Creepy

This is so...ghoulish...I doubt even Saturday Night Live will touch it.

The following video is of the president at a fund-raiser last week. In the midst of a health-care spiel, he mentions a deceased former campaign worker - and it's just so wrong. Pay particular attention to the audience's reaction.



As one commenter at the Big Hollywood site mentioned: "I gave money, energy and time to the Obama campaign and all I got was this lousy t-shirt."

Can he act any more non-presidential? No...wait...don't tell me. I really don't want to know.

Constant Companion

I have a constant companion. I don't like him very much, and I've asked him to go away on many occasions. But he sticks around, ignoring my protests. He's Cousin Eddie Johnson to my Clark Griswold. If I'm not careful, he can get me in all sorts of trouble. He's mischievous with the TV remote. He likes to needle me, occasionally nudging me with his elbow when an attractive woman is nearby. "It's just looking," he teases, knowing full well what he's doing. When I say a prayer to Mary, or to Jesus, he gets offended and stomps off in a huff. But before long, he's back again, acting as if nothing happened.

I really don't like him.

His name is Ken.

Ken Q. Puissance. I bet you've heard of him.

He is a real thorn in my side.

"And to keep me from being too elated by the abundance of revelations, a thorn was given me in the flesh, a messenger of Satan, to harass me, to keep me from being too elated. Three times I besought the Lord about this, that it should leave me; but he said to me, 'My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.' I will all the more gladly boast of my weaknesses, that the power of Christ may rest upon me." (2 Cor 12:7-9)

I bet St Paul knew Ken, too.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
I don't like Ken. But he just won't go away.

The Spanish In(i)quisition

A clear example that an increase in Socialism leads to an exponential decrease in morality. When God's standards are tossed aside, then everything and anything (with emphasis on 'anything') becomes acceptable.

From CNA: Spanish Government Course Teaches Sex Can Be Practiced With 'Girl, Boy or Animal'

Parent organizations in Spain are fiercely protesting the curriculum of the Socialist government’s required education course, “Education for the Citizenry,” after it was revealed that in one Spanish city, students are being taught that sex can be freely practiced, even with animals.

According to the organization “Professionals for Ethics,” third grade students in Cordoba, located in the southern Spanish region of Andalusia, are using course material stating that “nature has given us sex so we can use it with another girl, with a boy or with an animal.” Parents groups say the material indoctrinates children and camouflages an agenda that is pro-homosexual and critical of moral norms and values.

In the region of Castille and Leon, some 500 students have been excused from participating in the course for reasons of conscience, while hundreds in Madrid and Valencia are awaiting a ruling from the courts on whether or not they are required to attend.

When sex is disassociated from procreation, this is the kind of sick stuff that results. So what'll be next? Necrophilia?

s/s to Catholic Cavemen

One Degree Of Stupid

Ever play that game where someone names an actor or actress, and you have to connect them to Kevin Bacon in six "moves" or less? It's called "Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon", and I'm sure everyone has heard of it. So, for instance - start with "James Stewart", and find the connection to Kevin Bacon.*

Well, one of the writers at the National Catholic Distorter kinda does that by trying to equate the US bishops with the preacher character in the movie "Footloose". I've reprinted a portion here.

Bishops: It's Time To Cut Loose by Kate Childs Graham

[...]

And that got me thinking, what could "Footloose" teach the leaders of the Catholic church?

Rev. Moore's impetus for banning dance and rock-and-roll was full of good intentions. He wanted to stop the town's teens from being hurt -- a laudable effort. Much like Rev. Moore, I believe that many church teachings, particularly around gender, sex and sexuality, began with good intentions. In excluding women from leadership, for instance, the bishops of yore were aspiring to do what they thought Christ would do (though I believe Christ would have done exactly the opposite). And you can't blame them for that.

Quickly though, Rev. Moore's good intentions transformed into wielding power for the sake of power. He himself even lost sight of why he stood so firmly opposed to something he once enjoyed. But he thought that letting go, admitting he was wrong, would show signs of weakness. The church hierarchy has been in this position, too. Their unwillingness to reverse their teaching on condom use for people living with HIV is but one example. At some point it's no longer about protecting people, it's about the fear of losing power and seeming weak.

Ultimately, Rev. Moore is able to release his fear-filled grip -- and cut loose, if you will -- because he realized that by ignoring the wants and needs of the people, he was driving a wedge between himself and those he served. There is no doubt in my mind, and the number of people leaving the church confirms, that the church hierarchy's unwillingness to revamp its teachings on gender, sex and sexuality is driving a wedge between the hierarchy and the faithful.

Rev. Moore was able to cut loose from his distrust and power. And it's not that everyone's lives were perfect because of it, because not every choice is the right one. It's that in cutting loose everyone is free to follow their conscience. And that type of trust brings a community together.

Bishops, perhaps it's time to cut loose.

Same ol', same ol'. What the author fails to grasp is that a) it's just a stupid movie, and b) bishops don't have control of anyone's conscience. Duh! If her premise were true, she wouldn't have been allowed to write the editorial in the first place. The bishops aren't about coercing people's free will - they're about trying to guide souls to heaven, despite ourselves and because of our sinful inclinations.

She's comparing apples to oranges here. Rev Moore's private interpretation of scripture is not the same as apostolic tradition and revealed truth. Big difference. But in the blind drive to rationalize immoral behavior, and in the heady rush to idolize primacy of conscience without the gentle guide of the Church's teachings - well, some crazy things are written, and some very silly ideas are espoused. Crazy, silly, and very dangerous. Typical of most of the staff at the NCR, actually.

After having read the article, I had the "Footloose" theme running in my head. So now I get to share it with you - complete with updated lyrics:

You think you're so smart
No more than willful upstarts
Write columns. For what?
I'll tell you what you've got

I got this feeling
You're not playing with a full deck
But still you're squealing
About your 'deep intellect'

Lemme me tell ya, bud -

Your, screw's loose
Logic is quite obtuse
Kate, too late
One ace short of a straight
Joan, you crone
Ten bucks short of a loan
Views confused
Cos' all of 'em have screws loose!

You're playing so cool
Denying every rule
You try to sound so wise
But your Kids' Meal's missing some fries

Someone should tell you
To quit when you are ahead
But you're listening to
Dickie McBrien instead
You're misled! Which is why -

Your screw's loose
Logic is quite obtuse
Oohwee, Dickie,
Givin' out heresy
Oh, I know
Light's on but no one's home
Views confused
Cos' all of 'em have screws loose!

*James Stewart starred with Katherine Hepburn ("The Philadelphia Story") who starred with Henry Fonda ("On Golden Pond") who starred with Hal Holbrook ("Midway") who starred with Tom Cruise ("The Firm") who starred with Kevin Bacon in "A Few Good Men".

AoftheA SOTB Address

2010 State of the Blog Address

*thump thump* "Is this mike on? Can you hear me back there? I'm good?...what? No - I don't need no telprompter!! OK - let's get this thing started."

"Ladies and gentlemen of the blogosphere, esteemed members of St Blogs, random visitors and faithful Followers - it is said that there is a first time for everything. Thus, for the first time, as Editor-in-Chief of Acts of the Apostasy, I shall give the blogosphere information on the state of the blog.

"First of all, I wish to extend heartfelt thanks and appreciation to all who patronized AoftheA this past year. Your support and encouragement was very supportive and encouraging.

"2009 was a good year for AoftheA - month-to-month increase of visits, rapid expansion of Followers, and a rising volume of comments. AoftheA welcomed visitors from 132 different nations in 2009, and not a single one was turned away at the border. "For I was a stranger, and you welcomed me". (applause line)

"Much was accomplished in the past year. 545 posts. An improved layout. The addition of the Instant "Acts"cess page element. The introduction of guest blogger Sr Patricia Owens-O'Flannery. The humbling recognition as "Best Hifreakinlarious" blog in the 2009 Cannonball Awards. The opportunity to be a guest blogger for several weeks at Creative Minority Report. AoftheA even won the Pulitzer Prize in 2009. (applause line)

"All this was accomplished without having to charge fees or impose taxes on any of the thousands of visitors to AoftheA, whether rich or poor. I remain committed to the ideal of free subscription, and promise you that I will not waver in this commitment throughout 2010 and beyond. Read my lips: no Paypal widgets! (applause line)

"I will continue to promote the principle of a strong defense - - - of the Catholic Church, against all enemies, both within and without. Especially the 'within' crowd. The enemy may be ruthless, and while I am confident they will continue to provide opportunities for humor and satire, it must never be forgotten that they, whether consciously or not, are putting souls in peril. Not just their own, but the souls of all those who support their dangerous positions. (applause line)

"Let me be perfectly clear - the War on Terror is not over. (big applause line) Far from it. In this battle, bipartisanship is not an option. There might be dialogue, there may even be ecumenism, but there will never be bipartisanship. The battle continues to be waged on many fronts: over liturgy and doctrine, over faith and morals, on the blogs, at newsites, and in the comboxes. I am not interested in reaching a compromise, or reaching across the aisle. I am committed to fighting this battle until the bitter end. (applause line) I may not always be successful, but I assure you, I will always be faithful! (applause line)

"AoftheA maintained unwavering support for the Culture of Life in 2009. Whether the topic was abortion, or so-called same-sex marriage, or embryonic stem-cell research - in each case, the Catholic position was always clearly stated and defended. And I promise you, that trend shall continue in the upcoming year. (applause line)

"An issue that dominated 2009 was health care. Everybody knows that laughter is the best medicine, so this past year I strove to provide comprehensive health care to all visitors. Who can say how many lives were saved as a result of the Illustrated Progressive Catholic Alphabet or The Dr Seuss Bible? (applause line) Who knows how many illnesses were shortened via Women's Ordination: The Video Game", or by the Feigned Outrage Oscillating Locator? (applause line) Only the good Lord knows how many cures came about from learning of the Latest Bishop's Scandal, the newest Scooby Doo Mystery, or from reading An Open Letter to the TAC. (applause line)

"When I started this blog, I promised that transparency would prevail. I believe that I have made good on that promise - by making a startling Confession, by revealing My Softer Side, and by posting a photo of my family's Halloween costumes. I must publicly state, despite charges to the contrary, that no Christmas photo of my family ever appeared on this blog, at any time. (this is where Cathy of Alex mouths "not true")

"That is the state of the blog right now, today. I am pleased with the progress that has been made. I am proud that my Cuss-o-meter is at 0%. But let me be perfectly clear - that in no way means I am satisfied with the status quo. I have no intention of resting on my laurels. I have outlined some aggressive goals for 2010. Continued transparency.(applause line) A commitment to improved photo-shopping. (big applause line) A 20% increase in humor for 2010, with plans to introduce more snark. (applause line) New features. (applause line) All without raising fees or taxes. Your fees will not be increased one single dime. One.Single.Dime. (big applause line)

A good year lies behind, while a new one, full of hope and change, stretches ahead. It won't always be easy. There may be days where the intent to post something cogent will be overcome by the desire to post something silly and inane. It has happened before, it will happen again. Some may say it is even happening right now. But I won't quit. Let's seize this moment - to start anew, to carry the dream forward, and to continue to strengthen this blog. Ever serious. Ever satirical. Ever humorous. Ever faithful. (applause line)

Thank you. God bless all of you. God bless the blogosphere, and may God bless AoftheA. (big applause line)

Hey, if it's good enough for the President and governors and mayors, then what the heck!

Thinking For Yourself

A constant theme I see and hear among progressive Catholics is "You've got to think for yourself!" They try to explain what they mean, by saying it's the sign of a mature, adult Catholic, by challenging Church teaching, by giving dissenting opinions equal weight to established doctrine. In other words, giving lies the same value as the Truth - and then, after careful introspection and thoughtful reasoning, and maybe even a little prayer (but not likely), coming to a conclusion. They call this "following one's conscience". They'd like to think most other Catholics consider their advice to be just that - sensible encouragement to "use the brain God gave you". They're not fooling anyone (except for those who aren't thinking, that is).

Because the statement "You've got to think for yourself" doesn't mean what it says. When progressives say it, what they really mean is "How can you be so stupid for believing Church teaching on ________?" Fill in the blank with any doctrinal issue: contraception; homosexuality; salvation outside the Church; the Eucharist; womynpreests....any doctrine or dogma. But because the progressives are all about love and tolerance, they say "You've got to think for yourself" instead of asking "How can you be so stupid?"

Truth is, they're the ones being stupid. And I say that with all charity.

Would anyone tell an anesthesiologist "Hey - you've got to think for yourself!" and do things their own way in the operating room? Would you want to be that patient? Would anyone suggest to an airline pilot "You've got to think for yourself!" and then expect them to safely fly a plane or taxi about an airport? Would you want to be on that plane? Or who in their right mind would tell a police officer "Just think for yourself!" and watch as he take justice into his own hands? Would you want to be that perp?

The rational answer is, of course not! Rules and regulations and standard procedures exist for a reason. If it's bad advice for doctors, pilots and police officers, as well as any other professional, where people's personal safety would be at risk, then isn't the advice worse when we're talking about one's eternal salvation? I think so - and the Church thinks so too.

What irks me about the statement is the presumption that I didn't "think for myself" when I made the decision to follow all the Church's teachings as faithfully as possible. You've heard the worn out canard: "Pray, pay and obey." Very offensive, right? Truth is, many years ago, I came to the conclusion that the Church has the Truth, and I didn't. And if I wanted the whole Truth, then I had to decide to submit to Her authority on matters of faith and morals. I came to the conclusion that it's better to discover why the Church's teachings are true instead of debating if they're true. It's as simple as that.

And it's that simplicity that bothers the progressives. They thrive on nuance and subtlety. They delight in being the smartest person in the room. They hear Christ's words that we must be like little children, and they protest it can't be that easy. They look at their intelligence, their education, their experiences and believe that sacrificing their own self-importance is too great a price to pay to submit to our loving mother the Church. So they go off and think for themselves.

And if you think about it, the first person to "think for himself" was Lucifer - who avowed he would not serve - and we know what happened to him. The first thing he ends up doing is convincing Eve to think for herself. He disobeyed out of pride, and it's pride that the progressives suffer from when they "think for themselves". They refuse to obey because they think they know better than the Church. Well, I suppose time will tell. If the examples of the saints, with their humble submission to the Church, fails to convince them, then there's not much I can say. Heck - if Christ's example in the Garden of Gethsemane fails to convince them, then there's absolutely nothing I, or anyone else, can say.

In the end, the progressives are not thinking for themselves. They're only thinking of themselves.

Unknown Figures Of Church History #1

The Apostolic Grandfathers
Of The Early Church

-Selected quotes from letters to their sons-

Lucius of Smyrna: "Polycarp, when I was your age, I walked two leagues to the synagogue every Sabbath, uphill both ways. You don't know how easy you have it with these in-home liturgies!"

Nicodemus of Alexandria: "I worked three jobs in order for you to attend the best schools, and you're willing to throw away a perfectly good education and join some cult? Your mother and I are very disappointed in you, Athanasius."

Thalelaeus of Antioch: "When I was growing up, we ran and hid from the Romans. But you, Ignatius, seem eager to be captured by them. I don't get your generation."

Possidius of Lyons: "And if all your friends jumped off a cliff, would you follow them, Irenaeus? Stand up for what's right!"

Marcellus of Rome: "How many times have your mother and I told you, Clement - stay out of the catacombs! Do it again, and you're grounded for life!"

New Web Game Teaches Girls To Be Tramps

There's that Country-Western song "Mommas, Don't Let Your Babies Grow Up To Be Cowboys". The theme-song for a new Internet game called 'My Minx' could be "Mommas, Don't Let Your Daughters Grow Up To Be Hussies". This is wrong on so many levels.

From parentdish.com: Web Game Creator: Buying Condoms, Adopting Orphans is 'Stylish' Fun by Amy Hatch

An online game designed to let young girls create a character based on breast size, adopt orphans from developing countries, a la Angelina Jolie, and take "anti-baby pills" has parents up in arms.

The "My Minx" Web game encourages young girls to buy condoms and engage in all kinds of scandalous virtual antics, London's Daily Mail reports. They also can visit an "adoption agency" -- where orphans are named after the adopted children of celeb parents such as Jolie -- to choose a child as an accessory to make their avatar more fashionable.

The paper goes on to report that 4-year-old Zahara is said to be Ethiopian and a fan of eating guinea pigs, while Maddox enjoys cockroaches. Actor Ewan McGregor's adopted Mongolian daughter, Jamiyah, doesn't escape unscathed, either. She, apparently, prefers a diet of rats.

Chris Evans is the founder of Blighty Arts, the UK-based company that created "My Minx." He tells ParentDish that the game is intended for users ages 11[!] and up. He says the kerfuffle over the Web site is the work of "rogue journalists" who don't have their facts straight.
"It is not aimed at children," Evans says. "This is for teens or early 20s. When you register, you can't register if you are under the age of 11, and even so, there is nothing on there that would offend any child who might play the game."

When we signed up for our personal "My Minx" character, we were able to select from a drop-down menu description that included "single," "unhinged" and "horney [sic.]." We were unable to shop for fashions in the game's "boutique" section, because the game requires users to pay for the privilege of dressing their characters. Boys can play, too -- a male avatar is available.

(Warning: The 'My Minx' link displays scantily clad animated women - just the thing an 11-year old girl ought to aspire to.)

Almost makes me glad I don't have daughters, to avoid dealing with such smut. This is just nuts. This is supposed to help girls' self esteem how exactly? According to the article, girls can buy (virtual) condoms, morning-after pills and breast augmentations for their characters. Via Paypal! Not only is this game stupid and vile, it smacks of racism too. Treating orphans as accessories, instead of humans deserving respect and dignity - what a great way to promote sensitivity and love of neighbor.

We believe we are created in the image and likeness of God. This game teaches that girls ought to remade in the image and likeness of Madonna - and I don't mean Jesus' mother.

So how soon before Armageddon?

O-bow-ma Strikes Again!!

Is there anyone in this world the president won't bow to?? Unbefreakinlievable!!U.S. President Barack Obama bows to Tampa Mayor Pam Iorio at MacDill Air Force Base on Thursday, Jan. 28, 2010 in Tampa, Fla. (AP Photo)

s/s to Weasel Zippers

Voter's Remorse

Being in sales, I'm on the road every day. It's all local - southeastern Michigan - and I drive on average 700 miles a week, traveling between customers and our two manufacturing facilities.

Southeastern Michigan - it includes Detroit and Ann Arbor - is the bluest part of the state. The Big 3 are headquartered here, and each of them have several car plants in the area. If you recall, during the presidential campaign, McCain wrote off Michigan early (right or wrong, doesn't matter now), and Obama won the state rather handily.

I don't recall exactly, but I remember seeing a very high volume of Obama bumper stickers and car magnets during and following the election and inauguration. The ominous logo, or the "Yes We Can!" slogan, or his image plastered on, what seemed to be, vehicle after vehicle after vehicle. Tons of proud supporters on the roads.

Since his election, Obama's popularity numbers have fallen dramatically, with much of the erosion occurring in the ranks of the Independents. More and more people are increasingly getting upset and angry over the direction our nation is headed, as his approval rating has been below 50% for quite some time now. Rasmussen Reports has a Daily Presidential Tracking Poll (1/29/10's poll is below), and the spread between Strongly Approve and Strongly Disapprove has been in double digits for the past few months.Since the Massachusetts US Senate election, undoubtedly an indictment of the Obama administration, I've been given more thought to the idea of "voter's remorse", the regret some people (or perhaps many many people) feel over having voted Obama into office. To me, that seemed obvious in Massachusetts, as well as Virginia and New Jersey with last fall's election of two Republican governors. So I started to wonder about people in Michigan - were people here starting to feel "voter's remorse", here in a predominantly Democrat/liberal state?

I'm sure many in the automotive industry, primarily the UAW, remain proud of their vote, given that the government bailed out Chrysler and GM, allowing many of their members to remain employed. And those in public education who voted for him were most likely equally proud of their choice. And there are the public sector employees too - staunch Democrat supporters.

But what about the rest who had voted for him? This isn't something that can be asked directly - I know people who voted for Obama, but I wouldn't ask them if they regretted their vote. Chances are they would lie anyway, to save face, that they are comfortable with their choice. Not only that, I don't discuss politics with customers, especially if their opinion is different than mine - prudence dictates that such a topic remain verboten. Business is tough enough as it is, and giving a customer any reason whatsoever to switch suppliers harms my family.

But I was still curious - how to gauge whether or not Michiganders, in the bluest area of the state, were experiencing any regret. And I came up with a very unscientific, anecdotal, quasi-statistical method to measure my assumption.

I counted bumper stickers. I started this past Monday, and completed the count this afternoon. Whether I was driving on the expressway, or surface streets, or in parking lots - I counted the vehicles (passenger vehicles only - cars, vans, SUVs, pick-ups. No commercial vehicles) and kept track of how many had either pro-Obama or anti-Obama bumper stickers or similar paraphernalia on them.

And here are the results: out of 1,569 vehicles, 6 sported pro-Obama stickers, and 13 displayed anti-Obama stickers. By anti-Obama, I mean "McCain/Palin", or pro-Conservatism, or any sticker that displayed an anti-Socialism sentiment. There were 2 or 3 "Nobama" stickers.

Percentage wise, those are really small numbers. Statistically insignificant. And I'm confident that no vehicles were counted twice. My routes and destinations were different each day, as well as the time of day I was driving, and I never counted vehicles in or around my neighborhood. As well as I can recall, though, there were days during the election season when I saw more than 6 pro-Obama bumper stickers. Easily.

I have theories why the number was so low, besides the "voter's remorse" one - along with the desire to keep one's support hidden, out of embarrassment.

1. Many of the One's supporters are unemployed - thus, they're not driving around.
2. Many of his supporters took advantage of the "Cash for Clunkers" program, and their old car had the bumper sticker on it.
3. Many of his supporters are taking public transportation (or what there is of it around here!) because they can't afford the gas.
4. They moved out of state in order to find a job.

All in all, I'm not putting much stock in my impromptu, terribly unscientific and unmeasurable exercise. I was surprised, however, to see that there were fewer pro-Obama stickers than the anti-Obama ones. Given Obama's falling poll numbers, and the flight of the Independents, I believe "voter's remorse" is real. How real won't be known until the elections this November.

And it's given me a business idea - develop a program to help Obama voters get over their remorse. I'd get an on-line psychiatry degree (how hard could that be?) to get a little bit of legitimacy, develop a web-site where Obama voters can register for counseling sessions (their identity would be protected, of course - they're embarrassed about it, after all), and come up with a fee schedule depending on how many sessions they would require. I'd call it 'Obamabots Anonymous', and it'd go something like this:

1. Meet with person, one-on-one, and encourage them to admit that they voted for Obama.
2. Smack them up-side the head, saying "What were you thinking?!?"
3. Ask them if they intend on voting Democrat in the future.
4. Repeat Step 2 as many times as necessary until they answer Step 3 "No".
5. Enroll them in remedial American history and US Constitution comprehension seminars.
   

I'm willing to franchise, if anyone's interested.

Atheists Want Stamp Stamped Out

The nation's second largest group of cry-babies (after Congressional Democrats) are upset that the U.S. Postal Service will be honoring the memory of Mother Teresa of Calcutta with a postage stamp, due to arrive in August of 2010. Is it just me, or do atheists really hate her? Not just a mild I-hate-anchovies-on-my-pizza kind of hate, but the deep-in-the-gut visceral vein-popping sort. It's crazy how afraid they are of a little old Macedonian nun.

From MyFox9.com: Atheist Group Blasts Postal Service for Mother Teresa Stamp

An atheist organization is blasting the U.S. Postal Service for its plan to honor Mother Teresa with a commemorative stamp, saying it violates postal regulations against honoring "individuals whose principal achievements are associated with religious undertakings," Fox News reported Thursday.

The Freedom from Religion Foundation is urging its supporters to boycott the stamp -- and also to engage in a letter-writing campaign to spread the word about what it calls the "darker side" of Mother Teresa.

The stamp -- set to be released on Aug. 26, which would have been Mother Teresa's 100th birthday -- will recognize the 1979 Nobel Peace Prize winner for her humanitarian work, the Postal Service announced last month.

"Noted for her compassion toward the poor and suffering, Mother Teresa, a diminutive Roman Catholic nun and honorary U.S. citizen, served the sick and destitute of India and the world for nearly 50 years," the Postal Service said in a press release. "Her humility and compassion, as well as her respect for the innate worth and dignity of humankind, inspired people of all ages and backgrounds to work on behalf of the world’s poorest populations."

But Freedom from Religion Foundation spokeswoman Annie Laurie Gaylor says issuing the stamp runs against Postal Service regulations.

"Mother Teresa is principally known as a religious figure who ran a religious institution. You can't really separate her being a nun and being a Roman Catholic from everything she did," Gaylor told FoxNews.com.

I thought atheists were all for separating Mother Teresa's actions from her faith - that she was only a "great social worker" and all. That you don't need God to do good. But here, Gaylor links her work directly with her Catholicism. Trying to have it both ways?

And do these folks complain when the US Postal Service issues Christmas stamps that feature the Madonna and Child? Or will they grouse should a stamp commemorating Billy Graham, "America's preacher", ever be issued? And besides, no one will be forced into buying the stamps.

Rather than moan and groan all the time, these people ought to do something more constructive. All this constant whining creates a negative image about their enlightened beliefs. So here's a tip - rather than imagine the spectres of so-called separation of Church and state violations inside every envelope, do something positive for your cause.

Make your own stinkin' stamp!

Go to photo.stamps.com and create a stamp commemorating, oh I don't know, Madalyn Murray O'Hair, perhaps:

Doesn't she just look loverly?

Three simple steps - and you get to show the public who means a lot to you - someone who lived with humility and compassion and showed respect for the innate worth and dignity of humankind...by getting prayer out of schools.

Until then, just Kwitcherbisschen.

For more on this story, check out Curt Jester.

Caption Contest #14

(Source)

(Click here for previous contest winner)

Leave your captions in the combox!

Things Accepted As True

So AGW, which for years we were told was "settled science", has been exposed as a fraud and a hoax.

We were told that there is no connection between breast cancer and abortion. Wrong.

For the longest time, scientists swore that there is no connection between breast cancer and the Pill, too. Again, wrong.

What these things have in common, of course, is money. Abortion and contraception make a lot of money for their peddlers. And climate change schemes like carbon credits and Cap-n-Trade would have made some people a lot richer (just ask AlGore!) if it hadn't been for a hacker.

So it got me thinking? What "settled science" issue will be exposed next? Given the way money has tainted science - at least in these situations - and how politicized science has become, it's not inconceivable that other Things Accepted As True could become the next Piltdown Man. Liberals will use abuse science to advance their causes, regardless of the real harm that will result. Think The Population Bomb. Think spotted owl. Think some endangered fish in California wreaking havoc with farmers' livelihoods. Some of the Things Accepted As True are just feints to control behavior. At least that's how it seems to me.

Here's a few Things Accepted As True I've come up with:

* 50,000+ deaths a year attributable to second-hand smoke.
* The danger of transfats.
* MSG isn't unhealthy.

Add your own to the combox.

The End Of Roe v. Wade?

Last week's Constitution-defending, earth-shattering Supreme Court ruling in the Citizens United v Federal Election Committee suit, where in a 5-4 vote, major provisions of the McCain-Feingold Act were shot down, sent liberals in a tizzy.

Said Sen Chuck Shumer: “We will regret the day this decision has been issued.” He also wants to hold hearings on the court's decision. Where's that in the Constitution? Oh yeah - liberals read things that aren't there, and ignore passages that are. Forgot that for a second.

President Obama said it gave "a green light to a new stampede of special-interest money in our politics," particularly "big oil, Wall Street banks, health-insurance companies and the other powerful interests"....like Big Unions, Big Law, etc. etc. If there's one thing liberals hate, it's a level playing field.

But the bloviating and posturing on the elimination of 'fairness' in elections is just a show. Although the case revolved about the issue of free speech, this ruling was much more than about free speech. The decision may have a direct impact on the so-called right to have an abortion. And that, I believe, is what is causing the liberals' heads to explode. Contributions from corporations and unions don't really bother them, because the liberals are on the receiving end anyway - it's not like they'll be losing anything as a result of the ruling. No - what concerns them is that the way is being paved to strike down the law that permits nearly unfettered access to their most unHoly sacrament - abortion on demand.

From Newsmax.com: Justice Roberts Hints He Could Overturn Roe by Theodore Kettle

Chief Justice John Roberts last week made it clear that the Supreme Court over which he presides will not hesitate to sweep away its own major constitutional rulings when doing so is necessary to defend America’s bedrock governing document.

The announcement of that guiding core principle means two very big things. First, Roberts and his fellow strict constructionists on the court are now armed and ready with a powerful rationale for overturning the 1973 Roe v. Wade abortion ruling if Justice Anthony Kennedy or a future justice becomes the fifth vote against Roe.

Secondly, successfully placing Roberts atop the high court is beginning to look like former President George W. Bush’s most important legacy – a gift that will keep on giving for conservatives for decades.

In last Thursday’s 5-to-4 Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission ruling dismantling the McCain-Feingold campaign law, Roberts joined with fellow Bush appointee Justice Samuel Alito to issue a separate concurrence “to address the important principles of judicial restraint and stare decisis implicated in this case.”

While Roberts conceded that “departures from precedent are inappropriate in the absence of a ‘special justification,’” he quickly added that “At the same time, stare decisis is neither an ‘inexorable command’… nor ‘a mechanical formula of adherence to the latest decision’ … especially in constitutional cases,” noting that “If it were, segregation would be legal, minimum wage laws would be unconstitutional, and the Government could wiretap ordinary criminal suspects without first obtaining warrants.”

Instead, under the “stare decisis” judicial doctrine of respecting past rulings, “When considering whether to re-examine a prior erroneous holding, we must balance the importance of having constitutional questions decided against the importance of having them decided right.” The chief justice declared: “stare decisis is not an end in itself.”

The ruling on McCain-Feingold was a shot across the bow, and the liberals know that the next round - overturning Roe v. Wade - will be a direct hit. While it's anyone's guess when such a ruling would be made, Chief Justice Roberts is laying the foundation now.

Which only reinforces the fact that the elections really do matter.

Sister Patricia: On Christian Unity

(Sister Patricia Owens O'Flannery, OP, a post-modern pre-traditional omni-spiritual Dominican sister, periodically contributes to AoftheA. Today she has something to say concerning the Week of Prayer for Christian Unity.)

Hello gentle readers! I'm so dreadfully sorry that my posts are so few and far between! You cannot imagine how busy I have been since New Year's Day - but I promised myself that I would submit a post this week. It's the least I can do for my faithful followers out there. Wow! 113 are now following! If I posted more frequently, I bet that number would double. May Godde and Sophia bless you for your patience and long-suffering - it must be very trying for you, having to endure LarryD's posts while waiting for me to publish something. You are on the way to "sainthood"! (if you believe that kinda stuff)

Last week was the Week of Prayer for Christian Unity. You wouldn't know it because LarryD didn't write a single thing about it - he can be so...so...so singular in his thinking! Thankfully I'm going to write about it, so that when it comes around next year, you will be ready for it! And it is such a joyous week!

First a little history: the Week of Prayer for Christian Unity began in 1908 through the cooperation of two Christian ministers, one from America and the other from England. In 1909, the American (Paul Wattson) converted to Catholicism from the Episcopalian denomination, and subsequently developed the erroneous belief that true unity would only be achieved if the other Christian denominations returned to the Catholic Church. I'm guessing that went over like a lead balloon, because in the 1930's, that narrow belief was expanded, by a wonderful, forward-thinking progressive French catholic by the name of Paul Couturier (mmm - French! how delish!). He taught it's better for all to be drawn to Christ and not necessarily convert to the Catholic faith. And ever since then, we have had great success in praying with each other and making each other feel good and special about our different beliefs. If I'm not mistaken, the Second Vatican Council affirmed that view about Christian unity - I'm not really sure, because I've never read all the documents, but that was what I've been told.

You see, dear friends, people like LarryD, who believe in the "Magisterium", and read the "Catechism" and believe in "objective truth" - they're the ones who foment division and strife. Closed-minded attitudes only work to push people away. People aren't interested in hearing someone else's version of the Truth - they want to discover the truth that is within them, and be affirmed in that discovery. That's what the Week of Prayer for Christian Unity is all about.

And what a week it is! This year was especially exciting! I am deeply involved with the Interactive Dialogues Incorporating Observant Truths of Inclusive Christians Council - 75 of us gathered to discuss and dialogue and interact and affirm one another. We accomplished so much! For instance, we outlined a rough draft of a proposed statement on the recent invitation of the pope to the TAC to enter the Catholic Church. Once our statement is completed and unanimously approved, it will be sent straight to the Vatican, expressing our disappointment in such a bold, brash, insensitive action, an action which flies in the face of what Christian Unity truly stands for.

I believe, as do many of my Catholic friends, that Christian Unity will only be achieved by following a tried and true method of exhaustive dialogue and discussion. By doing so, the creative powers of Sophia will be unleashed in a spontaneous display of visionary wonderment. And that spontaneous unleashment will only be realized by faithfully following a carefully detailed 31-step process:

1) Call a meeting.
2) Determine who else needs to be included in "the Group" and invite them to the next meeting.
3) Call the next meeting.
4) Determine at the meeting what the purpose of Big Meeting will be about (this usually involves coming up with a catchy phrase, like "Calling Upon The Spirit Within"; or "We Are A New Reality Trapped In An Olde Construct")
5) A meeting is called to select a "Steering Committee"
6) "Steering Committee" meets to establish goals.
7) Goals are presented to "the Group", and then subcommittees are formed.
8) Subcommittees call their meetings.
9) Call a meeting so that subcommittees can report on their meetings to "the Steering Committee".
10) "Steering Committee" meets to compile all the great ideas from the subcommittees.
11) Form a new subcommittee to incorporate all the ideas for the Big Meeting.
12) Schedule a meeting to create felt banner ideas for the Big Meeting.
13) Outline press releases for the National Catholic Reporter, America and Commonweal.
14) Subcommittees meet again to create Action Teams.
15) Action Teams meet to give themselves cool-sounding names, like "Crimes Against Hu-woman-ity"; or "Shake Your Buddha" and come up with great ideas.
16) Action Teams present their cool-sounding names and great ideas to the subcommittees.
17) Subcommittees present the Action Team cool-sounding names and their great ideas to the "Steering Committee".
18) "Steering Committee" gives "the Group" an update on all the Action Team cool-sounding names and great ideas.
19) "The Group" meets to discuss and approve the Action Team cool-sounding names.
20) A meeting is called to repurpose the Big Meeting based on the Action Teams' great ideas.
21) Call a meeting to discuss where and when the Big Meeting will be held. A new subcommittee is formed.
22) Subcommittees meet to review their Action Teams' great ideas and incorporate them into the repurposed Big Meeting.
23) "Steering Committee" meets to plan a weekend retreat for the subcommittee leaders and Action Team members.
24) Weekend retreat.
25) "Steering Committee" calls a meeting to update "the Group" on their weekend retreat.
26) Felt banner ideas are presented to "the Group" and a "Felt Banner Approval Subcommittee" is formed.
27) "Felt Banner Approval Subcommittee" polls "the Group" and all the entries are approved.
28) Call a meeting for all subcommittees to give final reports to the "Steering Committee".
29) "Steering Committee" gives final report to "the Group".
30) Call a meeting for "the Group" to refocus on the purpose of the Big Meeting.
31) Hold the Big Meeting. Everyone is happy, no one's feelings are hurt, and Sophia arrives for the Big Kumbaya moment at the end.

That's how Christian Unity gets done: dialogue, discussions and catchy phrases on felt banners.