Brutally Honest

"It is among the most gruesome and horrifying actions perpetrated on innocent persons"

It... is abortion and the Kermit Gosnell trial and his subsequent conviction has opened the door to some much needed conversations:

I recently read with great interest a fascinating story by the Associated Press. The life of a young girl, Lake Annabelle Hall, was saved following surgery to remove a cyst on her left lung. Had it not been discovered it would have killed her. She received such tremendous care that four teams comprised of 43 doctors and nurses tended to her and her mother. If it had been otherwise, her doctor noted, “She wouldn’t make it out of the delivery room.”

Delivery room? Did I neglect to mention that this surgery was done before Lake Annabelle was born?

The cyst was discovered during a routine 20-week OB/GYN visit. Ten weeks later, Lake Annabelle was partially delivered and medical staff performed the life-saving procedure. Fox News reports that “Doctors pulled her halfway out of her mother’s womb, leaving her connected to her umbilical cord and placenta, which served as life support for her,” and then they cut into her little body so that they might save her life. Lake Annabelle is now 6 months old, a marvelous example of the life-saving prospects of modern medical technology.

What a stark contrast between this life-affirming story and the horrors we’ve heard in recent weeks concerning Kermit Gosnell’s murder trial. Gosnell faced numerous charges including first degree murder, third degree murder, and infanticide and he was found guilty of three first degree murder charges and numerous others including the involuntary manslaughter of patient Karnamaya Mongar. His “Women’s Medical Center” in Philadelphia has been accurately described as a “house of horrors.” The techniques employed by Gosnell to take the life of both unborn and born are too gruesome to describe here.

Usually over the top in it’s coverage of anything concerning blood, death, and mayhem, the mainstream media has virtually ignored the story, only reporting on it after being called out for failure to do so. Archbishop Chaput has noted that “the failure—the allergic disinterest—of some of our most important national media … really doesn’t surprise. It’s part of the fabric of a culture that simply will not see what it doesn’t want to see about the realities of abortion.”

The reality of abortion is that it is among the most gruesome and horrifying actions perpetrated on innocent persons. Yet abortion, and to a lesser extent, infanticide have become accepted by the so called cultural elite. In Evangelium vitae Blessed John Paul lamented that “[c]hoices once unanimously considered criminal and rejected by the common moral sense are gradually becoming socially acceptable… In this way the very nature of the medical profession is distorted and contradicted. (4) The routine infanticide done in the “Women’s Medical Center” has horrified many including the jury who rightly determined that Gosnell was guilty of murdering infants. It cannot be forgotten, however, that the primary difference between infanticide and abortion is the location of the child being killed.

Arland K. Nichols, the author of that Crisis Magazine piece, goes on to challenge every Catholic, dare I say every moral person, to no longer remain silent.  Silence is evil.  Period.

Read the rest.

Accept the challenge.

Doing nothing is in actuality doing something... on the side of embracing death, embracing wickedness.

Carry on.

Meat, crockpot, pickaxe, drill bit

Words used by a late term abortionist to describe the horror of what he does to children in the womb.

This should leave you nauseous.  And if it doesn't, you should check your moral bearings because you are quite lost.

LifesiteNews:

Late-term abortionist LeRoy Carhart, who made headlines in February when one of his patients died in his care, likened a dead, full-term baby inside its mother's womb to “meat in a Crock-Pot” in a new sting video released by Live Action this morning. He also tells the mother to call him instead of 911 if she faces any complications.

In the footage, Carhart jokes about dismembering the unborn baby with “a pickaxe, a drill bit.”

Two separate stings were filmed at Carhart's business in Nebraska, one before and one after the death of Jennnifer Morbelli at his Germantown, Maryland, facility.

At one point Carhart confirms to Live Action's investigator that she will be carrying a dead baby inside her for three days. When the mom asks if the baby will begin to decay, Carhart says, “No, it’s like putting meat in a Crock-Pot, OK?” The child merely “gets softer.”

Carhart counsels the woman to call him instead of dialing 911 in case of an emergency, because “they’ll take you to the hospital, right? They won’t bring you to the clinic.”

He adds he or his assistants will call emergency assistance “if we think you need 911.”

Instead, he hands the mother a packet containing “little drapes and sheets and gloves” in case she goes into labor in her hotel room or home.

It includes a bag to put the baby in. He gives no instructions about what to do if the baby is born alive, insisting, “it's not going to happen.”

But Live Action founder Lila Rose told LifeSiteNews.com that a live birth is a possibility.

“Carhart prides himself on making sure that the child is dead within three hours,” she said. “Carhart is certainly denying that infants are born alive after his abortions. He's very proud of his 'success rate,' as he calls it.”

“But...if he misses the child's heart with the Digoxin shot, if it's entered into the amniotic sack or otherwise, sometimes these children have been born alive,” she added, “We know from other testimonies and from studies done in the UK and elsewhere that children do survive abortion attempts.”

Carhart seems to acknowledge as much on tape, telling the mother if her baby “came out? Oh, yeah, it probably could” survive. “Probably.”

If a mother instead calls 911, her “baby will be given the life-saving care it deserves and that the law provides [for] it,” Rose told LifeSiteNews. “I think that this recommendation to not call 911 is very dangerous for women, because that is another layer of protection for them in case the abortion is putting their health at risk.”

Carhart is all-too familiar with one such instance. Jennifer Morbelli died in his care, after being unable to contact him.

There's more, including the doctor's denial about the woman he essentially killed.  The guy clearly missed his calling.  He'd have fit in nicely with the Nazi doctors at Auschwitz.

Sick SOB.

It's difficult for me to ask God's mercy on him.

So at this time, I won't.

Is Catholicism in America dying?

Fr. Longenecker suggests it is... and that it's being killed by cultural forces and complacency.

From his first in a series of posts on the subject:

The first problem is cultural catholicism. The Poles, Italians, Irish, French, Czech, German and more Catholics came here from the old country and the bishops reckoned the best thing to do with them all was to allow cultural parishes. So in the same town the Irish Catholics went to St Patrick’s and the Poles to St Stanislaus and the Italians to St Anthony of Padua. Geesh, a man in my parish who grew up in Reading, Pennsylvania said that when he was a boy a girl from his Czech parish fell in love with an Irish boy and the Irish priest wouldn’t marry them because it was a mixed marriage.

I’m all for cultural customs and so forth, but the problem is that the immigrant Catholics–in a foreign land–clung to their culture for security and happiness and part of that culture was their Catholicism. The didn’t distinguish their culture from their Catholicism. Then, after a few generations, when they were all really American and stopped being Italian or Irish or German they also stopped being Catholic. The Catholic faith wasn’t much deeper than Mama’s special spaghetti sauce or stories of the Blarney stone.

Of course they didn’t all stop being Catholic. Something else happened which was even more subtle and insidious. They became Americans and because their mindset was that their Catholic faith was something which blended with their culture, instead of being Italian-Catholics or Polish Catholics they became American Catholics. Just as nationalism and love of culture blended with their Catholic faith when they were ethnic minorities, now it blended seamlessly with their new American culture. Just as Catholicism gave their former culture God’s approval, not their Catholicism gave American values and culture God’s approval.

Thus we have what I call AmChurch: the American Catholic church which is happily and blissfully blended with everything wonderful about America. Except that the “wonderful” values of most Americans are unapologetically materialistic, hedonistic and self centered. Thus at least 50% of American Catholics live like their American neighbors–going to the mall, getting as much stuff as possible, giving as little as possible, having a neat and tidy two children and a double income, and basically smiling their way to success like everyone else.

Of course there's more, to include what Fr. Longecker sees to be a solution but he doesn't stop there.

In Part II, he writes about complacency:

Too many American Catholics are complacent. They are lukewarm, and when a church is lukewarm (as it says in the Book of Revelation) God will spit them out. Why are American Catholics lukewarm in their faith? The problem is not simply laziness. It is linked with the first problem of cultural Catholicism.

Too many American Catholics have soaked up the materialistic spirit of the American age totally uncritically. They have chosen the way of materialism, hedonism,utilitarianism and consumerism, and this has dulled their commitment to Christ and the gospel. What are all these “ism’s”? Materialism is not simply buying lots of stuff at the mall. It is also a philosophy that the physical world is really all that matters. This translates into an attitude about the church in which all that matters is the good works of feeding the poor and doing peace and justice. While these things are important–to focus on them alone makes the church, (as Pope Francis says) no more than an NGO–just another charity.

Hedonism is the pleasure principle. If it feels good do it. You needn’t be a debauched drug addict to be a hedonist. Your a perfectly good candidate for the hedonist party with your dedication to a nice, comfortable middle class lifestyle. If you live for pleasure–even if it is a refined and tasteful pleasure–you’re a hedonist.

Utilitarianism is putting practicality first. It is relying on worldly common sense rather then the Holy Spirit. It is making choices according to the bottom line, efficiency and practicality. Most American Catholics choose birth control, for example, because it is a practical, seemingly common sense decision. While we should be practical and efficient and choose wisely–we are also called not just to be practical, but radical. The saints are never utilitarian. Instead they are devoted to the wild and wonderful and unpredictable love of God.

Finally, consumerism is not just soaking up just as much of the world’s resources as possible. It is also a mentality that one is a customer. It’s Frank Sinatra’s theme song, “I Did it My Way”. It’s the attitude, “I’m paying. I’ll choose.” When this attitude comes into the church everybody is the loser. It breeds discontent, disorder and dissent.

Together these “ism’s” produce a kind of lethargy in the American Catholic Church. There’s a deadness and torpor. Eyes glaze over. Parishes become like yesterday’s porridge: cold and hard to stir. The fire is gone. The Church is complacent.

Again, there's more and it's all revealing.  I believe he'll be writing additional pieces so be on the lookout.

It's well worth checking into and frankly, I'm a little relieved at what I'm reading thus far.

Regular readers know that I returned to the Catholic Church roughly 3 years ago after about a 40 year hiatus.  My return however was offset by a number of people I know, some of them in my own family, who quit going.  I thought that perhaps I was killing Catholicism in America... or at least in my circle of influence.

It's good to know it's actually something else.  I was getting a complex.

Carry on.

"The military will make it a crime--possibly resulting in imprisonment--for those in uniform to share their faith" (UPDATED)

There's a part of me that wants to dismiss this report:

The Pentagon has released a statement confirming that soldiers could be prosecuted for promoting their faith: "Religious proselytization is not permitted within the Department of Defense...Court martials and non-judicial punishments are decided on a case-by-case basis...”. 

The statement, released to Fox News, follows a Breitbart News report on Obama administration Pentagon appointees meeting with anti-Christian extremist Mikey Weinstein to develop court-martial procedures to punish Christians in the military who express or share their faith. 

(From our earlier report: Weinstein is the head of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, and says Christians--including chaplains--sharing the gospel of Jesus Christ in the military are guilty of “treason,” and of committing an act of “spiritual rape” as serious a crime as “sexual assault.” He also asserted that Christians sharing their faith in the military are “enemies of the Constitution.”)

Being convicted in a court martial means that a soldier has committed a crime under federal military law. Punishment for a court martial can include imprisonment and being dishonorably discharged from the military. 

So President Barack Obama’s civilian appointees who lead the Pentagon are confirming that the military will make it a crime--possibly resulting in imprisonment--for those in uniform to share their faith. This would include chaplains—military officers who are ordained clergymen of their faith (mostly Christian pastors or priests, or Jewish rabbis)--whose duty since the founding of the U.S. military under George Washington is to teach their faith and minister to the spiritual needs of troops who come to them for counsel, instruction, or comfort.

This regulation would severely limit expressions of faith in the military, even on a one-to-one basis between close friends. It could also effectively abolish the position of chaplain in the military, as it would not allow chaplains (or any service members, for that matter), to say anything about their faith that others say led them to think they were being encouraged to make faith part of their life. It’s difficult to imagine how a member of the clergy could give spiritual counseling without saying anything that might be perceived in that fashion.

Someone tell me this is wrong.

Someone tell me that this is being blown out of proportion.

Please.

UPDATE: The Pentagon has weighed in:

“The U.S. Department of Defense has never and will never single out a particular religious group for persecution or prosecution,” Pentagon spokesman Lt. Cmdr. Nate Christensen said in a statement. “The Department makes reasonable accommodations for all religions and celebrates the religious diversity of our service members.”

“Service members can share their faith (evangelize), but must not force unwanted, intrusive attempts to convert others of any faith or no faith to one’s beliefs (proselytization),” Christensen added.

He also said that “when religious harassment complaints are reported, commanders take action based on the gravity of the occurrence on a case by case basis.” He did not specify what the range of penalties could be.

The latest statement was aimed at refuting widely circulated reports in conservative media outlets that Christian soldiers could be court-martialed for sharing their faith.

Good to hear.  Lord, help me believe it.

"Priests are no longer considered to be emergency responders."

A friend yesteday filled me in on what follows and it's seriously troubling in my view:

The heart-wrenching photographs taken in the moments after the Boston Marathon bombings show the blue-and-yellow jackets of volunteers, police officers, fire fighters, emergency medical technicians, even a three-foot-high blue M&M. Conspicuously absent are any clerical collars or images of pastoral care.

This was not for lack of proximity. Close to the bombing site are Trinity Episcopal Church, Old South Church and St. Clement Eucharistic Shrine, all on Boylston Street. When the priests at St. Clement's, three blocks away, heard the explosions, they gathered sacramental oils and hurried to the scene in hopes of anointing the injured and, if necessary, administering last rites, the final of seven Catholic sacraments. But the priests, who belong to the order Oblates of the Virgin Mary, weren't allowed at the scene.

The Rev. John Wykes, director of the St. Francis Chapel at Boston's soaring Prudential Center, and the Rev. Tom Carzon, rector of Our Lady of Grace Seminary, were among the priests who were turned away right after the bombings. It was jarring for Father Wykes, who, as a hospital chaplain in Illinois a decade ago, was never denied access to crime or accident scenes.

"I was allowed to go anywhere. In Boston, I don't have that access," he says.

But Father Wykes says he has noticed a shift in the societal role of clergy over the past few decades: "In the Bing Crosby era—in the '40s, '50s, '60s—a priest with a collar could get in anywhere. That's changed. Priests are no longer considered to be emergency responders."

...

In light of the devastation in Boston, the denial of access to clergy is a trifling thing, and it might even have been an individual's error. (The Boston Police Department did not respond to a request for comment on its policy regarding clergy at the scenes of emergencies.)

But it is a poignant irony that Martin Richard, the 8-year-old boy who died on Boylston Street, was a Catholic who had received his first Communion just last year. As Martin lay dying, priests were only yards away, beyond the police tape, unable to reach him to administer last rites—a sacrament that, to Catholics, bears enormous significance.

As the Rev. Richard Cannon, a priest in Hopkinton, Mass., where the marathon begins, said in a homily on the Sunday after the bombings, "When the world can seem very dark and confusing, the presence of a priest is a presence of hope."

The times they are a changin'... and not for the better.

God help us reverse these sorts of things, help we who are believers do what is necessary to draw folks back to You and Your ways.  God help us overcome the inclination to keep You at arms length.

This is but the beginning

I know, I know... who really cares:

The state attorney general has filed a lawsuit in Benton County Superior Court against a Richland florist who refused to provide flowers for the wedding of longtime gay customers, citing her religious opposition to same-sex marriage.

The state’s suit against Barronelle Stutzman, owner of Arlene’s Flowers and Gifts, came just days after the Attorney General’s Office wrote to ask that Stutzman reconsider her position and agree to comply with the state’s anti-discrimination laws.

“Under the Consumer Protection Act, it is unlawful to discriminate against customers on the basis of sexual orientation,” Attorney General Bob Ferguson said in a statement. “If a business provides a product or service to opposite-sex couples for their weddings, then it must provide same-sex couples the same product or service.”

JD Bristol, attorney for Arlene’s, said his client has many customers and employees who are gay and the claim that she is “discriminating on the basis on sexual orientation is nonsense.”

“This is about gay marriage, it’s not about a person being gay,” Bristol said. “She has a conscientious objection to homosexual marriage, not homosexuality. It violates her conscience.”

The suit stems from a March 1 incident in which Robert Ingersoll went to Arlene’s to purchase flowers for his upcoming wedding. Stutzman refused him service, citing her “relationship with Jesus Christ.”

In its suit, the Attorney General’s Office said the florist discriminated against Ingersoll based on his sexual orientation in violation of Washington’s anti-discrimination laws and its Consumer Protection Act. The state is seeking $2,000 in penalties and a permanent injunction requiring the florist to comply with state laws.

...

“I one hundred percent believe this is a freedom-of-expression and free-exercise-of-religion issue,” he said. “What the government is saying here is that you don’t have the right to free religious exercise.”

This is America.

Land of the free.

H/T to Mark Shea who adds:

Gay “marriage” is not about what people want to privately believe marriage means to them.  It is about bringing the armed might of the state to bear on punishing people who will not pretend that there is such thing as gay “marriage”.  It will create three classes of people.  Those who lie to themselves, those who lie to others, and those who will not lie and will be punished, sued, and jailed accordingly.  It is about force, not freedom.   And it will be used to punish the Church for its moral teaching.

It's inevitable.

Now folks, back to Dancing With The Stars and American Idol.

"No one gives a shit"

The conclusion drawn by Sam Rocha in the wake of media apathy over the Kermit Gosnell story, which arguably is but a reflection of society's apathy over the brutal killing of newborn children:

I avoided the Gosnell story, too, initially. The headlines seemed too fantastic to be the wholly true and the details I gleaned made my stomach turn. I tend to monitor stories like these from a distance to see if they stick. This one stuck, thanks to Twitter and Facebook. I’ve only been able to read two articles — from the Atlantic and Slate — on this gruesome crime, and I read them hastily, with a sense of disgust and despair. I also found this article from 2011 about Gosnell in the New York Times, which I scanned.

There has been some media coverage out there all along, it turns out, but it is the question of degree and quality — and volume — that is highly suspect. Salon seems to think that we just don’t read enough alternative media, which is true, but that doesn’t address the primary concern.

This event is different, but strangely related to Savita for me. What got me so worked up about Savita now has me depressed and despondent, senseless and void. Numb.

Let me be clear: cultural despair is not the same thing, I think (I hope?), as theological despair. Hope against hope.

Welcome to the dark ages. An age where darkness is not the result of widespread ignorance or circumstance or feudal folklore. No. This is a time of intentional darkness. The Enlightenment is over. The grand experiment of it all, the United States of America, has failed, miserably. We have nothing left but a futuristic fantasy that propels us into techno-economic nihilism.

We’ll forget Gosnell soon enough. Just as we forgot about the last person who told us that we’re headed for cultural suicide.

No one gives a shit.

I'd like to believe Sam is wrong.  I'd like to but I'm hard pressed to have that kind of faith.  Yesterday on Facebook, someone who I respect but who I disagree with more times than not, wrote this on his wall:

It is possible to find what Dr. Gosnell is accused of doing horrific and still support abortion rights. They are two completely different issues. I know this, because that's how I feel.

It's that disconnect that makes me think Sam Rocha is more right than I want him to be.  

How can one find what Dr. Gosnell did outside of the womb different from what other abortionists do inside the womb?  How?  Is the birth canal the container for magic juju that allows for something to be right before passing through it and wrong afterwards?  Seriously?  In what world?

Sam wrote that we live in a time of intentional darkness.  

It's hard, terribly hard, not to agree.

God help us.

Army Reserve training brief - Evangelical Christianity and Catholicism are extreme

The image that follows was clipped from this Army Reserve training brief.

In response, the Archdiocese for the Military Services has issued a statement:

The Archdiocese for the Military Services and Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty recently became aware of a U.S. Army Reserve Equal Opportunity training brief that expressly listed “Catholicism,” “Evangelical Christianity” and other religious groups as examples of “religious extremism” alongside groups such as “Al Qaeda”, “Hamas” and the “KKK.”  The Archdiocese is astounded that Catholics were listed alongside groups that are, by their very mission and nature, violent and extremist. 

According to an investigation and reply from the Army Chief of Chaplains office, the training in question appears to have been an isolated incident not condoned by the Department of the Army. The Archdiocese and the Chaplain Alliance explained that the Army can and should take steps to prevent such incidents in the future.The Archdiocese calls upon the Department of Defense to review these materials and to ensure that tax-payer funds are never again used to present blatantly anti-religious material to the men and women in uniform.

An isolated incident not condoned by the Department of the Army.

Today.

But just wait a little while and I'm guessing it'll not only be condoned by the Army but instituted as policy by the government.

It's the direction we're headed in.

To deny this is to deny reality.

"... every road leads, sooner or later, to heaven or hell"

Mark Shea wrote yesterday on Spy Wednesday that there are two questions we all must face. 

Head over there and see what they are.

It's important.

“Men may keep a sort of level of good, but no man has ever been able to keep on one level of evil. That road goes down and down.”

In the dead of night we learn the Obama administration's expected attack on marriage has materialized in the form of a legal brief filed by the Justice Department:

The brief formally urges the court to declare unconstitutional the portion of the 1996 law barring recognition of same-sex marriages by the federal government for income tax purposes, federal employee benefits, immigration and myriad other programs.

The portion of DOMA barring federal benefits for same-sex spouses “targets the many gay and lesbian people legally married under state law for a harsh form of discrimination that bears no relation to their ability to contribute to society,” Solicitor General Donald Verrilli and other government lawyers write in the brief. “It is abundantly clear that this discrimination does not substantially advance an interest in protecting marriage, or any other important interest. The statute simply cannot be reconciled with the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection. The Constitution therefore requires that Section 3 [of DOMA] be invalidated.”

The brief pulls few punches in its effort to knock out DOMA, using sweeping language about the history of discrimination against gays and finding no legitimacy in the reasons some have offered for rejecting same-sex marriages. The unsparing tone of the government’s brief led some observers to suspect that the Justice Department is laying the groundwork to endorse a federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage in another pending case that addresses that question more directly.

The question of gay marriage can be addressed no more directly than it's addressed by Dale Ahlquist at Crisis Magazine:

One of the pressing issues of Chesterton’s time was “birth control.” He not only objected to the idea, he objected to the very term because it meant the opposite of what it said. It meant no birth and no control. I can only imagine he would have the same objections about “gay marriage.” The idea is wrong, but so is the name. It is not gay and it is not marriage.

Chesterton was so consistently right in his pronouncements and prophecies because he understood that anything that attacked the family was bad for society. That is why he spoke out against eugenics and contraception, against divorce and “free love” (another term he disliked because of its dishonesty), but also against wage slavery and compulsory state-sponsored education and mothers hiring other people to do what mothers were designed to do themselves. It is safe to say that Chesterton stood up against every trend and fad that plagues us today because every one of those trends and fads undermines the family. Big Government tries to replace the family’s authority, and Big Business tries to replace the family’s autonomy. There is a constant commercial and cultural pressure on father, mother, and child. They are minimized and marginalized and, yes, mocked. But as Chesterton says, “This triangle of truisms, of father, mother and child, cannot be destroyed; it can only destroy those civilizations which disregard it.”

This latest attack on the family is neither the latest nor the worst. But it has a shock value to it, in spite of the process of de-sensitization that the information and entertainment industries have been putting us through the past several years. Those who have tried to speak out against the normalization of the abnormal have been met with “either slanging or silence,” as Chesterton was when he attempted to argue against the faddish philosophies that were promoted by the major newspapers in his day. In 1926, he warned, “The next great heresy will be an attack on morality, especially sexual morality.” His warning has gone unheeded, and sexual morality has decayed progressively. But let us remember that it began with birth control, which is an attempt to create sex for sex’s sake, changing the act of love into an act of selfishness. The promotion and acceptance of lifeless, barren, selfish sex has logically progressed to homosexuality.

Chesterton shows that the problem of homosexuality as an enemy of civilization is quite old. In The Everlasting Man, he describes the nature-worship and “mere mythology” that produced a perversion among the Greeks. “Just as they became unnatural by worshipping nature, so they actually became unmanly by worshipping man.” Any young man, he says, “who has the luck to grow up sane and simple” is naturally repulsed by homosexuality because “it is not true to human nature or to common sense.” He argues that if we attempt to act indifferent about it, we are fooling ourselves. It is “the illusion of familiarity,” when “a perversion become[s] a convention.”

In Heretics, Chesterton almost makes a prophecy of the misuse of the word “gay.” He writes of “the very powerful and very desolate philosophy of Oscar Wilde. It is the carpe diem religion.” Carpe diem means “seize the day,” do whatever you want and don’t think about the consequences, live only for the moment. “But the carpe diem religion is not the religion of happy people, but of very unhappy people.” There is a hopelessness as well as a haplessness to it. When sex is only a momentary pleasure, when it offers nothing beyond itself, it brings no fulfillment. It is literally lifeless. And as Chesterton writes in his book St. Francis of Assisi, the minute sex ceases to be a servant, it becomes a tyrant. This is perhaps the most profound analysis of the problem of homosexuals: they are slaves to sex. They are trying to “pervert the future and unmake the past.” They need to be set free.

Free yourself to read the rest, you might find where it takes you surprising.  I'll tease you a tad more by excerpting the following;

As Chesterton’s great detective Father Brown says:  “Men may keep a sort of level of good, but no man has ever been able to keep on one level of evil. That road goes down and down.”

Understand that Obama's promise to fundamentally transform America is coming to fruition.  We're on a road that's leading us ever downward. 

H/T to Frank Weathers for the Ahlquist piece which is simply brilliant.