Musing's musings

One of these things is not like the others

In an historic ruling today, Judge Vaughn Walker struck down California's Proposition 8 as unconstitutional:

Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license. Indeed, the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that opposite-sex couples are superior to same-sex couples. Because California has no interest in discriminating against gay men and lesbians, and because Proposition 8 prevents California from fulfilling its constitutional obligation to provide marriages on an equal basis, the court concludes that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional.

In an exhaustively researched, well-reasoned, and thoroughly sourced 138-page opinion, Judge Walker found that the proponents of Proposition 8 had utterly failed to make even an elementary case for their position. They could not even demonstrate a rational basis for their claims, the lowest possible standard of review in federal jurisprudence:

Proposition 8 cannot withstand any level of scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause, as excluding same-sex couples from marriage is simply not rationally related to a legitimate state interest.

Mixed reviews? I don't think so

After 18 months in office, the harsh realities of politics and compromise have caught up to President Obama. Hailed as a champion of LGBT rights during the 2008 campaign, LGBT rights advocates now give Obama mixed reviews for his performance to date.

In a statement to the Blade, Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, said "there’s no doubt" that Obama has done more for LGBT people than any other U.S. president in history.

via www.washingtonblade.com

Unfortunately for Solomonese, the "done more for LGBT people than any other U.S. president" bar is so low to the ground that a mobility-impaired ant could get over it without any effort at all. I'm with Richard Socarides: the Obama presidency thus far has "been a disappointing 18 months."

On Inauguration Day, this LGBT rights scorecard was posted on the White House web site:

President Obama did sign the Matthew Shepard Bill--but that can hardly be described as an accomplishment, given that he had nothing to do with the bill's passage (and hadn't done much to advance it during his time in the Senate). The bill had been languishing in Congress for more than a decade before it finally made its way to the president's desk. Moreover, while it's certainly nice to know that LGBT people have legal recourse if they are attacked on the basis of their sexual orientation, that still doesn't do much to address the underlying fundamental inequality that makes gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered Americans the second most common target of hate crimes after people of color. It should also be noted that the legal recourse afforded by the legislation is totally dependent on whether the police officers who investigate the crime, and the attorneys who prosecute it, agree that it was a hate crime. Otherwise, we're still SOL.

Every other thing on that scorecard remains un-done. Most of them have not even been addressed. (Yes, I know that the House has passed, and the Senate is considering, a crappy compromise bill that the president would like to have us believe constitutes a repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," but, first, the Congress has not yet passed the bill and the president has threatened to veto it on the grounds that one version contains funding for a controversial fighter engine he does not want to support. Second, even if the bill is passed, the discharges do not stop, and DADT is not repealed, until some future point in time after which the president, the Secretary of Defense, and the chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff all certify that the required conditions have been met. There is no guarantee that such certifications will ever be forthcoming, and neither is there any requirement in the law that they are made. In other words, this is a "repeal" of DADT only if you also believe that putting out a press release claiming victory equates to an actual victory. I'm not among those who believe that.

My review of the president's first year and a half in office? An unqualified "Poor." And that goes for more than just gay rights.

Blackhawks win the Cup!

For the first time in my lifetime (and then some), Lord Stanley's Cup will be calling Chicago home for the next year:

And there was much rejoicing!

Madness

Just before the United States invaded Iraq in 2003, Dick Cheney went on Press the Meat and pooh-poohed Tim Russert's estimates of how much the war would cost:

MR. RUSSERT: Every analysis said this war itself would cost about $80 billion, recovery of Baghdad, perhaps of Iraq, about $10 billion per year. We should expect as American citizens that this would cost at least $100 billion for a two-year involvement.

VICE PRES. CHENEY: I can’t say that, Tim. There are estimates out there. It’s important, though, to recognize that we’ve got a different set of circumstances than we’ve had in Afghanistan. In Afghanistan you’ve got a nation without significant resources. In Iraq you’ve got a nation that’s got the second-largest oil reserves in the world, second only to Saudi Arabia. It will generate billions of dollars a year in cash flow if they get back to their production of roughly three million barrels of oil a day, in the relatively near future. And that flow of resources, obviously, belongs to the Iraqi people, needs to be put to use by the Iraqi people for the Iraqi people and that will be one of our major objectives.

As it turns out, Russert's estimate was pretty egregiously lowball. As of the time of this posting, the Iraq war has cost us more than $720 billion (at a rough estimate). The Afghanistan war that President Obama is ratcheting up in the latest of a long line of futile attempts by western colonial powers to control that particular neck of the woods, has cost us on the order of $270 billion. Total spending on those two wars since 2001 (including enforcement, logistics, etc.) is already more than $1 trillion.

According to the National Priorities Project, if we hadn't flushed that $1.05 trillion down the toilet, here are some of the things we could have gotten for the same amount of money:

• health care for 308,396,946 people for one year
• 22,599,968 public safety officers for one year
• 17,944,326 music and arts teachers for one year
• 132,716,897 one-year scholarships for university students
• Pell Grants ($5,550 each) for 188,536,667 university students
• 8,139,680 affordable housing units
• health care for one year for 461,193,337 children
• Head Start placements for 143,595,239 children for one year
• 17,188,969 elementary school teachers for one year
• 1,083,271,391 homes with renewable electricity for one year

(Note that each of those items costs around $1.05 trillion; unfortunately, we couldn't get all of them for that same amount.)

A few other things we could have gotten for $1.05 trillion, off the top of my head:

• a balanced budget;
• 105 years' worth of funding for basic research at the National Science Foundation at $10 billion per year, the level NSF's budget is projected to reach at the end of the current doubling process--in 2017;
• 33 years' worth of funding for health research at the National Institutes of Health, at current funding levels;
• 52.5 years' worth of NASA funding at its projected FY2011 level of $20 billion;
• 6 months' worth of free health care for everyone in the United States, assuming no economies of scale or other savings would be realized from a single-payer system, based on total costs in 2008;
• a year's worth of HIV medication for two-thirds of the approximately 30 million people infected with HIV worldwide, assuming $50,000 per person per year

It's long past time to end these senseless wastes of our national time, talent, and treasure. If for no other reason than that we can no longer afford them.

Stories from the Frontlines: Former Army First Lieutenant, Laura Slattery

I'm going to be participating in SLDN's "Stories from the Frontlines" campaign to encourage (I'd prefer to say "force") President Obama to live up to his promise, in the 2010 State of the Union address, that he would end "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" this year. I won't go into the whole sordid history of that promise and the backpedaling the Obama administration has since done on it. Suffice it to say that he made the promise, and he told us himself on the night he was elected that it was up to us to hold his feet to the fire and make him do what he promised. Consider this ongoing effort part of that process.

"Stories from the Frontlines: Letters to President Barack Obama" is a new media campaign launched to underscore the urgent need for congressional action and presidential leadership at this critical point in the fight to repeal "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell" (DADT). Every weekday morning as we approach the markup of the Defense Authorization bill in the Senate and House Armed Services Committees, SLDN and a coalition of voices supporting repeal, will share an open letter to the President from a person impacted by this discriminatory law. We are urging the President to include repeal in the Administration’s defense budget recommendations, but also to voice his support as we work to muster the 15 critical votes needed on the Senate Armed Services Committee to include repeal. The Defense Authorization bill represents the best legislative vehicle to bring repeal to the president’s desk. It also was the same vehicle used to pass DADT in 1993. By working together, we can help build momentum to get the votes! We ask that you forward and post these personal stories.

May 5, 2010

President Barack H. Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

I may be stating perhaps an obvious truism: Love is confusing. As a friend and, later in life, a chaplain, I have counseled many as they tried to navigate the toughest of love‘s questions: Is this the person I should marry? Is this infatuation or love, and how can I know the difference? Should I take the relationship to the next level?

The first time I fell in love, it was just as confusing. I knew I was in love, but with a woman. It was a severe test for me. I had never been in a same-sex relationship and didn't see myself as gay. Yet the fact remained — I was in love.

Adding to the confusion, and the fear of the whole experience (love can be scary enough on its own!), was the fact that I had just graduated from West Point and was serving as a Second Lieutenant (2LT) at Schofield Barracks.

I had gone to West Point, to a large degree, because of the code of honor. Integrity has always been, of all the values, the one I hold most dear. My mother had graduated from UCLA and I remember clearly the day she told me how disappointed she was when she saw some of her students buying and selling papers they had written.

At that moment I thought: Nope, that is not going to happen to me. I am going to a school that matches my desire and need for honesty and integrity.

So there I was – in love with a woman – and a brand new 2LT on a small island in the middle of the Pacific Ocean.

The easiest thing for me to do -- and the course of action I tried -- was to encourage myself to run from love. I also considered confiding in others, but given the horror stories of investigations and removals from duty, I decided against it. The thought of the shame of being interrogated and kicked out of the Service for something I wasn't even sure I was (a lesbian!), was too much to bear.

In the short three years that I was on active duty, I was Airborne and Air Assault (first female Distinguished Honor Graduate). During the First Gulf War, I volunteered to go to Iraq. Due to the needs of the Army, however, I remained in the Pacific – working in the 25th Infantry Division.

The values of physical work, integrity, service and team building made the Army an almost ideal place for me. I may have continued serving if I had felt more a part of the team.

I was well-liked and had friends, but not being able to share the biggest struggle in my life (and the biggest joy) with my peers and military friends prevented me from really forming the kind of friendships that one needs to feel as an integral part of a team.

It’s the warmth and support of a team that is truly needed for real "unit cohesion" among the officer corps and with the troops. It is necessary to continue to risk life and limb for each other.

In the end we risked everything not only for our country, but for our country personified in and by our buddies, members of that integral team. Not feeling that, I resigned my commission in September of 1991.

If I can be so bold, Mr. President: we need to help soldiers, and all people really, develop healthy understandings of what it is to be human, divorced from antiquated stereotypes about gender and gender roles.

"Macho" has no place in the modern professional Army; put downs and negative comparisons to the feminine are also hurtful to the Esprit de Corps of the Forces.

I know that you have based your Administration on creating a culture of respect for difference, of developing your version of "unit cohesion" based on the values of inclusion and diversity, not in spite of them.

This is the direction that the military needs to go, and it can start by repealing DADT now.

Sincerely,

Former First Lieutenant Laura Slattery
United States Army

Stories from the Frontlines: Former Air Force SSGt Anthony Loverde

I'm going to be participating in SLDN's "Stories from the Frontlines" campaign to encourage (I'd prefer to say "force") President Obama to live up to his promise, in the 2010 State of the Union address, that he would end "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" this year. I won't go into the whole sordid history of that promise and the backpedaling the Obama administration has since done on it. Suffice it to say that he made the promise, and he told us himself on the night he was elected that it was up to us to hold his feet to the fire and make him do what he promised. Consider this ongoing effort part of that process.

"Stories from the Frontlines: Letters to President Barack Obama" is a new media campaign launched to underscore the urgent need for congressional action and presidential leadership at this critical point in the fight to repeal "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell" (DADT). Every weekday morning as we approach the markup of the Defense Authorization bill in the Senate and House Armed Services Committees, SLDN and a coalition of voices supporting repeal, will share an open letter to the President from a person impacted by this discriminatory law. We are urging the President to include repeal in the Administration’s defense budget recommendations, but also to voice his support as we work to muster the 15 critical votes needed on the Senate Armed Services Committee to include repeal. The Defense Authorization bill represents the best legislative vehicle to bring repeal to the president’s desk. It also was the same vehicle used to pass DADT in 1993. By working together, we can help build momentum to get the votes! We ask that you forward and post these personal stories.

May 4, 2010

President Barack H. Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

They called me "vapor" --

As a little boy, I always had an interest in serving in the U.S. military. Both my grandfathers served in the Korean conflict, an uncle in Vietnam and I soon became the first of my generation to serve, followed by my brother and a few of my cousins.

After entering the Air Force in February of 2001, I eventually was promoted to Staff Sergeant. Although successful in my job as a Precision Measurement Equipment Laboratory (PMEL) technician, I was still coming to terms of being a gay man.

I struggled with my faith that told me it was a sin. I couldn't talk to the Chaplain Corps because I had read about gays being discharged after coming out to a chaplain. And so, I continued to internalize my struggle with accepting myself, my faith and how I must live under "don't ask, don’t tell."

As my separation date approached, many of my supervisors offered career-counseling. They all said the same thing: "Tony, you need to consider re-enlisting. You are the kind of Airman that the USAF needs to retain. You have a bright future in the Air Force and it would be a great loss to see you leave."

They often times would ask why I wanted to leave, and I always replied: "I don't like wearing hats."

Eventually, I changed my mind and was able to better manage living under DADT. I applied for cross training into C-130 Loadmaster and was accepted. I figured the high ops-tempo; frequent deployments and lack of down time would make for a great environment to keep me so busy that I just wouldn't have time to be gay.

I thought it was a brilliant plan.

As a distinguished graduate from Loadmaster training, I quickly established myself as a top-notch troop with the 37th Airlift Squadron at Ramstein Air Force Base in Germany. Within four months of my arrival, I had completed my upgrade training and was mission ready. I deployed to Ali Al Salem, Kuwait, in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

But deployment can take its toll. I couldn’t lie to my fellow troops -- my friends -- anymore. I delayed coming out as to not compromise our mission and waited until we returned to Germany. At first, I ended up avoiding them as much as possible.

They nicknamed me "vapor" -- as soon as we hit the ground, I would disappear.

I didn't avoid them because I didn't like them, I avoided them because I respected them enough to not have to lie and burden them with my secret.

When I arrived in Germany, I sent an email to my First Sergeant to tell him I wanted to speak with my commander about being gay and not wanting to abide by DADT any longer. My commander said I served honorably and they would be there to support me in my transition back to civilian life.

Each one of my past supervisors from the ranks of E7 to E9 wrote character reference letters that requested my retention. My commander and First Sergeant said my character, performance and honorable service was not at question ...it was merely a legal matter.

Upon my discharge, I was hired by global contractor KBR to fill a technical position in Iraq and later in Bagram, Afghanistan. I was once again working with the same Airmen I had worked for on active duty, but this time openly gay. No one had a problem.

I continue to work side by side with members of our military -- each of them knowing me as a gay man -- and it has caused no impact on the mission. My contracting job for the Department of Defense now is the same job I performed when I was in uniform.

Mr. President, we need you to help repeal this law -- this year -- so that my comrades continue to work in a force that retains the best and brightest based on performance rather than sexual orientation. Our men and women in the military deserve better. Listen to them, and, please, sir, do not turn your back on us.

Very Respectfully,

Former SSgt. Anthony Loverde
United States Air Force

Stories from the Frontlines: Former Petty Officer 3C Joseph Rocha

I'm going to be participating in SLDN's "Stories from the Frontlines" campaign to encourage (I'd prefer to say "force") President Obama to live up to his promise, in the 2010 State of the Union address, that he would end "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" this year. I won't go into the whole sordid history of that promise and the backpedaling the Obama administration has since done on it. Suffice it to say that he made the promise, and he told us himself on the night he was elected that it was up to us to hold his feet to the fire and make him do what he promised. Consider this ongoing effort part of that process.

"Stories from the Frontlines: Letters to President Barack Obama" is a new media campaign launched to underscore the urgent need for congressional action and presidential leadership at this critical point in the fight to repeal "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell" (DADT). Every weekday morning as we approach the markup of the Defense Authorization bill in the Senate and House Armed Services Committees, SLDN and a coalition of voices supporting repeal, will share an open letter to the President from a person impacted by this discriminatory law. We are urging the President to include repeal in the Administration’s defense budget recommendations, but also to voice his support as we work to muster the 15 critical votes needed on the Senate Armed Services Committee to include repeal. The Defense Authorization bill represents the best legislative vehicle to bring repeal to the president’s desk. It also was the same vehicle used to pass DADT in 1993. By working together, we can help build momentum to get the votes! We ask that you forward and post these personal stories.

May 3, 2010

President Barack H. Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

After the recent letter by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates recommended the repeal of "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell" be delayed, this is my plea to you on the behalf of the soldiers serving in silence to end this law now:

I never wanted anything more in my life than to be a career officer. My entire childhood I was exposed to abuse, violence, and crime. I came out of it all with a simple, yet overwhelming desire to serve. When my first attempt at getting into the Naval Academy failed, I waited restlessly until I turned eighteen. I enlisted on my birthday and set off to prove myself to the Academy. I was eager to leave the cruelty of my past and join a true family.

I knew I was gay, but it was irrelevant to me then. I was determined to join an elite team of handlers working with dogs trained to detect explosives. As I studied hard to pass exams and complete training, I was convinced that the current law would protect me. I knew that based on merit and achievement I would excel in the military.

I never told anyone I was gay. But a year and a half later while serving in the Middle East, I was tormented by my chief and fellow sailors, physically and emotionally, as they had their suspicions. The irony of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is that it protects bigots and punishes gays who comply.

Shop talk in the unit revolved around sex, either the prostitute-filled parties of days past or the escapades my comrades looked forward to. They interpreted my silence and total lack of interest as an admission of homosexuality. My higher-ups seemed to think that gave them the right to bind me to chairs, ridicule me, hose me down and lock me in a feces-filled dog kennel.

On one day in the Middle East, I was ordered by a superior to get down on my hands and knees and simulate oral sex on a person working in the kennel. We were supposed to pretend that we were in our bedroom and that the dogs were catching us in the act. Over and over, with each of the dogs in our unit, I was forced to endure this scenario.

I told no one about what I was living through. I feared that reporting the abuse would lead to an investigation into my sexuality. Frankly, as we continue to delay the repeal of this horrible law, I can’t help but wonder how many people find themselves in similar, despicable situations and remain silent. My anger today doesn’t come from the abuse, but rather from the inhumanity of a standing law that allowed for it.

Three and a half years later when the Navy started investigating claims of hazing, I had finally earned my place at the Naval Academy Preparatory School. But instead of celebration, I began to question the life of persecution, degradation, and dishonor DADT had forced on me. I questioned the institution -- our great military -- that would condone and endorse this kind of treatment of its own members. The only thing I had ever done wrong was to want the same thing my straight counterparts wanted: a brotherhood and something to stand for.

At NAPS I realized that a career of service under DADT would be a forfeiture of my basic human rights. It would be a forfeiture of basic job security, peace of mind, and meaningful relationships, particularly with my fellow straight service members whom I was forced to deceive and betray.

After completing a six-week officer candidate boot camp, my commanders said they wanted to offer me a leadership role. But after what happened in the Middle East and even the suicide of my close friend, I was mentally and emotionally depleted. And so -- with my knees buckling -- I offered my statement of resignation in writing:

"I am a homosexual. I deeply regret that my personal feelings are not compatible with Naval regulations or policy. I am proud of my service and had hoped I would be able to serve the Navy and the country for my entire career. However, the principles of honor, courage and commitment mean I must be honest with myself, courageous in my beliefs, and committed in my action. I understand that this statement will be used to end my Naval career."

They say some people are just born designed for military service. It‘s the way we are wired, and the only thing that makes us happy. For too many of us, it‘s the only family we ever had. I am sure now, more than ever, after all the loss and hardship under DADT, that all I want to do is serve as a career military officer.

Mr. President, any delay in repeal is a clear signal to our troops that their gay brothers and sisters in arms are not equal to them. I plead that you take the lead -- fight for repeal -- and allow qualified men and women to serve their country.

Very respectfully,

Joseph Christopher Rocha
Former Petty Officer Third Class, U.S. Navy

Stories from the Frontlines: Former Army Capt. Rebecca H. Elliott

I'm going to be participating in SLDN's "Stories from the Frontlines" campaign to encourage (I'd prefer to say "force") President Obama to live up to his promise, in the 2010 State of the Union address, that he would end "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" this year. I won't go into the whole sordid history of that promise and the backpedaling the Obama administration has since done on it. Suffice it to say that he made the promise, and he told us himself on the night he was elected that it was up to us to hold his feet to the fire and make him do what he promised. Consider this ongoing effort part of that process.

"Stories from the Frontlines: Letters to President Barack Obama" is a new media campaign launched to underscore the urgent need for congressional action and presidential leadership at this critical point in the fight to repeal "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell" (DADT). Every weekday morning as we approach the markup of the Defense Authorization bill in the Senate and House Armed Services Committees, SLDN and a coalition of voices supporting repeal, will share an open letter to the President from a person impacted by this discriminatory law. We are urging the President to include repeal in the Administration’s defense budget recommendations, but also to voice his support as we work to muster the 15 critical votes needed on the Senate Armed Services Committee to include repeal. The Defense Authorization bill represents the best legislative vehicle to bring repeal to the president’s desk. It also was the same vehicle used to pass DADT in 1993. By working together, we can help build momentum to get the votes! We ask that you forward and post these personal stories.

April 30, 2010

President Barack H. Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

I am the mother of two young children, and an Iraq war veteran. I joined up just like my dad – a retired Army officer – and my sister, who currently serves in the Guard. My brother is a reservist and has been deployed to both Iraq and Afghanistan. Two weeks ago, our family gathered together as he is leaving again for Afghanistan -- his 4th deployment. Even my husband, Jay, served as an officer in the Air Force until 2008.

Like my dad, I chose the Army. I reached the rank of Captain and was a platoon leader in the military police. I was there during the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

I had some of the best NCO's (non-commissioned officers) in the Army who could accomplish any mission. Several members of my platoon received decorations for valor during the combat phase of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

On my last day of active duty, some of my old squad leaders revealed to me that one of my former team leaders was gay. They figured it was safe to tell me, as I was leaving the Army. My first feelings on the matter were, frankly, a little surprised, followed by complete indifference.

I was surprised because I had never suspected the soldier of being gay. But then, I never really had any thoughts about her sexual orientation whatsoever.

When I reflected on it, it didn't make one bit of difference in how she performed her job or how she related to the other soldiers in the platoon. She had the respect of her squad leaders (fairly conservative men, mind you), who kept her secret and continued working with her side-by-side for years.

As an officer, I would have been bound by my position to report such "credible information" that would have led to the discharge of a great NCO. I am glad that I was never placed in the position of having to choose between one of my soldiers and enforcing this terrible law, which I feel is unfair and wrong.

Please, Mr. President – at this critical time – do not allow those serving their country to be forced to choose between good, honorable soldiers, and upholding an unfair law.

Please, do not continue to allow gays and lesbians in the service to have to choose between hiding a part of their identity and continuing to serve their country.

Please, help Congress repeal "Don't Ask Don't Tell" now.

Respectfully,

Former Capt. Rebecca H. Elliott
United States Army

Jesus wept. Yet again.

This is a discouraging start to the Easter season (which is supposed to be a time of joyful celebration of new life and new beginnings):

During Easter Mass in St Peter's Square, Cardinal Sodano expressed solidarity with the Pope, who has himself come under scrutiny for his role in handling past cases of abuse.

"Holy Father, the people of God are with you and will not let themselves be influenced by the petty gossip of the moment, by the trials that sometimes assail the community of believers," the cardinal said.

With all due respect to the dean of the Sacred College, no, the people of God are not with the pope--at least not as long as he continues to pretend that nothing is wrong in the Church, and allows people to speak in his name dismissing the current crisis as nothing more than "gossip" or a "smear campaign." Nor should the people of God be "with" the pope on this. The people of God should be (and many of us are) clamoring for a full and open investigation of this suppurating wound on the Body of Christ, thoroughgoing reforms with real substance behind them, and an institutional change of heart away from the "protect the hierarchy at all costs" model that has been in effect for at least the last two pontificates, and back toward something more closely approximating the approach of John XXIII of blessed memory.

We need more pastors in the Church, and far fewer lawyers and career clerics whose major concern is to keep their noses clean so they can land a plum assignment. The primary duty of the clergy is the cura animarum, the care of souls--and they have been falling down on the job in that respect for decades.

In fairness, I will say that many of the critics of the Church (and of its handling of this latest scandal) are not doing much to help. The level of ignorance of Church doctrine and canon law displayed by many critics (and virtually all media outlets) is simply stunning. The critics, particularly those who are not themselves Catholic, can perhaps be forgiven--but the media should know better, and do better research. (Then again, when has this not been the case for the last couple of decades? Journalism, it seems, is--if not already dead--moribund.)

Were it not that I have a fairly good idea of what he means by "deep change," I could find a tiny crumb of cold comfort in this part of the pope's Urbi et orbi message:

In our days too, humanity needs an "exodus," not just superficial adjustment, but a spiritual and moral conversion. It needs the salvation of the Gospel, so as to emerge from a profound crisis, one which requires deep change, beginning with consciences.

What the pope most likely means by "deep change" is, in my estimation, for more people to adopt the attitude toward the papacy exemplified by the bull Unam sanctam, promulgated in 1302 by his predecessor Boniface VIII ("...Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff."). The correct attitude for him to adopt, just as for anyone approaching the Sacrament of Reconciliation (which the pope should be for the way he has behaved since this latest round of allegations surfaced), is one of deep humility, sincere repentance, and a firm desire to turn away from the mistakes of the past. I have yet to see so much as a scintilla of evidence that such a disposition is present in the pope, or in anyone close to him who has thus far spoken on this matter.

Our Orthodox brethren chanted the Paschal troparion last night:

Χριστὸς ἀνέστη ἐκ νεκρῶν,
θανάτῳ θάνατον πατήσας,
καὶ τοῖς ἐν τοῖς μνήμασι,
ζωὴν χαρισάμενος.

Christ rose from the dead,
Trampling on death with death,
And gracing life
Upon those in the tombs.
(My translation from the original Greek)

It is difficult to see how the attitude displayed by the pope, by Cardinal Sodano, by the Vatican homilist (a Franciscan, no less!) the other day, or by virtually any other member of the hierarchy, constitutes a gracing of life upon those whose "tombs" include surviving abuse by members of the clergy whom they ought to have been able to trust. And therefore, I suspect, Jesus wept again today, for the σκάνδαλον (stumbling-block) placed in the way of τῶν μικρῶν ...τῶν πιστευόντων (the little ones who believe; Mark 9:42).

Here's my advice for the pope

In his Palm Sunday homily today, Pope Benedict XVI dismissed critiques of his handling of recent allegations of clergy sexual abuse of minors as the "petty gossip of dominant opinion." Admittedly, Benedict did not explicitly mention the recent scandals, but his remarks were very much in tune with those of his press staff and other official Vatican organs over the last week or two. The reference was egregiously obvious.

Not surprisingly, Benedict continues to display a studied ignorance of the gravity of the situation, coupled with a breathtaking arrogance and an almost complete lack of understanding of how modern forms of communication work (and what they mean for his pontificate). Regrettably, that trend seems likely to continue until such time as the present generation of cardinals passes collectively to its everlasting reward--and even then, there's no guarantee that those who replace them will understand the modern world any better, given how few of them actually seem to be living in it.

For what it's worth, however, I will offer the pontiff a bit of advice on how he should be handling this scandal. First and foremost, when another allegation of abuse is brought to light, the only proper response--from the Vatican on down to the local rectory--is to apologize, profusely and sincerely, as often as it takes. Any other starting point will end in failure.

Second, investigate the allegations as thoroughly and openly as possible, consistent with the need to safeguard the privacy of innocent parties and to be respectful of due process. That means that no one from the hierarchy can be directly involved in carrying out the investigation, the reports can't be sent exclusively to the Curia or the local ordinary, and all interested parties must be publicly enjoined to cooperate frankly and fully with the competent authorities.

Third, when someone is found to have committed an act of abuse, or to have covered one up, that person must be disciplined appropriately within the Church, and also face whatever civil penalties may apply. There can be no exceptions to this rule.

Fourth, stop pretending that this rampant culture of abuse has anything whatsoever to do with sexual orientation. End, immediately, the idiotic ban on openly gay or lesbian individuals taking vows or serving in the Church: it is scapegoating every bit as perniciously wrong as the events we commemorate this week. Until you admit that the problem is with the culture of the Church and not the sexual orientation of persons within it, the problem will persist--and get worse.

To sum up, Your Holiness, you should pray more--a lot more--and preach less. Speak in public about the scandals only to apologize for them or to announce the results of investigations that have been carried out or new directives that actually have some chance of fixing what is quite obviously broken in the Church. Or, to quote the prophet Micah, "Do justice, love mercy, and walk humbly with your God." Concentrate particularly on the first and last of those three injunctions.