Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘pro-family’

From the AP via msnbc.com:

An international series of protests known as SlutWalks, sparked by a Toronto police officer’s flippant comment …is taking root in the United States.

…SlutWalkers have danced to hip-hop, worn T-shirts with the word “slut” and held signs that read “sluts pay taxes.” Some women have skated around on inline skates in lingerie, while their male supporters wore shirts reading, “I love sluts.”

Billing their event as something for the “whole family”, organizers around the country are promoting “SlutWalks” to build awareness that “sluts pay taxes too,” and to the “slut shaming” that is apparently a big problem for all the um, sluts out there.  (Slut shaming, the Associated Press helpfully explains, is “shaming women for being sexual.” Thanks AP!)  I’m grateful to msnbc and the Associated Press for making me aware of this great injustice being done to people who, through fate or poor life decisions, are sluts and are being burdened with unwelcome shame.

There have been SlutWalks throughout the country (Dallas, Philly, San Francisco, Seattle).  They originated when a Toronto police officer advised a group of university students in a safety seminar to avoid dressing like sluts so as not to be victimized.  Apparently, this was incorrect advice and the officer has been reprimanded.  However, the outrageous comments of this Neanderthal barbarian has galvanized the previously silent slut population who are taking to the streets throughout North America.

Here is the 21 year old organizer of the Boston Slut Walk, (she must be sorta like a modern Susan B. Anthony)–

It was taking the blame off the rapist and on the victim,” said Nicole Sullivan, 21, a student at the University of Massachusetts-Boston and an organizer of the SlutWalk planned Saturday in that city. “So we are using these efforts to reclaim the word ‘slut.'”

Well, good luck to all the sluts out there, reclaiming the word, “slut.”  It’s a shame (no pun intended) that the word ever got hijacked and used to describe, well, sluts.

The article contrasts these nationwide events with the Take Back the Night anti-sexual violence rallies, which are rather tame lame affairs in comparison.  Apparently, modern young women want to promote anti-sexual violence by dressing and dancing as, well…sluts.  And they have support among the more enlightened young men who proudly wear teeshirts and carry signs that say, “We love sluts.”  Yes, I imagine they do.

(At Take Back the Night’s official website, they don’t even have “We love sluts” teeshirts.  All they have are some boring “empowerment” and “break the silence” graphics.  *Yawn*)

In San Francisco, where the walk just developed “organically” (of course it did; isn’t everything in San Francisco “organic”?), the organizers think this would be a swell outing for daddies and mommies to bring the kiddos.

In San Francisco, SlutWalk organizers want to make their protest a family event.

“Singles, couples, parents, sisters, brothers, children, friends,” the SlutWalk SF BAY Facebook page announces. “Come walk or roll or strut or holler or stomp with us.”

So dress up your little girls as tiny sluts, pull a “I love sluts” teeshirt on dad and sons, and stomp on out to your local SlutWalk.  Because nothing, I mean nothing, deters sexual violence like running around in lingerie. 

You Satan will be so happy that you did.

Read Full Post »

Many babies died to get this picture.

 

***

And each one said to his neighbour: Come let us make brick, and bake them with fire. And they had brick instead of stones, and slime instead of mortar:  And they said: Come, let us make a city and a tower, the top whereof may reach to heaven; and let us make our name famous before we be scattered abroad into all lands.   Genesis 11: 3-4

 ***

“Life once conceived, must be protected with the utmost care; abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes.”  Gaudium et Spes, Second Vatican Council

 

IVF.  In vitro fertilization, also called artificial insemination.  The joining of an egg and sperm in a laboratory, creation of life in a test tube.  For some, it is a miracle.  They wonder at the majesty and brilliance of the medical profession, the advances man has made and exclaim what good man can do.  They forget, ignore, or willfully deny that man can do no good without God for God is the source of all good.  Our civilization is baking the bricks of our own technological Tower of Babel, and when we reach the top, when the medical community solves the riddle of life, we won’t need God anymore.  We’ll be like gods ourselves.

What a comforting thought. 

“After all,” we tell ourselves, “isn’t it God’s fault that there is poverty, want, ignorance, war, injustice, death and decay?  Isn’t it God who ignores our prayers and denies us what we desire, fails us in our wants, frustrates our right to have what we want when we want it?”  Well then, let’s not rely upon God.  His plan wasn’t very good and we can make a much better one.  Let us then make our own path.  Take the painful situation of infertility, of an absence of our own flesh and blood children.  Who is God to deny us our right to bear children?  I am entitled to have children, when and how I like, and it is not God placeto deny me, nor yours to judge me.  Like Lot’s daughters, we conspire, “Let us go into our doctors’ houses and lie with them so that we may have children.”

From UK‘s Daily Mail comes this priceless story of a 58 year old single woman who through IVF now has twins.  That’s her in the picture above, holding one of the children.  This story exemplifies all that is wrong with the western society’s brave new world of medical and technological advances.  Without moral grounding, you get this sort of thing.  To sum up the story, 58 year old Carole Hobson, a lawyer, decided that now that she was in her 50s, she wanted a child.  She admits never wanting one before.  Her boyfriend of eleven years felt differently.  So she ditched him and started her quest to get her some kids.  This involved an egg from India, sperm from Scandinavia, 5 rounds of IVF treatments, one abortion, £20,000, a team of National Health Service medical staff (paid for by British taxpayers), the birth of twins and the hiring of a fulltime nanny.   So single senior citizen gets her brand new kiddies with national healthcare, goes back to work and drops off the longed-for children with the college student who is going to raise them.  Sounds like a very happy ending, right?

Actually, interestingly, tellingly….no.

In one of those twists that reminds us who is God and who is not, mother Carole Hobson is overwhelmed and full of regret.  As the newsreporter writes–

Carole, sleep-deprived, pole-axed by the reality of caring for baby twins and anxious for their still fragile health, appears to illustrate perfectly the proverb: ‘Be careful what you wish for . . . you might just get it.’

But it’s early days yet and, to be fair to Carole, she looks far less frazzled than I’d expected, given the demands of twins. She seems to be  incredibly well and has a calm, loving commitment to her babies — but it’s hard to detect any sign of euphoria.

….

She was admitted to Medway Maritime Hospital as an emergency on December 17, suffering from pre-eclampsia and a winter respiratory virus. The decision to deliver the twins was made on Christmas Eve after Carole’s liver and kidneys started to fail.

‘Half an hour before the Caesarean, I was shown around the neo-natal unit where the twins would be taken after their birth and that’s when I sobbed my heart out, thinking: “What on earth have I done?” ’ says Carole.

‘I was crying for my babies and what they might have to go through to survive. That’s when the enormity of the situation hit me and I doubted whether I’d done the right thing.’

No, she didn’t do the right thing.  She did a very selfish thing and has brought those children into a life in which there is no father or mother, their legal mother may die before they even come of age and her plan is for nannies to raise them.  Those poor kids.  And I note that it is a funny time for her to wonder what her babies have to do to survive, given all that they had done to survive up to this point.  She had been pregnant with triplets but chose one to murder in the womb.  That’s called “a selective abortion” and is so frequent in IVF pregnancies that not having one or more abortions is rare.  So both of these twins had already survived one of her choices.   And these babies were born on her 5th round of IVF, meaning that literally 20-30 babies had already died prior to their arrival.  So dozens of dead babies preceded these tiny twins in life. 

What drives a person to such lengths?  Well, selfishness mostly.  It sounds to me as if Carole is greatly in need of love, a relationship with God and forgiveness, as her life decisions seem to be on a path of increasing destructiveness.

She described to me the extraordinary lengths she went to in order to achieve her goal, batting away any criticism of her quest for late, single motherhood with clear-headed logic and well-rehearsed argument.

She explained how it wasn’t until her late 40s and early 50s that — having lacked all maternal instinct in her 20s or 30s, while she forged her career — she came to bitterly regret her childlessness.

Her then partner of 11 years, a geologist, was not keen on the idea, so Carole decided to go ahead alone, effectively sacrificing their relationship on the altar of motherhood.

In pursuit of doctors who would help her, Carole travelled from Kent to the Ukraine, back to London, to Cyprus and finally to a fertility clinic in India — which treats women up to the age of 63 — where her fifth attempt at IVF proved successful.

‘I felt incomplete without a child,’ she said, explaining that she went to India because of shortage of egg donors elsewhere.

‘I want to seize every opportunity that medical science can offer me, as a woman. Some people might accuse me of being selfish or going against nature, but isn’t it going against nature to perform transplants or heart surgery? I’m no more selfish than any other woman who wants a family.’

Sin is like this.  We get embroiled in a few sins and before you know it, we have lost our relationship with God.  We may search to replace Him even.  I think that’s what happened here, with the helpful assistance of the Tower-building medical community.  Why didn’t someone say no?  Cause medical professionals are builders not moralists or ethicists.

So let’s review Catholic moral teaching:

Heterologous artificial fertilization violates the rights of the child; it deprives him of his filial relationship with his parental origins and can hinder the maturing of his personal identity. Furthermore, it offends the common vocation of the spouses who are called to fatherhood and motherhood: it objectively deprives conjugal fruitfulness of its unity and integrity; it brings about and manifests a rupture between genetic parenthood, gestational parenthood and responsibility for upbringing. Such damage to the personal relationships within the family has repercussions on civil society: what threatens the unity and stability of the family is a source of dissension, disorder and injustice in the whole of social life. These reasons lead to a negative moral judgment concerning heterologous artificial fertilization: consequently fertilization of a married woman with the sperm of a donor different from her husband and fertilization with the husband’s sperm of an ovum not coming from his wife are morally illicit. Furthermore, the artificial fertilization of a woman who is unmarried or a widow, whoever the donor may be, cannot be morally justified. (italics in original)

Why does the Church teach this?  Is it because she is out of touch?  Is it because she is run by a bunch of old guys who have no idea what desire feels like?  Is it because God hates us and wants us to be disappointed, frustrated and miserable?  No.  No. No.  It is because of love.  God will show us the path to life.

The Church’s Magisterium does not intervene on the basis of a particular competence in the area of the experimental sciences; but having taken account of the data of research and technology, it intends to put forward, by virtue of its evangelical mission and apostolic duty, the moral teaching corresponding to the dignity of the person and to his or her integral vocation. It intends to do so by expounding the criteria of moral judgment as regards the applications of scientific research and technology, especially in relation to human life and its beginnings. These criteria are the respect, defence and promotion of man, his “primary and fundamental right” to life, his dignity as a person who is endowed with a spiritual soul and with moral responsibility and who is called to beatific communion with God. The Church’s intervention in this field is inspired also by the Love which she owes to man, helping him to recognize and respect his rights and duties. This love draws from the fount of Christ’s love: as she contemplates the mystery of the Incarnate Word, the Church also comes to understand the “mystery of man”;  by proclaiming the Gospel of salvation, she reveals to man his dignity and invites him to discover fully the truth of his own being. Thus the Church once more puts forward the divine law in order to accomplish the work of truth and liberation. For it is out of goodness – in order to indicate the path of life – that God gives human beings his commandments and the grace to observe them: and it is likewise out of goodness – in order to help them persevere along the same path – that God always offers to everyone his forgiveness. Christ has compassion on our weaknesses: he is our Creator and Redeemer. May his spirit open men’s hearts to the gift of God’s peace and to an understanding of his precepts.  (footnotes removed) (emphasis mine)Introduction to INSTRUCTION ON RESPECT FOR HUMAN LIFE IN ITS ORIGIN AND ON THE DIGNITY OF PROCREATION REPLIES TO CERTAIN QUESTIONS OF THE DAY

Christ our Creator and Redeemer has compassion for us and God forgives.  I am praying that this mother who is realizing the repercussions of her monumental decision, will find in her disappointment, fear and difficulty that God loves her and her children and wants her to choose Him from now on.  This is a moment that could change this woman’s life.  We all have these moments and we know as believers that God takes the fruits of our selfish decisions and works His plan through it.

Read the full Daily Mail article here.

Read Full Post »

Editorial Opinion column in UK’s The Daily Mail:

These judges want to destroy our core moral values. We simply can’t let them succeed

It’s good reading.

(updated March 7, 2011)

Read Full Post »

Okay, sure the UK Daily Mail is one of those British tabloid types that have all the gossip about starlets and pictures of scantily-clad footballers’ wives.  It must be some sort of British thing that I don’t really get.  However, it might be my new favorite paper cause in addition to the article dissecting the “abortion is safer than pregnancy” guideline nonsense, it also published this little gem which flies in the face of the today’s moral relativistic, “if it feels right, it must be right” sensibility:

Having parents split up is worse for a child’s happiness than not having money, a major multi-million pound study has suggested.

In findings which may prove a comfort to every parent confronted with ‘pester power’ at the till, the Understanding Society project found that not living with both natural parents adversely affected a child’s ‘life satisfaction’ more than the household’s material situation.

In fact, neither poverty or wealth influences happiness, according to the research – although the more siblings they have, the unhappier they are.

So there you go.  Wealth is not the key to having happy children.  Having an intact family is.  Thank you, Daily Mail!

Read Full Post »

I have written about this song before, but now that the Sanctus Real album has dropped, I’m blown away by it all over again, and I am compelled to post it again.

Men?  Do you want to know what your wife needs?  Listen to this song. 

Women?  Do you know what is missing from your marriage?  How to ask for what you need?  Listen to this song.

You cannot have a solid marriage if God isn’t right in the middle of it with you.  Make prayer time together a new and fantastic habit.  Pray for each other throughout the day.  Bless your spouse.  Give thanksgiving daily for your marriage and family.  Ask God to lead you.  The most important people in your life may be secretly dying for lack of your leadership.  Ask for help.  God will strengthen you.

As I said the last time I posted Lead Me, if Sanctus Real does nothing else in their careers, they have done a great ministry just by writing and recording this song. 

Lead Me by Sanctus Real

Read Full Post »

I hope his ‘new direction’ takes him on a retreat with the Capuchins, past a Catholic church or heck even just into a Catholic bookstore.  In the AP article, note the exceedingly brief mention of the very public smackdown Rep. Kennedy received from his Bishop, which as you recall was all the news just 2 months ago.  This looks to be a victory for Bishop Tobin for the way the AP skirts around the controversy.  Surprisingly to many people, it was Rep. Kennedy who came out worse for having attacked the Church’s teachings and authority.  Interesting…

WASHINGTON – Rep. Patrick Kennedy’s decision not to seek re-election will leave Washington without a Kennedy in political office for the first time in more than 60 years.

The Rhode Island Democrat’s term ends early next year but he says in a television message viewed by The Associated Press on Thursday that his life is “taking a new direction” and he will not seek a ninth term.

The 42-year-old son of the late Sen. Edward Kennedy does not give a reason for the decision but says it has been a difficult few years for many people and he mentions the death in August of his father.

“Illness took the life of my most cherished mentor and confidante, my ultimate source of spirit and strength,” he said, as a black-and-white photo of him as a boy sailing with his father appeared on the screen. “From the countless lives he lifted, to the American promise he helped shape, my father taught me that politics at its very core was about serving others.”

The announcement is to air Sunday on Rhode Island television stations.

The decision comes less than a month after a stunning upset by Republican Scott Brown in the race for the Massachusetts Senate seat his father held for almost half a century. Last week, as Brown was sworn into the seat, Patrick Kennedy called Brown’s candidacy a “joke” and predicted Brown would betray his union supporters.

Mark Weiner, a major Democratic fundraiser in Rhode Island and one of Kennedy’s top financial backers, said he had spoken with Kennedy about his decision, and that his father’s death had taken an enormous toll.

“It’s tough to get up and go to work every day when your partner is not there,” Weiner said. “I think he just had a broken heart after his father passed away.”

Kennedy said in his ad that he remained committed to public service, and he thanked Rhode Island voters for supporting him through ups and downs.

He has been in and out of treatment for substance abuse since crashing his car outside the U.S Capitol in 2006. Still, he has been comfortably re-elected twice since then, after making mental health care his signature issue in Washington.

“When I made missteps or suffered setbacks, you responded not with contempt, but compassion,” he said. “Thank you for all the times you lifted me up, pushed me forward and filled my heart with hope.”

Kennedy was not specific about his plans, but said he would continue to fight for issues on behalf of those suffering from depression, addiction, autism and post-traumatic stress disorder.

“Now having spent two decades in politics, my life is taking a new direction,” Kennedy says.

As a member of the powerful House Appropriations Committee, Kennedy has made sure federal dollars are sent to his state.

Democratic Rep. Jim Langevin, Rhode Island’s only other House member, had spoken with Kennedy and said he would miss him in Congress.

“Patrick is a true public servant and passionate fighter who made a real difference for the people of our great state,” said Langevin, who served with Kennedy in the state House of Representatives.

Kennedy was elected to that position in 1988 at age 21 while still attending Providence College, then was sent to the U.S. House of Representatives in 1994.

Kennedy also has been a financial boon to the Democratic Party, drawing people to fundraisers nationwide, and he once served as chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

In Congress, Kennedy has pushed for greater mental health care coverage, citing his own struggles with depression and addiction. His mother, Joan Kennedy, has been through several alcohol treatment programs.

Kennedy has never married, and friends have said his personal life had taken a back seat to his career.

Still, until recently, Kennedy appeared committed to running again.

The only Republican in the race, state Rep. John Loughlin, has been working with Brown’s campaign team, the Shawmut Group, and was raising money. But Kennedy was heavily favored to win the race: Registered Democrats outnumber Republicans more than 4 to 1 in Rhode Island. Loughlin has little statewide recognition, and Kennedy had four times as much campaign cash on hand coming into the year.

He told The Providence Journal shortly after Brown’s win in January that he wasn’t worried about Loughlin, saying “bring it on.”

Weiner said Kennedy was not afraid of losing the election.

“Winning or losing had nothing to do, I’m sure, with his decision,” he said.

Loughlin said Thursday night that he wished Kennedy well.

“We hope that wherever life takes him beyond his career in Congress that he has good fortune,” Loughlin said. “And we’re going to stay in the race.”

No Democrat has entered the race for the seat.

Kennedy has had a difficult time in the public spotlight, with a number of high-profile troubles. Most recently, he engaged in a protracted public spat with Providence Roman Catholic Bishop Thomas Tobin over health care reform and Kennedy’s support of abortion rights.

After leaving treatment at the Mayo Clinic in 2006, he described to reporters how his work and public profile had taken a toll on his health, and bred feelings of isolation and self-criticism.

“How well this event did or how well that event did — and then I’d take that all home, and it’s all on me,” he said then. “And then I don’t have a private life. I don’t have real personal connections. I don’t have a support system.”

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100212/ap_on_el_ho/us_patrick_kennedy

Read Full Post »

So who won the battle in the most anticipated, scrutinized, studied, criticized and speculated upon Super Bowl in the history of this televised event?  No, I don’t mean the football game, I mean the Focus on the Family ad featuring the mother of Tim Tebow.   (oh, for the record, the Saints beat the Colts, 31-17).

Well, it’s only my opinion but the win clearly belongs to Focus on the Family and the Tebow family, and even more importantly the win also goes to the wider conservative, pro-life movement.  Even more clearly than who the winners are, is that the losers are hands down, unquestionably liberal pro-abortion groups like Planned Parenthood, NOW and Gloria Allred.  Yeah, cause they lost it.  Literally.  Remember all the articles expressing the Left’s outrage over this commercial that was going to “blur the lines of sports and politics”?   We all remember that.  Then the Super Bowl came and the ad (actually two ads) were run.

Nothing.  Nothing outrageous, nothing controversial, nothing offensive.

After seeing the actual commercial, most of us responded with a quizzical look and perhaps a “is that it?” question.  I myself thought I must have missed the real commercial, as the one I saw was so–uncontroversial.  Anyone not already on a side in this debate was left to wonder how come the liberals were trying so hard to shutdown that commercial.  The people in the room I was in, filled with twenty-something year olds of seemingly all political stripes responded with “is that it?” confusion and comments. A big debate about what the big deal was ensued.   And the liberals looked exactly like what they are:  controlling, irrational, anti-Christian and pro-abortion, and certainly not ‘pro-choice,’  if that choice means choosing Life.  The ungluing of the Liberal Left leading up to the Super Bowl wasn’t a pretty sight to see, unless you are on the pro-life side like I am, in which case, watching the left unravel in the weeks before the Super Bowl culminating in the final ‘sssssss’ as the air went out of their bloated windbags upon seeing the actual commercial was priceless. 

I want to say that the pro-abortion side handed the Tebow side the victory, because they clearly overreacted and overreached.  But you know what?  No, I don’t think that is quite right.  The Left lost it, sure and they certainly did  not seem to be in the same ballgame as the Tebow family.  But they didn’t lose the contest for America’s sympathy.  FotF and the Tebows won itby accurately predicting a meltdown on the left.  Looking back on it now, I can see that the win didn’t happen on Sunday, February 7th.  The win occurred in the strategy meetings at FotF.  Yep, altogether a brilliant plan.  Just let it be leaked that Focus on the Family was buying ad time during the Super Bowl, and that the ad in question might feature Tim Tebow.  Then get that corrected to say it’s really going to be about his mom.  Google searches ensue.  Blogs are written that suggest that Pam Tebow will be talking about her difficult choice to bring her pregnancy with Tim to term when doctors recommended she abort him.  Speculation grows like wildfire until it is a near certainty that Pam Tebow will be talking about her difficult choice to bring her pregnancy with Tim to term when doctors recommended she abort him.   Radical liberals and abortion providers go into meltdown, threatening CBS, the NFL and everyone else they can think of.  America takes note warily.  Why are all these people so up in arms?  If they are “pro-choice,” why can’t Mrs. Tebow talk about her choice?  Isn’t choosing Life an equally valid (at the least!) choice?  No, America learns during Super Bowl XLIV:  it’s not.  Choosing Life is not an option for radical pro-choice groups.

Personally, I want to thank Focus on the Family, Pam Tebow, Tim Tebow and all those bloggers out there who let it ‘slip’ that Pam Tebow might talk about abortion during an ad to be run during the Super Bowl.

Well-played!

(I am not the only one who thinks this)

(to see the full Tebow story, go here to Focus on the Family.  Click to view the ad.)

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »