Support This Website! Shop Here!

Tuesday, May 15, 2018

The Silence of the CABs

Catholic-American bloggers are strange beasts. Many of them went absolutely bonkers about Alfie Evans. They were insanely set on an amazing set of ideas:

  • parental rights are absolutely absolute, 
  • the state has no right whatsoever to step between a child and his parents, 
  • parents have the right to take their child to any country in the world if those parents believe there is even the smallest chance of improving the child's life. 
  • Even if the travel puts the child at grave risk of death, SCREW IT! Those parents have the right to do it!
So, Father Longenecker, EWTN, National Catholic Register, Rod Dreher (alright, he isn't Catholic, but still)... all of these and many, many more went absolutely bonkers insisting on some or all of these points. Anyone who even quietly attempted to moderate a single one of the points above was immediately attacked as a pro-abort, socialistic Democrat anti-Catholic hate monger who wanted a nanny state to replace legitimate parental authority.

Well, Catholic-American bloggers are nothing if not consistent. When the news came out that President Donald Trump's MAGA government explicitly and emphatically
  1. denied that parental rights are absolutely absolute
  2. insisted the state has every right to step between the child and his parents, 
  3. reviled the idea that parents have the right to take their children to other countries
  4. and argued that the very trip itself was simply too dangerous for the child, so the government has the right to actively kidnap the child and keep the parents from ever seeing their own child again...
... well, of course the Catholic blogosphere exploded! Articles came out in, National Review, National Catholic Register and Reporter. EWTN's Raymond Arroyo castigated the president as an out-of-control socialist. Rod Dreher attacked Trump's assault on the family. Father Longenecker lamented the putrid anti-Catholic malfeasance flowing like an open latrine from the Oval Office.

Right? Right!?!

Wait... What.....???

What do you mean all of those CABs are silent as the grave?
But... but.... but... consistency!
Catholic values!
Parental RIGHTS!?!?!

What about parental rights?
I mean, even the British didn't take Alfie away from his parents. They just wouldn't let Alfie on a plane, lest he die... too dangerous, in the government's view. But even the British never denied the parents access to their own child.

Trump, on the other hand, is actually snatching the kids, separating the families, making sure the parents never see their own children again. And doing this not just to one child, but thousands of children, not just one set of parents, but thousands of parents, not just one family, but thousands of families. The regular snatching of children away from their parents is now an exercise of official American government policy.

Sooo.... what happened to all that noise about Catholic Family Values (tm)?
Where did those click-mongers disappear to?

Oh... that's right.

For "conservative" Catholic Americans, Catholic values are disposable horseshit compared to the value in protecting Trump's legacy. That's what American Catholic Bloggers think. That's how they treat the Trumpian nightmare versus Alfie's nightmare. Trump is kidnapping the children of a bunch of Catholic Mexicans, but screw our brothers and sisters in the Faith. We support TRUMP, dammit, not a bunch of sniveling brown-skinned Catholics!

People sometimes question why I never read anyone in Catholic media.
The blow-up over Alfie vs the silence over Trump... yeah, that's why.


Unknown said...

Over generalization. May as well bitch about any RC blog topic. I may not have a vote but I’d rather read you opining on RC doctrine regarding the right of “the state”.

cwby said...

boy that was a conflation if I ever heard one.

Let's say someone is charged with breaking and entering. That person is arrested, charged and put in jail. He or she is separated from their children. No outrage there right?

Families that come here illegally are subject to the law as written. Unfortunately, foreign nationals have chosen to break our laws and the Administration is left to enforce these laws. The adults are separated from the children for illegal entry into the US. Like the example above, they are detained and processed for deportation.

The Alfie story.
A toddler with a rare and fatal disease has an opportunity to seek care elsewhere. The cost to Britain's healthcare is relieved. The cost for the treatment is covered by someone else.

The British law states that it can intervened in the best interests of the child. the law that originated in 1891 intended for the courts to intervene in cases where the parents are abusive or neglectful.

Intent is important. Does anyone believe that the parents were any of these? They wanted their child to live and recover. They were using outside resources to do so. They weren't selling him into prostitution, they loved him and wanted to save him.

The courts decided that it was. They felt that the parents effort to save him constituted abuse.

The courts got to decide what parents and their own personal resources would have decided.

The difference.
Families that come to the US illegally do so at the risk of prosecution and separation. To change that would change the incentives to further encourage illegal immigration. There is no misreading of the law. The law is administered as written. There is nothing particularly sinister about the process. We do the same to our citizens that break the law, why not non citizens?
Alfie's case was a misreading of the law. It is hard to twist the parents actions as neglect or abuse.

Why did they do it? There was a chance that Britain would be embarrassed on the world stage by other countries and agents providing better care than the mother country Thus the incentive was to deny the request using this law as cover.
Of course this is perverse