Saturday, June 28, 2008
The Church teaches that direct attacks on human life are always wrong. The laws of our society are meant to protect human life. The aim of the medical sciences is to preserve and protect life.
However, some claim that in the case of research killing is acceptable [or they try to argue that it is not killing at all]. The Bishops respond to 3 justifications used to promote stem cell research:
The Marxist argument or the ends justify the means.
This is a false argument because evil never results in good only more evil.
“The same ethic that justifies taking some lives to help the patient with Parkinson’s disease today, can be used to sacrifice that very patient tomorrow.”
Recommended reading “1984”
The final solution argument or Ayn Rand would be proud.
This argument tries to sidestep the Marxist ethic by redefining human-ness based on power. It is not genetics that makes a person, rather it is power. Self determination and ability are what count. Where have all the post-modern social critics gone on this one?
“If fundamental rights such as the right to life are based on abilities or qualities that can appear or disappear, grow or diminish, and be greater or lesser in different human beings, then there are no inherent human rights, no true human equality, only privileges for the strong.”
Recommended reading “Atlas shrugged”
The take one for the team argument or don’t confuse me with the logic.
This argument is so absurd I can only conclude it was dreamed up by an east coast politician.
“Finally, some claim that scientists who kill embryos for their stem cells are not actually depriving anyone of life, because they are using “spare” or unwanted embryos who will die anyway. This argument is simply invalid. Ultimately each of us will die, but that gives no one a right to kill us.”
Recommended viewing “C-Span.”
The Bishops continue by observing that increased “need” for stem cells is leading to pressure to legitimize cloning. They then explain the Churches position that cloning is that is intrinsically evil;
1. Cloning is evil because it reduces human beings to commodities with market values.
2. The cloning process is a manufacturing process which shows disrespect for human life in the very act of generating it.
3. Cloned embryos are produced only to be destroyed
4. Congress has already prohibited fetus farming a process in which cloned embryos are placed in a woman’s womb for some weeks to harvest more useful tissues and organs.
Human beings are not tools for our progress to be used as long they benefit us then disposed of like a dead battery. That kind of thinking puts all of us at risk. The culture of death is hopelessly contradicted. In the case of stems cells and cloning they clamor for the right to artificially create life to destroy it. In the case of abortion they destroy life naturally created. In both cases the argument is that somehow by killing a baby this world will be a better place.
Sunday, June 15, 2008
Saturday, June 14, 2008
A Fellow Scientist's Response To Your Article
Monday, June 2, 2008
And though I’m sure I’ll need some form of absolution for it, I can’t resist including a clip from the movie involving the story behind “Buddy Christ” to illustrate an important point.
Trying to be relevant can quickly lead to being ridiculous if not done properly, with the right intentions, and in areas we have any business trying to be relevant in. Think of your grandma coming over wearing her favorite pair of phat pants or hip-huggers ... For those still in front of your computer reading, here’s the clip (nothing any more offensive than the phrase "What the Pfleger" in the clip):
A Catholicism WOW! campaign - a "renewal of both faith and of style". Ouch.
For example, the crucifix. While it has been a time honored symbol of our faith, Holy Mother Church has decided to retire this highly recognizable, yet wholly depressing image of our Lord crucified. Christ didn't come to Earth to give us the willies... He came to help us out. He was a booster. And it is with that take on our Lord in mind that we've come up with a new, more inspiring sigil. So it is with great pleasure that I present you with the first of many revamps the "Catholicism WOW! " campaign will unveil over the next year.
The reasoning is obviously ridiculous, yet is still seems somewhat familiar.
Sunday, June 1, 2008
On the other hand, I believe that evangelizing in a very tough inner city environment is not a job for the timid, and few of us would sign up for it, or could handle it. A quick tour thru the web site of St. Sabina indicates a lot of (needed) social outreach. That's a good thing.
There's also a lot of the black liberation type rhetoric throughout the site, and in the content of Fr. Pfleger's "sermons" that he has delivered at the "services." To deliberately steer clear of the most basic Catholic terminology strikes me as wrong somehow. It gets worse if you keep digging-- I invite readers to explore for themselves.
Granted, I don't know a great deal about this parish or the priest, and I certainly haven't had to share in their struggles. I just think the last thing the Church needs in America is a renegade priest who seems to have capitulated to the bombastic tactics of the most far-left conspiracy nuts in the African American community.