jump to navigation

Various n’ Sundry: Dolan fails, Obama threatens, voting corruption abounds September 28, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, persecution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

Just a few recent items of brief note:

Root of the matter?  Cardinal Dolan can’t explain why Christianity is in free-fall in this country. Fr. Richard Heilmann advises Cardinal Dolan that perhaps the largest reason is the banality of the Mass and its reduction from glorious other-worldly act of transcendent beauty to “banal, on-the-spot product” is one major reason:

Those churches, religious orders, etc. who have fully embraced modernism (basically, a rejection of tradition and the sacred – see image on the right above), are emptying out at an alarming rate.

At the same time, there is an “awakening” going on in those churches that are staying true to the traditional and the sacred. “The Church is not meant to change with culture, but to be counter-cultural.”……

………..With all due respect, Cardinal Dolan (and all of the USCCB), this is really not rocket science. Once the decision was made to remove everything that points to the Glory of God, we are left with something banal and mundane and common. We are mere mortals … we need our eyes and, therefore, our hearts filled with visual reminders that “THIS IS GOD!” And, to be reminded, “THAT MEANS THIS IS A BIG DEAL!”

I think we can clearly see now that when it comes to the Liturgy Cardinal Dolan simply doesn’t get it.  Of course, he’s shown that with his repeated affronts to the TLM generally and Fr. George Rutler in particular.

I don’t know where Fr. Heilmann found this pic but it’s horrific:

Why is the cross on right upside down?

Why is the cross on right upside down?

Next, just a few hours after his new BFF Pope Francis left the country, President Obama threw down the gauntlet to Christians, telling us in no uncertain terms that sodomy trumps Jesus Christ, in his perverse and addled mind:

As Pope Francis flew back to Rome, President Obama issued a stern warning to Christians, warning them their attempts to assert their religious liberty to oppose gay rights would fail.

“We affirm that we cherish our religious freedom and are profoundly respectful of religious traditions,” he insisted during a dramatic speech at a LGTB fundraiser in New York City on Sunday night, praising the progress made on gay rights under his administration. “But we also have to say clearly that our religious freedom doesn’t grant us the freedom to deny our fellow Americans their constitutional rights.

That’s funny, because Obama sure doesn’t seem to have much problem denying the constitutional rights of millions of American gun owners, or at least trying to do so at every opportunity.

They could not be more clear: your religion means nothing to them, while their religion of satanic leftism means everything to them.  They are determined that their religion will win out.

Of course, our Pope did not exactly cover himself in glory on this matter of persecution of Christians in this country, but he did at least bring the subject up, unlike a certain Holy Name that should be on the lips of Christians every possible minute.

Final note: it has been claimed that 141 American counties have more registered voters than living souls.  But democracy rocks, and voter ID is just a cruelly repressive denial of the right of millions of dead and non-existent people to vote.  America!

The Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF) has put 141 counties on notice across the United States that they have more registered voters than people alive. PILF has sent 141 statutory notice letters to county election officials in 21 states. The letters are a prerequisite to bringing a lawsuit against those counties under Section 8 of the federal National Voter Registration Act (NVRA).

The letters inform the target counties that it appears they are violating the NVRA because they are not properly maintaining the voter rolls. The NVRA (also known as Motor Voter) requires state and local election officials to properly maintain voter rolls and ensure that only eligible voters are registered to vote. Having more registrants than eligible citizens alive indicates that election officials have failed to properly maintain voter rolls……..

……….“Corrupted voter rolls provide the perfect environment for voter fraud,” said J. Christian Adams, President and General Counsel of PILF. “Close elections tainted by voter fraud turned control of the United States Senate in 2009. Too much is at stake in 2016 to allow that to happen again.” [And decided the 1960 (certainly) and 2012 (possibly) elections]

Well there’s always too much at stake, we hear that every election. Having said that, I think “democracy” without some kind of property/knowledge/stakeholding requirement to vote is little more than a particularly prolonged method of national suicide.  Once everyone with a pulse can vote, those with the least stake in a society can vote for themselves all manner of benefits from those with the greatest involvement.  I think our voting base has revealed itself to be grossly ignorant of the issues at hand and easily manipulated.  I’m all for trying something else (the notion that democratic government is responsible to the will of at least this particular people long ago having become something of a joke).

 

Advertisements

Mercy is the Perfection of Justice September 28, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Interior Life, Papa, scandals, Society, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
comments closed

We hear so much about mercy these days, but is the proper sense of mercy being conveyed?  Mercy detached from justice is just false sentimentality.  It is not redolent of true Christian charity, but represents a false charity that is poisonous for souls in that in leaves them mired in error and sin.  This false mercy is in fact the inversion of true mercy, which is predicated on justice and, thus, conversion (or at least serious repentance).  That is why all these “openings” to the world that have been tried in the past several decades have failed to produce the result that is publicly claimed for them: the “bringing back” of fallen away, discomfited souls, or the winning of great numbers of converts to the Church.  They have failed because they are founded on a false premise and they are not in concert with the means of the working of Grace.

Bishop Sheen expands on the topic below, via the Catholic Gentleman:

As the world grows soft, it uses more and more the word mercy. This could be a praiseworthy characteristic if mercy were understood right. But too often by mercy is meant letting anyone who breaks the natural or the Divine law, or who betrays his country, simply get away with such acts with impunity. Such mercy is an emotion, not a virtue, when it justifies the killing by a son of his father because he is “too old.” To avoid any imputation of guilt, what is actually a murder is called euthanasia.  [or in the case of baby killing, abortion]

Forgotten in all such mercy pleas is the principle that mercy is the perfection of justice. Mercy does not come first, and then justice; but rather justice first, then mercy. The divorce of mercy and justice is sentimentality, as the divorce of justice from mercy is severity. Mercy is not love when it is divorced from justice. He who loves anything must resist that which would destroy the object of his love. The power to become righteously indignant is not an evidence of the want of mercy and love, but rather a proof of it. [YES!  Thank you!  And yet we are told today that those who are indignant over the state of the Church and the many errors promoted as truth are “divisive” or even “disobedient.”  There may come a time when even many of us, comfortable though we may be in our current situations, may have to choose between “obedience” and truth.  Are we prepared?]

There are some crimes the tolerance of which is equivalent to consent to their wrong. Those who ask for the release of murderers, traitors, and the like, on the grounds that we must be “merciful, as Jesus was merciful,” forget that that same Merciful Saviour also said that He came not to bring peace, but the sword.

As a mother proves that she loves her child by hating the physical disease which would ravage the child’s body, so Our Lord proves he loved Goodness by hating evil, which would ravage the souls of his creatures. For a doctor to be merciful to a typhoid germs or polio in a patient, or for a judge to be tolerant of rape, would be in a lower category of evil than for Our Lord to be indifferent to sin. A mind that is never stern or indignant is either without love, or else is dead to the distinction between right and wrong. [So rage on, you rad trads! oops. Left a little zinger in here. Took it out]

Love can be stern, forceful, or even fierce, as was the love of the Savior……..When a gentle hint to a woman at the well did no good, He went to the point ruthlessly and reminded her that she had five divorces.

When so-called righteous men would put Him out of the way, He tore the mask off their hypocrisy and called them a “brood of vipers.” When He heard of the shedding of the blood of the Galileans, it was with formidable harshness that He said: “You will all perish as they did, if you do not repent.” Equally stern was He to those would offend the little ones with an education that was progressive in evil: “If anyone hurts the conscience of one of these little ones that believes in me, he had better been drowned in the depths of the sea with a mill-stone tied around his neck.”

If mercy meant the forgiveness of all faults without retribution and without justice, it would end in a multiplication of wrongs. Mercy is for those who will not abuse it, and no man will abuse it who already started to make the wrong right, as justice demands. What some today call mercy is not mercy at all, but a feather-bed for those who fall from justice; and thus they multiply guilt and evil by supplying such mattresses.

Need I say anymore?  Sheen is on rock-solid moral ground here, and his catechesis is as excellent as it is thorough and to the point.

The notion of mercy being spread abroad from scandalous sources has been shredded.  What next?

I was right all along – USAF desperately short of F-22s September 28, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, disaster, Flightline Friday, foolishness, It's all about the $$$, non squitur, rank stupidity, silliness, Society, technology.
comments closed

Long early Flightline Friday below.  This was such a personal issue for me I simply couldn’t pass it up.  I recognize many readers won’t agree with my POV below, preferring a US with little or no military capability.

Way back in 1999, a California Congressman (Democrat, go figure) started an effort to cancel the F-22 program.  The effort did not succeed, but given that this effort had begun even before the first full-scale development prototype had flown, it was not a welcome development. As a result of this funding threat, the planned number of F-35s was cut to 339 from 448.   Even back then, I argued vociferously (to the few who would listen) that it

"Agile Wing F-16"

“Agile Wing F-16”

was not the F-22 that should be cancelled, but the then Joint Strike Fighter (JSF), which has become the incredibly expensive and dubiously capable F-35.  I was very passionate about this before my conversion, noting that the JSF, which hadn’t even seen any hardware produced (the initial flyoff competition was still 2 years away), was too much a jack of all trades and seemed like a repeat of the disastrous F-111 program of the 60s.  History has born my arguments out.  I pushed as hard as I could (but having almost no influence) to see the F-22 buy reinstated to the full 648 airframes, the JSF cancelled outright, and numbers made up with vastly improved F-16s (plus an additional 160 F-15Es, enough for two more wings).  The F-16s would have been very much like the F-16E/F produced for the UAE, except with a much larger wing to restore performance with the increased weight.  Engine would be the F110-GE-132, a 32,000 lbst version of the then-current F-16 powerplant.  With the 50% larger “agile wing,” conformal fuel tanks, AESA radar, and other advanced sensors the F-16G/H would have been the perfect compliment for a very f-22-raptor_006large F-22 force.  The F-22 force would be the “kick in the door,” first day of the war force used to beat down enemy defenses, after which large numbers of F-16s (along with F-15Es) would be free to perform ground attack with F-22s continuing in the air supremeacy and destruction of enemy air defenses (DEAD) missions.  This would also, not incidentally, been about $200 billion cheaper than the planned F-35 development/production cost.

Alas, the opposite happened.  Pure politician Robert Gates, the man who has destroyed the Boy Scouts, instead cancelled the F-22 prematurely and promised increased production of the eventual JSF, the F-35.  But the F-35 is beset with all manner of problems, and even if it weren’t, is not 1/2 as capable as the F-22 in the critical air supremacy mission.  With only 186 F-22, USAF is critically short of air superiority assets and in any battle with a near-peer competitor would be hard pressed to have enough assets.  The F-15s are ancient and cannot serve much longer, so it looks like USAF will have a critical shortfall in air superiority aircraft for decades to come (the F-35 simply being incapable of that mission, it’s a bomb truck).

Others have started observing what I’ve been saying for almost 20  years.

We didn’t build nearly enough F-22s, and the F-35 cannot simply pick up the slack. So why aren’t those who pushed so hard to cancel the F-22 program being held accountable? [It was an entirely political decision, driving in large part by civilian policy-makers being exceedingly ignorant of the differing roles and missions of the F-22 and F-35.  While USAF fought as hard for the F-22 as any program I can recall, with both the SECAF and CoS falling on their swords to try to save the program, USAF fighter mafia does share a bit of blame for the F-22’s cancellation by insisting that the F-35 be called a fighter.  It’s not, it’s a stealthy marginally supersonic attack aircraft, and should be the A-14, not the F-35.  To policy makers, a fighter is a fighter is a fighter, so why buy two?  That was a key tactical error that had huge repercussions later on]

By the mid 2000s, the F-22 was finally entering the fray as the world’s first true stealth fighter, offering a quantum leap in capability and performance when compared with anything else on the battlefield. [And that same quantum leap remains today, but no matter how capable, 50 F-22s cannot shoot down 500 Su-27s] It was a thoroughbred weapon system meant to shape the battlefield by vanquishing anything in the skies and neutering enemy air defenses, so that less capable combat aircraft could survive over the battle space. It was a high-end door kicker, the ultimate “anti-access” fighter.

At the same time that the Raptor was coming online and proving itself,Defense Secretary Robert Gates, of both the Bush and Obama Administrations, was calling for the F-22’s demise. This was said to be due to the aircraft cost and use as “only” an air-to-air, destruction of enemy air defense, and deep strike platform. [There was more to it than that.  Gates waged an existential struggle against USAF demanding total focus on the “War on Terror,” to the point of completely sacrificing future capability against the high-end threat.  Bush 43’s defense policy was disastrous on many fronts, mostly due to his appointing two disastrous SECDEFs, Gates and Rumsfeld.]

Gates’s push for the Raptor’s demise came at the same time as the cost of examples of the jet were rapidly dropping. For the last batch of 60 of the super-fighters, the unit cost per jet was $137 million, which is pretty close to the cost of an “affordable” F-35A today – at a time when a similar number of F-35s have been built as F-22s, about 165 compared to the F-22’s 187. [I always felt the F-35 would be no cheaper than the F-22. download (2) So far, I’ve been absolutely right]

Costs were slated to have continued to drop if another lot of about 53 jets were built to meet the Air Force’s stated minimum fleet size requirement of 243 airframes. But it never happened.

Instead the F-22 was cast off and all of the USAF’s fighter chips were put into the very much unproven F-35 bucket. Gates justified chopping the F-22 as he wanted aircraft to “fight the wars we are in today, and the scenarios we are most likely to face in the years ahead.” [It was an article of faith among the political elite in this country until about the last 18 months that we’d never fight anything but brushfire, COIN type wars against low-tech savages. Today such faith looks as risible as it always was] Considering air superiority and destruction of enemy air defenses is an absolute must for any conflict (aside for ones with totally permissible airspace), this was a very near-sighted evaluation, and as it turns out, prediction of the future.

Gates further rationalized his decision:

To sustain U.S. air superiority, I am committed to building a fifth generation tactical fighter capability that can be produced in quantity at sustainable cost. Therefore I will recommend increasing the buy of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

A misleading statement if there ever was one, as it’s impossible to build something in quantity at a sustainable cost when you’re not willing to build it in great enough numbers so that a sustainable cost is achievable. It’s a bit of a chicken-and-egg scenario, but at some point, the costs eventually balance out.

For the F-22, that point was rapidly approaching.

The F-22 was by many accounts on the verge of a cost breakthrough that would have sent its unit cost plunging well below the $100 million line. Gates later said:

We have fulfilled the program. It’s not like we’re killing the F-22. We will have 187 of them… The military advice that I got was that there is no military requirement for numbers of F-22 beyond 187.

Considering that the minimum the Air Force said they could operate with was 243, this statement seems less than true. And that number was last ditch compromise, the real bottom-line fleet size the USAF required of the F-22 was around 339 jets, which itself was dropped drastically from the original number of around 750 jets originally envisioned. At 339 examples it was hoped that the F-15C/D force could have been retired.  [What was really hoped was that a long term program that yielded 340 airframes would have enough Congressional support and momentum to yield ~100 more to build the minimum fleet really needed.  Just as USAF only programmed 180 C-17s but really download (1)wanted (and got) 230 through Congressional add-ons, the F-22 could have done the same – especially if there had been no F-35 to compete with it]

Yet Gates was not alone in the push to cancel the F-22. The Bush administration was guilty of it too, although they were able to punt the final decision to the Obama administration, who demanded it be cancelled with a sharp veto threat.

Key Congressional figures like Senator John McCain also wanted the Raptor line shutdown. Their justifications ranged from the program’s expense, which was largely sunk costs for research and development over the aircraft’s 30-year gestation period, to statements proclaiming that China would not unveil a stealth fighter until late in the next decade, with no chance of it being operational until the mid to late 2020s. Today, China has two stealth fighters flying, the first one, the J-20, getting airborne well before the last F-22 even left the production floor. The timing of the J-20’s first flight also occurred while Secretary Gates was in Beijing meeting with top-level government officials. The event was a well planned propaganda affair that aimed to make Gates look bad for underestimating Chinese technological capabilities.

For F-22 supporters it was an unwanted vindication.

Another common argument against the F-22 was that the idea of America meeting Russian, or any near-peer state fighter aircraft, head-on in battle was a relic of the Cold War, and had no place in 21st century. Because of this, less potent, multi-role platforms were more of a necessity. Fast forward a half decade, and that statement is far from accurate. In fact, theF-22 just made its first deployment to Europe as part of a security package to deter Russian aggression and to reassure our NATO allies. The F-22 has also been regarded as a force multiplier in the air war against ISIS, itself attacking many targets with 6980090-f22-raptorgreat precision from the first night of air strikes in Syria on.

Back in the Gates years, naysayers, like embattled Air Force Chief of Staff General Michael Mosley and Secretary of the Air Force Michael Wayne, both supporters of the F-22, were gotten rid of. Mosley has since reiterated his frustration with the F-22 decision, stating that the shutdown of the F-22 program “will prove to be one of the most strategically dislocated decisions made over the last 20 to 25 years.”

He also said that follow-on batches of F-22s were quoted as costing well below $90 million per copy fly-away cost, which is about 25 percent less than the cost of an F-35A today. [The F-35 might – might – decrease in cost once production ramps up BUT at the same time a lot of capability is still to be worked in, which will push airframe cost back up. I expect the average flyaway cost for the F-35 over its lifetime will exceed $125 million per]

Nowadays it seems that everyone laments the premature F-22 line shutdown, from late-to-the-scene defense commentators to those at the very top of the USAF, including Air Combat Command chief Herbert “Hawk” Carlisle, whoe was quoted in National Defense Magazine as saying:

“We don’t have enough F-22s, that’s a fact of life. We didn’t buy enough; we don’t have enough.” However, the Air Force is going to make do with the Raptors it does have, Carlisle said. “You’re going to need the Raptors” for a high-end fight, he said. “So you’re still going to have to do that and we’re going to do it with the 180 or so F-22s we have.”

Because only 187 F-22s were built, with only about 125 of the jets setup for assignment to combat units at any given time, even fullfilling small detachments of F-22s to the Pacific, Middle East and European theater may be troublesome. As such, the F-15C/D force, which less than a decade ago was suffering from mid-air breakups resulting in a year-long grounding, has had to stay online to supplement the relatively tiny F-22 force.

With all this in mind, if we built enough F-22s to eradicate the enemy’s defenses, both in the air and on the ground, and improved the aircraft over time, perhaps even stretching it into an FB-22 with F-35 like avionics, would the USAF need an F-35A at all?  [With enough F-22s, the F-35 was superfluous.  It was the Marines in particular, with their enormous (this cannot be understated) Congressional clout, who drove the JSF/F-35 program to success in their demand for a Harrier replacement.  The Navy has always been tepid towards F-35 and would frankly prefer a bunch more Super Hornets.  USAF hasn’t helped itself in its F-35 support, either.  Lockheed and the supply base generally supported seeing the F-35 win out since it meant hundreds of billions in extra funding for them]

Instead, the force could be filled in by other high-end capabilities currently in the works, like a new long-range stealth bomber, stealthy standoff weapons and unmanned combat air vehicles. On the low-end side of the equation, plentiful, relatively cheap and proven platforms, like the F-16 and A-10, among others, could be available once air dominance has been AIR_F-22A_Fort_Worth_Air_Show_LMCO_lgachieved, or for lower-end conflicts that do not require the F-22’s high-end anti-access capabilities.

What makes things worse is that the floundering F-35 program has sucked funds for much needed upgrades on existing systems, including the F-22. In fact the F-22 lacks relatively standard technologies found on all of America’s fighter fleet, thus needlessly handicapping America’s “tip of the spear” fighter.

So what exactly happened here? If we clearly do not have enough F-22s today and it seemed nobody really thought we had enough at the time of its cancellation, aside from those with the power to kill the program, and the jet was passed over for the F-35, an aircraft that the USAF itself admits cannot fill the high-end role like the F-22, somewhere along the line disinformation was passed along to decision makers, or worse. So why don’t we pull those key decision makers in and have them explain exactly how they understood the situation at the time, what information and intelligence were they going off of, and who gave them that information and when?

It wasn’t disinformation.  It was a dogmatic policy decision.  One or the other had to go. That was the command from on high.  The F-35 was vitally necessary to the Marines, so it was the chosen son.  End of story.

Totally not unrelated.  I mentioned the 50 F-22 vs. 500 Su-27 (a top end Russian aircraft) scenario above. This has been gamed out repeatedly in simulations and war games.  The war games show the US repeatedly fails to gain air superiority in a conflict with China. There simply aren’t enough missiles on the aircraft to go around.  Yes, the F-22s and a few F-15s shoot down 200 Chinese aircraft per sortie, but they are then destroyed on the ground when the land to refuel and rearm.  The People’s Liberation Army Air Force is gutted, but so is the USAF/USN.  One way to solve this problem is to hang more missiles on more aircraft. Boeing comes to the rescue with a plan for F-15s armed with 16 AMRAAMs.  Probably there will be no money for this, though:

1442580924-1427441622976745031-2

Bill Nye the leftist baby-killer guy September 28, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, asshatery, Basics, contraception, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, rank stupidity, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society.
comments closed

Bill Nye is a mechanical engineer.  So he has the exact same credentials I have to comment on scientific matters.  The only thing is, science is to him a god-like construct that demands total submission and brooks no dissent.  At least, that’s certainly how he presents the sacred shibboleth of “climate change.”  But it’s not the only shibboleth Nye holds.  He also believes abortion is just a wonderful, unquestionable good, and should be available from conception to birth (and since he supports partial-birth abortion, he probably extends “abortion rights” to some point after birth).  In fact, Nye is a profoundly religious man, it’s just that his religion is satanic progressivism of the scientism cult, and as such is irretrievably hostile to Christianity.

At any rate, with the same pedantic condescension that riddled is PBS program for kids (and made it root-canal-without-anesthetic painful to watch), Nye is now lecturing to all us scientific illiterates why abortion is perfectly justified and how stupid and hypocritical we are to oppose the wanton slaughter of perfect innocents:

This week Bill Nye took to YouTube channel Big Think to make a statistical argument in favor of unrestricted abortion……..

For those keeping score, the biological argument in favor of unrestricted abortion, advanced by ethicist Peter Singer and predicated on the idea of autonomy, led to the barbaric conclusion that infanticide is ethical, and sometimes even desirable. Nye’s argument from statistics sets an arbitrary timeline for what constitutes a worthwhile lifespan, leading to the conclusion that human existence has no value because we are all going to die anyway. [and the satanically evil Singer (along with other “ethicists”) have now concluded that “abortion” can and should be extended well past birth, and up to age 5 or some arbitrary point.  Once again, the left, supposedly everyman’s friend, reveals their inherent misanthropy and their desire for the god-like power to determine whose lives are worth living.  Find your 4 year old inconvenient and not so much fun – well Singer and others are perfectly happy to justify your murdering him.  There is absolutely ZERO moral difference between what Singer, and by extension Nye, advocate, and what the Nazis and Stalinists did.]

Bill Nye’s arguments for opposing legislation that would restrict abortion:
-A large number of humans in the blastocyst stage of development fail to implant in the uterus and subsequently die.
-If we respect the dignity of blastocyst humans, it follows that we need to imprison men and women whose babies fail to implant.

[No, it doesn’t.  The error expressed here is the typical leftist confusion of means with ends.  Because a baby accidentally fails to implant of its own, as an act of God, or whatever, is strictly that, an accident.  There is a monumental difference in morality between allowing actions that frustrate implantation, or that kill a baby after implantation, and it simply happening on its own.  One is the result of a deliberate, immoral act, the other is simply happenstance.  There is a moral gulf between the two that one would hope even a leftist scientician would recognize, but apparently not.  Remember, this is the same man who would very happily see millions starve and freeze to death in the dark (provided he gets his, of course) due to mass energy shortage to avoid non-existent “global warming.”]
-The typical pro-life advocate is a man of European descent trying to tell women what to do.

[BS. Total argument from ignorance and “otherization” of those he hates. The day to day operation of the pro-life movement is DOMINATED by women.  Go outside any mill at any time, go into any CPC, go into any CPLC, and you will find women out number men at least 3 or 4 to 1.]
-Pro-life laws are based on an interpretation of a book written 5000 years ago.

[WRONG. First of all, the New Testament is less than 2000 years old, but we also have the Didache and other ancient sources that point out the Church’s constant hatred of and total opposition to all forms of baby-killing from her inception.  There is a clear moral line of argument going back to the foundation of the Church. What Nye is really saying is: “shut up, bible-humper”]
-Pro-life advocates believe that every act of sexual intercourse should result in a baby. Legislation to restrict abortion is based on this unscientific belief.

[Not should, bonehead, could.  Another confusion of means and ends.  We realize the foundational immorality of frustrating the natural fecundity of the marital act.  Nye tries to turn this into one of the pro-aborts most ridiculous arguments, “pro-lifers think every instance of the marital act must lead to pregnancy.”  Please.  Are they really that dumb?  No, they’re just that blinded by ideology and possessed of a reprobate sense.]
You can’t tell someone else what to do. 

[THIS. This is the entire argument, period, full stop.  You can’t tell me what to do.  But would Nye grant the same argument with regard to carbon emissions or some other dogmatic belief he holds?]
-Abortion is needed because a woman might not like the man who impregnated her and might not want anything to do with his genes, especially if she has been raped.

[Fail. Argument from extremity.  Rape/incest constitute less than 2%, and quite probably less than 1%, of all abortions in the US. Why on earth is a woman fornicating with a man if she wants nothing to do with his “genes.”  See argument above, that’s what all of this gets back to (don’t tell me what to do).
-There are more important issues than abortion.

[On what other topic that had resulted in the intentional killing of 1.5-2 billion souls would leftists say “there are more important topics?”  They tell us we must stop “global warming” because it could, maybe, someday, hundreds of years from now, lead to mass calamities and huge numbers of death. Well, Bill Nye leftist guy, there are millions of deaths annually from abortion every year.  Who are you to say that their lives are any less valid or important than those who might, someday, maybe (but almost certainly not) be wiped out by global warming?]
-Science has taught us a lot about life before birth. Pro-life advocates are not scientists and do not know what happens after an egg is fertilized.

[We know that a unique human life has been created, and that is something you cannot deny, Mr. Science Guy.  That person is endowed with all the potential and value that you arrogate to yourself, Mr. Nye. Simply because it has not escaped the womb does not mean that it is worthless and free to be destroyed. I’m sure Nye would agree he’s quite happy HIS mother did not make this “choice.”]
-Teaching abstinence is ineffective. Closing abortion clinics and not giving women access to birth control will not lead to a healthy society.

[And killing babies does?  Again we see leftist materialism and argument from expediency.  Leftists truly believe many lives are not worth living (especially if they fail to include tony condos in hip neighborhoods, chic cars, arugula salad lunches, and other such high tastes).  Their materialism drives them to conclude that those without a certain standard of living are better off dead.  This is satanic. The simple fact of the matter is that “teaching abstinence” worked exceedingly well for centuries to keep the bastard birth rate very low.  It was only with the left’s march through the institutions that the entire moral order, including abstinence, began to fail.  So Nye is decrying the failure of something he is deeply committed to destroying, anyway.]

The video below is titled “Can we stop telling women what to do with their bodies?”  Certainly, I’m all for it. Provided what they do with their bodies doesn’t involve the destruction of someone else’s body, 50% of which are women, by the way (so by allowing a privileged subset of women to “control their bodies” ALL choice has thus been denied to 750 million – 1 billion other women killed by abortion).

Notice he also avoids sex-selective abortion, which is horrifically skewing the population balance in India, China, and other countries. There are so many contradictions, logical fallacies, and points of general illogic in the diatribe below that it’s laughable.  And yes, Mr. Nye, I’m actually MORE qualified than you to speak on science, unlike you I haven’t left science for entertainment decades ago, I continue to be a practicing engineer, and I didn’t get my master’s because I didn’t bother with the thesis, but I retain the knowledge from the coursework. There are thousands of PhDs in scientific disciplines who would be horrified by your exhibition below, both for its logical incoherency and its scientific illiteracy.  Your argument from expertise thus fails, too:

Was Nye always such a maroon, or has decades of inculcation in the leftist media-entertainment industrial complex rotted his mind?

Hopeful sign – traditional priests from different backgrounds come together at major traditional Conference September 28, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, episcopate, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Latin Mass, manhood, Papa, persecution, SSPX, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, true leadership, Virtue.
comments closed

I was sent this by two people, and I, too, am very gratified to see this:

Something you just don’t see every day. As the situation in the Church goes from really bad to much worse, it is hardly difficult to predict a gradual coming together of traditional Catholics the world over in the days to come.

At the Catholic Identity Conference in Weirton, WV, this weekend priests from all the major traditional Catholic fraternities and priestly societies came together to encourage the faithful to keep the old Faith and be not discouraged. Here we have two diocesan priests (who offer the old Mass only), one priest of the Fraternity of St Peter, one priest of the Society of St Pius X, and one priest of the Institute of Christ the King.

False compromise? NONE! There are still strategic differences between these priests, and they do not pretend otherwise. But recognizing the severity of the crisis at hand and the necessity of confirming the faithful at this critical moment in history, these priests have reached out as faithful fathers to scattered and fearful sheep, urging us to pray, take hold of Tradition and never let go, and keep the Faith.

God bless and keep these courageous priests and their powerful example of true Christian charity. May God continue to bless His Church with good and holy priests.

The priests are not identified, and that’s sadly necessary in this time of ramped up attacks between priests of the various traditional communities.  I know some folks are turned off by the “can’t we all just get along” approach but I think it vitally necessary at this time.  So while various elements within or in the orbit of these groups try to continue to stoke the fires of division (and even more, much more at times, than that), it is most heartening for me to see a certain grass-roots appreciation for the paramount need to come together in unity in the face of the truly unprecedented threats facing the Church and souls right now.  Certainly we all have our differences and concerns about the hated other, but at this time when literal insanity has gripped the highest echelons of Church authority (or the insanity already extant has taken a decided turn for the worse), Mr. Matt, myself, and many others feel it is absolutely critical to set aside our differences, however legitimate they may be, and all work together for the defense of Holy Mother Church.
May God bless those priests concerned.  One of them in particular has certainly had a most heavy cross to bear in his steadfast adherence to the Faith of our fathers, but I’m certain they’ve all had to share in those difficult but glorious sufferings.
May God sustain all those who strive to accept and practice the Faith whole and entire in these most trying times.  May He protect any of us from falling away or failing in our duty.