Category: Culture

Comrade Contraceptive

The big news item this week was King Obama going all dictatorial against “freedom of religion,” as seen in the contraceptive kerfuffle. Comrade Obama and his Commissar Sebelius finally decided, in an example of their infinite royal mercy and condescension to the masses, to relent in their requirement that all Religious institutions would be required to provide free of charge contraception to female employees. The new policy, which has been royally proclaimed from on high, is that the women employed by religious institutions will still receive free contraceptions to protect His Highness’ royal wombs, BUT instead of His Highness’ religious institutions paying for His contraceptions for His Highness’ female citizenry, His Higness’ insurance companies will foot the bill.

What people seem to be missing in this equation is that if religious organizations will be exempted from being required to give contraception to their employees but the insurance companies of those religious organizations will instead be required to pony up to provide those “services,” that simply means that the religious companies will still be providing these “services” as they end up paying more for their premiums in order to get insurance programs that exclude them from not paying for contraceptives. You see, when one lives in an arrangement where the Comrade State owns everything and everybody then playing these kind of shell games are easy to get away with. No sense to upset the Comrade religious institutions when we can get them to compromise their “scruples” by having them pay for contraceptives by pretending that the Comrade insurance companies are the ones paying.

This past week was kabuki theater at its best. Comrade Obama declares from on high that the Comrade State will require birth control contraceptives be given free of charge and the Commissar journalists spread the news. Comrade representatives of the religious institutions strut about and squeal squeal squeal thus pleasing the Comrade rank and file. Comrade Obama grants an accommodation that doesn’t change anything with the result the Comrade Obama is seen as Barack the merciful, and the Comrade Journalists are seen as ever vigilante, and the Comrade representatives of the religious institutions get to tell themselves that they are relevant.

Meanwhile Comrade Planned Parenthood make out like bandits and the Comrade State goes unscathed.

Birth Control & State Control

It strikes me as an opportune time, in the context of B. Hussein Obama’s entrance into American’s private sex life, to examine the idea of birth control which has the whole nation atwitter.

Certainly, there are many people who realize the irony is a birth control agenda, the consequence of which, makes for a lack of self control. Birth control is a means of sex without consequences, or what has come to be known as “free love.” Birth control, especially for the unmarried, is a way to achieve, apart from self control, the gratifying pleasure of passion divorced from the necessary pledge of commitment and the glad fruit of union. In the words of G. K. Chesterton, birth control is a “name … by which it is possible to filch the pleasure belonging to a natural process while violently and unnaturally thwarting the process itself.” Birth control thus is to take that which is natural and make it unnatural.

Second, there is the irony in the phrase itself. Birth control? Conception control maybe. Conception prevention perhaps. Even conception destruction often. But Birth control? Birth control would be deciding whether or not to undergo water birth or home birth. Birth control is choosing which Obstetrics Doctor one chooses. Contraceptives during sex is birth control the same way that choosing between a Glock and a Smith and Wesson while shopping is gun control.

Next, as I’m reading about this whole B. Hussein Obama contraceptive imbroglio I am taken back to Huxley’s “Brave New World,” where the citizenry in the dystopian statist world engage with sex with one another in the casual way that we may wave at an acquaintance. In all my reading on this subject matter what is brought forth repeatedly is the truth that the casual sex fostered by divorcing sex from conception serves the interest of the totalitarian state as such casual sex is a direct assault on the family. “Free love,” engendered by contraceptive nirvana, breaks down family integrity, either by voiding the formation of family or by sundering the family due to illicit affairs, thus preventing the creation of families to challenge the interests of the state in favor of tribal or familial interests or by throwing broken families on the paternal care of the state. If the state is to steal sovereignty from the family and keep that stolen sovereignty for itself, the state must do all it can to enfeeble the family. State sponsored contraception is one way of doing that. It is kind of ironic that the result of state sponsored birth control is state population control.

Fourth, the contraceptive carnival serves the end of our egalitarian wonderland. Historically, the responsibility of raising children have turned young married men into mature protective men and has drawn out the natural mothering instinct from women. Contraception mutes those realities from being developed as young men opt for the playboy lifestyle well into their late 20’s and young ladies, even if having children, sublimate those mothering instincts due to a blizzard of hateful messages of all things feminine, in preference for a career and daycare for the children they migh have. On this point we turn to Chesterton again who could say with his usual wit, “it (birth control) is mixed up with a muddled idea that women are free when they serve their employers but slaves when they help their husbands.” Families with small numbers of children due to contraception can allow the pretense to continue that there is no such thing as distinctly male and female roles. Men and women are interchangeable parts that have no clearly identified unique mission. Egalitarianism is sustained.

Fifth, I think we need to realize that if birth control actually resulted in fewer abortions you can be sure that the Obama administration would not support state sponsored birth control. In the documentary, “The Monstrous Regiment of Women,” a former Abortion mill owner revealed that she pushed birth control for young women because she had the data that proved that an increase of birth control contraceptives opportunities for young women guaranteed an increase of abortions thus increasing the profit on her bottom line as the necessity of abortions would increase.

Finally, someone needs to point out again the grisly irony that finds the generation that legalized the most demonic form of birth control (abortion) will be the first generation upon which the practice of Senior Citizen control will be practiced. The socialized health care that was just passed in these united States is, in reality, an abortion provision for Senior Citizens. The children of the Roe vs. Wade generation that made it through alive are going to return the favor of “self-control” upon the generation that legalized birth control. However, don’t miss the fact that as it is the state pushing birth control at the beginning of life so it will be the state through their death panels which will be pushing senior citizen control. Seldom has the proverb, “what goes around comes around,” been so clearly seen to be true for those with eyes to see.

Ultimately, a society defined by contraceptives and “free love” is a society that will be controlled by the state in life and death.

Equality … Then & Now

The Equality of the modern has no continuity with the Equality of the Magna Carta. The Magna Carta argued for equality before the law of all according to their franchise and station. This is the equality which is thoroughly consistent with that wide diversity of natural capacities, virtue, station, sex, inherited possessions, by which no social order can function without.

No, the equality of the modern is the equality of the Jacobin — of the Sans Culotte — which absurdly claims for every human the same specific powers and rights. This modern equality is the equality of the Leveller, the Anabaptist and the Communist. This absurd equality overturns all ability to build a coherent social order because it overturns all ability to make proper distinctions between people according to their diverse abilities and roles.

T. S. Elliot On Christianity & Culture


‎”If Christianity goes the whole of our culture goes. Then you must start painfully again, and you cannot put on a new culture ready made. You must wait for the grass to grow to feed the sheep to give the wool out of which your new coat will be made. You must pass through many centuries of barbarism. We should not live to see the new culture, nor would our great-great-great grandchildren; and if we did, not one of us would be happy in it.”

T. S. Elliot
Christianity and Culture; The Idea of a Christian Society and Notes Toward the Definition of Culture — pg. 200

Culture is the outward manifestation of a set people’s belief. Christianity is the belief cult that has created the culture of Western man for over one thousand years. It has been mercilessly attacked with success by various forms of Marxism in this country for 80 years. Eliot reminds us that once Christianity is snuffed out in the West then what made the West the West is snuffed out as well, and I would contend that means that not only is Christianity snuffed out but also those who were made by Christianity are snuffed out. The decline of Christianity also means the decline of Western culture and the decline of the European since on a civilizational scale they each imply one another.

Further Eliot reminds us that true Christian culture is not instant. Once Christianity on a Civilizational scale goes into final eclipse then it does not normatively come back in one generation. Christianity, on a Civilizational scale, is a tender plant that requires and creates its own eco-system. Destroy the eco-system that Christianity creates in a civilization and you cut back the tender plant of Christianity as a civilization creating plant. Eliot understood this and it is important for us to grasp again when living in a time when many in the Church today believe that the plant can thrive apart from the Civilizational eco-system that it requires and creates.

Our enemies understand this as well. Instead of seeking to directly choke off the Christian faith, they have wisely decided to attack indirectly by attacking the cultural eco-system that Christianity requires and creates. Our enemies realize that mouthing certain confessions means very little if those confessions can be quarantined from having any effect on the public square.

Unless we desire to go through a real dark age of tyranny and cruelty that can only be imagined by those who have read the tyranny and cruelty of the 20th century we would do well to heed Eliot’s words and gird up our loins and fight for the Christian faith and the civilization it creates. To refuse to do so would be a testimony that one loves death.

A Conversation On Abortion & Cultural Disintegration with a Typical Representative of the Christian Left

This conversation was launched by this clip of Sen. Rick Santorum that reveals his pragmatism on abortion,

http://www.bing.com/videos/watch/video/santorum-would-support-exceptions-to-abortion-ban/64yw0hd?cpkey=cadcf0db-9bec-40c2-9905-e572a76678b4

Emily Dorr

As of YESTERDAY, Santorum admits that he’s not really ‘pro-life’ by any standard that pretends to be connected to the teaching of the Bible.

Pragmatism is sin when applied to Christianity. Sadly, when sitting in church yesterday, nobody told you that.

These evangelicals will sell us all to the devil.

Kerry Culligan

Santorum supported pro- abortion Arlen Spector in the primary some years ago as a good Pennsylvania Republican as well. Iowa evangelicals have tried to pretend that he regrets that now, and wouldn’t do so again. Mind you, he never apologized or pretended to repent for that endorsement. No, these evangelical leaders are intentionally fooling themselves.

Ann Gardner Dorr

How can a law guarantee there will no longer be any abortions? Rich women will always be able to go to their docs and have a “D and C”. Poor women will go to the back alley and be injured or die. Or is that OK with all of you for them committing such a grievous sin? And, is there ever room for redemption after an abortion, or are they condemned forever? Are the fathers who encorage sn abortion equally condemned or are there degrees of condemnation? We outlaw murder yet it still occurs. Or is this the church wanting the gov’t to do their work? It truly is a moral issue and it is rare where laws can successfully legislate morality.

Bret L. McAtee

Sen. Santorum’s support for Arlen Specter, who was pro-choice, over a putative pro-life electable Republican proved to me that Santorum is just another whore politician.

Ann Gardner Dorr

Isn’t that a bit too harsh?

Bret L. McAtee

Observing that somebody is a whore politician because he flaunted his pro-life credentials and then turned around and supported somebody who was pro-death is a whore politician is to harsh?

No … actually, I think it is far to kind.

Referring to your previous comments Ann I would say that it is better if a few poor women to die by pursuing the death of their children then to have a law that supports baby killing so that rich and poor women alike can legally kill their children. Those who die in pursuing illegal abortions are only getting justice. What is unfair is that the rich avoid death in pursuing what would be illegal abortions in a culture where abortion was illegal.

Yes … God can forgive all sins but that doesn’t mean that sins that God has listed as crimes (such as murder) should not be enforced as crimes with the penalty that comes with those crimes.

Since laws can’t legislate morality, according to you, what say you about legalizing mass murder?

Ann Gardner Door

I guess my question has to do more with the separation of church from state and what is state business and what is church business? As you are aware, not everyone believes in the God that you do, yet they live in this country and according to our laws they are entitled to do that (believe differently than you and me). Since they don’t agree with your harsh judgments toward this issue, must they also be condemned to death in the back alley? I really wish Jesus was still with us to speak directly to this issue.

Bret L. McAtee

Ann, it is not possible to separate religion from the State. All Governments, including the current one, is beholden to and derivative of some religion. Why should I be satisfied with the State religion of Humanism that you find so superior over Christianity?

I am not advocating a Ecclesiocracy where the Church rules. I am advocating overthrowing the current pagan government that is ruled by a pagan religion that sanctions the torture and murder of the unborn.

Say, according to your standard why shouldn’t we allow for the Hindu custom (Sati) where widowed wives are burned with their deceased husbands on a funeral pyre? Why should these people be allowed their customs? After all, they don’t agree with our harsh judgments against wife killing.

You don’t seem to understand that all law order is a reflection of some God. Your God that you want to see the country subservient to allows for baby murder mine doesn’t. Why should you be preferred?

Ann Gardner Dorr

I really wish Jesus was still with us to speak directly to this issue. Hell, half the prophets and leaders in the old testament where “whores” by your standards. They had slaves, multiple wives, slept with their hand-maidens and had children by multiple women. I’m just trying to see where the Christ-like view on this whole issue would be. I just can’t be as harsh toward my fellow humans as some express here. I was also taught that to “judge” was God’s job, not mine.

Bret L. McAtee

The OT is full of the record of sin. That doesn’t mean that God approved of it. That’s pretty basic Ann.

The Christ-like view on this subject is the one found in Scripture. Those found guilty of murder by the testimony of two witnesses are to be executed.

Ann Gardner Dorr

I just can’t be as harsh toward my fellow humans as some express here. I was also taught that to “judge” was God’s job, not mine. I also wonder if you view abortion on some kind of “sin plane” and that it ranks as a higher degree of sin than say, lying on your taxes, or stealing from your employer.

Bret L. McAtee

Ann you are one of the harshest people I know in your advocacy of murder. It is incredible (more than incredible) to me that you can accuse me of harshness when I am trying to reverse a policy that has led to the torture and murder of 50 million people and the untold suffering of countless number of women who suffer from post traumatic abortion syndrome?

I must say that it is you that is the harsh one here Ann. Your cruelness and unfeeling character is grotesque in a high degree.

And the funny thing is, is that you are so deadened to reality that you find your cruelty to be the very nard of tender mercy.

Scripture clearly tells us that we are to judge righteously

Judge not according to appearance, but judge righteous judgment. (John 7)

And yes … though all sin is worthy of punishment not all sin is equally grave. Torture and murder is definitely worse then not paying your taxes.

Ann Gardner Dorr

Trust me, I don’t advocate abortion.

Bret L. McAtee

Yes you do. Your advocating that it remain legal is a advocating for abortion. You can not advocate for its legality or accuse people who oppose it as being “harsh” and then soothe your conscience with some kind of “but I don’t like it” declaimer.

Ann Gardner Dorr

I am almost 60 and still confused by this issue. I will say, I lived before it was legal and there definitely were abortions. People were dying, lives of all sorts were being destroyed. My own father, Emily’s grandfather, on her Dad’s side, was not as adamant about the position of it being illegal. He talked about knowing young people who were deeply affected by choices they were forced to make before it was legal. I think he was troubled by it too. We talked about it at the time it became legal. Roe v Wade was ruled while I was in college. It was very controversial at that time and remains so today.

Bret L. McAtee

You don’t strike me as confused at all Ann. You strike me as very certain that torture and murder should be continued.

Nobody doubts that abortion happened before its legality. It’s always the case that whatever is illegal is transgressed by people even though it is illegal. That is why we have the word “crime.”

But the fact that it happened illegally Ann isn’t an argument that we should make it legal. If that were the case we would make all kinds of things legal only because some percentage of folks break laws.

The fact that some were aborted illegally, that some lives were ruined doesn’t mean we make it so millions more are aborted legally and that more lives are ruined.

What kind of reasoning is this on your part Ann?

Ann Gardner Dorr,

Sorry, Bret, that still seems self-righteous and harsh, to me. Just like you, I can go through my Bible and cherry pick verses to support my case of compassion over harsh judgement. And, by the way, you have no idea what I find superior as a form of gov’t. I was merely referring to our gov’t as it exists today. And, I am still curious. Does your religion view/belief put varying degrees on sin? And if so, is abortion the lowest, (or highest) level of sin, as you see it?

Bret L. McAtee

Self righteous? I want to see millions of people saved and you call me self righteous?

Do you realize how upside down your thought process is?

I challenge you to find any passage in Scripture that finds God supporting murder.

Abortion is not the highest sin. A higher sin would be people who advocate that abortion should remain legal. Their place in hell will be far deeper then a woman who had an abortion.

Mickey Bolwerk

Bret gets to the heart of the issue here, and I’m not sure there’s much more I can do than reiterate his points in my own words:

1) There is no area of neutrality. All law is religious in nature; it’s only a matter of whose religion is represented in the law code. Ann, whether you realized it or not, you are promoting the law code of humanism.

2) There is no basic dichotomy between the Old Testament and the New Testament. God is immutable, containing no contingency, no unexplored potentials. He is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow. His standards of righteousness in the NT era are the same as those in the OT era.

By the way, John 7:53 – 8:11 is of highly questionable canonicity and, even if it was in the original text, your interpretation of it is not possible, by means of analogia scriptura (the analogy of Scripture; that is, that Scripture is internally consistent and any interpretation of Scripture leading to contradictions is incorrect). If we are to grant that it is Scriptural, then the only possible interpretations of this is that either:

1) Her accusers were themselves guilty of adultery, thus disqualifying them a witnesses, or
2) Christ refused to act in the role of the civil magistrate.

Either way, if the woman was guilty of adultery, she deserved to die. As do abortionists.

Ann Gardner Dorr

All I know, is that if Jesus came to earth with an attitude like yours we would all be Jews today. Your approach comes across as ego driven serving only to show your superiority to others and would make it difficult for someone who is struggling to understand or believe. I thank God every day that Jesus was NOTHING like you. You can’t even listen to my argument, you are so set in your superior ways. I never once said I advocated abortion. My argument is/was with the approach and procedures that anti-abortionists have employed over the years that have done nothing but to harden people against your position. I think your movement has done more to promote the use and choice of abortion, merely by the words and tactics you have employed. Talk about cruel and grotesque. . .

Bret L. McAtee

Ann … are you sober or are you drinking while your write this?

Look Ann … I am far more concerned for the millions who have been tortured and slaughtered then I am about your feelings. You get on your pious high horse self-righteously accusing me of being “superior” and “self-righteous,” and “ego-driven,” while you advocate that we should be sensitive to murder and murderers.

I can’t listen to your argument because you have no argument. Besides, I’ve listened long enough to refute it… thoroughly.

Me thinketh the lady doth protest too much.

Good night Ann.

Please reconsider your position.

Ann Gardner Dorr

I’m praying for your soul tonight Bret.

Bret L. McAtee

Don’t bother wasting your time Ann because there is no God at the address your sending your prayers to because your God is a myth of your own imagination.

Ann Gardner Dorr

‎”I thank God every day that Jesus was NOTHING like you.”

David Opperman

I wonder what Bible Ann has been reading? It seems to me like Jesus was pretty confrontational. The Jews didn’t want him crucified because he turned water to wine…

Misty Richards

Ann – You accuse others of self-righteousness while arguing in favor of murderers who will have their own children sucked piece by piece out of their womb?? Do you understand what abortion is?? Its murder, Ann, plain and simple and all murderers should face the death penalty.

Ann Gardner Dorr

Well, “good morning” all. This has been very eye opening. Once I get past the name calling and viciousness of all of your anger I will contemplate the base of your argument. It seems as though you all are so used to this fight you are blind. I don’t advocate abortion, rape, murder or anything else I’ve been accused of here. But I certainly understand now why this debate has shut down and I’m fairly certain the laws will never change. You scared the heck out of me with your vitriole and I am sure you have that effect on others when it comes to this subject. Ears shut off, hearts close down and the beat goes on. I’m certain that is not what any of you want but your efforts last night were very effective in revealing to me who and what you are all about.

Mark Chambers

What’s the matter Ann? So ashamed of your idiot arguments that you retreat from them?

Ann Gardner Dorr

Not at all, just realize it pointless to discuss this subject with the Christian Taliban pushing your form of Sharia Law. First the abortionists, then the gays, then the public schools, etc, etc until you’ve formed the perfect society accorording to your version of God’s desires for humankind. Now I see where the left came up with their notions about all of you. No wonder they have been so successful in their fight against this agenda. No wonder over 45% of Americans no longer hold any spiritual beliefs. There is very little that is appealing to me coming from you that would draw me to your side of the spiritual fence.

You don’t care to discuss and persuade. You want to bully me into agreeing with your view of everything, then we can be all lovey and friends. No middle ground here. It’s all or nothing. I’ll chose nothing.

Bret L. McAtee

Ann,

You talk about the left and how it came up with their notions of conservative but you seem not to realize that you are the left.

You complain about our form of Sharia but just look at all the sharia that you’re pushing on us. You are pushing a kinder gentler humanist sharia of abortion with hand wringing, of government schools, of homosexuality. In your putative benign acceptance of these things you now are pushing them down our throats dear Ann.

You find us odd and displeasing but we are only what America was before the success of the cultural Marxism that now flows through your veins.

I wish there was a kinder way to oppose torture and murder of the unborn. I genuinely would like for there to be a nicer way of contending that homosexuality is an abomination that has throughout history always been the final indicator of a culture that is in disintegration. I’ve prayed daily that I could find a softer way of telling people that government schools are poison to the souls of our children. But these truths do not allow a “smile in your face while I disembowel you” approach.

Imagine me weeping for you and for the countless numbers like you dear sweet Ann. My tears fall first because of your hostility towards the God of the Bible and His Lord Christ. My tears then fall because I know what your end is and it saddens me beyond naming. My tears fall for all the harm you are doing in your belief system to countless numbers of people. If my weeping would convince people of their hatred and vileness I would take my weeping public and weep before the world.

But it would do no good because people like you would still come back and hurl insults at me because of my desire to protect you, and other people, and you would hurl insults at my desire to see the end of the culture of death which your worldview supports.

Believe me Ann, when I tell you, that if I thought that I could be successful by changing anything in my approach or methodology I would change but having tried every which way, I know that it is not my methodology that turns people off but it is my insistence that the God of the Bible must be kissed lest he be angry and people like you perish in the way.

With deep affection for you but with even more for the Sovereign of the universe,