BIG BLUE WAVE

They just keep coming up with new ways to kill babies

2009-11-23T03:04:00.000-05:00

I've been scanning the medical literature when I came across this "gem" of an abstract describing a new way to kill the unborn during a multi-fetal "reduction".

Feticide by injection of potassium chloride usually involves sticking a needle into the chest, preferably into the heart of the baby.

With multi-fetal reduction, the intended victim of this procedure is a couple of inches long and his heart is tiny. So it's tough to hit the target, especially when he's moving around desperately trying to escape the needle.

These geniuses from Turkey suggested that instead of stabbing the heart, they should try to stab his head.

Isn't that lovely? What a heart-warming medical breakthrough.

Korean Campaign to Reduce the Number of Abortions

2009-11-23T02:12:00.000-05:00

Kind of interesting:

A group of more than 700 obstetricians sent promotional posters to 3,400 physicians nationwide Friday to urge them to participate in abolishing illegal procedures.

The group held a rally Sunday in front of Seoul Station and said it would reveal the names of clinics participating in their campaign online at www.antidc.org.

The Korean Gynecological Physicians' Association (GYNOB) claimed that all abortions should be banned except in cases where the woman is in danger of dying if she were to give birth.

"The moment the fetus is conceived, it has life. Its life should be respected like any other human beings in all circumstances," Anna Choi, the spokeswoman for the group and chief director of Ion Clinic, said. GYNOB previously said it would report clinics that conduct abortions to the government from next year.

'World's biggest animal sacrifice' in Nepal

2009-11-22T20:23:00.000-05:00

Just ew:

KATHMANDU, Nepal—Thousands of Hindu devotees have flocked to a village in Nepal ahead of the planned sacrifice of more than 300,000 animals in a ceremony condemned by animal rights activists, including French actress Brigitte Bardot.

Priests are preparing for the slaughter of more than 15,000 buffaloes and 300,000 birds
, goats, and sheep during the event, which starts Tuesday and is thought to be the biggest ritual sacrifice anywhere in the world.

Every five years, the village of Bariyapur, near Nepal's southern border with India, hosts this religious festival dedicated to Gadhimai, the Hindu goddess of power.

But leftitst will have more sympathy for these animals than for the unborn. Fetuses have to suffer and die? Who cares!

VIDEO: Street Preacher Arrested for Preaching Christ to the Bar Crowd

2009-11-20T23:24:00.000-05:00

Charges have been dismissed. But clearly, this is a form of intimidation.

Pregnant Pro-Lifer Attacked By Abortion Worker Outside KC Abortion Clinic

2009-11-20T11:22:00.000-05:00

Kansas City, KS – An abortion clinic employee attacked a pregnant pro-life volunteer outside the Central Family Medicine abortion clinic in Kansas City, Kansas, while she was engaged in peaceful, First Amendment activity.

On November 14, 2009, an unidentified abortion clinic employee came out of the Central Family Medicine abortion clinic and began to taunt the pro-lifers. Her verbal abuse escalated into violence as she rammed her shoulder into sidewalk counselor Jennifer McCoy, who is noticeably six months pregnant. A photograph taken by protest leader Mark Gietzen of the Kansas Coalition for Life shows McCoy recoiling and bracing for the hard impact that occurred a split second later.

Police were summoned, but the abortion worker attempted to flee the scene before they could arrive. McCoy followed the woman to keep her from evading the police. After realizing that she could not get away, the worker returned to the abortion clinic where she hid behind locked doors.

Police attempted to enter the clinic to arrest the woman for battery, but they were denied access by another worker who demanded that the police get a search warrant, then lied to them saying that the woman was not there.

McCoy has since been in contact with police, who are pursuing the case. There remains the possibility that the second abortion worker could face criminal charges for impeding a police investigation.

Those inconvenient babies

2009-11-19T12:34:00.000-05:00

From Choice is Murder...

Tim Murphy, Peter Krump, Edmund and I would rendezvous at nine or ten o'clock on a Saturday night at Blackie's, a bar on the south end of the Loop--a bar popular with young singles. Sometimes earlier in the week Tim would have gone by himself to the Michigan Avenue Medical Center trash dumpster and retrieved a box of babies. One night Edmund, Peter and I sat at a table at Blackies waiting for Tim to arrive. When he did, he walked into the bar carrying a large paper bag concealing the smallish, duct-taped cardboard box that contained the bodies of aborted babies. He had found the box in the dumpster on Wednesday and brought it to the bar to give it to Edmund and me to photograph the remains.

At first we were humored by Tim's brazenness. But then, to say the least, we all felt ill at ease with the box sitting on the table in the hip singles bar. I was also struck by something else. Young, attractive men and women professionals drank beer and Screwdrivers, played pin ball, watched sports programs, talked and laughed while in their very midst lay the hidden remains of aborted children. The tragedy of what the box contained clashed so completely with the noisy, rock music-filled, worldly gaiety of this place. The box of aborted babies thrust into the swanky bar was a kind of silent indictment of the sort of world the bar represented--the world so completely oblivious to the rejection of the aborted child.

VIDEO: SoulWOW (Humour)

2009-11-18T14:31:00.002-05:00

Autonomy: it's just not for killing

2009-11-18T14:24:00.000-05:00

Sane Conservatism is a new blog that is worthy of your consideration. Today's topic: euthanasia.

The most common argument in favor of euthanasia is an appeal to choice. The philosophical presupposition to this argument is the harm principle which was articulated by the philosopher John Stuart Mill. This is the well worn adage that you should be free to do whatever you want as long as you don't harm others. But, it is interesting that Mill himself argued that one could not appeal to the harm principle to sell oneself into slavery. On the surface it might seem this should be allowed. If I am willing to accept slavery to pay for a life saving operation for my wife or child say, then who are you to stop me. However, Mill noted that the purpose of the harm principle was to protect freedom and slavery clearly vitiates the very freedom the principle is supposed to protect.

I think the same case can be made for euthanasia. To kill oneself is to radically, once and for all, put an end to all future choices. It is, indeed, a radical end to ones ability to choose in way which is much more radical than selling oneself into slavery. After all a slave may be freed at some later time. My point, of course, is not that euthanasia is on par with slavery, but rather that euthanasia is in fact an attack upon the very freedom its most ardent promoters intend to defend. Euthanasia does not protect freedom, rather it is the death of freedom.

The same could be said of abortion. The right to control your body is not a license to kill. As I'm fond of saying.

From the bulging "abortion is a shady business" file

2009-11-18T10:03:00.000-05:00

Hodari Forced Abortion Suit Alleges Woman’s Mouth Covered to Muffle Her Screams

On June 17, 2009, Caitlin Bruce filed a suit against Hodari and his assistant, “Victor”, over an incident that took place at Hodari’s Flint, Michigan, abortion clinic in April, 2008. In that suit, Ms. Bruce alleges that she went to Hodari’s clinic seeking an abortion, but before the procedure began, she changed her mind and decided against it. She notified Hodari that she no longer wanted the abortion.

However, Hodari and his assistant, Victor, forcibly restrained Ms. Bruce, holding her down. Ms. Bruce screamed “Stop, stop, I don’t want this,” but her mouth was covered to muffle her pleas while Hodari forced the abortion upon her.

Included in the suit are six counts against Hodari, including lack of informed consent/medical malpractice, battery, fraud, misrepresentation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and ethnic/gender intimidation.

Who do you suppose feminists are going to defend in this confrontation?

Omar bin Laden spills the beans on his famous dad

2009-11-18T01:08:00.000-05:00

Obama bin Laden.

Once we were at his feet, my father said, “There is a paper on the wall of the mosque. This paper is for men who are good Muslims, men who volunteer to be suicide bombers.”

He looked at us with anticipation shining in his eyes. No one spoke or moved a muscle. So my father repeated what he had said. “My sons, there is a paper on the wall of the mosque. This paper is for men who volunteer to be suicide bombers. Those who want to give their lives for Islam must add their names to the list.”

That’s when one of my youngest brothers, one too young to comprehend the concept of life and death, got to his feet, nodded reverently in my father’s direction, and took off running for the mosque. That small boy was going to volunteer to be a suicide bomber.

I was furious, finally finding my voice. “My father, how can you ask this of your sons?”

Over the past few months, my father had become increasingly unhappy with me. I was turning out to be a disappointment, a son who did not want the mantle of power, who wanted peace, not war. He stared at me with evident hostility. “Omar, this is what you need to know, my son. You hold no more a place in my heart than any other man or boy in the entire country.” He glanced at my brothers. “This is true for all of my sons.”

My father’s proclamation had been given: His love for his sons did not sink further than the outer layer of his flesh. At last I knew exactly where I stood. My father hated his enemies more than he loved his sons.

Kuwait parents reject music classes as un-Islamic, 'Satanic'

2009-11-16T14:53:00.000-05:00

"Music is not part of our tradition and religion, and we totally reject it," Qatar's Gulf News quoted parent Salih al-Khalid as saying. "What will our sons gain from learning this Satanic course?"

Yeah. It's like all the poetry-reciting crap. And that painting non-sense. Who needs it? And sculpture. Pouah. Only leads to idolatry.

Mary's role in the life of grace

2009-11-16T14:05:00.002-05:00

I've been having a discussion elsewhere about devotion to Mary and related topics.

Many people tend to relegate Mary to the background, as if devotion to her was some quirky habit that detracts from the main event-- the devotion to Jesus Christ.

But the mind of the Church does not go in this sense. I don't want to turn this blog into a theological treatise, but as an example of this, I would like to publish an excerpt of Pope Pius X's encyclical AD DIEM ILLUM LAETISSIMUM, published in 1904 on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the definition of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception.

(I erased some of the academic referrals for readibility.)

When the supreme hour of the Son came, beside the Cross of Jesus there stood Mary His Mother, not merely occupied in contemplating the cruel spectacle, but rejoicing that her Only Son was offered for the salvation of mankind, and so entirely participating in His Passion, that if it had been possible she would have gladly borne all the torments that her Son bore. And from this community of will and suffering between Christ and Mary she merited to become most worthily the Reparatrix of the lost world and Dispensatrix of all the gifts that Our Savior purchased for us by His Death and by His Blood.

13. It cannot, of course, be denied that the dispensation of these treasures is the particular and peculiar right of Jesus Christ, for they are the exclusive fruit of His Death, who by His nature is the mediator between God and man. Nevertheless, by this companionship in sorrow and suffering already mentioned between the Mother and the Son, it has been allowed to the august Virgin to be the most powerful mediatrix and advocate of the whole world with her Divine Son (Pius IX. Ineffabilis).

(...)

14. We are then, it will be seen, very far from attributing to the Mother of God a productive power of grace—a power which belongs to God alone. Yet, since Mary carries it over all in holiness and union with Jesus Christ, and has been associated by Jesus Christ in the work of redemption, she merits for us "de congruo," in the language of theologians, what Jesus Christ merits for us "de condigno," and she is the supreme Minister of the distribution of graces. Jesus "sitteth on the right hand of the majesty on high" (Hebrews i. b.). Mary sitteth at the right hand of her Son—a refuge so secure and a help so trusty against all dangers that we have nothing to fear or to despair of under her guidance, her patronage, her protection. (Pius IX. in Bull Ineffabilis).

15. These principles laid down, and to return to our design, who will not see that we have with good reason claimed for Mary that—as the constant companion of Jesus from the house at Nazareth to the height of Calvary, as beyond all others initiated to the secrets of his Heart, and as the distributor, by right of her Motherhood, of the treasures of His merits,—she is, for all these reasons, a most sure and efficacious assistance to us for arriving at the knowledge and love of Jesus Christ. Those, alas! furnish us by their conduct with a peremptory proof of it, who seduced by the wiles of the demon or deceived by false doctrines think they can do without the help of the Virgin. Hapless are they who neglect Mary under pretext of the honor to be paid to Jesus Christ! As if the Child could be found elsewhere than with the Mother!

Korean Planned Parenthood Affiliate Looking to PROMOTE childbirth

2009-11-16T12:43:00.005-05:00

I was rather bowled over by this interview with the Choi Seon-jeong, the head of the Planned Population Federation of Korea, the Korean affiliate of the International Planned Parenthood Federation.

MercatorNet: You recently argued in the JoongAng Daily that "Religious groups need to advocate respect for life, abortion prevention and positive values on marriage and parenthood, encouraging the younger generation to form families and have children." These are unusual suggestions from Planned Parenthood. Does this indicate a shift in policy, or special circumstances faced by Korea?

Choi Seon-jeong: It is true that Korea implemented the family control policy to reduce the volume of population. It was a kind of family planning to meet the needs of that time. In principle, family planning means to plan how many children to have for happy family life. So when too many children impose a heavy burden on a family and the society, to reduce the number could be an appropriate way of family planning. On the contrary, when there are few children, to bear and raise more children will contribute to our happiness and the way of family planning will be also changed accordingly.

As the needs of Korean society have changed, we changed the name from "family planning association" into "planned population federation" in 2006.

Doesn't that sound just a wee bit creepy to you? I'm all for more babies, but it's just weird to go from the "family planning" business to the "population planning". It just smacks of big-brotherism.

With the change of name, we have reorganised ourselves into a low fertility rate team, an ageing society team, a public relation team, and so on and started to design and implement more comprehensive family planning programs, such as programs to prevent induced abortions, programs to support infertile couples, match-making programs, programs to dispatch assistants to women with her new-born babies, programs to enhance awareness of the public, and so on. To promote child-bearing and child-rearing, we should make efforts to prevent induced abortion, especially in cooperation with religious circles.

But...but...but...abortion was all about a woman's choice. Encouraging child-bearing? Preventing abortions. Match-making. Not very feminist, at all.

But it was never about feminism in the first place, right?

Maybe the hope of the world is Australia

2009-11-15T22:51:00.002-05:00

The Australian Bureau of Statistics 2008 births report found the nation's total fertility rate rose from 1.92 babies a woman in 2007 to 1.97 last year, the highest since 1977.

source

If they could just inch it up to 2.2, perhaps they could escape the social dysfunction of an inverted demographic pyramid. If they could grow their population, they could maybe become a political force in this world from the fact that they decided not to give up on childbearing.

Quebec Ex-Minister Dumps on Jihad

2009-11-15T20:07:00.004-05:00

Jacques Brassard, separatist and former minister from Quebec writes on his new blog:

La tuerie de Fort Hood n’est qu’une manifestation, parmi d’autres, du djihad islamique. Comme l’attentat monstrueux du 11 septembre. Les massacres de Londres et Madrid. Les guerres d’Afghanistan et d’Irak. Les tueries perpétrées par le Hamas et le Hezbollah. Les chrétiens persécutés et assassinés partout dans le monde musulman, dans l’indifférence totale de l’Occident. Le projet iranien de " rayer Israël de la carte ". La volonté des mollahs d’Iran de se doter de l’arme nucléaire. Il faut vraiment être une autruche pour ne pas voir que le djihad islamique est une guerre contre l’Occident et ses valeurs fondamentales et fondatrices.

The killing at Fort Hood is only one manifestation, among others, of Islamic jihad. Just like the monstrous attack of September 11th. The massacres in London and Madrid. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The killings perpetuated by Hamas and Hezbollah. Christians persecuted and assassinated everywhere in the Muslim world, met by the complete indifference of the West. The Iranian plan to "eradicate Israel from the map." The desire of Iranian mullahs to arm themselves with a nuclear weapon. You have to be an ostrich to not see Islamic jihad as a war against the West and its founding and fundamental values.

VIDEO: Rosary for Life in Toulouse: Pro-aborts vent their hatred

2009-11-15T19:36:00.004-05:00

Yesterday I posted about the Rosary for Life held in Bordeaux. I just got wind that the viglers at Saint-Étienne Cathedral in Toulouse were also the object of the pro-aborts' contempt. You can watch in the video (it's about 2 minutes). There's no voiceover, but the images speak volumes.

Rosaire national pour la Vie : Toulouse
par STTP31

Note how the pro-aborts were behind baracades and the police had to intervene to keep them back. One pro-abort commenter of the SOS Tout-Petits blog complained that a young counter-demonstrator ended up being "arbitrarily" arrested and getting seven stitches.

It doesn't look like there were too many arbitrary actions to me.

But remember, the pro-lifers are the violent ones!

Anti-Catholic Hatred Unleashed in Bordeaux at Rosary for Life

2009-11-14T14:34:00.003-05:00

Today is the 23rd anniversary of the French pro-life group SOS Tout-Petits. To mark the anniversary, the group held rosaries for life in over 28 cities across France, Belgium, Luxembourg and the Phillippines. (Gee, maybe us Canadians and perhaps some Americans should get in on the act next year-- already 4 countries there, why not make it six?)

But I digress...

AvortementIVG.com reports that the group in Bordeaux met at the St. André Cathedral with police presence and numbered 150 people strong. They were met with strong anti-Catholic hatred from the pro-abort counter-demonstration. Although I would normally expect this sort of opposition if the event were held in front of a clinic, I was quite surprised that they bothered to show up at a church event.

As usual, tolerance and inclusivity radiated from the left-wing crowd. They pro-aborts vented their hatred in the form of chants such as Caca-catholic and Jesus, Mary, we sodomize you and If Mary had had an abortion we wouldn't have this sh**.

To the credit of the pro-lifers, none of them were perturbed by the leftist agitation.

Original Source.

But we knew that, right?

2009-11-14T00:48:00.001-05:00

An Abortioneer writes:

A lot of pregnancies I see at work are wanted, even if they aren’t planned, even if the boyfriend is a jerk and the woman is still in school or even on drugs. Some women really want the baby, but it’s the circumstances and the future that they don’t want, and that tells them that they won’t really be able to support this pregnancy.

Pro-lifers dedicate millions of dollars to help these women bring their wanted pregnancies to term.

Abortioneers just stick a vacuum up their crotch and charge them $500 for it.

That's feminist empowerment for you.

The Death of Reason is the The Death of Man

2009-11-13T23:02:00.004-05:00

(Grab yourself a coffee...this is a long one ;) )

As we marked Remembrance Day this week, my attention turned towards the World War II era and I read up on the scientific racialism that fuelled the Nazis’ killing spree.

We have largely forgotten how widespread and accepted scientific racialism was back in the pre-war era. It was widely assumed that because whites were superior in this or that category, that gave them the right to kill or disrespect inferior peoples.

I’m not so irritated at the racism of the findings—that whites have higher IQ’s and that sort of thing. What grates on my nerves is that no one seemed to question that superiority gave one the right to kill. Even if, for the sake of discussion, you agreed that the Germans needed their Lebenstraum, what right did that give them to kill millions of people? Even if you thought that blacks constituted a threat to the purity of the white race, what right did it give people to lynch them?

There is absolutely no sense of responsibility toward others.

And of course this brings me to the fetal rights debate. You never read of a feminist claiming that a mother has a responsibility towards a fetus. A woman should be able to abort for any reason whatsoever, and no one is allowed to question that decision.

The fetus is a threat after all.

Poor choicers have no interest in that debate about the fetus. For abortionists and hardcore feminists, the fetus is worthy of zero moral consideration. Their allies in the poor choice movement may differ from one degree to another, attributing moral worth to the fetus in some circumstances and not others. A discussion on this matter would be politically fratricidal. Not to mention that it could play into the hands of pro-lifers by raising the status of the fetus, especially in Canada (where he has none). So the poor choice movement will remain officially mum on the fetus, holding to a relativistic position, with all the contradictions that that entails.

Poor choicers will continue to argue against fetal personhood based on the possible negative consequences of according that status. The problem with consequence-based thinking is that it make truth dependent on whether or not you like the results.

That may be a politically viable strategy. But it’s not intellectually honest. After all, even if Blacks had banded together and taken over the US and sullied “white culture”, was that any reason to deny their civil rights? If Jews had been the cause of all of Germany’s ills, would that have justified the Nuremberg Laws?

Of course not.

When you worry too much about consequences, you tend to forget principles. This leads to a mentality of accepting that the ends justify the means.

A lot of the argument about abortion is just that. Poor choicers posit that if pregnant women aren’t allowed to abort, they will be arrested for smoking a cigarette and that will lead to the establishment of the Republic of Gilead.

Let’s just assume for the moment that’s the case.

What right does that give anyone the right to kill their unborn child?

The argument from consequences is easy, because it by-passes the difficult process of actually using one’s reason and formulating principles. I’m not trying to argue that no feminist has an articulate defense for her beliefs beyond the typical pro-abortion slogans. But when you want to mobilize a bunch of people who may not be with you on a philosophical level, the easiest way to do that is by referring to what is concrete—namely potential consequences.

It’s the masses that seem to unquestioningly accept the idea that fetuses are not human beings (at least in Canada—perhaps this is less true in the United States). It is taken for granted that a woman’s autonomy outweighs the rights of the unborn child. There’s no consideration of the responsibility towards the unborn children. Just a raw desire to come out on top in the imagined maternal-fetal conflict, regardless of abstract principles. Respecting a two-celled human being seems so absurd in the absence of the value of the intrinsic dignity of human beings, the very basis of the Western idea of equality. People will respect an idea, however inconvenient, if they believe they must to remain honourable. They will not respect a prenatal human being solely on the basis of its DNA.

That sense of responsibility comes from the belief that human beings deserve respect; that humanity is something special and makes an individual worthy of consideration.

We have completely lost the sense that human nature is intrinsically valuable. I don’t wish to make the argument here because it will make my blogpost even longer than this. The loss of belief in the intrinsic value of human is what leads to mass atrocities. The Nazis didn’t think all humans had an intrinsic dignity. The atheist communists sure didn’t. Any time a group of human beings was not regarded as having intrinsic human dignity, they were targeted for abuse, exploitation or elimination.

I think this loss of the sense of human value is the consequence of the loss of any sense of metaphysics: the idea that our reason is able to know with certitude about intangible realities. Although the rejection of metaphysics began very long ago in the late Middle Ages, in the last century, we see not just a rejection of the power of reason to know, but an elevation of the non-rational, the irrational and the anti-rational as the foundation for a worldview. Take Freudian psychology. Based on no scientific observations whatsoever, it posited the existence of an “unconscious” in the mind, which contained an id, an ego and a superego (which is now largely discredited.) Post-modernist philosophy rejects any kind of absolute, and even accommodates contradictions, against the principles of logic.

The relativism and lack of intellectual discipline of our age makes any kind of abstract consideration to be a very daunting, if not seemingly impossible task. Of course I wouldn’t expect just anyone to be able to do this—abstract thought is not something everyone can do. But most college-educated people should be able to, especially those who graduate in the humanities. But this involves such a major challenge to everyday ideas that that it’d be hard to imagine anyone doing this spontaneously.

But the alternative is to ignore the truth. And lest I be accused of arguing based on “results” – against which I argued above—let me say that the whole purpose of thinking is to know the truth about reality, whatever that reality happens to be. You fail at the purpose of thinking if you can’t know basic things like who is worthy of moral consideration and what moral behaviour is.

People can accept that as a possibility. But we’re not programmed to remain in ignorance. That’s human nature.

McGill Student Union Revokes Choose Life's Club Status

2009-11-13T12:56:00.000-05:00

Reports ProWomanProLife.

The motion, which passed by a vote of 16-7, stipulated that the “Student Equity Committee work with Choose Life to draft a document for Choose Life on how to abide by SSMU’s Constitution, By-laws, and Policies, which will be adopted by Choose Life.”

I'm intrigued to say the least. How will that work, exactly? Criticizing abortion is perceived as misogynist, but the SSMU is willing to work with the group so that it...won't criticize abortion?

Is this a question of co-opting a group to better control its message, after a bunch of renegades staged a temper tantrum at the Echoes of the Holocaust presentation and embarrassed the crap out of the university?

I wonder.

Update

2009-11-12T13:43:00.000-05:00

I'm still sick. I was feeling better, but I had a relapse. Now I have a bad cough and runny nose. Maybe I picked up something new.

Meanwhile-- why not read the blogs on my sidebar?

Social Media and Pro-lifers

2009-11-10T14:36:00.003-05:00

An excellent primer from the U of T Students for Life blog.

If you're reading this, you probably don't need it, but it's always good to publicize it (and maybe increase its Google Rank...who knows?)

Can the Church be Honest with Anglo-Catholics?

2009-11-10T14:13:00.002-05:00

Anglican Samizdat raises some pertinent issues about the recent bid by the Church to open the gates to dissatisfied Anglo-Catholics:

For the Anglicans who accept what the charitable view as a more than generous offer and the cynical as opportunistic poaching, I wonder how they will feel when the Pope acts – and he or his successor will – on something they don’t agree with. Presumably those who are tempted by the current offer were not sufficiently tempted by previous ones or they would already be Roman Catholic; which means they don’t believe that the Roman Catholic Church is the one true church. Or perhaps some of the RC specific dogma about Mary, the authority of the Pope or praying to the saints stuck in their craw. For the priests, maybe it was the prospect of losing Anglo-Catholic paraphernalia – which now they can keep along with their wives; if that was the case, though, it seems like a shallow reason (well, apart from the wives) for resisting the call which has now become so compelling.

I have a friend who used to be an evangelical and converted to Roman Catholicism – mainly because he became convinced of the truth of transubstantiation. I asked him how he copes with some of the RC beliefs that are quite opposed to his previous views. His answer was that he ignores them – after all nothing is perfect. True enough, but I wonder how long Anglo-Catholic euphoria will last once the “Anglo” part fades under the weight of the Roman Magisterium.

I like the Anglo-Catholics. Really I do. But to be Catholic, you have to accept it as a package deal. There are lots of significant differences between traditional Anglicanism and Catholicism. Papal Supremacy being one. Marian dogmas are another. Prayers to saints. Purgatory. Sacred Tradition. And on and on.

Did no one else think of this?

My fear is that we'll be offering Anglo-Catholics a false deal. I'm afraid that there will be a lot of Marshmallow Bishops (to borrow John Pacheco's term) who will let all these people in because they are so morally correct, without requiring a profession of the Catholic faith.

And then when the Church defines another dogma, such as Mary Co-Redemptrix (which is even a hot dispute among Catholics) they'll be all miffed and say "we never signed on to this".

And the truth is, they won't have, but no one would have had the courage, honesty and charity to tell them.

The last thing we need in the Catholic Church is more dissidence and spinelessness.

Former PP Director Describes Watching Unborn Child Struggle Before Being Aborted

2009-11-09T23:55:00.006-05:00

Lifesite:

"I saw a full side profile, so I saw face to feet on the ultrasound machine," said Johnson. "I saw the probe going into the woman's uterus, and at that moment I saw the baby moving and trying to get away from the probe."

"And I thought, 'It's fighting for its life," said Johnson. "And I thought, 'It's life.' I mean, it's alive. ...

"My mind was racing, my heart was beating so fast, and I just was thinking, 'Oh my gosh, make it stop.' Then all of a sudden, it was over. I saw the baby just literally crumble, and it was over."

The Silent Scream: Watch it if you dare. Skip the blah blah blah. Go to about the 15th minute. Tell me that's a "non-sentient" being.

Abortionist admits: I love abortion

2009-11-09T14:44:00.004-05:00

Silky Laminaria confesses:

What do I mean when I say I love abortion? To me, there is absolutely nothing wrong or surprising with the supposed "controversial" statement. I love women, therefore I love abortion. Abortion is a part of women's lives.

But she doesn't love fetuses. They can suffer and die for all she cares. It's a zero-sum game, right? If you love women, you can't love fetuses. If you love fetuses, you can't love women. If you love women, you must support their "right" to have their fetuses ripped limb from limb. Because saying that women have a responsibility towards another human being inside of them is a profoundly hateful and misogynistic thing to say. Holding women up to the same moral standards as men is wrong, tragically, tragically wrong.

What a heartwarming thought.