I am amused
D.C. Police Chief’s Car Stolen
Reality is often more amusing than fiction…
Related Posts:Reuters Distorts Vatican View on Fertility Treatment
Vatican may campaign abroad against IVF - expert
The Roman Catholic church is liable to launch a global offensive against infertility treatment following its victory in an Italian referendum last week, a leading expert said on Sunday.
Um, IVF is one type of infertility treatment and there are many others, including things like fertility drugs and hormone therapy which do not fall afoul of the Vatican or Catholic teaching.
Let’s be direct. When I bring my child into the world, I don’t want to say it started by me looking at some porn in a side room of the doctor’s office while masturbating into a dixie cup so a doctor can make a cocktail in a petri dish to inject into my wife. That’s just not such a fun story to tell your kids when they are older. “Well, son, Vasoline and Playboy had much more to do with your conception…”
The other irony is that the Church is accused of wanting its members to breed like rabbits, yet somehow isn’t for “infertility” treatments that would yield to more kids. Strange, isn’t it? Which stereotype is it again?
Here is what the Cathechism has to say on the issue:
2375 Research aimed at reducing human sterility is to be encouraged, on condition that it is placed “at the service of the human person, of his inalienable rights, and his true and integral good according to the design and will of God.”[165]
2376 Techniques that entail the dissociation of husband and wife, by the intrusion of a person other than the couple (donation of sperm or ovum, surrogate uterus), are gravely immoral. These techniques (heterologous artificial insemination and fertilization) infringe the child’s right to be born of a father and mother known to him and bound to each other by marriage. They betray the spouses’ “right to become a father and a mother only through each other.”[166]
2377 Techniques involving only the married couple (homologous artificial insemination and fertilization) are perhaps less reprehensible, yet remain morally unacceptable. They dissociate the sexual act from the procreative act. The act which brings the child into existence is no longer an act by which two persons give themselves to one another, but one that “entrusts the life and identity of the embryo into the power of doctors and biologists and establishes the domination of technology over the origin and destiny of the human person. Such a relationship of domination is in itself contrary to the dignity and equality that must be common to parents and children.”[167] “Under the moral aspect procreation is deprived of its proper perfection when it is not willed as the fruit of the conjugal act, that is to say, of the specific act of the spouses’ union …. Only respect for the link between the meanings of the conjugal act and respect for the unity of the human being make possible procreation in conformity with the dignity of the person.”[168]
Emphasis mine.
It’s just THIS FORM of infertility treatment that is condemned, not all forms. And there is more than one treatment but you wouldn’t know that from reading this news article.
Related Posts:Do You Support the Geneva Conventions or Not?
You’ve heard the claims that we violate the Geneva Conventions at Gitmo under various (incorrect) theories. Let’s assume for the sake of argument they are correct. The interrogation methods are wrong, the facilites are illegal, and so on.
The same people say we need to have trials for these individuals and try them in civilian courts because military courts are obviously insufficient. If they haven’t committed a crime, they should be released. The problem is, under the Geneva Conventions we can’t try them, it would be illegal. And in the few circumstances that we could try them, the Geneva Conventions require a military court. Here are the appropriate quotes from the 3rd Geneva Convention.
Art. 83. In deciding whether proceedings in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed by a prisoner of war shall be judicial or disciplinary, the Detaining Power shall ensure that the competent authorities exercise the greatest leniency and adopt, wherever possible, disciplinary rather than judicial measures.
Art. 84. A prisoner of war shall be tried only by a military court, unless the existing laws of the Detaining Power expressly permit the civil courts to try a member of the armed forces of the Detaining Power in respect of the particular offence alleged to have been committed by the prisoner of war.
In no circumstances whatever shall a prisoner of war be tried by a court of any kind which does not offer the essential guarantees of independence and impartiality as generally recognized, and, in particular, the procedure of which does not afford the accused the rights and means of defence provided for in Article 105. (Hint: We try military members in military courts when they run afoul of their duties. The only time they hit the civilian system is when they are off-duty doing something off-base in the general population. And even then, they usually get a hearing in the military system also. No detainee has been in the US to commit such a crime).
Art. 99. No prisoner of war may be tried or sentenced for an act which is not forbidden by the law of the Detaining Power or by international law, in force at the time the said act was committed. (I’m still waiting on what law they’ve violated. They haven’t been in the US, and for the most part, were captured on the field of battle, so by and large almost the entire USC doesn’t apply.)
Art. 118. Prisoners of war shall be released and repatriated without delay after the cessation of active hostilities. (Hint: Al Queda is still fighting. There is fighting going on in Iraq, and to a lesser extent, in Afghanistan. Even if we tried them and convicted them, they’d still remain in general custody until hostilites have ended)
So what is it guys, do you support the Geneva Conventions or not? You can’t have it both ways where you support it only in X circumstance, but expect us to make up laws and crimes to try them and then release them contrary to the same Conventions you hold so dear.
Related Posts:Forgeries Abound!
Just when you thought it couldn’t get worse for the MSM, it does. Captain’s Quarters has the latest on the fake Downing Street Memo that was distributed and the subject of those “make-believe” impeachment hearings and the usual rancorous thundering from the left. Turns out that by the author’s OWN ADMISSION that the documents are not originals typed on an old typewriter and the originals were burned making it impossible to authenticate anything. This is not a rumor going around, this is what the author, Michael Smith himself, said to the AP. As CQ makes clear there is a difference between fakes and frauds. The documents are clearly fakes as the author himself states. But that certainly calls into question whether they are frauds as well.
That brings us to story two. Remember the Dishonorable Traitor Dick Durbin calling the US Military nazis based on a FBI memo? Turns out that Durbin was also lying about the memo too. Myopic Zeal brings the quote from Fox News that states:
One knowledgeable official familiar with the memo cited by Durbin as well as other memos said the FBI agent made no such allegation and that the memo described only someone chained to the floor. Anything beyond that is simply an interpretation, the official said.
So it looks like Durbin also was lying about the comments of a confidential memo because he knows they probably won’t release it and he’ll get away with it (much the same is true in the Downing Street Memos, they can’t release it so they can be mischaracterized without the government being able to adequately defend). Blogs for Censure is up and running calling for the Dishonorable Traitor Dick Durbin to be censured. I don’t think he should be censured… I think every GOP commercial should feature this man’s comments and if Democrats don’t explicitly condemn it, they should be ipso facto unqualified for any office anywhere in this nation.
Enough is enough. There is plenty to criticize about America. The Democrats have moved beyond that to make up stories to criticize. First it was Dan Rather, then Isikoff, the Amnesty International, then the Downing Street Memo, now a U.S. Senator. The entire party has made it clear to the nation they are not interested in constructive solutions, they are interested in fabricating charges. It’s time to throw them out of office. I don’t want censure… as an Illinois vote, I want a recall.
Related Posts:
