Clucking Catholic

Maxims to Remember

2009-08-21T00:18:00.000-07:00

You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
You cannot help little men by tearing down big men.
You cannot lift the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer.
You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.
You cannot establish sound security on borrowed money.
You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than you earn.
You cannot build character and courage by destroying men's initiative and independence.
And you cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they can and should do for themselves.

~Rev. William John Henry Boetcker

Because they'll do it anyway

2009-04-08T20:53:00.000-07:00

I understand that many of the folks in our society who advocate teaching safe sex practice as an aspect of sexual education classes defend their position by saying that teenagers will be having sex anyway, so the responsible thing to do is to teach them how to minimize the risk of unwanted factors such as pregnancy and STDs.

I've given that position a lot of thought. It really is an interesting perspective, and I'm beginning to wonder if there's credence to it. In fact, why not apply it to all controversial choices teens are faced with?

For instance, guns. Teenagers use guns. Actually, a lot of people do. And even with gun control laws, many people continue to use them irresponsibly. How many people's lives are ruined by firearm abuse? I think the solution is clear here. We should eradicate all laws forbidding guns, and instead focus on teaching our youngsters to handle them properly and minimize the risks of injury? They'll be shooting stuff anyway.

Drugs are another hot topic. Narcotics are an extremely popular pastime among young adults, and a habit which often carries into adulthood. Though illegal, thousands of teenagers as using marijuana, LSD, heroin and meth. These drugs can all be extremely hazardous if misused. Once again, the answer is obvious - legalize all narcotics, and teach children how to use drugs for recreation in a safe and healthy way.

It's amazing how many issues are simplified with this line of thinking. No wonder it's caught on so much.

Secular Abstinence

2009-03-14T11:46:00.000-07:00

After a brief sabbatical (can two years be considered brief?), I'm returning to this blog. No guarantees on the frequency of updates!

Today's subject is abstinence - specifically, secular reasons why it's a good idea.

Most American youth who choose abstinence do so for religious reasons. While admirable, this has led to a misconception prevalent in our society that the only reasons to consider abstinence are religious ones. We've fallen into a trap that tells us that anything that's forbidden to Christians is just fine for non-Christians. However, this simply isn't the case.

Oxytocin. Vasopressin. Have you ever heard those before? if not, I'll explain.

Both are hormones found in most mammals, including humans. Studies have shown both hormones to effect bonding abilities. Oxytocin, for instance, is released during childbirth and breastfeeding, two times when it is crucial for a mother to bond with her child. It has been found to sharply heighten maternal instincts.

But what does that have to do with premarital sex?

Studies of these hormones have uncovered another way in which these two hormones instigate close boding - intercourse. According to Wikipedia, "oxytocin released into the brain of the female during sexual activity is important for forming a monogamous pair bond with her sexual partner. Vasopressin appears to have a similar effect in males." Put simply, when you have sex with someone, these hormones will stimulate a very close and intimate bond between you and your partner.

Now, this is really an ideal setup if you're with someone you intend to remain with for the rest of your life. This chemical bond forming between the two of you will reinforce your relationship, ease the strains that come with it, and help you remain close to one another. For a married pair, these hormones are a Godsend.

However, the effects are a severe detriment in a nonpermanent relationship. Unless you're going to stay with a person for the rest of your life, forming such a powerful bond will make breaking up really suck. Because of the attachment you've developed, leaving each other will be painful and unpleasant, and may emotionally scar the involved parties. Furthermore, your hormones won't recognize a break-up as readily as you do. Even when you believe yourself to be ready to move on, there will be a part of your brain that remains attached to that other person, and it will compromise future relationships. The more people you have sex with, the harder it will be to establish a working and fulfilling permanent relationship.

In short, sex has a much more profound impact on those involved that most realize. It is a decision that should never be taken lightly.

Whose choice is it to make?

2007-04-04T18:34:00.000-07:00

In relevance to yesterday's post (as the subject of yesterday's post sparked an entire discussion on the issue including several different people with numerous viewpoints), I have a little something to add.

After some reflection on the subject, I've decided that, despite the intention of the original poster to criticize by using the term "anti-choice", I really shouldn't be offended by it. After all, I really don't think anyone should have the choice to commit murder. And I need to be strong in my morals, and not pretend them away whenever someone has a problem with them. It's a problem I've noticed all too often on our side of the issue - that some of us back out when the other side tries to intimidate us. But if we don't stand up for the unborn, no one will. Bruised egos are no reason to forget that.

Anti-choice? Yeah, I guess I am. And proud to be.

Politically Correct slander, anyone?

2007-04-03T19:31:00.000-07:00

Today, while pursuing an entirely unrelated matter, I encountered someone who made idle reference to "the anti-choice movement". Now, I do try to ignore those who make offensive comments like that, but given that the slander was completely out of context and unrelated to the current topic of discussion, I decided to take issue with it. Even so though, I didn't get rude about. I simply replied, "Actually, it's called pro-life". To which they responded that I must be one of those hypocritical conservative bigots, gave me a bogus link to falsified claims from abortionists that pro-lifers are liars, and then concluded with the remark that, "Actually, I'm not even going to have this debate."

Let's pause and examine for a moment, shall we? Unfortunately, this attitude is far too common among the liberals I've encountered. Unprovoked insults and slander from absolutely nowhere, when noted for what they are, are generally followed up by "evidence" which usually equates to artificial facts or even additional insults. And when they feel that they won't be successful in the debate, they end it, claiming victory by cowardice. This last tactic, I might note, is one I'm quite familiar with, as my eleven year old sister uses it often in arguments.

Perhaps I'd have more respect for liberal views if they weren't consistently backed up by childish, illogical tactics. Then again, if these were mature and logical people, they wouldn't believe half the things they do, would they?

Some thoughts about intimacy

2007-03-29T08:16:00.000-07:00

As many of us have heard before, dancing has been previously described in famous quote as "a vertical expression of a horizontal desire". My mind was recently recalled to this by a movie I watched, "Shall We Dance". It prompted me to a new question, however. Obviously, the "horizontal desire" described is sex.

But just what does sex express?

It depends on the context, to a great deal. But when used as God intended, as a way for a man and a woman to express to one another their love, I think it can be summed up like so - a horizontal expression of an otherwordly desire.

First Post Stuffage

2007-01-30T14:57:00.000-08:00

First post's always the most awkward, isn't it? Let's start off simply then.

I was having an interesting conversation with a friend online last night. We were discussing religion; he's protestant, I'm Catholic. And he asked the inevitable question: "Why do you worship Mary?"

Well, it took awhile to explain away the misconceptions and falsehoods he'd been taught. But afterwards, we moved on to the subject of the cross. And the differences between how Catholics and Protestants show it - we show it with Jesus on it, and they do not. He wondered why we show Jesus on the cross, when it was his resurrection in the tomb which was the miracle which saved us. I explained to him that without Jesus, the cross had no more meaning than a noose, a tool for killing the condemned.

All in all, an interesting discussion.