hmmm, let's see. I am not a Catholic, so why should I be upset or not who they choose? I am not a

[still_one]

member of _________ group, so it is up to those who are to support or not who their leadership chooses.

I am an American and a Democrat, I am involved and try to influence those things that I can, not things which I am not part of

If I am so concerned about the decisions or ideas of a group, I will join that group and try to exert influence or change, otherwise, not my issue who they choose.

[dark forest]

1. Just the opposite

of what I do. If I disagree with a group of which I am a member, I will leave that sucker in a hearbeat.

But then I am not really a joiner, and prefer my own company, and that of my family considerably more than that of other people.

[Cerridwen]

2. Political influence.

Political influence...I say again. If you don't get the role of the catholic church and its political influence...

Read the history of the catholic church.

Read about their role in the anti-choice movement.

Read about their role in slavery and the role of women in the world and their influence planet wide; not just in the US.

Learn how politics is the war for power over. Read how the catholic church hierarchy has perfected, influenced, and perpetuated that power over.

When you're finished; read about the Supreme Court of the US and the number of roman catholic members.

Or do you really believe that judges are impartial?

[stevenleser]

5. Precisely. nt

[still_one]

6. Gee, sounds a lot like the shit nixon did when John Kennedy ran for President. A supreme court

justice or a member of congress is supposed to do what is in the Constitution or have the laws changed accordingly. Whether they do that or not is another issue.

Oh by the way, Kennedy is on the Supreme Court and is a Catholic, and Roe would have been overturned by now if they followed you generalized stereotype.

I have no doubt that you too are influenced by certain assumptions which may not also be accurate

hmmm, John Kerry, Patrick Leahy, Joe Biden are Catholic and pro-choice

As far as scalia, alito, thomas, did you every think that the reason they are anti-choice, and just fucking predjudice has nothing to do with their religion, but because they are republicans?

[Cerridwen]

7. Nice try but fail.

I'm so far left of nixon I left you in the dust.

The business and power mongering of "religion" has been around since long before the US.

I know which catholics are on the Supreme Court. I also know that Supreme Court justices are hardly objective; have you met scalia and roberts and thomas?

No, I don't think it's because they're republicans; it's because they have a perverted view of the world because their "religion" says they can.

You want to justify the most horrific human abuses; look to any "religion."

Read the fucking history.

[still_one]

14. How about Kennedy? Do you believe that all the Catholic judges will vote against equal rights for

for gays?

I will tell you this, if every Catholic on the Supreme Court votes against gay marriage I will concede or at least consider that you may have a point

[Cerridwen]

31. Why are you comparing Kennedy with scalia, et. al.?

If you think all catholics are alike; you've got an issue that needs to be addressed.

I can discern the difference. Can you?

[still_one]

34. I had the impression you were saying because they were Catholic they would rule what

The Church would want them to. If I misinterpreted your comments regarding The Catholic justices my apologies

Yes I know Kennedy is no scalia

[freshwest]

15. I see it as conservatism. The Kennedys, Biden, Kerry and others being liberal means they support the

Rule of Law by the Constitution and all democratically-elected institutions.

The current USSC is more corporatist than religious. It favors the rich over the poor, the well-connected over the powerless. That is not due to their religion, IMO.

In any case I believe that religion is never more than window dressing for any cause, both left or right to gain authority or moral ground over their opponents. BTW, not a believer, that's not why I say this.

Just making a small disagreement on this and agree with the rest of your points.

I see religions as fronts for oligarches that have existed prior to any government and that is why a powerful secular state is essential. They have the support of wealth and can outlast democratic insitutions, and likely plan their demise, as well. It's not about belief with the top group.

The problem is the masses of people that seek comfort in a world they see changing, but not in their favor. They want to be part of something they believe will protect them to survive.

[Cerridwen]

32. I see it as "authoritarianism". It lives on both sides of the aisle.

I see it as "authoritarianism". It lives on both sides of the aisle.

The "hall monitors" the "police" the "traffic cops".

Conservatism plays a part but I see it as those people who would have power and control over others.

I agree with you that "religion" is not much more than window dressing and justification for "power over mongering". It validates and justifies; with holy approval, the God-keeping stamp of approval, if you will; a "legitimate" reason to control others.

The LOVE of money has become less of a sin and more of a virtue.

Those who call themselves "Christian" should be mortified to worship at the altar of "Mammon". Instead; they revel. With the blessing of the all-mighty raygun.

[OldDem2012]

11. Also, don't forget the role the Catholic Church played in enabling the Holocaust. nt.

[Ikonoklast]

33. And Rome knew that the German Jesuits had a big hand in that.

Killing Jews is a time-honored tradition in some religions.

[HERVEPA]

3. Well, that would make sense if the catholic church didn't wield so much influence in the world.

They argue against condoms in Africa despite the spread of AIDS.

[still_one]

9. So nothing stops anyone from supporting other institutions provide support to stop the spread of AID

through condoms and needle exchange programs

[Honeycombe8]

4. Me, too. I'm not Catholic (well, I'm babtized Catholic). But I can't get overly

concerned about the leader chosen for various religious organizations.

Catholics don't tend to leave their religion, though. It's something to do with tradition, familly history, the way they were raised. It becomes part of their identity, it seems. But the ones I've known tend to pick and choose what they believe, whether the Church is in favor or against something. It's a church of procedures and routines and religious practices, etc. The Catholics I've known follow the procedures, do what's expected of them, but choose to follow their own belief systems. And, after all, the Church provides atonement procedures to absolve them of sins, including Last Rites, so in that respect, their Church is more forgiving than some others.

[still_one]

10. That has been my experience also

[Deep13]

8. Sorry you feel a need to stick your head in the sand.

The RC Church is a powerful, global corporation and it matters to everyone who they pick. Further, I feel bad for average Catholics who live with an anachronistic, misogynist, backward-thinking leadership, over which they have no control.

Being a non-Catholic, I feel I have the intellectual objectivity to be critical.

[still_one]

12. I am not sticking my head in the sand, but anyone can choose whatever religion they want to be part

of, at least in America

and who in the hell is it for me to tell someone else what religion to subscribe to

I have had enough of other groups trying to "save my soul", no thank-you

[Deep13]

18. Not concerned about you're soul.

As far as telling people what to believe, you do realize that any one you or I did "tell" is free to ignore it.

Anyway, my criticism was directed to the corporation, not the customers.

[still_one]

20. Of course I realize that, and I was trying to understand from the perspective why would a

Non-Catholic be concerned?

[Deep13]

21. Asked and answered. nt

[bobduca]

26. And apparently those choices are without consequence!

when you profess your beliefs dont' act surprised when people challenge them, besides that's what faith is all about ,right? Enduring the slings and arrows of us non-believers!

[Gravitycollapse]

13. I'm not a member of the GOP. But I am,nonetheless, concerned with the actions of its leadership.

[freshwest]

16. You've made the correct connection, I think. It's about power, not belief. JMHO, though.

[still_one]

17. That is a valid point. However, the way the republican party exists today, the only way their

leadership will change is if they continue to lose elections

The only way the Catholic Church leadership will change is if they lose members. One we have control over, the other we don't, unless you are a Catholic, no?

[JI7]

19. That Woman in Ireland who wasn't allowed to get an abortion and died

she wasn't even Catholic .

i wouldn't care much if they were just telling their people what to do/believe etc. but when they get involved in laws of nations and want to control non members it matters.

[BB_Smoke]

22. You win the thread

No one is an island. If they insist on influencing public policy by forcing it to conform to their private dogma, then we have a responsibility to react to any development which may directly or indirectly foster such influence. Adams and Jefferson expressed grave doubts about the Jesuits, even while acknowledging it was the price of religious freedom to let them stay in America. I heed their vigilance.

[still_one]

25. Actually there is supposed to be seperation of Church and State, however, religion does try to

influence government policy, no question about it.

So we have Freedom of religion and they have a tax exempt status.

If a religion tells a congregation to vote or not vote for someone because their views are against their religious dogma, should they still be allowed a tax exempt status?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

23. So, only Republicans should criticize Republicans? Only, Fascists should criticize Fascists?

Is it necessary to join the Republican party to criticize it? Or, don a brown shirt to have the right to say unkind words about Fascism?

[still_one]

24. Others have made similar points in the thread, and it is a good argument

[LeftyMom]

27. Here are six reasons: Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, Alito, Kennedy and Sotomayor.

[still_one]

28. I will agree with you if every single one of them vote against marriage rights for gays. In other

words, an issue such as equal rights under the law which is what is really being argued, if they uphold that, to me that will be a strong single that their religious beliefs, and NOT the Constitution have more influence for them.

However, I think, except for scalia, thomas, and alito, that roberts, kennedy and definitely Sotomayor will rule in favor of marriage equality.

We will know soon enough

Your question does come down to the independence of the justices

[BB_Smoke]

30. Another win

[magical thyme]

29. as far as I'm concerned, they can choose whichever geriatric pedophile rapist they want

I just don't understand how they can stick their head in the sand about how much their church has perverted the teachings of Christ, whom they purport to follow.

And I do resent that all the toll gates to heaven don't pay taxes, even while they get all kinds of benefits at society's expense. Also their undue influence on our political systems. Also the fact that their rapists are above the law, and so arrogant about how far out of reach of the law they are that they rub in our faces by "forgiving" their victims for hating their rapist's guts.

Also the way the media shoves their pope in our faces all the time. Yes, there are over 1B catholics in the world. There are also over 1B+ Buddhists, but do you see the Dalai Lama sucking up all the oxygen on the news? No. And all we ever see of the 1B+ Muslims is Osama and al Qaeda.

And I also just learned that another difference between me and all of my co-workers at the hospital lab, aside from their all being libertarians and tea partiers is that they are all catholics who were all aflutter over who was elected pope.