A new home!
This is a mortal sin. She has been banned by her Archbishop from receiving Holy Communion. It is not specific to San Francisco. I guess she is begging Archbishop Cordileone to excommunicate her.
Archbishop Cordileone is hanging in the wind here. His "boss" just threw him under the bus. Francis is a boss that doesn't stand by his people. Cordileone should resign.
Tom Makin,Given Santita’s health, I think Archbishop Cordileone should hang on. Can you imagine John Paul II letting this go? Just another reason not to contribute to Peter’s Pence. Biden and Pelosi can pick up the slack
Cordileone has been showed shameful disrespect by the pope and Pelosi, but he is hardly "hanging in the wind". At least 15 bishops have joined with him in banning Pelosi from Communicating in their dioceses.All I can say to Pelosi is, enjoy it while it lasts.All I can say to the pope is...well, I'd rather not say. Let's just listen to the ticking of the clock.
This was planned. The Speaker of the House doesn’t just drop in for Mass with the Pope. This is a message.
I think so and if so clearl passive aggressive toward a member of the college of bishops and if so unacceptable for a pope to do this without dialoging with a coworker in the vineyard.
He is bordering on being an anti-Pope.
I saw where “Catholic” Biden is now advocating an exception to the filibuster in order to codify Roe v Wade. Maybe Pelosi was meeting with the Pope to get his secret blessing
Like I said, TJM, this “war” will never, ever end unless and until abortion becomes an unthinkable option because the reasons for women to seek one are removed. It’s all about hearts and minds and removing the incentives/pressures to seek an abortion, both by sensitizing everyone to the nature and value of unborn human life and by providing the necessary social supports for pregnant women, mothers, and children through private initiatives as well as governmental measures. In a very real and practical sense, the entire battle over Roe v. Wade has been a sideshow to the real battles where the war can be truly won.
Mark,I agree with your statement. However, the political left and the Democratic Party and its leaders will never let it go. They fire up their base on this issue. Surely you saw them send their demons into the streets to protest the reversal of Roe and their attacks on facilities that promote human life? That is why in my mind the Catholic Church once and for all must take a stand. Until they excommunicate Nancy Pelosi, I will not take Church leadership seriously on this issue. If Pelosi were formally excommunicated it may be the one action to wake her up to the reality of what she is doing. The Democratic Party has come a long way from Bill Clinton’s we call to make abortion “safe, legal and rare” to demanding funding for abortions during a pandemic and demanding abortions up to the time the baby is in the birth canal. Please do not let them off the hook. It is their hearts and minds that need to be changed because they are the power behind the perpetuation of this stain on our culture.
Mark,By the way that “braintrust” in the White House has informed the Europeans that the Dobbs decision is “destabilizing the world.” I guess his staff failed to tell him European countries abortion laws are more restrictive than those in the US.
Santita would have smiled at Adolph Hitler! It’s time to study Canon Law to see what can be done
TJM:I agree with you, too, when you say that the Democratic Party and its leaders will never let it go. But surely the same is just as true of the Republican Party and its leaders. I am skeptical about the potential for virtuous activity by many or even most legislators on both sides of the aisle, as opposed to political opportunism and indulging the lust for power, in the current conditions prevailing in our political system. So, what to do? One thing is for we the people to engage in genuine, respectful grassroots conversations with one another to help lay a foundation for improving the quality of those we elect to public office. Another may be to rethink how we conceive of “rights” and the role of the courts in “enforcing” them. Among other things, I have trained myself to be a comparatist. As in so much else (including its legal education, by the way), the United States is an outlier. But American “exceptionalism” isn’t always better. We need the humility to learn from other countries’ experiences, perhaps sometimes to follow a better model but always to stimulate deeper and wiser reflection on our own situation. For example, here is a link to an illuminating podcast from February in which Ezra Klein interviews a Columbia law professor, Jamal Greene, who wrote a book titled “How Rights Went Wrong: Why Our Obsession with Rights Is Tearing America Apart” (2021). In the book (and the podcast beginning at 35 minutes) Greene explains that other countries do things differently, with better results:https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-ezra-klein-show/id1548604447?i=1000567964776And then there is this old chestnut from the 1980s by the conservative Catholic author, Mary Ann Glendon, “Abortion and Divorce in Western Law: American Failures, European Challenges” (1987), which still has much of value to teach us I think:https://www.amazon.com/Abortion-Divorce-Western-Mary-Glendon/dp/0674001613?asin=0674001613&revisionId=&format=4&depth=1I would be interested in your thoughts.
Mark,I am confused by your first sentence. If the Democrats abandoned its ghoulish fascination with abortion, do you think the Republicans would decide to be pro abortion? I can’t think of a single intrinsic evil Republicans support as part of their party’s platform. Thanks for the references. I will take a look at them.May I wish you a Happy 4th? My son-in-law is a British citizen and tolerates this Holiday. Cheers!
TJM:My point is simply that both Republicans and Democrats have used, and will continue to use, abortion as a political football to, in your words, “fire up their base.” First, the focus was on Roe v. Wade and Casey, the Republicans saying how important it was to vote Republican to be able to get a majority on the Supreme Court to bring about the result that has now occurred, the Democrats saying that it was important to vote Democrat to preserve women’s reproductive “rights” and control over their own bodies. Now, the focus switches but abortion is still a political football for both Parties, the Republicans saying it is important to vote Republican to prevent Court packing and to enact a nation-wide ban on abortion, and the Democrats saying it is important to vote Democrat to reform the Court and overrule Dobbs, restoring a constitutional right to choose an abortion within limits and/or to enact a statutory protection of that right, ensure unrestricted access to medicated abortions, etc. And so it will go—on and on and on—every election cycle, never ending, nothing truly settled. And I haven’t even mentioned state elections yet, where now the same sort of dynamic will play out, focused on state statutes and constitutions, or the role of the lawyers mounting multiple legal challenges on one side or the other. Quite honestly, I am sick of this largely cynical “game” (and have been for years) because it plays the people for fools, and nothing EVER gets truly resolved.Worse, in playing the abortion political “game” some politicians will be sincere, but many others will be completely opportunist, caring not too hoots about abortion but using the issue to get power. My sense is that the only “voice” that has been consistently sincere on the issue over the decades is the Catholic Church, certainly not the evangelical Religious Right and many politicians who identify with or are responsive to that movement. See, for example:https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2022/05/10/abortion-history-right-white-evangelical-1970s-00031480The only result is to make our politics look ridiculous and to increase disrespect for a now overtly ideological Supreme Court and the Rule of Law. And the irony is--with no real impact on the number of abortions. Abortion is the gift that keeps on giving—for both Republicans and Democrats, so neither Party will want to give it up as long as they see political advantage in keeping it alive as an issue. That is why we the people must solve this issue (and many others besides); we certainly cannot count on the politicians to do it!But perhaps I am wrong about all this. Please tell me what, if anything, I am missing.Thank you for your wishes for the 4th, which are heartily reciprocated. Sadly, the British pub we used to frequent in Atlanta for an annual Grand Old Losers party is no longer open (but we can still toast General Cornwallis and General Washington privately). Perhaps your son-in-law can find something like that venue near him. -:) Where is he from in Britain, by the way?
P.S. My faith in the integrity of our politics (and our politicians) might be somewhat restored if, at both the state and the federal levels, there could be a bipartisan consensus for a truly pro-life position that supports pregnant women, mothers, and children through any needed government measures (and not just private sector initiatives). We will have to see whether, on the Democratic side, politicians are willing to refocus their energies on such measures and de-emphasize a right to abortion, and on the Republican side, whether politicians are willing to put their money where their mouth is and not scream Socialism as they are so often wont to do.
Mark,Grand Old Losers party! That is funny.I understand your point, but it is the Republican side which is on the side of the angels, pushing back against the demons. Is that not a good thing? Pelosi is particularly disgraceful fundraising incessantly on the notion that vote for the Democrats will protect your right to kill your baby! You seriously can't be supporting this. When a Republican politician takes this tact, let me know. Bill Clinton, for all of his peccadilloes did try to steer his Party in another direction when he said abortsons should be "legal, safe, and rare." Sadly, this never gained currency in his Party. You may not recall this, but I recall the moment when I switched parties. It was when the Democratic Party would not ALLOW long-standing Democrat, Governor Casey of Pennsylvania, Catholic and pro life, on the Party's national convention stage. That did it for me. Talk about lack of diversity of views! Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe there already are private and governmental programs for pregnant women without the resources to raise a child. That being said, another tragic side effects of an abortion culture is that it deprives childless couples from adopting a child, other than having to take whatever child they can get from overeas.
TJM:I will concede that insincere politicians supporting just policies is better than insincere politicians supporting unjust policies. But sincerity and honesty still weigh heavily with me, and in my ideal world the electorate would have sufficient good judgment to elect virtuous and wise leaders, which in my reading of U.S. history was the original vision of the Founders. I draw on several scholars to reach this conclusion, after canvassing various competing views, in the following very long article (see at pp. 1139-52):https://repository.law.uic.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1284&context=lawreviewI pursue this theme in the recent book although now I suggest that the electorate itself should be more virtuous and less self-interested than perhaps the Founders imagined.Anyway, perhaps you are beginning to understand why I have been so frustrated at being pegged as a Democrat (or of course as a Republican or indeed anything else except perhaps non-partisan and independent). I agree completely that if abortion is to be permitted at all under the law, every effort should be made to ensure that it is “safe, legal, and rare,” with emphasis on the last. And I cannot fathom why the Democratic Party ever dropped this notion, which seems a no brainer, or why they became so inhospitable to the pro-life elements within the Party, although that voice does still exist in the Party:https://www.democratsforlife.org/https://www.democratsforlife.org/index.php/issues/abortionAnd yes, there do exist government programs (in addition to private sector, especially faith-based, initiatives) to support pregnant women, mothers, and children, but more is needed. Here I defer to those who have studied the details. One example is Marco Rubio who has recently proposed a Providing for Life Act, which identifies several areas where more needs to be done (incidentally, I voted for Rubio over Trump, who I think is a major threat to our Republic and what I imagine it could be--imagine we could be--in the 2016 Republican Primary in Georgia):https://www.rubio.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2022/6/rubio-releases-pro-family-framework-following-dobbs-decisionOf course, even more needs to be done than what Rubio proposes. See, for example, the following amicus brief submitted in Dobbs at pp. 26-35:https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/19/19-1392/193302/20210921172339465_19-1392%20Brief.pdfHowever, at least proposals like Rubio’s are a start. And let’s not forget middle class families as we think about these needs:https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/roe-v-wade-overturned-supreme-court-hurts-middle-class-women-rcna35233?
P.S. I say I cannot fathom why the Democratic Party made that turn. But, of course, that is merely an expression of speech. Doubtless, it was due to crass political calculation, which is yet one more reason (among so many) why I think out politics is so corrupted. In addition, the Democrats aren’t even that good at political calculation. The Republicans are running rings around them when they should be really suffering in the polls, as David Brooks explains in the following piece:https://www.sltrib.com/opinion/commentary/2022/07/02/david-brooks-why-earth-is/But then, the Republicans have been outfoxing the Democrats for years now, perhaps because they play the long game while the Democrats are more focused on the short-term, Republican and their media allies’ rhetorical misdirection notwithstanding (for example, the false Great Replacement Theory canard).
Post a Comment