Friday, April 22, 2005

Odds and Ends

There is a new Pope in Rome and already we hear cries across the land as the secularists beat their breasts and shake their fists at Heaven. What is needed is NOT moral teaching or lectures, what the liberal establishment feels is needed are married priests, female priests, birth control, abortion, and all of those things that are so near and dear to the hearts of the liberals. Personally, I am not a Catholic nor do I subscribe to many of their beliefs, but the fact is the last Pope was a moral beacon in a sea of slime and immorality. He took a stand and stayed the course and for that reason alone he stands out among world leaders who seem to be more focused on their power and perks than on any personal beliefs. But there are some exceptions – George Bush and Tony Blair come to mind as does Bertelsconi (sp) in Italy and I am sure there are others, but the vast majority of “world leaders” fall into the Kofi Annan category --- contemptible power seekers who are corrupt and have no real moral convictions about anything. So the new Pope shows signs of continuing the policies of the last Pope and in my opinion this is a good thing since what the world seems to need is a moral compass and someone to point the way.

The debate on gay marriage continues unabated and I continue to find myself conflicted on the issue. First, I don’t think the government – any government – has the right to deny a license solely on the basis of sex. I think if two people decide to commit to spending their lives together and thus to enjoy the legal and financial advantages of that decision, then the government does not have the right to deny them. HOWEVER, I stop short of “gay marriage” since I think marriage is a sacred and religiously based institution. If a particular church decides to perform a “marriage” ceremony for same-sex couples, then that is their right but they are under no obligation to do so and the state has no right to force them. Furthermore, a civil union is not the same as marriage and the state is under no obligation to recognize same sex couples as “married”. This brings up the alternative situation and that is the civil union of heterosexual couples. Currently there seems to be a growing trend for couples to simply set up house without the benefit of a license or a marriage. These couples seem oblivious to the legal ramifications of this situation but if civil unions are allowed for same sex couples can they be denied for heterosexual couples? Apparently Sweden has elected to provide civil unions for all \who apply and the result has been the virtual elimination of marriage as an institution. Personally I think this is a serious matter because marriage is a commitment that has moral and religious overtones as well as legal ramifications. If the focus is shifted to the legal ramifications only I think it further separates us from the religious and moral teachings that underpin our society whether the liberal secularists like it or not.

I wonder if others have noticed that as the situation in Iraq improves and the number of attacks declines daily, that the New York Times and the rest of the elite media have shifted their attacks on President Bush from Iraq to domestic issues. Suddenly Tom Delay is all over the front page and accused of all sorts of nefarious practices – practices that are commonplace in Congress and have been for years but Tom Delay is being castigated for them. So once again the elite media are showing their partisanship while wondering why their credibility is eroding. Anyone who believes anything they read or see in the elite media are gullible fools.

Of course the media is having a field day with the Bolton nomination. The liberals and internationalists are distraught over Bolton because he has the temerity to speak the truth. The UN is a corrupt ineffectual organization whose sole purpose seems to be to attack and undermine the US while stealing as much money as they can and spending as much as they bleed from the US taxpayer. Bolton was selected because he is an outspoken bull dog who calls a spade and a spade. He is perfectly capable of looking Kofi Annan in the face and calling him a crook. He is quite capable of telling the French they are a two bit third rate nation whose position on the UN Security Council should be consolidated with the British seat. Bolton is a career diplomat but one who has the ability to say what needs to be said. Unfortunately too many of the liberals in this country still believe that getting the French to like us is important and that we can buy friends.

With any luck the people in this country will finally wake up and realize the Constitution does not call for the separation of Church and State it just restricts the Government from passing laws restricting the Church. The time has come to rein in the judiciary and since the Democrats clearly are not capable of doing that, hopefully the new Congress will be more conservative and will get this badly needed job done.

No comments: