Death penalty related case -- Supreme Court says juries, not judges, must decide whether an accused murderer's crime is worthy of being punished by the death penalty.

Given the changing trends in public opinion on the death penalty, this could very well result in a substantial decrease in executions...except in Texas.

Let's see the lavander mafia try to go against this group in Miami. As I've repeatedly asserted in this blog, homosexual desires are not the equivalent of race and ethnicity.

Talk about no brainers -- Supreme Court bars FLee Bailey from arguing before them.

More evidence that the requirement of celibacy in the priesthood is not the problem.

Yet another reason for maintaining the celibacy requirement in the priesthood.

From Fox News: Conservatives slam John Ashcroft for allowing Deputy AG Larry Thompson to speak at a gay pride event held at the Department of Justice.

"Just because he is fighting terrorist threats is no excuse to allow an officially sanctioned celebration by his department of immoral, unhealthy behavior that is illegal in nearly 20 states," said Robert Knight, director of the Culture and Family Institute. "I have to ask: Why is Mr. Ashcroft, a committed Christian, using his official capacity to celebrate sin?"
...

But gay employees at the Justice Department said conservative groups shouldn't have a problem with Thompson's speech since he didn't focus on lesbian and gay issues.

"He could have given that speech to a bunch of tourists," said DOJ Pride board member Mark Hegedus.

Like most pro-homosexual activists, Mr. Hegedus is missing the point. The objection is not with Thompson speaking to the group, it's with the whole event even taking place.

School bans "tag" game to preserve student self esteem: Only in the People's Republic of Santa Monica could something like this happen. Oh wait, it could also occur in that third world American city known as Berkeley.

The Supreme Court has ruled that executing mentally retarded murderers is unconstitutional -- cites change in public sentiment as main reason for decision.

Although I am against applying the death penalty to the mentally retarded, this ruling by the Court is absolutely ridiculous. Trends in public opinion should not be dictating judicial decisions. As with abortion, the Court should have allowed the individual state legislatures to decide for themselves whether convicted murderers who are mentally retarded should be executed.

The University of San Francisco's loss is Ave Maria College's gain. Father Fessio will be missed out here on the leftist coast.

I posed the following question on defining sexual deviancy to homosexual defenders on June 13. Here's one response I got (italicized) with my reply (bold):

I would define sexually devient conduct as predatory behavior, that stimulates you at the expense of another's mental, emotional, or spiritual loss of preceived well being.

This definition is problematic for a couple of reasons. In addition to automatically excluding blatant deviants who engage in acts like bestiality, also excluded are pedophiles who argue and believe that children can give informed and reasoned consent to sexual intercourse with adults. The basis for this argument and belief stems from the junk science research that "Heir Doktor" Alfred Kinsey put out fifty years ago. It is this same study that homosexuals use to argue that their "death-style" is perfectly natural and normal.

For a thorough eye-opening refutation of Kinsey, visit the site put up by Dr. Judith Reisman.

The decision by Nickelodeon to broadcast a program about children who are raised by homosexuals is most unfortunate. Rather than teaching kids to respect the humanity of a person despite his many faults, Nickelodeon is obviously trying to normalize and legitimate homosexuality by telling kids that "gay" couples who raise children are as much a "family" as married men and women with children.

Epiphany: There have been many occasions where I have thought about stealing from somebody. I don't know where these thoughts come from or why I have them. However, because I realize that stealing is intrinsically wrong, I refrain from doing it. But does the fact that I have the desire to steal make me a thief? No, because I have not stolen anything. Should my desire to steal alone afford me the legal status of a thief? Hardly. Should thieves, as a "class", be given the same civil protections that racial minorities like blacks and asians enjoy? That's just plain stupid. By way of analogy, then, why are individuals who tragically experience homosexual desires (but by God's grace do not act upon them) classified as "gay", and why should individuals who choose to practice homosexuality be given the same legal protections as racial minorities (who do not choose their ethnicity)? Hmmm...

Score another victory for those goofy JWs! The Supreme Court says cities cannot require door-to-door evangelizers and political canvassers to get permits.

"'It is offensive not only to the values protected by the First Amendment, but to the very notion of a free society, that in the context of everyday public discourse a citizen must first inform the government of her desire to speak to her neighbors and then obtain a permit to do so,' the court said in an 8-1 decision."

Addendum to my UC San Diego experience (below): a couple of female students got undergraduate degrees in something called "critical gender studies". For all you young girls out there, you too can spend four years at a major university to learn how to hate men!

Well, I just returned from So.Cal where I attended a friend's wedding and a cousin's graduation ceremony at UC San Diego. Regarding the latter, if there was ever any doubt that the University of California system was being run by a bunch of leftists, the names of the indivdual colleges at UC San Diego should lay such doubt to rest. First there's the college named after Sierra Club founder John Muir, hero to many a tree hugging eco-fascist. Then there's the college named after Earl "let's base constitutional law on feelings and other psychobabble principles" Warren, former governor of California and Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court. Third is Thurgood Marshall college, named after the late Supreme Court Justice who, in the later part of his life, reportedly had his clerks write all his decisions while he fell asleep in front of the T.V. Finally, there's Eleanor Roosevelt college, which is named after the long dead First Lady that Hillary Clinton apparently has regular conversations with.

At least the weather in San Diego was nice...

Looks as though my plate is full this weekend, so I won't be able to blog much for a couple of days. I'm attending a friend's wedding in L.A. and a cousin's graduation down in San Diego. It'll be nice to get away from the Sacramento heat for a couple of days.

If you think U.S. Bishops have been abusing their authority in regard to the welfare of children, they have absolutely nothing on the abuse of power practiced by our government through Child Protective Services. Why no media coverage here?

Question to those who find nothing abnormal about homosexuality: How do you define sexually deviant conduct?

With so much attention being directed at the Bishops' conference in Dallas, I've sort had a revelation as to why so many defenders of homosexuality are up in arms about proposals to keep more men with uncontrollable homosexual tendencies out of the priesthood. If "gay" priests pose an imminent danger to children they happen to run across or encounter, just think of the kind of danger that "gay" non-priests (e.g., teachers) pose to children they encounter on a daily basis! Homosexual activists and their defenders simply cannot afford to have people make this realization.

Lakers sweep!! Sacramento Kings fans are still in denial and whining. Sacramento is definitely a city with an inferiority complex.

Yet another reason to hate government schools: the principal of an elementary school in Morgan Hill, CA (near San Jose) one day felt the need to show and tell a class of five year olds how babies are made and the proper medical terms for male and female genitalia. The principal did all of this without informing parents or allowing them an opportunity to opt their children out of the instruction (both of which are required by law).

The Supreme Court has stayed the execution of a retarded inmate until it determines whether such executions are constitutional.

I personally believe it is constitutional, although I don't necessarily favor executing anyone in the absence of some imminent danger to the safety of others.

I find it curious how so many people refer to the Catholic Church in the United States as the "American Church". The problem I have with this term is that it suggests a kind of separateness or independence from the whole. Because there is only one Church, I think it would be more appropriate to refer to her as either the Catholic Church in America or the Catholic Church in the United States.

I'm finally back on line! Woo Hoo! I'll start blogging more extensively tomorrow as its late and I want to catch the Laker game. I'm prayin' for a sweep!

I've always maintained that "homophobia" is nothing but a clever term that leftist political activists use to legitimize (often through the power of big government) homosexuality. This study now confirms it.

Due to work and lack of Internet access over the past week, I haven't been able to blog much lately. I hope to start things going again on Monday.

And the Christian stripper mom's 15 minutes of fame rolls on...

First, Canada gives the world Hockey goons, now they're giving us...Croquet goons?

From Yahoo's Oddly Enough news items:

"It is just not acceptable that Ethiopia, where 62 percent of adults cannot read, where one million children are orphans, is paying $100 million a year to us."

-- Irish rock star BONO, in a speech to the African Development Bank's annual conference urging rich nations to increase aid to Africa and forgive past debuts.

I wonder if people like Bono have really thought about why it is that some of these countries languish in poverty despite continually receiving hundreds of billions of dollars in international aid. The structure of the impoverished country's government certainly plays a significant role. But dare we suggest that culture is a big root reason for why these countries are the way they are? As un-PC as it is, I would.

A key 1961 Vatican document on the ordination of men with homosexual afflictions has been found.

The document provides a clear statement of the Vatican's policy opposing the ordination of men with homosexual tendencies. The relevant section reads: "Advancement to religious vows and ordination should be barred to those who are afflicted with evil tendencies to homosexuality or pederasty, since for them the common life and the priestly ministry would constitute serious dangers."

'Nuff said. Time to clean house...

Big surprise. Call to Action opposes "zero tolerance" policy for child molesting priests.

The writer of this article calls CTA a liberal dissident Catholic organization. I would go further and call them apostate.

The Pope is planning on writing a new encyclical on the Eucharist. In light of the growing number of Catholics who don't even know what the significance of the Eucharist is, let alone believe in the Real Presence, I couldn't be any happier that this encyclical is in the works.

Well, I've decided to go back to the reverse chronology setting for my blog. No real reason...it just has a more easy feel to it.

Interesting Supreme Court trivia: The first Roman Catholic to serve on the United States Supreme Court was Chief Justice Roger Taney from 1836-1864. Chief Justice Taney, of course, is most famous (or infamous) for having penned the Dred Scott decision which essentially said that Black slaves were property and not persons under the Constitution.

The current "religious scorecard" on the Supreme Court finds the Catholic Church leading with three members (Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas), the Episcopal church with two (O'Connor and Souter), the Lutheran church with one (Renquist), one "Protestant" (Stevens), one Jew (Ginsberg), and one "unknown" (Breyer).

The Supreme Court says states have wide immunity when federal agencies investigate complaints about them, then challenge their activities.

Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for the majority, said the framers of the constitution "likely did not envision the intrusion on state sovereignty at issue in today's case." He said the court is "nonetheless confident that it is contrary to their constitutional design."

"By guarding against encroachments by the federal government on fundamental aspects of state sovereignty ... we strive to maintain the balance of power embodied in our Constitution and thus to reduce the risk of tyranny and abuse from either front," Thomas wrote.

(Justice Breyer in dissent) said the majority focuses on "highly abstract" phrases like state dignity and system of federalism instead of things like liberty and due process of law. "They suffer from the disadvantage that they do not actually appear in the Constitution," he said.

Question to Justice Breyer (who penned the decision striking down bans on partial-birth abortions): Where does the word "privacy" appear in the Constitution?

As much as I want to avoid having to do so, it looks as though I may have to attend Mass at a parish in Los Angeles next month. Being the semi-Traditionalist that I am (I've got no problem with the Novus Ordo as long as there is no hand holding during the Our Father and no irreverant guitar folk music being played) I'd appreciate it if anyone reading this can e-mail me the name of a substantially "conservative"/orthodox parish around the San Gabriel Valley I can attend. Much thanks in advance.

Deadline approaches for Catholic colleges and universities to obtain mandatum for theological courses and courses where Church teachings are presented.

I personally think the mandatum is a good idea. I would even go further and tell every school that unless they obtain a mandatum by the deadline, they will no longer be considered a Catholic institution. Oh, if only I could be the pope...

The Supreme Court will determine whether the KKK practice of burning crosses is constitutionally protected speech. The key sub-issue is whether states can prohibit a form of speech when it is specifcially intended to intimidate someone. I suppose the question must then be asked, "What does it mean to intimidate a person?"

A decision is not expected until next year.

Garry Wills' pedophilia problem (link to Traditional Catholic Reflections website).

Wills admits that almost all the cases of sexual predation by priests involved homosexual men—not pedophiles who target children, but immature gay men who slipped through the Church’s filters and got themselves ordained. Yet Wills has fought every initiative launched by Rome to clean up American seminaries, to root out the gay subculture which liberal bishops have fostered, or to enforce the Church’s rigorous condemnation of pornography and promiscuity. The gay subculture—which Michaelangelo Signorile, among others, has acknowledged is replete with erotica celebrating encounters between teen-aged boys and older men—is not the problem for Wills. No, it’s the Church’s "over-strict" morality, its excessive demands, which drives gay priests into the arms of teenagers, which drives gay men into the ranks of the clergy, which drives bishops to ignore and fail to discipline pedophiles.

Unlike other "conservative" Catholic bloggers, I've been hesitant to give any legitimacy to Wills' comments on the Situation, or his criticism of Philip Jenkins' findings that Catholic clergy commit far less acts of sexual abuse than Protestant clergy or American society in general. Now you know why. Wills has an agenda against the Church, and anything he says or writes about it should be looked upon with extreme suspicion...and doubt

Happy Memorial Day! When displaying your flag in memory of those who sacrificed their lives for our freedom, please be aware that there are federal guidelines. Don't worry, there are no penalties for failing to comply.

The normally left-wing San Francisco Chronicle sort of defends Capital Christian Center for its actions toward Christina Silvas, the Christian stripper mom.

BTW, Ms. Silvas has accepted a fully clothed job at a local radio station here in Sacramento. What a bunch of charitable guys, huh?

Here's a pretty nice story that illustrates the growth of the Catholic Church in the South. As you read the column, you'll notice that the writer describes the particular parish under discussion as a "megachurch". This is a term, of course, that is normally associated with large evangelical Protestant churches. Curious...

California school district authorizes "gay" teachers to freely "come out" in front of students.

It certainly does appear as though my home state is well on its way to legalizing "consensual" homosexual pedophilia. BTW, my boss, Brad Dacus, will be appearing on the O'Reilly Factor this coming Tuesday to talk about this district's policy. Catch it if you can!

Question to those who feel homosexuality is an immutable characteristic that should be treated no differently than heterosexuality: Is pedophilia wrong if the minor, or pre-pubescent, child consents to the sexual act?

Mike Hardy responds (italicized) to several of my previous comments (in bold):

After today, Roger Ho just might not be one of my favorite blogs. Three comments;

Pope accepts Weakland's resignation. My question to this Bishop is, even if he didn't molest anyone, does
he believe the homosexual desires he apparently acted upon were disordered? If so, and he is sincerely sorry
for what he did, he should be forgiven.

What if he's just sincerely sorry for what he did?

My reply: If he's sorry he violated his vow of celibacy, I suppose I wouldn't have a problem forgiving him. I would, however, have a problem if he didn't think homosexuality wasn't a disordered affliction.

Also

If the California Legislature votes to pass a bill that allows people engaged in an active homosexual "deathstyle" to be foster parents then I better not see one priest in this state imprisoned for pedophilia or one Bishop sued for trying to cover it up.

At least Mr. Ho doesn't come right out and say that the only thing homosexual foster parents want to do is fondle their charges. (Do I need to bother to say they don't?). It sure as heck looks like he wants you to believe it though. There's also this

My reply: The underlying presumption in Mr. Hardy's comment, of course, is that homosexuality is perfectly normal. It isn't. As such, I would ask Mr. Hardy if he thinks it would be wise for two homosexual acting males to act as the foster parents for a young boy who has been taken out of his home by Child Protective Services because his father was sexually molesting him.

You want to know what CPS' dirty little secret is? Even without the proposed law, children are already being placed in the homes of people who openly practice homosexuality, and more often times than not, these children are being sexually abused, if not by the foster parent, then by one of the foster parent's "acquaitances". But because CPS is allowed to operate by its own rules (an agent can refuse to allow a child to have an attorney present when he/she is asked questions about his/her parents) and is staffed by people who are vehemently anti-Christian and pro-homosexual, a blind eye is often turned. How do I know this? I get calls almost everyday about it, and I work with attorneys who are developing a strategy for suing CPS on a state by state basis.

And in case you're wondering, I'm not really in favor of placing children in the homes of people who, although not "gay", aren't married.

if the priests quoted in this decidedly slanted
article are not acting upon their desires, and they
are upholding the teachings of the Church, they aren't
"gay".

Baloney!

My reply: ...and cheese!

There's a certain over-used 4-letter word I try to avoid on this blog: "hate". Looking at the comments above, coming from a lawyer who is presumably bright enough to know better, you can see why many folks often find that word to be appropriate.

My reply: Ah, yes...the old standard reply of a liberal who is incapable of providing a reasoned response to a comment or statement he disagrees with. If homosexuality was an immutable characteristic on the level of race or ethnicity, MAYBE I would agree with you. But it isn't. Homosexuality is a disordered act eminating from a disordered desire. It is not much different than a man who can only feel satisfied by either masturbating or having as much sex with as many women he can find.

I've decided to change the settings in my blogs so that my earlier posts appear above the later ones. So if you happen to go into the archives and see me a reference to something "below", look up not down.

Woman sues diocese for not allowing her to be a priest; says Church should lose its tax exempt status.

The essential basis for this woman's claim is a horrible 1983 Supreme Court decision involving Bob Jones University.

I don't believe she has a case, but this lawsuit is a great example of how some people, blinded by the pursuit for power and ignorant of Church teachings, are determined to make God in their own image.

Pope accepts Weakland's resignation. My question to this Bishop is, even if he didn't molest anyone, does he believe the homosexual desires he apparently acted upon were disordered? If so, and he is sincerely sorry for what he did, he should be forgiven.

If the California Legislature votes to pass a bill that allows people engaged in an active homosexual "deathstyle" to be foster parents then I better not see one priest in this state imprisoned for pedophilia or one Bishop sued for trying to cover it up.

More papal hand-wringing from squish-con extaordinaire Andrew Sullivan:

The Pope doesn't want to deal with the profound issues of priestly celibacy, ecclesiastical abuse of power and sexual morality that are wreaking havoc in the American church. He has far more important things to do - like complain about some celebrities wearing crucifixes and tend to his sparse flock in Azerbaijan. There are two priests in Azerbaijan. Two. This papacy is now descending into self-parody. While Rome burns ...

Sullivan appears to be suggesting that the Pope needs to address the issues of celibacy and sex abuse because the Church has no positions on them. He is, of course, dead wrong (just read the Catechism). As such, Sullivan may as well demand that the Pope reinvent the wheel given all the damage and deaths that Firestone has caused.

Yeah, the allegations against Bishop Weakland are disturbing, but given his left-of-center doctrinal positions, not all that surprising...if true.

Yes! The National (Non) Education Association gets slapped for violating the religious rights of teachers.

Have not had an opportunity to read this article on heretical Bibles, but I'm kind of curious how non-Catholic Christians -- who generally accept the Bible as the only authority for their faith -- can claim a particular translation is heretical. How can they really know?

I'm getting mighty sick of these illogical Catholic arm-chair quarterbacks who are using the sex-abuse scandals as a vehicle for arguing that the Church is "out of touch" with the world. On the contrary, if the Church in America wasn't so *&%$! concerned about what the world thought of it (e.g., "homophobic", misogynist, prudish) the Church probably wouldn't be in the mess it is in today!

To those Catholics who are leaving the Church that Jesus founded because of the incompetant and arrogant acts of certain members of the hierarchy, l offer to you the following quote from St. Francis de Sales who confronted similar scandals in the Church during his lifetime:

"While those who give scandal are guilty of the spiritual equivalent of murder, those who allow scandals to destroy their faith are guilty of spiritual suicide."

Is the world's largest abortion provider outside of commie-hell China covering up sex crimes against female minors? I smell RICO...

(p.s., Thanks to the reader who gave me the "heads up" on this)

According to this story in the Los Angeles Times, several priests afflicted with homosexual desires are feeling scapegoated by the Church and may leave their positions out of protest.

The attitudes expressed by the priests in this article is a great example of what's wrong with the priesthood in America: like the popular culture, it presumptively equates a disordered psychological desire to an immutable biological characteristic (e.g., race). Contrary to what most liberals and squish conservatives like Andrew Sullivan think, "being gay" is not the same as being black, Chinese, or a midget. This is true both in civil law (i.e., homosexuality is not a "suspect class") and within the Church.

Bottom line is, if the priests quoted in this decidedly slanted article are not acting upon their desires, and they are upholding the teachings of the Church, they aren't "gay". If they understood this, then they wouldn't have any problems with booting out homosexual priests.

Being of Chinese descent, I knew I had to share this website I found on the lives of the Chinese Martyrs JPII canonized in 2000.

Since we're in the week of Pentecost, I thought I'd provide this link on Pentecostalism from the website of uber-Catholic Apologist Dave Armstrong. In a nutshell, Pentecostalism is a heresy that overemphasizes the Holy Spirit and external manifestations as evidence that one has been blessed by God. Although it is most prevalent among Protestant groups, Pentecostalism has been known to infiltrate some quarters of the Catholic Church.

I'm wondering... If a priest or Bishop admits to homosexual desires, but has always remained faihful to the Church's teachings on the issue (including celibacy), then can it be said that that priest or Bishop is homosexually oriented? I tend to think not. Moreover, I tend to believe that homosexuality as an orientation is as much a false concept as "homophobia".

Helpful legal tip of the moment: Parents in California have the legal right to access their childrens' school records regardless of whether the kids are in public or private school. This right is afforded under California Education Code Section 49069.

Well I finally made it to Sunday Mass at the "new" church building that the Sacramento Ecclesia Dei community recently acquired. They had their first Sunday Mass on Mother's Day, but I was out of town.

Because it used to be a Lutheran church, I had suggested (by e-mail) that it be re-named after one of the great Doctors of the Church and Reformation busters, St. Peter Canisius. Needless to say, my suggestion (which was sincere) was dismissed and the building was re-named after St. Stephen.

Although there are renovation plans to make it Catholic, it was kind of interesting to have a traditional Latin Mass in a former Protestant church building. All the pews are slanted in a diagonal direction and there are no kneelers. On second thought, the church looks a lot like some of the buildings I've been in that do clown Masses.

Christian church sponsors motorcycle stunt to attract potential new members.

"Those who came were treated to stunt man Todd Bennick soaring on a motorcycle across the top of four side-by-side buses a dozen times -- including once over the head of pastor Dan Barnes. From inside a red-and-white-striped tent, Barnes preached an hourlong sermon about 'how we are all sinners and, unless we choose God, are going to hell,' the 'Herald-Leader' reported."

God bless their heretical Protestant hearts, but they gotta realize that any new "convert" they get is going to expect to be entertained whenever he/she goes to church on Sundays. Encouraging such an expectation is almost as bad as encouraging people to go to church to scout for a potential husband or wife.

Harvard Law Professor Mary Ann Glendon on EWTN's "The World Over" has suggested that it may not be possible to hold someone like Cardinal Law civily liable to the sex abuse victims who have sued him. The reason is that a Bishop's duty to the laity is dictated by Church canon law, and no civil court in this country may constitutionally interpret or apply the principles of a religious institution.

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case regarding the constitutionality of states posting the names of convicted sex offenders on the Internet.

The case is on appeal from a lower court federal ruling which found the state of Connecticut had "deprived sex offenders of their rights to due process under the Constitution because they did not have an opportunity to show they were no longer a danger to the community."

"'It fails to accommodate the constitutional rights of persons formerly convicted of a wide range of sexual offenses who are branded as likely to be currently dangerous offenders irrespective of whether or not they are,'" it said.

I find this story to be of some relevance to the crisis in the Church insofar it seems to suggest that sex offenders aren't always a danger to repeat their conduct. Good news for Cardinal Law?

I've long been of the opinion that the only way to significantly reduce abortions in this country is to bankrupt the clinics that are providing them through aggressive medical malpractice litigation. With little to no incentive for ever making any money, what "doctor" would ever get into the business of killing babies? There's at least one organization out there with the right idea, and you can find them by clicking here.

Some good straight talk (no pun intended) from a priest in San Diego:

"It seems clear now why little seems to be said against sexual acting out with minors and against homosexual activity either in the clergy or in society from the shepherds of the church. The only sexual teaching that has come from our bishops in the past decade came out of a committee. This bishops' committee presented homosexuality in a neutral light. Its work was so flawed that the Vatican not only intervened by insisting on changes in this document, it told bishops that no committee ever again could issue such documents without the support of the entire body of bishops. Please pray for bishops and priests that we have the courage to be chaste and to preach chastity to you in the fullness of the gospel. Live your own lives chastely. Hold us priests accountable to the promises we expressed when God made us priests. If we're not hearing it from our bishops who were ordained to shepherd us, we need to hear it from you that you will not tolerate sexual misconduct from us, and that with Christ, priests can live properly to bring His grace to you as we were ordained to do."

The Christian stripper mom situation is "resolved".

"A 5-year-old Rancho Cordova girl will return to kindergarten at the Capital Christian School after being expelled last week because administrators discovered her mother works as a nude dancer."

"Christina Silvas, 24, agreed to stop working at Gold Club Centerfolds off Highway 50 for at least the next three weeks so her daughter can graduate from kindergarten and attend the end-of-the-year pool party she had been looking forward to, among other things."

"She has ruled out having her daughter return to the school to attend first grade."

"'I disagree with the way they've handled the situation,' Silvas said. 'I want to find a school less concerned with image and more concerned with the welfare of children.'"


So basically, not only does this woman feel she has done nothing wrong, she apparently believes that her association with a strip club provides a healthy environment for her child. Warped.

The Christian stripper mom situation here in Sacto has certainly garnered a lot of local responses. I actually drive by Capital Christian Center on my way to work everyday and noticed that they have a weekly Friday night singles meeting. I wonder what that must be like right now. "Hi, I'm Bob. Are you a strip, err, an exotic dancer?"

This is wishful thinking, but if anyone out there has read through the 10th Circuit's decision in Adarand Constructors v. Slater, 228 F.3d 1147 (2000), I'd appreciate any opinions or theories you might have on why that court's "narrow tailoring" analysis was wrong.

Kathy Shaidle at relapsedcatholic.com has issues with the pro-life movement:

The trouble with the pro-life movement is image. As long as "pro-life" equals "attention-KMart-shoppers", "salad" made of green jello and marshmallows, SUVs, sensible shoes and 10 dollar hair-cuts as long as it is something only icky old men and post-menopausal ladies care about (tell THAT one to Dr. Freud) it will remain the political equivalent of lawn bowling.

In an age of short attention spans and an "image is everything" culture, I suppose she has a point. But is marketing savvy compatible with the truth? Look what the need to "be more relevant" has done to the liturgy in most American parishes (I've certainly seen my fair share of clown Masses). Indeed, many Christians -- particularly on the non-denominational-evangelical-megachurch-Protestant side -- seem to only go to church because they know they'll be entertained by lots of happy singing and a jumbotron. Style over substance.

Although I think the pro-life movement would greatly benefit by utilizing different, and more attractive, spokesmen, I'm not so sure it is altogether necessary to tone down the current means of delivering the message that abortion results in the killing of innocent life (e.g., showing pictures of aborted babies). After all, sticking your dog's face in its own waste is usually the best way to make it stop taking a dump on your carpet.

In case I don't get around to blogging this weekend, here's something from St. Thomas Aquinas to think about and discuss around the coffee table:

“The natural law is promulgated by the fact that God instilled it into man’s mind so as to be known by him naturally…the natural law is something appointed by reason …It is therefore evident that the natural law is nothing else than the rational creature’s participation in the eternal [i.e., God’s] law.”

Eat your heart out Linda Richmond!

Here in California, a lot of parents who homeschool their children do so by filing what's known as an R4 Affadavit with the state. This form does not give parents permission to homeschool, but rather to establish a private school. Now it looks as though the state's Department of Education is trying to crack down on homeschooling by informing anyone who requests an R4 form that establishment of a private school for the purpose of homeschooling by uncredentialed teachers is illegal. I've requested a written copy of this advisement, and am curious to see what the state DOE is basing its position on.

If you live in California and have a child in one of its God-foresaken public schools, here's a little statute from the state Education Code you might find handy: Section 49091.12. (a) A pupil may not be compelled to affirm or disavow any particular personally or privately held world view, religious doctrine, or political opinion.

One of the drawbacks about working in a primarily evangelical Protestant environment is putting up with the occasional remarks that make a distinction between Catholicism and Christianity (yes, I am well aware that some Catholics do this as well). Everytime I hear this, I just feel like yelling "Hey buddy, the Catholic Church IS Christian; we don't worship statues or Mary; and the early Church did NOT have jumbotrons!"

I suppose I have no problem with the California Supreme Court's recent decision to uphold the right of Catholic Healthcare West to fire someone because he is an outward adherent to Protestantism (CHW actually claims the employee was fired because of poor work performance). The problem I have is with CHW claiming it is a religious institution, when for all intents and purposes, it really isn't. The courts, of course, cannot constitutionally get into determining whether an organization connected with the Catholic Church is adhering to the Church's core prinicples.

With the Pope's birthday coming up, the media, and not a few Cardinals and Bishops, appear to be back in death-watch mode: Will JPII retire if he gets too sick? Who will succeed JPII when he dies?

Ghouls...

I was thinking about Catholic colleges recently, and I realized there isn't one in the Sacramento area. Kind of odd for a city whose name, I think, comes from the word "sacrament". Go ahead and correct me if I'm wrong.

One last thing on the Christian stripper mom story below: What are the odds that she's an adherent to the doctrine of "once saved, always saved"?

Arrrrrgh! Can't those nimrods on the 9th Circuit get anything right?!

"A federal appeals court reversed course Thursday and ruled that anti-abortion activists who created Wild West-style posters and a Web site condemning abortion doctors can be held liable because their works amounted to illegal threats, not free speech."

"[the wall of separation] metaphor…is not a wholly accurate description of the practical aspects of the relationship that in fact exists between church and state...[the Constitution] affirmatively mandates accommodation, not merely tolerance, of all religions, and forbids hostility toward any." Lynch v. Donnelly, 456 U.S. 668, 673 (1984).

The Godless pagans at the ACLU have sued Louisiana for its abstinence before marriage education program. Lawyers claim the program is being used as a vehicle for preaching religion.

I am amazed at how many non-Christians express outrage and charge hypocrisy when they don't believe a professed Christian has complied with a general teaching in the Bible (e.g., not being "judgmental" of others). Since it's more likely than not that these non-Christians have never even read the Bible -- or at the very least the New Testament -- I don't understand where they get off thinking they know what Scripture teaches.

Here's that story I mentioned (below) about the kid who is being kicked out of a Protestant-based Christian school because her mom is a stripper.

As reported by Fox News: "Gays Ask Court to Force State to Issue Marriage Licenses".

The people that have filed this lawsuit are asserting that they have been unconstitutionally discriminated against and deprived of equal protection under the law. To a certain extent, these people are correct. However, because sexual orientation has never been deemed to be an immutable suspect classification (much like race and ethnicity are) the state's "discriminatory" conduct here should be upheld as constitutionally valid. Massachusetts has as much of a right to deny a marriage license to homosexuals as they would to minors.

Supreme Court upholds part of web porn law. Consensus is that nobody won or lost. Only pro-abortion, pro-homosexual rights, anti-Christian Justice Stevens dissents in full. Big surprise.

A federal district court judge in Iowa has determined that a public high school choir cannot sing "The Lord's Prayer" at its graduation ceremony as long as the two students who brought the lawsuit against the school are members of the choir. You guessed it, these two students are atheists.

I haven't had a chance to read the judge's written decision on this yet, but I can already tell I'm not going to agree with it.

Protestant evangelist John Jacobs ends brief second marriage.

Oh yeah, the Church should allow priests to get married...

As a passionate baseball fan (I follow the Dodgers and the Red Sox) I find this story about the possibility of another strike to be disheartening.

Have not been able to find a print story on it yet, but on the way to the office this morning I heard on the radio that a local Protestant megachurch here is Sacramento, Capital Christian Center, will not allow a kindergarten student to continue on at its school next year because her mother is an exotic dancer (i.e., stripper). The funny part of this story is that the mother doesn't believe her "profession" in any way contradicts the teachings of this church. Stay tuned.

Hey, Amy Welborn gave me a link on her page, and I didn't even ask. Cool and thanks!

Another disturbing legal factoid: it is apparently not illegal in California to show or distribute child pornography if it is done for a "legitimate educational activity". If I've read the statute correctly (Penal Code Section 311.1(b)) teachers in elementary schools can show kiddie porn to their students under the guise of education! (Of course, the teachers would still have to comply with all the parental notification requirements for instuctional materials dealing with sex and human sexuality -- See California Education Code Sections 51550-51555).

Interesting, and somewhat disturbing, legal factoid: Possession of child pornography in the state of California is only a misdemeanor. Yeah, you can be put in jail, but not for more than a year.

Well, at least they're honest about what they think about us.

Bible Baptist College -- Springfield, MO


BSST 433. A Survey of Roman Catholicism

This course provides the student with a knowledge of the teachings and belief system of the Roman Catholic church and comparative recent developments resulting from Vatican II. It discusses why the Roman Catholics believe their unique doctrines such as Mary worship, the holy Eucharist and transubstantiation, the other sacraments, the priesthood, the confessional, etc. This course is designed to help students better understand how to witness to Roman Catholics and lead them to the true saving Gospel as presented in the New Testament. 1 semester-2 hours

Supreme Court sidesteps "clergy malpractice" case involving secret voice taping. I don't know how this case will turn out in the lower courts, but if it comes down to whether the priest properly adhered to Church policies, regulations and customs, I expect the case to be thrown out. Courts cannot, and should not, be in the business of interpreting religious doctrines.

Found the following course offered at a Protestant-based school in California called BIOLA (Bible Institute of Los Angeles) University. I'm guessing there aren't any Catholics -- serious ones anyway -- who go there or even bother to apply.


TTTH707 Roman Catholic Theology
Units:2.0
School:Talbot School of Theology
Course Description:
A detailed study of the tenets of Roman Catholicism; reading from representative Roman Catholic literature; particular attention given to the distinctions between Roman Catholic and Protestant doctrines. Especially helpful for those contemplating missionary service in countries dominated by Roman Catholicism. Elective.

A US federal district court has found the land use portion of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 to be facially constitutional. This is significant to the extent that RLUIPA prevents all levels of government from using zoning laws as a pretextual vehicle for discriminating against religious institutions. Kind of ironic that Slick Willy Clinton is the one who signed this bill into law.

I heard on the radio that one of the Bishops, I forget which one, who is being civilly sued for not protecting children from sexual abuse has asserted that priests are essentially self-employed individuals. This is significant, in that one of the elements that must be proven to hold a person liable for negligence is that the person had a duty. If in fact priests are self-employed, then it cannot be said that the Bishops have a legal duty to protect anyone from the conduct of any priest. The problem I see, however, with attacking the duty aspect of negligence here is that Bishops do have a fair amount of control of where a priest is assigned.

Cardinal Law has asserted that moving Fr. Geoghan from one parish to another was primarily based upon the medical advice given to him by trained specialists in the area of psychology. If Cardinal Law and the Boston Archdiocese get off the hook in the civil suits filed by the victims of Geoghan's abuse, blame the medical community, not the diocean lawyers. Since the early 1970's organizations like the American Psychological Association have been co-opted by amoral activists with decidedly left-wing political agendas.

An underlying principle of secular humanism is the concept that truth (particular in regard to reality) is nothing but a social construct. This is the basis for which a reader has argued against the existence of God and why homosexuality cannot be regarded as abnormal or disordered conduct. Two things I would raise: There is not one surviving civilization in the world that regards homosexual conduct as normal. There may be different levels of tolerance for it, but not even the most atheistic non-religious society believes it to be in accordance with the laws of nature. Second, the assertion that truth is a social construct is internally contradictory. Truth cannot be both relative and transcendent at the same time. On a more practical level, who would want to live in an environment where truth is relative and decided by the majority; where what may be rape to one person is simply sexual foreplay for another? Life is ultimately meaningless if truth is a merely a social construct.