Just do it: Homily for February 14, 2018, Ash Wednesday

Deacon Greg Kandra posted this a couple of years ago on his blog. I repost the link here for your edification. Enjoy.

In 1971, an art student at Portland State University named Carolyn Davidson got a job doing some freelance design work for a local sporting goods company. They were looking for a company logo, an emblem. Carolyn Davidson came up with something in just a few hours. Everyone liked what she did and thanked her. For a day’s work, she was paid $35.

Little did anyone realize what Carolyn Davidson had created. That design went on to generate billions—and made history.

Click on the link below for the rest. You won’t be sorry. 

Source: Just do it: Homily for February 14, 2018, Ash Wednesday

Alarming Christian persecution in Europe – 3000 attacks in 2019. | Times of Sweden | Your home for #RealNews

Christian persecution has increased worldwide in recent years. Now a new report by the Gatestone Institute shows that the number of anti-Christian attacks in Europe have reached alarming, record high levels in 2019. Anti-Christian hate crimes which has previously been happening mostly only in Middle Eastern and Communist countries, have now started to increase more …

Source: Alarming Christian persecution in Europe – 3000 attacks in 2019. | Times of Sweden | Your home for #RealNews

You’re offended, I’m offended, all God’s children are offended!

Second in a series on the assault on Free Speech.

Let’s start with a premise. The US Constitution does not guarantee the right to anyone to not be offended. In fact, if anything it ensures our freedom to offend one another in the free exercise of speech and religion. There are exceptions, of course, and some of them are quite legitimate while others that have wormed their way into our laws are clearly inspired by a desire to control public discourse and this is always dangerous.

For those who may not have ever bothered to read it, this is what the First Amendment actually says:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

The language is simple and unambiguous, but God bless the lawyers, we have mountains of case law parsing and speculating just what it is supposed to mean. In doing so they have twisted and turned and bent and turned inside out this basic freedom until it has become a mere shadow of what it was intended to be.

There are many things that offend me, just as I am sure there just as many if not more that offend you. And that’s okay because nowhere in the First Amendment does it soften the idea by saying “unless it hurts someone’s feelings or makes them feel bad or is unpopular or not approved by self appointed elitist guardians of the public domain.”

Some of this hypersensitivity on the part of the perpetually offended is silly and would be laughable if it were not so dangerous to the liberties we cherish. For example I have never understood why atheists get worked up over religious displays such as a cross, Star of David, Menorah or Nativity scene in public. If atheists don’t believe in God then why are they so traumatized by references to what they proclaim to be a fairy tale?

Another place that has become a hotbed of hyperventilation is the college campus. The mere announcement that a conservative speaker has been engaged to give a talk is enough to touch off the wailing, whining and whimpering along with threats, intimidation, and all too often, violence. If there is anywhere that diversity of opinion and vigorous debate should have a home it should surely be the very places that aspire to higher learning. When only one point of view is tolerated that is not learning it is indoctrination.

Major U.S. city bans Christian agencies from helping kids – WND

(Image courtesy Pixabay)

The briefs are flooding in at the U.S. Supreme Court in a case in which the justices are being asked to reverse a Philadelphia policy that critics say is causing “grave harm” to children. The policy bars faith-based foster-care agencies from helping needy children, points out a brief from 44 members of Congress asking the court to review a lawsuit against the city brought by Catholic Social Services.

“Religiously motivated providers and parents have played a critical role in filling this need for centuries from coast to coast, and to drive them out ignores the critical need and the grave harm to children that would be caused by their loss,” the lawmakers told the court.
In another brief, officials from 10 states argued that working “with a diverse coalition of child-placing agencies provides better services to children in foster care and the potential parents eager to care for them.”
As WND reported, the city ordered Catholic Social Services to change its religious doctrine if it wanted to continue placing foster children as it had for a century.
The city’s “nondiscrimination” policy requires any partner agency to place children with same-sex couples.

Can someone tell me how a policy that to force a religious organization to change its core beliefs to bring it into line with secularists can even jokingly be referred to as “non-discrimination?” 

Source: Major U.S. city bans Christian agencies from helping kids – WND