Austria was, even after World War II, one of the most visibly Catholic countries in the world. But after decades of being steeped in (America-imposed) secular materialism, Austrians recently elected a man president who now argues that if opposition to islam continues to grow, the result will be that ALL women will have to wear “headscarves,” by which he means the hijab.
I can’t quite follow the logic, either, but he seems to be declaring that opposition to islamification only emboldens muslims and, if that occurs, all women will eventually wind up in the hijab. Of course, if opposition to islam does not increase, Austria will wind up in the same place, with total submission of the state and individuals to islam. Suleiman the Magnificent must be whooping for joy in hell, if such were possible.
About the video, this is Sargon again, and Sargon’s an atheist, and prone to blasphemy, as well. I would advise playing the video without sound until the 3:50 mark, knowing that the subtitles are quotes from muslim men in Austria regarding their feelings towards atheists:
Yes. Absolutely. These people do want to be conquered. They are like the late Greek and Roman elites who had totally, entirely given up on their own birthright, and so they got the barbarians.
We need to seriously start thinking about a strategic reserve where Christendom can be preserved. It won’t be Europe.
Just a quick reminder of what these young, aggressive, cocksure muslim men are willing to kill over (content warning, Mohammad, like almost all the enemies of Christ, was wholly given over to his prurient lusts):
Normal for muslim men, perhaps.
David Wood has still more – all muslims gain from the activities of their radical brethren, which is why virtually no muslims oppose the activities of the jihadis, just as essentially no muslims opposed the armies of the Grand Turk, nor the Berber hordes that repeatedly invaded Christian Spain, nor any of the other non-stop wars of aggression islam has waged against Christendom:
We have our own dhimmis in the Catholic Church. Many of these are priests, mostly of a certain age, but not always. I have been called a racist and islamophobe for pointing out – much more mildly than here – the deplorable beliefs that muslims hold. To these dhimmis – including a couple of local pastors I am thinking of – ANY criticism of islam or any other religion they hold in esteem (which is every one but their own) is absolutely forbidden and is met with accusations of racism or some other -ism. They’d fit in very, very well at an antifa riot, for the rhetoric is the same.
I know most of this post is old news for regular readers. Islam is a satanic counterfeit of Christianity, the veritable antithesis of all the goodness and light Christ brought to the world. The quote from the horrid president of Austria is notable, however. He was barely elected over a rival who was pilloried in the media as being a “far right” neo-nazi. All over the world, the elites are using the same tactics, the same words to gain their ends. Which ends, apparently, include complete and total surrender to islam, and probable eventual conversion.
Enjoy paying the jizya.
History takes many strange turns. A relatively poor circa 1580 Elizabethan England, casting about for means to compete with Spain’s enormous wealth mined out of massive New World colonies, seized upon what seemed like a hideous get rich quick scheme put forth by the amoral pirates Drake and Hawkins – capturing natives along the west coast of Africa, hauling them in hellish conditions across the Atlantic to the New World colonies, and selling them at a tidy profit. On the return trip, they would bring valuable commodities from the West Indies and other western hemisphere locales for sale at lucrative prices in English and Dutch markets, before heading south to gather more slaves. Even though local Spanish authorities took a very dim view of this practice initially, capturing and executing the crews of several English pirate-slave ships, the terrible practice eventually took hold and spread throughout the new world (and was taken up by other nations, especially the Portuguese). In fact, the practice grew so lucrative that it played a major role in encouraging English settlement of North America, since it was thought that extremely cheap labor to grow cash crops like sugar and tobacco would be easily available through the North Atlantic slave trade. The Europeans bought their slaves from West African slave dealers who were as often as not muslim.
Of course, there were always opponents to this barbarous practice, in England and elsewhere. Spain’s kings and the Holy See fought against the practice with varying degrees of intensity and varying degrees of success over the next 200 years. But it was in England, gripped by one of its periodic bouts of (most often) disordered religious fervor, that eventually became the prime champion of abolition of the international slave trade. Even disorders can produce happy outcomes, at times. In 1807, after years of effort by Wilberforce and others, Parliament passed the Abolishment of the Slave Trade act. Fortuitously for the world, England was approaching the zenith of her power, especially in the Royal Navy, which served as might and main to interdict the slave trade throughout the world and drastically reduce this practice. Thus those who had done the most to help popularize mass enslavement across continents, did the most to eradicate the practice.
150 years later, as Western Civilization, uncoupled from the Christian moorings which helped precipitate two of the most horrific wars the world had ever seen, passed from zenith into rapid decline, the practice of slavery had been all but extinguished. It still existed somewhat in Africa, particularly among some of the most backwards and isolated muslim sects along the transitional zone between Saharan Africa and tropical Africa. Slaves were mostly acquired through tribal warfare in small numbers, and shipped in small numbers to the Arabian peninsula. The African muslim slave trade merely continued a practice that had been maintained, uninterrupted, for 3000 years or more. Contrary to Christendom, islam had never formally forsaken slavery as contrary to the dignity of the human person created in God’s image, because islam has no comprehension of that image.
But that was 60 years ago. That was before the de-Christianized West, morally lost and full of self-loathing, withdrew its moral authority from the world stage, replacing moral substance with amoral harlotry exported via satellite dish and internet. Islam has, in much of the world, rushed in to fill this vacuum. The most radical forms of islam are growing the fastest, and these are the most comfortable with reducing other people to chattel and using them for the satisfaction of all manner of prurient desires. In doing this, islam is only repeating what it has always done. Indeed, for much of its history, from its satanic birth in the 630s up until well into the 19th century of Grace, islam primarily preyed upon Christian regions as its source of slaves. Barbary pirates were making slave raids on Cornwall as late as the 1710s.
And so today, thanks to the western intervention that ousted Gaddafi in 2011, the slave markets in Libya, under ISIS watchful eye, are booming again. Indeed, there is more slavery afoot in the world than at anytime since the late 19th century, and all the trends are headed in the wrong direction, and it has almost entirely to do with the trademarked “religion of peace,” islam:
The US has engaged in regime change in at least 4 Mideast countries going back to 1979. In every single case, what came out of the US intervention was drastically worse than what came before, especially for the local Christian minorities. Carter’s weakness and waffling paved the way for regime change in Iran, and we’ve had nearly 40 years of terror and extremism as a result. Iraq is a battleground, a made up nation with no real reason to exist anymore, and its ancient Christian populations have been decimated. Libya is now dominated by ISIS and is a completely failed state. We’re doing our best to drive Assad out of Syria and lay the groundwork for a new Caliphate, apparently, with millions more Christians, at least half of them Catholic, at dire risk. Even Trump now seems to have fallen into this neo-con world government mindset with regard to Assad, all on the basis of a chemical attack that either never happened, or was committed by the radical islamist rebels themselves.
Where we have absolutely no idea what we’re doing, I think it best we stay the heck out.
Great column by Sandro Magister noting the rapid erosion of the formerly non-negotiable principles regarding the sanctity of life in the only Church founded by Jesus Christ Himself. I’ve no time to add much commentary myself excerpt to say, yep, this is exactly right, this is exactly what one would expect to happen given a pontiff like Francis – the Church abandoning her most sacred beliefs in a pathetically false hope of earning the love and acceptance of an implacably hostile world:
And also to note the sad fact that the philosophy professor at the formerly Catholic, now Satanic University of Louvain I covered two weeks ago was indeed sacked for daring to say that abortion is murder:
There has been an uproar over events at the Catholic University of Louvain, which has suspended and finally dismissed one of its philosophy professors, Stéphane Mercier, for having written in a note for his students that “abortion is the murder of an innocent person.”
The matter is not surprising, seeing the track record of this university which is nonetheless endowed with the title of “Catholic,” the hospital of which has for some time been openly practicing euthanasia procedures, “from 12 to 15 per year,” according to the rector of the twin Flemish university of Leuven, the canonist Rik Torfs.
But what is more striking is the substantial approval that the bishops of Belgium have given to the removal of Professor Mercier.
Also startling is the reticence of the newspaper of the Italian episcopal conference, “Avvenire,” which in giving a concise account of the affair – the more complete documentation of which has appeared on the blog Rossoporpora – avoided taking a position, limiting itself to this: “It remains to be understood what is the meaning of what has been stated by the spokesman of the Belgian episcopal conference.” [Wherein the spokesman completely contradicted Catholic Doctrine by calling abortion a “fundamental right.” You can’t get much clearer than that, but the disciples of Francis are apparently hopelessly confused by such a statement]
Not to mention the silence of Pope Francis, who however has not failed on other occasions to call abortion a “horrendous crime.”
There is in effect a significant discrepancy between how the papacy and much of the Catholic hierarchy speak out on abortion and euthanasia today and how they used to speak out.
What during the previous pontificates were “non-negotiable principles” have now become realities to be “discerned” and “mediated” both in politics and in pastoral practice.
The Italian episcopal conference and its newspaper “Avvenire” are perfect examples of this mutation.
In February of 2009, when Italy was rocked by the case of Eluana Englaro, the young woman in a vegetative state whose life was taken when her nutrition and hydration were cut off, the current editor of “Avvenire,” Marco Tarquinio, wrote a fiery editorial, calling that act a “killing”.
While today the climate is different. It should be enough to look at the courteous detachment with which “Avvenire” refers to and comments on the law currently under discussion in Italy on advance healthcare directives, abbreviated DAT, the indications to be given to physicians beforehand on what lifesaving measures to take or not take in case of loss of consciousness.
Go to the link and read how differently the Italian bishop’s conference newspaper “Avvenire” covered euthanasia in 2009, and how it covers it today. Same writer, but much, much more “nuance” now, because the writer obviously understands that Francis believes God lives in the “shades of grey,” which historically had been regarded as the domain of the devil.
But who am I to judge? One man’s God is another man’s devil, I suppose, especially if that man is consumed with leftist ideology.
Freedom is the Hijab April 6, 2017Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, Christendom, disaster, Ecumenism, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, pr stunts, rank stupidity, scandals, secularism, sickness, Society, suicide.
As a believing Catholic, I am all for modesty in dress on the part of everyone. Not just women, but everyone. I am so convinced of the necessity of modesty, that I am even in favor of certain societal norms and social pressures that would encourage people to dress (and behave) modestly, casting out of polite society egregious offenders against this norm, as was the case throughout Christendom for, oh, about 17-1900 years (I hedge a bit, not knowing what standards of dress were like in the period of the early Church).
But I stop short at people being physically coerced to dress with decorum and modesty. I do not think women should be beaten if they show 2″ too much leg, or don’t wear a full, stinking burqa. I do not think there should be religious police wandering around able to dish out corporal punishment on the spot, with no trial, no appeal.
Practice of virtue is a great source of salvific Grace. But virtue that is coerced is not such a source. We can argue at length about where to draw the line, or whether societal pressures would constitute coercion, but I think it not unreasonable to conclude that threatening severe corporal punishment or death for a violation against modesty is not only a bad thing in general, but something that is prone to abuse and capricious application (as we see from the video below).
But we have come to the point in this country, where the muslim infiltration/invasion has been allowed to go unchecked for two decades or more, that the nation’s “newspaper of record” is running op-eds from muslim women opining that the essence of freedom is found in being forced to cover themselves head to foot under threat of force from the men around them:
A great point I wish I had more time to flesh out today, but will hopefully get to tomorrow: why are the Left and islam such easy bedfellows, in spite of holding radically contrary beliefs on almost every subject imaginable? Well, aside from islam being the perfect tool to crush the Left’s highest priority target for destruction – Christianity – neither recognizes any authority but its own. They don’t recognize the value of (true) liberal democracy, they don’t recognize the value of Christianity, they don’t recognize the value of peaceful coexistence, all they recognize is power and the urgent command to obey their ideological dictates. Islam, through the practice of deliberate deceit known as taqqiyah, will make allies wherever it finds them, no matter how noxious they find their beliefs, so long as it serves the interests of the unholy “ummah.” The Left uses islam as almost their armed wing to attack the instituttions of Western Civilization and to serve as a battering ram against Christianity (in which they are far too often – almost always – aided by the Quislings within the Christian community).
Thus it actually makes a great deal of sense that they collaborate so much, so that the wholly vulgar vagina-fest known as the “Women’s March on Washington” was principally led and organized by a hijab-wearing muslim woman, a woman literally sporting a symbol of her submission to men. And yet that woman was portrayed as a feminist icon.
What to Make of the Francis’ SSPX Marriage Imbroglio? April 6, 2017Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, cultural marxism, different religion, disaster, error, foolishness, Francis, General Catholic, horror, persecution, Revolution, scandals, Society, SSPX, the struggle for the Church, Tradition.
I chose the word imbroglio, because gambit felt a bit critical, and indult seemed off the mark, too.
For those who do not know, Francis, Bishop of Rome, extended another “indulgence,” or a faculty with no formal juridical structure, to the SSPX, this time concerning marriage. Readers will know that since Advent 2015 the SSPX has had faculties to hear Confession granted from Francis himself. Originally intended for the Year of Mercy, those faculties have been extended indefinitely. A few days ago, Francis, through the CDF and Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, granted permission to local ordinaries to grant faculties for the Sacrament of Marriage, as well, under some rather odd circumstances. The “normal” means of doing this would be to have a Novus Ordo priest perform the actual marriage sacrament, or to oversee it somehow?, with the nuptial Mass following according to the ancient Rite and conducted by a Society priest. But in addition – since this would surely be a huge burden to already overtaxed (or so we are told) diocesan priests – there is also a caveat allowing faculties to simply be granted without the involvement of local clergy.
That’s admittedly a rough summation of a fairly complex initiative but you can read all the details at the Rorate link. The point of this post is not to haggle over details of this initiative, or whatever it is, and to talk aboutits implications.
I have seen two general reactions to this, and they have followed in line with sentiments folks hold towards SSPX regularization overall. Some, like Rorate, are convinced that both this latest indulgence by Francis, and the overall process of regularization that now seems coming close to fruition, are unalloyed goods and something every faithful soul should be really excited about. I would like to present some text confirming this optimistic view, but Rorate seems to have shifted much of their focus to Twitter and while I’ve seen tweets confirming their excitement at this development, such as this: “This is clearly a final step towards full regularization that will go away when the papers are signed. It’s a good thing.”
Others, like Michael Matt below, are far more skeptical. In fact, in my very narrow experience, it seems a lot of folks who have had a long time association with the Society of St. Pius X are among the most skeptical of both this latest grant of faculties and the overall process of regularization. The Remnant video:
“They are wrecking the Church, they are enabling heretics everywhere……They are raping our kids, physically and spiritually, and then they have the audacity, to demand obedience. Oh so pious. To demand OBEDIENCE, and to hold the threat of schism over the heads of little old ladies to prevent them from in any way standing in opposition to their diabolical agenda.” Great rant.
Former Catholics are now the second largest “denomination” in the country. 70% of those baptized in Catholics in the US have fallen away. 80% of even those remaining American Catholics never go to Mass (and I bet it’s at least slightly higher than that). Even the vast majority of “practicing Catholics” are heretics of one form or another. Almost all of them support the use of contraception, and a large majority do not believe in the Real Presence, the very core, the essence, of our Faith. And these statistics from the US are much better than one would find in Europe and other locales, the Church’s ancient home.
Matt brings up a key point and one that I have gradually, over the years, come to accept, not as a metaphysical certitude but as being supported by the preponderance of the evidence: that “full communion” is a term much bandied about by those who have wrought the destruction of the Church in this world while demanding obedience from all to go along with a project they can easily see is causing nothing but devastation for souls. I am not sure what meaning that term means when bishops “in full communion” can declare, with the full backing of the pope, that adulterers can freely receive the Blessed Sacrament, re-crucifying our Blessed Lord over and over and over again in a horrid sacrilege. Given what is going on in the Church and world, as evidence by those statistics above and what we see and read every day, the arguments over the canonical regularity of the SSPX seem like a tempest in a teacup. Even worse, these same Church leaders who constantly appeal to obedience while snarling at and denigrating all those who strive to practice the Faith as it has always been practiced are the very ones who have placed the Church in the direst straits of her 2000 year history!
Not that the canonical status of the SSPX is a hill I’m prepared to die on, nor something I’m overly concerned about. I know there are fervent partisans on both sides, and I’ve always struggled to stay out of those endless squabbles where partisans stack up enormous piles of books and quotes from Fathers, Doctors, and Saints to support their favored side. It just seems to me, practically speaking, all this concern over and focus on the canonical status of the SSPX is just not a huge issue, compared to all else that is going on. The Church has fallen into the worst crisis of her history and the ostensible imperfect canonical status of the 0.05% of the Church (nominally speaking) associated with the SSPX just doesn’t concern me that much.
I do continue to be very ambivalent regarding this apparently unstoppable ongoing process of regularization. I’ve been catechized to believe that this must and has to be a very good thing, but something – my own lack of faith, the temptations of satan, worldly experience, natural cynicism, something – keeps shouting in my interior spaces that this is a grave, grave danger, not just to the SSPX but to all the Ecclesia Dei communities and the entire human aspect of the Church. It is also an opportunity, yes, but given how easily communities like the Franciscans of the Immaculate have been completely crushed by the modernist powers, it seems like the opportunity is far outweighed by the dangers.
If regularization comes to pass part of me will be happy and I’ll pray like mad – as I already have been – that everything will turn out for the best. In the grand, grand scheme of things I know it will, that the Church will be restored and Christ’s reign recognized by all, but I cannot get over my concern for the millions of souls who will continue to fall into hell so long as the Church persists in this disastrous crisis. Whether SSPX regularization will ultimately be a massive turning point in the restoration of the Faith, or simply another grim milestone in the chronicle of the Church’s long demise prior to the parousia, I do not know. None of us does. So I’ll just keep hoping and praying that God will have mercy on His Church and raise up the leadership and laity we so desperately need, and not that which we and the world deserve.
If you want an even more detailed critical take on this initiative, sent in by reader D, read this. I am concerned that it seems like the leadership of the SSPX is giving evidence of an attitude of appeasement towards the overwhelmingly modernist hierarchy in the Church and not rocking the boat, which bodes ill, I think, for their role in the Church after regularization, but we shall see.
A bit non sequitur for the blog, but regular readers know I am into firearms (though in a minor way, compared to some of you), home defense, a little bit of disaster preparedness, and similar topics. An Oklahoma man faced the nightmare of having his home invaded by hooded, armed, mask-wearing men one day. He was armed with an AR-15 and defended his home. The three criminals, who were apparently teenagers and probably relative newcomers to violent crime, were all killed. Their getaway driver and the apparent mastermind of the crime was later caught and has already publicly admitted to being involved.
The parents of the three dead young men are raising a ruckus demanding the 23 year old who defended his home be charged with some kind of crime. If he lived in a leftist-run state, he might well be in a tight spot, but Oklahoma’s people and government still take a dim view of crime, for the most part, and recognize the right of a person to defend himself in his own home, even to the point of taking a life. I’m sure the parents of these kids are devastated, but they chose to threaten other’s lives and they paid the price for their foolishness:
A 23-year-old Broken Arrow (OK) man who used his AR-15 to kill three masked home invaders with one shot each last week will not face any charges after authorities announced that the shooting was an act of self defense under Oklahoma’s version of castle doctrine.
The Wagoner County Sheriff’s Office and the District Attorney’s Office provided an update into the investigation of last week’s home invasion that left three teens dead in Broken Arrow on Monday at a press conference.
The triple homicide took place on the 9100 block of South Clearview Drive March 27.Wagoner County deputies said at about 12:30 p.m., three masked intruders entered the home, which was occupied by a father and his 23-year-old son, Zach Peters.
Deputies said Peters shot and killed the three intruders with an AR-15.
Peters will not face charges in connection with the shooting, officials said. The Wagoner County District Attorney’s Office ruled that Peters acted justifiably in his use of deadly force to defend the home.
Incredibly, the media is still attempting to claim Oklahoma’s implementation of stand your ground law is how Peters is avoiding prosecution for the deaths of the three suspects.
Elizabeth Rodriguez, the ringleader of the gang of burglary suspects and the getaway driver who left her three accomplices behind after shots were fired, was formally charged with three counts of first-degree murder and several counts of first and second-degree burglary. Rodriguez, who seems to be as intelligent as your average storm drain, confessed to the burglaries in a television interview last week, which should all but assure her conviction for the burglary charges, and since the murder charges are hinged upon the felony murder rule, a conviction on all three murder counts as well.
Oklahoma allows the execution of convicted first-degree murderers, but prosecutors have not yet announced whether they will seek the death penalty.
Despite being reviled by gun control supporters, AR-15s are excellent home defense weapons, featuring low-recoil, good ammunition capacity, and excellent self-defense performance from standard 55-grain FMJ M193 “ball” ammunition originally designed for the M16A1 assault rifle, but which is now also the cheapest bulk practice ammunition in .223 Remington and 5.56 NATO variants.
The three teenaged burglars killed in the home invasion were each struck just once.
The perpetrator’s families are lashing out at the young man who defended his home, claiming using an AR-15 against a knife was an “unfair fight.” As if that matters in the slightest. I understand the families are surely upset, though one does wonder who teen boys came to a life of violent crime, and are desperately trying to rationalize the death of their children, but blaming the victim in this horrific situation is hardly going to win them much sympathy. It is, however, perhaps an indicator of the kind of self-serving and self-deluding thinking that afflicts so many people today.
The remaining living perpetrator will almost certainly be convicted on three charges of first degree murder, to which she has already clumsily admitted being involved in a TV interview. She may well face the death penalty, but she, too, blamed the victim for shooting her homeboys when they invaded his house and refused to leave after being confronted by an armed man.
Some Darwin Award winners in this bunch. I have pity for them all, but especially the young man who defended his home and will now have to live with the memory of this nightmarish event and the deaths he caused for the rest of his life. That is no easy burden to bear, and perhaps the families of those quite rightfully killed should keep that in mind.
Now, I’ve got to preface this post somewhat. The survey that reports a huge spike in millennials reporting they are somewhere on the perverse spectrum was commissioned by the lead sodomy-advocacy group “GLAAD.” So, it is likely the results are skewed anywhere from slightly to severely. Having said that, however, even if the survey is over-reporting reality by 300%, that would still mean that over twice as many millennials are self-identifying as inclined to the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah (if not active, ongoing participants in same) than any previous population survey.
And as the pro-sodomy lobby gains more and more power and influence, as the perverse sexular pagan Left sinks its tentacles more and more into the mind, heart, and soul of our yutes, each generation is worse than the one before. My generation was somewhere between tolerant/ambivalent and moderately supportive of this sinful lifestyle. The millennials seem given to full-throated support. Some say the generation after them is somehow more conservative, but I doubt that, it would run counter to the prevailing trend of the past century or more, where each succeeding generation is more tolerant/supportive of immorality than the preceding one.
Twenty percent of millennials say they’re LGBTQ, and 12 percent are either transgender or gender-nonconforming, according to a new Harris Poll survey conducted for the activist group GLAAD.
And millennials also reported numerous gender identities: Three percent said they were agender; 3 percent, gender fluid; 2 percent, transgender; 2 percent, unsure or questioning; 1 percent bigender; and 1 percent genderqueer.
“This could be attribute to increasingly accepting environments, wherein for many people, family rejection is less frequent, job security is less at risk, and overall safety is less of a concern when coming out,” said their study, explaining the unprecedented findings.
Though pollsters agree that more Americans—and more millennials, especially– are identifying as LGBT, they disagree about the numbers. When it came to the percent of LGBTQ adults under 35, the Harris Poll’s findings were nearly three times higher than a Gallup survey released in January.
Yeah I didn’t even mention that 12% say they are somehow unsure of their gender. That’s such an enormous explosion from the teeny, tiny percentage of previous population groups it staggers the imagination. These kids are being propagandized to the extent they are embracing self-loathing and flirting with permanent self-mutilation. That’s a direct effect in being exposed to porn and self-abuse from a very young age. In addition to these kids being so fully indoctrinated in the victimhood hierarchy and the immense benefits, advantages, and immunities that flow from being a perceived member of a supposed victim group, but really an incredibly privileged group, that young people are embracing perverse, alien identities in order to garner some of those wonderful perks.
Even the secular conservative New Yorker Ace notes that a trend like this will quickly be the end of us should this persist much longer:
while some of that could just be virtue signaling — straights claiming to be gay in solidarity with gays, …… — and some could be GLAAD using the broadest possible definition of “gay” to plump the numbers, I wouldn’t completely discount it.
I’ve heard some horrifying stories from parents who say their kids are growing up in an environment where there is positive social and institutional pressure to be gay or experiment with being gay, as if being straight means there’s something defective in you. To not have any interest in sex with the same sex means that you’re a hater, so many kids are in fact trying a little bit of sexual and gender experimentation. [Very true. As is the reverse of the coin, being able to identify as supposedly gay or especially transgender puts one in the vanguard of a vital social justice movement both conveying purpose to an otherwise empty existence, and providing greatly coveted (if wholly unearned) moral authority and all manner of privileges, such as being able to never be questioned on a wide array of topics because of supposed “victim status.” It’s a moral authority card many kids find too irresistible to avoid]
Based on anecdotal data: Kids today are being coached and even “groomed” to be gay by cultural forces and intentional institutional programming.
This will all work out well, I’m sure. I’m sure that none of the psychological strains of forcing yourself to conform to a sexual preference you actually don’t share that gays often report will definitely not be evident in a generation of 97% straight kids taught that they’re probably gay and should at least experiment with gay relationships for a while to make sure.
Or else they’re perverts in revolt against the laws of nature and morality.
No bad consequences at all, I’m sure.
Dudes, I would never say my generation has covered itself in glory. It’s been shameful. But this……holy cow this is so beyond wheels off I don’t even know how to describe it.
UPDATE: Changed the post title. When I first read it, I thought this person actually had some role or position, like in the government, as a “gender educator,” but she just operates a dismal storefront in Golden, CO.
Who on earth determined this person was a “gender educator?” Or did this person just aggrandize themselves by making up this position?
Also note the shock below, that this deranged deviant has managed to ruin their young child’s life at age 7, convincing their boy he’s really a “trans girl.” So, this foul self-loathing soul has that going for them.
Not only are the inmates running the asylum, they’ve declared everyone outside insane for failing to conform to their mental illness:
A gender educator-turned-blogger is aghast that people would dare ask pregnant women about their baby’s gender.
She doesn’t just consider it just obnoxious; it’s “actually a hurtful, damaging question,” as well as an “archaic and misogynist” one, she writes.
Not only does the question reinforce “arbitrary gender roles,” Pearl says, but it also reinforces the gender binary and confuses gender with sexual anatomy…… [Said the gravely damaged miscreant, seeking to normalize their perversion and force everyone else to go along with their insanity]
……Pearl describes herself as a “genderqueer woman” who works as a therapist [of course she does. This woman serving as a therapist is like sending people given to homicidal rage to death row inmates for counseling on how to manage their anger], specializing in sex, gender and sexual trauma. She also blogged last month about how she’s parenting a “gender creative” child, who at age 7 already expresses strong preferences about personal pronouns. [I have to suspect this transformation of her son is hardly accidental. Mom is perfectly happy to use him as a political weapon to advance her politics, writing entire articles advancing this perverse agenda around her son’s supposed “gender creativity.”]
With that background, it’s not surprising that questions about a baby’s gender irk Pearl. It’s a query she considers unanswerable.
“If having a trans child has taught me anything, it’s that it doesn’t matter what you assign your child at an ultrasound,” she writes. “They will tell you their gender when they’re good and ready.”
Regarding this obvious child abuse, Ace nailed it:
So a boy, who gets almost all of his information about the universe from a trans person, [or at least one that takes obvious relish in being perverse, or, as they would say, “gender non-conforming”] and takes cues on what to believe and what to think from that person, is now himself convinced he is a girl trapped in a boy’s body.
What are the odds of that, huh?
Because of course she would look like that, although her latest photo indicates she’s gone full bald and now sports numerous other piercings. Have fun blowing your nose.
But the real tragedy is her son, whose photo I was going to include, but decided, for his sake and the sake of charity, not to. He’s an innocent, and doesn’t deserve to be used as – to be reduced to – a mascot for an extreme political ideology.
The pain this child has already internalized is heartbreaking. This is an absolutely brutal form of child abuse, worse in many respects than actual beatings. Those scars can heal. The scars inflicted on this poor boy never will. The terrifying thing is mom probably honestly believes her son magically materialized as gender dysphoric or whatever, that she had nothing to do with it, but the odds of that are virtually nil. This woman is deluding herself if she thinks something that afflicts 0.03% of the population, according to the latest census data, just randomly happened to her son.
Mom was probably created by similar scars. Or……by simmering in radical feminism for years, as she indicates she’s had a lifelong desire to “end rape culture,” which to a radfem means “destroy men and manhood as they have been known since humankind came into existence.”
Lord, how long must this persist? How much further will this descent into madness go, before people finally say “enough” and we return to the sanity You gave the world in the great construct known as Christendom? Will everything have to come to a shattering collapse, first?
More and more, I fear so, unless Our Blessed Lord come in His Glory before that happens. I’ve never really longed for that event, I’m not like one of those 90’s era evangelicals with a “In case of rapture, this car will be unmanned” bumper sticker, almost pining for the parousia……….but with evil like this, I am starting to.
PS – It’s people like this who have ruined Colorado.
Back when the Church was still much more of a force in the world, the Left, pursuing an agenda packed full of immodesty, immorality, and pornography to tear down the moral universe of Christendom, attacked such wholesome entities as the Legion of Decency or Father Peyton’s Rosary Crusade for good morals as being opposed to supposedly sacrosanct free speech. Free Speech was ostensibly such a good in and of itself that nothing, not even the fate of souls and the moral standards of an entire culture, could stand in its way. Thus, pornography was pushed into the mainstream, and little children were taught all manner of filthiness to insure that great gift of God, their innocence, would be ruined at a vulnerable stage, making them far more pliable for vicious demagogues pushing an unholy agenda.
Well, that was then, and this is now. With the Church beyond dysfunctional, nearly broken (for all practical purposes, a non-entity in the cultural zeitgeist), and virtually all the ancient moral standards and societal taboos totally shattered – that is to say, with the goal of the destruction of Christendom nearly obtained – NOW suddenly the Left is increasingly positing that free speech is not sacrosanct, is not a good in itself, and should, in fact, be jettisoned in furtherance of the broader leftist agenda. This agenda, as a previous post noted, is becoming more and more nakedly apparent as the standing up of a new, demonic religion, a religion of endless guilt for sins but no redemption save that offered by the Left- whatever dystopic utopia they are pushing for at the moment.
The shift against free speech and towards a totalitarian implementation of the leftist ideology is given evidence in thousands, probably millions of tweets, videos, blog post, and media articles. One recent article was more stultifyingly obvious than the rest, calling for deconstruction of “free speech protections” and the criminalization of speech the Left finds offensive, in this case, so-called islamophobia. It also highlights a belief I have long had, that some find counterintuitive – as push comes to shove, after (and if) Christendom is driven underground again, the Left will happily don the hijab and heed the call to prayer and endorse islam formally. This article endorses dogmatic claims of islam as fact, something I would wager a mighty sum the author would never grant to Christianity. See for yourself:
On March 23, New Zealand awoke to the horrific news of yet another terrorist attack, this time in London.
A deranged individual ploughed a car into innocent pedestrians and brutally stabbed a police officer to death before being shot. Five people died, including the attacker.
The Twittersphere was soon abuzz with conjecture and accusation. Who was to blame? What were the motives?
I felt sick as I read comments saying “Islam is to blame” and “it must be another Muslim”. [And with excellent reason, as the vast, vast, vast majority of such attacks are perpetrated by muslims. Given the location and the means of executing the atrocity, people had very good reason to assume a muslim was the perpetrator, and, guess what! He was.]
The fact that the attacker was a Muslim is irrelevant. The issue is that Islamophobia was the first response. [Oh for crying out loud. Muslims are responsible for attacks that kill tens if not hundreds of thousands of others, mostly Christians, around the world annually. No other religion comes close. Decrying this as “islamophobia” is just the bleating of an ideologue who has nothing to support their claim, so they shout epithets.]
If you are a Muslim, you continually have to defend your faith against people who accuse it of being a dangerous and violent set of ideas. [And rightly so, because it has been proven, over its roughly 1,350 year history, to be exactly that, a dangerous and violent set of ideas.]Islam is the religion of peace; anyone who understands this knows it has no part in the ideology of ISIS……..[Do you think the nebbish milquetoast wisp of a (white) man author would EVER grant such to Christianity, that it is THE religions of peace. Not A religion of peace, but THE religion of peace. This guy is halfway to being a muslim convert, and entirely because his ideology places muslims very, very high on the victim pyramid conveying instantaneous moral status and authority. These people will be the death of us, literally and figuratively.]
………The misogynistic, homophobic, transphobic, Islamophobic hate speech directed at oppressed groups is damaging to society – and with the rise of Donald Trump’s brand of politics, it is also being legitimised.
So, what does this have to do with free speech? And how might things change for the better?
Well, there is some hope. The Canadian parliament has passed the M-103 motion, which calls on the government to condemn Islamophobia. It is the silver lining of a dark and depressing cloud, and it is something I think New Zealand should seek to not only emulate but improve.
Our Government should look to criminalise not only Islamophobia, but racist rhetoric and the criticism of feminism and LGBTQAA+ rights. [Basically, any speech that attacks and undermines his leftist ideology should be made illegal. That’s what they have done in all the leftist “paradises” from 16th century Muenster to 1870 Paris to the FSU and up to today.]
Free speech is all well and good, but it should not be defended at the expense of minority groups. [And he and his cohort, naturally, get to define both who is a “minority,” and whether certain speech somehow offends against him/them.]
Nothing quells fear and hatred like making it illegal, and if we stop opposing progressive values then surely the constant fighting will stop too.
Spoken like a true believer. The ideological motive behind all this is revealed in this final paragraph, “progressive values” are so perfect and sublime they will lead to peace and concord for all, if we could only shut up those blasted recalcitrant unholy heretical right wingers once and for all.
Whether declaring vast swaths of perfectly normal political and cultural speech/criticism to be illegal would produce less “fear and hatred” is extremely debatable. While members of the leftist political coalition might be happy, millions of others would be extremely aggrieved. What he means to say is it would “quell the fear and hatred” of those he finds politically and culturally acceptable, ie., members of the leftist coalition. The rest can just go hang, perhaps figuratively at first, but eventually, literally.
The writer comes across as extremely young, naive, and indoctrinated. He doesn’t argue coherently so much as regurgitate talking points he’s picked up from the mainstream media in hyper-leftist New Zealand (one of the first Western countries to essentially completely destroy their capability to defend themselves, militarily – I kid you not – devolving this responsibility on their friendly neighbor Australia).
Wherever the Left has gained hold – oh, and always for the good of others, even as it makes those others utterly miserable – it has resulted in a total crackdown on civil liberties that were one of the great gifts of the Church to the world. Given leftism’s endemic anti-Christian nature, I guess this should not be surprising. What is amazing is the Left’s ability to dissemble and exist in total hypocrisy, even regarding its own history. Are today’s leftists, heirs of the once sacrosanct “free speech movement” of the 60s and 70s embarrassed at totally turning their back on this once vital precept? Of course not, both because they are wholly ignorant of history, and wouldn’t care if they weren’t.
Because it’s always been about power, power for them, over you, because they are totally convinced of their own innate superiority in every possible way – morally, intellectually, artistically, culturally, politically, socially……everything. Being a leftist means never having to say you’re sorry.
h/t Sargon of Akkad
Mass Media Catching On: Leftism Is a Religion April 3, 2017Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, Basics, cultural marxism, different religion, error, General Catholic, horror, paganism, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, the struggle for the Church, unadulterated evil.
They still don’t seem to understand, or – especially, given that this is the very secular-leaning “conservative” Weekly Standard – want to understand, that not only has leftism “transformed” into a religion, it was always deliberately conceived as a false counterfeit of true religion in order to oppose, subvert, replace, and ultimately destroy (if possible) Catholicism.
I’ve had this confirmed for me in many ways of late, not the least of which is reading William Thomas Walsh’s massive biography of His Catholic Majesty Philip II of Spain. Walsh, too (writing in the 20s and 30s), assessed the protestant revolt as being the first mass outbreak of leftism, and understood that leftism initially took on the trappings of religion, even the Christian religion, the better to sell itself and achieve maximum impact against its principal target, the Church. In addition, just as it is almost impossible to separate the modern Left from modern Judaism, the Jewish impact on the protestant revolt may have been much larger than is generally recognized. More on that, perhaps, later today.
All of which makes this report from the Weekly Standard at least slightly ironic? Nevertheless, it is quite gratifying to see (especially coming from a Catholic journalist) that some of the things I’ve realized for years are starting to become more widely recognized:
One of the more prescient essays in recent years is Jody Bottum’s “The Spiritual Shape of Political Ideas,” which I’m proud to say was published in THE WEEKLY STANDARD. The essay posits that religious ideas are transforming politics as we know it, only instead of the hand-wringing about the Moral Majority or the George W. Bush administration’s supposed attempts to impose theocracy, it’s the left that is, ahem, “culturally appropriating” religious ideas to suit their own attempts to seize power. [They’ve been doing so for 500 years. But the religious nature of the Left has become blatantly obvious of late.]
Take ethnicity, which has become a matter of original sin. Unlike the Judeo-Christian belief, however, this sin does not apply to all of humanity. “So profound is the sin, in fact, that not even its proponents escape. The more they are aware of white privilege, the more they see it everywhere, even in themselves,” writes Bottum. He quotes an essay of University of Texas professor Robert Jensen, who wrote: “There is not space here to list all the ways in which white privilege plays out, but it is clear that I will carry this privilege with me until the day white supremacy is erased.” [Jensen has been a literal nut embarrassing the University of Texas for a quarter century or more. This Jensen creature is the only guy I ever met who talked himself into becoming a sodomite in order to better conform to his political ideology. I am not much exaggerating. He is nuts.]
Even Andrew Sullivan recently reached this conclusion, when he recently examined “intersectionality,” the left-wing buzzword du jour, which he accurately describes as “neo-Marxist theory that argues that social oppression does not simply apply to single categories of identity — such as race, gender, sexual orientation, class, etc. — but to all of them in an interlocking system of hierarchy and power.” Sullivan further observes that intersectionality “is operating, in Orwell’s words, as a ‘smelly little orthodoxy,’ and it manifests itself, it seems to me, almost as a religion. It posits a classic orthodoxy through which all of human experience is explained — and through which all speech must be filtered. Its version of original sin is the power of some identity groups over others. To overcome this sin, you need first to confess, i.e., ‘check your privilege,’ and subsequently live your life and order your thoughts in a way that keeps this sin at bay.”…….. [In fact, this emergence of obviously religious leftism has come as a result of the steady retreat of Christianity and the growing influence of the Left on society. This is how the Left behaves when it comes very close to power, dropping the trappings of supposed reasoned argument and appeals to false intellectualism for much more nakedly dogmatic, emotionally-laden claims.]
……….The University of Regina is asking its male students to own up to their toxic masculinity, and they’re setting up a confessional booth—similar to those in Catholic churches—where guys can confess their sins of “hypermasculinity.”………[How does one express a firm purpose of amendment against masculinity? I’m sure you can imagine the life-shattering behaviors that could result.]
……….Certainly, the religious right has had its excesses. [Such as? Are you going to quote me Fred Phelps? But are they even genuinely religious, or “right?” Authentic Christianity has rarely been seen by most in this country, unfortunately. Very few Americans below about 70 would even have a recollection what it might have looked like in odd corners of this country, dominated by Catholicism “before the fall” of 1962-5] But if you think that’s bad, just imagine the consequences of a political system dominated by a religious left that doesn’t believe in redemption.
Oh, we don’t have to imagine, the world has seen it over and over and over. The Soviet Union, China 1949-present, Cambodia, Vietnam, Allendeist Chile, all the East European satellites of the FSU, Nazi Germany, revolutionary Spain, revolutionary France, etc., etc. Everywhere leftism as religion comes to power it leaves putrid mounts of dead bodies in its wake.
Of course, the religion of leftism has become the predominant belief set of those who claim the name Catholic over the last several decades, infecting especially the hierarchy and then trickling down from there to infect millions of souls. But a detailed analysis of that is beyond the scope of this post, and has already been done to death not only here but on hundreds of other venues.
A friend and frequent reader of this blog gave me a great quote last week – virtually everyone in the US is born a first degree mason, and a first degree wiccan, etc. That’s because this country has come to hold, culturally, politically, socially, such extraordinarily liberal and libertine ideas, and we are all so inculcated in the “normality” of these ideas from such an early age, that almost all of us emerge, even from earliest childhood, as little proto-liberals and proto-libertines, unless we are extremely fortunate and have parents who form us in opposition to the dominant cultural zeitgeist. I thought that was a really good and pithy saying, and I thank TE for sharing it.
Fits in well with the content of this post, anyway.