Blog Archives

Canada: Feminist Activist “Judges” For Suicide

Take away the stretched arm, and you have the typical liberal judge.

As a man coming from a so-called civil law country (a legal system common to most countries in Continental Europe, in which judicial power is much more restrained than in Anglo-Saxon, common law systems) I never cease to be amazed at the power elected democracies leave in the hands of people with either none or only indirect democratic representation. The result of the system is that small cliques of “progressives” (which very often means “perverts, Nazis,  and their friends”) judges can demolish one piece at a time the Christian edifice of a country, possibly for their own personal advantage (see the faggot judge of California’s “Proposition 8”).

A telling example is the recent Canadian decision about assisted suicide, with a woman behind the decision (I thought they were against the “judging”; but it must only apply when they don’t like the judgement) of striking down the law which declares assisted  suicide “unconstitutional”. I hope this will have further episodes.

Still, it turns out the woman is, as you would expect, an old abortionist,and it is certainly not surprising she should now take position against the protection of life (and democratic representation be stuffed). She who is able to approve the killing of unborn children will certainly not have any problem in killing old people.

We cannot know whether the lady is planning to take advantage of her decision on her own skin (these judges hate to do illegal things, I am told) and as a Catholic I can certainly not suggest that she do so. On the contrary, as a Catholic I have the unsavoury but, in the end, salutary duty to pray for the old female ungulate.

In the end, if she repents there will be, during the appropriate punishment in purgatory, sufficient time to regret the decision.

If she doesn’t, the time will be much longer.

Mundabor

.

The Decline Of The American Empire

Now with mascara and foundation

There can be no doubt that the military superiority of the West (and in particular, of the Unites States) is overwhelming and few in Europe – where the press spreads so many lies that one is not even angry anymore – know that the Iraq campaign has been made without moving more than the little finger of the immense US-american war potential.

One is reminded of the Roman Empire and stands in awe in front of such supremacy.

Still, one is reminded of the Roman Empire also for another aspect: that its end could come because of internal weakness and degeneration rather than because of the objective strenght of its adversaries.

Today, a beautiful example of how this country (which many in Europe admire and continue to consider the light of the West) works against itself comes from a new example of judicial activism, a decision of a federal judge in California about the “don’t ask, don’t tell” politics used by the Army. I read here that the judge has decided, against the opinion of the army, that not to allow a soldier to discuss his sexuality is a discrimination, because heterosexual soldiers can discuss it.

To me this has the same logic as to say that as normal people can talk about their love for dogs, people with tendency to bestiality should be allowed to talk about their, ahem, love for dogs. It just doesn’t make sense in any other logic than in the logic of the pervert for whom perversion is normality, and its condemnation “oppression”.

This still extremely powerful country works on its self-destruction. It allows the corrosion of everything which has made it big, piece by piece; from the symbolic advance of Islam to the toleration of so-called same-sex marriages to the ruthless secular mentality of his abortionist “maybe even Christian but no one is so sure anymore”-President to the systematic attack to its Christian values.

It will be interesting, for us European, to see if and how the Army reacts to this in the courts, in Congress and Senate, and by taking influence on the Government. I do not know American politics so well, but I’d be extremely surprised if the Military didn’t dispose of a rather powerful lobby in Washington. I might be wrong, of course.

Still, one thing must be said clearly: it was wrong to allow homosexuals in the first place. This silent toleration was not good from day one, and it is in a sense not bad that its intrinsic absurdity is now exposed.

It is time to wake up to reality, start switching the brains on and reclaim the supremacy of reason and common sense.

Rome was not built on homos.

Mundabor

%d bloggers like this: