Posted on 10/27/2004 9:30:37 AM PDT by Mershon
HOLY SEE-SAW
BY DUNCAN MAXWELL ANDERSON --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Email Archives Print Reprint
October 23, 2004 -- The Catholic Church's eternal teaching against killing the innocent by abortion doesn't apply this year — because it might affect the real world. At least, that seemed to be the message from the Vatican this past week. Throughout his career, Sen. John Kerry has called himself a Catholic while promoting abortion — including government-funded abortion.
In June, Los Angeles canon lawyer Marc Balestrieri sued Kerry in Ecclesiastical Court in Boston for heresy. As part of his research, Balestrieri went to the Vatican to ask if a Catholic politician who supports a right to abortion is automatically excommunicated — with no need for any special process or declaration from the pope or a bishop.
Within 10 days, Balestrieri heard from Fr. Basil Cole of Washington, D.C., who wrote to say he'd been asked by Fr. Augustine Di Noia at the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) to answer. Fr. Cole's reply: Yes. Abortion is so evil that any Catholic who publicly supports it is in effect an accessory to the crime, and excommunicates himself by his own action.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
That you don't know for sure. But you can see that the [only] other potential candidate generates religious kind of fear in the Planned Parenthood ;-D
They make these decisions because Bush is the only person who can be elected who will actually do something about abortion.
Peroutka cannot be elected.
Like I said, everybody loves a winner. When we have a Supreme Court full of David Souters, you'll understand what I'm talking about.
Peroutka is a fallen away Catholic. He is worse than excommunicated. He is an apostate. Why would I vote for an apostate Catholic? Why would you?
I did not realize this. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. Can you provide any additional info. If substantiated, then I guess I won't be voting this year.
I cannot remember where I read it, but I believe it was from a reliable Catholic media site.
I found a Fox interview where he acknowledged leaving the Church. I can't support the man.
Agreed, I had decided not to vote for him either. I am thinking a write-in for Joe Sobran, Pat Buchanan, or Dr. Thomas Drolesky will be in order.
I'll vote vote for Sobran.
What can you tell me about the circumstances of Peroutka's leaving the Church? Tragic as an apostasy would be, it needn't have a direct bearing on his policy views. I have no objection in principle to voting for non-Catholics, and I'd guess you haven't either.
I don't know the circumstances of him leaving the Church. I don't have an objection voting for a non-Catholic - especially when there are no other Catholics in the race. But I do have a problem with a guy who has abandoned the one true faith. He is headed down the wrong road. If he abandons his faith, he can abandon anything. I can't trust him, just like I can't trust a guy who leaves his wife.
I have actually decided not to vote for non-catholics, which is why I had originally decided to abandon my vote for Paroutka, even before I knew that he had abandoned the faith.
I am very near the point of abandoning the "democratic" process altogether. My "vote" goes to the establishment of a Catholic monarchy, and with each passing election that gets more and more clear.
Me too. Democracy in this country has failed IMO, and it's tiresome every four years being cajoled and harrangued to collaborate in a fraudulent pantomime.
My opinion is that a democracy is only is only as good as those going to the polls. In this country that's largely made up of idiots.
I believe this is the interview to which Grey Ghost II and Mershon are referring:
http://www.campaign.politicalcrossfire.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=41
See question 5.
I read the interview, but I was more astounded at this newspaper article, I excerpted some paragraphs but the article is very long and has more info: http://www.citypaper.com/news/story.asp?id=5324
"We love that one, don't we?" Peroutka continued, remarking sarcastically that "I didn't know the state had any children."
"The crowd was audibly amused. The reaction, though, may have been different had it been known that in the early 1990s Peroutka and his wife, Diane, forced her two teenaged daughters from an earlier marriage--Dawn and Holly Hubbard--to become wards of the state foster-care system until the age of 18. (Diane Peroutka's previous husband died of cancer in 1978.) This happened after Dawn told members of her Catholic youth group and her basketball coach at McDonogh School that she recalled sexual abuse at the hands of Michael Peroutka from when she was 9--memories that were not substantiated in an ensuing state investigation, and which she later recanted. And it happened after Holly, who suffered from learning disabilities and a troubled relationship with her stepfather, displayed behavioral problems."
"The Peroutkas transferred parental responsibilities for Dawn Hubbard to the State of Maryland on her 17th birthday, May 1, 1992, and Holly met the same fate on the day after Thanksgiving 1992, when she was 15. The sisters, now in their late 20s and living outside of Maryland, say they never wanted to be estranged from their mother and have tried without success to reconcile with her several times since being removed from the Peroutka household more than a decade ago. "
"Dawn Hubbard, once in the hands of the state, had to rely on Social Security for financial support. At first, her checks were sent to the Peroutkas' home, and Streng, in late June 1992, sent Diane Peroutka a letter asking for them. Diane Peroutka responded in writing that the money was used to pay bills, especially attorneys fees, "which have escalated far beyond the income I received for Dawn. . . . This expense was accrued because of the lies and problems caused by Dawn, and her Social Security check must pay for this."
"When Dawn attempted to deliver a letter to that effect to her parents, Diane Peroutka had her arrested for trespassing; Diane Peroutka had tried to do the same to to a visiting Holly Hubbard in June 1993, but the police wouldn't charge Holly. Shortly thereafter, Dawn appeared on the Phil Donohue Show with representatives from the False Memory Syndrome Foundation, and recanted her sexual abuse allegations to a national television audience. Still, the Peroutkas have rebuffed Dawn and Holly Hubbard's subsequent attempts at reconciliation."
"A decidedly different take on Michael Peroutka's role in his stepdaughters' treatment was expressed by McHugh, the psychiatrist who helped Dawn Hubbard determine that her memories were false and the only doctor with whom the Peroutkas agreed to consult with during Dawn's care at Hopkins. In a 1996 affidavit, McHugh stated that in his opinion Diane Peroutka "has been subjected to excessive emotional pressure by her husband to act in ways she otherwise would not act . . . contrary to her own best interests and those of her daughters."
"Democracy in this country has failed IMO, and it's tiresome every four years being cajoled and harrangued to collaborate in a fraudulent pantomime."
Amen. But with a slight caveat. We live in a democratic republic, not a democracy, despite what the media and sociologists all want us to believe.
"Domocracy" is the comfortable myth of the Left; "democratuc republic", that of the right. Both are deluded or disingenuous in my opinion; we live in a mobocracy, where popular passions are manipulated by the powerful to validate their pre-ordained decisions.
I do not disagree with your assessment of the current situation. However, the founders deliberately founded a democratic republic. What it is currently operating as is up for debate.
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.