Archive for February 28, 2011

Just a reminder about Christian obligation

Posted: February 28, 2011 by datechguy in catholic
Tags:

You know we laugh a lot at Charlie Sheen, we tease Andrew Sullivan and we go after Charles Johnson a lot here.

We’ve also been hard on the unions and the left lately for their actions at protests. They have earned that commentary and we should not be shy about calling them out.

But remember, however much we disagree or disapprove or even if they insult us or mistreat our friends it doesn’t change our obligation to pray for them, in fact it makes it a bigger imperative. Remember the rules:

For if you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners love those who love them. And if you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners do the same. If you lend money to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit (is) that to you? Even sinners lend to sinners, and get back the same amount. But rather, love your enemies and do good to them, and lend expecting nothing back; then your reward will be great and you will be children of the Most High, for he himself is kind to the ungrateful and the wicked. Luke 6:32-35

This is not an optional doctrine. This is incumbent on every Christian, directly commanded by Christ and is ignored at our peril.

Advertisements

…in my opinion they KNOW they are full of it but decided to play this game anyway. Listen to how they phrase things:

The bills are so loosely worded, abortion-rights advocates say

A Planned Parenthood official testified last week at a hearing on Nebraska’s LB 232 that such legislation “authorizes and protects vigilantes.

Oh of course. “Abortion rights advocates” and “planned parenthood” (one and the same) are saying this. Abortion is a sacrament to them. Anything that dehumanizes the unborn is sacred to them.

(BTW check out this new Planned parenthood ad arguing against their defending, funny how in their list of services they neglect to mention a particular one.

Now the only paragraph were they phrase it differently they say:

Critics of the bills, including law enforcement officials, warn that these measures could invite violence against abortion providers and possibly provide legal cover to the perpetrators of such crimes.

Do they name the law enforcement officials? Do they specify the affiliations of said folks, sorry no can do.

As Stacy McCain points out AUL has made no secret of any of these things:

My point is that there is nothing at all secretive about Americans United for Life’s role in promoting these laws. The model legislation for the “Pregnant Woman’s Protection Act” is featured on AUL’s Web site, and providing model legislation and legal advice is a specialty that AUL proudly proclaims on its Web site:

Let’s cut to the chase, AUL is not endorsing murder. Anyone who thinks that this would trump basic murder laws is selling you something. So why do you see this kind of panic article? Simple. The left is losing, and losing big, not only in terms of elections of republicans, but polls have been moving for years against abortion.

This is what comes of killing off millions of your potential voters over a 40 year period.

Be aware folks this is coming here if at all possible.

But Lord Justice Munby and Mr Justice Beatson ruled that laws protecting people from discrimination because of their sexual orientation ‘should take precedence’ over the right not to be discriminated against on religious grounds.

The landmark case heard that the couple, who are now considering an appeal, argued their rights are being ‘trumped’ by those of homosexuals under equality legislation.

Outside the Royal Courts of Justice in London Mrs Johns stood alongside her husband as she said: ‘We are extremely distressed at what the judges have ruled today.

‘All we wanted was to offer a loving home to a child in need. We have a good track record as foster parents.

‘But because we are Christians, with mainstream Christian views on sexual ethics, we are apparently unsuitable as foster parents.

One question, forgetting the absurdity and the religious blacklisting of Christians, would this same judge be willing to make the same judgment if a Muslim couple wanted to adopt?

HA!

This pretty much explains it

Was I wrong to put this under the category “entertainment”? Her post certainly was.