Skip to comments.O'Reilly 'Stunned' At Caroline Kennedy's 'Catholic Woman' Abortion Remarks
Posted on 09/07/2012 1:01:37 PM PDT by NYer
The O’Reilly Factor began last night by broadcasting the convention speech of Caroline Kennedy, who came out and declared “As a Catholic woman,” she supports Obama because “Now isn’t the time to roll back the rights we were winning when my father was president.” As if Roe vs. Wade was decided in 1963?
O’Reilly was blunt. “I have to tell you, I am stunned. I am stunned right now at what she just said as a Catholic woman and then she went on to object to 40 states implementing restrictions on abortion like a 24-hour waiting period.” O’Reilly said it “made my head snap back” when she proclaimed:
KENNEDY: His commitment to women is about even more than economic rights. It's about health care, reproductive rights and our ability to make our own decisions about ourselves, our families, and our future. When it comes to what's best for women, there is only one candidate in this race who is on our side, Barack Obama.
As a Catholic woman, I take reproductive health seriously. And today it is under attack. This year alone, more than a dozen states have passed more than 40 restrictions on women's access to reproductive health care. That's not the kind of future I want for my daughters or your daughters. Now isn't the time to roll back the rights we were winning when my father was president. Now is the time to move this country forward.
O’Reilly and Karl Rove discussed the speech further, and Rove found it to be a direct attack on the Catholic church:
O’REILLY: She's evoking her Catholic faith, which clearly condemns abortion, and using that as some kind of spring board into criticizing the restrictions on abortion that many states have passed. And the restrictions aren't you can't have one. It's wait a couple of days and think it over.
So maybe I'm wrong on this, but that made my head snap back. And here to help us analyze Fox News analyst Karl Rove who joins us from Richmond, Virginia. Did you pick that up when she said that? I mean, I'm -- I'm still flabbergasted.
KARL ROVE: Yes. Well, I think it was a direct response -- I mean a direct attack on the church. I mean it's going out of her way to say I disagree with the values of my church.
And remember, this year, no one is seriously talking about ending abortion. What we're talking about is the administration's effort to expand the realm of choice by, for example, requiring churches to provide contraceptive coverage to their employees regardless of the fact that it violates the deeply most-held tenets of that faith.
We have an attack on religious liberty that's masquerading as an expansion of you know, of choice. And you know, Miss Kennedy tonight sort of threw herself on the side of those who -- who would advocate such an attack on religious liberty.
O'REILLY: But not only that, I mean she cited her Catholicism when she didn't have to. This is what -- I don't object to her opinion.
O'REILLY: She has her opinion and she wants unfettered abortion, that's her opinion. Supreme Court has ruled abortion is legal in the United States. Nobody is denying anybody's rights to anything. But she -- that's a gratuitous comment. She didn't have to inject that she's a Catholic woman and then go and say she wants no restrictions on abortion. She opposes that.
That's -- that's offensive, I believe and I'm -- I'm frankly shocked that -- that she would do that. I don't know whether she is -- wants to attack her own faith or not -- I'm not -- I'd like to ask her about it. But I'm just taken aback.
ROVE: Well, are you surprised? Nancy Pelosi does it routinely.
O'REILLY: Yes I am. I'm sure -- Karl -- Karl --
ROVE: Nancy Pelosi speaking as the Speaker of the House of Representatives --
O'REILLY: Wait, wait. Wait.
ROVE: And now the former speaker, assuming that she can step in and declare what the theology of the Catholic church is.
O'REILLY: Karl, let me be clear on this. Nancy Pelosi all right, is a political animal. All right? Whatever she says doesn't surprise me.
This woman comes out under the heading of the Kennedy name and the Kennedy legacy and directly besmirches her church. I mean that's stunning.
ROVE: Yes well look, she -- she may not be a politician -- she may not be a politician in the way that Nancy Pelosi is, but she comes from a very political family. Her presence there tonight was on behalf of that family. She's been a political figure. She was a key endorsement for Barack Obama in 2008....
It's gratuitous when people of any faith go out of their way to basically say I'm a -- I'm a -- I'm a Catholic and I'm telling you that I disagree deeply with the Catholic Church's opinions and I'm going to do so in a political sphere in order to make it easier for people who share my particular faith to you know disregard the teachings of our church.
She’s a Kennedy first. Morals come last.
Only GOD can disprove your statements.
I believe in a life of abundance, Caroline Kennedy obviously not.
No, Anyone showing where the leadership of the RCC has taken a Kennedy or other high profile ‘Catholic’ to task, much less excommed them could EASILY disprove my statements.
Can you? No. Because it’s not happened. No matter how blatantly they spit in God’s face and claim their Catholicsm, the Kennedy/Pelosi Catholics are untouched by the RCC leadership. Period.
So again, show me where they have been slapped down publicly and I will gladly admit my error.
I hear ya Norm.
Praying for you, O'Really.
Now that’s pretty damn dumb. I can believe that the Bloviator is that dumb. He’s never met a fence he didn’t want to straddle. The flag he nails to the mast is Jello.
That’s why they’re said to worship Moloch, because they sacrifice babies. If they believe in anythng,they believe in baby sacrifice. Just read DU sometime, if you can stand it. Some monster over there-female at that-made a thread about how she unapologetically wants abortion on demand for any reason whatsoever and no woman should ever feel ashamed for having one. She was actually celebratory about it. Hard core ‘rats are evil, no two ways about it.
I never thought about it before but you are correct!
While the “Old money/powerful New England family” is a well worn plot device, the specifics of many stories are obvious variations on Kennedy exploits.
And there are HUNDREDS of books, if not thousands with identifiably “Kennedy” plots/backstories.
That O’Reilly is “stunned” by Kennedy’s remarks says volumes about Bill.
Talk about clueless.
Was her mom that smart...really?
I honestly don’t know. But she sure was a style icon.
I had about twelve paragraphs written before I self-redacted and just arrowed down to a few clear truths:
1.In the USA, we all have freedom of religion enshrined as one of the primary points in all of our other laws.
2.No religion/church is forced to officially accept/acknowledge an individuals self-avowed claim to “membership status”, nor are they required to dispute false claims.
No such “right” to fraudulently claim membership exists under our laws. It is strictly a private matter. A civil claim can be made by either party, if one or the other side abuses the others, resulting in measurable damages.
3.Nothing in our laws preclude any church from denouncing fictitious claims of membership, or from announcing the severing of membership, publically, of former members, if they so choose.
Everyone is responsible for their OWN soul, not their Priest;s or their Congressman's....their OWN.
I keep asking that question on FR and never get a response.
I have only one conclusion to make and it's obvious.
I don’t have to ‘act’ like anything to see that if the leadership did anything they were thoroughly ignored. The Pelosi/Kennedy clans are still out there redefining Catholic theology and making a mockery of the faith and it’s adherents.
Nor do I have to ‘act’ like anything to see you excusing this lack of moral leadership. Target your outrage where it will do some good. IE the source of the problem.