Vatican official calls Democrats “the party of death”
Will this help McCain?
HOTAIR-The elevation of Joseph Ratzinger to Pope Benedict XVI has brought a new assertiveness to the Roman Catholic Church, especially at the intersection of politics and life issues. The new prefect of the Vatican Supreme Court, the former Archbishop Raymond Burke of St. Louis, warned in an interview with an Italian newspaper that the Democratic Party is well on its way to becoming the “party of death” in the United States. Burke called for greater discipline within the American church for holding Catholic politicians accountable for their actions:
Vatican officials seldom single out political leaders who differ with the Church on issues like abortion rights or embryonic stem cell research. But now that the Vatican’s highest court is led by an American, the former St. Louis Archbishop Raymond Burke, we can expect things to get more explicit in Vatican City — at least when when it comes to U.S. politics.
Burke, who was named prefect of the Vatican’s Supreme Court of the Apostolic Signature in June, told the Italian Catholic newspaper Avvenire that the U.S. Democratic Party risked “transforming itself definitively into a party of death for its decisions on bioethical issues.” He then attacked two of the party’s most high profile Catholics — vice presidential candidate Joe Biden and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi — for misrepresenting Church teaching on abortion.
He said Biden and Pelosi, “while presenting themselves as good Catholics, have presented Church doctrine on abortion in a false and tendentious way.”
This is coming from a men’s club that protected pedophiles.
The Church, and Pope Ratzinger in particular, have no moral authority and should be begging for the forgivness of pro-choicers, not attacking them.
Hey Lefty, when, in your opinion, does life begin?
I only ask because you seem to have no problem with the wholesale slaughter of babies but your comment suggests that you do feel a sense of protection for older children. I’m just wondering what you think the difference is (between babies and older children) and when that difference-making-change takes place in the develpoment of human beings.
I like the way Napoleon put it…
“Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich”
“Party of death” ?
Didn’t his popeliness read the bit about killing civilians?
Aubrey: When does life begin? When the Republicans lose the White House.
““Party of death” ?
Didn’t his popeliness read the bit about killing civilians?”
That was mine, too.
Aubrey
Do you support free health care for all via your position on life?
No John, I don’t. I’m also a fan of the death penalty (though I wish it weren’t necessary, but am not naieve enough to believe that it never will be).
The American Dream, John, isn’t other tax-payers providing you a four bedroom house, full health insurance, a new car, and a border collie. The American Dream is exactly the right to live by the fruit of your labors. Your next door neighbor shouldn’t have to pay a portion of your medical bill for any reason. And charity is another toic altogether. The American Dream, though, begins with the right to live.
Aubrey
I thought the issue was the sanctity of life? Are you saying you are only pro birth not pro life? My only point is the life issue is grey not black and white.
Oh, the life issue is very black and white. Are you saying that because Jimbo and Sissy spend all their money on meth and booze that you and I should foot their medical bills? Or how about the idiots who ring up $50k on credit cards and get into houses they can’t afford, should we pay for their meical bills? You own your own business, you already pay a fortune in taxes and you are responsible in paying for your OWN family’s health care . . . why should the Konop family have to support Jimbo and Sissy, too?
Your black and white world doesn’t work very well in a world of gray Aubrey.
Oh, you’ll pay for Jimbo and Sissy one way or the other.
You can either pay for them to sit in a cell at a cost of $40,000 per year, or you can try to keep them productive and out of jail (public assistance, Medicaid). My guess is that public assistance and Medicaid is much cheaper per person than incarceration.
Don’t fool yourself into believing that you only pay for “welfare”.
Aubrey
You talk in circles you would force them to have a child that they coud not provide healthcare for?
I Am not advocating free healthcare I do think people should pay for it but as I said life is gray.
Really John? Did Jimbo and Sissy not have the right to chose to have sex, which everyone ought to know can result in a baby? It’s called reaping what you sow, or paying the Piper, or just plain being respopnsible. Call it whatever you like.
As for your idea, CM, why are Jimbo and Sissy in jail? If they were convicted for a crime that keeps them jailed for a year, they probably did something very bad.
See, I really think the problem that people like you have is that you are too afraid to see the world in black and white. You are afraid to see good and evil. Don’t worry, I understand. I understand that it takes courage to denounce the wrongful actions of a person. It’s scary to think that someone may scrutinize your own actions and find fault with you. It’s easier to just sit back and hope that everyone else will behave themselves than it is to draw a line in the sand. The world is black and white, unless, of course, you’re yellow.
Look Aubrey,
I think divorce is wrong. Black and white. It breaks up families, and is generally caused by immature adults not affectively communicating with eachother. There really is no excuse for divorce.
You’ve been divorced haven’t you?
Would you like me to create laws that affect you because you “chose” to get divorced?
You broke the sacred institution of marriage, and perhaps you should be punished? Maybe a good punishment will keep you from breaking God’s law in the future? Maybe a year in prison would help you to understand how your actions have hurt society?
Yeah, that’s right, I have the courage to persecute you and your sinful ways. Ahh, I feel better already. I could really get into this righteous indignation stuff.
To be right wing, one must be opposed to teaching sex education in our schools, but place responsibility for knowing the content of classes one cannot take on the student.
To be right wing, one must oppose making contraceptives available to students, but favor denying pregnant women the right to choose.
To be right wing, one must opposed helping those in need of a little hand up, but come down like a ton of bricks on anyone who steps out of line.
Sheesh.
CM
Yeah, I’ve been divorced and it is absolutely awful for my daughter. I stuck it out until the day I came home after 15 months in Iraq and my wife’s was four months pregnant. Again, I hadn’t been home in 15 months. By the way, that baby didn’t make it. She actually said that “abortion is my prefered choice of birth-control.” So, yeah. I got divorced. But I’m proud of you for making a judgment. The first step is always the hardest.
Since you equate the notion of life/death with divorce law I can see why black and white is so difficult.
David, come on, man. Of all people, you should know that “to be on the right wing” means to be part of those who give more to charities. I’ve never understood why the left believes that the government should be responsible for charitable works. And as for students, don’t you think that parents should do the parenting? I know you and CM love central planning, but at what point are you two willing to concede that parents’ should be parents before the middle school gym teacher?
Sheesh.
Aubrey, I don’t consider a blastocyst to be a viable life form. The majority of abortions occur while the blastocyst is nothing more than a cluster of developing cells.
A fetus becomes a baby when it is arrives after a gesticulation process that occurs in the womb. At that point it has rights that are guaranteed by the constitution. I don’t believe in the whole bit about a soul being conceived, etc., etc. That kind of story is up there with Santa Claus, and all of that, in my book.
Your religious ideology makes you feel a particular way about this issue. I don’t have any religious ideology, so I’m comfortable letting grown-ups make their own decisions, even if the decision causes the death of their unborn child.
It really is as basic as that. You aren’t going to convince me that legislating a woman’s womb is right, regardless of what a woman chooses to do with her own womb.
As for your divorce, yeah, your ex sounds like a real winner. Nice that you live in a country where you can choose to get a divorce.
When have I ever involved any of my personal religious beliefs in an argument? I could be a Muslim or Jew or a Catholic for all you know. In one of the worst movies ever, Under Seige 2, the antagonist has one line that actually made sense – “assumption is the mother of all f%ckups.” To assume that my convictions have been forged by time spent in a religious intstitution is wrong. Not necessarily the “mother of al f%ckups” but still based in a biased ignorance.
At least you are trying to deal in black and white, even if your white spills over into your white and vice versa.