Not after the State Department let this statement go out.

Washington on Friday condemned caricatures in European newspapers of the Prophet Mohammad, siding with Muslims who are outraged that the publications put press freedom over respect for religion.

“By inserting itself into a dispute that has become a lightning rod for anti-European sentiment across the Muslim world, the United States could help its own battered image among Muslims.

"These cartoons are indeed offensive to the belief of Muslims," State Department spokesman Kurtis Cooper said in answer to a question. "We all fully recognize and respect freedom of the press and expression but it must be coupled with press responsibility. Inciting religious or ethnic hatreds in this manner is not acceptable."

"We call for tolerance and respect for all communities for their religious beliefs and practices," he added.

Major U.S. publications have not republished the cartoons, which include depictions of Mohammad as a terrorist. That is in contrast to European media, which responded to the criticism against the original Danish newspaper that printed the caricatures by republishing the offensive images themselves.

Gee, the anti-Semitism and terrorism engaged in and supported by a huge part of the Muslim religion is a hell of a lot more offensive than a couple of cartoons. The out-of-proportion reaction of the Islamic world to the cartoons is significantly more troubling than a few cartoons that indicate that not everyone accepts or respects Islam – especially when that religion is the source of terror, violence, and oppression throughout the world. And that the American government – a government which subsidizes, not merely defends, speech and art which is blasphemous in the eyes of Christians and Jews – would dare to insist upon “responsibility” and “tolerance” is offensive in the extreme.

Maybe we Christians and Jews simply need to bomb, riot, take hostages, and behead innocents to get the same sort of tolerance and respect that the Bush Administration has called for in this infamous act of dhimmitude.

OTHER VOICES: Pink FlamingoBar & Gril, Dr. Sanity, Conservative Outpost, sisu, kaiser.com, NoisyRoom, News O'Rama, Michelle Malkin, TacJammer, Small Town Veteran, RightWinged, Jack of Clubs, Euphoric Reality, Oblogatory Anecdotes, Thieving Monkeys, Restless Mania, Irregular Times, My Vast Rightwing Conspiracy, All Things Beautiful

Posted by: Greg at 02:51 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 476 words, total size 9 kb.

Not after the State Department let this statement go out.

Washington on Friday condemned caricatures in European newspapers of the Prophet Mohammad, siding with Muslims who are outraged that the publications put press freedom over respect for religion.

“By inserting itself into a dispute that has become a lightning rod for anti-European sentiment across the Muslim world, the United States could help its own battered image among Muslims.

"These cartoons are indeed offensive to the belief of Muslims," State Department spokesman Kurtis Cooper said in answer to a question. "We all fully recognize and respect freedom of the press and expression but it must be coupled with press responsibility. Inciting religious or ethnic hatreds in this manner is not acceptable."

"We call for tolerance and respect for all communities for their religious beliefs and practices," he added.

Major U.S. publications have not republished the cartoons, which include depictions of Mohammad as a terrorist. That is in contrast to European media, which responded to the criticism against the original Danish newspaper that printed the caricatures by republishing the offensive images themselves.

Gee, the anti-Semitism and terrorism engaged in and supported by a huge part of the Muslim religion is a hell of a lot more offensive than a couple of cartoons. The out-of-proportion reaction of the Islamic world to the cartoons is significantly more troubling than a few cartoons that indicate that not everyone accepts or respects Islam – especially when that religion is the source of terror, violence, and oppression throughout the world. And that the American government – a government which subsidizes, not merely defends, speech and art which is blasphemous in the eyes of Christians and Jews – would dare to insist upon “responsibility” and “tolerance” is offensive in the extreme.

Maybe we Christians and Jews simply need to bomb, riot, take hostages, and behead innocents to get the same sort of tolerance and respect that the Bush Administration has called for in this infamous act of dhimmitude.

OTHER VOICES: Pink FlamingoBar & Gril, Dr. Sanity, Conservative Outpost, sisu, kaiser.com, NoisyRoom, News O'Rama, Michelle Malkin, TacJammer, Small Town Veteran, RightWinged, Jack of Clubs, Euphoric Reality, Oblogatory Anecdotes, Thieving Monkeys, Restless Mania, Irregular Times, My Vast Rightwing Conspiracy, All Things Beautiful

Posted by: Greg at 02:51 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 483 words, total size 9 kb.

It has happened again in Chicago. Accusations of abuse have resulted in the removal of priests from their parishes. Criminal charges have been filed in one case, for these are current charges.

But is an accused priest ever "innocent until proven guilty", or is he "guilty, and never permitted to be proven innocent"?

Due process does not apply to priests accused of molesting kids and it never has, according to both a priests advocacy group and critics of the Catholic church.

For different reasons, both priests and church critics say due process hasn't been observed when it comes to allegations against priests.

Priests say they're practically guilty upon accusation. Critics say the church for too long gave accused priests a pass and simply transferred them to other assignments without adequately investigating or addressing the problems.

Recent abuse allegations against Chicago clergymen show that in the court of public opinion, "innocent until proved guilty" stops at the church doorstep. "I don't know of any priest who is not afraid," the Rev. Robert Silva said.

Silva is president of the National Federation of Priests' Councils, an advocacy group that represents 26,000 of America's 43,000 priests.

"Anyone can accuse them, and they'll have to step down," Silva said.

"How do you restore people's confidence? How do you restore your reputation if you get accused?"

And that is a question that needs to be asked. Are some charges -- perhaps even most -- true? Yes, beyond all question. But are some false? Undoubtedly, whether due to different interpretations of events or malicious falsehood.

But for the innocent, the stigma stays. Ask my old mentor, Father Dan, who was accused of misconduct in the mid 1980s. The charge was reported, investigated by both the church and the state, and found to be unfounded. Several years later, in the mid 1990s, when an unrelated scandal broke in the diocese, he was abruptly yanked from his parish and subjected to an extended investigation by the diocese and the local prosecutor under the theory that any old accusation needed to be reinvestigated as a matter of due diligence. Cleared a second time, he was suspended and reinvestigated again, after the nation's bishops adopted their sex abuse investigation standards nearly a decade later. He was cleared again -- but was targeted for a civil suit by a disgruntled parishioner who had a history of mental instability. I don't doubt that when he finally is called home to the Lord, the first paragraph of the local paper's obituary will highlight the false accusations, not his years of faithful service as a priest.

This reality bothers me, for as a teacher I am in another field where accusations are easy to make and hard to defend.

It offends me, because good men are destroyed by a process that often does not give them a reasonable chance to defend themselves.

And it worries me, because I know that false accusations happen.

And because this time, one of the priests suspended in Chicago is an old friend, another Father Dan, who was a year ahead of me during my time in the seminary. I don't know whether or not he is guilty, and I don't pretend to know. If the charges are true, I hope that justice is truly and righteously done. But if the charges are not true, if Father Dan is not guilty, I hope that justice is also truly and righteously done -- and that he can return to active ministry without being forever branded as "the priest who was accused".

The article raises that issue.

Today, in the public's mind, [Father Dan] McCormack already is guilty, many say: Even if he were acquitted, one priest said, McCormack could never return to St. Agatha.

He probably can't come back to Chicago. His name is now forever linked to crimes he is accused of committing.

When it comes to priests accused of sexual abuse, attorney Frederic Nessler said, "Ruining lives is not a priority issue, because I feel they've ruined so many children's lives."

Nessler has represented nearly 100 victims of clergy abuse.

"In my opinion, (offending priests) should be given very little quarter," he said.

While I agree that the guilty should be given no quarter, I think that Nessler and those like him need to rethink their position that because of the failings of the Church as an institution in the past, that concerns about ruining the lives of innocent priests should be given low priority. After all, while a diocese or archdiocese is an ongoing entity that can be held accountable over time for the actions of its leadership, justice is not done when individual priests are falsely accused and destroyed for crimes they did not commit on the theory that "they've ruined so many children's lives." That is the mentality of the lynch mob, not the honest searcher for justice.

Posted by: Greg at 02:33 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 827 words, total size 5 kb.

Just a reminder that Christians are attacked by many different groups.

Cardinal Ivan Dias condemned a "violent attack" suffered by a bishop and some priests of the Vasai Diocese on Sunday and called on the authorities to take action.

"We are deeply shocked to learn of the violent attack made yesterday by certain unruly elements on the Most Reverend Bishop Thomas Dabre of Vasai and the priests who were accompanying him on a very praiseworthy humanitarian mission," said the archbishop of Bombay in a statement.

The statement was published today by the bishops' conference of India.

The Vasai bishop and priests were attending the inauguration of a boarding school for tribal youth at Gosali in Mokhada Taluka, in the Thane district, in the state of Maharashtra.

Cardinal Dias said that Bishop Dabre and the priests were pelted with stones. One of the priests, Father Brendon Furtado, suffered an ear injury.

The incident took place when Bishop Dabre, 60, along with 10 priests, nuns and social workers, went to the village to inaugurate the Suryodaya Ashram, a boarding school for 60 tribal boys and girls, the SAR News reported.

Just before the inauguration ceremony, 40 to 50 suspected members of the Bajrang Dal and Vanvasi Kalyan Parishad, organizations of the fundamentalist Hindu group Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, began to throw stones.

They were under the false impression that the Catholic bishop went there to convert students, SAR said. Other sources reported a much higher figure of attackers.

Fearful

A visibly shaken Bishop Dabre said: "It was the most horrible experience as stones were pelted in all directions in and around the building. There were about 200 parishioners within the building and outside, who had gathered for the inauguration of the ashram." They feared for their lives, he added.

"The fundamentalists who attacked us do not know that we have come to serve the poor tribals and we are opposed to forceful conversion," Bishop Dabre observed.

For his part, the archbishop of Bombay added in his statement: "Such a barbaric and unwarranted outburst of violence is indeed a disgrace to our Indian culture of respect and tolerance, and it sadly reveals a serious lack of a sense of civilized democracy in the politico-religious groups which instigated it.

"It is particularly painful that the incident occurred on the eve of the assassination anniversary of our beloved father of the nation, Mahatma Gandhi, the apostle of 'ahimsa' [nonviolence], which was the weapon with which he fought and won independence for a secular India."

Archbishop Dias added: "I am confident that the authorities concerned will take prompt action against the perpetrators of the criminal deed and will adopt such corrective measures so as to dissuade the repetition of similar episodes which seriously endanger communal harmony and wreck the secular fabric of our dear motherland."

Shame!

Posted by: Greg at 12:32 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 477 words, total size 3 kb.