An Addendum: Catholic Ethos

I've come across something more to add to the last posting and would like to offer an addendum and an expansion to further magnify what was already stated on a Catholic political ethos.

As it was read from the Gospel according to St. John this Sunday:

Jesus said to them, "Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day. For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him. Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me. This is the bread that came down from heaven. Unlike your ancestors who ate and still died, whoever eats this bread will live forever." ( John 6:53-58)

To summarize and distill Jesus' words here and, as it were, also the call to all Christians in its very essence: "In brief, the Eucharist is the sum and summary of our faith: 'Our way of thinking is attuned to the Eucharist, and the Eucharist in turn confirms our way of thinking.'" (CCC 1327). These words, "Our way of thinking is attuned to the Eucharist, and the Eucharist in turn confirms our way of thinking," come to us from St. Irenaeus in the Second Century A.D.—before the Schism of East and West, before the Protestant Reformation. The question we must ask now is, why aren't we fully living it in every aspect of our lives? The Church is not stating in her teaching that it is merely our religious thinking or our political thinking. Her teaching states clearly our thinking ought to be attuned to the Eucharist, to His Sacrifice—where time and space are spanned.

This is the Catholic Ethos: the Eucharist.

In Response: A Catholic Political Ethos

I was sent a convincing collection of U.S. state constitution preambles in the context of questioning President Barack Obama's 2009 words in Turkey: "We do not consider ourselves a Christian nation or a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation. We consider ourselves a nation of citizens who are bound by ideals and a set of values."

The preambles of the constitutions use an explicit declaration of an "Almighty God" and even the Virginia Declaration of Rights states in its Article XVI: "That religion, or the duty which we owe to our Creator and the manner of discharging it, can be directed by reason and conviction, not by force or violence; and therefore, all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; and that it is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian forbearance, love, and charity towards each other."

I am neither going to agree or disagree with the President's words or those of the author of the e-mail I received regarding them. However, the Virginia Declaration of Right's words speak to the duty we have in our view of society and of government in general. I wish to claim it necessary, as such, to view—and thus to to judge—the whole of American society through this particular lens.

Whether or not we were, are, are going to be a Christian nation...the first thing that must be done and instilled in our civics classes is that we have the right as citizens to the exercise of our religious beliefs, which does not mean a shirking of religion from the public square. Rather, it is a healthy expression (not coercion) of religious belief. And, in that, we are to live out the free will we were given since the time of Creation and thus reiterated, time and time again, in the preambles of our state constitutions and echoed countless times through our country's existence—that a country's citizens have a right to not be coerced but to live with one's countrymen in peace and prosperity. That we are truly endowed with the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Freedom of religion (or more rightly stated as freedom from an established state religion) does not equate to freedom from the existence any religion in the public square of the State. If this were to be the case, then the citizen's liberty has been trampled upon and the citizen's pursuit of happiness been halted dead in its tracks.

All men practice religion, but only few actually know what or whom they worship. It's often money, fame, or simply the vain pursuits of life. However, the true virtue of man is to look beyond one's own happiness and see the common good, the common thread in his fellow man. The true practice of religion is to see God's graces in His humanity and His creation and see the Sacrifice He instituted, once and for all time, for the salvation of Man—for the life, the liberty, and the happiness all men deeply long for. It is because of this Sacrifice and the awe of one's gifted existence which flows from this Sacrifice that they are called to true worship, not because of coercion of belief or because of mere labels.

Only once our countrymen actually live up to this calling, to this rugged individualism balanced with a responsible love can we even dare to even call ourselves a "Christian" nation in both word and deed. Only then can we be fully proud to be Americans.

Listen to what Ronald Reagan has to say: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yS4yf723kmY

Patriotism is not meant to be blind. It must be informed, informed not just with thoughtfulness and knowledge but also compassion for one's fellow man. There is no freedom without sacrifice. Freedom exists because of sacrifice.

As Pope John Paul II once said: "As the family goes, so goes the nation and so goes the whole world in which we live." We must change this country not by political speeches but by change in one family at a time. We are called to be missionaries to the secular world. It is in this missionary work that true change can—and will occur. All we must do is put our Hope in the correct place and be the change through Him who sent us—and do all this with perfect confidence in His love.

------

In chapter three of the Georgetown University Press book by Charles E. Curran, Catholic Moral Theology in the United States: a History, pages 77 to 78, the censured Curran makes an interesting deduction: that American constitutionalism as found in the prevailing inalienable rights "is in continuity with medieval constitutionalism" (78).

All other questions of Curran the theologian aside, the first two paragraphs on American political consensus are a good read. As St. Paul said in 1 Thessalonians 5:21: "Test everything; retain what is good"!

Democracy 2.0: The Need for True Advocacy

It can be said that democracy is a two-step process. Yes, its important component is the actual act of voting, that exercise of civic duty that so few of us actually avail ourselves. The other centers on its aftermath: advocacy.

In a country where 64% (this year's rough estimate of nationwide turnout) is the best that one of the standard-bearers of the free society can expect, advocacy is an integral and needed step in ensuring that good government is actually carried out.

While we often forget that these politicians work for us and not the other way around, we must instill in them a sense of accountability for their actions not only in the voting booth (as has been done just this past Tuesday), but each day through contact with our local politicians, state politicians, and those going up to that bureaucratic befuddlement of Washington, D.C. We mustn't rely on others to speak for us. This country's government, as President Lincoln stated at the close of the Gettysburg Address, is one "of the people, by the people, for the people." We mustn't forget this...we must change government ourselves through advocacy if true change is to occur.

Yes, informed consciences are important before the voting process and during it, but so too are they important in deciding the direction of leadership in one's community, great or small, and much greater is the need of active and informed advocacy of those very ones we vote in (or have foisted on us). We mustn't be quiet. We mustn't go quietly into the night. We must organize, continue to organize, and speak out for the change we see needed in a country where change can be abused.

We need informed consciences not to lord things over people. No, we need them to give the Truth to our society. We need to be shepherds of the Truth. We must speak out to injustices and change the way we work as a country. I implore you, do not give up on the second half of democracy—advocacy.

This country is need of it, or we as a nation might just plunge off the cliff of instability or—worse yet—insignificance.

Civil Rights and the History of the Moment

My thoughts are on the amazing history of this week, and, in fact, this past year. I personally identified a great deal with what John McCain stood for, I could see a determination in his heart, in his words that I knew from the beginning he would make an excellent leader, an excellent president for our country. That what he said weren't merely words to get elected (as politicians, none in this group included) so often do. I could not find anyone else I could stand behind more in the run-up to and during the election.

I, in fact, did volunteer in the final hours for Sen. McCain because I could feel the gravity of the moment. I also offered my thoughts of the current events, in the wee hours of the morning of Election Day, because I knew in my heart what was at stake here: the honor of our country and the honor of the American people. I knew this election was different, but I did not see it completely the way a voting majority of the country saw it. Even if my predictions were incorrect, I ask that you to take my thoughts with a grain of salt.

'Scorched earth' was and is never a good policy of action. I think that we will see some of that in the coming weeks and months, unfortunately. This is indeed a historic time in our country's history, a very historic time.

I find a great deal of promise in Sen. Obama, something that others see even more in. There are a number of policies we don't see eye to eye. And beliefs that we fail to share, one regarding abortion—but his stance of how to deal with the root of the problem (and that is women in difficult situations) is at the very least understandable if not admirable. However, regardless the differences we share, he is a gifted politician adept at staying calm and cool that it reminds me of a difference of the 'Teflon' presidential years of the '80s...the validation or invalidation of this current reality will come soon enough.

Nevertheless, the history made on Tuesday is to be commended. It is a time to heal the racial divides in this country and actually get to helping those in need and to protect the rights of all Americans. We must stand up for the rights of all in this country of ours, and this is a step in that direction. There is much else to do and further rights to protect.

If we needed any further reminded let me quote the beginning of the Declaration of Independence:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

We should always be wary of the abuses construed by those in power and ever vigilant of the rights we hold dear in this country of ours: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We must defend these rights for all, not just some. And, most importantly, realize once and for all human life is afforded those unalienable rights and are thus created equal. We are all called to have a voice, and we should always push further to form a more perfect union.

There is no "yes, we can"...for we have done, we are doing, and we will continue to do...all that is needed to ensure voices young and old, white or black, born or unborn are given the rights described in that Declaration of Independence.

We must never go quietly into the night. We must never be told to be quiet. If it is what it is, we must speak the truth of it. We must never stand for injustice. And for me, as we celebrate history, I must remember this as we celebrate one Civil Rights history and await another: the compassionate end of abortion where abortion is not necessarily illegal but simply and utterly unthinkable.

Justice's Fires are Burning

This is a poem centered on the upcoming election and what's at stake for those defending life, specifically the unborn. I wrote it one Sunday evening during a "Faithful Citizenship" coffeehouse but had to revise quite a bit since I had to reconstruct the poem after the first two stanzas. The second half was lost on a notecard somewhere on campus, but it remains relatively intact—if memory serves me correctly!

Justice's Fires are Burning

Justice's fires are burning;
The faithful's hearts are yearning.
Blessings and honor are flowing
To those Faithful Ones, age to age.

Wonders of God's work are showing;
His love remains enduring.
Evil's ways are falling;
Its ways are forever estranged.

Day to day, we hear the calling,
Working to enact true, lasting change.
Year to year, we seek to end the fighting;
We struggle and stumble all the same.

Faithful Citizenship is our call,
A calling of love and service to all.
We are called to tear down Injustice's walls
And to fight for faithful, lasting change.

The walls of injustice are falling,
Life overcoming the walls of death.
Never, never settle for injustice's delight,
For change is coming, Blessed Change—the True Light.

The Pick

A couple weeks ago, on the eve of the closing of the Democratic National Convention....the one with the Styrofoam Greek columns and all of the wonderful rhetoric...I made a guess in the dark. I was completely fed up with the way things were going then. I wasn't happy with either side, even as I supported John McCain earlier in the Republican primaries. He was the best of the bunch then...and is still the best of the bunch now.

This brings me to The Pick. I had my reasoning to what would happen after Thursday night when those columns were to be hauled back to some Hollywood backlot. I had my hunches of what should happen. That change was indeed needed. Change not only for the Republican Party, which has been destroyed more by George W. Bush and the faulty leadership he has provided in these eight years...the latter four of which I signed off for in 2004, as you might recognize from my earlier political posts from that time. It wasn't out of stupidity that I agreed with this man then...nor was it for over half the voting electorate that we agreed with this flawed man and his flawed leadership. It was in spite of these flaws that we voted for this man...and for that party of which he has—for better or worse—represented these tumultuous eight years.

Much has happened these eight years, a lot of which has changed not only the political landscape but the very fiber of which our country sees itself and how the world sees our country. This hasn't been for the best most of the time. We do have a realization across the country since our pre-9/11 era of the true nature of those who wish our civilization and culture to be no more. At the same time, we have had serious flaws in reacting to this threat, reactions that have not only taken our eyes away from the very dangerous threats that we still haven't addressed or subdued. We cannot take a head-in-sand approach. We must face these threats head-on and be as judicious in our actions abroad and built consensus with our allies.

Will either side of the political spectrum do this to the satisfaction needed to move our country forward? I doubt it as I've doubted it since we've gone into Iraq in 2003. But this is where the Democrats have been lost in the response to the threats at hand since then.

While they've been squabbling on what was so wrong about going into Iraq they haven't been providing solutions to solve the problems at hand. The same mantra has been to get out of Iraq no matter the cost. It's a policy of expediency that takes nothing into account for the security of the region. We do not need anarchy in the Middle East. Think our gas prices are high now? Think of it when the region is even further destabilized! We have been caught with our pants down in not only our execution of the military operations in the region but also our dependency to foreign oil there and elsewhere with nations that do not have our best interests at heart. Furthermore, we are simply too cozy with Saudi Arabia for our best interests and for democracy in the region. Simply put: enough is enough.

We as a nation must come together to solve these problems. The problem isn't that we don't have the answers, but it's that we have a nation of apathetic people more ready to give into a popularity contest rather than learn about the issues…and when new people come onto the scene to berate their inexperience. Both sides, as you might have seen this election season, have done exactly this.

This race has rarely been about the issues—because either side has refrained from giving clear policy thoughts on issues. It's all about how bad the other guy (or woman) is. It's been about lipstick on pigs, old doddering men, people who "don't get it", about being "the ones we've waited for", and a whole assortment of one-liners that don't get to the heart of the issues. Let's clear the clutter.

I had predicted Palin being picked by McCain as the VP pick for a couple of reasons:

1) She is a reformer.
2) She is not from Washington.
3) She is relatively untainted by the old politics of the Republican Party.
4) She is "Pro-Life."


On the first point, she has taken on the old vanguard of her state party organization. She does have some issues with in fact taking the Bridge to Nowhere funding though ultimately being against the project and for requesting earmarks as city mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, but in the end she is a breath a fresh air for Republicans...and potentially a number of Americans overall.

In fact, in the days after the announcement of Sarah Palin as the VP candidate, Chris Matthews did make a point similar to one that I noted in the conversation with a similarly-minded friend back in Louisiana a couple days before the pick, on August 26th. Specifically, that Palin is a sort of Bobby Jindal of the North. She is a new face, ready to take on the old politics of her state and make reforms for the better of all of her state. Jindal, who unfortunately was busy (as he ought to have been at the time) keeping Louisiana running and prepared for the onslaught of Hurricane Gustav that weekend to even make a step onto the national stage. In both Palin and Jindal, they provide a new set of faces to an old and dying party. The mantle of the party needs renewal, like most of the country. This isn't just a slogan or a catch phrase—it's a reality.


On the second point, she clearly isn't part of the Beltway politics. There's no way she can be labeled to be part of the Beltway politics. One of the huge issues (of many issues) I had with Mitt Romney overall. This is both a positive and a negative. She is, as a result, more apt to charges of being too inexperienced, much like Barack Obama was being accused of by the McCain and Clinton campaigns earlier in the election season. The problem for Obama is that he has been "tainted" by his involvement in Washington politics while doing very little in the way of authoring comprehensive legislation. So not only does he not have executive experience whatsoever but he has little legislative experience, too. Couple that with the fact that he's at the top of the ticket and she at the bottom and it leads to a great deal of confusion by the electorate which should be much more against another Republican administration, no matter their stripes or new changes. That is why the election polls are so close...and why it appears McCain has overcome Obama in the polls slightly as of late. And adding Biden at the bottom of the ticket does little but solidify the difference of understanding on the ticket (a bottom-heavy ticket rather than a top-heavy ticket). In fact, it's very much like a Bush-Cheney ticket with left political flavorings. Talk about "change!"


On the third point, Sarah Palin isn't an old face of the Republican party, which up to this time has been, for better or worse, the party of Old White Men. It's true, but it doesn't have to—nor should it—remain that way. Again, the Republican party needs a facelift. It needs some va-voom, some revving up. And by revving up, I don't necessarily mean beauty-queen popularity or "simply a pretty face" but that of a person who is of a different cloth than most Republicans. Yes, she doesn't have any foreign policy experience, but for that matter neither has Obama who has rarely traveled outside the United States, unless you count that trip to Europe with his celebrity speech in Berlin (an obvious blatant attempt to channel John F. Kennedy). Speaking of which, why does each side try to channel JFK or Reagan at every possible moment? Are these men (and women) their own persons? Honestly.

But back to the topic, her lack of foreign policy experience is indicative of the problems with the Democratic ticket at the top. Furthermore, VP picks don't require foreign policy experience...unless the top of the ticket doesn't have it, regardless of how old or young the top of the ticket is. There will be a learning curve for either president and vice president. Always have, always will.


On the fourth point, one that matters most to me personally, I see only gold for the Republicans. And this is where I think the Democrats "just don't get it" as Sen. Obama would say. The Democrat party is shutting those out of their party with the politics of abortion. If you want to have a compassionate approach to the issue, which there should be, then mandate funding or assistance to the mothers of unexpected children. Do not force the killing of innocents by your policy. Conversely, the politics of the Republicans hasn't been peachy either. They have used it as a political football and there is great hesitancy on this election for people like me who are Pro-Life. We don't want to be fooled again by an administration that uses issues like that and foist another set of policies that hurts our country and our place in the world. We feel betrayed.

That's what the uniqueness of the pick of Sarah Palin is for the Pro-Life movement. No, I don't mean the vocal and graphic segment of the Pro-Life movement that wishes to scream "BABY KILLERS" to all those going into clinics. No, we are the silent majority, good people of this country that see a woman—and by extension a society—caught in the crosshairs of a Culture of Death, one devoid of promises for life. We must not ignore the least defendable in our midst. We, the ones who pray on the street corners outside these clinics of despair that call death a "choice," are fed up. We see nothing but despair for those going in. Our prayers go out to those inside, not just to change the laws of this country but the hearts and minds of those who see things so differently than us. We do not call them names or do other things to shock them into submission. Rather, we wish to see change happen to save the millions lives of the children aborted each year. We wish to see a conversion of hearts in our midst, not to point the finger and use a "holier than thou" approach. We are a pro-life nation in exile.

In the pick of Sarah Palin there is an even greater promise for the country than it was going into the 2000 election. And yet, there is great resistance ahead for the Movement. That is why Sarah Palin has such popularity in the country right now. It's not that the Republicans, through John McCain, have picked a woman for VP. No, it's that McCain has chosen a pro-life person to help change this country, to reform it in ways untold.

The road ahead is one that is fraught with dangers. There will be continued missteps by both the Obama-Biden and McCain-Palin campaigns. The thing that must be avoided is a race on personalities and return it to a race on the issues. How do we become a more compassionate nation and a more righteous nation of citizens who not only have passionate beliefs and concerns for our country but a nation of citizens who can take pride in their government for standing on the right side of life in all instances. We must truly become a beacon shining on a hill—a true bastion of democracy and of true civil rights.

We must learn what kind of change we need after these eight years. It cannot and should not return to the status quo politics that we've been subjected to these eight years—or the eight years before that was with Clinton. We must have actual change, not just a slogan and eloquent words.

To both campaigns: lose the pig-and-lipstick lines, lose the old-fish-in-paper analogies. Give us true answers for the issues that matter the most.

A Note of Disclosure & The Need for Faithful Citizenship

As the days are waning towards Election Day here in America (all told, only two months to go), I want to stress the need for Faithful Citizenship. We are not only called to have properly formed consciences on the public issues and policies being discussed, but we must also exercise our rights as dutiful citizens with our properly formed consciences to actively change for the better our society through active participation in political life. How do we do that?


By Making Our Voices Heard

We must never allow our voices to be silenced, even if the stances we take appear to the Mainstream to be backward, ignorant, or somehow "out-of-touch" with their sense of reality. A lot has continued to change these years of this new millennium and the warped nature of things can quickly work to try and silence what is right and what is just out there. We must never give in to or "sit down" and "shut up" to the injustices of our world. Speak to the world for the world is in need of a voice to speak the Truth.


By Being Respectful of the Other Side

We needn't get personal of the other side. We must remain firm in our beliefs but not nasty in our defenses. We cannot win a battle and lose the war on the account of dirty tactics and unfair political ways. We must let the Truth do the talking, our feet do the walking, and our hands pulling the levers of democracy. Be firm and friendly even when it requires turning the other cheek.


By Living and Voting According to Our Consciences, NOT Our Wallets

The question shouldn't be: Are YOU better off four (or eight) years ago? The question should be: Is the world a better place, a more equitable and safe place for all? How do we do this? We must be advocates for equitable treatment and good government. Without it, our society hasn't any legs left to stand on. Remember the axiom of do unto other as you wish others do unto you, even when it means we aren't as "rich" or "powerful" as we otherwise might think.


In the end, we are a country of immense possibilities, but we can also become too narrow-minded and narcissistic. We can end up having tunnel vision in our morality and the application of our morality in our lives. We can accept the unacceptable and refuse to tolerate what we see as intolerable. We have seen in recent years the fog of morality and its application. We have been let down as a nation, but that doesn't mean we have given up.

In the coming days and weeks, I will make the case for who I believe will best answer to the challenges ahead for us as a nation and who, in the end, doesn't have a leg to stand on for in the broad call for the audacity of hope. We must realize in the end, what this "hope" is truly calling for, and what the consequences will be.

TR's Words to the Wise...

"This country has nothing to fear from the crooked man who fails. We put him in jail. It is the crooked man who succeeds who is a threat to this country." - Theodore Roosevelt

These words are a wise observation from Teddy Roosevelt. Nothing less than a realization that this axiom applies to today's society would be something tantamount to the rejection of democracy as we know it in our country today.

Neither side of the political aisle has lived up to Mr. Roosevelt here in this case. We have crooked men (and women) abounding in today's society. It's isn't a coinidence that notable cases of corporate greed such as Enron (Ken Lay, Jefferey Skilling, Andrew Fastdow), WorldCom (Bernie Ebbers), HealthSouth (Richard Scrushy), and the like have occurred in recent years. It isn't a coincidence that backroom politics rather than citizens' votes have set policy for our country or that even our upper echelons of government are almost constantly rocked with allegations of (and, on the rare occasion, convictions for) crimes of corruption and abuse of power. Look no further than our current administration and the K Street corruption scandals. Look no further than the level of unbounded zeal at which the current administration is using its power to do domestic spying without warrants. Neither side has lived up to Americans of any color, of any creed, or of any political persuasion in the issues as of late. They have been and continue to be ruled by special interests. This MUST come to an end and quickly.

It doesn't worry me that the political party that I have supported are party to several documented cases of unethical behavior. It is the cases that are not caught, that are not reported on and that we--as a public--are not privy to that worry me the most. This is where President Roosevelt's words are so indelibly important. We must fear the crooked man who gets away with the crime.

Whether it be on either party, I want my news unbiased and uncommented upon. I want the facts checked, and I want, by any means necessary and legally available, all facts reported upon both fairly and in their entirety. It is time for both sides of the aisle to remove the partisan atmosphere that has cloaked Capitol Hill and the entire country in a debilitating moral haze that not only aids the enemy abroad but also the crooked man among us.

Ray Nagin and the "Chocolate City"

I've listened to the Martin Luther King Day comments and remarks made by Ray Nagin, current mayor of New Orleans, and his Democrat counterpart, Hillary Clinton, Senator from New York. Nagin has recently apologized for certain parts of his comments (which can be viewed here from the New Orleans' WDSU or read from transcript here). However, those parts of the speech were merely concerning the mentioning of God sending the Hurricanes, nothing more. His comments about a "Chocolate City" and how New Orleans will be "one again" has raised a serious uproar both in the city and across the Nation. As being from the area, born there and raised nearby, I find it to be rather disparaging for the kind of frenzy he worked himself into that day. Dr. King would not be proud.

Neither would Dr. King be proud of Senator Clinton's remarks comparing the House of Representatives to that of a plantation. It is just not right. It is a spit in the face to what Dr. King worked towards, that of equality. When remarks like that are accepted by a community at large when they are not the case (and clearly the House is NOT run like a plantation), then you actually take a step back for what Dr. King had accomplished in his life. What the African-American community must realize is that neither party is looking out for their interests and neither party is truly looking for equality. There must be eracism before racism can be wiped from the Earth. We not only should we be not racist but we should also be color-blind to race all together. Morgan Freeman put it best in a 60 Minutes interview about a month ago when posed the question, "How are we going to get rid of racism?" from Mike Wallace, and he responded by saying, "Stop talking about it."

All of these thoughts led me to write in to a specific PBS show, Washington Week, which I have been watching rather regularly as of late. They had a "What were they thinking?" segment that called for viewer comments, and well, I couldn't resist writing in. Apparently they had a shortage of comments this week because mine got in! So without further ado, my ten seconds of fame courtesy of who other than Hillary Clinton and Ray Nagin...

My comment read on on-air...

In response to Ms. Ifill's January 20, 2006 request for comment on her "What were they thinking?" segment:

As a native New Orleanian currently out-of-state, I was stunned to listen to Nagin's remarks. I thought he went off the deep end. However, Nagin and Clinton were doing the same thing. They were both playing to the crowd, which that day was predominantly African-Americans. They were caught up in the moment.

Saying the House is run like a plantation is a degrading statement. It's a far cry from being as repressive as the antebellum plantation system and thus is a slap in the face of the ancestors of many African-Americans these days, the slaves that were oppressed.

For all the talk of New Orleans as a melting pot, what it is and still has been a socio-economically divided city. What Nagin did was evoke a racial tone to an already brewing pot of trouble. From any other mouth such words would make many cry foul. What would have saved him face was not to call for the city to be a "chocolate" city but instead for it to be a "Neapolitan" city again. The city is a rich mix of cultures, and to include one race without the other is completely and utterly racist.

Both set of remarks, from Clinton and Nagin, were uncalled for and cheap allegories that have no place in today's society where we must get past race in order to actually defeat racism.

John Book
College Station, TX

Roberts Confirmation and Anti-Catholicism in the United States

I've meant to comment for quite some time on this article since mid-September but due because of my schedule I have waited until now. However, the topic is still fresh in noteworthiness here in America, as it has been since the United States' founding over 200 years ago. What are the place of Catholics, especially active Catholics in tune with their moral conscience based in a foriegn state? As Catholics we believed in this day in age that we have forever banished the question: "As practicing Catholic, is a person fit to hold office?"

With the media these days, much of it filled with anti-Catholic sentiment, I guess we cannot. Entertainment is set on bashing traditional Catholicism even more than the media in their pathetic satire, so much so that Viacom (parent company of Comedy Central) recently banished one South Park episode titled "Blood Mary" that first aired on the eve of the Immaculate Conception, the Catholic feast day honoring the Virgin Mary. This kind of tasteless satire is both demeaning and rude. Not mention, it's happened countless times in one form or another throughout recent years from the Pope picture-tearing on live television during on Saturday Night Live by Sinéad O'Connor, which has since also been bannished from public viewing altogether like the one South Park episode, to being the butt of jokes on the priesthood scandals—something that should not be joked lightly about.

However, this is not what I came to comment about today. I wanted to comment on the Christopher Hitchens opinion article Catholic Justice: Quit tiptoeing around John Roberts' faith from Slate.com. The curt words of Hitchens in his labasting of good Catholics, stating simply:

If Roberts is confirmed there will be quite a bloc of Catholics on the court. Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas are strong in the faith. Is it kosher to mention these things? The Constitution rightly forbids any religious test for public office, but what happens when a religious affiliation conflicts with a judge's oath to uphold the Constitution?

Now that John Roberts has been confirmed and Samuel Alito has been nominated to replace Sandra Day O'Connor, must we hear this nonsensical ideological garbage again? Hitchens continues to insinuate later in his piece that through the actions of the Catholic Church in the child abuse scandals and the Church's teachings on abortion and evolution (which he both clearly and fervrantly disagrees with) that Church (and its members) is solely political in nature. Hitchens must realize that moral teachings WILL collide with political issues from time to time and that does not mean there will be any resulting double allegiance issues, which worried the WASP's during the 1960 election of John F. Kennedy, our first Catholic president. This new round of insuations in merely more anti-Catholic sentiment popping up in Supreme Court issues.

Hitchens even goes so far to equate Opus Dei, an organization that Supreme Court Antonin Scalia (a Catholic) is a member of, to that of the Ku Klux Klan, a totally outrageous notion that should not be given the time of day in consideration. What does it then? Because it is "cool" to bash Catholicism.

Well, I think Scalia put it best when he addressed a group of the Knights of Columbus (which protected the Church in the South decades ago from Klan anti-Catholic violence) in Baton Rouge, Louisiana: "Have the courage to have your wisdom regarded as stupidity. Be fools for Christ. And have the courage to suffer the contempt of the sophisticated world." Amen. Give me Scalia any day over a bucketful of contemptable liberals.