4.28.10 / Opinion
On April 1, Mike Ramsey, with the approval of The Call’s editorial staff, published a vile and offensive piece of anti-Catholic bigotry, and did it precisely on the day that Catholics remember and celebrate the origin of the Mass and the New Covenant priesthood. The cartoon depicted a priest pouring drugs in a chalice for the purpose of sexually abusing three altar boys. The insult was plain.
An entire class of people, Catholic priests, was generically held up for ridicule as child molesters, without the slightest intention of qualification or limitation (which would have been easy to do).
Mike Ramsey knew well that he would not be allowed to get away with a similar attack on representatives of other world religions, but he gambled that this particular piece of bigotry would get through, and he was right.
After hearing some of the outrage from both on and off-campus sources, Ramsey and The Call editorial staff had a couple of weeks to reflect. What the university community got back was Mike Ramsey’s April 22 letter, which is simply breathtaking in its dishonesty from beginning to end. He begins with some adolescent blather that his work was a “political cartoon,” the purpose of which was to “stoke controversy and initiate debate.” First of all, the cartoon had no political message at all; it was, again, simply an expression of bigotry against Catholic clergy. Moreover, with reference to the claim that the purpose is to “stoke controversy,” I would suggest that this is an unworthy goal. Any boor can take the low road Ramsey took and create controversy simply by insulting people; that is hardly an aim to be respected.
To initiate debate is laudable, but one does not initiate substantive dialog with crude insults. Instead of addressing forthrightly the actual content of his cartoon, Ramsey now changes the subject, dishonestly, to a theme in no way present in the original cartoon, that is, a criticism of the way the bishops and the Pope dealt with the crisis. Ramsey shed no light, giving us only inflammatory rhetoric and outright lies.
Let us begin with the false claims. First, it is not true that Church officials are currently “cowing their victims into silence with threats of hell-fire.” Canon law grants no such authority to a bishop, and there is no conceivable church moral teaching that could possibly be construed by anyone to mean that one would go to hell for reporting the truth about abuse. It is not in fact a theme in any responsible discussion of the issue. Secondly, in response to recent media reports, the Vatican most certainly did not “blame the victims,” nor did the Vatican claim that the victims were “conspiring to bring down the Pope . . .” Third, to say that Benedict XVI is someone who believes that “infallibility means never having to say you’re sorry” is a slur that utterly misrepresents the Pope’s attitude, as evidenced in recent, highly publicized statements of apology, most notably in his trip to Malta where he again met with victims.
Finally, he claims that “Vatican officials” have engaged in “what are unquestionably breaches of the law,” and for this are relying on “diplomatic immunity.”
The truth is that diplomatic immunity was mentioned in response to frivolous and groundless lawsuits naming the Pope. Can you imagine if every anti-American lawyer around the world could compel U.S. Presidents to come to their country to give testimony at will in civil lawsuits? No state filed criminal charges against the Pope, and there is no credible evidence that the Pope violated civil law in the United States or anywhere else.
In at least six other ways, Ramsey is misleading, although given his abysmal level of ignorance on the subject, I am reluctant to say deliberately so. First, he clearly suggests that the church is currently “protecting child rapists,” an inflammatory and unfair generalization on two accounts. First, as the Newman Association tried to explain to him, the bishops in the United States turned the entire situation around in the last decade, and there is no institution in the United States that has more systematically investigated abuses and run the guilty out than the Catholic Church. Secondly, while sexual activity with adolescent males is utterly opprobrious and merits the severest penalties, it is not generally called “child rape” when committed by anyone else other than a priest.
Thirdly, the letter blurs important distinctions in time. An honest discussion would note that the most widely publicized recent episodes (Wisconsin) were thirty-six years old, and that a similar abuse today would most certainly be handled according to the current “zero tolerance” policy.
Fourth, he grossly misrepresents the current Pope’s role in the Wisconsin cases, where a priest abused deaf boys until 1974. It was not until 2001 that Pope John Paul II shifted responsibility for dealing with such cases to then Cardinal Ratzinger’s Office, the Sacred Congregation for the Faith, so the only issue that said Congregation was dealing with in 1998 was the far narrower question of a canonical trial. The civil authorities were fully aware of the case and had decided not to prosecute.
Ratzinger’s office gave the go ahead for the trial, but, as the 1998 meeting in Rome to discuss the case showed, it would have been very difficult to complete a case with thirty-five year old accusations, a lack of available evidence, when the priest was near death. This had absolutely nothing to do with the legitimate complaints made against bishops who, following the therapeutic models of the times, sent abusers off to therapy and reinstated them. Fifth, the doctrine of infallibility in Catholicism has absolutely nothing to do with any of this, as it extends solely to doctrinal matters of faith and morals under tightly defined circumstances, and in no way extends to the Pope’s administrative decisions, much less his apologies.
Finally, he claims that “they compared criticism of the Church to the persecution of the Jews. . .” Well, “they” did not. One priest did, and it was reported that the Pope clearly distanced himself from the remark, and the priest later apologized. Can The Call not find someone with even a minimum level of competence to discuss such matters?
The Catholic community will certainly survive the immature ramblings of Mike Ramsey, but there will be a negative, long-term side effect. All honest people know that neither Ramsey nor The Call staff would have published such contemptible attacks against the other major world religions, still less against ethnic minorities. Everyone knows that had Ramsey targeted any number of other groups, there would have been a mad dash by administrators, faculty, and student groups to denounce the outrage roundly. Note that this did not for the most part occur. The astute observer is left to wonder about the incessant talk of allegedly university-wide commitments to values such as “tolerance, “diversity,” and “multiculturalism.”
These values were clearly not in play.
-Thomas Rourke
Author, The Social and Political Thought of Benedict XVI
4.28.10 / Opinion
The time is finally here. As a tradition at The Clarion Call, I am now addressing readers with my final viewpoint as editor-in-chief. The time has come for me to move on from my position and pass on my responsibilities to an editor who will create her own legacy at The Clarion Call.
As I reflect on this past year as editor, I cannot believe how much has happened. As an editor, I have strived to provide readers with the latest and most interesting news. This often proved to be a daunting task and I would find myself along with fellow editors saying, “Nothing ever happens in Clarion.”
However, this is not true. So much has happened this year. From the stabbing in Eagle Commons and the closing of the Siler Center in the fall to the retirement of a president and the announcement of the failed attempt to toll I-80 this spring.
While we may not have had an abundance of crime and scandals to cover, we did cover what mattered. I am extremely proud of everyone who worked with The Clarion Call this year. It took the dedication of so many individuals to produce a weekly paper.
This past month, The Clarion Call has been accused of bigotry, hate and indecency for shedding light on a national issue that newspapers across the country were also addressing via articles, letters to the editor and political cartoons.
It was the mission of The Call to bring about a forum of discussion in regard to the issue.
As a Christian, I do not hate Catholics, nor any other religion for that matter. If Jewish rabbis were involved in a molestation scandal I would have had no issue running a similar cartoon.
I thank Dr. Rourke for completely missing the point of the cartoon and making me feel more confident than ever with my decision to run the cartoon that week by his outlandish statements against The Clarion Call.
It was this event that made me realize how much I’ve developed in my time at Clarion. Normally, I would have cared what Rourke thought, but thanks to my experiences at Clarion I’ve gained a new sense of self. These lessons didn’t come from the classroom, but from my involvement on campus
When I first came to Clarion, I never saw myself becoming the person I am today. In fact, being the editor-in-chief is ironic in that I almost repeated my senior year of high school due to some difficulty in my journalism class. My experiences at Clarion have taught me more in four years than any class ever could have.
I came to Clarion as a shy guy, with little confidence and little knowledge of what I wanted to get out of my college experience. However, I did know that the best way to get anywhere was to start getting involved with an organization within my major.
I worked with WCUB-TV news as a reporter, weather man and an anchor for two years. While I enjoyed working in these positions, I realized that the broadcasting field wasn’t the right field for me.
Just as I began doubting my interest in broadcasting, I met previous editor-in-chief, Lindsay Grystar.
Grystar convinced me to start working with The Call. It was this meeting that jump started my career at the newspaper.
I urge everyone at Clarion to become involved on campus. The more you experience, the more you learn about yourself. Whether you’re involved in a educational organization or a social organization, the experiences and different people you will meet will directly mold you into the person you are destined to be.
I’ve met my best friends in college by taking a risk and joining a fraternity. While extremely scary at first, if I would never have joined, I’d never have met the amount of people I have met through Phi Delta Theta, something I wish I would have done earlier in my college career. The fraternity has taught me that being able to appreciate different people from all different walks of life is a great quality to have while making my journey through life..
I am a firm believer that everything happens for a reason and individuals have very little control over the destiny of their life. The best thing to do is to embrace circumstances and move forward. You can’t be afraid to try new things and step out of your comfort zone. If you don’t challenge yourself, you’ll never know yourself.
As I leave Clarion after four years, I will never forget the people I’ve met who have shaped me to be the person I am today: the original stoop kids on Becht stoop, the gentlemen of Phi Delta Theta, the ladies of Gemmell, the Dietz Place crew, my friends at WCUB, former and current editors of The Clarion Call, my RA co-workers, the United crew and my ride or die friend Sue.
Thanks to everyone for four wonderful years and good luck to the future generations of golden eagles.
4.22.10 / Opinion
As a political cartoonist, there’s nothing I like to see more than my work stoke controversy and initiate debate. Indeed, this is the primary reason for the existence of political cartoons. On April 1, Holy Thursday, I drew a cartoon about the Catholic church that did exactly that.
Some called it bigoted. Others said it was offensive to run a cartoon criticizing the church during Holy Week. It even prompted a letter from Clarion University President Joseph P. Grunenwald to each member of The Call’s editorial board and its faculty adviser questioning the decision to publish the cartoon.
While the cartoon may have been offensive to some, any implication that The Call wasn’t well within its rights under the First Amendment to publish it is ludicrous. It’s much more offensive that the officials of a major world religion are protecting child rapists while cowing their victims into silence with threats of hellfire than a political cartoon ever could be. More »
4.15.10 / Opinion
“What could student senate change on campus to make Clarion better?”
 Neal Henry / The Clarion Call |
Alvin Peoples
|
4.15.10 / Opinion
Dear Editor-in-Chief,
On April 1, 2010, The Clarion Call printed a political cartoon that was aimed to start a discussion about the abuses within the Catholic Church. However, the cartoon was poorly done, portraying all Catholic priests as child abusers which contributes to a stereotype that ignores their constructive service and personal sacrifice on behalf of society. Ridicule and shame do not shed any light on a terrible abuse that has been dealt with by U.S. bishops in a decisive manner. Since our bishops adopted a “zero tolerance” policy for clergy abusers, the U.S. Catholic Church has learned the huge importance of reaching out to and healing victims of this horrific crime. Our main focus should be on the victims, offering channels of healing and ensuring that no one else is victimized. The Catholic Church is learning from its past mistakes and doing what it can to rectify the situation, both in the U.S. and globally. More »
4.14.10 / Opinion
Dear Editor-in-Chief,
This letter is in response to last week’s letter by Emily Young, “10 questions for Clarion pro-life supporters.” Last week, Students for Life held our annual “Pro-Life Week” where we focus on different events to educate students and the community about abortion. After reading Emily Young’s letter last week, we would like to respond to her questions posed to the pro-life community. However, two clarifying points about our Students for Life organization:
1. Our organization is not based on contempt for women. In fact, it has been women-led since its inception in 2004. Our advisor, Dr. Rourke, informs us that female membership has never been under 80 percent. In six years, there have been only two male officers, or around 7 percent overall male membership. Nationally, the pro-life movement is young and female. At the March for Life, young women in the tens of thousands attend. By way of contrast, the pro-choice movement looks to be dominated more by the older advocates of the feminism of the ‘60s and ‘70s.
2. Concerning the display of crosses (what we call “The Cemetery of the Innocents”), it is neither illogical nor “hyper-religious.” The use of the symbol of the cross in the ground is to communicate a grave. A cross is a universally recognized symbol of a grave. No one, even those who disagree with us, seems to misunderstand that we are trying to underline one point – that abortion results in the death of a human being. As Dr. Jerome LeJeune, one of the world’s foremost authorities in the field of genetics and most notably the founder of the genetics of Down’s Syndrome states, “At no time is the human being a blob of protoplasm. As far as your nature is concerned, I see no difference between the early person that you were at conception and the late person which you are now. You were, and are, a human being.” Our organization does not take any religious stand and we have many members of diverse religious affiliations. Our members are only members because we all agree that abortion is wrong. More »
4.8.10 / Opinion
I am writing to The Call because I’m very concerned about the sociopolitical atmosphere at Clarion University. It seems as though the “pro-life” rhetoric has reached a fever-pitch recently. This is unsettling to me because I strongly believe that the pro-life/anti-choice worldview is based on contempt for women, especially young women of reproductive age.
When students walk past Gemmell, I wonder if they critically think about the faux-graveyard they’re seeing. It’s meant to be shocking. But if you actually take time to think about it, it’s in bad taste and it’s ludicrous. Why did Students for Life decide to use crosses to represent aborted embryos/fetuses? Not everybody is a Christian, and certainly not everyone is religious. I don’t see how they expect to draw anyone to their “cause” with such a display of hyper-religiousity. Furthermore, by creating the symbolic graveyard, it sends an illogical message — that many people have tragically died. An embryo/fetus is not a person and it cannot survive outside of the womb before 23 weeks gestation. Abortion is not a universal tragedy. I think time would be better spent addressing real tragedies… More »
4.8.10 / Opinion
“How about that summer-like weather?”
 Chantel Wilson / The Clarion Call |
Chris Cobler
|
 Chantel Wilson / The Clarion Call |
Janayah Davis
|
 Chantel Wilson / The Clarion Call |
Trisha Vamosi
|
Compiled by Chantel Wilson
4.1.10 / Opinion
As we approach the end of another school year, most students returning in the fall have started the search for next year’s living quarters.
In Clarion, some students are subjected to sub-standard housing and poor treatment by landlords, and I’m no exception. I’ve been unfortunate to have been a resident of the Campus Habitat apartment complex since September of 2008, living in the same studio apartment each year. Since the Campus Habitat organization acquired the old University Apartments in May of that year, little has been done to completely overhaul the two structures on the property.
I feel that the management of the complex has acted in poor judgment in regards to both the day-to-day operations of the two buildings and the interests of the renters themselves, and it is the reason why I am writing this letter.
In recent weeks, the management of the complex has gone on an advertising blitz to entice students to consider Campus Habitat for next year. In fliers, advertisements and such, a “dream” deal seems to be presented toward interested students.
The organization prides itself on providing renters with a “fully renovated” facility that includes furnished rooms with 42-60” flat screen televisions, breakfast bars, and lightly used appliances provided at no cost to the student(s). Along with these wonderful-sounding amenities and other on-site services such as a DVD library and a laundry facility, all utilities are included in your rent payments. You won’t have to worry about paying any bills during the school year, which sounds great to somebody who doesn’t have time for a job while up here. Beneath this amazing sounding deal, though, is a different story altogether for the majority of the residents who live in these buildings.
The complaints I have about this complex are the same ones that most students who live here have, considering it nearly affects all of us. Twice this year, we’ve received notices that our utilities/services would be discontinued due to lack of payment. This included our trash not being picked up over break, and just this week, we received a notice from our gas company that service will end after April 28 due to “insufficient payment.”
The laundry facilities are substandard, the buildings themselves are always unlocked and unguarded (save for a couple security cameras), the hallways and stairwells are in poor condition, and the list goes on. The plumbing systems in both buildings are in horrible shape, which I can attest to due to an incident last semester where I was forced to move out of my apartment for over a month (along with two other residents) due to our toilets backing up because of bad piping.
In my personal opinion, the management of these buildings seems to care more about getting students to sign up for leases instead of taking care of the property itself.
Whether it’s the unwillingness to deal with unruly residents, not paying the bills for our buildings, or simply turning a blind eye to the needs of residents, the management of the Campus Habitat has let down the renters of these two buildings. Instead of littering up campus with advertisements and taking full page ads out in newspapers, throw some of that money back into rehabilitating the structures themselves. Better yet, guarantee that residents will get their security deposits back and make sure that the bills are paid on time. Just a word of advice, that’s all.
When the buildings were bought out from the previous owners, empty promises were thrown out by the new management guaranteeing amazing on-property amenities (such as a barbeque pit and a hot tub, for example) for new residents. Well, those never came to be (even after some residents were kept out of their apartments for over a month due to overscheduled renovations), and more empty promises have come to pass as time went on. I try to tell myself that the problems will be fixed in due time and these buildings will get better, but myself and others have been proven wrong again and again. Recently, work has started on both landscaping the property and re-painting the stairwells. This is a start, but more needs to be done for this building feel and look safe.
The lesson you should take from this letter is to ask current residents and the management questions before you make a final decision, at least to give you an idea of what it is like to live there.
The story you’ll hear from others might prevent you from living in a substandard location, and trust me; it’ll be worth it in the end.
-The writer, Christopher Katella, is a senior political science major at Clarion University of Pennsylvania.
3.25.10 / Opinion
Illustration courtesy Thinkstock.com
It’s pretty clear that the paparazzi are a nuisance. Sure there are those fame-hungry reality stars that eat up the paparazzi and love the attention, but 98 percent of celebrities are visibly annoyed having their every move caught on camera.
The word “paparazzi” comes from a character in the 1960 film “La Dolce Vita” directed by Federico Fellini. The character is a news photographer named Signore Paparazzo. In his book “Word and Phrase” Origins, Robert Hendrickson writes that Fellini took the name from an Italian dialect that describes the noise of a buzzing mosquito. This is ironic considering the buzzing of a mosquito is quite annoying and so are the paparazzi. More »
3.18.10 / Opinion
Barnacles Hostels / flickr
St. Patrick’s Day is a yearly holiday celebrated on the 17th of March. It is named after St. Patrick, the most commonly recognized of the patron saints of Ireland. It began as a purely Catholic holiday and became an official feast day in the early 1600s. So why is it that on this day in particular, people act far from saintly?
Understandably, everyone becomes Irish when this time of year rolls around, pulling out their “Kiss Me I’m Irish” T-shirts and green wigs. St. Patrick’s Day has become a holiday for one thing and one thing only, drinking. Because getting sloshed is widely associated with the Irish culture, this is a fair way to celebrate this lucky holiday. However, when the day itself falls in the middle of the week, what is the answer? More »
3.18.10 / Opinion
What is wrong with the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education (PASSHE)? First of all, what is essentially right with PASSHE? Answer? The system was established to make sure that rural Pennsylvanians had access to a college education. In many cases, this means the rural poor, who can not only not afford to travel to larger centers of education, but could not afford the tuition even if they could. In this sense, PASSHE is an entirely good system and an entirely noble one.
But what is wrong with the system? I, for one, don’t have all the answers, but the following may shed some light on the problem:
When compared to student growth, since 1990, management has grown by 25 percent. During the same period faculty has shrunk by 17 percent. At the same time in 1990 10 percent of faculty were temporary faculty hires. That figure is now at 18 percent. Since 2000-01, virtually all faculty FTE is attributable to temporary staff hires, which still hasn’t kept up with student growth. These figures are available at APSCUF, the faculty union. More »
3.4.10 / Opinion
Many people will not understand what kind of question this is. They will mostly likely say the players on the court decide the game.
This is not always the case. Sure, in many cases they do, but don’t count out the fans and officials. More »
2.11.10 / Opinion
I have never been bothered by Eagle Commons closing at 6:30 p.m. on Saturdays.
I always got there before then and laughed at the kids who stood at the locked doors looking in on the last meal of the day.
I was never one of those kids until this past weekend when my boyfriend and I got to the outside door of the dining hall at exactly 6:29 p.m. (AT&T time), and an employee was locking the inside door. Sneakily, I walked through the exit door and the woman said, “We’re closed.” More »
2.4.10 / Opinion
Hey, want to know a spoiler? I know you can’t wait to get back to managing your FarmVille crops, so I’ll save you the time you’d spend reading this article: it ends with cheating.
(ChrisL_AK / Flickr)
Specifically, I had an opportunity several years ago, in my 10th grade psychology class, to score some major extra credit points for being the first to complete a difficult puzzle.
Instead of thinking it through on my own, I relied on the Internet to serve me the solution on a silver platter.
Filled with the kind of blissful euphoria that comes with having stolen a cookie from the cookie jar undetected, I turned in my assignment, much to the seething dismay of my classmates. More »
12.8.09 / Opinion
In memory of Suzanne P-Jobb 11/1/1941 - 5/23/09
This past summer, the sisters of Alpha Sigma Tau suffered a loss. Our longtime adviser, sister and friend, Suzanne P-Jobb lost her battle with breast cancer and passed away. To us this was so sudden. More »
11.12.09 / Opinion
Mike Ramsey / The Clarion Call
Read more about the Harvard Medical School study here.
We want to know your thoughts. Send them to: feedback@clarioncallnews.com
4.28.10 / The Clarion Call
Viewpoint: The anti-Catholic cartoon legacy: bigotry, dishonesty and discredit for the university
4.28.10 / Luke Hampton
Four years of experiences and friends shaped college for me
4.22.10 / Mike Ramsey
Cartoonist speaks out on “anti-Catholic” depiction
4.22.10 / Mike Ramsey
4.15.10 / The Clarion Call
It’s Your Call: What could student senate change on campus to make Clarion better?
Progressive commentary and cartoons from Call online editor and political cartoonist Mike Ramsey. Start reading »
Proudly conservative opinions and insights from Call opinion blogger Tom Toner. Start reading »
