1.17.2007

If Anyone is Still There

For anyone who still reads this...
This Monday is the Anniversary of Roe vs Wade and I will be fortunate enough to be in Washington D.C. for the March for Life. I have never been before but I have been told it is life changing. I have been looking forward to this since last July and now it is finally HERE!
So, I will pray very hard for the end to abortion and for peace in this world.

Our Lady, Queen of the Angels, pray for us!
Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us!

5.18.2006

Show the Burn

Vanishing away into nothing.
Nothing waiting
nothing going.
Smoke comes up to show the burning.
For times of past I'm yearning, yearning.
Light the end and just let go.
Fire entrances as it glows.
Don't just vanish and disappear,
walk yourself away from here.
Let them hear your hysterical laughter.
It will haunt them forever after.
Let them mumble and painfully say,
that you simply vanished away.
But in the end you'll make them know
you didn't vanish,
you just let them go.

This is a poem written by a very good friend of mine, Kylie. I think it's beautiful.

4.24.2006

A Question

Well, I'm going to post a random question. I'm workng on a post, but, this is to see how many people still read this blog. Ok? Good.

Now, I've decided to post two questions, one random, the other, not so random. You can answer one or the other but you MUST ANSWER ONE!

Question 1: If you suddenly, one day, appeared on an island with no way of getting off, who is the one person you would want with you? (Only ONE person.)

Question 2: What should be done about the immigrant situation?

There you have it. Now, answers, please. So let it be written, so let it be done.

3.21.2006

Home Sweet Home


Wichita, often called the "Air Capital of the World," because of its four major aviation plane manufacturers, has recently been dubbed "The Abortion Capital of the World."

According to an article published in Monday's local newspaper, the billboards have been put up along northbound I-35, one of the three major routes into Wichita. The city is the leading provider of late-term abortions in the country, and consequently, it is a hotbed of the pro-life/pro-choice debate.

The group that is funding the ads hopes that women coming to Wichita from out of state will see them and reconsider. They hope to put up similar billboards on the other two highways into the city.

When I read this article, I was a bit shocked at first, that someone would make such a bold assertion about my hometown, but by the time I had finished reading, I realized that it was true. Wichita is one of the few places that provides abortions in any stage of pregnancy. The sad fact is, my city is an aboriton capital.

To all you Wichitans out there, this can, and will, change. There are some awesome pro-life groups out there, and maybe one day these billboards won't be necessary.

God Bless.

3.08.2006

I wanted to post this song, just cause I felt like it! (Maybe it will prompt people to COMMENT!) Everyone wants somebody to believe in them. I'm lucky that I have so many people who do believe in me!

I never feel a thing is real
When I'm away from you
Out of your embrace
The world's a temporary parking place

Mmm, mm, mm, mm
A bubble for a minute
Mmm, mm, mm, mm
You smile, the bubble has a rainbow in it

Say, its only a paper moon
Sailing over a cardboard sea
But it wouldn't be make-believe
If you believed in me

Yes, it's only a canvas sky
Hanging over a muslin tree
But it wouldn't be make-believe
If you believed in me

Without your love
It's a honky-tonk parade
Without your loveI
t's a melody played in a penny arcade

It's a Barnum and Bailey world
Just as phony as it can be
But it wouldn't be make-believe
If you believed ine

2.21.2006

Another Birthday

Well, we have another birthday to celebrate! Today, Febuary 21st, is Publius' birthday. He turns the big 18 so, watch out, he's legal. Hope you have a safe, great day Publius! You are in our prayers.

New post comming!

~Life is Beautiful~

2.04.2006

Feliz Compleanos

Just wanted to give a shout out to somebody on this post. I don't wan to take the attention away from Miguel's post, so scroll down and read it. But, tomorrow we celebrate the birthday of one of our contibutors. Yes, the afore mentioned Miguel turns 17 Febuary 5th. So Michael, on behalf of myself and all who write for this blog, HAPPY BIRTHDAY! Hope you have an awesome day! We all have you in our prayers.

God Bless!

2.03.2006

America's Biggest Problem

I would first like to acknowledge Mr. Matthew J. Peterson for his posts on the Remedy, a blog affiliated with the Claremont Institute. His emphasis on the liberal arts of our world today is similar to my view towards one of America’s biggest problems today: abortion. I would like to reply to Mr. Peterson’s articles which I truly enjoyed reading and examining.

“If one responds that we have grown out of these older notions, how many students or professors at the top ten liberal arts colleges could give an account of why this change is justified, or give any sort of rational basis for the structure and curriculum of their college at all? Of course there will always be ongoing arguments over what exactly constitutes a liberal arts education. The frailty of human knowledge being what it is, we must admit a certain amount of elasticity to the sorts of things we think we ought to study for the obvious reason that we don't know everything. The problem today is that most of the modern liberal arts colleges have entirely rejected the idea that there is any particular body of knowledge that human beings ought to study inasmuch as they are human because these colleges think that we can't really know anything.” -Matthew J. Peterson (The Remedy)

I completely agree that the lack of concentration on Liberal Arts has debased our culture and intellectual thinking. Abortion and other infractions upon human rights are a result of foolish thinking, something common in our world today. Of course I am not as fluent in writing as Mr. Peterson, or Mr. Hadley Arkes (an author for the Claremont Institute) but I will try my best to present my position here.

The cause and blindness towards abortion can be attributed to the lack of Liberal Arts taught in our communities. As Mr. Peterson said, the lack of Liberal Arts has debased our intellectual skills to the point where we are making unreasonable decisions without seeing the evils that build upon them. Not only by the lack of studying the Liberal Arts, but also by the methods with which we are taught have we become ignorant to the teachings and truths established by ancient philosophers of old. Schools exclude certain curricula, vital for the mind, and states remove religious innuendo from their songs or slogans. The attitude with which teachers, parents, and leaders educate our students today, as a result of our culture, do not establish the students with a desire to know what is in our future, our past, and our present. They say ignorance is bliss, but is bliss here desirable? Do we want to live our lives in ignorance, living in ways that undermine what our founding fathers set down for us? Of course not, but it is inevitable to a certain extent now because of the lower educations out there. Few truly work for better education, training their mind for the world in front of them, anticipating the events that surround them. Plato’s, Aristotle’s, and Socrates’ teachings and moral values have dissipated from our world today. Only a few rigorously study these concepts, because they are the ones that desire a higher level of knowledge, they understand that there is something out there that can not be abandoned.

America’s biggest problem is also a result of positivism. No, this is not a way of living optimistically, it is something addressed by our late, holy father, Pope John Paul II. I assume most of you are familiar with the phrase “I think, therefore I am”. That is positivism. We look at abortion through a tinted window of positivism. Indeed, aborting the baby benefits the woman in many ways. She will not have the financial difficulties, or the limits of having a child to take care of. She will not have to worry about teaching this little one how to read or write. She’s free of many hindrances that could have stopped her from doing things that she would have otherwise wanted to do. Does this make it right? To them, yes. That is positivism. That is what is wrong with America. The holocaust benefited the Germans in many ways. It brought their fragile country more together through a feeling of superiority. Of course they were tearing thousands of Jews’ lives apart, but who cares? As long as it benefited them, it was just, right? This is a dangerous and perhaps, scary philosophy that is being embraced throughout America.

Abortion is not the first time Americans have abused the rights of others. We all remember how the blacks from Africa became subservient to the whites, forcing them and their families to serve the needs of their fellow homo sapiens. Abraham Lincoln, one who read the classics and studied liberal arts inside a cold cabin in Illinois, rose up against the injustices that were being carried out against our fellow homo sapiens because they simply looked different and were susceptible to us. During his debate with Stephen Douglas, Lincoln addressed the concept of slavery……..

“You say A. is white, and B. is black. It is color, then: the lighter having the right to enslave the darker? Take care! By this rule, you are to be slave to the first man you meet, with a fairer skin than your own.
You do not mean color exactly? You mean the whites are intellectually the superiors of the blacks, and therefore have the right to enslave them? Take care again. By this rule you are to be slave to the first man you meet, with an intellect superior to your own.”


Here Lincoln wisely refuted the statements made against him by his opponents. Perhaps his reading about the principles of the early philosophers aided him here?

The act of abortion is an infraction of the rights of the little human being carried in its mother’s womb. What rights? Its natural rights. The founding fathers recognized these as being rights given to us by God, inalienable, that cannot be taken away. Not even by the government? Gosh, that means that the fetus in the woman has rights! No, it’s not human, it’s not alive, and therefore it has no rights. Is the fetus alive? Of course it is! Its little heart beats as quickly as our own! Hadley Arkes explains that the fetus does not experience a change in species during its period in the womb. What species could it be except human? It therefore has the same rights that the rest of us hold.

Many of us believe that our rights come from God. This is also what the founders believed. But what if there is an atheist who denies the baby having its natural rights? What if the government elected to take away all these man’s rights and kill him? What would the atheist say? He would state that it could not be done to him. Why not? Because it’s wrong, he would reply. Exactly! Here, the atheist recognizes that he has some inner rights that are outside the spectrum of the government that cannot be taken away or bended to the government’s will. No one can take away our rights. They can ignore them, but they cannot take them away. The government simply administers our rights and regulates the country, however, whether the government decides to recognize them or not, we still hold our rights and will never lose them. Our natural rights establish what is right and what is wrong. The fact that people continue to ignore this, digs a deeper hole for our country. We continue to sink into the mucus of evil, confusion, and misconceptions of what is right and wrong. We begin down or continue down a path of positivism.

Why are we so confused about these simple concepts? Aristotle understood. Plato, our founding fathers, and Lincoln did. But we don’t. What do Aristotle, Plato, the founding fathers, and Lincoln have in common? They were philosophers! Of course Lincoln and the founding fathers did not call themselves this, but what does the word philosopher mean? It means one who loves wisdom. These men saw that there was something out there to attain. Whether it was Lincoln on his bed in his cabin reading, the founding fathers writing the Declaration of Independence, or Plato and Aristotle teaching their students, they all recognized that there was something more to be grasp than simply what our senses tell us. What is it? It is a quest for knowledge (as my mom calls it) : A desire to learn, a desire to grasp the world with both hands and pull it close, and a desire to do the right thing. This circles back to Mr. Peterson’s statement that a lack of Liberal Arts is hurting our country.

Recently, with upcoming appointments for our Supreme Court Justices, many Christians believe that the end of abortion is near. Indeed, we are beginning down that road, but it is a long route. First, Roe vs. Wade must be overturned in the Supreme Court. Some say after that it will be up to the states to determine whether it is legal or not. No! That is not the right way to approach it! The states should not be allowed to decide upon option of killing humans before birth. It should be overturned, finished, and recognized that the states have the same limited power to enslave or wrongfully take the lives of humans. We can and must pray that our president, justices, and governors of today and the future, will recognize what and where our rights come from, respect them, and respect life.

1.26.2006

Misdirected Intentions

Ok, time to get political, here's my post for the week*.

Last Tuesday the supreme court of the United States ruled in a 6-3 vote that the federal government has no right to impede the decision of the people of the state of Oregon to legalize physician-assisted suicide in their state. Attorney general Alberto Gonzalez was continuing the work of John Ashcroft in attempting to federally prosecute those physicians who help their terminally ill patients commit suicide. This federal authority was assumed through of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) that was approved by Congress in 1970. The constitutional basis for this federal law is the "interstate commerce" clause of the constitution (To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes; Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 )

Now, what control over narcotics has to do with interstate commerce has always been a mystery to me (unless of course they're referring to the contraband market, but I don't think that's what the framers had in mind), but we'll focus on the ruling rather than the law itself for now.

Let's assume for argument's sake that the law (CSA) was perfectly constitutional (as was ruled). One would hope that the federal government would make a provision giving the states most of the power in decided what was and what was not a controlled substance and how to implement the law's execution. In the opinion of the court, delivered by Justice Kennedy, we see that it does:

"No provision of this subchapter shall be construed as indicating an intent on the part of the congress to occupy the field in which that provision operates...To the exclusion of any state law on the same subject matter which would otherwise be within the authority of the state..." {903}

Now the CSA says that illegal narcotics are controlled substances that are not used for a "legitimate medical purpose". In 2001 Mr. Ashcroft sought to define the term "legitimate medical purpose", because it was not defined within the CSA itself (presumably because that was for the states to figure out). The people of the state of Oregon have decided that physician-assisted suicide is a "legitimate medical purpose". They are gravely, gravely incorrect in that judgment, but it is constitutionally their judgment to make, not Mr. Ashcroft or Mr. Gonzales'.

The disturbing thing about this ruling is the irony of who is on which side of the issue. All of the votes in favor of retaining the Oregon law were cast by traditionally very liberal or moderate (and hardly ever federalist) members of the court (Kennedy, O'Connor, Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer), while the conservative (usually more federalist) members of the court (Roberts, Thomas, and Scalia) voted against it for obvious reasons.

Scalia, Roberts, and Thomas are scaring me because I understand that they made this ruling with the best of intentions. Those intentions being the desire to prevent the spread of an objectively immoral practice in the states. I can draw some comfort from a comment made by Scalia on the ruling:

"The court's decision today is perhaps driven by a feeling that the subject of assisted suicide is none of the federal government's business. It is easy to sympathize with that position"

But there should be no "however" from him. If he expects conservatives to consider him and his dissenting colleagues truly conservative, they should act like it and vote according to the federalist principles of the American founding.

It would be naive to think that the liberal members of the court voted this way because they have "suddenly discovered the constitutional virtues of federalism" as suggested by the editors of the Wall Street Journal (Wall Street Journal, Editorial, 1/18/06). Rather, I don't think I need to produce examples of Kennedy or Ginsburg's total rejection of federalism and instrumental part in the creation of this federal behemoth. I can only say that the liberals of the court made the right decision very much for the wrong reason, and the conservatives of the court made the wrong decision for the right reason. But intentions are irrelevant here because the effect is the same.

I know, as does every conservative, that the liberals on the bench will never vote this way again unless the state in question happens to be defending an issue they agree with. What disturbs me here is that the conservative judges are becoming the very thing they (and all true conservatives) despise: activist judges who legislate from the bench. If they are not careful we will simply have activist judges on the court whose approval or disapproval on an issue is dependent on whether they agree with it personally or not. Please, Justices Thomas, Roberts, and Scalia, let's not give Alito a bad example. Do your jobs, interpret the constitution and the constitution alone and don't do anything else. Please remember the words of federalist #45:

"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State."




*Disclaimer: Please do not misunderstand me, I am vehemently opposed to the practice of physician-assisted suicide and its legalization in any form. My point here is merely to say that the federal government should mind its own business and let the people decide what's best for the country internally. If we're not going to follow the constitution then we need to scrap it and make a new one. But as long as the constitution is the law of the land we need to abide by its guidelines and not waver from them because of our own personal convictions.


Pax Vobiscum,
Publius