This came in an email this morning from Ryan Burge that is relevant to the discussion of original sin and baptism.
“There’s a running joke in American religious life that goes something like this: ask ten Catholics what the Church teaches on a given issue, and you’ll get eleven different answers. It’s meant to be affectionate, a nod to the big-tent nature of a tradition that has managed to hold together nearly a billion people across wildly different cultures, languages, and political contexts. But like most jokes, it contains more than a little truth.
The Catholic Church is one of the most doctrinally specific institutions in the world. The Magisterium — the Pope, Cardinals, and Bishops — has issued detailed guidance on everything from the mechanics of salvation to the appropriate use of birth control to how often a faithful Catholic should receive the sacrament of Reconciliation. These aren’t suggestions. They are, in the Church’s own framing, the authoritative teachings of an institution that believes itself to be guided by the Holy Spirit…….
And yet, anyone who has spent time around American Catholics knows that the distance between official Church teaching and the lived experience of the average Catholic in the pew can be considerable. This isn’t a new observation — sociologists of religion have been documenting it fordecades. But it raises a genuinely interesting empirical question: just how Catholic, in the doctrinal sense of the word, is the average American Catholic?”
There is also a story within the story that asks if converts are more hard- core than cradle Catholics.
He provides interesting data, charts and graphs, as usual
https://www.graphsaboutreligion.com/p/the-conformity-gap-what-american
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteApologies that this is tangential to your main theme about conformity to doctrine. I realize that the experience of converts is of very little interest to those here. I wrote the above for a different discussion group, so I am happy to delete here if too far off-topic.
DeleteWell, not a convert, nut married to one, and daughter of one. So not off topic for me.
Delete"nut" should be but.
DeleteAnother attempt to link to the sub- article about converts so that it will open.
Deletehttps://www.graphsaboutreligion.com/p/are-catholic-converts-more-hard-core
“ I realize that the experience of converts is of very little interest to those here”
Well, maybe not to everyone, but it definitely is to me. It’s a subject that has long fascinated me because my years long struggles to stay in the church often made me wonder why anyone would. actually Choose to be Catholic, if not for marriage purposes.. I have read books by those who can’t free themselves from Catholicism (like me) and those who explain why they left, like the author of “A question of Conscience” and articles by converts. Years ago I read a book called “Once a. CatholicI “ about the strong hold and lasting influence of Catholicism even on those who come to reject it. https://www.amazon.com/dp/039542111X?lv=shuf&channelId=500&plpRedirect=mhFallback#detailBullets_feature_div.
“ A Question of Conscience”
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0340037490?lv=shuf&channelId=500&plpRedirect=mhFallback
by an English theolgian who left Catholicism. I read articles by converts, trying to understand their experience. Unfortunately (in my opinion) too many of those convert stories are by evangelicals who kept their somewhat fundamentalist world views but loved the smells, bells, costumes, and drama of Catholic liturgy
I have been very interested in your reports from RCIA. And how the Church Ladies operate at your parish. And your pastor. Why would anybody want to become Catholic at your parish with your RCIA program?
Second link is blocked. Appatently, once you've had your freebie, you're done. Thanks for trying. Carry on with the original theme!
DeleteInteresting. I get an email from him several times/ week. I’ve not been blocked from opening the sub- articles and I’ve never been asked to subscribe to read them.
DeleteFor me, the 2nd link isn't completely blocked. It let me read about five paragraphs, showed me one interesting graph (of cradle Catholics vs. convert Catholics) and then told me I needed to be a paid subscriber to see the rest. Apparently it thinks I'm an unpaid subscriber; it addressed me, not by my usual name, but by a nickname I've used for different commenting situations over the years. I don't remember freebie-subscribing to Burge's Substack in the past (although I might have), so maybe Substack recognizes me from some other Substack author's site.
DeleteYeah, I just got to the graph but not the explanation of what it meant.
DeleteWe just had the gospel about the sower and the seed yesterday. I'm thinking some of the converts may be like the seeds that sprung up, but the ground was shallow, and they withered away. Maybe not, time will tell.
Btw, to digress: maybe "sower" is a traditional term for these Gospel passages the last couple of weeks, but I don't think anyone around here uses them in real life, and for someone who is listening rather than reading along, it may not be immediately intelligible - almost certainly would not be intelligible for any children in the congregation. Why can't they say, 'A farmer planted some seeds' rather than, 'A sower sowed some seeds'?
DeleteWhen I think of a farmer sowing seed, I think of a guy driving a John Deere pulling some heavy equipment planting seed in nice neat rows. The word "sower" brings a mental picture of someone walking and taking handfuls of seed from a canvas sack, and flinging the seed with abandon. It lands where it lands.
DeleteOk, I guess there is an implied scattering technique in "sow". It does sharpen the mental image, if one happens to know that. I think last Sunday's parable still works if you imagine the crops growing in neat rows, and the weeds growing wilky-nilly among them.
DeleteLast week's parable also seems to distinguish between the sower (who apparently was the landowner) and the harvesters, who seem to be the owner's slaves. Jesus makes that distinction between planters and harvesters in one or two other places, so that may be part of what is at work here.
Interesting observations. So many of the parables and episodes in the Bible are aimed at nomadic-agrarian people living, often struggling, in a desert climate using technology that is as much as 3,000 years old.
DeleteContext gets very puzzling to people as time goes without instruction. Does that instruction happen in CCD? Not in my experience. We had to fill in a lot for The Boy.
It strikes me that what's missing from our understanding of Baptism is the dual symbol of water. It washes and cleans, yes. But water is also the source of life, essential for plants and animals, precious in an arid climate. Baptism nourishes us so we can grow.
I don’t agree that baptism automatically nourishes spiritual growth. But the symbolism that you point out—that it’s essential for life— would be suitable if properly explained, and is much better than claiming that baptism washes away original sin.
DeleteI didn't mean to imply that Baptism automatically does anything.
DeleteIf an adult being baptized is just going through the motions to get his family off his back, the sacrament seems pretty empty. A neighbor told me flat out that his mom offered to make a down payment on his house if he had his kid baptized. Again, pretty empty.
But who knows what happens in the fullness if time.
When Robert Duvall and his stepson are baptized in "Tender Mercies," the kid asks his stepdad if he feels any different. He says, "Not yet."
Does Baptism always yield spiritual fruit? I suspect not. But I can't see into people's souls.
Since most of the more than 7 billion people currently alive in the world are not baptized Christians but many of those billions of unbaptized are deeply spiritual, it seems that baptism itself does not impact spiritual growth.
DeleteMy middle son delayed confirmation until he was 16. His elder brother deferred it forever. The third insisted on being confirmed in 8 th grade because all of his friends were being confirmed then. (All three were in a Catholic school in 8th grade). I asked #3 to consider waiting, but he wanted to do it when his friends did. When #2 was confirmed he admitted afterward that he was very disappointed. He had truly believed (even at 16) that he would have some sense of the “arrival” of Holy Spirit and he would feel a change of some kind. But nothing.
I’ve never seen Tender Mercies. I’ve never even heard of it and I don’t know who Robert Duvall is. I am pretty much culturally Illiterate. Do you recommend that movie? I’ve seen very few movies in my entire lifetime, mostly those made available on long airplane trips. Not the best selection. Since my husband and I are now pretty much confined to our home I am continually looking for worthwhile tv and movies. It’s like looking for the needles in the streaming haystacks. Lots of movies and tv shows available for streaming, but almost none are worth watching. I screen them at night on my iPad to find something for us to watch at night but seldom last longer than 10 minutes on the movies I select.
I liked it as a study of human frailty and redemption. I also liked Duvall's movie The Apostle. Both are about deeply flawed men. Evangelical point of view, so there's some stuff I don't click with.
DeleteI also liked the movie Millions, which is Catholic in its POV. You need subtitles because the North English accents are so thick.
I don't think that Baptism confers some sort of invisible, indelible mark so that God can more easily sort out the souls of the dead.
Baptism isn't for God (and neither are any of the other sacraments), it's for us.
I think God's love mercy extends to everyone who acknowledges that a) they are not the center of the Universe and that b) they have obligations to their neighbors. Isn't that what the Good Samaritan story was all about?
The Church is often preoccupied with what we believe or do. I've been reading De Profundis, written by Oscar Wilde while he was imprisoned for homosexuality. He says God cares more about what we become, that God will forgive actions and doubts and is more concerned what we make of ourselves in spite of all that. I think that's basically what the lives of the Saints teach us.
Anyway, that's me spoutin' my heresies at 8 a.m.
Thanks. I’ve not heard of any of those movies. I really don”t care if they have religious subject matter, just looking for positive stories that don’t use vulgarity as a primary feature of the dialogue. Accents have been irrelevant to me for many years because I always use subtitles. Otherwise I don’t understand a word of the dialogue!
DeleteI look at sacraments as traditions - symbolic rituals that mark certain milestones don’t leave “marks” on the soul. Since God’s grace is always present to every person on earth. I don’t believe that sacraments provide some kind of special, high- octane grace. We just need to become aware of the grace that is always there. I just googled Robert Duvall. I see he was an actor ( I thought maybe he was a producer) and died a few months ago at age 95.
Each of the sacraments, imo, marks a turning point, a mini-conversion. I don't care for the Catholic way of hustling kids thru the sacraments at set ages. It's great for the CCD teachers. But it makes receiving the sacrament seem rote and what someone else expects of you vs what reflects your own progress or lack thereof.
DeleteUgh, apparently religious discussions are still catnip to an old Unitarian despite good intentions to stay out of them.
Delete"It strikes me that what's missing from our understanding of Baptism is the dual symbol of water. It washes and cleans, yes. But water is also the source of life, essential for plants and animals, precious in an arid climate. "
DeleteYes. It also symbolizes the waters of giving birth (i.e. the water breaking).
Catholics believe that baptism also results in the one being baptized having sacramental grace conferred upon her/him. To a point discussed above, that may not result in any physical or mental feeling. (I probably have mentioned this recently: one of my little private views is that we are a very feeling-centered people these days. I think, culturally, reason has been dethroned.) But even if we don't feel it, the grace is real, and gives us spiritual strength. That doesn't mean that we are "bullet-proof". But it's a resource we can draw upon. Or that is how I think of it , anyway.
It's clear that my religious ideas offend the completeness of Catholic teaching about these things. I become frustrated and ashamed that I need constant corrections as much as you weary of having to make them. I apologize for butting in here, and hope to do better keeping my big yapper shut!
DeleteJean, there are millions of Catholics who share many of your views. You really shouldn’t keep apologizing. Your comments are always interesting. Religion in general is speculation — the result of people asking the eternal questions and developing theologies to try to answer their questions. These theologies range from nature based indigenous religion to the ridiculously complicated ones like Catholicism and Hinduism. Saying that your religious ideas “ offend” the catechism answers is absurd.
DeleteI do think converts give more thought to doctrine than some cradle Catholics do. Usually there is one thing in particular that bugs them. With both my husband and my mom I think it was the Catholic relationship with Mary and the saints that they had to work through. Even though all the denominations which recite the Apostles' Creed have the line about the Communion of the Saints.
ReplyDeleteKinda not too surprising, all in all.
ReplyDeleteI don't think the bishops, at least during my adult lifetime, are hard-core on politics. They don't really say, "Thou shalt not vote for Democrats". Or "Thou shalt not vote for candidates who want to excessively curtail immigration." And I think that is as it should be. The bishops apply Catholic teachings to contemporary situations (like birth control or immigration). And then the Catholic voters figure out how to translate that into votes for candidates.
The bishops say that abortion is paramount ( even though Francis warned against that). So they say “ don’t vote for anyone who is pro- choice. Which is pretty much saying “ Don’t.vote for Democrats”
DeleteThey don't actually say dont vote for anyone who is pro choice, at least not here. They say that it is wrong to vote for someone because they are pro choice. I have no problem voting for someone in spite of them being pro choice if I think they are the best candidate.
DeleteThe Republican party has used "pro life" as a sort of human shield for the ton of objectionable things they are doing now. Our former governor, Pete Ricketts, who was appointed by the present governor to fill a Senate seat vacancy, used his own family money, when he was governor, to bring back the death penalty by a ballot initiative after the state legislature voted to repeal it over his veto. This is supposedly a pro life Catholic guy. He actually has to run for that Senate seat in November, and I'm not going to have any qualms about voting for his opponent. Or for the Democratic governor candidate. Turn the rascals out.
Jim I think that's as it should be too, that they're not hard core on politics.
DeleteOur archbishop did issue a strongly worded letter, also signed by the other two bishops in Nebraska last year. It was about just treatment of immigrants, not about voting.
My mistake, Ricketts actually did run in 2024 to hold his Senate seat. But he is up for election again this year.
DeleteKatherine, I am glad to learn about this further evidence that bishops are speaking out about immigrants. As a national conference, I don't think they have been particularly vocal (I could be wrong, but I'm not thinking of anything), although they have a department that specializes in that topic, and I am sure it has been pumping out statements and other materials. But many individual bishops, and perhaps state conferences such as yours, are speaking up, clearly and courageously.
DeleteI really think the topic of abortion has changed politically in the last decade, for a couple of reasons. The first was the Dobbs decision, which led to a couple of election cycles in which state-level abortion law shook out; that era now seems to be over. The outcome in quite a few states (including mine) has been unsatisfactory to the church, but the political way forward is not crystal clear in those states.
The second is that the Trump administration has put the very foundations of democracy at risk. It is becoming more urgent to secure those than it is to fight about abortion. I'm not speaking for the church on this point; this is my personal observation. I'm not certain the institutional church in the US apprehends the risk. The same may be true of other churches and denominations in the US.
Jim—“ the Trump administration has put the very foundations of democracy at risk. It is becoming more urgent to secure those than it is to fight about abortion. I'm not speaking for the church on this point; this is my personal observation. I'm not certain the institutional church in the US apprehends the risk. The same may be true of other churches and denominations in the US.”
DeleteI’ve. been saying this for years now. The institution not only doesn’t apprehend the risk, I suspect that they approve because they wish to have the government impose Catholic theology on all on the abortion issue, and they also want the government to ignore separation of church and state and to provide access to taxpayer money to support their schools. If these issues were put to a democratic vote, it is likely they would fail in most states, as has been demonstrated in the few states that did have a vote on abortion rights. . So an authoritarian government suits them. At least until it starts imposing Protestant theology and Protestant bibles on the Catholic schools that government supports which is already happening in a few red states like Texas. The evangelicals are thrilled to have their agenda being imposed by government in Florida, Texas and other states. I see that abstinence is now going to replace comprehensive sex education in government grants. It makes me laugh. About 75% of the projects I was involved with over my career as a freelance consultant were related to some aspect of international economics. The others were all over the map. I worked on an abstinence education program for about a year. I learned from that project that abstinence only education doesn’t work. After tossing those programs in favor of comprehensive sex education ( including abstinence AND contraception information ) the teenage pregnancy rate dropped like a stone. Apparently now they want to return to that failed model. Perhaps because now they WANT more teenage pregnancies?
Project 2025 is being implemented - currently about 53% of its policy prescriptions have been proposed or actually implemented.
"I worked on an abstinence education program for about a year. I learned from that project that abstinence only education doesn’t work. After tossing those programs in favor of comprehensive sex education ( including abstinence AND contraception information ) the teenage pregnancy rate dropped like a stone. Apparently now they want to return to that failed model. Perhaps because now they WANT more teenage pregnancies?"
DeleteRight - I think, in an education setting, complete and accurate information should be presented.
In that light: I don't object to contraception knowledge being passed along to high school teens. But - if I were the king of education, I would decree that the benefits of abstinence also should be taught, and should be given more than lip service. I would wish the lesson to be: abstinence is superior to being sexually active, for a number of reasons.
That observation is "upstream" from the question of contraception.
For middle school kids, I'd put an even stronger emphasis on the importance of abstinence.
"Perhaps because now they WANT more teenage pregnancies?"
DeleteI guess the "they" being referred to here are the natalists? If that is what natalists want, then I guess I'm not a natalist.
Jim, “ …I would decree that the benefits of abstinence also should be taught, and should be given more than lip service.”.
DeleteJim, that’s exactly the description of comprehensive sex education! But for several years, especially during the Bush administration, sex education was exclusively abstinence only and information about contraception was not mentioned. ( these programs were government funded). I knew from my research there, immersed in data about the program I was supporting, and US data, and EU country data, that teens in Europe received comprehensive sex education starting in middle school. They started having sexual relationships at an older age than American kids (many of whom were involved with church related “ purity” pledges), had fewer teen pregnancies and fewer abortions. Comprehensive sex education was more effective than abstinence only education, which is apparently what the government is now requiring for funding programs. They never learn. Compressive sex education programs replaced abstinence only programs when Obama came into office and the teen pregnancy rate dropped dramatically.
Could this administration be so desperate for more babies that it’s pushing abstinence only in spite of the history of failure? They actually WANT more babies and have made abortion very difficult to obtain by anyone in red states, but especially by 16 year old girls. I suppose the next authoritarian move will be pushing the young pregnant women onto giving up their babies for adoption.
I dont think they want more teens having babies because that would just mean more people needing public assistance. Which they think is socialism. I think they want the proverbial family with the white picket fence and a stay at home mom, with a dad who makes lots of money. Like they think the 1950s were. Never mind that the steps on the ladder to those kinds of jobs are being cut off by AI.
DeleteBut more teenage pregnancies does not guarantee marriage because they are too young.
Delete"But more teenage pregnancies does not guarantee marriage because they are too young."
DeleteI don't know what natalists think about teen pregnancies. From a public policy perspective, the low birthrate is a genuine concern. I'm not aware that any public policies have ever figured out how to reverse the trend. Certainly, we should hope that teen pregnancies aren't part of the policy mix!
At any rate, we're supposedly in the midst of a "sex recession" or something similar among young people. It's really a head-scratcher. Abstinence shouldn't be that easy!
What I am noticing is that young people aren't giving up on relationships. They're just waiting longer. Maybe things seem too unsettled right now. A college degree used to be a pretty good path to employment. Now it's no guarantee.
DeleteMy parents married fairly young in 1950. My grandparents were 30-ish when they married in 1927. It was tough going through the 1930s as young marrieds. These things seem to be cyclical, following economic ups and downs.
I’m not a pro- natalist ( is that the term?) for a few reasons. First is the ethics - pushing people to have babies for utilitarian reasons like supporting social security is treating babies as a commodity. Babies should be the result of a choice by a mature (not teenage) couple (ideally married) who want to share their love with a child or children. Those who don’t want children should be left alone— no pressure from wanna be grandparents, from the Catholic Church or other religious institutions, or from the government. Second — the environment and the need to protect the planet and support the population we have without destroying the planet. The rate of population growth of the last century, even of the last 50 years, is not sustainable.
Delete“ Over the past century, the global total climbed from roughly 2 billion in 1926 to over 8.2 billion today. Over the last 50 years alone, since 1976, the population has more than doubled from about 4.1 billion to over 8.2 billion people”
Climate change adds to the challenges as water shortages grow, arable land recedes, deserts enlarge, and people are forced to migrate to areas where their lives can be sustained. This will lead to increasing stress on the infrastructure of these areas, both natural and man- made.
They are pushing early marriage so that there are more years for couples to create more children. Again - utilitarian. They do this in spite of piles of data that show that younger couples have higher divorce rates. It isn’t the 1950s anymore either, when wives (or husbands, but mostly wives) who wanted out were stuck. Women often married young for financial security because they had few options after high school. They hadn’t had access to higher education in great numbers to open doors to better paying jobs, they had to prove adultery or physical abuse to a court for a divorce, and they couldn’t get jobs that paid decently anyway. Gradually this changed so when no- fault divorce was passed divorce rate exploded.
Re: pressure: I don't know that (or how) a government would pressure married couples to have more children. But I am in favor of public policies that reward virtuous behavior and are directed toward good public policy outcomes. Like income tax deductions for children, and the elimination of the marriage penalty.
DeleteThere was basically no public policy justification for the Obamacare contraception mandate, and it seems contrary to a public policy goal of having sufficient wage earners to support the retirement entitlements. If you want to make an argument for subsidized contraception for unmarried teens, then at least that seems more rational.
If Google Gemini is to be believed, since the mid-20th century, immigration (rather than Ametican family size) has accounted for 75% or more of the American population growth. It seems possible to likely that, going forward, the US wil be welcoming fewer immigrants (both legal and illegal) than we have in the past; the 2024 election results showed what the American public thinks of a wide-open door at the borders. I think we are entering an age of population stagnation in the US. In that, we are like China, Russia and much of Europe. The world wide population Anne mentioned isn't happening in the wealthy nations.
DeleteI think the justification for the Obamacare contraception mandate was that it is considered legitimately part of healthcare. One may argue pro and con whether it *should* be, but that could apply to a lot of things. My personal peeve is, why aren't vision and dental care part of regular Medicare? After all, your eyes and teeth are part of your body!
Delete* The world wide population Anne mentioned isn't happening in the wealthy nations.”
DeleteThis is a good thing. The wealthy nations use far, far more of the world’s resources than middle income and poor nations. America is the worst offender because so much of our GDP is based on consumption — much more than is the case in other wealthy countries. . Trumps drive to gain control over other countries with desirable resources like minerals in Greenland, the oil in Venezuela (and Iran?) is not only morally wrong it could lead to an even more dangerous war than the one we are currently mired in. He also wants to destroy our national parks by leasing the land to oil and mining companies. America has more than enough people already. Policies that essentially force more births like a national ban on abortion, cutting funding for contraception or making it hard to obtain are wrong. Contraceptive pills are often Prescribed for health issues, but pregnancy prevention is also a health issue. The scare tactics used by the anti-contraception crowd about the dangers of the pill are lies. The death rate from pregnancy and childbirth greatly exceeds deaths from the pill. It is pretty non- existent these days. In the early years there were some strokes but the scientists quickly adjusted the dosage and strokes are exceedingly rare now.
If this administration really wants more babies they are pushing out the wrong people, since Latinos have more children on average than whites. They really only want more white babies.
"If this administration really wants more babies they are pushing out the wrong people, since Latinos have more children on average than whites. They really only want more white babies."
Deletei suspect this is largely true, and what underlies their natalism is hatred of immigrants. They know the country's population must grow if the economy is continue to grow and entitlements sustained, but they don't want that growth to come from immigration.
Jim —“ There was basically no public policy justification for the Obamacare contraception mandate, ”. Huh? Obamacare is health insurance and pregnancy is a health issue.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteWell, I was going to make a new post, but Blogger won't let me today. Don't know what the cause of that is, but anyway, this is the article I was going to post about:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.ncronline.org/news/he-converted-catholicism-while-death-row-it-began-one-question-about-god
We were commenting previously about Baptism, and whether it changes anything. The NCR article is about someone for whom it did. Briley Piper was a prisoner in SD on death row when he was baptised in 2008. He's still a prisoner on death row, but his life is different. It is interesting that he said he was more nervous on the day of his baptism than on the day he received a death sentence.
The article is interesting to read.
I read the article. It’s clear that his conversion was a gradual process. He didn’t change because of being baptized. Baptism was like a graduation ceremony. His conversion wasn’t due to being baptized but to a long, slow process of education, guidance and examples of love and kindness from the religious guides that served the prison.
DeleteWell of course it isn't magic, a sacrament is said to be an "outward sign". My baptism wasn't an instant change either, because I was, like, a month old. But it mattered, because it was the beginning of a process. Briley Piper's baptism was a sign of commitment. It's a serious thing, at whatever age it happens.
DeleteThere was a picture in the article of a lovely little chapel in the prison. I felt badly for Piper because he can't attend any services in it. He was baptized by the bishop, over a towel, with his hands cuffed behind his back.
Yes, Baptism is the beginning of a commitment, but by whom? When adults are baptized it is their choice, so they are making a commitment ( although often without full knowledge of what they are really committing to). But infants can’t make a commitment. They don’t ask for baptism. That’s why we gave our sons the choice for confirmation. Our pastor was angry with me for letting the boys choose. Mr Piper needs prayers. I am totally opposed to capital punishment. The church is also, but you never hear about that from the pulpits.
DeleteI am opposed to capital punishment too. I hope at least they will commute his sentence to life. The article said he was the only one on death row.
DeleteJust a note. At the Ft. Lauderdale airport on Monday, the agent that checks your ID and takes your picture got a young hispanic woman’s phone and later returned it to her. I guess they downloaded the contents of the phone. This was security for domestic flights, not international ones. I have a burner phone now and intend to use it whenever I travel.
ReplyDeleteStanley, having a burner for travel is an excellent idea. Several tech sites provide detailed information about avoiding these invasions of privacy on phones, tablets and laptops when traveling overseas and back. If you refuse to unlock them, they will keep your devices and return them only after their experts have managed to access your personal information. So people hand them over even though this should be illegal- search without a warrant.
DeleteThat's pretty likely illegal and if it's not just a one- off of someone overstepping their authority, I hope people raise a huge stink over it and initiate a class action lawsuit. Even if it is a one-off it merits a lawsuit.
DeleteIt's said that when the only tool you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. Prosecution in the courts is a blunt instrument, but so far it seems to be the thing that most often trips up the administration.
Florida has a large tourist economy which stands to be hurt by stuff like that. People need to boycott it. (I'll boycott it, of course it's the last place on earth I'd want to visit, maybe just a little ahead of Antarctica).
Yes. Our rights are being run over roughshod, Anne. And Katherine, if I didn’t have relatives down there, I’d never go. The Plantation FL streets were navigable. Three lanes in one direction with extra lanes for turns. I could still never live there.
DeleteAI summary
DeleteYour legal rights to data privacy depend entirely on whether you are traveling domestically (screened by the TSA) or crossing an international border (screened by Customs and Border Protection). TSA agents cannot legally search your phone's data, whereas Customs officers at international borders possess broad, suspicionless authority to search and copy local device files.Domestic Travel (TSA Checkpoints)Scope of Authority: The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) focuses strictly on aviation security, weapons, and explosives.Phone Searches: TSA agents cannot legally search your text messages, emails, photos, or documents. They may ask you to turn on a device to prove it functions, but they cannot demand your passcode or browse your data.Your Rights: You have the legal right to decline a request by a TSA officer to unlock your phone or review your digital data.International Travel (U.S. Customs and Border Protection)Scope of Authority: When re-entering or entering the United States, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) operates under the "border search exception" to the Fourth Amendment.Basic vs. Advanced Searches: CBP officers can conduct a basic manual search (scrolling through files, photos, or texts) on any electronic device without a warrant or suspicion of a crime. An advanced forensic search (connecting external equipment to copy or extract data) generally requires reasonable suspicion or national security justification and supervisory approval.Cloud Data: Legally, officers are restricted from intentionally logging into or pulling data stored solely in remote cloud servers; they are limited to data physically present on the device offline. Officers routinely ask users to turn off Wi-Fi and cellular data before a search to prevent accidental cloud syncing.Refusal Consequences: U.S. citizens cannot be denied entry into the country for refusing to unlock a device, though CBP may temporarily seize the hardware for forensic review. Non-citizens (including green card holders and visa holders) face higher risks, and refusal to cooperate can result in denied admission or revoked visas.Legal Ways to Protect Your DataUse Clean Devices: Travel with a dedicated "burner" or loaner laptop/phone loaded with only the bare minimum data required for the trip.Disable Biometrics: Turn off Face ID or fingerprint unlocking before travel. Law enforcement cannot legally force you to type a passcode in many contexts, but they may attempt to physically compel biometric unlocks without extra protections.Wipe and Cloud-Store: Keep sensitive documents in remote cloud storage rather than local device memory, and log out of all apps and email accounts before crossing borders.
It sounds as if the FLL action was illegal.
DeleteI agree - sounds illegal. FYI, Fort Lauderdale is an international airport, but normally TSA would be providing security for domestic flights.
DeleteThe eldest son and his wife who have traveled to Europe many times and are now moving to Spain have been aware of the risks especially because she is a naturalized citizen and is black, However they have Global Entry that provides access to the fast TSA lines in the US and bypassing a physical check in with Immigration officials when returning from outside the country. When you return you just have to scan your passport at a kiosk instead of stand in line to have an Immigration officer clear you. That probably helps as Global Entry vetting includes a background check and personal interview with the authorities and fingerprints before getting it. We just renewed our Global Entry. It’s good for 5 years at a time. I’m being optimistic that we will be able to go visit our family in Barcelona! Somehow.
DeleteYes, FLL is an international airport but when we’ve flown internationally we had to clear TSA on departure. On return the clearance is done by Customs and Border Patrol.
DeletePhone displays are used now as boarding passes. I don’t know if there was a problem with that but it would seem strange for an agent to take the phone. They’ve certainly got me paranoid at this point. Yes, I’m definitely setting up the burner. I don’t know why anyone would come to this country now except for business.
DeleteTrue. We have used our phones for the boarding passes. Maybe the woman ‘s screen display changed accidentally. We still have a printer and still print boarding passes when we remember. For we old folk, it’s easier to hand over the piece of paper than to juggle the phone to pull out up the pass and lose it on the phone display . but our sons don’t. They use the phones always. We would not be racially profiled, nor would you, I assume. We don’t speak with an accent and don’t have an Hispanic name, or any “suspicious “ name. I worked with an immigrant from Bangladesh whose last name was Khan. He had problems for years when traveling because someone with the same full name was on the Do Not Fly list. I doubt that we would be asked to hand over our phones. But my Jamaican daughter in law could draw attention.as could our Viet Namese daughter in law. They are immigrants of color.
DeleteMistreatment of immigrants of color is just the warmup for what is planned. ICE is essentially 20,000 brownshirts and the detention centers will be used for dissidents and outliers and anyone in the way of fascism. If Democrats are being called communists, then what happens to a democratic socialist like me?
DeleteThe roundup of black and brown people in concentration camps goes on and on, but MAGAs here in the cornfield say that's just media lies cuz, lookit, there are still Mexicans working at the dairy farm and the Mexican grocery store downtown is still there. The only thing getting them riled up about their Fuhrer is gas prices. I try to gripe about the price of gas with my Republican neighbors as much as possible to keep that irritant going.
DeleteIt's my understanding that you can put your phone or tablet in checked luggage, just turn it completely off. But most people would rather not do that. Too many instances of luggage getting separated from the flight you are on.
DeleteOver our many years of travel we learned two things - pack very lightly so that you don’t need to check a suitcase. If you do need more clothes ( I took a suitcase to Poland for our son’s wedding) try to book non- stops or as few changes as possible. We flew non- stop to Germany, then a flight to the Prague where we met family and visited Prague ( gorgeous city!) and drove together in a rental car to Poland. We didn’t lose our wedding clothes🙂
DeleteMAGA’s in the cornfield. Now, that’s an image. I imagine them coming out at dusk, shuffling through the cornstalks. Just when you thought it was safe to go into the cornfield.
DeleteI did a bit of quick research. The pro- natalists are not deliberately trying to increase teen pregnancies. They are trying to figure out ways to encourage young marriages which are prone to higher divorce rates. . Some want to rescind the no fault divorce laws. And they are replacing the programs that resulted in the dramatic drop in teen pregnancies with abstinence only programs that failed the last time they were used — mostly in the late 90s and early years of this century. The comprehensive sex education classes that replaced them were far more effective. Some conservatives not only want to implement national abortion bans they want to make the most effective forms of contraception illegal. Many have noted that the. “pro- life” movement is really a pro- forced birth program. If a war on modern contraception is being planned, an increase in unwanted births will create another huge problem for society.
ReplyDeleteA few stats on who seeks abortion - mostly poor women below or just above the poverty line, mostly women of color who already have at least one child they struggle to feed, clothe and house. In August the biggest cuts in Medicaid will hit, making it even more likely that poor women will try to get an abortion, even at a back alley abortion mill at risk of her life if she can’t afford to travel out of state and especially if the right- wing succeeds in stopping the maiing of mifepristone.
AI summary below shows a big shift since I was working on the abstinence program about 25 years ago. The biggest concern then was the high rate of teen pregnancies.
“Women obtaining abortions in the US are predominantly in their 20s, unmarried, already mothers, and from low-income backgrounds. About 41% live below the federal poverty level, and around 55% have previously had at least one birth. [1, 2]
The primary demographic breakdowns include:
Age: The majority of patients are in their late teens and 20s. Patients in their 20s account for roughly 61% of all abortions, while adolescents under 18 account for fewer than 4%. [1, 2]
Race/Ethnicity: Abortion patients represent diverse racial groups. National data varies slightly by source, but generally shows that Non-Hispanic Black (~28–40%), Hispanic (~21–30%), and Non-Hispanic White (~30–39%) women each make up significant, relatively equal portions of abortion patients, with Asian and other ethnicities making up the remaining percentage. [1, 2, 3]
Socioeconomic & Parental Status: Around 86% of abortion patients are unmarried, and approximately 75% are classified as low-income. Roughly 60% of women who seek abortions are already mothers. [1, 2, 3]”
Since these aren’t the babies that the white nationalist administration wants, I’m not sure what they will do when faced with the consequences of their policies.