I’ve long said that the Left ultimately desires to make children legally available to the sexual predations of adults. So you can look at the ongoing “transgender” bathroom wars as just part of an overarching process. As in, this isn’t so much a bug, as it is a feature.
In one of an increasing number of occurrences, a female (in this case, a child) using a Target dressing room in Frisco was victimized by a male who gained access to the dressing room through Target’s sick and misguided policy making restrooms and dressing rooms open to those of either sex, depending on how they happen to feel that day:
Police are searching for a ‘peeping tom’ who used his cell phone to record video of an underage girl inside a Frisco Target dressing room.
Investigators say the suspect put his cell phone over the wall of a female changing room and shot video of the girl.
The incident happened at the Target store on Preston Road Tuesday night around 7 p.m. on Tuesday.
The boy took off after the girl noticed the camera while changing clothes, according to police. She told her parent who told an employee. But by that time, the suspect was gone.
The got some pretty good screen caps of him, though:
There’s another where he is even more visibly messing with his junk. Poor lost desperate soul.
This dude will get caught, and all I can say is, the clink is no place for a pathetic creature like this. They’ll eat him alive.
It hasn’t even been two weeks since Target announced their new policy of rape-friendly restrooms and already there have been several incidents around the country. How many crimes will now needlessly happen, and how many police and other law enforcement resources needlessly devoted, as a result of this societal descent into insanity? Lord only knows. Lots.
Well, as if local Catholics needed a further reason to boycott Target. Now we know there are pervs assaulting women and little girls due to this demonic policy. How many have already gotten away with it? Perhaps a better question is, why would any parent take their child there?
Ted Cruz suspended his campaign after a severe defeat in Indiana last night. It appears, barring highly unlikely events, that Donald Trump will be the Republican nominee, facing Hilary Clinton. This leaves essentially no one in the major parties for faithful Catholics to support, to my mind, though I know that some disagree with that assessment. I will have to see what beliefs the Libertarian candidate holds with regard to moral issues, and whether the Constitution party will be on the ballot in most states. At this time, the latter seems an open question.
More broadly speaking, some observers are now concluding that the virtual certitude of Trump being the Republican nominee means that the social conservative movement is dead, or at least so moribund as to no longer matter. That was the opinion voiced by David Frum yesterday in a piece in The Atlantic. Now, it must be noted that David Frum is not an unbiased observer. He has long been a liberal Republican, especially on social issues, and has long taken a very critical, one might even say hostile, stand towards making traditional moral beliefs an important part of a party platform. So when he declares the social conservative movement to be dead, he’s not simply stating an observation, but a deeply held wish.
Nevertheless, his analysis is worth considering, even though I think much of it is wrong, or self-serving:
[H]ere’s something that traditional ideological conservatives will want to consider: Trump rose by shoving them aside. Trump’s rise exposed the weakness of social conservatives in particular. For a third of a century, social conservatives imposed a pro-life litmus test on Republican nominees for both presidency and vice presidency. They pulled the party into confrontations over sexuality and religion that many Republican elected leaders would have preferred to avoid. And then, abruptly, poof: The social conservative veto has vanished. New York values have prevailed, with a mighty assist from Jerry Falwell Jr. and other evangelical leaders. It seems unlikely the religious right will return in anything like its awesome previous form. A visibly conscientious objector to the culture wars easily defeated candidates who elevated the defunding of Planned Parenthood to the top of their agenda. That lesson, once demonstrated, won’t soon be forgotten….
The big internal conservative struggle of 2017 will be the fight to write the narrative of how Trump emerged and why he lost. Anti-Trump conservatives will want to say that Trump lost because he wasn’t a “true conservative.” But 2016 to date is proposing that “true conservatives” constitute only a pitiful minority of the Republican Party, never mind the country as a whole. Why should any practical politician care about them ever again?
Several things. First, this is a very strange year. This is a year when a sizable portion of the public has determined they will teach the establishment a lesson, once and for all. Ted Cruz thought he was the most anti-establishment candidate around, having fought a brutal battle against the Texas Republican Party to get elected to the Senate in 2012 and then standing out as the most reliably conservative Senator, but Donald Trump was able to project an image of being even more of an outsider, and really harm Cruz for his associations with Wall Street bankers (which, you think Trump doesn’t have even MORE association with them, being a New York financier?!?).
This is an election cycle where emotion has ruled the day and logic has not applied. This is a cycle where a very large number of people have determined they would only support a perceived outsider, even when that perceived outsider is as inside as they come. Trump has also made a lot of hay attacking political correctness/cultural Marxism, which I think is a major factor in his rise. I think people are just about sick of having leftist values shoved down their throat.
Don’t discount the impact of open primary states, either. Trump has done best in open primary states, where many democrats may be crossing over to vote for him in the assumption he’ll get killed in a general election.
Another factor is this: I know a fair number of extremely committed pro-lifers/social conservatives who are willing to ignore the past and believe Trump’s present claims that he is strongly against abortion and other social ills. They are willing to ignore his extremely immoral personal life. They are willing to do this, because they see that decades of supporting the mainstream Republican party has gotten us very little in return.
Millions are fed up with the political establishment and are willing to support a dark horse candidate who tells them very much what they want to hear, even against all the evidence that the rhetoric does not match the real belief. I know several folks who openly acknowledge that Trump is probably selling them a line, but at this point, they simply don’t care. They are willing to chance that this supposed outsider really has changed, because they feel this country is just about gone, anyway, so why not take a gamble?
Frum, in his analysis, seems to totally discount that voters could be willing to take a chance that the lifetime-liberal Trump could have suddenly changed his beliefs. He seems to assume that the vast, vast majority of voters, including former social conservatives, simply don’t value these issues that much anymore, otherwise, they wouldn’t support Trump. I think that’s a major flaw in his analysis.
Even more, the number one factor still driving Trump’s popularity is his early very strong rhetoric about stopping the torrent of unrestrained illegal immigration into this country. That is the top issue for a good 35-40% of Americans and his primary selling point. I don’t think you can understand the Trump phenomenon, and the willingness of many of his supporters to ignore how his present rhetoric contradicts a lifetime of belief, without taking into account his immigration stand. To me, it seems Frum practically discounts all of the above, and more.
Having said all that, I fear that Frum is correct in his primary conclusion: that there has been a sudden and severe drop off in the number of committed social conservatives, or at least in the degree of conviction conservatives assign to social/moral matters. I think this can be seen in numerous areas: the way the entire conservative movement has more or less caved to pseudo-sodo-marriage now that the Supreme Court has ruled, the institutionalization of the pro-life movement and its subsequent ineffectiveness, the increasing tolerance for grave immorality within the Church and many of the protestant sects, the lack of outrage over incidents like the persecution of Aaron and Melissa Klein and the poor Indiana pizza shop. Far too many Christians are willing to simply go along to get along, meekly changing their beliefs to whatever the cultural Marxists dictate, much more concerned about the state of their career and 401k than they are the state of their souls.
I’m interested to know what you think. Does Trump’s rise signal a temporary, or final, collapse of the strongly social conservative movement, or is it driven more by other things? Even if Trump’s rise is not specifically fueled by the collapse of cultural conservatism, do you see cultural conservatism in the decline? Polls show that Trump is pulling a pretty hefty portion of the cultural conservative vote. Does that probably temporary support mean those conservatives have forever given up on their primary moral concerns?
I can’t say my own thoughts on this are fully developed. I’m still of two minds. I’m interested to see how things play out in the general. I am afraid Trump will get absolutely pummeled by Dems quoting some of his noxious statements, dealings, and past moral failings. But he’s proven unusually resistant in the past.
Believing in the Doctrine of the Faith Will Get You Fired, and Investigated by Police, at “Catholic” colleges May 3, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, disaster, error, horror, martyrdom, paganism, persecution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, the struggle for the Church, unbelievable BS.
At Loyola Marymount in Los Angeles – a university in the 20th century Jesuit tradition of modernism, immorality, lies, and obfuscation – a lay employee was fired for having the temerity to very gently explain Catholic doctrine to militant students afflicted with perverse inclinations and general confusion over gender identity, which every 4 year old generally figures out quite clearly, unless they attend public schools and most colleges and universities. In which case, they lose their minds and no longer know up from down, and particularly right from wrong.
Although the students initially acted politely and seemed to appreciate the back and forth of the conversation, you just knew this being a leftist dominated institution in the Year of Our Lord 2016, they would just have to file a complaint. Complain they did, and now the employee is not only fired from their job at Loyola, but they are under investigation by the Orwellian-named “Bias Incident Response Team,” and the Los Angeles Police. Which just goes to show that not much has changed since the days of L.A. Confidential:
It’s uncommon at Jesuit universities these days for someone to openly share a traditional Catholic viewpoint. [How’s that for understatement of the decade?]
When it happened at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles, the school was so spooked it called the Los Angeles Police Department. [Was it spooked, was it really afraid, or is this simply part of the process of the radical Left attempting to ratchet up the open persecution of Christians in this country to an entirely more threatening level?]
Both the police and the university’s Bias Incident Response Team are investigating the stated belief that only two genders exist, male and female, as a hate crime.
A Loyola alumni office employee discussed her views on sexual orientation, which align with the Roman Catholic Church, with three students who were hanging up posters on the subject on April 14.
Cosette Carleo, one of the students involved, told The College Fix in a phone interview that the hate crime under investigation is “denying transgenderism.”….
…..The employee told Carleo, who identifies as gender-neutral, that only two genders exist, male and female, according to the student. Carleo told The Fix that statement was the hate crime.
Carleo responded that “you can have your opinion” as long as it doesn’t “deny my existence.”
Let me rephrase that for honesty: “You can have your opinion, so long as it corresponds to mine, which just happens to be a violent competing religion that will brook no compromise, least of all with you, Christofascist. Furthermore, I’m insane, and you must not simply share my insanity, but rejoice in it, and call it normality and saneness.”
OK, got a bit windy and harsh there. But how many marginal people of unhappy unbringings are falling into this mental illness because they perceive not only that it brings them great power and attention (as this example brilliantly illustrates), but it also conveys on them unassailable moral authority and victimhood status that elevates them to veritable superhuman status? Just whom has the power of the university and police-like state at their back? It sure ain’t the Catholic. So forgive me if I scoff at your self-serving claim that my refusal to accept your mental illness as a gender somehow denies your existence. Give me a break.
Naturally, it turns out that two very different accounts of the exchange have surfaced. But the supposedly Catholic university has chosen to side entirely with the aggrieved radical, even though there are serious holes in their story. In fact, the university immediately shamed and castigated the employee, refusing to hear her side of events.
The amount of space being given to Catholics to not just “operate” or evangelize, but simply exist, is shrinking at an alarming pace. I do not think Michael Matt and some others are wrong to fear that before long, the state will find reasons, related to “hate” and “bias,” to refuse to allow us to homeschool our children. What shall we do then? If we let our kids be brainwashed by the state, everything we have worked and suffered and struggled for will be for naught. Much will depend on the specific circumstances, of course, but our options will be limited by deliberate choice.
How long will God allow a culture – and a Church – filled to the gills with such evils to stand? And where in the heck is Cardinal Gomez in defending this persecuted woman?
The thing is, bowing and scraping to the culture a la Amoris Laetitia isn’t going to buy the Church acceptance or wiggle room. It’s going to cause the flashing knives of the Left to grow longer and to strike harder. Hard experience with the world caused the bastions to be built in the first place. But modernists just had to know better, didn’t they?
A very interesting post made the rounds over the weekend, containing data showing the incredibly minute number of so-called transgender individuals in this country. I won’t go into the hows or whys, but I’ve had some (more than incidental) contact with the tranny community in the past and I can say from my experience these numbers are spot on. If those lost in the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah number about 1-2% of the population, those suffering from “gender dysphoria” number about 1-2% of that. Meaning, women and children are being threatened needlessly for the sake of 0.02-4% of the population – a few hundred thousand across the entire nation, at most, tens of thousands, most likely.
But apparently, from what we hear the self-anointed elites of the government/academia/media complex tell us, the right of this vanishingly small percentage of the population not to suffer an occasional hurt feeling (bearing in mind, these people are mentally unstable and unwell to begin with) trumps the right for 330 million other souls to feel safe and secure in their most private, defenseless moments.
If you go through the data, it shows, for instance, that Texas, with a “moderate” population of “transgenders,” has 4.7 per 100,000. That means there are 1245 in the entire state, concentrated mostly in the largest urban areas, and, oddly, Corpus Christi. There are 600 in Pennsylvania, 300 in New Mexico, and fewer than 5000 even in California.
I’m a little skeptical on some of the numbers in the graphic because they are so repetitive – the minimum seems to be 3.3 per 100,000 in several states, and the max 10.6 per 100,000 in a few others. It seems unlikely roughly 14 states could have the exact same percentage. But, it’s supposedly culled from census data, so who knows.
Bear in mind, like many such disordered phenomenon, this “transgenderism” tends to be very fluid and runs across a broad spectrum, from men who occasionally dress like women in private to those who delve very deeply into the illness, even to the point of having their bodies mutilated. This graphic only covered those who went to the length of changing their names and sex coding on census responses, so they’re only looking at the more hardcore. That’s why I say the max number, including the less committed, may, at best, run into the low hundreds of thousands.
Of course, advocates for the normalization and even exaltation of this illness try to maximize their numbers in order to try to garner sympathy and political leverage. But even their inflated number doesn’t even amount to a million souls (which is itself a gross exaggeration, much like the totally made up “1 in 4 women raped on college campus” meme).
So, it is clear, the rights of hundreds of millions are being gravely threatened for the benefit of the tiniest of minorities. I say gravely threatened for two reasons. First, though their numbers are small, and thus the likelihood of encountering one of these poor lost souls not very great, the risk to allowing grown men into bathrooms or locker rooms full of women and little girls is enormous, the damage that could be done irreparable. Secondly, there is already ample evidence that men who have no true inclination towards this “dysphoria” are taking advantage of this situation to prey on those of the opposite sex. There is simply no way to avoid this predation when logic and evidence (as in, you are a MAN, not a women, in spite of whatever costume/makeup/mutilation you may adopt) are so thrown out the window, again, to pander to the tiniest of minorities.
There are two things going on here, at root. Number one is the Left’s constant attack on the family, Christian morals, and all things decent. That’s obvious. Number two is the Left’s desire to demonstrate its power and flex its muscles. What is in the offing here is really the attempt by the radical Left to get tens, if not hundreds, of millions of Americans to share in, and by extension adopt, the mental illness of a handful of others. The Left is attempting to exult in its new found power by demonstrating that they can dictate, over the plain evidence, all rational reason, and the express intent and Will of God, what constitutes “sex.”
As in, nothing, as in, gender is all a contrived notion, which anyone with a hint of sense and a tiny bit of experience living with those of the opposite sex knows is so false as to beggar the imagination. It’s that yuge mental leap that so attracts the Left in pursuit of this next great assault on their core enemy, the Christian God; “transgenders” make up too tiny a percentage of the population to be of any real political use, so the Left is not doing this, so much, to obtain votes, as it is to demonstrate that their ideology is now totally ascendant over the normative, or former, ideology of Western Civilization, Christianity.
In short, this is about power, and the naked exhibition of it. You will be brought to heel. You will be made to care, and to demonstrate your obeisance to the false religion of sexular pagan leftism. If you resist, you will be crushed, like Aaron and Melissa Klein and many others. And if the pseudo-sodo-marriage debacle is any indicator, the Left will succeed. They will gradually wear down the will of tens of millions and get them to buy into yet another astounding, unimaginable lie.
So I will start closing my blog posts in emulation of Ann Barnhardt, but with a twist: instead of saying, in emulation of Cato the Elder, “Furthermore, I consider that Islam must be destroyed,” I say that the Left must be destroyed. Islam is the principal external threat to Christendom, it is true, but the internal threat of Leftism is, to my mind, even more dangerous, especially in this country. Islam isn’t destroying the fabric of this country, islam isn’t perverting the minds (and actions) of millions of Americans, islam is not persecuting Christians in the US, leftism is. I certainly don’t disagree with Barnhardt’s assessment of the danger posed by islam, I simply feel that Leftism is even worse.
Christ or Chaos: Rejecting Christ does not result in cool rationalist enlightenment, it results in barbarism April 29, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, disaster, error, General Catholic, history, horror, Liturgical Year, Revolution, secularism, self-serving, sickness, silliness, The End.
Sorry I haven’t posted much of late. It’s been an interesting week. I’m doubly sorry for not posting much from The Liturgical Year, such a treasure of Catholic thought. Rectifying both, here is a bit from Gueranger’s writing on Pope St. Gregory VII, the great Hildebrand who rescued the Church from the grip of barbarism and the tyranny of the secularizing state. Gregory VII, more than anyone else, set the stage for the exaltation of Christendom which occurred in the 12th and 13th centuries. Now, 800 years later, the West – the creation of Christendom – has grown old and tired, and seeks to die. What comes in its place will not be happy, it will be hell, which is exactly what you get when you reject Christianity en masse. Even though written 150 years ago, the excerpt below paints a grim and prophetic vision of the future, one playing out before our eyes.
From pp. 386-7 of The Liturgical Year Vol. 8:
…….Governments have rebelled against the spiritual power; they have thrown off obedience to the Vicar of Christ; they have refused to acknowledge the control of any authority over earth. The people, on their part, have revolted against their governments, that is, against a power which has ceased to have any visible and sacred connection with God; and this twofold revolt is now hurrying society on to destruction.
This world belongs to Christ, for He is the King of kings, the Lord of lords (I Tim vi:15), and to Him hath been given all power in heaven and in earth (St. Matt xxviii:18). It matters not who they may be that rebel against Him – be they kings or be they people, they must inevitably be chastised, just as were the Jewish people who said in their pride: “We will not have this Man to reign over us!” (St. Luke xix:14). Pray, O Gregory, for this world which thou didst rescue from barbarism, and which is now striving to relapse into degradation. The men of this generation are ever talking of liberty; it is in the name of this pretended liberty that they have unchristianized society; and the only means now left for maintaining order is outward violence and force. Thou didst triumph over brute force by making the laws of right acknowledged and loved; thou gavest the world what it had lost – the liberty of the sons of God, the liberty of doing one’s duty – and it lasted for ages. O come, noble-hearted pontiff! and aid this time of ours! Beseech our Lord Jesus Christ to forgive the wickedness of them that have driven Him form the world, and scoff at His threat of returning on the day of His triumph and His justice.
Yes, pray to Him to have mercy on the thousands among us who call themselves Christians, and perhaps are so, yet who are led astray by the absurd sophistry of the times, by blind prejudice, by a godless education, by high-sounding and vague words, and who call by the name of progress the system of keeping men as far as possible form the end for which God has created them.
I don’t think that last paragraph can be stressed too much. We live in times awash in absurd sophistry, guided by a false science that assumed – by deliberate, malicious intent, starting 300 years ago – that anything that could not be inspected, weighed, and measured, did not exist*. Thus, the new scientists, who nowadays conduct themselves like the high priests of a diabolic religion, determined from the outset that God was dubious and distant, at best, and it was no time before they concluded He is non-existent. They discounted all miracles and the incredible testimony of millions of faithful souls going back centuries. They cut the beating heart out of Europe, in favor of the new religion they envisioned themselves – or their heirs – leading.
This new religion of sciencism was married to a new political force – progressivism or leftism. In fact, the two have always existed in symbiotic relationship. As one “advances,” so does the other. As science began its long descent from noble profession founded on reason, with theology as her queen, it constantly provided new bases upon which to attack the old, existing order of Christendom. Rationalism, materialism, deism, enlightenment philosophism, evolutionism, modernism……the more radical the claims of science became, the more radical their political allies in the progressive wing became. Their attacks were always always always first and foremost directed against Christianity, that is, the Church. Yes they have had many other targets but the prize has always been Rome.
As more and more of the old order was overthrown and replaced with a radical, new, and largely godless one (with various paeans given to “freedom of religion” or “freedom of worship” from time to time, to calm the fears of the masses), it was declared more and more loudly that progress was finally being achieved, that man was finally and irrevocably on the ascent, that the religion that had kept him held down for so long was finally being crushed, or at least put in its place. But the claims of success are solipsisms, and the crushing of religion must become ever more severe in order for the next great “advance” to take place. Thus, religion must be driven from the schools, to better indoctrinate the children in godlessness, then it must be driven from public square, then the marriage bed, and finally, driven out entirely.
That just about brings us up to the present day. And now that religion – I should say, Christianity, because false religions are just peachy with the Left – has been all but driven from the public square, now that sciencism is everywhere ascendant, is the world the great paradise of peaceful, cool, kind, rational individuals we’ve always been promised, if God could only be killed?
Hardly. The entire premise was false, as it was inspired by evil and founded in error. Reject God, and you don’t get peaceful coexistence, you get a new barbarism. Or you get overrun by islam. Christ or Chaos – the world can have one, or the other. The choice the world has made has been obvious. Instead of Christ, we get this:
It’s staggering there was actually a time when this commercial would have been anything but wretch inducing.
But I guess I’ve said this about 400 times already. Boring, much?
A bit of juxtaposition. For the second time in three years, the city government of Oklahoma City, OK – a city long dominated by a narrow cohort of white evangelical protestants – is going to permit the ultimate blasphemy against the universal Church, a black mass, on city property. OKC’s mayor, council members, and staff steadfastly maintain this is simply a First Amendment matter, that since satanists have “free speech” under our Constitution and Supreme Court rulings to blaspheme God, the city simply has no choice but to rent city property to these satanists allowing them to do so. To block them, they said, would be to invite a lawsuit OKC would lose with 100% certainty.
Meanwhile, 200 miles to the south, the City of Dallas has blocked a repeat performance of the diabolically lewd “Exxxotica Expo” at the Dallas Convention Center. Amazingly, when the producers of the Expo sued on First Amendment grounds, the City of Dallas won, at least at the district court level (no word yet on whether the Expo producers plan to appeal), but I have it on good authority the judge’s decision was worded in such a way that makes appeal quite difficult.
I would note in passing that Dallas proper is probably close to 50% nominal Catholic, with perhaps 10% actually practicing the Faith to some dimly recognizable degree. OKC’s Catholic population is far lower, less than 10% in general terms and probably in low single digits when it comes to faithful practice. However, to describe Dallas as a Catholic city would be ludicrous. Dallas has its own white protestant cohort who tend to run things their own way, even as the city has become increasingly Hispanic and Catholic.
So, on the one hand, we have a city that has permitted (and, by happily renting city property, I would say encouraged) direct assaults on the Catholic Faith and the commission of the gravest, most offensive blasphemy imaginable (and not only that, but acts constantly associated with depravity of a criminal degree in the past); and on the other you have one that was not only willing to go to court to prevent a much lower level of evil (sins directly against God in His majesty being the gravest possible), they proceeded to win.
I had no idea there was a second black mass planned in Oklahoma City, and already approved by the City, for the Feast of the Assumption August 15 2016, until about an hour ago. Even before learning this blood-boiling fact, I had already decided that Oklahoma City was, at least in its elected leadership and bureaucracy, a virulently, despicably anti-Catholic town. This latest revelation only further confirms that fact, just as it confirms that the arguments I heard all last year from OKC officials in my extensive correspondence with them in the run up to the desecration of Our Lady were as false as they were self-serving. Individuals claim First Amendment protections all the time, for all manner of nefarious activities. Cities and other government bodies, for myriad reasons, choose to oppose those claims, legally, for numerous reasons. Those bodies tend to win about as many First Amendment-related lawsuits as they win. The idea that because someone said “religious freedom” meant the city had to positively cooperate in the commission of grave moral evil was always tenuous, at best. Recent events in Dallas have proven it is verifiably false.
Which gets me to the conclusion I have been forced to reach: OKC would only roll over for these satanists, again and again, and even positively cooperate with their atrocities, out of reasons of bias, bias against Catholics. Now one could argue that bias stems from mundane worldly motives (such as, there not being many politically involved Catholics in the area, Catholics not representing a big enough voting bloc to act in favor of), but those are unlikely. City elections frequently draw only a few thousand voters and aggravating even several hundred could have a huge impact on an election. Since it is obvious even in this day and age that Catholics far outnumber satanists, even in OKC, it seems odd that a city councilman or mayor would not go to bat in favor of even 1-2% or so of their constituents. They routinely act on behalf of far, far fewer than that.
I’ll add to that reasoning my personal experience. If you know where I live and where my farm is (and all my family from), you will realize I’ve been through Oklahoma City scores of times. At least 50. We used to stop there all the time. Since I’ve become a more convicted Catholic, I’ve had some interaction with the local populace. Bear in mind, this is the city that likes to pride itself as being the brass clasp on the buckle of the Bible belt. It is evangelical central, and often aggressively so. I’ve had some encounters with the locals on religious matters, a few of them quite nasty. I’ve never felt much warmth of Christian brotherhood form the locals.
So, yeah, it’s not a lock solid proof, but I’m personally convinced the reason OKC is allowing all this to happen without even lifting a finger of opposition, nor showing even the slightest solidarity (by, say, participating in some of the protests or things to that effect) with Catholics is due to a widespread and quite deep anti-Catholic bias. We’re also safe targets, unlike muslims or even Jews. The former might kill you, while the media would go nuts should somebody draw a swastika on a synagogue.
Therefore, I’m boycotting OKC. In fact, I’m boycotting everything from Paul’s Valley to Guthrie. I’ll never stop there again. I might try to avoid stopping in the entire state when I’m passing through. It’s easy enough for me to do.
Another response: sign the TFP petition. Over 100,000 sigs so far, TFP are gunning for 200,000 and I bet they make it. Apparently even 100,000 people scandalized and broken-hearted by this horrid blasphemy aren’t enough to move the rock-hard hearts of the Oklahoma City leadership. That’s some pretty intense anti-Catholicism right there. Rather what one would expect from people who made the likes of Robert Tilton and Oral Roberts filthy rich:
No different from Kenneth Copeland, whom Francis has received and feted several times. Francis finds this kind of devilish, money-loving chicanery just fine, but traditional Catholics, well, they’re the real sinners.
Amoris Laetitia is a direct attack on the heart of the Faith April 22, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, disaster, Domestic Church, Francis, General Catholic, horror, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society.
So says longtime reader and now blogger docmx001 below. I am forced to agree. But doc goes further, noting what propels this attack: a near-total diabolical disorientation among the top leadership of the Church, the horrific errors of which cause them to look on marriage not as a tremendous gift and blessing, but as an empty drudge to be fought through for a few years before moving on to the next one, equally pointless attempt.
It’s a perfect encapsulation of the nihilist existentialism of the left which has infected so much of the Church, especially the clergy and episcopate, and it’s a very, very bad sign for the future (my emphasis and comments):
Traditional marriage (the only kind of marriage that exists, BTW) is being trashed in a way that has that element of diabolical inversion that I speak of frequently. I see it happening on two levels here.
First, marriage is dragged down to the pit by those who want to see irregular unions normalized. And I haven’t even touched on the same-sex nonsense that is promulgated in here. [That would be, Chapter 8 of Amoris Laetitia]For now, I’m just talking about second “marriages”. We are told of the “grace” they contain. We are told of the “worse sin” of renouncing the union, or even, perish the thought, remaining in the union but with perfect chastity. [Which union, however, would remain disordered if conducted in a “live together” situation, due to the constant temptation such proximity would represent]
Second, while at the same time dragging down traditional marriage, they also hold it up as a nearly impossible to achieve ideal, and it’s done in a way that insults the sacrament at the same time. In calling marriage a “lifelong burden” (AL36), the mask comes off, and we see plainly that the authors are completely lost. They are trying to blame-shift the sin of Adultery onto the sacrament of Marriage itself. The sacrament is culpable, the sinner is not. Unbelievable. [One of the most penetrating comments I’ve read on this whole sorry mess. That is exactly true, it is the Sacrament – and by connection, God – that is being blamed for the difficulty here, in expecting “too much” from people, even though millions of souls have for 2000 years managed to live perfectly in accord with those expectations (while admitting that many have struggled at times, too)]
Another axiom from Chesterton comes to mind: “Christianity has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and not tried.”
Stay with me, because this is KEY to understanding what is really going on here, and just how much poo poo we are in. The people who wrote this garbage are so far gone, so mired in sin, so far removed from living the gospel, so far removed from even TRYING to live the gospel, that they truly think it isn’t possible. It’s just too darn difficult, so we need to slather it with “mercy” and change God’s will. [I think that’s certainly a huge part of it. But I increasingly wonder just how innocent of motive some of these men are, and how many are deliberately attacking what they know – or should know, or strongly suspect – to be the Truth due to their fealty to a different, competing “truth” – the religion of sexular leftism. Having said that, I have no doubt that many of these leaders who are seeking to remake the Church into an indifferentist, worldly religion are doing so because they are mired in grave sin themselves, and simply cannot imagine giving that sin up. We all have a tendency to project our own faults and limitations onto others, but it’s a veritable immutable characteristic of the “progressive,” where entire world-views are constructed around personal sin and the desire to pretend it isn’t. Thus, transgender bathrooms and pseudo-sodo-marriage.]
You think I’m judging? Then try to come up with another explanation for what’s going on here. I mean, if the beautiful concept of remaining faithfully married for a lifetime is soooo hard, that it’s only an “Ideal” that is nearly impossible to achieve, just think what other wretched filth has blackened the souls of these men.
Indeed. Once one leaps into the abyss, there is no end to the darkness. Whether intentional or not – and I am dubious as to the latter – Amoris Laetitia represents a shocking, unprecedented assault on the Faith from the man most charged to protect and uphold it. It is almost unbelievable that a pope would write such things, but there it is, for all the world to see.
Docmx001 follows the above with some perceptive comments about the experience many of us have had in leaving sin behind, and how vital openness to the Truth was in whatever degree of progress we’ve managed to make in undoing much self-inflicted harm. But there are those so lost in sin, so attached to the world and its master, that it is impossible, absent a miracle of Grace, for them to even envision that it might be possible to live another way. I know at one time – thank God it was brief – I had pretty much concluded I would die in active addiction, that there was no way I could ever get clean.
When I did finally make a real break with drugs and alcohol, the amazing thing was, I wasn’t even particularly motivated to get clean. It’s not something I did, it was something that happened to me. It was Grace. Grace that stemmed from the prayers of many good people, and, I’m especially convinced, my deceased mother-in-law.
So we do have a duty to pray for these men, no matter what evil they visit upon themselves and millions of others, that Grace may convert a Schoenborn, Rodriguez-Maradiaga, Tagle, or, yes, Bergoglio from their wretched ways and bring them to the Light of Jesus Christ. I know it’s very hard to work up much charity for these men, seeing the destruction they so intentionally wreak, but I do pray for all of them and many others every day. I pray the great saintly bishops and popes of the past will, through their intercession, work a miracle of conversion that results in our poor excuses for leaders today emulating the great Saints of the past. I feel it a duty in charity, and the best recourse available to change such hardened hearts.
But one does, normally, have to have a glimmer of faith, a smidgen of belief, for this to work. Even when lost in drugs, I knew Jesus Christ was God and that I was doing wrong. With these men, it’s hard to see any openness to Grace, and God will, generally, not force himself on the totally unwilling. God does, however, in rare cases, work conversion based not on the faith of the recipient, but on the faith of those praying for them. Thus, we should never abandon all hope for these souls, even while we are dismayed and scandalized by them on an almost daily basis.
Check out Doc’s blog. It’s a good one.
Quick Hits – Boycott Target, Perverts for Equality, the Millenial Divorce Paradox
Cleaning out the inbox, a few quick hits for this Thursday arvonoon. First up, Target has decided to let mentally unstable men into women’s rest rooms at all of their stores. Time for a boycott:
The American Family Association is calling for a boycott of Target after the retail giant said it would allow men to use the women’s restrooms and dressing rooms in their stores.
On its web site this week, Target announced, “[W]e welcome transgender team members and guests to use the restroom or fitting room facility that corresponds with their gender identity. …Everyone deserves to feel like they belong.”
This means a man can simply say he “feels like a woman today” and enter the women’s restroom…even if young girls or women are already in there. [This has occurred far too many times already]
Target’s policy is exactly how sexual predators get access to their victims. And with Target publicly boasting that men can enter women’s bathrooms, where do you think predators are going to go?
Clearly, Target’s dangerous new policy poses a danger to wives and daughters. We think many customers will agree. And we think the average Target customer is willing to pledge to boycott Target stores until it makes protecting women and children a priority. Target should keep separate facilities for men and women, but for the trans community and for those who simply like using the bathroom alone, a single occupancy unisex bathroom option should be provided. [Why? This is precisely the problem. The longer we continue to reinforce these people’s grave mental problems and call them not just acceptable, but perfectly normal, the longer they will remain mired in a misery that will claim 30-40% of their lives through suicide, STD, or drug overdose. This is not charity, it is the cowardice masquerading as thoughtful concern.]
Sign the pledge to boycott Target now! Target should not allow men to enter the women’s restrooms and dressing rooms.
After you sign the pledge, contact Target and let them know you’ve signed the Pledge. Call Target Guest Relations at 1-800-440-0680.
Next up, it seems one of the major figures pushing for dramatically increasing the risk of rape of women and children through his opposition to North Carolina’s sensible public restroom policy is himself a convicted boy rapist:
In late 2015, the Washington State Human Rights Commission quietly put forward a new rule requiring all public establishments to grant locker room, shower, and bathroom access to any individual, at any time, regardless of that individual’s biological realities.
The rule, which also curbed concerned citizens’ legal ability to ask “unwelcome questions” of an individual if they felt uncomfortable, has since been attempted in various forms and fashions in cities and states across the country.
When the Charlotte, N.C. City Council passed their version of the open-facilities ordinance earlier this year, the Charlotte LGBT Chamber of Commerce led the charge to make it happen.
And leading the Charlotte LGBT Chamber of Commerce was convicted sex offender Chad Sevearance-Turner.
The Spartanburg Herald-Journal reported that Chad Sevearance-Turner had been a youth minister at a church in Gaffney, South Carolina. Sevearance-Turner was charged and convicted for “committing or attempting a lewd act upon a child under 16,” after taking advantage of a teenage church member while the child slept. [That’s what we’ve devolved to in this country – a moral climate where the perverse and sick dictate to the rest what is acceptable, and who are given the power by government to punish those who resist. Satan, and Vladimir Lenin, couldn’t be prouder.]
He recently resigned from the LGBT Chamber of Commerce after his record as a sex-offender surfaced.
Meanwhile, it seems millenials think divorce is bad, even though they are marrying less than any generation in American history. Pundits can comprehend the dichotomy, but it’s very clear to me:
Respondents were asked whether they agreed or disagreed with the statement that “Divorce is usually the best solution when a couple can’t seem to work out their marriage problems.” In 2002, about half of Americans disagreed. Within a decade, the share had risen to more than 60 percent. In the most recent data, younger Americans — a cohort with the lowest marriage rates on record, mind you — were especially likely to perceive divorce as an unacceptable response to marital strain.
Several hypotheses were floated to try to explain the seeming dichotomy between millenials “famous” liberalism, their low marriage rates, and their disdain for divorce.
It’s no mystery to me, and it has little to do with liberalism. Millenials are children of rampant divorce. That drives them to have a whole host of psychoses, ranging from fear of commitment (low marriage rates) to a tendency to low-rent promiscuity. But it also probably makes them find divorce abhorrent, as they have suffered its effects. That doesn’t mean they won’t divorce with abandon themselves, once they finally start getting married, if ever. Children raised in broken homes are far more likely to have unstable marriages and later divorce, for a whole host of reasons.
But hypothetically speaking, they know the devastation divorce causes children (i.e., themselves), and they have seen that many of the reasons adults offer to children to justify their divorce are hollow and self-serving. They rightly feel that there is really no justification for divorce in most cases. Too bad they are likely too emotionally scarred to have the wherewithal to put their generic belief into specific practice.
If you’ve been following the ongoing (and increasingly unhinged) leftist campaign against the state of North Carolina for having the audacity to say that men pretending to be women cannot legally use women’s restrooms, you know the SJWs (social justice warriors) have been displaying all their core characteristics to the max. Thus we have seen leftist agitators, many of them self-proclaimed feminists, jettisoning all their previous concern about protecting women from male depredation (all the while encouraging women to behave in ways that opened them up to same) and now demanding that all restrooms in the world be opened up to a tiny percentage of dreadfully mentally-ill individuals who believe they are somehow the “wrong sex.”
Since the vast majority of these trannies are males pretending to be female (and no matter how much you cut off or have added on, BOYS, you’ll never be rid of that pesky Y chromosome), what this effort has meant, in practice, is opening up women’s restrooms to mentally ill and/or predatory men. Not a very good combination. Of course, there have already been scores of incidents from around the country where this lunacy has already been enacted in law, of obviously predatory men assaulting women and even young girls in their most vulnerable moments, with the assaults ranging from actual rape to “mere” intimidation, groping, self-abuse, indecent exposure, illegal photography, etc.
Such is the insanity of our times, however, that when a state tries to protect 50+% of its citizenry from such a grave threat, the effort is labeled as being motivated by nothing but hate for transgenders – who make up perhaps 0.05 – 0.10% of the population (a few hundred thousand, at most) – and has become the latest poster child of the endless war by the sexually deranged left against everyone else.
All the more sickening, however, has been the key role corporations have played in the attempt to have this legislation overturned. Corporate pressure was the principle reason for the dramatic watering-down of similar legislation in Georgia, it might still work in North Carolina, though I am proud to see how much tar is still in those heels. To top it all is the stinking hypocrisy of these corporations, many of whom happily do business with the most thuggish, repressive regimes in the world, but who now publicly chastise and attempt to punish fellow Americans for holding beliefs different from their own (which beliefs just happened to have been shared by almost all those now doing the persecuting themselves as recently as a year or so ago):
Whether it’s Apple opening stores in Saudi Arabia or American Airlines looking to dominate the Cuban travel market, many of the companies that have threatened to cut business ties to North Carolina over its bathroom bill are eager to do business in countries with regimes far more repressive of gays (and everyone else).
PayPal’s international headquarters are located in Singapore, where sexual contact between males is punishable by up to two years in prison, and even littering can be punished by flogging. The company has a software development center in Chennai, India, where same-sex marriage is prohibited.
Matt Sharp, legal counsel for the Alliance Defending Freedom, said PayPal’s actions internationally speak louder than its words at home.
“They’ve got a political agenda that they’re trying to push in the U.S. But it definitely does not line up with what their actions are saying around the world in places like Malaysia and others,” Mr. Sharp said. [Why do corporations push an overwhelmingly leftist agenda? Because personnel is policy, and most corporations are staffed, to a nearly uniform degree, by highly trained but unthinking monkeys from the same far-left universities. The left managed to co-opt corporations during the 80s and 90s through the politically correct effort, and it is now paying huge dividends. Virtually all elites, be they corporate, academic, or government, adhere to the same left-wing social views. The only difference is that some of them want lower taxes than others, and so call themselves Republicans]
Apple is among the other major corporations that have taken to the pulpit to lecture North Carolina for its sins despite doing business with anti-gay foreign regimes. CEO Tim Cook was one of several high-profile tech CEOs who signed a letter to Republican Gov. Pat McCrory calling on him to repeal the legislation……..
…….But, as Mr. Sharp points out, that has not stopped Apple from opening stores in Saudi Arabia, where gay people are regularly executed in public and cross-dressing is also a criminal offense. Pro-gay and trans advocacy are illegal, as is every religion except Islam.
……..Corporate America is only as tolerant as it can afford to be without losing money. All this talk about “corporate values” is blather. If those “values” interfere with the company making money, the company will drop them.
Perhaps there is a lesson there for us few left who retain some degree of sanity. I know it gets exhausting to boycott this company or that because they are involved in immoral activities, if we boycotted every organization that is involved in some immoral activity we’d have to live in a cave, but there are leaders who can be chosen to make an example of, by refusing to do business with them because of their strident support for immorality. Like Apple.
But then, I haven’t been an Apple guy for a long time. I outgrew that after college. Not that Google is any better. I do sicken of Apple’s constant, reflexive, and hypocritical leftist agitating, however.
I pray to God people, especially women, could learn the object lesson of this latest shift in the great aggrieved class pyramid. 170 million odd American women have been demoted on this pyramid yet again, replaced on a higher step by 200,000 men who pretend to be women. Virtually every aggrieved gets demoted by the latest preferred group from time to time. And yet women, as a group, continue to lean left and endorse much of this cultural suicide pact called leftism. Present company excepted, of course.
The point being, it’s a fools game, and the benefits you think you are getting from being near the top today may not only evaporate tomorrow, but you may well be hoisted on your own social justice petard.
Well, eventually all this will come to an end, once islam overruns the remains of the comatose West. That is, barring some radical and completely unforeseeable change of heart.
Enjoy your time in the Camp of the Saints while it lasts.
Francis, asked about “new concrete possibilities” for Church Doctrine, answers “Yes. Period.” April 18, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, disaster, episcopate, Francis, horror, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, the struggle for the Church.
Hilary White has gone apoplectic over this, and I can see why. Francis was directly asked a very specific question by American Church-insider blogger Francis Rocca regarding change to what Rocca calls the “discipline” (it’s not mere discipline, it’s solemn Doctrine, but we can see how the constant apologists will be framing this matter, redefining Doctrine down to discipline) in the matters of morality touched on by Amoris Laetitia, and especially as it relates to those persisting in adulterous “unions.” The answer was very clear and to the point, but I’ll let you decide for yourself:
Today on the plane press conference on the way back to Rome from Greece, Pope Francis was asked a very direct question about the exhortation*:
Some maintain that nothing has changed with respect to the discipline that governs the access to the Sacraments for the divorced and remarried, and that the law and the pastoral practice and obviously the doctrine remains the same; others maintain instead that much has changed and that there are many new openings and possibilities. The question is for one person, a Catholic, that wants to know: Are there new concrete possibilities, that did not exist before the publication of the Exhortation or not.
His answer, though it went on longer, contained a straightforward affirmation:
“I can say yes.” (“Posso dire di sì“)
And that “yes” was immediately followed with a “punto,” meaning “period.” As in yes, period, or yes, damnit, I’m the Bishop of Rome, and I can do whatever I want.
Intent is the key to everything in the moral sphere. Asked directly if he intended to change Church “discipline” – and again, this is not a matter of discipline, but touches on a command straight from Our Blessed Lord’s own mouth – Francis did not equivocate. “New concrete possibilities” has been, for 50 years now, post-conciliar Church-speak for radical change. You can draw your own conclusions.
Now I kind of doubt Francis or the Vatican will issue clear commands to admit manifest adulterers to the Blessed Sacrament. He and his allies may be that bold, but I imagine they’ll just let events play out as they know they will – it will be the national conferences that will issue “guidelines” demanding/recommending/permitting the divorced and remarried (without annulments) to the Blessed Sacrament. Very soon this “permission” will become de rigeuer, and essentially mandatory, like Communion in the hand, god-awful protestant hymns, and barring Latin from the Mass. And I strongly doubt it will stop there. It is an open question whether the Ecclesia Dei communities will long be permitted to refuse such “service” to demanding customers.
It’s late and I’ve got to go, but I wonder if this rare moment of candor will finally convince some folks that the occasional orthodox bones they are thrown do not represent the “real” Francis of their surely well-meaning longings? I tend to doubt it, very little seems able to penetrate the bastions of the papologists, but it might move a few. Not that I rejoice in that. This whole business is as sorry as it is sad.
PS – This has been reported and translated by many and this is not a translation issue.