I glanced around my church this past Sunday and saw so many empty pews. It was terribly sad, for I had just spoken with a devote protestant who was complaining of the same problem. The congregations are aging and dying out in our area. Americans have gotten so busy gathering “stuff”, choosing places important to go to and things needing to be done that we seem to no longer have time to “give unto God what is God’s”. Because so many do not go to Church their children are not baptized. The tremendous graces received in baptism are lost to many. Daughters of mothers who are not active in their church grow up believing that this is not an important part of life. Sons of fathers who do not feel church attendance is important will never see this as vital to their lives. If our Lord did not feel that coming together as a community was important, He would not have established a church. His apostles would not have written so extensively in the new testament of how they gathered and remembered the passion of our Lord. The reality that God has a plan for our lives and there is nothing or no one who can offer anything that can bring us happiness that surpasses that which a loving God has planned for us is lost to many. America seems to be trying to fill that deep hole in their heart that is made when we leave our conscience behind for alcohol, drugs, sex, power, accumulations, or money. And what amazes me most is they actually wonder what has happened to our great country. America was built on a firm belief in God. When so many walk away from Him, how can we expect good results?

If you are Catholic and away from the church, a good confession is all that is needed to return you to a full relationship with Jesus, lovingly waiting for you in the tabernacle He pitched among us. Any priest would be very happy to welcome you back. Pope Francis is right. We must return to a full, loving relationship with Holy Mother our Church, who wishes to show us the right paths. Each of us has an individual love that God wants from us alone. No one can replace what God wants returned from each of His beloved creation. When we come to the end of our lives, how we loved and served God will give us peace or terrible fear.

The post office offered stamps for the holidays on a flyer. For the Jewish faith they had the lit Menorah – for Kwanzaa they had their religious symbol - for Christians they had a Ginger bread House. Christ was not born to be represented as a Ginger bread house, regardless of how much fun their inclusion is during the season. When you buy your Christmas stamps please ask for the stamps actually signifying what Christians celebrate. There are two kinds – enough to satisfy any Christian faith.

Sincerely,

Annette Corrigan

Jackson Township, PA

The recent observance of the 50th anniversary of the death of John F. Kennedy has inspired me to address how some see fit to characterize him. In recent years, the Right Wing has been trying to co-opt him, claiming him as a Conservative. Let’s examine this claim.

For starters, JFK described himself as a Liberal. Conservatives do not do this.

JFK did not express a venomous hatred of Liberalism. Conservatives these days sure do that.

JFK sought to summon the future. That’s a Liberal thing. He did not resist change, he didn’t look longingly at the past and try to go back there, and he did not try to undo any and all recent developments. That’s a Conservative thing.

So it’s an odd claim. To support it, Conservatives can cite only three things: 1) JFK was a Cold Warrior, 2) He put through a tax cut, and 3) He had a Republican in his Cabinet. Do these really make him a Bobbsey Twin of Barry Goldwater?

In the early 60’s, what politician wasn’t a Cold Warrior? Liberal icons like Hubert Humphrey were all Cold Warriors. The main difference between a Liberal and Conservative Cold Warrior was, the latter liked to accuse Liberals of being “pinkos”, “Comsymps”, and “fellow travelers”. (Something JFK never did.) The definition of Communism was insanely broad.

As far as tax cuts go, it’s inconceivable that JFK would support the radical tax cuts that Conservatives have championed and enacted since his death, cuts that are intended to undermine or even destroy the kind of Liberal government that JFK believed in. Furthermore, JFK’s tax cut was Demand Side, a side that’s totally forgotten by the Conservatives’ Supply Side fetish.

Finally, if having a Republican in the Cabinet makes a President a Conservative, then they ought to be claiming Clinton and Obama as well.

So case closed. JFK was not a Conservative. It may seem odd enough to claim that he was, but I’ve come across people who go that one better: they claim that Martin Luther King was “a staunch Republican”. Oh well, if you can’t beat them, co-opt them.

Sincerely,

Stephen Van Eck

Rushville, PA

“All the News That’s Fit to Print,” has been the motto of the New York Times since it was first published 160 years ago. At that time it referred to a standard of decency, but no more. Today its real meaning alludes to news that manages to squeeze through the paper’s liberal filter.

But it’s not just the Times’ self-imposed censorship, it’s all the major news outlets.

Witness the media slant in the Zimmerman case. Typically it was reported as Trayvon Martin, a young, unarmed black youth was shot and killed by white assailant, George Zimmerman. Frequently the story was accompanied with a photograph of Martin taken years before the 17-year old’s death.

But according to FBI race and crime analysis on a per capita basis the number of whites murdered by blacks is 50 times that of blacks murdered by whites. The lopsided ratio of other black-on-white felonies continues to be overlooked. You won’t hear about this in the media.

Racial prejudice also rears its head in the courts as well as in the streets. When Rodney King was acquitted by a white jury, blacks burned and rioted in Los Angles. But when O. J. Simpson was acquitted by a black jury, whites didn’t go on a rampage but many were infuriated by a racially tainted verdict.

Liberal racial bias was exposed once again when the media was no longer able to ignore the knockout game and its racial overtones.

The game is simple. Black youths challenge one another to knockout a randomly selected victim with a single punch. There is only one rule: the person blindsided, whether male or female, young or old, must be either white or Asian.

Also shocking is that while the game may be new to most of us, it’s been “played” for three or more years, in several states across the country, and in dozens of cities.

When occasionally reported the attackers are unusually described as “teens” or “troubled youths” without reference to the attackers’ or the victims’ race. But videos show the “troubled youths” do not appear to be the troubled ones. They are in a festive mood, laughing and joking. It is the victims who are troubled, injured, and, in some cases, killed, as were the glossed-over knockout fatalities of two elderly white men.

The media and many in the public think that sanitizing the racial element in crimes may be the best way of not provoking retaliatory violence.

Phoebe Connolly, a young white woman, was punched in the face by a group of black teenagers playing the knockout game. “I really have no hard feelings about what happened,” said Connolly. “I just see it as another reason why we need to better support our youth with activities and youth programs.”

Others have the opposite view.

They contend that the best way to combat racially motivated crime is not to sweep it under a rug or to cloak it with forgiveness, but to crackdown on the perpetrators exactly as is done with all other crimes and when necessary to defend oneself against them.

Marvell Weaver, a black teenaged game player, targeted a white man. The man pulled out a licensed-to-carry pistol and shot the teen twice but not fatally. Weaver is now in jail and admits to previously knocking out “six or seven” other people.

In a nation that spends half its time fretting about racial prejudice, its embers still glow brightly embers that can easily be fanned to a flame.

Whites are riled over racial preferences, set-asides, and implicit quotas, driven by an unwritten law that any racial disparity on the job or in school is prima facie evidence of racial prejudice and subject to litigation.

On the other hand, blacks wrap themselves in the mantle of victimization by whites, validated and egged on by the likes of Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.

We are a nation of different races in an uneasy peace, a fragile truce easily broken.

The dilemma is that this ceasefire could be shattered by the Connolly’s, that is, those who brush aside racial attacks. Or the armistice can be broken by those who defend themselves against racial attacks, such as the anonymous man who shot his knockout assailant.

Sincerely,

Bob Scroggins

New Milford, PA