Without realizing it beforehand, I attended a special 50th anniversary mass where twenty bishops were present, including both Garcia-Siller and my own bishop Lopes.
The next evening Bishop Lopes came to my parish to dedicate the new altar, very rare liturgy! Took a whole 2hrs 15min for the mass.
Hey guys! I and a friend are resurrecting a pro-life organization in my uni. Since my uni is non-sectarian, we want the same for the org too. However, I am fearing that since a lot of the old members are a part of the Catholic pro-life movement, they'd likely infiltrate the conversation and inject social conservative issues that I don't see are "life" issues at all like civil marriage for same-sex couples and civil divorce (we're the only country that doesn't have it). (Mind you I'm Catholic and practicing, yet I find the local pro-life movement woefully sectarian which made them shoot themselves in the foot plenty of times already)
So I'm curious to know what specific issues you guys as pro-lifers would see as pressing. The current hot issue btw in our Congress is a national anti-discrimination bill that aims to "protect" LGBT people which is more like the dreaded Bill C-16 in Canada. The local pro-life movement is getting hot on it, though would this issue be typically a "life" one?
I'm liberal and support LGBT rights, but even I don't see that as part of the pro-life movement. I mean, sure, if you want to define "pro-life" in the most literal way possible, you could include everything from LGBT rights to welfare to gun control, but then you'd have no pro-life movement, because everyone would disagree about how to be pro-life.
Having said that, I do think any anti-abortion legislation should be accompanied by measures aimed at reducing the incentive for abortion, such as increased support for struggling parents/single moms and access to contraception.
(P.S. - that awkward moment when you accidentally post using a nation in a completely different region)
Comparison of capitalism to socialism, by a woman who grew up in socialist Romania. It's heartbreaking to read of people living in a government-planned economy and being taught in schools that capitalism was a failure- while a family of four gets a quart of flour per month, four hours of hot water per day, and a four-hour wait for a chance at luxuries like milk and eggs.
And this was socialism, not communism- private property still existed. Yet certain political figures who obviously haven't read a recent history book trumpet the same Soviet propaganda of the evil of the free market and the benefits of socialism.
This is indeed a heart breaking read, however, only one version of socialism is being expressed in the article, and that is the soul crushing totalitarian version. Conveniently for the FEE, no other version of socialism is in anyway mentioned. The development of a democratic form of socialism in Europe isn't given any credence. For the FEE, it is a strict either/or position. Either you worship at the altar of the free market or you must be desirous of government takeover of goods and services. The Scandinavian countries so often decried as “socialist,” are capitalist countries. By some measures, they are even more capitalist than we are.
Also, to exalt capitalism without critically assessing its inherent weaknesses is a narrow view of thinking. Capitalism places the individual at the sole center of society, severing familial and communal bonds, putting in place "rugged individualism." The overarching principle is a person's autonomous self interest, without regard to how one person's interest may help or harm others. This denies that human beings are social and relational creatures. As Christians, we believe that every human being is made in the image of God. God is not an isolated unitary being, like Allah, but is the three in one. One God in three persons, at once relational and yet of one substance.
This is not to say we should abandon the free market, hardly, but it is in view of its weaknesses in need of a certain amount of regulation. For example, any marketing 101 class will tell you that companies desire to gain and sustain a large market share. Given human nature's fallen state, a normal desire for profit tends to give way to greed. Since the person's/organization's self interest is the guiding principle, the greed is expanded until monopoly develops. When monopoly occurs in an industry, the barriers to entry become so great that it is a "free market" in name only. This is shown in America’s own history with the gilded age and the trust busting that followed. For that matter, we can see numerous examples of monopolies in our own day and age.
Furthermore, for all the FEE’s handwringing, no one wants to abolish private property in America or ration the amount of shower water. No one wants bread lines. No one is calling for a centrally planned economy, like that of China. Speaking of China, it’s a great example of how opening the markets does not automatically lead to personal freedom and liberty. It makes way for it, to be sure, but other factors are needed, which China suppresses most cruelly.
Join the FCN Fantasy Football league! http://fantasy.nfl.com/registration/privateleaguejoin?leagueId=8102002 (password is fcnfootball)
It's open to embassy regions of the FCN, so pile on in! Hoping to fill out the 10 teams, autodraft is on September 3rd, two days before the first game.
On this weekend, when we rest from our usual labors, loving Father, we pray for all who shoulder the tasks of human labor—in the marketplace, in factories and offices, in the professions, and in family living.
We thank you, Lord, for the gift and opportunity of work; may our efforts always be pure of heart, for the good of others and the glory of your name.
We lift up to you all who long for just employment and those who work to defend the rights and needs of workers everywhere.
May those of us who are now retired always remember that we still make a valuable contribution to our Church and our world by our prayers and deeds of charity.
May our working and our resting all give praise to you until the day we share together in eternal rest with all our departed in your Kingdom as you live and reign Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, one God, forever and ever. Amen.
It's been a pleasure, but I'm afraid it must come to a close
I am pleased to announce that I will be leading the production of another issue of Right to Life News! Since our region is somewhat dormant, we will be focusing on real-life news and opinions related to the cause of life, with perhaps a NS edge. We want to fill this and get it highly upvoted, so I'd appreciate some input!
Please telegram or DM me if you are interested in writing.
Sanders wants to fund abortions in ‘poor countries’ to fight climate change
US presidential candidate Bernie Sanders said he would support using taxpayer money to fund abortions in foreign countries as a means of population control in the face of climate change.
Sanders merged the hot-button issues of climate change and abortion rights, at the same time singling out developing nations as the culprits overpopulating Earth, during a six-and-a-half-hour CNN townhall on climate change on Wednesday. While his supporters appeared galvanized, the proposal invoked the wrath of his detractors online.
He has lost me on this one, that somehow free abortions in developing countries are going to save the environment. This is exactly what Pope Francis means when he talks about 'ideological colonisation', Western nations funneling money to impose a culture of relativism, individualism and materialism.
"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one."
Spock, the logical Vulcan character in Star Trek, used this phrase numerous times throughout the television series. But is it true? Should this maxim guide individuals, should it guide governmental policy?
I was reminded of the phrase when I saw the following post on Facebook from the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum [https://facebook.com/holocaustmuseum/photos/a.423860602676/10156712169337677/]:
“Fathers and mothers, give me your children.” With these words, #OnThisDay in 1942, the Jewish council chairman in the Lodz ghetto asked parents to surrender all children under age ten. He believed that sacrificing those who could not work would save the other ghetto inhabitants. Children, the elderly, and the sick were sent to their deaths at Chelmno killing center to meet a quota of 20,000 set by the Nazis. But about two years later, the Nazis sent all those remaining in the Lodz ghetto, the last large ghetto in German-occupied Poland, to Chelmno and Auschwitz-Birkenau.
The Judenrat chairman followed similar logic to Spock. He felt sacrificing "the few" would save "the many". This is illustrated throughout history as well; Lot is an example in the Bible, when he offers his virgin daughters to the Sodomite mob in exchange for them not raping his angelic guest (they refused the alternate victim as the account goes on to tell).
While "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one" might be worthy motivation for the individual, it should not be what government uses as a guideline. Government ought to preserve the rights of the few, or the one, in order to preserve the rights of the many. If the rights of the few are not preserved, then neither will the rights of the many.
I like how people bashed the whole "kiddy table" second debate stages during the Republican debates in 2016 in favor of the 2020 Democratic model of excluding from any stage based on current popularity and name recognition.