For those who are salivating at the chance to use the Murder of George Tiller to attack Christians or defend the killer, let me quote the relevant passage from the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
II. Good Acts and Evil Acts
1755 A morally good act requires the goodness of the object, of the end, and of the circumstances together. An evil end corrupts the action, even if the object is good in itself (such as praying and fasting “in order to be seen by men”).
The object of the choice can by itself vitiate an act in its entirety. There are some concrete acts – such as fornication – that it is always wrong to choose, because choosing them entails a disorder of the will, that is, a moral evil.
1756 It is therefore an error to judge the morality of human acts by considering only the intention that inspires them or the circumstances (environment, social pressure, duress or emergency, etc.) which supply their context. There are acts which, in and of themselves, independently of circumstances and intentions, are always gravely illicit by reason of their object; such as blasphemy and perjury, murder and adultery. One may not do evil so that good may result from it. (emphasis mine)
As the passage above shows, the church never defends such an act (sorry lefties), nor can a believing Catholic attempt to defend it. The other McCain is exactly right on this. It is true that abortion is akin to murder but it is even more true that murder is akin to murder. Justifying it is no different than Groucho’s telling Mrs. Claypool that he was with another woman because she reminded him of her.
It reminds one of the fetus isn’t human nonsense, lets avoid such stuff altogether. It’s simply doubletalk without the greasepaint mustache.
…to blog about it till now but Jim Blazsik writes the definite word on the subject:
But in the end, whatever Mancow’s intent or conclusion – he actually proved that waterboarding ISN’T torture. Why? Think about it. Would Mancow submit himself to this procedure if there was any chance that his body would be permanently damaged? What if he knew that after the experience he would only have one eye, 8 fingers, his back beaten by bamboo, his toes smashed by a hammer, select parts of his body electrocuted, or punched repeatedly until his nose was fixed on a different part of his face?
Would Marine Sgt. Klay South waterboard Mancow if he knew he was going to hurt the guy? When the CIA used waterboarding (with only three terrorists), a doctor was always required to be present. If it is torture, where was the doctor?
So my message to the idiot who thought that shooting down late term abortionist George Tiller was a good thing….
This is simply another evil act that deserves the full punishment of law. This is not a “yes but” situation and any person who like myself considers abortion murder needs to publicly state this without any equivocation.
In moral terms it is just as mortal a sin and carries the same punishment as the abortions performed.
The Goode family is absolutely hilarious, much better than An American Carol. Even funnier has been some of the reviews particularly since places like NPR don’t get the joke. Rusty Shackelford elaborates in comments at NPR:
After watching the first episode – at least when I wasn’t too busy laughing out loud – I now find out I was wrong. It wasn’t funny after all. Who knew? I sure am glad there’s someone out there who cares enough to help me get my mind right, or perhaps more appropriately, left.
At least the review is unintentionally amusing in that its tone serves to reinforce the “greenie” stereotype as simultaneously self-deprecating and unable to embrace the humor inherent to their follies. What delicious irony! But I guess I should expect nothing less from one who can’t see the rainforest through the trees. Keep up the Goode work!
My favorite is Che, mainly because he is a (mostly) normal dog, or as you would put it in psychological terms; a repressed carnivore.
This one is going to be family viewing every Wednesday night.
For some reason I kept managing to lose this episode on eBay till I finally broke down and bought a new copy mail order from Mike Comics out of Worcester (they managed next day delivery without my asking, definitely worth your time). After listening to the story it’s a real shame I waited so long.
In my opinion it is one of the most important adventures of the run. First of all it was the first Big Finish to introduce an original companion to the series. It established an independence to the series that was necessary, after all we all know the fates of the doctor and each of the companions of the series (except for Ace) very limiting. She proved so popular that Baker didn’t have a different companion for over 18 months.
The second was what it did for Colin Baker. He was not a popular Doctor and his departure from the series was not a happy one. His initial story was of a poor quality. A second bad story would have really damaged the whole series. Remember at this point 8th doctor adventures were not part of the series. If he had been given another clunker that’s every third episode that doesn’t sell.
Anyways this one is very worth your money and time.
Update: Forgot to put in the cover.
Update 2:Colin Brockhurst has done some first rate alternate covers for Big finish products, with his permission I’m including his alternative cover on this post, and will include them in future reviews. As you can see they are pretty good.
Moderate followers of Islam said the protest played into the hands of extreme right-wing groups and made their day-to-day lives on the streets of Luton more difficult.
Yesterday, after weeks of rising tensions sparked by the protest, members of the two groups of Muslims clashed.
Qadeer Baksh, chairman of the Islamic Centre in Luton, said a group of around 200 moderate followers descended on Bury Park in the town – where the extremists regularly preach from a stall – to drive the protesters away.
This is exactly the thing that will prevent the catastrophe that I’ve been worrying about. It is vital that we support such people without marginalizing them within Islam.
The attempt to silence critics of president Obama pick of Judge Sotomayor have run into into two large snags. One of them is Rush Limbaugh who the administration foolishly elevated, cowardly ducks, and has actually driven listeners to. His listing of democratic reactions to Janice Rodgers Brown and Alito are devastating to the above the fray arguments.
The second is the Thomas Nast like quality of Judge Sotomayor’s own statements. Boss Tweed knew that even the illiterate in New York understood “Those damn pictures”.
It helped lead to his downfall.
Like the Nast Cartoon pictured Sotomayor’s statement is devastating to her and the White Houses cause because it is easily understood by any person of any education. Some democratic analysts understood this right away. Attempts to spin it or “contextualize” it are doomed because the average person who doesn’t follow politics knows exactly what it means.
If Sotomayor is unfit for the bench because she concedes that she struggles to remove herself from her own experiences, then O’Connor and Scalia are unfit as well because they believe the Court should not stop jurors from making decisions based on the own backgrounds and previous experiences.
Read the whole thing, it is one thing for a judge to state that you can’t remove a person’s life experiences from a juror’s judgment. (You can’t) It is a totally different thing to state that a particular racial or ethnic judgment is superior to another due to race.
The bottom line is Judge Sotomayor’s statement is indefensible and the “so’s your old man” argument isn’t going to wash. Very intelligent liberal voices know this, so the path of the argument has to change. This argument for example that rebuts the “radical” charge is solid but doesn’t address the question on the floor.
I repeat my question. If Judge Sotomayor’s was a white male who made such a statement publicly would that disqualify such a candidate for even a lower judgeship than Judge Sotomayor currently holds? Anyone Bueller? Bueller?
I didn’t see anything attacking Rush or Newt but the way the morning Joe crowd was talking you would have thought it was a shot across the bow attacking them.
You can certainly make the case that since the odds of blocking this appointment are slim we should save our powder for when it matters but I think that apathy and concession breeds apathy and concession.
Charles is trying to elevate the debate, he makes points but it seems to me he is choosing to be Captain America bringing a shield to a sword fight. In case you forgot here is what happens when you do:
This president is a Chicago Pol, the democratic party is one big Chicago Machine in the way it works. The right way to handle it is the Chicago way.
If we are going to uphold what we believe is right we have to be willing to fight. As one of my favorite presidents (a democrat) said: A public office is a public trust. If a person doesn’t meet that standard we need to fight it out. I can’t find the clip but the operative quote here is from the liberal movie The American President:
A. J. MacInerney: Oh, you only fight the fights you can win? You fight the fights that need fighting!