Orthodoxy - right teachings for a right moral compass

Don't forget next Tuesday's primary...

Mon, 14 Jan 2008 14:31:26 GMT

With this election cycle's early primary/caucus season, something is getting lost in the jumble.
We have already had the Iowa caucus (1/3/08), the Wyoming Republican caucus (1/5/08), and, last Tuesday, the New Hampshire primary (1/8/08).

Coming up this Tuesday, Jan 15th, there is the Michigan primary.
Saturday, Jan 19th is the South Carolina primary & the Nevada caucus.
Tuesday, Jan 29th is the Florida (primary), and Feb 5 is "Super Tuesday", when 22 states will hold their primaries or caucuses.

Looking at the above dates, we see a lot of Tuesday voting going on. However, there is a big gap between the S.C./Nevada vote and the Florida vote. 10 days is the biggest gap in the entire nomination season. There is a reason for this gap - next Tuesday is the "Prayer & Fasting Primary".

Jan. 22 is a National Day of prayer and fasting, as called for by the American bishops, because it is the date of the Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion in this country. This year is the 35th anniversary of the event that sparked the deaths of nearly 49 million babies. To put that number into perspective, the total number of people eligible to vote in the primaries and caucuses before Super Tuesday (according to 2004 numbers) was just shy of 27 million - in other words, 81% more people have been aborted than will possibly choose the candidates for President. Another way of looking at it: In 2004, John Kerry got 59,028,548 votes (a fifth more votes than the number of aborted babies) and George W. Bush got 62,041,268 votes (about a quarter more votes than the number of aborted babies). We often hear complaints about the two-party system and how we need a 3rd party. 49 million people is enough to make up a very viable 3rd party in this country.

Next Tuesday, when we fast as an act of "penance for violations to the dignity of the human person committed through acts of abortion" and we pray "for the full restoration of the legal guarantee of the right to life" (General Instruction of the Roman Missal, no. 373), let us make those 47 million voices be heard.

Let us pray that God has mercy on our country for killing about 3 million more people than the equivalent number of people who voted in 2004 in Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York, Texas, Florida, and California (the 6 most populous states) combined!
Let's offer up our fast so that abortion, embryonic stem cell research, cloning, euthanasia, and all other sins against life will be driven out of our country.
Let's not allow issues of life to get lost in the jumble of other campaign promises - the abortion issue is already the forgotten step-child of American politics, trotted out once every 4 years to make a candidate look promising, and then locked away in the attic for another 4 years.
Let's make next Tuesday a "Primary of Prayer and Fasting", because "this kind [of demon] is not cast out but by prayer and fasting." (Matt 17:21)

P.S. If we look at the least populous states, the number of aborted babies is a little more than the total 2004 voters of the following 37 states (nearly 3/4ths of the states) and the District of Columbia :

(State and total votes cast in 2004 election)
Alabama    1,883,415
Alaska    312,598
Arizona    2,012,585
Arkansas    1,054,945
Colorado    2,129,630
Connecticut    1,578,769
Delaware    375,190
District of Columbia    227,586
Hawaii    429,013
Idaho    598,376
Indiana    2,468,002
Iowa    1,506,908
Kansas    1,187,756
Kentucky    1,795,860
Louisiana    1,943,106
Maine    740,752
Maryland    2,386,678
Massachusetts    2,912,388
Minnesota    2,828,387
Mississippi    1,152,365
Missouri    2,731,364
Montana    450,434
Nebraska    778,186
Nevada    829,587
New Hampshire    677,662
New Mexico    756,304
North Dakota    312,833
Oklahoma    1,463,758
Oregon    1,836,782
Rhode Island    437,134
South Carolina    1,617,730
South Dakota    388,215
Tennessee    2,437,319
Utah    927,844
Vermont    312,309
Washington    2,859,084
West Virginia    755,887
Wyoming    243,428

Tags: abortion, 2008 Election, pro-life, primaries, Roe v. Wade, voter turnout, prayer, fasting

Chinese forced abortions and Amnesty

Thu, 30 Aug 2007 16:14:18 GMT

The Houston Chronicle has an article about Chinese victims of forced abortions fighting back.

QIAN'AN, China — Yang Zhongchen, a small-town businessman, wined and dined three government officials for permission to become a father.
But the Peking duck and liquor weren't enough. One night, a couple of weeks before her date for giving birth, Yang's wife was dragged from her bed in a north China town and taken to a clinic, where, she says, her baby was killed by injection while still inside her.
"Several people held me down, they ripped my clothes aside and the doctor pushed a large syringe into my stomach," says Jin Yani, a shy, petite woman with a long ponytail. "It was very painful. ... It was all very rough."
Some 30 years after China decreed a general limit of one child per family, resentment still brews over the state's regular and sometimes brutal intrusion into intimate family matters. Not only are many second pregnancies aborted, but even to have one's first child requires a license.
Seven years after the dead baby was pulled from her body with forceps, Jin remains traumatized and, the couple and a doctor say, unable to bear children. Yang and Jin have made the rounds of government offices pleading for restitution — to no avail.
This year, they took the unusual step of suing the family planning agency. The judges ruled against them, saying Yang and Jin conceived out of wedlock. Local family planning officials said Jin consented to the abortion. The couple's appeal to a higher court is pending.
The one-child policy applies to most families in this nation of 1.3 billion people, and communist officials, often under pressure to meet birth quotas set by the government, can be coldly intolerant of violators.

My question is this: Where is Amnesty International on this? What are they doing to help the Chinese people from having their rights (and the rights of their unborn children) violated? (I mean aside from pushing for abortion to be a "universal right".)

Quick quiz: who said, "Violence cannot be answered by further violence, murder by murder"? If you answered "Amnesty International", you're wrong. These are actually the words of Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, in response to Amnesty International saying that abortions are needed in Darfur because of the use of rape as a form of torture. It's the old "2 wrongs don't make a right", and abortion is not a right!

[Note: although there has been some press about pro-life rockers and the "Instant Karma" "Relief for Darfur" CD, there is not yet any evidence, one way or the other, that specific artists (like Christina Aguilera or Avril Livigne) are in fact pro-life, offended, or possibly pulling out of the project.]

Tags: abortion, Amnesty International, pro-life, China, Vatican, Christina Aguilera, Avril Livigne

Twin dies in failed eugenics attempt

Mon, 27 Aug 2007 20:42:58 GMT

Again, I will refer you to G.K. Chesterton's eerily prescient Eugenics and Other Evils. If you honestly think abortion is a victimless process, read on.

Botched abortion shocks Italy
August 27, 2007

Rome - A botched abortion in which a healthy twin foetus was terminated instead of its sibling with Down syndrome has reignited the abortion debate in Italy and raised allegations of eugenics.

"The time has come to re-examine the abortion law" that dates back to 1978, wrote leftist Senator Paola Binetti, who is close to the Vatican, in the Corriere della Sera newspaper.

"What happened in this hospital was not a medical abortion but an abortion done for the purposes of eugenics," she said, referring to the belief that the human species can be improved through selective reproduction.

The abortion was performed on a 38-year-old woman in Milan in June, but news of its outcome has only recently become public. Doctors blamed the mistake on movement of the foetuses between the examination and the abortion. [ed.: How about blaming the mistake on trying to kill a baby in the first place?]

"They wanted to kill the sick foetus and save the healthy one and what didn't work properly in this business was the selection," Binetti wrote.

Tags: abortion, eugenics, pro-life, Italy

another Terri Schiavo averted

Thu, 28 Jun 2007 15:46:38 GMT

Tell me if you've heard this one before:

A married couple has some difficulties in their marriage. One of them ends up in the hospital, diagnosed as "brain dead" (a very subjective term in the "science" of medicine). After being declared brain dead, but kept alive with a feeding tube and air tube, their spouse signs an order to have the tubes removed. The family of the "brain dead" person pleads with the spouse to no avail. They then go to the courts to get the feeding tube replaced.

Am I talking about Terri Schiavo? No, because this person is still alive, because the courts allowed the family to feed him again. He is now awake and communicating.

Injured man's awakening called 'miracle'
PHOENIX — Eighteen days after his wife instructed doctors to disconnect food and water tubes, a Chandler, Ariz. man is sitting up in his hospice bed, giving the thumbs-up sign and communicating with visitors.

Jesse Ramirez Jr.'s awakening, which friends called "a miracle," occurred after his sister, parents and other relatives went to court and obtained an emergency order for feeding and hydration tubes to be reinserted, reversing a directive given by his wife, Rebecca Ramirez.

Judge Paul Katz announced the news Tuesday during a Maricopa County Superior Court hearing. Relatives had been in a three-week battle over the 36-year-old postal worker's fate, and who should control it. Ramirez suffered brain injuries in a May 30 automobile accident. He regained consciousness on Sunday.

"He is awake," confirmed Judith Morse, an attorney appointed by Katz to investigate legal, ethical and medical issues. "He is able to respond to verbal commands. He is aware of who he is and who his family members are." No further information about Ramirez's condition was available.

Morse also announced that Rebecca Ramirez and her in-laws had reached a settlement in the dispute over Ramirez's care. An independent guardian will be appointed to make medical decisions.

Let's hope that we, as a society and a culture, learn from the Terri Schaivo mistake and err on the side of life.

Tags: euthanasia Terri Schiavo Jesse Ramirez Phoenix pro-life coma brain dead

great way to limit abortions

Mon, 18 Jun 2007 17:55:09 GMT

This is a great (and creative) way to limit the number of abortions taking place in our country - regulate them into non-existence!

Abortion Bill Could Force Changes at Planned Parenthood
Jefferson City, Mo. - Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri is studying how it could comply with new abortion requirements.

At issue is a measure that Governor Blunt is expected to sign into law.

It would require any facility that performs more than five first-trimester abortions a month, or any second- or third-trimester abortions, to meet licensure requirements for an "ambulatory surgical center."

That means doors and hallways would have to be wider.

Ambulatory surgical centers also must meet requirements for emergency equipment, infection control, medical staffing and numerous other things.

A Planned Parenthood official says it will cost substantially more than one million dollars at each of its abortion clinics to comply.

Tags: abortion Planned Parenthood pro-choice pro-life Missouri

Finally, a true authority speaks...

Wed, 06 Jun 2007 13:13:03 GMT

In the abortion "debate", so much of the argument boils down to emotions, which then degrades to ad hominem attacks, while straying from any facts and figures. It is because of this type of downward spiral that it is always refreshing to have someone with intelligence, a calm demeanor, and all the facts available who is able to guide us to a logical conclusion.

May I present to you: Gisele Bundchen, Brazilian supermodel, ex-girlfriend of noted environmental expert, Leondardo diCaprio, and now moral theologian and Bishop of Brazil.

According to this Reuters article, Gisele believes that, "Church opposition to condom use was ridiculous and women should have the right to choose on abortion." Her basis for this radical new position on the abortion issue? The facts - specifically:

when the Church made its laws centuries ago, women were expected to be virgins.
"Today no one is a virgin when they get married ... show me someone who's a virgin!"

This reminds me of a conversation that I had with my in-laws a few years after my wife and I got married. They knew that we were waiting until marriage, before we had sex, but they thought we were in a very small minority. My father-in-law said, "Boy, I bet there's not many people like you two." We replied, "As a matter of fact, we've been to 4 weddings this year, and 3 of them were of virgins marrying virgins, while the 4th one was a virgin marrying a girl who reformed her life and had remained celibate for over 5 years prior to marriage."

There is a common misconception that everybody out there is having sex before marriage. This used to be known as peer pressure, but now, it is no longer just your peers applying the pressure - it appears to be the entire society. In reality, over half of all teenagers are choosing abstinence and virginity, and that number is on the rise (53% in 2003, compared to 46% in 1990). Furthermore, those virginity pledges are starting to have positive returns.

Gisele, maybe the reason you don't know any virgins is because of the sexually over-charged industry you are in. Part of the reason so many celebrity marriages fail is because of the lack of true intimacy built up over time during a celibate dating relationship. Maybe models, actors, and other performers should just stick to what they do best (i.e., "look pretty and sound good"), and leave the morality to the experts (i.e., the Church).

Tags: abortion virgin Gisele Bundchen pro-choice pro-life abstinence supermodel

More unvitations from Archbishop Burke

Thu, 03 May 2007 15:07:34 GMT

Looks like Archbishop Burke is laying down the law regarding anti-Catholic views in his archdiocese. Now pro-choice, pro-ESCR Senator Claire McCaskill has been un-invited to speak at her daughter's high school graduation. Apparently, she was slated to speak at the high school graduation, but since the school gets the right to call itself "Catholic" from the archdiocese, the diocesan policies regarding public speakers must be followed, and that policy forbids granting a public forum at a Catholic institution to speakers who diverge from church teaching (in this case, being a pro-choice lawmaker and advocating embryonic stem cell research).

These politicians and celebrities need to realize that, even if they don't agree with the Church about the eternal consequences of their advocacy, there are still earthly consequences as well. Sen. McCaskill (D-MO) sold her right to speak at her daughter's graduation for votes when she had Michael J. Fox make that commercial advocating embryonic stem cell research.

Tags: abortion bishop McCaskill pro-choice pro-life stem cell St. Louis

All she wants to do...

Thu, 26 Apr 2007 15:30:57 GMT

... is be sexually irresponsible, but environmentally conscious.
... is promote abortion.
... is trade babies for Michael J. Fox.
... is use one square. (Well, maybe not, but that's what she wants all of us to do.)

Sheryl Crow is best known for being an adequate, folksy singer (think of a less talented, female version of John Cougar Mellancamp), but she is also a very vocal advocate for abortion and embryonic stem cell research, as well as being an advocate for protecting the environment. She has recently proposed that, in order to fight global warming, we should all use just 1 square of toilet paper per bathroom visit. Never mind the fact that her concert contract has riders in it that are far more ecologically wasteful than mere t.p.

What does this have to do with a religion-based blog? Not much, but it does show a pattern of misguided thought when coupled with another recent news story concerning Ms. Crow. You see, Archbishop Raymond Burke recently resigned from the board of a Catholic charitable organization over news that Sheryl Crow was going to be the headline act at a fund raising event. Specifically, the Archbishop rebuked the organization for sending mixed messages, which is not only within his rights as an American, but is his ecclesial responsibility as a member of the Church Magisterium. The good Archbishop said, "It's very painful for me, but I have to answer to God for the responsibility I have as archbishop." Kudos to the Archbishop of St. Louis for doing what so many other U.S. bishops (and U.S. Catholics, in general) are afraid to do: stand up for The Faith.

Back to Sheryl Crow, the link between these 2 news stories is hypocrisy. It is bad enough that she as a recording artist (note: not the same thing as a scientist, moral theologian, or anything else that requires study and thought) has decided to push her causes of abortion and global warming - what's worse is the lack of logic to see the hypocrisy of her own ideas. She believes that we should not waste toilet paper, for the sake of the planet, yet "unwanted" babies for whatever reason should be destroyed at the whim of the mother.

Let me make this more clear: she believes that we should not waste toilet paper, but innocent life can be sliced apart, sucked out, and thrown away. In other words, toilet paper is more valuable than a human being. Toilet paper - which was invented for the purpose of cleanliness - should not be thrown out haphazardly and irresponsibly, but babies - who are created in the image and likeness of God - can be disposed of to the tune of (no pun intended!) 1.2 million per year in the U.S. alone, for any reason if an irresponsible woman wants to get rid of it.

Personally, I'd much rather see college students abusing toilet paper (e.g., TP-ing a friend's house or car) than abusing God's gift of life by aborting it. Hopefully, the People's Republic of Sheryl Crow will never come to pass. As long as Catholics pray and use their dollar votes, as well as their electoral votes, to promote Catholic values, we will be able to spare a square.

Tags: abortion bishop Sheryl Crow pro-choice pro-life toilet paper concert

Pro-abort politicians and Church bishops

Thu, 01 Mar 2007 15:11:10 GMT

There's an interesting debate going on in the combox at Jimmy Akin's site, under the heading "Why Doesn't the Church Bar Pro-Abort Politicians". Many people are trying to figure out the strategy of relative silence on the issue being employed by the U. S. bishops. Many believe it's a pragmatic approach of balancing short-term gains versus long-term losses. Others believe that the bishops have lost their moral standing. Finally, there are those that believe the bishops are taking a protectivist approach, shielding their dioceses from potential attack from political opponents.

My take on it is this: I think we're talking too much about "practical actions" and "pragmatic solutions" without taking into account a very real fact of our Church - it has NEVER been popular!

It would have been easier to say that Jesus was just another god, rather than raise the ire of the Roman emperors. That didn't happen.

It would have been easier, once Christianity was accepted as a religion, to have gone along with Arianism. After all, that was what some of the Roman emperors preferred as a good interpretation of Christianity, and also would have been acceptable to many Jews. That didn't happen.

It would have been easier to have just gone along with King Henry VIII, than to lose Church property and the lives of many religious. If that had happened, than Sir Thomas More would not be known as St Thomas More. But that didn't happen.

So why, then, is it acceptable now to take the easier, more logical, more pragmatic approach of NOT speaking out against our politicians? Maybe if we had 30 or 40 years ago, abortion on demand would not be the law of the land.

But that didn't happen.

Tags: abortion bishop politician pro-choice pro-life

Ash Wednesday is tomorrow

Tue, 20 Feb 2007 18:10:29 GMT

Don't forget to figure out what you are doing for Lent this year (e.g., giving up doing/eating something; doing some extra praying or Christian reading; donating more time/talent/treasure to someone less fortunate; etc.).

Also, please pray today for all those who are going to use today (Mardi Gras, a.k.a., "Fat Tuesday") as an excuse to sin all the more.

Tags: Ash Wednesday Mardi Gras Lent Catholic giving up

more news that's not really news

Tue, 06 Feb 2007 16:28:19 GMT

What a surprise - some birth control causes deadly blood clots! Maybe God doesn't want people interfering with His plan of Creation...

And in other "news", teenage sex is harmful (and not just to your eternal soul!). If only people would heed the advice of Christ's Church regarding sex...

Tags: birth control pro-life blood clot science research side-effect sex teen

Reprint of "Remembering Roe v. Wade - a call to penance and prayer"

Tue, 23 Jan 2007 18:27:52 GMT

Thanks Jimmy for this link. An archbishop's comments about our national day of penance and prayer, January 22nd. Well worth reprinting.

In His Light
by Bishop Allen H. Vigneron

Remembering Roe v. Wade –
a call for prayer and penance

Dear Friends in Christ,

In the life of every people or nation there are events which serve to mark the reach of both the lights and the shadows at play in their history. About the lights they are proud; about the shadows they are ashamed.

In the history of the American people, we are justly proud for the level the light reached on the day the Declaration of Independence was signed and the hour when the Emancipation Proclamation was issued.

On the other side of the ledger, we are right to be ashamed of the shadow that was cast by the Supreme Court’s 1857 Dred Scott Decision, claiming that Blacks were chattel, not citizens, and by the Court’s 1973 Roe vs. Wade Decision, asserting analogously that prior to their birth children are not citizens and lack the most basic of all rights, the right to life.

This year the anniversary of the Roe vs. Wade Decision falls on Monday, Jan. 22, the day this issue of The Voice is published. Because of the profoundly hurtful impact this event has had on our nation, all of us need to consider how we mark this anniversary.

Last Saturday, Jan. 20, the Third Annual Walk for Life West Coast was held in San Francisco. It was a clear and peaceful witness to the sacredness of human life and an affirmation that no court or people can take away from any human being, no matter how small or powerless, the God-given right to life. Before the Walk, Mass was offered for the participants in St. Mary’s Cathedral.

While the Walk for Life was not a partisan political event, it was a way to fulfill our duty as citizens of this age and it had qualities that are proper to such a gathering. However, the liturgical norms for the United States for Jan. 22 open up a field for our response that is much wider in scope, one that carries us to a different level of acting – carries us to the level of supernatural action.

Here is what the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, n. 373, says: “On this anniversary of the Supreme Court decision Roe vs. Wade (1973), this day [January 22 ] shall be observed in all dioceses of the United States as a particular day of penance for violations to the dignity of the human person committed through acts of abortion, and of prayer for the full restoration of the legal guarantee of the right to life.”

This particular Church law makes remembering Roe vs. Wade part of the liturgical year itself for Catholics in the United States, part of the very rhythm of feasts and commemorations that include days like Christmas and Easter and All Souls and the memorials of our patron saints.

And this liturgical norm specifies the actions called for: here, not walks or demonstrations or letters to our leaders, but penance and prayer. Recall, it is our Lord himself who said that there are evils which can only be dealt with by prayer and fasting (cf. Mark 9:29).

To respond to legalized abortion by penance and prayer is to confront this evil at the deepest level of faith – at the level where the grace Christ won on the cross works most mysteriously.
So, even though you or I might not be complicit in legalized abortion – in fact some of us have been exemplary, perhaps even heroic in defending the right to life – all of us must do penance for this evil.

The crime of spilling so much innocent blood stains the whole society, and we are part of this community. Therefore, even if justice would not require that you make atonement for this evil, charity calls for it. Christ was sinless, but he bore the burden of our guilt. We, who are members of Christ, must shoulder the weight of our nation’s guilt and make expiation for it.

Every Catholic, then, ought to do some form of penance on Monday, Jan. 22 – or on one of the days to follow -- to ask God to deliver our beloved country from the evil consequences which inevitably follow from the decision of our laws that permits the taking of millions of innocent lives.

Ask the Holy Spirit to direct you to the form of penance that will please him. One such penance, performed individually or corporately by a parish, RCIA or prayer group, might be a financial gift made to one of our East Bay pro-life pregnancy help centers, easily found in the Yellow Pages under the heading “Abortion Alternatives.”

I suggest that you also consider the time-honored traditional practice of fasting and abstaining from meat.

And along with this penance we must pray. We must pray ardently for God’s grace to work a change. To change the hearts of those who work to keep abortion legal.

We must include in our prayer all those who have been touched by the evil of abortion, whether by performing it, or by procuring it or just by passively going along with it. These neighbors of ours – including our brothers and sisters within the Catholic household of faith – particularly need the assistance of our prayers, because, while the preborn victims of abortion have been the object of a terrible injustice, those who participate in this evil are even more to be pitied. Their state, if unrepented, is far worse.

Yet above all, let us remember that nothing lies beyond the great power of God’s Mercy. Let us pray that those wounded by a “choice” to abort may know the power of Divine Mercy, which touches and heals even our deepest wounds and most painful memories of sin.

We must pray for renewed strength for all who work to end legalized abortion; particularly let us pray that in this fight we will always act with that humility and charity that lets the power of Jesus Christ shine through his instruments.

I particularly recommend that you consider praying the Rosary for these intentions. I have no doubt that Our Lady’s intercession was the decisive influence in the peaceful dissolution in 1989 of the Communist tyrannies whose power seemed to many to put them beyond the possibility of change. We witnessed then the power of prayer, and we will see again what prayer can do to restore the order of truth that is the basis of human dignity and right.

To conclude I want to share with you a letter, a copy of which I recently received. It comes from a young Christian woman to one of her co-workers who was filled with anxiety at the prospect of an unwanted pregnancy. It is a marvelous example of the virtues we aspire to live out in our defense of the right to life. And it is a great source of encouragement to know that in the next generation God is raising up such fine workers in the pro-life cause. Here’s the letter:

Dear …,
I am writing this letter to you so as to encourage you to choose life for your unborn baby (if you are pregnant). I know you must be terrified by the thought of having another child. This is not because you do not love babies; but because you do not know how you will provide for the new child.

About 2000 years ago, a Virgin in Jerusalem was faced with the same problem. However, she trusted in God and he provided for her. Life is so great that the child born by this Virgin is still remembered today. Just think about it. If Mary refused to bear Christ we would have never been saved.

Your baby may not save the world, but he will be able to do great things for God. If this child is not given the chance, who will fulfill this part of history? This part in the play of life was given to this child and this child only. If he does not fulfill it, no one will and his role will go unplayed.

If you do not want the child, please give him/her to my family; we will lovingly provide for him/her. I love you and your unborn baby and this is my motive for writing you. It is love, not condemnation.

If you need financial aid, I can put you in contact with an organization that specializes in that area. Please choose life and give your baby a chance. I love you and I am praying for you.
Signed…

We serve the Lord of life, whose victory over death is total and lasting. Let us never lose heart.

Tags: abortion protest rights right to life pro-life

Second Holocaust and Catholic perspective of Israel

Tue, 23 Jan 2007 16:25:21 GMT

The New York Sun published an opinion piece called, "The Second Holocaust", which gives a detailed account of a scary (and very possible) scenario of a showdown between Iran (specifically under Pres. Ahmadinejad) and Israel that results in Iran nuking Israel. More importantly, it details the reasons why this is a political possibility.

However, the focus of this post is on whether this is theologically possible. There are some (including this comment poster) who hold that, because the Bible says that God would protect Israel, that it can never be nuked without also nuking the faith of every Christian and Jew. However, this is not true, neither from the viewpoint of Catholic theology, nor from history.

As a Catholic, our interpretation of the Book of Revelation is that the New Israel (i.e., The Church) is the one that Christ founded and will protect for all time. The nation/land of Israel is not specially protected in this respect, because through Jesus, God has created a New Israel, not built with stone and by human hands, but built on people and by the blood of the Lamb.

Eventually, "heaven and earth will pass away". Does this not also include the real estate known as Israel? In that respect, we expect a new heaven and a new earth to replace this world. However, Christ's Church will continue past the end of the age. His Church starts here on Earth as the Church Militant (still fighting the temptations of the world), but continues in Heaven as the Church Triumphant, the exultant Bride of Christ.

Therefore, there is no promise of protection of a parcel of land, just as there is no promise of protection from bodily harm for the faithful - martyrs have been made at every age and time. The loving care of the Father is that he will protect us from those that "may harm the body but cannot harm the soul". Let us pray for the souls of all those in the Middle East, because eventually, this entire world will pass away - parts of it possibly from nuclear annihilation, but the world in total by Christ's Second Coming. We should be more concerned with saving eternal souls, rather than whether or not temporal real estate belongs to one tribe or another. After all, the nation (or kingdom) of Israel has come and gone several times through human history, but the Jewish people and their faith have been preserved, regardless of location.

The Book of Revelation is not, primarily, an "end times" book. If you read The Lamb's Supper, you will see that much that the evangelicals believe about this book of the Bible is patently false. The "revelation" in the last book of the Bible is that what goes on at the Mass on Earth is the wedding feast of the Lamb in Heaven. Our sacrifice of the Eucharist on Earth is exactly the same sacrifice on the Heavenly Altar, with all the angels singing "Holy, Holy, Holy". This eternal city, the New Jerusalem, The Church, is the protected and beloved Bride of Christ, and this should be our focus - the salvation of souls.

Tags: Israel Ahmadinejad Iran Holocaust Church

In vitro baby saved from Katrina (and research!)

Tue, 16 Jan 2007 16:17:22 GMT

Noah Benton Markham was rescued from Hurricane Katrina 16 months ago. However, he "entered the world" this morning via c-section, according to the AP news article.

Embryo saved after Katrina is born
By JANET McCONNAUGHEY, Associated Press Writer
Tue Jan 16, 8:56 AM ET
COVINGTON, La. - Sixteen months after being rescued as a frozen embryo from a hospital flooded by Hurricane Katrina, Noah Benton Markham entered the world Tuesday morning and was greeted by his cheering family.
The 8 pound, 6 1/2-ounce boy was born by Caesarean section at 7:23 a.m. CST at St. Tammany Hospital. He was in good shape, doctors said.
Before the procedure Rebekah and Glen Markham had decided that if their baby was a boy, he would be named after the biblical builder of the Ark. A girl would have been Hannah Mae -- Hannah means "God has favored us."

Interesting choice of words. He entered the world today, and yet the hurricane that hit New Orleans (which, last I checked, was a part of "the world") nearly destroyed him 16 months ago. So, which is it? Did he enter the world today, or did he enter 16 months ago?

The point is this: this child was saved by Roman Pyrzak, lab director for The Fertility Institute of New Orleans, and it makes headlines. What are we to do about all those other frozen children (including any other Markhams who are in stasis)?

Were these children saved, just to be ripped apart for medical experiments?

Were they saved just to be thrown out?

Or were they saved in order to be birthed, so that they could be "born again" and saved by the Blood of Christ?

The answer lies in the free will of men and women. What will we choose?

UPDATED: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 10:55:10 - The headline has changed!!!

The same story (linked at: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070116/ap_on_re_us/katrina_rescued_embryos), as of Tue Jan 16, 11:17 AM ET, used to have the title "Embryo saved after Katrina is born" (see above). The current title and opening lines are:

Embryo saved from flood is now a boy
By JANET McCONNAUGHEY, Associated Press Writer
Tue Jan 16, 2:04 PM ET
Rescued from a great flood while he was just a frozen embryo in liquid nitrogen, a baby boy entered the world Tuesday and was named after the most famous flood survivor of them all, Noah.
Noah Benton Markham — 8 pounds, 6 1/2 ounces — was born to 32-year-old Rebekah Markham by Caesarean section after growing from an embryo that nearly defrosted in a sweltering hospital during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

So, is the new headline implying that, even though the embryo possessed a Y-chromosome, it was not a boy until it grew some more in the womb? (Remember that the baby wasn't even technically "born", i.e. passing through the birth canal. Noah was removed via c-section.) What kind of scientific and categorical determination is being made here by an AP reporter? If not, then why the headline change and overwrite of the link? The link that had the prior headline is now at http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070116/ap_on_re_us/katrina_rescued_embryos_3

Words are how we process and express thought and the words we use (or don't use) say a lot more about our message than our message alone says. This change of words is an attempt to remove life from the cycle of life, because we aren't supposed to believe in a divine creator (and therefore a divine purpose behind creation).

But we're supposed to believe in an unbiased mass media...

Tags: abortion pro-life stem cell science research embryo hurricane Katrina in vitro headline media bias

H.R. 3 vote and Amniotic Stem Cells announcement

Thu, 11 Jan 2007 15:53:11 GMT

While waiting for news of how the vote on H.R. 3 went, I decided to see if anybody else had written anything about stem cells and this upcoming vote. I found this post which talks about the media distortion of stem cell research. I went to read it to find out their take on it, thinking they would also attempt to debunk the mainstream media claim that embryonic stem cells are our only panacea. Instead, the blog post questions the timing of releasing news of a discovery of stem cells found in amniotic fluid, believing it to be an attack by the mainstream media against promoting embryonic stem cell research.

I'm sorry, but I have a hard time believing that the mainstream media is on the offensive against embryonic stem cell research, especially when they will trot Michael J. Fox and Christopher Reeve (God have mercy on his soul) out there to promote the wonders of killing babies for medicinal purposes, yet they ignore the message of another Parkinson's sufferer, who happened to write an entire book on the subject. Therefore, I posted the following comment on their site:

I, too, questioned the timing of the article about stem cells in the amniotic fluid. I knew that these had been discovered a while ago, but it didn't dawn on me that there might be a "media timing" issue until I talked with my sisters and some of my friends about this.
You see, H.R. 3 is coming up for the vote today, but it has not gotten a whole lot of attention, due to media frenzy around Ms. Pelosi, as well as Pres. Bush's address last night. The "looky-loo" was in full swing, because I called my congressman to give my take on H.R. 3, and lo and behold, I got through on the first attempt. Same with both of my Senators. This is very unusual, which tells me that either nobody cares about this vote, or nobody was aware it was going to take place. This is where the beginning of said "looky-loo" comes in.
When I called my sisters and friends to tell them to contact their elected officials, they were puzzled: "Wasn't there just a discovery of stem cells in amniotic fluid? They wouldn't vote on using embryos if there's a dilemma-free alternative..." This was not just the case with my family - it was also the case with many of my friends, with varying degrees of education and political awareness. They all knew about the amniotic stem cell discovery, but none of them knew the H.R. 3 vote was going forward anyway.
The timing of the article was not to draw criticism to the House bill - it was to deflect attention completely away, under the assumption of, "problem solved! No vote will even take place now..."
I hope that you will check out the transcript to the stem cell quiz which is currently available on Google videos. I would be interested to hear a rebuttal to any of the points mentioned. (It is only through debate on both side that we can all come to the truth.)

We shall see if I receive any comments to the transcript. As it stands, though, I also believe that we deserve better than embryonic stem cell research fraud, even if the researcher who discovered the amniotic stem cells says ESCR should still receive federal money. (Wouldn't you say the same thing, if it were possible that the place you work would receive gobs of money based on your opinion?)

Tags: abortion pro-life stem cell science research embryo Parkinsons Michael J. Fox amniotic

Stem Cell quiz

Wed, 10 Jan 2007 21:40:20 GMT

Check out the Stem Cell Quiz at Google videos, and be sure to email it to a friend/co-worker/etc. who may not know everything they should know about stem cell research. (And don't forget to tell your congressman to vote against H.R. 3.)

If you would rather email it, here is the transcript of the video:

A short quiz about stem cell research

Think you can pass?

True or False...
1) Bush's veto banned stem cell research in the United States
FALSE - Neither Bush's 2006 veto nor his 2001 policy changed the type of research allowed in the U.S.

2) Embryonic stem cell research is banned in the United States
FALSE - Research can be conducted on animal and human embryonic stem cells in the United States

3) Human embryonic stem cell research is limited to the few approved lines and they suck
FALSE - We actually have some of the least restrictive federal regulations worldwide, and the approved lines have been used for most of the published hES studies around the world (hES is short for human embryonic stem cell)

4) Stem cells only come from embryos
FALSE - Stem cells are found in most parts of your body, including bone marrow and blood, placenta, chorion, amniotic fluid, and cord blood, brain, heart, pancreas, liver, dental pulp, hair follicles, fat, and testicular tissue. With that, you can make any tissue in the body.

5) The U.S. government doesn't spend much on stem cell research
FALSE - The U.S. spent almost half a billion dollars on stem cell research in 2006 alone.

6) We don't spend much on embryonic stem cell research
FALSE - $40,000,000 was spent in 2005 just for human embryonic stem cell (hES) research, primarily studying hES-to-animal and even more went towards embryonic stem cell animal-to-animal studies.

7) There are 400,000 embryos in fertility clinics that will just be thrown away
FALSE - Here's the study
Conclusion(s): Nearly 400,000 embryos are stored in the United States, the majority of which (88.2%) are targeted for patient use. Few are available for research (2.8%), limiting possible conversion into embryonic stem cell lines. (Fertil Steril 2003;79:1063-9. ©2003 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.)

Now, there ARE 400,000 embryos, but almost all of them are designated for future family building. Only 11,000 are available for research. That's 250 per state. Most are available because of their age or poor quality. Many wouldn't survive the thawing process so living stem cells could be extracted.

Let's move on to treatments.

8) Embryonic stem cells have been shown to be more effective for neural damage & MS
FALSE - In head-to-head studies, adult stem cells outperform them in:

the number of axons myelinated per cell
the thickness of myelin sheath,
and post-myelination nerve signal conduction speed.

Many people have been successfully treated using their own stem cells.

9) hES are a better choice for curing diabetes
FALSE - hES haven't made the beta-cells that produce insulin. The closest they've come is to make something that doesn't respond to sugar levels and are rejected by the animal subject.
Yet, for human patients, stem cells from bone marrow resulted in:

84% off insulin with no complications, and
Juvenile Diabetes has been "cured" in mice, with clinical trials underway in humans

10) hES are well on the way to safely curing Parkinson's (like Michael J. Fox and Pope John Paull II had)
FALSE - They form brain tumors in all the subjects instead

11) hES research will put no one needlessly at risk
FALSE - Poverty stricken women around the world are already being pressured to donate eggs. Up to 10% of women undergoing the procedure suffer OHSS, which can result in stroke, renal failure, future infertility, and death. With growing evidence, future offspring are more likely to be deformed or stillborn.

Find the facts at StemCellsCure.info

Need help now? Visit: ClinicalTrials.gov

Tags: abortion pro-life stem cell science research embryo Parkinsons Michael J. Fox diabetes transcript fertility clinic

The purpose of this blog

Tue, 09 Jan 2007 16:18:05 GMT

I've received comments in the past regarding this blog that have me concerned. It seems that some are getting the impression that the purpose of this blog is to show all that is wrong with the world, in order to depress people or make them disappointed in the world, as if disappointment were an end in itself. The point of my blog is not to disappoint or depress - it is to give people notice of what is going on so they know to change it to match what the Church's ideal is.

The main reason things don't change is because people are unaware of the slippery slope to begin with. Essentially, evil triumphs when good people do nothing. The basis of our form of government is that the people (not just the politicians, businessmen, scientists, and entertainers) have the power. The government that governs best is the one that governs least. That's why we have 2 parties, 2 chambers of Congress, and 3 branches of the government - so that they will fight among themselves, thereby accomplishing nothing, so the ordinary people can rule their own lives. G. K. Chesterton said, "It is a good sign in a nation when things are done badly. It shows that all the people are doing them. And it is bad sign in a nation when such things are done very well, for it shows that only a few experts and eccentrics are doing them, and that the nation is merely looking on." He also said, "All government is an ugly necessity."

It is only when people are uninformed (or worse, ill-informed) and subjugate to others authority over their own lives that the problems start. One of the principle underpinnings of a democratic form of government is an educated and informed populace. We must curious enough to get the truth and be intelligent enough to understand it. (A form of that from our faith is that we must "be shrewd as serpents and simple as doves" - Matt 10:16.) Again, Chesterton (from What's Wrong with the World, which was written in 1910): "Men are ruled, at this minute by the clock, by liars who refuse them news, and by fools who cannot govern." According to Dale Alquist:

Chesterton consistently defended the amateur against the professional, or the "generalist" against the specialist, especially when it came to "the things worth doing." There are things like playing the organ or discovering the North Pole, or being Astronomer Royal, which we do not want a person to do at all unless he does them well. But those are not the most important things in life. When it comes to writing one's own love letters and blowing one's own nose, "these things we want a man to do for himself, even if he does them badly." This, argues Chesterton (in Orthodoxy) is "the democratic faith: that the most terribly important things must be left to ordinary men themselves - the mating of the sexes, the rearing of the young, the laws of the state."

So you see, my blog is not an attempt to say, "look how horrible life is" - it is more "look how bad things might get if we don't do something about it now." I also write positive things on my blog (such as the article I'm about to post, which talks about a new discovery of stem cells in amniotic fluid, which are as potent as embryonic stem cells, but without the controversy of cloning and killing embryos), because life is good, or as Archbishop Fulton Sheen would say, "Life is worth living." The world is good - just broken. God created the world and found it good. Unfortunately, sinful man found it and broke it with sin. If something is bad (like a rotted apple), we throw it out; but if something is merely broken (like a toaster), we fix it to make it good again.

People are the same way: good, but broken. The remedy to fixing them is not always to offend them. (In fact, offending is rarely the best solution.) The primary solution to fixing people is with love, because love is enlightening and life-giving, and "this life was the light of the human race; the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it." (John 1:4-5) Yes, people will disappoint you - that's because they're human (just like you and me), not perfect, which is why we do not put our trust or faith in any human being, except the Perfect One. It doesn't mean we are to love them any less - it means we are to pray for them even more, especially when we are tempted to "tell them off." By your life, they will know what you believe, because actions speak louder than words. If your life truly reflects high morals, no words are necessary. Hence the words of St. Francis: "Always, always, always preach the Gospel... and when necessary, use words."

If, then, people are still offended, it is their own conscience which is offended by your example, not their heart or mind offended by your words (see James 3:13-18). One more time from Chesterton: "Reason is always a kind of brute force; those who appeal to the head rather than the heart, however pallid and polite, are necessarily men of violence. We speak of 'touching' a man's heart, but we can do nothing to his head but hit it." Words, when they are "logical" or "teaching a lesson" are often more harsh than a whip. Compassionate words, though, are tender, loving, and healing. This is the reason that instructing is called a "work of mercy" (CCC 2447), not a work of justice or punishment.

There is no "logical" reason for forgiveness and mercy - you can think of a thousand "reasons" to continue to hold a grudge, and you can rationalize for all eternity why you were right and they were wrong. Logic is used in arguments and debates, and reason is best used to figure out your own best course of action. Love (mercy and forgiveness), on the other hand, sweeps away the entire argument and allows you (and your "opponent") to move on to other things. This is why love is a commandment; because it is not a natural reaction, but a super-natural decision. It doesn't necessarily solve by concluding; it solves by erasing. And this is the same love that The Father shows us.

Therefore, make sure your own life is as blameless and spotless as possible: "remove the log from your own eye, then remove the speck in your neighbor's eye" (Luke 6:41-42; Matt 7:3-5) And we now come full circle to our government again. We have no right to "blame society" or "blame the government" or "blame the culture" if we have done nothing to attempt to change things; because in this country, WE are the government; in all countries, WE are "society" and "the culture". If society is bad, it is because we have allowed it to be bad. If the culture is bad, it is because we support it with our "dollar votes" and "eyeball votes". If the government is bad, it is because we get the government we deserve.

The flipside of it is this: if we are endeavoring to "be perfect, as our Father in Heaven is perfect" (Matt 5:48) and we are spreading God's perfection by "make deisciples of all nations, baptizing them in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" (Matt 28:19), then we have the hope of changing this world for the better. Our government of, by, and for the people will be better because the people are better. Likewise, the culture and society will also reflect the light of Christ.

But charity begins at home, and peace on earth begins with me.

Tags: blog government culture society love mercy logic Chesterton

Birth Control Pill linked to children's allergies

Mon, 08 Jan 2007 17:44:54 GMT

Not that we needed any more proof that the birth control pill is bad news, but now there's a study that claims that the birth control pill raises the odds of children having nasal allergies.

The team found that, compared to children whose mothers had not used oral contraceptives, those who had taken the pill within a year of becoming pregnant had a 67 percent greater likelihood of having a child with allergic rhinitis, or nasal allergy.

When will women realize that "the pill" is not only not safe for them or their future children - it also has not made them free. If I were told that I had to take a pill every day for 30-40 years, just to have a 90% chance that a recreational act will not result in life-altering consequences... well, I'd give up that "recreation". (Oh yeah, and that unnecessary medication also has all kinds of side-effects, from occasional bleeding to damaged children to outright infertility.) Let's hear it for freedom from God's natural plan... *crickets chirping*

Tags: birth control pro-life allergies science research side-effect

Letter to Nancy Pelosi against federal funding of embryonic stem cell research

Thu, 04 Jan 2007 21:21:19 GMT

The Honorable Nancy Pelosi
House of Representatives
235 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515-0508

Re: Embryonic Stem Cell Research Funding - Oppose

Speaker of the House Pelosi:

I noticed that, before going to the Capitol this morning, you stopped by a Catholic Church to ask God to guide your actions. As a Catholic, you know that the Church is God's representative on Earth and the teachings of the Magisterium are binding on all Catholics, if we are to be One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic.

The Church opposes embryonic stem cell research and federal funding for it for the same reason it opposes abortion - it directly causes the destruction of innocent human lives. It does, however, support "adult" stem cell research, i.e., research using stem cells harvested from umbelical cords, bone marrow, etc. There has been much success already in this area, and studies suggest that "adult" stem cells may be as pluripotent (wide-ranging and potentially beneficial) as embryonic stem cells - all without the moral dilemma.

Please remain true to the Faith and refuse to start federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. I heartily encourage you to increase funding for adult stem cell research, but I pray that our country will never seek to destroy many innocent human lives for the off-chance that some may live a little longer and a little easier.

Sincerely and God bless,

Tags: abortion pro-life stem cell science research embryo Pelosi Speaker of the House politics embryonic stem cell research