bktheirregular: (Default)
[personal profile] bktheirregular
From the Denver Post:

"Bishop draws line for voters: Communion tied to politics"

"The bishop of Colorado's second-largest Roman Catholic diocese has issued a pastoral letter saying Catholics cannot receive Communion if they vote for politicians who support abortion rights, stem-cell research, euthanasia or gay marriage."

*blink*

*blink*

You know, I'm starting to get this odd impression that I'm living in some bankrupt Third World theocratic police state, and the country I was brought up to cherish is bound and gagged in the hall closet.

Because this ... this ... I want to use the phrase "spiritual blackmail", but that sounds too gentle.

"Spiritual extortion"? Is that strong enough?

Date: 2004-05-14 10:54 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] diannelamerc.livejournal.com
You know, I'm starting to get this odd impression that I'm living in some bankrupt Third World theocratic police state, and the country I was brought up to cherish is bound and gagged in the hall closet.

Not that I disagree in the slightest, but to be fair that part is coming from the politicians, not the clergy. Separation of church and state is incumbant on the government, not the churches. Religions may try to influence society all they want to. Lawmakers, however, are simply not allowed to cater to any single religious group no matter how large above another no matter how small.

This clergy, on the other hand, _are_ going in for the politically-based spiritual extortion. While I have to admit I have a grudging respect for anyone who truly believes something and then refuses to wiggle around, compromise, or negotiate, this does seem pretty dumb from a worldly, practical POV. American Catholics have shown themselves unlikely to accept this kind of ultimatum from their higher-ups.

Date: 2004-05-14 12:41 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] redbeardjim.livejournal.com
Religions may try to influence society all they want to.

Yes, but if they go in for endorsing specific political positions and/or candidates (as this bishop is pretty clearly doing), they are liable to lose their tax-exempt status.

Date: 2004-05-14 10:05 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] diannelamerc.livejournal.com
Good point. I forget that whole "tax-exempt" thing. (And why are they exempt again?)

Date: 2004-05-14 01:33 pm (UTC)
ext_5608: (Default)
From: [identity profile] wiliqueen.livejournal.com
American Catholics have shown themselves unlikely to accept this kind of ultimatum from their higher-ups.

You're so not kidding. There are lots of people already familiar with the fact that Sheridan is a great big gleeb. They've been ignoring him for years.

There are also a lot of people who will take this very literally and seriously. And while those same people are highly likely to share the political views it encodes, it's only going to give them more excuse not to actually think about those views. :-PPPP

Profile

bktheirregular: (Default)
bktheirregular

May 2021

S M T W T F S
      1
23456 78
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031     

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Dec. 25th, 2025 06:40 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios