We humans are quite good at rationalizing evil. When attempting to achieve a good end we oftentimes succumb to temptation to take a "shortcut." Evil is such a shortcut. Evil says to us that as long as we do this "quick" thing we can achieve the good end with only a little evil. Often we think this will be the only time, or it will be a "rare" thing. Evil but necessary to bring about the good. end.
But this is the insidious trap of evil. Once we establish that we can use an evil means to achieve a good end, the evil means becomes a valid (if distasteful) way of achieving a good end. Slowly but surely as we do the evil more often to achieve the end the evil becomes a legitimate path toward the end sought. Little by little the evil way transitions from "evil but necessary" to "just another way of doing things."
Eventually we must ask ourselves a question though: Why bother with a moral path to the good end? If we can achieve the good end by either means, why not do the "taboo" path? Why is it even wrong, when we achieve the same goal either way? Everyone is doing it already. Who am I to judge?
Eventually the evil used to achieve a good end is rationalized as a good in and of itself, by virtue of it achieving a good end. What was supposed to be a difficult but necessary compromise is now just another way to achieve the same goal. And if it is just another way to achieve this goal, then it is just as good as the other ways. And if it is just as good, no other means has a higher moral ground.
In the final stages the evil end becomes a "right" in and of itself. We rationalize that we should have the right to perform this evil action. The good end is all but forgotten. And not only is the evil means a "right" but that others must recognize it as such. To even comment on the possibility that such means are evil is seen as judgmental, bigoted, and intolerant.
And for dramatic irony, the evil now supplants the original good as that which society must be ordered around. All must recognize and celebrate this new "good." Not participating, supplying or even attempting to criticize the new "good" is condemned as "evil" and "wrong". Evil is now the good, and the good evil.
It is an interesting thought to see how contraception has progressed. Its initial beginnings with the infamous Lambeth conference in 1930 for "hard cases" has transformed into a "right" to enforce at gunpoint by the Obama administration. It is now the new good. And anyone not participating will be forced to.
Such a growth of evil should sober us when we think of the evil in our own lives. How often since the first time we gave into temptation have we come back to the same sins? Does that sin now rule your life? Do you struggle against it?
Evil offers nothing but more evil. It seeks to destroy all that is good to sustain itself. Do your part to exterminate evil. Do not feed it. Do good. And evil will die.
Monday, February 13, 2012
Friday, February 10, 2012
Obama the tyrant
President Obama has done what the USCCB has not been able to do for decades. The HHS mandate issued on Jan 20 has united everyone from Michael Sean Winters to Fr. John Zuhlsdorf. I mean hell, if Chris Matthews has a problem with it, you know it is bad.
The mandate effectively forces Catholic institutions such as hospitals and universities to fund contraception, abortion and sterilization procedures via the healthcare plans offered to their employees. If they do not, they are fined (I believe to the tune of $4000 per employee). So the choice left is to either violate the conscience of Catholics and the institutions they run, go out of business due to fines, or violate the law.
This is nothing less than a full frontal assault on the First Amendment and religious liberty. The whole point of the First Amendment was to protect the religious from government interference and to allow the people to live out their Faith. This INCLUDES public actions such as serving the poor and needy.
What is absolutely stupefying to me is how people seem to think that it is the Church violating separation of Church and State by resisting this law. Like Mark Shea says, that is like accusing the pistol-whipped victim during an armed robbery of a lack of charity. Such a view of freedom is not freedom but tyranny.
It is highly unlikely that this will hold up if it goes to the Supreme Court, given the trouncing that Obama received just recently. But the very fact that the "Constitutional Scholar" even tried to bring either of these up shows at the very least an appalling lack of understanding what the First Amendment actually is. So any of the lawsuits filed should come back with a victory for common sense and religious liberty.
Obama is a tyrant, pure and simple. He is ordering us to go against Natural Law and a proper understanding of the human person. He has, in his zealotry for the Culture of Death, overstepped his authority and is perpetuating the worst persecution of the Church since the Civil War.
As the bishops stated in their template letter, we cannot and we will not comply. It is only a matter of how we will resist this unjust command. Do your part to resist this evil measure. At the very least sign the petition and let your voice be heard. Even if you are not Catholic you should recognize this as an assault on all religious freedom. Because if this goes through, religious liberty in this country is dead.
The mandate effectively forces Catholic institutions such as hospitals and universities to fund contraception, abortion and sterilization procedures via the healthcare plans offered to their employees. If they do not, they are fined (I believe to the tune of $4000 per employee). So the choice left is to either violate the conscience of Catholics and the institutions they run, go out of business due to fines, or violate the law.
This is nothing less than a full frontal assault on the First Amendment and religious liberty. The whole point of the First Amendment was to protect the religious from government interference and to allow the people to live out their Faith. This INCLUDES public actions such as serving the poor and needy.
What is absolutely stupefying to me is how people seem to think that it is the Church violating separation of Church and State by resisting this law. Like Mark Shea says, that is like accusing the pistol-whipped victim during an armed robbery of a lack of charity. Such a view of freedom is not freedom but tyranny.
It is highly unlikely that this will hold up if it goes to the Supreme Court, given the trouncing that Obama received just recently. But the very fact that the "Constitutional Scholar" even tried to bring either of these up shows at the very least an appalling lack of understanding what the First Amendment actually is. So any of the lawsuits filed should come back with a victory for common sense and religious liberty.
Obama is a tyrant, pure and simple. He is ordering us to go against Natural Law and a proper understanding of the human person. He has, in his zealotry for the Culture of Death, overstepped his authority and is perpetuating the worst persecution of the Church since the Civil War.
As the bishops stated in their template letter, we cannot and we will not comply. It is only a matter of how we will resist this unjust command. Do your part to resist this evil measure. At the very least sign the petition and let your voice be heard. Even if you are not Catholic you should recognize this as an assault on all religious freedom. Because if this goes through, religious liberty in this country is dead.
Wednesday, February 8, 2012
Positives from the Susan G Komen kerfuffle
So the you-know-what hit the fan last week over the Susan G Komen foundation was reported to have cut funding to Planned Parenthood. The wailing and gnashing of teeth from the pro-abortion supporters was quite livid, and within a matter of days Komen seems to have reversed itself.
I was about to give a donation for the first time to the Komen foundation but something told me to hold back as the firestorm died down. When the reversal occurred (which to be fair is hard to tell if they did reverse, Komen's wording is quite vague and hard to pin down) I decided to put down the checkbook and see where everyone stood when the smoke cleared. It still remains to be seen what if any effect this will have. But the damage is done, and Komen's supporters and detractors are already pulling out. It remains to be seen if Komen survives this.
But I would be remiss if I did not point out some positives about this incident. I can think of a few:
1. It really is all about abortion. At the end of the day those who criticized Komen's move did so out of the idea that they were pressured by "anti-choice" ideologues. The irony of that criticism as they actually pressured Komen back into the fold has seemed to escape them. This has been helpful to illustrate to the doubters that for whatever the rhetoric of the PR machine of Planned Parenthood, at the end of the day it is about abortion, and abortion MUST be an acceptable choice. No criticism of abortion will be brooked. And offenses will be punished to the extreme.
2. Charities will think twice about joining up with Planned Parenthood. This episode will deter future charities from getting in bed with PP for two reasons. First is that the firestorm over this will make anyone think twice about partnering up with an organization that draws so much controversy. Controversy kills charities. And nothing gets more controversy than abortion. And given that abortion is PP's bread and butter it should be obvious to any charity to stand way-the-hell away from Planned Parenthood.
Second, this episode also illustrates that once you are in with Planned Parenthood, you are in for good. It is like the Mafia. You never leave the family, except with a toe tag. Charities should be well advised to note that it might not be a good idea to join up when that partnership will be an enduring one. Any attempt to secure one's own freedom will be met with a vengeance.
3. The media's leftist tilt is never more apparent when it comes to abortion. From ignoring the 400,000 stealthy ninjas in D.C. during the March for Life, the mainstream media does its best to put lipstick on the Grim Reaper of abortion. The coverage of the Komen issue has been so tilted to the point where the commentators couldn't even figure out why Komen might want to part ways with Planned Parenthood. Doubters take note, while one may argue there is diversity about other issues, when it comes to abortion, there is only one side of the debate as far as the media is concerned.
All in all incidents like these are helpful to get the lay of the land. It remains to be seen if Komen can survive. Komen now knows that Planned Parenthood has it by the throat. Such is the fate of any charity dumb enough to get involved with them.
I was about to give a donation for the first time to the Komen foundation but something told me to hold back as the firestorm died down. When the reversal occurred (which to be fair is hard to tell if they did reverse, Komen's wording is quite vague and hard to pin down) I decided to put down the checkbook and see where everyone stood when the smoke cleared. It still remains to be seen what if any effect this will have. But the damage is done, and Komen's supporters and detractors are already pulling out. It remains to be seen if Komen survives this.
But I would be remiss if I did not point out some positives about this incident. I can think of a few:
1. It really is all about abortion. At the end of the day those who criticized Komen's move did so out of the idea that they were pressured by "anti-choice" ideologues. The irony of that criticism as they actually pressured Komen back into the fold has seemed to escape them. This has been helpful to illustrate to the doubters that for whatever the rhetoric of the PR machine of Planned Parenthood, at the end of the day it is about abortion, and abortion MUST be an acceptable choice. No criticism of abortion will be brooked. And offenses will be punished to the extreme.
2. Charities will think twice about joining up with Planned Parenthood. This episode will deter future charities from getting in bed with PP for two reasons. First is that the firestorm over this will make anyone think twice about partnering up with an organization that draws so much controversy. Controversy kills charities. And nothing gets more controversy than abortion. And given that abortion is PP's bread and butter it should be obvious to any charity to stand way-the-hell away from Planned Parenthood.
Second, this episode also illustrates that once you are in with Planned Parenthood, you are in for good. It is like the Mafia. You never leave the family, except with a toe tag. Charities should be well advised to note that it might not be a good idea to join up when that partnership will be an enduring one. Any attempt to secure one's own freedom will be met with a vengeance.
3. The media's leftist tilt is never more apparent when it comes to abortion. From ignoring the 400,000 stealthy ninjas in D.C. during the March for Life, the mainstream media does its best to put lipstick on the Grim Reaper of abortion. The coverage of the Komen issue has been so tilted to the point where the commentators couldn't even figure out why Komen might want to part ways with Planned Parenthood. Doubters take note, while one may argue there is diversity about other issues, when it comes to abortion, there is only one side of the debate as far as the media is concerned.
All in all incidents like these are helpful to get the lay of the land. It remains to be seen if Komen can survive. Komen now knows that Planned Parenthood has it by the throat. Such is the fate of any charity dumb enough to get involved with them.
Monday, February 6, 2012
In honor of
Super Bowl Monday, which should be a holiday, this blog will not have a post. Apologies but come back Wednesday for our regularly scheduled programming.
Thanks,
The Management
Thanks,
The Management
Friday, February 3, 2012
Putting Politics in its place
I typically try to stay away from politics these days on this blog for a few reasons. First, I usually schedule my posts in advance. And political posts are more often than not outdated on this site before they go up. Second, politics is quite transient by nature. Most political discussions pertain to a current event or proposed laws that often are relative to culture and time. Since I typically gear my writing to more universal truths, politics is usually not the best topic for such discussions.
Finally I feel in this day and age we are too focused on politics in general. Somewhere along the line America went from the government being one of many ways American culture expressed itself into the de facto method of expressing one's views. Is it the growth of the government, changing views on society, the regression of other modes of expression (arts, religion, social gatherings)? I think that they all play a part.
I would however submit that the reason why politics is so paramount in today's life is the rejection of universal truth. All of the expressions of a healthy society and culture are ordered on a particular purpose, to learn and express the truth in a variety of different ways. Arts, literature, social commentary, religion, and a host of other modes all are oriented toward discovering those truths that speak to all mankind.
The rejection of universal truth however undermines this purpose obviously. By rejecting truth itself and reducing principles to mere "beliefs" we have severed the very reasons for these modes of expression. Art no longer reveals beauty. Literature is forgotten. Social commentary dissipates into meaninglessness. Religion is outright rejected.
Truth reduced into mere "belief" means that any person can believe anything that they "want." By "want" I mean truth is reduced to whatever makes a person comfortable. It does not matter if it is actually correct. As long as my beliefs make me comfortable and "happy" in the shallowest sense, then that is good enough.
No society can live like this however. A culture, a people, a society professes truths about men and how they should relate. Murder is wrong, regardless if the serial killer wants to believe otherwise. At some point in order to have a society, some truths must be preserved, asserted, and enforced.
Enter the modern state. Unleashed from any restraint of universal truth the state will seek to enforce its own whims. An individual whose beliefs are transient is powerless in the face of naked force for two reasons. First, by rejecting universal truth the individual has nothing to appeal to. Second, the individual's own beliefs are one of convenience. By making the situation more inconvenient, the reason to hold onto the belief evaporates at the business end of a gun.
A people that rejects universal truth is prostrate in front of a modern secular state. Force unrestrained by conviction is a club to keep the populace in line. And a people without truth has no convictions to resist such force with. The dictatorship of relativism is in full swing.
In order to put the state back in its proper function we must rediscover the notion of universal truth. But in order to that we must reeducate ourselves that there are some truths that bind all men. That no power, no opinion, no desire, can invalidate. This requires discipline and sacrifice, two words our modern society has forgotten.
Yet it must happen for Western society to survive. Because there is a word for unrestrained state power that recognizes neither universal truths nor limits on its own influence. Tyranny.
Update: I'd like to thank Mark Shea for his shout out for this blog and my work on IGNITUM TODAY. Also, more than a few of you are visiting this from IGNITUM TODAY. Welcome to all new visitors!
Finally I feel in this day and age we are too focused on politics in general. Somewhere along the line America went from the government being one of many ways American culture expressed itself into the de facto method of expressing one's views. Is it the growth of the government, changing views on society, the regression of other modes of expression (arts, religion, social gatherings)? I think that they all play a part.
I would however submit that the reason why politics is so paramount in today's life is the rejection of universal truth. All of the expressions of a healthy society and culture are ordered on a particular purpose, to learn and express the truth in a variety of different ways. Arts, literature, social commentary, religion, and a host of other modes all are oriented toward discovering those truths that speak to all mankind.
The rejection of universal truth however undermines this purpose obviously. By rejecting truth itself and reducing principles to mere "beliefs" we have severed the very reasons for these modes of expression. Art no longer reveals beauty. Literature is forgotten. Social commentary dissipates into meaninglessness. Religion is outright rejected.
Truth reduced into mere "belief" means that any person can believe anything that they "want." By "want" I mean truth is reduced to whatever makes a person comfortable. It does not matter if it is actually correct. As long as my beliefs make me comfortable and "happy" in the shallowest sense, then that is good enough.
No society can live like this however. A culture, a people, a society professes truths about men and how they should relate. Murder is wrong, regardless if the serial killer wants to believe otherwise. At some point in order to have a society, some truths must be preserved, asserted, and enforced.
Enter the modern state. Unleashed from any restraint of universal truth the state will seek to enforce its own whims. An individual whose beliefs are transient is powerless in the face of naked force for two reasons. First, by rejecting universal truth the individual has nothing to appeal to. Second, the individual's own beliefs are one of convenience. By making the situation more inconvenient, the reason to hold onto the belief evaporates at the business end of a gun.
A people that rejects universal truth is prostrate in front of a modern secular state. Force unrestrained by conviction is a club to keep the populace in line. And a people without truth has no convictions to resist such force with. The dictatorship of relativism is in full swing.
In order to put the state back in its proper function we must rediscover the notion of universal truth. But in order to that we must reeducate ourselves that there are some truths that bind all men. That no power, no opinion, no desire, can invalidate. This requires discipline and sacrifice, two words our modern society has forgotten.
Yet it must happen for Western society to survive. Because there is a word for unrestrained state power that recognizes neither universal truths nor limits on its own influence. Tyranny.
Update: I'd like to thank Mark Shea for his shout out for this blog and my work on IGNITUM TODAY. Also, more than a few of you are visiting this from IGNITUM TODAY. Welcome to all new visitors!
Thursday, February 2, 2012
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
It's that time again
My piece for IGNITUM TODAY will go up on Thursday, so no post today. Check back here on Thursday for the piece or go to IGNITUM TODAY right now and read many other articles by fine writers. You should be doing this anyway.
Thanks,
The Management
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)