It didn’t even take 24 hours for the games and backtracking by the White House to begin. Don’t forget, they insisted to the American people — in order to get the bill passed — that it was not a tax. Clearly, they are worried about the tax narrative shaping the rest of the election season rhetoric.
When the end was nigh for Finn, my faithful shaggy companion for more than 14 years, he knew it and I knew it. We had travelled a long way together, from Belfast to Washington to Israel to London and ultimately to the suburbs of northern Virginia but it was clear his journey was over.
The pain in his body was suddenly making him cry and yelp much more frequently. And then he just stopped eating and drinking. For several days, he didn’t touch his food and had to be forced to drink. I took him for a walk but he moved with agonising lassitude.
His hind legs seemed to have seized up. They would fold underneath him, he would try to haul them up and then he would let his front legs down in resignation and just look up at me plaintively. On his final proper walk, he collapsed nose first in the dust and I had to carry him home.
As I wrote in my recent piece about Finn’s waning days, his decline had been slow and steady. For a year, I had been carrying him up and down the stairs. For more than six months, he had been incontinent and wearing a nappy inside the house – something that distressed me at first but never seemed to bother him much.
But there was nothing slow and steady about what was now happening – it was as if Finn had fallen off a cliff. He lay in the hall by the front door barely moving for several hours. Nothing would perk him up. I put him in the bath (he always loved those) and got in with him. The water seems to soothe him a little.
Even a week earlier, the end of his bath had triggered a manic run through the bedrooms with Finn rolling on every rug and up against every duvet to get himself dry.
But this time, he just lay in the tub as the water drained out. Are you a happy chappy?’ I asked him, an inquiry that had always brought a tail wag in reply. He remained motionless.
The next day, I called the vet and told her that I thought Finn had reached the point at which he was ready to leave us.
After putting the phone down, I went to the garage, picked up a spade, walked around to the back of the house and began digging.
There's more and it's moving and touching and most worthy of your time.
Well, because we’re 21st century kids. And as such, we’ve had delivered to us a world with sky-high rates of divorce, abortion, and STDs; a world bored with sex and bored with romance; a world in which more and more people are turning to pornography to find sexual satisfaction; a world in which 1 in 5 women report being sexual assaulted, and the human body — the sexiest thing in the universe — is used to sell cars.
After extremely little consideration, we decided we don’t want that. We want awesome relationships and mind-blowing sex lives. We want women and men to be respected and loved for who they are, to the very depths of their being. We want sex free from fear, love free from use, and a world of people who love and respect their own bodies. In short, we want sexy back. In fact, we demand it.
1Flesh means just that. One flesh. Total union. No wrapping men in rubber or pumping women with artificial hormones. No interrupting the act of making love. Once the sex act became something in which women were “controlled” and men were “restrained” everything seemed to fall apart. Suddenly “objectification” wasn’t such a hard thing to do. Instead of repeating the mistakes of our parents, we’re trying to spread words of rebellion; that sex should be awesome, that pregnancy can be justly avoided withoutharmful chemicals, and that love is worth fighting for.
So I’m begging you, make this happen. If I’ve ever written a post that you haven’t wanted to kill me for, well now you can fist bump me through the Internet.
Share the website. Share it on Facebook, email it to your friends, post it on your blog — you know the drill. This isn’t a Catholic website, so don’t be scared to get it out of the Catholic world.
Help us out. Do you make sweet graphics? We need you. Can you make kinetic typography videos? We need you. Can you blog? We need you. Have a story about ditching artificial contraception? We need you. Email us and let us know.
Donate to us. This cost a crap-ton, and I have no more money. (No easy way to say that.) I truly believe that the actions of this website, with God’s grace and your help, will create a shift in popular opinion towards the issue of artificial contraception. I’d like to think we’re a worthy cause.
Some well-meaning people are peddling the notion that today’s Obamacare decision was a long term victory, that we lost the battle but won the war, that there was some master plan by Chief Justice Roberts to gut the expansion of Commerce Clause power under the fig leaf of a majority ruling upholding the mandate under Congress’s taxing power.
To paraphrase Joe Biden, I have just four words for you:
BIG —— DEAL
If this were some other more narrow law, if this was not a monumental takeover of the most private aspects of our lives, if this monstrosity would not cause such long term damage to our health care system, if this law was not Obamacare ….
I might be inclined to agree with you.
But it is Obamacare, it is the takeover of a substantial portion of our economy which empowers the federal government to write tens of thousands of pages of regulations telling us how to live and how to die.
This was the hill to fight on for any conservative Justice of the Supreme Court.
Yet because the conservative Chief Justice sided with the liberal Justices on the result, we have Obamacare.
Whether the Chief Justice did it out of good faith belief in the correctness of his opinion (which is what I believe) or as part of some master plan (the theory some are peddling), the result is the same: Until further notice Obamacare is the law of the land.
Sure, we now are motivated for November. And maybe in the end we will get rid of Obamacare.
But that is then and this is now. And under any reasonable theory of conservative judicial restraint, the Chief Justice should have allowed Obamacare to fall of its own weight, of a weight born of a political process in which the mandate could not be called a tax because the nation would not have stood for it.
He goes on to warn that we should not delude ourself. That the decision was a bitter loss.
The bottom line however is this.
We have a chance to overrule this decision by making wise choices in November.
We need to get busy convincing others that this coming election is going to be a "BIG —— DEAL".
I’m doing my best not to speculate too much on this.
Ever played Bridge?
You bid the hand in such a way that certain things are communicated to your partner, and then you trust that your partner will understand the bidding and play correctly. During play, you play your cards both in response to what the opposition plays and in such a way as to take advantage of your partner’s position.
Bridge is a complex game with a significant trust component.
I believe Roberts is playing Bridge here.
I’m guessing (yeah, I said I’m trying not to speculate) that his reading of the liberal justices was such that if he sided with the manifest majority, and struck down only the funding vehicle, the law would survive and be shored up through other, more devious measures.
By correctly classifying the funding vehicle as a tax, he has played a card that exposes the liberal reality and invites a response from Congress as well as the electorate.
By acknowledging that the *electorate* is responsible for its political choices and therefore its politicians and therefore, ultimately, its laws, and by making it clear that bad law and bad policy may not, in fact, violate the Constitution, since the Constitution was not written with the explicit injunction that “legislators may not write stupid laws,” he plays the card that clarifies the path to eliminating not only the heinous Health Care Sabotage machine, but also the fools and crooks who gave it to us.
Roberts is looking across the table at us now.
He has to trust that the electorate and Congress will look at the cards and play correctly to win the hand and ultimately the game. He can’t signal us with a kick under the table or tap out a strategy with his pen or convey in any fashion what he meant by his play.
Play now moves to us.
There's more... and it's thoughtful and well presented.
What I'm hoping it isn't is wishful thinking.
Time will tell, and I know Garry (we're email buddies)... and trust his judgment. He's shown lot of wisdom in the past.
That’s pretty much how I’m approaching RCIA and this blog during the countdown to my parish’s November baptisms. If there’s an irreconcilable difference here, neither the Church nor I will be well served if I keep my mouth shut. The only chance I’ve got to see if I’m persuaded by the Church’s teachings or if I don’t understand but trust or if I’ve hit a principle I can’t give up is by picking fights and making sure the other side gets a chance to take their best shot at me.
It should go without saying that I’m not an authoritative source on Catholicism, and, frankly, neither is most of the commentariat. Citing sources is always helpful, and I may reach out to you all for book or essay recommendation, but I’m not really going to try and crowdsource canon law. Writing and seeing what questions people raise helps me organize my thoughts and concerns so I can bring them to my RCIA class.
There’s a lot of space on the spectrum between being a cultural Catholic who is affiliated but doesn’t see the Church as an authority and understanding and assenting to every teaching. Right now, I think the Church has the best approach to thinking about moral philosophy which isn’t the same as thinking that it’s theologians always come up with the right answer on non-dogmatic issues on the first go-round. But even on things that I’m pretty sure are just matters of personal conscience, I’ll be airing my disagreements in the hopes that, if I’m wrong, I’ll be corrected, and if I’m right, I’ll be persuasive.
I don’t trust the Church enough to be certain I’ll find myself understanding or submitting to all its said, but I definitely trust it enough to let it decide whether I can enter, provided I don’t withhold data.
Brilliant. That is simply brilliant.
Watching her in the coming days, weeks and months will not be a chore.
And praying for her (and others like her) will become a duty.
Essentially the Court accepted all of the legal arguments establishing that Congress cannot force people to participate in commerce, which arguments were derided by the law professor establishment, but accepted the argument that everyone thought was a sad joke and afterthought, that this was a tax even though Congress chose not to call it a tax.
Court holds NOT a tax for purpose of Anti-Injunction Act (which means can’t challenge until tax owed) but IS a tax for purpose of Congressional power.
According to Romney campaign spokeswoman Andrea Saul the Supreme Court decisionupholding President Barack Obama’s healthcare reform law led to a windfall for Mitt Romney. Ms. Saul told The Politicker supporters donated at least $100,000 in the 50 minutes between the immediate aftermath of the ruling, which was issued at approximately 10:10 a.m. Shortly before 11:30, Ms. Saul said the total donations had reached over $300,000.
This battle is far from over.
Grab a bucket of popcorn or two cuz the battle just took a serious turn.
And oh by the way, for those with short memories, here's a video worth watching: