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

Featured Posts


Creative Minority Reader
Today on CMR —

Today On CMR - October 31, 2008

A Surprised Stay-at-Home Dad
—I made my wife cry and it changed my life.

How Was The Play Mrs. Lincoln?
—Some other ballots to watch election night.

If I Were a Pregnant Girl With Talent...
—From her horizontal perspective, Ebeth sees lots or irony in this election.

Obama Loving Nuns Blast Archbishop
—Nuns tell Archbishop: "You're not the boss of me."

Obama's Secret Police
—This is very scary and no joke.

Conservative is the New Gay
—We've allowed liberalism to become our cultural default.

Gene's Gay (Catholic) Get-together
—Gene Robinson leads retreat for gay Catholic clergy.



Sign Wars
—What I learned at the McCain campaign office.

When Obama Came For Them
—Courage is needed now...more than ever.

Rename Gallup the CYA Poll
—Gallup is admitting they have absolutely no idea but no matter what happens they're right.

30 Pieces Of Silver
—How much does it take to sell out your messiah?

A Surprised Stay-at-Home Dad

I made my wife cry. That's why I remember that particular night. At the time, we were not yet married and we were eating dinner at one of those chain restaurants. We were talking about the future as two young people do who have no idea what the future holds. We were still in that giddy in love phase where we named future children and decided what colors we'd paint the walls of our imaginary future home. We also discussed careers.

I'd just gotten a new job with a big newspaper in Philadelphia. I was feeling good about myself and liked talking careers because I was pretty impressed with myself. I mentioned that as a newspaperman I'd probably have to move around the country quite a bit. I asked her if she'd mind leaving her job to follow me around. She said she wouldn't mind a bit as long as we were together. And she said she'd work any job and it wouldn't matter to her one bit as long as we were together. It all seems silly now but that's the way young people talk. But I knew she was serious and I remember being marveled by her.

She asked why I was surprised and I said simply that although our future together was very important, I couldn't be happy unless I was succeeding in my career. You see, I said, to succeed at anything you need to have one thing as your goal. Whatever your goal is, everything else should be built towards achieving that goal.

When I look back, I don't even know the guy saying those things. But it was one of those moments that I didn't realize at the time was a big moment. I seem to never catch on to those moments while they're happening. I took a bite of potato skins and looked up to see my future wife crying. I was shocked. I honestly had no idea what could've made her cry. I stupidly looked around the room to see if someone had said or done something or thrown something at her. I didn't need to look so far to find the culprit.

She wiped her eyes and said she would've hoped that I could be happy with her and our future children in our imaginary house no matter what kind of work I did.

And that's when I said it: "I can't be happy unless I'm writing for big newspapers or magazines. I need to succeed. That's just me. It's the way I'm built. You have to accept that."

Well, the adage goes that if you want to make God laugh, make a plan. Well I had plenty of plans. God must have been laughing that day but I remember it because my wife cried. But that moment stuck with me and it made me think about myself a little more as to whether I was heading down the right path with my life. It wasn't anything I would ever talk about but it's one of those things that sits on your mind in the undistracted hours of the night.

I was still working at the newspaper when we had our first child. And because of our erratic schedules we decided to put my daughter into day care. To be honest, we hardly thought about it. It was what people did. So in theory I had no problem with it. But you see, my daughter is not a theoretical daughter. She's very real. And she's mine. And I had to drop off my very real daughter at daycare.

I remember it was the night before day care and my wife asked me who would drop off and who would pick up. I decided quickly. I would drop off and my wife would pick up. Seemed simple. Let me tell you something, dropping off is a lot more difficult. Dropping off changed my life.

The first day I dropped my daughter off at day care I knew that it was undoable. I didn't know know but I knew, if you know what I mean. I walked in and the nice lady said, "just put her down over there." So I put the car seat down on the rug. The lady said, "Not there because the toddlers might try to touch her." So I moved her over to the corner of the room and walked to the door. I turned to see the car seat rocking slightly and her little hand reaching up towards the colorful plastic keys dangling from the handle. I watched her from the door and nobody came and got her. And then I left.

And that's one of the secrets nobody tells you about day care. It's hard. It's hard to leave a child. It's hard to think of other people raising your children. It's hard to have the hurried phone conversation with your spouse asking if they can pick up the child because you're stuck at work. It's hard.

I was typing a story late one night when it hit me that every day my daughter was surrounded by people who didn't love her. It wasn't a knock on them. They were nice women...who didn't love my daughter.

It took a few weeks after that for my head to catch up but she was soon big enough to cry when I dropped her off. She knew she was being left. And that was really it. (As I'm writing this I'm realizing that so many changes in my life have come to prevent the women in my life from crying.)

I spoke to my wife that night. And when I spoke logically about what to do it became apparent that the newspaper business was a dying business. And moving around the country wasn't the best thing for children. And also, I could write from home and earn money. So, being ever logical, I decided to work from home. It was logical.

Now, when I started working from home I took on all sorts of work. I wrote technical articles, I wrote speeches for political candidates, I wrote press releases, news articles, features. Whatever I could write I wrote. I thought I could be a writer who took care of his kids on the side.

But children don't stay on the side. They're front and center. They're needy. They stink sometimes. They need baths. They need to get outside. They need to eat...a lot. They need to be tickled. They need to be talked to. They need to be held by the hand. They need someone to push them in the swing. In short, they need a parent.

And at some point their needs replaced my desire to conquer the world. My life focused more on being a Dad of one, two, then three, then four, now five children. Now, my afternoons are filled with homework assignments and diapers. I'm still a writer of press releases and articles but I'm first and foremost a stay-at-home Dad. A very surprised stay-at-home Dad.

I have four daughters and a son filling my everydays. Someone is always crying. We laugh a lot too, though. My wife doesn't cry in restaurants anymore but that's partially because we can't afford to go out to dinner that much. The funny thing is that our family has never been happier. So I have succeeded at that. And that is my one goal around which all other things are built.

How Was The Play Mrs. Lincoln?

So while all of our focus has been on the Presidential Election and the consequences of the potential outcome, there are some other important items related to the Culture of Life/Death on ballots around the country.

Proposition 8 in California. This proposition would (re)define the obvious, namely that marriage is between a man and a woman. This ballot is designed to undo the legislation by judicial fiat that occurred on May 15, 2008 when the California Supreme Court, by a vote of 4–3, ruled that the previous ban on gay marriage was unconstitutional and then made up a constitutional right thereof. This proposition would undo all that. Current polls show this to be a very tight, a dead heat even. Keep an eye on this election night.

Initiated Measure 11 in South Dakota. This initiative bans most abortions in South Dakota. This initiative comes on the heels of a 2006 defeat of a similar ban but with no exceptions. This time around they have included exceptions for rape and incest. Current polling shows that SD voters are evenly split right now with split 44-44 with 12% undecided. Planned Parenthood has been pulling out all the stops to defeat this measure. Pray for it and watch it on election night.

Proposal 2 in Michigan. Michigan is one of the only states that prohibits the destruction of embryonic human life for research purposes. Proposal 2 seeks to change that. Proposal 2 would amend the constitution to allow research on leftover IVF babies. The death eaters have been pouring funds into this one as well. Again, polling shows a very tight race on this measure with 46-44 in favor of the measure. Pray, vote, and watch!

Initiative 1000 in Washington State. This initiative would legalize assisted suicide in the state. I am not sure what it is with the Northwest US and suicide, but they are determined. Unfortunately, this initiative looks likely to pass with some recent polls showing 56-38 in favor with 6% too hopeless to care. Other polls however have it closer. This one doesn't look good, but keep an eye on it election night.

So if things don't go the right way in the presidential race, there may be some small glimmers of hope left. If things miraculously go our way Tuesday, then some victories here may be the icing on the cake. This being CMR, however, I cannot help but wonder what would happen in the liberal bastion of Washington State if I-1000 passes and Obama loses?. Boy, that could get really ugly, fast.

Today On CMR - October 30, 2008

If I Were a Pregnant Girl With Talent...
—From her horizontal perspective, Ebeth sees lots or irony in this election.

Obama Loving Nuns Blast Archbishop
—Nuns tell Archbishop: "You're not the boss of me."

Obama's Secret Police
—This is very scary and no joke.

Conservative is the New Gay
—We've allowed liberalism to become our cultural default.

Gene's Gay (Catholic) Get-together
—Gene Robinson leads retreat for gay Catholic clergy.

CMR Liveblogging Pushing Daisies Tonight!
—Join our protest against the Obamercial. Watch "Pushing Daisies" on ABC with us.

Sign Wars
—What I learned at the McCain campaign office.



When Obama Came For Them
—Courage is needed now...more than ever.

Rename Gallup the CYA Poll
—Gallup is admitting they have absolutely no idea but no matter what happens they're right.

30 Pieces Of Silver
—How much does it take to sell out your messiah?

Great Argument for Private Sexual Morality
—What we do in life echoes in eternity.

If I Were a Pregnant Girl With Talent...

If I were a girl and I were pregnant I'd like to think I could write something like this. But I'm not a girl. And I'm not pregnant. And I don't write this well. Go read Ebeth's great piece.

Back in February, my children rudely asked a woman we know how she had cast her ballot in the Virginia primary. She named a candidate who is adamantly pro-choice. They were horrified. “How can you vote for someone who is for abortion?” one of them blurted indignantly.

“I’m more concerned with the people who are already alive than the ones who aren’t yet,” came the steady reply.
Go read the rest.

Obama Loving Nuns Blast Archbishop

As you recall, Archbishop Chaput has been very forceful is saying that the culture of life should be predominant in our thoughts come election day. Well, you'd expect a motley bunch of secularists, atheists, and liberals to cry foul. I just didn't expect it from a couple of nuns. Here's a letter to the editor from The Denver Post from two Denver nuns who are essentially telling the Archbishop to mind his own business and they're going to support Obama. Sad. Here's the letter:

As Catholics and supporters of Sen. Barack Obama’s candidacy, we appreciate Archbishop Charles Chaput’s clarification in Sunday’s Post that he is speaking as a private citizen when he takes issue with Sen. Obama and his supporters.

We had supposed that since the official archdiocesan newspaper last week included a voter guide supporting John McCain from a group calling itself Colorado Family Institute (different from the guide promoted by the U.S. bishops), the archbishop might, perhaps, be attempting to influence the choices of Catholic voters.

We honor the archbishop’s right to support the candidates and issues he believes best represent his deepest values, and applaud his recognition that not all Catholics will make his choices their own.

We also appreciate the respect for primacy of conscience in our decision-making, as enunciated by Josef Ratzinger, now our current pope, Benedict XVI, who wrote: “Over the pope, as the expression of the binding claim of ecclesiastical authority, there still stands one’s own conscience, which must be obeyed before all else — if necessary, even against the requirement of ecclesiastical authority.”

We are making our ballot choices as adults and as faithful citizens who have weighed the issues in light of the gospels and the justice teachings of our church. We encourage all Catholics to do likewise.

Sister Mary A. Coyle, Denver
Sister Mary Ann Cunningham, Denver
This is a snarky letter written with nastiness in intent. It's no wonder the faithful are so confused.

Obama's Secret Police

A Civilian Security Force just as well funded as the military? Here in America? That is exactly what Obama wants and he is not ashamed to tell you about it!


Well, after all you do need to keep the proletariat ... um .... I mean middle class in line. First you promise them something to gain power, say fictitious middle class tax cuts. However when you don't deliver, you will need some forces to to keep the prolet... middle class in line. A federally controlled domestic police force is just the thing.

Something so ambitious needs a catchy name, dontcha think? How about say ... Gestapo ... or .... Stasi .... or Committee for State Security (roughly translated Комитет государственной безопасности?) or something catchy ike that?

All joking aside, did you get that folks? Obama wants a federally controlled domestic police force funded the same as the military. Oh my ... Is it any wonder that gun sales are up in Florida?

Ht to Gateway Pundit.

Conservative is the New Gay

We've all been in a moment when a conversation is going on among people around us and it becomes apparent that most of what you hold dear is held in contempt by everyone around you and you wonder if you should speak up. Sometimes you do. Sometimes you don't. It's like as a conservative you have to live in the closet and only "come out" at your peril.

Think about it, in our culture it's much easier for celebrities to announce they're gay than admit they're conservative. For our culture, liberalism has become the default setting. This column written a student at theThe Harvard Crimson really nails it:

The other day, a friend of mine made a heartfelt confession. I’d known it was coming, and I was prepared to offer support. I swaddled her shoulders in a rainbow blanket, played Elton John softly in the background, and reassured her that no matter what, she would always be the same person. This was only one small facet of her personality, and it wouldn’t change the way we thought about her. If anything, we would love her more for her honesty.

But when she blurted out, “Alex, I think I’m conservative,” I realized that I had been deluding her with false hopes. I couldn’t bear to look at her. Clearly, this girl I had always thought of as an intelligent, rational being was secretly a sub-literate moron. All those times we‘d innocently joked about Bristol and Levi, she’d been harboring perverted desires to do things like watch FOX News and vote for McCain. “At least tell me you still think Sarah Palin is Satan,” I pleaded. She shook her head and muttered something about the liberal media distorting things, but I couldn‘t quite make it out over the sound of our friendship crashing to an end.

Yet, for the sake of old times, I decided to try walking a mile in her shoes. The results were sobering. If you enjoy being yelled at, try sitting down next to a stranger in the dining hall and telling him you’re thinking of voting for McCain. Whenever I attempted this experiment, I was excoriated, stared at incredulously, or even slapped in the face. One time a group of people got together and tried to perform an exorcism on me.

Harvard prides itself on its diversity—economic, racial, social, geographical—but it remains intellectually segregated. It’s not what conservative commentators seem to imagine—a bastion of liberal professors force-feeding radical opinions to a naïve student body. It’s simply that the tacit assumption, in the classroom as well as outside it, is that everyone is liberal. Why is this? Perhaps because Harvard is located in the People’s Republic of Cambridge in the heart of blue Massachusetts: the sort of community whose Oktoberfest parade features a Communist marching band and an elaborate float of pigs strapped to lipstick rockets. But the Harvard student body comes from all over—even from red states. More than 25 percent of the class of 2012 hails from the traditionally more conservative Midwest and South. In fact, Harvard’s world-class reputation enables it to attract people from diverse backgrounds with diverse viewpoints. The problem is that instead of allowing this diversity to promote enriching discussion, everyone just assumes that anyone with any degree of intelligence is ipso facto liberal.

This “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy ultimately benefits no one, liberal or conservative. By isolating ourselves from those with whose opinions we disagree, we lose the ability to defend our beliefs. For me, as for most of my Harvard compatriots, the long, probing, in-depth discussions I’d heard were one of the best parts of college have been limited to topics like Youtube and the weather. When it comes to politics, every discussion is just a group of people agreeing with each other. This applies to campus conservatives as well:. Those comfortable enough in their political affiliation to come out as Young Republicans interact only with other Young Republicans, in an alternate, parallel universe similarly devoid of dissenting viewpoints. Given time, this sort of environment produces things like the Men for Palin video. This is good for no one.

And because of this, we have no idea how to respond when people disagree with us. This explains all the exorcisms and flame wars. The assumption that to be intelligent is to be left of center implies that anyone who disagrees is either confused or has recently experienced some sort of intellectually damaging event, like walking into a post. When someone bashfully admits to wanting smaller government or thinking that privatizing social security might not be such a bad idea, instead of trying to discuss, we rush them to UHS for a battery of tests and sprinkle them with secular water.

And that’s what makes things worse for people like my friend. Life is hard in the closet. It’s dark, and there are never enough hangers. But Harvard’s current culture of implied assent means she will never get to discuss her opinions with anyone. She will never be able to introduce her candidate to her friends. She can wear McCain gear to class, but she will have to pretend it’s ironic. And when she manages to come out, no one will hug her and whisper over the Elton John music, “It’s okay…I’m a moderate.”
This student does a good job of writing, even though I'm pretty sure we'd disagree on...just about everything. This is something we're going to have to deal with in the future. And I think we need to speak up more. We need to speak out. How many times have we chosen silence over confrontation? On some level, we've aided in secular liberalism becoming the popular culture.

H/T Phi Beta Cons

Gene's Gay (Catholic) Get-together

Not content with merely tearing his own Church apart, openly homosexual Episcopal New Hampshire Bishop Gene Robinson is now meddling with ours.

Apparently back in 2005 or so, Robinson helped lead a secret retreat of gay Catholic clergy. I cannot help but wonder that if it was so secret, why is he talking about it now. Can nothing stay in the closet with this guy? But I digress.

Bishop Gene helped lead the hush-hush homosexual huddle by telling his comrades that the best way to fight for gay rights in the church is to advocate for female ordination. The root of our deep seated homophobia, you see, is deep seated misogyny. Yes, we hate women too.

About 75 Catholic clergy from around the U.S. participated without notifying their bishops or provincial leaders, Robinson said. In 2005, the Vatican issued a document affirming the church's stance that men with "deep-seated" attraction to other men should not be ordained.

The retreat was held outside of New England, but Robinson would not say where...

..."at its root, the hatred of gays is driven by a hatred and second-class status of women," Robinson said...

"I had said to them, 'It's too dangerous for you to come out as gay to your superiors, but I believe that if you work for the ordination of women in your church, you will go a long way toward opening the door for the acceptance of gay priests," Robinson said.
Yes, let's follow Bishop Gene's advice and we can destroy our Church the same way he is helping to destroy his own. Or not.

See Gene, in the Catholic Church (although we certainly have our own problems) We are required to believe what the Apostles believed and what Jesus taught them. This has been faithfully handed down from generation to generation and is infallibly protected by the Holy Spirit. Sorry, but no amount of bath-house ecumenism is going to change that.

Today On CMR - October 29, 2008

CMR Liveblogging Pushing Daisies Tonight!
—Join our protest against the Obamercial. Watch "Pushing Daisies" on ABC with us.

Sign Wars
—What I learned at the McCain campaign office.

When Obama Came For Them
—Courage is needed now...more than ever.

Rename Gallup the CYA Poll
—Gallup is admitting they have absolutely no idea what's going on but no matter what happens they're right.

30 Pieces Of Silver
—How much does it take to sell out your messiah?

Great Argument for Private Sexual Morality
—What we do in life echoes in eternity. This proves it.

Bernstein's Mass Revival
—Anti-Catholic sacrilege is naturally a must see.



Newsweek Declares Victory for Obama?
—The media wants you to believe it's over but here's a few reasons this race is far from over.

Gianna Jessen Responds To Obama
—Abortion survivor calls out Obama for lying about his abortion record.

The Obamunist Manifesto
—Obama reveals full extent of his Marxism in 2001 interview.

CMR Liveblogging Pushing Daisies Tonight!

I can't watch Obama. I just can't. Not tonight. I know this is a HUUUUGGE event. But I'm so tired of the self-righteous platitudes and the empty rhetoric. I can't watch. So the only network that isn't showing Obama's infomercial is ABC and they're showing a show called "Pushing Daisies" that I've never seen before but I'll liveblog it as a protest against the Obamercial.

Starting at 8 p.m. (EST) It's described as a "forensic fairy tale", whatever that means. Please feel free to join us here in the combox in protest of the Obamercial. And hey, maybe a show about a pie-maker who has the power to bring the dead back to life will be good.

8:01: This is looking a bit like Harry Potter. Is it always like this?

8:02: The girl returned from the dead? Now, from what I understand, he brought her back to life but he can't touch her or else she'll die. Quirky so far.

8:04: Hey, the guy in the booth was in Office Space. He played the nerdy dude. I like him.

8:05 I'm already grateful because I'm interested in the show enought that five minutes in and I haven't thought about what Obama is saying once. For that I will be eternally grateful.

8:09: This show is very quirky. My wife hates it. I like it.

8:10: Call me an idiot but that guy running around with a stick through his head was very funny. Uh-oh. Commercial. Must...not...check...Obama. I wonder if the ratings for this will be very high because lots of folks aren't interested in Obama. Alright, no more mentioning Obama. That's it.

8:10 If only that guy had lived, he would haven't gotten a tax cut ...nevermind.-PA

8:12: "I could gold leaf my bathroom..." Funny.

8:15: This show feels French. Not the bad kind of French. Like that movie Amelie which I liked. Hey, don't make fun. I can be sensitive...

Good quote: "This my clue pad for writing down clues."

8:15 Didn't Kristin Chenoweth play the token conservative on the left wing?

8:18: "My Mandarin's a little rusty." I'm digging this.

8:20: "The complexities of this complex issue are so complex it makes this shallow conversation look silly." I may watch this show even when the guy who's trying to destroy my country isn't on every other channel.

8:21: Pat just told me he watched the first five minutes of Obama! I can't even count on my own brother to boycott with me. I feel used.

8:22: We just had a McCain commercial. Hooray.

8:22 Did the Michelle Obama Character just accuse the plumber of murder? What channel am I watching? PA

8:24: Patrick, stop it. We're pretending Obama doesn't exist -for a little while. Back to the show, we just discovered our hero has a family he didn't know about. Twin half brothers who are bad magicians.

8:27: Who owns the diner where the hero makes pies? I wonder if they make $250,000 per year?

8:29 Doesn't Obama have a half brother?

8:31; The Bun steamer exploded. Funny.

Alright. The show just got me through this half hour. I am grateful to it. But the World Series is coming on right now. Later. Thanks for getting me through.

Sign Wars

This morning I stepped out onto my front lawn to find my McCain/Palin sign torn from the ground, crumpled and tossed. I went over, picked it up, straightened out the sticks, and put it back up.

While driving the kids to school I noticed the same had happened to a few of my neighbors. Oddly, the few Obama signs I saw were left standing. What an odd trajectory for a storm, right?

So after I dropped the kids off I stopped at my neighbors' house and picked up their McCain signs.

This seems to be happening all over. I guess it happens every election but I've seen it more this cycle.

Recently, I was volunteering at the local McCain office and was speaking to this little old lady who was also volunteering. She told me the signs in front of her house had been savaged or stolen three times. And then she started laughing quietly. "But I've got the answer," she said.

She now puts the signs in the poison ivy bush in front of her house. "If they try it again I'll know 'em by their scratching," she laughed.

When Obama Came For Them

When Obama came for the the executives making $250,000
I remained silent;
I did not earn $250,000.

When Obama came for the babies,
I remained silent;
I was not a baby...anymore.

When Obama came for conservative talk show hosts,
I did not speak out;
I didn't have a talk show.

When Obama came for the plumber,
I remained silent;
I was not a public figure.

When Obama came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

Rename Gallup the CYA Poll

Gallup is making news because their most recent poll has McCain cutting Obama's lead to two. Good news. And I'm happy about it.

But in this recent election cycle, Gallup has disgraced itself because they have all but openly admitted that they have absolutely no idea what's going on. Instead of just releasing one poll and basing their reputation on its accuracy, Gallup is issuing two polls with two completely different turnout models.

They're issuing a traditional model and an "expanded" version (which is kind of like New Coke, I guess.) You see, Gallup is saying that they don't know how many people are going to turn out in this election so in the traditional model they're expecting a record turnout of about 60 percent of registered voters to vote in this election. That would be a record. The "expanded" model, however, is based on something like 2/3 of voters turning out. This is the 'we love Obama' model that says Obama voters are going to come out in not just record numbers but they're going to shatter records.

Maybe the expanded version is right but isn't it the job of a polling company to figure out who's coming out to vote and who isn't? I mean, that is their job.

But here's the result of issuing two polls. Today, according to Gallup's traditional model, McCain is down two. Good news, like I said. But according to the expanded model McCain's down seven. And there's a margin of error of three on each. So if McCain wins by one Gallup can say they were right on because it was within their margin of error. And if Obama wins by ten, that too will be in the margin of error.

If I want to know how the race is going within an 11 point estimation I can pretty much talk to anybody. It's a little silly for Gallup to be no more precise than regular folks like me who are just guessing. Gallup should just rename themselves the CYA pollsters. No matter what happens they're covered.

30 Pieces Of Silver

Judas infamously sold out the Messiah for a mere thirty pieces for silver. Ace of Spades is seeking a Judas at the LA Times to do the same to their messiah for $25,000.

$20,000 $25,000 Reward for Obama/Ayers/Dohrn/Khalidi Tape

Dirty Harry suggests a benefactor can offer $100,000.

Well, I don't know if one will step forward. I can guarantee, though, that if the goods are delivered the blogosphere can contribute $20,000. In a matter of hours.

Maybe more. More would depend on the tape.

This offer includes is particularly directed towards Los Angeles Times employees. Maybe ones that just got fired. Or will get fired in the next couple of weeks.

Guaranteed.

Anonymous.

That's how we roll.

Pretty pathetic that we have to try to bribe "newsmen" to release newsworthy tapes...
One big difference though, I don't think that their messiah turns the other cheek.

Today On CMR - October 28, 2008

Great Argument for Private Sexual Morality
—What we do in life echoes in eternity. This proves it.

Bernstein's Mass Revival
—Anti-Catholic sacrilege is naturally a must see.

Newsweek Declares Victory for Obama?
—The media wants you to believe it's over but here's a few reasons this race is far from over.

Gianna Jessen Responds To Obama
—Abortion survivor calls out Obama for lying about his abortion record.

Cardinal Egan Strikes Again
—Cardinal Egan has been eating his Wheaties lately.

The Obamunist Manifesto
—Obama reveals full extent of his Marxism in 2001 interview.

NCR Attacks Pro-Life Bishops
—The bishops are destroying the Church by standing up for truth. Somebody stop them!



Martin Luther, We Hardly Knew Ye
—Archeologists dig up my BFF's house. Guess what they found?

More Episcopal Backbone
—One Bishop speaks out on Prop 8 and another on voting for life!

Bishop Dewane On Voting Responsibility
—Bishop of Venice Fl. instructs the faithful.

Fireworks Over Town Canceling Christmas
—One company stands up against the secularization of Christmas.

Great Argument for Private Sexual Morality

You've all heard the argument: "What I do with my private life is nobody else's business. it doesn't affect anybody else."

Well, I can think of one recent instance where private immorality affected the world greatly.

Just a few years ago, a man took his wife to sex clubs in Europe and asked her to engage in sexual activity in front of other patrons. He called them "romantic getaways." His wife at first refused to go in the first but finally went at his insistence.

That's man's name was Jack Ryan. He was running for Senate. Because his private peccadilloes were made public he had to drop out of the race and the Republicans lost their majority, thus transferring the power of Congress to Democrats.

And the Democrat who was set to run against Ryan and cruised to victory after he dropped out was Barack Obama.

Newsweek Declares Victory for Obama?

Newsweek, this week:

On Nov. 4, Barack Obama will be elected as the next president of the United States. The real excitement won't come from watching that foregone conclusion come to pass. No, the big question is, will Democrats nationwide simply "win" the night—or will they deliver an electoral drubbing so thorough that it signals the utter rejection of conservative ideology and kills the notion that America is a "center-right" country?
Seems like Newsweek might be rooting a little bit rather than covering.

But here's the thing, Zogby's polling numbers have the difference between Obama and McCain at four while just last week the spread was twelve. The Investor's Business Daily poll has Obama up just two. Battleground has Obama up three. Rasmussen had it eight on Sunday but by Monday McCain had gained three. There has been a momentun shift here. The gap is narrowing.

I'm not saying it'll be easy. I'm just saying that this is far from over.

The pollsters are still, I believe, overestimating Democratic turnout. Sarah Palin is amassing record crowds wherever she goes. John McCain finally has a message and he's sticking to it and he's putting money behind it with the "spreading the wealth" and Joe the Plumber. Some 527's are finally stepping out from behind the trees for McCain including the Born Alive Truth folks.

And here's something hardly anybody's talking about. About 8-10 percent of the electorate is still telling pollsters they're undecided. Well, that means that despite seeing three times more commercials for Obama, the media telling them that the election is already over, and viewing exclusively positive news stories about "The One," there's a group of people who have resisted jumping on the Obamessiah bandwagon. Why?

If I'm Obama, that makes me very nervous.

Something tells me that many of these "undecideds" are going to break McCain come game day, just as they did for Hillary in the primaries. In short, don't give up hope. Too much is at stake this election day. Turnout is everything. If Florida in 2000 taught us anything, it's that one vote really does count.

Bernstein's Mass Revival

This has to one of the oddest reviews I have ever seen. The Washington Times reviews Leonard Bernstein's "Mass"

This is what WT has to say about "Mass"

Subtitled "A Theatre Piece for Singers, Players and Dancers," Leonard Bernstein's "Mass" - commissioned by Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis as a key part of the Kennedy Center's 1971 grand opening - generated a considerable amount of advance buzz and excitement.

Yet critics and the attending glitterati generally gave it thumbs down after hearing it.

Mawkish and sentimental, the work oozed the kind of New Yorky armchair agitprop skewered by Tom Wolfe in his book "Radical Chic & Mau-Mauing the Flak Catchers." "Mass" was, in effect, Mr. Bernstein's confused classical response to the radicalized 1960s, wrapping its garbled antiwar, anti-Nixon vibe in psychedelic, feel-good packaging reminiscent of the groovy Day-Glo brotherhood portrayed on the Beatles' "Sgt. Pepper's" album cover.

The composer used the Roman Catholic Mass as a frame-tale around which to wrap his secular approach to religion. With an assist from "Godspell" composer-lyricist Stephen Schwartz, Mr. Bernstein's book is a crazy quilt of liberation theology and situational ethics. Worse still, the climactic smashing of the Eucharist near its close is pure sacrilege for practicing Catholics.

So irritating were the politics of "Mass" that many classical fans, myself included, were happy to assign the work to the proverbial dustbin of history.
The review ends by saying that Mass "remains dated and embarrassingly awkward at times."

So the Times conclusion, this anti-Catholic embarrassingly dated mawkish and sentimental sacrilege? Four Stars, a must see. You can't make this stuff up.

Today On CMR - October 27, 2008

Gianna Jessen Responds To Obama
—Abortion survivor calls out Obama for lying about his abortion record.

Cardinal Egan Strikes Again
—Cardinal Egan has been eating his Wheaties lately.

The Obamunist Manifesto
—Obama reveals full extent of his Marxism in 2001 interview.

NCR Attacks Pro-Life Bishops
—The bishops are destroying the Church by standing up for truth. Somebody stop them!

Martin Luther, We Hardly Knew Ye
—Archeologists dig up my BFF's house. Guess what they found?

More Episcopal Backbone
—One Bishop speaks out on Prop 8 and another on voting for life!

Bishop Dewane On Voting Responsibility
—Bishop of Venice Fl. instructs the faithful.



Fireworks Over Town Canceling Christmas
—One company stands up against the secularization of Christmas.

Gay Marriage Battle On College Campus
—Gay marriage advocates attempt college campus coup. And fail.

Cardinal Egan: Look at this Photograph
—Look at it. Tell me this isn't an innocent human being worthy of protection.

Best (Or Worst) Halloween Costumes Ever
—I wouldn't be caught dead or alive in any of these costumes.

Gianna Jessen Responds To Obama

Remember Barack Obama essentially called abortion survivor Gianna Jessen "a despicable" liar in his ad. Well Gianna is not taking it sitting down. BornAliveTruth.org is releasing its second ad denouncing Obama’s abysmal voting record against protecting infants who survive abortions.

The ad features abortion survivor Gianna Jessen responding to Senator Barack Obama’s direct attack on her. Looks like significant money is behind the ad. Good for her.

H/Y Born Alive Truth

Cardinal Egan Strikes Again

What's gotten into all these bishops and cardinals recently? Many are actually...standing up for morality all of a sudden. Up until recently there had been so much "contextualizing" of abortion from bishops. Yes, they'd say, abortion is very important but so is immigration and welfare and the War in Iraq. But it seems that many have realized that without the right to life, all other rights are meaningless.

I bring this up because Cardinal Egan today criticized Fordham University for giving an award to Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, a supporter of abortion rights. The Jesuit university wasn't just giving him any award though. Breyer is scheduled to receive the Fordham-Stein Ethics Prize Wednesday at a dinner in New York. Ironic, huh? A judge who's supported partial birth abortion is receiving an ethics prize from a Catholic university.

A spokesman for the New York Archdiocese said Cardinal Edward Egan was surprised to learn Breyer would receive an award from Fordham's law school and has spoken to the Catholic university's leaders to ensure "that a mistake of this sort will not happen again," says the Associated Press.

Leaving no room for misunderstanding, spokesman Joseph Zwilling said Monday that Egan was talking specifically about Breyer's votes on the court in favor of abortion rights.

More than 1,100 Fordham alumni and others have signed a petition to the university administration calling for the reward to be revoked, the Cardinal Newman Society said on its Web site.

While it's depressing that they have to, I have been thrilled recently to see bishops and cardinals standing up against public immorality by Catholics and Catholic colleges.

Hooray for Cardinal Egan!

The Obamunist Manifesto

Even though it has been out for days, so far only Drudge and FoxNews are reporting on the startling (not really for anyone paying attention) audio of an interview The One gave in 2001. In the interview, which I have now dubbed the Obamunist Manifesto, Obama makes clear that he does not love or understand this country at all. In it, he says the "The Constitution reflects the fundamental flaw of this country." Do people understand, or care, what this man has said? What he thinks? The founding principles of this country of limited government represent a fundamental flaw. A fundamental flaw. But, through the courts, he thinks we can still change that.

Check out these money quotes from the Obamunist Manifesto courtesy of Newsbusters transcription:

You know, if you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement and its litigation strategy in the courts, I think where it succeeded was to get formal rights in previously dispossessed peoples -- so that I would now have the right to vote, I would now be able to sit at a lunch counter and order, and as long as I was able to pay for it I'd be OK. But the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society.

And to that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical. It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it's been interpreted, and the Warren Court interpreted it in the same way that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. It says what the states can't do to you, says what the federal government can't do to you, but it doesn't say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf. And that hasn't shifted. And one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was, because the civil rights movement became so court-focused, I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which to bring about redistributive change. And in some ways we still suffer from that.
...
The court's just not very good at it, and politically it's very hard to legitimize opinions from the court in that regard. So, I mean, I think that although you can craft theoretical justifications for it [redistribution of wealth] legally, y'know I think any three of us sitting here could come up with a rationale for bringing about economic change through the courts. .....
The man is a Marxist, pure and simple. A baby killing Marxist. God help us.

NCR Attacks Pro-Life Bishops

The latest editorial from the National Catholic Reporter lambastes the pro-life effort of bishops. I'm trying to make heads or tails out of their point of view but it just seems to follow the already stale Kmiec-isms that the real pro-life position is to ignore Roe V Wade and just give money to poor women.

Try as I might to find some logic in their stance I'm not being rewarded for my efforts. But here's what I'm getting so far - The pro-life bishops are so narrow-mindedly pro-life that they're actually helping the pro-choice side and hurting the Church.

Another presidential election cycle is nearly ended, and once again the Catholic bishops in the United States have sadly distinguished themselves for the narrowness and, in too many cases, barely concealed partisanship, of their political views.

Cycle after cycle they have promulgated the same message: Abortion trumps all other issues and the only credible approach to fighting abortion is voting for candidates who express a wish to overthrow Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion.
Yes. How silly of them to want to overturn the legalization of murdering babies. So narrow-minded.
We have persistently criticized the American bishops on this page for such a limited political strategy. For more than a quarter of a century they have generally used whatever political capital they might have in attempts to deliver the Catholic vote to whomever is making the most agreeable promises that year.

Year after year, however, the bishops get little in return for their antiabortion political endorsements, while often aiding in the election of politicians who have little regard for the rest of the church’s social agenda.

The abortion rate has been going down steadily in America, from a high of 29.3 abortions per 1,000 women ages 15-44 in 1981 to 19.4 abortions for the same demographic through 2005, according to the Guttmacher Institute.
Wait. I thought the bishops were getting nothing for their efforts but then they say the abortion rate is going down. I'm confused. But that's ok because they're even more confused.
No one, however, is suggesting that politicians promising to overturn Roe had any influence on a woman’s choosing to bring a child to term.

The point is significant, especially this year when highly credible voices in the Catholic community have been successful in reframing a Catholic approach to the abortion issue. Legal scholars Douglas Kmiec and Nicholas Cafardi, who have unimpeachable antiabortion credentials, among others have advanced compelling arguments regarding the futility of using a legal ban as a political litmus test.

Kmiec, who worked on briefs attempting to overturn Roe, said earlier this year when explaining his support for Democratic candidate Sen. Barack Obama: “We have been at the business of trying to find the elusive fifth vote on the Supreme Court for 30 years. We haven’t found it and even if we do find it, overturning Roe would not save a single life, but instead merely return the question to the states. While that would be important, it is not intended and never was intended to close the American mind or, for that matter, the Catholic mind to different or alternative ways to discourage abortion.”
Let's hit the logic here. The Supreme Court makes it illegal for the legislature to restrict abortion in any way. And then NCR blames the legislature for not restricting abortion and advises bishops to give it up.

Look, Republicans have been nibbling at the edges of abortion-on-demand for years with parental notification and pushing ultrasounds but they've had a hard time of things because the Supreme Court for years even shut down laws against partial birth abortion before President Bush finally stacked the court enough to let the law stand.

And the NCR editors referring to that "elusive fifth vote" on the Court, is just a lie. For years, we were down 7-2 on the court. And we've had disappointments over the years with Souter and Sandra Day O' Connor. But seemingly, President Bush got it right with justices Alito and Roberts. So now we might really be able to push real change without it being overturned by the court. So just when we might be able to right the ship, NCR is advising us to abandon ship and help fund swimming lessons for the poor.
Republican candidate Sen. John McCain has found favor among many bishops by agreeing with their conviction that Roe should be overturned. If that conviction is the sole guiding criterion, the choice becomes easy.

This year, however, Democrats have added a plank to their platform promising to enact programs aimed at reducing abortions by attacking some of the root causes, especially among the poor and minorities. It is distressing to witness so many members of the hierarchy eagerly dismissing the possibility of an alternative approach.
Are these people deranged? The bishops are standing up for life. They're pointing out that murder has been legalized. They're simply asking that murder be classified as murder again by the law no matter how small the person is.

The NCR staff has this wrong. They see the bishops as being closed and narrow minded on this. I think they're asking us to be open to life.
Instead of a thoughtful discussion of the political options, the Catholic community has been overwhelmed by shouting from the most extreme ideologues and partisans. Among the bishops it is easy to spot — and hear — the most imprudent. There are exceptions, of course.

It is the extremes, however, that drive the news and the general impressions of the Catholic community. No one among the bishops has had the courage to stand up to such misuse of office and distortion of the documents that the bishops themselves have promulgated over several decades.

Bishops who hold that a legal ban is the only approach to the abortion issue, as one observer put it, damage the church and the pro-life cause.

Certainly the conduct of many of the bishops this election cycle has diminished the significance of abortion and undermined the importance of the rest of the Catholic social agenda by turning the abortion issue into a partisan rallying cry. Their conduct further erodes the legitimate authority of an already beleaguered episcopal conference.
I love when these types predict the downfall of the church every time the bishops actually stand up and do something right. They'd rather the bishops followed the gospel of the New York Times. Oh and by the way, I guarantee the Times will go out of business before the Church.

Related: See Erin Manning's Progressive to English Translation of the NCR piece.

Martin Luther, We Hardly Knew Ye

Archeologists are doing a dig at the home of none other than Martin Luther. Now I have never been a fan of the man who split the Church. But after this reading some of this new research, I feel like we could have been friends, BFF's even. Here is what I have gleaned.

Marty, I call him Marty 'cause we peeps now, Marty (like me) was not a cat person.

The church has called "religiously irrelevant" the evidence that the peace-loving family used to throw dead cats into the rubbish bin...
He, also like me, was a bit of a tubbo.
Despite the widespread belief that Luther lived in poverty, evidence suggests he was a well-fed man - weighing in at a hefty 150kg (23st 8lb) when he died in 1546 at the age of 63.
Whoa! 150Kg? That is one hefty heretic. He should have gone on "The Biggest Loser: Schismatic Edition."

Marty in his youth, again like me, found creative ways to break up with girls so as to avoid the whole "It's not you, it's me. Any guy would be lucky to have you. It's just that I am in a weird place right now," thing.
But the claim by historians which will arguably be most upsetting for followers is the recently uncovered written evidence that it was not, as thought, a lightning bolt which led to the then 21-year-old's spontaneous declaration he wanted to become a monk. Rather, it was his desperation to escape an impending arranged marriage.
Last but not least. I surmise that Marty would not have much love for Obama's tax plan. Marty was rich you see.

Even Luther's claim that he came from humble circumstances have been dismissed.

New evidence has shown that already as a young man, his father owned land and a copper mill and lent money for interest. His mother was born into an upper middle-class family and it is unlikely, as Luther suggested, that she "carried all her wood on her back".

The discovery in his boyhood home in Mansfeld of a skittles set made out of cow bones and glass marbles also suggests the family was relatively well to do.

Looking at all the evidence, I think Marty and I could have been home team. Well, except for the whole heresy and excommunication thing.

Weekend On CMR - October 25-26, 2008

More Episcopal Backbone
—One Bishop speaks out on Prop 8 and another on voting for life!

Bishop Dewane On Voting Responsibility
—Bishop of Venice Fl. instructs the faithful.

Fireworks Over Town Canceling Christmas
—One company stands up against the secularization of Christmas.

Gay Marriage Battle On College Campus
—Gay marriage advocates attempt college campus coup. And fail.

Cardinal Egan: Look at this Photograph
—Look at it. Tell me this isn't an innocent human being worthy of protection.

Best (Or Worst) Halloween Costumes Ever
—I wouldn't be caught dead or alive in any of these costumes.

Enough With The Partisan Coverage! Not!
—Newspaper editor puts a stop to partisan coverage. Or not.

Wanna Be In A Video With Fr. Barron?
—Fr Barron will be taping a new video and is looking for some folks.



New Classical Church Architecture
—A special event with noted traditional architect Thomas Gordon Smith.

Nightmare Scenario: White Liberal Riot
—The sad riots of the Starbucks crowd should McCain/Palin win.

Christianity Is A Protestant Thing
—Anti-Catholic bigotry or pathetic religious ignorance?

Catholic Cover For Partisan Politics Part II
—Mark Shea and the Catholic fence sitters.

More Episcopal Backbone

Melody, a self described CMR fan (clearly a woman of taste!), sends us news of more Episcopal backbone on display. Melody writes,

The San Diego City Council plans on passing a resolution to condemn Prop 8 tomorrow.
San Diego's Auxiliary Bishop Cordileone wrote the following letter in response. And I couldn't be more proud.

A rally is also planned for tomorrow to express support for Prop 8. A follow up rally in front of the City Council Building is also planned. I'll send pictures if you like.

Melody

Most Rev. Salvatore Cordileone
Auxiliary Bishop
Catholic Diocese of San Diego



October 21, 2008


Dear Mayor Sanders and Members of the San Diego City Council,

Those of us who favor preserving marriage as the union of a man and a woman in California are wondering what ever happened to our democracy.

In 2000, 61% of voters – 4.6 million citizens – voted in favor of Proposition 22, which placed the traditional definition of marriage into the California Family Code. The will of the majority was overturned by four Supreme Court Justices on May 15th of this year. It is true that citizens should ensure that ballot propositions they present be able to pass constitutional muster. But defining marriage as it has been understood in every society since the beginning of the human race is hardly the stuff of which unconstitutional laws consist.

Trusting in the democratic process, many people expended vast resources of time, energy and capital to qualify the language of Proposition 22 as a constitutional amendment, and it was certified shortly after the Supreme Court decision as Proposition 8. Concerned about the confusion and legal quagmire that could result not only in California but all throughout the country due to same-sex marriages contracted between the time of the implementation of the decision and the hopeful passage of Prop 8, the attorney general was requested to stay the decision until after the election. Such an action would seem to be a common sense move to protect the public good. Nonetheless, he refused do so. Then, in an unprecedented move, he also changed the title of the proposition after its qualification for the ballot in a way that prejudices the wording as much as possible against the initiative.

Next, we hear of “Yes on 8” signs disappearing repeatedly, all throughout the state, with impunity. A pro-Prop 8 worker in Modesto was attacked, and so severely beaten he had to be rushed to the hospital and given stitches. And yet, not a peep from our elected officials decrying this violence and intolerance. A little over a year ago, a letter of mine was read in these very chambers when you were debating signing onto the Amicus curiae brief to urge our State Supreme Court to rule the traditional definition of marriage unconstitutional. In the letter, I stated that this issue was divisive, and we needed to unite our community; that point was rejected as being untrue. The experience over this last year has more than adequately demonstrated that it is true.

Now we find our City Council poised to speak for our entire city in taking a stand against Proposition 8. Have you taken a survey of the citizens of the San Diego area? The movement in support of Prop 8 began here in San Diego and has spread like an October wildfire all throughout the state. At this time, the polls indicate that supporters for Prop 8 outnumber its opponents. How can you presume to speak for the entire city when a majority – or at least, a very sizeable minority – is in favor? What would the other side think and feel if you voted to support Proposition 8? Why are our thoughts and feelings not worthy of equal consideration to theirs, especially when we can offer many rational, cogent arguments to justify our position? We support marriage because marriage benefits everyone; we abhor violence and unjust treatment against people who disagree with us. Nonetheless, we are accused of discrimination. Who, though, is being discriminated against now?

A little over two weeks ago, I stood on the same stage with some of you at the San Diego Organizing Project’s rally for our youth. I was happy to be there and even felt obliged to attend, because I can hardly recognize this city from what it was when I grew up here in the 1960’s. I could walk home alone from elementary school and fear no harm. My friends and I could play in the streets without our parents having to worry for our safety, and we all had secure homes to return to. That is why I was so gratified by your commitments to make the youth of our communities a top priority. What, though, can be a greater benefit to children and young people than growing up with their mother and father married to each other in a low-conflict relationship? We need to be supporting and strengthening the institution of marriage for the sake of children, not redefining and weakening it. Yes, many people find themselves as single parents through no fault of their own, and they need and deserve our praise and support for the sacrifices they make to give their children the best possible up bringing in less-than-ideal circumstances. But to intentionally deprive children of a mother and father is something quite different. After having made such laudatory and inspired commitments to our youth, please, do not now sell them down the river by telling them that it’s not important for them to have a mother and a father.

Please do not divide our community any more bitterly than it already is. Please do not betray the trust the public has placed in you. Please do not disenfranchise those who worked so hard to give Californians the opportunity to decide. Rather, please place principle over politics, and allow the democratic process to work, unencumbered and objectively. Please, do not give up on the idea that democracy is a good thing when allowed to work according to its principles. Please, let the people decide, fair and square.

Sincerely yours,

Most Rev. Salvatore Cordileone
Auxiliary Bishop
Catholic Diocese of San Diego
Thanks to Bishop Cordileone and many thanks to Melody for this letter. And yes Melody, we would like pictures!

But wait, there is more! This comes to us from Jeremy (Thanks!). This was read in every Church in the Diocese of Sprinfield-Cape Girardeau.
Dear Friends in Christ,

Grace and peace be with you! We may not realize it, but we are living at a decisive moment in our nation's history; one in which our own personal destiny and the destiny of our nation is at stake. As Christians we face this moment full of hope because of God's love revealed and given to us in His Son, Jesus Christ, who has promised to be with us “always, to the end of the age,” (Mt 28:20). Nevertheless, our hope in God's love and providence must be matched by our own faith in action.

While I have written several times in the past weeks on this topic, I wish to reiterate that while there are many social justice issues which demand our engagement as Catholic citizens, the Catholic Church teaches that the right to life holds a certain precedence. It is foundational. These other issues are dependent on this first right being upheld and protected. As Pope John Paul II stated:

“Disregard for the right to life, precisely because it leads to the killing of the person whom society exists to serve, is what most directly conflicts with the possibility of achieving the common good... It is impossible to further the common good without acknowledging and defending the right to life, upon which all the other inalienable rights of individuals are founded and from which they develop.” (The Gospel of Life, 72, 101).

While abortion and the destruction of human life for research purposes is not the only issue, it is the defining moral issue of today, and in fact, has been for the last 35 years, during which more than 48 million American lives have been lost.

In the U.S. Bishops' document, Faithful Citizenship, there is a section which addresses whether it might ever be morally permissible for a Catholic to vote for a candidate who supports and intrinsic evil, such as abortion – even when the voter does not agree with the candidate's position on that evil. In response, the Bishops note that it might be possible if another intrinsic evil outweighs the evil of abortion. While this is sound moral guidance, I ask you, are there truly any grave moral and proportionate reasons, singularly or taken together, that outweigh the millions of innocent human lives that are directly killed by legal abortion each year? Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver puts it in perspective when he says: “What is a proportionate reason when it comes to abortion? It's the kind of reason we will be able to explain, with a clean heart, to the victims of abortion when we meet them in the next life – which we certainly will. If we're confident that these victims will accept our motives, then we can proceed.”

Last month while I was in Rome, I had the privilege of viewing several paintings in the Vatican depicting one of the most crucial battles in history, the Battle of Lepanto. This crucial victory which saved Christian Europe on October 7, 1571, was attributed to the praying of the Rosary. In fact, the feast of Our Lady of the Rosary was established in thanksgiving for this event. The Rosary can also help us in our current struggle as a nation to build a culture of life.

I, along with the other Missouri bishops am asking that the week beginning next Sunday, October 26, be a week of prayer in all of our parishes. I am asking that every parish have a Holy Hour before the Most Blessed Sacrament, which includes praying the Rosary, on one weekday night next week, to pray for our country as we choose our leaders and the destiny of our nation. I also ask all families to pray the Rosary and other prayers from now until election day, November 4.

With the assurance of my prayers, and invoking the intercession of Our Lady of Guadalupe, I am,

Devotedly yours in Christ,
Most Reverend James V. Johnston, Jr.
Bishop, Sprinfield-Cape Girardeau

Bishop Dewane On Voting Responsibility

Bishop Dewane of Venice Florida issued this letter to the faithful of his diocese via the bulletin.


First and foremost, protect life. Amen. Thank you Bishop Dewane.

Thanks to Matt Soldano

Fireworks Over Town Canceling Christmas

My new favorite fireworks company is pulling out of a holiday boat parade because "Christmas" was dropped from the event's name, says Fox News. Good for them.

"Fireworks by Grucci" last year donated $5,000 of fireworks to last years Patchogue Christmas Boat Parade -which consists of millionaires decorating their yachts and floating down the Patchogue River. But now the millionaires have gone too far. They forgot the reason for the season by renaming the event the Patchogue Holiday Boat Parade.

So the company's vice president, Philip Butler, who has criticized the secularization of Christmas in the past, said parade organizers were "using all the themes of Christmas and plagiarizing all those themes."

Parade organizers said they changed the name after complaints that the use of "Christmas" wasn't inclusive enough. I'd love to ask this guy how many complaints. I mean really. Do you think he really even received two?

And in a nice example of Christmas cheer, the town's Mayor Paul Pontieri acted like a spoiled thirteen year old by saying he didn't even care that the fireworks company pulled out, "When I think about fireworks, I don't think about Christmas anyway."

Something tells me, this guy doesn't think a whole lot about Christmas. Period.

Well I'm absolutely sure that thousands of people will crowd around the Patchogue River to see how you decorated your yacht now that the fireworks are gone. Tell your mother to bring her camera because she might be the only one there.

And I'm now declaring The Grucci fireworks company to be the official fireworks company of CMR. If we ever hold a CMR parade with Patrick and I walking down the street, the Grucci's will be shooting off fireworks all around us. And there will also be pigs in blankets because that's the greatest food ever invented. CMR doesn't have an official pigs in blankets maker yet. Any takers?

Gay Marriage Battle On College Campus

The American River College Student Council voted 8-3 on Sept. 30 to endorse Prop. 8 which defines marriage as between a man and a woman.

Outrageous, right?

So, supporters of gay marriage responded by launching a recall effort and trying to immediately oust the council. Now they'd hoped that because nobody ever votes in school elections, that a small but committed advocacy group for gay marriage would oust the council and reverse the stance on gay marriage. In fact, only one percent of the school even voted for the council in the first place.

So the election happened this week. And guess what, lots of students turned out. It was the largest turnout in school history.T he leader's decision to endorse Prop. 8, a statewide ballot measure that would ban same-sex marriage, caused 3,486 students to turn out and vote on the recall.

And the student leaders who voted to support Proposition 8 won't lose their council seats after all.

Gay marriage advocates are left with a bit of a public relations black eye. The last thing they wanted to do was hand a victory to the traditional marriage defenders in the press.

I'm starting to have hope for Prop 8 in California. If gay marriage can't pass on a college campus, then I think they'll have a tough time passing it in the culture at large -even if it is California.

According to the Sacramento Bee, student council member Viktor Choban, 25, said of the vote, "This resolution has everything to do with education because it affects all the public schools and colleges...If Proposition 8 fails, schools will absolutely be required to teach that gay marriage is equal to normal marriage, thereby confusing students and children about the most basic roles of men and women in society."

This is such a huge issue and it's interesting to me how it has evolved that the traditional marriage folks are pushing the angle that children will be taught that marriage is between a man and a man, a woman or a woman, or maybe even sometimes a man and a woman is the angle that seems to be working.

For a while the Yes on Prop 8 folks seemed to be foundering for how to frame the issue but finally they landed on something pretty effective. Adults can get confused sometimes. But I think when we're forced to consider the world we're giving our children it sobers everyone up a little.

Today On CMR - October 24, 2008

Cardinal Egan: Look at this Photograph
—Look at it. Tell me this isn't an innocent human being worthy of protection.

Best (Or Worst) Halloween Costumes Ever
—I wouldn't be caught dead or alive in any of these costumes.

Enough With The Partisan Coverage! Not!
—Newspaper editor puts a stop to partisan coverage. Or not.

Wanna Be In A Video With Fr. Barron?
—Fr Barron will be taping a new video and is looking for some folks.

New Classical Church Architecture
—A special event with noted traditional architect Thomas Gordon Smith.

Nightmare Scenario: White Liberal Riot
—The sad riots of the Starbucks crowd should McCain/Palin win.

Christianity Is A Protestant Thing
—Anti-Catholic bigotry or pathetic religious ignorance?



Catholic Cover For Partisan Politics Part II
—Mark Shea and the Catholic fence sitters.

Shock Poll: Dems Favor Obama
—Pollsters interview 15 percent more Dems than Republicans.

The Second Slumming
—A poem from the perspective of the "conservative" elite.

Close to Infanticide?
—Pro-lifers are on the brink of being marginalized. What now?

Born Alive And The Aftermath
—Disturbing video on aftermath of Born Alive.

Cardinal Egan: Look at this Photograph

The following is a letter from Cardinal Egan which appeared in Catholic New York. Read it. It's the single best pro-life plea I've read in a long time. Here it is:

Just Look

The picture on this page is an untouched photograph of a being that has been within its mother for 20 weeks. Please do me the favor of looking at it carefully.


Have you any doubt that it is a human being?

If you do not have any such doubt, have you any doubt that it is an innocent human being?

If you have no doubt about this either, have you any doubt that the authorities in a civilized society are duty-bound to protect this innocent human being if anyone were to wish to kill it?

If your answer to this last query is negative, that is, if you have no doubt that the authorities in a civilized society would be duty-bound to protect this innocent human being if someone were to wish to kill it, I would suggest—even insist—that there is not a lot more to be said about the issue of abortion in our society. It is wrong, and it cannot—must not—be tolerated.

But you might protest that all of this is too easy. Why, you might inquire, have I not delved into the opinion of philosophers and theologians about the matter? And even worse: Why have I not raised the usual questions about what a "human being" is, what a "person" is, what it means to be "living," and such? People who write books and articles about abortion always concern themselves with these kinds of things. Even the justices of the Supreme Court who gave us "Roe v. Wade" address them. Why do I neglect philosophers and theologians? Why do I not get into defining "human being," defining "person," defining "living," and the rest? Because, I respond, I am sound of mind and endowed with a fine set of eyes, into which I do not believe it is well to cast sand. I looked at the photograph, and I have no doubt about what I saw and what are the duties of a civilized society if what I saw is in danger of being killed by someone who wishes to kill it or, if you prefer, someone who "chooses" to kill it. In brief: I looked, and I know what I saw.

But what about the being that has been in its mother for only 15 weeks or only 10? Have you photographs of that too? Yes, I do. However, I hardly think it necessary to show them. For if we agree that the being in the photograph printed on this page is an innocent human being, you have no choice but to admit that it may not be legitimately killed even before 20 weeks unless you can indicate with scientific proof the point in the development of the being before which it was other than an innocent human being and, therefore, available to be legitimately killed. Nor have Aristotle, Aquinas or even the most brilliant embryologists of our era or any other era been able to do so. If there is a time when something less than a human being in a mother morphs into a human being, it is not a time that anyone has ever been able to identify, though many have made guesses. However, guesses are of no help. A man with a shotgun who decides to shoot a being that he believes may be a human being is properly hauled before a judge. And hopefully, the judge in question knows what a "human being" is and what the implications of someone's wishing to kill it are. The word "incarceration" comes to mind.

However, we must not stop here. The matter becomes even clearer and simpler if you obtain from the National Geographic Society two extraordinary DVDs. One is entitled "In the Womb" and illustrates in color and in motion the development of one innocent human being within its mother. The other is entitled "In the Womb—Multiples" and in color and motion shows the development of two innocent human beings—twin boys—within their mother. If you have ever allowed yourself to wonder, for example, what "living" means, these two DVDs will be a great help. The one innocent human being squirms about, waves its arms, sucks its thumb, smiles broadly and even yawns; and the two innocent human beings do all of that and more: They fight each other. One gives his brother a kick, and the other responds with a sock to the jaw. If you can convince yourself that these beings are something other than living and innocent human beings, something, for example, such as "mere clusters of tissues," you have a problem far more basic than merely not appreciating the wrongness of abortion. And that problem is—forgive me—self-deceit in a most extreme form.

Adolf Hitler convinced himself and his subjects that Jews and homosexuals were other than human beings. Joseph Stalin did the same as regards Cossacks and Russian aristocrats. And this despite the fact that Hitler and his subjects had seen both Jews and homosexuals with their own eyes, and Stalin and his subjects had seen both Cossacks and Russian aristocrats with theirs. Happily, there are few today who would hesitate to condemn in the roundest terms the self-deceit of Hitler, Stalin or even their subjects to the extent that the subjects could have done something to end the madness and protect living, innocent human beings.

It is high time to stop pretending that we do not know what this nation of ours is allowing—and approving—with the killing each year of more than 1,600,000 innocent human beings within their mothers. We know full well that to kill what is clearly seen to be an innocent human being or what cannot be proved to be other than an innocent human being is as wrong as wrong gets. Nor can we honorably cover our shame (1) by appealing to the thoughts of Aristotle or Aquinas on the subject, inasmuch as we are all well aware that their understanding of matters embryological was hopelessly mistaken, (2) by suggesting that "killing" and "choosing to kill" are somehow distinct ethically, morally or criminally, (3) by feigning ignorance of the meaning of "human being," "person," "living," and such, (4) by maintaining that among the acts covered by the right to privacy is the act of killing an innocent human being, and (5) by claiming that the being within the mother is "part" of the mother, so as to sustain the oft-repeated slogan that a mother may kill or authorize the killing of the being within her "because she is free to do as she wishes with her own body."

One day, please God, when the stranglehold on public opinion in the United States has been released by the extremists for whom abortion is the center of their political and moral life, our nation will, in my judgment, look back on what we have been doing to innocent human beings within their mothers as a crime no less heinous than what was approved by the Supreme Court in the "Dred Scott Case" in the 19th century, and no less heinous than what was perpetrated by Hitler and Stalin in the 20th. There is nothing at all complicated about the utter wrongness of abortion, and making it all seem complicated mitigates that wrongness not at all. On the contrary, it intensifies it.

Do me a favor. Look at the photograph again. Look and decide with honesty and decency what the Lord expects of you and me as the horror of "legalized" abortion continues to erode the honor of our nation. Look, and do not absolve yourself if you refuse to act.



Edward Cardinal Egan
Archbishop of New York
You can read the letter here at Catholic New York.