What Happens When There Are No More Police?

A new attitude is becoming mainstream in leftist America. It is an anti-police, anti-ICE and anti-law-enforcement attitude. It is producing fell consequences.


The FBI states that in 2018, 55 police officers died as the result of felonious acts. Firearms were used to murder 51 of those officers. In 2019, through July 8, 24 officers have been shot to death.

Do you recall the Black Lives Matter video where the "protesters" chanted, "Pigs in a Blanket, Fry 'em like Bacon?" Or a second one, where New York "protestors" chanted, "What do we want? Dead cops. When do we want it? Now." (See https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Eric-Garner-Manhattan-Dead-Cops-Video-Millions-March-Protest-285805731.html.)

Now there's a new game in New York. When the police arrive to answer a call for assistance, crowds gather and douse them with buckets of water (https://www.foxnews.com/us/new-york-police-pelted-objects-drenched-water-video-reprehensible).


On July 1, Dante DeBlasio, the 21-year-old son of New York Mayor Bill DeBlasio, penned an op-ed which appeared in USA Today. He recounted his visit to San Francisco at age 18:

"I ... found myself walking through a neighborhood called the Tenderloin. All the storefront windows had bars on them, there was a man on one street yelling at passersby, trying to goad them into a fight, and homeless people were openly doing hard drugs on the sidewalk. But honestly, I wasn’t that scared. I was from Brooklyn, and I truly believed that I knew how to carry myself well enough not to be messed with. And due to the sheer force of my confidence, nobody messed with me (it also probably doesn’t hurt to be 6’3”)."

He eventually arrived at his friend's home. "In fact, the only time I felt fear during that entire night was at the very end of the walk ... at the keypad outside my family friend’s apartment building. My hosts had texted me the code ... but there were no instructions, so I was just standing there with my suitcase and ... pressing different buttons.

"I had been standing there for about 10 minutes when a police cruiser slowly rolled down the empty block. I figured it must be heading somewhere else but, no, it pulled over right in front of me. For years, I had been aware of the fear I caused as a young black man -- I had seen people cross the street to avoid me, I had been followed around stores -- yet I could still hardly believe someone thought that I was trying to break into a home. But ... somebody had called the police on me."

Dante is a mixed-race person. His wariness of the police is understandable. By the time he was in eighth grade, he had been instructed by his father and cousins to be extra-polite and deliberate when addressing police officers; not funny or casual. He also had been cautioned to avoid sudden movements, back-talking, or reaching for anything without first telling the officer what he was about to do. He was warned that small mistakes could result in his being arrested or even shot.

These were commonsense instructions. My dad told me essentially the same thing. But while being wary or respectful when confronted by a policeman is acting with commonsense, dousing officers, chanting that you want dead cops, assaulting officers or murdering them are all acts animated by hatred.


Drive the police out of your neighborhood; then what? Who will intervene to stop wife beating or the armed robbery at the 7-Eleven? Or keep the drug dealers and gang-bangers from selling cocaine at your front door? Or stop street gangs from shooting it out outside your home?

Read again Dante's description of the Tenderloin District. Do you want to live in a town with all home and business windows barred? Where thugs on the street goad passersby to fight? Where the homeless are openly doing hard drugs on every corner?

Is living in a Tenderloin District as described by Dante preferable to treating police officers with civility? What if officers refuse to come when you really need them?

Nine people were murdered in Dayton in the 32 seconds before the police killed the killer. How many more would have died had there been no police?

And now six officers were shot in Philadelphia, while the crowd taunted, and yelled at officers who were facing gunfire, according to CBS3 reporter Alexandria Hoff who was at the scene. (https://www.newsweek.com/philadelphia-shooting-crowd-taunted-police-report-1454473).


Posted: QCOline.com   August 22, 2019
Copyright 2019, John Donald O'Shea

Is Trump a "Racist?" Ask Media, any Democrat.

How would you like to be called a racist? Every day. Hundreds of times a day.

The Mueller coup having failed, Democrats have a new strategy: call President Donald Trump a racist.

On July 16, a Mike Brest/Washington Examiner article appeared captioned "CNN, MSNBC combine to call Trump or his tweets 'racist' more than 1,000 times since Sunday, July 14, 2019."

Why? Because in a three-tweet thread Sunday morning, the president told Democrat/Socialist Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib, Ihan Omar, and Ayanna Pressley to go back to their countries of origin to help them if they are unhappy with the United States.

Over two days, CNN called the president a racist 636 times; MSNBC, 471 times. But would Democrats reaction have been any different if the president had said "as American citizens, these congresswomen have an absolute right to emigrate to any country they believe to be is better?" Would he not still have been labeled racist.


Today anybody the left disagrees with is labeled a racist, including, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, former Vice President Joe Biden, Thomas Jefferson, and anybody who voted for Trump.


Then, when Democratic Rep. Elijah Cummings took a verbal punch at the Border Patrol and it facilities, the president launched a three-tweet counter-punch on July 27:

-- "Rep, Elijah Cummings has been a brutal bully, shouting and screaming at the great men & women of Border Patrol about conditions at the Southern Border, when actually his Baltimore district is FAR WORSE and more dangerous. His district is considered the Worst in the USA."

-- "As proven last week during a Congressional tour, the Border is clean, efficient & well run, just very crowded. Cummings District is a disgusting, rat and rodent infested mess. If he spent more time in Baltimore, maybe he could help clean up this very dangerous & filthy place."

-- "Why is so much money sent to the Elijah Cummings district when it is considered the worst run and most dangerous anywhere in the United States. No human being would want to live there. Where is all this money going?"

Not unexpectedly, the president was quickly labeled a racist by Cummings, Al Sharpton, Pelosi, Elizabeth Warren, Beto O'Rourke, Bernie Sanders and every other Democrat on the planet. But is Baltimore really a rat-infested, mess?

Watch: https://cbsaustin.com/news/nation-world/rat-runs-through-baltimore-tv-reporters-live-report.


Is it a dangerous mess? Baltimore has the highest crime rate among America's 30 largest cities, the second highest violent crime rate, and the highest murder rate with more than 50 homicides per 100,000 people. These facts are not being denied by the Democrats. So, can the president fairly call Baltimore "dangerous?"

And while the New York Times calls Trump a racist every chance it gets, consider what it has previously said. In May, the New York Times Magazine described the "Tragedy of Baltimore," decrying the 2015 post-Freddie Gray riots as “nothing less than a failure of order and governance the likes of which few American cities have seen in years.”

Has Cummings ever said Baltimore was "dangerous," or "infested?" Yup, in 1999: "This morning, I left my community of Baltimore -- a drug-infested area where ... the drugs ... have already taken the lives of so many children. The same children that I watched 14 or 15 years ago as they grew up, now walking around like zombies."

Why is it racist to say Baltimore is "rat and rodent infested" but not racist to say is is "drug infested?"


Sanders was also quick to label Trump a racist for his Baltimore tweets. But read what Sanders said about Baltimore in 2015: "The fact is that American is the wealthiest country in the history of the world, but anyone who took the walk that we took ... would think you were in a third world country. ... Half of the people don't have jobs. ... hundreds of buildings that are uninhabitable. ... kids are unable to go to schools that are decent."

So why is it racist to say Baltimore is a mismanaged, dangerous rat-infest city, but not racist to say Baltimore is a drug-infested city that looks like a third world country, where kids look like zombies, half the people are unemployed, hundreds of buildings are uninhabitable, and the schools aren't decent?


Could there be a double standard afoot? Why hasn't CNN called Elijah or Bernie a racist 636 times over two days?

You wonder why the president tweets? If you were accused of racism, would you take it? Are CNN and MSNBC going to defend him? If he plays the piñata, won't the allegations be taken as true by half the country?

Posted: QCOline.com   August 15, 2019
Copyright 2019, John Donald O'Shea

How to Destroy America's Great Cities

What's the best way to destroy a great city?


A retired colleague recently sent me a May 28, 2018 internet article published by CWBChicago, captioned "Downtown: Overworked cops battling Mag Mile (Magnificent Mile) fights, mayhem through weekend."


Along with the article, my colleague advised that he was "unable to offer a workable solution that would be consistent with due process or any other measure allowed under our law." He asked for my solution.


My first question was, what is CWBChicago?


The CWBChicago states that it is an organization "created in 2013 by five residents of Wrigleyville and Boystown, fed up with the inaccurate information provided at local Community Policing (CAPS) meetings. ... robberies in our neighborhood had been soaring. Yet city representatives at CAPS meetings continually claimed that crime was going down."


That article details some 64 police calls over the May 28, 2018 Memorial Day weekend: e.g., Saturday: 8:39 p.m. -- 70 or 80 teens coming off the Chicago Red Line. “Tell Water Tower to close their doors; otherwise, they gotta let ‘em in;” 8:42 p.m. -- Fights behind the historic Water Tower. Crowd: 200 people, per dispatcher; 8:44 p.m., -- “Water Tower is closed. There’s one door open so people can exit.”


That same article contains internet links to four videos showing graphic mob violence perpetrated by youthful gangs along and about the Magnificent Mile or Michigan Avenue, from the Chicago River to Oak Street. It is Chicago’s premier commercial district and home to upscale shops, luxe fashion outlets, fine restaurants, posh hotels, as well as the historic Chicago Water Tower, Tribune Tower, the Wrigley Building and John Hancock Center.


So what is my solution? Frankly, I haven't got one. At least not one consistent with our traditional notions of due process, and the Eighth Amendment prohibitions of "cruel and unusual punishment."


Our judicial system is simply not equipped to deal with mob violence. If you arrest the 200 people engaged in the fight behind Water Tower, and each demands a jury trial, the system grinds to a halt.

Each defendant will claim indigence, and 200 lawyers will have to be appointed. And each attorney will file a blizzard of motions to defend his client. Each attorney will have to interview all named witnesses, and confer with his client.


Assuming each attorney spends just 50 hours defending his client and is paid $50 per hour for his services, the county will receive bills totaling $500,000 for attorneys fees. If the attorneys are paid $100 per hour, double that.


If convicted, probation will do virtually nothing to deter future violence. Imprisonment will at least deter the criminal from engaging in mob violence during the period of his imprisonment, but at an annual cost of about $38,000 to the taxpayers.


"Boot camp" costs about half as much. But the National Institute of Justice says that while the camps generally produce some positive behavioral changes, "these changes did not translate into reduced recidivism." 

My friend says he once thought that putting them in the army might be a solution. "From my experience in Vietnam (as a line officer), I came to the rapid conclusion based on experience that placing these little (expletive deleted) in the military is about the worst conceivable idea ever placed in my pea-sized brain," he said, adding, "Individuals who are screw-offs in the civilian world are even bigger screw-offs in the military where they have access to even more powerful weapons than they carried in the real world. In combat, having even one of these jerks in your unit provided a risk that their action or failure to act would get someone wounded or killed."


So short of providing every street cop with a cat-o'-nine tails, and authorizing him to mete out clearly unconstitutional summary justice on the spot, I have no workable solution.


When you couple this gang violence, with the decriminalization of shoplifting of loot valued at less than $950 (e.g. California), toleration of tent cities for the homeless such as those in the heart of Los Angeles, and when you provide free drugs and needles to addicts, you have the perfect recipe for the destruction of taxpaying business districts in America's great cities.


And you can easily accelerate the destruction by instructing your police to stand down while Antifa, Black Lives Matter, and street gangs destroy business districts and terrorize shoppers, store owners and employees, without police intervention.


Simply put, who in their right mind wants to shop where he has to navigate makeshift tents, strewn garbage, discarded needles, and shoplifters, all the while avoiding violent street gangs and Antifa violence?

Posted: QCOline.com   August 8, 2019

Copyright 2019, John Donald O'Shea

Sweatshop Labor, New Face of International Slavery

                   "Multinational corporations ... should not be paying workers starvation wages." 

                                                                     Bernie Sanders, June 14, 2018, "Not Me. Us"

In the 1990s, Nike was accused by human rights and labor activists of "building its corporate wealth upon the backs of Asian sweatshop laborers" because it used cheap Asian labor to produce its shoes and other sporting goods.

Eight years later, company founder Phil Knight promised to eliminate the use of sweatshop labor. It appears that promise has not been kept.


In March of 2017 the International Labor Rights Forum charged that Nike had “turned its back” on labor agreements, effectively preventing independent monitors from reviewing conditions in many of its overseas factories.

Other groups say Nike has continued to employ predatory labor practices against women in many of its Asian factories. They argue female workers, who account for 85% of all workers in Nike's Vietnam shoe factories, are paid less than a dollar an hour for a 48-hour work week.

Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., states, “Nike is a symbol of everything wrong with the corporate economy. ... They take advantage of our laws. They send jobs overseas for sweatshop wages, partner with repressive regimes, and aggressively avoid paying any U.S. taxes.”


In May of 2014, Matthew Kish wrote in the Portland Business Journal that "a new report from Nike about its efforts to become a 'top corporate citizen,' does not include information about the wages paid to its roughly 1 million contract factory workers. ... The company released its 'corporate responsibility report' this month, but it did not include a table showing the average wages at the 785 contract factories that make Nike products."

In its report, Nike admits that wages for its factory workers remain one of three priorities. Twenty-one years after Nike's Knight promised to clean up the sweatshop problems, employee wages, worker representation and excessive overtime remain unfixed to the advantage of Nike corporate profits.

The most recent data on what Nike pays its Asian factory workers comes from 2001. In Bangladesh, it paid roughly $36.01 per month. In Vietnam, $73.94. In India, $75.79.

A person who works a 48-hour work week, works about 208 hours per month. In India, that would be about 37¢ per hour.

The wages that Nike currently pays appear to be a closely guarded corporate secret. In September 2018, Newsweek wrote, "The amount factory workers earn making Nike products varies depending on the facility and the country. Nike did not immediately respond to Newsweek's request for comment and clarification about how much it pays workers on average."

Would that suggest that Nike doesn't want the American public to know how much it's paying laborers?

Newsweek added, "A June report from the Clean Clothes Campaign (CCC) alleged that factory workers today receive even less of Nike profits than they did in the 1990s."

According to CCC, 'The share of production costs of Nike and Adidas shoes that ends up in a worker's pocket is now a staggering 30 percent less than in the early 1990s (2.5 percent in 2017 for Nike shoes compared with 4 percent in 1995) ... The company has transferred much of its manufacturing to Indonesia, Cambodia and Vietnam as wages have increased in China.

"In the three southeast Asian nations, average earnings for garment workers are 45 to 65 percent below the so-called living wage ..."

If an Indian worker earns 37¢ per hour, that worker earns $2.96 for an 8-hour day. Compare that with prices for Nike Air Jordans.

Go to Amazon. Fourteen styles pop up. The first six are fairly representative of the others: Nike Mens Air Jordan 4 Retro Basketball Shoe, $170.95;. Nike Air Jordan Legacy 312 Men's Fashion-Sneakers,  $91.98-$349.73; Jordan Nike Men's Air 3 Retro Basketball Shoes, $278.14-$611.60; Nike Jordan Men's Air Jordan 1 mid-Leather, $99.95; Nike Mens Air Jordan Spizike Basketball Shoes, $169.41; Jordan Air 1 Retro High Flyknit, $155.00-$660.40.

In its 2018 annual report, Nike asserts, "Management is committed to maintaining an environment where all Nike employees have the opportunity to reach their full potential."

Could you reach your full potential at 37¢ an hour? Nike is a multi-national corporation. That has afforded Nike three great advantages:

1.  It derives 58% of its revenues from outside the U.S.

2.  It pays pennies to hire its work force.

3. Nike uses sweatshop labor to maximize its profits.

It could not do better using slave labor? On this issue, Sanders is right.

Newsweek added, "A June report from the Clean Clothes Campaign (CCC) alleged that factory workers today receive even less of Nike profits than they did in the 1990s."

According to CCC, 'The share of production costs of Nike and Adidas shoes that ends up in a worker's pocket is now a staggering 30 percent less than in the early 1990s (2.5 percent in 2017 for Nike shoes compared with 4 percent in 1995) ... The company has transferred much of its manufacturing to Indonesia, Cambodia and Vietnam as wages have increased in China.

"In the three southeast Asian nations, average earnings for garment workers are 45 to 65 percent below the so-called living wage ..."

If an Indian worker earns 37¢ per hour, that worker earns $2.96 for an 8-hour day. Compare that with prices for Nike Air Jordans.

Go to Amazon. Fourteen styles pop up. The first six are fairly representative of the others: Nike Mens Air Jordan 4 Retro Basketball Shoe, $170.95;. Nike Air Jordan Legacy 312 Men's Fashion-Sneakers, $91.98-$349.73; Jordan Nike Men's Air 3 Retro Basketball Shoes, $278.14-$611.60; Nike Jordan Men's Air Jordan 1 mid-Leather, $99.95; Nike Mens Air Jordan Spizike Basketball Shoes, $169.41; Jordan Air 1 Retro High Flyknit, $155.00-$660.40.

In its 2018 annual report, Nike asserts, "Management is committed to maintaining an environment where all Nike employees have the opportunity to reach their full potential."

Could you reach your full potential at 37¢ an hour? Working a 48 hour week?

Nike is a multi-national corporation. That has afforded Nike three great advantages:

1. It derives 58% of its revenues from outside the U.S.

2. It pays pennies to hire its work force.

3. Nike uses sweatshop labor to maximize its profits.


Nike could not do better profit-wise using slave labor. On this issue, Sen. Sanders is right.


Posted: QCOline.com   July 18, 2019

Copyright 2019, John Donald O'Shea

Can US afford to buy what Sanders is selling?

Don Wooten and I have at least one thing in common: We both like ancient Greek tragedy.

Every time I hear Sen. Bernie Sanders glibly proclaim that if we only trash the present American health-care system, and adopt a single-payer system, the American health-care system will be vastly improved, my thoughts recur to Euripides, The Bacchae: "A man whose glibness flows from his own conceit, is a worthless and stupid citizen."


On June 18, our Rock Island County Board voted to put Hope Creek Care Center up for sale. The county care facility is $7.5 million in debt. Running the facility at a profit has never been the goal. Sadly, the county has been unable to break even. (If the county imposed a one-time $53 tax on every resident of the county, that would cure the $7.5 million deficit, and give Hope Creek a fresh start.)


So why is there any reason to believe that the U.S. government can run a nationwide health-care system, caring for 330 million people from Maine to Hawaii and from Florida to Alaska from headquarters in Washington D.C., when Rock Island County can't manage its small care facility in East Moline? Have we forgotten the problems of the VA?

If Hope Creek is sold, about 220 employees could lose their jobs and some employment benefits. At present, it is estimated that there are 500,000 workers employed by the health insurance companies, such as Aetna and Blue Cross.


Issue No. 1: What happens to those 500,000 health-care employees if the U.S. adopts a single-payer system? Is there even one single-payer advocate addressing this issue?


If we go to single-payer, do the 500,000 lose their jobs? Benefits? If they are transferred to the federal payroll, will the cost to the taxpayers be less than the cost to their former private employers? If so, how does that save any money? Will those who aren't transferred be replaced by new federal workers? If those who aren't transferred are re-trained for new jobs in other industries, what will that cost?


Will the cost of new federal employees, plus the cost of employees transferred from the private sector, plus the cost of re-training those not transferred, exceed what the private sector was paying its 500,000 employees?


And what about workers in related industries? Under single-payer, will the number of employees in hospitals, care centers, and doctors' offices remain the same? And if the numbers decrease, what happens to those workers? Do they go on unemployment or into job re-training?


Issue No. 2: Are American's better off destroying the present systems of coverage and going to single-payer? Total U.S. population (2016): 325,000,000. Covered by Medicare: 53,000,000. Employer plans: 155,000,000. Non-employer private plans: 90,000,000. Veteran's Administration: 15,000,000 Uninsured: 27,000,000.


In 2016, 91.2% of Americans had health insurance coverage and 8.8% didn't. That 8.8% will certainly be better off if we go to a single-payer system, but what percentage of Americans will receive less desirable coverage or substantially inferior coverage?


Would we be better off bringing the 8.8% into the present system? How many of the 8.8% already are on Medicaid?



Issue No. 3: Canada has a single-payer system. The Fraser Institute evaluates the Canadian experience from year to year. Have things gotten better or worse in Canada over the years? They advise that a key indicator is wait time: the time between referral by a general practitioner to a specialist and receipt of treatment. Fraser's answer: substantially worse.


The average Canadian wait time in 2018 was 19.8 weeks; up from 9.3 weeks in 1993. The wait consists of two components: an average 8.7 weeks wait to see the specialist; and an additional 11 weeks to obtain the treatment. In 2018, Canadians could expect to wait an average of 4.3 weeks for a CT scan, 10.6 weeks for an MRI, and 3.9 weeks for an ultrasound.


When the patient is suffering pain, a wait time is not his friend. Wait times can result in poorer medical outcomes. They can transform potentially reversible illnesses/ injuries into chronic, or irreversible conditions, or even permanent disabilities.


When I hurt my knee golfing, it didn't take me 19.8 weeks with my present insurance to see a specialist and get my MRI. What have your wait times been with your private plan or Medicare? Should 91.2% of Americans plunge into the unknown to provide insurance for 8.8%? Or is there a better alternative?


Simply put: Are you willing to buy the Sander's snake-oil elixir

Posted: QCOline.com   July 11, 2019

Copyright 2019, John Donald O'Shea

The "Rights" of Citizenship? What about the "Duties?"

Are you old enough to recall President Jack Kennedy's inaugural address? "Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country."

When was the last time you can recall any other American president or candidate asking a similar question?

Is that what the 2020 Democratic presidential hopefuls are asking? Or are they, without exception, asking, "Don't ask what you can do for yourself or for your country; ask what your country can do for you?"


Sen. Bernie Sanders believes Medicare-for-All is a "right." Sen. Elizabeth Warren believes there is a "right" to universal child care. Candidates Sanders, Cory Booker, Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar, Warren, Kristen Gillibrand, et al, believe black Americans have a "right" to reparations.

Warren believes the "right" might also properly be accorded to Native Americans, and couple days ago she added that she thinks reparations should also be paid to the LGBTQ community.

Sanders, Warren and Harris believe that that there is a "right" to free tuition at community colleges, and a "right" to free tuition at four-year colleges for families with incomes less than $125,000.

And, of course, there are those who promised to pay for their college education and then accepted room, board and education. Now they claim a "right" to have their college debt forgiven, and Sanders, Warren and others would support that "right."

Gillibrand, Booker and Sanders, believe every American "seeking work" has a "right" to a government job that would pay at least $15 per hour.

Then there are those who believe in a "right" to two-weeks paid vacation, paid family leave, and the old favorite, the $15 minimum wage.

Last Thursday night, Harris told the nation that she wants a new refundable $6,000 tax credit for families earning up to $100,000. If the family paid less then $6,000 in federal income tax, it would get a check from the U.S. Treasury for the difference. At a time when liberals are suddenly decrying "Trump deficits," this would cost the Treasury a mere $762 billion annually.


So, which candidate has spent even 30 seconds discussing the "duties" of citizenship? Or are they all too busy playing Santa?

Can we even agree that there still are "duties" of citizenship in 21st century America? If so, what are those "duties" in modern America? To vote? To do jury duty? To serve in the armed forces? I do not attempt to make a comprehensive list. I leave that to you.

I suggest that it is the "duty" of every able-bodied citizen to pay at least 1% of his income in federal income taxes. I suggest that no citizens should vote to increase the taxes paid by his fellow citizens, unless he votes to increase his own taxes in the same percentage.

I suggest that no citizen should demand his fellow citizens afford him "rights" that he is not willing to help pay for himself. And I suggest that it is the "duty" of every citizen to treat his fellow citizen -- rich or poor -- as he insists they treat him. Unless the Golden Rule is practiced by all, taxation degenerates into plunder; citizenry into a mob.


If no politician is discussing the "duties" of a citizen, why aren't they? Or do "rights" now come without "duties?"

Kennedy and Harry Truman were the heroes of my youth. At last week's debates, they would have been jeered off the stage. Their seats have been taken by socialist like Sanders and Marxist-sympathizers like Bill DeBlasio.


                 (If you doubt me, read JFK's Dec. 14, 1962 address to the Economic Club of New York.)


Posted: QCOline.com   July 4, 2019

Copyright 2019, John Donald O'Shea

Can a Christian Kill the Innocent? Bishop says, "No!"

Recently, two pro-abortion bills were passed by the Illinois Legislature. House Bill 40 became law in 2017. Now, Senate Bill 25, the Illinois Reproductive Health Act has been signed by Gov. J.B. Pritzker.

In response, Bishop Thomas Paprocki of the Diocese of Springfield issued a decree:

           "in accord with ... Canon Law that Illinois Senate President John Cullerton and 

           Speaker of the House Michael J. Madigan, who facilitated the passage of (the acts]

           are not to be admitted to Holy Communion in the Diocese of Springfield, because 

           they have obstinately persisted in promoting the abominable crime and very grave 

           sin of abortion as evidenced by the influence they exerted in their leadership roles 

           and their repeated votes and obdurate public support for abortion rights over an 

           extended period of time.


          "Moreover, I declare that Catholic legislators of the Illinois General Assembly 

          who have cooperated in evil and committed grave sin by voting for any legislation                                                                                                                                                         

          that promotes abortion are not to present themselves to receive Holy Communion 

          without first being reconciled to Christ and the Church in accord with canon 916 

          of the Code of Canon Law."

In support of his June 2 decree, Paprocki writes, "The church since the first century has affirmed the moral evil of abortion, which teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable, declaring, 'You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish' (Didache, 2:2).

"The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops in 2004 said, 'Failing to protect the lives of innocent and defenseless members of the human race is to sin.' ... Those who formulate law therefore have an obligation in conscience to work toward correcting morally defective laws, lest they be guilty of cooperating in evil and in sinning against the common good."


So is Paprocki right or wrong? Are bishops to remain silent and not confront "abominable crime and very grave sin?" What good is a church that will not forcefully speak out to protect the lives of the helpless and the innocent? What about a church that stays silent in the face of mass killing? Thou shall not kill has been the law since Moses. Is abortion not killing?

Christ instructed his disciples, "This is my commandment: love one another as I love you." When Christ was asked, "What is the greatest commandment?" he replied, "Love the Lord your God. ... The second is like it: Love your neighbor as yourself." How does a person love a child while intentionally killing it?

Abortion advocates argue that women who have an unplanned and unwanted pregnancy can be depressed or anxious, and after abortion many feel relieved. Respect for the life of the unborn is very important, but must be balanced by respect for the health and life of the mother and the impact on family and community. Madigan justified his actions stating, “I believe it is more important to protect a woman’s right to make her own health care decisions."

But Alan Guttmacher of Planned Parenthood in 2001 conceded only 3% of abortions were related to women's health problems; 1% to rape or incest.

Paprocki bears witness that children are human persons before birth, and certainly after birth. The bishop's actions come at a time when vote-hunting politicians are justifying killing children even after the birth of the child.

Recently, Ralph Northam, the Democratic governor of Virginia, was asked what would happen if a child were born after a failed abortion. He responded, “the infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”

Paprocki is teaching that killing a baby because pregnancy was unplanned, or because the baby is unwanted, or because the killing would relieve the mother's depression/stress, is grave sin with all that entails. He is teaching that one can't kill the innocent and hold himself out as a Christian. The bishop's historic office is to "teach."

In recent years, the Catholic Church has been properly excoriated for doing little or nothing to protect innocent children from sexual abuse by some clergy. Pius XII has been denounced for not denouncing the Nazi extermination of innocent Jews.

Nobody will be able to say Bishop Paprocki didn't speak out as mothers and their doctors are killing innocent children. And nobody will be able to say he didn't do what he could to confront the Bidens and Madigans complicit in the killings.

My mother always taught me, "Do unto others as you would have them do to you."

Paprocki is teaching that "a Christian can't kill the innocent!"

Posted: QCOline.com   June 20, 2019

Copyright 2019, John Donald O'Shea