Regarding the letter “Obey the Cardinal” and story “When a Pupil Has 2 Daddies” (March 27):
The letter writer (and Cardinal O’Malley as well), in thinking primarily of the child of a homosexual partnership, fails to consider the profound possibility that homosexuals may be intentionally trying to send their children to Catholic schools to begin probing for and eventually forcing the acceptance of homosexual partnerships in Catholic institutions.
Why would a homosexual couple — knowing Church teaching on homosexuality as intrinsically disordered — try to send their child to a Catholic school? Over the last 20 years, we have seen many instances of marketing homosexuality to the public and, where necessary, forcing its acceptance through the courts. The homosexual lobby has been brilliantly successful with their plans in this regard. The military, many public and private school systems, private businesses and churches have fallen to the unrelenting push and propaganda to accept what only 30 years ago was classified as a psychological disorder.
Orthodox faith communities are the last bastion — and the Catholic Church a favorite target — for the designs of homosexual advocates. Look at the fight to preserve the traditional definition of marriage: Cardinals and bishops nationwide have been woefully behind the curve in clearly and audibly stating Catholic bedrock belief about one man-one woman marriage, to the sad state that dozens of professed Catholics elected to legislative and executive offices support marriage redefinition laws.
This lack of foresight — and wisdom — by some cardinals and bishops is also apparent in the decision to let children of homosexual couples attend parish schools. Yes, it is not the fault of the child. But just what might the designs of the homosexual “parents” be in sending their “child” to a Catholic school, knowing their partnership profoundly violates Catholic beliefs?
Relevant to Paul Kengor’s column “Sins of the Father: Abortion, Birth Control and the ACLU” (March 13):
Abortion is the centerpiece of the secular humanist movement. As such, it is more a political statement than a medical procedure for those promoting this abomination against humanity.
Although, for the parents directly affected, it is nothing less than the calamitous rejection of pure love. For their child, it is the devastating knowledge of that rejection.
Juno Beach, Florida
Just a knee-jerk response to a letter written by Judith A. Smith (“Polygraphs Can ‘Lie,’” March 27):
She states that “polygraph test results are not allowed as evidence in courts,” which should be a fact, but, unfortunately, is not the case.
As an example, I can use my own person. I sit in my cell writing this almost 13 years into a 25-year sentence, in which the entire case hinged on the “pseudo-results” of a polygraph test.
Furthermore, the appeal, based on the fact that a polygraph result was used, was dismissed by the Texas Court of Appeals. So although her argument was well-written and thought out, it really doesn’t hold water in states or cases where one is “Guilty Until Proven Innocent,” as the Feb. 27 article states.
Real Union Reform
For the last several weeks, I have suffered through letters to the editor railing against public-sector employees, specifically teachers.
The writers opine that the bishops “fail to understand the facts surrounding public-sector unions,” when they themselves make statements that show their own lack of understanding.
In “Where’s the Justice?” (April 10), the writer complains that teachers in the public sector have average salaries of $54,000. Looking at comparable careers, we see that such a salary is not out of the ordinary (Bureau of Labor & Statistics): insurance adjustors, $56,000; electrical engineers, $86,250; registered nurses, $66,530; and computer programmers, $74,690.
Even if you multiply for having the summer off, teacher’s wages are comparable. The writer then makes the comparison to Catholic school teachers, which is fairly unreasonable, as they are one of the most underpaid groups in the work force, mainly because their history was such that positions were often filled by monks and nuns who did not need a higher salary due to their vows of poverty. (Teachers do not take a vow of poverty.)
He hypothesizes that “our benefit and pension plans [of Catholic school teachers] pale in comparison to public-school teachers.” Again I offer a correction. I worked for a diocese in Michigan for seven years while I was a public-school teacher at the same time. My wife and I looked over both health-care plans. We elected the plan that the diocese offered over the public-school plan because it was better.
Finally, we often hear nowadays that “guaranteed pensions are a thing of the past. … We just can’t afford them anymore.” That may be true, as long as you don’t work for the Catholic Church.
I have worked as a Catholic youth minister, as well as a public-school teacher, and I look forward to receiving my guaranteed pension from both employers. It may surprise some to learn that the formulas used to determine the benefit amount are almost identical.
So, it is time to stop bashing public employees with arguments that are passionate but just not based on facts. The Church has spoken often in the past on the right to trade-union association and collective bargaining. She speaks of these rights in the context of the dignity of the human person.
In themselves, these rights should not even be on the table. What does need to be on the table is what some unions do with their resources, like fund political action that is morally unconscionable. That is where unions need to reform, not in the areas of protecting the dignity of workers in the private and public sector.
Regarding beatification coverage: I am a convert to the Catholic Church (1976) and a monthly contributor to EWTN.
I admired John Paul so much. He was my hero, and I am looking forward to the day he is proclaimed a saint.
Mary S. Zangrilli
The Pope and Politics
Relative to “Islamic Scholars Bash Benedict” (March 13):
Al-Tahtawi made a statement concerning meetings with Pope Benedict. The meetings “must be a dialogue between equals.” This is impossible, as there is no equivalent to the pope in the Islamic world. There is no single man/office that oversees Islam, as does the pope with Catholics (and actually, all Christians).
Also, regarding “Pessimism, Not Depair” (Letters, March 27): Why have the Republicans not passed a law that states life begins at conception? This stroke of the pen would rid us of the evil of abortion.
While the Republicans are not pro-death as the Democratic Party seems to be, they are certainly not pro-life either. If they were pro-life, by now abortion would have been sent back to hell, where it came from. If we are relying on career politicians to end abortion, I think it will never end. We need to work and pray harder.
I won’t despair, but I am also pessimistic.
Flower Mound, Texas
Come, Holy Spirit …
Regarding “When a Pupil Has 2 Daddies” (Feb. 13):
It’s important not to lead anyone to everlasting perdition. The decision of the Archdiocese of Boston and the endorsement of Michael Reardon, in the eyes of many souls, gives a Yes to homosexual “marriage” and parenting.
Jesus went through the unspeakable suffering of his passion and crucifixion for each person reading this terrible decision. Why would Boston try to undo our blessed Savior’s work and gift of redemption?
We are all tools of the devil at different times of our life. We must pray for the light of the Holy Spirit to shine brightly on our minds. And quickly.