Very sad and shocking about the maimed woman on the cover and what happened to her, which is of course unjust.
However, before lying that the war in Afghanistan is about "saving" and "protecting" their women, consider this.
Perhaps TIME should put on the cover one of the DAILY morgue bodies of an American infant killed by the "baby mama's boyfriend" or even their own father or mother. We'd have many more examples to grace the cover each DAY than you have of honor killings and maiming in Afghanistan. Don't be total hypocrites, please. It brings you no closer to wisdom and justification.
Showing posts with label Child abuse. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Child abuse. Show all posts
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
Saturday, October 24, 2009
Understanding God
Reading, as many of you have, about the many problems of suicides, domestic violence, child abuse, murder-suicides and other signs of an increasingly sickening world, I thought of increasing one's understanding of God through the use of an old expression.
In English there is a traditional saying when describing someone who is mentally or emotionally unraveling, saying that he or she is "coming unglued." In that saying there is a tacit recognition that each human is "held together" by something, and that in trouble or illness there is a problem of falling apart.
For you to truly understand God you must recognize that God is the glue that holds individual persons and communities together. Without God (a genuine knowing of God, not idolatry) individual persons and communities as a whole risk coming unglued and falling apart.
Society, particularly relatively affluent Western society, has promoted "coming unglued" because not only is belief in God pushed out of the public square, but more fundamentally, society pushes the fragmentation of the individual and also of the society as a whole.
Let me repeat this. Even if God were still respected in the public square, society would still have tremendous problems because society has taken on a set of highly fragmenting values. Each person is evaluated with a list of scorecard types of attributes, for example, starting in their earliest childhood. Further, families have fragmented (become unglued), forcing even more individual fragmentation as family identity and safety net is lost. The home itself is often a dangerous place, even for the most helpless, the infants. It truly is "dog eat dog" and "every man for himself," even for the very young. With partially occupied residences and frequent moves, plus isolation from the community around a person (not being part of one's community by participation or emotional investment, and trust me, I know that's hard to do as they have become scorecard exclusionary) there is the fragmentation of the community and its social net too. With fragmented denominations even for those who still profess to believe in God, churches no longer have the gravitas to provide their share of glue, of community identity and safety net. Finally, marketers and media only speak to special interest groups, who they identify with, try to get money from by selling their products, and those they advocate and "relate" to, further fragmenting and ungluing individuals, families, communities and faith groups.
When one does not look to God to provide the glue that keeps body and soul together, individually and collectively, that is the wedge for then the lowering and lowest common denominators of society to fulfill the personal and community disintegration. That's why giving an alienated and depressed teenager, for example, information about God is not enough... the social and other environmental factors must also be addressed as a whole. Even a teenager such as this one in our example who values hearing about God, the true God, in their distress is not "cured" of their pain and alienation if the next day they go from their fragmented family to their fragmented school to be judged in the freak show society scorecard meat market.
Every few years or so researchers used to ask what kids want to be when they grow up, and then they'd analyze the results, looking at what occupations or interests raise or lower in popularity. But here is the problem. The past two generations don't want anything except to be "famous" with its twin non-vocation "get rich." That is the scorecard fragmentation I am speaking about. Young people want to be scorecard traits (famous, rich, "hot"), since that's what their parents, teachers, society, media and marketers have taught them, rather than to have occupations or vocations (including professions, clerical, labor, homemaker, parent, clergy, military...) They all want to do something or be something, rather than have an interest or a calling. It is not their fault: it is how society has become unglued, starting in the family and reaching its prime robotic programming in the classroom and the media.
So how does a sad and troubled teen "become famous?" Suicide. How does a teen escape a problem situation, from the most dire to the ones that in hindsight are only painful parts of growing up, when there is no safety net in family and community, and they've never been taught God as the glue? Suicide.
Now we also have the double whammy where a society that is only individual scorecard oriented now deprives individuals of their livelihoods. We no longer are a world where people can survive without a paycheck from somewhere. What do you have when someone lacks God as the glue, there is no church or community cohesion and safety net, and there is an economic desperation? Murder-suicide.
HOW LOW DOES HUMANITY, THAT HAS BEEN SO BLESSED, HAVE TO SINK?
What did anyone think (when they took a break from their hits on the bong) would happen when the glue of God, authentic self esteem, family, community and church was continually removed? What does any idiot think would happen if one removed the glue from any structure that is made up of parts held together by that glue? It all falls down.
In English there is a traditional saying when describing someone who is mentally or emotionally unraveling, saying that he or she is "coming unglued." In that saying there is a tacit recognition that each human is "held together" by something, and that in trouble or illness there is a problem of falling apart.
For you to truly understand God you must recognize that God is the glue that holds individual persons and communities together. Without God (a genuine knowing of God, not idolatry) individual persons and communities as a whole risk coming unglued and falling apart.
Society, particularly relatively affluent Western society, has promoted "coming unglued" because not only is belief in God pushed out of the public square, but more fundamentally, society pushes the fragmentation of the individual and also of the society as a whole.
Let me repeat this. Even if God were still respected in the public square, society would still have tremendous problems because society has taken on a set of highly fragmenting values. Each person is evaluated with a list of scorecard types of attributes, for example, starting in their earliest childhood. Further, families have fragmented (become unglued), forcing even more individual fragmentation as family identity and safety net is lost. The home itself is often a dangerous place, even for the most helpless, the infants. It truly is "dog eat dog" and "every man for himself," even for the very young. With partially occupied residences and frequent moves, plus isolation from the community around a person (not being part of one's community by participation or emotional investment, and trust me, I know that's hard to do as they have become scorecard exclusionary) there is the fragmentation of the community and its social net too. With fragmented denominations even for those who still profess to believe in God, churches no longer have the gravitas to provide their share of glue, of community identity and safety net. Finally, marketers and media only speak to special interest groups, who they identify with, try to get money from by selling their products, and those they advocate and "relate" to, further fragmenting and ungluing individuals, families, communities and faith groups.
When one does not look to God to provide the glue that keeps body and soul together, individually and collectively, that is the wedge for then the lowering and lowest common denominators of society to fulfill the personal and community disintegration. That's why giving an alienated and depressed teenager, for example, information about God is not enough... the social and other environmental factors must also be addressed as a whole. Even a teenager such as this one in our example who values hearing about God, the true God, in their distress is not "cured" of their pain and alienation if the next day they go from their fragmented family to their fragmented school to be judged in the freak show society scorecard meat market.
Every few years or so researchers used to ask what kids want to be when they grow up, and then they'd analyze the results, looking at what occupations or interests raise or lower in popularity. But here is the problem. The past two generations don't want anything except to be "famous" with its twin non-vocation "get rich." That is the scorecard fragmentation I am speaking about. Young people want to be scorecard traits (famous, rich, "hot"), since that's what their parents, teachers, society, media and marketers have taught them, rather than to have occupations or vocations (including professions, clerical, labor, homemaker, parent, clergy, military...) They all want to do something or be something, rather than have an interest or a calling. It is not their fault: it is how society has become unglued, starting in the family and reaching its prime robotic programming in the classroom and the media.
So how does a sad and troubled teen "become famous?" Suicide. How does a teen escape a problem situation, from the most dire to the ones that in hindsight are only painful parts of growing up, when there is no safety net in family and community, and they've never been taught God as the glue? Suicide.
Now we also have the double whammy where a society that is only individual scorecard oriented now deprives individuals of their livelihoods. We no longer are a world where people can survive without a paycheck from somewhere. What do you have when someone lacks God as the glue, there is no church or community cohesion and safety net, and there is an economic desperation? Murder-suicide.
HOW LOW DOES HUMANITY, THAT HAS BEEN SO BLESSED, HAVE TO SINK?
What did anyone think (when they took a break from their hits on the bong) would happen when the glue of God, authentic self esteem, family, community and church was continually removed? What does any idiot think would happen if one removed the glue from any structure that is made up of parts held together by that glue? It all falls down.
Killed for a piece of watermelon
A grandfather who with his wife had custody of their two grandsons shot the six year old dead when the grandfather was angry thinking the little boy had taken a piece of watermelon to eat. Trying to shield the boy the grandmother was gravely wounded. This happened in June. The grandmother died this week.
Anyone else notice the insane perverted violence just keeps escalating? Anyone interested in actually doing something about it instead of making it worse?
And by the way, watermelon jokes in households of the same name qualifies as making it worse. Regular readers know I'm for subversive humor when appropriate, but that kind of "joshing" is just criminal mental voodoo and as I warned YEARS AGO when I was trying to study the insane beliefs of the cultists IT WILL REBOUND ON YOU FOR YEARS AND UNTO THE NEXT GENERATIONS. Clean up your minds and your souls people. You don't fix error and perversion, nor save your souls, with more error and perversion. DUH.
Remember what the Bible says that sinful AND foolish thoughts are SIN. Each time someone either mocks someone else (and when they have the first thought of it), these are individual counts of sins. This is especially true and most certainly not mitigation if one is using the mocking or re-enactment for an occult reason (to "even the balance" or whatever) since that is blasphemy and idolatry. So each idea to do that is a sin, each subsequent thought of planning it is a sin, and each deed that each person does to accomplish the tableau and deeds are sins, and then the actual deed is a sin, and the feeling of the persons who are the object of the tableau and deeds, when they are sad or afraid, is a sin of violence against their spirit. Each time one "techs" or does other voodoo, "evening the balance" of acting out or preparing tableau to "cancel out" supposed "imbalance" seems to have on the average one dozen sins per person newly formed and attached. I have no hope for the vast majority of you as you only make things worse, not better.
For those of you readers who don't know what I'm talking about, be glad. A walk or a talk among the occult of this "New Age" and other "beliefs" is total filth and I don't enjoy a minute of it. Unfortunately true "light workers" seem to have to go to the filth in order to point out the lack of sewers.
DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Anyone else notice the insane perverted violence just keeps escalating? Anyone interested in actually doing something about it instead of making it worse?
And by the way, watermelon jokes in households of the same name qualifies as making it worse. Regular readers know I'm for subversive humor when appropriate, but that kind of "joshing" is just criminal mental voodoo and as I warned YEARS AGO when I was trying to study the insane beliefs of the cultists IT WILL REBOUND ON YOU FOR YEARS AND UNTO THE NEXT GENERATIONS. Clean up your minds and your souls people. You don't fix error and perversion, nor save your souls, with more error and perversion. DUH.
Remember what the Bible says that sinful AND foolish thoughts are SIN. Each time someone either mocks someone else (and when they have the first thought of it), these are individual counts of sins. This is especially true and most certainly not mitigation if one is using the mocking or re-enactment for an occult reason (to "even the balance" or whatever) since that is blasphemy and idolatry. So each idea to do that is a sin, each subsequent thought of planning it is a sin, and each deed that each person does to accomplish the tableau and deeds are sins, and then the actual deed is a sin, and the feeling of the persons who are the object of the tableau and deeds, when they are sad or afraid, is a sin of violence against their spirit. Each time one "techs" or does other voodoo, "evening the balance" of acting out or preparing tableau to "cancel out" supposed "imbalance" seems to have on the average one dozen sins per person newly formed and attached. I have no hope for the vast majority of you as you only make things worse, not better.
For those of you readers who don't know what I'm talking about, be glad. A walk or a talk among the occult of this "New Age" and other "beliefs" is total filth and I don't enjoy a minute of it. Unfortunately true "light workers" seem to have to go to the filth in order to point out the lack of sewers.
DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Another child murdered, dumped in the trash
How long? How long must we sing this song?
How long are our children victims of the perverts who rule, one way or the other, and destroyed?
When will the beast within human beings stop being fed?
How long are our children victims of the perverts who rule, one way or the other, and destroyed?
When will the beast within human beings stop being fed?
Monday, October 5, 2009
Go ahead and hate the Catholic Church
Honestly, it does not bother me at all. I'm posting this just to save some time and energy for those who go further and further in their hatred of the Church, trying to get some additional pain or reaction from me, or others. No lie, I could not care less if a billion people hated the Catholic Church as badly as the worst of them (check comments section of any article about religion to see what I mean.) God's truth: I could not care less if one billion people or more hated the Catholic Church just as much as the most despising individuals we see today. Why is that?
You can hate the Catholic Church to pieces, but it doesn't change the fact that there is a God, one to whom everyone, both people who are guilty of abuse in the Church AND haters in general, must be accountable to.
People keep confusing the institution with the reality of God. You know what that is? Darwin at work.
To hate a religious institution because of the abuse of some or even "many" is in opposition to one's own survival traits (terminology I've used before) and thus is "Darwin at work" for two reasons:
1. By hating the Catholic Church you diminish your own faith in God in general, regardless of your denomination and woe especially to you if you are atheist, as it's blinders on top of blinders.
2. By hating priest sex abusers you channel all your presumed "righteous indignation" toward the Church and away from, oh, I don't know, maybe parents who rape their own babies' behinds and mouths, give them drugs, sell (or trade them) for sex, or who have incest with their older children, or pose infants to teenagers for porn. I'm not a statistician but I could make a smart bet that there's much more of that, which ruins generations and destroys intimacy (and murders) many more individuals than all the abuse in the Church, and that's assuming a lot.
By doing any of the above you are diminishing your own survival traits and just fulfilling Darwin, like the clown who says "watch this" while handing a beer to his friend.
So pour on the hate: I am serious. Let's see how much we have to deal with and then the peanut gallery of good natured but uninvolved people on the sidelines will eventually say, just as I explained above, "Hmm. As outrageous as the abuse was, and how grievous, is the Catholic Church really the source of all perversion in the world?" *Glances at the newspaper and sees another "boyfriend" stuck his **** into his girlfriend's infant before beating it to death.*
Sooner or later if people are going to survive at all, they are going to have to get proportional and sane again. If on the way to that road (which may result in the Second Coming, by the way, where there are more disappointed people than joyful ones) you have to reach spittle flying total hatred for the Catholic Church, go ahead, it does not raise my blood pressure, nor make me boo hoo hoo into my hanky. I just think, with a small amount of chortling, how surprised YOU all will be when you discover that you can hate abusing doctors, but that does not mean that medicine is invalid. Get ready for God to pin that medal on your chest (or Satan to pin it on your backside).
And, just for a little theology, let's come up with an awful scenario. Let's suppose that millions of people rose up in hatred against the Church and individual Catholics, oppressing, attacking and even murdering them. Theologically that's an awesome thing, because even those lukewarm cafeteria Catholics would become martyrs, and we all know (if we actually read the Bible) how all martyrs are glorified by God for eternity.
Have a nice day!
You can hate the Catholic Church to pieces, but it doesn't change the fact that there is a God, one to whom everyone, both people who are guilty of abuse in the Church AND haters in general, must be accountable to.
People keep confusing the institution with the reality of God. You know what that is? Darwin at work.
To hate a religious institution because of the abuse of some or even "many" is in opposition to one's own survival traits (terminology I've used before) and thus is "Darwin at work" for two reasons:
1. By hating the Catholic Church you diminish your own faith in God in general, regardless of your denomination and woe especially to you if you are atheist, as it's blinders on top of blinders.
2. By hating priest sex abusers you channel all your presumed "righteous indignation" toward the Church and away from, oh, I don't know, maybe parents who rape their own babies' behinds and mouths, give them drugs, sell (or trade them) for sex, or who have incest with their older children, or pose infants to teenagers for porn. I'm not a statistician but I could make a smart bet that there's much more of that, which ruins generations and destroys intimacy (and murders) many more individuals than all the abuse in the Church, and that's assuming a lot.
By doing any of the above you are diminishing your own survival traits and just fulfilling Darwin, like the clown who says "watch this" while handing a beer to his friend.
So pour on the hate: I am serious. Let's see how much we have to deal with and then the peanut gallery of good natured but uninvolved people on the sidelines will eventually say, just as I explained above, "Hmm. As outrageous as the abuse was, and how grievous, is the Catholic Church really the source of all perversion in the world?" *Glances at the newspaper and sees another "boyfriend" stuck his **** into his girlfriend's infant before beating it to death.*
Sooner or later if people are going to survive at all, they are going to have to get proportional and sane again. If on the way to that road (which may result in the Second Coming, by the way, where there are more disappointed people than joyful ones) you have to reach spittle flying total hatred for the Catholic Church, go ahead, it does not raise my blood pressure, nor make me boo hoo hoo into my hanky. I just think, with a small amount of chortling, how surprised YOU all will be when you discover that you can hate abusing doctors, but that does not mean that medicine is invalid. Get ready for God to pin that medal on your chest (or Satan to pin it on your backside).
And, just for a little theology, let's come up with an awful scenario. Let's suppose that millions of people rose up in hatred against the Church and individual Catholics, oppressing, attacking and even murdering them. Theologically that's an awesome thing, because even those lukewarm cafeteria Catholics would become martyrs, and we all know (if we actually read the Bible) how all martyrs are glorified by God for eternity.
Have a nice day!
Thursday, August 20, 2009
Denying the faith and the Holy Spirit
I'm making just a quick "hold that thought" note about a complicated topic. This morning after watching Mass on EWTN (Father Pacwa hit his sermon right out of the ballpark, right away, totally excellent, I would have added just one thing :-) there was an excellent brief segment about one of the early church fathers. I'll talk more about who when what later but just want to make this point.
He was a bishop who lived a few centuries after Christ, during a time of terrible on and then off persecutions. The emperors and/or their local people would periodically decide to torture and force Christians to renounce Jesus Christ and worship idols, or die.
This became a huge topic (besides the obvious) in the early Christian Church. Remember that is YOUR church too, there was no "Protestant" versus "false church," you ALL come from the truth and the blood of the one true Church.
The topic was... what to do when a persecution was over with, and people who had denied Christ and thus saved their lives repented and wanted to return to the Church, while those who had not denied Christ had died for the faith. Remember, it was not just words mumbled at the point of a sword. Those who were forced to abandon Christ actually had to now regularly worship idols and false gods, not just cross their fingers behind their back and tell a fib. They truly had to turn their back on Jesus Christ AND actively worship idols.
Some in the Church rightly felt this was unforgivable. However some in the Church rightly felt this was forgivable. This is why there is a "Pope," a "Peter," by the way, not to make stuff up because he feels like it, but to help people to respond to the thorny theological questions of the time when they are in it, I mean, duh. By the way, the Pope during the time of this bishop was martyred in the persecution.
The Popes who reigned during the persecutions came to conclude that this was forgivable and believe you me, that was a really unpopular decision for some. The Popes decided on the side of scripture where Christ said that one should not forgive just once, or seven times, but seventy times seven times. The Popes and the bishops, however, felt that not just a hand wave was needed for such people, but genuine repentence and genuine penance (prayer and deeds) to atone for abandoning Christ.
Now, here is why some people correctly could hold the opposite view-that apostacy or whatever it is called-is not forgivable, and I will advise you how to understand how Christ reconciled the two facts that fuel each side in the debate.
Those who feel it is unforgivable cite the scripture when Christ said that offenses against the Holy Spirit are not forgivable. They correctly understand that denying Jesus Christ and then worshipping idols is an offense against the Holy Spirit. This is why people against forgiveness were not being mean, but were God fearing scripture readers, just like the forgiveness side.
Here is the distinction. Christ is saying to freely forgive genuine human weakness. People who broke under torture, or who feared torture on behalf of themselves and their families, were responding to genuine human weakness. Who cannot forgive genuine human weakness when it is genuinely mourned and repented, and conversion of the heart then occurs? That is why Christ says to forgive them repeatedly, as he would have done.
However, here is where that would not qualify for the repeated or even one time forgiveness. The primary offense against the Holy Spirit is to be cynically willing to sin with the planned assumption that "Hey, I'm going to get forgiven anyways." So those who jumped to worship idols, not doing so out of weakness and terror, but doing so because they figure God is mushy and will just forgive them anyways, they are the ones who will be denied forgiveness because they were committing an offense against the Holy Spirit.
So the "forgiving" side and the "tough" side were equally grounded in scripture and equally correct. They needed to discern the difference between those many who caved in due to genuine terror and weakness, and those who caved in due to attempting to manipulate the forgiveness of God through the Holy Spirit. This is why the Popes and the bishops in general decided on the side of forgiveness, trusting that God in his final judgment will sort out the hopefully minority of those who cynically jumped to abandon Jesus Christ, figuring it didn't really matter to God, who was "sure" to forgive them, anyway.
Here is a modern analogy to make it clearer. Sadly this is an all too common scenario.
A single mother lives with a "boyfriend" who abuses the mother's baby. She does not report the boyfriend until the baby is actually seriously injured or killed, and the cruelty is thus uncovered at the hospital by police.
One such mother scenario is that she is weak and craven and is so scared of the "boyfriend" that she lets the baby be hurt and die. That is still absolutely no excuse, either morally or legally, but she would be "eligible" for lack of better words for appropriate forgiveness after genuine repentence.
The other such mother scenario is that she is weak and craven but also cynically figures that at least she still "has" the boyfriend, and that even when they are caught she can claim that she was too scared to stop the abuse. She is planning ahead her "excuse" for her own selfish reasons (continue to have sex, money or whatever from the boyfriend while he abuses the baby). She, spiritually (and legally, of course) is not eligible for forgiveness, using our analogy.
This, by the way, is one reason the Catholic Church is against the death penalty. They hope against hope that even the worse of the worse can experience genuine conversion and repentence, even if they were cynical about it all their miserable lives.
So I wanted to deeply warn, as I have before, those of you who know the truth of the faith yet continue to deny Jesus Christ and the one true God, obeying him, figuring that you can always do it "later" because good old mushy God and "JC" will "forgive you anyway." That is in the realm of the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit. And yes, Protestants, Paul warns against grieving the Holy Spirit too... I know a lot of you feel better when Paul says so "in addition" to Jesus Christ himself! :-)
But those of you who cynically worship idols for money or whatever reasons, including fear, but do not do so from weakness, but from cynical strength, counting on God's mushy and easy forgiveness, even if you are absolved by a priest and so forth, if you are under false pretenses you can well wake up in hell, believe you me, just like the man Jesus talks about in Luke 16.
There is an overflowing abundance of mercy like flowing waters for the genuinely weak and flawed, even if it takes them at the point of the sword to denying Jesus Christ. Manipulators and semi-believers cannot count on that, though, as Jesus Christ, and later Paul, both warn.
He was a bishop who lived a few centuries after Christ, during a time of terrible on and then off persecutions. The emperors and/or their local people would periodically decide to torture and force Christians to renounce Jesus Christ and worship idols, or die.
This became a huge topic (besides the obvious) in the early Christian Church. Remember that is YOUR church too, there was no "Protestant" versus "false church," you ALL come from the truth and the blood of the one true Church.
The topic was... what to do when a persecution was over with, and people who had denied Christ and thus saved their lives repented and wanted to return to the Church, while those who had not denied Christ had died for the faith. Remember, it was not just words mumbled at the point of a sword. Those who were forced to abandon Christ actually had to now regularly worship idols and false gods, not just cross their fingers behind their back and tell a fib. They truly had to turn their back on Jesus Christ AND actively worship idols.
Some in the Church rightly felt this was unforgivable. However some in the Church rightly felt this was forgivable. This is why there is a "Pope," a "Peter," by the way, not to make stuff up because he feels like it, but to help people to respond to the thorny theological questions of the time when they are in it, I mean, duh. By the way, the Pope during the time of this bishop was martyred in the persecution.
The Popes who reigned during the persecutions came to conclude that this was forgivable and believe you me, that was a really unpopular decision for some. The Popes decided on the side of scripture where Christ said that one should not forgive just once, or seven times, but seventy times seven times. The Popes and the bishops, however, felt that not just a hand wave was needed for such people, but genuine repentence and genuine penance (prayer and deeds) to atone for abandoning Christ.
Now, here is why some people correctly could hold the opposite view-that apostacy or whatever it is called-is not forgivable, and I will advise you how to understand how Christ reconciled the two facts that fuel each side in the debate.
Those who feel it is unforgivable cite the scripture when Christ said that offenses against the Holy Spirit are not forgivable. They correctly understand that denying Jesus Christ and then worshipping idols is an offense against the Holy Spirit. This is why people against forgiveness were not being mean, but were God fearing scripture readers, just like the forgiveness side.
Here is the distinction. Christ is saying to freely forgive genuine human weakness. People who broke under torture, or who feared torture on behalf of themselves and their families, were responding to genuine human weakness. Who cannot forgive genuine human weakness when it is genuinely mourned and repented, and conversion of the heart then occurs? That is why Christ says to forgive them repeatedly, as he would have done.
However, here is where that would not qualify for the repeated or even one time forgiveness. The primary offense against the Holy Spirit is to be cynically willing to sin with the planned assumption that "Hey, I'm going to get forgiven anyways." So those who jumped to worship idols, not doing so out of weakness and terror, but doing so because they figure God is mushy and will just forgive them anyways, they are the ones who will be denied forgiveness because they were committing an offense against the Holy Spirit.
So the "forgiving" side and the "tough" side were equally grounded in scripture and equally correct. They needed to discern the difference between those many who caved in due to genuine terror and weakness, and those who caved in due to attempting to manipulate the forgiveness of God through the Holy Spirit. This is why the Popes and the bishops in general decided on the side of forgiveness, trusting that God in his final judgment will sort out the hopefully minority of those who cynically jumped to abandon Jesus Christ, figuring it didn't really matter to God, who was "sure" to forgive them, anyway.
Here is a modern analogy to make it clearer. Sadly this is an all too common scenario.
A single mother lives with a "boyfriend" who abuses the mother's baby. She does not report the boyfriend until the baby is actually seriously injured or killed, and the cruelty is thus uncovered at the hospital by police.
One such mother scenario is that she is weak and craven and is so scared of the "boyfriend" that she lets the baby be hurt and die. That is still absolutely no excuse, either morally or legally, but she would be "eligible" for lack of better words for appropriate forgiveness after genuine repentence.
The other such mother scenario is that she is weak and craven but also cynically figures that at least she still "has" the boyfriend, and that even when they are caught she can claim that she was too scared to stop the abuse. She is planning ahead her "excuse" for her own selfish reasons (continue to have sex, money or whatever from the boyfriend while he abuses the baby). She, spiritually (and legally, of course) is not eligible for forgiveness, using our analogy.
This, by the way, is one reason the Catholic Church is against the death penalty. They hope against hope that even the worse of the worse can experience genuine conversion and repentence, even if they were cynical about it all their miserable lives.
So I wanted to deeply warn, as I have before, those of you who know the truth of the faith yet continue to deny Jesus Christ and the one true God, obeying him, figuring that you can always do it "later" because good old mushy God and "JC" will "forgive you anyway." That is in the realm of the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit. And yes, Protestants, Paul warns against grieving the Holy Spirit too... I know a lot of you feel better when Paul says so "in addition" to Jesus Christ himself! :-)
But those of you who cynically worship idols for money or whatever reasons, including fear, but do not do so from weakness, but from cynical strength, counting on God's mushy and easy forgiveness, even if you are absolved by a priest and so forth, if you are under false pretenses you can well wake up in hell, believe you me, just like the man Jesus talks about in Luke 16.
There is an overflowing abundance of mercy like flowing waters for the genuinely weak and flawed, even if it takes them at the point of the sword to denying Jesus Christ. Manipulators and semi-believers cannot count on that, though, as Jesus Christ, and later Paul, both warn.
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Abortion case study: the Brazil raped child
I commented a few days ago that I thought the nine year old girl in Brazil, raped by her stepfather and now pregnant with twins, and of delicate health and no doubt greatly traumatized, should of course be viewed as someone who should be given an abortion since that is what she wants and her doctors concur regarding the risk. She went ahead and had the abortion and now the archbishop has responded. Here is the article and let's use this as a sad but very helpful case study to find some common ground of understanding even if people disagree on the conclusions and principles.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29531755/
snip
RIO DE JANEIRO - A Roman Catholic archbishop says the abortion of twins carried by a 9-year-old girl who allegedly was raped by her stepfather means excommunication for the girl's mother and her doctors.
Despite the nature of the case, the church had to hold its line against abortion, Archbishop Jose Cardoso Sobrinho said in an interview aired Thursday by Globo television.
"The law of God is higher than any human laws," he said. "When a human law — that is, a law enacted by human legislators — is against the law of God, that law has no value. The adults who approved, who carried out this abortion have incurred excommunication."
***
OK, here is the commentary and analysis. Here are the facts:
1) She is a nine year old child.
2) She was not only raped but it was done by a family member, her own stepfather.
3) There is a mother in the household and while we do not know the specifics, a mother has responsibility for knowing whether or not her live in boyfriend or spouse is raping her child.
4) The child wanted the abortion.
5) The doctors recommended that she obtain one due to extreme youth, delicate physical constitution and the stress of bearing not only one baby but two.
6) These were medical doctors at a reputable hospital, not abortion pimps and procurers. That is an important point in my mind.
7) We know that abortions are not mindlessly "pushed" because in the same article we learn of an older child, 11 years old, in the same situation who plans to bring her child to term and birth.
8) We know that the Catholic Church correctly opposes abortion.
Now, before we analyze what is the most defensible and balanced position in this disagreement and remedy, here are the exact words on the Church's doctrine:
2270 Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person-among which is the inviolable right of every human being to life....(supporting scripture cited)...
2271 Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law.... (supporting cathesis cited)...
2272 Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. "A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae," "by the very commission of the offense," and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law. The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.
2273 The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation.... (detailed supporting analysis and canon law cited)....
2274 Since it must be treated from conception as a person, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being.... (more wording emphasizing that the fetus is a life and a person and not some lesser entity, thus it experiences unjust death)...
2275 "One must hold as licit procedures carried out on the human embryo which respect the life and integrity of the embryo and do not involve disproportionate risks for it, but are directed toward its healing, the improvement of its condition of health, or its individual survival"... (more about the immorality of the exploitation for science of embryos or to manipulate custom features in human beings...)
Now, when you read the doctrine of the Church is it very clear, reasonable, scripturally founded and also a doctrine in existence from the time of only one to two hundred years after the time of Jesus Christ himself. Thus one cannot argue with the valid position of the Church.
However... and this is a huge point... as you read this you observe that rape and child molestation are not part of the imagery of the typical abortion situation. The canon law addresses adults who have consensual sex and who decide to abort as a matter of convenience. It is clear by the wording that there is a significant gap in the doctrine, which is to address abortion in cases of rape, child molestation and the endangering of the woman's life as a result of pregnancy. Now, it does not take a genius to realize that the Church would, rightfully, feel that addressing those cases directly would open the door to the logic that "well, it's a human life, but it is 'OK' to take that life in certain circumstances." The Church cannot and will not take that position and we need to respect their constancy and integrity. However, we must also be good shepherds and reasonable. Here is how I would recommend navigating through that dilemma while maintaining moral principle.
I totally agree with the archbishop that the mother (and obviously the raping stepfather, though we notice he's not addressed by the archbishop) bears the brunt of doctrinal punishment, not the child. So I agree with the wisdom of not harming the spiritual and emotional well being of the child by dragging her into the doctrine and, instead, correctly lay blame for the situation with the mother. So I give credit to the archbishop for, however imperfectly in action, discerning that doctrinal blame lies with the parents rather than the child herself.
Let us set aside whether excommunication is correct for a moment since that hinges on the medical advice and actions taken.
If the doctors were employees of abortion providing specialists, rather than a general hospital, I believe that of course excommunication would be entirely appropriate. I do think that Catholic hospitals have a right not to offer abortion at all, and I do believe that Catholics who work in abortion providing mills or other specialized services are abortion "procurers," matching the logic of the catechism and doctrine. However, I believe that the Catholic Church must recognize that abortion is, in secular and civil society, a medical procedure that is going to be practiced where the need is extreme, and that is the key. As I've written before I think that abortion is medically valid in certain circumstances, as sad as it is and the fact that it is a human life that is lost. Thus I would not have excommunicated the doctors unless they were working in a Catholic hospital or they were working for full time abortion specialist providers and procurers. However, as the facts show, rather, these doctors prescribed, reluctantly, out of concern for the life of this very young girl, an abortion as a medical service that they deemed was called for.
We need to look at the example of saints for further information in this regard. Recently a woman was canonized because she would not undergo life saving medical treatment that would have resulted in the termination of her pregnancy. She lived to deliver the baby and then died. The Catholic Church correctly recognizes this example of spiritual heroics and I use the term so that you can think about it. A woman should not be expected to die to deliver a baby; she and her family should choose whether to risk death or not. Many women will choose to take that risk and they are spiritual heroes. This does not mean that other women and of course, especially not nine year old children, should be forced to be spiritual "heroes." They are children, for goodness sakes. Thus I think the eleven year old child who is going to have her baby is a spiritual hero. However, I do not think that heroism of having an incest baby, a baby as the result of rape, or an endangering pregnancy should be forced upon her. This, I believe, is where the Church needs to use more discernment and nuance.
I believe that excommunication should be consciously enacted when we are dealing with, as the Church doctrine puts it, those who have "formal cooperation" and "procurement." These are adult (healthy adult) concepts, not concepts that are so easily applied to the very young and the molested. A child who is raped and who chooses to have the infant is a hero, but that does not make those who do not so choose or who cannot without risking their life or their mental health for the rest of their lives non-heroes. It is a hard reality in life, life that humans have made very complicated by their thoughtlessness, their cruelty and their sin, that something can be both hideously wrong (abortion) yet sometimes be necessary (abortion). One cannot really appreciate God's all knowing and mercy, and ability to fix even the worse of situations, if one does not recognize such a conundrum and deal with it in a realistic way.
Thus I would not have excommunicated the doctors, assuming they are not abortion procurers by profession and that they were, as the article reports, rendering a sad but realistic medical recommendation. If they were abortion procurers, sure, excommunicate them, as they work to legitimize what cannot be legitimized morally or canonically.
I would not have excommunicated the mother because she accepted the advice of doctors. However, I would have explained that she is not in good grace in the Church because she allowed such a situation, the molestation of her daughter, to take place, either knowingly or through neglect of attention and protectiveness. I would have proscribed a cycle of confession and penance and spiritual counseling to remediate her sins of, at least, neglect of the situation in the first place.
I would have delivered full wrath upon the perpetrator: why is he not soundly voiced as a hell bound soul by the Church? I mean, talk about someone who needs even worse than excommunication. The bulk of the verbiage should have been on his head.
Also, as I blogged originally about this case, I would have been low key rather than high profile for this particular case of abortion. Why? Because this poor girl has to grow up with her childhood destroyed already. I believe that the Church should go beyond the "not" condemning her for the abortion, of course, but also have been low key about the entire controversy so that the doctors and her care givers could guide her to spiritually think of the abortion as being akin to miscarriage. Her body simply was not mature enough and safe enough to continue to bear two pregnancies, yes, of full human lives. But this is why in this case it is more akin to miscarriage, a miscarriage after an act of violence. The press should not be loaded with the sinfulness of abortion; that very valid statement should be reserved for the discourse among the mature practitioners and those who procure. It's a bit shameful that the poster child for the legitimate dialogue about abortion is... a child... a child who was raped and violated by her own stepfather. How in the world could anyone think that this is the right "high profile" "take a stand against abortion" case?
Rather, if she had opted to and had been able to bear the children, she should have been trumpeted in the press-and by the Church-as a spiritual hero, of such a tender age and under such cruel circumstances. So I would have said, "Sure, elevate her story and her glory" if she had been able to have the children, either for the family keeping or for adoption. But since she cannot be a "hero," goodness, I would have found other adult abortion promoters to point the finger at, rather than her and her doctors. The Church would also have had great credibility in giving regular fire and brimstone preaching about child rapists. The faithful of this modern time need reminding that not only their willies will be burned off in all eternity for doing such to a child. I would have ordered extra bottles of ink for all the press I would have given to that subject, to the perpetrator (the stepfather) and the at least clueless and unprotective wife and mother of the victim.
The truthful conundrum of the middle ground sure is an uncomfortable place, but that is the problem of life and death, and the material world. Be careful, though, not to jump on the Catholic doctrine and call it insensitive or in error, for it is not. The Catholic Church continues to hold the gold standard in its doctrine, particularly the sanctity of life. The trouble is that the Catholic Church is very reliable and glorious in "keeping up the standard of the good," but the problem is that the Church, like the rest of society, has trouble keeping up with the evil. By this I mean that the doctrine is written with consenting adults who procure abortions in mind, and not with the thoughtfulness regarding spiritual heroics, of the young, those pregnant through incest and violence. It's brushed over not for a nefarious reason but because for centuries abortion was a problem of adults, not children. When the Catechism is next updated I would like to see more regarding comforting those who are in the position where heroics may be called for, and more focus on confession and penance where heroics, sadly, cannot take place by reasonable people. This by no means would undermine that life is always life and sacred. Mercy and options are not a "slippery slope," even though cheap arguments depend on the slippery slope fear and, its converse, the illogic of citing the slippery slope as justification. Life can still be life, the embryo still sacred and protected, yet the implications and nuances of the growing, rather than lessening, of evil options that humans seem to impose on each other and ways that people can be healed rather than further wounded as they walk that thorny road of necessity.
I hope that you have found this helpful, particularly those of you who have grappled with this dilemma and who have only seen the two, in theory, opposing sides. "Jesus would want it that way." Remember, Jesus was merciful to all, but "hell on wheels" regarding those who abuse children or lead them to sin. He would have been condemning the perpetrators from the pulpit and on the street (and in the hypocritical media) a hundred times more often than causing more pain for the violated child regarding the abortion itself. He'd be condemning perpetrator and the enabling members of the family and looking to root out all the other brutes like this from the pulpit, mark my words, he would. The Church should not allow shame over its own sex abuse problem (and those among the other faiths too) to silence it from condemning child abuse in many, many homilies, and reminding people of the very real penalties in eternal perdition. He'd not want the child dragged through the press or the poster child for the general abortion debate and horror in our modern times, goodness, of course not. We can talk about the millions of adults, not the few young, weak, the victims who suffer and who must, medically, make this difficult decision. The Church is actually very good at counseling adults who have had abortions, with worthy programs to accomplish this. People need to understand that they fall naturally into a state of grave sin with abortion, whether anyone knows about it or not, since God knows, and they should seek out such programs to comfort and advise them to feeling more authentically part of the fold again.
http://www.hopeafterabortion.com/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29531755/
snip
RIO DE JANEIRO - A Roman Catholic archbishop says the abortion of twins carried by a 9-year-old girl who allegedly was raped by her stepfather means excommunication for the girl's mother and her doctors.
Despite the nature of the case, the church had to hold its line against abortion, Archbishop Jose Cardoso Sobrinho said in an interview aired Thursday by Globo television.
"The law of God is higher than any human laws," he said. "When a human law — that is, a law enacted by human legislators — is against the law of God, that law has no value. The adults who approved, who carried out this abortion have incurred excommunication."
***
OK, here is the commentary and analysis. Here are the facts:
1) She is a nine year old child.
2) She was not only raped but it was done by a family member, her own stepfather.
3) There is a mother in the household and while we do not know the specifics, a mother has responsibility for knowing whether or not her live in boyfriend or spouse is raping her child.
4) The child wanted the abortion.
5) The doctors recommended that she obtain one due to extreme youth, delicate physical constitution and the stress of bearing not only one baby but two.
6) These were medical doctors at a reputable hospital, not abortion pimps and procurers. That is an important point in my mind.
7) We know that abortions are not mindlessly "pushed" because in the same article we learn of an older child, 11 years old, in the same situation who plans to bring her child to term and birth.
8) We know that the Catholic Church correctly opposes abortion.
Now, before we analyze what is the most defensible and balanced position in this disagreement and remedy, here are the exact words on the Church's doctrine:
2270 Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person-among which is the inviolable right of every human being to life....(supporting scripture cited)...
2271 Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law.... (supporting cathesis cited)...
2272 Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. "A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae," "by the very commission of the offense," and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law. The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.
2273 The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation.... (detailed supporting analysis and canon law cited)....
2274 Since it must be treated from conception as a person, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being.... (more wording emphasizing that the fetus is a life and a person and not some lesser entity, thus it experiences unjust death)...
2275 "One must hold as licit procedures carried out on the human embryo which respect the life and integrity of the embryo and do not involve disproportionate risks for it, but are directed toward its healing, the improvement of its condition of health, or its individual survival"... (more about the immorality of the exploitation for science of embryos or to manipulate custom features in human beings...)
Now, when you read the doctrine of the Church is it very clear, reasonable, scripturally founded and also a doctrine in existence from the time of only one to two hundred years after the time of Jesus Christ himself. Thus one cannot argue with the valid position of the Church.
However... and this is a huge point... as you read this you observe that rape and child molestation are not part of the imagery of the typical abortion situation. The canon law addresses adults who have consensual sex and who decide to abort as a matter of convenience. It is clear by the wording that there is a significant gap in the doctrine, which is to address abortion in cases of rape, child molestation and the endangering of the woman's life as a result of pregnancy. Now, it does not take a genius to realize that the Church would, rightfully, feel that addressing those cases directly would open the door to the logic that "well, it's a human life, but it is 'OK' to take that life in certain circumstances." The Church cannot and will not take that position and we need to respect their constancy and integrity. However, we must also be good shepherds and reasonable. Here is how I would recommend navigating through that dilemma while maintaining moral principle.
I totally agree with the archbishop that the mother (and obviously the raping stepfather, though we notice he's not addressed by the archbishop) bears the brunt of doctrinal punishment, not the child. So I agree with the wisdom of not harming the spiritual and emotional well being of the child by dragging her into the doctrine and, instead, correctly lay blame for the situation with the mother. So I give credit to the archbishop for, however imperfectly in action, discerning that doctrinal blame lies with the parents rather than the child herself.
Let us set aside whether excommunication is correct for a moment since that hinges on the medical advice and actions taken.
If the doctors were employees of abortion providing specialists, rather than a general hospital, I believe that of course excommunication would be entirely appropriate. I do think that Catholic hospitals have a right not to offer abortion at all, and I do believe that Catholics who work in abortion providing mills or other specialized services are abortion "procurers," matching the logic of the catechism and doctrine. However, I believe that the Catholic Church must recognize that abortion is, in secular and civil society, a medical procedure that is going to be practiced where the need is extreme, and that is the key. As I've written before I think that abortion is medically valid in certain circumstances, as sad as it is and the fact that it is a human life that is lost. Thus I would not have excommunicated the doctors unless they were working in a Catholic hospital or they were working for full time abortion specialist providers and procurers. However, as the facts show, rather, these doctors prescribed, reluctantly, out of concern for the life of this very young girl, an abortion as a medical service that they deemed was called for.
We need to look at the example of saints for further information in this regard. Recently a woman was canonized because she would not undergo life saving medical treatment that would have resulted in the termination of her pregnancy. She lived to deliver the baby and then died. The Catholic Church correctly recognizes this example of spiritual heroics and I use the term so that you can think about it. A woman should not be expected to die to deliver a baby; she and her family should choose whether to risk death or not. Many women will choose to take that risk and they are spiritual heroes. This does not mean that other women and of course, especially not nine year old children, should be forced to be spiritual "heroes." They are children, for goodness sakes. Thus I think the eleven year old child who is going to have her baby is a spiritual hero. However, I do not think that heroism of having an incest baby, a baby as the result of rape, or an endangering pregnancy should be forced upon her. This, I believe, is where the Church needs to use more discernment and nuance.
I believe that excommunication should be consciously enacted when we are dealing with, as the Church doctrine puts it, those who have "formal cooperation" and "procurement." These are adult (healthy adult) concepts, not concepts that are so easily applied to the very young and the molested. A child who is raped and who chooses to have the infant is a hero, but that does not make those who do not so choose or who cannot without risking their life or their mental health for the rest of their lives non-heroes. It is a hard reality in life, life that humans have made very complicated by their thoughtlessness, their cruelty and their sin, that something can be both hideously wrong (abortion) yet sometimes be necessary (abortion). One cannot really appreciate God's all knowing and mercy, and ability to fix even the worse of situations, if one does not recognize such a conundrum and deal with it in a realistic way.
Thus I would not have excommunicated the doctors, assuming they are not abortion procurers by profession and that they were, as the article reports, rendering a sad but realistic medical recommendation. If they were abortion procurers, sure, excommunicate them, as they work to legitimize what cannot be legitimized morally or canonically.
I would not have excommunicated the mother because she accepted the advice of doctors. However, I would have explained that she is not in good grace in the Church because she allowed such a situation, the molestation of her daughter, to take place, either knowingly or through neglect of attention and protectiveness. I would have proscribed a cycle of confession and penance and spiritual counseling to remediate her sins of, at least, neglect of the situation in the first place.
I would have delivered full wrath upon the perpetrator: why is he not soundly voiced as a hell bound soul by the Church? I mean, talk about someone who needs even worse than excommunication. The bulk of the verbiage should have been on his head.
Also, as I blogged originally about this case, I would have been low key rather than high profile for this particular case of abortion. Why? Because this poor girl has to grow up with her childhood destroyed already. I believe that the Church should go beyond the "not" condemning her for the abortion, of course, but also have been low key about the entire controversy so that the doctors and her care givers could guide her to spiritually think of the abortion as being akin to miscarriage. Her body simply was not mature enough and safe enough to continue to bear two pregnancies, yes, of full human lives. But this is why in this case it is more akin to miscarriage, a miscarriage after an act of violence. The press should not be loaded with the sinfulness of abortion; that very valid statement should be reserved for the discourse among the mature practitioners and those who procure. It's a bit shameful that the poster child for the legitimate dialogue about abortion is... a child... a child who was raped and violated by her own stepfather. How in the world could anyone think that this is the right "high profile" "take a stand against abortion" case?
Rather, if she had opted to and had been able to bear the children, she should have been trumpeted in the press-and by the Church-as a spiritual hero, of such a tender age and under such cruel circumstances. So I would have said, "Sure, elevate her story and her glory" if she had been able to have the children, either for the family keeping or for adoption. But since she cannot be a "hero," goodness, I would have found other adult abortion promoters to point the finger at, rather than her and her doctors. The Church would also have had great credibility in giving regular fire and brimstone preaching about child rapists. The faithful of this modern time need reminding that not only their willies will be burned off in all eternity for doing such to a child. I would have ordered extra bottles of ink for all the press I would have given to that subject, to the perpetrator (the stepfather) and the at least clueless and unprotective wife and mother of the victim.
The truthful conundrum of the middle ground sure is an uncomfortable place, but that is the problem of life and death, and the material world. Be careful, though, not to jump on the Catholic doctrine and call it insensitive or in error, for it is not. The Catholic Church continues to hold the gold standard in its doctrine, particularly the sanctity of life. The trouble is that the Catholic Church is very reliable and glorious in "keeping up the standard of the good," but the problem is that the Church, like the rest of society, has trouble keeping up with the evil. By this I mean that the doctrine is written with consenting adults who procure abortions in mind, and not with the thoughtfulness regarding spiritual heroics, of the young, those pregnant through incest and violence. It's brushed over not for a nefarious reason but because for centuries abortion was a problem of adults, not children. When the Catechism is next updated I would like to see more regarding comforting those who are in the position where heroics may be called for, and more focus on confession and penance where heroics, sadly, cannot take place by reasonable people. This by no means would undermine that life is always life and sacred. Mercy and options are not a "slippery slope," even though cheap arguments depend on the slippery slope fear and, its converse, the illogic of citing the slippery slope as justification. Life can still be life, the embryo still sacred and protected, yet the implications and nuances of the growing, rather than lessening, of evil options that humans seem to impose on each other and ways that people can be healed rather than further wounded as they walk that thorny road of necessity.
I hope that you have found this helpful, particularly those of you who have grappled with this dilemma and who have only seen the two, in theory, opposing sides. "Jesus would want it that way." Remember, Jesus was merciful to all, but "hell on wheels" regarding those who abuse children or lead them to sin. He would have been condemning the perpetrators from the pulpit and on the street (and in the hypocritical media) a hundred times more often than causing more pain for the violated child regarding the abortion itself. He'd be condemning perpetrator and the enabling members of the family and looking to root out all the other brutes like this from the pulpit, mark my words, he would. The Church should not allow shame over its own sex abuse problem (and those among the other faiths too) to silence it from condemning child abuse in many, many homilies, and reminding people of the very real penalties in eternal perdition. He'd not want the child dragged through the press or the poster child for the general abortion debate and horror in our modern times, goodness, of course not. We can talk about the millions of adults, not the few young, weak, the victims who suffer and who must, medically, make this difficult decision. The Church is actually very good at counseling adults who have had abortions, with worthy programs to accomplish this. People need to understand that they fall naturally into a state of grave sin with abortion, whether anyone knows about it or not, since God knows, and they should seek out such programs to comfort and advise them to feeling more authentically part of the fold again.
http://www.hopeafterabortion.com/
Monday, March 2, 2009
An example of justifed abortion
This little girl should obviously receive the abortion as soon as possible. She should then be counseled that it is not her fault, and that she should view the abortion as miscarriage, as her body is far too young to bring children to term.
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,25122051-950,00.html
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,25122051-950,00.html
Saturday, January 3, 2009
Father kills 2 yr old son to avoid child support
This 22 year old who never spent any time with his child asked for visitation, got him once and a few hours later shot his two year old in the head, dumped the body and claimed he was kidnapped, just so he could avoid child support payments. First he said a white woman took the child, then three blacks with AK-47's, he didn't even call the police, and then when the mother did, he leads them to the body, dumped in a vacant lot.
Read the story, look at the picture, and think of something to say because for sure, I'm pretty speechless. Pray for this insane clown posse world.
http://www.wwltv.com/topstories/stories/wwl010309tpgunpoint.339e3e97.html
Read the story, look at the picture, and think of something to say because for sure, I'm pretty speechless. Pray for this insane clown posse world.
http://www.wwltv.com/topstories/stories/wwl010309tpgunpoint.339e3e97.html
Saturday, December 6, 2008
Incredibly stupid teacher lesson re: "slavery"
Apparently some idiotic school teacher thought that she (I think it's a she, I've not read the newspaper yet about it) could "teach her class" "about slavery" by tying up two of the children and placing them under a desk. Parents are outraged and the kids are traumatized (what a surprise). That was not a lesson about slavery, that was lesson about bondage, ignorance and humiliation.
My point is not to bash the moron more than she is already getting, rightfully, but to use this as a case study. Regular readers know that I always try to watch for useful news and social issues to use accordingly as case studies.
When a modern tries to interpret history they have a problem with understanding facts. Moderns seem to think that history is about "feelings." So this moron tried to "help" "explain slavery" by making two children feel bad, and thus conveyed nothing about the facts of slavery, facts which all of their own make one feel "very bad and sad."
Here is what I would have done. I would have had a class exercise that illustrated the facts of slavery, and then asked the kids how that made them feel.
Using a pile of coins, such as pennies, have several children "earn" one penny each time they walked across the room and back, carrying a heavy book. So a child who walks five times across the room with a heavy book earns five pennies. However, under slavery, the five pennies are taken from the child who carried the book and given to a child who remained seated in the front row of the class.
That would illustrate slavery to a perfect "T" without traumatizing.
Teachers, parents and other "educators." You do not need to be Hollywood or Bollywood drama queens to "explain history" to children, and in fact, you do violence to the facts of history and end up blurring the child's understanding of history, rather than illuminate it, if you are only projecting your "feelings." Simple present the facts using simple tools and devices, like the book and pennies. Stop trying to brainwash children into feeling "outrage" and "hurt" when they will comprehend history like slavery perfectly clearly by being given fact based examples and using simple and clean exercises based on facts.
The facts of history speak for themselves and children have, on the whole, very compassionate and easily violated senses of 'fairness,' so they would understand working hard for pennies and then it all being given to someone else, the "owner" very easily.
My point is not to bash the moron more than she is already getting, rightfully, but to use this as a case study. Regular readers know that I always try to watch for useful news and social issues to use accordingly as case studies.
When a modern tries to interpret history they have a problem with understanding facts. Moderns seem to think that history is about "feelings." So this moron tried to "help" "explain slavery" by making two children feel bad, and thus conveyed nothing about the facts of slavery, facts which all of their own make one feel "very bad and sad."
Here is what I would have done. I would have had a class exercise that illustrated the facts of slavery, and then asked the kids how that made them feel.
Using a pile of coins, such as pennies, have several children "earn" one penny each time they walked across the room and back, carrying a heavy book. So a child who walks five times across the room with a heavy book earns five pennies. However, under slavery, the five pennies are taken from the child who carried the book and given to a child who remained seated in the front row of the class.
That would illustrate slavery to a perfect "T" without traumatizing.
Teachers, parents and other "educators." You do not need to be Hollywood or Bollywood drama queens to "explain history" to children, and in fact, you do violence to the facts of history and end up blurring the child's understanding of history, rather than illuminate it, if you are only projecting your "feelings." Simple present the facts using simple tools and devices, like the book and pennies. Stop trying to brainwash children into feeling "outrage" and "hurt" when they will comprehend history like slavery perfectly clearly by being given fact based examples and using simple and clean exercises based on facts.
The facts of history speak for themselves and children have, on the whole, very compassionate and easily violated senses of 'fairness,' so they would understand working hard for pennies and then it all being given to someone else, the "owner" very easily.
Friday, December 5, 2008
Case study of personal and societal neurosis
This isn’t going to be a very nice topic but as you know, I blog very frankly about the many problems that individuals and society as a whole have to face. So I’ve decided to address one of those problems as a case study, so you can both learn about the issue itself and also observe how to analyze when such a problem creeps up gradually until people don’t even realize it exists.
Two things precipitated my awareness and alarm about this topic. One is a continual pattern of infant and child abuse related to it, and the other is my awareness when I did my undercover occult investigation that cultists promote a very unbalanced view about this subject. In fact what they teach their own children is in every sense of the word also child abuse.
First let’s define some terms. A neurosis is a mental disorder that is considered “manageable.” In other words, it may be a mild obsession, or it could be a severe mental or emotional anxiety or discomfort, but one that if the patient is willing and has the right treatment can be remediated. A psychosis is a severe mental disorder that is fundamentally defined as a breakdown in one’s perception of reality. The problem I am going to describe is a neurosis that many individuals have, and that much of modern western society has developed as a whole. But I want to point out that untreated and inflamed neuroses can result in psychotic behavior, so one should always try to treat and remove the pain from even a mild neurosis.
Here is the problem. In certain circles of western society, particularly among the youth of the past two generations, there has been a development of a neurosis about “going to the bathroom,” particularly the function of defecation. The perspective I am going to give to you is based on both my age, which means I have a clear understanding of the “before” and “after” of the development of this neurosis, and also as a psychological counselor. This is very much a human biological, mental and societal problem; there is not a spiritual crisis component for me to discuss except when I explain how cultists have outrageously tried to “explain” and actually fuel the defecation neurosis by assigning it to a spiritual disorder. It’s so frustrating and disgusting, but I am getting ahead of my explanation so let’s start.
Hardly a day goes by that we do not read of a young parent, the boyfriend or girlfriend of a parent, or some other caregiver who severely beats and abuses, even killing, a baby over a matter of their “wetting their diapers” or “having an accident.” I’ve written about the overall problem before, in very blunt terms, about how the past two generations have had a spike in numbers of near monsters who will abuse, torture and kill their children or someone else’s, for a variety of “reasons,” but all rooted in rage coupled with a dehumanized view of the most innocent and helpless of their human victims. But I want to speak about the particular “reason, “related to a baby’s defecation, so that you can have a specific case study to examine the breakdown of societal education, perspective and identify the guilty parties. This has especially been on my mind as a thirteen year old boy in a city near my own home town beat a baby for an entire hour, brutally and with no mercy, because she urinated on the floor. She died needless to say. Police found that the baby was left alone for hours at a time, on the floor, while the mother and her live in “boyfriend” went to their high school classes. Yes, they left a baby alone on the floor for hours, and then beat her to death when she had to “pee.”
How has society developed so many people who are insane with rage when a helpless baby has to do what comes naturally, which is to urinate and defecate? My readers in South America, Africa, Asia and the Middle East, I understand you must be shocked and puzzled when you read this. This is because this is a phenomenon of “advanced” “Western” society, particularly in the United States. It is a neurosis that has developed in this society as a whole, and is fueled by a number of factors. This is what we will examine here.
The first problem is a problem of technological success and wealth that has an unintended result of detaching people from understanding reality. Specifically, I have noticed a change in behavior when parents were first able to replace cloth diapers that had to be washed and reused with disposable diapers. When I was a teenager I had to take care of my niece when she was a baby and this was during the time of cloth diapers. It’s not the most wonderful chore in the world, to change a baby and to clean the diaper enough that it can go into the laundry service, but it’s not the worst job either (as those of you who are still sane in the rest of the world well know). But when what seemed to be the “blessing” of disposable diapers came along, an unintended accompaniment to the throw away diaper was a changed mindset of the parents, which is that a baby’s bodily function is “dirty” and “disgusting.” I can practically point to the time when this happened, which is in the 1970’s.
Back when cloth diapers were used, parents were also better “potty trainers,” as they praised babies for doing “their job,” rather than hating them for doing what they have to and should be doing. So I noticed that soon after the rising of the problem of viewing a baby’s defecation as “disgusting” came a generation that suddenly started failing at “potty training.” Books were written, talk shows mentioned it, and I just shook my head. So when disposable diapers replaced cloth diapers and either home laundering or the use of commercial diaper services, there was a collapse of both equanimity and a healthy view of a baby’s normal bodily function, and also a collapse of understanding how to transmit healthy “potty training” to the child.
The children who picked up from their handlers this view of disgust grew up and went into the workforce. They then stoked “bathroom humor” to appeal to fellow traumatized adolescents. One cannot attend any movie pitched at the youngest of children, teenagers or young adults without constant “humor” which is mentioning and demeaning either defecation itself or the various ways that it is achieved. That’s one reason, seriously, that I will rarely view a film. The entertainment industry, having grown up with this neurosis themselves, honestly think that it is a “normal” source of humor, and that everyone loves, wants and expects “gross” humor based on “s***,” “buttholes,” “farting,” “asses and their assholes,” "booty crack" etc. The first traumatized and neurotic generation trained the next generation to not only be traumatized and neurotic, but to think it is an “adult” rite of passage, to make such humor, constantly. Trust me, the adolescents who went on to fight World War II did not grow up on a diet of “potty humor,” and they did not expect it. They all had, in general, sane and good parents, a sane growing up experience, little brothers and sisters who they gave sane care to, and also exposure to the realities of living on farms. Further, focus on the rectum etc. has become a predominant topic in rap videos and other "entertainment."
This is also another reason that you see the extremely underreported problem of people putting crap in other people’s food. Trust me, if you knew what I know, you’d hesitate to eat anything that you did not personally prepare yourself, and that is a horrible shame. Those who stoke this behavior as part of “pop culture” are beginning to regret it a little, and so once in a while they will allow a mention to get into the media (usually something like showing that people do it often to police, or to show a “nut” doing in on secret camera). But cultists and pop culture mavens have secretly promoted doing this for years, as “revenge” on people who offended them in “past lives,” and for other very scary and insane reasons. Think “vampire” and you won’t be too far from the mark in understanding their “logic” and “belief systems.” As a way to alert people of the very thing they have stirred up, they allowed the “pizza deliver guy” or the “waiter” “revenge” stories to trickle (excuse the pun) into the media. This is them slowly realizing how destructive and demented they have become, and trying to “come clean” and alert people to the cultural monster they have unleashed. Gosh, thanks.
People, I cannot begin to describe to you how jarring and shocking the change has become. You really had to be there, to be observant and of my age to witness how this has happened.
As a result there is a bonfire when you combine this second generation of “defecation neurotic” young adults with rage stoked by other things (drugs, alcohol, too early sex, thug environments, broken families and abuse) and you have hundreds if not thousands of cases each year where young men or women loath their own babies’ healthy functions and will literally “beat the s*** out of them.” Police and social workers, if they are honest with you, will tell you how traumatized they are by seeing so many of these cases. Even one is too many, obviously.
Here is the unspoken problem of the cultists. Since they have a totally unbalanced and delusional view of life, one that is simply ignorant in addition to being spiritually dirtied, rather than “enlightened,” they have taken the defecation neurosis and concluded that it exists as a homoerotic component of “spirituality.” This is one reason that anal rape has become not only common, both of babies and of children and adults, but also has become a catchphrase in everyday discourse. If you are shocked, especially those of you who are in countries and cultures that are still sane on this subject, all you need to do is see what is posted in the comments section on the Internet whenever a particular heinous criminal is sentenced to prison. Immediately people post to speculate how often, and hope for, as frequent anal rape of the prisoners as possible will occur by their fellow prisoners. This has obviously been also picked up in the porn industry for a very long time, further stoking the problem.
It is one of the things that most shocked me about the depraved mentality of cultists, who secretly steer much of the discourse in “popular” culture. While I obviously observed the “diaper problem” along with the poor parenting skills myself, I would never have guessed that cultists teach a “spiritual” homoerotic component to the rectum and human defecation function. For example, that is why there was the springing up of “colonic cleansing” services, which even Princess Diane availed herself of, due to the influence of her circle of cultists. Yes, people believe there is a health and “spiritual” benefit of shoving a tube up their rectums and flushing their colons with various fluids. They think that the body “does not work properly” unless one does this flushing. I wonder how the population of the earth reached billions of sane and healthy people in a period of 7,000 years, all without “colonic cleansing.” So now we are on the third generation of people growing up in some very dysfunctional parts of society that think that without “spiritual health intervention” that ‘bad things’ stay ‘stuck in your colon’ and must be “cleansed naturally” by paying $50 to $100 for a “spiritually healthy” “colonic cleansing.” The same third generation has members who will also flip out and beat the life out of their baby when the baby naturally does defecate in or outside of their diapers, and cry to signal they need to be changed, as they are supposed to do. They also look at their own children with sexual eyes, and that is an abomination, whether it occurs “in the front” or “in the back.”
Do you see the problem?
I sometimes despair that humans will ever remember what it is really like to be sane and human. This is one of those examples that I admit, I really wonder how to ever get an increasingly self hating and insane generation (one generation after the other) to learn to return to normal when it is something that they never grew up to know.
There is another horrible problem, one that is so ironic. This “do gooder” generation has forgotten the basic “do gooder” priorities of the generations past, which is to build latrines in poor countries, and sewage treatment plants near cities, and to learn better ways to control farm waste. They cry about “global warming,” yet they have neglected an essential component of preserving the endangered oceans and also the war on poverty, which are sanitation facilities. Another example of how dysfunctional they are is if one raises the issue with them, they will lecture you about stopping eating meat, and that way you have no cattle who “fart” and “crap” (thus “no pollution” and “no greenhouse gases.”)
But that used to be the basics of every generation before us, the first thing they did when they brought clean drinking water to a poor village, for example, was the development of latrines and a sanitation ethic, one that is based on simple reality, not neurosis. But now everyone wants to “stamp out a disease” (the most popular of the do good causes) or “save the polar bear,” yet the oceans are increasingly fouled by the modern neglect of promoting and providing complete sanitation. It is so bad that the UN earlier this year addressed this problem. I suspect the UN does not realize what they are up against, one of the hidden reasons why there is so much aversion to doing something about this problem. They don’t realize that the “do good” money, the people who support the “good causes,” while not beating their own children to death due to potty accidents, are equally unbalanced on the subject in their core, unlike our very sensible forefathers and mothers.
Like I said above, I honestly do not know what to do about this problem, because I despair of teaching sanity to those who grew up in very unbalanced conditions. How does one teach to society as a whole something to lose a neurosis and go back to a sane and balanced view, when so many never experienced that sane and balanced view? But whatever the solution, if one exists, obviously it cannot start unless people have the facts, and so this is why I’ve written this particular blog post. I must admit, thirty years ago, I never dreamed I’d have to be writing this type of post. Yes, concerns about the poor skills in the raising of children-that I foresaw-but not the total breakdown of sane education and perspective about human body function, and the resulting violence that has occurred. Nope, I am surprised, unpleasantly surprised.
Good luck, young people. Good luck.
Two things precipitated my awareness and alarm about this topic. One is a continual pattern of infant and child abuse related to it, and the other is my awareness when I did my undercover occult investigation that cultists promote a very unbalanced view about this subject. In fact what they teach their own children is in every sense of the word also child abuse.
First let’s define some terms. A neurosis is a mental disorder that is considered “manageable.” In other words, it may be a mild obsession, or it could be a severe mental or emotional anxiety or discomfort, but one that if the patient is willing and has the right treatment can be remediated. A psychosis is a severe mental disorder that is fundamentally defined as a breakdown in one’s perception of reality. The problem I am going to describe is a neurosis that many individuals have, and that much of modern western society has developed as a whole. But I want to point out that untreated and inflamed neuroses can result in psychotic behavior, so one should always try to treat and remove the pain from even a mild neurosis.
Here is the problem. In certain circles of western society, particularly among the youth of the past two generations, there has been a development of a neurosis about “going to the bathroom,” particularly the function of defecation. The perspective I am going to give to you is based on both my age, which means I have a clear understanding of the “before” and “after” of the development of this neurosis, and also as a psychological counselor. This is very much a human biological, mental and societal problem; there is not a spiritual crisis component for me to discuss except when I explain how cultists have outrageously tried to “explain” and actually fuel the defecation neurosis by assigning it to a spiritual disorder. It’s so frustrating and disgusting, but I am getting ahead of my explanation so let’s start.
Hardly a day goes by that we do not read of a young parent, the boyfriend or girlfriend of a parent, or some other caregiver who severely beats and abuses, even killing, a baby over a matter of their “wetting their diapers” or “having an accident.” I’ve written about the overall problem before, in very blunt terms, about how the past two generations have had a spike in numbers of near monsters who will abuse, torture and kill their children or someone else’s, for a variety of “reasons,” but all rooted in rage coupled with a dehumanized view of the most innocent and helpless of their human victims. But I want to speak about the particular “reason, “related to a baby’s defecation, so that you can have a specific case study to examine the breakdown of societal education, perspective and identify the guilty parties. This has especially been on my mind as a thirteen year old boy in a city near my own home town beat a baby for an entire hour, brutally and with no mercy, because she urinated on the floor. She died needless to say. Police found that the baby was left alone for hours at a time, on the floor, while the mother and her live in “boyfriend” went to their high school classes. Yes, they left a baby alone on the floor for hours, and then beat her to death when she had to “pee.”
How has society developed so many people who are insane with rage when a helpless baby has to do what comes naturally, which is to urinate and defecate? My readers in South America, Africa, Asia and the Middle East, I understand you must be shocked and puzzled when you read this. This is because this is a phenomenon of “advanced” “Western” society, particularly in the United States. It is a neurosis that has developed in this society as a whole, and is fueled by a number of factors. This is what we will examine here.
The first problem is a problem of technological success and wealth that has an unintended result of detaching people from understanding reality. Specifically, I have noticed a change in behavior when parents were first able to replace cloth diapers that had to be washed and reused with disposable diapers. When I was a teenager I had to take care of my niece when she was a baby and this was during the time of cloth diapers. It’s not the most wonderful chore in the world, to change a baby and to clean the diaper enough that it can go into the laundry service, but it’s not the worst job either (as those of you who are still sane in the rest of the world well know). But when what seemed to be the “blessing” of disposable diapers came along, an unintended accompaniment to the throw away diaper was a changed mindset of the parents, which is that a baby’s bodily function is “dirty” and “disgusting.” I can practically point to the time when this happened, which is in the 1970’s.
Back when cloth diapers were used, parents were also better “potty trainers,” as they praised babies for doing “their job,” rather than hating them for doing what they have to and should be doing. So I noticed that soon after the rising of the problem of viewing a baby’s defecation as “disgusting” came a generation that suddenly started failing at “potty training.” Books were written, talk shows mentioned it, and I just shook my head. So when disposable diapers replaced cloth diapers and either home laundering or the use of commercial diaper services, there was a collapse of both equanimity and a healthy view of a baby’s normal bodily function, and also a collapse of understanding how to transmit healthy “potty training” to the child.
The children who picked up from their handlers this view of disgust grew up and went into the workforce. They then stoked “bathroom humor” to appeal to fellow traumatized adolescents. One cannot attend any movie pitched at the youngest of children, teenagers or young adults without constant “humor” which is mentioning and demeaning either defecation itself or the various ways that it is achieved. That’s one reason, seriously, that I will rarely view a film. The entertainment industry, having grown up with this neurosis themselves, honestly think that it is a “normal” source of humor, and that everyone loves, wants and expects “gross” humor based on “s***,” “buttholes,” “farting,” “asses and their assholes,” "booty crack" etc. The first traumatized and neurotic generation trained the next generation to not only be traumatized and neurotic, but to think it is an “adult” rite of passage, to make such humor, constantly. Trust me, the adolescents who went on to fight World War II did not grow up on a diet of “potty humor,” and they did not expect it. They all had, in general, sane and good parents, a sane growing up experience, little brothers and sisters who they gave sane care to, and also exposure to the realities of living on farms. Further, focus on the rectum etc. has become a predominant topic in rap videos and other "entertainment."
This is also another reason that you see the extremely underreported problem of people putting crap in other people’s food. Trust me, if you knew what I know, you’d hesitate to eat anything that you did not personally prepare yourself, and that is a horrible shame. Those who stoke this behavior as part of “pop culture” are beginning to regret it a little, and so once in a while they will allow a mention to get into the media (usually something like showing that people do it often to police, or to show a “nut” doing in on secret camera). But cultists and pop culture mavens have secretly promoted doing this for years, as “revenge” on people who offended them in “past lives,” and for other very scary and insane reasons. Think “vampire” and you won’t be too far from the mark in understanding their “logic” and “belief systems.” As a way to alert people of the very thing they have stirred up, they allowed the “pizza deliver guy” or the “waiter” “revenge” stories to trickle (excuse the pun) into the media. This is them slowly realizing how destructive and demented they have become, and trying to “come clean” and alert people to the cultural monster they have unleashed. Gosh, thanks.
People, I cannot begin to describe to you how jarring and shocking the change has become. You really had to be there, to be observant and of my age to witness how this has happened.
As a result there is a bonfire when you combine this second generation of “defecation neurotic” young adults with rage stoked by other things (drugs, alcohol, too early sex, thug environments, broken families and abuse) and you have hundreds if not thousands of cases each year where young men or women loath their own babies’ healthy functions and will literally “beat the s*** out of them.” Police and social workers, if they are honest with you, will tell you how traumatized they are by seeing so many of these cases. Even one is too many, obviously.
Here is the unspoken problem of the cultists. Since they have a totally unbalanced and delusional view of life, one that is simply ignorant in addition to being spiritually dirtied, rather than “enlightened,” they have taken the defecation neurosis and concluded that it exists as a homoerotic component of “spirituality.” This is one reason that anal rape has become not only common, both of babies and of children and adults, but also has become a catchphrase in everyday discourse. If you are shocked, especially those of you who are in countries and cultures that are still sane on this subject, all you need to do is see what is posted in the comments section on the Internet whenever a particular heinous criminal is sentenced to prison. Immediately people post to speculate how often, and hope for, as frequent anal rape of the prisoners as possible will occur by their fellow prisoners. This has obviously been also picked up in the porn industry for a very long time, further stoking the problem.
It is one of the things that most shocked me about the depraved mentality of cultists, who secretly steer much of the discourse in “popular” culture. While I obviously observed the “diaper problem” along with the poor parenting skills myself, I would never have guessed that cultists teach a “spiritual” homoerotic component to the rectum and human defecation function. For example, that is why there was the springing up of “colonic cleansing” services, which even Princess Diane availed herself of, due to the influence of her circle of cultists. Yes, people believe there is a health and “spiritual” benefit of shoving a tube up their rectums and flushing their colons with various fluids. They think that the body “does not work properly” unless one does this flushing. I wonder how the population of the earth reached billions of sane and healthy people in a period of 7,000 years, all without “colonic cleansing.” So now we are on the third generation of people growing up in some very dysfunctional parts of society that think that without “spiritual health intervention” that ‘bad things’ stay ‘stuck in your colon’ and must be “cleansed naturally” by paying $50 to $100 for a “spiritually healthy” “colonic cleansing.” The same third generation has members who will also flip out and beat the life out of their baby when the baby naturally does defecate in or outside of their diapers, and cry to signal they need to be changed, as they are supposed to do. They also look at their own children with sexual eyes, and that is an abomination, whether it occurs “in the front” or “in the back.”
Do you see the problem?
I sometimes despair that humans will ever remember what it is really like to be sane and human. This is one of those examples that I admit, I really wonder how to ever get an increasingly self hating and insane generation (one generation after the other) to learn to return to normal when it is something that they never grew up to know.
There is another horrible problem, one that is so ironic. This “do gooder” generation has forgotten the basic “do gooder” priorities of the generations past, which is to build latrines in poor countries, and sewage treatment plants near cities, and to learn better ways to control farm waste. They cry about “global warming,” yet they have neglected an essential component of preserving the endangered oceans and also the war on poverty, which are sanitation facilities. Another example of how dysfunctional they are is if one raises the issue with them, they will lecture you about stopping eating meat, and that way you have no cattle who “fart” and “crap” (thus “no pollution” and “no greenhouse gases.”)
But that used to be the basics of every generation before us, the first thing they did when they brought clean drinking water to a poor village, for example, was the development of latrines and a sanitation ethic, one that is based on simple reality, not neurosis. But now everyone wants to “stamp out a disease” (the most popular of the do good causes) or “save the polar bear,” yet the oceans are increasingly fouled by the modern neglect of promoting and providing complete sanitation. It is so bad that the UN earlier this year addressed this problem. I suspect the UN does not realize what they are up against, one of the hidden reasons why there is so much aversion to doing something about this problem. They don’t realize that the “do good” money, the people who support the “good causes,” while not beating their own children to death due to potty accidents, are equally unbalanced on the subject in their core, unlike our very sensible forefathers and mothers.
Like I said above, I honestly do not know what to do about this problem, because I despair of teaching sanity to those who grew up in very unbalanced conditions. How does one teach to society as a whole something to lose a neurosis and go back to a sane and balanced view, when so many never experienced that sane and balanced view? But whatever the solution, if one exists, obviously it cannot start unless people have the facts, and so this is why I’ve written this particular blog post. I must admit, thirty years ago, I never dreamed I’d have to be writing this type of post. Yes, concerns about the poor skills in the raising of children-that I foresaw-but not the total breakdown of sane education and perspective about human body function, and the resulting violence that has occurred. Nope, I am surprised, unpleasantly surprised.
Good luck, young people. Good luck.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Warning for parents
Many infants, children, young people and the elderly are sexually abused when they are helpless in hospitals for surgery or other "care." The problem is much worse and much more prevalent than anyone realizes.
The odds are very high that if you are helpless in a hospital that they will at least "cop a feel." That is almost to be taken for granted as much as the inflated hospital bill and poor care.
Many are subject, while unconscious, to being orally sodomized. Fingering their rectal or vaginal orifices is also a "job benefit" for many.
Trust me, I know. And God knows all.
What goes around, comes around, as new agers are fond of saying. This is, unfortunately, true in ways you cannot begin to realize. And so those of you who bother to have children, and bother to care about them, now have to worry about paying this price. Most of you will never know that it happened, but many more of you realize it than you let on. You figure "well, the child will not remember."
Yes, but God was there and God remembers, God never forgets and God will have flaming justice and vengeance upon all those who performed these foul actions and also those who promote and enable that sick mindset. Imagine what he will do to those who not only sodomize in the mouth a helpless child, but who photograph it and gloat about it later?
You don't want to know, but you will find out. Oh yes, you will.
So for those increasingly few of you parents who actually do not want your children to be used as "blow up dolls" for sexual gratification, be very careful of whoever you allow to have your children tended to by, especially medical "professionals." I found out that the surgery theater is a theater all right, with endless people of a mindset to sexually abuse the helpless trooping in and out before, during and after surgery. Some get a special giggle out of knowing that a concerned relative is sitting in the waiting room, while they are giving your child, your mother, your wife, even your grandfather "the business" in their mouth or private parts.
I don't really know what to tell you, but asking sharp questions about everyone who will be in the room during the "procedure," and even asking for the names of the "clean up team" might be a sufficient warning to them that if something undue is suspected after the procedure, that you have a list of names and advance suspicion. I'm afraid I have to recommend this in even the "best" of facilities. There are sick and bad apples everywhere and like I said, I suspect every medical facility has one or more people who view a fingering or poking of your child or elderly loved one as a "job perk."
It's a sad and sick world, one that can only be cleaned, ultimately, by fire.
The odds are very high that if you are helpless in a hospital that they will at least "cop a feel." That is almost to be taken for granted as much as the inflated hospital bill and poor care.
Many are subject, while unconscious, to being orally sodomized. Fingering their rectal or vaginal orifices is also a "job benefit" for many.
Trust me, I know. And God knows all.
What goes around, comes around, as new agers are fond of saying. This is, unfortunately, true in ways you cannot begin to realize. And so those of you who bother to have children, and bother to care about them, now have to worry about paying this price. Most of you will never know that it happened, but many more of you realize it than you let on. You figure "well, the child will not remember."
Yes, but God was there and God remembers, God never forgets and God will have flaming justice and vengeance upon all those who performed these foul actions and also those who promote and enable that sick mindset. Imagine what he will do to those who not only sodomize in the mouth a helpless child, but who photograph it and gloat about it later?
You don't want to know, but you will find out. Oh yes, you will.
So for those increasingly few of you parents who actually do not want your children to be used as "blow up dolls" for sexual gratification, be very careful of whoever you allow to have your children tended to by, especially medical "professionals." I found out that the surgery theater is a theater all right, with endless people of a mindset to sexually abuse the helpless trooping in and out before, during and after surgery. Some get a special giggle out of knowing that a concerned relative is sitting in the waiting room, while they are giving your child, your mother, your wife, even your grandfather "the business" in their mouth or private parts.
I don't really know what to tell you, but asking sharp questions about everyone who will be in the room during the "procedure," and even asking for the names of the "clean up team" might be a sufficient warning to them that if something undue is suspected after the procedure, that you have a list of names and advance suspicion. I'm afraid I have to recommend this in even the "best" of facilities. There are sick and bad apples everywhere and like I said, I suspect every medical facility has one or more people who view a fingering or poking of your child or elderly loved one as a "job perk."
It's a sad and sick world, one that can only be cleaned, ultimately, by fire.
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Aborters kept mum on disabled girl's incest rape
And you wonder why pro life people are so indignant that aborters happily abort girls who are under age and/or disabled and refuse to report such obvious crimes, returning the victims to the men who exploited them and brought them in for abortions.
And yep, her own father raped her.
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/national/disabled-womans-rape-not-reported/2008/08/27/1219516614634.html
A MELBOURNE abortion specialist was one of several health professionals who did not report the rape of a severely intellectually disabled woman when the perpetrator was insisting on the termination of her pregnancy, a tribunal has heard.
Dr Patricia Moore, an expert called into review the case of a late-term abortion performed without legal consent, yesterday expressed shock that so many people who assessed the woman's pregnancy did not act on the fact she had been raped.
"There was obviously evidence of sexual abuse that was not investigated by many people before the final episode," she said. "I started to wonder if a special procedure had not been performed if any of the professionals would have addressed the issue of sexual assault."
snip
It is alleged Dr Schulberg performed the termination at 25 weeks without gaining legal consent through the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal, a legal requirement for an adult who is intellectually disabled.
It is alleged he did not contact police about pregnancy when he should have known she was incapable of consenting to sexual intercourse.
The woman's father, who helped organise the abortion, was convicted of the rape this year and sentenced to a minimum of seven years' jail.
The board heard the woman's father met at least one other doctor and social workers to discuss the termination of her pregnancy before he met Dr Schulberg at his Croydon clinic.
None of the health professionals took any action to find out who had raped the woman, despite some of them acknowledging that she was unable to consent to sexual intercourse, the board heard.
And yep, her own father raped her.
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/national/disabled-womans-rape-not-reported/2008/08/27/1219516614634.html
A MELBOURNE abortion specialist was one of several health professionals who did not report the rape of a severely intellectually disabled woman when the perpetrator was insisting on the termination of her pregnancy, a tribunal has heard.
Dr Patricia Moore, an expert called into review the case of a late-term abortion performed without legal consent, yesterday expressed shock that so many people who assessed the woman's pregnancy did not act on the fact she had been raped.
"There was obviously evidence of sexual abuse that was not investigated by many people before the final episode," she said. "I started to wonder if a special procedure had not been performed if any of the professionals would have addressed the issue of sexual assault."
snip
It is alleged Dr Schulberg performed the termination at 25 weeks without gaining legal consent through the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal, a legal requirement for an adult who is intellectually disabled.
It is alleged he did not contact police about pregnancy when he should have known she was incapable of consenting to sexual intercourse.
The woman's father, who helped organise the abortion, was convicted of the rape this year and sentenced to a minimum of seven years' jail.
The board heard the woman's father met at least one other doctor and social workers to discuss the termination of her pregnancy before he met Dr Schulberg at his Croydon clinic.
None of the health professionals took any action to find out who had raped the woman, despite some of them acknowledging that she was unable to consent to sexual intercourse, the board heard.
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Read about this "All American" drug murder family
Man allegedly responsible for something like three deaths (drug related) and one "but for the grace of God" shooting of a police officer who while critical is stable and slowly (pray God) recovering.
Dad's his pal in the drug abuse, murder and mayhem, with the dynamic duo doing their thing for over twenty years together. Oh, and that might, allegedly, include the rape and murder of a 13 year old girl. Must be really hot when you are a murdering child raping perv with your dad while on drugs, huh? Allegedly.
And mom's sure not letting moss grow under her feet. She was driving the getaway car, which resulted in the pursuit that led to the foot chase where the officer was so severely wounded.
Death penalty seems to be an apt legal remedy in this situation.
http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080716/NEWS02/80716027
Continued prayers for the full recovery of the officer.
Dad's his pal in the drug abuse, murder and mayhem, with the dynamic duo doing their thing for over twenty years together. Oh, and that might, allegedly, include the rape and murder of a 13 year old girl. Must be really hot when you are a murdering child raping perv with your dad while on drugs, huh? Allegedly.
And mom's sure not letting moss grow under her feet. She was driving the getaway car, which resulted in the pursuit that led to the foot chase where the officer was so severely wounded.
Death penalty seems to be an apt legal remedy in this situation.
http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080716/NEWS02/80716027
Continued prayers for the full recovery of the officer.
Meth user kills mom in view of their 4 with sword
Right in front of their 4 children. Police are on his trail. Apparently he passed through Albuquerque and is now in the locale mentioned in that link.
http://www.lcsun-news.com/ci_9899732
http://www.lcsun-news.com/ci_9899732
Must preach hell reality to combat child abuse
Modern society's ignoring of the reality of God, and of hell, has resulted in a diabolical ferocity of murder and abuse directed toward children.
I have just read that a French father HUNG his young daughters in his estranged wife's home, and then hung himself.
Parents who kill their children these days are almost 100 percent of those who do not believe that they will instantly find themselves separated from their dead children and in HELL.
Many "new age" or "religion lacking" parents think that like the pagans, they can kill their children and assume they end up together in some la la warrior paradise, or as united spirits. Nothing could be further from the truth. A parent who kills their child and then their self is instantly separated from the child, who goes to heaven, while the parent goes straight to hell, regardless of the "excuse" or "reason."
People, you MUST start preaching among each other this reality.
There is a list of seventeen subjects for daily meditation by the Christian. I will write more about them but remind you all of two:
"Hell to avoid"
"Neighbors to edify"
Society has done itself no favor and is in fact putting their children in constant peril when it ignores the reality of a judging God, and the certainty of hell's existence. You must start undoing this damage of hell being just a cuss word and that it's just an artistic tool. It is real and it is certain. This murdering French asshole is now finding out how real hell itself is for all eternity, and you can take that fact to the bank.
I have just read that a French father HUNG his young daughters in his estranged wife's home, and then hung himself.
Parents who kill their children these days are almost 100 percent of those who do not believe that they will instantly find themselves separated from their dead children and in HELL.
Many "new age" or "religion lacking" parents think that like the pagans, they can kill their children and assume they end up together in some la la warrior paradise, or as united spirits. Nothing could be further from the truth. A parent who kills their child and then their self is instantly separated from the child, who goes to heaven, while the parent goes straight to hell, regardless of the "excuse" or "reason."
People, you MUST start preaching among each other this reality.
There is a list of seventeen subjects for daily meditation by the Christian. I will write more about them but remind you all of two:
"Hell to avoid"
"Neighbors to edify"
Society has done itself no favor and is in fact putting their children in constant peril when it ignores the reality of a judging God, and the certainty of hell's existence. You must start undoing this damage of hell being just a cuss word and that it's just an artistic tool. It is real and it is certain. This murdering French asshole is now finding out how real hell itself is for all eternity, and you can take that fact to the bank.
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
Baby abuse so common hardly any outrage
People are so dehumanized and so numb that something that would have been an unbelievable unheard of outrage, such as this filmed stunt of a teenager flinging a crying baby across the room, several decades ago is now just the daily dose of people's hatred of babies and their inability to relate to babies as helpless humans, not small and tiny no talk fuck holes or abuse punching bags. I'm sorry to be so blunt but nothing seems to be getting through about the crisis that humanity (such as it is) is within. Every day there are more stories and every day there's the Greek chorus of Americans who think that it's just "one nut" doing these things. Each case is explained away as an individual event, rather than being seen clearly as being enabled by the tide of sewage and insane unreality of life that is engulfing "society" and this country as a whole.
http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/stories/2008/07/02/baby_thrown_video.html?cxntlid=homepage_tab_newstab
http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/stories/2008/07/02/baby_thrown_video.html?cxntlid=homepage_tab_newstab
Sunday, June 29, 2008
The Prophet's child marriage NOT justification
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/29/world/middleeast/29marriage.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
snip
“This is the first shout,” said Shada Nasser, a human rights lawyer who met Nujood, the 10-year-old, after she arrived at the courthouse to demand a divorce. Ms. Nasser decided instantly to take her case. “All other early marriage cases have been dealt with by tribal sheiks, and the girl never had any choice.”
But despite a rising tide of outrage, the fight against the practice is not easy. Hard-line Islamic conservatives, whose influence has grown enormously in the past two decades, defend it, pointing to the Prophet Muhammad’s marriage to a 9-year-old. Child marriage is deeply rooted in local custom here, and even enshrined in an old tribal expression: “Give me a girl of 8, and I can give you a guarantee” for a good marriage.
***
It is an outrageous insult to the Prophet (PBUH) that raping ignorant louts who marry children, raping and beating them, should DARE compare themselves to the Prophet (PBUH) and how he treated his wives.
I would think that such men, their tribes and their families would cover their heads in shame over THAT. First of all, the Prophet (PBUH) married someone of a correct age for many years and treated her with glory. He did not "start out" with a child bride. Second, the Prophet had the mercy and justice of God within him. He never treated anyone, not even the poorest servent or his worst enemy, the way the "men" in this article treat these children, stripping and raping them as tiny youngsters. It is disgusting to me and to God that anyone should even say the words of the Prophet (PBUH) on their stinking breath as justification for their cruel, disgusting, ignorant and infidel ways.
God bless the good judges who acted so promptly, and those who fight this cursed behavior.
snip
“This is the first shout,” said Shada Nasser, a human rights lawyer who met Nujood, the 10-year-old, after she arrived at the courthouse to demand a divorce. Ms. Nasser decided instantly to take her case. “All other early marriage cases have been dealt with by tribal sheiks, and the girl never had any choice.”
But despite a rising tide of outrage, the fight against the practice is not easy. Hard-line Islamic conservatives, whose influence has grown enormously in the past two decades, defend it, pointing to the Prophet Muhammad’s marriage to a 9-year-old. Child marriage is deeply rooted in local custom here, and even enshrined in an old tribal expression: “Give me a girl of 8, and I can give you a guarantee” for a good marriage.
***
It is an outrageous insult to the Prophet (PBUH) that raping ignorant louts who marry children, raping and beating them, should DARE compare themselves to the Prophet (PBUH) and how he treated his wives.
I would think that such men, their tribes and their families would cover their heads in shame over THAT. First of all, the Prophet (PBUH) married someone of a correct age for many years and treated her with glory. He did not "start out" with a child bride. Second, the Prophet had the mercy and justice of God within him. He never treated anyone, not even the poorest servent or his worst enemy, the way the "men" in this article treat these children, stripping and raping them as tiny youngsters. It is disgusting to me and to God that anyone should even say the words of the Prophet (PBUH) on their stinking breath as justification for their cruel, disgusting, ignorant and infidel ways.
God bless the good judges who acted so promptly, and those who fight this cursed behavior.
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Another massacre by a hot head young man
Just some observations about the massacre at the Atlantis Plastics plant in Henderson, Kentucky, rather than repeat the news about it, since there are many articles you've probably seen.
1. A young man with a short fuse who carried a gun (legally) in his car.
2. He is angry at his supervisor not for being treated cruelly, but because the supervisor was trying to enforce safety standards for this young man's own protection (to wear goggles, and to not use his cell phone on the assembly line). You care about your employee's safety and you get killed. This is a "no good deed goes unpunished" attitude that I have been on the receiving end of and I know quite well.
3. He slays men and women, no difference, no caring.
4. According to news reports he's been busted for drinking and pot use. You think?
5. Four of the dead are Catholics in the same parish. But they are Latino so the conservative commentators won't care about them because after all, Catholics just want "the Mexicans here to fill our empty church pews."
6. He tells his girlfriend he is going to kill his supervisor and she doesn't tell anyone and lets it happen. (I'm sure the women's libbies will jump to her defense making up battered woman syndrome or something, without her even being identified in the press or any details provided). So another woman is enabling a boyfriend's violence.
7. Conservative talk show hosts spewed the most vile venom all day today about the Supreme Court ruling that it is unconstitutional to give the death penalty to a child rapist who has not committed murder. Hour after hour of the most vile imagery to "illustrate" their "indignation" that the Justices "don't think infant raping is a crime," yet no ranting or raving about our increasingly insane society where a hot head pot head kills five people at work over SAFETY issues, and himself, and how about what THAT means for society. Not even a pause in the degrading attacks on the Supreme Court justices to talk about real degradation of rage filled maniacs who kill for no reason at all. Just another day in paradise, I guess, to these conservative morally high minded talk show hosts.
1. A young man with a short fuse who carried a gun (legally) in his car.
2. He is angry at his supervisor not for being treated cruelly, but because the supervisor was trying to enforce safety standards for this young man's own protection (to wear goggles, and to not use his cell phone on the assembly line). You care about your employee's safety and you get killed. This is a "no good deed goes unpunished" attitude that I have been on the receiving end of and I know quite well.
3. He slays men and women, no difference, no caring.
4. According to news reports he's been busted for drinking and pot use. You think?
5. Four of the dead are Catholics in the same parish. But they are Latino so the conservative commentators won't care about them because after all, Catholics just want "the Mexicans here to fill our empty church pews."
6. He tells his girlfriend he is going to kill his supervisor and she doesn't tell anyone and lets it happen. (I'm sure the women's libbies will jump to her defense making up battered woman syndrome or something, without her even being identified in the press or any details provided). So another woman is enabling a boyfriend's violence.
7. Conservative talk show hosts spewed the most vile venom all day today about the Supreme Court ruling that it is unconstitutional to give the death penalty to a child rapist who has not committed murder. Hour after hour of the most vile imagery to "illustrate" their "indignation" that the Justices "don't think infant raping is a crime," yet no ranting or raving about our increasingly insane society where a hot head pot head kills five people at work over SAFETY issues, and himself, and how about what THAT means for society. Not even a pause in the degrading attacks on the Supreme Court justices to talk about real degradation of rage filled maniacs who kill for no reason at all. Just another day in paradise, I guess, to these conservative morally high minded talk show hosts.
8. By the way, conservative talk show hosts. I have a challenge for you. Since you are all so high and mighty and moral, I look forward to you leading the charge to have every state pass a law that a child rapist receives life in prison with no chance of parole for the first offense. You want the death penalty, you say, yet there is no state that has automatic life for child rape with no chance of parole for the first offense. I look forward to seeing your citizen involvement and loud mouthed moral indignation state by state on this issue.
9. One slain victim is named Israel, just a sad side note.
Prayers for all the families who lost loved ones in "today's massacre," and for the colleagues who have now suffered through their personal "911." I know the feeling and I hope that you turn to God for condolence and comfort.
Saturday, June 7, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
