Posted on 12/29/2007 2:32:09 PM PST by big'ol_freeper
So, Father Carr has concluded that Mitt not stepping in to rescue Cardinal Law from the pedophile priest scandal (in a church that was not Mitt's!) is some sort of "plot" to foist liberalism on Massachusetts?
Sorry, not buying it. If Cardinal Law had wanted to remain a voice for morality in Massachusetts, it wasn't Romney's job to shore him up. Sounds like Father Carr reads too many conspiracy novels!
There was a backlash against catholics at that time because of the sex abuse scandals. What part was persecution and what part was righteous anger?
I suppose there is no love lost between Mormons and Catholics, same with Baptists and Catholics AS A WHOLE, so would it be better if I support catholic Rudy should-be-denied-communion Giuliani or what?
The catholics vote more Dem anyway; nothing is going to change that regardless of what the pope says. Some have crossed over because of the life issues and some have worked themselves up the food chain through their own efforts to be in higher income brackets, good for them (sincerely).
I don't know what the protocols are when a governor should or should not go to a bishop's installation mass. If it was a deliberate snub, then it wasn't very nice, but if he just didn't want to break away from his vacation, isn't that being a little petty?
I would like to know which candidate the priest here would endorse. Then maybe I understand it a little more.
No...that in no way represents what the author was saying. The author was describing what the pro-gay etc. lobby game plan was to achieve their abominations. That plan included silencing the Catholic Church which included bringing Law down. Once he laid out the pro-gay marriage plan the author then railed against Romney for failing to protect INNOCENT Catholics whose rights were being violated. He stood by and did nothing. He in no way was defending Law and his cronies. U.S. Army Retired |
| I would like to know which candidate the priest here would endorse. Then maybe I [would] understand it a little more." Huh? U.S. Army Retired |
Governor Mitt Romney, who opposes gay marriage because he says it undermines the traditional family, has said that, under a 1913 law, only residents of Massachusetts are eligible to marry same-sex partners. If couples come from other states seeking to marry, their unions will be void because same-sex marriage is illegal in the rest of the country, the governor has said. Gay-rights advocates disagree with Romney's application of the law, and are likely to test it in the courts in coming months.And also, how he wanted to appeal the case, but he had no power to force the State AG to take it to court, and the AG refused to do so:
The governor had tried to stay the SJC decision until after a proposed ballot question banning gay marriage is decided in 2006. But Attorney General Thomas F. Reilly refused to take Romney's case to the court, saying the governor had no grounds to seek the stay.It is clear that if Governor was a dictatorship position, Romney would have banned Gay Marriage -- and to suggest otherwise is to ignore the facts.
I'm trying to figure out which candidate is least objectionable to me that has the best chances of beating Hillary or Obama because I plan to vote in the primaries and just read something more that scared me about Obama after talking to my son today who said he is leaning toward him. Some are saying just now he refused to pledge allegiance to the flag at a political appearance on our local newspaper site here (can't verify that, but two posters claimed it) in the liberal heartland and posted a link to his church site which I had already read.
Plus a Rudy sign shows up sticking out of the snow in my yard last night. I took it out, brought it in the house, and am worried who will be mad at me for that. A couple of friends know I am a Republican or maybe it was my daughter.
Sorry I'm tired and probably not making much sense. And I'm not inebriated because I don't drink :-) booze.
| If you read the article he trashes liberals so I very much doubt your premise. The facts of the article stand on their own. U.S. Army Retired |
I'll see if I can read between the lines and determine just what constituted persecution of the innocent catholics.
"I don't think it's my role to demand the resignation of the cardinal,'' said the Rev. Robert J. Carr, parochial vicar at the Cathedral of the Holy Cross. "This is a problem that cannot be solved just by the resignation of the cardinal - it goes deeper than that -"
Romney Fairy Tale:
www.ARTLaction.com
Mitt Romney/Duncan Hunter............Next Leaders of the Christian World.
Let’s put in place a team that can take down the Clintons for the last time. Monica Lewinsky has more experience in the White House than does Hillary Clinton.
I like Duncan Hunter, but could never vote for a polytheist.
Fred’s numbers will rise as Suckabee’s fall. The only problem I have with Fred is I have heard a rumor that if he drops out, he’ll back his friend McCain...If this is true, conservatives should not support him at all.
The actual facts:
Rebut the Notion that Gov. Romney’s Inaction Allowed Same-Sex Marriage to Become Law in Massachusetts
http://www.freerepublic.com/~unmarkedpackage/#DOM
IssueSource.org is a website co-produced by MassINC and The State House News Service and is a project of MassINC’s Civic Renewal Initiative. It is a non-partisan, not-for-profit, free public service.
IssueSource.org has a remarkably detailed chronological journal of the legal actions and legislative events in Massachusetts regarding same-sex marriage following the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) ruling in Goodridge v. Dept. of Public Health on Nov. 18, 2003 (Issue: Gay Marriage: Prior to May 17, 2004). The journal records in great detail the actions taken by people both for and against the same-sex marriage court ruling up to the date the ruling became law on May 17, 2004 making same-sex marriage legal in Massachusetts.
The journal is a very long read with several examples where Governor Romney opposed the ruling and attempted to delay the implementation with statements and directives; actions that were openly defied by others at times. However, focus on the events after March 29, 2004 when the constitutional convention in Massachusetts approved an amendment to ban gay marriage. Note the legal action Gov. Romney initiated immediately after March 29, 2004 to prevent the SJC’s Goodridge ruling from becoming law on May 17, 2004. More importantly, note that Gov. Romney’s efforts were thwarted because the Democrat Attorney General Tom Reilly and Senate President Robert Travaglini refused to cooperate and blocked the required legislative action.
Excerpts from the journal of events are presented below:
“On Mar. 29, the Legislature, meeting in constitutional convention, approved the constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage and provide for civil unions. The measure must still be approved a second time, during the 2005-06 session of the Legislature, in order to be placed on the November 2006 ballot for ratification by voters.
-—— snip -——
“Immediately after the vote, Romney called on AG Reilly to go before the SJC to halt the start of gay marriages on May 17, but Reilly quickly responded that he would not seek the delay, arguing that the SJC’s two rulings, in November and February, had made it clear that the court would tolerate nothing less than marriage for same-sex couples. A week earlier, on Mar. 22, Travaglini told the State House News Service that any attempt by Romney to halt the issuance of same-sex marriage licenses on the SJC’s ordered timetable would probably fail. “It is my understanding that no matter what legislative action we take, we cannot affect the issuance of licenses come the 17th of May. If the governor believes that he has the capacity or the authority to stop the issuance of licenses, then that’s a personal political decision that he can make; I don’t necessarily agree.”
-—— snip -——
Office of Gov. Mitt Romney, “Romney Files Emergency Bill to Seek Goodridge Decision Stay,” Press Release, 4/15/2004
“Romney announced April 15 that he would seek emergency legislation to allow him to appoint a special counsel to ask the Supreme Judicial Court for a 2 1/2 year delay of its gay marriage ruling set to take effect May 17. Romney’s plan was to bypass AG Reilly—who refused to name a special counsel in March—and name his own special counsel, retired SJC Justice Joseph Nolan. Romney said the legislation would allow him to “protect the integrity of the Constitutional process” and return the decision on gay marriage to voters. “We believe the people have the right to have their position heard and that as the governor, I should have right to have my position heard. Look, people that don’t have any income are entitled to representation. Everyone in the Commonwealth is entitled to representation. But somehow as governor of the Commonwealth, it’s deemed that I can’t represent my view before the courts—I think that’s a mistake,” said Romney.
“State House News Service reported April 22 that Romney’s special counsel bill was “languishing” on Beacon Hill. The main obstacle was the Senate, which failed to admit the bill in its last two sessions. Senate President Robert Travaglini dismissed the legislation when it was announced and said the governor was only trying to push his “political agenda.” If the bill was not admitted, then there would not be a joint committee public hearing on it.
“Romney said April 21 that he would not file a supportive brief or otherwise get involved in a petition brought by the Catholic Action League of Massachusetts. The League was attempting to persuade the Supreme Judicial Court to delay the start of gay marriages until November 2006, when voters could vote on the issue. Romney said he preferred to make the case for delay himself. On April 23, Romney renewed his call for the Legislature to grant him the authority to appoint a special counsel so he could launch his own effort to persuade the court to delay gay marriages from taking effect May 17. “I call on both branches of the Legislature, particularly the Senate. . .to give me the opportunity to preserve the choice of the definition of marriage to the citizens and make sure that the hard work the Legislature went through to pass this amendment to allow the citizens to have a voice is worth something,” Romney told reporters at a press conference.
http://www.freerepublic.com/~unmarkedpackage/#DOM
| Nice post but unfortunately it has nothing to do with what the article was about. U.S. Army Retired |
Romney fought hard in Mass to defend traditional marriage. He also lobbied congress to pass a bill in defense of marriage. You know this but continue to post trash.
| The article is about how Romney stood silently and did nothing while innocent Catholics' civil rights were being denied, not about same-sex marriage. You really ought to read it. U.S. Army Retired |
What are you talking about: "innocent Catholics' civil rights were being denied"?
And you ought to read what I already posted.
The priest author was an aide to Cardinal Law. No one brought down the Boston Cardinal except his OWN unwillingness to protect the innocent Catholics who were abused. Cardinal Law stood by and did nothing to protect those innocents whose rights were being violated. And this priest is dissing Romney because he didn't ride to the rescue to prevent demonstrators from protesting in front of Holy Cross Cathedral?
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.