“Progressives” Act as if Bigotry/ Racism are the Worst Sins —- No, It’s Pride

Featured

Bigotry and racism are despicable, without a doubt.  They have caused much suffering in human history.  But despite what the Left and its media followers imply, it’s not mankind’s greatest flaw.  In fact, it’s not even one of seven capital vices (a/k/a “the seven deadly sins”).1

The biggest stumbling block to holiness is pride.2  It’s pride which gives humans the idea they can decide which of the unborn live, and which shall die — and call it “choice.”

This character defect is the one which suggests Natural Law can be shoved aside and calls the invention “marriage equality.”

It’s pride which causes the Democrats to claim they know what’s best for the inner cities in general and education everywhere despite decades of their failure and resulting despair for their victims.

What incites those in power to circumvent rules and laws, but not expect to receive the same consequences which others of lesser rank are held accountable for?  Answer: pride.

Without going on and on, it wasn’t racism which bounced one of Saul Alinsky’s heroes, Lucifer, from heaven.  It was pride.3

…This leads to a disturbing question: why does Hillary Clinton admire Saul Alinsky? [see footnote #4]

 

 1 – “Though people often speak of the ‘seven deadly sins,’ the more accurate description is ‘seven capital vices.’  A vice is not the same as a sin; rather, it is a habit that inclines us to sin.  Usually a vice is the result of repeated sinful actions of a particular kind, so that a truly ‘vicious’ cycle appears:  Sin leads to a habit, which in turn leads to more sins.”

“The word ‘capital’ comes from the Latin term for ‘head.’  A capital vice is thus ‘head,’ or chief, among other vices in the sense that it leads to others.  Though Scripture contains no explicit reference to seven particular vices as ‘capital,’ we find numerous biblical warnings against these seven: pride, envy, sloth, lust, greed, gluttony, and anger.  The Wisdom Books especially – Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom, and Sirach – address them repeatedly.”  From “The New Catholic Answer Bible,” Fireside Catholic Publishing; Wichita, Kansas, 2005.

2 – “For pride is the reservoir of sin,

A source which runs over with vice;

Because of it God sends unheard-of afflictions,

And brings men to utter ruin.”

(Sirach 10:13, Ibid.)

3 – “Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgement to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins – or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom – Lucifer.   —  Saul Alinsky   From “Rules for radicals,” Vintage Books, New York, copyright 1971; October 1989 printing.

4 – “It was July 1971, and Hillary Rodham was interning in the law offices of communist rabble-rousers Robert Treuhaft and his British-born wife Jessica ‘Decca’ Mitford, the one-time muckraking journalist. Treuhaft and Mitford had married in 1943, several years after Mitford’s previous husband died fighting for the Soviet Comintern in the Spanish Civil War.  They eventually moved to San Francisco and lived near Saul Alinsky.  Both Treuhaft and Mitford had joined Communist Party USA, and for many years were denied passports and investigated by government officials.”

“Yes, this was Hillary’s big internship — working for two notorious Bay Area communists. Her father must have been appalled.  Saul Alinsky, a self-described democratic socialist who proudly admitted working with communists, must have been pleased.  (‘Anybody who tells you he was active in progressive causes and never worked with the Reds is a goddamn liar,’ Alinsky once said.)”

“And so, on July 8, 1971, Clinton reached out to the aging Alinsky in a letter she marked ‘Personal’ and sent via airmail adorned by two stamps with the face of Franklin Roosevelt.  ‘Dear Saul,’ she began warmly, on a first-name basis. ‘When is that new book coming out — or has it come and I somehow missed the fulfillment of Revelation?’”

“The new book of Revelation that Hillary was excited about was Rules for Radicals.  Hillary told Alinsky that she had just had her ‘one-thousandth conversation about Reveille’ (his other classic) and ‘need some new material to throw at people.’”  She was hopeful that Rules for Radicals would be providing that material”

“…And further, we must add that Alinsky’s influence was not only on the current Democratic nominee.  He impacted the previous nominee as well.  As noted, a young man named Barack Obama would read and teach Alinsky’s tactics during his community-organizing days in Chicago — Saul’s haunting grounds.”

“Alinsky’s influence on the Democratic Party today is so pronounced that his son, David, boasted eight years ago that the ‘Democratic campaign in 2008… is a fine tribute to Saul Alinsky.’  He beamed: ‘the Democratic National Convention had all the elements of the perfectly organized event, Saul Alinsky style.’”

“The 2016 Democratic National Convention likewise will owe something to Saul Alinsky.  Hillary and crew may not give an open acknowledgment to Lucifer, but they ought to give an admiring nod to the lingering presence of Saul Alinsky.”  From “The Hillary-Alinsky-Lucifer Connection,” by Paul Kengor, http://spectator.org/the-hillary-alinsky-lucifer-connection/, 7/16/2016.

Assisted Suicide for Adults and Children & Islamic Adult and Child Suicide Bombers

Featured

The recent bombing at a Turkish wedding which killed 54, brought the horror of Islamic children suicide bombers to our attention again.  While the age of the perpetrator is still under investigation, it reminded us of the fact that Islamic minors are indeed being trained for this.1

We are naturally appalled at a practice which deliberately teaches children that such heinous actions are good.

But how much morally superior are we westerners?  Belgium, Canada, Colombia, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Switzerland in addition to the states of Montana, Oregon, Vermont, Washington and, most recently, California permit assisted suicide.2,3  The Netherlands and Belgium even allow assisted suicide for teenagers who are vulnerable to the natural emotional upheavals of that age group.4  So, instead of protecting them and helping them through their sensitive years, these jurisdictions indirectly encourage them to kill themselves with laws saying that this is a good option.

When it comes to the safety of minors, the promoters of young assisted suicide are just as reprehensible as jihadists who indoctrinate children to kill themselves and others.  The intrinsic evil of suicide is the same regardless of the age group; only the number of victims varies.

 

 

 1 – “The boy looked scared and younger than 16 when Iraqi police grabbed him on the street in the northern city of Kirkuk.  Pulling off his shirt, they found a two-kilogram bomb strapped to his skinny frame.”

“That was last Sunday.  Less than a day earlier, Turkey was less fortunate: a teenage bomber detonated his suicide vest among dancing guests at a Turkish wedding party, officials say, killing 51 people, nearly half of them children themselves…”

“In Afghanistan, the Taliban has long used children.  One 14-year-old bomber on a bicycle hit the Kabul NATO base in 2012 killing six people; two years later a teenager blew himself up at French cultural center in the Afghan capital…”

“Hisham al-Hashimi, an analyst and author who advises the Iraqi government on Islamic State, says militants this year had reactivated their Heaven’s Youth Brigade, in reaction to the group’s battlefield losses in Iraq and Syria.”

“’Teenagers are easier to recruit for suicide missions, especially in moments of suffering or despair having lost loved ones,’ he said. ‘They also attract less attention and less suspicion than male adults.’”

From “Child Suicide-Bombings Increasingly Used in Militant Attacks,” by Patrick Markey, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/child-suicide-bombings_us_57bb87aae4b00d9c3a19a62f, 8/22/2016.

2 – “Canada joins handful of countries, U.S. states in allowing assisted suicide,” http://www.reuters.com/article/us-canada-euthanasia-jurisdictions-factb-idUSKBN0LA26Z20150206, 2/6/2015.

3 – “California’s Physician-Assisted Suicide Law Goes Into Effect,” by Melanie Hunter, http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/melanie-hunter/californias-physician-assisted-suicide-law-goes-effect, 6/9/2016.

4 – “ In the Netherlands, a competent patient between the ages of 16 and 18 may request euthanasia or assisted suicide. The parent or guardian does not have a veto, but must be consulted. Competent patients aged between 12 and 16 may also qualify, but only if their parent or guardian consents.”

“ In Belgium, a competent patient under the age of 18 may request euthanasia with parental consent. Additional scrutiny of the child’s competence is required, and suffering based on a psychiatric disorder is excluded.”
From “Assisted dying: What does the law in different countries say?” by Penney Lewis, Professor of Law, King’s College London, http://www.bbc.com/news/world-34445715, 10/6/2015.

“Burkini” Ban Accomplishes Nothing Positive

Featured

There are many things a nation can do to protect its culture, but France’s ban on the burkini (full-body bathing suit) only adds to a perceived image of bigotry and does nothing to help the plight of Muslim women.

Lionnel Luca, the mayor of Villeneuve-Loubet:  “In France, one does not come to the beach dressed to display one’s religious convictions, especially as they are false convictions that the religion does not demand.”1

To quote the famous duo of Perry Mason and Hamilton Burger in the 1950’s and ‘60’s television series, “Perry Mason”:  “This is incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial.”  While some in the West may view this garment as another example of Islam’s “enslavement of women,”2  there are many other Islamic traditional mistreatments of women far more deserving of our concern.

The ban on burkinis says something else about common western attitudes.  It’s not enough that today’s hedonistic society wants no restraint on immodesty, now they have to stretch to complaining about excessive modesty?

OK, if an ISIS sympathizer uses this bathing suit to hide weapons used in an attack, then some sort of security measures may need to be put into place.  Until then, worry about real dangers like Euro open borders, homegrown terrorists, “honor” killings, etc.

 

 1 – “France PM backs burkini bans as three more towns consider outlawing garments,” by Samuel Osborne and Alexandra Sims, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/french-pm-backs-burkini-bans-as-three-more-towns-consider-outlawing-garments-a7195136.html, 8/17/2016.

2 – “France’s Prime Minister [Manuel Valls] has backed the banning of burkini swimsuits, saying they are not compatible with French values and are based on the ‘enslavement of women’.” He also said he was not in favor of a national law on this subject of burkinis. Ibid.

Trump is Correct — Time to Peacefully Change the D.C. “Regime”

Featured

In his speech in the Milwaukee area last night, Donald Trump reviewed how the “Washington Establishment” (including both major political parties) has become wealthy at the expense of the poor and middle classes over the last five decades.  The effects of this greed are especially evident in the inner cities where crime is up, education is down and opportunity is almost non-existent after billions have been spent.  Trump took umbrage at the Democrats who have been able to assume they have the African American votes in their back pockets despite generations of keeping them dependent and with lessening hope for a better future.  He said:

 “I’m fighting, all of us across the nation are fighting, for peaceful regime change in our own country. The media-donor political complex that’s bled this country dry has to be replaced with a new government of, by and for the people.”1

Regime?

Of course, the MSNBC was immediately indignant at the use of “regime” to describe the Obama/Clinton years we have endured.  Granted, when we Baby Boomers were growing up, such a word would have been considered absurd.  But we are now in absurd times.

Some  of  Our  Third  World  Blues

Stepping back for a moment, how would we describe a third world country run by a party who has taken the votes of its impoverished minority for fifty years without improving its lot one iota?  And, in fact, their lots have worsened.

What would we say about these countries when the party in power gets its leaders off the hook when, as Rep. Tom Marino (R-PA 10th district and member of the Judiciary Committee) said, one of them lies in front of a Congressional oversight committee several times–  yet “lesser” people commit lesser crimes and are given more severe consequences?

How would we describe a ruler who bypasses his country’s constitution with numerous swipes of his executive pen and then criticizes the opposition party when it sues him— the only means it has to obtain justice?

Yes, our constitutional republic has suffered from what is essentially a regime for eight years.  Why should we choose more of the same in November with Hillary Clinton?

1 – “Trump: I’m Fighting for ‘Peaceful Regime Change’ of the ‘Media-Donor Political Complex,” by Ian Schwartz, http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/08/16/trump_im_fighting_for_peaceful_regime_change_of_the_media-donor_political_complex.html, 8/16/2016.

From Woodhull to H.Clinton: Sadly, “Progressives” Haven’t Improved

Featured

While Hillary Clinton has become the first woman to win a major party’s nomination for President, she is not the first to run as a party’s nominee for this office.  Licking County, Ohio native Victoria Woodhull, was the nominee of the Equal Rights Party in 1872.  Among her other accomplishments, she was the first female stockbroker and the first woman to address a Congressional committee.  As a progressive, she promoted free love, less rigid divorce laws, socialism and spiritualism1.2

Let’s compare her with Hillary Clinton, a progressive woman presidential candidate 144 years later.  Clinton is known for promoting the killing the unborn and the legalizing disordered behavior through same-sex “marriage”(free love), less rigid border security to the point of endangering the nation, redistribution of wealth (socialism) and had “séance conversations” with Eleanor Roosevelt and Mohandas Gandhi3 (spiritualism).

Sadly, her list of agenda items includes pushing for a national minimum wage which is actually works against economic equality4, doing whatever it takes to preserve a Democratic victory (lies about Benghazi to uphold Obama’s false claim about putting terrorism on the run), erasing more emails as part of an investigation than Nixon had tapes erased, smearing the credibility of the women sexually harassed by her President husband, etc.

“Progressive”?  No, this philosophy is regressive.

 

1 – “Spiritualism, in religion, a movement based on the belief that departed souls can interact with the living. Spiritualists sought to make contact with the dead, usually through the assistance of a medium, a person believed to have the ability to contact spirits directly. Some mediums worked while in a trancelike state, and some claimed to be the catalyst for various paranormal physical phenomena (including the materializing or moving of objects) through which the spirits announced their presence.” https://www.britannica.com/topic/spiritualism-religion

2 – “Ohio woman was nominated in 1872,” by Maria DeVito, Cincinnati Enquirer, 7/29/2016.

3 – “Author Bob Woodward reported in the 1990’s that Hillary Clinton held ‘séance’ conversations with Eleanor Roosevelt and Gandhi in the White House. Bill Clinton also joked about the incident in 2012, during the dedication of Franklin D. Roosevelt Four Freedoms Park in New York.

‘As all of you famously learned when I served as president, my wife, now the secretary of state, was known to commune with Eleanor on a regular basis,’ he joked during his speech.”, from “Hillary Clinton: ‘I believe in Spirits’” by Charlie Spiering, http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/04/18/hillary-clinton-believe-spirits/, 4/18/2016.

4https://cartaremi.wordpress.com/2016/04/25/why-a-national-15-hour-minimum-wage-makes-no-sense/

 

Parallel: Overlooking a Candidate’s Stand on Abortion or Concentration Camps

Featured

“Litmus test” issues have been denigrated by the press for so long that most citizens are reluctant to suggest that some legitimate ones exist.

There is one foundational right without which all other rights cannot emanate.  It is one which the Supreme Court tied itself in knots in 1973 using bizarre logic regarding privacy to take away the Right to Life and legalize abortion.

Without protecting life at its very beginning, every other cause is irrelevant.

“It is impossible to further the common good without acknowledging and defending the right to life, upon which all the other inalienable rights of individuals are founded and from which they develop.” –Pope John Paul II, The Gospel of Life1

A certain way to raise a liberal’s ire is to say a particular judge should not be considered for the Supreme Court unless he/ she is pro-life.  They would rail against such a “litmus test.”

But suppose a candidate for Congress was asked for an opinion about the concentration camps in Germany during World War II.  What would the Left say if that individual passed on that by saying those killing camps were the business of the Germans and we should not have taken a stance at that time because their legal system allowed it?  Would the secular news channels have enough hours in a broadcasting day to declare that this candidate was unqualified?

Both the right to life and concentration camp issues are legitimate “litmus tests.”  It defies logic that only the second one is acceptable.  The only conclusion which can be drawn is that, to most “progressives”, all lives are not created equal.

 

1http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/abortion/living-the-gospel-of-life.cfm

 

Ensuring Trump’s Defeat Will Not Guarantee Republican Party’s Resurgence in 2020

Featured

As Chris Stirewalt reminded on Fox News last night, there are a handful of influential Republicans who believe having Trump “getting a kick in the pants” would destroy the populist arm of the party and lead to a Republican comeback.  He said they are most likely using the example of 1964 when Goldwater’s defeat led to a power reorganization within the party culminated with Nixon’s victory four years later.

BUT  THIS  YEAR  IS  NOT  LIKE  1964

The U.S. and the world of 1964 are not similar to 2016. Back then, the no-win Viet Nam situation virtually assured the Presidential winner of ’64 would not repeat in ’68 — Or why did Johnson shock the world when he announced he would not run in March of ’68?

Secondly, the future of the Supreme Court was not hanging on a precipice as it is now.  Few appointments were expected of the Presidential winner of ’64.  (Thurgood Marshall became Johnson’s only confirmed appointment.)  The Court was already liberal.  However, 1968’s presidential winner, Nixon, eventually made four Court appointments.  They changed its composition from two conservative, five liberal and two moderate to five conservative and four liberal (with the help of one justice, Byron White going from slightly liberal to slightly conservative according to the study). This ratio has remained intact ever since, even with a change in some of the Court’s members and Justice Kennedy’s increasing tendency to be more liberal since this study was done.

Graph_of_Bailey_Scores_of_Supreme_Court_Justices_1950-2011

1 – Source data from Michael A. Bailey, Georgetown University, June 2012 as posted in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideological_leanings_of_U.S._Supreme_Court_justices

Looking  at  2016  Plus  Four  Years

Several appointments will likely be required of this election’s winner. The Court’s current 4-4 ratio with one vacancy will definitely change in the next presidential term.  Once the new Court’s personality is established, it will remain unchanged for many years as it will be an even younger Court.

So, if some Republicans get their wish of a Trump defeat, the nation will not benefit EVEN IF they are able to limit a Hillary Administration to a single term. (Only two incumbents running for re-election have been defeated since Herbert Hoover.  Gerald Ford is not included as he was not elected to the position of Vice President, but was appointed and confirmed.)  The damage to the Supreme Court and the nation will already be entrenched before the 2020 election.  Recapturing the White House in that election will mean much less than winning this year’s as far as the safety of our Constitution is concerned.

To the Republican Establishment:  is it REALLY worth being led by pride to derail Donald Trump’s campaign?  Granted, Trump is not the most stellar Republican candidate in many years.  He is still more qualified than Hillary Clinton and her baggage of deceit.  If the Congress remains in Republican control and he chooses a wise Cabinet, things will work out for the civilization we need to protect.  If not, imagine what damage will occur in what will be essentially a  third and possible fourth Obama terms.

 

 

Send Planned Parenthood Federal Funds to Help the Fight Against Zika

Featured

Many debates have surprisingly simple resolutions if we would just step back and identify the priorities.  We would often find that two supposedly separate issues can easily be merged into one solution.

Such is the case of the Senate battle involving a bill to fund research in the fight against the Zika virus. Democrats are currently fighting it because, while the bill would allocate $40 million to community health centers to assist in this endeavor, it does not send funds to one of the Democrats’ favorite social agenda provider, Planned Parenthood.1

Their support for the organization which kills 300,000 unborn babies annually is legendary.2  In a way, it’s not surprising that they are willing to hinder Zika research in favor of one of their pet projects.

Their argument is that Planned Parenthood can provide contraception which would prevent the creation of any babies which might display the damage caused by Zika.  However, those willing to accept the use of artificial means to prevent conception do not have to be reliant on Planned Parenthood.

Step  Back  to  See  the  Resolution

The debate can be boiled down to two aspects.  On one hand, we have a potential health calamity which has numerous health impacts including birth defects.  On the other, we have an organization which receives $500 million in federal subsidies annually and whose primary mission/ source of income is the indiscriminate killing of unborn babies.

This becomes simple:  stop giving the $500 million of taxpayer money to the killing organization and apply it to the $1+ billion needed to prevent the suffering of babies and their families as a result of the Zika virus.

Sure, we’ll hear how Planned Parenthood might not be applying the $500 million directly to abortions.  But what this subsidy does is free their other financial assets to the killing processes and go to the bottom line of the anti-life organization.

Not convinced?  Here’s an analogy.  Suppose there’s a Senate bill written to fund orphanages, especially those who have children with special needs.  In this theoretical case, let’s say the Mafia also had a medical arm through which it launders money via medical device companies.

Would these pro-Planned Parenthood individuals be willing to allocate federal funds to these Mafia-sponsored medical companies. After all, the money is not going directly to their criminal activities.

Does anyone NOT see the serious moral problems with such an arrangement?3

Case closed, no federal funds for any organization engaged in first-degree killing regardless of the other activities it may be involved with.

 

 

1 – “Finally, and probably most importantly, Senate Democrats are upset that the Zika appropriations bill does not allocate funding for Planned Parenthood, arguing that it leaves women without care options. But, that’s not true. The bill allocates $40 million for community health centers that are more plentiful and offer a wider range of care, plus $6 million for the National Health Service Corps and $95 million to the Social Services Grant Program that can distribute funds for preventive care to the most at-risk areas. It is simply not the job of the federal government to fund the nation’s largest abortion provider, and it is unconscionable that Senate Democrats would block funding aimed to help protect pregnant women and babies because their friends at Planned Parenthood don’t get a cut.”  “Roby: Democrats are blocking Zika funding because Planned Parenthood doesn’t get a cut,” by Martha Roby, http://yellowhammernews.com/politics-2/roby-democrats-blocking-zika-funding , 8/7/2016.

2 – “Planned Parenthood performed 323,999 abortions and received $553.7 million from U.S. taxpayers during the 2014-2015 fiscal year, according to its most recent annual report.”

“Although it saw 200,000 less patients and provided 11 percent fewer services than the previous year, its taxpayer subsidy increased by nearly $25 million.”

“Abortions are down from 2013, when the industry performed 327,653 abortions.”The stability of Planned Parenthood’s abortion count – between 324,000 and 334,000 since 2008 – is remarkable, given that national figures for abortions have been in a nosedive since 2008,” the National Right to Life Committee noted. ‘They have dropped 13 percent in just three years.’”  From “Planned Parenthood reveals its 2014 stats: 323,999 abortions, $553.7 million from US taxpayers, by Ben Johnson, https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/planned-parenthood-performed-323999-abortions-and-received-553.7-million-fr, 1/4/2016.

3 – Here come the objections! “Abortion is legal.” Concentration camps in Nazi Germany were legal, too… So much for blind faith in fallible human court systems.

BLM Wants Reparations — Irish Americans Are Deserving, too

Featured

The Black Lives Matter, officially the Movement for Black Lives, released its platform of six demands this week.  Number two on the list is “reparations for past and continuing harms.”1

The U.S. fight for civil rights has been going on as a result of slavery which began on North America’s soil centuries ago.  Progress was realized in the 1960’s with various laws, but racial discrimination has not been eradicated, from both sides.

Obscured in the on-going strife is the fact black Americans have been not the only group poorly treated during our nation’s history.  The common misunderstanding is so pervasive to the point that most U.S. citizens would think “race” when the word discrimination is mentioned.  Women might be a second response, but most likely a distant second.

Irish Iberian

(see Footnote 2 for text and credit)

Time for a history refresher.  Irish immigrants were very poorly treated for generations after their initial influx as a result of the potato famine in the 1840’s.  Examples:

  • “They were forced to live in cellars and shanties, partly because of poverty but also because they were considered bad for the neighborhood…they were unfamiliar with plumbing and running water. These living conditions bred sickness and early death. It was estimated that 80% of all infants born to Irish immigrants in New York City died. Their brogue and dress provoked ridicule; their poverty and illiteracy provoked scorn.”4

  • “They became chamber maids, cooks, and the caretakers of children. Early Americans disdained this type of work, fit only for servants, the common sentiment being, “Let Negroes be servants, and if not Negroes, let Irishmen fill their place… The Blacks hated the Irish and it appeared to be a mutual feeling. They were the first to call the Irish ‘white nigger.'”4
  • “The Know-Nothing Party- a political party in the late 19th century—developed with “native” Americans who hated the immigrant influx particularly the Irish.”5
  • “Employers would place signs with NINA scrawled across the front. NINA spelled out is No Irish Need Apply, this would often be seen next to the No Dogs Allowed signs.”5
  • “The Irish were ostracized from American society for many things besides just being newcomers. The Irish were ostracized for being Catholic.  Many Protestants and ‘native’ Americans were distrustful of a religion that was, as they viewed it, highly irregular with its beads, meditative prayers to Jesus’ mother, oils, saints and statues.  The Irish were also categorized as angry, alcoholic beings – (the term ‘don’t get your Irish up’, stemmed from a stereotypical belief in the volatile Irish temper) who drank all the time in saloons and had regular bar brawls and parties filled with revelry and debauchery.”5
  • Even though early major league had Irish players, around the turn of the 20th century,” the large numbers of Irish fans misled the public into believing that the Irish dominated the game.”  The same book printed this:6

 

Baseball and No Irish need apply

Despite the cruel treatment, the Irish kept moving forward:

“The Irish were unique among immigrants… In New York City, during the Civil War, they rioted against the draft lottery after the first drawing showed most of the names were Irish.  For three days the city was terrorized by Irish mobs and only after an appeal for peace by Archbishop Hughes did it end.  In Pennsylvania they formed a secret organization called the Molly Maguires to fight mine owners who brutalized the miners and their families. They ambushed mine bosses, beat, and even killed them in their homes.  The Irish used brutal methods to fight brutal oppression.  They loved America and gladly fought in her wars… The days of ‘No Irish Need Apply’ passed. St.Patrick day paraded [sic] replaced violent confrontations…Through poverty and subhuman living conditions, the Irish tenaciously clung to each other.  With their ingenuity for organization, they were able to gain power and acceptance.  In 1850 at the crest of the Potato Famine immigration, Orestes Brownson, a celebrated convert to Catholicism, stated: ‘Out of these narrow lanes, dirty streets, damp cellars, and suffocating garrets, will come forth some of the noblest sons of our country, whom she will delight to own and honor.’  In little more than a century his prophecy rang true.  Irish-Americans had moved from the position of the despised to the oval office.”4

Our American history has its proud moments, but we also need to remember those groups who were not always treated properly.  Let’s not allow the tunnel-vision of political correctness to narrow our sense of fairness.

 

1 – “Black Lives Matter Releases Policy Agenda,” by Trymaine Lee, http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/black-lives-matter-releases-policy-agenda-n620966, 8/1/2016.

2 – “The Iberians are believed to have been originally an African race, who thousands of years ago spread themselves through Spain (undecipherable) Western Europe.  Their remains are found in the barrows or burying places in sundry parts of these countries.  The skulls are of low prognathous3 type.  They came to Ireland and mixed with the natives of the South and West, who themselves are supposed to have been of low type and descendants of savages of the Stone Age, who, in consequence of isolation from the rest of the world, had never been  (undecipherable) competed in the healthy struggle of life, and thus made way, according to the laws of nature for superior races.”  Credited as coming from Harper’s Weekly, 1899. Artist Unknown, Misusing Darwin’s science theories as a basis, the idea of the Irish as less than fully white persisted. This 1899 cartoon showing the Irish stereotype as less evolved, presented as scientific fact 11 years after Nast’s last cartoon was published by Harper’s. Source: Wikipedia Commons, as published I “Irish As Subhuman,” https://thomasnastcartoons.com/category/irish-americans/, 3/1/2016.

3 – “being or having an upper or lower jaw that projects abnormally forward, http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prognathous

4 – “Irish Immigrants in America in the 19th Century,” http://www.kinsella.org/history/histira.htm

5 – “The Irish in America: 1840’s- 1930’s,” http://xroads.virginia.edu/~ug03/omara-alwala/irishkennedys.html

6 – From page 88 of “Baseball as America,” by George Plimpton, W.P.Kinsella, Paul Simon, Roger Angell, John Grisham, Jules Tygiel and others, National Geographic, Washington D.C., copyright National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum, 2002.

 

Obama Administration Invites Terrorism — to a Community Near You?

Featured

From the answers many Democratic voters give to roving reporters these days, it is not surprising that no protest marches have filled our streets this evening against Jeh Johnson’s temporary amnesty to 8,000 Syrian refuges.  The declaration gives “permanent resident status, work permits, and other documents that would allow these migrants to remain without fear of deportation.”It also covers some who are here illegally, a staple of recruiting for Democrats.

It means that “almost anyone from Syria who is in the United States on an expired visa can stay here for at least another 18 months” as Syria has been given “temporary protected status” [TPS] because of its war-torn situation. 2

 To make matters worse:

“The background checks run on TPS participants are less stringent even than the screening of foreigners entering on some types of visas, let alone the multilayered vetting that refugees receive — procedures that FBI Director James Comey and other top government officials have said are insufficient to guarantee that terrorists cannot slip through.”3

Today, Trish Regan of Fox Business asked why does Hillary Clinton want to increase the immigration of those who “promised to seed with Islamic jihadists”?  Ms. Regan reminded us of the 1200 women who were sexually assaulted, mostly in Cologne and Hamburg, on New Years by migrants of Islamic nations.  This and the news of numerous attacks in Europe point to a reason why the UK left the organization which requires open borders in this time of war against radical Islamic jihadists.

Is this a case of taking political correctness to an extreme as Trish Regan offered?

It could be that reason or simply to create more chaos, thus “justifying” more big government control.  Any way we look at it, Obama and Hillary are welcoming the Trojan horse in to the cheers of the Left.  Because of their generosity (at our risk) these refuges can even apply for drivers licenses, too.4

Those of us who object will be reminded that we are not living up to the Christian directive to welcome the stranger.  The President and Ms. Clinton are thus following Hillary’s hero, Saul Alinsky and his 4th rule for radicals: “Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules [emphasis retained].”5

To them, it is irrelevant that Christian charity does not require that we lead with our chin either.  Or as Pope Francis said recently regarding the question of how Europe can handle its wave of immigrants: “[it is] a fair and responsible question, because one cannot open the gates wide unreasonably.”6

Assuming Obama and Clinton continue to follow Alinsky, the only question left is where and when will one of these guests, or future guests if Hillary wins, strike us next?

 

1 – “DHS Gives 8,000 Syrian Refugees Temporary Amnesty,” by Matt Vespa, http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2016/08/01/dhs-gives-8000-syrian-refugees-temporary-amnesty-n2200850, 8/1/2016.

2 – “Obama Grants Protected Status To Syrians In U.S. Illegally,” by Leo Hohmann, http://www.wnd.com/2016/08/obama-grants-protected-status-to-syrians-in-u-s-illegally/, 8/1/2016.

3 – “Thousands of Syrians Get Back-Door Amnesty,” by Brendan Kirby, http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/thousands-syrians-get-back-door-amnesty/, updated 8/2/2016.

4 – “Called Temporary Protected Status, it is anything but temporary.  The program basically works like this: big event, like a natural disaster or war, happens in a country, US then says anyone already in the US from that country doesn’t have to go home.  They can be here on a Visa or for some other reason (illegally?) and they then can apply for TPS and virtually never go home!

“They can work, get drivers licenses, do anything a legal citizen can do except vote (and they are probably doing that too!).”  https://refugeeresettlementwatch.wordpress.com/tag/temporary-protected-status/

5– From “Rules for Radicals,” by Saul Alinsky, Vintage Books, New York, 1971.

6 – From “Pope: Conscientious Objection Is a Human Right,” by CAN/ EWTN News, National Catholic Register, May 29-June 11, 2016 issue.

 

Anti-Portman Ad Criticizes Him for Proposing Social Security Funds be Taken From the Clutches of Congress

Featured

A Democratic  PAC ad opposing the re-election of Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH) says he takes money from Wall Street (big deal, so does Hillary and just about everyone else from both parties) and wants to privatize Social Security to the stock market.  It suggests he be elected senator from Wall Street not from Ohio.

While he supported a House bill in 2005 which would have allowed anyone under age 55 to divert some of the withholdings to private investment accounts, he hasn’t supported privatization since.  Incidentally, that option would have been voluntary and did not pass.1

In any event, imagine that!  Trusting something other than the federal government to handle our Social Security funds – which are essentially missing under its mismanagement.

Let’s think about this.  What is riskier, investing funds in the stock market which, if it crashes to zero, then everything crashes anyway and retirement becomes irrelevant OR entrusting it to the same organization (Congress) which has been a kleptomaniac with our money and without punishment for decades?

What  Should  be  Done

Let the Feds continue to take the employers half of the Social Security contributions and hope they do something honorable with it for a change.  Allow the employees to invest their halves wherever they want, as long as it’s legal, with the stipulation that there will be no government safety net if they fritter their half away.

Simple.  That’s why it has only a long-shot of happening.

 

 

1 – “Campaign Ad Watch: PAC Criticizes Portman on Social Security,” by Jessica Wehrman of The Columbus Dispatch, 7/8/2016.

Lesson for ISIS: Murdering the Priest Sent Him Straight to Heaven as a True Martyr! [1]

Featured

A French priest, Fr. Jacques Hamel (age 85), was killed while saying Mass two days ago and the terrorists further insulted the God they pretend to honor by filming “themselves preaching in Arabic by the altar.”2

The irony is that those who mistakenly think they can become martyrs3,4,5 by suicide bombing or being killed while murdering “infidels” actually assisted in achieving that glorified status for a fellow human whose faith they despise.  Now, the priest in heaven will be interceding on their behalf for their conversions!6

 

1 – “But some people do go directly to heaven–certainly as in the case of martyrs. Our Lord told the ‘good thief’ [that] he would be in heaven that day (Luke 23:43).”  — Fr. Vincent Serpa, O.P., http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=667156, 4/19/2012.

2 – “France in shock again after Isis murder of priest in Normandy,” https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/26/france-shock-second-isis-attack-12-days, 7/26/2016.

3 – first definition of “martyr” by this source:  “a person who voluntarily suffers death as the penalty of witnessing to and refusing to renounce a religion,” http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/martyr

4 – “Sacred Scripture attests to the courage of men and women who were willing to die as martyrs rather than renounce their faith or be unfaithful to God’s law.” “What is the Church’s Teaching on Martyrdom?”http://catholicstraightanswers.com/what-is-the-churchs-teaching-on-martyrdom/

5 – “Suicide contradicts the natural inclination of the human being to preserve and perpetuate his life.  It is gravely contrary to the just love of self.  It likewise offends love of neighbor because it unjustly breaks the ties of solidarity with family, nation, and other human societies to which we continue to have obligations.  Suicide is contrary to love for the living God.”  Paragraph 2281 from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 25th printing, November, 2013.

6 – “The witnesses who have preceded us into the kingdom, especially those whom the Church recognizes as saints, share in the living tradition of prayer by the example of their lives, the transmission of their writings, and their prayer today.  They contemplate God, praise him and constantly care for those whom they have left on earth.  When they entered into the joy of their Master, they were ‘put in charge of many things.’  Their intercession is their most exalted service to God’s plan.  We can and should ask them to intercede for us and for the whole world.”  Paragraph 2683, Ibid.

 

 

To Clinton Campaign: Russians Aren’t Waiting for the Green Light to Hack Our Government

Featured

How the Left can spin anything to attempt taking the focus away from their ineptitude and corruption.  Here is what gave their followers what they perceived was an opening:

“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” Trump said, according to the New York Times. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”1

So, Hillary Clinton’s campaign says this:

“This has to be the first time that a major presidential candidate has actively encouraged a foreign power to conduct espionage against his political opponent,” said Jake Sullivan, Mrs. Clinton’s chief foreign policy adviser. “This has gone from being a matter of curiosity, and a matter of politics, to being a national security issue.”2

You had better believe it’s a national security issue and foreign powers were encouraged, not by Trump today, but years ago whenever they discovered Mrs. Clinton took it upon herself to circumvent State Department procedures and put sensitive and classified emails on a private and unsecure server.

Russians  Don’t  Have  to  Be  Invited  to  Initiate  Mayhem

Since when have the Russians needed invitations or permission to cause trouble?  Ask Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia who have faced domination from outside powers for centuries, including last decade when Russia used its natural gas as a political tool.3  Or, how about Ukraine and Crimea?4

No, if Russia steals any of our secrets, it won’t be because Donald Trump encouraged them. They have shown repeatedly that they are very adept at being an international nuisance on their own.  Sure,  the Democrats will try to blame Trump, but the only ones who believe that are those who get their news from social media (or as Watters World discovered when a Democratic voter said Cuba is a successful socialist country and another who wasn’t sure who won our Civil War)….(!)… Then again, with the sad state of average public awareness of current events, Trump just might need damage control on his harmless comment.

 

1 – From “Donald Trump on Twitter:  Russia Should Give the FBI Hillary’s Emails,” by Rider Torrance, http://www.inquisitr.com/3354505/donald-trump-twitter-russia-treason-clinton-emails-news/, 7/27/2016.

2 – From “Donald Trump Calls on Russia to Find Hillary Clinton’s Missing Emails,” by Ashley Parker, http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/28/us/politics/donald-trump-russia-clinton-emails.html?_r=0, 7/27/2016.

3 – ” Attempts to control them began in the Middle Ages, with a period of Scandinavian domination in which Sweden and Denmark took prominent roles. By the end of the 18th century, the Baltic states were swept into the growing Russian Empire. Their subordination was briefly broken by a short period of independence in the early 20th century, before Nazi Germany invaded during World War II. Not long after, the region was annexed into the Soviet Union. After regaining independence in 1990 just prior to the Soviet Union’s collapse, the three nations entered a new phase: integrating with the West. It culminated with each of the Baltic states joining the European Union and NATO in 2004…”

“This became problematic when Russia resumed its role as a regional powerhouse with the rapid defeat of Georgia in August 2008 and use of natural gas cutoffs to punish Ukraine in 2006 and 2009. The small and vulnerable Baltic states became increasingly nervous that Moscow would set its sights on them next.”  From “Russian Influence Fades in the Baltics,” https://www.stratfor.com/analysis/russian-influence-fades-baltics, 6/10/2016.

4https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_Russian_Federation

Is This What You Had in Mind, Senator Warren, Seriously?

Featured

“It’s about what country we want to be.” — Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) during the Democrats convention last night in Philadelphia.

Her party has changed our country to one where:

1) The unborn live in the area of the highest death rate.

2) Civil law tells God to stick it in His ear because His idea of marriage is outdated

3) The inalienable right of religious liberty is subject to political correctness and its restrictions

4) People of influence can escape the consequences of breaking the law.

5) National sovereignty is considered old-fashioned so that borders are opened carelessly.1

6) The inalienable right of parents to teach their children is overrun by a centralized and unconstitutional Department of Education and experiments like Common Core.2,3

7) Parental stewardship of their children is taken away by subjecting them to arrest if they attempt to secure help for their children suffering from gender uncertainties.4

8) Parents must sign approval for big things like a school field trip, but not for trivial things like their daughter seeking to end the life of their grandchild.

The Democrats’ list goes on ad nauseam — literally.

No, Senator, people of solidly formed consciences don’t want your New Age vision of the USA — Ultimate Society of Abominations.

 

1 – “Political authorities, for the sake of the common good for which they are responsible, may make the exercise of the right to immigrate subject to various juridical conditions, especially with regard to the immigrants’ duties toward their country of adoption.  Immigrants are obliged to respect with gratitude the material and spiritual heritage of the country that receives them, to obey its laws and to assist in carrying civic burdens.”

From paragraph 2241 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 25th printing; November, 2013.

 2 – “As those first responsible for the education of their children, parents have the right to choose a school for them which corresponds to their own convictions.  This right is fundamental.  As far as possible parents have the duty of choosing schools that will best help them in their task as Christian educators.  Public authorities have the duty of guaranteeing this parental right and of ensuring the concrete conditions for its exercise.”  Paragraph 2229, Ibid.

3 – “Roger Pilon, constitutional scholar has said: ‘From beginning to end the [Constitution] never mentioned the word ‘education.’  Yet, the Department of Education has been around since 1979 when it came into being during the Carter Administration — even though the Constitution does not give authority to the federal government to collect taxes for funding and operating schools.”

“Why then was the Department of Education created?  President Jimmy Carter, during whose watch the new department came into being, had promised the department to the National Education Association. Contemporary editorials in both the New York Times and the Washington Post acknowledged that the creation of the department was mainly in response to pressure from the NEA.  According to Rep. Benjamin Rosenthal (D-N.Y.), Congress went along with the plan out of ‘not wanting to embarrass the president.’  Also, many members of Congress had made promises to educators in their home districts to support the new department.”

From “Cato Handbook for Congress, Policy Recommendations for the 108th Congress,” by the Cato Institute, http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/serials/files/cato-handbook-policymakers/2003/9/hb108-28.pdf as reported in “Common Core: Slingshot to Progress or Spider Web? Part 5 of 5 [What slingshot? More spiders here than at the old Munsters’ house]” by Tony Rubio, http://ohioconservativereview.com/2015/03/21/common-core-slingshot-to-progress-or-spider-web-part-5-of-5-what-slingshot-more-spiders-here-than-at-the-old-munsters-house/, 3/21/2015.

4 – “Yet, amid the mistruths that have formed to normalize ‘gender transition,’ some voices of truth are making themselves heard.”

“Dr. Paul McHugh is the head of the psychiatry department at Johns Hopkins University. Writing this summer in the Wall Street Journal, he notes how he stopped allowing sex change or “reassignment” surgeries at the university hospital after research and experience showed that the surgeries in which men sought to become women did not cure underlying psychological problems present prior to surgery, and that the desire for the surgery was instead the byproduct of other psychological and sexual disorders.”

“In the words of Dr. McHugh: ‘We have wasted scientific and technical resources and damaged our professional credibility by collaborating with madness rather than trying to study, cure, and ultimately prevent it.’”

“The problem is not a question of how to help people make their bodies match their subjective psychological state. The problem is much deeper…”

“As Pope-emeritus Benedict XVI noted in an important address to the Roman Curia in 2012, a rejection of the reality that we are created male and female is, even if unwittingly, a rejection of the Creator and his creation.”

“Therefore, cultural currents or policies that seek to institutionalize or ‘mandate’ affirmation of gender ‘reassignment’ (as opposed to anti-discrimination laws, some of which ensure that people have access to the basic necessities of life) cannot be supported because they perpetuate the confusion, brokenness, or pain that someone who identifies as transgendered is experiencing, instead of trying to get to the root of the problem and recognize his or her human dignity as created by God.  ”

From “Catholic Spirit: Transgender persons, human dignity and our response,” by Jason Adkins, http://www.mncc.org/catholic-spirit-transgender-persons-human-dignity-response/, 10/9/2014.

Exposing Democrats’ Failures Gets Trump Label of Fear-Monger

Featured

The Hillary Clinton campaign had so little substantive criticism they reverted to personality comments after Donald trump’s acceptance speech at the Republican convention on Thursday night.  Comments  included a charge of fear-mongering and being divisive.  It’s a convenient putdown, but an erroneous one when examining the facts.

 National  Security

Are we safer as a nation compared to eight years ago? Based on increased recent terrorist attacks and assassinations of police, the answer is “no.” There is nothing irresponsible of Trump saying that attacks on police are attacks on all of us.  Unless, of course, President Kennedy was also guilty of the same when he said a Soviet attack on any Western Hemisphere country would be considered an attack on the U.S.  It was not fear, but in both cases, an assertiveness against threats.

Trump does not believe that all of our national problems are caused by foreigners. Rather, he is reminding the nation that it is every country’s prerogative to protect its borders, despite what the Left tries to shame us into abdicating.2,3

In addition, Trump reminded last night, “Syria is engulfed in a civil war and the world faces a refugee crisis.”  Events in Europe over the past year verify that this problem is extended into Europe and to us if we allow it.

In a time when terrorists have promised and have shown the ability to infiltrate themselves among legitimate refugees, the concern for borders is reasonable and prudent.  It is not fear-mongering to require extra vetting mechanisms in place before we increase immigration from nations who have been compromised with increased presence of terrorism. It is basic common sense.

Crime  in  Cities

Trump noted that homicides rose 17% in the largest 50 cities last year — the biggest increase in 25 years.  The implication is that it will be difficult to deal with this problem as long as the police have to be aware of additional threats to their safety, too.  Does this qualify Trump as a fear-monger?

Is it fear-mongering to be opposed to sanctuary cities? As Trump reminded, where was the sanctuary for Kate Steinle and others murdered by the product of these unconstitutional locations?  Fear arising from the lack of law and order enforcement is natural, not divisive or a product of propaganda.

Decline  in  Education

Education has been crumbling in our nation for decades.  Although liberals use the opportunities to send their children to non-public schools2, they rail against school choice. The only fear here is not  created by Trump, but from the teachers’ union establishment fearful of having to be accountable for a change.

The  Iran  Deal

The Iranian deal gave them $150 billion plus a path to nuclear weapons which it was supposed to prevent.  Terrible deal.  The free world, including Israel SHOULD be fearful.  So is this fear-mongering?

National  Debt  and  Infrastructure

 Our national debt has worsened immensely during the Obama, and what do we have to show for it other than deteriorating infrastructure?  Is it fear-mongering to recognize that we have numerous crumbling bridges which are subject to the laws of physics to our severe peril?  The aim of his speech is that we must and we can fix these issues before it’s too late.

Renegotiating bad foreign trade deals is promoting fear? — perhaps for the nations who have used various methods, including currency manipulation, in order to circumvent agreements.  Unfair trade practices require a response.  This doesn’t necessarily mean actions that could lead to trade wars, but there must be consequences.  Democrats are usually opposed to consequences, but it’s time to end the Era of Enabling (this writer’s words, not Trump’s!)

Legal  Double  Standard

Regarding the Hillary Clinton confidential emails on her personal server which endangered our security, but for which she was not held accountable: “I know that corruption has reached a level as never, never before in our country.”  We should be concerned when the powerful received unwarranted free passes as it undermines the public’s faith in the system of justice.  A double standard inevitably leads to a loss of freedom for the less empowered — which is divisive.

In summary, how much longer will the party of Obama and Clinton keep “their rigged system in place?”

THAT is a legitimate source of fear for anyone with reason — but it’s also something we “little people” can fix in November.

 

 

1 – “According to a report by The Heritage Foundation, ‘exactly 52 percent of Congressional Black Caucus members and 38 percent of Congressional Hispanic Caucus members sent at least one child to private school.’ Overall, only 6 percent of black students attend private school.”
“According to a 2004 Thomas B. Fordham Institute study, more than 1 in 5 public school teachers sent their children to private schools. In some cities, the figure is much higher. In Philadelphia, 44 percent of the teachers put their children in private schools; in Cincinnati, it’s 41 percent, and Chicago (39 percent) and Rochester, N.Y. (38 percent), also have high figures. In the San Francisco-Oakland area, 34 percent of public school teachers enroll their children in private schools, and in New York City, it’s 33 percent.”

“Only 11 percent of all parents enroll their children in private schools. The fact that so many public school teachers enroll their own children in private schools ought to raise questions.”

 From “Racial Trade-offs,” by Walter E. Williams, http://townhall.com/columnists/walterewilliams/2013/10/09/racial-tradeoffs-n1718736, 10/9/2013.

2 – “Political authorities, for the sake of the common good for which they are responsible, may make the exercise of the right to immigrate subject to various juridical conditions, especially with regard to the immigrants’ duties toward their country of adoption.  Immigrants are obliged to respect with gratitude the material and spiritual heritage of the country that receives them, to obey its laws and to assist in carrying civic burdens.”  From paragraph 2241 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 25th printing; November, 2013.

3 – “Enforcement: The U.S. Catholic Bishops accept the legitimate role of the U.S. government in intercepting unauthorized migrants who attempt to travel to the United States. The Bishops also believe that by increasing lawful means for migrants to enter, live, and work in the United States, law enforcement will be better able to focus upon those who truly threaten public safety: drug and human traffickers, smugglers, and would‐be terrorists. Any enforcement measures must be targeted, proportional, and humane.”  From the “Catholic Church’s Position On Immigration Reform,”  http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/immigration/churchteachingonimmigrationreform.cfm; August, 2013.

 

 

Cruz Thinks He Has Vision for 2020, but He Has Become Short-SightedTed

Featured

Cruz  Being  Booed  at  RNC

(Photo from Fox Business News last night in their review of the evening’s events.)

Ted Cruz has always fancied himself as the second coming of Ronald Reagan.  After last night’s speech at the Republican convention, he should start hoping it wasn’t his Good Night in America speech instead.1

The bitter struggle which saw the Republicans narrow seventeen candidates down to one has a few who disregard the loyalty agreement of last year.  Even Ohio governor Kasich, who had thought Donald Trump’s loyalty was the one suspect from the beginning, disappointed his constituents by not appearing to greet his party on Day One.

While some voiced their dissatisfaction by not attending the convention, the senator from Texas did the best job of alienating party faithful by being present last night.

Many, except the most perceptive, didn’t see the bus wreck coming.  Cruz began his speech with a touching story of one of the children who lost her father in the Dallas police murders.  He skillfully wove a narrative tying our need and respect for law enforcement with the Constitutional rights which we cherish so much.

He contrasted these to the track record of Hillary Clinton and reiterated the differences between the Democratic Party and those values dear to the Revolutionary founders and to current Republicans.

But as his time at the podium began winding down, it became obvious that no attempt at extending a unifying olive branch was going to be given to Donald Trump that evening. The tide began turning with his request: “to those listening, please don’t stay home in November.”  It accelerated as Cruz exhorted the crowd “to vote your conscience, vote for candidates up and down the ticket, who YOU trust to defend our freedom to be faithful to the Constitution.”

By then, chants of “We want Trump” became obvious and Cruz aggravated his situation by saying, “I appreciate the enthusiasm of the New York delegation.”  He tried to play the crowd with a continuation of his family’s story of immigration to the U.S. and restating the image of the murdered policeman’s daughter.  Those with cowboy hats tried to offset the growing unhappiness in the rest of the audience with their approval.  The catcalls indicated Cruz had lost his credibility despite statesman-like: “We must make the most of our moment, to fight for freedom, to protect our God-given rights even of those with whom we don’t agree.”  “We want Trump” and other comments of disapproval were not going away.  Cruz’s “L” was cemented in the loss column as the boos strengthened.

Trump was shown watching and skillfully began to emerge from the side curtain with smiles, clapping with his followers and a reassuring thumb up as if to say “All is well, I’m still the candidate and definitely in charge.”  He Tweeted later that he had seen the Cruz speech two hours earlier, but he “let him speak anyway. No big deal!”

In the final analysis, Ted Cruz attempted to solidify his independent crusader-at-all-costs image.  For the time being, it cost him his image.

“trusTED” had tossed himself under the busTED.

 

1 – “’Prouder, Stronger, Better’, commonly referred to by the name ‘Morning in America’, is a 1984 political campaign television commercial, known for its opening line, “It’s morning again in America.” The ad was part of the U.S. presidential campaign of Republican Party candidate Ronald Reagan. It featured a montage of images of Americans going to work, and a calm, optimistic narration that suggested the improvements to the U.S. economy since his 1980 election were due to Reagan’s policies. It asked voters why they would want to return to the pre-Reagan policies of Democrats like his opponent Walter Mondale, who had served as the Vice President under Reagan’s immediate predecessor Jimmy Carter.”  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morning_in_America

 

News Flash, Pro-Choice: We Don’t Own Our Bodies, Including the Unborn

Featured

The longstanding argument rationalizing the killing of the unborn is the presumption that it solely involves the woman’s body and she can do with it whatever she wants.

Two errors here.  First of all, the chromosomes of the baby prove that a second, unique individual is also present.  Therefore, it’s not just about the woman’s body.

Secondly, we are only stewards of our bodies, not the ultimate masters of them.

“Everyone is responsible for his life before God who has given it to him.  It is God who remains the sovereign Master of life.  We are obliged to accept life gratefully and preserve it for his honor and the salvation of our souls.  We are stewards, not owners, of the life God has entrusted to us.  It is not ours to dispose of.”1

“The Torah states that the human body was created Bi’tzelem Elokim, in the image of God, and is the property of the Creator.  Man is given custodial rights to his body, and has no more right to harm or destroy his body than the superintendent has to ransack the building he is hired to maintain…”
“By extension a physician may not hasten the death of a patient, not only because of his duty to preserve life, but because he has no right to destroy the property of another, in this case God… Because one’s body is not his property…”2

Consequently, suggesting that we own ourselves is a position which cannot be held by those who hold to Judeo-Christian traditions.

 

1 – Paragraph 2280 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 25th printing; November, 2013.

2 – “Sanctity of the Human Body,” by Daniel Eisenberg, MD.  http://www.aish.com/ci/sam/48960576.html

 

 

PBS Documentary on the Unborn: Sneaking in a Requalification of “Human Individuality”

Featured

A recent PBS program about the development of the unborn baby claimed that at eight weeks “we’re not an individual yet.”

It said that the very “first signs of individuality” (which it described as sex identity) are known after eight weeks.

WRONG.  The uniqueness of a person’s individuality, including gender, is established at the moment of conception, NOT eight weeks later.  Science knows this.  And the Catholic Church knows this, Ms. Pelosi.1

It is the height of arrogance to push a lie in an attempt to dehumanize the baby at early development — with the accompanying implication that there’s no need to place any importance about this supposedly unidentifiable life.  A human exists from the moment of conception.  Any attempt to arbitrarily disqualify life as being less than human after that moment follows in the steps of great perpetrators of evil like Hitler, the Ku Klux Klan and Planned Parenthood.

 

1https://cartaremi.wordpress.com/2014/08/07/pelosi-blatantly-lied-regarding-churchs-teaching-on-abortion-so-why-not-misrepresent-hamas-too/

 

 

Satan Thrilled With Jihadists and Police Killers

Featured

The first degree murders in Boston, Paris, San Bernadino, Brussels, Istanbul airport, Orlando, Dallas, Nice and Baton Rouge are a sign of his handiwork.  The Father of Lies has been angry at the God, the Author of Life since before the universe and he continues to use those with poorly formed consciences as his pawns.1,2

Sadly, we see more and more falling prey to his message of hate and revenge.  Those who so wantonly despise and execute anyone who believes differently are not on a holy mission.  The perpetrators of the police deaths forget that revenge belongs to God.3

Jihadists and police murderers should recall that their virulently negative emotions are not from God, but from the one who allowed pride to throw away his spot in eternal happiness. But, perhaps I’m assuming too much on their behalf.

So, I ask them, on whose side do they want to be for now and, more importantly, for eternity?

 

1 – ”Satan or the devil and the other demons are fallen angels who have freely refused to serve God and his plan.  Their choice against God is definitive.  They try to associate man in their revolt against God.”  Paragraph 414 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 25th printing; November, 2013.

2 – “The education of the conscience is a lifelong task.  From the earliest years, it awakens the child to the knowledge and practice of the interior law recognized by conscience.  Prudent education teaches virtue; it prevents or cures fear, selfishness and pride, resentment arising from guilt, and feelings of complacency, born of human weakness and faults.  The education of the conscience guarantees freedom and engenders peace of heart.”  Paragraph 1784, Ibid.

3 – “Beloved, do not look for revenge, but leave room for the wrath; for it is written, ‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay,’ says the Lord.”  (Romans 13:19) from The New Catholic Answer Bible, Fireside Catholic Publishing; Wichita, KS, 2005.

USA Today Section Headline About Trump is “Incompetent, Irrelevant and Immaterial”1

Featured

This objection was used by both prosecutor Hamilton Burger and attorney for the defense, Perry Mason, in the old television series and is applicable to a recent USA Today section headline, “Trump: Litigator in Chief.”  The subheading  goes on to say that “Exclusive USA Today analysis finds 3,500 lawsuits, unprecedented for a presidential nominee.”2

This blogger is not objecting to the possibility that Trump’s firms may have been involved with that number of legal actions and that it could very well be a “first” for a presidential nominee.  Giving credit where credit is due, the article does raise an interesting thought that this data could indicate what style of leader he might be because his negotiating skills appear hard-nosed.  So what?  It would actually be a relief to have a leader who was at peace defending America’s values and interests — something which has been sadly lacking in the White House since January 20, 2009.

Back to candidate Trump.  It is use of the word “unprecedented” that raises the objection.  The implied criticism could be valid if the United States has had previous Presidents who were heavily involved in the world of big business.  But to date, we have had —  zero.  Top occupations for previous Presidents are as follows3 (as most commanders-in-chief had several occupations before being elected, even just the top three jobs have a sum in excess of the 44 Presidents we have had):

#1)  Lawyer 25
#2)  Congressmen 17
#3)  Governor 16
#4)  Senator 15
#5)  Vice President 13
#6)  Soldier 12
#7)  Schoolteacher 4
#7)  Secretary of State 4
#9)  Diplomat 3
#9)  Professor 3

Trump total of lawsuits doesn’t make him a risky choice just because his number of lawsuits seems high to those of us who have not spent four decades in big business.  His total simply cannot be compared to any other President in our history.  Using the USA Today’s implication, Reagan would have been dismissed as a viable candidate because he probably had the most poor movie reviews.  Of course, he was the only President who was an actor in his list of occupations.

This is certain.  If Hillary Clinton is elected, she will bring an unprecedented list of unsavory deeds that will bring relief to supporters of the memories of Presidents Grant, Harding and Nixon by redirecting the spotlight of notoriety to her.

 

 

1 – “(often stated together, which may mean the question is not about the issues in the trial or the witness is not qualified to answer)” —  http://dictionary.law.com/default.aspx?selected=1364

2 – From the USA Today 6/2/2016 issue, Section B.

3http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0768854.html

Hillary Ad: “Our children are watching. What example will we set for them?”

Featured

 

Yes, Donald Trump could use some polishing in his speech and a few policies.  But while it’s easier to ridicule his superficial faults, we disregard Hillary Clinton’s foundational faults at our peril.

If we disregard her abominable record of:

  • the (preventable) lives lost at Benghazi
  • the transfer of 20% of our nation’s uranium to Russia1
  • loss of trust from our allies when she was Secretary of State,
  • the thousands of at-risk national security emails which will endanger us for an unknown amount of time
  • seeking the support of those who believe freedom of religion and speech can be limited by arbitrarily assigning “hate speech”2,

Then, the question to “With whom would our children better off with as a role model?” can be limited to their parenting abilities.  That is the only case it would be difficult to decide.

But this is certain, the only children who have a chance with Hillary Clinton are those already born. Unborn babies are at severe risk with a woman who thinks a human life can be taken by “choice” and who is amused by Madeleine Albright’s often used “There’s a special place in hell for women who don’t help each other!”3 for women who stray from the Left’s agenda regarding women including support for Hillary Clinton.

Those millions not allowed to live can never see what example she may be setting for them.  But then, she’s not concerned about them, they can never vote against her.

 

1—” –Bill and Hillary Clinton had helped a Canadian financier named Frank Giustra and a small Canadian company obtain a lucrative uranium mining concession from the dictator in Kazakhstan;

–The same Canadian company, renamed Uranium One, bought uranium concessions in the United States;
–The Russian government came calling and sought to buy that Canadian company for a price that would mean big profits for the Canadian investors;
–For the Russians to buy that Canadian company, it would require the approval of the Obama administration, including Hillary’s State Department, because uranium is a strategically important commodity;
–Nine shareholders in Uranium One just happened to provide more than $145 million in donations to the Clinton Foundation in the run-up to State Department approval;
–Some of the donations, including those from the Chairman of Uranium One, Ian Teler, were kept secret, even though the Clintons promised to disclose all donations;
–Hillary’s State Department approved the deal;
–The Russian government now owns 20 percent of U.S. uranium assets.

2 – “Conservative outlet Townhall notes that several European countries have prosecuted their citizens for merely speaking out publicly against radical Islam and Sharia law, including a pastor in Northern Ireland who gave a sermon critical of the religion.”

“’This resolution is an overt attempt to force Sharia Law compliance worldwide – banning criticism of Islam everywhere – and Hillary Clinton supports it wholeheartedly,’ claims Bare Naked Islam. ‘Despite the countries of the OIC ignoring and perpetuating many human rights abuses and even refusing to sign the UN’s Declaration of Human Rights, these nations worked with Hillary Clinton to meet their objective of criminalizing so-called ‘Islamophobia.’” From “Hillary Will Impose ‘Blasphemy’ Laws to Protect Islam: Conservatives,” http://www.therightperspective.org/2016/05/14/president-hillary-will-impose-blasphemy-laws-to-protect-islam-conservatives/, 5/14/2016.

3 – “Albright: ‘special place in hell’ for women who don’t support Clinton,” https://www.the guardian.com/us-news/2016/feb/06/madeleine-albright-campaigns-for-hillary-clinton, 2/6/2016.

 

Railroading Trump Makes it Hillary-ous For Democrats and Dismal for The Future of the U.S.

Featured

Just for a moment, let’s disregard Hillary Clinton’s unethical and illegal present and past.   Is Trump the best the Republicans have to offer?  The simple answer is “no.”  Is protesting his  nomination by not voting or voting for third party candidate helpful to our country’s future?  A more emphatic, “NO.”

A Trump Administration will not likely be the “Morning in America” which Reagan brought and our nation needs again.  Trump is a little unpolished when it comes to foreign policy and has a public relations problem with some groups and his economic plans could go sour.  That is why a President has a Cabinet to advise him.

It’s crucial that potential Trump voters not be intimidated by the demonstrations of the Left. They are protesting the “splinters” in his eye while  ignoring the planks in Hillary Clinton’s.  To make it worse, some of these disturbances are being financed by notoriously anti-U.S. billionaire George Soros according to Monica Crowley of the Washington Times on July 11 in a Fox interview.

Who  is  Really  Promoting  Division?

Their claim is that Trump is promoting hate.  Yet, it’s the current Administration which has fanned the flames of racial division during its seven years with comments slanted toward those instigating trouble but against those trying to keep the peace.  Trends from Gallup, which do not include possible changes from recent events in Louisiana, Minnesota and Dallas:1

Increase in racial tensions

Police forces are staffed by imperfect people — just like the ones they are protecting.  The Democrats’ discussions that racism is our biggest sin overlooks the top killer of the President’s race: abortion.2

Terrorism  Through  Immigration

Trump’s initial plan to ban all Muslims was certainly not diplomatic and he has learned the need to modify it.  As flawed as his initial position was, it is not as dangerous as the Democratic plans to allow thousands of refugees from the Arab world without an ability to screen them adequately.  ISIS has vowed, and has been successful in infiltrating jihadists into Europe.  We’re next… Probably already happening.

Tenuous  Freedom  of  Religion

How about inalienable rights?  Trump will defend freedom of religion, speech and the right to bear arms.  Obama, Clinton and followers believe that those with religious convictions are out of touch with “progressive” times and should be forced to participate in abortions and comply with the legitimization of disordered behavior with same-sex “marriage.”

And their “religious accommodations” in Obamacare aren’t as advertised.  Signing over the authority to a third party to implement abortion and abortion-causing drugs for one’s employees is the same as signing over one’s car to be used in a crime.  Just because you didn’t drive the car doesn’t mean you weren’t participating.

True religious freedom means being able to not provide any of the items used for a same-sex “marriage.”  Forcing believers to concede is outrageous.  Marriage does not originate from the state and, therefore, cannot be defined by the state.  Marriage is also not a right because it is a vocation – a calling requiring discernment.  Conditions must be met for it to be valid.  The state’s only legitimate involvement is from its original interest regarding separation of property in the case of a divorce and care for minor children..

The tide is already turning to classify Catholic and some other Christian beliefs as “hate speech.”  The Left’s sense of “tolerance” includes silencing dissenters– even if they are espousing timeless truths that have survived Sodom, Gomorrah, Rome, the Dark Ages and modern totalitarians.

Second  Amendment  

Self-defense is a basic human right.

“Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality.  Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one’s own right to life.  Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow…”3

Giving our right to do so, then relying on a very fallible government to protect us at all times is foolish.  These governments prove their fallibility with policies such as gun-free zones (which make law abiding citizens mere sitting ducks) and sanctuary cities which put law-abiding citizens at the risk of criminals.

Gun availability was easier in the past.  Then why were mass killings far less frequent?

“Catalogs and magazines from the 1940s, ’50s and ’60s were full of gun advertisements directed to children and parents… The 1902 Sears mail-order catalog had 35 pages of firearm advertisements. People just sent in their money, and a firearm was shipped. For most of our history, a person could simply walk into a hardware store, virtually anywhere in our country, and buy a gun…”

“Why — at a time in our history when guns were readily available, when a person could just walk into a store or order a gun through the mail, when there were no FBI background checks, no waiting periods, no licensing requirements — was there not the frequency and kind of gun violence that we sometimes see today, when access to guns is more restricted?…”

Customs, traditions, moral values and rules of etiquette, not just laws and government regulations, are what make for a civilized society, not restraints on inanimate objects [emphasis added]… Moral standards of conduct, as well as strict and swift punishment for criminal behaviors, have been under siege in our country for more than a half-century… At best, the police and criminal justice system are the last desperate line of defense for a civilized society. The more uncivilized we become the more laws are needed to regulate behavior.”4

Federal  Government  and  the  Economy

Financial responsibility?  Trump at least knows enough to say and work for reducing a dangerous federal debt. His success is yet to be determined.  However, Hillary and Bernie are enamored with giveaways, but with no rational plan to pay for them.  Either the federal debt would become unsustainable under them or their redistribution of wealth would recreate an eastern European form of socialism — one of man’s greatest failures.

Speaking of fiscal disasters, there is the proposed $15 per hour federal minimum wage. This has thousands of followers despite the critical fact that national pay standards are reasonable only if the cost of living is similar across all fifty states (not 57, Mr. President).

But it isn’t.  Mandating $15 in Mississippi, which has the lowest cost of living, would be like requiring $24.25 in New York and California.  Florida has the median cost of living. Only $11.10 is required there to accomplish what $15 does in those other two states.5

Job losses through trade deals?  It’s ironic that the parties have turned 180 degrees.  NAFTA was a Republican darling when it became effective in 1994.  Now that it has been shown to aggravate trade imbalances and loss of jobs, the Republicans want to revisit it.  For some unknown reason, Democrats want to keep it, possibly because they’re afraid of upsetting China — despite the fact that it has shown not to need a reason to trade unfairly.

Future  Composition  of  the  Supreme  Court

Finally, we have a number of Supreme Court positions which will be vacated soon in addition to Justice Scalia’s death.  Add another Obama/Clinton type term and the Court will be the playground of those who believe the Constitution is a malleable list of suggestions, like their view of the Ten Commandments and Natural Law.

The  Challenge  is  Clear

Trump is not the prototypical conservative even for those of us independents who don’t care about the party establishment’s thoughts.  There’s a time to be unwavering about some political ideals.  This is not one of them because there won’t be an opportunity to undo the damage with the 2020 elections, especially if the Democrats reclaim the Senate as well as keep the White House.

Trump may or may not perfectly promote all of the values which our Founding Fathers fought and died for 240 years ago.  But whatever is done to trip him up will do nothing except guarantee a third term of Obama’s path to our downfall.

Our federal deficit, the condition of the Supreme Court and the most crucial of constitutional rights cannot withstand a continuation of the last 7-1/2 years.  The choice is ours.  The consequences will impact the next generation or two in a way unseen previously.

Human history is littered with the fossils of societies who believed they were invincible to the consequences of unwise behavior.  Likewise, we are not immune to a big fall.

 

1 – “Concern Over Race Relations Has More Than Doubled In The Past 2 Years,” by Janie Velencia, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/race-relations-worry-rise_us_570bd5a7e4b0836057a1c547, 4/11/2016.

 

2 – “In announcing the new web page, Right to Life of Michigan said, ‘More than crime. More than accidents. More than cancer, heart disease and AIDS. Abortion has taken more black American lives than any other cause of death since 1973.’”

“’Did you know that? Abortion is the leading cause of death in the United States, but for black Americans abortion causes more deaths every year than every other cause of death combined. Now is the time for this fact to be addressed in the media and in the classroom,’ it added.”  From “Abortion Has Killed More Black Americans Than Crime, Accident, Cancer or AIDS,” by Sarah Zagorski, http://www.lifenews.com/2015/06/25/abortion-has-killed-more-black-americans-than-crime-accidents-cancer-or-aids/, 6/25/2015.

3 – From Paragraph 2264 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 25th printing, November, 2013.

4 – “Are Guns the Problem?” by Walter E. Williams, http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/walter-e-williams/are-guns-problem, 10/1/2013.

5https://cartaremi.wordpress.com/2016/04/25/why-a-national-15-hour-minimum-wage-makes-no-sense/

“Martyr” is Being Misused

Featured

The Merriam-Webster on-line dictionary gives its first definition of the word “martyr” as the one pertaining to faith:  “a person who is killed or who suffers greatly for a religion, cause, etc.”

Another description:  “Sacred Scripture attests to the courage of men and women who were willing to die as martyrs rather than renounce their faith or be unfaithful to God’s law.”1

It’s pretty straight forward.  A martyr is a person who is killed by someone else for refusing to say or do anything contrary to his beliefs.

Yet we see other views.  Some declare that a person is a martyr when he commits suicide in the process of killing others in the name of his religion.  Impossible.  Suicide is an objectively evil deed.  True, the state of that person’s soul is known only by God.2  However, no such act can be glorified by assigning the respected title of martyr to the perpetrator because “suicide is seriously contrary to justice, hope and charity.  It is forbidden by the fifth commandment.”3  In addition:

“Everyone is responsible for his life before God who has given it to him.  It is God who remains the sovereign Master of life.  We are obliged to accept life gratefully and preserve it for his honor and the salvation of our souls.  We are stewards, not owners, of the life God has entrusted to us.  It is not ours to dispose of. [emphasis added]  Suicide contradicts the natural inclination of the human being to preserve and perpetuate his life.  It is gravely contrary to the just love of self.  It likewise offends love of neighbor because it unjustly breaks the ties of solidarity with family, nation, and other human societies to which we continue to have obligations.  Suicide is contrary to love for the living God.”4

So, the next time someone claims martyrdom for a suicide bomber or for anyone who is killed while murdering others in the name of a religion or other cause (including the mass murderer in Dallas last week5), don’t accept that distorted use of the word.

 

1 – “What is the Church’s Teaching on Martyrdom?” http://catholicstraightanswers.com/what-is-the-churchs-teaching-on-martyrdom/

2 – Summary of Paragraph 2283 from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 25th printing, November, 2013.

3 – Paragraph 2325, Ibid.

4 – Paragraphs 2280-2281, Ibid.

5 – “The first black woman crowned Miss Alabama is standing by a controversial video in which she called the Dallas gunman a ‘martyr — but admits it was a poor choice of words.”  From “Former Miss Alabama Admits She Shouldn’t Have Called Dallas Gunman ‘a Martyr’… But Won’t Pull Video,” http://www.insideedition.com/headlines/17473-former-miss-alabama-admits-she-shouldnt-have-called-dallas-gunman-a-martyr-but-wont-pull, 7/12/2016.

Hillary’s Emails ARE Potentially More Dangerous than Gun Violence

Featured

Most Americans of mature thought are tired of the Left’s treatment of Hillary’s at-risk classified emails  as if it were merely a harmless use of communication.  Today, Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) made the dismissive statement in a Congressional hearing that it appears her emails are taking precedence over gun violence.  His comment emphasizes his party’s desire to deflect attention from the huge danger her irresponsible actions, in violation of State Department regulations, have put us at risk.  What she did endangers ALL Americans for the foreseeable future and in many ways we cannot easily prevent.

Gun violence is far more preventable.  However, unlike Clinton’s negligence (which requires consequences, Mr. Comey), it can be better curbed by returning to the values which made the U.S. special, and not by even more laws which handcuff honest citizens.  As evidenced in a Walter Williams column:

“Youth involvement with guns has a long history. The 1911 second edition of the Boy Scout Handbook made qualification in NRA’s junior marksmanship program a prerequisite for obtaining a BSA merit badge in marksmanship. In 1918, the Winchester Repeating Arms Co. established its own Winchester Junior Rifle Corps. The program grew to 135,000 members by 1925. In New York City, high school gun clubs were started at Boys, Curtis, Commercial, Manual Training and Stuyvesant high schools. I would like to ask America’s anti-gun fanatics what accounts for today’s mayhem: Have guns become more evil or have people become more evil?1

… Wonder why Rep. Conyers is overlooking abortion violence which takes hundreds of thousands of innocent lives each year across our nation?

 

1—“Isn’t it Strange?,” by Walter E. Williams, https://www.creators.com/read/walter-williams/02/16/isnt-it-strange, 2/16/2016.

 

 

Not BusyNess, But Faith-filled Loving and Hope

Featured

When we ask each other how our lives are, what are the most common responses?  Many rely on the well-used “everything has been hectic.”  Recently, “it’s been crazy” has gained popularity.  Could the Freudian connection to “insanity” be any more telling?

Sometimes events can be truly out of control and beyond much influence from us.  But for this condition to be so widespread, it indicates a shift in our priorities instead of just our lots in life.  Jesus doesn’t ask us to be hectic or crazy, but to love others as he loves us.1,2

If we remember that God sometimes speaks in a whisper,3 perhaps we will make the effort to separate ourselves from the noise of the world which distracts us from Him.  C.S. Lewis wrote about a senior devil who was mentoring his nephew in the book, “The Screwtape Letters”who said:

“We will make the whole universe a noise…We have already made great strides in this direction as regards the Earth. The melodies and silences of Heaven will be shouted down in the end.”4

That noise can be literal noise such as constantly being plugged into music, endless activities and social media.  Or it can come from allowing the multitude of anxiety-causing dramatics of “news” programs to frighten us.

Fear is not from God, but from the Father of Lies. We should remind ourselves and encourage each other to focus on strengthening our faith in Him, the one who is truly in control of everything.  In that way, we are less likely to hide behind unnecessarily busy schedules which prevent us from having life-giving peace in our lives.

 

 

 1 – “I give you a new commandment: love one another.  As I have loved you, so you also should love one another.  This is how all will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”  (John 13: 34-35)  ) from “The New Catholic Answer Bible,” Fireside Catholic Publishing; Wichita, KS, 2005.

2 – “Without love, everything is painful, everything is tiring, everything is burdensome.”  From “I believe in Love: A personal Retreat Based on the Teaching of St. Therese of Lisieux,” by Jean C. J. d’Elbee, M.Teichert, M.Stebbins, http://amzn.to/29PvmaR

3 – “After the earthquake there was fire, — but the Lord was not in the fire.  After the fire there was a tiny whispering sound.  When he heard this, Elijah hid his face in his cloak and went and stood at the entrance of the cave.  A voice said to him, ‘Elijah, why are you here?’  (1 Kings 19: 12-13)  from “The New Catholic Answer Bible,” Fireside Catholic Publishing; Wichita, KS, 2005.

4 – From “Baird: Why We Need Silence (Not Cell phones),” by Julia Baird, http://www.newsweek.com/baird-why-we-need-silence-not-cell-phones-81149, 10/21/2009.

Clinton Math: Extreme Carelessness Does Not Equal Gross Negligence

Featured

Hillary Clinton’s mismanagement of highly sensitive information as Secretary of State has resulted in ten other people being prosecuted for similar actions in the past — but not her — according to former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani in a Fox interview last week.

Last year, General David Petraeus was found guilty of “the unauthorized removal and retention of classified material, in the form of notebooks he shared with his lover and was given a sentence of two years probation and a $100,000 fine.1  Even though the attorney for Eric Snowden called Petraeus’ punishment “a slap on the wrist,”1 she must be really astonished at FBI Director James Comey who described a longer list of more dangerous errors on Hillary’s part.  It included his admission on July 7 that her server was less secure than gmail.  Yet, he did not move to prosecute, saying she was only guilty of “extreme carelessness.” According to Giuliani, that equates to gross negligence which, by law, requires consequences.

Going back 42 years, President Nixon was compelled (and rightfully so) to resign after his Watergate cover-up.  As a protector of the Constitution, he attempted to be above the law when he interfered with the investigation of a break-in which he likely did not initiate.2

His mistake was serious.  Not only was it illegal, but it irreparably damaged the nation’s confidence in his ability to lead.

Ms. Clinton, on the other hand, actually engineered the violation of statutes regarding classified State Department information and lied under oath.3  When her husband talked for thirty minutes with Attorney General Loretta Young in her personal plane a few days prior to Comey’s decision, it added to appearances of favoritism.4  Even without this Ill-advised meeting, it should seriously undermine her ability to lead PLUS it has put our nation at risk internationally to the point that she is “blackmailable” by foreign governments5  — a much more far-reaching impact than Nixon’s error.

How she can still be considered a legitimate candidate for our nation’s highest office after she put herself above our nation’s security defies logic.

We have come across something more flawed than the new math of the 1960’s and the current Common Core.  It’s called Clinton math where one’s position in office magically changes the final outcome regardless of the facts.

The distortion of logic gives us this:

Extreme Carelessness + Lying Under Oath + Bill Clinton + Loretta Young = free, I mean, three.

 

 

1 –“At issue are ‘black books’ — eight notebooks in which Petraeus kept highly classified information that the government says included ‘the identities of covert officers, war strategy, intelligence capabilities and mechanisms, diplomatic discussions, quotes and deliberative discussions from high-level National Security Council meetings, and defendant David Howell Petraeus’s discussions with the President of the United States of America.’”

“That description comes from court documents that were filed along with the plea deal. The documents also included an email in which Petraeus promises to give the black books to Paula Broadwell, his biographer with whom he was having an affair.”

“The government also said that Petraeus gave false statements to FBI agents about giving Broadwell the notebooks, and that he also falsely swore when he left the CIA in 2012 that he did not have any classified material in his possession or control.”

“The black books were found in 2013, after the FBI conducted a search of Petraeus’ house. They had been sitting in an unlocked desk drawer, according to court documents.” From “Petraeus Sentenced To 2 Years’ Probation, Fine For Sharing Classified Info,” by Bill Chappell, http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/04/23/401672264/gen-david-petraeus-will-be-sentenced-thursday-over-secret-notebooks, 4/23/2015.

2 – “Early in the morning of June 17, 1972, several burglars were arrested inside the office of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), located in the Watergate building in Washington, D.C. This was no ordinary robbery: The prowlers were connected to President Richard Nixon’s reelection campaign, and they had been caught while attempting to wiretap phones and steal secret documents. While historians are not sure whether Nixon knew about the Watergate espionage operation before it happened, he took steps to cover it up afterwards, raising “hush money” for the burglars, trying to stop the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) from investigating the crime, destroying evidence and firing uncooperative staff members. In August 1974, after his role in the Watergate conspiracy had finally come to light, the president resigned.” From “Watergate Scandal,” http://www.history.com/topics/watergate

3 – “Oops, When Clearing Clinton, FBI Accidentally Proved She Committed Perjury,” by Claire Bernish, http://theantimedia.org/hillary-clinton-perjury/, 7/6/2016.

4 – “Bipartisan Disapproval Follows Bill Clinton’s Meeting With Loretta Lynch,” by Carrie Johnson, http://www.npr.org/2016/06/30/484192533/bipartisan-disapproval-follows-bill-clintons-meeting-with-loretta-lynch, 6/30/2016.

5“(Breitbart News National Security editor Dr. Sebastian) GORKA: Right, which means that she is blackmailable. We know more than 100 emails contained classified information, some of, them TS/SCI, the highest level…

HANNITY: SAP.

GORKA: SAP, special access program — which means that she could be blackmailed by anybody, Russia, China, North Korea, Iran. She was sending classified emails from outside U.S. territory on multiple servers using multiple devices. That means she could be — the second she gets into office, they give her the football with the nuclear codes. North Korea, Iran starts blackmailing her. She should recuse herself from any public office, Sean, instantly!

HANNITY: Colonel Peters, do you agree with that assessment?

COL. RALPH PETERS, U.S. ARMY (RET.), FOX MILITARY ANALYST: Well, yes, I certainly do. And when this all broke — you know, my — I just remembered my interactions with the old KGB in Moscow and here in Washington at meetings. And you know, the Russians must have been stunned. They probably thought it was all an elaborate CIA hoax at first, that no American secretary of state would do this, would be this stupid.” From “Gorka: Hillary Proven Vulnerable to Blackmail by Foreign Governments,” http://www.teaparty.org/gorka-hillary-proven-vulnerable-blackmail-foreign-governments-174700/, 7/6/2016.

Hillary’s Or The Donald’s Economy: Heads We Lose, Tails We Could Lose

Featured

Hillary’s ideas for her economy have varying levels of appeal.  They include free college, major expenditures on infrastructure, improved health and elder care, “help parents balance work and family” and an absurd $15 national minimum wage (leading to greater loss of jobs in many states with much lower costs of living).  Unfortunately, they would require us accept a race to see which means of funding destroys us first:

  1. Taxing all of us to death which kills the economy because government is never as financially efficient as the marketplace.
  2. Redistributing wealth by taxing the wealthy much more which drags us into widespread socialist poverty a la the old Eastern Bloc (which the liberal Baby Boomers conveniently forget and Millenials weren’t taught).
  3. Destroying us with unsustainable debt, either by putting us at the mercy of foreign creditors if their holdings on us are sufficient or devaluing our currency to nothingness and start a domino defaulting express of government securities.

We are certain lose catastrophically either way.

 

The Donald starts with budget cuts. Good luck, because:

“Mandatory spending is currently estimated to be $2.606 trillion for FY 2017. That’s nearly two-thirds of all federal spending and is a new record. It’s also three times more than the military budget…Federal law dictates that all mandatory programs must be funded. For this reasons, they are outside of the annual budget process that governs discretionary spending. (Source: Congressional Budget Office, Mandatory Spending Control Mechanisms)…”

“It literally takes an act of Congress to change a mandated program. For example, Congress amended the Social Security Act to add Medicare. However, Congress has a difficult time reducing the benefits entitled under any mandated program. Most consider it political suicide because such cuts guarantee voter opposition by the group receiving fewer benefits. That’s one reason mandatory spending continues to grow.”1

His other plans hinge on significantly restoring the US economy in order to pay for rebuilding the military, saving Social Security, effects of new trade deals, securing our border and winning the war on terrorism.  Regardless of how healthy our own economy is, it will always be somewhat dependent on the world economy as a whole.  It’s difficult for any nation to have a robust economy if most of the world is destitute.

We could very well lose with Trump, but it’s a sure thing with Clinton.

The lesson is this:

If basic economics were taught in high school and college, candidates wouldn’t even try to present these simplistic and risky ideas.

 

1 – “Mandatory Spending:  Definition, Programs, Impact,” by Kimberly Amadeo, http://useconomy.about.com/od/glossary/g/mandatory_spend.htm, 7/5/2016.

 

The Zika Threat, Planned Parenthood, Hitler and Democrats’ Tolerance

Featured

Dr. Denise Jamieson, chief of the Center for Disease Control’s Women’s Health and Fertility Branch, acknowledged that the Zika virus will lead to difficult decisions for some expectant parents.   What sort of decisions are these?  Could it possibly involve “terminating a pregnancy”?

A little background first.  The article in question explained what geographic areas are at the greatest risk and the birth defects resulting from this virus. It then quoted Dr. Jamieson who said, “Abortion is a legal medical procedure in the U.S., and in the context of Zika, couples need to make complex, highly personal decisions about their pregnancies.”1  So, the expedient way to deal with this disease is to kill the affected human?  Despite its prevalence in today’s society, it is still unsettling to realize that some, perhaps many, parents do not want children with birth defects.

Sanger  and  Birth  Control

Unfortunately, eradicating unwanted human qualities was Margaret Sanger’s philosophy.  She founded the American Birth Control League in 1921 which eventually became Planned Parenthood. Her goal was to improve the world with birth control because it “is nothing more or less than the facilitation of the process of weeding out the unfit, of preventing the birth of defectives or of those who will become defectives.”   She also proposed that governments should “apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is already tainted, or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring.”

 Planned  Parenthood  Morphs  to  Killing,  Hitler 2.0

Surprisingly, as late as 1963, Planned Parenthood was opposed to abortion: “An abortion kills the life of the baby after it has begun.”  But in December, 1971, George Langmyhr wrote: “We support the view that when an unwanted pregnancy has occurred, abortion services should be available, with the decision essentially being made by the patient and her doctor … . In summary, Planned Parenthood hopes that abortion will become even more available and supports the efforts of others in seeking reform and repeal of outdated laws.”5  It is likely that many parents, fearing possible birth defects from the Zika virus in their babies, will turn to PP to provide a Hitlerian “final solution” for the burden they wish to discard.6

This is the same organization which several ranking Democrats, including President Obama and Hillary Clinton, have expressed a strong loyalty for continuing its annual federal funding of just over $500 million.

But don’t they belong to a political party which professes inclusiveness and tolerance for all humans?

Democrats’  “Tolerance”  Must  be  Granted

Obviously, there are qualifications before someone is eligible to receive “tolerance” from the Obama/ Clinton Party of Death.  The most critical one is that a human not have a defect which would make him/her disposable at the hands of organizations like Planned Parenthood.  The irony is that imperfect humans have seized the power of life and death over the most defenseless and most innocent of humans — the unborn.

Thus, we have the legal killing of those deemed undesirable.  How is it that the United States of 2016 is like Germany of the 1930’s?

 

1 – “What You Need to Know About ZIKA + How to Beat the Virus – and the Mosquitoes that Carry It,” by Alexandra Sifferlin, Time magazine, May 16, 2016 issue.

2 – “Takedown,” by Paul Kengor, PhD, WND Books, Washington D.C., 2015, page 55.

3 – “Margaret Sanger Quotes, History, and Biography,” http://liveaction.org/research/margaret-sanger-quotes-history-and-biography

4 – “A Plan for Peace,” a summary of address before the New History Society, 1/17/1932 New York City as published in Birth Control Review, April 1932.

5 – “40 Years: Planned Parenthood Becomes Abortion Empire,” by Randall K. O’Bannon, PhD, National Right to Life News, Winter 2013, http://www.nrlc.org/archive/news/2013/201301/AbortionEmpirePage8.html#.V3_PXvkrKN0

6 – “The Nazis frequently used euphemistic language to disguise the true nature of their crimes. They used the term “Final Solution” to refer to their plan to annihilate the Jewish people.” From “‘Final Solution’: Overview,” https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005151

Hillary Clinton Says She is NOT Part of the Political Establishment?

Featured

During a primary debate, Hillary Clinton ridiculed the charge that she was part of the political Establishment because no woman has ever been a Presidential candidate for a major political party.  Consequently, are we to believe veteran women lawmakers such as Pelosi, Boxer, Mikulski and Feinstein are not part of the ruling class in Washington because no woman has run for President in a general election?

So, if Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic nomination, these women will suddenly be “reclassified” to Establishment status?

Back to Ms. Clinton.  She was the First Lady of Arkansas for nearly twelve years and First Lady of the U.S. from 1993-2001 where she was the chair of the Task Force on National Health Care Reform. Then, she was senator from New York from 2001-09.

Twenty-eight years involved with state and federal government – and she’s not to be associated with the problem Establishment?

Her supporters probably also believe that if they want to keep their doctor and health plan, they can.  Wait, that’s a falsehood from a different Democrat.

 

Buyers Must Share Blame Regarding “Unfair” Car Insurance Policies and Other Contracts

Featured

The “surprise problems” with some car insurance agreements and other contracts people sign often result from the same human weakness: CARELESSNESS.

What?  Example:  One well-known car insurance firm (using the Statue of Liberty) has been running ads attempting to depict their competitors as unfair and insensitive because of their policies regarding car replacement.  In reality, the ads inadvertently accuse the average policy holder of simple laziness with:

“Did you read all of the pages? Only lawyers do that.” Or:  “Does your insurance cover a tow truck?  Who knows?”

Not reading what you sign will get you get what you deserve!

This is not to suggest that insurance policies shouldn’t cover the entire cost of car replacement or provide for a tow.  These are reasonable things to expect in insurance.  But why would someone pay premiums periodically without knowing what’s covered?

It’s this same lack of attention to details which explains why many accept “free” phone apps without looking to see what invasive access to their phone is being given away.  Some apps can read address lists and even turn the camera or microphone on without owner approval.

Too many wander along through life with a sense of entitlement that Big Brother will always protect them (when, in fact, he’s a massive problem himself). Instead, we must take the time to read all contracts of consequence.

This includes not only car insurance policies and phone app agreements, but also house purchase contracts, condo/association rules and all ballot issues (bond issues and local/ state constitutional amendments).  In that way, we can avoid these times of dismay:  A condo owner discovers after damage occurs that the area in question is not “common property” but his responsibility or a house property tax assessment for a specific situation never seems to go away — because it’s an “on-going” tax without the usual renewal periods in place!

Yes, there is unfairness in the world, but there’s much we can do to prevent trouble in our lives.  We must shed the “victim” mentality and READ before we sign.

 

 

 

Time Magazine Trades Decency for Being Common

Featured

“Ain’t no man can avoid being born average, but there ain’t no man got to be common,”  —  Satchel Paige1

Time magazine has forgotten the motto “All the News That’s Fit to Print” made popular by Adolph S. Ochs, owner of The New York Times, in 1897.2 While his purpose was to make clear that his newspaper would be impartial in its coverage, the philosophy of that era also implied civility and decency in its presentation.  Unfortunately, Time has chosen the crass route in an attempt to be relevant or cool.

In its “Love it/ Leave it” section of the May 23, 2016 edition, it wrote “Adele stopped her concert in Denmark to praise Beyonce’s Lemonade [emphasis retained]: ‘How is it even possible that she only ever gets better?  How is that possible?  She is Jesus f-cking Christ.’”

Needing another thrill after that sophomoric rush wore off, it decided to quote Priyanka Chopra two weeks later in its June 6 issue:  “F-ck that – I wanna be Bond” in response that she might be the next Bond girl.

Perhaps Time magazine no longer needs readers looking for real news.  The publication would rather cater to the immature element of our society — which is sadly understandable seeing how prevalent being common has become.  Glad Satchel Paige didn’t live to witness this decline.

 

1http://www.satchelpaige.com/quote2.html

2http://www.readwritethink.org/classroom-resources/calendar-activities/york-times-used-slogan-20412.html

 

Terrorists Aren’t Really “Responsible” for Their Crimes

Featured

In the 1960’s, when jet hijackings and other acts of terror became more common, it took a while for newscasters to learn how to report these events.  It’s hard to believe that, initially, reports of such evil acts were described that a certain terror group was “claiming credit” for their crimes.  This was eventually changed to “claiming responsibility” which we hear to this day.

But is this accurate? Those claiming to be truly responsible must have several qualities as listed in http://www.dictionary.com/browse/responsible.  One is to be answerable or accountable to someone.  Some terrorists claim to be answerable to a god, they believe, who wants torture and destruction for those who won’t discard their beliefs and submit to Islam (the meaning of Islam is “submission”).1  Interesting view of the Deity.

Being “responsible” also means “having the power to control and manage” along with being the cause of something.  Terrorists would qualify here.

But the similarities between terrorists and being responsible spiral downward with “having a capacity for moral decisions and therefore accountable” plus “able to discharge obligations or pay debts.”  Terrorists may believe they are able to distinguish between right and wrong.  If so, then they had better hope their displays of ignorance regarding true virtue were caused by their upbringing and forces beyond their control.  Otherwise, their eternity is in severe jeopardy.

As far as paying debts are concerned, there is no doubt that they feel no obligation to atone for their crimes.  In fact, they believe acting heinously is somehow glorious.

The use of the word “responsibility” gives Islamic jihadists an undeserved air of decency.

Jihadists are not preoccupied in the civil spreading of spiritual good news.  For fourteen centuries, they have put a lot of energy in destroying all who disagree with them and establishing a worldwide caliphate.

Recommendation:  to avoid giving the slightest respect to terrorists, we should simply report that a specific group claims “involvement” with the atrocities.  Unfortunately, that word leaves out the horrible immorality of their acts and is too dignified for them.  There ought to be a more appropriate word.

 

1 – “The root word for Islam is “al-Silm,” which means “submission” or “surrender.” There is no disagreement about this among Islamic scholars. al-Silm (submission) does not mean the same thing as al-Salaam (peace), otherwise they would be the same word.”  https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110819104302AA2UHLT

 

Another Case of Well-Meaning People Not Understanding Math and Fairness

Featured

For years we have heard accusations of unfairness when the wealthy receiving greater dollar amounts in tax breaks when an across-the-board easing of taxes occurs.  It’s somehow discriminatory when people paying six figures in taxes receive several thousand dollars in tax breaks just because it’s more than the rebates received by those who pay only a few hundred dollars in the first place.

A recent business article shows that these irrational conclusions are alive and well.  The author was trying to make the point that upward mobility out of poorer neighborhoods is harder in part due to an unfair tax structure.  Changes are deemed necessary because of the following:

 “Some of this will require money, so funding priorities must also change.  As of 2014, U.S. households with an income of $200,000 or more received an annual subsidy (largely through the tax deduction on mortgage interest) of more than $6,000.  Households with an income below $20,000 received less than $1,500.  And only a quarter of the households that qualify for housing vouchers actually receive them.”1

It’s agreed that it’s an unfortunate waste of available opportunities if 3/4 of eligible households do not receive what the law can provide them.

But to claim an inequality regarding the data is misleading.  The wealthy receive 3% or less of their income when filing for the mortgage deduction.  Lower income families receive 7%.  Should the tax structure be skewed further in the favor of lower incomes so that they would receive the same $6,000?  This would be at least 30% of their income and undoubtedly more than the total they paid in the first place.

Let’s focus on making sure vouchers and other forms of assistance actually help people escape undesirable living conditions.  Just don’t use math disingenuously to paint a picture of unfairness where it doesn’t exist.

 

1 – “Helping Americans Move Out of Poverty, Bloomberg Businessweek ,May 23-29, 2016 issue.

 

Satan Likes to Control People (Strange, So Does Big Government!)

Featured

Evil’s dislike for Good is not restricted to the realm of the supernatural. The Earth has been a battleground since our most distant ancestors with consciences came into being.  For people of faith, these wars will continue until the Second Coming.  For skeptics, it could last until the sun becomes a red giant and overtakes the first three planets, including ours.  Either way, it will be a long struggle.

Many Good vs. Evil confrontations are obvious.  Organized crime, neighborhood gangs and Islamic jihadists are clear examples of those who attack innocent people.  However, the colliding political philosophies of small vs. big government are part of an overlooked venue.  Striving for big government unwittingly puts many on the side of the control freak who was bounced from Heaven; thus, creating Hell.

Respect  for  Human  Life  Creates  Two  Sides  of  the  Battle

A key principle around which sides are taken is respect for the dignity of human life.   Government intervention should be limited to doing for individuals what they have a right to do for themselves, but cannot.1  Assistance ought to be given where it is truly necessary.  Taxpayer funds should be available to provide the basics of life for those who are unable to provide for themselves.

But it must not also promote, unintentionally or otherwise, the breakup of the family as many of the War on Poverty programs have done over the last half-century.2

It also means that tax money should not arbitrarily fund some private startup industries just because they happen to be a favorite of someone in power (e.g. Solyndra).3   In addition, there are government intrusions which force communities to accept government subsidized housing.4

European  Union  Ruling  Class  is  Power  Happy

Overbearing control of government is seen in many ways.  Mandating that member nations take unreasonable security risks by the arbitrary and negligent opening of national borders was the main reason the United Kingdom decided to leave the European Union in order to restore its rightful sovereignty.  The EU ruling elites also find ways to control the trivial as well as the big picture.  They determined which tea pots and toasters they considered environmentally acceptable and, therefore, permitted to be used in the home.

Trivializing  Human  Life  in  the  U.S.

The more massive the exercise of control, the more it aligns with Evil. (The word “evil” may have fallen out of favor with the self-proclaimed enlightened.  Nevertheless, that doesn’t make it cease to exist.)

In our country, the creeping vine of mega-government has long since crossed the line from Good to its hellish opposite.  Legalizing the killing of unborn babies under the ironic claim of “women’s health” has been more devastating to both mother and baby than the pro-death crowd is willing to admit.5

Trivializing human life has surreptitiously led to relegating its status to mere animal life in the lab. In vitro fertilization/ genetic modification and surrogate motherhood are just two examples of breeding human life to serve our wishes as we do thoroughbred horses or cattle.  Discarding unwanted human embryos used in stem cell experiments causes less anxiety for researchers than getting rid of weeds in their carefully manicured gardens.

Those of faith understand that we are to have humane dominion over animal life, but not dominion over human life. That belongs exclusively to the Author of Life Himself.

State  Elevating  Itself  Over  the  Church

The unwarranted intrusion of Big Government extends to trying to force religious orders and organizations to comply with the contraceptive/ abortifacient mandate of the Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”).  For these in power, it’s not sufficient that our tax dollars are used for purposes which we have an inalienable right to object to.  Rather, the Obama Administration will not be satisfied unless we materially participate in the evil by giving our consent to a third party to carry out his control of human reproduction — which is not his to control in the first place. It’s the 21st century version of the Romans who threatened early Christians with severe consequences if they didn’t offer “just a little incense” to Roman idols in order to satisfy their political leaders.6

Broad  Range  of  Government  Dominance  Over  Citizens

Modern Big Government has reached new lows with a brazen insult to Natural Law. Citizens who understand the timeless irrevocable truth that a valid marriage can only exist between one man and one woman are being required to provide ceremonial items for same-sex “marriages.” While religious liberty must never be used to justify denying anyone the basics of life such as food, housing, medical care, employment, etc., it must not be dismissed in favor of the sham, known in politically correct circles as “tolerance” or “inclusiveness.”

These are only a few of the headlining points of concern. Requisite to the ultimate control (aka “possession”) of people involves intervention in the smaller details of daily life as well.  Mundane items such as kitchen utensils in the EU have already been mentioned.   It has also spread from the micro-managing of limiting the size of soft drinks in New York City to the insulting requiring of law-abiding citizens of Kentucky to have their urine tested annually – and at their expense – to ensure they are consuming specific prescriptions instead of selling them illegally.7

Where  Will  This  Lead?

The Prince of Darkness would be pleased with these displays of coercion.  The “religion” of secular humanism has set itself against the religion of eternal origins, mimicking the unsurpassed failure of the confrontation the Father of Lies had with the Creator before the universe existed.

God grants free will and proponents of small government defend it.  On the other hand, it drives Satan – and perpetrators of oppressing Big Government, crazy.  Being a control freak is an indication of a severe disorder.  Why would the Left want to have goals which parallel those of the infamous fallen angel?  Aiming for world domination now risks eternal disaster later.

 

1 – “In accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, neither the state nor any larger society should substitute itself for the initiative and responsibility of individuals and intermediary bodies.”  Paragraph 1894 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, Twenty-fifth printing; November, 2013.

2 – “7 Ways the War on Poverty Destroyed Black Fatherhood,” by Nick Chiles, http://atlantablackstar.com/2014/12/24/ways-war-poverty-destroyed-black-fatherhood/, 12/24/2014.

3 – “Barack Obama Solyndra Scandal: 8 Facts About Green Energy Company Controversy,” by Alana Marie Burke, http://www.newsmax.com/FastFeatures/Barack-Obama-Solyndra-Scandal-Green-Energy/2015/01/29/id/621537/, 1/29/2015.

4 – “Under the new plan, residents from low-income neighborhoods would be placed all around Baltimore County, essentially integrating the poor among wealthier families.”
“Studies indicate doing cluster in one area is not successful,” said Tony Fugett, president of the Baltimore County NAACP. “The hope is that the units would be dispersed throughout the county.”

From “Low-income housing ordered to be integrated in Baltimore neighborhoods,” by Leland Vittert, http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/04/05/low-income-housing-ordered-to-be-integrated-in-baltimore-neighborhoods.html, 4/5/2016.

5 – “How Abortion Hurts Women:  The Hard Proof,” by Erika Bachiochi, http://www.catholiceducation.org/en/controversy/abortion/how-abortion-hurts-women-the-hard-proof.html

6 – From a homily given by Fr. Joshua Lange when he was an assistant pastor at St. Joseph Catholic Church in Cold Spring, KY several years ago.  He was reassigned to a parish of his own in the summer of June 2012, http://www.stjosephcoldspring.com/Portals/stjoeschool/Documents/News/June172012FC.pdf

7 – “Urine tests required by new drug law can cost patients hundreds of dollars,” http://www.kentucky.com/news/politics-government/article44379045.html, 9/27/2012.

 

Root Problem for Obama, Hillary Clinton and Most Liberals is Vanity

Featured

Vanity:  “…is where we put the esteem of others first. Like the other root sins, vanity springs from insecurity. We place our security in what others think of us… “What will they think of me?” is a perennial concern of the vain person.”1

Politically correct speech is where the evidence is found:

  • The most recent example of the Left’s vanity is when they level the charge of xenophobia (fear and hatred of strangers or foreigners or of anything that is strange or foreign2) as a result of the Brexit vote.  Part of the support for leaving the EU came from a revolt against the ruling class in Brussels which opened the EU borders without reasonable care for security against terrorists.  The liberal philosophy ignores a central fact that nations have a right to protect their borders as long as it’s done humanely.3

Of course, we also hear this accusation of xenophobia when a Republican speaks of not allowing large numbers of Arabs or Mexicans/Central Americans into our country because the FBI has warned that there is no safe way to verify our safety.

  • A related charge of Democrats is Islamophobia.   Those using this term are afraid that any limiting of Muslim immigration will incite jihadists to more acts of terrorism, so they want to stay on their good side as much as possible; hence another example vanity. (This also displays an ignorance of key tenets of the Qur’an which, for 1400+ years, has instructed Muslims to convert those of other faiths, charge the “jizya” tax as a sign of submission to Islam or kill them if they do not comply.4)They are also disregarding the jihadists’ admission that they will use the large scale immigration of Arabs to assist the infiltration of fellow terrorists.  Just yesterday in a FoxNews interview, UK Independent Party leader, Nigel Farage, noted that a terrorist plot was foiled in Dusseldorf recently.  Of special significance was that all four of the guilty had entered as immigrants.

A most egregious example of Democratic submitting to vanity in the face of Islam was in the newly released House of Representatives report on the Benghazi killings.  It revealed that much of the delay which doomed our men came from a debate among Administration leaders regarding whether our military should wear their military uniforms when going to help our endangered citizens.  The overriding worry was not the safety of our people, but would the presence of these uniforms upset the Libyans into thinking we were invading them.

In addition, the President and Hillary Clinton lied repeatedly that the attack was inspired by a viral video when the report showed they already knew in advance that something was imminent based on intercepted terrorist communications.

Why is this another example of vanity?  The date of the attack was just 56 days before the hotly contested Obama/Romney election was to take place and an admission of their obvious failings would have been detrimental at the polls.

  • Finally, there’s the well-known claim that “homophobia” (which in its true definition rarely exists5) is what  makes citizens protective of their religious beliefs when it involves the LGBT community.  This charge is levied when an individual does not wish to be complicit with actions which condone disordered behavior against genuinely held religious beliefs (now arbitrarily legitimized by the Supreme Court).  This vanity of liberals does not arise from fear of retributions like the issues with Islam, but merely a desire to be liked by as many as possible (even if it goes against Natural Law) with the side benefit of ensuring more votes at the polls.

Former presidential candidates Dr. Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina warned our nation of the dangers of political correctness during the primary process.  “PC” emanates from vanity and we are less as a nation because we continue to ignore them.

 

 

1 – “How Can I Overcome the Root Sin of Vanity?, http://www.spiritualdirection.com/2011/01/06/how-can-i-overcome-the-root-sin-of-vanity, 1/6/2011.

2 – “http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/xenophobia

3 – ”A country has the right to regulate its borders and to control immigration.

The overriding principle of all Catholic social teaching is that individuals must make economic, political, and social decisions not out of shortsighted self-interest, but with regard for the common good. That means that a moral person cannot consider only what is good for his or her own self and family, but must act with the good of all people as his or her guiding principle.

While individuals have the right to move in search of a safe and humane life, no country is bound to accept all those who wish to resettle there (emphasis added)…” , http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/immigration/catholic-teaching-on-immigration-and-the-movement-of-peoples.cfm

4 – “Muhammad clearly established that people of other religions have to pay a poll tax to Muslims called the jizya, as a reminder of their inferior status. This abrogates an earlier verse stating that there is ‘no compulsion in religion’ and it destroys any pretense that Islam is merely a religion and not a political system.”

Quran (9:29) – “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.”

Muslim (19:4294) – There are many places in the hadith where Muhammad tells his followers to demand the jizya of non-believers. Here he lays down the rule that it is to be extorted by force:“If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah’s help and fight them”  http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/quran/jizya.aspx

5 – “Homophobia” is Contrived, so where is “Adulterophobia?” , https://cartaremi.wordpress.com/2015/05/19/homophobia-is-contrived-so-where-is-adulterophobia/, 5/19/2015.

The “Brexit” Choice: Short Term Pain for Long Term Stability?

Featured

 

British voters will go to the polls on Thursday for an issue possibly more important than choosing a prime minister as it will impact future prime ministers.

The issue:   to stay in the European Union or leave it.

The fear mongers against leaving will be convincing only if concerns for the immediate rule the day.  Yes, if Britain leaves, it must renegotiate trade deals with the countries it is separating from.  These new agreements could very well be less advantageous.  Also true, there may be some pullout of investment from current fellow EU comrades.

HOWEVER, the foolishness of the EU’s common currency (the “euro” which the UK would eventually need to adopt), is a far greater negative.  The euro joins many countries of varying levels of fiscal responsibility.  Several countries using the euro seem to believe that they can have their cake and eat it too.  As of last summer, six EU countries had debts greater than their GDP!  While the UK’s was ninth highest in the EU, hanging around with these rising debt nations only consoles them if they accept “misery loves company.”1  A few years ago, Germany was actually criticized for responsible managing of its trade balance.2  In addition, as of late last year, just eight EU nations had average working hours exceeding ours in the U.S. while fifteen worked fewer hours per week.3  Despite working less, several of those nations have well-known expectations of benefits which aggravate economic struggles.4

Britain has a chance to separate itself from an unsteady large ship known as the EU.

The choice is theirs.  They can stay with a modern day economic Titanic with its mesmerizing marketing glitter — and its fatal flaws.  Or, they can choose to guide their own smaller, less “cool” ship where rational decision-making is an everyday necessity.

If they choose this, they will be more likely to succeed because they will have their head on the wheel instead of partying on deck, blissfully ignoring of impending dangers.

If they stay, they will inevitably be dragged down with the rest of the EU because its reach is clearly beyond its wisdom… Besides, “President Obama sparked fury by pressuring UK to stay in the EU and telling its citizens their nation’s stranding (sic) would be diminished if it leaves… London Mayor Boris Johnson accused him of making an ‘incoherent’ and ‘inconsistent’ argument because the U.S. would never give up sovereignty.”5  Obama’s near-command for Britain to stay is a solid argument for them to leave the EU!

1 – “European debt crisis: It’s not just Greece that’s drowning in debt,” by Ashley Kirk, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/greece/11705720/European-debt-crisis-Its-not-just-Greece-thats-drowning-in-debt.html, 6/29/2015.

2 – “A Common Currency (Euro) is Europe’s Real Problem, Not Germany’s Trade Surplus,” https://cartaremi.wordpress.com/2013/03/12/a-common-currency-euro-is-europes-real-problem-not-germanys-trade-surplus/, 3/12/2013.

3 – “Americans Work Hard, Nut People in These 15 Countries Work Longer Hours,” by Benjamin Snyder and Stacy Jones, http://fortune.com/2015/11/11/chart-work-week-oecd/, 11/11/2015.

4 – “France’s unemployment benefits are among the most generous in Europe, payable even for net salaries of €6,959 (£5,021) per month. That may seem to favour high earners in a country where the average monthly net salary is just over €2,000, however a spokeswoman for UNEDIC, which administers the benefits says that less than 1,000 unemployed people receive the top amount, out of a total 2.6 million claimants. The current system, negotiated between unions and employers last year, kicks in after four months’ employment. Workers aged under 50 can claim unemployment benefit for two years, while those aged over 50 can claim for three years. On average, benefits are about 65% of employees’ salary… Compensation for sick leave in Norway is often described as the most generous in the world: employees receive 100% of salary from day one for up to a year. But sickness absence is high, seen as a symptom of hidden, structural unemployment. Almost 7% of the workforce are on sick leave at any given moment – by far the highest rate of work absence among full-time employees in the industrialised countries, the OECD says…” from “Which are the best countries in the world to live in if you unemployed or disabled,” by Anne Penketh, Kate Connolly, Stefanie Kirchgaessner, Henry McDonald, Justin McCurry, David Crouch, Shaun Walker, David Smith, Mary O’Hara and Anna Bawden, http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/apr/15/which-best-countries-live-unemployed-disabled-benefits, 4/15/2015.

5 – Obama infuriates the Brits as he threatens to send UK ‘to the back of the queue’ if they vote to leave the European Union,” by Francesca Chambers, Euan McClelland and Matt Dathan, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3553788/Obama-flies-Brexit-storm-President-faces-furious-backlash-downright-hypocritical-decision-tell-British-voters-stay-EU.html, 4/22/2016.

Do Lay People Have the Authority to Interpret Scripture Infallibly?

Featured

Visiting the Martyn-Lloyd Jones article about the supposed errors of the Catholic faith, we find this one about interpreting Scripture:

“Protestantism teaches the ‘universal priesthood of all believers’ and the right of every man to read the Scripture for himself and to interpret it under the illumination of the Holy Spirit.”

“Rome denies that completely and absolutely. She, and she alone, is able to understand and to interpret the Scripture and to tell us what to believe.”1

This is one of the celebrated differences between the numerous Christian denominations which have sprung up since the early 16th century and the Church which Christ established in the first century.

To  Whom  Did  Jesus  Give  the  Authority  to  Teach?

Jesus was clear about this at the end of the Gospel of Matthew: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you.  And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age.”2

The apostles were given the mission to teach and, importantly, “all that I have commanded you.”  He did not order them to write a New Testament.  While the Bible is divinely inspired, He did not say that teaching would have to wait until the Bible was completed and the canon ultimately defined at the Councils of Hippo and Carthage centuries later.3

Can  the  Laity  Interpret  Scripture?

Jesus established who the teachers are to be:  the apostles and their successors.4  Where does that leave the rest of us?

The teaching authority of the Church (“Magisterium”) has strictly defined just seven passages of the Bible.  The Church’s focus is to define doctrine.We, the laity, are encouraged to study Scripture and its myriad of finer points using all available and reliable sources.  The key thing to remember is that if we conclude something which is contrary to the Church’s teaching over the last two millennia, we would be wise to look for our error and not assume we are the final arbiter.  Failing to do this, we run the risk of adding our names to the confusion brought on by the 30,000+ who self-empowered themselves to start new denominations.6

 

1 — “Martyn Lloyd-Jones on Roman Catholicism,” https://wordpress.com/read/feeds/36351627/posts/18413

2 – Matthew 28: 19-20.  The New Catholic Answer Bible, Fireside Catholic Publishing; Wichita, KS, 2005.

3 – “It was not until the Councils of Hippo and Carthage that the Catholic Church defined which books made it into the New Testament and which didn’t. Probably the council fathers studied the (complete) Muratorian Fragment and other documents, including, of course, the books in question themselves, but it was not until these councils that the Church officially settled the issue.”

“The plain fact of the matter is that the canon of the Bible was not settled in the first years of the Church. It was settled only after repeated (and perhaps heated) discussions, and the final listing was determined by Catholic bishops.”  From “Was the Canon of Scripture determined before the Church councils decided it?,” http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/was-the-canon-of-scripture-determined-before-the-church-councils-that-decided-it

4 – “Our apostles knew through our Lord Jesus Christ that there would be strife for the office of bishop. For this reason, therefore, having received perfect foreknowledge, they appointed those who have already been mentioned and afterwards added the further provision that, if they should die, other approved men should succeed to their ministry.”  — Pope St. Clement of Rome, circa A.D. 80. From “Why is That in Tradition?, by Patrick Madrid, Our Sunday Visitor Publishing Division; Huntington, Indiana, 2002.

5 – ▪ The reference to being “born of water and the Spirit” in John 3:5 includes the idea of   baptism.

▪ In telling the apostles, “Do this [the Eucharist] in memory of me” in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24, Jesus appointed the apostles priests.

▪ In Matthew 18:18 and John 20:22–23, Jesus conferred on the apostles the power to forgive sins; everyone does not share this power.

▪ Romans 5:12 refers to the reality of original sin.

▪ The presbyters referred to in James 5:14 are ordained, not merely elder members of the Christian community.

From “Are Catholics free to interpret Bible verses without the Church’s approval?,” by Peggy Frye, http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/are-catholics-free-to-interpret-bible-verses-without-the-churchs-approval

6 – The Bible was never intended to be our sole source of guidance.  “Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement or by a letter of ours.” (2 Thessalonians 2:15) and “Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation, for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God.” (2 Peter 1:20-21) as found in The New Catholic Answer Bible, Fireside Catholic Publishing; Wichita, KS, 2005.  If everyone outside of apostolic succession claims to be guided by the Holy Spirit, then why is there so much confusion and contradictions in the non-Catholic Christian world?

Clearing Up the Confusion About Praying to the Saints

Featured

Misinformation about the teachings of the Catholic Church has been accelerating since 1517.  The words of the late Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen ring truer with each passing generation:

“There are not more than 100 people in the world who truly hate the Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they perceive to be the Catholic Church.”1

The  Misstatement

Here is an example of a misconception regarding why Catholics pray to the saints for their intercessions.  As it appeared in a recent WordPress blog:

“They believe in perfectionism in this life, and they say that some of these saints have lived a perfect life. The result of this is that they have acquired and built up so much “merit” that they have much more than they need for themselves; so they have a superabundance of merit.”

“The result is that you and I, who may be failing and who are so lacking in merit, can go and pray to the saints and ask them to give to us a certain amount of their superabundance.”2

Saints’  Intercessory  Prayers  Are  Not  Like  Carbon  Tax  Cap/Trade

Outside of the Virgin Mary, no one, not even the saints, lived a “perfect life.”  In fact, some were far from it in their early days.  Just take a look at St. Augustine’s life!3

When we ask the saints to pray for us, we are not asking them to give us from their “excess merit.”  No, we are asking them to pray for us in the same way we pray for one another during times of trial in this life.  The saints are simply closer to God and they no longer have any need to pray for themselves.

Intercessory  Prayer  IS  Biblical

“And when he had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and with golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints…”

Again, those in heaven have no need of prayers for themselves since they have already passed judgment.  They now praise God directly, so they are presenting our prayers.  If this sounds silly, then so it is when we pray for each other on earth.  And that is certainly not the case! (“… and pray for one another, that you may be healed” James 5:16)5

Speaking of intercessions, we remember that the first miracle of Jesus’ public life occurred as a result of an intercession.  At the Wedding Feast of Cana, Jesus’ mother Mary approached him with the request to solve the problem of the wine having run out.  She was interceding for the groom and attendants who were capable of asking Him directly.

The American spirit of individual initiative certainly has its good points.  Carried to an extreme, however, it can cause us to forget that the Church Victorious can assist those of us in the Church Militant on our earthly journey.  This is accomplished by the inspiration their lives can be for us AND their active intercessions on our behalf.

 

 

1 – “Archbishop Sheen Quotes,” www.catholicbible101.com/archbishopsheenquotes.html

2 – “Martyn Lloyd-Jones on Roman Catholicism,” https://wordpress.com/read/feeds/36351627/posts/18413

3 – “St. Augustine of Hippo is the patron of brewers because of his conversion from a former life of loose living, which included parties, entertainment, and worldly ambitions. His complete turnaround and conversion has been an inspiration to many who struggle with a particular vice or habit they long to break…,” http://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=418

4 – Rev. 5:8 as found in The Holy Bible, revised standard version Catholic edition, Thomas Nelson & Sons, Toronto/Camden, NJ/London, 1966.

5 – Ibid.

Yes, Jesus Really Does Give Priests HIS Authority to Forgive Sins

Featured

 

This is in response to a posting today from a fellow WordPress blogger who does not understand that we are to receive Christ’s forgiveness through a priest.  The basis for the Catholic Church’s teaching stems from the often heard: “Do Catholics believe in the Bible?” “Yes, the entire Bible.”

John 20: 21-22:  “Jesus said to them again, ‘Peace be with you.  As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.’  And when he has said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit.  If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.’”

James 5:16  “Therefore, confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another, that you may be healed.  The prayer of a righteous man has great power in its effects.”

Jesus continues to forgive sins through the priests who, with the Pope and bishops, exist because of apostolic succession.  Our Savior knew that , while Church leaders would never  be sinless, His Church would not teach error because of the guidance of the Holy Spirit.  He did not scrap apostolic succession because Peter denied Him three times and Judas betrayed him.  He said He would be with us always until His second coming.My prayer is that some day all Christians will avail themselves of the wonderful gift of the Sacrament of Reconciliation!

 

1 – “Go therefore make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age.”  (Matthew 28:19-20)  This and the other verses are taken from The Holy Bible, Revised Standard Version, Catholic edition, Ignatius Press, San Francisco, 1966.

Needle Exchanges Without Rehab Requirement: Society’s “Too Big to Fail” Bailouts for the Addicted

Featured

Origins  of  “Too  Big  to  Fail”

The financial debacles of the last few Administrations have brought years of debates about whether “Too Big to Fail” subsidies from beleaguered taxpayers are causing more harm than good.The belief was that, while it was not the taxpayers’ fault that these institutions were failing, the average citizen should “take one for the team” with large financial assistance or risk company bankruptcies and massive job losses.   It has become a sort of hostage situation: “you fix the consequences of our greed or you’ll suffer more than we will.”  Fortunately, many in power are becoming more skeptical of these ransoms.

Unfortunately, there is another scenario where we citizens are being told to do something intuitively counterproductive or face dire consequences even though we are not the cause of the problem.  Drug addictions produce much physical and financial pain to users and frequently to non-users who have property useful for purchasing drugs.

It must be the belief of many social engineers that the human condition regarding addictions is hopeless2 just as Obamacare’s contraceptives and abortifacient policies express the notion that humans cannot suppress sexual urges.  Back to drug addiction: instead of an all-out strategy to help those who wish to regain control of their lives, needle exchange programs are funded by some local governments in order to reduce the additional consequences of irresponsible behavior.3  Those consequences include the spread of hepatitis C and HIV and not only to the substance abusers themselves.4

Financial  Bailouts:  How  Well  Have  They  Worked?

Some of the early federal rescues occurring either after a company failed or before it did have had mixed results at best.  Lockheed (1971), New York City (1975) and Chrysler (1980) settled accounts eventually and may have even yielded a return on taxpayer investment.5

Then there was 1989 Savings & Loan crisis:  “The Financial Institutions Reform Recovery and Enforcement Act authorized $293.8 billion dollars to finance the folding of numerous failed S&Ls. The final tab for the bailout was roughly $220.32 billion. Of that total, taxpayers were responsible for about $178.56 billion; the private sector covered the rest.”5

Bailouts have digressed resulting in the “Trouble Asset Relief Program (TARP) which disbursed $700 billion dollars in Federal (taxpayer) money to clean up the mess because of the financial crisis of 2008.  In many cases, a profit was returned to the federal government.6  However, the bailout did not come to the aid of the average person who was essentially being held hostage again.  Instead, it rewarded those whose mismanagement created the crisis.  Such was the final analysis of TARP.7

Drug  Addiction  Bailouts:  Needle  Exchange  Programs  (NEP)

These programs had their beginnings in Europe during the 1980’s.  San Francisco, Tacoma, Portland and New York City implemented theirs before 1990.By early 2015, there were roughly 200 NEP’s in the United States.Most articles on the subject list data on the reduction of the previously mentioned diseases and other hazards.  Some will state anecdotally that drug usage has not increased with NEP’s in their communities along with a few testimonials of how the NEP encouraged a few to consent to rehabilitation.

Rationalization  Doesn’t  Warrant  Most  Bailouts  or  NEP’s

Even though entering rehab is not a stipulation of receiving free, sterile needles, supporters of NEP’s maintain their actions don’t condone drug use.  However, basic human nature comes into play with both financial bailouts and needle exchanges.  Without legal commitments to reform selfish fiduciary actions, what’s to keep businesses or banks from taking unwise risks — only existing laws which may be insufficient.  They will simply continue to operate as they have believing that a safety net will be thrown in their direction to neutralize the consequences of their actions and the innocent may or may not be spared.

The same goes for those who take unwise risks with their health; and therefore, endanger the health of the rest of us.  Very little will change as long as the focus is on blunting the natural consequences of bad decisions instead of encouraging the responsibility to change destructive habits.

The desire to stop the spread of any infectious disease is certainly noble.  However, before resorting to just any plan, we must remember that “The end does not justify the means… It is therefore an error to judge the morality of human acts by considering only the intention that inspires them or the circumstances.”10  Needle exchange programs must be modified greatly to be in concert with solving the root cause of the problem of substance abuse and to ensure that “NEP” stands for ‘not enabling people.”

 

 

1https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Too_big_to_fail

2 – “This is an understandable argument; however, drug use is not going to end. Therefore necessary measures should be taken in order to help this unsafe practice become a bit safer.”  From “Needle Exchange Programs: Making a Risky Behavior Safer,” by Kimberly Swan, https://www2.cortland.edu/dotAsset/122267.pdf

3 – The most recent occurrence of this: “Campbell County officials made the right decision to support the creation of a needle exchange program to give to give heroin users access to clean syringes.  Studies have shown that, when implemented properly, needle exchanges can limit the spread of diseases including hepatitis C and HIV. Supporting needle exchange programs is not the same as condoning heroin use; it’s good public policy that protects us all from the potential spread of deadly infectious diseases.”  Part of a Cincinnati Enquirer editorial, 5/7/2016.

4 – “These diseases do not remain confined to the network of individuals who are injecting drugs, but are transmitted to their spouses, families and communities.”  From: “Column: Needle exchange programs not only help addicts, but the public, too,” by Dr. Judith Feinberg, http://www.wcpo.com/mobile-showcase/op-ed-needle-exchange-programs-not-only-help-addicts-but-the-public-too

5 – From “History of U.S. Gov’t Bailouts,” https://www.propublica.org/special/government-bailouts

6 – “Bailout recipients,” updated 5/23/2016, https://projects.propublica.org/bailout/list

7 – “Study:  Bank bailout didn’t boost small business lending,” by Stephen Gandel, http://fortune.com/2012/11/14/study-bank-bailout-didnt-boost-small-business-lending/, 11/14/2012.

8http://luxury.rehabs.com/iv-drug-use/needle-exchanges/

9 – “More States and Cities Consider Needle-Exchange Programs to Reduce Spread of Infection,” by the Join Together Staff, http://www.drugfree.org/join-together/states-cities-consider-needle-exchange-programs-reduce-spread-infection/, 3/31/2015.

10 – Taken from paragraphs 1753 and 1756 of the “Catechism of the Catholic Church,” second edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2000.

Biden Urges War on Cancer — Why Not a War on Abortion? It Kills More Each Day

Featured

Attempting to get global focus for President Obama’s war on cancer, Vice President Joe Biden called cancer a “constant emergency”.  He added that it kills 3,000 daily in the United States alone.1  (The same article’s estimate is closer to 1,600 per day, still a tragedy.)

Speaking of constant emergencies, “there are over 3,000 abortions per day. Twenty-two percent of all pregnancies in the USA (excluding miscarriages) end in abortion.”2

Cancer research must be a high priority as it impacts so many lives, often indiscriminately, not by choice. Abortion kills and always by someone’s choice.

In addition to massive funding, curing the various cancers will take time.  It cannot be willed overnight.  Creating a more supportive pro-life society may require additional expenditures on the part of compassionate citizens and even governments if they become enlightened.  However, not to abort is a decision capable of being willed overnight.

With such an achievable goal at hand, why isn’t there a war on abortion?

 

 

1 – “Biden Urges Global Focus on Cancer as a ‘Constant Emergency,’”
http://www.voanews.com/content/biden-urges-global-focus-curing-cancer/3308974.html, 4/29/2016

2http://www.worldometers.info/abortions/

Link

Many activists and presidential candidate Bernie Sanders have defined their version of a “living wage” to be a minimum of $15 per hour.Unfortunately, this cause gained some momentum last year as “Fourteen cities, counties and states approved a $15 minimum wage through local laws, executive orders and other means in 2015.”2

Cost  of  Living  Varies  Widely  Among  the  States

A national minimum wage of this magnitude makes the careless assumption that the cost of living is relatively equal across our country.  Not the case!

For 2015, the cost of living in California and New York was close to 35% above the mean for all states.3  For an “average” state such as Florida, it only takes $11.10 per hour to create the same economic climate for an employee as $15 does in California and New York.  Why should Florida be forced to effectively pay nearly $4 per hour more for the same work?

The absurdity is worse for states with below average costs of living.  Mississippi’s was 16.5% below the U.S. mean for last year.  A citizen of the Magnolia State would do as well on $9.28 per hour as his counterparts in California or New York would do on $15.  Requiring Mississippi to have a $15 minimum is as ridiculous as pushing California and New York to $24.25 —  a guaranteed method of raising machine employment at the expense of humans.

States  Are  Different  Despite  Simplistic  Liberal  Beliefs

For decades, the Left has confused equality with being identical.  The concept of a national minimum wage is just one of their futile attempts at creating fairness by legislating sameness among the inherently different.  Some national policies are unwise.  For at least two millennia, it has been shown repeatedly that the best policies result when problem solving occurs at the lowest effective level.4,5    

The U.S., with its diversity of geography, cultures, economic climates, etc., does not lend itself well to many across-the-board mandates because they can often be destructive.  A national minimum wage of $15 per hour is one of them.

1 – “Bernie Sanders is The Only Presidential Candidate Who Supports $15/Hour Minimum Wage,” by Jason Easley,  http://www.politicususa.com/2016/04/04/bernie-sanders-presidential-candidate-supports-15hour-minimum-wage.html, 4/4/2016. 

2 – “14 Cities and States Approved $15 Minimum Wage in 2015,” http://www.nelp.org/news-releases/14-cities-states-approved-15-minimum-wage-in-2015/, 12/21/2015.

3https://www.missourieconomy.org/indicators/costof living/

4 – “… Excessive intervention by the state can threaten personal freedom and initiative.  The teaching of the Church has elaborated  the principle of subsidiarity [emphasis retained], according to which ‘a community of a higher order should not interfere in the internal life of a community of a lower order, depriving the latter of its functions, but rather should support it in case of need and help to co-ordinate its activity with the activities of the rest of society, always with a view to the common good’… The principle of subsidiarity is opposed to all forms of collectivism.  It sets limits for state intervention…”  — excerpts from paragraphs 1883 and 1885 of The Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition, published by Libreria Editrice Vaticana, March 2000.

5 – So as to avoid confusing the real meaning of “common good” with the one currently in vogue (that it’s whatever benefits the most, even at the expense of individuals):  “The common good comprises ‘the sum total of social conditions which allow people, either as groups or as individuals, to reach their fulfillment more fully and more easily… The common good consists of three essential elements: respect for and promotion of the fundamental rights of the person; prosperity, or the development of the spiritual and temporal goods of society; the peace and security of the groups and of its member.”  Paragraphs 1924 and 1925, Ibid.

“The Highest Standard of Care” Actually Kills Babies?

Featured

The language of the pro-death crowd comes from a never-ending fountain of a deception.  The latest affront to the dignity of human life was the statement that “After reviewing the supplemental application, the agency determined that Mifeprex is safe and effective when used to terminate a pregnancy in accordance with the revised labeling… Mifeprex is approved, in a regimen with misoprostol, to end a pregnancy through 70 days gestation.”

Following this morally sterile description of facilitating murder, we have:

“It means the health care providers can provide medication abortion according to the highest standard of care after more than 15 years of research and experience.”2

Killing never sounded so comforting.

 

1http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/PostmarketDrugSafetyInformationforPatientsandProviders/ucm111323.htm

2 – Jerry Lawson CEO and president of Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio, as quoted in the 3/31/2016 edition of the Kentucky Enquirer.

“Right to Health Care” — But No Right to Life?

Featured

“In my view healthcare is a right of all people, not a privilege, and I will fight for that.” —  Bernie Sanders1

“Health care is a basic right.”  —  Hillary Clinton2

 

A person must be alive in order to need health care.  If the right to life is not protected, then health care becomes irrelevant.  Without the defense of life, a “right to health care” is mere grandstanding to impress the unthinking.  It’s as absurd as saying everyone has a right to car insurance, but your vehicle can be taken from you arbitrarily.

Bernie and Hillary, the right to life is THE basic right.

 

 1http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Bernie_Sanders_Health_Care.htm

2 – Hillary Clinton speaking to AOL.com on 1/27/2016, https://ballotpedia.org/Hillary_Clinton_presidential_campaign,_2016/Healthcare

Is “Abortion Access” Going the way of “Gangster Economic Opportunity”?

Featured

“Abortion access in the U.S. has been vanishing in recent years.”  — Esme E. Deprez and Evan Applegate  in the February 29-March 6, 2016 issue of Bloomberg Businessweek.

Euphemisms can be used to express unpleasant things in a polite manner such as euthanizing a pet in the final painful stages of a terminal illness… or they can be used to indicate the condoning of a heinous act.

Such is the case with the intrinsically evil act of abortion.  Bemoaning the loss of abortion “clinics” would be like being sadly reminiscent of the 1920’s and 30’s when the FBI cracked down on the gangster world’s ability to make a living by prosecuting their crimes and stopping bloodshed for profit.  In a macabre way, the criminals’ back-of-the-head executions were more humane than the chemical burning or bodily ripping apart methods used in killing the unborn.

The laws of a civil society must not give “access” to murder.  The taking of an innocent human life is despicable regardless of the way the term is phrased when hiding behind the flawed Roe v. Wade decision.

Some Topics Which Incite Liberals to Attack First Amendment Right of Free Speech

Featured

  1. Defend a timeless moral values or institution such as marriage
  2. Suggest that current climate change is not primarily caused by humans
  3. Attempt to hold a political rally for a Republican candidate in a liberal city as occurred in Chicago yesterday evening when a Trump event had to be cancelled for security reasons

Before we go any further, let’s remember the inalienable rights which are protected by, not granted by, the First Amendment:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”1

(Second refresher, “inalienable” means something that can neither be taken away from nor given away by the possessor.)  Freedom of speech is a basic right.  Slander and libel aside, individuals do not forfeit the right to express their opinions simply because they are not in sync with a local majority.  As John Stuart Mill reminded us:

“If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind.”2

Current  Trend

Three examples of the topics listed at the beginning.

  1. “Ben Carson, the noted pediatric neurosurgeon, has become the target of a petition by Johns Hopkins students who want him removed as the medical school’s commencement speaker this spring… Last Tuesday, he told Sean Hannity of Fox News that “marriage is between a man and a woman. No group, be they gays, be they NAMBLA3, be they people who believe in bestiality, it doesn’t matter what they are, they don’t get to change the definition.”4 He withdrew later.
  2. “One group of climate scientists is trying a different approach. Dismayed by what they see as a lack of progress on the implementation of climate policies that they support, these 20 scientists sent aletter to the White House calling for their political opponents to be investigated by the government.”5
  3. “Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump canceled one of his signature rallies Friday, saying he didn’t want to see ‘people get hurt’ after protesters packed into the Chicago arena where it was to take place… Protesters at the rally for Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump rushed the arena floor in jubilant celebration after the announcement that he was calling off the event due to security concerns.”6

Those  Whose  Rights  Were  Violated  Are  Not  the  Only  Ones  Robbed

Universities have aided mankind’s progress by promoting open, civilized debate.  When this process is impeded, all are lessened.  John Stuart Mill cautioned:

But the peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is, that it is robbing the human race; posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth: if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error.”2

When it comes to Freedom of Speech, all ideas matter.

 

 

1https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/first_amendment

2 – From Mill’s essay “On Liberty,” Chapter II “Of the Liberty of Thought and Discussion, http://www.econlib.org/library/Mill/mlLbty2.html

3 – “The North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) is a pedophile and pederasty advocacy organization in the United States. It works to abolish age-of-consent laws criminalizing adult sexual involvement with minors and campaigns for the release of men who have been jailed for sexual contacts with minors that did not involve coercion. The group no longer holds regular national meetings, and as of the late 1990s—to avoid local police infiltration—the organization discouraged the formation of local chapters.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Man/Boy_Love_Association

4 – He apologized to those he did not intend to offend with:  “Now perhaps the examples were not the best choice of words, and I certainly apologize if I offended anyone . . . But the point that I was making was that no group of individuals, whoever they are, whatever their belief systems, gets to change traditional definitions. The reason I believe the way I do, I will readily confess, is because I am a Christian who believes in The Bible.”

Yet, we also have “In fact, it was liberal Supreme Court justice Sonia Sotomayor who brought up the issue of bestiality during this week’s oral arguments on a gay-rights case, openly asking if the extension of marriage laws to gays would open the courts up to lawsuits demanding equal marriage rights by polygamists and those who engage in bestiality.”

From “Dr. Carson Banned from a Commencement Speech,” by John Fund, 3/29/2013, http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/344291/dr-carson-banned-commencement-speech-john-fund

5 – Going further: “None of the Grijalva 7 was found to have engaged in wrongdoing of any sort, yet there have been significant career consequences for some.”

“The demand by Senator (Sheldon) Whitehouse (D-RI) and the 20 climate scientists for legal persecution of people whose research on science and policy they disagree with represents a new low in the politicization of science.”

“The role of these 20 scientists is particularly troubling.  The consequence of this persecution, intended or not, is to make pariahs of scientists who are doing exactly what we expect of researchers: to critically evaluate evidence and publish that work in the scientific literature.”

From “A new low in science: Criminalizing climate change skeptics,” by Judith Curry, http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/09/28/new-low-in-science-criminalizing-climate-change-skeptics.html, 9/28/2015

6 – From “Trump cancels Chicago rally, says he didn’t want to see anyone hurt,” by FoxNews.com, http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/03/12/trump-cancels-chicago-rally-says-didnt-want-to-see-anyone-hurt.html, 3/12/2016

Democratic Candidate’s Research Paper Position is Not Unforgivable

Featured

“Local  Democratic party leaders decided not to impede the campaign of an upstart state representative candidate, but many still aren’t forgiving Ben Lindy for the anti-research paper he wrote in law school.”

The article proceeded to explain that the resolution to strip him of “the essential benefits provided a candidate in order to run a fair campaign” failed by just a few votes, 26-21.  Additional fuel for this uproar stemmed from the fact that “it was discovered last month that his Yale University research paper has been cited in a legal brief used in a U.S. Supreme Court case that could weaken unions’ collective bargaining agreement nationwide, including in Ohio.”1

Purpose  of  Research

It’s understandable that the party which counts on the backing of unions would be apprehensive of possible fallout from some of their supporters over this.  But let’s step back for a moment.  The purpose of the academic world is to make clear previously undiscovered conclusions.  It aims to shed preconceived notions in order to reach these conclusions objectively.

The fact that a research paper is “anti-union” does not make it intrinsically evil, worthy of disdain.  The presence of labor unions may or may not be beneficial.  Unions are not inherently good or bad because it depends on the circumstances and application.

Intrinsic  Evil  vs.  Prudential

This conflict exemplifies the confusion which has existed in our nation for a long time.  For example, Prohibition was instituted because a majority was not able to understand that alcoholic drink is a prudential issue.2,3  A drink for an adult is not necessarily a bad thing.  It can be if the person is predisposed to addiction or excessive use, but a drink itself is not inherently evil.  Thus, the 18th Amendment was not only inappropriate for the purpose of the Constitution but it incorrectly labeled all alcoholic drinks as something to prohibit under all circumstances.

Abortion, on the other hand, is intrinsically evil despite attempts to rationalize it with reasons ranging from “privacy”to the erroneous assertion that we don’t know when human life begins.5,6  The act of abortion is always morally wrong even though the level of moral responsibility may vary for each individual involved.

An “anti-union” research paper does not carry the same moral liability.  The subject of unions is a prudential issue requiring discernment for each situation.  Each position deserves to be evaluated on its own merits.  Regardless, “unforgiving” is not an admirable attitude.

Of course, if the Democratic Party strongly opposes a person’s views on this, perhaps he should switch parties.

 

 

1 –“Democrats back off sanctioning candidate,” by Jason Williams, The Kentucky Enquirer, 2/6/2016

2 – “Intrinsically evil acts are always immoral, regardless of the intention or purpose for which the act was chosen, regardless of the circumstances or consequences of the act, and regardless of the other acts that are chosen before, during, or after the intrinsically evil act. Nothing can cause an intrinsically evil act to become moral.” By Ron Conte, contributor to Catholic Answers Forums, http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=476417, 7/16/2010.

3 – Prudential issues are not clear-cut, but require sound judgment.  “Man is sometimes confronted by situations that make moral judgment less assured and decision difficult.” From paragraph 1787 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church,” Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1997.

4 – “On January 22, 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its landmark decision in the case of Roe v. Wade, which recognized that the constitutional right to privacy extends to a woman’s right to make her own personal medical decisions — including the decision to have an abortion without interference from politicians.”  https://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/issues/abortion-access/roe-v-wade/

5 – “I would say that as an ardent, practicing Catholic, this is an issue that I have studied for a long time. And what I know is, over the centuries, the doctors of the Church have not been able to make that definition.” spoken by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) to Candy Crowley of CNN’s “State of the Union,” http://www.cnsnews.com, 7/28/2014 as reported in “Pelosi Blatantly Lied Regarding Church’s Teaching on Abortion, So Why Not Misrepresent Hamas, Too?” https://cartaremi.wordpress.com/2014/08/07/pelosi-blatantly-lied-regarding-churchs-teaching-on-abortion-so-why-not-misrepresent-hamas-too/, 8/7/2014.

6 – “Furthermore, what is at stake is so important that, from the standpoint of moral obligation, the mere probability that a human person is involved would suffice to justify an absolutely clear prohibition of any intervention aimed at killing a human embryo. Precisely for this reason, over and above all scientific debates and those philosophical affirmations to which the Magisterium has not expressly committed itself, the Church has always taught and continues to teach that the result of human procreation, from the first moment of its existence, must be guaranteed that unconditional respect which is morally due to the human being in his or her totality and unity as body and spirit…” from the second paragraph of section 60 of “Evangelium Vitae,” by Pope John Paul II, http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_25031995_evangelium-vitae.html, 3/25/1995.

“I am Your Father” and Campbell’s Soup Buys into Lucifer’s Message

Featured

In what was probably an attempt to modernize its image, Campbell’s Soup decided to add “a wink and a smile” to its advertising messaging by including two increasingly famous “gay” men and their adopted son in their “Made for Real, Real life” campaign. [1] (For those who have not witnessed this, each “father” attempts to imitate the famous quote from the Star Wars promotion of Campbell’s.)

Before the Left and some badly formed Christians take to the streets in protest of this article, it needs to be clear that all have a right to dignified work in order to provide food, shelter, clothing, etc. for themselves so long as it’s done in an ethical manner. [2,3] The word “ethical” was chosen instead of “legal” because there are many fallible civil laws on the books. “Moral” was avoided as it is summarily dismissed by those who promote the pagan philosophies of our post-Christian United States.

Therefore, this is not a commentary on homosexual actors who have the inalienable right to work. Rather, this addresses Campbell’s disappointing decision to join the politically-correct parade attempting to normalize disordered behavior. [4] Whether it’s rejecting the Ten Commandments or dismissing Natural Law, the results have never been pretty historically:

“Once the modern mind denied that man was a creature made in the image and likeness of God, it naturally fell into the error of saying that man was made in the image and likeness of the beast… But, if man is not different from nature, then what value has man? If there is no specific difference between a man and a horse, then why not yoke man to the plow of Nazism or the tractor of Marxian Socialism, or make him an instrument of the State as the Fascist intelligentsia teach today.” [5]

Campbell’s Soup would do better stick to the art of preparing food and forget about its venture into social engineering.

1 – “Campbell’s Soup Star Wars Commercial,” by Jendaya Fleming, http://arhsnewspaper.com/949/ae/campbells-soup-star-wars-commercial/, 10/21/2015

2 – “For, every man has by nature the right to possess property as his own. This is one of the chief points of distinction between man and the animal creation…it must be within his right to possess things not merely for temporary and momentary use, as other living things do, but to have and to hold them in stable and permanent possession; he must have not only things that perish in the use, but those also which, though they have been reduced into use, continue for further use in after time. ” from paragraph 6 of the encyclical Rerum Novarum by Pope Leo XIII published 5/15/1891, http://w2.vatican.va/content/leo-xiii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_15051891_rerum-novarum.html

3 – “From work comes a person’s dignity,” quote of Pope Francis, in “Pope Francis on the Dignity of Labor,” by John A. Coleman, http://americamagazine.org/content/all-things/pope-francis-dignity-labor, 11/20/2013

4 – “A popular God-is-dead book in the United States argues that homosexuality will become normal in a humanistic society where there is no restriction of morals which come from religion. St. Paul declared homosexuality and atheism were related to one another as effect to cause.” From The Quotable Fulton Sheen, edited by George J. Marlin, Richard P. Rabatin and John L. Swan, an Image book by Doubleday, New York City, 1989. Quote was cited from Footprints in a Darkened Forest, page 213, New York: Meredith Pres, 1967.

5 –Ibid. with the original quote from Philosophies at War, page 52, New York: Scribner’s, 1943.

You Misunderstood, Mr. President, We’re Trading YOU For a 3-Year Old Orphan

Featured

In the absence of a persuasive argument, President Obama has spoken condescendingly once again. This time it was directed to those who are concerned about allowing Syrian refugees into the U.S., especially since last weekend’s terrorist attacks in Paris. (One of the dead terrorists in France, an EU nationalist, and a man in a Serbian refugee camp each had passports with the same details: those of a Syrian loyalist soldier, Ahmad Almohammad, who died a few months ago.[1])

Using his favorite tactic, our President said, “At first they were worried about the press being too tough on them in during debates. Now they’re worried about three-year-old orphans. That doesn’t sound very tough to me.” (2)

Mr. Obama, we’re not afraid of three-year old Syrian orphans, quite the contrary. We’re looking to trade you for one of them. You see, with a child of that age, we don’t have to worry about his spending trillions of dollars he doesn’t have. Another benefit is that little one cannot possibly write unconstitutional executive orders. Three-year olds normally don’t harass Christians and conservatives. And when that child tells a lie you’d be proud of, we’ll make sure he faces the consequences of his actions and no news media will deflect for him.

While we’re thinking of it, Syria, if you have a couple extra three-year olds, we’ll take them and you can have our Vice President and the presumptive Democratic nominee, too – and we’ll pay the shipping. We will ensure their servers are secure and that no money from foreign governments is going into their little “529” foundations which would influence their decisions some day.

1 – “Were Syrian refugees involved in the Paris attacks? What we know and don’t know,” by Ishaan Tharoor, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/11/17/were-syrian-refugees-involved-in-the-paris-attacks-what-we-know-and-dont-know/, 11/17/2015.

2 – “Obama torches GOP on Syrian refugees: ‘Now they are scared of 3-year-old orphans’,” by Nahal Toosi, http://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/barack-obama-refugees-216007, 11/17/2015.

Was Quentin Tarantino Speaking About Planned Parenthood?

Featured

“’When I see murders, I do not stand by . . . I have to call a murder a murder and I have to call the murderers the murderers,’ the ‘Pulp Fiction’ auteur blathered to a cheering rally-goers.” (1)

Wow, Quentin Tarantino must have seen the Planned Parenthood videos describing their methods of increasing their abortion profits from selling parts of killed babies… Oh wait, that’s not right. He’s Hollywood and they are in favor of legalized murder as shown in the recent movie where a grandmother decides to help her teenage granddaughter raise the funds for an abortion because:

“While the media do their best to avoid the house of horrors that Planned Parenthood has been exposed as being, in a series of videos by the Center for Medical Research, they have no problem with touting the wonders of a film about abortion.” (2)

Too bad he doesn’t have the moral formation to speak out against the real murderers which are our nation’s biggest shame.

1 – “Quentin Tarantino, protesters rally against police brutality in NY days after cop shooting,” http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/10/25/quentin-tarantino-joins-protest-against-police-brutality-in-new-york/, 10/25/2015

2 – “Leave it to Hollywood to promote ‘funny’ abortion movie in midst of Planned Parenthood scandal!,” by Carmine Sabia, http://www.bizpacreview.com/2015/08/22/leave-it-to-hollywood-to-promote-funny-abortion-movie-in-midst-of-planned-parenthood-scandal-241496, 8/22/2015

Please Be Certain: Divorce is NOT a Mortal Sin

Pope Francis’ accessibility to the secular press has provided for many teaching moments. The opportunities are welcome especially on the light of this statement of the late Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen:

“There are not more than 100 people in the world who truly hate the Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they perceive to be the Catholic Church.  ….As a matter of fact, if we Catholics believed all of the untruths and lies which were said against the Church, we probably would hate the Church a thousand times more than they do.”1

The discussions around the pope’s various comments have also brought to light one misconception which a surprising number of Catholics have.  The issue involves whether divorced Catholics may receive Communion.  The lifelong nature of the marriage commitment is why the Church discourages divorce.  However, the key point is that divorce, by itself, is not a sin.  It is not objectively wrong as sex outside of a valid marriage between one man and one woman is.

Merely securing a divorce does not require the individual to abstain from receiving Holy Communion.  Living chastely after a divorce is a virtue, certainly not an impediment to receiving the sacraments!

The item which has the secular press abuzz is the problem of divorced Catholics who marry outside the Church, because no annulment was sought or granted, and live as husband and wife.  For this situation the words of Christ are definitive:

“I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another commits adultery.”2

Christian marriages are for life unless it can be proven that not all of the necessary elements for this commitment were present at the time of the wedding.

As the verse goes, “So they are no longer two, but one flesh.  Therefore, what God has joined together, no human being must separate.”3   No civil court has the authority to break a covenant created by a Christian marriage.  Only the Church can determine that the bond was not sacramental and therefore no covenant exists.

The plea to fellow Catholics is: don’t miss out on Holy Communion if your only concern is that of being divorced.  The Eucharist must be respected4  but it’s very unfortunate when it’s avoided unnecessarily.

 

1http://www.catholicbible101.com/archbishopsheenquotes.htm

2 – Matthew 19:9 from The New Catholic Answer Bible,” Fireside Catholic Publishing; Wichita, KS, 2005.

3 – Matthew 19:6, Ibid.

4 – “Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord.  A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup.  For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself.” (1 Corinthians 11:27-29), Ibid.