Some interesting considerations below, where a self-described long-time progressive admits to being shocked, flustered, terrified, and offended at the presence of an obvious male in the women’s public restroom at Disneyland in Southern California. There are a whole lot of revelations below – paralyzing fear of being called out as politically incorrect and thus having one’s credibility destroyed in the secular pagan milieu, an incoherent feeling of being violated but an inability to do anything about it, and a demand that someone must fix the situation that goes along with a steadfast refusal to take personal action to help bring that fix about.
In short, it’s a pretty good summation of where we are as a culture, with the demands of the leftist extremists becoming more and more irrational, more and more invasive every day, and yet a sense that we are somehow powerless to stop this advance. But all it takes is will, the will to act, the will to be slimed by leftist activists on Twitter and other social media and not giving a damned what they say. That is, of course, easy to say, when one recognizes that even one’s professional standing and job could be permanently ruined by one act of moral bravery. Nevertheless, we eventually must fight, as the cost of delay will be much greater penalties in future if we don’t act now:
I was off to the side waiting with the two boys, when I noticed a man walk into the restroom…He took a few more steps, at which point he would’ve definitely noticed all the women lined up and still kept walking. My next thought was, “Maybe he’s looking for his wife…or child and they’ve been in here a while.” But he didn’t call out any names or look around. He just stood off to the side and leaned up against the wall. At this point I’m like, “…Am I the only one seeing this?” I surveyed the room and saw roughly 12 women, children in tow…staring at him with the exact same look on their faces. Everyone was visibly uncomfortable. We were all trading looks and motioning our eyes over to him…like “what is he doing in here?” Yet every single one of us was silent. And this is the reason I wrote this blog.
We had been culturally bullied into silenced. Women were mid-changing their baby’s diapers on the changing tables and I could see them shifting to block his view. But they remained silent. I stayed silent. We all did. Every woman who exited a stall and immediately zeroed right in on him…said nothing. And why? B/c I…and I’m sure all the others were scared of that “what if”. What if I say something and he says he “identifies as a woman” and then I come off as the intolerant ass… at the happiest place on earth? So we all stood there, shifting in our uncomfortableness…trading looks. I saw two women leave the line with their children. Still nothing was said. An older lady said to me outloud, “What is he doing in here?” I’m ashamed to admit I silently shrugged and mouthed, “I don’t know.” She immediately walked out…from a bathroom she had every right to use without fear.
And let me be clear, my problem wasn’t JUST that there was a man in the restroom. Its that he wasn’t even peeing, washing his hands or doing anything else that you’d do in a restroom. He was just standing off to the side looking smug…untouchable… doing absolutely nothing. He had to of noticed that every woman in the long line was staring at him. He didn’t care. He then did a lap around the restroom walking by all the stalls. You know, the stalls that have 1 inch gaps by all the doors hinges so you can most definitely see everyone…
So yes… there were women and small children using the restroom and this man was walking around knowing no one would say anything. So here I am…writing this blog, because honestly I need answers. We can’t leave this situation ambiguous any more. The gender debate needs to be addressed… and quickly. There have to be guidelines. It can’t just be a feeling… this notion that we’re shamed into silence b/c we might offend someone, has gone too far.
There was a man who felt entitled to be in the woman restroom, because he knew no one would say anything. There were 20-25 people by the time I left, who were scared and uncomfortable by his ominous presence. And the only thing stopping us, was our fear of political correctness and that the media has told us we don’t know what gender is anymore. I never want to be in the position again. I’m not asking for permission to tell transgender people to get out my bathroom. I need to know it’s ok to tell a man, who looks like a man, to get…out. Gender just can’t be a feeling. There has to be science to it. DNA, genitals, amount of Sephora make up on your face, pick your poison, but as a very progressive woman…I’m sorry it can’t just be a feeling when there’s but a mere suggestion of a door with a peep hole separating your eyes from my…or my children’s genitals.
All of which, fine. I feel your pain. There is even a certain sense of I told you so.
But the title of the post was actually a tongue in cheek joke – progressives like this will never reach their limit. They (or the vast majority, anyway) are the problem. They always kowtow to whatever the more radical fringes of the Left demands of them. And they will submit this time, and channel their impotent rage onto more culturally approved targets, like Donald Trump, white males, and conservatives, generally. Somehow this will all wind up being our fault.
Of course, there are exceptions. Sometimes it is moments like those above that start a person traveling on the path from former progressive to solid conservative.
Most importantly, the “lesson” I’m trying to convey is that if we want this to stop, it’s going to be up to us and like-minded individuals to start calling these jackholes out when they try to invade the private space of the opposite sex. Don’t let them get away with it, but know you will probably wind up being the one being blamed and even victimized if you do call them to account for their perversion and effrontery. But if we want this culture, rapidly descending into a literal hell, to change, we’re going to have to be willing to suffer for it. Pay me now or pay me later, the price will only go up if we delay, when we are finally to pushed to such extremes that we have no choice but to fight back and where far weightier things – the ability to have Mass said publicly, the ability to raise your kids in the Faith – are at stake.
Of course this is just one of a thousand and more areas where pushback is needed. That’s part of the Left’s strategy, using full time paid activists they advance on a hundred fronts simultaneously, finally wearing out the outmanned and out-funded opposition. We all have to pick our battles. But maybe if you are confronted with a bearded dude in a women’s bathroom, don’t just silently fume, but wack him over the head with your purse (which should always have a nice, heavy breviary in it). Or at least scream and shout and tell him what a sicko perverted freak he is.
Earlier this week, a crazed female politician improbably elected to office proposed a bill that would fine men for such acts as sexual self abuse and impose “restrictions” on vasectomies. While her reasoning in beyond specious and reveals both a deep self-loathing and an immense jealousy of men, and while some aspects would require the erection (so to speak) of a massively invasive totalitarian state literally observing men’s every move in public or private, as a Catholic, I am not, in principle, opposed to much of what she advocates for below. However, the logic behind these proposals is, quite literally, insane, and reveals a very great deal about how divorced from reality left-wing rhetoric has become.
The politician, not incidentally, is from Texas, showing that whatever benefits there are to being in the Lone Star State, we have a disturbing number of crazies:
House Bill 4260, titled “Man’s Right to Know Act,” would require men to pay $100 fee for masturbating each time; require someone seeking a vasectomy, Viagra prescription, or colonoscopy to receive an informational booklet (complete with artistic illustration of each procedure), undergo a digital rectal exam and rectal sonogram and wait 24 hours to get the prescription or procedure; and allow health professionals the right to withhold treatment based on “personal, moralistic, or religious beliefs.”
The bill intentionally draws from anti-abortion laws in Texas, including legislation mandating a 24-hour waiting period for women seeking an abortion and the requirement that during their initial consultation, women receive an error-filled booklet about the risks associated with the procedure.
Hah hah hah you’re soooo clever and funny! What a great way to send up those repressed Christofascists telling women what to do with their bodies!
Of course, you have to completely overlook the fact that, in the case of an abortion, it’s not just the woman’s body, but also the body of a life inside her, that is in question. And that tiny fact not only obliterates the “wit” of this “sendup,” it also makes things like a 24 waiting period seem rather like very much a bare minimum, instead of being some onerous imposition.
The supposed “errors” of the booklet, by the way, are only errors if one takes unsubstantiated and largely disproved pro-abort rhetoric as fact.
So we can see this is just more virtue signaling and point-scoring from the tribe that lives and dies by its standing within the great leftist herd. We can also see how the Left tries to equate the brutal murder by dismemberment or chemical scalding of an infant with a “routine procedure” like a colonoscopy.
And finally note how the radfem tries to portray very minor limitations on the wholesale murder of babies that occurs in our country as seemingly random, clumsy, and unrelated hoops that “good women seeking abortions” must jump through. The truth is, they no better, but have to pretend all objections to abortion are somehow insane.
But what about the fines for self abuse? Leaving aside the fact that monitoring and enforcement would require the creation of a Big Brother like police state, I would not mind at all seeing a broad cultural pushback against the normalization of porn use and self-abuse which has emerged over the last several decades. I also would like to see vasectomies not accompanied by stupid, unnecessary, persecutory procedures, but made completely illegal. Here I think the feminist errs, as I don’t think a lot of men have a burning desire to undergo the procedure, but generally do so only under heavy pressure from their spouse. At least, the 5, ahem, Catholic fathers I knew who had the procedure all done around the same time were more or less pushed into having it done by their wives.
What of Viagra? The commercials make watching most sports impossible, and much of the use is based on want, and not need. My preference would be to see it simply banned. At the very least, how about tying the procreative act, to, you know, procreation, and thus limiting the use of such chemicals – whose long term effects are still largely unknown – to those men in a position to father and responsibly raise young children, e.g., the married? There is also of course a unitive aspect to the act which is also only suitable for marriage.
So, see how reasonable I am? I can even find the good in the most unhinged, unserious proposals from the far left.
Trump Offers to Continue Funding Planned Barrenhood IF They Stop Aborting – Guess What They Said? March 10, 2017Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Abortion, contraception, cultural marxism, disaster, General Catholic, horror, It's all about the $$$, paganism, scandals, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
As if you need to guess. Planned Murderhood, which exists for no other reason than to be not only the leading baby murderer in the country but also the primary advocate for keeping abortion legal, turned down Trump’s offer to fully fund them at their desired level if they would only stop killing babies. So much for abortion only being “3% of their business,” it is the one non-negotiable activity they perform, their most “sacred” satanic sacrament they adhere to:
Half a billion dollars in federal funding isn’t enough to keep Planned Parenthood from what it does best — abortions. This week, Planned Parenthood proved once again that, for all their talk of “women’s health,” their business IS abortion.
On Monday, The New York Times reported that the Trump administration made an informal proposal to the nation’s largest abortion provider: You can keep your federal funding if you stop taking the lives of unborn children.
PP refused, as abortion services are simply “nonnegotiable.”
“Let’s be clear: Federal funds already do not pay for abortions,” Dawn Laguens, the executive vice president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, said. “Offering money to Planned Parenthood to abandon our patients and our values is not a deal that we will ever accept. Providing critical health care services for millions of American women is nonnegotiable.”
That’s at least the talking point. But money is fungible (as anyone who has ever handled currency ought to understand).
GOP officials, of course, promised relentlessly on the campaign trail that they’ll get taxpayer dollars out from under the abortion giant. It was an issue that found new life in 2015 after undercover videos from the Center for Medical Progress purported to show PP involved in a large-scale fetal tissue racket.
This all begs the question: If Planned Parenthood was really concerned about vital low-cost health services for women, and really thought the organization would not be able to adequately service patients without an enormous taxpayer kickback, why would it put said handouts on the chopping block for something it says is such a negligible part of its entire existence?
Because it’s all a crock……..
…….Given what the public now knows about the kind of operation that Planned Parenthood is running all over the country, and the Republican promises made to voters in the 2016 election cycle, there’s absolutely no reason that they should continue receiving a red cent of public money.
That is, if the courts will allow it. Texas’ attempt to defund Planned Murderhood was rejected by a West Texas Bush ’41 appointed federal district court judge. Texas plans to appeal, but the odds are the courts will reject Texas’ arguments that Planned Barrenhood’s non-abortion services are neither vital nor irreplaceable in the vast majority of the state. Which, of course, is a lie, but whatever it takes to keep the evil leftist sacrament of abortion viable.
This Planned Barrenhood de-funding will be another major test of both Trump and the Republican Congress. In Trump I think it safe to say his commitment to social conservatism remains mostly unproven, and in Congress decades of evidence reveal their social conservative principles to be almost entirely campaign prevarications. So I don’t expect Banned Parenthood to be defunded, but I hope and pray I will be proven wrong.
Great video from the NRA, blasting the pompous, out of touch New York Slimes for having the temerity to run recent ads touting their commitment to truth-telling. Just as an additional demonstration of their complete bias and lack of journalistic integrity, they totally ignored the frequent desecrations of Jewish cemeteries occurring in this country when Obama was in office, but now that Trump is in office they dispatch reporters, camermen, and plaster the coverage wall to wall, strongly intimating that Trump and his supporters are somehow behind these attacks. But, ooops, fake news strikes again, it turns out at least one perpetrator of recent anti-semitic threats and violence was a hardcore black muslim Obama/Hillary supporter:
Don’t know about you, but I place absolutely zero stock in anything any of the democrat-party operative organizations called CNN, MSNBC, CBS, NBC, ABC, the NYT, Washington Post, LA Times, etc., ad nauseum, have to say. Heck Alex Jones has more credibility than they do.
Increasingly I entirely get my news and analysis from content providers at Youtube, who range from actual reporters to commentary and analysis providers.
The sickeningly lost far left “ethicist” Dr. Peter Singer is at it again, opining that intellectually disabled children are less “valuable” than animals. This kind of wholly perverse, reprobate sense is where the inevitable logic of the leftist-materialist conception of the world will drive someone – to the brink of insanity and right over it.
In his apologetics for infanticide, Princeton bioethicist Peter Singer has used a baby with Down syndrome as an example of a killable infant based on utilitarian measurements. (He actually supports infanticide because babies–whether disabled or not–are, in his view, not “persons.”)
To Singer, moral value primary comes from intellectual capacities, and that means that developmentally and cognitively disabled human beings (also, the unborn and infants) have less value than other human beings, and indeed, a lower worth than some animals. [Since he bases his view of a right to life on such arbitrary standards, when super-brilliant AI machines get developed by stupid technologists who create what they cannot control, and they develop capacities infinitely above human intelligence, Singer will have no complaint when they decide to kill all of us off? What is the floor of intelligence that allows one to have a right to life? Who gets to decide this? Deranged imbeciles like Singer? What is different between Nazi’s deciding all Jews (and Catholics and Gypsies and others) had to die based on their own arbitrary definitions on who gets to live, and Singer’s? I suppose we can thank God that Singer is not, yet, empowered to make such decisions.]
Were society to ever adopt Singer’s bigoted anti-human exceptionalism views, it would mark the end of universal human rights, opening the door to tyrannical pogroms against the most weak and vulnerable–you know, the kind of people that the Singers of the world deem resource wasters. [Materialists almost always posit life as a zero sum game – if someone is better off, that means someone else must of necessity be worse off. In a sick sort of way, they demand the deaths of others so they can have it better.]
It would also break the spine of unconditional love, as our children would have to earn their place by possessing requisite capacities.
Take the recent statements by Singer, published in the Journal of Practical Ethics in which he explains why he would adopt a child with Down syndrome out (my emphasis).
He then expresses a profound bigotry against people with cognitive and developmental disabilities:.
For me, the knowledge that my [hypothetical Down] child would not be likely to develop into a person whom I could treat as an equal, in every sense of the word, who would never be able to have children of his or her own, who I could not expect to grow up to be a fully independent adult, and with whom I could expect to have conversations about only a limited range of topics would greatly reduce my joy in raising my child and watching him or her develop. [You are an idiot. Thank God He never gave you such a child. The parents of Down Syndrome children I know often regard them as the easiest child to love, as they have no guile, they are as simple, kind, and genuine as one can be. And yet, very soon, in many countries Down Syndrome people will cease to exist. No “downie” has been born in Iceland, for instance, in nearly a decade. All have been killed via elective abortion.]
“Disability” is a very broad term, and I would not say that, in general, “a life with disability” is of less value than one without disability. Much will depend on the nature of the disability. [What if we have a vote, and decide old age is a disability, consumes a disproportionate amount of medical resources for “little” return, and kill everyone over age 70? How would he feel about that? Age brings with it inevitable disabilities. Singer, BTW, turns 71 this year.]
But let’s turn the question around, and ask why someone would deny that the life of a profoundly intellectually disabled human being is of less value than the life of a normal human being.
Most people think that the life of a dog or a pig is of less value than the life of a normal human being. On what basis, then, could they hold that the life of a profoundly intellectually disabled human being with intellectual capacities inferior to those of a dog or a pig is of equal value to the life of a normal human being? [Because we’re not pathologically mendacious God-denying amoral monsters like you! Humans are special, humans are even sacred, in a sense, because they are created in the image and likeness of God. Denying that leads one open to such gross evils in thinking as Singer routinely demonstrates. I would also ask, hypothetically, how do you “prove” that a dog or a pig or a fruit fly has greater intellectual capacity to a human? All but the most profoundly disabled people – and note how he mixes, probably deliberately, the notion that someone with Down’s is inevitably profoundly disabled, which is not always the case – can speak, something no dog or pig has ever done.]
This sounds like speciesism to me, and as I said earlier, I have yet to see a plausible defence of speciesism. After looking for more than forty years, I doubt that there is one. [I just gave you one, the difference is, we humans have infinite worth, in all of our individual forms of being, because God gave us that worth by creating us in His image. The extremely ugly, utilitarian world you posit, Singer, is a direct result of your rejection of God. I take it Singer has never read Solzhenitsyn, and if he has, he didn’t understand it at all.]
I would also add, this is the kind of inanity that an intellectual comes up with in trying to justify abortion on demand. That is the specter looming over everything Singer says, the unacknowledged “god” of his moral universe whose awful appetite he must seek to rationalize away.
Speaking of insanity, ever read the history of the various factions of the Japanese far left during the late 60s and early 70s? In addition to helping found the PLO and stage some of their most horrific early terror attacks, in 1972 they purged half their own membership by murdering them in miserable ways. They then took a hostage and staged a week long standoff with the Japanese police. They were finally arrested after killing two cops and an innocent bystander.
No, not everyone who falls into liberalism will eventually become a hard leftist and even murderously unsane, but the logic of the belief system always tends in that direction. The fact that abortion is the most sacred policy position/religious doctrine of the ideological left is bloody testimony to that fact.
You won’t get much argument from me. Of course, we know that, in the end, Christ and His Church – including all the Truth He has revealed – will prevail. But we also know that the end of the world will be preceded by a great apostasy, the horrific persecution of true religion, the standing up of a satanic cult in the place of that religion, and a man of sin preceding the antichrist. That is to say, the Church, in her human element, will all but be destroyed. The preponderance of thinking among Fathers and Doctors has been that this would be a rapid process, taking place over a few years. Maybe it will be more drawn out, however.
Michael Matt categorizes just a small number of the recent atrocities emanating from Rome and the episcopate at large. It seems Soros money may well be pouring into Amchurch and significantly influencing attitudes – or at least making possible closer coordination between already progressive bishops and the broader anti-Trump push that is presently ongoing (to a degree that is astounding – virtually every single protest, town hall, riot, etc., has been astroturf, planned, organized, funded, and directed by Soros money. None of this is genuine).
What we are seeing certainly seems like a coalescing – in the open, as opposed to the dark corners in which they normally operate – of a transnational one world one religion global elite. Note Matt’s comments that what is being pointed at in all this is a call to conversion, but a conversion to what? There are strong rumors of an intercommunion declaration for Lutherans, whether they want one or not (that is, a wholly one-sided, Catholic affair, a surrender). I’m quite certain that won’t be the end of it. I also like the note that they seem to be rushing to get things done, this year. Given the portentuous anniversaries this year represents, that’s something worth pondering.
What do you make of the conclusion that Francis must be opposed? Is Francis not deviating from the Faith, and obviously, openly so? Goodness now even open fornicators/cohabitators are to be “welcomed,” not admonished or exhorted to convert!
And we all know just what this means – as the initial arguments by Church (maybe I should say “Church”) leftists like Curran and others in favor of contraception were supposed to be limited to mature, faithful, devout married couples, discerning in conscience whether to use contraception or not, we have seen how the Church, as people experience it in almost all local parishes, in practice tacitly now endorses, or at least never condemns (which is the same thing), contraception use by anyone at any time. So it will be with communion for divorcees and now, apparently, fornicators – there will be much brave talk of “paths of discernment” and “mature accompaniment,” but in the end – and it will take zero time – we all know that what will emerge is a deliberate, if unspoken, destruction of the Church’s condemnation of fornication and adultery (with many more coming).
That’s the end goal. That’s your “new church” coming into being. Liberal protestantism. The far left of the Lutheran spectrum and/or US mainstream Episcopalianism, which is beyond moribund and will soon die. That’s what the West’s elites want to propose as a one world religion, but islam will mow it down.
IOW, viz yesterday’s fisking, it is about subordinating the Faith to the progressive zeitgeist. You can see exactly how that will play out in that post.
Uncovering scandals in the Archdiocese of New York, or chastising Bishop McElroy’s latest idiocy, is essentially meaningless if you refuse to discuss the elephant in the Church. I assume you know to whom I am referring.
I’ve had an odd day, so didn’t expect to post, but I saw this and had to share. Does Time Magazine bother to mention that “Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good” is nothing more than a leftist front group intended to provide pseudo-intellectual cover for liberal self-described Catholics to vote democrat, no matter how egregiously the D candidate offends against the Doctrine of the Faith? Do they relate that “Catholics in Alliance” has a tiny and severely aging membership, and that they have been roundly decried by bishops and even the Vatican for spreading falsehoods regarding the Faith? Of course not.
Miraculously, it seems, for this leftist writer, the Truth Our Blessed Lord revealed just happens to align perfectly with his particular brand of leftism, feminism.
But, preach, brother, tell us all about this Jesus fellow we’ve been so mixed up on in the past. I pray you won’t mind if I add my own comments:
Jesus, the great protagonist of this holy season, shows us that life and redemption aren’t achieved through strength and power but by rejecting privilege and taking up the sufferings of the entire human family. [Actually, Christ spoke greatly about religious hypocrisy, but never denounced privilege – such as political or economic power – as such. He denounced the Pharisees because they twisted the true faith and used it to serve their own prurient interests. But being rich or powerful or privileged is not a sin in itself, so long as that wealth or power is turned towards the practice of virtue in sharing it as Christ demands with others]In Jesus, God takes on the fullness of human dysfunction — its disloyalty, its violence, and its terror — to redeem everything. He goes all the way down to bring everyone up. No one is excluded. [No. This is horrifically wrong. Christ did not take ON human dysfunction, in the sense that it corrupted His perfect being as both God and Man. Christ ENDURED human dysfunction, he was the victim of it, but he did not succumb to it, as this writer perversely says. The horrors that can emerge from this fatal misunderstanding of who Christ is cannot be overstated. This is an egregious error far beyond even what the Arians claimed. God is not “dysfunctional.” Sheesh.]
[Here it comes……..] As a white heterosexual Christian man it’s a reminder that if I am to authentically honor the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ this holy season, I must acknowledge and reject the privilege afforded me for the sake of taking the path of Jesus Christ. [And there it is. See my conclusion below. This poor lost soul has made the Truth of Jesus Christ subordinate to his ideology. Those privileges, for instance, should be viewed as gifts God has provided someone – gifts of normal, non-perverse sexuality, gifts of a stable home life as a child, gifts of being inculcated in the Faith (though it appears this one was done badly) – these are things to be cherished and recognized in order to demonstrate our thanks to God for them. How does one show thanks by loathing all that one is and has? That is precisely what SJWs of the feminist type demand of men, especially non-perverse white males. That loathing is the height of presumption and, yes, diabolical narcissism. Of course all sin and all are dependent on God’s Grace for salvation, but that doesn’t mean we have to bemoan whatever goods and privileges God has given us. We must simply, like the good stewards, take these gifts and make them profitable, returning 10 fold or 5 fold on them in the service of God and Holy Mother Church.]
There’s nothing better for me to do this Lent than to abstain and fast from the sexism that too often colors my life. [Speak for yourself. And perhaps you might focus on some of your more significant sins, such as finding nothing wrong in supporting politicians and policies who make baby killing their highest and most sacred belief.]
Now, let’s set the record straight: there are those who are blatantly sexist and there are those who unintentionally perpetuate micro-acts of sexism in their everyday lives. I’m most certainly a sinner, but on my best days, I’m hopefully more of the latter than the former. And perhaps that’s more pernicious in a country where Donald Trump is President. [And now we get to the point. This isn’t about Catholicism, or providing counsel to souls in need, this is about getting democrats elected and defeating Donald Trump – which is the sine qua non of the so-called Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good.]
His election certainly reminds us that sexism still runs rampant in the world’s longest lasting democratic republic. But to pretend that this problem is spread equally throughout the nation is to ignore the reality that some communities and institutions are the greatest offenders. [Republicans and conservatives, we can be sure. But how sexist is it to support the brutal murder of 50,000,000 million babies worldwide, which are disproportionately female (in some countries, over 80% female)? This is nothing but SJW politicking disingenuously and cynically wrapped in religious language.]
As a sinner who does his best every day to follow Jesus Christ, [I think I can safely say, you’re doing it wrong]it’s time to admit that the Christian community runs rampant with sexism, [So having a traditional family with mom at home, dad working, raising kids to do the same, going to church, and opposing abortion are now “sexist.” And the stupid link doesn’t even begin to provide any evidence of this supposed sexism, it’s another opinion piece written by – get this – a rock n’ roll front man] and that — yes — I am a big part of it. All men are. [To attribute a negative characteristic simply on the basis of one’s being – black, white, male, female, whatever – is the height of whatever “-ism” the SJWs purport to oppose. All men are sexist, and we can only redeem ourselves by completely surrendering to the leftist-feminist zeitgeist. Convenient, that. Thus, politics are made the only means of redemption, a complete perversion of the Faith.] That’s the nature of societal sin: no one is truly devoid of responsibility, though some are more responsible than others. [Christ is far less concerned with societal sin, than he is with personal sin. Once again, you reveal how you have TOTALLY subordinated whatever faith you purport to have to your ideological predilections]
I am responsible, and I ashamed. The words of the Psalmist ring in my ears: “Forgive me, O Lord, for I have sinned!” [Get this: ashamed of imaginary sexism, things he isn’t even able to be conscious of, but not of baby murder. Got it.]
………“Rend your hearts, not your garments!” It’s time for me and for the Christian community to reject artificial penance and to open our broken and confused hearts to authentic conversion and to see what it is inside of us that constantly allows us to debase and devalue women. [Again, speak for yourself. And perhaps, consider this (which is huge, and perhaps explains why leftists project so much). And this. This is again naught but a massive guilt trip – vote democrat OR YOU’RE GOING TO HELL!!!!]
[Now here we go, with such totally devastating truth bombs your mind will EXPLODE!!!!] …..M y journey towards an authentic Christian feminism isn’t novel. In fact, it’s a rediscovery of the faith as it was in the beginning. [See, Christianity was always intended to align perfectly with leftist-feminist views, before evil men – like St. Paul, St. John, St. Peter, and, oh yeah, the Holy Ghost, as He inspired all Scripture – ruined it.] Jesus Christ himself was the faith’s first feminist. The great heroes of this holy season are the strong and courageous women who stayed with Jesus through his final hours, while most of his male disciples ran away in fear.
This is really disgusting and egregious. These poor lost creatures never miss an opportunity to co-opt a great Holy Day to advance their agenda.
Here’s a notion our emasculated hero might want to contemplate: this Faith Jesus Christ conveyed is meant to be much larger than your political preferences. Indeed, the Doctrine of the Faith is meant to inform and, most importantly, transform your pre-existing notions, about, say, how wonderfully good and holy it is to murder 125,000 babies a DAY worldwide through elective abortion (Catholics in Alliance being notoriously pro-abort). I’ve radically changed numerous beliefs to conform with the Truth Jesus Christ reveals. THAT is the fundamental transformation that has to take place within each individual heart and mind before this transformation of the culture the author so longs for can even begin to occur. All else is just a fallen human construct, even diabolical, and will end in horror, as all history has shown leftism invariably tends to do.
But what a feeble, pathetic, obvious attempt.
The Media’s “Job,” and Some Just Can’t Handle the Truth February 24, 2017Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, cultural marxism, Domestic Church, family, General Catholic, rank stupidity, silliness, Society.
A couple of brief, close out the week items via reader T. First up, the media let’s us know what their real job is, not just presenting events as they occur in a factual and unbiased manner, but, no, telling us scary, unstable, easily enraged little people what to think:
Secondly, the billboard below apparently enraged some North Carolina feminists:
Seems pretty straightforward to me. I guess theirs no accounting for taste, but I think you have to be pretty messed up to find this notion so offensive as to stage a protest……..next to a billboard:
A billboard on Interstate 40 West near Winston-Salem is angering many who say its message is offensive to women.
The board reads: “Real men provide. Real women appreciate it.” The owner of a Winston-Salem women’s boutique called Kleur has organized a demonstration against the billboard’s message for Sunday at 11 a.m.
On the plus side, from one of the comments:
the women’s movement nor their marches represent me…this sign does!
What do you lovely ladies think?