Eastern Health: 40 Denim Bags Filled With Condoms But Still “Huge Lack Of Awareness”

The headline reads: Young people ill-informed, say officials

Health experts alarmed by increase in cases of gonorrhea

Armed with the knowledge that some sexually transmitted infections are on the rise in this province, health promotion consultants are saying that, in addition to taking care of their physical, mental and nutritional health, young people need to pay more attention to their sexual health and well-being.

Anita Forward and Donna Dawe are health promotion consultants with Eastern Health.

It’s well documented, they say, that condom use is one of the best ways of reducing your risk of acquiring a sexually transmitted infection (STI) and preventing pregnancy.

Looks like their program is failing miserably. The more condoms go out, the more STD’s go up. Someone please help!

Attention Catholic Bishops and Priests (and other Christian leaders who still believe in biblical chastity): Here’s an opportunity waiting to be captured! Why not begin to share the Church’s teaching on chastity with your congregations? You know, a little bit here and a little bit there, a little on this Sunday and a little on that Sunday, in your bulletins and in your homilies. This could really help out government agencies like Eastern Health who are terribly overworked and under-financed.

Just think, you get to cover topics like masturbation, contraception, fornication, homosexuality, pornography [just like when you had your own schools]. You have no idea how this will boost interest in Mass.

Oh wait… I forgot, you’ve been a little shy on sexual mores and the Moral Law…

…since like 1968.

Disgraceful.

Cowardly.

Betrayal.

This is serious stuff. There will be Hell to pay.

 

RNC Save Women From Partner Violence, Ignore Murder Of Unborn Babies

Question: In a sane world, which is the closer, more intimate bond: the bond between a woman and her significant other or the bond between a pregnant mother and her child?

OK, another question, even easier: What’s the worse crime, the murder of one adult by another adult or the murder of a defenseless or disabled child by an adult?

According to a story in today’s newspaper, The Telegram, entitled Dozens of volatile cases on RNC’s radar, the RNC will be taking a proactive approach to domestic abuse.

An RNC initiative to get a tighter grip on domestic violence has an officer keeping a close eye on 50 cases that have the potential to end in tragedy.

For the first time, the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary has dedicated a full-time officer to the position of domestic violence co-ordinator who is responsible for analyzing calls for service and conducting risk assessments to determine if an abuser is likely to kill his intimate partner.

Const. Suzanne FitzGerald told The Telegram this week she has 50 active cases for which she has concluded that, without some form of intervention, the women could end up as victims of domestic homicide.

As I noted in a previous posting, nothing quite qualifies for the description “domestic violence” like a mother killing her child. [But, granted, the baby killing crowd has an arsenal of slogans and deceptive “logic” to dehumanize and depersonalize the child in the womb, so, according to them, it’s not really a mother killing her child!]

Until the unborn child recovers the same right of personhood as you and I, the RNC will never be “conducting risk assessments to determine” if a mother is likely to kill the baby she carries in her womb.

Catholics, Have You Heard About Woodworth’s New Human Dignity Motion?

What’s that you say? You can’t remember the last time you heard a Bishop or Priest at Mass encouraging a petition or initiative of any kind in support of unborn children in Canada?

But you are expecting a request this Sunday for contributions to the D&P fall appeal?

But surely Canadian Catholics must be the prime target group to advance protections for human life, given their official doctrinal positions and papal directives?

Sure, if their Bishops and Pastors didn't have so much blood on their hands. 

In the meantime, up to this point, no announcements on the CCCB Media page about Woodward's motion …

The Catholic Register reports:

OTTAWA - Warning of a “dark and dystopian future” if society accepts any instance of the state stripping even one person of their status as a human being, Conservative MP Stephen Woodworth tabled another motion in Parliament that highlights the status of the unborn child.

This motion — which follows Woodworth’s unsuccessful attempt in 2012 to have Parliament examine when life begins — asks that the House of Commons “affirm that every Canadian law must be interpreted in a manner which recognizes the equal worth and dignity of everyone who is in fact a human being.”

….

A Simple, Painful, Five-Point Plan For Catholic Marriage

In regard to Catholic marriage, exactly how can we get our house in order? The author ventures out into some very controversial space but his ideas are quite focused and down to earth when you give them a few minutes thought. The intended application is the good old USA but, hey, this is just as applicable and urgent in Canada, especially since we have “progressed” further down the road of same sex “marriage” than our southern neighbour. But, dear me, they are catching up at a very rapid pace.

This article is a couple months old but it’s really a ground-shaker in terms of envisioning our Catholic identity. The only problem is that it requires Bishops to be bold, principled and disciplined.  And of course if that were to happen, they’d already be very busy with their plan to end the legalized child killing in Canada.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Marriage: Let’s Get Our Own House in Order

Catholics must start treating marriage as though they actually believed what the Church teaches

John Zmirak

The Supreme Court’s decisions last month to remove all federal protection for natural marriage and deny the people of a state their right to define it were the most momentous events for the Church’s safety since the Russian Revolution. We will spend the next several years working out how far the laws of our country will be turned against us.

How much of our freedom of religion, of association, of contract will survive the rising demands for “equality,” “fairness,” and “tolerance” – words that have been handily redefined to justify using the guns and jails of the state to impose a secular standard on faithful citizens and their churches? Will Catholic schools be forced to hire partners in homosexual couples? Will seminaries? Will Catholic cemeteries be forced to bury same sex couples side by side?  Will churches themselves remain exempt from the social and legal pressure to perform such ceremonies? (Already in England and Denmark, state churches are being pressed by governments to conform. How long will Catholics there be exempt?)

Americans are not immune to these threats. Some say that it’s outlandish to imagine a future Supreme Court – duly packed by Democratic presidents with more judges like Sotomayor and Kennedy – ruling that churches’ free exercise of religion must be “balanced” against the interests of “fundamental rights” like marriage, that refusing to marry same-sex couples is no more protected by the First Amendment than Indian tribes’ use of peyote in their rituals. But then, 20 years ago, few would have predicted a Supreme Court overturning the Defense of Marriage Act, either. We like to think of the Court as a solemn arbiter of timeless principles and historic precedents, but in fact, it’s a more like a lap dancer that chases elite opinion like a stray $100 bill.

What should we do to push back and defend our institutions and our freedoms? I made an extended argument last week in The American Conservative that in the light of these crushing defeats, we need an entirely new strategy – one which concedes the fact that the public laws of marriage have utterly ceased to mirror the natural law.  That battle is lost for now and for many reasons, the chief one being that few outside conservative Christian circles even believe in natural law. We once thought that human nature was designed, by a Designer, and that we were bound to respect the purposes mirrored in its design – for instance, the fact that sex organs were intended to help us reproduce. Those who believe that we are, like cancer cells, a random result of blind and meaningless mutations will hardly defer to such “design.” We still think that we have “rights,” though we’re hard put to say why or where they might have come from, and we’re keen on Photoshopping the rights of the weak, the sick, and the young to match our current convenience.

As long as a vulgar Darwinian “just so” story explains for people what humans are and how we got here, we cannot expect to win the public over by pointing to traces of natural order. In fact, I don’t believe we can use political means to win the public over at all – not in our lifetimes. Instead, in the realm of politics, we should switch gears right away and strive to limit the power of the state to interfere in our lives and institutions. If we cannot win over majority opinion, then we must fight like wildcats for the rights of minorities – not so much ethnic minorities, whom the state defends well enough – but religious and ideological minorities, like us. (Yes, I mean to include Muslims and Mormons; we need all the friends we can get, and our principles must be consistent.) We must carve out exceptions to anti-discrimination laws, to protect all religious believers from the steamroller of the state.

We need to wean our institutions entirely off government aid. We ought to abandon entirely the project of promoting “social justice” through the state – this state, anyway, in its secular senile dementia – and become the most aggressively anti-government force this side of bomb-throwing anarchists. The secular state is our enemy, as the Communist Polish government was the enemy of its people, and the larger and stronger it gets, the easier it will find the task of persecuting our clergy, closing our churches, and re-educating our children. No, we don’t want the government offering health care, or haircuts, or collecting one more penny in tax than it takes to protect innocent life, guard the borders, and keep the roads free of fallen meteorites.

Instead of using the Church’s money to lobby Congress to pass Obamacare, or hire lawyers (as some dioceses do) to represent illegal immigrants, we ought to pour every penny into keeping our school doors open, running our own soup kitchens and hospitals, and fighting Leviathan’s tentacles wherever they try to reach. (As a symbolic gesture and a nice payback for all that the U.S. government is trying to do to our Church, the Vatican ought to offer asylum to Edward Snowden.) Our enemy is the state – this state. We’ve seen that we cannot ride the beast; it is time to break its kneecaps and bring it to heel. Just as we once joined with Jews to fight religious teaching in public schools because it was Protestant, now we must make common cause with libertarians to cripple the state because it is Jacobin.

Our other task is harder: if we wish to stand up for marriage, it’s time for our Church’s institutions to start acting as if they believed in it. I have a simple, painful, five-point plan for Catholics, which if undertaken would make of believers prophetic witnesses to the reality of marriage in the face of the pale, pansexual temporary sex contract that our laws call by that name. Consider this a gauntlet thrown down before our bishops:

1.  Each pastor should require of couples who wish to marry that they be trained in the methods and moral underpinnings of Natural Family Planning. This should be a non-negotiable part of Catholic marriage preparation. (It would help with credibility if some NFP instructors could step forth who have fewer than seven children; I’ve never met one, but I’m sure they’re out there.)

2.  A boilerplate “covenant” prenuptial agreement should be drawn up by our bishops and provided to pastors, which binds Catholic spouses to lifelong marriage, renounces divorce and remarriage, and awards all community property to the wronged party in any civil divorce. In states where “covenant marriage” is on the books – as it should be in all 50 – pastors must require that couples contract one, or find some other fancy building for their ceremony. I don’t know that our corrupt courts would enforce any such agreements, but forcing people to sign them will weed out the unserious. Anyone who objects is admitting in advance that he lacks sacramental intent. Give him directions to City Hall.

3.  A civil divorce should no longer be a prerequisite for an annulment, but its legal aftermath. Catholics unsure of their marriage’s validity should be required, on pain of excommunication, to await the Church’s judgment before they seek the remedies of the state.

4.  Annulment tribunals should, of course, be much stricter in their application of canon law, especially with marriages contracted after measures 1, 2, and 3 have been enacted. While the ease with which a Catholic marriage can be annulled is scandalous, the state of catechesis and marriage prep has been so abysmal for 40 years that many of the marriages our bishops are annulling might really deserve it; if either party, going into a marriage, secretly thinks that divorce and remarriage might be an option, that might be enough to invalidate the bond. That’s the seed of the cancer which we must root out; it’s not so much the annulments we approve that are scandalous farces, but many of the weddings. 

5.  The party whose intent was found to be defective in any annulment should have to wait 3-5 years before contracting a Catholic marriage, complete a rigorous marriage prep that fully explicates the conditions of the sacrament, and, of course, sign a “covenant” pre-nup so that this never happens again. 

In other words, put plainly, instead of trying to direct traffic in the public square while our own house is in disarray, we should fight off Caesar’s soldiers and make of our Church a beacon and an example. I seem to remember that one major world religion spoke of being a “city on a hill.” That sounds like a good idea.  

A Medical Doctor Emphasizes The Intimate Connection Between Contraception, Abortion And Euthanasia

In an article entitled “Contraception, Abortion, and now Euthanasia: Demographics is Destiny” Dr. Brian Kopp provides an overview of the evolution of these three social phenomena, reinforcing a point I recently made about the abortion-contraception link, but taking the link yet a step further.

Here's the full article:

Contraception, Abortion, and now Euthanasia: Demographics is Destiny

By Dr. Brian Kopp

The historical and universal Christian prohibition on contraception, which dates back to the Apostles, was first shaken by the Anglican Church’s 1930 Lambeth Conference, the first Christian body ever to condone contraception. Although the Anglicans limited contraception to what they termed exceptional cases, they cracked open a door that had previously been tightly shut. Within three decades, most Protestant denominations had abandoned the universal Christian prohibition against contraception and, by the early 1970s, much of Eastern Orthodoxy had dropped its prohibition on barrier methods.

The connection between the acceptance of contraception, beginning only in 1930, and the legalization of abortion, just four decades later, cannot be overstated. The apocryphal “right to privacy,” upon which the horrid 1973 Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion-on-demand was based, was first invented by five justices on the US Supreme Court in the 1965 case Griswold v. Connecticut. The Court decided in Griswold married couples had a “privacy” right to purchase contraceptives. To this day, Constitutional scholars openly concede there was simply no foundation or precedent for such a ruling, but there was also no means to stop the Justices from imposing their opinions on the nation. The Griswold ruling struck down the only remaining “Comstock Laws,” written by Protestant legislators in the 1800′s to make it illegal to sell or distribute all forms of contraception.

Over time, birth control became accepted in our culture because Christian groups abandoned traditional Christian teaching regarding sexual morality.

In 1968, Pope Paul VI issued Humanae Vitae, the landmark encyclical letter reaffirming the Christian prohibition of contraception passed down from age to age. A large number of Catholics rejected Humanae Vitae, so that, in the early stages of the Pro-life Movement (begun as a Catholic movement), contraception was never really examined or debated. This is regrettable since contraception is a fundamental consideration in the fight against both abortion and euthanasia. Paul VI warned that legalized contraception would result in disregard for life and morality leading to widespread divorce, abortion and euthanasia. Of course, in retrospect, it is obvious that he was correct. The Pro-life Movement, which began in the 1960s as a Catholic response to efforts to legalize abortion, would become a coalition of Catholic, Evangelical and Fundamentalist Christians in the ensuing years. The issue of contraception was never debated within this broad pro-life coalition because of the many Catholics who considered it a non-issue and because the movement’s Protestant members held that the issue had already been “settled.” In the interest of political effectiveness, a movement was born that never examined the root cause of what it was fighting against.

The fabricated legal foundations for the “right” to birth control progressed naturally to the philosophical foundations of a “right” to abortion. The US Supreme Court, in its 1992 Planned Parenthood v. Casey decision, said:

In some critical respects, abortion is of the same character as the decision to use contraception… for two decades of economic and social developments, people have organized intimate relationships and made choices that define their views of themselves and their places in society, in reliance on the availability of abortion in the event that contraception should fail.

This brutal honesty on the part of the US Supreme Court should have been cause for the pro-life community to re-evaluate the role of secular and Christian acceptance of the contraceptive mentality in fomenting the legalization of abortion. Unfortunately, that didn’t happen.

Of course, there are organizations, such as American Life League and Human Life International, whose founders did recognize that the widespread embrace of contraception led to legal and social acceptance of abortion, but they are the exception.

To orthodox Christians, who form the core of the Pro-life Movement, it is morally and philosophically inconsistent to support (or ignore) contraception and oppose abortion. Even the US Supreme Court admitted the connection. Surely the pro-life community can address contraception, which, for the most part, has never been credibly debated in spite of its role in the legalization of abortion and its precipitation of the cultural embrace of euthanasia.

As the momentum for legalized euthanasia builds, and de facto legalized stealth euthanasia becomes more and more commonplace, the question must be asked: Why euthanasia now?

The answer seems simple enough. The solvency of Social Security, Medicare, Welfare and Medicaid is based on younger workers paying into the system to support the outlay of benefits. In 1940, there were 159 workers paying into the Social Security Trust Fund for every Social Security beneficiary. In 2010 there were 2.9. This is due to increased life expectancy as well as decreased birth rates. The Baby Boomer generation, born from 1946-1965, filled the coffers and kept the welfare benefits flowing well into the 80s and 90s. But the Boomers did not reproduce at the rate of their parents. By 1970, the ratio of workers paying into the Social Security Trust Fund for every Social Security beneficiary had already dropped to 3.7. (Therefore this collapse in the ratio cannot be laid at the feet of Roe v. Wade.)

No society has both a shrinking population and a growing economy. As the federal government projects the costs of pensions and medical care promised to retirees will soon outstrip the ability of our population base to provide support, pressure is mounting to control costs by rationing care. Demographic changes have created the economic incentive to euthanize the Baby Boomer generation.

Frankly, killing the elderly is the final solution for a culture that has contracepted and aborted out of existence the generations that would otherwise have supported and cared for them. That is the ultimate end product of the cultural embrace of the contraceptive mentality. Why euthanasia now? Demographics is destiny.

Roman Catholic Theologian Edward Schillebeeckx: The Gracious Assassin

Augustine refutes a heretic: note the toppled Church

Michael Voris offers a compelling account of how dissidents and heretics within the Church accomplish the perversion of doctrine and resultant destruction of souls.

Police To Pro-Life Protester: It’s All About Protecting Children

Today I held my signs outside St. Pius X Catholic Church in St. John’s. Within minutes of arriving I heard a neighbour screaming out to me to get my sign out of view of her children. Apparently her children were in the house and my graphic abortion sign disturbed them, even though her house was about 100 feet away from my sign, making it a little difficult to see the detail. Also, I guess it didn’t occur to her to keep the children away from the window; no, she had to make a federal offense out of the matter. She insisted I turn the graphic picture side of my sign away from her house because it was disgusting and if I did not do as she insisted she would call the police. I did agree with her that the picture was disgusting. However, I don’t make a habit of carrying on a long distance conversation so I simply asked the lady if she would like to read my pamphlet and then I continued on in my protest.

About fifteen minutes later the police did arrive. Two female constables exited the car, walked towards me and began to ask questions. The video details the drama. What I found surprising was, once again, the argument that we mustn’t show the pictures for the sake of the children. Apparently the pictures will inflict some sort of damage on children. Never mind my argument—which is that abortion is actually KILLING children every day—but let’s rather focus on removing this picture from view for the children’s sake. Even though we know that children are subjected to huge amounts of violence on TV, including murders with some very graphic and gruesome scenes, apparently we need to take every possible precaution to prevent them from seeing one more disturbing picture on the sidewalk outside. In fact, we need to call the police to ensure that the picture is removed immediately so that children aren’t subjected to such awful imagery.

Whatever. But let’s face it, it’s a masterful ruse! Get rid of the pictures, they bother us terribly, and we’ll let the children take the heat for our discomfort. [Am I being fair in saying that? I think so; after all, it was only recently that a local psychotherapist remarked at our recent pro-life conference that, insofar as graphic abortion pictures are concerned, children are much more resilient than we think.] Hey, come to think of it, I do see a pattern here. Blame the children for our sins, discomfort and failures and then use them as our excuse. If they suddenly and unexpectedly appear after sex, we’ll “terminate” them quickly and carry on with life. If we get unexpected reminders of the evil deed, we’ll say the children can’t handle the hard truth so please get it out of their faces, you evil person!

I wonder how many times that mother called the police to report what was happening every day at the Morgentaler abortuary on LeMarchant Rd. where hundreds of children are actually suctioned—ripped asunder—to their deaths every year. But of course that’s all legal so it’s not the same thing, is it? It needn’t be brought into the conversation therefore at all. God forbid that anyone introduce it into the discussion for it will be mysteriously ignored or summarily dismissed.

But getting back to the police…this was a clear case of harassment and intimidation, and if it should happen again, I intend to use a different approach and stand a little firmer on my legal rights.

Catholic Bishops of Canada Unveil Plan For Philippine Victims: Still No Plan For Abortion Victims

In response to the shocking loss of life and property in the Philippines, the Archbishop of St. John’s, Martin Currie, has a plan to address the tragedy. Likewise the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops (CCCB) has joined with the Canadian Catholic Organization for Development and Peace (CCODP) “to prepare a first response and a plan of continuing aid for the victims of Typhoon Haiyan.”

Human beings, moved by compassion for their fellow man, rise to such occasions.  And somehow in the mystery of life and death on this planet we make allowance for Divine Providence when lives are lost by accident, sickness or weather. As I noted in my recent posting, all of us—nations small and great, media of all stripes—will obsess over the loss, do everything possible to rescue and rebuild, and put new systems in place to prevent a repeat catastrophe.

Yet not one of those who perished due to Typhoon Haiyan had their lives taken from them unlawfully, in premeditated fashion by their fellow man. How much more grievous and lamentable would it have been if thousands had lost their lives to slaughter by their neighbours, such as when Syrian civilians were recently subjected to nerve gas attacks?

Perhaps at the end of the year the Archbishop and the CCCB will announce a prayer vigil for the 110,000+ human victims destroyed viciously in utero by Canada’s “maternal health” specialists in 2013. Perhaps also they will call for a collection to fund their 2014 Bishops’ plan to end the senseless loss of life so no such repeat catastrophe ever occurs in Canada again.

But so far, for nearly fifty years since legalized abortion came to Canada in 1969, the Bishops have not reacted with the typically human and compassionate response to a dreadful tragedy, let alone to a heinous crime (which abortion is, in the eyes of God). Although they—and they alone—are charged by Heaven with the spiritual and moral authority of Christ in the affairs of men in Canada, they are, in practical terms, silent about this Canadian holocaust. The evil has not been called out and backed up by a war plan. The demons are yet unbound and will continue to roam throughout Canada in 2014, with their ravaging bloodlust for womb children unabated.

As horrifying as it may sound, the Bishops, in varying degrees, appear to have made their peace with the devil. Forgive me but what other explanation can be possible?

You cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of demons: you cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of demons. 1 Corinthians 10:21

Amazing Video: New Twins, Sleeping, Take Bath Together

A heart touching video provokes mystery and the Divine.
Do they remember their 40 weeks snuggled closely together in warm surroundings?



In our day so many of God's innocents will be taken by the knife of the abortionist, before we get to see or enjoy them. God help us to rescue them.

Friday News: Typhoon Haiyan Claims 10,000. Abortion Claims 3,600.

For a few days, media and the world will obsess over the tragic loss of human life caused by Typhoon Haiyan. And rightly so. Let us pray and do everything we can with our time, money and other resources to assist them in their need. In the name of God. In the name of Humanity.

But let's review the terrible reality of our times:

Friday News: Typhoon Haiyan Claims 10,000. Abortion Claims 3,600.

Saturday News: Abortion claims 3,600.

Sunday News: Abortion claims 3,600.

Monday-Friday News: Abortion claims 3,600 daily.

Weekly total: 25,200 (USA plus Canada)

--Now repeat News Cycle every week--

But only extremists and radicals obsess about such tragic loss of human life when the humans are little babies not yet visible to the human eye.