When Good And Evil Are Confused..

These two incidents occurred in England, which is probably just a little further down the moral decline than are we.  However, the United States isn't that far behind.

A woman had a baby out of wedlock.  She gave birth at home and immediately strangled the poor baby girl.  Rather than jail the woman for murder, the judge lets loose with a bunch of psychobabble, literally excusing the murder of a defenseless baby.  I remember when Roe v Wade occurred.  Pro-lifers were mocked by pro-aborts when we voiced apprehension about infanticide.  Our fears have come to pass and the pro-baby murder people could not care less.

Elsewhere a gay teenager asked a Christian preacher what he believed about homosexuality.  For the high crime and misdemeanor of giving an honest response to a question, he was arrested on charge of a hate crime.  Fortunately the judge threw out the case; it was an obvious example of entrapment.

I cite these to demonstrate that on the one hand a woman who admitted to murdering her own newborn is let go, while a Christian who preaches the truth is jailed for so doing.  This is happening in England; it could soon happen here.  Had Clinton won in November, I think we'd be racing towards that state of affairs.  We dodged a bullet in November and were granted a little bit more time to turn things around.  While there are good signs from Washington, the bulk of the work in that regards will be the responsibility of each and every one of us.  Ora et labora.

Knife Control! We Just Knew It Would Come To This!

It is illegal for British citizens to keep guns in their homes.  However, murders still continue there!  Fancy that!  You don't suppose sinful human nature has anything to do with that, do you - not to mention the liberal loopy law enforcement?  Nah?  Perish the thought!

Some dopes doctors who write for the British Medical Journal are saying that long knives should be banned.  We're talking kitchen knives, folks!  "Long pointed knives have little value in the kitchen."  Really?  How do they propose that roasts or other meat dishes be sliced?  And what makes these geniuses so convinced that will work?  Wasn't the banning of guns supposed to eliminate murder?  If knives are banned, the thugs will devise something else.

Hey!  Here's a radical idea!  How about jettisoning the knife ban AND the gun ban.  Bring back real punishments that fit the crimes.

This knife-ban nonsense is just another example of the loons running the asylum in England.  I'd suggest that our confreres "across the pond" wake up and start taking their country back while we strive to take ours back.

(HT - Pewsitter)

Barbarism At New Lows In England

The picture at the left is that of an oven/crematorium in the Nazi death camp at Dachau.  Hundreds of thousands of prisoners were executed, and then their remains were incinerated in these ovens.  After the fall of the Nazis at the end of World War II, civilized people thought they'd seen an end to that oh-so-efficient barbarism of the Nazis.  Not so.

England was one of the countries that helped liberate many from the Nazis who had taken over Germany.  The United States was too.  Did our fathers and grandfathers have any inkling that less than 100 years later, such callousness and brutality would be found in their beloved homelands?

Today much of England is aghast at the revelation that ten of their National Health Service hospitals have been burning the bodies of babies who were miscarried and murdered via abortion .  In most cases, they were considered "clinical waste".  In a move that would have done any Nazi proud, some have burned the babies in "waste-to-energy" plants to warm the hospitals.

To their credit, the UK Department of Health has ordered an immediate ban on the burning of babies.  However, over 15 thousand babies were so treated; their parents were given little say in the matter and often treated callously.

Such is the coarsening effects of abortion.  The lives of tiny babies are treated as nothing, so why should any special regard be afforded their tiny corpses?  We've certainly seen that here.  Every pro-life activist has been aware that the late George Tiller, notorious late-term abortionist, had his own incinerators in which he burned the bodies of his tiny murder victims.  I've no doubt that Leroy Carhart would have set up some incinerators in Germantown were it not for the environmentalists (In the case of the latter, the broken clock is right at least twice a day).  On the other hand, the Nazi-esque gnomes in Annapolis just might try to "make some arrangements" for him in that regard.

That the National Health Service is in an uproar gives me hope that England's national conscience isn't completely deadened by abortion.  There might still be the slightest chance that western civilization can be salvaged - but only if people, en masse, repent before God and turn their lives and their countries around.

British Bishop Waffles On Church Teaching

The smoke has scarcely cleared away from Pope Benedict's departure jet and already the lead British bishop is falling all over himself in downplaying the Magisterium's clear proclamations regarding marriage.

From Lifesite News, we read, and I quote, "Attempting to defend the Catholic hierarchy from accusations of being opposed to the homosexualist political agenda around the world, Archbishop Vincent Nichols of Westminster hastened to assure the BBC’s Huw Edwards, 'That’s not true.'”  Right off the bat, we see a problem.  Why did the archbishop see a need to "defend the Catholic hierarchy"?  The fact is that the Church is vehemently opposed to the gay political agenda that seeks to distort marriage to its own perverted ends.  Instead of defense, what would have been appropriate is polite but bold acknowledgment that the Church promotes God's will in all areas of human life, and that it's the gays that must apologize to the world for the harm they are inflicting.  Note I said "apologize" instead of "defend", for in reality, the gay agenda is indefensible.

Archbishop Nichols made his remarks during a panel discussion that included a gay Anglican professor and a "catholyc" professor known for her dissent on abortion and marriage.  Why did not the archbishop stand and act like, well, a bishop and call these two on the carpet for their destructive advocacies?  Now when the dissenter "accused" the Church of interfering in British politics concerning sexual morality, the archbishop gave a response so pathetic that it will be unbelievable unless I again quote verbatum: "“It’s not true. The times we interfere most in British politics are either to do with poverty or to do with education. The media is obsessed with certain questions. But if you want to know what we’re really passionate about, it’s about the fight against poverty and the education of young people.”

If ever you wanted prima facae evidence that the so-called "social gospel" is usurping the proper priority that must be given to moral issues of life and sexuality, and that weak bishops are using such advocacy as a cloak for their vaccilations, well voila!!  The gay Anglican and dissenter then responded to the effect of saying to the archbishop, "that was a nice grovveling job!  We know you don't take that Benedict fellow seriously!  You're okie-dokie!"  John Smeaton of the Society for the Protection of the Unborn Child rightly deplored the archbishop's remarks as undermining the Pope's call for Christians to defend Christianity in the public square.

So that's in England.  What does that have to do with situations in the US?  Plenty!  How often have you seen on this blog warnings of the damage done by the so-called "social justice" cabal?  Most (not all!) of that bunch are progressives; certainly their leadership is dominated by such. 
 
Two immediate concerns come to mind.

1. The November 2nd elections.  No doubt some of you are receiving "voter guides" from your states' Catholic conferences.  I'd bet that many of them don't differentiate the non-negotiable issues (abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research, gay lifestyle) from other issues upon which good people may disagree (death penalty, environmental issues, taxation).  Not all issues are the same.  If a candidate seems right on most of them, but promotes a "pro-choice" platform, he/she is not worthy of a Catholic's vote - even if that candidate dares to call him/herself a Catholic!
2. The in-pew collection for Catholic Campaign for Human Development is almost upon us.  I would urge that you boycott it, as the collection proceeds are usually funnelled to organizations that oppose Church teaching.  Chicago CCHD is exempted from my recommendation here.  As I've explained previously, the Chicago CCHD has taken significant steps to correct its grant-giving process and at this time seem acceptable.

A Warning From Fellow Christians in England

Take note!  We see that now, in various lawsuits going on around this country.

http://downloads.cbn.com/cbnnewsplayer/cbnplayer.swf?aid=9425