Some Roman Catholic clergy have been in USA media lately, such media just "not having time" to air Papal speeches or cite to his catechism, instead deferring to said clergy who likewise "haven't means" of promoting global Catholic network EWTN (which carried complete Papal speeches, live and in repeated encores)...and a lot of cable systems and newspapers don't include EWTN in listings; so you can wind up with "this clergy said this, that clergy said that".
 
Now, relevant media and clergy sometimes appear to take much poetic license, government funded as they are and often having to abide in some places churchgoers are of interest and elsewhere non-churchgoers, with what "the Pope REALLY said". Again, not a judgment, just fact.
 
In any event, in such "coverage" the Pope does not do the talking. This could create impression, insofar as faithful finding means to watch actual speeches, that they may have heard from the original Apostles other than really happened or was said ab initio (by extension, so to all religions)...e.g., for being such a miracle worker and sage, some suggest, Christ sure seems illiterate and perhaps made up, meaning moral authority cannot come Him or any laws enacted by those who believed (even if accomplished laws enacted trump thereto prior contemplations).
 
Suppose, however, that not unlike Benedict XVI, Christ was more the doer/talker type rather than a journalist; then suppose that ala EWTN and Beendict, the Apostles faithfully recorded Christ's words and deeds, with some clergy/media of the time ala the Apochrypha deemed widely to be too self-serving to be of value.
 
Just like Benedict and EWTN, Christ easily could have existed and been truly recorded in His day...despite self-interested detractors of yore. Similarly, look how we believe 232 years ago John Hancock faithfully recorded what England had done to the Colonies, yet we have no direct and timely non-print witness today...relying on folks who had faith in Providence, no less.
 
But that Declaration of Independence later brought forth a separation of Church and State; for the religiously challenged, prior to George III of England, the monarch was both ruler and head of the Church of England; our Founding Fathers appear to just have wanted to be clear whereas religion deserves protection, no GOVERNMENT official(s) should have ex officio influence over or by ANY single religion or combination(s) thereof, and note none of our Founding Fathers ever expressed wish for government funding of any faith(s) despite general respect for Providence itself. (Providence is olde tyme for "heaven".)
 
The USA being also a Republic but a democratically elected one with design a priori officials offer best ways to sanely accomplish betterments a relevant electorate wants, I respectfully submit that it would not be un-American for Congress to seek guidance of Providence if so moved...rather than of any Pope, Imam, Rabbi, or other religious party...and in any event strive to avoid promising far more than could be delivered even if all persons acted to the letter of proposed legislations or budgets.
 
Sidebar re Christians as morons: some also wish to defeat Western if not all religion on grounds early Christian Church prophecy of the Book of Revelations HAS to be purely dreamt up to make speakers thereof princes over us, based on "it hasn't happened YET, has it?". Well, in 1967 famed Roman Catholic William F. Buckley Jr. wrote essays prophesying that giving in to then modernists saying Latin Masses were "too elitist", and no longer requiring knowledge or use of Latin by the diverse laity, would give rise to impression that only slackjawed yokels were interested in Christianity; he was laughed at as "preserving Catholic elitism" against all other faiths, then lo! Earlier this month, Bill Maher said Catholics are possessed of no greater intellects than Nazi hitmen, and Senator Obama opined Christians are largely slackjawed yokels "clinging" to faith in hopes of avoiding "humanly unavoidable" events known only to Obama. It took 41 years for Buckley's prophecy to be proven true; what would a mere 2,000 or more years be for something as epic as the Book Of Revelations? Maybe those lawyers, doctors, and other Founding Fathers weren't so slackjawed themselves.
 

Back about 1976, there arose this amorphous effort in Europe and the USA which represents broadly that if said lands would just "know their places" respectively and collectively, as well as downplay or rid themselves of their Christian faiths, a smorgasbord of liberty, mass opportunities for growth, and security would be theirs for all time; the same geezers today banging such drums were at the forefront, and since have brought in new blood to their ranks (e.g., Barack Obama). Gosh, at so many levels, that seems to be baloney, big-time.
 
But that doesn't stop the current malarkey about USA religion: "hey, want State faith based? Teach and enforce only this mot du jour, it helps national security or whatever's topical at the moment, and anybody not going to Church is of interest and will be watched generally as potential Laden-like fundamentalists...duhhhh, yeah, even if it's Byzantine Christianity the Muslim world terrorists have always hated, and we're tearing down Western faiths to install Byzantines while deconstructing borders and defense forces. Come on! Buddy boy Bill Maher just called the Roman Catholics a child abuse club and Nazis again, and we can USE that...yeeaarrrrrggghhhhh!!!!".
 
Now, it has never and does not now matter(ed) to me WHAT anyone on earth wants to have or not have in re religious beliefs; Roman Catholicism has always worked for me, I'll offer anyone interested info on it, and don't get flustered because someone says "no". I don't care if someone would rather blow their nose on the concept of God, believe God is that catty coolster in the candle-adorned mirror, or prefers to practice from a litany of humanly known faiths. But these days, so many are so ready to keep State education and faith funds coming that they'll even expel an innocent kindergartner for having a "Jesus Loves You" pencil; at the same time, I understand I'm simply not at innocent liberty to simply say "no" to my archdiocese re attendance if the Host is "adored" in a can and the archdiocese will support teaching homosexuality as an alternate lifestyle (even DEMOCRATS know that's not true) to be explored by youth while otherwise collectivizing Hispanics, other immigrants, and nationals...to some, "zat iss very interesting", and I don't mean to Benedict XVI.
 
And there's spin saying how can you be FOR Benedict XVI yet not want aimless, economy-destroying mass immigration that only weakens remaindermen in countries of origin...as if to say BENEDICT is behind such mass immigration, unless Bill Maher infers otherwise.   
 
Wherefore, all I wish to conclude re my observations of religion and politics for 2008 is that especially given such within aforesaid palavers, I worry what other leaders will say about government money going into USA religion to effect government agendas; I cite homegrown example PFAW saying the other month government faith money pushes agendas, and homegrown example Pelosi re China being such an intermeddler with religion...both homegrowns pushing their own buttons, unlike say China not yet connected to a "red" button.
 
Other than that, I think government money should be better spent on defense, education and economic diplomacy rather than faith funding as shinola for something unrelated apparently not working very well. As it is, about all we get otherwise are admonitions to fear a litany of everday "possible harms" from pre-school to going for a walk or seeing a mosquito, with going green played as financially secure progress rather than making do with reducing options as all status quos rapidly deepen.

Per a Congress.org PSA link to me today, it is represented Senatord Durbin (D-IL) wants a cap on H1-b visas until employers fill jobs with nationals and immigrants already here.

The problem is, Senator Durbin in all other legislation opposes ENFORCEMENT, enforcement funding, or both, to ensure that can happen; also, here within his own Illinois, it appears the politically orthodox economy is full speed ahead on new urban immigrant and handpicked "needy nationals", just as strong as ever with not much else on the current drawing board including preserving or adding to NUMBER of existant commercial and ethanol/agricultural edifices, in fact shrinking them ...which of course requires the same old same olds, and last I looked neither Bush nor the GOP were in charge of Illinois State-distributed funds; also, where will all the credito come from for these ever-growing folks you "can't compassionately turn away from housing or healthcare"...even if that's all you expect any nationals or immigrants will need, despite chances of repaying "kindnesses".

The United States recently was reported as now having the highest number of inmates in its entire history; that certainly is not a prideful boast, and occurs amid not a whit of HOW anybody already here can turn that around, nor do some officials think asking them to be allowed to "is healthy" or otherwise their responsibility...for example, in Chicago and many other towns, how binding, if even allowed, is any nature of citicen's advisory re TIFD's and such? Too often, the variances between advisories, sometimes even houses of faith, and officials is settled via eminent domain.

Wherefore, the Durbin proposal seems aimed more at garnering racist votes in that all it does is say "no more immigrants!" period...yet with all funding for enforcement opposed by Durbin, and his Illinois orthodoxy set on more a nature of expanding its status quos, in burning candles to the middle from both ends Durbin offers immigrants little as "accomplishments" in their regard.

I respectfully submit that slowing the pace of immigration for the purposes it effects despite vocalizations of intents seems necessary, and that Congress consider what other nations looking at the USA as a "dump for surplus folks" are doing in their own lands and if that will build export potential for any goods we might ideate; also, would acting like those nations be likely to increase USA dreams and help it keep other democracies and peaceable peoples inching ever upward?

My local parish is a Roman Catholic parish situated within the archdiocese of Chicago, which takes in ALL Cook and Lake Counties of Illinois; Illinois has a completely Democrat legislature and Executive branch, and is represented in the U.S. Senate by Democrat Senators Durbin and Obama.
 
Earlier this year, January 23, 2008 to be precise, it appears my parish mailed my wife and to me a single "welcome" note, with chastisement represented that although married civilly by a Judge 20 years ago to preserve my Roman Catholic faith and my wife's Lutheran faith, rules apply which will keep us out of actual "membership" until such time as my wife converts to Catholicism, although we would be free to otherwise attend and volunteer; that same time, my parish requested Insta-Sets in Ohio to send us temporary donation envelopes, although ordering only half the envelopes they could have for the same one dollar cost; we've never received any since of any nature, nor has my parish ever reached to us in any way(s) since; shortly thereafter, I discovered that some in politics appeared to be jockeying to say that if you did not attend ANY faith's Church clergy at which reject the tenets of the Vatican catechism, and also add homosexual conduct to acceptable social units, you may be "of interest" under looming Democrat HR 1955 say-so homegrown terrorist fundamentalism. So even if you went, as long as say my parish says "no, you don't", well...and it's only coincidental the archdiocese clergy, Cardinal objections or not, teach, give up interest in education to allow teaching, and otherwise do this amid Illinois giving them public funds for administering parish activities in communities.
 
Now, at that time I was also informed that no matter how other parishioners appeared or talked, I was THE only one interested in Vatican catechism on social justice...see, as reports for each week's collections show in each bulletin, every week the Church meets or exceeds its weekly budget in collections from parishioners...most are just "slumming". Well, if that were the case, again, why would they NEED State funds at all? Yet, through St. Vincent DePaul, Catholic Charities, and such parishioners "don't need", immigrants are collectivized apart from others and ministered to as if dealing with State welfare and immigration contracted officers, and all the parish asks is for its staff to have luncheons and anything else paid for.
 
Immediately following Easter, I notified my parish and others of my impression Vatican catechism items 1550, 2089, 2120, and 2357 were therein being discarded, that more than once I had noted it to the Church, and thus per New Testament 16 Romans 17, II Timothy 3:4-5, and Titus 3:10 I would no longer provide my presence or funds to my parish or any part of its archdiocese; I have not since nor has my Lutheran wife, and we thought that was the end of it until one day I can attend another archdiocese; I have EWTN in meantime, as well as Vatican and Bishopric faith study materials.
 
Yesterday someone showed me online that my parish, for the April 13, 2008, bulletin, printed "Mr. and Mrs. (my name)" as new members; CLTV on local cable today represented Obama as recently having said anyone going to Church clings to faith as they're bitter over direction of the domestic USA...so now if a Church says I AM a member I'm some little "bum" unlike other parishioners who "hates immigrants", something like that? Does that extend, say, to those in public office, even those in the United Church Of Christ?
 
So the archdiocese, ipse dixit, needs NO State funding of any kind, as their parishoners' contributions without it will prove where they stand on gay activity and all other things, and avoid looking like they politic for Obama and related whether or not parishioners agree or even know. Oh, and my parish remains in lockstep with the rest in the archdiocese in not mentioning that EWTN or the Papal Visit exist.
 
I would suggest that beyond my own self, the bigger idea HAS to be that per Carter inter alia foreign Islamic terror is unbeatable and thus must be negotiated with...worked for Carter and the world in and since 1979, eh? Then, Democrats through Obama types can set up that only scum likes the Vatican catechism, and by leaving the Mid East to terrorists of course they'll act up, they being fundamentalists or unemployed, so by parallel inference to "prevent homegrown" you just pick up anyone in the USA who simply is unemployed or even waves at some Pope or similar clergy. Progress, dignity, security...yeeeaaarrrrrgggghhhh!!! Hmm...still seems to need work on the rough edges prior to Conventions, readers on the Left.
 
Speaking for myself on faith, I was baptised at birth as a Roman Catholic in 1960; I was therein confirmed 1973; I follow with all my heart The Vatican's version of everything. One of a number of them, my RC faith was started 2,008 years ago, and has transcended oh so many good and bad times, this and that ideologies...all with the same sort of devotion to God as now expressed by Pope Benedict XVI; I have so conducted my life no matter what era, what age, what economics...national or personal. And I shall continue to pray for each and every one of us on this planet, as I continue to live by the Vatican Catechism of the Catholic Church on behalf of all our goods together.
 

I use the title in its sarcastic sense, since annually our Boy Governor Rod Blagojevich (D-IL) and folks like Durbin and Obama and like-minded cronies around the USA always have the same old levees, floodplains, couple of purposely unshoveled snows, yadda, yadda, yadda, to create the "new" fill-in-the-blank weathermergency, from which...yes, AGAIN...they're going to slam Bush and demand mucho bucks to "recover".
 
Today, believe it or not, the Des Plaines River in Illinois is again nearing flood stage (less dramatically than when it just receded after flooding slightly after snowmelt); this means it could go a foot or so over by the weekend. Seizing the dramatic opportunity of say the Weather Channel reporting on ANYTHING other than dull rote forecasts, it appears the Warren Township High School and grade school have let their students out early to save "the chillllllddddddrrrrreeeennnnnn!!!!!!!!!!!!!" from a watery scourge of God, likely of POSSIBLE proportions it would drive Noah to drink.
 
Mercy stars, sure is a brave, pro-active he-manly anti-Bush-like defender of Illinois there, and he loves children struggling, fretting parents, blocked roadways...oh lawdy, massa Bush, kin yo' bwah Blago have some floodmergency megabucks which he can use to recover and prevent recurrances in this election year?
 
Aw, wait a minute! Those kids are sashaying, not running, in the "magnum rain", and most are piling into the half-block away Warren-Newport library; most have no parents in a rush to come get them, nothing new; roads aren't closed or traffic distressed; no mass or ANY sandbagging going on; nothing but dramatics and "pro-active non-Bush-like closures" as moods take...and no calls to once and for all or AT ALL evacuate those allowed to constantly live right by this constant flooder of usually never more than 9 feet at crest.
 
Oh, Blago and say Louisiana Democrats are non-Bush-like, to be sure; Bush gets that moolah to 'em every time, and every time it disappears, more new urban immigrant housing goes up, and all that's taken away are jobs and agriculture...and yep, not one singleton seems to be spent on say levees or diversion of the Des Plaines River or relocating floodplain dwellers...guess SOME nationals have to stay, 'cause they pull in big easy Federal dollars in lieu of say tax uncollected due to lack of anyone else with income sufficient.
 
Same old same old, no matter how many eons and Presidents come and go; blame infinite strawmen as "the voices" you hear "making" you do or not do something popular; the usual non-responsible attitude, never having a single idea or care to have such ideas, for those who believe the USA is more an abstract form sending State lawyers to tend its abstract health, as if voters were therein just clients to control, discipline, and have someone get a settlement for them, of course lawyer-legislator-social physicians deserving of lofty pay to assure "only the best will be called for office".
 
This is why I continue to support President Bush re Iraq and national security and diplomacy; and why I will support Conservative candidates for 2008 generals. Perhaps Democrats and Independents and some GOP will evolve a post-Convention display of a program for at least stopping things ongoing, unpopular, but "sigh...infinite strawmen are responsible, so why fix the tools used to effectuate the words of any...after all, that's only done for government-backed religions, where the job IS to change the Word employed by God to include that political representation isn't direct, thus you're judgmental if talk up or back simple".
 

 

Disregarding Ex Corde Ecclesiae, many Catholic institutions of higher learning, including your own, allow and in some cases even recognize "pro-homosexual" clubs and/or activities.

 

In varying degrees of intensity, such groups and activities participate in the homosexual movement's open and radical challenge to 2,000 years of Catholic moral teaching. The movement's subversive agenda endangers the souls of students who have a right to study on a Catholic campus without being subjected to organized efforts to promote unnatural vice.

 

I therefore join TFP Student Action in respectfully urging you to discontinue authorizing or recognizing any pro-homosexual group and/or activities on your campus. Your clear and forceful steps in this matter are necessary to avert further scandal.  I strongly believe this agenda must be denounced and opposed, not assisted.