Euthanasia Legalized in Montana

Today is Wednesday, December 10, 2006. On Friday, December 5, the state of Montana, or rather an activist judge in Montana, ruled that euthanasia is legal and protected by the state constitution. The news didn't come out in the AP until Saturday. I did not see it on the news until today. That this very troubling news has slipped under the radar is a frightening testament to our general moral anesthesia. You may not believe it but this is the beginning of what I guarantee will be a vast tide, a Satanic assault, against the dignity of life and the moral teaching of the Church as has been gay "marriage" and abortion.

Montana legalizes Euthanasia

The eugenic tide which began with birth control, has brought us abortion, and is now moving towards euthanasia is here. Whether we resist it and continue to affirm the dignity of all human life will be the moral test of our civilization, and one which will destroy us if we should say no. We can not take up the opinion that to kill a weak person who requests it is acceptable. We can not accept the lie that we should be allowed to murder those who are smaller than us, who are voiceless, who are weak, who are ill, those who most demand our love and care! For those who sympathize with this heinous crime, do not be so confident in thinking that it will not catch up to you. History is doomed to repeat itself.

"It is necessary to state firmly once more that nothing and no one can in any way permit the killing of an innocent human being, whether a fetus or an embryo, an infant or an adult, an old person or one suffering from an incurable disease or a person who is dying. Furthermore, no one is permitted to ask for this act of killing, either for himself or herself or for another person entrusted to his or her care, nor can he or she consent to it, either explicitly or implicitly nor can any authority legitimately recommend or permit such an action. For it is a question of the violation of the divine law, an offense against the dignity of the human person, a crime against life and an attack on humanity." Vatican Declaration on Euthanasia, 1980.

"Whatever its motives and means, direct euthanasia consists of putting an end to the lives of handicapped, sick, or dying persons. It is morally unacceptable. Thus an act or omission which, of itself or by intention, causes death in order to terminate pain constitutes a murder gravely contrary to the dignity of the human person and to respect due to the living God, his Creator. The error of judgement into which one can fall in good faith does not change the nature of this murderous act, which must always be forbidden and excluded." cf #2277.

"Discontinuing medical procedures that are burdensome, dangerous, extraordinary, or disproportionate to the expected outcome can be legitimate; it is the refusal of 'over zealous' treatment. Here one does not will to cause death; one's inability to impede it is merely accepted. The decisions should be made by the patient if he is competent and able or, if not, by those legally entitled to act for the patient whose reasonable will and legitimate interests must always be respected." Ibid. #2278.

"Even if death is considered imminent, the care ordinarily owed to a sick person cannot legitimately be interrupted. The use of analgesics to alleviate the suffering of the dying, even at the risk of shortening his days, can be morally in conformity to human dignity if death is not willed, as an end to a means, but only foreseen and tolerated as inevitable. Palliative care constitutes a privileged form of disinterested charity. For this reason it must be encouraged." Ibid. #2279.

The Armies of Perversion March!

Anyone who thinks Christianity is not a persecuted religion only has to watch this video to see one of the most despicable and scandalous acts that I have ever seen- activist homosexual perverts cursing at an elderly woman, tearing away her Cross, and trampling it underfoot! Where are the police? Where is our government? Is this the mark of a civilized nation where freedom of speech is defended?

The people of California have spoken for the second time. Prior to the California Supreme Court justices telling the voters to take a walk, the voters voted to uphold the traditional definition of marriage as between one man and one woman. Responding to the .01% of the population represented by the sodomite fringe, four treacherous justices ruled that the democratic vote was worth nothing and then gave gays and lesbians the "right" to legally sodomize. Now, the people spoke again and once again the dictatorial homosexual mafia is telling them to drop dead. Where is the goverment to disperse the mobs and restore our democracy? Nowhere!

We're witnessing not just the most essential functional unit of civilized society being torn to shreds but our very faith spit upon by radical hedonists who would stop at nothing to gain the legal right to do whatsoever they please. When will the rule of law be reestablished? When will a high-level political figure stand defiantly in defense of our most sacred beliefs and salvage our crumbling civilization? When?

2008 Presidential Election: Time for Foreboding

The Lord be praised- our long national squabble will be over within hours. What is the American obsession with such a painfully long election cycle? It is often heard that our elections last months on end because we are choosing the holder of the most powerful office in the world. Or maybe it is a period in which we engage in national soul-searching?

If in the end I were to learn nothing in this election save one tidbit of wisdom, it would be this: mankind is, without the slightest doubt, broken and corrupted to the core by sin. And yet, it is because of the sting of sin that we can experience God's purest love and obtain that courage by which we make His will be done. No one is free from this sting, no less in this most pivotal election.

I have seen the most despotic and dictatorial elements of our increasingly impatient, desperate, and reactionary society work with all of their strength to crush the voice of the minority, to silence the teachings of the Church, and to muzzle and ridicule those who disagree. While both sides of the political spectrum are guilt of this, no side is more to blame than the Left.

Dare to love your country, and you are called a backwards patriot.
Dare to love your God, and you are a zealot, a fool, an unintelligent oaf.
Dare to love your family, and you are just an old-fashioned relic of an oppressive past fading away.
Dare to stand up for the innocent, the unborn, and you are cursed, your efforts mocked, your signs and literature torn down and stolen, your name smeared!
Dare to stand up for your traditions and beliefs, and you are dismissed as an uneducated conservative.
Dare to work for your living, to be independent, to try to make your way in the world, and you are selfish!

We're living in a dictatorship! We don't need to wait for the next president to be chosen! Our beautiful country is being murdered by radical elements who hate it! Mark my words: the days are on the horizon where criticizing another element of society or the government will bring fines or other punishment. Where you will be forced to fund abortions, euthanasia, and social programs that encourage slavery through dependence with your tax dollars. Achievement will be frowned upon and even discouraged. Religion and traditional symbols of our Christian roots will be removed from public spaces with a degree of radicalism unmatched even by the Europeans. Independent thinking will be branded as bigotry, discrimination, backwardness, and ignorance and will be swiftly repressed by the brainwashed elements. Defending your nation and its sovereignty from incursions and enemies will be seen as isolationist and insular, vestiges of a primitive, medieval closedness. Private and church charities will be taxed or regulated to the point that the poor will have nowhere to turn but the government, which they will be forced support for their livelihood and will therefore never dare to question.

The list goes on and on! If we do not wake up and speak out against the despots and dictators in our midst, then there is no greater proof that these things will happen than the fact that have happened and are happening as we speak. We have seen this in our very own country, our neighborhoods, abroad, and right here in this town where I live!

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin

Catholic Voters: The Moral Basis of Our Vote - PART ONE

The 2008 Presidential Election is fast upon us and I am choosing to take some time to address a very contentious topic that has been circulating, that of supposed single-issue politics on the part of pro-lifers, particularly many of my Catholic pro-life friends (which is a redundancy; all real Catholics are pro-life). We can take as axiomatic that nobody should vote for a pro-abortion/”right-to-choose”/pro-choice politician at all, least of all a CATHOLIC. I am actually not arguing for that point- it is crystal clear already. I am going to argue that there are many other issues, not as grave as the abortion one, that nonetheless must command a Catholic’s attention. While issues pertinent to life must be the primary reason motivating our vote, our moral framework does not exclude other important areas. I’ll address them by the catchwords by which we often hear about them in the news.

I’ll be referring heavily to Canon Francis Ripley’s definitive book, This is the Faith. This will be written in installments.

1) PRIVATE PROPERTY AND SOCIALISM

The Church has held, since time immemorial, the right to private property as essential for the good-functioning of society. As Moses states in Deuteronomy 19:14:

Thou shalt not take nor remove thy neighbour's landmark, which thy predecessors have set in thy possession, which the Lord thy God will give thee in the land that thou shalt receive to possess.

Because we are endowed with an intellect and free will, by our nature we must have private property by which to manifest these capacities and to achieve the work for which God has created us. We cannot work land unless we have a plot that is ours. And if it is not ours and we work on it, we are expected to receive a wage which is in itself a form of private property which can be converted into other things like food, land, an investment, etc. This too is a natural right, viz., to be able to convert our labor for a wage and vice versa.

So, enter socialism, which by its pure definition denies the right to private ownership of productive goods. Socialism to some minor degree exists everywhere. It could be argued that the tax system in its most fundamental form is a form of socialism in that the resources of the many (taxes) are pooled into a common, social depository which is the federal government. It then uses that money as it sees fit for the social good, as outlined in the US Constitution, primarily through national defense and the regulation of commerce. We must agree that, fundamentally, the system of taxation is a form of theft from the populace, but that a majority of people would agree that it is morally imperative for all to see after the means of their defense and the safeguarding of the conditions necessary for the economic welfare, i.e., unfettered commerce. These are necessities which we most certainly agree upon as vital and common to all.

And so arrive at our contemporary period where we often hear about such ideas as socialized medicine, welfare, affirmative action, government bailouts, and the like. Of recent interest is the government bailout of Wall Street which, perhaps surprisingly, warranted the ire of the American people. What was this bailout? Once we lift the political baggage, it is clear that the government took money that was given to it by the people for their good and given to corporations the owners of which abused their rights to private property with excessive risk-taking and ultimately menaced the whole economy. So who is to pay? By the simple premise of personal accountability they, along with their companies, must bear the responsibility for their actions. However, the government saw it more fit to take taxpayer money entrusted to it and to give it over to save these private property-owners. This is, by definition, socialism- more specifically, the privatization of profit and the socialization of losses. This goes against the personal accountability which forms the entire backbone for our moral fabric as Catholics. We must account for our own sins and nothing that anyone else save the Lord does can absolve us of this culpability.

Do you therefore take courage, and let not your hands be weakened: for there shall be a reward for your work. (2 Chronicles 15:7)

Logically, if we do not work, we will not be rewarded. Now, even if we work hard and reap fewer benefits than may be desired due to the misfortunes that are inevitably a part of life, the government can not be called upon to alleviate the difficult conditions which are a natural part of life. Firstly, these can be minimized to a degree but to eliminate them altogether is impossible. Such attempts have led to the utopian social projects which have been historically to blame for great suffering. Secondly, the belief that government can alleviate the difficult conditions of life imbues government with those qualities which can only be ascribed to God and to our Faith, and thus lead to the sort of atheistic and socialist ideologies which have so ravaged Europe’s moral fabric along with more extreme cases like North Korea, Cuba, and the Soviet Union. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states in paragraph 2425: “The Church has rejected the totalitarian and atheistic ideologies associated in modern times with ‘communism’ or ‘socialism’”.

History, particularly the history of the 20^th century, has shown that government promises to alleviate those vicissitudes which have always been a natural part of our existence have always transpired as: 1) a bold promise for change, 2) an attempt at a sweeping change with occasional success virtually always ending in, 3) great expectations (often met with disappointment) among the people vis-a-vis the government due to their desire for further change. The government may either be toppled, capitulate, or blame their failures or inadequacies on certain elements of the population or even other political parties as a pretext to continue its social projects. Often we hear of the "need" to press on towards the future. A fitting example from recent history is the Common Agricultural Policy of the European Union. In its attempt to unify the nations of Europe economically, the EU has sought to focus its energy on agricultural policy through a system of intensive subsidization. While ambitious and promising in the beginning, this socialist system has led to an exacerbation of the inequalities which were the original target. While the wealthier countries of the EU such as France, Germany, and Belgium enjoy considerable prosperity and cheaper food prices, less well-off countries like Italy and Greece suffer from stagnated development, artificially high food prices, and even major environmental problems. Subsidization has killed production.

Thus, as Catholics determined to work for a greater justice in the world, we must ask if it is better to allow our resources to be taken from us for the “common good” or if perhaps we ourselves are better stewards of these resources. As rightly-guided faithful, we would know better where our resources will be deposited in a moral sense than the government, which most often does not share our cherished beliefs. It is upon private property in the expanded sense of our controlling these resources personally that the Church has always placed its moral weight and confident approbation.

Pope Leo XIII's Encyclical Quod Apostolici Muneris: On Socialism