Only Fr. Thomas Reese, S.J. Could Come Up With This Kind Of Hogwash

Spitzer Scandal About Crime, Not Sex
The Question: What does the Elliot Spitzer scandal say about our public and private morality? Should he have resigned?
The Elliott Spitzer scandal is not about sex, it is about crime. If prostitution were legal, he would be a sinner, but there would be no reason for him to resign. Many in the media have accused the Catholic Church of being obsessed with sex, but the media frenzy surrounding the Spitzer scandal makes one wonder who is really obsessed. Catholic moral theology distinguishes between personal and (All sin is committed by an individuals) social morality. Personal morality deals with actions by a person alone or with a consenting adult. Social morality applies to actions that have consequences on others. Normally we keep law out of personal morality. Some have even argued that prostitution should be legal because it is between (Are you father making this claim?) consenting adults. Most Americans (excerpt in Nevada) disagree because usually prostitutes are not really free in their choices.

They are exploited. Spitzer broke the law when he paid prostitutes for sex. Is this the worst crime a person can commit? (Spitzer advocated with a new proposed law to permanently legalize all abortion and continue the genocide of the unborn)

I think some of the people he prosecuted (bullied political enemies) on Wall Street committed bigger crimes and bigger sins. Certainly the people behind the current (How does he know this? Who is he talking about? This just left-wing gobbledygook.) credit crisis committed bigger sins and crimes. But we expect our government officials to observe the law, whether it applies to the taxes of domestic workers, the hiring of undocumented workers, drinking while driving, cheating on taxes, visiting a prostitute, etc. Spitzer committed a crime, but it was not a political crime like accepting a bribe or (torture is not a political crime) torturing (water boarding is not a sin, I that is what you are getting at?) a prisoner. Is it a crime for which he should be forced out of the office to which he was democratically (He transported hookers across state lines, he illegally took campaign contribution from his father) elected? Whatever the case, he made the judgment that he no longer had the credibility or support to govern and resigned. But what would have been the media’s response if the crime had been of similar legal (He has publicly admitted to committing adultery for over six years) weight but not sexual? Link to original article (here)

.

Eliot Spitzer was elected to enforce the laws of the State of New York. As Attorney General he ruthlessly busted up prostitution rings. Even the those in the Democrat party think he should forced out of office. I would expect a Catholic priest would be able to make basic observations on moral implications of adultery and its consequences of the loss of Salvation that Spitzer is facing, not to mention the misery Spitzer has caused his family. I would also expect a priest to be able to stand up for the unborn children of New York.

More on Spitzer (here) (here) and (here)

Were Fr. Tom got his mixed up idea's from (here)