LAT op/ed: "The Unholy Alliance Against the Filibuster" - Pope joining?

[Nothing Without Hope]

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-miles27apr27.story
April 27, 2005
COMMENTARY

The Unholy Alliance Against the Filibuster

By Jack Miles
Jack Miles, an ex-Jesuit, now a practicing Episcopalian, is the author of "Christ: A Crisis in the Life of God" and "God: A Biography," which won a Pulitzer Prize in 1996.

(snip)

A key part of the Republican strategy is to claim that it is hatred of religion that has moved the Democrats to oppose these judicial nominees. "Justice Sunday: Stop the Filibuster Against People of Faith," a TV program produced by evangelical leaders, was simulcast Sunday via the Internet, just as Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist was preparing to call for a vote on the anti-filibuster measure. Evangelical Protestants have led the way in portraying Democrats as enemies of God, but the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has chimed in on the issue of judicial nominees in a mass mailing to parishioners timed to yield constituent letters just as the matter comes to a vote.

If the Republicans succeed, they will not just have crushed Democratic opposition in the Senate but will be en route to a dramatic weakening of the independent judiciary. Tom DeLay, the ultraconservative Republican leader of the House of Representatives, recently said, defiantly, to a group of reporters: "We set up the courts. We can unset the courts. We have the power of the purse." In an audio recording obtained by the Los Angeles Times of Protestant leaders at a private meeting, the most influential among them, James C. Dobson, provided chilling detail: "Very few people know this, that the Congress can simply disenfranchise a court. They don't have to fire anybody or impeach them or go through that battle. All they have to do is say the 9th Circuit doesn't exist anymore, and it's gone."

(snip

And the German pope? In what mood does he witness the rising threat to democracy within the U.S.? During the presidential election, each candidate had an issue that he could exploit to claim Pope John Paul II as an ally. Kerry had Iraq, which the pope opposed; Bush had abortion. But Ratzinger would have nothing of such evenhandedness. "Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia," the future pope wrote to the U.S. bishops. "There may be legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not, however, with regard to abortion and euthanasia."

What his letter seemed to suggest was that if Bush gave Rome what it wanted on the abortion issue and the (now strategically inflamed) euthanasia issue, Rome would do its best to give Bush what he wanted regarding the death penalty and, above all, war. The question that now arises is whether Rome is offering a similar deal with the U.S. Constitution at stake: If Bush backs Rome on abortion and euthanasia, Rome will do what it can to turn U.S. Catholics against the filibuster. The fact that the mass mailing will swing only a minority of the country's Catholics against the filibuster is irrelevant. The minority, as it did in the last election, may make the difference.

[dzika]

1. The plan comes together...

[Ruffhowse]

2. More and more I am beginning to feel religion should be outlawed. I can

handle it up until the point they try to foist that superstitious drivel on me and my life. And it's not the spirituality so much that's the problem, it's how it puts people in the position to be exploited by others for their own gain in power and wealth. Religion seems to turn people into stupid sheep. I believe in God, but I do not trust His word being filtered to me by others with ulterior motives.

[borg5575]

4. No.

Outlaw religion? That's what murderous dictators like Stalin tried to do. We should never even remotely consider the prospect of outlawing religion. Your comment is one of the stupidest and most uninformed comments I have ever seen at DU.

Having said that, I don't like the religious right anymore than you do.

[Ruffhowse]

8. Oh I've said a lot worse than that here. But it appears you're somewhat

new, so maybe you haven't seen my other postings. I'm not the most PC person here by any means. Let me just quote someone far more talented and intelligent than I and maybe you'll see where I'm coming from....

Imagine there's no heaven,
It's easy if you try,
No hell below us,
Above us only sky,
Imagine all the people
living for today...

Imagine there's no countries,
It isnt hard to do,
Nothing to kill or die for,
And no religion too,
Imagine all the people
living life in peace...

Imagine no possessions,
I wonder if you can,
No need for greed or hunger,
A brotherhood of man,
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world...

You may say Im a dreamer,
but Im not the only one,
I hope some day you'll join us,
And the world will live as one.

John Lennon

[borg5575]

16. Duh...

I think I've heard of John Lennon before. But he said "imagine there's no religion." He didn't advocate making it illegal for Christ's sake. (No pun intended.)

[Ruffhowse]

24. Well if you'd read my post carefully, I stated that I FELT like

outlawing religion, which expressed my current frustration with certain religious organizations. I didn't and do not advocate the actual banning of anyone's right to assemble with others to pursue whatever spiritual efforts they so desire, as long as those efforts do not conflict with any of MY rights. I do have an increased amount of hostility towards organized religion lately, and I think understandably so, so you probably picked up on that from my post and overreacted with your flaming response.

[borg5575]

25. I didn't mean it to be a flame.

Actually, now that you have explained yourself further, I have no problem at all with what you have said.

[blogbear]

10. The church is all powerful so long as there are 'stupid sheep'..We have

many sheepish in the US..Karl Marx referred to religion as 'the opium of the people'..Just look how drugged and hooked so many here are on this uncontrolled substance..

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

11. but outlawing religion

would merely make it more attractive. It would also play into the hands of the rw pundits who are claiming that Christianity is under attack.

Religion should be practiced, but seperate from politics. Even Jesus said this.

[Daphne08]

12. Not outlawed... Just Taxed!

Churches should lose their tax-exempt status!

[FreedomAngel82]

23. Oh good grief

These people need to butt out. Good God. Poll numbers show other wise. These people only get media attention but they don't speak for the majority of our population.

[w13rd0]

3. So is it ok to say...

..."Fuck the Pope" now? Can we all agree that he's a HORRIBLE choice, and if not, why the hell are you still here?

[borg5575]

5. Yes, he's a horrible choice.

He certainly wouldn't have been my choice. But it's their church, not mine, and the leaders of that church have the right to choose whatever leader they want. But I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of Catholics leave the church now.

[LittleClarkie]

7. Perhaps you should have dinner with the pope first

Maybe he'll let you wear his pope hat.

Even then, there's that chastity thingie. That'll probably get in the way.

[LittleClarkie]

6. That looks like a rehash of the election letter and nothing more

which, it appears, the author is misinterpreting. According to our theology expert here at work, that letter was meant to convey, somewhat more liberally than what would be expected from God's rottweiller, was that if a Catholic was voting for a pro-choice candidate specifically because he was pro-choice, that would be bad. If a Catholic, on the other hand, was voting for a pro-choice candidate because of other reasons unrelated to pro-life or pro-choice, such as war, that this would be acceptable.

In other words, he wasn't supporting one-issue voting. In fact, as JPII's right hand man, they both shared a view AGAINST the war. So he will not be giving Bush what he wants in regard to, above all, war. He is most definitely not in favor of the war, and has said so, repeatedly.

I'm giving the old coot a fair shake. So far, on my pope-o-meter, he has acrued have some pluses and minuses:

plus:
The fact that he was thinking "Don't do this to me, God" as he was being voted in.

Hearing him greet his "Jewish brethen"

Hearing him call for dialog with Muslims

minus:
With everything happening in the world, his first concern was... Harry Potter. Oye vey.

Hard line stance against gays is worrisome.

Overall, he appears to be moving away somewhat from being "God's rottweiller." But he is indeed going to be a Conservative hardliner and that will cause some problems I think. He seems to be saying you're either a Catholic all the way, or you're not.

Many American Catholics may likely say, "Not."

That said, nothing is served in distorting who this man is and what he has stood for. He appears to be, by all intents and purposes, sort of the vice president of the previous pope. It's like Bush died and the Cardinals elected Cheney. So, the Dr. No of popes needs some work in the PR department. But the clear message from the church is nothing more and nothing less than "Stay the course."

He's not THAT much different from JPII, in other words.

[radar]

18. Ah...

"...According to our theology expert here at work, that letter was meant to convey, somewhat more liberally than what would be expected from God's rottweiller, was that if a Catholic was voting for a pro-choice candidate specifically because he was pro-choice, that would be bad. If a Catholic, on the other hand, was voting for a pro-choice candidate because of other reasons unrelated to pro-life or pro-choice, such as war, that this would be acceptable.

In other words, he wasn't supporting one-issue voting...."

...So, it appears he has the problem of not speaking in simple sentences & terminology the majority of Americans expect today. (Kinda like the Dems approach to the last election)

Nuance & reading the fine print aren't popular anymore. Now we need to highlight & summarize the Cliff Notes.

[LittleClarkie]

20. But we're smart, and can grok nuance

Nuance was never popular, btw. Requires too much thinking.

[saracat]

9. The Jesuit point of view, even as an ex Jesuit, is the intelligent arm of

the Catholic Church. Some of our best educational institutions are Jesuit. Georgetown and Fordham come to mind. Remember Clinton had a Jesuit education as did most of his staff! This guy has got it nailed. There is a link between Benedict and Bush and I am sickened. Frankly this is one of those things I would rather not know! I feel such hatred for Bush and the Christians of this ilk that I can't stand it. It makes me ill!

[paineinthearse]

13. Can anyone provide a link to the federal register for the statute

prohibiiting agents of foreign states from lobbying the congress or executive without first being registered?

[flpoljunkie]

14. Saw clip of a raving William Donohue today who was evidently at the rally-

Justice Sunday. Disturbing. Did not realize he was at the rally.

Of course, Catholic League president William "What are we, the Taliban?"Donohue is almost always frothing at the mouth-- and a frequent guest of Tweety and other cable ravers.

If you have not watched this segment from The Daily Show on his appearance, it is worth taking the time to do so. Donohue segment is on from 1:27 To 2:37 in the video.

Link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1747224

[Nothing Without Hope]

15. Can anyone here get the TEXT of this new mass mailing from the bishops?

In the first paragraph:
Evangelical Protestants have led the way in portraying Democrats as enemies of God, but the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has chimed in on the issue of judicial nominees in a mass mailing to parishioners timed to yield constituent letters just as the matter comes to a vote.

I feel that we should know exactly what is said in that letter. The wording is also important for the route suggested in the previous post by Paine. Come on - it's a mass mailing to parishioners. Somebody here should have a copy. Or it should be on the web at a church site.

[paineinthearse]

17. Try cross-posting in the RELIGION forum. nt

[Nothing Without Hope]

21. Will do. It's not up yet at the US Council of Catholic Bishops web site

Or at least I couldn't find it there. But this is a web site we should keep an eye on.

Here's the USCCB home page; http://www.usccb.org

USCCB Office of Government Liason (OGL):
OGLHome page: http://www.usccb.org/ogl/index.shtml
OGL "current issues in Congress" page: http://www.usccb.org/ogl/oglmonitor.shtml#1

And here is a page with the full text of Ratzinger's own "DOCTRINAL NOTE" (approved by Pope JP2) on Catholics' participation in politics, issued in Rome Nov 24, 2002. Note that at the time he wrote this he had been head of the Congregation of the Doctriine of the Faith, which is the new name (since 1908) of the Inquisition, for two decades:

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia//congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20021124_politica_en.html

DOCTRINAL NOTE

on some questions regarding
The Participation of Catholics in Political Life

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, having received the opinion of the Pontifical Council for the Laity, has decided that it would be appropriate to publish the present Doctrinal Note on some questions regarding the participation of Catholics in political life. This Note is directed to the Bishops of the Catholic Church and, in a particular way, to Catholic politicians and all lay members of the faithful called to participate in the political life of democratic societies.

(snip - main body of document follows)

There follows a long text of instruction to Catholics about how to run their political lives - anyone concerned about Ratzinger's plans for intrusion into US politics should read it. In my opinion it is wordy and general, but it needs careful scrutiiny to figure out what the man believes.

[Nothing Without Hope]

22. New USCCB-sponsored mass mailing campaign from parishioners to senators

This is from one of the links at the US Council of Catholic Bishops web site. Note the reference in the third paragraph to a January mailing to all US Senators from Cardinal Keeler. Could this be the mass mailing referred to in the LAT article? Or is there another? In any case, the mass mailing by the PARISHIONERS shown here is timed to attempt to impact the filibuster confrontation, though it is not mentioned specifically.

http://www.usccb.org/comm/archives/2005/05-093.shtml
Catholics Send Millions of Postcards Urging Senators Not to Use a Pro-Abortion Litmus Test for Judges

WASHINGTON (April 13, 2005)-- Millions of postcards are on their way to the district offices of U.S. Senators coast to coast as part of the "End the Roe Litmus Test" campaign. The campaign, sponsored by the National Committee for a Human Life Amendment and the Secretariat for Pro-Life Activities of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), invites Catholics to send a message to their Senators that support for Roe v. Wade should not be used as a litmus test for judicial nominees.

"Abortion advocacy groups have pledged to spend $10 million dollars every year to see that only judges who promise to endorse Roe are confirmed," said Cathy Cleaver Ruse, Esq., Director of Planning and Information for the USCCB Secretariat for Pro-Life Activities. "Yet even legal scholars who favor legal abortion have said Roe is not good constitutional law."

In January Cardinal William Keeler wrote to all U.S. Senators urging them not to use a pro-abortion litmus test for nominees. "By any measure," he said, "support for the Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade decision is an impoverished standard for assessing judicial ability." Cardinal Keeler is Chairman of the USCCB's Committee for Pro-Life Activities. The End the Roe Litmus Test campaign also includes an e-mail component.

"Roe v. Wade is bad law, bad medicine, and bad social policy," said Ruse. "No Senator should make a litmus test out of what Justice Blackmun's former law clerk Edward Lazarus calls 'one of the most intellectually suspect constitutional decisions of the modern era'."

[DemoTex]

19. A poem for the times (Carl Sandburg): "To a Contemporary Bunkshooter"

TO A CONTEMPORARY BUNKSHOOTER

You come along. . . tearing your shirt. . . yelling about
Jesus.
Where do you get that stuff?
What do you know about Jesus?
Jesus had a way of talking soft and outside of a few
bankers and higher-ups among the con men of Jerusalem
everybody liked to have this Jesus around because
he never made any fake passes and everything
he said went and he helped the sick and gave the
people hope.


You come along squirting words at us, shaking your fist
and calling us all damn fools so fierce the froth slobbers
over your lips. . . always blabbing we're all
going to hell straight off and you know all about it.


I've read Jesus' words. I know what he said. You don't
throw any scare into me. I've got your number. I
know how much you know about Jesus.
He never came near clean people or dirty people but
they felt cleaner because he came along. It was your
crowd of bankers and business men and lawyers
hired the sluggers and murderers who put Jesus out
of the running.


I say the same bunch backing you nailed the nails into
the hands of this Jesus of Nazareth. He had lined
up against him the same crooks and strong-arm men
now lined up with you paying your way.

This Jesus was good to look at, smelled good, listened
good. He threw out something fresh and beautiful
from the skin of his body and the touch of his hands
wherever he passed along.
You slimy bunkshooter, you put a smut on every human
blossom in reach of your rotten breath belching
about hell-fire and hiccupping about this Man who
lived a clean life in Galilee.

When are you going to quit making the carpenters build
emergency hospitals for women and girls driven
crazy with wrecked nerves from your gibberish about
Jesus--I put it to you again: Where do you get that
stuff; what do you know about Jesus?


Go ahead and bust all the chairs you want to. Smash
a whole wagon load of furniture at every performance.
Turn sixty somersaults and stand on your
nutty head. If it wasn't for the way you scare the
women and kids I'd feel sorry for you and pass the hat.
I like to watch a good four-flusher work, but not when
he starts people puking and calling for the doctors.
I like a man that's got nerve and can pull off a great
original performance, but you--you're only a bug-
house peddler of second-hand gospel--you're only
shoving out a phoney imitation of the goods this
Jesus wanted free as air and sunlight.

You tell people living in shanties Jesus is going to fix it
up all right with them by giving them mansions in
the skies after they're dead and the worms have
eaten 'em.
You tell $6 a week department store girls all they need
is Jesus; you take a steel trust wop, dead without
having lived, gray and shrunken at forty years of
age, and you tell him to look at Jesus on the cross
and he'll be all right.
You tell poor people they don't need any more money
on pay day and even if it's fierce to be out of a job,
Jesus'll fix that up all right, all right--all they gotta
do is take Jesus the way you say.
I'm telling you Jesus wouldn't stand for the stuff you're
handing out. Jesus played it different. The bankers
and lawyers of Jerusalem got their sluggers and
murderers to go after Jesus just because Jesus
wouldn't play their game. He didn't sit in with
the big thieves.

I don't want a lot of gab from a bunkshooter in my religion.
I won't take my religion from any man who never works
except with his mouth and never cherishes any memory
except the face of the woman on the American
silver dollar.

I ask you to come through and show me where you're
pouring out the blood of your life.

I've been to this suburb of Jerusalem they call Golgotha,
where they nailed Him, and I know if the story is
straight it was real blood ran from His hands and
the nail-holes, and it was real blood spurted in red
drops where the spear of the Roman soldier rammed
in between the ribs of this Jesus of Nazareth.

Carl Sandburg, Chicago Poems, 1916

[Nothing Without Hope]

26. kick n/t