The War Room

DOSSIER # 17A : SHOULD PAUL MARTIN BE EXCOMMUNICATED?

The War Room will not mince words on this issue. Paul Martin should be excommunicated. From his vehement contempt of Catholic teaching on issues such as abortion, to same-sex marriage and his exploitation of the issue of 3rd World Debt, Paul Martin has openly mocked and ridiculed Roman Catholic teaching; that teaching which he claims to adhere to.

He has not only compromised his own Catholic views but more importantly, he has forced other Catholic politicians to compromise their own beliefs by threatening their livelihoods and careers if they did not vote for his legislation. He has permitted laws to be passed that will enable Catholics in Canada to, at worst be prosecuted and at best have a very difficult time raising their children as such.

The following two part Dossier will deal both with Paul Martin’s beliefs and how he has used deceit in the argument of separation of church and state. This is an issue that not only Catholics should be concerned with, but any Canadian citizen interested in issues such as truth, integrity and morality in government.

The War Room has watched in amazement Paul Martin’s comments on this issue. My views on Paul Martin over the past decade have run the gamut from inspiration to
frustration to disappointment to flat our contempt and now…regardless of the next election results…sadness.

This is a man who understands neither the philosophy of Catholicism nor the concept of the separation of church and state. His views are rooted in the dated, laissez-faire approach to Catholicism that is based in the 1960’s and early 1970’s.

I believe that Paul Martin believes that he is a good Catholic. Yet…I do not think he understands why he should not believe in either abortion or same-sex marriage. He does not understand the philosophy behind the rhetoric. More importantly, he is weak and lacks the courage to defend his views to those that hold sway over him.

Catholicism is a philosophy that is about natural law; that the human being has dignity during all phases of its life from conception, during life and until death. That the human body is a vehicle for one’s soul and that vehicle must be treated with the respect and dignity that God imparted upon it.

Catholicism is opposed to abortion because abortion presupposes one of two things; that the fetus is either not human and should be discarded as trash or that the fetus is human but does not deserve to be treated as human.

Catholicism believes in helping the poor and as such the Vatican was the prime lobbyer to the United Nations in supplying cheaper pharmaceutical drugs to combat AIDS in Africa.

Catholicism believes that marriage is a sacred institution between a man and a woman that is family/child based. That it is an institution created by God through nature by which a man and a woman can show love to each other through sexuality which can result in the creation of lineage…family through which the entire human species can be sustained.

Because the church believes that every human body is sacred, even the sick and frail body, no one has the right to destroy it; even the owner of the body itself. This is why they are opposed to euthanasia.

Now all of these are much more complex than I have made them but Paul Martin seems to not even understand this basic philosophy. He is of a generation that heard the rhetoric but did not think to ask the question; why?

Now whether or not you, the reader, believe in these arguments is not pertinent to the debate of whether or not Paul Martin should be excommunicated. These are core tenets of Catholicism. They are non-negotiable. The church here is merely asking a question:

If one does not believe in these tenets, or in Paul Martin’s case vehemently opposes them, why then would one call themselves a Catholic?

Paul Martin calls himself a good Catholic but as a politician he says he believes in the concept of the separation of church and state.

As a Catholic, he fails to understand that his belief system becomes who he is. Ones actions define who they are…not their words. In a democracy the Catholic politician has a duty to say this is who he/she is and the electorate can accept or reject them.

In a democracy, no one forces another to adhere to the tenets of a specific religion or faith. But if one is going to promote themselves as being an adherer to a faith they should at least let it define who they are and be consistent.

The hypocrisy in this issue is astounding.

The United Church has spoken up countless times in support of same-sex marriage and the media encourages them. When Pope John Paul II spoke out against the war in Iraq he was lauded.

Yet…when the issue is one of conscience in the case of abortion or same-sex marriage the Catholic Church is effectively told to ‘shut up’ by people such as Paul Martin, and the media. The arrogance and lack of logic bedazzles.

In the next installment will look at the origin of the concept of the ‘separation of church and state’ and how it has been both abused and misused in this case.


TO BE CONTINUED

posted by Nicol DuMoulin @ 9:30 PM