Via Media

Via Media


The thing about blogging is..

posted by awelborn

…when something really interesting and bloggable that is surprisingly and instantaneously sucking up the world’s available Blogxygen happens, the temptation is strong to well, blog on it.
But then, about 6 hours into this…thing..it becomes clear that this might just take a while. That something’s been unleashed and it’s going to be one of those stories that changes by the day or even by the hour.
And you think…well, shouldn’t I wait and see what happens? I really don’t have time to blogblogblog and follow the comments on this right here and right now. Got to go to Knoxville to say farewell to the GlobeTrotting son, got to write stuff, got to go get a root canal (today!)..
But then (again)…you end up not being able to blog on anything else because if you blog on some funny thing that happened to you or some cultural blip, readers are gonna go, “Huh? Why isn’t she blogging about the thing that’s sucking the Blogxygen?”
So you end up sitting around, amazed, aghast and reading political blogs like a crack addict.  And BlogParalzyed.
(And honestly, you also think…there’s quite enough commentary on this out there. Quite. Enough.)
So anyway, it’s off to the dentist. And seriously, I’m waiting for Palin’s speech tonight for comment.
That said,  I can agree wtih most of  what the Anchoress has been writing over the past few days aboutall of this.
And Peggy Noonan, today.
(Oops…..watch that hot mic, Peggy)
Now, off down the hill to the dentist…



Advertisement
Comments read comments(37)
post a comment
MargoB

posted September 3, 2008 at 9:52 am


But Amy, we know you have a life (and that your main vocation is not blogging for us). And we (or at least I) bet that you’ll get to The Currently Popular topics soon enough. Besides, even though I appreciate hearing bloggers’ takes on current events, I return to their blogs also because of the unique things they comment on — new books, funny things, family things, current thoughts running through head, etc.
I enjoy reading your blog, the same as I enjoy seeing my friend Vince’s paintings: he does hope they generate some $$, but he does it because he enjoys doing it; and I get to see the results. If you don’t get to the ‘big’ topics this very second, I’ll live :) and come back ;)



report abuse
 

bill bannon

posted September 3, 2008 at 9:55 am


I’m thrilled but worried as to lack of experience in Palin on the international level should anything happen to McCain… were he to win…. though recent numbers do not look good….?50/40. Oi veh.
Since, unlike John Paul II fans and droves of people at Vox Nova, I do not see the recent change on the death penalty as authentic “development” at all, I am thrilled with her support of the death penalty coexisting with her opposition to abortion…which is where we were in our own way from the 5th century til 1969 (development can be so abrupt…lol). I prefer root canal to the expected Catholic…. Blog of Lamentations on that aspect of Palin’s views.
The bizarre thing is that it makes the experience issue contrapunctal diagonally with one pair having the international experience in the vice presidential choice and the other pair having the international experience in the presidential choice and both having the internationally inexperienced choice reversed….and neither side then being able to discuss experience anymore as a factor….which means they will have to return to positions on issues….just in time for Autumn.



report abuse
 

TSO

posted September 3, 2008 at 11:01 am


Oh, you’re obviously talking about the start of the college football season right?
Seriously, when I see someone who blogs contra the daily topic I always think “wow, they have a life.”
I see Peggy Noonan finally wrote a WSJ column about Palin, which I’d been awaiting. I mean, the Gov has been the news for at least five days now, which is equivalent to 5 years in 19th century news terms.
But that’s why I appreciate Noonan and you. You don’t just rush in and look like a fool three days later…



report abuse
 

alexsandra

posted September 3, 2008 at 1:58 pm


Thanks for the link to Peggy Noonan. She speaks truth.
As a Canadian, I’m not following as closely but I do appreciate getting these viewpoints. It will be interesting to watch. (to put it mildly….)



report abuse
 

Daniel H. Conway

posted September 3, 2008 at 3:34 pm


“So you end up sitting around, amazed, aghast and reading political blogs like a crack addict.”
And then I looked up and saw four open web browser tabs to political web sites.
And like an addict forced to rehab I slowly closed them. (Of course taking one last peak.)



report abuse
 

Dan

posted September 3, 2008 at 3:43 pm


Peggy Noonon knocked it out of the park. She’s an outstanding columnist. (I wasn’t particularly impressed though by her book about JPII.)



report abuse
 

mfelt

posted September 3, 2008 at 3:54 pm


I *love* Peggy Noonan, one of the smartest in the business. So listen to what she had to say when caught on an open mike earlier today (the Palin choice was “cynical,” “gimmicky,” the McCain campaign is “over,” and a few other things that can’t even be printed!)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrG8w4bb3kg
I think the smarter conservative pundits are finding it hard to defend this and getting annoyed that they are expected to.



report abuse
 

Lynn

posted September 3, 2008 at 4:11 pm


Good luck at the dentist.



report abuse
 

Thomas

posted September 3, 2008 at 4:16 pm


After a segment with NBC’s Chuck Todd ended today, Republican consultant Mike Murphy and Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan were caught on a live mic ridiculing the choice of Sarah Palin.
“It’s over,” said Noonan, and then responded to a question of whether Palin is the most qualified Republican woman McCain could have chosen.
“The most qualified? No. I think they wen tfor this– excuse me — political bullshit about narratives,” she said. “Everytime Republicans do that — because that’s not where they live and it’s not what they’re good at and they blow it.”
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0908/Noonan_Murphy_trash_Palin_on_hot_mic_Its_over.html



report abuse
 

Amy

posted September 3, 2008 at 5:06 pm


Daniel:
Only 4? :-)
Thank goodness in the apartment, my computer is in the kitchen. Saves lots of steps that way.



report abuse
 

marianne

posted September 3, 2008 at 5:17 pm


Just wondering why so many “reporters” ask if Palin is the “most qualified”. Is Obamma the “most qualified”? Who is ever the “Most” qualified for any job, including reporter? It’s their way of dismissing her, for ideological reasons. Like the way they dismissed Hillary, by writing a script that she is too “divisive”.
Are the current overpaid band who have cable shows the “Most” qualified for that much power and influence? Does anyone ask?
Before Cheyney, VPs kept their mouths shut, were given a pet project and went to funerals. I thought everybody wanted us to go back to that and that Cheyney’s power was seen as dangerous.



report abuse
 

Christopher

posted September 3, 2008 at 7:39 pm


Here is Peggy on ‘Open Mike at MSNBC’:
http://online.wsj.com/public/article/declarations.html
Well, I just got mugged by the nature of modern media, and I wish it weren’t my fault, but it is. Readers deserve an explanation, so I’m putting a new top on today’s column and, with the forbearance of the Journal, here it is.
Wednesday afternoon, in a live MSNBC television panel hosted by NBC’s political analyst Chuck Todd, and along with Republican strategist Mike Murphy, we discussed Sarah Palin’s speech this evening to the Republican National Convention. I said she has to tell us in her speech who she is, what she believes, and why she’s here. We spoke of Republican charges that the media has been unfair to Mrs. Palin, and I defended the view that while the media should investigate every quote and vote she’s made, and look deeply into her career, it has been unjust in its treatment of her family circumstances, and deserved criticism for this.
When the segment was over and MSNBC was in commercial, Todd, Murphy and I continued our conversation, talking about the Palin choice overall. We were speaking informally, with some passion — and into live mics. An audio tape of that conversation was sent, how or by whom I don’t know, onto the internet. And within three hours I was receiving it from friends far and wide, asking me why I thought the McCain campaign is “over”, as it says in the transcript of the conversation. Here I must plead some confusion. In our off-air conversation, I got on the subject of the leaders of the Republican party assuming, now, that whatever the base of the Republican party thinks is what America thinks. I made the case that this is no longer true, that party leaders seem to me stuck in the assumptions of 1988 and 1994, the assumptions that reigned when they were young and coming up. “The first lesson they learned is the one they remember,” I said to Todd — and I’m pretty certain that is a direct quote. But, I argued, that’s over, those assumptions are yesterday, the party can no longer assume that its base is utterly in line with the thinking of the American people. And when I said, “It’s over!” — and I said it more than once — that is what I was referring to. I am pretty certain that is exactly what Todd and Murphy understood I was referring to. In the truncated version of the conversation, on the Web, it appears I am saying the McCain campaign is over. I did not say it, and do not think it. In fact, at an on-the-record press symposium on the campaign on Monday, when all of those on the panel were pressed to predict who would win, I said that I didn’t know, but that we just might find “This IS a country for old men.” That is, McCain may well win. I do not think the campaign is over, I do not think this is settled, and did not suggest, back to the Todd-Murphy conversation, that “It’s over.” … [READ THE REST]



report abuse
 

Thomas

posted September 3, 2008 at 8:24 pm


It is certainly more fun to watch via ustream.tv (e.g. http://www.palmettoscoop.com/2008/09/02/gop-convention-2008-live-stream/ ) where there are no commercials or commentaries.



report abuse
 

Jeff

posted September 3, 2008 at 8:59 pm


Blogxygen
Amy, you need to copyright that! And when i first heard Peggy Noonan’s “hot mic” tape (and the second hearing, and third, and . . . sigh), i thought “i don’t think she’s saying what they say she’s saying.”
But by the same token, like her or loathe her, Gov. Palin, if you hear the REST OF THE QUOTE said “i want to know what the vice-president does” — and then, i thought, isn’t her voice going up, as if they cut off the senten — “every day to help the American people, and if the job doesn’t help everyday americans, i’m not much interested in it.”
So the edited quote becomes “what a dim bulb the mayor of Wasilla is.” Uh-huh.
Blogxygen. We need a tank of it, and a mask, and a place to put the quarters, kind of like the box for coins for candles . . .



report abuse
 

Daniel H. Conway

posted September 3, 2008 at 10:30 pm


I’d pay more attention to Peggy Noonan and consider her less a propagandist for all things Republican if she came off more like unpublished “Real” self in print and on television. Perhaps, now I consider her writing a little like I view Rush Limbaugh-a bit of an on-air (or on-page) personna. Is this how she is or how she wants us to think “it” and “she” are? (Whatever “it” is-the world, the race, etc.)
Her anecdotes will seem a little more tinny, affected. I think of her depiction of the Santorum car ride as he reflected on the struggles of his last campaign and said a Rosary for the Caseys. What to make of that story now? What was left out, how was it staged?
A little more reality, a little of the darkness present in the leaders would be more honest. Ms. Noonan got it a bit when discussing the creepy little aides looking to use Sarah Palin. But then again, the powerful always look good in her stories and the little folks, minor servants around her, are always somehow morally suspect, groping, and clearly deserving of their secondary roles. I think back to her Reagan anecdotes, or the Santorum car ride anecdote in which minor aides play some contrapuntal harmony challenging and distracting the Grand Moral Figure.
Ms. Noonan spoke her mind “off the record.” And it sounded unstaged and genuine-far more interesting than the other stuff. Now her “other stuff” seems less so-less so in everything. One wonders about other conservative thinkers and writers.



report abuse
 

Clare Krishan

posted September 4, 2008 at 9:42 am


Forgive me for seeming caustic, but Peggy’s suffering the female version of p***s envy — she’s a journalist by trade, so’s Sarah Palin. But Sarah has a hubby and five delightful munchkins too. What a difference a decade — and the “choices” on what to do with those years — make! A lot of what made it possible for Palin is what needs to be made possible in every community large or small: self-reliance of families (run your own business: there’s no glass ceiling to contend with on the experience ladder, just prove your mettle and cooperate with God’s grace and bring the bambinos into the world, he’ll see to it that “Papa won’t preach” in a way that’s much more lyrical than the starched suits aka Santorum’s “Like a Prayer” huddle with Mr “corporate interests” Mitt Romney). The purist at the WSJ may not like the messiness of politics but then she’s been telling us to hold our noses and wait’n’see what her “hollywood hasbeen heroes” will do for us. Well some other church ladies found their own heroes, married ‘em, had a life, and then came back to tell us how to emulate her own real-life accomplishments, not someone else’s sentimental idea of success! Way to go!
Yet Peggy is gracious in her denouement – Palin deserves the best staff from Anchorage she can persuade to leave their Northern Exposures to hold their noses in DC!! Stay away from the ‘professional Catholic’ beltway crowd, “past behaviour predicts future behaviour” is the HR mantra where I learned the ropes, and they’re incorrigible (their bad habits proudly unshriven). If someone knows the back story and it involves Colleen Campbell, I’ll recant my detractions, but not until.



report abuse
 

bill bannon

posted September 4, 2008 at 9:54 am


Palin has spoken and she had me at “lipstick” and the soccer moms. I was not scheduled to run along the NY harbor this morning in a large grassy park behind the statue, Lady Liberty…. but I did anyway….Palin had got me in motion on my alternate day and I ran extra in the humid heat with the harbor and distant ships stretching way out into the Atlantic in the distance. Palin was a lady liberty herself in how she let the personal barbs in the media roll right off. I was afraid she would be depressed and she was the opposite. She was humorous, tough, above the niche “republican” category with the steel union husband comment, and she was confident….and she ignored the dirt….which is critical and enchanting. Biden this AM was visibly depressed to my perception probably at her
vitality and willingness to discuss their executive experience as legislators as opposed to her being mayor and governor.
But the humor combined with confidence and family juggling and family problems puts her in the everyday hard pressed woman category which by the way Biden’s wife, Jill, joins her in….being a teacher for years of emotionally disturbed children which she intends to keep doing regardless of the election results.
Great enervating speech….things will get tougher after the media takes a brief break since gone are the days when an Eric Severeid stuck to news and not to gossip as the media does now. Even Anderson Cooper does the new combination of both on CNN…so I can’t blame this whole new trend on Order of St. Gregory honoree (don’t ask)….Rupert Murdoch.
Palin is young if a Mc Cain can still run….Hillary Clinton’s life just changed again.



report abuse
 

Curmudgeon

posted September 4, 2008 at 10:35 am


She is great on some life issues, obviously. (Not the death penalty, but none of the four are.)
But, that doesn’t mean that she is qualified to be VP or God forbid, President.
She just isn’t.
Harry Truman wasn’t that prepared to be president either, and sort of resented that. It wasn’t a virtue. It was poor planning (on the party’s and FDR’s parts).
This is more of the same. (Truman did OK, but he had also had military experience as a captain and had much more experience in local government than she has and also had been in the Senate ten years before becoming Vice President. And he admitted that he STILL wasn’t prepared.)
At long last, I think that we have to stop looking to the Federal government for a solution to the issue of abortion. We have to change both hearts and social conditions. Make it an unthinkable choice, even if it is still a legal choice. Changing the law won’t stop it, without the supports to encourage women to make another choice.
We have to work to change society. We keep putting energy into candidates, but since Roe, the GOP has held the Presidency 24 years vs. 12 for the Dems. And this has gotten us where?
Lipstick on a pit bull might be an engaging metaphor, like field dressing a moose. But to tell you the truth, universal health care for women and children would go a lot further to reduce the rate of abortion, imho.



report abuse
 

Primus

posted September 4, 2008 at 10:52 am


Bill – do you live in Battery Park City?



report abuse
 

Lurker

posted September 4, 2008 at 1:00 pm


Curmudgeon:
I agree on changing hearts/minds toward abortion rather than laws. I’m positive that this isn’t a sentiment shared by most Pro-lifers© but so be it.
If the anti-abortion crowd can do for abortion what the anti-smoking people did for tobacco, every child, teenager, parent, adult and celebrity would shun abortion like a dead possum in the driveway.
Lurker: I’m going to let your comment pass, but reluctantly, because a) your identity and email is fake and b)Your point is dead wrong and tiresome.
Most pro-life work is in the trenches, in crisis pregnancy centers, post-abortion counseling sessions, adoption counseling and meeting rooms and classrooms. That’s just a fact. Anyone who is actually and truly involved in the movement knows this. The anti-smoking people were able to stigmatize tobacco use because they were in the public school classrooms. Do you honestly think that the public school classrooms of this country are open to an anti-abortion message?



report abuse
 

ContraMundum

posted September 4, 2008 at 1:06 pm


“She is great on some life issues, obviously. (Not the death penalty, but none of the four are.)”
Please spare us the moral equivalence argument between the death penalty and abortion, Curmudgeon. It’s tiresome, and it’s manifestly untrue (from a Catholic teaching point of view). Catholics are obviously free for a variety of reasons to oppose the death penalty–but not because it’s unjust. It just isn’t. Even the Catechism and Evangelium Vitae make that crystal clear–two documents that express suspicion of the death penalty.
“At long last, I think that we have to stop looking to the Federal government for a solution to the issue of abortion. We have to change both hearts and social conditions. Make it an unthinkable choice, even if it is still a legal choice. Changing the law won’t stop it, without the supports to encourage women to make another choice.”
Funny, there’s nothing here a pro-abortionist would disagree with. Listen: just because legislating against abortion won’t solve all the problems (obviously!), it’s still an indispensable condition. Hearts need to be changed, true. Hearts have been changed after a generation of Roe v. Wade–in favor of abortion. Hearts need to be changed back, and the law is a great heart-changer. It’s not sufficient, but it’s necessary.
“But to tell you the truth, universal health care for women and children would go a lot further to reduce the rate of abortion, imho.”
Universal health care would be a universal economic disaster, and it would do nothing to disincentivize abortion. Universal health care requires a hulking, omnicompetent federal government–precisely the kind of thing that militates against the “principle of subsidiarity” that lies at the basis of Catholic social teaching. It’s big government and its repercussions that have made health care so unaffordable as it is now!
I for one would not mind “flipping the ticket”; and I hope I can vote for Sarah for president 4 or 8 years from now. I love her. She’s the most refreshing thing to hit politics since Ronald Reagan.



report abuse
 

Clare Krishan

posted September 4, 2008 at 1:45 pm


Curmudgeon, check out the link Building Cathedrals pointed to:
http://www.slate.com/id/2199086/
“Remember that before you judge or poke fun at Sarah Palin. She’s not the candidate whose daughter messed up. She’s the candidate who didn’t get rid of the mess.”
Sure, let’s debate marginal utility. But include “reparations” (backdated 4 years) to the kids who lost siblings or the grandparents without a “full quiver” in the debit column, and then add “culture warriors” to the VA’s healthcare plan to cover the cadre of PTSD cases resulting from the domestic terrorism of abortion…
Many European Nations have universal healthcare, AND high abortion rates. The two are not causally linked. Yet the malinvestment of capital from the promiscuous-with-friends-on-Wall Street can be traced to both sides of the political aisle, and as long as our economic way of life makes it nigh on impossible to start a family when nature intended (abstinence and chastity education can only go where the libido leads, some are blessed with tame temperaments while some — males and females — have a heavier cross to bear) our country will remain captive to corporatist interests, wage slaves to ideologues from Harvard and Yale, and not live up to the founding fathers dream of a colony of liberty for human personhood, a Vineyard worthy of the Owner.



report abuse
 

Clare Krishan

posted September 4, 2008 at 1:48 pm


“Psychologists tell us that character solidifies at about age 30. After that it becomes not impossible but vastly more difficult for the couple truly to knit themselves into unity.”
http://www.faithandfamilylive.com/blog/on_marrying_young



report abuse
 

Lurker

posted September 4, 2008 at 2:02 pm


Apologies about the email. I assure you it is an active account.
I apologize as well for what was seen as “dead wrong”. I agree with the public schools doctrine of no smoking (but curiously light on drug use).
My point was that I wish we could do the same for abortion in the public schools, public television stations, and through the media that was done for tobacco.
Apologies again.
My apologies for assuming your email was fake. Truly. My point was that the lack of broad-based anti-abortion education isn’t the pro-lifers’ fault. They’re doing what they can with what they are permitted to do. (Well, obviously not everything. But you get my point.)



report abuse
 

Tim J

posted September 4, 2008 at 2:39 pm


For those who didn’t read the post above regarding Peg Noonan and the Open Mic Flap…
She’s explained herself. She was partly misinterpreted (“In the truncated version of the conversation, on the Web, it appears I am saying the McCain campaign is over. I did not say it, and do not think it.”).
In short; much ado about not much at all.



report abuse
 

James Kabala

posted September 4, 2008 at 2:47 pm


Clare: I’m not quite comfortable with the tactic of Mr. Saletan (a pro-choicer, by the way). An abortion by a candidate’s child probably has happened at some point, but we can’t prove it and we can’t point to any specific person who did it. I suppose those on the list who have spent some time in the public eye (e.g., Stephanie Miller, Maria Shriver, and Eleanor Mondale) have become thick-skinned by now, but I can’t see anything admirable about putting a scarlet question mark next to the names of obscure, completely out-of-the-limelight people like the Agnew or McGovern or Dukakis or Kemp daughters, none of whom I had ever heard of before. Imagine their horror if they should find this article as a top Google hit on their names!
As for late vs. early marriage, it’s perfectly OK by me if Bristol and Levi want to get married young, but it would be better if they had done it in the proper order of marriage first, child afterward. In the age of easy divorce, any marriage contracted under the shadow of the shotgun has one strike against its success from the start. I pray it will be otherwise, of course.



report abuse
 

curmudgeon

posted September 4, 2008 at 5:40 pm


About changing hearts vs. changing the law: I remember life before Roe. In my own family (some Catholic, some not), I am aware of three people close to me who had one abortion each, one who had two and one who had more than a dozen. All before Roe. All pretty safe. (One had a bad infection as a result, but bore a healthy child later.)
So, I am not convinced that the rate of abortion before Roe was all that much less. I think it was just impossible to track.
There were lots of doctors who would “help a girl out.” (Those abortions in my family occured in various parts of the country, too. None, as far as I know, was ‘back alley.’)
Given that, I am really not convinced that changing the law will change a thing. (And overturning Roe will not make abortion illegal, of course. Just subject to state legislation.)
I actually agree with “Lurker.” I think that the anti-smoking and seat belt campaigns show that you can change minds through propaganda. Granted, we don’t have the forum of the public schools, but I’m not sure that is essential. I don’t think I ever heard a thing about either seat belts or smoking in public school anyway, but I’m older! But I saw a LOT on TV. Why not fund some mega campaigns?
Let me give you an example of what I mean by not providing adequate support: I once asked our bishop, “Could we not have a fund where every woman who needed medical care for a pregnancy knew that she could turn to the Catholic church – no questions asked?” He said, “Possibly, but it would be expensive.” Well, yeah! That’s why women sometimes feel forced to terminate. They can’t afford it.
On another occasion, I was trying to turn over rocks to find housing for a pregnant homeless woman. She had housing during her pregnancy, but the agency where she was staying could not accomodate a newborn. I (naively) assumed that Catholic Charities would be the logical place to look, but no. They couldn’t help me. They couldn’t even refer me to someone who could! (We did find her housing through a purely secular agency who were scandalized that I, a professional working in the church, had to turn to them since we couldn’t give this woman anything.)
My point: If we don’t even provide the support, and people find it difficult to get that support in other places, why do we wonder why women feel honestly desperate? I know that places like crisis pregnancy centers do valuable work. But our local version of that can’t provide medical care or housing. They give diapers, equipment, moral support. I’m not denigrating any of that. But we have to do much, much better if we are going to even make a dent in erradicating abortion.
If every woman in America knew “If I went to a Catholic church, they would do their best to see me through this” I think we would be way ahead of the game. And that might just change hearts as well.
I know that we can’t say that about our local (diocesan) church, though. I would be interested if any of you out there could provide a counter example.



report abuse
 

David S

posted September 5, 2008 at 7:54 am


Death penalty big 6: China, Iran, Iraq, Sudan, Pakistan, USA. Interesting club to be in. I’ll go with JPII.



report abuse
 

Bill Bannon

posted September 5, 2008 at 10:59 am


David S
Lists are interesting or can be deceptive. Your countries do so for three different reasons and so are not univocally motivated….the USA alone does it…the death penalty…. from a biblical tradition and thus the USA alone does it rarely and for murder only (more rarely than the Vatican did it through their executioner…Buggatti…in the first half of the 19th century..over 500 executions) whereas China has 62 reasons and Islam has several reasons including adultery which God gave in the law as punishable that way and then God rescinded that in John when grace came since threats are less necessary after grace (Jn1:17)…neither China nor Isalm are biblically based.
Six of the top ten murder rate countries in the world are nominally Catholic and only one has a death penalty. We ought to attain example status prior to preaching to others in a way opposite most of Church history. Have the Popes looked into why Catholic countries are at the top of the murder rate countries? I suspect not because no one challenges them and Augustine said that we grow by rebuke and grace and not by grace alone but according to a recent remark by Archbishop Martini…Popes do not get exposed to rebuke intimately and at their level….no one in Rome will challenge at that level because doing so would stunt careers. So the Popes do not have rebuke but simply grace and that explains a lot….
John Paul did not believe the violence in the Old Testament was from God (see section 40 Evengelium Vitae)even though the Bible reveals it as being from God….that is why he edited the death penalty passage out of his notes on Genesis 9:5-6 in section 39 of Evangelium Vitae and had he left it in, it would have disturbed his whole point. And that is why he nowhere quotes Romans 13:3-4 in EV as Aquinas did in fact quote it….because it too undoes his hermeneutical journey toward softness in this area. Rather he pointed to Cain being protected by God but John Paul made that iconic of all cases after Cain…. when in fact God Himself shortly after Cain gives both Jews and Gentiles a command to kill those who kill which is repeated eliptically in Romans 13:3-4 by Paul.
But if you are not biblically inclined…or you follow modern techniques of voiding what you don’t like via context etc…go here to the NY Times and its report of present university researchers who in some cases regretfully changed their mind toward the death penalty:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/18/us/18deter.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
fragment: ” Gary Becker, who won the Nobel Prize in economics in 1992 and has followed the debate, said the current empirical evidence was “certainly not decisive” because “we just don’t get enough variation to be confident we have isolated a deterrent effect.”
But, Mr. Becker added, “the evidence of a variety of types — not simply the quantitative evidence — has been enough to convince me that capital punishment does deter and is worth using for the worst sorts of offenses.”
__________________________________________
Primus…no….and I can’t be specific where I live because I was once stalked due to a debate with dispensationalists on the net…..little ole me…harmless as a coral reef fish.



report abuse
 

Bill Bannon

posted September 5, 2008 at 11:40 am


Primus
I’d rather not pinpoint it since I was once stalked after debating dispensationalists on the net who called me at home despite our number being unlisted and only in my wife’s name. You can’t imagine how that feels when another person breaks through multiple fire walls of life…that you thought were there all along.



report abuse
 

Curmudgeon

posted September 6, 2008 at 7:53 am


Re the death penalty and Mr. Bannon:
My sister was murdered – and in Texas. I always say, if the DP is a deterrent, then why isn’t she alive? (In the year she was killed, they executed someone there almost every other week. That doesn’t seem to have stopped her killer.)
I think that current Papal teaching is clear – and certainly that of the US bishops. One may differ, but acknowlege that one is steering away from the magisterium.



report abuse
 

dymphna

posted September 6, 2008 at 9:34 am


I think the trouble with Peggy is that she’s still sore because the Bush’s didn’t want her as a speechwriter and becuase the DC Republicans don’t pay her any mind.



report abuse
 

Gina

posted September 6, 2008 at 10:29 pm


At least with capital punishment in the United States, there’s a defense attorney and an appeals process. The innocent victims of abortion get no such protection or consideration under the law.



report abuse
 

Bill Bannon

posted September 8, 2008 at 9:43 am


Curmudgeon
There are types of murderers who are not deterred as in romantic passion cases for example. There are others such as bodega robbers in the inner city who often kill (where passion is absent and self profit is primary) that might be deterred. The end of Acts 5′s account of the deaths of Ananias and Sapphira by word of Peter and power of God notes that “the whole community took fear”…..author: Holy Spirit.
One should steer away from the Magisterium in the ordinary magisterium under certain conditions. We are not called to surrender our intellect totally despite LG 25 which is supplemented by moral theology tomes approved by Rome after LG 25 which describe dissent in the non infallible areas.
In 1252 in “Ad extirpanda”, Pope Innocent IV brought back the reality of torturous death and made burning at the stake for heretics mandatory for secular rulers to enforce under pain of excommunication (it was in the referred to papal decretals from the imperial constitutions “Commissis nobis” and “Inconsutibilem tunicam”). It had been condemned by a previous Pope some centuries prior. Pope Innocent brought it back and it was renewed and confirmed by Popes: Alexander IV,
Clement IV,Nicholas IV, Boniface VIII. Had you lived then and followed the magisterium down that trail uncritically, you would have been facilitating or enabling a process that John Paul II called “intrinsically evil” in section 80 of Splendor of the Truth.
In 1452 and 1455, Pope Nicholas V gave Portugal the right to “invade” and “perpetually enslave” those newly discovered natives who resisted the gospel (see Romanus Pontifex/ 4th paragraph-middle) with a stipulation that no future authorities could rescind it no matter what the authority level. It was renewed or confirmed by Pope Callixtus III. Pope Sixtus IV, and Pope Leo X and Pope Alexander VI repeated the same rights for Spain in 1594. Again if you at that time volunteered as a conquistador’s soldier based on the magisterium’s position, you would have been doing something which John Paul II condemned in section 80 of Splendor of the Truth as intrinsically evil. Tomas Cajetan, Head of the Dominicans objected to what they did as early as the early 16th century as did Pope Paul III in a bull in 1537 which unfortunately could not stop what had begun and which imperialism led indirectly and over centuries to the rich poor divide and hence high murder rates of parts of Latin America. When a Conquistador sailed from Mexico to the Phillipines in 1571 and conquered that with little trouble and made it Catholic, Japan some 14 years later drove out all missionaries since partly….Catholicism off their coast obviously meant subjection to Europe. The Dutch also conquered Formosa and several years later there were more ordinances against Christianity by Hideyoshi.
We could have used hundreds of thousands of Catholics writing in to Rome or dissenting on both issues…burning at the stake and enslaving…later bulls took centuries to affect the first wave of bulls which had that stipulation that no one could overturn them for Portugal and Spain who became the worst with 33% of the slave trade passing through Portguese hands….and with Brazil, that Catholic country being last out of the slave trade in the West and Portugal being last out as to Europe.



report abuse
 

Bill Bannon

posted September 8, 2008 at 9:46 am


correction: Alexander VI in 1494 not 1594.



report abuse
 

matt

posted September 8, 2008 at 4:59 pm


Yeah. You just described my life to a tee. I read some blogs and I wonder a their ability to follow an issue so closely and just be on top of every wrinkle. Thank God for them because I find out much of what’s going on that I care about.



report abuse
 

cigarette pas chere

posted November 20, 2011 at 5:05 pm


Extremely well executed piece!!



report abuse
 

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Previous Posts

There is nothing I shall want
A couple of weeks ago, a memorial Mass for Michael was held here in Birmingham at the Cathedral. The bishop presided and offered a very nice, even charming homily in which he first focused on the Scripture readings of the day, and then turned to Michael, whom he remembered, among other things, as on

posted 9:24:16am Mar. 05, 2009 | read full post »

Revolutionary Road - Is it just me?
Why am I the only person I know..or even "know" in the Internet sense of "knowing"  - who didn't hate it? I didn't love it, either. There was a lot wrong with it. Weak characterization. Miscasting. Anvil-wielding mentally ill prophets.But here's the thing.Whether or not Yates' original novel in

posted 9:45:04pm Mar. 04, 2009 | read full post »

Books for Lent
No, I'm not going to ask you about your Lenten reading lists...although I might.Not today, though. This post is about giving books to others. For Lent, and a long time after that. You know how it goes during Lent: Prayer, Fasting and Almsgiving, right?Well, here's a worthy recipient for your hard-

posted 9:22:07pm Mar. 04, 2009 | read full post »

Why Via Media
How about....because I'm lame and hate thinking up titles to things? No?Okay...how about...St. Benedict? Yes, yes, I know the association with Anglicanism. That wasn't invovled in my purpose in naming the joint, but if draws some Googling Episcopalians, all the better.To tell the truth, you can bl

posted 8:54:17pm Mar. 04, 2009 | read full post »

Brave Heart?
I don't know about you, but one of effects of childbirth on me was a compulsion to spill the details. All of them.The whole thing was fascinating to me, so of course I assumed everyone else should be fascinated as well in the recounting of every minute of labor, describing the intensity of discomfor

posted 10:19:45pm Mar. 03, 2009 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.