I have mixed feelings about 57% of Swiss voters banning the construction of minarets. My first reaction was to be appalled. As my good readers know well, freedom of religion is important to me.
But how much is this about freedom of religion? One can still be Muslim in Switzerland, just as I am Anglican in America. But my freedom of religion does not mean I have the right to build a 300 foot spire with loud speakers that periodically proclaim “Eat cake or die!”
And as pointed out here (in an albeit over the top manner), mosques and minarets are not just Muslim church buildings.
A mosque is NOT a Muslim "church." It is a Muslim "church" and a Muslim "community center" and a Muslim "armory" and a Muslim "army recruiting center" and a Muslim everything.
And that comes complete with a loud and obnoxious call to prayer multiple times a day. Yes, more obnoxious than “Eat cake or die!” Minarets, especially when placed in areas with many non-Muslims, are nothing if not a form of religious bullying.
And, as Cranmer boldly points out , Switzerland is still a democracy not under the thumb of Gulag EU. So if the Swiss look at the rest of Europe and its foolishness and say, “No, we will not be bullied by Muslims,” and put limits on Muslim freedom of religion that do not violate human rights, then that is their right to do so.
So on second thought, I do not blame the Swiss. It would be nice to have absolute freedom of religion. But as long as people use religion to bully, abuse, or even kill the innocent, then even that freedom which I cherish and defend must have its limits.
I still understand why many disagree with how the Swiss have limited that freedom. But I wonder how many of those critics are non-Muslims who have lived close to a minaret.
Monday, November 30, 2009
Friday, November 27, 2009
Personal Ordinariates and UK Property Issues
I have been hoping that property issues surrounding Church of England Anglo-Catholic parishes that decide to cross the Tiber would be handled in a gentlemanly manner. But I am now afraid “hope” is the operative word.
[R.C. Archbishop Vincent Nichols] added that Dr Williams had already ruled out the purchase of Church of England buildings as "impossible".
. . .
Forward in Faith, the largest Anglo-Catholic group, has estimated that 450 parishes are considering the Pope's offer and as many as 200 of them might accept it.
Anglican Bishop John Broadhurst of Fulham, chairman of Forward in Faith, said: "We have 1,000 priest members in my organisation and there are many others who agree with us. The main issue for many Anglican priests is now the ownership of parish churches.
" Understanding the attachment of Anglo-Catholics to their church buildings, many of which are listed or historic, the Catholic commission is expected to look at the possibility of church-sharing and also the chances of taking out 100-year leases of some Anglican parishes, including a commitment to maintain and repair them.
Fr Anthony Symondson, a former Anglo-Catholic vicar who became a Jesuit priest, doubted however whether mass conversion was inevitable. He predicted that if an English Ordinariate relies on "shared churches and temporary buildings" he felt it would "represent a very small number of people with a very limited future".
"None of us really know how the Church of England is going to respond to it and how the Church Commissioners are going to respond to it in terms of letting property go," he said. Congregations are likely to be split by the decision and may be tempted to experiment with parish-sharing, he said, but he explained that when this was tried at a church in west London in the 1990s it was soon halted by Cardinal Basil Hume because of divisions between Catholic converts and the resident Anglican congregation.
I do not want to comment too much on this as I am not expert on peculiar CofE property laws and the like. Nevertheless, I am puzzled as to why the sale of some CofE buildings is “impossible”. Doesn’t the Church of England need the money to put it bluntly? Aren’t many of these buildings very expensive to maintain?
Surely, accommodations can be made that would benefit both the Church of England and departing parishes. Surely, the ugliness exhibited by The Episcopal Church won’t at all be practiced in the Church of England.
Right?
Hat tip to Jeffrey Steel.
[R.C. Archbishop Vincent Nichols] added that Dr Williams had already ruled out the purchase of Church of England buildings as "impossible".
. . .
Forward in Faith, the largest Anglo-Catholic group, has estimated that 450 parishes are considering the Pope's offer and as many as 200 of them might accept it.
Anglican Bishop John Broadhurst of Fulham, chairman of Forward in Faith, said: "We have 1,000 priest members in my organisation and there are many others who agree with us. The main issue for many Anglican priests is now the ownership of parish churches.
" Understanding the attachment of Anglo-Catholics to their church buildings, many of which are listed or historic, the Catholic commission is expected to look at the possibility of church-sharing and also the chances of taking out 100-year leases of some Anglican parishes, including a commitment to maintain and repair them.
Fr Anthony Symondson, a former Anglo-Catholic vicar who became a Jesuit priest, doubted however whether mass conversion was inevitable. He predicted that if an English Ordinariate relies on "shared churches and temporary buildings" he felt it would "represent a very small number of people with a very limited future".
"None of us really know how the Church of England is going to respond to it and how the Church Commissioners are going to respond to it in terms of letting property go," he said. Congregations are likely to be split by the decision and may be tempted to experiment with parish-sharing, he said, but he explained that when this was tried at a church in west London in the 1990s it was soon halted by Cardinal Basil Hume because of divisions between Catholic converts and the resident Anglican congregation.
I do not want to comment too much on this as I am not expert on peculiar CofE property laws and the like. Nevertheless, I am puzzled as to why the sale of some CofE buildings is “impossible”. Doesn’t the Church of England need the money to put it bluntly? Aren’t many of these buildings very expensive to maintain?
Surely, accommodations can be made that would benefit both the Church of England and departing parishes. Surely, the ugliness exhibited by The Episcopal Church won’t at all be practiced in the Church of England.
Right?
Hat tip to Jeffrey Steel.
Monday, November 23, 2009
Orthodox With Attitude: Bishop Tobin and the Manhattan Declaration
I have long thought that the decline of church and society in the West can not only be laid at the feet of libchurchers but also at the feet of those “orthodox” who done nothing. So I am heartened by two recent developments in which orthodox leaders show some backbone and maybe even a little attitude, too.
First was RC Bishop Thomas Tobin’s excommunication of Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-RI). The Kennedys are perhaps the family which has done the more harm than any other to this nation. Their evil, which extends beyond support of abortion on demand (although that is certainly bad enough), had long been brazen. Yet has any RC cleric stood up to them and said, “Enough”?
Now one has. And it’s about time. Kudos to Bishop Tobin.
Second was, and is, the Manhattan Declaration. It is a robust statement by Christian leaders in defense of life and marriage.
But it goes well beyond that in a needful time. And this is where such backbone is displayed as to stir my heart. It proclaims both a right and obligation to act upon orthodox Christian principles in these areas. This declaration is more than just words.
Moreover and perhaps most importantly, it acknowledges openly and confronts the attack on religious freedom in the West, particularly attacks on those speaking and acting in the areas of life and marriage.
It is ironic that those who today assert a right to kill the unborn, aged and disabled and also a right to engage in immoral sexual practices, and even a right to have relationships integrated around these practices be recognized and blessed by law—such persons claiming these “rights” are very often in the vanguard of those who would trample upon the freedom of others to express their religious and moral commitments to the sanctity of life and to the dignity of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife.
We see this, for example, in the effort to weaken or eliminate conscience clauses, and therefore to compel prolife institutions (including religiously affiliated hospitals and clinics), and prolife physicians, surgeons, nurses, and other health care professionals, to refer for abortions and, in certain cases, even to perform or participate in abortions. We see it in the use of anti-discrimination statutes to force religious institutions, businesses, and service providers of various sorts to comply with activities they judge to be deeply immoral or go out of business. After the judicial imposition of “samesex marriage” in Massachusetts, for example, Catholic Charities chose with great reluctance to end its centurylong work of helping to place orphaned children in good homes rather than comply with a legal mandate that it place children in samesex households in violation of Catholic moral teaching. In New Jersey, after the establishment of a quasimarital “civil unions” scheme, a Methodist institution was stripped of its tax exempt status when it declined, as a matter of religious conscience, to permit a facility it owned and operated to be used for ceremonies blessing homosexual unions. In Canada and some European nations, Christian clergy have been prosecuted for preaching Biblical norms against the practice of homosexuality. New hate crime laws in America raise the specter of the same practice here.
And in confronting this attack on religious freedom, it states a manful determination to refuse to submit to it, ending with . . .
Going back to the earliest days of the church, Christians have refused to compromise their proclamation of the gospel. In Acts 4, Peter and John were ordered to stop preaching. Their answer was, “Judge for yourselves whether it is right in God's sight to obey you rather than God. For we cannot help speaking about what we have seen and heard.” Through the centuries,
Christianity has taught that civil disobedience is not only permitted, but sometimes required. . . .
Because we honor justice and the common good, we will not comply with any edict that purports to compel our institutions to participate in abortions, embryodestructive research, assisted suicide and euthanasia, or any other antilife act; nor will we bend to any rule purporting to force us to bless immoral sexual partnerships, treat them as marriages or the equivalent, or refrain from proclaiming the truth, as we know it, about morality and immorality and marriage and the family. We will fully and ungrudgingly render to Caesar what is Caesar’s. But under no circumstances will we render to Caesar what is God’s.
To which I say, “Yes!” and “Amen!”
I have signed the Manhattan Declaration and urge my good readers to do likewise.
And I may post further analysis at a later time.
First was RC Bishop Thomas Tobin’s excommunication of Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-RI). The Kennedys are perhaps the family which has done the more harm than any other to this nation. Their evil, which extends beyond support of abortion on demand (although that is certainly bad enough), had long been brazen. Yet has any RC cleric stood up to them and said, “Enough”?
Now one has. And it’s about time. Kudos to Bishop Tobin.
Second was, and is, the Manhattan Declaration. It is a robust statement by Christian leaders in defense of life and marriage.
But it goes well beyond that in a needful time. And this is where such backbone is displayed as to stir my heart. It proclaims both a right and obligation to act upon orthodox Christian principles in these areas. This declaration is more than just words.
Moreover and perhaps most importantly, it acknowledges openly and confronts the attack on religious freedom in the West, particularly attacks on those speaking and acting in the areas of life and marriage.
It is ironic that those who today assert a right to kill the unborn, aged and disabled and also a right to engage in immoral sexual practices, and even a right to have relationships integrated around these practices be recognized and blessed by law—such persons claiming these “rights” are very often in the vanguard of those who would trample upon the freedom of others to express their religious and moral commitments to the sanctity of life and to the dignity of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife.
We see this, for example, in the effort to weaken or eliminate conscience clauses, and therefore to compel prolife institutions (including religiously affiliated hospitals and clinics), and prolife physicians, surgeons, nurses, and other health care professionals, to refer for abortions and, in certain cases, even to perform or participate in abortions. We see it in the use of anti-discrimination statutes to force religious institutions, businesses, and service providers of various sorts to comply with activities they judge to be deeply immoral or go out of business. After the judicial imposition of “samesex marriage” in Massachusetts, for example, Catholic Charities chose with great reluctance to end its centurylong work of helping to place orphaned children in good homes rather than comply with a legal mandate that it place children in samesex households in violation of Catholic moral teaching. In New Jersey, after the establishment of a quasimarital “civil unions” scheme, a Methodist institution was stripped of its tax exempt status when it declined, as a matter of religious conscience, to permit a facility it owned and operated to be used for ceremonies blessing homosexual unions. In Canada and some European nations, Christian clergy have been prosecuted for preaching Biblical norms against the practice of homosexuality. New hate crime laws in America raise the specter of the same practice here.
And in confronting this attack on religious freedom, it states a manful determination to refuse to submit to it, ending with . . .
Going back to the earliest days of the church, Christians have refused to compromise their proclamation of the gospel. In Acts 4, Peter and John were ordered to stop preaching. Their answer was, “Judge for yourselves whether it is right in God's sight to obey you rather than God. For we cannot help speaking about what we have seen and heard.” Through the centuries,
Christianity has taught that civil disobedience is not only permitted, but sometimes required. . . .
Because we honor justice and the common good, we will not comply with any edict that purports to compel our institutions to participate in abortions, embryodestructive research, assisted suicide and euthanasia, or any other antilife act; nor will we bend to any rule purporting to force us to bless immoral sexual partnerships, treat them as marriages or the equivalent, or refrain from proclaiming the truth, as we know it, about morality and immorality and marriage and the family. We will fully and ungrudgingly render to Caesar what is Caesar’s. But under no circumstances will we render to Caesar what is God’s.
To which I say, “Yes!” and “Amen!”
I have signed the Manhattan Declaration and urge my good readers to do likewise.
And I may post further analysis at a later time.
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Pope, Rowan Meet for . . . 20 Minutes? UPDATED
I am not yet able to confirm Damian Thompson’s report that the long awaited meeting between the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Pope lasted only 20 minutes. And I do find that hard to believe.
But if they did indeed have such a brief meeting, that [Anglican understatement alert] does not reflect well on RC-Anglican relations.
UPDATE:
The Guardian’s report also has the meeting pegged at 20 minutes.
But if they did indeed have such a brief meeting, that [Anglican understatement alert] does not reflect well on RC-Anglican relations.
UPDATE:
The Guardian’s report also has the meeting pegged at 20 minutes.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Jesse Jackson, Racist
Jesse Jackson: “You can’t vote against healthcare and call yourself a black man.”
Yes, if a Negro strays from the Obama Left plantation, why, he’s not a good darkie; he’s hardly a black man at all.
Can you imagine a White public figure getting away with spewing such racist garbage? He would be tarred and feathered in the media, then driven off the public stage. And rightly so.
And that’s exactly what should happen to Jesse Jackson and his ilk.
But I don’t think the “mainstream” news media will even pay much attention to this. We shall see.
Yes, if a Negro strays from the Obama Left plantation, why, he’s not a good darkie; he’s hardly a black man at all.
Can you imagine a White public figure getting away with spewing such racist garbage? He would be tarred and feathered in the media, then driven off the public stage. And rightly so.
And that’s exactly what should happen to Jesse Jackson and his ilk.
But I don’t think the “mainstream” news media will even pay much attention to this. We shall see.
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
TEC’s Pythonesque Attack on Ft. Worth Floundering UPDATED
As Texanglican sums up well, The Episcopal Church’s attempt to loot the Diocese of Ft. Worth by claiming to be THE REAL Diocese of Ft. Worth is not going very well.
First, the trial court judge has already ruled that the lawyers suing on behalf of TEC's "diocese" DO NOT represent the corporation known as the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth that was established in 1983 and which Bishop Iker still heads. Yet the trial judge did not strike all the pleadings TEC's lawyers had filed claiming to act on behalf of the corporation at the time he ruled that they were not real diocese's lawyers. Logically, if these TEC lawyers do not represent the real diocese that actually owns the property, then they should not be able to even appear in court to file pleadings demanding that property be handed over to the folks they represent!
The appellate court has stayed any further proceedings until this fundamental illogic can be resolved. And that is GOOD news for the ACNA diocese--the real diocese of Fort Worth.
One wonders what sort of stimulant the worthies at 815 were drinking when they decided to pretend they and/or their puppets were the real Diocese of Ft. Worth in order to loot the Diocese of Ft. Worth. That strategy is, well, rather silly. It reminds me of the Monty Python School Prize-Giving sketch in which a thief mugs the Bishop of East Anglia, who was presiding over a school awards ceremony, and proceeds as follows:
I'm afraid there's been a mistake. The man who has been speaking to you is an impostor. He is not in fact the Bishop of East Anglia, but a man wanted by the police. I am the Bishop of East Anglia and anyone who doesn't believe me can look me up in the book. Now then, the first prize is this beautiful silver cup, which has been won by me. (He puts the silver cup into a sack) Next we come to the Fairfax Atkinson Trophy for outstanding achievement in the field of Applied Mathematics. Well, there was no-one this year who reached the required standard so it goes in my sack. And by an old rule of the school all the other silver trophies also go in my sack.
It makes for good humor, but a questionable legal strategy.
UPDATE:
The Diocese of Ft. Worth (Yes, the real one.) has issued a statement.
The Anglican Curmudgeon is following this closely, of course.
First, the trial court judge has already ruled that the lawyers suing on behalf of TEC's "diocese" DO NOT represent the corporation known as the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth that was established in 1983 and which Bishop Iker still heads. Yet the trial judge did not strike all the pleadings TEC's lawyers had filed claiming to act on behalf of the corporation at the time he ruled that they were not real diocese's lawyers. Logically, if these TEC lawyers do not represent the real diocese that actually owns the property, then they should not be able to even appear in court to file pleadings demanding that property be handed over to the folks they represent!
The appellate court has stayed any further proceedings until this fundamental illogic can be resolved. And that is GOOD news for the ACNA diocese--the real diocese of Fort Worth.
One wonders what sort of stimulant the worthies at 815 were drinking when they decided to pretend they and/or their puppets were the real Diocese of Ft. Worth in order to loot the Diocese of Ft. Worth. That strategy is, well, rather silly. It reminds me of the Monty Python School Prize-Giving sketch in which a thief mugs the Bishop of East Anglia, who was presiding over a school awards ceremony, and proceeds as follows:
I'm afraid there's been a mistake. The man who has been speaking to you is an impostor. He is not in fact the Bishop of East Anglia, but a man wanted by the police. I am the Bishop of East Anglia and anyone who doesn't believe me can look me up in the book. Now then, the first prize is this beautiful silver cup, which has been won by me. (He puts the silver cup into a sack) Next we come to the Fairfax Atkinson Trophy for outstanding achievement in the field of Applied Mathematics. Well, there was no-one this year who reached the required standard so it goes in my sack. And by an old rule of the school all the other silver trophies also go in my sack.
It makes for good humor, but a questionable legal strategy.
UPDATE:
The Diocese of Ft. Worth (Yes, the real one.) has issued a statement.
The Anglican Curmudgeon is following this closely, of course.
Monday, November 16, 2009
The Episcopal Church Welcomes You . . . Unless You’re Pro-Life
The Episcopal Church likes to pat itself on the back for being oh-so tolerant and inclusive. But that inclusiveness has not extended to pro-life people for many years. Pro-lifers and their consciences have been thrown under the bus and run over repeatedly by such outrages as TEC’s support of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice.
Now it seems in at least some parishes, the disdain for pro-lifers is personal:
Abby Johnson, the former Planned Parenthood clinic director whose about-face on abortion prompted her to resign her job, says she's gotten flack for her decision from an unexpected quarter: her own church.
Her Oct. 6 decision to leave Planned Parenthood in Bryan, Texas - after viewing an ultrasound-guided abortion of a 13-week-old fetus two weeks earlier - made headlines, especially when she ended up volunteering at the Coalition for Life center a few doors away. Her former employer filed a restraining order to silence Mrs. Johnson, but a judge threw out the case on Tuesday.
Now she is facing a different kind of music at her parish, St. Francis Episcopal in nearby College Station, the home of Texas A&M University.
Whereas clergy and parishioners welcomed her as a Planned Parenthood employee, now they are buttonholing her after Sunday services.
"Now that I have taken this stand, some of the people there are not accepting of that," she told The Washington Times. "People have told me they disagree with my choice. One of the things I've been told is that as Episcopalians, we embrace our differences and disagreements. While I agree with that, I am not sure I can go to a place where I don't feel I am welcome."
The rector at St. Francis refused to comment on the charge of nonacceptance.
Just like he refuses to speak up against all sorts of evil, I’m sure.
In the Episcopal Church, evil is treated as good and good is treated as evil. “Tolerance” and “inclusiveness” are just code words to paper that over.
Hat tip to Stand Firm.
Now it seems in at least some parishes, the disdain for pro-lifers is personal:
Abby Johnson, the former Planned Parenthood clinic director whose about-face on abortion prompted her to resign her job, says she's gotten flack for her decision from an unexpected quarter: her own church.
Her Oct. 6 decision to leave Planned Parenthood in Bryan, Texas - after viewing an ultrasound-guided abortion of a 13-week-old fetus two weeks earlier - made headlines, especially when she ended up volunteering at the Coalition for Life center a few doors away. Her former employer filed a restraining order to silence Mrs. Johnson, but a judge threw out the case on Tuesday.
Now she is facing a different kind of music at her parish, St. Francis Episcopal in nearby College Station, the home of Texas A&M University.
Whereas clergy and parishioners welcomed her as a Planned Parenthood employee, now they are buttonholing her after Sunday services.
"Now that I have taken this stand, some of the people there are not accepting of that," she told The Washington Times. "People have told me they disagree with my choice. One of the things I've been told is that as Episcopalians, we embrace our differences and disagreements. While I agree with that, I am not sure I can go to a place where I don't feel I am welcome."
The rector at St. Francis refused to comment on the charge of nonacceptance.
Just like he refuses to speak up against all sorts of evil, I’m sure.
In the Episcopal Church, evil is treated as good and good is treated as evil. “Tolerance” and “inclusiveness” are just code words to paper that over.
Hat tip to Stand Firm.
Leftists Assault Tea Party Activists in Florida Amnesty Protests
I’d like to see how Leftists are going to explain this violent assault away.
This story is not out there much yet. But it will be.
This story is not out there much yet. But it will be.
Friday, November 13, 2009
Q: How Do you Ask for a Terrorist Attack?
A: Try 9-11 terrorists in a criminal court in New York City.
This is an inexcusably irresponsible move from the Obama Administration.
This is an inexcusably irresponsible move from the Obama Administration.
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Owens Seated Before the Votes Are All In
Interesting story here. It turns out that the vote count in the NY-23 Special Election (the one that featured Democrat Owens, Conservative Hoffman, and a certain RINO) is much closer than thought on election night. There were some input errors that night that did not count Hoffman votes.
No, I am not going to rant about vote fraud, because I don’t think there is any here. This looks like simple human and/or technology error to me. However, I find it outrageous that Owens was seated as a member of the House before the votes were all in, counted, and canvassed.
Why the rush anyway? So he could vote to nationalize health care? Hmmmm?
It seems unlikely that a full counting of the ballots will change the NY-23 result. (But I would LOVE it if it did. Imagine the embarrassment of unseating Owens after he voted for Obamacare in a close vote. Wow.) Still, Owens should NOT have been seated until all the votes were counted and canvassed. The rush to seat him beforehand is beyond scandalous.
No, I am not going to rant about vote fraud, because I don’t think there is any here. This looks like simple human and/or technology error to me. However, I find it outrageous that Owens was seated as a member of the House before the votes were all in, counted, and canvassed.
Why the rush anyway? So he could vote to nationalize health care? Hmmmm?
It seems unlikely that a full counting of the ballots will change the NY-23 result. (But I would LOVE it if it did. Imagine the embarrassment of unseating Owens after he voted for Obamacare in a close vote. Wow.) Still, Owens should NOT have been seated until all the votes were counted and canvassed. The rush to seat him beforehand is beyond scandalous.
About Voter Enthusiasm/Anger
Amongst all the poll numbers thrown about, something you do not hear much about is the enthusiasm and/or anger potential voters have about their positions. This enthusiasm/anger is important because it affects the likelihood of them actually going out and voting their positions instead of just yakking. And, as any politico will tell you, voter turnout is always key, especially in off-year elections.
I have suspected that this enthusiasm/anger factor favors the Republicans for off-year 2010 congressional elections. For one thing, the tea party movement would not have the success it has had without a great undercurrent of both anger and enthusiasm out there. And I think the 2009 Virginia and New Jersey elections were affected by that anger/enthusiasm.
Now some other numbers are confirming my suspicions. From a Pew poll:
[V]oters who plan to support Republicans next year are more enthusiastic than those who plan to vote for a Democrat. Fully 58% of those who plan to vote for a Republican next year say they are very enthusiastic about voting, compared with 42% of those who plan to vote for a Democrat. More than half (56%) of independent voters who support a Republican in their district are very enthusiastic about voting; by contrast, just 32% of independents who plan to vote for a Democrat express high levels of enthusiasm.
Those numbers are *interesting* and do not look good for Democrats. However, Obama and friends are pushing the most offensive aspects of their Socialist agenda now and will surely soft pedal that by late summer as the election nears. (Won’t they?) So anger may wane some. And no one really knows what the economy will be like. That, as always, is a huge factor that will influence voter attitudes.
Nevertheless, the enthusiasm/anger factor, which is now favoring conservatives, is one to watch.
I have suspected that this enthusiasm/anger factor favors the Republicans for off-year 2010 congressional elections. For one thing, the tea party movement would not have the success it has had without a great undercurrent of both anger and enthusiasm out there. And I think the 2009 Virginia and New Jersey elections were affected by that anger/enthusiasm.
Now some other numbers are confirming my suspicions. From a Pew poll:
[V]oters who plan to support Republicans next year are more enthusiastic than those who plan to vote for a Democrat. Fully 58% of those who plan to vote for a Republican next year say they are very enthusiastic about voting, compared with 42% of those who plan to vote for a Democrat. More than half (56%) of independent voters who support a Republican in their district are very enthusiastic about voting; by contrast, just 32% of independents who plan to vote for a Democrat express high levels of enthusiasm.
Those numbers are *interesting* and do not look good for Democrats. However, Obama and friends are pushing the most offensive aspects of their Socialist agenda now and will surely soft pedal that by late summer as the election nears. (Won’t they?) So anger may wane some. And no one really knows what the economy will be like. That, as always, is a huge factor that will influence voter attitudes.
Nevertheless, the enthusiasm/anger factor, which is now favoring conservatives, is one to watch.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
The Perfect Man for the Job!
The word is that retired Bishop Wallis Ohl is in line to become the bishop of the faux Diocese of Ft. Worth in The Episcopal Church (opposed, of course, to the real diocese in the Anglican Church in North America).
Yes, that is the same Bishop Ohl who, as Bishop of Northwest Texas in 2005, drove the orthodox congregation of St. Nicholas’ Episcopal Midland out of their building they built and bought just four years earlier. . . .
. . . Which means he is the perfect man to be a bishop in Katharine Schori’s Episcopal Church!
Yes, that is the same Bishop Ohl who, as Bishop of Northwest Texas in 2005, drove the orthodox congregation of St. Nicholas’ Episcopal Midland out of their building they built and bought just four years earlier. . . .
. . . Which means he is the perfect man to be a bishop in Katharine Schori’s Episcopal Church!
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Gulag Obama: Prison for Obamacare Dissidents
Many of you are already aware of this, but I have not yet mentioned it here. And it should not only be mentioned but opposed with all the strength we can muster. The House Obamacare bill passed Saturday night, with the approval of my congressman Solobama Ortiz, has prison for those who refuse to submit.
Ranking Member of the House Ways and Means Committee Dave Camp (R-MI) released a letter from the non-partisan Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) confirming that the failure to comply with the individual mandate to buy health insurance contained in the Pelosi health care bill (H.R. 3962, as amended) could land people in jail. The JCT letter makes clear that Americans who do not maintain “acceptable health insurance coverage” and who choose not to pay the bill’s new individual mandate tax (generally 2.5% of income), are subject to numerous civil and criminal penalties, including criminal fines of up to $250,000 and imprisonment of up to five years.
To their credit, even some Lefties are appalled at this provision.
Democrats, your jackboots are showing.
Ranking Member of the House Ways and Means Committee Dave Camp (R-MI) released a letter from the non-partisan Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) confirming that the failure to comply with the individual mandate to buy health insurance contained in the Pelosi health care bill (H.R. 3962, as amended) could land people in jail. The JCT letter makes clear that Americans who do not maintain “acceptable health insurance coverage” and who choose not to pay the bill’s new individual mandate tax (generally 2.5% of income), are subject to numerous civil and criminal penalties, including criminal fines of up to $250,000 and imprisonment of up to five years.
To their credit, even some Lefties are appalled at this provision.
Democrats, your jackboots are showing.
Monday, November 09, 2009
God and the Fall of the Berlin Wall
Today, Germany and the World (except for Obama and some other Leftists) celebrate the 20th Anniversary of the Fall of the Berlin Wall.
The anniversary connects with me because it reminds me of a way God very personally demonstrated his sovereignty.
Just over 20 years ago, a news story about East Germany (I don’t remember the details.) so provoked me that in anger, I prayed that God would remove “that Communist fossil” East German leader Erich Honecker from power.
Only a few months later, not only was he removed from power, but the Berlin Wall fell.
Now, of course, God did not say, “Oh my, Mark has prayed. I must do his bidding.” Just the opposite. God showed the arm of His sovereignty and answered the prayers and yearnings of millions beyond what they hoped or imagined, certainly far beyond what I hoped or imagined. The Iron Curtain fell, and that peaceably for the most part. Not longer afterward, the Cold War ended with the Fall of the Soviet Union, again with hardly a shot fired.
Younger readers may not understand how remarkable that was. So a little perspective. In the late 80’s, I was already well past 25, and the Cold War and the Iron Curtain was all I knew. These evils preceded me and I expected they would continue my whole live and beyond. And if I did see them end, it would surely be with violence. Communists did not care what “the people” really thought. They would hold on to power until it was ripped out of their cold dead hands by either internal revolution or by war, or so I thought. Nuclear war was still far more thinkable than the peaceful fall of Communism in Europe. In fact, the 80’s saw not a little Nuclear War scare. See the movie The Day After for one symptom (and cause) of that. I, myself, gave a lot of thought to what I would do if a nuclear strike seemed likely. On the other hand, it did not even occur to me that the people behind the Iron Curtain would see freedom and that peaceably.
So I practically had to pinch myself when the Fall of the Berlin Wall and the other events of 1989 occurred. I still consider these a wonderful act of God. And I still get a bit emotional thinking back on it.
The Lord is indeed Lord. He is sovereign. Thanks be to God!
The anniversary connects with me because it reminds me of a way God very personally demonstrated his sovereignty.
Just over 20 years ago, a news story about East Germany (I don’t remember the details.) so provoked me that in anger, I prayed that God would remove “that Communist fossil” East German leader Erich Honecker from power.
Only a few months later, not only was he removed from power, but the Berlin Wall fell.
Now, of course, God did not say, “Oh my, Mark has prayed. I must do his bidding.” Just the opposite. God showed the arm of His sovereignty and answered the prayers and yearnings of millions beyond what they hoped or imagined, certainly far beyond what I hoped or imagined. The Iron Curtain fell, and that peaceably for the most part. Not longer afterward, the Cold War ended with the Fall of the Soviet Union, again with hardly a shot fired.
Younger readers may not understand how remarkable that was. So a little perspective. In the late 80’s, I was already well past 25, and the Cold War and the Iron Curtain was all I knew. These evils preceded me and I expected they would continue my whole live and beyond. And if I did see them end, it would surely be with violence. Communists did not care what “the people” really thought. They would hold on to power until it was ripped out of their cold dead hands by either internal revolution or by war, or so I thought. Nuclear war was still far more thinkable than the peaceful fall of Communism in Europe. In fact, the 80’s saw not a little Nuclear War scare. See the movie The Day After for one symptom (and cause) of that. I, myself, gave a lot of thought to what I would do if a nuclear strike seemed likely. On the other hand, it did not even occur to me that the people behind the Iron Curtain would see freedom and that peaceably.
So I practically had to pinch myself when the Fall of the Berlin Wall and the other events of 1989 occurred. I still consider these a wonderful act of God. And I still get a bit emotional thinking back on it.
The Lord is indeed Lord. He is sovereign. Thanks be to God!
Benny Hill Stamp Rejected by Royal Mail
It is with regret that I pass on the sad news that the Royal Mail has rejected a Benny Hill stamp.
Newly released minutes from a Royal Mail committee meeting show that political correctness won the day when it came to selecting images to represent ITV comedy. "Benny Hill has been included in previous presentations but concerns were raised by our public relations team as it was in direct opposition to company's policies on harassment in the workplace," the minutes stated.
Mark Steyn is also concerned:
Hmm. Hope this won't derail the USPS Clinton commemorative.
Newly released minutes from a Royal Mail committee meeting show that political correctness won the day when it came to selecting images to represent ITV comedy. "Benny Hill has been included in previous presentations but concerns were raised by our public relations team as it was in direct opposition to company's policies on harassment in the workplace," the minutes stated.
Mark Steyn is also concerned:
Hmm. Hope this won't derail the USPS Clinton commemorative.
Friday, November 06, 2009
BREAKING: NPR Reporting on Ft. Hood Shooter’s Radical Muslim Background UPDATED
NPR (Yes, NPR.) is reporting on Ft. Hood shooter Major Hasan’s Muslim background. And, in case you haven’t figured it out yet, he is not one of those nice Muslims:
He gave a Grand Rounds presentation. . . You take turns giving a lecture on, you know, the correct treatment of schizophrenia, the right drugs to prescribe for personality disorder, you know, that sort of thing. But instead of giving an academic paper, he gave a lecture on the Koran, and they said it didn’t seem to be just an informational lecture, but it seemed to be his own beliefs. That’s what a lot of people thought.
He talked about how if you’re a nonbeliever the Koran says you should have your head cut off, you should have oil poured down your throat, you should be set on fire. And I said well couldn’t this just be his educating you? And the psychiatrist said yes, but one of the Muslims in the audience, another psychiatrist, raised his hand and was quite disturbed and he said you know, a lot of us don’t believe these things you’re saying, and that there was no place where Hasan couched it as this is what the Koran teaches but you know I don’t believe it. And people actually talked in the hallway afterwards about ‘is he one of these people that’s going to freak out and shoot people someday?’
More here.
Meanwhile, much of the news media is distracting us from this core cause of his evil. I wonder how much longer they can keep that up.
UPDATE: Kudos to the Wall Street Journal (Registration may be required.) for recognizing that the presence of Muslims in the U. S. Armed Forces raises “difficult issues.”
He gave a Grand Rounds presentation. . . You take turns giving a lecture on, you know, the correct treatment of schizophrenia, the right drugs to prescribe for personality disorder, you know, that sort of thing. But instead of giving an academic paper, he gave a lecture on the Koran, and they said it didn’t seem to be just an informational lecture, but it seemed to be his own beliefs. That’s what a lot of people thought.
He talked about how if you’re a nonbeliever the Koran says you should have your head cut off, you should have oil poured down your throat, you should be set on fire. And I said well couldn’t this just be his educating you? And the psychiatrist said yes, but one of the Muslims in the audience, another psychiatrist, raised his hand and was quite disturbed and he said you know, a lot of us don’t believe these things you’re saying, and that there was no place where Hasan couched it as this is what the Koran teaches but you know I don’t believe it. And people actually talked in the hallway afterwards about ‘is he one of these people that’s going to freak out and shoot people someday?’
More here.
Meanwhile, much of the news media is distracting us from this core cause of his evil. I wonder how much longer they can keep that up.
UPDATE: Kudos to the Wall Street Journal (Registration may be required.) for recognizing that the presence of Muslims in the U. S. Armed Forces raises “difficult issues.”
Leftist Thugs Targeting Maine Voters
Now that liberal Maine, like liberal California, has voted down gay marriage, leftist gay rights activists are, as in California, targeting those who bravely opposed gay marriage for harassment and worse.
…In a defiant speech to several hundred lingering supporters, No on 1 campaign manager Jesse Connolly pledged that his side “will not quit until we know where every single one of these votes lives.”
The aftermath of the Maine vote is something to watch.
By the way, have you noticed the bait and switch pulled by the gay rights crowd the past few years? We were once told that gay rights is all about tolerance. Now we are told that opposition to gay “rights” should not be tolerated and that tactics such as blacklisting and mobs outside of churches and businesses are justified.
So which is it, gay rights people? Are you about tolerance . . . or brownshirt thuggery?
MORE: Maggie Gallagher puts the Maine vote in perspective:
Americans have a great deal of goodwill toward gay people as friends, neighbors and fellow citizens. Most of us do not want to hurt them or hate them or interfere with anyone's legitimate rights to live as they choose. But we do not believe gay marriage is a civil right; we think it is a civil wrong. And we do not appreciate the increasingly intense efforts to punish people who disagree with gay marriage as if we were racists, bigots, discriminators or haters.
Case in point: Don Mendell, a school guidance counselor at Nokomis Regional High School in Maine, now faces ethics complaints for his decision to appear in a TV ad for the Yes on One campaign in the closing days of the contest. If substantiated, the ethics complaint could lead the government to yank his license as a social worker and, therefore, threaten his livelihood. What kind of movement spurs people to act like this? Meanwhile, a teacher of the year who campaigned for gay marriage faces no such threat to her livelihood. Is gay marriage really about love and tolerance for all?
…In a defiant speech to several hundred lingering supporters, No on 1 campaign manager Jesse Connolly pledged that his side “will not quit until we know where every single one of these votes lives.”
The aftermath of the Maine vote is something to watch.
By the way, have you noticed the bait and switch pulled by the gay rights crowd the past few years? We were once told that gay rights is all about tolerance. Now we are told that opposition to gay “rights” should not be tolerated and that tactics such as blacklisting and mobs outside of churches and businesses are justified.
So which is it, gay rights people? Are you about tolerance . . . or brownshirt thuggery?
MORE: Maggie Gallagher puts the Maine vote in perspective:
Americans have a great deal of goodwill toward gay people as friends, neighbors and fellow citizens. Most of us do not want to hurt them or hate them or interfere with anyone's legitimate rights to live as they choose. But we do not believe gay marriage is a civil right; we think it is a civil wrong. And we do not appreciate the increasingly intense efforts to punish people who disagree with gay marriage as if we were racists, bigots, discriminators or haters.
Case in point: Don Mendell, a school guidance counselor at Nokomis Regional High School in Maine, now faces ethics complaints for his decision to appear in a TV ad for the Yes on One campaign in the closing days of the contest. If substantiated, the ethics complaint could lead the government to yank his license as a social worker and, therefore, threaten his livelihood. What kind of movement spurs people to act like this? Meanwhile, a teacher of the year who campaigned for gay marriage faces no such threat to her livelihood. Is gay marriage really about love and tolerance for all?
Thursday, November 05, 2009
Betrayal: Cameron Surrenders UK to EU Beast
The Labour Party betrayed the British people by reneging on a promise to hold a referendum on UK participation in an EU treaty. Now David Cameron and the Conservative Party have done the same.
Thus, with Cameron’s cowardly whimper, the UK gives up its sovereignty to Gulag EU. It is indeed a sad and sorry day for Britain. What Guido Fawkes tried to do with gunpowder on the Fifth of November, the two major parties have now done willingly.
Peter Hitchens’ take may be found here.
This betrayal will drive more into support of the BNP and UKIP, for better or worse. But that will not be nearly enough to stop this craven surrender.
When I was a youth, it was fashionable among dispensationalists to suggest that the then European Common Market was the precursor of the Beast of the Apocalypse. Given how the UK and other nations have so easily given up their sovereignty to the EU and its tyranny, I am once again wondering if Hal Lindsey et al were actually right.
MORE: Here is just one example of EU tyranny.
Thus, with Cameron’s cowardly whimper, the UK gives up its sovereignty to Gulag EU. It is indeed a sad and sorry day for Britain. What Guido Fawkes tried to do with gunpowder on the Fifth of November, the two major parties have now done willingly.
Peter Hitchens’ take may be found here.
This betrayal will drive more into support of the BNP and UKIP, for better or worse. But that will not be nearly enough to stop this craven surrender.
When I was a youth, it was fashionable among dispensationalists to suggest that the then European Common Market was the precursor of the Beast of the Apocalypse. Given how the UK and other nations have so easily given up their sovereignty to the EU and its tyranny, I am once again wondering if Hal Lindsey et al were actually right.
MORE: Here is just one example of EU tyranny.
Wednesday, November 04, 2009
A Lesson for the GOP from North Carolina
“From North Carolina?” my perplexed readers may already be saying. “Weren’t New Jersey and Virginia the big elections last night?”
Well, yes. And, despite amusing protestations from Democrats otherwise, those two elections were an angry repudiation of Democrat policies. Look at the margins of those two gubernatorial elections.
But I think it more important for the Republican Party to pay attention to two municipal elections in North Carolina, along with the NY-23 Special Election. John Hood sums up the two North Carolina results well:
The only major city in North Carolina with a Republican mayor going into Tuesday’s balloting was Charlotte. In a expensive and hard-fought race, a Democratic city councilman, Anthony Foxx, defeated fellow Republican councilman John Lassiter last night, thus taking the top job back for the Democrats for the first time since the late 1980s. Lassiter ran as a moderate, fudging the differences between the two men on virtually every issue and generating little enthusiasm from GOP-leaning voters.
In North Carolina’s third-largest city, something very different happened. Greensboro's municipal elections are nonpartisan, but both parties are extremely active supporting their candidates. The incumbent mayor, Yvonne Johnson, is a longtime Democratic politician in Greensboro. She was upset last night by Republican Bill Knight, who's never held political office and who ran on a strongly conservative platform on fiscal and criminal-justice issues. The GOP now holds a majority on that city council for the first time ever, as far as I can tell.
Both cities voted for Barack Obama last year. Both Democratic candidates were black. The difference was the content of the Republican message.
The lesson from North Carolina as well as from the disappointing NY-23 result? It is not enough not to be Obama and not to be a Democrat (although I suspect that will help in next two election cycles). To be successful, Republicans have to stand for something more than “me too.” The long standing tendency of establishment Republicans to back wimps and RINOs is self-destructive. It alienates conservatives, does not attract enough liberals and so-called moderates, and enables Democrats.
Now one would think the expensive disaster that was the Dede Scozzafava campaign would teach the Republican Party this lesson and teach it well. But the National Republican Party has historically been rather slow to learn this lesson.
Which, by the way, is why I will not give my political donations to the NRC, the NRSC, or the NRCC. Further, should they ask (again) for my money, I will make clear to them in no uncertain terms why I am not giving to them.
Well, yes. And, despite amusing protestations from Democrats otherwise, those two elections were an angry repudiation of Democrat policies. Look at the margins of those two gubernatorial elections.
But I think it more important for the Republican Party to pay attention to two municipal elections in North Carolina, along with the NY-23 Special Election. John Hood sums up the two North Carolina results well:
The only major city in North Carolina with a Republican mayor going into Tuesday’s balloting was Charlotte. In a expensive and hard-fought race, a Democratic city councilman, Anthony Foxx, defeated fellow Republican councilman John Lassiter last night, thus taking the top job back for the Democrats for the first time since the late 1980s. Lassiter ran as a moderate, fudging the differences between the two men on virtually every issue and generating little enthusiasm from GOP-leaning voters.
In North Carolina’s third-largest city, something very different happened. Greensboro's municipal elections are nonpartisan, but both parties are extremely active supporting their candidates. The incumbent mayor, Yvonne Johnson, is a longtime Democratic politician in Greensboro. She was upset last night by Republican Bill Knight, who's never held political office and who ran on a strongly conservative platform on fiscal and criminal-justice issues. The GOP now holds a majority on that city council for the first time ever, as far as I can tell.
Both cities voted for Barack Obama last year. Both Democratic candidates were black. The difference was the content of the Republican message.
The lesson from North Carolina as well as from the disappointing NY-23 result? It is not enough not to be Obama and not to be a Democrat (although I suspect that will help in next two election cycles). To be successful, Republicans have to stand for something more than “me too.” The long standing tendency of establishment Republicans to back wimps and RINOs is self-destructive. It alienates conservatives, does not attract enough liberals and so-called moderates, and enables Democrats.
Now one would think the expensive disaster that was the Dede Scozzafava campaign would teach the Republican Party this lesson and teach it well. But the National Republican Party has historically been rather slow to learn this lesson.
Which, by the way, is why I will not give my political donations to the NRC, the NRSC, or the NRCC. Further, should they ask (again) for my money, I will make clear to them in no uncertain terms why I am not giving to them.
Tuesday, November 03, 2009
How Appropriate
There are reports that the New Jersey Democrat Party has hired convicted felons for its Get Out the Vote efforts.
Given that half the NJ Democrat Party ought to be convicted felons, I find this appropriate.
Given that half the NJ Democrat Party ought to be convicted felons, I find this appropriate.
An Anglo-Catholic Slice of Life
To get an idea how lonely being an Anglo-Catholic can be, I recommend this slice of life over at Anglican Wanderings. Due to geography and the sorry state of the Anglican Church of Canada, the blogger’s parish is over a thousand miles from the next orthodox Anglo-Catholic parish. Yes, rather isolated.
When many Anglo-Catholics are isolated and often not exactly welcomed, one can understand why Pope Benedict’s invitation is . . . inviting.
Personally, if I had to choose between being a lonely Anglo-Catholic and crossing the Tiber, I would be a lonely Anglo-Catholic for reasons I may go into sometime. But I certainly understand those who would choose differently.
When many Anglo-Catholics are isolated and often not exactly welcomed, one can understand why Pope Benedict’s invitation is . . . inviting.
Personally, if I had to choose between being a lonely Anglo-Catholic and crossing the Tiber, I would be a lonely Anglo-Catholic for reasons I may go into sometime. But I certainly understand those who would choose differently.
Monday, November 02, 2009
“Hell hath no fury like a RINO scorned.” UPDATED
Over the weekend, Dede Scozzafava continued to disgrace herself and the “Republicans” who backed her by withdrawing from the NY-23 Special Election race, then endorsing the liberal Democrat.
A lot of good all that Republican money showered on her did.
This appears to be a good development for Conservative Doug Hoffman. The final PPP poll has him double digits ahead.
But those “Republicans” who pushed Scozzafava might want to barricade the gates against those carrying pitchforks and torches. RINO Dede letting her true colors all hang out will increase conservative Republican anger all the more. For a sample of that anger, check out Newt Gingrich’s site.
Frankly, I think those “Republicans” who nominated and pushed Scozzafava need to resign their party offices . . . after they wipe the egg off their faces.
Meanwhile, with Hoffman, Christie, and McDonnell all polling ahead, that earthquake might just happen tomorrow.
UPDATE: But do NOT think a Hoffman victory is a shoo-in. A new Siena poll still has it close.
UPDATE 2: Turnout for a Biden-Owens rally today in Watertown is pitiful.
DISCLAIMER: If Democrats get thumped tomorrow, just remember: it has nothing to do with Obama. Nothing at all.
A lot of good all that Republican money showered on her did.
This appears to be a good development for Conservative Doug Hoffman. The final PPP poll has him double digits ahead.
But those “Republicans” who pushed Scozzafava might want to barricade the gates against those carrying pitchforks and torches. RINO Dede letting her true colors all hang out will increase conservative Republican anger all the more. For a sample of that anger, check out Newt Gingrich’s site.
Frankly, I think those “Republicans” who nominated and pushed Scozzafava need to resign their party offices . . . after they wipe the egg off their faces.
Meanwhile, with Hoffman, Christie, and McDonnell all polling ahead, that earthquake might just happen tomorrow.
UPDATE: But do NOT think a Hoffman victory is a shoo-in. A new Siena poll still has it close.
UPDATE 2: Turnout for a Biden-Owens rally today in Watertown is pitiful.
DISCLAIMER: If Democrats get thumped tomorrow, just remember: it has nothing to do with Obama. Nothing at all.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)