Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Kerry [Catholic} says he'll filibuster Supreme Court nominees who do not support abortion rights
SFGate.Com ^ | (06-20) 16:05 PDT | NEDRA PICKLER, Associated Press Writer

Posted on 06/21/2003 12:23:09 AM PDT by Land of the Irish

Edited on 04/13/2004 2:42:49 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry said Friday that he is prepared to block any Supreme Court nominee who would not uphold the Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion.

"I am prepared to filibuster, if necessary, any Supreme Court nominee who would turn back the clock on a woman's right to choose or the constitutional right to privacy, on civil rights and individual liberties and on the laws protecting workers and the environment," Kerry said in remarks via satellite at a meeting of Democratic party officials in St. Paul, Minn.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

TOPICS: Activism; Apologetics; Catholic; Moral Issues; Religion & Culture; Religion & Politics; Religion & Science
KEYWORDS: abortion; kerry
Will he be ex-communicated by Amchurch? I doubt it.
1 posted on 06/21/2003 12:23:10 AM PDT by Land of the Irish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Aloysius; Dajjal; Domestic Church; dsc; ELS; FBDinNJ; Francisco; frozen section; ...
The Most Comprehensive Online Guide to American Politics
search POLITICS1:

Presidency 2004

John Kerry

(Democrat - Massachusetts)


POLITICAL: Democratic nominee for Congress, 1972; Lieutenant Governor, 1982-85 (elected 1982); US Senator, 1985-present (elected in 1984, re-elected in 1990, 1996 & 2002). Chair, Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, 1987-89.

PROFESSIONAL: US Navy, 1966-69 (awarded the Silver Star, Bronze Star, and three Purple Hearts for combat action in Vietnam). Attorney. Assistant District Attorney, 1977-82.

EDUCATION: B.A., Yale University, 1966. J.D., Boston College, 1976.

PERSONAL: Born December 11, 1943, in Denver, Colorado. Married to Theresa Heinz Kerry. Two children; three step-children. Catholic

2 posted on 06/21/2003 12:34:46 AM PDT by Land of the Irish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Land of the Irish
He will be praised and suported by the heretic Amchurch. After all, he's saying all the right things.

Fact is, though, he is NOT Catholic. An unrepentent advocate for mortal sin is utterly incompatible with Roman Catholicism. Kerry might claim to be a Master of the White Crane system of Kung Fu, but his ridiculous claim would not make him so, any more than his ugly claim of being Catholic makes him so.
3 posted on 06/21/2003 12:40:28 AM PDT by Thorondir
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Land of the Irish
The Deadly Dozen
4 posted on 06/21/2003 3:36:40 AM PDT by Dajjal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Land of the Irish
If this evil-dripping moron really thinks that Roe v. Wade is in any way in accordance with the Constitution, he ought to be locked away on a back ward somewhere and put to work weaving baskets.
5 posted on 06/21/2003 3:55:10 AM PDT by dsc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Thorondir
Agree he is not a practicing Catholic IMO if he is pro choice.

I have never met a fellow practicing Catholic that was pro choice.
6 posted on 06/21/2003 4:30:45 AM PDT by oceanperch (Warning: James Carville is showing up again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Land of the Irish
Your edited title Kerry [Catholic} should read Kerry [CINO}. If he supports abortion he's already excommunicated himself latae sententiae. There's also the matter of his divorce from Julia Thorne and his extramarital behavior while he was still married to her. Kerry may claim he's a Catholic but so do people like Frances Kissling and Richard McBrien.
7 posted on 06/21/2003 7:59:14 AM PDT by SMEDLEYBUTLER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Land of the Irish
i didn't know Kerry was Catholic! Isn't this his second wife? Hmmmmmmmmmm.

Another thread for the Catholics and Politicians collection!
8 posted on 06/21/2003 8:00:46 AM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Land of the Irish
The Deadly Dozen

Canadian Prime Minister Taunts Church: "I Am A Catholic And For Abortion"

Catholic Church asks Tom Daschle to stop calling himself a Catholic

On Catholic Politicians and Faith

Vatican Urges Catholic Politicians to Vote Along Church Lines

Senator Santorum on Being Catholic and a Politician

William E. Simon, Sr. and Jr. Devout Catholics, Philanthropists and Politicians

Deadly Dozen senator taken to task over claims of Catholicism

THE BISHOP AND THE SENATOR [author links to FR thread regarding Daschle in her online column]

Blood On Their Hands: Exposing Pro-abortion Catholic Politicians

MI Gov Granholm Proclaims June "Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Pride Month"

Colorado Governor To Media:'WE LOVE OUR CHURCH' [Gov. Bill Owens

U.S. Senator Brownback and Commentator Dick Morris Join Catholic Church


Kerry [Catholic} says he'll filibuster Supreme Court nominees who do not support abortion rights

9 posted on 06/21/2003 8:06:09 AM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

If he supports abortion he's already excommunicated himself latae sententiae.

Agreed. But my point is: why are Amchurch Bishops and priests not publicly excommunicating the likes of Kerry or Gray Davis, let alone administering Holy Communion to them every other Sunday?

10 posted on 06/21/2003 8:48:58 AM PDT by Land of the Irish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Your edited title Kerry [Catholic} should read Kerry [CINO}. If he supports abortion he's already excommunicated himself latae sententiae.

Man did I take a bunch of misinformed crap for sayng this same thing about Little Tommy Dashole.
11 posted on 06/22/2003 12:07:06 AM PDT by Thorondir
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Land of the Irish
Because the Amchurch "priests" and "bishops" are anti-Christs who support abortion, homosexuality and every other sort of anti-Catholic abomination.

The Church is filled with her enemies.

God help us.
12 posted on 06/22/2003 12:10:12 AM PDT by Thorondir
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Thorondir; SMEDLEYBUTLER; Land of the Irish
I don't think the word "vote" is the same as the word "procures". Look them up. I've called a number of dioceses and all had the same answer, you are not excommunicated by voting for abortion, I may not agree with it but that is the Canon Law of the Church today as it is written.

If that were the case, just about every Democrat, including many priests, bishops and nuns, would be excommunicated for 'voting' for pro abortion politicians who represent the voters.

Can. 1398 A person who actually "procures" an abortion incurs a latae sententiae excommunication.

A person who commits one of the following sins incurs a
latae sententiae (automatic) excommunication.
Those marked "Reserved," are reserved to the Apostolic See.

The confessor of a repentant excommunicated person, whose sin is "Reserved,"
must obtain permission from the Vatican to absolve and restore one's
membership in the Church. A person's identity is not generally required.
The Code of Canon Law — 1983 A.D.

Apostasy - renunciation of one's faith.
Heresy - rejection of a formal Church teaching.
Schism - separation from the true body of Christ (the Catholic Church). – Can. 1367

Throws away the consecrated species, or for sacrilegious use takes them away or keeps them. – Can. 1367 Reserved

Physical force against the Roman Pontiff. – Can. 1370 §1 Reserved

Priest who absolves a partner in a sin against the sixth commandment. (Except in danger of death the absolution is invalid.) – Can. 1378 §1 Reserved

Both parties to an episcopal consecration without a pontifical mandate.
– Can. 1382 Reserved

Confessor who directly violates the sacramental seal. – Can. 1388 §1 Reserved

Abuse of ecclesiastical power or office - to be punished according to the gravity of the act or the omission. – Can. 1389 §1 Unspecified penalty

Through culpable negligence, unlawfully and with harm to another, performs or omits an act of ecclesiastical power or ministry or office. – Can. 1389 §2 Unspecified penalty

One who actually procures an abortion – Can. 1398;

habitual lack of use of reason, – Can. 1322
not completed the sixteenth year of age, and more exceptions, – Cann. 1323 - 1325
incomplete offense, – Can. 1328
9. What is the Church's current penalty for abortion?

Current Church law states: "A person who procures an abortion, where the effect follows, incurs an automatic excommunication." (Canon 1398) This law is normally interpreted to include the adult woman who knowingly has the abortion and anyone who assists willingly and directly, such as the doctor, the nurse or others. Recently, the Pontifical Commission for the Authentic Interpretation of the Code of Canon Law (January 19, 1988) ruled that the "abortion" mentioned in Canon 1398 embraces the "killing of the fetus in whatever way or at whatever time from the moment of conception." In such cases, the excommunication occurs immediately after the knowing and willful act of the individual. The excommunication occurs without any action by the bishop. (Excommunication means, basically, that one is cut off from full communion with the Church and is forbidden to receive any of the Sacraments except Penance, which requires confession and rejection of one's sins, an act of penance, and reconciliation with the Church.)

Automatic excommunication is to be distinguished from penalties that individual bishops might impose on those who support abortion in a general way. There are impermissible forms of cooperation, inconsistent with being a practicing Catholic, which give active scandal within the Church and within society. In such cases, Church law gives the bishop the authority to impose excommunication on an individual. Should the Church exercise public sanctions against such a person, obviously the purpose would be to counteract scandal, that is, to make clear to the world that it does not approve such conduct. But it must be understood that in the final analysis excommunication is the choice of the individual excommunicated; it is not the choice of the Church.

To have the power to impose penalties and to use that power, however, are two different things. The Scriptures say: "I will not the death of the sinner, but that he be converted and live." And our Lord speaks of letting wheat and weeds grow side by side until the harvest time. when the weeds will be burned, but the wheat used for bread. The purpose of penalties is not simply to punish the wrongdoers. Penalties are intended to encourage the faithful as well as to deter wrongdoing.

Sometimes, however, if ordinary Catholics see a prominent individual ignore the Church's teaching and go unpunished by the Church. they are confused and scandalized. At the same time, the Church does not want to make "martyrs" out of individuals by punishing them. It is up to the local bishop to use his best judgment concerning particular cases in his area.

Where Catholics are perceived not only as treating Church teaching on abortion with contempt, but helping to multiply abortions by advocating legislation supporting abortion, or by making public funds available for abortion, bishops may decide that, for the common good, such Catholics must be warned that they are at risk of excommunication. If such actions persist, bishops may consider excommunication the only option. Undoubtedly bishops would engage in considerable prayer and discussion before moving in such a direction.

Some bishops, wanting to avoid imposing severe penalties like excommunication, are beginning to impose lesser penalties, which do not separate public wrongdoers from the communion of the faithful as does excommunication, but serve as warnings and help to reduce scandal. For example, some bishops have directed that no one who supports abortion, or holds that abortion is a right, or a matter of choice, may speak at Catholic functions (except, perhaps, at an academic symposium where both sides of the issue might be fairly presented), receive honorary degrees, be appointed special ministers of the Eucharist, serve as rectors in church, or be otherwise honored by the Church.

One significant reason a number of bishops are taking such steps is that they want to make clear that an individual's position on abortion does make a difference to the Church. The Church can hardly be expected to treat those who publicly violate its teachings in serious matters the same as those who observe such teachings.

Question: Over time, I notice some in Congress, like Sen. Edward Kennedy and Sen. Barbara Mikulski, have supported abortion and its financing. Have they excommunicated themselves from their Catholic faith? If not, why not? Can a Catholic constituent do anything to join the issue canonically?

Answer: Certainly, Senators Kennedy and Mikulski, with others in Congress, have long since hidden behind the deceit of the anti-life fig leaf: “I am personally opposed, but . . .” By now, all pro-lifers and political observers know that this is not “personal” opposition at all because their actual voting record never opposes but always proposes and expands the financing of abortion and its extension even to the point of “partial birth abortion.”

To me, this is a scandal to the faith and is radically inconsistent with being a “practicing Catholic.” It is not, however, an automatic excommunication.

Scandal, of course, is sinful and in some cases gravely sinful. However, the canonical penalty of excommunication is carefully delineated in Church law and purposely limited in application. In fact, it is a general principle of canon law that penalties of law and the restriction of rights are to be interpreted strictly (cn. 18); that is, narrowly. It is a traditional rule: favorable understandings are amplified (favorabilia amplianda), harmful ones narrowed (odiosa restringenda).

Now, it is true that one of the few automatic excommunications in the new (1983) Code is the abortion canon: “one who actually procures an abortion, where the effect follows, incurs a latae sententiae excommunication” (cn. 1398). Latae sententiae means automatic—you do it, you got it.

By extension, the same penalty of excommunication applies to necessary cooperators in actual abortions—that is, “those without whose help (sine eorum opera) the crime (abortion) would not have been committed (cn. 1329, #2). Many “cooperators” help, assist, promote, encourage, even praise abortion, but the only cooperators penalized by this canon are those “without whose assistance” the abortion would not be done.

The Congress did not legalize abortion, the Supreme Court did that (1/22/73) by evacuating all the States’ criminal laws against abortion. In fact, the Congress rarely votes up-or-down on abortion per se, although there have been recent up-or-down votes to criminalize “partial birth abortion.” More likely, the Congress votes to fund (subsidize) abortions or their expansion (e.g., military base hospitals; District of Columbia; government insurance policies) and large sums to national and international Planned Parenthood.

Now, some argue and have argued that a number of abortions would not have occurred without federal, state or welfare financing. This may well be so. But since it “may be” so and is not patently clear, causal participation in an actual abortion, then it seems to me this is outside the scope of cn. 1329, #2 and does not engage the penalty of excommunication.

We need both caution and perspective here. To say that voting for abortion-funding does not involve automatic excommunication is not to say it’s O.K., nor is it to say Catholic representatives are “off the hook.”

Recall, this penalizing canon is narrowly drawn on purpose and strictly applies only to cases where it clearly applies. Some have the impression that there are automatic excommunications all over the place. That is not true. Curiously, our Latin Western Code of Canon Law has no canonical penalty for first degree murder; whereas the Eastern Code of Canon Law (1990) does (cn. 1450, #1). In a sane society, we should be able to assume that the criminal code would prohibit and punish crimes against human life.

Nevertheless, whatever civil or canon law omits or narrows, we must never forget that abortion is the direct killing of a moral innocent (i.e., morally, it’s murder). By every moral standard, every direct and deliberate act of that kind (murder) is an objective offense against the Natural Law and Divine Positive Law, from which no one on this planet is exempt. By definition, this is grave scandal and incompatible with being a practicing Catholic.

Those who promote, sustain and expand abortion cannot disentangle themselves completely from this grave sin and objective injustice.

The gravity of this crime against life and supporting cooperation in it is significantly highlighted by the explicit teaching of two recent universal documents. The Catechism of the Catholic Church formally proscribes direct abortion (CCC ##2270-1) and “formal cooperation” in same (#2272). It is most unusual for a Catechism—any Catechism—to go into the specifics of canonical penalties, but the Catechism (1992) does.

Also, the masterful encyclical of Pope John Paul II, Evangelium Vitae (3/25/95) on the “Gospel of Life” specifically details the canonical discipline on abortion and cooperation in it (EV, n. 62). Again, it is most unusual for a papal encyclical to delve in canonical details, but Evangelium Vitae does.

Thus, it is not wise to judge maximum moral teaching or its seriousness by the presence or absence of one canonical penalty. The Canon Law of the Church has its own rationale and worthy purposes; it is not a shadow government to monitor or censor everything that is morally wrong in every society.

On the other hand, any elected representative who can talk away or talk around the direct killing of the innocent is a walking, talking inconsistency. It is my personal conviction that this verbal dodge and inconsistency cannot be confined to one subject area. It will show up elsewhere and undermine other important values; after all, if you can’t trust them with life, just what can you trust them with consistently?
13 posted on 06/22/2003 11:20:06 AM PDT by Coleus (God is Pro Life and Straight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
Legalistically minimizing the aiding and abeting of the murder of millions of innocents will not put you in good stead with the author of life, my friend.

The support of mortal of sin by consent is a mortal sin. Mortal sin makes it so you cannot receive communion, because you are no longer in a state of grace and therefore not in communion with the body of Christ.

All the machinations, excuses, strained pharisaical legalizing and whitewash in the world don't make it less of a tomb.
14 posted on 06/22/2003 7:27:41 PM PDT by Thorondir
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Thorondir
Sorry my friend, I follow the canon law, the Catechism of the Catholic Church and the Magesterium of the Pope, making your own rules will only hurt YOUR salvation, and spreading false truths about the Catholic Church only hurts the church and does not help it. One is NOT excommunicated for voting pro-abortion, it's so clear and you can't see it. You are definitely a lost cause and maybe you think you are the Pope and can make your own laws and excommunicate anyone you want. Sorry you are not.

I suggest you study the current and approved catechism of the Catholic Church. I guess you feel the Pope and Cardinal O'Connor are wrong and you are right, no way, sorry about that. I hope you come back to the mother church soon, before it's too late. You are not a Catholic and your irrational suppositions are only hurting your cause and the Church. Please stop. Somebody may actually believe you.
15 posted on 06/22/2003 7:40:25 PM PDT by Coleus (God is Pro Life and Straight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
Support of mortal sin is mortal sin. I don't care how much you like voting for abortion, or supporting it in any way, it's still a mortal sin.

The arrogance, the arrogance, the wild-eyed false witness and satanic arrogance!
16 posted on 06/22/2003 8:04:01 PM PDT by Thorondir
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Thorondir
You're crazy.

Of course a politician voting for abortion commits a mortal sin and is not in a state of grace to receive communion. That's what I've said all along and that person can go to confession and receive absolution.

But to say he is excommunicated is absolutely absurd.

Please seek help and get out of the sun.
17 posted on 06/22/2003 8:13:02 PM PDT by Coleus (God is Pro Life and Straight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Thorondir
You have yet to show me or anyone else here any "official" Roman Catholic Document where it states that if a politician who votes for abortion is Excommunicated from the RCC, why is that?

Because you make your own rules in your own mind. Lying is a mortal sin, I suggest you go to confession. Help is on the way and learn the definition of "procure".
18 posted on 06/22/2003 8:21:39 PM PDT by Coleus (God is Pro Life and Straight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
Twisting my words and continuing to bear false witness against me while self-righteously judging the state of my soul are not good ways to make yourself look good, sir. It doesn't work, and, furthermore, NOBODY CARES!

Is that what KofC is all about?
I hope not.
19 posted on 06/23/2003 12:04:39 AM PDT by Thorondir
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson