one of his podcast themes is that people watch different "movies" in their heads, and interpret reality based on what movie they are watching...
The “blank space” in Woodward’s book
- He looked really hard…and found no Russian collusion
- What the left feels is obvious, Woodward saw nothing
--------------------------
which brings us to this essay:
SciFi author Sarah Hoyt, who grew up in Socialist Portugal, writes in pjmedia: Those who walked away from sanity.
The problem is this: the deals with the devil people make — the real ones, which apply whether one believes in the devil or not — are not the kind made at twilight at a crossroads with a being of distinctly evil shape, and imbued with a suspicious smell.
Instead, they’re made in nice rooms, in meeting rooms, at conferences, with well-dressed people who are so benign, so kind, so full of wish to help us. And also, inevitably, powerful and full of the aroma of success. They stand in our way and without quite saying anything political (some of them do. One of them was stupid enough to at least hint at politics to me when I was in the political closet, but most don’t) make it clear that if you want to advance, succeed, or even “just” remain employed, you must say the right words, believe the right things, hang out in the right circles.(for background of this for sci fi authors, see Sad puppies controversy).
But the title echoes the title of the story: The Ones who walk away from Omelas.
the PC wikipedia page is the socialist interpretation, of course, but essentially the utopia only exists because it allows a child to be tortured. But a few walk away...
So who would torture a child?
well, what about the Democrats mantra rah rah rah abortion is good because it lets women to be successful.
as in this British ad:
oh, but if you study to be a doctor or nurse, you will be pressured into agreeing with the abortion agenda.
Nor is this new:
I saw this compromise with evil in medical school fifty years ago, where most of the students were anti abortion, but then RoeVWade and our powerful professors reeducated us to approve of the procedure, and even forced us to do them. (I didn't, and one professor tried to get me thrown out of medical school, but that's another long story).
Yet even then, most of the students were so horrified at what they saw, few continued to do abortions after they graduated. So the reeducation didn't quite succeed.
But the propaganda is now pushing killing senile grandmom, because she wants to be dead. What might stop it is that when this happens to minorities, because Blacks remember Tuskeegee and object... which is why the rate of living wills in minority communities tends to be lower than in suburban ones.
Indeed, few of our Objibwe patients would sign living wills...(they remembered the Red Lake Streptococcus experiment... long story)
---------------------
speaking of walking away from sin: The photo shows a happy Pope talking about the abuse crisis in the USA with happy happy bishops.
 |
| vatican media photo |
no, not a good PR photo, guys.
maybe you should try tearing your shirt in horror and lamenting in sackcloth and ashes.
Father Z links to two articles: The weekly standard and at Virtueonline (an Anglican site) that discuss the possible consequences.
so which of the bishops will walk away from Omelas?
only a few have so far, alas.
and pray for the good priests who do their job and have to bow their heads in shame for their brothers.
the good news: Maybe they will purge sin from their midst, and repent and the church will be renewed.
The bad news: It might just let secular prosecutors destroy the church. It usually isn't good news to let the government have power over churches, but Pope francis is clueless about this: he is even allowing the Chinese gov't to take over the Catholic churches there.
this whole thing is turning into a witch hunt, reminding me of the Mc Martin preschool hysteria and the demonic abuse hysteria of the 1980s.
from Wikipedia:
hmm... sounds like the "pizzagate" hysteria we see on fake news sites.
In The Devil in The Nursery, Margaret Talbot for The New York Times summarized the case: When you once believed something that now strikes you as absurd, even unhinged, it can be almost impossible to summon that feeling of credulity again. Maybe that is why it is easier for most of us to forget, rather than to try and explain, the Satanic-abuse scare that gripped this country in the early 80's – the myth that Devil-worshipers had set up shop in our day-care centers, where their clever adepts were raping and sodomizing children, practicing ritual sacrifice, shedding their clothes, drinking blood and eating feces, all unnoticed by parents, neighbors and the authorities.[6]
on the other hand, our resident "gay" tells me of subtle signs in films etc. that have meaning for gays who were cruising around for sex.
I don't notice such things: I have worked with a lot of abuse cases, but most of the incest/child abuse/child sexual abuse cases I cared for as a physician were girls, and their abusers were just plain straightforward sociopaths who liked to abuse and have power over children in the neighborhood or family, but not into kinky stuff or child trafficking... but the cops who work with these things can tell you horrific stories which they rarely publicize for fear of inspiring copy cat cases.
so where do you draw the line at believing accusations?
the problem with the anonymous "me too" accusations, as we now see in the Senate hearings, means that any mentally ill woman can sue your or destoy your life while remaining anonymous. NeoNeocon writes:
as I wrote yesterday, that’s probably not her intent. Her intent was to delay the hearings if possible (that doesn’t seem to be happening), or at the very least to taint Kavanaugh’s reputation forever and to rally Democrats to even greater fury for the 2018 elections. But there’s even more behind it. It’s a warning to any future appointee of Trump’s, just as the Manafort and Cohen and Flynn prosecutions are warnings to anyone who might associate with him in business or government: beware!! It’s scorched earth, and we will use every method we can think of to destroy you.
something to remember: the flip side of exposing harassment is the dirty little secret that false accusations are easy to make but hard to disprove.
which is why Freud said children's stories of incest were "projection" of their imagination, (as we were taught in medical school 50 years ago, by the way). and why for years psychiatrists didn't believe actual victims.
and then you have "false memory syndrome", and of course, people who make up stories for publicity or revenge (some are sociopaths and know it, but some are mentally ill and end up believing their fantasies).
on the other hand, this comprehensive health survey on teenagers that surveyed everything down to the percentage of students drinking milk or not having a good night sleep has this fact hidden deep inside their report:
Analyses based on the question ascertaining sexual identity indicated that nationwide, 3.0% of heterosexual students; 6.1% of gay, lesbian, and bisexual students; and 4.1% of not sure students had had sexual intercourse before age 13 years (Supplementary Table 135). The prevalence of having had sexual intercourse before age 13 years was higher among gay, lesbian, and bisexual (6.1%) than heterosexual (3.0%) students. Among female students, the prevalence was higher among lesbian and bisexual (5.2%) than heterosexual (1.3%) students. The prevalence also was higher among heterosexual male (4.6%) than heterosexual female (1.3%) students....
The prevalence of having had sexual intercourse before age 13 years did not change significantly from 2015 (3.9%) to 2017 (3.4%).so yes, evil exists, and it needs to be exposed and fought.
But one reason that people are told not to concentrate only on evil is that witchhunts can destroy the innocent too, and be manipulated by evil ones who will benefit from these accusations.
===============
addition: All the press is saying that a lot of Catholics are shocked, shocked at what went on: but a lot of us are just happy someone is finally noticing what happened, and might actually reform things.
And of course, the "new" cases are way down, thanks to the 2002 guidelines: the problem? The bishops (like Wuerl) who looked the other way at abuse never were punished, and in some (but not all) diocese, there were bishops who might have punished priests accused of abuse of children, but ignored openly cruising gay priests... as if the lay people didn't know about these things.
if the bishops were serious about such things, Bishop Adamec of Altoona would have been thrown out in 2003 and Wuerl, who presumably knew what was going on there, should have been quietly retired to a monastery to ponder his failures of not reporting the corruption in the nearby diocese.
to make things worse (conspiracy theory) if you believe the Weekly standard, are joined with the liberal "reformers" in essentially a coup d'etat in trying to take over the church to remake it according to their specifications.
End story. I have to get ready to go to church.
Ironically, the sacraments and grace from attending mass don't depend on the moral status of the priest, any more than the action of antibiotics depends on the moral status of the physician giving the medicine.
which is why in some way I am more upset at the Pope's denial of the holiness of the Eucharist (give it to anyone, who cares what Paul said) than I am with his moral agnosia.
No comments:
Post a Comment