Archive for the ‘politics’ Category

My letter to Nancy Pelosi (sent Tuesday)

September 18, 2008

Dear Madam Speaker:

I enjoyed watching (on C-SPAN’s Book TV) your recent appearance at a Washington synagogue, talking about your book Know Your Power: A Message to America’s Daughters.  As the father of five daughters, a Catholic, and a religion teacher at a Catholic high school, I was very interested in what you had to say. 

I was particularly impressed by how comfortable you clearly are in speaking about your Catholic faith and how it intersects with your public service.  You invoked St. Francis and didn’t hesitate to speak of him as the patron of your hometown, or to quote his important maxim, “Preach the Gospel always, and when necessary use words.”  You invoked Catholic social justice principles and cited them as a foundation for your own work in working for policies and laws that respect all people.  You even spoke of a “spark of the divine” that is in each person, to which we must respond with laws that protect and respect them, regardless of who they are.  You cited examples of care for the environment, living wage, health care, and other policies that have been put in place in San Francisco, and said you prefer to speak of respect rather than tolerance, because speaking of tolerance belittles those who are different from us (I agree; it’s a good distinction.)  You said these matters are not political issues to you, but values to be upheld.

Ms. Pelosi, while I admired and agreed with all of this as I listened, I write today because it’s difficult to understand why you are willing to leave out one important piece from that beautiful mosaic of thinking about personal integrity in public service: working for laws that protect and respect the unborn. 

I am one of those who has been disappointed with your recent public comments about abortion, as well as those of Senator Obama and Senator Biden, all of which seem intentionally to ignore the very clear fact that when human life begins is not, fundamentally, a matter of faith at all, but of science.   

But having watched you at the synagogue event, I’m more confused still, since you so clearly do not hesitate to stand by the principles of human dignity in other cases, despite the fact and even because of the fact that they are rooted in your own faith tradition.  And you do it even regarding issues that are controversial, about which many people disagree with you.  (I applaud you for that.)

An illustration of what I mean, then I’ll finish: Obviously, some of the San Francisco policies you cited with approval – access to health care for every child and a living (rather than “minimum”) wage, for example – are not universally embraced with enthusiasm.  Suppose someone objected to these by saying, “I saw you on C-SPAN defending these policies by saying there’s a ‘spark of the divine’ in every person that must be respected, and these laws do that.  But I don’t believe in God or any divine spark, so don’t you force your faith on me by enacting laws that suggest there is.” 

I bet (and I’d hope) that your response would be something to this effect: “Though my faith tells me that divine spark is there, I needn’t be a person of faith to understand that we must respect every single person, and our laws must protect every single person.  Human dignity and human transcend any religion.”  And you’d be right.

So why is abortion different?  

In both cases we’re talking about an issue of human dignity (one that is part of the teaching of your religious faith, but transcends it, because we’re dealing with human life and human rights), and an issue that not everyone agrees upon.  Why is it so hard to stand up here and say, “You may disagree with me, but this is a fundamental issue of human dignity to which I must be true”?

In closing, Ms. Pelosi, I have to say that I agree with you and most of your Democratic colleagues about many things – including the crucial matter of the War in Iraq.  I think this war was a mistake in the first place, and that it was mishandled throughout.  And yet I won’t be able to vote for Senator Obama in the upcoming election, because abortion, to me, is an even more fundamental issue.  How could it be otherwise: over 3000 Americans have died in Iraq in the past six years – that’s how many died by abortion in the last day or two.   

A comment I read on the internet recently reflects my own thinking: “Don’t the Democrats realize if they’d drop their passionate commitment to abortion rights, they’d win every election?”  Ms. Pelosi, I can tell you they would have my vote, every time.


Barry Michaels 


Uh-oh. Wait til Pamela Anderson hears about this.

September 13, 2008

So Sarah Palin prayed for a friend in college (Mark Shea recently pointed out the article). 

And (hold on, because this is where it gets really monstrous), the friend credits Palin’s prayer with her own conversion to Catholicism.

Matt Damon’s blood spewing out of his ears is going to make a great YouTube video.

(C’mon, you know you can picture it.  “This is absurd.  Absolutely absurd.  Someone explain to me why more people aren’t talking about it.  I really want to know, Does she think prayer helps people?  Does she think that? Because she’s going to have the nuclear codes.  She–  She–”  sploshhh!)

I figured it out…

September 12, 2008

why I (and so many others) like the idea of Sarah Palin as vice-president so much, despite the fact that she is not at all the most qualified candidate for the job. 

It’s because she is so completely baffling to the people who consider themselves so far above and beyond what the rest of us see as most important in life.

[Recent New York Times comment about that little scene, that most folks found so lovely, of little Piper Palin giving the spit-shine to her baby brother’s hair: “In the press galleries at the convention, journalists wrinkled their noses in disgust when Piper, Ms. Palin’s youngest daughter, was filmed kitty-licking her baby brother’s hair into place. But to many Americans — including some I talked to in the convention hall — that looked like family church on Sunday, evidence of good breeding and sibling regard.”  Read over that sentence a few times and consider what it says about the folks “in the press galleries.”]

They can’t figure her out, which is another way of saying, they can’t figure us out.


In fact, she drives them absolutely bonkers.  [I’ve revised my previously less polite terminology here.]


And I like that.

The Catholic Vote

September 10, 2008

So I had this idea…

September 1, 2008

Wanna buy a bumper sticker?

Seriously.  $3.50, plus postage.  If you want a lot, e-mail me, and we’ll work something out.

The Doctor of the Church and the Speaker of the House

August 28, 2008

Here we are on the feast of the great St. Augustine, smack dab at a time when his name is being invoked in American politics with a frequency and intensity like it almost certainly never has before! 

The Nancy Pelosi issue is being very well covered elsewhere in the Catholic blogosphere (like here, here, and here) so I won’t rehash it here, other than to say that our bishops are making me proud this week. 

I only want to point out one piece of commentary that could be overlooked, but shouldn’t be.  Though several American bishops have been holding their own this week, this piece in the Chicago Tribune by columnist Kathleen Parker could serve as a fine example of a sober and clear explanation of the most relevant facts.   

Happy feast of Augustine, the Doctor of Grace!

St. Augustine, pray for us.