Author Topic: Traditional Catholic Teaching on Amy Barrett Being a Supreme Court Justice  (Read 5356 times)

Offline Geremia

  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 3530
  • Thanked: 974 times
    • St. Isidore e-book library
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Traditional Catholic Teaching on Amy Barrett Being a Supreme Court Justice
« Reply #255 on: October 17, 2020, 08:37:34 PM »
If "power" is judged by masculine standards, then it is feminism.
I don't understand what you mean.

Most feminists don't belittle or exclude men.
By "feminist", I mean someone who hates men, eschews her femininity, yet wants to be just like men.

Any mother who unnecessarily has a job outside the home is infected with feminism.
« Last Edit: October 17, 2020, 10:14:08 PM by Geremia »

Offline james03

  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 9092
  • Thanked: 3527 times
  • The Brutal Clarity of a Winter Morning
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Traditional Catholic Teaching on Amy Barrett Being a Supreme Court Justice
« Reply #256 on: October 18, 2020, 07:37:10 PM »
Distinguish for me the difference between feminism and misandry?  Clarity of terms is absolutely necessary.

Feminism:  a Frankfurt School attack targeting women.  Convincing women that standards for "success" are only defined by masculine achievements.  For example, to a feminist having your man brag about your cooking is not a sign of success, because that is a feminine standard.  Raising healthy, well developed children is not success.  Keeping up with your feminine beauty is not success.  At the same time, being a "kick-ass" woman is not failure, but success.  Getting an article written about you: "How Amy Balances Family and Career while Succeeding in a Traditionally Male Dominated Field" is considered the pinnacle of success.  (As an aside, I know of two "high powered" women who had those articles written about them who were clueless about their profession.).

Misandry:  Hating men.  A milder form is female supremacy.

Misandry and Feminism are not synonymous, though there are many cases where they overlap.  Feminism also usually leads to misandry.  When a woman "fails" in her "career", she will blame the "patriarchy" and thus starts the road that ends in misandry.   Also, since Feminism has as its ONLY goal the destruction of the Christian West, it has the self-contradictory goal of turning women into mere sex objects.  After a feminist gets banged and kicked to the curb by 100 men, she oftentimes becomes a misandrist.

All feminists are not misandrists.  Mrs. Barrett, a feminist, doesn't appear to be a misandrist.  The flip side might be true with few exceptions.  All misandrists are feminists.  For an exception consider a feminine lesbian partner who grew up being raped by her step-dad.  She lives with a bull dyke, but herself is very feminine.  She hates men, but is not living a feminist life.
« Last Edit: October 18, 2020, 07:40:51 PM by james03 »
"But he that doth not believe, is already judged: because he believeth not in the name of the only begotten Son of God (Jn 3:18)."

"All sorrow leads to the foot of the Cross.  Weep for your sins."

"Although He should kill me, I will trust in Him"

Offline Greg

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Major
  • ****
  • Posts: 13717
  • Thanked: 8163 times
Re: Traditional Catholic Teaching on Amy Barrett Being a Supreme Court Justice
« Reply #257 on: October 21, 2020, 11:51:18 AM »

Amy Coney Barrett will be confirmed on Monday 26th of October.  100 years after Abortion was legalised in the Soviet Union.

On November 20, 1920, the nascent Soviet government released what it termed a simple “public health announcement.” The statement, a missive intended as law, proclaimed a new, fully-funded program for women: legalized abortions, available free of charge at state-run hospitals. By keeping abortions high and the birth rate low, Soviet leaders and their sycophants hoped to keep more women in the labor force, economically viable and controlled by the state.
The legalization of abortion in the Soviet Union emerged as but one important facet of a systematic extermination program of a theologically-grounded social morality. Only months after the Bolshevik revolution in October 1917, the new regime issued a series of marriage laws which undermined the importance of wedlock and approved an extremely permissive “no-fault” divorce clause. Other leading authorities had earlier endorsed state-sanctioned promiscuity—labeled “free love”—as a viable alternative to marriage. Regarding the state’s disdain for wedlock, “The people’s commissar of justice . . . stated that the main purpose of the legislation was to undermine religion-sanctified marriage,” blessed by the church (see Mervyn Matthews, “Soviet Social Policies,” in The Soviet Union and Eastern Europe). By subverting family life, the Soviets self-consciously attempted to defy what even they seemingly knew: that marriage is a decidedly religious act, performed in the presence of God.
To its dismay, the government witnessed its agenda wildly succeed. Divorce rates skyrocketed. In Moscow, state statisticians reported a rate of three abortions to every one live birth, a shocking population reduction which in 1936 led Stalin to seek desperately for a way to limit the damage. Unaware of the grim realities produced by the legalization of abortion, social liberals in America lauded what they deemed the progressive nature of Soviet thinking on the issue. As journalist Marvin Olasky writes, “even . . . the sedate American Journal of Public Health in 1931,” argued on the basis of Soviet practice that legalized abortion was “the only means for women’s emancipation” in modern times.
Despite modernist fantasies, abortion did not emancipate Soviet women. It placed them in a brutal bondage, a slavery that remains to the present hour. Recently, the Russian Health Ministry revealed an abortion to live birth rate of 1.7:1 in Russia, a number five times higher than in the United States. Epidemic abortions among these young women have produced an unintended consequence: widespread infertility. As a result, researchers estimate a twenty-five percent population decline in Russia during the next half-century, a deterioration which makes one wonder whether such numerical decline will inevitably lead to cultural demise.
Other countries would do well to learn from the tragic legacy of the long Soviet war against the family. The way a nation regards marriage and the protection of its unborn children presages the long-term health of its society. Disregard toward such defining cultural institutions is nothing less than anger directed toward God, who created them. But such defiance is never taken lightly, for although even “the wrath of men praises [God] . . . He is to be feared by the kings of the earth” (Psalm 76:10, 12 ESV).
The BibleMesh Team
The following users thanked this post: Michael Wilson

Offline Heinrich

  • Steig mal auf den Berg hinauf
  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 8386
  • Thanked: 3389 times
  • Gott, wende Dich zu uns und gib uns neues Leben
  • Religion: römisch-katholisch
Re: Traditional Catholic Teaching on Amy Barrett Being a Supreme Court Justice
« Reply #258 on: October 21, 2020, 05:54:50 PM »
Saw on the Twitter that that's Killary's Birthday.
Schaff Recht mir Gott und führe meine Sache gegen ein unheiliges Volk . . .   .                          
Lex Orandi, lex credendi, lex vivendi.
"Die Welt sucht nach Ehre, Ansehen, Reichtum, Vergnügen; die Heiligen aber suchen Demütigung, Verachtung, Armut, Abtötung und Buße." --Ausschnitt von der Geschichte des Lebens St. Bennos.