Roman Catholic Blog

Utter Drivel

If you have been following the Republican National Convention in Minneapolis/St.Paul as I have, perhaps you too have noticed the total absence of "fair" reporting.

Ninety-Nine percent 99% of the media are on the warpath, and determined to add Sarah Palin's scalp to the pole in front of their tepee or wigwam!

The latest example of absolute drivel, even before the revelations of her daughter's pregnancy, comes from CNN anchor John Roberts.

His quote:

"There's also this issue that on April 18th, she gave birth to a baby with Down's Syndrome.... Children with Down's syndrome require an awful lot of attention. The role of Vice President, it seems to me, would take up an awful lot of her time, and it raises the issue of how much time will she have to dedicate to her newborn child?"

So Sarah Palin is unqualified to be Vice-President because it will leave her insufficient time to care for her Down's Syndrome baby? This when Roberts and the rest of his pro-death cabal would have aborted such an infant in the blinking of an eye!

I have actually taken extra antacid while watching this coverage. Gads!

God save our Republic!

__________________

For behold, Your enemies make an uproar, And those who hate You have exalted themselves.

(NASB - Psalm 83:2)

Quoniam ecce inimici tui sonaverunt et qui oderunt te extulerunt caput.

(Vulgate Psalm 82:3)

"Thrown Away and Withering"

"I am the vine; you are the branches. If a man remains in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing. If anyone does not remain in me, he is like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned. If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be given you. This is to my Father's glory, that you bear much fruit, showing yourselves to be my disciples. John 15: 5-8

"Ego sum vitis, vos palmites: qui manet in me, et ego in eo, hic fert fructum multum, quia sine me nihil potestis facere. Si quis in me non manserit, mittetur foras sicut palmes, et arescet, et colligent eum, et in ignem mittent, et ardet. Si manseritis in me, et verba mea in vobis manserint, quodcumque volueritis petetis, et fiet vobis. In hoc clarificatus est Pater meus, ut fructum plurimum afferatis, et efficiamini mei discipuli. - Johannes 15:5-8

Why is this woman smiling? Her particular religious order, and those who share her heretical views, are withering.

See the interesting article from John Allen - the neo-modernist mouthpiece at the National Catholic Reporter.

He reports on the address of Sr. Elizabeth A. Johnson, CSJ before the joint assembly of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious and the Conference of Major Superiors of Men, described in the article as "the main umbrella groups for women’s and men’s orders in the United States."

This is a bit of a misnomer as the LCWR and the CMSM do represent mostly those orders with the most institutional wealth, but also mostly those orders that are gratefully dying as you read this.

The full article can be seen at: http://ncronline3.org/drupal/?q=node/1551

Her are some excerpts:

"The entrenched clerical system of patriarchal power, in addition to creating conditions in which the sex abuse scandal could occur, has also at times been deeply suspicious of the charism of religious life and where it would lead the church. I think of the Jesuits and justice, of the option of so many women’s religious orders for a collegial style of leadership and obedience, etc."

"We in this Catholic church continue to live by patriarchal values that, by any objective measure, relegate women to second-class status governed by male-dominated structures, law, and ritual,"

And here is her heresy "par Excellence," as partially summarized by John Allen:

"Johnson argued for seeing the Cross not "as a death required by God in repayment for sin," but rather "as an event of divine love" and as the price paid by Jesus for his ministry — a price, she said, still sometimes paid today by religious women and men in different parts of the world.

"Jesus did not come to die but to live," Johnson said, "and to help others live in the joy of divine love."

Her full speech can be found at:

http://www.lcwr.org/lcwrannualassembly/2008assembly.htm

While I am confident that in time the religious orders of Sr. Elizabeth’s ilk will pass like the dodo...

the institutional wealth they possess makes them far more dangerous than their numbers would suggest.

For "real" religious orders look to the "Institute on Religious Life," comprised of most of the most orthodox, and fast growing, communities of priests and religious in the United States.

SEE: http://www.religiouslife.com/

Damnable Dowager of Doublespeak

More nonsense related to the misuse and abuse of the English language!

Senator Hillary Clinton opines at the Huffington post that the Bush administration is trying to ban contraception by calling it abortion.

See:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hillary-clinton/an-outrageous-attempt-by_b_114064.html

In part her post reads:

"The Bush administration is up to its old tricks again, quietly putting ideology before science and women's health. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is poised to put in place new barriers to accessing common forms of contraception like birth control pills, emergency contraception and IUDs by labeling them "abortion." "

Senator Clinton, vile defender of the massacre of innocent children that you are, buy a dictionary!

Main Entry: abor·ti·fa·cient

Pronunciation: \ə-ˌbȯr-tə-ˈfā-shənt\

Function: noun

Date: 1873

: an agent (as a drug) that induces abortion

— abortifacient adjective

___________________

If one defines pregnancy, like life, as starting at conception, there is a huge difference between a pill that PREVENTS conception and an abortifacient.

The Bush Administration is opposed to the funding of abortifacients.

Dennis Prager: California Decision Will Radically Change Society

Here's the link: California Decision Will Radically Change Society

Here's a quote:

Americans seem mesmerized by the word "change." And, by golly, they sure got it last week from the California Supreme Court. It is difficult to imagine a single social change greater than redefining marriage from opposite sex to include members of the same sex.

Nothing imaginable -- leftward or rightward -- would constitute as radical a change in the way society is structured as this redefining of marriage for the first time in history: Not another Prohibition, not government taking over all health care, not changing all public education to private schools, not America leaving the United Nations, not rescinding the income tax and replacing it with a consumption tax. Nothing.

Unless California voters amend the California Constitution or Congress amends the U.S. Constitution, four justices of the California Supreme Court will have changed American society more than any four individuals since Washington, Jefferson, Adams and Madison.

And what is particularly amazing is that virtually none of those who support this decision -- let alone the four compassionate justices -- acknowledge this. The mantra of the supporters of this sea change in society is that it's no big deal. Hey, it doesn't affect any heterosexuals' marriage, so what's the problem?

This lack of acknowledgment -- or even awareness -- of how society-changing is this redefinition of marriage is one reason the decision was made. To the four compassionate ones -- and their millions of compassionate supporters -- allowing same-sex marriage is nothing more than what courts did to end legal bans on interracial marriage. The justices and their supporters know not what they did. They think that all they did was extend a "right" that had been unfairly denied to gays.

Another reason for this decision is arrogance. First, the arrogance of four individuals to impose their understanding of what is right and wrong on the rest of society. And second is the arrogance of the four compassionate ones in assuming that all thinkers, theologians, philosophers, religions and moral systems in history were wrong, while they and their supporters have seen a moral light never seen before. Not a single religion or moral philosophical system -- East or West -- since antiquity ever defined marriage as between members of the same sex.

That is one reason the argument that this decision is the same as courts undoing legal bans on marriages between races is false. No major religion -- not Judaism, not Christianity, not Islam, not Buddhism -- ever banned interracial marriage. Some religions have banned marriages with members of other religions. But since these religions allowed anyone of any race to convert, i.e., become a member of that religion, the race or ethnicity of individuals never mattered with regard to marriage. American bans on interracial marriages were not supported by any major religious or moral system; those bans were immoral aberrations, no matter how many religious individuals may have supported them. Justices who overthrew bans on interracial marriages, therefore, had virtually every moral and religious value system since ancient times on their side. But justices who overthrow the ban on same-sex marriage have nothing other their hubris and their notions of compassion on their side.

Be sure to read the rest at the link.

Also worth reading:

Pope restates gay marriage ban after California vote

Bishop Vigneron To The Faithful Of The Oakland Diocese On The California Supreme Court Decision Allowing Same-Sex Marriage

No wiggle room: Vatican says no exceptions to ban on homosexuals in seminaries

Any thoughts?

"It's Perfectly Normal" – Sex Education For Ages 10 & Above

Any thoughts?

California Supreme Court Overturns Homosexual "Marriage" Ban

Dante and Virgil in Hell by William-Adolphe Bouguereau (1850)

Here's the story: California Supreme Court Overturns Homosexual "Marriage" Ban

Quote:

The California Supreme Court has overturned a ban on gay marriage, paving the way for California to become the second state where gay and lesbian residents can marry. The case involved a series of lawsuits seeking to overturn a voter- approved law that defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

With the ruling, California could become the second state after Massachusetts where gay and lesbian residents can marry.

"What happens in California, either way, will have a huge impact around the nation. It will set the tone," said Geoffrey Kors, executive director of the gay rights group Equality California.

California already offers same-sex couples who register as domestic partners the same legal rights and responsibilities as married spouses, including the right to divorce and to sue for child support. It's therefore unclear what additional relief state lawmakers could offer short of marriage if the court renders the existing ban unconstitutional.

A coalition of religious and social conservative groups is attempting to put a measure on the November ballot that would enshrine California's current laws banning gay marriage in the state constitution.

The Secretary of State is expected to rule by the end of June whether the sponsors gathered enough signature to qualify the marriage amendment, similar to ones enacted in 26 other states.

My thoughts:

This isn't really surprising. This is typical liberal activity, using courts to accomplish what can't be done by allowing people to vote on the matter. Hopefully, this will wake people up and provoke a movement to return to sanity that will include a reversal of this foolish decision, which essentially amounts to judicial legislation and circumvented the will of the majority of California voters.

Catholic Answers has an excellent article, titled, Gay Marriage, which is well researched and discusses in detail the various diseases and pathologies associated with homosexuality. The article gives many reasons why society, as a whole, should seek to protect marriage as a union between one man and one woman and not grant legal protections for homosexual unions, as such.

See also:

Procter & Gamble Promotes Explicit Open-Mouth Homosexual Kissing

You Decide: Has "The Cafeteria Is Closed" Blog Reopened The Cafeteria Over The Issue Of Legal Recognition For Homosexual Unions?

Any thoughts?

Obamanation - The Cult Of Barack Hussein Obama

It's nice to see that Barack Obama's supporters have reasonable expectations, rooted in a firm grasp of his personal and political background; as evidenced by the devotional artwork above and the images found here: Reach Out and Touch Faith

Note: I'm pretty sure NRO got their title idea from this song: Depeche Mode - "Personal Jesus"

More evidence of the disturbing religious fervor many of Obama's supporters have for him, despite (or perhaps, because of) his consistent pro-abortion record, can be seen in these videos produced by will.i.am of Black Eyed Peas: "Yes We Can" and "We Are The Ones"

This video parodies the fantasies of Obama supporters: Video: “Obamatopia” [Warning: The Lord's name is taken in vain once, but it's done to illustrate how Obama's supporters view him.]

As I've said before, the Obama's followers have a view of him that is essentially consistent with the song below, which should be his campaign theme song:

Obama's supporters don't care that he doesn't have the experience necessary to be President of the United States. They don't care that he's never been elected to an executive office (like state governor). They don't care that Obama has been connected, for over 20 years, to a church that promotes racism, or that he's friends with murdering terrorists. They don't care that his wife constantly complains about America. They don't care that Obama has been endorsed by Hamas. They don't care that Obama doesn't respect the religious beliefs of Christians who don't share his views.

To quote Rush Limbaugh: "Obama has become, to a lot of people, an idea of what they want him to be. So they project their perceptions onto him, and that's exactly what he wants." (From: Obama is Damaged Goods, but Radical Hillary Can't Close the Deal)

Barack Obama, ladies and gentlemen, is a blank canvas upon which anybody can project their fantasies, or their desires. You look at Democrats in the audience, and they're swooning. He's saying nothing. He's saying nothing better than anybody in my lifetime ever has. The reason he says nothing so well is because everybody thinks that he's saying what they want. So they're able to project onto Obama their fantasies. If they believe in allowing somebody to marry a dog, they think Obama will support it. Therefore, I would like today to announce a tentative decision, I'm stilling thinking about it, to endorse Barack Obama, since everybody is asking who am I going to endorse, and here's why. Barack Obama is pro-life. Barack Obama is a Constitutionalist. Barack Obama believes in limited government. Barack Obama is in favor of health care savings plans. Barack Obama loves free markets and wants to protect them. Barack Obama is strong on national defense. Barack Obama is a tax cutter extraordinaire. Barack Obama makes my leg tingle when I hear him speak. Barack Obama will end the designated hitter rule. Barack Obama will establish a college football playoff once and for all so we will genuinely have a champion. Barack Obama will get to the bottom of Spygate. Barack Obama will offer free beer Fridays. Whatever you want Obama to be, folks, he's a blank slate, he's an empty canvas, and this is the nature of his appeal. Whatever people fantasize about, whatever they want, they are confident Obama supports it, too.

(From: Rush Endorses Obama Because He Is Anything You Want Him to Be)

See also:

Barack Obama: There Will Be Bamboozling

Obama’s biggest general election liability: His bitter half

Video: Gazans running phone bank for Obama

Obama: I want to be president of all 57 states

Rush Limbaugh: Let's Tweak The Media: Obama to Campaign in 57 Islamic States

RUSH: Hey, folks, you want to tweak the Drive-By Media with me right now? Want to participate in tweaking the Drive-By Media? You are aware, probably, that Barack Obama lost his bearings recently and said that he was going to campaign in all 57 states. You heard this? And everybody chalked it up to, "Well, he's tired." You know, this is a Dan Quayle moment. I mean, Dan Quayle goes out there and misspells potato, and we still get jokes about it. Barack Obama says he's gonna go out and campaign in 57 states, he was just tired, you know, it's been such a long campaign, he's been so many places, he probably thinks there are 57 states. Well, I have here a printout from a website called the International Humanist and Ethical Union. And here is how the second paragraph of an article on that website begins. "Every year from 1999 to 2005 the organization of the Islamic conference representing the 57 Islamic states presented a resolution to the United Nations commission on human rights called combating --" yes, H.R., get ready for the phone calls up there.

We're participating here in a tweak of the media. Obama said he's going to campaign in 57 states, and it turns out that there are 57 Islamic states. There are 57 Islamic states. "Every year from 1999 to 2005, the organization of the Islamic conference representing the 57 Islamic states," this is from the International Humanist and Ethical Union. And the title of the piece here is, "How the Islamic states dominate the UN human rights council," and there are 57 of them. So did Obama just lose his bearings, or was this a more telling slip, ladies and gentlemen? Obama's 57 states, not just a simple gaffe. He might have been thinking of the 57 Islamic states when he said he was going to campaign in all 57 states. (laughing) Can't wait 'til the Drive-Bys hear about this.

Rush Limbaugh: Separating Obama's Followers from the Movement Won't Be Easy

Any thoughts?

Video: Hillary Clinton Tries To Work The Coffee Machine

Source: Video: Smartest woman in the world tries to work the coffee machine

Quote:

The beauty of this footage? It was apparently taken during Her Majesty’s common-man joyride/photo op this morning, replete with choreographed pit stop for gas and java. I guarantee you, right now somewhere in Indiana, some poor lackey is being berated for failing to brief her on how to work the self-serve.

Thank goodness the working class has an alternative to this out-of-touch poseur, one who appreciates them for the xenophobic, Bible-thumping gun fetishists they are.

My thoughts:

Imagine if this were a clip of George W. Bush or Dan Quayle (back in the day). This footage would have been looped everywhere. I'm not sure how much airplay it's gotten now, but I'm confident the only reason we're seeing footage like this and seeing the media report on Hillary's Bosnia whoppers is that most of the mainstream media is in the tank for Obama.

Many politicians who claim to be "champions" of the common folk are actually multi-millionaires who don't have to do the things most people have to do every day, because they have staff to do those things for them. See: Jackpot: Billary scores $109 mil since leaving office; Update: $20.4 million in 2007

Often, when they try to look like "one of the people", it looks staged: Video: Defender of the common man knocks back a shot; Update: More Hillary: Have I mentioned that I know how to shoot?

To be fair, Trent Lott didn't come off much better here: Everything that’s wrong with the Beltway GOP elite in two words

See also:

Snobs here, snobs there, snobs everywhere

Getting fat off the American taxpayer

CBS reporter on Hillary’s Bosnia trip: Yes, I can confirm she’s a shameless liar

A Tuzla greeting exposes Hillary

Walking back the Tuzla sniper-fire run

Video: Hillary “misspeaks” about Tuzla again; Update: “I was sleep-deprived”

Hillary, Serial Fabulist?

Tuzla Girl haunts Hillary

Hitchens on the Tuzla Dash, and what Hillary hides

Hillary fired for lies, unethical behavior from Congressional job: former boss

Surprise: Hillary caught in another stump-speech lie

More thoughts:

Democrats (even "Catholic" ones) don't seem to care if their candidates are liars (see the links above), friends with murderous, far-left fringe America haters, friends with racists (and possibly closet racists, themselves, as seen here and here), or even that their candidates promote the killing of unborn babies and/or infanticide.

I don't understand it.

Any thoughts?

Barack Obama: There Will Be Bamboozling

A look at Obama's pattern of "borrowing" rhetoric from uncredited sources. Is Obama a plagiarist? See for yourself.

Ann Coulter: Out Of "Context" Or Out Of His Mind?

Thomas Sowell: An Old Newness

Dennis Prager: Wright Speaks for the Left

OneNewsNow.com: Jeremiah Wright undermines racial reconciliation

Rush Limbaugh: Obama Throws Wright Off Planet, As Wheels Come Off the Campaign

Rush Limbaugh: Drive-Bys Praise Obama's Poll-Driven Phoniness as "Courage"

Bill O'Reilly & Karl Rove:

At first, I winced when Bill O'Reilly claimed Jeremiah Wright, a man who repeatedly accuses the United States government of creating HIV and AIDS in an effort to instigate the genocide of the black population, is "smart", but had to admit that O'Reilly may be right after I heard O'Reilly connect the dots back to Jeremiah Wright's mansion and money.

Hate peddling can be profitable, and Jeremiah Wright has indeed profited by the lies he continues to repeat. One wonders if Wright actually believes those lies (which would call his intelligence into question) or simply repeats them for financial gain, as Bill O'Reilly seems to suspect.

HotAir.com has some good analysis here: Press conference: Obama shocked, shocked at Wright’s behavior; Update: Video added; Update: Q&A highlights added

Excellent points by Allahpundit:

The bottom line: After 20 years of friendship, if Obama didn’t know Wright held these beliefs he’s a moron and if he did know he’s a fraud.

Remember when TNR [The New Republic] broke the news about Ron Paul’s neo-confederate newsletters? The big knock there wasn’t that Paul necessarily held those views himself but that his carelessness in letting them be published under his name called his judgment and competence into question. How is this [situation with Obama over Jeremiah Wright] any different? Unless someone wants to argue that Wright’s militancy is something he came to only recently, then Obama somehow spent 20 years in the pews without ever noticing that his preacher wasn’t particularly fond of America, white people, “Zionism,” etc etc. Exactly how many sermons did he miss?

More from HotAir.com: Does Obama’s repudiation lance the boil?

Any thoughts?

Ad nauseam

This picture makes me ill, the caption on it reads:

"Chelsea Clinton listens to her translator as she is introduced prior to speaking to a group of residents at the Our Lady of Providence elderly home, in San Juan, Puerto Rico, Tuesday, April 29, 2008. Clinton is spending two days here campaigning for her mother, Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., ahead of the June 1 primary.(AP Photo/Brennan Linsley)"

Perhaps someone should tell the elderly residents Senator Clinton's pro-euthanasia stances, or even better the nun posing with her in the picture!