I have a problem. I agree absolutely with those who oppose this war. It was a morally wrong from the beginning... we never should have been there in the first place.

I also agree with those who say President Bush should be impeached for lying to Americans and to the global community about why we should have gone to this war.

So where is my problem? I disagree with those same people about how and when we should pull out. I agree with Powell -- despite being upset with his complicity in Administration deceit -- on his statement that if we break it we own it.

On December 14th, we will have a simultaneous press conference in New Orleans (sponsored by the NAACP) and in San Jose (sponsored by 20 SJSU students and faculty), to announce a "national call to students" to participate in "Louisiana Winter" this January 14-20. (See attachments or www.SolvingPoverty.com)

The goals of Louisiana Winter are: to turn the nation's attention to the Gulf Coast; to have students witness first-hand the social suffering that is occurring; and to promote the immediate passage of federal legislation to implement the Gulf Coast Civic Works Project, which if passed by Congress would hire 100,000 Gulf Coast residents to rebuild New Orleans and the surrounding region.Students can participate for just one day, for two or three days, or for the entire six days. Help us get the word out to students.

Bishop William S. Skylstad, President of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), has joined religious leaders from diverse faith traditions in rejecting the use of torture because it is a violation of basic human dignity.

Bishop Skylstad signed the statement entitled “Torture is a Moral Issue.” The text follows:

“Torture violates the basic dignity of the human person that all religions, in their highest ideals, hold dear. It degrades everyone involved – policymakers, perpetrators and victims. It contradicts our nation’s most cherished values. Any policies that permit torture and inhumane treatment are shocking and morally intolerable. Nothing less is at stake in the torture abuse crisis than the soul of our nation. What does it signify if torture is condemned in word but allowed in deed? Let America abolish torture now – without exceptions.”

The statement can be found on the web site of the National Religious Campaign Against Torture at www.nrcat.org

Note: This was originally submitted in August and was lost in our recent server change. I'm sorry that I don't have any any of the comments from August.
As the fall elections draw near, many Catholics will once again see their choices as a dilemma. Some anti-abortion candidates will seem unacceptable for other reasons and some pro-choice candidates will seem attractive for other reasons. In 2004, then Cardinal Ratzinger wrote a memorandum to Cardinal McCarrick which dealt with this problem. He said that there is no room for dissent from candidates and voters in Church teaching on abortion and euthanasia, but he added the following Nota Bene:
“A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of the candidate’s permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia. When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favor of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons.”

Just two days ago, I listened to an interview on CNN with a neocon Evengelical. Ironically, the Evengelical was speaking about the Foley scandal. He cited John Adam's claim that Christian religion is an important basis for a sound government. He also insisted that the statement of John Adams, as a Founding Father, is to be taken as the intent of the Founding Fathers and writers of our Constitution. The Evengelical Christian minister cited that statement -- which he did not actually quote -- to argue that homosexuals do not belong in government.

Here is what John Adams really said:

We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge or gallantry would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution is designed only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for any other.

Note that John Adams, in his list of vices he thought would destroy this country, did not mention anything to do with sex, heterosexual, homosexual or otherwise. The Evengelical minister forgot to mention that fine point. However, John Adams did mention many of the sins of the Corporate-owned Republican party. It seems that, yes, John Adams was right. When we have a socio-economic system, and corresponding political posturing, unresponsive to Christian ethics, our society and government will fall apart as a democracy.

In 1971, as a Defense Department Official and Vietnam Vet, he "released" 7,000 pages of Nixon's secret war plans, "The Pentagon Papers", to The New York Times. Placing him at the top of Nixon's "Enemies List" and having Henry Kissinger call him "The most dangerous man in the world."