Backlash

It is mostly a non-issue that three of the four remaining contenders for the US Senate seat in Colorado -- Ken Salazar, Peter Coors and Bob Schaffer -- are members of the Catholic Church. Except that local Archbishop Charles Chaput has been, in a rather heavyhanded way, saying that Catholic politicians who are pro-choice are not really Catholic. This, of course, is a swipe at Salazar (although I don't think I've heard Coors' positions on just about anything). But the Rocky Mountain News reports that instead of hurting Salazar, Chaput's stance has hurt the archdiocese's outreach efforts to Latino Catholics (full disclosure: I'm not one) and may actually be promoting a rally-around-Salazar effect.

Count me as a big supporter of the separation of church and state. It bothers me when a religious organization -- any religious organization -- says that their religion requires its followers to try to impose its beliefs on the population as a whole through the force of government.

Comments

[ralph]

Right on!

The most frightening thing about politics today is this tendency--on the left and the right--to inject religion into politics.

All candidates must submit. All candidates must obey. Otherwise, excommunication. Frightening.

[joaquin Guerra]

The same thing happened in Texas in 2002. A diocese in South Texas -ironically, Corpus Christi- admonished Catholic politicians i.e.: Tony Sanchez and John Sharp who were running for Governor and Lt. Governor respectively for supporting a woman’s right to choose. It got lost after a couple of news cycles as a non issue and it might have had something to do with the CC diocese fighting allegations of sexual abuse within it's ranks.

[BoulderDuck]

But this is nothing new. As none other than Ronald Reagan used to remind us, the greatest civil rights leader - one of the greatest Americans in the history of the republic - was a baptist minister, and never hid it.

The thing that steams me is the selectiveness of the issue. I heard Chaput celebrate Mass at my parish; the gospel was "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, give to God what is God's." He is about the worst preacher I have ever heard (sigh), but the message of his sermon was quite clear: anti abortion AND anti death penalty. Look, Catholic teaching on the death penalty is not obscure, or unclear! So why doesn't he choose to make noise about the death penalty in the media? ARRRRGGHHH!

I think it may be about money, but I really don't know. It's a national pattern, and it drives me up a wall. In this case, I don't think Salazar is anti-death penalty. And part of this is the media's fault. But the church is so unbalanced in their emphasis. Drives me nuts.

Democrats (like John Kerry) should bring this up. When the meatheads in the Senate were accusing the democrats of being anti-catholic for holding up one of the Dear Leader's judicial nominees (was it Prior?), nobody brought up his support of the death penalty. Arrgh.

(quack.)

[Walter]

"Count me as a big supporter of the separation of church and state. It bothers me when a religious organization -- any religious organization -- says that their religion requires its followers to try to impose its beliefs on the population as a whole through the force of government."

How about individuals who try to impose their beliefs through force of government. Is that any better?

[Luis]

Well I think an individual's chances of imposing his or her own morality through legislation are about as good as me winning the Stanley Cup by myself. Politics is a team sport. And I find the idea of a top-down religion trying to throw its weight around in politics extra objectionable, especially while it is enjoying tax exempt status.

You get down to the individual level and you could argue that practically everyone's view of proper public policy is informed by their own sense of morality. For example,if one were to personally view taxes are morally equivalent to slavery, then one would want a government with minimal or no taxation. Whether that is "imposing" morality in the same sense of enacting Church doctrine as temporal law is, I guess, in the eye of the beholder.

And that is probably a pretty non-Catholic way of looking at it.

[Walter]

"You get down to the individual level and you could argue that practically everyone's view of proper public policy is informed by their own sense of morality. For example,if one were to personally view taxes are morally equivalent to slavery, then one would want a government with minimal or no taxation. Whether that is "imposing" morality in the same sense of enacting Church doctrine as temporal law is, I guess, in the eye of the beholder."

Yup. The bets I can hope for is a government that tries not to impose its will from the top down, as well.

[Timothy Klein]

This is extremely annoying on the part of the Catholic Church. And it does not have a damn thing to do with religion. This is politicking in the guise of religion. The Catholic church should be admonishing its members to avoid joining either party: abortion is wrong, the death penalty is wrong, to them. They should also be railing against pro-choice Republicans.

Funny thing, they only care about Democrats. Go figure. That is politics, not religion. It should be stopped, or they should be taxed. Period.

[EssJay]

Has the Coors family named any kids "Adolph" recently? I am surprised if not, it is appropriate in a couple of ways.