The Atheocracy Report

Francis Beckwith -- of the blog Right Reason and contributor -- is starting another:

I am developing a new website and blog that are dedicated to supporting the political liberty of religious citizens to participate in America's liberal democracy. The website is The Atheocracy Report (atheocracy.com). The blog can be found here. I don't know how much time I can dedicate to this. But I thought it would be a good idea to get the ball rolling.

It seems like a good project, and I hope Mr. Beckwith can keep up with it. From the website itself:

Atheocracy.com intends to accomplish two goals: (1) To offer a positive case for the right of religious citizens to participate in America's liberal demorcacy by critically assessing the burdens placed on them by those who mistakenly claim that an atheocratic public square is a neutral one; (2) To document and offer commentary about unjust and uncharitable discrimination, depictions, and marginalizaiton of religious believers who seek to participate as citizens in the public square and shape the laws and policies of their communities. Because this injustice is often supported and perpetuated by groups and individuals that maintain that all religious belief is irrational and thus ought to be sequestered from the public square, we refer to these groups and individuals as atheocratic, which literally means supporting "atheistic government."

These atheocratic groups and individuals often misrepresent, charicature, and engage in ad hominen attacks against serious religious believers. The Atheocracy Report maintains that church and state ought to separate, and that a theocracy is just as bad as an atheocracy. However, religious believers often come to the public square, not merely with blind faith and sacred Scripture, but with arguments and reasons that are distinctly public. We believe that these ought to be assessed on their own terms. Citizens should not be dismissed by an atheocratic litmus test that excludes them from the conversation because they happen to be religious believers, or requires that their arguments be ruled out a priori because they happen to be consistent with views congenial to belief in God and inconsisent with atheocratic views on the nature of law, morality, the good life, or human beings.

Spanish Senate Rejects Gay "Marriage" Law But Lower House Can Still Pass It

In an anomaly of the Spanish constitutional system--an anomaly, that is, in the eyes of those used to a very different American system, even though the Spanish Senate has now rejected the Socialists' proposed gay "marriage" law, the Spanish lower house of parliament can still pass it because the Senate vote is considered non-binding (see Spero News story). But, in any event, the good news is that another sector of Spanish society has rejected this radical proposal in the heels of the massive pro-family demonstration in Madrid on June 18th (see Catholic Analysis post for June 21st for background on the gay "marriage" issue in Spain). In addition, the media is reporting that for the first time the Socialist government has agreed to meet with the organizers of the Madrid pro-family demonstration.

What is the lesson here? Take a stand. The tides of political correctness are not inevitable. Peaceful resistance and protest make a difference. There is nothing to lose by proclaiming the truth. What might have happened if way back, in the wake of Roe v. Wade in 1973, Catholic bishops and others had called for a massive march on Washington to protest the new decision? We do not know because, to my knowledge, no such massive pro-life march ever occurred in 1973 [I invite readers to correct me if they know differently].

St. Ignatius Loyola points out, in his Spiritual Exercises, how the devil flees if we stand firm. The apostles refused to be muzzled in the face of persecution and declared that they must obey God, rather than man in the book of Acts. As Christians and Catholics, we are called to resist evil by witnessing to the truth. Earthly success is not guaranteed, as we all know. But we do know that the truth is a seed that is guaranteed to take root and eventually overpower all lies.

So, in a sense, it is better to say that earthly success is indeed guaranteed--but that success may ultimately be seen only in the "new earth" promised in the Scriptures. Marx told workers long ago to unite because they have nothing to lose but their chains. The Scriptures tell us to unite and proclaim the truth because we have nothing to lose but lies. There is no reason not to witness to the truth. It is the distinctive Christian way of resisting evil.

Pill Bill

ALBANY - The state Senate passed a bill that would let New York women get so-called "morning after" pills without a prescription - sending the controversial issue to Gov. Pataki.The Democratic-controlled Assembly already had approved the emergency contraception measure, but pro-choice advocates had been worried about the bill's fate in the Republican-controlled Senate.

Senate GOP Leader Joe Bruno (R-Rensselaer), however, allowed it on the floor, and the bill passed 34-27.

Pataki aides said the governor would study the measure. Given his generally pro-choice record, advocates said they were hopeful he'll sign it.

"This is a triumph of science over politics," said Kelly Conlin of the National Abortion Rights Action League.

The Catholic Conference, led by Edward Cardinal Egan, is vehemently opposed to the legislation, which it noted carries no age restriction for those who want to get the pills."The senators would authorize the use of young girls as guinea pigs," said Dennis Poust, Catholic Conference spokesman. [Source]

Surprisingly the headline for this article was "Abort pill bill heads to gov." Pray for Gov. Pataki that for once he might actually follow his Catholic faith.

House Votes Against Restoring Funds for Pro-Abortion UNFPA

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- The House of Representatives on Thursday voted against restoring $34 million in taxpayer funding for the United National Population Fund because lawmakers say it is still involved in supporting and promoting China's coercive population control policies. On a 233-192 vote, the House rejected the attempt by pro-abortion lawmakers to attach an amendment to a State Department appropriations bill that would have sent the public funds to the UNFPA. New Jersey Congressman Chris Smith, a Republican, was one of the leading opponents of the amendment. "Despite being admonished to do otherwise on countless occasions, the UNFPA continues to be the chief apologist and enabler for past and ongoing crimes against humanity," Smith said. "Let's not forget or be naïve about the fact that in China today, brothers and sisters are illegal and children can only be born if, and only if, permission is granted by the state." Smith indicated the amendment would have made it so no U.S. laws would apply to UNFPA funding, including laws making sure the foreign groups like the UNFPA itself don't engage in forced abortions or pay for or perform abortions. The Bush administration has sent two investigative teams into China to determine if the UNFPA has any role in promoting the one-child Chinese policy that has resulted in forced abortions and sterilizations and jail sentences for those who break the law. Read the complete story.

You can find the votes of our Catholic representatives in the report over at Catholics in Congress.

Michelle Malkin responds to those gloating over Terri's death

Michelle Malkin -- a journalist with a good head on her shoulders and a credit to her profession -- provides "a sober look" at the autopsy results, with hard words on "the callous gloaters on the other side of this debate . . . who can only talk about the sanctity of life if it's enclosed in ghost quotes and pronounced with a sneer."

It is not clear to me from the neuropathology report when and over what period the much-talked-about brain shrinkage occurred. I have also noticed that some are already mocking the claim that Terri recognized visitors (note that the report also does not appear to indicate when and over what period that loss of sight occurred).

For God's sake.

Terri Schiavo, a profoundly disabled woman who was not terminally ill and who had an army of family members ready to care for her for the rest of her natural life, succumbed to forced dehydration at the hands of her spouse-in-name-only.

This is something to gloat about?

She provides a good roundup of other blogger responses.

Terri Schiavo's Autopsy

The banner headlines and the articles tell us that the autopsy results for Terri Schiavo show that her brain damage was untreatable and that this result means it was right to deny her food and water (see, for example, today's N.Y. Times). The N.Y. Times reports that the official cause of death is "marked dehydration," not starvation. It is no surprise that no county physician would have used the word "starvation"--that would have been like expecting the current Supreme Court to call abortion "murder." Authorities know that words, however factually accurate, can be dangerous to the legitimacy of their power.

Even if one should accept the conclusion that Terri's brain damage was untreatable in any way or form, the immorality, the evil, of starving her remains. She was not dying. The courts killed her precisely because she was not dying. The feeding tube was not damaging her, but rather keeping her alive. She did not have a disease that was causing her crucial organs to stop functioning.

And so the question becomes: do you deny the ordinary care of a feeding tube to someone whose severe brain damage seems to be beyond treatment of any kind? The answer is no because in these circumstances denying the feeding tube is an act of mercilessness and cruelty. Ordinary care is that care which is the basic minimum required by mercy. In the medical circumstances of Terri Schiavo, mercy required nutrition and hydration. Those who ruled otherwise damaged themselves severely by making themselves merciless. If sin is self-mutilation, then the judges who favored removing the tube in this particular case mutilated themselves morally. And so a moral autopsy of our judicial system would read: "cause of moral death: lack of mercy." As others have said, in moral terms, the one most damaged by evil is the evildoer.

Steele for Senate?

According to the Baltimore Sun, leading Maryland Republicans say Lt Gov Michael S. Steele, a practicing Catholic, is their best chance to capture the Senate seat being vacated by Democrat Paul S. Sarbanes. Steele announced today that he is forming an exploratory committee to consider entering the race. "The potential candidacy of Steele, an African-American lawyer and former seminarian who has never been elected to office on his own, is attractive to a national party looking to broaden its appeal among minority groups," the paper said.

I do not know much about Lt Gov Steele. He is pro-life and against the death penalty. He gave a well received speech at the RNC last summer.

According to one profile I found, he is a member of St. Mary's Catholic Church in Landover Hills, Maryland, which he attends with his wife, Andrea, and their two sons, Michael and Drew. In June 1998, Mr. Steele was honored by his Church community as Man of the Year. In 2005, he was chosen by the President to be part of the U.S. delegation at the investiture of Pope Benedict XVI in Vatican City on April 24, 2005.

If anyone knows anything else about him please post it in the comments. And maybe one of the editors can provide a profile here in CPS.

Catholics in Congress

I have put together a report on how the 131 Catholics in the U.S. House of Representatives, voted/acted on the non-negotiable issues of abortion, embryonic stem cell research, cloning, same-sex marriage, euthanasia, and torture. I looked at 14 different actions (votes, co-sponsorship status, co-signing of letters of support). An introduction and links to the report in Excel and HTML formats can be found here. I hope it generates discussion and thought. Of course, comments, complaints, etc. are welcome.

UPDATE: The report on the 24 Catholics in the U.S. Senate is complete. It looks at 12 actions dealing with the six non-negotiable issues for Catholics. Check it out here.

McCain-Bush in 2008?

Maybe.

Jeb Bush has said he will not run in 2008. But that does not rule him out as a vice presidential candidate. If McCain won, Jeb would be the No. 2 to a president who will turn 72 on Aug. 29, 2008, and might well serve only a single term. If McCain lost, Jeb would have enhanced national recognition for a run in 2012. If picking Jeb is the price of winning over George W., McCain will pay it.

House Committee Backs Increasing Abstinence Education by $11M

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- A House subcommittee has approved a spending bill which calls on increasing federal funding for abstinence education by $11 million in fiscal year 2006. Abstinence-only education has come under increasing debate as abortion advocates seek to reduce state and national support for such programs. Last week, the Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health, and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies approved the increase, which is smaller than the $39 million increase President Bush requested. In a statement, the Christian Coalition applauded the vote, but said funding for contraception-based programs is still too high. "Failed contraceptive sex education programs receive 12 dollars for every dollar abstinence receives," the pro-life groups said. "It is long past time that there is parity between the two programs." In the Senate, abortion proponents, led by Montana Sen. Max Baucus, are seeking to redefine the kind of programs that qualify for abstinence funding to switch funds from abstinence-only programs to those that also teach using contraception. Backers of abstinence education programs say that is a wrongheaded approach because the abstinence initiatives work. A new study of teenagers who took part in a sexual abstinence campaign found they were significantly less likely to have sex or use alcohol, drugs, or tobacco than their peers. The groundbreaking study of junior high and middle school aged-girls appeared in the recent issue of the journal "Adolescent & Family Health." Read the complete story.

95-10: Pros and Cons

Nathan over at Sollicitudo Rei Socialis has a very good summary of the 95-10 initiative. Though Nathan and I disagree on other issues he, like myself, sees problems with the proposals including contraception insurance coverage and pregnancy prevention which may be open to teaching kids about artificial contraception. He also points out the need for all of us not to lose sight of the main goal, which is to outlaw abortion. His suggestion of including a provision condemning Roe v. Wade would be a fine addition to 95-10.

Young Catholic Adults to Meet Gov. Schwarzenegger

Young adults from across the country will meet with California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger tomorrow, June 9, at 10 a.m. to discuss the ongoing problem of Catholics in public office who support the act of abortion. "This is a dedicated group of individuals who want to talk to the governor about a basic Catholic teaching: You can't be both Catholic and pro-abortion," said Joe Starrs, director of American Life League's Crusade for the Defense of Our Catholic Church.

Because of his consistent support of abortion, Gov. Schwarzenegger has been included in American Life League's Deadly Dozen campaigns, which identify pro-abortion Catholics in public office and encourage them to recant their support of abortion or cease claiming Catholicism as their faith.

Brownback Devotion To Life, Other Issues Makes Him A Standout Senator

Since coming to Congress in 1994 and the Senate in 1996, Kansas Republican Sam Brownback has distinguished himself as one of the most stalwart defenders of human life while simultaneously developing a diverse legislative portfolio that includes efforts to defend religious freedom around the globe, to stop genocide in Darfur and even to build a museum honoring African-Americans on Washington DC's Mall.

One of the causes to which Brownback has lent his leadership is a total ban on human cloning. Brownback has led the charge in the Senate for a total ban by sponsoring legislation that would make cloning illegal not only in instances when a cloned embryo is carried in a pregnancy, brought to full term and delivered but also in cases when a human embryo is created for the purposes of being destroyed for scientific research such as for embryonic stem cells.

Brownback has also threatened to filibuster a recent bill that gained passage in the House that would provide federal funding for embryo destructive research if it reaches the Senate floor. He has also led the way in cleaning up the pop-culture airwaves by sponsoring legislation that would increase the amount of money the Federal Communications Commission can fine TV and radio stations for broadcasting indecent content.

Though his principled stands on these issues as well as his good standing with Christian conservatives might lead some to stereotype as only a social conservative, Brownback has put considerable effort into developing bipartisan initiatives, a fact illustrated by his work with Democratic Senator Mary Landrieu on cloning. He has even won the accolades of Nicholas Kristof, a liberal columnist with one of the left's favorite institutions, The New York Times. In a December column Kristof praised the senator for taking the lead on a number of international human rights issues including most notably his efforts to intervene on behalf of Sudenese citizens in the region of Darfur who are, according to many, experiencing genocide. "Members of the Christian right, exemplified by Brownback, are the new internationalists, increasingly engaged in humanitarian causes abroad — thus creating opportunities for common ground between left and right on issues we all care about," Krstof wrote. ". . . I’m embarrassed to say that Democrats have been so suspicious of Republicans that they haven’t contributed much on those human rights issues where the Christian right has already staked out its ground."

Brownback may have his eye beyond representing Kansas in the US Senate. In recent months, he has made has made visits to Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, states where the first presidential primaries are held. He recently told RightWingNews.com that he is examining a presidential run but that, "No final decision has been made. . . . It’s quite a challenge and so I’m taking time and looking at it quite carefully."

Brownback may harbor high aspirations, but he is not like the usual politician. He believes that government can be a force for moral good and personally demonstrates a profound interior life of faith. At a recent address to the graduates of Christendom College makes it clear that Brownback approaches his work with humility and awareness of its limitations. "The temptation that many of us in public life face is to treat public policy issues as if they were of transcendent importance. In fact, that can become a handy excuse for treating people as means to an all-important end, as well as all sorts of other omissions of responsibility," he said. "But it is this constant interior struggle to do our work well and to fulfill our obligations with the right intention that will have the most profound effect on society. This is the re-evangelization in action: the positive influence we can have on the souls we touch each day."

Copyright 2005 - C-FAM (Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute).

Learn more about Senator Brownback at Catholics for Brownback.

Father Pavone on '95-10'

The commitment to defend the weakest and most vulnerable human beings does not arise from a political party or platform, nor from any kind of personal or communal agenda.

Nor does it arise from bishops, priests, or pastors. Rather, it arises from our humanity itself, fashioned as it is by the hand of God. God, who is life, writes upon our hearts its value, and He bestows on us both the gift of life and the privilege and duty to defend it.

Nobody needs any kind of permission to defend life, nor can anyone excuse himself from that duty. Nobody has a monopoly on the defense of life, nor is the pro-life task a means to an end. Defending life is an end in itself, and has in itself all the justification it ever needs.

The two major political parties in America, right now, take opposite views of the right to life. The Democratic Party platform (2004) reads, "Because we believe in the privacy and equality of women, we stand proudly for a woman's right to choose, consistent with Roe v. Wade, and regardless of her ability to pay." The Republican Party platform (2004) reads, "We must keep our pledge to the first guarantee of the Declaration of Independence. That is why we say the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution, and we endorse legislation to make it clear that the 14th Amendment's protections apply to unborn children. We oppose using public revenues for abortion and will not fund organizations which advocate it."

There are, nonetheless, pro-life and pro-abortion members of both parties, including legislators on the state and federal level.

Recently, I was with some of the pro-life Democratic members of Congress at a press conference led by Democrats for Life and held at the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee in Washington. The topic was the "95-10" Initiative, which contains numerous legislative proposals aimed at reducing the numbers of abortion by 95% in the next ten years.

There are many proposals in this package, like women's right-to-know provisions, funding for promotion of alternatives to abortion, strengthening of adoption practices, and more. These are key goals for all of us to pursue. The precise way in which these and other proposals in 95-10 should be written into law will, of course, need to be carefully debated and refined. For example, we always have to avoid the trap of thinking that access to contraception is a solution to the abortion problem. The opposite, in fact, is true.

And in the end, we cannot be content to reduce the numbers of abortions. We have to acknowledge that laws permitting even a single abortion undermine the very fabric of our freedom and our republic. Abortion is an act of violence that no nation has the right to permit. But when anyone in our great nation, Democrat or Republican, wants to advance the Culture of Life to any degree, that deserves an "Amen!" from us all.