Feed on
Posts
Comments

Focus on the Family

Today, families across the nation will gather to watch the best of America’s beloved sport. As one person said to me, “Super Bowl Sunday should be a national holiday.” It certainly brings families and friends together like a holiday does.

This year, the idea of celebrating family during the Super Bowl has brought quite a controversial stir.

Over a week before Super Bowl Sunday, University of Florida football superstar Tim Tebow confirmed that he will appear in a commercial with the theme “Celebrate family, celebrate life,” along with his mother Pam, to share their family’s inspiring story. The CBS Super Bowl commercial, sponsored by the evangelical Christian group ‘Focus on the Family, will somehow discuss her decision 23 years ago to continue with her pregnancy despite complications. Doing missionary work in the Philippines at the time, Pam contracted amoebic dysentery, and the treatment required strong medications that doctors warned could cause irreversible damage to Tim, the child she was carrying.

Mrs Tebow chose to continue the pregnancy, citing her Christian faith as reason for hope that her son would be born healthy. She spent the last two months of her pregnancy in bed and eventually gave birth to healthy ‘Timmy’ in August 1987, the star quarterback who would go on to win the 2007 Heisman Trophy Award, headed for a career in NFL pro-football. Now Tebow wants to celebrate his life with his family in this opportunity to give thanks for both before a major audience. Which is precisely what big-name athletes do, using their ‘celebrity’ responsibly to influence people with a positive message. Tebow’s message is that his mother had a choice, and he’s grateful for the one she made.

Simple, uplifting, and brings us back to family. While the ad has not be released yet, a pre-game ad has.

If the Super Bowl ad is anything like this ad, those who are against are going to really regret letting their true colors show. They say they’re all about helping people plan for families in their argument for choice. If that’s true, what’s so wrong with an ad like the Tebows’, which simply focuses on the gift of family?

The Law of Love

Our world is in desperate need of saving measures.

The United States Congress seems to think passing a bill is the answer to all our problems. Too much college debt? Draft a bill. Unemployment? Draft a bill. Corrupt businesses and banks? Draft a bill. And so on.

While certainly government regulation is needed in many of these instances, many Americans are getting the feeling the President and Congress think these bills will solve everything.

Pope Benedict XVI has a message they should hear:

What man needs most cannot be guaranteed to him by law.

Couldn’t be more relevant. Neither could this.

“Material goods are certainly useful and required – indeed Jesus Himself was concerned to heal the sick, feed the crowds that followed Him and surely condemns the indifference that even today forces hundreds of millions into death through lack of food, water and medicine – yet ‘distributive’ justice does not render to the human being the totality of his ‘due,’” Pope Benedict added.

“Just as man needs bread, so does man have even more need of God.”

It’s called natural law. Yes, as humans we naturally have physical needs to be met but natural law actually  points to that deeper yearn in our hearts, that desire for truth and beauty.

Thanks to Christ’s action, we may enter into the “greatest” justice, which is that of love (cf. Rm 13, 8-10), the justice that recognises itself in every case more a debtor than a creditor, because it has received more than could ever have been expected. Strengthened by this very experience, the Christian is moved to contribute to creating just societies, where all receive what is necessary to live according to the dignity proper to the human person and where justice is enlivened by love. (Emphasis added)

Some members of Congress could use a copy of this message. Anyone care to deliver it?

During President Obama’s presidential campaign I would frequently hear his campaign speeches and think ‘That’s a great idea.’ Inevitably though, that thought would be followed with the questions ‘how?’ or ‘with what money?’ It seemed he had a great idea for everything but it wasn’t spelled out how all these things would be accomplished.

Last Wednesday’s State of the Union address brought back those same thoughts. For instance, when the President mentioned forgiving college debt after a certain number of years.  A great idea I thought-no one should be burdened with such heavy penalties for seeking a higher education. But where is the money to forgive that debt going to come from? And is the government going to regulate this program to ensure it’s not abused? Back to campaign mode, I thought.

Unlike the 2008 campaign, the media has picked up President Obama’s speech and fact checked it.

The president pedantically quoted the Constitutional requirement that he “from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the union”. But given his PR woes, information was the crucial word. Instead his speech was virtually fact-free, relying at key points upon the sorts of touching anecdotes effective on the stump but insulting to members of Congress with detailed policy responsibilities.

When he finally got to the deficit, more than half way through the speech, he promptly blamed George Bush for it. But he did not say how big it was. When he called for a spending freeze, he did not say how much it would save or why he now embraced an idea he once rejected. When he said it would exempt four key spending categories, he failed to explain what share of federal spending would be left unaffected. When he advocated abolishing the capital gains tax on small business investment, he didn’t say what the threshold for “small” business was.

Within hours MSNBC published an Associated Press “fact check” piece noting inaccuracies in more than a few of the facts he did offer. Mark Alexander of The Patriot Post chimed in that Obama’s only other reference to the Constitution, “We find unity in our incredible diversity, drawing on the promise enshrined in our Constitution, the notion that we’re all created equal” was botched because that’s the Declaration of Independence, a strange blunder from a former University of Chicago professor of constitutional law.

Perhaps this sounds nit-picky, but compare President Obama’s SOTU to President Ford’s 1975 SOTU

“To bolster business and industry and to create new jobs, I propose a 1-year tax reduction of $16 billion. Three-quarters would go to individuals and one-quarter to promote business investment. This cash rebate to individuals amounts to 12 percent of 1974 tax payments – a total cut of $12 billion, with a maximum of $1,000 per return.”

Good idea or not, it’s specific. As was “we must reduce oil imports by 1 million barrels per day by the end of this year and by 2 million barrels per day by the end of 1977.” Ford also warned that “If we project the current built-in momentum of Federal spending through the next 15 years, State, Federal, and local government expenditures could easily comprise half of our gross national product. This compares with less than a third in 1975.”

This is actual information. Obama offered only hype, blame-shifting, and vague initiatives suitable for a campaign based on hope but deeply inadequate for a president mired in discontent because of the growing conviction that he’s all talk. (In 7,000 words he gave just 13 actual dollar figures; in 4,000 words in 1975 Ford managed 27.)

What we see of his presidency thus far is many ideas, less solutions. I wish I could say otherwise, particularly as relates to unemployment and the economy.

Pro-choice, what a misnomer

The pro-choice movement is not about choice. If they were about choice they would have no problem with Tim Tebow’s Super Bowl ad, which highlights his mother’s choice to give him life.

A simple ad with the theme “Celebrate Family, Celebrate Life” has now been deemed by the National Organization for Women “extraordinarily offensive and demeaning.” The Women’s Media Center says an ad that uses sports to “divide rather than unite has no place in the biggest national sports event of the year.”

The groups are demanding that CBS pull the ad, which is paid for by the conservative Christian group Focus on the Family. CBS is defending its decision and says it has changed its mind about airing advocacy ads, which it had rejected in the past.

Why all the controversy around this ad? Because it highlights Mrs. Tebow’s choice and it’s not the choice the ‘pro-choicers’ like.

In the ad, Pam Tebow is expected to talk about how she decided to ignore doctors’ advice to abort her fifth child when she suffered complications during a 1987 mission trip to the Philippines. Tim Tebow, a beloved figure in Florida and around the country, told reporters this week he was happy to do the ad, because “that’s the reason I’m here, because my mom was a very courageous woman.”

However, she’s not courageous in the way the ‘pro-choicers’ would like.

Let’s be clear here, public opinion on abortion is swaying. More and more people are identifying themselves as pro-life and even more youth are pro-life and actively taking a stand against the pro-abortion movement. And those in the pro-abortion movement are nervous about the future of abortion in this country.

A commercial like the Tebow commercial is a threat to the ‘pro-choice’ movement. The outrage directed toward the ad makes it clear, ‘pro-choicers’ aren’t for choices, they’re for one choice–abortion.

It’s been reported that roughly 300,000 individuals attended the National March for Life in Washington DC, and of those 300,000 about half were under the age of 30. This is promising news for the pro-life movement, and pro-abortion activists recognize that.

This column from the Washington Post, written by a pro-abortion writer, explains:

Iwent to the March for Life rally Friday on the Mall expecting to write about its irrelevance. Isn’t it quaint, I thought, that these abortion protesters show up each year on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, even though the decision still stands after 37 years. What’s more, with a Democrat in the White House likely to appoint justices who support abortion rights, surely the Supreme Court isn’t going to overturn Roe in the foreseeable future.

How wrong I was. The antiabortion movement feels it’s gaining strength, even if it’s not yet ready to predict ultimate triumph, and Roe supporters (including me) are justifiably nervous.

As always, we in Washington enjoy an up-close view of the health of various causes because of the city’s role as the nation’s most important setting for political demonstrations. In this case, I was especially struck by the large number of young people among the tens of thousands at the march. It suggests that the battle over abortion will endure for a long time to come.

And these young people are ready for the work ahead.

“People our age are going to be the ones to change, to be the future leaders,” said Lauren Powers, 16, who came with a group from an all-girls Catholic school in Milwaukee.

The young generation is a very promising generation, with high goals and surprising understanding of the humanitarian issues that need to be addressed. My work with youth has shown me young individuals with creative minds and huge hearts, ready to right wrongs in society.  And abortion is a top issue with these youth. They know the facts, namely that it kills babies and it hurts women. And they know the opposing views and how to counter argue them.

This column’s content  is not surprising to most in the pro-life movement. We’ve known for years that support is large and growing. The media has refused to give us the due coverage. Perhaps that tide will change, but even if it doesn’t the pro-life sites have it covered and those are the ones that matter.

Typography from Ronnie Bruce on Vimeo.

The not so powerful media

The media has the power to control what we think and what we think about. Historically, the have overlooked a epic protest in Washington DC and missed a powerful story to share with the world. This year it was a record number protest.

Some 300,000 people gathered in Washington, D.C. today [Jan 22] to mark the 37th anniversary of the U.S. supreme court decision that legalized abortion.


And a major headline in mainstream was hardly to be found. Yet, as Sheila Liaugminas reports, they can and are at their best when they report on humanitarian crises and loss of life.

I customized my computer homepage to be filled with news headlines from sources I’ve chosen as a cross-section of top world news, top national news, big media headlines, politics, law, media, culture….a look at all the top headlines of the moment on the biggest stories of the moment, hour and day. It constantly refreshes. I gave it until the end of the night on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, after learning from my own sources that 300,000 people came out this year impressively and boldly to stand up for the fundamental right to life. At last scan, there was not one headline out of dozens and dozens that referred to the March for Life.

Besides the above Zenit article, and the video available on EWTN, and the usual bloggers like Carl Olson at Ignatius Insight and First Things making the essay by Fr. Richard John Neuhaus available again for the occasion…

…..we wouldn’t have heard about it.

And yet, I noticed this piece on a Haitian relief rally.

“The official death toll from the 7.0-magnitude quake has risen to 110,000.

“The benefit concert took place in New York, Los Angeles, London and Haiti.

“More than 100 Hollywood and music stars took part.”

The unofficial but modest estimate on the death toll from Roe v. Wade is 50 million babies. The rallies to benefit the cause of life took place in Washington D.C, online in a ‘virtual march’ and in cities around the country in solidarity with the annual March. More than 300,000 citizens nationwide took part in Washington, more than 70,000 in the ‘virtual march’, and countless others all over the country and the world…..in Paris, France, Italy, Spain, Belgium, the UK, Ireland, Switzerland…..and you only heard about it on pro-life news outlets.

The media’s biases aren’t only revealed in what they say and how they say it, but in what they don’t say. This bias is very clear.

Leave nothing on the field

Grant Desme

Grant Desme

Some athletes take that mantra beyond the field. Minor league player Grant Desme has. Coming off a .315 batting average with a league-leading 11 home runs and 27 RBIs in 27 games this fall in Arizona minor leagues, Desme was a suspected top pick for the Oakland A’s.

Instead, he believed he had another, higher calling.

Desme announced Friday that he was leaving baseball to enter the priesthood, walking away after a breakout season in which he became MVP of the Arizona Fall League.

“I was doing well at ball. But I really had to get down to the bottom of things,” the 23-year-old Desme said. “I wasn’t at peace with where I was at.”

“I love the game, but I aspire to higher things,” he said. “I know I have no regrets.”

Talk about giving it all you’ve got.

A lifelong Catholic, Desme thought about becoming a priest for about a year and a half. He kept his path quiet within the sports world, and his plan to enter a seminary this summer startled the A’s when he told them Thursday night.

Desme spoke on a conference call for about 10 minutes in a quiet, even tone, hardly sounding like many gung-ho, on-the-rise ballplayers. As for his success in the minors, he said “all of it is very undeserving.”

“It’s about a 10-year process,” he said. “I desire and hope I become a priest.” In a way, he added, it’s like “re-entering the minor leagues.”

Desme’s first two years in the minors were beset by shoulder and wrist problems. He said his days off the field gave him time to think about what was most important to him, to read and study the Bible and to talk to teammates about his faith.

In retrospect, he said, those injuries were “the biggest blessings God ever gave me.”

Pray for Grant Desme and for all seminarians.

Year end review

AP Photo

AP Photo

It’s been a year since President Obama took office, and what a year it’s been.

WASHINGTON – When Barack Obama entered office, the expectations that he and others set for his presidency couldn’t have been higher.

Obama announced that he was embarking on an ambitious agenda — to create new jobs, to reform the nation’s health care system, to lessen the world’s nuclear threats and to curb partisan bickering.

“We have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord,” he said in his inaugural address. “On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn-out dogmas that for far too long have strangled our politics.”

But how have those promises fared this year? According to a recent NBC/Wall Street Journal Poll

A plurality of Americans believe his health care overhaul is a bad idea; fewer than one in five are satisfied with the economy; just 30 percent give him good marks on changing business as usual in Washington; and a majority think he has accomplished “very little” or “only some” of his goals over the past 12 months.

“What Americans wanted and expected was a better economy, a reduced presence in Iraq and a fundamental change in the way Washington does business,” said Democratic pollster Peter D. Hart, who conducted the survey with GOP pollster Bill McInturff.

“This hasn’t happened. And not surprisingly, the president has suffered.”

But he still has three years of presidency and some say ‘as long as one’s alive there’s hope.’

Yesterday, the people of Massachusetts showed they’re still hopeful a different kind of change can come to America.

Aroused and well-informed by a year of watching a liberal majority go very far wrong, Massachusetts voters handed a Senate seat held by Ted Kennedy for 47 years to Republican Scott Brown, a little known state senator from Wrenthem.

The resounding five-point victory in one of America’s most liberal states is an upset heard ’round Washington—and one that ought to force Democrats to rethink their entire agenda, national health care in particular. Despite an 11th-hour intervention by President Obama in a state he carried with ease only 14 months ago, state Attorney General Martha Coakley was routed even in such unlikely tea-party outposts as Andover (58%) and amid a large turnout for a midwinter special election.

Some say it was a miracle. Many say it’s an indication of how the November congressional races will swing.

It’s been a year of change, to some not the change they thought though.

We worship because we live

Picture from cell phone camera

Picture of destroyed Port Au Prince Cathedral--taken from cell phone camera

That’s the message Haitian Catholics and Christians proclaimed today, at their first Sunday worship since the earthquake devastated their capital city.

PORT-AU-PRINCE, Haiti (CBS) ―Drumbeats called the faithful to a Sunday Mass praising God amid a scene resembling the Apocalypse — a collapsed cathedral in a city cloaked with the smell of death, where aid is slow to reach survivors and rescue crews battle to pry an ever-smaller number of the living from the ruins.

Sunlight streamed through what little was left of blown-out stained windows as the Rev. Eric Toussaint preached to a small crowd of survivors. A rotting body lay in its main entrance.

“Why give thanks to God? Because we are here,” Toussaint said. “We say ‘Thank you God.’ What happened is the will of God. We are in the hands of God now.”

As relief efforts continue, signs of hope, survival, and faith are appearing in great numbers. People all over the world have been stunned by the miraculous rescues that are still happening. The international community is rallying with unbelievable force, delivering much needed food, water, hygienic products, and other basic necessities. And now this–Haitians continue to rise above their despair, choosing instead gratitude and faith.

At the roofless cathedral, elderly women worried the beads of their rosaries and prayed for the intervention of Our Lady Of The Ascension, to whom the 81-year-old church is named.

A military helicopter roared overhead, drowning out a hymn by the congregation. Above loomed the partially destroyed office of the archbishop who died nearby and another building whose blown-out walls had laid it open it like a doll’s house.

At the cathedral, the Rev. Toussaint described his own near-miraculous survival.

“I watched the destruction of the cathedral from this window,” he said, pointing to a window in what remains of the archdiocese office. “I am not dead because God has a plan for me.”

“What happens is a sign from God, saying that we must recognize his power – we need to reinvent ourselves,”

God did not will such destruction, but He will bring good out of suffering, if those who suffer let Him. What strong and devoted faith these Haitians have. May we continue to remember them in our prayers as they continue their long road to recovery.

Older Posts »