Daily Archives: May 8, 2009

Holy Father says Right to Life and Right to Conscience are Inalienable

Of course, this means that governments cannot take away right to conscience. It does *not* mean that members of a religion have freedom of conscience to sin without retribution.

But does it mean that Pope Benedict is contradicting Pope Pius IX???

Mike Huckabee opposes torture

Implicit in the “torture” debate among Catholic intellectuals, and sometimes explicit, is the effort of the Left to find a “non-negotiable” equivalent to abortion with which to discredit Republican votes.

It’s taken for granted that “Republicans support torture”. Now, John McCain, having been tortured himself, is of course anti-torture, though he equivocated a bit on waterboarding. If anything, had I realized the import of this issue a year ago, I might have adjusted my views a bit as per McCain (i.e., a moderately good position on two pro-life issues better than a bad positoin on one and a good position on the other).

But the question arose, in the “I Told You So” department, “What does Mike Huckabee think?”

Well, according to this interview, he is opposed to waterboarding.

Here’s some Republican blogger from December 2007 calling Mike Huckabee “too moralistic”.

Ron Paul is against waterboarding, too.

I can’t find that Sarah Palin has said anything one way or the other.

Pro-choice Libertarian candidate Bob Barr opposed torture.
Chuck Baldwin said that “subordinate military personnel should not be empowered to engage in activities which Congress defines as torture”

The main argument against McCain is that he voted against requiring the CIA to follow the Army Field Manual (which specifically condemns waterboarding), but said he still opposes waterboarding.

So, my hero in the election, Mike Huckabee, opposes torture. Ron Paul, who got the support of many pro-lifers in the primary, also opposes torture. McCain opposes torture, although most of the other Republican nomination candidates support it.

In the general election, each of the candidates supported by pro-lifers–McCain, Barr (why? I have no idea) and Baldwin–opposes torture. Can’t find anything on Palin.

While Abu Ghraib happened before the 2004 election, most of us thought it was an isolated incident. The realities of the Bush Torture Regime didn’t hit until after the 2004 election, and most of us are just now coming to terms with it. So it really shouldn’t effect questions of a vote 4 years ago.

There really is no reason a Catholic should be defending waterboarding politically, just to make a point. No matter who won the past election, there would have been action taken against waterboarding.

So, from the perspective of the Catholic vote ,it’s a non-issue.

OT: "They were the dream . . . "

Today is apparently the 25th Anniversary of the Transformers franchise. Best anyone can figure, May 8, 1984 was the day the first issue of the Transformers comic book from Marvel hit stands, and apparently the first day the toy hit stands.

“mechanical beings, able to transform their bodies into vehicles, machinery, and weapons.”

My first actual Transformer was Hoist. Now, what confuses me about my memory is that Hoist was a 1985 Transformer. I remember when I got Hoist for my birthday, and part of me wants to remember it as my 7th birthday. But it had to be my 8th, because I am pretty sure that I had some idea what Transformers were.

“A last line of defense against the chaos-bringer, Unicron.”

There were a lot of robots that year: Transformers, Gobots, and some Saturday morning series that I don’t even remember the name of.

“They are at war, heroic Autobots pitted against evil Decepticons,”

But there was something different about Transformers. During the 84-85 year, when I was in second grade, it aired on Saturday mornings at like 7 AM. My brothers used to watch it with me, and that’s why they bought the toy.

“both on their homeworld, the metal planned called Cybertron,”

It’s amazing how childhood memories work. . . .

I remember my cousins having Transformers toys, and they always seemed to break easily. Back then, they were a combination of die-cast metal and plastic, which some collectors today insist was superior. It was cool, yes, but they broke like nothing. That’s one reason I was never really interested in the franchise as far as toys until years later.

“and here on our earth.”

My first glimps of the Marvel comic was on the same birthday. The Marvel series was originally supposed to be a 4-issue limited series. It ran one issue every two months for 8 months, and it was so successful it was extended (when the series ended with issue 80 nearly ten years later, the cover said “#80 in a Four Issue Limited Series!”).

“they are the galaxy’s last hope.”

I would start reading the comic book regularly two years later. When I was in fourth grade, I disocvered that the library had comic books available for check out, and I would read comic books from the library.

“They are . . . More than Meets the Eye!”

Of course, the 1986 Movie was groundbreaking in many ways. It traumatized millions of children by kiling off their childhood hero. It introduced a more mystical element to the series that writer Simon Furman would later build on in the comic books, developing the mythology that the Transformers were created by God–known to them as Primus–to battle Unicron, a demon who had incarnated himself in a planet to try and gain divine power by consumption of the universe itself (OK, I’m Christianizing it a bit: Furmans “actual” mythology is Dualistic).

“They are . . . Robots in Disguise!”

A recent book claims that, after Star Wars, it is the most successful science fiction franchise in history.

“Beyond good . . . Beyond evil . . . Beyond your Wildest Imagination”

“Strong enough to break the bravest heart
So we have to pull together–no we can’t stay worlds apart.
To stand divided we will surely fall,
Until our darkest hour, when the Light will save us all!”

“It’s Judgement Day and now we’ve made our stand,
And for now the powers of darkness have been driven from our land.
The battle’s over, but the war has just begun,
That’s the way it will remain, till the day when All are One!”

"L’Osservatore Romano" needs to watch this video

New Bishop of Oakland, CA, speaks out on Right to Life at Installation Mass

Bishop Salvatore J. Cordileone, like most Benedict bishops, has a love for traditional liturgy. In March, he celebrated two Masses at Thomas Aquinas College: one was in the extraordinary form, and one was in the ordinary form, but in Latin, facing ad orientem.

He talked about life issues in the context of his ancestors’ immigratoin compared to modern America’s lack of hospitality, particularly to the unborn.

With an obvious reference to Catholic politicians who claim personal Catholicism but do not reflect their faith in their public life, Bishop Cordileone said: “Nothing and no one may be exempt from his rule. Whether in public or in private, whether professional or personal, no matter how intimate, we must claim him as our Lord.”
He concluded the point stating: “To exclude the rule of Christ from any aspect of our lives, no matter how intimate or personal, at best makes us ourselves the impostors; more often, in some way or another we even become accomplices of the moral and physical violence we claim to abhor.”

"Catholic" Democrat opposes the First Amendment

“Catholic” Democrat U.S. Representative Linda Sanchez has proposed a bill that would ban so-called “cyber-bullying.” According to World Net Daily:

At Wired.com, in a report labeled “Threat Level,” writer David Kravets criticized the plan to demand “up to two years in prison for those whose electronic speech is meant to ‘coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress.'”. . .
The plan is labeled the Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act, after the 13-year-old Meier, whose suicide last year reportedly was prompted by a woman who utilized the MySpace social networking site to send the teen critical messages. . . .
Wrote a contributor to the Wired forum page, “If passed, this legislation could be easily abused with the effect of criminalizing all criticism. You probably [couldn’t] even criticize the legislation itself because it would cause Sen. Sanchez emotional distress or possibly be considered a form of intimidation.”

OK, even if we look at the direct intent of the law, it’s a violation of subsidiarity. They would make it a federal crime to bully? Sure, there need to be stronger laws against bullying–at the local level. But this open-ended wording clearly suits a higher agenda.

Video Blog: Sarah Palin–the new face of Terror

Not sure how to embed this one, but watch it. It’s hilrious!
h/t to Jill Stanek.