Tag Archives: religious liberty

Jihad, Guns, and Gays

Predictably, a shitstorm of Biblical proportions has arisen following the horrific mass-murder in a gay nightclub in Orlando last Sunday by a Jihadist Muslim who claimed allegiance with ISIS.  And shamefully, but just as predictably, the vulturine Left – including Obama and Hillary Clinton – has opportunistically exploited this slaughter, in their usual fashion, to attack second amendment rights and Christians, while ignoring the real threat of radical Islam.

Before I continue, I’ll just state that while, yes, the club’s patrons were engaging in a sinful, immoral lifestyle, that in no way excuses or lessens the evil of the murder, and this should be a solemn time of prayer and mourning, rather than self-righteous condemnation.  But neither should we react as some, acting as though the victims were holy martyrs for a noble cause, as so many are doing.  And I don’t believe the slaughter would be any bit less horrific had it taken place in, say, a school or a Wal-Mart rather than a gay club.  Using this tragedy to promote LGB-Whatever politics is as shameful as any other political exploitation, but of course the Left knows no shame.

While our Dear Leader still cannot bring himself to so much as utter the words “radical Islam,” he, Hillary, and the rest of the Jackass Party rogues gallery are once more seeking to punish law-abiding citizens by infringing on their right to keep and bear arms.  And the NRA-endorsed Donald Trump is talking of further restrictions on gun rights, reverting, as on abortion, to his liberal true colors.

 

In dealing with Islamic terrorism and violence in general, the Left typically takes two lines, neither of them truthful.  The first is to deny (a la Obama) that such acts of murder and terror, or that groups such as ISIS and Al Qaeda, actually have anything to do with Islam (which, after all, as no less an Islamic scholar than George W. Bush has assured us, is a Religion of Peace).

Of course that is nothing but pc hogwash.  I see no point, as a Catholic who believes Islam to be a false religion, to get into debates about whether violent Jihadists or more peaceful groups represent “true Islam.”  All the violent “extremist” views are supported by some Muslim clerics, and have backing in the Qu’ran , and, from the beginning, the history of Islam is far from peaceful.

But, whether you believe it represents “true Islam” or not, the fact is that the jihadist terrorists, whether formal members of terror cells or internet-inspired “lone wolves,” are in fact motivated by a religiously-based ideology.  Many on the secular Left cannot understand this, and insist that the “real cause” of Islamic terrorism must be something else – laying the blame on entirely on U.S. foreign policy (even though many attacks are in countries such as France), poverty and income inequality (even though the data says that most Islamic terrorists are not poor), and even that liberal catch-all demon, Climate Change.  (You see, gas from your SUV makes the Middle East more hot and dry, so the people there go mad and blow shit up.)  In short, nothing about Islamic terrorism that wouldn’t be fixed by a Bernie Sanders presidency.

But the claim that Islamic terror is primarily motivated by economic factors (which will be fixed, of course, by more socialism), rather than religious ideology, has no basis in reality.  There’s a reason the Orlando killer shot up a gay night club, rather than a corporate headquarters or SUV factory.

The other route is to acknowledge that Islam has a violent branch, but also to claim that it’s no worse in that respect than any other major religion, particularly Christianity.  This line of pc is typified by a presentation to West Point cadets a few years ago equating “extreme” Islam with evangelical Christianity, the Catholic Church, and Orthodox Judaism.

It’s not just militant atheists or secularists that use this line of talk; even the Pope has attacked generic “religious fundamentalism,” rather than radical Islam, following the Paris “Charlie Hebdo” attacks.

Of course, this is quickly dispelled as nonsense by the facts; there simply aren’t any significant numbers of conservative Christians or Jews blowing up buildings, murdering, and raping in the name of their faith.  (And frequently cited groups like the IRA are more political than religious.)  Take the most devout, hard-core conservative Traditionalist Catholic you can find (maybe at my FSSP parish). Start a gay club, or draw a blasphemous cartoon of Jesus, and he might start a novena of prayer and fasting for the salvation of your immortal soul.  His Islamic counterpart will load up his Sig Sauer, or load up his truck full of pipe bombs.

After the Orlando attacks, many on the left went one step further and actually blamed Christians, rather than radical Islam, for the killings.  We’re told that an “environment of hate” caused by anti-gay Christians was responsible.  Even liberal Catholic bishops have used this line, exploiting the killings to condemn Catholics who actually agree with Church teaching that homosexual activity is sinful.  (What about the “environment of hate” towards orthodox Catholics/Christians?)  And I’ve seen Catholics express guilt that “Christians like themselves” made the murder possible.  The reality is that Christians or Christianity had nothing whatever to do with it.

Please.  It’s time we wake up, stop being cowed by pc guilt-tripping, stand up for truth, call a spade a spade, and identify the real enemy: radical Islam.  We must not allow the left to continue to exploit evil acts of terror to advance its own rotten agenda, and chip away at our own liberties.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Big Sports vs. Religious Liberty

Every day it seems, we descend further into madness.  And I’m not even referring at the moment to the presidential race.  Last week, Republican Georgia governor Nathan Deal, in typical spineless Republican manner, folded under pressure from big corporations including Disney and Apple, and vetoed a bill that would ensure religious liberty as guaranteed by the first amendment by, among other things, ensuring that ministers would not be forced to officiate “gay marriages” against their will.  In North Carolina, there is a lawsuit against another bill that would protect private business owners against such things as being forced to cater “gay weddings” or allow gender-confused dudes to use the ladies’ room.   The NBA has declared that unless that bill is vetoed, the All-star Game will not be played in Charlotte.

I don’t get ESPN, but it is on regularly at the break room at my place of work, and the channel seems to every day be less and less about sports, and more and more about pushing left-wing political propaganda.  It has heavily covered  the above-mentioned brouhaha concerning the NBA’s proposed boycott of North Carolina, siding with the NBA as if they were making a stand of great heroism and courage, as well as running sob stories about the alleged horrible plight of “transsexual” athletes in schools around the country – such as the epic struggles of strapping young “biologically male” jocks fighting for the “right” to play on the girls team and use the girls’ locker room.  (Sign me up, dude!)

I’m really not sure why the issue of “transgender” bathrooms and such is of such pressing importance to the NBA.  Are there really that many pro basketball players demanding to use the ladies’ locker rooms?

At the same time, ESPN is also heavily covering the epic struggle of heroic litigators against the Big, Bad Corporate NFL regarding the concussion issue.  (And in case you miss the larger political context, the commentators explain that in denying the danger of concussions from playing pro football, the NFL is exactly the same as the evil “climate-change deniers.”)  However, with regard to LGB-alphabet-soup issues, we’re supposed to root for the Big Heroic Corporate NBA against some tiny Christian-owned bakeries and such.  Now, Goliath’s the good guy, and David the villain.

The left (including ESPN) is always screaming about the power of Big Evil Corporations, and their undue influence on government.  However when the Big Corporations are pressuring and influencing government for socially “progressive” causes, this influence is applauded and celebrated.  And increasingly, large corporations push leftist social causes, helping win the favor of leftist politicians in our crony-capitalist system.

 

The enforcement of politically-correct social causes such as those mentioned by law on the national level is likely to happen if Hillary wins the presidency, and the packing of federal courts—and the Supreme Court—with leftist activists continues.  Basic freedom of religious practice will become a thing of the past.  (Though such judicial activism may prove unnecessary if Republican governors continue to act so spinelessly.)

One more reason Republicans and conservatives need to get their heads out of their arses and rally behind Ted Cruz before it’s too late.  And that loser Kasich should have gotten out of the race long ago.  He’s only helping Trump—and Hillary.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Jihad Comes to Texas

Last week, Islamic Jihad came to the Lone Star state (sort of) when two would-be Jihadists armed with AK-47s, pistols, and over 100 rounds of ammo attacked the Curtis Culwell Center in Garland, TX, which was hosting a “Draw the Prophet” art exhibit organized by Pamela Geller’s American Freedom Defense Initiative.  (The center was the site of January’s “Stand with the Prophet” event which I had mentioned in my previous rant “Standing Against the Prophet.”)   Unfortunately for the “Prophet” and his “religion of peace,” the attempted at Jihad came to a quick end when the gunmen were shot dead by a hero cop with a Glock pisto.  Despite the two Jihadist wannabes being the only fatalities, the Islamic State (which claimed credit for the attack) bizarrely declared it a “victory for Islam.”  (Guess those guys still got their 72 virgins, so score one for them.)

Members of the Left (once known for being an advocate of absolute free speech, especially when the speech offends religious sensibilities) were for the most part either silent, or placed all the blame on Geller and her group for indulging in “hate speech” and needlessly provoking Muslims.   Some even claimed that the exhibit as “hate speech” (aka speech leftists don’t like) was not in fact protected by the first amendment.

That’s quite a different tune than that sung by the left concerning speech or artistic expression offensive to Christians.  In such cases, it is not “hate speech,” but free speech that must be allowed, and even tax-subsidized.  Remember the controversy over Andres Serrano’s “Piss Christ” back in the late ‘80s?  Any opposition to funding that little piece of artsy blasphemy with tax dollars was strongly decried by liberals as un-American censorship, and a sure path to fascism.   Would many liberals be so adamant about supportive of publicly funding a “Piss Mohammed”?

Why the double standard?  Well, of course, there’s the obvious (though un-pc) difference that pissing off (figuratively or literally) Muslims involves a real risk of getting gunned down or blown up, while pissing off Christians does not.  It might at most result in an upset letter to the editor.  (All ridiculous pc claims that Islam is no more violent than Christianity to the contrary.)

Ironically, it’s typically expression offensive to Christians that liberals praise as “bold,” while insulting Islam is slammed as hateful bullying and bigotry.  But try to argue with a bleedin’ heart on this point, and they’ll typically start spouting incoherent babble about “Christian White Privilege” and such.

While this failed attempt at Jihad in Texas may not amount to much, the harsh reality is that in other parts of the world, followers of the “Religion of Peace” continue to murder, rape, and oppress Christians on a major scale.  Once upon a time, Popes called Christian men to crusade to defend innocent Christians against Muslim aggression.  Today, many Church leaders, like their secular liberal politician counterparts, are strangely quiet.  Apparently, more politically correct first world concerns, like “climate change” and finding ways to make “gays” feel more welcome in church, are more pressing priorities.

While some “liberals” may try to argue that Muslims and other “oppressed minorities” somehow have a right not to be publicly offended, the religious liberties of Christians as well as Muslims are falling under ever greater threat.  Legal experts say that if the Supreme Court declares “gay marriage” to be a “constitutional right,” as many say is inevitable (despite the fact that the Constitution says nothing about marriage whatever, and nowhere grants the federal government the power to define marriage), churches and religious institutions opposed to homosexual “marriage” may lose their tax exempt status, and face lawsuits.  Believe it or not, once upon a time, the job of the Supreme Court was actually interpret and uphold the Constitution, rather than dictate the demands of social liberalism to the masses.

And Democratic presidential Anointed One Hillary has stated that “religious beliefs” that oppose “reproductive rights,” including abortion, “must change.”

Of course, such measures will be supported and applauded by many bleeding heart “Catholics.”  Can’t let issues such as human life get in the way of “social justice,” aka leftist socialism.  God help us all.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Imposing Immorality

A lot has already been said about the recent uproar by “gay rights” activists and liberals in general over Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act, and Governor Mike Pence’s subsequent spineless folding in typical Republican fashion.  Protesters even forced a local pizza parlor to close because the owner said in an interview that she would not cater “gay weddings.”  (Though the news is that the shop has now re-opened.)

(I tried to keep Holy Week at least somewhat holy, and thus held off on commenting on the ungodly cesspool of current politics, but I thought I’d share a few thoughts.)

At this point no one can still harbor the foolish and naïve notion that the political-cultural left has anything whatever to do with freedom, tolerance, or diversity.

Talk about, for instance, any proposed laws even restricting abortion, and liberals will howl like rabid banshees about how we must never “impose our morality” on others by law.  This is typically followed a lecture on the evils of “theocracy,” with grim warnings about how parental consent laws or whatever are just one slippery step away from beheading infidels and burning heretics at the stake.  (Personally, I prefer my heretics just well done.)

However, as illustrated by the hullabaloo in Indiana, the same secularist bleeding hearts are more than ready to impose their own “morality” on those who disagree with politically-correct orthodoxy on issues such as “gay marriage.”  (Or, rather, to force others against their will to cooperate in immorality.)

As I pointed out earlier regarding similar issues in Texas, choosing not to cater or a homosexual “wedding” is not about discrimination against individuals, but about not catering a particular type of event that is contrary to Christian morality.

Forcing persons in private business to cater or support events contrary to their beliefs against their will not only violates the free exercise of religion guaranteed in the First Amendment, but the basic right to freedom of association, regardless of religious belief or lack thereof.  (Deroy Murdock makes this point eloquently in a National Review article, giving a wide variety of potential non-religious examples where this principle would apply.  Should a feminist be forced to do photography for a strip club?  A black musician play at a KKK event?  Etc.)

Prior to the passing of the Indiana statute, there was never any actual issue of discrimination.  Gays have no problem finding bakers and such to cater their “weddings.”  The hysterics of the likes of Al Sharpton notwithstanding, who scream that unless Christian bakers are forced by law to bake gay wedding cakes, the return of Jim Crow is imminent.  (You know, back when gays were forced to sit in the back of the bus.)  Hell, it will probably set us back to the days of slavery, when gays were put in chains and forced to pick cotton from dawn to dusk in the hot Southern sun, to the tune of the slave-driver’s whip.  (Though I hear some of them liked the whole whips and chains thing.)

(If I were black I’d be absolutely disgusted at the comparison of “gay rights” issues to slavery and segregation.  Hell, I’m not black, and I’m still disgusted.  But that’s another rant.)

But the very thought of a few bakers, wedding photographers, or caterers out there who don’t conform with pc orthodoxy on “gay marriage” so enrages the bleeding heart fascists that they are willing to force people at gunpoint to conform and comply.

Freedom of religion and of association be damned.

For the left, “gay rights” has become an all-important all-trumping sacred cause, which they pursue with the fanaticism of religious crusaders (or perhaps Jihadists?).

Perhaps most disappointing is that Catholic response to this blatant assault on religious freedom seems largely lacking.  Though that is hardly surprising, given the weak and tepid response to Obamacare’s contraception mandate.  And the sad truth is that most of the bleeding heart social-justice “Catholics,” who salivate like Pavlov’s dogs at any statist activism claiming to be on behalf of The Oppressed, and who piously obey every dictate of political correctness, side with “gay rights” against the teachings of their Church.

For many, the issue of a few gay wedding cakes and such may seem too trivial and petty to be worth  bothering with.  And by itself, perhaps it is.  But wars are won or lost by many small battles, and freedoms once taken for granted in this country are being steadily and relentlessly chipped away piece by piece.  If (as expected) the Supreme Court (absurdly) declares “gay marriage” to be a “constitutional right,” things will only get much worse.  How long before we wake up?

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

Abortion Über Alles: Obama’s Real Agenda

The HHS recently withheld $30 million in Medicaid funding from Texas’ Women’s Health Program (WHP), a Medicaid program which provides family planning services to low income women. The reason for this was Texas’s rule passed last year preventing any WHP funds from going to clinics which provide or refer for abortions, notably Planned Parenthood. Patrick Brennan has a good article about this here: “HHS Messes with Texas,” in which he makes the following observation;

This HHS policy begins to confirm what conservatives have suspected all along: While the Obama administration has made it clearer than it would like to claim the mantle of “protecting women’s health,” its real aim is unfettered access to abortion and ubiquitous, free contraception.

The primary agenda of the Obama administration, as well as that of the national Democratic Party in general, could not be clearer. Contrary to their propaganda, they care absolutely nothing about providing for “Women’s Health,” only with funding contraception and the killing of babies. While liberals love to preach sanctimoniously (and hypocritically) against rich corporations and lobbies controlling government, their own party is squarely in the pockets of Planned Parenthood, the world’s largest and wealthiest provider of dead babies, and the multi-billion dollar abortion industry. Obama is nothing more than the puppet of Planned Parenthood and the abortion lobby, which insists that nothing – not the Constitution, nor state’s rights, nor principles of religious liberty – must be allowed to stand in the way of tax-subsidized abortion and contraception for all. For liberals today, that has become the all-important, all-overriding purpose of American government.

Of course, Texas and other states would not be in this conundrum if we abolished such socialist federal welfare programs, and the individual states had not become so many squealing piglets tussling for a better position at the teats of the grotesquely obese and bloated sow that is our federal government. Dependence breeds slavery. Secession now more than ever, I say!

But returning to the topic at hand, the utter falseness of the idea that support for the Obama administration and the Catholic Faith (or even basic principles of religious freedom) are in any way compatible should be glaringly obvious. How self-proclaimed “Faithful Catholics” can continue to tolerate, much less support, Obama is truly mind-blowing. Sorry– silly me! – -I forgot for a second there that Jesus’ primary message was to spread socialism, and that we must be willing to sacrifice anything—including religious liberty and right to life—in order to help bring about the Socialist Kingdom promised by Karl Ma – I mean, Jesus. After all, to the “progressive”-minded “Catholic” and the pious worshippers at the shrine of Saint Kennedy (Jack or Ted, take your pick), Jesus, Marx, and Che Guevera are all essentially different avatars of the same Deity. (But I digress. Look for more on this topic in future Rants.)

As Mark Steyn  has pointed out, we’re now the brokest nation ever, yet the Obama administration insists that the government must pay for everybody’s abortions and condoms with tax-payer money, while as our national debt tops 16 trillion. The madness continues.

Meanwhile, we must wait while the Supreme Court debates whether the Constitution should actually apply to Obamacare, as James Madison rolls in his grave.

Tagged , , , , , , ,

The Tyranny of Militant Hedonism

Forget for a moment the blatant immorality of the HHS contraception mandate.  Forget for a moment the issues of constitutionally-guaranteed religious liberty.  Forget the fact that pregnancy is not a disease, and contraception is not health care.

What in the hell gives the federal government the right to dictate what private entities must buy for others?  By any standards, food and drink are more essential to basic health than contraceptives.  Should the government mandate that colleges provide beer and pizza for students free of additional charge?   What other freebies will suddenly become “rights” owed by private institutions to students or employees?  When the government becomes freed of any constitutional restraints, the sky is indeed the limit, and we’re left with tyranny, pure and simple.

The U.S. Bishops have been courageous in fighting this tyranny, but they, who have long been champions of an ever-expanding socialized-everything Welfare State, are now battling a monster which they have helped create.

It seems the only real discernible principle  the modern-day Left has is that everybody has an absolute entitlement to (in the parlance of our times, man) bang absolutely whomever however and whenever they want, free of all consequence; and it is the duty of the government, and consequently tax-payers, to subsidize and support everyone’s sexual debauchery of choice.  Those that choose to fornicate are owed free contraception, and if a baby is conceived, the government must subsidize those who provide abortions.  And the government must ensure that if people choose to engage in same-sex sodomy, which cannot result in the procreation of any life other than the bacterial variety, their “union” must receive the same benefits given to married men and women faced with the burden of raising a family.

All rights, including religious liberty, economic freedom, and constitutional limits on government power, are subordinated and sacrificed to the all-overriding principle of Consequence-free Sex for All, under what is best described as Militant Hedonism.   The current regime is as coldly ruthless and relentless in enforcing the utopian hedonist goals of the Sexual Revolution as the Russian Soviets were in enforcing those of the Bolshevik Revolution.   Our Holy Father was not engaging in idle hyperbole when he warned of a “dictatorship of relativism.”

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

Not Just a Fluke

The Left has been predictably “outraged” by talk radio icon Rush Limbaugh’s comments about Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke, in which he referred to the dutiful Obama foot soldier and crusader for the cause of government-mandated “free” contraception as a “slut” and a “prostitute,” with many sponsors compliantly pulling their sponsorship of Rush’s show.

It would actually be kind of nice if all this fury was actually motivated by old-fashioned chivalry and a defense of decency and civility in speech regarding the Fair Sex.  But, of course, it is nothing of the sort. Much has already been said of the craven double-standard and hypocrisy of the Left’s calls for Rush to be silenced, while leftist “comedians” and other pundits have long regularly indulged in every kind of obscene, vulgar, and tasteless insults towards any women who dare publicly challenge leftist orthodoxy.  And of course there are no demands for silencing or pulling sponsorship of those folks’ shows from the self-appointed guardians of Civility– but instead such people are prominently wined and dined at Democratic fund-raising functions. (Bill Maher’s infamously calling Sarah Palin a “c**t” and a “t**t” is only one example. Obscene and hateful language towards conservative women has long been de rigueur among those on the left.  Here’s some good commentary on the topic from Michele Malkin. Rush’s language was in fact quite mild compared to that of the typical lefty Palin-basher.)  But, of course, such talk is not only justified in such cases, but is “courageous” “free speech” which must be celebrated, rather than condemned. (For liberals, it’s always “courageous” to verbally disparage fashionable targets such as Christians and conservatives, but hateful and bigoted to use much milder insults if they are directed against one’s Comrades in the Leftist Cause.)

We all know that Rush’s crime in reality had nothing to do with incivility towards women, and everything to do with publicly opposing Dear Leader’s agenda. Look for more of such nonsense in the future.

Not to mention that Rush was absolutely right in this case, even if his language was imprudent. Back in the benighted pre-Vatican II Dark Ages, any woman who flaunted her extra-marital sexual behavior–much less insist that you pay for her good time–would be regarded as a floozy or worse.  But, of course, we’ve “evolved” so much since then.  Today we all know that the height of Liberated Womanhood is to behave like a cheap whore.

But now, Miss Fluke is being widely hailed as “heroic” by the leftist media for her demands that others subsidize her bedroom fun on government mandate.  Just like many on the left (as well as some on the loopy libertarian right) hailed all that wild partying in the park by the kids in the Wall-stock festival (oops, I meant “protests”) as acts of heroism. Once upon a time, in a less-enlightened age, “heroism” was reserved for those who willingly underwent great personal sacrifices for the good of others.   Today, anybody who demands entitlements for one’s self at the expense of others is somehow a “hero.” We celebrate those who demand hand-outs for birth-control pills or college tutition as “heroic,” while those young men and women in the Armed Forces who daily literally risk life and limb to keep the rest of us safe, are generally either ignored, or treated merely as victims in need of our pity.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , ,