"Nothing is more dreaded than the national government meddling with religion." John Adams

Featured Posts


Creative Minority Reader
Today on CMR —

Gonzaga. A Humanist University?

Gonzaga University's Mission Statement calls itself "an exemplary learning community that educates students for lives of leadership and service for the common good. In keeping with its Catholic, Jesuit, and humanistic heritage and identity."

Humanism, according to the dictionary, is "an outlook or system of thought attaching prime importance to human rather than divine or supernatural matters."

Uhm, what's "humanistic" doing in the mission statement of a Catholic university. Is there something I'm missing?


*subhead*Huh?*subhead*

Less Than Human

A childhood friend "friend requested" me on Facebook just a few days ago. I knew her growing up. She's married, and has children. She was always funny and kind. But after perusing her page I decided not to accept her friend request. You see, she has a Planned Parenthood ribbon on her page. And she's got a few rainbows on certain posts. She was "with her" during the election too.

Now, it used to be that we could all look past those things and still speak to each other. Political views were ancillary. But that's not the case anymore. It's not that I would start an argument with her but I'm not going to monitor everything I write on Facebook so as not to offend others with my views. And offend I would. In today's culture I'm offensive just for being a white Catholic conservative male.

It used to be the talking heads on television argued over issues and we listened but that wasn't us. It was a sideshow to real life. But now it's like we're all talking heads. We all have our platforms and opine daily. It used to be that politics was something that happened down in D.C. but government and its long bureaucratic arm pervades into every corner of our lives making it difficult to ignore. So many of the questions today used to be bedrock principles of reality such as life, marriage, gender, and speech. And it seems that very often we can't help but offend just by believing what we do. Politicians, the media, and the judiciary reaches into our lives and squeezes. And when we say "ow" we're criticized.

Please continue reading at The National Catholic Register>>>


*subhead*Second Civil War?*subhead*

News Roundup: G'Town Students Want More "Catholic Thought" and Growing Lay Leadership at Catholic Colleges...More

News Roundup: Georgetown Students Want More “Catholic Thought”, Growing Numbers of Lay Leadership at Catholic Colleges


Georgetown’s student editors want more ‘Catholic thought’

“Georgetown’s students and Catholic identity would be better served if Catholic thought was more integrated into the core curriculum,” writes the editorial board of The Georgetown Hoya in a piece that is otherwise critical of the late William Peter Blatty and The Cardinal Newman Society.

Referring to Blatty’s efforts to strengthen Georgetown’s Catholic identity by filing of a canon law petition, the editors defend “ideas which compete with Catholic teachings” but admit that “Georgetown’s Catholic pedigree is an integral component of Georgetown’s Jesuit heritage that all students ought to engage with during their years at Georgetown.”

…the lawsuit is correct in wishing to preserve Georgetown’s Jesuit heritage. The [Cardinal Newman Society’s accompanying] report notes students can graduate from the university without directly enrolling in a class focused on Catholic teaching and that the presence of Jesuits on campus has decreased from 122 in 1975 to 64 in 2011.

Unlike our Catholic peer institutions such as Boston College, Notre Dame and Villanova, Catholicism does not explicitly play a role in Georgetown’s core theology curriculum; even the university’s hallmark course offering, “Problem of God,” depends almost entirely on the preferences or academic background of the professor.

St. Thomas University offers abortion drug coverage, refers to abortion center

It’s hard to imagine—or to stomach. LifeSite News reports that the board of directors of St. Thomas University in New Brunswick, Canada, recently voted to offer students the abortion drug cocktail Mifegymiso under the university’s health plan for a $5 co-pay.

The Cardinal Newman Society also found that the university’s telephone directory includes “Clinic 554 (Sexuality and Reproductive Health/Abortion Services)” among its “emergency numbers,” as does a resource for “students in distress” produced by the university’s department of student services.

St Thomas University claims to teach “within a humanistic and Catholic tradition,” and its chancellor is Bishop Robert Harris of Saint John. Something is very wrong here!

Lesbians, radical feminists, drag queens at USF’s ‘global’ women’s forum

California Catholic Daily reports on the University of San Francisco’s upcoming “Global Women’s Rights Forum,” which will feature sexual activists and drag queens.

The Jesuit university’s event on March 7 and 8 will discuss “Feminism of Color and the Politics of Print,” “the intersections of sexuality, race and gender with different forms of citizenships and borders,” “Gender, Sexuality and the Latin American Left” and “Hookup Culture, Culture, Sexual Politics and Campus Rape.”

A drag queen named “Fauxnique” will perform something called “The F Word.” The USF website elaborates, “The F Word is FEMINISM! No longer unmentionable, now on everyone’s lips—let’s hear it from the painted mouth of a lady drag queen.”
CalCatholic laments that “the subject most universally, one might even say ‘globally,’ relevant to university-age women, marriage and family—which would also be of interest to any genuinely Catholic university, is completely ignored.”

Loyola Chicago theology prof blasts pro-lifers

Theologian Susan Ross of Loyola University Chicago blasts pro-life Catholics and defends legal abortion in a letter to the Chicago Sun-Times.

Please continue reading at The National Catholic Register>>>

*subhead*Put Your Blurb Here.*subhead*

We Never Hear About These Hostile Acts of Discrimination

Funny how the media isn't reporting this.

Sage Steele of ESPN, who is biracial, and married to a white man, said she's experienced worse racism from black people, not white people.

Breitbart:

Sage Steele, who is biracial and in an interracial marriage, stated that black people should look at themselves before putting blame on others. She also said that the worst racism she’s experienced has come from black people.
According to the Daily Wire Steele said, “There are times that I believe that we, as African-Americans, can be hypocritical, and that is to not look ourselves in the mirror when we are saying certain things and blaming other groups for one thing when we are doing the exact same thing.

“The worst racism that I have received [as a biracial woman married to white man], and I mean thousands and thousands over the years, is from black people, who in my mind thought would be the most accepting because there has been that experience. But even as recent as the last couple of weeks, the words that I have had thrown at me I can’t repeat here and it’s 99 percent from people with my skin color. But if a white person said those words to me, what would happen?”

Then you have this:

WNBA star Candace Wiggins said she retired early because she was harassed for being straight.

NY Post:
Candice Wiggins was a college star at Stanford, the third pick of the 2008 WNBA draft and a 2011 champion. And at the mountaintop of her basketball career, her sexuality marred the moment.

There is a “very, very harmful” culture running throughout the WNBA, she says, which saw her get bullied during her eight-year career because she is heterosexual.

Wiggins, who last played in the league in 2015, said she retired prematurely to leave a league that she estimated — wildly — is 98 percent lesbian, and which is played in such isolation that it weighs on the people on the court.

“It wasn’t like my dreams came true in the WNBA. It was quite the opposite,” Wiggins said in an extensive San Diego Tribune story published Monday. “… I wanted to play two more seasons of WNBA, but the experience didn’t lend itself to my mental state. It was a depressing state in the WNBA. It’s not watched. Our value is diminished. It can be quite hard. I didn’t like the culture inside the WNBA, and without revealing too much, it was toxic for me. … My spirit was being broken.”

The 30-year-old couldn’t take it anymore — being harassed for being straight and fighting for attention in a league that is starved.

“Me being heterosexual and straight, and being vocal in my identity as a straight woman was huge,” Wiggins said. “I would say 98 percent of the women in the WNBA are gay women. It was a conformist type of place. There was a whole different set of rules they [the other players] could apply.”
Hostility and discrimination only matters when it's from white males. Other than that? Meh. Whatevs.



*subhead*Hostile.*subhead*

An Interesting Take on "Hostile Work Environment." I Like It.

Hanging them on their own petards. I think that's what this is called. I don't know how far this will get but I love when Christians use the left's own ridiculousness against it.

A Houston social security judge is suing the federal government for creating a "hostile work environment" as well as for discriminating against him as a Christian by mandating that he watch an LGBT advocacy video as part of its "diversity" program or something.

Judge Gary Suttles has refused to watch a 17-minute LGBT diversity training video, which gives all federal employees tips on how to treat LGBT people with respect and how to "increase cultural awareness in a diverse and inclusive environment," as Suttles's boss described it in an email to employees. After facing disciplinary action for his repeated objection, Suttles has now filed a federal lawsuit, claiming that he has faced religious discrimination in the workplace.

"The Agency's repeated direct orders to Judge Suttles to watch or read a transcript of the religiously obejectionable [video] and threatening to discipline him for his faith-based refusal is unwelcome and is sufficiently severe to create an intimidating and hostile work environment," his attorney, Robert Painter, wrote in the lawsuit.

The LGBT sensitivity video stems from a 2011 executive order from President Barack Obama directing  federal agencies to develop new plans to promote diversity and inclusion in the workplace. Last May, Suttles received an email from his superior asking all employees to carve out 17 minutes of their day sometime in the next few months to watch the video. But according to the lawsuit, Suttles responded:

"I will not be participating in this training. I am already fully aware to treat all persons with respect and dignity and have done so my entire life. Furthermore, this type of government indocrination [sic] training does not comport with my religious views and I object on that basis as well."
The way I see it is if the video is actually just a kumbaya can't we all just get along video, Suttles doesn't have a leg to stand on. But if there is some LGBT advocacy in it (which I find likely) then he has a case. Now, the only problem is getting a judge to agree. And that may prove to be the difficult part.

Say, how's Trump doing with getting nominations in for all those empty seats on the federal bench. Maybe he should make that a priority, huh?




*subhead*LGBT.*subhead*

Grow a Spine So they Can Grow Theirs

A Texas woman testified before the state Senate to encourage them to find the "testicular fortitude" to pass legislation restricting abortion. She starts off a little shaky with the whole "lend me your ears" but I love the way she just unabashedly calls them out. And I love the line with which she signs off, "Grow a spine so they can go theirs."




*subhead*Brazen.*subhead*

Comedy Show Has Pro-Choice Men Thank Women for Abortions. Some Truth Here.

The TV Land show "Throwing Shade" did a skit in which "Various pro-choice men let their voices be heard and say 'thank you' to the smart ladies in their lives for having an abortion."

Because nothing says comedy like the taking of innocent life, right? But I think although they didn't mean it, there's some inadvertent truth here. Legal abortion allows many men to continue being boys.

(Some language so that's your warning.)





*subhead*Comedy.*subhead*

The Left Made Milo. The Right Just Knew The Left Hated Him.

I was busy so I didn't get a chance to write about MILO. All of a sudden he's everywhere. I feel bad for the guy. I'm not saying he didn't bring it on himself but to have a book contract and $250,000 coming your way only to have it yanked is a big deal, especially when it's because you're said to be in support of pedophilia. I feel bad for the guy because he said he was abused by a priest. I guess I take him at his word. He's going through a rough time. I haven't said a prayer for the guy but I'm thinking I probably should.

He's certainly smart and witty. But he doesn't seem happy, does he? And he can be pretty mean to people. I mean, there's a difference between being politically incorrect and mean. So that's all just to say I'm not a fan. And I'm not saying it in that understated way like people do to say they actively hate someone. I'm just not a fan. Milo didn't occupy much of my thinking, except the thought that I noticed someone taking Ann Coulter's shtick to the nth degree. I don't think I've ever even written about him before. Maybe but I don't think so. I've seen the YouTube videos of him and like I said, sometimes he's right. But more often it just seemed to me like he was putting on a FABULOUS show of which he was the star.

But from what I'm reading now, it seems that Milo has said some pretty anti-Semitic things and does he support pedophilia? I don't know. I guess it depends on what he meant by the term "boy." It did sound pretty bad. But Milo rose to prominence because he said outrageous things. It's hardly surprising that he said something over the line.

But the thing is, Milo rose to prominence because he wasn't allowed to speak, not because of what he was saying. It's a pretty important distinction. The left made Milo a thing, not the right. And some on the right began hailing him simply because the left hated him and attempted to silence him. But having the left hate him doesn't make him someone to listen to.

But what's of interest to me is that here you have this homosexual who's very OUT AND PROUD and he was invited to CPAC, a conservative organization, to speak BECAUSE THE LEFT HATED HIM. But conservatism must stand for something more than being against the left. I get it. Those guys have been pushing conservatives around for decades. But conservatives must be careful to simply not become an anti-left organization. It has to stand for something or it will find itself defending the indefensible.


*subhead*Hatred.*subhead*

Why Don't They Just Outlaw Christianity?

Johm Zmirak wonders "Why Don’t Secularists Just Be Honest and Outlaw Christianity?" The answer is simple. They'd rather not have the debate. They'll do it Grima Wormtongue style. I mean, why pick a fight when you're already winning.

Zmirak is right that banning Christianity from the public sphere is the eventual goal of the left. But they'll never say it. They'll just let judges chip away at it.

The recent Barronelle Stutzmann decision amounts to a Christian ban. The court is essentially saying you can't be a business owner and a Christian. Soon it'll be that you can't be a citizen and a Christian.

He writes at The Stream:

So I wish that our masters would just admit what they’re really up to and try to enact a Christian ban. All they would need to do is create a case that makes its way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which gives the judges the pretext to exempt Christianity from the First Amendment’s protections. I am sure that the legal brains at the ACLU and the Southern Poverty Law Center could find the right test case, and aim it at the creative jurists of the Ninth Circuit Court — confident that the same five-vote majority that issued Obergefell v. Hodges would vote their way. In fact, they really ought to, if they want to honor that precedent, as well as that shining lodestar of American moral thinking, Casey v. Planned Parenthood.

Perhaps the case could center on Christian parents who wish to home-school a child, or a Christian college that doesn’t want to hire openly homosexual faculty, or a doctor who won’t perform abortions. I leave the specifics to our betters. I know that they’re up to the task.
I have faith that Ruth Bader Ginbsurg and Anthony Kennedy can come up with some narrative that proves that the Founding Fathers really meant to ban orthodox Christianity, while protecting other creeds. Those justices could “prove” to their own satisfaction that the whole Bill of Rights is really a recipe for chicken mole. And the rest of our elites (including too many Republicans) would back them up, and call that decision “settled law.”

Decades of training and practice of modern legal theory have trained these experts to see through the tangle of messy words with specific denotations and plausible connotations, and ignore the grubby historical context and plain intentions of the Founders — and hear the clear, pure voice of our “living Constitution.” That god, whom Caesar demands that we worship, will never fail. It can be trusted. It will always tell the world just what the flesh and the devil would like us to hear.
The only Christians the elites like are those that twist and mangle and garble the faith into something resembling their secularist utopia.



*subhead*Twisted.*subhead*

President Trump, This is Why Many Christians Voted for You

They call it "holding their nose." And many Christians who were wary of Donald Trump, worried about specific policies, or disgusted by some of his personal behavior still voted for him because he vowed to nominate pro-life conservative judges and to cease the Obama administration's war on religious liberty. (His press conferences are just a fun bonus.) Many serious Christians were berated and hectored in incredulous tones with phrases like, "How could you?!!!!" or "No faithful Christian could ever support Trump!!!" 

But many Christians did vote for Trump. According to one study, Trump won 52 percent of the Catholic vote, 58 percent of the Protestant vote, and 81 percent of the white evangelical Christian vote. And now their faith in Trump may be shown to be well placed. Or it won't.

Recently, it came to light that the Trump administration was mulling an executive order that would protect religious liberties. Many religious people are understandably excited because they're hoping that unlike so many politicians, Donald Trump may be true to his word that he will defend religious liberty. Please recall his words at the National Prayer Breakfast when he said, "My administration will do everything in its power to defend and protect religious liberty."

Please continue reading at The National Catholic Register>>>



*subhead*Religious liberty.*subhead*