blake johnson

Some might disagree, but I think the most sensible interpretation of what John Kerry means by a “global test” is a universal standard. In other words, before any political leader commits troops to an action, he has a responsibility to ensure that the action is just, and that he has exhausted non-violent alternatives.

Stephen Green seems to be on to the same idea in his liveblogging coverage of the VP debates, but he tries to turn “global” into “American”:

7:19. The “global test” means not lying and being credible. Isn’t that an AMERICAN test? So, we still don’t know what a global test is.

I think global refers to the moral status of the test, not its geographic boundaries.

Gay marriage is back in the news. Voters in 10 States Likely to Ban Gay Marriages on NYTimes and Spain Church Blasts Gay Marriage on BBC News shows just how different the US is from Europe on this issue. Anti-gay marriage people continue to use language that amazes me:

Their spokesman likened gay marriages to a counterfeit currency. “It would impose on society a virus, something false, which will have negative consequences for social life,” Juan Antonio Martinez Camino said.

This is one that I find especially hard to understand, since allowing gay marriage won’t increase the number of gays living together. It will just give them the same rights as heterosexual partners. What is the big deal?

The Rev. Prof. Peter Gomes provides his take on the gay-marriage issue in Massachusetts. Here’s a nice quote from it:

“Judicial tyranny” is a phrase usually heard from those whose prejudices have not been sustained by a court’s decision. Happily, the fundamental rights of citizens in this Commonwealth and republic are in the long run defended against another form of tyranny even more dangerous, the tyranny of the majority.

Paul Krugman’s column in the New York Times this weekend raises a point on an issue that has been driving me bonkers for the last few months— what are the democratic candidates’ positions on things other than the war in Iraq. Yes, the war is important, but sooner or later the war will be over (for real this time) and we will still have a president. So, why doesn’t the media devote any time/space to the candidates other views? What are their stances on trade, stem-cell research, digital copyrights, human rights in China, etc., etc.? The list could go on and on. Krugman’s column delivers a much needed plea to journalists to report on specific policy proposals, not on the candidates’ fashion taste.

I actually tried to ask a non-war question when I appeared for the taping of Chris Matthews’ Hardball with John Kerry, but the producers didn’t seem at all interested. In fact, there wasn’t a singled question asked which was not about the war.

It is immoral to pursue monetary claims against the Church for sexual abuse crimes. Don’t get me wrong, I believe these crimes are very serious, but sueing for damages will not accomplish anything. Monetary awards really do little to heal the suffering of a victim of sexual abuse, and the money that these victims would receive would come out of programs that help the poor. Therefore, monetary rewards in these suits have a large social cost to society.

What is really needed is new leadership in the Church which will not try to hide its problems. Now that Cardinal Law has resigned, perhaps new leadership will arrive that can straighten our course.