DC bishops back up Sebelius’ KC bishop: Don’t come to communion
Wow, this is a first for the Archbishop of DC, Fr. Donald Wuerl, and a very big development.
Wuerl has the distinct problem of being the away-from-home bishop for all pro-abortion Catholic politicians, including Joe Biden, Dick Durbin, Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, and Nancy Pelosi, to name some of the more infamous.
The Washington Times first reported March 24 that bishop wagons were beginning to circle, starting with Kathleen Sebelius. Deal Hudson expounded March 30 in a great, informative piece in Inside Catholic:
… Gov. Sebelius got some bad news… something not noticed much in Catholic media or the secular press. The bishops of Washington, DC, and Arlington, VA, confirmed publicly they would uphold the declaration of her ordinary, Archbishop Joseph Naumann of KC, stating that Gov. Sebelius should not present herself for communion.
A spokeswoman… said Archbishop Donald Wuerl [pictured right, next to Sebelius] would expect Sebelius to follow Bishop Naumann’s request while in Washington…. [A] spokeswoman… announced that Bishop Paul Loverde would expect the same while she was in Northern VA.
That Archbishop Wuerl and Bishop Loverde would back up Bishop Naumann in regard to the future Secretary of Health and Human Services is a significant development in the effort of some bishops to enforce Canon 915: “Those upon whom the penalty of excommunication or interdict has been imposed or declared, and others who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin, are not to be admitted to holy communion.”…
This will send the message to other bishops that if they choose to pronounce members of Congress from their dioceses unfit for communion, their authority will be respected in DC and across the Potomac in VA. The ramifications are enormous: For example, if Sean Cardinal O’Malley of Boston stated publicly that Sen. John Kerry was in violation of Canon 915, he would not have been able to receive communion at Pope Benedict XVI’s Mass in DC a year ago. Rep. Nancy Pelosi would not have been able to celebrate her elevation to speaker of the House with a special Mass at Trinity College, if Archbishop Neiderhauer had found her wanting according to the standard of Canon 915.
Some will argue that neither Archbishop Wuerl nor Bishop Loverde will attempt, through their priests, to deny Governor Sebelius communion. But this misses the point, and the significance, of how the combined statements of Bishops Naumann, Wuerl, and Loverde have created a new and more vulnerable situation for the pro-abortion Catholic members of Congress. As Archbishop Raymond Burke has explained, Bishop Naumann did not impose a “sanction” on Governor Sebelius; Bishop Naumann asked Sebelius, not the clergy, to apply Canon 915 to herself.
But if Sebelius were to receive communion in D.C. or Northern VA, it would likely generate a news story that would mushroom quickly, involving the priest who administered communion and his bishop. This is not news coverage that Sebelius, or the Obama administration, would want to deal with.
No doubt there are priests in both dioceses who would have little compunction about giving communion to pro-abortion Catholic politicians, but whether they want to get into a media-generated spat with their bishop over a high-profile politician is another matter.
A final point: Archbishop Wuerl and Bishop Loverde’s collegial response to Bishop Naumann destabilizes the relationship between pro-abortion Catholic politicians and their bishops back home. The question will arise as to why Governor Sebelius should be the only politician in Washington who has been called to account under Canon 915. What about the dozens of others in Congress who have a 100% pro-abortion voting record? What about Vice-President Joe Biden himself?
Will other bishops seize this opportunity to apply Canon 915 to politicians in their dioceses, knowing that Archbishop Wuerl and Bishop Loverde will back them up? Given the determination of the Obama administration and the Congress to roll back all restrictions on abortion, I wouldn’t be surprised.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Good for Archbishop Wuerl!
Now if only the pro abort “catholics” would actually LISTEN to him!
This is encouraging. Changes like this must begin at the top, and “trickle down” to the base. And since it is obviously hypocritical not to apply the same standard to other proabort politicians, it is reasonable to expect this to spread. One can only hope.
Mark Shea likes to entitle posts like this one Episcopal Spine Alert!
It is long past time for our bishops to do their job. I have been thrilled by this and other incidents in recent days that indicate that at least some of them are finally starting to draw lines in the sand.
But her communion with the other tax cheats will feel so sweet for her.
She of course in healthcare will have some influence over 16% of our economy. It is rapidly on the way to 20% of the economy before it is even socialized. This is an examople of her being both ethically irresponsible in taxes and she will be irresponsible with healthcare in a fiscal way as she is morally clashing with her named religion.
I keep seeing this phrase, proabort politicians, here and at similar anti-abortion blogs.
It’s crazy talk. Who’s pro abortion? Who’s out there saying, “Yah! Abortion?” Who?
Links, please.
As for the whole wafer thing – I guess I’ll listen to what a priest has to say about women’s health and reproduction, a)when the priest is a woman, and/or b)when the priest is in a position to make a decision about being a parent him/herself.
Otherwise, they don’t know what they’re talking about.
FF,
“I guess I’ll listen to what a priest has to say about women’s health and reproduction, a)when the priest is a woman, and/or b)when the priest is in a position to make a decision about being a parent him/herself. Otherwise, they don’t know what they’re talking about. ”
You seem to be implying that one must be directly involved with something or have actual experience with a situation in order to speak on said situation. This is patently false for a number of reasons. First of all, there are many women on this very blog who are parents themselves who would make the exact same arguments and statements as the priest in question, and then your above objection would be completely null. It is an ad hominem attack which doesn’t address the issue at all; rather, the person and who they are. If someone else who “fits your criteria” were to make the same statements, you would have no way of refuting them, at least if you used the above method.
Second, if what you say above is true, then to be consistent, no mother should be allowed to make a decision whether or not to circumcise her son. After all, she does not have a penis; she doesn’t know what it’s like. Once she becomes a man, maybe then her opinion about whether or not to circumcise should be considered. Until then, it is solely up to the Father.
Finally, the absurdity of the argument is overwhelmingly seen in the fact that if this really only is a woman’s issue or a father/mother issue, then in order to be objective and look at this from an outside point of view, truth demands that we look to the opinion of a priest or someone who is not involved. Someone who has no personal experience with abortion can look at these questions from an outside, objective point of view with no “personal baggage” because he has never been emotionally involved and hence is the best candidate to make a a sane, rational decision. A woman is too personally involved and can not look at her situation objectively. Her subjective feelings and emotions will get in the way. Hence, an outside observer, one who has never been personally involved in such questions, is the best possible candidate to make decisions about abortion for the woman.
“It’s crazy talk. Who’s pro abortion? Who’s out there saying, “Yah! Abortion?”
=================
ACTIONS speak louder than words, FF.
If you still don’t know who these people are…you must be living under a rock for (at least) the past 50 days.
I think it’s fine for the church to deny communion to pro choice or pro death penatly politicians. It’s their church, they can do as they want. Some will probably leave the Church, those that remain will at least share a common doctrine.
Maybe I’m missing something, but this doens’t seem like a big issue in the scheme of things. Secretary Sebelius will have a bit more free time on Sundays, sounds good to me.
sorry, anonymous at 10:38 was me.
“Maybe I’m missing something, but this doens’t seem like a big issue in the scheme of things”
——————————-
Not receiving the Body and Blood of Christ IS the biggest issue in the Grandest scheme of things…
Yeah, anon…you ARE missing something.
Archbishop Wuerl is not a priest, so his title is not “Fr.”, it’s “Most Rev.”.
Not a huge deal, but Catholics would expect him to receive his particular honorific.
While I commend these actions by the Bishops, and applaud them for it, I don’t think it will make a bit of difference to these politicians.
By virtue of their pro-abortion ideas, presenting themselves for Communion is nothing but a charade. IF they were true Catholics, they wouldn’t hold the views they do. This is a no brainer. Being present at Mass is just a PR tactic for these people…a chance to “be seen”.
They’re not fooling anyone.
I highly doubt any of them would present themselves for Communion and risk the “scene” that would ensue if this is enforced. Bad PR for them…although I would love to witness it.
I wonder which one of them will be the first to challenge this.
Sadly Hal, to my knowledge I’ve never heard of communion denied to pro-death penalty, supporters of torture, or war ‘realists,’ they are only concerned about abortion. In fact, I would love to see some sort of acknowledgement of these issues in the public sphere by these bishops (they have had a lot of ‘declarations’ about them that are awesome but noone seems to hear or want to listen to them). I think they are just as important, so why not hold public officials accountable for their support of unjust wars and their support of killing, raping, and torturing of grown people as well as their pro-choice views? Of course, that might mean some Republicans as well as Democrats would have to get their clock cleaned.
Consistency would do the ‘body’ good.
Hey, Bobby Baby – were you the nerdy debate club geek in high school?
the Body and Blood of Christ
Is it crispy, or chewy?
“Hey, Bobby Baby – were you the nerdy debate club geek in high school?”
Ha! I wish. No, I was a different kind of nerd; the kind who stayed home on Friday nights and played video games or D&D, all while aspiring to be a professional wrestler. I was THAT kind of dork!
FF: If you think anyone here is amused by your imbecillic screen name and comments, you’re sadly mistaken.
We’ve seen your ilk here many times before…so stop wasting your time and ours.
Grow up.
PIP, as I understand it, “you can’t be pro choice and a Catholic.” You can call yourself Catholic, but you’re not. Same goes for the death penalty, torture, birth control and the Iraq War I imagine, but you don’t see all the fuss about those things.
Cafeteria Catholics come from the right and the left.
Typical pro-abort…resorts to insulting a faith they don’t understand.
FF…state your curses and blasphemies and leave…we’ve had worse.
we need to have the bishops focus on ALL the prochoice “catholics” not just Sebelius. We need Biden and Pelosi for sure to be included in this sort of sanction.
we need to have the bishops focus on ALL the prochoice “catholics” not just Sebelius. We need Biden and Pelosi for sure to be included in this sort of sanction.
Posted by: angel at April 2, 2009 12:56 PM
I agree. And Ted Kennedy. There must be others as well. And any “Catholic” who supports the death penalty.
glad you agree Hal that any Catholic who supports abortion shouldn’t receive Holy Communion, especially Mr. K.
I absolutely agree. And they should be stricter with “Catholics” who use birth control too.
Not really for me to say, since I’m not a member of that Church, but I guess I can have an opinion.
well Hal, technically, any Catholic who is on the BC pill should not be receiving Holy Communion. It would mean many Catholic couples likely could not receive. Of course the option is to reconsider what’s at stake and stop using the pill. Not really that difficult a “choice” in my mind. :)
Not just the Pill, but condoms, IUD’s, diaphragms, etc. No more CINO’s.
Shape up or get out, right?
Exactly, Hal, if you can’t be pro-abort and Catholic, you can’t pick and choose which of the other doctrines one supports in any other area either. Why not call them all out? CINOs are all over the place, I hope that Bishops will start using this kind of public consistency but I haven’t seen it happen yet.
“Exactly, Hal, if you can’t be pro-abort and Catholic, you can’t pick and choose which of the other doctrines one supports in any other area either. Why not call them all out? CINOs are all over the place, I hope that Bishops will start using this kind of public consistency but I haven’t seen it happen yet.”
Agreed.
And let’s not forget the pro-choice Republicans too, like Ah-nald, and whats-his-name from New York that ran for president.
Bobby, what can we do to encourage the church to start enforcing some standards? I’m not even a member of the church, and I know it’s not a democracy. Should we just assume they know what they’re doing and let it play out over time?
“And let’s not forget the pro-choice Republicans too, like Ah-nald, and whats-his-name from New York that ran for president. ”
Rudy Guliani. There actually was a lot of talk and controversy about him when he was running for president and receiving communion. I think the idea though is that the more public you are, the more grave the scandal is. Like, we don’t hear as much today about John Kerry receiving communion as we did when he was running for president.
“Bobby, what can we do to encourage the church to start enforcing some standards? I’m not even a member of the church, and I know it’s not a democracy. Should we just assume they know what they’re doing and let it play out over time?”
I don’t know exactly, Hal. As some of my favorite Catholic apologists say, “I’m in sales, not administration.” Because aside from writing to our local Bishops and pointing out these abuses, there really isn’t much we can do because we don’t have the authority; it isn’t our job (our=lay Catholics). We can do the best we can to raise awareness like we’re doing here on Jill’s and other places too. But sometimes there are things that suck and that we can’t control and at that point, we (Catholics) have to just offer up our sufferings and frustrations.
Not the enthusiastic answer you were hoping for, but that’s about all I got right now.
Ah yes Bobby that’s right. I’m glad they were at least discussing it around that time.
Regardless, I don’t think it should be contingent on someone’s popularity, if you are a politician and set an example for the community they should still be called out. I was watching Gavin Newsom on Bill Maher the other day, and he quite clearly talked about how his area priests and bishops don’t consider him a Catholic at all and dislike him intensely and he openly admits how much he strays away from teachings about abortion, birth control, etc. I actually think he said he was a terrible Catholic or something. It seems like at least his local clergy are still holding him accountable..again a consistency thing I guess..
Hey Bobby, if it’s not your job, it certainly isn’t my job. I guess we’ll see how it plays out.
I’m guessing the Church doesn’t want to force the issue and lose half of its members.
“Sadly Hal, to my knowledge I’ve never heard of communion denied to pro-death penalty, supporters of torture, or war ‘realists,’ they are only concerned about abortion.”
1.) Our country doesn’t torture people (except unborn children).
2.)pro-death penalty (this is for convicted murderers, etc). So, it’s not as grave as abortion, any sane compassionate person can tell the diffrence between the purely innocent unborn and guilty murderers. To be consistant, catholics should be against the death penalty. But to compare the 2 is really sick.
3.) Sometimes war is justified in the catechism
“To be consistant, catholics should be against the death penalty.”
Consistent? You’re either a Catholic or you’re not. You can’t decide for yourself which parts of the Catholic faith you’re going to follow.
There’s no such thing as a pro-death penalty Catholic. Or a pro-birth control Catholic. Or a pro choice Catholic.
Right?
And we sure did torture Jasper. Lots and lots over the last eight years.
“I’m guessing the Church doesn’t want to force the issue and lose half of its members.
Posted by: Hal at April 2, 2009 3:21 PM”
==================================
You mean the Church will just be left with the FAITHFUL half??
Hey, I can live with that.
PIP, here is an article concerning Guliani — the Church doesn’t discriminate between Dems and Republicans :)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2012746/posts
Hal, what are your sources for the torture accusation.
“And we sure did torture Jasper. Lots and lots over the last eight years.”
I agree that we tortured lots and lots of unborn children Hal, I don’t dispute that.
I think we may have waterboarded 3 terrorists and roughed up another 12 or so, not many. but it’s not done anymore. Only a crazy person would compare this to the abortion holocoust.
Kalik Shiek Mohammoud (9/11 mastermind) was one of the ones waterboared, he gave up information that saved lives, according to George Tenet.
The other thing you have to realize too, Hal, is that this whole idea of the MAJORITY of Catholics being rebels is fairly new (I’d say within the past 50 years). It used to be the case in my parents day that it was a virtue to be obedient and have respect for proper teaching authority. Now everyone decides for themselves what is good and what is evil, and this is really a new concept. The Church, historically, is very slow to respond to new things like this. They take their time, wait many years, see how things play out, before MAJOR action is taken. I mean, if you think about it, the Church is not set up to be able to accommodate some 60-70%(just a guess) of its members openly rebelling and dissenting from her teaching. Sure, you have the local Bishop, but this is just a huge, overwhelming problem, especially in the detail that you and PiP are discussing (and I agree with a lot of what y’all are saying).
So I don’t even think it’s a matter of not wanting to lose members. My main points are that 1) this open rebellion of enormous proportion is fairly new in the grand scheme of things 2) the Church is slow to delegate on major points 3) the Church is currently not structured to handle the rebellious situation to the level of detail that you (and I) would hope to see.
so what do you say bobby? Is the RC church going to change in response to todays world after 50 years of not? Because I really don’t see people going back on birth control. Just not going to happen.
Jasper, do you ever watch the news? Now we are finding documents about the authorization of torture and Gonzales is having legal problems regarding his institutionalizing torture.
Not to mention the fact that we have numerous declassified military documents of people torturing at various detention centers. Our allowed “interrogating techniques” can be easily classified as torture; “ruffed them up a bit” is dehumanizing. Also, if you don’t believe waterboarding is torture you have to be delusional. It always was considered torture (it was a favorite of the Inquisition) until recently when we suddenly decided that since we don’t torture, but we waterboard, we must not be torturing. (Circular logic).
Secondly, the church only authorizes death penalty in extreme cases that are practically impossible in this day and age especially in countries like ours.
Thirdly, the Church allows for JUST WAR. By many aspects, the war in Iraq does not satisfy the requirements. In fact many of the wars fought in the past century don’t even qualify by the strict standards that were layed out years and years ago.
And finally, we are NOT COMPARING them to abortion per se; but saying these are teachings of the church JUST LIKE abortion, and should not be ignored.
ndfan: I think more and more Catholics will return to the natural way of doing things. I think many young Catholics today have seen the effects the sexual revolution has had on unfaithful Catholics and are not impressed. there are plenty of Catholics who have stayed close to the teachings of the Church and over time the good results of this can be seen – lower divorce/no sti’s, large close families etc.
overall, happier and more stable lives.
I have to go, but maybe will check in later to continue the discussion.
yeh well I think you are living in dreamland if you think that’s really happening. Few want a mess of kids and to start having them early. Maybe the ones you know.
Hi ndfan.
” so what do you say bobby? Is the RC church going to change in response to todays world after 50 years of not? Because I really don’t see people going back on birth control. Just not going to happen. ”
No, the Church will never change it’s teaching on birth control. It will always stand firm and preach the gospel without apology.
I wasn’t implying that it would change a doctrine. I was just talking about how it’s slow to deliberate, to take disciplinary actions of such a large magnitude.
It’s sort of amusing to see the proaborts recoil in horror at the use of the term that describes them best. It’s like someone from the pro-gun lobby objecting to that label, and saying that no one really likes guns, they just want others to have the right to own them. Yeah, right.
Oh, btw, FF, here’s what you asked for:
pro-abortion SYLLABICATION: pro-a·bor·tion PRONUNCIATION: pr-bôrshn ADJECTIVE: Favoring or supporting legalized abortion. http://www.bartleby.com/61/27/P0572700.html
“Jasper, do you ever watch the news? Now we are finding documents about the authorization of torture and Gonzales is having legal problems regarding his institutionalizing torture.”
define ‘torture’
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/cat.htm
“the term “torture” means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity”
Practices reliably documented at U.S. detention centers in Iraq, at Guantanamo Bay, or Afghanistan:
Beating (Fish, truncheon, kick, slamming)
External electrodes
Stretching or suspension (may tear ligaments or muscles or cause asphyxia)
Asphyxiation: Water Immersion, obstructing airway, chest compression, suspension
Thermal burning
Ligatures
Rape
Painful medical procedures such as administration of drugs, enemas, etc
Food, water, access to toilet, shelter, medical care sleep, and sensory deprivation
Forcing victim to abase self: urinating on self, masturbating, renouncing religion, falsely confessing or accusing, applying urine and feces to others
Verbal abuse: threats to prisoner,threats against prisoner’s family, insults, denigration of prisoner’s religion
Mock executions
Sexual degradation: nudity, fondling
Forcing a victim to watch abuse or torture of loved one
Perceptual monopolization: loud noise, immobilization, bright lights/blindfolind, confinement in small space
Mutilation: dog bites
Disorienting drgus such s tranquilizers or hallucinogens
Source;
Randall GR, Lutz L, QuirogaJ, et al. Physical and psychiatric effects of torture: two medical studies. In Stover and Nightingale, 62-63.
Thomsen JL. The role of the pathologist in human rights abuses. Journal of Clinical Pahtology 2000;53;569-72
Also, check out amnesty.org and amnestyusa.org, humanrightswatch, etc.
Torture is very well documented jasper.
Hey jasper, I bet if we started waterboarding murder suspects we’d get some good confessions! Wanna try to legalize torture for Americans?
I mean why stop at foreign people? I mean sure you’d have to get past the “cruel and unusual punishment charge” but we already do inflict cruel and unusual punishment on middle easterners and non-American suspects. Are citizen papers that big of a deal?
…or are you in the ‘if it’s legal it’s okay’ crowd? Er, at least when it comes to torture of foreign people?
Face it Jasper, you can’t believe in inherent dignity of people except for foreign suspects, or (any nationality) criminals. The key word here is inherent, if it applies to children, it better apply to adults too no matter what they have done or where they are from. Denigrating other human rights abuses because they aren’t “as bad” as abortion is basically denying their existence or need for attention. Congrats!
how many rapes and suspensions occured or burnings? exactly how many by American CIA or military.
I have more torture testimonies I can pull out for you if you want by the way. They aren’t pretty though :(
Jasper, we may never know the true numbers. We only find out through testimonies and reports by abuses that are reported.
There are numerous accounts and reports on amnestyusa.org, amnesty.org, and hrw.org. There are also many books and resources available.
PIP,
I don’t need more testimonies, I just wanted to know how many.
I know for certain that >3,000 American unborn children are aborted every day.
How many cases of ‘torture’ have there been by the CIA or military in the last 8 years ?
We’re talking about denying communion, so lets get down to specifics.
“We’re talking about denying communion, so lets get down to specifics.”
What does that have to do with anything? Since when did human dignity constitute a numbers game??
5,073,670 unborn babies aborted since 2003
3 terrorist waterboarded since 2003
12 terrorist roughed up since 2003
BTW, it IS extremely hard to find numbers on this because:
A. we like to send suspects to countries that will torture them for us
B. Techniques considered ‘not torture’ are still not openly reported for security reasons
C. What we know about torture incidents that are considered ‘torture’ by the U.S. we can only gather from reputable human rights organization and prosecutable trials; there is evidence that there have been incidents covered up by medical personnel, but again, when you put the veil of ‘national security’ over everything things get a bit fuzzy.
There ARE many people I have met that have no problem with torture or allowing forms of torture to continue. That is the point of this jasper. The ENTIRE POINT I’m making is that torture is against the idea of inherent human dignity, and so any support of torture is spitting in the face of human dignity. You can’t pick and choose which parts of inherent human dignity you want to accept, and that is what the CC upholds.
PIP,
who is worse when it comes to inherent human dignity, Obama or Bush?
Egypt’s Prime Minister noted in 2005 that the U.S. had transferred 60-70 detainees to Egypt alone, and a former CIA agent with experience in the region believes that hundreds of detainees have been sent by the U.S. to prisons in the Middle East. The U.S. has acknowledged the capture of about 30 “high value” detainees whose whereabouts remain unknown.
Of 60 publicly available Iraq contracts that University of Connecticut Law Professor Laura A. Dickinson examined, none required contractors to obey human rights, anticorruption or transparency norms.
About 100 to 150 detainees have been “rendered” to countries where torture is routine. For example, Maher Arar, a Canadian in airplane transit in New York, was detained and sent to Syria. On his release 10 months later, he described repeated torture, often with cables and electrical cords.
At least 11 al-Qaida suspects, and most likely many more, have simply “disappeared.” The CIA is holding them in undisclosed locations, with no notification to their families, no access to the International Committee of the Red Cross and no oversight of their treatment, effectively placing them beyond the protection of the law
At Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, reports have recently emerged about FBI agents who witnessed chained detainees forced to sit in their own excrement, adding to accounts of painful stress positions, female interrogators humiliating detainees and prolonged exposure to extremes of heat and cold.
In Afghanistan, where at least nine prisoners have died in U.S. custody, detainees have been beaten severely by guards and interrogators, deprived of sleep for extended periods and intentionally exposed to extreme cold.
yeh well I think you are living in dreamland if you think that’s really happening. Few want a mess of kids and to start having them early. Maybe the ones you know.
Posted by: ndfan at April 2, 2009 5:20 PM
It might not be your reality ndfan, but it is certainly mine and that of others.
I know many young Catholics who want large families. Not only that but I know many young women who want to have babies – lot’s of them! It’s nice to have a career or an interesting job, but most women feel best fulfilled having a family.
There have been countless op-ed pieces written by women who had bought the feminist lie that they can have children at any time and that they will only be fulfilled by having a career. Experience has shown neither is the case.
The Catholic Church’s teachings reflect this truth because it understands the true nature of human person created in God’s image.
jasper, don’t change the subject, face the truth on what you support. Be consistent.
U.S. forces have now been deployed in Iraq for over three years. During this time, tens of thousands of Iraqis have been arrested, detained, and interrogated by U.S. personnel. Many of the detainees-held at Forward Operating Bases (FOBs) or at central detention centers such as Abu Ghraib prison, CampCropper, and CampBucca-have been interrogated by personnel from U.S. Military Intelligence (MI) or the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). While some detainees have been insurgents, others have been innocent civilians caught up in U.S. military operations, in the wrong place at the wrong time.
There is mounting evidence to show that many detainees have been abused. The Abu Ghraib scandal, which broke in April 2004, brought the issue of detainee abuse to the world’s attention, but it is now clear that the scope of the problem is far broader than was known at the time. Since 2003, Human Rights Watch has reviewed hundreds of credible allegations of serious mistreatment and torture of detainees in U.S. custody. Alleged abuses have taken place in locations all over Iraq, in both FOBs and centralized facilities, and have involved CIA agents, military interrogators, MP guards, and ordinary combat soldiers. Abuses have also been alleged in detention facilities in Afghanistan and at GuantanamoBay, where smaller numbers of detainees are held. In many cases, it has taken years for abuses to come to light.
(http://www.hrw.org/en/reports/2006/07/22/no-blood-no-foul-00)
I’m done. I’ve spent too much time and I need to seriously begin studying again. If you want to know more, read more. I don’t know if you are just in denial or you support torture, but leave me to say, that supporting one human right, and not others, is either blindness or hypocrisy. Social justice for all.
Good night.
All I have to say is that Bobby should post more.
I agree most women want kids. They don’t want to have as many as their body could produce though. That’s where your living in a dreamland comes in. Don’t kid yourself. Women won’t give up birth control and the CONTROL that comes with it!
Freddy:
We’ve had quite a few pro-baby-killers admit on this site that they are, in fact, pro-abortion.
FF@11:31: Blasphemy is verboten here.
I totally agree that much of what PIP describes is disgusting, wrong, and incompatible with human dignity.
But some of what she described is not as bad, and I think that all the “torture” gets combined together, and suspect that the true abuse is very rare and things like sleep deprivation, uncomfortable temperatures, and waterboarding are much more common. Those involved with Abu Ghraib were severely sanctioned, I believe, and I suspect it is the same with anyone involved with things that are really ugly and disgusting.
I know what severe sleep deprivation is like; it wasn’t so long ago I had a newborn. It is not a technique that causes permanent harm or is outside human dignity. It is likely to be uncomfortable, and it might get people confused and out of it enough to provide information they wouldn’t otherwise. There is no pain. The same is true of keeping a cell uncomfortably (but not dangerously) hot or cold. Waterboarding may be extremely uncomfortable and I wouldn’t want it to happen to me, but I do not believe it causes permanent damage. It isn’t the same as rape, or beating, or cutting off fingers. Verbal abuse is not on the same level as being forced to sit naked in your own feces. I am against torture that mutilates, humiliates, causes severe pain, and/or permanently harms the victims, and I think that when that occurs it should be stopped and severely punished.
As far as giving prisoners to countries where torture is more common–I thought we were supposed to work with the international community? Perhaps there was a valid extradition process that happened (the prisoner was wanted in Syria or was a citizen of Syria). It’s not the same as torturing them. If the Syrians are working with us, and their troops are alongside ours (I don’t know), then it would make sense that some of the prisoners would go there. I don’t agree with it if the administration is/was just outsourcing torture, but I am not sure that is what has happened.
I am sure that every day in this country unborn children who are not even suspected of committing a crime are shredded by sharp instruments, have their brains sucked out after having their heads stabbed with scissors, and have arms or legs twisted off by people who call themselves doctors. Seeing as this happens to so many, and it is explicitly allowed by the government (they don’t even deny it happens), I am much more concerned about it. Everyone recognizes that the more brutal techniques you describe are wrong; the outcry over Abu Ghraib proves it. Somehow they do not recognize that it is wrong to slice an unborn child to shreds. Therefore, it seems a cause that is more in need of championing.
PIP,
how would fight the war on terror? by giving them cookies?
….or Ipods?
No, jasper I’m done. If you want to know more about solutions that don’t involve spitting on human dignity go read those websites for yourself.
Let’s face it … the popular, even secular label for certain unfaithful individuals is “CINO”. In reality this whole foolish crowd, working against basic moral law derived from the natural law, are creating the predicted great apostasy. The warnings from the saints is coming to be in our time. That is, “protect your faith, for there will be formed an ‘American church’, separated from Rome”. It’s here. Whether or not these reprobates are caught in this world, their souls are now in eternal danger of death. Since nothing is sacred to their minds and hearts they will, by their own free wills, live for eternity in the darkness of that culture of death. And are there enough good and faithful souls to pray hard enough for their repentance before their time is up?
No place is this so clear as in 1 Corinthians 11, where St. Paul writes, “For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the death of the Lord until he comes. Therefore, whoever eats the Bread or drinks the Cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. . . . For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself.”
And one does not eat and drink the precious Body and Blood of Jesus Christ while in such mortal sin without the guilt and need for reparation for the great additional sin of sacrelige.
http://prolifeaction.org/wordpress/2004/40430/
And re: the comment that would take the right to speak about the right to life from all those outside of the ones who experience actual reproduction … well, whether your vocation/ calling, is to the single life, married life, or to one where you sacrificially give up a human desire to marry and have children for the sake of the Kingdom (and will be rewarded with many more fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers and children because of that action), those of any category who demonstrate their true love for God’s holy will in His beloved creation of all human life, far outweigh the “opinions” of those who go through the activity that results in life but who willfully then act to destroy that life. In their case, because they experience the miracle itself, have an even greater disconnect with Life than those who may, in whatever way, long to keep that life. In everything and everyone, the justification comes from Love.
who is worse when it comes to inherent human dignity, Obama or Bush?
Posted by: Jasper at April 2, 2009 8:13 PM
Bush, by a mile.
Jasper, people who shrug off torture should be denied communion, don’t you think?
YCW @ 6:41 — good points. Thanks.
who is worse when it comes to inherent human dignity, Obama or Bush?
http://vimeo.com/2128086
who is worse when it comes to inherent human dignity, Obama or Bush?
http://vimeo.com/2128086
Obama
Proof I have terrible impulse control, but I just saw this:
“..waterboarding are much more common. ”
Exactly how does forcing water down someone’s lungs with their face covered in a towel or saran wrap so they can’t breathe does not constitute torture.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/08/AR2007110802150.html
Go ahead, try to justify it. It was considered a form of torture (a favorite of the Inquisition but also used in Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan and Cambodia) until somewhat recently when we just ‘decided’ it wasn’t ‘as bad’ and so it ‘wasn’t torture.’
I suggest you look into this matter a little bit more. Those websites I have linked above are excellent resources.
Think about it this way: if we can’t use these techniques on criminal suspects in America, we shouldn’t do them on foreign criminal suspects. The only difference between American criminals and foreign criminals is that Americans have citizenship papers, and my thinking is, there should be a standard for anyone we interrogate; if one technique is okay for some people it should be okay for others!
Since these techniques aren’t that bad, why not go for making it normal legal procedure here in the U.S. as well? Come on, why not?
“I know what severe sleep deprivation is like; it wasn’t so long ago I had a newborn”
After 6 days of sleep deprivation is enough to make you hallucinate. Imagine at least 6 days of sleep deprivation in a place where health is compromised, food is compromised, etc. I don’t think it compares at all.
Haha, one more thing.
If we are sending suspects to prisons in foreign countries to interrogate, where torture is common and often unregulated and unchecked, and we have testimony after testimony of torture happening in these places, simply brushing it off going “aren’t we supposed to work with foreign countries”? can only be seen as a form of denial.
YES we are supposed to WORK WITH foreign countries, but we are supposed to work with them to ensure peace and establishment of human rights, not make prison contracts so that we can get away with torture.
Time out!
Reality Check!
The PBHO administration, the most ethical, the most moral, the most transparent administration (followed closely by the Clinton Administration) in the history of this still young republic is now fully in charge.
(Do not pay any mind to all those tax cheats behind the curtain.)
Barack Hussein Obama is THE president of these United States of America!
PBHO is offering the mea culpa for all the past ‘sins’ of America. What else would you expect of your ‘messiah’.
All this talk about what is or is not torture is irrelevant. It never happened, it is buried in the sea of forgetfulness as far as the east is from the west.
The sin slate is wiped clean. There is no room for recrimination because there is no crime.
Now if PBHO would be as candid in regard to the torture done to prenatal humans, we could put that issue behind us as well.
PBHO will extend the protections of the ‘law’ to the ‘lawless’, but he will not extent that same protection to those who have been placed outside the laws protection in order to facilitate their destruction.
In PBHO’s bigotted view the prenatal human is not even worthy of consideration.
PBHO has decreed that no one refer to mass murderers as ‘terrorist’s and hell has forbid PBHO to acknowledge the humanity of the unborn child.
yor bro ken
And there goes ken, derailing the thread into something completely irrelevant.
PIP,
The thought that ‘innocent’ people may have been wrongfully imprisioned disturbs me deeply.
The thought that ‘innocent’ people may have been subjected to ‘torture’ disturbs me deeply.
I do not like to contemplate ‘torturing’ self avowed mass murderers, even knowing they would kill me and my family if they could.
These vile wicked men whom PBHO mistakenly believes he can appease with kind words are not all softened by his overtures. The jew haters are unfazed by PBHO’s rhetorical flourishes.
Until PBHO publicly joins them in their jew hating dogma they will continue to view him and us as their ‘enemy’.
yor bro ken
Well ken, at least you admit that you think torture and death is only okay when people “deserve it.”
Oops, I misread your post.
You think that torture is okay or else we will lose the war.
It’s still wrong, but it’s not what I read at first glance. Apologies for the misinterpretaiton.
And there goes ken, derailing the thread into something completely irrelevant.
Posted by: prettyinpink at April 3, 2009 5:03 PM
——————————————————–
“If you want to know more about solutions that don’t involve spitting on
‘human dignity’
go read those websites for yourself.
Posted by: prettyinpink at April 3, 2009 9:39 AM
————————————————
April 2, 2009
DC bishops back up Sebelius’ KC bishop: Don’t come to communion
————————————————–
Pip,
If we exploring ‘torture’, in terms of ‘human dignity’, then my comments are right on track.
This is after a ‘prolife’ website that is all about acknowledging the humanity of the prenatal child and recognizing him as a fellow member of the human family.
The Bush policy on interrogating suspected ‘terrorists’ never denied their humanity. The Bush policy was to treat these ‘terrorists’ as enemy combatants, who had no sworn allegiance to a particular nation state by their own choice. These jew hating barbarians are people who have set themselves outside the law.
They are not US citizens, neither are they resident aliens or even tourists. They have no recourse to the benfits of the US Constitution which they seek to destroy.
They may appeal to the United Nations and the World Court. But I believe even in those bastions of anti-americanism they will not find much sympathy.
They have placed themselves in the no man’s land by their own words and deeds.
I understand there are plans to close Guantanamo Bay detention facility and relocate some of the detainees to the continental US. Why don’t you contact the Obama administration and volunteer to sponsor some these ‘persons of interest’.
You could limit your invitation to the females.
yor bro ken
PIP,
I do not believe any human being ‘deserves’ to be tortured.
But “if you grab a dog by the ears, do not scream torture when the dog bites you.”
Actions have consequences. Sometimes the consequences include collateral damage to innocent people in proximity to the intended target.
‘If you lay down with dogs do not be surprised when you get up with fleas.’
War is messy business. Our enemy has declared war on us. Despite PBHO’s attempts at appeasment, the enemy has not asked for a ceasefire nor sued for peace. The jew hating enemy has not retreated one inch from his stated to goals to destroy the USA and destroy Israel as a nation and anihilate the Jews.
yor bro ken
Yes, Bush’s policy labeled them as something other than criminals or prisoners of war, which made it easier to evade Geneva Conventions and to hold people without letting them know what they are being charged or arrested for and no trial.
Furthermore, if we believe as “pro-lifers” that human life and dignity are intrinsic, then it is not conditional on whether that person is a “barbarian” or not. It doesn’t matter. I’ll say it again. It doesn’t matter. No body deserves torture and nobody has the right to inflict it.
Period.
And yes, I do support people who have been tried and found innocent be allowed to come to the U.S. because if we don’t accept them, it would be unfair to ask other countries do the same. People released from Gitmo in the past have gone back into their home countries only to be arrested and tortured by their government, or some have simply disappeared. That’s not responsible.
“I do not believe any human being ‘deserves’ to be tortured.”
As i said before, sorry for misreading your post, at first I thought you did, but then I re-read your first couple statements.
And as I said, the dichotomy you are setting up (e.g. if we dont’ torture, we are softies and we will lose the “war on terror”) is false. I suggest you research more into why torture does not work as well as being an affront to human dignity.
“Public authorities must be ever vigilant in this task, eschewing any means of punishment or correction that either undermine or debase the human dignity of prisoners. In this regard, I reiterate that the prohibition against torture “cannot be contravened under any circumstances”
Benedict XVI
“They have placed themselves in the no man’s land by their own words and deeds.”
Unless, of course, they’re entirely innocent. Then we have held them for 8 years without a chance to even state this in a courtroom, or anywhere else. That’s upholding some serious dignity there.
For people we have evidence were actually members of a terrorist organization, I could probably to my shame overlook some deprivations of their civil liberties. The fact that we’ve held hundreds of people with apparently no clue they’ve done anything wrong (although we call them “the worst of the worst”) is bone chilling.
It’s not that radical to say we must have *some* evidence they did something before we hold them indefinitely without lawyers, court appearances, or any rights whatsoever.
“Furthermore, if we believe as “pro-lifers” that human life and dignity are intrinsic, then it is not conditional on whether that person is a “barbarian” or not. It doesn’t matter. I’ll say it again. It doesn’t matter.”
Oh yes it does matter. Stop disrespecting INNOCENT unborn children!!!
I don’t give a sh** about terrorists! they are not being killed by the thousands!!!
Stop the nonsense!!!!!!!!!!!!
Jasper, you really need to be having this discussion with your priest, since he is the expert on Catholic doctrine.
But I do believe you are required to give a sh** about other people. “Giving a sh**” about both the innocent and the guilty can only show how much more respect you pay to the unborn because you are striving for the example that Jesus set..
Wow, I’m trying to get the kink out of my neck from trying to follow the forcible thread redirections.
There are several wonderful explanations of Catholic teachings that go back to St Paul in this thread. Sadly, they are buried in the noise here. It is, for those of us who are Catholic, the Year of St Paul.
Back to the post. It is worth noting that those who act in defiance of the wisdom of the church are truly “eating and drinking condemnation on THEMSELVES.” That they lead others who are not well catechized to follow them is the scandal.
To repeat what has been said several times: The greatest horror is the murder of innocent Human lives. It adds another level of culpability to the commandment that “Thou shalt not murder.” This is not a new teaching of the Church. It goes back to the early Church Fathers. We are not in the position these days to commit the civil disobedience of the early Roman Christians of taking a child, (mostly girls) who was left exposed to die, into their home to raise them. “Whatsoever you do the the least of these…”
As an aside – If you’ve not been through the sleep deprivation that follows the birth of a child, don’t make light of it.
Many of us have been poorly catechized and have had to fight our way back to full obedience of church teaching. We still suffer from the effects of the heresies of Americanism and Modernism. If you are not familiar with them, stop your pontificating and look them up.
Many of us keep the “Public sinners” mentioned in the post above in our daily prayers. We do this because we recognize our own sinfullness and Gods healing graces. It is a work of mercy. That it “heaps coals on their heads” is a side benefit. My prayer is that God leads and protects them.
Hal,
You are ‘assuming’, because there has been no trial, that no evidence exists.
PBHO is ‘on it’ like a bum on a bologna sandwich.
If the situation is as you assume it to be, then PBHO, the magnificent, defender of truth, justice and the American way, will surely produce the evidence of ‘no evidence’ and immediately release all the ‘innocent victims’.
The people responsible for the miscarriage/elective abortion of justice will be identified and will be tried in a court of law.
(While the bomb throwin’, jew hatin’, mass murderin, serial killer terrorists laugh themselves to death. [We can only hope.])
Ya’ll hold your breath till PBHO administers justice, OK?!?!
Then there is this one little problem, when do you repatriate prisoners of war?
I realize that some times prisoner exchanges occur while a war is still active, but our enemy does not keep prisoners alive. They shoot them execution style, cut their throats, and decaptitate them slowly with a hand saw.
We do bad things like parade them naked in front of women, make them wear underwear on their heads, deprive them of sleep, and make them listen to heavy metal, and water board them and the worst of all: we ridicule their ‘book’.
(Now I have been foolish and repeated what I have read about in our media without qualifying it as such.
All of this has been ‘alleged’ by the lap dog media that masquerades as journalists. So assume bias against USA in general and previous administration in particular.)
Our alleged ‘brutality’ is the exception.
Our enemies blatant barbarism is the rule.
Our soldiers have distinguished themselves in the most difficult of circumstances. They have demonstrated restaint and discipline when it would have been easy to do otherwise. The cost for their exemplary conduct has been their own lives in greater numbers than there should have been.
I for one will be excited to welcome them home, sooner, rather later.
That is now up to the new Commander in Chief to determine. It is PBHO’s ‘WAR’ now, no matter what euphemism he chooses to use.
I suspect PBHO will need the ‘war’ as a political prop and diversion when his domestic policies fail and he needs some one else to blame for his own malfeasance, misfeasance and general incompetence.
yor bro ken
“As an aside – If you’ve not been through the sleep deprivation that follows the birth of a child, don’t make light of it.”
I don’t make light- I’m just saying it’s not comparable. When you have a baby, sleep deprivation is horrendous, but you are well fed, clothed, etc, you know you are doing this sacrifice for a child you love, etc etc
In most cases this “sleep deprivation” occurs in a cold confined cell in conditions that are often abhorrent; much of the prisons in the Middle East have been suffering from TB and parasite breakouts. Prisoners are not well fed, and medical staff many times aren’t stocked enough to keep the prisoners healthy and comfortable.
So straight days of sleep deprivation in a concrete and exposed jail cell with no love, no warmth…it’s just a different story.
In the end, I’m just asking that we demand that foreign criminals be interrogated with the same standards domestic criminals are interrogated. If citizen papers is all it takes for us to act ethically in the interrogation room, then we might have some problems.
Hey Ken, let’s make waterboarding legal for interrogation here! What do you think?
PIP, I never said that waterboarding wasn’t torture. I just said that it was a form of torture I found acceptable under the circumstances.
I listed several that I did not think were affronts to human dignity, including sleep deprivation, extreme but undangerous temperatures, and waterboarding. I am not talking about doing this to innocent people–obviously it is unacceptable if they are innocent, and I do think that every precaution should be taken not to take innocent prisoners (or, if they must take someone prisoner without clear proof of guilt–it is war, and waiting till they are sure could get them killed–treating potentially innocent prisoners as well as possible until they can be reasonably sure they are guilty).
I am talking about enemy combatants who may have information which can save the lives of the men and women fighting over the sea so that we aren’t fighting terrorists here at home. I am not talking about torturing them just to be mean; I am talking about trying to get information from them that saves lives. That is almost never the case with American prisoners. Guess what, though? If an American citizen is found guilty of a violent or deadly crime, and we can gain information on other violent criminals by torturing them, I don’t have a problem with it. The application would be limited to terrorists or gangs, I would suspect. It is only justifiable when there is a good chance that the person being interrogated knows information that could be used to save lives or prevent serious bodily harm. I am not suggesting torture as a form of punishment. That would be cruel and unusual. And as I stated earlier, it must be something which does not cause injury or serious harm, and is not physically humiliating.
I do think the conditions should otherwise be as healthful as possible, and that medical care should be available should it be necessary–but I also wonder how much of the conditions you mention (disease, vermin, poor hygiene) are true for the soldiers as well.
And I have yet to hear anyone explain how it is worse to beat up and humiliate a dozen terrorists than to kill thousands of babies each day by dismemberment.
PIP
You are right about sleep depravation for children we love. It is done out of love.
you understand that.
How many of those who are terrorist for their beliefs do it for love? How many have we insulted by not putting them to death? How many have we refused to Martyr?
Do some reading on those who have declared a jihad on us. Their actions are not out of love. They act only in obedience. They are obeying the commands of the god who owns them. They are not “children” of that god. They are slaves. To call God “Father” is among the deepest forms of blasphemy to them. Please be careful that you don’t paint the jihadists with your beliefs and understanding of God. With a true understanding of their beliefs, it is prudent to be cautious.
Having said that, We must always remain true to our beliefs. We must remain true to our laws. More to the point, one cannot do an evil to acheive a just or good result. But in our passions or concerns or our fears we will often overreact. Some of the public terrorist murders have been undertaken just to spread fear.
The common belief in portions of the world is that this society (The demonic USA in particular) is weak and can be easily influenced by that fear. They say that we are corrupt and evil to the core. I believe there are aspects where they see the truth. If one goes only by the Mainistream Media and the corruption that comes out of the “entertainment industry” then it is easy to draw that conclusion.
I see your passion in your posts. Don’t lose it. Live it out in your everyday life. But remember that life is “messy.” Sometimes people make mistakes. Sometimes we make the prudential decision to disagree. Know how to recognize when the patterns show that some person’s actions are not mistakes. Is the wisdom that “Actions speak louder than words” still in common use?
“And I have yet to hear anyone explain how it is worse to beat up and humiliate a dozen terrorists than to kill thousands of babies each day by dismemberment.”
It is not worse-and jasper also makes the mistake that I am “comparing them”. It’s not a comparison game. They are simply both life issues that warrant public action and attention. All human rights are the same way.
Littlejohn, the problem with torture is that it doesn’t work, and rarely, if ever, are situations that are so dire that you KNOW someone has information about a specific event and you try to get it out of them. Most of the time, due to guerilla warfare, it is difficult to make direct connections and it is easy for innocent people to become an ‘enemy combatant’ and be subject to legal (or illegal) torture. Torture is likely to cause false confessions (look at the Inquisition) and often the information given is unreliable. Furthermore, torturing people only reinforces their idea that we are corrupt, that we are cruel, etc, and turns them into a martyr. There are a lot of ‘messy’ effects that come out of torture, especially sanctioned torture, beyond the moral value of it.
I do believe that the religion of Islam itself is outside of this discussion though, because this sort of “terrorism” is not truly religious but cultural.
Maybe we should agree to disagree :)
Harsh interrogation does work. It broke Kalid Shiek Mohammoud and he ended up giving valuable information that saved lives.