A proposed bill promising major changes in the U.S. abortion landscape has Roman Catholic bishops threatening to close Catholic hospitals if the Democratic Congress and White House make it law.
The Freedom of Choice Act failed to get out of subcommittee in 2004, but its sponsor is poised to refile it now that former Senate co-sponsor Barack Obama occupies the Oval Office.
A spokesman for Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., said the legislation “is among the congressman’s priorities. We expect to reintroduce it sooner rather than later.” FOCA, as the bill is known, would make federal law out of the abortion protections established in 1973 by the U.S. Supreme Court’s Roe vs. Wade ruling.
A spokesman for Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., said the legislation “is among the congressman’s priorities. We expect to reintroduce it sooner rather than later.”
FOCA, as the bill is known, would make federal law out of the abortion protections established in 1973 by the U.S. Supreme Court’s Roe vs. Wade ruling.
The legislation has some Roman Catholic bishops threatening to shutter the country’s 624 Catholic hospitals — including 11 in the Archdiocese of St. Louis — rather than comply.
(Hat tip: Psaturn)
Tags: Abortion, Catholic Church
And once the babies are slaughtered, you can ravage their remains to suck out stem cells in hopes of curing a disease that can be done with noninvasivly taken stem cells.
But that’s ok…. If they can manage to avoid the deathtrap of abortion, the government will put them to work as a drone until they die.
Big Brother is Watching You.
I am really glad you posted this. As a person of Faith, and someone who recently attended the March for Life, I cannot tell you how upset I am to see this President and this Congress dismantle protections for the unborn in this nation and abroad. The permission to federally fund Embryonic Stem Cell research with our tax dollars (which btw, has not even been shown to work) is another slap in the face to those of us with who support a culture of life. We can anticipate an attempt to pass FOCA as well, which will complete the trifecta. I am sorry, but in my view, there is evil afoot. Our leaders are so readily corruptible that they have lost their moral compasses. It is so obvious to me what is happening. Our secular world has shut out God. And they instead have devoted themselves to other forms of worhip, namely humanism and secularism. Those supporting a culture of death are spritually lost. I know I am preaching to the choir here (btw) this entire post would have gotten me banned at 1.0) but for those here of faith, I say the only thing I can say, while the horizon is dark, fear not and still have hope for through prayer, mountains can crumble and tyrants are vanquished. So please pray for “change” only this time, let it be of Mr. Obama’s heart and the remainder of our elected officials.
If this is a “women’s rights” issue, than what about unborn women? Don’t they have rights too?
BuddyG….
Nope. now that babies aren’t considered humun unil they’re born, there’s no stopping the forces that want to kill them. The sad part is the guilt isn’t even realized once you dehumanize.
LanceKates, yup, all women are created equal, but some are more equal than others.
Many Catholics have been writing on FOCA for a while, I expect another wave when it is reintroduced — that is a good time to protest to the Congresscritters, since they do have a short attention span.
Denver’s Archbishop Charles J. Chaput has become a leading and very eloquent spokesperson for the Church’s position on life matters. Here is a link to an article he wrote on the new president and FOCA:
http://www.catholic.org/politics/story.php?id=31743
And Archbishop Chaput with Bishop Conley wrote the most stinging rebuke to Pelosi last August when she interpreted Catholic doctrine concerning life matters on “Meet the Press” and demonstrated her total ignorance of Catholic teaching and that she has obviously never opened her Catechism:
http://www.archden.org/images/ArchbishopCorner/ByTopic/onseparationofsense&state_openlettercjc8.25.08.pdf
The Archbishop does not mince words.
Bar, I really like the poster you added — never saw it before, what is the origin??
(My second link is running outside the white area in IE7, but it still seems to work)
Dhild of Mary, as a Catholic, and a practicing one at that, I am aware of FOCA. I agree that it is coming soon but not here yet. But already the Mexico City policy has been reversed, now embyonic stem cell, and FOCA is not far behind. BHO appears to be doing everything he promised. Americans better find ir voices. This problem is urgent. I also agree that our church leaders need to be yelling from the rooftops what we believe and why! We need about a thousant Father Corapi(s)…
Child of Mary – btw, are you a devotee of Our Lady?
Too simple, logical and reasonable for the left to wrap their minds around.
wright1faith–
Obama is doing so much so fast — it’s hard to believe he’s only been in office for a short while — the man is positively exhausting.
Praying the Rosary was a spiritual practice that helped me become a Catholic, as did praying the Morinig and Evening prayer of the office. I was completely unchurched and had a childhood that led me to agnosticism at age 10, which lasted for many, many years. As God kept calling, which He does, I had many choices — the more I studied and contemplated and compared the more I came to believe that the Catholic church was where I belonged. My attraction to the Church was more heavily an intellectual one rather than a sort of spiritual awakening. But the Rosary reflections and the Divine Office definitely keep me focused and are the spiritual practices that seem to fit me best — as well, of course, the Mass and Eucharist. That’s one thing about the Church, she has many spiritual approaches — most people don’t realize that.
song_and_dance_man
Amen — logic has no place for the left — it’s all about feelings and what they define as good intentions. I think if most of them had to deal with logic their heads would probably explode.
CoM: I like your answer although you did not answer my second question. I was a convert from agnosticism as well. I converted in my 20’s but my Faith did not impact me because I did not know much about it. I heard the call to become more invested in my Faith a few years ago and I went to Medjugorje and it changed my life. I am now a faithful follower. I too say the Roaary as often as I can and try to make it to Daily Mass. The Divine Office I have not yet entered into but it is a prayer that no doubt awaits me. Adoration of the Eucharist has helped me strongly. I have seen the proverbial light and I will never abandon Him again. Amen.
What happened to the recent comments in the sidebar? I need that to see which threads are jumping.
wright1faith–
You asked whether I was a Devotee of Our Lady — and I would say yes — praying the Rosary — and I have to say knowing that she is my Mother, that meant a lot since my own parents were not what parents should be in too many ways — does that clarify a bit more? And was there a second question — I be confused, but then I often am –
I’m glad to hear your story — it seems that taking a look as an adult often leads to more conviction — I consider myself a John Paul II, EWTN, Father Richard John Neuhaus Catholic.
# 6. ChildOfMary
I found that image at photobucket, I just did a simple anti-Abortion google image search.
Many of the images are far to repulsive to post.
# 13. song_and_dance_man
I was wondering the very same thing, I feel lost.
#14 CoM – Thank you. It was your nickname that drew my attention. I am with you on the persons and philosophy you admire. I am a huge fan of the work of Father John Corapi. But I also enjoy Mother Angelica.
Getting back to SaDM, I too noticed that there are no comments bar…hmmm?
Oh Bother.
Now let’s see, as a Catholic I believe in God the Creator, so I am a Creationist. A Creationist by bobxxxxxxxx def. is equal to a Muslim terrorist, so the Catholic hospitals must be terrorist training camps. The training camps must be removed as they promote evil.
/Close’em down, turn,em into urban retreat houses.
Song and Dance and Bar
I was wondering the same thing. I feel all out of the loop of what’s happening!
Just to play the devil’s advocate (pardon the pun), how many Catholics vote democrat??
To cite Jefferson—not exactly a Bible-thumping right-winger—”I fear for my country when I reflect that God is just.”
Annie—IIRC, the Catholic vote split about 50-50 in the presidential election. Among those who go to church weekly, nearly 65% voted for McCain.
Sparky— Give ‘em to ACORN !
In all seriousness, Almighty Caesar is a jealous god and would be happy to see church charities disappear. People should look to the State for their care, right?
Buckle up…the Obama ride begins.
Thanks Anastacia. I thought it would be about that. There are many Catholic Democrat groups out there. I posted elsewhere about growing up in St. Louis where the heavy union influence is common. My question there was where will all the needy go when all the Catholic hospitals close. Will the needy get better care through the state? HA!
Sure! The needy will get great care! Free abortions. Free pills to commit suicide if your disease is deemed too expensive to treat. Lotsa goodies!
If the Catholic vote wasn’t split, would it have effected (or affected?) the election outcome?
Anastacia,
I need free drugs. I worked so hard this week I could us some of Mother’s little helpers.
Hi Admins,
Can you do a new thread on the John Galt effect?
Annie, that’s a good question. If just 10% more had been on McCain’s side, I suspect Colorado and Indiana would have been saved, and maybe Florida. I dunno.
It would have been closer.
Speaking of Mother’s little helpers, my daughter is calling me to supper. She’s made scrambled eggs.
(Please, please Lord, make it edible!)
LOL!
Anastacia, maybe it get’s back to that need to look like you are the kinder person who cares about people, hence they vote democrat.
Good luck with dinner.
If the government mandate that ALL hospitals carry out abortions then the Church has no choice but to close its hospitals. many will be loaded onto the already stretched health indusrty and some may suffer long waits. That is the cost of forcing Christians to do evil. They refuse no matter what.
What i want to know is when the US College of bishops will get their collective arses into gear and excommunicate the whole covern of catholic politicians who support aborting starting with the Speaker and Vice President/
There have been enough warnings. It’s time for the vatican to ‘man up’ and if the local bishops refuse to act then the Vatican should and repost those dissenting bishops to missionary work in the Third World where they can mull over their faith.
It’s time for the church to start kicking butts. If it doesn’t then it will be seen as weak and vacillating. I don’t think B XVI can be called that!
Hell Ausie maybe those hospitals need to close so people can suffer under socialism. Only then will they get it and vote these bozos out.
I followed ChildofMary’s link to Archbishop Chaput’s article and have read the article three times. Why, I wonder, didn’t he leave out the third paragraph? Particularly in the light of the sentence which precedes it, “But we can always at least serve the truth by not lying to ourselves and to each other. ”
Archbishop Chaput encourages his flock work against the passage of a bad (evil?) law, while he points to beneficial elements of the election of Obama and encourages support of his administration’s stated goals of national renewal, unity, and hope. Stated goals are no longer the issue. They served the purpose of getting Obama elected. Actions are now the issue, and none of the actions of this administration thus far offer much hope.
Obama himself is the lynch pin of the future of FOCA. When the rabidly pro-choice Congress sends him the legislation is he likely to veto it? The Archbishop’s grasping at the straws to point out possible benefits arising from Obama’s election merely produces confusion of the sort which led to Obama’s margin of two or three million among the thirty million Catholic voters. The potential losses resulting from Obama’s power far outweigh the potential gains. He demonstrates that every day.
I’m not Catholic, but I certainly deserve being banned from LGF because I devoutly believe that our Creator did endow us with inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Perhaps simplistically, I contend that the most precious among them is the right to life. I count on the Catholic Church to share that belief and to articulate the stand of the Church in no uncertain terms. Perhaps the Archbishop doesn’t generally mince words, but I think he did in that article, to the detriment of his overall message.
I recognize that Catholic voters make up no more than about 20-25% of the electorate, but I hope that the leadership of the Church can motivate them such that more than 45% of them will vote with me against so-called pro-choice candidates for every office including that of President.
Annie– I think there were so many things operating to throw the election Obama’s way — Hillary’s stupid planning that just assumed the nomination was hers for the taking; Obama’s race; the economic downturn that generated fear; the nomination of McCain and his weak, inefftive campaign; the general cultural changes that have greatly influenced the younger generation; the fact that the Obama campaign was able to skillfully get that younger generation; downright intimidation in a couple of primaries by the Obama supporters; Obama’s race; that’s just off the top of my head, but it was like a “perfect storm” situation.
Aussie infidel — I could not agree with you more — I want my Church leaders to do what is right, to practice what they teach, — NOW!!!
Hagar — I think that Church leaders always try to look for something good to say in the midst of the negative and to not make outright enemies unless necessary and to hope for a change of heart by those who show themselves to be at odds with God’s natural law — Remember, hope and change were pretty poorly defined except for those of us who really took a good look at O’s past. As long as they step up when all is finally obvious — and I do whish they would do as Aussie suggested above, it’s been way too long and gentle reproaches and prayers for change have not done enough to change the culture. Time to fight.
Well, AussieInfidel, you did it again. If I hadn’t been involved in writing my post, but instead had read your #32, I’d have recognized that you had already said it all and, I should add, better than I did. Hear, Hear!
Hagar — I will also say in my church there could not possibly be any confusion as to who the church supported and why, they went as far as they could without violating the law that states Church’s cannot engage in politics and directly endorse a person(unless, of course it’s a black church, in which case it’s ok to actually have the favored candidate speak during the services — it’s a blatant double standard). But it was very obvious except to the exceptionally dense who the Church felt the choice should be and why — but God gave us all free choice and freedom to violate our consciences and that includes Catholics.
ChildOfMary,
More than I wish that current statements by the Church hierarchy were stronger, I wish that statements from the pulpits prior to the election had provided to the congregations those facts about Obama’s past that some of us took the time to find for ourselves. Water over the dam, I know, but tragic, don’t you think?
Concerning Catholics, the problem is simply poor leadership amonst various Parishes and Dioceses. There is no confusion on what we believe. The Pope has been very clear as has his predecessor, John Paul. But dissension in the ranks has been tolerated and for that, we have all suffered.
I know that in my diocese we had films, brochures, words from the pulpit that made it very clear that whereas we sometimes have to weigh carefully who to vote for because one person does not have 100% of the policies that the Church supports, there was one set of overriding issues in this election, and that those were life issues and there was one candidate who was clearly unacceptable — and that was Obama — there could not have been any confusion in anyone’s mind — and yet I’m sure some in my parish supported Obama.
I again point to Archbishop Chaput who addressed voting and the choice we had to make very clearly in speech he gave in October 2008:
http://www.zenit.org/article-23964?l=english
Can’t be much clearer than that and this address received wide circulation in Catholic circles.
Child of Mary
I’ve never understood how a Catholic person could interpret the life issues any other way. Though I brought up the issue of the heavy union influence in many largely populated Catholic areas, there are other areas that vote heavily Democratic but are heavily Catholic.
Nearly all the California Hispanic population. They voted for Yomama but voted down Prop 8. Go figure.
#42 Annie
I know what you mean — but don’t forget that the Church has been and continues to be under attack from within — maybe coming to it from the outside means I appreciate this more clearly — but there are those Catholic church members who have been influenced by the broader culture and believe that the church needs to change on some of the life issues (among other things) — that it is old fashioned, out of step with modern ideas, which they believe are far superior to traditional ideas. Their mission has been and remains to change the church from within. To my mind the Church needs to say if you cannot accept the teachings on these few basic issues then leave the Church — period. There are pleanty of churches these folks could join. Those of us with traditional ideas willing to inform our consciences by evaluating and bringing ourselves into agreement with what has worked for thousands of years rather than worshipping the new must encourage the dissenters to leave and continue to fight them and, of course, pray for them.
ANd some of those advocating change are those who have become a part of the heirarchy — priests, bishops, etc. — they are not all laity.
A little OT, but interesting.
A Proposal to Clarify the Legal Definition of Religion (Vanity).
no2liberals — thanks for the link
ChildOfMary,
You’re welcome.
I’m still processing it, before I can comment.
#46 no2liberals
Me, too — and since i’m fading fast, it will probably be tomorrow before I can fully process and comment.
BuddyG,
I’m a female, and I’ve noticed that hypocrisy, too – abortion involves the killing of little females in the womb, but most feminists don’t seem to care.
Most people who get abortions in China and other nations usually opt to abort females, since males are more valued, due to cultural reasons.
Do Western feminists care? Because they sure don’t act like they care that lots of little girls are getting killed in the womb.
I used to be pro-choice, from the time I was very young, until I got up to around age 25.
Because I was once pro-choice myself, I do understand the opposition and where they’re coming from, but when I got older, I realized that trying to depict abortion as a “woman’s choice” and all that is bunk, and it’s unfair to the human in the womb.
I changed my mind because I realized it came down to responsibility (don’t have sex if you don’t want to get pregnant, but if you insist, at least use birth control) and it’s about being selfish, putting self first.
That is, the attitude of a pregnant woman considering an abortion seems to be, “Having a kid would be inconvenient for me, or I just don’t want to go through it all -the physical changes, time, and expense- so I’m going to terminate the pregnancy.”
I’m sure for some women who get abortions, there’s a lot of heartache and thought involved as well, so I don’t mean to make it look like it’s necessarily an easy decision for them, but I’m saying once you get right down to it, they’re putting their own needs, wants, goals, and life ahead of that life in their womb.
It also dawned on me that nobody was really taking into consideration the unborn’s right to life.
Obviously, a little fetus can’t get on a loud speaker and say, “Hey, Mom, please reconsider aborting me, as I’d really like to be born.” They can’t speak up for themselves.
Everyone on the pro-abortion side has a lop-sided interest in the welfare, feelings, or “rights” of the pregnant woman or teen girl, but they don’t give a squat about the baby human growing inside the teen girl/woman.
I think it’s weird that people who claim to be so concerned about one class of people (grown woman, teen girls) does not give a whit about another (little babies in the womb, some of whom will be future teen girls and women if allowed to be born).
# 48. CloudyDay
From what I have read and the few women I have spoken to about this issue, they are devastated later by their choice. It goes against most women’s nature which is to nurture not to kill.
Now us men are not guilt free in this issue, it benefits them also, free sex without the worries.
And I bet a lot of men talk the women into doing this.
CloudyDay
Very well said — many people’s thoughts evolved in a similar way, few could sum it up so well
CloudyDay
I must admit I hadn’t given your gender a thought, but generally a name, or cue lets others know.
Now I know.
As for the content of what you wrote, it makes perfect sense to me. Young ladies are being indoctrinated early, in believing they can chose what to do with their bodies, without consequence. This often creates conflicts later, as you experienced, in realizing what is right and good, and the power to create that a woman has, and the mighty responsibility that comes with it.
bar alluded to it, and have heard Rush reference it many times, over the years, that statistically, males under the age of 35 are more supportive of abortion on demand, than any other demo.
Hunh!
WP codex doesn’t seem to work.
#49 (I am so glad that #s are showing up by posts now!)
bar-
Yes, both points you raised are true.
I have watched TV shows with women who had abortions years ago, they all said they regretted it, felt guilty, some had medical problems from the abortions, and at least one lady said her boyfriend pressured her into getting an abortion, but she really didn’t want to.
In a way, some men do use abortion for their own selfish benefit, which you would think would cause some feminists to be against abortion.
Years ago, at least the feminists had sense enough to be against pornography -they recognized how demeaning and damaging it was to all women- but then a new school of feminists came on to the scene actually defending pornography and lambasting traditional values regarding marriage and sex.
These new feminists basically defined “being empowered” as a woman having sex when ever she wants, with whomever she wants, as often as she wants.
And of course, there will always be piggish teen boys and men who will gladly support that new feminist outlook, since they benefit from it – sex with no strings attached, no commitment demanded first.
The result is that a lot of young women from the 1980s onwards are getting taken advantage of (sexually), don’t understand why they can’t land a decent man, they cry and lament that there are no decent men left.
It goes back to the old saying, “Why buy the cow when the milk is free?” There’s a lot of wisdom and truth in that expression.
n2l, the new theme was very basic. I’ve had to add all the cool stuffs. I’ll put that on the list to check out
AKm,
So that’s where you’ve been, busily working the gears and levers behind the satin curtain.
Don’t take my comment as a complaint, more of a…hunh?
No worries, n2l! I have to know these things or I can’t try to fix’em
AKm,
Here is the codex home page, and here’s their smilies.
That one was nice and easy. It was just turned off in wordpress
Yeah!
#51 no2liberals
I was posting at this blog under the names “RainyDay” or “Rainy Day Weather,” up until two weeks or so ago, but once I had problems posting under those names, I switched to “Cloudy Day.”
My screen name at LGF 1.0 was different than the names I chose here.
BTW, I suspect that one reason so many women are pro-choice is that they are afraid they might get raped and get pregnant by the rape.
None of them want to carry a rapist’s baby to term.
I’ve had a few tell me this point blank – they don’t really like abortion on demand (abortion as birth control), but they’ve all said if they get raped and get pregnant, they want to know that they can run right out and get an abortion.
I still don’t buy into that, because all the studies I’ve ever seen published say that the vast majority of abortions were of babies conceived through consensual sex, not rape or incest.
I think hospitals these days give rape victims the “morning after” pill (or whatever it’s called) so that they won’t conceive, so keeping abortion legal for cases of rape seems moot.
Secondly, I don’t see how it’s the baby’s fault if he or she was conceived from rape, so why should the baby pay for the mistake of the scum bag rapist?
I’ve seen interviews with women over the years who did conceive via rape, had the baby, and kept the baby, and they loved the baby.
I’m sure some such women give the baby up for adoption, which is another option.
Getting raped would be pretty traumatic, but I’m not sure I see how two wrongs make a right – getting raped (wrong), aborting the baby conceived thru the rape (wrong).
n21,
I touched on this in a post above, but I’d think that would be one reason feminists would be against abortion, and against encouraging women to have sex with no boundaries: men just take advantage of both views/situations, and women get used.
That might be fine with women who are just interested in casual sex and being used and tossed away like a piece of trash….
But most women aren’t into casual sex, and despite all the feminist indoctrination (”You don’t need a man! You don’t want a man! You can have sex with no negative consequences!”), most females, deep down, want to be in a stable relationship with Mr. Right, a guy who will treat them with respect, bring them flowers now and then, etc.
~And you’re not going to get that kind of guy if you’re “putting out” for free all over the place.
CloudyDay,
I was funnin’ with ya’.
I knew you had posted with the previous nics, but never knew, or even gave a thought as to your sex. Some just have to know, I don’t even think about it. I mean, I assume Hagar and bar are guys, because of some of the mechanized sports we like, but if I’m wrong, and they are both female, it wouldn’t matter to me, we still have the same interests.
So you will know, I’m a dude, with two daughters that I love very much, and three wonderful grandchildren, two of which are girls, and hug me to death.
It has always pained me to hear of people getting abortions, and the massive number that are performed each day. I look at my little miracles, and am filled with joy, and love of life.
I can certainly understand why some women would feel threatened by a pregnancy from rape. To me, that is the very reason a morning after should even exist. While the attack is traumatic enough, and the damage to the confidence of the woman is immeasurable, removing any potential for further trauma, with a morning after, would make sense to me.
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t presume to know how a woman feels about her body, or her power to create. I’m simply looking at the cost, immediately, long term, and of course to society, in devaluing human life.
I spent a number of years in law enforcement, when I was younger, and have witnessed nearly all of the depraved things people do to one another, and because of my love for all the women in my family, and the respect I held/hold for them, was always very sympathetic to a rape or assault victim.
#62 n2l
Oh, okay; didn’t realize you were kidding around.
Up until the other day, I thought bar was a lady, for some reason (seriously, I thought bar was a woman).
n2l wrote,
I was watching a TV show, a police show, with my father a few days ago, and I was just telling him, “I don’t think I could handle being a police officer or one of those CSI people… think of all the horrible crime scenes and stuff they have to witness day in, day out.”
I have a sister who is interested in morbid stuff. When I was at her house last year, I was browsing her book collection.
She has a book with real-life crime scene photos- of suicide victims, etc.
I don’t think I could deal with being around the sort of thing on a daily or weekly basis. It has to be difficult. Looking at that book was enough to get me upset.
# 63. CloudyDay
That’s funny, do I really spell that good? Thank you Word Perfect.
When I pick my nic “bar” back in 2004 for JihadWatch, I didn’t realize it was a girls name in Israel.
I assumed that DJM was a guy, but come to find out I was wrong.
# 63. CloudyDay
Now when I am at the doctors office I tend to pass-out easy so the doctor kids me for being a girl.
It does have to be funny seeing a 6′ tall 185lb guy going straight to the floor. And then getting up and asking what the hell are you doing to me?
CloudyDay,
You have to develop coping skills.
They only work so well, and for me, of all the things I had to deal with, it was the car wrecks, with dead children, that convinced me to go back to college.
One night, after trying to get a badly injured woman to give me her 3 month old infant, that had been crushed to death, just ripped my guts out. I went home late that night, and just stood in the door and looked at my babies, and said “I can’t do this anymore.”
bar,
I actually was fainting once in my life, and realized it in time to get my head between my knees.
It was a shockumentary that the USAF made us watch for training purposes, about the effects of venereal disease, and what would have to be done if your urethra was blocked from the effects of gonorrhea.
It was not pretty.
I like your story Child of Mary, I came to The Church 3 years ago, but my parents were lapsed while I was growing up. I was raised basically agnostic, but I converted to Christianity in 05 after reading the Gospels again. I’ve been a “Shroudie” for years though. I just finally accepted it.
Lex – What is a “Shroudie” – do you mean the shroud of Turin? And if so, how did that change your faith?
n2l
That doesn’t sound pretty the last time I was able to notice it coming and assumed the position.
Its strange for me, if I see blood and gore I am going down. Yet I have witnessed a few bad car accidents and was able to help despite the gore. I assume it’s the adrenalin from seeing the accident that prevents that.
ChildOfMary,
One important item missing from your list of why Obama won is the Fellatio Media. 30 years ago, can you imagine a ‘reporter’ saying a candidate sent a thrill up their leg? And keeping his job? The total whitewash of Obama by the Fellatio Media led far too many to not know who Obama was. There were no questions or articles with even a hint of criticism for the Teleprompter Precedent.
68 Lex
It always astonishes me how God keeps pursuing us and sending us small signs and for a long time we barely listen or shake it off since the message is so radical — so mysterious — little by little things begin to make sense — and at some point, you realize here you are ready to committ
I don’t understand “Shroudie” — what’s it mean?
71 RickZ — you are correct, of course — another element in the perfect storm.
bar,
Don’t know what happened to my last comment.
I don’t know what causes fainting, but don’t think it’s the adrenaline. I’ve OD’ed on it several times, and all it did was make things slow way down, and then make me cry and vomit during the come down.
Anyway, got to shut it down. Have a good’un.
Have a good one n2l
n2l, we had a blip in the matrix momentarily.
Cloudy, that is weeeeeeeeird. I have firefox and IE and it’s popping up fine. There is a picture plugin activated, let me see if that’s the cause.
CloudyDay, I deactivated the picture plugin. Can you refresh and try it again?
Arwyn –
It took a while to get my last post up, I kept getting this delightful page:
==========
This Account Has Exceeded Its CPU Quota
Please contact this site’s webmaster.
Wait a few minutes and use your browser’s “Back” button or click here to try again.
——————————————————————————–
If you are the webmaster, your account may have gotten this error for one or more of the following reasons:
Your account has used more than its share of the cpu in the past 60 second sliding window.
Your account has too many concurrent processes running simultanously.
Your account has consumed too much memory.
Your site was recently very busy trying to run inefficient scripts.
The solution would be to optimize your applications to use less CPU.
Adding appropriate indeces to your SQL tables can often help reduce CPU.
Using static .html documents instead of painful .php scripts will practically eliminate CPU usage.
ChildofMary, I think we all got that for a few minutes. It may have been because I uploaded a bunch of pictures at once. I’ll just use photobucket for things like that and maybe it won’t happen again.
If you use photobucket does that mean the pics will sit there and be linked when you want them to appear rather than storing them on your site?
#78. ChildOfMary
Same thing was happening to me on the ‘Amsterdam’ page.
#80 ChildOfMary.
I’m not an admin at this blog, but yep, that’s what it means.
What you do is upload an image to sites such as Photobucket and Image Shack, and they host the photos for you, on their servers.
The only downside to using free image hosting sites is that some of them, sometimes, after several months or a couple of years, they will delete or move your image, so that any links to it will no longer work. (Image Shack has done this to images I’ve hosted before.)
I know that if too many people visit a photo hosted on Photobucket, you will temporarily get a message saying something to the effect of,
“Sorry this picture cannot be displayed right now, it has exceeded its bandwidth allotment.”
Other than that, free image hosting sites are a good solution if you need to show other people a photo and don’t want to host it on your own site for whatever reason.
Child of Mary.
Remember that the catholic church has been in a state of civil war for the past 40 years, ever since Vatican II.
Now there was a highly bureaucratic church structure post WWII and that needed to change to revisit the base underpinnings of the Church. Every few centuries the cguech needs to clean its stables of the accumulated dross. Vatican II was meant to do that. Unfortunately it happened at a time of great social change and elements within the church got caught up in that social change.
Many clergy were confused and began to think that Communism and Christianity were singing from the same song sheet. Hence the growth of so called Liberation Theology. Hence the growth of leftist theological colleges. Hence the capture by senior liberal bishops with strong homosexual proclivities dressed up in the clothing of liberal tolerance but in reality shielding a corrupt and corrupting academic clergy in theological colleges.
In Australia St. Patrick’s Theological college became a hotbed of radical leftist and homosexual excess. Professors of theology openly recruited clergy who pushed a homosexual lifestyle. Homosexual and corrupted seminarians used to hunt in packs up at Kings Cross and the gay bar scene in Sydney every weekend. Straight seminarians were hounded out or voted with their feet when the hypocrisy became too hard to bear. This trend was most strongly felt in the US. The stench of corruption entered the parishes with uber-liberal parish priests and PC spouting neo-marxist spouting bishops. The Laity hunkered down to ride out this perfect storm in the church. Some just left the church. Some were swept up in the hypocrisy because it was easier to do and herd instinct took over. Some sought out parishes where priests had good formation.
Meanwhile the Church swept all of its dirty washing including child abuse under the carpet. Such was the mood of the times. As always however there were small groups of clergy who kept to the hard narrow path and waited for the liberal perfect storm to wane. People like Cardinal George Pell in Melbourne. He and 17 priests recaptured the state of Vicroria from the hypocrites. They single handedly moved on the corrupt clergy and re-established parishes. Guess what. Those empty pews of formally liberal parishes began to fill once more as Catholics came out of the woodwork again as good parish priests took over. Once Victoria was secure once more Pell moved on the New South Walles Australia’s most populous state. He took a dozen or so priests with him because he couldn’t trust the clergy in that state as they were all corrupted and compromised. Over a decade NSW is coming right as did Victoria. Queensland is next. Currently there is a single parish in the whole state that isn’t dominated by corrupt clergy pushing the leftist PC line. That single parish in Brisbane overflows with laity every day and is the ONLY parish in the state that produces seminarians. Last year there were 3. From the rest of the parishes in the state … zip, nana. Zero zilch and it’s been like that for years. Pell asked that the parish priest come south but he dug in and asked to remain as he is the only outpost left in Queensland. Pell will invade over the next few years and take back the church in that state as well.
Now St Patrick’s Theological college is a 5 star hotel on Manly Beach in Sydney! That says a lot! There is however 2 new theological colleges where the professors are well formed and true to the church and seminarians are once more swelling the ranks of the clergy as parish priests retire or are moved on. The Church looks from a perspective of decades and centuries where the political radicals look in terms of months or years. Slowly the Church is being won back parish by parish. I believe that this is also so in the US. There are a LOT of hypocritical bishops especially in the US College of Bishops. They are slowly being winkled out or retired and slowly the church is returning to its principles. The point here is, don’t despair. There are a LOT of very good clergy who know what has transpired and they have a plan, and it’s working to win back the Church. My advice is to look around. Talk to people and find yourself a parish that you know has a priest with good formation. They are easy to spot. Their parishes are FULL. Laity know a good parish when they see one. The corrupt, PC and plain pathetic parishes fold as the pews empty and the hypocrites preach to empty pews.
B XVI has a plan as well because he helped to write it! He’s the arch …’long view tactician’… and he is winning this civil war one parish at a time.
I’m a recent convert to Eastern Orthodoxy, and the main thing each jurisdiction in Orthodoxy can agree on is the sanctity of life. We can’t even get the Patriarchs and Metropolitans to agree where to meet for an ecumenical council, but they all agree on that to be Orthodox is to oppose abortion. Of course how this plays out on the parish level is a different matter. Priests are free to refuse Eucharist to whomever they feel is unprepared to receive, and I could see quite a few of the priests I’ve spoken to refusing an open supporter of abortion.
In case we were wondering which way out nation is headed: http://kansascatholic.blogspot.com/2009/03/i-was-like-how-am-i-going-to-survive.html
Typical Obama strawmam statement when signing the bill:
“medical miracles do not happen simply by accident”
wright1faith
My son was educated in private Christian schools up to the 6th grade. And then I moved from Los Angeles to Albuquerque.
Since I became a single parent I can longer afford a private education so I enrolled J in public school. A thing I did not want to do. Well I was pleasantly surprised to find that here in the largest and most ’sophisticated’ city of New Mexico (I know that’s not saying too much) at my son’s first Open House in his High School the schools chorus sang an inspirational hymn praising Jesus.
I would think that Kansas, being a Bible Belt state would have a bit more tolerance towards the faith of the majority there.
song & Wright–I’m also a “Kansas Catholic”. We just switched back from the Parish school to public. Teachers here are like teachers everywhere though. They know the rules and adhere pretty strictly here to separation of school and religion. The school is rather mixed though, lots of Hindu kids, a few Muslim families and plenty of Jewish kids as well. They just don’t bother with any Faith issues, they leave it all out.
One funny aside though, they had this “Diversity” mural up with different kids with different flags from different countries. I finally (and would’ve done this had it been ANY faith) noticed the Saudi Arabian flag on the wall painted there and I had to make a complaint. I felt like they would think I was the biggest bigot, but I wasn’t going to let that stand.
If you don’t get that, here’s the Wiki page of the flag. I knew that the text was the shahada but no one else seemed to have noticed, and that is obviously an endorsement of one Faith, and of one Faith over others:
” a ilaha ill allah muhammadun rasul allah
“There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is his prophet”
I thought they’d just choose a different country, but they just painted it out and have a solid green flag now…LOL. I don’t know what bothered them more, that there was an endorsement of a religion on the very wall of the school or that I had told them that they messed up the script horribly and that the Arab families at our school would be offended by seeing the shahada painted all wrong.
Some people got angry when I posted about it ages ago trying to make points about the crosses as well as stars and crescents (and the Star of David on the Israeli kid’s flag), but those are symbols I argued back. Part of the culture, not an endorsement. So they didn’t change any of the flags with those symbols.
It was just so weird to be the only person who noticed that (there are a few Palestinian Muslim families there and they may have noticed). But even my husband was on the other side, that it was a flag and therefore didn’t count somehow under those rules, but I just kept up my case that the symbols on the other flags of all three Abrahamic religions weren’t even close to the proclamation right on the wall of “There is no God But Allah and Muhammad is his Prophet”!! In the end they might have just painted over it because they were more worried when I told them that the incorrect Arabic might offend Muslims rather than the endorsement issue. Eh, who knows. It just looks stupid now though….LOL.
Song–Kansas’ majority population is the KC area and while the rest of the state (other than Lawrence) might be “Bible Belt”, KC’s historically been majority Catholic. I actually have a pic of me with Archbishop Naumann.
Actually, the Sunday before the election Archbishop Naumann wrote a letter that Priests were forced to read about voting strictly on the pro-life issue. A friend’s Priest even said that he was only reading the letter because he was being forced to. My Priest read it grudgingly and seemed horribly uncomfortable having to read it. Honestly, we walked out rather angry about the letter. There was so much talk about Rev. Wright’s church and how it should lose tax exempt status for telling people how to vote and preaching politics, and then here were all the Priests forced into politics from the Altar. I would’ve been upset at this regardless of whom I supported for President, in this case Obama, as it was just so forced. I found in inappropriate to have the Archbishop telling us how to vote.
Regardless, we had early voting in Kansas (not on the Missouri side, though), so the letter reached most after they had voted early. And that sums up my dispatch from Kansas City!
That said though, I’m horrified at just how pro-abortion Obama’s turning out to be. I thought it would stay a non-issue during this Presidency no matter who won, and now that it hasn’t I feel horrified. I’m so pro-life I consider animal shelters that aren’t “No Kill” to be murderous! I just thought this wouldn’t come up at all, not this early especially. Oddly, I had turned down a request to be voted in and take over the Life Issues group’s Presidency last year, and I’m glad I turned it down, to be honest. I didn’t know then that I’d be supporting the Dem. candidate, but I’d have had to resign over it during the campaign. Now that that’s over though I’m rather sick over this. It’s just not a “choice”!!! Not to me, anyway!
Oh well, what can I say, I get upset if a tree gets cut down…LOL….I’m shocked that I still even eat meat. I’m pro-life on basically everything other than eating meat!
Lex – I agree with just about all you said and like the way you presented it except the part about telling you how to vote. Our Pators and especially our Bishops have an absolute obligation to correct misrepresentations on Church Teaching. Propogation of Abortion is a mortal sin. Period. End of discussion. If you vote for a politician that endorses the death of inocents, then you are in mortal sin yourself and you need to seriously consider what you have done and go to confession with CONTRITION. Catholics have been misled too long. That is why we have cafeteria Catholics. This is not a social club. The Church stands for what is the Truth. If we ameliorate that, we will have no church. So I say amen to the lone wolves in the wilderness who like John the Baptist are yelling out what we need to desperately hear. As if you needed further evidence, we now see what we have wrought with Obama. Evil is on the march. That may make people uncomfortable but there is evil in the world. His name is Satan. And this I am sad to say is his time. But fear not, for those who believe, we know he is the Father of Lies and he cowers from Our Lady and God. The other good news, we will ultimately prevail. All we need to do is continue to pray – that is what God asks of us…
#87-Lex — If you did not know that Obama is a pro-abortion extremist, it is because you were asleep at the wheel. If you did not know that he relentlessly and deliberately obstructed the Born Alive Baby Act in Illinois, that he sided 100% with the abortionists who stuffed born-alive babies in the utilty closet to die so the staff didn’t have to hear the screams, you were asleep at the wheel. If you did not know that Obama has been a pointman and shill for the abortion industry, and that promoting that industry has ALWAYS been and always will be a high priority for him, you were asleep at the wheel.
You can say that the MSM kept people in the dark and covered this up. A lot of pro-lifers who voted for Obama can use that excuse. But not you. You were WILLFULLY asleep at the wheel. You didn’t WANT to know. When the Church told you the issue was crucial, you were angry. They were meddling in politics, telling you how to vote! But they didn’t tell you to vote for McCain or not vote for Obama, did they? But you KNEW who was pro-life and who was pro-death. You KNEW. And you didn’t want to hear it, and you were pleased that your damned priest didn’t want to say it. And you were pissed off that the Church would actually care about life enough to spoil your little self-serving blindness. You didn’t WANT to investigate, so you distracted yourself by trashing the messenger that said you should, that said you had a moral and religious obligation to know where the candidates stood on these issues and to vote accordingly.
And now you are “horrifed?” Shocked! Your precious, sensitive, tree-loving soul is aching! Your golly-I-love-animals feelings are wounded! Please. GET REAL.
You are pro-life? Not if it requires you to perform even the most trivial sacrificial ACT. You are pro-whatever-Lex’s-exquisitely-beautiful-feelings-mandate-at-the-moment.
YOU personally voted for every single pro-death measure Obama executes. Your pretty feeeeeelings mean NOTHING. If you ever GET REAL, maybe you’ll be ready to get on your knees.
Lex … The narcissism is strong in you. As long as you put yourself first and pander to your own ego you will continue to be surprised by the unintended consequences of your actions and views. Please don’t try on the strawman argument of separation of faith and politics. We all live in the real world and compromises with evil is still evil and more so because we actually know the options and choose to follow our ego and self and rationalize our way past the ‘difficult questions’. That is the wrong road Lex and you must know it in your heart of hearts.
Your selfish choices will result in evil being done and there is no way that you can rationalize that away. You did have a choice. You knew that when you choose to vote for someone who was pandering to evil. Closing one’s eyes to evil when one knows the truth is the worst kind of evil. Rejection of the gifts given.
Time to get your faith back on track Lex and get your ego under control. It’ll be the death of your soul if you don’t. It’s up to you. Pray and climb back onto the hard narrow path. It was never supposed to be easy, trendy or ego enhancing. It was just the truth.
#89 – Well said Anastasia! I have met many a hypocrit like Lex, I am always vary of them and it looks like instincts were right. I always judge a person by their actions and not words.
My impression of Lex is that she is an overly emotional but basically sweet person, naturally tender-hearted in disposition. This is a great gift, but as CS Lewis once said, in matters of faith and morals, it is no more important than the gift of a good digestive system or a fabulous head of hair.
Indeed, it can be a liability in that one may come to believe that s/he is “nicer” than most people (probably true) and can therefore rely on inherent “niceness” to be good (absolutely, utterly false.) The habit of following one’s feelings with willful disregard of whether personal sentiment conforms to Truth and Goodness is, needless to say, deadly.
I’m sorry but I hate hypocrits, especially the ones with a stick up their backsides, the holier then thou types.
I usually never read her posts as I note 99% of the time, it’s complete nonsense….not trying to be mean but it looks like the words of someone who may need ’special help’ if you know what I mean.
Transcript of Obama’s remarks on stem cell research prior to signing today’s executive order:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/09/us/politics/09text-obama.html?_r=1
Text of Obama’s executive order on stem cell research and the executive order on scientific integrity:
http://blogs.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2009/03/full-text-of-ob.html
Some random thoughts from my very Fibro-foggy brain today:
Does anyone see anything in the executive order on scientific integrity that even hints at a moral demension to scientific work? It’s like if we can, we should, period. Very, very dangerous.
The President believes that the argument is between “politics” and “science” — object to his point of view and you are being political, there can be no other basis for differing with him.
In Goldberg’s “Liberal Fascism” he devotes a whole chapter to the connections between the 20th century Progressives in this country and the Eugenics movement. I found it quite chilling when our political liberal politicians started to refer to themselves as “Progressives”.
Obama says he is against “human Cloning” — but he does not clearly define this term, because if he did he would have to admit cloning is ok as long as the embryo is not implanted in a woman to develop into a human being — like it isn’t a human already.
We often speak of morality vs. immorality — we can argue with those who are “immoral” when measured by traditional Judeo-Christian values, because they acknowledge there is a concept of morality, a shifting one, perhaps, but a concept. What is more dangerous are those who are amoral — there are no standards, shifting or otherwise — I think this may be what we are dealing with today — many people who are amoral, they do not even understand the concept, they do not realize they are amoral.
Finally, Robert P. George’s October 2008 essay on Obama’s views on all life issues — everything covered here:
http://www.catholic.org/printer_friendly.php?id=30081§ion=Cathcom
Here is a good passage to remember, something I always need to remind myself of.
And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be humbled; and whosoever shall humble himself shall be exalted. (Matthew 23:12 ASV)
Lex
Our spiritual leaders should be compelled to distinguish right from wrong, no matter the law of the land.
As Paul said (and I paraphrase) ’should I obey God or man?’
The Sunday before the election is the first time our priest (not Roman Catholic, but Russian/Eastern Orthodox) even vaguely mentioned politics. His comment during the homily was about supporting those who support life for the unborn as essential to the Orthodox faith. Lots of pouty faces in the congregation that day, because despite the fact that as a religion Orthodoxy is very conservative/traditional (we still don’t have females serve at the altar) there are many liberal people who are Orthodox.
Child of Mary— Very thought provoking post and links. Thanks. I’m going to quote a part of your own “foggy” two cents because I think it’s worth a repeat:
CofM said: “Does anyone see anything in the executive order on scientific integrity that even hints at a moral demension to scientific work? It’s like if we can, we should, period. Very, very dangerous.
The President believes that the argument is between “politics” and “science” — object to his point of view and you are being political, there can be no other basis for differing with him.”
orthoi— If all the “pouty” Orthodox and Catholics would obey church doctrine and vote pro-life, the Democrat Party would be forced to change its position. At the very least, it would have to accept and accomodate pro-life candidates from heavily Catholic-Orthodox districts. Then liberals could choose a liberal pro-lifer, instead of having to choose a liberal cult-of-death candidate.
Pro-life liberals could really make a difference if they would put their faith BEFORE politics. Pretty soon they’d find that they could have BOTH.
Unfortunately, many of them are “pro-life” in name only.
Oh please. This election was offering nothing but losses and gains either way one voted. I wasn’t about to vote for that idiot pageant queen with McCain being so old. I could make these same comments at my other haunt and they’d think me rather right-of-center, not that I care there either. But please, as if my one vote does much at all. It was more to give the local GOPers the middle finger, which seems rather appropriate in this suburb of Escalades and Hummers. Abortion generally goes back to state law, something many Conservatives are fond of saying.
Abortion wasn’t a big part of Obama’s platform, hence my surprise. As for Faith, I never understood what abortion had to do with my religion, especially as I became pro-life before I became a Christian.
I can’t say anything here without it being torn down, not that it bothers me, it just makes me really wonder about you all. I at least give people a chance on my own site and on others. I might as well change my name to “Gary Ruppert” and become the notorious troll of Sadly, No!.
Here’s a challenge, go express these opinions at sadlyno.com and then make your case and debate it through. Then you’ll understand trying to simply converse about political matters on less friendly ground. The difference with me is that I’m rather detached from the opinions of others. “Overly emotional”? Hardly. I wouldn’t post here if I was, as I’d get far too emotional. As it is, I thought I was posting a comment that generally in agreement with the pro-life statements and admitting something I don’t like about Obama’s Presidency so far.
So be it, I’ll just let you all rag on me and have your fun since there’s no Sharmuta Triangle to be upset at here. The I’ll stick to skewering everyone as usual on my own turf. I’m just being me, and your assessments of me are rather off the mark. I’m quite friendly with the majority of you all. That takes a lot of tolerance on my part.
BTW, what exactly is this right-wing obsession with protecting dissenting opinions (a view I rather share) yet no one can seem to handle these opinions without sinking to ad hominems? It’s rather sad.
Oh, and Anastasia–I’m hardly pro-life “in name only”, as I do act locally for the cause, which does far more than voting for Obama in a red state that was sure to go to McCain anyway. At least I was consistent in my view that ending the war would save more lives under Obama’s plan than McCain attempting any restrictions on abortion, a battle he was bound to lose had he become Pres. with the Dem. opposition he’d have faced.
OK, back to Sadly, No! with me. See you there!
Lex—
If you had checked pro-life records and policy, you would know that McCain had no intention of restricting abortion beyond what Bush had already done. He would simply have maintained the status quo. He was on record as saying he would veto the Freedom of Choice Act, a sweeping pro-abortion bill, if Congress passed it. It was never a matter of what magical good that McCain would initiate, but of the evil that he could obstruct. THAT was the battle he enjoined, and he was NOT “bound to lose it.”
I’ll grant you that “abortion wasn’t a big part of Obama’s platform”— for PUBLIC consumption. As I said, the media covered his butt. But as I also said, any pro-life site would have told you exactly what he intended to do if elected, which is to overturn every single advance the pro-life cause has made at the federal level. Obama is a huge supporter of the Democrats’ pro-abortion agenda and his election gives Congress the green light to pass it.
Do you favor sending our tax money abroad to promote abortion? Do you favor using federal tax money to pay for abortions? Do you favor partial-birth abortions and want Congress to fund them? Do you favor rescinding federal funds from any hospital that will not perform abortions? Do you want Congress to enshrine abortion up to nine months as a “fundamental right?” If so, you are NOT pro-life, not even nominally.
If you are opposed to those things, but giving “the local GOPers the middle finger” is a higher priority to you than voting pro-life, you are pro-life in name only.
As for Obama saving lives by ending the war, it might have been useful for you to have noticed that the Iraq war was not a big issue in the campaign. By last fall the war had pretty much ended and Bush had already set plans for withdrawal of troops. There is no reason whatsoever to believe that the trivial differences between a McCain withdrawal and an Obama one would matter. I would argue that withdrawal would be more likely to proceed peacefully under a man who is feared than one who is not. So that attempt at “balancing pro-life goods” simply does not fly.
If you do not want ad hominem responses, knock off the pro homine (in this case, pro ego) rhetoric. Stating your opinion will most likely provoke a response to your opinion. Lacing your comment with prolific self-praise about how much YOU care, how deeply sensitive YOU are about this issue, opens the door to cross-examination about YOU, particularly when your actions clearly speak against your words.
(And BTW, if you did not want to vote for McCain, at the very least you could have abstained from voting for Mr. INFANTICIDE. As a fan of Obama, you can’t have too much objection to the whole idea of voting “present!”)
Well said. Actions speak louder than words. Especially when lives are at stake!
Once again, well said Anastasia! I enjoy reading your posts.
I hope I don;t come off sounding like a jerk but I think majority of women will always vote for the Dems, no matter what. We think we’re voting on issues but in actuality we’re not. We delude ourselves especially when we’ve made politics our religion.
Bar wrote
And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be humbled; and whosoever shall humble himself shall be exalted. (Matthew 23:12 ASV)
I think I need a dose of humility.
SD wrote
As Paul said (and I paraphrase) ’should I obey God or man?’
I think there is a correlation between atheism and socialism.
Ego? You just have me pegged wrong. If you knew me better you wouldn’t say these things. Admittedly, last year I was less active with Kansans for Life as I was struck down with Trigeminal Neuralgia which restricted much of my activity. Talk about a humbling experience!
Sorry about the mega-comment up there though, no need for me to leave ones that long other than if I’m telling a tale such as the “Saudi School Fiasco” tale, which I thought might be interesting to people here.
Either way you cut it though, I still think that voting pro-life locally did more (or at least seemed so at the time) for life issues than a VERY lost red state vote for Obama.
I think I’ve figured it out, Lex.
For you, it’s all about giving people you don’t like the middle finger, be it your local Republicans, Spencer, Pamela, whoever. Far as you’re concerned, it’s not about faith, politics, doing what’s right, avoiding what’s wrong; it’s all about attacking those you disapprove of, for whatever reason. Life for you is one big photo-shop joke, and you just can’t wait to stick it to the next one on your enemies list.
I hope you never have to explain to those kids who lives were lost to abortion, “Hey, sorry, kids! I just had to stick it to those mean ol’ local Republicans! No hard feelings, ‘kay? Peace! Save the trees!”
Good luck with that local work. Seeing as abortion is now federalized, I suspect whatever good you do there is just going to be a drop in the bucket. And please, you had to know Obama’s stand on abortion! Remember his remark about not wanting his daughter “punished” with a baby? Remember his support of letting children born alive during an abortion die? Remember his support of embryonic stem cell research? I think you knew, you just couldn’t bear to vote for that supposedly dreadful “beauty queen”, and you just had to give the finger to those horrid local Republicans. Guess they hurt your feelings, or something.
jamuka, I think there’s definitely a connection between atheism and socialism; if the state is to be all-powerful, then your good socialist can’t admit there could be anything more powerful than that. For socialists, the state must trump all.
I’m also beginning to think there’s a correlation between socialism and stupidity. Even if you start out your career as a socialist pretty smart, you’re going to be pretty dumb by the time it’s finished with you, and you’ve spent a lifetime making excuses for it.
Lex, if you’d been paying attention, you’d know Obama blocked the born alive act: http://www.citizenlink.org/content/A000007034.cfm
But, hey, you sure got to sock it to all those dreadful GOPers, who drive Hummers, and Escalades!
Lex, touchy touchy.
Anastasia simply commented on your comment. They do that over at Sadly, No! too ya know.
It’s just that over here you might get a “WTF?” instead of “WTG!”
Here’s something else pro-lifers should have considered before voting Obama: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/03/catholic_hospitals_might_close.html
Lex, I took a look at your Saudi article. Once again, it was mainly about Pam, Pam Geller, Pam, Pam, Pam, Pam, Pammycakes, Pam. In short, that busily waving middle finger again.
# 104. jamuka
You are fine, I rarely follow my own advice.
#34— Hagar— That is an excellent and articulate criticism of the Church’s handling of this issue.
I meant to say that earlier upthread—but better late than never!
In any case, when you juxtapose your remarks with the comments of orthoi (about liberal Orthodox getting “pouty” when priests mention abortion) and Lex (the resentment about a nice liberal priest being forced to inflict pro-life doctrine on nice liberal parishioners; the nervousness about the Church meddling in the sacred realm of politics)you can see the difficulty the Church faces. That even so strong a man as Chaput cannot face it head on is tragic.
#104 Jarmuka
There is indeed. Socialism depends upon the community of man and what he can do to create it without the help of Providence.
Lo and behold evolution fits quite nicely with socialism.
oops that jamuka not Jarmuka.
#103–Jamuka– You are, IMO, hitting on something fundamental in your statement that women will always vote heavily for Democrats. (IIRC, the only female demographic that does NOT lean that way is women who have been married over 5 years.)
Women, as a whole, are more interested in security than freedom. They are also far more easily suckered by sentimental images, mushy slogans, and feeeeeeelings than men are.
The fact that the decline of the West into socialism and wimpery coincides with the enfranchisement of women is not a mere coincidence. (I do not say it alone explains the decline, but it is certainly one important factor.)
#104- Jamuka
#115- Song
Caesar is a jealous god.
Yaza….ROFL…are you actually crediting me with causing abortions? Nice one! But yes, I do hate Yukon drivers. They drive like assholes, assholes whose crappy driving quotient goes up if it’s a Yukon XL. I just moved to the wrong part of town is all.
As for my blog, if I mocked the people you guys hate, you’d like it fine. It’s hardly my life. I do like photoshopping, it’s funny. As for mocking Pamela, guess you guys didn’t know that she’s PRO-CHOICE. HAHA! But she knows how to bash Muslims and Obama, so that’s all OK with you all.
I run a mockery blog. We’re just goofing off. I used to run a serious blog, and it had horrible consequences. Far better to be goofy. I have a new team member, BTW, a nice Muslim guy whom I’m SURE you’ll all love…Heeheehee!
Lex, I knew Pamela was pro abortion. Guess what? So are you, when you vote for pro abortion candidates like Obama. When you vote for pro abortion candidates, you are indirectly responsible for supporting, and abetting, abortions.
And Pamela doesn’t try to pass herself off as some oh so sensitive, feeeeeeelings, highly moral kind’ve pro lifer, who, gosh darn it all, just can’t bring herself to vote pro life because, heckity whizz darn it all, she just can’t stand those horrible GOPers who drive (gasp, shudder auuuuugh!) drive like asshoes in their Yukon XL’s! AIIIIIEEEEEEEEEE!
Once again, you just prove that your feelings, political views, stances, sensitivities, blah, blah, are all about waving that middle finger at people you don’t like. You try to pass this off as some sort of deeply moral stance, but it isn’t.
You run a goofy, mockery life. Is the “nice” Moslem guy Sphinx, the guy who supports Hamas? I’m sure he’s a pip.
Amid all you heeheeeheeeees, and goofing around, maybe you could tell us how you feel about Catholic hospitals closing, because they won’t go along with federally mandated abortions?
Of course, you probably think it’s A-OK. Never mind that Catholic hospitals save lives, and should be allowed to have freedom of conscience. Voting for Obama let you feel like you were giving the finger to those awful GOPers, who drive cars Lex does not approve of! Woot!
You might want to get a splint for that middle finger, it’s probably getting a bit sprained by now.
#105–Lex– My use of “ego” there was actually meant in the simple Latin sense of “I.” It was in the context of saying that pro homine statements naturally lead to ad hominem responses. It would have been much better if I had said “in this case the homine and hominem being you.” I agree with you that the word “ego” carries implications that were not necessarily warranted.
CAUTION: AD HOMINEM! (kind of)
The question is not whether your vote alone has the magical power to move the world, or more specifically, Kansas. The question is whether your personal act of pulling the lever for Mr. Infanticide was right, wrong, or morally neutral.
If you were honestly ignorant or slow-witted, it might be neutral. If you were purposefully ignorant, if you refused to look, if you deliberately pushed it out of sight and out of mind, it was NOT a neutral decision. Since you say that you are involved in the pro-life movement, it’s very hard for me to see how you could avoid the truth without massive and willful self-deception.
So was it right or wrong? The answer entirely depends on whether you are seriously pro-life or not. That’s all. If it was right, if you’d pull that lever all over again, then why in hell freak out NOW about what Obama is doing? If it’s a minor issue, it’s rather unfortunate, but it’s no big deal.
Geeze Lex, is the new guy anything like the old guy? (the nice muslim sphinx that supports hezbollah)
lol, Yaza I should have read down. You covered my question.
Lex
I am kinda surprised you didn’t accuse us who drive large trucks as supporting terrorist, with all gas we have buy.
You’re slipping.
#119–Lex— I’ve looked at your blog! (I haven’t read much there so I wouldn’t presume to trash or endorse it.) I think the photoshops are funny.
Of course I enjoy the mockery against Charles (ugh!) more than that against Geller (eh), much less that against Spencer (yes.) But I do think the Spencer as Sasquatch p-shop is clever and the Geller as a Cheetah Doll is priceless. The one with Geller as a sort of King Kong climbing up a building with CJ’s head in the window is a real hoot!
Lex– You said to Yaza : “ROFL…are you actually crediting me with causing abortions? Nice one!”
So, whom will you blame for the enactment of the pro-abortion agenda?
And why in hell are you LAUGHING?
Lex in #100 Wrote “As for Faith, I never understood what abortion had to do with my religion, especially as I became pro-life before I became a Christian.”
I’m just astounded by this statement — you did say you were a Catholic, yes? I became a Catholic a mere two and a half years ago. But for years before I was reading Church documents, for years before I was looking at any church, for so many years I would have to go back to high school days — for over 40 years, actually, I was acutely aware that the Catholic Church stood for LIFE in all circumstances. The Catholic church has been attacked for its stance for decades — mocked, condemned — how could anyone just living in the world not imbibe that from their surroundings. Meanwhile other demominations began to change, to become anti-LIFE — how could anyone alive not be aware of that also? I’m flumoxxed!
I’m also curious about something else you wrote in #119, “I used to run a serious blog, and it had horrible consequences.” What, pray tell, were the horrible consequences?
Meanwhile, as some of you may know, the Connecticut legislature was going to consider a law that would dictate how the Catholic Churches would be run in that state. I did not believe this could be a real story when I first heard it last night — but it is. Astonishing. Not that I don’t expect that to happen even on a national level if the Progressives continue to get their way — I just did not think it would happen anywhere this soon. After receiving many phone calls and emails, just since yesterday, the law has been shelved (for now).
Here is the article from the local paper, the Hartford Courant:
http://www.courant.com/news/local/hc-catholicshowdown.artmar10,0,7744055.story
The Anchoress has some very thoughtful coverage and very worthwhile links:
http://theanchoressonline.com/2009/03/10/ct-govt-wants-to-control-the-church/
A demonstration scheduled for noon tomorrow will still take place — info here for anyone in CT who can attend:
http://www.kofc.org/un/eb/en/news/legislative/detail/548357.html
Deleted