I've just emerged from the silence of my annual 8-day silent retreat and am catching up on Mirror of Justice posts and piles of e-mail. One of my e-mails brought to my attention the "Platform for the Common Good that was recently approved at a convention of 800 Catholics in Philadelphia. The platform seeks to bring to the attention of candidates and voters the importance of, and to highlight Catholic Social Teaching on, the promotion of the common good. The platform is available here.
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
Platform for the Common Good
Friday, July 4, 2008
Thurgood Marshall Centennial
I just realized we let July 2 pass without mention the 100th anniversary of the birth of Thurgood Marshall. However 4th of July is a pretty good day to reflect on a couple of his thoughts.
"A child born to a Black mother in a state like Mississippi...has exactly the same rights as a white baby born to the wealthiest person in the United States. It's not true, but I challenge anyone to say it is not a goal worth working for."
"None of us got where we are solely by pulling ourselves up by our bootstraps. We got here becuase somebody - a parent, a teacher, an Ivy League crony or a few nuns - bent down and helped up pick up our boots."
"In recognizing the humanity of our fellow beings, we pay ourselves the highest tribute."
Monday, June 30, 2008
What Teenage Girls Read
A post on the Feminist Law Professors blog reported the author's experience of looking for a book to give a 12-year old girl as a gift. What she found in her local Barnes & Noble bookstore, "were shelves of books promoting vanity, consumerism and sex. The titles were things like Gossip Girl and Cheetah Girls. After reading the cover summaries it seems that in order to encourage reading in our teen girls we have to expose them to the promotion of celebrity worship, buying designer handbags, gossiping about your friends, and having sex to be popular."
I asked my 15-year old daughter her reaction to this. She reports that it is the case that the bulk of books in the teen section of our local Barnes and Noble consist of things like Gossip Girl and Cheetah Girls. Fortunately, she also reports that one can, in fact, find wonderful books the encourage and inspire girls beyond the sorts of things promoted in the teen series. Why it takes such work to find such books is another matter.
For those looking for some good books for teen girls, I share some of Elena's suggestions: Chinese Cinderella, by Adeline Yen Mah; The Great Good Thing, by Roderick Townley; The Book Thief, by Markus Zusak; and The Beekeeper's Apprentice, by Laurie R. King (one of Elena's favorites)
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Evaluating Candidates
I agree with Amy that it makes a lot more sense to construct our own criteria for evaluating candidates rather than simply reacting to how they score on NARAL's scale. With respect to the congressional voting record, the example of the Unborn Child regulation that Amy raises is not the only one that poses complexities. For example, the United Nations Population Fund is about more than reproductive rights - its concerns include prevention of violence against women, reducing the spread of AIDs and promoting safety of childbirth. As a result, I'm not convinced there is anything wrong with voting in a way that ensures that the president can not unilaterally remove funding from the UNPF. I appreciate that there may be some who disagree with that assessment, but the fact that NARAL lists a vote againt an amendment to strike the language that would ensure the president can not do so as "pro-choice" should not be what determines which position is more consistent with Catholic thought.
Monday, June 9, 2008
State Interest in Nonmarital Friendship Relationships
With respect to the conversation initiated by Rob's post on Friends with Benefits, my colleague Elizabeth Brown suggests that part of the reason the state may choose to recognize such relationships "may be because the type of benefits that society gains are not tied to only very limited forms of relations (e.g., marriage, sexually-oriented relationships)." She states:
"Businesses and the federal and state governments, which provide healthcare to individuals, already have a financial incentive to promotion friendship and other social relationships. Research shows that not staying connected to other people through friendships and other relationships poses the same risk to your health as high blood pressure, obesity and even smoking. As staggering as that is, a trend toward smaller social networks and fewer close confidants is growing. 'More Americans in the last 20 years say that they have fewer close friends or people in their lives with whom they can discuss important matters,' says Duke University sociologist Lynn Smith-Lovin. 'What ties to a close-knit group of people does is create a safety net,' she adds.
"Doctors agree, and say that a good chat or regular girls' night out can do even more. 'Feeling cared for and supported within a social network is particularly important for women in fostering self-care,' says Todd Jackson, PhD, author of a study published this year linking high levels of social support and community involvement with healthier diet, exercise and sleep habits, among other positive effects. As a result, people who enjoy high levels of social support would cost businesses and federal and state government less money than those who fail to form and maintain such relationships.
"These benefits are not connected solely with marriage or sexual relationships. If society benefits from the formation of these social networks, then it has an interest in promoting them and preventing their current decline."
Question for Michael
Regarding Michael S.'s response to Rob's post, I don't understand why Michael says it is "irrelvant to the state as to why someone would want to form such an association." The state is being asked here to provide privileges to these nonmarital friendship relationships, some of which privileges will impose costs on some third parties that deal with this new unit (e.g., employers). Doesn't that mean the state should have to articulate an interest in promoting such relationships before it provides these privileges?
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
The Role of Law in Holding Back the Poor
The UNDP's Commission on Legal Empowerment of the Poor has just released a report, Making the Law Work for Everyone, which addresses how and why wealth and other inequalities persist within societies. The executive summary contains this conclusion:
"[I]t is not the absence of assets or the lack of work that hold [the poor] back, but the fact that the assets and work are insecure, unprotected, and far less productive that they might be....In too many countries, the laws, institutions, and policies governing economic, social and political affairs deny a large part of the society the chance to participate on equal terms. The rules of the game are unfair."
The report can be accessed here. The co-chairs of the Commission also discuss the findings here.
Friday, May 30, 2008
Catholic Thought in Seattle
Yesterday was the second day of the gathering of the Conference of Catholic Legal Thought in Seattle. We had three panels: Teaching and our Pastoral Role (led by Amy Uelmen, via video, Greg Kalscheur and myself), Catholic Thought and Legal Theory (led by Patrick Brennan) and Scholarly Career Planning as a Christian (led by Lucia Silecchia, with presentations by Michael Scaperlanda, Lisa Schiltz and John Breen). Just to give you a brief idea of what our day was like:
The first panel was a wide-ranging discussion of how we teach Catrholic Social Thought in the classroom, addressing both seminars devoted to the subject and the introduction of Catholic thought into other classes. In the seminar setting, challenges include how to present CST when students lack formation in Catholic or Christian traditions and teaching, how to approach topics such as abortion, divorce and sexual identity, given that for many students these issues are a personal source of grief and how to deal with the fact that students are reared in an environment that discourages them from thinking in terms of absolute truths and from making absolute value judgments about the behavior of others.
The Legal Theory panel took as its starting point a 1958 article by Anscombe titled Modern Moral Philosophy setting forth Anscomb's position that our usual way of talking about morality presupposes a divine lawgiver who is uniquely competent ot legislate for the entire cosmos, including humans. The question for discussion is whether Anscomb was right that one cannot coherently and truthfully use a moral vocabulary without affirming the existence of a divinity that can and does legislate for us rational creatures? No surprise that there was some difference of opinion on this issue.
In the third panel, John Breen focused on where there are currently gaps in Catholic legal scholarship, suggesting that the crucial issue as we move forward in the project of Catholic Legal Thought is articulating a proper understanding of the relationship between faith and reason. Lisa Schiltz and Michael Scaperlanda each then shared some of their thoughts about the nature of our role as scholars in this tradition.
An important part of the benefit of our time at these gatherings is our time outside of the formal more academic sessions. After enjoying dinner together, the group reconvened in the lovely St. Ignatius chapel on the Seattle U. campus, where Greg Kalscheur invited us into an Ignatian examen, something that has been part of my own daily prayer for at least the last six or seven years, and then presided over Mass with us. It was a wonderful way to end the day.
Our gathering concludes with lunch today (except for those able to stay for an afternoon of fun, which lamentably does not include me). One final note: Part of our aim is to be a resource and a community for those seeking to enter this area of teaching and writing and so it was terrific to see some new faces among our group this year.
Thursday, May 29, 2008
Catholic Teaching on the Role of Authority
I'm in Seattle at the third annual meeting of the Conference of Catholic Legal Thought, along with fellow-MOJ'ers Russ Powelll, Michael Scaperlanda, Steve Shiffrin and Lisa Schiltz (and, via video this morning, Amy Uelmen).
As with the prior conferences, the first day of the conference (yesterday) was devoted to deepening our understanding of the some of the theological principles relevent to our consideration of the intersection of Catholic thought and the law. In the first morning session, Professor William Buckley of Seattle University gave an introduction to Catholic Social Thought that was very useful for some of the newer members of our group. The two afternoon sessions featured Frank Sullivan, S.J., from Boston College, a leading authroity on church authority and the role of the role of the Magisterium.
The focus of his talk was on the teaching authority of the church, in one session speaking about the definitive exercise of that authority and in the other on the non-definitive exercise of that authority. I don't have the time this morning to do a full summary of his two talks, but there were a number of points that raised some interesting discussion and warrant further consideration.
The one I'll raise here (for perhaps obvious reasons) has to do with public expression of dissent from the teachings of the Church. Having talked about what the church has said about expressions of dissent from teachings by theologians, Sulliavan was asked about expressions of dissent by lay persons and given the example of a lay person writing an editorial or blogging against the church position on things like homosexuality or contraception. He expressed the view that how one evaluates such expressions of dissent depend on a couple of things. First, how diligently the writer has tried to reach assent to the teaching? Has the person proceeded from an attitude of obsequium religiousum (which Sullivan thinks is best translated as religious docility rather than religious submission or loyal submission), which includes an openness to a deeper examination of the issue and respect for the authority of the Church, and despite efforts be unable to give intellectual assent to the Church teaching? Second, he also thought relevant what reasons the person has for expressing the opinion? Re the last, he did not explore what reasons might justify public dissent and what would be considered improper reasons.
I hope others at the conference will chime in either expanding on Sullivan's comments of yesterday or in regard to today's sessions, which will begin shortly.
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Health Care and the Presidential Election
Sr. Carol Keenan, D.C., President of the Catholic Health Association, spoke this morning on “Health Care and the 2008 Presidential Elections: Whose Voice is not at the Table?” at a workshop for Catholic health care administrators being held at St. John's University in New York this week. The talk focused on our failure to develop a rational health delivery system and raised questions about the positions of the various candidates on health care. She gave a similar talk in Cleveland last week, which can be viewed on youtube here.
Recent Posts
Categories
Monthly Archive
StatCounter
PageViews
Since February 19, 2008
