Skip to Content, Navigation, or Footer.
Saturday, June 13, 2026
The Observer

Opinion


The Observer

On staying Catholic

·

I almost gave up Catholicism twice while at Notre Dame. For two weeks during freshman year, a class I was taking had convinced me that the existence of God was incompatible with rational belief. During the middle of my college career, a traumatic personal experience left me angry, lonely and wanting to give up any faith. Reflecting on those experiences, I am sometimes surprised I am still here, will be graduating in a few weeks and am still Catholic.


The Observer

Good old 42

·

42. It's the only number retired by every Major League baseball club. And now it's a movie that depicts the life of the great Jackie Robinson, the man behind good old number 42. By taking a walk through Robinson's playing career, "42" does a good job reminding us why he mattered.


The Observer

Chicago sports

·

"Oh no, here we go again."  It's a phrase any Chicago sports fan knows. Throughout the city's illustrious sports history, certain events, some seemingly an act of God, have brought these words to the lips of Cubs, White Sox, Blackhawks and Bears fans alike. The fact the city has survived the infamous Steve Bartman, the Billy Goat curse and a lack of a World Series appearance since 1945 (and that's only the Cubs) leads me to claim Chicago as the quintessential American sports city.   Although Boston used to lay claim to the most unlucky sports city, recent successes of the Patriots, Red Sawx, Celtics and Bruins makes me beg to differ. A little reference for non-Chicagoans: In my 20 years, I am able to remember just one championship. The Blackhawks, riding a wave of young talent spearheaded by Patrick Kane and Jonathan Toews, defeated the Philadelphia Flyers to win the 2010 Stanley Cup. In the past 10 years, Boston sports teams have won a combined seven championships. My detractors will point to the six NBA championships the Bulls won in the 90s, to which I will reply, "It should have been a minimum eight-peat, Bob," in my best Bill Swirsky voice. Yes, Chicagoans were spoiled by the Michael Jordan-led Bulls. The Bulls in recent seasons are finally returning to the same level of competitiveness, but these strides forward have produced no new championships. The beloved Bears, who have won exactly one championship in the Super Bowl era, are topic of constant conversation. Tickets to a game at Soldier Field may be the hottest ticket in town outside of "The Book of Mormon."  How many other cities possess such a rabid football fan base that their team could not win a championship in 50 years and still sell out every game? What other city could still embrace a team that hasn't won anything since William Howard Taft was the president?  Wrigley Field is an essential tourist spot for anyone visiting the city.  Although it's become more of a social event in the bleachers for twenty-somethings looking to let their hair down, there is still a very large contingent of diehard Cubs fans that bleed Cubby blue. Only recently have these fans allowed their distaste with the new ownership and a terrible product on the field reflect on their attendance at games. Chicago embraces the name "The Second City." Our sports teams are rightfully blue collar to reflect their fan base. The sense of camaraderie between Chicago sports fans is unparalleled.  It stems from a century-old feeling of anguish, followed by infinite optimism every April, September and October.  These teams can break the city's collective heart, but we keep on coming back.  We can forget the feeling of "Oh no, here we go again" better than any other city's fans.  Because of this collective "amnesia," Chicago is the American sports city.


The Observer

Let's talk about love

·

I've heard arguments that the logical leaps made in Mr. Boyd's column ("Somewhere Over the Rainbow," Apr. 10) render it unworthy of a response. But the underlying attitudes are real and corrosive, and should be addressed. There's a limit on how much you can deride, demean and insult someone and still claim to love them. When you compare someone's sexual attraction to and love for people of the same sex to acts of evil that deliberately harm, destroy, or end life (rape, murder, terrorism), you perpetuate hate. When you deny someone's ability to love fully and deeply because biology prevents them from creating children with the person they love, you deny an intrinsic part of their humanity. When you belittle their love by calling the symbol of their movement proof of their inferiority, you insult them. When you call their desire for truly equal treatment under the law a "fad," you spit on the memory of our gay and lesbian friends and forebears who have been excluded, maimed, and murdered simply for wanting to be with the wrong person. Is that really love? Mr. Boyd, I'd like to offer a challenge. Just talk to a gay or lesbian person about it. I guarantee you know at least one person from your classes, in your dorm, heck, in your pew. Approach him or her with an open heart and an open mind, and just listen. Watch a young man's face light up when he talks about his boyfriend of two years. Hear the longing when a woman talks about her girlfriend who's studying abroad. Talk to an older couple about the dedication it took to get through the tough times and the joy of the good ones. Listen for the pain engendered by years of being told that they're incomplete, wrong and disordered. Of course, I'm not sure how many of our homosexual comrades will really want to talk to you after you've degraded and denied them, so I'm not volunteering anyone. But my hope is someone would be willing to take the time to show you what real love means.

The Observer

Thoughts on the minimum wage

·

On Feb. 12th, in his State of the Union address, President Obama discussed a wide variety of issues - arguing for gun control measures, elaborating on corporate profits and mentioning the Affordable Healthcare Act among other things. But, one other specific issue I'd like to consider further is the President's call to raise the minimum wage up to $9 at the federal level. In his address, Obama stated raising the minimum wage "would raise the incomes of millions of working families" and continued to offer other arguments in support of his proposition. While society would agree with the President that no person should be marginalized or left in poverty without help, we should step back from the emotional charge of his speech and consider whether a federally mandated minimum wage would be an effective way to help those who need it the most. Minimum wage is a misnomer. The true "minimum wage" is zero dollars; you don't get paid if you don't have a job. Instead of saying the federal minimum wage is $7.25, we should be saying we aren't allowed to earn a wage between $.01 and $7.24 dollars. As someone who believes in the freedom to spend your time as you see fit (and receive compensation in accordance with a contract), the constitutionality of a minimum wage law appears to be more controversial than one may initially believe. Sadly, if I value my labor at $6 an hour and a business values my time at that same amount, I guess I'm just out of luck. Now, since it doesn't look like the minimum wage is going to be declared unconstitutional any time soon, we can start discussing its effectiveness and whether or not raising it to $9/hour would actually achieve the goal it was designed to accomplish: helping the poor. Numerous studies have been conducted by economists on both sides of the argument, but in one article produced in the Wall Street Journal on Jan. 10, 2013, author Jason Riley provided data which found that less than 20 percent of people being paid minimum wage live below the poverty line - the majority of people affected by the minimum wage are young people who are entering the workforce for the first time. It appears that raising the minimum wage would create the most displacement in employment for individuals between the ages of 16-24 - and make it harder for those who are trying to gain entry-level experience to find and keep a job, instead of accomplishing the intended goal of helping low-income families. It appears many of those in favor of increasing the minimum wage would argue that the positive effects the increase would have on the poor would outweigh the deadweight loss the rest of society faces. It just seems to me there could be programs or charities that could be better organized and more effective at targeting the poor and allocating resources to them, rather than just increasing the federal minimum wage across the spectrum. Consider this: if someone has a heart attack, a physician would not simply focus on unclogging the blocked artery - the doctor would also attempt to remedy the long-term problem at hand (e.g. high blood pressure). To compare this anecdote to the economy, we should also focus on why we have inflation, which leads people to demand higher wages. One might look to "QE Infinity," the devaluation of our fiat currency, and the special treatment top corporations receive from government. Issues with prices will arise too, especially with those companies who do not face "sticky prices" and provide goods with inelastic demand (like medical supplies or other stuff people need to purchase). These companies can simply charge more for their goods in response to the minimum wage hike. Those who may defend the sentiment shared by President Obama and Elizabeth Warren (among others) may point to Costco and Starbucks, whom have already called for an increase in the minimum wage. These two Fortune 500 companies reason that more money in the hands of their workers will induce more spending, allowing families to be better off. But if the data Jason Riley offered is accurate, very few people affected by the wage increase will have families to take care of, based on the argument that young people are most impacted by this type of legislation. Also, nobody bothered to mention that employees of these companies are already paid above minimum wage and the increase would knockout smaller businesses Costco and Starbucks currently compete with in the market. While these sentiments appear noble at first glance, there may also be deeper lying motives that some try to sweep under the rug. With all of these calls for an increase in the federal minimum wage, we as a society need to step back and look at the costs and benefits this motion would forge. Perhaps raising the minimum wage to $9 would make those below the poverty line better off, but maybe there are better options out there to specifically target that socio-economic group and do so even more efficiently than a minimum wage increase. I am a strong believer in charity and voluntary action among individuals, but for now, it looks like we'll just have to wait and see what happens in Washington in the future.


The Observer

An apology for the understanding of traditional marriage

·

This is an "apology" in two ways. The first one, is that I sincerely wish to apologize to all members of the Notre Dame family who found the piece "Somewhere Over the Rainbow" to be offensive, especially those of the LGBTQ community. While I believe Mr. Boyd wrote it with the best of intentions, his arguments display a lack of understanding for the complexity of the issue and a lack of compassion for our brother and sisters in Christ who have same-sex attractions. Secondly, I wish to give a more sympathetic and sincere "apology" (a formal justification) for the Catholic Understanding of Marriage in response to Mr. Boyd's article. First of all, as Christians, we must understand that homosexuality is more complex than simply being "sinful." Sexual orientation means more than simply who we want to have sex with, but rather is the lens through which we interact with each other. Therefore, to say to someone "the way you interact with other people is wrong, and although it is something you can't change, you are sinful because of it!" is a terribly uncompassionate thing to say to someone who is really struggling (in one way or another) to understand his or her sexuality. It is not sinful or wrong to have same-sex attractions, but it is considered sinful by the Catholic Church to act upon those attractions. As Mr. Boyd rather bluntly added, the reason why the Church is against homosexual intercourse is because it is not procreative (the same reason it is against birth control and masturbation, but for brevity's sake, let's deal with one issue at a time). As someone who has one of those Cross profile pictures, I believe that in order to be a full expression of love, the sexual act must have the opportunity to be procreative. When God created the world, he did so not because of some rational thesis on why He needed creation or why he needed us, but purely out of love. Through God's love (the same love expressed on the Cross similar to the one on many people's profile pictures) all the world came into being, and in the sexual act we are called to reflect that love to its fullest. Therefore, when two people offer themselves to each other, in love, fully and completely, it must be open to this participation in God's creative act. I realize this does not address the issue of "same-sex marriage" and its legality in the United States. However, since I do not have the legal background to properly defend that, and since Mr. Boyd hardly proposes any legitimate arguments for why it should remain illegal, I will leave this issue for someone more apt than I to solve. While I cannot comprehend the struggles the LGBTQ community has gone through, I recognize it cannot be easy having same-sex attractions, whether it be condemnation from loved ones or being socially marginalized because of how you interact with others. What is probably hardest to hear is when someone says you do not deserve the infinite love of God because of your sexuality. But let me be the first to say that it is not so. You are more than your sexuality. You are a child of God who loves you so much that, through your parents, He called you into existence. Christ loves each of us because we are all His children, just as he loved Peter even after Peter denied Him three times. But Christ also called Peter to repentance and to a deeper, more perfect love than Peter could have ever anticipated. So too, the Church calls all of its people to repentance and to continue to enter more deeply in the love in which we were created and through which we are saved. For those of you who have same-sex attractions, for more reasons than not, you are stronger than I am. For those of you who have decided that, while having same-sex attractions, to live out your sexuality according to God's will in purity and chastity - you are truly the saints of the modern day. I cannot comprehend the weight of the cross you bear and I thank you for your witness to those of us who struggle in keeping our sexuality (homo or hetero) pure and chaste. I am praying with you and for you, and I would consider myself very fortunate if you would do the same for me. God Bless.


The Observer

An apology for the understanding of traditional marriage

·

This is an "apology" in two ways. The first one, is that I sincerely wish to apologize to all members of the Notre Dame family who found the piece "Somewhere Over the Rainbow" to be offensive, especially those of the LGBTQ community. While I believe Mr. Boyd wrote it with the best of intentions, his arguments display a lack of understanding for the complexity of the issue and a lack of compassion for our brother and sisters in Christ who have same-sex attractions. Secondly, I wish to give a more sympathetic and sincere "apology" (a formal justification) for the Catholic Understanding of Marriage in response to Mr. Boyd's article. First of all, as Christians, we must understand that homosexuality is more complex than simply being "sinful." Sexual orientation means more than simply who we want to have sex with, but rather is the lens through which we interact with each other. Therefore, to say to someone "the way you interact with other people is wrong, and although it is something you can't change, you are sinful because of it!" is a terribly uncompassionate thing to say to someone who is really struggling (in one way or another) to understand his or her sexuality. It is not sinful or wrong to have same-sex attractions, but it is considered sinful by the Catholic Church to act upon those attractions. As Mr. Boyd rather bluntly added, the reason why the Church is against homosexual intercourse is because it is not procreative (the same reason it is against birth control and masturbation, but for brevity's sake, let's deal with one issue at a time). As someone who has one of those Cross profile pictures, I believe that in order to be a full expression of love, the sexual act must have the opportunity to be procreative. When God created the world, he did so not because of some rational thesis on why He needed creation or why he needed us, but purely out of love. Through God's love (the same love expressed on the Cross similar to the one on many people's profile pictures) all the world came into being, and in the sexual act we are called to reflect that love to its fullest. Therefore, when two people offer themselves to each other, in love, fully and completely, it must be open to this participation in God's creative act. I realize this does not address the issue of "same-sex marriage" and its legality in the United States. However, since I do not have the legal background to properly defend that, and since Mr. Boyd hardly proposes any legitimate arguments for why it should remain illegal, I will leave this issue for someone more apt than I to solve. While I cannot comprehend the struggles the LGBTQ community has gone through, I recognize it cannot be easy having same-sex attractions, whether it be condemnation from loved ones or being socially marginalized because of how you interact with others. What is probably hardest to hear is when someone says you do not deserve the infinite love of God because of your sexuality. But let me be the first to say that it is not so. You are more than your sexuality. You are a child of God who loves you so much that, through your parents, He called you into existence. Christ loves each of us because we are all His children, just as he loved Peter even after Peter denied Him three times. But Christ also called Peter to repentance and to a deeper, more perfect love than Peter could have ever anticipated. So too, the Church calls all of its people to repentance and to continue to enter more deeply in the love in which we were created and through which we are saved. For those of you who have same-sex attractions, for more reasons than not, you are stronger than I am. For those of you who have decided that, while having same-sex attractions, to live out your sexuality according to God's will in purity and chastity - you are truly the saints of the modern day. I cannot comprehend the weight of the cross you bear and I thank you for your witness to those of us who struggle in keeping our sexuality (homo or hetero) pure and chaste. I am praying with you and for you, and I would consider myself very fortunate if you would do the same for me. God Bless.


The Observer

Not for ND Confessions

·

"Secrets, secrets are no fun, secrets, secrets hurt someone."  For those of you who recognize this quote, congratulations. For those who don't, it is spoken by a stripper in the Benjamin Franklin episode of The Office, back when Jim and Pam were Jim and Pam. As Michael Scott reflects on the happenings of the day, he notes the irony which comes from the female dancer teaching the most profound life lesson of the day. It is only human to want to hear others' secrets, but continuing to keep secrets is good for no one. No doubt within the past month you or someone you know has looked at or possibly even liked the Facebook page ND Confessions. When I first found out about the page, I spent at least a half an hour reading secrets shared by my fellow Notre Dame students. Some of the so-called "confessions" are quite humorous, such one marveling at their recent weight loss despite a propensity towards drinking and laziness.  Besides posts which attempt sensationalism and are almost certainly untrue, many people around campus have felt compelled to share something deep and meaningful.    Old news doesn't get better with age.  This idiom lies at the heart of a student's motivation to make a true and most of the time alarming confession on this Facebook page. When something goes wrong, it is at first human nature to cover it up.  It is almost easier to ignore a bad experience and move on like it never happened. Keeping something bottled up, however, only leads to feeling worse about the previous negative experience. Eventually, you feel the need to let out the secret for the world to know. None of this is exactly groundbreaking news to anyone, but what disturbs me is what these confessions imply about our student body.   For one, how many people are there on campus who do not feel comfortable enough to talk to a single person about their deepest concerns? Discounting the mildly humorous or completely untrue confessions, there seems to be an unhealthy amount of people who have concluded there is nowhere else to turn besides the Internet. While initially it seems someone sharing a hardship in their life would help ease that person's load, I believe a confession on ND Confessions provides little to no benefits. Although people may be comforting you or showing compassion, the fact that it is anonymous and over the Internet takes out the human part of consoling someone - namely, seeing the look on someone's face, the body language of that person, the inflections in their voice and physically being there to comfort  someone.


The Observer

Contribute to the discussion

·

As this week's controversy over Carter Boyd's column ("Somewhere Over the Rainbow," April 9) and Mark Gianfalla's guest column ("True Matrimonial Equality," April 9) demonstrated, Notre Dame students have strong opinions about the issues the authors raised about the gay marriage debate. Comments on social media and in Letters to the Editor sprung up quickly to address Boyd's and Gianfalla's comments. The two outlets combined to create yesterday's letter ("Spread the Love. Spread the Equality," April 11), which Notre Dame students were asked by its creators to sign through a Facebook event. "We cannot all write Viewpoints about why we support marriage equality," the letter stated. "We should not have to defend and fight for equality of love." Hundreds of you signed this letter. But sometimes, strength in numbers isn't enough to refute an argument. Sometimes, our signatures on a list aren't enough to persuade someone we deserve to be heard. In such cases, writing to defend something we believe in is the only way to truly affect change. At its core, The Observer's Viewpoint section tries to provide Notre Dame with an open platform for that change. Viewpoint strives to lend a voice to the community and to foster constructive discussion of events both on campus and in the wider world. The fundamental goal of the section is to allow students to articulate their diverse and sometimes conflicting views by providing a venue for their expression. First and foremost, the Viewpoint section is a mouthpiece of the student body. The columns and letters you see in the Viewpoint pages are the work of your colleagues, classmates and friends. Members of The Observer do not contribute to Letters to the Editor and columns, or allow personal opinion to dictate which submissions make it to publication. Viewpoint has and will continue to be a forum for controversial or unpopular opinions, provided a certain level of respect is maintained. While this means some groups may disagree with certain columns, these conflicts still have a silver lining. Drawing potentially upsetting opinions into the open allows others to address them in a constructive forum and promotes debate that potentially can help us all either to reconsider our views or strengthen our current convictions.  But, it's up to you to keep that forum constructive. Nowadays, when many students read columns they find foolish or misinformed, perhaps while enjoying a gourmet dining hall meal, they only scoff. Labels are tossed around in the column's wake: stupid, bigot, ignorant or self-righteous, to name a few. But what is accomplished by leaving the offending paper in a puddle of spilled chocolate milk and stale dining hall pasta? It takes far more courage to voice an opinion and publicly defend it than to mutter criticisms under our breath. If we don't agree with an opinion, then we should take a leap and put ourselves out there as well. Write a response. We shouldn't internalize feelings. We need to let the Notre Dame community know if we agree or disagree with an issue. We must foster a constructive dialogue by respecting that many issues are not black and white, that they are really defined in shades of gray. We should realize that all arguments have two sides, and that our Constitution protects the right for your ideological opposite to voice his thoughts just as much as it allows you to speak your mind. It may be easier to remain detached from controversial issues. It may be easier to simply voice thoughts and concerns while protected by anonymous forums like ND Confessions or in The Observer website's online comments. However, Viewpoint needs you. The Notre Dame community needs you. Get off your futon, fire up your laptop and start writing. If you take a risk and put yourself out there, Viewpoint, and the Notre Dame community, will embrace your contribution, not sweep it under the rug. That's what this section is for: putting your voice in the hands of the Notre Dame community. So, if you want to contribute, if you want to direct the argument in a constructive and effective way, here's what you do: Go to ndsmcobserver.com and click on "Write a Letter to the Editor." Or, better yet, send a full column to obsviewpoint@gmail.com To paraphrase a quote often misattributed to Voltaire, The Observer's Viewpoint section may not wholeheartedly agree with what you have to say, but it will always defend your right to say it.


The Observer

Play for the green

·

It's that time of year again. Yes, it's April. And the onset of April means another thing - The Masters. The time of the year when everyone becomes an avid golf fan. It's the weekend when those who consider golf "boring" find themselves excited to watch golf for three days. People model their green sport jackets, and some dig out their golf clubs from the attic.


The Observer

The diversity debate

·

On Sept. 6, 2012, I submitted a letter to the editor aptly named "Multiculturalism fosters segregation" in which I critiqued the various race-based groups that insist celebrating division somehow unifies us. This is an elaboration of the article.




The Observer

Getting serious about unplanned pregnancies

·

On Tuesday, the Observer ran its traditional satirical edition of the Absurder. Listed in the Classifieds page was a personal ad claiming: "UNPLANNED PREGNANCY:  You're going to have to go it alone. This is Notre Dame, stupid." This poor attempt at humor is very disappointing, considering both the facts of the matter and the Observer's own history in condemning this kind of behavior. Last September, the Observer staff wrote an editorial condemning the jokes that resulted from NDSP's reporting of "forcible fondling" attacks on students. The staff wrote "For one person on campus, each crime alert wasn't a joke. It was a reminder of a situation that was probably scary and scarring. And that's an alliteration that isn't quite as hilarious." While the situation is different from a sexual assault, for a woman facing an unplanned pregnancy, a joke in the student newspaper about a lack of support can only deepen anxieties about a situation that is scary and potentially scarring. Notre Dame has gone to great lengths to promote and strengthen its resources for unplanned pregnancies. It has stressed that while Notre Dame is a Catholic university that promotes the Church's teachings regarding sexual morality, it will make every effort to help students in unplanned pregnancies with "caring, non-judgmental, professional assistance and support." The administration has particularly stressed that you do not have to leave Notre Dame, that the university will not press disciplinary action and will make every effort to accommodate a students needs with coursework and housing. If the editors of the Observer really do care about students in unplanned pregnancies, they should seek to promote the resources available for those students, instead of encouraging false stereotypes. Regardless of your opinion of the University's stance on Catholic sexual ethics, we can all agree that women in unplanned pregnancies require the love and support of the entire Notre Dame community. Making a joke out of unplanned pregnancy is not okay. To take a page from the editors, "That's not who we are. That's not Notre Dame."


The Observer

A love letter to baseball

·

Though you might not be able to tell by the weather, the return of Major League Baseball this past Sunday night unequivocally heralds the arrival of summer. Indeed, the "boys of summer" have returned and they will eventually bring the warm weather with them. Aside from the knowledge that summer is on the way, Opening Day also gives life to English poet Alexander Pope's words that "hope springs eternal." Even hopelessly dejected fans in Houston, Miami and even the North Side of Chicago can find some solace in the unparalleled hope offered by Opening Day and a fresh start (full disclosure: my allegiance lies on the South Side of Chicago with my beloved White Sox). But more than hope and the imminent arrival of warm weather and sunshine, baseball remains one of the few things in my life that never fails to amaze and inspire me. The simplicity and beauty of the game, whether played in a beat-up backyard on a warm summer night or under the bright lights of a big league stadium, is still enough to take my breath away. It has been six years since I have played organized baseball, but my love for the game remains as strong and passionate as it was the day I first picked up a baseball. Some say lower impact games like tennis and golf are "lifelong sports," but I contend that, if you let it, the game of baseball can provide a lifetime of cherished memories and invaluable lessons. I cannot help but shake my head when someone says any sport, let alone baseball, is "just a game" because it is so much more than a mere game to so many people. As journalist (and avid baseball fan) George Will said, "Baseball, it is said, is only a game. True. And the Grand Canyon is only a hole in Arizona. Not all holes, or games, are created equal." Baseball is one of life's great learning experiences as it is often one of the first games we learn as children. It teaches us how nine people need to work to become one team in order to accomplish anything. It teaches us to persevere through whatever obstacles may cross our paths. It also teaches us that it is okay to fail. After all, there are few other endeavors in life in which one can fail seven out of ten times and still be considered great. For me, baseball has provided innumerable life lessons, but only a few make for good stories. Perhaps the best of these stories occurred in the summer of 2001 when a small, seven-year-old Jack Rooney got the unexpected invitation to try out for the Ridge Beverly Little League All-Star Team. Several days after the tryout, I waited inside on a gorgeous evening waiting for a phone call that I expected to bring good news. When my parents broke the unfortunate news that I did not make the team, my entire, tiny world collapsed in on me. But, after a few tears and plenty of hugs, I found myself back in my backyard, playing baseball with my brothers and neighbors. Baseball also taught me to persevere through unexpected challenges, despite the urge to give up. When I was 10 years old and playing catcher for the Little League Florida Marlins, my head had an unfortunate collision with the ball while warming up the pitcher prior to the start of a playoff game. Needless to say, I was not wearing my catcher's mask and a portion of my forehead ballooned to twice its normal size, all before the start of the game. Nevertheless, I proceeded to catch the entire game, which went into extra innings, on a brutally hot early June day, goose egg on my head and all. Earlier in that same season, also while catching, I made the bold decision to step in front of the plate as a runner barreled down on me. I refused to let him score, though, and I held on to the ball as we both tumbled to the dirt. When I popped up, ball in hand, I took off my mask to find that one of my teeth was ready to fall out. So, without a second thought, I pulled out the tooth, handed it to my dad on the bench, and proceeded with the rest of the game (which, for the record, we won). In life, we experience bumps in the road much more severe than bumps on the head and teeth falling out, but from an early age, baseball conditions us for the greater challenges, none of which we ever expect. And when those bigger challenges do arise, I, for one, know I can always find comfort and release in the simplicity of a game of catch, the awesome power of the crack of the bat and the sheer, unparalleled beauty of baseball.   Jack Rooney is a freshman studying political science.  He can be contacted at jrooney1@nd.edu The views expressed in this column are those of the author and not necessarily those of The Observer.


The Observer

My Notre Dame bucket list

·

With the school year and my last semester here quickly (I'm sure you'll all agree too quickly) reaching its end, more and more nights have been spent reminiscing about the past four years: the things we've done and the things we hope to do before we leave. Here's a snapshot of a few things on my bucket list I've either been lucky enough to check off or hope to in the next month and a half. 10. Make a bucket list. It's self-explanatory to say one needs to make a bucket list before trying to check things off of it... 9. Win a Bookstore Basketball game. While this may come easy to most of the athletic population on campus, my 5-foot-6 self would be better suited for a bookstore tennis match. My last shot is this Friday at 5:30. 8. Study on every floor of the library. Though you may be partial to the renovated fishbowl or the tables on the second floor, make the hike up to each floor and discover something new about medieval history or corporate law. 7. Spend time abroad. Whether it's a full semester, summer or even spring break in Mexico, take the time to see the world and immerse yourself in a different culture. 6. Do a CSC seminar. Few things are more rewarding than spending a fall or spring break in Appalachia making close friends and helping others. 5. Eat a quarter-dog 4. Regret eating a quarter-dog 3. Meet a Notre Dame celebrity. On the list: Father Hesburgh, Regis Philbin, Austin Swift... 2. Start a tradition. Make crepes for your friends on Sunday afternoons, they'll love you for it. Or drink white wine on Wednesdays solely for the alliteration. Start something for yourself and your friends and you'll feel like you've added to the already rich traditions of this university. 1. Graduate. While I'm dreading the day as much as everyone else, it is a testament to our time here and the culmination of the nights spent in the library and the Backer alike.


The Observer

Is Virginia for loathers?

·

For nearly 45 years, the Commonwealth of Virginia lured tourists through an iconic slogan, "Virginia is for Lovers." The brainchild of Richmond advertising company Martin and Woltz, the slogan launched in 1969 for the Virginia State Travel office and has been copied in various iterations by other tourist organizations. Part of the slogan's allure is the tolerant and accommodating feeling one derives when associating Virginia with tourism. Unfortunately, the GOP state legislature and governor have tarnished that imagery of brilliant openness in Virginia with another new legislative intrusion - this time permitting campus organizations to discriminate. Two weeks ago, Notre Dame alumnus and Republican Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell ('76) signed the so-called Student Group Protection Act into law.  The measure maintains funding for student organizations that limit membership based on religion, sexual orientation or personal beliefs. In an attempt to apparently protect a campus group's ability to discriminate, Virginia's reactionary initiative is a direct response against and attempt to reverse a 2010 U.S. Supreme Court decision, Christian Legal Society (CLS) v. Martinez. The high court affirmed that requiring college student groups to adopt an "all-comers" policy is not a violation of that group's First Amendment rights. The CLS at the University of California had sought to limit its membership based on a requirement that its members subscribe to a statement of beliefs as well as refrain from practicing behavior outside the statement.  Members were further prohibited from advocating beliefs considered contrary to the statement, and in this case, restricted those who merely supported a gay rights campus group. While it is disheartening that a Notre Dame alumnus elected to a high statewide office can support such a narrow-minded policy of exclusion, in this instance it is not surprising. When McDonnell worked on his joint law and public policy degree from the Christian Broadcasting Network University (currently Regent University), his 1989 thesis reveals the roots of his restrictive thinking. Entitled, "The Republican Party's Vision for the Family: The Compelling Issue of The Decade," McDonnell wrote that "government policy should favor married couples over cohabitators, homosexuals or fornicators." He additionally characterized feminists and career women as detrimental to the family structure. McDonnell also responded to a 1965 Supreme Court decision that legalized the use of contraceptives. He said that "man's basic nature is inclined towards evil, and when the exercise of liberty takes the shape of pornography, drug abuse or homosexuality, the government must restrain, punish and deter." Like any slick politician, McDonnell has brushed off his past academic thoughts by saying Virginians will judge him on his nearly 20-year record of public service rather than on his academic exercise. However, his record is not one of inclusion for Virginians. Last year McDonnell virtually eliminated himself from GOP vice presidential consideration with his awkward initial support of a legislative proposal mandating every woman in Virginia considering an abortion must submit to a vaginal ultrasound examination. In another obvious attempt to circumvent the current law of the land decided by the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade four decades ago, McDonnell asserts a severely hard pro-life stance since he does not support the standard abortion exceptions for cases of rape or incest. Paradoxically, while he openly supports babies, he virulently executes convicts - most notably the September 2010 execution of Teresa Lewis, judged to have an IQ of 72 (U.S. law prohibits the execution of persons with a 70 IQ or less) who was the first woman in nearly a century executed in Virginia. Appeals had come to McDonnell's desk where only he, as governor, could have commuted her execution. He refused to be pro-life with Lewis who prayed and held hands with her chaplain and lawyer during her final moments before her execution. At the time, McDonnell's decision had many question whether he was among those who truly stand for life in all situations including capital punishment and unnecessary war deaths.  During the past few years, the GOP agenda in Virginia is but one of many examples how out-of-touch and selectively exclusive statewide Republicans have attempted to overturn current law. Time and again, political conservatives pick and choose how the government should "protect" certain narrow group thought over the expansive freedoms granted in our Constitution. Their candidates avoid revealing their true socially restrictive thinking during a campaign in order to win office, and then, while in office, rear an ugly prohibitive stance against those who may think differently. It is no wonder the GOP was handily rejected in the last presidential election. Anybody can get elected at least once, especially if the opposing party nominates a country bumpkin with lesser communications skills and considerably less political savvy. McDonnell never signaled his restrictive nature during his run for governor in 2009 but stressed jobs and economic issues. This year, his hopeful GOP successor will have no such stealth advantage. For now, anyway, we can sadly say, "Yes, Virginia, there is a separation clause." Gary J. Caruso, Notre Dame '73, serves in the Department of Homeland Security and was a legislative and public affairs director at the U.S. House of Representatives and in President Clinton's administration. His column appears every other Friday. Contact him at: GaryJCaruso@alumni.nd.edu The views expressed in this column are those of the author and not necessarily those of The Observer.



The Observer

Summer fever

·

I start saying it's almost summer New Year's Day. Allow me to explain.


The Observer

The opacity of hope

·

On April 16, 2009, the United States Department of Justice, at the behest of President Obama, released CIA memos that the Bush administration used to justify using enhanced interrogation techniques to solicit information that is vital to national security against suspected terrorists. The information provided in the memos was released with such detail that several watchdogs groups, including Cause of Action, lauded Obama for his campaign promise to achieve absolute government transparency.