Certainly in an any western democracy, the Pope has explicitly condemned the use of the death penalty (as have the U.S. Bishops for America). Those politicians who advocate its use are acting contrary to church teaching as much as Kerry’s position on abortion is contrary.
Bricker, as usual on these kinds of things, is spot on IMHO.
In case you didn’t make it to the end of the original argument, the chances of this action amounting to anything are remote.
I suspect that O’Malley has quite a full plate these days.
I also predict that if this is taken seriously by anybody…that you can expect similar charges from moderate/liberal Catholics against pro death penalty/pro Iraq war politicians…which again is another reason why this probably won’t go anywhere.
I’m going to raise a related issue, only slightly OT. Bishop Sheridan of Colorado Springs, a Catholic prelate, has publicly stated that any Catholic in his diocese who knowingly votes for a pro-choice candidate is ipso facto excommunicating himself.
(On another board, members pointed out that while Kerry is pro-choice, Bush approves of abortions in certain limited circumstances in disagreement with the Catholic no-abortion-whatosever stance, so any vote for a major-party candidate for President by a Diocese of Colorado Springs Catholic is self-excommunicating!)
To me, that promulgation seems to cross the line between censure of a view not permitted by a Catholic, on the one hand, and impermissible meddling in the political process, on the other. Any comments?
Beatcha by four minutes!
Yep–if I may indulge in a little shameless flattery, folks like Bricker are why I subscribed to the boards.
Daniel
Daniel, I know that this has been covered on the board, about a month ago when this topic first came up. There were two threads on the subject - one in GD, one in the Pit. I want to say you were participating in the Pit thread (re: Bush’s attempt to bullypulpit from churches), but I’ll try to dig them up for you when I get a moment.
Long story short, 501©(3) organizations are perfectly (and legally) capable of a limited amounts of lobbying and political activity. Short of an actual endorsement, the IRS isn’t going to do squat (as they shouldn’t).
Are the guidelines for what counts as an endorsement crystal clear? It seems to me that if the Church publicly condemns a candidate during an election cycle, either that’s unlawful meddling in the election or it should be unlawful meddling. I know nonprofits can do limited meddling (thanks to your education of me on this point), but it boggles my mind that they’d be allowed to do so much meddling.
Daniel
That’s correct. But I do believe the story is both accurate and important. It had already been reported by The Catholic World News. It seems to me that its omission by other sources is as political as its inclusion by the Washington Times. The story is important because Catholics comprise a sizable portion of the population. All that said, however, I also think it is notable that Jesus was charged with heresy.
Nope, they’re about as vague as you’d expect from the IRS. And deliberately so - the IRS can err on the side of caution in that case. To be honest, the Church (and to be specific, in this case it would be a church, as they are individually chartered) would need to do a good amount of justification. If any action were to take place, it would be the ultimate case of “can open, worms everywhere”. I’d predict no punitive damages towards the Church, but merely a slap on the wrist and the IRS telling everyone in the 501©(3) business “this is what we meant”.
That’s very kind of you, and I consider myself shamelessly flattered! 
I don’t know how common it is, but I would suggest that, generally, a pro-choice person probably wouldn’t recognize any distinction between “life” and “personhood”, that being the very reason why they are pro-life.
Actually, you can read Bricker’s fabulous prose without subscribing. The reason you subscribe is so that you can chastise me and bind me to an agreement to refrain from criticizing your political philosophy. 
quibble: FWIW, There is the notion of double-effect (scross to bottom) where some abortions that occur in efforts to save a mother’s life would be considered acceptable as regards to church teachings.
AFAICT, Dubya opposes abortions except in cases or rape and incest (and I assume to save a mothers life)…the traditional “hard cases”. I’ve seen mixed info on this, so I’m not clear if that is correct. If it IS correct (anyone have some good current cites?) , then yes Dubya’s stance is not fully in line with church teachings.
Well I’ve commented before in other threads that I think that Sheridan’s idea is dumb…it’s similar to what Bruskewitz was doing in Lincoln, Nebraska to members of Call To Action.
I’m really pissed at idiots like Archbishop John Myers of Newark who think it’s perfectly accpetable for politicians to support the death penalty or the war in Iraq, while condemning the pro choice positions of other politicans. And yes, I’m pro life.
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2004/may/04050401.html%20
He’s either a total idiot as regards to the Pope’s/Bishops teaching on the death penalty (there is NO room for disagreement on the death penalty in a western democracy…it is immoral according to statements from the Pope and U.S. Bishops) or a damn liar. (Same with the Iraq War)
As relevant as it is perceptive!
Daniel
quibble: The Iraq War doesn’t appear to meet the standards for a just war as far as the Pope and the bishops know. (That is, they are well-informed on the criteria for a just war; they may not be fully aware of all the facts surrounding the Iraq situation.)
At present, it’s looking very very unlikely that there will emerge additional facts that will justify the war from this perspective. But in an effort to bend over backwards in fairmess, it’s not impossible.
In contrast, the death penalty as administered in this country admits no reasonable dispute – it IS immoral.
***Government ** * and religion are not intertwined in the US. ***Politics ** * gets intertwined with whatever issue will give some scoundrel advantage. Therein lies the key difference.
The law suit (which, I will agree, is silly) has nothing to do with the Constitution, or with government, and will have (imho) very little impact on politics. Sure, the suit is cynical and calculated (again imho, don’t ask for cites) - that’s what makes it politics.
Were Kerry to throw away a lifetime of received faith in order to procure election, then he would indeed have thrown away the election. Nothing we hate more over here than someone who’ll chuck principle out the window for mere power and position (he’s already got the wealth). As I noted above, Kerry’s stand is the most principled position he can take, honoring both the strictures of his faith and the traditions of his country.
You’re right. I shouldn’t have brought it up. Oh wait, I didn’t. You did.
OK…I’ll modify my statement. 
Those politicians…and there are plenty… who are using publically available knowledge to justify the war in Iraq, are not meeting the criteria for a just war.
Yup.
Alright, Alright, the CC is not violating the Constitution. They are, however, attacking it. They hate our freedoms. US servicemembers swear to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic and the CC has made itself our enemy by demanding that they, not the voters, should be the ones to decide how our elected officials make decisions. Kerry is being singled out because of the large number of Ameican voters who support him. The CC is not simply choosing to disassociate itself from Kerry, it is trying to coerce him with this heresy and excommunication business. No other organization has–or grasps for–that kind of power. How would we like it if there was a priest in every voting booth? To Americans–patriotic Americans–the secret ballot is “sacred” in a sense, and so is the principle of government of the people by the people and for the people.
Again, you fail to understand what is being told to you. The Catholic Church is doing no such thing. Some guy is.
Keep digging. Maybe that hole actually **will ** get smaller.