Pets And Their People

By Deacon Mike Mannno

(The Wanderer) – As we move into the “dog days” of summer, I noticed an interesting report by the Pew Research Center. It found, unsurprisingly, that most pet owners see their pets as a part of their families. Now as a pet owner all my life, I decided to look into their research and do a little bit of my own on the subject.

Now, I have to confess that I am a biased witness. I was fortunate enough to grow up in a suburb of Des Moines where we had a fairly large yard in which we could let a dog run. I don’t remember too much about my first dog, only that I named him Meat Ball (my Italian coming out), and, according to my folks, I was a bit young and too small for him so he was given to one of my dad’s employees who had a small farm just out of town.

My real first pet was a little dog I named Ginger. She was as loyal as a dog could be. When my brother was born, my mom used to sit out on our front porch and let little Mark crawl around on the grass. Ginger was always near-by and I remember when anyone would walk up the street Ginger would take a position between Mark and the “threat,” show her teeth, and if the guy had his own dog, she would growl, always maintaining a position directly between my baby brother and the guy.

Now I’ve always treated my pets like part of the family, and according to the Pew research, most folks do so as well. It reports that most Americans, 62 percent own a pet and 38 percent own more than one. Of those, nearly all — 97 percent — consider them part of their families, and about half, 51 percent, say their pets are “as much a part of the family” as their human members. Women break a little ahead of men in this category with 57 percent considering a pet as much a part of the family versus 43 percent for the men.

The report indicates that the “as much” category is much higher for urban dwellers, 61 percent, with suburban residents at 47 percent and rural folks at 50 percent. Pew reported that the “as much” group was influenced by the owner’s family situation. “Unmarried pet owners and those who do not have children younger than 18 at home are the most likely to consider their pets to be as much a part of their family as a human member,” it reported.

According to Pew, dog owners top cat owners in the “as much as” category, 53 percent to 48 percent. In that dog-cat mix, 40 percent have a dog only, 23 percent have a cat, 24 percent have both, and 4 percent have neither.

The Pew report contains a lot of other interesting information concerning income brackets, racial backgrounds, such as: 68 percent of whites, and 66 percent of Hispanic adults own pets, just 37 percent of Asians, and 34 percent of blacks own pets. The report piqued my interest enough to do a bit more research.

Here is what I found: Half the dog owners in the country allow their dogs to sleep in their bed at night, 73 percent carry photos of their pet with them, only 18 percent of cat owners put their cats outdoors for the night.

Dogs are the most popular pet in the nation, found in 65.1 million households, followed by cats in 46.5 million homes, and fish in 11.1 million homes. Millennials make up the largest percentage of pet owners at 33 percent, followed by Gen X, 25 percent, and baby boomers at 24 percent.

According to the statistics, 42 percent of dog owners and 43 percent of cat owners got their pets from a store, while 38 percent of dog owners and 40 percent of cat owners say they got their pet from a breeder or shelter. Forbes Advisor reports that pet ownership has “increased significantly” over the past three decades; in 1988 only 59 percent of U.S. households had a pet.

Other interesting factoids: The average dog owner spends $1,201 annually on their pets as compared to cat owners who average $687. In addition to dogs and cats, 9.9 million households have a bird, 6.7 million have a small pet such as a rabbit, hamster, etc., 5.7 million have a reptile, and 3.5 million own a horse, although I never thought of them as pets.

Wyoming has the most pet owners at 72 percent, the District of Columbia has the lowest at 38 percent, Idaho has the most dog owners, 58 percent, and Vermont has the most cat owners, 45 percent. Those who think of the pet as their best friend is 78 percent; 89 percent say their pet has “brought them comfort” during COVID. The most popular dog breed is the Labrador Retriever, and the Ragdoll is the most popular cat breed.

Okay, so why take a column to discuss all this pet stuff? Well, to tell the truth I find this very interesting. The life and death of our pets are in a way a microcosm of our lives.

Just the other day I saw a Facebook video of a little girl getting a pet dog. In the video she was opening a box and shortly a head popped out and she began to realize what she was getting. A set of hands entered the picture and helped her open the box lid at which time she got a full view of the puppy. With help she pulled the little dog from the box, held it close to her and began to cry as she mouthed “thank you” to the person with her.

We’ve seen it all before, the surprise cat or dog given to a small child which invokes that precious response, tears and holding the new pet close as if the child was afraid someone would take it away. Great film for a pet food commercial. But I think it means more.

I remember thinking how the little girl in the video was shedding tears of joy, yet if the trajectory plays out correctly, that relationship will end with tears also as every pet owner’s dreaded decision must be made.

How close is that to our human condition? Every year millions celebrate the joy of a new relationship, be that marriage or birth. Yet we know that each of those relationships will end in tears: That’s the cycle of life. Yet how much more should that mean to a Christian?

If the figures above are correct and the vast majority of pet owners consider their pets on par with their human families, how many understand the pet-owner relationship better than the human-to-human relationship? This may be a stretch, but if we began to think of our fellow humans as well as we think of and treat our pets just maybe this might be a better place to live. Just sayin’.

(You can reach Mike at: DeaconMike@q.com and listen to him every weekend on Faith On Trial or podcast at https://iowacatholicradio.com/faith-on-trial/)

France's National Academy of Medicine says NO to euthanasia but YES to assisted suicide

By Alex Schadenberg
Executive Director, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

David Sadler reporting for Globe Echo World News on July 14, 2023 stated that France's National Academy of Medicine decided on July 12, to support assisted suicide and oppose euthanasia. Sadler reported that they support “assisted suicide consisting in making a lethal product available to a person who requests it and self-administers it” and reject“euthanasia consisting of the administration by a third party of a lethal product to a person who requests it”.

On April 1, 2023, France’s National Council of the College of Physicians stated their opposition to legalizing euthanasia stating that it is against the participation of a physician in a process that would lead to euthanasia, and that a doctor cannot deliberately cause death by administering a lethal product. They state that if assisted suicide does become legal, there should be conscience clauses put in place to protect doctors, and that the doctor should not actively participate when the patient takes the lethal product.

On December 29, 2022; the highest administrative court in France rejected a challenge to France's law by Switzerland's Dignitas assisted suicide group. France's Council of State has ruled that European Law does not recognise the right to die with dignity, and thus, France is not obliged to establish a regulation that legalises assisted suicide.

Sadler indicated that the National Academy of Medicine oppose any future law legislating that physicians can do the act (euthanasia) and they oppose physicians being forced to participate in assisted suicide.

The French people need to demand that their politicians say no to euthanasia or assisted suicide.

Bishop Strickland: Laying His Life Down for His Sheep

Bishop Joseph Strickland

Crisis Magazine has a great opinion piece by Kevin Wells on Bishop Joseph Strickland. It starts:

“Like Christ, Bishop Strickland understands the duty of a shepherd is to become, unhesitatingly, a victim for his sheep.”

The story can be found here:

https://crisismagazine.com/opinion/bishop-strickland-laying-his-life-down-for-his-sheep?utm_source=Crisis+Magazine&utm_campaign=e50b045116-Crisis_DAILYRSS_EMAIL&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_a5a13625fd-e50b045116-28429859&mc_cid=e50b045116&mc_eid=2fe5c614ca

Legislature passes ‘heartbeat’ bill

From the Iowa Catholic Conference:

In a special session on July 11, the Iowa Legislature passed House File 732, a bill to prohibit abortions after a heartbeat can be detected. Thanks to those of you who contacted your legislators.

The vote was 56-34 in the House and 32-17 in the Senate. The governor said she will sign the bill on Friday. Opponents have filed a lawsuit in an attempt to keep the law from taking effect.

The Catholic bishops of Iowa have released a statement on the legislation. They said:

“We commend the Iowa Legislature for passing a law that would prohibit abortions after a child’s cardiac activity can be detected. As Pope Francis has said, 'Let us respect and love human life, especially vulnerable life in a mother’s womb.' For us, this is a matter of personal rights and dignity and the common good. Human life is precious and should be protected in our laws to the greatest extent possible.

“As a state and as a society, we should commit ourselves to working for the protection of all vulnerable populations from violence – wherever individuals and groups are at risk. We urge people of good will in Iowa both to work for an end to the practice of abortion and to join us in tireless, unremitting and compassionate solidarity with pregnant women in distress, with the men who fathered these children, and with families in need.”

The bishops of Iowa are: Most Rev. Richard Pates, Apostolic Administrator of Dubuque; Most Rev. R. Walker Nickless, Bishop of Sioux City; Most Rev. Thomas Zinkula, Bishop of Davenport; and Most Rev. William Joensen, Bishop of Des Moines.

This week on Faith On Trial

Listen now: https://iowacatholicradio.com/faith-on-trial/  Episode 371

Gov. Reynolds Statement on Special Session to Protect Life

Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds

Gov. Kim Reynolds released the following statement in response to the Iowa Legislature passing the heartbeat bill:  

“Today, the Iowa legislature once again voted to protect life and end abortion at a heartbeat, with exceptions for rape, incest, and life of the mother.”  

“The Iowa Supreme Court questioned whether this legislature would pass the same law they did in 2018, and today they have a clear answer. The voices of Iowans and their democratically elected representatives cannot be ignored any longer, and justice for the unborn should not be delayed.”   

“As a pro-life Governor, I am also committed to continuing policies to support women in planning for motherhood, promote the importance of fatherhood, and encourage strong families. Our state and country will be stronger because of it.”  

Gov. Reynolds plans to sign the bill on Friday, July 14, 2023.

Social Conservatism Is Rebounding

By Bill Donohue, Catholic League President

(This article originally appeared on The American Spectator on July 3, 2023.)

It was just a matter of time. Decent Americans have had a radical race and LGBT agenda shoved in their face for too long, and now they are fighting back. Too bad not all conservatives are on board.

Former congressman Paul Ryan recently said that he was not a “cultural war guy,” contending that he is more concerned about the debt crisis. This is what we would expect from someone who found his home sitting on the board of directors of Fox News’ parent company, Fox Corporation.

Under its founder, Roger Ailes, Fox News Network covered what I call the three “M’s” of conservatism: missiles, markets and morality. But in more recent times, with some notable exceptions, Fox News has been more concerned about the first two “M’s.” Ryan’s influence is obvious. Tucker Carlson’s absence is only one clear example.

As it turns out, Fox News is on the wrong side of history. The country is becoming more socially and culturally conservative. Consider three recent Gallup surveys.

In a Gallup poll released June 8, we learned that “More Americans this year (38%) say they are very conservative or conservative on social issues than said so in 2022 (33%) and 2021 (30%). Those who identify as very liberal or liberal on social issues are in decline. What makes these figures so impressive is that in the past two years, the increase in conservative identification is found among nearly all political and demographic subgroups.

The Gallup poll published June 16 found that support for same-sex marriage is declining: it went from 71 percent to 64 percent in the past year, which is dramatic. This helps to explain the increase in social conservatives. 

Why this is happening can be gleaned from a Gallup poll released June 9. The title says it all: “Views of State of Moral Values in U.S. at New Low.” Public assessments on the state of moral values is the worst since Gallup took these measures 22 years ago. “The 54% of U.S. adults who rate moral values in the country as ‘poor’ marks a four-percentage-point increase since last year and the first time the reading has reached the majority level.”

A third of Americans, 33 percent, say our moral values are “only fair”; 10 percent say they are “good”; and a mere 1 percent rate them as “excellent.”

No wonder social conservatism is rebounding—most are convinced we are morally troubled, to say the least. I hasten to add that there are reasons for optimism. Some very good things are happening.

While Covid was a tough time for many Americans, there is one good thing that came of it. Parents, especially moms, found out what some of the schools were doing to their children. Instead of education, there was indoctrination. The content of this proselytization—and that is what it is—is also objectionable: students are being told how racist America is, and that they can switch their sex. Both are invidious lies.

As a result of this kind of activism, we now have Moms for Liberty, and similar other groups. Proof that they are having an effect is the ruling by the far-left Southern Poverty Law Center to name them on its “hate map.” That is a badge of honor.

Disney is being beaten up all over the place. It has decided to adopt the radical LGBT agenda, most notably by inviting children to believe that they can change their sex, and that there are many sexes besides male and female. Both are palpable lies.

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis led the way in taking Disney to task for adopting the woke agenda. The Catholic League documentary, “Walt’s Disenchanted Kingdom,” added to their problems. The blowback from customers showed up on its bottom line: it has taken quite a hit. We are also happy to note that its summertime film, “Elemental,” featuring a “non-binary” character, bombed at the box office.

Bud Light is still reeling from trying to push trans politics down our throats. It now regrets hiring a trans person to market its beer. It should never have done so in the first place. Ditto for the U.S. Navy which hired a drag queen, a man dressed as a woman, to recruit new sailors. It was a monumental flop—recruitment numbers are down.

Target got into the act by selling “tuck-friendly” swimwear—with “extra crotch coverage”—for men trying to pass as a woman. Ever since, they have been feeling the pinch of a boycott.

Muslims run the Michigan town of Hamtramck, and their city council has banned the LGBT pride flag, making the case that only the American flag should be flown.

The pushback against the Dodgers for honoring drag queens who mock Catholicism, which the Catholic League led, made international news. From all accounts, the message has been received.

Moreover, surveys show that most Americans do not believe men should be able to compete in women’s sports. They also oppose sex-reassignment surgery performed on children. 

These are encouraging developments. The culture war is far from over.

Stay up to date on our social media posts. Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Truth Social and subscribe to our Rumble and YouTube Channels.

Victory For The First Amendment… Misinformation From The Bench

By Deacon Mike Manno

“The First Amendment envisions the United States  as a rich and complex place where 
all persons are free to think and speak as they wish, not as the government demands” — Justice Neil Gorsuch, 303 Creative v. Elenis, June 30.

It was a great victory for free speech and the First Amendment. While the case was not framed as a religious liberty case, the echoes of this decision will ring throughout the world of religious rights. But, as if it was intended to go hand-in-hand with the result, was a stinging and misleading dissent.

First some background. In Colorado, where First Amendment rights and religious liberty are looked upon with suspicion, a web designer, Lorie Smith, who owns a website and graphic design business wanted to expand the business to include wedding websites.

However, as a devout Christian who believes in traditional marriage, she did not wish to produce websites for same-sex weddings, but the state’s public accommodations law prohibited her from refusing to build websites for homosexual weddings, and also prohibited her from articulating that policy on her site.

Smith had a pretty good idea of what would happen to her if she tried to operate on her Christian values and beliefs. She knew what had happened to Jack Phillips, the baker who refused to make a cake celebrating a same-sex wedding; a fight to a Supreme Court victory only to have the state come after him again for refusing to bake a gender transition cake for an activist who only wanted a cake from Phillips.

She also saw bakers, florists, and wedding photographers fall into the same trap, many losing their businesses and being burdened with heavy fines and penalties. So, she didn’t wait for the government to come after her, she went for the government, challenging its application of the public accommodations law. With the help of the Alliance Defending Freedom her business sued the state, claiming that the First Amendment protected her business, 303 Creative.

She lost most of the early rounds. There were mixed results at the district court level, but ultimately it refused her request for an injunction prohibiting state action against her. That refusal was upheld by the Tenth Circuit Court of appeals, thus setting up the showdown in the Supreme Court which ended with Justice Gorsuch’s majority opinion June 30.

What was interesting about the case is that religious liberty was only a peripheral matter. Central to the case was the question of whether or not the government could force an individual or business to promote an idea with which it disagreed. In short, does the Free Speech Clause which protects your right to say what you believe, protect someone from being forced to say something with which they disagree?

The answer was clear: The Free Speech Clause protects both.

The six justices in the majority looked at Lorie Smith as a creative professional, and as such had the right to not create messages that violated her beliefs, not at all different from a baker, florist, photographer, or anyone engaged in a business of creative expression. Of course, it is broader than a religious belief, it encompasses a lot of heretofore natural assumptions that you can’t force a Jewish printer to print hand-bills for a neo-Nazi organization, or a Catholic printer for Planned Parenthood, and the examples are too numerous to mention.

On the other hand, the opinion did not vizierate the public accommodation law entirely. Just because a person is “gay” does not allow you to refuse service in a restaurant, gas station, candy shop, or department store. The rule, which makes common sense, is that if the goods or services are ready made, the law still applies, but if there is a portion of the transaction which includes a creative expression it cannot be enforced against a merchant who disagrees with the message.

But common sense never stops criticism. A few days after the ruling, the attorney general of Colorado, Phil Weiser, was quoted in The Hill as saying, “Our position in this case has been there is no website development happening, there is no business operating. This was a made-up case without the benefit of any real facts or customers.” A made-up case? Apparently the state’s top lawyer has never heard of a pre-enforcement action. Nor did he know what his office had stipulated as facts in the case.

But the worst criticism came from the three dissenting judges in a dissent by Justice Sonia Sotomayor. She immediately took the side of the LGBT community by twisting the facts to say the Constitution “contains no right to refuse service to a disfavored group.” She argued that the Colorado law bars businesses from discriminating against members of the public over their sexual orientation. This decision, she said, “declares that a particular kind of business, though open to the public, has a constitutional right to refuse to serve members of a protected class.”

Now in my mind it is hard to fathom how three Supreme Court judges could not understand that this was a case in which a business would have been required to use its creative talents to state approval of an idea in which it disagreed. But, as leftists do automatically, she characterized the issue — not as one involving free speech rights — but as one of a dominant group denying a minority its rights to force someone to affirm an idea whose truth is foreign to him.

The problem is larger than the three dissenters; it is the message they sent to the public and especially to the media who were quick to jump on the Progressive Left’s bandwagon: The court is bad, discrimination in creativity and thought is bad, bad thinking must be kept to oneself.

It’s nice to know that the court got this one right. It is un-American and un-constitutional to force people to say and endorse messages they find objectionable. But it is sad to see how the three can manufacture an issue that does not exist to placate their leftist friends, both in and outside the media. We deserved an honest reflection on the case. But, as the court has opined, even “misinformation” is protected speech.

(You can reach Mike at: DeaconMike@q.com and listen to him every weekend on Faith On Trial or podcast at https://iowacatholicradio.com/faith-on-trial/)

From the Iowa Catholic Conference: Contact your legislator to support protections for the unborn

 Gov. Kim Reynolds has called the Legislature back into special session tomorrow (July 11), she said, "with the sole purpose of enacting legislation that addresses abortion and protects unborn lives." 

House Study Bill 255 and Senate Study Bill 1223 have been introduced. They are virtually identical to the 2018 law which would prohibit abortions after a heartbeat could be detected. That law was never enforced due to an injunction. Last month the Iowa Supreme Court, on a tie vote, left the injunction in place.

The Legislature will apparently pass the same law again to address some of the judges’ concerns that too much time had passed since the original passage of the bill.

The Iowa Catholic Conference supports efforts by legislators to limit the harm of abortion to the greatest extent possible. “Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception,” including through the civil law [Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2270, 2273].

We encourage you to contact your Representative and Senator and, in your own words, ask them to support these efforts. 

A public hearing on HSB 255 is scheduled for 9:30 a.m. tomorrow (July 11) in the Iowa House. You can sign up to speak or make written comments

NY Abortionists Kill Girls as Young as 13, but Democratic Gov Cracks Down on Pro-Life Centers

By Ben Johnson – The Washington Stand

As the state’s leaders crack down on pro-life pregnancy resource centers, New York Democrats fund abortionists who have killed dozens of women. At least 38 women and girls, as young as 13, have lost their lives during “safe and legal” abortions carried out by the state’s private abortionists, according to a private research report furnished to The Washington Stand.

Yet that greatly undercounts the number of total abortion deaths in the state, because these numbers do not include the harms caused by the nation’s largest abortion franchise, Planned Parenthood. Then-New York City Health Commissioner Stephen Joseph noted in a June 1987 memo, “During the period between 1981 and 1984, there were 30 legal abortion-related deaths in New York City.”

“Abortion is the original quackery. Abortion is a mercenary industry preying on women in crisis for profit and power,” Rev. Jim Harden, CEO of CompassCare, a New York-based coalition of pregnancy resource centers, told The Washington Stand. “I have said for years that the abortion industry represents serial medical malpractice.”

 Enjoying news and commentary from a biblical worldview?

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

Despite these gruesome results, New York Governor Kathy Hochul (D) and other Democrats have supported abortion businesses while trying to bring the full force of the law to bear against pregnancy resource centers. Last May, Hochul gave abortionists $35 million in taxpayer funding in the name of advancing “human rights.” Abortion activists firebombed Harden’s pro-life medical network last June 7; six days later, Hochul signed a bill authorizing the state health commissioner to investigate so-called “limited service pregnancy centers,” which do not take part in abortions.

This week on Faith On Trial, the Iowa Catholic Radio Network

Listen now: https://iowacatholicradio.com/faith-on-trial/

 

Court Blocks Government Censorship of Social Media

MONROE, LA – A federal judge in Louisiana ruled yesterday in Missouri v. Biden that the Biden Administration “likely” violated the First Amendment free speech rights of Americans by suppressing and censoring social media posts during the COVID-19 pandemic. The judge issued a sweeping preliminary injunction barring numerous federal agencies and officials, including the entire Department of Justice and FBI, from having any contact with social media companies for the purposes of manipulating protected speech. 

The 155-page landmark ruling is a result from a “censorship-by-proxy” challenge brought by attorneys general in Louisiana and Missouri alleging the federal government either pressured or “significantly encouraged” big technology firms such as Google, Meta, Twitter and others to suspend or censor social media accounts and posts that the government viewed as unfavorable. 

Chief U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty for the Western District of Louisiana wrote in the July 4 ruling that the plaintiffs in the case “have produced evidence of a massive effort by Defendants, from the White House to federal agencies, to suppress speech based on its content.” 

Judge Doughty stated, “Opposition to COVID-19 vaccines; opposition to COVID-19 masking and lockdowns; opposition to the lab-leak theory of COVID-19; opposition to the validity of the 2020 election; opposition to President Biden’s policies; statements that the Hunter Biden laptop story was true; and opposition to policies of the government officials in power. All were suppressed.” 

Judge Doughty noted the evidence presented in the case “depicts an almost dystopian scenario.” 

“During the COVID-19 pandemic, a period perhaps best characterized by widespread doubt and uncertainty, the United States Government seems to have assumed a role similar to an Orwellian ‘Ministry of Truth,’” Judge Doughty wrote. 

“If the allegations made by Plaintiffs are true, the present case arguably involves the most massive attack against free speech in United States’ history. In their attempts to suppress alleged disinformation, the Federal Government, and particularly the Defendants named here, are alleged to have blatantly ignored the First Amendment’s right to free speech,” wrote Judge Doughty. 

The injunction also bars the U.S. State Department, Department of Homeland Security, Department of Health and Human Services, Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and at least 40 cabinet members and federal officials from engaging with social media companies, except when dealing with criminal activity and national security threats. 

According to the injunction, the government used “meetings, emails, phone calls, follow-up meetings, and the power of the government” to influence public narratives. Therefore, Judge Doughty specifically prohibited government entities agencies from “engaging in any communication of any kind with social-media companies urging, encouraging, pressuring, or inducing in any manner for removal, deletion, suppression, or reduction of content containing protected free speech,” said the injunction. 

The injunction takes effect immediately. 

Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver said, “The Biden administration’s shameful and unprecedented censorship of protected speech violates our most fundamental liberty. This is the worst censorship in history and it harmed people by preventing the dissemination of life-saving information. What the U.S. Constitution directly prevents, government officials cannot do indirectly through private actors. The federal government’s lawlessness must be stopped.”

Iowa Gov. Reynolds Calls Special Session to Enact Pro-life Legislation

Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds

DES MOINES – Today, Governor Reynolds announced she will convene the General Assembly of Iowa on Tuesday, July 11, 2023, at 8:30 a.m. for a special session with the sole purpose of enacting legislation that addresses abortion and protects unborn lives.   

"Iowans have elected representatives willing to stand up for the rights of the unborn and, in doing so, they have voted strongly in support of pro-life principles and against the arbitrary destruction of innocent, defenseless lives,” stated Governor Reynolds.   

“In 2018, I proposed, the legislature passed, and I proudly signed into law legislation that protected unborn babies from abortion once a heartbeat was detectable. After years of litigation, the Iowa Supreme Court was split 3-3 last month in its opinion regarding whether a lower court’s injunction of the Fetal Heartbeat Law should be dissolved. This lack of action disregards the will of Iowa voters and lawmakers who will not rest until the unborn are protected by law.  

“I believe the pro-life movement is the most important human rights cause of our time. Not only will I continue to fight against the inhumanity of abortion, but I will also remain committed to supporting women in planning for motherhood, promoting fatherhood and parenting, and continuing policies that encourage strong families. These are the most essential building blocks of our society, and they are what will keep the foundation of our state and country strong for generations to come.”  

The governor has issued a Proclamation of Special Session in accordance with Article IV, Section 11, and Article III, Section 2, of the Constitution of the State of Iowa.  

Happy Birthday America!!! Many more!!!

 

Happy Birthday USA . . . How Many More Will There Be?

By Deacon Mike Manno

(The Wanderer) – This week we celebrate the Fourth of July, the anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence. I guess you might say that I’m a patriotic guy: I easily tear-up when a band strikes up America the Beautiful,” and I joined my college ROTC program after landing 344 in the draft lottery — they would have taken candidates with seeing-eye dogs first!

Unfortunately, I wasn’t very much of a soldier; I couldn’t read a map or climb a rope — you know, those kinds of things that soldiers should be able to do well. I did have one accomplishment during my lackluster military career: training as an artillery spotter, the shot I called in actually made a direct hit on the old car body we were circling above.

The instructor in the front seat, a major, turned to me with a big grin on his face, and gave me the thumbs-up. I passed that one. Only problem was the shot didn’t hit the old car I was aiming at. I kept that part to myself; it was my military secret.

But being an undistinguished second lieutenant didn’t curb my enthusiasm for patriotism. I think that goes back to my parents. They both grew up in Philadelphia, and while they brought me to Iowa at eleven weeks, we always took our vacations back “home.” It was there that my dad took me to see Independence Hall, the Liberty Bell, Betsy Ross’ house, and scores of other historical places where the fabric of our nation was first woven.

I stood where Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, Charles Carroll, and fifty-two other brave men pledged to each other “our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor.” I was there, not only physically, but in spirit as well. My life in many respects was a product of what they did there.

But patriotism — at least my version of it — doesn’t end with John Hancock and his colleagues signing their own death warrant. It continues to this day, and in that continuation we take on the American legacy, both the good and the bad. Part of each of us is Valley Forge, Antietam, and Normandy, but it also includes John Brown and Dred Scott, the Japanese internment, and lies and indifference to those who first occupied this land.

You see, we must accept our heritage — both good and bad — as part of our national DNA, much the same as we must accept the physical traits we have inherited from our parents. We don’t come out of the womb perfect: We just have to learn to deal with the negatives given to us by our parents: lactose intolerance, heart problems, deformities, and the list could go on.

Like those who have learned from the shortcomings in their DNA, as a nation we must learn from our past shortcomings. Unfortunately, today all too many folks teach that our nation is only a sum of our collective failures with only little or no reference to that which we have aspired. This, of course, does not tell the whole story of our national identity, much as judging a man only by his flaws. It also ignores the fundamental Christian belief that in fault we can find redemption.

The heart of our national being is the document we celebrate this week, for it contains our shared aspirations: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

And that, in summary, is what we have been doing since those words were written in 1776; striving for perfection, falling short, but continuing to strive. Ultimately what we created was a republic where each individual was empowered to live life on his own terms, free from undue governmental interference, realizing at all times that we were still all part of one national and cultural family where tolerance and responsibility were unwritten rules of the bargain.

We must understand that “American” is not an ethnic identity, such as Italian, or Irish. It is an idea that is not only outlined in the Declaration but in most of our founding documents that compose our American Scripture.

Unfortunately, in these days of disunity we have been driven by those advocating — for very sinister reasons — polar extremes and a lack of tolerance. No longer is our political cleavage driven by fiscal policy and the like but by cultural issues that are deliberately designed to divide us into tribes that are taught to hate those who do not give their wholehearted support to our tribe and its allies. It’s a subtle movement, but I think easy to see for those who have eyes and wish to see.

The general phrase we use is “cancel culture,” but it goes beyond simply shutting down dissenting views; it includes ostracizing those holding nonconforming views from society. It includes claiming that the impossible is possible, that boys can become girls, sex is not immutable but should be viewed as a spectrum, and that science is only settled if it is politically correct.

Children no longer belong to parents, but to the village that raises them, indoctrinated with a politically correct curriculum that brooks no challenge no matter how minor.

The authors of this disunion have found political success in pitting us against one another, cherry picking issues from history to claim that we are a nation of white supremacists and neo-Nazis who have succeeded by holding others in bondage and controlling cultural norms to marginalize them. We are corrupt, founded on slavery, for slavery, and the benefit of the white race.

And the unscrupulous members of our political class have found that by treating us as tribal units they can gain a political advantage. Following right behind are modern Marxists who piggy-back on those same issues to weaken the American system. Everything, including our faith in God as well as our faith in ourselves and our institutions, is under attack behind the argument that things were never really that good here.

Of course, I disagree.

I asked in the headline if there will be more birthdays for the United States. The answer, of course, is yes — there will be plenty of more July Fourths. The real question is what will that America look like? Socialists, Marxists, Communists?

That is up to us. We each have a vote and a voice. Along with a lot of prayer we need to use both — loud and often. Those 56 men who signed the Declaration of Independence knew that if they were not successful they would all be hung as traitors to the Crown. They gambled with their lives to make us independent. We need not risk life or limb to save our nation, but we must be willing to risk something, even if that something is to challenge our own long-held political views.

The challenge today is more subtle than in 1776, but it is no less dangerous. This is America, our land of the free. Let’s not let anyone take it from us.

(You can reach Mike at: DeaconMike@q.com and listen to him every weekend on Faith On Trial or podcast at https://iowacatholicradio.com/faith-on-trial/)