I have to admit I never thought of this till today. It seems an eon ago but do people recall all the silliness on the Huckabee ad with the bookcase in the background. You know this is some subliminal message when Huckabee just wanted to wish people Merry Christmas. Even people like Peggy Noonan decided to indulge the silliness and said it was an attack on Mormons or some balderdash. Elections do make us at times a little warped in our thinking. The left was talking about Theocracy all over a silly bookcase
Oak Leaves points out the delicious irony here at Obama’s Faith and his latest political flyers.
For the record I have no problem with Obama's Flyer. I don't think the Republic will fall over it.
1 comment:
I am responding to what you've written (http://vox-nova.com/2008/05/15/chaplain-refuses-kmiec-communion/#comment-21802) shown below.
The President of the United States cannot overturn Roe v. Wade. All he or she can do is appoint justices who may or may not agree with his view of RvWade.
Because of this, it doesn't really matter if you vote for a pro-abortion or pro-life candidate. They have no power to make abortion illegal.
Congress can reject an ardently pro-life nominee. Future presidents and future courts can reverse the work of previous courts (either in favor of Roe or against it).
Even if Roe is overturned, individual states have laws protecting abortion's legality. So you see, voting for a pro-choice politician, even for president, does not advance or strengthen the legality of abortion. It changes nothing. The politician nor the voter actually procures an abortion, no sin is involved, and therefore, communion cannot be withheld.
You wrote:
"# jh Says:
May 16, 2008 at 6:02 pm
Liam,
I think that is a good point. WHich is why I wonder why we spend so much time on whether a person lets say running for Congress or President supports the State Execution. 99 pecent of that is occuring at the state level. That goes for people that make that a issue whether pro or con.
I suppoe one could make an argument for someone that intends to use the BUlly Puplit to speak against State sanctioned execuction but who on the radar is going to do that. That would be indeed I suppose be valid. ON the flip side one would oppose someone that would use the BUlly Puplit aspect of the office to oppose Catholic Teaching"
Post a Comment