An Ace is Dooced: Prosecutor Fired Over Blog

Lance Salyers was an assistant prosecuting attorney at the Montgomery County, Ohio, prosecutor's office until yesterday, when he was fired for writing a blog entry critical of a justice system that tells victims, "You're not worth fighting for." Read his entry about his firing—and the entry that sparked his employer's ire—on his blog, Ragged Edges.

Something tells me that Ragged Edges is going to be where the action is for some time.

I know Lance, and the interesting thing about his case is that he is not a rabid, ultraconservative, God-blogging fanatic. He's a mild-mannered, garden-variety midwestern Protestant Christian. He never made any trouble for anyone but the rapists he put in jail. If he can suddenly suffer the loss of a job for speaking out against what he perceives as injustice, it can happen to anyone.

Simply put, some people don't like working with people who believe there is a real difference between good and evil. Those people don't like the feeling of having their behavior judged—and they feel judged by the mere presence of someone who believes there's right and wrong. To that end, like the vinedressers in Jesus' parable, they believe that by disposing of the person who represents judgment to them, they can dispose of judgment itself. In Lance's case, they tossed out a breadwinner who has a wife and a 5-month-old daughter.

It's important to realize that every stand for righteousness, however small—even a stand for the concept of righteousness—makes an important difference. This is not just a Christian concept, but a concept that runs through every major religion, as was noted by C.S. Lewis.

Blessed are you when they revile and persecute you, and say all kinds of evil against you falsely for My sake. Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you.

* * *
Part 2 of yesterday's post will appear tomorrow.

Support Our Troops

Regardless of opinions about U.S. military involvement overseas, President Bush was right in saying last night that we should express our support to the men and women who put their lives on the line to serve our country. Visit the "America Supports You" Web site to send an encouraging message to the troops.

And Asteroid 27 Does His Copyediting

Ed Jordan of Media Culpa reports that Michael Schiavo lawyer George Felos believes the universe gives him assignments.

Amanda Witt is thinking about passion.

The New York Times Promises to Respect Black 'Chicks' in the Morning

"Pioneers Are Taking Black Chick Lit Into Middle Age" exclaims the New York Times in the headline of an article that begins with this sampling of the "pioneering" authors' literary themes:

Consider Marilyn Grimes, a wildly hormonal mother of three in a stale marriage, hiding in a toilet stall and weighing her options. Watch Barbara Bentley ponder having a fling because her Pratesi sheets and Jimmy Choo shoes can't compensate for a cheating husband. And check out preppie Aisha Branch McCovney, lolling in bed for three days with her dream man, although she's engaged to the scion of an old-money family.

In other words, "black chick lit" has matured into middle age precisely because authors are creating "wildly hormonal" female characters who are so determined to have sex outside of marriage that they engage in "Desperate Housewives"-style tactics.

That's the Times' condescending view of black women in a nutshell. The women have reached equality with whites in the newspaper's eyes because their literary heroines reflect the morality of Carrie Bradshaw & Co.

I must have missed the part of Martin Luther King Jr.'s speech where he said something about having a dream of a day when all of God's children, black women and white women, would hold hands with one another's husbands, naked.

Kudos to the news editor of CaNN for his blistering editorial on the Anglican Consultative Council's decision to divest from Israel. He concludes:

We have an accountability before God, before our race, before history, before our consciences, and before the living Way, Truth, and Life. Is it not high time to grow up, and stop play-acting, to get serious about the issues confronting us in Western Christianity and the Western world, and to take on our responsibilities, come what may?

Read the whole thing.

Me and My RC

As promised, here are a few mundane details of my approaching a priest about starting RCIA. I thought about writing about why I want to become Catholic, and perhaps I will at some point. But I think the reasons are already clear to my Catholic friends and readers who have long seen that religion's sensibilities in my writings on faith. What reservations I've expressed on this blog were overcome in part through gaining an understanding of the Communion of Saints via my devotion to Maximilian Kolbe, as I wrote in April.

Last week, I approached a priest at a church near Columbia University to inquire about taking the Rite of Christian Initiation for Adults, a means by which prospective Catholics are educated about and taken into the Church. (Catholic readers, please forgive me if my terminology is inexact; I'm at the beginning of the learning curve here.)

I first inquired about RCIA in February at my favorite church, in midtown Manhattan. The parish's RCIA director never returned my message. I already had a bit of an inferiority complex about the place, so rather than try harder to insinuate myself, I decided to look elsewhere.

In April, I saw John Zmirak, an intensely creative writer friend with whom I alternately agree and disagree wildly (he invented the slogan "Arm the Unborn"), and told him of my interest in converting. He said that, given my hunger for orthodoxy and my being more knowledgeable about the faith than most non-Catholics, I would be unhappy in most RCIA programs. RCIA, he said, stood for Repelling Catholics In-Advertently.

John recommended I approach a priest he knew at the Columbia-area church, Fr. J., whom he said was very literate and "liked journalists." That sounded encouraging. Also, being a Kolbe devotee, I thought it was a good sign that Fr. J. was from Poland. Neither the common interest nor the Polish ancestry really matters in the grand scheme of things, I know, but hearing about it helped me overcome my reluctance to call a priest who was a complete stranger—something I was already shy to do, since my interest in RCIA didn't seem to matter much to the first church I tried. I finally left a message for Fr. J. early last week and he got back to me within an hour.

I met with Fr. J. for about an hour and thoroughly liked him. I could see why John had recommended I meet him. He was a vibrant personality: warm, welcoming, encouraging, interested in my story, and brimming with recommendations of articles and books to build me in the faith. He talked much of issues that Protestants (and Catholics from the spiritually drier regions) don't normally associate with Catholicism—about how our past identity has a place in our faith journey, and about the primal longing for God. On the former, he recommended Fr. Neuhaus's First Things essay "How I Became the Catholic I Was." On the latter, he quoted John 1:37-39, describing how we know we are seeking something and, though we can't fully articulate it, we recognize it when we find it: the presence of Jesus.

If this all sounds like wavy-hazy New Age theology, then I am completely mischaracterizing the conversation. What the priest said was all very orthodox, which is why it appealed to me: In the spirit of the G.K. Chesterton and C.S. Lewis books that I adore, he found orthodoxy to be dramatic and exciting.

Fr. J. recommended that, until his RCIA group begins in the fall, I should read Luigi Giussani's trilogy, with which I wasn't familiar. He also gave me a good-sized pile of reading material: Fr. Neuhaus's Death on a Friday Afternoon (which I'd already read, but was very happy to own), and two issues of a beautiful monthly prayer publication, Magnificat.

I left the meeting feeling happy and thankful, knowing more than ever that I had made the right choice.

Graham Crackers

Scene 1: Entering Flushing Meadows—Corona Park, 4:43 p.m. yesterday.

MOM, disgusted at the sight of a group of about 12 people holding rainbow-colored signs screaming "THANK GOD FOR 9/11," "GOD HATES AMERICA," "GOD HATES BILLY GRAHAM," and worse: What's that?

ME, sighing, equally disgusted: That's Rev. Phelps. He gives "Christians" a bad name.

* * *

Scene 2: Three hours later, seated in the overflow section, we watch the giant video screen as the lead singer of Jars of Clay introduces Billy Graham. Cheers. The camera shows Graham's smiling face.

Cut to Bill Clinton's smiling face.

Pan to wider shot of Bill and a gloating windup-doll Hillary.

BILLY GRAHAM, as the cheers subside: I am so happy to have my good friends the President and Mrs. Clinton here. [Scattered cheers. One indeciperable malign yell from the row behind me.] I have been friends with them for so long that I just think of them as Bill and Hillary. I have always felt that Bill should be an evangelist.

[Pause.]

BILLY GRAHAM continues: He would make a very good evangelist. He has a natural gift for it.

[Pause. Video screen shows Bill's grinning, unrepentantly adulterous mug.]

BILLY GRAHAM continues: Then, while he's doing that, Hillary could run the country. [Scattered whoops and hollers.]

* * *

Scene 3—Five seconds later

MOM, turning to me, deadpan: I'm beginning to side with Rev. Phelps.

* * *

UPDATE: Here's a news account with a closer approximation of Graham's words. My memory wasn't far off.

Mad magazine fans, rejoice! I wrote one of the cover headlines for today's paper, on its pan of "Bewitched": "Just some old blecch magic."

Bigger Than Rod

A section of a comment that Rod Dreher wrote to my post about Crisis magazine's E-Letter deserves a post of its own, as I know it will elicit some strong reactions.

Rod writes:

Frankly, I'm sick of all this Catholic yammering about what a glorious thing it is that we have the Magisterium, and we have the Sacraments, and we have Tradition -- unlike those benighted Protestants, or (with ref to the Magisterium), those schismatic Orthodox. All those things are fine, but if you don't have a living, transformative relationship with Christ, what good is all that?

I have said on Amy [Welborn]'s site that I don't know what I would do if one of my devout Evangelical friends asked if he or she should convert to Catholicism. I guess the default position is "yes," because Catholicism is the truth, and possesses the fullness of faith. But I know these Evangelicals have a very strong relationship with Christ, and find a lot of genuine spiritual growth and fulfillment in their Evangelical congregations. To leave that for Catholicism as it exists in this place and time would be to enter into a desert in which it might well be more difficult to be close to Christ. That's just a fact, and we don't evade that fact by retreating into an empty triumphalism.

Rod is speaking from the background of his own faith journey—he's a Protestant convert to Roman Catholicism—and I don't want to characterize it without knowing the facts. Perhaps he or another reader could post a link to his testimony, as I was unable to find it online. (I did find a comment he made on The Corner about the vaunted Catholic author Walker Percy which bibliophiles might find heretical—and I must admit that, having read only The Moviegoer, I am in complete agreement with him.)

Taking Rod's comments on their face, it seems that he believes evangelical converts risk trading their "very strong relationship with Christ" and "genuine spiritual growth and fulfillment" for "a desert." Therefore, "the truth" and "the fullness of faith," according to him, exists in a dry and barren place.

I can't accept that. If Rod wants to say that Protestants are more visible, more upfront, more on fire for their faith, that can be argued. But to say that the Catholic faith is "the truth" and "the fullness of faith," and that it is at the same time "a desert," is impossible. Where there is true faith, there must, by definition, be living water, as Jesus said: "He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water"—"a well of water springing up into everlasting life."

You get out of a church what you put into it. Yes, our spiritual life would be much easier if we could just walk into the most fiery, intellectually vivid, and socially just church we could find and have done with it. But that's not the point.

Where the truth is, the living water has to be. You go there, you find that living water, you share it with everyone you can, and somehow God keeps making more. That's how you irrigate the dry places. It doesn't happen if you just sit on top of the fountain and wait for someone to switch it on.

Good morning! New post coming after I wake up. Ahhhh—my day off! Hope to catch up on major e-mail backlog and answer those RCIA questions—thanks to everyone who posted with good wishes about my Tiber-swimming efforts.

Rolling Stone Discovers Abstinence—Or Something Like It

Rolling Stone's story "The Young and the Sexless," by Jeff Sharlet of the liberal-leaning religion-in-journalism site The Revealer, is now online. (UPDATE: A commenter recommends I warn readers that Rolling Stone uses X-rated language.) It mentions me in passing. I welcome your thoughts on the piece in the comments section below.

Deutsch Treat

Sometimes I feel like my comments section is the bar where everybody knows your name—and I love my regulars. Reader Colleen answers the challenge of a commenter who claims to be a European psychologist by posting a response to her—in German. Gesundheit!

Gibb Me a Break

In the "Curiosity Killed the Cat" Department:

I confess that I tracked through every single one of the 20 tracks on the unreleased Robin Gibb album currently available on Bedazzled.

That is a considerable swath of my life that I will never get back.

Man, is it depressing. I don't know the history of the album, but I'm guessing Robin made it just after his sorrowful brothers, missing him, recorded their lonesome masterpiece Cucumber Castle. Well, emotionally speaking, this makes that album sound like Sergio Mendes by comparison. It makes Neil Young's Tonight's the Night sound like The Best of the 1910 Fruitgum Co. It makes Big Star Third sound like "Potato's in the Paddy Wagon." It makes "I Started a Joke" sound like Jose Jimenez.

The worst part is, the first 20 seconds of the first ten songs or so make them sound worthwhile. They hook you. And then you're sorry.

This is not so bad it's good. This is just plain bad. You have been warned.

Crisis Mismanagement

The latest Crisis magazine E-Letter arrived today and I junked it immediately after skimming it, for fear that if I kept it, I would lambast it on this site. Well, it's still grating on me, so I'll lambast it anyway, with the caveat that my memory may be off. (If you've got a copy of it, I'd be grateful if you'd post it in the comments section below.)

Editor Brian Saint-Paul mentioned the horrific case of the Romanian Orthodox priest and nuns who are accused of horribly torturing and crucifying a schizophrenic nun whom they believed was possessed by the devil. He noted that the recent scandals in the Roman Catholic Church had prompted some Catholics to consider converting to the Orthodox Church. And he seemed, by all appearances, to be using this Romanian horror as an opportunity...to gloat.

Again, my memory could be off, but I have this impression of Saint-Paul, sounding very unlike the Saint Paul, writing words to the effect of, "Har de har-har-har! You dissatified Catholics thought you were leaving the Church for something safer. Think again!"

Is it just me, or is that not necessarily the best way to encourage people to stay in the Church? (Not that it'll discourage me from starting RCIA this fall.)

Does This Mean Planned Parenthood Finally Cares About the 'Love Child'?

The top story today on the Planned Parenthood Federation of America's Web site is, "What's Next With the Supremes?"

I realize I've been terribly hard on Margaret Sanger's organization. As a service to them, using my vast knowledge as a rock historian with an able Google finger, I'll do my best to answer their burning question:

• In January, Diana Ross signed on to be one of MAC Cosmetics' Beauty Icon spokesmodels. She continues to tour and will perform at Liverpool's Blenheim Palace next month.
• Cindy Birdsong is currently a minister in the Los Angeles area and has declined offers of Supremes reunion tours.
• Mary Wilson just starred with "The Jeffersons"' Marla Gibbs for a two-performance run in Philadelphia of the gospel musical "Heavenbound."
• Florence "Flo" Ballard is still dead.

I fully expect Charles G. Hill of Dustbury to follow up on this story (as he did when I broke the news about Lesley Gore's new album). In the meantime, the best sources for Supremes news are the ones that Planned Parenthood doesn't want you to see.

Good morning! Going to bed "early"—will put up a blog entry in the early afternoon. In the meantime, there's lots of good reading on Trevor Romain's blog.

Christians Are Working-Class Zeroes, Says the New York Times

If there's any question about the true message of the New York Times Magazine's cover story "What's Their Real Problem With Gay Marriage? (It's the Gay Part)," it's answered by the article's online URL: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/19/magazine/19ANTIGAY.html.

Yes, in Times author Russell Shorto's world, believing that homosexuality is—as the Roman Catholic Church and many other Christian and Jewish denominations believe—disordered behavior, equals being "ANTIGAY," which equals hating gays' guts.

The equivalent logic for gays would be: Believing in the Kinsey continuum—that most people are somewhere in between being 100% gay and 100% straight—equals believing that the sizable number of people who consider themselves 100% straight are likely misguided and therefore disordered, which equals hating those who consider themselves 100% straight. (The Times article is, appropriately, sponsored by the video release of the movie "Kinsey.")

What's most telling about Shorto's piece is the way in which he portrays the "ANTIGAYS"—who are, of course, universally Christian (no "ANTIGAY" Jews exist in the New York Times' world, despite Orthodox Jewry's opposition to homosexual marriage)—as working-class idiots.

For example, Shorto notes, traditional-marriage activists Jim and Evalena Gray still have their Christmas lights up in March because, says Evalena, "the grandchildren like them." They're "semiretired opticians" who do their infernal "ANTIGAY" work from their basement—"paneled, wall-to-wall-carpeted, decorated with Jim Gray's Confederate memorabilia (a portrait of Jeb Stuart, framed currency)."

The Grays' fellow traditional-marriage advocates Laura and Dave Clark live with their four children in "a ranch house...tucked cozily into the back of a cul-de-sac in a 1970's housing development," Shorto observes. "Inside, it is wall-to-wall carpeting and hand-me-down furnishings." No books to speak of, but "snapshots of the kids cover the refrigerator door. The couple's wedding album is prominently displayed on a table in the living room. Dave works for the federal government. Laura home-schools the 7-year-old twins, Grace and Cole, while also looking after 5-year-old Kayla and 3-year-old Jacob."

When their fellow traditional-marriage activists come over to meet Shorto, the Clarks prepare quite a spread: "sliced lunch meats, hamburger buns, tomato and onion slices, bowls of pretzels and chips, cookies and several two-quart plastic bottles of soda." What, no sushi? Guess there's no Dean & Deluca in the Clarks' little '70s time-warp nabe.

Contrast Shorto's descriptions of the Clarks and Grays with that of the one homosexual couple he spotlights: "Lisa Polyak and Gita Deane, a lesbian couple who have been together for more than 20 years and have two daughters" live in a "quaint house" that's "white-painted brick with a picket fence." No wall-to-wall carpeting here: "The hardwood floors are covered with Oriental rugs." In other words, the only home in the article that clearly doesn't need the Queer Eye.

Of course, Polyak and Deane, unlike the Clarks and Grays, actually own books other than Bibles and traditional-marriage propaganda: "[T]he living-room bookshelf is crammed with kids' books and photo albums." What's more, they have real jobs. "Deane works part time as a learning specialist at Goucher College," and—remember how Dave Clark simply worked in "government"? Polyak has an actual government-job title: "an environmental engineer for the U.S. Army."

The point is not that conservative Christians are in fact icons of hip. The point is that Shorto feels a clear need to stress their gaucherie (like leaving Christmas lights up) in order to make them look foolish. If a news article stereotyped homosexuals the way that the Times and many other media outlets regularly stereotype Christians, gay-rights advocates would quake with rage.

Downing Out

John Bambenek has the details on the fakery and deception surrounding the so-called Downing Street Memo.

Bacterial Babes and Viral Vultures:Planned Parenthood's Teen Theater

The following are show synopses from Planned Parenthood of San Diego and Riverside County's IMAGES Theatre, copied unedited from the theater's Web site. The shows are performed by teenagers before high-school classes and assemblies, for students as young as 14. Your comments are appreciated. Please do not use profanity or obscenity. Thank you.

Little Red in Sex Forest (birth control) 20 minutes
 
Little Red Riding Hood is going to her boyfriend’s house. Though her parent encourages her to stick to Abstinence Road, she gets tempted by the Trees and takes the route through Sex Forest, trying to avoid Conception Cliff. Along the way, Red is misinformed by the Old Lady who lives in the shoe, steered on the right track by fairyland Yogic Birth Control Crew, and educated by gynecologists Drs. Goldilocks and Gretel, all the while being pursued by the Big Bad Sperm. Red finally evades the Big Bad Sperm’s grasp in the Magic Drugstore with the help of her Fairy Godmother. During her travels, and before reaching her boyfriend’s house, Red learns about the various methods and uses of birth control, and the importance of using birth control correctly, consistently, and cooperatively.

Primary Messages:

1. Abstinence is the only 100% method for avoiding pregnancy and STIs.
2. Birth Control is necessary for avoiding pregnancy.
3. Various methods of birth control are introduced: Barrier methods (diaphragm, cervical cap, and male and female condoms), hormonal methods (the pill, the patch, the ring, and the Depo-Provera shot), spermicides (foams, film, and inserts). Condoms are the only method of birth control that can also prevent the transmission of STIs.
4. When you choose to have sex make sure you are emotionally ready to do so and be prepared to use the birth control method that works best for both partners. It is important to be able to discuss Birth control methods with your partner and use the method consistently, correctly, and cooperatively.

Summer Lovin' (sexually transmitted diseases) 15 minutes

The scene is a loosely based parody of “Grease.” Sandy and Danny spent a great summer together, which included having unprotected sex. Their friends warn them that it wasn’t such a good idea and that now they may have contracted an STI. Sandy worries and falls asleep after singing “Hope I’m Not Infected,” feeling anxious about her actions. She has a dream in which her friends have transformed into the Bacterial Babes and tell her all about bacterial STI’s she may have contracted. The boys, better known as the Viral Vultures, sing about how viral infections, that never go away, may be transmitted even when using the mega-condom “Greased Lightnin’.” She also dreams that Danny has HIV and didn’t know about it and now she may be infected as well. She wakes up, greatly relieved that it’s all been a dream. When she sees Danny at a party they make a decision to slow things down. Singing a final song, “We’ll Go Together,” they agree to go to the clinic to get tested for STIs.

Primary message:

1. The play addresses the symptoms, treatment, and information on various bacterial and viral STIs: chlamydia, gonorrhea, syphilis, herpes, genital warts and HIV/AIDS.
2. If planning on engaging in sexual behavior, you must use condoms to avoid getting an STI.
3. Go to the clinic to get tested.
4. The best form of protection is abstinence.

The Caelum of Sex

I am proud to be sex-positive. The Dawn Patrol is a sex-positive blog.

One of the biggest deceptions of the Planned Parenthood crowd—perhaps the biggest—is that those in favor of legal abortion, contraception-based sex ed, and the like are "sex positive," while pro-life supporters, who back abstinence education, are sex-hating prudes.

Viewed objectively, it is clear that it is the Planned Parenthood crowd that thinks sex is disgusting, while those who are pro-life and support abstinence education have a complete understanding and appreciation of sex.

Planned Parenthood's Web site currently features an article stating that "healthy marriages" are dependent upon contraception. The organization founded by Margaret Sanger asserts that unintended children are "potential marriage killers."

St. Augustine saw this contraceptive mentality over 1,500 years ago*:

Whoever says that to procreate children is a worse sin than to copulate thereby prohibits [the purpose of] marriage; and he makes the woman no more a wife than a harlot, who, when she has been given certain gifts, is joined to man to satisfy his lust. If there is a wife there is matrimony. But there is no matrimony where motherhood is prevented; for then there is no wife.

Note that Augustine criticized those who say "to procreate children is a worse sin than to copulate." Surely, if anyone believes that, it is Planned Parenthood. That is the organization's reason for existence: to separate sex from its natural effects.

I suggest that it is cowardly to refuse to face the consequences of one's acts. Persons who use contraceptives will never learn the value of self-restraint. They will not need it. Self-indulgence with contraceptives may prevent the coming of children but will sap the vitality of both men and women, perhaps more of men than of women. It is unmanly to refuse battle with the devil....

It is a sin to bring forth unwanted children, but I think it is a greater sin to avoid the consequences of one’s own action. It simply unmans man.

The above was said by Mahatma Gandhi. It appears in a page of quotes about contraception on a Web site maintained by the sage's followers.

Another Gandhi statement, from the same source, could be speaking to Planned Parenthood today**:

My quarrel with the advocates of contraceptives lies in their taking it for granted that ordinary mortals cannot exercise self-control. Some of them even go so far as to say that even if they can, they ought not to do so. To them, no matter how eminent they may be in their own spheres, I say, in all humility but with utmost confidence, that they are talking without experience of the possibilities of self-control. They have no right to limit the capacity of the human soul.

And my plea, based on positive experience, is that even as truth and ahimsa are not merely for the chosen few but for the whole of humanity, to be practiced in daily life, so exactly is self–control not merely for a few "Mahatmas," but for the whole of humanity. And even as, because many people will be untruthful and violent, humanity may not lower its standard, so also, though many, even the majority, may not respond to the message of self–control, we may not lower our standard.

Is it "sex-positive" to say, "Have all the sex you want, but don't exchange body fluids?" To say, "Have all the sex you want—but forcibly alter your body's chemistry so that it won't operate the way it should?"

Think about the nature of contraceptive hormones—the pill, the patch, and so on. Since when did it become "healthy" to attack the body's normal, healthy processes?

A diabetic woman takes insulin because her body is not in perfect health and she needs the hormone to function as she should. I wear contact lenses because I do not have perfect vision naturally. A heart patient gets a pacemaker because his heart rate will not be normal otherwise.

Taking hormones or using other contraception, by contrast, prevents the body from doing exactly what it would do if it were in perfect health. That's not "sex-positive." That's an abject, utter fear of sex's consequences.

Abstinence education is not about how bad sex is. It's about how good sex is—a precious gift that enables a man and woman to be intimate in a unique and intense way, and gives them the creative power to bring forth new life. What's bad is to limit the sexual act, to take certain aspects of it and vaunt them above all others, so that the Promethean fire of sexual union is diverted from illuminating the partners' full humanity—including their potential fertility.

The people who coined the term "sex-positive" think that Christians hate and fear sex.

If only they knew. Christian couples do it like bunnies—even the ones who use Natural Family Planning as a means to space children. For the NFP couples, sex is all the more exciting because they have to abstain a few days out of the month. When they do have it, there are no barriers, no hormones, no condoms—just two devoted lovers giving and receiving everything they have to give. Now, that's sex-positive.

The so-called sex-positive feminists, so terrified of the natural consequences of sex in all its God-given glory, don't realize they're reducing themselves to nothing but a bunch of vaginas.

*The Augustine quote is taken from an essay published by American Life League.

**I first learned about Gandhi's vocal stand against contraception from a lecture on the topic by Fr. Bryce Sibley. The lecture is on CD; copies may be available from Fr. Sibley, who can be reached through his Web site.

There's some wonderful weekend viewing up at Bedazzled right now: a beautiful Scopitone (a sort of primitive music video) of Francoise Hardy,
an awesome clip of the Carpenters doing a Bacharach medley (I say this without even liking the Carpenters—it's that good), and the amazingly Brute Force-like George McKelvey doing "My Teenage Fallout Queen"—can't believe I never heard of him before.

Porn Liberals* Live Up to Their Name

Pandagon's readers, in an effort to prove their intellectual superiority, have taken to leaving expletive-laden comments on this blog, in violation of the comments rules posted at left.

I have almost never quelled genuine intellectual discourse in this blog's comments. (I say almost never because it could be argued that, during the Schiavo case, I deleted some comments that were of the "let her die with dignity" variety. However, I did warn commenters in advance that I was ultra-sensitive about that particular topic and not in the mood for pro-homicide arguments.) Regular readers know that I don't delete or ban commenters for disagreeing—only for being disagreeable. Commenters visiting via Pandagon or any other blog are welcome to take me or other commenters to task, provided they do so observing the rules, which are perfectly reasonable and simple enough for a kindergartener to understand.

Break the rules and you may not be caught right away. Your pithy little f-words may hang in the Web's ether for hours, shocking all the white-bread, uptight, Midwestern sticks-in-the-mud whom you assume comprise this blog's fan base.

But I will see your doo-doo pee-pee wee-wee witticisms when I check my comments. And I will ban you. And if a ban doesn't work, I will continue to whitewash your excremental fingerpaint designs wherever they turn up.

To the vast majority of commenters who are polite, thank you for your cooperation. Please do not feed the animals.

*A term which I still, with Anne Frank-like optimism, believe is not necessarily redundant.

Fear of Fundamentalists

See-Dubya keeps getting better, doing brilliant, Chestertonian work at Patterico's Pontifications. Be sure to read his post on the British press's report on child-sacrificing Africans—whom the news outlets claim are fundamentalist Christians.

This passage from that post easily qualifies as the quote of the day, week, month:

Being myself familiar with what goes on in fundamentalist Christian worship, I think I can say with some authority that that sort of thing doesn’t happen very often and when it does there's usually a very good reason for it.

OK, I'll give you the next line too:

I understand why these rumors get around, though, because media types and leftists generally tend to use "fundamentalist" when they really mean "person who probably listens to albums by rhinestone-wearing gospel quartets" or "politically conservative" or as a shorthand signal for "we think these guys are wackos."

Now, just go on and read the whole thing. And read his more recent post as well. You can comment there. Go. Git.

The ACLU: Concerned About Your Children

John Bambenek, quoting the book Twilight of Liberty, notes a Supreme Court case where the ACLU argued that the manufacturing of child pornography should be illegal, but its sale and distribution should be legal:

ACLU objects to the idea that porn movie producers be required to maintain records of the ages of its performers; this would be "a gross violation of privacy."

So far, the best take I've seen on the Terri Schiavo autopsy is the one by Ed Jordan at Media Culpa.

Every Child a Sautéed Child

JRob has the definitive headline on WorldNetDaily's account of an abortion doctor accused of eating fetuses: "Safe, Legal, and Medium Rare."

Regardless of whether the fetus-eating charge is true, the Kansas City police department has plenty of evidence that the doctor's clinic was a house of horrors. Jill Stanek links to photos.

Apologies to anyone offended by the puns. The problem is, the truth is so offensive, yet major news organizations are ignoring it, despite the charges' being announced by the Kansas City police, and despite there being photographic evidence of the clinic['s grisly violations. Sometimes humor is the most effective way to elicit outrage. If people are offended by the puns, then they should be outraged by the truth.

Good morning! New post to come in the late morning/early afternoon.

Eggcellent

Check out this fine editorial cartoon (found via Real Choice).

The Choice Is Yours

Just caught up with Vita Mea, the online home of Roman Catholic seminarian Dennis Schenkel, whose mission trip to Guatemala is inspiring him to write some of his strongest-ever posts. His provocative "Coming Out" is about something that I've only heard one Catholic clergyman discuss—and I'll keep that man's name private. Dennis writes:

Some people have been telling me for a long time that I should change. My lifestyle has not been compatible with the Christianity I profess. It doesn´t matter what my urges are, or what I´m attracted to, they say. They claim I can change and that just because I´m attracted in a way that´s different from other people, I can simply exercise some kind of self-control. They´re telling me that I´m not some kind of animal who doesn´t have control over what he´s attracted to.

Do read it before you make any conclusions—and note Dennis's use of "what" as opposed to "whom."

Dennis goes on:

I choose, regardless of my inclinations. I´m not compelled beyond reason by urges beyond my power to do things I know are wrong.

It's sad that this is such a radical idea in today's society—the idea that we bear personal responsibility for whether or not we act upon physical urges. Planned Parenthood, for example, is all about "choice," yet it insists that when it comes to resisting physical urges, we don't really have a choice—we can choose only how we will handle the aftermath.

I can relate to Dennis, because to this day I struggle to unlearn past behaviors that were limiting and instead widen my horizons to admit the better choices that God enables me to make.

What Planned Parenthood and their ilk will never understand is that many of the very physical behaviors which it touts as fine "choices" are in fact constricting, because—put in a godless context—they force us to view our bodies as mere repositories of physical sensation.

Admittedly, it's scary to think of a world where one's choices are truly choices, requiring personal responsibility and not mere acquiescence to physical urges. Nonetheless, the rewards of such a lifestyle are well worth the risk.

In Planned Parenthood's worldview, a person can make only the "right" choice, because each decision is according to what is right for one at the moment one makes a choice. But where there are no wrong choices, there really can be no right choices either.

I've made a lot of wrong choices, and sometimes I still make them. Yet, as Paul wrote, Christ died for us while we were yet sinners. Standing in His love, I have to believe that it is never too late to change my behavior and bring it in line with His vision for me, which is that I be in Jesus' image—or, looking to a feminine paradigm, the image of His Mother. Now, that's an alternative lifestyle.

Happy Sunday! Joel, his son, and I are going to church at Our Saviour today, and then I'm going to work, so here's an item for you that combines both pursuits, courtesy of CaNN's Binky the Web Elf: biblical headlines. My favorite:

On feeding the 5,000:
PREACHER STEALS CHILD'S LUNCH
Disciples Mystified Over Behavior

Murder Most Fowl

My beloved Joel, who is in town for the week with his son, told me that I said something blogworthy yesterday, so here you go:

We were talking about turducken, which is apparently something bizarre that they eat way out there in the mysterious Midwest, consisting of a chicken in a duck in a turkey.

Joel, noting my surprise, went on to enlighten me about beer can chicken, which apparently involves sticking an open can of beer inside a chicken and then cooking it so that the beer evaporates into the fowl. This struck me as even more macabre, despite the fact that, like turducken, it also sounded delicious.

I said, "I guess that once you've decided that the corpse of a chicken has no moral value, you can do anything with it."

I guess you had to be there. Anyway, I'm thankful that I have a boyfriend who thinks my bon mots are gems.

Joel (the Joel) has an excellent twofer of posts on recent stories of men who gave their girlfriends abortions: "Little Texans a Big Deal" and "A Pounce of Prevention." The black humor of his pun-laced titles masks serious outrage. He writes: "These cases depict the wider cheapening of life which abortion portends. If you can kill them in a clinic, you can kill them at home."

I am over the proverbial moon to report that I wrote the wood again. For today's cover story on the "Gladiator" star's apology, it's "EATING CROWE."

Small Victory

Reading the second page of Salon's latest article deriding those who believe embryos are human life, I was delighted to find this ad smack in the middle of the page:

For a cogent take on embryonic stem-cell research minus Salon-style condescension, read Deroy Murdock's well-researched piece in National Review Online.
* * *The above-mentioned Salon piece slams President Bush for endorsing embryo adoption while failing to take a position against in vitro fertilization, which routinely results in the destruction of embryos (as detailed in an article in last week's Baltimore Sun).

Left-wingers have come to rely on the divide-and-conquer tactic, and the embryonic stem-cell lobby doesn't miss an opportunity to use it with regard to Bush's position. These relativists are hoping that conservatives will be so stung by the moral relation between the embryo issues—stem cells and IVF—that they will become paralyzed, unable to support Bush on one while disagreeing on another.

Pope John Paul II foresaw this situation when he wrote Evangelium Vitae. If one substitutes "embryonic stem-cell research" for "abortion," his words would seem to exonerate the president of criticism that he cannot attempt to protect embryos in one instance and not the other:

A particular problem of conscience can arise in cases where a legislative vote would be decisive for the passage of a more restrictive law, aimed at limiting the number of authorized abortions, in place of a more permissive law already passed or ready to be voted on. Such cases are not infrequent. It is a fact that while in some parts of the world there continue to be campaigns to introduce laws favouring abortion, often supported by powerful international organizations, in other nations—particularly those which have already experienced the bitter fruits of such permissive legislation—there are growing signs of a rethinking in this matter. In a case like the one just mentioned, when it is not possible to overturn or completely abrogate a pro-abortion law, an elected official, whose absolute personal opposition to procured abortion was well known, could licitly support proposals aimed at limiting the harm done by such a law and at lessening its negativeconsequences at the level of general opinion and public morality. This does not in fact represent an illicit cooperation with an unjust law, but rather a legitimate and proper attempt to limit its evil aspects.

Bear Facts

Reader Paul Giovanni saw my online and print references to Not a Desperate Housewife's claim of sighting of "Hooker Bear" at a Build-A-Bear Workshop, and wrote to the company's president. Here is the response he received:

Dear Dr. Giovanni:

Thank you for your email and letter of concern. We will investigate this Blog immediately. As a family friendly company, we take our role very seriously and we understand that we have a responsibility to our families to ALWAYS have a fun and family friendly environment.

All of our merchandise is developed by our product design team. Our head of product development is a mother of a three year old girl and she is extra sensitive to the safety of our products as well as how everything looks and fits. She oversees EVERY product. One manufactured [sic], our products are all sent from our distribution facilities to stores along with detailed, display instructions that they are required to implement. We would do not carry any merchandise that would be suggestive of a "hooker" nor would we allow our stores to alter our merchandise in any way to create such a "look". I am equally shocked that a young boy would know the word "hooker" let alone what one might look like and would make that association in conjunction with a stuffed animal in our store. But, I am a little conservative and old fashioned. We don't sell jewelry, make up or high heels for our bears so I am not quite sure what outfits could be put together to come up with an offensive bear that could be labeled as described in this Blog. Someone might not like the style of the outfit or the length of the pants or skirt but we would not intentionally depict a bear in any unwholesome way. While I have not had any store report this incident to me, we will get into this right away.

We live in an age today when a Blog or message board that states someone's personal views or impressions can become fact instantly without any malicious intent. Someone posts a question and presses "reply all" or "send" and soon, a simple question becomes facts to millions. I read Blogs and message boards myself on various subjects of interest to me and I have to admit they can be convincing. I have checked out many to find that some were misrepresentations (though possibly not intended) of information that if not investigated, could be harmful. One was a health website about a "nutriceutical" that worked for one person but could have actually caused people physical harm if taken literally. I do believe most are doing it in good faith and in the spirit of positive communication, but there is also the opportunity to make a personal impression into fact and cause harm to innocent people and company's reputations. We will all have to just be smarter and make every effort to check out the facts when we "Google" a subject. While I think most smart people know the facts especially of companies and products they frequent, sometimes this information can be harmful. We will do our best to track down what might have offended this Guest immediately. I can promise you, if she had called or written me directly and described the situation we would have responded positively and quickly to her inquiry.

Again, thank you for taking the time to write to us and call this to my attention, It is interested and concerned Guests like yourself who help us do a better job. I can assure you that displaying bears in such a fashion is not part of who we are nor would it be tolerated in our company. We appreciate your loyalty and personal interest more than you can know,

Sincerely,

Maxine Clark
Founder and Chief Executive Bear
Build-A-Bear Workshop

I sent Clark's letter to Stacy, a k a Not a Desperate Housewife, who responds:

Hello Dawn, wow, I had no idea this went anywhere. Hmm. First, the son that I mentioned is not a young boy. He is my middle child and 15 years of age, so he knows what a hooker is. We were in BABW for my third child, aged 8, to purchase more clothing for his lion. There was a scantily clad bear dressed and placed for all to see. There was a mini-skirt, boots, skimpy top, and yes, she looked like a lady-of-the-night. In my opinion this bear was dressed inappropriate. This was at the BABW at the Flatirons Mall in Broomfield, CO. I did not say anything to the staff and used the opportunity to teach my kids a lesson. So to all of those who assumed that I had poor parenting skills spend some time on my blog and apologize to me via e-mail because it's the exact opposite.

Maxine Clark's e-mail is clearly a sensitive response which brings up important points about how even the most responsible company can be damaged by Internet rumors. I do believe that Stacy saw a "scantily clad bear" at the Build-A-Bear workshop. However, based on her response, I'm not convinced that the bear was actually labeled "Hooker Bear," which is what her original post implied.

UPDATE: Not a Desperate Housewife responds further on her blog. She writes to me that her original post "never implied" that the bear was called Hooker Bear. I invite you to read it and make your own conclusions. At any rate, she does not hold Build-A-Bear Workshop responsible for the scantily clad bear.

Wood You Believe

I am elated to report that I wrote the wood for today's paper: "FEDS WANT ALL HE'S GOTTI." (The wood is the front-page headline, so named because its oversized capital letters used to be set up with wooden type.)

My last act at my last job was shouting out a suggested wood as I headed for the door. They used it the following Sunday for the Donald's wedding: "LADY IS A TRUMP."

It's a wonderful feeling to be able to say that I have written the woods for both of Manhattan's tabloids—especially "New York's Hometown Newspaper"—within five months. Who woulda thunk it! (Well, who, except the friends, family, and readers who encouraged me between jobs.) Thank God.

I also like the fact that penning the wood's an anonymous kind of fame; I can see my words on newsstands everywhere, and yet nobody knows except my friends and you who read this entry. Newspapers rule.

Good morning! New blog entries coming in the early afternoon...must get sleep...

'There's No Other Option Than to Be Strong'

Reader Theresa sends this link to an interview with a friend of hers who just lost a son in Iraq. (The quote above comes from that interview.) Theresa writes:

Paula is the head of our Semper Fi Parents group here in the Hudson Valley. I got a phone call last night that her son was killed in Iraq yesterday....

I spent last night on my balcony brokenhearted, praying for them. Just earlier I had heard all the usual stuff on the news about the abuse of the Koran etc. I could not help thinking how I wished people prayed more and complained less. We have spent countless time on the Koran (not that I think it should be abused but...) while so many Marines have died the last few weeks. The media always wants to make us look like the bad guys while our kids are dying because of people who care nothing for life.

Someone from my apartment building stopped me the other day because she heard [my son] Mike was a Marine. She told me she felt sorry for him and the other soldiers...I told her they did not want her sympathy, only her prayers....no matter how anyone feels, these guys are over there.

Tap of the Pops

If you've ever wondered whether the "Listen to the Flower People" incarnation of Spinal Tap was based on a real psychedelic rock band, my own hypothesis is that the writers of "This Is Spinal Tap" were influenced by the Move. Check out this video of the Move's wonderful "Walk Upon the Water" and you'll see what I mean—though I hasten to add that Bev Bevan, who went on to play in Move offshoot ELO, is far better than any of Tap's combustible drummers.

'Nightmare' on West 43rd Street

Daniel Okrent's column is still warm in its grave and already the New York Times' arts critics are taking advantage of being able to once again flaunt their Bush hatred without being called on it.

Under the Red Rock's JB Hudson points out the following from Times movie critic Manola Darghis, ostensibly writing about "The Cinderella Man":

Like Gary Ross's "Seabiscuit," the legend of the little Depression-era horse that could, "Cinderella Man" is a shamefully ingratiating old-fashioned weepie. To his credit, Mr. Howard does not wave the flag as vigorously as Mr. Ross, though the new film's tagline ("When America was on its knees, he brought us to our feet") prepares you for the worst. In any event, given that Mr. Howard and his writers would be hard-pressed to bend this underdog narrative to our current political nightmare, it's a good thing they don't venture down that path.

Observes Hudson:

"Current political nightmare," where did that come from? Mr. Dargis seems to get a little carried away himself there for a bit, though certainly not with waving the flag.

I love President Bush if for no other reason than that he is so incredibly good at irking liberals. They even think of him when they are watching a seemingly innocuous "old fashioned weepie."

Agreed (though Dargis is actually a Ms.). Dargis gives the distinct impression that she views patriotic feel-good movies with trepidation because they get people feeling, well, good about values held by the architects of our "current political nightmare."

Dargis is the same reviewer who called "Celsius 41.11," a conservative response to Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11," "another unconvincing effort on the part of conservatives to mount a viable critique of Mr. Moore." "What [the filmmakers] want to do with their movie," she wrote,
"is make you afraid—very, very afraid."

Apparently the only thing that scares Ms. Dargis is our current political you-know-what. Then again, if I believed everything Michael Moore says, I'd be scared too.

Wigged Out

Via an e-mail from The Happy Homemaker, here's more on Trinity Church's Clown Eucharist: the official home page for the event, including advice on "having your own Clown Eucharist."

Briefcase Encounter

If you read one blog entry today (besides this one, natch), read former New York judge Robert N. Going's "The Man With the Briefcase," on the occasion of the anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre. It's a reminder of why some people believe freedom is worth giving their lives.

Beyond the 'Pale'

Charles G. Hill reports that, nearly 40 years after the Bach-flavored song hit, Procol Harum keyboardist Matthew Fisher is suing for a writer's credit on "A Whiter Shade of Pale."

Of course, I hear you wondering, "What did Dawn Eden write about this subject in her rock-historian days?" Well, I'm glad you asked. A Google search of my name and Procol Harum turns up this. I wish I could say I saw this latest development coming, but despite Fisher's fans giving me credit for "the first time EVER that Matthew Fisher was even mentioned in a press article on AWSoP," I had no idea that the keyboardist had a mind to sue.

Come to think of it, I have no idea what the song's about, either. I just have no idea.

* * *
Apologies to readers who commented politely on my Friday blog entry, only to see the entry with its 90-odd comments taken down. I am on a three-day vacation, blogging this on a friend's computer, and don't have time to delete the off-topic, profane, and abusive comments as I normally do. When I checked on the comments to that entry just now, they were out of hand, so rather than let them go further before I return home tonight, I've taken the whole thing off.

Seeing Double

Peter Horvath of my favorite Who-inspired think tank, the Anderson Council, writes to me that he thought he'd seen the ad campaign for the new Russell Crowe film somewhere before. See for yourself:

Crowe

Not Crowe

Rome and Away

Up late writing my column—here are a couple of short takes for you this morning:

• Planned Parenthood of Houston wants you to know that "most Catholics disagree with [the] church's stand on birth control." That's just in case you're Catholic and are wondering whether you should heed Pope Benedict XVI or Margaret Sanger.


• An atheist in Africa defends the Roman Catholic Church's stance against condoms.

"Blog On!" Home Page

I'm elated to announce that the Daily News' Web site now has a permanent URL for my weekly column, "Blog On!" It includes the unretouched version of my column photo, in color, plus my bio—complete with shout-out to Maximilian Kolbe.

Oh, Randi, Well, You Came and You Gave Without Faking, But They Sent You Away

Remember James Randi? The magician and devout skeptic who offered $1 million to anyone who could "show, under proper observing conditions, evidence of any paranormal, supernatural, or occult power or event"?

Apparently he's no longer just putting up money for people to demonstrate something that he believes doesn't exist. He'll now pay big bucks to stifle discussion of a nonmaterialist worldview.

According to Jonathan Witt of the Discovery Institute, the James Randi Educational Foundation is offering the Smithsonian $20,000 to back out of its contract with the institute to co-sponsor a showing of the intelligent-design documentary "The Privileged Planet" at its Baird Auditorium.

Randi insists, "We need to be alarmed and militant about this situation." Indeed. His proposed bribe is $4,000 more than the Discovery Institute paid for the showing. At this writing, the Smithsonian has not reneged on its contract.

Notes Krauze of Telic Thoughts:

Is this ability to buy out others’ arrangement limited to James Randi, or can others join the fun? If a group of young-earth creationists have a big enough bag of money, will they be able to cancel Smithsonian events that mention the ancient age of the Earth?

(Found via Jonathan and Amanda Witt's fine blog, Wittingshire.)

Darfur Shame

Thanks to the Republican Jewish Coalition, you can read Jay Nordlinger's highly informative column about what's going on in Sudan without having to subscribe to the digital edition of National Review.

It's sad but not surprising that some of the same left-wingers who opposed taking down Saddam are now insisting that the United States intervene in Sudan. The very same people who berated President Bush for not waiting for the United Nations to take action in Iraq are now insisting that America get the jump on Turtle Bay and march on into Darfur.

I'm aghast at the Darfur genocide. My gut says that I want my elected leaders to do everything within their power to stop it. But my head tells me that it's outrageous of people to expect America to be the world's policeman—while the rest of the nations just sit on their hands.