Liberty or Death

From Gerard:  (Warning - a bit NSFW...)

WWJD?

Kick ass and take names...

Via Gerard, because he's on a roll.

Sane Discussion About Abortion

I found out about Cecile Richards and her "hand wave" about when life begins in this article at NRO yesterday.  She says:

“It is not something that I feel is really part of this conversation,” Cecile Richards of Planned Parenthood told Fusion’s Jorge Ramos on Thursday. “I don’t know if it’s really relevant to the conversation.”

I started reading the coments, and found this one, by Bob Wynne:

 

Bob Wynne • a day ago

If any of you full grown adults that are definitely alive needed to be hooked up to my blood supply for months, would the choice to carry that burden be up to me or not? It is not a question of whether you are alive. I accept that you are. Yet there is still a question.

 It piqued my interest, and I responded to him.  I was expecting the "forced gestation" argument to surface pretty quickly, but it didn't.  Instead, I found myself in a conversation with someone who has genuine concerns about the rights of the mother vs the rights of her unborn child.

See what you think.  My initial response:

 leelu Bob Wynne • a day ago

Wonderfully bogus argument, and totally off the point, too.

Bob Wynne leelu • a day ago

No argument from me, Boss. Just asking a question. You might wonder, "Why would Bob ask that?" In order to get an answer. So far I have been unsuccessful.

leelu Bob Wynne • a day ago

 Ah... To answer your question, I would say yes, you definitely should/would have a say in it. OK?

Bob Wynne leelu • 21 hours ago

Now, I am asking what the point is that I am off of?

leelu Bob Wynne • 21 hours ago

What I perceive as the point of the article - the assertion that the issue of when life begins is irrelevant to abortion. I just don't see a connection there?

Bob Wynne leelu • 8 hours ago

The point is that I think that if we, as civilized people, can agree that society cannot force an individual to share their blood, oxygen and nutrients with another living person, then it is not relevant when a cell mass becomes a person for purposes of abortion rights. If we can agree that society can force a person to share their blood, oxygen and nutrients with another person, then personhood might be relevant in the discussion.

leelu Bob Wynne • 3 hours ago

The short answer is, if "it is not relevant when a cell mass becomes a person", then ,by a simple logical extension, there no reason why I should be penalized in any way for shooting you. (This is *not* a threat, btw.)

Your whole "sharing" example is irrelevant as well. In your case, you are talking about somthing that, absent force, would be, by definition, a contractual arrangement. I expect that you would not let me "hook up" for nothing. That is not the case between a mother and child - no contract exists. It is a moral issue, based exactly on the point of the start of personhood. Hand-waving it doesn't make it go away.

Bob Wynne leelu • 3 hours ago

You may be right on your primary position here. We all agree that you cannot do anything to another person. I am suggesting that if the fetus is a person, that there is more to discuss along those lines.

Some would argue that refusing to share your resources is not doing something to them. It is not allowing them to do something to you. You are removing them from your personal space. You are redirecting your blood flow for your personal use. They are free to go on their way. But they feed on you only by your grace and agreement.

That is what I would say if some born person needed some component in by blood for some period of time. I do not believe in killing another, but I do not belive in forcing anyone to support someone else, either.

As far as the comparison to the abortion debate, I have no answers. I cannot support forcing anyone to make that sacrifice. Even if the fetus is deemed a person, why would I give him or her more rights than me or you? I am glad that the decision does not rest on me. I feel that it should be left up to those that will have to live with it.

leelu Bob Wynne • 2 hours ago

If you donate blood or are an organ donor, then the resource sharing issue is moot. You may, if you want, or not. Same with me, as a first responder - I am under *no* legal obligation to administer CPR, just as you are under no legal obligation to give blood. 

"Feeding" suggests a parasite-host relationship, which again, is moot, since we are agreed that you have voluntarily donated blood or organs (I'm thinking "live donor" here, as in kidney or liver parts).

I don't think it's ultimately about rights, altho that certainly is a big part of the legal debate. If we agree that the unborn baby is human, then I would argue that his/her "right to life" is equal to yours or mine. So, in spite of Richard's hand waiving, it really does come down to that.

I'm enjoying this discussion. I can relate to your dilemma- my Catholic upbringing informs my conscience even today, yet I don't want to see women forced into the old "back alley/dirty coat hanger" environment. Women *will* get abortions, legal or not. If it came to a vote, I *would* vote my conscience ("No"), and still hope that women who sought them would be well cared for.

I'd like to post this to one of my blogs (leelusplace.blogspot.com). If you prefer, I will "anonymize" you.

Bob Wynne leelu • 2 minutes ago

Post it if you like. But I would like to close with the notion that not all decisions that need to be made, need to be made by government. And if the solution is not universal, then it should not be enforced by law.

leelu Bob Wynne • in a minute

Agreed!

And there we have it.  What do you think?

Veteran's Day, 10/13/2103 - Washington D.C.

Then...

...and now!

 

Meanwhile, at Gettysburg...

Park Police Mounties...

 

...face a hostile and dangerous force.

About Damned Time!

The Washington Times reports that:

 "Mrs. Pelosi should be denied Communion until she changes her advocacy views on abortion, Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke said, according to the Western Center for Journalism."

Seems she is continually breaking Canon Law 915, which says:

"...that Catholics who are stubbornly contrary “in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to Holy Communion.”

I wonder if she even goes to Mass?

Via Drudge.

(Sorry, Sister.)

Cheese Nazis....

...from Fox:

Florida official tells Christian charity to choose between Jesus and cheese

A Florida ministry that feeds the poor said a state agriculture department official told them they would not be allowed to receive USDA food unless they removed portraits of Christ, the Ten Commandments, a banner that read “Jesus is Lord” and stopping giving Bibles to the needy.
“They told us they could no longer allow us to have any religious information where the USDA food is going to be,” said Kay Daly, executive director of the Christian Service Center.

Florida is saying its the USDA's call.  The USDA is saying, according to the article, that basically as long as a religious organization is not discriminating against people of different faiths, religious display is OK

I didn't vote for him.

NSA Whistleblower Comes Out

Go.  Read the whole thing.

Mr. McEldowney's Editorial

I have been reading Brooke McEldowney's 9 Chickweed Lane and Pibgorn for years, now, and have even had an e-mail conversation with him.  I love his art, I especially love his story telling, the range of human experience he manages to capture, from the sensual interplay of relationships to the embarrassment of drooling (temporary) idiocy.  I especially love his wry use of language.  No one I know writes like him.

Today, on his gocomics.com Pibgorn page, he posted what I believe is his first editorial:

As I wrote to him, I believe we are poised for the second step.

Black Conservatives, Gun Control, Living Right

Mme Scherzo has been on a serious roll lately:

That is all.

Guess I'm a Lapsed Extremist?!

Saw this over at Sondrakistan:

I stopped practicing the Catholic faith when I was twenty, because I disagreed with most of their teachings on the nature of human sexuality.  I was pretty sure I wouldn't be able to convince them to change their stand, so I left.

Fourty some odd years later, I seem to be in what might be described as a near-earth orbit of the Church.  I see how it is still a bulwark against the insane "-isms" that plague us at every step.

And then there's this stupid training poster the Army has put together.  I saw it and said to myself, "I stand with the Catholics".  I may not participate in the liturgy and Communion, but I stand with the Catholics.

Letter to Scott Kurz - Updated

Update -  Scott replied to my e-mail:

Leelu,

I'M catholic. I'm mocking my own religion. I'm not singling out anyone but myself and the dogma I was raised in.

 Not much of an answer, I guess.  But , hey, it's his strip.

I wrote  this to him after reading today's strip.  If I receive an answer, I shall post it.

Hello, Scott,

I've been reading PvP since I discovered it quit a few years ago, and have read the entire canon.  I truly enjoy your work, and miss it when you are unable to get it posted.

Yet, I have to take issue with the Holy Ghost/Pope story today.  First, we generally refer to it as  the Holy "Sprirt", to avoid cliche' associations with Casper, Ghost Busters, and others of that ilk.  Second, the Holy Spirit is regarded as the source of spiritual wisdom and guidance, so it would be natural for the conclave to pray to the Holy Spirit for guidance.  Since prayer is a form of meditation, it is a process of opening one's self up to the Holy Spirit, to recieve needed guidance.

Anyway..., are you going to Hell for this strip?  I doubt it.  Will you lose readers over it?  Maybe one or two.  Invective?  Possible, but unlikely.  However, since it is considered near hate speech to say words like "fag" or "queer" in contexts other than their meanings of a "burning  bundle of kindling", (or "cigarette"), and "odd" - a good thing, too, I respectfully request that you extend the same courtesy and respect to Catholics and their faith.

This one goes much deeper into bad taste than the usual "fart and dick jokes".

I have a guess or two about this one, based on the inference that he is gay.  He has posted some pics of himself with his partner (mentioned, I think, only in the context of their work together).  That said, Scott is often looking at Kris the way I look at Te'a Leone.  But I'm just  guessing, and willing to be wrong.  The "go-to" guess is, of course, the Church's stance against homosexuality (but not against homosexuals), and the attendant refusal to consider sanctifying gay marriage.

I guess the lawyers have finally managed...

...to teach everyone else to eat their young.

From The Anchoress:

Not everyone is into political issues, or keeps up with them, and my husband has a limited attention span for news articles on issues that have promised “nothing new” for the last few decades. For that reason, and although he is strongly pro-life, articles touching on the issue rarely get his attention: there’s a lot of yelling on all sides, but few if any saying anything new.
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo is helping to change that, by saying something new, extreme, and rather shocking, and by trying to codify his new words into law. Deacon Greg Kandra sums it up in a particularly good homily:

. . .In New York City today, 40% of all pregnancies, nearly half, end in abortion.
Among minorities, it’s as high as 60%. In some neighborhoods, it’s 67%. And that’s just the beginning. To some, it seems, that’s not enough.
In Albany two weeks ago, the governor of this state proposed an abortion bill that threatens to make New York the bloodiest state in the union.
It would permit unlimited late term abortion on demand – right up to the ninth month.
It would allow people who are not doctors to perform abortions.
It would declare that the “state shall not discriminate” against the right to abortion, a declaration that could threaten the very existence of Catholic hospitals. Long Island alone is home to six hospitals that could be crippled by having Medicare funds withheld if they refuse to comply.
If enacted into law, this bill would declare that abortion is a fundamental right that cannot be denied. No parental notification for minors, no limits on taxpayer funding of abortion, no limits on late-term abortions.

 When I was 16, the hospital my mom worked at shout down the maternity ward (1966 - end of the baby boom).  She found a new job at a Catholic run maternity home.  We moved into a house that was across the street from the hospital, so I got  to see a lot of the "young mothers".

They came from all over the country.  It gave them and their parents a chance to save face - "Oh, Patty is going to school in California for a year."  Which was true.  I saw them crossing the street to school as I was coming and going.  So, the home provided a place to live, school, and a hospital where a young girl could have her baby.  They were also given counseling by social services workers.  Most of the babies were adopted.

The home is still there, and it's gotten larger. 

And yet, more and more every day, we are killing our unborn children in ways that would loudly be declaimed as "inhumane" if we executed murders, or put down our pets in the same way.

Our government is warring against our children, but not against those who threaten us.

It's that simple.

Elevating Thought

 It's been a month since the election, and I'm still trying to re-group.  What upset me the most (after the outcome)  was the encroaching lack of civility and clear, useful journalism on the Right as well as the Left.  I find that disheartening, since one of the Big Deals we made about the Left was and is their lack of civility, and the mendacity of the MSM.

One writer who comes to mind is John Nolte, at Breitbart.  Here is his opener on the Zimmerman/NBC suit:

"Though it might feel like a hundred years ago, it was only last April when the media joined Barack Obama's cynical crusade to gin up his base in Florida through the artificial inflaming of racial tensions. And there was no question NBC News was the worst of these co-conspirators after the network was busted editing a 9-1-1 call to make Trayvon Martin's suspected shooter, George Zimmerman, look like a racist. Today, Zimmerman filed suit against the Peacock Network."

Now, I gather that his basic assertion about NBC editing the sound track of the 911 call is factual.  But I don't think anyone would deny that the inflammatory nature of the paragraph.  I'm not suggesting that Mr. Nolte do anything differently - he has his "bully pulpit", the editors must like the way he's writing, and the First Amendment applies.  You go, John.

But I think this kind of writing only helps to maybe put an up-tick in the pitch fork, torch, tar, feather, and rail markets.  Which I don't think is really helpful at all, even in the short term.

My metaphysics training has taught me to stand guard at the doorway of thought.  In a nutshell, this warning is based upon the idea that we see and become what we think and believe.  If we don't pay attention to what we are admitting into our thoughts, we can start to slide downhill.  A practical example - repeat a lie often enough, and it (seems to) become true.

My distress is in no small part to my own slippage.  Looking back over my pre-election and near-post election posts, I'm struck by how they could have been less, well, vulgar, and more informative and thoughtful.  Fortunately, Gerard turned on a light for me, and gave me a glimpse of what I've been seeking.  It has apparently been wending its way thru the web.  One full copy of it is at The Thinking Housewife.  I'm excerpting the first section here:

A Plan for Traditionalists

AT The Orthosphere, Kristor offers a reasonable guide to survival and affecting the culture. In the immediate future, he recommends:

1. Resolve to pay no more PC jizya (beautifully spelled out in the Solzhenitsyn essay that has been discussed a lot lately in the wider orthosphere). Tell the truth, and call a spade a spade: calmly, politely, and without being obstreperous about it, but nevertheless firmly. Without making a big deal about it or calling attention to yourself, fail to appear for the public rites of Moloch. If you must thus appear, quietly fail to meet the requirements of the rite.
2. Write, read, blog, talk: join a book club, an apologetics roundtable, a bible study group. Learn the arguments for reaction, for Christianity, for theism; learn the arguments against them, and how they may be defeated. Speak up: fearlessly, scandalously, but always humbly and politely.
3. Live a virtuous, upright life, at home and in business. Speak the truth, and do the right thing. Whatever it happens to be, don’t let it be about yourself; let it be about the True, the Good, and the Beautiful.
4. Beware; and be prepared to move, quickly. Get rid of stuff that you don’t need or that is not positively beautiful to you in some way – especially debt and belly fat, which are likely going to cost you as the financial and medical sectors of the economy devolve over the next ten years.
5. Maintain tradition in small things: e.g., dress more formally than is customary these days, practice old-fashioned manners, refrain from swearing; read old books, and then discuss them around the family dinner table; join together in regular and serious family prayer, if only to bless each meal; remember your family holiday traditions, and observe them gravely and with joy.
6. Pray without ceasing. Pray whenever your attention is not wholly consumed with the task at hand. Work toward praying even when it is. Nothing is so convincing as sanctity, or so attractive, or so authoritative. Without it, personal rectitude can seem like Pharisaical arrogance (and risks becoming just that). You can’t push sanctity. But you can work at allowing it to happen.

 (Debt isn't the huge problem it was five years ago.  The belly fat, though continues to be tough.)

There's more, all worth read, pondering, and incorporating into our lives.  Go!

The New Revolutionary War

The ever-suave and lucid Steven Green has a post up about Michael Cannon's article in the LA Times.  The gist is, many states are not implementing the exchange infrastructure required to make Obamacare "work" (sorry).  He posits that this will make the true costs of the monstrosity visible  to all, causing massive sales in torches, pitchforks, rails, tar and feathers.  (OK, he didn't say the part about increased sales.  But it's a happy dream... .)

Vodkapundit doesn't think this has much of a chance.

This all got me to thinking (uh-oh), which started to coagulate what's been ricocheting around my cranium since the election.  Here's my comment:

"I've been contemplating may navel since the election, and I'm coming to the conclusion that the only way to stop this frikkin' nightmare is to fight and beat it at the state level.  (And by "frikkin' nightmare", I mean the whole greedy, bloated Federal Government!)

State laws prohibiting state enforcement of Federal mandates.

Lawsuits, lawsuits, lawsuits.

States, start to wean yourself off the Federal dime.  Keep your own tax money.  Don't send any money to Washington.  Pay for your own schools and roads.

Keep as much activity and business in-state as you can, to circumvent the commerce clause.

Make yourself business-friendly.  Low taxes, right-to-work.  Train literate and numerate workers - teach them reading. writing, arithmetic, history and computers; art, literature.  Yeah, world art & lit, but make sure there's a solid foundation in American and Western history, lit and art.  Give the kids their heritage, not someone else's.

It doesn't have to be a shooting war, but it is a war."

If we aren't going to start a shooting war, which, I think, is a really bad idea, we need to entrench and start resisting through the "system" at the state level.

But we must fight back, because it is a war.

Pray and Act

The Manhattan Declaration and the 40 day fast for America.

I found this while reading through reader comments at Brietbart about  the AFP commercial I linked to in the post below.  The responder did not include any links, so, since Google is my friend, I found a bunch of posts about the 40 day fast for America.

I followed the link to the "Pray and A.C.T." page at the Renewing American Leadership (ReAL) website.  It describes the why and how of the fast.  It also directs you to the Pray and A.C.T. website.  as of today, the link fails, returning a "Server Not Found" error.  I'll poke into that when I'm done here...

The "ACT" part of the page asks that you go to the Manhattan Declaration webite, and read and sign it.  That link goes to the web page.  Here is a link to the declaration as a .PDF.

The declaration is about 4,700 words long, so get comfortable.  It is a clear and concise defense of life, marriage, and religious liberty from a Christian moral perspective.  Two thinks I liked the most about it:  first, it strongly and clearly emphasizes human free will, and the fundamental right and freedom to follow one's own conscience.  (I inferred that one might add "well informed" as a state of said conscience.  Or that could just be the Ghosts of Jesuits Past.)  Second, was the mini-lesson on Martin Luther King, Jr.'s from the Birmingham jail: "...citing Christian writers such as Augustine and Aquinas, King taught that just laws elevate and ennoble human beings because they are rooted in the moral law whose ultimate source is God Himself. Unjust laws degrade human beings. Inasmuch as they can claim no authority beyond sheer human will, they lack any power to bind in conscience. King's willingness to go to jail, rather than comply with legal injustice, was exemplary and inspiring."


Read the whole thing.  Sign it if you feel so moved.  Fast if you feel so moved.  And act, if you feel so moved.

Pax Vobiscum.

(Cross-posted at Window on Red Lion)

"Ishmaelites"...

...or "Saracens".

Mme Sherzo posts a goldmine!

Go.  Read.  It. All!

Faithful Citizenship

As I've mentioned before, I was raised Catholic, and abandoned the faith when I was about 20 or 21.  I honestly didn't agree with the teaching on birth control (I now have a grasp on the reasoning, but issues remain).  In any case, it has informed my spiritual and philosophic views of life, the universe and everything.  As I slowly come to some semblance of maturity, I'm beginning to find that the Church is starting to make more sense to me.

So, I was bouncing around the interwebs (as I do), and found a U.S. News and World Report on the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops' (USCCB)  Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship .  The article discusses how there are "Faithful Citizenship" meetings in Dioceses across the country.  One of them, in Cleveland, Ohio, "...led in part by open Obama-supporter Karen Leith, downplay(s) abortion and religious freedom, issues of irreducible importance to Catholic voters."

I'd like to have a discussion with someone knowledeableon the issues, about personal adherence to no abortion in my own life (Ihave no problem with that), versus not making it legally available (life pre-Rowe vs. Wade)  I realize that women are going to have them, and I can't see forcing them into the proverbial dark alley to meet with someone who owns a coat hanger.  Am I morally obligated under the Church's teachings to opposing this?  Knowing that prohibition generally doesn't work, should we make abortion medically safe for the putative mother-to-be (a.k.a., the murderer-to-be)??

Anyway, follow the links, read the whole thing, and vote with a true heart.

And go read this at The Anchoress:  Teddy Roosevelt on how Republics Die…

Faith & Freedom Voter Guide

Click, read, vote your conscience!

Via Dave Brody.