Thursday, May 31, 2012

Lucia One of the dangers of receiving government money for Catholics

There's a bit of a battle brewing in Ontario, Canada, over what Catholic schools should and shouldn't be forced to do in contravention of authentic Catholicism.

The Ontario government’s decision forcing Catholic schools to host anti-bullying groups called “gay-straight alliances” has brought to the fore a deep divide between Roman Catholic teaching and secular society, even calling into question whether public funding for Catholic schools should continue.

At the root of the issue is a polarizing debate about whether public money should be used to support a religious education system that says homosexuals deserve love and respect but that gay sex is a mortal sin.

“The question as to whether Catholic schools should be required to support gay-straight alliances has been satisfactorily answered,” Justin Trottier, spokesman for the Toronto-based Centre for Inquiry, an atheist group, said. “The real question now is whether Ontario should be required to continue to support Catholic schools. The elephant in the room — public funding of Catholic schools — has become so destructive to fundamental rights and equality it’s impossible to ignore.”

Presumably governments fund Catholic schools because the cost of converting all those children to the public sector were the Catholic schools to fail (ie go bankrupt) would be very expensive and a logistical nightmare.

The threat of withdrawing money, however likely that would be, does seem to apply a varying amount of pressure on Catholic schools to cave in degrees to secular society. Far better to call society's bluff, and if heaven forbid, the money is withdrawn, then let them close. Better that they close, rather just be Catholic schools in name only. Otherwise, what good are they?

Meanwhile, here in New Zealand ...

I was certainly wondering what good Catholic schools are last night, after the meeting I attended. What is the difference between a government school teaching "positive puberty" and a Catholic school teaching the same thing? As far as I can make out, when I asked if they'd tell the children that they'd need to go to Confession if they masturbated, after spluttering a bit, the principal replied that moral issues were up to the parents! Personally I think that if Catholic schools are going to mention things like masturbation, the moral dimension should be included with it. Obviously I'm just strange expecting morality to be taught in a Catholic school in New Zealand.

Related link: Catholic schools’ opposition to gay clubs revives public-funding debate ~ Holy Post

Wednesday, May 30, 2012

Lucia Whale Oil is now supporting polygamous marriage

Hope you're not thinking of setting up a harem, there, Whale.

In his post Family First opposes big families, Whale Oil conflates big families with those with multiple wives.

He says, "I mean seriously if a bloke wants two mothers in law then all power to him."

Right, it's all about the bloke.

Lucia Going to a Catholic Positive Puberty meeting tonight

I'm going to a school meeting tonight on sex education Positive Puberty for Year 7 & 8 pupils.

I'm not particularly impressed with the list of items I've been given that they will be studying, and even less impressed that this list was read out to the class before I was even given the option to withdraw my child. The list included, "Coping with wet dreams, periods and erections." Apparently the bishops have approved the content of the programme.

So this post is in effect my notes for tonight.

chapter XI of On Teaching the Faith, by Thomas P. Dolan, 1984.

Bishops who countenance sex education in schools quite probably tell themselves that if the instruction is given under Catholic auspices, it will be given "the right way." But there is no right way to give explicit sex instruction to children who are mentally and emotionally unready for it. There is no right way to give information in groups that should be given privately. There is no right way for an outsider to assume a role which belongs particularly to the parents.


Modesty and reticence are guardians of chastity. When these are broken down, through casual discussion in groups of what should be intimate, personal matters, the child loses his strongest defense against unchastity.

When bishops have countenanced sex education in schools, it is clear that they intended an education based on morality, and aimed at forming, in the young, the virtues of modesty and chastity. In the Basic Teachings, the bishops said: "In a sex saturated society, the follower of Christ must be different. For the Christian, there can be no premarital sex, fornication, adultery, or other acts of impurity or scandal to others. He must remain chaste, repelling lustful desires and temptations, self-abuse, pornography, and indecent entertainment of every description... The follower of Christ must be pure in words and actions even in the midst of corruption."

These things should be taught to young people in every Catholic school. But what we have in many schools is something altogether different. We have courses which reflect the obsession with sex that has permeated secular society.

Does this sex education have as it's aim a cultivation of chastity?

Gaudium et Spes, Vatican II ... stipulat[es] that “especially in the heart of their own families, young people should be aptly and seasonably instructed about the dignity, duty, and expression of married love. Trained thus in the cultivation of chastity, they will be able at a suitable age to enter a marriage of their own after an honorable courtship” (emphasis added). Thus, if there is anything than can rightly be called “Catholic sex education,” it cannot be anything else but an “education in chastity” imparted by the parents or in close collaboration with and in support of the parents.

Sex Education: The Vatican's Guidelines

Lucia Pope John Paul II spied on by Communists from 1946

Before Karol Wojtyla was elected as Pope John Paul II in 1978, the Communist authorities in Poland considered him dangerous enough to keep under constant surveillance.

“During the communist era, authorities saw all priests as enemies of the people and the party – Lasota explains – and they were placed under surveillance by the political police, the “Bezpieca”. Wojtyla had been under surveillance since 1946. This intensified in 1958 when he became Auxiliary Bishop of Krakow. As an archbishop in the ‘60s, he was considered a dangerous political opponent. This is why he was ferociously monitored in everything he did.”

The Communists wanted to know everything about him, even down to what underwear he wore and who washed it!

One of the documents presented in the book is particularly striking. It contains 98 questions which spies who kept an eye on the future pope had to answer: attention was paid to every minute detail of his daily life. From the time at which he got up in the morning to his morning activities and the order in which these took place; from how frequently he shaved to the “cosmetics” he used.

There were questions about his habits in the office, which documents he took home with him, whether he took the keys to his desk with him, what he talked about at lunch, whether he “liked playing bridge or other card games, or chess” and with whom he played, whether he smoked or whether he liked alcoholic drinks (“how much does he drink and how often”). The secret police even wanted to know “who supplied his underwear,” who “washed his underwear, socks etc.,” whether “he possessed a medicine cabinet and what medication it contained.”

And yet they could get nothing on him.

Out of the sea of documents, reports and dossiers on Wojtyla, he came out completely clean. He could not be blackmailed, manipulated or influenced. The communist police’s check-up newspaper therefore confirmed that cardinals made the right choice during the 1978 conclave.

I wonder if all these spy documents will unwittingly help in the cause for his Sainthood? God certainly works in mysterious ways, even down to co-opting Communists.

Related link: Polish historian reveals John Paul II was spied on by the priests closest to him

Tuesday, May 29, 2012

Lucia Asterix the cat in a silk tree

Asterix is a fearless tree climber. See her balancing on very thin branches at roof level on the silk tree in our front yard. Sometimes she will jump onto the roof from those branches, but not this time. Occasionally, a branch breaks and she has to hold on almost like a gymnast and swing herself back up again. Again, not this time.

Lucia A woman's story of what it was like being raised by a gay dad

Dawn Stefanowicz was only able to write the book of her life, Out from Under,what it was like being raised by a gay father and a passive mother, once her parents were dead. It's pretty intense reading, but very worthwhile for those who want to know more about gay parenting now that gay adoption and gay marriage is in the media again.

See also a previous post on this book.

Monday, May 28, 2012

Lucia God favours free markets

Seen at : Fr. Sirico (about new book) interviewed by Stuart Varney – fun! ~ WDTPRS

Lucia Education funding changes will affect intermediates the most

I have a child in intermediate this year. It's his first year back to school after a number of years home-schooling. One of the highlights for him has been getting on the bus once a week to travel to the local college for his technology class.

Back in the day for me, I remember it being called "Manual". It was a special class where we learned sewing, woodwork and cooking. I personally found it the most valuable for the sewing lessons which continued on into college level to form four. I was so proficient at sewing that I was able to put together quite a few fashionable items of clothing that my family would never had been able to afford to buy me.

I don't know how every one thinks about their "Manual" days, but I feel like they were sort of rite of passage. And now it looks like this is going to be their final year with the funding changes for education that have recently been announced.

Hundreds of technology teachers nationwide could lose their jobs, and aspiring builder Matt McAlpine, 11, only has two words to say: "I'm bummed."

At Tawa Intermediate School yesterday, Matt found out his hard materials teacher – that's woodwork, metalwork and electronics – might not be at the school next year. Technology time each week was likely to be halved, and might be taught by his regular classroom teacher.

Changes to funding for teaching staff announced in yesterday's Budget would alter the way technology teachers were funded at intermediate schools.

It is not known exactly how many teachers would be affected, but the Post Primary Teachers' Association (PPTA) has calculated up to 1122 teachers would lose their jobs across primary and intermediate schools.

Wow. So, when Hekia Parata was on the radio last week talking about how 90% of schools would gain or lose one teacher, she was probably aware that mentioning what would happen to the other 10% would be the explosive part and best not brought up at that time.

Raroa Normal Intermediate principal Kevin Ryan said the changes were shocking, and signalled the "demise of intermediates."

"This is going to have an enormous impact – since intermediates were set up in the 1930s they have always had specialist funding. My kids were gutted today, they were just devastated. It's a place they can find success that is outside the general academic areas."

His school would have to raise class sizes to 37 pupils or lose four teachers.

Hutt Intermediate School stood to lose six teachers, or bump classes up to 45 pupils, principal Mike Gillatt said.

Education Minister Hekia Parata said the extra technology funding for Year 7 and 8 pupils had been a "historical anomaly," and had now been spread out to benefit all pupils from Years 2 to 10.

A historical anomaly? I really wonder if politicians are attracted to changing things things that have been a certain way for a long time, to make them feel like they are doing something. But without any understanding of why they are that way.

Related link: Intermediates face big teacher losses

Sunday, May 27, 2012

Lucia Amazing stories of change of men who have resolved unwanted same-sex attraction

A common theme seems to be that some boys who haven't had their masculinity positively affirmed as they were growing up sexualise what is missing in them and seek it in others.

Before, I was powerfully attracted to men sexually, but I didn't like them as people. I craved their bodies and their attention, but I didn't like men in a fraternal, platonic way. I didn't want to be around them. I didn't feel like one of them.

In therapy, I uncovered abuse issues and dealt with the lingering impact of peer abuse and bullying in my past, as well as my disaffection from my father and other men. I discovered how those things had put me on a track of isolation and alienation from other males and from my own masculinity that I had been unconsciously trying to heal through homosexual lust, without ever realizing that's what was driving those feelings. I had this lust-hate relationship with men where I wanted them sexually but I had vengeful feelings for them at the same time.

These are not "pray the gay away" type stories. They require work, hard work.

After years of trying to pray the attractions away, wish them away, trying willpower and more and more religious zeal, at last I discovered reparative therapy and books and other resources that showed me a way out. I began uncovering and healing the underlying wounds and emotional pain, and as I did, my sexual desire for men began to dissipate, then disappear.

It was a miracle - but not the overnight miracle I had prayed for all those years. It was a hard-work miracle, where God led me to new resources and support and knowledge and people. He led me through the difficult, painful work of healing that I needed to do.
Related link: People Can Change

Fletch For Greater Glory

New movie out soon, based on a true story of the Cristeros war in Mexico 1926, when the Govt tried to outlaw Catholicism and other religions. The blurb at Brietbart says of the movie -

The film, “For Greater Glory,” hits theaters on June 1 and tells a little known chapter of Mexican history — the Cristero War of 1926 to 1929, which pitted an army of devout Catholic rebels (led in the movie by Andy Garcia) against the government of Mexican President Plutarco Calles (played by Ruben Blades).

For Catholics enraged by the Obama administration’s proposed contraception mandate, the film about the Mexican church’s fight in 1920s is a heartening and timely cinematic boost in the American church’s battle to preserve “religious freedom” in 2012.

For other Catholics and non-Catholics, the film is, more simply, action, suspense and a good cast. Besides Garcia and Blades, there’s “Desperate Housewives” star Eva Longoria and the legendary actor Peter O’Toole.
 For a fuller account of the story, you can download an audio talk on the subject by Patrick Madrid for $2.50 from Lighthouse Catholic Media

Saturday, May 26, 2012

Lucia Priestly vocations are strong in traditional dioceses

Just goes to show the attraction that real Catholicism has.

In our forthcoming book, Beyond the Catholic Culture Wars (Encounter Books), my coauthor and I survey a number of dioceses across the United States that are experiencing an upward trend in their vocation rates. The two common characteristics of these dioceses is that they are led by bishops that are committed to a bold and courageous defense of orthodox Catholicism, and they are making vocations a number one priority within their dioceses through building strong vocation teams that are actively recruiting new priests.

If your diocese is not getting vocations, then you're in a place (like me) where only watered down quasi Catholicism is taught.

Related link: Traditional Catholicism winning in New York

Friday, May 25, 2012

Fletch Porn For Women Goes Mainstream

I walked into Whitcoulls bookstore today, and saw that they have a big cardboard stand featuring the books of one E.L James - a female author. For those that don't know, she has authored a number of very successful novels, beginning with Fifty Shades Of Grey. It's basically "porn for mommies" (as one reviewer described it) and has taken off like wildfire. It is the number one bestselling book on Amazon at the moment, and the two sequels are numbers #2 and #3.

I know that some women have read Mills & Boon and other such books for titillation, but this one seems overtly pornographic with supposed explicit scenes and heavy doses of bondage and sadomasochism.

I had to wonder if a book like this would have been popular in a mainstream bookstore only a few years ago? Or is it only popular because it is said to have been inspired by the Twilight series?

All I can say is that we as a society seem to be getting further and further away from genuine love and it is lust that is coming in to fill that gap. It's quite sad, really.

Lucia It's dangerous to save yourself until marriage because ...

Forget sexually transmitted diseases, the greatest danger to women today is not having sex before marriage, because if you don't, you're obviously uptight and therefore will be unable to have sex when you are married.

Just have a look at this article, complete with a picture of a bride showing her legs, but she has no torso or head, implying you know what: The danger of saving yourself until marriage.

Sheesh, just as bad as a previous article encouraging married people to flirt to rekindle their desire for each other, "so that each spouse becomes aware of their own, and their partner's, power to attract". I wonder how well that works for encouraging fidelity?

UPDATE: Just found a blog post by Simcha Fisher who is horrified by a type of abstinence only education that she came across. She quotes the following:

[G]irls were given two glasses of water and told to chew up food and spit it into one of them.

Their teacher -- a guest speaker from an anti-abortion "crisis pregnancy" group, then asked them which glass they'd rather drink. The lesson, in case you haven't guessed already, is that premarital sex makes you a gross glass of regurgitated food.

If that's the type of education that uptight girls are getting, no wonder they are scared of sex!

Thursday, May 24, 2012

Lucia Wives and pornography

Carrying on from my previous post today, here is how wives respond to their husband's pornography use. It is adultery and women typically will suffer from post-traumatic stress after discovering their husband's habit. It's a big deal.

Lucia National Budget OK

As much as I am disappointed in National, listening to what Labour would do were they in charge made my skin crawl just now. A capital gains tax and compulsory super would save us all, apparently.

Meanwhile, National taking tax from kids' after-school jobs is a bit of an own goal. Doesn't make them look good, even though I'm pretty sure the rationale was to clamp down on parents channelling money through their tax-free children. Just because a loophole exists, doesn't mean you have to take it. A great example of the greedy ruining it for everyone.

For more on the budget, read this: Budget 2012: English's nickel and dime Budget

Lucia It takes being a man to have self-control [UPDATED]

View Part 2 of the interview.

The General Debate on Kiwiblog a couple of days ago inspired me to point out to one of the commenters who mentioned wanting porn, that the use of porn would lead to impotence. Thus started a bit of a debate, which mostly degenerated into how crazy I was for daring to suggest that porn use in marriage was cheating on one's wife.

So, for Dime, the one to whom I first replied, I have found the above YouTube video of an interview with the founder of The Porn Effect, Matthew Fradd. Matt talks about when he first came across porn accidentally at age 8; how by age 11 he and a friend were stealing magazines from the local newstand; how his father when he found his boy's porn stash just told him to not let his mother know; how at age 12 - 13, his friend's mother would hire a porn video for his friend and him to watch. And how he knew as he got older, he just knew he didn't want to be the type of man who crept away to his bedroom to look at porn. However, breaking free was a little more difficult than just not wanting to look at it any more. Like with any vice that we have, it requires struggle.

As he says, it takes [being] a man to have self-control.

To the fathers out there, just think of what your daughters might think when they find out you use images of other women than their mother to gratify yourselves. Girls have said to Matt Fradd of their dads when they do discover what they get up to, "I used to look up to him, now I can't even look at him."


Manhood by Matt Fradd
These are short YouTube clips that I found on Matt Fradd's YouTube Channel where Matt will help you with regaining your masculinity by discarding porn.
Part One - Introduction,
Part Two - What porn promises and how it fails,
Not sure what happened to Part Three,
Part Four - Awakening your deeper desire,
Part Five, Practical steps

Tuesday, May 22, 2012

Lucia Transgender rights endanger real women

We separate public bathrooms by sex because women should have the right to privacy when going to the toilet. But transgender "women" (men who think they are women) are making it easier and easier for men to gain access to previous no go zones, thus endangering all women and girls who enter such places.

But obviously female safety is not important, it's all about the men being able to feel like women. Fantastic.

Adding transgender rights could facilitate another kind of abuse. Campaign Life Coalition national president Jim Hughes has warned that such laws give sexual predators “legitimized access” to women’s restrooms.

“Wherever this [provision] is passed, privacy and decency are eroded,” agrees Staver.

Canadian women have suffered a flurry of restroom attacks by men. In 2010, an Ottawa man was sentenced to three years in prison for assaulting a 15-year-old girl at Nepean High School. The year before, a Halifax woman was assaulted with a sharp object in a restroom at the mall.

In the United States, Concerned Women for America’s Donna Miller was shocked to see a man urinating in a women’s restroom in plain view, “very intentional, in your face” in 2009.

Yet a Macy’s store in San Antonio, Texas, fired 27-year-old Natalie Johnson for denying a man who identified himself as transgender access to the women’s restroom.

Staver cited a case in Orono, Maine, where a teenage boy uses the female restroom on the grounds of his perceived gender identity.

Such lunacy will spread, just like "gay marriage".

Related link: Florida ordinance could give ‘transgender’ men access to women’s restrooms

Lucia Catholic fight-back against the US Government begins

The US Government mandating that Catholic organisations fund contraception has galvanised Catholics across the US to fight back against this blow to religious liberty and interference through the courts. It begins.

Washington D.C., May 21, 2012 / 10:39 am (CNA/EWTN News).- Forty-three Catholic dioceses and organizations across the country have announced religious liberty lawsuits against the federal government to challenge the Obama administration’s contraception mandate.

The announcement was applauded by Cardinal Timothy M. Dolan of New York, who called it “a compelling display of the unity of the Church in defense of religious liberty.”

“We have tried negotiation with the Administration and legislation with the Congress – and we’ll keep at it – but there's still no fix,” said Cardinal Dolan, who is the president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

“Time is running out, and our valuable ministries and fundamental rights hang in the balance, so we have to resort to the courts now,” he explained in a May 21 statement.
Related link: Forty-three Catholic organizations file lawsuits against HHS mandate

Monday, May 21, 2012

Lucia Disturbing story of sex-slave in NZ

This is truly awful.

A serial rapist who kept one of his teenage victims as a sex slave in a remote bush hut is expected to walk free from court because he has developed mild dementia.

Court delays, including more than two years elapsing since he was first charged with abduction and rape, have also contributed to what one of his victims says is the justice system failing them.

A judge has accepted the man committed what amounted to hundreds of rapes involving four women – some aged as young as 15.

But he is expected to walk free on the charges when he appears in court next month. He is also seeking permanent name suppression.

The dragged-out court process has appalled one of his victims, who was 19 when she was lured to a remote part of the North Island and kept as a sex slave for five months.

She said the public should know who the 79-year-old is and believes his violent sexual history has close parallels to one of New Zealand's worse sexual offenders, the "Beast of Blenheim", Stewart Murray Wilson.

"I was repeatedly terrorised with threats of torture, forced abortion with wire, starvation, being eaten alive by pigs, death and death to any babies born to me," she told The Dominion Post.

Surely there should be some sort of Justice process for the mentally incapable when they've committed crimes of this magnitude?

Suppression orders mean The Dominion Post cannot reveal specific details of the woman's ordeal, including dates and where the offending took place.

The woman was the first to complain to police, in September 2008. Three more victims subsequently came forward.

She wants her own name suppression lifted – and she and the other victims want the man's name suppression lifted so the public knows what he did.

I do not understand why NZ Courts so readily grant name suppression. Here the victim wants name suppression lifted for her and that of the man who repeatedly raped her and three other women/girls. If justice is not going to be done because the man has "mild dementia", then at least the name suppression should be lifted.

I wonder if his "mild dementia" will stop him from committing further crimes? Somehow, I doubt it.

Justice denied for sex-slave ~ Dominion Post

Sunday, May 20, 2012

Lucia Hitler was automatically excommunicated by 1933

The gay marriage debate seems to bring out the anti-Catholics in force. One of the main talking points always seems to be Hitler being Catholic and having never been excommunicated. As if this proves the Catholic Church was behind Nazism all along.

I have posted about this previously, but probably didn't make too big a deal of it, so now this subject has it's own post totally dedicated to debunking the false notion that Hitler was never excommunicated by the Catholic Church.

NEW YORK, APRIL 16, 2010 ( An interreligious group trying to discover the facts regarding Pope Pius XII and his efforts to help Jews during World War II has announced the discovery of documents showing how the Church excommunicated Catholics who joined the Nazis.

The New-York based Pave the Way Foundation said that its representative Michael Hesemann found a large series of documents from 1930 to 1933.

The documents indicate that any Catholic who joined the Nazi party, wore the uniform or flew the swastika flag would no longer be able to receive the sacraments.

This policy set three years before Hitler was elected chancellor made clear that the teachings of the Church were incompatible with Nazi ideology.

“The documents clearly show an ideological war between the Catholic Church and National Socialism already in the pre-war decade," Hesemann explained. "The German bishops and the Roman Curia considered the Nazi doctrine not only as incompatible with the Christian faith, but also as hostile to the Church and dangerous to human morals, even more than Communism."

Among the documents is a handwritten letter from a leading member of the Nazis, Hermann Goering, requesting a meeting with Cardinal Eugenio Pacelli (the future Pius XII), which was flatly refused.

There are also documents asking for a removal of the excommunication, which was also denied.

Related link: Archives Show Church Excommunicated Nazis ~ Zenit

Lucia Homophobes should chill out

Alison Mau, mother, ex-wife of Simon Dallow, and now partner of Karleen Edmonds wants the homophobes to "chill out".

"I don't really know where these attitudes come from. It shocks and shames me that they still exist in New Zealand," Mau told the Sunday Star-Times.

"It's time for everybody to wake up, and not just those who hold such ridiculous views."

She said those who discriminated needed to "chill out" because their stance was old-fashioned. "Why should anybody be uncomfortable about something that is normal?"

Yes, it is normal* for some people have desire for those of the same-sex. Just as it is basically normal for most men to want to have sex with anything. However, acting on many of our desires is harmful. A pagan society doesn't care who a person has sex with, while as a Christian society does. That's really where the attitudes come from.

The whole self-control thing and doing the right by your children is not really featuring in this whole debate, it's all me, me, me!

Related link: Mau tells anti-gays to chill out ~ Stuff

*Normal in the sense that without moral guidelines, many people easily fall into a depraved way of living. See: Judaism's Sexual Revolution: Why Judaism Rejected Homosexuality

Saturday, May 19, 2012

Lucia It's becoming dangerous to oppose same-sex marriage

Especially if you are the daughter of Sarah Palin.

The daughter of former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin received vicious, hateful, and incendiary criticism – including death threats – after posting a blog registering her opposition to same-sex “marriage.”

She revealed the hatred she has endured in a follow-up post, “Hate in the Name of Love, Bullying in the Name of Tolerance,”  earlier this week.
* ~ * ~ *

And in Australia, a doctor who signed a petition to the Government stating that children do better with a married mother and father has had to resign soon after his name became public knowledge from his job in the Human Rights Commission.
A board member of the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission (VEOHRC) has resigned less than 48 hours after Australian media reported that he had signed a submission supporting true marriage.

Professor Kuruvilla George, who is also Victoria’s deputy chief psychiatrist, signed a pro-marriage submission to a Senate inquiry on the Marriage Equality Amendment Bill 2010 in March. (There are currently three bills to change the legal definition of marriage before Australian parliament, which are the subject of two separate inquiries).

When it was revealed on Sunday by various newspapers that Professor George had been one of a group of 150 medical professionals who submitted to the inquiry that “the evidence is clear that children who grow up in a family with a mother and father do better in all parameters than children without,” there were immediate calls for his resignation.


Ironically, the submission that Professor George signed predicted that if the legal definition of marriage was changed, charges of hate-speech and vilification against those who support a child’s right to a biological mother and father would increase, and freedom of speech would be curtailed.

So, if the legal definition of marriage hasn't changed both in Australia and in Britain where an English blogger is already being persecuted by a government agency for supporting traditional marriage, this does not bode well for what will happen once the various states seek to enforce their new definition of marriage.  Same-sex marriage will create a more powerful state that will tell us what to think about marriage, and if we don't comply, it will punish us.  Ominous times.

* ~ * ~ *

What is Marriage?
The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring; this covenant between baptized persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament.

Catechism of the Catholic Church

Related links: Same-sex ‘marriage’ advocates threaten Bristol Palin and her family with death
Human Rights Commission member pressured into resigning after supporting traditional marriage

Friday, May 18, 2012

Lucia Fr Barron on Religious Liberty - most fundamental of rights

The secular attack on religion in the public sphere should concern everyone in a free society.

Some quotes from the video:

The right to worship, as one sees fit and the right to live one religious life as one sees fit is the most fundamental of rights. Why? Because it has to do with the most important relationship we could possibly have ... with God. And it reaches down to the deepest level of one's personhood. We speak of the person as inviolable. Well, what's the deepest level of the person, it's the person in relationship to God. And that's why religious liberty is absolutely fundamental. [...] Tyrants, both ancient and modern, first go after religious liberty. [...] Tyrants want dominate the mind and the soul [not just our bodies].

Lucia Our most popular post was a throw-away

It's amazing how many hits we get on this post every, single day. Every day. The number of perverts out there is just astounding and more than a little scary.

I can only hope that the concept that pornography destroys marriage enters their consciousness in some way.

Related link: Marriage Destroyers - Pornography (Lolicon Edition)

Lucia New Blog - The Contrarian

I've just noticed a new blog, The Contrarian, through a comment in Kiwiblog from a very new commenter. Looks like the blog is not really ideologically aligned with this one, but his first post: That first taste of fermented gibberish, got my attention as he mentions that he's not been writing for a few years.

It’s been a long time since I did any writing, several years in fact, and over that period I have been studying politics, intensely scanning all avenues of the media, trawling the seedy back alleys of the internet and getting into arguments with religious conservatives, far left hippies, right-wing neo Nazi’s, communists, rationalists and, quite bizarrely, people who believe that the world is secretly run by shape changing reptiles from another dimension. These online antics have taught me a few things about constructing logical arguments, how to find and present evidence for or against a position and that people are incredibly reluctant to give up a notion once held dear when it is proven false. Not only reluctant but occasionally the amount of hoop jumping and mental gymnastics some will go through in order to hold on to a long disproved position can be quite extraordinary.

Hmmm, could it be? ...

Thursday, May 17, 2012

Lucia Do we redefine Christianity so that homosexuality becomes a valid expression of love?

Cameron Slater, on his Whale Oil Beef Hooked blog, wrote a post last month about a young man, Matthew Vines, who argued that the traditional interpretation of Bible on homosexuality was wrong. The post linked to a You-Tube clip of over an hour in which Matthew articulated his arguments, and listening to him, I have to admit I was moved. Here was a young man who was in pain, and who was searching for answers, and had spent two years studying the Bible looking for those answers.

However, I stopped listening about 15 minutes in, because Matthew Vines, in my opinion, had made two fundamental errors in his interpretation of Scripture at that point. All his other arguments rested on these two errors and therefore it seemed pointless for me to continue. Thankfully, after investigating the link given, I found a transcript of Matthew's hour long presentation, which helped enormously in understanding his arguments and being able to counter them.  Here's the first argument where he makes a mistake in logic:

The first problem is this: In Matthew 7, in the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus warns against false teachers, and he offers a principle that can be used to test good teaching from bad teaching. By their fruit, you will recognize them, he says. Every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. Good teachings, according to Jesus, have good consequences. That doesn’t mean that following Christian teaching will or should be easy, and in fact, many of Jesus’s commands are not easy at all – turning the other cheek, loving your enemies, laying down your life for your friends. But those are all profound acts of love that both reflect God’s love for us and that powerfully affirm the dignity and worth of human life and of human beings. Good teachings, even when they are very difficult, are not destructive to human dignity. They don’t lead to emotional and spiritual devastation, and to the loss of self-esteem and self-worth. But those have been the consequences for gay people of the traditional teaching on homosexuality. It has not borne good fruit in their lives, and it’s caused them incalculable pain and suffering. If we’re taking Jesus seriously that bad fruit cannot come from a good tree, then that should cause us to question whether the traditional teaching is correct.

If we want to take this concept further, what is the fruit from traditional sexuality? Answer, children. From the love of a man and a woman come the blessing of children - even if there is no marriage. But, there is no blessing of children from sex between two of the same sex - it is sterile. But what God does for marriage is provide His Grace for the husband and wife to be good parents and stay together. Of course, Grace can be resisted and can be lost through mortal sin (ie pornography, contraception, adultery, abortion), but it is there for those who take advantage of it, and the result is that male/female unions are far more stable if joined together in monogamous, non-contracepted marriage.

Good teachings can be destructive to human dignity if those teachings are resisted, if the help that Jesus offers us to bear them is resisted. It's like having a wound that you refuse to let anyone tend - it's going to fester, and then you are going to feel really bad. Traditional teaching is the treatment for wounds that people have.  Dealing with wounds is always going to hurt, but it's far worse if you redefine the wound to not exist.
The second problem that has already presented itself with the traditional interpretation comes from the opening chapters of Genesis, from the account of the creation of Adam and Eve. This story is often cited to argue against the blessing of same-sex unions: in the beginning, God created a man and a woman, and two men or two women would be a deviation from that design. But this biblical story deserves closer attention. In the first two chapters of Genesis, God creates the heavens and the earth, plants, animals, man, and everything in the earth. And He declares everything in creation to be either good or very good – except for one thing. In Genesis 2:18, God says, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.” And yes, the suitable helper or partner that God makes for Adam is Eve, a woman. And a woman is a suitable partner for the vast majority of men – for straight men. But for gay men, that isn’t the case. For them, a woman is not a suitable partner. And in all of the ways that a woman is a suitable partner for straight men—for gay men, it’s another gay man who is a suitable partner. And the same is true for lesbian women. For them, it is another lesbian woman who is a suitable partner. But the necessary consequence of the traditional teaching on homosexuality is that, even though gay people have suitable partners, they must reject them, and they must live alone for their whole lives, without a spouse or a family of their own. We are now declaring good the very first thing in Scripture that God declared not good: for the man to be forced to be alone. And the fruit that this teaching has borne has been deeply wounding and destructive.

Well, women are difficult, I'll grant him that. Not only do men have to put up with our off days, they need to take care of any children we might have. There's no free sex and we tend to get very upset if they sleep with anyone else.  Unfortunately, our desires are not perfect as a result of concupiscence, while as with Adam and Eve, we see the ideal (before the Fall, of course).

Matthew Vines, meet Patrick Einheber. He's quite a bit older (Matthew is 21, Patrick is 37) and therefore is able to offer more in the way of experience:
A major part of my struggle as a Catholic who experiences same-sex attraction has been the difficulty of wrestling with my desire for the goodness of love, relationship and pleasure that seems to be denied me by the teachings of the Church about homosexual relationships. After all, aren't these things good and aren't we all entitled to them? Why would the Church, or more importantly, God, wish to deprive some of us of these things? The answer, although it may not seem obvious at first glance, is that they don't wish to deprive us of any goodness at all and in fact wish for our perfect happiness. So how then can we understand these apparently disparate things? I found the solution to this problem in a consideration of good and evil themselves, as the Church and the Bible describe them, and what it is that the good God wishes to give to us in our creation as sexual beings. It's not a simple answer, but it is a consistent, meaningful and beautiful one.

I would strongly recommend that any one who is interested in this subject read more: Same-sex attraction and the choice for the greatest good

Related links: The Gay Debate: The Bible and Homosexuality ~ Whale Oil Beef Hooked
The Gay Debate: The Bible and Homosexuality ~ Matthew Vines

Lucia Dunne scared of Conservative "extremists"

Any position is extreme to a fence-sitter.

The Conservatives have been touted as a future coalition party for National since ACT leader John Banks' donations scandal. Leader Colin Craig has risen to prominence lately with controversial views on promiscuity and gay marriage.

Now Mr Dunne – who has a confidence and supply deal with National – has launched an attack on the political newcomers.

And he says he should know, as two of his former MPs – Larry Baldock and Gordon Copeland – stood for the Conservatives in last year's elections. Mr Baldock was third on the party list, while Mr Copeland stood in Hutt South.

"They're extreme," he said.

"Look at Larry Baldock's fanaticism over smacking. Copeland, the fact he left UnitedFuture over smacking, for goodness sake, when it was a conscience issue.

"Any relationship with the Conservative Party ... suggests it's going to be dogma on one side versus pragmatism on the other side, and I think it's a pretty unhealthy mix."

Mr Dunne believed the party had "little tolerance" for alternative views.

"It's a real moral jihad; it would be smacking, not just resisting any change to the abortion laws, it's tightening the abortion law, it's anti-prostitution, you name it, the whole suite of agenda items.

Ooh, ooh, you care about something... Extremist! And you're prepared to do something about it... Extremist! Oh, oh, and you think these things matter and they'll have long term ramifications ... Extremist! Extremist! Extremist!

So, why does smacking matter? Because it's too much of an intrusion into the family by the Government that subverts parental authority and therefore proper guidance, over children. This issue galvanised New Zealanders enough to get them out signing a petition for a referendum and then voting in that referendum en masse, the result of which the Government ignored. The State is a terrible parent and wrestling power from families in this way is a precedent for more intervention as time goes on. Not to mention the families that have been persecuted to date by the law in New Zealand. But obviously concepts and realities of that nature just go over Dunne's head.

Related links: Dunne attacks 'moral jihad' extremists ~ Stuff

Some of our posts on the anti-smacking law
The anti-smacking law, why parents are criminals
Smacking law referendum not being held with General Election
What is wrong with John Key?

Tuesday, May 15, 2012

Lucia More on the English Blogger being persecuted by the government for defending traditional marriage

The effect of a complaint can be devastating, even if there is nothing to it as is the case here. Running an advertisement for the defence of traditional marriage where male/female couples are shown is not offensive. And yet, in Britain, that sort of carry-on gets you the attention of a government agency who asks you to please explain.

His Grace apologises to his readers and communicants for his brief absence from his cyber pulpit: he has been closeted with lawyers and advisers, and has downed one or two vodka-martinis (‘dirty’, two olives) along with sundry bottles of Rioja. It’s interesting how a request to comply with an official investigation and a demand to respond to a formal inquiry becomes distracting and all-consuming: the mere request is a formidable weapon of harassment in itself, sapping energy, time and money (vid. His Grace’s Collection Plate ‘donate’ button on the right: all solidarity contributions welcome).

Read more : ASA – His Grace responds ~ Archbishop Cranmer
Previous Post: Ominous Government harrassment of Christian Blogger ~ NZ Conservative

Monday, May 14, 2012

Lucia The place to be tonight

The place to be tonight is in front of the fire.

This is after Asterix gave up trying to figure out what I was doing pointing the camera at her and making strange noises. Sleep became more interesting.

Lucia Colin Craig did surprisingly well on Q&A yesterday

I'm impressed.

To view, click here.

Hattip Kereopa, of Being Frank.

Lucia Paula Bennett and Dr Josef Mengele cartoon [UPDATE]

Considering that most New Zealanders support the Governments plans to offer free long term contraception to female beneficiaries and their older teenage daughters, the cartoon above from today's Dominion Post should really have had a mob with pitchforks rather than a lone Nazi wanting to butcher all and sundry.

Related link : Free Birth Control wins Public Support ~ Stuff

UPDATE 4:40 pm: KiwiBlog and Keeping Stock have published their own scanned copies ofthe cartoon now as well. They are outraged at it's offensiveness. I'm kind of meh... so used to offensive cartoons aimed at Pope Benedict XVI and the Catholic Church and anything Catholic and/or Christian, that this is just another one those.

Sunday, May 13, 2012

Lucia Ominous Government harrassment of Christian Blogger

The first I heard of this story was from the Protect the Pope blog. A prominent Christian and conservative blogger, Cranmer has fallen foul of the British Advertising Standards Authority for an advertisement that he ran on his site which asked readers to sign the petition to defend traditional marriage.

As many of you here may know already, there seems to be a strong desire by David Cameron, the British PM to implement "gay marriage", even though the option of a civil union is available for those of the same sex who wish to be seen as unified by government contract, and even though the population seems dead set against the idea.

Already, Catholic Bishops could be in trouble for asking Catholic schools to publicise the marriage petition. Apparently this is "political indoctrination". Right, never mind that marriage between a man and a woman is the orthodox Catholic doctrinal position.

Meanwhile, Cranmer was told to keep the matter confidential, but rather than bowing down to government intimidation, he went public. As he said:
Since His Grace does not dwell in Iran, North Korea, Soviet Russia, Communist China or Nazi Germany, but occupies a place in the cyber-ether suspended somewhere between purgatory and paradise, he is minded to ignore that request. Who do these people think they are?

We are the government and we are here to help. NOT.

Isn't it interesting that siding with the current legal position of marriage in Britain is considered to be "homophobic" and "political indoctrination"? Welcome to the bizarre new world where defending the status quo gets you into trouble with the Government.

Friday, May 11, 2012

Lucia Obama invoking the harmless hippie Jesus on "Gay Marriage"

Msgr. Charles Pope has written a post on The President, Gay unions, and the problem of selective Christianity where he looks at what Obama said to use Our Lord to justify his endorsement of "gay marriage".
In this post however lets consider the problematic appeal of the President to Jesus to affirm Gay “marriage.” Specifically Mr Obama said to ABC News:

…In the end the values that I care most deeply about and she [Michele] cares most deeply about is how we treat other people and, you know, I, you know, we are both practicing Christians and obviously this position may be considered to put us at odds with the views of others but, you know, when we think about our faith, the thing at root that we think about is, not only Christ sacrificing himself on our behalf, but it’s also the Golden Rule, you know, treat others the way you would want to be treated. And I think that’s what we try to impart to our kids and that’s what motivates me….[1]

It is a common problem today that people often present simplistic portraits of Jesus Christ to support a variety of agendas. And the portraits of Jesus are not only simplistic, they are incomplete (usually intentionally so), and fail to accept that Jesus cannot be reduced to a simple sentence or two.

I would argue this is what the President is doing here. As if to say, “Jesus, was basically a nice and affirming person, who spoke of Love,  and so beautifully and taught us to do unto to others as we would have them do to us. “Surely,” the thinking goes, “this Jesus would affirm and rejoice over two Gay people getting “married.”" It is as if this were all Jesus was or said, “Love…Do unto others”. Never mind that he had some pretty high standards when it came to sexuality (Matt 5:27-30; Matt 15:19; Mk 10:11; Rev 22:15; Rev 21:8) Never mind that he told his apostles he had other things to teach them and would send his Holy Spirit, and never mind that His Holy Spirit inspired the Epistles writers like Paul to speak clearly in the ancient Biblical tradition about the sinfulness of homosexual activity, fornication, and adultery [2]  “Never mind all that,” says the modern world, and our President, “I chose the Jesus who said only, ‘God is love, and be kind to one another.’”

Msgr. Pope then talks about orthodoxy vs heresy, where heresy is to pick and choose what you will believe. while as orthodoxy is to take the whole of the faith, and then follows with great misunderstanding people today have of Our Lord, that he's some sort of harmless hippie.  No, he argues.
The modern tendency on the left, from which the President speaks has been to reduce Jesus to a rather harmless hippie who went about talking about love and inclusion and healed people. Gone from this harmless and politically correct Jesus are volumes of verses that help complete the picture: a Messiah who claimed authority in our lives, who spoke quite clearly of sin, yes even sexual sin, and who warned repeatedly of the coming judgment, and the reality not only heaven, but of hell.

Archbishop Fulton Sheen talked a lot about this concept, of people in the West separating Christ from His Cross and thus making Him harmless and sentimental. In the preface of Life of Christ (written at a time when the Soviet Union was still alive and kicking), he says:
The modern world which denies personal guilt and admits only social crimes, which has no place for personal repentance but only public reforms, has divorce Christ from His Cross; the Bridegroom and the Bride have been pulled apart. What God hath joined together, men have torn asunder. As a result, to the left is the Cross; to the right is Christ. Each has awaited new partners who will pick them up in a kind of second and adulterous union. Communism comes along and picks up the meaningless Cross; Western post-Christian civilisation choose the unscarred Christ.

Communism has chosen the Cross in the sense that it has brought back to an egotistic world a sense of discipline, self-abnegation, surrender, hard work, study and dedication to supra-individual goals. But the Cross without Christ is sacrifice without love. Hence, Communism has produced a society that is authoritarian, cruel, oppressive of human freedom, filled with concentration camps, firing squads and brain-washings.

The Western post-Christian civilisation has picked up the Christ without His Cross. But a Christ without a sacrifice that reconciles the world to God is a cheap, feminised, colourless, itinerant preacher who deserves to be popular for His great Sermon on the Mount, but also merits unpopularity for what He said about His Divinity on the one hand, and divorce, judgement, and hell on the other. This sentimental Christ is patched together with a thousand commonplaces, sustained sometimes by academic etymologists who cannot see the Word for the letters, or distorted beyond personal recognition by a dogmatic principle that anything that is Divine must necessarily be a myth. Without His Cross, He becomes nothing more than a sultry precursor of democracy or a humanitarian who taught brotherhood without tears.

I've seen too many arguments by Christians who believe in this sentimental Christ, so Obama's position on "gay marriage" and Jesus approving will seem entirely rational. But they need to know that the Lord they base this on is one of their own making and therefore one who has no power to save them or anyone else.  And using him to support "gay marriage" helps no one, even those who think they need to get married in order to feel complete and supported by society.  Only real marriage completes and sanctifies, especially when the real Christ is involved.

Lucia Same-sex marriage will devalue women in society [UPDATE]

Now that the gay marriage debate is raging about equality of rights for homosexuals, how many realise that the widespread acceptance of same-sex relationships as we are seeing, herald the long-term devaluation of women in marriage and in society in general? We need to learn from history.
In societies where men sought out men for love and sex, women were relegated to society's periphery. Thus, for example, ancient Greece, which elevated homosexuality to an ideal, was characterized by "a misogynistic attitude," in Norman Sussman's words. Homosexuality in ancient Greece, he writes, "was closely linked to an idealized concept of the man as the focus of intellectual and physical activities...The woman was seen as serving but two roles. As a wife, she ran the home. As a courtesan, she satisfied male sexual desires." Classicist Eva Keuls describes Athens at its height of philosophical and artistic greatness as "a society dominated by men who sequester their wives and daughters, denigrate the female role in reproduction, erect monuments to the male genitalia, have sex with the sons of their peers..."

In medieval France, when men stressed male-male love, it "implied a corresponding lack of interest in women. In the Song of Roland, a French mini-epic given its final form in the late eleventh or twelfth century, women appear only as shadowy marginal figures: "The deepest signs of affection in the poem, as well as in similar ones appear in the love of man for man..." The women of Arab society, wherein male homosexuality has been widespread, remain in a notably low state in the modern world. This may be a coincidence, but common sense suggests a linkage. So, too, in traditional Chinese culture, the low state of women has been linked to widespread homosexuality. As a French physician reported from China in the nineteenth century, "Chinese women were such docile, homebound dullards that the men, like those of ancient Greece, sought courtesans and boys."

While traditional Judaism is not as egalitarian as many late twentieth century Jews would like, it was Judaism --- very much through its insistence on marriage and family and its rejection of infidelity and homosexuality --- that initiated the process of elevating the status of women. While other cultures were writing homoerotic poetry, the Jews wrote the Song of Songs, one of the most beautiful poems depicting male-female sensual love ever written.

Related link: Judaism's Sexual Revolution: Why Judaism Rejected Homosexuality
Previously linked to in my post: Some reaction to Obama's endorsement of "same-sex marriage"


Debates on NZ Blogs today:
Guest post - Louisa Wall, Rush Limbaugh on gay marriage, Family First ~ Whale Oil Beef Hooked
Major party leaders all support same-sex marriage ~ KiwiBlog

Thursday, May 10, 2012

Lucia Interview with a philosopher

I really enjoyed listening to this podcast interview with Peter Kreeft by the Catholic Cafe. Kreeft talks about his conversion from Calvinism, which he was brought up in, to Catholicism when he was in his early 20's.

Worth listening to if you've got nothing better to do this evening.

Lucia Some reaction to Obama's endorsement of "same-sex marriage"

From WDTPRS: Obama the Theologian invokes Christ while endorsing unnatural sexual acts, same-sex “marriage”. Fr. Z rants.
Obama instrumentalized the Lord’s Sacrifice, the ultimate act of the love which is charity, to promote unnatural sex and the overturning of one of our most important societal bonds.

We, according to charity, must act for the true good of the other. It is not for the true good of another person to help them to sin or to undermine Christian morals. But that is exactly what Obama is doing. This is an astounding example of both scandal and blasphemy. It is beyond absurd to to invoke the Lord’s Sacrifice in an attempt to violate our human nature and God’s laws.

Obama invoked the Sacrifice of the Cross for the sake of justifying the destruction of the definition of “marriage”, as if that is “good” for people. It is NOT for the good of anyone, because it promotes and condones a sin that cries to heaven.

We cannot wish that people sin.
We cannot help them sin.
We cannot tell them that sin is good.
We cannot give them the means to sin so that they will sin.
We cannot defend the sins of others.

In charity, we must treat people with the affliction of sex-sex attraction according to their God-given dignity. In charity, we can NEVER condone their sinful acts.

[...] What the President did was vile [...] He is an embarrassment to the United States.

Meanwhile, Whale Oil is asking why our political leaders won't do the same and then mocking the arguments against the redefinition of marriage.  While as David Farrar thinks that Obama has guts, and that opposition to "gay marriage" will wane with time as most of the bias comes from those aged over 60.

I recommend they both read this article: Why Judaism rejected homosexuality. As the introduction to it says:
When Judaism demanded that all sexual activity be channeled into marriage, it changed the world. The Torah's prohibition of non-marital sex quite simply made the creation of Western civilization possible.

And the converse will be true.

The irony here is men supporting something that will disproportionately harm women and children.  Men are supposed to be our protectors, but many men in today's times act like narcissistic children.

Meanwhile, the yet another American state has rejected "same-sex marriage" by a 61%-39% margin: North Carolina voters approve marriage amendment.

Fletch Melinda Gates Contraception Push. Defying Church Morally Necessary

Melinda Gates (Bill Gates' wife), wants to make contracption a priority so that "120 million more women access to contraceptives by 2020". You can watch the video above to see what she says, or check out the story in Newsweek.

Some quotations from the story -

As she revealed in an exclusive interview with Newsweek, she has decided to make family planning her signature issue and primary public health a priority. “My goal is to get this back on the global agenda,” she says. [...]

Now the foundation, which is worth almost $34 billion, is putting her agenda into practice. In July it’s teaming up with the British government to cosponsor a summit of world leaders in London, to start raising the $4 billion the foundation says it will cost to get 120 million more women access to contraceptives by 2020. And in a move that could be hugely significant for American women, it is pouring money into the long-neglected field of contraceptive research, seeking entirely new methods of birth control. Ultimately Gates hopes to galvanize a global movement. “When I started to realize that that needed to get done in family planning, I finally said, OK, I’m the person that’s going to do that,” she says.
Well, I think this is horrendous, myself. In the video above, she makes the claim that somehow contraception and abortion aren't linked, although there are many studies that prove they are.She obviousluy thinks she is doing the world a favour, but it is actually a great disservice. What's even worse, is that she is a self-described Catholic (which the media is making a big deal of in regard to the story), but sees it as being OK with her faith.

Perhaps more importantly, there’s her Catholic faith, which has always informed her work. “From the very beginning, we said that as a foundation we will not support abortion, because we don’t believe in funding it,” she says. She’s long disagreed with the church’s position on contraception, and the Gates Foundation did some family-planning funding early in its history. Still, she went through a lot of soul-searching before she was ready to champion the issue publicly. “I had to wrestle with which pieces of religion do I use and believe in my life, what would I counsel my daughters to do,” she says. Defying church teachings was difficult, she adds, but also came to seem morally necessary. Otherwise, she says, “we’re not serving the other piece of the Catholic mission, which is social justice.”
OK, so she has "pieces of religion" she believes? Defying Church teaching is "morally necessary"?
She may as well go join another Church, because if you do not follow Church teaching, you are truly Catholic in name only.

Wednesday, May 9, 2012

Fletch Study Proves That Abortion Ban Does Not Lead To Back Alley Deaths

Chile is proving to be a good testing ground with regard to abortion laws. While other countries have embraced abortion - we have abortion-on-demand for all intents and purposes - Chile went the other way in 1989, banning all "therapeutic" abortions. A new study, headed by Dr. Elard Koch, an epidemiologist from the Department of Family Medicine, Faculty of Medicine at the University of Chile, shows that -

a) outlawing abortion is remarkably effective at reducing the number of abortions that take place in a country, including clandestine ones, and b) there is absolutely no link between making abortion illegal and an increase in the number of deaths from clandestine abortions.
More snippets below the fold

Tuesday, May 8, 2012

Lucia I've never been on the pill

Thankfully, during all the years of my confusion over right and wrong, I never went on the pill. I knew that was wrong, taking chemicals to mess with my fertility. I objected to it on health grounds, having known so many women whose hormones were wrecked though the pill, some of whom still managed to get pregnant. I really wondered what the point was.

However, my husband and I have contracepted through other means, until I returned to the Catholic faith that is. And I can tell everyone that our marriage has been greatly enhanced by not using contraception any more. It's different, really different. I feel more respected and more.

Approaching one's spouse with a genuine openness to the possibility of parenthood represents one of the most profound expressions of love and total acceptance of the other person in marriage. When a husband and wife are truly open to life in their marital relations, it is as if they are looking each other in the eye and saying, "I love you so much that I am even willing to embark on the adventure of parenthood with you! . . . I entrust myself to you so much that I am willing to become a partner with you in serving any new life that may come from this act."

So many don't realise how destructive to marriage contraception is.

Related link: How contraception destroys love

Lucia Governments should not be funding contraception

Government funding of contraception was inevitable. So far it's not compulsory, but I'm sure that it will be so in the future.

Women on benefits - including teenagers and the daughters of beneficiaries - will be offered free long-term contraception as part of a $287.5 million Budget package for the Government's welfare reforms.

But critics say the measure borders on state control of women's reproductive choices.

I agree, this is heading into very dangerous territory. From a Catholic perspective, the use of contraception is completely immoral. (See Contraception, Why Not?)

I suppose the problem is that the Government is acting as quasi-husband to thousands of single women with children, so is therefore theoretically within it's right to demand that those women not have more children. But instead it ignores the activity that creates the children (ie sex) and just wants the women to keep doing what they are doing (having casual relationships with men who won't act as fathers to their children) and throws contraception at them. In other words, the women can keep rorting the taxpayer by pretending to not have relationships, take the contraception and therefore keep those men free from any responsibility.

However, until the Government and society stops encouraging women to be sexually available, it and we are morally responsible for all the children that result from such activity.

Related link: Free birth control for beneficiaries ~ NZ Herald

Monday, May 7, 2012

Lucia Just say Om: Catholic disaster in Wellington

The front page of the Dominion Post today has a young boy in a Yoga meditation position, complete with thumb and forefinger together learning how to meditate. This is not an after school activity that his wacky parents have enrolled him in, this is being taught in a Catholic school in Wellington. Specifically, Holy Cross School in Miramar, the school I used to go to when I was a child.
When visited by The Dominion Post, a classroom of Holy Cross children sat with their eyes shut tightly and legs crossed, breathing slowly.

"Meditation makes me feel happy, and also afterwards it makes me relaxed and calmful," said Dallas Arthurs, 10, after the five-minute session.

Others had been thinking about God, or about those less fortunate. "I feel sad for all the people because some people have no food, and I felt sad for the people who have no homes or anything," said Bailey Abbie, 9.

Principal Celeste Hastings said the school had introduced meditation so children could learn the importance of taking time out.

"In this day and age, when everybody can be really busy, we think teaching kids the skill of slowing down and just having a bit of quiet time is a life skill, really. It's asking them to stop and just be a little bit reflective."

Parent Francesca Ngan said it was a great initiative.

Her son Zachary Lorenz, 9, told her it made him feel calm. "It is really quite lovely."

It was hoped the whole 218-pupil school would eventually participate in the classes, taken by Sister Ema Konokono from Our Lady's Home of Compassion.


I shouldn't be surprised. Several years ago I wrote about Centering Prayer infesting the Diocesan newspaper, Welcom. I reasoned that if the paper is theoretically overseen by the region's two bishops (Dew and Cullinane), I had to wonder just how far up did the rot go.  (Cullinane has since retired and was replaced this year with Charles Drennan).

Since that blog post of three years ago, I have discovered that meditation is being taught in the Wellington Diocese with full approval of Archbishop John Dew. Last August, the Diocese ran a weekend training course in Stewardship. The Friday beforehand, they also ran a pre-Stewardship event where they brought in a number of speakers to the Cathedral of the Sacred Heart Cathedral, including a priest who talked to the participants about meditation which he called contemplative prayer.

I attended this event originally to listen to one of the speakers, Joy Cowley, as I was curious as to how much of her New Age views she'd try to pass off as Catholic to a wider audience. Obviously the Archbishop approved of what she was saying as he introduced her and mentioned that she'd run a retreat for Wellington priests and how much he valued a prayer she'd written for him.   Her talk, "Connecting with the God Fire Deep Within", wasn't overtly heretical, you'd have to know specifically that she doesn't believe in evil (and therefore Salvation), and when she talks about us being shards of clay with a sparks of God's love within that this isn't just about being temples of the Holy Spirit, she means that each one of us is divine.  But then she was probably very aware that most of her audience was what she probably considers in the "first stage of faith" where such concepts as good and evil is taught, so they wouldn't be "advanced enough" to get the "higher" stuff, and therefore she ought to be careful in what she says to them.

As if Joy Cowley wasn't bad enough, the speaker that followed her that I wasn't intending staying to listen to shocked me into staying and turning my voice recorder back on.  His name was Fr Alan Roberts and he was there to teach the participants how to meditate.

Now the thing with meditation is that is can be fine. But meditation can be used as a means of preparing a person for their journey of "self-redemption" (making Salvation through Jesus unnecessary) as the Vatican document on the New Age explains:

Some stages on the way to self-redemption are preparatory (meditation, body harmony, releasing self-healing energies). They are the starting-point for processes of spiritualisation, perfection and enlightenment which help people to acquire further self-control and psychic concentration on “transformation” of the individual self into “cosmic consciousness”.
In Fr Roberts' talk, I can point to a couple of specific problems with what he said.  The first was importance of the position while meditating so that you can receive God.  You either sit on a chair or on the floor in the "lotus position" (or even on a chair in the lotus position!) for the meditation.  You had to relax your whole body "so that God's word could come through.  We're like faulty televisions; the reception is coming through, but the wires are crossed."

This sort of thinking that relaxation is important in order to let in something higher is very common in the New Age. However, it's bizarre hearing the same ideas rephrased so that they might look palatable to a Catholic audience. It's also incredibly different from the traditional Catholic position of kneeling where you indicate reverence for God through your body.  There appears to be no reverence for God when you're trying to pick Him up as if He's a television signal!

He also said: "We can stop hiding and running away and allow Jesus to lead us, sometimes to the light and sometimes to the darkness.  When we are taken to the latter we acknowledge it and hand it over.  This lays the foundation for the process of inner healing to begin, so we can become free to love in return."

What Fr Roberts says above leads me to believe that he uses darkness as a euphemism for sin; darkness which is only acknowledged and handed over, but not repented of.  A denial of sin that connects up very nicely with the lack of availability of Confessions in the Wellington Diocese.  Because we can become our own healers, Confession is obviously unnecessary.


Just because something makes you feel good doesn't mean it is good.  I was involved in the New Age for a while and I can tell you that I learned to do quite a few things that felt really good that I know are dangerous for my soul, that I wouldn't do now.  One of the most amazing, peaceful places that I have ever experienced that gave me quite a spiritual high was a New Age conference on something or other (I forget which one, I attended quite a few), and afterwards, random people in the street couldn't stop looking at me.  I really don't like that sort of attention, so I wasn't hooked on it and wanting it again, and all I can think of was that the conference imparted a sort of "glamour" for the day.  It wore off, thankfully.  So, in my experience, I would say that feelings can be very deceptive as to whether or not something is good.

I can't tell from the brief write up whether what is going on at Holy Cross School is harmful for the children, or if it's more benign than what it looks.  The little boy on the front page of the paper today sitting cross-legged with his hands upturned and his forefinger and thumb together certainly looks like he's not doing a Christian meditation, but for all I know, that could be staged.  The photographer may have asked him to pose like that.  But with what I know is happening at the Diocese level, anything is possible.

So, I'll just finish with a bit more from the Vatican document, on the main difference in the spiritual life as a Christian in comparison with spirituality in New Age thinking:
For Christians, the spiritual life is a relationship with God which gradually through his grace becomes deeper, and in the process also sheds light on our relationship with our fellow men and women, and with the universe. Spirituality in New Age terms means experiencing states of consciousness dominated by a sense of harmony and fusion with the Whole. So “mysticism” refers not to meeting the transcendent God in the fullness of love, but to the experience engendered by turning in on oneself, an exhilarating sense of being at one with the universe, a sense of letting one's individuality sink into the great ocean of Being.

Pupils meditating and doing philosophy ~ Dominion Post & Stuff
Catholics and the Dangers of the New Age Movement ~ Catholicism Pure and Simple
Jesus Christ, the Bearer of the Water of Life: A Christian reflection on the “New Age” ~ Vatican

Sunday, May 6, 2012

Lucia Pornography turns men into cowards

Something to think about.
“I knew a guy, and I couldn’t actually believe he was saying this, but he said, ‘Why would I want to eat in the same restaurant every night when the world’s a buffet?’ I thought people said that only on 'Entourage.'"

This relational cowardice, this disinclination to commit to the sacrament of marriage, and especially this reduction of women to selections on a “buffet” — this is utterly beneath the dignity of a man made in the image of God.

The greatest calling we have as men is to love like Jesus Christ. Christ loved his disciples “to the very last” — and in his commitment to love, he suffered; he was wounded; and in the end, he was murdered. True love involves a tremendous commitment to danger.
Related link: Pornography Is for Cowards ~ NCRegister, Vaughn Kohler

Lucia Euthanasia - AGAIN

This is one of those issues that will not die and putting it out of it's misery is not an option; what is needed is a complete change of heart.

Every one dies. Choosing to kill yourself or some one you love when it all looks too hard is selling life short, is selling those last days or weeks short.

My Dad died of (lung and liver) cancer when I was in my early 20's and I am so grateful that he didn't have the option to be killed. He spent his last few days on morphine, so I was able to get there in time to see him before he died. Yes, it was awful, but I would not trade that last afternoon and morning that I was with him for anything. Sometimes, I still miss him so much it hurts.

I didn't believe in anything at that point, but I knew absolutely after being there when he took his last breath that he went to God. It was like Heaven opened for a brief time and let me know that there was far more to life that just what we have here. Of course, I filed that incredible experience away as something inexplicable that I couldn't accept at the time.

So, I've come away from my Dad's death with a knowledge that how we die MATTERS. Being but down like a dog degrades us. Dogs do not have the capacity for self-knowledge in the way that we do, therefore we need to allow the process of death to unfold for ourselves and for our loved ones because it is through suffering that we learn what is absolutely important in life. There's no shortcut to that.

Related links: The euthanasia debate ~ KiwiBlog, David Farrar
Legal euthanasia kills justice for all, Sunday Star Times, John Kleinsman

Saturday, May 5, 2012

Lucia Gay marriage not a vote winner in Britain

A lesson for so called "conservative parties", don't pick up issues that your constituency doesn't back you on.
An opinion poll carried out by ComRes has found that PM Cameron’s plans to legalise homosexual marriage by 2015 could lose the Conservative party 1 million votes at the next election,and up to 30 seats in the Commons. For every disaffected Tory supporter attracted back to the party, it loses almost three because of its stance on the issue.

In The Sun today,Trevor Kavanagh says Tory supporters are “deserting in droves over [David Cameron's] irrelevant campaign for gay marriage” and other unpopular issues.

A Home Counties Tory MP said:‘We’re worried we’ll haemorrhage votes unless Cameron backs down. These protests are not from the usual suspects of complainants. These are from quiet,unassuming Tory supporters telling us,do this and we won’t vote for you again.

The Mail on Sunday has been told that Chief Whip Patrick McLoughlin has privately assured anxious Tory backbenchers that the Prime Minister’s same-sex marriage plan will ‘not come to a vote’.

Related link: Cameron’s plans for gay marriage could cost party 1 million votes,up to 30 seats ~ Protect the Pope

Lucia The unpalatable choices facing National [UPDATE]

Now that the ACT Party has basically died, Tracy Watkins muses as to what National needs to do in order to get more than 50% of the vote in the next election.

The unpalatable choices facing National, then, are a deal with Colin Craig's hardline Christian Conservative Party, and hope it might make it into Parliament in numbers – though most National MPs would probably view that relationship as even more toxic than the relationship with ACT – or extending an olive branch to NZ First.

I suppose this is what happens when you ignore a huge number of people on what they consider vital issues (remember that anti-smacking law that National supported and then ignored the referendum results on?), you then start relying on smaller parties supported by the really annoyed ones in order to try and get yourself re-elected.

Related link: ACT 1, final scene: exit stage Right ~ Stuff

UPDATE: 6:00pm David Farrar asks if the Conservatives will replace ACT, however, he calls them the CCCP in reference to things Soviet.

Friday, May 4, 2012

Lucia Russia threatens preemptive strike

Thanks to Luc Hansen on Kiwiblog for mentioning this.

MOSCOW — Russia’s top military officer has threatened to carry out a pre-emptive strike on U.S.-led NATO missile defense facilities in Eastern Europe if Washington goes ahead with its controversial plan to build a missile shield.

President Dmitry Medvedev said last year that Russia will retaliate militarily if it does not reach an agreement with the United States and NATO on the missile defense system.

Chief of General Staff Nikolai Makarov went even further Thursday. “A decision to use destructive force pre-emptively will be taken if the situation worsens,” he said at an international conference attended by senior U.S. and NATO officials.

Russian Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov also warned on Thursday that talks between Moscow and Washington on the topic are “close to a dead end.”

Related link: Russia’s military threatens preemptive strike if NATO goes ahead with missile plan

Lucia Civil Unions almost as durable as Marriage? [UPDATE]

Isn't it interesting that a higher rate of relationship breakdown for civil unions is reported in the positive?
Civil unions have proved to be almost as durable as traditional marriages in the first seven years since the legal status was introduced.

Statistics New Zealand figures provided to the Herald show that 4.4 per cent of civil unions registered in New Zealand from 2005 to the end of 2009 were dissolved by the end of last year, compared with 3.8 per cent of marriages in the same period.

The actual numbers - 82 civil unions dissolved out of 1876 - were so small that Statistics NZ demographer Anne Howard said any differences with the rate of marriage breakdown were unreliable.

That's from Civil union splits match divorce rate in  the NZ Herald

Another article in the same paper, Same sex marriage can last, talks about the difficulties that same sex couples have with recognition of their union.

Grey Lynn couple Diana Rands and Anna Birkenhead are pleased to find that same-sex civil unions can last - but they also feel there is a social expectation that they will break up.

"When heterosexual people meet each other and get married, everyone is, 'Yay, well done!"' says Ms Rands, 50, who has been in a civil union with Ms Birkenhead, 41, for two years.

"If that was a same-sex couple, it's, 'Oh, it's not going to last.' There is this underlying misinformation that gay relationships don't last, so it's really nice that they actually do."

Two years is not very long.

In terms of heterosexual couples, very few are still together by the time their oldest child is 15 if they never marry. Considering that a civil union is not a marriage, the real test will be that 15 year mark in comparison with traditional marriage, not 2 or 7 years.

Society supports heterosexual couples, she says, but gay couples are often shunned. She has heard of children who are banned from visiting friends as soon as the child's mother hears the friend's mother is a lesbian.

Society needs to support heterosexual couples, a traditional marriage has been shown to be the most protective of mothers and children and is greatest determinant of success in life for children (see Married parents' children do better than peers Australian Institute of Family Studies report says).

Also, parents are very protective. I don't let my youngest boy visit a particular friend's house because his parents do Yoga and other New Age things there, but the friend is welcome to visit our home.  Thankfully, anti-discrimination laws don't force parents to send their children off to various homes even if they disagree with what is going on there.  Yet.

I then noticed that yesterday the NZ Herald published Kiwi marriage and divorce numbers dropping.

New Zealanders are getting married at their lowest rate in more than a decade, new figures show.

Statistics New Zealand said New Zealand residents entered into 20,231 marriages in 2011.

That was the lowest number since 2001, when 19,972 weddings were celebrated, it said.

It marks a continuing decline in marriage numbers, with 21,500 weddings taking place in 2009 and 20,900 in 2010.

Divorces also dropped slightly from 8,874 in 2010 to 8,551 last year.

Ok, the figures show that the marriages last year were slightly higher than the lowest number of marriages in 2001, but lower than 2009 and 2010. One could almost say that the numbers of marriages were slightly increasing, even though there was a drop from the peak in 2009, there is still an increase from the low of 2001. But no, it seems it's better to put out the idea that marriages continue to decline and then today that civil unions are almost as durable as marriages.  You'd almost think that the NZ Herald has an agenda here.

UPDATE 2:35pm: I see Whale Oil has now written about one of the articles I've quoted. He says:

Nice article in the Herald about civil unions and the way it is viewed as a second class marriage…not quite there. It continues to amaze me that we allow first cousins to marry but not two gay people. It is a shame they can’t marry. They’d prefer Nikki Kaye to do something more meaningful than promote a big gay expensive mardi gras[.]

Yet again, two gay people can marry, they just have to follow the physical rules for marriage (ie Man + Woman = Marriage). Anything else, no matter what we call it, is just a relationship contract.