An Apology

Tuesday, February 7, AD 2017

(I originally wrote this about eight years ago when the blog readership was much smaller.  I last reran it in 2015.  Now that Planned Parenthood is back in the news, and we may at last defund that murderous organization, I thought that current readers might wish to know why I refer to Planned Parenthood as Worse Than Murder, Inc.)

Lately, in several posts, I have been in the habit of referring to Planned Parenthood as Murder, Inc.  I apologize for doing so.  It was unfair of me to draw this type of comparison.

In the late twenties of the last century, gangsters Charles “Lucky” Luciano and Meyer Lansky set up the National Crime Syndicate.  Organized crime needed a mechanism to keep anarchy from breaking out within its ranks between various gangs and factions.  Operating out of a 24 hour candy store in the Brownsville neighborhood of Brooklyn, Murder, Inc. ( the name was a newspaper invention) provided this mechanism.  Louis “The Judge” “Lepke” Buchalter and Albert “The Mad Hatter” Anastasia were the leaders of Murder, Inc.

The Syndicate, by majority vote, would order the slaying of an unruly gangster and Murder, Inc would carry it out.  The hitmen of Murder, Inc. operated under strict guidlines.  No innocent bystanders were to be killed.  No hits could be ordered against judges, police or prosecuting attorneys for fear of reprisals from law enforcement.

Over the years Murder, Inc. murdered some 800 fellow gangsters.  In 1940 the downfall of the murder enterprise began when Murder, Inc. killer Abe ‘Kid Twist’ Reles, turned informant in order to save himself from the electric chair.  Louis “The Judge” “Lepke” Buchalter died in the chair in Sing Sing in 1944, after the US Supreme Court rejected his appeal which raised, among other issues, the contention of Buchalter that lurid press coverage had tainted the jury.  Other Murder, Inc. members swiftly followed “The Judge” down the last mile.  Albert “The Madhatter” Anastasia would have followed in their footsteps but for the tragic “accidental” death of Abe ‘Kid Twist’ Reles when he fell from room 623 of the Half Moon Hotel on Coney Island.  In the gang world he was ever after known as “The Canary that sung but couldn’t fly.”  However, with the attention of law enforcement focused upon it, Murder, Inc. could no longer function and it ceased to exist except as a gangland legend.

Based upon this grim record I hope you can see why it is necessary for me to apologize—to Murder, Inc. 

Continue reading...

5 Responses to An Apology

  • “Never apologize. It’s a sign of weakness.” Capt. Nathan Brittles (John Wayne, “She Wore A Yellow Ribbon).

    In the spirit of this post, here is an alternate-history statement President Obama would have issued upon the 9/11 WTC tragedies. “We deeply regret the tragic deaths of 19 virtuous Muslims. This Administration will do everything in its power to reverse the evils committed by America so that reverent Muslims will no longer need to fly jumbo jets into tall buildings located in evil, unjust America.”

  • What may really finally turn this debate in our favor (=pro-life cause), even while P Francis, Card. Cupich, and others, is the book “Gosnell”, and the extraordinarily articulate description of Kermit Gosnell by one of the co-authors, Phelim McAleer, of he whom he calls “the greatest US mass-murderer of all time.” I heard his interview today on Hugh Hewitt’s radio show, and McAleer cites that, under former Gov Tom Ridge (an official “catholic”, small “c”), investigations of Planned Parenthood were side-tracked, even though the screams of Gosnell’s victims could be heard out on the street. At least 2 women died in his office—and no investigators from the City of Philadelphia were curious as to why. Bodies of infants were literally stacked—stacked–in the basement in freezers, and no one ever wanted to check.

    This story may catalyze an explosion of revulsion to abortion at last—as well it should.

  • I imagine that people learning about Murder, Inc. at the time thought the murderers for hire were the lowest of the low- that people couldn’t get any more evil and callous than that.
    Even at the outset of Worse Than Murder, Inc I would say most people didn’t know how much worse it would get. Now proponents of euthanasia play down the idea of a worsening descent spreading in our culture.
    I am thankful for our Nominee for Supreme Court- and I pray that God will shine a huge bright light on our justice department and expose many and clean house.

  • Every human being ever murdered by Kermit Gosnell is written on his face.
    America needs to have Truth and Justice reinstituted.

  • It takes a real man to apologize. The Son of God apologized to His Father for us.

How Worse Than Murder, Inc. Sells Abortion

Tuesday, February 7, AD 2017

 

A chilling video in which Live Action pro-life heroine Lila Rose talks with former Planned Parenthood Worse Than Murder, Inc. managers of abortion clinics.  They had quotas to make and they were under instructions to sell abortion as a solution to the desperate pregnant women who come to these death clinics.  The banality of evil indeed.  The deaths of innocents in order to meet a cash quota for a month.  Imagine trying to explain that to God.  Jesus wept.

Continue reading...

One Response to How Worse Than Murder, Inc. Sells Abortion

  • God bless Lila Rose, and all the faithful outspoken active people who pray and work to stop this madness.
    The business of abortion is so lucrative and is supported by so many useful idiots that hard think there will ever be a change of heart by, say, CRichards. Even when lots of lower level worker help with the expose’ it is hard too imagine a real change in this society without a real smack down from God.

Mark Shea Celebrates March for Life

Friday, January 27, AD 2017

 

While hundreds of thousands of pro-lifers are marching in Washington, Mark Shea delivers this:

 

Fascist Scapegoating.

Jefferson bought the entire Louisiana Purchase for two cents an acre. It was an incredible steal. Smartest decision in American history.

Trump is buying the complete cooperation of prolife Christians even more cheaply. For the cost of a few words from Mike Pence and KellyAnne Conway at the Prolife March in Washington, prolifers will henceforth reliably go to bat for every evil he wants to do. Torture? Fantastic! Scapegoating immigrants? We are on board! Destroying access to health care for the poor! Great!

Christian Trump supporters have completely bought a false soteriology that opposition to abortion taketh away the sins of the world.

Prove me wrong. I beg you.

Continue reading...

44 Responses to Mark Shea Celebrates March for Life

  • If a brazen kidnapper was caught but wouldn’t tell cops where Shea’s granddaughter lay bleeding in a basement, he should be tortured for the address…Proverbs 20:30 ” Evil is driven out by bloody lashes and a scourging to the inmost being”…” a rod for the back of fools”. Twentieth century Bishops condemned torture at Vatican II and St.JPII copied their list in section 80 of Splendor of the Truth. Prior to Vatican II, the Church backed torture for centuries…that is they backed Pro.20:30. Modern clergy approach the OT cafeteria style…tithing=good…torture=bad. The trouble with tithing is that the catechism says to give according to one’s ability…and tithing was part of a covenant that promised health, affluence, victory in battle IF the Jews obeyed hundreds of laws. Job was an exception.

  • Tell me one reason why I should give a flying hoot what Mark Shea says. He ought to go back to the left coast from whence he came and stay in the People’s Republik of the State of Washington.

  • Shea is desperately trying to be relevant. He is failing.
    Scrapping Obumblercare is not taking away health care from poor people. Stopping illegal immigration is not hatred of the poor.
    Shea has resorted to using leftist tactics to stay in the public square. He is irrelevant on that regard. Leftist bitching takes place in echo chambers.

  • Mark who?

    Has-been and unless he wakes up he might be never-more.

    Prayers for his mental health.

  • Personality strong dislike disorder.
    No matter what, Mark Shea must not be able to stomach President Donald Trump. I have seen this kind of reaction from people before to very strong D’s of DISC personality theory.
    Trump is definitely an over-the-top: https://www.discinsights.com/personality-style-d#.WIvE0hLkr5U

    Me being at least part D, I love Trump.. I’d love to work for him, even though it would be a 24/7 endeavor. Some people don’t trust DISC type D’s. Oh well. As they say, it takes all kinds. Hold on to your hat, Trump is just getting started. His type are interested in “results” 🙂

  • The only thing that scares me more than Trump is the anti-Trump hysterics. Mark has gone against his word that where Trump does right, he would support Trump. This is clearly breaking that promise. Simcha and Mark, who explained why it was proper to march alongside zealously pro-choice forces last Saturday, are now saying nothing done by the WH for pro-life counts because Trump. What can you say?

  • Anti-Trump Hysterics= the Trump/Pence 2020 Reelection Campaign

  • Off of the Shea for a moment.

    A remembrance of Holocaust victims today. Fitting to say the least.

    http://hmd.org.uk/page/why-mark-27-january-holocaust-memorial-day

    All holocaust victims be in our prayers tonight….please. Jews – Cambodians – Rwandans – Bosnians – Darfurians…..And American Holocaust victims…The aborted.

  • As they say on Family Feud: “good answer!” Donald McClarey.

    The plan for immigration laws affecting future possible legal immigrants to be reviewed and strengthened concerning anti-American ideologies does not amount to scapegoating.
    Also it is strange to accuse Christians of being bought and paid for by a pandering / power-sucking governemnt. What an example of projection.

  • BTW, I wonder if the one comment by Russel Moore is the same Russel Moore Mark has linked to from my seminary days. Any ideas?

  • Hopefully, this will cost Mark some readers. If enough of them rebel maybe Mark will be freed up to do other things.

  • Mark could apply for the Librarian position when Obama’s Library is erected in Havana. TR.

  • The fundament of the priority of the Divine gift of life is no hard to understand. The flattening of all the mentioned issues must be willed or the intellect could not take it.

  • He may be leading a pilgrimage soon…
    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/markshea/2017/01/question-reader-re-possible-pilgrimage.html

    Regardless of how well you think he’s know, Shea is well known enough to deceive too many.

    Though he is providing a fun game nowadays. ANYTIME he posts a link, follow it and find the line, paragraph, etc that completely contradicts what he posted. Every. Single. Time.

  • Nate, that’s the problem. It’s actually bothersome that he continues to get high fives and thumbs up from Catholics who present him as a credible example of Catholic teaching. And some of those Catholics are in positions to suggest that Mark fairly represents how Catholics should act and think.

  • I AM COMPLETELY surprised by Shea’s stand!! What was the January 21st March as opposed to the March for Life? Who was REALLY bought and paid for with a pink hat!! Give President Trump a chance!! A FEW words from our VP!!?? What anniversary is this march celebrating?? 44 years?? and this is the first…the FIRST and highest representative from the Nation’s Administration? Torture? Oh yea, bring it on if it works to get information to SAVE a nation!! Immigration halt? Oh yeah..if it saves the security of a nation…. Destroying healthcare?? Oh MY GOSH, Shea…have you your own healthcare so Obamacare doesn’t effect you?? I have friends whose company divided itself up just so it didn’t have to provide obamacare and now they scrounge for healthcare which for the husband and male children is it OVER $1,100/month and covers mammograms and pap smears for all…male and female members of the family WHAT?? Maybe…JUST humor me here, Shea,…Maybe just maybe President Trump is REALLY trying to make things better…….You have to have SURGERY first before you can get better!! Oh yeah, it will hurt, but in the long run maybe it will be better. But go ahead, Shea, with your big Catholic popularity, and keep openning your piehole about IMPORTANT issues that you evidently have a closed and blind mind to. YOU HAVE LOST THIS READER and all that I know.

  • Philip beat me to the “punch.” Mark-who?

    FYI, Mark-who running around wearing vagina hats and throwing F-bombs does not advance a dishonest cause. His and Fr. Martin, S.J.’s real religion is liberalism not Catholicism.

    I’m convinced Mark-who isn’t sufficiently intelligent or self-aware that he constantly politicizes and subverts Church Teaching.

    My wife’s liberal sister posted on Facebook a video by Fr. Martin, S.J. (Society of Judas) exhorting the masses of morons to oppose the border wall. He is so arrogant (dismissive of his asinine audience?) as to only politicize and subvert one each OT Exodus sentence and one each NT St. Matthew (not written in any of the other three Gospels) sentence to say that the wall needs to be opposed because illegal invaders and infiltrating Muslim terrorists are the embodiments of Christ. I kid you NOT.

  • He won’t be brave enough to say it, but I think Mark replied.
    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/markshea/2017/01/cheaper-buy-louisiana-purchase.html

    Oh and for those curious, the country ban list seems to have came from Obama.
    https://sethfrantzman.com/2017/01/28/obamas-administration-made-the-muslim-ban-possible-and-the-media-wont-tell-you/

  • Pingback: SUNDAY MORNING EDITION | Big Pulpit
  • Nate, know what I noticed in that piece from Mark? He said Trump didn’t mention Antisemitism in his Holocaust Remembrance speech. And? How many times over 8 years did Obama fail to mention things near and dear to the hearts of Christians and people like Mark scoffed saying such things were trivialities? Now, of course, it can only mean one thing!

    Everyone screaming about Trump stood idly by for eight years while Obama, the Democrats and their surrogates in the press/pop culture did the same. We don’t like a list published of illegal crimes? We had no problem with the press stepping over the bodies of hundreds of white people killed by police in order to find those blacks killed in order to whip up racial divisions. We had no problem with the press digging into any dirt possible and publishing it to derail an opponent of liberal agendas. Where was the outrage then?

    It makes me think of that line from A Man for All Seasons:

    “And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned ’round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man’s laws, not God’s! And if you cut them down, and you’re just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I’d give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s sake!”

    For eight years the left either supported or, in Mark’s case, said increasingly little about all the trees of law and principles that were felled in order to make way for the progressive agenda. And now the devil of their worst nightmare is in office, and they’re looking for cover and finding none. I get the feeling they won’t turn the mirror on themselves to see who is to blame. In fact, I fear they’ll use it to lay the groundwork for even worse once Trump is out of the way.

  • “This is (one reason) why I’m proud to be a supporter of the ACLU (and not the Catholic Church).”

    One of the comments on the post linked by Nate. On the few occasions when I read his blog, there are more similarly minded comments. More of the materialist Left and less true Catholicism. Pray for the man as he is moving towards love of the Kingdom of the World and less love of the Kingdom of God.

    And yes, mock his posts. This might help.

  • I also notice that Mark is referring to our country as “Amerikkka.” Perhaps in the same spirit we should refer to his politics as “Marksism.”

  • Re: Phillip. We should call him Marx Shea in honor of his leanings.

  • And we could call his materialist followers “Marksists.”

  • Phillip, Mark’s blog has become quite the haven for people who express their dislike of Catholicism. Was a time where Mark would have come down on someone like that, even if they were agreeing with his position. Was a time.

  • Yes. Thus his continued slide into materialism. He sells out the supernatural message of the Gospel for the pottage of salvation by the State. He begins to worship Mammon. Not the Mammon of money but the Mammon of government power, central planning and the wisdom of human elites.

  • Mark Shea
    Who could not stay
    Within the church
    Did leftward lurch

  • Why is Mr. Shea still being used as an authority on the “Catholic Answer,” radio show?

  • Brian, that’s been my point. There are plenty of credible outlets and individuals who lift him up as an authority on Catholic teaching.

  • Dave Griffey.

    Is there anything that could come from the diocesan authority, Bishop? Any action that could warn him of being in grave error..(? Cannon 915 for Catholic politicians who support abortion on demand.)

    Wondering aloud here.

  • Pingback: CATHOLIC HEADLINES 1.29.17 – The Stumbling Block
  • I don’t know. I’d think, but I also think Mark has referenced attempts by others to go to the Bishop. The thing about Mark is that he doesn’t say ‘The Church is wrong!’, he says there is only one way to be a Catholic, unless Mark says otherwise. So I don’t know how that would go.

  • Thanks Dave.

    It would be a good for all if Mr Shea took a sabbatical away from man and Internet.
    A silent retreat of sorts. 🙂
    Extended version.

    Yes. Prayers for him.

  • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/markshea/2017/01/montreal-bishop-tom-dowd-really-good-guy.html

    That is how Mark sees it. It’s common, especially on the left side of the aisle, to fire verbal nukes at people, only to have a meltdown if someone is so mean as to suggest they might be wrong. Mark says far worse than anything I’ve ever seen said to him, and that Mark put words in my mouth that I never said before banning me, which suggests Mark has entered that level of unreality so crucial to following a more progressive worldview. Also since, according to him, he continually gets assurances, support and even commission from various official outlets of the Church and Catholic sources suggests he won’t stop soon. Then again, the question is, should he? If what he does appears to be supported and affirmed by official outlets and representatives of the Church, why should he?

  • I was having to question a possible witness to a crime in “Johnson Place”, here is my Hometown where I later retired from the Police Department. Now, Johnson Pl is a large sub-division made up of homes for the extremely rich. A place where in-home elevators and indoor pools come standard. So, I’m asking this guy if he might have seen anything different. To which he responded, “Well sir, they sure got some fancy garbage there !” TR.

  • One of the comments on the post linked by Nate. On the few occasions when I read his blog, there are more similarly minded comments.

    Has anyone gone back and checked again? Here’s a random sampling of quotes, I won’t spoil contexts but each quote is from a DIFFERENT poster, no two are from the same person.
    * “The population is being numbed; atrocities are in the future.”
    * “Anyway I myself have lost my faith in democratic governance period.”
    * “The only sin of Hitler was that he lost. That will not happen again.”
    * “Every crazy thing Obama was going to do – FEMA Camps, Martial Law, invalidating elections … us what Trump et al will do and gave started.”
    * “Sooner or later, it will be our turn, as Catholics. The bishops and the pope have already had disapproving words to say about Trump’s immigration policy, and if I remember right, at least two bishops spoke out against his pet “pro-life” nonprofit’s grotesque, thinly-veiled campaign ad. It’ll be the Church or Caesar. America First, remember?”

    Ready for the punchline? On October 13th of last year, Shea posted this:
    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/markshea/2016/10/its-getting-down-to-the-wire-for-obama.html
    Dinesh D’Souza, the adulterous Boy Who Cried Wolf in the false prophecy called 2016: Obama’s America foretold all this to a salivating audience of credulous sucker while he was betraying his wife. Now, of course, relying on the fact that the fathomless pride of his audience means never having to admit error, D’Souza is back, leading the Boys Who Cry Wolf with more dire prophecies of the horrors that await us in Hillary’s America.

    Well Shea isn’t adulterous so we can give him that. But otherwise I guess we know now that it’s only fear-mongering when the Right does it. When the Left does it it’s justified warnings.

    That is how Mark sees it. It’s common, especially on the left side of the aisle, to fire verbal nukes at people, only to have a meltdown if someone is so mean as to suggest they might be wrong. Mark says far worse than anything I’ve ever seen said to him, and that Mark put words in my mouth that I never said before banning me, which suggests Mark has entered that level of unreality so crucial to following a more progressive worldview.

    Spot on, Dave. I believe the term de juor is “crybully” or as my daddy used to say, “they can dish it out but can’t take it.” It was perfectly captured by South Park here:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNl-Hydyxh0

    It’s interesting to watch someone who has been so hard on Protestants in the past (i.e. pretty much saying we’re all that’s wrong with the world) then go to the mat for Muslims. Here are posts that were put up just TODAY.
    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/markshea/2017/01/usccb-condemns-lawless-executive-order.html
    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/markshea/2017/01/trump-promotes-racist-conspiracy-theorist.html
    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/markshea/2017/01/abp-vigneron-writes-letter-support-imams-detroit.html
    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/markshea/2017/01/mccain-graham-join-resistance.html
    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/markshea/2017/01/two-us-cardinals-condemn-trumps-assault-refugees-immigrants.html

    Oh and the tags he is using on some of these posts?
    * Life in the Banana Republic of Trump’s Amerikkka
    *Racism is a sin
    *The Least of These
    *The Thing That Used to be the Prolife Movement

    And of course will there be ANY acknowledgment about the actual executive order? Nope. A man who harps on seeking out what the church REALLY says can’t be bothered to see what the law really says. For a bonus game, watch this:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNu4xU9qOEM

    And see how many of Obama’s actions named in that video Shea called out. I think maybe 1. But Shea is welcome to come here and prove me wrong. Unlike his site where nobody’s welcome to prove him wrong.

  • Re: Nate, et al. Why not stop donating to National Catholic Register and EWTN until Mark Shea is removed?

  • Michael Dowd.
    Good point.
    Amen.

    I feel sad however, for the sheep who are lead astray by the wolf man Shea. They are going to need Nat, et al, to calmly corral them back to the fold. His big mouth may attract many flies causing him to choke on his own words…Until then we pray for his return to the Faith.

  • Watching this man circle the toilet is depressing.

    The state of discourse in the American Church is parlous.

  • Art Deco.
    Imagery….Your a master Art.
    Lol.

  • The progressive left reminds me of HAL9000.

    Michael Dowd: Mark Shea was let go by the National Catholic Register a while back. His name no longer appears on their list of bloggers.

  • GregB.

    HAL 9000…. Progressive Left?
    OK.

    Personally,
    the opening sequence of 2001, bone in hand and screaming at the top of their fuzzy heads….these ARE the progressive Left. 🐵

  • Philip: The progressive left act like they are foolproof and incapable of error. Their mission is too important to allow anyone to jeopardize it. HAL did go on a rampage against the crew.

  • It seems Screwtape has taken to advising Wormwood on what to do to counteract effective blogger/apologists:

    One very promising avenue as of late is to divert the apologist – or for that matter, any Catholic who has effectively forced their false beliefs upon others – into a strong, even obsessive attention to mere politics and matters of government. This has recently been rather spectacularly successful. If we can achieve the result of getting these apologists to write more about politics, by far, than about what they call “the faith” then we have succeeded beyond our wildest hopes and aspirations.

    Beyond this matter of relative output, they even tend to start thinking that everyone who disagrees with them on political matters, is a sort of “enemy”: rather than us and our Brave Leader being their true enemy. They forget that they are more often than not fighting against their own fellow “Christians” within the dreadful and pathetic so-called “Body of Christ.”

    This can happen (another great break for us!) in any part of the political spectrum. “Political correctness” and a smug intellectual snobbery, or on the opposite side: extreme, paranoid semi-conspiratorialism and self-righteousness, are the fashions and fads of the day and conquer all.

The Whole Great Family of Man

Friday, January 27, AD 2017

March for Life

These communities, by their representatives in old  Independence Hall, said to the whole world of men: “We  hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are  created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with  certain unalienable rights; that among these are life,  liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” This was their majestic  interpretation of the economy of the Universe. This was their  lofty, and wise, and noble understanding of the justice of  the Creator to His creatures. [Applause.] Yes, gentlemen, to  all His creatures, to the whole great family of man. In their  enlightened belief, nothing stamped with the Divine image and  likeness was sent into the world to be trodden on, and degraded,  and imbruted by its fellows. They grasped not only the whole  race of man then living, but they reached forward and seized  upon the farthest posterity. They erected a beacon to guide  their children and their children’s children, and the countless  myriads who should inhabit the earth in other ages. Wise  statesmen as they were, they knew the tendency of prosperity  to breed tyrants, and so they established these great  self-evident truths, that when in the distant future some man,  some faction, some interest, should set up the doctrine that  none but rich men, or none but white men, were entitled to life,  liberty and the pursuit of happiness, their posterity might look  up again to the Declaration of Independence and take courage to  renew the battle which their fathers began — so that truth,  and justice, and mercy, and all the humane and Christian virtues  might not be extinguished from the land; so that no man would  hereafter dare to limit and circumscribe the great principles  on which the temple of liberty was being built.

Abraham Lincoln, August 17, 1858

Continue reading...

2 Responses to The Whole Great Family of Man

Stamped With the Divine Image

Sunday, January 22, AD 2017

These communities, by their representatives in old  Independence Hall, said to the whole world of men: “We  hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are  created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with  certain unalienable rights; that among these are life,  liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” This was their majestic  interpretation of the economy of the Universe. This was their  lofty, and wise, and noble understanding of the justice of  the Creator to His creatures. [Applause.] Yes, gentlemen, to  all His creatures, to the whole great family of man. In their  enlightened belief, nothing stamped with the Divine image and  likeness was sent into the world to be trodden on, and degraded,  and imbruted by its fellows. They grasped not only the whole  race of man then living, but they reached forward and seized  upon the farthest posterity. They erected a beacon to guide  their children and their children’s children, and the countless  myriads who should inhabit the earth in other ages. Wise  statesmen as they were, they knew the tendency of prosperity  to breed tyrants, and so they established these great  self-evident truths, that when in the distant future some man,  some faction, some interest, should set up the doctrine that  none but rich men, or none but white men, were entitled to life,  liberty and the pursuit of happiness, their posterity might look  up again to the Declaration of Independence and take courage to  renew the battle which their fathers began — so that truth,  and justice, and mercy, and all the humane and Christian virtues  might not be extinguished from the land; so that no man would  hereafter dare to limit and circumscribe the great principles  on which the temple of liberty was being built.

Abraham Lincoln, August 17, 1858

Continue reading...

2 Responses to Stamped With the Divine Image

  • I love president Lincoln. He was powerfully, deeply aware of those great thinkers and founders – and he was so capable of putting his knowledge and understanding into practice.
    I guess he was about forty years before it was started to become important to be “progressive” and to put down the old order of the past.

Roe V. Wade and the Right to Rule Ourselves

Sunday, January 22, AD 2017

 

On January 22, 1973 the United States Supreme Court in the case of Roe v. Wade and in the companion case of Doe v. Bolton made up a Constitutional right to abortion out of thin air.  There was nothing in the Constitution forbidding the states from regulating abortion, and the states had so regulated, and often criminalized, abortion since the inception of the Republic.  Roe and Doe were terrible crimes against the unborn, but they were also blows against the most precious civil liberty Americans possess:  the right to rule ourselves.

If Roe were overturned, the abortion regime of abortion on demand would be limited to a handful of states.  Some states would ban abortion outright in almost all cases.  Most would bring abortion under ever growing restrictions that would shrink the number of abortions performed.  One of the prime defenses of abortion currently, that is a Constitutional right, would be no more.  Pro-lifers would be free to focus on the ugly reality of abortion without fear that Federal courts by judicial fiat would upend hard won pro-life legislation at the state level.

How do we get there? Two main paths that I can see. 

Continue reading...

40 Responses to Roe V. Wade and the Right to Rule Ourselves

  • Agreed.

    The forces opposed to Life have made their presence known;https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/01/21/politics/madonna-speech-march/index.html

    This is invoking treason.
    A public figure talking like this is a threat and should be dealt with accordingly.

    Today all of my prayers are for the Right To Life March. God protect them from the Evil that has shown up. The Evil that is restless because they sense their demise.

    God help us in this battle for Life.

  • Remember what it took to end slavery and think not that sadly human error won’t require the same to end abortion today. I pray I am wrong. But I fear that the left will never surrender abortion till it is utterly defeated. The recent march by feminist lesbian and abortionist murderous perverts on DC prove that.

  • Court-stripping does not need to be tested. The authority to determine jurisdictions in right there. In truth, judicial misfeasance in this matter and in so many others that anything short of putting out contracts is legitimate means in a war on the courts.

  • The woman’s march was a celebration of Roe vs. Wade, the right of women to kill their own children.

    “Our Lady of Fatima, help us in the year 2017, intercede for us please. Our world has gone insane.

  • Keeping in mind that our Society is actually run by Lawyers ( no offense Don R. ) and Lawyers, ancient Greek Lawyers, invented Sophistry. That’s the Cop in me speaking. And yes, I have known some really great people that happened to be Lawyers. But the Sophism yet remains. Timothy Reed

  • In Fact ! Me own Niece, my very God Child, is one o’ THEM ! And I never let her forget it ! TR.

  • Could they be Leprechauns in disguise, all but the Niece ? TR.

  • When the Supreme Court violates our Founding Principles, the Court miscarries Justice. “We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal.” (not born equal).
    Roe v. Wade violated the principle that all men are created equal and never called for the burden of proof that the newly begotten sovereign person had no sovereign personhood. It was assumed and under pressure, the fix was in.
    The newly begotten human soul must actively will to survive. This act of the will is proof of sovereign personhood. The newly begotten sovereign person’s innate freedom to freely will to survive is his civil Right to Life. Any newly begotten sovereign person who cannot survive is a spontaneous abortion or miscarriage.
    Roe v. Wade violates the newly begotten human being’s free will to survive.
    The Constitution for the United States provides “the blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our (constitutional) Posterity…” all future generations.
    Roe v. Wade slaughters our constitutional Posterity and the mob marches on our Law of the Land.

  • Mary De Voe…do I have your permission to print up your comment and share with friends at our Church ?
    I find it brilliant and convincing. Timothy Reed

  • Timothy Reed.

    She’s just warming up.

    Mary De Voe is spot on.
    Truly.

  • I like her. TR.

  • Timothy Reed: Public domain is public, for the public and by the public. Public domain is held in joint and common tenancy by each and every sovereign person. Go for it or I have failed. Timothy means Honor of God. My maiden name translates from the Polish to Timothy. Rosaryvictory.blogspot.com. God bless us, one and all and The American Catholic forum.

  • Pingback: TUESDAY EDITION | Big Pulpit
  • All that is necessary, at least as a first step, is for Congress to issue a resolution stating that Roe v Wade was an illegal seizure of power by the courts, as was Obergefell. Then, pass a statute stating that impeachment proceedings will be brought against any judge who invents constitutional rights, uphold any decision that uses the doctrine of substantive due process.

  • Roe v. Wade is worse than a miscarriage of Justice, malfeasance in office and dereliction of duty, Roe v. Wade is the imposition of tyranny over the sovereign citizens being denied the acknowledgement of their sovereignty, acknowledgement of their institution of the sovereign nation and the sovereignty of government of the people, for the people and by the people. The rise of the administrative state is government against the people.
    Roe v. Wade never bore the burden of proof that the newly begotten innocent soul of Baby Roe had no sovereign personhood. Had the Court acknowledged “that all men are created equal”, the Court was to assume Baby Roe as a ward of the Court and defend Baby Roe’s right to Life, hence, the charge of dereliction of duty.
    (There can be no religious test for public office. There must be a Founding Principles test. How can a judge tell those who come before him who they are, unless he knows who he is? Every America citizen is a constituent of the American President. When the president becomes partisan or refuses to represent his constituents, the president impeaches himself.)
    Roe v. Wade refused to acknowledge the sovereign personhood of the infused, rational, immortal soul of Baby Roe, his free will, his intellect, his right to choose life. Baby Roe’s right to choose life, his will to survive and his choice are the cause of Baby Roe’s soul being scraped from the womb.
    Roe v. Wade refused to acknowledge the infused soul endowed with unalienable, innate, human rights that become Baby Roe’s civil rights. Baby Roe was refused acknowledgement of his freedom to entertain the gift of Faith from God. Baby Roe’s response to the gift of Faith from God is his intimate and personal relationship with God called religion, protected and guaranteed in our constitutional First Amendment.
    Roe v. Wade imposed atheism, the Supreme Court’s atheism on Baby Roe. Atheism is a belief that must be chosen by the free will and conscience of the sovereign person for his soul. The atheist must be tolerated as a death bed convert as a member of the human species, Homo Sapiens, the wise man.
    Atheism as the atheist’s ungodly choice is patently totalitarian and antithetical to our Constitutional First Amendment, as the belief in atheism, denies every sovereign person, his sovereign soul, his unalienable human rights, and his freedom to have a relationship with his “Creator” in thought, word, deed and peaceable assembly, thereby being the first and foremost cause of a War for Freedom.
    Sins and crimes against humanity diminish and eradicate the sovereignty of the person and the sovereignty of the nation. That is, that the criminal and the sinner cannot institute the sovereign state. The criminal and outlaw has forfeit his sovereignty, that is, his discipline over himself.
    Addiction to sodomy, avarice, lust, gluttony and pride do not constitute and cannot institute the sovereign state. Addiction to sodomy is not a civil right. Addiction to drugs confounds legal informed consent. All addiction is a violation of free will and freedom. The sovereign nation and government cannot be instituted by individuals lacking informed consent.
    The sovereign state is not instituted by addicts, criminals and despots to impose atheism and totalitarianism. The sovereign state is instituted for healing and the common good.
    Rosaryvictory.blogspot.com

  • doug: You have made it clear.

  • As Rush LImbaugh pointed out decades ago, hearts must be changed before the law can be changed.

  • The law is usually changed before all hearts are changed.

  • Mary De Voe…Thank you for the info. And I’m itching with curiousity about how your maiden name could equate to Timothy. I don’t know whether or not I told you about my book. It is an autobiography titled : “Wings held up by Hope” by Timothy Reed. It is available at most book outlets. The cover was designed by my daughter, a professional artist, Jill Reed Render. Also, I’m working on a second book. And it has a lot to do with Policework and the Rosary. When I shared the title with Jill she said, “Only a Cop could get away with that title, Dad !” Curious ? TR.

  • Timothy Reed: I am about buying Wings Held Up by Hope and some of the other books you have authored. Tyszkiewicz is the Polish form of Timothy. Brother John’s son is an artist. I love you, too.

  • Jan 25 Dred Scott, decided by Roger B. Haney, was never rescinded. Dred Scott was never declared a mistrial nor a miscarriage of Justice. The Dred Scott decision must be declared a miscarriage of Justice as The Supreme Court refused to acknowledge the sovereign personhood of Dred Scott (“created equal” a self-evident truth from our Unanimous Declaration of Independence, ratified by every state) and further refused to protect Dred Scott’s civil rights as Scott became a ward of the Court. This must happen now, even after the Civil War.
    Roe v. Wade must be declared a miscarriage of Justice by The Supreme Court again for the same reason: the self-evident truth that all men are created equal and that they are endowed with certain unalienable human rights to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness, the accomplishment of their destiny.
    Declaring the unjust decisions, Dred Scott and Roe v. Wade as mistrials and miscarriages of Justice will prevent another civil war, a war that is already in our streets with mobs of ferocious protestors running amok with nothing but the Roe v. Wade Court decision as their sole purpose.
    Prayer ban too, must be confirmed by the Supreme Court. The Court said that the atheist “May go her own way” as we all might. The Main Stream Media bannered PRAYER BAN.
    Individuals who get their information through the MSM and the MSM itself cannot figure out why President Trump testifies to the MSM’s artificial facts.

  • When any individual or institution, as in government, runs afoul of our Founding Principles, they incur ostracism, impeachment and sanction. They are free to leave and they are free to get three quarters of the states to ratify their opinion for their opinion to become the Law of the Land. A Founding Principles test must be given to any individual seeking any government office.

  • “So wonderful is the Lord, that HE accepts the dreams of Children, as prayer.” From “Wings held up by Hope ” by Timothy Reed Page 18

  • Mary…I only have “Wings held up by Hope” out so far. I am working on book two, as we speak. TR.

  • Timothy Reed: Your prose is poetry. I am looking forward to your writing.

  • Timothy Reed.

    Today I received my Amazon shipping notice that your book is on the way here.

    I too am looking forward to reading your story.

    God be with both of you, Tim and Mary.

    btw……I liked Mary before you did Tim..Na na na nahh na na nahh. 🙂 had to get my four year old self out. sigh..I feel better now.

    Have a Great Feast of the conversion of St. Paul.

    St. Peter…Pray for us.. please.

  • The Truth is more dangerous for the teller, than for the one Truth is uttered about. TR.

  • Philip….My brother, and I, were attracted to the same girl in High School. We argued over who should be the one to ask her out. As luck would have it, we both showed up dateless at a school Dance. And there she waltzed ( she didn’t walk…she waltzed ) thru the front door. Both our hearts sank as we got a look at her date. He was at least 7 or 8 years older than us, obviously rich, and might have been the Middle Linebacker for Green Bay. TR.

  • High School?
    Seven or eight years your senior.
    Ouch.
    Mom and Dad would of had a cow if they knew…Her parents of course.

    Well Timothy…
    I’m going to step aside.
    As much as this hurts it’s only right.
    You both have my blessings.

    My cyber crush is over. 🙁

  • I’m going to make an observation. I think, as a Society, that the more tech advanced the Society becomes, the more Evil it will become. Do you think that the devil carries a cell phone ? TR.

  • TR.

    St. Maximilian Kolbe used the latest media of the day to warn the faithful of sinister regimes coming to power. Radio and his printing presses. The internet has help influence the hearts of many in ways profitable for their souls as well as the opposite. Which wolf do you feed?

    The impersonal aspects are worrisome and the pursuit of the ( fountain of youth ) always seemed a dangerous venture since life on earth is not our eternal goal, but for wealthy non-believers it may be there only hope for eternity. Cryogenics, to me, seems freaky. Maybe they can thaw a person out in 2525 to heal their life threatening hang nail.

    I’m old fashioned I guess.

  • @Timothy Reed

    I know that I’m going to enjoy your story!

    Your dedication is perfect.
    Absolutely perfect.
    This, from a common leper trying his best to serve the healer.
    I’ll drop into it tonight after dinner.

    Peace.

  • @Timothy Reed.

    “The Bible says that we are fearfully and wonderfully made. No wonder, then, that the Lord does not want us to judge on another.” -TR

    Amen.

    “Charlies” are gifts from God for certain.
    It is beautiful. Kindred spirits that help hold up our wings…encouraging and engaging in our trek through this valley.

    Thank you for sharing your story.
    Half way through. Your childhood memories, pains, disappointments and answered prayers are soul stirring. Miraculous and marvelous.
    “Accepts the dreams of children as prayers.”

  • Philip…a short explanation of my book : I have seven Grandsons. And I began my book as a Journal for them. I wanted them to glean the lessons that I have learned, throughout my life, without having to learn them from personal experience. The main lesson is simply to do the Right thing, even when it might be tied to a consequence. I quit my “dream” job ( and you can figure which one that was ) because I came to realize that, in order to keep it, I would have to compromise my Christian beliefs. And it has had lasting effects. It was very much a self-demotion. My pension as a retired Police Officer is not near what I could have had. And sometimes, when I have to tell my wife that we cannot afford this, or we cannot do that,
    I have to fight against feeling guilty, for having done the right thing. But I will continue to convey to my Grandsons that I “willingly” made the sacrifice in order to please my God, rather than please other men.
    TR.

  • @Timothy Reed.

    Your leaving them a priceless inheritance when your freedom bird leads you into the Cerulean Blue. The sharing of Faith and Trust in Jesus in our lives is tapping into the living waters spoken of in our Bible.
    Waters that quench a thirst that can not be quenched by any other means.

    Your helping your grandsons to come to know this spring, this source. Truly a blessing for all grandsons everywhere.

    When you land safely into the kingdom we long for, I believe you will hear the sweetest song; “Well done, my good and faithful servant.” Be not surprised when He substitutes servant for the word friend.
    For as it is written; “……But I have called you friends because all things whatsoever I have heard from my Father I have made known to you. 16 You have not chosen me, I have chosen you…” John 15: portion of verse 15 and16.
    I believe you are bearing good fruit with Wings held up by Hope. I look forward to finishing your treasure this evening after work.

    I’m glad you mentioned that you had written this work. I’ll be better for having read your story. I know it. 🙂

  • TR.

    btw…When we and our household sacrifice for God’s glory by following the promptings of the Holy Spirit, we give up nothing. Rather our reward we be great in a kingdom that is everlasting. No “thing” or man or angel can take away the treasures given you once you enter into God’s kingdom.

    My wife too has suffered because she has allowed me to follow the Holy Spirit into the nursing home environment. No more trips to the Caymans, but we are better for having made known the True Paradise that awaits for those who love God and neighbor. Your sacrifices and those of your wife, will be rewarded abundantly… Forever!

  • One day, after Church, I was walking down the sidewalk towards my truck; when suddenly, 5 or 6 small girls came running up the same sidewalk towards me. One of them tripped and fell and sat there crying in misery. I approached her ( we did not know each other ), examined her while straightening her dress, and simply said, “You’re alright”. She immediately stopped crying, got herself up, and ran after the others ! I was amazed, and had this thought : ‘That is whar my Lord, my Friend in Heaven has been doing for me. TR.

  • What a perfect example of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Prayer.. Church is over(really just starting.) = Action, your works=results..Stopped crying.. Confidence regained= refreshing revelation of His mercy in our daily struggle.

    TR.
    He is so alive if we only have the hearts to see him.

    Thanks again.

  • Philip…I am very grateful for your feedback and encouragement. You are an example, for me, of a guy that is doing great things, and yet humble about it. Timothy Reed

Cold Winter of Unbelief

Wednesday, December 28, AD 2016

Today, dearest brethren, we celebrate the birthday of those children who were slaughtered, as the Gospel tells us, by that exceedingly cruel king, Herod. Let the earth, therefore, rejoice and the Church exult — she, the fruitful mother of so many heavenly champions and of such glorious virtues. Never, in fact, would that impious tyrant have been able to benefit these children by the sweetest kindness as much as he has done by his hatred. For as today’s feast reveals, in the measure with which malice in all its fury was poured out upon the holy children, did heaven’s blessing stream down upon them.

“Blessed are you, Bethlehem in the land of Judah! You suffered the inhumanity of King Herod in the murder of your babes and thereby have become worthy to offer to the Lord a pure host of infants. In full right do we celebrate the heavenly birthday of these children whom the world caused to be born unto an eternally blessed life rather than that from their mothers’ womb, for they attained the grace of everlasting life before the enjoyment of the present. The precious death of any martyr deserves high praise because of his heroic confession; the death of these children is precious in the sight of God because of the beatitude they gained so quickly. For already at the beginning of their lives they pass on. The end of the present life is for them the beginning of glory. These then, whom Herod’s cruelty tore as sucklings from their mothers’ bosom, are justly hailed as “infant martyr flowers”; they were the Church’s first blossoms, matured by the frost of persecution during the cold winter of unbelief.

 St. Augustine

Continue reading...

5 Responses to Cold Winter of Unbelief

  • Thank you for the reminder.
    We will mention this memorial tonight at the empty manger gathering.

    When we picked this date it wasn’t based on the Holy Innocents feast day…But now in clearer light, it couldn’t be a better date.

    To the END of the slaughter we pray and sing…Peace on Earth and Mercy mild, God and sinner reconciled…

  • I’ve been able to attend daily Mass during my Christmas vacation. Here is what I recall of my priest’s homily for today:
    .
    http://prognosticis.blogspot.com/2016/12/martyrium-innocentum-sacrorum.html
    .
    PS, Donald, I used your last two posts on King Wencelaus and St Stephen, and on St John for my family Bible reading at night the past two days. After we read the Scripture readings for the day, I read your post as the meditation. As always, keep up the good work.

  • Abortion would be seen as more horrific if the government mandated that babies must be born before they are slaughtered. I would like to see someone propose such a bill in Congress in order create another focus on today’s form of child murder.

  • Michael Dowd.

    To your proposal add this: that the birth mother must be the executioner of said order.
    She can not use poisoning as a method of termination.
    She must spend a minimum of thirty minutes alone with the corpse after her wishes are carried out.

    A deterrent to abortion?

Pro-Life Democrats and Other Myths

Sunday, August 7, AD 2016

 

Securing Reproductive Health, Rights, and Justice
Democrats are committed to protecting and advancing reproductive health, rights, and justice. We believe unequivocally, like the majority of Americans, that every woman should have access
to quality reproductive health care services, including safe and legal abortion regardless of where she lives, how much money she makes, or how she is insured. We believe that reproductive health is core to women’s, men’s,and young people’s health and wellbeing. We will continue to stand up to Republican efforts to defund Planned Parenthood health centers, which provide critical health services to millions of people. We will continue to oppose and seek to overturn federal and state laws and policies that impede a woman’s access to abortion, including by repealing the Hyde Amendment.We condemn and will combat any acts of violence, harassment, and intimidation of reproductive health providers, patients, and staff.

Democrat 2016 Party Platform on abortion

 

 

 

Christopher Johnson, a non-Catholic who has taken up the cudgels so frequently for the Church that I have deemed him Defender of the Faith, at Midwest Conservative Journal, casts his eyes on Tim Kaine:

 

“Pro-life, Catholic Democrats.”  We hardly knew ye:

Observers of the abortion debate may feel a little whiplash watching the roll out of Tim Kaine’s vice presidential nomination. His position on abortion has changed over the years, and multiple times just over the last few days. He was for the Hyde Amendment before he was against it, but as of Friday morning, he was claiming to be in favor of it again. He is trying to square a circle in his attempts to line up his supposedly “traditional Catholic view” on the issue with Hillary Clinton’s position of taxpayer-funded abortion on demand. Perhaps the impossibility of reconciling the two is what accounts for Mr. Kaine’s flip-flops during the past week.

Running for governor 11 years ago, Mr. Kaine invoked his faith in opposition to abortion, supported pro-life laws and promoted adoption as an alternative to abortion. In 2008 he said, “I’ve supported restrictions on abortion, not all on the left have appreciated it, but I think it has been important to do that because there’s a moral gravity, I think, to abortion as an issue that has to be respected.”

However, Mr. Kaine’s respect for the moral gravity of the issue seemed to completely dissipate when he moved up to national office. In the Senate, Mr. Kaine’s voting record received a crystal-clear 100 percent score from the abortion lobby. He even voted to allow late-term abortions, opposing a bill to ban the procedure after 20 weeks of pregnancy. 

Tim Kaine “evolved” still further once he was under consideration for VP, knowing how dogmatic the Democratic Party has become and how unqualified he would be in the eyes of Hillary Clinton if he retained any shred of defense for preborn lives. To improve his resume he quietly co-sponsored pro-abortion legislation in the Senate that would wipe out all state abortion restrictions, including those he signed as governor.

He even privately agreed to support Hillary Clinton’s agenda for taxpayer-funded abortions. Mrs. Clinton’s campaign manager went on CNN to announce Mr. Kaine’s shift on the Hyde Amendment. “He has said that he will stand with Secretary Clinton to defend a woman’s right to choose, to repeal the Hyde Amendment.”

Yet Mr. Kaine continues to maintain that he has a “traditional Catholic personal position.”

Timmy?  Insofar as you and people like you don’t seem to have a single religious principle that you won’t enthusiastically repudiate for secular political gain, best of luck on Judgment Day, “Christian.”  Because, in the immortal words of the Alan Parsons Project, I wouldn’t want to be like you.

Judas.

Not everyone that sayeth unto me, “Lord, Lord,” and all that.

Continue reading...

6 Responses to Pro-Life Democrats and Other Myths

  • Kaine is a lying sack of cow manure. How convienent to switch to abortionist…..and the Virginia bishops….well, I haven’t heard a word from them. Wonder why? Canon 915…..oh, that’s right…..Cardinal Wuerl in DC, right arcoss the Potomac and Papa Frank’s best American buddy pretends Canon 915 doesn’t exist.

  • If Bishops will not implement Canon 915, then God will implement 1 Corinthians 11:27-32.
    .
    27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. 28 Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself. 30 That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died. 31 But if we judged ourselves truly, we should not be judged. 32 But when we are judged by the Lord, we are chastened so that we may not be condemned along with the world.

  • Bart Stupak put to rest the myth of the pro-life democrat. He also pulled back the curtain and showed us how few bishops are actually pro-life. In that sense, he actually did us all a service. It’s no coincidence that the vitriol of people like Mark Shea has gone up as more and more folks know exactly what these so-called pro-life democrats actually believe.

  • As governor of my State, Kaine was vocal in opposition to the death penalty, and even before his “dissipation” was comparatively meek on the abortion issue. Let me also add following Father of Seven, any pol, such as Kaine and Stupak, who voted for obamacare knew full well that abortion was to be made a part of normalized ‘health care’ through coercive regulation, taxation, fines and penalties.

  • prolife democrat; military intelligence; pure whores; military music; truthful clinton; catholicd kaine; the list goes on . . . .

  • Judas

    Not Judas, Pontius Pilate. The original “personally pro-life” sellwash-out.

Just a Reminder: The Democrats are the Party of Abortion

Wednesday, July 27, AD 2016

 

 

Jesus wept:

 

When talking about abortion, Democratic politicians and activists usually prefer to speak euphemistically: The dismemberment or lethal poisoning of a baby who hasn’t been born yet is almost always referred to as “reproductive health care” or “a woman’s choice.” The group NARAL, once known as the National Abortion Rights Action League, went so far as to change its name to NARAL Pro-Choice America so its supporters and allies could avoid saying the a-word.

But there’s been a growing push on the left to not only defend abortion as a necessary evil that should be “safe, legal, and rare” but to celebrate it as a positive good. (See the #ShoutYourAbortion Twitter campaign of 2015.) And so on Wednesday evening, Ilyse Hogue, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, took the stage at the Democratic National Convention and told the story of the time she aborted her first child because it was an inconvenient time to become a parent.

“To succeed in life, all we need are the tools, the trust, and the chance to chart our own path,” Hogue said during her DNC speech. “I was fortunate enough to have these things when I found out I was pregnant years ago. I wanted a family, but it was the wrong time. I made the decision that was best for me—to have an abortion and get compassionate care at a clinic in my own community.” At this point, applause and cheers could be heard in the crowd. “Now years later, my husband and I are parents to two incredible children,” Hogue continued.

Continue reading...

31 Responses to Just a Reminder: The Democrats are the Party of Abortion

  • He did comment on it. You can tell it must have pained him because that was 1 of 2 posts on that day he did about Ds compared with… 3 about Rs. Oh and he’s already ahead of you, Don about why it’s totes ok to support one party of death but not the other.
    .
    John C Wright said it best: “[Mr. Shea] was once a Catholic apologist. I stopped reading him when he became instead an apologist for Progressivism.”
    .
    Anyway, I see you’ve been having fun with those of similar dispositions on Dave’s site. It’s going to be interesting to see if the next civil war is over that, or immigration.

  • But, as some Catholics such as certain members of the clergy including some bishops and bloggers such as Mark Shea say, there are compelling social justice issues that allow one to vote for a radically pro-murder candidate. Just so long as one is pursuing equity.

    Now, if one supports the Second Amendment, that’s a different matter.

  • They served their idols, which became a snare to them. They sacrificed their sons and their daughters to the demons; they poured out innocent blood, the blood of their sons and daughters, whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan, and the land was polluted with blood.” ~Psalm 106 (105)
    Democrats, Beware the sin of the Amorites. Today the idols have different appearances, but the demons are the same.”

  • “…fanatically dedicated to viewing abortion as a positive good”
    ,
    The depth of confusion is almost impossible for us to comprehend.
    These people are literally blinded by what the world reinforces to them over and over again. They have eyes but cannot see, ears but can’t hear.
    They have been formed that way by the culture of the 20th century, when it seems the devil apparently did have more license against us.
    A 3 yr old (just turned 3!) told me today that there is some evil that is good and some that is evil, that there are good witches. I came upon her- 3 years old, in lotus position hands held up to the side with palms up, saying “om” over and over. The older child told me she was meditating like on kung fu panda.
    Oh Lord help us!
    I have heard that the spiritual warfare against us is tactical and strategic- the devil lays plans and traps because he can’t take us against our will. He has to entice us to go on the dark path of our own will..he has to make us accept the lies — not an even handed choice, not a decision after a while of clearly choosing evil over good but to the point that we really believe evil can be good.

  • I we imagine we will be hearing a lot about the “seamless garment” moral approach to justify Catholics voting Democrat. Thus abortion and the death penalty are considered morally equivalent which they are not. To me the Modernistic (relativistic) thinking that drove Vatican II is largely responsible for much of the moral evil we have in the world today. The Catholic Church, and especially the Popes, have much to answer for the present condition of the world by being not only ‘in’ the world but ‘of’ the world. This is not the way of the Lord.

  • “To succeed in life, all we need are the tools, the trust, a the chance to chart our own path.”
    -Houge

    That statement coming from her, in her capacity is downright demonic.

    To succeed in life…( In order to be successful you may have to sacrifice the life of your child.). All we need are the tools..( forceps, vacuum and saline.). The trust…(non-trust. She means the fear. Fear rules in the choice to kill.) A chance to chart our own path..( free will is a gift from God. Charting your own path can be disastrous. The Bible is the chart. Any charting without the help of the Bible is complete destruction, and we have over 60 million examples to prove that!

    Liar’s abound in the camp of the left.

  • BTW…..from today’s Chart; Matthew 13:47-53 ” Jesus said to his disciples the Kingdom of Heaven is like a net thrown into the sea which collects fish of every kind. When it is full they haul it ashore and sit down and put what is good into buckets. What is bad they throw away. Thus it will be at the End of the Age. The angels will go out and separate the wicked from the righteous and throw them into the fiery furnace where they will be wailing and gnashing of teeth.”

  • Philip. He’s talking about Vatican II’s bad fish, e.g., abortion supporting liberals, etc.

  • Michael Dowd.
    Agreed!

  • This link is broken; Go here to read the rest.

  • Thanks for catching that. Fixed.

  • That the CEO of NARAL was a featured speaker at the Democratic convention is appalling. I use the term the CEO vice the president because these abortion groups are Big Business. It’s not compassion or blah, blah, blah; it’s all about money. “compelling social justice issues that allow one to vote for a radically pro-murder candidate” I heard that one from Catholics 8 years ago as the rationale for an Obama vote. Social justice issues? The educated, middle class (maybe married) woman standing up there had her abortion for convenience sake.
    The Democratic Party is the Party of Baby Murders and funding abortions with government money is on their platform.

  • Please let us do a “Stalin” and never ever in any way mention that Mark guy’s name. Even negative and truthful publicity for him is better than none, and undoubtedly will increase his ad revenue. The Party Of Death has progressed from “safe, rare and legal,” to this court-created, court-legislated, not-in-the-Constitution “right” is “absolute”. Their platform says they will abide absolutely no restrictions or limitations on this “right.” Is this the end? Hell no. Now their platform says we are all going to pay for all abortions for every woman (and girl, i.e. a fourteen year old without her parents knowledge standing before a complicit judge with a Planned-Parenthood lawyer paid for with our tax money). Is this use of our tax dollars the end? Hell,. hell no! Next up, and make no mistake about it, is the demonic extension of this “absolute” right to “post-birth abortion.” Yes, the mother and the mother alone will have the right, guaranteed and legislated by the likes of Sotomayor, Ginsburg and Kagan, to kill any baby who happens to survive a grisly gruesome abortion. Only the mother will be allowed to let the baby suffer like Christ on the Cross, screaming bloody murder (pun intended) on a cold stainless steel tray til it dies, alone. The party Of Death’s president has already voted againt saving the lives of such children. Thing this is not possible? Think like the first US troops in WWII walking into Dachau or Auschwitz – and then add in the liberals efforts to lower the age of consent to 10 or even 7, and you dont have America, you have Hell on earth. Guy MCClung, San Antonio, Texas

  • Good comment, Guy. They are going for a lower age of consent. The LBGT activists are in league with the abortion crowd.

  • Wait….it gets better!
    Let’s start up with stricter gun control laws… maybe even getting to the point of restrictions that tyrants dream about. This is the perfect storm for liberal elite’s. Murder, Perverse behavior as normal, open the field of prey to include pre-adolescents and then the gun grab. Not my guns!

    Guy, this hell is alive and well because folks are deciding their respective eternal home.
    This is the decisive action of souls picking their camp. The lukewarm are shrinking in numbers now…and that’s good. Your with Our Lord or his adversary. People are making the choice. Some knowingly, some blindly.
    Conversion isn’t a closed door, so we pray for their hearts to turn to God.

  • The Democrats are the party of abortion. The GOP is not far behind now. They won’t enthusiastically embrace it, but I can see acquiescence. The new GOP has forfeited many social values this cycle as they applaud speakers, including Trump, who chastise them for righteous positions or perceived unfair slights in “fake” culture wars.

  • “The GOP is not far behind now.”

    That is a ludicrous contention considering all the pro-life legislation passed by Republicans at the state level since their victories in 2010 and 2014. Even at the recently concluded Trump Convention the platform is more pro-life than ever. Year after year most Republicans labor to advance the pro-life cause and get only abuse as thanks from far too many pro-lifers.

  • That is a ludicrous contention considering all the pro-life legislation passed by Republicans at the state level since their victories in 2010 and 2014
    Under the old GOP, that’s true. But if Trump’s creation is the beginning of a new GOP, I stand by my statement.
    Year after year most Republicans labor to advance the pro-life cause and get only abuse as thanks from far too many pro-lifers.
    I didn’t say the party is not pro-life. (“Not far behind” doesn’t mean they are there.) But if the culture war surrender trickles down from the top, I think some GOP politicians will see it as license to loosen their position. The well is being poisoned. Its impact remains to be seen. A Trump victory sure won’t help.
    .
    Get only abuse? A bit dramatic. I have defended many Republicans for their pro-life stands. I have marched with some in pro-life marches and thanked them. Ever hear of Ken Paxton? I reserve the right to disagree with Trump’s GOP surrendering the culture war and supporting a man who gives praise to Planned Parenthood.

  • Trump, even if he wins the Presidency, which I think he will, will have minimal long term impact on the Republican Party and will quickly be at war with the Congressional Republican Party. Trump is a product of the economic failure of the Obama years, combined with the failure of the Republican establishment to take seriously voter rage at illegal immigration. Trump is sui generis and is not the founder of a long lasting movement.

  • Once years ago (1970) I purported to do a small study of what difference a party platform made as seen in action once a party or party’s candidate was in power. I didn’t do a good job and would still like to know.

  • You know, about all that applause for questionable things Trumpeted at the convention: I know people can get caught up in the moment – and will be chagrined when they get home and put down their placards hats.

  • “Trump is sui generis and is not the founder of a long lasting movement.” I fully agree with your assessment, Don. It took the Soviet communists seventy years to squander the vast resources of Russia but they eventually went broke. The American quasi-Soviets have in about sixty years caused the middle and working classes to go broke. Trump would not otherwise be the nominee of the Republican Party.

  • Kyle Miller: “The Democrats are the party of abortion. The GOP is not far behind now.”

    The GOP presents itself to the conservative base as the party of life. It is one of its primary attractions. There is no doubt that in many cases that is true; they are for life.

    There is zero life element in the Democrat Party. They love abortion. That is also true.

    Yet that deep distrust for being burned, year after year lingers.

    Where I agree with Kyle, above, is that somehow true success is just never..quite..grasped. It’s always juuuuust out of reach. The best example of this is Supreme Court Nominees. Liberal Democrats install 100% pro abortion, judicial legislators. No shame. Just radicals. Take that! Republicans nominate moderates who go along with the tide. None, save Scalia (RIP), can articulate the centrality of the Right To Life. The entire judicial system is oriented to strike down life laws. And abortion just somehow keeps swimming along just fine.

    Legislation may be passed here or there; but then struck down under review; quietly, it dies because no one is willing to defend it. We have had generally strong Republican majorities for a long time and yet abortion remains the preeminent law of the land.

    I see no one who can coherently, passionately lead on life and stake everything on success.

  • “None, save Scalia (RIP), can articulate the centrality of the Right To Life.”

    You can add to that list Alito and Thomas. Roberts has voted against abortion every time it has come before the court. If Ted Kennedy had not succeeded in defeating Reagan’s nomination of Judge Bork, legalized abortion would just be a bad memory.

  • But who is articulating the conservative case as to why a law is moral or immoral; good or bad for individuals and society?

    Yes, we have 3 votes on the Supreme Court. Good. Scalia was a voice who made the case for WHY. Who else does, or can?

    Liberals always seem to have more votes. Liberals always seem to control narrative. Liberals are always on offense. Conservatives are always on defense, apologizing for their backward ideas. Liberals win. Conservatives lose. Frustrating.

  • Trump, even if he wins the Presidency, which I think he will, will have minimal long term impact on the Republican Party and will quickly be at war with the Congressional Republican Party.
    If Trump wins, it will give a green light to other GOP members to take similar paths and positions. (My point, not Sowell’s thought it might be.) I’m going to agree with Thomas Sowell on this one. It will do harm to the GOP and its brand.
    Trump is a product of the economic failure of the Obama years, combined with the failure of the Republican establishment to take seriously voter rage at illegal immigration
    The conservative wheels on the GOP bus have been coming off for a while. I wrote about it in January 2012. (http://primecut.blogspot.com/2012/01/pain-of-bain-for-conservatives-gop.html) I predicted in May of this year what Trump would do, and he’s doing it to a tee. (https://plus.google.com/u/0/+KyleMiller/posts/hpgi1DaCo4D) As we travel further away from the Reagan revolution, the more GOP politicians soften and the coarser the party becomes. The coarser it becomes, the more unrecognizable it becomes.
    .
    If Trump wins, it won’t be by a wide margin. I’ll be wrong if he continues to go left and pull in more Democrats. He’s doing nothing to win conservative base support. “I’m not Hillary” is an insufficient argument. Of course, Trump has been unconventional, so maybe he will. He has plenty of material to pin Hillary to the mat.

  • Brian-I wish multiple sites would do many articles on your “frustration” point – it just seems to get worse, sometimes daily, for both Church and country. “worse” does not really convey what is happening to our world-nor does “dismal.” I just keep thinking of Ephesians and the phrase “world rulers of this present darkness.” Yes Christ is the light, but I sure would like to see a glimmer shining occasionally amidst all the evil. Guy McClung, San Antonio Texas

  • “If Trump wins, it will give a green light to other GOP members to take similar paths and positions.”

    And they will fall flat on their face if they do. Trump’s rise was very much a product of this year, the failed Obama presidency and his personality. Trump wanna be’s will be few and unsuccessful. Trump routinely does things that would be fatal to any politician not named Donald Trump.

    “It will do harm to the GOP and its brand.”

    Perhaps, although I think a President Trump will quickly establish beyond doubt that declaring himself a Republican was merely a means to gain office. Trump considers himself above petty party politics.

    “The conservative wheels on the GOP bus have been coming off for a while. I wrote about it in January 2012.”

    You were wrong then, you are wrong now. The Republican party, as a party, is more deeply conservative now then at any time in its history.

    “If Trump wins, it won’t be by a wide margin.”

    My guess is he will win by five points or more. Hillary is an appallingly bad candidate and the establishment incarnate. She is the perfect candidate for a populist insurgent like Trump, in this year, to be running against. Unless Trump implodes, and with Trump almost anything you can imagine is possible, it will not be close. As for Trump moving to the left, Trump says whatever he thinks advantageous at the moment. He would say that he isn’t moving anywhere except in for the kill against Hillary.

  • Hillary by 3. With some helpful voter fraud to push her over the top,

    It’s all about the machine.

  • Yep, that Democrat machine and fraud was shown to function well in 2004, 2010 and 2014. When it’s not close they can’t steal it.

  • Pingback: GOD & CAESAR TUESDAY EDITION | Big Pulpit

Man Isn’t Meat

Tuesday, June 28, AD 2016

ABortion-Training-fetus-baby-2-700x256

 

 

Kevin Williamson, who was adopted as a newborn just prior to Roe being decided in 1973, has the best commentary I have seen yet on the Supreme Court decision in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt striking down the key portions of the Texas abortion law:

 

There is a great deal of dishonesty in the abortion debate, which is necessary: Otherwise, we’d be obliged to think about the horror of what we perpetrate and what we endure, and that would be very difficult. Instead, we hear a great deal about extraordinarily rare catastrophes of pregnancy, which are heart-hurting but which also are, in the vast majority of cases, entirely beside the point: These cases are as a statistical matter nearly nonexistent. Even the usual hedge offered by office-seeking pro-life Republicans — the exemption for children conceived through rape or incest — approaches statistical insignificance. (Never mind the moral insignificance, as though we could murder a four-year-old, or a 38-year-old, because he was conceived via rape.) We hear dark warnings about a new Torquemada and a rising theocracy, as though an atheist such as my good friend Charles C. W. Cooke doesn’t know a baby when he sees one, as though the world were not full of agnostics and outright heathens who still have enough civilization in them to know better than to accept butchering unborn children as normal.

 

A culture that treats pregnancy as a horrible disease and classifies its children as liabilities rather than assets is a culture that is, strangely enough, childish. For most of our history, we marked adulthood from the moment of sexual maturity, i.e., from the age of fertility in women and the roughly corresponding age of men. Granted, these were young, inexperienced, ignorant adults — but we knew that they were at the age of responsibility, if only barely. We eventually learned to tell ourselves a different set of stories about that, and in anno Domini 2016 we have men in their late 20s, perhaps with a grey hair or two in their beards, perhaps with their hair showing the first signs of starting to thin, worried about being kicked off Mommy’s insurance policy. “I didn’t think I was ready,” I’ve heard any number of women say, sometimes with regret that could absolutely waylay you. No doubt there are men thinking the same thing, though you don’t hear them talk about it very often. The women always say the same thing: “They lied to us.”

Of course they lied. You cannot foist a philosophy of man-as-meat on civilized people without a great quantity of lies, some of which will be published in the form of Supreme Court opinions. That is why those who oppose the philosophy of man-as-meat are denied political recourse, and why the authorities in backward places such as Ohio have tried to quash their First Amendment rights, too. Man isn’t meat, and the political model built on insisting that man is meat cannot withstand much scrutiny or debate. It must rely on brute force, which sometimes comes disguised as a Supreme Court ruling. How many people throughout the ages have been convinced of the most indefensible nonsense by similar figures in black ceremonial robes? Think on that the next time you feel inclined to snigger at Iran’s Guardian Council. But when the hysteria subsides and the blood dries up, reality is still there, and we’re still putting millions of unborn children to death because Caitlyn doesn’t want her prom ruined and because Rachel is living out some third-rate HBO fantasy in Brooklyn, or some place she wishes were Brooklyn. Harry Blackmun didn’t imagine that, but it is his legacy — and our indictment.

Continue reading...

4 Responses to Man Isn’t Meat

  • Yes, yes let us please hear a word from Pope Francis who, some of us believe, is supposed to reflect the thinking of Christ. It is the very Liberal folks he admires most that are the greatest advocates of abortion and other methods of suppressing life and freedom.

  • I can’t think offhand of anyone who’s more of a “must-read” right now than Williamson. Range, depth, originality of thought, he’s got it all. He’s the kind of person who rightfully deserves the name intellectual, back when the term had meaning and hadn’t become a pejorative.

  • “Over the past half century life has become ever more enmeshed in a pernicious game of make believe.”
    And now we believe that Iranians are not building nuclear weapons nor that they mean it when they chant “Death to America”.
    What goes around might just come around, thanks to such a pernicious common denominator.

  • Amazing that there still are bishops who fail to preach monthly jeremiads against the sin of voting for the Abortion Party and all her candidates.

    A hired man, who is not a shepherd and whose sheep are not his own, sees a wolf coming and leaves the sheep and runs away, and the wolf catches and scatters them.–John 10:12 NAB

Supreme Court Strikes Down Key Provisions of Texas Abortion Law

Monday, June 27, AD 2016

 

 

The Supreme Court remains guardians  of the right of women to slay their offspring:

WASHINGTON, D.C., June 27, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) – The Supreme Court has reversed a landmark Texas pro-life law requiring abortionists to have admitting privileges and abortion facilities to meet more stringent health standards.

An eight-justice Supreme Court has reversed the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals on Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt (formerly Whole Woman’s Health v. Cole), 5-3.

The case was brought by the New York-based Center for Reproductive Rights on behalf of independent abortion facilities in Texas.

The case involves Texas’ H.B. 2, a pro-life law that, aside from restricting abortion to the first 20 weeks of pregnancy, required abortionists to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of their offices and abortion facilities to meet the same health standards as other ambulatory surgical centers (ASCs).

Those regulations caused the number of abortion facilities to drop from 41 to eight according to Planned Parenthood, closing 13 abortion facilities in one day.

The decision, written by Justice Stephen Breyer, says that both requirement place a substantial burden on women’s right to exercise their reproductive rights, including the right to obtain an abortion. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote her own concurring opinion, writing that “complications from an abortion are both rare and rarely dangerous.”

Continue reading...

12 Responses to Supreme Court Strikes Down Key Provisions of Texas Abortion Law

  • Planned Parenthood, NARAL, Emily’s List and their fellow travelers on the
    current Supreme Court all believe that having abortion facilities meet the
    same health standards as other ambulatory surgical centers constitutes
    an unreasonable burden on a woman’s right to an abortion– even if it’s
    an unsafe one, evidently.
    .
    Kermit Gosnell’s infamous “clinic” was where born babies were murdered and
    displayed in jars, where conditions were filthy and basic health regulations
    were flouted. His abortion “clinic” operated like that for 17 years because
    in that time the state of Pennsylvania, under pressure from groups like Planned
    Parenthood, opted to cease all inspections of all of Pennsylvania’s 22
    abortion facilities.
    Kermit Gosnell happened as a direct result of Planned
    Parenthood’s policy against ‘undue burdens’ on access to abortion, and
    now that policy is enshrined in a Supreme Court decision.
    .
    An abortion is not the removal of a hangnail– it’s a serious surgical procedure
    and a lot can go wrong. It’s a strange society that chooses to have more
    rigorous health inspections for its nail salons and restaurants than it does for
    its abortion facilities. As of today, the Supreme Court has made another
    Kermit Gosnell butcher shop much, much more likely.

  • Planned Parenthood’s expert witness admitted the following:

    During these proceedings, Planned Parenthood conceded that at least 210 women in Texas annually must be hospitalized after seeking an abortion. Witnesses for both sides further testified that some of the women who are hospitalized after an abortion have complications that require an Ob/Gyn specialist’s treatment.

    That is almost certainly a low ball estimate:
    However, expert witness Dr. John Thorp told the court that the 0.3% hospitalization estimate “is based on data that is thirty-eight years old.” He also indicated that abortion complications are notoriously underreported and that only one-third to one-half of all abortion patients return for follow-up visits where complications could be reported to clinic staff.

    In addition, in many states, abortionists are simply not required to report abortion complications. The underreporting means that the percentage of women actually suffering surgical abortion complications is much higher.

    The number suggested by Planned Parenthood of “at least 210 women” who were hospitalized due to abortion complications was not based on any actual reporting. Instead, it appears to have been calculated using 2011 state abortion numbers with Fine’s 0.3% hospitalization rate, and assumes that all of the 70,003 abortions done on Texas residents in 2011 were first trimester surgical procedures, an assumption that is completely inaccurate.

    Medication Abortions

    Numbers obtained from the DSHS indicate that in 2011, 26 percent of all abortions on Texas women were done using the abortion pill. The court documents reveal testimony indicating that a full six percent of women who obtain medication abortions using the abortion pill require surgical abortions due to failure of the abortion pill process.

    Based on those numbers, there would actually have been approximately 1,089 cases where women required surgical intervention following medication abortions.

    http://www.lifenews.com/2014/04/22/nearly-1000-texas-women-hospitalized-every-year-after-botched-abortions/

  • Even using the underreported, outdated statistics, the complication rate is comparable to the overall rate of accidental lacerations and punctures for surgery in general.

  • Texas needs to tell the Supreme Court to go to hell, and take Planned Parenthood with ’em. If I were Greg Abbot, I would tell Breyer and Ginsburg to enforce their damned decision themselves…..and have them arrested for vagrancy the second they stepped in the state of Texas.

  • “When the time comes, as it surely will, when we face that awesome moment, the final judgment, I’ve often thought, as Fulton Sheen wrote, that it is a terrible moment of loneliness. You have no advocates, you are there alone standing before God — and a terror will rip your soul like nothing you can imagine. But I really think that those in the pro-life movement will not be alone. I think there’ll be a chorus of voices that have never been heard in this world but are heard beautifully and clearly in the next world — and they will plead for everyone who has been in this movement. They will say to God, ‘Spare him, because he loved us!'”

    Congressman Henry Hyde

  • The Supreme Court has found baby killing, sodomy and homosexual marriage to be protected by the Constitution, though none are mentioned in the Constitution. The Ten Commandments, nativity scenes and crosses on government land are unconstitutional. To hell with the Supreme Court. It is past time for an uprising against this crap.

  • Here are the presumptive Republican nominee’s comments on the case:

  • @cthemfly25.

    Thanks for the Henry Hyde quote.
    I haven’t heard of it before.

    That we, as a Nation, haven’t been brought to our knees by catastrophic events is evidence of God’s mercy. The millions of aborted souls who Henry Hyde imagined, are real. Do they count? Not on earth, especially in America, but in heaven they count. They are an active part of the celestial court. They will give testimony on behalf of the righteous as well as the damned.

    To equate Woman’s Reproductive Health with the slaughter of the innocent child isn’t just absurd, it’s callous. To think our Highest Court on our soil would disregard the right to LIFE in favor of Planned murder is alone the single most revealing evidence that we are in the new dark age. Dog’s that are suffering the consequences of their owners stupidity by dieing in automobiles due to excessive heat are held in higher sympathy than the human baby who is ripped apart.

    God help us.

  • Pingback: Fortnight For Freedom: Abraham Lincoln on the Supreme Court – The American Catholic
  • The Pope came to the Mexican border to give comfort to those who violate another country’s laws , and while there he criticized a candidate for President of the United States who is not a Catholic! I’ll wait to read about the Pope’s ex communication of the Catholic US Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy who… with his single vote, keeps more abortion clinics in business and prevents reasonable restrictions to the taking of that innocent life. Pope Francis…. I’m waiting!!!

  • Being ignorant of the entire legal process I can’t help but wonder if the pro-lifers in Texas can go back and write a series of laws instead of one broad law with many facets?

A Studied Indifference to Evil

Friday, March 4, AD 2016

24436244272_a72a2120b1_o

 

This declared indifference, but, as I must think, covert real zeal for the spread of slavery, I cannot but hate. I hate it because of the monstrous injustice of slavery itself. I hate it because it deprives our republican example of its just influence in the world,—enables the enemies of free institutions, with plausibility, to taunt us as hypocrites; causes the real friends of freedom to doubt our sincerity, and especially because it forces so many really good men amongst ourselves into an open war with the very fundamental principles of civil liberty,—criticising the Declaration of Independence, and insisting that there is no right principle of action but self-interest.

Abraham Lincoln, 1854

 

 

David Griffey at his blog Daffey Thoughts, shines a light on one of the more disgusting developments this election year:  the attempt by some Catholic and conservative bloggers to gin up support for avowed socialist Bernie Sanders, a 100% pro-abort:

 

I read this opinion piece at The Imaginative Conservative, I had to ask myself: When did abortion go from being the only sin that matters to a sin that doesn’t seem to matter at all?  I mean, we’re not talking about a pro-choice politician who has been sort of pro-choice.  We’re talking about someone who has tried to open the gates for any and all abortions, up to and including partial birth abortion even without the mother’s life on the line.  Something so heinous, that it has been called one of the worst murderous crimes in our country today.  And yet, so what if Sanders supports it?  Big deal, right? 

I understand – and have always maintained – that there are more than one or two issues to think about in an election.  But I also understood that there were certain issues that were off the table.  They certainly were when it came to Romney or McCain.  Certain sins that were non-negotiable.  Not because they were all that mattered.  But because there was no way to support them and do so in a sinless way.  There was no ‘right interpretation of abortion.’  There might be different opinions on how to limit it or eliminate it.  But at no point could you say ‘I support unrestricted abortion rights’ and be in the running.

Now it doesn’t just look like abortion isn’t the only big deal.  As more and more Conservatives and Catholics flock to Bernie, it looks like abortion is now no big deal at all.  And by my lights, that is something that will swim around and bite Conservatives, Christians and Catholics in the ass when all is said and done.  Especially if all of the things that have been said about the horrors and evils of abortion through the years are still, you know, true.

Continue reading...

17 Responses to A Studied Indifference to Evil

  • http://www.tfp.org/tfp-home/catholic-perspective/what-the-popes-have-to-say-about-socialism.html

    Check out this site to see what the last ten popes say about socialism – they all condemn it.And believe it or not, our good Pope Francis also came out a while back and condemned socialism.
    Churchill’s quote is a doozy, and the great Margaret Thatcher stated that – “Socialism is fine until they run out of other peoples money”.
    It stuns me that so many apparently normal intelligent people – particularly Catholics – think its wonderful. I even had an argument with our previous PP, who stated that he quite liked socialsim; I gave him the above list of popes who condemned it – he never raised the subject again. 🙂

  • Wow. In what sense is the imaginative conservative conservative? Not about economic system, not about social issues…
    I can say that the term “imaginative” seems apropo.

  • There’s a conservative case for socialism? Paternalism, sure. Nationalism, okay, maybe. Seignorialism/manorialism/feudalism, why not? –every group has its romantic cranks.
    .
    But socialism?

  • From what I’ve heard, America is even MORE liberal on abortion than most of Europe and the so-called blessed socialist nations (I am given to understand that they only allow it in the first two trimesters I think – if I’m misinformed, let me know).

    Shea once put up a stupid post about trading the 2nd amendment away for eliminating abortion. While I would trade the death penalty away, I wonder why so few ask about trading abortion (even the just to the limit of Europe) for socialism.

    So what do you say, socialist? After all, to pay for everything we’re going to need a constant influx of new people to replace the old and dying. Shall we open negotiations? The more socialism you want, the more time we knock off the window for legal abortion?

  • It seems to me that a socialist must, in the interests of coherence, be in favor of abortion, euthanasia and contraception as socialism is inherently selfish and pessimistic. Doesn’t it make sense that if wealth is going to be spread around every one could get more if there were less people, i.e., If supply is assumed to be fixed demand must necessarily be reduced.

    It is high time the Catholic Church came out four-square against socialism and it many evil implications including repression of the Catholic Church itself.

  • Speaking of Lincoln, Don, any recommendations as to a good Lincoln biography?

  • 1. Carl Sandburg-Poor scholarship even when it was written back in the forties, it is a magnificent oil painting of a biography that gets to the essence of Lincoln, while lacking the accurate detail of a photograph.
    2. Michael Burlingame’s recent massive two volume bio is great for looking at the more recent Lincoln scholarship.
    3. T. Harry Williams’ Lincoln and His Generals still remains, after more than six decades, the best look at Lincoln as commander in chief.
    4. James G. Randall’s Lincoln the President is an exhaustive look at Lincoln as President, from an interesting standpoint: an admirer of Lincoln who also thought the Civil War was unnecessary. Scholarship was superb, albeit dated after six decades.
    5. Allen Guelzo’s Redeemer President views Lincoln as a thinker, a surprisingly overlooked aspect of Lincoln as he first and foremost was a man of ideas. Lincoln had the ability of taking abstract and complicated concepts, stripping them down, and presenting them in his writing and speaking in a straightforward manner. He makes it all look easy, which perhaps detracts from what a powerful mind he possessed.
    6. Stephen Mansfield’s Lincoln’s Battle With God is the best book on Lincoln in years. First rate scholarship directed at Lincoln’s religious views, a perennial subject of vitriolic debate in Lincoln Studies. Mansfield details the difficulties of making iron clad assertions about Lincoln on many topics because Lincoln often kept his cards tucked against his vest, and contemporary accounts by people who knew Lincoln often disagree about the most basic items.
    7. Stephen B. Oates’ With Malice Towards None, stands out as perhaps the best one volume bio of Lincoln.

  • Yesterday I saw several news stories noting that the “Bernie Baby” — a 3-month old baby boy whose parents had taken him to a Sanders rally wearing a wig and glasses to make him look like Sanders, and whose pictures posing with Sanders had been all over social media — had died, apparently of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome. The Sanders campaign had expressed its condolences to the family, along with many condolences being expressed on social media, comment boards, etc. by people of all political persuasions.

    The boy’s pictures were undeniably cute, and his death is a tragedy by any measure. I would not post this comment on a thread meant primarily to express sympathy for the child’s loss since I would not feel it was appropriate to sidetrack or politicize the topic (even though some did). But in this discussion, I feel quite free to point out the irony of the fact that Bernie himself would have had no issue at all with his mother killing him, if she had chosen to do so, just a few months earlier.

  • The indifference of a socialist to abortion is more understandable than the indifference of evangelicals. Some one has said that the evangelical support of Trump is from not very religious evangelicals ? ?
    So one begins to wonder what the meaning of terms is anymore. What is a progressive evangelical. Evangelical about what? .
    .
    People can be indifferent to abortion only because of the terms they explain it to themselves with.

  • Elaine Krewer.

    I’ll pray for the family.
    Your spot on in your insight.
    What a few months will do for the blinded to regain sight.
    Sad commentary on our freedom shores.

  • I can’t get around Catholics who think supporting a guy who identifies with the only political group in this election that’s specifically condemned by the Catechism.
    You can argue that he won’t have the power to do anything about abortion; you can’t really argue he won’t have the power to try to get us to socialism.
    (CCC 2425; amusingly, I’ve seen it pulled out with claims that thus-and-such person is a Capitalist, even though the condemnation of that is qualified and sorry, no, nobody is going for a totally unregulated market. Maybe a few hard-core Libertarians are arguing for it, but not one of the top ten for prez.)
    *****
    .Anzlyne –
    from what I hear, there’s some folks who are the Evangelical version of C&E Catholics– or maybe “wedding and funeral” Catholics. They went up to an altar call, they might wear a cross and even think Jesus is kinda cool, but they’re not going to be at church most months.

  • Donald,

    I ruminated a bit (a lot…) on the Rieth piece at Imaginative Conservative on my blog, here: http://sardonicexcuria.blogspot.com/2016/03/catholic-principles-of-governance.html if you’re interested.

  • “What I often find lacking in Catholic documents, especially the guides such as discussed herein, is any sense of concrete political situation, and how far a countries’ political structures must be respected in light of any otherwise laudable goal. The same seems to hold true for many Catholics. Some people, discussing a political question, look solely (so to speak) at whether a stated political goal is acceptable and laudable to the Faith, and then whether a certain candidate or politician supports it. If so, then other conditions seem secondary.”

    This passage you wrote Jonathan reminds me of this passage from the beginning of Burke’s Reflections on the Revolution in France:

    “But I cannot stand forward, and give praise or blame to anything which relates to human actions, and human concerns, on a simple view of the object, as it stands stripped of every relation, in all the nakedness and solitude of metaphysical abstraction. Circumstances (which with some gentlemen pass for nothing) give in reality to every political principle its distinguishing colour and discriminating effect. The circumstances are what render every civil and political scheme beneficial or noxious to mankind. Abstractedly speaking, government, as well as liberty, is good; yet could I, in common sense, ten years ago, have felicitated France on her enjoyment of a government (for she then had a government) without inquiry what the nature of that government was, or how it was administered? Can I now congratulate the same nation upon its freedom? Is it because liberty in the abstract may be classed amongst the blessings of mankind, that I am seriously to felicitate a mad-man, who has escaped from the protecting restraint and wholesome darkness of his cell, on his restoration to the enjoyment of light and liberty? Am I to congratulate a highwayman and murderer, who has broke prison, upon the recovery of his natural rights? This would be to act over again the scene of the criminals condemned to the galleys, and their heroic deliverer, the metaphysic knight of the sorrowful countenance.”

    http://www.bartleby.com/24/3/1.html

  • Donald,

    If I have to channel anyone, let it be Aquinas or Burke…or preferably, both. Thank you for the link!

    –Jonathan

  • There’s been cars with Obama bumper stickers in the parish parking lot but today before this morning’s mass I saw my first Re-elect Gov. Jerry Brown bumper sticker in the lot.
     
    I pray the car with the Brown bumper sticker wasn’t a parishoner’s. And I do wish our bishop’s silence on abortion, socialism, rendering the poor unto the State, and coveting thy neighbors goods wasn’t so loud. There are a significant number of Catholics who regularly attend mass who take the silence of the bishops about these matters as tacit consent.

  • Tacit consent! leaving the door open for “forming your own conscience”
    Sometimes tho the priest is just unwilling to teach the hard teachings or even to come out strong when other friend priest are not
    Contra Blaise cup inch etal. . pro lifers aren’t confrontational. Many of us can talk with like minded people but don’t want to be caught in a ruckus. ( we know they are meaner than we are )
    They don’t fear man or God. I have had people respond negatively to my “choosy mothers choose life”

  • Pius IX rightly condemned socialism as a materialistic heresy unconcerned about anything spiritual and rooted in self. Bernie Sanders is a worthy exemplary of the Poe’s judgement.

You Know, Hitler Was Pretty Good on the Environment

Tuesday, February 2, AD 2016

a5d67ecc34cdf373877a2b08b0436d44

 

 

Over at National Catholic Register Mark Shea carries water for socialist pro-abort Bernie Sanders:

 

Sanders?  The pro-abort?  But, but! Cardinal Ratzinger said in 2004:

Regarding the grave sin of abortion or euthanasia, when a person’s formal cooperation becomes manifest (understood, in the case of a Catholic politician, as his consistently campaigning and voting for permissive abortion and euthanasia laws), his Pastor should meet with him, instructing him about the Church’s teaching, informing him that he is not to present himself for Holy Communion until he brings to an end the objective situation of sin, and warning him that he will otherwise be denied the Eucharist.

Yes. He certainly did. And he’s absolutely right. And if my reader were in any way indicating he supported Sanders because he supports abortion, he’d be in exactly the pickle Cardinal Ratzinger describes. But my reader is obviously not trying to support abortion. What he’s trying to do is support the other things Sanders advocates, many of which are obviously and immeasurably better than what Trump advocates. And in a contest with a GOP candidate such as Trump whose views on abortion are indistinguishable from Sanders, there is therefore a case to be made that my reader can do so without incurring any sin at all.

Sez who? Sez Cardinal Ratzinger in the same letter:

A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of the candidate’s permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia. When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favour of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons.

In other words, if you vote for somebody who advocates grave evil (abortion, euthanasia, torture, etc.) because of the grave evil they advocate, you are guilty of advocating the grave evil yourself and therefore are unworthy to present yourself for communion.

But! If you vote for somebody, not because you support their advocacy of grave evil, but because you are trying to prevent an even graver evil, or because you think there is some proportional good supporting them will achieve, you are not committing a sin and are only offering remote material cooperation with evil. Bottom line, the Church says that you can, under certain circumstances, vote for a pro-abort candidate. Meaning it is on the cards that, under certain circumstances, my reader might be able to vote for Bernie Sanders. That’s not me talking, remember. That’s the future Benedict XVI talking.

Continue reading...

32 Responses to You Know, Hitler Was Pretty Good on the Environment

  • Does seem inconsistent to say the least…. but to break his stance of purity for Bernie?!?! Richard Rich at least got Wales.

  • Mark Shea is clearly in need of prayers. It’s been said that the more influential a person becomes, the harder the devil tries to corrupt him. Reading his recent work, I fear for his soul.

  • The Register published this trash!? I hope the NCR and Shea’s comment section is flooded with demands for his removal!

  • Ironic from the guy who yelled “consequentialism!” every time it was suggested in the torture debates that it might be a just and proportional thing to inflict some pain on a terrorist who knows where the ticking bomb is hidden. Now he discovers that mirabile dictu!– the Church does in fact condone the use of reason and making judgments about proportionality when faced with imperfect moral choices.

    It’s a sign of his pride and insecurity that he can only admit this principle when it suits his urges, in this case, his urge to support a candidate who embraces not just every social immorality, but also the evil of socialism which has been repeatedly condemned by the Church. I can’t think of a candidate *less* worthy of a Catholic vote than Sanders. Even Hilary is not as unabashedly anti-property and openly socialist.

  • In the NCR article Mark Shea is quoted, “… as well as the preposterous nomination of pro-abort Harriet Miers …”. Now I was no fan of that nomination and there were concerns that she didn’t have much of a track record on Roe vs. Wade or most other legal issues. However, I have never seen any indication that she was pro-abortion and quite a few suggestions that she was actually anti-abortion. This is disgraceful. He is falling for the typical liberal fallacy, A is bad, person B believes things that I don’t like, so therefore B must believe A.

    I think the biggest problem is that Shea seems to understand politics less than any commentator, left or right, who regularly comments on it.

  • Hardly surprising. The Shea of today would have fit right in writing for the Vox Nova of 8 years ago. He’s distinguishable from Morning’s Minion et al only in being slightly less overtly partisan, but even that appears to be changing. Say hello to the new guard at the “Debate Club at Auschwitz”.
    ***
    The people commenting on his blog and /or his Facebook page in days gone by would have been a who’s who of orthodox Catholics from around St. Blog’s and elsewhere. Today, those venues are filled with a veritable freak show of hard left Catholics whose views are more in line with the DNC platform than the Catechism and with an amen corner of malleable Catholic sycophants who can’t think for themselves without having Shea tell them how to do it.

  • Is Bernie saying that PP only murders male unborn babies?

  • It seems Shea’s clinging to the term “conservative” exists for one reason and one reason only; to convince those who love the Lord Jesus and the teachings of the Church that they should sit still and quiet while he promotes unrestrained progressivism.

  • Ironic from the guy who yelled “consequentialism!” every time…

    Thanks, Tom. I prepared and deleted about 3 possible comments of the same thing and you up and expressed better what I was trying to articulate.

    So, amen!

  • Why are you even dignifying anything written by Mark Shea?

    He is a rabid dog. You are best not going near him.

  • RodH: DING, DING, DING we have a winner.

    I’ve been saying it for years: Shea simply uses his supposedly orthodox Catholicism to give cover to his rabid progressivism. And in the process, leading many gullible Catholics astray. Something is terrible wrong at EWTN and its newspaper the NCRegister, that they continue to allow this man a voice. Mother Angelica would have given him a good old-fashioned tongue-lashing, and sent him packing a long time ago.

  • Steve D: I agree with you about the Register. In general, really, and not just about Shea. The more I read the slant given by the writers, the more I wonder if they are trying to make it a Reporter and not a Register…

  • “The Register published this trash!? I hope the NCR and Shea’s comment section is flooded with demands for his removal!”

    Stephen, I wrote to Dan Burke, who was then and may stiil be, the head publisher at the Register about Shea. I got no response.

  • The title says it all.

  • There is no substantive difference between a national socialist of the German Reich and a democrat socialist of the American left. Elect a Bernie Sanders and open persecution of the Church will begin.
    .
    As for Mark Shea, liberalism is a mental defect or disease.

  • Thanks for the head up on Shea and the NCR. I will unsubcibe to both of them

  • Apparently, Mark-who? stopped taking his meds years ago.

  • Voting For Democrats Hitler -Berlin: 1938
    Dear Friends in Christ, We encourage all faithful believers to vote in the upcoming elections which are so important to the future of our cities and of our beloved country which was once a shining star in Christendom.
    You can in good conscience vote for Adolf Hitler, but you cannot vote for him for the wrong reasons, which would be a mortal sin. You, as we all do, know that his government has killed millions of people, and millions of Jews, including thousands of Jewish babies, and that this will continue for the foreseeable future since he has told us this will be so and this is his Party’s publicly stated policy. If you vote for him and his government because you want them to kill Jews, that would be a mortal sin. You cannot vote for Hitler so that more Jewish babies will be killed, that would be a mortal sin.
    If you vote for him and his Jew-Killing government, it must be for good reasons. If you like the fact that they have made the trains run on time, and do not vote for him so Jews will be killed, that will be not only morally permissible, it will be an act of virtue. If you vote for him, not because more Jewish babies will die horrible deaths if he is elected (which, of course, is absolutely certain), knowing your own tax dollars are paying for the killing, but because he has increased employment here in the Fatherland and will continue to do so, that will be a civil good in accord with your moral duty as a good citizen. If you vote for Hitler because he has all but eradicated poverty and hunger (by his focus on preparing for the war that is now inevitable), in accord with the Savior’s Sermon on the Mount and the Gospel’s clarion call to social justice – you can proceed in good faith to vote for him and any Nazi Party candidate for any office, knowing you have followed your conscience and you will have no sin to confess. We all know that our tax money funds the Nazis killing programs, provides the money to run the Death Camps, pays for the ovens that cook away most of the evidence of the dead bodies, and pays for the fuel for the trains that bring the people to the camps. You cannot pay your taxes with the intent that these things be done. If however you pay your taxes, as all good citizens should, so that children (the children of good Germans) will be properly educated or, for example so that foreign workers here are properly housed and fed, then you can in good conscience pay your taxes and win merit in heaven for doing so.
    Also, you can vote for any member of the Nazi party, some of whose soldiers wear the Death’s Head Symbols, especially those Nazis who say they do not support the intrinsic evils of death and of racism that the Party has espoused for years and has made a reality here. You will know who they are if they say things like: “Yes, The Nazi Party has done and will continue to do these atrocities, but I am personally opposed to such atrocities;” or “I am personally opposed to gassing Jews so vote for me;” “It is their right to choose to kill Jewish babies, but this is against my personal conscience;” “I can keep my personal views on holocausts private, and vote for the common good of all citizens;” or “My religion, whose principles are explicitly contrary to those of the Nazi Party, will remain a private thing for me.”
    Pay attention: if a candidate says he is personally opposed to Hitler or he is personally opposed to Jewish genocide, you can in good conscience vote for such a candidate and we encourage this; even if such a candidate takes part in the public rallies with their clear quasi-religious message in support of Hitler. If a candidate says he is personally opposed to your tax money funding killing, paying for gas chambers, and buying the furnaces at Dachau, Buchenwald, Auschwitz and other locations, and you know what they are used for, you can still vote for such a candidate.
    If a candidate says he is personally opposed to denying your religious liberty, even though you know the Party will continue through legislation to do this, it will be an act of virtue to vote for such a candidate.
    Yours in Christ,
    German & Austrian Church Leaders

  • Comment of the week Guy! Take ‘er away Sam!

  • Guy:

    Your satire is biting! And…hard to distinguish from Shea’s position.

    Now Shea is just one guy who is devoid of even a theology degree. He has no credentials and is a guy just like most normal people, a guy with an opinion. So it is easy to discount what he says and draw the obvious direct connection between his bankrupt arguments and the satire you so masterfully present.

    What is horrific and truly demonic is the vociferous support for genocide that has been provided by Catholic Bishop after Catholic Bishop as they stand in “solidarity” with Democrat after Democrat and have for MANY years after the changes in the Democrat party erased all moral justification to do so. In fact, what we have in the USA is such a blending, such a syncretism, I long ago began calling the movement the “Democatholic Party” for it best describes the inseparable brotherhood of Catholics with the Democrat Party and the wholly ghastly union of what should be diametrically opposed groups. Democatholics have been using precisely your satirical reasoning but treating it as a legitimate defense for supporting abortion, the advance of the homosexual agenda and rank feminism for decades.

    I was very encouraged to see the USCCB voting recommendations this year as it shows some form of break with the past. However, not yet do we see condemnation of a truly meaningful form or what might better be called true catechesis on the issue of the butchery of millions and why one cannot support a party who promotes it and indeed has it as a permanent plank in its platform. Of course, Catholics are not supposed to do things such as “uncharitably” condemn anything it seems. You know, except “fundamentalists” who actually try to follow Christ and live according to the teachings of the Catholic faith.

  • Greg Mockeridge:
    Dan Burke is part of the problem at EWTN and the NCRegister, I’m not surprised you didn’t get a response from him. He’s just another part of the neoCatholic / establishment cabal infecting the Church these days. Most are converts to the faith, trying to make their living off the Church.

    Rod Halvorsen,
    Look no further than Bernardin’s “seamless garment” argument to understand the mess we’re in today in AmChurch. This homosexual prelate did much to destroy the Church in America. Of course, Shea is a big fan of the seamless garment.

  • Steve D; Right you are about the seamless garment and Shea’s elevating it to his own personal dogma.

    But hey, don’t chuck all of us converts out with Shea’s bathwater! 😉

  • Here we have another neo jumping on board the Shea Wagon.

    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead/2016/02/can-a-catholic-vote-for-bernie-sanders.html

    Folks, seriously, what happened to the Catholic Church? So often I just plain have trouble finding it. Thank God for my FSSP parish…

  • Jahwohl, democratic socialism ist güt.

  • “Greg Mockeridge:
    Dan Burke is part of the problem at EWTN and the NCRegister, I’m not surprised you didn’t get a response from him. He’s just another part of the neoCatholic / establishment cabal infecting the Church these days. Most are converts to the faith, trying to make their living off the Church.”

    Steve, I am not surprised either. I have been railing about the behavior of people like Shea and have written to the powers that be within the”orthodox” Catholic Media Complex for about a decade only to be treated with indifference at best and downright hostility at worst.

  • I was permanently banned from Catholic Answers for stating what I thought were well-known and simple facts about Swedish Lutheran “Bishop” Brunne’s lifestyle and I being an ex-Lutheran, suspected Martin himself would have the lot of them gibbetted. It wasn’t meant to be a cut, it was meant to literally demonstrate how we have slid historically, to the point that now we are taking seriously what would have been simply rejected out of hand what…just a few years ago!

    So I don’t think the Register is alone in this passive acceptance of anti-Catholic culture.

  • Fr. Dwight Longenecker gets in touch with his inner Mark Shea here:

    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead/can-a-catholic-vote-for-bernie-sanders

  • That one could vote for a Sanders or a Hillary in spite of their odious positions against the Right to Life because you like their other ridiculous ideas is wearing a soiled garment that won’t wash in the tub of my conscience.

  • I saw this article and I was also concerned. If I were less charitable, I would say Mark is now another ‘poster child’ for the labor unions who spew the same garbage. Marxism

  • Mark is attempting to meld the sacred and the profane and in the process has lost sight of the fact that some things are simply and objectively evil and can not be negotiated with for the simple reason that there is no “lesser” evil. Also, it should also be noted that Bernie Sanders is the typical 60s flower child gone to seed. While I am loathe to consign anyone to perdition, I will note that the devil need not have a long reach to snare this catch.

  • Like they do on Amazon.com when you buy a book, “Others who bought ‘If you liked How to Sin Mortally by Voting for Democrats’, you may also enjoy Voting For Nero,” – if you liked Voting For Hitler, you might relish:

    from Catholic Lane, 24 Apr 15:

    Prostitution Politics

    I live in a brothel,
    But I am not a whore.
    Personally opposed to impurity,
    I’m chaste to the core.

    I help with the auctions,
    But no slaves are mine.
    Opposed to such servitude,
    I try to be kind.

    Working at Auschwitz,
    Folks arrive every day.
    Personally opposed to holocaust,
    What else can I say?

    In a warm den of thieves,
    I spend most of my time.
    Opposed to all thievery,
    I commit no such crime.

    I party with death,
    But never would harm a child.
    I am personally opposed to killing
    And to all murder most vile.

    I dance with the devil,
    But I’m untouched, in the lead.
    Opposed to all evil,
    I’m not self-deceived.

    I live in a brothel,
    But no whoring I know.
    Opposed to defilement,
    I’m pure as the snow.

    Copyright

  • Another (internet) source of ignorant banter, Matt Yglesias, was quoted elsewhere as tweeting something like, “Aside from genocide and war, the Nazis had some good ideas.” FYI, some “good ideas” don’t make licit 58 million abortions. If you vote for abortion advancers, you likely won’t be getting into Heaven.

Obama Celebrates Roe But Does Not Thank Catholic Leftists

Monday, January 25, AD 2016

 

As he has done as President each year on the anniversary of Roe, Obama released a statement praising Roe:

 

“Today, we mark the 43rd anniversary of the Supreme Court ruling in Roe v. Wade, which affirmed a woman’s freedom to make her own choices about her body and her health. The decision supports the broader principle that the government should not intrude on private decisions made between a woman and her doctor. As we commemorate this day, we also redouble our commitment to protecting these constitutional rights, including protecting a woman’s access to safe, affordable health care and her right to reproductive freedom from efforts to undermine or overturn them. In America, every single one of us deserves the rights, freedoms, and opportunities to fulfill our dreams.”

Continue reading...

10 Responses to Obama Celebrates Roe But Does Not Thank Catholic Leftists

  • “. . . a woman’s freedom to make her own choices about her body and her health.”

    Leaving aside, of course, the body and health of the child who is being killed.

    “. . . the government should not intrude on private decisions made between a woman and her doctor.”

    Yes, of course . . . a woman and her doctor can decide to kill the child inside the woman’s womb.

    “In America, every single one of us deserves the rights, freedoms, and opportunities to fulfill our dreams.”

    Except, of course, the little children who were killed in their mother’s womb.

  • “… the government should not intrude on private decisions..”

    “…every single one of us deserves the rights, freedoms, and opportunities to fulfill our dreams…”

    Pushing buttons “right” and “left”

  • Roe wasn’t the end nor was privacy the goal.
    Obamacare was the eventual choice of the leftist feminists. So much for privacy with your doctor when you now must submit your private self to an army of government medicrats, while forcing the morally sane to participate in the nation’s sin of infanticide.
    No description of terrorism can be more evil than what we do to helpless humans.

  • Praising the works of Adolph Hitler is akin to this Presidents proud support of abortion on demand. The blind left make me vomit.

  • He didn’t thank the Catholic left? How ungrateful!!

  • I still find it difficult to pray for those culture of death friends who dare call themselves good Catholics. Yet, that is precisely what we are called to do. There’s that little incident with Saul that gives us reason and hope.

  • “…that the government should not intrude on private decisions made between a woman and her doctor.”
    What a complete & total lie. Just ask anyone who takes their kids to the pediatrician for a well-visit about the intrusive forms they’re required to fill out, or the invasive questions doctors are mandated to ask in order to get paid.
    I could not imagine living in such a way where all lies were the truth.

  • Missy.

    “I could not imagine living living in such a way where all lies were the truth.”

    Funny thing, millions of folks don’t imagine it, they live it fully and freely. They have bought the lie. They own it and wish to multiply it by millions so others too may own it, and by its acceptance it becomes….. (in there minds, truth.) Here we are. A nightmare that is being prolonged by our fellow citizens.

    Pray harder Missy.

  • Too many “living” in that sentence…. Oops.

  • “we also redouble our commitment to protecting…………from efforts to undermine or overturn them.” Frightening. That’s us and all the moral people who believe in the sanctity of life.
    Note the evil Emperor never used the word “abortion”. Of course not. The Pro-Choice (a Madison Ave word code word for it’s okay to abort!) Catholic Left, and the Cardinals and Archbishops and Bishops who allow them to receive the Holy Eucharist, all perpetuate this murder of innocents. To be fair I don’t know if or what these people confess, but if they do, bring back public penance. STOP GIVING SCANDAL TO THE CHURCH!

Carly Fiorina and Abortion

Sunday, January 24, AD 2016

 

When it comes to abortion, I am beginning to think that Carly Fiorina has the zeal of a convert:

 

 

Despite the blizzard warning, thousands of pro-life activists gathered at the March for Life in Washington on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade.

Former HP CEO Carly Fiorina, the only presidential candidate to attend the event, pledged to continue speaking out against abortion in the face of opposition from pro-choice activists.

“The establishment media and political class don’t want us to talk about what the abortion industry is doing. You saw what happened when I talked about the horrific truth of the Planned Parenthood videos during a Republican debate,” she said at the march. “Unlike the media, you’ve watched the videos. You’ve seen an aborted baby, it’s legs kicking, it’s heart beating while the technician describes how they would keep these babies alive to harvest their organs.”

In response to the videos, a Planned Parenthood representative said a woman might choose to donate tissue for scientific purposes.

“In healthcare, patients sometimes want to donate tissue to scientific research that can help lead to medical breakthroughs, such as treatments and cures for serious diseases,” said Eric Ferrero, vice president of communications at Planned Parenthood Federation of America. “Women at Planned Parenthood who have abortions are no different.”

Fiorina had a message for those who protest her pro-life stance at her campaign events.

“You can scream and throw condoms at me all day long. You won’t silence me. You don’t scare me,” she said at the march. “I have battled breast cancer. I have buried a child. I have read the Bible. I know the value of life.”

Fiorina pointed out that President Obama’s successor will have the “awesome responsibility” to pick up to three Supreme Court justices who will weigh in on religious liberty issues. She added that the next president is going to decide if a life is a life only after it leaves the hospital.

“That is the Democratic platform – that a life is not a life until it is born, and they call us extreme. It is the Democrats and the pro-abortion industry that are extreme,” she said.

Fiorina told the audience Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and “the left” use women as a “political weapon” to win elections.

“I know, having started out as a secretary, being empowered means having a voice, but ideological feminism now shuts down conversation on colleges campuses and in the media,” she said.

She vowed to defeat Clinton and defund Planned Parenthood as president.

“You can count on what I will do as president,” she said. “Together we will restore the character of our nation.”

Continue reading...

68 Responses to Carly Fiorina and Abortion

  • It is a pity that Carly Fiorina’s chances of winning the primary elections are so abysmally low. Feminist supporters of Livia Caesar would have an epileptic fit.

  • Agree, Luke. Fiorina would be a terrific president. She is a leader, not a poll-reader. Only wish she would come out against torture. Cruz is not my favorite candidate but he at least has that issue right.

  • She passes “my must have” values filter, unfortunately she won’t get to fight from the White House for life.

  • How do you come out against something you really can’t define?

  • Greg, it is not that unusual for the boundaries of various ethical definitions to be less than perfectly clear-cut, but we have GOP candidates who actually don’t even bother with the boundaries — taking the position that torture, however defined, is ok if necessary to save the lives of our troops. Me, I have a simple starting point: If I would consider it unacceptable for our enemy to do it to our troops, then we shouldn’t do it to their’s. McCain applied that test to water-boarding, and he was absolutely spot-on right.

  • It’s not just that it’s not “clear cut,” it’s that the definition is commonly used to mean everything from “no danger, some discomfort or annoyance” to “putting people on the rack.”
    **
    It’s rather like some people are trying to re-define “pro life” to mean things as far out as “supports a cradle-to-grave government support program and no borders.”

  • What you say is true, Foxfier, but unless you are cool with the waterboarding of our troops. I don’t see how you can define torture to not include it.
    So where do you stand? Are you cool with the waterboarding of our troops or not?

  • I have always been against physical abuse Mike, but any foreseeable enemies that we fight will torture our troops, and worse, no matter what we do to theirs. In regard to our troops, they often are water-boarded to give them a taste of the least they can expect if they fall into the hands of adversaries.

  • Don, I agree that it is likely that foreseeable enemies will torture our troops, but I don’t see how that morally justifies our torture of their’s. Yes, we do water-board a small number of our combatants as part of training. I just don’t see how that logically changes anything. My point stands — the physical abuse of prisoners is wrong. While there can be honest disagreement as to what constitutes such abuse, we can only claim water-boarding is acceptable if we believe it is acceptable for the enemy to water-board US POWs. I do not see a logical away around this. Our response to Japanese inhumane treatment of our POWs was to try them for war crimes, not emulate them.

  • The point I was responding to Mike was that you seemed to me to be saying that if we water-board our enemies our troops will be water-boarded. I was pointing out that our behavior really does not impact what our current foes do. In regard to the Japanese, our troops did not take prisoners until rather late in the War. Few Japanese troops of course attempted to surrender but those who did tended to be killed out of hand by our troops, a product of hatred born out of Japanese atrocities and the habit of feigned surrender by the Japanese. Late in the War our troops were under strict orders to take prisoners and they, very reluctantly, complied. It is difficult to enforce moral treatment of enemy troops in War, when one side views such a concept as laughable.

  • Yes, Don, you misunderstood me. My practical moral litmus test was to test the morality of the treatment, not compare and copy. The inhumane treatment of our prisoners by the enemy does not justify the inhumane treatment of their prisoners by us. Whether the treatment crosses the line to inhumane can be revealed by our reaction to such treatment if applied to our prisoners. I think the water-boarding of our POWs is morally wrong and a war crime, and our use of water-boarding was a blemish on our great country. Yes, it was confined to a limited number of prisoners for sure, and those prisoners were presumably especially odious. And yes those facts certainly mitigate the gravity of this moral lapse, but a lapse it was nonetheless.

  • “My practical moral litmus test was to test the morality of the treatment, not compare and copy.”

    My response to that Mike is that there is always a practical component to morality as applied in war time. An example of this is Nazi Germany in World War II. Most German troops who surrendered were treated quite properly because our troops knew that the Germans in regard to British and American POWs followed the Geneva Convention. (As opposed to the treatment that the Germans and Soviets meted out to prisoners taken from each other.) An exception was made by our troops however in regard to the Waffen SS due to their well known penchant for murdering prisoners. Somehow they found it extremely difficult to surrender to our troops. One can decry this, but when it comes to moral treatment of prisoners in a War it has to be a two way street, or ordinary troops simply will not abide by rules that the enemy does not follow.

    In regard to John McCain his political positions tend to depend on whether he is running for office. For example in February 2008 he voted against a bill which would have banned waterboarding by the CIA. I am sure that his being engaged in a tough battle for the Republican nomination for President overrode his torture in Vietnam on that occasion. This was on a par with his brief metamorphosis to an anti-illegal immigrant hawk in 2010, facing a tough Republican primary for the Senate nomination, when he screeched: Build the dang fence!

  • Don, I realize that the behavior of our troops is necessarily informed by the behavior of their enemy. But that does not justify mistreatment as a matter of policy, even if it explains mistreatment by individual soldiers. Torturing prisoners in order to secure tactical military advantages is wrong, even if it can be understandable or even forgivable. While I have no interest in making villains of individual soldiers who commit moral errors in the heat of difficult moments, such lapses are not comparable to intentional policy decisions made in Washington. The hardest morality is always that which involves good ends being used to justify evil means. I don’t doubt the noble intentions of the Bush Administration for a moment, but nor do I doubt the immorality of torturing prisoners.

  • “But that does not justify mistreatment as a matter of policy,”

    Agreed. Humane treatment of prisoners of war was a long time developing in the Christian West, and was only imperfectly applied in the best of times. With Christianity being effectively driven from the public square in most of the West, I fear that we may look back upon the occasional waterboarding of a major terrorist as a virtual golden age of humanity.

  • The use of water boarding on captured terrorists to secure their compliance in providing lifesaving intelligence is not prisoner abuse nor does it cross any moral lines.

  • My mind keeps wondering why waterboarding is unacceptable to do to an enemy, but a bullet to his head is okay.

  • During the wars between Christianity (the Church) and the Barbary Moslems, slavery (like torture?) was a goal of the Moslems. Pope Nickolas V wrote that it was licit to keep Moslem slaves permanently.

  • Donald, have you noticed that Marco Rubio,is taking a page right out of McCain’s playbook with regards to immigration?

  • Greg,
    You are free to think so of course, which I assume must mean that you believe that it is morally acceptable for our servicemen to be water-boarded by their captors.

    DonL,

    To my knowledge no one is suggesting that it is morally acceptable to assassinate POWs, but certainly that was the position of the Waffen SS — a position with which the Allies took extreme exception and rightly so.

    And I find it amusing that a commentator on the same blog that regularly (and correctly) reminds us that not every papal utterance from our current Holy Father is binding or correct now invokes Nickolas V in support of slavery. The Church formally teaches that slavery and torture are grave evils, and the Church is correct on both counts.

  • Better question Don, is why is waterboarding unnacceptable but assassination from 20,000 ft (with the attendant collateral damage) isn’t.

  • Ernst,
    First, there is a critical difference between engaging in combat and assassinating combatants who are disarmed and in your custody. Second, the morality of bombing turns largely on whether the damage to which you refer (presumably the death of innocents) is the object of the bombing or collateral to that object, which is a key question of fact.

  • “Donald, have you noticed that Marco Rubio,is taking a page right out of McCain’s playbook with regards to immigration?”

    One of several reasons why I am supporting Cruz.

  • If our servicemen were terrorists who had knowledge of the inner workings of their terrorist network and that information was necessary to protect innocent lives and water boarding was the only way to secure their compliance in divulging that information, then yes. But since that is not the case, Mr. Petrik, your moral equivalence argument is a non-sequitur. I am actually surprised you made such an argument. I would expect better from you.

  • Greg, you seem to be under a misimpression. The intelligence we were seeking was directed to the end of preventing and mimimizing the deaths of allied combatants, not innocent non-combatants. In any case your argument is just classic consequentialism — a justification of evil means by reference to good ends. I took your earlier post to be a different argument, which is that the means were not evil because water-boarding is not torture. That is a more serious argument than your consequentialist one, but in order for it to be sincere its application must be reciprocal — and you retreated from that. You ought to examine your logic more carefully before criticizing mine.

  • No, Mr Petrik, the intelligence we gained from the compliance of KSM, Zubaydah, etc. prevented terrorist attacks on non-combatants here in the U.S. and Eurpoe. This has been well documented. Read Thessien’s book Courting Disaster and Jose Rodriguez’s Hard Measures for starters. I’m sorry, but the whole notion of water boarding being intrinsically evil is a false one. Torture itself is not intrinsically evil for sole reason that it cannot b objectively defined. Intrinsic evil is evil by its very object and if you cannot objectively define it, it cannot be intrinsically evil. Before you throw around the term “consequentialism”, take the time to,learn what it actually means.

  • “Are you cool with the waterboarding of our troops or not?”

    Actually we do in SERE training. The same techniques that were applied in training were applied in interrogation.

    Now the problem begins…

  • Greg,
    Consequentialism is a method of moral reasoning that determines the morality of an act by examining its objective or end. It is useful unless the act is intrinsically evil. While I’m not aware of a comprehensive list of intrinsically evil acts, we can borrow a list from Pope John Paul II. Quoting Gaudium et Spes, he says that intrinsically evil acts are “any kind of homicide, genocide, abortion, euthanasia and voluntary suicide; whatever violates the integrity of the human person, such as mutilation, physical and mental torture and attempts to coerce the spirit; whatever is offensive to human dignity, such as subhuman living conditions, arbitrary imprisonment, deportation, slavery, prostitution and trafficking in women and children; degrading conditions of work which treat laborers as mere instruments of profit, and not as free responsible persons: all these and the like are a disgrace … and they are a negation of the honor due to the Creator” (Veritatis Splendor, 80). John Paul II was an accomplished moral theologian and he plainly did not regard your idiosyncratic definitional requirements as especially relevant, and nor do I.

  • A link to what I was referring to:

    http://humanevents.com/2007/11/05/waterboarding-a-sereing-experience-for-tens-of-thousands-of-us-military-personnel/

    I don’t necessarily agree with the conclusions. But part of the justification by the DOJ for waterboarding terrorists was that it was done in training.

  • Philip, please answer the question I was asking. Are you cool with Islamo-fascists water-boarding our troops or not?

  • Phillip, yes I am aware of the report and its conclusions. I know personally some of the report’s contributors and count them as friends. But the DOJ justification was widely regarded by objective parties as legally quite weak. But in any event its merits, if it had any at all, rested in legal analysis, not moral analysis. Not all evil things are illegal.

  • Mike,

    I will answer your question if you answer this. Was waterboarding in SERE training torture?

  • Phillip,
    Yes, this is old and irrelevant news. Consent matters. Rape is intrinsically evil even if sexual intercourse is not.
    Your turn.

  • Not old and irrelevant news. Just because one consents doesn’t make it moral. One may have consented to what was done in SERE, but its still not moral if all physical interrogation is torture.


  • Mike Petrik on Sunday, January 24, A.D. 2016 at 9:51pm (Edit)
    What you say is true, Foxfier, but unless you are cool with the waterboarding of our troops. I don’t see how you can define torture to not include it.

    Roughly half of my uncles have been waterboarded. By the US military.
    Secondly, “torture” does not mean “things I don’t want to happen to our soldiers.”
    I don’t want our guys to get shot, either, but that isn’t torture– that’s part of war.

  • Gee, Mike, why am I not surprised that you would bring up VS #80.? It doesn’t take a high level moral theologian to see that JPII doesn’t mean what you and people like Mark Shea think it means. It just takes common moral sense. To wit, listed alongside things like torture are deportation (so,we can’t deport any illegal aliens. The 20+ million here in the U.S. will be happy to hear that!) and substandard living conditions. Substandard living conditions doesn’t even constitute a human act. It may or may not be CAUSED by a human act, but it is not a human act in and of itself. It also begs the relevant question I brought up before, how do you even objectively define what substandard living conditions are? It is obviously subjective. If your interpretation of VS#80 is correct moral theology is meaningless.

  • Greg,
    You can leave Shea and his moral preening out of this. I agree that VS#80 cannot be interpreted literally but requires fair-minded exegesis. But no such exegesis can convince me that the torture of the defenseless is any more licit than the murder of the defenseless.

    Phillip, fairly understood the term torture, like battery for instance, presupposes a lack of consent.

    Foxfier, so I infer from your response that you think that the water-boarding by our troops by the enemy would be morally licit because such water-boarding, while unpleasant, is not torture. If so I congratulate you on your consistency even if not for your clarity.

  • Edited for readability:

    Greg,
    You can leave Shea and his moral preening out of this. I agree that VS#80 cannot be interpreted literally but requires fair-minded exegesis. But no such exegesis can convince me that the torture of the defenseless is any more licit than the murder of the defenseless.

    Phillip,
    Fairly understood the term torture, like battery for instance, presupposes a lack of consent.

    Foxfier,
    So I infer from your response that you think that the water-boarding of our troops by the enemy would be morally licit because such water-boarding, while unpleasant, is not torture. If so I congratulate you on your consistency even if not for your clarity.

  • Mike,

    Perhaps you mean in a legal sense. But in a moral sense one cannot consent to an intrinsic evil.

    Or perhaps you are working towards a definition of torture.

  • I hate to say it Mike, but your moral reasoning I this thread was really no different than that of Mark Shea, sans the snark. You tossed the world “consequentialism” around the same way he does.

  • “All is fair in love and war. What a contemptible lie.” Robert Anson Heinlein
    .
    People like Mark Shea who have not defended their country do not merit an opinion on war, torture or anything related thereto. And for all their whining about torture, let them see what happens to pre-born babies every day at Planned Parenthood. Let them fill up on the full measure of what torture really is.

  • Torture also does not mean “things it is not morally licit for the bad guys to do to our soldiers.” Choosing to fight for ISIS isn’t morally licit, either, so it’s got to go back further in the foundation of the argument.
    ****
    Stop trying to tell me what I think and figure out a definition of torture that you will support. Then the way that you are including a bunch of assumptions into your conclusion will actually make sense, because the assumptions and the conclusion are yours.

  • MP I hardly recall “regularly” pointing out that not every papal utterance is binding, nor was I pushing (one pope) Nicholas V position on slavery as either correct or not–merely adding info to the question of the issue of never doing an evil, when in fact that papal bull said slavery in certain cases was licit.
    I also have pointed out that Pope Pius XI has called violations of the principle of subsidiarity a grave wrong. That’s not my mere opinion, but a pope speaking on morality.
    Quoting two popes seems to have riled your sensitivities a wee bit.

  • Phillip,
    It is true that one cannot consent to an intrinsic evil, but the presence of consent can be relevant to the definition of that intrinsic evil. See rape for instance. In my a lack of consent is embedded in a proper understanding of torture, just like rape.

    Greg, I do try to avoid snark, insults too. I think I have a pretty good grasp of consequentialism, but am quite open to fraternal correction. But I don’t think that our disagreement is over the definition of consequentialism (you apparently just get all hot and bothered by the word). Our disagreement is very simple: I believe that torture is an intrinsic evil and you don’t. Accordingly I believe that one cannot justify torture by evaluating its ends (i.e., consequentialism), whereas you believe that this moral prohibition is inapplicable. I differ from Shea in two areas (aside from the snark). First, I think that defining the boundaries of torture is important and a perfectly fair discussion. I don’t pretend to offer an ontologically certain definition. I only apply the Golden Rule. Since I would regard such abuse of our soldiers to be torture, I would not similarly abuse their combatants. Mark regards the very entertainment of the definitional boundaries as somehow evidence of evil intent, which I regard as absurd. Mark also insisted on asserting that torture was and is ineffective as an interrogation tool, even though (i) this is irrelevant to his own moral claim that torture is intrinsically evil and (ii) he has zero competency to know such matters.

    Luke,
    I don’t like Shea either. He is an obnoxious blowhard, at least when hiding behind the Internet. But he has always been at least as vocal about the evils of abortion as he has been about torture.

    Foxfier,
    Your request is granted. I have no idea what you are saying so will no longer try to make sense out of it.

  • Phillip,

    So consent may be part of the definition. But per the link I gave, the individual did not consent to be waterboarded- at least not the last time it was done. He thought he had escaped and would be rewarded. So he was tortured?

  • DonL, I apologize for not writing more clearly. My papal utterance claim was in reference to this blog, not you. I am mystified as to your diagnosis of my sensitivities.

  • The other thing to state is that the act of waterboarding in and of itself is not intrinsically evil if one can consent to such a thing and it still be moral. So what other circumstances can it be licit?

  • Philip,

    I disagree that the linked article shows a lack of informed consent.

    Second, I agree that waterboarding in and of itself is not intrinsically evil if one can morally consent to it. That does not logically mean that it is not intrinsically evil if one does not consent to it. Sexual intercourse is not intrinsically evil, but is if proper consent is lacking. The fact that we have a word for that second evil act (rape is intercourse without consent) and not for the first (waterboarding without consent) is of no logical moment.

  • Mike-
    where’s your definition?
    Twice I answered you, even when it appeared you were making false and irrational accusations against me, personally; was that actually calumny to avoid having to defend your own views on their virtues?

  • Mike,

    There is where we will have problems. Per my link, clearly the individual did not know what his training, let alone waterboarding, involved. No clear idea, no clear consent.

    But he was clearly deceived the second time he was waterboarded. he thought he had escaped and that his trainers were acknowledging this. There was no consent to that incident.

  • Greg Mockeridge wrote, “Torture itself is not intrinsically evil for sole reason that it cannot b objectively defined.”

    That shows a deep misunderstanding of the nature of language.

    Take Wittgenstein’s example of the word, “game.” It is impossible to devise some definition of “game” that includes everything that we call games, but excludes everything that we do not. However, we are all familiar (i.e. socially) with enough things that are games and enough things that are not games that we can categorize new activities as either games or not.

    As Wittgenstein argued in the Philosophical Investigations, there is no reason to look, as we have done traditionally—and dogmatically—for one, essential core in which the meaning of a word is located and which is, therefore, common to all uses of that word. We should, instead, travel with the word’s uses through “a complicated network of similarities, overlapping and criss-crossing”

    He argues that definitions emerge from what he termed “forms of life” roughly the culture and society in which they are used. He stresses the social aspects of cognition; to see how language works, we have to see how it functions in a specific social situation. It is this emphasis on becoming attentive to the social backdrop against which language is rendered intelligible that explains Wittgenstein’s elliptical comment that “If a lion could talk, we could not understand him.”

  • Phillip, I will take your word for that. Perhaps in my haste (I have work to do) I missed some facts. If consent was not present then the waterboarding would be morally wrong in my view. I do not have time to analyze the consent issue properly, however, and have no set opinion on whether consent is implied by enlistment or application, etc.

    Foxfier, I have no idea what you are talking about. I am not avoiding your request for a definition and have not insulted you. Instead, I have expressed fairly plainly that I don’t have a definition, or at least one that is reliable. Instead I applied the Golden Rule in asserting that we should not render any abuse upon prisoners in our custody that we would find morally offensive if rendered upon American combatants in the custody of the enemy. When folks say that our water-boarding of enemy combatants in our custody is not morally problematic, I have asked whether they then agree that the same water-boarding of our imprisoned troops by the enemy would similarly not be morally problematic. For reasons that mystify me (or perhaps not), I’ve had a hard time getting a straight answer.

  • MPS That’s an interesting comment, which reminded this old codger of the old comment made regarding the definition of pornography (Was it a Supreme Court issue?)

    Someone said, “I can’t define it but I know it when I see it.”

    I wonder if the same could be applied to the definition of torture?

  • DonL,
    To varying degrees I suspect that such is always the case. Words, grammar and language are all imperfect social vehicles for imperfect human thoughts. This does not render definitions useless at all. It just reminds us of their limits, I think.

  • Mike,

    Thanks for the conversation. I think in large measure it is pointless (thus my comment at first “Now the problem begins…) for a number of reasons not the least of which is emotions which cause some to insult instead of reason. But then there are also legitimate questions about definition and then obscure questions of philosophy including moral object and intention come in that further complicate the issues if simple agreement on those terms cannot be reached.

    Actually, the exchange we have had has been the most polite I’ve ever had on this topic.

  • Mike
    I’ll buy that. Being a fisherman, I noticed my kind always has a gazillion definitions for the word “big” when pertaining to fish.

  • Thank you Phillip and DonL, on all counts.
    Dominus Vobiscum!

  • Mike Petrik on Monday, January 25, A.D. 2016 at 3:19pm

    Foxfier, I have no idea what you are talking about. I am not avoiding your request for a definition and have not insulted you.

    I said you falsely accused me, not “insulted” me. Specifically, calumny; at best detraction.
    Here:
    unless you are cool with the waterboarding of our troops. I don’t see how you can define torture to not include it.
    So where do you stand? Are you cool with the waterboarding of our troops or not?

    http://the-american-catholic.com/2016/01/24/carly-fiorina-and-abortion/#comment-278449
    and here:
    I infer from your response that you think that the water-boarding by our troops by the enemy would be morally licit because such water-boarding, while unpleasant, is not torture.
    http://the-american-catholic.com/2016/01/24/carly-fiorina-and-abortion/#comment-278497
    ***
    You say that you cannot define torture in a functional way; you previously offered “If I would consider it unacceptable for our enemy to do it to our troops, then we shouldn’t do it to their’s.
    I refuted that here:
    http://the-american-catholic.com/2016/01/24/carly-fiorina-and-abortion/#comment-278494
    because I do not believe it is “acceptable” for the bad guys to shoot our troops.
    *
    *
    *
    Make up your mind; either you are not able to define torture, in which case you cannot object to others defining it to not include what you feel it should and you DEFINITELY cannot morally accuse others of supporting everything you FEEL should be grouped in the same undefined-outside-of-your-personal-feelings category.
    Or.
    You can define torture, and you either need to fix your initial definition of things which are acceptable for the enemy to do to our troops or make another one.
    *
    I suppose there is a third option; examine your own thoughts and figure out why you are unable to form a working definition of torture, before you use your beliefs as a foundation to try to understand others.
    Understand yourself, and then try to figure out everyone else.

  • Foxfier, with all due respect I do not think a continuing dialog with you would be productive or beneficial for either of us.

  • Foxfier,
    One last college try. I don’t think a precise definition of torture must be agreed upon in order to agree with Church teaching that it is wrong. You are correct that I think water-boarding qualifies and is therefore morally unacceptable, but I do respect (though disagree with) the opinion of those who think it is not torture and is therefore morally acceptable — as long as they agree that the water-boarding of our POWs must therefore be similarly morally acceptable. The notion that the boundaries of torture, however defined, are different for us than for our enemy strikes me as unsustainable.

  • I don’t think a precise definition of torture must be agreed upon in order to agree with Church teaching that it is wrong.
    That is correct.
    A definition is required, however, before you attempt to use Church teaching to argue that a thing is torture and thus wrong under that specific Church teaching.
    You are correct that I think water-boarding qualifies and is therefore morally unacceptable, but I do respect (though disagree with) the opinion of those who think it is not torture and is therefore morally acceptable — as long as they agree that the water-boarding of our POWs must therefore be similarly morally acceptable.
    That’s a problem, unless you are going to define torture to mean “that which it is OK for someone to do to our POWs.”
    There are a great many ways that something can be unacceptable, without being torture. “Torture” is not a synonym for “wrong.”
    The notion that the boundaries of torture, however defined, are different for us than for our enemy strikes me as unsustainable.
    You are the only one putting forward that theory.

  • First of all, there is no Church teaching that says torture is wrong. Secondly, if you are going to call something intrinsically evil, you do have to object ly define it. MPS, with all due respect, nothing you said is at all relevant to the discussion at hand.

  • You do have a point, Greg; here’s the specific part of the CCC where torture is mentioned:
    http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s2c2a5.htm#2297
    Torture which uses physical or moral violence to extract confessions, punish the guilty, frighten opponents, or satisfy hatred is contrary to respect for the person and for human dignity.

    For contrast, here’s the section for indirect, intentional killing:
    http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s2c2a5.htm#2269
    The moral law prohibits exposing someone to mortal danger without grave reason, as well as refusing assistance to a person in danger.

  • You might notice that torture is mentioned as contrary to human dignity in a list of cases which does not include “to extracting information needed to stop an illicit act” or anything which can be construed to include it.

  • Remember Carly Fiorina? It’s good to see prominent women like Joni Ernst and Carly with pro-life and good social values attend the March. All news channel 8 on Fri night featured footage of both Fiorina and Ernst speaking at the March and interviews of out of town attendees. Bless them all. The weather was gray, damp and in the 20s.
    It won’t happen, but I would love to see Carly and Hillary debate. Carly would make mincemeat of her.

  • Foxfier wrote, “either you are not able to define torture, in which case you cannot object to others defining it to not include what you feel it should.”

    Not at all. Take the word “pain.”

    “If anyone said “I do not know if what I have got is a pain or something else,” we should think something like, he does not know what the English word “pain” means; and we should explain it to him.—How? Perhaps by means of gestures, or by pricking him with a pin and saying: “See, that’s what pain is!” This explanation, like any other, he might understand right, wrong, or not at all. And he will shew which he does by his use of the word, in this as in other cases.

    If he now said, for example: “Oh, I know what ‘pain’ means; what I don’t know is whether this, that I have now, is pain”—we should merely shake our heads and be forced to regard his words as a queer reaction which we have no idea what to do with. (It would be rather as if we heard someone say seriously: “I distinctly remember that some time before I was born I believed …..”.)” (PI 288)

  • Looks like Planned Parenthood in Texas is off the hook, and not the people who made the videos are to be hung. See https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/breaking-david-daleiden-faces-20-years-in-prison-for-offering-to-purchase-h

    Don, I bet you have a legal posting in the works for later today.

  • Not yet since I have insufficient information to do so. However, I have not yet seen a grand jury that was not a tool of the DA. The DA in Harris County is a Republican but this smells to high heaven.

  • MPS-
    That doesn’t have anything to do with the discussion, beyond being tangentially part of a philosophical discussion.

To All His Creatures

Friday, January 22, AD 2016

March for Life

 

 

These communities, by their representatives in old  Independence Hall, said to the whole world of men: “We  hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are  created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with  certain unalienable rights; that among these are life,  liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” This was their majestic  interpretation of the economy of the Universe. This was their  lofty, and wise, and noble understanding of the justice of  the Creator to His creatures. [Applause.] Yes, gentlemen, to  all His creatures, to the whole great family of man. In their  enlightened belief, nothing stamped with the Divine image and  likeness was sent into the world to be trodden on, and degraded,  and imbruted by its fellows. They grasped not only the whole  race of man then living, but they reached forward and seized  upon the farthest posterity. They erected a beacon to guide  their children and their children’s children, and the countless  myriads who should inhabit the earth in other ages. Wise  statesmen as they were, they knew the tendency of prosperity  to breed tyrants, and so they established these great  self-evident truths, that when in the distant future some man,  some faction, some interest, should set up the doctrine that  none but rich men, or none but white men, were entitled to life,  liberty and the pursuit of happiness, their posterity might look  up again to the Declaration of Independence and take courage to  renew the battle which their fathers began — so that truth,  and justice, and mercy, and all the humane and Christian virtues  might not be extinguished from the land; so that no man would  hereafter dare to limit and circumscribe the great principles  on which the temple of liberty was being built.

Abraham Lincoln, August 17, 1858

Continue reading...

7 Responses to To All His Creatures

  • “…nothing stamped with the Divine image and likeness was sent into the world to be trodden on, and degraded, and imbruted by its fellows.”

    To all Pro-Life people’s everywhere… God be with you. My humble prayers go to you and may Gods grace accompany you today and everyday.

  • I wonder where the ‘Black Lives Matter’ are on abortion since they are the main target of Planned Parenthood. We have a black holocaust going on and very few care to take notice.

  • Of course, the Dying Legacy Media ignores it all.

  • It always fascinates me that in spite of the mass “education” of today, we radically fail to reach the wisdom of our forefathers and great leaders. We are now reduced to arguing about the economics of things as if money alone envelopes our humanity. We are blind to the fact that it is the social issues that are the very weapon that our enemies within have taken us down with so well. Perhaps radical Islam will reawaken us in time to resurrect the great cultural yeast given us by the wisdom of our forefathers and the pure gift of our Creator?

  • @Don L.

    If not radical Islam, then possibly an act of nature. Of course no one would wish disaster upon themselves, but as you correctly mentioned, a reawakening on a massive volume of people, could reorient them to the last four things and the importance therein.
    Death Judgement Heaven Hell

  • “…so that truth, and justice, and mercy, and all the humane and Christian virtues might not be extinguished from the land”
    I think Abe Lincoln would have liked Marco Rubio’s answer to an atheist

  • “…We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal….” Perhaps the most profound quote of our forefathers! I embrace the word “self-evident” because the fact also covers the logic of the very human existence of man, and with that follows the sacred character of the Commandments, all of them resting upon that very same being, viz., man, and his very nature.

5 Responses to Morality and Abortion

  • So logical. Why do so many people have trouble with simply thinking thoroughly.

  • Original Sin

  • Moral bankruptcy (defined as a state of being completely lacking in a particular quality or value). A person to be admonished (sinful), counseled (doubtful), and instructed (ignorant). See The Spiritual Works of Mercy.

  • Great defense of our teaching on the moral reasoning against abortion. I was about to post it until you used the word most in regard to cases in which abortion would be morally wrong. I know that a number of observers of the posting would feel that vindicates their notion that there are at least some morally acceptable cases, and they could choose when it is deemed morally acceptable. Maybe I am too much of a hardliner.