By Mark Henry
On this Memorial Day, we are called to honor and remember those who have served our country. We must never forget that the freedom we take for granted is not free and comes with a heavy price. It is also a time to remember that we are one nation under God and we honor those in the military who sacrificed to keep it that way.
While all Americans need to be thankful for the service of our military veterans, there are those among us who owe a particular debt of gratitude to family members who served in the armed forces.
This Memorial Day is particularly significant for my family since my father, a veteran of WWII and the Korean War, was interred this week at Punchbowl National Cemetery in Hawaii. My father was one of a whole generation of young men who were pressed into military service when WWII broke out. Since Dad was not keen to fight in the trenches, he opted to enroll in flight training school to become a Marine aviator. Barely meeting the pilot minimum age requirement of 18, he went on to flight training school and was rushed into air combat in the Pacific.
By military standards, Dad had a successful tour of duty as he was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross among other wartime citations and awards. However, Dad never liked to talk much about his experiences in the war. In fact, the Catholic chaplain at my father’s memorial service this week nailed it when he said that if my father were here he would say he did nothing special, nothing but his duty.
My father’s memorial service last week was with "military honors" and was a deeply moving experience. Since I never served in the military, I had no idea what I was in for. Seeing an honor guard of seven Marine soldiers firing their rifles into the air three times was awe-inspiring. The ceremonial playing of taps by a lone bugler, followed by eight additional Marine honor guards presenting the American flag to me as the next of kin was an unforgettable experience.
Many Americans do not realize or appreciate the deep Christian symbolism which is reflected in the flag presentation ceremony at a military funeral. The honoring of God in the presentation of the American flag was personally comforting and surprising in this age where our federal government seems so determined to remove any semblance of Christian faith from the public square.
Each individual fold of the flag has symbolic significance, with a number of folds honoring God and traditional Christian values. At my father’s service, the flag was folded thirteen times by eight Marine honor guards, standing in two rows of four honor guards each.
The first fold of the flag is a symbol of life. The second fold of the flag is a symbol of a belief in eternal life. The fourth fold of the flag represents man’s fallibility, man’s need to trust in God and the importance of turning to God for His divine guidance in times of war and peace.
The twelfth fold of the flag symbolizes eternity and glorifies God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The thirteenth and last fold of the flag reveals the stars on the flag and symbolizes the United States' national motto, “In God We Trust.”
My father’s military memorial service, especially the flag presentation ceremony, was an experience that will live with me all my days. However, what made Dad’s memorial service not just moving but spiritually significant was realizing how different events in my father’s life, like the ceremonial folding of the American flag, manifested God’s providence and led my father inexorably closer to God.
Earlier in his life, my father never seemed to have too much of an interest in his faith. While he occasionally joined the family for services on holidays and other occasions, it seemed more in his character, as the battle hardened Marine combat pilot, to be the breadwinner, disciplinarian and sports coach rather than spiritual leader of the family. While the Lord may have called Dad, he was not yet willing to listen and the Lord's call fell, for the moment, on deaf ears.
However, during his final years my father’s worsening physical condition provided him a timely opportunity to reflect on his life, his accomplishments, his regrets and also his gradually awakening desire to come closer to Christ.
During this stage of Dad’s life, his numerous hospitalizations required that we, his family, “stand guard” at his bedside and literally defend his life. I believed it was the least we could do in return for all Dad did for us and his country. The need for this was clear as each time Dad was hospitalized the hospital staff tried to convince us that Dad was dying and it was futile and pointless to insist that he received life-sustaining care like food and water intravenously. According to the hospital staff, the better thing to do was to medicate him, not provide him nutrition and hydration and let him die.
Essentially, the hospital staff wanted us to agree that Dad could be euthanized. Fortunately, we resisted the unrelenting pressure of the hospital staff to terminally sedate Dad and each time Dad walked out of the hospital on his own.
While I did not realize it at the time, I eventually came to appreciate the eternal spiritual significance of the battle that we were waging for Dad. He needed just a little more time for God’s loving arms to embrace him. Had the hospital had its way and been able to euthanize Dad, he may not have come back to Christ and his soul could have been lost forever.
After Dad was discharged from the hospital for the last time, he sat down with me and the final and most joyous chapter of his life unfolded. I remember it well, after having lunch with my father and returning to his apartment we sat down and he asked me to tell him about my faith in Christ! Hearing his request brought a lump to my throat and tears to my eyes. Dad had now unfolded the first and second folds in the flag, he was acknowledging the importance of life and eternity.
This conversation with my father was the first in a sequence of memorable events that ended with Dad accepting Christ as his Lord and Savior. Soon enough, Dad began attending church services with us. He also started a daily prayer life, sometimes on his own and sometimes with friends of his who also had been encouraging him to renew his Catholic faith.
The Lord’s plan for my father was finally unfolding before my very eyes. By now, my father’s failing health made it apparent that he may not have long to live. He was now at the fourth fold in the flag and had recognized his own fallibility and his need to turn to God in this most difficult of times.
All to soon, Dad was admitted to the hospital for the last time and he took his final step of spiritual reconciliation - he confessed his sins to the hospital Chaplain and received the last rites. Dad was now unfolding the final folds in the flag where he recognized the need to reconcile with God, to glorify Him and to trust in His saving grace. Within twenty-four hours, the Lord tenderly reached out and took Dad home.
My father’s memorial service at Punchbowl last week was a tribute to a man, his service to country and his Catholic faith. Like the faith inspired folding of the American flag, Dad’s life journey was a testimony to the values of life, honor and God’s providence. My father, the prodigal soldier, finished faithful which was God’s plan for him all along. Semper Fidelis, Dad.
Monday, May 31, 2010
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Lessons Learned From Greece: Dominos and Subsidiarity
by Mark Henry
The recent economic chaos in Greece has generated shockwaves felt all the way to America with many financial commentators opining that last weeks dramatic stock market losses were due to Wall Street anxiety about the economic problems in Greece and what it portends for other countries which have adopted economic policies similar to those adopted in Greece.
The recently announced bailout of Greece by the E.U. Union and IMF are stop gap measures that fail to address structural weaknesses that are firmly entrenched in most European economies. These stress fractures of the welfare state are now spreading to the U.S. economy and the economic policies of America’s current political leaders threatens to exacerbate the economic hardship that may be in America’s future.
Political leaders in Europe and America would do well to adopt economic policies guided by pertinent Catholic social doctrine, including the principle of subsidiarity. If policymakers reject these Catholic teachings they will do so at their own peril and jeopardize the well being of the countries they have been entrusted to protect.
Essentially, Greece’s financial meltdown is due to the government’s socialistic leaning policies which, inter alia, promote government entitlements and discourage private enterprise. The Greek government policies favors government employees who receive higher wages, better benefits and more generous retirement than private sector employees. These policies require increasing levels of taxation and result in significant redistribution of wealth.
Greece’s policies favoring public employees are seen as a quid pro quo for the political support of these well provided for public employees. However, a recession weakened economy in Greece, combined with costly government entitlements has pushed the country to the brink of financial collapse. The European Union and the IMF have agreed to a monetary bailout of Greece in exchange for austerity measures which Greece’s ruling socialist leaders have been compelled to implement. These austerity measures include deep pay cuts to the salaries and pensions of government workers.
What the Greeks are learning – and what other developed countries in Europe are having to cope with – is that socialist economies doesn’t work very well and are not sustainable over the long-term. That’s why the E.U. and IMF have to bail out Greece.
The bigger problem is that other European countries like England, Spain, Portugal and Ireland also have “Greek” economic problems of their own with unsustainable overspending on government entitlement programs. Like Greece, these countries have also overpromised entitlements which they can no longer afford give to their citizens. The fear is that Greece is just the first domino to fall and if other countries follow the E.U. and IMF are going to be unwilling or unable to bail these other countries out. This could result in sovereign defaults with disastrous effects on the worldwide economy.
How can we understand the causes of this growing economic problem and discern the direction our political leaders should take to deal with it? As is usually the case, Catholic teachings provide helpful guidance on how the faithful should analyze this pressing problem.
Pope John Paul II harshly criticized the welfare state in his 1991 encyclical Centesimus Annus wherein he stated that the welfare state undermined this core principle of subsidiarity. This Catholic teaching states that when something can be done locally by a smaller simpler organization this is better than central planning type action by a larger and more complex organization. This tenet safeguards the ideals of limited government and personal freedom and stands squarely opposed to the welfare state’s goals of centralization and bureaucracy.
John Paul II warned us that the welfare state discourages human initiative and results in an excessive increase of public bureaucracies. This results in an enormous increase in spending by a government whose goal is to achieve its own statist agenda rather than to serve the public.
What we are seeing in Europe are the disastrous financial consequences that come to countries that reject subsidiarity and embrace the failed economic model of socialism. Recent images of Greek government workers rioting in the streets in response to limited austerity measures announced by Greece’s socialist ruling party is an omen of economic chaos that can spread throughout Europe and to America if unsustainable government entitlements are not brought under control.
However, the “fix” to these serious national economic problems is not a knee-jerk return to unfettered capitalism. The seeds of the serious recession we have been going through in the U.S. were planted during the Bush administration which was roundly criticized for excessive government spending and ineffectual regulation of the financial industry. And this occurred with an administration that professed support for free market policies instead of socialism.
While socialism’s economic failures are obvious and historically documented, improperly regulated capitalism has had its fair share of train wrecks as well. The 2008 stock market crash, recent banking and insurance industry failures and the collapse in real estate values were the handiwork of capitalism gone wild.
It is true that misguided government intervention into the free market arena was at least partially responsible for some of these economic collapses.
However, regardless of whether these economic failures were caused by free wheeling capitalists, wrong-headed statist minded politicians or all of the above, Catholic social teachings in the economic realm can be a light on the path to improving the economic well being of all of us.
In his recent Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate, Pope Benedict reveals his keen insight on some of the financial abuses which caused the recent meltdown on Wall Street. Pope Benedict writes “Economy and finance, as instruments, can be used badly when those at the helm are motivated by purely selfish ends. Instruments that are good in themselves can thereby be transformed into harmful one… The Church's social doctrine holds that authentically human social relationships of friendship, solidarity and reciprocity can also be conducted within economic activity.” (CV 36) Benedict goes on to say that “Financiers must rediscover the genuinely ethical foundation of their activity, so as not to abuse the sophisticated instruments which can serve to betray the interests of savers” (CV 65).
In light of these pressing economic problems how can Catholic’s chart a path which avoid the abject failures of socialism while avoiding the excesses of unbridled capitalism?
Steering clear of socialism’s bureaucratic welfare state is clearly called for. America needs to learn from and not embrace the failed social welfare system currently wreaking economic havoc in Europe. These failed ideologies have jumped the pond and are taking hold in America under the statist policies of the Obama administration and the majority party leaders.
The most recent example of European modeled statist policies being implemented here at home is the federal takeover of health care insurance, destined to be a huge public entitlement that will raise taxes but is not likely to measurably improve health care.
Another example of the recent drift towards the European style social welfare state is the accelerated growth of both the numbers of government employees and the benefits paid in the public sector. According to leading economic historian John Steele Gordon, federal workers currently earn almost twice what their private-sector counterparts earn. Further, Obama's new spending programs will result in a 14.5 percent increase in the number of federal employees in just two years.
A variety of other policies the America’s political leaders are pushing will, if unchecked, take us down the path of unsustainable government spending which is creating economic chaos in Europe.
On the other hand, an unconditional embrace of purely economic driven capitalism, bereft of any ethical parameters, is not the answer either. We have recently seen that this economic philosophy generally works but is accompanied by periodic upheaval that leaves far too many suffering in its wake. Pope Benedict’s Caritas In Veritate highlights the need for economic practices which are not just efficient and productive but are also based on ethical principles which promote positive human development.
Pope Benedict’s refreshing economic philosophy manifested itself recently in a recent study by the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences. This study was issued by the Pontifical Academy during its recent April 30 - May 4 session, just as the economic chaos in Greece was coming to a head.
Pontifical Academy Chair Mary Ann Glendon called for financial reform to promote “the essentially ethical nature of economics as an activity of and for human beings.” The study also attributed part of the current economic instabilities to an overreliance on speculative financial activities that are separated from productive activity in the real economy.
While this recent study shied away from detailed economic policy directives, it is sensible to conclude that we are called by Catholic social doctrine to take a middle path somewhere in between the two extremes of socialism and laissez faire capitalism.
To the extent that these recent teachings call for increased government oversight of the economy, it would be mistaken to interpret this as support for the type of top down centralized government control of major economic sectors like the recent federal government takeover of the health insurance industry.
While Catholic social doctrine acknowledges a proper role for government to play that role is purposely limited. Government is called to regulate but not to dominate or unduly control commerce. A country’s government and economic system need to coexist and have a complimentary relationship in order to advance the overall well being of a country’s citizens.
Fundamental Catholic teachings on both subsidiarity and the proper but limited regulatory role of government are a critical light on the path to guide socio-economic policies to maintain the delicate balance between government and economics. Political leaders who disregard these important Catholic social teachings jeopardize their own political futures and imperil the well being of the citizens they are entrusted to lead.
The recent economic chaos in Greece has generated shockwaves felt all the way to America with many financial commentators opining that last weeks dramatic stock market losses were due to Wall Street anxiety about the economic problems in Greece and what it portends for other countries which have adopted economic policies similar to those adopted in Greece.
The recently announced bailout of Greece by the E.U. Union and IMF are stop gap measures that fail to address structural weaknesses that are firmly entrenched in most European economies. These stress fractures of the welfare state are now spreading to the U.S. economy and the economic policies of America’s current political leaders threatens to exacerbate the economic hardship that may be in America’s future.
Political leaders in Europe and America would do well to adopt economic policies guided by pertinent Catholic social doctrine, including the principle of subsidiarity. If policymakers reject these Catholic teachings they will do so at their own peril and jeopardize the well being of the countries they have been entrusted to protect.
Essentially, Greece’s financial meltdown is due to the government’s socialistic leaning policies which, inter alia, promote government entitlements and discourage private enterprise. The Greek government policies favors government employees who receive higher wages, better benefits and more generous retirement than private sector employees. These policies require increasing levels of taxation and result in significant redistribution of wealth.
Greece’s policies favoring public employees are seen as a quid pro quo for the political support of these well provided for public employees. However, a recession weakened economy in Greece, combined with costly government entitlements has pushed the country to the brink of financial collapse. The European Union and the IMF have agreed to a monetary bailout of Greece in exchange for austerity measures which Greece’s ruling socialist leaders have been compelled to implement. These austerity measures include deep pay cuts to the salaries and pensions of government workers.
What the Greeks are learning – and what other developed countries in Europe are having to cope with – is that socialist economies doesn’t work very well and are not sustainable over the long-term. That’s why the E.U. and IMF have to bail out Greece.
The bigger problem is that other European countries like England, Spain, Portugal and Ireland also have “Greek” economic problems of their own with unsustainable overspending on government entitlement programs. Like Greece, these countries have also overpromised entitlements which they can no longer afford give to their citizens. The fear is that Greece is just the first domino to fall and if other countries follow the E.U. and IMF are going to be unwilling or unable to bail these other countries out. This could result in sovereign defaults with disastrous effects on the worldwide economy.
How can we understand the causes of this growing economic problem and discern the direction our political leaders should take to deal with it? As is usually the case, Catholic teachings provide helpful guidance on how the faithful should analyze this pressing problem.
Pope John Paul II harshly criticized the welfare state in his 1991 encyclical Centesimus Annus wherein he stated that the welfare state undermined this core principle of subsidiarity. This Catholic teaching states that when something can be done locally by a smaller simpler organization this is better than central planning type action by a larger and more complex organization. This tenet safeguards the ideals of limited government and personal freedom and stands squarely opposed to the welfare state’s goals of centralization and bureaucracy.
John Paul II warned us that the welfare state discourages human initiative and results in an excessive increase of public bureaucracies. This results in an enormous increase in spending by a government whose goal is to achieve its own statist agenda rather than to serve the public.
What we are seeing in Europe are the disastrous financial consequences that come to countries that reject subsidiarity and embrace the failed economic model of socialism. Recent images of Greek government workers rioting in the streets in response to limited austerity measures announced by Greece’s socialist ruling party is an omen of economic chaos that can spread throughout Europe and to America if unsustainable government entitlements are not brought under control.
However, the “fix” to these serious national economic problems is not a knee-jerk return to unfettered capitalism. The seeds of the serious recession we have been going through in the U.S. were planted during the Bush administration which was roundly criticized for excessive government spending and ineffectual regulation of the financial industry. And this occurred with an administration that professed support for free market policies instead of socialism.
While socialism’s economic failures are obvious and historically documented, improperly regulated capitalism has had its fair share of train wrecks as well. The 2008 stock market crash, recent banking and insurance industry failures and the collapse in real estate values were the handiwork of capitalism gone wild.
It is true that misguided government intervention into the free market arena was at least partially responsible for some of these economic collapses.
However, regardless of whether these economic failures were caused by free wheeling capitalists, wrong-headed statist minded politicians or all of the above, Catholic social teachings in the economic realm can be a light on the path to improving the economic well being of all of us.
In his recent Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate, Pope Benedict reveals his keen insight on some of the financial abuses which caused the recent meltdown on Wall Street. Pope Benedict writes “Economy and finance, as instruments, can be used badly when those at the helm are motivated by purely selfish ends. Instruments that are good in themselves can thereby be transformed into harmful one… The Church's social doctrine holds that authentically human social relationships of friendship, solidarity and reciprocity can also be conducted within economic activity.” (CV 36) Benedict goes on to say that “Financiers must rediscover the genuinely ethical foundation of their activity, so as not to abuse the sophisticated instruments which can serve to betray the interests of savers” (CV 65).
In light of these pressing economic problems how can Catholic’s chart a path which avoid the abject failures of socialism while avoiding the excesses of unbridled capitalism?
Steering clear of socialism’s bureaucratic welfare state is clearly called for. America needs to learn from and not embrace the failed social welfare system currently wreaking economic havoc in Europe. These failed ideologies have jumped the pond and are taking hold in America under the statist policies of the Obama administration and the majority party leaders.
The most recent example of European modeled statist policies being implemented here at home is the federal takeover of health care insurance, destined to be a huge public entitlement that will raise taxes but is not likely to measurably improve health care.
Another example of the recent drift towards the European style social welfare state is the accelerated growth of both the numbers of government employees and the benefits paid in the public sector. According to leading economic historian John Steele Gordon, federal workers currently earn almost twice what their private-sector counterparts earn. Further, Obama's new spending programs will result in a 14.5 percent increase in the number of federal employees in just two years.
A variety of other policies the America’s political leaders are pushing will, if unchecked, take us down the path of unsustainable government spending which is creating economic chaos in Europe.
On the other hand, an unconditional embrace of purely economic driven capitalism, bereft of any ethical parameters, is not the answer either. We have recently seen that this economic philosophy generally works but is accompanied by periodic upheaval that leaves far too many suffering in its wake. Pope Benedict’s Caritas In Veritate highlights the need for economic practices which are not just efficient and productive but are also based on ethical principles which promote positive human development.
Pope Benedict’s refreshing economic philosophy manifested itself recently in a recent study by the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences. This study was issued by the Pontifical Academy during its recent April 30 - May 4 session, just as the economic chaos in Greece was coming to a head.
Pontifical Academy Chair Mary Ann Glendon called for financial reform to promote “the essentially ethical nature of economics as an activity of and for human beings.” The study also attributed part of the current economic instabilities to an overreliance on speculative financial activities that are separated from productive activity in the real economy.
While this recent study shied away from detailed economic policy directives, it is sensible to conclude that we are called by Catholic social doctrine to take a middle path somewhere in between the two extremes of socialism and laissez faire capitalism.
To the extent that these recent teachings call for increased government oversight of the economy, it would be mistaken to interpret this as support for the type of top down centralized government control of major economic sectors like the recent federal government takeover of the health insurance industry.
While Catholic social doctrine acknowledges a proper role for government to play that role is purposely limited. Government is called to regulate but not to dominate or unduly control commerce. A country’s government and economic system need to coexist and have a complimentary relationship in order to advance the overall well being of a country’s citizens.
Fundamental Catholic teachings on both subsidiarity and the proper but limited regulatory role of government are a critical light on the path to guide socio-economic policies to maintain the delicate balance between government and economics. Political leaders who disregard these important Catholic social teachings jeopardize their own political futures and imperil the well being of the citizens they are entrusted to lead.
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Restoring The Primacy of Christian Values in America
by Mark Henry
The fact that America has elected the most pro-abortion and most socialist leaning U.S President and Congress in our Country’s history says much about how far our country has strayed from the traditional Christian values upon which our country was established.
Quo Vadis – where is America headed? With Congress’s passage of the federal health insurance takeover bill, America has lurched down the path of socialism. Emboldened by this victory, the far left leaders of the Democratic party will likely seek to further increase the power of the federal government over the private sector and the individual by way of new laws, regulations and policies.
With the federal health insurance takeover finally completed, a wide array of statist oriented policies are likely to follow which will dramatically expand the role of government and further undermine the important impact that the values of life, faith and family historically have had in America. These new policies will result in the federal government promoting abortion, euthanasia, and non-traditional marriage at an unprecedented level.
Additionally, we will no doubt see new entitlement programs established that will stifle personal freedom and initiative and, instead, will usher in greater citizenry dependence on big government. The unprecedented growth in government that will follow is contrary to the fundamental principle of Catholic social doctrine of subsidiarity. Essentially, this important Church doctrine states that decisions are best made at a smaller, more local level, rather than issuing forth from a more distant centralized source.
The common thread running through the federal health insurance industry takeover and other statist policies the government is pursuing is a modus operandi to transform America into a post Christian nation. What the majority party leaders seek is to subordinate traditional values like faith, family and personal responsibility and to elevate moral relativism, utilitarianism, narcissism and other secular values. We cannot allow them to do this.
Of course, these striking changes in government policy should not come as a big a surprise to most clear thinking Americans. This is because during his campaign for the Presidency, Barrack Hussein Obama often said that he intended to transform America while he studiously avoided saying just what it was he wanted to change. Regrettably, the mantra of unspecified change was good enough for far too many Americans.
Now it is patently clear what the President and the Democratic leadership plan to do to America and its citizens. What they envision is an America that looks more like the secular and socialistic countries of Europe and nothing at all like the traditional Christian values based country our founders established.
Any serious doubt about this euro-centric direction vanishes when you see that the major policy initiatives of the Obama administration are substantially identical to the statist big government policies followed by the dominant countries of the European Union. This administration’s policies concerning health care, abortion, same sex marriage, global warming and taxation are all in lock step with prevailing European Union policies.
Well, what is so wrong with coming back into the fold and returning to the values of Europe, the land where many of our ancestors hailed from? Well, to begin with today’s Europe is a world apart from the traditional Christian values based civilization of either our forefathers or the Europe which American soldiers died defending in World Wars I and II. Foundational American values like respect for life, traditional families and freedom of religion are on the wane in most of Europe.
Our Constitution’s Bill of Rights expressly protects the free exercise of religion. On the other hand, the Constitution of the European Union intentionally lacks any acknowledgment of the singularly important role that Christianity has had in shaping European civilization. While the ramifications of such a collective rejection of Europe’s Christian heritage is beyond the scope of this article, it suffices to say that our American Constitution and the European Union’s Constitution are oceans apart and America is much better off for it, thank you.
Therein lies the crux of the problem. President Obama and the leftist leadership of the Democratic party would like to build a statist bridge to take America down the path towards the European socialist welfare state.
However, to take America on this transformative journey, Democrat leaders will need to cajole more Americans into sacrificing their traditional values like faith, freedom and personal responsibility and, instead, get Americans to accept these new statist policies and leftist secular values. Faithful Catholics need to join together with increasing numbers of Americans who will oppose these efforts to transform America into a nation the Founders would scarcely recognize.
What Can Catholic Christians Do To Restore America’s Christian Values? With the Democrat leadership’s game plan now more obvious, the only questions unanswered are whether the Catholic faithful are prepared to fight for our country’s Christian heritage and, if so, how are we to wage that battle?
There are critically important actions we the Catholic faithful need to begin taking immediately to restore and preserve America’s Christian heritage for future generations. The strategies we need to pursue run the gamut and include ecclesial, cultural, economic, educational, legal and, most assuredly, political action. More will be said in the next issue in this series of articles; The Fight to Preserve America’s Christian Heritage.
The fact that America has elected the most pro-abortion and most socialist leaning U.S President and Congress in our Country’s history says much about how far our country has strayed from the traditional Christian values upon which our country was established.
Quo Vadis – where is America headed? With Congress’s passage of the federal health insurance takeover bill, America has lurched down the path of socialism. Emboldened by this victory, the far left leaders of the Democratic party will likely seek to further increase the power of the federal government over the private sector and the individual by way of new laws, regulations and policies.
With the federal health insurance takeover finally completed, a wide array of statist oriented policies are likely to follow which will dramatically expand the role of government and further undermine the important impact that the values of life, faith and family historically have had in America. These new policies will result in the federal government promoting abortion, euthanasia, and non-traditional marriage at an unprecedented level.
Additionally, we will no doubt see new entitlement programs established that will stifle personal freedom and initiative and, instead, will usher in greater citizenry dependence on big government. The unprecedented growth in government that will follow is contrary to the fundamental principle of Catholic social doctrine of subsidiarity. Essentially, this important Church doctrine states that decisions are best made at a smaller, more local level, rather than issuing forth from a more distant centralized source.
The common thread running through the federal health insurance industry takeover and other statist policies the government is pursuing is a modus operandi to transform America into a post Christian nation. What the majority party leaders seek is to subordinate traditional values like faith, family and personal responsibility and to elevate moral relativism, utilitarianism, narcissism and other secular values. We cannot allow them to do this.
Of course, these striking changes in government policy should not come as a big a surprise to most clear thinking Americans. This is because during his campaign for the Presidency, Barrack Hussein Obama often said that he intended to transform America while he studiously avoided saying just what it was he wanted to change. Regrettably, the mantra of unspecified change was good enough for far too many Americans.
Now it is patently clear what the President and the Democratic leadership plan to do to America and its citizens. What they envision is an America that looks more like the secular and socialistic countries of Europe and nothing at all like the traditional Christian values based country our founders established.
Any serious doubt about this euro-centric direction vanishes when you see that the major policy initiatives of the Obama administration are substantially identical to the statist big government policies followed by the dominant countries of the European Union. This administration’s policies concerning health care, abortion, same sex marriage, global warming and taxation are all in lock step with prevailing European Union policies.
Well, what is so wrong with coming back into the fold and returning to the values of Europe, the land where many of our ancestors hailed from? Well, to begin with today’s Europe is a world apart from the traditional Christian values based civilization of either our forefathers or the Europe which American soldiers died defending in World Wars I and II. Foundational American values like respect for life, traditional families and freedom of religion are on the wane in most of Europe.
Our Constitution’s Bill of Rights expressly protects the free exercise of religion. On the other hand, the Constitution of the European Union intentionally lacks any acknowledgment of the singularly important role that Christianity has had in shaping European civilization. While the ramifications of such a collective rejection of Europe’s Christian heritage is beyond the scope of this article, it suffices to say that our American Constitution and the European Union’s Constitution are oceans apart and America is much better off for it, thank you.
Therein lies the crux of the problem. President Obama and the leftist leadership of the Democratic party would like to build a statist bridge to take America down the path towards the European socialist welfare state.
However, to take America on this transformative journey, Democrat leaders will need to cajole more Americans into sacrificing their traditional values like faith, freedom and personal responsibility and, instead, get Americans to accept these new statist policies and leftist secular values. Faithful Catholics need to join together with increasing numbers of Americans who will oppose these efforts to transform America into a nation the Founders would scarcely recognize.
What Can Catholic Christians Do To Restore America’s Christian Values? With the Democrat leadership’s game plan now more obvious, the only questions unanswered are whether the Catholic faithful are prepared to fight for our country’s Christian heritage and, if so, how are we to wage that battle?
There are critically important actions we the Catholic faithful need to begin taking immediately to restore and preserve America’s Christian heritage for future generations. The strategies we need to pursue run the gamut and include ecclesial, cultural, economic, educational, legal and, most assuredly, political action. More will be said in the next issue in this series of articles; The Fight to Preserve America’s Christian Heritage.
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
Congressman Massa Tries To Torpedo Obama Healthcare Bill
by Mark Henry
Congressman Eric Massa resigned from office Monday night claiming that Democrat leaders pressured him to resign because he intended to vote “no” on the Senate’s controversial health bill. Massa’s resignation occurred after an ethics investigation into allegations of sexual harassment of staffers was made public.
Massa alleges that he was set-up by Democrat leaders who are desperate to reduce the number of yes votes needed to pass the health bill. Massa, a former Naval Commander, admits to using inappropriate "salty" language but that the remaining ethics charges are trumped up.
Last Sunday, on a Hornell, N.Y. radio program Massa spent 90 minutes attacking Democrat leaders including Majority Whip Steny Hoyer and White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. In his comments, Massa lambasted Emanuel, calling him “the son of the devil's spawn" and said he would "strap his children to the front end of a steam locomotive" to get a vote passed through Congress.
Democrat leaders are doing the best to maintain a stiff upper lip and deny Massa’s allegations that they will do “whatever it takes” to pass the unpopular health bill, including destroying the career of one of their own party members. However, Massa’s story has marathon legs and is getting extensive coverage on the radio, television and online media. The story is not only garnering coverage from the predictable conservative programs but is also getting critical attention from leading left of center venues like the Huffington Post.
The details of former Congressmen Massa’s complaints of harsh tactics by Democrat leaders are interesting but not that important. The real story here is the emergence of a clear modus operandi of unseemly deal-making and Chicago thug like intimidation by Democrat leaders intent on doing whatever it takes to get this health insurance bill passed.
Massa is part of a group of centrist and blue dog Democrats who have come under fierce pressure to pass the health bills in the Senate and House. Democrat Bart Stupak has been critical of the Senate bills lack of prohibitions against federal funding of abortions. Others have criticized the Senate bill as an expensive first step towards an eventual takeover of the health insurance industry. Republicans have strongly criticized the Senate bill’s mandate that essentially all Americans purchase health insurance.
These problematic aspects of the health bills, along with the hardball tactics employed by Democratic leaders to win approval of fellow Democrats have resulted in this version of health reform being very unpopular with the majority of Americans.
Given the unpopularity of the health bills, many are wondering why the Democrat leadership is so doggedly determined to pass the bills.
Conservative Commentator Mark Steyn has opined that “Government health care is not about health care, it’s about government.” Steyn asserts that once socialized medicine is put into place it will be next to impossible to get rid of this new entitlement program. This will result in a fundamental change in America with the country having a new and likely permanent left of center entitlement based foundation.
The Senate bill’s encroachment by the federal government into health care insurance is contrary to the fundamental principle of Catholic social doctrine of subsidiarity. This important Church doctrine states that decisions are best made at a smaller, more local level, rather than issuing forth from a more distant centralized source. Subsidiarity is wholly consistent with principles of limited government and personal freedom. On the other hand, it stands squarely in opposition to the statist welfare state’s core tenets of top down, centralized bureaucratic planning.
With the extreme measures used by Democratic leaders to cajole cooperation by their rank and file, it should come as no surprise when a recalcitrant party member pivots, turns on their ex-leader and shouts out a critique or two as he is shoved out the door. Massa said that if he was forced to resign he would not go quietly.
Massa’s tour de force series of prime time interviews during which he rains down criticism on his party’s leadership may be the torpedo that hits the health insurance cruiser just below the waterline. The only question is whether the next command from Democrat leaders presently steering the ship of state will be "abandon ship" or "all hands on deck". Recent polls suggest that most Americans hope it is the former rather than the later.
Mark Henry is a Catholic writer, speaker and author of “Finish Faithful”, a how to guide on Catholic estate planning. He can be reached at mthenrysaz@gmail.com or http://markhenry-quovadis.blogspot.com/
Congressman Eric Massa resigned from office Monday night claiming that Democrat leaders pressured him to resign because he intended to vote “no” on the Senate’s controversial health bill. Massa’s resignation occurred after an ethics investigation into allegations of sexual harassment of staffers was made public.
Massa alleges that he was set-up by Democrat leaders who are desperate to reduce the number of yes votes needed to pass the health bill. Massa, a former Naval Commander, admits to using inappropriate "salty" language but that the remaining ethics charges are trumped up.
Last Sunday, on a Hornell, N.Y. radio program Massa spent 90 minutes attacking Democrat leaders including Majority Whip Steny Hoyer and White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. In his comments, Massa lambasted Emanuel, calling him “the son of the devil's spawn" and said he would "strap his children to the front end of a steam locomotive" to get a vote passed through Congress.
Democrat leaders are doing the best to maintain a stiff upper lip and deny Massa’s allegations that they will do “whatever it takes” to pass the unpopular health bill, including destroying the career of one of their own party members. However, Massa’s story has marathon legs and is getting extensive coverage on the radio, television and online media. The story is not only garnering coverage from the predictable conservative programs but is also getting critical attention from leading left of center venues like the Huffington Post.
The details of former Congressmen Massa’s complaints of harsh tactics by Democrat leaders are interesting but not that important. The real story here is the emergence of a clear modus operandi of unseemly deal-making and Chicago thug like intimidation by Democrat leaders intent on doing whatever it takes to get this health insurance bill passed.
Massa is part of a group of centrist and blue dog Democrats who have come under fierce pressure to pass the health bills in the Senate and House. Democrat Bart Stupak has been critical of the Senate bills lack of prohibitions against federal funding of abortions. Others have criticized the Senate bill as an expensive first step towards an eventual takeover of the health insurance industry. Republicans have strongly criticized the Senate bill’s mandate that essentially all Americans purchase health insurance.
These problematic aspects of the health bills, along with the hardball tactics employed by Democratic leaders to win approval of fellow Democrats have resulted in this version of health reform being very unpopular with the majority of Americans.
Given the unpopularity of the health bills, many are wondering why the Democrat leadership is so doggedly determined to pass the bills.
Conservative Commentator Mark Steyn has opined that “Government health care is not about health care, it’s about government.” Steyn asserts that once socialized medicine is put into place it will be next to impossible to get rid of this new entitlement program. This will result in a fundamental change in America with the country having a new and likely permanent left of center entitlement based foundation.
The Senate bill’s encroachment by the federal government into health care insurance is contrary to the fundamental principle of Catholic social doctrine of subsidiarity. This important Church doctrine states that decisions are best made at a smaller, more local level, rather than issuing forth from a more distant centralized source. Subsidiarity is wholly consistent with principles of limited government and personal freedom. On the other hand, it stands squarely in opposition to the statist welfare state’s core tenets of top down, centralized bureaucratic planning.
With the extreme measures used by Democratic leaders to cajole cooperation by their rank and file, it should come as no surprise when a recalcitrant party member pivots, turns on their ex-leader and shouts out a critique or two as he is shoved out the door. Massa said that if he was forced to resign he would not go quietly.
Massa’s tour de force series of prime time interviews during which he rains down criticism on his party’s leadership may be the torpedo that hits the health insurance cruiser just below the waterline. The only question is whether the next command from Democrat leaders presently steering the ship of state will be "abandon ship" or "all hands on deck". Recent polls suggest that most Americans hope it is the former rather than the later.
Mark Henry is a Catholic writer, speaker and author of “Finish Faithful”, a how to guide on Catholic estate planning. He can be reached at mthenrysaz@gmail.com or http://markhenry-quovadis.blogspot.com/
Monday, February 15, 2010
Cogito Ergo Sum (I Think, Therefore I Am); Comatose Patients Think and Communicate
by Mark Henry
The medical world was stunned last week by a study published in a prestigious medical journal revealing that a number of patients diagnosed as being in a vegetative state could actually think and communicate. Experts are calling the study a “game changer” that will prompt changes in how patients in coma-like states will be treated in the future.
The study was evaluated in the February 3, 2010 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine in an article aptly titled “Cogito Ergo Sum (I think, therefore I am) by MRI”. Doctors scanned a man’s brain while asking him questions like “is your father’s name Thomas”. They were astonished when the results of the scan showed that the man was able to think “yes” or “no’ answers by consciously changing his brain activity.
The author of the article, Dr. Allan M. Roper, said that the findings will make it “difficult to tell families confidently that their unresponsive loved ones are not in there somewhere.”
This study is re-igniting a controversy in the Catholic pro-life community about the medical profession’s using diagnostic terms like “brain death”, “vegetative state” and “minimally conscious state” to justify denying life sustaining medical care to a patient. This controversy is not just about semantics as the use of such terms to describe a patient’s medical condition can be a life or death matter. This is because any one of these diagnosis’s can result in a patient’s death by dehydration, their organs being harvested or suffering another form of medically induced death.
Dr. Paul Byrne, organizer of the February 2009 Signs of Life Conference in Rome, has long been an opponent of the brain death standard. When interviewed for this article, Dr. Byrne pointed out that while official Catholic teachings prohibit the taking of a person’s vital organs before death there remains much support for the brain death criteria within the Vatican.
According to Dr. Byrne, for many decades now medical professionals have supported “brain death” as the standard for determining when a person has died and their organs can be removed. Among the many criticisms of the brain death standard is that a person can be pronounced dead even though their heart is beating, they are breathing, they can digest food and even carry a child to term.
To most of us, such a person would be considered alive. However, if such a person was in a coma then under prevailing medical practice this person could be pronounced “brain dead” and their organs could be removed. According to Dr. Byrne, an organ donor’s vital organs are usually removed without giving then anesthesia. To support his point that “brain dead” patients are not really dead, Dr. Byrne points out that doctors who remove organs from such patients often see the patient move, their heart beat jump and their blood pressure rise rapidly during the organ incision.
When medical workers see an unanaesthetized patient’s physical reaction to the removal of their organs it can traumatize them. For that reason, organ donors in the U.S. are often injected with a paralyzing drug to control the patient and reduce trauma to the medical staff. How's that for misdirected compassion?
In light of these and other revelations, the Vatican’s support for brain death may be changing. In September 2008, Professor Lucetta Scaraffia, Vice-President of the Italian Association for Science and Life and a member of the Italian National Committee on Bio-Ethics, wrote a front page article in the Vatican newspaper L’Observatore Romano that was highly critical of the brain death standard.
While such a writing is not by any stretch considered Magisterial teaching, it is an indicator that the Vatican may be reassessing its support of the brain death standard.
Bobby Schindler, brother of Terri Schindler Schiavo, also weighed in on this development. When I interviewed Schindler, he said the story adds to the growing evidence critical of the persistent vegetative state ("PVS") diagnosis. Schindler also voiced his objection to using the PVS standard when diagnosing and treating people with severe head injuries.
In the case of Schindler’s sister, Terri, Schindler said that the doctor’s diagnosis that she was in a persistent vegetative state paved the way for denying her food and water resulting in her tragic death by dehydration.
The New England Journal of Medicine’s article will hopefully trigger a groundswell of support to change how doctor’s diagnose and treat people with serious brain injuries. This study will certainly be welcome news for families who have compassionately cared for brain injured loved ones in the face of a medical establishment that far too often treats these patients and their families cavalierly, without empathy and without the medical attention they need and deserve.
During the United States Conference of Catholic Bishop's annual meeting in 2009, the Bishops commendably adopted new guidelines requiring the provision of nutrition and hydration to patients in a persistent vegetative state. Let us hope and pray that this study discussed in the New England Journal of Medicine will be a light on the path to encourage the Church to continue further down this road and adopt new policies that protect helpless brain injured persons who desperately need the Church to be a vocal moral ally in their corner.
The Church could advance the Culture of Life by voicing disapproval of the medical establishment’s harsh approaches to dealing with people who are diagnosed as brain dead, in a persistent vegetative state or who are minimally conscious. A good starting point would be Magisterial teaching which categorically rejects the morally bankrupt “brain death” criteria and expunges the dehumanizing phrase “vegetative state" from Catholic health care lexicon.
The medical world was stunned last week by a study published in a prestigious medical journal revealing that a number of patients diagnosed as being in a vegetative state could actually think and communicate. Experts are calling the study a “game changer” that will prompt changes in how patients in coma-like states will be treated in the future.
The study was evaluated in the February 3, 2010 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine in an article aptly titled “Cogito Ergo Sum (I think, therefore I am) by MRI”. Doctors scanned a man’s brain while asking him questions like “is your father’s name Thomas”. They were astonished when the results of the scan showed that the man was able to think “yes” or “no’ answers by consciously changing his brain activity.
The author of the article, Dr. Allan M. Roper, said that the findings will make it “difficult to tell families confidently that their unresponsive loved ones are not in there somewhere.”
This study is re-igniting a controversy in the Catholic pro-life community about the medical profession’s using diagnostic terms like “brain death”, “vegetative state” and “minimally conscious state” to justify denying life sustaining medical care to a patient. This controversy is not just about semantics as the use of such terms to describe a patient’s medical condition can be a life or death matter. This is because any one of these diagnosis’s can result in a patient’s death by dehydration, their organs being harvested or suffering another form of medically induced death.
Dr. Paul Byrne, organizer of the February 2009 Signs of Life Conference in Rome, has long been an opponent of the brain death standard. When interviewed for this article, Dr. Byrne pointed out that while official Catholic teachings prohibit the taking of a person’s vital organs before death there remains much support for the brain death criteria within the Vatican.
According to Dr. Byrne, for many decades now medical professionals have supported “brain death” as the standard for determining when a person has died and their organs can be removed. Among the many criticisms of the brain death standard is that a person can be pronounced dead even though their heart is beating, they are breathing, they can digest food and even carry a child to term.
To most of us, such a person would be considered alive. However, if such a person was in a coma then under prevailing medical practice this person could be pronounced “brain dead” and their organs could be removed. According to Dr. Byrne, an organ donor’s vital organs are usually removed without giving then anesthesia. To support his point that “brain dead” patients are not really dead, Dr. Byrne points out that doctors who remove organs from such patients often see the patient move, their heart beat jump and their blood pressure rise rapidly during the organ incision.
When medical workers see an unanaesthetized patient’s physical reaction to the removal of their organs it can traumatize them. For that reason, organ donors in the U.S. are often injected with a paralyzing drug to control the patient and reduce trauma to the medical staff. How's that for misdirected compassion?
In light of these and other revelations, the Vatican’s support for brain death may be changing. In September 2008, Professor Lucetta Scaraffia, Vice-President of the Italian Association for Science and Life and a member of the Italian National Committee on Bio-Ethics, wrote a front page article in the Vatican newspaper L’Observatore Romano that was highly critical of the brain death standard.
While such a writing is not by any stretch considered Magisterial teaching, it is an indicator that the Vatican may be reassessing its support of the brain death standard.
Bobby Schindler, brother of Terri Schindler Schiavo, also weighed in on this development. When I interviewed Schindler, he said the story adds to the growing evidence critical of the persistent vegetative state ("PVS") diagnosis. Schindler also voiced his objection to using the PVS standard when diagnosing and treating people with severe head injuries.
In the case of Schindler’s sister, Terri, Schindler said that the doctor’s diagnosis that she was in a persistent vegetative state paved the way for denying her food and water resulting in her tragic death by dehydration.
The New England Journal of Medicine’s article will hopefully trigger a groundswell of support to change how doctor’s diagnose and treat people with serious brain injuries. This study will certainly be welcome news for families who have compassionately cared for brain injured loved ones in the face of a medical establishment that far too often treats these patients and their families cavalierly, without empathy and without the medical attention they need and deserve.
During the United States Conference of Catholic Bishop's annual meeting in 2009, the Bishops commendably adopted new guidelines requiring the provision of nutrition and hydration to patients in a persistent vegetative state. Let us hope and pray that this study discussed in the New England Journal of Medicine will be a light on the path to encourage the Church to continue further down this road and adopt new policies that protect helpless brain injured persons who desperately need the Church to be a vocal moral ally in their corner.
The Church could advance the Culture of Life by voicing disapproval of the medical establishment’s harsh approaches to dealing with people who are diagnosed as brain dead, in a persistent vegetative state or who are minimally conscious. A good starting point would be Magisterial teaching which categorically rejects the morally bankrupt “brain death” criteria and expunges the dehumanizing phrase “vegetative state" from Catholic health care lexicon.
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Obama’s Budget and The Death of American Exceptionalism, R.I.P.
by Mark Henry
President Obama proposed 2011 Budget was released on Monday. The underlying nature of the federal budget always results in winners and losers, fiscally speaking, so it is not surprising that President Obama’s budget is generating criticism. However, if you look beyond the raw numbers and analyze the priorities reflected in the budget it opens your eyes to President Obama’s vision for America. Clearly, his is an extreme leftist vision that is disconnected from and contrary to the wishes of an increasing number of Americans of all political persuasions, especially people of faith.
One of America’s greatest accomplishments of the last century was the manned space program including the Apollo program which culminated in the moon landing. This historic period of American exploration was chronicled in a number of notable movies like “The Right Stuff”. The scientific advances and technological developments spawned from the space program are extensive and too numerous to itemize here. However, Obama’s new budget would effectively cancel the manned space program.
Obama’s plans to cancel America’s space program speaks volumes about his vision of America. The President has been described by some as the apologist-in-chief who feels compelled to publicly chastise America when he interacts with the international community. He seemingly views America’s manned space program as an irritating example of American achievement. Excellence and achievement just don’t fit in with the principle of mandated equal results which is the cornerstone of socialism. America’s space program, one of the crown jewels of American accomplishment, is just the wrong stuff in President Obama’s eyes. Obama’s proposed budget seeks to push America away from acheivement and take our nation down the path of mediocrity.
Obama’s budget also plans on reducing the tax incentives for charitable giving. When you look at what makes our country great, the exceptional charity of Americans comes to mind. Americans give much more to charity than any other nation in the world. The tremendous outpouring of financial support in Haiti is part of a long history of Americans individually stepping forward to help suffering people throughout the world. Much of this outpouring of financial assistance comes from faith-based organizations rather than the government.
The charitable behavior of Americans contrasts starkly with Europeans who are coddled by socialist governments that provide for every need. In a recent speech, Conservative author Dennis Prager said “The European knows: The government, the state, will take care of me, my children, my parents, my neighbors and my community. I don't have to do anything. The bigger question in many Europeans' lives is, "How much vacation time will I have and where will I spend that vacation?".
Obama’s plans to revise tax policies to discourage charitable giving are a hatchet attack on the positive role charitable organizations, including myriads of Catholic charities, play in American society. It’s all part of an Obama vision to transform America into a more European like socialistic country. What this would mean for America is to make an already big government even bigger and to change the independent American character into someone else, a person who does not value faith, service to others, self-reliance or freedom.
President Obama’s budget also calls for a plan to end subsidies which underwrite private bank involvement in student loans. The savings generated by ending these federal subsidies would be used to increase Pell grants which are the main federal program to help poor students attend college.
The short-term impact of these changes would be to squeeze out private lenders from the business of making student loans. The federal government would become the sole single provider of government-backed student loans. Chalk up one more industry taken over by the voracious federal government.
In this regard, President Obama is pushing a single payer/provider strategy which is similar to the single payer idea which he tried to ram through with the recent attempted federal takeover of health care insurance. Evidently, President Obama feels he has a better chance of getting his way with college students than he did with the more politically seasoned seniors who opposed him in the failed health care takeover debacle.
There is a more troubling aspect of the proposed student loan changes which further illuminates the socialistic agenda underlying aspects of Obama’s budget. What Obama is proposing is that if you choose to go into "public service," any college loan debts will be forgiven ten years after you leave college. This is a “making big government even bigger” plan which seeks to draft America’s youth into the already bloated ranks of government bureaucracy.
In the last six decades, the number of Americans employed by the government has grown five times faster than the population. However, President Obama believes this is not enough; his plan would dramatically increase the numbers of government employees. This will be accomplished by the dual strategy of student loan forgiveness bribes to the youth to herd them into the government bureaucracy and by over taxing and over regulating businesses to the point that working in the private sector is a financially unattractive career path. It’s all part of the socialist playbook to make the individual smaller and big government even bigger.
Of even greater concern to Catholics are the Obama budget provisions that would increase federal funding for abortion. The Title X family planning program’s funding of Planned Parenthood would increase to $327,356,000. The budget also proposes the elimination of abortion funding limits affecting the Legal Services Corporation as well as the continuation of abortion funding for the United Nations Population Fund which promotes abortion across the world.
Underlying these and other provisions contained in the Obama budget are policies which seek to expand the size and reach of the federal government and to weaken the faith, resolve and resources of those who stand in the way. The desired end result of these policies is to transform America into a socialistic welfare state that would be both unrecognizable to the Founding Fathers and far removed from the Judeo-Christian principles which our country was founded upon. It does not seem to matter that these policies have consistently failed when implemented either in Europe or elsewhere.
How then should the Catholic community respond to the many objectionable provisions contained in the Obama budget? Once again, we are blessed by the enduring insights of Pope John Paul II. In his 1991 encyclical Centesimus Annus, Pope John Paul II harshly criticized the corruption of the modern democratic state in which citizens with religious beliefs are viewed with great suspicion. The Pope went on to condemn the welfare state stating that it undermined the core principle of subsidiarity. The welfare state discourages human initiative and results in an excessive increase of public bureaucracies. This results in an enormous increase in spending by a government whose goal is to achieve its own statist agenda rather than to serve the public.
Pope John Paul II’s observations on the welfare state shed a bright light on the fundamentally flawed ideologies that underlie these provisions of the Obama budget.
Further, Catholics who seek to follow the tenets of Catholic teachings on abortion will be strongly opposed to the Obama budget’s plan to expand federal funding of abortion. Pope John Paul II’s landmark encyclical Gospel of Life taught us that all human life has value. In Worthiness To Receive Communion, General Principles, Pope Benedict XVI (then Cardinal Ratzinger) stated that while Catholics could disagree on many issues, abortion is a grave sin and Catholics are obligated to adhere to the Church’s teachings on these issues.
These Catholic teachings on the welfare state and abortion are directly on point to America as our country stands at an epic politicalcrossroads. As such, Catholics would do well to heed these teachings as we decide how to respond to the political and economic challenges posed by President Obama’s budget.
President Obama proposed 2011 Budget was released on Monday. The underlying nature of the federal budget always results in winners and losers, fiscally speaking, so it is not surprising that President Obama’s budget is generating criticism. However, if you look beyond the raw numbers and analyze the priorities reflected in the budget it opens your eyes to President Obama’s vision for America. Clearly, his is an extreme leftist vision that is disconnected from and contrary to the wishes of an increasing number of Americans of all political persuasions, especially people of faith.
One of America’s greatest accomplishments of the last century was the manned space program including the Apollo program which culminated in the moon landing. This historic period of American exploration was chronicled in a number of notable movies like “The Right Stuff”. The scientific advances and technological developments spawned from the space program are extensive and too numerous to itemize here. However, Obama’s new budget would effectively cancel the manned space program.
Obama’s plans to cancel America’s space program speaks volumes about his vision of America. The President has been described by some as the apologist-in-chief who feels compelled to publicly chastise America when he interacts with the international community. He seemingly views America’s manned space program as an irritating example of American achievement. Excellence and achievement just don’t fit in with the principle of mandated equal results which is the cornerstone of socialism. America’s space program, one of the crown jewels of American accomplishment, is just the wrong stuff in President Obama’s eyes. Obama’s proposed budget seeks to push America away from acheivement and take our nation down the path of mediocrity.
Obama’s budget also plans on reducing the tax incentives for charitable giving. When you look at what makes our country great, the exceptional charity of Americans comes to mind. Americans give much more to charity than any other nation in the world. The tremendous outpouring of financial support in Haiti is part of a long history of Americans individually stepping forward to help suffering people throughout the world. Much of this outpouring of financial assistance comes from faith-based organizations rather than the government.
The charitable behavior of Americans contrasts starkly with Europeans who are coddled by socialist governments that provide for every need. In a recent speech, Conservative author Dennis Prager said “The European knows: The government, the state, will take care of me, my children, my parents, my neighbors and my community. I don't have to do anything. The bigger question in many Europeans' lives is, "How much vacation time will I have and where will I spend that vacation?".
Obama’s plans to revise tax policies to discourage charitable giving are a hatchet attack on the positive role charitable organizations, including myriads of Catholic charities, play in American society. It’s all part of an Obama vision to transform America into a more European like socialistic country. What this would mean for America is to make an already big government even bigger and to change the independent American character into someone else, a person who does not value faith, service to others, self-reliance or freedom.
President Obama’s budget also calls for a plan to end subsidies which underwrite private bank involvement in student loans. The savings generated by ending these federal subsidies would be used to increase Pell grants which are the main federal program to help poor students attend college.
The short-term impact of these changes would be to squeeze out private lenders from the business of making student loans. The federal government would become the sole single provider of government-backed student loans. Chalk up one more industry taken over by the voracious federal government.
In this regard, President Obama is pushing a single payer/provider strategy which is similar to the single payer idea which he tried to ram through with the recent attempted federal takeover of health care insurance. Evidently, President Obama feels he has a better chance of getting his way with college students than he did with the more politically seasoned seniors who opposed him in the failed health care takeover debacle.
There is a more troubling aspect of the proposed student loan changes which further illuminates the socialistic agenda underlying aspects of Obama’s budget. What Obama is proposing is that if you choose to go into "public service," any college loan debts will be forgiven ten years after you leave college. This is a “making big government even bigger” plan which seeks to draft America’s youth into the already bloated ranks of government bureaucracy.
In the last six decades, the number of Americans employed by the government has grown five times faster than the population. However, President Obama believes this is not enough; his plan would dramatically increase the numbers of government employees. This will be accomplished by the dual strategy of student loan forgiveness bribes to the youth to herd them into the government bureaucracy and by over taxing and over regulating businesses to the point that working in the private sector is a financially unattractive career path. It’s all part of the socialist playbook to make the individual smaller and big government even bigger.
Of even greater concern to Catholics are the Obama budget provisions that would increase federal funding for abortion. The Title X family planning program’s funding of Planned Parenthood would increase to $327,356,000. The budget also proposes the elimination of abortion funding limits affecting the Legal Services Corporation as well as the continuation of abortion funding for the United Nations Population Fund which promotes abortion across the world.
Underlying these and other provisions contained in the Obama budget are policies which seek to expand the size and reach of the federal government and to weaken the faith, resolve and resources of those who stand in the way. The desired end result of these policies is to transform America into a socialistic welfare state that would be both unrecognizable to the Founding Fathers and far removed from the Judeo-Christian principles which our country was founded upon. It does not seem to matter that these policies have consistently failed when implemented either in Europe or elsewhere.
How then should the Catholic community respond to the many objectionable provisions contained in the Obama budget? Once again, we are blessed by the enduring insights of Pope John Paul II. In his 1991 encyclical Centesimus Annus, Pope John Paul II harshly criticized the corruption of the modern democratic state in which citizens with religious beliefs are viewed with great suspicion. The Pope went on to condemn the welfare state stating that it undermined the core principle of subsidiarity. The welfare state discourages human initiative and results in an excessive increase of public bureaucracies. This results in an enormous increase in spending by a government whose goal is to achieve its own statist agenda rather than to serve the public.
Pope John Paul II’s observations on the welfare state shed a bright light on the fundamentally flawed ideologies that underlie these provisions of the Obama budget.
Further, Catholics who seek to follow the tenets of Catholic teachings on abortion will be strongly opposed to the Obama budget’s plan to expand federal funding of abortion. Pope John Paul II’s landmark encyclical Gospel of Life taught us that all human life has value. In Worthiness To Receive Communion, General Principles, Pope Benedict XVI (then Cardinal Ratzinger) stated that while Catholics could disagree on many issues, abortion is a grave sin and Catholics are obligated to adhere to the Church’s teachings on these issues.
These Catholic teachings on the welfare state and abortion are directly on point to America as our country stands at an epic politicalcrossroads. As such, Catholics would do well to heed these teachings as we decide how to respond to the political and economic challenges posed by President Obama’s budget.
Thursday, January 28, 2010
President Obama’s “Statist” Of Our Union Speech
by Mark Henry
Americans who watched the President’s State of the Union speech hoping for a new kind of “change” will most assuredly be disappointed with what they saw and heard. While Obama did acknowledge coming up short on a number of first year goals, mainly the failure to pass health reform, most of the speech charted a course that continues with the administration’s increasingly unpopular leftist vision for the future.
President Obama’s decision to avoid substantive policy changes manifests an unwillingness to come to grips with the message delivered by blue state Massachusetts voters who elected Republican Scott Brown to the U.S Senate. President Obama’s speech revealed a man who has been slightly humbled but completely undeterred from proceeding with an agenda that has become increasingly unpopular with most Americans. His decision to proceed with health reform efforts reveals an imperial like disregard for the wishes of the electorate that is difficult to fathom. Ditto for his comments that we need to proceed with cap and trade.
On a somewhat more positive side, President Obama did propose a jobs bill that purportedly would encourage investment in small business, manufacturing and the creation of green jobs. This does show that this administration is mindful that most Americans would prefer that the federal government focus on improving the dreadful unemployment problem, as opposed to reforming health care.
However, with the 2009 Economic Recovery Act resulting in worse unemployment numbers many in the private sector doubt that the Obama administrations statist centralized planning approach towards stimulating the economy and creating jobs will improve their lot.
President Obama’s new initiative to increase federal support of college programs sounds good but a look behind the curtain of this program is troubling. What Obama proposed was that students going into public service, including the government sector, would be entitled to have their student loans forgiven. The obvious purpose of this would be to drive college graduates into government work and discourage private sector employment. In essence, they would offer a “Nebraska Cornhusker Kickback” to all college students receiving federal aid. It’s all about making big government even bigger. The fingerprints of the big government central planner are all over this one.
This special deal for students who agree to work for the government is a bitter pill for most Americans in the private sector who have suffered in the economic downturn while public employees are riding high, unaffected by the recession. According to a recent USA Today study, 7.3 million people in the private sector have lost their jobs during this recession. On the other hand, between December 2007 and June 2009, federal payrolls grew by nearly 10 percent. To top it off, Office of Personnel Management data reveals that your average federal employee is making about $71,000 per year. This is a whopping 76 percent higher than the average salary earned in the private sector.
When you look at the President’s job creation and college funding programs, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that President Obama is aloof and very disconnected from the economic hardship that the majority of Americans who are not working in the public sector are experiencing.
President Obama is getting a few kudos for proposing a freeze of government spending. On the surface, it sounds fine; however, the proposed freeze may effectively lock in the huge spending increases made by the federal government in 2009. For example, the EPA’s budget increased by approximately 35% in 2009. Freezing such ridiculously high levels of spending hardly qualifies as government belt-tightening.
Additionally, the proposed freeze will limit only discretionary spending which amounts to less than 1% of the federal budget. Will the proposed freeze limit salaries of federal employees? Have to look into that one but I would not bet the farm on it.
Obama’s statist agenda for America stands in stark contrast with the competing vision articulated by Virginia governor Bob McDonnell who ably gave the GOP’s response to the State of the Union Speech. McDonnell quoted Thomas Jefferson as he appealed for a return to principles of limited government.
“It was Thomas Jefferson,” McDonnell said, “who called for ‘A wise and frugal government which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry .... and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned.’ He was right. Today, the federal government is simply trying to do too much.”
Governor McDonnell took the Democrats to task for their failed effort to strengthen the economy via massive federal spending. He reminded us that the Democrats promised us that last years’ Economic Recovery Act would create more jobs immediately and keep unemployment below 8%. McDonnell pointed out that the economic stimulus has failed as more than 3 million Americans have lost their jobs.
Governor McDonnell then called for a new era of limited government and hearkened back to America’s Founders stating that “As our Founders clearly stated, and we Governors understand, government closest to the people governs best.”
Many Catholics will find much to like about Governor McDonnell’s vision of a more limited government. This governing philosophy coincides closely with the core Catholic principle of subsidiarity. This Catholic teaching states that when something can be done locally by a smaller simpler organization this is better than central planning type action by a larger and more complex organization. This tenet safeguards the ideals of limited government and personal freedom and stands squarely opposed to the welfare state’s goals of centralization and bureaucracy.
Pope John Paul II harshly criticized the welfare state in his 1991 encyclical Centesimus Annus wherein he stated that the welfare state undermined this core principle of subsidiarity. According to the Pope, the welfare state discourages human initiative and results in an excessive increase of public bureaucracies. This results in an enormous increase in spending by a government whose goal is to achieve its own statist agenda rather than to serve the public.
Catholics would do well to heed Pope John Paul II’s insights on the serious problems of the welfare state. This time tested Catholic teaching helps explain why President Obama is bound and determined to pursue highly unpopular policies like health care reform and cap and trade. I guess tin ears are what it takes to herd the masses into the statist corral.
Americans who watched the President’s State of the Union speech hoping for a new kind of “change” will most assuredly be disappointed with what they saw and heard. While Obama did acknowledge coming up short on a number of first year goals, mainly the failure to pass health reform, most of the speech charted a course that continues with the administration’s increasingly unpopular leftist vision for the future.
President Obama’s decision to avoid substantive policy changes manifests an unwillingness to come to grips with the message delivered by blue state Massachusetts voters who elected Republican Scott Brown to the U.S Senate. President Obama’s speech revealed a man who has been slightly humbled but completely undeterred from proceeding with an agenda that has become increasingly unpopular with most Americans. His decision to proceed with health reform efforts reveals an imperial like disregard for the wishes of the electorate that is difficult to fathom. Ditto for his comments that we need to proceed with cap and trade.
On a somewhat more positive side, President Obama did propose a jobs bill that purportedly would encourage investment in small business, manufacturing and the creation of green jobs. This does show that this administration is mindful that most Americans would prefer that the federal government focus on improving the dreadful unemployment problem, as opposed to reforming health care.
However, with the 2009 Economic Recovery Act resulting in worse unemployment numbers many in the private sector doubt that the Obama administrations statist centralized planning approach towards stimulating the economy and creating jobs will improve their lot.
President Obama’s new initiative to increase federal support of college programs sounds good but a look behind the curtain of this program is troubling. What Obama proposed was that students going into public service, including the government sector, would be entitled to have their student loans forgiven. The obvious purpose of this would be to drive college graduates into government work and discourage private sector employment. In essence, they would offer a “Nebraska Cornhusker Kickback” to all college students receiving federal aid. It’s all about making big government even bigger. The fingerprints of the big government central planner are all over this one.
This special deal for students who agree to work for the government is a bitter pill for most Americans in the private sector who have suffered in the economic downturn while public employees are riding high, unaffected by the recession. According to a recent USA Today study, 7.3 million people in the private sector have lost their jobs during this recession. On the other hand, between December 2007 and June 2009, federal payrolls grew by nearly 10 percent. To top it off, Office of Personnel Management data reveals that your average federal employee is making about $71,000 per year. This is a whopping 76 percent higher than the average salary earned in the private sector.
When you look at the President’s job creation and college funding programs, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that President Obama is aloof and very disconnected from the economic hardship that the majority of Americans who are not working in the public sector are experiencing.
President Obama is getting a few kudos for proposing a freeze of government spending. On the surface, it sounds fine; however, the proposed freeze may effectively lock in the huge spending increases made by the federal government in 2009. For example, the EPA’s budget increased by approximately 35% in 2009. Freezing such ridiculously high levels of spending hardly qualifies as government belt-tightening.
Additionally, the proposed freeze will limit only discretionary spending which amounts to less than 1% of the federal budget. Will the proposed freeze limit salaries of federal employees? Have to look into that one but I would not bet the farm on it.
Obama’s statist agenda for America stands in stark contrast with the competing vision articulated by Virginia governor Bob McDonnell who ably gave the GOP’s response to the State of the Union Speech. McDonnell quoted Thomas Jefferson as he appealed for a return to principles of limited government.
“It was Thomas Jefferson,” McDonnell said, “who called for ‘A wise and frugal government which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry .... and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned.’ He was right. Today, the federal government is simply trying to do too much.”
Governor McDonnell took the Democrats to task for their failed effort to strengthen the economy via massive federal spending. He reminded us that the Democrats promised us that last years’ Economic Recovery Act would create more jobs immediately and keep unemployment below 8%. McDonnell pointed out that the economic stimulus has failed as more than 3 million Americans have lost their jobs.
Governor McDonnell then called for a new era of limited government and hearkened back to America’s Founders stating that “As our Founders clearly stated, and we Governors understand, government closest to the people governs best.”
Many Catholics will find much to like about Governor McDonnell’s vision of a more limited government. This governing philosophy coincides closely with the core Catholic principle of subsidiarity. This Catholic teaching states that when something can be done locally by a smaller simpler organization this is better than central planning type action by a larger and more complex organization. This tenet safeguards the ideals of limited government and personal freedom and stands squarely opposed to the welfare state’s goals of centralization and bureaucracy.
Pope John Paul II harshly criticized the welfare state in his 1991 encyclical Centesimus Annus wherein he stated that the welfare state undermined this core principle of subsidiarity. According to the Pope, the welfare state discourages human initiative and results in an excessive increase of public bureaucracies. This results in an enormous increase in spending by a government whose goal is to achieve its own statist agenda rather than to serve the public.
Catholics would do well to heed Pope John Paul II’s insights on the serious problems of the welfare state. This time tested Catholic teaching helps explain why President Obama is bound and determined to pursue highly unpopular policies like health care reform and cap and trade. I guess tin ears are what it takes to herd the masses into the statist corral.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)