Illinois Senate candidate Mark Kirk mocks Pro-Lifers

Pro-lifers can only take so much, and Kirk needlessly poking that stick at us lost some tepid support.

But the last straw for me was a June 2010 memo we received today, written by Kirk to the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, seeking its endorsement.

Both NARAL and PP IL Action have already endorsed Giannoulias, and the PPAF lists Giannoulias as an endorsed candidate, so Kirk lost his bid, unless PPAF determines at some point Giannoulias has acquired too much baggage, which I doubt. There are no Republicans on its endorsement list, so it must be willing to tolerate a lot.

But reading Kirk’s list of pro-death accomplishments is sickening. Also note how many times Kirk brags about battling his own party’s president on the life issue.

Even anticipating a Republican Senate majority isn’t worth electing another Collins, Snowe, or Specter for the next 6-24+ years.

Read more

Tom Roeser’s thoughts about !@#$%! (Cussing)


“Do you know what that officious bastard wrote in The New York Times today? He tried to dress up research in embryonic stem cells as vital to saving lives when he knows—fully knows—that adult stem cells can do the job. You know what? That sonuvabitch simply glories in defending an act of snuffing out lives!”

The fact remains that I feel better when I say this…and that’s important—important to let repressed steam be released…a safety valve that spares bottled up blood pressure.

Let’s be clear. Cussing fate with a string of denunciatory colorful words is different from cursing where you call down evil on someone. Or invoke God to strike someone dead. That’s altogether different. I would judge that to say “goddammit” is different than slowly pronouncing “God damn so-and-so!” Although I’ve been known to do that as well. But seriously calling down evil on someone and invoking God to do it is blasphemy.

(Father) Ernie once told us that to curse rational creatures is a grave offense against justice and charity. When I sat in his classroom so long ago listening to him I thought—and still think—but if you say this to yourself and do not poison this guy’s reputation by enunciating it to someone else but to yourself in solitude, what’s wrong with that? It makes me feel better. And who hears it when I mutter to myself? Ever since that time I have doubted Ernie on that particular item. How do you sin against justice and charity if you growl to yourself imprecations against an unfeeling boss for example?

Another thing Ernie would say is this: “To curse irrational creatures such as the weather or animals who let us say defecate on the floor is a venial sin of impatience.” Wha? Do you understand what I’m getting at here? Is it not possible that we are too Jansenist in this business of cussing? Do we imagine that General George Armstrong Custer at the battle of Little Big Horn…when suddenly surrounded by 3,000 Indians who seemingly came thundering out of the hills from ostensibly nowhere…and remembering that he foolishly left a supply of Gatling guns at Yellowstone because he felt they would not be needed…said:

“Oh my gosh where did these darned Indians come from all of a sudden? And gee whiz, I wish I had the Gatling guns!”

Ernie also said this: “To curse the evil spirit as the enemy of God and human beings is lawful.” That means I guess I can say: “God damn the devil and all his works!”

But Ernie, being Ernie, added: “Exclamations that in themselves are not sinful may become so for other reasons such as the danger of scandal.”

Read more at Tom’s site

Pie chart courtesy of GraphJam.com

Worldly matters should not keep clergy (and lay people) from their sacred duty.


Scripture says the Clergy must Speak…..Paul says of the bishop: He must be able to encourage men in sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it (Titus 1:9). For the same reason God tells us through Malachi: The lips of the priest are to preserve knowledge, and men shall look to him for the law, for he is the messenger of the Lord of hosts (Mal 2:7). …..

Every Priest Must Preach – Anyone ordained a priest undertakes the task of preaching, so that with a loud cry he may go on ahead of the terrible judge who follows. If, then, a priest does not know how to preach, what kind of cry can such a dumb herald utter? It was to bring this home that the Holy Spirit descended in the form of tongues on the first pastors (Acts 2:3), for he causes those whom he has filled, to speak out spontaneously.

The People must pray for the clergy – Beloved brothers, consider what has been said: Pray the Lord of the harvest to send labourers into his harvest (Matt 9:38). Pray for us so that we may have the strength to work on your behalf, that our tongue may not grow weary of exhortation, and that after we have accepted the office of preaching, our silence may not condemn us before the just judge.

Read more

Enough is Enough: The Crusades and The Jihad Are Not Equivalents


First, the historical facts: a long “train of abuses”, to borrow Jefferson’s phrase, preceded the launching of the First Crusade in 1096. Since its very inception, Islam had waged an unremitting war against Christianity. It conquered and subjugated centuries-old Christian societies in the Middle East and North Africa. After sweeping through France, the Muslim advance was finally checked by Charles Martel at the Battle of Tours in 732. Following this, Muslim aggression against Christians continued in southern Italy, with the conquest of Sicily in 827. Resistance to these repeated acts of aggression was not characterized as a “crusade”, but simply necessary self-defense.

Over the next centuries, the Seljuq Turks, who converted to Islam, waged war against the Eastern Christian Byzantine Empire. At the Battle of Manzikert in 1071, the Turks wiped out the Byzantine army, leaving Emperor Alexius Commenus helpless before a relentless and determined foe. Not long after this, he sent envoys to Pope Urban II pleading for military aid. The Council of Clermont was called by the pope in 1095, in which he addressed the clergy, knights, and commoners who had assembled. To the knights especially his words were both reproving and encouraging:

You, the oppressers of children, plunderers of widows; you, guilty of homicide, of sacrilege, robbers of another’s rights; you who await the pay of thieves for the shedding of Christian blood — as vultures smell fetid corpses, so do you sense battles from afar and rush to them eagerly. Verily, this is the worst way, for it is utterly removed from God! if, forsooth, you wish to be mindful of your souls, either lay down the girdle of such knighthood, or advance boldly, as knights of Christ, and rush as quickly as you can to the defense of the Eastern Church. For she it is from whom the joys of your whole salvation have come forth, who poured into your mouths the milk of divine wisdom, who set before you the holy teachings of the Gospels.

What was at stake was nothing less than the preservation of Christianity, and the civilization which had, even if imperfectly, sought to embody its teachings in the world.

Read more

Niece of Martin Luther King Jr. calls for boycott of abortion industry. Gets flack.

“It is absolutely ludicrous that abortion supporters would accuse a blood relative of Dr. King of hijacking the King legacy. Uncle Martin and my father, Rev. A. D. King were blood brothers. How can I hijack something that belongs to me? I am an heir to the King Family legacy,” she said.  “I have a right to stand at the Lincoln Memorial on the 47th Anniversary of my Uncle’s ‘I Have A Dream’ speech. The Dream has yet to be realized. That Dream is in my genes and I carry forward in the fight for equality and justice for all blacks, including those in the womb.  My dad and my uncle gave their lives to ensure that the day would come when blacks would be judged not by the color of their skin, but the content of their character. If they were here, I know they would stand with me in this fight for the lives of those most vulnerable among us,” said King.

Other African American leaders are joining Alveda in calling for a boycott of the abortion industry.

“It’s interesting to me to hear so called religious people call us the religious right — but that’s okay because they are obviously the complete opposite… they are the religious wrong!  Which begs the question… what God — if any do they serve?” asked Day Gardner, President of the National Black Pro-Life Union.  “As for me, I serve the God of Abraham, Jacob and Isaac — the great I AM… Father of my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and all things created.  Those of us who serve the one true God acknowledge we are all made in his image. We bow to God’s Word when He says: ‘Blessed is the fruit of the womb.’ If God says children are a reward, a gift and our heritage, then we must uphold that all children are greatly valuable and desirable to God.  So, I ask again… what God do they serve?”

Read more

Galileo was wrong: The Bible does not teach how the Heavens go … but rather, how to go to Heaven.


Lima, Peru, Aug 25, 2010 / 10:06 pm (CNA).- In an interview this week with the Peruvian daily El Comercio, physics expert Fr. Manuel Carreira clarified numerous and often misunderstood details about the life of Galileo, also touching on the relationship between faith and science.

The priest confirmed to El Comercio that Galileo “was a believer” and that, despite assumptions to the contrary, “he did not spend one minute behind bars … nor was he excommunicated.” Fr. Carreira added that Galileo “died professing the faith under the care of a religious sister and with a papal blessing.”

Fr. Carreira, who was in Lima for the Second Congress on the Holy Shroud of Turin, said that during Galileo’s time, there was no proof  that the Earth moved around the sun. “His supposed evidence was invalid,” the physicist noted, as well as dismissed by other astronomers.

Galileo’s correct idea, he explained, was that “the Bible does not teach science.” However, the famed astronomer “also wanted theologians to change their interpretation of the text according to his theory.” Although the theologians of his day “were mistaken in thinking that the Bible teaches astronomy,” the priest added, “they were correct in saying that as long as there was no evidence, Galileo should have presented his ideas as a theory and not ask them to change their opinions.”

Read more

Woe to you that call evil good, and good evil: that put darkness for light, and light for darkness: that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter.


As many know, there once was a great boxer named Cassius Clay. He converted to Islam in 1964, seemingly bothered that Jesus was portrayed as “a white with blond hair and blue eyes,” as he put it, and took the name “Muhammad Ali.” Of course, the irony of this is that despite being intensely aware of his slave roots, Ali rejected the name of an abolitionist (Clay) and took the name of a slave-owner (Muhammad). It also perhaps eluded him that Christians were the first ones to outlaw slavery, while Muslims give black Africans rope and chains to this day.

But I mention this because Ali’s path is a common one in the black community; it is why we’ve long had the Black Muslims and why Islamic names are so common among American blacks. Many blacks have bought the bill of goods that Christianity is the white man’s religion, the faith of oppressors. And they embrace Islam as part of a rejection of “white” society.

Obviously, being part of this milieu could only have reinforced Obama’s affinity for things Muslim and antipathy for things authentically Christian — of which Western civilization is one. And if Americans hadn’t been brainwashed with political correctness, they would understand this. With foreign and domestic Muslim influence; attendance at a Black Liberation Theology, pseudo-Christian church; and alliances with ex-terrorists and declared communists, Obama perfectly fits the profile of an America-hater.

Read more