heaven is for real?

Heh. Uncle Orson give it a fairly good review.

Not only did the movie avoid creating cardboard villains, it also avoided turning the heroes into tinplate saints. Todd and Sonja are all too human, and while they have a strong, loving, and not-for-a-second-sappy marriage, they are also perfectly capable of arguing and getting angry at each other.
Their faith is not of the "God will provide" sort -- they know they must do all that they can to solve their own problems, and then they'll see whether divine intervention will spare them some of the things that might go wrong.
Through it all, the movie NEVER requires us to decide for ourselves whether we accept every aspect of Colton's experience as a literal roadmap to heaven. On the contrary, Todd very wisely says, near the end, "Colton saw the heaven that God showed to him,"leaving us the ability to accept that the child saw something, but he understood it only as well as his youth and inexperience would allow.

HE ADDS:

The movie THINKS it is about Colton's vision. But it is not. Rather, it is about people who are trying their best to live a Christlike life within a community of believers.
In an era when the national media regularly portray religious people as dangerous fanatics, smarmy hypocrites, or ludicrous rubes, HEAVEN IS FOR REAL shows church-goers the way I know them to be: imperfect people trying to live up to a very high ideal, and helping bear each other's burdens along the way.
Todd's sermons -- which, by the way, are never boring -- finally come to this point: Colton saw a vision of a faraway heaven that most will see only after they die. But meanwhile, there is a vision of heaven that anyone can see all around them -- the heaven created by people who serve as angels in each other's lives.

for non geeks, OrsonScottCard is best know for Ender's Game, a classic sci fi novel about growing up and war.
but he is also a practicing LDS believer who dares to say he believes (but doesn't put his faith into his works, except for a few of his apocolyptical short stories about after society collapses.

Gay "marriage" is the ultimate result of disconnecting sex from procreation and family.
Paul VI was right?

Actually, what is being made non pc to notice is the male gay subculture that is sex centric. But those with same sex attraction are now lumped in with those with bisexual attraction and heteros who like kinky promiscuous sex.

sex is no longer how we express love, but the center of our being, never to be placed under any limitations...

and a lot of the problem is that radical feminism hates marriage and is happy to destroy this "patriarchal" institution.

Philippine news: how the COD is being pushed here

You won't read it in the papers but old lefty Archbishop Cruz (ret) has a summary on his blog.

Malacañang Palace

Proclamation No. 749

4 April 2014

National Family and Marriage Week

12 – 18 May 2014

Too great to be true! Too strange to be credible! Not anything that glitters is gold. Something is wrong here. Nothing less than Malacañang itself cited not only Section 12, Article II on the sanctity of family life but also Section 2, Article XV on the violability of the family (1987 Philippine Constitution), and thereafter declared the “National Family and Marriage Week.” Some questions come to mind.
Why was the Presidential Proclamation altogether silent about the protection of the right of the unborn from conception as provided by the same Section 12, Article II?
Why did Malacañang openly endorse and pay much from public funds for the eventual passage of the Population Control Law alias “Reproductive Health Law”?
Why did the Palace allow the 7th Conference of APCRSHR to be held at the Cultural Center of the Philippines itself on 21-24 January 2014, participated by no less than five contra population ultra-national organizations?
Why is the Executive Department distinctly silent about the Divorce Bill filed in Congress, with no less than some of its alias fervently supporting and promoting its passage?
Why is Malacañang playing deaf and dumb about the multiplication of the grounds for marriage annulment likewise supported and promoted by some of its followers in the Legislative Department?
Why is the Office of the President indifferent and comfortable about the “Same Sex Marriage” Bill – under different words and forms – contrary to the nature of marriage but supported as well by some of his party fellows?

There is something cooking – as the saying goes – with the above said Proclamation. No. This is categorically not paranoia of one kind or another. It is but a quest for elementary logic on the part of the real Boss in the Palace, together with his very close executive advisers.

FYI: The " 7th Conference of APCRSHR" stands for "7th Asia Pacific Conference on Reproductive and Sexual Health and Rights" (APCRSHR)

their aim
The objective of the APCRSHR is to provide a pro-active venue for exchange of experiences among Asia Pacific countries on good practices to achieve the objectives of the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) held in Cairo in 1994 where the term and concept of “Reproductive Health” was introduced and operationalized. The conference moreover, aims to inform delegates on the progress of the Health MDG in Asia Pacific. Some 3,000 delegates from various countries in the region representing the CSOs, academe, interfaith groups, youth, donors and program staff are expected to attend. www.7apcrshrmanila.org

and of course their aim is "SRHR"....

you can tell this is a western elite thing,because here in the Philippines, they make jokey  type names (e.g. Charter Change is "Chacha").

and then there is this video: ..LINK

yeah. Lots of white blonds with Anglo saxon names living in Manila.

and then there is this: Make your population control/sexual promiscuity/destruction of traditional marriage your agenda: SRHR- sexual reproductive health

 “This is a world of conflict, crisis, and persistent inequality and it is common for governments to cite other priorities ahead of SRHR. Missions of rescue, rehabilitation, and programs of development must address SRHR as core elements, without which all other investments are diminished. For this reason, We CHALLENGE all governments, civil society organisations, and religious institutions to demonstrate respect for SRHR by acknowledging SRHR needs of all people in all contexts now and into the future.”

this conference will get a predetermined concensus, because they invite the participents from those they know will agree with them.

Then they say it is grass roots. Can you say "astroturfing" children/

Which is why the UN is eager to get the vatican out of the UN: Because the vatican has the right to attend the uN conferences and mess up the consensus, especially by pointing out the slippery language involved.

My favorite story: One female delegate at a UN conference said she did support full human rights for lesbians, and then asked naively, where is the country of lesbia? (urban legend)

so the vatican points out that "woman's health" means abortion on demand, etc.

aND THEN WE HAVE THE UN

From TurtleBayblog:

selective reporting? we haz that

No one ever heard about the U.N. Committee Against Torture until today, when every media outlet decided to take note of the obscure U.N. panel of 10 experts because they brought up Catholic clergy sex abuse.
Unfortunately reporters with major media outlets are at best lazy, and more likely complicit in a smear campaign against the Catholic Church. Instead of looking into the issues in any detail they simply parroted what the U.N. committee told the Vatican in Geneva. They did not even try to be objective. That is troubling.
If you look at the mainstream media reports you will not find any mention of the responses of the Vatican to many of the issues brought up in the report of the committee which the Holy See actually responded to in a live webcast meeting with the committee. This journalistic failure means that the reporting on this story is nothing but junk worthy of tabloid papers.....
I could go on… But will devote myself to something more productive.
This whole affair reflects very poorly on the news media and the U.N. human rights framework, for all our sake, lets hope everyone forgets the episode. The unfortunate truth is, I doubt anyone will remember the U.N. committee after this, but they sure will remember the smear on the Catholic Church.

-------------------------------

the vatican's answer is here.

-------------------

and the Papuans are finding pressure to legalize abortion.

They have reason to worry. The UN Population Fund and Planned Parenthood initiated a scheme targeting Papua New Guinea and other Pacific Islands to impose abortion and sexual rights.
The UN Population Fund (responsible for crafting China’s one-child policy) and Planned Parenthood held a meeting in SE Asia with a hodge-podge of people holding government jobs in Pacific islands (they were not representing their governments).
They signed the Moana Declaration, a statement clearly written by radical abortion/sexual rights advocates.
Here is a UNFPA article lauding the Moana Declaration. Note that it admits it is not an agreement by governments, but a commitment by individuals:
“Participants also agreed to institutionalize mechanisms through which support whether technical, advocacy or otherwise, could be generated by a political leader wishing to advance issues related to the ICPD or sexual and reproductive health and rights.”
Random officials signed this declaration. They were urged to get onto their government delegations (and probably had their expenses paid) to, what turned out to be, a key UN meeting held this April.
At the UN Commission on Population and Development, the ambassador for Papua New Guinea declared the Pacific islands endorsed the Moana Declaration.
By the end of the Commission, after Pacific island governments were notified of their delegations actions, many were silent. The UN Population Fund couldn’t muster support for the radical agenda – and even distanced itself from their radical agenda, preferring to obfuscate their goals.
Abortion and sexual rights advocates have failed at creating international rights. They’ve broadened their approach to infiltrating inside governments.
Christian leaders in Papua New Guinea are onto them.

Fight against christians take two

This report on Ireland shows the plan of getting rid of Catholics in the Philippines. It doesn't help when the protestants poach and twist scriptures to get converts either.

I remember 40 years ago when someone asked why the press there was so anti catholic and was told that the powers that run  the place saw the church as an obstacle for modernization.

And a lot of the (very real scandals) there were pushed out of proportion to the amount of good done, a fact that only one atheist at Spiked dared to mention. One only has to read between the lines of "angela's ashes" to see how dire poverty (that killed two siblings) was a very real problem back then. As for mistreatment: Another point of view can be seen in Frank O'Connor's biography, whose mom was brought up in one of those orphanages and trained to work as a maid: she worked "in service" and preferred marriage to a semi abusive alcoholic to working as a maid. But she always loved (most) of the sisters, who always helped her get another job...

I remember a mulatto woman on 60 minutes cursing the nuns who brought her up about their mistreatment: but I remember her face had the same diabolic hatred as my oldest son when he accused me of "mistreatment" to his psychologist.

It was psychological projection in the case of my son: He was adopted at 15 and almost as large as I was, and a lot stronger, so how could I "mistreat" him? The answer is that he was angry at his parents for dying, angry at God for their deaths, ,and angry that no one including his relatives bothered to take him in. So I was the scapegoat. I pointed out to his psychologist that his "first" mother had him for 12 years, and he lived on the streets for 2 years, and I only had him 2 years: so blame his first mom. Finally I found a psychiatrist who recommended a one way plane ticket back since he was 18 years old and could indeed work there: The alternative, said the psychiatrist, was jail time for domestic violence (against me: the agreement of the psychologist gave him permisson to "punish" me when he disagreed with me).

Sigh.

Well, anyway, the same things that went on in Ireland are going on now.

and I wondered when the (?fake) seer Christine Gallagher warned that a positive vote on the Maastrict treaty would result in apostasy. The first vote went against them, but of course the elites couldn't accept that, so they voted again and joined the EU: and it has been downhill since then.

Gallagher is charged by the eager press with money grabbing, yet some of her warnings, including a tsunami vision, has come true.  The local bishop shut down her chapel for visitors to pray (how gauche) and of course she is backed by a priest who tries to stop abuse at seminaries and made lots of enemies.

Related item: A history of the masons.

a lot of very right wing catholic schismatics point out masonic plots, which seem ridiculous to those who only know American masons, but there is a reason for their paranoia.

And PJO'Rourke, ( a humor writer) when he visited Haiti saw a voodoo ceremony, and said he was familiar with some of the ceremony because his father was a mason.

If even fake ceremonies can induce devils, maybe one should worry.
And when student want black masses at harvard, and when actors ask the audience to shout "Hail Satan" as Jack Black did to an awards show a couple years ago, one does wonder if something is being evoked

The fight against Christians

Some of these I posted on my main blog because the internet connection goes off and on with the rolling brownouts. So here is what I posted:


Was Mgt Sanger a eugenist or just hated poor people? More eugenics history via Mrs. Gay Caswell. As a metis she is well aware of the eugenics influence in Canada against the First Nations...and if you think she is exaggerating, I could tell you similar stories from my time working "on the res" in the USA...

I just finished a book about Lindburgh and his friend Nobel prize winner Dr. Carrel, both of whom suported eugenics and the idea that the superior should run the world: it wasn't just the Nazis pushing this back then (and when the English talked about inferior races, they meant the Irish, of course). Ironically, what ultimately changed :Lindburg's mind about the beautiful German utopia was the horror of visiting the German rocket site after the war and seeing how the Nazis worked thousands of workers to death to build it..and later, he changed his mind about non Caucasions after making friends with a Masai leader. So then he went bonkers about environmentalism, but that's another story.

-------------------------------------------

Pope Francis just excommunicated a liberal who for years has been pushing heresy for years...the anchoress updates and say it was actually the local bishop, but someone upstairs put a bee in his bonnet to get him to act like a pastor not a wimp.

What's next? telling Georgetown to take the "catholic" off their logo?

The speech by Princeton's Professor George doesn't give one much hope for the future of Catholicism. YOUTUBE LINK

The days of socially acceptable Christianity are over, the days of comfortable Catholicism are past… Powerful forces and currents in our society press us to be ashamed of the Gospel—ashamed of the good, ashamed of our faith’s teachings on the sanctity of human life in all stages and conditions, ashamed of our faith’s teachings on marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife. These forces insist that the Church’s teachings are out of date, retrograde, insensitive, uncompassionate, illiberal, bigoted, even hateful. —National Catholic Prayer Breakfast, May 15th, 2014

and the US State department (and the UN and some EU countries are pushing a similar agenda on small poor countries, under the threat of losing foreign aide)...

This has huge implications, both for US politics and for international affairs, but of course don't expect the NYTimes to cover it...

-----------------------------------------

made up or true? fox, via Gateway pundit  says that the 911 museum mounted the steel cross upside down...

and looks like they took the "shroud" off too.

 the cross, which gave many of the (mainly Catholic) firefighters and construction workers working on the rescue comfort...was opposed by atheists. SNOPES report here. 

hashtag: Abortion

Turtlebay notes that the "hashtag bring back the girls" isn't really aoout Bokoharum, but will be used to pushe through the "violence against women" UN paper through the US congress: which of course includes stuff and funding for abortion.

Which is why Hillary's state department refused to call the group a terror group, and why the many other atrocities by this group including the killing of Christians in churches, the killing of dozens of Muslim boys at a boarding school and the wipe out of entire villages, has been pretty well ignored by the US MSM.

Who is pushing abortion?

Yes, it's a far right news source, but apparently James Dobson lit into Obama for his pro abortion push.

Wonder if it got into the other papers? His group has been called a hate group after a series on the homosexual agenda, and he was blamed for the death of Matthew Shepherd, even though anyone familiar with the gay lifestyle knew Matthew was into the "rough trade" and had been beaten up before (The rough trade is seeking sex with abusive lower class men: The film/book "looking for Mr Goodbar" was about a woman who did this). And more recently someone actually checked out the evidence and found he was into selling meth, and the punishment was for a drug deal gone wrong.

But never mind.

The real question is why the US bishops are so silent: For fear of being called a Republican I guess. And of course, now the press will criticize them because Pope Francis comments not to stress abortion over other sins: never mind that the Pope has said more against abortion (but the press ignored it) and never mind that as a third world pope, he knows political corruption is the problem: Often his remarks about crony capitalism and corruption in the third world are twisted out of context by the press to diss republicans, ironically despite the massive links between the Obama administration and big banking, i.e. the crony capitalism in Washington.

Chano figures a persecution will come soon, but he gets as paranoid as I do. And, as I remind Ruby, we will be eaten up by China if that happens.

Back to abortion: old Cardinal Arinze (an African) pointed out that even first graders know abortion is murder, and if you support murder you shouldn't receive communion. Heh. He used to have a program teaching catechism on EWTN.

As for EWTN: They now have a news program, but I suspect if they cross the line they too will be attacked by the powers that be. And if mother Angelica was there, she'd be out there attacking Obama by name too. She was one of the few Catholics who named Cardinal Mahoney for pushing heresy, at a time when he was the darling of the msm for being liberal...(and the MSM covered up the pedophilia, which was pretty well known).

Another aside: I was browing videos (I am a big fan of Coast to Coast, not because they don't have nonsense, but because they openly discuss things like the economic links, the NWO, and science that is ignored, such as the massive radiation break at Fukushima: I wasn't aware of it and thought c2c was being paranoid until I watched a program on the Japanese NKH station about how bad it was).

Well, while browsing I came across a bunch of videos from Davos last year, several of which discussed if religion was out of date with the NWO. (they didn't put it that way, of course) and guess who was there? Sister Keenan (sp?) from the Catholic health association...the group that backed Obamacare, has since opposed the bishop's opposition to abortion payed by that law.

I downloaded but haven't listened to the video (there were several long discussions) but here in a news release on the story.

Note that some reject religion, the story busily points out the decline of religion, while Sister carol and other "religious" speakers defend religion mainly as a source for warm fuzzy feelings.

The idea that religion, common law, and customs was the way that societies codify what works pragmatically for a good society is not discussed of course. The Davos forum is about a bright new utopia world of the progressives, not about if their utopia might now work pragmatically...