jump to navigation

California Charges Center for Medical progress with 15 Felonies March 29, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, asshatery, Basics, disaster, error, General Catholic, horror, It's all about the $$$, persecution, pr stunts, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, unbelievable BS.
add a comment

And this being California, the likelihood of CMP being found guilty of at least one of these “throw ’em at the wall and see if they stick” charges is disturbingly probable.  At the very least, the goal of the prosecution – to defend Planned Murderhood by ruining the reputations of those who publicly expose them for the evil purveyors of baby-killing they are – will be achieved whether a conviction occurs or not.  Forever anon, whenever CMP or David Daleiden is mentioned in the liberal/leftist press, there will surely be a little message about how they have faced numerous criminal charges for their activities, which message will be designed to discredit them and by extension the entire pro-life movement.

Ben Shapiro makes some sharp and insightful commentary below on this nakedly political persecution below:

On Tuesday, the state of California charged David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt of the Center for Medical Progress on 15 felony counts over their undercover reporting regarding Planned Parenthood. In 2015, Daleiden and Merritt released video showing high-ranking Planned Parenthood members joking about selling baby body parts for market rates and picking through baby body parts in order to demonstrate which sorts of body parts were available for sale for medical research, as well as talking about the best methods of abortion for procuring those baby body parts. The California Department of Justice, under the auspices of now-Senator Kamala Harris, raided Daleiden’s home for footage in April 2016; last year, the state of Texas pursued charges against Daleiden and Merritt, but those charges were thrown out. [With prejudice.  It was a humiliating defeat for the Harris County DA (a known Planned Butcherhood supporter and collaborator) and the grand jury that made the indictment.  But expect a different outcome in just about any court in California, save maybe for Orange County or some rural county in the north, but I’m sure the state will prevent the trial from being held in such reasonable environs]

So, here’s the question: where’s the media, rushing to the defense of these undercover journalists?

They’re silent. Or they’re celebrating, since they think that Daleiden and Merritt were evil conservatives out to target the saints at Planned Parenthood. They buy the lie that the tapes were deceptively edited so as to implicate Planned Parenthood in nefarious activity – but the tapes show precisely what the tapes show.

Shapiro then goes on to show important court precedents regarding the law under which CMP is being charged – a CA law that bars taping of PRIVATE conversations between two individuals unless consent is obtained from both parties.  But as Shapiro notes, a conversation in a public place like a restaurant is a dubious grounds for a private conversation, and even precedents from the crazy 9th Circus Court have found that journalists have a right to tape conversations when engaged in investigative journalism.  I expect the prosecutors to try to establish that CMP were not real journalists and thus do not fall under this broader interpretation.

Another note via Ace of Spades, a Chicago-area TV station secretly recorded undercover footage of alleged animal cruelty at a poultry farm in California – is there any likelihood at all that this ABC affiliate will be prosecuted?  Absolutely none.

Just another way that the Left is trying to create a tiered standard of citizenship in this country, with leftists at the top enjoying special privileges and immunities, and conservatives at the bottom facing not only the full force of the law but vicious interpretations of same simply because of their beliefs.  More and more in this country, the ability to live free from tyrannical persecution from the government depends very much on where you live and what you believe.  And this trend is growing.  I cannot see how this can persist for much longer without some kind of rupture.

I was, however, somewhat heartened to see the video below.  Some self-described “antifa (anti-fascist)” protesters used fascist techniques to try to stop a pro-Trump rally in Huntington Beach Saturday.  The left were vastly outnumbered, and when they started hitting conservatives and spraying women with pepper spray, things did not go well for them (language warning, this was a heated situation and people did not always maintain their cool):

The good news is that in a dicey legal situation like this none of the Trump supporters were arrested but 4 “antifas” face felony counts.  At least until it becomes known they are the sons of “important” college professors or judges or left-wing activists and then of course the charges will be quietly dismissed.  But at least they may get to sweat for a while.

Death Worship Is a Common Feature of Dying Cultures March 21, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, asshatery, Basics, contraception, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, It's all about the $$$, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society.
1 comment so far

So reports have been coming from the Netherlands and Belgium with grim regularity telling of numerous souls being murdered by doctors, against their wills, because the doctors have decided their case is hopeless and that these people deserve to die.  Formerly called murder, even genocide, this mass taking of human lives is now dressed up in the mild sounding euphemism of euthanasia.

This is also exactly what people, mostly convicted Christians, warned would happen if states, strapped for cash with massive aging populations and taxpayer funded and government administered health care systems, started “allowing” people to commit suicide by doctor if they wanted to.  From an occasional permission it soon morphed into mass use and now appears headed towards something towards compulsory participation.

The Church, of course, has always held a “consistent life ethic,” which declares that thou shalt not murder an innocent no matter how inconvenient or annoying they may be.  That ethic once informed thinking throughout the West, but since the West has chosen to pretend God doesn’t exist, that ethic went out the window, first with chemical contraception, then baby murder on demand, and then the murder of the elderly and sick.  Some of these people aren’t even particularly sick, which plainly indicates that something like a Brave New World death date of 60, or Logan’s Run “carousel” at 30, may not be the stuff of science fiction anymore.

After all, it’s cheaper and easier for all involved, most especially those government bureaucrats calling the shots, to just kill people at a certain date before they start to get sick, rather than waiting for the endless drain and expense of those nasty old sick people:

In the Netherlands an elderly woman suffering from dementia was held down against her protests as a lethal injection was administered by a doctor. In the days before her “euthanasia” she repeatedly said “I don’t want to die.” The doctor was cleared of wrongdoing.

Another elderly woman in the Netherlands was euthanized due to her supposed “unhappiness” about living in a nursing home. This despite testimony from the staff that she was often “content and friendly.”

Doctors in the Netherlands and Belgium have also routinely euthanized patients with depression. Now, a law to “legalize euthanasia for perfectly healthy people who hold ‘a well-considered opinion that their life is complete’” is being considered in the Netherlands. [Doctors in these nations are just another form of bureaucrat. They work for the government in one form or another.  We all know from personal experience just how faultless bureaucracies are, right?  Ever had a run in with a bad doctor or out and out quack?  I have.  Want someone like that given the power of life and death over you?]

In the US, Washington, DC and five states—California, Colorado, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington—euthanasia is legal. Should we be concerned? [In any nation with not only legalized baby murder but a hundred other moral atrocities ongoing constantly with government approval, we should be more than concerned. Terrified, outraged, is more like it.]

Advocates tell us euthanasia allows a patient to “skip the suffering and die with dignity.” Based on this, euthanasia advocates advocates suggest that until we walk in the shoes of someone who wants assistance in dying, who are we to deny them “death with dignity”? The idea that an individual has an “inalienable right” to use their body as they see fit has some appeal. [Notice the similarity in language to the pro-aborts?  Notice how they reduce immutable truths, literally conveyed by God, to endlessly nebulous, amorphous things like feelings?  There is a reason for that.  Logically, what they propose is unacceptable and easily refutable.]

Liz Carr is the creator of the hit British anti-euthanasia play Assisted Suicide: The Musical. Carr grew up with and still suffers from severe disabilities. In her youth she visited some emotional “dark places” where she saw no hope. Born in 1972, Carr feels lucky that euthanasia was not yet on the cultural radar. It is her belief that the movement can encourage disabled individuals to believe their life “isn’t worth living.” [Thank you.  People are endlessly susceptible. If they weren’t, multi-hundred billion dollar industries like Madison Avenue would not exist.  It is even possible to talk people into wanting to kill themselves.]

In the Wall Street Journal, Sohrab Ahmari conducted a compelling interview with Carr who argues we “don’t know what assisted suicide means or what the consequences are.” We just clap along to a mindless mantra “the right to die, the right to die.”

Why shouldn’t we exercise “self-determination” and choose how and when we die?

Ahmari cautions, “The death-with-dignity case is often based not on the lived experience of people with disabilities, but on the subjective judgments of others.”

“Legalizing euthanasia doesn’t empower you,” argues Carr. “It empowers doctors.”

Doctors that are, in the nations in question, essentially agents of the state. “Oh, but there are review boards to insure there are no abuses.”  Review boards can easily be stacked, especially when everyone has been similarly indoctrinated, where everyone or almost everyone has the same biases and the same interests at stake.

This also shows the ubiquitous tendency of left-wing governments and societies towards mass death.  They cannot exist without causing mass death.  Every single leftist society that has ever come into being has been sustained by the deaths of millions, be they Jews, rural Chinese peasants, Russian kulaks, or unborn babies.  Now the elderly and sick are becoming too expensive to fit into the great leftist utopia, so they have to go.  Yet we are the Nazis, they tell us daily.  The mirror must not get much use in left-wing households.

But the projector sure does.

Who knew the 25th century would look like mid-70s Hyatt Regency lobbies?

In Horrible Decision, Anthony Kennedy Allows Trial Verdicts to be Nullified if Jurors Are Found Insufficiently Politically Correct March 15, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, huh?, Immigration, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, unbelievable BS.
comments closed

This story did not get much coverage, but has the potential to be huge.  It will almost invariably lead to endless appeals and an end to the anonymous jury system, with jurors being investigated after the fact for any beliefs that might exonerate those found guilty of crimes.  It also fits in perfectly with the general left-wing assault on civil liberties ranging from practice of Christianity to freedom of speech to freedom of association.  Now jurors can be publicly excoriated if they are found to have uttered something politically incorrect at any point prior to or during a trial involving some “minority.”

Naturally, “Catholic” Anthony Kennedy sided with the Supreme Court’s left-wing minority to decide the issue.  He is the most powerful man in America by a long shot, and was never elected to so much as dog catcher:

A recent Supreme Court ruling turns criminal justice on its head, putting the jury on trial for political incorrectness and letting the criminals run free. Pena-Rodriguez v. Colorado is utter lunacy:

After a Colorado jury convicted a Mexican man of sexual harassment, two jurors signed affidavits that a retired police officer on the jury had expressed racial animus during deliberations. The juror was reported to have stated that “nine times out of 10 Mexican men were guilty of being aggressive toward women and young girls,” among other slurs. The defendant’s counsel sought to overturn the conviction based on racial animus but was denied by the trial judge.[Who declares that statement to be a slur?  It might be wrong, it might be a slur, but it could also be a mere statement of fact.  Who gets to decide what constitutes a slur?  Yet another power acceded to an unelected, unaccountable jurist?]

Civilization has been protected from verdicts being retroactively nullified due to alleged flaws of the jurors for centuries, thanks to the no-impeachment rule rooted in English common law.

As Justice Anthony Kennedy explained in the 5-3 majority opinion this week in Pena-Rodriguez v. Colorado, the rule “promotes full and vigorous discussion by jurors by providing considerable assurance that after being discharged they will not be summoned to recount their deliberations” or otherwise harassed. It also “gives stability and finality to verdicts.”

Yet Justice Kennedy joined the Court’s four liberals in Pena-Rodriguez to overturn that standard for accusations of racial bias. [Remember, Anthony Kennedy was the man possessed of the god-like power to peer into the souls of tens of millions of Americans opposed to so-called same-sex marriage, and find nothing but bigotry and blind animus.  This is the creature that decides the fate of hundreds of millions of people.]

What exactly constitutes “racial bias” that should result in the verdict being overturned? The Supremes don’t say, guaranteeing endless appeals on grounds of alleged juror political incorrectness.

Presumably it will still be possible to incarcerate white male heterosexual Christian criminals. All other guilty verdicts are likely to be held up indefinitely while the jurors are retroactively investigated for any indication of ideological impropriety.

The ruling is a step toward corrupting juries with political standards based on the progressive obsessions with race, gender and class.

Beyond that, it is a step toward reducing our legal system to a dysfunctional farce.

Indeed. If there is an extreme imbalance in the failing US constitutional system of checks and balances, it is in the judiciary.  Every single leftist advance in the culture, going back decades, has come from the judiciary, not the people themselves.  Even constitutional amendments have been found “unconstitutional.”  Basically anything a left-leaning judge does not like can be found to be unconstitutional, and rationalized on the most ephemeral of precepts: emanations from the penumbras, and all that.  Amazing.

As far as turning the legal system into a dysfunctional farce, to those who want to see the United States, as it has been, destroyed, this is a feature, not a bug.  Anything that undermines people’s support for the USA That Was is good to them, as they think it will bring forth their much longed for revolution.

Of course, the vast majority of the people longing for revolution today will be among the first lined up and shot should it occur.  Along with millions of other relative innocents.

So now you have another reason to strive to get out of jury duty.

 

Didja Hear About the Latest Franciscan Desecration of St. Peter’s? March 15, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, different religion, disaster, Ecumenism, error, Francis, General Catholic, horror, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, the struggle for the Church, unbelievable BS.
comments closed

I really meant to post this on the weekend, or at least on Monday, but events conspired to prevent me from doing either.

Starting Friday night, I began to see videos on Youtube from the Fatima Center highlighting an upcoming atrocity in Rome – the opening of St. Peter’s for Anglican “Evensong” prayers on Monday, March 13 – the fourth anniversary of the election – God knows why – of Bergoglio to the papacy.  Fatima Center did a really good job highlighting why this event was so novel, so egregious, and then took steps to mobilize the faithful in resistance.

Unfortunately, the Vatican kept this event intentionally buried, never publicizing it on any of their PR arms (newspaper, radio, website, etc).  It had to be found on the website of the tiny Anglican community in Rome.  Thus, it was found out late, when there was very little time to mobilize opposition, which I am quite certain was why it was so little publicized.  Nevertheless, efforts were made to stop the event, which did, however, go on.

Two videos below, one explaining the event and how it ties in with the overhaul of ecumania occurring  under the pontificate of Francis – especially in this both great and dark anniversary year of 2017 – and the other featuring Chris Ferrara, who explains its dark significance.  Of course, Anglicans lack valid orders and thus any liturgical simulation they perform anywhere, but especially in St. Peter’s, amounts to sacrilege.  Allowing sacrilege within the very Basilica of St. Peter is simply breathtaking in its blasphemy.  Ferrara explains how the cult of ecumenism is ultimately behind this latest abomination.

Sorry I did not get this coverage out before the event took place, but I haven’t seen this covered in many other places, so I thought it deserved a post, regardless:

Now Ferrara’s commentary:

And, as usual, so far as I am aware, no cardinals or bishops publicly condemned this ecumenical confab before it occurred.  I am aware of few priests who did.  I’m sure more will as they become aware of it, but both the indifference and information security on this were really tight.

Matt: Don’t Give Up, Fight for the Church! March 10, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, different religion, Francis, General Catholic, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, true leadership, unbelievable BS.
comments closed

I really like this video from Michael Matt.  It makes a very good corollary to the two videos in the post below.  Sort of like diagnosis, and treatment plan.

I should never like to give the impression that I am hopeless or despondent over the state of the Church. Much aggrieved, certainly, outraged, definitely, but not hopeless.  I do know God will prevail in the end, and that all of this somehow ties in with a plan of Providence that may well forever elude human understanding.  I also know that situations, even extremely dire ones, can sometimes turn on a dime, that what appears a hopelessly lost cause can rapidly transform into unbelievable triumph.

So I really like the last several minutes of the video below, and the exhortation to fight.  I agree with Matt that I don’t know how to “define” Francis.  I have read and seen some of the same things he has: that Francis is antipope, that Benedict’s abdication was null because it was made under duress, that Francis is the false prophet, that the Chair of Peter has been vacant since ’63, or ’58, or whenever.  And while some of these arguments may have more merit than others, I have not –  I cannot – fully embrace any of them because I. Just. Don’t. Know.  Francis was elected.  He sits in Rome.  He is viewed by all the world as the pope.  He exercises petrine powers.  But he also attacks the Faith in ways never before seen, at least not from this most holy office.  So what is he?  I don’t know.  Scary.  Terrifying.  A destroyer. A fool. A knave. a weak, flawed, failing man.  All of the above.

All I know for certain is that he is wrong; dangerously, destructively, wrong.  And I know he must be opposed.  I have known that for a long time.  I also know he – and more importantly the cardinals and bishops who surround his office and who can either put his policy wholly into effect, or block and undermine it – must be prayed for with passionate intensity.  I have been doing that, too, for a long time.

As to whether “neo-Catholics” are “getting it,” I really have no idea.  I don’t have the time to read their thoughts much anymore.  I’m willing to take Matt’s analysis at face value, but I also know a lifetime of intellectual habit and deeply held belief – the pope must never be questioned or doubted, ever – is not an easy thing to overcome.  So we shall see.  As to whether there are portents to a mass resistance to Francis’ pontificate and the forces that elected, we shall have to wait for the future to see that, too.  I a way, I pray that is correct, but what will that mean?  Schism?  Or simply a formal recognition of the schism that has existed for 60 or more years, ever since the modernist forces that badly influenced, if not hijacked, a council, first started to reveal themselves en masse?

It’s all a bit much for me to figure out.  I shall be content to continue to do my part in bringing awareness, as Matt says, to how extremely radical and unprecedented this pontificate is.  All else I leave in the hands of Almighty God, whose Will shall eventually triumph.

Trump Offers to Continue Funding Planned Barrenhood IF They Stop Aborting – Guess What They Said? March 10, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Abortion, contraception, cultural marxism, disaster, General Catholic, horror, It's all about the $$$, paganism, scandals, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

As if you need to guess. Planned Murderhood, which exists for no other reason than to be not only the leading baby murderer in the country but also the primary advocate for keeping abortion legal, turned down Trump’s offer to fully fund them at their desired level if they would only stop killing babies.  So much for abortion only being “3% of their business,” it is the one non-negotiable activity they perform, their most “sacred” satanic sacrament they adhere to:

Half a billion dollars in federal funding isn’t enough to keep Planned Parenthood from what it does best — abortions. This week, Planned Parenthood proved once again that, for all their talk of “women’s health,” their business IS abortion.

On Monday, The New York Times reported that the Trump administration made an informal proposal to the nation’s largest abortion provider: You can keep your federal funding if you stop taking the lives of unborn children.

PP refused, as abortion services are simply “nonnegotiable.”

“Let’s be clear: Federal funds already do not pay for abortions,” Dawn Laguens, the executive vice president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, said. “Offering money to Planned Parenthood to abandon our patients and our values is not a deal that we will ever accept. Providing critical health care services for millions of American women is nonnegotiable.”

That’s at least the talking point. But money is fungible (as anyone who has ever handled currency ought to understand).

GOP officials, of course, promised relentlessly on the campaign trail that they’ll get taxpayer dollars out from under the abortion giant. It was an issue that found new life in 2015 after undercover videos from the Center for Medical Progress purported to show PP involved in a large-scale fetal tissue racket.

This all begs the question: If Planned Parenthood was really concerned about vital low-cost health services for women, and really thought the organization would not be able to adequately service patients without an enormous taxpayer kickback, why would it put said handouts on the chopping block for something it says is such a negligible part of its entire existence?

Because it’s all a crock……..

…….Given what the public now knows about the kind of operation that Planned Parenthood is running all over the country, and the Republican promises made to voters in the 2016 election cycle, there’s absolutely no reason that they should continue receiving a red cent of public money.

That is, if the courts will allow it.  Texas’ attempt to defund Planned Murderhood was rejected by a West Texas Bush ’41 appointed federal district court judge.  Texas plans to appeal, but the odds are the courts will reject Texas’ arguments that Planned Barrenhood’s non-abortion services are neither vital nor irreplaceable in the vast majority of the state.  Which, of course, is a lie, but whatever it takes to keep the evil leftist sacrament of abortion viable.

This Planned Barrenhood de-funding will be another major test of both Trump and the Republican Congress.  In Trump I think it safe to say his commitment to social conservatism remains mostly unproven, and in Congress decades of evidence reveal their social conservative principles to be almost entirely campaign prevarications.  So I don’t expect Banned Parenthood to be defunded, but I hope and pray I will be proven wrong.

 

SJW Millennials and Severe Personality Disorders March 8, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, demographics, disaster, error, family, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, rank stupidity, Revolution, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, unbelievable BS.
comments closed

What is it Michael Savage has said for years?  That liberalism is a mental disorder?  That might be a bit broad and harsh, but for the hardcore social justice warrior millennials, their brittle, unhinged behavior may have been an inevitable outcome of their upbringing in daycare centers and the rare overinvolvement of guilt-ridden helicopter parents.  So says this author I’ve never heard of, whose conclusions I agree with so of course he must be right (teasing, this actually is important and parallels a recent Paul Joseph Watson video I’ll include at the bottom):

If you were to come across someone who cried in the streets, who saw the world in terms of black and white and made death threats against strangers, who cowered in a special room and made public displays of naked self-harm and blood letting, you might conclude that they were suffering from a personality disorder.

All these symptoms can be found in the High Conflict Personality Disorder category known as Axis II in DSMV, including Anti-Social PD, Histrionic PD, Paranoid PD, Narcissistic PD, and Borderline PD.

Alternatively, you might reason that these are the everyday behaviors of the modern Social Justice Warrior (SJW).

Of course, not every SJW has a personality condition, but sufferers from High Conflict disorders are often drawn to extreme beliefs and behaviors under the illusion that they are acting politically.

A 2016 UK survey found that, since 1990, rates of depression and anxiety among the young have increased by 70%, while the American Counseling Association has reported a “rising tide of personality disorders among millennials.”

Goodness.  What could have caused this generation-wide descent into self-reinforcing mental disorder?

Part 1:

The majority of millennial children (now aged 18-34) had two working parents; this was partly an ideological project of feminism and partly economic necessity. The downside was the damage done by daycare, services for which grew by 250% between the 1970s and ;90s (see Laura Perrins’ work on psychological trauma caused by daycare). According to Bowlby’s Maternal Deprivation Thesis, babies require two years of intimate attention to enable them to form the caregiver-child bond essential for secure ego formation. Any disturbance of this process will “predispose the children to respond in an anti-social way to later stresses.”

The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development has found:

Children in full-time day care were close to three times more likely to show behavior problems than those cared for by their mothers at home.

The more time in child care of any kind or quality, the more aggressive the child.

The result is young people who, a decade and a half after daycare, scream at the parent/State for not protecting them sufficiently. It is no coincidence that “safe spaces” resemble daycare centers.

Unfortunately, “safe spaces” enforce the distressed person’s fear of the world, trapping them in their original trauma within a psychological frame of permanent and inescapable victimhood.

Part 2:

Faced with histrionic students, university staff end up behaving like “Helicopter Parents”: those largely absent, full-time working parents who overcompensated by flying in to fuss over their child. Attempting to assuage parental guilt, one of the tools they used was “positive parenting” — a philosophy created by social Progressives.

Parents were taught to not scold or punish, and instead to use “positive reinforcement” in an attempt to raise their children with “high self-esteem.” This ideology also became fashionable within an increasingly progressive school system that awarded children prizes for “non-competitive sports” and for merely taking part in school activities……..

……..A false picture of the world and a vastly inflated sense of self-importance did not compensate for the foundational trauma of parental neglect. Instead, as Dr. Jean Twenge has explained, Positive Parenting created young people with a “narcissistic wound” for whom the real world would be perceived as a threat to self-worth. [And a mystery they are wholly unable to navigate, let alone unravel]

Sooo…..insecure, uneducated, brittle narcissists with delusions of grandeur.

Well, that should bode well for the future.

My boss, who is within a year or two of my own supremely awesome Gen X age (no daycare for me, just a latch key kid from age 7, but I did get that all-important two years of cuddling), and I were discussing the prospects of hiring a college intern this summer.  He was really wary of hiring a millennial.  I gave him my experience – some are perfectly normal, awesome go-getter kids with a lot of motivation.  I tend to imagine anyone successfully navigating engineering school cannot be entirely lost in infantile narcissism, but who knows?!  We’ll find out this June.  He says he’ll can ’em in a week if they have any attitude.

Good boss.

Seriously, the cultural and economic ramifications of this ignored-yet-coddled generation are shaping up to be mammoth.  Largely children of baby boomers, they may turn out to be even more destructive than their parents.  Millennials are shaping up to be extremely marriage- and child-adverse.  They prefer apartments, and high-rise apartments at that, to single family homes.  They want to live in hip urban centers, and nearly as many would rather use Uber than own their own car.  The economic portents of those three factors alone are enormously negative.  Whether they ever marry or not, it appears millennials will have even fewer kids (on average, we’re talking in the broadest sweeps) than any preceding generation.  The US appears poised to start down the path of final demographic decline that Europe began 40-50 years ago.

But as I’ve said many times before, it is the kids who are the ultimate, most suffering victims of the great cultural marxist consumption of our culture.  These kids didn’t choose to be raised by people making $7 an hour or indoctrinated into the cult of narcissistic self-esteem.  They are as much victims as anyone, the parents visiting their own sins upon their children.  Sadly, each proceeding generation has grown worse and worse.  I shudder to imagine what the few kids of the millennials will turn out as.   Maybe a large enough percentage will be sane homeschoolers living in rural areas/the exurbs to start to turn things around.

Probably don’t quite have the numbers  yet.

Is this post too much like the fave of leftists from a few years ago, the “studies reveal all conservatives are stupid” kind?  Or is it OK in this case BECAUSE IT’S TRUE!

US Bishops Oppose Appeal of Johnson Amendment – Why? March 7, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, different religion, Endless Corruption, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, It's all about the $$$, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, the struggle for the Church, unbelievable BS.
comments closed

I saw the following excerpt of a lengthy interview Archbishop Lori gave to the Catholic Register recently on the subject of the new presidency and the prospects it brings to the Church, and in addition to being generally disappointed with the bishop’s general view of much of the Trump agenda he was queried about, I was very surprised by this particular excerpt:

What is your assessment of the president’s proposal to eliminate the Johnson Amendment?

That’s, of course, a very complex question. We would certainly want to see, more specifically, what the president might have in mind. As a general rule, it is not a good idea for churches to engage in partisan politics. I believe that, generally, that proves to be a great distraction from our central task and mission, which is to preach the Gospel. Furthermore, I think it would have a tendency to unnecessarily divide our congregations.

I would recognize that the Johnson Amendment is lived out fairly unevenly, across religious lines, but in general, I think we would eye the adjustment of this amendment warily. I think that’s the best adverb I can give you. We are looking at this carefully and warily.

The Johnson Amendment, for those who don’t know, was something created by the corrupt, racist Lyndon Johnson in 1954 and tacked onto a defense appropriations bill to punish the churches who had opposed his 1952 candidacy to the US Senate from Texas.  Johnson only won by literally manufacturing votes in magical ballot boxes, but he had faced criticism from various churches for some of his stands and he did not want to have to deal with that again.  So, he created an amendment that churches that endorse or oppose specific candidates would lose their precious tax-exempt status.  The amendment was shockingly non-controversial at the time, but it has had enormous ramifications.

Now why would the bishops not favor being freed from this restriction on their ability to speak freely and endorse the most moral, most worthy candidates, and oppose those who are unworthy?  There are two reasons, really – money, and ideology.

Regarding the money, the USCCB – and Lori was speaking in at least a semi-official capacity for the USCCB in this interview – is wholly dependent on federal funding for almost all of their activities, activities which have come to be thoroughly politicized by this very same funding.  Something like 90% of Catholic Charities and 92% of Catholic Relief Services funding comes directly from US taxpayers.  One could imagine that, if freed of the Johnson Amendment the bishops would be placed in a very difficult position, not wanting to anger either party by openly opposing some or many (or all) of their candidates.  Such politicking could place their precious, precious billions at risk.  Can’t have that.

In addition, one can easily forecast how divided and lukewarm the bishops would be in determining which candidates to endorse or oppose.

Think how many very difficult, uncomfortable stands out milquetoast bishops would have to take should the Johnson Amendment be repealed.  The house divided they worry about is their own conference’s alienation from faithful souls.  Either way they went, they’d be angering a large proportion of their sharply divided flock, but in most of these cases, there is a clear, Catholic moral imperative to support one candidate and oppose another. Right now, they have the perfect excuse not to speak out much more forcefully against pro-abort, pro-contraception, pro-perversion, etc., candidates.  They simply can’t speak out for fear of losing that “holy” tax exempt status.  It’s great cover.

But it’s also a huge shirking of duty and conduct unworthy of a shepherd of souls.  In fact, much of the division among those in this country who apply the name Catholic to themselves stems precisely from the bishop’s unwillingness to take clear stands on moral issues, and, more importantly, impose ecclesiastical penalties against politicians and others of notoriety who advocate for positions contrary to the Doctrine of the Faith.  How many pro-abort politicians have been denied Communion, for instance?  How many have been condemned by name?  How many morally worthless, mealy-mouthed “voting guides” have been trotted out over the years, always containing just enough  morally ambiguous language to give a shade of cover for those who want to vote for politicians who advance morally reprehensible positions?

Overall, this commentary reveals the moral corruption at the heart of the USCCB and most national episcopal conferences.  Not only do they try to enforce a rigid conformity, blocking individual ordinary’s ability to speak out by imposing penalties against those who do, they also reveal a bureaucratic contractor more concerned with getting paid than saving souls.  Repealing the Johnson Amendment would allow the Church and the protestant sects and others to have a stronger impact on the electoral landscape than they’ve had in decades, and thus materially improve the moral condition of this nation.  In point of fact, one can trace the steady decline in morals in this country almost in a direct line back to 1954 – that is to say, the silencing of the churches played a significant role in the subsequent moral collapse of this nation.

But perhaps many of our shepherds today consider that much more of a feature, than a bug.  Whatever keeps  the gravy train rolling……is that their primary concern?  And how many of them favor the Church to be a mute, subservient, loyal and dutiful NGO-type contractor to the government, rather than the radically countercultural Body of Christ and vehicle of salvation she is intended by our Lord to be?

Tempting Christ – Avoiding Satan’s Trap March 7, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, Ecumenism, episcopate, error, Francis, General Catholic, horror, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, Spiritual Warfare, the struggle for the Church.
comments closed

In posting this video, The Remnant asks why St. Augustine called the Cross “satan’s trap?”

Strange question, isn’t it?  How could the Cross, the very vehicle of our salvation, be a “trap” for faithful souls?

Watch the video, and see if you can figure it out:

From the standpoint of this very good sermon, the “trap” was satan’s belief that he could undo this Messiah by having him killed.  Satan was unable to determine that Christ was truly God, and so erred in believing engineering the most horrific, shameful death possible would destroy all the good this Messiah was intending to accomplish.

But I think the analogy works on another level, too. How else can the Cross possibly be a trap?  We have no need but to look at the present Bishop of Rome, and, shuddering, find the reason.

The Cross also becomes a trap when people reduce the act of salvation to it, and it alone.  When protestants, and their unimaginative emulators in the Church, proclaim that one is saved, wholly and entirely, by Christ’s salvific Sacrifice, independent of one’s actions, this is a terrible error that has led countless millions of souls to their eternal doom.

Personified in the totally novel, made in America phrase (invented in the late 19th century) “once saved always saved,” this pernicious error has grown and multiplied until it has come to dominate most sects and made very deep inroads into the Church herself.  This is the opposite error of Pelagianism, which posits that it is possible to earn salvation entirely by one’s own efforts at virtue, independent of God’s Grace flowing through that one-time but constantly re-presented Sacrifice.

Salvation through a one time proclamation that Christ is one’s “personal Lord and Savior” is refuted numerous times in Scripture, most notably I Cor xv:31, Heb iii:13 and especially Mt xxv:31-46, but the supposedly “scriptural” protestants have twisted it to their own destruction, as St. Peter warned they would.

Of course, Catholics know the truth, that we are saved through Christ’s Sacrifice, yes, but also by cooperation with Grace through the good works we do and the sins we avoid.  Christ tells us repeatedly through Scripture that we establish the fact of our existence in the state of Grace through good works, and that those works are necessary for our salvation.  Christ’s Sacrifice offers us the potential for salvation, which was all but impossible before, but does not guarantee it based on a silly one time altar call.  Such an American concept, anyway, that salvation is like placing an order in a drive thru.

It is terrifying to contemplate that the man elected to the Chair of Peter so openly seems to hold protestant beliefs as much superior to the Sacred Doctrine of the Faith.  Francis has heaped praise on the sects and feted numerous sect leaders, and seems to never tire of heaping scorn and derision on faithful Catholics.  It is the inversion of the Truth and the damage being done to souls is incalculable by human means.

Our Lady, however, revealed the answer, at least figuratively, at Fatima, when she showed Lucia, Jacinta, and Francisco the souls falling into hell like snowflakes.

Unmitigated Effrontery – Bishop Appointed over Institute for Marriage+Family Installed Sodo-erotic Painting in Cathedral March 6, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, disaster, episcopate, Francis, General Catholic, horror, paganism, Revolution, scandals, self-serving, sexual depravity, the enemy, the struggle for the Church, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

And, beyond that, features himself in what is an obviously perverse and blasphemous work of “art.”  Paglia is one of several well known extreme modernist bishops from the Italian episcopate that have experienced a rapid rise during Francis’ pontificate.  Particularly shocking is the fact that this same archbishop who seems to tip his hand quite obviously regarding his own proclivities and, quite probably, extracurricular activities, has been made the president of the John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and the Family and the head of the Pontifical Academy for Life.  These appointments are part of a clear trend under the current Bishop of Rome to grant cover and partronage to the sodomite underworld prevalent in the clery, as Francis’ recent rollbacks of penalties put into place for priest sex abuse have helped underscore.

Many wondered how Francis would deal with this lavendar mafia.  Little did they know the several-hundred page dossier on pervert priests compiled under Benedict would be used by Francis as recommendations for promotions and advancement.  Of course, given the tight correlation between sodomy and hatred for the constant belief and practice of the Faith, it is probable that much of Francis’ most fervent support within the episcopate comes from those lost in this reprobate lifestyle.  In spite of the fact that this archbishop and his painting were very controversial within Italy, Francis has still seen fit to give him two plum and highly influential assignments, both centering on what appears to all the world to be an attempt to undermine and ultimately destroy the moral edifice of the Faith:

The archbishop now at the helm of the Pontifical Academy for Life paid a homosexual artist to paint a blasphemous homoerotic mural in his cathedral church in 2007. The mural includes an image of the archbishop himself.

The archbishop, Vincenzo Paglia, was also recently appointed by Pope Francis as president of the Pontifical Pope John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family.

The massive mural still covers the opposite side of the facade of the cathedral church of the Diocese of Terni-Narni-Amelia. It depicts Jesus carrying nets to heaven filled with naked and semi-nude homosexuals, transsexuals, prostitutes, and drug dealers, jumbled together in erotic interactions.

Included in one of the nets is Paglia, the then diocesan bishop. The image of the Savior is painted with the face of a local male hairdresser, and his private parts can be seen through his translucent garb.According to the artist, a homosexual Argentinean named Ricardo Cinalli who is known for his paintings of male bodies, Bishop Paglia selected him out of a list of ten internationally-known artists specifically for the task of painting the inner wall of the facade. Bishop Paglia, along with one Fr. Fabio Leonardis, oversaw every detail of Cinalli’s work, according to Cinalli, who approvingly notes that Paglia never asked him if he believed in the Christian doctrine of salvation.

“Working with him was humanly and professionally fantastic,” Cinalli told the Italian newspaper La Repubblica in March of last year. “Never, in four months, during which we saw each other almost three times each week, did Paglia ever ask me if I believed in salvation. He never placed me in an uncomfortable position.” [Of course not!  We wouldn’t want to disrupt all that pleasant “accompaniment” and “welcoming” with any talk of such a minor and trivial subject as the state of one’s eternal soul!]

“There was no detail that was done freely, at random,” added Cinalli. “Everything was analyzed. Everything was discussed. They never allowed me to work on my own.” [Ergo, Paglia endorsed every portion of the monstrosity, which you can view below]

Cinalli admits to La Repubblica that the naked people in the nets are meant to be “erotic,” although Bishop Paglia drew the line when Cinalli proposed to show people actually copulating.“In this case, there was not – in this sense – a sexual intention, but erotic, yes,” said Cinalli. “I think that the erotic aspect is the most notable among the people inside the nets.” He later added, “The one thing that they didn’t permit me to insert was the copulation of two people within this net where everything is permitted.” [In a sane Church, this artist would never have been considered.  This is the reduction of the Church to mere platform for the advancing of worldly left-wing ideals and, more importantly, the personal vanity of an unworthy prelate.]

The reason he wasn’t allowed to be so explicit, says Cinalli, is that his painting had already done enough to demonstrate the notion that man has “freedom” in this life and even in the next, apparently to engage in whatever sexual behavior he deems appropriate. “The bishop and Fr. Leonardis . . . told me that they didn’t think it was necessary to arrive at that extreme to demonstrate the freedom that man, in reality, has in this world and in the next.” [Orwellian. Slavery is freedom.  God condones sodomy, prostitution, and drug use in “heaven.”  Please.  All this does is reveal to total immorality of Paglia, the priests involved, and the artist.  It says nothing to anyone about God, sin, redemption, the human condition, etc.]

The article then goes on to note how Paglia has moved to undermine the Doctrine of the Faith on numerous occasions since his pontifical appointments, including this:

In July of 2016, still under the direction of Paglia, the Pontifical Council for the Family issued a new sex-ed program that includes lascivious and pornographic images so disturbing that one psychologist suggested that the archbishop be evaluated by a review board in accordance with norms of the Dallas Charter, which are meant to protect children from sexual abuse.

The images in question, which, quite frankly, are of an amateur level of quality and boringly progressive in their message.  I wish these geriatric progressive perverts would understand just how tired and predictable their attempts at shocking have become (beware these images contain nudity and are, as stated above, obviously intended to be erotic:

Paglia circled. The image is obviously intended to leave vague whether it be Christ or some male love uplifting the bishop

Yes there are drug dealers and prostitutes and people obviously getting it on if out and out penetration is not show.  SOOOO appropriate for a church and children.  Consider how diligent a man who has no problem bombarding children with homo-erotic art every day in what should be the sanctuary of the Lord is going to be about protecting children’s innocence generally, or from predatory priests in particular.

And yet Francis has seen fit to install this man over pontifical departments dedicated to upholding the family and the sanctity of life.

Outrage doesn’t begin to describe it.