Christianity is the Root of Reason and “Reality Based” Existence January 18, 2017Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, Basics, cultural marxism, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, paganism, rank stupidity, Revolution, scandals, secularism, sickness, Society, unbelievable BS.
A shockingly contrarian declaration, but a true one, nonetheless. As for living a life based on reason or factual reality, it sure isn’t leftism, and especially not some of its radical fringe, like extreme feminism, that will put you there. As a for instance, is it shocking at all that the poor, damaged, brittle feminist soul who decided to turn her shame (Genital Herpes) into a badge of honor would also be deeply ingrained in astrology? Is it any coincidence that many major feminists hold similar if not more bizarre views (such as being devotees of Druid or other pagan religions)?
In fact, acceptance of totally false, demonically-inspired religions/philosophies is a pandemic on the Left. So much for being reality based. But as Robert Stacy McCain notes below, there is another aspect to all this. The philosophies extreme leftists tend to adopt tend to encourage abdication of personal responsbility: “Oh, I’m in a terrible mood because ‘Mercury is in retrograde,'” or Venus is transposed, or whatever. Who really believes the position of the planets and stars at our birth somehow dictates our existence? Amazingly, I know a fair number of nominal Catholics who are far more devout practitioners of astrology than they are the Faith of Jesus Christ.
“Mercury in retrograde” is a dye-marker of belief in astrology, and you don’t want to be in the proximity of anyone foolish enough to believe such ridiculous nonsense. Belief in astrology is like theosophy or voodoo or Keynesian economics — a hallmark of poor judgment. Bad things happen when you start hanging around losers like that. Avoid them.
Go take a look at the Twitter search results for “Mercury retrograde” and you will notice that it’s almost entirely women. You can explain that however you wish, but doesn’t the unusual prevalence of belief in astrology among women also tell us something about feminism?
Like astrology, feminism is a quasi-religious belief system that tells people that their problems are caused by circumstances beyond their control. It’s not her fault she didn’t get hired for that job, feminism tells the young women — she’s a victim of sexist discrimination. The college girl got drunk at a frat party and did things she regrets? That’s certainly not her fault, feminism tells her — she’s a victim of “rape culture.”
Or maybe Mercury was in retrograde.
Feminism offers a ready-made excuse for anything a woman might be unhappy about, so the feminist movement attracts a lot of unhappy women who need excuses for what’s wrong with their lives………
………..In April 2016, Emily Depasse bragged about teaching sex to 12-year-old boys in Baltimore during the #ShoutYourStatus campaign to “destigmatize” sexually transmitted diseases. DePasse graduated in 2015 from Maryland’s Salisbury University, where she majored in Gender and Sexuality Studies, doing her senior project on “The Secret Sexual Revolution at Salisbury University in the 1960s and 1970s.” Not long after graduating, in July 2015, DePasse was diagnosed with genital herpes. This was an entirely private misery for Ms. Depasse until Ella Dawson and her feminist comrades decided to launch the #ShoutYourStatus campaign, the rationale of which was to end the “stigma” of herpes. And so Ms. Depasse was emboldened to go public with the fact that (a) she was infected with this incurable virus, and (b) she was talking about her diseased genitalia with seventh-graders. [This is the same woman who declares that herpes wasn’t a consequence of poor behavior or wanton sexuality, it was “inevitable,” something that just happened to her irrespective of her dangerous life choices]
What kind of person thinks this is a good idea? A fool or a feminist, but I repeat myself. It appears that the inspiration for #ShoutYourStatus was a campaign in September 2015 to “destigmatize” abortion. The #ShoutYourAbortion campaign was a response to efforts by Republican members of Congress to end taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood. In other words, it was about partisan politics……….
…………Feminism is essentially a religious cult. Members of the cult are unable to step back and examine their value system from a critical perspective and, no matter how irrational their beliefs, or how damaging the consequences of acting on those beliefs, they remain fanatically devoted to the feminist cause. Fanatics only listen to their fellow fanatics, and this echo-chamber effect tends to alienate feminists from normal people. Trying to convince Ella Dawson that making her name a synonym for “herpes slut” is a bad idea would be like trying to convince Mohamed Atta that flying a Boeing 757 into a skyscraper was a bad idea. Belief systems that are fundamentally irrational — like feminism or radical Islam — tend to attract people with a psychological predisposition to fanaticism.
This is why the prevalence of belief in astrology among women is a clue to the nature of the feminist movement. Emily Depasse, the herpes-infected feminist who teaches “human sexuality” to seventh-graders, also has a mystical belief in the influence of “Mercury retrograde.”…….
……..There is such a thing as evil in this world, and when people start dabbling in the occult, they’re opening the doors to that evil. You may think astrology is harmless nonsense, but once people buy into that nonsense — “Mercury in retrograde!” — what will they buy into next? It’s like drug addiction. If you’ve seen a few people completely wreck their lives through substance abuse, you become wary of claims that drugs and alcohol are harmless. Similarly, if you’ve known people whose interest in the occult led them into madness, crime and self-destruction, it’s not so easy to laugh off astrology as harmless. The Bible repeatedly condemns occult practices (e.g., Leviticus 20:27, Deuteronomy 18:10-11, Nahum 3:4, Revelation 9:21). Indeed, a reliance on astrologers is condemned specifically by the prophet Isaiah as among the sins of Babylon.
Secular readers who disdain scriptural authority are apt to disregard the Bible’s condemnation of sorcery and necromancy and astrology, but we cannot ignore the fact that occult beliefs are now flourishing in our culture at the same time that destructive ideologies like feminism are flourishing in our politics. Why is this? Because the same hate-filled atheists who insist that Christianity must be excluded from our culture (thus enabling the proliferation of the occult) also insist that they have an exclusive monopoly on moral virtue and political wisdom.
And isn’t that an interesting transposition – those most given over to personal immorality insisting they are the true arbiters of moral virtue and cultural standards – standards they constantly manipulate to give themselves, and their ideological allies, a pass, while constantly attacking, belittling, and undermining Christianity. In fact, qua Chesterton, these amoral elites are happy for people to believe anything, so long as that anything is not convicted Christianity. Christianity is the one true enemy that must be destroyed.
It’s almost as if they were part of a deliberate diabolical plot. A diabolically narcissistic plot, to be specific. Continued thanks to Ann Barnhardt for correctly diagnosing the ultimate source of our society’s manifest ills. Astrology and feminism are just two particular manifestations of diabolical narcissism, but there are many others, including some particularly popular with men, like excessive devotion to sports and addiction to onanism.
Not that you needed me to tell you that, it was obvious to anyone with eyes to see that the former-billion dollar plus “charity” known as the Clinton Global Initiative was a sick combination of perpetual campaign apparatus and global shakedown machine. On two fronts, it no longer has a need to exist – there are no more campaigns to staff up and fund, and there are no longer any donors seeking to gain influence with a hopeful future president of the United States.
But I think even more, the rapid shuttering of the Clinton Global Initiative reveals that this was an organization that raked in huge donations from extremely shady characters not only because these characters sought to influence Clinton, but also as a sort of protection racket. Either cough up a fat $300 million “donation,” or the Clintons might use the power of the US government to destroy that nice uranium mining outfit you’ve got there, or that child slavery/sex trafficking ring.
At any rate, it’s all gone now. There is no longer any influence to peddle, and it turns out people really didn’t really adore the Clintons to the tune of $5 million speaking engagements after all:
The Clinton Global Initiative (CGI) filed a WARN — Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification — with New York State’s Department of Labor on Thursday, announcing that, effective April 15, 2017, it would be closing its doors and laying off 22 employees. The CGI’s stated reason: “Discontinuation of the Clinton Global Initiative.”
Following the election, foreign governments that had been regular donors began cutting their contributions to the Clinton Foundation, some severely. For example, news.com.au noted that the Australian government “has not renewed any of its partnerships with the scandal-plagued Clinton Foundation, effectively ending 10 years of taxpayer-funded contributions worth more than $88 million.” The government of Norway, which had been contributing as much as $20 million a year to the foundation, cut its contribution by nearly 90 percent.
As noted by the New York Observer, these cuts indicate that “the organization’s clout was predicated on donor access to the Clintons, rather than its philanthropic work.”
Surely the most corrupt family in the history of American politics. They’re kind of leaving Chelsea out to dry, though, aren’t they? I thought the Clinton’s, like the Bushes and Obama’s, were intent on setting up a political dynasty a la the Kennedy’s?
Probably they’ve amassed more than sufficient cash already to fund whatever political ambitions Chelsea may have.
And the elites wonder why the people are in full, open revolt against their scheming corruption and constant self-aggrandizement?
Fake Shock Post – Same Firm Responsible for Trump Oppo Dump Provided Cover for Baby Murder, Inc. January 12, 2017Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, contraception, cultural marxism, disaster, General Catholic, horror, It's all about the $$$, rank stupidity, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, the enemy, unbelievable BS.
There has been a great deal of backlash over the totally unsubstantiated, wholly fabricated oppo dump released against Donald Trump late last week, which claims he was “compromised” by the Russian intelligence services. Turns out the same firm responsible for that oppo dump – which began work under funding from Republicans during the 2016 primary and continued under funding from demonrats during the general – was responsible for the wholly false smear campaign conducted against the Center for Medical Progress and their expose videos against Planned Barrenhood:
That’s not all Fusion GPS has been up to in recent years. In 2015, Planned Parenthood was stung by a video expose that detailed its involvement in human organ trafficking—organs harvested from the bodies obtained after abortions. Those behind the expose, David Daleiden and the Center for Medical Progress, knew they would be severely scrutinized so they released dozens of hours of raw footage that their documentary evidence was culled from to show that their reports had not been selectively edited. Nor were they misrepresenting the shocking statements of Planned Parenthood officials.
Nonetheless, Planned Parenthood produced a “forensic report” concluding that the videos had in fact been manipulated. The author of that report was none other than Fusion GPS. If you bothered to read the details of Fusion GPS’s report it made some damning concessions, even admitting there was no “widespread evidence of substantive video manipulation.”But overall, the report was calculated to be misleading and was nothing but an underhanded PR stunt for Planned Parenthood. Naturally, Fusion GPS’s report was uncritically covered by a credulous media. Politico’s headline was “Report for Planned Parenthood finds sting videos manipulated.” The New York Times went with “Planned Parenthood Videos Were Altered, Analysis Finds.” Neither report mentioned the controversy about Fusion GPS’s attacks on GOP donors or otherwise suggested the firm had partisan motivations.
Indeed, it seems that the media have been uncritically amplifying Fusion GPS’s disinformation campaigns for years now.
This Fusion GPS is – surprise! – staffed by former major media apparatchiks, and is known to be a thoroughly corrupt organization that will produce a report saying anything those footing the bill want them to say. I sat through several hours worth of CMP raw footage and it was nakedly apparent the publicity-focused time-reduced versions were not manipulative in even a remote sense. They showed straight up the level of evil Planned Butcherhood routinely involves itself in. The “report” was nothing but cover so Baby Murder, Inc’s media allies could spin damage control stories. The report had no more relation to reality than theories that Trump is a secret Nazi controlled by the ghost of Rudolf Hess.
I was so tickled to see Trump just saw through the media’s totally unmerited arrogance and assertions of authority at his press conference the other day. Call them out for exactly what they are, lying, paid agitators for the democrat/leftist cause and individuals so devoid of scruple and principle they make your average streetwalker blush.
Unfortunately, I think the whole system is now so rotten and the country so divided into ideological camps that not even complete discrediting of the media will lead to any significant change or improvements, though individual media operatives may lose their very well paid sinecures. Perhaps I’m getting jaded, but I read comments from mainstream sites and videos on Youtube and the level of left-cult believing dumb out there is simply inconceivable.
It says something about Trump’s opposition that they would turn to this firm, which (as the Weekly Standard article notes) has a reputation for being a source of salacious, unsubstantiated claims that dates back years. Historically, that firm was used to attack conservatives, using the same underhanded, amoral tactics of prevarication. That tells us more than a little bit about at least some of Trump’s opposition, doesn’t it?
Still recovering. Came into work today but will probably leave early so posting may be light again. I’ll see if I can find some other quick things to share. Your prayers and recommendations are much appreciated!
Fr. James Martin, LBGTSJ, Continues to Cover Himself in Dung January 9, 2017Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, asshatery, cultural marxism, disaster, General Catholic, horror, religious, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, the struggle for the Church, unbelievable BS.
A brief final post of the day: many readers will be aware that Fr. James Martin, SJ, is typical for men of the sadly fallen order he represents so fittingly, in being solidly on the progressive, worldly side, frequently (if not constantly) making what should be clear Doctrine into a dog’s breakfast of confusion and uncertainty. He displayed that to excess, recently, in trying to claim that the Holy Family was filled with argument and disunity at times, contrary to the constant belief of the Church dating from Apostolic times, which is that the Holy Family featured three souls for whom sin was totally foreign*, and for whom self-interest was a non-existent commodity, thus making argument an impossibility, even if Mary and Joseph were sometimes confused by aspects of the Savior’s mission on earth:
Perhaps I’m overstating things in claiming that Martin is asserting arguments within the Holy Family, but I think that implication can be plainly drawn. His intent to “humanize” or “de-mythologize” the Holy Family may have good or sinister intent, but it is wholly consistent with the kind of insidious attacks on long-held belief that Jesuits have been infamous for these past several decades.
Our Lady was miraculously preserved from sin from her Immaculate Conception. She was incapable of disagreeing with her Son, of not seeing “eye to eye.” If there were times when she did not understand, fully, the Christ’s actions, she instantly conformed her will to them once their meaning became plain, such as when we read in the Gospel from the Feast of the Holy Family this past Sunday, when Jesus stayed behind in the Temple in obedience to his true Father instead of his earthly one – the completely right priority. Joseph and Mary were naturally worried about their son, but did not chastise Him or argue with Him in any way once He made his reply. The Wedding at Cana is another instance where what may to secular eyes appear as “conflict” is actually the perfect alignment of wills. Our Lady asked Jesus, perhaps prematurely, to address the exhaustion of the wine. She asked this KNOWING that He would accede to her……it wasn’t really even a request, it was more a bald statement of fact, but Jesus, in His perfect generosity, knew what His mother willed……..and that is of course what happened. Any other purported instances of disagreement are simply the natural result of what happens when limited human understanding confronts omnipotence and omniscience – there are bound to be misunderstandings on the human part, but in every case, Our Lady conformed her will to that of her Son as perfectly as a human being can.
This kind of tweet and post are just click-bait, to me. Say something controversial in the hope of attracting hits. It’s as banal as it is predictable – especially for a creature such as Martin. There is no concern over causing scandal or offending the sensibilities of numerous devout souls, the only concern is for the clicks.
But that’s not all, Martin LBGTSJ also feels compelled to jump on the cultural bandwagon whenever something pleasing to progressives comes along, such as Meryl Streep’s breathless hyperventilating at the Golden Globes:
Wow, so deep. You can see how social media so elevates the cultural discourse.
Streep’s comments were offensive, because they equate voting for Trump with holding a foundational disrespect for certain others (whoever the Left wants from one moment to the next). Sure, Trump has said some unfortunate things, but they are off-hand comments made in passing, not points of deliberate policy. Streep, Martin, and their co-religionists of the Left think very little about the “disrespect” shown to the unborn by the outgoing president they so idolize. No, they are fixated on 15 year old off-color comments, not because they really care, but because it serves their political interests to do so. That’s what all this screaming and crying and literal public lunacy on display over the past 2 months has been about, an attempt to de-legitimize the man elected president and prevent his administration from being able to roll back any of Obama’s disastrous policies, policies that have pushed this nation to the brink of destruction.
But politics is what it’s always about with the Left, whether it’s Streep or Martin or Winters or Chittister. They are fervent adherents of an implacably hostile, alien religion, a demonic mishmash of bad science, diabolical philosophy, hatred for sound Doctrine, and unbounded pride – the religion of sexular Leftism.
I’m quite certain you already knew well enough to ignore anything Martin, SJLBGT and his ilk have to say, because you guys is S-M-R-T smart.
The only question I have is, can the Jesuits be reconstituted along something like the lines of their holy founder again through great suffering, reduction in numbers, and eventual replacement by solidly orthodox membership, or will extreme measures like suppression for a century or so be required to snuff out their particularly vile and pernicious set of errors?
*- St. Joseph is regarded – I don’t think it is a doctrine, but it is a strong tradition – to have been sinless from the moment of his betrothal to Mary. For the time Jesus was Incarnate until his death, then, St. Joseph did not sin, even venially.
Francis Fave Spadaro: Adultery Is a Moral Duty! December 7, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in different religion, disaster, error, General Catholic, horror, Revolution, Sacraments, scandals, secularism, self-serving, the struggle for the Church, unbelievable BS.
That’s plainly what his reasoning in an interview given in the amateur liberal Catholic website Crux points to. Asked whether those persisting in extramarital unions would have to refrain from sex in order to receive the Blessed Sacrament, possibly Francis’ closest confidant and advisor Antonio Spadaro said, in some cases, they may be permitted to continue in adulterous acts and still receive the Blessed Sacrament, if they thought a “worse evil”would result. In answering thus, Spadaro has elevated adultery to a moral duty, if some “worse evil” is to be avoided.
This is precisely the kind of anti-Christ illogic that flows from Amoris Laetitia’s direct assault on Church Doctrine, attempting to overturn Christ’s direct command with flawed, diabolically-inspired reasoning:
…..Fr Spadaro was asked whether he thought the divorced and remarried could receive Communion if still in a sexual relationship. Fr Spadaro’s answer was startling – partly because he seemed to think the answer was yes, and partly because of his reasoning.
He explained that sometimes the remarried could “be asked to take on the challenge of living in continence”. This is, of course, the only path to the Eucharist which Catholic doctrine allows. But Fr Spadaro asserted that “this option may not be practicable”. And he then said that someone might “believe they would fall into a worse error”. That is, not sleeping with one’s new partner would be worse than sleeping with them. Hence, it could be a moral obligation to sleep with them. [Folks, he HAS to say this, because Communion for adulterers is untenable unless they are allowed to continue the adultery. I’ve said before, this is exactly like the contraception ploy of the late 60s, they present it as an rare exception accompanied by spiritual intervention, but know in the back of their minds this will be naught but a 100% removal of adultery from the list of practical mortal sins. They won’t declare such, but that will be the effect. And that is promotion of heresy without the slightest doubt.]
In short, a papal adviser has said that extramarital sex could be a moral duty.
This is more interesting, and more worrying, than any number of anonymous accounts and Tolkien-themed screenshots. The Church teachesthat God always gives us enough grace to follow His will. She also teaches that some acts – extramarital sex among them – are never justified, whatever the situation.
I don’t see how Fr Spadaro’s words can be reconciled with these well-established truths. (Unless he means to say “believes erroneously“, but nothing in his words indicates that.)
If Spadaro is saying this, if he believes this, then it is a virtual certitude that Franky George Bergoglio does, as well. These two have been peas in a pod going back years, well into Francis’ Argentinian days, and there are few closer to the Bishop of Rome.
The other matter – could this be something said accidentally, because of a problem speaking English as a second language? It’s a possibility, but what Spadaro puts forth is EXACTLY the point Francis has been driving at all along with his doctrine of false mercy, pitting Catholic Truth against a conception of mercy very appealing to the world, but extremely disconnected from the constant belief and practice of the Faith. Logically speaking, given Francis’ obvious push to permit manifest adulterers, whether civilly remarried or not, to receive the Blessed Sacrament, and since abstaining from the marital act would almost certainly cause many of these second relationships to shatter, it is logically consistent for Spadaro to advance the notion that continued adultery would be a “moral duty” to avoid the “worse” evil of another divorce or breakup. This is a total inversion of the Truth, of course, but also very revealing. It reveals the intent is not merely to permit, out of some misguided sense of mercy (a “mercy” which would have the effect of putting millions of souls at the gravest risk of eternal hellfire), civilly remarried Catholics to receive the Blessed Sacrament, but it is to upend, or, more accurately, invert, the entire moral Doctrine of the Faith.
Some people have had the honesty and audacity to point this out for years. Some are only just coming around to this realization. But as the evidence accumulates, this veneer of “mercy” wears increasingly thin, and more and more people are realizing the consequences of what Francis is driving at. And with another synod in the offing for the coming year, we can expect the assault on the Faith ton continue.
Please pray for Cardinal Burke and his allies, that they will have the strength to drive the examination of Francis’ errors (can they be doubted as such any more?) to the conclusion God desires. May God have mercy on our Church, and on us all. We are in circumstances that are just unbelievable.
Good post on preparation for the coming spiritual war here at Non Veni Pacem. I am gratified to see that Cardinal Burke is claiming that refusal to ask the dubia is being taken as admission of error. I also agree with the thrust of the post, that the time is coming that those who reject the errors being promoted by the Bishop of Rome will be castigated by ostensible Catholics and that this schism will break out into the open, probably in the coming year. We need to be getting ready for some real suffering NOW, because it is coming in a hurry.
Burke, et. al., Threatened With Loss of Cardinalate Over Dubia November 30, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, different religion, disaster, episcopate, error, Francis, General Catholic, horror, persecution, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, the struggle for the Church, unbelievable BS.
The reasoning, as always with FrancisChurch, is absolutely atrocious. Coming as it does from the Dean of the Roman Rota – the very man Francis sacked Cardinal Burke to replace with – is all the more disheartening. Via LifeSiteNews:
While the dubia of four Cardinals concerning clarification of Amoris Laetitia spreads wider and wider ripples in the Vatican and worldwide, the dean of the Apostolic Tribunal of the Roman Rota, the highest appeals court of the Church, says that they might lose their Cardinalate.
“The action of the Holy Spirit cannot be doubted,” he says. “[The Cardinals] question not one synod but two! The ordinary and the extraordinary,” Mons. Vito Pinto explained during a conference in the Ecclesiastical University of San Dámaso in Madrid, Spain. [OK. Whether or not the exhortation following the Synods – Amoris Laetitia – is Magisterial (normally it would be, but how can it be where it plainly intends – via Francis’ own implementation/interpretation – to contradict the Sacred Deposit of Faith!), the Synods WERE NOT. Tiny subsets of bishops do not equate to an ecumenical council, whether they meet one time or forty times. Not even 5% of the world’s bishops were invited to attend, and the deck was stacked with as many friendly to revolution as possible, particularly in the second synod. This is specious, circular reasoning at its lowest]
The four Cardinals, Walter Brandmüller, Raymond Burke, Carlo Caffarra, and Joachim Meisner, asked Pope Francis for clarification on September 19, and then went public with their concerns earlier this month when Francis failed to answer.
“Which Church do these Cardinals defend?” Pinto reproaches. “The Pope is faithful to the doctrine of Christ.” [The boundless effrontery of it all is simply amazing. So now that they have a progressive pope, the Left in the Church decrees that the Faith = whatever the pope says it is today. They weren’t quite so ultramontanist when Benedict was in the Chair of Peter!]
“What they have done is a very serious scandal that could lead the Holy Father to remove them from the Cardinalate, as it has sometimes happened in Church history,” Pinto expounds. [I think if Francis did that, he would both be making a very big mistake, and also telling us a very great deal about his conception of mercy. These men, after all, only asked questions, questions which permitted no wiggle room, no diabolical “shades of grey,” which Francis, apparently, has either preferred – or is unable – to answer. Who is introducing the novel doctrines here? It is not the four cardinals, and their numerous allies. It is Jesuit Francis.]
The Cardinalate – unlike the deaconate, priestly, or bishop’s ordination – does not entail an ontological change in the individual, but is an office conferred by the Pope. Therefore the Church speaks of “creating” Cardinals who join the College of Cardinals. They serve principally as helpers – in Latin, “hinges” (cardines) – to the Pope in ruling the Church. Therefore, they could theoretically be removed from their positions and return to being “simple” bishops or archbishops.
Mons. Vito Pinto affirms that the Pope has not directly answered their dubia but “indirectly he has told them that they only see in white or black, when in the Church there are shades of colors.” Pinto referred to multiple instances in which Pope Francis stated that life is not black and white but grey.
In the same conference, Mons. Pinto recalls, referring to Catholic “remarried” divorcees, how the center of Francis’ message is that the Church needs to accept the injured and fallen: “A nun told me that there are people divorced or living together who are communicating. And what should the Church do, say ‘yes, you may’ and ‘no, you may not’? Pope Francis wants a Church that is very close to the people.” [Which, if you note, does not address the supposed nun’s supposed concern at all. It’s meaningless blather. In reality, the message is being conveyed, but in the typical passive-aggressive, cowardly leftist way. They won’t straight up publicly proclaim heresy, but they hint at it, give it a wink and a nod, and basically encourage people to go that way, while in private communiques, the clear message is sent: give Communion to adulterers. I guess Christ, then, was not up to Francis’ exceedingly high standards of closeness to the people, when he said that manifest sinners who refuse the intervention of the Church should be anathematized?]
For Mons. Pinto the only solution – and the key to Francis’ pontificate – is acceptance, what he calls “mercy.” “In our time the Bride of Christ prefers to use the medicine of mercy and not wield the weapons of severity. The Catholic Church wishes to show herself to be a kind mother to all, patient and full of mercy to the children separated from her.”
Even while they fall into hell? So did Our Blessed Lord tell the Truth, or not? Is remarrying after a civil divorce adultery? Is adultery not a grievous sin? Did not St. Paul inform us that those who receive unworthily eat and drink condemnation on themselves? And what did St. Peter tell us about false prophets and blind guides who try to soothe the itching ears of the world by telling them happy lies, lies that smell of sulfur and brimstone? St. Paul told us that anyone who tries to bring a Gospel other than the one Christ preached must be anathematized. Does Vio Pinto represent Christ, or Francis?
I am willing to bet Cardinal Burke will be willing to lose much more than a red hat than to fold on this matter of permitting this radical change – this insidious attack – on the Church’s moral Doctrine.
What Diabolical Narcissism Wrought: Self-Described Sluts Bragging About Having STDs November 29, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, asshatery, Basics, contraception, disaster, error, General Catholic, horror, paganism, rank stupidity, Revolution, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, Society, unbelievable BS.
And not just any STD, but one of the worst, most impossible to recover from, and most insidiously contagious: herpes simplex 2.
I don’t think the phrase popularized, if not coined, by Anne Barnhardt, diabolical narcissism, could have a better definition than being so morally lost – heck, amoral – as to be able to convince oneself that not only was one’s catting around not something to be ashamed of, but something to be boldly extolled as a badge of honor, something to be admired and emulated. That is what the culture, the media, and the sicko feminist fringe have convinced millions of women to believe – that selling themselves cheap to the lowest, most momentary bidder is “empowerment,” that murdering babies that come from this activity is “women’s health,” and that what could easily be conceived of as God’s wrath against wanton behavior is just something that happens to people accidentally, like contracting an allergy or some congenital disease. The complete divorce of action and consequence, the constant self-justification and self-exaltation, and the absolute lack of any kind of even remote attachment to moral standards has been a deliberate goal of the cultural-political left for two centuries or more, and it has produced what was always desired: people so divorced from any conception of dignity, let alone their unspeakable worth as unique children of God, that they – rather desperately, one might add – proclaim the evil they have wrought to be good, and the only evil to be to shame or judge them for their hedonistic behavior, that hurts not only themselves but who knows how many others. I would not believe the world in which we live, if I were not confronted with the evidence of its wickedness every day.
And, naturally, this self-described “slut” got a letter of congratulations from Hillary Clinton, during her campaign for the presidency, applauding this young woman for her………for what I have no idea. Because promiscuity is a vital part of the Left’s war on religion, and thus always and everywhere to be praised? Because the evil religion of feminism, which has taught women that giving themselves away to any dude who happens along for a night is empowering, and must always be praised? Because diabolical narcissism demands it?
Anyway, to the article, which is old, but worth your attention (emphasis in original, my comments):
“I’m a slut, and I have herpes. I still am a person who deserves respect,” blogger Ella Dawson tweeted as part of her campaign to remove the “cultural stigma” surrounding sexually transmitted diseases. The Wesleyan grad gained notoriety and celebrity online after writing an article in Women’s Health titled “Why I Love Telling People I Have Herpes.” A follow-up article at Medium defended her position. [But she doesn’t mean respect in the sense that no one should be treated with undue cruelty or as less than anyone else. What she means, in the lexicon of the modern left, is to be never questioned, called to account, or Robespierre forbid, shamed for having engaged in extremely risky and self-destructive behavior and now being afflicted with the almost inevitable natural consequence of such behavior. This becomes obvious as her “logic” unfolds. She wants to be lionized as a sublime and pure princess, while having all the “benefits” of behaving like a slattern – the constant feminist double standard]
Some — like Hillary Clinton — praised Dawson for being “brave and insightful,” while others condemned her for being “stupid.”……
………Hillary Clinton certainly agrees with House. She even sent Dawson a thank you note praising her for speaking out against the “stigma” and for standing up to her critics. [I continue to thank God that, no matter what Donald Trump may be, Hillary Clinton will never be president. Thank you, Lord]
Dawson was thrilled to receive the letter, of course, because it elevated, at least in the minds of some, her campaign to make contracting oozing sores on your genitalia “cool.”
In other words, and like other “sex-positive” feminists and liberals who want to legitimize every social deviancy while stigmatizing anyone who disagrees with them, the 24-year-old Dawson is using social media platforms and a hashtag campaign (#ShoutYourStatus) to justify her behavior and to ease her feelings of guilt. [As you will see, however, Dawson’s end was perfectly predictable, and was, in fact, made virtually inevitable by the flawed ideology she holds. Who listens to a 24 year old anyway?!? I at least had the decency to wait till my mid-30s to afflict the world with my opinions]
Instead of simply making the common-sense case for respecting people who are hurting and not stigmatizing them because they made a mistake — you know, the Golden Rule — Dawson goes much further.
She denies the moral context of how an STD is contracted. She refuses to take responsibility for her bad behavior. She perpetuates misinformation about the seriousness of the disease.
And, she plays the victim. Isn’t feminism glorious?
I wasn’t the sort of person STDs happened to. I was a Planned Parenthood volunteer, a sexuality studies major, and everyone’s go-to friend when they had questions about losing their virginity. How could I have caught something when I had always been so careful? [As I said, her ideology almost guaranteed this outcome, indoctrinated in the baby-murdering sex cult of Planned Murderhood for who knows how long. She has been steeped in demonic lies regarding the gift of sexuality, only to be made use of within the confines of sacramental marriage, for years. She even worked at the whore of Babylon itself, Planned Butcherhood. That she has had numerous partners, and eventually contracted an STD, is entirely predictable, based on her embrace of the errors preached by Margaret Sanger’s satanic spawn. But she is so lost in this ideology, and, one fears, her sins, she still, even when afflicted with a cursed, incurable disease, refuses to question her assumptions and the ideology she has been very carefully brainwashed to fervently accept and even proselytize for.]
First of all, being a feminist isn’t a full-body condom. Second, there is no such thing as 100-percent certified safe sex when you’re doing it with strangers or just having casual sex with multiple partners………
……….Dawson also, nonsensically, believes that contracting herpes has nothing to do with her behavior.
On a logical level. I knew that getting herpes had nothing to do with my actions and didn’t say anything about my character. [You keep telling yourself that, sweetheart.]
On a logical level? Really? She repeats this brilliant display of logic in a TED Talk: [As if I didn’t have a low enough opinion of “Ted talks”]
An STI, especially herpes, is not a reflection of your character or a consequence of a bad decision.
Neither is it, as she writes at Medium, “a consequence of personal choices.”
Sorry to break this to you, but an STD is the direct result of a personal choice. And if you’re a slut — as she claims — that is, by definition, a reflection of your character.
Fact: if she had never had casual sex, she would have never contracted genital herpes. [And this is where we see the ultimate evil that is diabolical narcissism revealed. This woman – and she is far from alone – has turned logic, reason, and even decency on its head in her constant attempts at self-justification. There is hardly anything that could be MORE a consequence of one’s actions that contracting an STD, unless one happened to be a spouse to a partner who was adulterating and contracted it through them. Contracting an STD may involve bad luck, it may involve incredible naivete, but it always – in the practical sense – involves promiscuity, that is, deliberate sex outside marriage for pleasure’s sake alone. I have had some female commenters in the past who tried to argue that there is “good” and “bad” feminism, but that’s bullocks. THIS WOMAN’S FAILED LINE OF THINKING IS AN EXACT REPRODUCTION OF THE IDEOLOGY AT THE HEART OF FEMINISM!!]
Instead of taking responsibility for her own bad choices, Dawson wants to throw logic — and morality — to the wind and justify her behavior by recasting the entire narrative about STDs into something positive: It’s just something that magically happens to you. You’re a passive victim, and there’s nothing you could have done to stop it. So you’re not guilty of anything. And most of all, you don’t have to feel ashamed. [Do you think this woman is driven by guilt, perhaps on some fundamental level? Or is it something else?]
This might come as a shock to Dawson and other moral relativists, but shame isn’t always a bad thing.
The personal shame you feel when you’ve done something wrong is healthy, because it leads you (or should) to conviction that will help you change your behavior. [But when you’ve killed God in the minds of millions, and carefully indoctrinated them to believe that this life is the only one they’ll ever have and so they better get in all the possible pleasure they can, because after this there’s nothing, such reasoning is generally lost on them in their headlong pursuit of pleasure]
……..She goes so far as to sayherpes is “harmless,” and that’s dangerous misinformation.
In an interview with Salon, Dawson said the disease has actually made her sex life better:
Herpes is such a great way to weed out jerks. It’s like the metal detector of douchebags because if somebody is scared of something so harmless, they’re just not worth your time. I have a really high bar for the people I date. [I’m sorry my dear, but you can’t have both a “high bar” and be a self-described slut. Not sure what the idiot college was where you majored in bedding losers, but you need some remedial English and logic] Most people have risen to it amazingly. That’s not to say I’ve only had committed relationships; I’ve had casual sex since getting diagnosed, it’s just always with the conversation of: This is a reality, how do we want to handle this? Do you want to use condoms? What are you most comfortable with? What makes sense for you? [I am willing to bet a substantial sum she has engaged in casual sex without that conversation.]
Herpes is not harmless.
According to the Mayo Clinic, genital herpes is highly contagious with many health risks, including brain damage, blindness or death in a newborn, bladder problems requiring a catheter, meningitis, rectal inflammation, damage to the nervous system, and an increased risk of “transmitting or contracting other STDs.” [We’ve fallen so far, this even needs to be said? That says everything.]
And there’s always a risk of contracting it if you have sex with someone who has the disease, even if they’re not experiencing a breakout.
So if you’re a guy who doesn’t want to risk, say, brain damage? Dawson thinks you’re a jerk. A douchebag.
If you want to remain healthy and not get painful pustules on your lower regions? Dawson says you’re a terrible human being.
I’m sure it does make her feel bad when someone doesn’t want to have sex with her because he’s afraid of getting herpes — but that’s not stigma. If Dawson would take responsibility for her own actions and stop playing the victim, she might understand that, and respect that other people’s decisions can’t cater to her feelings.
If anyone is being a douchebag when it comes to STDs, it’s Dawson.
Indeed. A douchebag that is almost guaranteed to be a divorcee, and highly likely a multiple-divorcee, should she ever decide to marry. The data is incontrovertible on that score. Women who have a high number of lifetime partners are a statistical lock to divorce. Barring, I suppose, a true conversion, but since she worships at the altar of Moloch/Planned Parenthood, that would require a substantial miracle.
Whether it’s shame or not that serves as motivation, this entire line of thinking is just reeks of the victimhood mentality that has apparently gone from small segments of the population to infecting most of an entire generation. But the only person this particular “victim” has to blame, is herself, and that’s the one realization diabolical narcissism absolutely prevents.
Of course, she wouldn’t have to make such a hideous public spectacle of herself, and her shame, driving away any man of quality permanently, if she would find that salve her conscience needs through Jesus Christ. He is the only One that can take away the pain of our past sins – which we all have, some, fortunately, not quite so spectacularly public – not this further descent into endless rationalization and self-justification which this poor creature is demonstrating, showing absolutely no ability to learn from her past mistakes. The shame of it is, in refusing the Grace of Jesus Christ, freely offered, she is damning herself to a lifetime of endless pain and self-induced suffering, no matter how many brave words she uses to try to talk herself off the ledge.
It’s not the sins that damn the diabolical narcissist. It’s the refusal to countenance that they have sinned, that they must repent, and experience conversion in trying to live a life of virtue in concert with the Truth Christ has revealed to us all. We see in the above the tragedy of a soul who manifestly refuses to acknowledge she is capable of grievously sinning, and so continues in that hellish form of living. Her Cure awaits her, patiently, infinitely patiently, but pride prevents her from seeing how easy it is to admit to sin and seek forgiveness.
Poor lost soul. One of so very many. She needs many prayers. She, and those she afflicts with her lies and false propaganda.
War of Words: Chaput Fires Back at Farrell November 18, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, different religion, episcopate, error, foolishness, Francis, General Catholic, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, the struggle for the Church, unbelievable BS.
I’ll take practical schism for $400, Alex.
Yesterday, we saw the unfortunate comments of former Bishop of Dallas, and now Cardinal-Elect, Kevin Farrell, singing the Francis tune for all its worth. In the same interview, he also dropped some none-too-subtle criticisms of American prelates like Chaput who have made clear they will not be implementing false mercy for manifest adulterers, admitting them to reception of the Blessed Sacrament. Farrell made clear he had wished Chaput and similar conservativish bishops had waited until the USCCB – a locus of administrative bureaucracy to the point of killing faith if I’ve ever seen one – had reached some common, watered down, soul-numbing policy all could agree to.
Well, Archbishop Chaput of Philadelphia has now fired back, wondering if Farrell even read his archdiocesan policy, claiming Farrell’s concerns were very far from the mark. Given what I know of Farrell’s lack of what you might call thoroughness and intellectual persistence, and near total acceptance of the cultural conventional wisdom, I’d say it’s a fairly safe bet to conclude he not only hadn’t read the policy, but couldn’t care less. Let’s see what Chaput had to say in rebuttal (my emphasis and comments):
Philadelphia Archbishop Charles Chaput has fired back at Cardinal-designate Kevin Farrell’s suggestion that his guidelines for implementing Pope Francis’ controversial Exhortation Amoris Laetitia are causing “division.”
“I wonder if Cardinal-designate Farrell actually read and understood the Philadelphia guidelines he seems to be questioning. The guidelines have a clear emphasis on mercy and compassion,” the archbishop stated in comments emailed to LifeSiteNews.
Earlier this week, Farrell — one of Pope Francis’ most outspoken American supporters — said that he disagreed with Chaput issuing his own guidelines in his own diocese, stating that implementing the pope’s exhortation should be done “in communion” with all U.S. bishops. [Well. So did Farrell similarly complain when the bishops of the Archdiocese of Buenos Aires chose to implement Amoris Laetitia according to Francis’ revolutionary intent, instead of waiting for a joint decision of all the bishops of Argentina? Yeah…….we’ll see that about a month after hell freezes over]
But at the center of Farrell’s criticism appears to be Chaput’s insistence that the document be interpreted, as Chaput has previously stated, “within the tradition of the Church’s teaching and life.” Chaput’s guidelines unequivocally state that divorced and civilly remarried Catholics may not receive Holy Communion unless they “refrain from sexual intimacy.”
For Farrell, this is problematic.
“I don’t share the view of what Archbishop Chaput did, no,” the cardinal-designate told Catholic News Service on Tuesday. “I think there are all kinds of different circumstances and situations that we have to look at — each case as it is presented to us,” he said. “I think that is what our Holy Father is speaking about, is when we talk about accompanying, it is not a decision that is made irrespective of the couple.” [This is nothing but an apologia for excusing and ultimately ignoring sin. This is exactly – I mean precisely, even to the use of the exact same words – the same argument put forth by the Currans and Drinans with regard to use of contraception in the late 60s and early 70s. Contraception would only be for married persons, after a period of discernment and accompaniment, under the watchful eye of a priest. Yeah……how has that worked out. Exactly as they intended, that’s how, with Catholic use of contraception completely indistinguishable from that of the general population, and souls likely – almost certainly – falling into hell like snowflakes]
But Chaput called Farrell’s criticism of his guidelines, and the fact that he issued the guidelines as a bishop acting in his own diocese, “puzzling.”
“Why would a bishop delay interpreting and applying Amoris Laetitia for the benefit of his people? On a matter as vital as sacramental marriage, hesitation and ambiguity are neither wise nor charitable,” Chaput said. [That’s the least of what could be said in rebuttal]
“I think every bishop in the United States feels a special fidelity to Pope Francis as Holy Father. We live that fidelity by doing the work we were ordained to do as bishops. Under canon law — not to mention common sense — governance of a diocese belongs to the local bishop as a successor of the apostles, not to a conference, though bishops’ conferences can often provide a valuable forum for discussion. [Whatever] As a former resident bishop, the cardinal-designate surely knows this, which makes his comments all the more puzzling in the light of our commitment to fraternal collegiality,” he added. [Maybe they aren’t so puzzling after all. Maybe the message is, you will comply, or else. Perhaps not today, perhaps not tomorrow, but soon, there will be repercussions for “dissent”]
Chaput doubled down on his key for interpreting the exhortation, stating that any implementation that contradicts not only Sacred Scripture but the Church’s previous magisterial teaching is contrary to the mission of the Church given to her by Christ.
“Life is messy. But mercy and compassion cannot be separated from truth and remain legitimate virtues. The Church cannot contradict or circumvent Scripture and her own magisterium without invalidating her mission. This should be obvious. The words of Jesus himself are very direct and radical on the matter of divorce,” he said.
Dang right. Good for Chaput. I’d rather it be said with a bit more emphasis, that the veil of false episcopal decorum be dropped entirely, but so be it. He still made a very effective rebuttal. Farrell can hardly respond save for appeal to authority – “bu- bu- but the pope said!” That used to be all one had to say, but who knows what the future may hold.
A Liberal Refutes Every Outrageous Claim Being Made Against Trump……. November 18, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, error, foolishness, General Catholic, paganism, rank stupidity, Revolution, secularism, Society, unbelievable BS.
………and his supporters.
I say again, this writer – who I’ve never heard of before – admits to being a progressive. But he is one of the few who has enough sense to note that the Left is increasingly losing control over political debates and even the cultural battleground due to their constant, reflexive use of insult and calumny against their opponents.
The novella he wrote – it’s over 8000 words – goes into extensive detail to refute that Trump is racist, that his “sexism,” to the extent it exists, is little different than many other political elites, and much less than his opponent’s spouse, that Bill Clinton ran on exactly the same platform of severe immigration control in 1996, etc. Basically, every single claim the Left has been making against Trump and his supporters is refuted, and in detail, with extensive supporting information. It’s a long post, but well worth a read.
He notes something else, more significant. While there are many, many genuine criticisms of Trump one can make, the Left has become so intolerant of dissent, so intellectually lazy, and so enveloped in the worst aspects of identity politics that they have literally lost the ability to form cogent arguments and are now reduced to doing nothing but shouting epithets at those who disagree. Far from Trump – and his supporters – being the harbinger of some kind of totalitarian shift in this nation’s governance, it is the Left themselves who are becoming increasingly open to the vicious strong man who will give them what they want more than anything else – the destruction of those they hate most. Their very simple-mindedness and divorce from evidentiary argument is a virtual invitation to this kind of creature coming to the fore in future.
Even more, the Left is – with complete inevitability – increasingly coming to embrace the very racism they constantly apply to others. Witness how many open castigations of all white people as being irredeemably evil and worthy only of being crushed, if not death, have emerged in the past week. On the other hand, with respect to the strong man argument, the Left’s constant use of claims of racism and sexism against people who very plainly are not, have made those terms meaningless in the culture, so that the future possibility that a monster motivated by real racism and real sexism will not face effective opposition, since the terms have been used to such excess that they simply carry no weight. Of course, the Left always projects their own psychoses onto their opponents, so when they decry the racism, sexism, or whatever-ism of others, they are really only revealing their own.
It’s a good piece, and even if you don’t agree with his conclusions – after all, he wants to “save” the Left in this country and make it more effective in future elections – the data he provides is eminently useful. I encourage you to check it out.
As I Predicted: Trump Won In Spite of Massive Voter Fraud November 16, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, demographics, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, persecution, Revolution, secularism, self-serving, Society, unbelievable BS.
So, a local precinct warden and Republican national delegate told me of his experience at our local precinct – at least 5 men certainly committed voter fraud, voting without present voter ID, which they are allowed to do thanks to the Obama Justice department/leftist judge overturning a Texas law requiring photo ID to vote, while another 8-10 individuals probably voted both in our precinct and out of state. There were myriad details surrounding these individuals he provided I won’t go into, but, suffice it to say, the legality of their local votes was dubious, at best. So, perhaps 15 fraudulent votes in a precinct where only 313 were cast for president – nearly 5%.
True the Vote is reporting they have data that shows over three million illegal aliens – non-citizens of the US – voted in the election. I think it safe to say they voted overwhelmingly for Hillary, and thus make up her margin of victory in the popular vote, and then some:
Three million votes in the U.S. presidential election were cast by illegal aliens, according to Greg Phillips of the VoteFraud.org organization.
If true, this would mean that Donald Trump still won the contest despite widespread vote fraud and almost certainly won the popular vote.
“We have verified more than three million votes cast by non-citizens,” tweeted Phillips after reporting that the group had completed an analysis of a database of 180 million voter registrations.
“Number of non-citizen votes exceeds 3 million. Consulting legal team,” he added.
According to current indications, Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by around 630,000 votes, although around 7 million ballots remain uncounted.
Virtually all of the votes cast by 3 million illegal immigrants are likely to have been for Hillary Clinton, meaning Trump might have won the popular vote when this number is taken into account.
Vote fraud using ballots cast in the name of dead people and illegal alien voters was a huge concern before the election.
On the morning of the election there were 4 million dead people on U.S. voter rolls.
As I predicted, Trump would have to win by a margin of three to five million in order to win in the “official” count by 1 vote. That’s how many fraudulent votes I expected him, or any non-demonrat party candidate, to have to win by in reality to be judged the winner officially because of all the fraud, to which the democrats admit. The democrats generally do most of their electoral fraud at the presidential level because it’s much simpler to execute, which is why they have continued to mostly get pummelled on down-ballot races since they started instituting large-scale voter fraud in every presidential election since the 90s. But it really got started in earnest in 2004 when they knew they had a compliant media that wouldn’t investigate anything they did, and self-justification in the lie that Bush “stole” the election in 2000.
I really hope this effort to have millions of ballots cast out succeeds, for a variety of reasons. I’m quite certain Trump won the popular vote at least as handily as he did the electoral college. Leftists will never tire of singing about a “stolen” election unless if it can be proved Trump won the popular vote by a healthy margin. Even then they’ll still pretend it didn’t happen. Most important of all, however, is proving electoral fraud occurred, and then investigating in depth who perpetrated it and striving to have them prosecuted. This nation is strongly divided, ideologically, probably to the greatest extent since the Civil War. Throwing severe doubt on the validity of elections into the mix would be a very quick way to bring about a calamity.
If one considers the fact that Clinton won California by a 2:1 margin, that California does not require ID, and the huge number of illegals that reside there, it would be interesting to see what the real result was. Amazingly, states with no ID requirements tend to be dominated by democrats. Go figure. Of course, they’ve been doing this for well over a century around the country, wherever the demonrat party gets strongly established. Used to happen en masse here in Texas, and magic ballots found in south Texas helped Kennedy win in ’60.
It will be interesting to see if this story develops, or if it gets squashed by the powers that be.