Quotes Suitable for Framing: GK Chesterton

Wednesday, August 26, AD 2015

War is an ugly thing

 

 

I cannot see how we can literally end War unless we can end Will. I cannot think that war will ever be utterly impossible; and I say so not because I am what these people call a militarist, but rather because I am a revolutionist. Absolutely to forbid fighting is to forbid what our fathers called “the sacred right of insurrection.” Against some decisions no self-respecting men can be prevented from appealing to fortune and to death.

GK Chesterton

Eagle on gravestone

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

4 Responses to Quotes Suitable for Framing: GK Chesterton

  • “I say so not because I am what these people call a militarist, but rather because I am a revolutionist.”

    As the Declaration of the Rights of Man & the Citizen puts it, “The aim of all political association is the preservation of the natural and imprescriptible rights of man. These rights are liberty, property, security, and resistance to oppression.”

    Without the right of resistence, the rest are written in sand.

  • I never thought that I could agree with anything that John Stuart Mills wrote after his lifeboat theory of survival. Let Mills be the first to be cast overboard. The good will of man allowed seven men to survive a number of days lost at sea in a lifeboat built to four, here in the state of Delaware, proving Mills’ lifeboat theory WRONG.

  • Above comment: “Without the right of resistance, the rest are written in sand.” Ergo, the Second Amendment of the US Constitution. As in “a rifle behind very blade of grass”. It’s the motivation of the left’s deceitful, perennial thrust to confiscate your property, your liberty, and your life.
    .
    Post-modern politics are essentially deceit and coercion; translated bu!!s#!+, money and TV. Now, government is simply the crimes/sins we commit together. The group or oligarchs have usurped individual liberties. E.G., an Enlightenment leader’s campaign slogan would be, ‘Yes you can!” not Dear Leader’s “Yes we can.”

  • “I cannot see how we can literally end War unless we can end Will. ”
    Concerning our right to resist oppression- the current mode seems to be not Ending Will, but co- opting it or neutralizing it with all the freebies the state can provide, encouraging drug use as in Colorado and some other places already, discouraging Religion, dumbing down the education of the masses, etcetera etcetera

On Not Having Sex At Harvard

Sunday, July 25, AD 2010

From the New York Times:

There was a time when not having sex consumed a very small part of Janie Fredell’s life, but that, of course, was back in Colorado Springs. It seemed to Fredell that almost no one had sex in Colorado Springs. Her hometown was extremely conservative, and as a good Catholic girl, she was annoyed by all the fundamentalist Christians who would get in her face and demand, as she put it to me recently, “You have to think all of these things that we think.” They seemed not to know that she thought many of those things already. At her public high school, everyone, “literally everyone,” wore chastity rings, Fredell recalled, but she thought the practice ridiculous. Why was it necessary, she wondered, to signify you’re not doing something that nobody is doing?

And then Fredell arrived at Harvard.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Continue reading...

0 Responses to On Not Having Sex At Harvard

  • We need more Janie Fredells and Mary Anne Marks

  • We need to pray for them and the many others that have to live in a sex-saturated society such as ours.

  • Unforetunately one night about a year ago, I stopped at a serious tv documentary which was about a Catholic author who found extensive non marital sexual activity at Catholic colleges which went on to note then the gradual regrets of the females but with this caveat…that the females doing this outnumbered the males doing so but not by much.

  • Something which seems to be downplayed in the article is the belated realization that the annoying evangelicals of the first paragraph had a point.

    I think that both young evangelicals and young Catholics are young; they have things to learn about life. The evangelicals in this case seem to have not learned how to read Janie Fredell so as to speak with a potential ally in a winsome way.

    But Janie herself seems to have misunderstood her circumstances; it took immersion in Harvard to wake her up. Little or no sex amongst unmarried teens in Colorado Springs? I doubt that. The evangelical chastity ring culture may have seemed odd to her, but it grew up as a response to something. It was a rallying cry for Jesus, but also against a threat.

    The whole secular world is engaged in undermining the sexual virtue of the young so as to preemptively undermine their relationship with God before it can grow into something world-changing. From the WWJD shirts to the multicolored bead-bracelets to the chastity rings, evangelical expressions of counter-cultural fervor are like the redness and puffiness of a histamine reaction. They may border on kitch, but they are the signs of an immune system rising up to fight an invader.

    Miss Fredell is a Catholic; I hope however that now that she’s seen the infection up close, she’ll give her evangelical brothers and sisters their due props.

  • Catholics who insist that evangelicals have had a baneful effect on us (as evidenced in the recent sparring with Vox Nova) tend to deny the importance of chastity as a criterion of Christian fidelity. In so doing, they deny the importance of what the Church teaches is the very groundwork of a just society: strong family life. It may take people like Miss Fredell, educated in an elitist environment but respectful of the position of the evangelicals, to help our co-religionists to see the light here.

  • I’m not sure delaying sex until one is 30 is “pro-family.” I take that back, 30 is when they want folks to get married. Abstinance programs tend to delay sex only until 18-21. Certainly that is better than 14 or 16, but that is more a public health issue. If stop gazing at evangelicals long enough, we’ll see that they aren’t retaining their youth either.

    The time between when one is capable of producing a child and when one gets married has traditionally been called adolescence. Our model has now stretched that well past the early twenties. Having a large adolescent culture is not pro-family.

  • MZ, I do have to agree with you – adolescence has been unnaturally extended well beyond its due course. Largely due to materialism I would wager.

  • I take that back, 30 is when they want folks to get married.

    Who?

  • I’m unclear what relation, if any, MZ’s comment is meant to have with the article quoted.