Really? Is that An Argument? Was I Suppose to be Convinced?

Have any of you seen this http://front.moveon.org/two-lesbians-raised-a-baby-and-this-is-what-they-got

I suppose the young man is trying to convince us that same sex parents make good parents and institute of marriage can exist even when there is not one man of consenting age and one woman of consenting age.  And if those statements did not go against all logic and sense, there wasn't mountains of evidence to the contrary, and I were stupid, then maybe, it would convince me.

The man speaks for three minutes - 3 minutes! - and we are suppose to look at him like he is this intelligent, successful, well adjusted gentleman.  I don't know about you, but I do try to not judge people too quickly - and I certainly wouldn't rule out any major character flaws (which seems to be the purpose of his speech) in merely three minutes.  The guy could cheat on his tests in school, shoplift and beat his girlfriend for all we know.  He certainly wouldn't admit that and even if he wanted to, it might not make it into the three minute speech he has to convince you that lesbianism is the way to go.

So why is everyone standing around him, smiling and clapping like he gave this long, well researched speech? Turn the tables, and if I stood up and spoke for three minutes about all my successes and how my heterosexual parents raised me so wonderfully, do you think I would convince anyone that is the way to go?  We have the the 2000+ years teachings of the church, research and evidence, plus nature to tell us that children are meant to be raised and do best when raised in monogamous heterosexual marriages.  We know that this is the truth, but if I spoke about it, even if I spoke eloquently and with passion, as this young man did, I would be just a small weak argument, at best.

What struck me right away when I watched this video, was sadness.  I felt so sad for this young man and his situation.  What is one of the first things that people say when a parent is lost in a heterosexual marriage?  "Oh, little Timmy will have to be raised without a father!"  "Poor little Vanessa will have to grow up without a mother!"  We see the loss of a parent as tragic - why would you choose to inflict that on a child?!  It boggles my mind that someone would choose to do this and then go on to teach their child that it is best and others should do it too.  That should raise some really good adults for a real fine society.

The other point that struck me was his comment that they do not want to be treated like "second class citizens" anymore.  So, to be considered a first class citizen, you have to be able to marry whoever you want?  That opens a pretty big can of worms.  What if I want to marry someone who is already married, or I want to marry another woman, or I want to marry two men, or two men and a woman, or two men and two women, or a little boy, or my brother, or a monkey?  According to this young man, I am a second class citizen if I am denied any of these unions.  I also take offense at the term "second class citizens."  Second class citizens was how minorities were treated when they could not go to the same schools, hospitals, drink out of the same water fountains, go into the same stores or use public transportation like the rest of society.  Second class citizens is not  a term to be used carelessly by a group of people struggling with their disordered sexuality who are not allowed to legally make all of their unhealthy and destructive fantasies come true.  Part of the purpose of laws is to protect society, and sometimes it is from yourself you need protection.

What a sad road this society is walking down.



 

Almost Time for Another Baby!

When I was in college, I came across a prayer card with a prayer for unborn babies.  The prayer was written, I believe, by Fulton Sheen.  The intention of the prayer was more specific than petitioning for an end to abortion or more respect for human life, it was a prayer to save a specific unborn baby, who was likely to be the victim of abortion.  The prayer card instructed you to say the prayer every day for one year to save one baby.  Once a new year started, you were working on saving another baby.  Below is the prayer:

O Virgin of Guadalupe, Grant us the Grace to love and respect life in it's beginnings with the same love with which you conceived in your womb the life of the Son of God.


Jesus, Mary and Joseph, I love you very much.  I beg you to spare the life of the unborn baby, that I have spiritually adopted, who is in danger of abortion.  


The prayer and it's purpose immediately appealed to me.  Not only was it about babies, it was about saving an actual baby.  When I began this daily prayer it was around this time of year - late January - near the horrid anniversary of Roe v Wade.  So each year as fellow Catholics, and many Christians, pray, march and protest to end abortion, my spiritual baby is born and I begin praying for a new spiritual baby.  I forget the exact year I began this tradition, but I think I will start praying for my ninth spiritual baby next week!

And while I was blessed enough to conceive, carry, birth and be in charge of raising and nurturing (along with my husband) our beautiful baby boy, I still have a very special soft spot in my heart for all these spiritual babies.  Every January, I am filled with joy knowing that one more of God's special souls has been saved and I am working on helping to save another.  I sometimes think about these spiritual children of mine, wondering what they are doing now, that they have narrowly escaped an untimely death.  I think about how blessed the world is to have them in it, but how few probably realize, that although God gave them life, they almost did not live.  I wonder sometimes too, do I know these children?  Have I come across them in my daily life?  They do not know who I am nor I them, but I pray for them and love them.

Pro-life or ?

I would venture to say that many if not most of you would say that the opposite of pro-life is pro-choice.  But in a strictly logical or maybe grammatical sense, what is the opposite of life?  Is it not death?  I have found myself, and a few other friends or acquaintances of mine, using the term pro-death to label those on the other side of the debate.  Admittedly, I could be using that term to take a small jab at those that take that stance (*whispers* you are for murder - the murder of tiny babies) In a culture that seems to be so supportive of abortion, maybe the jab is a much needed wake up call to remind those, who have emotionally removed themselves from the issue, that the "freedom" to choose that they are so relentlessly fighting for, is really a license to kill.

 I have noticed in my life, that I have not really come across anyone who is truly pro-choice - as the name would suggest.  I would think that anyone for choice is advocating all to choose anything that they deem right.  So, wouldn't they view the pro-lifers as merely exercising their freedom of choice and choosing that stance and that is just as good as any other?  Those who are "pro-choice," however, do not seem to think like this.  They seem to want to open more abortion clinics, expand the window of opportunity to do an abortion within the weeks of pregnancy and limit the amount of counseling, ultrasounds and information that would convince a pregnant woman to not abort her child.  How can you even use the word "choice" to describe your position on the matter, if you oppose woman having all the necessary information needed to make an informed choice?

 I use to pray outside an abortion clinic when I was in college, and one of the things that sticks out in my memory from those days, was how the abortion clinic "escorts" would all but push the woman and girls into the building before one of the pro-life students could utter a single word to them or hand them a brochure detailing real risks of abortion and real alternative options. It really seemed, to me, that they had a quota to fill for that day.  They had to abort x number of babies and they were going to accomplish their goal before they broke for lunch.  I remember one time, that a pro-life student did manage to hand a woman a brochure just before she entered the clinic.  The woman standing guard at the door of the clinic tore it out of the young woman's hands and ripped it up before she even had a chance to glance at it.  (As infuriating, sickening and depressing standing outside of a filthy abortion clinic in a bad neighborhood is, I really encourage anyone who had never tried praying there once to do so.  It really is, at the same time, a moving, enlightening and humbling experience.)    

Also, the "pro-choice" side does not seem to care that their position completely inhibits the pro-life's side ability to choose.  We want to live in a world where life is respected and cherished.  We want to meet all those cute babies that are seen as mistakes or accidents and tossed aside like garbage.  But, you may say, wouldn't the pro-life side completely hinder the "pro-choice" side's ability to live as they choose?  As our beloved Pope John Paul II said, "freedom consists not in doing what we like, but in having the right to do what we ought."  It seems to me that societies laws should be a good secular match to the laws of God.  All good comes from God, and, because some members of society do not believe in God, His laws need to be translated and set in another context for them.  But God, in His infinite wisdom knows what is best for every human, whether they believe in Him or not.  Society at large seems to agree that murder is wrong.  I'm sure, in terrible fits of anger, one can believe that the world would be better off without an offensive person.  But, our laws protect that transgressor.  The angry party knows through God's laws, civil laws or both, that it is not okay to murder.  If the angry person decides to anyway, he is punished.  Somehow, along the way, society no longer applied this law of God and society to unborn babies.  Society also decided that each individual person should be able to decide for themselves if murdering an unborn baby was a just thing to do or not.  Laws need to apply to everyone.  If abortion is legal and encouraged - both of which seem horrifically true, what if everyone choose that route?  Society would end here pretty quickly.  You need to have laws that apply to everyone and allow for everyone to follow them.  How it does not seem chaotic and uncivilized to just let everyone pick and choose what is wrong and right for themselves and have no code applicable to everyone, I will never understand.  I especially will not understand this "pro-choice" culture because, as I hope I have proven, there is no true choice.  It is a culture of death that needs to be overturned.