That's one of the most pitiful straw men I've ever seen on your blog, John. You're putting words in their mouth that I am certain they would not say themselves: I'm sure if you asked them they'd agree that the nukes in other countries are also wrong.

But this is their country, they pay taxes, they share responsibility for those nukes (as they do not for nukes in other countries), and they have a tiny bit more influence here than they do in other countries of which they are not citizens. That's why they protest them in Greeley rather than Lop Nor.

Of course, if you'd rather believe they're cowards than seriously think about their position and try to understand it (not agree, just understand); if you are unable to ascribe good will to people who disagree with you, well, I'm sorry. That can't be a very pleasant state of mind.

BTW, as an aid to understanding, you might want consider the possibility that their actions flow from a deeper understanding of the teachings of their church than yours:

"In May of [2005] the Vatican took a dramatic step that signals a sea change in Catholic moral teaching on nuclear weapons. In his address to the delegates at the Review Conference of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, Archbishop Celestino Migliore, Vatican U.N. ambassador, called into question the ongoing morality of nuclear deterrence: “When the Holy See expressed its limited acceptance of nuclear deterrence during the Cold War, it was with the clearly stated condition that deterrence was only a step on the way toward progressive nuclear disarmament. The Holy See has never countenanced nuclear deterrence as a permanent measure, nor does it today when it is evident that nuclear deterrence drives the development of ever newer nuclear arms, thus preventing genuine nuclear disarmament.”

No strawman.

I've been hearing about or observing anti-nuke protestors since the 1960's. And they are ALWAYS against America and her allies. It is a fraud and a sham, (and was often in the past led and funded by Communists.)

I'd buy your "this is their country" argument if peaceniks in, say, Spain or Germany or Sweden headed EAST when they wanted to protest nukes. Never happens. They ALL find a way to attack America.

This stuff has nothing to do with "peace." Nukes in the hands of rogue nations like NK or Iran, or shaky ones like China or Pakistan are a million times more threatening to the world's peace than nukes in America's arsenal. But the fake peaceniks NEVER find any energy or enthusiasm for protests against those countries.

I find the Vatican's position misguided, but the morality of nuclear weapons is not the subject of this post. (It's not a "Teaching of the Church," by the way. It's a teaching of the Pope, or the Bishops. They are often confused. Teachings of the Church evolve slowly, and are found in the Catechism.)

Even if I were a proponent of nuclear disarmament, the fraudulence of the always-anti-American protestors would be no less repulsive to me.

And you are being "neutral" once again. You chide me, but you never lay out your own positions and support them and defend them in debate.

Teachings of the Church evolve slowly, and are found in the Catechism.

Actually, the Catechism is a little broader than you're thinking. This from paragraph 2315:

2315 The accumulation of arms strikes many as a paradoxically suitable way of deterring potential adversaries from war. They see it as the most effective means of ensuring peace among nations. This method of deterrence gives rise to strong moral reservations. The arms race does not ensure peace. Far from eliminating the causes of war, it risks aggravating them. Spending enormous sums to produce ever new types of weapons impedes efforts to aid needy populations; it thwarts the development of peoples. Over-armament multiplies reasons for conflict and increases the danger of escalation.

They don't claim it to be a sin, of course, and do not claim their opinion to be infallible - but unfortunately, their political beliefs are in fact promulgated in the Catechism. Including the basic elements of the Just War theory (paragraph 2309), which includes the absurd requirement that "there must be serious prospects of success" - er...yeah. When your country is invaded by a brutal oppressor, if your cause doesn't look very hopeful, you can't fight. I'm so glad the generation of the Revolution, the Civil War and WWII didn't have to meet the criteria of a Just Frickin' War...

But your real point is accurate - it's not a Teaching of the Church, it's more what they think is likely the best way to apply the true Teachings of the Church...

I think the Church is on the wrong tack here, but they are just following "conventional wisdom."

The CW in this case is so exceedingly conventional that it is almost impossible for most people to escape it. If you challenge them they just think you are talking nonsense.

But in fact, nuclear weapons are the greatest force for peace in the world (or possibly the second-greatest, after globalization.) They have put an end to global war, to regional wars, and pretty much to war between nation states. Certainly between developed states, which could if desperate, produce nukes even if they did not have them at the start of the war.

I'm sure people are about to leap in and denounce our horrid bombing of Japan. But that was actually a great mercy, which brought to an immediate end a bloody war, and almost certainly saved millions of lives.