Louis R. Avallone

Category: Religion

  • Doesn’t Make Sense

    None of this fits together. None of it. It’s like Mark Twain said, “It’s no wonder that truth is stranger than fiction. Fiction has to make sense.”

    So, here’s the truth: Last month, 183 members of the House of Representatives voted against a bill in Congress that would have imposed penalties on abortion providers who didn’t give medical care to any child who was born alive, after an abortion procedure. These 183 elected officials chose to make the intentional killing of a born-alive child inconsequential, insofar as there are currently no criminal penalties, or even fines, for such an unconscionable, immoral, and brutal act.

    Those 183 men and women opposing this bill (called the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act) would not subject abortionists to even a fine. I mean, if you’re late with a payment to your credit card company, you pay a late fee. If you don’t return your library book on time, you have to pay a reconnection fee. But if you intentionally kill a born-alive child, while in the commission of an abortion, you get to go home for the day, pick-up some dinner, watch some Netflix, AND come back the next day, where you will likely do it all over again, and get paid, too.

    In fact, this happens more often than you may have ever considered. According to the Centers for Disease Control (“CDC”), between 2003 and 2014, 588 infant deaths were reported by abortion clinics with the cause of death being “termination of pregnancy, affecting fetus and newborn.” And that’s just the numbers from the clinics who reported these killings at all. After all, as doctor for Planned Parenthood explained, reporting born-alive, infant deaths depends on “who’s in the room” when the baby is born, and who will keep silent about it all.

    But you remember Planned Parenthood, right? Back when they admitted that babies born alive, after an abortion procedure, were sometimes being killed, and then sold to medical research firms? You remember when Planned Parenthood’s medical directors admitted to Congress that their abortionists were sometimes altering their abortion procedures, just to increase the likelihood of a live birth, because intact babies can be sold for even more money than if they weren’t?

    But whether the CDC’s numbers are understated or not – if there’s 1 child lost, that’s too many. The fact that 183 members of the House of Representatives voted to allow this conduct, without even so much as imposing a fine to be paid is gut-wrenching.

    Nevermind that all 183 opposition votes were Democrats. They are children of God, nevertheless. They are the same ones that ran for Congress and stopped by one afternoon to wedge their campaign flyer into your front door. They had the slick websites which showed them kissing babies, craving apple pie, and posing for idyllic portraits with their family, all to say, “You can trust me.”

    But who among those 183 Democrats would possibly try to justify the killing of a born-alive child? Or would even tell their children that you shouldn’t try and help someone when they are in need?
    It’s not clear whether such a bill will advance in the Senate. It would likely require at least 60 votes to break a filibuster there. President Donald Trump has already praised House Republicans for passing the bill, saying “I call upon the Senate to pass this important law and send it to my desk for signing.”

    You see, being pro-life is more than being anti-abortion. It’s not just supporting a political candidate who shares your views. Being pro-life means we are advocates for life because there is greatness within each of us, and we are created in the image of God.

    But when we stop protecting the weak and the vulnerable, we’re extinguishing them – instead of caring for the least among us all.

  • For Crying Out Loud

    For Crying Out Loud

    Good grief, Charlie Brown!

    In December 1965, nearly 15 million viewers, or one-half of the television viewing audience, tuned in to watch “A Charlie Brown Christmas.” It has become the longest-running cartoon special in history, but it almost was canceled before it ever was aired. You see, the CBS network executives were less than impressed. Aside from the technical criticisms, resulting from a rushed production schedule, the executives did not want to have Linus reciting the story of the birth of Christ from the Gospel of Luke. It was thought that viewers would not want to be preached upon by an animated cartoon, especially from Biblical passages. Obviously, after 50 years of airing every Christmas, receiving an Emmy and a Peabody award, those CBS executives got it wrong.

    “There will always be an audience for innocence in this country,” said Charlie Brown’s creator, Charles Schulz. Nonetheless, the religious celebration of Christmas continues to face trivialization by an increasingly vocal and secular strain of society today.

    Retailers have tried calling Christmas trees, “holiday” or “family” trees. They’ve pressed-on with “Happy Holidays,” even though 67 percent of Americans prefer the greeting, “Merry Christmas.” Advertisers have pushed out “Christ” from Christmas and pushed on with “X-Mas.”

    Last year, a group calling themselves “American Atheists” purchased billboards that proclaimed, “Go ahead and skip church! Just be good for goodness’ sake. Happy holidays!” The year before that, another activist group spent big bucks to purchase a billboard advertisement in New York City’s Times Square – a 40 by 40 image that asks, “Who needs Christ?” and answers that question with “Nobody.” In 2012, there was another Times Square billboard that urged viewers to, “Keep the Merry. Dump the Myth,” with an image of Christ beneath a photo of Santa Claus.

    And as our 2016 elections fade, future candidates for public office will increasingly find that secular voters are the fastest growing minority group in America, all who are committed to keep religion out of government.

    After all, the number of people in America who believe in God has dropped almost 10 percent since 2009. And in our public schools, there is increasingly no room for recognition of any faith whatsoever, Christianity or otherwise. And more than 10% of the U.S. House of Representatives believe that the mere presence of our national motto (“In God We Trust”) on currency violates their Free Speech and Free Exercise Clause Rights.

    Goodness gracious. So what is it about Christ, or Christmas, that is so offensive?

    Well, you see, it’s not about Christmas at all – it’s Christ that’s the issue. While many might deny the existence of God, it’s much more difficult to deny Jesus, for whom we have historical evidence of his existence, even from secular sources that are outside of the Bible. Still, the life of Jesus is so powerful, and his words so meaningful, that even atheists cannot seem to get Him out of their minds. They must find it helpful to mock the religious beliefs of Christians everywhere with their billboards, even as they encourage non-Christians to do the same.

    Last year was the deadliest, worst year for Christian persecution than any other time in modern history – over 7,000 were killed. Additionally, over 2,400 churches were attacked, damaged or destroyed last year, which is more than double the number from the year before that.

    Even while it is true that 96 percent of Americans celebrate Christmas, only 51 percent consider it a “religious” holiday – and that number is declining. That means that the odds are pretty good, that when you are out Christmas shopping, the person ahead of you in line, or the person behind you, probably doesn’t consider Christ’s birth as the significant “reason for the season.”

    They may not realize either that buying more and more expensive gifts or all that “stuff” we buy at Christmas doesn’t mean we “care” more about our family or friends, especially when the teachings of Christ can demonstrate that love so much more than buying another gizmo or gadget. In fact, the person in line with you may not know the life of Christ very well at all, or his teachings of tolerance, and respect for one another and the goodness of life. Or of gratitude, and humility.

    So, while Charlie Brown first asked the question in 1965 on national television, “Isn’t there anyone, who knows what Christmas is all about?!” The answer has been the same for over 2000 years – it’s Christ. And for crying out loud, we ought to put that up on a billboard too.

    Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

     

  • We Talk About the Power of Prayer

    We Talk About the Power of Prayer

    We talk about the power of prayer. About how it can transform a life, enlighten and guide us. Inspire us.

    Many refer to themselves as “prayer warriors”, and they belong to prayer groups in churches all across our country, coming together to pray – everyday. Praying for healing. For peace. For wisdom. For the poor, and those who are hurting.

    But is prayer enough? The Bible tells us that faith alone, without works, is dead, “What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works?” And yes, oh Lord yes, we need both this year, if we ever needed them, for sure.

    This was no more evident in recent days than in the miraculous relief efforts of churches from all over our country, who rolled up their sleeves, packed up 18-wheelers that were full of supplies, drove into Baton Rouge and assisted those who lost nearly every material possession they owned during the historic flooding there.

    The truth is, though, our country has always needed its churches, and prayer. You may not have needed it – but our country has – and still does. It’s right there in the Declaration of Independence, hiding in plain sight. It says, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

    Did you catch it? The reason that prayer is so very needed for our country, and our very way of life, is that without the Creator, there are no rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. None. And because government’s duty is to protect these rights for us, it’s necessary that we elect men and women who pray. You don’t necessarily have to, but those whom we elect must.

    After all, if we continue to elect those who don’t acknowledge our rights come from our Creator, or that there is even a Creator, at all, how can these elected officials possibly pretend to protect our rights, if they don’t believe the Creator is the source of those rights to begin with?

    Put another way, we are all free to believe what we wish, or not to believe at all. This isn’t about your religion, and frankly, that’s a personal matter, anyways. But what matters to every single one of us is that we elect a government that acknowledges our rights come from God because, if they don’t come from God, they must necessarily come from man – and what man can give, man can also take away.

    There is more reason for concern here, though. The share of Americans who identify as atheists has roughly doubled in the past several years – and that’s just the beginning of it. In fact, for every 1 admitted atheist in our country, there are three more Americans that say they do not believe in God or a universal spirit, either.

    This declining faith is most evident in our young people. Consider that 70% of those ages 65 and older express an absolutely certain belief in God or a universal spirit, but only about half of adults under 30 feel the same way (51%).

    In fact, it is estimated that by 2050 the percentage of the U.S. population attending church will be almost half of what it is today. Those that profess no particular spiritual belief already make up 21% of our electorate – and that is up 50% from 2008.

    Non-believers even make-up a larger voting block than Catholics, than Protestants, or any other religious group out there.

    And for some reason, they also make up a significant portion of the Democratic Party – more than 25% of Democrats are non-believers. This influence was reflected in the 2012 Democratic Party Platform which did not mention, whatsoever, our Creator, in any shape, form, or fashion. In the Democrat’s 2016 platform, there were three (3) shorthand references to God, but in the context of an individual’s “God-given” potential (but no mention of any redeeming value that religion provides to society).

    But if it is too unholy of an idea to replace “God” with the arbitrary power of government officials, who pretend to know what is best for us, that limit what we can say, and that minimize the expression of our faith, then prayer alone is likely not enough for you.

    Instead, we must also elect men and women who believe in God (even if you don’t), to preserve our unalienable rights. And not because any of us are less holy, but because elected officials who already believe in God, already know it will never be their right, nor has it ever been, to decide yours.

  • Can’t Get Comfortable With That

    Can’t Get Comfortable With That

    They are not “comfortable” voting for Donald Trump, they say. Ted Cruz. John Kasich. Lindsey Graham. And now more than 75 Republicans have signed a letter urging that the Republican Party spend the party’s money on helping secure the Republican majority in the Senate, and not on Donald Trump’s presidential campaign.

    You are not comfortable? Not comfortable? Pardon me, but I don’t give a damn about your comfort. This election isn’t just about you, or your namby-pamby “wow, I’m a big kid now” culture of “what’s in it for me”.

    How “comfortable” was the First Infantry Division when they hit the beach at Omaha, knowing they would not likely survive the German snipers firing at them, as their landing craft doors swung open, during the D-Day invasion in 1944?

    How “comfortable” is the mother or father who watches their son or daughter go off to war, not knowing exactly where they are, or if they will ever see them again? Not knowing if they are enduring heat and hunger, or surviving mortar fire and roadside bombs?

    How “comfortable” were the American soldiers in the Revolutionary War, who were merely a group of civilians fighting the most formidable and professional army in the world, not to mention the world’s greatest navy? Or how “comfortable” were those who signed our Declaration of Independence, sacrificing their own lives and property, for the belief that our rights are granted unto us by our Creator, while committing High Treason against Great Britain and their sovereign, King George the 3rd, in the process?

    If this is the type of discomfort you feel you are experiencing, perhaps you can muddle through the pain, and choose the candidate most likely to protect our Constitutional principles, because it’s what our country needs, and not just because of what you want.

    Yes, we are all grieving the loss of the America we grew up in, and the erosion of the fundamental values that provided us all with a sense of security, identity and purpose as proud Americans. No, we didn’t always agree, but at least we felt like we could make a difference.

    And now, we no longer feel in control of our own lives. Well, how “comfortable” does that make you feel?

    How “comfortable” are you that government has seemingly crept into every nook and cranny, and that we can’t choose our doctor anymore, or the curriculum being taught in our schools, or even practice our religion in some instances, without being bullied into silence. How “comfortable” are you that we can’t even recite the Pledge of Allegiance “under God” without being sued? Or that we’re paying more and more taxes each year, and that household incomes are the lowest they’ve been in 20 years, and that 94 million Americans are not even working right now – how “comfortable” does that make you feel?

    How “comfortable” are you that any human being, whether they are Secretary of State or the secretary in your office at work, would lie to a grieving mother about how and why their son lost his life, like Hillary Clinton did about Benghazi?

    Some say they still cannot vote for Trump. He doesn’t look or sound the part. Some are considering voting for a Libertarian Party candidate, or not voting at all. Some have even said that they will vote for Hillary. Admittedly, they just aren’t “comfortable” with any of the choices.

    If this describes you, please reconsider how “comfortable” you have been over the past eight (8) years because a Hillary Clinton administration will essentially be the second game in a double-header of a major league baseball game where both teams end up losing.

    She wants to raise taxes on the middle class (saying everyone should pay their “fair share”) and she will continue deficit spending and increasing our federal debt with a $275 billion federal investment in public works spending. Her national security policy will be more of the same that allowed ISIS to gain power and become the world’s most dangerous organization, and her immigration policy will simply promote more sanctuary cities where people in our country illegally can evade prosecution of our laws and conceal themselves long enough to attack our homeland, all while political correctness continues to run amuck and silence the voices of those who should be heard.

    Not everything that feels “comfortable” is what we need, and not everything that is “uncomfortable” should be avoided. In fact, if you look back at your life, the times that you are most grateful for are often those times where you were not “comfortable” because it was in those times that you became stronger. And I believe the same can be true for our country.

    Trump may not be your choice, but he’s the only choice that makes sense. It’s a catch-22 situation, for many, many, principled people. But if you protest his candidacy, you will elect Hillary, and inadvertently preserve the very conditions that gave rise to his campaign (and your objections to it), in the first place. By not voting for Trump, you actually make it less likely that other principled conservatives will ever have a shot again, at least not anytime soon, to be elected to the highest office in our land.

    By then, unfortunately, it may just be too late. And as for me, I can’t just get “comfortable” with that.

  • In 2009

    In 2009

    In 2009, newly elected President Obama said, “Elections have consequences, and at the end of the day, I won.” Unfortunately, though, it is the unborn that has continued to lose. Even as the number of abortions are continuing to drop nationwide – 31,000 fewer abortions last year – and while 53 abortion clinic closed in 2015 alone, black children are still being aborted at 5 times the rate of white children. Abortion is the number-one killer of black lives in America.

    And yet, Planned Parenthood (where a third of their facilities operate in primarily black neighborhoods) continues to receive almost exclusive Democrat Party support and protection, plus over a half-billion dollars in taxpayer money. Actually, taxpayer funding accounts for 41% of Planned Parenthood’s overall revenue.

    And while it claims to provide other, vital medical services for women, abortions make up 94% of Planned Parenthood’s pregnancy services, even though abortions performed to save the life of the mother occur less than 1% of the time. In fact, even when you combine all of the non-life threatening health issues, that number increases only to 2.8%.

    What that means to you and me is that there are over 1 million babies whose lives were taken last year for reasons that were wholly unrelated to the health of the mother. This is important because being pro-life about babies should not come at the expense of being pro-life about women. Obviously, when two lives are threatened and only one can be saved, doctors must always save that life. But this argument – that abortion must remain legal to protect the health of women – is a smokescreen because those instances are almost non-existent, according to the federal government’s own statistics.

    Nevertheless, the pro-life community is making progress in the efforts to protect the unborn, and to support life, even after the past 7 years of pro-abortion policies from Washington, D.C. The incessant prayers, the marches, and events like Bishop Duca’s Annual Pro-Life Banquet, or the Ark-La-Tex Pregnancy Crisis Center Dinner, keep the candle of this miracle-in-progress lit – and burning brightly for even those who might not yet know why we believe what we believe.

    There have been some recent legal developments regarding Louisiana’s Unsafe Abortion Protection Act, which went into effect on September 1, 2014 and I wanted to briefly mention those. This is regarding the law that requires physicians who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of their facility. As you may know, the law was authored by State Representative Katrina Jackson, from Monroe, to combat what she calls “the number one genocide in the African-American community: abortion.”

    And despite being passed with large majorities in the Louisiana legislature, and after being signed into law by the Governor in 2014, abortion providers have repeatedly fought back. This past January, they met with some success, as a federal district judge said that requiring abortionists to have admitting privileges at a local hospital violated the constitutional right to an abortion established by the Supreme Court in 1973.

    Then, late last month, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals went the other direction, and blocked THAT decision, which allowed the law to go into effect –namely, requiring abortionists to have admitting privileges at a local hospital.

    But no sooner than this law was in effect, the U.S. Supreme Court, moved to temporarily block the law from going into effect. This allowed two recently closed abortion clinics to reopen for the business.

    Although we might need to draw a diagram to keep up with the legal back-and-forth here, stay with me.

    You see, this same law was enacted by the State of Texas, before ours, and their law is currently before the U.S. Supreme Court to determine its constitutionality. Meanwhile, there are seven (7) other states with similar laws, just like ours, that no doubt will be affected by the ruling in the Texas matter (which is expected at the end of June).

    And with the death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, there are only eight (8) justices now. If there was a tie vote in our case, our Louisiana state law would remain in place and enforceable. The importance of the next Supreme Court justice being pro-life cannot be understated, especially since Justice Scalia was perhaps the most passionate abortion opponent, among all of the justices.

    And one last note: If you feel that being pro-choice is different than being pro-abortion (because you wouldn’t choose it for yourself, but it’s okay for someone else), please remember pro-choice voters and pro-abortion voters, are almost always two peas in a pod, when it comes to voting on election day. But whichever way you nuance it, you either oppose legal protection for the innocent unborn, or you don’t.

    So, yes, President Obama was right on this one. Elections do have consequences, and as the November election approaches, the consequences of this election for the unborn, perhaps like never before, is truly a matter of life or death.

  • Recently…

    Recently…

    Would you rather “feel” better, or “do” better? Your answer will tell a great deal about you, and may even help predict who will be elected our next President in November.

    You see, our brain circuitry is such that emotion overrides reason, and much more easily than the other way around. And while many voters think they are casting their vote based on their logical analysis of the issues, many really aren’t – at least not today, in our non-stop streaming, round-the-clock, always on, television, radio, and Internet news cycles.

    Because of the amount of available information to us on the issues, and the speed at which it is dispatched to us, there simply isn’t enough time in the day to analyze every new development or alert. Suddenly, then, our country is moving away from a cautioned, logical analysis of the issues, to a quicker, knee-jerk, emotion-based decision making process, instead.

    And if you said you would rather “feel” better, than “do” better, perhaps that is an indication that you’ve thrown in the towel, so to speak. Maybe now you’ve decided you won’t try keeping up with the constant barrage of breaking news and will move towards rely more on how a candidate, or an issue, “feels” to you, instead.

    It’s just a basic human principle, really. We like things that make us feel good. We avoid stuff that feels bad. Here are some examples of how emotion-based decisions are dominating our nation’s most pressing issues:

    You want to improve national security, but don’t want to engage in profiling all Muslims, or to turn away refugees coming into our country from Syria.

    You support the Bill of Rights, including the 2nd Amendment, but you feel that increased gun control legislation must be passed in order to “do something” about the rising gun violence in our communities.

    You believe that universal healthcare, controlled by the government, actually reduces access and increases medical costs for millions of Americans, but you don’t want to deny medical care to anyone, or for anyone not to be able to get the medicines they need to feel better.

    You know that the unemployment rate always increases whenever the minimum wage is increased, especially among the poorest Americans, but you feel like everyone is entitled to a living wage, and the dignity of supporting your family.

    You believe in the freedom of religion, but you don’t feel it’s right for any business owner to refuse service to a customer because of their sexual orientation.

    You know the poverty rate has remained unchanged over the past 50 years in our country, even after spending $22 trillion, but you don’t feel right about any legislation aimed to cut entitlement spending because the poorest among us deserve a “hand up.”

    We could go on and on here. All of these examples represent impossible choices for many voters, and the difference is between doing what we know is better, or doing what makes us “feel” better.

    It makes us “feel” better not to profile and to welcome refugees who are suffering, but according to the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”), we could “do” better if we did profile. In fact, a former DHS employee testified that the San Bernardino terrorist attack could have been prevented if the Obama administration had not shut down his surveillance investigation on the grounds that he was profiling Islamic groups.

    You may “feel” better to support new gun control legislation because “something” must be done, but study after study has shown that nations with the strongest gun control laws have substantially higher murder rates than those that do not. Chicago has the toughest gun control laws in the country, for example, and they have the highest violent crime rates, as well.

    You may “feel” better to support universal healthcare coverage, but since Obamacare was enacted, there are 31 million Americans who still can’t afford medical care (and won’t for the foreseeable future).

    You might “feel” better advocating for a “living wage,” but the recent increased minimum wage law in Seattle resulted in the loss of 1,000 restaurant jobs within a month following that wage increase.

    Again, we could go on and on here, comparing how we may “feel” with the actual facts. The question is, “How much damage to our country, or lost opportunities to “do” better, is this shift to “feeling” better costing us?”

    How many more laws will the “feel” better crowd propose, that overrule our personal freedoms, from the freedom to worship to our right to bear arms? How much more of our national security will be compromised, because of political posturing? How long will we continue to remain silent, as hard work continues to be replaced with greater and greater entitlements by those who want to “feel” better? How much longer will we allow the government to run our lives based on what they “feel” is best for us, instead of us running them?

    No, good decisions don’t always “feel” good – not at first, at least – but that sure doesn’t stop them from being the best ones, either. Happy New Year to you all, and may God bless America.

  • What’s Past is Prologue

    What’s Past is Prologue

    Can we talk for a minute? It’s about this governor’s race. Now, please understand, I’m the first one in line to expect a higher standard from myself, as well as from those whom we cast our ballots to lead our cities, represent us in Baton Rouge, and make our nation’s laws in Washington. But having high standards, and electing less-than-perfect public servants are not mutually exclusive, either.

    It’s entertaining for some to judge, and even ridicule, David Vitter for being…well…a sinner, or having otherwise made a mistake, or a regret that he wishes he could have gone back and had a second chance to do all over again. But that hardly makes him any different than any of us. He did not blame others, or his circumstances, as so many others in our culture are prone to do today. He didn’t allege there was some conspiracy against him. He said, “I am completely responsible. And I am so very, very sorry.” He also said he had “asked for and received forgiveness” from God and his wife in confession.

    Now, for Catholics (and Vitter is Catholic), confession is more than telling your sins to God on your way to work, or in the shower, and Him forgiving you. Confession for Catholics is a sacrament before a priest, instituted by Jesus Christ in his love and mercy, which permits all of us to reconcile with the church, and repent. Vitter did just that – and he did so many, many years ago, in fact.

    But do we all need to be defined by where we came from, or should it be about where we’re going? Unless you allow it to, why does your future need to look like your past? Abraham Lincoln had failed in business and had a nervous breakdown before being elected President. Lucille Ball was dismissed from drama school with a note saying she was “wasting her time.” The Beatles were first told by a recording studio that their sound was awful and that “guitar music was on the way out.” Michael Jordan was cut from his high school basketball team. Thomas Edison was told by a teacher that he was “too stupid to learn anything”

    The point is that if our past equaled the future, what chance – what hope – would any of us have to better ourselves, redeem our lives, or enrich those around us? Those who have reservations about voting for Vitter, not because of his politics, but because of his past, may need to be reminded that no man or woman is without a defect, or burden, or is wise enough to sidestep the effects of mistakes and bad decisions that we’ve all made in the past. A more accurate indicator of someone’s future, however, is the present moment, and what they are doing right now.

    Still, there is a reader out there who says, “Well, if Vitter did that 15 years ago, he’s probably going to do that again, and embarrass us because the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior.” While that is relatively true, it turns out that such conventional wisdom about the “past being prologue” is a gross oversimplification, according to psychologists who study this subject.

    For example, if you smoke a pack of cigarettes everyday for a year, your past is a pretty good indicator of your cigarette smoking tendencies for the near future. Same for exercise habits or drinking alcohol. That makes sense to me.

    However, over longer periods of time, it turns out that these kinds of high frequency, habitual behaviors can actually be changed forever. For example, someone stops smoking at age 55, even though they have smoked everyday since they were a teenager. Or a heavy drinker chooses his family, over the bottle, spends the rest of his or her life sober.

    People can change. You know that. And if not voting for David Vitter has virtually nothing to do with his politics, and everything to do with his imperfection, despite him remaining “clean and sober” and solidly representing our conservative values over the past 15 years, then here’s your stone, some Windex, and some paper towels – for that glass house you’ve built.

    No, I’m not making you the issue, or the bad guy. It’s just sometimes we seem to be more and more critical of others and want to correct their imperfections, yet we are slow to mend our own (no, I’m not going to point out yours, or mine, right now). We judge others, too often without mercy, and yet pardon ourselves, too often without question. This is one of the reasons that reality television shows are so popular: It often makes us feel better about ourselves, as we watch and think to ourselves, “At least that’s not me.”

    And maybe that’s what’s going on here. Maybe many of us are looking at David Vitter and saying, “At least that’s not me, and I’m going with the other guy, instead.”

    Well, I just hope on judgment day, God doesn’t say the same thing to me.

     

     

  • Doing Hard Time

    Doing Hard Time

    It’s ironic. Just last month the ACLU sent a letter to the superintendent of Bossier Parish Schools demanding that “religious proselytization” at Airline High School stop immediately, especially with the principal’s unrepentant use of the phrase, “May God Bless You All.”

    Then there’s the Oklahoma Supreme Court who ruled during the summer that displaying the Ten Commandments outside the state capitol building violated a provision in the Oklahoma state constitution and therefore, the display had to be moved. In Alabama, a sheriff’s department was pressured into removing “Christian” decals from their patrol cars which read, “Blessed are the Peacemakers,” after being threatened with a lawsuit, and realizing the time and money it would take to defend themselves.

    Atheists continue to seek removal of “In God We Trust” from our nation’s currency, and an increasing number of groups are asking our school districts to remove the words “under God” from the Pledge of Allegiance recited by students. There’s even a Facebook page to banish the singing of “God Bless America” from the seventh-inning stretch of major league baseball games.

    Yes, it’s ironic. You see, it seems the only place in America where religious freedom is not being diminished, nor otherwise being dismantled, is in the very place where residents do not have full Constitutional rights to begin with – our prisons.

    While prison inmates lose many of their civil rights, the freedom of religion is not one of them. In fact, inmates are overwhelmingly spiritual, comparatively speaking – only 1 in every 1,000 prisoners will identify themselves as atheist, compared to 1 in every 100 Americans within the general population.

    And the importance of religion in prisons is recognized so much so that almost all of the nation’s 1,100 state and federal prisons employ at least one chaplain or religious services coordinator – nearly 1,700 professional chaplains in all. Could you imagine if every school in our country had a chaplain or religious services coordinator?

    Of course, the role of religion in prisons is not breaking news, really. The Gospel of Matthew says, “I was in prison, and you visited me.” And Saint Paul, in his letter to the Romans, explains, “The love of God has been poured out in our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us.” Essentially, whenever we have this sense of connectedness or belonging with other people, our physical and emotional health necessarily improves and when we get better on the inside – everything just tends to get better on the outside, as well.

    And the formula works, indeed. The rate of infractions while in prison, and the recidivism rate following their release from prison, is lower for inmates who have taken part of a prison fellowship program, compared to those who did not. In fact, recidivism rates are as low as 13% for inmates who participated in faith-based programs, compared to 50% who did not and unfortunately return to prison within three years from being released.

    In addition to one’s spiritual development, the cost of administering faith-based services for each inmate – about $250 per year – is a fantastic return on the dollar, especially when our prisons are greatly overpopulated and where the average taxpayer cost of care for each inmate is $31,286 per year.

    It’s a cruel reality for many people of faith in the general population that the freedom of religion may be most voraciously protected, and nurtured for growth, by our prison system, while our general population culture convenes daily to sanitize our schools, stadiums, courthouses, statehouses, and public squares from reference to any religious beliefs whatsoever.

    And even though the U.S. Supreme Court has declared that Americans have a right to hold religious beliefs and not be forced by the government to act in ways that violate those beliefs, we nonetheless are being restricted to fewer and fewer venues to act in ways that support our beliefs – from reading the Bible in schools to even saying “God Bless You,” whenever someone sneezes.

    If religion can help create more peaceful prisons and significantly reduce recidivism by connecting inmates spiritually, and making them far less likely to hurt others or to do wrong, then it seems that every cultural effort to disconnect the rest of us spiritually would have the opposite effect – making us all more likely to hurt others or do wrong.

    There are lots of folks out there who will read this column and begin pointing out the fallacies of embracing religion in the same spirit as our prisons do. They will also cite Constitutional and other legal arguments, one after another, on why it cannot be done the same.

    Legally, they may be right. But all I know is this, in the words Frederick Douglas: “It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men,” and I can’t figure out for the life of me, why a minority of Americans are so hell bent on doing it the hard way, and making us all do hard time, in the process.

  • The Shepherd Tends His Flock

    The Shepherd Tends His Flock

    Pope Francis is only the fourth Pope to visit the United States. As he visits Washington, D.C., New York City, and Philadelphia, the crowds who come to see him stretch for as long as the eye can see. Many say that millions will crowd out one another to merely catch a glimpse of the Pope because our country, as well as across the world, are starving for spirituality. In fact, Mother Theresa once said that the poverty in the West is a different kind of poverty – one of spirituality, adding that “there’s a hunger for love, as there is a hunger for God.”[br]

    After all, Jesus had said the same, saying, “I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty….” And it is perhaps this point that explains why so many millions, even those who are not of the Catholic faith, will get up at 4:00 a.m. in the morning, or travel thousands of miles, if only to be in the presence of the Pope.[br]

    And as Catholics, we believe that whenever the Pope teaches a doctrine on faith or morals, and asserts his official authority as leader of the Church, he is to be held infallible, or otherwise incapable of error. But when the Pope makes statements about what many feel are political matters, and not of faith or morality, many say that the Pope is still infallible, and should not be questioned, especially by Catholics.[br]

    Recently, the Pope advocated for the U.S. to open its borders to refugees from around the world, saying, “When the stranger in our midst appeals to us, we must not repeat the sins and the errors of the past.” Is this a truth? Or is that his opinion?[br]

    Surely he knows that 80% of our population growth is already from immigrants that are in our country, and we spend $113 billion on the effects from illegal immigration, and that we’ve even set-up sanctuary cities for illegal immigrants by immunizing them from the laws of our very own country.[br]

    And surely he knows that our country is nearly $20 trillion in debt, and that unchecked illegal immigration has continued to overcrowd our schools and made learning more difficult for our children, since we know that smaller schools tend to have higher attendance and graduation rates, less violence, higher grades, and test scores.[br]

    I’m sure he knows that continuing to allow illegal immigration to grow chaotically, without a plan, means that our nation’s ability to care for the sick, regardless of their citizenship, will continue to decline, as hundreds of hospitals are now closing or reducing treatment services because the uninsured number of illegal immigrants continues to grow. The average wait time in a California emergency room, for example, is now 4 hours (and growing).[br]

    When he blames the Syrian refugee crisis on the “the god of money” or on a “bad, unjust” socio-economic system, but doesn’t comment on the Islamic State that has now taken over half of Syria, a third of Iraq and is expanding out into Gaza, Libya and Afghanistan – is this a truth, or is that his opinion?[br]

    He has criticized global leaders for their failure to combat climate change. But is it his opinion that the earth is warming, or it is a truth? Surely he knows that in 2014 there was record ice in Antarctica, record snowfall, record cold, and that the oceans are rising much less than predicted (95% less). Surely he know that nature produces much more CO2 than man, and that 99% of scientists don’t believe in man-made global warming.[br]

    Despite this all, how can we question the Pope if he is infallible? This illustrates the common confusion between infallibility and imperfection. After all, there are many Popes that even disagree with one another. Infallibility does not make a Pope’s private, theological opinions become “truth”. He learns the “truth” as we all do – through careful study. His infallibility, according to the Catholic Church, applies to “solemn, official teachings on faith and morals.”[br]

    Whether you believe or not that the Pope is infallible on matters such as immigration or global warming, we simply cannot have it all. Life is a series of trade-offs. You can’t have all of the joys of having children, and then have lots of time for yourself, or your career. You can’t eat poorly, and then have good health. You can’t speak up and remain silent.[br]

    So when the Pope offers his comments, surely he also expects us to consider there are trade-offs to achieve the great works we are called by God to accomplish, such as extending mercy to those who are suffering and coming to our country, while making sure we have a sustainable system in place to transition them from pain to prosperity.[br]

    After all, we are not called to merely accept our circumstances, but to change the things we can change. As Pastor Joel Osteen wrote, “You were not created to just get by with an average, unrewarding, or unfulfilling life. God created you to leave your mark on this generation.”[br]

    And we can do that. The path we take to do so may be different than Pope Francis imagines today in his speeches, but I’m sure he won’t mind how we do it – not because it may reveal his infallibility – but because it reveals the teachings of Christ truly are.

  • Don’t Give Weeds a Fighting Chance

    Don’t Give Weeds a Fighting Chance

    ­It’s often said that life is a fight for territory, and that once we stop fighting for what we want, what we don’t want will automatically take over. We need only to turn on the television, or pick-up a newspaper, or read comments on social media to realize exactly what we, as a country, have stopped fighting for – and what has automatically taken over.

    Too many have stopped fighting for moral values by their silence, while others openly mock traditions and customs, such as building a stable family unit that is committed to the precepts of the Bible, or protecting and defending life, especially the most vulnerable.

    Many more of us say today, “to each his own”, or “that’s none of my business,” or “it’s not my place to judge”. And as a result, more and more of us are teaching our children that morality is a matter of opinion, convenience, or consensus. Our children then grow up in a culture where right or wrong is not so much an absolute, as much as it is a decision about what makes us feel good, or is convenient for us – even if it is destructive to ourselves and to others.

    Our seeming indifference to immorality is akin to watering the weeds in a garden, instead of removing them altogether – the weeds only get taller and stronger, while the fruitful plants become smaller and weaker.

    And the “weeds” seem to be flourishing. Last month, a gunman opened fire in a Lafayette theater, murdering 2 people, and maiming countless others in the process. Barely 2 weeks before that, a 25-year old man killed four U.S. marines at a military recruiting center in Chattanooga. In June, a 21-year old man killed nine churchgoers in Charleston, South Carolina during a prayer meeting.

    And these are just the well-reported, senseless mass-shootings by those who have no regard for the sanctity of human life. But these mass-shootings are taking over our culture, it seems. In fact, it is reported that there have been 206 mass shootings so far in 2015 – nearly 1 mass shooting everyday this year where four or more persons were shot.

    Not surprisingly, our murder rates are climbing, as well. In Milwaukee, twice as many people were killed in the first half of 2015 as in the same period last year. In St. Louis, murders are up by 60%; in New Orleans, by 30%; in Washington, DC, by 18%; in New York by 11%.

    More and more of us feel unsafe in our own homes, or going to the grocery store, or taking our children to the theater or a sporting event – or even sending them into our schools.

    To make us feel safe, there are calls to install more metal detectors in public places, and more cameras in our shopping malls, and more security guards during worship services on Sunday mornings.

    Maybe you are one who says that gun control is the solution to the carnage in our country because if bad people didn’t have guns, they couldn’t murder people as easily. Even if that were accurate, making new laws won’t effectively do anything to reduce the number of guns currently in our country, and FBI crime statistics show more people are murdered by clubs and hammers, than rifles and shotguns, anyways.

    And then there are those that say we should simply pray to God to save us. That’s always a good idea. But worshipping in our churches on Sundays is not enough, if we are unwilling to change our ways, or abandon the “to each his own”, or “that’s none of my business,” or “it’s not my place to judge” mentality that is so entrenched in our culture now.

    Our prayerful words seem meaningless if we allow our culture to silence the expression of our moral values, and if we all choose, instead, to live our lives on our terms – and not on God’s.

    You see, protecting one another from evil is an “inside” job. It starts inside our homes, where children are being raised by adults – instead of YouTube. This is because it is the family that passes down wisdom on how to live one’s life best.

    And through the family, from generation to generation, by word of mouth and religious teachings, we all learn what works, and what doesn’t, harvested from trial-and-error, and not from what’s merely easier to do or popular in our culture.

    Calling for more police officers, or new laws, or adding metal detectors is important, but it ignores the reality that we can never protect one another from the growing number of people whose understanding of right or wrong is not so much an absolute as much as it is a decision about what makes them feel good.

    You see, we’ll eventually run out of police officers and metal detectors in our country – there simply are not enough of them to go around, in all the places they will be needed in the future, based on the present trends. The question really is, will our country eventually run out of righteous people like you first, in all of the places you will be needed, instead?