There are few better ways to earn puzzled and even alarmed reactions than by declaring your public opposition to the pill. It gets better when you declare that birth control doesn't work, and that it is only leading to social dissolution. Yet as a former scientist explains, it's all in the numbers:
http://www.acceptingabundance.com/mathematical-proof-that-birth-control-fails/
Friday, March 30, 2012
The War on Language
It is much easier to define a false reality if one first changes the meanings of words. Lenin and Stalin knew this, as did 20th century feminists and liberal extremists. Read on:
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/cw/post.php?id=644
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/cw/post.php?id=644
Thursday, March 15, 2012
Religious Liberty Cuts Both Ways
Are the current actions of secular liberals - including the controversial HHS mandate - increasing the future risk of a dictatorial religious regime sometime in the American future? Read on...
It is sometimes said that "when fascism comes to America, its symbol will be a cross draped in an American flag." This is certainly as possible as any other strange scenario in human history. Yet we must admit that this is one of the least likely forms of oppression which may be visited upon America as we know it. To begin with, the historical and legal precedent of our nation is such that the notion of a religion controlling the state is quite foreign to our American way of life. Our laws and customs reflect this clear distinction between religious influence and religious control. Furthermore while the "cross and flag" image may be terrifying to secularists, it is generally employed by people who don't have experience with people of any strong religious persuasion. The fact remains that the majority of mainstream religion in this country - including traditional Protestantism, Evangelicalism, and various orthodox Jewish and Christian groups - simply find the idea of their religions having control over the state as a highly distasteful idea. Traditional Catholics, for instance, know enough of their own history to know that religious power over the state tends to end badly for everybody involved; it is not in the best interest of our religion to make it the master of any state. The only "orthodox" exception to this norm comes from the Sharia Law of Islam, which is what makes Fundamentalist Islam a potential dangerous exception to America's otherwise successful religious plurality.
Finally, the first amendment establishes a clear barrier between the secular state and any religious organization. This is for both the protection of the state, and the protection of any religion in question. And here is where our current problem begins...
In order for the HHS mandate to stand in the Supreme Court, the state must argue via the Free Exercise Clause that there is a compelling state interest in forcing the Catholic Church to pay for contraception and abortificient drugs like the morning after pill. Given that there is no "contraception crisis" in America, and that Obama's plans already provides this service via the state, we can only conclude this as a real attack on religious liberty in America. The "war against women" slogan is only a smokescreen to divert attention from this painful truth.
While religious people (and constitutional scholars) are obviously up in arms about this blatant violation, non-religious types may feel very little panic, while more extremist secular types may secretly or even openly favor such a curtailing of "medieval" religious belief. Bill Maher certainly isn't losing any sleep over the HHS mandate.
Yet the neutral should be quick to drop their "meh" attitude, while dedicated secularists should be alarmed at the legal implications of the HHS mandate. Consider as there is no pressing state interest in enforcing the HHS mandate per the Free Exercise Clause, the forcing of this idea becomes an active erosion of the Church/State separation as defined in the First Amendment. If this attack were somehow to be upheld in the US Supreme Court, we would be setting a dangerous legal precedent for the disregarding of the First Amendment.
While such a precedent may now be used to push an aggressively secular agenda, there is no reason that such a radical legal precedent could not be exploited by religious extremists as well. There could well be a time in the future where a strong and potentially negative religious voice comes to dominate life in America, and it could easily use the legal precedent set by the current secularist administration and their HHS mandate to justify an overstepping of bounds by religion into secular life.
In short, the erosion of religious liberty by secularists sets up a scenario by which secular liberties can one day be eroded by religionists. It's not a pretty picture, and it distinctly shows why the First Amendment should not be tinkered with for something as historically inconsequential as Sandra Fluke's imaginary budget.
Secularists may call this alarmism by a threatened religious thinker, and they'd be right. But they would be wrong to disregard the power of legal precedence in the halls of American Justice. Secularists who once passed a controversial Roe v. Wade position now - scarcely 40 years later - use "legal precedence" to defend the normality of this law, an argument with the power to sway even some conservative judges who oppose their position. As such, there is absolutely no reason to believe that the legal precedence set by Obama's abuse of the first amendment could not - in some 40 years time - be used by an aggressive and politically entrenched religious establishment to erode the rights of secular people in America.
Secularists may call this alarmism by a threatened religious thinker, and they'd be right. But they would be wrong to disregard the power of legal precedence in the halls of American Justice. Secularists who once passed a controversial Roe v. Wade position now - scarcely 40 years later - use "legal precedence" to defend the normality of this law, an argument with the power to sway even some conservative judges who oppose their position. As such, there is absolutely no reason to believe that the legal precedence set by Obama's abuse of the first amendment could not - in some 40 years time - be used by an aggressive and politically entrenched religious establishment to erode the rights of secular people in America.
Consider that active enforcement of Sharia Law is a global agenda of Fundamentalist Islam (and one becoming quite entrenched in parts of the European Union), and even the most dedicated secularist should now be alarmed by the legal implications of this current administrations attack on the separation of Church and State.
We are a long way from the totalitarian "cross draped in a flag," yet the unconstitutional actions of this current administration make legal reality of such a situation more possible. As such, this is not an issue about women's rights, religious rights, or a little pill. It's a bi-partisan issue of a blatant disregard of our Constitution, and should be firmly opposed by both religious and secular citizens of our country.
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Steroids and the Pill
Please take a few moments to read this excellent article by Michael Forest comparing anabolic steroids - banned by all major sporting leagues - and the "accepted" risks of the pill. People need to be informed of these risks!
http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/baseball-steroids-the-pill-and-russian-roulette/
http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/baseball-steroids-the-pill-and-russian-roulette/
Saturday, March 10, 2012
Obama's Lies and the Catholic Vote
Why is Obama lying, and why does he feel that he can get away with it?
When in 2008 Obama carried the Catholic vote - along with a significant percentage of the Christian vote in general - I am certain that these voters were not meaning to elect an enemy of religion. I am certain that they followed their consciences and picked a man whom they thought loved America and would help her recover from difficult times.
I am also certain that all of those people, to a man, were bewitched by a speaker of unmatched eloquence. I am certain that they voted for how things were said, rather than the content of what was being said, let alone the feasibility of the promises Obama was making. I recall some of my most intelligent religious centrist or left-leaning friends literally tying themselves in intellectual pretzels to try to "prove" how Obama's promises would work. It was a sad state of affairs.
Yet I must admit that it's hard to blame them. Even Obama opponents like myself, who personally vetted the man and found his ideas to be lacking and his background to be radical, had to pause and give in to hope when our new President gave his election night acceptance speech. I remember hoping that night that I was wrong about Obama, and hoping that the idealism in his speech would translate into a positive change for America.
As many Obama voters begin to wake from their idealistic dream, they are realizing that the kind of change that they're getting is not exactly what they hoped for. Yet given Obama's radical political ties and origins, it should not surprise them (had they really been paying attention) that he would put radicals like Sebelius in charge of Health and Human Services. Yet even the most cynical of us did not expect Obama to attempt a trampling of the first amendment in his first term.
Nor did we expect him to outright lie. Take the contraception battle: The fact is that Title X of the forthcoming Obamacare plan guarantees free contraception to anybody walking into a government clinic. The fact is that Target will already give you that contraception at 9 dollars per month, which means that either Fluke/Sebelius/Obama/Pelosi are lying to you, or Fluke is running a bordello. The numbers don't stack up otherwise.
So if 90% of health care plans already offer contraception, and places like Target offer it for a mere pittance, and the government will soon offer it to EVERYBODY free of cost (see: paid for by taxpayers, since nothing is free), why are Obama/Pelosi/Sebelius ramming this new HHS mandate down the throats of religious organizations?
Because, though many remain afraid to admit it, the Obama administration is a radical secular administration which has diametrically opposed itself to all orthodox and traditional forms of religion. Their ideological radicalism is revealed in the fact that they would rather risk votes in an upcoming election rather than miss a chance to permanently handicap the work of religious organizations.
Obama is not concerned that orphanages and hospitals will close, and that Catholic schools and Universities will be forced to deny health coverage to their workers. No - rather, this is exactly what his administration is hoping for. In short, they are looking to bully religious institutions first out of the public square, then out of public service, and then drive them underground in general. They feel that people like orthodox Jews and Catholics and Evangelicals are extremists, and want to marginalize them as such.
To boot, a letter recently sent from the administration to Cardinal Dolan said that all discussion on the HHS mandate was "off the table," and suggested that Dolan and the Bishops take a cue from the handful of progressive Catholic groups who support this mandate. So if you doubted it before, here is proof of Obama's arrogance: he is pretending to lecture Bishops on what their own doctrine should be. It would be appalling if it were not completely ridiculous.
As obvious as all of this is, why does Obama continue to lie while trampling the first amendment in an election year? Because if 2008 is any indication, the public is easily distracted and easily fooled. Already the manufactured Fluke "scandal" has been shown to move women voters to Obama's side. That's right: women who only a generation ago would have been horrified at the immodesty of Sandra Fluke now see her as representative of them. How far we have fallen.
The Obama campaign knows that they will not bewitch the nation as they did in 2008. They know that this election will be closer, but they also have the percentages on American naivety, and right now the bewitched, confused, and uninformed continue to lean in their favor. It only takes 50.1% of American voters to continue the Obama administration's reign.
Four more years, it seems, would be enough to solidify the extremist secular ideological goals of this administration. Four more years would be enough for secular progressives like Bill Ayers and Van Jones and George Soros to declare:
"Mission Accomplished."
When in 2008 Obama carried the Catholic vote - along with a significant percentage of the Christian vote in general - I am certain that these voters were not meaning to elect an enemy of religion. I am certain that they followed their consciences and picked a man whom they thought loved America and would help her recover from difficult times.
I am also certain that all of those people, to a man, were bewitched by a speaker of unmatched eloquence. I am certain that they voted for how things were said, rather than the content of what was being said, let alone the feasibility of the promises Obama was making. I recall some of my most intelligent religious centrist or left-leaning friends literally tying themselves in intellectual pretzels to try to "prove" how Obama's promises would work. It was a sad state of affairs.
Yet I must admit that it's hard to blame them. Even Obama opponents like myself, who personally vetted the man and found his ideas to be lacking and his background to be radical, had to pause and give in to hope when our new President gave his election night acceptance speech. I remember hoping that night that I was wrong about Obama, and hoping that the idealism in his speech would translate into a positive change for America.
As many Obama voters begin to wake from their idealistic dream, they are realizing that the kind of change that they're getting is not exactly what they hoped for. Yet given Obama's radical political ties and origins, it should not surprise them (had they really been paying attention) that he would put radicals like Sebelius in charge of Health and Human Services. Yet even the most cynical of us did not expect Obama to attempt a trampling of the first amendment in his first term.
Nor did we expect him to outright lie. Take the contraception battle: The fact is that Title X of the forthcoming Obamacare plan guarantees free contraception to anybody walking into a government clinic. The fact is that Target will already give you that contraception at 9 dollars per month, which means that either Fluke/Sebelius/Obama/Pelosi are lying to you, or Fluke is running a bordello. The numbers don't stack up otherwise.
So if 90% of health care plans already offer contraception, and places like Target offer it for a mere pittance, and the government will soon offer it to EVERYBODY free of cost (see: paid for by taxpayers, since nothing is free), why are Obama/Pelosi/Sebelius ramming this new HHS mandate down the throats of religious organizations?
Because, though many remain afraid to admit it, the Obama administration is a radical secular administration which has diametrically opposed itself to all orthodox and traditional forms of religion. Their ideological radicalism is revealed in the fact that they would rather risk votes in an upcoming election rather than miss a chance to permanently handicap the work of religious organizations.
Obama is not concerned that orphanages and hospitals will close, and that Catholic schools and Universities will be forced to deny health coverage to their workers. No - rather, this is exactly what his administration is hoping for. In short, they are looking to bully religious institutions first out of the public square, then out of public service, and then drive them underground in general. They feel that people like orthodox Jews and Catholics and Evangelicals are extremists, and want to marginalize them as such.
To boot, a letter recently sent from the administration to Cardinal Dolan said that all discussion on the HHS mandate was "off the table," and suggested that Dolan and the Bishops take a cue from the handful of progressive Catholic groups who support this mandate. So if you doubted it before, here is proof of Obama's arrogance: he is pretending to lecture Bishops on what their own doctrine should be. It would be appalling if it were not completely ridiculous.
As obvious as all of this is, why does Obama continue to lie while trampling the first amendment in an election year? Because if 2008 is any indication, the public is easily distracted and easily fooled. Already the manufactured Fluke "scandal" has been shown to move women voters to Obama's side. That's right: women who only a generation ago would have been horrified at the immodesty of Sandra Fluke now see her as representative of them. How far we have fallen.
The Obama campaign knows that they will not bewitch the nation as they did in 2008. They know that this election will be closer, but they also have the percentages on American naivety, and right now the bewitched, confused, and uninformed continue to lean in their favor. It only takes 50.1% of American voters to continue the Obama administration's reign.
Four more years, it seems, would be enough to solidify the extremist secular ideological goals of this administration. Four more years would be enough for secular progressives like Bill Ayers and Van Jones and George Soros to declare:
"Mission Accomplished."
Monday, March 5, 2012
Freedom Watch: Liberty and free speech destroyed by Liberal Tolerance
Can there be any denying what is happening in our poor world?
First in Scotland, midwives were denied the right to not assist in an abortion due to conscientious objection:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-17203620
Then in England, anti-discrimination laws have become the basis for censoring Catholic teaching on sexual morality in private faith-based schools:
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/stop-catholic-schools-from-distributing-homophobic-literature-leader-of-uks/
Such moves will prevent talented individuals of religious persuasion from entering the healthcare industry, gradually but surely secularizing the majority of the industry within a generation. They will also force orthodox religious thought underground. We are already living in an age where many "modern" nations have criminalized any speech having to do with the sexual preferences of others, even if read from Scripture. We are precariously close to having these beliefs relegated to hushed whispers and basement sermons, all done in fear of reprisal. They may not throw us to the lions, but they can punish us financially, censure us, and jail us for simply reading one sentence out of the book of Leviticus.
Many secular liberals salivate at the thought of trampling our Constitutional Rights by enacting such laws in the United States. The stench of similar legislation wafting from over the Canadian border is almost whipping them into a frenzy. All the while Europe draws ever closer to the manner of Soviet-like ideological domination which liberals claim to despise, and our own turn draws perilously near.
Those who have ears ought to hear...
Ezekiel 12:2 "Son of man, you live in the midst of the rebellious house, who have eyes to see but do not see, ears to hear but do not hear, for they are a rebellious house."
Then what can we call her?
What do you call a young woman who testifies before Congress and the Nation that her annual birth control costs far exceed the earnings of her summer job?
It seems that in our tragically politically correct state, we are not allowed to call her anything else but a victim. This young woman claims "victimhood" by the fact that she is "forced" to spend thousands per year in order to avoid pregnancy. Yet this is far from accurate, nor is the entire story.
Rush Limbaugh gave this young woman a more apt label, and has since endured an unjust media firestorm as a result. You are free to find Mr. Limbaugh's loud firebomb-throwing style distasteful (as this commentator often does), nor are you required to like Mr. Limbaugh or his politics, but in this case you cannot - within the limits of sanity - criticize his harsh truthfulness. You may think it mean or uncouth to call this young woman a "slut" - and I would agree with you - but a slut she nevertheless remains.
Let's drop the self-righteous liberal indignation and instead engage in some critical thought:
The budget this woman claims to need for the simple satisfaction of carnal desires reveals her to be an intemperate and irresponsible individual. The fact that she would reveal such private information to the entire nation makes her astoundingly immodest. That she expects private insurance companies (see: the other people on her insurance plan or private taxpayers, since nothing is free)to be required to cover her intemperate and irresponsible activities makes her either a freeloader or patently delusional.
So here we have an intemperate, irresponsible young woman who immodestly implies the extent of her carnal activities to the world, and then demands that the rest of us pay for it. Seen in the light of truth, Mr. Limbaugh's ire seems far from misplaced. (While this was not part of the hearing, one can only imagine that this unfortunate young woman would also want a free backup plan (see: abortion) just in case her carnal safeguards fail her. Judging by the size of her budget, the frequency of her escapades statistically dictates that this is only a matter of time, if it has not already happened.)
(Once must ask the question: Why doesn't Pelosi just send her to the local Planned Parenthood? Don't they cover such things in the effort to generate return customers? It wouldn't have anything to do with radical feminists trying to enshrine their depraved vision of sexuality at all levels of American culture? Nah, that couldn't be it....)
Finally, she is also a victim, though not in the way that Obama, Pelosi, Sebelius, or the leftist media would have you believe. She is the victim of a modern culture which has framed her sexuality in the dialogue of modern feminism and liberalism, while clearly also being a victim of the modern popular culture. One must feel compassion for a woman whose body has become nothing more than a means to an end. This is one lost individual among many in a lost culture, and we should indeed weep and pray for these young women denied a vision of true femininity.
Mr. Limbaugh's comment may have been uncouth, but it is the type of comment made by healthy people living in healthy societies. The shunning of immorality may be a painful part of certain cultures, but it holds the distinct role of being yet another safeguard and deterrent from such unacceptable behavior becoming normalized. What we witness here is a young woman proudly proclaiming the normality of her deviant behavior, and the healthy reaction against it being condemned. When we "compassionately" accept such depravity while shunning the just criticism of its messengers, we only fall further from the standards of common decency which once were a guidepost and safeguard in our culture.
It seems that in our tragically politically correct state, we are not allowed to call her anything else but a victim. This young woman claims "victimhood" by the fact that she is "forced" to spend thousands per year in order to avoid pregnancy. Yet this is far from accurate, nor is the entire story.
Rush Limbaugh gave this young woman a more apt label, and has since endured an unjust media firestorm as a result. You are free to find Mr. Limbaugh's loud firebomb-throwing style distasteful (as this commentator often does), nor are you required to like Mr. Limbaugh or his politics, but in this case you cannot - within the limits of sanity - criticize his harsh truthfulness. You may think it mean or uncouth to call this young woman a "slut" - and I would agree with you - but a slut she nevertheless remains.
Let's drop the self-righteous liberal indignation and instead engage in some critical thought:
The budget this woman claims to need for the simple satisfaction of carnal desires reveals her to be an intemperate and irresponsible individual. The fact that she would reveal such private information to the entire nation makes her astoundingly immodest. That she expects private insurance companies (see: the other people on her insurance plan or private taxpayers, since nothing is free)to be required to cover her intemperate and irresponsible activities makes her either a freeloader or patently delusional.
So here we have an intemperate, irresponsible young woman who immodestly implies the extent of her carnal activities to the world, and then demands that the rest of us pay for it. Seen in the light of truth, Mr. Limbaugh's ire seems far from misplaced. (While this was not part of the hearing, one can only imagine that this unfortunate young woman would also want a free backup plan (see: abortion) just in case her carnal safeguards fail her. Judging by the size of her budget, the frequency of her escapades statistically dictates that this is only a matter of time, if it has not already happened.)
(Once must ask the question: Why doesn't Pelosi just send her to the local Planned Parenthood? Don't they cover such things in the effort to generate return customers? It wouldn't have anything to do with radical feminists trying to enshrine their depraved vision of sexuality at all levels of American culture? Nah, that couldn't be it....)
Finally, she is also a victim, though not in the way that Obama, Pelosi, Sebelius, or the leftist media would have you believe. She is the victim of a modern culture which has framed her sexuality in the dialogue of modern feminism and liberalism, while clearly also being a victim of the modern popular culture. One must feel compassion for a woman whose body has become nothing more than a means to an end. This is one lost individual among many in a lost culture, and we should indeed weep and pray for these young women denied a vision of true femininity.
Mr. Limbaugh's comment may have been uncouth, but it is the type of comment made by healthy people living in healthy societies. The shunning of immorality may be a painful part of certain cultures, but it holds the distinct role of being yet another safeguard and deterrent from such unacceptable behavior becoming normalized. What we witness here is a young woman proudly proclaiming the normality of her deviant behavior, and the healthy reaction against it being condemned. When we "compassionately" accept such depravity while shunning the just criticism of its messengers, we only fall further from the standards of common decency which once were a guidepost and safeguard in our culture.
Monday, February 27, 2012
The Ideological Morgue
If you have a moment, please read this aptly titled and very interesting article by Ambrose. It paints our fight for freedom in a very fair and honest light. It also discusses the source of not only the moral bankruptcy of our current administration, but of our society in general. It certainly gave me a different and valuable angle on the problems we currently face.
http://www.ncregister.com/site/article/the-ideological-morgue/
http://www.ncregister.com/site/article/the-ideological-morgue/
Saturday, February 25, 2012
Is the stage being set?
Even the most logical and cold-blooded amongst us has to feel a bit nervous regarding recent events in American politics. Too much has happened too quickly, and one cannot wonder if the proverbial dung-heap isn't about to hit an industrial-sized, government subsidized fan.
This is a blog based on faith and reason, so we must use both in trying to understand the spirit of our own times. Too often we grow used to speaking about the moral and economic challenges of our day in purely secular terms. Be it our fear of being labeled a religious lunatic or simply out of the good desire to influence our non-religious friends, we forget that the spiritual dimension is the most real and important dimension in our existence. It is the material - not the spiritual - which is temporary and transient.
Consider this carefully: "the spiritual dimension is the most real and important dimension in our world." That means that behind every seemingly banal politic decision lies a spiritual battle, and the ball can only move down the field in one direction at once. There are many games being played, but only one endgame. Now consider the events of recent years in this light. America's moral firmament is under constant attack by the media and educational elite, a vicious campaign in which those labeled "traditionalists" of any kind are attacked mercilessly. To be a traditional person in America is to certainly commit oneself to various manners of white martyrdom at the hands of self-proclaimed social reformers and their leftist sheep.
Hopping the border, Canada is virtually in their snares. Europe has long since fallen, with the last holdouts of Catholic morality under a vicious ideological siege. Consider Poland for a powerful example: One generation ago, millions took to the streets to greet their countryman, Pope John Paul II, chanting "we want God, we want God!" While youth in America were busy being flower children and later amoral 70's era hipsters, their counterparts in Eastern Europe were enduring red martyrdoms in the name of faith and freedom. Now their children - having seized the freedom for which their parents so bravely fought - have already forsaken their spiritual birthright. The intense attack on tradition and the Catholic religion in Poland are relentless: it is likely that before the wonderful generation which cheered the first visit of John Paul II go to their eternal reward, Poland will become a largely secular nation.
Or consider Ireland, where Bishop Phillip Boyce is currently facing a "hate speech" lawsuit because of a recent homily which criticized secularism and claimed that secularism was attacking the Church. (Which, of course, it most certainly is.) One wonders - would the law work if the shoe was on the other foot? It is doubtful, and such a double-standard is beyond telling.
Africa and South America remain holdouts in the spiritual battle for humanity. Yet systematic poverty has persuaded these regions to fling their doors wide to international aid. These very same "humanitarian" organizations relentlessly pressure poorer governments to adopt measures contrary to their cultural and religious beliefs in order to be fed. "Want food and water? Distribute these condoms and legalize abortion in return." It's not done so boldly, of course, but the fine print is nevertheless damning.
Then there is the Middle East, where religious freedom and Christians are under the most direct assault. It is disturbing to think that the most "enlightened" secularists share one of their greatest hates with the most radical and hateful of Islamists. The irony of such an arrangement remains that leftists and liberals - who are by nature weak and cowardly - would never be able to stand the ideological onslaught of a mobilized and motivated Islamic front. A secular Europe could simply not survive such a battle.
Now come home to the United States. We are, quite literally, the last holdout of enshrined Judeo-Christianity on the planet, and we're fading fast. The abortion issue -- the single clearest manifestation of massed and organized evil in human history -- still remains frighteningly unclear to a disconcertingly large amount of people. Rather than study and treat homosexuality, extremists are using the gay "marriage" debate to drive a legal wedge between Americans and their constitutional and religious heritage. (It is shocking to think that such a small minority of Americans could orchestrate the undoing of so great a nation.) Now consider the consistent growth of an already bloated government, the complete overreach of Obamacare, the attempted violation of fundamental constitutional rights via the HHS Contraception Mandate, and the recent bullying of the Komen Foundation. Consider further the numerous liberal international bodies constantly seek ways to regulate local American affairs from foreign places, in the name of environmentalism or childrens' rights or any number of sensitive issues.
The war is in full swing, and those of us who understand the spiritual import of our times cannot help but understand that - apocalyptic considerations aside - we are at least at the beginning of a new dark age.
The final confirmation to our terrible plight can be seen in the faces of our people, heard and read in our media, and painfully realized through our popular culture. We are a world fallen blissfully asleep, unaware of the terrible consequences of our selfish materialism. Most people simply cannot see the truth any longer. They DO not want to see the truth.
We have officially entered a new dark age. If the renaissance saw the peak of Christian culture and the beginning of the relativist age, we are seeing this relativism in full and rotting bloom now. We are in the first post-Christian age of our society, and are already reaping the frightful fruit of this newly established global tyranny of tolerance. We should not despair, as evil cannot win and to Christ belongs the glory and final victory. Yet difficult times lie before the sowers and reapers in Christ's field, and a truly momentous labor awaits those who would fight for the victory of Truth. May God protect us, aid us, and allow us to share in the final victory with him.
-AMDG-
This is a blog based on faith and reason, so we must use both in trying to understand the spirit of our own times. Too often we grow used to speaking about the moral and economic challenges of our day in purely secular terms. Be it our fear of being labeled a religious lunatic or simply out of the good desire to influence our non-religious friends, we forget that the spiritual dimension is the most real and important dimension in our existence. It is the material - not the spiritual - which is temporary and transient.
Consider this carefully: "the spiritual dimension is the most real and important dimension in our world." That means that behind every seemingly banal politic decision lies a spiritual battle, and the ball can only move down the field in one direction at once. There are many games being played, but only one endgame. Now consider the events of recent years in this light. America's moral firmament is under constant attack by the media and educational elite, a vicious campaign in which those labeled "traditionalists" of any kind are attacked mercilessly. To be a traditional person in America is to certainly commit oneself to various manners of white martyrdom at the hands of self-proclaimed social reformers and their leftist sheep.
Hopping the border, Canada is virtually in their snares. Europe has long since fallen, with the last holdouts of Catholic morality under a vicious ideological siege. Consider Poland for a powerful example: One generation ago, millions took to the streets to greet their countryman, Pope John Paul II, chanting "we want God, we want God!" While youth in America were busy being flower children and later amoral 70's era hipsters, their counterparts in Eastern Europe were enduring red martyrdoms in the name of faith and freedom. Now their children - having seized the freedom for which their parents so bravely fought - have already forsaken their spiritual birthright. The intense attack on tradition and the Catholic religion in Poland are relentless: it is likely that before the wonderful generation which cheered the first visit of John Paul II go to their eternal reward, Poland will become a largely secular nation.
Or consider Ireland, where Bishop Phillip Boyce is currently facing a "hate speech" lawsuit because of a recent homily which criticized secularism and claimed that secularism was attacking the Church. (Which, of course, it most certainly is.) One wonders - would the law work if the shoe was on the other foot? It is doubtful, and such a double-standard is beyond telling.
Africa and South America remain holdouts in the spiritual battle for humanity. Yet systematic poverty has persuaded these regions to fling their doors wide to international aid. These very same "humanitarian" organizations relentlessly pressure poorer governments to adopt measures contrary to their cultural and religious beliefs in order to be fed. "Want food and water? Distribute these condoms and legalize abortion in return." It's not done so boldly, of course, but the fine print is nevertheless damning.
Then there is the Middle East, where religious freedom and Christians are under the most direct assault. It is disturbing to think that the most "enlightened" secularists share one of their greatest hates with the most radical and hateful of Islamists. The irony of such an arrangement remains that leftists and liberals - who are by nature weak and cowardly - would never be able to stand the ideological onslaught of a mobilized and motivated Islamic front. A secular Europe could simply not survive such a battle.
Now come home to the United States. We are, quite literally, the last holdout of enshrined Judeo-Christianity on the planet, and we're fading fast. The abortion issue -- the single clearest manifestation of massed and organized evil in human history -- still remains frighteningly unclear to a disconcertingly large amount of people. Rather than study and treat homosexuality, extremists are using the gay "marriage" debate to drive a legal wedge between Americans and their constitutional and religious heritage. (It is shocking to think that such a small minority of Americans could orchestrate the undoing of so great a nation.) Now consider the consistent growth of an already bloated government, the complete overreach of Obamacare, the attempted violation of fundamental constitutional rights via the HHS Contraception Mandate, and the recent bullying of the Komen Foundation. Consider further the numerous liberal international bodies constantly seek ways to regulate local American affairs from foreign places, in the name of environmentalism or childrens' rights or any number of sensitive issues.
The war is in full swing, and those of us who understand the spiritual import of our times cannot help but understand that - apocalyptic considerations aside - we are at least at the beginning of a new dark age.
The final confirmation to our terrible plight can be seen in the faces of our people, heard and read in our media, and painfully realized through our popular culture. We are a world fallen blissfully asleep, unaware of the terrible consequences of our selfish materialism. Most people simply cannot see the truth any longer. They DO not want to see the truth.
We have officially entered a new dark age. If the renaissance saw the peak of Christian culture and the beginning of the relativist age, we are seeing this relativism in full and rotting bloom now. We are in the first post-Christian age of our society, and are already reaping the frightful fruit of this newly established global tyranny of tolerance. We should not despair, as evil cannot win and to Christ belongs the glory and final victory. Yet difficult times lie before the sowers and reapers in Christ's field, and a truly momentous labor awaits those who would fight for the victory of Truth. May God protect us, aid us, and allow us to share in the final victory with him.
-AMDG-
Whom the Gods Would Destroy
A truly excellent article about the arrogance - and the inevitable downfall - of our well-meaning but otherwise clueless Commander in Chief.
Whom the Gods Would Destroy
Whom the Gods Would Destroy
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)