Posted on 01/07/2009 4:42:29 PM PST by SmithL
When vandals covered the walls of the Most Holy Redeemer Catholic Church with swastikas and other graffiti last weekend, Gavin Newsom condemned the attack, as any mayor should.
But according to some Catholics, the mayor (and the Board of Supervisors) is partly to blame for the vandalism.
"Both Newsom and the board have shown nothing but contempt for the First Amendment rights of Catholics," said a statement released by the Catholic League the day after the graffiti was discovered. "When crucifixes are sold as sex toys and Catholic sensibilities are assaulted by naked men in the street at the annual Folsom Street Fair, they say nothing. When gay men dressed as nuns show up at Mass -- at the same church -- they say nothing."
The statement -- the full version of which can be read at the Catholic League Web site -- also includes Newsom's email address. Vetting the mayor's e-mail must be a fun job!
The church graffiti included angry messages against Proposition 8 -- the same-sex marriage legislation that Newsom very vocally opposed. Ironically, the Most Holy Redeemer church is located in the Castro and is a gay-friendly parish,
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
Ugh, when will the Catholic League go away.
They aren't too keen on me, either.
I live with it.
I hope the Catholic League sticks around for a long time.
I don’t understand what the sex toys have to do with graffiti. I don’t really care for Newsom, but this Catholic League guy appears to be experiencing some senility. I guess he thinks that if San Francisco prohibited crucifix sex toys, they problem of vandalism with graffiti would be eliminated too. I agree with you.
Because of course Catholics should just lie down and take it and give up their First Amendment rights?
The Catholic League is just pointing out the hypocrisy and biased nature of the San Francisco GOVERNMENT. The SF Board of Supervisors passes an official resolution condemning the Catholic Church specifically for its teachings on homosexuality, which the SF government theologians consider “hateful”, something that is a blatant breach of the establishment clause of the First Amendment, but they decline to condemn hate speech against Catholics that the gay activists are constantly spewing forth, including the blasphemous sex toys, Sisters of Perp. Indulgence, etc.
See post no. 7.
Thank you for the explanation. It helps to have all the facts. I agree that there is hypocrisy, and that the SF government should either stay out of it completely, or condemn all who make hateful comments on both sides. Personally, I think they should just stay out of it. As for the first amendment, there is no breach. They are not making the teachings illegal, they are just saying they don’t agree with them. The first amendment allows you to speak freely, without fear of legal recourse. It does not guarantee that you can speak without condemnation or criticism.
No, this is not a matter of SF government officials in their private capacity exercising a right of free speech to criticize the Catholic Church. This is the GOVERNMENT in an official act condemning the religious beliefs of private citizens. It is not their place to do so. The government is establishing a state-affirmed religious dogma, and it is definitely a breach of the establishment clause. People have a right to their own religious beliefs on homosexuality. The Government has NO RIGHT to tell people what they can and cannot believe. The GOVERNMENT has no right of Free Speech under the First Amendment. The First Amendment protects private citizens and private religious organizations. So you are completely wrong that the government has a First Amendment right to pronounce on theological issues. The government cannot establish a religion. What if a majority of the US Congress voted a resolution that all citizens should be Muslims and that Shariah law should be established in the US? Is that merely an exercise of free speech?
You can outrage Christians at a Christian church, just don’t anger the Jews there?
Rather than a knee-jerk reaction against the Catholics, maybe you should know some of the facts on the ground?
The Folsom Street Fair makes a regular point of attacking the Catholic Church. Among these attacks: illustrating Benedict and even John Paul wearing swaztikas and promoting sex toys in the form of likenesses of the Jesus Christ crucified and Blessed Virgin Mary. The idea is pure and simply to be as hateful and offensive to Catholics as possible. Mayor Nuissance makes a point of attending such “festivities” regularly.
The use of swaztikas against Catholic Churches is likely more like scrawling “ni**ers” on a black church than burning a cross on it: People like Newsom associate with and promote people who call Catholics nazis, and then he acts surprise when someone puts nazi graffiti on a Catholic Church.
(Of course, the bitter irony is that the Holy Redeemer Church has in the past appeared to condone such outrages by committing the unspeakable blasphemy of distributing the eucharist to the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, a hate-group which mocks nuns by dressing up as them then engaging in public acts of lewdness.)
No, I don't. I just don't think emulating Jesse Jackson is the right way to exercise them.
I have nothing against Catholics. The Catholic League is not the same as the Catholic Church. Just because I don’t have a lot of positive feelings for the Catholic League doesn’t mean that I have anything against Catholics. I am and have always been a practicing Catholic.
I admitted in an earlier post that given the additional information, the hypocrisy was clear. The article did not include any historical background, and some of us aren’t knowledgeable about what goes on in San Francisco.
As for the idea that Catholics are called nazis, I have never heard that. Maybe it is specific to the San Francisco area, but it is not anything I am familiar with. The vandalism is obviously wrong, and I hope that the people responsible are punished severely. I believe that Newsom was right in condemning the vandalism. He may be hypocritical for not criticizing other offensive things, but it doesn’t make him wrong to condemn the vandals.
I didn’t mean to call you anti-Catholic or anything, just to encourage you to read up a little before you dismiss something.
It’s not normal for Catholics to be called Nazis, no, but the radical left, which likes to call everyone Nazis (Bush, Cheney, Sarkozi, Uncle Sam, Israel, Petraeus, Giuliani) has taken to calling the Catholic hierarchy nazis, especially since the election of Benedict. You’d think the appointment of the notoriously gay-friendly archbishop of San Francisco to head the CDF (the Vatican’s cabinet-like post in charge of doctrinal adherence) would have softened them up a little.
Donahue certainly has a penchant for sticking his foot in his mouth, and he seems to ignore the fact that the media will only give him attention when he says something which can make him seem silly. But Newsom is the most reprehensible anti-Catholic bigot to ever serve office in the US, and yes, I am including the old days when the KKK ruled Pennsylvania. (Most people think of the KKK as being anti-black and southern, but PA was their biggest stronghold where Catholics were their chief focus.)
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.