GABRIEL'S CLARION (may4gab.htm)
WEDNESDAY
May 4, 2005
vol 16, no. 124




What's My Line?

Part Three of
CATHOLIC IDENTITY CRISIS IN THE USA

    Blindly the clueless seek out answers that are just as clueless unless they have eyes to see and ears to hear what's really going on. In that case their true intent will shine through or you'll see more of the flim-flam that will twist and turn truths for in truth they really don't want you to know the truth but continue following the company line.

      "So, you see, take a situation where liberals and the media would normally jump to the rescue, switch in a Catholic agenda, and suddenly these same liberals and media will be nowhere to be found or will be on the opposite side. We should not be angry with these imbeciles. We should instead just feel sorry for them as they wallow in their ignorance, their hypocrisy, and their arrogance. May God Almighty have more mercy on their souls than they have on their opponents!"

    I can still recall seeing a show called What's My Line? as a child wherein a panel of celebrities would don blindfolds and specifically New York aristocrat celebrities Bennett Cerf, Arlene Francis, Dorothy Kilgallen would ask a mystery person along with host John Daly some questions trying to determine what he or she did for a living or who they were. The interplay of questions and answers was amusing to say the least.

    Today, too many treat Catholicism as a game show or as a game they can interact with by providing their own answers. This begins innocently enough but soon blows into a true storm of controversy, confusion and eventual heresy.

    I mentioned that they might start innocently enough. As an example, many kids today like to buy books which have sentences with blank slots in the place of nouns, verbs, and the like. The child fills in the words randomly ahead of time without looking at the context in which those words will be used. What results is a silly, sometimes humorous set of statements.

    What both of these situations have in common is the notion that what at first appears one way can rapidly turn with a mere switch of a word, a context, or of participants. If I told you that three women were riding wild bulls, you might say that these women were courageous and tough, but if I then told you that all three were pregnant, you might just be shocked or, if you have become cynical enough, ascribe this activity to a new kind of feminist abortion technique! Why don't we play this kind of game here?

    I am sure you will be interested in what you find.

Situation 1…Technology and Choice

    Suppose that a pregnant young woman wants to use technology to help her make choices concerning her unborn child. She firmly believes that her right to privacy and her moral maturity unquestionably enable and entitle her to use this technology and make these decisions. However, various authorities seek to impose their political and personal agenda on her and prevent her from this right to choose. In fact, they are actually trying to make it illegal for her to make this choice. What do you think that liberals would say about this situation?

Situation 2…Separation of Church and State

    Suppose that several conservative members of Congress joined some Roman Catholic leaders in holding a Catholic service complete with three Catholic prayers, including The Rosary. Further suppose that the members actively participated in this service, adding remarks at the end of the event. Finally suppose that the service was held in one of the main rooms of Congress. What do you think that liberals would say about this situation?

Situation 3…Getting Involved

    Suppose that The National Organization of Women or a national homosexual group was choosing its next president and the Vatican argued that it should be given a role in that choice. Various Bishops and Cardinals then wrote lengthy articles describing who that next president should be and what that person should do. In fact, a number of men demand that they should be considered for leadership posts in NOW, be given a voice and vote in choosing the next leader, and even have a chance to be elected president of that group. In addition, some non-sodomites further demand that they too should be given key posts in the sodomite group and have a chance to choose the head of that group as well. What do you think that the feminists and sodomites would say to these Catholics and men?

Situation 4…Collateral Damage

    Suppose that terrorists were killing 4,000 Americans per day on the streets of this country. Suppose that Pro-life forces were killing 4,000 abortionists per day. Suppose that religious groups were killing 4,000 feminists per day or 4,000 sodomites per day. Further suppose that the government passed a law making this murder legal. What would the media and liberals say about this?

Situation 5…Prior Commitment

    Suppose that Martin Luther King had lived to the present time and recently died. Further suppose that just before King's death a Cardinal or conservative leader had ripped up his photo on television calling King "the real enemy". Also suppose that once King died a religious or conservative leader called him "irrelevant". Finally suppose that a memorial service was held a few days after King's death and no Roman Catholic or conservative leader attended or sent a representative, all expressing that they had "prior commitments". Daughter's birthday parties, etc, to attend. Suppose that one such leader said he never received an invitation, but added "I would probably be more apt to attend when a white leader dies". What would the liberals and media think about this situation?

Situation 6…Permit for Murder

    Finally suppose that a helpless, defenseless young woman was being neglected and abused by her husband. Suppose that her husband had physically and psychologically abused her trying to force her to have a child or stop her career or both. Suppose her husband beat her into unconsciousness and, against the protests of her family, her husband did not allow her doctor to give her treatments that could save her life, allowing her to die. Suppose that husband then set her body on fire with the permission of his local authorities. What would liberals and the media have to say about a man killing his wife because she wanted to have an abortion or an education or a career?

Just a Reminder

    I will not spend too many words or time insulting your intelligence by reminding you that, in all of the cases above, liberals and the media would go ballistic one way or the other. In situation 1 they would jump to defend that young woman if she wanted an abortion. In situation 2 they would wail against this event as an unconstitutional mixing of religion and politics. In situation 3 they would ignore or mock what they saw as unwanted intrusion by outsiders who did not agree with their group. In situation 4 they would go wild in protest demanding that this wholesale murder be stopped at any cost. In situation 5 they would demand apologies, reparations, and hold the offending persons responsible for such an insult to the African-American community. No doubt the careers of these offending people would be ruined. Can you say Jimmy the Greek Snyder, Al Campanis or Rush Limbaugh? In situation 6 they would demand that this process be stopped before the death of the woman and, once the woman died, would demand that the husband and all judicial and political leaders involved be held responsible as well. None of these predictions uses much stretch of the imagination or seems unrealistic or extreme given the political, social, and cultural nature of our society.

Time to Switch

    As it turns out, each of these situations has happened, but with a slight variation in the details. In absolutely none of the actual situations, however, did liberals or the media go wild in defense or in protest. You can figure out why. Here are the real facts for each case.

    Situation 1... The technology is 4D-ultrasounds to see unborn babies and the choice is to bond with them. Liberals are trying to make this illegal and the media is mostly ignoring the whole thing.

    Situation 2... The whole thing happened last November 12 as members of Congress joined Moslem leaders in holding a Moslem prayer service and event in the House Judiciary Committee Hearing Room. Still waiting for a protest from separation of church and state types.

    Situation 3... Everybody from Frances Kissling to Mark Morford to Richard Cohen to Katie Couric to every member of the mainstream media felt that they had the right to help decide who the next Pope should be and what that Pope should and should not do. Liberals have no problem sticking their noses in anything they do not agree with or which counters their sinful agenda but please do not intrude in their affairs.

    Situation 4... Only one word is necessary: ABORTION!

    Situation 5... No local or country elected official in San Francisco attended a memorial service for John Paul II despite the attendance of over 3,000 people from all backgrounds and faiths to the event. Mayor Gavin Newson and Supervisors Michaela Alioto-Pier and Sean Elsbernd, all claiming to be Catholics, did not attend due to other commitments including, for Alioto-Pier, her daughter's birthday party. Homosexual supervisor Tom Ammiano responded to questions of his snub by saying he received his invitation too late and adding "I would probably be more apt to attend when they have the first gay marriage at St. Mary's." As for the "irrelevant" comment, that belongs to liberal feminist journalist ( redundant?) Anna Quindlen who just called JPII or any Pope "irrelevant" to American Catholics.

    Situation 6... Only two words necessary: Terri Schiavo. By the way, where were the women's groups and such hypocrite dissident Catholic groups as The Association of American Nuns to Terri's rescue? I guess these feminists only defend women who agree with their agenda!

    Conclusion

        So, you see, take a situation where liberals and the media would normally jump to the rescue, switch in a Catholic agenda, and suddenly these same liberals and media will be nowhere to be found or will be on the opposite side. We should not be angry with these imbeciles. We should instead just feel sorry for them as they wallow in their ignorance, their hypocrisy, and their arrogance. May God Almighty have more mercy on their souls than they have on their opponents!

    Gabriel Garnica

      NEXT: PART FOUR: Situation 1: Who Still Wants To Be In The Dark Ages?


    Editor's Note: Heaven is once again under attack by those who would seek to ignore and overthrow God's majesty and authority. Gabriel Garnica, educator and attorney, submits regular insights and commentaries to remind and help guide readers toward a deeper and more assertive faith. Touching on topics and issues ranging from personal faith, doctrine, education, scripture, the media, family life, morality, and values, Gabriel's notes are music to traditional ears but unpleasant tones to those who have bought into the misguided notions so prevalent and spreading in today's Catholic world.


    Gabriel's Clarion
    May 4, 2005
    Volume 16, no. 124