Wednesday, April 6, 2011
Baby Boy A - What's In A Name?
There's a familiar question - what's in a name? It provokes us to really look at the meaning of giving someone a name or moniker. In English, the question, "what's your name", sounds matter of fact. In the Latin Romance languages, such as the Spanish, "Como Se Lama", which interprets to English "How are you called", seems to touch a little more deeply on the subject of "what's in a name".
The giving or changing of a name in the Bible is quite important, as we read how God changed Abram's name to Abraham, Jacob's name to Israel, and ultimately Simon's name to Peter. There is even a childhood fairy tale, titled "Rumpelstiltskin" wherein a woman is forced to guess the name of a mischievous gnome, if she is ever to win back her kidnapped baby from the devious wretch. To this day, much excitement goes into the naming of a new baby ... and even the naming of pets. In the many cemeteries for those killed in wars, the saddest are always those in unmarked graves. In Arlington National Cemetery in fact, a special "Tomb of the Unknown Soldier" was erected in 1921, as a shrine to specially honor unknown and unidentified soldiers. To this day, a special "Society of the Honor Guard" keeps perpetual vigil over this tomb, in memoriam to these soldiers whose names are unknown.
What's in a name? Quite a bit I would say. It's almost as if you really don't exist until you know how you are called; or more importantly, who your father is. Even pets soon learn how they are called by their masters.
So, who is Baby Boy A and why is he called only thus? There is a a criminal grand jury case against an abortionist, Kermit Gosnell, who stands accused of butchering seven babies after they were born alive, as well as fatally drugging one of the mothers. The Grand Jury case against this man, has a 261 page report, which includes a photo of "Baby Boy A", whose neck was allegedly slit by Gosnell. This poor little nameless baby boy, is simply relegated to evidence in a criminal case, by the moniker " Baby Boy A".
The horrors of this case are beyond description, in which Gosnell repeatedly murdered babies, born alive after he aborted them well beyond the legal limits, by slitting their necks and severing their spinal cords, in order to, in his own words, "ensure fetal demise". People are rightfully horrified, shocked and appalled at this gruesome and macabre story, which defies reason; and the case against this man is fully and completely justifiable.
But I would put forth, that Baby Boy A, is merely one of many nameless little victims of abortion. Baby Boy A's case is only brought to court because he was murdered after he was outside his mother's womb. As such, our societal conscience is still sensitive enough not to want to see a newly born infant's throat slit, while it moves and squirms and struggles to take it's first breaths outside the womb. And so, Gosnell is charged with the 7 counts of murder in the deaths of what are termed, "viable babies". Viable because they were outside the womb and gestationally old enough to continue life outside the womb.
So again, what's in a name .. viable? The dictionary definition of this moniker, in brief, is that it indicates a person or state, capable of existing independently .. ie ... such as a child that can sustain life outside it's mother's womb. This is one of the biggest excuses used by pro-abortion advocates, in their reasoning of a woman's right superseding that of her child, because she is viable, while her child, as long as it is still dependent upon her body to sustain life, is not.
And so, the abortionist Kermit Gosnell is only charged with murder of these infants, simply because they were considered "viable". What's in a name? For those women who sought Gosnell's services, or the services of any abortionist, when they were not far enough along in their pregnancy for their baby to be deemed "viable", Gosnell's work would be, according to our current laws, completely legal and not considered murder. And their children would never be called by any name.
The Tomb of the Unknown Soldier is a special shrine to honor all those fallen, whose names are unknown to us. Yet, though we may not know their names, they did have names; unlike the millions of little Baby A B Cs all the way to Z's, who no one called by name. No one except for God that is. In Isaiah ch. 43 we read, "I have called you by name: you are mine." Don't worry little Baby Boy A, you do have a name .. even if we don't know it ... God does, and He has called you by your name.
The giving or changing of a name in the Bible is quite important, as we read how God changed Abram's name to Abraham, Jacob's name to Israel, and ultimately Simon's name to Peter. There is even a childhood fairy tale, titled "Rumpelstiltskin" wherein a woman is forced to guess the name of a mischievous gnome, if she is ever to win back her kidnapped baby from the devious wretch. To this day, much excitement goes into the naming of a new baby ... and even the naming of pets. In the many cemeteries for those killed in wars, the saddest are always those in unmarked graves. In Arlington National Cemetery in fact, a special "Tomb of the Unknown Soldier" was erected in 1921, as a shrine to specially honor unknown and unidentified soldiers. To this day, a special "Society of the Honor Guard" keeps perpetual vigil over this tomb, in memoriam to these soldiers whose names are unknown.
What's in a name? Quite a bit I would say. It's almost as if you really don't exist until you know how you are called; or more importantly, who your father is. Even pets soon learn how they are called by their masters.
So, who is Baby Boy A and why is he called only thus? There is a a criminal grand jury case against an abortionist, Kermit Gosnell, who stands accused of butchering seven babies after they were born alive, as well as fatally drugging one of the mothers. The Grand Jury case against this man, has a 261 page report, which includes a photo of "Baby Boy A", whose neck was allegedly slit by Gosnell. This poor little nameless baby boy, is simply relegated to evidence in a criminal case, by the moniker " Baby Boy A".
The horrors of this case are beyond description, in which Gosnell repeatedly murdered babies, born alive after he aborted them well beyond the legal limits, by slitting their necks and severing their spinal cords, in order to, in his own words, "ensure fetal demise". People are rightfully horrified, shocked and appalled at this gruesome and macabre story, which defies reason; and the case against this man is fully and completely justifiable.
But I would put forth, that Baby Boy A, is merely one of many nameless little victims of abortion. Baby Boy A's case is only brought to court because he was murdered after he was outside his mother's womb. As such, our societal conscience is still sensitive enough not to want to see a newly born infant's throat slit, while it moves and squirms and struggles to take it's first breaths outside the womb. And so, Gosnell is charged with the 7 counts of murder in the deaths of what are termed, "viable babies". Viable because they were outside the womb and gestationally old enough to continue life outside the womb.
So again, what's in a name .. viable? The dictionary definition of this moniker, in brief, is that it indicates a person or state, capable of existing independently .. ie ... such as a child that can sustain life outside it's mother's womb. This is one of the biggest excuses used by pro-abortion advocates, in their reasoning of a woman's right superseding that of her child, because she is viable, while her child, as long as it is still dependent upon her body to sustain life, is not.
And so, the abortionist Kermit Gosnell is only charged with murder of these infants, simply because they were considered "viable". What's in a name? For those women who sought Gosnell's services, or the services of any abortionist, when they were not far enough along in their pregnancy for their baby to be deemed "viable", Gosnell's work would be, according to our current laws, completely legal and not considered murder. And their children would never be called by any name.
The Tomb of the Unknown Soldier is a special shrine to honor all those fallen, whose names are unknown to us. Yet, though we may not know their names, they did have names; unlike the millions of little Baby A B Cs all the way to Z's, who no one called by name. No one except for God that is. In Isaiah ch. 43 we read, "I have called you by name: you are mine." Don't worry little Baby Boy A, you do have a name .. even if we don't know it ... God does, and He has called you by your name.
Who Weeps For These - What Makes Us Cry
As a young child, my mother taught me a valuable lesson about morbid curiosity. She greatly abhorred the voyeuristic habit of onlookers who would rush to the scenes of car accidents, out of a sick need to satisfy some inner blood lust. Our modern movies and television programs have taken the place of the Roman Colosseum, where our modern morbid curiosity towards violence and gore can be satiated; all from the comfort of our living room couch.
Some would say we have become desensitized by the daily exposure to gruesome scenes in movies and television. Perhaps. But what makes us cry? What really reaches down into the deepest part of us to stab at our heart? Do the morbidly curious onlookers of a car accident, stand there in tears, as they view the suffering of a fellow human being? Are they merely desensitized because of being immersed in the violence of modern entertainment? Or is it the same blood lust which also tempted the ancient Romans, who delighted in the violence of the arena.
When we see images of aborted babies, we are shocked - some are offended - others scandalized - but how many are moved to tears? When we watch scenes of victims of the Nazi death camps on newsreels, or the victims of a tsunami, war or famine, do we weep? Or do we simply retreat somewhere inside ourselves to that place of security, where we are simply glad that it is not us.
What does it take to reach our hearts? The abortion issue is easily relegated to an intellectual and political debate, because of a desensitization that has taken place, long before babies were being killed in the womb. When people used to go to a hanging with picnic baskets, and rush to the scene of a car accident to satisfy their morbid curiosity, or just look on and walk by with indifference, as in the story of the "Good Samaritan".
To be perfectly honest with you, I have seen more people cry over the suffering and abuse of animals, than that of their fellow man. Why? I'm sure each of you has your own ideas of what is at the root of the problem here. And I could go on and on enumerating my many thoughts on the subject. But then this blog would become a novel. I simply want each of us to ask ourselves, what makes us cry? In the well known account of The Good Samaritan, Jesus teaches us who is our neighbor; that all are our brothers and sisters, from the poor, the elderly, the disadvantaged to our little brothers and sisters in the womb.
Ezekiel 36:26 "I will give you a new heart and place a new spirit within you, taking from your bodies your stony hearts and giving you natural hearts." I am my brother's keeper and he is mine. He weeps for me, and I weep for him.
Some would say we have become desensitized by the daily exposure to gruesome scenes in movies and television. Perhaps. But what makes us cry? What really reaches down into the deepest part of us to stab at our heart? Do the morbidly curious onlookers of a car accident, stand there in tears, as they view the suffering of a fellow human being? Are they merely desensitized because of being immersed in the violence of modern entertainment? Or is it the same blood lust which also tempted the ancient Romans, who delighted in the violence of the arena.
When we see images of aborted babies, we are shocked - some are offended - others scandalized - but how many are moved to tears? When we watch scenes of victims of the Nazi death camps on newsreels, or the victims of a tsunami, war or famine, do we weep? Or do we simply retreat somewhere inside ourselves to that place of security, where we are simply glad that it is not us.
What does it take to reach our hearts? The abortion issue is easily relegated to an intellectual and political debate, because of a desensitization that has taken place, long before babies were being killed in the womb. When people used to go to a hanging with picnic baskets, and rush to the scene of a car accident to satisfy their morbid curiosity, or just look on and walk by with indifference, as in the story of the "Good Samaritan".
To be perfectly honest with you, I have seen more people cry over the suffering and abuse of animals, than that of their fellow man. Why? I'm sure each of you has your own ideas of what is at the root of the problem here. And I could go on and on enumerating my many thoughts on the subject. But then this blog would become a novel. I simply want each of us to ask ourselves, what makes us cry? In the well known account of The Good Samaritan, Jesus teaches us who is our neighbor; that all are our brothers and sisters, from the poor, the elderly, the disadvantaged to our little brothers and sisters in the womb.
Ezekiel 36:26 "I will give you a new heart and place a new spirit within you, taking from your bodies your stony hearts and giving you natural hearts." I am my brother's keeper and he is mine. He weeps for me, and I weep for him.
Pharmacists' Conscience Rights Restored
Illinois Review has the story:
Americans United for Life President and CEO Dr. Charmaine Yoest applauded a decision today from an Illinois circuit court that struck down a state administrative rule forcing pharmacists and pharmacies to dispense “emergency contraception” against their conscientious beliefs. Long involved in the case, AUL first represented the plaintiffs in 2005 when Morr-Fitz, Inc. vs. Blagojevich was filed.
The complaint alleged that then Gov. Rod Blagojevich violated the conscience rights of pharmacists and pharmacies by requiring them to dispense “emergency contraception” against their religious convictions. As the case has proceeded, AUL’s involvement included two amicus curiae briefs on behalf of national medical organizations in support of the plaintiffs and the conscience rights of all health care providers in the state of Illinois. Click here and here to read those briefs.
In today’s ruling, the court found that the rule was improperly aimed only at pharmacists and pharmacies holding religious convictions. While proponents of the draconian rule claim it is necessary in order to ensure availability of “emergency contraception,” the court noted that not a single person has ever been unable to obtain “emergency contraception” because of a pharmacist’s religious objection.
Dr. Yoest commended the state court: “For six years, pharmacists and pharmacies have been bullied by the state of Illinois into choosing between violating their religious beliefs or violating the law. We applaud the Illinois circuit court for permanently striking this unconstitutional rule.”
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Monday, April 4, 2011
Obligation Catholic or Christ Centered Catholic?
A recent survey by the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) revealed Catholics surpassed other Christians, and even the mainstream public, when it came to supporting homosexual unions, marital or civil.
The poll was broken down into 3 different groups of Catholics - those who attend mass weekly .. ie.. Sunday obligation Catholics - those who attend maybe once or twice a month - and those who attend less often .. probably not at all. The findings shockingly showed that even among weekly mass attendees, only 31% were against any legal recognition of legal unions for homosexuals.
The survey seemed to recognize a generational aspect to these opinions as well, with the younger Catholics being far more agreeable to any type of homosexual lifestyle tolerance. Mark M. Gray, Ph.D., director of CARA Catholic Polls and research associate for the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate at Georgetown University, stated, ""Over time there's been a growing percentage of people who agree specifically with the questions about civil unions and marriage." "A lot of it we see in generational differences."
Of course, the PRRI survey is primarily funded by the Arcus Foundation, which was founded by gay rights billionaire Jon Stryker. As such, these findings of Catholic acceptance of the homosexual lifestyle would be right up their alley.
Msgr. Charles Pope of the Archdiocese of Washington lamented, "In the Church I think we have to accept that a generational shift has occurred, both in the Church and in the culture. And it has happened on our watch." He was referring to the silence from the pulpits on matters of Church teaching and doctrine.
But I would put forth, that there has been another group of Catholics, who have slid under the radar of PRRI's survey. A 4th group of Catholics who do not fit in with any of the other 3 groups surveyed, They are not the "some time church attendees" .. or even the "Sunday obligation Catholics". I am speaking of those Catholics who truly live Christ centered lives; many of whom even attend daily Mass and Communion, as much as their schedule allows. They may even get in a Holy Hour or two during their week, along with all their other prayers and devotions. Most of all, their faith is not merely rote for them; they have a personal relationship with their Lord and Savior, and truly attempt to live according to the teachings of Christ in the gospels, as discerned through the teachings of His Holy Catholic Church.
I would suggest that if these Christ centered Catholics were ever polled, the surveyors might get a big surprise. Yes, the sad tragedy is that this last group of Catholics would be among the minority - a remnant, as they are oft times called. Nevertheless, Christ began His Church with only a scraggly group of 12 nondescript men.
The early Christians were willing to give their lives for their faith; much less would they have acquiesced to the pagan opinions of their day. What has happened to this type of Christian? Are they still around today? Would the pollers be able to find justificaiton for their immorality by polling Catholics such as those who were willing to be burned at the stake, rather than deny Christ?
At daily morning masses all across our nation, a faithful remnant, prayerfully and devotedly kneel at the foot of the cross, offering their lives along with their Lord and Savior, as He is crucified all over again in this modern day. In devout Catholic homes all across the country, mothers and fathers teach the virtues and the Beatitudes to their children through word and example. Their numbers may be low in the polls, but they are the living witnesses that the message of the gospels as preserved through Christ's Church, is still alive; and that Truth is not something which is subject to popularity in the polls.
Sunday, April 3, 2011
Coming Soon To A School System Near You
French teacher suspended, fired, and forfeits public social benefits for showing pro-life film in class (H/T: Acts of the Apostasy):
More liberal tolerance of opposing views.
Philippe Isnard, 40, a history teacher who was suspended last November for having provided pro-life materials and shown images of aborted babies during a debate about abortion in his 10th grade class in Manosque, France, was fired from the National Education system on Thursday.Here in Illinois, biennial School Board elections take place on Tuesday of this week. When you go to vote, will you know how tolerant to pro-life views the people on your school board ballot are?
Isnard lost his position without salary, benefits or any right to financial compensation via the social welfare system.
He told LifeSiteNews.com he was “stunned” by the severity of the decision, even though he was beyond hoping for complete exoneration.
Revocation constitutes the harshest possible disciplinary measure for a teacher in the French public education system. Graded 4 on a scale of 1 to 4 of possible disciplinary measures, a full revocation can only be pronounced by the Education minister himself. It puts a full stop to the father-of-two’s teaching career in all state-funded schools.
The controversy around Isnard began last fall when several parents started a public campaign against the history teacher after he showed students aged 15 to 16 graphic video footage entitled, “No Need to Argue.”
The French mainstream media were quick to pick up the story. Fueled by a pro-abortion feminist organization, “Prochoix,” the campaign provoked angry media reactions calling on the Education ministry to take measures against Isnard.
The education minister, Luc Chatel, responded by publicly criticizing the teacher, saying: “What has happened is unacceptable. Professors are under obligation to respect neutrality and to have respect for the person.”
Shortly after Isnard was temporarily suspended in November, a “psychological counseling unit” was set up at Les Iscles high school to support students who had participated in the abortion debate. Reportedly no students have made use of its services.
The local Planned Parenthood was also invited into Les Iscles high school to follow up the debate, meeting with the students in groups of five.
For his part, Isnard has argued that he encouraged debate in the class. Students were encouraged to bring their own material, either for or against abortion, while Isnard himself provided Simone Veil’s Assembly speech promoting the first French law legalizing abortion, now known as the “Loi Veil,” pro-life video clips, a pro-life tract and “No Need to Argue.”
He says he warned his students about the shocking nature of some of the materials to be presented and told them they were free to leave the class if they wished.
More liberal tolerance of opposing views.
Saturday, April 2, 2011
Pay to Play
Gov. Quinn Nominates Supporter to Key Post
Illinois' premier pro-abortion activist, Terry Cosgrove, Executive Director of Personal PAC, claims credit for electing Democrat Pat Quinn as Illinois Governor last November, and well he might. His organization's vile, lying, misleading and mean-spirited ads, mailings and calls slandered Republican Bill Brady -- and many other candidates besides.Is Governor Quinn grateful? You bet your sweet bippy!
Last week, Governor Pat Quinn nominated abortion rights leader Terry Cosgrove to fill an opening on Illinois' Human Rights Commission. Next Thursday, Cosgrove's nomination will be heard before the Senate Executive Appointments Committee.Certainly, no one could reasonably hope that Cosgrove would support human rights for all humans. Cosgrove's vision of "human rights" is something that mere humanity doesn't qualify you for.
Cosgrove, the 58 year old CEO of Personal PAC, plans to continue directing his pro-abortion political action committee while he serves part-time on the commission. Personal PAC's generous $400,000 campaign donation to Governor Quinn's campaign in 2010 is stirring another round of Quinn "pay to play" buzz.
Cosgrove's Facebook photo (right) is pretty indicative of his pro-Quinn, anti-Brady partiality in the 2010 governor's race. You've got to wonder how impartial he'd be voting on the Human Rights Commission, don't you?
And Quinn's vision of public service is something that mere public service isn't a qualification for. In both cases, something... extra is required.
And, oh yeah, this is the same guy who sent out this mailing about me during my campaign in a Republican primary.
(Cross-posted from Thoughts of a Regular Guy.)
Friday, April 1, 2011
Planned Parenthood Forgets the Lesson of Pinocchio
Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood, appeared on CNN's Headline News channel, protesting the def-funding of her organization, stating that this would "prevent it from providing women with mammogram services." Now, a media watchdog group is calling on CNN to set the straight, regarding Ms. Richard's statement, which has since been proven false by the pro-life group, Live Action.
Live Action released videotaped footage revealing 30 calls made to Planned Parenthood centers in 27 different states, where the abortion facility staff was asked if a mammogram could be performed on their site. The response from every one of the abortion facilities, without exception, was that they could not do mammograms, and that the women would have to go elsewhere to obtain one. I guess Cecile Richards mother never read her the story about Pinocchio; the story of the little wooden puppet, who had to learn the benefits of truthfulness, and the consequences of telling lies. The abortion industry is riddled with lies, that totally eclipse the prevarication of the little wooden head.
Live Action has presented their findings to CNN Headline News (HLN) offering them the opportunity to show true journalistic integrity. How will HLN respond? We don't yet know. But, Planned Parenthood's response to the expose has been to attack Live Action, while conveniently avoiding the mammogram issue, claiming it is a false charge. Planned Parenthood stated that their abortion business provides a wide range of preventive health care services to millions of women. Well, while, we know that millions of women have had multiple abortions at their facilities, we still know very little of how many other services are obtained through their organization. Apparently mammograms aren't one of those services. And apparently being truthful to the women they profess to serve, is also not one of the benefits they provide. Pinocchio's nose has nothing on Planned Parenthood's proboscis.
Live Action released videotaped footage revealing 30 calls made to Planned Parenthood centers in 27 different states, where the abortion facility staff was asked if a mammogram could be performed on their site. The response from every one of the abortion facilities, without exception, was that they could not do mammograms, and that the women would have to go elsewhere to obtain one. I guess Cecile Richards mother never read her the story about Pinocchio; the story of the little wooden puppet, who had to learn the benefits of truthfulness, and the consequences of telling lies. The abortion industry is riddled with lies, that totally eclipse the prevarication of the little wooden head.
Live Action has presented their findings to CNN Headline News (HLN) offering them the opportunity to show true journalistic integrity. How will HLN respond? We don't yet know. But, Planned Parenthood's response to the expose has been to attack Live Action, while conveniently avoiding the mammogram issue, claiming it is a false charge. Planned Parenthood stated that their abortion business provides a wide range of preventive health care services to millions of women. Well, while, we know that millions of women have had multiple abortions at their facilities, we still know very little of how many other services are obtained through their organization. Apparently mammograms aren't one of those services. And apparently being truthful to the women they profess to serve, is also not one of the benefits they provide. Pinocchio's nose has nothing on Planned Parenthood's proboscis.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
