggested Reilly's attempt to have such a significant role in the archdiocese's affairs would violate the separation of church and state.
I've seen postings from FReepers stating time and time again that the words "separation of church and state" do not appear in the Constitution. They state this so as to justify the appearance of Ten Commandment monuments on public grounds or justify some other action in which government shows a bias toward Christianity, their favored religion.
Well, there is a down side to this line of thinking. If there is truly no "separation of church and state" in the Constitution, then there is nothing wrong with the hostile takeover of the Archdiocese of Boston by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
This sword cuts both ways. Be careful how you wield it.
So what's the state going to do, rely on the same feminoids and liberal hacks who have caused this problem in the first place?
In truth, a STATE may get involved with religion. The 1st Amendment does not prohibit it. It only prevents CONGRESS from making any laws to that regard. State governments may do as they wish.
Wrong. The 14th Amendment extends the Bill of Rights to the states, so now the 1st Amendment applies to the states.
I think this is a fine path for the leftists to be taking. A game of chicke with the Catholic Church is just what is needed to keep the Democratic Party as credible like that Party's fine leaders in the state.
Liberalism always carries with it the seeds of its own demise.
So, is the Catholic Church's handling of molestation.
The govt needs to butt out, and the Church needs to get it together, my son will never be an altar boy.
If they want to monitor the training of priests let them do the same for all professions i.e. doctors, lawyers, counsellors, and ALL RELATED PROFESSIONS AND RELIGIONS. I talked to my doctor about this last week. He said if they layed him off everytime he got some kind of complaint about his practice and behavior he would NEVER get back to work.
Chalk it up to another attack on the sacred priesthood in an attempt to harm and destroy the Catholic Church.
What should be is simple. Any claims should be turned over to civil authorities as the law states. These are crimes.
Settling the case and putting the priest back out to prey on other children is not the answer, that in itself is a crime.
You are correct, but no more of an attack than the self inflicted wound that the Church is doing to itself in handling these atrocious matters.
To be an altar boy is a great honor. To serve God by assisting at Mass in the sacred sanctuary where God Himself in the person of Jesus comes down on the altar from HEAVEN and is offered to the Father as a sacrifice for our sins and to know and believe that the Father accepts this sacrifice is one of the greatest honors one can be given. To allow a sicko priest like Fr. Geoghan to deprive your son of this honor is giving him more power than he ought to have.
As I am not a Catholic, I don't follow this issue that closely. A lot of the media coverage focus would leave us believing that all aspects of Religion are bad, so I hesitate to assume their focus on this issue in the past decades is indicative or an increase versus a decline.
It is certainly apparent that this Bishop, in this locale, has done a very poor job in this regard.
Anyone, however, that doesn't understand that pedophiles and gays seeking initiation don't gravitate to all places in society where they come into contact with children while they are in a role of authority, doesn't understand those fallen people. It is my opinion that even prior to acting out their evil, that predispostion with implant them in the position to promote their crimes. ALL institutions need to beware, not just churches or boy scout troops.
For example Fr Spagnolia, refused to leave his rectory when told to by Cardinal Law. He manipulated his congregation into applauding and defending him (even though the are totally ignorant of the charges), Spagnolia then went on O'Reilly and lied again.
One day later Spagnolia, admitted to 2 "consensual" homosexual relationships. I suspect this too is a lie and "consensual" is being debated.
I AGREE 1 MILLION %
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.