WaPo: Is “Fortnight for Freedom” a covert Catholic effort to unseat Obama?

posted at 2:41 pm on June 8, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Melinda Henneberger certainly thinks so.  My friend and fellow Catholic wonders in her She the People post what it would take to get the IRS to strip the Catholic Church of its tax-exempt status for politicking in presidential elections, and sees the “Fortnight for Freedom” campaign in two weeks as a legitimate reason to do so (via Deacon Greg):

Surely if the church ran a massive PR campaign just ahead of a national election, calling for widespread civil disobedience and reading letters about it from pulpits across the nation, that would cross the line into campaigning?

Ixnay on that, too, because the “Fortnight for Freedom” set to run from June 21-July 4th, is just such an effort.

Just the other night on Twitter, the Archdiocese of Washington tweeted several messages that struck me as partisan: “Unconscionable #HHSMandate #Obamacare set to trample sanctity of human life,” said one of them, sent on June 5th.

In a press release, the bishops compared themselves to Martin Luther King writing his “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” and a priest in San Francisco called this “our Rosa Parks moment.’’

But that was nothing; a frend in Pennsylvania told me he recently heard a homily drawing parallels between the Catholic Church in 2012 under Obama and the persecution of Catholics in Mexico under Plutarco Calles, who between 1926 and 1929 systematically razed churches and executed priests.

In response, I’d ask Melinda this question: Who picked this fight?  It certainly wasn’t the Catholic bishops, who tried working with Barack Obama in crafting the scope of the religious exemption to the HHS contraception mandate.  They didn’t pick the timing, either.  It was Obama and Kathleen Sebelius who decided to promulgate a new rule in an election year that claimed the authority to define religious practice as restricted to only what happens inside a church.

Here’s another question: why would the USCCB want to unseat Obama at all, absent this attack on religious expression?  Although the bishops ended up opposing ObamaCare because of insufficient bars on abortion, their policy positions align more with liberals than conservatives.  Until the HHS mandate, the bishops wouldn’t have had anything to say at all about the federal government’s actions during Obama’s term.

And yet another question: Since when does tax-exempt status mean forfeiting First Amendment rights on issues? This ruling directly impacts the Catholic Church and other faith organizations and threatens their efforts to serve the community.  The bishops have the right to speak out against government action, especially that which tramples on religious expression and arrogates to government the ability to define and curb it.   While some of the debate has been hyperbolic, that doesn’t mean that religious leaders should be threatened with silence or told that protesting unconstitutional incursions on religious liberty is somehow subversive and unethical.  This protest isn’t aimed at some unrelated, esoteric policy decision or candidacy, but an attempt to impose regulation that would force churches to violate their own doctrines or hide inside their churches.

If the churches don’t fight that kind of regulation, which even Henneberger calls “problematic,” who will?

Nancy Pelosi might define her religion as what she does inside a church on Sunday.  That’s her right, even if I disagree.  The government has no right or authority to impose that definition on the rest of us.  If Barack Obama chose to make that attempt ten months before an election, that doesn’t mean that religious leaders of any faith have an obligation to be silent about it until December.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Pelosi and the WaPo are delusional. I love them in this state.

Schadenfreude on June 8, 2012 at 2:43 PM

“Shut up”, the Democrats explained.

NoDonkey on June 8, 2012 at 2:45 PM

So let’s see, trample civil rights of Christians and then threaten financial penalties if they object, have I got that right?

This is what fascism looks like.

KrebsCyclist on June 8, 2012 at 2:46 PM

…Nancy Pelosi was giving mass and could not be reached for comment.

KOOLAID2 on June 8, 2012 at 2:47 PM

Maybe we should threaten unions with the same treatment.

search4truth on June 8, 2012 at 2:47 PM

Frankly. The Catholic Church is well within their right to pull out all stops to have Obama defeated in November.

The Obama agenda has, in so many ways, trampled on the beliefs of Catholics everywhere, and also on the beliefs of Christians everywhere !

DEFEAT OBAMA! and his agenda leading toward a Godless society !!

BigSven on June 8, 2012 at 2:48 PM

Is “Fortnight for Freedom” a covert Catholic effort to unseat Obama?

Is “The Barrack Obama Presidency” a covert Communist/Marxist effort to unseat the Catholic Church?

I say yes to both and pray that the former not the latter comes to fruition.

reddevil on June 8, 2012 at 2:48 PM

Didn’t I just hear that Holder was giving speeches in black churches? How long have politicians been doing this? As long as I can remember, and nothing is ever said about it. Only when the speech goes against the liberals is this separation important.

Night Owl on June 8, 2012 at 2:48 PM

What if the President advocated for policies refusing advanced medical care to people over 65–would churches be forfeiting tax exempt status if they argued against that?

secant on June 8, 2012 at 2:49 PM

…Nancy Pelosi was giving mass and could not be reached for comment.

KOOLAID2 on June 8, 2012 at 2:47 PM

Black mass, most certainly.

NoDonkey on June 8, 2012 at 2:49 PM

Every Catholic, every Christian and every patriotic American should be working tirelessly to unseat obama – obama’s war on the Catholic Church, Christianity and America must end, and it is up to us to end it.

Pork-Chop on June 8, 2012 at 2:49 PM

This administration stepped in an enormous cowturd, and now they’re mad that their shoe is soiled.

NapaConservative on June 8, 2012 at 2:49 PM

There’s nothing in the IRS code that prohibits tax exempt Churches from taking vocal positions on political issues. They are (supposedly) only prohibited from endorsing one specific candidate by name over another. And even that regulation is clearly unconstitutional which is why the IRS has NEVER taken the issue to Court. They always back down and dismiss. They know how the courts would rule.

tommyboy on June 8, 2012 at 2:50 PM

Unfortunately, no.

Blake on June 8, 2012 at 2:50 PM

Melinda Henneberger, Nancy-poo and Her Highness of Health Care are all obviously on the same wave-length.

Next they’ll be saying that the Vatican wants to overthrow the US government.

When you’ve got nothing, throw bull shit and hope it sticks somewhere.

GarandFan on June 8, 2012 at 2:51 PM

…all the Reverends, Pastors or Bishops from Barracks Black Church supporters are b!tching about their sermons too?

KOOLAID2 on June 8, 2012 at 2:52 PM

Who picked this fight?

Exactly. Baraka did a very poor job of weighing the risk vs reward here.

Kind of like going into a biker bar alone and announcing you’re there to kick everybody’s azz.

antipc on June 8, 2012 at 2:52 PM

“STOP FIGHTING BACK!!!”

-Obama/Pelosi/Libtards

portlandon on June 8, 2012 at 2:54 PM

Is “The Barrack Obama Presidency” a covert Communist/Marxist effort to unseat the Catholic Church?

I say yes to both and pray that the former not the latter comes to fruition.

reddevil on June 8, 2012 at 2:48 PM

Took the words out of my mouth. The Catholic Church has woken up to the fact that their socialist buddies have betrayed them, and may even start actively persecuting them. And having the Coward-in-Chief removed peacefully is the best option. The others quickly get ugly, and mostly for them.

MelonCollie on June 8, 2012 at 2:56 PM

If we are betting on the outcome, I am going to choose the Catholic Church.

If we are judging how dumb the strategy of attacking the Church is, in the run up to a major election….This looks like just one more in a long line of bad pieces of advice provided by Valerie Jarrett. Now all the usual suspects are trying to apply lipstick to that pig of a bad ploy.

Dr Evil on June 8, 2012 at 2:57 PM

Besides the obvious financial benefits, why should a religious organization remain tax exempt?

jwally on June 8, 2012 at 3:00 PM

Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Obama, what’s the difference? ALL of them banned or restricted the Church.

wildcat72 on June 8, 2012 at 3:02 PM

So let me get this straight: it’s ok for Holder to go to black churches and spew lies about voter ID laws and Republicans http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-faith/ag-eric-holder-black-church-leaders-mull-voter-law-changes/2012/05/30/gJQAAngW2U_story.html

it’s ok for Media Matters to have tax exempt status http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/06/30/media-matters-questioned-over-tax-exempt-status/

but The Fortnight for Freedom means the Catholic Church should lose it’s tax exempt status? The hyprocrisy is just blatant. Wow, just wow!

neyney on June 8, 2012 at 3:02 PM

Why did we ever decide in the first place that religious organizations weren’t allowed to take political positions? That is absurd on its face.

Shump on June 8, 2012 at 3:02 PM

Besides the obvious financial benefits, why should a religious organization remain tax exempt?

jwally on June 8, 2012 at 3:00 PM

Because their freedom FROM government is explicitly guaranteed by the 1st Amendment?

wildcat72 on June 8, 2012 at 3:03 PM

Shump, they are allowed. They’ll just lose their tax exempt status if they do.

jwally on June 8, 2012 at 3:03 PM

That would be a desirable side effect of the protests, to be sure.

Melinda, you’re wrong.

either orr on June 8, 2012 at 3:03 PM

wildcat, I don’t think applies to taxes..

jwally on June 8, 2012 at 3:04 PM

Took the words out of my mouth. The Catholic Church has woken up to the fact that their socialist buddies have betrayed them, and may even start actively persecuting them.

MelonCollie on June 8, 2012 at 2:56 PM

Dont be so sure about that. The Catholic Church is a very unreliable supporter of limited government. As soon as the mandate is off the table they will go back to normal, back to cuddling Democrats again.

Valkyriepundit on June 8, 2012 at 3:05 PM

Who picked this fight?

Looks like a classic case of the President bringing a knife to a gunfight. Or, more accurately, threatening someone with a knife under the assumption that the victim isn’t packing heat.

“The Pope?!? How many divisions has he got?” -Stalin

Libraritarian on June 8, 2012 at 3:05 PM

M

elinda Henneberger? (whoever?)and her ilk, needs to be informed that the Catholic Church has been around a hell of lot longer than the IRS, and no matter what befalls the IRS, the Catholic Church will remain true to its believes and outlast them all. True believers will see to it !!

BigSven on June 8, 2012 at 3:05 PM

What churches may not do under the IRS code is use “a substantial amount” of its revenues to promote political causes or candidates, nor tell parishioners whom to vote for or against.

Otherwise, they are perfectly free to comment on current events of any kind.

Akzed on June 8, 2012 at 3:07 PM

Exactly. Baraka did a very poor job of weighing the risk vs reward here.

Kind of like going into a biker bar on your Vespa scooter alone and announcing you’re there to kick everybody’s azz.

antipc on June 8, 2012 at 2:52 PM

Amended.

CurtZHP on June 8, 2012 at 3:07 PM

Keep talking, lefties! Even non-practicing and “lapsed” Catholics and other religious beliefs are noticing the willingness – even eagerness – to intrude.

Of course, the Bishops are as self-serving as ever, and only want an exemption for “religious institutions,” leaving lay businessmen at the mercy of federal whims. If the rule is wrong, it is wrong and should be repealed completely.

Adjoran on June 8, 2012 at 3:07 PM

If the Democrats want to talk separation of church and state, by all means let’s do it. Keep the state out of the church’s affairs, and the church will likely keep out of politics.

It’s the same way with lobbyists–take the politics out of money (i.e. remove the government’s ability to mess with the economy) and you’ll take the money out of politics (because there will be nothing to gain through lobbying).

Mohonri on June 8, 2012 at 3:07 PM

Why did we ever decide in the first place that religious organizations weren’t allowed to take political positions? That is absurd on its face. Shump on June 8, 2012 at 3:02 PM

LBJ sponsored and got passed a bill in the 50′s making religious institutions’ tax exempt status revokable if they endorse candidates.

It seems that many churches saw that the Democrat Party was evil, realized where it was taking us, and were advising members not to vote for Democrats. Hence, the Democrats passed this law.

Akzed on June 8, 2012 at 3:10 PM

In a press release, the bishops compared themselves to Martin Luther King writing his “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” and a priest in San Francisco called this “our Rosa Parks moment.”

So, it appears that what you are arguing is that the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s church should have lost its tax-exempt status? Because that’s what it sounds like from here.

sadarj on June 8, 2012 at 3:11 PM

We have entered the “take away their freedom” stage of Obama hope and change. The army he has chosen is the IRS -uncontrollable by congress, now enforcing healthcare and about ready to put on their jackboots.Did we not read of their ordering mucho rounds of anmmunition?

Where is the GOP opposition to the missuse of this unconstitution al agency?

Don L on June 8, 2012 at 3:12 PM

Excellent article and excellent points Mr. Morrissey. Thank you.

thatsafactjack on June 8, 2012 at 3:13 PM

sadarj on June 8, 2012 at 3:11 PM

You need a new hearing aid.

strictnein on June 8, 2012 at 3:15 PM

CurtZHP on June 8, 2012 at 3:07 PM

If you really wanted to go big you should have gone for girls bike and mom jeans scenario. :)

antipc on June 8, 2012 at 3:15 PM

The law that says churches can’t get involved with politics is UN-Constitutional and needs to be challenged anyway.

Axion on June 8, 2012 at 3:16 PM

And of course, no problem when Black churches hold their Democratic love-ins.

paul1149 on June 8, 2012 at 3:16 PM

Liberals love free speech.*

*If you disagree with them they will call you vicious names, accuse you of hate crimes, thought crimes, and try to sue or tax you out of existence.

gwelf on June 8, 2012 at 3:18 PM

Should poor people lose their tax exempt status for “getting invovled” in politics?

gwelf on June 8, 2012 at 3:18 PM

Yeah those stupid Catholics should just shut up and not get involved with politics like all those Black churches…………………

Teacher in Tejas on June 8, 2012 at 3:19 PM

Is suggesting that the IRS might want to revoke tax-exempt status a covert attack on the Catholic church? No, actually, it seems pretty overt to me.

The Rogue Tomato on June 8, 2012 at 3:21 PM

WaPo: Is “Fortnight for Freedom” a covert Catholic effort to unseat Obama?

Yeah, Mitt Romney is going to divert the money for the alien autopsies at Area 51 to dig a tunnel under the Atlantic connecting the White House to the Vatican.

DagoTwit on June 8, 2012 at 3:21 PM

And yet another question: Since when does tax-exempt status mean forfeiting First Amendment rights on issues?

It doesn’t. The writer of that article didn’t want to do the necessary digging. A tax-exempt organization may take on public polic issues, even ones that are divisive.

Section 501(c)(3) organizations may take positions on public policy issues, including issues that divide candidates in an election for public office. However, section 501(c)(3) organizations must avoid any issue advocacy that functions as political campaign intervention. Even if a statement does not expressly tell an audience to vote for or against a specific candidate, an organization delivering the statement is at risk of violating the political campaign intervention prohibition if there is any message favoring or opposing a candidate.

They never say vote against Obama, they talk about his policy in the HHS mandate. His name being attached to the legislation just makes some see that it is a partisan issue, going after his campaign. That is not the case.

Patriot Vet on June 8, 2012 at 3:21 PM

Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Obama, what’s the difference? ALL of them banned or restricted the Church.

wildcat72 on June 8, 2012 at 3:02 PM

But in Obama’s case not Mosque, they got a religious exemption. It looks like the state is sanctioning one religion over another.

Dr Evil on June 8, 2012 at 3:24 PM

Hey Catholic church… time to clean house and start with poohlosi. She worships alright but not the same God us far right lunatic Christians do….maybe a unicorn or a moonbeam god or just at the altar of do your own thing

crosshugger on June 8, 2012 at 3:25 PM

Media Matters is also a tax exempt organization. Lefties never complain about them.

gwelf on June 8, 2012 at 3:25 PM

Oh, yes. Obama vs. the Catholic Church. Lovely. Do it.

Christmas in November.

spiritof61 on June 8, 2012 at 3:27 PM

That’s WIsconsin at national scale :)… They picked a loosing fight and now they are whining pre-emptively, ’tis the money’, ‘the BIshops do not speak for the Ctaholic church ‘(NAncy P), their rescind their tax exemption status.’…. Blah, blah….the Left is coming undone at the seams…and it is such a joy to watch this spectacle…

jimver on June 8, 2012 at 3:28 PM

wallyj: The reason that churches are tax-exempt is for the simple reason that anything the government has the power to tax, it has the power to control.

Scott H on June 8, 2012 at 3:31 PM

If you really wanted to go big you should have gone for girls bike and mom jeans scenario. :)

antipc on June 8, 2012 at 3:15 PM

Yes, but nothing says horribly over-inflated sense of coolness like a Vespa.

CurtZHP on June 8, 2012 at 3:31 PM

Kind of like going into a biker bar alone and announcing you’re there to kick everybody’s azz.

antipc on June 8, 2012 at 2:52 PM

Chuck Norris can.

meci on June 8, 2012 at 3:31 PM

Boiled down, here’s what the argument is.

“Hey, Catholics! Get back in line, wouldn’t want something bad to happen to you, would you?”

Truly revolting.

Red Cloud on June 8, 2012 at 3:31 PM

Chuck Norris can.

meci on June 8, 2012 at 3:31 PM

It’d be his bar.

CurtZHP on June 8, 2012 at 3:32 PM

I went to the USCCB’s website and found the webpage for the event. I did not visit every link for every Diocese on the list but the couple that I did planned a few extra worship services for the period in question and asked for the Rosary to be prayed after each service.

Is that now some sort of offense against state now that the Lightbringer is in charge? Dr King is damn lucky Obama wasn’t President during the Civil Rights marches then.

Dawnsblood on June 8, 2012 at 3:34 PM

WaPo: Is “Fortnight for Freedom” a covert Catholic effort to unseat Obama?

Yeah, Mitt Romney is going to divert the money for the alien autopsies at Area 51 to dig a tunnel under the Atlantic connecting the White House to the Vatican.

DagoTwit on June 8, 2012 at 3:21 PM

Loool :)…I knew t’was the bloody money and, and…and Bilderberg and Illuminati and, and… Cosa Nostra and.. The Maya prophecies…did I leave anything out? Oh, yeah, the Reptilians…and the Royal Family :)…the ROckefellers and the ROtschilds…I hope I covered it all…merde, I forgot the Federal Reserve…

jimver on June 8, 2012 at 3:35 PM

Surely if the church ran a massive PR campaign just ahead of a national election, calling for widespread civil disobedience and reading letters about it from pulpits across the nation, that would cross the line into campaigning?

Yeah, ‘cuz black churches never do that.

Anyhoo, the law prevents churches from endorsing or speaking out against specific politicians not laws or policies.

Does the government want the Catholic Church to STFU about helping the poor, illegal immigration, etc.?

Resist We Much on June 8, 2012 at 3:37 PM

Does the government want the Catholic Church to STFU about helping the poor, illegal immigration, etc.?

Resist We Much on June 8, 2012 at 3:37 PM

I’d say, yes. They probably do. They’ve got Cardinal Pelosi to pontificate for them on such matters.

gwelf on June 8, 2012 at 3:42 PM

Exactly. Baraka did a very poor job of weighing the risk vs reward here.

Kind of like going into a biker bar on your Vespa scooter alone wearing spandex workout gear and leg warmers and announcing you’re there to kick everybody’s azz.

antipc on June 8, 2012 at 2:52 PM

We can keep this going all day….

ScottG on June 8, 2012 at 3:43 PM

Yeah, ‘cuz black churches never do that.

Anyhoo, the law prevents churches from endorsing or speaking out against specific politicians not laws or policies.

Does the government want the Catholic Church to STFU about helping the poor, illegal immigration, etc.?

Resist We Much on June 8, 2012 at 3:37 PM

Yep, the current WH, Barry’s govt and their minions have been long wanting to take over these services from the Church…what a more perfect way of grooming their future activists and voters/julias :)….

jimver on June 8, 2012 at 3:43 PM

Will Bart Stupak please pick up the white courtesy anvil and throw it on his head.

Rixon on June 8, 2012 at 3:45 PM

Liberals love free speech.*

*If you disagree with them they will call you vicious names, accuse you of hate crimes, thought crimes, and try to sue or tax you out of existence.

gwelf on June 8, 2012 at 3:18 PM

And if that doesn’t work, there’s always someone like Brett Kimberlin to step up to the plate.

Libraritarian on June 8, 2012 at 3:47 PM

I hope the Catholic community actually does the right thing and helps rid the country of Obama; but with all due respect, the Catholic community helped elect Obama in the first place. For that reason they have more responsibility than some of us to step up to the plate and fix this mess. They’ve been literally dancing with the devil in the political sense and now they seem surprised to find out the devil is still evil.

MikeA on June 8, 2012 at 3:51 PM

Kind of like going into a biker bar alone and announcing you’re there to kick everybody’s azz.

antipc on June 8, 2012 at 2:52 PM

More like walking into a biker bar alone wearing mom’s jeans and a goofy bicycle helmet and announcing that you’ve come to be their leader/messiah. And if they don’t worship you immediately with words of praise and a Nobel Peace Prize, then you’ll kick all their behinds.

Gladtobehere on June 8, 2012 at 3:52 PM

This is so stupid on the Libs side. Taking away the Catholic Church’s tax exempt status — or even threatening to do so – will bring out EVERY tax exempt religious institution for Mitt.

Maybe if they had done it in the first year Obama was POTUS it might have played better because people, except Catholics, would have had time to forget the pain. But with less than 5 months left before the election — no way no how.

talking_mouse on June 8, 2012 at 3:54 PM

Oh what a disgrace if such a despicable and base man, who hates America and it’s constitution and all Christians, and worships himself, should be allowed to assault a people which has the faith of omnipotent God! With what reproaches will the Lord overwhelm us if we do not promptly and fully aid those who’s conscience is being brutalized and murdered because they profess the Roman Catholic religion! Let those who have been accustomed unjustly to wage private warfare against other of the faithful now all unite and go against the tyrant in a Holy Crusade and end with total victory in November!

Let those who have been in service of this tyrant against their own brothers and sisters now fight in a proper way against this tyrant. Let those who have been wearing themselves out in both body and soul in vain attempt to appease him now labor for glorious honor against him. Behold! On the one side will be the completely destroyed tyrant, on the other the fierce and righteous protectors of the Constitution and Christianity. On the one side will be the destroyed enemy of the Lord, on the other, his friends who will shout at the tyrant as they destroy him in November, “It is for the Founding Fathers!”, “It is for the Founding Fathers!, and “It is the will of God! It is the will of God! It is the will of God!”

RasThavas on June 8, 2012 at 3:54 PM

I don’t know nuttin about bein’ no Cathlic but, I’ll say 1000 hell merrys if this is true.

esnap on June 8, 2012 at 3:56 PM

The Liberal definition of “Separation of Church and State” is the state can attack the church, but the church can’t fight back.

29Victor on June 8, 2012 at 3:59 PM

I’m organizing the events at our Parish and there is *nothing* that indicates support for one candidate over another. The goal is a) awareness of the value of religious freedom and b) a prayerful campaign to ensure that we in the US are able to hold on to our religious freedom and c) to pray for those around the world who aren’t as fortunate as we are and are being injured and killed for being Christians.

Someone else pointed out that Holder has been making speeches to black Church leaders about their ‘right to vote’. So its okay for him to do that – but not okay for Catholics to make their parishioners aware of their right to religious freedom?

joadard on June 8, 2012 at 4:03 PM

calling for widespread civil disobedience

Heh, yeah, when you follow the link, those kids in the picture look so much like they’re engaging in widespread civil disobedience. Why, they look just like OWS.

SailorMark on June 8, 2012 at 4:36 PM

The answer I want to know is: will Roman Catholic bishops endorse Romney for the presidency, openly and as recognition that the Øbama presidency has been a disaster for Catholics, non-Catholics and Democrats as well as for everyone else?
.
Will they ignore his Mormon roots and accept his belief in Christ in order to remove the obstinate, ineffectual, narcissistic Complainer-in-Chief?

ExpressoBold on June 8, 2012 at 4:38 PM

My friend and fellow Catholic(!?)

Isn’t that precious.
All cuddly with a lefty who wants to stifle speech and religious freedom.
Not surprising.

Dr. Carlo Lombardi on June 8, 2012 at 4:41 PM

Once again -the Catholic Church (note I did not say the USCCB which has no hierarchal authority, or some Notre Dame theologian, or Nancy Pelosi, or Obama’s cool Jesuit Chicago priest)holds to the principle of subsidiarity,whereby Caesar (the state) becomes the last resort in who is responsible for social issues, and needs to remove itself from our business that we must handle.

Furthermore, the Church holds the right to own property (no charity is possible without this.

The Church holds that the business of immigration belongs to the moral decisions of the laity.

The Church holds that we have a right (and an obligation to preserve and protect ourselves) it’s called defense -a legitimate war (just) may sometimes be a necessary lesser evil.

The Church holds that all lying (political spin)is evil.
the Church holds that envy (soak the rich) is evil.

You can’t get much more conservative, yet fiscal conseervative hurl spittle and loathe what they euphamistically call -social conservatives -when it is they who hold the storng conservative values.

Don L on June 8, 2012 at 4:44 PM

Well I would only say to Melinda: where have you been?

Any of us sitting in the pews recognized that many churches were alternately preaching the socialist “gospel” over the years. They somewhat surreptitiously have tried to tell us if our Lord and Savior were here today- he’d be a Democrat.

Where were you then with these protestations?

Ah, yes. That’s different- I know.

Now, the same people with whom some have formed this unholy alliance are seeking to take away a fundamental pillar of the American church, the aggrieved protest and Melinda doesn’t like it?

Well I suppose we are in a agreement that religion should be bereft of politics. All politics, not just the ones which don’t comport with people like Melinda’s whimsical, parochial inclinations.

But this fight isn’t about that. It is about the fundamental precepts of the church based on our Lord’s teachings, our constitutional right to practice them freely and our very unique existence as Christians.

If there every was a time the church should organize and speak out- it is now. For what will be left if they don’t, will not resemble and true House of the Lord.

Marcus Traianus on June 8, 2012 at 4:55 PM

WaPo: Is “Fortnight for Freedom” a covert Catholic effort to unseat Obama?

Works for me if it is.

SagebrushPuppet on June 8, 2012 at 5:00 PM

My friend and fellow Catholic …

Get some new friends, Ed.

SagebrushPuppet on June 8, 2012 at 5:05 PM

Kind of like going into a biker bar alone and announcing you’re there to kick everybody’s azz.

antipc on June 8, 2012 at 2:52 PM

Chuck Norris can.

meci on June 8, 2012 at 3:31 PM

Even Chuck Norris wouldn’t try it riding a Vespa while wearing the mom jeans bicycle helmet combo.

If Chuck ever even got near those things except to spray them with a flame thrower it would warp the very fabric of the space-time continuum.

Lily on June 8, 2012 at 5:08 PM

The answer I want to know is: will Roman Catholic bishops endorse Romney for the presidency, openly and as recognition that the Øbama presidency has been a disaster for Catholics, non-Catholics and Democrats as well as for everyone else?

ExpressoBold on June 8, 2012 at 4:38 PM

That is the one thing they will never do–endorse a candidate and the Church will be stripped of tax-exempt status as soon as you can say “ACLU.”

Which isn’t to say that they can’t make their position on any law or issue clear from the pulpit. First Amendment.

spiritof61 on June 8, 2012 at 5:09 PM

The prohibition against religious entities politicing has never been tested in court.

What about the first amendment?

What justification is there for banning political speach in church and allowing it in labor unions?

People join church voluntarily.
People give to churchs voluntarily.
People are free to leave their church with no repercussions (in this life).

People are force to join labor unions.
People are forced to give their money to labor unions.
People we stop paying dues in a closed shop lose their jobs.

Both are tax exempt orgainizations.

Are unions really so much more virtusious that they can be trusted and churches can’t?

I wish every church in America would challenge this.

The Rock on June 8, 2012 at 5:12 PM

In a press release, the bishops compared themselves to Martin Luther King writing his “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” and a priest in San Francisco called this “our Rosa Parks moment.’’

I see what they are trying to do by equating these actions with an extension of the civil rights movement but it just isn’t accurate. This is more away the German National Socialists took over the Protestant churches and corrupted them to include turning the church’s youth programs over to the Hitler Youth. Catholics vis-a-vis the Pope cut a seperate deal.

Happy Nomad on June 8, 2012 at 5:17 PM

As always, if you take the time to go to the original WaPo story linked at the article, the Comments are Comedy Gold.

The reliably delusional Leftist “Ferguson Foont”, for example? Wants the Catholic Church to be governed by the Commerce Clause.

Epic Insanity.

Del Dolemonte on June 8, 2012 at 5:58 PM

…Nancy Pelosi was giving mass and could not be reached for comment.

KOOLAID2 on June 8, 2012 at 2:47 PM

Black mass, most certainly.

NoDonkey on June 8, 2012 at 2:49 PM

ZING!!!!! That one is going to leave a mark.

SubmarineDoc on June 8, 2012 at 6:06 PM

The Democratic party has had a majority of the catholic vote for so long that they think they will always have the way they do the African American vote. here is the problem. Catholics are generally speaking highly educated thanks to their schools and university system. Eventually if you keep kicking them they will kick back. When that happens they will lose it for a long time.

It was already happening before this. More and more of my fellow regularly attending Catholic friends were voting republican. Now even some of the staunch dems are looking at voting the one out of office.

huskerthom on June 8, 2012 at 6:30 PM

Obama is a bully. The schoolyard simpleton.

pat on June 8, 2012 at 6:30 PM

It must be said that the RCC Bishops did a lot to bring themselves to this pass. They have supported government actions in so many things it boggles the mind. Now that it comes around to bite them in seat of their Cassocks, they whine about it.

I agree that the mandate which they complain about is a serious breach. The Bishops need to realize that such things are part of the package when you involved government, particularly when you support secular government doing things the Church should be doing in the first place. If it didn’t affect us all I’d tell them to “cry me a river.”

Quartermaster on June 8, 2012 at 8:02 PM

This is so stupid on the Libs side. Taking away the Catholic Church’s tax exempt status — or even threatening to do so – will bring out EVERY tax exempt religious institution for Mitt.

talking_mouse on June 8, 2012 at 3:54 PM

The attempt to take away religious tax exemptions has already begun in California.

See today’s news:

A proposal to eliminate churches’ property tax exemptions in California has been cleared to collect signatures.

The item needs 807,615 signatures by November in order to make it on the ballot. If passed by voters, it would eliminate property tax exemptions on buildings used for worship or religious purposes on Jan. 1, 2013.

http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/news/2012/06/08/california-ballot-initiative-would.html?ana=e_du_pub&s=article_du&ed=2012-06-08

The Catholic Church and other religious institutions need to fight hard for religious freedom NOW!

wren on June 8, 2012 at 8:22 PM

It was Obama and Kathleen Sebelius who decided to promulgate a new rule in an election year that claimed the authority to define religious practice as restricted to only what THEY IMAGINE happens inside a church.

(Corrected quote to reflect the fact that the Obamacrats have no idea or understanding about what happens inside a real church)

Obama picked a foolish fight. Even an armored battalion looks puny against tens of millions of citizens with pitchforks!!! This is why, in the modern world where it is impossible to prevent communication, all forms of government ultimately require consent of the governed.

landlines on June 9, 2012 at 12:05 AM

Bark cares about one thing only and it is not religious freedom.

He cares about his own re-election at all costs.

Let him strip the Catholic Church of its charitable status if he really is that stupid. You’d be hard pressed to find any Christian who would vote for him at that point.

Bark foricibly retired In November, charitable status restored on Day 1 of the Romney presidency.

CorporatePiggy on June 9, 2012 at 11:41 AM

Black mass, most certainly.

NoDonkey on June 8, 2012 at 2:49 PM

And if Obama was in attendance, does that make it blacker mass?

MelonCollie on June 9, 2012 at 1:59 PM