Category: Current Affairs

Well, if THIS is any indication of what we are up against in terms of domestic terrorist sleeper cells, I say "keep ’em coming".

Props to the FBI, but these guys can’t be the sharpest khanjars in the drawer. They brought a videotape of themselves at Terror Summer Camp (Lake "Wanabommalot") to a local video shop to have it dubbed onto DVD. The manager tipped off the Feds.

The first write-up of the story I saw this morning indicated only that it was six "Yugoslav Nationals". The linked article gets more specific. HINT: They are not disgruntled Christian Homeschoolers.

GET THE STORY.

Several readers have e-mailed me the following story (CHT to them) and it’s easy to see why.

GET THE STORY.

When was the last time you did something you knew would make you world famous?

The Virginia Tech shooter knew. He understood the importance of a multi-media approach. He sent a package off to NBC with the absolute assurance that within a couple of days his image, his name, his rambling thoughts would be inescapable… a pervasive, 24-7, continuous loop of streaming video. He knew from that day on his exploits would be "up there" with Columbine, Oklahoma City, the Unabomber. There would be books. The pundits would be miked-up and the klieg lights turned on. There would be documentaries about his life… about him… not some rich kid, not a politician or entertainer… but him.

Where’s Imus now? Where’s Anna Nicole?

When notoriety and stuff are the highest values in a culture, there are those who don’t respond well if they happen to feel they have been left out of that picture. If they are mentally unbalanced to begin with, there might be the makings for a perfect storm of vanity, resentment and rage, and no internal mechanism to stop it.

And there will inevitably follow people who feel the need to figure the whole thing out. How did this happen? Why?  Who’s fault is it? Can’t we pass a law, fund a program to prevent this in the future? Let’s get started on that.

I saw Dennis Miller last night, talking to Bill O’Reilly, and he had a point of view so similar to my own that the simplest thing is just to link to the video. In short, he is not interested in fixing blame, or in promoting a particular view of the tragedy. He is just – as best he can – trying to "mourn with those who mourn". O’Reilly attempts to pull him into a gun control debate ala Rosie O’Donnell, but Miller gives it a pass. He gives Rosie a pass, and points out, I think with a kind of weary wisdom, that in times like this, people will generally seek shelter in familiar templates. They will cling to whatever grid they happen to see through. They will think aloud and give knee-jerk responses.

In short, Miller was graceful. He was human, and he let everyone else be human, too. He said that, rather than trying to analyze the event for the cameras, about the only thing he felt like doing was shooting hoops with his kids.

Probably a good instinct, there. I like Miller.

Love your families. Keep them close. Pray.

Here’s the Miller video (FOX).

The last few days the nation has been shocked by the tragic campus shootings in Virginia, and I thought I would do a post so that people could talk about them–their feelings, their questions, their prayers–whatever it is that they have on their hearts concerning the horror that unfolded earlier this week.

I don’t really have a lot to say at this point, myself. The guy who committed the shootings was obviously completely nuts–as his multimedia rant to NBC illustrates–and it’s hard to know what to say when someone goes murderously off the deep end. It’s just so irrational. The guy was filled with hate and rage–so much so that his ranting to NBC doesn’t even give a clear sense of who he was mad at. Maybe he wasn’t mad at anyone in particular. Maybe he just had a globalized rage that didn’t have a specific focus.

I will have more to say–perhaps tomorrow–but for now it’s just appalling that anything like this can happen. I can’t understand how someone can get so twisted around that they would want to do something like this. I can only conclude that something went desperately wrong inside him, and I can only pray for his victims and for his own soul.

Just got word that, following a meeting with AMU faculty members who expressed concern about the future of the institution, Fr. Joseph Fessio, SJ, was offered a position at AMU.

The new position is not provost but a triple position of theologian-in-residence, being a member of the theology faculty, and also head of the university’s abroad program.

Fr. Fessio has accepted.

Interestingly, he is also scheduled to be inducted into the Catholic education hall of fame.

A reader writes:

My good friend’s daughter goes to Ave Maria in Fl.  She received this email from Fr Fessio:

To the Ave Maria University community:

I have been asked to resign my position as provost and leave the campus immediately.

I will miss Ave Maria and the many of you whom I hold dear.

Fr. Joseph Fessio, S.J.

MORE.

Whatever happened to making license plates? In a scenario that seems to take the Chinese model as an inspiration,

Apparently, South Carolina is considering allowing prisoners to trade body parts for time off their sentences.

Being that the political and ethical problems with this are smell-able from a couple of furlongs, the only question in my mind is how an idea this grisly and morally tone-deaf could get this far along. Who the heck thought this is a good idea? I’m speaking as someone who’s niece underwent a heart transplant yesterday!

"Mary Jo Cagle, chief medical officer of Bon Secours St. Francis Health
System in Greenville, urged senators to find an allowable incentive.
"We have a huge need for organs and bone marrow," Cagle said."

Oh. I see. Well, that makes it okay, then. It’s a market-driven thing, I guess. To be fair, the legislative committee that has worked on the proposal is not sold on the idea of an incentive program to encourage inmates to cut their incarceration by donating organs or tissue. They are not even sure it’s legal (obviously some outdated legal aberration, like in Hartford, Connecticut, where it’s illegal to kiss your wife on Sunday).

In an advanced society such as ours, we understand that it is WRONG to ask an inmate to trade his/her very flesh for a reduced prison sentence (this could give a whole new dimension to the Plea Bargain), or to be so crass as to just write a check for someone’s internal organs. We prefer to steal valuable tissue from anonymous, microscopic people. Far fewer entanglements.

GET THE STORY.

A lot of regular JA.O readers may be already aware of this story, as it is all over the blogosphere and has been discussed on Catholic radio. It poses a number of conundrums and ethical snares concerning the proper medical care of disabled people, elective surgery, and other issues.

According to THIS MSNBC ARTICLE, a young girl named Ashley has undergone surgery, hormone treatment and other medical procedures in order to retard her growth – keep her at her present size and weight – so that caring for her will be easier.

In a case fraught with ethical questions, the parents of a severely mentally and physically disabled child have stunted her growth to keep their little “pillow angel” a manageable and more portable size.

The bedridden 9-year-old girl had her uterus and breast tissue removed at a Seattle hospital and received large doses of hormones to halt her growth. She is now 4-foot-5; her parents say she would otherwise probably reach a normal 5-foot-6.

Now, I’m not an expert in anything, so I don’t feel the need to do a whole boatload of commentary on this. I think the ethical concerns are obvious enough to anyone. I would like to see some thoughtful combox rumination on this (hopefully with the input of some medical professionals, students and ethicists), while avoiding the immediate consigning of the parents to an especially toasty corner of Hell in a knee-jerk fashion. Keep in mind that there are many parents who struggle with the issues of caring for their disabled children , even as these children become disabled adults. Keep your dog on a leash, is what I’m sayin’, and talk about the issues, rather than making personal attacks.

My first response to this story was to think about how many times my wife and I, as we watched our little ones sleeping or doing something especially endearing, wished out loud (mostly kidding) that we could "put a brick on their head" and keep them that age forever. Just stop time and keep our babies forever. It’s an impulse I’m sure we share with a lot of parents.

But that is not what kids are made for. Certainly MY OWN kids would be easier to care for if we had somehow halted their growth. Alzheimer’s patients would be less worrisome if we surgically made them all paraplegics. They could not wander off and become a danger to themselves and others, that way.

Another thought (and this is complete speculation) that occurred to me was the possibility that the parents, subconsciously, may fear that caring for their child will be more challenging as she grows, not because she will no longer be small and light, but because she will no longer be cute, cuddly and sympathetic. There can be a certain tenderness, sweetness and even playfulness in changing a baby’s diaper. The experience of changing the diaper of a fully-grown adult is rather short on rewards, unless one possesses a particularly mature and compassionate spirituality. I am not saying this is the case with Ashley’s parents, but the thought does occur that perhaps the greatest issues may be emotional and mental, rather than physical.

Just some thoughts.

GET THE STORY.

VISIT THE PARENT’S BLOG.

MAY GOD HAVE MERCY ON HIS SOUL.

I’ve blogged previously about how–not matter how good a guy he may be personally–Mitt Romney is not electable to the presidency because–even if he is faced with someone like Hillary Clinton–a large enough percentage of the Christian vote (and specifically the Evangelical vote) will simply stay home rather than vote for a Mormon–the efforst of EvangelicalsForMitt notwithstanding.

There were a number of Evangelical supporters of Romney at GodBlogCon, and the topic of his electability came up in panel discussion moderated by Hugh Hewitt. Panelist John Mark Reynolds (who is a really nice guy, BTW, and who spoke admiringly of "John Paul the Great" and "Benedict" and the leadership they have shown in building the culture of life) spoke in favor of Romney, and a blogger in the audience asked how many present would refuse to vote for Romney simply because he is a Mormon–expecting a very small number of hands to go up.

More went up than he seemed to be expecting.

It wasn’t a majority of those in the audience, but (a) it doesn’t have to be a majority, just enough to lose a crucial fraction of the vote in a nation that has been having closely-divided presidential elections of late and (b) these were the people who (1) knew enough about what Mormons believe and (2) had thought through the issue enough to have an opinion already and (3) were willing to announce their opposition in public and potentially be labeled bigots and (4) were willing to defy prominent bloggers who had just been speaking in favor of Mitt and why Christians should be willing to vote for him.

Among those who raised their hands was another panelist: La Shawn Barber.

Which brings up the fact that, should Mitt get nominated, some opinion leaders in the Evangelical world will be refusing to support him, and some will be speaking out against him.

Like it or not, there is enough opposition to Mormonism in the Christian community to cost him the fraction of the vote needed to win.

But he’s not the only much-talked-about candidate in that condition.

There’s also Rudy Guiliani.

Joe Carter–another GodBlogCon speaker–recently wrote an ABSOLUTELY DEVASTATING indictment of Guiliani’s potential candidacy and why he also is simply unelectable.

He concludes the idictment by saying:

The real question is not whether Rudy can win Republican nomination but rather why anyone takes his candidacy seriously. It’s understandable when Democrats swoon over some completely unqualified candidate (once again, see: Barack Obama). Republicans, though, are expected to be a bit more coolly rational than the emotion-based community. Yes, its true that Rudy was a star on 9/11 and he deserves the highest praise for his leadership in a time of crisis. Yet keep in mind that George Bush was also considered to have done a stellar job during that particularly trying time in our nation’s history. When a sense of normalcy returned, though, the shine wore off the President. The same will happen with Giuliani long before he wins the GOP nomination.

Let’s hope he’s right.

In the meantime,

GET THE IDICTMENT.
(CHT: Southern Appeal.)