Tuesday, November 23, 2010
I thought the top leaders/choices at each dollar award level was a striking commentary on our society:
1) Rescue Animals from Cruelty
2) Stop Healthy Animals from Being Fed Antibiotics
3) Teach Hip Hop and Respect to Inner City Youths
4) Provide Dogs in Shelters with Comfort Items
Now, I am not saying that helpless animals don't deserve or need our help to save them from ongoing abuses, but three out of the four programs that our country currently believes is the best use for these financial awards does not relieve any aspect of human suffering. The other deals with teaching Hip Hop music.
Such a commentary on our nation.
By way of comparison, and to illustrate my point, these causes are beating programs that would work towards the end of human trafficking and one that would help babies with Cystic Fibrosis.
I thought over the past day or so what was responsible for this anti-human sentiment. Was it the belief that animals can't help themselves and people can? I believe this answer would not be at the true, underlying, subconscious root cause of this mindset. Babies with Cystic Fibrosis can't help themselves either, so that is not it.
I came to the conclusion that this anti-human sentiment is embedded in our society becoming more and more secular by the year. If we are all made in God's divine image, turning away from the priority of helping our fellow humans first has to coincide with turning away from God in our society, whatever the reasons these voters may give.
We all know people who are vegetarians and cite their lifestyle comes from a belief in not harming defenseless animals, or PETA members who subscribe to the same doctrine. For the most part, the vegetarians and PETA members I know personally have no problem with abortion, or even late-term abortions. I think the same rationale can be used here whether they acknowledge this mindset or not.
How many times has a pro euthanasia person argued with you, "Well they put animals out of their pain, don't humans deserve at least the same?" They are arguing actually humans should be brought down to the level of animals, although they think in their mind that humans should be raised at least to the level of animals. Same mindset again, Secularism 101.
Sunday, November 21, 2010
I finally viewed Newt Gingrich's Nine Days that Changed the World, the story of John Paul II's victorious return to Poland after being elevated to the Papacy. The DVD is beautifully done with stunning, never-seen-before footage.
It is hard for Americans to understand this history-altering event from the inside. A bad day for most Americans is an unexpected $500 car repair bill. Our Polish brethren lived through Nazi occupation which resulted in the death of 5.5-6 million Poles, and the dark, soul-crushing, brutal regime of Communism after this carnage. Their suffering can not be comprehended by Westerners.
This documentary gives you that glimpse from the inside where in June of 1979, 12 million Poles (1/3 the population) greeted John Paul in person as their conquering hero and their national hope.
George Weigel summed up the trip saying that by the second day of this nine day trip, the Polish people had a new de facto leader of their county; the Holy Father had overtaken the government and eclipsed the fear it held on the people. Communism was headed to the "ash heap of history."
I can not emphasize enough that this is a DVD that every Catholic household should own. It should be viewed by your children and grandchildren to understand the greatness of Pope John Paul II, the unparalleled influence of the Papacy and the effect that the power of the absolute truths of Catholicism can have when preached and recognized.
Amazon apparently does not sell this DVD. I would go directly to the DVD's official website and secure this masterpiece for yourself and your family. Click here for the Nine Days Web site. Here is a little sample of this great DVD:
Saturday, November 13, 2010
In May of 2008, I wrote a post that received a good amount of traffic calling George W. Bush the second Catholic U.S. President with a question mark. Cracking open his memoirs have led me to the feeling again that he is a closet Catholic or a future convert.
On page 113 of Decision Points, Bush writes, "I did feel a responsibility to voice my pro-life convictions and lead the country toward what Pope John Paul II called a culture of life." Interesting, no? He could have gone with a more Protestant statement saying his sense of responsibility came from sacred scripture, or his personal relationship with God, but he surprisingly quotes a Pontiff. Moreover (it is very subtle but when you notice it is very telling and impactful), he aligns his personal views with that of a Pontiff, and the Pontiff's moral teaching. Martin Luther must be rolling over in his grave.
A few pages later, Bush pens that during a private meeting with John Paul he expressed to the Vicar of Christ, "I thanked him for his example of principled leadership. I explained [to the Holy Father] that the Catholic Church's steadfast support of life provided a firm moral foundation on which pro-life politicians like me could take a stand on." An Episcopalian standing on a Catholic foundation? Why can't he stand on the Episcopalian foundation? Again, he is lining himself with the moral teachings of the Magisterium more than his own religion.
Now for the grand finale. Bush remembers the last moments of the funeral Mass of John Paul II that he personally attended, " [The pallbearers] turned to face the crowd and lifted the coffin for the last time. As they did, the clouds parted and the sun shined through onto the simple wooden [coffin]." An Episcopalian believing God shone His favor on a life of Pontiff? Henry VIII is now rolling over in his grave and disturbing multiple wives.
Before everything is said and done, President Bush might very well close his eyes as the second Catholic President.
Blogger Note: It is important in understanding this post to read the evidence I laid out in the original post here. When these two posts are taken together, Bush converting is a much more clearer reality.
Thursday, November 4, 2010
CC.org references in passing that honoring of the most militant, pro-abortion politician in America with a Humanitarian Award might have had some effect on donations. Ya' think???
The site then states, "The decline in donations largely coincided with the late-2000s recession, which officially began in December 2007 and ended in June 2009."
Oh really... let's see how the recession has affected some other big universities in the same region to test this theory. The below list shows: specific, similar-size universities; how much their donations went up or down in 2009 versus the previous year; and the percentage increase or decrease over the previous year:
Penn State University: +$4.8 Million (+2.7 percent)
Ohio State University: -$3.4 Million (-.14 percent - less than 1%)
Michigan State University: $-5.4 million (-4.2 percent)
University of Michigan: -$70 million million (-21 percent)
The University of Notre Dame: -$120 million (-35 percent)
If Notre Dame's decline in donations were due to the economy, other university declines would have been similar. As you can see, some of the universities' donations were actually up during this time frame.
If donations were affected by a lousy football season - I can hear this argument out there -, the donations to Michigan (who had a record of 3-9 that year) would have fallen much more than Notre Dame's (7-6). Notre Dame's donations for the year were $50 million worse than Michigan's.
I think the fallout from this decision is obvious with the above comparison. You can't offend the essence of an organization without major fallout.
People of Notre Dame, I am proud of you for not supporting this farce with your hard-earned money! I wrote this post to honor you.
The sad part is that Notre Dame did not lose this money for its beliefs, it lost this money for President Rev. John Jenkins' beliefs.
Htip to the bro's at CMR:
Monday, November 1, 2010
“If Latinos sit out the election instead of saying, ‘We’re gonna punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us,’ if they don’t see that kind of upsurge in voting in this election, then I think it’s gonna be harder and that’s why I think it’s so important that people focus on voting on November 2.”
These comments are so insightful to President Obama's psyche.
First of all, Obama is feeling like he and his administration are completely under siege and the barbarians are at the gate. Notice his mention of the word "enemies." What professional politician ever says this word? Really, even Hillary used the term "Right-wing conspiracy," and not the term "enemies." Please note, Obama is a man who does not even call terrorists our "enemies." It is a complete slip up giving us insight to how threatened he really feels and how much pressure he is currently under - that he made the slip up.
The second aspect I see in this slip up supports the controversial piece written by Dinesh D'Souza in regard to what he believes is Obama's governing, literally, personality trait. His Kenyan Anti-colonial Behavior:
"It may seem incredible to suggest that the anticolonial ideology of Barack Obama Sr. is espoused by his son, the President of the United States. That is what I am saying. From a very young age and through his formative years, Obama learned to see America as a force for global domination and destruction. He came to view America's military as an instrument of neocolonial occupation. He adopted his father's position that capitalism and free markets are code words for economic plunder. Obama grew to perceive the rich as an oppressive class, a kind of neocolonial power within America. In his worldview, profits are a measure of how effectively you have ripped off the rest of society, and America's power in the world is a measure of how selfishly it consumes the globe's resources and how ruthlessly it bullies and dominates the rest of the planet.
For Obama, the solutions are simple. He must work to wring the neocolonialism out of America and the West. And here is where our anticolonial understanding of Obama really takes off, because it provides a vital key to explaining not only his major policy actions but also the little details that no other theory can adequately account for."
All of the targeted traits mentioned above (military, free markets, the affluent, profits) have to deal with how Obama actually sees Conservatives. His "enemies" -- which explains this slip up again.