While the Mormons have received the majority of press for their financial support of Proposition 8 (over $20 million), Catholics and the Catholic Church have also played a major role in its passage.

Announced August 12, 2008, Catholics for ProtectMarriage.com was established as the official Catholic grassroots effort dedicated to passing Proposition 8. It’s members include the Knights of Columbus (who donated over 1.4 million in support of Prop 8), the California Catholic Conference and Catholics for the Common Good.

Catholics for the Common Good (CCG) based in Daly City just outside of San Francisco, mobilized local Catholics through prayer, education, fundraising and volunteering to pass Proposition 8. Catholics also played a large role in the passage of Proposition 22 in 2000 which defined marriage as being between one man and one woman.

CCG is chaired by founder Bill (William) May, a professor of Moral Theology who also serves as a chair for Catholics for Protectmarriage.com. May has also appeared on various media outlets throughout the SF Bay area speaking against Proposition 8.

In an interview with the Catholic Voice in early September 2008, May said, “We’re asking people to volunteer to help in parishes, to participate in telephoning, talking with neighbors. This is a really important issue. Marriage is the foundation of the family. People are very upset that the Supreme Court overruled the will of the people.”

Also in September, May sent out a plea to Catholics urging them to make sacrifices and re-order priorities, recruit volunteers and acquire and distribute yard signs.

May appears in the television clips below.

In addition to supporting traditional over same-sex marriage, May also rejected adoption by same-sex couples in 2006, then performed by Catholic Charities of San Francisco. May cited an official Vatican document that stated “Allowing children to be adopted by persons living in such unions would actually mean doing violence to these children, in the sense that their condition of dependency would be used to place them in an environment that is not conducive to their full human development.” and are “Gravely immoral.”

May and the CCG are also enthusiastic supporters of Archbishop William Levada of San Francisco, who was accused by the Survivors Network for those Abused by Priests (SNAP) for protecting pedophile priests in the San Francisco Archdiocese, by refusing to post names of priests who were accused of sex abuse. Levada also opposed domestic partnerships in San Francisco back in 1997 as an attack on the sacrament of marriage. Levada now serves in Rome leading the Vatican’s investigation of hundreds of ordained clergymen suspended from public ministry amid allegations they had sexually abused children. May has also personally praised Levada for speaking out against gay marriage.

May spoke at length recently with in an interview with the Catholic Business Journal about Proposition 8, describing it as the most important vote in California history.

“At this point we are beyond tolerance and acceptance, and we are now facing compliance and obedience to a new standard of marriage, of the human person. People have been tolerant and accepting as a culture – but this law, this court decision, has changed the standard and created a new one… Catholics and others who understand the meaning and nature of marriage will be counter-cultural and seen as discriminatory or bigoted. It opens the way for lawsuits and challenges to tax exemption.

“The stakes are high. We are battling for the survival of the family as we know it, as God established it… Proposition 8, the Marriage Protection Act, is the most important thing that has ever been on the ballot in California history! People around the world are watching carefully.”

It’s clear now that the strong push by Catholics of ProtectMarriage.com and other Catholics groups were ultimately successful. In a field poll one week prior to the election, Catholics accounted for 24% of the electorate, voting 44% Yes on 8. Exit polls on election day showed Catholics accounting for 30% of the electorate and 64% voting Yes on 8, an increase of 20%.

Assuming the projections in the exit polls hold across the entire voting population, of the 10.3 million Californians who voted, approximate 3 million were Catholic, and nearly 2 million of those voted Yes on Proposition 8. That’s a 1 million voter difference in the final week prior to election day.

By comparison, in CNN exit polls African Americans accounted for 1 million of the Californian voting electorate, 70% voting Yes, or seven hundred thousand voters.

Many believe the high voter turnout of African Americans led to the passage of Proposition 8. What about the Catholics?

It’s been terrible these past few days watching the fires ravage Southern California. It’s also been amazing to see the community come together to assist, and the brave men and women struggling to bring the fires under control and help the injured and displaced through the ordeal. In such an event, politics should take a back seat. But not according to Glen Beck, conservative talker who also somehow managed to snag a show on CNN Headline News.

Check out the audio clip below…

[audio:https://inlookout.com/wp-content/media/audio/beck-20071022-calif.mp3]

This is simply the latest in series of incendiary statements made by Beck over the last several months. To believe I spent the better part of a year listening to him in the car just to get a sense of how the other side thinks. In a later broadcast, Beck indicated he was only joking with regards to that little quip about those losing their homes to the fire were America Haters. Funny thing was.. didn’t sound like a joke… Didn’t feel like a joke. It actually wasn’t very funny. Perhaps you should dial in a laugh track when your joking, Mr. Beck. Might be helpful. Then we’d know.

And with any luck, like most recent shows with a laugh track, you’d be canceled.

It has been some time since posting here, and I apologize. The deluge of news, most of it bad, has left me at a loss for words. The sorry state of affairs in this country has sometimes made me ill, and sometimes extraordinarily angry. But my silence ends today.

Seems ABC and the folks at the mouse house are putting out a little mini-series this Sunday night called “Path to 9/11”. The “docudrama” is causing quite a stir, raising the ire of many on the Left while at the same time receiving accolades by many on the Right. Especially if you ask Rush Limbaugh, one of the lucky few who have actually seen the film.

Consider my ire sufficiently raised.

Before this tirade builds up any steam, let me address one thing. Some are already saying “What’s the big deal? Michael Moore made “Fahrenheit 9/11“? Why can’t we have our own movie.” Well if your among the 40+ percent in a recent CNN poll who believe Iraq had something to do with 9/11, you also probably don’t know the difference between a docudrama and documentary so move to the back of the line.

First of all “Fahrenheit 9/11” was a movie at the “movie” theater, that you had to PAY to see. Also there was no illusion that this film passed through the filter that is Michael Moore, a controversial and opionated documentarian often prone to hyperbole, as demostrated in his previous films. Also of note, Disney refused to distribute the film, as not to become entangled in the political process of an election year (allow me to lift one ass cheek in response as the gas, I mean hypocrisy begins to build).

The “Path to 9/11” however has a few notable differences. It will play on TV… not at you local cinema, for FREE, carried over the airwaves the FCC has so graciously licensed for our enjoyment. It is based soley on the 9/11 Commision Report (apparently) and purports to have the air of fact and truth about it. Its airing coincides with 5 year anniversary of the attacks of September 11, and also comes on the eve of what may be the most crucial midterm elections in this nation’s history. Depsite growing criticism, ABC/Disney is moving forward with it’s airing despite its pre-election timing (other cheek is now airborne, followed by a resounding “whoosh”).

Give me an F’ing break.

Let’s talk a little truth.

• Only right wing media (in additional to the usual bevy of TV reviewing publications) have been allowed to preview the film and have subsequently praised it as gospel; the same media that slammed that Reagan film a few years ago which eventually aired on the sleep-inducing Lifetime network.
• The film contains factual inaccuracies (dramatic license I’m sure), most notably a scene that never actually happened, and was improvised on the set. Said scene infers that the Clinton administration had the chance to capture Osama (essentially troops standing outside his door, awaiting orders to go in) but declined.
• Its writer, Cyrus Nowrasteh, is a conservative activist, who has spoken out against Michael Moore and Bill Clinton, and praises the Patriot Act. The film is factually-based on the 9/11 Commission Report (at least up until yesterday). In addition, Nowrasteh has granted interviews only to right-wing sites, no mainstream of left-wing interviews to be found.
• At least one member of the 9/11 Commision has denounced a key scene in the film.
• Scholastic Press has pulled it’s “Path to 9/11” discussion guide from distribution in high schools, saying the materials “did not meet their high standards.”

You know I wouldn’t have much of a problem with this film if it was showing at the theatres, where people actually paid to see it, you know, like that other film. Many say that other film contains factual errors too. I feel however that “Path to 9/11” is imminently more dangerous then “Fahrenheit 9/11” (as viewed by the Right) ever was. It masquerade’s as historical fact, delivered into every home’s idiot box without cost but plenty of bias (smells like the “P” word). It could certainly affect the positions of those on the fence, particularly those mentioned in that earlier poll. And the timing of the film certainly plays into the hands of the Right desparately attempting to hold power past November.

If nothing else, with something as important as 9/11, ABC/Disney is seriously remiss in not telling a story as accurate as possible, and in doing so dishonors those who lost their lives on September 11, 2001. It also insults the intelligence of the 50+ percent in that poll who heard and understood when Bush said that Iraq hand nothing to do with the attacks on 9/11.

As of this writing it appears ABC may be re-editing the film to give it a more balanced view of the events. Too little. Too late. The damage is done.