Does Santorum Represent Catholics? Fa...

Does Santorum Represent Catholics? Fans, Foes Argue

There are 19 comments on the Patch.com story from Mar 14, 2012, titled Does Santorum Represent Catholics? Fans, Foes Argue. In it, Patch.com reports that:

Matt Muchowski, Toni Weaver and Jon Zahm all attended Catholic schools, butA disagree strongly over Republican presidential contender Rick Santorum's views.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Patch.com.

Fr Jack Kearney

Huntington Beach, CA

#1 Mar 15, 2012
Atltho Santorum may side with the Church on abortion and marriage, he clearly opposes the Church on capital punishment, immigration, unions, health care, and welfare. He really isn't all that Catholic....
(I speak only for myself)

FaFoxy

“ WOOF !”

Since: Oct 10

Coolidge, AZ

#2 Mar 15, 2012
Santorum represents NUTS.

So yes, he represents Catholics.
John

Sun Prairie, WI

#3 Mar 15, 2012
FaFoxy wrote:
Santorum represents NUTS.
So yes, he represents Catholics.
If this is the best comeback you have , BAM! you don't count. You obviously are low on the food chain. You are eliminated from reasonable discussion. No one argues with a fool for long.
No one

Bangladesh

#4 Mar 16, 2012
Fr Jack Kearney wrote:
Atltho Santorum may side with the Church on abortion and marriage, he clearly opposes the Church on capital punishment, immigration, unions, health care, and welfare. He really isn't all that Catholic....
(I speak only for myself)
I thought the Catholic thing was about "if you want peace, work for justice," while Santorum is cynically and unequivocally against that dictum as well as the principles you mention. He's just another evil Republican looking to leverage the party's ignorant electoral base. Shame about reasonable GOP (ex-Western state governor-type) candidates who've been shunted aside like Huntsman or who never even reached a level of viable voter consciousness like Gary Johnson (now running as a Libertarian)...

FaFoxy

“ WOOF !”

Since: Oct 10

Coolidge, AZ

#5 Mar 16, 2012
John wrote:
<quoted text>
If this is the best comeback you have , BAM! you don't count. You obviously are low on the food chain. You are eliminated from reasonable discussion. No one argues with a fool for long.
Obviously it was humor.

:)

(Although as a devout church-going Protestant, I must admit that there IS some truth to it.:))

“Your religion is NOT in charge”

Since: Nov 11

Columbus

#6 Mar 16, 2012
In a sensable world, we wouldn't even be having the discussion... as he's SUPPOSED to represent Americans. Religion is humanity's single greatest failure.

FaFoxy

“ WOOF !”

Since: Oct 10

Coolidge, AZ

#7 Mar 16, 2012
Nytebreid wrote:
In a sensable world, we wouldn't even be having the discussion... as he's SUPPOSED to represent Americans. Religion is humanity's single greatest failure.
Then why did the Founding Fathers deem it so imporatant that they singled it out in the U.S. Constitution to give it SPECIAL protection ? Yet at the same time they didn't give ANYONE the "right to vote". Why did they do that ?
Printman

Elmwood Park, IL

#8 Mar 16, 2012
FaFoxy wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet at the same time they didn't give ANYONE the "right to vote". Why did they do that ?
OH great now you went & done.. You clued in the liberals that the right to vote isn't in the constitution..WE can expect numerous court battles trying to keep religious whites from the ballot box.. THANKS A LOT!!!

FaFoxy

“ WOOF !”

Since: Oct 10

Coolidge, AZ

#9 Mar 16, 2012
Printman wrote:
<quoted text>
OH great now you went & done.. You clued in the liberals that the right to vote isn't in the constitution..WE can expect numerous court battles trying to keep religious whites from the ballot box.. THANKS A LOT!!!
Well, it's not.

:)

LOL

There is NO federa; "right to vote" and never has been. Voting rights are the EXCLUSIVE purview of teh states (with certain narrow limited exceptins), and the states can do away with that right whenever they wish.

In fact, DEMOCRAT Perdue recently suggested doing away with voting for a few years because she didn't like the results of the 2010 congressional elections when Republicans won the most amount of seats in 70 years.

"DEMOCRATIC" Party ?! ROFL !
Heidi Ho

AOL

#10 Mar 16, 2012
I was raised Catholic, and I remember singing in Church "Whatsoever you do to the least of my brothers, so you do unto me", as a quote from JC. Whatever the Republicans are calling themselves, they are certainly not Christians. They would step on a sick child lying in the gutter to hand a tax refund to a billionaire.

“The Black Mermaid”

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#11 Mar 17, 2012
Nytebreid wrote:
In a sensable world, we wouldn't even be having the discussion... as he's SUPPOSED to represent Americans. Religion is humanity's single greatest failure.
I agree, but watch - Santorum will get all the Catholic votes.

FaFoxy

“ WOOF !”

Since: Oct 10

Coolidge, AZ

#12 Mar 17, 2012
Sherlayne wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree, but watch - Santorum will get all the Catholic votes.
Thsi is a Protestant country and always has been. The majority of American voters have ALWAYS voted against a Catholic candidate for POTUS.

“The Black Mermaid”

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#13 Mar 17, 2012
FaFoxy wrote:
<quoted text>
Thsi is a Protestant country and always has been. The majority of American voters have ALWAYS voted against a Catholic candidate for POTUS.
I can't argue with you there. Although I was too young to vote at the time, I remember the huge fuss over Kennedy - our first Catholic pres. People were really up in arms about that! I don't think a candidate's religion should matter, but it does to many. For instance, why have we never had a Jewish president?

FaFoxy

“ WOOF !”

Since: Oct 10

Coolidge, AZ

#14 Mar 17, 2012
Sherlayne wrote:
<quoted text>
I can't argue with you there. Although I was too young to vote at the time, I remember the huge fuss over Kennedy - our first Catholic pres. People were really up in arms about that! I don't think a candidate's religion should matter, but it does to many. For instance, why have we never had a Jewish president?
Why ? Because like I said. Te are a Protestan country, always have been and despite what a person may say in public, once they get into the privacy of the voting booth, they vote PROTESTANT.

Protestant values are NOT Catholic values, nor Jewish values.

“Your religion is NOT in charge”

Since: Nov 11

Columbus

#15 Mar 17, 2012
Let an atheist run against one of yor protestants. I acknowledge that he or she probably wouldn't win... but I think they'd get enough votes to prove that Americans are drifting away from religion in politics.

...and the more we drift, the better.

FaFoxy

“ WOOF !”

Since: Oct 10

Coolidge, AZ

#16 Mar 17, 2012
In fact, for many decades, Congress SPECIFICALLY FORBADE U.S. diplomatic relations with The Vatican, by federal law.

Beginning February 28, 1867 when Congress passed legislation that prohibited any diplomatic relations with The Vatican.

That prohibition lasted until September 22, 1983, when it was repealed at the request of President Regan who was secretly funnelling money and other resoures thru Pope Paul II to Solidarity in Poland, to bring down the government there.

I have always believed that a motivating fact of The Vatican to choose a Polish Pope in 1978, was specifically directed at bringing down the communist government in Poland, and starting a domino effect in Europe. AND IT DID !

Remember that the communists attempted to murder Pope Paul II, BECAUSE THEY KNEW he was working to bring down communism in Poland.

The price of The Vatican doing this in cahoots with the U.S. was full restoral of diplomatic relations.

FaFoxy

“ WOOF !”

Since: Oct 10

Coolidge, AZ

#17 Mar 17, 2012
But since The Vatican IS The Roman Catholic Church, and exists for NO other reason, I contend that having diplomatic relations with The Vatican, and NO other religious organization of any kind, violates the First Amendment, and thus, the federal law authorizing and funding these relations is UNCONSTITUTIONAL, as it OBVIOUSLY grants special favor to ONLY this one particular religion.

“Your religion is NOT in charge”

Since: Nov 11

Columbus

#18 Mar 17, 2012
FaFoxy wrote:
But since The Vatican IS The Roman Catholic Church, and exists for NO other reason, I contend that having diplomatic relations with The Vatican, and NO other religious organization of any kind, violates the First Amendment, and thus, the federal law authorizing and funding these relations is UNCONSTITUTIONAL, as it OBVIOUSLY grants special favor to ONLY this one particular religion.
I've disagreed with you and argued with you on multiple occasions... but not this time.

FaFoxy

“ WOOF !”

Since: Oct 10

Coolidge, AZ

#19 Mar 17, 2012
Nytebreid wrote:
<quoted text>
I've disagreed with you and argued with you on multiple occasions... but not this time.
That's because I am ALWAYS Fair. And Balanced.

:)

(And Protestant, Thank God !:))

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Mundelein Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Lake County Fair prepares for opening Wed Fair Lady 2
Who do you support for U.S. House in Illinois (... (Oct '10) Tue OldManBenny 72
Singles, STAY AWAY from the Lake County Fair! Tue County fair man 1
News Lakemoor Woodman's stalled as parties wait for ... Tue Wauconda Jim 2
Emily Mirochnick is get ready moved to Californ... Jul 24 Emily 1
home choice stores (Aug '09) Jul 23 Unknown 26
News OSHA cites Lakemoor Dental with employee safety... Jul 21 toothless in fox ... 1

Mundelein Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Mundelein Mortgages