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...

...to 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.

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."

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.

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 (Zenit.org).- 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.

"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 (Zenit.org).-

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.

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

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 (Zenit.org).“