And for a bit of comic relief:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gldlyTjXk9A

It is precisely this sort of thing that made the going so rough for JFK in 1960 (not to mention a great deal of enmity toward Catholics in politics historically in the US). It has been well understood throughout history that this is how the RC Church hierarchy operates and Americans have been rightfully concerned about these medevil . JFK, of course, completely renounced any notion that he would serve the interests of his church first or decide matters of publicly policy based on the preferences of the church or it's foreign leader as opposed to making decisions based upon the interests of the nation within the bounds of the Constitution.

Since 1960 that line has blurred considerably but particularly since the church decided to take up an unending fight against women's right to decide whether or not they would get or stay pregnant. Let's not forget, the RC church remains opposed to all contraception. Seems the RC Church, like numerous other Christian denominations has big problems with anything related to sexuality.

The prelates of the RC church have increased their involvement (some would say meddling) in political affairs with the whole same sex marriage issue. In this and other areas, increasingly, the RC Church has been aligning itself politically with the most reactionary and extreme Protestant fundamentalists. The involvement of religious groups on this issue is, of course, nothing but an intrusive and heavy handed effort to impose particular religious beliefs and standards on everyone even though it doesn't impact any religious groups in any way. One need look no farther for the extent of the involvement than this piece running in the St. Louis Post today regarding the role of the RC church in overturning same sex marriage laws despite the fact that such laws have no bearing whatsoever on the church or how it operates:

Carlson tapped archdiocesan fund to fight gay marriage in Maine
BY TIM TOWNSEND
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
Thursday, Nov. 12 2009
The St. Louis Archdiocese contributed $10,000 to a voters' initiative that
overturned a Maine law last week legalizing gay marriage, campaign finance
records show.

Only two other dioceses in the country — Phoenix and Philadelphia — contributed
more ($50,000 each). The dioceses of Newark, N.J., and Youngstown, Ohio, also
contributed $10,000.

In a statement Wednesday, St. Louis Archbishop Robert Carlson said the money
came from a "special needs" account tapped at his discretion. That account is
funded by "private gifts."

By 53 to 47 percent, Maine voters rejected a law that Maine's Roman Catholic
governor signed in May. The law would have made Maine the sixth state to allow
same-sex partners to wed. Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts and Vermont allow
gay marriage now. New Hampshire will in January.

The Nov. 3 ballot measure asked voters: "Do you want to reject the new law that
lets same-sex couples marry and allows individuals and religious groups to
refuse to perform these marriages?"

The catechism of the Roman Catholic Church calls homosexual acts "acts of grave
depravity" and "intrinsically disordered" because they "close the sexual act to
the gift of life."

The Catholic church led the charge to reject the new law. In the quarter
leading up to the vote, 45 dioceses around the country contributed a total of
$180,550 to the effort, according to the campaign finance records. Nearly 70
percent of the dioceses contributed $1,000 or less. Six bishops personally
contributed a total of $2,700.

Two other Missouri dioceses contributed to the cause. The Diocese of
Springfield-Cape Girardeau gave $500, and the Diocese of Jefferson City gave
$2,000.

According to the Portland Press Herald, the two sides of the ballot issue in
Maine "spent more than $7 million, with same-sex marriage supporters
outspending opponents."

It is illegal for tax-exempt religious organizations to participate in
political campaigns for candidates, but they can "engage in advocating for or
against issues and, to a limited extent, ballot initiatives or other
legislative activities," according to Internal Revenue Service regulations.

It's not unusual for Catholic dioceses to support one another when ballot
issues arise that relate to church teaching. In 2006, the St. Louis Archdiocese
contributed $121,000 in a failed attempt to defeat a ballot proposal now
protecting all forms of embryonic stem cell research allowed under federal law.
On Wednesday, archdiocesan officials said other dioceses around the country
contributed to that effort.

Carlson said that in June, Portland Archbishop Richard Malone asked all U.S.
bishops for financial support "for issues the church considers to be moral
issues." Carlson then approved the $10,000 donation, which was taken from the
archdiocese's "special needs fund."

"This fund has traditionally been the archbishop's for discretionary spending,
not for formal operations, and is funded by private gifts," according to the
archdiocese's statement

There is also the pseudo-christian mafia 'The Family', the congressmen that live at C Street house and other involved. It isn't just the Catholics doing this.

I still will take some time to watch reruns of Bishop Sheen. I have blogged about him. Born in Illinois in the 19th century; speaking with an Irish accent!!!

The poor, charity, the sick, health care, compassion...

Oh sex was the great sin and all that. But he spent so much time discussing individual responsibility owed by the haves and the have mores...ha!

Now our biggest concern is supposed to be rubbers and gay people and abortion. I don't think they have taken it as far as Pat Robertson who also seeks lower taxes and freedom for offshore corporations, but still.

WAKE UP EL PAPA.

I think we might have done better with someone who did not grow up in a NAZI youth camp.

There is one good thing in all this TheraP. I hope Dad is feeling better, but the good news here is that it is clear that the lord has blessed you with some mighty strong genes...

TheraP will be with us for some time to come. ha!!

Seems to me you could cast all Christian religions in the same light too so why get your feathers all ruffled up? Mormons and southern baptists come to mind most readily as having axes to grind in pretty much the same manner - they just don't have the global reach.

What I do mind is religion exercising political gamemanship when they're exempt from being taxed based on them not being political. So let the tax axe fall and then see which they feel is more important - playing politics and paying taxes or being quiet and sitting pretty.

It's the only way to make a religion obedient to the rule of law.

But the Vatican, through its lackeys in the form of bishops and cardinals, is seeking to subvert the legal process by threatening "excommunication" from their church - if the duly elected, sworn to the Constitution, representatives fail to carry out the orders of the Vatican.

So what? How is that a "subversion" of the legal process? Suppose I personally compile Dan Kervick's List of Politically Cool People. Now suppose I come to decide that I don't like the voting behavior of my US Representative, Paul Hodes, and as a result I announce that Hodes has been subjected to Official Erasure from Kervick's List of the Politically Cool. Have I subverted our system? No. I'm free to engage in that kind of political communication and activism.

What if Hodes actually feels influenced or politically threatened by my unilateral decision to erase him from my list? Am I guilty of subversion in that case? No. Whether or not Hodes is influenced by my statements and decisions regarding The Cool List depends on Hodes's personal attitudes and choices. It's then up to his constituents to decide whether or not to return a person to office who is animated by those dispositions.

Nobody in the United States is compelled by law to be a member of the Catholic Church, or to seek to remain in "communion" with it. That is their own choice. If some representative's behavior is influenced by what the Catholic Church says about him, or by what relationship the church unilaterally declares to exist between them, that influence comes about because of that representative's own attitudes and loyalties. If you think the influence is on the whole harmful, don't blame the organization for trying to do what any other organization is entitled to do - advance its values and agenda through the political process - instead, blame the representative for being thus influenced, and then un-elect him.

The Catholic Church is an organization with an ideology. Like any other organization, it is permitted in our system to attempt to advance it's aims by publicly promoting its message, and by engaging lawfully in the political process. The same is true of any other religious organization, or non-religious organization for that matter.

If we don't like the message, or some of the messages, the Catholic Church preaches, or some of the agendas it promotes through political activism, then it is our responsibility as citizens to articulate dissenting messages and to engage in opposing political action to thwart the church in what it is trying to achieve. But one shouldn't throw around accusations of "subversion" at people of whom we disapprove, simply because they are on an opposing side, and work vigorously to influence political decision-making.

The Catholic Church's undemocratic, theocratic and rigidly hierarchical organization is backward and obnoxious. But there is nothing in the US Constitution that says that the organizations to which Americans belong must be organized on a democratic basis. Nor is there anything that prohibits most such organizations from engaging in political activism.

Interesting take here:

http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/2034/house_healthcare_bill_discriminates_against_religious_freedom__

Yes, scrutinize their tax-exempt status!

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29336.html

Organized churches often do things that are just plain mean and stupid. Individual churches can be found that understand the true message of religion. These churches feed the poor and provide comfort to their congregations.

Evil will always exist and at times seem overwhelming. US Catholics are not in lockstep with the message coming from the hierarchy. Individual Catholic churches will find a way to administer to the poor despite what the Catholic Charities decide.
Religious people (Catholics, Protestants, Muslims, etc) will prevail over those in Catholic administrative positions who have lost their way.