You know how the Catholic Church is always going on and on … and on and freakin’ on … about the sanctity of life and also a bunch of vague concepts about liberty ‘n stuff? We can’t have abortion because every sperm is sacred. We can’t have insurance coverage for women’s health care because something about Taco Bell and freedom. We can’t even fund cancer screening because apparently Jesus was cool with women dying of undetected breast cancer.
And all of this—all of it—goes back to the Church’s insistence that life begins with your very first hell-worthy dirty thought and must be protected at all costs, despite all consequences, including, of course, the consequence of dead women, whose lives are not nearly as valuable as the “life” of an unborn fetus. In just the past year, the Church has called upon its faithful followers to march, to starve themselves, to go to jail, to even take up arms—all to protect those fetuses. No exceptions. None. Not if the fetus is already dead inside the womb. Not if the fetus is going to kill the actual living woman carrying it. No goddamned exceptions EVER.
Well, except for one: when it’s going to cost the Church money.
Turns out, when a man sues a Catholic hospital for malpractice because his wife and the twins she was carrying inside her died when she turned up in the emergency room and her doctor never bothered to answer a page—well, things get a little tricky. Yes, the Catholic hospital adheres to the strict Ethical and Religious Directives of the Catholic Church, as set forth by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. And yes, those directives include the claim that “[t]he Church’s defense of life encompasses the unborn” and a mandate to uphold “the sanctity of life ‘from the moment of conception until death.'” But come on. That obviously does not apply when Catholic Health Initiatives, the Church-affiliated organization that runs the Church-affiliated St. Thomas More Hospital where a young woman and her two unborn fetuses died, is the lead defendant in a lawsuit:
Instead, they are arguing state law protects doctors from liability concerning unborn fetuses on grounds that those fetuses are not persons with legal rights.
As Jason Langley, an attorney with Denver-based Kennedy Childs, argued in one of the briefs he filed for the defense, the court “should not overturn the long-standing rule in Colorado that the term ‘person,’ as is used in the Wrongful Death Act, encompasses only individuals born alive. Colorado state courts define ‘person’ under the Act to include only those born alive. Therefore Plaintiffs cannot maintain wrongful death claims based on two unborn fetuses.”
Thank you, counselor, for totally undermining everything the Catholic Church has ever said about women and health care and fetuses and the “sanctity of life,” just to save a buck, thereby confirming how very empty and meaningless all that rhetoric really is. Praise the Lord.
this occurred here in Canada
Listing faith-related problems, the new study said some men refused to take orders from a woman boss or shake hands with women and some refused to handle alcohol or pork products.
Other problems include employees wanting to pray or wear religious garb at work. Some employees try to impose their religious standards on colleagues, such as preventing non-observant Muslims from eating at work during Ramadan.
Smaller towns and rural areas had far fewer problems, the study said. Fewer than five percent of human resources managers in the western region of Brittany reported any difficulties.
The survey, conducted by university researchers in Rennes and the international recruitment agency Randstad, was released as French lawmakers prepare new legislation extending strict public service bans on religious garb at work to some private firms.
Two Papa John’s delivery drivers were fired after accidentally butt-dialing a customer and leaving a racist voicemail.
The duo — who worked at the Sanford outlet in Orlando — was heard mocking the man for not leaving a tip.
The angry client posted audio of the message.
one came to my door yesterday
As the last of this year’s graduates from Algonquin College leave the neighbourhood, and the new crop of students move in, the energy re-sellers looking to take advantage of the newbies flock to the neighbourhood.
If you haven’t already had the “pleasure” of meeting somebody from Just Energy (www.justenergy.com) you will soon be summoned to your front door by a knock, or that obnoxious doorbell we all have and hate. What you will find is a friendly person wanting to talk about your household’s energy consumption and, guess what, how they can save you money! Sounds great right? Wrong. 98% of the people who sign this contract lose money! Here are the stats.
Here’s how it works:
A young, usually attractive, person will visit your house holding a clipboard, binder, or folder and an official piece of ID hanging around their neck, or clipped to their pocket…
View original post 515 more words
Europe has welcomed immigrants with the idea they would become part of the established culture but some groups are taking advantage of the largess.
HERNDON, Va., May 28 (UPI) — In 1995, herpetologists began observing frogs in the U.S. with various mutations and genetic defects. Suspecting the cause was environmental rather than natural, they launched a decades’ long study linking pesticides and other toxins to disturbing nature’s balance.
If so few herpetologist observers could identify such a dangerous trend evolving and isolate its cause, why then is it so difficult for social scientists to do so concerning human behavior within democracies that is disrupting stability’s natural balance?
A series of articles by author Soeren Kern underscores this trend in Europe.
Switzerland is a land famous for not having had to fight a war for centuries. Generations of its citizens have proven adept getting along with all cultures. With no standing army, it opted instead to provide for its national defense with a people’s militia.
But recently, to enhance public safety, it armed transport police as robberies and assaults on Swiss trains have drastically increased — the crime rate having doubled since early 2011. A society once secure in the warm glow of peaceful human co-existence now suffers from insecurity as 70 percent of voters say they want an increased police presence.
In Sweden this May, riots broke out in Stockholm as hundreds of mostly young people torched vehicles, set fires and threw rocks at police. The unrest spread to 15 other parts of the city with police stations, schools and community centers set on fire.
In London, youth gangs verbally harass passersby. Their main targets are women and gays. But more aggressive gangs warn non-members they intrude on the gang’s turf at their own risk.
Just like herpetologists isolated pollution as disrupting nature’s balance for frogs, the cause for the above changes — ongoing in Switzerland, Sweden, England and elsewhere — is more obvious. A pollutant, again, is at fault — one disrupting security’s natural balance within these democracies.
These countries, long embracing Christianity while welcoming other religions, opened up to Muslim immigrants who have used that openness against them. With Muslim immigrant populations radically growing in these countries, the “guest” is brazenly taking on the role of “host.”
In March, Swiss authorities acknowledged significantly increased recruitment of jihadists and of women being forced into marriage. Muslim gangs have been forcing disadvantaged children to convert to Islam and then sell drugs for them.
Ironically, while indications are otherwise, a governmental study claims all is well. With 5 percent of the Swiss population now Muslim, it downplays Islam-related violence, putting responsibility upon natives to be more accepting, less labeled as Islamophobic.
A Swiss Islamic group, publicly declaring its intentions to impose Shariah law on Switzerland, enthusiastically supported the study’s results. Meanwhile, its critics dismiss the report as a “case study in political correctness.”
As the government soft-pedals Islam’s impact, the natives are getting restless. A recent poll is most telling: 50 percent of those asked say they see Islam as a threat; 58 percent say it doesn’t belong in the Western world; two-thirds say Islam conflicts with their values.
Interestingly, the early 2011 date marking the start of increased criminal activity coincides with Switzerland having opened its doors to a massive influx of Muslim immigrants escaping the Arab Spring’s violence.
Meanwhile, Muslims say others are politically insensitive to their “suffering,” making outrageous charges.
They complained to Swiss Airlines about “offensive” advertising, simply for depicting a plane bearing the Swiss flag’s red and white cross with the words “Cross is Trump” (as in the card game). Outraged Muslims alleged it a “Christian slogan used as a provocation and attack against Islam.” As a Christian symbol, they say the cross “no longer corresponds to today’s multicultural Switzerland.”
Yet they build mosques in Switzerland with defining domes and minarets symbolic of Islam.
Islamic groups report their intention to establish their own parliament in Switzerland based on Shariah. This is an effort to get Shariah’s “nose under the tent” so jurisdiction will grow, initially as a “parallel” system of law but eventually replacing Swiss law.
With the most generous immigration laws in the world, Sweden attracts hundreds of thousands of Muslims — now comprising 5 percent of its population as well.
Offered free housing and welfare benefits, poorly educated immigrants unable to speak Swedish are hard-pressed to find work. While openly accepting such welfare, they criticize their hosts, seeking to impose their own non-productive culture upon them.
Their hosts’ reward for their generosity is the creation no-go zones where non-Muslims are unwelcome. In England, Muslim gangs ban non-Muslims from even walking by a mosque.
If a block representing only 5 percent of Sweden’s population aggressively seeks to impose its culture upon the host majority, one can only imagine what the future holds that minority grows.
What has enabled democracies to survive after opening their doors to immigrants is a willingness to assimilate voluntarily. Because Islam prohibits assimilation, Islamists asserting incompatibility of their religion with democracy are absolutely right.
Thus, the mission of Muslim immigrants becomes one of transitioning the host democratic state into an Islamic one. An Islamic leader, told Sweden historically is a Christian state, commented: “So it was perhaps before … Now it is a new era.”
A similar claim in England met with the response: “This is not a Christian country. To hell with Christianity. Isa [Jesus] was a messenger of Allah … Allah is great! We are coming!”
Swedes, too, now sense Islam’s threat “to destroy the West from within” is real.
A radical imam in England warns: “This is a wake-up call for society to ask ‘Where are we headed?’ There is a clash between Islam and liberal democracy in hotspot areas of London.”
This cleric has led an effort to convert 12 British cities into independent Islamic states. His bravado is motivated by a Muslim population that has doubled and “white British” in London becoming a minority for the first time.
Unbelievably, a British newspaper suggests those concerned about the increasing Muslim population are “Islamophobes.”
Muslim immigrants follow a modus operandi in imposing Islam upon a democratic state’s majority — witness the German government’s recent attempt to hold a conference on German-Muslim relations to engage “moderate” Muslims to combat Islamism.
The government’s concern was Muslim violence becoming endemic in countries like Sweden and Switzerland. Substantive discussion on the matter was sought but attending Muslims became offended at the suggestion Islam could become radical. Instead, they pressed the government to make “Islam equal to Christianity” in Germany.
At the same time Muslims avoided substantive discussions addressing Western concerns, they also suggested they only sought equality with Christianity. Readers of the Koran know it preaches Islam’s superiority to all other religions — thus, equality is a no-go.
A rational non-Muslim call to discuss such concerns is denied by Muslims claiming Islamophobia.
Islam has disrupted stability’s natural balance within Europe’s democracies. It is an intolerant toxin that leaves “freedom’s canary in the mineshaft” gasping for air.
(Lt. Col. James G. Zumwalt, a retired Marine infantry officer, served in the Vietnam war, the U.S. invasion of Panama and the first Gulf War. He is the author of “Bare Feet, Iron Will–Stories from the Other Side of Vietnam’s Battlefields,” “Living the Juche Lie: North Korea’s Kim Dynasty” and “Doomsday: Iran–The Clock is Ticking.” He frequently writes on foreign policy and defense issues.)
(United Press International’s “Outside View” commentaries are written by outside contributors who specialize in a variety of important issues. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of United Press International. In the interests of creating an open forum, original submissions are invited.)