jump to navigation

Biden hates democracy, and a pro-abort feminist drives herself insane July 7, 2010

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, asshatery, Basics, foolishness, General Catholic.
comments closed

Two very interesting tidbits from what is becoming one of my favorite blogs/news sites, Ignatius Insight.   First, Joe Biden, our dunce-like catholyc Vice President, stated in Kenya recently that people being able to fight and advocate for a cause, specifically, pro-life work, is “one of the drawbacks of democracy.”  Joe Biden may also have violated federal law when he told the Kenyans that, if they vote for a new constitution that will legalize abortion, the Obama Administration will shower Kenya with so much money it will make their heads spin.  After all, it’s the Chicago way!   Seriously, the Obama Administration stating that they will provide financial rewards to Kenya for ‘voting the right way’ is a violation of federal law.  From the Catholic perspective, it is amazing to me that there are still Catholics, like the incredibly disappointing Doug Kmiec, who can support this obviously pro-abort President.

More toxically revealing on a psychic level was this post obliterating an article written by a self-professed pro-abort feminist, a mother who has managed to reach the conclusion that, “yes, abortion is murder.” Not only that, but in trying to rationalize her continuing support for abortion (a doctrine of the faith to feminists) even after becoming a mother, this woman plumbs great depths of depravity, essentially saying that “murdering babies is ok, because it allows women to be ‘free’ from the tyranny of their bodies.”  No, really, after establishing that life begins at conception, she goes on to say:


But you cannot separate women’s rights from their right to fertility control. The single biggest factor in women’s liberation was our newly found ability to impose our will on our biology. Abortion would have been legal for millennia had it been men whose prospects and careers were put on sudden hold by an unexpected pregnancy. The mystery pondered on many a girls’ night out is how on earth men, bless them, managed to hang on to political and cultural hegemony for so long. The only answer is that they are not in hock to their biology as much as we are. Look at a map of the world and the right to abortion on request correlates pretty exactly with the expectation of a life unburdened by misogyny.
As ever, when an issue we thought was black and white becomes more nuanced, the answer lies in choosing the lesser evil. The nearly 200,000 aborted babies in the UK each year are the lesser evil, no matter how you define life, or death, for that matter. If you are willing to die for a cause, you must be prepared to kill for it, too.
Wow, there’s just a bit of misanthropy there!  If those disgusting, drooling male pigs had been burdened with child bearing, abortion would have been legal 12,000 years ago, and the world would be ruled by fierce amazon women, bless ’em! 
Leaving the misanthropy aside, it is horrifyingly revealing to see the extent to which this self-professed feminist will discount her own instincts, her feelings for her own child, and the evidence that reveals that a baby is a human life at conception, in order to continue the lockstep march with feminism.  And not just continue the march, but take it well down the avenue towards wanton disregard of human  life, to the extent that at the end, she appears to be laying some intellectual stonework for an extension of abortion avenue down to child killing lane.  In some of the most fervently pro-abort countries, the intellectual vanguard is arguing for “post-natal abortions” (known heretofore as murder), especially in cases where a mother gets tricked, and instead of getting that perfect little child, they have one with some “awful” disease like Down’s Syndrome, autism, or simple chronic hallitosis.   By claiming that one must be prepared to kill to further the feminist cause, I can see a connection to this “next step,” the elimination of those children who escape the abortuary but who are just not quite perfect enough for madame feminist.
So, in order to further “women’s rights,” a mother has come out foresquare advocating what she admits is murder, for the “greater good.”  So critically important is a woman’s right to be able to climb that corporate ladder, or lead that army, or have anonymous sex with dozens of partners, that tearing a child limb from limb in her womb is not only a necessary evil, it’s the very linchpin that makes that wondrous freedom possible.  Far from being a barely tolerated evil, it’s something to get out there and fight for with every fiber of your being, because abortion is a postive good.  Am I the only one who notices the religious overtones to her paean to child sacrifice?  She is elevating abortion to some transformative act, that alone enables women to achieve true happiness and a higher state of being.  This would be like some macabre fantasy novel if it weren’t the stark, naked reality.  Thinking on this too much can make me feel sick.
This woman, her name is Antonia Senior and she is the personal finance editor for the Times of London, needs prayers.  I think she is masking a great deal of terrible guilt.  She knows abortion is murder, but she is a thoroughly indoctrinated idealogue who is suffering to rationalize her continued feminism in light of her maternal, and God-given, instincts.  She’s desperately seeking a way to justify her continued support for abortion.  She likely has had an abortion or three.  She needs prayers for conversion, to listen to that still voice, that Word of God imprinted on her heart, that is telling her that so much of what she believes is completely, inalterably wrong.  She  may believe that bloody sacrifices are necessary for a woman’s happiness, but deep inside God’s Love is still calling to her, telling her that it is not too late to change.  I pray that, even in post-Christian London, she will hear that voice.

Catholics and Pro-Life July 7, 2010

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, Basics, General Catholic.
comments closed

From the blog of Fr. Angelo Geiger, a Franciscan of the Immaculate, comes some very powerful words written back in November 2008, after Catholics were the determining factor in electing the extremely pro-abort Barack Hussein Obama:

The vast majority of Catholics don’t have the moral fortitude or political will to really be pro-life, because we have been evangelized by the purveyors of lust [I seriously doubt most Catholics, especially most Catholic men, have any clue how often they commit sins of lust. – ED] We have not been witnesses to Christ and we don’t have the determination to be so, because we have put our trust in the world and what it has to offer.

How many people, even those in the pews, actually believe that fornication is a sin, let alone pornography, masturbation and lustful desires and thoughts? In principle most Catholics do not believe that lust is wrong unless it “hurts” someone else—whatever that means. So how can anyone like this be expected to put aside all their personal opinions and political fears and vote for someone they cannot stand because the Church says that we must vote pro-life?

We must have our contraception and our dirty little fun. Kids must be “protected” from anything that is not “age appropriate,” that’s true, but we wouldn’t dream of depriving anyone of their “rights,” or even presume to know what’s best for society at large when it comes to matters of sexuality.

I will go a step further and critique the whole “new chastity movement.” I use that term so as not to be construed as disagreeing with the “Theology of the Body” of the late and saintly Pope John Paul II. I agree that that a more positive approach to the teaching of chastity is necessary, and that the insights of the Theology of the Body are important. However, some (notice the emphasis) of the promotion of these insights seem a bit gnostic and disingenuous.

I say gnostic, because it is asserted that this new way has been kept a secret until now, and with the new indoctrination all the old problems of original sin, scrupulosity, prudishness and guilt will be minimized. It is suggested that we will be naked without shame almost to the point of original innocence. Who is kidding who?

I say disingenuous, because there is an underlying cause for the new approach that has nothing to do with a “new revelation.” That underlying cause is simply the fact that the vast majority of Catholics refuse to give up their contraception. Some alternative had to be devised, just as some alternative had to be devised for Catholics who refuse to give up divorce and remarriage. [Fr. Geiger  in these last few paragraphs has been referring to the interpretations of the ‘Theology of the Body’ popularized by Chris West.  Fr. Geiger has a series of strong critiques of Christopher West’s discourses on the Theology of the Body, of which this post is something of an introduction.  For more, see here. – ED].

I believe many use Natural Family Planning for the right reasons. I also believe that many use it as a substitute for contraception, because that is the way it has been promoted and because many of us have lost hope that there is an alternative.

I know I put myself out on a ledge with some of these views, but I don’t disagree with Fr. Geiger at all.  Polls and other data show that most Catholics simply must have their contraception.  I don’t think it unreasonable to conclude that for many who use contraception, and thus deviate from Church doctrine, deviating still further in terms of supporting a pro-abort candidate for political office is no big moral issue.  Contraception is the ‘third rail’ of the Catholic priest.  This is the single least talked about Catholic doctrine I know of – so very few priests will ever touch this subject.  The only contender is divorce/remarriage, which goes hat in hand with contraception. 

I’ve tried to explain both traditional Church doctrine on contraception, and the views my wife and I share, but I haven’t seemed to made much headway convincing many people the necessary imperative of being fully open to the procreational aspect of marriage throughout married life.  This is a deeply personal topic, yes, but it’s also an area where many Catholics have seemed to accept the reasoning of the dominant culture without question.  Having too many kids is too expensive, it makes your life too complicated and difficult, it will take all the fun out of your marriage, you won’t be able to afford college, etc, etc – these are many of the reasons I have heard why folks just can’t accept Church doctrine and so contracept.  My experience with six kids has indicated that none of these reasons are really valid, but they are accepted by so many Catholics as absolutely true.  This is an area of the Faith where ‘protestantization’ appears to have made the most deep and lasting impact – Catholic attitudes on contraception have come to ape those of America’s protestant majority.  And contraception seems to be some sort of ‘gateway;’ once accepting of contraception, Catholic moral standards in other areas, from rates of porn use and masturbation to divorce and remarriage rapidly fell in line with the average for all Americans – another area of capitulation with the dominant culture. 

I don’t think this capitulation is irreversible.  I pray that we might start hearing priests mention that contraception use is still a grave sin occasionally in homilies/sermons – that would be a start.  I think we need to start a lay organization that will help to spread this core Church doctrine, as well.  And we need to keep pushing back on the culture – we Catholics should be distinct from the dominant culture, not utterly submerged in it and indistinguishable from it.  And pray.  If this post makes any sense to you, pray pray pray for a change of hearts and minds.

Update on the Apostolic Visitation of US women religious July 7, 2010

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, General Catholic.
comments closed

Fr. Z has a post revealing the contents of a letter sent from William Cardinal Levada, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, to the Leadership Conference of Women’s Religious, the body that represents about 80% of United States religious sisters.  The letter explains some of the reasoning for the visitation (rejection of Christ as core to the Catholic doctrine, continual demands for the impossibility of women’s ordination, and acceptance and even promotion of the homosexual lifestyle, among others).  The letter, originally published at the Distorter, where it is presented as part of a campaign of abuse and repression of women’s religious, is mostly just an explanation of the logistics of the investigation.

One interesting factoid – I have read statements from some of the members of LCWR that the apostolic investigation is being unfairly targeted solely at the “more progressive”  membership of their organization, and that the members of CMSWR are not subject to this visitation.   This is not true.  My wife’s cousin, Sr. Miriam James Heidland is a Sister with the Society of Our Lady of the Most Holy Trinity.   I was speaking with her over the weekend at the family gathering at Lake Medina, and we talked about the apostolic visitation.  Contrary to what Joan Chittister and some others have said, the apostolic visitation is NOT focused solely on ‘progressive’ orders – SOLT is being visited, specifically, the SOLT Sisters of Seattle are preparing to be visited.  Sr. Miriam’s sentiment was the opposite of that presented by Chittister and others associated with LCWR – SOLT welcomes the investigation, they feel they have nothing to hide and hope to gain some commentary on thier efforts.   I have heard similarly from some other women’s religious – the Poor Clare’s at Our Lady of the Atonement in San Antonio, for one. 

You should read about Sister Miriam’s conversion.  I remember reading about my cousin-in-law in the Dallas Morning News a few years ago.  Having spent some time with her this last weekend, she’s quite a young woman.  It was great to see her holding Benedict.