I am distraught with the election of Donald Trump. Not necessarily the fact that he will be the president, or that the press is seemingly unable to accept his election. Not even with the millenials protesting by burning and breaking their neighborhoods, with the complicity of professional victim groups like Black Lives Matter and Moveon.org. After all, one expects millennials to be safe-space demanding, crying at the drop of a hat, emotionally driven hipster morons.
Trump wasn’t elected to be dictator, or leader for life, or fascist-in-chief. Despite the abuses of the outgoing president, a president’s power is limited. Not only by the constitution itself, but also by the Congress and the Supreme Court. It takes roughly 270 elected people to agree with his actions before he can implement them. He may get lucky, like Obama, and be faced with an opposition party that consists largely of quislings, but I doubt it.
No, what bothers me is the reaction of those who I thought were my friends and acquantences. People I had previously thought to be reasonable, rational people seem to have become unhinged at the thought of Trump in the White House.
I have friends that are liberal, conservative, and pretty much everywhere in between. And I’ve always enjoyed our sometimes-combative discussions. Mostly because they have been rational, fact-based arguments.
But now, it’s all been changed. I still have liberal friends, and I still have conservative friends, and I have smart friends, and less smart friends. But now I have a new category of friends: trivial friends. Not that their friendship is trivial to me, but that they have relegated themselves to the status of trivial by their embrace of empty and shallow rhetoric, by their acceptance of media smear tactics, and by their abandonment of the democratic process.
I have a friend who is, putatively, a man of science. Yet he has parroted the “not my president” line, and slams the incoming president’s choice of staff as being racist. When asked what evidence there is that Stephen Bannon is a racist, he resorts to the time-tested avoidance of “look it up yourself.”
That places him squarely into the “trivial” category, and that saddens me. That so many people are so deranged by an election that they jettison reason and serious thought, and instead become talking memes, is a cause for sadness. And that is exactly what has happened. I am saddened and distraught that people I once thought serious are now regarded as trivial. And that is the real reason that Trump’s election makes me distraught.
Well, I voted today. I did my part to preserve the Republic, defend democracy, and make my voice heard, ad nauseum. At least I think I did; I have a sticker that says so. But did I really? I have no idea, nor do most Floridians, I guess.
I live in what I jokingly refer to as Cuba Norte, otherwise known as Miami-Dade County, home of egregious corruption and chicanery. Perhaps it is best exemplified by the City of Opa-Locka. Opa-Locka is so corrupt, it has had its entire government turned over to outside supervision. But I digress.
Living in Dade County, I, like every other voter in the county, have no idea whether I voted; or if I did, whether it was counted; or if it was, whether it was counted for the candidates I voted for.
When one votes in this county, one first must show an ID to an election official. I had to use a photo ID, even though it may have disenfranchised me. I am, after all, a minority in this county. After you show your ID, you sign an electronic register, which then prints out a receipt. You then hand your receipt to another official who hands you a ballot form and your receipt.
You then go to a booth where you fill out your form. Much like the SATs, you do this by filling in ovals that correspond to your choices on candidates and issues.
From there, you hand your receipt to another official, who shows you how to place your ballot form into the scanner, where it is scanned and then deposited into a sealed box. Having heard the beep that signifies that the machine has ingested your form, the official then places your receipt into another box.
Now comes the interesting part. You leave the polling place. But you have no idea whether your vote has been counted, counted correctly, altered, or discarded. There is no readout on the machine that indicates your ballot was recorded correctly, no printout either. Nothing, in short, to indicate you really voted. I asked the official how I was to know my vote was counted. He replied that it was “better than hanging chads.”
So, everyone in Dade County, and, for all I know all of Florida, could be disenfranchised without even knowing it. Dade County is ripe for voter fraud, and we would never know. I think we need a better system.
The Catholic Church’s teaching on abortion is clear and unambiguous. Not even a liberal Pope like Francis can change it. 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. Canon Law deals with the question by excommunication. For example, Canon 1398 says “A person who procures a completed abortion incurs a latae sententiae excommunication.”
The church is also clear on who is considered a schismatic. For example, in the list of those excommunications specially reserved to the Pope, we find this: Schismatics and those who elude or obstinately withdraw from the authority of the reigning Roman pontiff. The schismatics here referred to are of two kinds: those who are such because they belong to separated Churches which reject the authority of the pope, and those who, being Catholics, become schismatics by reason of obstinate disobedience to the authority of the pope as such. Specially reserved to the Pope means that only he can release one from the status of excommunicant.
Automatic excommunication for abortion (CIC 1398) applies not only to the woman who has the abortion, but to “all those who commit this crime with knowledge of the penalty attached, and [this] includes those accomplices without whose help the crime would not have been committed” (Evangelium Vitae 62).
Tim Kaine has said: “I strongly support the right of women to make their own health and reproductive decisions and, for that reason, will oppose efforts to weaken or subvert the basic holding of Roe v. Wade.” When asked if he’d like to see the Supreme Court overturn Roe the Governor answered, “I don’t think the Supreme Court should.” He continued, “Roe vs. Wade is ultimately about saying that there is a realm of personal liberty for people to make this decision.” Kaine also supports public funding for abortions.
But it is not just Kaine. There’s Pelosi, and Biden, and erstwhile HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), and Sen. Susan Collins (R-Me.) among others. All of them claim to be Catholic, but none of them follow the teaching of the Church. St. Justin in the second century tells us: “The only people who are to go to Communion are people who believe everything we believe.” Archbishop of Philadelphia, Charles Chaput, said that, “If they don’t believe what the church teaches, they’re not really Catholic.”
The Pope agrees. A letter Pope Francis sent to the bishops of Argentina in late March states, in part, “[people] cannot receive Holy Communion and at the same time act with deeds or words against the commandments, particularly when abortion, euthanasia, and other grave crimes against life and family are encouraged. This responsibility weighs particularly over legislators, heads of governments, and health professionals.”
At the Spring meeting in Denver, the Catholic Bishops of the United States took a strong stand that Catholic politicians who have the responsibility to formulate law are obliged “to work toward correcting morally defective laws”. The often used excuses that “abortion is the law of the land” or “that I am personally opposed to abortion but I can’t thrust my opinion on others” does not free the politician “from moral guilt of cooperating in evil and in sinning against the common good”
At the same meeting, the Bishops were emphatic regarding the moral evil of abortion. Catholics in all walks of life are called to have an “unequivocal commitment to the legal protection of human life from the moment of conception until natural birth.” It appears that no Catholic can support abortion rights and believe that he or she has a correctly formed conscience. Any Catholic who would believe that they are morally justified in supporting abortion has to know that they are in opposition to natural law and the official teachings of their Catholic faith. To do so, places them in bad faith and with a mal-formed conscience.
It is clear that the Catholic Church’s teaching on abortion is plain. It is clear that one can not support abortion, and continue to claim communication with the Catholic Church. One cannot be a Catholic and vote for a politician that supports abortion “rights.” If one wishes to be “pro-choice,” one should have the moral and intellectual integrity to leave the Church, and not claim allegiance to an organization that believes the exact opposite.
The flap over the various state efforts to enact laws regarding public accommodation of “trans-gender” people raises an interesting question. Not about politics or common sense, although there are those considerations. The really interesting question is one of motives. Not the motives of those that are opposed to normalizing aberrancy, but those who are promoting it.
I can hear the howls now, but I don’t use the word “aberrancy” lightly. It has a meaning in biology, as well as in common English. In biology, a working definition of “aberrant” is “diverging from the normal type.” In the vernacular, it is defined as “departing from an accepted standard.” Neither definition is a value judgment, but a statistical or empirical one.
Transgender people, by the best estimates available today, make up about .3 percent of the population. Roughly about 1 million people in America. Just about the same as thee number of heterozygote carriers of the Tay-Sachs gene in the general population. Which doesn’t make either condition normal or desirable.
But that isn’t the real reason behind the drive to get us to accept and praise those who are disordered.
The real issue is the drive to eliminate objective reality.
Objective reality is the standard by which we judge and decide how to act. Marcus Aurelius taught us 2000 years ago, “first of all, know what a thing is.” It was a call to recognize reality as a thing that we can know. Objective reality is the standard by which science operates. Objective reality is that which really exists, operates by knowable, immutable, and eternal laws, like conservation of matter or inertia. Objective reality is what Western civilization is based on. We can deny reality all we wish, but our desires can not change reality, anymore than our desires could stop the heliocentric nature of our solar system.
The forces that wish to destroy our civilization are clever. They know that to outright deny objective reality would be impossible, so they chip away at its foundations, like termites in a house
The transgender phenomenon is a case in point. We are told, almost daily, it seems, by the “social justice warrior” nuts that gender is a fluid concept. What they mean by that is that we can never know what someone’s gender is; we can never know the reality of a person’s sex. Therefore, we can never act in any particular way as regards sex. No rationally based bathroom policies, marriage policies, dormitory or barracks policies.
And they enlist a large number of unwitting people to their cause by using pity and our natural desire to be kind to our fellow humans. And make no mistake, gender dysphoria is an abnormality, and those that suffer from it should be pitied, treated compassionately, and cured. But to transform compassion into acceptance is as disordered as the disease itself. To deny that there is an objective reality about sex that is knowable is to descend into a madness that will deny all knowledge but that which serves the immediate drive to control, to own, to enslave others.
“The great and admirable strength of America consists in this, that America is truly the American people.” Jacques Maritain, French Philosopher and political theorist.
Monsieur Maritain had it correct. America is the American people, and herein lies the problem with the administration’s thinking. America is not immigrants, but Americans. America is not refugees, but Americans. America is not illegal immigrants, but Americans. Immigrants, refugees, and illegal immigrants can become American, but to do so requires more than changing their location. It requires changing their core, their mindset, their animus.
No more can they be Syrian, or Mexican, or Latvian. No more can they hold on to their old-world way of thinking or living. To be an American requires one to believe in America, to cast off the old love and embrace a new love. The love of America. And it must be a greater love than the love for the old country.
It is no different for France. To be French, one must give up the things of the Levant and embrace all that is France. Or Germany, or Ireland, or any other country one immigrates to. To come to America, but continue to long for the old country results in a resident that is neither fish nor fowl nor good red meat. Honor the old country, remember some of its traditions, but give oneself to one’s new country, wholeheartedly or stay home.
And that is precisely the issue faced by this administration in regard to the potential influx of Syrian “refugees.” How do we separate those who wish to assimilate from those who wish to do us harm? Have no doubt, among these refugees are certainly ISIS soldiers. ISIS brags about it. They issue threats to us about it. And we see it first hand in France, Belgium, and Germany.
Loretta Lynch, US Attorney General, refuses to even admit the possibility that it would be difficult to even vette the new immigrants. And yet I can’t buy unpasteurized French brie. Why not? Because of the USDA. In their own words: “The Food Safety and Inspection Service is the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s public health regulatory agency that protects consumers by ensuring that meat, poultry and egg products are safe, wholesome, and accurately labeled.” It would be wonderful if there were any agency that could say the same about the refugees.
To get into the country, one must run a gantlet of byzantine complexity. First off, only thirty-three countries are eligible to import meat and poultry products to the U.S.
Then comes re-inspection. That begins with FSIS determining that a country’s federal inspection system is equivalent to that of the U.S. That consists of a comprehensive system that involves document reviews, on-site audits and port-of-entry examinations of every shipment of product that enters the United States.
Each meat, poultry and egg product shipment enters the country under the authority of U.S. Customs and USDA’S Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) and is transferred to FSIS where inspectors visually inspect every shipment as well as its accompanying documentation.
FSIS claims that it can be assured that all products under FSIS jurisdiction, regardless of the volume imported to the United States, are sampled. In general, the higher risk ready-to-eat products are being sampled at a higher rate.
And that’s just for starters. Refugees? Nowhere near that level of scrutiny. Just look at our feet-dry policy on Cuban illegals. Look at the 11, or 12, or 15 million illegal Mexican immigrants. There’s no scrutiny at all, and even when we determine that they are unsafe or unwholesome, we don’t deport them, and if we do, they come right back.
The first duty of any nation-state is the integrity and safety of that nation-state. Like the intrinsic human right and obligation of self-defense, every nation has a duty, and a corresponding right, of self0-defense. Bringing in undocumented, un-inspected, and unknown thousands of Syrian islamic refugees in the middle of a war against Syrian islamists is madness. Turning a blind eye to a threat, and admitting that threat into the country isn’t just misfeasance, it’s malfeasance. Why, the government might just as well let in semi-soft unpasteurized cheese!
The current insurrection at the University of Missouri is disturbing on a few different levels. On one level is the invincible ignorance of people like the university student VP, who opined that the First Amendment was merely a cover for “white privilege.” On another level, there is the complete and utter disregard for the truth shown by the student who claimed that the KKK was on campus, then admitted it was a lie. On another level we find the “hunger striker” who comes from a family led by a man who made 8 million dollars last year. He has the temerity to complain about white privilege and racism, while spending 8 years at the university, paid for, no doubt, by the white privilege of his black father.
I would love to say I sympathize, but I don’t. I’d like to say I care about their plight, but I don’t. I think some of them are ignorant infants, so scared of everything that they are reduced to seeing imaginary boogie-men. Some are professional agitators whose goal is to destroy America. Think I’m exaggerating? A recent op-ed in the Afrikan Black Coalition says:
“The United States has declared war against us; it is time we demand a new constitution or tell America that she will get the bullet…If America fails to allow all people of this nation to write a new constitution, then it will be the bullet.”
Perhaps it is time to remind all of those that are fomenting the overthrow of the system of a little history.
Like, the university system they are allegedly studying at is the product of that white, euro-centric, Christian patriarchy that they rage nonsensically about. Hospitals, likewise, were a development of that same group of white devils. Not one of those students goes to Zaire to study, or Addis Ababa. None of them go to the Cote d’Ivoire for their health care.
Sub-Saharan Africa is a bastion of corruption, murder, rape, and lawlessness. Ethiopia doesn’t have hordes of people trying to immigrate, nor does Iraq or Morocco. Compare that to countries run by the people those protesters and “students” hate. The Syrians aren’t going to Tanzania or Kenya. No, they seek refuge in the only places that are bastions of that western tradition that upholds the dignity of all people.It was the Greeks, not the Angolans, that championed the idea of democracy. Free speech? Thank the European enlightenment philosophers, not the necklacing South African savages.
No group has done more for the dignity of all people than white western christendom. Perhaps it is time to make that a little more well known.
According to their news release dated October 1st, the “American Civil Liberties Union and the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan announced a federal lawsuit today filed on behalf of their members against Trinity Health Corporation, one of the largest Catholic health systems in the country, for its repeated and systematic failure to provide women suffering pregnancy complications with appropriate emergency abortions as required by federal law.”
Good for them. Conversely, good for the Church’s insistence on the sanctity of human life. Leaving aside arguments about the law of unintended consequences and such, I think the Church needs to take on the ACLU and “the nattering nabobs of negativism”(apologies to Spiro Agnew) and do it with the nuclear option.
The Roman Catholic Church is the largest non-government provider of health care services in the world. It has around 18,000 clinics, 16,000 homes for the elderly and those with special needs, and 5,500 hospitals, with 65 percent of them located in developing countries. In 2010, the Church’s Pontifical Council for Pastoral Assistance to Health Care Workers said that the Church manages 26% of the world’s health care facilities.
The early Christians were noted for tending the sick and infirm, and Christian emphasis on practical charity gave rise to the development of systematic nursing and hospitals. During the Middle Ages, monasteries and convents were the key medical centers of Europe. Catholic scientists (many of them clergymen) made a number of important discoveries which aided the development of modern science and medicine. As Catholicism became a global religion, the Catholic orders and religious and lay people established health care centers around the world. Women’s religious institutes such as the Sisters of Charity, Sisters of Mercy and Sisters of St Francis opened and operated some of the first modern general hospitals.
Geoffrey Blainey likened the Catholic Church in its activities during the Middle Ages to an early version of a welfare state: “It conducted hospitals for the old and orphanages for the young; hospices for the sick of all ages; places for the lepers; and hostels or inns where pilgrims could buy a cheap bed and meal.” The Spanish and Portuguese Empires were largely responsible for spreading the Catholic philosophy regarding health care to South and Central America, where the church established substantial hospital networks. Catholic hospitals were established in the modern United States prior to the American War of Independence.
In America, the Catholic Church is the largest private provider of health care in the United States of America. During the 1990s, the church provided about one in six hospital beds in America, at around 566 hospitals, many established by nuns. The church has carried a disproportionate number of poor and uninsured patients at its facilities and the American bishops first called for universal health care in America in 1919. The church has been an active campaigner in that cause ever since. In 2012, the church operated 12.6% of hospitals in the USA, accounting for 15.6% of all admissions, and around 14.5% of hospital expenses ( roughly 100 billion dollars). Compared to the public system, the church provided greater financial assistance or free care to poor patients, and was a leading provider of various low-profit health services such as breast cancer screenings, nutrition programs, trauma, and care of the elderly.
And now the ACLU is unhappy. The answer, at least for the Church is simple. Dismantle all the hospitals and health care facilities it owns and operates. Close every single one of them. Don’t sell them, or sub-contract them; close and shutter every single one of them. Transfer all the patients to government run hospitals. Fire all the doctors, nurses, technicians, janitors, etc.
Time for the Church militant to burn and slash. Salt the earth, and lay waste to the ACLU and other critics who whine about the lack of abortions at Catholic facilities. Transfer all the nuns, brothers, priests, and others who provide the infrastructure of health care. Send them to Africa or South America. Take all the money that helps operate the Catholic medical infrastructure and send it to China or somewhere.
And then wait for the inevitable caterwauling. And have the intestinal fortitude to make the ACLU publicly ask the Church to come back into healthcare. Then demand that the government make it clear, by legislation and regulation, that Catholic conscience cannot be bought or sold. It is high time that the Church Militant lived up to its name.