Remi (e-mail him)
am a native-born English-speaking American, I also
speak fluent Spanish.
Like many other
Roman Catholics, I am greatly distressed by
direction my church has taken by encouraging illegal
immigration. And recently I came across something in our
parish that confirmed my worst fears about its
engaged couples should meet with their priest
at least four months
anticipated wedding date. This is the Bishop`s stated
fixed policy per its website.
Our local parish however,
St. Thomas Aquinas, has
bulletin, the pre-nuptial guidelines require that
no wedding date can be set until an engaged couple meets
with the priest
at least six months
before the anticipated wedding.
But in the
states that the no wedding date can be set up until an
engaged couple meets with the priest
at least six weeks before the
proposed wedding date.
Since I am
one of the few native-born Americans in our parish that
speaks Spanish fluently, this outrageous double-dealing
goes unnoticed by most other parishioners.
Here is the
word for word text that I copied from my Church`s actual
From the St. Thomas Aquinas
Sunday English Bulletin:
Matrimony…Please contact the Office or Rectory at least
six months before the date of the proposed marriage”
From the Sunday Spanish
“…Sacramento del matrimonio
favor pongase en contacto con la oficina por o menos 6
semanas antes de la fecha de la boda.”
(“Sacrament of Matrimony…Please contact the office at
least 6 weeks before the date of the wedding.”)
addition, the Church certainly fears an increase in
abortions among the brides-to-be if a wait longer than
six weeks is required, since many brides are already
pregnant. Abortion rates are higher among Hispanics per
Alan Guttmacher Institute figures that
VDARE.COM has previously published.
The likely explanation one would probably get from our
Father Chad Puthoff, is that the Church made a
typographical misprint. But my wife and I have been
collecting both the English and Spanish versions of the
bulletin for about six months. This is no error—it done
completely by design.
My wife and I have already been denounced as
racists, troublemakers, malcontents, etc— the usual
litany of charges—when we speak out about this and other
matters concerning our parish`s
preferential treatment of Hispanics.
Alice Gregory (e-mail
Re: Joe Guzzardi`s Column:
A Mexican Immigrant Asks Why Can`t He Wave His Flag? Joe
(And Ruben Navarrette) Explain
II understand the point Miguel Mendoza, the letter writer with
Guzzardi corresponded and cited in his column, is
trying to make. Mendoza feels that
demonstrations involving the Mexican flag are
Maybe…but more often foreign flag waving and its more
offensive variation of flag hanging send a different
When Mexicans wave their flag, it is not done in celebration
but to represent an act of defiance in opposition to
American resistance to their
Gregory is recently retired. Although
her family encourages her to return to work, she finds
patriotic immigration reform activism more satisfying.
Augusto Perez (e-mail
Letter writer Mendoza fails to understand that
Mexico continues to exert influence over what it
calls "Mexican communities abroad," as it defines
the term here in a Spanish-language only
That the vast majorities of these “communities” consist of
illegal aliens and their children is of no
importance to nationalists like Mendoza.
Defending waving the Mexican flag in the U.S. is the same if
gang member alleged that flashing his signs is not a
breach of civil discourse.
That the galvanizing issue for many
ethnocentric immigrants, most often Mexicans,
continues to be the quest for legalization of illegal
aliens proves that those who have citizenship
have yet to shed the national loyalties they swore to forego when they
took the oath of allegiance to America.
lobbyists and apologists persist in cooperating with
Mexico to further that country`s agenda, it is
tantamount to nullifying their citizenship.
Were it not for the fact that Mexico uses its
Diaspora as a lobbying tool, all the flag waving
might be ignored.
But the fact is that Mexico maintains a
constant campaign to create links between their
citizens and to have them think “Mexico first”.
I propose that the U.S. end ill-conceived notion of tolerating
dual citizenship. Foreign-born citizens, if they
hold a passport from their native country, should be
forced to surrender it immediately or his U.S.
citizenship would be annulled.
Joe Mulvey (e-mail him)
Re: Today`s Letter:
A Connecticut Reader Predicts Senator Christopher Dodd
Will Drop Out
There`s so much more dirty laundry to hang out about
Christopher Dodd`s sleazy financial maneuverings.
Not only has Dodd been the recipient of generous
contributions but also his wife
Jackie Clegg Dodd was from 2001 to 2004 an
"outside" director of
Ltd., a Bermuda-based company controlled by AIG. [Dodd`s
Wife, Too, Had Money Links to AIG, by Jennifer
Fermino, New York Post, March 25, 2009]
In 2003, according to
a proxy statement, Clegg received $12,000 per year
and an additional $1,000 for each directors and
committee meeting she attended—and she faithfully
attended more than 75 percent of them. Clegg sat on the
Audit and Investment committees during her final year on
Furthermore, she served as the managing partner of
Clegg International Consultants, LLC, which she
created in 2001, the year she joined the board of IPC.
Dodd`s public financial disclosure reports with the
Senate from 2001-2004 can be seen
Mulvey is an insurance