“Heinz Kerry Criticizes ‘Neanderthal’ Attacks On Husband”

Gosh, she isn’t even First Lady, and already she’s tiresome.
In all likelihood, she’s living in sin with her “husband,” who refuses to document his supposed annulment, even though he says he’s “in good standing” with the Church. (He does think annulments are funny, however.) Lord, deliver us from these proud, ridiculous people.

8 comments

  1. Eric,
    We don’t know whether or not an annulment was granted, so I think it’s counterproductive, not to mention uncharitable, to accuse the Kerrys of living in sin. John Kerry’s public support of abortion to the Nth degree is a public sin, and is a matter highly relevant to public discussion, whereas the sacramentality, or lack thereof, of Kerry’s marriage is not.

  2. I think it’s relevant, and not uncharitable. We’re not electing a set of policies into office, we’re electing a man. If that man’s character is called into question by a public action (such as marriage, which has a public dimension), then he should be given every opportunity to explain himself, and he should be given the benefit of the doubt.
    But when Kerry can’t provide a straight answer to a very simple question (“Was your marriage to Julia Thorne declared invalid?”), and when he has an extremely well-documented record of prevaricating about objective facts, then I think it is reasonable to conclude that he is living in sin with the woman he calls his wife.
    Let me put it this way: if I were a public figure and someone asked if my marriage was invalid, I’d get angry and show them proof that it was valid. If you have evidence that Kerry received an annulment before he attempted to marry Heinz, I’ll retract my statement. However, the fact that Heinz and Kerry attempted marriage outside the Church is enough grounds to conclude that their marriage is not “in good standing” with the Church, unless by “the Church” you mean the whack-jobs at the Paulist Center in Boston.

  3. Eric,
    I see your point, though I still think there are much more certain, and effective, avenues to criticize Kerry’s character than going after his marriage.
    Anyone who actually takes Kerry’s profession of Catholicism seriously either isn’t a Catholic, and therefore doesn’t care whether or not his marriage is valid, or is a cafeteria Catholic who also doesn’t care. Any support from remotely orthodox Catholics comes not from his religion, but from his most praised talent (among left-leaning types): not being Bush.

  5. I love it when people question my links. The quotation was from the Don Imus show, not from WorldNetDaily (a site I don’t read regularly). You can find the same quotation other places if you Google it. Even if my parenthetical remark is false, that doesn’t falsify my main point.

  6. Anyway, speaking of the pickle queen: if (God forbid) Kerry ever happens to win the election, one of the few enjoyable things about it will be her gaffes: enjoyable in the sense of Schadenfreude.

  8. Clearly, RC. The high point of a Kerry administration would be all the laughs we’d get from La Tuh-RAY-zuh as First Lady. (Speaking as a journalist, she does actually make great copy, much better than Laura “no real job” Bush. I know what side MY bread is buttered on.)

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.