It is no secret that we have a papal problem:

The Church’s
opposition to gay marriage is “non-negotiable” and Catholic politicians
have a moral duty to oppose it, as well as laws on abortion and
euthanasia.

— Pope Benedict     March 13, 2007

We expect that the first loyalty of politicians is to their oath of office     not to some religious leader in a foreign country. In the United States, we expect politicians to be loyal to the Constitution which clearly provides a separation of church and state. We also expect politicians to consider the best interests of their constituents. About 7% to 10% of those constituents are probably gay. About half of those constituents probably have a close and beloved family member who is gay. Moreover, what the Pope is saying is that he expects politicians to not just be good Catholics but to impose the Pope’s religious dictates on everyone else. Once you claim that something is non-negotiable it means that you are not interested in opinion or fact related to the matter.

Perhaps that is why predominantly Catholic Spain, which is also world HQ for Opus Dei, has had marriage quality for seven years. Marriage equality is supported by 66% of the citizenry     almost all of whom are Catholic. This is also in spite of the fact that Spain’s constitution, while specifying that there is no state religion calls for public powers to take into account the religious beliefs of Spanish society and maintain
the appropriate relations of cooperation, with the Catholic Church and
other denominations.
But I digress.

In the United States we have influential and monied would-be Knights Templar. These warriors for the faith include people like Tom Monaghan, Robert George, Maggie Gallagher and organizations like the Knights of Columbus and National Organization for Marriage. K-of-C is, in essence, a life insurance company that gets a not-for-profit pass from the IRS. They have plenty of money, at taxpayer expense, to influence politics and to impose the Pope’s will. Shame on them. Putting their religion and allegiance to a foreign power above the best interests of all the citizens is un-American.

As for Mr. Santorum     Frothy Mix himself, his strict obedience to orders from his religious leader might be why he was so embarrassingly trounced in his senatorial re-election bid. The other day, Santorum said that he doesn’t have a problem with homosexual people; he has a problem with homosexual acts. That is precisely the position of the Catholic Church. They expect gay people to be “chaste.”

Santorum broke with the Church in his outspoken support for “Intelligent” Design. In that instance, he substituted one religion’s ideology for another. His position is that public schools should violate the separation of church and state.

Thus, I have a question for Mr. Santorum. On all matters do we know your position by knowing the position of your church or your pope? If, by some remarkable set of circumstances, you were to become President of the United States, who would you really serve? J.F.K made his priorities perfectly clear. How about you Mr. Santorum? Cross your heart and hope to die?

Enhanced by Zemanta

By David Cary Hart

Retired CEO. Formerly a W.E. Deming-trained quality-management consultant. Now just a cranky Jewish queer. Gay cis. He/Him/His.