A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. - MLK
Remembering something sort of like this often said by a a great role model of mine, Fr. John Corapi (not a direct quote):
When we are in the darkness, it is harder to see. If we expect to see Truth in the dark, we are kidding ourselves. The only way to see what is true, is follow the Light.
I rarely get too political on this blog. It seems that it is too easy to get folks riled up, and some of that is certainly not intended, though I guess some still is...
=========================
"Today we have a similar spiritual battle in progress; a battle between theforces of good and evil, light and darkness, truth and lies, life and death. If we do not soon stop the genocide of abortion in the United States, we shall run the course of all those that prove by their actions that they are enemies of God; total collapse, economic, social, and national.The moral demise of a nation results in the ultimate demise of a nation.
The more than 48,000,000 abortions since Roe v. Wade in the United States constitute genocide by definition.The group singled out for death: unwanted, unborn children. No other issue, not all other issues taken together, can constitute a proportionate reason for voting for candidates that intend to preserve and defend this holocaust of innocent human life that is abortion."
--Fr. John Corapi
=============================
Our New President, our Vice President, our Speaker of the House...all favor abortion.
Guess who does not? You don't know?
...How about "Roe" from Roe v Wade! You can bet that is not well published! Her name is Norma McCorvey, and this has been known for years. What may be little known is that she opposes abortion.
The attack on the family continues....in California the vote to keep the definition of marriage as "between a man and a woman" was won, but somehow this sits wrong with those who seem to think it is a "right", as in a civil right, to marry...regardless of gender. Now I will say this: If a fish is a fish, can we call it a dog? If a cloud is a cloud, can we simply call it what it is....a cloud? Let us please be with some reason. The issue about marriage is not about hate as much as it is about what is real, and what is not. This is not to show ill will or lack of love for any gender or gender affiliations, it simply is what it is.
I will support our new president and government as the people of our nation that they are, though I will never agree to many of their stated principles. I will also pray for them, for the nasty folks in all political parties, and for all who bother to read this. Wow....now that means I have to spend time doing that....but I will.
I need prayers too, by the way. We are all in need of each other.
--Dan
13 comments:
I love the last two lines.
We all need prayers - our own and as gifts from others.
We, as a society, need each other - regardless of race, creed, colour or all those other things that makes every one of us unique.
xx
Dale
I do miss the Redwoods! (native CA girl) It's very hard to live in godless Vermont....home of the "civil union..."
Stay faithful, keep a light lit. Bring in holy water and blessed candles.
MomvMany
Hi Dan, it's good to be back. I've been a bad blogger and have't been around for a while. I picked an intersting time to visit you! I have posted my response to you on my blog too - you have made me think, which can't be bad.
I have sometimes wondered
why I feel so drawn to your blog - I don't visit many (just too darned busy), but I always like coming here. Our beliefs, our politics, our attitudes are often so different, yet I like reading what you have to say, and I think you are a good, decent and immensely likeable man.
Never has a post showed so clearly how fundamentally different our beliefs are. We have divergent views on so many things. I remember a good discussion on gun laws many many months ago, and here we are again, poles apart, but I hope still friends.
My politics are clearly not yours - I celebrated madly when Barack Obama was elected your next President. I was brought up nominally Anglican, but remain unimpressed by organised religion and too much reliance on people's interpretations of the will of God. I am happy that some people find it fulfilling to live their lives within a stated religious framework, but deeply suspicious of fundamentalism in any form where it seeks to dictate how others should live their lives. Again, it appears we are different.
I was deeply saddened with the result of the vote on Prop 8 in California. Marriage has many forms, as do people. Their way may not be your way, but it is a way, and will hurt no-one who is prepared to accept and celebrate the diversity of human life. It cannot harm your family, and is an attack on no-one, simply an expression of love and commitment. Theirs cannot threaten yours.
Ah, and the big one - human life in its earliest form. I don't like the terms pro and anti-abortion. They suggest some people think it's a jolly good thing and highly recommended. It isn't. It's the result of a hard, traumatic and challenging decision, which sadly, some find themselves having to make under difficult circumstances. I cannot say I could choose it, or would not under certain circumstances, but I will not judge those who do. They have a right to do so safely and without my approbation.
Truth is a flexible concept - yours may not be mine. Fortunatly, humans are flexible too, and can accept, celebrate and discuss differing views. Most of us try to live our lives within moral frameworks with which we feel comfortable, and are at least respectful of others' beliefs. I respect yours, and hope mine don't threaten our frindship.
Voltaire said something along the lines of "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
Sound chap, Voltaire.
Dear, kind, wonderful Dan, your compassion and humour shines through this post, even through the seriousness of what you have published here. I think this post is symptomatic of your honesty, and I applaud you for it. I cannot agree with everything that is written or quoted here...certainly the fire and brimstone element is not something that sits well with my view of the world and what is ethical and moral. However, as Margie has so elegantly finished with that wonderful Voltaire quote, I can only say that I agree with both her and Dale here...and indeed your own last lines. We all need tolerance, the freedom to believe what we wish, and the love and compassion of our fellow men, regardless of religious or ethnic origin. Thanks for making us all think Dan the Man.
PS: I came back to see if you were mad at me. Not yet, obviously. Must check my email ....
Still love you Dan
M.
Hi Dan,
|
I hope you and Cruz, and your family are well.
I only can say that I wish all well with humanity, I don't have issues with those who love each other, I only wish for respect and love for our fellow man. And I have only the best for our country, being a veteran, I love my country. God Bless America. Be it safe. Lets unite and support this great land and world
This certainly has unearthed the lurkers, is probably what you’re thinking Dan, and if you are, you are right. Although I drop in from time to time too, I was led to this particular post by my favorite antipodean. I am not here to pontificate, but you have sure whipped up something that will get folks thinking. My thoughts on this for what it is worth.
Essentially Prop 8 is a definition limiting civil marriage, which is a secular contract, and as such it is not something where a referendum should decide who is entitled to it. Now, under religious laws, the similar contract or religious vow is something else. If people wish to marry in the “eyes of the church”, of course that is their right. For it to be legal within civil law, they must supplement their religious vow with the legal registration, or similarly if someone wants to legalize their civil wedding with the church, the must do it under God.
Religious groups have the right to define conditions for the religious ceremonies and what is legal under their church law; I have no issue with that. However, the matter in California involves a majority vote to influence civil law, and as such the Prop 8 passing is a travesty.
In my opinion, I cannot see how this will be sustained and expect it will be reversed in March when the Supreme Court reviews it. In this country the judiciary is there to prevent majorities from doing exactly what has happened, limiting the rights of minorities, and there is no doubt in my mind that this will be overruled. The folks protesting have a right to expose their opinions on this, and if it helps get the matter to Supreme Court, that is also their right. However, it should not sway the judiciary in determining the legality of this decision under constitutional law.
The discussion on abortion is one I struggle with a lot. It has extremely difficult issues that are not easy to reconcile, and I don’t find it boils down to holding a simple pigeon-holed position. I have no argument against the rights of an individual, and agree that a person should be at liberty to make there own choices. If they desire to die with dignity and endorse a doctor to help them, then I believe it is their right to do so. However, an individual’s choices must be checked when another person, or the rights of another person is involved. And that is where it breaks down for me; I find it very difficult not to give the unborn child those inalienable rights. It is a life and the right to life should be protected. An argument might be that it is not ‘another person’. But however it is syntactically described, it is a human life, already created, already vulnerable. Although my opinion is more similar to that of fundamental Christians than a liberal view, my argument is not bound with religious collateral.
With similar opinion, I find it extremely difficult to condone taking a life through capital punishment, even when I have been forced hypothetically in counter-arguments to imagine horrible situations involving severe harm upon my family; if someone murders or does heinous things to my family, they have done wrong. Killing them for it does not help me.
As I have said, I don’t find these arguments easy. I respect people with faith, and I respect people’s individuality.
I extend to you and your family, and indeed, all the folks here, my sincere wishes for a wonderful and peaceful Thanksgiving.
Be well.
P.
Hey Dan,
I've enjoyed our exchanges over the years, dating back to TBWHM blog all those years ago. I've even felt a bond of some kind with you -- as a Who fan, as a California resident, as a person of faith. With that in mind, I come with a smile on my face and warmth in my heart to tell you that -- come December -- my partner, Allan, and I will have been together 20 years. In 2003 we were married in Vancouver shortly after British Columbia began extending civil marriage to same-sex couples. In Canada, we are as married as anyone can be. For a few fleeting months, that legal commitment was even recognized here in the Golden State -- as I believe in my heart it will be again someday.
It would be easiest to just avoid this discussion completely I suppose. But I respect you enough to want to be honest and stand witness to what I know to be the truth of my life.
I could never in good conscience marry a woman, so there is no "traditional" marriage that has been harmed, pre-empted or threatened by my commitment to Allan. And I have never understood how some can perceive our attempts to build a life together as a threat to "the family." I am, after all, a son. A brother. An uncle. A cousin. A godfather, even. I am a part of a family that, thankfully, loves me and accepts me, warts and all, as I do the other members. When they work best, that's what families do, it seems to me.
While I am happy to discuss any part of this issue at any time, I am also not aiming to get a reply from you. Just hoping you'll take it in and process it with the same care, specificity and discernment with which I've seen you wrestle with all kinds of other issues over the years.
I guess my point is that, in the end, Proposition 8 wasn't about some imaginary figures out there lurking in the shadows [as the truth-bending TV commercials would have you believe]. It was about me.
Thanks so much for listening. I really do appreciate it.
- Chris
Hi Dan, after reading some of these magnificent comments here, it seems you have managed to encourage your readers to take the same kind of compassionate and reasoned stance that you yourself have taken, albeit with different outcomes, and that is fantastic. It is a reflection of the sort of person you yourself are that others have responded so thoughtfully and positively.
I've been thinking a lot about these issues since you posted them, and as I too avoid confrontation, it is difficult for me to add what I would like to say, particularly on the abortion aspect, but I'll have a go. As far as Prop 8 goes, I tend to agree that it is sad that a majority group should be making a decision about the civil rights of any other group, regardless of persuasion, and that all human beings should have the same rights under law. I agree with Paul here that this should be inalienable, and that when it comes to religion that should be a separate matter entirely.
As regards abortion, there are far too many other factors involved, and many women are faced with impossible dilemmas - medically, emotionally and practically - when they find themselves faced with an unplanned pregnancy. It therefore seems to me that the issue is too complex and fraught with potential injustices for the law and society to make a generalised legal and moral stand against it. If everyone campaigning against abortion on ethical grounds were to stop for one moment and put themselves in the shoes of a young married woman who has been raped, who already has children and whose whole life and that of her family are being put at risk by the fact of a pregnancy resulting from the violence inflicted on her, then maybe they might have a greater realisation of some of the trauma such a decision involves.
As Chris says so poignantly, these are not just numbers we are talking about, these are real people that we know.
With lots of love and respect, dear Dan xx
PS Perhaps I should also say that the reason I have described this particular scenario (re abortion) is that it's a fairly common occurrence in South Africa where I lived for so long.
To all the posts that have been visiting here:
I truly thank you for your interest, and certainly even more so for your responses. These are absolutely very important issues, and we all have shown that to be so very true. I will not change my views, but certainly respect your own.
So many folks here that often I do not see anymore so often...
I'd type all the names, but I am a two fingered typer at nearly mid-night, so I am short on skill there. Needless to say, good to see you all.
I am not really interested in making my blog a big ol' political blog buster, so some will likely miss the "heat" to come. That is not, by the way, because I am not outspoken. My daily and personal interactive friends know me well too much that I absolutely am willing say what I mean, and mean what I say.
And,...
I know that I am remiss...
I do not often respond very personally on this website as often as I wish I could, nor as often as I should...but it does not mean I am not responding at all...indeed, if I receive your e-mail responses (through blogger), I almost always address issues that way...to you....because I mean to be more personal, not because I mean to be secretive in any way.
I wish all visitors here a most Happy Thanksgiving!
We are loving this coming week a whole ton, here!
--Dan
Dan!
Isn't it wonderful that we all have such varied interests, lifestyles, beliefs and point of view?
Not to mention, different accents which, in typeface, we sadly can't hear.
Much love to you and yours.
xx
Dale
a fish may not be a dog, but people defined whales as fish for a long time before we learned that, as mammals, they are really much more closely related to us than they appear. just because something has a different form, doesn't mean it is fundamentally all that different. definitions can, and do change. it is the beauty of language, of the adaptability of people, and of culture. what is first needed is a willingness to take off the filters provided by the language as it stands, a willingness to see, and accept, as you said, what is real, and what is true. love. family. life.
Post a Comment