Tuesday, April 23, 2024

Why Are Leftists So Miserable?

By Bill Donohue, Catholic League president

 

It was the day after Ronald Reagan beat Jimmy Carter in the 1980 presidential election. I was smiling (I had run Reagan’s campaign in the North Hills of Pittsburgh), but most of the other professors at La Roche College (now a university) were sulking, and many appeared depressed. However, their mood was not uncharacteristic of the way they were most of the time: There are a lot of unhappy campers in the professoriate, especially in the liberal arts.

 

Nothing has changed.

 

In a new study by psychologists in Finland assessing the state of mind of radical social justice devotees, it was found that those who bought into progressive ideas are profoundly unhappy. Published in the Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, the researchers started with a sample of 851 persons, mostly students and professors at the University of Turku, and then expanded it to 5,030 adults. They distinguished between those who hold to a traditional liberal perspective and those who identify with a  radical one. They focused on the latter.

 

The researchers devised a Critical Social Justice Attitude Scale (CSJAS) that measured seven aspects of what they deemed as representative of “woke” politics. Most of the items dealt with race, though one tapped transgenderism (the idea that the sexes are interchangeable). For example, “University reading lists should include fewer white or European authors” was deemed reflective of the “woke” view.

 

Social justice attitudes, the study’s authors said, “perceive people foremost as members of identity groups and as being, witting or unwitting, perpetrators or victims of oppression based on the groups’ perceived power differentials; and advocate regulating how or how much people speak and how they act if there is a perceived power differential between speakers, and intervening in action or speech deemed oppressive.”

 

The conclusions were riveting.

 

Regarding the initial small sample, it was determined that high CSJAS scores were “linked to anxiety, depression, and a lack of happiness.” On the larger sample, “this lower mental well-being was mostly associated with being on the political left and not specifically with having a high CSJAS score.” Women were more likely than men to have high CSJAS scores, which explains why their happiness quotient was smaller.

 

The researchers noted that their findings were consistent with that of other studies on this subject. They are right about that.

 

“Liberals, especially liberal women, are significantly less likely to be happy with their lives and satisfied with their ‘mental health,’ compared to their conservative peers aged 18-55.” According to University of Virginia sociologist W. Brad Wilcox, this was “the big takeaway from the 2022 American Family Survey, a striking new poll from YouGov and the Deseret News.”

 

In 2023, Musa al-Gharbi, a sociologist at Columbia University, examined data from many studies on this subject and concluded that conservatives are indeed happier than liberals. He said this finding “is consistent across countries and extends back in time.”

 

The question remains: Why are those on the left so miserable?

 

For starters, consider this. Imagine waking up each day thinking the world is made up of oppressors, racists, sexists, homophobes and their victims. Is that likely to put a smile on your dial?

 

It’s actually worse than this. Left-wing professors, which is to say most of them in the social sciences and humanities, love to bask in their negativity. Smug as can be, they love thinking that those who don’t share their views are ignorant buffoons; they, of course, are the only really bright ones. Their darkness is their defining characteristic.

 

But why do these malcontents think this way?

 

It has much to do with what Catholicism calls the sin of pride, the belief that we are self-sufficient human beings and have no need for God. The big thinkers believe they are too smart to believe in God. Too bad they aren’t smart enough to know that boys who claim to be girls should not be allowed to compete against girls in sports and shower with them. There must be a cavity in their brain when it comes to sex.

 

It must be said that while those on the left are the most likely to be unhappy, it has been my experience that extremists on the right are just as likely to be despondent.

 

I have often said that when I encounter a highly educated person, or an activist, for the first time, I know within minutes if I am dealing with an extremist. The individual could be on the right or the left—it doesn’t matter. The common denominator is humorlessness. They rarely smile and their bouts of laughter usually come at someone else’s expense.

 

Smiling is important. Laughter is important. They are staples of mental health. Hanging around those who are habitually unhappy—for reasons wholly due to their cast of mind and their inflated idea of who they are—is a chore. It’s also a bore.

 

The Finnish psychologists learned that left-wing “woke” mavens find it hard to be happy. The deeper problem is that they actually like it that way. 

Ilhan Omar’s daughter banned from Barnard facilities

Barnard College reportedly suspended the adult daughter of controversial far-left Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-MN, following the student’s participation in a massive pro-Palestine protest at Columbia University, where Jewish students were threatened with violence. Isra Hirsi, 21, claims that the school banned her from her dorm and its dining hall. Barnard is an elite and prestigious women’s college partnered with adjacent Columbia.  READ

Migrant crime abounds in NYC

A Home Depot store in a New York City suburb reportedly hired guards equipped with bulletproof vests and a German Shepherd to ward off surging migrant crime. The story broke the same weekend a youth soccer game was canceled at a nearby park in East Harlem after dozens of migrants stormed the field. New York Police Department (NYPD) officers were called to the scene, yet even after this, the migrants still refused to leave.  READ

Catholic Bishops Slam Biden for Trying to Force Christian Employers to Fund Abortions

By Hannah Hiester, CatholicVote

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) has denounced the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for violating religious freedom and forcing all employers to provide accommodations for employees to have an abortion.

CatholicVote previously reported that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) announced a new rule on April 15 that requires employers “to provide reasonable accommodations,” such as leave time, to employees if they wish to have an abortion. The rule falls under the implementation of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA).

Bishop Kevin Rhoades of Fort Wayne-South Bend, chairman of the USCCB’s Committee for Religious Liberty, said in a news release that “No employer should be forced to participate in an employee’s decision to end the life of their child.”

“The bipartisan Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, as written, is a pro-life law that protects the security and physical health of pregnant mothers and their preborn children,” he added. “It is indefensible for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to twist the law in a way that violates the consciences of pro-life employers by making them facilitate abortions.”

CatholicVote reported in August 2023 that in addition to being supported by pro-life organizations, the PWFA was approved by pro-abortion groups, as the language left room for facilitating abortion access.

“The original act required employers to reasonably accommodate a worker’s pregnancy, childbirth, and ‘related medical conditions,’ but left the interpretation of those terms to the Biden administration’s EEOC, the federal agency responsible for regulating workplace discrimination laws,”  CatholicVote reported at the time.

Monday, April 22, 2024

News from the Iowa Catholic Conference


The 2024 session of the 90th General Assembly adjourned for the year “sine die” (without a day) early on Saturday morning. Here’s what happened on the legislative front last week from the Iowa Catholic Conference (ICC) perspective:

The “standing” appropriations bill is generally the last one of the session. As it has for many years, SF 2443 limits the amount of money going to public schools to provide transportation services for nonpublic school students. The total appropriation is about $9 million. If this limitation was not present, the funding would be about 25% higher.

SF 2443 also allocates $2 million in new money for the Department of Public Safety for 12 jobs “to address the rise in illegal immigration and related criminal conduct such as drug trafficking and human trafficking, or as assigned by the commissioner of public safety."

SJR 2004 passed the House. It is a constitutional amendment proposal that passed both chambers this year and will be eligible for consideration next session before it would go to a vote of the people. SJR 2004 would require a flat income tax. HJR 2006, passed earlier in the session, is a constitutional amendment requiring a two-thirds vote of the legislature to raise the income or corporate tax. The ICC has opposed both proposals.

A new part of SF 2435, the education appropriations bill, allocates $2.1 million in new money to the Department of Education for providing professional development for teachers in public and nonpublic schools. The legislation also includes funding for a person at the department to help nonpublic schools with special education issues. These are positive developments.

SF 2368, supported by the ICC, requires public schools to give charter and nonpublic schools the right to match the top offer when selling public school buildings. SF 2368 was passed by both chambers and goes to the governor for her signature.

Opposed by the ICC, HF 2319 was passed by the Senate and heads to the governor for her signature. It forbids local governments from participating in projects where individuals are provided with periodic cash payments that are unearned and that may be used for any purpose. The concern among legislators supporting the bill is that people will not work if they receive money with few obligations attached to it. In a Polk County UBI program being tested, more than two-thirds of the people have a job. About 30% are unpaid caregivers. 

HF 2672, eliminating the tax credit for forests, was not taken up by the Senate for debate. A Senate amendment would have significantly improved HF 2672 by requiring local landowners to only pay a little bit. The ICC opposed the bill as drafted, and we’ll likely see a new version next year.

The Iowa House did not take up HF 2690, which was supported by the ICC. It related to the "Medicaid for employed people with disabilities" (MEPD) program and would allow employed people with disabilities who are married to retain more monetary resources (up to $21,000) before going over the limit and losing coverage.

In other news, HF 2586 was signed by the governor last week. It allows school staff to get a professional permit to carry guns at school. HF 2652 also passed the chambers and will go to the governor. It provides funding for public schools for weapons detection systems, weapons and stipends for personnel who get one of the professional permits. It also requires all schools to have access to a public safety answering point (radio), which will be paid for by pandemic funds. These proposals were a top priority of the legislature. 

Education Savings Account applications are open for Fall 2024

The application period for Iowa’s Education Savings Account program is open until June 30. If your family received an ESA this school year, you still must reapply. For this fall, Students First ESAs are awarded based on the following eligibility:

  • A student that was approved and used an ESA in the 2023-24 school year
  • A student entering kindergarten at an Iowa accredited nonpublic school
  • A student that attended an Iowa public school in the prior year
  • A student enrolled in an accredited nonpublic school with a household income at or below 400% of the 2024 Federal Poverty Guidelines, $124,800 for a family of four

For the fall of 2025, all students will be eligible.

Pope Francis meets with pro-abortion Dem senator

Pope Francis met with Sen. Raphael Warnock, D-GA, during a private audience at the Vatican Saturday. Warnock is the senior pastor of Atlanta’s Ebenezer Baptist Church and “has come under fire for using Sacred Scripture to justify the practice of abortion,” Catholic theologian Thomas D. Williams, Ph.D., wrote for Breitbart. “Warnock, who was endorsed by abortion giant Planned Parenthood, has publicly stated that abortion is consistent with his role as “a Christian minister,’” Williams added.  READ

Friday, April 19, 2024

FBI Probe Of Catholics Still Unresolved


 By Bill Donohue, Catholic League president

 

On Thursday, April 18, 2024, the Department of Justice's (DOJ) Inspector General (IG) Michael E. Horowitz released his report on the FBI's leaked memo targeting Catholics, and once again the loyal sons and daughters of the Catholic Church have been slapped in the face.

 

While the IG's report notes that the memo "improperly conflated religious beliefs of activists with the likelihood they would engage in domestic terrorism," it goes on to say that there was no evidence that "anyone ordered or directed" an investigation of Catholics because of their religious beliefs.

 

To say that no one ordered an investigation of Catholics because of their religion is about as persuasive as saying no one ordered an investigation of blacks because of their race.

 

Frankly, the IG's report does little to bring this issue to a close. It is overly vague, ambiguous, and littered with contradictions. Catholics deserve a better accounting of the FBI's and DOJ's actions.

 

The IG insists that the memo grew out of the FBI's investigation of alleged domestic terrorists. But if the intent of this investigation was to focus on right-wing nationalists, how did Catholics become the focus of the leaked FBI memo last year? Why did the FBI look into establishing sources and other contacts in the Church, instead of focusing on the stomping grounds unique to right-wing nationalists? The IG's report has nothing to clarify these questions.

 

Further, the IG's report admits that one of the woman authors of the leaked memo says she was "really interested in this resurgence of interest in the Catholic Church" by what the FBI claim are domestic terrorists. This statement alone contradicts the claim in the IG's report that Catholics were just tangentially connected to the FBI's investigation of genuine targets. From the jump, the authors clearly were "interested" in the Catholic Church.

 

Ultimately, the IG's report does not put this matter to rest. Certain elements within the FBI and DOJ went rogue and have not been held accountable for their actions. For a year, they could have taken proactive steps to assure Catholics across the country that these renegades faced serious consequences; however, they have admitted they were "aghast" and even "appalled" by the leaked memo but took no substantive actions to resolve the matter.

 

Therefore, I call upon the Congress, a co-equal branch of government, to exercise its oversight authority to get to the bottom of this once and for all. Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) has rightfully pointed out that the IG's report glosses over the fact that critical files associated with the memo were deleted. This is a serious breach. These files are federal records and bureaucrats cannot just destroy them on a whim.

 

Additionally, Representative Jim Jordan (R-OH) has shown great tenacity in taking on the FBI. I would encourage him in the strongest terms possible to call for new hearings on this matter so we can hear directly from IG Horowitz to clear up the vagueness and ambiguities in his written report.

 

Last year, I sent several letters to Rep. Jordan with direct questions that would help allay the fears of Catholics regarding the FBI's memo. Many of them remain unanswered. It is paramount we get the answers to these questions:

 

Was it someone from outside the FBI that crafted this egregious abuse of power?

 

Has there been a broader internal investigation of the FBI seeking to learn if other agents have also been spying on Catholics?

 

How common is it for FBI agents to infiltrate houses of worship—of any religion—employing "tripwire sources"?

 

What did they intend to do with the information once they completed their probe?

 

Without new hearings and concrete efforts not only to resolve the lingering questions but also to hold these rogue agents accountable, Catholics will rightly remain skeptical of the FBI and DOJ. We are not walking away from this, and I will have more to say on this in the future.

Investigation: border crisis sparked spike in child labor

The Biden administration’s Department of Labor “filed a lawsuit in late March against a California poultry processor and its affiliated entities, accusing the firms of using ‘oppressive child labor,’” Blaze Media reported. According to the complaint, minor workers were hired to use “sharp knives” to remove bones from raw poultry. Blaze Media investigates. READ

Special Edition of Faith On Trial: Garabendal!

Special edition of Faith On Trial: The alleged apparition of Mary at Garabandal, Spain. Listen to the podcast now:


 

Thursday, April 18, 2024

State threats to our religious freedom

By Deacon Mike Manno

(The Wanderer) – Recently, the Iowa Catholic Radio Network carried two individual segments – one from Minnesota, the other from Indiana – that shed a glaring spotlight on how anti-Catholic and anti-religious elements in society are attempting to undermine our traditional values and beliefs, as well as our ability to follow the tenets of our faith and to apply them to our daily travails.

          Our program, Faith On Trial, has been on the air at Catholic Radio since May of 2013 and focuses on how law and society affect people of faith. During that time we’ve covered hundreds of religious based lawsuits, had guests from the major religious liberty law firms, experts from institutions such as the Heritage Foundation, pro-Christian and pro-family organizations, such as the Family Research Council, as well as a host of other guests, including an FBI whistleblower and an expert Catholic ethicists.

          While we’ve under gone changes in our days and times, the program now airs each weekend for one hour and is podcast on our web site. It consists of two interview segments with guests usually on related topics. But recently we had two back-to-back programs that I think highlighted the lurking problem we face in our society today.

          During the weekend of March 20 we had an attorney from the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, Joe Davis, who detailed a case from Indiana that Becket lost which involved a state investigation against two loving Catholic parents who were accused of neglecting and verbally abusing their son who was suffering from gender dysphoria.

          The investigation, which was prompted by an anonymous complaint, included a charge that the parents refused to call their son by his preferred pronouns and female name. The result of the investigation found that there was no neglect or verbal abuse, and that the parents had sought mental health counseling for their son for observable mental irregularities as well as for an eating disorder.  

          However, the parents explained that as devout Catholics they believed that the immutable characteristics of sex could not be changed and they tried to discuss that with their son. They did not call him by a female pronoun but agreed to call him by a mutually agreed upon nick name. That did not matter to the state who removed the boy from his parents’ home claiming that their actions contributed to his eating disorder and placed him in an LGBT-friendly foster home, where his eating disorder became worse. The parents were allowed to visit with their son as long as they did not mention their religious beliefs.

          The parents appealed through the state courts and were denied a return of custody. An appeals court upheld the removal ruling that the parents’ First Amendment rights did not apply to private speech in the home. In March the United States Supreme Court refused to review the matter. The boy has now aged-out of the juvenile system without returning home.

          The parents now live in fear that the state might try to remove their other children over their religious beliefs.

          Anonymous complaints? Resisting the LGBT gospel? No free speech in the home? No religious conversations? Who was the boy’s rightful parents and what happens to their beliefs and values? 

          At the same time we were airing this story another came across the wire: Washington State denied the renewal of a foster care license because the foster parents were unwilling to promote the state’s gender ideology.

          The other radio interview came from Minnesota where this paper is published. It was aired the weekend of April 4 and the guest was Jason Adkins, executive director and general counsel for the Minnesota Catholic Conference.

          Minnesota has a Human Rights Act which prohibits discrimination against persons based on traits such as race, disability, religion, and sex. In 1993 it was amended to include sexual orientation. As is the normal practice in these matters, there was an exception protecting religious organizations from being forced to act against their beliefs.

          Last year the legislature amended the Act again this time adding protection for gender identity. Unknown at the time was that in an apparent oversight the religious exemption was omitted leaving religious institutions unprotected. When that discrepancy was uncovered it seemed only a simple matter to add language to the new law that would restore the religious exemption.

          But what appeared to be a simple oversight which needed only a few words of correction became much more.

          As the Catholic Conference explained, when the bill to amend the law was introduced, the Democrat controlled legislative leaders made it clear that the omission of the exemption was no oversight and they had no interest in amending the law. The “oversight” was intended to persecute some faith communities because of their “bigoted” beliefs over the concept of gender identity. They saw the attempt to add the exemption as “disturbing, appalling, and infuriating” and that the proposed amendment is just an “excuse for hatred.”

          Unfortunately for the state’s religious communities, neither the legislative leadership nor the Democrat governor have the exemption on their to-do lists for this session, leaving churches to the perils of a law without a religious exemption. In addition, there is now at least one church forced to defend itself from legal action due to the omission of the exemption.

          Now what does this mean for the religious communities in Minnesota if the law is allowed to stand as written? Christian schools could be forced to hire gay-friendly teachers and administrators, school curriculums could be forced to acknowledge that gender is fluid and can be changed, churches and other religious organizations could be denied state benefits due to their bigotry and hatred. Depending on how far the enemies of Christ want to take this, some such communities could be forced out of business and outlawed.

          Fortunately the Catholic Conference has the support from the leaders of several other religious communities: Missouri Synod Lutheran Church, the Islamic Center of Minnesota, and the Association of Christian Schools International. But will that be enough to turn the governor, the legislature, and the Democratic Party around or will they still view conservative religious beliefs as hateful. All this, of course, coming from the party of tolerance.

          These are only two stories from amongst the many that we broadcast every week, but they tend to demonstrate the depth to which religious animas will dive in an attempt to strike at people whose only crime is their religious faith and their desire to live that faith. Of course I could go on about some of the more appalling stories, such as Covid church closings, pastors being fined for holding services, surveillance of traditional Catholics by the FBI, government imposed transgender ideologies in schools, and the like. But these are two that should hit home with any believing person.

          We need prayer, but we can’t forgo political and legal action. If we fail now, then what? The possibilities are endless, and none are good.

#

 (You can reach Mike at: DeaconMike@q.com, and listen to him every week on Faith On Trial on the Iowa Catholic Radio Network, or the podcast at https://iowacatholicradio.com/faith-on-trial/ the programs mentioned in this article are Episodes 405 and 406).

 

KYLE SERAPHIN: FBI’S TARGETING OF CATHOLICS THREATENS ALL CHRISTIANS

FBI whistleblower and CatholicVote’s 2023 Hero of the Year Kyle Seraphin tells his powerful story as he warns that the Bureau will not stop at targeting Catholics. “Slowly but surely, the FBI is probing its way into all religious communities. All Christians are in the crosshairs,” he wrote. “[T]he idea of [the FBI] targeting a so-called ‘radical Baptist’ or ‘radical Lutheran’ in the near future is certainly on the table.”  READ

Cease and Desist: Barn Worship Banned

Wednesday, April 17, 2024

SCOTUS Lets Idaho Protect Children From Medical Mutilation

 WASHINGTON, D.C. – This week, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an emergency order allowing Idaho to enforce its statewide ban on harmful puberty blockers, hormone treatments, and irreversible mutilating surgeries for minors. With Chief Justice John Roberts abstaining from any opinion, the High Court ruled 5-3 to largely vacate a lower court’s decision to fully block Idaho’s law. However, the High Court allowed puberty blockers and hormone treatments to continue for the two anonymous teenagers whose families sued to block the law. 

In 2023, Idaho enacted the “Vulnerable Child Protection Act,” which criminalizes the act of mutilating children through “gender-related procedures” as a felony. According to the law’s text, violators can face substantial prison time for a term “of not more than life.” While the law was set to take effect January 1, 2024, a federal district court temporarily blocked it citing the law “likely” violates parents’ equal protection and due process rights under the 14th Amendment. U.S. District Court Judge B. Lynn Winmill ruled that parents have the right to seek “specific medical treatment” and approve “gender procedures” for their children. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals declined Idaho’s appeal and kept the law from being enforced. 

While the case regarding the two families is still under litigation in the lower courts to determine a permanent decision, Idaho’s attorney general filed an emergency request with the Supreme Court claiming the injunction was too broad asking it to be limited to just the two plaintiffs seeking access to drugs. Idaho is seeking to enforce the law statewide in all other circumstances. 

Justice Neil Gorsuch, who authored on of the High Court’s majority opinions, sided with Idaho and stated the district court chose to impose a “universal injunction” that prevented the state from enforcing all aspects of the law instead of a “narrower” injunction that just allowed access to the drugs the two plaintiffs sought. He noted that mutilating surgeries were not at issue in the case and questioned the need to block the entire law. 

“In this case…the district court went much further, prohibiting a State from enforcing any aspect of its duly enacted law against anyone,” wrote Justice Gorsuch. “Among other things, this meant Idaho could not enforce its prohibition against surgeries to remove or alter children’s genitals, even though no party before the court had sought access to those surgeries….” 

Justice Gorsuch stated that even the district court admitted the plaintiffs had no contention with the surgical bans under the law. Due to this admission, Justice Gorsuch noted the district court’s universal injunction was an “extraordinary remedy” that “defied” the “foundational principles” of an injunction, which should be tailored based on how likely it is to succeed on the merits and how it must not be “more burdensome” on the state than necessary. 

Justice Gorsuch further stated that when a state is prevented from enforcing a law enacted by its people’s representatives, “it suffers a form of irreparable injury.” He concluded that “prompt execution” of a law, “absent a showing of unconstitutionality,” is always in the public interest. 

Justice Gorsuch concluded that “prohibiting the surgical removal of children’s genitals” has never been specifically held as “offensive to federal law” and the lower court’s ruling “clearly strayed” from “traditional bounds.” 

At least 23 states have passed legislation banning medically mutilating procedures on children. Similar laws in Kentucky, Tennessee, and Oklahoma have been upheld by federal courts, while laws in Alabama, Florida, Indiana, and Montana are temporarily blocked as legal challenges are adjudicated. In Arkansas, a federal judge declared in June 2023 that the state’s “Save Adolescents from Experimentation (SAFE) Act” was unconstitutional holding that restricting health care professionals from making referrals for “gender-related procedures” was content and viewpoint discrimination. However, Arkansas has appealed the ruling, and the U.S. Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals approved the state’s request for all 11 judges on the Court, rather than a three-judge panel, to hear its appeal. 

Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver said, “Medical mutilation has devastating consequences on children and is never the answer to gender confusion. No one has the right to harm a child. More laws like that in Idaho are needed to protect children from being irreversibly harmed.”

Pediatrician: ‘trans’ procedures for kids ‘faulty from the foundation’

The executive director of a premier group of American pediatricians said a newly published report from the UK revealed significant flaws in the studies that have been used to treat young people with experimental puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones. “The protocol that all these guidelines are based on ... are flawed, and they’re based on these Dutch studies that were done and they were not done on children,” explained Dr. Jill Simons. READ 

Pew research: 6 in 10 U.S. Catholics say abortion should be legal

Pew Research Center recently published an article about trends in Mass attendance, abortion support, and the politics of Americans who identify as Catholic. “While the Catholic Church opposes abortion, about six in ten Catholics say abortion should be legal,” Pew reported. A Catholic priest on X pointed out that Pew’s surveys include large numbers of self-identifying Catholics who do not regularly practice the Faith and do not regularly attend Mass.  READ