Friday, July 30, 2010

Immigration and Dictatorship

The totalitarian nature of the American left and the Democratic party grow clearer by the day. That clarity is the only upside of the current one-party rule in the White House and both houses of Congress.

We've seen the will of the people overridden by courts time and time again on the issue of same-sex "marriage"--courts forcing a counterfeit version of marriage down the community's throats-- and in Massachusetts and Washington DC refusing to even allow the people to vote on the issue.

Now we're getting the same thing on illegal immigration, with an added twist. As everybody knows, Judge Susan Bolton put Arizona's SB 1070 on hold. Legal scholars have eviscerated her ruling, which is so bad that people like Heather MacDonald and Andy McCarthy are disagreeing over which part to attack first. McCarthy says:

"We are a body politic not a body legal. Federal law is (and is supposed to be) very limited in what it can prevent a sovereign state from doing. Beyond those narrow limitations, the state has discretion to govern itself as its citizens see fit. Similarly, the federal executive branch is vested with vast powers but finite resources, and it has discretion over how it will husband the latter. When a state’s lawful discretionary action conflicts with the president’s lawful discretionary decision not to enforce a congressional statute, that is not a legal issue. It is a political issue.

In such a situation, the job of the federal courts is to stay out of it. Then, in the court of public opinion, Arizona gets to demonstrate why illegal immigration is a huge problem, and the Obama administration can try to defend the de facto amnesty it seeks to confer on the illegal immigrant population. Indeed, it is only when the law throws back its veil and politics is allowed to operate, that we actually get to see that de facto amnesty is the president’s objective. That’s why the administration and its Justice Department want you to think of this as a legal case — if it’s politics, they lose . . . big."

The added twist is the newly discovered memo from Immigration services. Robert VerBruggen, writing in National Review:

"According to an internal U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services memo going the rounds of Capitol Hill and obtained by National Review, the agency is considering ways in which it could enact “meaningful immigration reform absent legislative action” — that is, without the consent of the American people through a vote in Congress.

“This memorandum offers administrative relief options to . . . reduce the threat of removal for certain individuals present in the United States without authorization,” it reads."

So now you don't even need a judge. Just make law via a group of bureaucrats. Rosemary Jenks, also in National Review, writes:

"The four authors of the memo, titled 'Administrative Alternatives to Comprehensive Immigration Reform,' are political appointees USCIS chief of policy and strategy Denise Vanison (a former immigration attorney and partner at Patton Boggs) and USCIS chief counsel Roxana Bacon (former general counsel for the American Immigration Lawyers Association), and two career employees of USCIS director Alejandro Mayorkas, another Obama appointee.

The U.S. Constitution gives Congress — and only Congress — the authority to decide federal immigration law, but the Obama administration has come up with an extensive list of ways to ensure that a majority of the illegal aliens in the United States are allowed to remain here."

She then lists a number of the most offensive of the memo's recommendations (follow the link) and which can be summed up "make(ing) sure no illegal alien is left behind."

Gibbons J. Cooney

"It is beyond the realm of reason... think that the Archdiocese of New York is unaware of these issues."

Michael Voris on the unbelieveable response from the Archdiocese of New York to the scandal at St. Francis Xavier parish.

His video is an almost word-for-word replay of what we have been saying about the Archdiocese of San Francisco and Most Holy Redeemer parish for lo these many years.

Wednesday, July 28, 2010

Good Shepherd in the Capitol

And no, he does not work for the government.

We must congratulate and thank good Bishop Jaime Soto of Sacramento. His Excellency was in the news last week for defending those still in the womb. On Saturday, August 14 he will celebrate Mass and then lead a pro-life Rosary at a Sacramento abortion business. The event starts at 8 a.m. at St. Mary’s Catholic Church (that's Bishop Soto, right, with another fearless shepherd, Salvatore Cordileone of Oakland, at the 2009 Walk for Life West Coast).

And today Bishop Soto came out strongly in defense of natural marriage and the common good of society. LifeSiteNews has the story:

"Soto has been an outspoken advocate of the Church's teaching supporting marriage between a man and a woman in his diocese. In 2008, Soto, then coadjutor bishop, shocked an audience at a National Association of Catholic Diocesan Lesbian and Gay Ministries dinner, where he delivered a keynote address confirming the sinfulness of homosexual conduct and encouraging chastity outside of marriage.

The bishop told LSN that he and other bishops "are concerned about particularly the young Catholic voter" who does not understand marriage, and thus cannot grasp why the Church opposes homosexual "marriage."

"The common perception of marriage is adrift," said Soto. "The murky confusion about sexuality in general is what has placed the question of marriage and what a marriage is into doubt, and so I feel as a pastor that we have to really focus on the broader question of how to clarify the dignity of human sexuality overall."

One important solution, he said, was to bring nominal Catholics not only to a deeper participation in the sacraments, but a greater appreciation for and pride in their own faith identity. Soto noted that the Catholics Come Home advertisement campaign, which prompted a large number of Catholics to return to practicing the faith in his diocese, also caused them to feel more affirmed in their Catholic faith - something the bishop considers vital to the moral issues besetting California.

"Catholics need to have a certain sense of confidence that their beliefs are not just religious preference, but that in fact serve the common good," said Soto.

And that's an important disposition for Catholics to have: to realize that their faith is not an imposition either on themselves or on others, but that their faith is a gift, and that it makes common sense and serves the common good. So I think that's a message that has to be repeated over and over again."

Monday, July 26, 2010

NARAL Offers Outdated Abortion/Breast Cancer Link Information

(A version of our article appeared in today's California Catholic Daily)

NARAL Pro-Choice California has launched an effort to make it more difficult for crisis pregnancy centers to operate in the state of California. The first shot in this battle was the release of a 20-page booklet titled “Unmasking Fake Clinics. The Truth About Crisis Pregnancy Centers in California.” The purpose of the booklet is given on page 15: “In 2011, NARAL Pro-Choice California Foundation will work with local elected officials to enact a disclaimer bill similar to that in Baltimore. The health of California women and their families depends on it.”

While NARAL claims that crisis pregnancy centers give deceptive information, and professes an interest in women’s health, in at least one glaring instance that appears to be the opposite of the truth. NARAL cites, as an example of allegedly “deceptive” information, the assertion by some crisis pregnancy centers that there is a link between breast cancer and abortion. In response, NARAL flatly states “The link between abortion and breast cancer has been exhaustively investigated and it is the well established conclusion of the National Cancer Institute that abortion has no effect on a woman’s risk of developing breast cancer.”

That categorical statement relies solely on the National Cancer Institute’s study “Summary Report: Early Reproductive Events and Breast Cancer Workshop.” But that report was published in 2003, and is at odds with more up-to-date science. Over the past 16 months, independent studies in Turkey, China, Sri Lanka, and Seattle have all concluded that there is indeed an increased risk for breast cancer in post-abortive women. All four studies were published in significant professional medical journals.

The Chinese study “A case-control study of reproductive factors associated with subtypes of breast cancer in Northeast China,” was published in the Journal of Medical Oncology on September 23, 2009. The study’s abstract concluded: “Breastfeeding protected parous women from any subtype of breast cancer. Postmenopause and spontaneous abortion were inversely associated with the risk of luminal tumors. By contrast, multiparity, family history of breast cancer and induced abortion increased the risk of breast cancer.”

The Turkish study “Breast cancer risk factors in Turkish women – a University Hospital based nested case control study” was published on April 8, 2009 in the World Journal of Surgical Oncology. It concluded: “These findings suggest that age and induced abortion were found to be significantly associated with increased breast cancer risk whereas oral contraceptive use was observed to be associated with decreased breast cancer risk among Turkish women in Istanbul.”

The Sri Lankan study “Prolonged breastfeeding reduces risk of breast cancer in Sri Lankan women: a case-control study” was published in Cancer Epidemiology in June 2010. It concluded, in part: “The significant factors associated with increased risk of breast cancer were: post-menopausal women (OR=1.74; 95%CI=1.01, 3.01); having an abortion in the past (OR=3.42; 95%CI=1.75, 6.66) and exposure to passive smoking (OR=2.96, 95%CI=1.53, 5.75).” In other words, as the Daily Mail UK reported, although the study was focused on the association between the duration of breastfeeding and the risk of breast cancer, other risk factors were discovered, and “the highest of the reported risk factors was abortion.”

The Seattle study “Risk Factors for Triple-Negative Breast Cancer in Women Under Age 45” was published in April 2009 in Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and Prevention. The study concluded, in part: “In analyses of all 897 breast cancer cases (subtypes combined), the multivariate-adjusted odds ratios for examined risk factors were consistent with the effects observed in prior studies of younger women . Specifically, older age, family history of breast cancer, earlier menarche age, induced abortion, and OC (oral contraceptive) use were associated with an increased risk of breast cancer.”

The Seattle study was remarkable not just for its conclusion, but because of the identity of one of the authors, Dr. Louise A. Brinton, MPH, Ph. D. It so happens that Dr. Brinton works for the National Cancer Institute and was one of the organizers of the NCI’s 2003 workshop that produced the study that NARAL cites as the sole authority for their sweeping claim of no abortion/breast cancer link. Unfortunately for NARAL, while Dr. Brinton may have held that opinion in 2003, she no longer does. From the Daily Mail UK “Earlier this year, Dr Louise Brinton, a senior researcher with the U.S. National Cancer Institute who did not accept the link, reversed her position to say she was now convinced abortion increased the risk of breast cancer by about 40 per cent.”

Unlike Planned Parenthood, NARAL does not even seriously pretend to be interested in women’s health, only in electing pro-abortion politicians and passing pro-abortion legislation. Their mission statement reads: “NARAL Pro-Choice California is the political arm of the pro-choice movement. We educate voters about reproductive rights in California. We provide resources and information for voters who want to support pro-choice legislation and elect pro-choice legislators.”

Still, even recognizing that they have no professional interest in the health of women, one would hope that common humanity would cause NARAL to avoid publishing a conclusion that could be dangerous if not fatal to women—a conclusion that has now been abandoned by one of its major proponents.

Sunday, July 25, 2010

Kenya & Abortion

Obama has sent $23,000,000 (of taxpayers’ money) to Kenya to support the vote to allow abortion. Here’s what the Church as to say about the referendum:

NAIROBI, Kenya, JULY 23, 2010 ( The Church in Kenya continues to defend life and fight against abortion leading up to the referendum on a new constitution scheduled for Aug. 4.

The constitution as proposed would open the doors to more permissive legislation on abortion, which at present is illegal in the country, as well as give limited rights to Muslim courts.

Given its opposition to both these clauses, Church leaders are encouraging the faithful to vote "no" in next month's referendum.

Last week, the justice and peace commission of Nairobi's Holy Family Basilica organized a meeting on abortion and its effects, in order to explain the Church's position regarding the constitution.

According to the Catholic Information Service for Africa, gynecologist Ngatia Njogu of the Kenyatta National Hospital, one of the major hospitals of East Africa, pointed out the need for the Church to show its concern for issues related to human life.

He also called for a proactive response to situations in which women face difficult pregnancies.

“We need to institute serious areas of intervention on the would-be cases of abortion," Dr. Njogu said. "We need to create better options [for] those planning to undertake abortion, [for] example, assuring them of care in a given care center during and after pregnancy."

The doctor said the Church is already active in this regard and he offered the example of Nairobi's Jamaa Hospital, where "young girls, who would turn to abortion are convinced to carry the pregnancy up to end and equally are assured of the after birth care at this hospital."

In December of 2007, Kenya erupted into two months of violence after the presidential election was disputed. As many as 1,500 people were killed in the conflict, which ended with U.N. mediation on a power-sharing agreement.

Friday, July 23, 2010

"Marriage and Children—Reshaping the Dialog to Reflect the Human Reality"

Our friend Bill May, Chairman of Catholics for the Common Good, will be speaking at St. Margaret Mary parish in Oakland this coming Tuesday.

"Marriage and Children—Reshaping the Dialog to Reflect the Human Reality"
Seventh Manhattan Forum Lecture, Oakland, CA, July 27

Join Bill May, Chairman of Catholics for the Common Good, and leader of the Catholic response in the Prop 8 campaign, for a discussion of how to apply the lessons of Prop 8 to rebuilding a marriage culture.

The threat of enshrining same-sex “marriage” in law is merely the culmination of much more insidious threats that are undermining the understanding of marriage, motherhood, and fatherhood in every family. "

Surprisingly, the answer has less to do with homosexuality and related lifestyles, and more to do with confusion that leads many to unwittingly accept false premises. Restoring a marriage culture is not possible without regrounding ourselves in reality and our shared human experience."

Tuesday, July 27, 2010
St. Margaret Mary Parish's Father Kozina Hall
1219 Excelsior Avenue
Oakland, CA 94610

Journalist Proposes Don Bosco for the Role

In the wake of the FIFA World Cup, which ended July 11, it has been pointed out that soccer as a sport lacks a patron. Journalist Albert Christian Sellner suggested in the Austrian paper, "Der Standard," that St. John Bosco would be a good candidate for the role.Sellner noted that in the international soccer tournament, even though FIFA prohibited the use of religious symbols and gestures, many athletes were seen publicly expressing their faith.He pointed out that Diego Maradona, manager of the Argentine national team, was often seen with his rosary as the games were being played.

The Salesian News Agency picked up on this proposal to have Don Bosco, founder of the congregation, named as the patron of soccer.In a July 13 article, it noted that St. John Bosco is associated with the characteristics of soccer: "youth, friendship, artistic skill and celebration."It affirmed that the saint often "roamed the streets of the city looking for boys and a suitable place to gather them together, demonstrating all his own personal skills in games, artistry and creativity which helped him in his mission of education."Thus, as Sellner stated, "At his death over 200,000 youngsters had enjoyed the benefits of his friendship."The journalist affirmed that Benedict XVI "would have the chance of making a mark in the world of soccer" by proclaiming Don Bosco as its patron.

VIENNA, Austria, JULY 21, 2010 (

Wednesday, July 21, 2010

Good News from Moscow!

His Beatitude Kiril, Patriarch of Moscow and all Russia had good words for our Holy Father:

"Moscow, July 19, Interfax - Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia has said that he sees eye-to-eye with Pope Benedict XVI on many pressing moral issues.

'I must say that the stance of incumbent Pope Benedict XVI gives rise to optimism,' he said in an interview with Ukrainian media ahead of his visit to the country.

He reminded reporters that the Pope is often criticized by 'liberal theologians and liberal mass media in the West' for his views.

'However, on many public and moral issues his approach fully coincides with the approach of the Russian Orthodox Church. This gives us an opportunity to advocate Christian values together with the Catholic Church, in particular at international organizations and on the international arena," he said.'

Speaking of "Progressives"...

The revelation of the posts from the Journolist website, a cyber meeting place for "progressive journalists" is certainly generating a lot of buzz. The same derangement we see in the video in the previous post affects these people, too.

The Daily Caller has the posts. Listen to "Progressive journalists" in their own words:

TheDC: Liberal journalists, law professor debate merits of shutting down Fox News on Journolist

TheDC: READ excerpted scans of Journolisters talking about the need to regulate Fox News.

TheDC: Journolist documents show media plotting to kill unfavorable stories about Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

TheDC: Journolister admits to crying by himself on a plane while watching 'Hardball.'

Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney

Why Counterfeit "Marriage" Activists Keep Losing Elections

This was Providence, Rhode Island last Sunday. Full story at LifeSiteNews.

Tuesday, July 20, 2010

Homosexualist Propaganda Drag Show at "Catholic" Santa Clara University

Apparently it is an annual thing. What is the purpose of such an event? An article in the Santa Clara, ("SCU's weekly undergraduate newspaper since 1922") about the 2007 version of the show, explains:

"Drag Show 2007 aims to provide more education,"
by Alexa Dijulio

"...The exhilaration that comes from viewing a show like this often is a product of Burke's mentioned shock-value, especially at a Jesuit university. Emory Lynch, senior out-going director of SCCAP and member of GASPED, wants to make sure that this shock acts as a means for breaking stereotypes down instead of reinforcing them.

Max Voltage, who is responsible for starting the Drag Show at Santa Clara, said to performers, "Take risks, push boundaries, challenge your audience. But also, find that line to walk, between risky art and oppressive crap," in an essay written for The Third National Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender & Ally Conference for Jesuit Colleges.

The conference, which was hosted at Santa Clara last summer, is held for Jesuit universities to facilitate discussion and action within the LGBTQ communities."

In plain English, Santa Clara University has become a re-education camp for normal Catholic kids.

The 2010 Santa Clara Drag Show took place on April 29. A Catholic who attended took video of the event, which can be found here . The author also has other videos of the event, including his analysis. We're happy to see he quotes at length from our article in the California Catholic Daily about the appointment of homosexualist activist Fr. Michael Zampelli as Rector of the Santa Clara Jesuit Community.

The first of his videos is below. Warning: it shows an extremely vulgar attack on chastity, but what is truly Satanic is that this is offered, by a "Catholic" university, as education. This is one of the reasons why same-sex attracted men should not be allowed into the priesthood. Even if they themselves are chaste, would they be chaste if they were not in the priesthood? And are they willing to encourage others with same-sex attraction, not priests, to chastity?

H/t Curt Jester

Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney

Monday, July 19, 2010

Church Teaching Unwelcome, Even in Catholicism Class

Professor Fired for Explaining Natural Law and Homosexuality

Attorneys from the Alliance Defense Fund have approached the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign regarding the firing of a Introduction to Catholicism professor. Why was Kenneth Howell fired? He presented Catholic teaching on homosexuality.A friend of one of his students sent an e-mail to university authorities in protest. Among the ideas in the email: "Teaching a student about the tenets of a religion is one thing. Declaring that homosexual acts violate the natural laws of man is another."Unwittingly, the author of the complaint gave a good summary precisely of a tenet of Catholic teaching.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church notes in No. 2357, "[...] 'homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.' They are contrary to the natural law."Senior Counsel David French of he Alliance Defense Fund protested what he called censoring a professor's speech "including classroom speech related to the topic of the class -- merely because certain ideas ‘offend’ an anonymous student.""It’s ridiculous that a school would fire a professor without even giving him a chance to defend himself when he simply taught Catholic beliefs in a class about Catholic beliefs," French added.Howell has been teaching at the university since 2001 and has been recognized by students for excellence in teaching. He also had a directorial position at the Newman Center on campus, which he also lost since he would no longer be employed by the university.

The First Amendment protects the ability of faculty to speak freely, especially when the material is of direct relevance to the class,” French stated. “Professors’ careers cannot be made to stand or fall based on the emotions of intolerant, anonymous students who do not yet understand that opposing viewpoints exist within a free society.”

The Diocese of Peoria, Illinois, is scheduled to meet with university officials to discuss the termination
CHAMPAIGN, Illinois, JULY 19, 2010 (“

Fight the Global Sexual & Reproductive Health Act

It's urgent that you sign the Petition today to Stop Obama's Massive New Abortion Giveaway of $715 million to* Bankroll international RH "education" and abortion for children as young as ten, and pay for global abortion referral services.

You can help stop this new abortion outrage.
Steven W. Mosher, President, Population Research Institute

Saturday, July 17, 2010

"Eventually, pretending forcibly that valueless things have value dilutes the currency's value for all"

That's from the essay "America's Ruling Class -- And the Perils of Revolution" by Angelo Codevilla, which is creating something of a buzz around the web. He's taking about markets, but the observation applies to counterfeit marriage as well. Excerpt:

"The ruling class is keener to reform the American people's family and spiritual lives than their economic and civic ones. In no other areas is the ruling class's self-definition so definite, its contempt for opposition so patent, its Kulturkampf so open. It believes that the Christian family (and the Orthodox Jewish one too) is rooted in and perpetuates the ignorance commonly called religion, divisive social prejudices, and repressive gender roles, that it is the greatest barrier to human progress because it looks to its very particular interest -- often defined as mere coherence against outsiders who most often know better. Thus the family prevents its members from playing their proper roles in social reform. Worst of all, it reproduces itself.

Since marriage is the family's fertile seed, government at all levels, along with "mainstream" academics and media, have waged war on it. They legislate, regulate, and exhort in support not of "the family" -- meaning married parents raising children -- but rather of "families," meaning mostly households based on something other than marriage. "

Read the whole thing.

h/t American Thinker

Friday, July 16, 2010

Court vs People

Last week, a federal district court judge in Massachusetts decided that DOMA, the national law defining marriage as between a man and a woman, was unconstitutional...

Last week, a federal district court judge in Massachusetts decided that DOMA, the national law defining marriage as between a man and a woman, was unconstitutional. Today, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit decided in a narrow 5-4 ruling that the D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics was justified in blocking citizens from voting on the definition of marriage because, if passed, it would discriminate against same sex couples under the DC Human Rights Act. This is another example of judicial tyranny -- this time denying the right, guaranteed under the DC Charter, of citizens to vote on policy affecting the very foundation of society.

Every time citizens have had a chance to vote on the definition of marriage they have affirmed the reality of marriage as a union of a man and a woman. By the way, the initiative in question had the same wording as California's Prop 8 and Maine's Question One. The attorneys representing both the proponents and the citizens of DC (59% of which support "traditional" marriage) are considering an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. As you recall, it was the Washington, DC same-sex "marriage" law that forced Catholic Charities to give up providing services to children who had been deprived of their mothers and fathers. If they continued, they would have been forced to place children with same-sex couples. When a child is deprived of his or her mother and father, a man and a woman are the best people to stand in for the people who were unable to fulfill their responsibilities to the child. To intentionally deny the child of the experience of being cared for and raised by a man and a woman in these circumstances is a second privation, and an assault on the dignity of the child. This is common sense and the teaching of the Church.
Catholics for a Common Good

Thursday, July 15, 2010

Self Government Repudiated in Washington DC

Counterfeit marriage can only be sustained by counterfeit arguments. Get this headline from the Washington Post:

Same-sex marriage in District narrowly upheld by D.C. Court of Appeals

But here are the two lead paragraphs to the article:

"The D.C. Court of Appeals narrowly sustained same-sex marriage in the District in a 5 to 4 vote Thursday.

The nine judges were asked to determine whether the D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics acted lawfully when it rejected an initiative by opponents of gay marriage to have the matter voted upon in a referendum. The D.C. Council approved same-sex marriage in December."

So "same-sex marriage" was not upheld at all. The headline and first sentence of the article are completely false. What the ruling does is prevent the people of Washington DC from voting on the issue. It is quite possible that the people of DC would have voted to allow counterfeit marriage. And the Post is not alone. Here is the headline from the Christian Science Moniter:

DC's gay marriage law survives court challenge

Again, utter falsehood. Had the Court allowed the people to vote on whether to recognize counterfeit marriage, the law which legalized counterfeit marriage, passed in March, would still be on the books. And again, it is quite possible that the people of DC would have voted to allow counterfeit marriage.

Counterfeit marriage is just that--counterfeit. It has no basis in reality. Hence the ongoing need for intellectual contortions by its supporters.

Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney

Nancy Pelosi Honored by her Church

Her real church, Planned Parenthood. That can be said because when forced to support either Planned Parenthood or the Catholic Church on the preeminent moral issue of our time, the legalized murder of the young, Pelosi chooses Planned Parenthood.

Pelosi is being honored as we speak. The Hill's Washington Scene has the story, and promises photos tomorrow. LifeSiteNews has more.

Tuesday, July 13, 2010

Obamacare's Publicly Funded Abortion Begins

The Party of Death. Every Catholic, every American, who voted for or supported Obama shares responsibility for this.

From LifeSite News:

"In the first known instance of direct federal funding of abortion under the new health care legislation, the Obama Administration will give Pennsylvania $160 million to set up a new "high-risk" insurance program - and has quietly approved a plan submitted by an appointee of Governor Edward Rendell (D) under which the new program will cover any abortion that is legal in Pennsylvania.

The high-risk pool program, which will be funded entirely by the federal government, is one of the new programs created by the sweeping health care legislation President Obama signed into law on March 23....

Although an earlier version of the health care legislation prevented federal funds from subsidizing abortion, that protection was not included in the bill signed into law. Although the president's Executive Order regarding funding for abortion was touted as the solution, the White House later admitted the Order simply "reiterated" what was already in the bill. Nonetheless, the mainstream media continues to portray the Executive Order as having effectively blocked federal funds for abortion."

Monday, July 12, 2010

Friday, July 9, 2010

Catholic Teacher Fired for Introducing Students to Catholicism in "Introduction to Catholicism" Class

Teaching the natural moral law and Catholic doctrine is now considered "hate speech." That's no surprise: in our juvenile & narcissistic culture, speech that accurately describes reality will be considered "hate speech," and since the description of reality is part of the Church's job, those who teach Church doctrine will be considered "haters." If they are not considered "haters" they are probably not doing their job.

From Catholic News Agency:

"The University of Illinois has fired an adjunct professor for teaching in a class on Catholicism that homosexual acts violate natural moral law.

Dr. Kenneth Howell was informed that he could no longer teach in the university's department of religion. The decision came after a student complained that Howell's statements were 'hate speech.'

In response to his firing, Howell wrote a letter to friends explaining the events surrounding his dismissal

'Since the Fall of 2001, I have been regularly teaching two courses in the department of religion,” Howell explained. One of the classes, 'Introduction to Catholicism,' includes an explanation of Natural Moral Law as affirmed by the Church as well as an application of Natural Law Theory to a disputed social issue.

“Most of those semesters, my chosen topic was the moral status of homosexual acts,” he explained."

Tom Peters has a post with links to the Professor's well-reasoned email, which prompted the student's complaint, as well as the college student's email. He also links to the "Save Dr. Ken" Facebook page, and gives the email address of the University of Illinois:

The Alliance Defense Fund is acting for Professor Howell:

"David French, senior counsel for the ADF said in a written statement, 'A university cannot censor professors' speech – including classroom speech related to the topic of the class – merely because some students find that speech 'offensive.' Professors have the freedom to challenge students and to educate them by exposing them to different views. The Alliance Defense Fund is working with Professor Howell because the defense of academic freedom is essential on the university campus.'"

Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney

Thursday, July 8, 2010

David Berwick, the ACLU, and Catholic Hospitals.

Excellent points by Tom Peters, noting the disturbing juxtaposition of Obama's recess appointment of David Berwick as director of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services with the ACLU's letter to the same Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services demanding a crackdown on hospitals that refuse to provide "emergency reproductive care"--Catholic hospitals that refuse to perform abortions.

iPad/Pampers Create "Hello Baby!" App!

Very nice.

Tuesday, July 6, 2010

What a Government!

Feds sue Arizona for protecting it's citizens:

"The US government on Tuesday filed a lawsuit against Arizona for a controversial immigration law which has been sharply criticized by America's neighbors and by the US administration.

A Justice Department statement said it was challenging the new state law in the courts because it hampered the authority of the administration of President Barack Obama to enforce national immigration policy.

...The American people must wonder whether the Obama administration is really committed to securing the border when it sues a state that is simply trying to protect its people by enforcing immigration law," Republicans John McCain and Jon Kyl said in a joint statement.

More than 60 percent of the US population supports Arizona's new immigration law, according to a recent opinion survey."


TSA tells it's employees they can't browse "controversial" sites:

"The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is blocking certain websites from the federal agency's computers, including halting access by staffers to any Internet pages that contain a "controversial opinion," according to an internal email obtained by CBS News."

Well, they changed their "minds."


NASA concerned about Islamic self-esteem:

"When I became the NASA administrator -- or before I became the NASA administrator -- he charged me with three things. One was he wanted me to help re-inspire children to want to get into science and math, he wanted me to expand our international relationships, and third, and perhaps foremost, he wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science ... and math and engineering," Bolden said in the interview."


Department of Justice Nailed for Race Prejudice in Voter Intimidation case

"Today I testified to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights pursuant to a subpoena investigating the New Black Panther Party voter intimidation dismissal. I would rather no such obligation had arisen.

My previous Pajamas Media article comprised much of what I was willing to testify about. In that article, I detailed specific instances of hostility being expressed towards a race-neutral enforcement of civil rights laws, and in particular laws regarding voting and elections."

He Has Backup, Now

Several former DOJ employees have been in contact with Pajamas Media, interested in publicly supporting J. Christian Adams as he comes forward about the DOJ’s failure to enforce the country’s laws from a race-neutral perspective.

These former DOJ employees have expressed a willingness to go on record regarding Adams’ professionalism, excellent performance, and outstanding record of enforcing the law without racial bias.

Additionally, they would like to corroborate Adams’ statements about the DOJ.

And perhaps — pay attention, DOJ press liaisons — offer their own accounts regarding the DOJ’s hostility to race-neutral law enforcement."

Sunday, July 4, 2010

"The existence of a providential God, objective truth, moral duty and the right to life itself.”

The Catholic News Agency reports a wonderful Fourth of July column by the young Archbishop of New York, Timothy Dolan:

"The archbishop then spoke of the false contemporary understanding of freedom “as the right to do whatever we want, whenever we want, wherever we want, however we want, with whomever we want.” Our culture has lost the true understanding of freedom as “the liberty to do what we ought,” he said.

He observed the modern trend of “freeing” oneself from “any sense of obedience to God, His revelation and the basic code of right and wrong He has engraved upon the human heart.”

This false understanding of freedom has devastating consequences, he continued. “The Ten Commandments become a list of suggestions, the Eight Beatitudes a set of nice ideas, the Bible mere literature, the Church unnecessary, religion a crutch for the unenlightened, objective truth an outmoded oppression.”

His Excellency then pointed out some of the consequences:

"By adopting this distorted mindset, we elevate ourselves to the level of gods, the archbishop said. This is evident in today's culture, which claims dominion over life in matters such as abortion, euthanasia and embryonic stem cell research, he explained. Focused on consumption and convenience, the culture presumes to re-define marriage and family as it sees fit, revels in violence in its movies and music and resorts to war and terrorism without regard to the demands of morality.

This phenomenon is “curious,”Archbishop Dolan said, because the very culture declaring itself independent of God and morality has become “terribly dependent” on “money, insurance, gas, weapons, security systems or even upon alcohol, pornography, lust, gambling and drugs.”

Friday, July 2, 2010

Protect Life Act Petition

Tom Peters and the young people over at Catholic Vote Action have created a petition asking the members of the Catholic Health Association (Carol Keehan et al) to to support the Protect Life Act, a bipartisan efforto ensure no federal funds will go to abortion or abortion-related services.

You can sign by going here.

Senator Hatch to vote Against Kagan--Only Second Time he has Opposed SCOTUS Nominee

Good for him.

"Sen. Orrin Hatch said Friday he will vote against Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan, marking only the second time in 34 years the Utah Republican has objected to a president’s pick for the high court.

Hatch said he is not convinced that Kagan wouldn’t become an “activist” justice and that she fails to meet the standard to which he’s held previous nominees."

Of course she is an "activist" judge. She's a liberal Democrat.

“Over nearly 25 years, [Solicitor] General Kagan has endorsed, and praised those who endorse, an activist judicial philosophy,” Hatch said in a statement. “I was surprised when she encouraged us at the hearing simply to discard or ignore certain parts of her record. I am unable to do that. I also cannot ignore disturbing situations in which it appears that her personal or political views drove her legal views.”

Let's hope to see his fellow Senators join him.

"Unborn children at the taxpayer's expense"

Jack Smith's "quote of the day" is from the great Archbishop Wenski of Miami.

"...we weren't willing to go for health care reform under (just) any conditions. Basically we have said that health care reform means that it should be accessible to everybody and nobody should be killed. And this Obamacare does not make it accessible to everybody and it allows for people to be killed, mainly unborn children at the taxpayer's expense."

Jack's story (with links to the original article) is here.

Thursday, July 1, 2010

Happy July 4!

Andy Rooney and Prayer
Andy Rooney says: I don't believe in Santa Claus, but I'm not going to sue somebody for singing a Ho-Ho-Ho song in December. I don't agree with Darwin , but I didn't go out and hire a lawyer when my high school teacher taught his Theory of Evolution. Life, liberty or your pursuit of happiness will not be endangered because someone says a 30-second prayer before a football game.
So what's the big deal? It's not like somebody is up there reading the entire Book of Acts. They're just talking to a God they believe in and asking him to grant safety to the players on the field and the fans going home from the game.

But it's a Christian prayer, some will argue.Yes, and this is the United States of America and Canada, countries founded on Christian principles. According to our very own phone book, Christian churches outnumber all others better than 200-to-1. So what would you expect -- somebody chanting Hare Krishna? If I went to a football game in Jerusalem , I would expect to hear a Jewish prayer. If I went to a soccer game in Baghdad , I would expect to hear a Muslim prayer. If I went to a ping pong match in China , I would expect to hear someone pray to Buddha. And I wouldn't be offended. It wouldn't bother me one bit.
When in Rome .....

But what about the atheists? Is another argument. What about them? Nobody is asking them to be baptized. We're not going to pass the collection plate. Just humour us for 30 seconds. If that's asking too much, bring a Walkman or a pair of ear plugs. Go to the bathroom. Visit the concession stand. Call your lawyer! Unfortunately, one or two will make that call. One or two will tell thousands what they can and cannot do. I don't think a short prayer at a football game is going to shake the world's foundations.
Christians are just sick and tired of turning the other cheek while our courts strip us of all our rights.

Our parents and grandparents taught us to pray before eating, to pray before we go to sleep. Our Bible tells us to pray without ceasing. Now a handful of people and their lawyers are telling us to cease praying. God, help us. And if that last sentence offends you, well, just sue me.The silent majority has been silent too long. It's time we tell that one or two who scream loud enough to be heard that the vast majority doesn't care what they want. It is time that the majority rules! It's time we tell them, "You don't have to pray; you don't have to say the Pledge of Allegiance; you don't have to believe in God or attend services that honour Him. That is your right, and we will honour your right; but by golly, you are no longer going to take our rights away. We are fighting back, and we WILL WIN!

God bless us one and all...Especially those who denounce Him, God bless America and Canada, despite all our faults We are still the greatest nations of all. God bless our service men who are fighting to protect our right to pray and worship God. Let's make 2010 the year the silent majority is heard and we put God back as the foundation of our families.