Please freepmail me if you want on/off this list
Posted on 06/02/2009 4:04:21 AM PDT by Man50D
The Roman Catholic Diocese of Bridgeport in Connecticut has filed a federal lawsuit following assertions by a state official that rallying church members at the Capitol in Hartford constitutes a violation of lobbying law.
Six weeks after 4,000 Catholics in Connecticut rallied in opposition to a proposed state law known as Bill 1098, which dictated local parishes reorganize their governing structures to substitute lay leaders for priests in oversight of finances , the Diocese of Bridgeport received a letter from Connecticut's Office of State Ethics informing it that an investigation was underway to ascertain if the diocese had violated state law by failing to register as a lobbyist organization.
"Following the surprise introduction of Bill 1098," said Diocese Bishop William E. Lori in a statement, "a proposal that singled out Catholic parishes and would have forced them to reorganize contrary to church law and the First Amendment, our diocese responded in the most natural, spontaneous, and frankly, American, of ways: we alerted our membership – in person and through our website ; we encouraged them to exercise their free speech by contacting their elected representatives; and we organized a rally at the State Capitol. How can this possibly be called lobbying?"
Nonetheless, the lawsuit states, in a meeting with church representatives one month following the investigation letter, the ethics enforcement officer of the state OSE, Thomas K. Jones, told church representatives that the rally in Hartford and statements on the diocese website constituted a sufficient basis to file a complaint.
Consequently, a complaint from Jones could lead to imposition of a $10,000 fine and even possible criminal charges against the diocese. Furthermore, to become a registered lobbyist, the diocese would have to comply with reporting requirements, submit to audits and wear badges at the Capitol.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
What’s the background on Thomas K. Jones?
Silly me! I thought lobbyists were people who offered a government representative campaign money for voting for the lobbyist’s cause.
Thisispretty damned extreme. They are attacking a Church’s right to exist as a free entity.
These activities are clearly protected by the First Amendment; anyone who raise objections based on petty legalisms should not occupy any position requiring an education. or affording him any sort of legal or moral authority.
Sounds as if it’s time to clean the Connecticut Legislature.
On a related note:
Support Rob Simmons for Chris Dodd’s US Senate seat.
http://www.icontribute.us/robsimmons/initiative/qpolltwit
Lets see how long it takes for the FR anti-Catholic crowd to show up...
ping
Liberals like these jerks in Connecticut simply do not believe in the notions of freedom of religion or freedom of speech on which our country was established.
>>Sounds as if it’s time to clean the Connecticut Legislature.
That will be very difficult. Half the seats don’t even have opposition candidates—in my city, only 1 of the 2 seats had a challenger. In our case, the local GOP candidate is a young, dedicated member of the community and he beat the incumbent. But, for example, the only GOP candidate for mayor of Hartford (the capital) in the last election just changed his party affiliation because in his words ‘a GOP candidate can’t win in this city’, so he switched to oust the mayor from inside the donkey party.
We are becoming a complete one-party state. Not a Democrat stronghold or majority, a Democrat tyranny.
CT ping.
There’s a reason it’s called the Nutmeg State.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.
Pastor Martin Niemöller
Community and individuality are not opposites. People cannot survive on their own. When the odds are stacked against you, you must rally with the oppressed and hated.
When a growing oppressive regime is taking hold, you must act, otherwise you will soon face your enemy alone and hopeless.
Strength of community is a strength as much as individualism, as long you are willing to face weaknesses in your own community. Ignoring slacking values will mean that you will be rallied against by those you oppress.
Niemöller affirms we must rally against unhealthy organized regimes. We must also stay vigilant with those that appear to be good natured, as all organisation attracts corruption. Niemöller also warns us that if it is you who are corrupt, then you will face a stronger combined force of foe!
Vexen Crabtree
Lay persons are taking over more and more aspects of the church and this, imo, is not a good thing. The priests are largely unaware of their machinations.
Also, in this way, the church in America strays farther and farther from doctrine. There is an attitude: the church belongs to us, we ARE the church. That is not exactly true. Priests are trained and consecrated to duties and rites only they can perform.
Moreover, WTH is govt doing “dictating” to the church in these matters. More evidence of communist agenda infiltration, in my view.
Fudge the rules and it’s not the Catholic church anymore.
added CT to the topics list
WHITE HOUSE MOVES TO SILENCE CRITICS OF THE STIMULUS PROGRAM! FRONTAL ATTACK ON FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS! (Excerpt) Read more at thelibertysphere.blogspot.com ...
From the WH Blog link: Following OMB’s review, the Administration has decided to make a number of changes to the rules that we think make them even tougher on special interests and more focused on merits-based decision making. First, we will expand the restriction on oral communications to cover all persons, not just federally registered lobbyists. For the first time, we will reach contacts not only by registered lobbyists but also by unregistered ones, as well as anyone else exerting influence on the process. We concluded this was necessary under the unique circumstances of the stimulus program.
=======================================
ANALYSIS A new White House policy on permissible lobbying on economic recovery and stimulus project has taken a decidedly anti-First Amendment turn. It’s a classic illustration of Big Government trying to control every aspect of a particular activity and in the process running up against civil liberty. Check out this passage from a post on the White House blog by Norm Eisen, Special Counsel to the President on Ethics and Government Reform (emphasis added): “First, we will expand the restriction on oral communications to cover all persons, not just federally registered lobbyists. For the first time, we will reach contacts not only by registered lobbyists but also by unregistered ones, as well as anyone else exerting influence on the process. We concluded this was necessary under the unique circumstances of the stimulus program. Further, The key passage is the reference to expanding regulation from registered lobbyists to “anyone else exerting influence on the process. We concluded this was necessary under the unique circumstances of the stimulus program.” This is the Camel’s nose under the tent….......
"Following OMB’s review, the Obama Administration has decided to make a number of changes to the rules that we think make them even tougher on special interests and more focused on merits-based decision making. First, we will expand the restriction on oral communications to cover all persons, not just federally registered lobbyists. For the first time, we will reach contacts not only by registered lobbyists but also by unregistered ones, as well as anyone else exerting influence on the process. We concluded this was necessary under the unique circumstances of the stimulus program."
======================================
FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE US: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Clearly a violation of separation of church and state. It also looks like harrassing people for their religous beliefs. The diocese should sue the "suers" I think this is about gay marriage actually. It's gays harrasing the church because of her opposition to gay marriage. Gay storm troopers go about looking fo things to complain about against parishes. One batch of them moved into a neighborhood in Chicago and then filed a complaint about the parish church's bells ringing. Once they got the Church to stop ringing the bells, they (gay storm troopers)suddenly moved out.
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.