Blog Archives

My parents’ book is better (2/8/2005)

February is the NMF’s “Have a Heart for Marfan” month (don’t ask me why everybody has to choose February as their awareness month; the fact that it’s heart disease month would lead me to put Marfan someplace else, anyway). . . .
So the NMF has added an online shopping cart system to their website. Previously, to order materials, you had to just print out the form or call.
In 1984, my parents wrote a book called How John Was Unique, a children’s story to help springboard families’ discussions of the hard facts of Marfan syndrome: the pros and the cons, etc. It was published by the NMF (US) as a coloring book, both to save money and to make it more interactive.
Well, somewhere along the line, the Canadian Marfan Foundation as put out a book called A Very Special Mouse.
Last week, among other items, I ordered a copy of the mouse book and “my book” (also 2 t-shirts and some informational materials to give to people).
They came on Saturday, and, without bias, I can say that my parents’ book is much better.
The mouse book basically says, “There once was a family of mice. One mouse was taller and slower than his brothers and sisters. He couldn’t see very well, either. One day he went to the doctor, and the doctor said he had something called Marfan syndrome. That’s why he was so tired all the time, so tall and he had to wear glasses. We’ll tell you more when you’re older.”
It’s almost like they wanted an alternative to my parents’ book for those parents who like to stick their heads in the sand.

Why not talk to your kids honestly and openly. My parents tell the story of when I was something like 5 or 6 and I demanded total honesty about my health issues, because “It’s my life.”

So I sat down with my little hyperactive 3-year-old and tried to read her the book. She was about as impressed as possible, for a child of the computer and video camera era, that there was this little book written by Nana & Papa about daddy, and that the drawing of the boy in the book was daddy.
But when I got to the core parts, about the hospitals and tests and glasses and such, I was able to say, “Remember when you had this test done?”
And she said, “Yeah.”
And I said, “Well, this is about when I had it done when I was little.”
“Oh!” she said with a smile.

Now, if only I could get her to wear her glasses. . . . .

Advertisements

Invitation to Abortionists Day

Fr. Pavone preached on EWTN this morning, and talked about how tomorrow, March 10, is “Abortionist Appreciation Day.” So the pro-lifers have declared March 9, “Invitation to Abortionists Day.”

Today, please pray for the conversions of abortionists and clinic workers. And if you happen to have any personal contact with them, please invite them to repent and experience Christ’s love.

I read about this in _Celebrate Life_

I used this link because it’s the best commentary I’ve read yet. Kirsten Johnson, a 26-year-old with brain damage, was taken to court by her legal guardian, her aunt Vera Howse, to order her sterilization because, as a mentally challenged person, she allegedly is incapable of caring for children.

That may be so, but let’s look at the following statement from a University of Chicago professor:

The article was about Kirsten Johnson, 26, who suffered a brain injury years ago
and today requires help with basic tasks. She is sexually active

If she only has the “cognitive abilities of a pre-teen,” then why is she sexually active? It’s funny. She’s allegedly incapable of the adult decision of having children, but she’s allowed to make the adult decision of having sexual intercourse?

How about taking her to court to force her to remain chaste? But *that* would be moral outrage to liberals. Then they’d be crying “individual rights.” Uh-huh. . . .

Now, in addition to the usual problems with birth control, sterilization violates the principle of bodily integration. The Church teaches that the body of an “innocent person” should never be altered except for medical necessity (many of us interpret this to include ear piercing, and it definitely includes circumcision).
The “innocent person” qualifier leaves room for corporal punishment of criminals, and that would seem to include sterilization under certain circumstances.

However, Kirsten Johnson is not a criminal. There is a clear alternative, stated above. And as “Minivan Mom,” whose post I linked in the title, points out, this just sets precedent for anyone deemed “incompetent” to care for a child, whether due to mental or physical disability.

Harold Pollack, the sociology professor above, throws out the following Culture of Death bugaboo:

“Would you stand ready to raise that child in the likely event that she proves unable? “
Short answer? Yes.

One of my favorite priests, Fr. Deusterhaus (can’t recall his first name; last I heard, he was active duty in Iraq), gave a homily on this very topic once. He said, “I don’t know a single family in this parish [it was a very conservative parish] who wouldn’t love to adopt a child that would otherwise be aborted. And I know every one of those families would very easily qualify for adoption, except maybe a couple families whose fathers work for parts of the government that don’t exist. . . .”

This is one of those issues that liberals like to claim are “complicated” and “heart-wrenching” as they goose-step along in their agenda of forced eugenics.

But it’s really much more simple. A person with the cognitive abilities of a child should not be having sex. Anyone having intercourse with such a person is no better than a pedophile.

The big picture, or, "Aslan is on the move."

Since the events of Rue de Bac, Lourdes and La Salette in the early 19th Century, and Fatima in the 20th, there has been great attention to reported Marian apparitions, often with apocalyptic messages. As a friend of mine points out, “the greatest lie is 99% truth.” Certainly, Satan can masquerade as an “angel of light,” but I wonder if he doesn’t do this in part to clue us in on his own plans?
_The Thunder of Justice_ by Ted and Maureen Flynn sat on my shelf for several years. I finally read it in 2002, finding many references that were quite timely in the light of 9/11 and the sex abuse scandals. One story involved a reputed locutionary who lived in New England in the early 1980s and was supposedly endorsed by Cardinal O’Connor, among others. She predicted that “World War III” would be started by 2 Arab leaders, after the year 2000. One Arab leader wearing a turban (Osama?) would attack NYC with “two missiles.” That would start one war. Another war would be started by an Arab leader in a beret (Saddam?), leading into WWIII.

Pope Leo XIII famously predicted that God had given the Devil 100 years to try and destroy the Church, composing the St. Michael Prayer to aid the faithful in one of the greatest spiritual battles in history. Popes Paul VI and John Paul II, among others, have stated that the Church is in one of its greatest spiritual battles of all times.

When the notorious “Third Secret of Fatima” was finally revealed, it bore a remarkable resemblance to the prophecy of St. John Bosco regarding the Ship and the Two Pillars.

The reported apparitions of Garbandal, Spain, in the 1960s said that there would only be three more Popes in “these times” (meaning the the time of trial for the Church), making JPII the last pope of “these times.”
After his death, the apparition predicted, the world would enter a time of chastisements.

Meanwhile, as Our Lady of Fatima made note of Lucia’s being around to see things fulfilled, and as Sr. Lucia lived to such a ripe old age, many of us expected her death to be significant in world affairs.

As it happened, in the past year, both Sr. Lucia and Pope John Paul II went to their eternal rewards within a short time of each other.
John Paul was succeeded by Joseph Ratzinger, Benedict XVI, whose papacy has been the hope and prayer of many of us for many years. More importantly, some have made striking comparisons to Benedict’s election and the aforementioned vision of Don Bosco.

Recently, even Peggy Noonan has suggested that our society is doomed for collapse.

The Culture Wars have “polarized” the US to a point not seen perhaps since the 1850s. The devastation of 9/11 has been overshadowed by the devastation of Katrina and Rita. Billy Graham once said that God would owe an apology to Soddom and Gommorah if He didn’t do something to certain American cities. Of course, Jesus says that the Judgement is far greater on those who are given faith than it would be on even Soddom or Gommorah. Jerusalem, says the NT, is far worse than Rome or Babylon.
Thus, it is the “Catholic” city of New Orleans that gets devastated in the worst disaster of US history.

Now Paris, the city of riots, is burning in uprisings by Muslim immigrants, and those uprisings are spreading throughout Europe.

In C. S. Lewis for the Third Millennium, Peter Kreeft says that postmodern society is at least as bad as Ancient Rome, and Rome was bad enough to warrant the coming of the Messiah.

Laura Ingraham’s Cancer and the Left’s "Compassion"

Laura Ingraham, of whom I’ve been a fan since 1996, has breast cancer. Laura is one of those people who, when I first heard her as a regular guest on CSPAN, I assumed she was Catholic. . . . She has always seemed to be a stronger voice on pro-life issues than most other mainstream conservative commentators. Well, her commentary on the Pope’s election had Mary & me hooting, and Mary asked, “Is she Catholic?” I said, “I don’t think so.” Turns out, she converted ca. 2003–she’s a Fr. McCloskey convert. . . . One thing that fascinates me is the number of conservative political thinkers who convert to Catholicism, from Orestes Brownson to Russell Kirk to the hoarde of converts that William F. Buckley has won through _National Review_.
You don’t hear too much of that on the Left. . . . I still question Jane Fonda’s reputed conversion to Christianity.
Anyway, this has created a side-controversy regarding the Left’s attitude. The hate-mongers on the Left are basically saying she deserves it, that it’s probably “caused by all that hate she carries”, and even tying in the ABC link, claiming it’s some kind of reverse justice against someone who promotes teh “lie” that abortion is linked to breast cancer.

Obviously, there are plenty of causes of breast cancer, just as there are more causses of lung cancer than just smoking. It is disgusting how the establishment says “We don’t know why breast cancer has risen over the past few decades,” then deny the numerous studies that show the links between abortion, contraception and breast cancer.
One poster on the Democrat Underground site even referred to the studies taht say breastfeeding decreases the risk of breast cancer–“Did she refuse to breastfeed?” asks this ignorant person, obviously unaware that Miss Ingraham is a miss.
Of course, she is a conservative woman, and the Left always accuses prominent conservative women of being whores. . . .

Anyway, it’s yet another example of the Compassion of the Left. The great, daunted “COMPASSION” of the Left, touted by Elizabeth Edwards in her calls that her allies have compassion for Laura Ingraham, even while disagreeing with her wrong views, is the #1 reason I’m conservative.

Let’s see the examples in recent memory:
1. If you disagree with them, politically, they wish you would die rather than express that disagreement.
2. Compassion for the Poor Nations of the World means killing them off with abortion and contraception. The Popes are to blame for poverty in the Third World, because they preach against birth control, while the birth controlled Liberals in the US enjoy their Big screen TVs, XBoxes and expensive cars made by former Axis powers.
3. Compassion for the sick and suffering means killing them.
4. Compassion for women in difficult pregnancies (what pregnancies aren’t difficult?) means killing their babies.

Lefties say, “Take your kids to see _Fahrenheit 9/11_; the violence is necessary to drive home the horrors of the war. But _The Passion of the Christ_, now that is a disgusting, voyeuristic attempt to arouse feelings of anti-Semitic violence.”
Let’s see. . . . Which movie has elicited more hatred and violence among its viewers in the past year???