Stephen Roney's Blog, page 92
March 30, 2023
Hockey Night on the CBC
According to this piece from the CBC, NHL players are “ostracizing” gay and transgender people by not wearing rainbow “gay pride” jerseys. We should perhaps be happy they do not go so far as to call it genocide. Brian Burke, of the Pittsburgh Penguins, insists that resistance on religious grounds makes no sense. He was, he says, born and raised a Catholic, and “I don’t see any conflict” between Catholicism and affirming—not just tolerating, but affirming, or, to use his exact word, “honouring”—gay sex.
Anyone who knows the catechism of the Catholic Church knows he is simply lying, or apostate.
Paragraph 2357: “Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that ‘homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.’ They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.”
Paragraph 296: “Among the sins gravely contrary to chastity are masturbation, fornication, pornography, and homosexual practices.”
The CBC interviewer, supposedly neutral, asks two gay advocates the leading question, “do you think religion is being used to disguise bigotry?” No advocate for religion, or for the dissenting players, is invited to give their point of view.
But one of the gay spokesmen gives the game away. Cyd Ziegler emotes, “I grew up Christian. I grew up hating myself, because I was gay. Because I felt that I would go to hell for eternity.” Bayne Pettinger agrees with him an endorses what he just said.
Obviously, then they know perfectly well that they are in opposition to Christianity and Christian beliefs. They know that Christianity teaches that gay sex, or endorsing gay sex, leads to hell. They are not prepared to live and let live; they want to ostracize Christianity from the NHL, or crush the conscience of individual Christians.
Cyd Ziegler insists otherwise: “The players have the right not to wear the jersey, if their teams allow it. But guess what? I have the right to criticize them.”
This is a false parallel. The players are not criticizing gay sex. His demand is that they affirm it, or face criticism. There is a difference between objecting to speech, and objecting to silence. He wants compelled speech.
For a proper comparison, think of requiring the players to wear a scarlet A to affirm their support of adultery, or requiring them to endorse on camera theft or the telling of lies. Or, conversely, imagine him as a gay man required to come on the CBC to condemn gay sex; or risk losing his job and his livelihood.
The important and most interesting question here is why homosexuals and transvestites cannot be satisfied with tolerance, and insist on universal public affirmation. Why do they need to compel assent? Why, for that matter, do they need “gay pride parades”? Why do they even need to “come out of the closet”? Straight people, after all, have no parades on the topic of sex, and are content to and expected to remain in the closet their entire lives, keeping their sexual interests behind closed doors.
It is presumably because they have a guilty conscience. Gays and transgenders must constantly be reassured that they are not doing anything wrong, precisely because they at least suspect they are doing something wrong. And because the problem is their own conscience, they can never be satisfied by any speech or action taken by any other. Their demands will just keep escalating. And they will grow more hysterical, beginning to speak of “revenge” and “genocide.” Ultimately, quite possibly, leading to egregiously violent action, like shooting small children in a Christian school. For the Erinyes pursue them, and they are relentless.
Orestes pursued by the Erinyes'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.
March 29, 2023
Bananapants
I think I have evidence that Leslyn Lewis follows this blog. Her response here to being accused of meeting with Christine Anderson is close to what I suggested ought to have been Pierre Poilievre's response to the charge when first raised.
What I suggested:
“Christine Anderson is a democratically elected representative of the German people. Not to entertain and to respect her shows contempt for the German people, our good friends and allies. It does not mean we agree with all her views. Cooperating with those with whom we sometimes disagree, on matters of agreement, is the lifeblood of democracy. It is the lifeblood of civil society. Much of the ill-will and suffering in Canada today is caused by a Prime Minister who refuses to even speak with those with whom he disagrees, who simply calls them names and slanders them, as ‘racists or ‘misogynists’ or ‘antisemites’ and the like.
This man who danced around in blackface with his tongue out and a banana stuffed down his trousers.
We Conservatives do not want that kind of Canada, nor that kind of world. We respect people, the people of Germany and the people of Canada, and we welcome those who come here from abroad.”
Mr. Sunshine Baby liked it:
The Nashville Wakeup Call
In the wake of the Nashville shootings, I think there is an awakening, at least on the right, to the idea that “transgender” people are potentially violent.
It stands to reason. Transgenderism is narcissism. It is, firstly, a demand for attention; this is why they must act out so flamboyantly, why they need to preen, to promenade, to twerk in front of children. This will never be satiated; it will escalate until stopped. Transgenderism is, secondly, an attempt to impose the will on physical reality itself.
Such narcissism, if frustrated, will not stop short of violence; why would it, if reality itself is no barrier to the will? They will feel they have the inherent right to use violence. Violence, moreover, gets attention; violence exhibits their dominance. And we can guarantee that they will feel frustrated, as reality and the rest of the world do not bend readily enough to their wishes.
Given a rising tide of people identifying as “transgender,” things look likely to get more violent. On the other hand, when it comes to blows, it is hard to imagine the impetuous and undisciplined “transgenders” winning. Like spoiled children, their urges are ultimately self-destructive.
'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.
March 28, 2023
The Real Genocide
Moloch: the pagan attitude towards children.I can’t locate the clip, but Stephen LeDrew recently did a three-minute interview with Brian Lilley in which they lamented a teacher who was fired for questioning whether the Indian residential schools were so bad. I suspect it has actually been pulled. Too controversial?
Both Lilley and LeDrew took care to make clear in the interview that they themselves thought residential schools were bad—but why can’t we discuss the matter?
They ought to know why. When an opinion or viewpoint is suppressed, it is usually because it is right. Because those who oppose it, and are in power, do not believe they can convincingly argue against it. Nobody cares to silence claims that the earth is flat, or that the US never went to the moon.
Lilley does point out that he has interviewed many “survivors” who remembered the schools fondly. This despite the fact that anyone who attended has a financial incentive to say they were as bad as possible: compensation is being offered. Lilley also notes that he has read the historical documents, and knows that, when they were set up, they were the “progressive” option. They were intended, if mistakenly, to help the Indians. There was no genocide in mind.
Most of them were mostly orphanages: refuges for kids whose parents had died, or who came from a profoundly dysfunctional family, or whose parents were too poor to properly care for them. And the Indian family is still broken. Simply closing them, without offering an alternative, is in callous disregard of the interests of Indian children. This is the real ethnic genocide, and it is happening now. Scapegoating the residential schools looks like a cover to get away with it.
We pretend we have no idea why there is this problem of “missing and murdered indigenous women.” We keep demanding more investigation and more commissions. The answer is obvious: most of them are adolescent women fleeing some intolerable situation at home. We pretend we have no idea why there are so many suicide pacts among young people at remote reservations. The answer is obvious.
We don’t give a damn about Indians. We don’t give a damn about young people in general. Whether consciously or not, we want to kill them all. We abort them, we surgically mutilate them, we mock mothers who spend their time raising them, we will not give them a proper education, but force them into factory schools and indoctrination centres, we declare them “mentally ill” and refuse to listen if they say they are abused at home.
To most of us, in our post-Christian society, the young seem only to be an unwanted consequence of our sexual pleasures. Just a damnable inconvenience, and to be punished for it.
'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.
March 27, 2023
For Theirs Is the Kingdom of Heaven
Can you recognize this princess?A model essay in a current text begins, I long thought oddly, “Almost everyone knows how the story of Cinderella ends, but do people actually think about how she spent her days before she met the prince? Her daily routine was not glamorous.”
I would have thought everyone knew very well how Cinderella spent her days. It is, after all, in the title, “Cinderella.” It is the story of an abused childhood.
And yet, our writer apparently assumes no one remembers. And, in fact, a grad student who actually specialized in children’s literature once remarked to me, “I wish I could have a life like Cinderella’s.” And isn’t it true that every little girl feels the same; don’t they imagine themselves as a “Disney princess,” either Cinderella or Snow White or Belle or the like?
We seem collectively to take no notice that all, that almost all fairy tales, are primarily stories of child abuse. Which we read lovingly to our children.
All these “Disney princesses” had appalling lives, in the original tales, up until the final happy ending. Snow White was hauled out to the forest to be murdered at age seven, at the command of her mother. She survives; but as a small child abandoned in the wilderness. Like Hansel and Gretel, and many others in these tales. Her mother finally tracks her down and does murder her.
It turns out okay in an improbable ending, in about the last paragraph.
So too with Cinderella. She is saved from her private hell only by divine intervention, a “fairy godmother.” And Belle volunteers to be devoured by a beast. Instead she agrees to marry him. Up to the last moment, her future life does not look enviable.
Yet nobody seems to remember most of the story as important. Only the happy ending. This strikes me as a justification for all the evil in the world. These stories may have been written for this purpose, to reconcile suffering children to their fate. These stories show, we can accept and do not care about even extreme suffering, so long as there is a happy ending. In other words, all the sufferings of this world are justified if we end up in a blissful heaven.
Consider the matter for yourself. Would you accept Cinderella’s life? Would you prefer it to your own? Most little girls obviously say yes. They want the suffering, for the same of the happily ever after.
So long as there is a heaven, and it in there we are bound, the suffering does not matter on the way.
Yet why, you may ask, do some people have to suffer more than others? It may be that not everyone is bound for heaven. This is what Matthew, and especially Luke, suggest. Suffering on earth earns us heaven, and is a sign of God’s preference. Woe unto those of us who have it too easy. God is treating us like brute beasts, without a soul to save.
Observe as well in life that those of us who suffer greatly in childhood are generally given a clearer view of heaven in this life; of imagined wonderlands. The world to us is more transparent, as for Hans Christian Andersen’s Little Match Girl. It is for those of us who suffer that the stories are written; we are those who have ears to hear, and eyes to see. We are more engaged by the stories; we are apt to create them. We are apt to come up with new ideas generally to make the world better; because we see how it should be.
And so we have a hope of true happiness.
'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.
March 26, 2023
Poilievre on Nowruz
Say what you will--Pierre Poilievre knows how to give a speech.
I bet this gets him the Iranian vote.
Eucharistic Miracle in Connecticut
Following so soon after the Asbury REvival, is this a further sign that something is going on, or about to happen, spiritually in the USA?
God knows we need it. Perhaps he is listening.
'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.March 25, 2023
A Dark Age after History
Went downtown for a medical appointment on Thursday. I rarely go downtown.
At Spadina and College, there is a Project Bookmark plaque on the sidewalk with a poem by Milton Acorn.
Knowing I live in a dark age before history,
I watch my wallet and
am less struck by gunfights in the avenues
than by the newsie with his dirty pink chapped face
calling a shabby poet back for his change…
And I see it has been defaced with green paint.
You know a civilization is dying when it defaces art, when it torches religious buildings and pulls down statues. This is a culture committing suicide.
Why do cultures commit suicide? For the same reason, no doubt, that people do. Because of a loss of meaning. Because people feel there is no point to anything. Except perhaps the moment’s gross physical pleasure: eat, drink, and be merry, for there is no tomorrow.
Downtown Toronto these days feels like the Cities of the Plain.
'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.
March 24, 2023
Han Solo
Canadians will by now probably all know the name Han Dong. Foreigners may not care, or may need some background. I ask them to Google it. Or just think “Benedict Arnold,” or “Quisling”—accused, not proved.
Dong’s tearful speech in parliament yesterday has convinced some—notably Althea Raj—of his innocence. This is soft-headed, naive. He has reason to regret damage to his career and reputation, and to his family, whether he is guilty of the charges or not. Indeed, he has more reason if he is guilty.
One word he spoke makes me think he is guilty. He referred to these “absolutely untrue claims.” An innocent man doth not protest so much. I remember O.J. Simpson saying that he “absolutely” did not kill his wife.
Another reason to believe the charges true: if the charges are false, Global News and the Globe and Mail risk not only their credibility, but possible lawsuits. The whistleblower at CSIS risks his career and a prison term.
What is the evidence that led them to make such a dangerous move? Given the nature of the claims, the evidence almost must be a wiretap. That would be compelling evidence; my guess is that they have this in hand.
And, if the matter was indeed brought up to the government long ago, they too could have heard this evidence. Yet they took no action. In other words, they were actively colluding with the Chinese government against Canadian interests. The government.
Whether Dong is innocent or guilty, it is now essential to hold a public inquiry. If he is innocent, this is necessary for him to clear his name: he has a right to his day in court. If he is guilty, the public must know the truth. There may be no specific criminal charge possible; the necessary punishment must be political, and for this the grand jury of the Canadian people must know the evidence.
He and his cabinet are stalling in every way they can, but I cannot imagine Justin Trudeau still being Canadian prime minister a year from now.
'Od's Blog: Catholic comments on the passing parade.
March 22, 2023
Senator Richards in Epoch Times
I'm a sucker for fine oratory.
