Interesting. Though I'll let others work out the further practical implications.

"Connecticut High Court Permits Gay Marriage"

"The 4-3 ruling is the first time that a state that had willingly offered an alternative to marriage was told by a court that civil unions aren't enough to protect the rights of gay couples."

"Study Shows Quarter of Oregonians Requesting Assisted Suicide Are Depressed"

Go figure.

"PET Scans Show Patients in Minimally Conscious State Feel Pain"

And, note this: "The distinction drawn between patients supposedly in a minimally conscious state (MCS) and those said to be in a persistent vegetative state (PVS) is nowhere near as clear cut and easy to parse as the article that appeared in places like MedPage Today suggests."

"Method doesn’t use viruses to reprogram cells"

Article includes the usual blah-blah about how this doesn't mean we don't need to keep killing embryonic human beings for their cells.

In our Mass readings this Sunday, we hear heaven likened to a wedding feast. From the prophet Isaiah, we learn that this feast will be fully satisfying. There will be the best of food and drink; there will life and happiness. At this feast, we will acclaim God as our Savior. And from Jesus' parable, we learn that are only options are this feast or eternal death. We also learn that this is a wedding feast, the wedding feast of the Son, and that we must arrive prepared. What does this mean?

Some further light on the parable is shed by the many biblical texts that refer to God as Bridegroom and his chosen people as Bride. In the New Testament, it is especially the Son who is the Bridegroom. In light of these texts, we can understand more fully what sort of wedding it is to which we are invited. It is none other than the wedding of Christ and the Church. Furthermore, although this particular parable refers to "guests," we should note that, in fact, there are no mere "guests" at the wedding of Christ and the Church, the eternal wedding that is heaven. All men and women who go to heaven will be there as members of the Bride.

This, in turn, helps us to understand what it means to arrive at this wedding in the proper garment. I have heard once or twice that part of the point of Jesus' parable is that such garments were customarily provided to guests, and therefore that the man who arrived not wearing one had no excuse. This point is underscored by one of the other New Testament texts about the wedding of Christ and the Church, from the book of Revelation. Remember again that the "guests" at the wedding are also - and even more so - the Bride. Thus, the garment of the guests is also the garment of the Bride. Then, note these words from Revelation: "The wedding day of the Lamb has come, his Bride has made herself ready. She was allowed to wear a bright, clean linen garment. The linen represents the righteous deeds of the holy ones."

When we consider the words "allowed to wear," and when we recognize that our "righteous deeds" must be attributed to God's grace, we must conclude that, indeed, God provides us with the garment that we must wear in order to be prepared for the wedding feast to which we are called as members of the Bride. At the same time, of course, we must freely cooperate with God's grace if we want to be admitted to the feast rather than cast down to hell.

The number of ways in which we must cooperate with grace in performing righteous deeds is equal to the number of kinds of righteous deeds that we might be expected to perform in the circumstances of our lives. But I would like to draw from our second reading, from St. Paul's letter to the Philippians, to mention one general type of righteous deed. Paul sincerely thanks the Philippians for their sacrificial care for him in his material need. But he first explains to them: "I know how to live in humble circumstances; I know also how to live with abundance. ..." Only then does he add: "Still, it was kind of you to share in my distress." What is the meaning of his initial words of explanation?

Of course, Paul is saying, for one thing, that he can cope with material deprivation, because he needs only - and has - Christ. But, interestingly, he also writes that he knows how to live with abundance, and has learned the secret of being well fed, of living in abundance. One might think that there is little to know or learn about how to live with all that one needs. Perhaps the Philippians think that they need to be concerned for Paul's situation only because of his poverty. But Paul reminds us that, just as we do not know intuitively how to live in poverty, so we do not know intuitively how to live in wealth. We need to learn, from the Gospel, how to handle wealth.

We need to learn that, just as Christ is our "glorious riches" even in times of poverty, so Christ is the only riches that matter even in times of wealth. We cannot buy our own wedding garments; we must receive and cooperate with Christ's offer to us of the only acceptable ones. We must use such riches as we have in a way that cooperates with God's offer to us of righteousness, love, and holiness. We must use our material riches for generous service to others - and never exploit or even ignore others to gain or keep our riches. This is perhaps worth underscoring as we consider current events. Not all, but some, of the actions that have led to bank failures and financial losses and economic turmoil were actions at odds with the message of the Gospel. We ought to remember in this connection the words that Jesus speaks earlier in the Gospel about how hard it is for a rich man to enter heaven.

May God grant us, then, so to live in this world - especially, so to develop our attitudes toward, and actions regarding, material wealth - as to be fully prepared for the wedding feast that is heaven.

AP article. It includes the inevitable disclaimers that this doesn't mean we shouldn't continue to pursue embryo-destructive stem-cell research too. Of course, the more alternatives we have, the less convincing these disclaimers are - even from a purely scientific standpoint. And I may have said this before, but I'll say it again: How come articles that focus on the hopes and successes of embryo-destructive stem-cell research never include disclaimers to the effect that we need to keep pursuing the alternatives too?

"As term opens, court declines to take four abortion-related cases"

It would have been nice if the appeals court ruling in the Arizona case had become nationwide precedent.

And it would have been nice if the rulings in the Missouri and New Jersey cases had been overturned.

The Court will hear a case if four of the nine justices want to do so, I think. Apparently, at least one of the four justices who are either on record as opposing Roe and Casey and similar decisions, or who have given us some reason to hope that they oppose the current abortion regime - Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito - was unwilling to hear these cases.

I'd like to know why not. Maybe they, with reason, thought that the pro-life side would inevitably lose. Maybe they had other, less defensible reasons.

"Rap Music Offender Sentenced to 20 Hours of Bach, Beethoven"

Also, I'd have added Mozart.

has been posted!

A reader emails:

I thought that you might like to post this prayer which was published by the Vatican for the success of the 12th Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops.

Thank you.

Lord Jesus Christ, whom the Father has commanded us to listen as his beloved Son, shed your light upon your Church, so that she might have nothing more holy than to listen to your voice and follow you. You are the Supreme Shepherd and Ruler of Souls. Look then upon the Pastors of your Church gathered in these days with the Successor of St. Peter in synod assembly. We implore you to sanctify them in truth and confirm them in faith and love.

Lord Jesus Christ, send forth your Spirit of love and truth on the bishops in synod and on all who assist them in fulfilling their task. Make them more faithful to what the Spirit is saying to the Churches; stir their souls and teach them truth by that same Holy Spirit. Through their work, may the faithful of their Churches be purified and strengthened in spirit, so that they might greater follow the Gospel through which you accomplished salvation and they might make of themselves a living offering to the heavenly Father.

May Mary, the Most Holy Mother of God and Mother of the Church, assist the Bishops in these days, as she assisted the Apostles in the Upper Room, and intercede with motherly affection to foster brotherly communion among them, to allow them to rejoice in prosperity and peace in the calmness of these days, and, in reading the signs of the times, to celebrate the majesty of the merciful God, the Lord of History, to the praise and glory of the Most Blessed Trinity, Father Son and Holy Spirit. Amen.

Read on: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/09/080930144218.htm

One of our trustees has resigned after saying that we've permanently lost the abortion battle, and endorsing Obama.

Okay, my head is hurtin' from too much thinking about serious (therapy) and frustrating (election) stuff, so I'm posting something really light ... personal lego sculptures for the bargain price of $60,000 (now don't everyone rush at once!)

Kevin, this would make quite the wedding gift for your beloved!  Nothing says "Love" like "Lego".

Here's the article: http://gizmodo.com/5060455/buy-a-lego-life+size-replica-of-yourself-for-60000

Nearly three in four teenagers say they were bullied online at least once during a recent 12-month period, and only one in 10 reported such cyber-bullying to parents or other adults, according to a new study by UCLA psychologists.  MORE

Online aggression is a rising problem.  FOr concerned parents, I really encourage you to check out www.WebWiseKids.org for some wonderful resources on raising cyber-responsible kids.

Pope sends message to international congress commemorating 40th anniversary of Paul VI's encyclical.

Of course, the reiteration of the Church's teaching regarding the evil of contraception is noteworthy. Also noteworthy, I think, is the reiteration of the Church's teaching about the genuinely positive value of NFP. Unfortunately, there's been some dissent from this teaching from the "Catholic right" - though of course not nearly as much as there's been dissent from the teaching on contraception from the "left."

By the NRLC's Doug Johnson. Have a look. Don't vote for Obama. Instead, do all you can to keep him from winning - i.e., vote McCain.

Beware of what you say to kids.

When a parent says, "We can't afford to eat that," sometimes kids magnify that statement and imagine: "We can't afford to eat!" Instead, tell them that the family needs to cut back on expenses and will be pickier about what you buy.

Put a positive spin on a bad situation by encouraging the family to work together to cut costs.

"It can be something that pulls a family together if they do it wisely," says Dr. Marci Alessi, a psychologist in Winter Park, Fla. "The key is not to alarm kids, but to say, 'We need everyone's help.'"

If you're worried about losing the house or having to move out of state for another job, keep it to yourself until you're sure the move is coming. "It's important for parents to insulate their kids from the severity of it until it becomes definite," Alessi said. "Then you can tell them we're definitely moving out. We have to find a smaller house."

But she urges parents to remain calm - because it will help the children cope with the change too.

Show kids that they can help, which will give them a feeling of control.

For instance, encourage the kids to look for ways to save money - by borrowing DVDs from the public library instead of renting them, or saving electricity by turning out lights. Encourage them to think about how much money your family saves when you eat at home instead of eating out.  MORE

The important thing, from my perspective, is not to pretend nothing is wrong or lie to the kids.  They KNOW that there are problems, and moms and dads don't do kids any favors when they pretend everything is wonderful when the wolf is at the door.  When parents adopt this approach, they often become irritable and kids become alienated from mom and dad because mom and dad seem inexplicably stressed and angry.  At the very moment a family should be coming together, they start drifting apart because of the well-intentioned lies mom and dad are telling.  Be honest and prepare your kids--sensitively--for the truth.  Help them discover how they can be part of the answer, however small.

She's offering a new reason every day until the election.

Good for her. I hope that Seattleites (and others in the state) pay attention, and vote accordingly.

AP story. "The judges said the proposal would limit their ability to choose the best home environment for children."

That shows, I think, that they don't have a clue as to what constitutes a minimally acceptable home environment for kids. It also shows why this measure is (not unlike the CA marriage vote) so important.

Apparently it has been discovered that Coca-Cola kills sperm buy making them explode (if they are swimming in the Coke that is).  The reported motivation behind the study was that women were thinking that Coke killed sperm so they were actually using it as a contraceptive aide and as a way to protect themselves from the AIDS virus.  Yet another example of society's distorted contraceptive mentality.

Here's the article: http://www.reuters.com/article/scienceNews/idUSTRE49200220081003?rpc=64

Interesting WS article: "Notes from the Nanny State: On the tyranny of the baby seat."

As someone who thinks that conservative complaints about the "nanny state" sometimes go too far - as someone who, for example, doesn't have a big problem with seat-belt laws (at least those laws that make failure to wear a belt only a secondary offense, i.e., one for which one can be ticketed only after being stopped for another offense) - I nonetheless suspect that at least some of the child-seat laws I've heard about also go further than is really warranted.

First, this (via Maggie Gallagher) is good news: "CBS 5 Poll: Young Voters Lead Prop 8 Support Shift"

Second, this (via J-Ro-Mo) seems very important: "Legalizing Same-Sex Marriage Will Increase Prevalence of Homosexuality: Research Provides Significant Evidence"

Third, thanks to a reader for word of this video, which offers another perspective on why we need to preserve marriage:

Fourth, have a look at this WS article also: "R-e-s-p-e-c-t: The next stage in litigating same-sex marriage."

Important info about this topic - talks about how the experience of 18th century nuns helped improve our understanding of how pregnancy and lactation help prevent breast cancer.

Evidence for the protective effect of having children and breastfeeding has accumulated in the years since. In the 1920s, British doctor Janet Lane-Claypon's pioneering epidemiological survey for the Ministry of Health demonstrated that breast cancer was linked to a woman's number of children, lactation, and age at first pregnancy and menopause.

There have been debates over which of these factors is more important, but the size of the Million Women study, led by Valerie Beral from the clinical epidemiology unit at Oxford University, has made its results fairly conclusive. Beral yesterday challenged the medical industry to turn its attention to preventing the disease.

The Million Women study found having a first baby at a young age is protective, as is late onset of puberty and early menopause. Taller and heavier women are at greater risk. But the biggest protective factors are the number of children and years of breastfeeding. A woman has a 7% decreased risk of breast cancer per birth and her risk drops by a further 4% for every year of breastfeeding.

More...

Dear Friend of the Unborn,
 
I am delighted to announce that our UN Petition for the Unborn Child has topped 15,000 signatures in ONE WEEK! 
    
I am also proud to say that people have taken it upon themselves to translate the petition into French and Spanish. German is coming. So is Portuguese.
 
This petition is rocketing around the world for one reason. Folks want to strike a blow for the unborn child at the UN. For years, UN radicals have used UN forums and UN documents to take the human right to life away from defenseless unborn children. Their latest trick is to say that “right to life” language in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights now means a right to abortion. They claim a right to abortion now exists in all international human rights treaties!
 
This December 10th is Human Rights Day and is the 60th Anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This will be a very big deal at UN headquarters in New York. The opponents of the unborn child will be out in force. We expect they will present petitions to the General Assembly asking for an EXPLICIT RIGHT TO ABORTION. Those agitating for this are the largest, richest and deadliest abortion groups in the world: International Planned Parenthood Federation and Marie Stopes International.
 
We do not know how many names they will submit on December 10th, but I do know that we, defenders of God’s precious infants, must answer them with names of our own. Can we get 50,000? 100,000? More? We sure could if you get this petition to EVERYONE YOU KNOW. 
 
Go HERE and sign the petition and send it rocketing all over the world.
 
I cannot say exactly when and where we will present these petitions because the enemies of life read my messages closely, but we will present them at UN headquarters on December 10th and it will make a big splash.
 
Help us and help the unborn child by signing the petition HERE and by sending this note or your own note to everyone you know.
 
Act now.
 
Yours sincerely,
 
Austin Ruse
President
C-FAM

Matt and I had a whirlwind visit to Ohio this weekend.  Taking advantage of Franciscan U.'s All-Campus Reunion and Homecoming we headed back to Steubenville for quick visit.  We arrived on Saturday afternoon and left on Sunday afternoon but it was worth it.

Not just the good food and fellowship with Greg, Lisa and family but the walk around the festival on campus and the drive around town.  We showed our kids were we first met - the bench up on the hill behind the JC William's Center.  They saw our dorms - Francis and Marian.  We met with other friends (whose children attend the school) and watched some soccer and just had a good time.

Yes, we spent a good deal of time saying "It wasn't anything like this WHEN we were here!!"  And yes, we embarrassed ourselves and our children with our stories of walking on the cliffs, eating lunch together and falling in love.

At one point driving to and from someplace over the weekend, I leaned over to Matt and said, "Thank you for coming here and thank you for marrying me!"  He said the same back to me.  Charlotte then piped up - "Thanks Mom and Dad for marrying each other and making us.  We've got a good thing!"

Yes, we do.  Our kids think our story is funny and weird in the way adult things are to young kids but they also think it is cool.  They all laughed at our early days and our stories but it was good laughter. 

Make sure your kids know your love story.  After all, someday they will be writing their own and you should give them a good head start by having a great one yourself.

It can be  a tough line to draw.  Basically, if you have to ask the question, it might be worth getting checked out.  Here's a great article on the subject.

Imagine this scenario. Your seven-year old son is riding his bike, and takes a nasty fall. He has a gash on his knee that looks pretty bad, but you get out your first-aid kit, clean the wound, put a little iodine on it, and cover it with a sterile gauze pad.

Two days later, your son complains that his knee hurts a lot and that he “feels crummy.” He didn’t sleep well the night before, and his face seems a little flushed. You remove the gauze pad and notice that his knee is red and swollen, and there is a foul-looking, greenish liquid oozing out of the wound. You get that sinking, “Uh-oh!” feeling, and decide you had better have your family doctor take a look at the knee.

As you are about to drive off, your friendly neighbor buttonholes you and asks where you are going. You explain the whole situation to him. He looks at you like you are from Mars, and says, “Are you nuts? You want this kid to grow up to be a wimp? He is supposed to be in pain! Pain is a normal part of life! We all have to learn how to live with pain. Redness and swelling are normal, after you bang up your knee! Let the kid heal up naturally! The doctor is just going to put him on some damn antibiotic, and you know the kind of side effects those drugs have. Those doctors, you know, they just make money on all those prescriptions!”

Would you feel that your well-intentioned neighbor was giving you good advice? I very much doubt it. Well, it’s the kind of advice some well-meaning but misinformed individuals give, when dealing with the issue of severe grief and depression.  MORE

Our Mass readings this Sunday include two texts, from the prophecy of Isaiah and from the Gospel according to St. Matthew, that refer to the Lord's desire to obtain fruit from his vineyard, his chosen people, and his response when he does not obtain this fruit. The metaphors in these passages are somewhat different - in Isaiah, the people are the vineyard itself, and especially the plants; in Jesus' parable, the people are the tenant workers in the vineyard - but the point in both texts seems to be the same. And we know that God did deal with his people as he said. First, about a century and a half after Isaiah, God allowed Judah to be destroyed, and its people carried off into exile, by the Babylonians. (Perhaps our responsorial psalm refers to this.) The exile lasted only decades; then the people were allowed to return and rebuild. But, second, a few centuries later, and decades after Jesus Christ's death and resurrection, Jerusalem was destroyed again, this time by the Roman Empire. Its temple has never been rebuilt.

God's message about his vineyard does not, however, serve for us only to illumine these past events. We know that God has not definitively abandoned his original chosen people. St. Paul writes to the Romans about the eventual faith and restoration of the original Israel. And we know also that our eternal salvation is not yet certain. Paul likewise warns us about this. Put differently, as he says earlier in the same letter (in the words chosen by our Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI, as the beginning of his most recent encyclical): "In hope we were saved." He writes still earlier: "Hope does not disappoint." But as we are not to despair, so we are not to claim certainty of salvation.

In this light, we turn to our second reading, from St. Paul's letter to the Philippians. Paul instructs us, first, "Have no anxiety at all." Most of us find ourselves in situations that can easily provoke anxiety or "stress" - which can in turn be an obstacle to our growth in holiness and love, our spiritual fruitfulness. Paul is making a strong statement here: "Have no anxiety at all" - none at all. Humanly, this may not be possible. But Paul tells us that we must, "in everything, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, make [our] requests known to God." "Then," he continues, "the peace of God ... will guard [our] hearts and minds." We must trust God, then entrust ourselves to, and cooperate with, his plan for our perfect happiness. This cooperation with him will then involve acting in peace. Paul's words, "with thanksgiving," are perhaps significant here. We are to remember above all God's superabundant goodness to us, in the death and resurrection of Christ. Our recognition and appreciation of and thanksgiving for God's perfect love is to be the context for our petitions and requests. This will help us to know God's peace in our needs and in his response to those needs.

Second, Paul exhorts us to think about "whatever is true, whatever is honorable, ..." This is to say, we are to think about whatever authentically contains or reflects God's goodness. This will enable us, in turn, to be thankful and peaceful. Furthermore, it will enable us to do what is true and honorable and so on - what is good and loving and holy; what is fruitful.

This is not to say that we are to build an impenetrable wall between ourselves - as individuals or together as the Church - and the world. But - to go back to the image of the vineyard - there is to be at least a "hedge" between ourselves and the world. And without simply turning our backs on the world, we are to turn to God and one another and what is good.

I cannot help but think in this connection of another kind of food crop: corn (I have thought about corn recently in another connection: sadly, the cooler temperatures and shorter days and colored leaves of early autumn also mean the end of fresh corn on the cob for the year). I learned as a child that if one wants to produce corn, one really needs to plant more than a few stalks, more than a very small patch. Otherwise, the necessary cross-pollination will not occur. If this does not occur, one will get corn, but only one ear per stalk - not much produce. Similarly, one might say, we need the "cross-pollination" of our spirits that comes with interaction with God and with holy people and with examples of truth and goodness and beauty, if we are going to bear the abundant fruit that God wants.

As a final note, this is, as I have mentioned, Respect Life Sunday. As a culture, we have badly failed to bear fruit for God. We are a "culture of death" that badly needs to be transformed into a "culture of life and love." This makes the warnings and exhortations that we find in our readings all that much more relevant and important.

By God's grace, then, may we so live as to bring forth the fruit that he asks of us, and so find the perfection and happiness that he offers us.

The story. The prohibition is actually against foster-parenting by unmarried, cohabitating couples, and the point of controversy is that it thereby bars foster-parenting by same-sex couples. It seems to me that such couples' homes are, by definition, not the right place for kids. And that the solution to the problem of the lack of good foster homes is to find and/or create more good foster homes, not to call bad ones "good."

A reader writes:

A California friend emailed this to me asking for thoughts.

"Proposition 4 is a proposed amendment to the California Constitution that would prohibit abortions for an unemancipated minor until 48 hours after the physician notifies the parents or legal guardian."

I wish it would stop after "prohibit abortions." Is this dealing with the devil? Any comments?

I want to prohibit abortions (period) too, of course, but I think one should vote "yes" on this (and generally support parental-notification and -consent laws). Prohibiting abortions is impossible at the moment - even South Dakota voters turned down prohibition, and even if a state voted for it, the Supreme Court wouldn't allow it. So, we have to take into account the teaching of Pope John Paul II that we can support laws that would limit the harm caused by generally pro-abortion ones, and that in politics we ought "to make those choices which, taking into account what is realistically attainable, will lead to the re-establishment of a just order in the defense and promotion of the value of life." And as I've noted before, pointing out especially some important work on this topic by a political scientist, we have good reason to think that laws like parental-notification ones do in fact have this effect, perhaps even more so than pro-lifers initially expected. Here are some further reflections, by a political scientist and philosopher who's a friend of mine, on the moral issues involved in these kinds of "compromises" with legal abortion.

This might be the misleading headline of the century.

And if you go to the web page for the event and click on the link for the background booklet ("The Issue of Marriage in America"), you'll find stuff that's more subtly misleading, but misleading nonetheless, I'd say (and probably more effective at misleading readers for being less obviously irrelevant or flat-out wrong).

Just one example: the third full paragraph on p. 13, which begins: "What has come to be known as the ‘culture wars’ emerged in the 1990s as social liberals responded to social conservatives."

Uh, hadn't socons themselves been "responding" to what liberals had already been doing?

This narrative, I think - I'm talking about the booklet as a whole, as well as specific passages like the one I quoted - stacks the deck in favor of the view that recognizing same-sex "marriage" would be most consistent with how marriage has, historically, been understood by everyone except for a few abberant and narrow-minded meddlers.