Brutally Honest

"Every single move in the Obama administration's effort to sweep Catholicism from the public stage has happened before"

Peter Sean Bradley at Lex Communis:

Why knowing history is important.

Having recently read books on the Kulturkampf and the Nazi state's relationship with the German Catholic Church, I am struck by the fact that every single move in the Obama administration's effort to sweep Catholicism from the public stage has happened before.

The Obama's administration's argument that Catholic conscience and practice is protected only when it involves the administration of the sacraments to Catholics? The Nazis made the same distinction for the same purpose, namely to eliminate Catholic influence in "political" life. See this and this.

The Obama's administration use of Catholics who identify themselves as Democrat or liberal or progressive first, and Catholic second?That is a gambit, again, right out of Nazi Germany.

The intrusion of state power and politics into every facet of life so that dissenting from the State's policies on maters of conscience is made into a risky "political" decision? The Nazis, again.

Using State power to suppressing Catholic moral doctrines on the grounds that such doctrines are "superstitious"? The German Kulturkampf - a period of oppression and persecution initiated and sustained by German liberals. 

Ludicrous you might be saying.  Outrageously Godwin-ian.  Far-fetched rightwing outlandishness.

To which I say... I hope you're right.  I genuinely do.  

"The secular state is no longer satisfied with this sort of steady drift toward secularization..."

Father Robert Barron speaks to Obama's secular totalitarianism with wisdom and prescience... listen through to the end and understand why he's not just speaking to Catholics:

"There was a time when certain things were considered holy"

Those times seem to be slipping away at an alarming rate:

I cannot imagine the black heart of a man (or, alas, a woman) who struts before a simple little family, and steals their child away. That person, we would say, should be hauled before a court of law and then be banished from civil society. He – she – should be granted plenty of spare time to think again about the cruelty, while staring at the blank walls of a prison cell. How much worse it is, however, when the abduction involves an entire social organism: the long arm of a dull-witted and compliant police force, the convoluted brains of a corrupt judiciary, and the seething metaphysical hatred burning in the heart of politicians, who cannot abide a single little reproach, not even in the form of a happy little boy, against their claims to know what is best for everyone. So far from repenting in sackcloth and ashes, the Swedish thugs have compounded their sin by breaking their own laws, denying the Johanssons their right to choose their own legal counsel. The Swedish education domina has even written, openly, brazenly, that all homeschooled children should be abducted.

Back in the days when Swedes were men, not sheep, they raided the coasts of Europe in their long ships, burning and looting. Oh for the Vikings of old! For when they had either loaded their ship with your tribute or razed your village to the ground, they left, to enjoy their spoils; and you could go on living your life without interference, with your cow and a couple of chickens, and a field for corn and potatoes, and children, whom you would love and raise by your best lights, as mothers and fathers have done since the dawn of the human race.

And now, from the far whale-road of the Northmen, and the wintry binding of the waves, my mind returns, with the cry of a sea-bird, to my own native land. And I see something like the same misshapen hulk I saw moving across the arctic fens, now battening in warmer climes.

There was a time when certain things were considered holy. The family was holy: it was a realm of order and authority and love, not to be burst into by marauding benefactors. “A man’s home is his castle,” went the saying, meaning that the home, for father and mother and children, is as an independent dukedom, with its own traditions, its laws, its bonds of loyalty, its wisdom, and its hard-won wealth. So long as no crimes against God and man were committed, that castle was to be honored; for upon such families the whole social order was founded. One would no sooner set spies in the home to rat on mother and father, as the Soviets did, than one would burn down a church. It is not simply that one would refrain from abducting a child, as the Swedish government has done. One would not wish even to associate with someone who could conceive of so vile a thing.

The whole thing should be read and understood not so much for what it means across the pond but for what it portends right here at home.

The ideology that led to what took place in that piece is the ideology in power right here in the U.S. of A.

Recognize it.

And fight it with every breath.

 

"They wanted to show the bishops and the Catholic laity who is boss"

Paul Rahe at Richochet on Obama's HHS decision:

On the face of it, President Obama would appear to be shooting himself in the foot. Why would he risk losing the Catholic vote? One could, of course, argue that his aim was to excite the feminists and give them a reason to turn out in November. As a rationale, however, even this seems a bit lame. The benefit that the President proposes to provide is insubstantial. The administration’s claim to the contrary notwithstanding, the pill and other birth control devices are not free. But the expense involved is not great. Among those who are employed and have healthcare insurance, no one is hard put to come up with the paltry sum required.

This suggests that there can be only one reason why Sebelius, Pelosi, and Obama decided to proceed. They wanted to show the bishops and the Catholic laity who is boss. They wanted to make those who think contraception wrong and abortion a species of murder complicit in both.  They wanted to rub the noses of their opponents in it. They wanted to marginalize them. Humiliation was, in fact, their only aim, and malice, their motive.

Last week, when, in response to the fierce resistance he had deliberately stirred up, the President offered the bishops what he called “an accommodation,” what he proffered was nothing more than a fig leaf. His maneuver was, in fact, a gesture of contempt, and I believe that it was Barack Obama’s final offer. From his perspective and from that of Sebelius and Pelosi, the genuine Catholics still within the Democratic coalition are no more than what Vladimir Lenin called “useful idiots,” and, now that the progressive project is near completion, they are expendable – for there is no longer any need to curry their favor.

He's got more.

Bottom line is that the Left, as represented by the Obama, Pelosi, Sebelius wing, have utter contempt for anyone, but particularly faithful Catholics, they see to be roadblocks to their agenda.

Utter contempt.

And two of the three stooges call themselves Catholic and love to tell us how virtuous and tolerant they truly are.

Complete and total bovine fecal matter.

Thanks to Glenn for the find.

"The move to dismantle the Catholic conscience — or at least to redefine it as a threat to the public good — is underway"

The Anchoress sees what's taking place with clarity:

Some may remember that back in November, Mrs. Pelosi proclaimed her love for the church but noted regretfully, “they have this conscience thing”. And it is really getting in the way of where she thinks society should be.

Thus, the move to dismantle the Catholic conscience — or at least to redefine it as a threat to the public good — is underway. To that end an administration that didn’t need to involve the churches in its policies at all has gone out of its way to do exactly that.

And now, comes a “nuanced” assist.

Planned Parenthood called Paul’s Pantry, part of the St. Vincent de Paul Society and the biggest food pantry in Wisconsin, and asked them to come and pick up donations, which may have been noble, but wasn’t something the Catholic organization felt comfortable doing — sending a truck over and perhaps giving the abortion provider a photo opportunity. The American Life League reports what the worker at the pantry said:

All I told the young lady from Planned Parenthood was that I couldn’t send a truck to pick up, and gave her a list of other food pantries that might want to pick up, I gave her no reason at all and she didn’t ask why. Soon after, I started receiving the hate e-mail and phone calls. I politely explained to callers that although we are non-denominational in regards to those we serve, we are a Catholic organization who shares a board of directors with our sister organization, St. Vincent de Paul. We adhere to the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church and to the Rule of St. Vincent de Paul. I also explained our Gift Acceptance Policy and how acceptance of the donation would compromise our core values and possibly damage the reputation of Paul’s Pantry.

What happens next, of course, is entirely predictable, and of a piece with President Obama’s move with the HHS Mandate; this is all gauged to eliminate the churches from the public square.

Read what happens next and understand that it's coordinated, willful and frankly wicked.  

To suggest otherwise is to be obtuse or ignorant... or an accomplice.

Crossposted at Wizbang.

He promised to fundamentally transform this country...

... and he's doing his level best to do just that:

President Obama has ordered the Pentagon to consider cutting U.S. strategic nuclear forces to as low as 300 deployed warheads—below the number believed to be in China’s arsenal and far fewer than current Russian strategic warhead stocks.

Pentagon and military planners were asked to develop three force levels for the U.S. arsenal of deployed strategic nuclear warheads: a force of 1,100 to 1,000 warheads; a second scenario of between 700 and 800 warheads; and the lowest level of between 300 and 400 warheads.

A congressional official said no president in the past ever told the Pentagon to conduct a review based on specific numbers of warheads.

“In the past, the way it worked was, ‘tell me what the world is like and then tell me what the force should be,’” the official said. “That is not happening in this review.”

The plan for a radical cut in warheads is contained in a review of nuclear weapons ordered by the president in an August directive. The review called the Nuclear Posture Review Implementation Study is nearing completion and could be presented to the president as early as next month.

The plan has come under fire from senior military officers in charge of maintaining nuclear deterrence against Russia, China, and future nuclear rogue states.

Asked about the opposition, a senior officer involved in strategic arms declined to comment.

Critics of the nuclear force cuts in Congress and the national security community said the force structure is being studied without matching the need for nuclear forces to combat growing threats, as was done in past strategic nuclear reviews.

Currently, the U.S. arsenal includes about 5,000 warheads, many of them slated for dismantlement. Russia has between 4,000 and 6,500 warheads and China is believed to have more than 300.

Pentagon spokesman George Little declined to comment on the specific force levels being examined in the review.

“While the details are classified, the president asked DoD to develop several alternative approaches to deterrence and stability, to include illustrative force size and postures to best support those alternatives,” Little said. “As part of the NPR implementation study, DOD is evaluating these alternatives using policy criteria outlined in the 2010 Nuclear Posture Review.”

John Bolton, former U.N. ambassador and undersecretary of state for international security during the George W. Bush administration, said in an interview that the administration’s plan to cut nuclear force to as low as 300 “alone is sufficient to vote against Obama in November.”

“Congress should urgently adopt a resolution rejecting the idea that any of these levels is consistent with American national security,” Bolton said. “Let’s just see who is prepared to support Obama.”

Many of us have been saying for more than three years that this guy's a radical.

Can there be any doubts now?

Crossposted at Wizbang.

"We've come to an incredibly serious moment in American history"

Chuck Colson gets it.

Do you?

Thank you Mark.

"I have never seen such a determination to divide"

Another Catholic responds to Obama's HHS mandate, and vigorously:

To whom it may concern, 

This response to our petition to remove the HHS mandate is an insult. Pardon my language and frankness, but you must really think that people like me are idiots. As disappointing as this may seem to you, I can actually read and understand the true intent of this letter...just as I understand the intent of this mandate. You can't hide your true intent behind the niceties of this letter. Your intentions are clear and they still threaten quite a few freedoms. 

This response proves to me that you are ignoring our concerns and simply going ahead with a plan that violates the consciences of many employers who will now have to choose between adhering to an unfair law and forgetting about religious freedom...or refusing to violate their conscience and face the legal repercussions. For an administration that sold messages of "hope" and unification in the last election, I have never seen such a determination to divide a nation for the sake of self-interests. I know exactly what sort of organizations support this mandate and who they supported during election time. You can't hide this between pleasant words and your futile attempts at relating to our cause and concerns are appalling. 

Your response to our petition is shameful. You should be ashamed of your condescending tone, your attempts to patronize the people behind the petition, the biased sources you used to justify your argument...and your inability to cooperate with those whose conscience you refuse to understand. I am ashamed that this country's history will be forever blemished by this unreasonable administration and forever tarnished by the lack of willingness on this administration's part to truly cooperate with people who simply cannot and should not comply with a law that violates consciences. America was not created for the rights of its citizens to be trampled upon by a government that refuses to genuinely address our concerns. It was created in defiance, in response to an unreasonable king and empire that refused to address the concerns of its colonies....a king that chose, instead, to impose restrictions and unfair laws on his "colonists."

Surely you must see how this mandate controversy parallels with the controversy that led to the formation of this nation. 

I was born into a country that prided itself in the freedoms held by its people. These freedoms made this nation great and they were a hope to the oppressed of nations ruled by tyrants. How dare you support a blatant violation to these freedoms? How dare you attempt to promote a known carcinogen as health care? How dare you quote Planned Parenthood in a matter of conscience and religious freedom...an organization that PROFITS from abortions, contraception, etc? 

How dare you mock us with such a rubbish compromise? Even if the burden falls on insurance companies to carry these "treatments," it is still the money of the employer (Catholic or otherwise) that pays for this coverage. NOTHING CHANGED WITH THIS COMPROMISE. Did you really think we were stupid enough to believe this "compromise" was actually a true compromise? YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED for attempting to pull the wool over our eyes. You should be ashamed for insulting our intelligence with your condescension. We are not fools. We are Americans who know our rights. We know what the word "freedom" truly means...even if the current administration is confused by this concept. 

America deserves better than this administration. America deserves better than this mandate. I will continue to protest against it. I will continue to make my voice heard.

Thank you,

Barbara Soares

I'm adding The Catholic Science Geek to the blogroll as a regular read.

Crossposted at Wizbang.

Did Obama really cave to the Catholic Church? (UPDATED)

I'm not so sure... I mean, isn't he still mandating what it is Americans can or can't do without due process?

President Obama is scheduled to announce Friday afternoon a revamp of his contraception policy requiring religious institutions to fully pay for birth control, changing the onus on who pays for contraception from employers to insurance companies.

Sources tell CBS News the White House will not back off the administration goal to provide increased access to birth control for women, but it will provide religious institutions additional details on how to comply with the law.

Senior administration officials tells CBS News the new policy will mean female employees of religious institutions will get free contraceptive coverage from health insurers, without employers having to pay for it.

Religious institutions don't have to cover it, don't have to pay for it, and they don't have to refer women to it. It is the insurance companies' responsibility, per the Obama administration.

I agree with Professor Reynolds:

My advice to the bishops: He’s on the run — don’t settle for his opening bid.

The focus needs to be liberty. Period.  Religious or otherwise and this administration's attempt to circumvent what our forefathers died on battlefields to give us.

He's still mandating, to religious organizations and all others, what Americans must purchase, must possess.

The man and those who think like him are still a threat.

Father Z references the words of his good friend Roman Fabrizio to spell it out:

Where am I going with all this?

It’s good  to see such a massive reaction  - albeit only a verbal one so far –  by the US bishops. But if they think that all they have to aim to is for Obama and his Kommissars to drop the contraception mandate they’re in for bitter surprises down the road, and they would prove that they are completely missing what’s at stake here (but some bishops gave me hope with what they wrote).

What I mean is that it is inherent to the very idea of socialized medicine that the state gets to tell you what to do and what to pay for and how much.

It’s all about the delusional thought that unhindered “planning” done by “experts” who “know” is what will make the magic machine work. They may back down on secondary provisions for political/electoral reasons, but the principle they want to enshrine is  that the state is the ultimate and basically the sole provider of healthcare. What it does is bring to completion the utter distortion of the relationship between the individual, the family and all “intermediate bodies” of society and the State. In other words, the contrary of subsidiarity, which is the XX century Catholic name for the originally Catholic concept of “limited government”. Once it’s in place, you can kiss the Declaration of Independence and the whole Land of the Free business goodbye. You’ll be forever a glorified European Union.

Sooner or later, because of the invitable rationing that comes with centralized healthcare, they won’t even need to mandate that you perform abortions or give away condoms. You’ll simply lose all hospitals and schools because there is no way a large independent health provider can survive in such a system. Why do  you think so many Italian hospitals, founded centuries ago, with names of saints and popes, are nowinn the hands of the Sistema Sanitario Nazionale, directly or indirectly? Why do you think there is hardly a Catholic school that is affordable anymore and which teaches anything different from what kids would hear at the Liceo Statale A. Gramsci or what have you?

The contraception/abortion coverage mandate is immoral, we all agree on that, but getting Catholics – and anybody who’s not in the service of the State – out of the healthcare system is PRECISELY what the goverment wants. If they can force you to accept it now, that’s good for the State, they take over indirectly.  If you go the principled way and shut down or sell facilities, that’s good for the State, they take over directly. If you manage to obtain an exemption, that’s still good, the principle of the State running the asylum will still be there and it will become unstoppable before too long and you’ll have to cave in anyway.

You can't help but wonder if we've been played.

America needs to see this man and his minions for what they are.  A threat to our liberty.

Crossposted at Wizbang.

UPDATE: Mark Shea calls today's move a head fake from our tyrant King:

Don’t be a sucker. No compromise. This assault on religious liberty must be utterly defeated and salt sowed in its smoldering ashes. This man is an enemy of the Church and is acting with malice.

Read the whole thing.

"It is imperative for the blogosphere to make noise here"

And so Mark Shea is making some... righteously:

It is imperative for the blogosphere to make noise here, because the MSM is largely in the tank for Obama and is, with malice aforethought, deliberately lying to make it appear that this is merely some dumb bishops with hangups about sex trying to impose their will on defenseless people who just want health care coverage.

The amazing chutzpah of those who say, “Whether I contracept is none of your business” while holding a gun to our heads and demanding we pay for their contraceptives is truly breathtaking, particularly since they are not only robbing us, but forcing us to violate our consciences while they do it. Contraceptives are cheap as dirt and common as water. Let those who want them get them themselves and not gratuitously force those who think them immoral to pay for them. Painting this as “the Church imposing its morals” on them is like accusing the pistol-whipped victim of armed robbery of lack of charity. This is an act of war against Catholic conscience and religious liberty and a naked act of malice from the Obama Administration. There must be no compromise. It must be utterly defeated.

Question is... are you one to fight or are you one to sit on the sidelines?

Answer the freakin' question.

Crossposted at Wizbang.