# Catholic politicians get strict orders from pope **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 14, 2007, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-politicians-get-strict-orders-from-pope/395822 "2007-03-14T00:13:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2007, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-politicians-get-strict-orders-from-pope/395822/61 "2007-03-16T17:27:27Z")
And again, there are things apart from banning abortion that a politician like Kerry could do to reduce their number, and a good many of those things could be undertaken without imposing on anyone’s rights. To the best of my knowledge, Kerry hasn’t done anything substantial in this regard. ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2007, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-politicians-get-strict-orders-from-pope/395822/62 "2007-03-16T19:04:16Z")
[QUOTE=Captain Amazing] Well, but the position of the Catholic church is that abortion is the evil murder of innocent unborn babies (“EMIUB”). If you really believe that EMIUB is going on, isn’t stopping it one of those moral obligations you have? [/QUOTE] Yes, that’s exactly right. Kerry, ISTM, could have said he doesn’t buy the church’s position, as it is taught, but he can’t say the contrary and still support abortion rights. It’s incoherent. ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2007, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-politicians-get-strict-orders-from-pope/395822/63 "2007-03-16T19:08:17Z")
[QUOTE=Anduril] Correct. But as far as I know, there have been no dogmatic pronouncements on abortion and homosexual marriage, so Catholics can approve of both if their own search for truth led them to that conclusion. [/QUOTE] I am no expert, but that is contrary to what I have learned. I’ll defer to someone more expert than me, but in the interim I firmly believe that the RCC does NOT allow for someone to morally come to the conclusion that abortion is OK. Only my own experience, but I base that on my 20 years of education in Catholic education and 46 years as a Catholic. While there are certain scriptural passages (as an example) that the church allows for personal interpretation, their position on abortions seems brightly unambiguous. I’m not aware of anything that would suggest otherwise. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2007, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-politicians-get-strict-orders-from-pope/395822/64 "2007-03-16T19:44:33Z")
[QUOTE=Captain Amazing] Well, but the position of the Catholic church is that abortion is the evil murder of innocent unborn babies (“EMIUB”). If you really believe that EMIUB is going on, isn’t stopping it one of those moral obligations you have? [/QUOTE] They also used to believe that anyone unbabptized was going to spend an eternity in hell, so it was a moral obligation to forcibly convert anyone they could. So this kind of thing is inherent in absolute moral judgments not arrived at through strongly supported ethical arguments. It’s the fundamental disconnect between religion and secular society. Absolutist monotheistic religions (those who say we have the one true answer) decide how much of their doctrine they want to push on society from almost none by Quakers to almost all from advocates of Islamic law. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2007, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-politicians-get-strict-orders-from-pope/395822/65 "2007-03-16T19:51:17Z")
[QUOTE=Stratocaster] Yes, that’s exactly right. Kerry, ISTM, could have said he doesn’t buy the church’s position, as it is taught, but he can’t say the contrary and still support abortion rights. It’s incoherent. [/QUOTE] Not at all. I’m not sure he ever said he totally accepted the church’s position, but he did say that he felt his responsibility as an elected representative of those not accepting the church’s position came first. He never got this far into it, but you can imagine him saying that he accepts the church’s position by faith, but that is not enough support for a law. He might say he feels it’s right, but he doesn’t know that it’s right. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2007, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-politicians-get-strict-orders-from-pope/395822/66 "2007-03-16T20:02:51Z")
IANA Catholic. I must say, though, that it’s very troubling to me that the Pope would be issing edicts like this. In the long run, I suspect it will make non-Catholics more suspicious of the church’s role in American politics and give credence to (largely unfounded) accusations of improper influence. John F. Kennedy was the first and thus far only Catholic President. His 1960 speech to the Greater Houston Ministerial Assn., given while he was a candidate coping with openly anti-Catholic bias, should be required reading for the current Pope, all bishops and priests, and all Catholic politicos. JFK’s words still ring true, IMHO. See the fourth and fifth paragraphs, in particular: [American Rhetoric: John F. Kennedy -- Address to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association](http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/jfkhoustonministers.html) ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2007, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-politicians-get-strict-orders-from-pope/395822/67 "2007-03-16T20:12:57Z")
Just to add to the debate, I give you [Archbishop Donald Wuerl](http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07022/755820-84.stm), who as the archbishop of Washington was asked point blank whether he would deny communion to pro-choice Catholic lawmakers: > [@](#): > > A week ago in San Diego he took questions from a conservative Catholic journalist about Ms. Pelosi. > > “Do you intend to discipline her at all for being persistent and obstinate about her support for abortion and same-sex marriage?” asked Allyson Smith of the Web site California Catholic Daily. > > “I will not be using the faculty in the manner you have described,” he replied, referring to his authority. > > “Will you make a statement to your priests and deacons to warn them not to allow her to receive if she presents herself for Communion?” Ms. Smith continued. > > The archbishop responded: “You’re talking about a whole different style of pastoral ministry. No.” > > …When he took questions, a woman asked how be would respond to Catholic politicians who support legal abortion. > > His response was “teach.” > > “That is what Jesus did,” he said. “Did everyone accept that teaching? No. … But he didn’t stop teaching. We are in this for the long haul.” I can’t say I disagree with his approach. Chase someone like Kerry or Pelosi away from the church and you lose forever the chance to teach them. I think you can challenge them a bit, though. If they claim they are personally pro-life, then test them on it. Ask them to assist a pro life endeavor in a way that doesn’t infringe on choice, and make their prestige work for a cause they claim to believe in. ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2007, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-politicians-get-strict-orders-from-pope/395822/68 "2007-03-16T20:26:47Z")
[QUOTE=Voyager] Not at all. I’m not sure he ever said he totally accepted the church’s position, but he did say that he felt his responsibility as an elected representative of those not accepting the church’s position came first. He never got this far into it, but you can imagine him saying that he accepts the church’s position by faith, but that is not enough support for a law. He might say he feels it’s right, but he doesn’t know that it’s right. [/QUOTE] From [this cite](http://www.beliefnet.com/story/149/story_14928_1.html): > [@](#): > > First of all, I cannot tell you how deeply I respect the belief about life and when it begins. I’m a Catholic - raised a Catholic. I was an altar boy. Religion has been a huge part of my life, helped lead me through a war, leads me today. > > But I can’t take what is an article of faith for me and legislate it for someone who doesn’t share that article of faith, whether they be agnostic, atheist, Jew, Protestant, whatever. I can’t do that. But I can counsel people, I can talk reasonably about life and about responsibility. This is the hypocrisy. He can’t have it both ways. These two paragraphs cannot go together. The church does NOT teach that the belief in the sanctity of human life is a personal decision. It just does not. Let’s leave the unborn to the side for the moment. My church teaches that murder is wrong, and I accept that. I believe that murder violates the most fundamental of human rights. Unless I believe that this right does not deserve protection, I can’t simultaneous believe murder is wrong and that it’s a personal decision. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2007, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-politicians-get-strict-orders-from-pope/395822/69 "2007-03-16T20:33:00Z")
Does Kerry counsel anyone? I mean, outside of a political campaign? Kudos if he does, but he doesn’t seem the type to me. ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2007, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-politicians-get-strict-orders-from-pope/395822/70 "2007-03-16T20:35:59Z")
[QUOTE=Mr. Moto] Does Kerry counsel anyone? I mean, outside of a political campaign? [/QUOTE] The pious glow he exudes will apparently offset any political support he has provided for abortion rights, thereby eliminating the need for the practice. ---
**Author:** ![gigi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a587f6/32.png) [@gigi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gigi)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2007, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-politicians-get-strict-orders-from-pope/395822/71 "2007-03-16T21:30:05Z")
[QUOTE=Stratocaster] Bullshit. You can NOT fully believe the RCC’s teachings on abortion, IMO, and hold that this is a matter of personal faith, one where any position is acceptable as a matter of conscience. Politicians who say so, again IMO, are gutless panderers, attempting to have the best of both worlds, demonstrating their piety by virtue of their adherence to the faith as good Catholic / Christians, while also showing their colors to the party faithful with regard to this plank in the platform. [/QUOTE] I agree with you and not just in regard to the abortion issue. I don’t see how an individual who is faithful to all the tenets of their religion could serve a secular role like that and remain faithful. There will always be compromise that leads to spreading something contrary to the guidelines of the faith. Of course I would go farther than Kerry–my faith wouldn’t allow me to go to war, never mind if it would “guide me through it”. ---
**Author:** ![Qadgop\_the\_Mercotan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/qadgop_the_mercotan/32/83_2.png) [@Qadgop\_the\_Mercotan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qadgop_the_Mercotan)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2007, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-politicians-get-strict-orders-from-pope/395822/72 "2007-03-16T22:06:10Z")
[QUOTE=Kimstu] I’m not so comfortable with religious leaders deliberately targeting politicians in the exercise of their secular functions and threatening them with religious penalties if they don’t strive **to impose their religious principles by force of law upon all citizens of whatever religious persuasion**. [/QUOTE] **Kimstu** manages to articulate the reason for my unease after reading the Pope’s statement far better than I’ve managed to. Thanks! I’m pro birth control, and don’t want a multi-national religious hierarchy using its clout to try to restrict the birth control choices available to my fellow US citizens and myself. I’m anti death penalty, but want the US citizenry to figure out how we will deal with this issue as a society. ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2007, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-politicians-get-strict-orders-from-pope/395822/73 "2007-03-16T22:16:25Z")
[QUOTE=gigi] I agree with you and not just in regard to the abortion issue. I don’t see how an individual who is faithful to all the tenets of their religion could serve a secular role like that and remain faithful. [/QUOTE] I could, I think. My religion prescribes all sorts of things, many of which I think have no place in the public arena, nor do I think my religion should demand so. I don’t think it should be law that all Catholics must go to mass on Sunday, must never divorce and remarry, must all abstain from eating meat on Fridays in Lent, etc., despite the fact that I am faithful to each of these laws. Anyone who thinks Catholics must actively attempt to install such matters as the law of the land are misguided, in my book. Render unto Caesar, and all that. I believe that civil and criminal matters ought to deal with the protection of one’s rights against the intrusion of another. Where such protection is not in play, it’s no concern of the law, regardless of what my individual morals dictate for me. Where such protection is required may overlap with my religious beliefs, but that’s just coincidence. My religious beliefs, by themselves, should carry no weight. ---
**Author:** ![Anduril](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c0e974/32.png) [@Anduril](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Anduril)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2007, 1:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-politicians-get-strict-orders-from-pope/395822/74 "2007-03-17T01:34:44Z")
[QUOTE=Stratocaster] I am no expert, but that is contrary to what I have learned. I’ll defer to someone more expert than me, but in the interim I firmly believe that the RCC does NOT allow for someone to morally come to the conclusion that abortion is OK. Only my own experience, but I base that on my 20 years of education in Catholic education and 46 years as a Catholic. While there are certain scriptural passages (as an example) that the church allows for personal interpretation, their position on abortions seems brightly unambiguous. I’m not aware of anything that would suggest otherwise. [/QUOTE] I’m willing to be corrected on there being no pronouncements _in ex cathedra_ by the Church about abortion. But if my memory is correct, then my assertion stands because it merely flows from this fact and the fact that Catholics can reject any teaching that runs counter to their own conscience - provided that it is not an article of Catholic faith - something that you can not ignore if you wish to remain Catholic. ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2007, 1:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-politicians-get-strict-orders-from-pope/395822/75 "2007-03-17T01:58:08Z")
[QUOTE=Anduril] I’m willing to be corrected on there being no pronouncements _in ex cathedra_ by the Church about abortion. But if my memory is correct, then my assertion stands because it merely flows from this fact and the fact that Catholics can reject any teaching that runs counter to their own conscience - provided that it is not an article of Catholic faith - something that you can not ignore if you wish to remain Catholic. [/QUOTE] [Excerpts from the Catechism of the Catholic Church on Life, Abortion, and Euthanasia](http://www.priestsforlife.org/magisterium/catechismonabortion.htm#abortion): > [@](#): > > Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person – among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life.(71) > > Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you. (72) > > My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately wrought in the depths of the earth .(73) > > 2271 Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law: > > You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish .(74) > > God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes.(75) > > 2272 Formal co-operation in an abortion constitutes a grave offence. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. ‘A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae’ (76) ‘by the very commission of the offence’, (77) and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law . (78) The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society. Really, I don’t think there’s the wiggle room on this issue that you think there is. The RCC says that abortions performed principally to terminate the life of the unborn (as opposed to abortions that are a secondary effect of something like removing a tumor) are wrong, always. And bears shit in the woods and the pope’s Catholic. Really. ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2007, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-politicians-get-strict-orders-from-pope/395822/76 "2007-03-17T02:09:39Z")
And to bring this back to the original point, guys like Kerry say they _have_ filtered the teachings through their consciences and agreed with them. And simultaneously decided that abortion rights should be supported. Read the cite I just provided and try to reconcile the positions. It can’t be done. ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2007, 2:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-politicians-get-strict-orders-from-pope/395822/77 "2007-03-17T02:58:44Z")
[QUOTE=Stratocaster] And to bring this back to the original point, guys like Kerry say they _have_ filtered the teachings through their consciences and agreed with them. And simultaneously decided that abortion rights should be supported. Read the cite I just provided and try to reconcile the positions. It can’t be done. [/QUOTE] well, what you cited prohibits Catholics from having or aiding in abortions. I didn’t see anything there that required a Catholic to force those not subscribing to the catechism to follow it. Abortion is legal in the US with certain restrictions and it isn’t up to any Catholic politician who is acting in his official capacity to force non Catholics to accept the position stated in the first paragraph in your cite. ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2007, 3:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-politicians-get-strict-orders-from-pope/395822/78 "2007-03-17T03:21:52Z")
[QUOTE=David Simmons] well, what you cited prohibits Catholics from having or aiding in abortions. I didn’t see anything there that required a Catholic to force those not subscribing to the catechism to follow it. [/QUOTE] This is tedious. The cite I provided refers to “the inviolable right of every innocent being to life.” Here, let me provide a definition of [“inviolable”](http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/inviolable): > [@](#): > > in·vi·o·la·ble > –adjective > > 1. prohibiting violation; secure from destruction, violence, infringement, or desecration: an inviolable sanctuary; an inviolable promise. > 2. incapable of being violated; incorruptible; unassailable: inviolable secrecy. You cannot hold this to be true and believe that this is a matter of personal conscience. You cannot hold this and simultaneously believe that abortions can be permitted, unless you simultaneously hold that innocent human life needn’t be protected. John Kerry was a weasel on this particular issue. Sorry. ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2007, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-politicians-get-strict-orders-from-pope/395822/79 "2007-03-17T03:31:44Z")
[QUOTE=Stratocaster] This is tedious. The cite I provided refers to “the inviolable right of every innocent being to life.” Here, let me provide a definition of [“inviolable”](http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/inviolable): You cannot hold this to be true and believe that this is a matter of personal conscience. You cannot hold this and simultaneously believe that abortions can be permitted, unless you simultaneously hold that innocent human life needn’t be protected. John Kerry was a weasel on this particular issue. Sorry. [/QUOTE] It’s even more tedious for me. I care not what the Catholic catechism says. According to the laws of the US abortion is not a violation and your citing an “inviolable right” is meaningless. Politicians take an oath to uphold the US laws, and collateraly to accept the definitions therein, not the catechism of the Catholic Church and its definitions. All your cite does, one more time, as regards Kerry is bar him from participating in an abortion. You simply must abandon the idea that just because the Catholic catechism defines something a certain way and lays down certain strictures for Catholics that that’s that for all. ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2007, 11:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-politicians-get-strict-orders-from-pope/395822/80 "2007-03-17T11:19:09Z")
[QUOTE=David Simmons] It’s even more tedious for me. I care not what the Catholic catechism says. According to the laws of the US abortion is not a violation and your citing an “inviolable right” is meaningless. Politicians take an oath to uphold the US laws, and collateraly to accept the definitions therein, not the catechism of the Catholic Church and its definitions. [/quote] Are you kidding? This is a straw man. The question was not whether RCC catechism should carry the weight of U.S. laws. It was whether or not the church’s position on abortion allows for individuals to make personal decisions regarding this act, whether or not Kerry’s blather could in any way be reconciled with the RCC’s abortion teachings. It cannot, not when the church views this as a violation of an inviolable right. Kerry cannot simultaneously accept that teaching and support abortion rights. You getting this? Please don’t counter now with some straw man nonsense about how Kerry doesn’t have to follow church law, therefore my point is meaningless. > [@](#): > > All your cite does, one more time, as regards Kerry is bar him from participating in an abortion. > > You simply must abandon the idea that just because the Catholic catechism defines something a certain way and lays down certain strictures for Catholics that that’s that for all. That’s that for Catholics, though, which is the point. This isn’t that tough. If you’re a Catholic pol who says he accepts the church’s teachings on abortion, then you believe that abortion violates the most fundamental and inviolable human right. Given that belief, you either would assert that it’s a right, but it’s a right that does not deserve protection, one that society needn’t concern itself with, or you would assert otherwise and oppose abortion rights. But given that belief–which essentially assigns the same inviolable right to live that a toddler, a teenager, a senior citizen possesses–how could one coherently assert that abortion is acceptable? “I believe that the unborn have the inviolable right to live” and “I believe abortions should be permitted” are two statements that do not go together. And I would argue that legislators who actively install law that facilitate abortions are absolutely active participants in the process, enabling the practice. Even if I grant your point for a moment (though I think it misses the point, obviously), how could one reasonably argue that a pro-choice voting legislator plays a substantially different role–in the sense we’re discussing–than an abortion doctor, than the guy who drives the woman to get the abortion, than the person who pays for it? All are active participants in this act. “Formal co-operation in an abortion constitutes a grave offence.” Kerry and his senatorial brethren are far from innocent bystanders. Again, you and I may or may not consider that his right. But the point is, he (and people like Kennedy, Pelosi and Giuliani) should have the balls to simply say, “Sorry, I’m not convinced the church has it right on this one.” Would take some of the steam out of any concerns people have regarding the Holy Father setting U.S. policy through his faithful toadies, wouldn’t it? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-politicians-get-strict-orders-from-pope/395822.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholic-politicians-get-strict-orders-from-pope/395822.md?page=5)