USEFUL IDIOTS
Gay conservative Kevin DuJan lets the cat out of the bag:
John Nolte at Breitbart.com just published a hard-hitting piece that’s worth your very valuable time…exposing Barack Obama’s commitment to the institutional Left’s Alinskyite objective of “dismantling, undermining, and toxifying the Catholic Church”; this article’s one of those that I’ll probably quote from for years to come, because I’ve never seen this articulated so succinctly before. Dismantle. Undermine. Toxify. That is precisely what Leftists have been attempting in their decades-long war against the Catholic Church. Kudos to Nolte for precisely encapsulating so much evil into three small words…which I hope you’ll join me in making everyday vocabulary from this point forward.
What John Nolte probably doesn’t know firsthand, though, is that the Left’s weapon of choice against Catholics is normally gays…who serve as a Gaystapo goon squad that is revved up into frenzies of hatred against Christians in general (but Catholics quite specifically). If you observe the institutional Left’s strategic moves long enough, you’ll see it’s almost always gays who are bused in to block the entrances to cathedrals or churches and scream expletives at parishioners heading into mass; this is, of course, the toxification aspect of the Leftists’ agenda…since they are attempting to make going to Catholic mass so unpleasant an experience for believers that they’ll potentially start staying home, just to avoid being screamed at by obnoxious gays out on the street (most of whom, in the video above at least, are actually members of the Chicago Teachers’ Union…more on that later).
The Left uses the Gaystapo against the Church (with gays screaming “Bigots!”) in much the same way that Democrats trot blacks (led, of course, by the likes of Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and Henry Gates) in front of cameras to accuse conservative businesses, Republican politicians, or any of the Democrats’ other perceived “enemies” of being “Ray Ciss”. This is stage crafting coordinated by the DNC, with gays and blacks serving as useful idiots and foot solders for the institutional Left.
It’s a long article and there’s lots of video at the link.
Is this what Catholics have to look forward to? Sure, if this country’s gays are titanically stupid. For my part, nothing would get me into the Catholic parish directly across the street from where I live faster than hearing that I would be greeted by wild-eyed hordes of marauding gays as I walked in the door.
Of course, the Archdiocese here would probably discourage me from coming quite strongly, what with the fact that as I walked in, I would point and laugh at the assembled homosexuals, perhaps drop an F-bomb or two, physically react to any physical assaults on my person and break out an Anglican apology (I’m sorry if you were offended…) later if anyone called me on it.
You get the idea.
John Nolte, in the Breitbart.com post DuJan linked to above, overstates the case a bit. Would the left really like to “demystify, undermine and toxify” the Roman Catholic Church? Undoubtedly.
Why? Because at the present time, the Roman Catholic Church is the single largest and most influentialworldwide organization standing in the way of the leftist agenda. I certainly don’t mean to suggest that strong opposition to the left does not also exist in Protestantism or Orthodoxy; it most certainly does. But Protestantism is too fragmented and Orthodoxy still too exotic and foreign to put up the kind of fight that only the Catholics can currently wage.
I’m not making a judgment, I’m simply stating a fact. Think of it like this; once you take Helm’s Deep, all you have left to do is to quietly wait for the rest of Middle Earth to fall into your hands.
That said, I don’t believe that the left has to make any special effort to “demystify, undermine and toxify” the Roman Catholic Church and certainly not by sending out wild-eyed hordes of marauding gays since wild-eyed hordes of marauding gays will attract far more people into Roman Catholic parishes than they will ever drive away.
All the left needs to do is to allow liberal Christianity to accomplish its goals for it.
Now and then, I have a serious purpose in writing twaddle like this. In the case of that particular twaddle, I believe that that is precisely what the Christian left would do if it had the ability to time-travel.
Liars like Susan Russell, Joan Chittister, Jim Naughton, Katharine Jefferts Schori, Gene Robinson, Matt Fox, Doug Kmiec, TEO’s entire House of Squishops and the rest of the Christian left knows what the Book says about The Issue. Unfortunately, they can’t travel back through time, destroy or alter the relevant manuscripts and instantly solve their problem.
So what do they do? Since those words can’t be removed from the Bible, do the next best thing. Delegitimize them.
How do you do that? Simple.
Try this one on. Some leftist bastion or other, San Francisco or New York City, say, passes a law declaring that any speech which denigrates a particular group of people is harmful to that group and will no longer be allowed. The city also declares that no religious organizations will be excepted from this law’s provisions.
After this law is passed, the Catholic Church takes the city to court claiming that this statute is an obvious violation of the First Amendment. How does the city respond?
As part of its case, the city hauls in a steady stream of “Christian” leaders, the local Episcopal squishop foremost among them, to testify before the court that the Catholic Church’s interpretation of the Scripture verses in question is not only incorrect but detrimental to the propogation of the Gospel.
Salvation, they inform the court, comes from Christ and from Christ alone and the Church has taught this throughout its history. No one, they say, is saved or has ever been saved by believing that homosexual sex is a sin.
Would the Supreme Court take such a case? The current one probably wouldn’t but future courts might. The “Christian” testimony in favor of this law certainly gives the Justices an out on the “free exercise” clause.
And it’s not unlikely that one of the city’s more astute lawyers will observe that the First Amendment is not absolute even in matters of religion. After all, declaring yourself a follower of Molech or an adherent of the pre-Conquest Aztec religion does not give you the legal right to kill innocent people even if your alleged “religion” demands that you be allowed to cut someone’s heart out from time to time.
So our theoretical Supreme Court decides that forbidding the teaching of certain doctrines not only does not materially impede the free exercise of the Christian religion but provides a definite public good. Thanks to the Court’s decision, traditionalist Christian teachings will not only carry legal opprobrium but “Christian” opprobrium as well.
At that point, traditionalist Christians of all denominations, both leaders and laity, will face a terrible decision. Do they really believe the “in the world but not of the world” or “be not conformed to this world” or “obeying God rather than man” mantras that they said that they believed all those years? If they do, what do they intend to do about it?
Or, by citing Romans 13:1-4 again and again, will they find ways to accomodate themselves to the new reality, rationalize their continued membership in their old churches and save their barns while still claiming to be valiant for the Gospel?
Enquiring minds want to know.
John Nolte at Breitbart.com just published a hard-hitting piece that’s worth your very valuable time…exposing Barack Obama’s commitment to the institutional Left’s Alinskyite objective of “dismantling, undermining, and toxifying the Catholic Church”; this article’s one of those that I’ll probably quote from for years to come, because I’ve never seen this articulated so succinctly before. Dismantle. Undermine. Toxify. That is precisely what Leftists have been attempting in their decades-long war against the Catholic Church. Kudos to Nolte for precisely encapsulating so much evil into three small words…which I hope you’ll join me in making everyday vocabulary from this point forward.
What John Nolte probably doesn’t know firsthand, though, is that the Left’s weapon of choice against Catholics is normally gays…who serve as a Gaystapo goon squad that is revved up into frenzies of hatred against Christians in general (but Catholics quite specifically). If you observe the institutional Left’s strategic moves long enough, you’ll see it’s almost always gays who are bused in to block the entrances to cathedrals or churches and scream expletives at parishioners heading into mass; this is, of course, the toxification aspect of the Leftists’ agenda…since they are attempting to make going to Catholic mass so unpleasant an experience for believers that they’ll potentially start staying home, just to avoid being screamed at by obnoxious gays out on the street (most of whom, in the video above at least, are actually members of the Chicago Teachers’ Union…more on that later).
The Left uses the Gaystapo against the Church (with gays screaming “Bigots!”) in much the same way that Democrats trot blacks (led, of course, by the likes of Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and Henry Gates) in front of cameras to accuse conservative businesses, Republican politicians, or any of the Democrats’ other perceived “enemies” of being “Ray Ciss”. This is stage crafting coordinated by the DNC, with gays and blacks serving as useful idiots and foot solders for the institutional Left.
It’s a long article and there’s lots of video at the link.
Is this what Catholics have to look forward to? Sure, if this country’s gays are titanically stupid. For my part, nothing would get me into the Catholic parish directly across the street from where I live faster than hearing that I would be greeted by wild-eyed hordes of marauding gays as I walked in the door.
Of course, the Archdiocese here would probably discourage me from coming quite strongly, what with the fact that as I walked in, I would point and laugh at the assembled homosexuals, perhaps drop an F-bomb or two, physically react to any physical assaults on my person and break out an Anglican apology (I’m sorry if you were offended…) later if anyone called me on it.
You get the idea.
John Nolte, in the Breitbart.com post DuJan linked to above, overstates the case a bit. Would the left really like to “demystify, undermine and toxify” the Roman Catholic Church? Undoubtedly.
Why? Because at the present time, the Roman Catholic Church is the single largest and most influentialworldwide organization standing in the way of the leftist agenda. I certainly don’t mean to suggest that strong opposition to the left does not also exist in Protestantism or Orthodoxy; it most certainly does. But Protestantism is too fragmented and Orthodoxy still too exotic and foreign to put up the kind of fight that only the Catholics can currently wage.
I’m not making a judgment, I’m simply stating a fact. Think of it like this; once you take Helm’s Deep, all you have left to do is to quietly wait for the rest of Middle Earth to fall into your hands.
That said, I don’t believe that the left has to make any special effort to “demystify, undermine and toxify” the Roman Catholic Church and certainly not by sending out wild-eyed hordes of marauding gays since wild-eyed hordes of marauding gays will attract far more people into Roman Catholic parishes than they will ever drive away.
All the left needs to do is to allow liberal Christianity to accomplish its goals for it.
Now and then, I have a serious purpose in writing twaddle like this. In the case of that particular twaddle, I believe that that is precisely what the Christian left would do if it had the ability to time-travel.
Liars like Susan Russell, Joan Chittister, Jim Naughton, Katharine Jefferts Schori, Gene Robinson, Matt Fox, Doug Kmiec, TEO’s entire House of Squishops and the rest of the Christian left knows what the Book says about The Issue. Unfortunately, they can’t travel back through time, destroy or alter the relevant manuscripts and instantly solve their problem.
So what do they do? Since those words can’t be removed from the Bible, do the next best thing. Delegitimize them.
How do you do that? Simple.
Try this one on. Some leftist bastion or other, San Francisco or New York City, say, passes a law declaring that any speech which denigrates a particular group of people is harmful to that group and will no longer be allowed. The city also declares that no religious organizations will be excepted from this law’s provisions.
After this law is passed, the Catholic Church takes the city to court claiming that this statute is an obvious violation of the First Amendment. How does the city respond?
As part of its case, the city hauls in a steady stream of “Christian” leaders, the local Episcopal squishop foremost among them, to testify before the court that the Catholic Church’s interpretation of the Scripture verses in question is not only incorrect but detrimental to the propogation of the Gospel.
Salvation, they inform the court, comes from Christ and from Christ alone and the Church has taught this throughout its history. No one, they say, is saved or has ever been saved by believing that homosexual sex is a sin.
Would the Supreme Court take such a case? The current one probably wouldn’t but future courts might. The “Christian” testimony in favor of this law certainly gives the Justices an out on the “free exercise” clause.
And it’s not unlikely that one of the city’s more astute lawyers will observe that the First Amendment is not absolute even in matters of religion. After all, declaring yourself a follower of Molech or an adherent of the pre-Conquest Aztec religion does not give you the legal right to kill innocent people even if your alleged “religion” demands that you be allowed to cut someone’s heart out from time to time.
So our theoretical Supreme Court decides that forbidding the teaching of certain doctrines not only does not materially impede the free exercise of the Christian religion but provides a definite public good. Thanks to the Court’s decision, traditionalist Christian teachings will not only carry legal opprobrium but “Christian” opprobrium as well.
At that point, traditionalist Christians of all denominations, both leaders and laity, will face a terrible decision. Do they really believe the “in the world but not of the world” or “be not conformed to this world” or “obeying God rather than man” mantras that they said that they believed all those years? If they do, what do they intend to do about it?
Or, by citing Romans 13:1-4 again and again, will they find ways to accomodate themselves to the new reality, rationalize their continued membership in their old churches and save their barns while still claiming to be valiant for the Gospel?
Enquiring minds want to know.
No comments:
Post a Comment