Post #179,677
10/17/04 11:42:30 PM
|
Kerry talking more religion
[link|http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40595-2004Oct17.html|Washington Post] John F. Kerry is evolving from a reserved Catholic reluctant to discuss faith in the public square into a Democratic preacher of sorts who speaks freely and sometimes forcefully about religion on the hustings.
From the pulpit to the pastures, Kerry is increasingly spreading a more spiritual message and visiting local churches, as he did the past two days in Ohio, to expound on the political lessons of the Bible's James and Saint Paul. It wasn't always this way. For much of the campaign, Kerry resisted pressure from some Democrats, including aides, to discuss his faith more widely and mostly touched on the topic only before African American audiences on Sundays.
In an interview with The Washington Post during the Democratic primaries, Kerry appeared hesitant to discuss religion. He steered the conversation toward his belief that Bush was blurring the lines between church and state in dangerous ways. The Kerry campaign is playing this down somewhat, but it obvious that Kerry is going after Bush's stronghold here. By attacking Bush on religion, he undermines Bush's last solid support group. How much impact this can have at this point is hard to say. But things are so close that shifting even a few people might make a difference. Jay
|
Post #179,679
10/18/04 12:11:27 AM
|
I really don't think he should go there.
Kerry's Catholic. Catholic doctrine is that divorce is forbidden. He's been divorced once.
I don't think he wants to go too deeply into religion or risk having to discuss his differences with his church - something that's a no-win for him.
Cheers,
Scott.
|
Post #179,704
10/18/04 9:52:48 AM
|
Was he divorced, or was his marraige "annulled"?
There is a technical, but significant, difference in the Catholic church
jb4
shrub\ufffdbish (Am., from shrub + rubbish, after the derisive name for America's 43 president; 2003) n. 1. a form of nonsensical political doubletalk wherein the speaker attempts to defend the indefensible by lying, obfuscation, or otherwise misstating the facts; GIBBERISH. 2. any of a collection of utterances from America's putative 43rd president. cf. BULLSHIT
|
Post #179,754
10/18/04 1:34:55 PM
|
Things I've read say "divorced".
E.g. [link|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Kerry|Wikipedia]: Kerry was married to Julia Thorne in 1970, and they had two children together. Alexandra Kerry was born on September 5, 1973, days before Kerry began law school. She graduated in June 2004 from a film school in the Los Angeles area. Vanessa Kerry was born on December 31, 1976. She is a graduate of Phillips Academy (like her grandfather) and Yale University, and is currently a student at Harvard Medical School. Vanessa has been active in her father's Presidential campaign.
In 1982 Thorne, who was suffering from severe depression, asked Kerry for a separation. [13] They were divorced on July 25, 1988. "After 14 years as a political wife," she wrote in A Change of Heart, her book about depression, "I associated politics only with anger, fear and loneliness." The marriage was formally annulled by the Roman Catholic Church in 1997. Thorne later married Richard Charlesworth, an architect, and moved to Bozeman, Montana, where she became active in local environmental groups such as the Greater Yellowstone Coalition. She has announced that she is "100% behind" Kerry's candidacy for President. So it looks like it was both a divorce and an annulment. What a surprise. :-/ Cheers, Scott.
|
Post #179,846
10/18/04 6:44:48 PM
|
In your link, however, we have this:
The marriage was formally annulled by the Roman Catholic Church in 1997. jb4
shrub\ufffdbish (Am., from shrub + rubbish, after the derisive name for America's 43 president; 2003) n. 1. a form of nonsensical political doubletalk wherein the speaker attempts to defend the indefensible by lying, obfuscation, or otherwise misstating the facts; GIBBERISH. 2. any of a collection of utterances from America's putative 43rd president. cf. BULLSHIT
|
Post #179,871
10/18/04 8:39:15 PM
|
Didn't I post, and say, that too? :-/
|
Post #179,738
10/18/04 1:10:27 PM
|
Don't think it would
I don't think he wants to go too deeply into religion or risk having to discuss his differences with his church - something that's a no-win for him. There are some hard core Catholics that won't vote for him because of his disagreements with the church, but those people set their posistion long ago. Most American's are more irritated with the Catholic church then Kerry for their political stance against him. Most American's are closer to Kerry's posistion on abortion then the Catholic Church's. And many are aware that the church leaders are being very selective in condeming Kerry for abortion but not Bush for the death penalty. But most importantly, Kerry's talking about religion in a non-denominational way comes across well. Kerry is obviously speaking about something he does believe, and is able to get is some hits on Bush by quoting the bible. Jay
|
Post #179,743
10/18/04 1:21:47 PM
|
Re: Don't think it would
I'd be surprised if Bush the fundie got 1 in 4 Catholic votes. Let's see, Boston, St. Louis, New Orleans...
[image|http://www.adherents.com/maps/map_us_romcath.jpg||||]
The blue states are - well, blue states (other than Biblethumpiana).
-drl
|
