Thoughts of a Regular Guy

More On That Candidate Forum

2009-11-22T14:43:00.003-06:00

I noticed something yesterday as I listened to twenty-odd political candidates addressing a pro-life audience yesterday.

Almost every candidate began by talking about his religious upbringing.

This one was the son of a pastor, that one was one of nine children of a Catholic family, one was a conservative Jew, another an Indian Hindu, but almost every one, if not in fact every one, started discussing the life issue from a religious perspective.

And, what makes me crazy, some of them use that religious foundation as an excuse to avoid facing the abortion issue in law.

The argument goes something like this:

The Catholic Church teaches me that abortion is an intrinsic evil.
This is part of my faith.
I cannot use the force of law to impose my faith on others.
Ergo, I cannot support restricting abortion in law.

This is why, as you saw in the video I posted earlier, I eschewed all discussion of religion to assert the importance of protecting human life in terms that should be equally accessible to anyone.

And they say I'm a religious fanatic.

Adam For Life

2009-11-22T14:15:00.003-06:00

My favorite gubernatorial candidate, Adam Andrzejewski, at the same candidate forum yesterday.

Unfortunately, the video picks up after he said that what we need in the fight against abortion is more people like Paul Mitchell. I could barely believe I heard that, and I really wish I had video of that remark.

Regular Guy Speaks To Pro-Life Candidate Forum

2009-11-22T08:36:00.001-06:00

The Lake County Right to Life organization hosted a candidate forum yesterday attended by over 20 candidates, including 6 gubernatorial candidates, 4 Senate candidates, several other statewide and judicial candidates, and yours truly:

Unfortunately, I was limited to three minutes; there was so much more I wanted to say.

A Spoonful of Illogic

2009-11-19T08:03:00.003-06:00

[guest commentary by Paladin]

With all due apologies to the makers of Mary Poppins (and the song "A Spoonful of Sugar")... I think I've finally placed something.

People who are steeped in our modern culture (at least in the Western world) has damaged spiritual/moral taste buds. For whatever reason, illogic tastes good to them... and they'll swallow most anything, so long as you serve it with several heaping teaspoons of illogic (flashy food colouring is good, too). This explains a great many things:

1) Why is Oprah so rich through such popularity?

2) Why is Dan Brown so rich, and why has he sold so many books which contain provable nonsense, though he bills them as "based on fact"?

3) Why was the President of Death elected to the highest office in the United States, despite his miniscule experience, his open contempt for American patriotism, his radical pro-death stances, and his utter ineptitude with both foreign relations and domestic policy?

Got it. Understood, now! Just prepare with flair, garnish with several delectable spoonfuls of illogic, and serve at whatever temperature you wish... and my, just watch those little mouths gobble up every crumb! Iron chef, eat your heart out!

Case in point (h/t the extraordinary LifeSiteNews.com):

Pro-Abortion Lawmakers Shower Praise on Senate Bill's Phony Abortion Compromise

WASHINGTON, D.C., November 19, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The phony compromise language unveiled in the Senate health care bill Wednseday night has already won high praise from pro-abortion lawmakers on Capitol Hill; yet, it has not fared as well under the scrutiny of the National Right to Life Committee, who slammed the bill's abortion funding as "completely unacceptable."

[...]

Some pro-abortion Senators have already exalted Reid's abortion language, claiming that it accurately reflects the Hyde amendment.

"Senator Reid did an excellent job of crafting language that maintains the decades long compromise of no federal funds for abortion," gushed Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA). Boxer has a consistently 100% pro-abortion rating from NARAL.

Late Wednedsay, Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, who also votes largely pro-abortion, claimed to reporters that Reid's bill "extends the Hyde amendment to these programs so the status quo is maintained." Rep. Capps, another 100% NARAL-approved legislator and author of the House's phony compromise, praised Reid's language and noted that it "closely mirrors my language" in the original House bill.

The same legislators had lambasted the Stupak language as "illogical, discriminatory, and unnecessary" (Capps) and a "very radical amendment which would really tear apart compromise" (Boxer).

Did you follow that? Pro-abort legislators are praising this "new compromise bill" as "accurately reflecting the Hyde Amendment" (which they hate, by the way--Rule #1: if pro-aborts pretend to praise something for reflecting something they hate, look for additional hidden lies).

Perhaps the abortion-tolerant readers of this blog could help me out, here:

If the ersatz "Health Care Reform" bill doesn't fund abortions, then why are the pro-abortion groups (who, along with Moloch-in-Chief, ever insist that the bill has never been about abortion, and doesn't fund abortions in the least) all up in arms over efforts to remove abortion funding (such as the Stupak amendment), and why are they so thrilled with other "compromises"? From here, it seems that they just want to perpetuate abortion, and they'll say and do anything (no matter how dishonest or absurd) to further that goal. This implies that such people are immoral (or amoral, if you like) hacks who shouldn't be trusted with a sharpened pencil, much less domestic policy.

Seriously: aren't they embarrassed to make such obvious lies? I mean, we in the pro-life crowd appreciate the lack of strain in sniffing *out* those lies, but... still. No sense of shame, or at least artistic self-respect?

Why Homeschool, Part 29

2009-11-16T07:24:00.002-06:00

So your children won't be recruited to be prostitutes!

A shocking story:

Throw out everything you think you know about prostitutes.
Investigators say a new epidemic is sweeping the local area - and the nation.

Underage prostitutes are being recruited within local high schools and junior highs, and sometimes even "pimped" by their own classmates!

Alexis Del Cid shows us the story through a survivor's eyes. Jessica Richardson lived through the nightmare - a nightmare that's still going on, all around us.

And please, please, when you comment, don't give me that libertarian nonsense about legalizing prostitution.

Some Favorite Moments From My Favorite Movie

2009-11-11T20:59:00.003-06:00

Veteran's Day

2009-11-11T08:56:00.002-06:00

Veteran's Day is also the anniversary of my Honorable Discharge from the Air Force in 1986. One day, I really must scan some of my pictures from those days and post them.

In the meantime, this video has become something of a tradition here on the blog for Veteran's Day and Memorial Day. It's a favorite of mine, and here it is again:

State of the Union (or: "the FOCA Syndrome")

2009-11-09T15:26:00.007-06:00

[guest commentary by Paladin]

At the risk of typecasting myself as "the angry man" (Sorry, John!), or as a paranoiac (those efforts to mandate taxpayer-funded abortion and euthanasia don't really indicate a love of death by the instigators, do they?), I want to make a few things clear. Mind, our esteemed host can and will speak for himself (and BTW: God bless and speed his run into the Illinois’ 62nd (State) District seat, and God speed his pro-abortion RINO opponent, Sandy Cole into a well-needed retirement!), but there are a few rather clear facts which need to be laid out.

1) I strongly suspect that, if I speak out against the current "Health Care Reform" bill (a la Nancy Pelosi) currently chugging its way through Congress--especially after the "modern Holy Grail" called the Stupak Amendment (as good as it is, so far as it goes) was successfully attached--I may get labelled a "mindless conservative" who's "always angry (Sorry, John!)", who "lets the perfect be the enemy of the good", and who's never satisfied with anything. To that, I say: horse puckies! (For those outside of Wisconsin, see here.) The fact that I decry 10 evils a day doesn't mean that the other (x - 10) evils aren't there, or aren't evil, or aren't important. Give it at least a millisecond of critical thought, and you'll see what I mean. Some of us have the tiresome (and un-asked-for) job of perpetually waking up the sleepy ADD sheep around us, whose Mass-Media-drenched attention spans and anemic motivation are about as emphatic as a 5-point [font] period at the end of a 100-point sentence, even if they know what "pro-life" means. (See references to "Faux Catholic", here or on my woefully neglected and inferior blog, for examples/references on that.) If you haven't noticed, the current administration hasn't limited itself to making only one foray into the culture of death at a time; at least a few people in the temple--ahm--I mean, administration of Master Obama, Leader Of Civilized Humanity and his faithful servants seem to be able to multi-task.

2) Aside from the soul-searing moral bankruptcy of the current administration/regime, their transparent hunger for power is outstripping their desire to minimize the damage done to the nation while gaining said power. Case in point: how will spending trillions of dollars that we don't have (yes, that's with a "T"--do you remember the good old days [at least 10 years ago, was it?] when commentators would say, "Yes, that's "billions" with a "B", as if it were still shocking?) get our economy into anything but deeper trouble? It's a bit like saying, "My bank account is empty, but my credit card has graciously agreed to lend me money to deposit into it, and to spend!" Math apparently isn't a strong suit, or a high priority, for The One and company. And that's only on a tactical, economic level, for the sake of easy example...

3) Like most evil actions and movements, the culture of death either doesn't know that it will destroy that which it seeks to control... or else, it doesn't really care (so long as it can fondle it for a while, until it does). At this point, the idea of artificial contraception is held in such reverence by the typical westerner that any challenge to it is viewed as a stupefying challenge to "that which was, is, and should be forever, world without end"... and yet, even from a bone-dry practical level, the engineers of this "social re-programming" have no apparent idea that a lack of children--and a manifold cultural bias against them--will cause any of their droolingly coveted "worldpower-state programs" to implode (think Medicare, Social Security, and the proposed "Universal Health Care"). It's at this point that sane people everywhere--even the most generous and patient--start to question either the liberals' collective sanity, intelligence, and/or self-preservation instinct.

Here just one other instance (off the top of my head--I leave it as an exercise for the reader to find others) of this "suicidal liberal lemming-dance": instill a hatred of pregnancy, monogamy and heterosexuality into westerners, and promote "alternate sexualities" (including pornography in all venues) in all possible forms, while paradoxically instilling into their audiences an irrational sympathy for radical Islam (because they hate Christians, and Christianity is still part-and-parcel to the core of America, and "the enemy of my enemy is my friend, dontcha know..."). That way, if they take over America, Islam will take over America by default (through a surprising tolerance for pregnancy and fertility)... and, after the imposition of Sharia Law, these very same "useful liberal sexual-license-ridden idiots" will be the first buried in the ground up to their necks, and stoned to death. (Logical, huh?)

As anyone who's read my posts for any length of time already knows: Capitulating (i.e. "Faux") Catholics make me see red as quickly--or more quickly--than can the most die-hard, liberal, culture-of-death, atheist/agnostic evangelist of hedonism. Betrayal just hurts worse than a frontal assault, that's all. But one insidious direction by which even otherwise-"solid" Catholics can get "conscripted" into the "Faux Catholic Corps" is what I'll call the FOCA Syndrome.

What's the FOCA Syndrome, you ask?

It's the syndrome by which a typical Catholic (ranging from the modestly devout to the bland pew-potato), who leads an otherwise quiet ("I wish people wouldn't bother me!") life, has been motivated--by some perceived emergency--to some sort of action which is otherwise extraordinary for them. The bishops sound the alarm about FOCA, and this (otherwise bland and conviction-vague) Catholic rouses himself to send in a postcard ("my stars, what *will* they ask me to do NEXT?"), even at the risk of enduring somewhat bemused or cross-eyed stares from those who are even more bland than he! Heroism in action! But after that, he settles back into his quiet, dumpy life of lukewarmness, and breathes a sigh of relief: "Thank God that's over!". Crisis averted, and he feels that he's served his tour of duty--and earned an honourable discharge from the "temporary Catholic military." (Onward, Christian soldiers!)

But a few months later--alas, Obama and Co. are not content to make just one foray into the destruction of society; they wish to pass FOCA by stealth, in pieces--or in different wrapping! They want to institute (wait for it!) Death Panels, by which the elderly and profoundly disabled will be offered "loving care, condolences, and a few aspirin--along with a small pill to end their troubles quietly" in the name of conserving the money for those whose standard of life (as judged by the honourable [sic] Kathleeen Sebelius) is higher! "Not again!", says the weary soldier; "Didn't I just fill out a postcard... and in full sight of at least a dozen parishioners, too?" But somehow, he whips his exhausted spirit into yet another act of heroism, and he--wonder of wonders--actually CALLS his Congressman and leaves a polite message explaining his difference of opinion! Ahh... not only retirement will reward him, but surely an increased pension in Heaven, or even a medal of honour, in the afterlife will await him, will it not?

Repeat this scenario a few more times. You can see where it's going. Eventually (after, say 4-5 such "calls to action"), the "heroic Faux Catholic" will throw up his hands in disgust and refuse, citing his unwillingness to accede to anything so relentless and insatiable as these demands on his time. And so it goes.

(This, by the way, is why RESOLVE, rather than EMOTION, is needed in the heart of a Christian in this battle.)

Look. Christians (the ones who are sane, at any rate) are not trying to run your life. They're not even trying to dictate your preferences. They're trying to stop you from destroying yourselves... and us in the process! Rampant sexuality decays and destroys a culture. A willful disregard/contempt for life (especially the weak and the "inconvenient") destroys it even more quickly (and rampant sexuality seems to lead inexorably toward such disregard/contempt). It's only natural that bystanders, after watching you take out a cultural machine gun and open-fire in all directions, might just try to stop you by some means or another, eh?

From the Land of the Comfortably Insane

2009-11-08T15:12:00.003-06:00

[guest commentary by Paladin]

Hi, Kids! Welcome to the

Brave New World(!!)

... where everyone is happy all the time, and where everyone's cares are lovingly and skillfully handled by Big Broth...--(*ahem*)--Dear Earnest Author of Total Healthcare!

Here's what you can look forward to, in your new Healthcare Entitlement for/from Lofty Liberals:

1) Affordable healthcare for everyone... for only $11,000-15,000/year!.

That's for all the good boys and girls, mind you; if anyone doesn't pay their fair share of the plan supported by Master Obama, Leader Of Civilized Humanity and his faithful servants (naughty, naughty!), they'll have to have:

2) 2.5% of their allowance taken away (as a "naughty, naughty fee").

For those who are REALLY naughty, and don't even play nice and say "I'm sorry" by paying their "naughty, naughty" fee (Boo! Hiss! Bad boys and girls!), then Master Obama, Leader Of Civilized Humanity and his faithful servants will have to send them to a little bit of:

3) time out, which good little boys and girls know as "Play Right, I Say, Or No Supper!" (1-5 years).

Happy, happy, joy, joy!! Let's finish our worship session with the refrain from our new National Anthem:

"Barack Hussein Obama... Mmm, Mmm, Mmm!"

Until next time, boys, and girls... be good, and remember: freedom is only freedom if unwanted leech-babies are removed by good doctors (or halfway-reasonable facsimiles with a dose of RU-486), or if you're following Master Obama, Leader Of Civilized Humanity and his faithful servants!

Love,

Paladin
Civilian Re-Education (CaRE) Center #5, Cell Block #3
Exact Whereabouts Withheld for National Security Reasons

Find God In 60 Days

2009-11-07T06:54:00.002-06:00

(H/T: Is Anybody There?

(Originally posted to the Thoughts of a Regular Guy blog.)

Wallace Withdraws From Senate Race

2009-11-02T17:33:00.005-06:00

I've written before about U.S. Senate candidate Eric Wallace, one of the several conservative candidates seeking to prevent the nomination of liberal Republican congressman Mark Kirk (Kirk has been endorsed by my legislative opponent, Sandy Cole). Kirk was one of only eight Republican Congressmen who voted for Cap & Trade, and is also pro-abortion, pro-gay "marriage", pro gun control, and opposed the surge in Iraq.

The U.S. Senate seat in question is that currently held by Senator Roland Burris, who was appointed by now-impeached Governor Rod Blagojevich, following the election of President Obama. Coincidentally, it is the same seat once held by Democrat Stephen A. Douglas in the 19th century.

But today, the last day for candidates to file their petitions and candidacy paperwork, Eric Wallace has announced that he will not be a candidate:

Eric Wallace, conservative candidate for Il U.S Senate, formally announces today (Monday, November 2, 2009) that despite meeting minimum signature requirements he will not, at this time, seek his party’s (R) nomination. Wallace states, “While the goal continues to be the coalescing of our efforts behind a candidate committed to upholding conservative values—I have decided that it is in the best interest of the conservative movement that I not run at this time. The most important issue here is not my candidacy, but that the conservative principles and values that our campaign has been espousing across the state continue to gain momentum; and that we find a person to consolidate around who will champion this cause.

I know that a lot of people whom I greatly respect have been supporters of Wallace's candidacy, but I'm relieved to see this, because, as Wallace himself states, we have too many conservative candidates to oppose just one well-funded liberal. I salute Dr. Wallace for his decision.

Other conservative candidates include Patrick Hughes, Robert Zadek, and John Arrington. I've had the pleasure of meeting Zadek and Arrington in the course of my own campaigning, including sharing the stage with Arrington at a candidate forum just this past Saturday. I can say that I've been very favorably impressed by both Arrington and Zadek. Hughes comes with a substantial amount of his own money and the endorsements of several high-profile pro-life leaders, so I'm favorably disposed towards him, but I have not yet been impressed by him or by his campaign. I'm still waiting.

(Originally posted to the Thoughts of a Regular Guy blog.)

The Regular Guy Returns

2009-11-01T21:49:00.005-06:00

This blog is not dead. It's just been a tad neglected.

OK, rather more than a tad. Thanks to Paladin for keeping things going in my negligence.

For those who might be interested, my legislative campaign continues apace. I collected more than twice the required number of signatures, and filed them with the other requisite paperwork with the Board of Elections in Springfield on the first day of filing, last Monday. I have a number of activities coming up this month, with more details on my campaign website, where donations to a comprehensively conservative candidate are still being accepted.

The NY-23 race proves one thing: liberal Republicans are liars. In this respect: they tell us that the purpose of a political party is to elect its candidates. This is not true, and they know it. The real purpose of a political party is to advance its principles. When the party nominates candidates who don't believe in its principles, it is defeating its own purpose. But the liberal Republicans understand this fully well; given a choice between endorsing a liberal Democrat and a conservative Republican, the liberal Republican will choose their principles over their party every time.

If you're in the Chicago area tomorrow and love good music, you could certainly do worse than a visit to St. John Cantius Church, where they'll be celebrating the Feast of All Souls with the Mozart Requiem Mass as a solemn high mass in the Extraordinary Form with full choir and orchestra. 7:30 pm.

More soon.

Woe to you, Faux Catholic, Hypocrite...

2009-10-23T11:16:00.007-05:00

[guest commentary by Paladin]

For those of you who're more used to my usual mild tone, I apologize in advance... but I am seriously ticked off.

From the Indispensable LifeSiteNews:

HINSDALE, Illinois, October 23, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A Dominican nun has been seen frequenting an abortion facility in Hinsdale, Illinois recently - but not, as one might expect, to pray for an end to abortion or to counsel women seeking abortions, but to volunteer as a clinic escort.

Local pro-life activists say that they recognized the escort at the ACU Health Center as Sr. Donna Quinn, a nun outspokenly in favor of legalized abortion, after seeing her photo in a Chicago Tribune article.

This woman is corrupt. Let's call a spade a spade. She may've slid into this corruption through "good intentions" (Hell need not go to Menards or Builder's Squarem for paving stones for its inroads, y'know), but she's a hypocrite--in the worst sense of the word, and of the highest order. This woman contributes to the torture and death of unborn children, and still cravenly clings to the title, not only of "Catholic" (which is a big enough lie), but of "Catholic religious sister".

I see. So, just as the modern world demands that we allow a Greenpeace member to carve their initials into living beached whales with dull, rusty knives while still demanding Greenpeace membership rights... just as the modern world demands that someone who boils kittens alive for sheer enjoyment can still be a card-carrying member of PETA... just so, does the world demand that the Catholic Church not reject this wayward woman and her demonic volunteer duties. I see.

At least the members of the Culture of Death are consistent... right?

So... at least I can take consolation in the fact that her religious superior will, at very least, denounce her and expel her from the order, right?

Sr. Patricia Mulcahey, OP, Quinn's Prioress at the Sinsinawa Dominican community, said in an email response to LSN that the nun sees her volunteer activity as "accompanying women who are verbally abused by protestors. Her stance is that if the protestors were not abusive, she would not be there."

Though Sr. Mulcahey claimed that her sisters "support the teachings of the Catholic Church," she declined to comment on Quinn's public protest of Catholic Church teaching.

Wow.

Seriously... give me a good, honest atheist and/or relativist, any day of the week. But betrayal--especially if that betrayal involves a grandmotherly smile as she walks the women past the mean and cruel pro-lifers, a kindly pat on the shoulder as she tells the woman to "be a brave girl" as she submits her body to violation and her child to dismemberment, and a sweet and humble suggestion to drink some hot Linden tea if she has any cramps afterward--makes me want to spit rusty nails.

I tremble for this woman on Judgment Day. But in the meantime, might I offer my own (perhaps isolated) plea that she physically GET THE **** OUT OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, so that her body at least matches her soul which abandoned the Church long ago??

Diplomatic Dithering, and Other Evils

2009-10-14T14:43:00.005-05:00

[guest commentary by Paladin]

At the risk of putting my foot in a pile of unsavoury stuff: apparently, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops has felt it necessary to congratulate the President of Death for his (yes, I still blink incredulously when I hear it) Nobel Peace Prize (h/t LifeSiteNews.com):

Cardinal Francis George of Chicago, president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), issued the following statement, congratulating President Barack Obama on being honored with the Nobel Peace Prize:

"In the name of the Catholic Bishops of the United States, I would like to offer congratulations to President Barack Obama on his receiving the Nobel Peace Prize. As he has graciously said, much of the work of realizing a more peaceful and just world for all persons and nations remains to be done; but the prize was given because as President of the United States he has already changed the international conversation. [...]"

Okay. I know that it's the modus operandi of the USCCB (or its mouthpieces) to be diplomatic in all circumstances (at least to those on the political left), and I'm certainly no strong advocate of turning rhetorical flamethrowers on people; but, for the love of all that's holy, why say anything at all??? Does anyone truly think that the rest of the world was waiting, with hands on hips and tapping foot, for the USCCB to add their comments to the body politic? They had every opportunity simply to keep quiet and let the absurdity speak for itself... but no: they had to try to invest the moment with some "gravitas" (but, fortunately in this case, the USCCB hasn't much of it to invest). Argh. Common sense, anyone?

The Maltese Pigeon

2009-10-01T07:35:00.006-05:00

[guest commentary by Paladin]

I usually don't like to exert even a tiny bit of bandwidth to give (*ack* *ahem* *choke*) Ambassador Douglas Kmiec, chief faux-Catholic apologist for the President of Death and heir-apparent of the Sir Richard Rich "Sell My Soul for Wales" legacy (thanks to Fr. Z for the phrase), the media attention he appears to crave so desperately. But I did need to pass on one of the best quotes on the matter that I'd read in a long time.

From the ever-admirable LifeSiteNews, and from the pen/keyboard of Human Life International's Joseph Meaney:

Perhaps even more troubling than Kmiec’s obsequiousness in accepting these pathetic lines of reasoning is how he describes being intellectually seduced by President Obama. The ambassador has bought--hook, line, and sinker--the false definition of ‘dialogue’ which always entails a serious, thoughtful pose and a polite nod of the head, and results in the even greater acceleration of the culture of death. Of course they "listen" when they’re in power! Then they do exactly what they were going to do and people like Kmiec get in line and become their apologists.

How long, O Lord...?"

Great Moments in Blogging

2009-09-28T12:47:00.002-05:00

Compiled by Jerry Agar (with a little help from yours truly):

Not so long ago in America if it wasn’t on Walter Cronkite’s news report or in the pages of the New York Times, it wasn’t news. Most of the rest of the electronic and print reporters and commentators relied on those two entities to show them what was important.

A person who knew something the big news operations did not, especially if their news contrasted with the way the media chieftains saw the world, was labeled as a crank and dismissed.

The cost of setting up a competing news operation was a barrier to entry only a select few could penetrate. It is so cost prohibitive to start a daily paper that former KGB General Oleg Kalugin told me that it was the only piece of the “long march through the institutions” the Russians were unable to achieve.

No more.

The recent explosive story exposing the depths some ACORN employees were willing to sink to in order to thwart “the man” is the latest example of how powerful a tool the Internet is to the little guy and gal.

With the help of local bloggers listed below I have compiled a list of the “10 Great Events in the Rise of the New Media.”

We have tried to make a list of transformative moments.The Virginia Tech shootings, the landing on the Hudson and the 7/7 Tube bombings in London were initially reported by cell phone and blog, showing the power of on-site reporting with new media, but were perhaps not seminal moments, as they would have been reported anyway, and quickly, by the mainstream media (MSM).

Read the rest!

Relatively Speaking, Redux

2009-09-23T09:28:00.002-05:00

[guest commentary by Paladin]

Waaaay back in the spring of this year, I posted a rather modest post about moral relativism (which had a surprising amount of traffic). Given the arrival of some new champions of moral relativism in our comment boxes, I thought I'd open the idea up again... and give the poor, overburdened (but excellent) "Abortion" thread some room to breathe!

One case in point: our honoured guest, Mr. Robert Schwartz, once wrote, in reply to our esteemed host:

Indeed: I find it mildly amusing that in a single breath you confess reluctance to strike up a contract with me due to your supposition that I am untrustworthy, yet simultaneously assert that I'm honest about my position!

That's as good a starting place as any.

Moral relativism, when taken to its logical conclusion (or applied consistently), cannot help but collapse on itself, in a sense--especially when the proponent also claims to hold to some sort of moral code. In this case: the fact that a relativist could be up-front and honest about his relativism is (while that honesty is a good thing, in and of itself) something of an "accident of the moment". Let's grant that Mr. X, a moral relativist, currently holds himself to a standard of "honesty", which we'll assume (for now) means, "I will not intentionally deceive, and/or give false information." Given the starting premise (of absolute moral relativism), I personally see nothing that would prevent Mr. X from dropping that "honesty" standard like a hot potato, should the right combination of factors/incentives move him sufficiently... and there's no assurance that Mr. X will even be "good" enough to let others know of his new-found rejection of truth-telling and honesty.

In short: if the only reason Mr. X is "honest" is that it pleases him to be so at the moment (and if there's no reason to suppose that this won't change for whatever reason, at any time), then I really can't blame anyone else for not being willing to enter into a contract with Mr. X; his honesty is "an accident of the moment", which is as fickle as would be a liar from the start.

Ironically enough, this "accidental attitude of honesty" is also only recognizable by reliance on an objective standard of truth! A true relativist would not balk at being skeptical of the very perceptions of reality of others (i.e. taking a knife and stabbing an innocent child on the street is actually murdering a real, externally-existing person, rather than being an exercise of a somewhat energetic day-dream within his head).

Question: if you embrace moral relativism, then why do you not also embrace radical relativism (e.g. solipsism--the idea that you are the only person whose existence is certain, and that all other persons/things are more-or-less persistent hallucinations, figments of your vibrant imagination, etc.)? There's no such thing as "evidence against solipsism", any more than there's evidence against "absolute moral relativism", right?

P.S. Robert, sorry about losing track of so many of your points, and (good/challenging) questions! The frenzy at work/home has subsided somewhat, but I'm still picking up a dizzying number of pieces; I'll try to get to some of your earlier comments if I can, but feel free to re-ask them if I "space out" about them for too long...

Blogger Announces Run for Illinois House

2009-09-20T15:17:00.004-05:00

No, I don't mean me, I'm already a candidate.

Well-known milblogger Blackfive is seeking election to an open house seat in the Illinois 41st District.

UPDATE: It's been brought to my attention that that race already had two conservative candidates, including Peter Breen, of the Thomas More Society.

Another Look At Moral Relavatism

2009-09-15T16:04:00.001-05:00

The President's buddies at ACORN offer still more advice on how to run criminal organizations, with a little counsel on how to get away with (literally!) murder thrown in:

Nadler To Introduce Bill To Repal DOMA

2009-09-15T14:58:00.003-05:00

I'd be interested to hear from every congressional candidate in the nation, for both the House and Senate, how they would vote on this bill:

This morning, Representative Jerry Nadler (D-New York) announced he will introduce a bill to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). This law defines marriage for federal purposes and ensures that states are not forced to recognize alternate definitions. DOMA passed overwhelmingly in 1996 by 342-67 in the House and 85-14 in the Senate.

Wendy Wright, President of Concerned Women for America (CWA), said, "The citizens of 39 states have worked hard to pass legislation and constitutional amendments to protect marriage as the union between one man and one woman. DOMA ensures the integrity of our constitutional system and the will of Americans. DOMA reflects the reality that marriage provides unique benefits to individuals, children, and society which cannot be replicated by any other living arrangement.

"The Defense of Marriage Act anticipated the assault that homosexual activists would inflict upon marriage. Through DOMA, the will of the people is honored, as evidenced in the 39 states that have passed laws protecting marriage."

Shari Rendall, CWA's Director of Legislation and Public Policy, said, "Homosexual activists and their congressional supporters are making the outrageous claim that protecting marriage is a form of discrimination. But the reverse is true -- failing to protect marriage and overturning marriage laws will result in reverse discrimination against people who believe that marriage is between one man and one woman."

All the staff, cast and crew here at Thoughts of a Regular Guy would like to welcome the gay marriage issue back to the national agenda for another election cycle.

A New Abortion Post

2009-09-13T05:00:00.003-05:00

I've been having an argument with two friends of mine over on Facebook, and I'm inviting them here to carry on the debate in my combox, where there are not such limitations on length of comments as there are at Facebook.

My basic premises:

That abortion entails the intentional taking of an innocent human life.
That the intentional taking of an innocent human life is morally wrong.
That it is a legitimate function of government to protect innocent human life.

Ergo, abortion is not a "right" and should be illegal.

This is a public discussion, all are invited to take part.

Can I Live

2009-09-07T22:57:00.001-05:00

It's probably just my impression, but is it rappers who are doing the best pro-life songs these days?

The Butterfly Circus

2009-09-06T15:41:00.002-05:00

[guest commentary by Paladin]

With many thanks and kudos and hat tips to Chelsea Zimmerman--an old friend of this blog whose "Reflections of a Paralytic" are (by any sane standard) a font of sanity in the mixed and muddied fields of the blogosphere: please do check out the following movie, available for free viewing online (20 min):

THE BUTTERFLY CIRCUS

The movie, a 20-minute submission for a competition at The Doorpost Film Project (which promotes films which inspire and build up, rather than degrade and tear down), stars award-winning Eduardo Verástegui ("Bella") and Doug Jones ("Pan's Labyrinth"), and debuting Nick Vujicic, who runs a mind-blowing and inspiring ministry. Seriously: go check up on Nick's site!)

To borrow a bit of text from the film's site:

At the height of the Great Depression, the showman of a renowned circus leads his troupe through the devastated American landscape, lifting the spirits of audiences along the way. During their travels they discover a man without limbs at a carnival sideshow, but after an intriguing encounter with the showman he becomes driven to hope against everything he has ever believed.

And to snitch a bit of comment from Chelsea:

Life with a disability is NOT without value, hope, meaning or purpose. You must watch this film!

The writer/producer of The Butterfly Circus tells me that the film

will be up for *over a year* to be enjoyed at http://www.thedoorpost.com…

It is part of a film competition for The Doorpost Film Project which is a project designed to empower filmmakers who want to bring messages of hope to the world.

This makes me curious to see the other movies in the competition! Voting is open now through September 16. Please click on the picture above to watch and vote for Butterfly Circus. It really is a beautiful film with a beautiful message of hope and the dignity of the human person!

Well? What are you waiting for? Get moving!

Congratulations, Duggars, Yet Again!

2009-09-04T14:42:00.003-05:00

[guest commentary by Paladin]

For those of you who haven't yet heard, the Duggar Family (see here, here, and so on, for earlier posts about them) have been blessed with child #19 (who's currently in utero, and temporarily unavailable for comment)! God's blessings upon the new blessing, and upon his/her parents and siblings! Culture of death, take that! :)

(H/T: the heroic Jill Stanek)

Ted Kennedy, 1932-2009

2009-08-26T15:36:00.002-05:00

[guest commentary by Paladin]

I just learned (along with most of the world, who knew it hours before I did) that Ted Kennedy, the dissident Catholic senator from Massachusetts, died last night at his home.

I hate episodes like this. In the social/political order, this is a clear case of "addition by subraction", in that Senator Kennedy can no longer champion the culture of death; in the spiritual order, it's a time of fear and grief... since there's great reason to fear for his eternal soul. In your charity (and if your worldview allows), I ask you to pray for the soul of this sadly wayward man; he is a child of God, whose redemption was bought by Christ's agony and death on the cross, and our prayers (which go beyond time--see HERE for details) can make the difference between his salvation and damnation. He now knows the full horror of what he's done throughout his life and career; and if his soul is saved, he will have (by the grace of God) grieved for that evil far more than we could understand... and he will have joined his repentant tears and prayers to ours, in trying to undo those evil works.

Kyrie, eleison.