In The News

Catholic Democrats Calls on Senator John McCain to Reject Strategy of Politicking in Parishes

2008-08-07T22:54:58Z

Calls on Senator to Remove Deal Hudson as Catholic Outreach Advisor Boston, MA--7 Aug 2008--Catholic Democrats is calling on Senator John McCain to reject a new religious outreach strategy targeting Catholic parishes, and the deeply divisive rhetoric of the man who first developed it. First announced on July 11th, this strategy is being spearheaded by Senator McCain's Catholic Outreach Coalition under the names of former Governor Frank Keating and Senator Sam Brownback. But this plan is strikingly similar to the 2004 Bush campaign strategy devised by current McCain Catholic advisor, Deal Hudson, whose frequent columns have for months heaped crude insults on Senator McCain's opponent in the name of Catholicism. "The kind of divisive language in Deal Hudson's column today, and the strategy of taking over our parishes for political gain, both represent a concerted effort to pit one Catholic against another at a time when we need so much to promote healing in our Church," said the president of Catholic Democrats, Dr.Patrick Whelan. "As Catholic Democrats, we believe that the use of our sacred spaces to divide Catholics is morally wrong." The Catholic News Service reported that RNC Deputy Chairman Frank Donatelli, in his press conference on July 11, predicted a McCain Catholic campaign that would be "very, very aggressive." He added, "It will involve literature, sending speakers to parishes and Catholic gatherings, a direct mail program and statements by Sen. McCain on issues of concern to Catholics." Deal Hudson had originally engineered the strategy to use parishes for political purposes during the Bush re-election campaign in 2004. But Hudson was compelled to resign as the major architect of President Bush's Catholic Outreach due to revelations about sexual misconduct involving one of his students some years earlier. Catholic Democrats is joining with other organizations in calling for his removal from McCain's Catholic Outreach Coalition. "Deal Hudson has launched an ugly rhetorical crusade against Senator Obama that is cartoonish in its vulgarity. It is beyond ironic that Hudson would seek to position himself as a Catholic expert on child abuse," said Dr Whelan. "He engineered strategies employed by the Bush Campaigns that exploited our churches for partisan politics of the worst kind. We respectfully urge the McCain Campaign to rid itself of this destructive figure, as the Bush Campaign did just four years ago. More importantly, out of respect for our Church, we believe Senator McCain should jettison any plans to use Catholic churches as a staging ground for attacking his opponent in these last months of his Campaign." About Catholic Democrats Catholic Democrats is an association of state based groups representing a Catholic voice within the Democratic Party, and advancing a public understanding of the rich tradition of Catholic Social Teaching and its potential to help solve the broad range of problems confronting all Americans.

Catholic Democrats call on McCain Campaign to pull cynical ad that mocks people of faith

2008-08-06T23:24:48Z

Boston, MA -- Aug 6, 2008 -- Catholic Democrats is calling on Senator John McCain to pull an advertisement that mocks people of faith and their support for Senator Barack Obama's campaign for President of the United States. "Senator McCain and his staff described this ad as a stab at humor, but there is nothing light-hearted about using religion to belittle your opponent or his supporters," said Dr. Patrick Whelan, president of Catholic Democrats. "This advertisement mocks a central tenet of Christianity, the Divinity of Christ, for political gain. Through an ad that plays on people's emotions, Senator McCain has betrayed his own vow to run an honorable campaign by hiding behind sarcasm in belittling the judgment of Senator Obama's supporters." The McCain advertisement uses religious language and imagery, including clips from the film The Ten Commandments, to suggest that supporters of Senator Obama believe that the Democratic candidate is a Messiah-like figure. It also takes Senator Obama's words completely out of context in short snippets to make its argument. Some analysts have found a peculiar pattern of imagery in the ad that ties into the popular "Left Behind" series of books by Tim LaHaye, who has spoken publicly in very harsh terms about Catholicism. It will be interesting to see if any of the conservative Catholics who have condemned the LaHaye books will ultimately criticize the McCain Campaign for indulging in this form of manipulative sublimininal advertising. Christina Bellantoni from the Washington Times points out that the McCain ad (coincidentally?) uses only scenes that include black audience members. "It is amazing that Senator McCain, who claims to be concerned about global warming and who describes himself as a 'straight talker' on the issues, would allow his staff to create an ad that demeans the religious beliefs of Americans while ridiculing Senator Obama's call to address the climate crisis," Whelan continued. "The sarcastic tone of the advertisement really demonstrates a lack of sensitivity by Senator McCain toward the religious sensibilities of Catholics and other people of faith," said Whelan. "This ad suggests that his Campaign is determined to focus on the politics of personal destruction rather than the abundance of pressing moral issues, like climate change, that face all Americans." Please contact media@catholicdemocrats.org for further details, or call 617-308-1584.

Judge rules that torture-tainted evidence not admissable in 1st Guantanamo war crimes trial

2008-07-22T14:05:51Z

Boston MA--22 Jul 2008--The Bush Administration's strategy of torturing its war prisoners backfired severely yesterday when a military judge threw out large chunks of evidence against a low-level employee of Al Queda who was put on trial in the first war crimes proceeding since WW-II. Navy Captain Keith Allred ruled that Salim Hamdan had been subjected to "highly coercive" interrogation after being apprehended in Afghanistan, without benefit of counsel. The suspect said he had been kept tied hand and foot in solitary confinement, deprived of sleep, struck in the back, and knocked to the ground with a hood over his head. His attorneys argued he was never an ideological adherent of Al Queda, but only a bottom rung employee. Few national security experts have supported the use of torture in gathering intelligence. The New York Times reported last month that the CIA's approach to torturing suspects in Cuba, Iraq and Afghanistan had been derived at least in part from a study of Chinese tactics toward American troops in the Korean War. Morality issues aside, the use of torture is widely acknowledged now to be worse then useless in revealing useful intelligence information. It is telling that the first prosecution of an adversary in the Afghanistan campaign is someone who has not been accused of directly harming anyone and had no known leadership role in the organization. Presumably Mr Hamdan's case incorporated the best evidence available against any of the Guantanamo prisoners. And now the judge has determined that even that evidence, in large part, is inadmissible due to the coercive manner in which it was obtained. Fearing a similar fate for many of its other cases, the Administration worked furiously Monday to lobby Congress for new legislation to keep Guantanamo detainees from being brought to the US for the federal appeals proceedings mandated by the recent Supreme Court decision validating habeus corpus rights to appeal their detentions. Attorney General Michael Mukasey argued that these men posed a "grave threat" to the security of the US if brought within the country. One wonders whether the gravest threat wasn't to the reputation of the Bush Administration, which would have to contend with wider access by news photographers and day-to-day interviews with the attorneys for the tortured prisoners. Conservative religious commentators, like Bill Donohue and Deal Hudson, have remained entirely silent about the Bush stance on torture, despite the unequivocal condemnation of the US Bishops' Conference. Taken together, these extraordinary events make the powerful case once more that torture is always wrong, and that all human beings deserve to be treated with dignity. For more than six years, Bush officials have treated these several hundred luckless Middle Easterners like animals. 2000 years ago, Jesus was treated this way--viewed as a grave threat to the security of his country. The American deaths on 9/11/2001 and the subsequent casualties in the occupied countries are a source of tremendous collective grief. But regardless of whether the Guantanamo prisoners are truly guilty of the crimes for which they will be held accountable, it seems likely that the prosecution of their cases will be severely limited by the stupidity of those in the Administration who decided that torturing them was consonant with American values and promoted our collective security. In the end, neither the cause of morality nor security has been served.

New Yorker: The Fall of Conservatism

2008-07-14T18:26:38Z

The era of American politics that has been dying before our eyes was born in 1966. That January, a twenty-seven-year-old editorial writer for the St. Louis Globe-Democrat named Patrick Buchanan went to work for Richard Nixon, who was just beginning the most improbable political comeback in American history. Having served as Vice-President in the Eisenhower Administration, Nixon had lost the Presidency by a whisker to John F. Kennedy, in 1960, and had been humiliated in a 1962 bid for the California governorship. But he saw that he could propel himself back to power on the strength of a new feeling among Americans who, appalled by the chaos of the cities, the moral heedlessness of the young, and the insults to national pride in Vietnam, were ready to blame it all on the liberalism of President Lyndon B. Johnson. Right-wing populism was bubbling up from below; it needed to be guided by a leader who understood its resentments because he felt them, too. Read the whole article here...

Catholic Democrats applaud Sen Obama's support for churches and other religious groups

2008-07-02T22:17:44Z

Catholic League defiles itself in attacks on Obama's plan to help those in need The Catholic Democrats spoke out Wednesday in support of efforts by Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama to reinforce the ability of faith-based organizations to strengthen our nation's social safety net. The Catholic Church in the United States has a long tradition of addressing the needs of the poor and the underserved, and continues to provide much-needed social services in neighborhoods and communities throughout the country. Bill Donohue and the Catholic League today attacked Senator Obama's proposed expansion of social services by church and other faith groups. Senator Obama believes that religious organizations of many faiths have a special expertise in serving the unmet needs of people across the country, particularly at a time of such widespread economic distress. At the same time, the Catholic Democrats call on Donohue and the Catholic League to cease their relentless partisan broadsides on Senator Obama. Donohue confirmed that he had not read the details of Senator Obama's proposal to magnify the role of faith-based organizations in their critical work. Dr Patrick Whelan, president of the Catholic Democrats, issued the following statement: "Yesterday, Senator Obama pledged to elevate faith-based organizations and strengthen the relationship between government and these critical partners who help people in need every day. Indeed, Senator Obama held out the good works of groups like Catholic Charities as model examples of successful faith-based and government partnerships. But Catholic League President Bill Donohue chose to mark the occasion by launching another installment of his near weekly partisan attacks on Barack Obama." "Bill Donohue wants to smear Senator Obama's authentic attempts to elevate the important role of religion in public life and that's shameful," said Dr Whelan. "If he had read any portion of Senator Obama's remarks or the details of the plan, he would quickly learn that under the Obama administration, faith-based groups will receive more funding, more support, and a higher profile as government partners. How exactly is that 'gutting religion,' as Mr Donohue charges?" Dr Whelan continued, "It appears that Donohue and other partisan operatives are scared that Senator Obama is achieving something they've never been able to do: authentically holding up the best religion has to offer society without using it to divide people." Catholic Democrats, like so many other people of faith, are tired of religion being used as a wedge and continue to urge Mr. Donohue and his collaborators to stop launching partisan smears from a 501(c)3 non-profit, whose noble mission has been greatly tarnished by such attacks.

NEW STUDY FINDS DEMOCRATS HAVE LEAD WITH CATHOLICS

2008-06-27T05:48:02Z

NEW STUDY FINDS DEMOCRATS HAVE LEAD WITH CATHOLICS FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Bill Roth, roth@catholicdemocrats.org [ mailto:roth@catholicdemocrats.org ] (408)-876-0111 SAN JOSE, Calif. — June 25, 2008 — A new study published by Georgetown University shows that Democrats have a distinct advantage among Catholic voters in the upcoming November election. The study, from The Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate, shows a number of trends which show bode well for the Democratic Party. * The study estimates that there are about 47 Million Catholic Voters in the United States. * Democrats have an edge of 8 million voter advantage among registered voters who are Catholics. * Only 21% of Catholics are either strongly or weakly affiliated as a Republican. This is the lowest number of Catholic Republicans recorded since before the 2000 presidential election when Al Gore won the Catholic Vote. * Republicans have lost nearly a third of the Catholics who identified themselves with the Party since 2004. A link to the study can be found at: [ http://www.catholicdemocrats.org/news/2008/06/more_data_cara_study_on_cathol.php ]http://www.catholicdemocrats.org/news/2008/06/more_data_cara_study_on_cat hol.php Information on Catholic beliefs taken from a Pew Research Study, and Analysis from Fr. Thomas Reese, SJ, can be found at: [ http://www.catholicdemocrats.org/news ]http://www.catholicdemocrats.org/news/ This data reinforces the analysis by Catholic Democrats that showed that nearly 68% of Catholics voted Democratic in the presidential primary. Information on this analysis can be found at: [ http://www.catholicdemocrats.org/news/2008/03/analysis_of_catholic_voting_in.php ]http://www.catholicdemocrats.org/news/2008/03/analysis_of_catholic_voting _in.php _About Catholic Democrats _ Catholic Democrats is an association of state based groups representing a Catholic voice within the Democratic Party, and advancing a public understanding of the rich tradition of Catholic Social Teaching and its potential to help solve the broad range of problems confronting all Americans.

More Data: Cara Study on Catholic Voting preferences

2008-06-25T18:05:49Z

http://cara.georgetown.edu/pr061808.pdf Only 21% of Catholics are either strongly or weakly affiliated as a Republican. This is the lowest number of Catholic Republicans in a long time, even going back before 2000 when Al Gore won the Catholic vote. (23% R in ‘06) and (31% R in ‘04). 60% Catholics are D's to 36% Catholics are R's when leaners are included. Democrats have an edge of 8 million voter advantage among registered voters who are Catholics. If Catholics stick to their current party identification when voting for president, Barack Obama would have a potential edge over John McCain among Catholics by more than 8 million (18 million Democrats to 10 million Republicans) Catholics are also going post-partisan. 19.5 million Catholics who are independents; 41% (pretty much double the number of Catholic Republicans), A huge increase since 2004 (30%). Two major issue shifts among Catholics during the Bush administration: Catholics are more supportive of diplomacy over military overthrow of governments and the wealthiest in our society should be paying their fair share. (20 pt. and 13 pt. shifts). (also a small shift in favor of support for immigrants) Health Care for all and a Support for working Americans were the highest issue area agreements among Catholics. A staggering 78% of Catholics support Health Care for all: Regardless of cost, the U.S. government should guarantee basic health care for all citizens And 82% support workers right to a living wage and the right to form a Union. Weekly attenders are still more likely to be Democrats than anything else. Thirty-four percent of weekly Mass attending Catholics are Democrats and an additional 19 percent are not affiliated with a party but lean toward the Democrats (53 percent identifying or leaning as Democrats). Twenty eight percent of weekly attenders are Republicans and an additional 17 percent lean toward being a Republican (43 percent identifying or leaning as Republicans). Thus, among Catholics attending Mass once a week or more often, Democrats have a 10 percentage point edge. Only 5 percent of weekly Mass attenders say they are independent, apolitical, or identify with a third party. Catholics who attend Mass less than weekly are even more likely to be a Democrat rather than a Republican. 57% to 40% for D’s among non-Hispanic white Catholics. Thirty-two percent of non-Hispanic white Catholics are Democrats and an additional 25 percent currently lean towards the Democratic Party (57 percent identifying or leaning as Democrats). By comparison, 23 percent of non-Hispanic white Catholics are affiliated with the Republican Party and 17 percent currently lean Republican (40 percent identifying or leaning as Republicans). Catholics are more than 47 million potential voters in the U.S. electorate. (That is not far off the number of Americans without Health Insurance.)

More on Catholics in the Pew Forum Religious Landscape Survey, Part II

2008-06-24T18:05:23Z

More on Catholics in the Pew Forum Religious Landscape Survey, Part II http://religions.pewforum.org/pdf/report2-religious-landscape-study-full.pdf Here are some more areas where Catholics differ from the national trends shown in the Pew Forum Religious Landscape Survey. Catholics are more likely to believe in heaven (82% vs. 74%) than the nation as a whole, but are just as likely to believe in hell (60% vs. 59%). Catholics are also more likely to believe in evolution (58% vs. 48% for the nation). Catholics are more likely to be members of a congregation (67% vs. 61%) than the national as a whole, but their participation in congregation activities such as choir, volunteer work, work with children or social activities tend to be lower (31% vs. 37%). This may be partially due to the fact that Catholic congregations tend to be larger. Catholics still read the scriptures less than typical Americans. Only 21% of Catholics say they read the scriptures daily compared to 35% of the nation. Fifty-seven percent of Catholics say they seldom or never read the scriptures compared to 45% of the nation. Likewise, only 29% of Catholics say they participate in prayer groups or other religious activities at least once a month, compared to 40% for the nation. Sixty two percent of Catholics say they seldom or never share their faith with others, compared to 47% for the nation. Only 36% of Catholics think their church should "preserve its traditions and practices," while 57% think it should "adjust to new circumstances" or "adopt modern beliefs and practices." For the nation, the numbers are 44% and 47%. Catholics are less likely to think there is a conflict between religion and modern society than the nation (34% vs. 40%). When given a series of choices, Catholics are less likely to say their religion is what most influences their thinking about government and public affairs (9% vs. 14%) than the nation as a whole. Catholics like all Americans believe that “good diplomacy is the best way to ensure peace,” but by slightly greater margins (64% vs. 59%).

Catholics Reflect National Trends

2008-06-23T20:52:47Z

For Immediate Release Thomas J. Reese, S.J., Senior Fellow, Woodstock Theological Center Georgetown University Catholics Reflect National Trends Pew Forum Religious Landscape Survey, Part II What is most striking about the Catholic responses to the Pew Forum Religious Landscape Survey is how closely Catholics match the national responses. On social and political questions like party affiliation, political ideology, abortion, the government's role in protecting morality, environmental protection, and the country's role in world affairs, Catholics are within 2 to 3 percentage points of the national responses. Only on "size of government" and "views of homosexuality" do Catholics depart from the national statistics by much. On both, Catholics take a more liberal view by 5 percentage points for "bigger government and more services" and by 8 percentage points saying "homosexuality should be accepted by society." Catholics are more liberal on homosexuality than Evangelicals, Mainline Christians, and Black Protestants. This similarity to the national norm on political and social questions may reflect the fact that Catholics are also similar to the nation demographically. The statistics on Catholics for age, gender, income, and education reflect the national numbers within 2 to 3 percentage points. More Catholics tend to be married (4 percentage points) and have slightly higher numbers of children than the national average. Demographically, the biggest difference between Catholics and America at large is the high percent of Hispanics (29% vs. 12% for the nation). On matters of belief and practice, Catholic responses are somewhat more positive than the nation as a whole on belief in God, importance of religion in one’s life, church attendance and frequency of prayer. Evangelicals and Black Protestants typically have more positive responses on these questions than Catholics. Catholics are less likely than the nation to believe that Scripture is the "word of God, literally true, word for word," and more likely see it as the "word of God, but not literally true, word for word" or as a "book written by men, not the word of God." Catholics are also more likely to say "There is more than one true way to interpret the teachings of my religion" (77% vs. 68% for the nation). Clearly, Catholics find no problem with many voices in their church interpreting their faith in different ways since Vatican II. Only mainline Christians and non-Christians (except Muslims) score higher. Catholics are also more likely to say "many religions can lead to eternal life" (79% vs. 70% for the nation). This shows the impact of Vatican II and ecumenism on Catholics, who no longer believe that non-Catholics go to hell. It also reflects the contemporary Catholic experience of living and working side by side with non-Catholics outside the Catholic ghetto. They do not believe that their God would consign their friends and colleagues to hell.

Book Review: A Nation For All by Korzen and Kelley

2008-06-18T19:56:32Z

If you are a Catholic and a progressive, but have not been able to find a way to articulate how your values inform your political, A Nation for All, by Chris Korzen and Alexia Kelley is a great book for you. The book serves as a manual for US-based Catholic progressives who want to put their faith into action. The book is well written, well-structured, and more to the point, seeks to provide solutions to serious problems, without getting preachy.

The book, written by the executive director of Catholics United and the executive director of Catholics in Alliance see to provide a framework for Catholics to engage in the political process by engaging their values. Importantly, they speak to the broad range of the values in Catholic Social Teaching, not just abortion, gay marriage and stem cells. They make heavy use of the US Bishops' document, Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship to show the full range of the values important to American Catholics.

The book is also well-structured. The first section outlines Korzen and Kelley's vision for the Common Good, and how we might return to a more civil public discourse. The second section is a primer on Catholic Social Teaching, and its breadth and depth. This section is great for anyone looking for an introduction to the history and scope of Catholic Social Teaching. After a brief discussion on the how to navigate the Church/State divide in America, A Nation For All then goes on to discuss the difficulties in being a Catholic Voter and the tough choices that have to be made.

Section 5 is the most interesting in the book. It does what most books like this do not. Rather than a philippic against the ills of society, it actually seeks to provide solutions. These solutions acknowledge that we can not wave a magic wand of legislation and solve difficult problems, but show how Catholic voters several way they they and their elected representatives can take steps in the right direction.

While this was the most satisfying section of the book, I found myself actually wanting more. A decent model for this is James Carville's book We're Right, They're Wrong, where he lists 10 specific government programs that resulted from progressive politics. This book would benefit from not only more values-based solutions, but more details as well.

As a former academic, I would like to see more footnotes and references to source material, but I admit this might be my own bias.

In summary, A Nation For All, by Chris Korzen and Alexia Kelley is the perfect book for Catholic values-based progressive looking to articulate how their values can be put into action in the political arena.

You can get the book here:

New Study: Little Support for Clergy Endorsing Political Candidates

2008-06-16T22:46:18Z

For Immediate Release Thomas J. Reese, S.J., Senior Fellow, Woodstock Theological Center Georgetown University Only 28% of Americans agree that “clergy should be permitted to endorse political candidates during worship services,” according to the Calvin College “Religion and 2008 Election” survey. Support among Catholics is even lower (23%). Support for a politically active clergy is highest among Latino and Black Protestants, but even among these groups only 35% agree that clergy should be permitted to endorse political candidates during worship services. "While members of the clergy, like every American citizen, have a constitutional right to vote and support candidates, their congregations do not want to hear endorsements from the pulpit," says Thomas J. Reese, S.J., senior fellow at the Woodstock Theological Center. "Endorsements at church services can also get the clergy and their churches in trouble with the IRS." Catholic Church canon law forbids priests from holding "public offices which entail a participation in the exercise of civil power," but does not forbid priests from endorsing candidates or political parties. However, in the United States it has been the tradition, often enforced by the local bishop, that priests should not endorse candidates. This restriction is beyond any imposed by the Constitution or the IRS. “Church’s leaders are to avoid endorsing or opposing candidates or telling people how to vote,” states "Faithful Citizenship," the U.S. Catholic bishops' document on political responsibility approved overwhelmingly in November 2007. This prohibition applies both inside and outside church services. "This is a church imposed restriction that has nothing to do with separation of church and state," said Father Reese. "The American Catholic bishops learned from the mistakes of their European brethren who got too close to particular parties and candidates," said Reese. "Inevitably the church got tainted by the corruption and bad policies of these politicians. Many Protestant ministers have ignored this history and are making the same mistakes today. I wish they would follow the Catholic example." "It is alright for Catholic priests and bishops to talk about political issues (hunger, homelessness, abortion, war) as moral issues, but they must avoid endorsing parties or candidates," said Reese. "That is why you will not see Catholic clergy listed among 'Catholics for Obama' or 'Catholics for McCain.'"

New Study: Changing Political Preferences Among Religious Voters

2008-06-16T16:20:13Z

On June 9, the Henry Institute for the Study of Christianity and Politics at Calvin College in Grand Rapids, Michigan released a national survey on religion and public life. The study gauged the political attitudes and preferences of mainline Protestants, Roman Catholics, evangelicals, and religiously unaffiliated voters. It found that for the first time in polling history, more mainline Protestants identify with the Democratic Party than the Republican Party. According to the study, 46 percent of mainline Protestants call themselves Democrats, compared to 37 percent who describe themselves as Republican. Nonetheless, John McCain has an edge with mainline Protestants voters over presumptive Democratic nominee Barack Obama (44 percent versus 38 percent). Eighteen percent of mainline Protestants say they are undecided. Read the full article here.

What abortion is to American Catholics, the death penalty is for Italians

2008-06-16T16:18:16Z

By JOHN L. ALLEN JR. Rome I'm in Rome this week, where this morning I took part in an hour-and-a-half radio program on RAI, the Italian state network, along with Cardinal Pio Laghi, the former Apsostolic Nunio in the United States; Gian Maria Vian, director of L'Osservatore Romano, the Vatican newspaper; and Greg Burke of the Fox News Channel. The topic was Pope Benedict XVI's April 15-20 visit to the United States. Read the full article here.

What good is a "Catholic" Supreme Court?

2008-06-14T06:49:59Z

by Raymond Schroth SJ June 13, 2008 The first Guantanamo trial, which featured arraignment just last week and may be derailed by Thursday's Supreme Court rejection of the Bush administration's policy on the denial of habeas corpus to detainees, was already an occasion for shame on many levels. This is particularly true among lawyers, civilian and military, who cared for the honor of their profession. But also, I would hope, for anyone with a sense of human decency - especially a religious person who wants to see Christian principles applied to public life. Here is a United States Supreme Court with a Roman Catholic majority. Is there any trace of their religious upbringing in their judicial decisions? Anthony Scalia (Xavier High School and Georgetown U.) and Clarence Thomas (Holy Cross) have Jesuit educations? The trial of the five alleged participants in planning 9/11 was morally poisoned from the beginning: first because much of the evidence had been extracted through torture, and second because the government asked for the death penalty. Torture extracts not the truth but submission to the torturers. Khalid Mohammed, for one, confessed to 30 crimes, including the murder of Daniel Pearl, which prosecutors know cannot be true. If the trial continues, and if it is to be perceived by the world as just, no evidence extracted under abuse should be admitted. Nor evidence from unnamed sources who cannot be cross-examined. In May the Pentagon, without explanation, dropped charges against Mohammed al-Qahtani, because, according to Slate.com, "what had been done to him would prevent him from ever being put on trial." His interrogatin included sexual humiliation, attack dogs, stress positions, and sleep deprivation. Meanwhile several military lawyers, representing both the defense and prosecution, have resigned in protest, because they don't believe the procedures will guarantee a just trial or because, as Col. Morris Davis, former chief prosecutor for the tribunals, says, the system has "become deeply politicized." Another prisoner, Omar Khadr, is a 21-year-old Canadian scooped up in Afghanistan and incarcerated when he was 15, accused of killing an American in a battle by throwing an grenade. If the accused prisoners are guilty, who gains by killing these Muslim fanatics? Certainly there would be no deterrent effect; they pine for martyrdom, and martyr wannabes will follow their example. That executions bring "closure" for victims' relatives is a myth. Taking pleasure in the death of another person can be only a morbid, self-destructive gratification. Most likely President Bush imagines that killing more "bad guys" - men he's called "the worst of the worst" and kept incommunicado, many without any charges against them, for seven years - will boost his image as a leader. Bush received the court's decision in Rome, where he has been visiting the Pope, with a sulking grump. I hope Pope Benedict, while he and Bush strolled in the Vatican gardens, reminded him that the Vatican has again condemned cluster bombs, which Bush clings to, and consistently opposes torture and the death penalty. What to do with its 270 detainees if Guantanamo is closed? The Guardian (June 6-12) reports that 17 naval vessels around the world are serving as "floating prisons," holding pens for suspects until they are rendered to secret prisons somewhere else. And what of the justices who do or do not examine their religious consciences before condemning men to endless prison without charges or appeal? Judge Scalia said the majority opinion, written by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, a Catholic, "will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed." Justice Roberts regretted that the "public," by which he meant the president, would lose control of foreign policy. Catholics Clarence Thomas and Anthony Alito both signed the two dissents. Thank God for non-Catholics John Paul Stevens, David H. Souter, Stephen G. Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Supreme Court repudiates Bush cruelty at Guantanamo, and that of 4 Catholic justices who supported him

2008-06-13T14:59:31Z

Four Catholic Supreme Court justices, including the Chief Justice, voted to support the cruel prolongation of imprisonment without trial for 6 Bosnian men seized from their homes and imprisoned for six years with no opportunity to see the evidence against them. Justice Anthony Kennedy, the lone Catholic in the majority, wrote the passionate ruling that condemned President Bush for his short-sightedness and heartlessness in rendering the treatment these prisoners have received. What could more thoroughly violate our Christianity than this total lack of empathy for these men, and the inability to put one's self in another's shoes? On Thursday the Supreme court ruled 5-4 to allow the inmates at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, access to US courts in order to contest their confinement. They were viewed as being so dangerous that they were placed in solitary confinement, denied access to family or lawyers for years, and in some instances force-fed to keep them alive. Many have been tortured. Now that federal courts have been opened to them, it is likely that most, if not all, will eventually go free. Coerced confessions cannot be the basis for conviction in a US court, so the Bush strategy of torturing detainees into making various kinds of admissions will turn out to have made the US dramatically less safe. Even the most egregious among them, including the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, may ultimately have to be set free because the evidence he provided will be excluded based on the Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination. Indeed, the Fifth Amendment was written precisely to prevent the kind of torture-ridden interrogations upon which the Bush people have so inhumanely relied. One must assume that if the Administration had convincing evidence of their guilt, the criminal proceedings would have been long-over by now. Having been so unjustly imprisoned, tortured, isolated and force-fed all these years, would it be any surprise if many of these individuals choose to enlist themselves as combatants against the US once they are ultimately released? It is human nature to return the hatred that has been shown to them. There will be some in Congress who will say, "See, we should have kept them locked up in order to protect ourselves." But the Way of Jesus suggests that had we simply treated them with respect from the beginning, as our Constitution compels us to treat all prisoners in the US, they may well have left US custody with a new respect for Americans--or been rightly convicted of the crimes with which they may have been charged. "Love your enemies" was the advice that our Lord and Savior gave us, and we ignore it at our own great peril. The Supreme Court has brought a measure of dignity back to the judicial proceedings of our nation, which reflect so directly on each of us. Time will harshly judge these four Catholic Justices who once again abandoned the principles of our Catholic faith out of their personal ideological conviction. 13 June 2008