Academic Racism?

By Deacon Mike Manno

(The Wanderer) – When a bill is passed by Congress or a state legislature, the president or the state governor usually hosts a public signing ceremony. It is, of course, a way to get some good publicity for the executive — “See, I’m getting stuff done for you” — and it gets their names mentioned, mostly favorably, in the news.

That’s what happens most of the time. I suppose there are times when an executive is signing something very controversial where the signing is done behind closed doors, sometimes in the dead of the night, hidden in darkness. Those times are few and far between, but they do raise questions about what the legislation being signed into law really does.

This happened recently in Oregon where the Democratic governor, Kate Brown, privately signed a bill on July 14 that had passed the Oregon legislature last June. Why no public ceremony? Perhaps it is because the bill, SB 744, suspends the state’s proficiency requirements to graduate from high school for the next five years.

A spokesman for Gov. Brown said the suspension of proficiency requirements was to benefit minority students.

“Oregon’s Black, Latino, Latina, Latinx, Indigenous, Asian, Pacific Islander, Tribal, and students of color” will benefit, said the governor’s spokesman. “Leaders from those communities have advocated time and again for equitable graduation standards, along with expanded learning opportunities and supports.”

Equitable standards, okay, but eliminating standards, that’s something else.
What are those proficiency standards? Why do they matter and why are they being suspended? And how are they to be made more equitable? Those standards are described by the state’s Department of Education as “essential skills” and include:

1. Read and comprehend a variety of texts, and being able to demonstrate the ability to read and understand, critically analyze key points of the text, and be able to follow instructions from informational texts to perform tasks, answer questions, and solve problems.
2. Write clearly and accurately, which includes being able to adapt writing to different audiences, purposes, and contexts, be able to explain, summarize, and inform in business and personal communications, and able to use correct grammar, punctuation, capitalization.
3. Apply mathematics in a variety of settings, and be able to apply workable mathematical concepts where applicable, produce graphs, and communicate and defend the verified process and solution, using pictures, symbols, models, narrative, or other methods.

Kind of simple, right? Reading, writing, and arithmetic.

There are some other items listed such as being able to listen and speak clearly and coherently, and the ability to think critically and analytically, but these are the three that are first listed. Reading, writing, and arithmetic. Essential skills that educators believe that you should possess at least at a tenth-grade level before you graduate from high school — except not in Oregon, not now, not until at least until 2027. In the meantime, no standards, no essential skills because, apparently, this is the way to help minority students.

So what is really going on? You would think that if some students, due to language or cultural barriers, are not able to meet the standards of the educational establishment in the state, they would (or at least should) be working overtime to bring them up to proficiency. But alas, that is not what is being done; rather the standards are going to be modified over the next five years. How are they to be modified and why drop them completely?

I remember years ago when I was teaching at a local community college. Word came down that certain students were to pass, even if they had not turned in assignments, or taken and passed the course exams. In short, it was a no-fail policy and was in effect until the local paper got wind of it and published it in one Sunday edition. In other words, substitute a diploma for actual knowledge.

That, of course, explains why the governor signed the bill in the dark of night. Something is very wrong with this policy. And, in fairness, I should mention that there are plenty of other localities that have abandoned educational standards to make their graduation rates look more acceptable than they would if the whole truth were known.
And, in general, these lax policies, when they are defended, are defended because it is claimed that the standards somehow hurt minority students, except for the Asians — they excel despite their cultural backgrounds.

So I did a little looking at Oregon. It appears that several months ago the state Department of Education did a bit of warning about some of their standards and why they might need to be changed, especially in the area of mathematics. It was contained in an 82-page guide, A Pathway to Equitable Math Instruction.

The educational culprit, the guide was happy to report, was white supremacy.
“White supremacy culture infiltrates math classrooms in everyday teacher actions,” the guide reads. “Coupled with the beliefs that underlie these actions, they perpetuate educational harm on Black, Latinx, and multilingual students, denying them full access to the world of mathematics.” The guide went on to provide an outline on how to “deconstruct racism” in mathematics.

The guide alleges that certain teaching practices, which I always thought were normal, perpetuate white supremacy, such as asking students to show their work, focusing on the correct answer, tracking student progress, and grading students.

The guide explains that asking students to show their work is “a crutch” for teachers to understand what students are thinking. It is white supremacy because it reinforces “paternalism” and “worship of the written word,” an alleged foundation of white supremacy culture, which reinforces documentation and writing skills.

It continues: “The concept of mathematics being purely objective is unequivocally false, and teaching it is even much less so . . . upholding the idea that there are always right and wrong answers perpetuates objectivity.”

Okay, now I understand. This is political correctness run amok in academia.

The bill, secretly signed, orders the Department of Education to develop recommendations for changes in the “requirements for high school diplomas . . . with the goal of ensuring that the processes and outcomes related to the requirements for high school diplomas are equitable, accessible, and inclusive.”

It’s pretty obvious what the state is doing. Some students for a variety of reasons have difficulty mastering — even at a tenth-grade level — the essential skills necessary to be a high school graduate. But is this really the answer, lowering expectations? Schools should be raising expectations, demanding proficiency from students to give them a greater opportunity to succeed in real life, not in the artificial environment of Oregon’s flirtation with Never-Never Land.

“The approach for Senate Bill 744 is to, in fact, lower our expectations for our kids,” said Oregon House Minority Leader Republican Christine Drazan, and she is right.
No kid should be denied that basic education because helping them may be too burdensome or uncomfortable for the school. They are not a throwaway commodity that can be bandaged with a paper diploma. Education should demand the best from them, not the “soft bigotry of low expectations.”

And we wonder what’s wrong with education today.

(You can reach Mike at DeaconMike@q.com and listen to him every Thursday morning at 10 Central on Faith On Trial on IowaCatholicRadio.com.)

Students Think America Oppresses Women...Then They Hear About Afghanistan

Campus Reform reporter Ophelie Jacobson talked with female students at the University of Central Florida about what is happening in Afghanistan and how that compares to the treatment women receive in the United States.

 

Deacon Mike's homily: 13th Sunday after Pentecost (Latin)

Readings: Galatians 3:16-22; Luke 17:11-19

Good evening:

            The story of the ten lepers is one that we’ve all heard before. The ten ask for mercy from Jesus, which they receive, yet only one returns to thank him. It is certainly a story that tells us a lot about human nature and the apparent world of ingratitude in which we live.

            And, of course, all those messages are true and you’ll hear them every time this Gospel passage is read.

            But St. Alphonsus Liguori had an interesting twist on the story. In case you are unfamiliar with him, Alphonsus Ligouri lived in Eighteenth Century Italy, was a writer, a lawyer, a bishop and a scholastic philosopher. He founded the Congregation of the Most Holy Redeemer – the Redemptorists – and was proclaimed a doctor of the church in 1871 by Pope Pius IX.

            While most of us who hear this story see a message about prayer and graduate, St. Alphonsis saw the Gospel story about avoiding bad company and sin. In his view he sees the leprosy as representing sin. Jesus, he notes, doesn’t cure the lepers immediately, but sends them off to the priests; they are only cured in route. That is because Jesus did not want to cure them at a place where there were other lepers and they might be re-infected. Thus, the trip to the priests was a way to protect them since leprosy was considered not only incurable but also contagious.

            St. Alphonsis makes the analogy of how sin which infects one person can quickly spread to others. Thus the infection of sin spreads just as the infection of leprosy spreads. And as it grows, more and more persons will be caught up and infected with sinful ways blocking our relationship with God.  

            And, of course, we kind of already knew that.

            I remember a few years ago when I was practicing juvenile law, I was appointed to be a judge in the county’s “peer court” program. It was a very simple concept, first-time juvenile offenders could plead guilty to their “crimes” and plead their case to a jury of their peers, who would then decide the punishment.

            I remember these tiny misdemeanants would always open their stories with, “Me and my friends were …” The bad grammar was bad enough, but what always caught my attention was the group think that went into a plan to pulverize a neighbor’s mail box, it was never, “Oh I just decided to take a baseball bat to Mrs. Wilson’s planter.”

            It was always a result of that spreading infection about which St. Alphonsus warned us.

            He told his listeners that “one scandalous companion is enough to corrupt all who treat him as a friend. … They are the false prophets whom Jesus Christ warns us to avoid.” He quotes St. Ambrose as asking: “how can bad companions give you the odor of chastity, when they exhale the stench of impurity?”

            “What greater madness can be conceived than to believe in Hell and to live in sin?” he asks.  

            But beyond that there are still some questions about this story, such as: what if Jesus had not cured some of the lepers? And what about the message of giving thanks to God, where is it?

            I think those questions are pertinent since they involve real life. We know that not everyone who asks of God will receive that which he asks. What does this tell us about what we pray for?

            I think it tells us this: While we may have needs and wants, our purpose in invoking his assistance should be to promote his will first, not ours. That is why we pray every day “thy will be done.”

            I think once we focus on the larger picture, the one that God envisions; the more content we will be in our own narrow circumstances.

            And finally, the best way we can show that gratitude is to live a Godly life, to avoid sin, and to make amends when we do fall out of grace.

            Unfortunately, too many of us cannot reconcile God’s love for us with our own narrow interests. That failure leaves a block in our relationship with God.

            Shortly after World War II, the great Christian apologist C.S. Lewis wrote a short allegorical novel, The Great Divorce. The story begins with a bus ride where the travelers are residents of hell who visit the outskirts of heaven where they are given a chance to stay.

            As they wonder around the country side they are met by friends and relatives who try to convince them to continue the journey to the heavenly mountain.

            One by one, however, the lost souls refuse the invitations and take the bus back to hell. One is offended that God’s sense of justice differs from his own and thus rejects his friend’s plea to travel to the mountain.

            Another, who spent her earthly life attempting to control her loved ones, finds it offensive that God will not allow her to continue to possess others. And there is the mother who refuses to believe that God could love her son more than she; and there was even a bishop who was more concerned with theological hair splitting than simple, childlike faith.

            For all who chose to return to hell their choices were made because they had closed their hearts and their minds to the enormous love that God has for every one of them. They missed the message of the Gospels of an open heart and a resolution to amend their lives. They refused to remove that block that stands between God and the sinner.

            As Lewis points out about those lost souls, “There is always something they insist on keeping, even at the price of misery.  

            Sin is that block which breaks our relationship with God. When sin is present we need to restore that relationship.

            And one way to do that is by frequent use of the Sacrament of Reconciliation. I’ve seen firsthand how this sacrament can change a person’s life. I was once a chaplain at a drug and alcohol treatment program for those in trouble with the law. They weren’t always an easy bunch to work with, many were just resistant to a Gospel message to which they had never been exposed, but there were a few who were accepting.  

            Many in that later category had been baptized Catholic and asked me if, knowing their background and history, they could ever come back to the Church. My response was always the same: Just go to confession.

            But I would add to that not to just go on a Sunday morning and stand in line, let me make an appointment with a priest where you will have time to tell your full story. I’d then pick them up for their appointment and take them to the church.

            One thing I always noticed. I never took the same person back to the clinic that I had taken to confession. There was always a relief and new spirit in them when they finished. The guys would relax, the woman would sometime cry. But they all had the same experience: a great burden had been lifted from their shoulders and they could finally call God their friend again.

            I could see the power of that sacrament. It had the power to take what was crooked and make straight, what was murky and make clear, and what was fear and make safe.

            If you are looking for a way to truly express your gratitude to God that is the way to do it. Repent, reach out to heal the gulf between you and God and remove those blocks that have been a barrier to the fulfillment of your Christian identity.

            Then leave the bus behind and join the faithfully departed who have gone before you and ascend the mountain.

August 22, 2021

St. Anthony’s Parish, Des Moines

                                                                        #            

This week on Faith On Trial

At the Iowa State Fair with Maggie DeWitte, executive director for Iowans for Life

Behind The Grisly Pitt Panther

By Deacon Mike Manno

(The Wanderer) – I don’t know if I speak for everyone, but I do think that most of us take pride in the institutions from which we have graduated. That may be a little more difficult when one of those institution is a Jesuit college, but I manage and hope that you do, too.
And like many of you I happily wear T-shirts and sweatshirts emblazoned with their names and images of their mascot — yes, even the blue jay!

Anyway I thought of that this morning when I read from several sources that the University of Pittsburgh would like to become the distribution hub for fetal parts. I don’t know what kind of mascot it has for that, but I don’t think I’d wear it, even though the school, I guess to show its “wokeness,” is claiming that its baby part business will conform to strict racial quotas.

Judicial Watch and the Center for Medical Progress (CMP) have reported that they have received public records from the National Institutes for Health (NIH) about government-sponsored fetal experimentation at the University of Pittsburgh. According to David Daleiden, founder and president of the Center for Medical Progress:

“The NIH grant application for just one of Pitt’s numerous experiments with aborted infants reads like an episode of American Horror Story. Infants in the womb, some old enough to be viable, are being aborted alive and killed for organ harvesting, in order to bring in millions of dollars in taxpayer funding for Pitt and the Planned Parenthood abortion business it supports. People are outraged by such disregard for the lives of the vulnerable. Law enforcement and public officials should act immediately to bring the next Kermit Gosnell to justice under the law.”

According to the report, the NIH was the subject of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request submitted by CMP over a year ago. When the requested documents were not produced, Judicial Watch went to court on behalf of CMI to demand them.

The documents finally produced include the university’s original grant application from 2015 to become the fetal tissue distribution hub for the Genito-Urinary Development Molecular Anatomy Project (GUDMAP). In its application, Pitt touts its “over 18 years of experience” collecting fetal body parts from aborted babies and suggests that its existing fetal tissue collections “can be significantly ramped up.”

In a grisly reminder of Kermit Gosnell, Pitt’s application boasts of its ability to minimize “ischemia time” — that is, according to the NIH, “the time a tissue, organ, or body part remains at body temperature after its blood supply has been reduced or cut off but before it is cooled or reconnected to a blood supply.”

The university, in its application says, “We record the warm ischemic time on our samples and take steps to keep it at a minimum to ensure the highest quality biological specimens. We get feedback from our users and utilize this feedback to tailor our collection processes on a case-by-case basis to maximize the needs of investigators.” In other words, the school is stating that it is proficient in keeping the fetal body parts at or close to body temperature.

Which means that in reference to a whole body fetus, where the heartbeat and blood circulation continue in a labor-induced abortion, “the fetus is being delivered while still alive and the cause of death is the removal of its organs,” according to CMP.
Judicial Watch says that the documents from Pitt reveal, among other things, the following:

“The aims of the project listed in the original 2015 proposal were to ‘develop a pipeline’ to the acquisition, quality control, and distribution of human genitourinary [urinary and genital organs and functions] samples obtained throughout development (6-42 weeks gestation)…[and] generate an ongoing resource to distribute fresh developmental human genitourinary samples from various stages (6-42 weeks) to the GUDMAP.

“In the proposal, Pitt notes that it has been ‘collecting fetal tissue for over 10 years . . . include[ing] liver, heart, gonads, legs, brain, genitourinary tissues including kidneys, ureters, and bladders.’

“Pitt noted in 2015 ‘we have disbursed over 300 fresh samples collected from 77 cases. The collections can be significantly ramped up as material could have been accrued from as many as 725 cases last year.’

“Pitt boasts it has a number of internal connections as well as a ‘strong working relationship with UPMC [University of Pittsburgh Medical Center] and the Department of Pathology’ as well as three ‘laboratories in the flagship UPMC hospitals.’ This includes a lab boasting a ‘Butcherboy band saw for sectioning bone,’ and a ‘frozen section room has digital video feed to and from the operating rooms. This also allows for instantaneous discussions with the surgeons as well [as] immediate “show and tell” for them.’ The proposal ironically also boasts about the laboratories at the ‘Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh.’

“The Pitt scientists note that, ‘All fetal tissue is collected through a collaborative process including Family Planning, Obstetrics, and Pathology.’ And that, ‘the numbers of consents and collections has been steadily increasing…and we are in an excellent position to expand our services to include the needs of the GUDMAP Atlas projects.’

“Pitt anticipated ‘being able to harvest and distribute quality tissue and cells…[and] do not anticipate any major problems related to the acquisition and distribution of the tissues.’

“Pitt’s target goal ‘is to have available a minimum of 5 cases (tissues and if possible other biologicals) per week of gestational age for ages 6-42 weeks.’

“Pitt’s proposal requested more than $3.2 million over a five-year period. The documents show NIH has funded at least $2.7 million so far for Pitt’s human fetal tissue harvesting and hub.”

Additionally, the university also states in its application that its harvesting program will include “Inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals on the basis of sex/gender, race, and ethnicity.” It claims that it will use only white “patients” for half of its “inventory” and of the other half of what it calls “minority patients,” half of those will be black.

“These documents show taxpayer money is being used to turn the University of Pittsburgh is a one-stop human fetal tissue shop — from procuring the tissue from elective abortions, ‘subdividing’ the human remains, to distributing and shipping the harvested tissue,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. 

Yeah, somehow, even if I went there, I wouldn’t want to wear a Pitt sweatshirt. The Jesuits are starting to look a lot better right now!

(You can reach Mike at: DeaconMike@q.com and listen to him every Thursday at 10 a.m. Central on Faith On Trial on IowaCatholicRadio.com.)

Abortion advocates want to force all doctors to become abortionists

Abortion advocates want to force all doctors to become abortionists: The abortion industry is on a mission to force doctors to participate in abortions, even if it violates conscience protections to do it.

Deacon Mike’s homily for the Feast of the Assumption

Good morning:

            Today the Church celebrates the feast of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary into heaven. So on this feast it might be fitting to reflect on her life and her message for us.

            Our tradition teaches that after her earthly life was over, Mary was assumed bodily into heaven.

            Tradition says that after her death her body disappeared, in fact some early Christian writings say that Mary died and was buried in a site near Gethsemane, and, in fact, there is a Greek Orthodox Church near Gethsemane where it is claimed Mary’s body was placed. A more modern tradition is that Mary spent the last part of her life in Ephesus in Turkey, and died there.

            In any event, the process of her death and assumption was known as “the Dormation of Mary” which conveys the idea of “the sleep of Mary,” the idea that Mary fell asleep; that she died.

            But in the early 1950s when Pius XII officially proclaimed the doctrine of the Assumption, he stated only that “after her earthly life was over” she was assumed into heaven, leaving open the possibility that Mary was never required to suffer death. And we could easily understand that the Woman who bore the Christ-child not only was immaculately concerted – that is without original sin – but could easily have been spared physical death by her Heavenly Father.

            There is a lot that can be said about our Holy Mother, and a lot of interpretation from Scripture gives rise to numerous other ideas about her. Take our First Reading today in which is described “a woman clothed with the sun.” The woman is about to give birth and the dragon is waiting to devour her child … a male child … following which she then had to flee into the desert.

            Most of us think of the woman as Mary, and, in fact, that is a good interpretation of the passage and was the interpretation popular from medieval times. However there are a couple of other interpretations that have found favor with some theologians. One is that the woman represents Old Israel, the nation from which the Messiah came. It is suggested that the author of Revelation was not seeing Mary but Israel waiting for the coming of the promised Messiah. Another is that the woman represents the Church, the New Israel, and the mother of the faithful.

            Yet there is one thing that stands out to me, the Woman “wailed aloud in pain as she labored to give birth.” Now, in Genesis God is punishing Eve for her disobedience telling her, “I will intensify the pangs of your childbearing; in pain shall you bring forth children.” Now since Mary was free from Original Sin you would think that the birth of Our Savior would have been painless.

            These are just a few bits and pieces of Mary’s life that I hope will raise you curiosity about her and perhaps start you to study her life and the message.  And when you do you will find that she not only teaches us by her example, but by her words as well.

            The first lesson we learn about her is that she was humble before God and surrendered herself to him completely, “let it be done to me according to your word,” she told the angel and you can see throughout Scripture how she lived that surrender: Simon told her that her soul would be pierced with sorrow, she frantically sought the young Jesus when he was lost for three days, and committed to her total surrender when he said that he had to be about his Father’s business.

            One way for us to imitate Mary’s complete surrender is through her oft repeated messages that were contained in many of her apparitions. And it was through those apparitions that she taught us in the only way the Mother of God could.

            For example, during her appearance to St. Catherine Laboure in 1830 she asked St. Catherine to have medal struck in her honor on which was to be a depiction of Mary as she appeared to St. Catherine with rays of light streaming from many of her fingers. Catherine asked Mary why light was not streaming from all of her fingers.

            Mary’s response was, “These rays symbolize the graces I shed upon those who asked for them. The gems from which rays do not fall are the graces for which souls forget to ask.”   The message, of course, is an invitation to ask our Holy Mother for the graces we need to live a more devout life.    

            In several other apparitions she begged us to do penance, and to pray for sinners. The conversion of sinners was paramount to her, and she continues to speak of the value of penance and prayer for the conversion of all.

            However, for most of us we tend to think of Mary as she is in today’s celebration: the Glorious Mary; the Mary of Guadalupe, the healing waters of Lourdes, or the miracle of the sun at Fatima.  But what we often times don’t realize that she was human, just like us. Yet she had an unusual faith in the Word of God, and perhaps this is the best lesson she can give to us.

            If you take a look on the west wall you’ll see what I mean.  There you will find probably the saddest point in our redemptive history.  Station Four: Jesus meets his mother.

             Think about that meeting.  Jesus, beaten, humiliated, and under a death sentence meets his mother.  He knew that in a few hours they would kill him, but I suspect this was his worst moment; for the beatings, the scourging, the piercings would not compare to the tears he saw in his mother’s eyes.  

            And Mary, can you imagine what was going through her mind?  Isn’t this the child that the angel told her would sit on the throne of David – whose kingdom would not end?  And now look at him.  Betrayed by a disciple, abandoned by all, save young John and a few women, he was being led to a criminal’s death by a band of roguish soldiers at the behest of their Jewish community.

             If there was time for despair; if there was time to question God, for Mary it was then. 

            Yet despite what she saw she did not abandon hope, she did not despair, she did not falter in her faith.  As hard as it was for her, we find her following her Son, and the Cross of our Salvation, to Calvary. 

She followed, station after station, she saw Simon carry the cross, Veronica wiping His face, Jesus falling two more times, her Son being stripped of his clothing and nailed to the cross:  She saw it all, and throughout all, she remained faithful.  And at the end, she could be found at the foot of His cross. 

            I think we can learn a lot from that.  Today, we are all confronted with challenges when things just don’t go right; things and events that can shake our faith; that can cause us to question our basic assumptions about God and the Church.  

            And it’s all around us today; not only in our personal lives, but in the public arena.  Our secular world is ready to crucify Christ again.  It rejects faith, prayer, and values just as the Pharisees rejected Jesus 2,000 years ago.  It rejects our spiritual heritage in favor of a worldly view that puts man – not God – at the center of the universe. 

            Just as Mary watched Christ stumble in the streets of Jerusalem, we are today watching – as the Prophet Isaiah once described – truth stumbling in the public square. 

            Like Mary we’re being called to reject the crowd and follow the cross.  And if we do so; if at the end we are found – like Mary – at the foot of the cross, then we too will experience the glory of our own resurrection; to join with Mary – and the faithful who preceded us – in the home our Heavenly Father who has, as Mary quite rightfully put it: “remembered His promise of mercy, the promise He made to our fathers, to Abraham and his children forever.”   

             Let us close as we should begin each day, with the prayer of the Miraculous Medal, the medal that Mary asked St. Catherine Laboure to have struck:        

               “O Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.”

 

St. Augustin Parish, Des Moines, Iowa August 15, 2021 

#

 

The Abortion Ties of the COVID Vaccines: A Deal-Killer or No Big Deal? | The Stream

The Abortion Ties of the COVID Vaccines: A Deal-Killer or No Big Deal? | The Stream: Little Johanna was carved up for parts so you could have your vaccine. Are you okay with that? It's still happening, with the NIH funding it.

Media Ignore Antifa Assault On Christians

By Catholic League president Bill Donohue

Antifa, the urban terrorists, brutally assaulted Christians who were praying in a Portland park on August 7th, and the media have almost totally ignored it. Dressed in black, with face coverings, the left-wing nihilists destroyed the sound system and assaulted the Evangelicals with pepper spray and projectiles.

Andy Ngo, the reporter who has covered Antifa better than anyone—and has been beaten up for doing so—recorded this savage event. Flash bombs were thrown at kids as young as four months old. "Where is your god now?" asked an Antifa thug.

The police were called to the scene but did nothing. They were acting rationally: The authorities have yielded power to street barbarians, handcuffing the cops. The same passive police presence is now routine in America's largest cities, thanks to no bail, no prosecutions, no insurance protection for cops, and calls to dismantle the police and empty the prisons.

Quite frankly, it is now borderline legal to kill and maim innocent persons in urban America, including those whose crime it is to pray in public, never mind the police. Anarchy reigns. And what do the media do? Nothing.

Not one major newspaper or wire service covered the Antifa assault on Christians. Broadcast TV networks also ignored it, and among the cable channels, only the three conservative outlets, Fox News, Newsmax and OAN profiled the story. Ngo had video footage but had few takers.

By contrast, the recent CNN interview with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) was covered by almost all the mainstream media: print, internet and television gave it wide attention.

She said that on the day of the Capitol riot, January 6, she feared for her life, adding that she also feared she would be raped. Yet unlike the Christians who were attacked, no one laid a hand on her. They couldn't—she was not in the Capitol when the riot occurred (she was safely tucked away in her office).

Unlike the Christian victims of Antifa, AOC's tale of woe is patently contrived. For the media to play up her phony story while dismissing the real-life Antifa riot, smacks of ideological and religious bias. No wonder the public holds the big media in such low esteem. Cub reporters earn more respect these days.  

Mark Levin: Whatever Happened to Individual Liberty? 'Soft Tyranny' is Getting More Aggressive | The Stream

Mark Levin: Whatever Happened to Individual Liberty? 'Soft Tyranny' is Getting More Aggressive | The Stream: If you love freedom and your family, and if you are concerned about the direction of our country, then I plead with you to watch this clip with an open heart and open mind.

No Voter Fraud? Let's Look at Harris County, Texas | The Stream

No Voter Fraud? Let's Look at Harris County, Texas | The Stream: A big name in Texas Democrat politics, Gerry Monroe, is reportedly “blowing the lid off” the story of massive voter fraud in Harris County. That’s the Houston metropolitan area, the third largest voting county in America with about 2.5 million...

Middle School “Trans” Indoctrination

By Deacon Mike Manno

Lately there has been a slew of reports about how unhappy parents are confronting school officials for attempting to indoctrinate their children in ideologies the parents reject. Unfortunately, with the backing of the teachers’ unions and “woke” school administrators, the schools are fighting back sometimes even to the point of violating the law.

Unfortunately, these efforts have turned schools into war zones, whether over critical race theory, masks in the classroom, or even if the schools are to open for in-person instruction. It’s the parents vs. the academic community.

And also unfortunately, the academic community starts with the upper hand; for to them your children belong to the schools once one realizes that folks with titles and initials after their names are smarter than you, and if you persist in causing “trouble” the state can take you children away and find someone else to raise them. That’s not speculation, it has been done in the United States and even more spectacularly in Canada.

Recently, there has been one more hideous example of what the academic-industrial complex has been doing to kids.

This story comes from the great People’s Republic of Massachusetts, Baird Middle School in Ludlow, to be more specific.

It was only a few years ago that several parents exposed the school for its graphic sexual, homosexual, and transgendered themed books in the library and classrooms. According to reports from MassResistance, the outfit that is assisting the parents, the impetus came from the school’s cross-dressing librarian along with support from the school’s staff, principal, superintendent, and board.

Apparently things started leaking out when the librarian held talks with some of the children where they were given certain books to read and videos to watch — all with transgender themes. According to one of the teachers, many of the children chosen for this “education” were from troubled homes who were “easy prey for such messages.”

From there it went into the classrooms where children were asked not to use “boys” and “girls” but were given a list of non-gender specific terms that should be used instead. In addition they were asked to decide on a “preferred pronoun.” That was followed by the choosing of opposite sex names and identities. Of course, none of this was to be told to the kids’ parents.

To show how insidious this was, here is a copy of a note sent to staff about one of the girls:

“Mary has a preferred name of Michael/Mike and preferred pronouns of he and his. He understands that there will be times that ‘Mary’ and ‘she/her’ slips out and he is fine with that.

“Michael is still in the process of telling his parents and is requesting that school staff refer to him as Mary and use she/her pronouns with his parents and in written emails/letters home. When Michael has informed his parents of his preferred name and pronouns, we will change the name in the computer system if that is what he wishes to do at that time.

“I explained to him that we understand this is a complicated process and we will be as supportive as possible — but may make mistakes from time to time.”

You can probably see where this whole thing is heading: the “transgendering” of our children behind the backs of their parents.

In February of this year an 11-year-old girl sent this e-mail to her teachers and staff. See if this sounds like an 11-year-old:

“Hello everyone,

“If you are reading this you are either my teacher or guidance counselor. I have an announcement to make and I trust you guys with this information. I am genderqueer. Basically, it means I use any pronouns (other than it/its). This also means I have a name change. My new name will be Raymond. Please call me by that name.

“If you deadname me or use any pronouns I am not comfortable with I will politely tell you. I am telling you this because I feel like I can trust you. A list of pronouns you can use are: she/her he/him they/them fae/faer ae/aer ve/ver xe/xem ze/zir. I have added a link so you can look at how to say them. Please only use the ones I have listed and not the other ones. I do not like them.”

Of course I’m sure this sounds just like the little 11-year-old that is underfoot in your house. If not, what have you been teaching them?

This was followed up a short time later by the 11-year-old’s brother, 13, who then decided that he was really a girl and wanted to be called “Skylar.”

Unfortunately for the school, a teacher, identified only as “Bonnie” took a critical look at the situation and notified — against all school norms — (gasp!) the siblings’ parents.

In March, Bonnie was placed on administrative leave for “conduct unbecoming a teacher related to your inappropriate communications with the parents of a student.” In other words, according to the academic-industrial complex of the Peoples’ Republic of Massachusetts, parents had no need to know of the struggles their children face. Or, perhaps, the professional educators didn’t want the parents to know who suggested these ideas to their kids. After all, what 11-year-old knew what the words “genderqueer” and “deadname” mean, much less the wide variety of pronoun alternatives?

When Bonnie was called to attend an “investigative interview” with the school’s compliance officer she was represented by a local pro-life attorney because the teachers’ union refused to provide a lawyer. Shortly after that hearing, Bonnie got a letter from the principal stating that she was intending to terminate her employment. So much for telling the truth and respecting parental rights.

Now in a morality tale you’d expect it to end with a righteous comeuppance against the school administration. But this isn’t a morality tale. Stacy Monette, the principal of Baird Middle School who fired Bonnie, was named Middle School Principal of the Year by the Massachusetts School Administrators Association.

Yup, no morality tale here.

(You can reach Mike at: DeaconMike@q.com and listen to him on Faith On Trial on IowaCatholicRadio.com every Thursday at 10 a.m. central.)

Note: See below for Faith On Trial's interview with Bonnie. This article was written before the interview. 

Religion Clause: 6th Circuit En Banc Upholds Tennessee Abortion Wai...

Religion Clause: 6th Circuit En Banc Upholds Tennessee Abortion Wai...: In a 9-7  en banc decision in Bristol Regional Women's Center, P.C. v. Slatery , (6th Cir., Aug. 5, 2021), the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of...

This week on Faith On Trial

 

Bonnie Manchester was fired from her job as a teacher at Biard Middle School in Ludlow, Massachusetts for disclosing to parents that their children were being groomed for a transsexual lifestyle. Bonnie’s crowdfunding site is https://bit.ly/3jt9HWl and her story is told at https://bit.ly/3lEhinM.

Does A Preborn Baby Have Standing To Sue?

By Deacon Mike Manno

(The Wanderer) – A brief submitted to the Rhode Island Supreme Court in June argues that a pre-viable fetus, along with a post-viable fetus, has standing to challenge the Rhode Island Reproductive Privacy Act (RPA), which, according to the brief, “unlawfully amended the Rhode Island Constitution by granting, securing, and funding a right to an abortion.”

Of course the fetuses are not alone in their challenge: Also on board with the argument are three Rhode Island voters, Catholics for Life, and its umbrella entity, Servants of Christ for Life. Representing the plaintiffs is a Chicago-based religious liberty law firm, the Thomas More Society.

The case, as unusual as some of the plaintiffs are, started — as most do — when Rhode Island Gov. Gina Raimondo, a practicing Catholic who now serves the Biden Administration as secretary of Commerce, signed into law a bill that would legalize abortions up to birth. The bill allows late-term abortions on viable fetuses including partial-birth and dismemberment abortions.

The bill was described by the director of the state’s Right to Life Committee as a “New York-style abortion expansion bill.” Thus a legal challenge was initiated. Last November, the trial court rejected the plaintiffs’ claims and dismissed the suit, finding that “unborn persons do not have rights as persons to make this challenge,” their claim about the unconstitutionality of act was dismissed as they suffered no “concrete and particularized harm.”

As a result the case was dismissed by the trial court — not over the merits of the case, but because the plaintiffs did not have standing to sue. The appeal to the State Supreme Court is asking it to find that the plaintiffs do have standing to challenge the law. Under Rhode Island case law, “a plaintiff has sufficient standing to sue if he or she alleges ‘an injury in fact resulting from the challenged statute’.”

The plaintiff’s suit claimed, among other things, that the state’s RPA unlawfully established a constitutional right to an abortion by statute, but not according to the requirements of the state’s constitution. The Rhode Island constitution, Article XIV, Section 1, states, “The general assembly may propose amendments to the Constitution . . . and submitted to the electors at the next general election . . . if then approved by a majority of the electors voting thereon, it shall become a part of the Constitution.”

One of the allegations made by the plaintiffs was that by the legislature’s adoption of the act, plaintiffs were denied the opportunity to campaign and vote against the law during a referendum campaign that would have taken place had the proposal been submitted to the voters for approval or rejection, as any constitutional change would have required.
Since the legislature had no power to alter the state’s constitution without a vote of the people, the action of the legislature violated their right to equal protection because “it treated opponents of the change less favorably than proponents.”

To counter the argument that the plaintiffs suffered no injury, they argue that the denial of their ability to express their views in a statewide constitutional referendum is in itself a judicially cognizable interest that satisfies the legal requirement of injury since the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that voters treated unequally suffer actual injury.

While these arguments will follow the course of other cases, the interesting question that is raised is about the preborn children. One, Baby Roe, at the time of filing, was non-viable at 15 weeks, the other, Baby Mary Doe, was viable at 34 weeks and was considered a “quick child,” defined by Rhode Island law as: “An unborn child whose heart is beating, who is experiencing electronically measurable brain waves, who is discernibly moving and who is so far developed and matured as to be capable of surviving the trauma of birth with the aid of usual medical care and facilities available in this state.”

As a “quick child,” the viable fetus had the protection of the “Willful Killing of Unborn Quick Child” statute. But since the RPA repealed the fetal homicide statute, the child’s right of due process and equal protection was violated, it is claimed.

The unborn babies also “had a protectable legal interest in continuing to keep the criminal abortion law on the books because Roe v. Wade [and other cases] “as judicial decisions, are subject to reversal, and could be overturned as early as the next U.S. Supreme Court term in view of the court’s grant of certiorari in [the Mississippi case of] Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.”

The contention is that if Roe is overruled by the Supreme Court, all state laws that are still on the books that were negatively affected by that case and rendered null, would become enforceable as if Roe never existed. Thus by repealing such statutes such as the fetal homicide statue the “rights” of the unborn babies — whose interest is being advanced by their respective mothers — have been abridged by the passage of the RPA.

Thus the fetuses have a sufficient stake in the outcome of the case, according to the brief.

But a more interesting question is this: Are the fetuses, especially a pre-viable one, persons under the law?

This is where things get a bit complicated. And remember as you read this, the primary issue to be resolved is the issue of standing. You can have standing and still lose your case; but without standing you can’t even sue. So the main issue now is the issue of standing. We’ve seen above how the adult and organizational interest argued for standing.

Now, continuing the standing argument for the preborn, the brief argues:

“The trial court did not distinguish between Roe’s holding — that a pre-viable fetus is not a ‘person’ under the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution when the issue is a woman’s privacy interest in terminating a pregnancy — and a viable fetus’ legal interest in avoiding the depredations of a killer under Rhode Island’s fetal homicide (or quick child) law.

“The latter law renders a viable fetus like Baby Mary Doe a ‘person’ for purposes of the Rhode Island Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act, enabling her to determine her rights under the fetal homicide law and other laws that may protect her. In situations when the rights of a post-viable child, in this case, Baby Mary Doe, under fetal homicide or other protective laws, do not impinge on a woman’s right to abortion found by the U.S.

Supreme Court [and] it is erroneous and unjust to ignore injury to their legal interests on the ground that they are not ‘persons’ in the abortion context [emphasis added].
“This is an access to the courts and to justice issue — it does not implicate a state’s attempt to interfere with or abridge a woman’s right to abortion…she has standing to ask, and justice requires, that the Court hear her claim for redress of her injury pursuant to Article I, Section 2 of the Rhode Island Constitution, the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act.

“For these reasons Baby Roe and Baby Mary Doe have shown an actual injury. It was error for the court below to conclude they had no standing to claim redress.”

Thomas Olp, vice president and senior counsel at the Thomas More Society, explained the substantial public interest in this case. “There are several issues here in which a lower court erred,” Olp explained. “In this case the personhood of a pre- or post-viable child in utero is not negated by the United States Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade. We are asking the court to acknowledge that a preborn child has standing to challenge the Reproductive Privacy Act’s removal of legal protections under Rhode Island law, including the fetal homicide law and other laws that may protect her.”

So, does a preborn baby have the right to sue? We’ll soon find out what Rhode Island has to say in the matter. Stay tuned.

(You can reach Mike at: DeaconMike@q.com and listen to him every Thursday morning at 10 a.m. Central on Faith On Trial on IowaCatholicRadio.com.)