During the previous summer, I was in Kingston visiting my parents. While there, my youngest daughter, Sophia (aged 3), was running in the house, tripped, fell down, and hit her forehead on the corner of a door. There was a small gash.  I dreaded going to the hospital because, having experienced long wait times before with our other kids, I knew the drill: wait for many hours before we get to see a doctor.  But I thought this would be different since she was bleeding and required, in my opinion, immediate attention.  Much to my unsurprise, however, we also “took a number”.  Apparently, to the hospital staff, my little daughter’s gash was not a big deal after all.  So we waited…and we waited…and we waited.  Four and half hours later, when the wound had already started to dry up and stabilize, we finally got to see a doctor.  The doctor cleaned up the wound, applied some gel, and slapped a bandaid on her.  He didn’t even give her a stitch.  It was too late for that.  I could see that he was apologetic, but that’s the way things are today in Canada’s health care system.  As I left with my wife, I remarked that we could have done the same damn thing he did, except save ourselves 5 hours in an emergency room on a beautiful Sunday afternoon.  I wouldn’t have minded waiting, if we had receive proper medical treatment which we did not.  To this day, my little one has a 1/4 inch scar on her forehead, and it will take years for it to go away (if it does go away).  For a lousy $100 or so, that scar did not have to be there.   But the health czars in this country demand that it be there in order to service their sick and twisted ideology which prohibits me from obtaining health care for my family.

That scar is a constant reminder to me of how pathetic our health care system is.  And it scares the shit out of me to think of what might happen when one of my kids really does need medical attention.  I can see a lot of people taking medicine into their own hands because, like the instances in this video, people just don’t even bother going to the clinics and emergency rooms anymore.  They just stay home and take their chances — all to serve a failed and corrupt moral and social utopia that is falling apart at the seams.  Socialized medicine does not ensure universal access. It ensures universal suffering — except for those rich Canadians who can afford to go to the U.S. for treatment (like Jack Layton).

Back in the day when the Pope was Cardinal Ratzinger, Pete Seewald did a series of interviews which give us great insight into the way our Papa thinks. And I like it. Here’s a great example directly swiped from Webster at Why I Am Catholic. The non-italicized words are Webster’s commentary. Go there to read all of his post.

In the interviews that became God and the World (Ignatius Press, 2002), German journalist Peter Seewald asked then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger:

In the course of two thousand years of Christian history, the Church has divided time and again. In the meantime, there are around three hundred distinguishable Protestant, Orthodox, or other churches. There are way over a thousand Baptist groups in the United States. Over against these there is still the Roman Catholic Church with the pope at her head, which claims to be the only true Church. She remains at any rate, and despite every crisis, indeed the most universal, historically significant, and successful Church in the world, with more members today than at any time in her history.

This question asked by a skeptical young journalist, no Catholic at the time he asked it, might seem to be what Frank would call a “fat pitch.” Did Ratzinger, in his answer, knock Protestantism out of the park in a grand slam of triumphalism? No, the cardinal laid down a thoughtful bunt single—then stole second, third, and home:

I think that in the spirit of Vatican II we ought not to see that as a triumph for our prowess as Catholics and ought not to make much of the institutional and numerical strength we continue to enjoy. If we were to reckon that as our achievement and as our right, then we would step outside the role of a people belonging to God and set ourselves up as an association in our own right. And that can very quickly go wrong. A Church may have great institutional power in a country, but as soon as faith is no longer there to back it up, the institution will break down.

Perhaps you know the mediaeval story of a Jew who traveled to the papal court and who became a Catholic. On his return, someone who knew the papal court well asked him: “Do you realize what sort of things are going on there?” “Yes,” he said, “of course, quite scandalous things, I saw it all.” “And you still became a Catholic,” remarked the other man. “That’s completely perverse!” Then the Jew said, “It is because of all that that I have become a Catholic. For if the Church continues to exist in spite of it all, then truly there must be someone upholding her.” And there is another story, to the effect that Napoleon once declared that he would destroy the Church. Whereupon one of the cardinals replied, “Not even we have managed that!”

I believe that we see something important in these paradoxical tales. There have in fact always been plenty of human monstrosities in the Catholic Church. That she still holds together, even if she groans and creaks, that she is still in existence, that she produces great martyrs and great believers, people who put their whole lives at her service, as missionaries, as nurses, as teachers, that really does show that there is someone there upholding her.

We cannot, then, reckon the Church’s success as our own reward, but we may still say, with Vatican II—even if the Lord has given a great deal of life to other churches and communities—that the Church herself, as an active agent, has survived and is present in this agent. And that can only be explained by the fact that He grants what men cannot achieve. (Source)

Another Muslim Jihadi tries to take down another airliner. 

Sooner or later, the West has to realize that not all religions are equal.  Now, for reasons only known to them, the Leftists would like to see Christianity squelched so that they can continue their sexual auto-demolition of western society.  But when we’re gone, they’ll have a much harder time taking down the Jihadis.  That will be a completely different cup of tea since the Jihadis don’t play by the same rules of social engagement.  If they don’t like you, they won’t vote against you; they’ll simply blow you up.  

There won’t be any Christians in influence to blame anymore, although Obama still likes to kick George Bush around for his problems.  And there won’t be anyone left to fight the Jihadis either.   (Leftists don’t fight, and when they finally figure out that we live in a rough and tumbly world, they’ll fold and play the dhimmi rather than actually fight for what they believe in.  They have never understood or accepted the notion of sacrifice, and I don’t expect them to do so in the near future.)

But, beyond all this, there is a question of religious freedom we need to re-examine.  Just like free speech, religious freedom is not an absolute “right” at all.  You cannot simply stick the word “religion” on something and have a carte blanche to advocate for anything you want.  A religion that advocates for murder or suicide, for instance, is clearly a threat to our society, and the State has every right to suppress it.  Just like the State has every right to suppress Islam if Islam becomes synonymous with violence and destruction.  If the moderates in Islam do not take control and start countering the poisonous rhetoric and violent teaching that its extremist members advocate for, then for the sake of the common good, they must realize that their religion will not and should not enjoy the same privileges that others do.

The Catholic Church, for instance, while recognizing the principle of religious freedom, places such a freedom within “due limits”:

This Vatican Council declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom. This freedom means that all men are to be immune from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups and of any human power, in such wise that no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs, whether privately or publicly, whether alone or in association with others, within due limits.

The council further declares that the right to religious freedom has its foundation in the very dignity of the human person as this dignity is known through the revealed word of God and by reason itself. This right of the human person to religious freedom is to be recognized in the constitutional law whereby society is governed and thus it is to become a civil right.

It is in accordance with their dignity as persons-that is, beings endowed with reason and free will and therefore privileged to bear personal responsibility-that all men should be at once impelled by nature and also bound by a moral obligation to seek the truth, especially religious truth. They are also bound to adhere to the truth, once it is known, and to order their whole lives in accord with the demands of truth. However, men cannot discharge these obligations in a manner in keeping with their own nature unless they enjoy immunity from external coercion as well as psychological freedom. Therefore the right to religious freedom has its foundation not in the subjective disposition of the person, but in his very nature. In consequence, the right to this immunity continues to exist even in those who do not live up to their obligation of seeking the truth and adhering to it and the exercise of this right is not to be impeded, provided that just public order be observed. (Dignitatis Humane, 2)

In exercising religious freedom, adherents to religion are to do so “within due limits” and “provided that just public order be observed”.  In other words, the Church is calling for a “common ground” in the search for religious truth by implicitly recognizing the necessity for everyone, regardless of their religion, to observe the natural law which binds everyone.  If the public order is breached; that is, if anyone or any religion attacks the common good or seeks to break down public order, the State has every right to step in and suppress that religion.  They have that right in order to protect society. Indeed, failing to do so may create a dangerous atmosphere of vigilantism where individuals and not the State take their own security (and the law) into their own hands and seek to maintain order and justice apart from the State.  This can lead to civil unrest and even civil war.

Santa Cruz, WA (LifeNews.com) – A Seattle-area man is in police custody after allegedly killing his girlfriend and their infant daughter after the woman refused his request to get an abortion. Daniel Thomas Hicks is charged with two counts of first-degree murder in the death of 28-year-old Jennifer “J” Morgan and 13-month-old Ema Morgan.

The Seattle Times indicates the trio hailed from Santa Cruz, a town on the Washington state coast west of Seattle.

Hicks was charged on Thursday after he was apprehended following the discovery of the bodies by Morgan’s mother and cooperation with other relatives who aided them in locating Hicks.

The Times indicates Hicks was diagnosed as depressed and suicidal for some time after having lost his job and that the condition worsened when he learned Morgan was pregnant.

Legal papers the Times obtained say Hicks wanted Morgan to have an abortion and claimed she “was just trying to trap him with the pregnancy.” They say Hicks made several threats about killing Morgan and himself.

The documents indicate that Hicks was upset after the birth of the baby because he was disappointed Ema was a girl and not a boy.

The papers also say he “became very jealous and suspicious of Jennifer,” and questioned whether he was in fact the baby’s biological father.

Morgan, the newspaper indicated, had planned to tell Hicks last week while her mother was at work that he needed to move out of their home. When Morgan’s mother returned home late that evening, she was glad to see Hicks’ truck gone and assume he had left.

She assumed Morgan and Ema were sleeping and, when she went downstairs the next morning, she discovered they had been shot and killed.

Hicks left a note apologizing and the police paperwork indicated Hick’s father shot and killed his mother when he was young.

Although Morgan did not have an abortion, incidents of mothers facing pressure and coercion to have an abortion by their husband or boyfriend are commonplace. Surveys of women who have had abortions indicate as many as 60 percent have said they faced pressure from a partner, family, or employer.

But ‘ya know…it’s all about a woman’s right to choooooooose.  Isn’t abortion great? 

Feminists are such suckers to their male conquistidors.  Just slap on some liberating sounding jingle and they’ll dance to whatever tune we play.  “Honey, you know it’s your right.  It’s a duty and an obligation to go through with an abortion. You owe it to your gender’s emancipation!”

For any non-scientist interested in the climate debate, there is nothing better than a ready primer to guide you through the complexities of atmospheric physics – the “hardest” science of climatology. Here we outline the essential points made by Dr. Gerhard Gerlich, a respected German physicist, that counter the bogus theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW).

Before going further, it’s worth bearing in mind that no climatologist ever completed any university course in climatology–that’s how new this branch of science really is. Like any new science the fall-back position of a cornered AGW proponent is the dreaded “appeal to authority” where the flustered debater, out of his or her depth, will say, “Well, professor so-and-so says it’s true – so it must be true.” Don’t fall for that proxy tree-ring counter’s gambit any longer. Here is the finest shredding of junk science you will ever read.

In a recently revised and re-published paper, Dr Gerlich debunks AGW and shows that the IPCC “consensus” atmospheric physics model tying CO2 to global warming is not only unverifiable, but actually violates basic laws of physics, i.e. the First and Second Law of Thermodynamics. The latest version of this momentous scientific paper appears in the March 2009 edition of the International Journal of Modern Physics….read the rest here.

When a new equity policy kicks in next year, students of other religions will get areas to pray in local Catholic schools, but homosexual students hoping for a gay/straight alliance at their high school may have to wait.

School boards across the province will be required to have in place equity and inclusive education policies before the start of next school year. The policies are wide-ranging, affecting everything from religious accommodation to what the province says are discriminatory biases and systemic barriers to education.

One of the things it will mean is that if a student of any religion attends a Huron-Superior Catholic District School Board school, the board will have to provide that student with a place for prayer, said Supt. Maria Esposito, though she noted that in Northern Ontario boards religious accommodation is expected most often to apply to native spirituality.

In its guidelines on religious accommodation, the province uses as an example the Toronto Catholic District School Board, which has made its chapels available to Muslim students to pray.

The same could be expected at the H-SCDSB, said Esposito.

“We would be called to provide a space for them to pray, provided that they want to come into a Catholic school,” said Esposito.

…

“We promote the respect and inclusion of any student, no matter their race, ethnicity, socio-economic status, sexual orientation, any disability or identity that makes them unique,” she said.

Trustees at the Algoma District School Board last month questioned that board’s policy, and the potential the religious accommodation guidelines have for returning prayer to public schools after years of absence.

What the new policy’s religious accommodation requirements won’t change is one “basic” requirement to which non-Catholic families at the HSCDSB are expected to adhere, said Esposito.

“If they choose to register their child in our schools, yes we will try to accommodate them, but by the same token, they will be respectful of our religion,” she said. “We don’t expect them to receive the sacrament, for example, but if there is a mass scheduled, they attend the mass, they are respectful of our faith.”

Esposito said the board has already made significant strides to include aboriginal spirituality, such as including smudging ceremonies in masses.

“Our bishops are very much on board,” she said.

Esposito said the Huron-Superior Catholic District School Board’s administration is several months away from presenting a policy to trustees for approval. (Source)

I don’t doubt at all that the bishops are very much on board with accommodating other religions in Catholic schools.  But then again Catholic schools aren’t really Catholic schools anymore, are they?  They’re multi-cult, multi-religious institutions which will become predominately Muslim in the coming years, as is already starting to happen in some elementary schools.   In fact, at least the schools will become real Muslim schools.  It’s not like, after all, they will be replacing real Catholic schools.  They will be replacing the “Happy Holidays” religion which fraudulently passes as “Catholic”.  At least, there will be something to celebrate when that is gone.  Praise be to God.

The current system exists as an excuse for the bishops not to provide authentic Catholic schools, as they are required to do under canon law.  It’s so much easier to rely on the form of a farcical and dead system, rather than to strike out boldly and call out parents to substantive sacrifice without the State’s intrusions and saturations of an authentic Catholic education.

When I graduated from Catholic high school, I had to empty my head of the social justice drivel that largely occupied it, and actually learn the central tenets of the Faith.  That was over 20 years ago.  Things are a whole lot worse today. 

Not that this take-over is such a bad thing because, at least then, Catholics will have to squarely face what they have become and where they have permitted themselves to be led.  Don’t count on the bishops to actually take their responsibility seriously in maintaining the Catholic identity of our schools, either.  I very much doubt that any of them have the slightest clue that something is terribly wrong with the Catholicity of our schools (or maybe they do but they don’t have the cahonays to do something about it).

I am sure that in addition to the religious accomodation offered to other religions, the belt-sized kilts worn by our high school tramps and their condom-totting jigilos will also continue indefinitely into the future.  Along with marriage, modesty and piety have whole new definitions too.

And while we’re at it, why not give up a few hours during the week to every religion to conduct their services at the local Catholic parish or Cathedral? We wouldn’t want to make any kind of exclusivist and dogmatic claims about what we believe or be accused of being closed minded, would we?

There are (unconfirmed) reports that Wikipedia has fired its long-time climate editor William Connolley. Connolley is a software engineer and host at RealClimate, a pro-Anthropogenic [man-made] Global Warming site that skewers skeptics while praising supporters.  Connolley has been using his position at Wikipedia to promote the cause. Whether this is the reason he may have been fired is uncertain. Lawrence Solomon of the National Post outlines what a busy-bee Mr. Connolley has been:

He rewrote Wikipedia’s articles on global warming, on the greenhouse effect, on the instrumental temperature record, on the urban heat island, on climate models, on global cooling. On Feb. 14, he began to erase the Little Ice Age; on Aug.11, the Medieval Warm Period. In October, he turned his attention to the hockey stick graph. He rewrote articles on the politics of global warming and on the scientists who were skeptical of the band. Richard Lindzen and Fred Singer, two of the world’s most distinguished climate scientists, were among his early targets, followed by others that the band especially hated, such as Willie Soon and Sallie Baliunas of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, authorities on the Medieval Warm Period.

All told, Connolley created or rewrote 5,428 unique Wikipedia articles. His control over Wikipedia was greater still, however, through the role he obtained at Wikipedia as a website administrator, which allowed him to act with virtual impunity. When Connolley didn’t like the subject of a certain article, he removed it — more than 500 articles of various descriptions disappeared at his hand. When he disapproved of the arguments that others were making, he often had them barred — over 2,000 Wikipedia contributors who ran afoul of him found themselves blocked from making further contributions. Acolytes whose writing conformed to Connolley’s global warming views, in contrast, were rewarded with Wikipedia’s blessings. In these ways, Connolley turned Wikipedia into the missionary wing of the global warming movement. (Source)

From this entry…

I had an abortion 10 days ago. I want to go back and stop myself from doing it. The trauma is unbearable. I want to put the baby back in my belly so bad. I am in such grief it is killing me. I hate myself. I can’t sleep because the dreams are to real. I’m ashamed and feel like I should sit in jail for murder. I have been drinking and taking pills just to cope and numb myself. I wish I could go back. I am certain god will not forgive me. I have no purpose anymore. none.

- Anonymous

__________________________

Anonymous,

Listen carefully to me. What you did was wrong. There’s no point in sugar-coating that. BUT. And please pay attention to the “BUT”: But all hope is not lost. There is forgiveness and hope for you. Christ promised forgiveness to all those who seek Him through faith and seek to amend their lives. There are also groups of women who have gone through abortions and offer counselling and support.

Please do not despair. Christ still loves you. Turn to Him now and begin the journey of healing and restoration and redemption.

Peace,

John Pacheco

December 18, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A growing number of Christian churches are joining forces with a grass-roots movement known as the Advent Conspiracy, which is seeking to “do away with the frenzied activity and extravagant gift-giving of a commercial Christmas.”

The group was founded by Portland pastor Rick McKinley, who with a group of fellow pastors realized that their own, and their congregations’, focus during the time of Advent revolved more around secular consumerism than preparing to celebrate the birth of Christ.

“What was once a time to celebrate the birth of a savior has somehow turned into a season of stress, traffic jams, and shopping lists,” McKinley observed.

“And when it’s all over, many of us are left with presents to return, looming debt that will take months to pay off, and this empty feeling of missed purpose. Is this what we really want out of Christmas?”

“None of us like Christmas,” McKinley said in a Time.com report, adding, “That’s sort of bad if you’re a pastor. It’s the shopping, the going into debt, the worrying that if I don’t spend enough money, someone will think I don’t love them.”

McKinley, whose church donates money to dig wells in developing countries through Living Water International and other organizations, saw that a fraction of the money Americans spend at retailers in the month of December could supply the entire world with clean water.

As a result he and his friends embarked on a plan to urge their congregations to spend less on presents for friends and family, and to consider donating the money they saved to support practical and tangible charitable works.

“If more Christians changed how they thought about giving at Christmas,” he argued, “the holiday could be transformative in a religious and practical sense.”

McKinley observed that at first church members were uncertain. “Some people were terrified,” McKinley recalled. “They said, ‘My gosh, you’re ruining Christmas. What do we tell our kids?’”

Soon though, the idea caught on and McKinley found that not only were people “relieved to be given permission to slow down and buy less” but were “expressing their love through something more meaningful than a gift card. Once church members adjusted to this new conception of Christmas, they found that they loved it.”

According to the Time.com report the Advent Conspiracy movement has exploded, counting hundreds of churches on four continents and in at least 17 countries as participants.

The Advent Conspiracy video has been viewed more than a million times on YouTube and the movement boasts nearly 45,000 fans on Facebook.

To find out more about the Advent Conspiracy please visit their website here.

Liars, nihilists all.

I found it strange that the Pope has, for some time now, spoken against the worldiness of some bishops.

Now I understand who he was talking about.