Article from Catholic Culture
Humans must always come before animals in the order or importance. If a wild animal is a threat, it must be destroyed. Obviously, God created animals and all of nature, but they do not occupy the same place of importance as each human being with an immortal soul. This article is about monkeys severely attacking some workers in Congo, but they are protected species. This could be another example of Western interference, forcing Congo to recognize this animal as endangered, and then disallowing legitimate protection of humans. Any person is more valuable than even the last remaining one of these monkeys.
Thursday, August 18, 2011
Friday, August 12, 2011
Milton Friedman - Population and Ecology
Even Milton Friedman, the Nobel prize winning economist with no stake in religion, does not believe in the overpopulation myth, and this was back in the 70s when people were having more babies than they are now.
Thursday, August 11, 2011
Tuesday, August 09, 2011
Monday, August 08, 2011
Sunday, August 07, 2011
Craziness has reached a new high
So apparently not satisfied at their current reputation as being crazy, Planned Parenthood has decided to take things a step further and celebrate the forced insurance policy coverage of contraception with Bollywood dancers. I should correct myself, only 2 or 3 of the 25 person dancing troupe are Indian, the rest look like white feminists.
So now everyone has to pay for everyone else's birth control, no matter what. Other stuff, like medically necessary stuff, are not covered, but birth control is. Using birth control is morally wrong. For those who do not care about sexual morality, one good reason why it's immoral is that you are curtailing or frustrating a normal, healthy part of the body and that's self-abuse. A couple engaging in contracepting sex is withholding their sexuality from their partner. That union is not really a union, but almost just mutual masturbation.
Get real people, Margaret Sanger was an avowed eugenicist who considered the black population a problem that had to be solved by birth control. But since everyone started using it, all the stuff it was supposed to make better just got much much worse.
I hope Margaret Sanger went to heaven when she died, but people should know about history and realize what Planned Parenthood stands for.
Here's the article, and make sure to check out some of the comments. Some of the ones I read were really funny.
Planned Parenthood Goes Bollywood to Celebrate New Birth Control Guidelines - National - The Atlantic Wire
So now everyone has to pay for everyone else's birth control, no matter what. Other stuff, like medically necessary stuff, are not covered, but birth control is. Using birth control is morally wrong. For those who do not care about sexual morality, one good reason why it's immoral is that you are curtailing or frustrating a normal, healthy part of the body and that's self-abuse. A couple engaging in contracepting sex is withholding their sexuality from their partner. That union is not really a union, but almost just mutual masturbation.
Get real people, Margaret Sanger was an avowed eugenicist who considered the black population a problem that had to be solved by birth control. But since everyone started using it, all the stuff it was supposed to make better just got much much worse.
I hope Margaret Sanger went to heaven when she died, but people should know about history and realize what Planned Parenthood stands for.
Here's the article, and make sure to check out some of the comments. Some of the ones I read were really funny.
Planned Parenthood Goes Bollywood to Celebrate New Birth Control Guidelines - National - The Atlantic Wire
Saturday, August 06, 2011
Religious liberty & the case against gay 'marriage'
This guy's Baptist, but I think it's appropriate for Catholic audiences. He makes some really awesome points. Those who are pushing a brand-new definition of marriage that isn't really valid anyway are not simply out for equally, they want complete domination. They want everyone to just shut up and not express their opinion and those who do are attacked in various ways.
Baptist Press - FIRST-PERSON: Religious liberty & the case against gay 'marriage' - News with a Christian Perspective
Baptist Press - FIRST-PERSON: Religious liberty & the case against gay 'marriage' - News with a Christian Perspective
Mad scientists create sperm from stem cells
Scientists that would make Frankenstein blush have created sperm cells using stem cells in mice. I can't really explain the science, but basically they want to make sperm out of other cells. Of course, this is absolutely insane and immoral, but as usual, we will defer to the scientific community to see if it's ok to do this, even though science has absolutely no moral character and is utterly incapable of telling the morality of an action.
As usual, the general populace are like a frog in gradually heating water. First it was contraception, then in-vitro fertilization, then surrogacy, and it just keeps on going on. We have sperm banks and people donate eggs. Kids don't even know their parents and they are the real losers in all of this.
It's all just so sad.
As usual, the general populace are like a frog in gradually heating water. First it was contraception, then in-vitro fertilization, then surrogacy, and it just keeps on going on. We have sperm banks and people donate eggs. Kids don't even know their parents and they are the real losers in all of this.
It's all just so sad.
Saturday, July 30, 2011
Friday, July 29, 2011
Anglicanism: a case study in moral relativism
The modern Anglican Church accepts openly gay bishops who live with their "lover", gay marriage, and the use of contraception within marriage. That's not to mention female priests and bishops plus many other issues.
But how did they get here? I was just looking back at some of the Lambeth Conferences that they've had over the years. This is roughly equivalent to an ecumenical council in the Catholic Church. After splitting from Rome, the Anglican Church managed to uphold most Christian doctrines, but suddenly in 1930 that began to change, and very quickly.
The change is truly astonishing and just goes to show the destructive power of moral relativism. It also shows the veracity of the statement "stand for something or fall for anything." Sadly, that's what happened to the Anglicans.
So what happened?
At the 1920 Lambeth conference, they completely rejected all forms of contraception even within marriage. Look at the uncompromising language used:
It's shocking and hard to believe that just 10 short years later, the Anglican communion would disavow their previous comments and break from their own tradition, so clearly laid out so recently. In 1930, they became the first mainstream Christian church that accepted birth control, although at the time it was limited to married couples for certain reasons.
How could they be so clear in 1920, then reverse their position a decade later?
From there, it was a free fall of moral laxity. In 1958, the reaffirmed the use of birth control.
In 1968 there were more big changes. They began recommending women to the priesthood and the diaconate. They also endorsed "open communion". This is interesting because it seems their doctrines were so shaky and minimized that any less than open communion would appear illogical.
In 1988, they began accepting women to the role of bishop, although this continues to be debated in the various autonomous churches.
In 1998, something odd happened. The conference declared that homosexual actions were incompatible with Scripture. This was voted on and only succeeded narrowly. However, after this statement was issued, many Anglican bishops around the world issued apologies to their gay and lesbian parishioners. This shows the inherent division the Anglican communion is currently experiencing.
Of course, it must be noted that many priests and bishops in the Anglican Communion are far more traditional than others. Often these more conservative leaders come from Africa, and there is a huge split in the church.
I think the goal of the Anglican Church has been to please people, to become popular, but this strategy has backfired. The Anglican Church is not growing. I think the reason is that people either want the truth or they don't. They don't want an accommodated truth which cannot offend anyone. If someone is against the Christian faith, they will not accept a watered-down version of it. Conversely, someone who wants real Christian meat and potatoes will not settle for anything less than the real thing. The Anglican Church is trying to appeal to a group of people that really doesn't exist.
A few years ago, Pope Benedict created a way for Anglicans to make the transition to Catholicism easier and many thousands have taken up the offer. Let's hope more Anglicans are able to find a home with Rome.
But how did they get here? I was just looking back at some of the Lambeth Conferences that they've had over the years. This is roughly equivalent to an ecumenical council in the Catholic Church. After splitting from Rome, the Anglican Church managed to uphold most Christian doctrines, but suddenly in 1930 that began to change, and very quickly.
The change is truly astonishing and just goes to show the destructive power of moral relativism. It also shows the veracity of the statement "stand for something or fall for anything." Sadly, that's what happened to the Anglicans.
So what happened?
At the 1920 Lambeth conference, they completely rejected all forms of contraception even within marriage. Look at the uncompromising language used:
We utter an emphatic warning against the use of unnatural means for the avoidance of conception, together with the grave dangers - physical, moral and religious - thereby incurred, and against the evils with which the extension of such use threatens the race. In opposition to the teaching which, under the name of science and religion, encourages married people in the deliberate cultivation of sexual union as an end in itself, we steadfastly uphold what must always be regarded as the governing considerations of Christian marriage. One is the primary purpose for which marriage exists, namely the continuation of the race through the gift and heritage of children; the other is the paramount importance in married life of deliberate and thoughtful self-control.
It's shocking and hard to believe that just 10 short years later, the Anglican communion would disavow their previous comments and break from their own tradition, so clearly laid out so recently. In 1930, they became the first mainstream Christian church that accepted birth control, although at the time it was limited to married couples for certain reasons.
How could they be so clear in 1920, then reverse their position a decade later?
From there, it was a free fall of moral laxity. In 1958, the reaffirmed the use of birth control.
In 1968 there were more big changes. They began recommending women to the priesthood and the diaconate. They also endorsed "open communion". This is interesting because it seems their doctrines were so shaky and minimized that any less than open communion would appear illogical.
In 1988, they began accepting women to the role of bishop, although this continues to be debated in the various autonomous churches.
In 1998, something odd happened. The conference declared that homosexual actions were incompatible with Scripture. This was voted on and only succeeded narrowly. However, after this statement was issued, many Anglican bishops around the world issued apologies to their gay and lesbian parishioners. This shows the inherent division the Anglican communion is currently experiencing.
Of course, it must be noted that many priests and bishops in the Anglican Communion are far more traditional than others. Often these more conservative leaders come from Africa, and there is a huge split in the church.
I think the goal of the Anglican Church has been to please people, to become popular, but this strategy has backfired. The Anglican Church is not growing. I think the reason is that people either want the truth or they don't. They don't want an accommodated truth which cannot offend anyone. If someone is against the Christian faith, they will not accept a watered-down version of it. Conversely, someone who wants real Christian meat and potatoes will not settle for anything less than the real thing. The Anglican Church is trying to appeal to a group of people that really doesn't exist.
A few years ago, Pope Benedict created a way for Anglicans to make the transition to Catholicism easier and many thousands have taken up the offer. Let's hope more Anglicans are able to find a home with Rome.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)