Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Abortion Ruling Raises Backlash for Catholic Justices (BARF alert)
ABC.com ^ | 04/26/2007 | JAN CRAWFORD GREENBURG

Posted on 04/26/2007 1:13:19 PM PDT by Rutles4Ever

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-49 next last
To: Rutles4Ever
What it means when a man says, "It's the woman's right to choose".

The woman sees she's made a huge mistake and was too drunk.

The man says, "Well if you have to abort it, I guess you have to."

Thinks to himself, "Whew, that was close!"

That about right?

21 posted on 04/26/2007 1:47:10 PM PDT by FixitGuy (By their fruits shall ye know them!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rutles4Ever

“The Supreme Court’s landmark abortion ruling last week has triggered an anti-Catholic backlash, with critics pointing to the Catholic faith of the five justices in the majority and suggesting their religious views influenced their decision in the case. “

Morons. Evangelical and fundamentalist Protestants and Orthodox Jews oppose abortion also. So do Orthodox Christians.


22 posted on 04/26/2007 1:48:00 PM PDT by ZULU (Non nobis, non nobis Domine, sed nomini tuo da gloriam. God, guts and guns made America great.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rutles4Ever

My guess is the two “Jewish” justices who voted for it are secular cultural Jews rather than religious Jews.


23 posted on 04/26/2007 1:48:54 PM PDT by ZULU (Non nobis, non nobis Domine, sed nomini tuo da gloriam. God, guts and guns made America great.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rutles4Ever

Rosie’s comment was crude and stupid (not to mention very unoriginal). However, I do think it’s reasonable for people to be concerned about a Catholic majority on the court when 1) this doesn’t reflect the religious make-up of the country, and 2) The Catholic Church is fond of issuing pronouncements telling politicial figures that as Catholics they are obligated to vote in accordance with the Church’s teachings, especially on this topic. Same would hold for any other religion: a one-religions majority on the court is somewhat problematic if it’s not reflective of the country’s religious make-up, and even more problematic if the religion in question officially teaches that political figures are obligated to vote in accordance with its teachings.


24 posted on 04/26/2007 1:49:58 PM PDT by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CheyennePress

One prick would do it, I do believe!


25 posted on 04/26/2007 1:55:26 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet (Barack Hussein Obama: The Manchurian Candidate from the Maddrassa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Rutles4Ever
Anyone who would start off quoting the sleazy Rosie isn't worth the lint in her fat folds.
26 posted on 04/26/2007 1:55:57 PM PDT by wolfcreek (DON'T MESS WITH A NATION IN NEED OF MEDICATION !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rutles4Ever

...I doubt most people would even know they were Catholic without ABC out there waving the bloody shirt around.
Looks like ‘08 is going to be a long year to be a Catholic....or a Mormon.


27 posted on 04/26/2007 2:34:16 PM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rutles4Ever

Any individual that thinks anti-abortion activity is an exclusive concern to Catholics is an ass.

The small minded who crawl to the refuge of Catholic Hate as a diversion away from facing the harsh reality of the violence perpetrated on innocent new life are to the rest of us pathetic, self-indulging fools. It’s far too plain for pro-abortionists to accept the simple principle that those of us who abhor the systematic process of abortion are concerned about ‘the children’ and not what the fools perceive as blind adherence to the coincidence of religious values.


28 posted on 04/26/2007 2:47:39 PM PDT by Gene Eric
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentShrinker

So, in other words, we need some affirmative action on the SCOTUS? Why stop there? Let’s analyze the religious makeup of Congress. And the Presidential cabinet. And the Defense Department. You know, there are too many neo-con Jews in the Department of Defense. That’s why we’re in Iraq, right? At least, that’s what the media says.


29 posted on 04/26/2007 3:34:58 PM PDT by Rutles4Ever (Ubi Petrus, ibi ecclesia, et ubi ecclesia vita eterna)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Rutles4Ever

The Ginzburg broad hardly votes to support “precedent”. She’s the worst ideologue on the court and consistently votes to kill the innocent and enrich the guilty.


30 posted on 04/26/2007 3:40:52 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog

Exactly right. The public would have no clue with the exception of Justices Scalia and maybe Alito. And that’s simply because they’ve got blatantly Italian names. Kennedy? Maybe.

But then again, I’d be surprised if 30-40% of the public can name a single justice on the Surpreme Court. And that’s with all the press they’ve had recently.


31 posted on 04/26/2007 3:45:30 PM PDT by CheyennePress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentShrinker
The "majority" changed from being composed mostly of a cadre of secular Jews and secular Episcopaleans (who cannot, by rational people, be differentiated) to one of mostly Catholic most of the time (Stevens is a big question mark on that though).

As the non-Catholics die off, retire or get kicked off the Court, it is time to nominate no one but Holy Rollers ~ (to keep up with that "represenative of the population" part).

32 posted on 04/26/2007 3:45:47 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: cpforlife.org
That is why I read the opinions themselves at the SCOTUS web site. What is not commented on by the press is the fact that the concurring opinions by Thomas and Scalia stated that abortion NEVER was a Constitutional issue. Rather than a settled issue by the advocate professors, it is a made up right.
33 posted on 04/26/2007 4:16:39 PM PDT by IrishCatholic (No local communist or socialist party chapter? Join the Democrats, it's the same thing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: cpforlife.org

The Supreme Court has a serious Catholic problem.

There are only five!


34 posted on 04/26/2007 4:18:12 PM PDT by Petronski (FRED!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Petronski; Rutles4Ever

Psssst! Plan B is now in effect! Kennedy has been activated!

35 posted on 04/26/2007 4:24:36 PM PDT by Frank Sheed (Dead Ráibéad.... Lifelong Irish Papist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Frank Sheed

Shhhhh!


36 posted on 04/26/2007 5:27:18 PM PDT by Petronski (FRED!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: IrishCatholic

righty-o!


37 posted on 04/26/2007 9:19:04 PM PDT by cpforlife.org (A Catholic Respect Life Curriculum is available at KnightsForLife.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Petronski
"The Supreme Court has a serious Catholic problem.

There are only five!"

I wish brother. There are only four. Anthony Kennedy is a heretic. He continues to support Roe v Wade. Also IIRC Kennedy supports sodomite rights.

38 posted on 04/26/2007 9:28:07 PM PDT by cpforlife.org (A Catholic Respect Life Curriculum is available at KnightsForLife.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Rutles4Ever

He served at the Court under Brennan, a bigger hypocrite than which one cannot imagine. Brennan pushed Blackmun into his opinion, because he was afraid, as a nominal Catholic, to get his hands dirty by openly taking the lead.


39 posted on 04/26/2007 9:32:25 PM PDT by RobbyS ( CHIRHO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spunkets

Ping


40 posted on 04/26/2007 9:32:36 PM PDT by garv (Conservatism in '08 www.draftnewt.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-49 next last

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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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