After the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Roe (abortion on demand everywhere) unconstitutional, the elite Woke have been rampaging generally – but against one judge in particular. Mr. Justice Clarence Thomas is black and, wouldn’t you know …
Brendan O’Neill has the story at Spiked. We can’t republish this racist abuse; you must read it there for yourself. One of his own comments sums up the enlightened Woke view:
Why has Clarence Thomas become the target of so much flak following the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v Wade? It’s because he’s black. It’s because, as someone with black skin, he is not meant to hold conservative views on issues like abortion. In the eyes of the furious woke agitators who are haranguing Thomas even more than they are the other Roe-sceptical justices, he has not only made a bad legal decision – he has also betrayed his race. His sin is twofold: he has undermined the right to abortion and he has failed in his racial duty to nod unquestioningly along to every ‘progressive’ idea. He’s a racial transgressor, a bad black man, and therefore he must be reprimanded even more severely than the white folk on the Supreme Court. Ladies and gentlemen, behold the scourge of woke racism.(June 26, 2022)
Apparently, Mr. Justice Thomas does have civil rights so long as he does not exercise them.
When you read this stuff, you don’t wonder why the Woke believe in “nature red in tooth and claw,” Darwin’s “survival of the fittest,” and all that. When they were deafening the rest of us us with “Love Is Love!” the sharper among them were just trying to spot the carotid artery…
Here’s what the court actually ruled vs. what the Woke are screaming about.
Here’s a sympathetic view of Thomas and his role on the Court:
Meanwhile, a very active American abortionist gets the true crime treatment from a pair of investigative journalists from Ireland. Perhaps no American would touch it.
And now, let’s turn it over to the Babylon Bee for some lighter moments: Roe vs. Wade aborted in the 198th trimester:
Millions become prolife after learning that they won’t have to listen to Pink any more.
“Are you a journalist? With Roe v. Wade overturned it’s YOUR job to fight back by controlling the language and righteously steering the narrative toward a world in which abortions are safe, legal, free, common, and performed through all 9 months of pregnancy. That’s what journalism is all about! Here is a list of terms you should use going forward.”
The good news is, readers will learn more by seeking out sources other than Woke newsrooms.
Speaking of Woke newsrooms: This isn’t fake news: Mainstream media are very out of touch. Massively so, if recent survey research is any guide. But how did they get SO far out of touch? Pew Research Center’s recent survey sheds some light on the gap between journalists and the public they are supposed to be trying to reach.
60 Replies to “The Woke without their makeup …”
Well, the big question becomes Is Justice Thomas a Racist?
What would Darwin, Bill Nye The Science Guy, Al Gore or LeBron James say?
I think we all know the answer to that question.
How about the US being the least racist country in the history of the world?
If this is true or close to true, how does this affect wokeness?
They were bought. Everyone should look to their puppet masters who are now obvious and control more money than the US economy.
The woke are just pawns in this process. They are the useful idiots. The strings are elsewhere.
That’s about right
Why is the mainstream media so out of touch? It’s all part of the grand design:
I blame the MSM for most of what is wrong in the Western World these days. Maybe that’s simplistic, but it is a good start.
Today is the 92nd birthday of America’s smartest man in the last 100 years, Thomas Sowell.
The opposite of woke – pure evidence and reason.
What Clarence Thomas’s main legal opponent says about him.
The question is why this doesn’t get circulation.
Canada and the US, along with many other westernized countries, have been taken over by a bunch of left-leaning lunatics. We are literally watching the destruction of the west unfold before our eyes; the result of which will be a cultural vacuum.
Jerry at 5 and 6,
Don’t think I’ve heard of him. As opposed to great philosophers like Woody Allen 🙂
KR at 7,
A bit apocalyptic there. I watched it happen – decade by decade by decade. Here’s the formula: you push The Pill, then you push Abortion. Then legalize abortion in the U.S. in 1973. And then you open Adult Bookstores all over the place. In those stores, you include a thick magazine with page after page of photos of nude and partly nude women willing to have SEX with anybody, and their contact information. In the ’80s you fill the newspaper Classifieds with Divorce ads like: “No kids? $75 and you’re out. Call 800-DIVORCE.” You introduce cable TV that could have so many interesting things on it, like the knitting channel, and then put PORN on it. Then, in the ’90’s, you put “Shock Jocks” on the radio interviewing prostitutes, falsely referred to as porn stars, and late at night, two guys on the radio talking about SEXUAL encounters. Then you introduce the internet and fill it with as much PORN as possible. Then it’s off the precipice…
The woke insanity is related to sex(pill, abortion, sexual depravity ,porn, trans, lgbt,etc.) and opposed to family. Looks like sexual “freedom” produce depression , delusion , despair , hate and suicidal tendencies. Looks like Bible was right. What a shock. Not. 😆
I lived through a period of time filled with normal people and normal living. Kids played together. Our fathers worked and most mothers stayed home. It was not perfect because people are not perfect. But it, the late 1950s and early 1960s, were a lot better than today. A lot better.
Yes, the Bible was right. The Word of God contained what was needed for man to do what was right.
Douglas Murray and Peter Boghossian – Woke ideology, the university, and grievance – discuss the origins of Woke ideology
One of the comments mentions Murray along with VDH (Victor Davis Hanson) and Thomas Sowell as top political minds of our time.
How about ‘drag queens’ in schools? They don’t hurt – are not bad examples – to kids. Yeah, right.
Unless you were a homosexual, a transgendered, black, Asian, indigenous, a woman being physically (and legally)“disciplined” by her husband, a child being sexually violated by an uncle, a pregnant teen, or a child sexually assaulted by a priest.
You are remembering a golden age that never existed.
JH at 14,
Yeah, yeah, yeah. And those particular things are a lot better today?
I am really tired of seeing the same PROPAGANDA over and over and over.
You know what? Homosexuals have been doing what they want since recorded history. And who do you think you are? The creator of UTOPIA? You are proposing a perfect reality that has NEVER existed until today.
So cut the crap.
There never was a golden age.
But if one wants to discuss actual progress and regress, then cherry picking is not a logical way to go. Nearly every society that has exemplified itself since the beginning of time has disappeared. The one exception is current Western Civilization which now could be argued is slowly disappearing mainly from within.
Recently, ex Attorney General Barr made a speech and sort of summed up the problem with today. A problem which the “Woke” will strenuously oppose, namely the disappearance of Christianity from Western Civilization. Here are two references that discuss his speech.
The appearance of the modern world with all its technology, medicine, wealth, longevity, comfort and knowledge started in one place, England and a little bit in Holland. Christianity was a major part of this.
I am sure some will violently disagree but that is for discussion, not ad hoc elimination.
Also I highly recommend Ibn Khaldun’s Asabiyyah if one wants to understand what is happening in the world.
It could be argued that the best society the world has ever seen was the combination of freedom with Christian morality. Before one cherry picks and criticizes Christianity, please provide a superior system. Hint, one never existed and any attempts to impose a different one are full of obvious flaws.
Freedom produced the modern world, Christianity moderated the excesses of freedom. Certainly not perfectly, especially when so called Christians did not practice their Christianly when exercising their personal freedom. But the system learned and things got better even with this, the best system since the beginning of history.
Now, a large minority wants to eliminate an essential part of the modern world. Mainly because they believe they are smarter.
Aside: why do these experts who are smarter than everyone else, need to avoid the truth in so many areas? How will such behavior lead to a good result?
Jerry at 16,
“… Western Civilization which now could be argued is slowly disappearing…”
It’s very important to be as specific as possible so others can understand why certain things are happening. First, certain STANDARDS existed that governed personal and public conduct. No one can call themselves civilized and then behave in an uncivilized way. Does anyone want the following to become common? Profanity, pornography, treating other people badly? THAT has to be specific. And people should get away from these things.
A civilized person is someone who behaves well, has a standard of dress and a sense of limits.
As opposed to the late 1960s, which Radicals/Anarchists/Leftists are attempting to retry today:
“We’ll burn this country down if we have to!” Sure, and knock over a few statues.
It is people like that who are eroding society today.
In the mid-1960s, some radicals appeared in our neighborhoods to offer their way of living, which included smoking dope and sex outside of marriage. That was followed by telling people to abandon their Church and even their families, or at least to stop listening to your parents. You needed to listen to them. And who were they? TOTAL STRANGERS. People who wanted to replace Christianity with Eastern beliefs. In the early 1970s I was on the edge of a college campus in a major U.S. city. I walked into a bookstore that had books on Eastern beliefs on shelves that ran from floor to ceiling. How did they get there? Who put them there?
This was the subversion of the American colleges and universities that really got underway in the ’70s. I’m a bit younger than you so I remember those early ’70s as the work of my mentors and teachers and elders. They had taken over the culture at that moment. The Eastern beliefs were an anti-Christian movement, but also inspired by psychedelic drug use, post-modern philosophy and the moral revolution. It didn’t start in the ’60s – it can be traced to the communists and the Frankfurt School.
I remember the big names of the time. Aside from the rock-stars who were considered the new religious shamans of the time (the Beatles had their Eastern religion promotions) there was Timothy Leary and Wilhelm Reich and Abby Hoffman and Allen Ginsburg. Also Thus Spoke Zarathustra and Carlos Castaneda were the books kids were reading while smoking dope. The beatniks turned hippies decided that they wanted some “spirituality” without real commitment. So they could talk about Buddhism and put posters of Hindu gods on the wall and sit in the lotus position chanting Om.
The college bookstores, like the one you encountered, were just following the trend. The professors had been embarrassed by the anti-war and civil rights movements and now, whatever the students wanted was supposedly the right thing to do.
The hippie ethos died off in the late 70s but the anti-Christian idea had become mainstream by then. Universities now are dominated by the progressive left. The hippies became the professors – then they were “Tenured Radicals” as Roger Kimball called them.
David Horowitz has several books on the topic. He was a ’60s radical (Jew) who became a conservative.
Guys like Bill Ayers are still in action – an unrepentant terrorist from the ’60s.
The American universities and colleges continue to spread progressive left wing propaganda – they have radicalized several generations.
SA at 19,
I hate the word Progressive as used by Leftists. It means “Give me what I want, right now.”
I know about the Beatniks changing clothes and becoming Hippies. The Beatles were pulled into a carefully planned Propaganda operation. I like certain rock and soul artists and groups. I wanted the music – only.
The Hippies had no ethos, just dope and sex, like the Beatniks with booze and sex.
Professors were respected by students not controlled by them. I think any acceptance of this idea is quite wrong. Here’s what happened in Catholic Universities:
The truth of what actually happened is hard to come by today because the mainstream media is controlled by Leftists/Liberals and they want you and I to believe what they say. To think what they say is important is actually important and the behaviors they show are somehow good.
Depending on the subject, I might accept as much as 20% as factual and good. After that, zero.
The “moral revolution” is the wrong term. It’s the Sexual Revolution – sex with anybody.
I invite you and all reading to read the following:
The Newman Society article on the Land O Lakes statement is good.
This is the cultural revolution. Where you and I disagree is that it wasn’t only a sex-revolution. The Frankfurt School and followers used sex to destabilize the culture. “Academic freedom” eventually meant “freedom to destroy”- and post-modernist deconstructionism was the means for that.
Catholic Universities have the mission of teaching the truth, but because of the surrender to revolutionary concepts they ended up (some not all) attacking the concept of truth.
We can look back to Darwinian evolution as an example.
ID has been fighting against that movement, but the American universities – which are major shapers of our culture, remain committed to Darwinian materialism today.
Hanna-Barbara Gerl-Falkovitz does not speak there only of a sex revolution.
She’s talking about the destruction of human exceptionalism. There are people who think humans are nothing but accidental by-products of chemical reactions. They deny the divine identity and destiny of human life. They’ll deny that human life has any ultimate meaning or purpose.
The sex-revolution is a big part of it, but not the only aspect.
SA at 21,
Darwinian materialism must be taught. It underpins everything they believe. If I was made by no one, I am responsible to no one. My life is the material realm and when I die, nothing happens. No afterlife and certainly no judgment.
The Hippies, for example, were against Conformists like the Beatniks were against ‘squares.’ That meant normal people had to become non-conformists like them. That’s a lie. I had a few Hippie friends and I saw the before and after. One acted like he had just walked out of Hippie Boot Camp. He spoke perfect Hippie-speak, engaged in mandatory dope smoking, had the regulation clothes, the regulation length chain and the regulation length hair. He was as Ultra-Orthodox as a member of a religious group. And in some ways, he was part of a cult. He referred to his girlfriend as his “old lady” and referred to sex outside of marriage as performing “natural acts.” I won’t even go into the perverse and dope promoting Underground Comix that appeared at the time.
Certain magazines and underground newspapers were there. All promoting perverse sexuality and Marxist/Communist ideas. The goal was to convince Squares, like me, to take a walk on the perverse side. No. Not me. If it’s all about drugs, sex and booze – forget it. Reject it. True male – female relationships involve earned trust, mutual respect and rules of behavior. This helps to ensure that good relationships between compatible people can lead to good marriages.
TODAY – and I cannot emphasize this enough – the goal is to destroy families, to destroy real, loving male – female relationships. To turn dating into have sex first, ask questions later, or not. A perfect example of putting the cart before the horse. And should the couple marry, finding out only after the ceremony, who they actually ended up with.
SA at 22,
I see your point. I understand. But everything today that is disruptive to the individual revolves around sex. Gay men should be ‘out and proud.’ I’m not sure about lesbians. Bisexuals fall into two categories. Transgender is not just about gender dysphoria, but some form of “acceptance.” A male acquaintance of mine went through the transition process. He visited me and was dressed as a woman. He had a few female secondary characteristics but he was the same person I had known. His mind did not become different or female. He told me he was going to marry his boyfriend. We had a pleasant conversation and he left. I had no involvement in his decision and was unaware that he had been involved with a man. So some in a gay marriage are adopting kids. A discussion for another day perhaps.
The following are old statements: “Man invents himself” and “Man is the measure of all things.” When people deny their God-given natures then they turn in on themselves. Man becomes god.
“For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.”
We are going through a period where some are trying to impose their vain imaginations on others.
relatd @ 23 – excellent summary and memory of those times. You said it well – the hippie bootcamp transformed all the non-conformists into exact copies of each other. The clothes, the language, the attitude. Like a religious cult, they would kick out anyone who didn’t agree. Yes, remarkable to hear that team “old lady” – that was a classic hippieism. As a kid I wondered why they showed so much disrespect to someone they lived with – but the guys wouldn’t marry the girlfriend anyway so as you said there wasn’t much respect. The girls all believed in feminism and that meant they could destroy their self-esteem and let the men act like hippie-animals. The children of that generation are also very similar if not worse today.
Your insight on the Comix was great also – I had forgotten about how powerful those were. Yes, perverted sexuality presented for young adults as if it was the newest and most intelligent thing – with that ever-present spirit of mockery of the square world.
So many guys I’ve known who lived the hippie hedonism ended with miserable lives, but they wouldn’t change. They abandoned the Catholic Faith for nothingness and pot-smoking addictions. Broken marriages and disordered families are the wreckage that followed. A small few have come back to the Church, very broken in need of healing. As Julian the Apostate famously said “You have won, Galilean”. Yes, the Holy Church survived, as it did under pagan Rome.
I see there is a petition with over 700,000 signatures calling for the impeachment of Clarence Thomas and possibly the other Catholic justices who were less than completely honest about their views on abortion at their confirmation hearings.
Then why did they push for same Dec marriage and legal adoption? How is the effort to create families an attempt to destroy families.
Don’t tell my wife of forty years. Or the wives of my brothers (38 and 37 years respectively).
It also runs counter to actual evidence.
There is nothing wrong with having sex before marriage. I highly recommend it.
Again, you are pining for a golden age that never existed. In spite of all of its flaws, things are much better today for the vast majority of people than it was in your beloved 50s and 60s. Spousal abuse is no longer legal. Homosexuals are no longer being jailed, denied accommodation or denied employment. Black people can eat wherever they want, use any bathroom, drink out of any fountain and sit at the front of the bus. Women can pursue careers that were not available to them in the 50s and 60s. The church is no longer covering up their past and present indiscretions. In fact, I just read that the Pope will be travelling to Canada to offer an official apology for their role in residential schools. Teenage girls that get pregnant are no longer removed from high school. Suicide rates amongst gay teens is declining. Interracial marriage is now legal. Abortion rates are lower.
Sev, of all people, at 26 laments the supposed lack of honesty in others? I think my irony meter just blew up:
St. Paul says that those who commit fornication will not enter the kingdom of heaven. 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 – so it depends on what kind of risk you want to take, even with promoting immorality on a public forum. What kind of moral authority says that sex before marriage is permitted but sex outside of marriage is not? Children suffer from divorce and there is a sharp decline in the number of marriages, as well as a continued decline in the birth rate.
It depends on how God judges it. Are more people going to end up in hell as a result of “how good” things are going these days? Church attendance was much higher in the beloved 50s and early 60s – because people gave God a priority and they lived with eternal life as their destiny.
Our society has exchanged a destiny in heaven, for pleasures in the here-and-now.
Again, it’s a big risk to follow the atheists who claim that there is no God to judge their behavior.
I’d advise that it’s much wiser to follow the teachings of the great spiritual guides of the past and not the shallow rhetoric of today’s destroyers of culture and meaning.
Who says that sex before marriage is immoral? You are certainly entitled to live your life according to your moral values, and I would defend your right to do so. But, as long as my actions do no harm to others, you don’t have the right to impose your moral values on me.
I am the only moral authority I accept to inform my behaviours. Of course, I seek input and feedback, and constantly modify my moral values.
All this means is that people are taking marriage more seriously than they did in the past. And what is so wrong with a declining birth rate.
Why should I care how a mythical being judged me?
I wouldn’t underestimate the influence of societal pressure in why people went to church.
No, they have exchanged a delusional belief for making the most of the only life they get.
PS, but please don’t get me wrong. I fully support your right to live your life according to your beliefs. But I do oppose the imposition of laws on others based on religious beliefs, when the behaviours being prohibited or persecuted are doing no harm to anyone.
Is there anytime sex is immoral or should be prohibited?
Doesn’t the Catholic Church forbid divorce and regard remarriage as a sin?. In that case, instead of acknowledging that humans are fallible creatures and can make mistakes in choosing their partners, it would force people to live out their lives in a failed and loveless relationship? How does that benefit anyone?
I don’t know why you think I would be impressed by a CS Lewis quote. I prefer Philip Pullman
JH at 27,
What “families” are you talking about? You mix truth with falsehoods. Homosexuals have no natural capability to have children. The Supreme Court did a workaround with voters who rejected same-sex marriage, so-called. So they adopt kids and what do these kids see? Two men who are “married.” How are they married? Even kids understand what heterosexual married couples do.
So you and some relatives are married. I don’t care about people who are doing things right. I’m concerned about people who are doing it wrong.
I wrote about DIVORCE in the context of ads in newspaper Classifieds from the 1980s. “Who cares about the sanctity of marriage? I’m a lawyer and I want to make a quick buck.” Divorce became too easy and the “No-Fault” aspect was abused. So divorce is down? If people do it wrong for years, and see the wreckage among people they know, they start to see how to do it right – after YEARS of doing it wrong.
“NEVER EXISTED” “NEVER EXISTED” It existed. I was there. I saw how people BEHAVED toward each other. I had neighbors who were like family. There was a man down the street who grew beautiful roses. On the next street were two men who sharpened saws and blades out of a garage. The Church was the center of the community. No, not everyone went to the same Church but they went. During Summer Vacation I would wake up to the sounds of a hammer pounding or see someone painting their house or garage. TV was CENSORED so sexual perverts could not get their way. You could not say sex on TV. Married couples could not be shown in bed together. It was good. It was clean. It was wholesome and that’s what I saw.
And homosexuals. Do you think I’m stupid? That I have not studied this? Who was in charge of diagnosis for homosexuals back then? I know that the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual came out in 1952. But, the American Psychiatric Association decided to ignore the evidence and held a vote in 1973 to declassify it. A vote?
And black people. I am friends with black people. I am grateful that non-violent people like the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. did things the right way. He was a Baptist minister. It’s not correct to call him Dr. King.
Women? I am sick and tired about hearing about WOMEN. Those people were used and abused by TOTAL STRANGERS for a long time. Still are. How much “progress” have women made?
Your beloved LEFTISTS are lying to to you. Got that?
The Church is no longer covering up what? Have you taken one microsecond to get both sides of the story? Or did you only hear the MainFake Media side? So, tell me, out of all priests in the time period in question, what number actually did something? All Christian ministers? When something like that actually happened, actual victims acted – not the date on the calendar. As in, today is automatically better because it’s the 21st Century. Reality doesn’t work like that.
What do you care about what the Pope does? It’s obvious the Leftist/Liberal Media does because at certain times of the year and after certain “legal” events that go against Leftist ideology, the Church gets dragged through the mud. That has not changed and it’s gotten worse. I don’t defend wrongdoing but I will always point out that the Church takes blame but when sexual abuse occurs in public schools, not so much.
“Teenage girls that get pregnant are no longer removed from high school.”
Why is that a good thing?
“Suicide rates amongst gay teens is declining.” And what? I don’t think suicide is a good thing but you are pushing the LEFTIST narrative again. And IF rates are declining, where is the scientific evidence?
Interracial marriage is legal? Again with the “legal.” You think zero interracial marriages occurred before the legal?
Do I want people to be treated well? Treated fairly? Yes. But today, just because something is legal does not always mean it’s right.
“There is nothing wrong with having sex before marriage. I highly recommend it.”
Why do you write such idiotic things? Who died and put you in charge of sexual morality? You say you’re married and you promote this? Truth mixed with lies.
Spousal abuse is no longer “legal”? Do YOU think it stopped the moment that happened? Do you think men, right now, have stopped beating their wives? Is the “legal” all you care about? Do you think battered women no longer exist?
As long as sex is between consenting adults, I see no reason for any restrictions.
If one party refuses consent or is unable to provide informed consent for some reason or is too young to be able to provide informed consent then that should be prohibited.
Yes, this is reserved for Catholics who are married with vows before God – in a sacramental marriage. To break that vow (a promise “until death do us part”) would be like lying under oath in a federal court, or in some very significant situation.
If however, one of the spouses defrauded themselves at the time of marriage and had no intention of living the Catholic lifestyle – then that’s not a valid marriage and could be annulled so the other party can marry again (if the marriage breaks up).
If both parties fully understand their vow and commitment, then they’re bound. If they divorce, they cannot remarry because they’re bound by their vows before God.
In the Catholic view, the purpose of marriage is not the feeling of love (although many people think that’s what it is and when they don’t feel love they think the marriage failed). It’s instead, being of service to one another, desiring to raise a family (and doing that if possible) and being a good example to society of married life – helping others, etc. It’s a means of serving God, not just in giving oneself pleasure. There is necessary pleasure and joy that comes along with it, but couples can work out their differences and keep the family together. But even if they have to split that’s not necessarily a sin. It’s only immoral if they marry another person after having made their vows.
Seversky, perhaps you could quote someone other than Pullman to try to undermine Lewis’s quote? i.e. After all, Pullman is apparently a militant atheist and a liar in and of himself!
And Seversky, since CS Lewis is not to your liking, perhaps you can answer Dr. Colin Patterson’s, former Senior Paleontologist, British Museum of Natural History, question? i.e. “Can you tell me anything you know about evolution, any one thing that is true?”
Neither did my mother’s adoptive parents. Does this mean she wasn’t part of a family?
They are married in the same way that my wife and I are. The concept isn’t difficult. They avow their love and faithfulness to each other in front of witnesses and sign the necessary documents.
So? Do they do it in front of their children?
And who decides this? Without proof of harm, live and let live. The concept is simple. How does two men marrying each other harm anyone, other than your puritanical sensibilities?
BS. You saw what you wanted to see. You didn’t see the neighbour’s wife who always wore sunglasses to hide the bruise. You saw the neighbours teen daughter who went to live with her aunt for seven months. You saw the priest reassigned to another parish. You never saw the uncle who your neighbour would not allow near their daughter. You never saw the illegal abortions, the homosexuals jailed, etc. because they were never talked about.
So, you approve of censorship and against freedom of speech. Good to know. And, yes, I watched the same shows. Do you really think kids are so dumb that they though Rob and Laura Petrie actually slept in separate beds?
The thought has crossed my mind.
I’m not racist. Some of my best friends are black.
Not enough. But at least they have legal recourse to husbands that hit them, which in your beloved era was legal. Sexual harassment now results in the firing of male coworkers and bosses rather than dismissing the woman making the complaint.
Both sides? When an adult is having sex with a minor under his charge, there isn’t two sides. And for decades the church handled it by moving the priest to a different parish rather than calling the police.
Of course not. Just as making abortion illegal won’t stop them. But in your “golden age” men were legally allowed to hit their wives. It took your despised “leftists” to change it.
JH at 30,
The common Leftist tactic – someone is trying to “impose” on you and everybody else who believes like you do. That’s false. 100%. True morality is regarded as foolishness. Man replaces the judgment and rules of God with his own perverse, fleshly judgment. “I’m not harming anyone else” is no excuse. You are promoting a situation where true love and commitment is replaced by the desires of the flesh.
Why do you constantly modify your morality? Because you’re waiting for the word on high from TOTAL STRANGERS and/or LEFTISTS? Do you think your own thinking skills are inferior? Do you wait for certain ideas to become popular and just imitate the cool kids?
Going to Church due to “societal pressure” ?!!!? Pure, 100% Leftist propaganda. I did not go to Church because I didn’t believe in God? I only went because my parents told me to go and went with me? NO! According to You, I went because my neighbors might look at me funny if I didn’t? That’s crap.
Apparently, you are suffering from Leftist societal pressure. I hope you realize that.
According to you, eat, drink, have lots of sex, and be merry, because this life is all there is.
I am required to say the following: There is a judgment. It cannot be avoided.
JH at 31,
“Not hurting anyone”? Again? I wanted a hand grenade when I was 12. Do you think 12 year olds should be allowed to have hand grenades? For the record, I’m totally against it.
Allow me to translate your vagueness: I want to have sex with anybody so LEAVE ME ALONE!
A society needs to be ordered in all its parts. Do you understand? Not – sex, sex, sex, followed by more sex with whoever. How about a “family” with three adults? Good idea? How about more than one conjugal partner? Here’s where that’s going:
And pedophiles. Shouldn’t they get the sex they want? Why not? So, how do you sell that idea to normal people? First, you stop calling them pedophiles. They are now “minor attracted persons.” Doesn’t that sound … uh… vague? That’s the idea.
Since the late 1960s, radicals, anarchists and others said, “Give us this and we won’t ask for anymore.” That was a lie. It’s still a lie today
Seversky at 33,
If a married couple divorces without cause and remarries, that’s wrong. In the Catholic Church, a married couple can get an Annulment. This means there was some defect in the marriage.
“What is often referred to as a “marriage annulment” in the Church is actually a declaration by a Church tribunal (a Catholic Church court) that a marriage thought to be valid according to Church law actually fell short of at least one of the essential elements required for a binding union.
“The process for obtaining such a declaration is frequently misunderstood.
“These FAQs explain the process and its effects. For more information about the Church’s teaching about divorce, see Divorce FAQs.”
Who is an adult?
JH at 39,
False equivalence regarding adoptive children placed in heterosexual households. A group I will now call The Blind exists and you are being led by the them. Let’s do the math:
One Man + One Man
One Woman + One Woman
DOES NOT EQUAL
One Man + One Woman.
So the math doesn’t work and the biology doesn’t work.
So same-sex couples can get ‘married’ because the Supreme Court, not the people, said so? This was on the ballot. It did not go well. So the Supreme Court gave them what they wanted? Hurray for the Supreme Court? Let’s see the reasoning: Mom and dad could object or throw us out of the house, so we’ll create ‘domestic partnerships.’ Oh wait. Gay groups said that’s not enough. They wanted 100% “equivalence” with heterosexual marriage, otherwise they are ‘second-class.’ So, the “legal” exists out of thin air.
“puritanical sensibilities” from page 32 of The Leftist Handbook. Nonsense. Private sexual conduct should meet certain criteria as opposed to “She’s hot.” You are ruled, and others like you, by your flesh.
“BS. You saw what you wanted to see. You didn’t see the neighbour’s wife who always wore sunglasses to hide the bruise. You saw the neighbours teen daughter who went to live with her aunt for seven months. You saw the priest reassigned to another parish. You never saw the uncle who your neighbour would not allow near their daughter. You never saw the illegal abortions, the homosexuals jailed, etc. because they were never talked about. ”
QUIT LYING? OK? Stop now.
Do you think men have stopped beating their wives or girlfriends today? Yes or no.
Have teen daughters suddenly stopped living with their aunt for seven months today? Yes or no.
I saw one religious that was removed from a convent. Me and others never heard the reason why. Catholics believe in avoiding scandal. That whatever this woman did was handled by those with the proper authority.
And uncles behaving badly toward daughters stopped today? Yes or no.
I stood outside of an abortion clinic and never saw a legal abortion. I read how NARAL lied about the scope of illegal abortions.
Why were homosexuals jailed? You talk about that without any context at all. Do people who are homosexuals still end up in jail today for other reasons?
You are just mindlessly quoting from the What Leftists Should Say to Christians Who Say the 1950s Were Good handbook.
I definitely approve of censorship in the media. In the 1960s, a man would appear on TV and address viewers. “I represent the Standards and Practices Department of your TV station. We review all programs to make sure they are suitable for the entire family.” Did you get that? Standards, as in real, and good standards so that everyone from grandma to the 4 year old could watch TV without anything offensive.
Again, you are mindlessly reading from the Leftist handbook: “Tell Christians that they are stupid if they think two FICTIONAL married characters from the 1950s, who were always seen in separate beds, did not have sex.” (Page 63.) Here’s reality: I had two parents, I knew where they slept.
And Leftist were responsible for everything good? Not by a long shot.
“But in your “golden age” men were legally allowed to hit their wives. It took your despised “leftists” to change it.”
Only Leftists use the Official Leftist Term: “golden age.” What are you talking about? There was nothing good about the 1950s – at all? Well, according to Leftists – no.
And now, men are still hitting their wives. Look up battered women’s shelters.
So in the sick and twisted Leftist mind, only Leftists are good. Only Leftists do good. Nobody else.
And everything is better today? NO. Definitely no.
During one of Mitt Romney’s early forays into running for the WH, radio pundit Lynn Samuels said, “I don’t dislike Romney because he’s Mormon, I dislike him because he’s a schmuck.” The same can be said about Clarence Thomas, it’s not the fact that he’s black that makes him so odious, it’s that he is a sanctimonious creep that took full advantage of affirmative action to get himself into elite schools and cushy federal jobs, then turned around and did everything he could to pull up the ladder behind him, thumbing his nose at a generation of young people of color. The snickers, even among the GOP, were palpable when GHWB nominated him to the Supreme Court saying that he was “the most qualified candidate in the country.”
It is almost incomprehensible that a sitting Supreme Court justice, in the 21st century, would even entertain overturning decisions affording fundamental due process and equal protection rights to the use of contraception and same-sex marriage (read his concurrence in Dobbs), but there you have it.
Thomas with all the vision of an 8th century prelate is weaving into American jurisprudence Catholic “doctrines” that not even the Vatican is interested in these days. His mentor, Scalia, would be mighty proud of old Clarence as he takes us kicking and screaming back to the Dark Ages……..
Reading through these comments I can’t help but think of Malcom X and his views on white liberals. He called the white liberal the biggest racists and biggest threat to blacks and ain’t that the truth..
CD ,Joholo and Sev pick out the black man as their target
“Blacks’ biggest enemy is a white liberal” Malcom X
CD at 45,
What do you know about Catholic doctrines? What do you know about the Catholic Church’s position on any issue?
“… “doctrines” that not even the Vatican is interested in these days.”
Vb at 46,
Can you be more specific? What did “white liberals” do to qualify as an enemy?
“What do you care about what the Pope does? “
As a Catholic you should . Did he not just embrace Pelosi?
Vivid @46 – very true.
I’m glad to see more black commentators and leaders realizing that fact and speaking out about it.
The number of black conservatives is growing. Clarence Thomas was a pioneer in that way.
Vb at 49,
I suspect you’re not a Catholic and did not look into that.
Catholic News Agency excerpt:
“I am therefore inviting all Catholics to join in a massive and visible campaign of prayer and fasting for Speaker Pelosi: commit to praying one rosary a week and fasting on Fridays for her conversion of heart.”
Cordileone urged Catholics and people of goodwill to sign up for the “Rose and a rosary for Nancy Pelosi” campaign.’
Almost 8000 roses were sent to Nancy Pelosi’s office from that campaign, and I will imagine that quite a lot more rosaries than that were prayed for her.
“I suspect you’re not a Catholic “
Attended Catholic schools from grade 1 thru 12. Was an altar boy. Left the Catholic Church when I was 18.
Vb at 54,
A common problem for Catholics. Leave High School and start attending a “party time” college. Let’s look at the menu: lots of attractive women, sex outside of marriage, drinking and illegal drugs. So some people took one of each. Not good for the soul or a good life.
So you decided to leave. Your Baptism still matters. There will be a judgment. I’m required to remind you.
A brief personal aside. I got involved with the local Punk Rock scene in the late 1970s. I never went to the parties because I needed – yes, needed – to stay away from that.
“There will be a judgment. I’m required to remind you.”
I guess I am required to remind you of that as well.
“A common problem for Catholics. Leave High School and start attending a “party time” college”
Interesting, rather than ask me why you assume. I attended a D1 school on a Football scholarship which kept me quite busy.. Partying had nothing to do with my leaving the Roman Catholic Church.
Vb at 57,
Would you care to say why you left? You’ll note that my statement was general, not specific to you. I was pointing out the bad atmosphere I experienced myself at college and reports I read about Catholics, in general, leaving or no longer practicing their faith, which often started once they got to college.
“Would you care to say why you left?”
It’s not that I am hesitant to share the whys but it’s way off topic. Suffice to say I have some very serious theological problems with the Roman Catholic Church. Let’s us both lock arms together as we fight the war being waged on Western Civilization
“You’ll note that my statement was general, not specific to you.”
Thanks for the clarification.
Vb at 59,
It’s not enough to say there’s a war. People need actual examples. Specific things to focus on.