After spending hours, yet days, yet weeks of our duly elected political officials
on a constant hatred loop, I try to find some distractions.
Growing up, we had certain people we trusted.
Our parents were trusted because they fed us and gave us a place to
sleep and provided enough direction to send us to some form of education so we
wouldn’t grow up sleeping in a cardboard box. The extended family was trusted
because we were family and all had the last name. Our teachers were trusted to
tell us what we needed to know and then ask if we remembered any of it. Our
police and fire folks were trusted because they wore uniforms like the military
and kept us safe from bad things. Our coaches were trusted (and we see how that
worked out). Our clergy was trusted since they gave us the instructions of
faith.
All along there were these dark little secrets that no one talked about.
As sex abuse scandals rocked the Catholic Church over the last few
decades, there’s been mounting criticism that pontifical secrecy was used to protect pedophiles, silence victims
and prevent law enforcement from investigations.
The ‘pontifical secret’ or pontifical secrecy or papal secrecy is the
code of confidentiality that, in accordance with the canon law
of the Roman
Catholic Church, applies in matters that require greater than
ordinary confidentiality:
Business of the Roman Curia at the service
of the universal Church is officially covered by ordinary secrecy, the moral
obligation of which is to be gauged in accordance with the instructions given
by a superior or the nature and importance of the question. But some matters of
major importance require a particular secrecy, called ‘pontifical secrecy’, and must be observed as a grave obligation.
It is also now time for the pope to mandate that crimes be reported to
the police by bishops, religious superiors and others and to make documents and
testimony public with the appropriate redactions of victims’ names.
Now the pope sounds like a swell guy.
The pope also known as the supreme pontiff (pontifex maximus) is the
bishop of Rome, leader of the worldwide Catholic Church, and head of state
representing the Holy See.
Since 1929, the pope has official residence in the Apostolic Palace in
the Vatican City, the Holy See’s city-state enclave within Rome, Italy.
While his office is called ‘the papacy’, the jurisdiction of the
Episcopal see is called the Holy See.
It is the Holy See that is the sovereign entity by international law
headquartered in the distinctively independent Vatican City State, established
by the Lateran Treaty in 1929 between Italy and the Holy See to ensure its
temporal, diplomatic, and spiritual independence. The primacy of the bishop of
Rome is largely derived from his role as the apostolic successor to Saint
Peter, to whom primacy was conferred by Jesus, giving him the Keys of Heaven
and the powers of “binding and loosing”, naming him as the “rock” upon which
the church would be built.
The papacy is one of the most enduring institutions in the world and has
had a prominent part in world history. In ancient times the popes helped spread
Christianity, and intervened to find resolutions in various doctrinal disputes.
In the middle ages, they played a role of secular importance in Western Europe,
often acting as arbitrators between Christian monarchs.
Currently, in addition to the expansion of the Christian faith and
doctrine, the popes are involved in ecumenism and interfaith dialogue,
charitable work, and the defense of human rights.
So the pope is sort of the mouthpiece of God?
‘Pontifical secrecy’ is the
subject of the instruction Secreta continere of 4 February 1974 issued by the
Secretariat of State. The text is published in Acta
Apostolicae Sedis, 1974, pages 89–92. German Cardinal Reinhard Marx challenged
Pontifical secrecy in the Vatican’s 2019 Meeting on the Protection of Minors in
the Church and the rule was subsequently abolished in respect of sexual abuse
of minors.
It was imposed officially in 1974 as a way of trying to protect the name of both the accuser
and the accused until the point at which there had been a firm judgment.
The pope has vowed two documents issued known as rescriptums, where the
pope uses ‘his’ authority to rewrite specific articles of canon law or parts of
previous papal documents.
Now, according to the pope…
“The person who files the report, the person who alleges to have been
harmed and the witnesses shall not be
bound by any obligation of silence
with regard to matters involving the case.
The well being of children and young people must always come before any protection of a secret, even the ‘pontifical’
secret.
Transparency is now being
implemented at the highest level.”
So sayeth the pope.
Well that takes care of that.
But that is only those naughty nuns and pedophile priest.
What about the Lutherans or the Methodist or the Presbyterians or those
wild dancing Baptist? Let’s not forget the Quakers.
Maybe the Jews need a pope to speak for them?
Oh, that’s right, they had one.
Speaking of the Jews.
In the United States, an ‘executive order’ is a directive issued by the
president of the United States that manages operations of the federal
government. The legal or constitutional basis for executive orders has multiple
sources. Article two of the United States Constitution gives the president
broad executive and enforcement authority to use their discretion to determine
how to enforce the law or to otherwise manage the resources and staff of the
executive branch. The ability to make such orders is also based on express or
implied Acts of Congress that delegate to the president some degree of
discretionary power (delegated legislation).
Executive Order on Combating
Anti-Semitism
Issued on: December 11, 2019
By
the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the
United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:
Section 1. Policy. My
Administration is committed to combating the rise of anti-Semitism and
anti-Semitic incidents in the United States and around the world. Anti-Semitic
incidents have increased since 2013, and students, in particular, continue to
face anti Semitic harassment in schools and on university and college campuses.
Title
VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI), 42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq.,
prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national origin in
programs and activities receiving Federal financial assistance. While
Title VI does not cover discrimination based on religion, individuals who face
discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin do not lose
protection under Title VI for also being a member of a group that shares common
religious practices. Discrimination against Jews may give rise to a Title
VI violation when the discrimination is based on an individual’s race, color,
or national origin.
It
shall be the policy of the executive branch to enforce Title VI against
prohibited forms of discrimination rooted in anti-Semitism as vigorously as
against all other forms of discrimination prohibited by Title VI.
Sec. 2. Ensuring
Robust Enforcement of Title VI. (a) In enforcing Title VI,
and identifying evidence of discrimination based on race, color, or national
origin, all executive departments and agencies (agencies) charged with
enforcing Title VI shall consider the following:
(i)
the non-legally binding working definition of anti Semitism adopted on
May 26, 2016, by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), which
states, “Anti-Semitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed
as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of anti-Semitism
are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property,
toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities”; and
(ii)
the “Contemporary Examples of Anti-Semitism” identified by the IHRA, to
the extent that any examples might be useful as evidence of discriminatory
intent.
(b)
In considering the materials described in subsections (a)(i) and (a)(ii)
of this section, agencies shall not diminish or infringe upon any right
protected under Federal law or under the First Amendment. As with all
other Title VI complaints, the inquiry into whether a particular act
constitutes discrimination prohibited by Title VI will require a detailed
analysis of the allegations.
Sec. 3. Additional
Authorities Prohibiting Anti-Semitic Discrimination. Within 120
days of the date of this order, the head of each agency charged with enforcing
Title VI shall submit a report to the President, through the Assistant to the
President for Domestic Policy, identifying additional nondiscrimination
authorities within its enforcement authority with respect to which the IHRA
definition of anti-Semitism could be considered.
Sec. 4. Rule of
Construction. Nothing in this order shall be construed to alter
the evidentiary requirements pursuant to which an agency makes a determination
that conduct, including harassment, amounts to actionable discrimination, or to
diminish or infringe upon the rights protected under any other provision of
law.
Sec. 5. General
Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be
construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i)
the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or
the head thereof; or
(ii)
the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget
relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(b)
This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and
subject to the availability of appropriations.
(c)
This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit,
substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against
the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers,
employees, or agents, or any other person.
DONALD J. TRUMP
THE
WHITE HOUSE,
December 11, 2019.
News of President Trump’s recent executive order to combat ‘anti-Semitism’
on college campuses set off a firestorm online.
To use ‘Title VI of the Civil Rights Act’ to fight discrimination
against Jews, Jews would have to be defined under that law as a nationality or a race, since Title VI does not
address discrimination against religious groups.
But according to polls, the vast majority of Jews in the United States
do not see themselves as a separate nationality or a race. In most polls, they
describe their Jewishness as a cultural or religious identity, or simply as a
matter of heritage, while their nationality is ‘American’.
Bias is prejudice in favor of or against one thing,
person, or group compared with another, usually in a way considered to be
unfair.
Bigotry is intolerance toward those who hold different
opinions from oneself.
Synonyms: prejudice · bias · partiality · partisanship ·
sectarianism · discrimination · unfairness · injustice · intolerance ·
narrow-mindedness · fanaticism · dogmatism · racism · racialism · sexism ·
heterosexism · homophobia · chauvinism · anti-Semitism · jingoism · Jim Crowism
Yet it makes one wonders about Tiki torches and tweets?
First Amendment.
An amendment to the United States Constitution guaranteeing the rights
of free expression and action that is fundamental to democratic government.
These rights include freedom
of assembly, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, and freedom of speech.
If you think about these Constitutional writings, one wonders.
Amendment XIII
Section 1.
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a
punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall
exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Section 2.
Congress shall have power to enforce this article by
appropriate legislation.
How has that worked out?
Jim Crow laws were state and local laws that enforced racial segregation
in the Southern United States. All were enacted in the late 19th and early 20th
centuries by white Democratic-dominated state legislatures after the
Reconstruction period. The laws were enforced until 1965.
In practice, Jim Crow laws mandated racial segregation in all public
facilities in the states of the former Confederate States of America and other
states, starting in the 1870s and 1880s.
Jim Crow laws were upheld in 1896 in the case of Plessy vs. Ferguson, in
which the U.S. Supreme Court laid out its “separate but equal” legal doctrine
for facilities for African Americans. Moreover, public education had
essentially been segregated since its establishment in most of the South after
the Civil War (1861–65).
The legal principle of “separate but equal” racial segregation was
extended to public facilities and transportation, including the coaches of
interstate trains and buses. Facilities for African Americans and Native
Americans were consistently inferior and underfunded compared to the facilities
for white Americans; sometimes, there were no facilities for people of color.
As a body of law, Jim Crow institutionalized economic, educational, and social
disadvantages for African Americans and other people of color living in the
South.
Jim Crow laws and Jim Crow state constitutional provisions mandated the
segregation of public schools, public places, and public transportation, and
the segregation of restrooms, restaurants, and drinking fountains for whites
and blacks. The U.S. military was already segregated. President Woodrow Wilson,
a Southern Democrat, initiated the segregation of federal workplaces in 1913.
In 1954 segregation of public schools (state-sponsored) was declared
unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court under Chief Justice Earl Warren in
landmark case Brown v. Board of Education. In some states, it took many years
to implement this decision, while the Warren Court continued to rule against
the Jim Crow laws in other cases such as Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United
States (1964). The Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965
overruled the remaining Jim Crow laws.
So now it is time to see the president impeached.
Just another day in ‘Just Another Life’.