Archive for February, 2012

A Princess of Mars and a Messiah of Mars

Posted February 29, 2012 By John C Wright

In honor of Leap Day, I thought I should write a post in honor of the most famous long-leaper of all, the clean-limbed fighting man of Virginia, John Carter, Warlord of Mars.

I have recently been rereading the ‘Barsoom’ novels of Edgar Rice Burroughs to my boys, and I was pleasantly surprised to learn that my memory of them as trivial boy’s adventure tales was an underestimation.

They are honest-to-goodness science fiction, written with at least as much speculative thought and speculative wonder as anything by, say, Robert Heinlein, but with this difference: Burroughs was more a Victorian writer than a modern one, and did not buy into the conceit, so prevalent in modern writers, that assumes that man’s nature, nay, manhood itself, is a by-product of environment.

An examination of these two writers, one who portrayed a man named Carter on Mars, and the other, a Martian named Smith on Earth, is instructive.

Read the remainder of this entry »

26 Comments so far. Join the Conversation

Protected: Nightfall and Night Lamp

Posted February 27, 2012 By John C Wright

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

The Argument Against Materialism

Posted February 27, 2012 By John C Wright

In case anyone who is interested has not understood the basic argument against materialism, let me give it in a syllogism.

My argument is that anything which cannot even theoretically under any conditions whatsoever in this universe or any other be described in literal material terms, using words that only refer to material properties, is not material.

The mind (or, for that matter, words as opposed to ink marks in the book) cannot even theoretically under any conditions whatsoever in this universe or any other be described in literal material terms, using words that only refer to material properties.

Therefore the mind is not material.

(And even if it were, since we cannot refer to it (therefore not think about it) in words except those which tacitly treat the mind as immaterial (words like “form” or “pattern” or “intent” or “meaning” or “embed” or “refer to” or “involved with” or “logic gate” or “either-or”) we would still have to talk and think about mental thinks using the categories and terms of final cause and formal cause, that is, as if it were non-material.)

That is my argument. It is in modes ponens. So far, no one has actually made an argument against it.To make an argument against it, it is not enough to state an opinion that the conclusion is false; one must challenge, that is, give evidence that the major or the minor premise is false, or, at least, not sufficiently clear as to compel belief.

All they have done is made the assertion that thoughts are material, and this is done, always and without exception, by describing thoughts in material metaphors, saying that thoughts are little balls or sparks of energy pushed by other balls or sparks of energy — and then, always, always, always, adding some word that refers to non-physical reality, like ‘symbol’ or ‘refers to’ or ’embed’ or ‘pattern’ or refers to non-physical abstractions such as logical or mathematical objects.

I’ve been arguing this for years, decades, and I have yet to hear an argument which does not rest on a subtly or transparently ambiguous definition conflating mental and physical properties, such as using the word “brain” to refer both to the mind and the brain, or using the word “word” to refer both to the ink marks on the page (the physical aspect of the word) and to the meaning of the word (the mental aspect).

 

123 Comments so far. Join the Conversation

Quote of the Day

Posted February 24, 2012 By John C Wright

Mark Shea over at Catholic and Enjoying It quotes the great Macauley

There is not, and there never was on this earth, a work of human policy so well deserving of examination as the Roman Catholic Church. The history of that Church joins together the two great ages of human civilisation. No other institution is left standing which carries the mind back to the times when the smoke of sacrifice rose from the Pantheon, and when camelopards and tigers bounded in the Flavian amphitheatre. The proudest royal houses are but of yesterday, when compared with the line of the Supreme Pontiffs. That line we trace back in an unbroken series, from the Pope who crowned Napoleon in the nineteenth century to the Pope who crowned Pepin in the eighth; and far beyond the time of Pepin the august dynasty extends, till it is lost in the twilight of fable. The republic of Venice came next in antiquity. But the republic of Venice was modern when compared with the Papacy; and the republic of Venice is gone, and the Papacy remains. The Papacy remains, not in decay, not a mere antique, but full of life and youthful vigour. The Catholic Church is still sending forth to the farthest ends of the world missionaries as zealous as those who landed in Kent with Augustin, and still confronting hostile kings with the same spirit with which she confronted Attila. The number of her children is greater than in any former age. Her acquisitions in the New World have more than compensated for what she has lost in the Old. Her spiritual ascendency extends over the vast countries which lie between the plains of the Missouri and Cape Horn, countries which a century hence, may not improbably contain a population as large as that which now inhabits Europe. The members of her communion are certainly not fewer than a hundred and fifty millions; and it will be difficult to show that all other Christian sects united amount to a hundred and twenty millions. Nor do we see any sign which indicates that the term of her long dominion is approaching. She saw the commencement of all the governments and of all the ecclesiastical establishments that now exist in the world; and we feel no assurance that she is not destined to see the end of them all. She was great and respected before the Saxon had set foot on Britain, before the Frank had passed the Rhine, when Grecian eloquence still flourished at Antioch, when idols were still worshipped in the temple of Mecca. And she may still exist in undiminished vigour when some traveller from New Zealand shall, in the midst of a vast solitude, take his stand on a broken arch of London Bridge to sketch the ruins of St. Paul’s.

Mark Shea adds: Since this was penned by Macauley, the British Empire has gone to pieces, Europe has committed suicide in two global wars, the Soviet Empire has come and gone, the Japanese Empire likewise, the Chinese Communist experiment is daily menaced by a growing Church, and the thousand year Reich vanished like a mayfly in 12 years. Don’t over-estimate the odds that our fantastically ephemeral cult of celebrity, hedonism and imperialism is likely to inflict lasting damage on the Church.

My comment: The Church lasted so long because each generation that was threatened willing offered up witnesses and martyrs to the divine truth we uphold. Fortunately, in this country, our ‘prosecution’ will probably amount to no more than people posting images of flying spaghetti monsters on Facebook, or fines, or jail time if we don’t pay the fines. Only in the Middle East and Africa are they actively burning churches and slaughtering Christians. Compared to that, what are we being asked?

We are being asked to resist the Tyrant.

Resist the Tyrant. Merely because Mr Obama (aided both by a compliant media and by those who are his alleged opponants) by one slow step at a time has reached the point where he feels it within his powers to nationalize automobile industries, health care industries, banks and mortgage industries, not to mention the student loan industry, and he feels it within his powers to murder American citizen suspected by an unknown government body of terrorism, and also feels it within his powers to appoint officers without the advice and consent of the Senate, and also feels it within his powers to define to the Catholic Church was is and is not permissible exercise of our freedom of religion, at that point there is nothing, economic nor military nor judicial nor theological, beyond his grasp, or to serve as a check on his power.

At that point, he is a tyrant. We might as well call him one.

And now for a word from Al Kresta:

As many of you already know, Ave Maria Radio launched StopHHS.com two weeks ago to provide a comprehensive source for news on thje HHS Mandate. The reason I’m sending this to you today is that we have worked together in promoting the faith in the past, and I know you would be interested in at least being
approached about cooperating with us on this issue as well.

I’m asking you to click here to download the banner and post it on your blog / site / social media, and, if appropriate, send it to your e-mail lists. This is the most significant Church / State conflict in our lifetimes. Let’s make a stand. Thanks much and God bless your efforts for the Kingdom.

– Al Kresta

Request:

1. Please add the LOGO of StopHHS to your website home page & link it to www.StopHHS.com

2. Please email / Facebook / & Twitter your contacts to state you are now “Endorsing StopHHS.com

3. Then send a print screen of your website with the StopHHS.com logo to endorsements@stophhs.com

StopHHS.com will check endorsements@stophhs.com each day and add your endorsement to the list of national endorsers as they come in. Your SEO will be improved when we load the name of your webite, the URL, and hyper link back to your site.

For more information contact Nick Thomm: 734-277-0693 or nthomm@avemariaradio.net

11 Comments so far. Join the Conversation

The Parable of the Adding Machine

Posted February 23, 2012 By John C Wright

I suppose we science fiction writers are to blame for the modern phenomenon of people who think computers think, that adding machines add, and so on. I have never seen a version of Pinocchio done where the puppet was never brought to life by the fairy, but Geppetto merely was convinced by BF Skinner or Karl Marx or Lucretius that the puppet was alive 0n the grounds that it moved when it strings were pulled.

Like this crazy version of Geppetto, there are some men these days who are convinced that since computers move numbers around, therefore they think, therefore humans (who think) are nothing but computers.

But even if the logic were sound, the premise is wrong. A computer does not literally move numbers around. That expression is merely a metaphor.

Read the remainder of this entry »

66 Comments so far. Join the Conversation

Quote of Tomorrow

Posted February 23, 2012 By John C Wright

As far as real science is concerned, we are as likely to create C3PO, or any other self-aware, talking, thinking and acting computer, as we are to create the Tin Woodman of Oz by the process of chopping off one body part at a time until all are replaced by the tinsmith (as described by L Frank Baum, the Royal Historian of Oz, in a grisliness odd for a children’s book.)

Despite the eagerness with which modern materialists confuse the objects on which symbols are inscribed, or to which symbolic meaning is attributed, with the material object itself, in their eagerness to pretend we are all Tin Woodmen, in reality even the most advanced of computers neither reflects nor cogitates nor acts of its own volition, no, not even so much as an amoeba acts.

One of my correspondents in a debate on this point solemnly proclaimed that the computers of the future would be self aware.

He was as confident as Robert Heinlein predicting the discovery of life on Mars. He seemed to forget that, as a science fiction writer, I am one of the unscrupulous ilk of story tellers who both made up the idea of talking computers and used our arts of deception to make them seem realistic. We did the same thing for flying cars, which are possible, and for time machines and faster than light drives, which are not possible.

Read the remainder of this entry »

17 Comments so far. Join the Conversation

Santorum and Ashes

Posted February 22, 2012 By John C Wright

Happy Ash Wednesday, if that is the proper greeting for the advent of the season of repentance in ashes and mourning for our sins.

On the radio this morning, I heard what I thought was a Twilight Zone episode about a parallel universe in which the human race had never heard any Bible stories, fairytales, pagan epics, nor seen the movie TIME BANDITS nor read even a single history book of the long and sad and terrible history of the human race, and so had no idea that evil was real.

In this deliriously naive parallel world, the radio was chattering nervously about some politician who made a speech a few years ago, and made reference to the Supreme Being, and also to His adversary.

One liberal commentator, Lanny Davis, apologist for the Clintons, condemned the language as moralistic and judgmental; one conservative commentator, Anne Coulter, supporter of Romney, dismissed the talk as inappropriate and distracting, saying the Republicans should concentrate on debating economic issues and leave divine issues aside.

Everyone seemed as embarrassed for the politician as they might for a bride’s maid who farts during the ceremony.

Read the remainder of this entry »

27 Comments so far. Join the Conversation

Reviewer Praise for COUNT TO A TRILLION

Posted February 21, 2012 By John C Wright

Mr Vogt over at Examiner.Com has a kind word to say about COUNT TO A TRILLION.

http://www.examiner.com/speculative-fiction-in-national/review-count-to-a-trillion-by-john-c-wright-review

What would you do to make yourself smarter? Study harder? Get a private tutor? Invest in a Ph.D.?

Stab yourself in the brain with an untested cocktail of intelligence enhancers based on formulae inscribed on an alien artifact?

Maybe not the wisest approach–but hey, if you were smart enough to realize that, perhaps that brain booster wouldn’t have been necessary anyways.

[…]

Count to a Trillion is an epic science fiction novel that travels more through the uncharted vastness of human intellect than it does through space itself. It asks questions such as, “How much does intelligence define the human nature?” and “Can humanity even be trusted to chart its own evolution?” Some readers may find themselves skimming the more esoteric portions, where Menelaus grapples with his heightened thinking, but these sections do give a good sense that he’s gone beyond anything compared to normal levels of human intellect. This book won’t hand you any easy answers, but will leave you pondering long after the final page–and any story that encourages deeper thinking is worth tackling in my estimation.

No one ever told me that the hard part of being a writer would be fending off a natural modesty that urges one to deprecate or contradict the flattery of pleased readers. Another danger is the opposite one, the desire to vaunt and prance like  Cassius Clay for every slight compliment. Even modest fame is not good for the soul.

I think the way to avoid both Scylla and Charybdis is simply to be grateful to the muses and to the readers for their favors, which they bestow by grace, not which the writer by his own accomplishment earns.

But in this case, the reviewer is right about the book. I hope.

Go out immediately and buy a copy or nine in hardback for Fat Tuesday! Reading my books can be your penance over Lent!

4 Comments so far. Join the Conversation

Exhibit A That SF is F

Posted February 20, 2012 By John C Wright

A science fiction fan, and, later, writer, I have always maintained that the only really insightful social and political commentary being written is written in the genre of Science Fiction.

My reason for this admittedly outrageous statement is that, first, the art of story telling is the art of exaggeration. Telling an un-exaggerated and balanced and even handed story is the task of newspaperman, if they seek to the serve the truth rather than serve up the party line, that is.  To examine a exaggerate a social or political trend, you mus exaggerate it, so as to make the latent characteristics plain.

The only way to exaggerate a latent political trend is to ask the question “what will happen if this goes on?” and then write up an extrapolation.

The only way to engage the soul of the reader instead of merely his cool and remote intellect, is to cast the extrapolation as a fiction. “If this goes on” must take place in the future, and therefore must be science fiction.

I will hold up WE by Zamyatin, NINETEEN EIGHTY FOUR by George Orwell, FAHRENHEIT 451 by Bradbury, ANTHEM by Ayn Rand, BRAVE NEW WORLD by Aldous Huxley as examples, and perhaps even NAPOLEON OF NOTTING HILL by Chesterton. In film, the oldest and seminal film of SF was written to make a political and social point: METROPOLIS by Fritz Lang.

But one thing I never expected to see was those whose fame rests on social and political commentary get involved in the geekfest fanboy debate over trivia in a sciffy film of our little beloved ghetto of a genre.

Here is Bill Whittle, who has written essays and make speeches as fine as anything I have ever read or heard, talking about whether Han shot first.

Read the remainder of this entry »

21 Comments so far. Join the Conversation

Note this article from the Carolina Journal Online.
http://www.carolinajournal.com/exclusives/homemade-lunch-replaced-with-cafeteria-nuggets.html

RAEFORD – A preschooler at West Hoke Elementary School ate three chicken nuggets for lunch Jan. 30 because a state employee told her the lunch her mother packed was not nutritious.

The girl’s turkey and cheese sandwich, banana, potato chips, and apple juice did not meet U.S. Department of Agriculture guidelines, according to the interpretation of the agent who was inspecting all lunch boxes in her More at Four classroom that day.

The Division of Child Development and Early Education at the Department of Health and Human Services requires all lunches served in pre-kindergarten programs – including in-home day care centers – to meet USDA guidelines. That means lunches must consist of one serving of meat, one serving of milk, one serving of grain, and two servings of fruit or vegetables, even if the lunches are brought from home.

When home-packed lunches do not include all of the required items, child care providers must supplement them with the missing ones.

The girl’s mother – who said she wishes to remain anonymous to protect her daughter from retaliation – said she received a note from the school stating that students who did not bring a “healthy lunch” would be offered the missing portions, which could result in a fee from the cafeteria, in her case $1.25.

“I don’t feel that I should pay for a cafeteria lunch when I provide lunch for her from home,” the mother wrote

Read the remainder of this entry »

28 Comments so far. Join the Conversation

Wright flees Ignominiously

Posted February 20, 2012 By John C Wright

One small advantage of being a Christian is that I no longer need to be as scrupulous about my honor and pride.  Indeed, part of my task is to beat down my pride, which, as a candid reader can see in the words that follow, I have not yet done.

I young (I presume) man (I presume) named Bran, who in his spare time serves as the the Mouth of Sauron and an apologist for the heresiarch Karl Marx has addressed me with the following offer, which I admit is a noble one:

He writes:

John, then let neither of us muddy the waters. This argument was not started specifically with the intention of making this into ‘capitalism vs communism’. I may have less experience than you, but I have still argued it enough to be tired of it. For the same reasons as you, just in reverse.

Let us go even unto the electronic mail, where no hecklers, rhetoricians and other people in general cannot interfere. Let us set out our arguments in a logical fashion, without ad hominem and other logical fallacies, which you rely on, but claim that you do not and I do. Let us be emotive when emotion is called for, and analytical when it is not, not this strange fusion which we are experiencing here. Let us state our sources, and also quibble over them.

How shall we discuss it? Shall we select elements, such as economic and humanitarian, and then beat them to exhaustion in turn?

What we shall not do is make unsupported assertions. Or insist that, to quote point 13: Start referring to Marxism as being some kind of religious faith, Messianic, or whatever other spiritualist bullshit you can come up with. When people point out that you can draw similarities between virtually any political ideology and other religions, ignore them. Or use smilies. -_-

Until such a time as we have finished or, to prevent either side (well, given my record, mainly me) simply not replying in order to gain time, you shall not do an overtly anti-communist post. Continuing your posts against the current action regarding insurance is fine. Criticising the Democrats is fine. Doing an angry 20,000 word rant on communist infiltration, communist indoctrination and the international communist conspiracy sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids is not fine.
In return, I shall be a lot more restrained, and not get into arguments, on any topic, with anyone. This is, of course, a perfect moment to engage me in argument. I will remain actively commenting, though.

I set out the terms here, as opposed to privately, so that if you and I agree to them, then we have witnesses to our promises. A bit like a marriage ceremony, really.

I decline. I am not willing to debate a man who does not know how to debate on a topic with which he is unfamiliar. My offer was for a future time after you had corrected these shortcomings.

If the offer had been made in the language a mature man would make,  not the same old sneering smugness and accusatory tones, I might be willing to put some faith in your ability to conduct yourself honorably.

As it is, I will let the gauntlet lay as is, and accept the dishonor of refusing to meet you in the lists. I think my escutcheon can withstand the stain.

I was not doing overtly anticommunists posts because, frankly, I thought with the fall of the Soviet Union your heresy had lost so much prestige that it was no longer an issue.

Just one more idol that fought the Church and failed.

I met two people, a brother and a sister, who escaped from one of your Worker’s paradises. They were Korean. In broken English, and with a look of disgust on his features, the brother explained how at the factory those who stood outside lounging got paid as much as those who worked hard all day, and so no one worked hard, or, if they could help it, at all. He could express, even in broken English, the concept so simple and so obvious that only an intellectual could fail to see it.

If you do not pay people for work, people will not work; and in order to make them work not for pay, you must taskmasters over them to drive them. They are slaves. Nothing could be more clear.

The sister mentioned that they had lost everything, their family and their home, when they fled.

That is what you are defending.

Those people were friends of mine. I knew them and worked with them. They were people whose lives were ruined because of an idea so stupid, and so obviously stupid, that no honest man can take it seriously for an instant.

Your idea.

Read the remainder of this entry »

48 Comments so far. Join the Conversation

Borrow Some Small Wonder: The Secret World of Arrietty

Posted February 19, 2012 By John C Wright

I do not have time to write a proper review of this wonderful movie, so let me just gush. Think of some of the better Disney movies you saw a a child, or some of the better Hayao Miyazaki films.  This is on par with that. I think every man should, upon reading these words, go get married, father a fourteen year old daughter, and take her to see this film. That is what I did. Okay, well I did not get married JUST for this film, but it made me glad I was a Dad. It is one of the few where the relationship between a stern and loving father and a willful yet obedient daughter is done right.

It is based on the book THE BORROWERS by Mary Norton (which I read as a child, but, alas, do not remember). The conceit is that some houses have little people living under the floor or in the walls who ‘borrow’ small items humans think we only misplaced. The charm of the original illustrations in the book are here given magic and glamor by exquisite execution: I watched in fascination scenes where the tiny Borrowers poured tea (made from a single leaf) from a toy teapot into doll house cups, and the artist remembered to scale up the water tension so that the water drops were as big as softballs to the little people, and flowed like magical pearls.

The typical Miyazaki care and detail lavished on every frame is here most evident. Miyazaki and company love drawing insects, crows and cats, particularly on a giant scale.

One scene showing the young Borrow girl Arrietty, climbing a vine. The art showed every vein on every leaf and the water droplets from a late rain sliding as the wind across the housetop blew. She turns and looks out upon the back yard, but instead of a back yard, it was as fabulous, seeing it through her eyes, as elfland.

It takes true magic to made stealing a lump of sugar and a single tissue into an adventure across the grand canyon like spaces of an enchanted giant’s castle.

The plot is simple. A young man, resting up before an operation he fears he may not survive, spends his days while his uncaring parents are away in his mother’s old house, under the care of a servant. His grandfather believed in the little people, and so does the young man. Meanwhile, Arrietty and her parents fear they may be the last Borrowers alive in the world, and the father strictly enjoins the daughter not to take foolish risks, neither to show herself to any humans — for if they are seen, even once, the Borrowers must abandoned their beloved home and flee.

And, of course, when the young human sees Arrietty on her first mission out into the vastness of the human house …

I don’t think it ruins any surprise to reveal that both the young Borrower and the young human are curious about the other, and want to befriend each other, but their two worlds want to separate them. This is not a film about action and plot twists. The scenes unfold slowly and deliberately.

I will mention Spiller, who is an ‘outside’ Borrower, who lives not in a human house, but in the wild, as even though he has less than half a dozen lines, comes across as noble and romantic a figure as Ashitaka from Princess Mononoke (who, come to think of it, he dressed somewhat like.)

The English dub was done with Disney’s characteristic attention to detail as their other Miyazaki dubs, with professional voice actors whose performances blend smoothly into the animated expressions and lip movements. There were certain places I suspect Disney put in dialog where I thought a more Japanese moment of silence would have been better.

See this movie in the theater. Bring your family. Buy popcorn. Let us by all means reward Hollywood with our entertainment dollars when they do something right.

My only complaint is an absurdly small one. I like the title THE BORROWERS. The title in Japanese is ‘The Borrower Arrietty’. The decision to change this to ‘The Secret World of Arrietty’ strikes me as being a little tin-eared.

I will not provide a link to the trailer, which I think spoils all the surprises in the film in a ham-handed way. But I will insert some stills.

Read the remainder of this entry »

28 Comments so far. Join the Conversation

Jennifer Fulwiler: HOW I BECAME PROLIFE

Posted February 17, 2012 By John C Wright

Update:

Here is a fine essay by Jennifer Fulwiler. At first I thought it had disappeared, and so originally I posted it in its entirely, but now seeing my mistake, I post the opening paragraphs and some money quote and link where you may read the whole thing, and give her page its deserved traffic.

In the comments below you may see readers alerting me to the error. I thank them and have made the correction.

Please note the paragraphs where Mrs Fulwiler explains that in her entire upbringing, the relationship between sex (coitus) and sex (reproduction) was never mentioned, not once. Readers of mine will recall that my encounter with a friend of mine, a Christian, who described sexual relations as nothing other than a pleasant sport or pasttime suffered from the same stupid deception, and it was this that first convinced me contraception was wrong. Absent contraception, the false-to-facts myth claiming sex was not sex could not be maintained.

http://www.conversiondiary.com/2008/01/how-i-became-pro-life.html

Here is the essay:

How I became pro-life

Who is human?

Back in college I remember reading about how in certain societies throughout history (I believe in this case it was the Greeks) it was common for parents to abandon unwanted newborns, leaving them somewhere to die. It was so deeply troubling to me, and I could never figure out what was going on there: how on earth could this have happened?! I mean, I knew lots of people, and nobody I knew would do that! In fact, in our society you only hear about it in rare cases of people who are obviously mentally disturbed. How could something so obviously evil, so unthinkably horrific be common among entire societies?

Because of my deep distress at hearing of things like this, I found it really irritating when pro-lifers would refer to abortion as “killing babies.” Obviously, nobody around here is in favor of killing babies – and to imply that those of us who were pro-choice would advocate for that was an insult to the babies throughout history who actually were killed by their insane societies. We weren’t in favor of killing anything. We simply felt like women had the right to stop the growth process of a fetus if she faced an unwanted pregnancy. It was unfortunate, yes, because fetuses had potential to be babies one day. But that was a sacrifice that had to be made in the name of not making women slaves to the trauma of unwanted pregnancies.

I continued to be vehemently pro-choice after college, and though my views became more moderate once I had a child of my own, I was still pro-choice. But as my husband and I were in the process of exploring Christianity, we couldn’t help but be exposed to pro-life thought more often than we used to be, and we were put on the defensive about our views. I remember one day when my husband was in the middle of reconsidering his own pro-choice ideas, he made a passing remark that stuck with me ever since:

“It just occurred to me that being pro-life is being pro-other people’s-life,” he quipped. “Everyone is pro-their own-life.”

It made me realize that my pro-choice viewpoints were putting me in the position of deciding who was and was not human, and whose lives were worth living. I (along with doctors, the government, or other abortion advocates) decided where to draw this very important line. When I would come across Catholic blogs or books where they said something like “life begins at conception,” I would scoff at the silliness of that notion as was my habit…yet I found myself increasingly uncomfortable with my defense:

“A few cells is obviously not a baby or even a human life!” I would say to myself. “Fetuses eventually become full-fledged humans, but not until, umm, like six months gestation or something. Or maybe five months? When is it that they can kick their legs and stuff?…Eight weeks? No, they’re not human then, those must be involuntary spasms…”

I was putting the burden of proof on the fetuses to demonstrate to me that they were human. […]

The contraceptive mentality

Here are four key memories that give a glimpse into how my understanding of sex was formed:

  • When I was a kid, I didn’t have any friends who had baby brothers or sisters in their households. One friend’s mom was pregnant when we were twelve, but I moved before the baby was born. To the extent that I ever heard any of our parents talk about pregnancy and babies, it was to say that they were happy that they were “done,” the impression being that they could finally start living now that that pregnancy/baby unpleasantness was over.
  • In sex ed class we learned not that sex creates babies, but that unprotected sex creates babies. After we were done putting condoms on bananas, our teacher counseled us that we should carefully decide when we might be ready to have sex based on important concerns like whether or not we were in committed relationships, whether or not we had access to contraception, how our girlfriends or boyfriends treated us, whether we wanted to wait until marriage, etc. I do not recall hearing readiness to have a baby being part of a single discussion about deciding when to have sex, whether it was from teachers or parents or society in general. Not once.
  • On multiple occasions when I was a young teen I recall hearing girls make the comment that they would readily risk dangerous back-alley abortions or even consider suicide if they were to face unplanned pregnancies and abortion wasn’t legal. Though I was not sexually active, it sounded perfectly reasonable to me — that is how much we desired not to have babies before we were ready. Yet the concept of just not having sex if we weren’t ready to have babies was never discussed. It’s not that we had considered the idea and rejected it; it simply never occurred to us.
  • Even recently, before our marriage was validated in the Catholic Church my husband and I had to take a course about building good marriages. It was a video series by a nondenominational Christian group, and in the segment called “Good Sex” they did not mention children or babies once. In all the talk about bonding and back rubs and intimacy and staying in shape, the closest they came to connecting sex to the creation of life was to briefly say that couples should discuss the topic of contraception.

Sex could not have been more disconnected from the concept of creating life.

[…]I was reading yet another account of the Greek societies in which newborn babies were abandoned to die, wondering to myself how normal people could possibly do something like that. I felt a chill rush through my body as I thought:

I know how they did it.

[…]

Read the whole thing. http://www.conversiondiary.com/2008/01/how-i-became-pro-life.html

6 Comments so far. Join the Conversation

A Miracle from the Bishops, and Gibberish from the Machine

Posted February 17, 2012 By John C Wright

From  https://www.stophhs.com/stop_hhs_mandate/breaking-every-single-bishop-has-condemned-the-obamahhs-mandate/

Every single Roman Catholic bishop in the United States has condemned in public the Obamacare HHS mandateall 180 bishops who lead dioceses in the U.S. have spoken.

My comment: I am astounded. I have never known all the Bishops in America to agree on anything. Nothing other than the most brazen attack on the Church would provoke such a response.

Read the remainder of this entry »

68 Comments so far. Join the Conversation

Lord, Hear Our Prayer

Posted February 16, 2012 By John C Wright

Regarding the brazen attack on the religious freedom of all Catholics, and, indeed, of all Americans of any faith, including the freedom of atheists to be left alone (for is not the worship of secular idols just as insulting to you, my atheist friends, who despise worship, as it is to us, who despise idols?), and following by the insulting so-called accommodation proffered by an unrepentant administration, Fr. Frank Pavone and Priests for Life have asked us to pray. Here is a link to the page on his website.  Here is the text (copy-and-pasted) from the aforementioned site:

Lord God,
You are the Author of Life and Freedom.
In your Spirit, we have the freedom of the children of God,
And in your Name, we promote the freedom of all
To seek, embrace, and live the truth of your Word.

In that freedom, Lord, we your people stand with Life
And reject whatever destroys life
Or distorts the meaning of human sexuality.

In that freedom, Lord, we your people live our lives
In a way that advances your Kingdom of Life,
And we refuse to cooperate in what is evil.

At this moment, therefore, when our government has decided
To force us to cooperate in evil,
We pray for the grace to be faithful to you
And to oppose the unjust laws and mandates
That have been imposed upon us and our institutions.

We pray for the conversion of those in civil authority
Who fail to appreciate the demands of conscience.
We pray for the complete reversal of all policies
That permit the destruction of life
Or coerce the cooperation of your people
In practices that are wrong.

Bring us to a Culture of Life.

We pray through Christ our Lord. Amen.

Read the remainder of this entry »

75 Comments so far. Join the Conversation