By Jess Lujan
KUAM
November 2, 2009
http://www.kuam.com/Global/story.asp?S=11423518
 |
In general, I subscribe to President Obama's constant refrain that we should disagree with each other without being disagreeable. Unfortunately Bill 185, a Bill to allow civil unions on Guam, has brought out long simmering discontent and tensions in our society that must be aired, debated and exorcised from our small community.
This is the only way we can live in peace and harmony with each other. Lending my efforts to promoting this laudable goal, I want to address some of the contentious points raised by both sides in the debate over Bill 185.
On the one side, Senator B.J. Cruz, advocating for the Bill, disclosed that he had been molested, for years, in his early teens, by a Catholic priest in Los Angeles. And, a self-described, 30 year veteran of the Guam police force, who called into my radio show, stated that he had arrested a Catholic priest who molested a young alter boy on Guam. He stated that after his arrest, the priest admitted to molesting multiple victims on Guam.
According to the retired police officer, this entire incident was covered up by former Archbishop Flores. The alleged offending priest was, according to the retired officer, promptly shipped off-island shortly after his arrest, and never faced justice on Guam. These examples of molestation by Catholic clergy were publicized, we were told, to expose the hypocrisy of the Catholic Church in tolerating child sexual abuse while simultaneously victimizing homosexuals. The double standard was presented to our community to undermine the moral authority of the Catholic Church's leadership to speak out against homosexuality and Bill 185.
Any person who has been molested, especially by a Catholic priest, should come forward and make a formal accusation. Thereafter, our judicial system should prosecute any credible allegations to the fullest extent of the law, especially if the alleged perpetrators are Catholic priests, who are held in positions of trust and confidence by our community. Archbishop Apuron recently released a statement expressing the position of the Church that allegations of molestation against priests should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
The Archbishop reaffirmed that the Church has put in place procedures to ensure prompt investigation and prosecution of allegations of abuse made against any Catholic clergy. Chief of Police Paul Suba also confirmed that his officers will pursue allegations of sexual abuse to the fullest extent of the law. I believe this sets the stage to ensure that victims of molestation will receive full support from our community when making formal accusations against any person, including Catholic priests.
While much effort has been spent to ensure that allegations of molestation be addressed outside a climate of fear, there is more to be done regarding statements made by Archbishop Apuron while arguing against Bill 185. The Archbishop, twice, apologized for any hurt he may have caused to members in our community by some of his statements in support of Bill 185. However, there are some parts of the Archbishop's statements made in support of 185 that still disturb me, and the Archbishop still needs to more specifically and forcefully refute them.
Here is what I mean. Archbishop Anthony Apuron made the following statement as part of a comment supporting the Church's opposition to Bill 185.
"Islamic fundamentalists clearly understand the damage that homosexual behavior inflicts on a culture. That is why they repress such behavior by death. Their culture is anything but one of self-absorption. It may be brutal at times, but any culture that is able to produce wave after wave of suicide bombers (women as well as men) is a culture that at least knows how to value self-sacrifice. Terrorism as a way to oppose the degeneration of the culture is to be rejected completely since such violence is itself another form of degeneracy. One, however, does not have to agree with the gruesome ways that the fundamentalists use to curb the forces that undermine their culture to admit that the Islamic fundamentalists charge that Western Civilization in general and the U.S.A. in particular is the "Great Satan" is not without an element of truth. It makes no sense for the U.S. Government to send our boys to fight Al Qaida and the Taliban in Afghanistan, while at the same time it embraces the social policies embodied in Bill 185 (as President Obama has done). Such policies only furnish further arguments for the fundamentalists in their efforts to gain more recruits for the war against the ‘Great Satan.'"
In the heat of an argument about deeply held beliefs, we sometimes say and do things that we later regret. I am sure that the above statement falls into that category for the Archbishop.
The above statement seems to excuse, or perhaps even advocate, violence against homosexuals, because they are homosexuals. This incitement to violence can be inferred from the Archbishop's seeming endorsement of the Muslim Fundamentalists' practice of murdering homosexuals. This is wrong.
Because of the Archbishop's moral leadership, and because of the respect he commands in our community, any ambiguity about this statement can cause misguided Catholics to inflict violence on homosexuals, believing their actions are sanctioned by the Archbishop and the Church. The Archbishop must clearly retract this statement, and inform Catholics in the community that neither he, nor the Church, advocate violence against homosexuals, even thought the Church may strongly disagree with homosexuality.
Secondly, the Archbishop seems to have commented approvingly or admiringly about the Muslim Fundamentalists' practice of suicide bombing. This is wrong. I disagree with the Archbishop's position that Muslim Fundamentalist suicide bombers are engaging in an act of self-sacrifice. Their act of homicidal suicide is the ultimate act of selfishness, and represents the culmination of a depraved set of beliefs and ideals, much like the Nazis who willing killed and died for Adolf Hitler's Nazi ideology.
Most Muslim Fundamentalists blow themselves up believing they will go directly to heaven and live in eternal bliss, serviced by 72 virgins. For this "reward", they are willing to murder thousands of innocent people. Some of these murdered innocents were killed on September 11th in New York City. Their act of suicide bombing cannot be construed as an act of genuine self-sacrifice as the Archbishop suggests.
The Archbishop's comment also disrespects our men and women in uniform who have been murdered by suicide bombers. These men and women in uniform, who put their lives on the line for love of country, love of family, and love of liberty, are true examples of self-sacrifice - not the "self-sacrifice" of suicide bombers, who kill innocents out of hate for our love of liberty, and hate for our love of tolerance and democracy. The Archbishop must retract this statement seeming to approve suicide bombers and suicide bombings.
Thirdly, the Archbishop's sympathy for the Muslim Fundamentalists' notion that the U.S.A. is the "Great Satan" is personally offensive to me. While I am the first to admit that our country has many imperfections, it nevertheless respects human dignity consistent with Christian principles far more than the system the Muslim Fundamentalists established in Afghanistan under the Taliban, or anywhere else where they have held sway.
I often disagree with the things my country does, but the very fact that I can disagree with those in power, and with our religious leaders, without being imprisoned or killed is exactly why I am a proud American. Many of our men and women, including many homosexuals, have died in defense of these ideals. That is the kind of self-sacrifice I admire, and I believe, so does our community.
Finally, the Archbishop seems to be advocating a strategy of appeasement towards Muslim Fundamentalists to deter them from attacking us. This is wrong. The notion that we should become more like Muslim Fundamentalists to escape their wrath is misguided. How far should we go? Do we begin stoning women to death for relatively minor infractions? Do we implement Sharia law? Do we convert to Islam?
Our beliefs in tolerance, democracy and liberty, are, in my opinion, superior to Muslim Fundamentalists' beliefs of intolerance, dictatorship and hate, and therefore, our superior beliefs are worth defending against attacks on them by Muslim Fundamentalists. We must do this with all our power, even if it means confronting and defeating fanatical suicide bombers.
The views and opinions expressed in KUAM Columns do not necessarily reflect those of Pacific Telestations, Inc. or its advertisers
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.