No Changes If The State Disapproves?

I came across this information this morning and cannot believe that a person’s freedom of choice can be against the law if the choice doesn’t come under what the State wants rather than the individual.

People should have choices and even if one doesn’t always approve of another person’s choices, it should be their choice, right? Not according to a new bill being considered seriously in the State of California. The bill will make it unlawful for a person who is gay to decide to seek counseling because they might want to change their sexual identity. The law would also take away the right to separation of church and state as even a priest, rabbi, or minister would not be allowed to do counseling to that effect.

https://activistmommy.com/californias-shocking-must-stay-gay-bill-serious-violation-liberty/

I’ve been coming across this information for the last week or so and am wondering if NOW, our priests and bishops will stand up and speak against this bill as it does affect the way they can deal with parishioners in conflict legally.

In California, we tend to avoid musing over ‘what next’ as the future ‘what next’ is always worse than the last one. Don’t we have enough serious problems in California to keep our government busy that they seem to feel they have to meddle in everyone’s personal life? It’s truly not constitutional but that hasn’t really stopped many politicians up to now.

And the rest of the country shouldn’t get too complacent because the liberal factions are constantly trying to make the changes they want not the the changes that truly benefit the citizens.

Protecting Freedom

To all the teens that walked out of school in favor of taking down the Second Amendment  and taking away everyone’ guns. . . These are the shoes of Jews that were forced to give up their firearms to Hitler. They were marched into gas chambers, murdered and buried in mass graves . Today’s world is based on learned lessons but if you don’t study even the basics of history, you will repeat history and things won’t turn out the way you view your idea of a perfect world. Pick up a history book and you’ll realize what happens when you give up freedoms and why we have them.

The Truth Should Set You Free . . .

I AM AN AFRICAN-AMERICAN. I HATE THE INSTITUTION OF SLAVERY AS MUCH AS BISHOP DUKES DOES. BUT I HAVE NOTICED SOMETHING HE SEEMS TO HAVE MISSED. I AM NOT A SLAVE! AND NEITHER IS HE.

SLAVERY WAS AN AWFUL HISTORICAL INJUSTICE, AND IT HELPED SET IN MOTION MANY OF THE PROBLEMS THE BLACK COMMUNITY FACES TODAY. BUT IT IS NOT THE PROBLEM WE NEED TO SOLVE TODAY. THOSE PROBLEMS ARE POVERTY, ILLITERACY, DRUGS, CRIME AND VIOLENCE.

TEARING DOWN STATUES DOESN’T SOLVE ANY OF THOSE PROBLEMS, AND SOLVING THOSE PROBLEMS IS WHAT WE NEED TO BE FOCUSED ON.

IT MIGHT CREATE A PROBLEM, THOUGH. TEARING DOWN STATUES THAT REPRESENT HISTORY IS LIKE PRETENDING HISTORY DIDN’T HAPPEN. IT DID. AND NOT EVERYTHING THAT RESULTS FROM HISTORY IS SOMETHING YOU WILL LIKE. WE NEED TO REMEMBER ALL OF IT, EVEN (AND PERHAPS ESPECIALLY) THE PARTS THAT BOTHER US BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT WE LEARN FROM.

TELL YOU WHAT: WHY DON’T YOU ERASE FROM HISTORY EVERY REFERENCE TO A PERSON WHO HAD A SERIOUS CHARACTER FLAW?

OR WE COULD JUST TELL THE WHOLE STORY. YES, THESE MEN HAD AN AMAZING VISION AND USED IT TO CREATE THE GREATEST NATION THE WORLD HAS EVER SEEN. YES, THEY GAVE US A POLITICAL SYSTEM THAT HAS PROTECTED FREEDOM AND PROSPERITY LIKE NOTHING WE’VE EVER SEEN.

ALSO, THEY WERE PARTICIPANTS IN AN INSTITUTION THAT WAS EVIL, IF VERY COMMON FOR WEALTHY MEN OF THEIR DAY. THEY MIGHT HAVE BEEN BETTER MEN IF THEY HAD RID THE WORLD OF THAT INSTITUTION, AND THEY DID NOT DO THAT. BUT THEY DID CREATE THE POLITICAL SYSTEM THROUGH WHICH IT WOULD BE ELIMINATED LESS THAN A CENTURY LATER. THAT IS NOT NOTHING.

FLAWED MEN AND WOMEN HAVE GIVEN US QUITE A WORLD, AND WE SHOULD KNOW AS MUCH ABOUT IT AS WE CAN. MAYBE THE LESSONS THEY TEACH CAN EVEN HELP US SOLVE THE PROBLEMS WE FACE TODAY.

OR WE CAN WASTE OUR TIME TEARING DOWN STATUES, WHICH SOLVES NOTHING, NOR DOES IT MAKE HISTORY GO AWAY. IT JUST MAKES US IGNORANT OF IT.”

Charlie Gard – Not An Isolated Case

The reason we can’t and shouldn’t put aside the Charlie Gard case is that it isn’t an isolated event. If we put it aside and ‘go on with our lives’, it will only empower the hospitals and courts to make more and more decisions for our lives and not usually for the betterment of our lives.

http://www.crisismagazine.com/2017/charlie-gard-case-portends-frightening-future

The Untimely Death of Charlie Gard

A baby died in England this week. This baby’s death shouldn’t go unsung because a tiny infant showed the world what becomes of the humans of the world when the ways of the world have come to a pass that full-term, living babies can be deprived of necessary treatment and not allowed a chance at life.

Although little Charlie Gard seemed in perfect health his first couple of months of life, he suddenly started failing and ended up in a hospital with a diagnosis that could be considered a definite death sentence if left untreated. Although it was a chance, at best, Charlie’s parents researched options, begged for financial help, and got in touch with an American doctor who said he would examine the baby. Seems like a ray of home in what was being touted as a no-win situation.

Even with money in hand and a place to take their baby, the United Kingdom’s courts and doctors refused to allow the parents this option. There would have not been a single charge to the hospital for taking the baby to that one chance of help but the doctors said an adamant, unexplained ‘NO!’ and the courts backed them up on their say so. The time line for saving Charlie began in January when first diagnosed. At that point in time, the treatment just might have been beneficial giving the parents a feeling of hope in doing all they could for their first child. The doctors dragged on the process and the court trials didn’t get the immediate hearings you would think the situation merited so we end up seven months later with a baby slowly deteriorating in health.

Even in the condition he was in this month, the American doctor made the trip over to examine the baby and met with the UK doctors. A doctor in Rome offered his help on this as the Pope was also anxiously watching this turn of events. Everything was rejected and the courts sided with the doctors.

It got worse even after the parents realized that time had run out on treating their baby due to the doctors’ lack of action. They allowed that their son’s little life was fast running it’s course and only asked that they could take him home to die. This was refused. From what I read, they took the baby to an undisclosed place where the doctors removed him from his life support and Charlie died.

I only wonder how much celebration was enjoyed by those grown men who fought so hard for the death of this baby. I wonder if the judges breathed a sign of relief to have this pesky situation finally put to rest being glad little Charlie was finally being put to rest.

To basically recap: The parents of a sick baby had the wherewithal to transport him to the United States for experimental treatment. There would be no further cost to the UK hospital. The doctors refused to give the baby this once chance and regulated the time the parents could spend with the baby. When the parents persisted, the courts stepped in and took away their parental rights to do the best they could for their son.

You have to ponder what was going through these people’s minds to constantly refuse to move an inch on possibly saving this innocent child. Do these doctors have children? Would they appreciate a stranger telling them they couldn’t decide what was good for their own children? Yet, the doctors involved and the courts thought nothing of depriving this little family of their God-given free will and rather than have their word contradicted and take an ego bruising, felt it was better to get rid of the evidence . . . little Charlie Gard.

I’m thinking there are a great many people in the world today shedding tears for this family and not thinking well of how the helpless are treated under the medical guidelines of the medical health care system of the United Kingdom. A doctor vows to do no harm. I didn’t see any evidence of compassion in the events of the last few months.

Over the years, so many atrocities have been committed under the guise of medical treatment, especially in what unborn get to live and who are thrown away. It seems to follow, in a way, that if you get used to dumping aborted babies into the trash that helping a live baby to their demise would just be another day’s work. AND, if you have the backing of the court, it looks like one takes a huge chance in trusting their health and eventual outcome to the powers that be who want to run our lives.

Unfortunately, this is not isolated to the UK. People might remember Terri Schiavo who was deliberately starved to death because that was her husband’s wish with the backing of doctors in spite of her having a family who wanted to save her. Another case was the teenager, Justina Pelletier, who held by the Boston Children’s Hospital based on a doctor’s view that she wasn’t being properly treated medically. She went in a healthy young lady and finally left in need of much health care and rehabilitation from her time in that hospital.

Many prayers needed, today, for Charlie Gard’s family as well as other people/children who might be in similar situations and not allowed their freedom of choice.