Archive for the ‘Family’ Category

The Obama Baby (ka)Boom

Posted: November 22, 2008 by cacoop in Abortion, Dems, Family, Feminism, Media, Obama, Politics


by cacoop

Let’s get it on!

Conventional wisdom tells us that monumental and sometimes cataclysmic events lead to a resultant boom in population.  Apparently, whenever something dramatic takes place in the public square, pants come off and men and women start knocking boots.  I am told that the action takes shape from one of two motives: (more…)

Congratulations, California... You're Gay!

Congratulations, California... You're Gay!

by cacoop


Wow… This is fun! 

At least the economy is rebounding.


But the terrorists have given up, right?

but… but…

We sure have put those commies in their place

OK… but those are the Chinese and they’ve always been a little unpredictable…

The Ruskies are keeping quiet.

Heeeeey, wait a second, here…

Thank you Captain Obvious…

Posted: November 13, 2008 by cacoop in Abortion, Family, Politics, Religion
Copyright 2008 -

Copyright 2008 -

by cacoop

The Esteemable Bishop DiMarzio is scratching his head over why Catholics voted for Obama 54% to 46%.

DiMarzio said many Catholics misinterpreted or misused “Faithful Citizenship.”

Wow!  Really???!  You think.  Why might that be?

“We spoke in very clear but difficult language about moral choices,” said DiMarzio.

Uh… No.  You did not.  You, Dear Bishop, purposefully insinuated that John McCain was a racist by slyly juxtopostioning abortion and racism in the Faithful Citizenship Video (see 6:58 in video in the post below.)  And by equivocating abortion to racism you implied that this alledged bigotry was reason enough to pull the lever for Obama.

Well done.

You stay classy, Lansing…

Posted: November 13, 2008 by cacoop in Family, Gay Rights, Politics, Religion, Uncategorized


by cacoop

“Tolerance” 1 – Christianity 0


by cacoop

Welcome back USCCB.

One question though…  Where in the heck were you during the campaign???  With the exception of a few, brave knights in Christ’s army such as Bishops Chaput, Martino and the like, the best we got from your group in 2008 b.b. (Before Barack) was the ambiguous, relativist, steaming pot of mushy feel good crap called Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship. (Warning – 5MB document coming your way). 

I will save you the frustration of wading through the complete 42 pages and take you to the salient part.  The bishops write:

The first is a moral equivalence that makes no ethical distinctions between different kinds of issues involving human life and dignity. The direct and intentional destruction of innocent human life from the moment of conception until natural death is always wrong and is not just one issue among many. It must always be opposed. 

Sounds good, huh?  Unfortunately they don’t stop there…

The second is the misuse of these necessary moral distinctions as a way of dismissing or ignoring other serious threats to human life and dignity. Racism and other unjust discrimination, the use of the death penalty, resorting to unjust war, the use of torture, war crimes, the failure to respond to those who are suffering from hunger or a lack of health care, or an unjust immigration policy are all serious moral issues that challenge our consciences and require us to act. These are not optional concerns which can be dismissed. Catholics are urged to seriously consider Church teaching on these issues. Although choices about how best to respond to these and other compelling threats to human life and dignity are matters for principled debate and decision, this does not make them optional concerns or permit Catholics to dismiss or ignore Church teaching on these important issues.

What’s the matter?  Why do I have my panties in a wad?  Well, glad you asked…

  1. The bishops say abortion and euthanasia must “always be opposed”, implying that there is to be no compromise on those issues.  Then they go on to list a whole litany of other issues that they equivocate as being equally important.
  2. They then, through juxtaposition of life issues with social justice issues, say (and I paraphrase), “Barack Obama may be pro-choice, but John McCain is a racist, warmongering, war criminal executioner who tortures those who suffer from hunger, lack of health care and an unjust immigration policy… Take your pick.”
  3. Let’s, for the sake of argument, grant the insinuation that John McCain is all of these things and more (I heard that he also likes to dress up in Cindy’s negligee whilst goose-stomping on little bunnies’ heads all while screaming, “Ja Vol” at the top of his lungs.)  So what?  There is no equivalency to abortion.  None.  Not any.  What-So-Ever.  If you are killed in the womb, you have absolutely no opportunity to be oppressed, repressed, depressed…  Abortion trumps all when it comes to social justice issues, not only qualitatively, but quantitatively.
  4. Besides is the any clearer example of racism in action than Abortion?  Why are all of the Planned Parenthoods in the hood?  The poorest, blackest, brownest and most run down parts of our cities?  One word… Eugenics.
  5. If you say, “But Emperor Barackus has pledged to reduce abortions, and I believe he is a kind and just ruler that will deliver on his promises.”, I implore you to read my post below.
  6. You may retort, “Hey Chris, you are overreacting.  The bishops meant to promote life through this campaign.”  Check out this companion piece to the FCFFC document:

Skip ahead to 6:58 where Bishop DiMarzio of the Diocese of Brooklyn, once again reiterates that “Barack Obama is misled on the abortion issue, but John McCain is the Grand Knight of the Sedona Chapter of the KKK” (OK… I paraphrased again).

Do not mistake me.  I am in no way endorsing any of the evils that the bishops list off.  I am simply stating that there was only one issue where there was a clear choice between candidates and clear choice between right and wrong.  Abortion should have defined the Catholic conscience this election and the bishops should have stood up against it.


by cacoop

Mr. Kmiec,

You were quite eloquent in your defense of Candidate Obama (now our Messiah-Elect) and adamant that his worldview would somehow rise above partisan politics and elevate the discourse to one where all views were acknowledged and given due consideration.  In your endorsement of the “One” you wrote:

 As a Republican and as a Catholic, I believe life begins at conception, and it is important for every life to be given sustenance and encouragement. As a Republican, I strongly believe that the Supreme Court of the United States must be fully dedicated to the rule of law and to the employ of a consistent method of interpretation that keeps the court within its limited judicial role. As a Republican, I believe problems are best resolved closest to their source and that we should never arrogate to a higher level of government that which can be more effectively and efficiently resolved below. As a Republican and a constitutional lawyer, I believe religious freedom does not mean religious separation or mindless exclusion from the public square.

In various ways, Sen. Barack Obama and I may disagree on aspects of these important fundamentals, but I am convinced, based upon his public pronouncements and his personal writing, that on each of these questions he is not closed to understanding opposing points of view and, as best as it is humanly possible, he will respect and accommodate them. 

So I ask you now… How is that working out for you?  This man, whom you deem to be “a person of integrity, intelligence, and genuine good will” has, through his minions (might I add, virulent partisan democrats Rahm Emmanuel and John Podesta – so much bipartisanship), declared that his first actions will be to rescind President Bush’s Executive Orders related to restrictions on ESCR and foreign aid to organizations that counsel women about the availability of abortion.  Full details here.

Oh wait… my bad… here is someone who’s views Barry O. is apparently “accommodating“:


Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America said her organization had been communicating with Obama’s transition staff almost daily. “We expect to see a real change,” the Washington Post reports.

Good thing the price of silver is on the rise.  Looks like you got 30 pieces coming your way.


Posted: November 11, 2008 by cacoop in Family, Gay Rights, Miscellaneous, Politics, Religion

by cacoop

California already grants same sex couples all of the rights, privileges and responsibilities as married couples.  See California Family Code Section 297.5.  So the opposition to Proposition 8 is obviously not a human rights issue. 

Why must there be a redefinition of marriage?  What does that buy the same sex couples of the world?  Society has already normalized homosexuality.  To question its normalcy is to be labeled a bigot.  The only thing I can come up with is the compulsion to indoctrinate.

The voters have spoken.  TWICE!  Ironically the same voters that overwhelmingly voted for Barack Obama inordinately supported Proposition 8 (Blacks and Hispanics at a rate of almost 3 to 1 voted for Proposition 8 whereas Whites were almost exactly evenly divided).

  • 52% – 48% in the Presidential Election = Landslide
  • 52% – 48% in favor of Proposition 8 = Injustice of the magnitude that you must accost little old ladies.

You gotta love the “Hate from both sides” comment by the talking head at the very end.  What a tool. 

Lord have mercy.

H/T Ace.