That’s your bizarre opinion.

Since Communion has no value for you as an atheist, then why are you getting your panties in a bunch? Also, who is forcing Kennedy to be Catholic? Since you’re an atheist, shouldn’t you be pleased if he and other pro-choice politicians were to leave the Church?

The Constitution’s Free Exercise Clause protects Tobin’s action. There are no IRS guidelines that regulate the dispensation of religious sacraments.

If American Atheists (which has the same 501 c 3 nonprofit status as any church, synagogue, mosque, or Scientology center) wanted to punish a member who was also an elected or public official because he voted against their views, it would be within it’s right to do so.

Let’s be honest everyone. It doesn’t matter who you are, your religious viewpoints (religion is a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith) drive every decision you make in life. This goes for Atheism, Theism, or Pantheism.

For instance, if someone believes that life is a random occurrence with no ultimate cause or purpose, then abortion and other sensitive subjects can be supported because no inherent accountability (other than social acceptance) exists for one’s actions.

But if someone believes that there is an ultimate cause (whether God, or any other spiritual being) to the universe that gives life an overarching purpose, then life has inherent value. If someone believes this to be true, then to terminate life would be considered murder. I know that Theists and Pantheists disagree on this and unfortunately some people have not followed their worldview to its logical conclusion. You can see how someone’s worldview drives every political decision.

It is absurd for any politician to claim that their religious viewpoints do not affect their politics. Atheism is a religious viewpoint and it does affect Atheists’ politics. Unfortunately we live in a functionally atheistic society where the majority of the people are Theistic or Pantheistic. Politicians are told they have to not allow their religious viewpoints to affect their judgments. That is impossible for anyone!

As a country we fall into this laughable irony by ignoring the facts. It’s funny, yet scary at the same time. Religious neutrality is a hoax. It is not dangerous to acknowledge your religious viewpoints and live likewise.

We can disagree as friendly Americans and be kind to one another, but unfortunately most people would rather lie to themselves and everyone else.

It is utterly inappropriate to use communion as a weapon against Patrick Kennedy for something that Representative Kennedy does.

I can’t believe I’m going to say this, but I’m actually going to side with the Catholic church on this issue.

They’re a private organization and can make up their own rules. If people don’t agree with the rules, they’re free to leave. In fact, I wish they would leave. If all the moderate and progressive Catholics stopped attending mass, decided to pull their kids out of parochial school, and refused to donate money, then maybe the Catholic church wouldn’t have so much power. If all those who support gay rights, abortion rights, women clergy, and birth control told the church to go fly a kite, perhaps the hierarchy would be forced to change. If not, at the very least, they wouldn’t have the resources or the clout to interfere so much with American politics.

How does it work now: do they fax out a bulletin with a mug shot for the priests to intentionally exclude?

http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/columns/view/20091122-237831/When-churchmen-campaign

More to the point, Catholic doctrine (from the mouths of the last two Popes, no less!) also opposes the death penalty, the war in Iraq, and rampant global capitalism.

However, you never hear the U.S. Catholic bishops attack politicians for holding those positions. Only the doctrines dealing with the reproductive organs. You can slaughter people by the thousands, as long as they’ve passed through the birth canal, and the U.S. bishops are fine with it.

The interesting political drama is the question “why?” Apparently Kennedy just now has decided to fight. I wonder if it had anything to do with Ted passing.

[/snark]

It’s perfectly logically consistent to be solidly against abortion, to not get an abortion yourself (or to council your wife not to get one), and to simultaneously think that there should be no laws preventing abortion. In attempting to deny this truth, the priest is painting with the broadest monochromatic brush imaginable. Religion’s stark black/white divisions stunt moral development.