Reader Tom on S. Florida Scouts de-funded because of excluding gays:
The Philadelphia chapter of United Way also reportedly cut off the Scouts.
Tell me why the Catholic Church is being sued for letting them in even as the
Episcopalians are making them bishops while the Scouts are being punished for
keeping them out.
Me: They being sex-predators, mostly gay among RC priests, or gay-periods among Episcopal bishops, so not the same thing. Thinking is, don't discriminate on orientation. Gets complicated, however. Tom has half a point. Consider also the infidelity issue as regards the Episcopal bishop, who left wife & kids for his lover but gets a pass for that because of same-sex element. Newhouse News columnist James Lileks zeroes in on that today at his own site, at http://www.lileks.com/bleats/archive/03/0803/080703.html.
========================
MICHAEL MEDVED ON MEL GIBSON'S MOVIE "THE PASSION," WHICH HAS BEEN CHARGED WITH ANTISEMITISM
(http://discuss.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/zforum/03/sp_entertainment_medved080603.htm)
Film critic Michael Medved in Wash Post-sponsored q&a chat, when asked about "JFK" as inaccurate but (its maker Oliver Stone) not pressured to change it, said:
The argument concerning "The Passion" centers on the history of anti-Semitism. No people have ever been murdered as a group because of accusations that they killed Kennedy. Millions of Jews have, in fact, suffered death and persecution because of accusations that they were "Christ-killers." If the movie irresponsibly recycled those old, poisonous accusations, I believe that people of good faith would appropriately condemn it. It's obvious, however, that Mel Gibson has tried to avoid echoing ancient charges of deicide and has gone to some lengths to stress that Jesus and his disciples, as well as his primary accusers, were Jewish.
. . . .
Q: How does the film portray the Jews? Specifics, please?
Michael Medved: For specifics, read the Gospels (particularly John and Matthew). The term "the Jews" is never used in the film since nearly all its characters are, of course, Judean (with a few brutal Romans in the mix as colonial oppressors). It's very important . . . that he avoided identifying the Temple authorities with contemporary Jewish symbols-- prayer shawls, skullcaps, side curls, etc. -- as did previous cinematic treatments of Jesus (like the genuinely anti-semitic work of DW Griffith, for instance, in "Intolerance.")
. . .
Q [and a very good one, getting to the heart of the Christian experience]: The charge against "The Passion" is that, like Passion Plays in the Middle Ages, it inflames anti-Semitic feelings by blaming Jews for killing god. How does this "Passion" differ from those traditional passion plays?
Michael Medved: It stresses the Jewish nature of Jesus Himself. It never connects the Temple authorities in the First Century with today's Jews in any way.
[Again, very important point]
. . .
Q [in case you intend to see "Gigli"]: Which is more offensive, "The Passion" as an offense towards Jews, or "Gigli" as an offense towards the filmgoing public?
Michael Medved: You know the answer to that. Gigli isn't just an offense to moviegoers-- it's a crime against humanity.
Q: Um, you sound really dimissive of the ADL (a snarky comment about not having government control "yet") and really chummy with "Mel". I think you should admit that you are not perhaps an objective resource for concerned citizens of all faiths who are worried about the implications of this kind of film. Please be aware that Mel Gibson funds a church that decries the ruling of the Pope Council that cleared the Jews of Christ-killing. Anyone who bankrolls a church like that needs to be looked at carefully on issues like that. And sadly, you sound like you are more interested in being pals with a movie mogul than in being a concerned man of faith. (Self-hating Jew?)
Michael Medved: I served fifteen years as a synagogue president, and I'm on the board of a half dozen national Jewish organizations. I've addressed the ADL frequently-- once as a keynote speaker for their national convention. When it comes to charges that I'm a "self-hating Jew," I don't think they will stick. (By the way, both my father and my brother made Aliya more than a decade ago and live their lives as patriotic Israelis). I admire Gibson (okay, Mel) for his work and his courage. In his recent film choices (The Patriot, We Were Soldiers, Signs) he has taken risks on behalf of some of the conservative and patriotic values that I've endorsed for years as a film critic and public figure.
. . . .
Q: Mr. Medved, as a Catholic Christian I am appalled by Mr. Gibson's attempt to resurrect medieval notions that have no place in my faith tradition or ecumenical efforts. Is it possible for concerned groups to publicize the fact that Mr. Gibson's father, Hutton, is a well-known Holocaust denier?
Michael Medved: Of all aspects of this controversy, the most despicable is the attempt to smear Mel Gibson by reference to his 84-year-old father, Hutton Gibson. My father lives in Jerusalem and maintains ties with the extreme right wing in Israel. I still love and admire him-- he's my dad, and one of my personal heroes. I profoundly disagree with some of his political ideas. Should I be tarred with my father's sentiments just because I still love and admire my parent? Mel Gibson has given not the slightest indication at any time in a long, productive career, of anti-semitic sentiments of any kind.
. . . .
Q: [Regarding Anti-Defamation League's opposition to the film] Perhaps we can improve on our understanding of just what is the ADL's influence. No one is saying that they are a government agency exercising prior censorship. On the other hand, they don't just meet and have poetry readings. What is their influence?
Michael Medved: The ADL is a huge organization that receives broad support from the Jewish community and does much good work-- monitoring potentially violent organizations on the racist and anti-semitic fringe, for instance. However, like any big bureaucracy with hundreds of employees (or perhaps even thousands, if you include all the branch offices) they must find new causes to engage their energy. I wish they'd find another cause rather than attacking an actor-director who's a good man and first class artist.
. . .
Close by Medved: This has been great-- I do welcome the opportunity to talk about this movie and the issues it raises. Let me emphasize that I have no business or professional relationship in any way with Mel Gibson or Icon Productions. But I do think that the more openly we can discuss all aspects of the current controversy, the more likely it will be that the more extreme and irresponsible charges will die before the film's release. I hope the movie can be viewed as a work of cinema, deserving or respect and acclaim for its power and artistry. I also hope that the ADL and other organizations can go back to the work of confronting the real enemies of the Jewish people -- and God knows we have them. If we can refocus, and demonstrate more fairness and open-mindedness in our response to Mel and his movie, it will be good for the Jews, good for Hollywood and, most importantly, good for America. Thanks for the opportunity to chat on line!
=================
Here's a primer on gay activism gotten out of hand. It's one thing to agitate to keep cops from raiding your clubs unfairly (and clubbing you), another to revolutionize community benevolence, as in this S. Florida punishing of Scouts. Wouldn't it be nice for a group to gain fair treatment for itself and stop right there, without neurotically and endlessly upping the ante?
=================================
----- Original Message -----
From: "Concerned Women for America"
To: "Friend"
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 3:02 PM
Subject: The Boy Scouts Need Your Help!
Dear Friend,
In May, the South Florida Boy Scout Council was told it would immediately lose a half million dollars in promised and budgeted funds from the United Way, because it refused to allow homosexuals access to children through its programs.
The loss of that funding has gravely hampered summertime Scouting programs for 4,200 children in Broward, Miami-Dade and Monroe Counties, and school-year mentoring programs will be the next to suffer.
This story is being repeated across the nation, as homosexual activists, unsuccessful in the courts, continue to try and reshape the venerable institution to better suit their appetites.
But the citizens of Miami-Dade are not letting this happen unchallenged. A coalition is growing there with the single-minded goal of reversing this move by the United Way.
''This discriminatory decision by United Way is a direct affront to our shared community values and a slap in the face to Miami-Dade's unique cultural and religious diversity,'' noted Waldo Cardenas, a concerned citizen and public school teacher.
Cardenas has dedicated his summer to drawing public attention to this move and getting funding restored to the South Florida Boy Scout Council. Cardenas' vocal efforts have caught the attention of the United Way of Miami-Dade, as have those of the Miami-Dade Christian Coalition head, Anthony Verdugo.
''In just 4 to 6 weeks, the Christian Coalition of Miami-Dade generated 4,800 e-mails to the 41 board members of our United Way chapter,'' Verdugo said. ''We posted a pre-written letter that people could sign and send or rewrite and send if they chose.''
''We targeted all 41 United Way board members because this vote, to deny contractually promised funds to the South Florida Boy Scout Council without warning, was unanimous,'' he added.
That effort needs national support this week, as United Way and Boy Scout leaders in south Florida will meet again August 12.
''This issue has been raised to the national level,'' Verdugo said. ''With enough public attention, this slap at the Boy Scouts can be reversed, and if so, it would be the first time that has happened.''
To that end, Robert Knight, director of the Culture and Family Institute, an affiliate of Concerned Women for America, says concerned citizens nationwide must act now to help turn the tide in south Florida.
''Americans need to send a message to Miami that will reverberate around the nation: Stop abusing the Boy Scouts, and stop kow-towing to homosexual activists,'' Knight said.
YOU CAN HELP:
Click on the following link [ http://congress.cwfa.org/cwfa/issues/alert/?alertid=3057761 ] and you will find a pre-written letter to the executive board of the United Way of Miami-Dade. You may sign the letter as is, or re-write it as you choose.
Sincerely,
Sandy Rios
President
P.S. Thank you again for considering CWA for your strategic financial support. With you, we're fighting on key issues like abstinence, pornography and abortion. We need you. Please help today by going to http://www.cwfa.org/support_cwa.asp and entering your most generous donation.
------------------------------
CURRENT ISSUES
Vatican Statement Against Homosexual Unions Encourages Pro-Family Advocates
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/4410/CFI/cfreport/index.htm
Scripture Plaques Return to Grand Canyon
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/4385/BLI/femfacts/index.htm
New Data Chart on Judicial Confirmation Crisis
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/1799/legal/judges/index.htm
''Gay'' High to Open
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/4378/CWA/family/index.htm
Promoting Homosexuality at the Expense of School Children
http://www.cwfa.org/articles/4366/CFI/cfreport/index.htm
MORE MURDER IN CHICAGO
Chi Sun-Times follows on its Sunday piece about crime in NYC vs. in Chicago with its "Big Apple shows us how to take a bite out of crime" editorial today, inserting homicides per population, 1 for every 27G+ New Yorkers, 1 for every 10G+ Chicagoans; auto thefts, 1 for every 811 vs. 276 Chicagoans; cops, 1 for every 222, vs. 227 Chicagoans.
Editorial also notes that Daley has been willing to contradict ACLU dogmatism but not aldermen contesting a reallocation of cops.
Forget ACLU, whose concern for Man & Woman on Street threatened with senseless or meaningful (for money) violence has not been noteworthy. (Theirs is a broken record, as in days of 78 rpm's when the same sound was heard over & over.) The problem would be Chi Trib and its left-wing mainstream friends, who would feature abuses of police toughness over increased sense of safety on part of Mr. & Mrs. Chicago.
What remains to be seen is MayorDaley 2's guts and imagination in addressing the city's murder rate. You don't have to be a bleeding-heart liberal to ask what if those murders were all of white people.
==========================
For important follow-up on the Chicago cop story sent yesterday, "HIGH-RANKING CHICAGO COP VS. GANG-BANGERS & IRRESPONSIBLE PARENTS", see Sunday 8/3 Sun-Times, "Why is New York safer than Chicago?" -- http://www.suntimes.com/cgi-bin/print.cgi -- page one story by Frank Main, "Crime Reporter, all about cops coming to New York City to see how crime is controlled there, including First Deputy Police Supt. Phil Cline, who came with a mayoral aide. It's Manhattan Institute-style thinking, as mirrored in the Heather Mac Donald article quoted below. Manhattan Institute puts out City Journal, for which Mac Donald is a contributing editor.
SUNDAY GO TO MEETIN'
Woman in front of me at mass shook my hand warmly at handclasp-of-peace time today. I turned to do the same for someone behind me. By the time I had turned back, the first woman was gone. She had gone a half dozen rows up, where she was hugging and kissing a friend, with whom she remained and chatted most sociably during the pre-communion "Lord, I am not worthy" time.
Later, back in her pew, she was most solicitous for fellow worshipers, finding a hymn book for one who opened and sang from it and for another who shook her off like a pitcher telling the catcher nothing doing on that pitch he was calling for.
Thirty-five-ish, nicely groomed, friendly as all get out, she is just the sort the Vatican had in mind in its just-issued addendum to "General Instructions for the Roman Missal" (GIRM) which calls for a halt to such proceedings as finding someone six pews away with whom to exchange the handclasp or hug.
This was in MY Roman Catholic church, where it occurred to me the Vatican and the bishops might instead have issued its addendum to pastors instructing them or, gosh, maybe even suggesting, if strongly, that they consider how their parish's worship habits interfere with true religion. The addendum might recognize the peculiar expertise each pastor is presumed to possess about what's best for his parish. Wouldn't this be something, for the Vatican and bishops to make even passing reference to such expertise, based on excellent seminary training and on-site familiarity?
No sooner had I got home after these ruminations than the lady of our house read from the bulletin of HER Roman Catholic church, whose mass she had attended -- we like it that way, is all; no serious split is on the horizon -- quoting HER pastor as suggesting less walking around during mass.
This is a little bit like the teacher in the Jesuit classroom of 40 years ago who reportedly announced to his students, boys of no uncertain vitality and willingness to take over a situation to the detriment of true learning if not true religion, "There are entirely too many people walking around in here."
Nonetheless, the bulletin advice about how to worship is presumably more likely to gain acquiescence than GIRM edicts, or so one would think. Besides, it respects the old Catholic principle of subsidiarity that says or used to say that the higher governmental body should not take over functions performable by the lower.
===============
HELP FOR THE POOR PREACHER
Meanwhile, looking ahead to next week, here are some ideas on how a 19th Sunday in Ordinary Time sermon might go, keeping in mind that the same readings are used on the same Sundays by 25 Protestant denominations as part of the Revised Common Lectionary:
* 1st Kings 19, 4-8: Elijah wants to die but God won't let him. Angel gives him food, orders him to eat, he gives up on dying, gets up and does what he has to do, walking 40 days and 40 nights to "the mountain of God, Horeb."
We'd like to give up but we can't: there's work to be done, miles to go before we sleep, miles to go before we sleep. See Robert Frost, "Stopping by the Woods on a Snowy Evening."
* Ephesians 4.30-5.2: Paul says don't "sadden" the Holy Spirit. Soften your whole response pattern. Drop "bitterness, passion & anger, harsh words, slander, and malice of every kind." Forgive each other, as God forgave you (us). Take your cue from that, "follow the way of love."
Doesn't this slow us down in our headlong pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness, family good order, sticking up for what we believe in? Even in our pursuit of good things we have to slow down when we get too hot and bothered. Be done with malice. Cool it.
* John 6.41-51: "The Jews" again. They "murmur" over Jesus' claim to be the bread of heaven. They knew him back when. It's the Jews of Nazareth apparently, who knew him since he was a little kid. Here's a way out for Christians embarrassed by Paul and the four Evangelists, who seem constantly to harp on Jews and their hard hearts. More to come on this important issue, now in the news because of the coming Mel Gibson film, "The Passion." Best bet is to concede readily, "The Jews," yes, but the ones who were there, specifically.
Jesus hits home at them: "Your [and his, for that matter] ancestors ate manna in the desert, but they died." He is "the living bread." Eat this bread, and you will live forever. It is "my flesh, for the life of the world."
It's a riff on what we call the Old Testament, the Jewish scriptures, we should keep in mind: reference after reference rooted in those time-honored texts. It's beyond most of us, even if we look it all up and become quite learned.
Something else to consider: Jesus was dropping on them some very heavy stuff, and we cannot entirely blame the murmurers. Young priest many years ago to friendly black mother of little kids unfamiliar with Catholic ways, in low-income home on Chicago's NW Side, responding to her amazement that he wasn't married but refrained from intimacy with women, which she called "impossible": "You'll just have to take my word for it." To which she: "I do, but it's still impossible."
It's impossible that Jesus becomes food for us. We will have to take his word for it.
HIGH-RANKING CHICAGO COP VS. GANG-BANGERS & IRRESPONSIBLE PARENTS
See yesterday's Sun-Times, http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-gang01.html, for Fran Spielman's reporting of Chief of Patrol Jim Maurer's defense of his men vis-a-vis critical wounding of nine-year-old when gunfight broke out in midst of gang members' social gathering on Chicago South Side Sunday. It was 1 a.m., the kid was sitting in a parked car. Was much complaining by alderman and others about cops not being more forceful. [Let them not, however, bee TOO forceful; let them get it just right.] Maurer, who has applied for the superintendent's job -- one of too few to apply, so deadline for deciding has been postponed -- minced not a word:
* "These are spontaneous gatherings of hoodlums. Why in God's name would you have a 9-year-old out at 1 a.m. in the first place?"
* Of gang leader Mickey Cogwell, in whose memory the gathering took place: "He was a savage killer whose birthday is celebrated by a bunch of other savage killers. You [newspapers etc.] make it sound like a community event with a picnic where everybody buys tickets. That's a lot of b.s."
* Of criticisms of police: "We put an army over there and harassed those people continuously all day. We made 'em move. We made 'em take down their tents. These gangs don't send out invitations. This isn't like the Moose having a party. These are savages taking over an area to celebrate another savage. Why don't we do that for Adolf Hitler. Let's have a big national day to honor the founder of the Nazi Party."
* More defense of cops and condemning of parents: "We can only do so much. We're supposed to be on every dot--every place in the city where somebody's going to act like a moron? That's not possible. What about the parents? Why would you bring kids out that young in a neighborhood where you know there's going to be problems?"
===================
COPS UNDER FIRE OTHER PLACES
Meanwhile, the shooting dead a year ago of a Seattle policeman by a black man whom he was pursuing raised "troubling questions about whether the ubiquitous crusade to portray cops as racist has resulted in a potentially lethal reluctance to use necessary force," said City Journal editor Heather Mac Donald in National Review, 7/23/02.
There was almost no media coverage of the incident but lots of the Inglewood, CA case of the cop who slugged a handcuffed black teen-ager. He was caught on videotape, which got shown 'round the world -- 370 stories in nine days, Mac Donald reported. (Just last week the federal jury exonerated one of two officers in this case but could not agree on the other.)
The Calif. kid had attacked cops who stopped him and his father for expired tags and were asking the father about his expired driver's license. Bam! He went after them, apparently in a fury, clawing one of them and grabbing his testicles. News stories mostly skipped this part. TV showed the video part where the kid is being slammed against the squad car "in a vacuum," said Mac Donald.
What Mac Donald calls "ignorant or biased reporting" leaves cops hanging. She concedes the cop was out of line but asks for some context in the reporting, not just immediate context but wider in the major changes in police training and behavior: "Police professionalism has increased enormously in the last three decades; never before has training placed such emphasis on using words to defuse potentially explosive stops. Excessive force is denounced at every turn in police academies, and the vast majority of officers have gotten the message."
She gives New York as an example, where "over the last five years . . . 47 percent of the complaints filed against the New York Police Department were dismissed because the complainant disappeared or withdrew his case," which to her suggests "that the charges were bogus to begin with."
She quotes NYC detectives McLaughlin and Reedy, both black and not Irish, as some readers may have assumed. "I'm going to hit Lotto on your badge," a Jamaican drug dealer told Reedy, who had to fight him to arrest him. The dealer was anticipating a judgment in his favor.
"If you do nothing, no one can do anything to you. You're not punished if you don't accomplish anything on the job," Lt. Mark Christian of the San Antonio Police Department told Mac Donald -- so great is the fear of a race-related suit that will cost him and his family their house and his job.
"All we hear is: 'We're racially profiling,'" a black Street Crime Unit officer at an NYPD "sensitivity training" session said angrily, Mac Donald wrote. "I can't stand the media. They're a bunch of lying pigs, they put down the NYPD every single day. People forget that some guys are actually committing crimes."
=========================================
Mac Donald's work on crime and other subjects can be found at http://www.city-journal.org/.
=========================================
HIGH-RANKING CHICAGO COP VS. GANG-BANGERS & IRRESPONSIBLE PARENTS
See yesterday's Sun-Times, http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-gang01.html, for Fran Spielman's reporting of Chief of Patrol Jim Maurer's defense of his men vis-a-vis critical wounding of nine-year-old when gunfight broke out in midst of gang members' social gathering on Chicago South Side Sunday. It was 1 a.m., the kid was sitting in a parked car. Was much complaining by alderman and others about cops not being more forceful. [Let them not, however, bee TOO forceful; let them get it just right.] Maurer, who has applied for the superintendent's job -- one of too few to apply, so deadline for deciding has been postponed -- minced not a word:
* "These are spontaneous gatherings of hoodlums. Why in God's name would you have a 9-year-old out at 1 a.m. in the first place?"
* Of gang leader Mickey Cogwell, in whose memory the gathering took place: "He was a savage killer whose birthday is celebrated by a bunch of other savage killers. You [newspapers etc.] make it sound like a community event with a picnic where everybody buys tickets. That's a lot of b.s."
* Of criticisms of police: "We put an army over there and harassed those people continuously all day. We made 'em move. We made 'em take down their tents. These gangs don't send out invitations. This isn't like the Moose having a party. These are savages taking over an area to celebrate another savage. Why don't we do that for Adolf Hitler. Let's have a big national day to honor the founder of the Nazi Party."
* More defense of cops and condemning of parents: "We can only do so much. We're supposed to be on every dot--every place in the city where somebody's going to act like a moron? That's not possible. What about the parents? Why would you bring kids out that young in a neighborhood where you know there's going to be problems?"
===================
