Thursday, January 29, 2015

From a psychiatrist, advice about contraception

A clear and scientifically irrefutable relationship exists between the use of contraceptives and the plague of divorce, with its life-long damage to millions upon millions of young people, loyal spouses, and their families worldwide. Many days in my work, I feel like an army medic on a battlefield strewn with people of various ages and conditions, severely wounded by something essentially ignored.
 The growth in marriage from “me” to “we,” which St. John Paul II describes as an aspect of betrothed love in Love and Responsibility, is also dependent upon trusting the Lord with every aspect of one’s marriage. In using contraceptives, the couple is unconsciously communicating to the Lord, “We do not trust you with our fertility.”
 This stance slowly and unconsciously weakens the ability to entrust all aspects of the marriage, children, and family life to the Lord. And a further consequence is that it makes it more difficult for the couples to turn to Him and seek his help for the numerous challenges and stresses in married and family life.

Reminds me of Kimberly Hahn's observation that she thought she had entrusted her life to the Lord, then realised that she wouldn't trust Him with how many children she and Scott should have.  This was the last step before she decided she had to become a Catholic.  Worth the read, Rome Sweet Home.


Saturday, January 24, 2015

Generational Healing

The other day, I spent quite a long time with someone who was grieving the loss of her daughter. And I was aware of her own hurts that came from not having a mother who cared for her.  And with her own children, she is giving of herself in the way she wished her mother had given to her.

How we fail our children. And how we feel our own parents didn't do certain things for us. All we can do is surrender all that hurt and pray that it will be transformed by love and forgiveness.

Thinking about generational healing, this song is probably my favourite to express what I can't say in words.


Wednesday, January 14, 2015

Conscience pangs of the abortion-minded

Emails obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request have revealed that Maryland government officials and activists with the state chapter of NARAL Pro-Choice America have been working closely together on a legal effort to shut down a local pro-life pregnancy care center. 
One of the strategies used by NARAL in their effort to close pregnancy centres is to accuse them of false information and false advertising. The very same strategy that was used here in Halifax by a young woman who began a campaign to pull the bus ads of the Open Door Centre.

Her claim was that the ads were not honest since they did not state that the Centre is faith-based and will not refer for abortions. She took her complaint to the Advertising Standards Council, and she lost.  The director of the Centre was obliged to hire a lawyer to write a letter to the ASC, and that letter clearly showed that the ads simply directed women to the Centre's website. On that website it is clearly shown that the organization is faith-based. And the list of services do not include abortion referrals; actually no centre can refer for an abortion unless they have a doctor on staff.

It is surprising that someone should get so worked up about ads on the buses. The ads are not confrontational, they are not judgmental in any way. They simply state that the Centre is there to help should someone find themselves in an unplanned pregnancy.

Why is this seen as so threatening?

Peggy Hartshown of Heartbeat International says:
“No amount of political maneuvering or coercion can take away the fact that pregnancy help organizations are good for America’s expectant mothers, families, and babies," said Hartshorn. "Pregnancy help organizations like Centro Tepeyac exist so that every mother can feel loved and supported during her pregnancy. The only opponents to this mission are those who, like NARAL, stand to gain financially and ideologically by the intentional killing of a child within the womb."

It is fairly obvious that private abortion clinics in the US make money from abortions. However, in Canada, where the majority of abortions are performed in hospitals and are paid for by tax dollars, who is benefitting financially?  I have heard it said that the abortion clinics in hospitals are money-makers for the hospitals as they are profitable whereas other procedures are much more costly in terms of equipment, length of patient stay, etc.  But the woman who lodged the complaint against the Open Door Centre won't be considering the money aspect of this. She is just angry that an alternative to abortion is being offered in such a public way.

The threat in this case must be a moral one. The very suggestion that a woman could consider carrying her baby to term and either parenting herself or having her baby adopted is seen as judgmental of the woman who chooses abortion. The stirrings of conscience exhibit themselves in various ways, but a person's conscience is difficult to silence. When it shows itself in anger and recrimination, you can be sure someone is feeling either guilty or threatened at the possibility that they could be wrong.

Saturday, January 10, 2015

Bill Donohue Unjustly Criticized

Fox News' Megyn Kelly takes Bill Donohue to task over his reaction to the massacre in Paris of journalists who mocked Mohammed.  Look past the bluster of Bill Donohue and hear what he is really saying:
 Freedom of speech is not an end in itself, it is a means to an end. And in a society like ours, one is free to put whatever one wants in the public media; however one has a responsibility for what is said, and Bill expresses the belief that one should "self-censor".
Sorry, but I don't see what is wrong with that.
Donohue upsets Megyn by stating that the journalists were "pornographers disguised as satiricists".  And he calls the journalists narcissistic.  He gets a very negative reaction from Megyn, but I think Donohue has a valid point to make. He is talking about morals here, not just a constitutional right. Donohue is taking the argument to a higher level, unfortunately most people want to stay at the level of "rights" and "freedom of speech".
Personally, I think what Donohue said was brilliant.
Liberty can be lost by the abuse of power, but also by the abuses of liberty. Self-censorhip is the friend of freedom, because if we don't have self-censorhip, we are going to have individuals interpreting their rights in an extreme fashion.  That leads basically to license.


Friday, January 9, 2015

Fired for His Beliefs

After serving a one-month suspension for writing a book expressing sex outside marriage (including homosexuality) as sinful, Chief Cochran faced the wrath of homosexual activists and Atlanta mayor Kasim Reed and was  publicly chastised and summarily fired from his position.

Apparently Chief Cochran referenced homosexuality on less than half a page in his 160-page book.

 "When you're a city employee, and [your] thoughts, beliefs and opinions are different from the city's, you have to check them at the door." – Councilman Alex Wan

How did we reach the point where someone's job can be terminated because of his beliefs?  On the contrary, it is someone's belief system that makes them the very person we want in that job. It is one's principles that measure the quality of an individual.

It is not one's beliefs that should bring about firing, but one's actions. If Chief Cochran were found to be treating his firemen differently on the basis of their views on marriage, then he could be taken to task for that. But to hold certain beliefs, to express them in one's writings, does not disqualify someone for a job. And should never result in being fired.

Tolerance is the quality that is deemed so very important in today's society. But that tolerance does not tolerate deviations from what is now "politically correct". 

Show your support for Chief Cochran by signing the petition at this link.

Monday, January 5, 2015

The Pope on Climate Change - please say it isn't so

The rumour is out that the Pope will issue an encyclical on climate change in the new year. 
No one says it better than Mark Steyn.

I'm not a Catholic, and so my views on the Vicar of Christ are neither here nor there. In the Anglican Communion, the Archbishop of Canterbury is generally regarded as a camp joke on a par with the leading panto roles, but I understand that not all "faith traditions" are the same in this respect. Nevertheless, I'm not a big fan of the present pontiff. Pope-wise, I like the other fellow - the Pope Emeritus or whatever you call him. Yet, putting personal preferences aside, the notion of a papal encyclical on climate change in order to "impact" a UN conference is utterly depressing in its cobwebbed banality.
 And also kind of decadent at a time when some of the oldest Christian communities on earth are being systematically extinguished. That's a real present-tense crisis, not one of those Al Gore if-we-don't-act-now-time-is-running-out-to-save-the-polar-bears crisis. It's happening now, now, now. Oughtn't that to take priority for the Bishop of Rome? Is the Pope Catholic?
 Nor is the onslaught on Christians confined to the Holy Land and the rest of the Middle East. Today's paper includes an account of the ransacking of a Italian church by a man uttering certain phrases in Arabic. He smashed the baptismal font, two altarpieces, a painting of the Assumption, statues of the Madonna with child, our Lady of the Sorrows, our Lady of the Rosary, and St Joseph. No doubt he was just another of the "mentally ill". Maybe all these mentally ill Koran-quoters would be worth an encyclical.

But then I suppose an encyclical on violence in the name of religion might just get some heads chopped off in the Vatican.

Friday, January 2, 2015

Eugenics an Integral Part of Progressivism

Most people who listen to the news have heard of Jonathan Gruber, the professor from MIT, who was involved in the writing of Obamacare and who was recently outed for calling the American people stupid. So stupid that Obamacare had to be initiated quickly so that they wouldn't know what was being put over on them.

Further investigation of Mr. Gruber reveals more unsavoury details about the man.

In a paper he wrote in 1997, he was talking about the economic impact of legalized abortion on the American economic situation. Echoes of Margaret Sanger.

By 1993, all cohorts under the age 18 were born under legalized abortion and we estimate steady state savings of $1.6 billion per year from positive selection.
As George Weigel says in First Things:

 In plain English: The abortion license saved the taxpayers $1.6 billion a year because those terminated before birth were from social classes most likely to be welfare clients.

This is the thinking that puts abortion clinics into poor neighbourhoods, attracting clients from the people who are usually African American or Hispanic. This is why 33% of abortions are done on 13% of the population (i.e. black Americans).

But this is not the only "positive selection" that is going on. Aborting babies who have any kind of problematic diagnosis is going on at a high rate as well.

The thinking is so pervasive that even a good Catholic woman remarked "well she wouldn't have had much of a life anyway" when she found out about the death of a nine-year child who suffered from multiple disabilities. Shouldn't our response be sympathy for the suffering of that child and her family rather than some kind of convoluted relief that her life ended before she, or perhaps, we could be burdened with any more of it?

When we live with evil, we become insensitive to it. And the more we keep quiet, the more inured to evil we become. We have to push back against the all-pervasive "culture of death" not only for the sake of those who are the victims of that culture, but for our very own spiritual health as well.