What material impact?
While this reflection isn't specifically on the Liturgy, I'm sure that it will still be of some interest.
One of the platforms that the major political parties will pounce upon towards the upcoming state elections in November will be the decriminalisation of abortion. It is currently illegal in Victoria, but there is a legal dispensation for the usual pathetic reasons.
It would be preferable, say many poor souls, that the law be changed to say that: "No abortion be criminal when performed by a legally qualified medical practitioner at the request of the woman concerned."
No God, no sin. No law, no guilt. No baby, no baby. Because, you know, abortion is one of those fashionable surgeries, like liposuction, a face lift, or something... I don't want to be fat - I don't have to be. Me, wrinkles? No way, not for me. I don't want to be a mother. So I won't be. Thanks be to... um, me.
Now, back to the issue at hand. Please read the following comments from Mr Baillieu, newly elected leader of the often touted conservative Opposition:
"The criminal sanction is outdated, (but) I don't think decriminalisation is something we'd be pressing for desperately," Mr Baillieu told The Age. "I don't think it's going to make much difference to the world. But in the event that it was there, I'd probably take the same view as Robert [former leader, supported decriminalisation].
"Being premier is about the principle issues and advancing the principle causes. That issue (abortion) is an emotional cause, but it's not going to materially change this state. If you are dealing with emotional, divisive issues which don't have a material impact on the state, then I think you really need to have very substantial support to embark on an exercise like that."
I wonder if you repeat it long enough that after a while it will begin to make more sense?
Killing babies has no material impact on the state. Killing babies has no material impact on the state. Killing babies has no material impact on the state. Killing babies has no material impact on the state. Killing babies has no material impact on the state. Killing babies has no material impact on the state. Killing babies has no material impact on the state.
No. On second reading? No.
Killing babies? Yes, Mr Baillieu. Yes, to you too, Mr Bracks, you Premier, you Maronite Catholic, you. That is what abortion is.
But P, it's the ultimate CHILDCARE, baby.
It would be preferable, say many poor souls, that the law be changed to say that: "No abortion be criminal when performed by a legally qualified medical practitioner at the request of the woman concerned."
No God, no sin. No law, no guilt. No baby, no baby. Because, you know, abortion is one of those fashionable surgeries, like liposuction, a face lift, or something... I don't want to be fat - I don't have to be. Me, wrinkles? No way, not for me. I don't want to be a mother. So I won't be. Thanks be to... um, me.
Now, back to the issue at hand. Please read the following comments from Mr Baillieu, newly elected leader of the often touted conservative Opposition:
"The criminal sanction is outdated, (but) I don't think decriminalisation is something we'd be pressing for desperately," Mr Baillieu told The Age. "I don't think it's going to make much difference to the world. But in the event that it was there, I'd probably take the same view as Robert [former leader, supported decriminalisation].
"Being premier is about the principle issues and advancing the principle causes. That issue (abortion) is an emotional cause, but it's not going to materially change this state. If you are dealing with emotional, divisive issues which don't have a material impact on the state, then I think you really need to have very substantial support to embark on an exercise like that."
I wonder if you repeat it long enough that after a while it will begin to make more sense?
Killing babies has no material impact on the state. Killing babies has no material impact on the state. Killing babies has no material impact on the state. Killing babies has no material impact on the state. Killing babies has no material impact on the state. Killing babies has no material impact on the state. Killing babies has no material impact on the state.
No. On second reading? No.
Killing babies? Yes, Mr Baillieu. Yes, to you too, Mr Bracks, you Premier, you Maronite Catholic, you. That is what abortion is.
But P, it's the ultimate CHILDCARE, baby.
- Anonymous | 1:08 AM GMT
Comments [3]
I think that the issue of abortion is a liturgical matter because it is one of the most grievous sins committed by man and for which our Lord offered himself first on the Cross, now on the altar. What is more, the Blessed Sacrament as a continuation of the Incarnation in the womb of our Lady should remind us of the countless souls which are incarnate in the wombs of women at every moment in time.
As for the ridiculous comments of Mr Baillieu on the lack of a material impact, let us hear Blessed Teresa of Calcutta, "The greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a war against the child ... By abortion the mother does not learn to love, but kills her own child to solve her problems ... and the father is told that he does not have to take any responsibilty at all for the child he has brought into the world."
Firstly, at a time when the birth rate is falling and people are forced to work longer, an increase in children would be most welcome not only to assist the aged but also to keep the country running.
Secondly, what is the main reasons for abortion? Is it not because mothers (and fathers) often find themselves in a situation where they cannot provide for the child's welfare? That certainly has to do with the material.
Thirdly, if you want the most obvious example of material impact consider the number of single women who are bringing up a child without the support of its father. How many of them are having to rely on social benefits because the fathers have shirked their responsibilities? How many of them will be able to provide a proper male role model for their children and avoid them becoming juvenile delinquents?
So I say to those two bananas in pin stripes, Baillieu and Bracks, if you really cared about the state of Victoria, you would not treat abortion as a mere matter of emotion and opinion but as a matter of life and death (for the unborn and the state).
In reference to "fashionable surgeries" I have read in a moral theology text that all those who have them for reasons of vanity are committig mutilation, which is a mortal sin.
Perhaps they should take a leaf from St Brigid who preferred not to be beautiful in order to be holy.
Juda my dear, we both know that there is no reason for a child to be killed. I'm sure the Premier believes that it is fine to wipe out babies, because a mother of a dead child doesn't get a child support payment.
Most beautiful liturgical comments - I will add them as a little post. Do post things to the Juventutem blog! :)
Ah, St Brigid - with a television on her altar.
Post a Comment
<< Home