Racism is an unspeakable crime in Canada. Anyone guilty of it is publically shunned and criticized. But apparantly this is only the case for white Christians. Other people can feel free to mock and criticize the majority with impunity. This is clearly shown on Little Mosque on the Prairie.
The other day I finally decided to watch an episode. Every time I watch Jeopardy, previews for the upcoming show are shown. I heard reviews, but decided to have a look for myself. I was pretty disappointed.
The episode started when the Anglican priest ordered a Jesus statue, ostensibly for his own church. A group of Muslims, including a white woman convert, opened the crate that it came in and saw the statue. One of the men accidentally knocked over the large statue (larger than life-sized) and it smashed to pieces. They were worried about being caught, and made several jokes in bad taste. First of all, it seems rather shocking to feature an episode where a statue of Jesus would be smashed to pieces. Would there ever be an episode where a koran was accidentally shredded in an industrial shredder? Don't count on it. Jesus is obviously the central figure of Christianity and a statue is a likeness of Jesus which we use as a point of reverence. To smash it is a great insult. Why it's part of a comedy is a little odd to me.
We then go to the Anglican priest in the episode. The priest is shown as extremely untrusting and suspicious of Muslims in general. He believes they are all "up to something". This is quickly contrasted with the Muslims' acceptance and tolerance. The bigotted priest accuses Amaar, the young imam, of doing things which are wrong. The only basis for his accusation is that they are Muslim and must be up to something. Amaar, however, is the voice of morality throughout the episodes. He continually petitions others to "do the right thing". This of course is much different from the priest who only jumps to unfounded conclusions and whose morality seems somewhat skewed.
The episode plays like a sort of "after-school special". It attempts to be comedic but falls short as it quickly become a politically correct lesson in Islam. Baber is a more traditional Muslim who seems to be in the episodes simply to provide a springboard for canned responses to popular opinions about Muslims. For example, in the episode Baber demands that his daughter wear a traditional Muslim veil. She refuses. This sets up a great "the more you know" opportunity. A Muslim woman informs the girl that: wearing the veil is a choice, one that must be made by all Muslim women. The entire episode was one contrived and humourless lesson opportunity after another.
The current Anglican priest replaced another who was less morally offensive. It seems they wanted to turn up the contrast of Muslim vs. Christian. Whereas the Muslims are seen as tolerant members of society who want to integrate themselves and help out the community, the Christians are viewed as backward and bigotted. In the episode, the original Jesus statue was (accidentally) replaced by a black Jesus. The priest had a good laugh at this "ridiculous" Jesus and went on a sort of racist rant. This was only to discover that the Catholic priest for whom he was storing the statue was himself black.
I have only watched one episode, and doubt I will watch more. However, I am not spared from the constant onslaught of commercials promoting the show on CBC. It seems the next episode will feature the same Anglican priest in a state of near ecstacy at the possibility of the Muslims leaving the community. I'm sure viewers can expect some comedic genius in that episode.
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Canadian Government does something sensible - partakes in seal meat
On Wednesday in the parliamentary restaurant, MPs ate seal meat prepared in various ways. This was meant as another show of solidarity by the government with those in the seal industry, including many Newfoundlanders. The EU recently banned the sale of all seal products in Europe. This is also the case in the United States. But these bans are non-sensicle.
Please read my previous article for reasons why this ban is a bad idea: here
I am proud of the Canadian Government for making this move. Their support for the seal hunt is logical and moral, unlike the EU's position.
Please read my previous article for reasons why this ban is a bad idea: here
I am proud of the Canadian Government for making this move. Their support for the seal hunt is logical and moral, unlike the EU's position.
Tuesday, March 02, 2010
When Life is more opposed to than Death
The Duggars, a famous American family known for having 18 children and their own TV show, has just given birth to the 19th member and are not planning on stopping until God tells them to. But in this strange world in which we live, many people are not happy about this.
Birth and children are true gifts. Each one is unique and brings something wonderful to the world. But many people are calling the Duggars 19th child a bad decision. They say it is irresponsible to have that many children. In order to justify their objection, they make up things which may or may not be true, but fit with their narrative. They say this many children cannot be loved, they cannot be supported financially, the mother's health is at risk, etc. But there is no coherence, because these are all invented objections.
The baby, named Josie, was born prematurely, but is doing well. She is born into one of the most loving families out there. Also, the family is quite secure financially. The forces of darkness are very upset about this because it acts in accordance with God's command to "go forth and multiply". Having a large family is a blessing from God. These children are well raised, respectful, and loving. They add a lot to their communities and the world.
How can people object to such a beautiful situation? The culture of death detestes stories like this. They contradict the idea that a woman can only be happy if she has a career where she is making tons of money, is independent, and has a maximum of 2 children, preferably a boy and a girl. That's a maximum. Women who denounce their childbearing ability are commended as heroes. One woman I heard of recently felt she was helping the world by rendering herself sterile. Angry, vindictive people refuse to believe that anyone who chooses to be a mother and raise a family is anything but oppressed by a patriarchal society. When a woman does this and is very happy and joyful, it does not fit well into their vision for the world.
On the other hand, a woman who procures an abortion is seen as brave, standing up for the rights of women everywhere, a champion of femininity. The is seen as progressing the women's rights movement. But a woman who bares a beautiful child willingly and lovelingly is attacked and berated. Every article you read will approach this story from the angle of "isn't this too many kids?" Never will a positive point of view be presented.
Also, how can we look at these 19 beautiful children and say "She had too many children"? Which of the 19 would you like to see disappear? These are not numbers, these are living, breathing human beings who are loved by their family and by God. Who are we to say they don't belong?
Let's celebrate this beautiful family and show them our support.
Birth and children are true gifts. Each one is unique and brings something wonderful to the world. But many people are calling the Duggars 19th child a bad decision. They say it is irresponsible to have that many children. In order to justify their objection, they make up things which may or may not be true, but fit with their narrative. They say this many children cannot be loved, they cannot be supported financially, the mother's health is at risk, etc. But there is no coherence, because these are all invented objections.
The baby, named Josie, was born prematurely, but is doing well. She is born into one of the most loving families out there. Also, the family is quite secure financially. The forces of darkness are very upset about this because it acts in accordance with God's command to "go forth and multiply". Having a large family is a blessing from God. These children are well raised, respectful, and loving. They add a lot to their communities and the world.
How can people object to such a beautiful situation? The culture of death detestes stories like this. They contradict the idea that a woman can only be happy if she has a career where she is making tons of money, is independent, and has a maximum of 2 children, preferably a boy and a girl. That's a maximum. Women who denounce their childbearing ability are commended as heroes. One woman I heard of recently felt she was helping the world by rendering herself sterile. Angry, vindictive people refuse to believe that anyone who chooses to be a mother and raise a family is anything but oppressed by a patriarchal society. When a woman does this and is very happy and joyful, it does not fit well into their vision for the world.
On the other hand, a woman who procures an abortion is seen as brave, standing up for the rights of women everywhere, a champion of femininity. The is seen as progressing the women's rights movement. But a woman who bares a beautiful child willingly and lovelingly is attacked and berated. Every article you read will approach this story from the angle of "isn't this too many kids?" Never will a positive point of view be presented.
Also, how can we look at these 19 beautiful children and say "She had too many children"? Which of the 19 would you like to see disappear? These are not numbers, these are living, breathing human beings who are loved by their family and by God. Who are we to say they don't belong?
Let's celebrate this beautiful family and show them our support.
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Sexual Abuse Reporting: a double standard?
Recently an article emerged of a famous Newfoundland hockey coach who has been charged with sexual assault of a boy. Many were shocked because he such a prominent figure in the community. Many have rightfully pointed out that although our justice system ensures that someone is considered innocent until proven guilty, the publication of his name has already led to disgrace.
There has been a vocal outcry from the public denouncing this practice and saying that if someone is innocent until proven guilty, their name should be withheld unless they are found guilty of an offense.
Strangely however, no such outcry was made when Catholic clergy were being accused left, right and center. In fact, the reaction was quite the contrary. People were quick to not only condemn all accused priests, but also those who were not accused. Popular opinion suggested that every single priest is a pedophile and none are innocent.
People's reaction to a priest accused of inappropriate sexual behavior was to lock him away and throw away the key or worse, and then to begin a diatribe about the evil Catholic Church. I read dozens of articles with reader responses and not once did anyone suggest hiding identities until charges were proven.
There have been accusations and arrests for pedophilia for all kinds of people, including teachers, coaches, scouts leaders, and yes, clergy. But have you ever heard a report of a teacher accused of sexual assault in another country? How about settlements between victims and school boards worth hundreds of millions of dollars? Never. The statistics however show that teachers are 4 times more likely to sexual abuse children than clergy.
To get an idea of the double standard, go to Google News and search for things like arrest pedophile, etc. You will find stories of people from all walks of life. There may be an odd priest here or there, but there are far more from other areas.
Clearly there is a major bias. A priest who commits sexual abuse in Germany is headline news, but 17 teachers who get arrested in a single country is not mentioned.
This is in no way excusing clergy sexual abuse. It must be stopped immediately and the Church is doing many things to eradicate this. But let's show some semblance of fairness. Let's end the double standards.
There has been a vocal outcry from the public denouncing this practice and saying that if someone is innocent until proven guilty, their name should be withheld unless they are found guilty of an offense.
Strangely however, no such outcry was made when Catholic clergy were being accused left, right and center. In fact, the reaction was quite the contrary. People were quick to not only condemn all accused priests, but also those who were not accused. Popular opinion suggested that every single priest is a pedophile and none are innocent.
People's reaction to a priest accused of inappropriate sexual behavior was to lock him away and throw away the key or worse, and then to begin a diatribe about the evil Catholic Church. I read dozens of articles with reader responses and not once did anyone suggest hiding identities until charges were proven.
There have been accusations and arrests for pedophilia for all kinds of people, including teachers, coaches, scouts leaders, and yes, clergy. But have you ever heard a report of a teacher accused of sexual assault in another country? How about settlements between victims and school boards worth hundreds of millions of dollars? Never. The statistics however show that teachers are 4 times more likely to sexual abuse children than clergy.
To get an idea of the double standard, go to Google News and search for things like arrest pedophile, etc. You will find stories of people from all walks of life. There may be an odd priest here or there, but there are far more from other areas.
Clearly there is a major bias. A priest who commits sexual abuse in Germany is headline news, but 17 teachers who get arrested in a single country is not mentioned.
This is in no way excusing clergy sexual abuse. It must be stopped immediately and the Church is doing many things to eradicate this. But let's show some semblance of fairness. Let's end the double standards.
Friday, February 19, 2010
Co-worker's anti-catholicism
At my workplace, I sit across from a man who spews his anti-Catholic rhetoric on a regular basis. He generally speaks to another anti-Catholic individual, but his conversation partner could be any number of co-workers, all of whom agree with him either implicitly or explicitly. I have yet to hear someone criticizing his viewpoint. I believe this is less the fact that they agree with him and more so the fact that they want to be "politically correct". In today's age, political correctness means agreeing with anti-Christian bigots, but not tolerating any form of religious observance.
The man identifies himself as a former Catholic so most of his venom is targeted in that direction. Of course, he beats the same dead horses, such as the clergy sex abuse scandal. But he also seems to have gone very deep in atheist teachings, and mocks the Eucharist, belief in God (especially the God of the Bible), Jesus, Mary, etc.
He doesn't simply disagree with these topics, he mocks them, laughs at them, and presents them in a very vulgar and distasteful way.
As an example, he was speaking to a co-worker about someone's wedding. Apparently a friend or family member of his called him about the wedding and said it will be at a Catholic Church. On the phone, he mocked the ceremony, including the format and the use of wine and unleaven bread. Later, when speaking to a co-worker and mocking Catholic marriage preparation. He claims the marriage prep course said a man cannot touch a woman in a sexual way and the only "acceptable" action is direct intercourse for the purpose of procreation.
After laughing about this thoroughly, he added: "you can tell this stuff was made up by guys who don't have sex" ... "well, except for with altar boys". To which the guy he was speaking with responded: "Yeh, they had that system down to a T!"
This is considered acceptable. In fact, someone would appear "odd" if they openly disagreed with the comments made.
The only conversation topic which this man prefers is that of fast food. He has at least one very in depth conversation per day on the topic of fast food. The topics get rather specific. Such as his favorite type of cheese on a pizza, how long he likes to microwave leftover fast food, etc.
I'm not attacking him personally. I'm just saying I find his two main conversation topics kind of strange.
I would implore anyone of faith to speak to these individuals when they have a chance. Tell them you disagree with what they are saying. Refrain from laughing. Speak the truth. You will probably be criticized and harrassed, but this is a small price to pay.
The man identifies himself as a former Catholic so most of his venom is targeted in that direction. Of course, he beats the same dead horses, such as the clergy sex abuse scandal. But he also seems to have gone very deep in atheist teachings, and mocks the Eucharist, belief in God (especially the God of the Bible), Jesus, Mary, etc.
He doesn't simply disagree with these topics, he mocks them, laughs at them, and presents them in a very vulgar and distasteful way.
As an example, he was speaking to a co-worker about someone's wedding. Apparently a friend or family member of his called him about the wedding and said it will be at a Catholic Church. On the phone, he mocked the ceremony, including the format and the use of wine and unleaven bread. Later, when speaking to a co-worker and mocking Catholic marriage preparation. He claims the marriage prep course said a man cannot touch a woman in a sexual way and the only "acceptable" action is direct intercourse for the purpose of procreation.
After laughing about this thoroughly, he added: "you can tell this stuff was made up by guys who don't have sex" ... "well, except for with altar boys". To which the guy he was speaking with responded: "Yeh, they had that system down to a T!"
This is considered acceptable. In fact, someone would appear "odd" if they openly disagreed with the comments made.
The only conversation topic which this man prefers is that of fast food. He has at least one very in depth conversation per day on the topic of fast food. The topics get rather specific. Such as his favorite type of cheese on a pizza, how long he likes to microwave leftover fast food, etc.
I'm not attacking him personally. I'm just saying I find his two main conversation topics kind of strange.
I would implore anyone of faith to speak to these individuals when they have a chance. Tell them you disagree with what they are saying. Refrain from laughing. Speak the truth. You will probably be criticized and harrassed, but this is a small price to pay.
Monday, February 08, 2010
Is the Catholic Church a protector of Muslim freedom of worship?
In France, the Catholic Church is speaking out against a ban on full veils for Muslim women. I'm not an expert in Islam, but I believe the correct term for this face covering is the Niqab. Another common piece of clothing is called burqa, which I believe refers to an entire set of clothing worn by Muslim women.
In any event, the Catholic Church in France is against plans to ban these face covering veils. The reason is they feel in order for full rights to be granted to Christians to practice their beliefs in Muslim countries, the opposite must be granted as well.
Right now in Saudi Arabia, North Korea, and several other countries, practice of Christianity and specifically Catholicism is banned completely and anyone caught worshipping is strictly dealt with. In other countries, such as China and some Middle Eastern countries, the practice of Catholicism is seriously curtailed. The Catholic Church is striving for religious freedom in all parts of the world. They do not want any hindrance on their faithful practice. Therefore, they believe religion must be free and thus oppose efforts to curtail this freedom.
Another example of the church's fight for freedom of worship is its stance against banning new minarets in Switzerland. The Swiss people, in a referendum, banned any new development of Islamic minarets in the country. The Church spoke out against this as well.
This is an appropriate and well thought-out move by the church. The Church realizes that with true freedom, Christianity will grow. Also, many Christians now live in oppresive states where they are not free to worship. But it would be ironic to only advocate freedom of religion for Catholics. Therefore, the Church stands up for religious freedom of all people.
The Church is not afraid of the Truth, because the Church proclaims the Truth which is Jesus Christ. Therefore, if there is worldwide freedom of religion, there is bound to be an increase of Catholic faithful, as people seek the truth.
For more on the situation in France, please view: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/02/world/europe/02briefs-France.html
In any event, the Catholic Church in France is against plans to ban these face covering veils. The reason is they feel in order for full rights to be granted to Christians to practice their beliefs in Muslim countries, the opposite must be granted as well.
Right now in Saudi Arabia, North Korea, and several other countries, practice of Christianity and specifically Catholicism is banned completely and anyone caught worshipping is strictly dealt with. In other countries, such as China and some Middle Eastern countries, the practice of Catholicism is seriously curtailed. The Catholic Church is striving for religious freedom in all parts of the world. They do not want any hindrance on their faithful practice. Therefore, they believe religion must be free and thus oppose efforts to curtail this freedom.
Another example of the church's fight for freedom of worship is its stance against banning new minarets in Switzerland. The Swiss people, in a referendum, banned any new development of Islamic minarets in the country. The Church spoke out against this as well.
This is an appropriate and well thought-out move by the church. The Church realizes that with true freedom, Christianity will grow. Also, many Christians now live in oppresive states where they are not free to worship. But it would be ironic to only advocate freedom of religion for Catholics. Therefore, the Church stands up for religious freedom of all people.
The Church is not afraid of the Truth, because the Church proclaims the Truth which is Jesus Christ. Therefore, if there is worldwide freedom of religion, there is bound to be an increase of Catholic faithful, as people seek the truth.
For more on the situation in France, please view: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/02/world/europe/02briefs-France.html
Wednesday, February 03, 2010
I now have EWTN!
Yesterday I had digital cable installed. About an hour later, I called in to have EWTN activated. I'm really glad I did. It costs $2.79 per month, but is worth much more than that. When it came on, they were at the Vatican, where Pope Benedict was celebrating the Feast of the Presentation of Our Lord in the Temple.
Tuesday, February 02, 2010
Non-Catholics
I was just watching a debate between a Christian and an atheist. They both made their respective points. So I decided to make a blog posting about non-Catholics. As everyone knows, I am Catholic. So what is my relationship with others, and my feelings about them? I want to spend some time speaking of the good aspects of non-Catholics.
Atheists:
They seek the truth and love science. Atheists are seekers like Christians. Many are good people and many make contributions in their own ways. Some atheists have made contributions to science and to other fields. They have logical minds. Sometimes it may seem I am angry with atheists, and often I will receive angry messages from people who seem to be atheist. In fact, according to the survey on my blog, I get more atheist viewers than Catholic. I am not angry with atheists. I only want for them what I believe is best, what I believe will bring most joy.
Muslims:
Believers in the one God. Muslims have strict morals and are known for praying five times a day and doing what they believe God asks of them. They also share a love of Jesus and Mary.
Jews:
The first to believe in the One True God. They were chosen by God to carry his message. Today, we receive much from them including their Scriptures. Jesus and the some Apostles were Jewish.
Hindu:
Hindus are also lovers of truth and wisdom. They place great value on family and community. Gandhi is a well known Hindu who advocated peace.
Buddhists:
They seek peace and meditation. I will admit I do not have much contact with Buddhists, but they adhere to principles of non-violence.
Protestants:
Great love for God and his Holy Scriptures. We see them as our brothers and sisters, though separate and pray for future unity.
Jesus called everyone into his fold, and so who am I to reject others? Jesus prayed for unity, and that's my prayer also. Everyone is a child of God, whether or not they are believers. We do not need to convert someone, we just need to make them aware of their calling. The calling comes from God and once they hear it, the process will take care of itself.
Atheists:
They seek the truth and love science. Atheists are seekers like Christians. Many are good people and many make contributions in their own ways. Some atheists have made contributions to science and to other fields. They have logical minds. Sometimes it may seem I am angry with atheists, and often I will receive angry messages from people who seem to be atheist. In fact, according to the survey on my blog, I get more atheist viewers than Catholic. I am not angry with atheists. I only want for them what I believe is best, what I believe will bring most joy.
Muslims:
Believers in the one God. Muslims have strict morals and are known for praying five times a day and doing what they believe God asks of them. They also share a love of Jesus and Mary.
Jews:
The first to believe in the One True God. They were chosen by God to carry his message. Today, we receive much from them including their Scriptures. Jesus and the some Apostles were Jewish.
Hindu:
Hindus are also lovers of truth and wisdom. They place great value on family and community. Gandhi is a well known Hindu who advocated peace.
Buddhists:
They seek peace and meditation. I will admit I do not have much contact with Buddhists, but they adhere to principles of non-violence.
Protestants:
Great love for God and his Holy Scriptures. We see them as our brothers and sisters, though separate and pray for future unity.
Jesus called everyone into his fold, and so who am I to reject others? Jesus prayed for unity, and that's my prayer also. Everyone is a child of God, whether or not they are believers. We do not need to convert someone, we just need to make them aware of their calling. The calling comes from God and once they hear it, the process will take care of itself.
Thursday, January 28, 2010
St. Thomas Aquinas
It's just after midnight where I am, and therefore officially January 28th, and the Feast Day of St. Thomas Aquinas. Aquinas is one of my favorite saints. He wrote a book on theology which is 3 times the size of the Bible called the Summa Theologica. He had such an amazing mind and loved God with all his heart. I may write more about him soon.
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Fearless Pope during the Black Plague
Today is the 667th anniversary of the publication of Pope Clement VI's papal bull Unigenitus. In it, he explains indulgences and justifies their use. As I was reading Clement's biography, some things stood out as exemplary. He was the pope during the black plague in Europe, which killed between 1/3 and 2/3 of the population of Europe. The pope consulted with many people, including astronomers and doctors to see if they could find a cure. Many people blamed the Jews for the outbreak, and it was a very popular public opinion, but Clement condemned this belief and said those who blamed the Jews were being influenced by Satan.
Clement also tended to those with the illness, without fear that he would contract it himself. This is similar to the early Christians. In early times, some plagues swept through the Roman Empire. Pagan Romans tried to save their own lives and did not provide much care to family and friends. The Christians however, not fearing death, risked their lives to help their brethren. Ironically this helped the Christians live. The reason is that these diseases were not necessarily deadly if proper care was given. However, left alone a person had a much greater chance of dying. So, the Christians, by helping each other, survived. Also, the caretakers would develop an immunity to the diseases. After this had occurred several times, the proportion of Christians in the Roman Empire increased substantially.
Back to Clement. He also did not get the disease, even though he cared for those who were ill. There are many good things about Clement's life which are worth emulating.
Clement also tended to those with the illness, without fear that he would contract it himself. This is similar to the early Christians. In early times, some plagues swept through the Roman Empire. Pagan Romans tried to save their own lives and did not provide much care to family and friends. The Christians however, not fearing death, risked their lives to help their brethren. Ironically this helped the Christians live. The reason is that these diseases were not necessarily deadly if proper care was given. However, left alone a person had a much greater chance of dying. So, the Christians, by helping each other, survived. Also, the caretakers would develop an immunity to the diseases. After this had occurred several times, the proportion of Christians in the Roman Empire increased substantially.
Back to Clement. He also did not get the disease, even though he cared for those who were ill. There are many good things about Clement's life which are worth emulating.
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Pope embraces technology
In a speech, Pope Benedict encouraged priests to use the internet to spread the Gospel. This harkens back to the time of the apostles when they traveled to far off lands to spread the good news. Although he was speaking to priests, the message is for all Catholics. I'm glad that my blog is able to reach a lot of people.
Check out more on this story at: http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/pope-wants-priests-to-become-web-savvy/?news=123
Check out more on this story at: http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/pope-wants-priests-to-become-web-savvy/?news=123
Friday, January 22, 2010
Women with Hairy Legs at MUN: Strange fundraiser
Memorial University is sponsoring a strange event where they are asking women (and men?) to not shave their legs for nearly a month. They are raising money for Planned Parenthood. Obviously there are several problems with this.
First and foremost this event, dubbed "Feb-U-Hairy", is sponsoring Planned Parenthood. Officially the money is going towards paying for pap smears to help prevent cervical cancer. There is nothing wrong with preventing cervical cancer, and it is in fact commendable. But giving money to Planned Parenthood is not. Planned Parenthood was founded by Margaret Sanger to assist with her eugenics plan. She wanted to eliminate "minorities" as much as possible, especially black people. Nowadays, Planned Parenthood is the world's largest provider of abortion, and they are trying to extend this to every corner of the Earth. True to their roots, black people are the main target of their activities, especially in the United States.
Secondly, this Febuhairy (Februhairy) event is encouraging women to not shave their legs. What is the purpose of this? They say they are encouraging men and women not to, but 99% of men don't shave their legs anyway, unless they are professional wrestlers or swimmers or something. What is the point of encouraging women to act like men? Maybe that's something Planned Parenthood encourages because it fits with their ideology. They want women and men to be the same, not equal. Then they can more easily promote their ideology that an unborn child is a parasite that inhibits a woman's progress, because women compare themselves to men who do not get pregnant.
People should give their money to more worthy causes.
First and foremost this event, dubbed "Feb-U-Hairy", is sponsoring Planned Parenthood. Officially the money is going towards paying for pap smears to help prevent cervical cancer. There is nothing wrong with preventing cervical cancer, and it is in fact commendable. But giving money to Planned Parenthood is not. Planned Parenthood was founded by Margaret Sanger to assist with her eugenics plan. She wanted to eliminate "minorities" as much as possible, especially black people. Nowadays, Planned Parenthood is the world's largest provider of abortion, and they are trying to extend this to every corner of the Earth. True to their roots, black people are the main target of their activities, especially in the United States.
Secondly, this Febuhairy (Februhairy) event is encouraging women to not shave their legs. What is the purpose of this? They say they are encouraging men and women not to, but 99% of men don't shave their legs anyway, unless they are professional wrestlers or swimmers or something. What is the point of encouraging women to act like men? Maybe that's something Planned Parenthood encourages because it fits with their ideology. They want women and men to be the same, not equal. Then they can more easily promote their ideology that an unborn child is a parasite that inhibits a woman's progress, because women compare themselves to men who do not get pregnant.
People should give their money to more worthy causes.
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Scott Brown wins!
I was glad to hear Scott Brown got elected today in Massachusetts. I haven't been reading a huge lot about this issue, but I understand Massachusetts has always been a Democrat stronghold, but now it has fallen. This is good because Obama can't get away with a fillibuster-proof government. I hope the US government works for the most destitute who need medical services, just as Church groups have for centuries. They must do so in the spirit of do no harm and look out for the best interest of all patients.
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
An Accidental Lenten Pun
I just received an email with I believe an unintentional pun. It said "Lent is Fast Approaching". It has a double meaning. First of all, Lent is nearby. But also, there is an approaching fast, where we refrain from food during Lent, so it's a fast approaching. I'm not sure if anyone else will appreciate this punny situation.
Will Massachusetts end Obamacare?
Tonight Massachusetts will vote for their senator: either Democrat Martha Coakley or Republican Scott Brown. This election is being watched across America, and perhaps much of the world, because if Brown is elected, then Obamacare will not be able to pass so easily. Right now, the Democrats have 59 senators, but will need 60 in order to be fillibuster-proof and allow the bill to pass.
Many people of faith would like to see Mr. Brown elected. First of all, Obama's health care plan could involve millions of dollars of donations to Planned Parenthood, which has doctors that performs abortions. Right now, abortions are not paid for by tax-payers, but if Obamacare is passed, it may start being funded, which is a bad thing.
Also, Mrs. Coakley made some disparaging comments to people of faith, suggesting they should perhaps not work in emergency rooms in hospitals because they may be against abortion and other things. This flies in the face of legislation which guarantees the right of people of faith to work in any environment and not be forced to violate their faith and morals. Anything less is tyranny. Also under this law, medical practitioners have the right to not give contraception and other things.
Let's hope that Scott Brown is elected and that he helps reduce abortion.
Many people of faith would like to see Mr. Brown elected. First of all, Obama's health care plan could involve millions of dollars of donations to Planned Parenthood, which has doctors that performs abortions. Right now, abortions are not paid for by tax-payers, but if Obamacare is passed, it may start being funded, which is a bad thing.
Also, Mrs. Coakley made some disparaging comments to people of faith, suggesting they should perhaps not work in emergency rooms in hospitals because they may be against abortion and other things. This flies in the face of legislation which guarantees the right of people of faith to work in any environment and not be forced to violate their faith and morals. Anything less is tyranny. Also under this law, medical practitioners have the right to not give contraception and other things.
Let's hope that Scott Brown is elected and that he helps reduce abortion.
Monday, January 18, 2010
Pope John Paul II's would-be assassin released from prison
Mehmet Ali Agra, who attempted to kill Pope John Paul II in 1981 by shooting him was released from prison in Turkey. Agra spent almost 20 years in prison in Italy and was then sent to Turkey where he served another 10 years for a murder he committed in 1979. Pope John Paul visited Agra in prison in Italy, in a very touching moment.
Now that Agra is released, rumours about his connection to communists are re-emerging. Did the KGB hire him, directly or indirectly, to assassinate John Paul, the great voice against communism? The Pope at the time believed there was more to the plot than Agra acting alone and believed it was the work of the Soviet Bloc. JPII was instrumental in defeating communism and so such a plot would make sense. By the way, the pope credited the Lady of Fatima with saving his life.
Agra was a trained gunman and member of the Grey Wolves. The injuries sustained by the pope were very substantial. He lost nearly three quarters of his blood as he was shot several times. He lost consciousness on the way to the hospital, but just before the operation, he regained consciousness and told the doctors not to remove his Brown Scapular of our Lady of Fatima.
A little over two years later, Pope John Paul II went to the prison to visit his would-be assassin, and spoke to him for 20 minutes. He completely forgave him. We will never know what was said during the meeting.
A commission was set up in 2006 by Silvio Berlusconi in Italy and it concluded that the Soviet Union was indeed behind the assassination attempt on John Paul II.
Pope Benedict was also attacked. A mentally disturbed 25-year old woman jumped at him during Midnight Mass at the Vatican. He was uninjured. Last week, he met with her privately and expressed his forgiveness.
Now that Agra is released, rumours about his connection to communists are re-emerging. Did the KGB hire him, directly or indirectly, to assassinate John Paul, the great voice against communism? The Pope at the time believed there was more to the plot than Agra acting alone and believed it was the work of the Soviet Bloc. JPII was instrumental in defeating communism and so such a plot would make sense. By the way, the pope credited the Lady of Fatima with saving his life.
Agra was a trained gunman and member of the Grey Wolves. The injuries sustained by the pope were very substantial. He lost nearly three quarters of his blood as he was shot several times. He lost consciousness on the way to the hospital, but just before the operation, he regained consciousness and told the doctors not to remove his Brown Scapular of our Lady of Fatima.
A little over two years later, Pope John Paul II went to the prison to visit his would-be assassin, and spoke to him for 20 minutes. He completely forgave him. We will never know what was said during the meeting.
A commission was set up in 2006 by Silvio Berlusconi in Italy and it concluded that the Soviet Union was indeed behind the assassination attempt on John Paul II.
Pope Benedict was also attacked. A mentally disturbed 25-year old woman jumped at him during Midnight Mass at the Vatican. He was uninjured. Last week, he met with her privately and expressed his forgiveness.
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Chinese World Map from 1600s show Catholic involvement in Science
Yesterday an exhibit started at the Library of Congress which will showcase a rare World Map, the first in Chinese to show the Americas, which was created by Jesuit Priest Matteo Ricci. Ricci was a missionary in China, but was also heavily involved in science.
Ricci was one of the first Westerners to to master Chinese script and Classical Chinese. Ricci was invited to live in Zhaoqing when the governor there heard of his skills as a mathematician and cartographer. It was here that Ricci prepared several maps in Chinese that contained the Americas. Six survive to this day.
Ricci and his companion not only developed several Chinese maps, but also created the first European-Chinese dictionary, translating Portuguese into Chinese. Ricci's amazing breakthrough into China continued when he was the first Westerner ever to enter into the Forbidden City in Beijing.
Ricci converted many people when they heard about Our Lord. He combined his love of God with a love of science. His beatification is under review.
For more on this story, please visit: http://www.loc.gov/today/pr/2010/10-002.html
Here's a great video about Ricci:
Ricci was one of the first Westerners to to master Chinese script and Classical Chinese. Ricci was invited to live in Zhaoqing when the governor there heard of his skills as a mathematician and cartographer. It was here that Ricci prepared several maps in Chinese that contained the Americas. Six survive to this day.
Ricci and his companion not only developed several Chinese maps, but also created the first European-Chinese dictionary, translating Portuguese into Chinese. Ricci's amazing breakthrough into China continued when he was the first Westerner ever to enter into the Forbidden City in Beijing.
Ricci converted many people when they heard about Our Lord. He combined his love of God with a love of science. His beatification is under review.
For more on this story, please visit: http://www.loc.gov/today/pr/2010/10-002.html
Here's a great video about Ricci:
Archbishop of Port au Prince, Haiti killed in Earthquake
As churches and cathedrals are reduced to rubble in Haiti, the archbishop has been tragically killed. Joseph Serge Miot, the spiritual leader of over 10.5 million Catholics, died today and his body was found in the ruins. He was 63 years old. Let's pray for all the thousands of victims of this great tragedy!
Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/breaking-news/story/1422923.html
Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/breaking-news/story/1422923.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)