Abortion & Guns As LIFE Issues

Yesterday I received, in the mail, copies of the "National Catholic Register" (An essentially orthodox publication) and one of the magazines published by the American Rifle Association. Both of these periodicals criticized Senator Obama (And, to a only slightly lesser extent, Senator Clinton) for positions: One as to his (Their) opposition to the rights of sane, adult and law-abiding citizens to keep and bear modern firearms; The other as to killing unborn children or even (As in the case of Sen. Obama) protecting the lives of babies who somehow survive abortion attempts.

Yet, these two publications appear unable to make the connection and note that these are both "LIFE ISSUES". One of the right of free people to have the means to enforce their statutory and Natural Law rights to protect their lives from criminal assaults; The other of the most innocent in our world, unborn children, to live without being cut to pieces or chemically burnt to death in the womb.

I think it well past the time for the editors of both journals (AND EVERYONE ELSE) to set aside their respective prejudices and reexamine the rights of all as should be supported by those who oppose abortion and abortive and ineffective gun control measures.

No Police Or Armed Citizens To Protect

By this time you have read or seen (It made the national TV news) the horrid attack upon a Milwaukee County bus driver, with passengers in his vehicle, by a "gang banger" thug. There were no police or deputies to protect that driver and his endangered riders.

Of course, Governor Jim (Protect The Criminals) Doyle twice vetoing of passed legislation which would have allowed adult, sane and law-abiding citizens to carry concealed weapons made it impossible/illegal for some such patriot to pull out a pistol and, as is usual in the millions of such cases each year in the USA, frighten off the criminal. (Of course, if that critter continued to attack, two rounds to the head would yield a considerable savings to our County and State budgets by saving courts and prisons the costs of dealing with such a dangerous animal.)

A Human Life Concern Ignored

The religious, academic, political and media debates the political and moral aspects of various human life issues (eg Abortion, Euthanasia) are more-and-more discussed in spite of some candidates' reluctance to do so. However, the human life issue never (Well, hardly ever) discussed is the Natural Law right of every human to self-defense against criminal attacks.

That is a right for each human and the protecting of innocents against such attacks is a duty for able and right-thinking persons. That right applies to the female student walking home from school, the Christian or Pagan under Islamic attack in the Sudan, the store keeper or other worker terrorized by gang-bangers and all like threats.

The "sticky" part of defending that Natural Law right is the question of innocents' access to the immediate and effective means (Modern weapons) when the police or inter-national peace keepers are unable (Or unwilling because of the political pressures of such as the Islamic Block in the UN) to provide instant and effective protection of the innocent.

Alternatives To Guns

Since police are often unable (Or is it unwilling?) to protect shop keepers and other citizens from bandits, those citizens should take measures to protect themselves. As too many officials (Especially very "political" Police Chiefs) appears to frown on citizens having readily accessible firearms (Hand guns) to do so, I suggest that shop keepers keep ready and use one or more of the following: Gas or elastic powered fish spears; Ordinary harpoons; Nail studded baseball bats; Home made (Liquid Petroleum Gas) flame throwers; Sling shots" (Called "catapults" in the UK) with steel ball bearings as projectiles; Chain saws; Lead shot filled garden hose sections; Chinese style repeating cross bows; Batons plugged into wall current with sharp prong electrodes to jab into thugs; Old style "zip guns" using sharpened flooring materials as projectiles; Packets of red pepper dust to be followed with boots and clubs (The Maori have some nice designs); And, any number of other improvised weapons.

Property represents the portion of the lives of those who honestly labored to acquire it and is therefore subject to protection by use of force---Even deadly force as every theft and robbery represents a "little murder".

"Disguised As Muslims"? Ya, Sure!

The three persons suspected of gunning down a Philadelphia police officer, in traditional terrorist style, had shaved heads and full beards in Islamic style, wore Islamic style clothes and used an AK-47 style weapon, the favorite weapon of Jihadi.

Do not forget the maxim: "If it walks like a duck, looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is likely to be a duck"? Unless Philadelphia is more like Londonistan than I expect it to be, wearing Islamic style garb to rob a bank is more likely to be a "statement" than a disguise.

I suggest that that city's overly politically correct police officials are too intent on avoiding "offending" Muslims---And afraid to face up to inconvenient truths. All (Including the FBI, those PC-Police & the equally PC newspapers) should look more closely into the background and affiliations of those three terrorists. It should be remembered that bank robberies have been a means of raising money for terrorist organizations.

"Homoaidia" Not "Homophobia"

The term "homophobia" should not be used as that word is based on the word for "fear", which emotion is not the usual reaction to (Male) homosexuals. I suggest the term "Homoaidia" based on the word for the usual and natural reaction to such creatures, disgust or revulsion.

The only time a "fear" based word should be used is when discussing male homosexuals as disease vectors (HIV/AIDS) or when considering those who sexually abuse boys.

Negative VS Positive Religious Liberty

In my recent rereading of The Virtue Of War (1) [A book I highly recommend to all], certain concepts were noted by me that I had missed during earlier readings: That of "Negative Religious Liberty" and "Positive Religious Liberty". I suggest that the recent political, academic and media debates, as to the question of the place of religion in the USA, would be better understood if all understand those concepts.

"Negative Religious Liberty" means, in today's world, that no one should be harmed for what they believe (Including "moral" imperatives") or rituals practiced and statements made as to Faith---As long as such are kept out of public forums and NOT considered in voting for candidates or making public policies. This is the "liberal" or "secular humanist" position or standard which, of course, excludes religion-based "moral" choices (eg As to politics, abortion, war and other like and "hot" topics) as are likely to be in opposition to those held by "liberals" or "humanists" from even being considered by the general pubic, law makers, judges, ETC.. (This is, of course, the current and perverted interpretation of the first part of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, the so-called "separation clause"!)

"Positive Religious Liberty" supports the full "free exercise of religion" (The second clause of the First Amendment) by allowing, if not encouraging, "Believers" to proclaim the tenets and practices of their religions in ALL forums; But, also and more importantly for this discussion, to have the ethical, moral and faith-based aspects of religions be accounted as valid issues and frameworks for voting and other public decision making.

I hope I have neither twisted nor misinterpreted the Dr. Cole's and Fr. Webster's much better, but longer, presentation of this issue.


1. Webster, (Fr.) Alexander F. C. & Cole, (Professor) Darrell;
The Virtue Of War; Reclaiming the Classic Christian
Traditions East and West;
Regina Orthodox Press; 2004;
ISBN 1-928653-17-0

More Lies About St. George

THE VERY LEFT-WING "THINK TANK" EKKESIA (UK) PRESENTED THE VIEWS OF THE GREEN PARTY, BUT FLAMING RAINBOW PERSON (I WILL NOT USE "MAN" OR "GENTLEMAN" TO DESCRIBE HIM) PETER TATCHELL AS TO ST. GEORGE. BELOW IS MY LETTER TO THAT UK ORGANIZATION.


Mr. Peter Tatchell is of the worst sub-class of liars, those who use half-truths to corrupt history and subtract from the sub-total of human knowledge. His declaration that the father of St. George was "Turkish" seems to ignore the fact that there were no Turks in Anatolia in his time. To declare that St. George's mother was a "Palestinian" appears to be some perverted effort to link that warrior with the Arab occupiers of parts of today's Holy Land whose commitment to following Mohammed's instructions to use murder, genocide, perpetual war and the other horrors contained within the Koran and Hadith is too apparent in today's events and has been in that area since Muslim bandits occupied that land.

To the whores-of-history as tell such lies as Mr. Tatchell, I note that St. George is the multi-national (In the true Churches of East and West) symbol of the perpetual war against evil and the Evil One and of such of his all too eager helpers as the Mr. Tatchell. His statements are proof that the Evil One is "The Father Of Lies".

My key question for today is: Why do you assist in the lying work of the Evil One? My secondary question is: Why does the RC Church in the UK do the same?



News Brief
St George hailed as a human rights campaigner
By staff writers
24 Apr 2008
The Patron Saint of England (and a number of other countries) has been hailed a human rights campaigner by fellow activist Peter Tatchell - who backs ideas that his national day should be a public holiday celebrating dissent.
"It is time we ditched the myths surrounding St George and celebrated the reality of his courageous life", said Tatchell - who is a prospective Green candidate in Oxford, and has gained widespread media attention for his direct action campaigns for Tibet, against Robert Mugabe, and for the LGBT group OutRage!
"St George's Day should be a national holiday in England. We should celebrate St George as a symbol of freedom, dissent and multiculturalism," says the human rights activist.
"He doesn't belong to the far right. He represents multiculturalism and rebellion against tyranny.St George wasn't white or English. He was a rebel from the Middle East. His father was Turkish and his mother probably Palestinian. He rebelled against the Roman Emperor Diocletian and was executed for opposing the persecution of Christians by the Romans."
"An early defender human rights, he is a heroic symbol of protest and the right to freedom of belief and expression."
"St George's parentage embodies [many nations] and his life expresses the values of English liberalism and dissent," said Mr Tatchell.
Catalonia, Portugal, Beirut, Moscow, Istanbul, Germany and Greece are among the numerous other principalities claiming a historical or mythological link with St George.
The idea of St George as dissident was proposed last year by the religion and society think-tank Ekklesia, whose report entitled When the Saints Go Marching Out: Redefining St George for a new era points out that the original story which dates from the 4th century CE told of St George offering hospitality to a refugee, defending the marginalised, and challenging the persecution policy of the Emperor.
This image has been distorted, and replaced by one of a dragon slayer who backs the crusades (religious wars), the report says.
A new painting of St George by highly regarded artist Scott Norwood Witts, which depicts the saint as a man of compassion rather than a crusader, has been unveiled at the Roman Catholic Cathedral of St George, Southwark, this week.