Unveiling the Light

I have had mixed feelings about the wars in the Middle East but am beginning to come down on the side of doing something rather than nothing. Diplomacy has no effect amongst outlaw terrorists and rogue nations. I fear that notions of peace will only allow evil to freely reign. We would buy peace for ourselves, in our generation; but what of others who live in that region and future generations that follow us? Israel unilaterally pulled out of Lebanon and much of the West Bank and this, instead of being seen as a move towards peace, was seen as a sign of weakness and vulnerability. This perceived weakness led to it being exploited which led to the current war. Poverty is certainly one root cause of the conflict, at least in Gaza and the West Bank, but international aid is continuously siphoned off by local militias and terrorists.

In the end, evil must be confronted. It may be more virtuous for us to stand up to evil rather than allowing it to reign while we spout platitudes of peace. The longer we put it off, the stronger evil gets. Hitler could have been easily defeated when he talked of "reuniting the empire." By the time he controlled Austria and invaded Poland, a protracted world war was inevitable. Our problem is that we do not confront evil directly. We allow evil to use others to do its deeds and we reluctantly respond to these proxies while allowing the cause to grow stronger. In the case of the Middle East fighting in Lebanon, the Gaza, and even in Iraq; we witness tremendous infrastructure damage, hundreds of thousands of refugees and scores of innocent victims. Israel and (in Iraq) the U.S. are fighting evil but we are fighting its proxies while the main body grows stronger.

It is acknowledged by all that Iran and Syria are the sponsors of Hezbollah and are the providers of the missiles now terrorizing Israel. This same group has attacked U.S. interests several times with deadly results. Most everyone also agrees that Iran and Syria are the sponsors and supporters of those terrorists who are slipping into Iraq and bombing innocent victims and American soldiers. So the question then becomes, should we be fighting in Iraq, Lebanon and the Gaza, or should we be fighting in Syria and Iran? At least with the latter there will be less innocent victims and neither the terrorists of Iraq nor those of Lebanon and the Gaza will last long without the money and supplies from these two sponsors.

It may seem that I should be evoking peace instead of war, but I have seen little evidence that peace offers are effective in these cases. The terrorists are supplied and rewarded for their acts of war, not for gaining peace. Meanwhile, even just responses to terrorism will cause innocent victims. Why not then go to the source? It may be easier than our current course. We won't have to keep rebuilding the war zone and if we are cutting out the source of these problems we are being far more efficient. There may be more casualties in the short term but in the long run there would be many less. It just seems that if the world is all pointing towards Syria and Iran as the cause of this war, then our guns should be pointed in their direction. In the end the cause of peace will be strengthened and fewer innocents would be affected.

Posted by Fr Steven Foppiano at 10:49 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

President Bush has met a challenge from both Democrats and Republicans and delivered the first veto of his administration as he rejected federal funding for fetal stem cell research. Why has this become such a big issue that even his own party would pass this legislation?

Few people seem to be aware of all the facts of this matter. First we should realize that research on fetal stem cells has been undergoing for some time. President Bush and Congress have allowed federal research working with certain stem cell lines that had already entered the laboratory pipeline. The current law only prohibits federal funding of research into new stem cells but even this has not stopped research.

Research has continued all over the world and in the United States using new lines of fetal stem cells. It simply is not funded by the federal government. Even the state of California is funding research although it does so in the hope of drawing such labs to the state and getting a jump on other states. The governor is hoping for a new tech boom based on stem cell research. There is nothing to stop private companies, who make millions if not billions off of medicine and medical procedures, from doing their own research or funding universities to do it for them. Private funding of such research is perfectly lawful. President Bush has refused to allow federal funding of this research but has done nothing to stop the research of private companies.

What is startling is that all progress on stem cell research has come not from fetal stem cells but from adult stem cells and stem cells harvested from the placenta at birth. There has been no progress or even promise of cures from fetal stem cells. There is plenty of hope and theory but none of it has resulted in laboratory progress. Meanwhile there has been real and measurable progress using stem cells harvested without harm to anyone and without going against the moral guidelines of so many.

Why then is there so much support for the use of fetal stem cells in federally funded research? To fund such research with tax dollars forces those in opposition to financially support something they see as morally corrupt. If, like many, you understand life to begin at conception, the fertilizing of an egg, then to harvest fetal stem cells is akin to sacrificing human life for the benefit of other humans. You have to kill the fetus to harvest the cells. That such research may help others was the same justification used by Nazi doctors when experimenting on humans that they felt were bound to die anyway. Of course, they failed to note that they were bound to die because of the policies of their own government.

That these cells are human life was demonstrated by those who surrounded President Bush at the announcement of his veto. Over 100 "angel babies" were in the room. There are babies conceived because their parents "adopted" fertilized eggs left over from others who received artificial insemination. To date there have been over 400 such births. Instead of destroying unused eggs, generous women are allowing others to adopt them. (The existence of excess fertilized eggs is a common occurrence with in vitro fertilization and is one of the reasons the Catholic Church is against such artificial means of conception.

With all progress in stem cell research occurring in harmlessly harvesting adult or placenta stem cells, why then do so many wish to push a method so morally repugnant to others. Already the State of California is needlessly causing many to involuntarily support such research. It does so not so much for the sake of any cure but for the sake of founding new businesses. Thus the state forces many to indirectly support a process they see to me akin to murder of a human life, and they make us do it for economic reasons.

I believe this has more to do with intolerance for any beliefs that have even the possibility of standing in the way of our own human progress. Our society has become so enamored with itself that God has become merely an obstacle to our own grandeur, yet we demonstrate that we lack the same basic respect for life that our Creator calls us to have. Our morality is flexible and we seem to always reserve the right to accept anything that has benefit to us. The beliefs of others, the funds of rich and poor alike and even future generations are to suffer so that we may thrive. The primary focus of our lives seems to be ourselves. How sad!

Posted by Fr Steven Foppiano at 11:10 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

This blog will attempt to look at current events and issues in the light of Christian revelation. The revelation I refer to has nothing to do with the end times. It refers to what Christians consider to be the fullness of revelation, given us in Jesus Christ. Jesus gave us both instructions and an example in Himself as to how to live. How should this be applied to the world in which we live?

How ironic then that I begin this blog during a time of war and one with so many religious components. The Jewish nation is battling against Muslim extremists, in the land of Lebanon which once was overwhelmingly Christian but today barely holds a plurality of Christian population. This is chaos. Many would point to this as an example of how wars are often caused by religion. I believe that religion is often used by those who wish to wage war. It is not the reason for the war but is used to cloak the politics of just plain hatred that motivates one people to kill another.

Christianity is often blamed for some of the historic and bloody wars of Europe that followed the Protestant Reformation. In fact, Protestantism was often used as a tool to break away from the Holy Roman Empire. The kings and princes did not go to war over religion in itself. This was the time of Europe dividing itself into various nation states and Protestantism was a handy tool to use to separate the people from that Catholic empire. Had the Roman empire of the time been secular, the wars still would have occurred. The tribal peoples were growing more unified and the nation states were a natural outgrowth as sections of Europe became unified within themselves and differentiated from others.

In the Middle East today, I believe the cause of the war has more to do with racism and power grabbing than religion. Israel has become largely a secular nation. While the Jewish faith is very strong and has influence, most Jews have become secularized. Like the United States, they often look towards religious people with some suspicion. For the extremist Muslims, I believe their faith is a thin veil over the underlying hatred and racism that drives their revolt. It may have poverty as an underlying cause but it is fanatical leaders that drive them towards hatred of a people.

The Christians seem to be sitting this one out, except as victims of the war taking place in their country. This may be a matter of self preservation as they are surrounded by hostile Muslim extremists. I remember my visit to Israel when it became apparent how little influence Christians had in a country dominated by the Jewish and Muslim faiths. It is common practice for extremists to use Christian homes to launch attacks against the Jewish nation. In that way the Jewish army would bulldoze the Christian home, sparing those of the Muslims.

The hard part is to apply Christian principles to this war. Should we seek peace at any cost or is there a growing evil in the Middle East that needs to be confronted. Is Israel justified in its response to hostile incursions into its nation or should it turn the other cheek? How should the U.S. be involved or should we? Certainly there is great need to help the Palestinians and alleviate their poverty but can’t they at least acknowledge Israel’s right to exist? There are no clear answers in this region of the world but evil seems to be having its way. Many of the countries in this area have eerily similar doctrines to Nazi Germany. Some are even openly in admiration of Hitler.

I give you no clear answers but many points to ponder. This one is still being processed.

Posted by Fr Steven Foppiano at 10:25 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)