I will admit, that was the first thing that came to mind as I read this. After all, of course, you and I both know that they’re not going to give up their armed guards. Of course, there was this comment, too:
“Yeah, right. The Vatican is very concerned with children’s safety. Except for rape and sodomy of children by priests. Then, not so much.”
Hitting below the belt? Sure it is. And so what? Is the fact that you fought a fair fight going to be any consolation to you as you stand blindfolded before a shallow grave, waiting for your world to go black forever?
Tags: politics
January 21, 2013 at 21:54 |
Hitting below the belt? Sure it is. And so what? Is the fact that you fought a fair fight going to be any consolation to you as you stand blindfolded before a shallow grave, waiting for your world to go black forever?
I didn’t get this one. Do you think the Vatican will come after people who criticize it? Maybe I’m reading it wrong.
I think the Vatican has all sorts of problems, and I’m Catholic. But I also recognize the Holy See is nowhere near the world power it used to be. The Pope’s official approval of Obama’s proposal really means little more than nil, even to Catholics in the United States. Most Catholics I know pay way more attention to their leaders in the diocese rather than the cardinals in Rome. That may be different for Catholics in other countries (who may actually agree with the Vatican’s approval), but that really doesn’t matter. Obama is the president of the United States of America, and American Catholics ultimately must live under his rule.
For only four more years, though.