How to improve the Catholic Church in America...

This is just my opinion. Seems everyone else wants to weigh in on the topic and IMO most of them have zippo idea of what it'll take.

Stop trying to turn back the stinking clock to pre Vatican II times. It's a done deal. You can't put toothpaste back in the tube and you can't go back to highly idealized times that exist only in some folks' imagination. There was a real reason Vat II was convened. Want more details? I'll be happy to provide examples from my own experience. Trust me, Vat II was necessary.

Trying to have females in a church wear doilies on their heads won't help.

Banning altar girls won't help.

Doing away with the idea of Extraordinary Eucharistic Ministers won't help.

Doing away with "Protestant" style hymns won't have any positive effect.

This is 2011 and not 1960. Get. Over. It.

Want to know what the solution to the majority of our problems would be? Those problems include low Mass attendance, a disregard for the sanctity of the Real Presence, failing to live according to Church teaching, scant numbers of candidates for the seminary.

The solution starts with you and I, Chumley.

First, work with what we have. That starts with the Catechism. Get familiar with it and live according to it. You've no idea what power a positive example has on the casual onlooker. Act as if you're the only copy of that document many folks will encounter. This includes the practice of humility, charity, tolerance and patience.

Second, don't be a self-righteous pain in the ass about things. Just quietly live in a manner that brings notice to your faithfulness. That'd include any awful lot of prayer for all concerned.

Third, get involved with your parish. While doing this remember that just because you're attempting to better things doesn't mean guaranteed success as you understand it or want it. Christ assured us his Church would last until the end of time. That should be good enough in the way of assured success.

That's it.

Got a priest who isn't in conformance with Church teaching? Remember that his are the consecrated hands that bring Jesus to us in Mass. Anything else is secondary. Complain if necessary to the local chancery but remember that at worst the priest is only temporary. Same goes for the bishop. Even someone like Mahoney out in L.A. has to leave sometime. Offer it up for the suffering souls if nothing else.

Have a hard time with accepting inappropriately clad laity at Mass? Practice some "custody of the eyes", complain to the pastor since it's his problem to deal with and then (most important part here); Let. It. Go.

Don't like the music? If it's so important to be changed then surely you'll be actively engaged with the music ministry. When things don't go your way accept it as your cross to bear.

Shaking hands with others rubs you raw? Better remember you need to learn how to get along with your fellow Catholics in this life. Waiting until the next is waiting too long. Remember that maybe they're not too enthused with shaking your hand either.

Don't like altar girls serving? Then come up with a better solution that you can sell to the pastor. They're not mandatory and if something else that addresses female participation in Mass is offered it might just get used. If he ain't buying what you're selling accept that you're just stuck. Pray for all concerned.

Want to do something about the shortage of priests? Pray.

If all else fails and another parish is close enough then shift your membership. If another parish isn't close enough then offer up your trials/tribulations for the suffering souls.

Life isn't Burger King, we're not supposed to have it "our way". That includes any pet peeves seeming to arise in the last forty-fifty years.

Trust me, being 58 years of age allows me to remember some of the problems we had pre Vat II. It really WASN'T that great a time.

At other times the Church has had problems worse than what's happening now. Being a member of an active F-A-I-T-H-F-U-L laity is the most many of us can achieve.

If that seems unsatisfactory, pray on it.

From the mouths of babes...

This from a high school sophmore:
“I’m tired of everyone treating us like animals who can’t control themselves,”

On Friendship...

Found this at The Cookshack, proof positive that men have better friends than women;

Friendship among Women:
A woman didn't come home one night. The next morning
she told her husband that she had slept over at a
friend's house. The man called his wife's 10 best
friends. None of them knew anything about it.

Friendship among Men:
A man didn't come home one night. The next morning he
told his wife that he had slept over at a friend's
house. The woman called her husband's 10 best friends.
Eight confirmed that he had slept over, and two said he was still there.

The Philadelphia Abortion Story...

So when was the last time ANY other "medical procedure" saw this sort of story?

PHILADELPHIA, Pennsylvania, January 26, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) - “Scores” of Philadelphia abortionist Kermit Gosnell’s victims are coming forward after his arrest last week, says Pennsylvania’s District Attorney. Many women are detailing the horrid atrocities in the media, with some alleging that he even forced them to abort their child.

One woman, Robyn Reid, told ABC News that she had planned to sneak away when her grandmother brought the then-three-month-pregnant 15-year-old to Gosnell’s facility on January 31, 1998. “When I said no, the doctor got upset and he ended up taking my clothes off, hitting me, my legs were tied to the stirrups,” she said.

“I was fully dressed. He actually managed to get all of my clothes off and tie me down to the medical bed,” she continued. “I just remember my very last thought ... looking up at the light and thinking, ‘Don’t fall asleep.’”

In the midst of the 30-minute struggle, she says the abortionist assured her by saying, “This is the same care that I would give to my own daughter.”

Reid said the drugs Gosnell gave her were so strong they knocked her out for 12 hours, and she was carried home asleep by her mother and aunt. “What would you give somebody that small that would knock me out for 12 hours? What if I had died?” she asked.

Gosnell, 69, was arrested last Wednesday for eight counts of murder, which included charges for killing seven babies that were born alive and one count for the botched-abortion death of 41-year-old Nepalese refugee Karnamaya Mongar.

His arrest followed the release of a 281-page photograph-laden Grand Jury Report that detailed Gosnell’s bone-chilling practices, including the killing of what clinic workers testified were “hundreds” of living, breathing newborn children by severing their spinal cords or slitting their necks.

“I said, ‘I don’t want to do this,’ and he smacked me. They tied my hands and arms down and gave me more medication,” Davida Johnson, who went to Gosnell in 2001, told The Associated Press.

Within a few months, the then-21-year-old began suffering gynecological issues, and learned she had contracted a venereal disease. She said she now suffers from an unidentified lifelong illness, and has since had four miscarriages.

Commenting on Gosnell’s horrid treatment of the babies, Johnson asked, “Did he do that to mine? Did he stab him in the neck? Because I was out of it. I don’t know what he did to my baby.”

Gosnell has faced 46 civil lawsuits in the past, the Pennsylvania District Attorney’s office told ABCNews, and more and more victims are coming forward. “Phones are ringing off the hook. There are scores of women,” District Attorney Christine Wechsler said.

LaToya Ransome told CNN that her abortion in July 2007 by Gosnell left her disabled. “It was the utensils that he used ... to do the abortion,” she said. “They wasn’t sterilized, so it caused me to get an infection called endocarditis.”

“By August 31, 2007 I had open heart surgery,” she said. “October the first of 2007 I was disabled, meaning I couldn’t do nothing for myself, take care of my son, take care of myself, feed myself, clothe myself, none of that.”

“He’s crazy and he’s careless. He had ... no type of feelings of what he’s doing to these women and these babies,” she added.

Nicole Gaither, 38, told ABC News that she was in excruciating pain and could hardly sit down after Gosnell aborted her baby at five-months gestation in 2001. It turned out that the abortionist had left parts of her baby’s body inside her. When she went back, he sucked the remains out without giving her anesthesia. Afterward he said, “Stand up, you aren’t in that much pain.”

“I was just laying on the table and crying and I just asked the Lord to get me through it,” she said.

The Grand Jury report slammed the Pennsylvania Department of Health and other state government agencies for turning a blind eye to Gosnell’s practices, despite their knowledge of complaints and lawsuits against the abortionist.

According to the Grand Jury, the state ceased inspecting abortion facilities in 1995 under the administration of former Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge, a pro-abortion Catholic. The inspections were only resumed in 2010 by then-Governor Ed Rendell.

“The Pennsylvania Department of Health abruptly decided, for political reasons, to stop inspecting abortion clinics at all,” said the grand jury. “With the change of administration from Governor [Robert] Casey to Governor Ridge, officials concluded that inspections would be ‘putting a barrier up to women’ seeking abortions … Even nail salons in Pennsylvania are monitored more closely for client safety.”

The report also implicated the National Abortion Federation, which failed to report him to authorities after observing numerous violations during an evaluation as part of a failed membership application.

Authorities only discovered Gosnell’s gruesome thirty-year abortion operation when they raided his facility for a drug bust.

Today the pro-life activist organization Operation Rescue emphasized that Gosnell’s abortion facility is merely one of the few “house of horrors” to be caught, as they released a report exposing Gosnell’s connection to the Delta Clinic of Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

The report, says the group, reveals a “web of death” between Gosnell, co-arrestee Eileen O’Neill, and Delta Clinic’s owner Leroy Brinkley, who also owns the Atlantic Women’s Services abortion facility in Wilmington, Delaware. Gosnell was employed at Atlantic Women’s Services one day per week, and O’Neill, who pretended to be a licensed physician, was employed by both Gosnell and Brinkley. She was arrested along with Gosnell last week.

The report also implicates again the National Abortion Federation, which claims Brinkley’s Louisiana and Delaware facilities as proud members.

A group of attorneys has threatened to sue the Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals if it does not immediately order the Delta Clinic closed for violations that mirror squalid conditions found at Gosnell’s Philadelphia abortion mill.

“Certainly Gosnell’s mill is not the only ‘house of horrors’ in operation. He is just one of the few that has been caught,” said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman. “Horrific conditions and practices exist at most abortion clinics, and in fact, we have yet to find even one that obeys all the laws.

“However, we can take hope in the fact that political conditions that have ignored and covered up for abortion abuses are changing and the arrests in Philadelphia of Gosnell’s band of criminals are a testament to that,” he added. “However, there is still a very long way to go, as this report shows.”

(End of story. My comments follow.)

Even taking into account the probability some of these "scores" of women are just out for a fast buck, they can't ALL be lying.

So where is the outrage from local chapters of NOW and other organizations advocating the rights of women? When do the protest marches start?

Just wondering.

About the SOTU Address...

It's times like this that not watching the tube at all pays off unexpected dividends. Not only will I miss that speech, I'll miss all analysis of it that follows immediately afterwards.

Life is good.

"I Did It My Way"

I really hate that song.

Just for all that it represents. Some schmoe who's insisted on doing it "his way" and is damned proud of it, no matter how things turned out. Arrogance, hubris and stupidity all set to a tune.

What brought this on was scanning the news and seeing that Ted Williams, the homeless man with the golden voice, has checked out of rehab against his doctors' orders. I've known a few alcoholics & drug addicts over the years, so when I say it's a recipe for disaster you can bet that knowledge comes via hearing many other folk in similar situations who did the same damned thing. Just think "Lindsay Lohan" for an example we all know of.

This is a part and parcel of our culture, the myth of one who goes against the common grain and proves himself to be more than just another face in the crowd. Didn't Ayn Rand & Nietzsche propose similar prototypes? Nice ideals in theory, not so good in reality.

I've known far too many folks who had this "I'll do it my way" attitude. Without ANY exception their lives turn into train wrecks. This includes the relative who defiantly smoked four packs of cigarettes a day, casually dismissing all health concerns with "Ya gotta die from something, don't cha?" That individual passed away at age 57 from a very aggressive cancer of the lung. Smooth move, ExLax.

It includes all too many jerks who felt the rules & regulations of the military didn't apply to them, even though they formally took an oath to the contrary. They were more a colossal pain in the ass to deal with than anything else. For the record folks; Rambo was the product of some idiot's imagination. In real life our military doesn't work with "Rambo" types. Even Audie Murphy was a "follow all orders" type. The military is built on teamwork and there really is no "I" in T-E-A-M.

As I've already implied, it includes one HELL of a lot of people I've known in AA who felt they could do it better than the rest of us. AA follows (loosely, but it follows) a program that has certain "suggestions". They're called "suggestions" because too damned many alkies are pigheaded enough to think they don't need any stinking rules or regulations. Even that is too restrictive for many, once they've a few 24 hours of sobriety under their belts they're ready to remake the world. It normally ends with them passed out drunk again.

Don't get me started on fools who think they can have a "special" relationship with their kids, totally eschewing the traditional parent-child model. Trying to be buddies with a twelve year old who thinks they know everything only insures the kid will become an insufferable self-centered asshole in about ten or twenty years.

And those who routinely disregard safety precautions almost always will prove in sufficient time the truth that all precautions were written in someone's blood.

Wanna know who succeeds best? It's the guy/gal who knows rules should be followed, they're more than likely find success in life. The one who follows the doctor's orders to improve their health. The one who doesn't believe in the 11th Commandment, i.e. "Thou Shalt Not Get Caught". The nameless, faceless type who is one of many and doesn't seek to stand out from the rest of us to prove how "exceptional" they are.

Back to Ted Williams. God have mercy on him, I believe in less than six months he'll be back to standing on a street corner with a sign begging for charity. What a waste.

The gutter is filled with highly intelligent and talented folks. They're kept there by their own pride and nothing else.

Nothing much to this post, just blowing off steam. Lately I've been dealing (again) with a family member who knows it all and if you don't believe it you can just ask him. So the story about Williams struck a nerve.

People can't help being ignorant, they can't help it if they're born stupid. I've always felt sorry for anyone who wanders through life perpetually confused. But self-willed ignorance and stupidity are without any excuse and deserves zippo sympathy.

Thanks for listening.

A topnotch commentary on the Church & abortion.

Go to the Ignorant Redneck's blog for a truly outstanding commentary on how we've gotten to our present state of affairs vis-a-vis abortion.

It's here: http://sadcatholic.blogspot.com/2011/01/my-belated-roe-v-wade-blog-post.html

Texas sonogram bill fast tracked for legislative action...

Found at www.chron.com, I'd heard about this today at the Roe v. Wade Memorial March.

AUSTIN — Legislation requiring women seeking an abortion to first have a sonogram is an emergency that merits expedited consideration by the Legislature, Gov. Rick Perry told anti-abortion activists on Saturday.

A bill backed by Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst and Houston state Sen. Dan Patrick will be granted emergency status, Perry told more than a thousand anti-abortion protesters at a Saturday rally. They had gathered at the Capitol on the 38th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the landmark Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion.

"It's pretty hard to imagine people of good conscience sitting idly by through this, and in Texas we haven't," the governor said, calling the court's decision a "tragedy."

Although a similar bill died in the House in 2009, the measure faces better prospects this session with a two-thirds Republican majority in the lower chamber and close to that in the Senate.

Planned Parenthood, a provider of family planning services and abortions nationally, sharply criticized the timing of the proposal.

"It's pretty unbelievable, given the state of the state," said Rochelle Tafolla, a spokeswoman for Planned Parenthood in Houston. "We're facing an unprecedented budget crisis and this bill is completely unnecessary."

Granting the bill emergency status allows the Legislature to take up the matter before the 60th day of the session, in effect putting it on the fast track.

Patrick's bill this session goes further than in 2009. Beyond requiring women who seek an abortion to receive a sonogram, a procedure that provides an image of the fetus, the bill would require women to listen to a doctor's explanation of the physical characteristics of the fetus and to hear audio of the heartbeat. It would also require women to be informed about alternatives to abortion at least 24 hours before the procedure.

Two votes short in Senate
The 2009 bill passed in the Senate but died in the House. It was supported by three Democrats in the Senate, allowing it to pass with the required two-thirds vote.

Currently, Republicans are two votes short of a two-thirds majority in the Senate.

"This is the same bill I passed in '07, this is the same bill that I introduced in '09," said Patrick. "We needed to tweak it a bit (in 2009) in order to pass it."

Two of the Democratic senators who supported the bill in 2009 said they would be inclined to support legislation that was similar to last session's sonogram bill, but wouldn't commit to Patrick's bill as currently written.

"If it's the same bill as last year, I'm very supportive and I'll probably end up coauthoring the bill," said Sen. Eddie Lucio, D-Brownsville. "I very much support making sure that those who are unborn have the protections they need."

But Lucio said he would have to carefully look at the mandates in the new bill.

Sen. Carlos Uresti said he couldn't say whether he supports the bill until he has read it. He voiced concern about some of the new provisions.

Lucio and Uresti said they were puzzled as to why this bill was declared an emergency.

"It's analogous to calling 911 and saying, 'We have an emergency and it's the sonogram bill,' " Uresti said. "As far as I'm concerned I would think that our budget, the fact we're in the hole $27 billion, is the emergency."

Dems slam Perry's picks
Democratic leaders have expressed outrage over the issues Perry chose as emergency items, complaining that the Legislature should be working to close the budget shortfall, which has been estimated at between $15 billion and $27 billion.

"Once again, Rick Perry is trying to distract from the real emergency - our state's massive budget shortfall - with divisive partisan issues," said Kristen Gray, a spokeswoman for the Texas Democratic Party. "He is more concerned with trying to be a GOP celebrity than looking out for everyday Texans."

Patrick rejected the criticism that the bill was being fast-tracked to score political points for Republicans before tackling the budget crisis.

"The people who would say that apparently put money before life," Patrick said. "I refuse to allow myself to be offended by comments like that."

The governor has previously announced four other emergency items for legislators to consider: eminent domain reform, ending "sanctuary city" policies that don't require police to check the immigration status of people they stop or arrest, a voter identification bill, and calling for an amendment to the US Constitution that would mandate a balanced federal budget.

The issues that Perry has given emergency status are important to his base of conservative activists and to the tea party movement.

Outstanding!!

Abortion: 38 years after Roe vs. Wade

Here's a statement from B.O.:

Today marks the 38th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court decision that protects women's health and reproductive freedom, and affirms a fundamental principle: that government should not intrude on private family matters.

I am committed to protecting this constitutional right. I also remain committed to policies, initiatives, and programs that help prevent unintended pregnancies, support pregnant women and mothers, encourage healthy relationships, and promote adoption.

And on this anniversary, I hope that we will recommit ourselves more broadly to ensuring that our daughters have the same rights, the same freedoms, and the same opportunities as our sons to fulfill their dreams.

We've a long way to go yet. I attended the Memorial Mass and March here in Dallas today. It's growing in size, a few years back when I went, everyone fit very comfortably in the Guadalupe Cathedral but this year they had to erect a tent outside to contain the overflow.

That doesn't take into account the members of Trinity Baptist Church who joined us on the March to the Federal building where Roe vs. Wade was initially decided. Trinity Baptist is no small group either.

So for whatever personal observations are worth, the prolife movement is growing.

But as evidenced by the statement coming from our Chief Executive, Foggy Bottom and it's denizens are still sitting firmly & comfortably in the lap of Moloch.

And the beat goes on....

Linking autism to vaccination is despicable & irresponsible

Found this at www.nydailynews.com, with two autistic sons I feel I've a dog in this fight. This op-ed piece pretty well says it all, especially the part about folk passing up vaccinations for reasons such as this:

There isn't enough science in the world to debunk anti-vaccine quackery for some people

No matter how conclusively science proves them wrong, there are those who persist in propagating the dangerous quackery of a link between childhood vaccinations and autism.

Celebrity mom Jenny McCarthy is among the die-hards. She has a young autistic son, has long believed vaccinations triggered his condition and last week dismissed the latest scientific debunking as merely "one journalist's accusations."

All sympathy to her, McCarthy is wrong. Worse, she and like-minded advocates are harmful. They compound damage that was done to public health by the fraudulent, half-baked study that fomented vaccination hysteria.

In 1998, the British medical journal Lancet published a study by Dr. Andrew Wakefield that purported to find a connection between the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine and autism.

The study was based on 12 children, and, in time, the vast majority of Wakefield's co-authors disavowed the findings. A British medical group did an in-depth investigation and concluded Wakefield was guilty of dishonesty and misconduct. The Lancet retracted his article. And now, the British Medical Journal has concluded that Wakefield had committed an "elaborate fraud."

The fallout from Wakefield's assertions has been severe. Many parents grew skittish about vaccinations, leading to a resurgence of measles in England and Wales.

And reports about Wakefield's findings contributed to unfounded suspicions about vaccinations in general.

As Dr. Art Kellermann and Katherine Harris of the RAND Corp. noted in a Daily News Op-Ed last week, only a quarter of New Yorkers were vaccinated against the flu last fall, compared with a third of the people nationwide.

"The low participation rate could cost lives," Kellermann and Harris wrote. "People - often motivated by fears and myths - may need some facts to help persuade them to get some shots."

Here is one: The claim that vaccinations cause autism has been completely, totally debunked.

Bravo. IMHO anyone passing off junk like this is deserving of eternal damnation. I've seen too many folks in too many waiting rooms just trying to make sense of why their child turned out autistic. It's heartbreaking to say the least.

ACLU: "All you Catholics shut up and follow orders..."

WASHINGTON, D.C., January 14, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) - the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has criticized the US bishops for opposing free birth control under the new health care law, saying that the Catholic leaders “cannot interfere” into the matter “by turning their religious beliefs into federal law.”

The ACLU made the remarks in a January 12 hearing before an Institute of Medicine committee, which has been charged with determining what should be covered as preventive care under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. The group called birth control coverage “good medicine” and “a critical component of basic health care for women.”

“Whether the new health guidelines should mandate contraceptive coverage is not a religious question, as the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops has argued,” read the statement, which the organization posted online. “It is critical that the guidelines that the Department of Health and Human Services issues later this year recognize the importance of birth control as preventive care and put an end to politicians and faith leaders imposing their religious beliefs on women and their families.”

“Religious leaders are free to express their belief that birth control is immoral, but they cannot interfere in our personal decision making by turning their religious beliefs into federal law and taking away access to critical health care,” the statement concluded.

The US Bishops have argued that birth control is not health care at all, but a lifestyle choice, and that mandating coverage would amount to a drastic infringement of the conscience rights of employers and insurance issuers.

In November, Dierdre McQuade, Secretariat of Pro-Life Activities of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, urged against contraception and sterilization coverage, saying that, “To prevent pregnancy is not to prevent a disease.”

“Indeed, contraception and sterilization pose their own unique and serious health risks to women and adolescents,” said McQuade. In addition, she noted that birth control, while not curing any disease itself has been linked to increased risk of stroke, heart attack and blood clots, making a coverage mandate “in contradiction with itself.”

In addition, while employers are currently free to purchase and offer health coverage that excludes contraception, “They would lose this freedom of conscience under a mandate for all plans to offer contraception and sterilization coverage,” McQuade said, making President Obama’s claim that Americans can keep their current coverage unchanged “a hollow pledge.”

The USCCB’s Office of the General Counsel, in a September letter to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), also said such a coverage requirement “would pose an unprecedented threat to rights of conscience.”

An aggressive campaign for taxpayer coverage of contraception has also been launched by Planned Parenthood, which would directly benefit from a steady source of taxpayer funding of contraception.

In a radio appearance last October, Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards said that federal officials should consider birth control coverage a good investment because preventing children from being born would reduce the government cost burden.

“Unlike some other issues of cost, birth control is one of those issues that actually saves the government money,” Richards told DC radio host Bill Press. “So an investment in covering birth control actually in the long run is a huge cost savings because women don’t have children that they weren’t planning on having and all the sort of attendant cost for unplanned pregnancy.”

The decision on preventive care coverage is expected to be announced by HHS in August.

(End of story. My comments follow.)

Okay, here's where the rubber hits the road; as long as my money is used to support any entity that funds artificial birth control I DEFINETLY have a say if that funding violates my religious beliefs. End of story.

If I find myself employed again and my health care plan contains a provision against my beliefs then I'm obligated to speak up.

If my 401K invests in health insurance companies who provide this item, I'm obligated to speak up.

If for some reason my tax dollars are used to support artificial birth control, I'm obligated to speak up.

This isn't a "personal choice" for me, it's something that has a direct impact on the salvation of my eternal soul. Silence isn't optional if I'm involved in any fashion with something that goes against the teachings of my Church.

Since B.O. & Co. are making health insurance coverage and the coverage of artificial birth control mandatory, there will be no chance of any ducking this particular issue. Any Catholic involved will either be a part of the solution or a part of the problem.

As for myself, you can bet your sweet ass they'll mandate the Feds offer this in their military health care system. Yes, I know our esteemed Command in Chief has issued an executive order that goes directly against that, just what is likely to be the outcome when these two contradictory mandates meet? I've no faith in Executive Orders, they're so easily overturned.

So yours truly has some letters to write. Now. Before it's a done deal.

This looks like the right address:

Office of Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight
Department of Health and Human Services
Room 45-G
Hubert H. Humphrey Building
200 Independence Avenue, SW
Washington, DC 20201

The final nail in our military's coffin...

This tops everything thats gone before. GI Jane will be a reality soon and our military will achieve permanent second-rate status.

(Newser) – Another military taboo to fall? It looks like the ban on women serving in direct combat roles is in jeopardy. An advisory panel's draft report declares that the practice of restricting women's duties is behind the times and discriminatory, the Huffington Post reports. Among other things, the panel says it constitutes a glass ceiling for women, since distinction in combat is a primary way that soldiers advance their careers.

"The Commission recommends that DoD and Services remove a structural barrier for women," reads the draft report from the Military Leadership Diversity Commission, made up of 24 senior military officials along with academics and business leaders. It also shot down arguments that integrating women into combat would harm unit morale or cohesion. The draft report is under review and is expected to be out in March.

(End of story. My comments follow.)

I've known some women who were in the military. Some were great to work with, (as was a SCPO who ran the outside machine shop aboard the tender in Scotland) and some stunk to high heaven (an example being the LTJG aboard the tender in Sardinia who allowed herself to be photographed naked while performing oral sex on her married enlisted boyfriend). So there are good and bad, just like the men.

But there are some roles in the military that women shouldn't try to assume and that definetly includes being a member of a unit that will see actual combat. The reason? Too many guys will be worrying about "Susie" and not about the mission. Ask the Israelis, they had women in front line units and finally pulled them out. In addition to the aforementioned problem they also had the one of facing Islamic macho fools who would rather die than surrender to a woman. THAT helps to add to the body count for both sides.

Call me a sexist pig but IMO nothing good comes from this one. You can try convincing yourself all day long that there are no real differences between men and women, therefore their interactions with one another should remain the same as with members of their own sex. Spend some time working in a local high school and you'll see how absurd that is. End of story.

On a lighter note, Cookie commented about this. He's kinda ambivalent. One of his suggestions involved all-female companies in the military. That would be scary. Imagine that many women (80-200 bodies) with weapons and going through PMS at the same time. Wouldn't that be against the Geneva Convention?

But if they were allowed just think of the different names they'd have. "PMS Panzers", "Menstrual Militia", "Tampon Tsunami", "Kotex Commandos", I'm sure there are more possiblities.

Daddy's Little Girl...

This'll put a lump in your throat for sure (H/T to Cookie)

Little Melissa

Little Melissa comes home from 1st grade & tells her father that they learned about the history of Christmas.

'Since Christmas Day is to celebrate Jesus's birth, and we're Jewish,' she asks, 'Will God get mad at me for giving someone a Christmas card?

Melissa's father thinks a bit, then says: 'No, I don't think God would get mad. Whom do you want to give a Christmas card to?'

'Osama Bin Laden,' she says.

'Why Osama Bin Laden?' her father asks in shock.

'Well,' she says, 'I thought that if a little American Jewish girl could have enough love to give Osama a Christmas card, he might start to think that maybe we're not all bad, and maybe start loving people a little bit.

And if other kids saw what I did and sent Christmas cards to Osama, he'd love everyone a lot. And then he'd start going all over the place to tell everyone how much he loved them, and how he didn't hate anyone anymore.'

Her father's heart swells and he looks at his daughter with new found pride.. 'Melissa, that's the most wonderful thing I have ever heard!'

'I know, ' Melissa says, 'and once that gets him out in the open, the Marines could shoot the mother fucker.'

From The Horse's Mouth...

...or another more appropriate orifice:

Obama: “They Bring a Knife…We Bring a Gun”

Obama to His Followers: “Get in Their Faces!”

Obama on ACORN Mobs: “I don’t want to quell anger. I think people are right to be angry! I’m angry!”

Obama to His Mercenary Army: “Hit Back Tw...ice As Hard”

Obama on the private sector: “We talk to these folks… so I know whose ass to kick.“

Obama to voters: Republican victory would mean “hand to hand combat”

Obama to lib supporters: “It’s time to Fight for it.”

Obama to Latino supporters: “Punish your enemies.”

Obama to democrats: “I’m itching for a fight.”

Obama to Latino supporters: “Punish your enemies.”

Obama to democrats: “I’m itching for a fight.”

More from http://www.therightperspective.org/2010/06/12/a-history-of-obamas-violent-rhetoric/

(H/T to Rick at Divine Ripples)

So tell me again how it's the vitriolic rhetoric of political conservatives that's stirring up the unhinged of this nation.

Thoughts on the Rep. Giffords shooting...

Well by now I'm sure everyone knows about this one: 6 Killed, Congresswoman Injured In Ariz. Shooting

From the looks of things, the shooter was a four-star nut. But looking across the blogosphere there are plenty of opportunists looking to link this with (take your pick here) Fox News, Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, the Tea Party, etc.

My point? Things are getting more tense and volatile in this country. In times past nobody would have started the "blame game" over something like this. Case in point: the Kennedy assasination. Lots of tinfoil hat type theories over it then and now. But nobody immediately started screaming to blame JFK's political opponents.

Things are different now.

Watch your backs folks. There are plenty of nutjobs still out there. It's a different world than our fathers had to deal with.

Internet ID's for Americans coming...

Found this on www.cbsnews.com:

STANFORD, Calif. - President Obama is planning to hand the U.S. Commerce Department authority over a forthcoming cybersecurity effort to create an Internet ID for Americans, a White House official said here today.

It's "the absolute perfect spot in the U.S. government" to centralize efforts toward creating an "identity ecosystem" for the Internet, White House Cybersecurity Coordinator Howard Schmidt said.

That news, first reported by CNET, effectively pushes the department to the forefront of the issue, beating out other potential candidates including the National Security Agency and the Department of Homeland Security. The move also is likely to please privacy and civil liberties groups that have raised concerns in the past over the dual roles of police and intelligence agencies

The announcement came at an event today at the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research, where U.S. Commerce Secretary Gary Locke and Schmidt spoke.

The Obama administration is currently drafting what it's calling the National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace, which Locke said will be released by the president in the next few months. (An early version was publicly released last summer.)

"We are not talking about a national ID card," Locke said at the Stanford event. "We are not talking about a government-controlled system. What we are talking about is enhancing online security and privacy and reducing and perhaps even eliminating the need to memorize a dozen passwords, through creation and use of more trusted digital identities."

The Commerce Department will be setting up a national program office to work on this project, Locke said.

Details about the "trusted identity" project are unusually scarce. Last year's announcement referenced a possible forthcoming smart card or digital certificate that would prove that online users are who they say they are. These digital IDs would be offered to consumers by online vendors for financial transactions.

Schmidt stressed today that anonymity and pseudonymity will remain possible on the Internet. "I don't have to get a credential if I don't want to," he said. There's no chance that "a centralized database will emerge," and "we need the private sector to lead the implementation of this," he said.

Inter-agency rivalries to claim authority over cybersecurity have exited ever since many responsibilities were centralized in the Department of Homeland Security as part of its creation nine years ago. Three years ago, proposals were were circulating in Washington to transfer authority to the secretive NSA, which is part of the U.S. Defense Department.

In March 2009, Rod Beckstrom, director of Homeland Security's National Cybersecurity Center, resigned through a letter that gave a rare public glimpse into the competition for budgetary dollars and cybersecurity authority. Beckstrom said at the time that the NSA "effectively controls DHS cyber efforts through detailees, technology insertions," and has proposed moving some functions to the agency's Fort Meade, Md., headquarters.

(End of story. My comments follow.)

This sets off so many alarms within me, it isn't funny.

Consider the following statements from this article ; 1) Details about the "trusted identity" project are unusually scarce. (Now THAT alone should raise the hackles on anyones' neck) 2) There's no chance that "a centralized database will emerge,...(This sounds too much like "Trust me" from the Feds.) 3) It's "the absolute perfect spot in the U.S. government" to centralize efforts toward creating an "identity ecosystem" for the Internet, (Just why is this even necessary? No explanation on that one) 4) What we are talking about is enhancing online security and privacy and reducing and perhaps even eliminating the need to memorize a dozen passwords, through creation and use of more trusted digital identities." (Yeah, lots of spin in this statement. What it boils down to is the ability to track down voices of dissent. Just having that capability is cause for alarm. It might not be used today, tomorrow or next year. But sooner or later...)

Hey, we're a nation that really drags it's feet on privacy issues. Just look at how the notion of registering firearms goes over anytime it's mentioned. There IS a valid reason for this reluctance, we've seen what happens when nations passively allow this "for the greater good".

About the firearm registration flap. One of the most quoted arguments against registration is "Hitler had the German people do it, when the time came they all lost the ability to dissent". Well that one isn't strictly true.

The truth is, firearm registration was instituted by the Weimar Republic PRIOR to the ascension of Hitler. Those registration laws were intended with the best of intentions, the intention to NOT have a totalitarian leader arise and take over the nation while backed by his own private army/force of thugs. Worked out so well too, didn't it? That feared leader DID arise and use the very pieces of legislation that were designed against him (although in the interests of accuracy I'll note that the leaders of the Weimar Republic were more fearful of the Communists when they passed those laws. Damned little difference in the end result.)

So no, I really don't believe B.O. & Co. are pushing for a totalitarian state with this idea. IAW with their "nannystate" tendencies they're probably doing what they honestly think is the best thing. But history has shown just where good intentions like this can lead.

I DON'T want my name on another government list, for ANY reason. It's already on enough pieces of paper.

This is another step down the slippery slope of eventual totalitarianism. The whole mindset behind this entails trusting the government.

Now let me state I DON'T automatically mistrust all government employees. As a retired military man I have to own up to having been one myself for 22 years.

But we've seen what happens when the government is allowed to act unchecked. Quite often the intentions were noble, the results tragic.

Just think of Ruby Ridge where an unarmed mother and her baby son were shot by an FBI sniper.

Recall how David Koresh and his followers were cooked in Waco, TX because some idiot felt it was time for a shootout.

Remember the photo taken when the Feds removed Elian Gonzalez from his relatives home prior to sending him back to Cuba. That photo was the one showing a fully armed Federal agent pointing his automatic rifle at the cringing aunt who was holding the little boy.

Remember the notice sent to EVERY police department in the country warning about potential right-wing terrorists coming from the ranks of veterans, 2nd Amendment supporters, prolife groups and limited government advocates. Remember how it's been noted that the FBI currently trains their people to be aware of potential violence from the prolife movement.

Can you say, "potential police state"?

Quite often the only thing keeping us from descending into totalitarianism is the outrage of a well informed citizenry. In recent years that information has been available only from anonymous bloggers. As an example, think of Dan Rather and "memogate". It was a bunch of anonymous, pajama wearing fools who pointed out the improbability of the whole thing.

For an eyeopening look at how government listings of various groups can work against us, read "War Against The Weak". It details how over 60K (yes, that'd be sixty thousand) American citizens were sterilized for the "common good" in the first half of the last century. This followed after extensive tabulation of the populations in 27 states. The information gathered included family health history, financial history, work history. All of it used to justify placing negative eugenic policies (sterilizations) in place. It sounds like tinfoil hat stuff, believe me it isn't.

Trust government employees on a case by case basis? Sure, I see a retired one every time I shave. Hell of a guy too. Trust the government in general? No way, no how.

Bottom line, there is no need for this program (especially one that is very scarce on available details). There's no reason for yet another government "watchdog" to be birthed. There IS a need for unrestricted access and anonymity on the Internet. This will continue as long as our MSM are in the hip pockets of politicians of ANY stripe. Because believe it or not, it's up to John & Joan Q. Public to safeguard their own liberties.

Defunding of Planned Parenthood proposed...

WASHINGTON, Jan. 7, 2011 /Christian Newswire/ -- U.S. Congressman Mike Pence issued the following statement today after introducing the Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act. The bill currently has 122 cosponsors.

"It is morally wrong to end an unborn human life by abortion. It is also morally wrong to take the taxpayer dollars of millions of pro-life Americans and use them to promote abortion at home or abroad.

"Last year, Planned Parenthood received more than $363 million in revenue from government grants and contracts. During that same time, they performed an unprecedented 324,008 abortions.

"The largest abortion provider in America should not also be the largest recipient of federal funding under Title X.

"The Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act will prevent any family planning funds under Title X from going to Planned Parenthood or other organizations that perform abortions. It will ensure that abortion providers are not being subsidized with federal tax dollars.

"I am grateful for the support of more than 122 original co-sponsors of this important legislation and look forward to voting to enact the Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act."

BACKGROUND: The Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act would not reduce the total amount of funds available for family planning; it would simply block funding to organizations that perform abortions. Title X is the only federal grant program dedicated solely to providing comprehensive family planning and related preventative health services, and there are a number of federally funded clinics across the nation that offer beneficial services including patient counseling, breast cancer screenings, HIV prevention education and more.

Last year alone, according to Planned Parenthood's own annual report, it received more than $363 million in revenue from government grants and contracts. During that same time frame, they performed an unprecedented 324,008 abortions, a 5.8 percent increase from the previous year. The nation's largest abortion provider is also under investigation in multiple states including Indiana, California, Alabama and Tennessee for allegations of fraudulent use of Title X funding.

The cultural cesspool just got worse.

Found at www.nypost.com via Drudge:

Bottoms up!
By MAXINE SHEN

Call it full moon rising -- soon, there could be bare butts all over the boob tube.

The US Second Circuit Court of Appeals has vacated the $1.21 million worth of fines that the FCC levied against ABC after alleging that the network violated broadcast indecency standards for daring to show actress Charlotte Ross' naked behind during a 2003 episode of "NYPD Blue."

When overthrowing the fine, the court cited the FCC's own declaration that "nudity itself is not per se indecent." It also reiterated that the FCC's context-based indecency test is "unconstitutionally vague," as previously determined by the court when the FCC demanded fines from Fox when profanities were aired during the 2006 Billboard Music Awards.

The result of the latest ruling is that "because networks know that they won't be fined for [showing bare buns on screen], they know that it is another tool in the arsenal to engage viewers," says Lawrence Meyers, editor of "Inside the TV Writer's Room" and "Picket Fences" story editor.

In essence, the ruling "gives television producers and networks more freedom to do it if they wish," he says, noting that "because network ratings are in severe decline and have been for a number of years, they may try to pull out all the stops and say, 'Let's throw in as much nudity and swear words as we can out there,' instead of focusing on playing great content, which they have not been doing."

Still, neither Meyers nor "NYPD Blue" co-creator Steven Bochco expects that bare buns will be de rigueur on broadcast TV.

"It's not just a question of, 'Oh, maybe they'll program where you're going to see a little t- - - and

a- - ,' Bochco says. "That's not the issue. The issue is, generally speaking, having a broader palette to tell your stories.

"I thought 'NYPD Blue' would sort of usher in a somewhat more relaxed approach to adult fare on broadcast TV and instead, it carved out a niche for itself . . . it never really spilled over into broadcast TV programming in general. Part of it was the [period's] political climate, and a lot of it was due to the fact that it's an advertising-driven medium."

Bochco says he hopes that this ruling does convince showrunners to try edgier things for the sake of storytelling but admits that "broadcast TV is not in the business of controversy." (The broadcast networks contacted refused to speak about the court ruling.)

What the ruling is more likely to bring about, though, is boundary-pushing on a different front -- "What are parallel things that we can get away with now that we couldn't get away with back then?" Meyers says.

"Not just nudity, but will it be showing sexual pleasure or showing a little more violent content than you might have seen before instead of cutting away when a dagger is plunged into somebody's neck, do we see a little bit of blood spurting out first? Every little push forward, you might call it a microcalibration."

(End of story. My comments follow.)

Is it the end of the world as we know it? No, as a matter of fact most of our televised fare is rather tame when compared to European shows (my favorite while stationed in Italy featured a late Friday night strip poker telecast. Nope, not kidding.)

But it lowers the standards of an already raunchy medium that has proven itself to NOT be "family friendly" over the last few decades.

Our popular culture just took another step into the cesspool.

You can't even dress this guy up!

Seriously, doesn't it appear as if he forgot how to button his coat? When was the last time a Chief Executive showed the world he needed to be dressed by "Mommy"?

(H/T to Moonbattery)

"I don't think that word means what you think it means..."

Found this at www.onenewsnow.com:

Abstinence redefined?

A study published this week in the journal Pediatrics says ten percent of teens who said they were abstinent also tested positive for a sexually transmitted disease. But an advocate for abstinence says the sex-education curricula in most schools could be blamed for those numbers.

Of the 964 teens who tested positive for an STD, 118 claimed they had not had sexual intercourse in the last 12 months, and 60 said they had never had intercourse in their lives. The study, based on its findings, recommends that all teens receiving clinical services -- regardless if they self-report as being sexually abstinent -- be tested for prevalent STDs such as gonorrhea and chlamydia.

Valerie Huber of the National Abstinence Education Association tells OneNewsNow that 75 percent of young people in America are receiving explicit contraceptive-centered education that defines "abstinence" subjectively. She believes that could be one of the reasons why teens who say they are abstinent have an STD.

"Because in these curricula [teens] are given free rein to define abstinence in any way, including whatever doesn't cause a pregnancy or however they want to define it," she explains. "And we know that there are a lot of behaviors that put them at risk for sexually transmitted diseases."

Huber says the abstinence programs that her organization promotes are very clear about what constitutes safe and unsafe behavior.

"[When we talk about abstinence] we're talking about avoiding all of the activities that put a young person at risk," says the abstinence advocate. "So if they receive the skills and the motivation to truly remain abstinent [as an abstinence program defines it], they have absolutely zero-percent chance of acquiring a sexually transmitted disease."

It is "crazy," she adds, that some would try to redefine abstinence.

(End of story. My comments follow.)

When the affair with Monica Lewinsky came to light, wasn't one of the excuses given by "Slick Willie" something along the lines of "Well it really wasn't sex?"

If you're wondering where our children get their ideas...

The cheapening of humanity continues...

Gee, who would honestly be surprised at this:
Women relying on morning-after pill as contraception after sex

The "reproductive health" industry will continue churning out items such as this pill, making casual sex seem less prone to negative consequences and the practices of abstinence and chastity as ridiculous and unrealistic.

We'll be seeing a continual slide into the moral cesspool until something shakes us all awake. I have no idea of what that something could be.

Some time ago I read "Carnage and Culture" by Victor Davis Hanson. In the opening chapters he relates how a stranded Greek army made it's way over a several thousand mile trip back home. Along the way they encountered some really bizarre cultures, ones we don't hear about today unless we've a background in the history of those times. Among those cultures was one where sexual acts were performed wherever/whenever the participants got "in the mood". If that was a city street, well let's just hope they didn't scare the horses.

Another culture had it's members running pell mell off a cliff in a ceremony of mass suicide. There were others mentioned but my memory is hazy on the details and the main theme of the book had to do with military history, not aberrant cultures.

My point? If we think our modern day imaginations are capable of foreseeing the upcoming flood of perversion and filth possible as regards human sexuality and anything else cheapened by the Culture of Death, we're sadly mistaken. There are still vast unopened fetid pits to plumb, and we'll be doing it too!

Hang on to your hats, we're in for a long bumpy ride before regaining decency in this life.

The Procedure...

Found via Rick @ Divine Ripples. It's pretty strong, turn off the playlist at the top before viewing:

Stupidity knows no limits regarding rank...

Washington (CNN) -- The Navy has opened an investigation into how a series of raunchy videos, full of sexual innuendo and anti-gay remarks, were produced and shown to the crew of the aircraft carrier USS Enterprise while on deployment supporting the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Navy spokesman Cmdr. Chris Sims said the videos, which were shown to the crew in 2006 and 2007, are "inappropriate."

Excerpts from the videos and descriptions of their content were first published Saturday by The Virginian-Pilot newspaper in Norfolk, Virginia.

The videos on the paper's website, reviewed by CNN, feature a man identified by two Navy officials and The Virginian-Pilot as Capt. Owen Honors, who at the time was the executive officer, or second-in-command, of the Enterprise. He recently took command of the carrier, winning one of the most coveted assignments in the U.S. Navy, which has only 11 aircraft carriers.

Honors is shown cursing along with other members of his staff in an attempt to demonstrate humor, according to videos. There are also anti-gay slurs, simulated sex acts, and what appear to be two female sailors in a shower together.

The investigation was ordered Friday by Adm. John Harvey, the four-star head of the Navy's Fleet Forces Command, after the videos were detailed in The Virginian-Pilot. The paper also posted a link to some of the material, but edited it so that expletives were censored and some identities of junior Navy crew were disguised.

CNN left a message for Honors on Saturday. The Virginian-Pilot said he did not respond to requests for comment.

The Navy issued a statement Saturday, saying in part "production of videos, like the ones produced four to five years ago on USS Enterprise and now being written about in the Virginian-Pilot, were not acceptable then and are still not acceptable in today's Navy. The Navy does not endorse or condone these kinds of actions."

The statement also said, "U.S. Fleet Forces Command has initiated an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the production of these videos; however, it would be inappropriate to comment any further on the specifics of the investigation."

But the Saturday statement was an about-face from the initial military statement to the newspaper. In that statement, the Navy said the videos were "not created with the intent to offend anyone. The videos were intended to be humorous skits focusing the crew's attention on specific issues such as port visits, traffic safety, water conservation, ship cleanliness, etc."

Sims said senior officers had not yet seen the videos when they issued the first statement. It was after viewing them that the investigation was ordered, he said.

When the videos first came to light the "leadership" of the Enterprise was "directed" to make certain future videos were appropriate, the Navy said. Sims said he was not aware if Honors was ever reprimanded. In the videos, Honors repeatedly jokes that his superior officers were unaware of the content of the videos and "they should absolutely not be held accountable."

The Virginian-Pilot says the videos were shown over the ship's internal broadcast system to its nearly 6,000 crew.

(End of story. My comments follow.)

You would think after the Tailhook incident every senior officer in the canoe club would know better. Evidently not.

This comes at a very bad time. With the ending of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" you can bet there will be too many politically ambitious members of the Navy's top brass looking to score points with the gay crowd.

It's almost certain this Captain will be publicly crucified, IMO he's brought it upon himself so I've little sympathy for the man.

The fallout from this will last years (did it ever stop from the Tailhook incident?).

Shit.

Bishop Garcia: To All Texas Catholics...

Taken from the Bishop's blog, ABYSSUS ABYSSUM INVOCAT

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS MUST NOT BE ELECTED SPEAKER OF THE TEXAS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 11, 2011 WILL BE A CRITICAL DAY FOR TEXAS

On January 11, 2011, the 2011 Biennial Session of the Texas State Legislature will convene. The first order of business for the Texas House of Representatives will be the swearing-in of the members. The second order of business will be the election of the Speaker of the House.

I do not exaggerate when I state that the choosing of the person who will be the Speaker of the House is probably going to be the most important action of the House in this session. Why? Because the Speaker of the House controls the legislative activity of the House.
He does this first of all by appointing the chairmen of the various committees of the House and he does it by controlling the calendar for the consideration of all bills.

There can be no better example of how the Speaker of the House controls legislation than by citing the record of Speaker Nancy Pelosi in the House of Representatives in Congress during the past two years. Obamacare, the bailouts, the deficit spending, all the damage done to the United States in the past two years could not have been done without the exercise of raw power by Nancy Pelosi that we witnessed.

The potential for damage to the State of Texas by the Speaker of its House of Representatives may be limited in scale compared to that done by Nancy Pelosi, but it still too great to great to be risked. That is especially true with regard to respect for life issues.

There are three leading candidates for the office of Speaker of the Texas House of Representatives: Representative Ken Paxton, Representative Warren Chisum and the incumbent Speaker, Representative Joe Straus.

All three candidates were asked to answer pro-life questionnaires. Representatives Paxton and Chisum answered the questionnaires but Representative Joe Straus did not. The answers that Paxton and Chisum gave to the questionnaires clearly showed that they are 100% supportive of the pro-life cause. The record of Representative Joe Straus shows not only that he is not pro-life, but that he is beholden to Planned Parenthood of Texas, the principal provider of abortions in Texas and the United States.

Planned Parenthood was conceived as a racist organization by its Founder, Margaret Sanger, and it has remained true to her program of eugenics that seek to halt the growth of black and Hispanic sectors of our population. It is no accident that Planned Parenthood abortuaries are usually located in barrios and ghettos where the majority of poor black and Hispanic Americans live.

Joe Straus received a $1,000 campaign contribution from a Planned Parenthood PAC. He has been given high praise by Planned Parenthood for “his tireless efforts” during the last legislative session. He has been quoted as saying of Planned Parenthood that “they do so much good on the family planning and the womens health issues.”

In 2009 Joe Straus allowed two pro-life bills that had passed the senate, Senate Bill 182 (the sonogram bill) and Senate Bill 1098 (the “Choose Life” license plate bill) to die in the House by failing to bring them to the floor for a vote.

In 2007 Joe Straus co-authored House Bill 2707 that would have allowed the creation of living, human embryos by “any method other than fertilization” (human cloning) and would have required the destruction of embryos.

The re-election of Representative Joe Straus as Speaker of the Texas House of Representatives would be a legislative and moral disaster for Texas.

I cannot believe that any Catholic member of the Texas House of Representatives could with a clear conscience vote for the election of Joe Straus as Speaker. And if a Catholic member of the Texas House of Representatives cannot vote for Joe Straus with a CLEAR conscience, that member would be committing a serious sin by casting a vote for Joe Strauss.

I urge the readers of this Blog to contact their representative before January 11 and to urge their representative to vote either for Representative Paxton or Representative Chisum, but not to vote for Joe Straus.

Written by Bishop Rene Henry Gracida, Bishop Emeritus of the Diocese of Corpus Christi, having served as the Fifth Ordinary, or Diocesan Bishop, of that Diocese from May 19, 1983 until retirement on April 1, 1997. This has been copied directly from his blog.