Monday, August 29, 2016
Here is one of my favorite stories, a true one told by an Austrian Doctor:
On a cold morning in Austria, only two babies were born in a certain hospital. One was physically perfect, a little boy - bright and strong. The other, a little girl might not have made it to birth in our times - she was a Downs Syndrome baby.
When the two grew up, the little girl lived with her parents, worked to help support them and took care of them in their old age.
The little boy grew up to be Adolph Hitler.
In our times, the little girl would have likely died before birth or soon after, as most Downs Syndrome babies are either aborted or 'euthanized' after birth through starvation. Indeed, the baby whose death witnessed by Patricia Shafer, a pro choice nurse working for Dr Haskell, spurred the nurse on to Congress to testify against the cruel partial birth abortion, this little girl was a Downs Syndrome being aborted in late term pregnancy.
In retrospect though, in considering the story above, a true one told by a doctor who delivered the babies, which baby added to the world, the Downs Syndrome or Hitler? And if one chose a baby to abort, which would have been the better choice?
A strong witness for the fact that no one can make a 'good' choice of death for another as well as a strong proof of the fact that being mentally challenged is of little consequence when judging 'human worth' or contribution to society.
Wednesday, July 27, 2016
Tony Schwartz, a writer, was allowed by "the Donald" to shadow him for 18 months, after which he wrote, an apparently positive book about Mr Trump called "The Art of the Deal". Trump, according to the New Yorker Magazine's feature story, allowed Schwartz a byline on the book, half the $500,000 advance and half the royalties on the book.
And the first error in the New Yorker article, is calling Schwartz a "ghost writer" of this Trump biography... If he was given a byline in the authorship of the book, and half the royalties and cash advance, he's a co-author - hardly a ghost writer.
But the dis-information of the New Yorker article was just beginning. Following are quotes from the article, allegations from Mr Schwartz, which actually are non issues...
1...."Trump prefers TV as news source"...all the presidents and busy people do that, in addition to the American public.
2... "Short attention span"... He's probably doing a lot of multi level processing and has what Dr Ted Hallowell calls a "race car brain" which appears as a short attention span. Dr Hallowell says another name for this, is "a dose of American life"
3. "Trump hasn't read a book straight through his adult life"... Schwartz based this allegation on seeing no books on Trump's desk however, truth be known, many highly intelligent, but busy people, read audio books or read on the computer...
Next Schwartz points out that Trump was incorrect in quoting a book title. Being incorrect in a book title is a common error, especially for a very busy person. I keep a database of books I read - if I didn't, I would find it difficult to remember titles and authors and I read A LOT.
Bottom line is, Schwartz makes a lot of baseless allegations and also, clearly doesn't understand what it takes to run big business like Trump does... And we should remember the fact that if Trump allowed Schwartz to shadow Trump, to camp out in Trump's office and to ride with Trump in his helicopter, that suggests Trump had nothing to hide which is impressive.
In the article, Mr Schwartz admitted to not being honest in the book ... However, considering that, I cannot help wondering if Schwartz is being honest now? How would we tell, WHEN Schwartz is being truthful?
Next, Schwartz accuses "The Donald" of displaying "insatiable hunger for money, praise and celebrity" but again, this would describe MOST Americans.
And Schwartz quotes Trump as saying, that it is "Possible that the president was born in Africa" (referring to Barack Obama) - well, from what I have read...he was born in Africa - for example, read Obama's book, DREAMS of MY FATHER ... he's natural American because he was born to an American mother.
Donald Trump was angry because Schwartz spoke out negatively about him - well, who wouldn't be angry - Schwartz a life long liberal, has an agenda - Trump trusted Schwartz, split the royalties and advance for the book with Schwartz and now, Schwartz basically has turned on him. The term, "Ethically challenged", describing Tony Schwartz' actions, comes to mind to say the least.
If the article was trying to prove what a "sociopath" (Schwartz's allegation) Trump is, it failed miserably. Schwartz did NOT, in any shape or form, prove his allegations and actually, Trump comes out looking like kind of a nice guy...
Abortion and euthanasia "stand alone" "among the evils and injustices in American life in 2016" (Archbishop Gomez in the LA Diocesan Newspaper, June 2016) The Archbishop went on to say: "The hard truth is that not all injustices in the world are ‘equal..."
Ironically, the Platform accepted by the Democratic party at the 2016 convention, advocates unrestricted abortions for all women as a form of Health care and supports tax payer funding of Planned Parenthood (which is highly profitable and yet, a huge percentage of our taxes presently funds this world-wide corporation) and other abortion facilities.
Here are some quotes from the actual platform:
"We will appoint judges who defend the constitutional principles of liberty and equality for all, and will protect a woman’s right to safe and legal abortion,..." (Page 25)
"Democrats are committed to protecting and advancing reproductive health, rights, and justice. We believe unequivocally, like the majority of Americans, that every woman should have access to quality reproductive health care services, including safe and legal abortion-regardless of where she lives, how much money she makes, or how she is insured."
"We believe that reproductive health is core to women’s, men’s, and young people’s health and wellbeing. We will continue to stand up to Republican efforts to defund Planned Parenthood health centers, which provide critical health services to millions of people. We will continue to oppose—and seek to overturn—federal and state laws and policies that impede a woman’s access to abortion, including by repealing the Hyde Amendment." (Page 37)
"In addition to expanding the availability of affordable family planning information and contraceptive supplies, we believe that safe abortion must be part of comprehensive maternal and women’s health care and included as part of America’s global health programming. Therefore, we support the repeal of harmful restrictions that obstruct women’s access to health care information and services, including the “global gag rule” and the Helms Amendment that bars American assistance to provide safe, legal abortion throughout the developing world."(page 46)
It should be noted that in recent years, Democrats have lost several seats in Congress and 11 governorships.
Sunday, May 15, 2016
So today is Pentecost and I, like your average, less than knowledgeable- Catholic, found myself wondering "What does the Holy Spirit really do, anyway?" I prayed and found the answer on - where else - EWTN TV. Here is a prayer to the Holy Spirit that St John Paul prayed daily... enjoy!
Oh Holy Spirit,
I ask You for the Gift of Wisdom, that I may know You and Your Divine Perfection better
...for the Gift of Understanding that I may understand better the mysteries of the Holy Faith
...for the gift of knowledge that I might be guided in life by the principles,of our Faith,
...for the gift of Counsel that I may seek and find your counsel in all things
...for the Gift of Fortitude to keep me inseparably with you undaunted by fear or worldly attachment
...for the gift of piety that I may always serve Your Majesty with a son's love
...for the gift of Fear of the Lord that I may dread sin which offends You, O my God
All these through Christ our Lord...Amen
(St Pope John Paul)
Monday, April 25, 2016
I have a Bible calendar which provides verses daily. It's generally very nice but today's verse confused me. It was Luke 5:39: which reads "[And] no one who has been drinking old wine desires new, for he says, ‘The old is good.'"
I kept looking at that, wondering what it meant. Did it mean the old is better than the new and then, what old was it talking about?
I finally researched it i.e. read it in context with a Bible Commentary. Turns out in context, it was referring to the fact that 1. What Jesus preached wasn't a combination of the old and the new but something completely new and 2. People are not comfortable changing from the old to the new i.e. in this case which was following Jesus.
Most of the verses on the calendar one can read and get the meaning but in this case, the context said something very different from what the verse seemed to mean out of context.
Just another reason, reading the Bible in context is a good idea! :)