Thursday, November 24, 2011

Now that it's sports, the tables have turned

I was driving home not long ago when I heard Jian Gomeshi on his program Q on CBC Radio speaking with journalist Jane Leavy, from the Washington Post. She wrote an article in which she tries to sympathize with Mike McQueary, a wide receiver for the team, who witnessed Jerry Sandusky allegedly rape a 10-year-old boy. Mike told two school officials and Joe Paterno about the incident but did not contact the police or any other law enforcement agent.

Jane Leavy then wrote an article exploring all the possible psychological issues a person faces in these situations and says he is perhaps not all that blameworthy.

Her article takes the form of a letter to Mike McQueary, beginning with the following:

Dear Mike,

We don't know each other and I doubt we will ever meet, though I'm available if you want to talk.

She goes on to explain away the action or inaction of this man.

The reason I am writing this is not to say she wasn't hard enough on Mike. I'm writing to show the hypocrisy in the world of journalism. No one ever wrote a letter saying they understand the actions of the handful of bishops who did not report the activities of a small number of priests to the authorities. These bishops were lambasted for not going to the police. In fact, people have condemned the entire church, and have tried to implicate the Holy Father himself.

I have seen no attempt in all the years since the Catholic sex abuse story broke to try to explain the actions of the bishops from everyday journalists. This is an amazing double standard.

And this is not the only case of childhood sexual assault to be found in the sports sector. More and more cases emerge all the time of sexual abuse of minors by hockey coaches. So it's not an isolated incident.

But even though these abuse cases seem widespread in sports, just as much or more than in the Catholic Church, I don't hear anyone say the entire NCAA or NFL or NHL are guilty of these crimes. I don't see multi-million or billion dollar lawsuits emerging. I certainly don't hear anyone say marriage must be the cause for the actions of this minority of sports leaders.

One thing about all these stories is that it is emerging that sexual abuse does not only happen in the Catholic Church, it happens anywhere where there are children. That is becoming very clear, and in some areas it's far worse than in the Church. Nowadays the Church is the safest place for kids anywhere. For example, out of 40,000 priests in the US in 2008, there were only 6 accusations of sexual impropriety. That's accusations, not convictions.

If this lady wants to write an article which attempts to understand the actions or inactions of this sports player, that's fine, I don't have a problem with that. My main problem is that the Catholic Church is portrayed as uniquely bad, and cut absolutely no slack. Rather the entire Church is implicated and hardly a journalist anywhere tries to correct that misperception. How about less bias?

Monday, November 14, 2011

Dr. Scott Hahn at Franciscan University of Steubenville

Amazing video by Dr. Scott Hahn explaining Mass. He is such a great speaker. I urge you to listen to even the first ten minutes of this presentation. You won't regret it.

Friday, November 11, 2011

Seven Deadly Sins: Pride - History Channel - WATCH

There's a lot of iffy stuff in this documentary about Pride, but it's fun to watch and actually does contain some truth. So check it out.

USCCB marriage advisor resigns after suggesting devil plays role in homosexuality

First of all, I don't know of any evidence that homosexuality is genetic. But what if some people were predisposed to it, and they were born like it. Would that justify homosexual actions or even gay marriage? I would say no. Within Catholic teaching, something doesn't automatically become acceptable as long as someone has a "natural" desire for it. Adultery is wrong. But you could argue that a man is naturally predisposed to want to have sex with a woman who is not his wife. Should we then be accepting of this because it's "natural"?

Just imagine a man who cheats on his wife reassuring her by saying "This is just who I am. It's natural, I was born this way! God wouldn't have created me this way if he didn't want me to act on it!" I doubt his wife would be very convinced.

But the same argument could be made for all kinds of behavior. A serial killer could argue he was "born that way", that he didn't choose to be a killer, but it's just how God made him. Or a pedophile. He could also argue that's how God made him, and then rhetorically ask "if God didn't want me to act on my pedophilia, why would he create me like this?"

I'll probably get a bunch of comments blasting me for comparing homosexual actions to murder, but all I can say to this is that you are missing the point. The point I'm trying to make is that just because we find a "natural" desire to do something, that doesn't automatically legitimize it.

Article here by

Pope ranks 7th on Forbes 2011 Most Powerful List

Wednesday, November 09, 2011

Gluttony: One of the Seven Deadly Sins

Good History Channel show on this vice:

Tuesday, November 08, 2011

IVF vs. C-section

Ok, so I wrote a comment on that last video on Youtube outlining my objection to IVF. Another user responded to my comment by asking what the difference between IVF and a C-section is. I didn't fully know how to answer his question, so I decided to see if by chance Catholic Answers Live had an appropriate guest on the show to answer my query. Amazingly, Fr. Tad Pacholczyk was there and was the perfect guy to ask.

Here is the response I received from him:

Then I typed in Fr. Tad's name into Google, and the second result that appeared was Fr. Tad talking about IVF and the Catholic position on it. That video can be found here:

Friday, November 04, 2011

Alison Motluk: A Primer on Assisted Reproductive Technology

This clip talks about the terribly immoral act of IVF. Most of the time embryos are destroyed. Children have the right to be conceived in the loving embrace of their parents and not at the hands of a lab technician in a petri dish in a sterile laboratory. Not only that, some of these innocent children never discover their real parents. What a sad story. A moral country would ban such a practice.

Unfortunately, besides briefly saying the word "moral", there is no discussion of the morality of this act. Truly horrible.

A Very DISGUSTING Harold and Kumar Christmas

Thank goodness for movie reviews. The only way I would suggest going to Harold and Kumar Christmas Movie would be if you were in immediate need of an emetic. The kind of absolute filth you will find in this film is staggering. But don't worry, they make sure only to mock Christians, and mostly Catholics. That's right, they wouldn't dare criticize any other faith, only society's perennial whipping boy, the Christians.

If the foul language and disgusting jokes aren't enough to make you upset, the inappropriate sexual references to Catholics priests and nuns will surely put you over the edge. From the reviews, this movie seems to have no redemptive quality to it whatsoever, just a roller coaster ride of gag-inducing humorless schtick that's only funny through its sheer shock value.

Apparently you can say whatever you like about Catholics and get away with it in Canada. How many human rights cases will emerge because of this work of depravity? None of course. But I don't have a problem with that. I don't think there should even be a Human Rights Tribunal. The whole idea is stupid. All I'm saying is there is complete hypocrisy here. Criticize any other group like this and you would be in deep "descriptor this movie". You'd be lucky if this movie got a PG rating in Canada. Probably go in as G. Teachers will probably bring their students to see it.

For some Christian reviews of this production that somehow passes as a movie, please visit this site.