Reader Mail

Awful Truths

Democracy, Hamas and accountability. Bringing it on. Jimmy Carter. James Frey. Joel Stein. Ben Stein. Plus much more.

1.30.06

Send to Kindle

DEMOCRACY, HAMAS, AND ACCOUNTABILITY
Re: David Yerushalmi's Democratically Elected Fascists:

While I agree that democracy does not create peace, I think this argument misses an even more important point. Democracy creates accountability. Throughout the battles that Israel and the Palestinians fought, the horrors that the civilian population endured were the front page stories. Palestinians were innocent civilians caught between Israel and Hamas. Palestinians have now elected known terrorists. There are no longer any innocents. If the freely elected government chooses to promote terrorism, the Israelis are free to answer in kind. The election of Hamas was the best thing the Israelis could have hoped for.
-- Joseph R. Davey

Though I might concur with your general theme you miss the most critical factor. Lacking any other means of consensus, the Palestinians could hide behind a strong man one rule government like Arafat -- "We are for peace, it's Arafat that is the problem." But now we have a duly elected Hamas government. The burka is off, so to speak. So now the Arab street is as complicit in the actions of the militant Hamas as Hamas itself. And that is a significant milestone.

No longer will the Palestinians be able to claim innocence. No longer can the U.S. government deal in a blind faith that the "People" can be saved if only by moderating the interests of the militants. No longer can Hamas claim status as a nonbelligerent entity lacking any power other than self-defense.

From this point forward, Israel can view any attack by a Hamas follower as the equivalent as an attack by the Palestinian Authority and act accordingly under international law.
-- John McGinnis
Arlington, Texas

I agree wholeheartedly with the contention that, where our enemies are concerned, "A strategy of conquer and control must be contemplated, devised and made ready for implementation." I disagree, however, with his repudiation of the Bush doctrine. It is difficult to wage war on a nation (or pseudo-nation, as in the case of "Palestine") whose leadership we have propped up. Israel (with the help of the U.S.) legitimized Arafat and his PLO thugs, believing, among other things, that a strongman in power in the territories could better tame the radicals than Israel could. This was part of the Realpolitik thinking that Bush has for the most part rejected. The result, exemplified by the victory of Hamas, is an even more radicalized population today than before Oslo. That should be proof enough that systems do affect people's behavior -- not in the way the left contends -- but in a significant way nonetheless. Just as the welfare state creates a culture of dependency, the fact that the Palestinian Arabs have never been able to assume responsibility for their own leadership has kept them in a collective childlike state. They have for years been ruled by a dictatorship who deprived them of any means of sovereignty, happiness or prosperity while insisting that those responsible for their miserable condition were Israel and America; and who pretended to accept Israel's right to exist, while pursuing the "phased plan" of destroying the Jewish state. And that leadership was one that Israel and America brought to power and called our "peace partners!" It was a ridiculous charade that was allowed to go on much too long.

The only way to reverse course is to make the Palestinian Arabs responsible for their own destiny, starting with last week's elections. The Palestinians chose a leadership openly dedicated to annihilating Israel. Now, Israel doesn't have to pretend that the Palestinians are peace partners and can and should respond as any responsible nation must: by defending herself and, yes, contemplating a "strategy of conquer and control." When the Palestinians feel the repercussions for their actions, they will finally be on the road to "adulthood." Feeling the self-inflicted pain that their choices bring upon them is the only way they can possibly emerge out of the bloodthirsty, diseased culture that they have become.
-- Alison Milstein
Brooklyn, New York

David Yerushalmi replies:
In response to the letters from Messrs. J. McGinnis and J. Davey, you are absolutely correct in your strategic assessment of what must follow. But that is really not the main point. The main point is what any country does to protect its national existence. President Bush seems to have a good idea, if we assume he is holding some of his cards close to the vest, as is often necessary in foreign policy and war.

As it relates to Israel, we know Fatah was also "elected" and everyone knows that it used its own Al Aqsa Martyr Brigades to terrorize no less than Hamas. Fatah pointedly refused to disarm the militants. Hamas is just more brazen. But if you see the main point in "strategy," then you box yourself in a corner when Hamas comes out and says it has now split itself into two separate entities: one a political, and one a paramilitary/terrorist. The political arm will disavow the terrorist side when it speaks in English, the way Fatah did, and the world will once again clamor for Israel to negotiate with this now "moderated" arm (citing examples of the IRA and Sinn Fein) and you will be right back where you started with the war of terror and attrition in full bloom.

National existence always includes elements of "strategy," but that is never the main point. The Left in this country would have us strategize with nuance, diplomacy, capitulation, compromise, and retreat without even getting to the main point: the threat to our national existence. National existence as such and its defense requires a look past "strategy" to the core before coming back to understand what is required to establish a good and viable strategy.

As to the point by Ms. Milstein's letter, Arafat was elected President and Fatah was voted into power enthusiastically. Granted, there was no real opposition but all of the polls and the reality on the ground were clear: the Palestinians wanted the world renown terrorist and father of the PLO to head the PA. You are absolutely right that Israel chose to ignore the threat to its national interest when it permitted Arafat to leave Lebanon and then later to enter the Israeli controlled territories soon to be deeded to the PA. That, however, was not Realpolitik; rather it was national destruction. If the point is that now the Israelis should "get it" and finally wake up, don't hold your breath. They might feint a move here or there, like Ariel Sharon did when he initially invaded Gaza to clean out the hornet's nests of terrorists, but like Sharon, they will, if they follow the pattern, capitulate and begin negotiating a no-win terror-laden "peace process." The political/military class in Israel has never learned what it takes to take your enemy out. Let us hope the U.S. leadership does.

BRING IT ON
Re: Jed Babbin's Make Our Day:

Great overview of the Dems' problems with Judge Alito. My question to the N.Y. Times and the Dems is, if Sam Alito is such a conservative nut and he is against everything that America stands for, why weren't they screaming about him which he was on the Court of Appeals? Why weren't they calling for his impeachment from the bench? Why wait until he is ready to be put onto the Supreme Court? We all know the answer.
-- Tom Corry
Ridgefield, Connecticut

I understand the necessity of responding to the often times faulty, mostly ridiculous, positions taken by the left. And nobody does it better than Mr. Babbin. But I fear that our intellectuals aren't following these arguments far enough. It is not enough to parse the arguments and point out the inconsistencies and lies. To stop an analysis at this point is to leave the consumer of information with the idea that the left is just a bunch of stupid or loony people who are just "wrong." Obviously this is not the case. So the question must be asked and commented on, "Why does the left expound these arguments that are so easily dealt with?"

The answer is that they are steeped in socialism, Communism or anarchism and invested in the defeat of capitalism. They will say or do almost anything to win this political war that has been going on since the Civil War. The first expressions of this war were unionism and utopianism against industrialization and working conditions. In modern life it is a fight for government benefits against private competition in a rich society. Deep down the left knows it has some weak even false arguments, but that won't stop them from wiggling to try to gain an advantage with voters.
-- Howard Lohmuller
Seabrook, Texas

I felt like I was reading a passage out of Michael Herr's Dispatches, his front-line report of the Vietnam War which had those rapid-fire passages and images that caused your heart to pound and mind to run.
-- C. Kenna Amos Jr.
Princeton, West Virginia

In the final paragraph, Jed Babbin's otherwise fine essay fails to give proper acknowledgement to the no-talent hysteric Gail Collins, former Daily News Metro columnist and current Sulzberger "diversity" statistic, who "edits" the unhinged screeds that the Times currently publishes in lieu of editorials. Credit where credit is due, Jed.
-- Mary Daly

Jed Babbin is a genius at unraveling the tangled web the Dems constantly weave. Unfortunately like everything else they do these days, they drop a stitch here and there and everything unravels without outside help....
-- Diane Smith
South San Francisco, California

Terrific article. I disagree with you on the 2008 election. As it stands today, the Dems will win in 2008. Will it be Hillary? I have no idea.

If it's McCain, I'm staying home. It will be a first for me.
-- Ron Kessler

PEANUT PRESIDENT
Re: Jacob Laksin's His Deranged Values:

Good article... the name of Carter sends goose bumps up my spine.

We had him for four long years as President, now we have to endure all his actions now as EX...did you get that, EX-President.

What ever happened to the class of ex-presidents in keeping their big mouths shut? All these ex-presidents show no class at all... or is it just Dems?

I don't see Bush 41 saying anything, even when Clinton was in, nor do I recall Ford saying anything. Of course, Reagan is another thing, but I couldn't see him ever doing or saying anything about a president... but then along comes Clinton and Carter! What a joke they both are and they are just a legend in their own minds.
-- Betty Wiggins
Kentucky

Just how fallacious is Jimmy Carter's peace always at the price of America's freedom and values can be illustrated by the sequence of events when Iran attacked and captured our embassy. Every American will remember this groveling, simpering, weak little man, quite literally begging Iran to let our hostages go. We will also remember Iran's response to Mr. Carter's knee crawling pleading: "We'd help if we could but this is a private act, not one of the government of Iran so there is really very little we can do."

Then we turned this poor excuse for a leader out, almost unanimously, and immediately (with Reagan the winner), the hostages release could be arranged by Iranian government officials. How many Americans remember this cowardly wretch's humiliation of this nation before the insults of Stone Age mullahs, the Soviet Union, Cuba which opened its prisons and flooded us with its human garbage, and the communists in Nicaragua? For his accomplishments during his presidency, had he been a Russian, he would have been awarded the Order of Lenin!

We should pray that Mr. Carter continues to be lionized by Democrats because it is exactly his "hate all things American" attitude that keeps Democrats out of power. And that may be enough to save America.
-- Jay W. Molyneaux
Wellington, Florida

For years, I thought that Jimmy Carter was an awful president but a good man. In the past few years, I've had to give up on the idea that he is even a good man.

I no longer hate Bill Clinton; I'm now too busy trying to exhaust the seemingly bottomless well of contempt I have for Carter.
-- unsigned

DECEPTIVE ROOTS
Re: Paul Beston's A Million Little Truths:

"...both men seem to share a conviction that the individual makes his own morality, and is the ultimate judge of right and wrong."

It would be good if TAS would look into the sources of this ethical philosophy, since for all practical purposes this view represents "state religion" as taught in nearly every elementary school in America for the last several decades.

While I suppose it all started with John Dewey, the current text with which most teachers college students are instructed is Joseph Fletcher's Situation Ethics and/or its many clones. Essentially the philosophy boils down to "all ideas are equal" (except of course the one which says they are not), that all morality is personal, and therefore no one is permitted to be "judgmental."

Until this perverse ethical indoctrination is pulled root and branch from school textbooks and teacher college curricula, we're in for more and more Steins and Freys.
-- Jameson Campaigne
Ottawa, Illinois

Can someone explain why the Los Angeles Times book review section still lists James Frey's made-up memoir in the nonfiction section of best-selling books?
-- Caroline Miranda
North Hollywood, California

I think it gives Frey far too much credit to hold "radical individualism" responsible for his "million little lies" -- as if Frey were expounding a philosophical position gleaned from Emerson and Thoreau. In truth, Frey is just another in a long line of all-American hucksters and con-men. No need to give him any more credit than that.
-- Gene Schmidt
Brooklyn, New York

There was a not-so-good old boy named Michael Bakunin, a Russian exile living in France in 1848, who said (among many other things), "Whoever lays his hand on me to govern me is a usurper and a tyrant; I declare him to be my enemy... Government of man by man is slavery" and its laws "are cobwebs for the rich and chains of steel for the poor."

That was basically the anarchist credo of that day and age.

Mr. Frey, as described in Mr. Beston's column, seems little more than your run-of-the-mill, dishonest opportunist.

Joel Stein, however, may fancy himself a kindred soul-mate of Bakunin. That's a bit more serious.
-- Joseph W. Holmes
Cedar Park, Texas

TENNESSEE EARNING FRAUD
Re: Jay D. Homnick's Commission Off a Crime:

I always like your little "teachings" on Jewish tradition sometimes included with your teachings on morality and politics. The best Jewish jokes, I discovered years ago, are told by Jews. Along the lines of cultural "stereotypes," I concluded (again years ago) that "If you can't get along with an Italian, you can't get along with anybody." Subsequently, after finding out more about the culture of my ancestry (and "inherited" behavior), I concluded, "If you can't get along with a Scotsman, don't worry, no one else can either."

Otherwise, I'm ashamed of Tennessee. From my experience it is a state filled with some of the most amenable and reasonable people in the Country.

Thank you for your gifted insights and humor.
-- Carl Gordon Pyper (Clan Murray)

What next, get out of jail free cards for illegal aliens? How about a corruption stamp for the legislature? If the tax is paid on the bribe, it is OK or maybe the two parties get a lighter sentence for engaging in pre-taxed bribery. This is the most embarrassing law passed since the Tennessee legislature passed a law that the ratio of the circumference to the diameter of a circle was not pi, but 3.0.
-- Danny L. Newton
Cookeville, Tennessee

This is not new. As I recall, the feds put Capone away on tax evasion charges suggesting that all would have been hunky-dory if he had paid them the vigorish.
-- Jay Salwen

BEN'S LEGIONS (Cont.)
Re: Ben Stein's Saints in Armor and Reader Mail's Ben Stein's Legions:

Thanks for the praise from the honorable Ben Stein. Morale here is very good. We GIs don't verbalize our thoughts and feelings about why we are here. It is understood that our service is necessary and beneficial for America, Britain, and other countries that have been victims of al Qaeda, as well as for Iraq itself.
-- SPC Snuffy Smith
Operation Iraqi Freedom

The time has come to stop condemning Joel Stein. We should commend him for his honesty. He's just saying what the left really thinks. His honesty is refreshing in contrast to his political masters (Dick Durbin, Ted Kennedy, Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Rahm Emanuel, Hillary Clinton, etc.). Personally, I don't want his support or those who mouth "support for the troops," but are doing everything they can to defeat America in the war on terror. Thank God for Joel Stein. Now if the politicians he worships would be just as honest that would be something.
Lt. Michael Tomlinson, USN
Curtis Bay, Maryland

...Thank you for all that you do and please don't stop because the day that compassionate and brilliant people like yourself stop responding to the Joel Steins of this world is the day that they start to come true. God bless you sir,
-- Adam Murka

I read Joel Stein's article, and more importantly, I heard Hugh Hewitt's interview with this sniveling little brat, and Ben Stein is right on the money! Joel Stein should go to Iraq and see for himself, instead of cozying up to his Hollywood buddies with his six-figure salary! Maybe having his head severed is the only way for him to see the light.

Bravo Ben Stein!
-- John F. Bergin
Centennial, Colorado

Ben Stein's article is the most powerful rebuttal to Joel Stein that I could imagine.

It is also a beautiful homage to our brave men and women ("They are saints in body armor") who have chosen to confront such Evil on our behalf.

God bless Ben and God bless our troops.

At least one of the Steins understands what's going on (that we're fighting for our very survival) and the stakes involved (the future of Civilization).
-- John Nehmer
Milwaukee, Wisconsin

Please pass along my compliments and heartfelt thanks for Ben Stein's recent column, "Saints in Armor."

Mr. Stein correctly points out that the vast majority of American troops are highly moral people. They have no say in the policy decisions that put them into harm's way. They have no say in the outcome of Iraqi elections. They have no say in the outcome of the investigations into alleged abuses by a few bad apples at Abu Ghraib. But, they do their difficult duty, in difficult circumstances, and have made a large part of planet Earth safer because of it.

My own military career began in 1975. Despite the fact that I never went to Vietnam, I have been spit at and called a "baby killer" in airports. (I went to basic training four months after the embassy in Saigon fell. But, details like that didn't matter to Hippies and Hare Krishnas.) Our society has come a long way since then -- no thanks to John Kerry and his ilk. (Scroll halfway down the page for my comments about "John, Jane, and ... Henry.")

My close friend's son is now a third-generation Marine, and is on his way back for another tour in Iraq. He is part of a special, "way out front" unit. His unit membership is 100% combat experienced. (Some of them could've gotten out of this tour, because of rotation factors. None of them did.) Their biggest complaint is not the hardship of their counter-terrorist duties. Rather, it is the portrayal of America by the "mainstream" media.

So, Mr. Stein, thanks for using your position to stand up for what is right, and for people that don't have a say.
-- Thomas F. Kovach candidate, 5th Congressional District
Mount Juliet, Tennessee

In the Stein wars, I support Ben. However, Ben makes one error. He says Joel would have his head sawed off if not for our fighting men and women. Considering the column Joel wrote, I think his head's already been sawed off.
-- Dr. Charles G. Waugh

In his response to Joel Stein, he calls them "saints in armor." At a speech at West Point years ago, Tom Wolfe used a similar phrase, "armed monks at the orgy," identifying the American military with the Roman legionnaires who stood guard for Rome, turning their backs to the libertine lifestyles of Rome's privileged class so they could face outward against threats. The images of both phrases are fitting: individuals who set themselves apart from opportunities to indulge themselves in order to protect others.
-- Leroy Hurt

Ben Stein writes what is in his heart. We admire his unabashed willingness to tell us what is in his heart, in a time of cynicism and anti-patriotism. I also enjoy reading the many accolades that follow in your Readers Column. It is reassuring to know of the many people from cities large and small across our nation who are inspired by, take solace in, the almost lonely but eloquent voice of Ben Stein expressing his gratitude to those who make our safe and sheltered life in this free land possible.

Thank you! Thank you!! Thank you! Ben Stein has expressed eloquently how the majority of Americans feel about the brave men and women who have and are putting their lives on the line everyday. Our appreciation is so great for this and I am so glad that Ben put it into words for the world to see. Shame on Joel Stein for his cowardly description of our defenders.
-- Harriet Traxler
Carver, Minnesota

...The world is a dangerous place and getting more dangerous and unstable by the day. If Joel Stein has a problem with U.S. troops being overseas and shooting and being shot at now, he is going to be a total wreck for the next 20 years. More young men and women are going to have to step up to fill the ranks of our military. Military personnel, like baseball players, get older and have to retire, you know. But, those troops are the only thing that may keep Mr. Stein from reading by the light of the radioactive glow of his own body. This is not the best time to denigrate our troops and the people who show support for them. So, keep displaying the yellow ribbons. If you do not want to support the Chinese, then buy American products or make your own. Just do not forget who makes it possible for you to sip your double latte while you read your stock quotes on your BlackBerry.
-- Michael Tobias
Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

Ben Stein writes what is in his heart. We admire his unabashed willingness to tell us what is in his heart, in a time of cynicism and anti-patriotism. I also enjoy reading the many accolades that follow in your Readers Column. It is reassuring to know of the many people from cities large and small across our nation who are inspired by, take solace in, the almost lonely but eloquent voice of Ben Stein expressing his gratitude to those who make our safe and sheltered life in this free land possible.
-- Diane Smith
South San Francisco, California

Ben Stein's heart and mind are a "Perfect Storm" for those Joel Stein's of the world who would see the miracle of America as a glass half-empty... at most.

The images they see, that causes them such self-hatred, is not the half empty glass... it is their own mirror images.

Their painful reflections must emanate from their guilt at being so fortunate to live in America. They suffer this tyrannical land that feeds them, protects them, and suffers their disgustingly shallow arrogance and their sterile, soft-handed lack of life experience and total lack of tangible contribution... while others give all.

America was built by and will always be sustained by men and women with optimism, confidence and courage. Joel Stein seems afraid of what he sees in the mirror.

Our military men and women have earned their self-pride with service, sacrifice and valor. Joel can kiss my common...
-- John Curtis

Kudos to Ben Stein! As an Army wife of 18 years, and rarely seeing my husband because he is sent throughout the world at a moments notice at times, as he witnesses his soldiers or friends injuries or even death, and yet he goes on. He's served a tour to Iraq and is gearing up for yet another one. Not for his own glory, certainly not for the money (which is laughable compared to what his civilian counterparts make doing what he does), or prestige (insert laugh here). He is the most patriotic person I know. His love of country goes deeper than even I can sometimes comprehend because he will actually give his life for every single American despite their political, religious, or ethical views. He may not like those who oppose what he stands for, but he will fight to the death to defend their freedom to have those views or beliefs. Something Joel Stein and others like him will NEVER come close to understand. Thank you Ben Stein for supporting our service members. Every time I read one of your articles supporting our military, it brings a tear or three to my eyes.

God Bless you, Ben Stein!
-- Darlene Lovelace

Due to circumstances, I have been pre-occupied with other matters lately, so I have just read Ben Stein's piece. I happened to see the Kudos in Monday's edition and I went back to read his post. Excellent -- brings a sense of pride and tears to the eyes. Thank you Ben, for defending our warriors at home here on the second front. It is increasingly clear that the media is a bigger enemy than an armed insurgent (terrorist) for while a terrorist kills the body, the media poisons the soul and saps the spirit if it continues on unchallenged. We saw that in Vietnam. I'm a little late on this but I would like to add my thanks also.
-- Pete Chagnon

You are correct about the "other" journalist named Stein, who tells the world in the L.A. Times that he "does not support the war," and therefore either supports leaving the Iraqis to their torturous ex-dictator because it's none of our "imperialist" business, or that the Iraqis in his mind deserve their punishments by their charming ex-dictator.

But why just tell your readers what L.A. Times author Joel Stein believes is OK, when you can show them as here? Sometimes, a picture is worth not just a thousand words, but millions.
-- S. Silverstein, M.D.

Ben Stein praises those "who guard the ramparts of our blessed island of peace and decency." Well, sadly, those ramparts are utterly unguarded, which is why the evils he described outside them will surely and inexorably come to us within them.
-- Jay Maxwell

WE ARE NOT ALONE
Re: David Holman's Reclaiming Catholic Colleges and Br. Kenneth Cardwell's letter (under "Newtonian Scrutiny") in Reader Mail's Cruising for a Bruising :

David Holman's measured, but optimistic, article about the efforts of two Catholic universities to re-establish their religious, spiritual, and educational identities is hopeful sign for those of us who believe that the state of Catholic education in general, and higher education in particular, is in freefall. And we are not alone: it has been eight years since James T. Burtchaell wrote The Dying of the Light, which described in great detail the gradual, but relentless, separation between churches -- the book includes both Catholic and Protestant institutions -- and the academy. It should be noted that, at the time the book was published, Rev. Burtchaell, a Catholic priest, was Provost at Notre Dame.

That Mr. Holman would refer to several Catholic universities as "super orthodox," tells you something about what has happened since the baleful effects of post Vatican II wreaked havoc on Church education. Aided and abetted by all-too-complaint and modern bishops, organizations like Georgetown University developed their separate philosophy of teaching that often either conflicted with, or totally contradicted, Church teachings. Today Georgetown is a CINO operation -- Catholic in Name Only -- but still calls itself "an institution in the Jesuit tradition."

If Fathers Shanley and Jenkins think their road will be easy, I suggest they think again. For as surely as night follows day, every major -- and minor -- obstacle will be raised by the AAUP, civil rights organizations and feminist groups threatening endless legal challenges to the good Fathers' attempt to rein in the charade that now passes for Catholic education. I wish them well and the determination to stay the course. If Providence and Notre Dame universities are limited example of a return to sanity in Catholic education, there are, unfortunately, too many other examples, especially at Jesuit institutions, where modernism has run amuck. A most recent occurrence at the University of San Francisco (USF) makes my point.

St. Edmund Campion along with St. Thomas More are two of the best known martyrs of the Catholic Church in England. Campion, a graduate of Oxford, and a man of great learning, died at Tyburn in 1581. His crime was that he was a Jesuit priest, for which he was beheaded. Campion Halls have adorned, appropriately, many a Jesuit university (if memory serves, there is even one at Oxford), including the University of San Francisco. Until recently that is. The USF announced that it was changing the name of Campion Hall to Kalmanovitz Hall. Why? It appears that the family of Mr. Kalmanovitz, whose fortune stems from beer sales and real estate, paid USF officials $10 million for the privilege of renovating the hall and renaming it after its patriarch. Can Ignatius Loyola's name now also be bought if the price is right? But we should remember that, like Georgetown, USF is "an institution in the Jesuit tradition."

Pax tecum.
-- Vincent Chiarello
Reston, Virginia

It's amusing to me since Catholicism "invented" universities several hundred years ago. At least according to the book How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization by Thomas Woods. For a few decades, Catholic Universities have left their Roman Catholic identities for the secular and are not recognizable. It's good to read that at least some are "coming home." There are others who have been founded recently, Ave Maria University and Steubenville, that adhere. Gonzaga was on the edge of being secular. Father Spitzer is bringing it back. Parents send their children to Catholic universities to keep their Catholic values instilled but soon find out that they have lost them to secular ideas.

Check out the book I mentioned above. It's a very informative read.

Thanks!
-- Clasina Segura
New Iberia, Louisiana

Brother Cardwell, F.S.C. (Forever Selling Chances, as Brother Richard once told me) has traveled a long way from the brothers who educated me. The Christian Brothers with whom I interacted during my high school years were quite a bit more definite about the difference between non-Catholic and anti-Catholic. I would like to point out that prohibiting the showing or performance of a movie or play that is patently anti-Catholic, offensive, indecent, and tasteless (not to mention just plain stupid) on the campus of a CATHOLIC college or university probably shouldn't even need to be discussed. Piss-Christ was said to have artistic merit by those who detected art in it. Should it be displayed at a CATHOLIC college or university? Of course not? Those F.S.C. brothers of yesteryear would have seen this in a heartbeat. I wonder why it is so hard to grasp today.
-- Joseph Baum
Garrettsville, Ohio

Like this Article

Print this Article

Print Article