THE FOUNDATION: RELIGION AND MORALITY

“The Bible is the best of all books, for it is the word of God and teaches us the way to be happy in this world and in the next. Continue therefore to read it and to regulate your life by its precepts.” —John Jay

IChThUS IMPRIMIS

“Christ is head of the church.” —Ephesians 5:23

THE GIPPER

“The truth is, politics and morality are inseparable. And as morality’s foundation is religion, religion and politics are necessarily related. We need religion as a guide. We need it because we are imperfect, and our government needs the church, because only those humble enough to admit they’re sinners can bring to democracy the tolerance it requires in order to survive. A state is nothing more than a reflection of its citizens: The more decent the citizens, the more decent the state. If you practice a religion, whether you’re Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, or guided by some other faith, then your private life will be influenced by a sense of moral obligation, and so, too, will your public life.” —Ronald Reagan

SELECT READER COMMENTS

(Our servers automatically delete “Reply” messages to this e-mail. To submit or to view reader comments visit our Reader Comments page. Join the debate at The Patriot Post Blog.)

“I know The Patriot has written well and extensively on topics other than just politics, but wondered why you would challenge an age old theological conflict in ’Catholic v. catholic’? Then I revisited your mission statement and realize that you write, as did our Founders, from the perspective that we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable Rights, and that ‘liberty is ordained by God’ not men. I am Catholic, but count me among the ranks of catholic patriots!” —Sacramento, California

Editor’s Reply: And after all, The president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, Cardinal William Kasper, said the decree in question, is an “invitation to dialogue.” We accept!

“I am a Catholic Christian, a conservative, and find myself wondering why the flap over Catholic v. catholic? Then I see that Mr. Alexander is a Presbyterian. I was a Presbyterian before conversion—the single most important act in my life. Please, unless you have lived the life of a Catholic and enjoy the wonders of the Mass do not throw stones.” —Lee’s Summit, Missouri

Publisher’s Reply: Actually, I am still on the roll as an Episcopalian and enjoyed the “wonders of Mass” for many years. This essay was not written as a Presbyterian, Episcopalian or even Protestant. It was written as a Christian and member of the catholic church!

“I am a Catholic and a catholic! I appreciate your coverage of Benedict XVI since his election, and thank you for giving clarity to this important issue. What our Church has yet to learn is what Scripture makes most clear: ‘Jesus Christ is the only mediator between God and Man whereby your sins may be forgiven.’ I think your assessment was more than fair and balanced, though I am sure some of my Catholic brethren will respond to your essay with something less than admiration.” —Newark, New Jersey

“Pope Benedict is correct in his comments about the Catholic Church being the only true church. Catholics are the true believers of what Jesus commanded, ‘Eat my flesh, Drink my blood.’ The Euchrist (sic) is the principle point of Christianity. All Christian faith expressions evolved from Catholicism, so stop the Catholic bashing.” —Arroyo Grande, California

“The Patriot did a fine job of defining Catholic v. catholic. I am a Catholic. In answer to the question regarding the Pope being a Catholic or catholic, I believe he is a Catholic who would prefer to be catholic. As to ‘which Jesus would be?’, I believe His love for all indicates which He would be.” —Pine Beach, New Jersey

“Thank you for being the only publication to air any thoughts on the subject of the Pope’s recent edict. It is hard to understand the silence on such a vital subject! Thanks for your editorial courage. Thanks also for your note about the Episcopal Church. My husband and I are both former Episcopalians.” —Bethesda, Maryland

Publisher’s Reply: If you saw the hate mail I have received from some Catholics regarding this “dialogue,” you would understand why few others, Catholic or catholic, have written on the subject! I mentioned my painful break with the Episcopal Church only to say that I understand how difficult it is to question historic institutional teachings.

FAMILY

“As many parents know, most sex-ed classes are already candid enough… The last thing we need is for anyone to spice them up or further complicate what should be a pretty simple subject. But that’s what schools in Montgomery County, Maryland plan to do by introducing lessons on homosexuality to 8th and 10th graders—lessons that serve to further the radical homosexual activist agenda… We are teaching our children a lie—a lie that robs them of the joys of childhood and their best futures. Why shouldn’t we expect the very best from them? And why are we afraid to teach them the truth? We would never tell our little boys and girls to engage in ‘safe drug use’ or to ‘smoke responsibly.’ We don’t hesitate to put our foot down in other areas of life. So why should it be different when it comes to setting standards for sexual behavior?” —Rebecca Hagelin

CULTURE

“Former Vice President Al Gore recently penned a book in which he rails against the current ‘assault on reason’ by the evil forces of Earth-hating right-wingery. He repeatedly invokes science as if it’s his exclusive property… Gore talks about the dysfunction of political discourse today. But when it comes to global warming, he and his acolytes insist that the time for debate is over. In other words, Gore’s ideal discourse would involve only discussion about how best to follow through on his prescriptions. But such high-minded objections sail over the chief source of Live Earth’s lameness… But the outrage and passion felt so prepackaged, you almost expected Ludacris (who rapped about the evils of SUVs) to say, ‘This moral outrage is brought to you by GE’s Ecomagination’.” —Jonah Goldberg

LIBERTY

“There ought to be no question that declaring defeat in Iraq will encourage every terrorist organization and nation state that means us harm… Whatever political victory politicians might achieve by sustaining themselves in office will be lost to terrorists who will make sure that those who think they are secure in their congressional seats will face the ultimate insecurity in their homes and offices… At the risk of repetition, it is not enough for the president to plead for patience and understanding. He must do more—much more—and he must do it immediately. He needs to open a second front—a surge—in the propaganda battle. He should directly challenge those who want to give-up to provide him with a specific plan to win the wider war against terrorists should the defeatists prevail and Iraq devolve into chaos and become a base for launching new terrorist acts throughout the world. They don’t have such a plan and a challenge from the president would expose their empty and self-serving rhetoric. … The president expects our troops to be more aggressive, so he needs to demonstrate more aggressiveness at home.” —Cal Thomas

OPINION IN BRIEF

“As I watched the [president’s] news conference, it occurred to me that one of the things that might leave people feeling somewhat disoriented is the president’s seemingly effortless high spirits. He’s in a good mood. There was the usual teasing, the partly aggressive, partly joshing humor, the certitude. He doesn’t seem to be suffering, which is jarring. Presidents in great enterprises that are going badly suffer: Lincoln, LBJ with his head in his hands. Why doesn’t Mr. Bush? Every major domestic initiative of his second term has been ill thought through and ended in failure. His Iraq leadership has failed. His standing is lower than any previous president’s since polling began. He’s in a good mood… Is it defiance? Denial? Is it that he’s right and you’re wrong, which is your problem? Is he faking a certain steely good cheer to show his foes from Washington to Baghdad that the American president is neither beaten nor bowed? Fair enough: Presidents can’t sit around and moan. But it doesn’t look like an act. People would feel better to know his lack of success sometimes gets to him. It gets to them.” —Peggy Noonan

GOVERNMENT

“Do we really need a surgeon general at all?… There are plenty of private groups that are fully capable of instructing us on how to be healthy, wealthy and wise without government involvement. The American Lung Association can tell us not to smoke. Alcoholics Anonymous can preach sobriety. The American Medical Association can lecture couch potatoes on the benefits of losing weight and exercising more. Planned Parenthood and the Family Research Council can fight it out over when and how we should have sex. Surely someone can deal with overweight children. Given the government’s track record of efficiency, being the nanny for 300 million Americans seems a little beyond its ability.” —Michael Tanner on one of many government social services that are extra-constitutional

RE: THE LEFT

“The eight Democratic presidential candidates assembled in Washington recently for another of their debates and talked, among other things, about public education. They all essentially agreed that it was underfunded—one system ‘for the wealthy, one for everybody else,’ as John Edwards put it. Then they all got into cars and drove through a city where teachers are relatively well paid, per-pupil spending is through the roof and—pay attention here—the schools are among the very worst in the nation. When it comes to education, Democrats are ineducable… [N]ot a one of them even whispered a word of outrage about a public school system that spends $13,000 per child—third-highest among big-city school systems—and produces pupils who score among the lowest in just about any category you can name. The only area in which the Washington school system is No. 1 is in money spent on administration. The litany of more and more when it comes to money often has little to do with what, in the military, are called facts on the ground: kids and parents. It does have a lot to do with teachers unions, which are strong supporters of the Democratic Party. Not a single candidate offered anything close to a call for real reform.” —Richard Cohen

POLITICAL FUTURES

“For her critics, of course, the problem with [Hillary] Clinton’s rèsumè is not that she was in the White House but what she did there. In his biography of Clinton, A Woman in Charge —a nice executive title—Carl Bernstein writes that a number of Clinton’s Democratic allies were deeply concerned about her performance in the White House, concerns that went beyond her mismanagement of the health care portfolio. The core problem, some felt, was that she just wasn’t suited for the job. Ex-senator Bill Bradley of New Jersey chafed at the first lady’s ‘arrogance’ and her ‘assumption that people with questions are enemies.’ White House aide Rahm Emanuel quietly approved when a newspaper columnist urged Clinton to remember she had not been elected president. Former Health and Human Services secretary Donna Shalala told Bernstein she was never convinced by those in Clinton’s circle who claimed the first lady would have reached high office even if she had never met Bill Clinton. ‘They assume that (just) being smart is enough,’ Shalala said. ‘And it’s not enough. It’s judgment. It’s experience. It’s being strategic at the right points.’ Exhibit A, of course, was Hillary Clinton’s mishandling of health care reform. It was the president’s premiere policy initiative, she was the chief executive in charge, and by almost all accounts she made a hash of it. After its failure, she went into internal exile for a couple of years—an option not available to a president.” —Byron York

FOR THE RECORD

“A young Air Force airman is fighting for his life in Camden, N.J. He was shot on Independence Day by a crazed gunman who reportedly had a beef with the military and the U.S. government and ‘wanted to make a statement’ on the Fourth of July. Have you heard about the plight of 22-year-old McGuire Air Force Base loadmaster Jonathan Schrieken? Probably not. The shooting got no mention in The New York Times—not even a squib in a back section… Now, imagine the scenario flipped: What if a soldier had attempted to murder a peace activist over the holidays in order to ‘make a statement’? The Times would be holding front-page vigil, and Katie Couric’s brow would be furrowed for a week. The yakkity yaks on ‘The View’ would be clucking their tongues about the culture of violence bred by the military—and who knows what Rosie O’Donnell would be dressing her poor child in to exploit the story on her website. Funny how the Root Causes crowd becomes so incurious about the root causes of crime when the suspects are anti-military nutballs and anti-war protesters.” —Michelle Malkin