I think it useful to US interests, particularly in Africa and Latin America, to have an ambassador to the Vatican. It is not, perhaps, critical, but useful allies are always nice to have about.

Heh. Yeah, particularly when one is trying to claim the moral high ground.

Allies are rarely useful for claiming the moral high ground. One ends up being forced to defend policies one has no control over; morals inevitably end up being sacrificed in the name of expediency.

Now, whether one who worked so hard for Obama could or should be categorized as being in the "pro-life" camp is debatable, but Kmiec certainly believes that one can.

In other words it isn't enough to believe in the pro-life cause or consider yourself pro-life, you have to meet our criteria.

Hence again why I used the phrase "openly affirm allegiance to the host’s ideals."

Now, whether one who worked so hard for Obama could or should be categorized as being in the "pro-life" camp is debatable, but Kmiec certainly believes that one can.

Enlightened progressives like Ms Kennedy, and Mr Kemic are not able to publically admit this(That would not be good PR), but in reality they understand and support the need for this "Final Solution". Their pro abortion stance is an obvious clue.

Understandably, this potential genocide toward a substantial number of the poorest of his world wide flock gives the "Wily Old Pope" a reason to have some doubt about his public acceptance of
a neo genocidal figure such as Ms Kennedy.

The Pope is the ultimate example of those intolerant Christian bigots. As soon as we can rid the world of his type. We progrssives can finally bring rational secular justice to the world. But the unfortunate fact is that will take another 10 to 20 years, while we bring a newly indoctrinated generation on line.

I think it useful to US interests, particularly in Africa and Latin America, to have an ambassador to the Vatican. It is not, perhaps, critical, but useful allies are always nice to have about.

Heh. Yeah, particularly when one is trying to claim the moral high ground.

Catholic thought distinguishes between the three acts. Abortion is murder (the deliberate taking of an innocent life). The death penalty is the taking, by legitimate authority, of a guilty life. War is much more multifaceted, where the innocent suffer along with soldiers (or non-innocent).

There is no inconsistency is separating the three different acts because they are different. I cannot help you if you cannot see the difference.

he correctly points out the right tilt of memorandum and that the suggested links were universally praiseworthy

No, the paragraph was a summary of the right-leaning sites aggregated as of writing by memeorandum.

Stickings and Chusid were also included, as was van der Galien.

Around of applause to our host, for he correctly points out the right tilt of memorandum and that the suggested links were universally praiseworthy of the alleged Vatican refusal to accept Carolyn Kennedy as Ambassador to Holy See. Mea Culpa to the academicians in the crowd for using that dreadful Wiki as a source, but the magic blue over Holy See may help clarify some of the issues. (See, for example, Paul Barnes ( April 12, 2009 | 01:31 pm )

As our host pointed out in his blue funk column:

We’ve lost the youth and future generations are decidedly unlikely to ever become meaningfully “conservative,” short of an apocalyptic scenario.

True, as sad or joyful as that might be… But, not only that, the educated class drifted to Obama, and horrors, exit poles showed that a majority of Catholics had shifted back to the Democratic Party. A critical situation, as even the smart sheep were drifting away from the Shepard.

The problem is that basic tenants of the Catholic Church are being obfuscated. It is the responsibility of each individual Catholic to chose between two potential evils; his or her salvation rests in the wise exercise of such a choice. By extension, in civic matters, the Catholics choice certainly has to take in the reality of what candidates are offering for his family’s well being, as well of the well being of the nation. It is the old thing of render unto Caesar…

In the good old days, before virulent apposition to abortion became the raisons d'être for being a devout Catholic, we used to have venial sins, and mortal sins, and depending on intent, severity, damage to others, one could slide from one, into the other. For example, the sin of calumny, know among the non faithful as character assassination, and among politicos as “the smear”, certainly gains in gravity when repeated, when it known to be untrue, and is being presented for overt gain. Now we have an existential grave sin, abortion, that supersedes all others. Thus, in the link kindly provided by SKI (April 12, 2009 | 12:19 pm) a frothing at the mouth Pat Buchanon presents arguments about Notre Dame’s invitation of President Obama that are patently false, as assuredly he must know.

Tlaloc has presented cogent arguments that Doug Kmiec is a pro life Catholic, not mentioned is that he is also a staunch conservative, a constitutional lawyer, and the Dean of Pepperdine Law School. His endorsement of Obama for President was based on what he viewed as best for the country. That he was savaged by the hard right, and fundamentalist Catholics, cannot be disputed.

I have said it before, but I will say it again. The hard right is playing a shell game, look at this scandal, and do not keep your eyes on the issues. The issue is whether the Obama administration is able to decrease the inordinately high abortion rate in the US, which is his stated goal. That can only be achieved by changing our support mechanisms for pregnant mothers (married and single), education, and (gasp) health care.

But, once again, all three activities involve the destruction of life, so it makes perfect sense why the Church would be opposed to all three actions...so if a good Catholic is one who is opposed to abortion, he/she should also be opposed to the death penalty and war...if the Vatican is to be consistent, they would also reject a potential ambassador who was in favor of the two latter activities...

Everything beyond that is rationalization and isn't necessarily sensible or even consistent.

I do find it funny that so many of the right, who adopt a "my way or the highway" diplomatic stand with every other theocratic regime believe we should kowtow to the pope.

And the obvious answer would seem to be that the Pope has more support than Obama, among these. or perhaps more correctly the Pope's policy on abortion has more support among them then does Obama's.

For the unitiated, uninformed, and downright ignorant, it is up to the host country to approve of any diplomat or ambassador. That's the way it works, always has, always will. This is NOT a liberal/conservative consideration.

You miss the point. The argument is not whether the Vatican has the right to do this, indeed they do. The question is whether or not it violates the very nature of diplomatic relations and is ultimately self defeating.

Yes they can insist on only accepting an ambassador who is pure blood Italian roman catholic direct descendant of pope innocent if they like but where does it get them?

We can demand they send us a wiccan, but all that does is make it very hard for them to send us anyone.

There are always things you have the right to do that nevertheless remain counterproductive.

For the unitiated, uninformed, and downright ignorant, it is up to the host country to approve of any diplomat or ambassador. That's the way it works, always has, always will. This is NOT a liberal/conservative consideration.

You miss the point. The argument is not whether the Vatican has the right to do this, indeed they do. The question s whether or not it violates the very nature of diplomatic relations and is ultimately self defeating.

Yes they can insist on only accepting an ambassador who is pure blood Italian roman catholic direct descendant of pope innocent if they like but where does it get them?

We can demand they send us a wiccan, but all that does is make it very hard for them to send us anyone.

There are always things you have the right to do that nevertheless remain counterproductive.