| |
 |
|
Contributions to Reader's Forum should be limited to 250 words.
Letters must be signed and must include the writer's address and
phone number for verification purposes. All letters are subject
to editing.
Mail your letter to:
The Catholic Voice
2121 Harrison St., Suite 100
Oakland, CA 94612
FAX: (510) 893-4734
Email letters to:
|
|
|
An honor undeserved
As a conservative, I really don’t mind when liberals disagree with
the conservative position on issues. But I do wish they would take the
time to listen to what conservatives are actually saying before they start
disagreeing. Case in point, letters in Reader’s Forum (June 22)
blasting conservatives for criticizing Notre Dame for inviting President
Obama to speak at its commencement ceremonies.
There were actually two issues involved here. The first was inviting Obama
to speak. The second was honoring him with an honorary law degree. I think
Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League, summed it up best when
he said, “I have no problem with Obama speaking on the campus. .
. . I have no problem with him addressing the law school, being involved
in this symposium. . . . I do have a problem giving him the honor.”
In 2004, the U.S. bishops issued a document, “Catholics in Political
Life” that stated in part, “The Catholic community and Catholic
institutions should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental
moral principles. They should not be given awards, honors or platforms
which would suggest support for their actions.”
Note that the document does not say that only Catholic politicians should
not receive honors. It plainly states that no one should be honored if
they reject fundamental moral principles. If the Church’s teaching
about the sanctity of life and our opposition to abortion is not a fundamental
moral principle, then what is?
Two other schools, Arizona State and the U.S. Naval Academy, also invited
Obama to speak around the same time as his appearance at Notre Dame. Neither
one of them felt the need to award him an honorary degree. So why did
Notre Dame feel the need to give him an award? They must have known that
honoring the most pro-abortion president in American history would outrage
devout Catholics.
One last point, if 75 years ago a Catholic university had wanted to honor
Hitler with an honorary business degree based on his economic miracle
in restoring the German economy, would liberals have objected to conservatives
raising the issue of his treatment of the Jews as grounds for not giving
him an honor? And if not, then what is the difference between how Hitler
treated the Jews and how Obama treats the unborn?
Robert Burke
Antioch
Meeting with Obama
As a Catholic and a graduate of Notre Dame, I was pleased to see both
Father John Jenkins, Notre Dame’s president, and Pope Benedict stand
up to critics who did not want either Notre Dame or the Vatican to meet
with President Obama. I think those who opposed the meetings are “single-issue
zealots.”
Phil Everist
Moraga
Intellectual bankruptcy
Reading the Forum, it is painfully obvious that for many reasons the topic
of life is apparently still controversial within this diocese.
If you are a baptized and confirmed Catholic who attends Mass and recites
the Apostle’s Creed, there should not be any doubt as to what the
correct ethical, moral, righteous, true and just view is when it comes
to the rights of unborn human beings.
There has been a bloody stain on this republic for over 40 years as it
has wrapped itself under the legal cover of our subverted Constitution
to justify prenatal infanticide and wiped out an entire generation of
innocent American lives.
Judges, politicians, bureaucrats and lobbyists for this inexcusable madness
are as guilty as the abortionists for perpetrating this national crime
that debases our culture, violates the Natural Law and mocks the very
foundations of our Constitution. Indeed, of the four sins that cry out
to heaven for vengeance this sin is the first.
And yet, as is evident from this Forum, there are individuals who continue
to label themselves as Catholic but continue to vote for politicians who
enthusiastically support prenatal infanticide.
These individuals justify this by the intellectually lazy fallback of
“moral equivalency.”
The most egregious example of intellectual bankruptcy I have witnessed
in Reader’s Forum are letters that compare the death penalty of
those who have been found guilty of first degree murder to the violent
murder of an innocent child while still in its mother’s womb.
Yet, this continues to be the fallback position of those who defy the
Magisterium and enable the Culture of Death.
What you do in the privacy of the voting booth is one thing, but please
don’t publically justify your moral culpability by pointing at politicians
who favor capital punishment to demonstrate your reasoning. It is intellectually
dishonest moral equivalency, an inconsistent comparison and thus a logical
fallacy.
David Yuers
Walnut Creek
‘Thou shalt not kill’
When will we learn that abortion and the death penalty are the worst sins
that humanity can commit against itself? This is a lesson that must be
repeated over and over again until it penetrates our thick skulls.
“Thou shalt not kill” was written for a reason — to
prevent us from sinning and so thereby saving our own souls.
Is it so difficult to comprehend that we should cherish life?
Lillian Silver
Walnut Creek
Confused and uninformed
Thomas Templeton (Forum, July 6) objected to the frequent publication
of Reader’s Forum contributions from individuals who dissent from
Catholic teaching.
I respectfully disagree with Mr. Templeton on this point. It is important
for faithful Catholics to be aware of dissent in our diocese. If The Voice
stopped publishing dissenting letters, readers might be lulled into thinking
“all is well” and incorrectly conclude that our diocesan catechetical
efforts and resources are sufficient to meet the need.
With every publication of the Reader’s Forum, it is painfully clear
that many of our brothers and sisters are confused and uninformed about
basic Catholic teaching. Mr. Templeton correctly points this out in his
commentary. However, the solution is not censorship.
The Voice should continue publishing these dissenting viewpoints. Such
letters offer a “teachable moment,” an opportunity for The
Voice to provide a brief statement citing correct Catholic teaching and
references so no one is confused.
We are fortunate to have Catholic radio (AM 1260) and Catholic television
(EWTN) available in our diocese. With some fine tuning, The Catholic Voice
can also become a powerful resource to help us “know Christ better
and make Him better known.”
Mike McDermott
Concord
The opinions expressed in letters to Reader's Forum
are the writers and do not necessarily reflect the views of The
Catholic Voice or the Oakland Diocese.
back
to top
home
|
