http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/politics/8286311.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp

Now, I don't know much about Kerry, but I do know that he 'claims' to be Catholic. If he is even remotely somewhat of a servant of Christ how can he go around claiming that people are 'born gay'(refer to link) and deserve the freedom to be 'who they are' (whatever that means)and not be excommunicated from the Church then and there. I also read several articles where he chose to use offensive expletives in order to relate to a younger audience (e.g.MTV.) The hypocrisy of this man is so deep it makes me heartbroken to think that he is my only other choice than the current president. He goes to Mass in his sking outfit and (in my opinion) shows a lack of reverence for the celebration by showing up so. I feel somewhat bad writing this because I am no saint but he is a role model and through these acts, he is only perpetuating the lies of the culture of death and not uplifting the True Faith at all. Sorry for this long diatribe, but I do have a question. Has anyone called him on these anti-christian views and addressed his apparent and almost flagrant oppistion to the teachings of the Magisterium, the Pope, and all sound Cristian doctrine. Please forgive my ignorance on this matter. As I said I have very little knowledge of the man. Thanks in adavance

JD Brabant

-- j.d. brabant (joshua123@qwest.net), March 26, 2004

Answers

Sorry I did not read the question before mine. I see it almost addresses the same issue. I had just finished reading that article and did not bother to read the forum today. If anyone has any opinions I would still be interested to read them

JD

-- JD Brabant (joshua123@qwest.net), March 26, 2004.

My opinion is that Kerry is a liar, tryign to cater to tw ends of the spectrum at once.

He is nohting buty a con man, and shoudl not win the elction.He also shoudl be barred from al Chruches until such time that he recognises the sanctity of worship.

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), March 26, 2004.

to answer your question:

the bishop of kerry's diocese (and several others) have declared that Kerry is not a catholic in good standing and is therefore restricted from taking the Eucharist until he makes confession and changes his anti Life policies.

His reception of communion, regardless of his attire or tardy policy, then constitutes the sin of sacrilage added to the sin of scandal involving the murder of millions of unborn babies. The priest should not have offered him communion, knowing that he was banned and was committing a sin by participating. Unfortunately there are priests out there who would support a monster like Kerry, yes, even to the point of abandoning the sacraments to those who CANNOT take valid communion

-- paul h (dontSendMeMail@notAnAddress.com), March 26, 2004.

Is it time to bring back a kinder, gentler Inquisition to deal with the Kennedys and Kerrys of the world?

-- Brian Crane (brian.crane@cranemills.com), March 27, 2004.

Is it time to bring back a kinder, gentler Inquisition to deal with the Kennedys and Kerrys of the world?

No, it it time for Catholic polititians to live their faith and claim to be Catholic because in Boston it means more votes.

In Christ,
Bill

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson-nospam@hotmail.com), March 27, 2004.

correction: should have read:

and not claim to be Catholic simply because in Boston it means more votes.

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson-nospam@hotmail.com), March 27, 2004.

Bill, I'm originally from Boston and what is truly frightening is to have such a high-level politician be not the LEAST discomfitted by openly defying the Church..Sen. Kerry appears to have the feeling that contrary to him losing the support of Catholics across America, he will GAIN them by shaking his fist at the teachings of the Church. THIS, to me, is much more disturbing than the man himself..there appears to be more of a hue and cry from veterans against his rhetoric than from the lay people of the Church. I see no reports of mass rallies of Catholics against "Kerryism" or calls for thousands to participate in prayer vigils across the country..no wonder he feels so free to express his heresy.

-- lesley (martchas@hotmail.com), March 27, 2004.

Good point lesley. Your point kind of echoes an article by Joseph Sobran that I read recently. He questioned the reader as to why the play "A Man For All Seasons," the story of St. Thomas More's martyrdom under King Henry VIII, had turned out to be so well liked given the anti-catholic bias of theater critics, actors, playwrights etc. When catholics view this play (and movie), they see a catholic martyr defending the faith even to his death. But what do non- catholics see? According to Sobran, they see Sir Thomas More defying AUTHORITY, the authority of a king. The catholicity of it all is secondary if not meaningless. People love the underdog, one who challenges authority. Maybe, Kerry thinks people would like HIM if he was defying the authority of the almighty Vatican. Or maybe he really does believe in abortion, same-sex marriage etc. He is either a shameless opportunist or a heretic,......OR BOTH.

-- Brian Crane (brian.crane@cranemills.com), March 30, 2004.

I would like to bring a new website to your attention. A small group of Catholics recently started this website in response to Senator Kerry's attempts to gain Catholic votes. Our goals are to stop Senator Kerry from using his faux catholicism as an election prop, to reduce the number of votes he receives from Catholics, and to enable other Catholics to tell the world we do not support this man--that he is not a "Catholic candidate." If you have a moment, could you look over the website? Its address is www.catholicsagainstkerry.com Any and all comments, suggestions, and especially criticisms would be appreciated. Please feel free to forward the website or this email to anyone you wish to forward it too, or post a link online. Sincerely www.catholicsagainstkerry.com info@catholicsagainstkerry.com

-- www.catholicsagainstkerry.com (info@catholicsagainstkerry.com), April 09, 2004.

I'm afraid i do not understand the pre-occupation amongst american catholics with Kerry's short commings as a catholic. while it is true that in many ways the man is not an ideal catholic, and many of his policies are un-orthodox to say the least, this is missing an very important point. While Kerry is a Catholic, George Bush is a protestant. While kerry may sin in his every day life, he at least confesses and takes communion every sunday, and believes in the sezerinity of rome, which cannot be said of bush. While Kerry may fail in his effort to follow holy teachings, bush is following a heretical cult proposed by the followers of calven and luther.

therefore, when catholics voted in november, thay chose between a man who was interdicted in some dieces, but who would at least take the welfare of catholics to heart and follow the vast majority of the popes teachings, and a latae sententiae excommunicate, who will continue to follow whatever are the current beleifs of his mormon and babtist coreligionists. thanks to catholics like those on this board who let small lapses of docterine elipes the bigger picture, it seems most of america's catholic floch chose the speritual decendant of the cathars.

-- Terry Fulton (None@Im_afraid.com), February 15, 2005.

The rumor is that Jeb Bush (who converted from Protestant to Catholic) is working on converting his brother George to Catholicism. A few months ago, President Bush did an interview with a major news station where he had a picture of Mary next to him, symbolizing he could already be partipating in Marian devotionals.

We might have the second Catholic president if he converts during this term!

-- Tim K. (tk4386@juno.com), February 15, 2005.

I htink th issue was policxy. I for one do nto vote popel in based on religion...

But even your own Bishops tell you not to vite for a Pro-Choice candidate, which Kerry was.

so, allow abortion-On-Demand so w can have a president who pays lip service to rome but decides to help the Gay Marirage plan move forward, and pretend he follows he vast majority of rome's beelifs? or a proven conservitive leader who does folow the vast majority of romes teajcigns dispite the fac that hes not Cahtlci because, dispite yur ocmlaunt baot Protestnats ( and hes not conenced ot Mormosn rellay, who have no rels conneciton to Luther and Clavin, but Joseph smith) the reality is Morlaity remaisn failry consistant in all Branches of Christendom.

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), February 15, 2005.

Terry, you try to disguise the fact that you are an anti-Catholic protestant by spouting Catholic terms. But you give yourself away by trying to get us to agree that Catholics believe in the “sezerinity” (suzerainty, i.e. feudal overlordship) of “rome”. Catholics reject your charge that they believe the Pope has secular authority over rulers of nations. And as a protestant you should know that Protestantism has almost nothing in common with Catharism. Bush is a Methodist, not a Mormon or Baptist.

Tim, I’m sure that’s exactly what Bush’s PR men wanted you to think when they carefully positioned a picture of Our Lady where the cameras would pick it up, to court the Catholic vote (but without Bush actually mentioning her, so that if his protestant buddies accused him of “mariolatry” he could claim the picture was there by pure coincidence).

-- Steve (55555@aol.com), February 15, 2005.

quick thing....

people can be "born gay" the chemicals in the womb can become mixed......

and no im not saying that being gay is right....

-- kt (jc_died_4_me@hotmail.com), February 18, 2005.

Yeah right, "Chimicals in he womb". Yiur talking the Hormon theory, which has absolutley no evidenct to support it.

No evidence to date suggests any difference in natal orogins for Homosexuals as oposed ot Heterosexuals. Just because its popular ot beleive that peopel are Born Gay doesnt mean its sietificlaly repsoncible to proclaim they are as a sicnetific fsact.

unless you can show valid, peer revieewed and accepted literature form the Medical associatiosn fo the owrld makign this affirmitive claim, then you cannot sya htis a a fact.

To daye this is speculaiton, not een tested theory, and not somehtign anyone operates on. it was invented as a theory to support the" Born Gay' theory when the Human genome project decimated the Gay gene theory, and when all other Gay Gene research was subsequently discredited. Now they want Hormones ot be blames, yet no existign evidence supports htis,

-- ZAROVE (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), February 18, 2005.

Some people are born with blindness. Out of fairness do we have to allow them to fly planes? Some people are born with a proclivity to health problems such as mental illness...are we duty bound by "fairness" to act as though they were absolutely healthy?

Most american indians are born with a low toleration for alcohol. Does this mean we ought to spend $4000 billion on a "cure" for this while simultaneously encouraging them to drink as much and as often as possible?

Just because you have a weakness or proclivity towards some action doesn't automatically make the action moral and OK from an emotional or biological standpoint!

Feeling really good about raping little boys may be an in-born defect, but it doesn't make rape OK. Feeling really good about same sex sodomy makes lots of gays feel good - but it also leads to their early death by STD - so "natural" it isn't.

-- Joe (joestong@yahoo.com), February 18, 2005.

okay i never said that it was right i was just puting an argument forward ( i do ethics!)

-- kt (jc_died_4_me@hotmail.com), February 18, 2005.