ON THE ABUSE OF CHILDREN BY THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH

On February 5th, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child issued a scathing report regarding the Roman Catholic Church's sexual abuse scandal. The report demanded that Vatican authorities immediately remove all priests and bishops who participated in sexual abuse and turn them over to civil authorities for prosecution. Additionally, all records of this abuse and its cover up should be released immediately.

I have written earlier about my Catholic school attendance during the first twelve years of my formal education.  The school names were St. Mark's in Catonsville, Maryland, a Baltimore City suburb; St. Joseph's Monastery in Irvington, a southwest Baltimore neighborhood; and Mt. St. Joseph College, a Catholic preparatory high school also located in southwest Baltimore.

Though I did not witness what I would call blatant sexual abuse beyond what would probably now be deemed inappropriate touching, the physical and psychological abuse that occurred during all twelve years of my schooling stands out in neon.  I cannot remember a day when my classmates and I spent an entire school day without someone being held to public ridicule or being thrashed by one of God's chosen black-clad rosary carriers.

Stories were told to us that were horrific in content. I remember in 4th grade Sister Mary Renilda, a nun at St. Joseph's Monastery, told us about a boy who struck his mother. She told us God struck him dead as his hand rose to pummel her. His arm had to be chopped off to fit him in the coffin, she added. This was during the study of the commandment, "Honor thy Father and thy Mother."  I think a less scary parable would have sufficed. I had nightmares for weeks on that one.

When I was five years old my younger brother set himself on fire accidentally at home.  To this day I can remember his charred body and face as he screamed in pain while we waited for my father to arrive from work to take him to the hospital. He died at age 4.  Just a couple of years later, in second grade at St. Mark's, a nun who knew my family told the story of my brother Eddie to make her point about limbo (which, evidently, does not exist anymore).  Because my brother was baptized, she said, Eddie was a fortunate baby who was in heaven now. She made me participate in this in front of about 50 classmates without even a scintilla of thought about the horrendous pain my burned brother evoked in me.  It was thoughtless and cruel, and I have never, and will never, forgiven that woman.

In high school, the Xaverian Brothers, who were mostly Irish Catholic men from either the old sod or New York, were criminal in their brutality.  In the late Spring, when windows were open because there were no fans or air conditioning, Brother Declan hit a kid in my class.  He struck Mel Frazetti with his fist with such force it knocked him back against the wide open window. Our class was on the third floor of the Tower Building. The window sill caught the back of Mel's legs and saved him from a long fall. The entire class of freshman gasped.  The good brother did this during Religion class.  Mel's sin was talking to a classmate during lecture, a sin for which he came close to death.

Mt. St. Joseph College required coats and ties be worn at all time.  After school, at detention, however, this rule was typically relaxed as the weather warmed.  I did not know that Brother Benedict was to be the "jug" (a name commonly used in Catholic schools from the Latin "jugum" meaning yoke or burden) monitor one day.  I learned this particular day that the good Brother's reputation as a bare knuckles boxer in England was more than likely true. I arrived without my jacket, which I left in my locker.  Brother Benedict called me to the front of the room as soon as he arrived and asked me to remove my glasses.  He immediately punched me with a closed fist, first in the nose and then with an upper cut to the jaw.  He then told the lot of us to quickly get our jackets and return dressed properly.

He was not the only physical abuser.  Brother Francis in my Sophomore year hit me the hardest I have ever been hit in the jaw in my entire life.  By senior year, again in Religion class, Brother Salvatore introduced me to the "noogie."  This was a closed fist, middle knuckle protruding, planted firmly in the middle of the top of the skull.  Usually from behind when you did not expect it.  It was incredibly painful and left no marks.  He also had another specialty, the "tulip" (yes, he actually named his assaults).  The tulip required you to hold your hand, fingers and thumb touching, fingertips to the sky to produce a round, flat plain.  He then used a wooden yard stick to deliver a blow to your fingers with the flat side of his measuring tool.  The pain bolted down your arm and directly into your feet, trust me.  It was like an electric bolt.

And, I am not suggesting physical abuse did not occur in grammar school.  It is where it started.  The difference was that nuns and priests handed it out. It usually came in the form of slaps or yard sticks across the bottom.  But, physical abuse seemed to be second nature to the School Sisters of Notre Dame...a sort of "spare the rod, spoil the child" sadism. Father Julius, a Passionist priest at St. Joseph's Monastery, used to make us boys kneel on our knuckles on the concrete or marble floor for punishment. He was a believer that all suffered if one sinned. So, if one boy talked during a lecture, we were all punished for his action.

To me, this abuse was horrific.  It hurt both psychologically and physically and it was uncalled for.  It was sanctioned and encouraged by my church. And, it has withstood time without punishment for any of these attacks.  The election of Pope Francis may be a start toward change, but what I am talking about is centuries old ingrained behavior.  It is not just sexual abuse that needs to be rooted out and destroyed, it is the whole righteous use of corporal punishment, which is thought to cleanse sin, that must be driven from the bosom of this institution.

[CLICK HERE FOR HOW THIS AFFECTED MY RELIGIOUS BELIEF]

ON THE GOP PROMISES OF JOBS AND OPPORTUNITY

After the State of the Union speech last week by President Obama the GOP presented a response...several of them to be exact. The Republican Party's mainstream speech came in both English (Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers) and Spanish (Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen). Not to be left out, the party's fringe wings were also heard from afterwards. Representing the Tea Party was Senator Mike Lee. For Senator Rand Paul the response was given by, well, Senator Rand Paul!  Basically, all four told us that if President Obama and the Democratic Party would just get out of the way, Americans would have lucrative jobs and a wealth of opportunity

Last week the Commerce Department issued its gross domestic product report for the 4th quarter of 2013.  Gross domestic product is the broadest measure of economic activity in the United States.  It jumped a robust 3.2%, much higher than economists had predicted, stated The New York Times.

Forbes magazine reported that Federal spending was down 12.6% in the quarter.  In the 3rd quarter spending was down only 1.5%. The Commerce Department estimated the Defense Department alone spent 14% less in the quarter ending December 31.  The Guardian reported the GOP's almost three week closure of the Federal Government, led by Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, was responsible for most of the drop in spending.  CBS News estimated that without those forced cuts the gross domestic product for the quarter would have been almost one percent higher. 

If they are so much in favor of helping the average American with opportunity, which they say will provide Americans with jobs, why are Republicans so intent on making sure the economy stagnates, or at least, does not grow at as fast a pace as it would without their interference?  Cutting food stamps, cutting unemployment benefits, cutting Defense spending, cutting domestic spending, all means less will be spent on agricultural products, less will be spent on clothing and housing, less will be spent supporting our troops, and less will be spent on roads and infrastructure.

I think their reasons for these cuts have nothing to do with caring for America's pocketbook or budget.  I believe the reason for these cuts is an intent to sabotage the economy in hopes the public will blame President Obama and get GOP candidates elected as an alternative.  Put a Republican in office, they say, and see how the jobs fly into the market.

No to everything is their mantra.  When is the last time you heard a new idea from this party that did not include cutting taxes, cutting Medicare, cutting Medicaid, cutting Social Security, cutting Obamacare, cutting money to programs that support women, or bombing a country to show how strong we are?

These are not the ways a nation builds jobs or opportunity.  Like their willingness to pass laws related to science without using scientific fact, the Grand Old Party passes laws related to our economy with no underlying economic footing.  

ON HOW THE FARM BILL WILL MAKE AMERICANS HUNGRIER

Last week the House of Representatives, by a vote of 251-166, passed a comprehensive Farm Bill that had been in negotiations for nearly two years. Yesterday, the Agriculture Act of 2014 passed the Senate on a 68-32 count.  It now goes to the President to sign. Mr. Obama has said he will do so.  According to The New York Times the bill cuts $8 Billion from the Federal Food Stamp program.

Feeding America, a food bank coalition, estimates that as a result of this bill every household affected will eat 34 fewer meals a month.  In the Times article cited above writer Ron Nixon estimates that 850,000 households will be affected, each losing about $90 per month in food purchasing power.

As Americans work hard to move beyond this crippling recession, this bill creates a tragic loss for its poorest families trying to survive day to day. Couple this with Congress' refusal to reinstate unemployment benefits for its citizens unable to find a job and you have a tsunami of bad economic news for Americans trying to continue to make it in the world's richest nation.

And, if that is not bad enough, according to a report by CBS News, this bill gives millions of dollars to businesses for the sole purpose of advertising their products. Sunkist alone will receive $1.8 million. Republican lawmakers are willing to provide large corporations with subsidies to pay for their advertising campaigns,  but cut a program that puts food in children's bellies.

The food stamp cuts in this bill will evidently also have an impact on Wall Street. The first mention of this was in a statement released last week by Walmart. The New York Times' Elizabeth Harris reported that the company announced it was cutting it's 4th quarter earnings forecast due to food stamp cuts and a harsh winter.

Ms. Harris wrote that Charles Holley, Jr., Walmart's CFO, emphasized that the reduction in the SNAP program, commonly known as Food Stamps, was, "greater than we expected."  He went on to say that Walmart customers, as a result, just had less money to spend.

These remarks were based on last year's cuts.  The new Agriculture Act adds another $8 Billion in future reductions. Walmart, which has built a huge business catering to households with low income, is smart to get this news out regarding this drop in projected income.  I think we will see this message from all food-related businesses soon, downgrading their profit projections for the coming year.  So both Wall Street giants and our poorest citizens will suffer because Republicans want less money spent on their poorest constituents.

Republicans in Congress do not seem to believe the message of organizations like Feeding America regarding the effects of their draconian cuts. After all, the poor do not have a lobbying voice in Congress. Perhaps, however, they will listen when giant American corporations begin sounding the alarm in lost earnings and profits.

In my opinion, the Tea Party wants to destroy the American economy at both the top and the bottom. Poor people are not the problem in America.  Lunacy in governance is the disease we need to focus on resolving.

ON CONGRESS AND LACK OF SCIENCE REASON

A dear friend of mine reads my blog every day.  He often calls me with the same refrain, "You can't make up this stuff!"  He is right.  It seems every day I am fighting four or five different absurdities for the right for me to offer them up in print.

Today I am going to concentrate on a speech delivered in Congress in 2005 by the current Chairman Emeritus of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Joe Barton (R-6th TX). Though the comments were made a number of years ago, they make the point about a serious problem with our Congress.  This is no lightweight on whom I am focusing attention.  The Wall Street Journal, in an article in 2002, called Mr. Barton the, "House GOP's leading expert on energy policy."

In a discussion on the effects of any energy policy that might include wind turbines, the Waco Congressman had this to say:

Wind is God's way of balancing heat. Wind is the way you shift heat from areas where it is hotter to areas where it is cooler. That's what wind is.  Wouldn't it be ironic if in the interest of global warming we mandated massive switches to energy, which is a finite resource, which slows the wind down, which causes the temperature to go up? Now I'm not saying that's going to happen, Mr. Chairman, but that is definitely something on the massive scale. I mean it does make some sense. You stop something, you can't transfer that heat, and the heat goes up. It's just something to think about.

In other words, Representative Barton believes that if we incorporate wind turbines to produce energy we will slow down the world's wind. I have read this quote dozens of times and my head still hurts from the lack of science, logic and common sense. If he is the Republicans' energy expert in the House, it is no wonder China and other nations are eating our lunch when it comes to alternate energy sources.

What can make a man this stupid?  According to the Congressman's website, he has a degree in Industrial Engineering from Texas A&M and a Master's in Industrial Management from Purdue. Though these schools are not Ivy League in stature, they are both well-respected bastions of learning.

So, if he is not stupid, what would make him utter such stupid things? Perhaps he is speaking for someone else. Let us look at who funds his campaigns since he has been in Congress.  Since 1985 Mr. Barton has received almost $4 million from the energy and natural resource sector, according to the website OpenSecrets.org.  To provide perspective, the health sector is a distant second providing $1.4 million less to Barton's campaigns.

Could this be the answer to the question?  The Texas Congressman knows that turbines take away from oil, gas, and coal industry profit.

Maybe he is thinking, "I'll say something outrageous because I know everyone will listen.  I'm the leading expert on energy here and people will believe I used science to reach my conclusion.  After all, who is going to look it up?  I'm the old professor!"

According to statistics posted on the website School Digger, which are compiled by the National Center for Educational Statistics, U.S. Department of Education, and the Texas Education Agency, schools in Waco, Texas, are ranked 660th out of 853 cities.  This puts basic education in Mr. Barton's district in the lower 25 percent of schools in the Lone Star state.

Perhaps Mr. Barton believes the people who elect him are so stupid he can blow this kind of smoke up their collective butts and get away without a challenge.  In the meantime he continues to accept large contributions from the industries that...quite literally...are profiting from his obfuscation and unscientific rantings.

Congressman Barton is not alone.  In both the Senate and House, legislation is discussed without a tablespoon of science to prove theories both correct and incorrect.

I do not think members of Congress are stupid.  I do believe, however, they think we are!

ON DEVELOPING FERVOR TO STOP CHILD ABUSE

What is it about Americans and their passionate concern for animal welfare, but no passion at all about the welfare of children?  With perhaps the sole exception being the unborn, there seems to be fervor only for the rights of animals.  Though animal cruelty is a crime, it certainly is not as serious a crime as maiming or murdering a child.

The ASPCA has developed a strong TV ad campaign extolling the terrible abuse of dogs and cats that occurs everyday in America.  With its reliance on the sad voice of Sarah McLachlan singing “Angel” over a plethora of photos of animals with only one eye or matted hair, the abuse is palpable.  Sarah appears in the ad sitting on her couch.  She tells us we need to act now to save these helpless critters. I leave the room when I hear the song come on the TV.  I know I am going to be bombarded with sad photos. Friends have told me they find the ads so distressing they give the $25 each month, but refuse to watch the commercial because it makes them cry.  

It is terribly sad what human beings do to animals.  Whether it’s mistreating a family pet, herding orcas for Sea World, or killing a rhinoceros for its horn, it’s horribly wrong.

For me, however, nothing is more startling than the abuse of children.  Every day babies across America suffer at the hands of abusive parents and relatives, are pimped on the streets for sex, or they are able to easily find Daddy’s not so well-hidden pistol. Around the world children are mutilated in tribal ritual, bombed from above, or are malnourished by famine or abuse.

Some, like the “Dozier Boys,” were beaten and murdered while housed under the supposed watchful eye of the Florida School for Boys located in Marianna, Florida.  According to the Tampa Bay Times the graves of 55 boys have been dug up and more are expected to be found.  The number of graves already found is 24 more than the State of Florida reported had died at the facility.  The school has since been closed.

But, no one seems to care.  Hell, a gunman slaughtering 20 children in a grammar school cannot get America off its duff to help children be safe. More, rather than less, guns was the immediate rallying cry of a caring Congress and National Rifle Association.

If Sarah McLachlan wants to really make a difference in the world she would license her song, “Angel,” to play over a one-minute commercial showing photos of children chained to radiators; locked in closets; living in their own filth; missing limbs or eyes taken by guns or knives; dead from gunshot wounds caused by parents who did not love them enough to hide weapons; malnourished due to poverty or neglect; beaten until their bodies were weak; unable to walk because their mother preferred crystal meth to love; or maybe some of the thousands of orphans who lost their parents to disease, accident or crime and now await a safe place to live.

Sarah’s voice-over might read:  “Every day thousands of children are abused by neglect, poverty, violence, and bad parenting.  You can help.  With a donation of only $30, just one dollar a day, you can help one of these children.  Call the number on the screen now and donate what you can.  If you call in the next ½ hour and commit to supporting one of these children, we’ll send you the name of the child you are helping along with their photo.  Don’t wait.  Do what you can.  Save these children from abuse, starvation, and death. Thank you very much.”

I am certain whichever organization is brave enough to air this commercial will raise tens of millions of dollars.  Unfortunately, knowing America as I do, the Tampa Bay Times “Charity Checker” will be required to separate those charities that actually provide care to children in need from those who put the money in their pocket for personal gain.

But, do it we should.  Too many children in this country of wealth are abused and starving. For that matter, this epidemic is worldwide.  Perhaps the "new" Roman Catholic Church under Pope Francis could pull this off.

ON SUPER BOWL PREDICTIONS

ON THE EXISTENCE OF GOD

I am an atheist.  I have not believed in a divine supreme being since I was in high school. Frankly, I am not sure I ever believed in a god.

And, please, do not jump to the conclusion that I am a heathen with no proper religious education. I spent twelve years studying in Roman Catholic schools, including six years at a grammar school that was part of a minor seminary in Baltimore.  I studied religion every day and spent every morning at Mass.  I studied Latin as an altar boy. At university, in addition to studying History as a major, I minored in Philosophy, including religion, morals, and ethics.

Religion has always fascinated me.  I just do not understand why it has such a hold on people.  I could not accept the “leap of faith” the Catholic Church requires in order to believe in a magical person in the sky, much less a father, a son, and a holy ghost.  I believed it was okay to have questions with no provable answers.  Arguing a strong point of view was a good thing in my book.  It did not need to have a conclusion.

I also could not reconcile the acceptance of a belief in Jesus Christ with the way organized religion operated.  Churches accepted corporal and capital punishment vs. forgiveness and the turning of the other cheek.  This startled me.  My classmates and I were beaten daily by the School Sisters of Notre Dame in grammar school and then by the Xaverian Brothers in high school.  I served in the Marine Corps and in Vietnam and in my whole life I have never been struck in the face with as hard a blow as those I was given by Brother Benedict and Brother Francis for the infraction of talking out of turn in class.

Or, maybe I am a non-believer because I grew up in Baltimore. In 1960 Baltimore Attorney Madalyn Murray, on behalf of her son, William, filed a lawsuit (Murray v. Curlett) against the Baltimore City School system.  The schools forced Bible readings and/or reciting the Lord's Prayer before class each day.  A Maryland law specifically allowed these practices. The Murray's declared they were atheists and that by virtue of these forced recitations their Constitutional rights were being trampled.

In 1962, using Engel v. Vitale, the Supreme Court prohibited officially sponsored prayer in school.  Later, in 1963, after consolidating Ms. Murray’s case with Abington School District v. Schempp, a similar suit, the Supreme Court ruled mandatory Bible reading should be banned from public schools as well.  The Establishment Clause of the Constitution was upheld in an 8-1 decision. Justice Potter Stewart, as he was in Engel v. Vitale, was the lone dissenting vote.

I remember these cases well because I was in a Catholic prep school, Mt. St. Joseph College, at the time.  Our faculty prayed loudly every day that these suits would be found in favor of the almighty.  I also had a very close friend, a neighbor, who attended Baltimore Polytechnic Institute where the Murray boy was a student.  Every day Neil would regale me with tales of the various ways they would torment the teenage atheist.  It got so bad I remember his mother had to keep him out of school for several weeks to protect him. The case got so much attention in the  media that I began to learn more about atheism and the Establishment Clause than I did about religion.

Even as a teenager I found it bizarre that people were threatened by the fact that someone asked them to keep their religious thought to themselves and that this even evoked violence from some. Where was the forgiveness in these actions? I certainly understood why parochial schools like mine would recite prayer everyday, but public schools?  I could not understand the purpose.  I can remember often asking Neil how he would feel if non-believers attacked him everyday?  I also suggested that if he and his family felt so strongly he should attend parochial school instead of public school.  

By 1964 Life magazine called Madalyn Murray the most hated woman in America. And, truthfully, she was anything but a sweetheart.  Later, after marrying Richard O'Hair she disowned her son William after he became a Baptist minister.  

In 1995 she disappeared along with two of her adult children in Austin, Texas. Their bodies were found in 2001 when a former employee admitted to the murders and led the police to their graves.  The killer found she was hiding close to $500,000 from her membership and killed her for it, cutting her body into small pieces.  Many thought it was a rightful end to someone like her.

But, atheists are just people.  They have jobs and they make America work.  They teach in our schools, work in our factories, play sports on the home team, wait on our tables, and fly our airplanes across the country.  Atheists are also ethical people who care about their fellow man.  Atheists care only for people, not a fictitious master being in the sky.  My Harvard Divinity School-trained Philosophy of Religion Professor once told me that an Episcopal Bishop once said to him:  “If there is a heaven and hell, based on what I've seen, there will be a lot of atheists in heaven and a lot of devout Christians in hell.”

It is not what you call yourself; it is how you lead your life.  I have been around many businessmen who prayed before meetings and made large financial commitments to their church, and then climbed their way to the top by stealing and lying.  
  

As for praying in schools, it is okay be me.  Pray in silence to your soul’s content.  The other night I sat with a friend at a restaurant. Before we dined, he bowed his head for a second or two.  I knew what he was doing, but he did not force me to join him. That is the way it should be.  Religion is a private matter, keep it to yourself.