Happy Easter - To hell with the Vatican edition

Commentary By Ron Beasley

The old celibates and child molesters at the Vatican have said no to a US Ambassador who supports abortion and stem cell research.

Vatican blocks Caroline Kennedy appointment as US ambassador

Vatican sources told Il Giornale that their support for abortion disqualified Ms Kennedy and other Roman Catholics President Barack Obama had been seeking to appoint.

[......] 

The Italian paper said that the Vatican strongly disapproved of Mr Obama's support for abortion and stem cell research. The impasse over the ambassadorial appointment threatens to cloud his meeting with the Pope during a G8 summit in Itay in July.

Ms Kennedy, 53, has said that she supports abortion. Raymond Flynn, a former US ambassador to the Vatican, said earlier this week that Ms Kennedy would be a poor choice.

"It's imperative, it's essential that the person who represents us to the Holy See be a person who has pro-life values. I hope the President doesn't make that mistake," he told the Boston Herald. "She said she was pro-choice. I don't assume she's going to change that, which is problematic."

Now I'm not sure why we even need an ambassador to a church but I think my friend Jazz gets it right.

The broader point there, though, is the truly bizarre concept that foreign entities should be rejecting ambassadors because of policy differences between them and the person selected. Perhaps our ambassador to Venezuela should only be someone who supports Castro, hates America and wants Russian missile installations throughout Central and South America? Here’s an idea… let’s have an ambassador to England who wants the United States to forfeit its independence and go back to being a territory of the U.K.

A quick note to our Obama bashing pundits who are cackling with glee over this: ambassadors, by definition, are representatives of our nation and, in particular, of the positions and views of the current administration. The current administration happens to be pro-choice, and to the extent that should ever come up in discussions, they need to represent those views. All they really need is the ability to communicate well and be, well… diplomatic. They deliver messages, gather information and facilitate relations behind the scenes.

So let's simply not have an ambassador to the Vatican.  I side benefit will be we can watch Pat Buchanan's head explode.

Comments

[distributorcap]

personally the whole vatican can just go away.....

didnt the pope ask bush to not invade iraq... we didnt listen then (then again we should have)