The Ratzinger delivers Satan's dirty work in 2004 Election against Kerry

[zulchzulu]

The Moneychangers at the Vatican Corporate Headquarters chose this dirtbag who made this statement in the 2004 Election:

"A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of the candidate’s permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia. When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favor of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons.”

The Rat believed that Kerry should not receive communion because he is not a theocratic neocon hellbent on getting the government to strip women's rights. He also felt that anyone who votes for Kerry might go to Hell.

I used to be a Catholic. And this action by the Moneychangers proves once again that Jesus would use a rocket launcher if he had the chance on these fanatical zombies.

[Zynx]

1. Ummm, that is more moderate than what the fundie bishops were doing

They were talking of denying Communion flat out. Note the following:

"When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favor of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons.”

That's saying you CAN vote for Kerry if you believe Bush is evil, Bush starves poor, etc.

[zulchzulu]

2. The fact that The Rat chimed in on the 2004 Election shows he's a dirtbag

Memo to the Vatican Fanatic Moneychangers: The US is not a theocratic nation. Yet.

If Jesus ever comes back, the Vatican is his first stop to tumble over the tables...again. The Rat is nothing but a stooge...with his Hitler Youth training as a young boy, he is a Perfect Fit.

[Zynx]

5. Do you remember what some of the bishops were doing???

That was a circus. The Vatican needed to make a statement.

And I wouldn't classify Ratzinger as a stooge - he's actually the direct opposite problem - a supreme authoritarian. He'd be more likely to excommunicate you or say you were hell bound than take orders.

Now repeat after me...Bush does not own the pope.

[Inland]

8. It's pretty hedged

I'm not comfortable with even hedged language on religion guiding votes.

[politicasista]

3. Sadly religion will play a role in elections for years to come

:mad: :cry:

[mikehiggins]

4. Jesus would forgive them

though he would have some harsh words for Cardinal Law and the other pedophile protectors.

What Ratzinger said was that you could vote for Kerry in good conscience IF you were basically in a "lesser of two evils" situation. Certainly, the Church opposes abortion BUT the Pope also opposed the Iraq Invasion (which is more than lots of Democratic officeholders did, by the way). If the active killing of Iraqi men women and children seemed a larger evil than abortion to the individual Catholic involved, there was "wiggle room" for voting in favor of the less horrendous candidate.

Ratzinger should have been a lawyer, rather than a priest. He knows how to split a hair with the best of them.

[Zynx]

7. Ratzinger: Endorsing the Anyone But Bush Vote.

Close? :)

[Dave Sund]

6. This is ACTUALLY correct

I'm a huge critic of Ratzinger, but this is the correct position, and I only wish the U.S. bishops would have followed it.

[karynnj]

9. The Ratzinger quote or the poster's opinion

His quote let you choose to vote for Kerry, the original poster's interpretation was really the bishops' position.

Has Ratzinger weighed in on the politicians themselves? - I suspect that Kerry's very nuanced position may have been an attempt to balance two incompatible things on this issue; his love and respect for the constitution while attempting to preseerve at least a narrow claim to connection with his religion, which by all accounts is important to him on a personal level, on this.