Universalis, your very own breviary in pixels...

Monday, 29 February 2016

Have you ever noticed that when someone argues that your tactics are unfair, or wrong, he hardly ever believes that those same tactics were wrong when utilized in some other situation, some other conflict, when they were deployed in the service of an aim with which he is aligned?


Just sayin'...

Denying People the Eucharist Because They Defy Their Bishop's Notions of Morality Is WRONG! ... Right?

Or is it?

Are They Really Being Denied "Rights" or Are They Snatching At Privilege?

Per the headline, girls are being "denied right to honor...heritage."
Not sure of any of this, but it seems as if someone is trying to paint sort of averagely transgressive teenagers as "victims."
Are the little darlings actually being made to "alter their attire" and "their whole selves" when they choose one month to wear ethic/heritage headgear?
For that to be true, wouldn't geles need to be an item which they wore all the time, not just for Black Pride Month?
The principal is herself Black, so I suspect she has a better handle on this than Professional Grievance Hunters.
Of course, one then wonders if other national or ethnic headdresses or other clothing that violates the dress code is acceptable at certain times, (if so, than this should certainly be added to the exceptions.)
Many school of which I know, for instance, have a navy/dark green/white/khaki pallate but allow red and green on the days before Christmass vacation, or gaudy Kelly green on St Paddy's.
Is there a day when all the kids with Scandinavian ancestors show up like this?
Image result for kid in viking helmet

Saturday, 20 February 2016


A very short, concise, lapidary take-down of the bedrock argument for allowing the private murder by chemical or dismemberment of unborn human beings, the first seven paragraphs of this piece.

Featured Image

Sometimes, you want to get away even from people you love....

"Aw, gee, here comes that chatterbox.... quick, start a Rosary or something, I just can't take any more of him today."

(I kid, because I love.)

Friday, 19 February 2016

In Fiscal 2014-2015, "for every adoption referral, Planned Parenthood performed 160 abortions"

In Rosenkrantz and Guildenstern, a coin is flipped.
There are only two possible outcomes, (in real life, does the coin ever end up on its edge?)
Heads or tails.
Heads or tails.
Heads or tails.
Both equally possible.

The previous outcome, even the previous thousand outcomes, has no real bearing on the probability of the next one.

But in an event with a moral component, its outcome subject to that outcome's capacity to beguile those involved, aleatoricism has very little place.

Despite their reminders, their insistence that Planned Parenthood is not just about abortion, it must be allowed that abortion  is, nonetheless, the service for which they are known and lionized.

They will kill your unborn baby for you, (or they will kill your inconvenient hook-up's baby for you, guys.)

So all in all, I don't find I strange that the outcome of a pregnant woman walking through their doors leans heavily away from adoption. (And it is not a binary situation - there is also the other reprieve for the baby, in which he is kept by his Mother.)
But it must also be said that by its own words and those of its supporters, its near fetishization of some "right" to kill the new life begun in you, it is clear that there is pressure to go with its disgusting flow and just abort.

I don't find it strange that by its own count abortions outnumber adoptions 160 to 1.

I don't find it strange.

I find it vile, obscene, appalling, outrageous, ugly, evil horrifying... but I don' find it strange.

Thursday, 18 February 2016

"Okay, look, come back tomorrow, okay? no, no...we're not gonna build a wall, or anything like that, we're just gonna.... make a bridge! yeah, that's it! Come back later, I'll have my people build a bridge for ya! Then my people will call your people and..."

"I mean, it's really right there in my title, when you think about it, Attila...."

Dishonest Heart-tugging by CBS

Last night the national news had a touching piece about a badly wounded vet who was finally going to have a child with his wife, thanks to in vitro fertilization.

But thanks to the mean mean meanies who oppose abortion, the Veterans Administration won't pay for such procedures for vets whose reproductive organs have been damaged.

The reporting pretty much left it at that, as if "no help for soldiers who have lost their testicles" was some kind of casualty of an unrelated pro-life initiative, you know, the way congress like to tie extraneous amendments to must-pass bills as a way of sneaking them past media/constituents/sleeping congressmen?

They could have at least had the decency to explain that in vitro fertilization invariably involves the creation of multiple lives in the hope of obtaining on or two babies, the others that are not implanted to be destroyed, or frozen.
And in fact, even some that are successfully implanted are often times deliberately destroyed - "selective reduction" they call it, when they abort two or three of the quads a woman is carrying.

Opposition to in vitro by pro-lifers is not "the product of anti-abortion politics" it is the only logical attitude for us to have as long as the method continues to effect the creation and subsequent destruction of other human lives in the quest for one.

Wednesday, 17 February 2016

Gee, If It Were an Inter-Denominational Service, the Lutherans Could Have Brought "Bars"

A funeral in Italy for the gentleman who invented the Moka, basically.... an elegant coffee pot.

Image result for bialetti funeral

Elegant enough for liturgical use? exemplifying "noble simplicity?"

Honestly, I don't know.
It wasn't to be funny, and it was meaningful to the family.
The Church now permits cremation, as long as it is not done to disparage belief in the Resurrection of the Body, and a container with sentimental significance to the family or the deceased is deemed appropriate by most people for the  grounds  remains.

Mmmmm.... bars.

I'd not heard that term, 'til Himself told me tales of touring small towns in the upper Midwest and parts of Canada, and the immense hospitality of the people.
But the concept is more than familiar to me. (I've subbed with Lutheran church choirs. There's this magic thing with butter and graham crackers.....)

Alas, I am Polish/Irish/Norman/Austrian-American Catholic, and I only bake anything of that sort at Christmass time.

Commiting Suicide... "Not That There's Anything Wrong With That?"

Speaking of the knee jerk revulsion to certain matters but the PC insistence that they are not wrong, or repellent -
How do the chattering classes decide amongst themselves when a suicide is "tragic", and when it is "courageous" and "inspiring"?
And what about The Powers That Be in, say, Belgium?
Do they have suicide prevention hotlines?
Or suicide encouragement death with dignity hotlines?
Are any suicides there officially tragic? Are there some suicides out of which the government and the society try to talk people?
Which are which?
I'm sure they know, and I'm sure they are right, and I'm sure that I am just too obtuse to comprehend on my own the differentiation between the hunky-dory ones and the bad ones, but how do our betters determine who goes on which list?
It's not just the method, is it? Is it how useful or useless the dead might have been in the eyes of the chatterer?
  Story image for suicide from TMZ.com Story image for suicide bbc documentary simon from The Independent Story image for dominique venner from New Yorker (blog) Media image for alexander mcqueen suicide from New York MagazineStory image for MarShawn McCarrel from NBCNews.com Media image for Junior seau from NBC 7 San Diego Relied on each other: The twins, pictured here on Belgian television before they were named, had lived together their entire adult lives and could not communicate with the outside world Media image for suicide jutra from National Post Story image for suicide cobain from Alternative Press  Image result for nancy verhelst

Well, we know it has nothing to do with integrity....

What does it mean when a Catholic cardinal says some who use charges of freemasonry against members of the Catholic hierarchy are "integralist"?

Right wing nationalists? Nationalists certainly, but rightwingneonazi-ish?

Whatever he means, it aint' good.....

 Image result for seinfeld "not that there's anything wrong with that"
But it's all a little like the sitcom character constantly denying rumors that he was gay, "not that there's anything WRONG with that....." 

"Hey, Masons? us Catholics need to get past that thing where Catholics who want to really, really insult other Catholics accuse them of being Masons... not that there's anything wrong with that"

Monday, 15 February 2016

Temptation and the Three Pillars of Lenten Practice

Fasting, Alms-giving and Prayer?

So Satan tempts Christ with food, food out of nothing, power over others, over the oppressed, over those who do not have it; and appropriating to Himself divine powers He has ceded on taking on human form?

One of my 5th graders noticed the correlation.

I love these guys.

It is ABSURD...

... I repeat, it is absurd to think that ANYONE seeks a job or a ministry  in a Catholic institution and is somehow unaware of what the Mystical Body of Christ actually teaches, in fact, declares pretty dang openly, in regard to the sanctity, (or otherwise,)  and propriety, (or otherwise,) of certain kinds of relationships.

I have difficulty believing that at least some of these instances, (I know nothing about Mr. Barrett specifically,) are not a result of a deliberate effort to obfuscate ones beliefs and situation while applying to work in a Catholic institution so that something at odds with Catholic belief and practice can then be sprung on ones employer.
SERIOUSLY??!?!? You have a PROBLEM with that?

Thursday, 11 February 2016

Three Years On, I Still Don't Want to Believe It

This day in 2013, I was going through the greatest sorrow of my life, woke up on a not-too-bad-day to learn this-
Pope Benedict XVI will leave the papal seat empty on February 28 (Photo: CNS)
My heart was already breaking, but I learned from the other tragedy, and I learned and am still learning from this.
Depend on me, says the Lord.

Tuesday, 9 February 2016

The Face of Evil - Boko Haram in Nigeria

This is quite horrifying, don't look at the picture, squint past it if you haven't a strong stomach, but read it, this is important.

WHY are the atrocities in Africa not reported on as prominently as those in the middle east, why do we involve ourselves in some and not others?

I do not believe it is because the victims are black, I cannot believe it is because the victims are Christian.

How do we allow this to continue without trying to remedy the situation?
The blogger is British, but changes the mileage and he could as well be American.
Some two thousand miles away in Deir ez-Zur, Syria, Islamists have besieged the city of 120,000 souls. Women are raped in the street, men beheaded on the banks of the Euphrates, and children are left to starve. The Islamic State (aka Daesh) is in control, and our media and political class insist that we must open our borders to those who can flee the persecution.
Some two thousand miles away in Dalori, Nigeria, Islamists have beseiged the village of an unknown number of souls. Women are shot, men blown to smithereens, and children burned alive in their homes. Boko Haram (which has pledged allegiance to the Islamic State, aka Daesh) is in control, and our media and political class have condemned the slaughter.

I Am a Woman; I Am Moderately Sane; I Am Not Defending Rapists - BUT.....

... it's time to talk about immigrants, neo-nationalism and the purpose of the Church.

But first, a word about sin.
I believe in sin.
Sin is poison, it is toxic to the Soul.
Suppose this is poison:
Image result for chocolate bon-bon
Suppose this also is poison:
Image result for moldy candy
Which one tempts you, which are you more likely to ingest?

The devil, (I also believe in the devil,) is not stupid enough to think his best bet for ensnaring you is the second one.

So, assuming they are both poisonous to the same degree, I don't think there's much question as to which actually poses the most danger to you.

Which brings us back to the fable of The Bishops and the Rapists.
There's been a bit of hand wringing over the reaction of Important European People to the rape gangs of New Years Eve.
Personally, I think the anger at civic leaders and politicians who fret more about being unwelcoming to Immigrants With An Agenda than about protecting their own citizens is more than justified.
There first responsibility is the protection of their citizens.

But the contempt or anger directed at Church leaders?

The most important task of the successors of the Apostles is getting as many souls into heaven as possible, our salvation, not our bodily safety, is their mission.

Harm to the Soul is a much greater peril to the human being than harm to the Body.

And realistically, what are the chances that the flocks of Bishops Woelki, Hanke and Schönborn are going to fall into the sins of the Immigrants With An Agenda who made up the rape gangs?
- Gee, Hans, Ahmed and Raafat there look like they're havin' a great time, let's join in!
- I'm with you, Fritz!
I'd say minimal.

But what are the chances of them falling into the sins of xenophobic neo-Nazis? of seeking to buy a little temporal and corporeal safety by throwing in their lot with evil men?

You know, just a little. Oh, and maybe just a little more. Okay, and just that one more...
The Church knows what it's doing with it's theology of "venial" sins, She's seen a lot of slippery slopes in Her day.
And hatred of the stranger under the guise of Protecting Our Womenfolk is much more likely to lure Germans than is organized sexual assault.
That's how sin works.
It deceives us into thinking a Big Good Cause justifies a Small Evil Act.
Just a little.
And maybe just a little more.

We'll stop before anything really bad happens...
Do they have a history of anything like that?
Image result for "nice nazi"

So I'm thinking maybe the German bishops, even if the thought behind them was wrong, said the right things.

You know, God drawing straight with crooked lines?

Gettin' It Out Of My System, Alleluia, Alleluia, Alleluia....

My Sunday School Kids buried it on Sunday.

I discovered some of them, (naturally, the ones who made the most mockery of the various square-note "alleluias" we looked at,) can really sing.
Hmmm... Stabat Mater?

Now, I just need a paczki, (which I won't actually have, don't know where to find them,) and one last cheeseburger before the Great Fast.
Image result for cheeseburger
I'm not sure I could give up cheese... should I try? I see a period of discernment in my future....

Initiates and the Uninitiated

When I as a young whipper-snapper, the catechesis of callow Catholics was in a dormant stage, at least in my neck of the American woods.
We painted rocks and sang along with a guitar wielding high school girl from red plastic books, (the red plastic books may be a false memory, as Glory and Praise had not yet blighted the landscape - on the other hand, the girl in question, a friend of our family, was a world traveller, very sophisticated, she may have brought it back from somewhere exotic, like France. I'm just remembering, she was also the one who explained the meaning of "to sleep with." At a drive-in, us little ones tumbling in the back of the station wagon like pajamed puppies, adults and semi-adults in the two bench seats, there was a "coming attraction" touted which I now think must have been the Cardinal, while we waited to see something like 3 Lives of Thomasina. In it, a woman in a confessional said, "I slept with a man." I asked her later how sleeping could be a sin, and she explained that not much sleeping often occurred during the act of "sleeping with.")
Until Confirmation class virtually anything I learned about the Faith was from the way people behaved in church, which was very powerful, and from my parents, both by osmosis and deliberately.
As is only right.
But I digress.)
In any case, until I was an adult I never heard the specific phrase "sacraments of initiation." (My own confirmation was a good long ways after what we now know should have been the final of the three, I had skipped a grade and was allowed to make my Communion with my older class-mates, but according to the diocese, IIRC, had to wait for the Seven Gifts until I was the "right age." Although I was lucky, very lucky, suddenly, after years of strum and hum and craft projects, they wheeled an ancient nun with a hair-sprouting mole out of the back, wearing a mask like Hannibal Lecter, who TAUGHT us actual THINGS. You know, facts, and precepts and principles and doctrines. I shall be forever grateful to Sister Clare Cornelius.)
Another digression, sorry.


Since I am now in possession of this expression, the sacrament of initiation,  I was struck rather forcefully by a snippet I read.
"Family Day" in Italy was apparently an enormous outpouring of popular support for the Traditional, might I say Normal? notion of "family," despite possible neglect by, or at least ambiguity from the Pope and outright hostility on the part of some Italian bishops.
In following links to see what manner of man was head of the bishops' conference, I came across this from some time ago. It was,
reported that he said the Eucharist “is and must remain a ‘universal assembly’”, and that it must also be an “eloquent sign of the divine and his free gift for the ‘uninitiated’.”
I have nothing to say.
That was kind of a long way to go, I suppose for nothing to say.
Maybe I AM the Dutiful Brother.
But I want my prodigal brother to come home, I want him to!
But not to pop in for dinner, drop off his laundry for Mom or the servants to do and take off again, after pawning the finest robe and ring and sandals so he could squander the proceeds by resuming his life of dissipation.

Is that just me being selfish? Or is it me remembering that the spiritual acts of mercy are "not a devotion," they are required of us who dare to bear the name of Christian?
“When in the evening of life, we are asked if we fed the hungry and gave drink to the thirsty, we will also be asked if we helped persons come out of doubt, if we were committed to receive sinners, admonishing and correcting them, if we were capable of combatting ignorance, especially that concerning the Christian faith and the good life. This attention to the works of mercy is important: they are not a devotion. It is the concreteness of how Christians must carry forward the spirit of mercy.”

Monday, 8 February 2016

The High Holy Days

I mean, you no sooner get your Super Bowl tree up and decorated and it's time to take it down!
Didn't get my Super Bowl cards sent, didn't wrap and deliver all my presents...
And the stores! they've already taken down their Super Bowl things and are promoting the next holiday, what an irreligious society we've become.
This commercialization of holy things has to stop.

My Chicken Little Moment, and the See of Peter

My dearest husband is a worry-wort. Yes, Himself is anxious over many, many things, yet always has time to include another scenario in his Litany of Terrible Things That COULD Happen.

Not that "seem likely to," note - but no matter how unlikely still could.
(And he almost always believes them to be more likely than they are, I should add.)
Most of them have to do with politics, and many, many, many of them seem to be inspired by political thrillers he watched an an impressionable age, Manchurian Candidate, 8 Days in May sort of stuff.

He grew up ducking and covering, (how sad that I was born too late to share in that....) and worrying about missiles in "Cuber," and he is not above remarking to people that what didn't happen could've happened, if it had happened, even though... well, it didnt - e.g. a coup by Nixon and his cronies? Could've happened.

"End Times" has just never been the future which my mind's eye envisious when awful occurances loom.
I simply never imagined apocolyptic results of elections, disasters, atrocities....

So whence the dread as I read this?
Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri, secretary general of the Synod of Bishops...and the synod secretariat will be hosting a symposium Saturday through Tuesday to “build a discussion” on the topic [of decentralization]... the nature of the Pope’s speech [on the topic] one that aims to pay more attention to the concerns of bishops and their faithful and offer them greater autonomy — has caused some concern. If inappropriately devised and executed, critics say, it could threaten unity and possibly even lead to schism.
Why did I see the dissolution of the Church and the End of Days?
I am not one of nature's pessimists, I don't live my life in fear of judgement day, I know the gates of hell will not prevail against God's Church...
So what is this foreboding?
I can tell you, I don't want to be a member of the American Church, still less of the Church of Gary or the Church of Newark or the Church of Venice, I don't even consider myself particulalry bound to Rome nad its rite, (going to a liturgy in Aramaic soon, as a matter of fact,) but I do consider myself bound to Peter's succesor.
I put not my faith in princes, even, or perhaps especially, princes of the Church.
a major concern about the proposed reform is that it could be especially vulnerable to abuse, particularly if it facilitates national or regional conferences gaining authority to approve pastoral practices that are not coherent with doctrine.
I see the promulgation of doctrinal developement and the handing on of teachings and Tradition becoming like some massive game of telephone.
It is hard enough to trust in Pete's successors, trying to muster confidence in the successors of all the apostles just multiplies my doubts by 12.

Saturday, 6 February 2016

How Could That Be an Act of God? It's Not the Way That I Would Have Done It, If I Were God

The oddest blog, from December, from an outlet that bills itself as an "international Catholic weekly newspaper."
The author, a "religious journalist," according to a note in Wiki, is apparently a convert to the Faith, but seemingly not one who buys into all that religious claptrap, that Catholic mumbo-jumbo, that Papist palaver. Not "Catholic" but "Catholish"?

Intercessory prayer?
Whatever for?
One might think it would be better to cut out the middle man or woman
Miracles? But it would be,
a very small God who can be manipulated and used to send signals to the Vatican Congregation for the Causes of Saints, about who is and who is not in heaven.
The Lord still working wonders to increase someones faith, you know, the way He did in the Gospels? Like Mary McCarthy and the election of Nixon, he has his doubts-
Has this miracle helped to persuade a single person who previously doubted it
Apparently not anyone he knows, so that's that.
But, not very originally, what it finally gets down to is that whole, existential, why would God do something nice for one measly little person, when He, you know, permits evil?
One only has to think of the millions of desperate prayers for deliverance offered up by the terrified victims of the Nazis, not just by six million murdered Jews but by as many as two million Polish Catholics and others who shared the same ghastly fate. A God who does miracles in answer to prayers just to let us know that Mother Teresa is in heaven, but who leaves all those other prayers unanswered with so much suffering unrelieved, is a very strange God indeed.
So it's not Catholic practice he has a problem with, or Christianity, or even Monotheism - it's belief in a God who intervenes in human existence, period.

It's God.

I can't help him there.

But he seems just about right for the Tablet.

Romans 8:35?

Who then shall separate us from the love of Christ?
No one.
Okay, then who or what will separate us from His Bride?

Frank Sheed has the answer, (h/t to Nick Donnelly, @ProtectThePope):
“We are not baptized into the hierarchy; do not receive the Cardinals sacramentally; will not spend an eternity in the beatific vision of the pope. Christ is the point. I, myself, admire the present pope, but even if I criticized him as harshly as some do, even if his successor proved to be as bad as some of those who have gone before, even if I find the Church, as I have to live with it, a pain in the neck, I should still say that nothing a pope (or a priest) could do or say would make me wish to leave the church, although I might well wish that they would leave."

"Not a 'Casual Catholic'” ? Sorry, Father, That's EXACTLY What She Was

A very sad story in USCatholic about a sibling who left the Church for warm fuzzies.
There is no specific acknowledgement that that is what she left for, there is talk of "spiritual needs" being unmet, finding "warm greetings", "uplifting music",  easy to read lyrics...

So yeah, warm fuzzies.

The evidence that she was not a "casual Catholic" is that before her apostasy, she "was involved in youth ministry, retreat leadership, and liturgy planning."

How could anyone who either didn't know about, or simply didn't believe in the Real Presence be allowed to be "involved in youth ministry, retreat leadership, and liturgy planning"?

Because I can state categorically, no one who did know and did believe would abandon Him, Present in the Sacrament, Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity, for warm greetings and an available pastor.
"As I drove home, I realized how adult-centered this church was. This is in stark contrast to the typical Catholic parish, where a lion’s share of its time and treasure are committed to the education of children"
So, instead of "child-centered," we should be more "adult-centered"?
Here's an idea -
The writer, who is a priest, (THAT is sad,) blames the flight of those like his sister on the lack of adult involvement and formation available in Catholic parishes? poppycock - the primary source of formation and involvement is the Liturgy.
And if we present the Liturgy, as too many of us have for decades, as a place where readings from the Bible; fellowship with our co-worshippers; and catering to our fluid tastes in music, art and everything else, are just as important as or, sometimes it seems, even more important than the sacramental Presence of our Eucharistic Lord, well no wonder we have several generations of malformed, and therefore necessarily "casual" Catholics.
When our faith is dependant on activities and experiences and things that we can get elsewhere, when it is tied to incidentals, why stay?
Why go to Mass?

Make such a big deal of the box and the wrapping, ignore the contents, is it any wonder that the Greatest Gift is held cheap, ignored, TOSSED ASIDE as in this case?

Until the Blessed Sacrament regains its centrality in Catholic life, this is a sucker's game - the rock arena or the opera house will always have better music; the neighborhood pub is always going to offer better conversation and more fun, and the chance to be with people you really like; the library is going to be more informative; your psychoanalyst or you Mom will have more reassuring, easier to put in practice advice; and your favorite chair with a good reading lamp will make lectio divina more rewarding.

I have a suggestion for you non-casual Catholics - you "like" where you go to Mass now?

Go somewhere else once in a while.
That other parish with the wretched music. The pastor who puts you to sleep. The people you don't like. The ugly stained glass windows. The uncomfortable pews. The lousy parking lot.

Go to THAT Mass.

It'll remind you what, or rather Who you are really there for.

Friday, 5 February 2016

The Enemy of My Enemy's Enemy's Enemy Is My... SQUIRREL!!!! And what in the world is "Sutdugoo"?

I imagine we have all been embarrassed by finding ourselves in agreement with someone whom we find loathsome - or lest you think I am attacking anyone ad hominem, whose ideas, words, opinions, attitudes, or actions we find loathsome.

And of course, the interwebs are just that, a web, a tangle, a great time-sucking morass of claims, counter-claims, self-contradictions - after a bit, of trying to understand the scorecard, I just get distracted.

I'm weak minded that way.
Image result for vicious dog distracted by squirrel

What brought on my present crisis of faith in my own judgement and "alliances" is two-fold. Or maybe three?

First there is the absurd vortex of militant feminism, militant islam, militant atheism  or anti-christian sentiment, (never can quite make up my mind,) and militant misogyny.
I'm not going to link to any of these loonies, suffice to say I offered sympathy to someone whose attacker seemed either evil or unhinged, (mocking, laughing and singing jovially about the death by suicide of a sibling,) as caught on video.
Supporters of that attacker claim that attacker was attacked via tweet by an attacker linking a satirical attack on the first attacker who is therefore now an attackee and also another attackee, both of which attackees are apparently frequent attackers themselves, and both actual persons identifiable in the satire but only one of whom the supporters of the initial attacker feels should be spared attack, as they don't like the other attackee in the satire, so tough beans for him.
Got that?
"Does [attacker via tweet] have any conception of just how much abuse [persons] like [attacker who mocked suicide of relative of soon-to-be-an-attacker-himself] get?"
Imagine that.
People who behave badly experience retaliation.
Because it's all a matter of the new hobby that's sweeping the globe! It's  SUTDUGOO, ("Selective Umbrage-Taking Dependant Upon Gored Ox's Ownership.)

Oh, I said two- or three-fold, didn't I?
Well, I've gone on long enough for now.

Wednesday, 3 February 2016

Equal Rights, Equal Healthcare, and a Modest Proposal

I admit, I'd never read this before, (h/t to Lifesite CORRECTION, h/t to Catholic World Report,) - the Affordable Healthcare Act? Life is not that long!!!!
Nondiscrimination in Health Programs and Activities Proposed Rule
Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act
[seriously, 1557 sections?]
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has issued a proposed rule to advance health equity and reduce disparities in health care. The proposed rule, Nondiscrimination in Health Programs and Activities, will assist some of the populations that have been most vulnerable to discrimination and will help provide those populations equal access to health care and health coverage....individuals cannot be subject to discrimination based on their race, color, national origin, sex, age, or disability....
Image result for baldrick
I have a cunning plan!
The proposed rule requires that women have equal access to the health care they receive and the insurance they obtain. Moreover, the rule makes clear that sex discrimination includes discrimination based on gender identity. For example -
  • Individuals cannot be denied health care or health coverage based on their sex, including their gender identity.
  • Individuals must be treated consistent with their gender identity, including in access to facilities.
  • Sex-specific health care cannot be denied or limited just because the person seeking such services identifies as belonging to another gender. For example, a provider may not deny an individual treatment for ovarian cancer, based on the individual’s identification as a transgender man, where the treatment is medically indicated.
Don't you think every pro-life guy you know should trot on over to the nearest Planned Parenthood and ask for a pregnancy test? Demand one! And maybe insist on being given an abortion? after all, it's zir* body. Ze* should say that ze's been doing the backstroke in the gender fluidity pool and today woke up feeling all womanish.
Com'on, it'll be fun.
I should make plain, unlike many who are pro-life, I was in favor of healthcare reform. But I thought it should have gone much further than it did, I think socialized medicine is the only civilized set-up. The trouble is, we didn't get healthcare reform, we got health INSURANCE reform, it still costs a bloody fortune and it's still making the medical establishment, the insurance establishment and the pharmaceutical establishment filthy rich with the scams they have set up amongst themselves.
And the way the whole thing fell out, it made clear, it made it undeniable, the fetishization of abortion and contraception that sends tingles up the spine in certain quarters of what used to be called with some justification, the liberal movement.
Let's be honest, there are plenty of common and necessary heathcare services and drugs that are not required to be covered under ALL plans, (adult eye exams? foot care? weightloss surgery?) but contraceptives, some of which are abortefacient, was a hill the Obama administration was willing to die on - despite the knowledge that compromising on that would have allowed them to form a coalition with the USCCB which would have guaranteed success. But nope, they were going to punish those whose very refusal to embrace skankdom themselves feels, even without a word being spoken**, like such a reproach to those who revel in it  - they were going to insist that those puritanical types pay for it. Because make no mistake, this was never about healthcare, it was about silencing, driving from the public square those who don't espouse the notion that the only wrong or unhealthy sexual activity or attitude is continence.
Your body's working as it was intended? Great, you can get drugs that will stop that!
Oh, your body's NOT working as intended, you're infertile? Nope, probably not gonna give you any help with that...
* Not making this up. Anyone else worried that irony and satire are becoming redundnat?
** I, of course, am not such a one - I'm always ready to speak, or type a word. And "skankdom" is a pejorative that applies at least as much to men (whatever their "gender," she added sarcastically,) as to women. What can I say, I think sluts should be ashamed...