GROWING UP CHRISTIAN Goes to Print

The promotional copies go to the printer tomorrow. Here's the cover spread. Now taking orders at http://www.GrowingUpChristian.US.

Ford Motor Company and LGBT Promoters are the Intolerant Bigots

The unfortunate thing about dictionaries is that they define words based on their usage, and if the usage is ambiguous or equivocal, the dictionary is, by function, destined to promulgate such confusion.  This contributes to social unrest and misunderstanding when words lose their ability to discriminate from one another, and individuals and social groups argue past each other by using the same terms but not the same underlying definitions.

Terms that have fallen prey to such catastrophic use are  "intolerance," "discriminate" and "bigot."

In the social conversations about the acceptance or rejection of LGBT values, individuals and groups that are against LGBT values are often derogatorily called "intolerant," "bigots," and their disagreement with LGBT values "discriminatory."  Where those supporting LGBT values are called "fair-minded," and "loving." But

Sweet Cakes Tolerance vs. Tyranny. Who's the Bully? Brad Avakian?

Regarding: Sweet Cakes by Melissa in Oregon will have to pay $60,000 in damages to Laurel Bowman-Cryer, and $75,000 in damages to Rachel Bowman-Cryer so rules Oregon Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian.

Let's define tolerance and intolerance, discrimination and prejudice, shall we?

"Discrimination" is not necessarily a bad thing. The laws of the land discriminate between what politicians determine is right and wrong. Religions discriminate between what theologians determine is right and wrong. Personally, we discriminate between whom we make friends with and who we don't. It's good to discriminate against criminals and bad influences.

The same can be said of the term "prejudice." The law is prejudice in favor of those that obey the law and is prejudice against those that disobey the law. God is prejudice against sinners, and prejudice in favor of the righteous....by his rules of discrimination, by the way.

For a bakery to discriminate against a homosexual couple and refuse to bake a cake for their commitment ceremony, and letting the couple buy a cake somewhere else is tolerant.

Throwing homosexuals off roof-tops to kill them is

Double Dog Dare

 LINK TO MORE DETAIL DESKTOP PAGE

David Lewis Crawford - Family Songs from a Whimsical Heart 

 Approved therapy for parents.

AUDIO - CD

Behavior Modificationary Blues (3:41) 

Our Love Is Forever (5:58)

Double Dog Dare (3:29)

Pachelbel Bedtime (3:18)

In My Dreams (3:18)

Spoiled Bumblebee (1:51)    

Heelies (2:57)

Walkin' Daddy Blues (3:15)

Sabre Dance Morning (2:30)

Your Eyes (3:37)   

I'm Travelin' On (3:09)  

 
David is an singer-songwriter treasure whose humorous songs are a mellow blend of down-home folk, whimsey and romance, with touches of blues, classical and country. Think Glen Campbell and Allan Sherman. Fans claim his songs are sweet and pure like the smell of fabric softener expelled from a clothes dryer on a hot summer day. Other times they sound like a seal barking for help on a mid-summer glacier flow with several hungry polar bears closing in. Whatever you want to call it, his witty and endearing lyrics are matched only by melodies that lodge in your brain like cotton candy that sticks to the roof of your mouth.

DAVID LEWIS CRAWFORD: DOUBLE DOG DARE 50% Discount $7.48

Protestantism's Moral Relativism the Cause of Supreme's Ruling on Marriage

Protestantism has been protesting moral truth for almost 500 years. Evangelical and Fundamentalist Protestants have been protesting each other. Each sees truth in their own eyes and have rejected the infallible truth that God gave the Church. That's why there are tens of thousands of interpretations of the Bible resulting in as many denominations, each refusing the other. So, such Christians, even Catholics who dissent from Church teaching, have no station to complain of the Supreme's ruling on marriage. Like Protestants, the Supremes interpret things as they want. There is no standard. Welcome to Protestant America...and The Scandal of Christianity. 

A Christin's Life is Like Architectural Hand-Lettering

Modeling our life after good architectural lettering provides some simple and clear techniques for living the good life:

1. Honor the legibility and consistency of your moral life above all else.

2. Use guide lines (rubrics, hedges) to ensure uniformity and clarity in all your decisions.

3. Emphasize in your outward actions your inward motivations of love and compassion.

4. Give your actions a slight upward tilt to convey hope.

5. Curve your judgments like a balloon to provide fullness and dignity.

6. Be attentive to the space and time between what you say and what you do. Be accountable.

(Inspired by Matthew Frederick's 101 Things I Learned in Architecture School)

Spoiled, Bumblebee

Imagine these lyrics sung by a five-year old daughter confronting her parents in the aisle of a toy store... at the speed and to the tune of Rimsky-Korsakov's “The Flight of the Bumblebee.” Can you do it in 1 min: 49 seconds?

Spoiled Little Girl:
Daddy!
Can I have it?
Oh, I need it!
Can I have it?
Will you get it for me, daddy?
I can’t live without it, daddy.
It’s so pretty and I love it.
Will you buy me what I covet?
I’ll be good, I promise daddy?
...if you let me have it now.
Please dad. Now I need it!
And I want it!
Can’t believe you never bought it.
It’s the newest in the set...
...and it’s the bestest of the best.
There’s not a toy I love more...
...in this entire toy store.
And this doll is so sublime.
But for a limited time.

Determined Dad:
No! No! No! No! No! No!
No! No! No! No! No! No!
No! No! No! No! No! No!

Spoiled Little Girl:
I’ll go ask my mom, and
...then I’ll tell on you, ‘cause
You are being very mean to me.
(she finds mommy in the next aisle)
Mommy, can I have it?
Oh, I need it can I have it?
Will you get it for me, Mommy?
I can’t live without it, mommy.
It’s so pretty and I love it.
Will you buy me what I covet?
I’ll be good I promise.

Patient Mother:
Tell me what did daddy say?
Tell me what did daddy say?

Spoiled Little Girl:
Daddy, daddy he said, “No!”
But he was being very mean.
(Sob)
You never let me have it.
What I want you never get me.
You don’t like me!
You don’t love me!
And you wish you never had me!
If you loved me then you’d buy it.
But instead you make me cry.
It happens every single time.
I don’t know why I even try.
I’m gonna fuss and scream and shout.
And then I’ll whine and moan and pout.
And then I’ll pitch a little fit.
And then my eyes I’m gonna squint.
I’m gonna lay here on the floor.
'Cause you don’t love me anymore.
You never buy me any stuff.
And when you do it’s not enough.
What did I ever do except to.
Love and honor you?
You never let me have my way.

Fit to Be Tied Daddy:
You never listen anyway.
You’ve got at least a dozen dolls like this at home.
You never play with them.
They sit there all alone.

Spoiled Little Girl:
(Tantrum interlude)

That's It Daddy:
You can act this way while we’re inside the store.
'Cause the cameras.
They are all set to record.
But when we get into the van.
I’m gonna whip your little can.
Unless you get up off the floor.
'Cause I can’t take it anymore.
Instead of buying that new doll.
We can go home and play some ball.
So, let’s go home.

SPOILED BUMBLE BEE
David Lewis Crawford, on his music CD
DOUBLE DOG DARE
Family Songs from a Whimsical Heart
"Approved Therapy for Parents and Grandparents"

Do Catholics Read the Bible?

Excerpt from the book version of

What Catholics Really Believe 

by Dr. Ray Guarendi & Fr. Kevin Fete 

Chapter 2. The Bible 

DRG (Dr. Ray Guarendi): Thank you. Why can't Catholics read the Bible for themselves?

FKF (Fr. Kevin Fete ): First of all, the perception is that Catholics don't read the Bible, and that is not true. That's a falsehood. Catholics, first of all, come to Church, and they hear the passages of the Scripture - Old Testament, New Testament, and the Gospel - at every Mass. They are preached the Gospel message in the homilies that are prepared for them by the priest and delivered during the Mass. There are Bible study groups in many, many of the parishes and many of the homes and amongst the families of the Catholic believing community.

What we have concern with isn't that people read or do not read the Scriptures, but do become their own authority with regard to how the Bible is interpreted. And there's where we have the concern, wanting people to stay within the context of the Scripture themselves and within the Tradition of the Church.

http://www.ninevehscrossing.com/WCRB-3UP.php 

Original Production Catholic Television Network, 

Youngstown, Ohio.

Producer – Dr. Ray Guarendi

Director – Rev. Jeff Mickler

Post Enhancement and Production by SWC Films

Producer – Stan Williams

Editor – Michael Sroka

Answer Guide – Dave Armstrong

Editor – Stanley D. Williams, PH.D.

 

MONOGAMY, ONCE A GOOD IDEA, NOW RULED ILLEGAL

IT'S ABOUT GRAVITY

In a previous post the headline read: "Gravity, once a good idea, now ruled illegal."

I claimed that "gravity" and "marriage" were and are similarly defined by Natural Law. One reader took exception and said that "marriage" was an invention of man. I countered that the term "marriage" was indeed an invention of man, much like the term "gravity." But that the essence of both were scientifically defined by certain unalterable rules, which, if ignored, had undesirable consequences for the health and sustenance of the species.

In the previous post, I cited "unitive" and "procreative" as the two concepts enshrined in Catholic teaching that suggested where scientists should look for evidence of the natural law effect of a heterosexual couple's sexual union.

Gravity, Once Considered a Good Idea, Now Ruled Illegal

Gravity, perhaps, is Natural Law's most obvious witness. This essay suggests that the traditional concept of Marriage is a close second.

Traditional Marriage is best defined by Natural Law—the rules of the universe that describe unalterable reality. It is the ubiquitous presence of natural law's order found in the physical, psychological, and moral realms that defines some of the most astonishing attributes of God—the heavens declare the glory of God. That is, God is revealed in the quantifiable, visible, mathematical, supreme order of the universe and that such order is immutable.

Yet, some courts and lawmakers think they can mess with Nature. Yes, they can make any choice they want, but they have no choice over the consequences. Only Natural Law will determine the outcome. One such example of the Supreme Court's mistakes in this regard was 1857 Dred Scott Decision that concluded African Salves were property, not U.S. Citizens. Natural Law disagreed... and the consequence was the Civil War, ...which then led to the 14th Amendment.

But is "marriage," as the Catholic Church defines it, really capable of being defined and defended by Natural Law?

UNITIVE AND PROCREATIVE

An often-ignored principle of Catholicism is that its practice and purpose is to succinctly define Natural Law in its doctrines and practical teachings so the faithful can follow nature more easily and thus live more happily.

Thus, it's not surprising that what the Church says about marriage is vastly supported by medical and social science. But it takes some careful reading to see it. And, it would help society if our Bishops were more publicly vocal and assertive. The Church is called to be salt and light. But it is often lost its saltiness and its batteries seem dead when the dark invades. So, let me try to make a candle and light it...I've got some bees wax here somewhere.

Paragraph 2366 of the Catechism states:

The inseparable connection, established by God, which man on his own initiative may not break, between the unitive significance and the procreative significance which are both inherent to the marriage act.

In this sentence, the Church claims that marriage is defined uniquely by these two terms alone: (1) unitive and (2) procreative. Pundits might want to add that marriage is "between one man and one woman" or that marriage is a "permanent" relationship. But as we will come to understand, the terms unitive and procreative make such clarification redundant (although for the common communication the esoteric is often not enough and more wordy formulations are necessary.)

So, is there evidence from science and Natural Law that the concepts of a unitive relationship combined with a procreative relationship are possible for homosexual relationships, or are they reserved for heterosexual relationships?

ONE FLESH

A Unitive Relationship implies that the relationship creates "one flesh" through the congeal act. On the surface, this has one (1) meaning—the temporary physical union of the persons. While this is possible on the surface with male-on-male homosexual relationships, it is not possible with a lesbian relationship. Yet, with male-female unions it is always possible.

If we add the Procreative component, the unitive relationship of a male-female union has a second (2) and more significant meaning. For, only then can the "two "flesh" produce the "one flesh" of a baby. This is not the typical interpretation of the Mark 10 passage, below, but it is true.

For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh. So they are no longer two but one flesh. (Mark 10:6–8)
But there is yet another way that only a male and female can become one.

WHEN UNPROTECTED SEX IS GOOD SEX

Getting deeper into science, there is a third (3) meaning to unitive, which we discover goes far deeper than physical copulation, and is more subtle than having a baby...and it is only possible in heterosexual relationships.

Science has discovered that male semen plasma, apart from conveying nourishing sperm on their way to the female's eggs, contains a host of vitamins and nutrients that benefit the female by providing to the female's blood stream (a) antidepressants, (b) several mood-elevating compounds, (c) antigens that can help prevent breast cancer, and (d) agents that lower blood pressure helping to prevent preeclampsia conditions.

These discoveries came out of research that studied heterosexual vs. lesbian couples. Women who were in lesbian relationships, or women who used condoms, had a higher probability of depression and thoughts of suicide, higher blood pressure and a higher affinity for breast cancer.

Thus, unprotected sex, which allows semen plasma to be absorbed into the woman's blood stream becomes yet another layer of meaning to the concept of unitive as chemicals (not just sperm) from male are passed into the female.

Further, this passing of chemicals reinforces the procreative component of the definition of marriage by making the woman physically healthier, apart from producing a baby. Benefits that are absent in all homosexual unions.

There is more to consider in my next essay on the natural law and science surrounding monogamy. But, with only the information presented above, the legal attempts to redefine the natural law of marriage suggests that someday a hauteur will ask the courts to upend gravity. I can see the headline now: GRAVITY, ONCE CONSIDERED A GOOD IDEA, RULED ILLEGAL.

And, that's why I'm Catholic.

Stanley D. Williams, Ph.D.

Next Time: What Does Natural Law Say About Monogamy?

(SOURCES: Aside from the citations referenced in the text, this essay made liberal use of cited medical journal references found in Wikipedia's articles on marriage, semen and polygamy.)