psalm123

Here we go.  Here is a dose of the bad medicine that may be coming to a state near you.

"Human Resources buddy. You keep your opinions to yourself!'"---That is if you are Christian or are in any way against so called same sex marriage.  If people will only think about some of the consequences that "gay marriage"  brings. If I as a Christian express my opinion that same sex marriage is wrong in a state that has given same sex marriage legal status, I am necessarily doing something wrong. To what extent my actions would be seen as wrong is still unclear as this is still an issue in its infancy.  Giving my (reasoned) opinion on gay marriage would suddenly be an action that could jeopardize my job? What?  Where is this "tolerance" that the gay rights activists always scream about?  This is what could be coming to your state.  Add to this the recent trend towards an expanding "hate crimes" legislation, and we are headed for some trying times in the realms of free speech and religious freedom. Agree with homosexuality or else......?  But wait.. Isn't this a case of "don't try and force your morals on me"? I get that a lot when discussing issues like abortion. See how that (fallacious) argument is conveniently forgotten in this case? Why is it ok to punish the Christian for not accepting the homosexual's morality? Think about it for awhile. It's a fair question.

Man fired after saying homosexuality wrong
Accused of 'harassment' even though lesbian approached him

A Massachusetts man has been fired from his sales position at the Logan Airport branch in Boston of Brookstone allegedly for telling a female manager that his Christian faith says homosexuality is wrong.

Peter Vadala was fired, and the company says he violated a tolerance policy. But Vadala reports his dismissal came because he expressed his Christian view of homosexuality after a female manager made repeated references, as she approached him four times during work hours, to her plans to marry her lesbian partner.

"At the start of the day, she told me she was getting married. I told her 'Congratulations,' and asked, 'Where's he taking you on your honeymoon?'" Vadala said.

"She replied that her partner was a 'she,'" he continued, "So I immediately tried to change the subject.

"I think she knew I was uncomfortable talking about it," he continued. "But, she brought it up to me three more times during the day

"After the fourth time she told me about her plan to marry her partner, I told her, 'I think homosexuality is bad stuff,'" Vadala said.

"That's what I said. I wasn't rude about it and I didn't act disrespectfully to her," he said. "All the woman said to me as she left the store was, 'Human Resources buddy. You keep your opinions to yourself!'"

Vadala said when he was hired he went through the company's training program

, including a requirement to watch a video.

"In the video, there was a homosexual man who said he overheard two workers talking. One man in the outsourced video tells the other, 'If a homosexual man hits on me, he better watch out.'

“The homosexual man in the video said he was offended, but I'm not allowed to be offended by a homosexual ... I was told that since homosexual marriage is supposedly legal in Massachusetts, that I was wrong for being offended," Vadala said.

A Brookstone human resources staffer called a few days after the incident and Vadala said he told the caller he wanted to resolve the matter.

"I spoke to (the human resources staff member) and I wanted to resolve it. I said that for his sake, the matter needed be resolved because this manager will be around customers

who, chances are, will be offended by the types of things she is saying," Vadala said

But during the course of the conversation Vadala said it became clear the call wasn't about resolving the issue.

It was a few days later Vadala received a termination letter from Brookstone.

The letter accused Vadala of "harassment" and described his comments as "inappropriate and unprofessional." Further, the letter charged, he was "imposing" his beliefs upon others.

Vadala said the letter from Brookstone, signed by Susan McGrath, contained numerous false accusations.

In a copy made available to WND, the letter reads, “You acknowledge that you then expressed to Ms. (name blacked out) that you disagreed strongly with her homosexual lifestyle and that [you] believe it is wrong. You describe it in your statement, as you did when speaking with me, as 'deviant.'"

But Vadala said he didn't use that word.

McGrath's letter further asserts that a sales associate "who was working with you at the time … provided a written statement indicating that while she did not witness the conversation … you did tell her later that you 'knew (she) is marrying another woman' and that you 'hate people like that.'"

Vadala reports he also did not say that.

McGrath refused WND's request to comment on the dispute. Instead she suggested Brookstone’s legal department be contacted. That department did not respond.

When contacted about the firing, store manager Katelyn Woodard said, "You need to speak to human resources about this and if you call this number again, I'll file harassment charges."

Vadala said it's clear to him he was fired for his faith.

"Absolutely," he confirmed.

This sounds reasonable to me. Let us wait and see what happens.

USCCB To Congress- Fix Health Bills or We'll Oppose.

This just in from the USCCB Pro-life Secretariat. The bishops are throwing down the gauntlet over failed amendments to fix abortion, conscience, affordability and immigrants in health care bills. This letter is dated October 8 and was sent to all members of the House and Senate:

Dear Member of Congress:

On behalf of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), we are writing to express our disappointment that progress has not been made on the three priority criteria for health care reform that we have conveyed previously to Congress. In fact, the Senate Finance Committee rejected a conscience rights amendment accepted earlier by the House Energy and Commerce Committee. If final legislation does not meet our principles, we will have no choice but to oppose the bill. We remain committed to working with the Administration, Congressional leadership, and our allies to produce final health reform legislation that will reflect our principles.

We continue to urge you to

1. Exclude mandated coverage for abortion, and incorporate longstanding policies against abortion funding and in favor of conscience rights. No one should be required to pay for or participate in abortion. It is essential that the legislation clearly apply to this new program longstanding and widely supported federal restrictions on abortion funding and mandates, and protections for rights of conscience. No current bill meets this test.

2. Adopt measures that protect and improve people’s health care. Reform should make quality health care affordable and accessible to everyone, particularly those who are vulnerable and those who live at or near the poverty level.

3. Include effective measures to safeguard the health of immigrants, their children and all of society. Ensure that legal immigrants and their family members have comprehensive, affordable, and timely access to health care coverage. Maintain an adequate safety net for those who remain uncovered.

We sincerely hope that the legislation will not fall short of our criteria. However, we remain apprehensive when amendments protecting freedom of conscience and ensuring no taxpayer money for abortion are defeated in committee votes. If acceptable language in these areas cannot be found, we will have to oppose the health care bill vigorously. Catholic moral tradition teaches that health care is a basic human right, essential to protecting human life and dignity. Much-needed reform of our health care system must be pursued in ways that serve the life and dignity of all, never in ways that undermine or violate these fundamental values. We will work tirelessly to remedy these central problems and help pass real reform that clearly protects the life, dignity and health of all.

Sincerely,

Bishop William F. Murphy
Diocese of Rockville Centre
Chairman
Committee on Domestic Justice
& Human Development

Cardinal Justin Rigali
Archdiocese of Philadelphia
Chairman
Committee on Pro-Life
Activities

Bishop John Wester
Diocese of Salt Lake City
Chairman
Committee on Migration

http://americanpapist.com/blog.html

"Condom Couture: Columbus designers get busy with colored condoms"

Keep it classy, Planned Parenthood:

Twelve students from the Columbus College of Art and Design have proven your health teachers wrong-there is more than one way to wear a condom.

On Thursday, Oct. 1, CCAD put on their 2009 'Condom Couture' fashion show. This event, held at the Bar of Modern Art, was a celebration of Planned Parenthood's 77th anniversary.

Before the event, there was a reception for patrons featuring a live jazz band, swirling condom-shaped lights, and a slide show about Planned Parenthood.

The program began with a fashion show of designs students had created with condoms.

...  Although host Ali Barrett joked "cocktails, condoms, high fashion... typical Thursday night," 'Condom Couture' was anything but typical.

Despite being described as a celebration, it was also an inventive, fun way to raise money and increase awareness for Planned Parenthood of Central Ohio. (source)

These people get our money. The government gives Planned Parenthood our tax dollars.

Work and school has me pressed for time, so here is an important post from Thomas Peters  http://americanpapist.com/blog.html

"A second and related cause is the protection of Childhood Innocence in our nation's schools. Homosexual activists are attempting to teach school kids inappropriate material about the homosexual "lifestyle" starting as early as kindergarden (this really is happening already - and almost always its the parents who are the last to know) One of the leaders of this "queering" movement, Kevin Jennings, was appointed by President Obama to the Deparment of Education.

Now through the efforts of American Principles in Action, we're trying to get him expelled:


I've written extensively on Jennings here, and will write on the situation in Maine soon.

Here are five effective ways you can help:

1. Link to this post from your blog, website, facebook profile, or through sending emails
2. Watch, favorite, rate, comment on and/or embed each of these YouTube videos
3. Join the Facebook groups Expel Kevin Jennings, and Stand For Marriage Maine, and invite your friends. Re-tweet this message for Jennings and this message for traditional marriage.
4. Visit http://www.expeljennings.com/ to sign the petition requesting Jenning's removal, and visit http://standformarriagemaine.com/ to find a variety of ways you can help them save marriage in Maine
5. Pray for the protection of children, and for the preservation of traditional marriage

I know there are many causes that are worthy of our attention these days, but these are two critical issues close to my heart, where small, organized actions taken by us can have a great and beneficial effect. Together, we can win this."

 

Work plus school has me pressed for time, so here is an important post from Thomas Peters at  http://americanpapist.com/blog.html

Video: Traditional Marriage and Preserving Childhood Innocence

Two videos this morning about two important causes....

First, the battleground to preserve traditional marriage in the United States is currently in the state of Maine. The victory won in California through the passage of Proposition 8 last November in California is threatened if the referendum for traditional marriage in Maine is defeated (30 out of 30 of the previous state referendums have all preserved traditional marriage, but this vote in the liberal state of Maine is down to the wire - and it will take place on November 4th).

Here is the latest video from Stand For Marriage Maine:

I'm back from class after a busy day at work so I'm pretty tired. Here is a topic that I have been meaning to comment on. Hopefully, I can get to it in the near future. The bottom line is that all life is sacred. It's very simple.


"The fact that 92 percent of women who are told that their unborn child carries the high risk of Down syndrome choose to abort the baby should shock us all. What does that say about our devaluation of human life and human dignity? This can only mean that these women see a child with Down syndrome as not worth having -- and the baby as a life not worth living."

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/sep/09092101.html 

Commentary by Albert Mohler, President, Southern Baptist Seminary

September 21, 2009 (AlbertMohler.com) - The development of prenatal diagnostic technologies presents a constellation of moral issues -- with the diagnosis of Down syndrome front and center. Over the past several years, a marked decrease in the number of babies born with Down syndrome has been both observed and widely reported. This decrease can be traced directly to the decision to abort after prenatal diagnosis.

As Science Daily reports, a new leading article to be published in Archives of Disease in Childhood points to developments in the near future that will likely increase the diagnosis of Down syndrome [DS] during pregnancy.  "New tests expected to be introduced next year will offer a simple blood test that poses no risk to the fetus and delivers a definitive diagnosis of one of more of the genetic variants of Down syndrome -- trisomy 21, translocation, or mosaicism," the journal reported.

The development of these new tests will almost surely make the practice of prenatal screening for Down syndrome more widespread. At present, the available tests pose some risk to the fetus and are invasive. The new tests expected next year are based on simple blood tests.

The new research is based on work by Dr. Brian Skotko, a clinical genetics fellow at Children's Hospital Boston.  Skotko, who has a sister with Down syndrome, asks this haunting question: "As new tests become available, will babies with Down syndrome slowly disappear?"
 

( Read more... )
 

 

This is a good talk which points out some of the contradictions involved with moral relativism. Patrick tells some personal stories which I am sure many people can relate to. He keeps things very basic for this talk and it works very well.  If you want to go deeper on this issue, look up Catholic philosopher extraordinaire, Peter Kreeft.


Thanks to Ryan  http://catholicaudio.blogspot.com/

Pat Madrid - Moral Relativism

Pat Madrid, Catholic apologist extraordinaire, recently gave a talk about moral relativism. I know he knows his Bible and his Church history -- but philosophy? I've gotta' hear this!

Here's what he had to say:

 

I would have refused to participate in the abortion, walked out and then filed a lawsuit. How dare they try and force this nurse to participate in the killing of an innocent human being. What a twisted world. I wonder if they would have done the same thing to a Muslim nurse?

New York City, N.Y., Jul 23, 2009 / 06:05 am (CNA).- The Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) has filed a lawsuit on behalf of a Catholic nurse who was forced to participate in an abortion, despite voicing her moral objections.

Catherina Cenzon-DeCarlo, a nurse at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York, was instructed to assist in a late second-trimester abortion for a woman 22 weeks into her pregnancy.  The hospital had known of the nurse’s religious objections to abortion since she was hired in 2004.

Cenzon-DeCarlo reminded her supervisors of her religious objections, but was told that if she did not participate, she would be charged with “insubordination and patient abandonment,” which could result in disciplinary action and the possible loss of her job and nursing license
 

( Read more... )

NY hospital tried to force nurse to help with late-term abortion

http://www.americanpapist.com/blog.html


Appearing on FOX News:

“Certainly NARAL or Planned Parenthood would never invite Benedict XVI, much less extend an award to him.” - Bishop Samuel Aquila of Fargo, ND

             Bingo.       

I very much agree with this message.  I run into these so called "Catholics" all the time. I read their articles in "Catholic"  magazines and blogs. I debate them on message boards and through letters to the editor. It seems fashionable nowadays to claim Catholicity and and the same time preach a much different set of beliefs and values.  There are plenty of Nancy Pelosi type "ardent Catholics" who seem to be quite ignorant of authentic Church teaching.  Then there are those who claim their personal agenda driven version of the Catholic faith is "more in line with todays faithful".  However, when challenged to provide a reasoned justification for their novel views within the framework of the actual deposit of faith held by authentic Catholics, these dissenters stumble over their words and misquote scripture or the Saints of the Church. There is no basis of support for their views within the vast teachings of the Church in scripture, tradition, or magesterial teachings. They have to make things up based on nothing more than the authority of their own opinion which is fueled by agendas and the popular culture.

So, keep this in mind the next time you hear that" the majority of Catholics polled support" ...(whatever anti-Catholic issue is being discussed).  Maybe the poll should be qualified with dissenting and uneducated Catholics.

There is nothing more unfaithful then to create ones own set of antithetical personal doctrines and then try and impose them on the authentic truths of the Church.  These self styled 'wiser-than- 2,000 years of Church teaching and tradition' Catholics are a modern spin off of the pick and choose what you want to believe "cafeteria Catholics". 

The Church is not a democracy. The truths of its teachings in faith and morals are not dependent on popular opinion or majority vote. Look a little deeper and you will begin to understand why this is.

Peace.

This excellent speech is definitely worth posting.  I agree with Thomas Peters(americanpapist.com) when he says "I think Abp. Burke has provided Catholics in America with a comprehensive manifesto for action in the coming year. I think his speech will have wide, beneficial consequences, or at least I pray that it does." I think it's required reading for Catholics in America".

WASHINGTON, D.C.
MAY 8, 2009
KEYNOTE ADDRESS

Introduction

1. I am deeply honored to give the Keynote Address at this annual gathering of Catholics to pray for our nation. I express my heartfelt esteem and gratitude to those who, each year, organize and support the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast.

2. The theme of this year's Breakfast is most fitting to the difficult time through which our nation is now passing. Before the fundamental and great challenges which we as a nation are facing, how better to express our patriotism than by celebrating the teachings of our Catholic faith. The most treasured gift which we as citizens of the United States of America can offer to our country is a faithful Catholic life. It is the gift which, even though it has often been misunderstood, has brought great strength to our nation, from the time of its founding. Today more than ever, our nation is in need of Catholics who know their faith deeply and express their faith, with integrity, by their daily living.

3. Although I no longer have my residence in our beloved nation, I am no less bound to practice the virtue of patriotism, taught and exemplified by Our Lord during His public ministry. It is Our Lord Who gives us, in the Church, the grace to practice patriotism as a fundamental expression of the bond of charity which we have, in Him, with our fellow citizens. From my earliest formation in the life of the faith, received at home from my parents and in the Catholic schools, it was clear to me that duty to one's nation, to one's fellow citizens, is integral to our life in Christ in the Church. In the Baltimore Catechism, the virtue of patriotism is joined with filial piety. These essentially connected virtues, in the words of the Catechism, dispose us to honor, love and respect our parents and our country (Revised Baltimore Catechism and Mass, No. 3, New York: Benziger Brothers, Inc., 1949, 1952, no. 135). Surely, the most fundamental expression of patriotism is daily prayer for our homeland, the United States of America, her citizens and her leaders. Our participation in the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast is, I trust, an extraordinary expression of the daily prayer which we all offer for our country, as good Catholics and, therefore, good citizens.

4. It pleases me that today's celebration included a presentation by Mother Shaun Vergauwen, Superior General of the Franciscan Sisters of the Eucharist. I have known Mother Shaun's religious congregation for all the years of my priestly life. The consecrated life of the Franciscan Sisters of the Eucharist is an inspired witness to the truths of our Catholic faith, especially what pertains to the Gospel of Life, and, therefore, also makes a strong contribution to the good of all citizens in our nation.

Growing Crisis in Our Nation

5. I come to you, this morning, with the deepest concern for our nation. I come to you, not as someone who stands outside of our nation but as a citizen who, with you as fellow citizens, takes responsibility for the state of our nation and, therefore, cannot remain indifferent and inactive about what most concerns the good of us all, especially those among us who are small, weak and defenseless.

6. Over the past several months, our nation has chosen a path which more completely denies any legal guarantee of the most fundamental human right, the right to life, to the innocent and defenseless unborn. Our nation, which had its beginning in the commitment to safeguard and promote the inalienable right to "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness" for all, without boundary, is more and more setting arbitrary limits to her commitment (cf. The Declaration of Independence: Action of Second Continental Congress, 4 July 1776, in The Constitution of the United States with the Declaration of Independence and the Articles of Confederation, New York: Barnes and Noble Books, 2002, p. 81). Those in power now determine who will or will not be accorded the legal protection of the most fundamental right to life. First the legal protection of the right to life is denied to the unborn and, then, to those whose lives have become burdened by advanced years, special needs or serious illness, or whose lives are somehow judged to be unprofitable or unworthy.

( Read more... )

Americans may want to pay attention to articles like this.  What's the latest over here in America....?Proposed "hate crimes" legislation. I don't suppose 'Christianophobia' will be included in such legislation.
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/may/09050602.html


By Hilary White

May 6, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A deliberate campaign to enforcce “diversity” and political correctness by “unelected or quasi-governmental bodies” is turning Britain into the “the first modern soft totalitarian state”, an Australian political science expert and author says.

Hal Gibson Pateshall Colebatch, an Australian historian, author, poet, lecturer, journalist, editor, and lawyer, has warned in an editorial in the Australian that while there may as yet be no concentration camps or gulags in Britain, “there are thought police with unprecedented powers to dictate ways of thinking and sniff out heresy, and there can be harsh punishments for dissent.” He points to the dozens of cases over the last ten years in which Christians and others who hold traditional moral views, have been targeted by police and other governmental agencies for their beliefs.

Colebatch warned of legislation that is currently being pushed through Parliament that will outlaw the telling of racist, “homophobic” or politically incorrect jokes, with a potential sentence upon conviction of seven years in prison. An attempt in the House of Lords to insert a freedom of speech clause was shot down by Labour Justice Minister Jack Straw.

( Read more... )

New York City, N.Y., May 1, 2009 / 12:01 pm (CNA).- This week New York Governor David Paterson attended a gay pride rally and lashed out at religious leaders for opposing gay "marriage" saying they were "motivated by a five letter word: guilt."


What an ignorant thing to say. I thought the standard secular response involved a four letter word "hate".  Perhaps Gov Paterson is breaking new ground in anti-religious rhetoric.

Catholic supporters of traditional marriage responded by calling the governor’s remarks "confusing, offensive, and just plain mistaken."

( Read more... )

Here's another example of that so-called "tolerance" for homosexual acts we are heading towards in this country. It goes something like this.... You have to affirm the homosexual lifestyle as being morally acceptable or risk being called  'hateful' , 'homophobe' , or in this case get yourself kicked out of a public university. Hmm, now where is the 'tolerance' for opposing viewpoints in all of that?  Ya know there are people who haven't a hateful bone in their body who disagree with the homosexual lifestyle based on various rational arguments grounded in natural law, logic, anthropology, religion etc. How about a little tolerance for them?

`Peace
 Dave

School faces lawsuit for dismissing student who refused to condone homosexuality

Ypsilanti, Mich., Apr 9, 2009 / 03:31 pm (CNA).- A lawsuit was filed against Eastern Michigan University on Thursday after school officials allegedly dismissed a student from the school’s counseling program for not affirming homosexual behavior as morally acceptable. The Alliance Defense Fund Center for Academic Freedom filed the lawsuit with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan on behalf of student Julea Ward.

( Read more... )

I thought that I would start out the new year with a short speech by Mother Teresa. Everyone can benefit by listening to what this saintly woman has to say.  I especially like her stories of the great character and compassion found in the poor and dying people she encountered in her ministry.  Start your new year right and give this audio a listen.

I found this talk and tons of great Catholic audio at  http://catholicaudio.blogspot.com/

As one holy woman said in 1994...

 

 

(Click here for Spanish version.)

Speech of Mother Teresa of Calcutta to the National Prayer Breakfast,
Washington, DC,
February 3, 1994

Listen online to the audio of this talk or download it free in MP3 format.

On the last day, Jesus will say to those on His right hand,

"Come, enter the Kingdom. For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was sick and you visited me." Then Jesus will turn to those on His left hand and say, "Depart from me because I was hungry and you did not feed me, I was thirsty and you did not give me drink, I was sick and you did not visit me." These will ask Him, "When did we see You hungry, or thirsty or sick and did not come to Your help?" And Jesus will answer them,

"Whatever you neglected to do unto one of the least of these, you neglected to do unto me!"

As we have gathered here to pray together, I think it will be beautiful if we begin with a prayer that expressed very well what Jesus wants us to do for the least. St. Francis of Assisi understood very well these words of Jesus and His life is very well expressed by a prayer. And this prayer, which we say every day after Holy Communion, always surprises me very much...

 

"Whatsoever You Do..."

 

[Read the rest here.]
 

Taken from
http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=1313

When discussing "gay marriage" with people who immediately pull the "hate card" in regards to Church teaching , I always issue the challenge to argue against the reason and content of the arguments the Church proposes rather than simply name calling.  The arguments presented by the Catholic Church (and others) against so called gay marriage are based in reason, logic, anthropology, psychology, public policy and jurisprudence. There is no hate involved.  I am concerned for the good and decent people who stand to be hurt by unjust accusations of "hate" when standing up for traditional marriage. Respect and "tolerance" is a two way street.

San Francisco archbishop defends marriage-amendment supporters
December 04, 2008

In a column that appears in tomorrow’s edition of the San Francisco archdiocesan newspaper, Archbishop George Niederauer defends supporters of Proposition 8 against the charge that “hatred, prejudice and bigotry against gays, along with a determination to discriminate against them and deny them their civil rights” motivated their support for the amendment that defined marriage as the union of a man and a woman.

“The churches that worked in favor of Proposition 8,” the archbishop writes, “did so because of their belief that the traditional understanding and definition of marriage is in need of defense and support, and not in need of being re-designed or re-configured … Members of churches who supported Proposition 8 sincerely believe that defining marriage as only between a man and a woman is one such issue. They see marriage and the family as the basic building blocks of human society, existing before government and not created by it. Marriage is for us the ideal relationship between a man and woman, in which, through their unique sexual complementarity, the spouses offer themselves to God as co-creators of new human persons, a father and mother giving them life and enabling them to thrive in the family setting.”

( Read more... )

Full article here.  http://www.sfarchdiocese.org/about-us/news/?i=1505

This is not the way to make your point. There is a video of this incident showing an older woman getting pushed around and screamed at.  Stuff like this should not be happening on either side of this debate. Have people forgotten what reasonable discussion is? 

Los Angeles, Nov 10, 2008 / 09:44 pm (CNA).- Supporters of California’s Proposition 8 are reporting harassment and even violent assaults from opponents protesting the passage of the ballot proposal which rescinded a California Supreme Court decision that imposed same-sex marriage on the state. Homosexual activists have held large protests at Mormon temples and Catholic churches, deriding their opponents as hateful.


( Read more... )

One of my friends mentioned Proposal 2 today. I just want to clarify a couple of things for those who are going to vote.

The intention behind proposal 2 is not to legalize embryonic stem cell research in Michigan.  Embryonic stem cell research is in fact already legal in Michigan and is going on currently.  Proposal 2 would remove current limits on embryonic stem cell research.

Proposal 2 is a proposed amendment to the state constitution.  Proposal 2 would make it illegal for our representatives (read "us") to restrain (read "regulate") experimentation on human embryos. This proposal is about permitting embryos to be killed in our state for the purpose of extracting their stem cells. Killing embryos is illegal here, so researchers import embryo stem cells for their work from outside of Michigan.
That's my understanding of the proposal. Please feel free to correct me if I have been misinformed. 

Proposal 2 results in an attack upon the dignity of unborn human life.  Scientific study and the advancement of medical science is important and desirable. However, we cannot justify ends (regardless of how good)  through immoral and unjust means.

Vote NO on 2.


God Bless

Here are a couple of great talks related to relativism.  We live in a society that is willingly participating in a downward spiral morally speaking. A major cause of this problem is moral relativism.  "To each their own" and "different strokes for different folks" sounds good on the surface but what happens when this philosophy is lived out?  "Moral absolutism leads to intolerance".  That's a popular slogan heard these days but is it true? Could it be the other way around.... that moral relativism leads to intolerance and imposition?  These talks will make you think and I know you will learn something new.

1. Fr. John Riccardo. For this talk Fr. makes good use of quotes from Pope Benedict and noted Philosophy professor Dr. Peter Kreeft to shed some light on the implications of moral relativism.  Fr. John is a graduate of The University Of Michigan and Sacred Heart Major Seminary in Detroit, Mi.
http://frjohnriccardo.libsyn.com/index.php?post_id=147010


2. Dr. Peter Kreeft. A refutation of moral relativism.                     
 http://www.peterkreeft.com/audio/05_relativism.htm

Peter Kreeft, Ph.D., is a professor of philosophy at Boston College and at the King's College (Empire State Building), in New York City. He is a regular contributor to several Christian publications, is in wide demand as a speaker at conferences, and is the author of over 45 books.

In this talk, Dr. Kreeft takes on several popular moral relativist arguments including: morals are culturally determined or are the result of social conditioning.

Much more Dr. Kreeft as well as tons of other free audio can be found at.  http://catholicaudio.blogspot.com/


God bless,

Dave