Talking about the "things that matter most" on Oct. 6
4:00 – “Rust”
In “Rust,” Corbin Bernsen plays Jimmy Moore—a pastor who loses his faith in God only to find it again through his childhood friend, Travis, who is wrongly accused of setting a fire that claimed a beloved family. Moore refuses to accept that Travis is capable of such evil, and sets out to uncover the real story of that tragic, fatal blaze. Travis himself offers a pivotal piece of this moving puzzle: “God has his plan,” he tells his friend Jimmy. “You should know that better than anyone.” Moore’s faith in Travis kindles his own spiritual reawakening, and he blasts the “rust” from his heart and soul. “RUST” is an uplifting drama with important life themes about faith, family, loyalty, the past—and understanding the ties that bind a community together. Corbin Bernsen joins us.
4:20 – Times Square Bomber: The Enemy in Our Hands?
Winston Churchill once remarked, "A prisoner of war is a man who tries to kill you and fails, and then asks you not to kill him." Military historian and Franciscan University professor Robert C. Doyle recently wrote a book on prisoners of war entitled The Enemy in Our Hands. With the defiant screed of the Times Square bomber yesterday in NYC Federal Court and his statement that he still wants to kill as many Americans as possible, we look talk to Robert about Faisal Shahzad.
4:40 – Are You Smarter Than An Atheist?
Atheists and agnostics, Jews and Mormons are among the highest-scoring groups on a new Pew Forum survey of religious knowledge, outperforming evangelical Protestants, mainline Protestants and Catholics on questions about the core teachings, history and leading figures of major world religions. But does that headline tell the whole story? We talk about the much-discussed Pew Forum study on world religions with Fr. Robert Barron.
5:00 – Direct to my Desk
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Re: The Times Square Bomber
ReplyDelete"U.S. dominance of the Middle East is not the corrective to terror. It is a cause of terror. Were we not over there, the 9/11 terrorists would not have been over here. And while their acts were murderous and despicable, behind their atrocities lay a political motive. We were attacked because of our imperial presence on the sacred soil of the land of Mecca and Medina, because of our enemies' perception that we were strangling the Iraqi people with sanctions and preparing to attack a second time, and because of our uncritical support of the Likud regime of Ariel Sharon."
Who said that?
Al, you mentioned certain statements Faisal Shahzad made when he was sentenced on Tuesday, such as "the defeat of the U.S. is imminent and will happen in the near future" and "brace yourselves because the war with the Muslims has just begun." Not surprisingly, you left out his main grievance: American aggression in Muslim lands. You, Robert Spencer, Guy Rodgers, and the hysterical Brigitte Gabriel want us to believe that Muslim terrorists are attacking us purely because we are infidels. You carefully avoid mentioning the criticisms these terrorists make about U.S. meddling in the Middle East.
With all your bitching about Islam, it's obvious that you want something to happen. You and others are trying to get Americans all agitated about Islam, but you don't have the guts to tell us exactly what it is you want us to do about it. Nope. All you do is bitch. My wording is intentionally blunt. Let's try your wording: "I'm telling people that they should be aware of what Islam teaches." If that's true, Al, why don't you interview someone who can dispassionately tell us about Islam; someone outside the CAIR, Act! for America, Jihad Watch three ring circus. Robert Doyle seems more sensible than the usual crowd you have on. That's a start.
But all this agitation has had its intended effect. On Tuesday, Robert from Fort Myers, Florida, called in to the show. He wants the Church to take a stand against Islam, like launching a new Crusade. Robert, you see, is worried that Muslims are going to take over America. But good ol' Al reassures Robert, telling him that the prospect of a Muslim takeover is unlikely -- at least for the next 25 years.
The quotation at the beginning of my comment was penned by Catholic "blame America firster" Patrick J. Buchanan in his book Where The Right Went Wrong, page 238.
Re: The Times Square Bomber
ReplyDelete"U.S. dominance of the Middle East is not the corrective to terror. It is a cause of terror. Were we not over there, the 9/11 terrorists would not have been over here. And while their acts were murderous and despicable, behind their atrocities lay a political motive. We were attacked because of our imperial presence on the sacred soil of the land of Mecca and Medina, because of our enemies' perception that we were strangling the Iraqi people with sanctions and preparing to attack a second time, and because of our uncritical support of the Likud regime of Ariel Sharon."
Who said that?
Al, you mentioned certain statements Faisal Shahzad made when he was sentenced on Tuesday, such as "the defeat of the U.S. is imminent and will happen in the near future" and "brace yourselves because the war with the Muslims has just begun." Not surprisingly, you left out his main grievance: American aggression in Muslim lands. You, Robert Spencer, Guy Rodgers, and the hysterical Brigitte Gabriel want us to believe that Muslim terrorists are attacking us purely because we are infidels. You carefully avoid mentioning the criticisms these terrorists make about U.S. meddling in the Middle East.
With all your bitching about Islam, it's obvious that you want something to happen. You and others are trying to get Americans all agitated about Islam, but you don't have the guts to tell us exactly what it is you want us to do about it. Nope. All you do is bitch. My wording is intentionally blunt. Let's try your wording: "I'm telling people that they should be aware of what Islam teaches." If that's true, Al, why don't you interview someone who can dispassionately tell us about Islam; someone outside the CAIR, Act! for America, Jihad Watch three ring circus. Robert Doyle seems more sensible than the usual crowd you have on. That's a start.
But all this agitation has had its intended effect. On Tuesday, Robert from Fort Myers, Florida, called in to the show. He wants the Church to take a stand against Islam, like launching a new Crusade. Robert, you see, is worried that Muslims are going to take over America. But good ol' Al reassures Robert, telling him that the prospect of a Muslim takeover is unlikely -- at least for the next 25 years.
The quotation at the beginning of my comment was penned by Catholic "blame America firster" Patrick J. Buchanan in his book Where The Right Went Wrong, page 238.
Re: The Times Square Bomber
ReplyDelete"U.S. dominance of the Middle East is not the corrective to terror. It is a cause of terror. Were we not over there, the 9/11 terrorists would not have been over here. And while their acts were murderous and despicable, behind their atrocities lay a political motive. We were attacked because of our imperial presence on the sacred soil of the land of Mecca and Medina, because of our enemies' perception that we were strangling the Iraqi people with sanctions and preparing to attack a second time, and because of our uncritical support of the Likud regime of Ariel Sharon."
Who said that?
Al, you mentioned certain statements Faisal Shahzad made when he was sentenced on Tuesday, such as "the defeat of the U.S. is imminent and will happen in the near future" and "brace yourselves because the war with the Muslims has just begun." Not surprisingly, you left out his main grievance: American aggression in Muslim lands. You, Robert Spencer, Guy Rodgers, and the hysterical Brigitte Gabriel want us to believe that Muslim terrorists are attacking us purely because we are infidels. You carefully avoid mentioning the criticisms these terrorists make about U.S. meddling in the Middle East.
The Times Square Bomber continued
ReplyDeleteWith all your bitching about Islam, it's obvious that you want something to happen. You and others are trying to get Americans all agitated about Islam, but you don't have the guts to tell us exactly what it is you want us to do about it. Nope. All you do is bitch. My wording is intentionally blunt. Let's try your wording: "I'm telling people that they should be aware of what Islam teaches." If that's true, Al, why don't you interview someone who can dispassionately tell us about Islam; someone outside the CAIR, Act! for America, Jihad Watch three ring circus. Robert Doyle seems more sensible than the usual crowd you have on. That's a start.
But all this agitation has had its intended effect. On Tuesday, Robert from Fort Myers, Florida, called in to the show. He wants the Church to take a stand against Islam, like launching a new Crusade. Robert, you see, is worried that Muslims are going to take over America. But good ol' Al reassures Robert, telling him that the prospect of a Muslim takeover is unlikely -- at least for the next 25 years.
The quotation at the beginning of my comment was penned by Catholic "blame America firster" Patrick J. Buchanan in his book Where The Right Went Wrong, page 238. Pat listened to the terrorists.
An Opportunity for Catechesis
ReplyDeleteAl leans toward the execution of Faisal Shahzad, the Times Square bomber, on the grounds that Shahzad is a threat to life. (Of course, Al would be willing to perform the state sanctioned execution of Shahzad himself: personally injecting a lethal dose of drugs into Shahzad's arm, or pulling the switch that would electrocute him, or pulling the handle that would hang him, or shooting the rifle that would send a bullet into his head or into his heart.)
Al's position on the death penalty for Shahzad prompted Jason from Tacoma, Washington, to call in during Tuesday's Direct to Desk segment. Here's a brief excerpt from that call:
Jason: "... But I think we can control our morals and our relationship that we know would be true with God to love your neighbor, to love your enemy ...
Al: "Well, of course, that would be the reason to execute him."
Jason: "How so?"
Al: "Because that's how you love your enemy."
Jason: "Well, I wouldn't say that."
Very interesting. Jason, like me, seemed to be taken aback by Al's statement. After all, up to that point Al wanted Shahzad to be killed because Shahzad posed a threat to others. Unfortunately, Al didn't go on explain his statement. Anyway, I thought about what Al said, and I might have figured out what he's getting at.
I think there are two reasons why Al's love for Shahzad means killing him. One reason is to prevent Shahzad from doing further damage to his soul. If Shahzad is able to carry out his evil intentions, he would do even more damage to his soul.
The other reason has to do with justice. We love our enemy only if we do right by him. As Pope Benedict said in Caritas in Veritate:
"Charity goes beyond justice, because to love is to give, to offer what is 'mine' to the other; but it never lacks justice, which prompts us to give the other what is 'his', what is due to him by reason of his being or his acting. I cannot 'give' what is mine to the other, without first giving him what pertains to him in justice. If we love others with charity, then first of all we are just towards them."
For the remorseless, pro-death Faisal Shahzad, justice -- hence love -- means death.
Am I on the right track, Al?