A Sobering Thought

What is the Sign of Jonah?

  1. When Jonah made his announcement of imminent destruction, Assyria did repent, and in their strength they would become a rod in God’s hand to punish Israel. Isaiah the Prophet had well described Israel’s crimes and said that punishment would surely come upon her from Assyria. God would use Assyria to humble and punish His people, Israel. Here is a key passage in which Assyria is described in this way: … Assyria, the rod of my anger, in whose hand is the club of my wrath! I send him against a godless nation, I dispatch him against a people who anger me, to seize loot and snatch plunder, and to trample them down like mud in the streets (Isaiah 10:5-6).

Here, then, is a deeper meaning of the sign of Jonah: if Israel will not repent, then God will take their power and strength and give it to a foreign land that knows Him not. These foreigners will shame and humiliate Israel, inflicting God’s punishment on them.

  1. In our time, I suggest that the sign of Jonah may be active. I know that this may be controversial, but it seems to me that many Christians and Catholics in the decadent West have stopped loving life. Birth rates have dropped dramatically and are well below replacement level. We are on our way to aborting and contracepting ourselves right out of existence. God has loosed judgment on us in the form of the sign of Jonah. He seems to be saying this to us: “Fine, if you do not love life and are not zealous for the faith I have given you, then disaster is upon you. Others still do appreciate larger families and are zealous for their faith. And even if they (like the Assyrians of old) are not my people as you are, I will use them to humble and punish you. They will grow and increase while you decrease. Perhaps when you are punished by a people who do not respect your religious liberty, you who remain will repent and begin to love life.”

In the European Union today, the birth rate is about 1.6 children per woman. Globally, Muslim women average 3.1 children. Do the math and realize that Europe as we have known it is coming to an end. In the United States the birth rate is higher, but still only about 1.9 children per woman. In general, the Catholic world in the West is in decline, both in terms of our birth rates and our zeal for the faith. We are surely being diminished by our culture of death and decadent sloth. Is it the sign of Jonah? You decide.

When everyone is a racist, then no one will be

Gotta start with those kids early!  A writer over at the Carlos Slim’s blog wonders: Are We Raising Racists?

The consequences are serious. When we don’t talk honestly with white children about racism, they become more likely to disbelieve or discount their peers when they report experiencing racism. “But we’re all equal” becomes a rote response that actually blocks white children from recognizing or taking seriously racism when they see it or hear about it. This is at best.

I note that only white children need to be spoken to about racism.  Minorities are never racist, children, remember that.

At worst, the consequences are akin to what happens when you breathe in polluted air. Not realizing the pollution is there doesn’t mean it doesn’t affect you. White children are exposed to racism daily. If we parents don’t point it out, show how it works and teach why it is false, over time our children are more likely to accept racist messages at face value. When they see racial inequality — when the only doctors or teachers they see are white, or fewer kids in accelerated classes are black, for example — they won’t blame racism. Instead, they’ll blame people of color for somehow falling short.

Minorities also never fall short–which is why we’ve had to scrap literacy tests for teachers in order to get more minority teachers.

We have better models. Parents of black and Latino children have long made thoughtful choices about when and how to engage in difficult and nuanced discussions about difference. Studies show that such parents are two to five times more likely than whites to teach their children explicitly about race from very young ages to counter negative social messages and build a strong sense of identity.

Which group is more like to have a chip on their shoulder about race?  Might it possibly be because yo mama told you that pinky’s out to get you and pointed at every possible instance and example of this?

After telling her daughter that George Washington was a horrible person, the writer concludes:

It’s always risky to tell other people how to raise their children, and I don’t want to imply that I’m some kind of perfect parent. On top of that, our children and families are all different and there are many distinct ways to have conversations about race with our children. But however we talk about it, we need to talk about racism now more than ever.

Liberals have this bizarre black and white sort of thinking.  We can’t say that George Washington as a good person because he owned slaves and therefore was a bad person. We can’t tell our children that “we’re all equal” because if we’re equal then we must be equal in every way possible thus nothing bad happens to other people that doesn’t happen to us.  Sorry, but George Washington, just like every person ever, had good and bad qualities.  Also he freed all his slaves.  (I  know, I know, it was after his death so he didn’t tear his new nation apart and start the Civil War early.  What a jerk.)  I can be equal to you, and I can also have problems that you don’t have.  Are you ignoring my Nixon-only problem, you vile bigot?

My parents raised me to be a not-racist.  They failed because the culture around me kept saying over and over “you’re a white person; white people are racist; why aren’t you noticing how racist you are, you racist?”  When you try to shove something down someone’s throat, the gag reflex kicks in.  The only thing that’s creating more racists, is YOU who won’t shut up about racism.

 

Feminists: Treating the image of history’s most important and holy woman with disrespect empowers women!

If you thought the recent women’s march was bad…

US feminists are being one-upped by the vulgarity and blasphemy of the Argentine feminists.  International Women’s Day was just marked in the US by encouraging women to protest “inequality” and stay home from work or otherwise shirk responsibilities, not by staging a “bloody fake abortion on a woman dressed as Virgin Mary.”

Feminists in pink masks pretended to commit an abortion on a woman dressed as the Virgin Mary outside a northern Argentina cathedral as part of an International Women’s Day protest last week…

Meanwhile, in Buenos Aires, participants in an International Women’s Day march tried to set the city’s cathedral on fire. They attacked a lone man who held a Vatican flag and tried to defend the cathedral.

Or maybe those US feminists are still in the running:

At the Women’s March in Washington, D.C. in January 2017, a protester carried a sign depicting Our Lady of Guadalupe as a bloody vagina.

Yet again these “ladies” show their priorities.  How does insulting an important female holy figure further female “empowerment?”  Perverting and insulting the image of the Virgin Mary doesn’t exactly translate into empowering or respecting women.

Obamacare Repeal vs. Planned Parenthood

Planned Parenthood is reaching its claws into our government representatives yet again. They’re probably working overtime to make sure any pro-life measures, like defunding PP, are stripped from the new healthcare law.  We expect this from Democrats, but even some of the Republicans are vowing they won’t vote for the bill if it includes language to remove government subsidies of PP.  Here is their treachery:

“I don’t think it makes sense to have the defunding of Planned Parenthood linked to this issue at all,” said Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), according to The Hill. “If the House Republicans want to bring it up, it should be in a separate bill. I would oppose that bill, but it further complicates the negotiations to have it included in this bill.”

***

 

In February, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) announced she would not be voting with fellow Republicans for an Obamacare repeal bill that defunds Planned Parenthood.

“Taxpayer dollars should never be used to pay for abortions, but I will not vote to deny Alaskans access to the health services that Planned Parenthood provides,” she said.

“‪It’s illogical for any senator to claim she does not want tax dollars being used to fund abortion, while at the same time insisting that the federal government continue to lavish money on Planned Parenthood,” Dr. Grazie Pozo Christie, a policy advisor for The Catholic Association, tells Breitbart News.

“As long as Planned Parenthood continues to perform abortions, and especially as long as abortion is their core business, they should not receive the hard-earned money of American taxpayers,” she adds. “Any tax money redirected to Comprehensive Community Health Centers from the abortion giant will only enhance and increase medical services for low-income women.”

Members of the pro-life base of the GOP have stood by for years as GOP congressional leaders have explained they would need to wait for a Republican-controlled Senate and a Republican president in the White House to eliminate taxpayer funding for the nation’s largest abortion business. With Republicans in control of both chambers of Congress and a Republican administration now in place in the White House, the expectation is that goal will finally be realized.

***
Liberal Republican members of Congress, however, have placed their support for Planned Parenthood ahead of their party’s attempts to pass other legislation in the past.

Murkowski joined Collins and former Sen. Mark Kirk (R-IL) in 2015 to try to remove a provision to end Planned Parenthood’s taxpayer funding from the Obamacare repeal bill.

In 2011, Collins received a personal “thank-you” letter from Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards, who expressed her gratitude that the Maine senator voted to continue funding her abortion business

Pro-life groups are analyzing the prospective new law.  Life Site News wonders: Will Trump’s Obamacare replacement REALLY defund Planned Parenthood?  Life Legal Defense Foundation lists some of the changes and their interpretation:

House Republicans have finally unveiled the American Health Care Act (AHCA) to replace the so-called “Affordable Care Act,” aka Obamacare. Life Legal has been sifting through the bill to determine how it would impact federal funding for abortionists, especially Planned Parenthood.

1. The AHCA places a one-year ban on all payments to “prohibited entities,” which are narrowly defined as non-profit abortion providers that receive more than $350 million in federal taxpayer funding annually—i.e., Planned Parenthood. This means that, for one year, the nation’s largest abortion provider would not receive Medicaid reimbursement for any of its services. Medicaid reimbursements account for the lion’s share of the $550+ million Planned Parenthood receives each year from U.S. taxpayers.

2. For AHCA purposes, any insurance plan that offers abortion coverage is not a “Qualified Health Plan,” meaning federal tax credits cannot be used to purchase plans that include abortion coverage. The Los Angeles Times reported that “virtually all health plans” in California would be ineligible for purchase with tax credits, pursuant to a state law requiring any plan that provides maternity coverage to include abortion coverage.

3. Small businesses can no longer receive expense credits for plans that include abortion coverage.

THE GOOD: •Planned Parenthood would lose approximately $490 million in federal funds, which represents about 38% of its total annual budget.
•No taxpayer funds will be used to pay for insurance plans with abortion coverage.
THE BAD: •The Planned Parenthood funding ban is only for one year. Also, other abortion providers will continue to receive state Medicaid reimbursement for abortions.
•Individuals and small businesses can still buy out-of-pocket abortion coverage.
THE UGLY:
The Republican-controlled Senate may not have enough votes to pass the AHCA with the pro-life provisions intact. House Republicans want to try to get the bill through the Senate using the budget reconciliation process, which only requires a simple majority of 51 votes. However, two of the 52 Republican senators—Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine—said they will not vote for any health care legislation that restricts abortion coverage. Unless one of them changes her mind, no pro-life bills or amendments are likely to pass the Senate during this term.

Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins sounds more optimistic: “while pieces of the bill may be negotiable, the White House has assured me that the portion stripping Planned Parenthood’s tax dollars is not one of them.”

Who would trust their health care to a group that doesn’t know anything about medicine? Try the U.S. government. For years, they’ve been funneling billions of dollars to an organization that can’t even answer basic questions on pregnancy: Planned Parenthood.

In an interview that should have been embarrassing for any group (let alone one trying to defend its half-billion dollars in taxpayer funding), Tucker Carlson asked questions that should have been easy for any “expert” in women’s health to answer. “You work for the country’s biggest abortion provider,” Tucker said to Executive Vice President Dawn Laguens. “If you can hear the heartbeat of this thing, this fetus, what is it?” he asked. “Is it a piece of tissue or is it a separate human being?” Well, she replied, “I think that’s up to each individual to decide.” Surprised, Tucker tried again. “This is at the core of what you do — you’re the biggest abortion provider in the United States. It’s not like you haven’t thought of this,” he pressed. Laguens paused and said again, “I think that’s up to each individual to decide.”

And this is an organization that’s supposed to be on the cutting edge of women’s health? A group that says “feelings” — not settled science — define human reality? Unfortunately, this is the kind of “create your own truth” thinking your tax dollars make possible.

***

Meanwhile, in a deft move, President Trump has offered to keep the cash flowing to Cecile Richards’s group. There’s just one condition: Planned Parenthood would have to stop performing abortions. In a revealing reply, Richards called the idea “obscene and insulting.” No, what’s obscene is a group that destroys more than 330,000 innocent unborn children a year — in large part because our tax dollars help them keep the other side of the business afloat. Carlson touched on the organization’s obsession with abortion in his sit-down with Laguens. “[Why is abortion] so important to Planned Parenthood that you’re willing to forgo half a billion dollars a year in federal subsidies?” he wanted to know. She stumbled through a response about not being “bullied.”